.

Reply to Neville Jayaweera
What ails the UNP critics?

For the last four weeks an intensive campaign has been conducted in the media on the UNP and its present leadership. The campaign, planned on the eve of the six provincial councils elections, misfired when UNP Chairman, Karu Jayasuriya, pledged loyalty to the present leader. Senior party members, however, pining for old times, are evidently more interested in retaining their powers and privileges than in rebuilding the fortunes of the party. They are vigorously resisting attempts to give a place to the younger members of the UNP. The alacrity with which some UNP members are crossing over to the PA must surely be a blessing for the UNP in the process of cleansing the party.

What is surprising is that for four weeks the media has concentrated on the internal problems of a political party while national issues are overlooked. Two verdicts of Special Presidential Commissions have been rejected by the Supreme Court, but the media has not questioned the government for depriving citizens of their civic rights on the basis of flawed verdicts, as the government attempted to do.

The medley of writers opposed to honest leadership of the UNP has been joined by a pundit who lives abroad and pays Sri Lanka an occasional visit. In the three lengthy articles in the Sunday Island Mr. Neville Jayaweera has dissected the UNP and its leadership. While Mr. Jayaweera still retains the capacity to produce long-winded reports for official consumption, he has obviously lost command of facts and analysis. The pen is the pen of Neville Jayaweera, but the hand is not the hand of the Ceylon Civil Service to which Neville Jayaweera once belonged. In the first two articles he makes a weak attempt to be non-partisan, but in the third article distorted facts drip venom into the current anti-UNP leadership campaign.

Given below are some of the statements made by Mr. Neville Jayaweera in his final articles and the facts and circumstances which he chooses to ignore.

(1) "Dudley Senanayake and Sirimavo Bandaranaike inherited leadership fortuitously but within a very brief time went to validate their inheritance by leading their parties to resounding victories at the polls.’’ Mr. Jayaweera fails to mention that these were General Elections subsequent to the death of the current Prime Minister giving rise to controversy regarding the succession in the UNP and the SLFP. Dudley won his election and resigned shortly afterwards handing over the premiership to Sir John Kotelawala, the other contender for the succession. Mrs. Sirimavo Bandaranaike did not win the March 1960 election but obtained a "resounding victory’’ in July 1960 with the support of the Left parties who, in the March 1960 elections, vociferously demanded that she go back to the kitchen.

The present UNP leader was unanimously elected to the party leadership at the UNP annual convention in December 1994. He has been re-elected subsequently at the annual party conventions. For national leadership he has to await a General Election which is called by the government and not by him. The present leader of the UNP has already challenged the President for a Presidential Election. A challenge which she seems reluctant to accept.

(2) "Why has Mr. Wickremesinghe not been able to convert his formidable advantages to votes?’’ (in Provincial Council elections). There are two simple answers to this question. Provincial Council elections are parochial elections. The people vote candidates of the area who are able to provide them with their immediate needs - Samurdhi, electricity, water, housing, employment which are more easily available from the government in power than from the opposition. The "formidable advantage’’ that procures votes is to be the government in power that doles out the "goodies’’ and also the violence and intimidation. The unprecedented violence reported by the independent polls monitors in all seven provincial elections is the other answer to Mr. Jayaweera’s question which is puerile in the context of Wayamba election techniques already taking place in the Southern Province. Perhaps Mr. Jayaweera does not know that there is a war in the country and war weapons, army deserters and government patrons are easily available to government supporters.

(3) "Mr.Wickremesinghe became leader of the party under some extraordinary circumstances of a very fortuitous nature.’’ What are these "extraordinary circumstances’’ that Mr. Jayaweera refers to but fails to define? As ex-Prime Minister, Leader of the House, cabinet minister in two successive governments with a rare record of moral integrity, he was the natural UNP candidate for the Presidency. He acceded to a last minute request by senior party members to stand down in favour of Mr. Gamini Dissanayake whom they were proposing as Presidential candidate, in order to prevent a split in the party. When Gamini Dissanayake was assassinated, this same group nominated Srima Dissanayake in the expectation of a massive sympathy vote. There was none. The party fared disastrously in the Presidential election of 1994 and those who manipulated the nominations must take the blame for the debacle. Six weeks later, in December 1994, at the annual UNP party convention the present leader was unanimously elected the leader of the party. That election was neither extraordinary nor fortuitous and Mr. Jayaweera’s statement is both irresponsible and malicious.

(4) "Furthermore his (Mr. Wickremesinghe’s) habit of losing his own electorate - Biyagama - does nothing to strengthen his claim. Very importantly, unlike most of his predecessors, very clearly he lacks that inner capacity to draw people to himself’’. This ponderous observation casts grave doubts on Mr. Jayaweera’s credibility. J.R. Jayewardene lost Kelaniya electorate in 1956, won Colombo South and went on to become Prime Minister and President for ten years. Was he not a predecessor of Mr. Wickremesinghe and did his "inner capacity to draw people to himself’’ get exposed when he abandoned Kelaniya for Colombo? Is Mr. Wickremesinghe going through the same process as he obtained the largest preferential votes in the last General Election after transferring to Colombo?

(5) "His (Mr. Wickremesinghe’s) style has been to react to government’s alleged errors and failures rather than put forward and expound his own vision and agenda. For four years he has been harping on the cost of living, the imminent collapse of the economy, alleged corruption on the part of the PA as if they were mantras.’’ Unwittingly Mr. Jayaweera has admitted that the present leader of the UNP has performed well as Opposition Leader. To react and expose government’s errors and failures is the job of a democratic opposition in parliament. The mantras chanted in the last four years have brought down the government’s majority from 62 percent to 42 percent. A notable achievement indeed for the party in this horrendous atmosphere of violence and intimidation. The immediate needs of the country have already been announced by the UNP - an independent Election Commission, an independent Police Commission and an independent Public Services Commission. Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga who made many promises to the people four years ago has not implemented a single. No action has been taken against the corrupt and violent in her government though she freely abuses the opposition, doctors and public servants. The leadership of the UNP has taken measures to curb corruption and violence and is today facing vicious attacks from those who are opposed to those measures.

It is surely time to judge our leaders by their actions and not by their words and fancy visions which recede silently into thin air after elections.

A lot of hardwork has been done to salvage the UNP after the last presidential election disaster. Now that it is recovering after its many vicissitudes, the old guard is revolting for personal power and privilege regardless of the needs of the country and the party in the new millennium. They are aided by a small disgruntled group outside the party who are exerting themselves to confuse and mislead the public. The next howl will come from the same quarter if the PA wins the election for the Southern Provincial Council, however violent and corrupt this election may be. Let us wait and see.

N. Atukorale
Ratmalana.

Towards better governance

by Sepala Ilangakoon
Before we consider the subject perse, let us review the recent history of our country.

If one were to turn back the pages of time and look back into the recent record of political authority in our country, one would find that with Independence in 1948, the colonial masters handed over the island of Ceylon to us natives who had been a subject race since 1815 - for over one hundred and thirty years. The British had introduced their system of government by a Legislative Council which metamorphosed into a State Council and then into a Parliament.

Our national leaders of the day had won our Independence without bloodshed, unlike our near neighbours and other countries emerging from the yoke of subjugation. They were men of stature and political sagacity with an intuitive and discerning bargaining power and have won the accolade of ‘Father of the Nation’ etc.

With the united efforts of all our peoples, as one nation, with one political party, regardless of schisms of creed and race, the country prospered and then, through an unfortunate lapse, an irreconcilable incompatibility, that unity was split and a break away party was born. That was the start of bipartisan politics which over the last half a century, has been the single significant constraint to national development and progress.

