groundviews is a Sri Lankan citizen journalism initiativeregister here.login.find out more
inicio mail me! sindicaci;ón

From a Tragedy to a Farce: Comments on the SLFP Proposals

Professor Wiswa Warnapala, the Minister of Higher Education, is one of the leading political scientists in Sri Lanka. He has produced, even after entering the busy life of politics, many books in a wide variety of subjects, the most recent being about Sri Lanka-Russia Relations. When the media reported that Prof. Warnapala would be the main architect of the Sri Lanka Freedom Party’s proposals to the All Party Representative Committee (APRC), we all became optimistic assuming that the proposals would adequately address complex issues of restructuring the postcolonial state in Sri Lanka. However, the SLFP proposals submitted to the people on May Day 2007, have demonstrated clearly and conclusively that the SLFP have not traveled forward in time but far back. Its “fresh approach” to a “complex problem,” that has grown to gigantic magnitudes over the years, is in essence nothing more than the proposals of the Bandaranaike-Chelvanayaham Pact of 1958, almost five decades ago! History sometimes, in Sri Lanka oftentimes, repeats itself, but as Marx aptly puts it, the first time as a tragedy and second as a farce. The SLFP proposals are totally disproportionate to the questions at hand. Not only are they a retreat from the earlier positions of the SLFP, they cannot be a basis for a long-lasting solution to the ethno-political conflict in the country. The drafting of the proposal, which took so much time, reminded me of an old Sinhala saying: “kandak vili la meeyek veduwa vage”.

The SLFP proposal includes inter alia (1) devolution of power with district as a unit of devolution; (2) a second chamber; (3) making chief ministers ex-officio members of the 75 member second chamber; (4) national water and land commission; and (5) district ethnic ombudsman. The powers of the second chamber have not yet been specified. Since Prof. Warnapala was a strong unicameralist in the past (he quoted from Dr N. M. Perera’s PhD dissertation in support of this position), the SLFP’s proposed second chamber would not be more than a replica of the lower house. Since I have discussed the issue of the second chamber in relation to Sri Lanka’s Ethno-political conflict in my earlier article in the Daily Mirror (republished in A Glimmer of Hope: A new Phase of Constitutional Reforms In Sri Lanka, Colombo: South Asia Peace Institute, 2007), I will not delve into the subject here. The innovative proposal to establish an ethnic ombudsman is promising, but the appointment procedure specified in the proposals may not produce results. The section on the language in the SLFP proposals shows that the authors are even ignorant of the present constitutional provision on language. However, in this article my focus on the SLFP’s proposals will be limited to its proposals on devolution of power.

The Current Discourse
Whatever its limits, the Report of Sub-Committee B (RSCB) contain positive features. It accepts that Sri Lanka is a multi-ethnic, multi-religious, multi-linguistic and multi-cultural society. It proposes that power should be devolved, with the existing provinces being the unit of devolution. The sub-committee has no objections toward a second chamber if it can effectively address the issue of power-sharing. On the other hand, RSCA has proposed changes that would produce far-reaching results and would make the Sri Lankan state more accommodative. It is no secret that the RSCA proposals have a close affinity to the 2000 constitutional draft bill that was presented to the Parliament by the Peoples’ Alliance government, of which Mahinda Rajapakse and the members of the current SLFP sub-committee on constitutional proposals were key members. Both the RSCA and the Constitutional Draft Bill 2000 accept that the minimum unit of devolution would be the existing province. Both documents have left space to accommodate specific Tamil and Muslim demands especially in relation to the Eastern Province. The Chairperson of the APRC, Minister Tissa Vitharana have also suggested that the unit of devolution should not be lower that the existing province. What is the status quo? The 13th Amendment introduced devolution of power on the basis of the existing provinces with the qualified merger of Northern and Eastern Provinces. A recent Supreme Court decision delivered a verdict that on legal grounds the merger was no longer constitutionally valid. Of course, the constitutional issues transcend legal boundaries since constitutional issues in a pluri-national society are more political in nature. What I am trying to stress here is that the Sri Lankan constitutional discourse has reached some consensus that the unit of devolution should not be smaller than the existing provinces.

