 |
Editorial21st March 1999 |
Front Page | |
47, W. A. D. Ramanayake Mawatha Colombo 2. P.O. Box: 1136, Colombo 2.
|
||
      
|
Let's have sober pollsDuring the past three decades especially, we have seen a cancerous trend towards confrontational politics and the cult of violence before and after elections, culminating in the shame of Wayamba. All parties, including the ruling PA, are pledging that never again would there be another Wayamba, yet what we have seen upto now is as usual a matter of too much talk and too little action and that also too late. Two weeks ago, the all-party monitoring committee presided by President Kumaratunga decided that all posters, banners and cut-outs must be removed within 72 hours. But various parties, including the police, found various excuses and by this weekend we yet don't know whether the offensive material is still on or off. A probe committee was also appointed by the President with much promise but our page 1 story today shows that someone somewhere is sitting on the whole thing. If politics today still remains criminalised as it was in the so-called dark era, then the blame is largely because politicians politicise crime for their own gain or protection. The People's Alliance government which was swept into office on pledges of clean governance and the rule of law has gradually dragged itself into a mud-hole that produced one of the most fraudulent elections in Sri Lanka's history. Passing the blame to the police or the Elections Department may provide some temporary relief to the ruling party, but a government elected by the people and placed in a position of trust is ultimately responsible and accountable to the people for whatever is done or not done. Somewhere down the line, something has gone terribly wrong and we find ourselves embroiled today more in the rule of the thug where we hit first and talk later. With the cancer having gone so deep, some urgent surgery is obviously required if democracy is to be saved and strengthened. One important area is a change of attitude from confrontational personal politics to consensus politics where we could see a healthy and sober exchange of views on policy matters. As a step towards this, the all-party monitoring committee has decided that the parties contesting elections would be given equal time on state TV and radio to explain their policies and programmes. It would be good also to see all-party dialogues on vital national issues - the ethnic conflict, the economy, education or other state matters. Properly conducted with a balanced moderator, these dialogues even for two or three hours would certainly provide more light in contrast to the heat that is often generated at political rallies. We are not suggesting that political rallies be scrapped. Such meetings and house-to-house canvassing help to bring about a personal relationship between the candidates and the people while also giving at least some idea of what servant leadership should mean. The personal touch is important. A local newspaper cartoonist put it nicely with a quip over the pulling down of posters. A voter complains that if the picture of his candidate is pulled down, he would not be able to recognise him as he has not seen the candidate after the last election campaign. The personal touch is part of the hallowed concept of government by the people and for the people. But in a situation where criminal gangs give orders to the police, where top public officers lack not only power but often a backbone and where the government talks a lot while doing little, we must acknowledge that what we have is more a muddle democracy than a model democracy. So it would be advisable to have a sober, low profile election on April 6, allowing the people to freely exercise their vote and will after quiet reflection on the issues and answers.
|
|
|
Please send your comments and suggestions on this web site to |
|