Why? The progressive legislation, however benign, which one party proposed, the other party felt obliged and compelled to oppose; the small splinter parties sometimes being the deciding factor and becoming king makers. Seldom or never did the two major parties see eye to eye and take collective action.

When one party is returned by the people with a decisive majority of votes and forms the government, they spend the first few months in a futile effort; finding fault with the previous administration and exposing the skeletons in their cupboard, in an effort to get the maximum mileage from the misdemeanours, before they settle down to any constructive business. Next, they take unilateral action regardless of what the opposition deems fit and just. And when the opposition is returned to power, they reverse the earlier legislation or make crippling amendments which nullify the original design and purpose of bills. And the seesaw continues thus, to the net detriment of the country. This extravagant performance takes place in every unit of governance. How petty minded!

What is the available key to this national enigma? Every unit of local government has its own quota of politicians - in Parliament, Provincial Councils, Municipal Councils, Urban Councils, Town Councils and in Village Committees. Of these, the first and the last are essential, but the in between are mere trappings and adornments and are redundant and would deserve to be eliminated like the former Senate in the bi-cameral system. The number of politicians would thus be reduced automatically and in vast numbers leaving a residue of only Members of Parliament at the pinnacle and Members of Village Committees at the grass roots level. Both categories would be totally engrossed in doing some solid and meaningful work solving their voters’ problems and planning and implementing development projects. All this would result in a substantial saving in the cost to the tax payer.

In fairness to these hard worked politicians they would be well recompensed with lavish remuneration and ample facilities to the extent that they would not need to depend on the largesse of their voters. This liberal budget would be effortless and no burden as it would be funded by the gross savings to the exchequer on the several local bodies which would have been dissolved throughout the country

Consider Provincial Councils Chief Ministers. Ministers members security staff vehicles offices and even foreign travel to mention the salient headings of expenditure conservatively assessed at some thirty billion rupees i.e. 30 000 000! Mostly funded by the tax payer!

But what happened at the last Provincial Council elections? If one were to discount the bonus seats awarded according to the rules of the game the two main parties were evenly matched and had very nearly tied. This is probably the very first time when this phenomenon has surfaced in our country. It seems to be the God sent opportunity for the two parties to bury the hatchet and to shake hands.

What then? With the venom of acrimony out of the way, it is open to the two dominant parties to work full time and at full speed using the best brains of both parties for the common good of Sri Lanka. As a first step they should sign a No Contest Pact under the aegis of Parliament the life of which would be extended to a period of twelve years - three parliamentary periods to establish a new political culture and to give politics a third dimension - development politics. During this period only by-elections would be held to replace natural drop outs and chuck outs.

The first item on the agenda of the first meeting of the National Government would be to decide on the nominations for President Prime Minister Speaker of the House Ministers and Deputy Ministers etc. In order to avoid discrimination a suitable formula would have been worked out in advance to reach consensus on an order of precedence by name from both parties and in the true spirit of democracy from among the most valuable erudite and esteemed representatives of some of the lesser parties as well.

As a National Government with no irritations of party politics to retard them they can make a determined and combined effort to move the country forward.

Both senior parties, for the first time in our country’s history, have been favoured and blessed with intelligent, comparatively young, forward looking, energetic, pragmatic and charismatic leaders from the same level of society. The circumstances are phenomenal and miraculous, perhaps by providence and divine intervention, in answer to the fervent prayers of a disillusioned and despondent nation.

What more opportune and propitious moment to set our country on the road to prosperity ? Failure to utilize this unique, now or never opportunity, will haunt our leaders and the country throughout the next millennium.

Electoral Prospects: Another View

I seek your indulgence to take issue with Mr. Neville Jayaweera on some points in his 3-part article, "What ails the UNP?", published in your esteemed newspaper on successive Sundays, 25 April, 02 and 09 May, 1999. At the outset, I wish to question in passing the validity of Mr. Jayaweera’s assumption, that voting patterns at a provincial election can meaningfully be extrapolated to assess prospects at a national election.

Mr. Jayaweera constructs his article around three interlocking propositions with which I agree entirely. They are: that for perpetuating democracy in Sri Lanka, a strong political formation with a real chance of challenging the PA is absolutely essential; that for the foreseeable future, only the UNI’ has the electoral base to play that role, and that when both the UNP and PA are pursuing policies which are congruent in essentials, the issue that will decide the outcome at the next contest will be, who has the more effective leader.

There, however, I part company with him. The rubric here has to be ‘good governance’. Yet, notwithstanding his insistence that he is engaged in an objective analysis, he addresses only one aspect of the matter; namely, the quality of Mr. Ranil Wickremasinghe’s leadership. Despite readily acknowledging Mr. Wickremasinghe’s record of probity and professionalism in public affairs, he finds that quality wanting. He does not address the widely held public perception of a lack of professionalism, integrity and transparency in President Kumaratunga’s governance.

Mr. Jayaweera readily concedes that the PA has not embarked upon any new developmental strategies, but has merely taken on board the UNP’s programmes launched by President Jayawardene, and carried forward mutates mutandis by Presidents Premadasa and Wijetunga. He equally readily concedes the PA’s prevailing unpopularity due to a perceived failure to perform. Yet, he cites the absence of ‘new’ strategies as a cause of the UNP’s and its Leader’s supposed failure.

Those who have had to deal with President Kumaratunga in the conduct of government would know well enough the causes for her failure to perform. Even the public cannot be totally unaware of the inefficiency and cost of the replication in governance through so-called task forces. The monumental cost and dislocation of a ‘war’ based on flawed military strategy is now a byword.’ The UNP also waged ‘war’ from 1990-94, whilst achieving significant developmental progress.

In the light of the foregoing, the focus of our attention should perhaps not be upon the questions raised by Mr. Jayaweera: namely, what ails the UNP and/or what are its Leaders shortcomings? Our focus might instead more usefully be on the questions: can President Kumaratunga govern, and even more importantly can we as a country afford to endure another six years of a PA administration.

T. D. N. de Abrew
Colombo 8

L E G A L W A T C H
Rights case raises questions about police and attorneys

by Nayana
Before starting on this week’s topic, this column thanks Prof. K. N. O. Dharmadasa of the University of Peradeniya for his elucidation of the administrative structure of the universities, and regrets that the brief summary contained in Legal Watch last forTnight may not have conveyed an accurate picture.

However it is unfortunate that Prof. Dharmadasa seems to have got the impression that Legal Watch was trying "to justify the blatantly undemocratic provisions in the Universities (Amendment) Bill". At the time of writing, a challenge to the Bill was pending before the Supreme Court, and for this reason this column merely summarized the likely arguments of both sides.

Security threat

Turning to the matter referred to in our title this week: In a situation where a security threat is posed by a group whose members tend to come from one particular ethnic community, there is always a difficulty in determining precisely where reasonable suspicion ends and racial prejudice begins.

In principle it is no different from a case of "ordinary" crime where, for instance, a bystander claims to have seen a tall blond man walking away from the scene. One can hardly blame the Police if they investigate tall blond men in the area somewhat more carefully than short dark- haired ones. However if the Police placed a prohibition on all blond men from going about their business without a special permit, they would undoubtedly be crossing the line from permissible criminal investigation to a violation of human rights.

It was just such a line that was crossed by the police and security services in the case of Joubert Gnanamuttu whose fundamental rights case came up for judgment earlier this month.