Is there a justifiable ground for the SLFP to now change this consensus and to suggest afresh that the district instead of the province be the unit of devolution in future constitutional arrangement? I would say no. The chauvinists of the current SLFP leadership are here trying to find a justification for the choice of district as a unit of devolution based almost in a farcical manner on the principle of subsidiarity and the concept of “grama rajya”. The two concepts are of great importance in a pluri-national society not as substitutes for the protection of group rights but as complementary to it. Let me explain. The setting up of constitutionally separate two-tiers of government can be justified on multiple grounds. The notion of subsidiarity has increasingly been invoked to legitimize the setting up of a lower level of government. It has multiple meaning, but what is most common and relevant here is that it refers to organizational and territorial principles requiring that decision-making and implementation be carried out in a space that is as close as possible to the citizen. This idea also goes with the notion of deliberative democracy where all the affected should be given an equal opportunity to participate in decision-making as equals in a non-coercive context. The principle of subsidiarity in this sense addresses the issues of effectiveness, and good and inclusive governance. However, it does not and could not directly address the rights of self-determination of different peoples living in the same territorial space.

Secession Justified
In RSCB as well as in Tissa Vitharana proposals, these two principles –the principle of subsidiarity and the notion of “grama rajya”- are incorporated by introducing a third-tier of government. That was the principle enshrined in the Indian Constitution. However, the SLFP’s so-called “indigenous model based on the idea of Grama Rajaya” is based on complete ignorance/ negligence of the Indian model and the complex nature of the Sri Lankan problem. The SLFP leadership seems to reject the national or ethno-political question in Sri Lanka by arguing for devolved smaller unit. One of the key demands of the minorities in Sri Lanka is that they should be allowed to take decisions that affect them and their destiny. What is good for the numerically big nation may not be necessarily good for the numerically small nations living in the same territory. The best examples were the Citizenship Acts, Official Language Act of 1956, and the language-based standardization policy in the early 1970s. The whole question of constitutional change arose because of the failure of the two autochthonous constitutions because they were prepared according to the needs and requirements of the numerically large nation, the Sinhalese. SLFP proposes attempt the same once again without taking into account the proposals by the TULF (Anandasangree), EPDP, EPRLK (Pathmanabha) and the Muslim political parties for more comprehensive power-sharing arrangements.

The SLFP proposes to set up 30 district councils as the second-tier of government. In a way, the current proposals are even short of Bandaranaike-Chelvanayaham Pact of 1958. Because the B-C Pact (if I remember correctly) accepted that the Northern Province should be kept as one unit and that units could be merged with the consent of the Parliament. The principle behind this is that the numerically small peoples should be given space, not only to participate in governance, but also to govern themselves with the control of reasonable resources. Can a district council protect, preserve, and advance the culture of the Tamil people? Village committees are territorial units, not politico-cultural units. Majoritarianism in a pluri-national society can be contained only if numerically small nations can constitutionally mobilize their strength effectively against the unreasonable and hegemonic decisions of the numerically large nation/s. District committees are designed to divide them more and more, and as a result to weaken them and their identity.
The SLFP proposals give justification to the demands of the LTTE for a separate state. As Mr Sambanthan, TNA MP once remarked, the LTTE is in fact a baby of Sinhala chauvinism. This chauvinism is once again expressed by the SLFP in its 2007 proposals. So the SLFP by presenting these proposals continues to feed the baby, the LTTE, to keep it alive.

Sumanasiri Liyanage teaches Political Economy at the University of Peradeniya.
E-mail address: sumane_l [at] yahoo.com


1,288 have read this this article so far. You may also find these articles interesting:
  • THE SRI LANKA FREEDOM PARTY’S BREATHTAKING PROPOSALS ON CONSTITUTIONAL REFORM Rohan Edrisinha Faculty of Law, University of Colombo and Centre for Policy Alternatives The Sri Lanka Freedom Party has a new approach to negotiated settlement. It goes like this in a hypothetical negotiation regarding a salary dispute between employer and employee. Employees ABC earn a salary of Rs 10000 per month and go on strike demanding... groundviews, May 5, 2007
  • Some thoughts on the Second Chamber Some Thoughts on the Second Chamber   By Sumanasiri Liyanage One of the main lacuna in the 2000 constitutional draft was that although it proposed quasi-federal arrangements closely following the Indian model, it did not have a provision for a second chamber so that it as a whole lacked adequate power-sharing at the center. The report by the... Sumanasiri Liyanage, January 27, 2007

| Share this article on Facebook

Saravan said,

May 2, 2007 @ 11:27 am

Not only does it feed the baby, it is also meant to keep it alive in order to use the politics of ethnic and religious acrimony boiling by politicians from the south to exploit these issues at election time while killing, displacing as many Tamils as possible, and colonising their lands in the northeast. It is not that of a farce as a crafty manouvre to use the LTTE bogey to accomplish the Mahavamsa goal. All the talk of second chamber etc etc is for the gullible birds. What is most needed is to educate the politicians and send them to a political place of learning as to what governments and good governance are all about. It is about people, not politicians.

cyberviews said,

May 2, 2007 @ 2:28 pm

A succinct and informative analysis of the farcical nature of the SLFP proposals which reflect a failure to grasp the gravitas of the current political situation. It also points to the political bankruptcy of the SLFP leadership who by its pusillanimous capitulation to hardline chauvinistic elements has taken the country 20 years backward. This leadership,and the opportunists and psychophants surrounding it, see as their aim, holding on to power by whatever means, even at the risk of survival, in order to enjoy the privileges, benefits and status it brings.

