.

Election or war?

The Wayamba election battle between the People's Alliance and the United National Party reminiscent more of a yuddhaya (war) rather than a chandaya (election) is almost over and the voters of the North Western Province will deliver their verdict tomorrow. Both the ruling party and its chief opponent have expressed confidence about pulling off a victory while the JVP too has let it be known that it expects to show the two major parties that many voters are disillusioned with both.

The country will see which way the pappadam is crumbling when the results are out on Tuesday. But nobody would be satisfied that this election was either free or fair given the high jinx that were on public display during the campaign. The fact that incumbents do have a handicap at election time has to be faced, but over the years the abuse of state machinery and the people's resources for political advantage have grown from bad to worse. The campaign that has just ended would have reminded many of the no-holds-barred referendum of December 1982. Those who were loud in their protests then have shown the country that they will do exactly the same thing given the chance.

The vital question is whether the people are big enough to stand up to this kind of nonsense and show their rulers that elections must be held freely and fairly. Even the ranks of Tuscany who regarded President D.B. Wijetunge as ineffectual have conceded that he gave the country a fair election in 1994. It was a wonder that the previous election that brought Mr. Premadasa to power could be held at all given the anarchy that prevailed at the time and the determination of a murderous group of insurgents to wreck it altogether. What must be clearly understood at this moment is that if the election "culture" that has been flaunted in the Wayamba campaign is to continue, there is every possibility that forces of anarchy will use such abuse to best advantage.

It is not only the people who have to stand up against efforts to those flexing government muscle and abusing the resources of the state to win elections. The election apparatus too must be properly and impartially applied to ensure that the true will of the voters prevails. Sri Lanka is fortunate that the people have grown in a tradition of making and breaking governments in elections that have been free and fair. When Mr. Bandaranaike rode to power at the crest of a nationalist wave in 1956, the UNP government of the day was known to have ensured that their safe seats would poll on the first of a 3-day election, the not-so-safe seats on the second day and the tough ones on the last day.

The strategy was to pull in the vaasi paththata hoiya (hurrah for the winning side) votes their way. But the first day left not only that strategy but also the government in tatters. In March 1960, thanks to Dr. W. Dahanayake and then Elections Commissioner Felix Dias Abeysinghe, Sri Lanka has shown that an excellent one day election was possible. Though Dahanayake lost his own seat at Galle, he improved practices that had prevailed up to that time and deserves to be remembered for that. The police and government officials in those days were less malleable than today's, it must be said. The blame for what has happened must be laid squarely at the doors of successive more recent governments who worsened rather than improved the system.

The matter of presidential immunity is also something that this election has thrown up. While it is conceded that certain immunities are needed, is it correct to permit a president who campaigns for his or her party at elections to make statements that ordinary people cannot do without risking libel? This was a matter that was urged when President Jayewardene was in office but no remedial action has yet been taken. During this campaign, the president has made accusations that have been rejected by Mr. Ronnie de Mel and Mr. Ranil Wickremesinghe's family.

De Mel is categorically on record saying that he was not a minister nor even an MP at the time the Marketing Department cannery was privatised. He was out of the country at the time when Heath and Co. Ltd., controlled by his son-in-law, acquired the factory by bidding for the shares on the Stock Exchange. There has been no rejoinder following the publication of de Mel's statement. The media, of course, must be careful of libellous statements made by politicians from public platform. While statements made in Parliament are clothed with absolute privilege publication of a libellous remark made outside can mean trouble even if the person making such statements is immune.

Being a highly politicized country, the result of tomorrow's election will be eagerly awaited. Hopefully, no violence or sharp practice is going to occur on polling day or during the counting. The people expect those responsible to ensure that this is so. Although the campaign itself left much to be desired, it is up to the concerned authorities to do their duty and ensure that the result truly reflects the will of the voter.

| NEWS | PROVINCIAL | POLITICS | DEFENCE | FEATURES | LEISURE | BUSINESS | SPORTS | ADS |