Gnanamuttu was a Tamil civil engineer who had been resident in Colombo for 29 years. According to the established facts, on the morning of February 13 last year he had been travelling in a Borella-bound bus when it was stopped at the military checkpoint on Stanley Wijesundara Mawatha and the passengers were asked to disembark. Upon being asked to show his papers, Gnanamuttu had produced his National Identity Card, driving licence and a student identity card issued to him by the Bandaranaike Centre for International Studies.

He was then asked to produce his "Police registration form" which he did not have and did not believe he needed. He was then detained on the public road by the Army personnel manning the check point until a police jeep arrived (its occupants in civilian clothes) and took him to the Cinnamon Gardens Police Station.

Gnanamuttu was thereafter questioned, fingerprinted, and finally produced before the Colombo Magistrate who released him on his personal bond and directed him to appear one week later. On that date he was discharged.

While the OIC of the Cinnamon Gardens Police Station claimed that the suspect had been produced in court around 10.45 in the morning, Gnanamuttu claimed it was 4.00 in the afternoon. Given the fact that Police records showed that the officer who had accompanied him had returned to the station only at about 7.00 in the evening, the Court was inclined to accept Gnanamuttu’s version.

After his release, Gnanamuttu filed a fundamental rights action and was given leave to proceed under Articles 12(1) - equality before the law, and 13(1) - unlawful arrest.

It was clear from the material placed before the Supreme Court that the sole reason for the petitioner’s arrest was that he was not in possession of a "Police registration form".

This was the reason stated by the Army personnel at the check point where he was detained, and also the reason recorded by the Police for taking him into custody. At the hearing, State Counsel conceded that an arrest cannot be made on the basis that a person does not possess a "Police registration form" which is not a legal requirement. In this instance, as the Court noted, the petitioner had produced more than sufficient evidence of his identity.

However, having conceded that the OIC Cinnamon Gardens ought to have released the petitioner immediately, the State saught to exculpate the Police on the grounds that it was the Colombo Magistrate who had ordered the petitioner to sign a bond and appear in court one week later. The Supreme Court did not accept this argument, pointing out that the Magistrate had acted on the basis of the "B Report" filed by the Police which stated that Gnanamuttu was suspected of terrorist activities.

The Court (Justice Shirani Bandaranayake with the Chief Justice and Justice Wijetunga in agreement) held the petitioner’s fundamental rights to have been violated and ordered compensation and costs in a sum of Rs. 50,000 out of which Rs. 42,500 were to be paid by the State and Rs. 7,500 by the second respondent (O.I.C.) personally.

Regular Tamil residents of Colombo have for some time been complaining about misuse of police powers regarding this "registration form" and it is a matter of regret that neither the Police hierarchy nor such official bodies as the Human Rights Commission seem to have been able to instill the correct procedures and attitudes into the Police in this regard. The Court directed a copy of the judgment to be sent to the Inspector-General of Police and it is to be hoped that suitable guidance will even now be given to the rank and file.

There is, however, another matter for concern in this case, namely the mysterious movements of Gnanamuttu’s national identity card. His story, which does not appear to have been contradicted by any of the other parties, was that while he was being questioned at the Cinnamon Gardens Police Station, prior to being taken before the Magistrate, his documents and wallet were taken from him but all except his national identity card were thereafter returned. When he was taken to the Magistrate’s Court he found his identity card in the possession of an Attorney-at-Law who demanded a fee of Rs. l500 to appear for him and allegedly became hostile when his offer was refused.

The petition filed of record shows the apparent "tippexing" of a name immediately after the reference to the Attorney. Unofficially, one understands that a decision not to name him was taken owing to the petitioner not being quite sure of the name of the offending lawyer. That fact, however, is not mentioned in the judgement which merely recites the petitioner’s allegations without comment.

In any event, a failure to name the Attorney in the petition did not preclude the Court from making its own efforts to ascertain his identity. For instance, the Court could have directed the Police to furnish the name. Unlike the petitioner, the Police could not plead ignorance, unless they are in the habit of auctioning identity cards to the highest bidder!

The Supreme Court

Of course no finding of wrongdoing could or should have been made against the Attorney in the fundamental rights case since he was not a party to those proceedings and would have had no opportunity to defend himself. However the facts as disclosed do at least merit an inquiry, and the Supreme Court, as the final arbiter on the professional conduct of Attorneys, could have looked into the matter directly or referred the matter to the Disciplinary Committee of the Bar Association for a preliminary investigation as is the usual practice.

It is unfortunate that on the face of the present judgment which may be read by lawyers, laymen and future lawyers, a three member Bench of the Supreme Court presided over by the Chief Justice appears to have allowed an allegation of serious malpractice against an Attorney to pass without comment.

It may also create a sense of grievance amongst the Police, that errant officers from their ranks are being punished to the extent of being made personally liable to pay compensation, while a traditionally better educated and more affluent section of legal personnel get off scot free.

p
A modified German electoral system for Sri Lanka?

by Mahanama
Ever since the announcement of the formation of a Cabinet Sub-Committee on Electoral System Reform this February there has been much public debate on what the best alternative could be. Eminent persons like Minister of Justice and Constitutional Affairs, Professor G.L. Peiris, as well as backbench MP’s and ordinary mortals have proposed various systems. Some of these are a modified form of the German mixed system of proportional representation and the single member constituency method. Others advocate going back to the "first-past-the-post" (FPP) system entirely in which the "winner takes it all." The lunatic fringe like the National Joint Committee has even proposed an end to the political party system which Mahanama understands to be the very foundation of parliamentary democracy.

Another curious phenomenon is the argument that the recent Wayamba election fiasco was pure and simple, " a battle for the manape. " So the PR system and the preference vote is the culprit who robbed the people of their right to vote. Not the PA goon squads who invaded the polling booths armed with state provided automatic weapons, travelling in ministerial vehicles and in some cases, escorted by the very police whose duty it was to safeguard the elections. The total breakdown of the elections system and massive fraud perpetrated on the people of Wayamba on January 25th 1999 cannot be explained simply in terms of a "battle for the manape."

The people expect their political leaders to conduct free and fair elections and go home if they are defeated at the polls. In this regard the examples set by Prime Minister Sirima Bandaranaike in 1977 and also by then President D.B. Wijetunga and then Prime Minister Ranil Wickremasinghe in 1994 are worthy of emulation by the various excellencies who hold the reigns of government today.

Tyranny of the Majority

The danger of the old FPP system was that it promoted the " tyranny of the majority." It was this " winner takes it all " approach that resulted in huge " steam roller " majorities for the SLFP in 1970 and UNP in 1977 which both parties used to curtail civil liberties, politicize state and civil society, postpone elections, ban opposition parties, crackdown on press freedom and engage in prolonged periods of emergency rule leading inevitably to authoritarianism, and of course civil unrest and ethnic rebellion. We had the ludicrous situation in 1977 of the SLFP getting 29% of the vote and only 8 seats while the TULF which got 6% of the vote had 18 seats. TULF Leader Appapillai Amirthalingam became the Leader of the Opposition and used his position as " Leader of the Alternative Government " to promote the cause of Thamil Eelam worldwide.

Sirima Bandaranaike was driven into the political wilderness while the JVP led by Rohana Wijeweera emerged as the UNP Governments main " extra-parliamentary " opposition. The same thing happened to the UNP which was reduced to 17 seats in 1970 though getting 38% of the vote. As the saying goes, (applicable to all those pundits now demanding the head of the PR system on a platter) fools rush in where angels fear to tread. A look at Tables 1 and 2. will substantiate the argument for retaining the essence of the PR system.