It is important here to take note of the LTTE’s spokesman, Rasaiah Ilanthirayan’s, , recent statement to the Hindustani Times. He claimed that its newly established “Tamil Eelam Airforce”, will help the organization gain international recognition as running a full fledged state. His claim that “We have territory, administration, judicial and law enforcement systems; an army, navy and now an airforce. Let’s call a spade a spade, we are a state” , may be just bombast, intended for an international audience –nevertheless it is a bold assertion. The subsequent air attack on the oil installations 2 days later, only further underlined this assertion. Now juxtapose the SLFP proposals against this backdrop and one realizes that the SLFP leadership has lost all sense of political reality.

But where does this leave the country? Jehan Perera in his weekly article to the Daily Mirror yesterday, asserts that the burden of hope now falls on the UNP, who given their consistent stand for a politically negotiated, federal solution, based on the OSLO declaration, is the only alternative left. This would however require them acquring power through a voter determined southern consensus. Only time, of which there is very little left, will tell if this is feasible.

Does Sri Lankan politics proffer the chance of an alternative third force emerging along the lines of the ADQ in Quebec. (Refer D.B.S Jeyeraj’s excellent analyis of the March 26 Quebec elections in the Sunday Leader of 29th April). But then this would require a charismatic leader of the calibre of Mario Dumont, which is hard to find in Sri Lanka.

It is at a historical juncture such as this that one realizes the enormity of the betrayal of the progressive forces of this county by the traditional left parties. Their foray into coalition politics over 40 years, has not only left them decimated and derelict, but has resulted in their conceding this political space to pretenders, who garbed in red and claiming to be Marxists ,spew nothing but a politics of hate and intolerance.

Nevertheless, I still see a glimmer of hope, if the left partners in the coalition were to take a firm stand for the need for meaningful devolution of power. Tissa Vitharna, who played a big role in bringing to the table the RSCA report and subsequently, his own synthesized report, could together with Dew Gunaskera, give leadership to this effort. There will be many progressive forces in the country and many in the international community who will back them. Remember, many people were prepared to clutch at the straw put out by the National Anti-war front, when it came onto a platform denouncing the war and calling for political negotiations to resolve the conflict.

Am I being naïve to even suggest this? Are they ready to make the sacrifices required? To-date there has not been a protest made by these left parties in government to the appalling statement made by Champika Ranaweera concerning civil society organizations.

We are at a political crossroad today, and it is an opportunity for somebody to act in the interest of the well being of the country. I still have hope.

A Postscript:

While I find Sumanasiri Liyanage’s concluding reference to Sambandan’s remark about the LTTE being a baby of Sinhala chauvinism, quaint, I am not sure if the LTTE can any longer be referred to as a baby. Having been conceived and born in the early 80s, it has over the past 25 years, aggressively nurtured by Sinhala chauvinism, become a fully grown, mature adult. Energised by its successes (and perhaps, failures), it no longer needs the nurturing of Sinhala chauvinism, as it goes about its task of nation building, even if it is fascistic in form and terroristic (some would say “counter-terroristic”) in its application. The task of Sinhala Chauvinism, after nearly 60 years of toil, is now complete. Any residual chauvinistic barking is, proverbially speaking, at the moon!

Deane said,

May 3, 2007 @ 8:55 pm

I think the SLFP proposals were put out more or less to appease the JVP/JHU types and to avoid accusations, particularly by the JVP if the president moved away from his platform in ‘05 elections.

This is why people like Nimal Siripala Silva have pacified the proposals by saying, they are not the final position of the government, etc.

i think its highly disillusion to think of so called ‘left’ forces been seen as having any say in contemporary politics, belonging to parties who’s membership find it difficult to fill in a small three-wheeler.

i am quite skeptical (although i’d like to remain hopeful) as to the outcome and the impact of the APRC itself.