TABLE 1
The 1970 Parliamentary General Election
Political Party Votes Seats % of votes % of seats
United Front
(SLFP,CP, LSSP)		 2,440,476 116 49% 77%
UNP 1,895,341 17 38% 11%
TABLE 2
The 1977 Parliamentary General Election
Political Party Votes Seats % of votes % of seats
SLFP 1,683,753 8 29% 5%
UNP 3,175,991 140 51% 83%
TULF 399,043 18 6% 11%

The challenge today is how to retain the obvious advantages of the PR system in terms of balanced representation and combine it with a method that takes into account the wishes of the people to elect their own member of parliament to their home constituency. The link between the people and the individual MP’s must be restored. Here again, it is worth reminding that the preference system was first experimented at the 1989 general election. The PR system originally had only party lists and the " manape " was a move to try and accomodate the peoples desire to elect individuals, not just party members. Abolishing the preference vote may be good but doing away with the PR system entirely would be quite disastrous. The German electoral system practiced since 1951 seems to offer an interesting alternative.

How the Germans elect their Bundestag

What is the Bundestag and how do Germans elect their representatives? The Bundestag is the Lower House of the German Parliament (like our own House of Representatives in the Soulbury Constitution) and has between 656 and 672 members elected by the peoples direct vote. The Germans also have their Second Chamber or Upper House called Bundesrat (similar to our previous Senate from 1947-72) consisting of 68 members nominated by the 16 Lander. The Lander in Germany are like our Provincial Councils and they also have an executive head named Minister-President like our Chief Minister. The Bundesrat provides a valuable function in bringing the Lander to work with the Federal Government as the Second Chamber of the German Parliament.

What concerns us more though is the mixed system of elections practised by the Germans to their First Chamber, the Bundestag. All parliamentary elections in Germany are direct, free, equal and by secret ballot with those over 18 gaining universal franchise. The Germans call their system " Personalized Proportional Representation " which is PPR. In the PPR system each voter has two votes. One is given to the candidate of their choice on the basis of electoral constituencies. The candidate who receives the highest number of votes is then elected to the Bundestag. The second vote is given to the list of candidates put up by political parties. Eventually the number of seats per party on the PR basis is determined.

At the end of the general election there comes the process of equalizing known as " topping up. " In this remarkable system the votes from the constituencies and those for the party lists are offset in such a manner that the composition of the Bundestag almost identically reflects the distribution of votes among parties nationwide. Half the number of MP’s are elected by the constituencies via FPP while the other half are given seats by party list based national PR.

The good news is that as far as the UNP and the PA are concerned, both parties are committed to reforming the present system and its replacement with a German PPR type hybrid system. UNP Leaders Ranil Wickremasinghe and Karu Jayasuriya have indicated they are in favour of a modified German system while PA Cabinet Minister Professor G.L.Peiris has written many articles to the " Sunday Observer " and " Sunday Island " on his own version of how the German system could be modified for Sri Lanka. Given below are excerpts from the UNP and PA General Election Manifesto’s of 1994 about their advocacy of the German PPR system of elections.

The Peoples Alliance (PA) 1994 Manifesto states in its section on Constitutional Reforms, paragraph 3, that " The system of proportional representation will continue, subject to the modification that one half of the seats in Parliament will be filled on the basis of territorial constituencies, while the other half will be catered for by the principle of proportional representation, much as it operates in the German system. The hybrid structure will enable retention of the advantages of proportional representation, coupled with scope for closer contact between a Member of Parliament and his constituents."

The United National Party (UNP) Manifesto of 1994 states that " The general consensus is that the system of Proportional Representation in Parliament, introduced by the United National Party and by which system the last Parliament was elected should be continued.... However we recognize the fact that the electors suffer the disadvantage of not having a Member of Parliament who is directly responsible to represent end look after the interest of a particular area.... We therefore propose to modify me present system by combining the former electoral or constituency system with proportional representation. Such a combined system will have the advantage of electing a Parliament which reflects the overall voting patterns of the country; it also has the advantage of having representatives chosen by the people in each electorate."

Peoplized Proportional Representation

Mahanama proposes the following system by which 162 seats in Parliament are filled by 10 Multi Member Electoral Regions. One half of these 162 elected members would be chosen by 81 Single Member Electoral Counties islandwide. Like in the German system this would combine the advantages of both the FPP and PR systems. To ensure stable government the winning party will get another 8 Nominated Members giving them a smooth working majority. This would make up a total of 170 MPs in the First Chamber, called the House of Parliament. A Second Chamber, named the Senate, is also proposed with 60 members.

In the Senate, each of the nine Provincial Councils will have 6 members through a method of indirect election via nomination of the already elected PC members. The Provincial Chief Minister and the Provincial Opposition Leader would nominate three Senators each. The President of the Republic would nominate another 6 Senators from among the elected Provincial Councillors. That is how the 60 Senators would be chosen; 54 by the nine Provincial Councils and 6 by the President. Furthermore, two of the six Senators nominated by the President have to be women. The Provincial Chief Ministers and Provincial Opposition Leaders would also have to nominate one woman Senator each. This would result in a minimum of 20 women Senators in the 60 member Senate. The Senate will always have 33 members nominated by the Government and 27 members nominated by the Opposition. This would give any Government a slight majority, (though never an overwhelming majority), that would ensure the balance of political power in the Second Chamber.

This is not unusual for Sri Lanka. From 1947 to 1972, when we had the Soulbury Constitution, the Prime Minister designate was given the privilege of nominating 6 MPs who were then appointed to Parliament by the Governor General. In the first Parliament of old Ceylon in 1947 there were 95 members elected from 90 single and multi member constituencies and 6 appointed members, making up the 101 member House of Representatives. There was also the 30 member Senate of which 15 were nominated by the Governor General and the other 15 elected by Parliament. The first Parliament of old Ceylon had a total of 131 members.

Mahanama calls the proposed system, " Peoplized Proportional Representation "(PPR), which in Sinhalese would be known as "Janahithakaani Samaanupaathika Niyoojanaya." The Bundestag type House of Parliament or First Chamber would make use of the integrated PPR system that is really a fusion of the FFP and PR systems. For the Bundesrat type Senate or Second Chamber there would indirect election through each of the nine Provincial Councils.

Another unique feature is that the 6 Senators from each Province would also be elected Provincial Councillors. Furthermore, it would be mandatory for the Chief Minister and Opposition Leader of each Provincial Council, to be nominated as Senators. A noteworthy feature of the new system is the drastic limitation in the numbers of MPs and PCs in the public interest. The overwhelming number of MP’s and PCs with their Pajero’s, Intercoolers, body guards and camp followers, has been the subject of intense public debate.

At present there are 680 such politicians. That is, 225 Members of Parliament and 455 Provindal Councillors. Mahanama proposes they be cut down to 490 while at the same time ensuring good governance, greater efficiency and national unity. In this system of government there would be only 170 MPs in the House of Parliament and 320 PCs in the nine Provincial Councils. There would be 60 Senators also, except that all the Senators are to be nominated from among the 320 PCs. Not just the 54 Senators from the nine Provinces, but even the 6 Senators nominated by the President, have to be already existing Provincial Councillors. That is how the total of 490 is arrived at. Today there are 680 members in 09 legislative assemblies. In the new system proposed there will be 11 legislative assemblies but only 490 members.

In this integrated PPR system there would be 81 Single Member Electoral Counties named (Mathiwarana Janapada and 10 Electoral Regions named (Mathiwarana Kalaapa) for the 162 elected Members of Parliament. For the sake of territorial contiguity and integration with local government the 81 Single Member Electoral Counties and 10 Multi Member Electoral Regions would be based on Provincial boundaries. The ten Electoral Regions would be, (1) Mayarata, (2) Gampaha, (3) Ruhuna, (4) Wayamba, (5) Udarata, (6) Sabaragamuva, (7) Uva, (8) Rajarata, (9) Vanni,and (10) Thambapanni. By this PPR system no party would be able to gain an overwhelming majority of two thirds unless they get nearly 60% of the vote.

Balanced Representation with Territorial Weightage

The 81 seats obtained via the Multi Member Electoral Region based Proportional Representation method will balance the numbers while the other 81 seats based on Single Member Electoral Counties via the " First Past The Post" method will establish the link between voters and MPs. Given below is the number of seats allocated to the Regions drawn up on the basis of population and geographic area. For the 162 elected members, 75% (or 122 seats) are to be allocated on the basis of population in each Province. The other 25% (or 40 seats) are to be distributed on a calculated territorial basis with the Province being the unit.The sparsely populated Dry Zone provinces are given some weightage.

By this method 20 seats are allocated to the five heavily populated Wet Zone provinces. That is, 4 seats each for the Western, North Western (Wayamba), Southern (Ruhuna), Sabaragamuva and Central (Udarata) provinces. The four sparsely populated Dry Zone provinces are also given 20 seats. That is, 5 seats each for the Northern (Vanni), Eastern (Thambapanni), North Central (Rajarata) and Uva provinces. In the Western Province, of the 4 seats allocated on a territorial basis, 2 would go to the Mayarata, and 2 to the Gampaha Electoral Regions. That is how the 9 Administrative Provinces result in 10 Electoral Regions.

The Soulbury Commission also noted this neccessity and recommended a system of " balanced representation " by which the Kandyan areas and Tamil majority areas were given some weightage. In fact, for the first Parliament of old Ceylon in 1947 there were 70 seats distributed on a population basis and 25 on a territorial basis with one member per approximately 1,000 square miles. The proportions in 1947 were 74% to 26% to be exact. If the new system is adopted, the proportions of population versus territorial distribution of seats would be exactly 75% to 25%. That is, three to one, approximately, in both cases.

Sir Ivor Jennings wrote in his classic work, The Constitution of Ceylon, published in 1949, in chapter 4, titled, " The Franchise And The Constituencies " that " The Province is the unit Each Province has one constituency for each 75,000 of population, ascertained to the nearest 75,000, and an

additional constituency for every 1,000 square miles of area. The weightage thus varies from 1 in the Western Province to 4 each in the Northern, Eastern and North Central Provinces... In addition there were to be six nominated members. "

According to the number of seats allocated to each Province in 1947, as described by Sir Ivor Jenninges there were 67 for the five Wet Zone provinces and 28 for the four Dry Zone provinces. The proportions then, were 70% for the five Wet Zone provinces and 30% for the four Dry Zone provinces. If the new system is adopted the five Wet Zone provinces will have 110 seats (68%) and the four Dry Zone provinces 52 seats (32%). The system of PPR proposed by Mahanama for the new millennium in 2,000 will therefore closely approximate the territorial versus population "balanced representation" formula described by Sir Ivor Jennings that prevailed at the dawn of independence in 1947.

User Friendly Nature: Single Transferable Vote

In the German system of PPR it was noted that each voter is given Two Votes; one for the election of the individual member and one for the election of a political party or an independent group. In the Mahanama system of PPR there is only a " Single Transferable Vote" that achieves everything like the Seylan Bank SMART (Seylan Multi Action Rapid Teller) Card. The voter has to only mark a cross in front of the party symbol, Elephant, Chair, Bell, Peacock, as the case may be. By this single action the voter elects the MP of the Electoral County to represent him in Parliament while also contributing to the total aggregate of votes won by the Political Party or Independant Group for that Electoral Region. Hence, the Mahanama system of PPR is " User Friendly" to use a current IT buzz word. Then, the total number of votes within an Electoral Region are counted for the operation of the German style " topping up" procedure to determine the number of seats won by parties and groups.

A concrete example from the Ruhuna Electoral Region using a hypothetical scenario could be used to illustrate the new PPR system. Let us assume that in the year 2,000 general election the PA gets 42% of the vote while the UNP gets 42% and the JVP 8% in Ruhuna. The UMP, MEP, NLF, LP, SLPF all combined have a total of 3% of the votes. All of them would lose their deposit while the spoilt votes are 5% in Ruhuna.This leaves only the PA, the UNP and the JVP for the purpose of seat allocation.

Since the total number of seats from Ruhuna for the House of Parliament is 20, the PA is entitled to 9 seats, the UNP 9 seats and the JVP 2 seats. Now let us assume that the PA has won in 6 of the 10 Single Member Electoral Counties in Ruhuna. Then they are entitled to another 3 from the Electoral Region making it a total of 9 MPs for the PA. As for the UNP let us assume they won in 4 of the Electoral Counties. Since the number of MPs they are entitled to is 9 they get 5 from the Electoral Region. The JVP didn’t win a single Electoral County. However their entitlement is 2 which is given from the Electoral Region. The total adds up to 20 seats for the Ruhuna Electoral Region.

A skeptical reader, like the Scottish philosopher David Hume, might wonder how practical this PPR system and the "topping up" procedure is if by chance the PA had won all 10 Electoral Counties and also gets 12 seats by winning 56% of the vote. In this second scenario the UNP gets only 28% and is entitled to 6 seats while the JVP gets 8% and is allocated 2 seats. The answer is, NO PROBLEM. In this case the PA has already won 10 of its 12 seat allocation from the Electoral Counties. So the PA gets 2 more from the Electoral Region in the " topping up" process. The UNP and the JVP get their 6 seats and 2 seats, respectively, from the Electoral Region.

The practice would be established by law in the Mahanama type PPR system that preference be given to the Electoral County candidates, followed by the Electoral Region candidates in the arrangement of the Political Party or Independent Group List. First of all there is only One List by each Party or Group for each Region and a Single Transferable Vote for each voter. To go back to the Ruhuna example, since there are 20 seats in all, the Election Region List would have the ten County Candidates as number one to ten and the ten Region Candidates as number eleven to twenty.

If we consider the latter instance in which the PA gets 12 MP’s, the UNP 6 MP’s and the JVP 2 MP’s only, the system would still work very well. The ten PA County Candidates would be elected while their numbers eleven and twelve who are Region Candidates also get elected making up the 12 seats. As for the UNP the 6 seats would be given automatically to numbers one to six in the List which means their top 6 County Candidates get elected. The JVP also gets their County Candidate number one and two elected. Thereby there will still be 18 Janapada Manthri (County MP’s) and only 2 Kalaapa Manthri (Region MP’s). The only unusual feature is that the voters will have two individual MP’s instead of one in eight out of ten Electoral Counties. Hence the new system actually promotes greater democracy. The people are asking for their own Member of Parliament. Many of them will get not one, but two Members of Parliament for the same Electoral County!

Parliamentary Advisory Committee System

There are other features of the Bundestag system that may be applicable to Sri Lanka including its Permanent Committee System. The Bundestag is elected for a 4 year term by the people direct vote. Its main function is to pass laws, to elect the Federal Chancellor by an electoral college together with the Bundesrat, and to keep check on the government. It is in the 22 Parliamentary Permanent Committees (whose meetings are not open to the public) that the groundwork for legislation is done. All 672 members of the present Bundestag are in the 22 Permanent Committees ensuring participatory democracy and consensus politics at the highest levels of the German government.