Aliya said,

May 4, 2007 @ 7:11 am

These observations made by the writer on the proposals of the SLFP are of course informative making it understandable even to the general reader, at the same time carrying a very satirical tone. Since I haven’t gone through the proposals of the SLFP my self I would not hurry to conclude that it is a sufficient analysis of the SLFP proposals or to state whether they [SLFP proposals] are farcical or tragic.
I’ll only deal with several issues put forward by the writer and the two previous respondents.
It’s 100% true that the North and East Political conflict is a direct result of the Sinhalese Chauvinism of the South but is it justifiable to say that the LTTE is a direct result of the Sinhalese Chauvinism only?
What about so called moderates and neutrals that played a part in nurturing the LTTE by providing them with play toys and sweet bonbons?
Didn’t they show the LTTE its possible future prospects and future slogans and didn’t they intensify the climate favorable to flourish such parasite organizations like the LTTE?
Have the so called moderates made a genuine attempt at fulfilling their responsibility over the Sri Lankan nation in incorporating the minorities to the centre? Have they ever acted as Sri Lankans without wearing their colored glasses?
Have these active moderates ever come to an agreement concerning the national question as a body at large?
None.
So, should they be so cynical?
No doubt it is a responsibility of a government to ensure the wellbeing of all its citizens. Marx may say that repetitions of the history appear first time as a tragedy and second as a farce but we also know that failures are the pillars of success. No need to be so distrustful, do we?
After all, “SLFP proposals” do not & would not equate “government’s proposals”? So, why worry?

punitham said,

May 7, 2007 @ 12:29 pm

”Why worry?”
1.How can the main government party take 18 months to produce a peace proposal after the government takes over power of country afflicted with one of the deadliest conflicts for so long? This is not only politically but also morally and ethically too.
Every hour Tamils are being killed and there have been nearly 5,000 deaths in the last 18 months alone, nearly 300,000 displaced in addition to the already nearly 200,000 displaced, the geography suitably puts the Northeast out of sight of Sinhalese Sri Lankans and tourists and out of access to national and international reporters.
2.Politico-socio-economic fabric of the Tamils have been damaged severely over the last six decades and much worse is the fact that this has led to the onset of decay of personal/social morals in some pockets of most deprived Northeast never heard/seen 30 years or so ago.

Aliya said,

May 8, 2007 @ 10:33 am

To Punitham

It was not my intension to say that one should not worry over the long time taken to present these ridiculous proposals or the harm such proposals would do to the Tamils, Muslims and Sinhalese [all those who are affected by the war] and to the hard work by various people in order to come to a general consensus over power sharing …
Of course the content of these proposals presented by the SLFP is worrying and jeopardize the entire work done so far.
I didn’t mention a thing about the proposals of the SLFP.
I said, it’s not fair to put the LTTE in to the account of Sinhalese chauvinism when its roots are scattered all over the world. How many other parties have fed it and is feeding it at the moment?
And you haven’t got the equation correct. The SLFP is not a synonym for the GoSL. Therefore these proposals are 100% subject to change; hopefully to the positive side [We have a democratic system?].
Have faith on Democracy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

suntzu said,

May 8, 2007 @ 3:05 pm

The day there is peace in Sri Lanka is the day when pigs fly/ or when hell freezes over…until then people like Punitham will have to keep their fingers crossed and hope to God that they dont get abducted while walking in the streets!

punitham said,

May 9, 2007 @ 9:34 pm

Aliya
OK, your equation is technically correct. But in practice
i.Rajapakse is the President and making decisions(along with numerous other Rajapakses) … decisions which have been bringing about so much more agony to i.the people who have been already suffering for the past 30 years and ii. many many many more Sri Lankans
ii.every area of life in Sri Lanka is being put in more and more mess …
iii. ABSOLUTELY no hope on the horizon…
iv. So……. there is no point in talking about this at all….. till
v. a conscientious Sinhalese leader is born

Aliya said,

May 15, 2007 @ 12:23 am

Forgive me for this late reply!!!!!!!

Suntzu, you think Pigs can’t fly? Read Funny Boy by Shyam Selvadurai. He thinks pigs can fly and I think the day there’s peace in Sri Lanka is not so long and people like Punitham, people like you and people like me can contribute to it. Nobody has to keep their fingers crossed and hope to God.
Miracles are rare! Besides God is busy.

Punitham, don’t be so pessimistic and live in the present world without being so idealistic. Sure the president has supreme powers. But do you think the civil society is inferior?
And you think other coallition parties would just obey MR and his brother?
What about most seeked Democracy? Don’t just talk about Democracy and worship it, work for it. No pain no gain!

ajvrcb said,

May 23, 2007 @ 10:38 am

Hi, I have been looking for sites like this for a long time.
Bye.

RSS feed for comments on this post · TrackBack URI

Leave a Comment

This is a moderated forum. Comments are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy.

Please read our full submission guidelines before you comment.

Comments that do not adhere to these guidelines will be edited or deleted and those who repeatedly abuse this forum will be banned. Thanks in advance for your civil and constructive engagement.

Spam protection by WP Captcha-Free