Here it is a question of harmonizing political intentions with detailed knowledge provided by experts. It is also in the committees that parliament scrutinizes and controls the activities of government. The Bundestag’s 22 Permanent Committees roughly corresponds with the Federal Government’s Departments and Ministries. They can range from the small Tourism Committee and Sports Committee with 17 members each, to the large Health Committee and Legal Affairs Committee with 32 members each, to the even larger Finance Committee and Foreign Affairs Committee, with 39 members each. It is interesting to note that the State Council of Ceylon, from 1931-47 under the Donoughmore Constitution, had a membership of 50 with 7 Executive Committees each with seven or eight members.

For the National Parliament of Sri Lanka the following 17 Parliamentary Advisory Committees are proposed. (1) National Budget and Public Finance, (2) National Security and National Police, (3) Justice and Constitutional Affairs, (4) Provincial Councils and Local Government, (5) Foreign Affairs and Civil Aviation, (6) Health and Education, (7) Shipping and Transport, (8) Sports and Tourism, (9) Mass Media and Cultural Affairs, (10) Post and Telecommunication, (11) Agriculture and Irrigation, (12) Youth Affairs and Women’s Liberation, (13) Labour and Social Welfare, (14) Trade and Commerce, (15) Industry and Fisheries, (16) Housing and Urban Development, (17) South Asian Regional Cooperation.

Since the new model House of Parliament or First Chamber would have 170 members, each Parliamentary Advisory Committee would have 10 members and would be led by a Chairman and a Vice Chairman. The Deputy Speaker (Chairman of Committees) and the Deputy Chairman of Committees (two offices that already exist) would coordinate the activities of the 17 Parliamentary Advisory Committees. The Committee system gives the opportunity to 34 MP’s (including Opposition MP’s) to serve as Chairmen and Vice Chairmen. Furthermore, all MP’s without exception would be in one of the Committees, most of which would be bi-partisan.

The alienation of the backbench MP’s from the business of government would become a bad legacy of the past. The Young Turks of the earlier "Ginger Group" of the UNP and the "Mulberry Group" of the present PA would have won their unceasing struggle for participatory democracy within Parliament.The new model House of Parliament would then truly embody the spirit of the entire nation since all the Members of Parliament would be involved in the affairs of the country. That is the Brave New Parliament that Mahanama proposes for 21st century Sri Lanka.

Ceylon Workers Congress keeps cool despite provocations

Apropos the news item purported to have been given as a statement by the National Movement Against Terrorism (N.M.A.T.) in your esteemed Journal which appeared on the 9th of May 1999 (Sunday issue), I herebelow give the factual position which took place between 29th April, to 1st May (May Day) and kindly request you to give equal publicity, since my name in my capacity as a Member of Parliament, representing the Nuwara Eliya District and a Vice President of the Ceylon Workers’ Congress has figured prominantly in your Edition.

The statement of the National Movement against Terrorism (N.M.A.T.) is far from true and certain versions appearing in the statement is not only concocted , but misleads§ the public, to seek public opinion and sympathy.

• The Ceylon Workers’ Congress which has the biggest membership in the Nuwara Eliya district made arrangements to hold its May day rally in Nuwara Eliya, and the preparations were made from the mid of April, 1999. Accordingly, the law enforcing officers, the police were informed of the May Day arrangements and the necessary permits obtained and their co-operation for security arrangements and the maintenance of law and order, were sought during this period, since a large crowd was expected to participate:

• During this period, the Annual "Mariamman Temple" celebrations and the Chariot (Ther) festival too coincided with the May Day. And this matter too was informed to the Nuwara Eliya Police and the necessary permits were obtained:

• Surprisingly, the Sinhala Veeravidhana Movement (N.M.A.T.) all of a sudden came out with Anti-Tamil posters, and a huge sixty foot banner with a racial cry and anti — Tamil had come up below the Post Office, Nuwara Eliya, was the venue of the Ceylon Workers’ Congress May Day Rally, where a stage by 50 X 15 feet, was to be erected. On the same day (30th April, 99) the Sinhala Veeravidhana Movement organised a meeting in the Public Library, almost adjacent to the Post Office, while the Ceylon Workers’ Congress May Day decorations and the stage was in the process was being erected the speakers at the N.M.A.T. meeting made racial, anti-Tamil, anti-Thondaman, anti-Ceylon Workers’ Congress and very disparaging utterances much to the annoyance and anger of the Tamils present for the preparations for their May Day. One cannot understand as to how the 60 foot banner was put up in the early hours of the 28th April, two days prior to the C.W.C. May Day. The question remains as to how the Nuwara Eliya Police did not notice such a huge banner being put up in the same venue where the Ceylon Workers’ Congress May Day celebrations were to take place:

• It is pertinant to question the Police how while the Emergency Laws were in operation, such racial, communalistic slogans displayed in the banner was allowed? Knowing too well, especially when two important functions, namely the Annual Muthumariamman Temple festival and the May Day celebrations involving majority of the Tamils were to take place.

• The action of the Sinhala Veeravidhana Movement amply demonstrates the fact, that thiers was a well calculated step to disturb the friendliness among the majority community and the Tamils living in this part of the country:

• It will be recalled in April 1998, when the Sri Muthumariamman Temple’s Ther festival was taking place in Nuwara Eliya, a few members belonging to this movement, deliberately cut down the decorated plantain trees, along the Bazaar, and later the suspects were produced before the Magistrate and fined Rs. 5000.00 each.

• Certainly, the Nuwara Eliya Police fully knowing the previous happenings, should have taken adequate measures and prevented the anti-slogans displayed the huge banner:

• It is very unfortunate, when the whole country is crying for racial unity, and peace, the N.M.A.T. is speaking about the so-called illegal immigrants being brought into this country. But they have forgotten the toil of those people for the well being of the country. It is inhuman, to accuse them of dividing the country.

The Sinhala Veeravitana Movement (N.M.A.T.) should know that all citizens of Sri Lanka, have rights for equal treatment. And no one has any right to deprive them of opportunities enjoyed by every citizen of the country.

Regarding the entire events that took place on the 28th of April, till May 1st, a full and comprehensive statement was made by myself, and other members of parliament representing the Nuwara Eliya district namely S. A. R. Thondaman and Muthu Sivalingam.

It is pertinant further to point out that despite the provocations by members of the Sinhala Veeravidhana Movement the Ceylon Worker’s Congress leadership conducted its affairs peacefully.

S. Sathasivam, M.P.
Vice President, Ceylon Workers’ Congress.

Wayamba – that day of infamy

As described in the Prologue during the seventeen years of rule and mis-rule by the UNP, some elections were fair and others were not. For example the Presidential Election of October 1982 was fair, barring the disenfranchisement of Sirima Bandaranaike. The Referendum of December 1982 was anything but fair. The Presidential Election of December 1988 was anything but fair but the General Election of February 1989 was fair, so was the General Election of August 1994.

There is a serious doubt in my mind whether the Local Government Election of March 1997, the first of the major elections held under the SLFP - led People’s Alliance was fair or not. The tragic murder of Nalanda Ellawela MP (SLFP - Ratnapura District) allegedly by Susantha Punchinilame MP (UNP - Ratnapura District) greatly disturbed the emotional equilibrium of the nation and generated a tidal wave of resentment against the UNP. Beeshanaya was once again the campaign theme of the People’s Alliance and the verdict of the nation was:

People’s Alliance - 50.1% UNP - 41.3%

My considered opinion is that after the assassination of Nanda Ellawala, allegedly by a Member of Parliament of the UNP, the People’s Alliance had to win. However there were many nefarious activities by SLFP elements in the Districts of Chilaw, Gampaha, Kandy, Kurunegala and Polonnaruwa. More disturbing was that anti-social elements were brought into the campaign in significant numbers by Members of Parliament of the SLFP, some of whom were Ministers and even Cabinet Ministers. The information I had in 1997 was not sufficiently corroborated to accuse anybody by name but a sad feature was that the Police was impotent in the Districts under reference. Much worse, the Government took no remedial action.

Capacity

The Sorbonne-educated President Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga is unquestionably a member of the intelligentsia. Her intellectual capacity is more than obvious to anyone who speaks to her in English or French. Somehow her style of speaking is so different in Sinhala. In that language she is both coarse and inelegant and suffers in comparison to her mother. That blemish is certainly strange because both mother and daughter are products of St. Bridget’s Convent, Colombo, which has such a well established reputation for refinement.

On the election platforms the Sinhala used by the President is even worse. With her repertoire of the colloquial and the bawdy in Sinhala, she comes through not as intellectual but as a street fighter, at best as a fiery Leader of the Opposition and anything but a President of Sri Lanka.

Aggressive

She was indeed in a very aggressive mood campaigning in Wayamba. Rather than defend her performance as President of Sri Lanka and that of her Administration, she berated the UNP and berated the Leader of the Opposition, Ranil Wickremasinghe, as if he was a pickpocket. As she gathered momentum she attacked not only Ranil Wickremasinghe, but even his mother, once a wealthy land owner in Wayamba and elsewhere, his brother Shan who operates Teleshan Network Ltd.(TNL) and even his sister who is merely a private citizen!

That puzzled me greatly because at the General Election of 1994 she was the de facto Leader of the Opposition, because her mother was too ill to campaign. Now more than four years into a six year term as President she was speaking in the same vein. Besides she had a habit of stating,

"Api kohoma hari Wayamba dinanawa" (We will somehow win Wayamba)

The operative word was somehow. That meant different things to different people. I wondered why she repeatedly said "We will somehow win Wayamba", because the People’s Alliance was winning anyway according to so many diverse intelligence reports.

Dignity

On the other hand Ranil Wickremesinghe conducted himself with great dignity on the election platform. It was drilled into him by his Godfather, President J.R Jayewardene, that he must never ever abuse people. He has perfected that art to such an extent that he cannot breath fire even as the Leader of the Opposition! Ranil Wickremesinghe was such a lacklustre speaker as a Cabinet Minister, that his Godfather kept him away from the UNP national platform which for years was dominated by such superb orators like Prime Minister R. Premadasa, Cabinet Ministers Gamini Dissanayake and Lalith Athulathmudali and of course President J.R Jayewardene himself as Leader of the Opposition Ranil Wickremesinghe has improved considerably as a speaker. However he has to improve so much more to match the previous Leaders of the Opposition from the UNP, namely Dudley Senanayake (1960 - 65), J. R. Jayewardene (1970 - 77) and Gamini Dissanayake (August-November 1994).

The campaign in Wayamba began around January 10th 1999. In the fray were the President, the Leader of the Opposition, a multitude of Cabinet Ministers and former Cabinet Ministers. They campaigned against a background of escalating violence.

On January 11th a gang of approximately 100 goons from the People’s Alliance (PA) attacked the UNP candidate Johnson Fernando and damaged his office at Mawatagama. The damage was estimated to be around Rs. 280,000. This incident took place just 400 metres from the Mawatagama Police Station. The Policemen watched nonchalantly. That night, jeep loads of goons from the PA attacked the home of UNP candidate Mrs. S. L. K . Wadugodapitiya in Wariyapola. They threatened her and her young daughters with dire consequences if she decided to complain to the Wariyapola Police Station. On January 12th two JVP supporters M.T. Chaminda and R. G. Premaratne were attacked with iron rods at Mawatagama by goons from the PA. Both were admitted to the Kurunegala General Hospital. On January 13th the Chief Ministerial candidate of the New Left Front, Patrick Fernando, and the leader of that Front Dr. Wickremabahu Karunaratne, a Cambridge-educated Marxist, were attacked by unknown assailants and both were admitted to the Kurunegala General Hospital. The same night Leslie Gunawardene of the PA and his son were attacked by goons from the UNP. Both were taken to the Kurunegala Police Station and their complaint was duly recorded by the Police. The complainant being the PA, the Mawatagama Police shed their nonchalance and went into action. They arrested the goons, Abdul Ishan Mohammed, H. D. Nandasena, Sunil Premachandra, G.G. Piyasena and Edward Piyasena. They were immediately produced before the Kurunegala Magistrate and duly remanded for two weeks.

On January 14th the convoy of the Leader of the Opposition’ travelling to Marawila, was attacked by some supporters of the PA. One van was damaged and the extent of damage was assessed at Rs. 35,000.

During early hours of January 15th several shots were fired at the residence of UNP candidate Nimal Fernando. He escaped unhurt but his house guest Premaratne Gunasekera M.P. (UNP - Colombo District) was slightly wounded. He received treatment at the Out Patients Department at the National Hospital in Colombo. Heavily bandaged he appeared on TNL Television the next day while the Rupavabini TV took great trouble to refute these allegations.

Candidate

On the night of January 15th the home of UNP candidate Gamini Dissanayake at Hettipola came under fire by T-56 machine guns. His wife was shot in the chest and was admitted to the Kurunegala General Hospital and underwent surgery. His house guest K. S. M. Tudor was shot in the stomach and underwent surgery. Another house guest P. Siva, the Treasurer of the UNP Youth League, was shot dead. After opening fire the assailants fled in two double cabs, a white Toyota Hiace van and a blue Pajero. They were allowed to go through a check point just 200 metres away. The Police manning the check point, PC Mangala, PC Tillekeratne, PC Kamal and PC Adikari were interdicted the following day.

As the violence escalated there were 152 incidents reported to the Police Station at Kuliyapitiya and 69 incidents reported to the Police Station at Mawatagama. What Police action was taken remains a mystery. For example Mohammed Thaha Anoous alias Anju was specifically named in five separate complaints. Yet the Mawatagama Police could not apprehend him as of the end of January 1999.

Damage

On the night of January 17th armed gangs from the PA attacked the home of D.M. Bandaranayake MP (UNP-Kurunegala District) at Daladagama near Maho. In broad day light on January 18th, the supporters of A. M. S. Adikari,former Cabinet Minister from the UNP for Post and Telecommunications, and the PA supporters of Bandula Basnayake MP (SLFP-Kurunegala District) clashed at the Galgamuwa Junction. Each side threw stones at the other causing damage to their vehicles. At the Police Station at Galgamuwa each side blamed the other. The Police claimed that they would inquire into the complaints. As of this writing they are still inquiring!

With five days of campaigning left the Wayamba was transformed into a battlefield. Somehow all parties contesting the Provincial Council Election barring the ruling People’s Alliance were severely attacked. The People’s Alliance was seriously attacked only twice, at Mawatagama and at Galgamuwa.

Campaign

January 19th 1999, will indeed go down to the annals of history as a unique day for women in Sri Lanka. On that day "Kasippu" Lal a goon from the PA from Gantiriyawa and his fellow goons armed with T-56 machine guns and travelling in a van accosted UNP supporters from the Southern Province who were on a house-to-house campaign at Gantiriyawa. The men, including Provincial Councilor Justin Galappathy were mercilessly assaulted. Then the machine guns were turned on a 50 year old grandmother B.M. Chandrawathie from Akuressa. She was asked to remove her clothes. She refused and was assaulted. In fear she then removed the top button of her blouse, hoping her humiliation would stop there. Just the opposite happened. Some of the goons ripped off her blouse, others ripped off her brassiere. When Justin Galappathy gallantly went to her rescue he was hit with the butt of the T-56 machine gun. Then some goons pulled off the cloth of Chandrawathie, others her underskirt. Thus she was stark naked. Then with a machine gun at her back, she was made to run on the road. She ran into a nearby scrub jungle. With whatever scanty clothes she could collect she finally made it to the Katupotha Police Station and lodged her complaint there. No action was taken by the Police during the month of January 1999.

The following day the same ritual was performed in Wariyapola by another gang of goons from the PA riding in a numberless Pajero and armed with T-56 machine guns. The victim that day was an 18 year old school leaver Dulani from Wariyapola who was taken to the Wariyapola hospital by her family. She lodged a complaint with the Wariyapola Police. She too identified her attackers but no action was taken by the Police during the month of January 1999.

When the campaign was on its last three days, the violence increased still further. The JVP meeting at Pannala had to be cancelled because the stage and the sound system was set on fire that very afternoon, January 20th. The Police who were on duty merely watched the spectacle. Shortly after dusk the same day at Palaviya junction, M. M. Gamini a supporter of the PA and a businessman was shot dead outside a bar he owned. According to the Puttalam Police the assailant probably walked in with the murder weapon, a shot gun, because the Police checkpoint clearly confirmed that no vehicle entered or departed from the scene of the murder. The CID subsequently established that the murder was the result of a private feud.

The following night when the Agence France Presse (AFP) and the Press Trust of India (PTI) sent their journalists and photographers to cover a UNP meeting at Anamaduwa and a PA meeting at Chilaw, their convoy was shot at. Mercifully there were no casualties. Later that night the UNP office at Chilaw was attacked savagely. When Ranil Wickremesinghe was addressing the UNP rally at Anamaduwa still later that night thousands of PA and UNP supporters hurled insults at each other. For once the Police was effective in preventing a breach of the peace. Two truck loads of personnel from the Special Task Force, who were on stand-by duty, intervened effectively.

On the last day of campaigning, namely January 22nd, Mervyn De Silva M.P. (UNP - Hambantota District) and two UNP supporters were shot at Nochiyagama and were admitted to the Anuradhapura General Hospital. At the final rally of the UNP at Kuliyapitiya once again UNP and PA supporters were trading insults and the atmosphere was most tense when the Leader of the Opposition was winding up his campaign. Once again detachments of the Special Task Force brought in from Colombo earlier that day maintained law and order. In direct contrast at the giant rally of the People’s Alliance at Kurunegala the President wound up her campaign breathing fire at the UNP at a meeting which was devoid of incidents.

Till the dawn of 1999 the Wayamba was very tranquil. For years that Province had been spared of the agony of terrorism by the JVP, by the LTTE, or by the State. Yet it was transformed into a battlefield within ten days. According to the President while campaigning for the Presidency in 1994, "Our people must live in dignity and with self-respect. We assure you a free and vibrant democracy, law and order and the freedom to live in peace. My Government will be committed to non-violence and the democratic way of life".

Reacting to the allegation that her Government had resorted to terror tactics at the Local Government Elections of 1997 she stated:

"Terror tactics are the last resort of the weak and foolish politicians who have neither a vision nor political courage. We have the human values, the vision, the backing of our people and the courage to arrive at a consensus. Therefore there is no necessity for us to resort to terror tactics".

Since Independence Wayamba has been a unique electorate, the only Province to vote with a winning party every time. Their impressive record is as follows:

General Election Voting pattern
1952 UNP
1956 SLFP led- Coalition
1960 (March) UNP
1960 (July) SLFP led - Coalition
1965 UNP led - Coalition
1970 SLFP led- Coalition
1977 UNP
1989 UNP
1994 SLFP led - Coalition

In 1956 Wayamba saw the Leader of the Opposition S. W. R. D. Bandaranaike lead his campaign and return a few months later as Prime Minister. In 1965 it was Leader of the Opposition Dudley Senanayake who led the campaign of the UNP and was duly elected Prime Minister. In 1970 it was Leader of the Opposition Sirima Bandaranaike, who led the campaign of the SLFP, she wss duly elected Prime Minister. In 1977 the Leader of the Opposition J.R. Jayewardene led the UNP to a landslide victory throughout the nation winning 20 out of 21 electorates in Wayamba. In 1994 the Leader of the Opposition Sirima Bandaranaike was too weak to lead the campaign, having suffered a stroke. Her daughter Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga deputised for her. She was duty elected Prime Minister.

Why did the SLFP, not the other components of the People’s Alliance namely the LSSP, the Communist Party, the Sri Lanka Muslim Congress or the United Lalith Front, behave so badly during the election campaign in January 1999? Why was the Leader of the Opposition Ranil Wickremasinghe not allowed to address the people of Wayamba without being heckled by thousands of SLFP supporters? Why did the SLFP led by a women since 1960 and with a woman President of Sri Lanka since 1994 demean itself by stripping two women till they were stark naked and then force them to parade on the road? Those questions must be answered truthfully sooner rather than later. Indeed I hope the SLFP will be brave enough to face itself when it is guilty. Otherwise the future of democracy in Sri Lanka is indeed in peril.

Over the week-end Saturday 23rd — Sunday 24th January 1999 I met amongst others The Right- Reverend Andrew Kumarage, the saintly Bishop of Kurunegala of the Church of Ceylon and the successor to The late Bishop Lakshman Wickremasinghe, my friend, philosopher and guide.

Bishop Andrew Kumarage was indeed horrified by what he had seen and heard. He said that the least I owed the nation was to write an impartial book on what happened in Wayamba during the past two weeks and what will happen on January 25th 1999.

The apprehensions of the Bishop were indeed vindicated. Over that week-end all manner of State-owned vehicles without their number plates, suddenly came into Wayamba Armed security personnel from several State owned Corporations came by their hundreds some even in their uniforms! The Ministerial Security Division (MSD) was there in full strength reportedly to provide security for the 21 Ministers, in Cabinet rank or otherwise, who were assigned to the 21 electoral areas, former Parliamentary electorates in the first past the post system. Those personnel from the MSD were heavily armed with T-56 machine guns adequate to equip a Company in the Sri Lanka Army on operational duties in the North. Above all hundreds of buses from depots of the Sri Lanka Transport Board throughout the nation barring the North and the East and scores of taxis from the Bandaranaike International Airport brought in thousands of strangers to Wayamba. In the meantime this phenomenon was watched with nonchalance by thousands of dummies from the Sri Lanka Police on election duty in Wayamba.

By dawn on Monday 25th January the dummies of the Sri Lanka Police and the election staff manning the ll50 polling booths in Wayamba moved into their assigned positions. Polling commenced without incidents as scheduled at 7 am. that morning.

By 8 am. mayhem had broken out in over 200 pollingbooths. As a sample, the polling at the following booths was near 100% by 11 am.

Anamaduwa (all booths), Boraluwewa, Chilaw (Carmel Maha Vidyalaya) Kalpitiya (Toranahewa), Kotagama Government School Mawatagama (all boolhs), Nikaweratiya (Babakmeegalla Muslim School), Pannala, Polgahawela (all booths) Puttalam (most booths),Wennapuwa (Dankotawa Girls School),

(Serial to be continued next Sunday)
(Book to be released on May 31st )

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