.

A potential minefield

Snippets of information emanating from various sources, including what appears to have been a stormy exchange at cabinet, suggests that the draft equal opportunities legislation may well be a veritable minefield which this country should not traverse without utmost care. Nobody will dispute the good intentions of the proposals. But we must also not forget the old saw that the path to hell is littered with good intentions. Also, it is necessary to be pragmatic in these matters.

Government insiders admit that the late Dr. Neelan Tiruchelvam, who was one of the most visible human rights activists produced by contemporary Sri Lanka, had a big hand in the preparation of this legislation which is being presented by Justice Minister G. L. Peiris who also has cabinet responsibility for national integration and constitutional affairs. Peiris who has impeccable liberal credentials has carefully orchestrated the presentation of these proposals with articles, press interviews, etc. But already sections of the community are disturbed by what they perceive as possible hazards.

The long title of the draft Bill clearly sets out the intention of the proposed legislation. It reads: "An Act to make unlawful, discrimination on the grounds of ethnicity, gender, religious or political opinion, language, caste, age or disability, in employment, education, access to public places and means of transportation and in the provision of accommodation, goods and services; to provide for the formulation of equal opportunity programmes by employers; to provide for the establishment of an Equal Opportunity Commission and an Equal Opportunity Tribunal; and to provide for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto."

On the face of it, there do not appear to be any features that any reasonable person would object to. But any law must take necessary cognizance of ground realities that exist in the society in which it is to be implemented. There are, for example, schools in this country which are denominational in character. Ananda College, Colombo, for example, was founded by the Buddhist Theosophical Society during the colonial years to provide a Buddhist educational background to its students. From its inception, the students of that school have been predominantly Sinhalese Buddhist. To say so is not to assert that others were totally excluded. That is not so. There were non-Sinhala Buddhists among the students and staff of the school and many Anandians speak affectionately of schoolmates and teachers who were neither Sinhalese nor Buddhist.

Is it the intention of the government under the guise of equal opportunities legislation to change the character of such schools and say that the area rule of admissions must lie? We would certainly hope that this is not the case. There are other schools in the country that are Christian, Catholic, Hindu or Muslim. Some of them that are run by various religious organisations, we are told, will not be caught up in the proposed legislation. Trinity, St. Thomas’, St. Joseph’s, St. Bridget’s Convent and Ladies College to name a few are among these. But schools like Ananda, Nalanda, Visakha, Musaeus, etc. appear to come under its ambit and there can be obvious difficulties.

Take also the question of old boys (or old girls) admission quotas that apply in many of the better known schools. What will the equal opportunity legislation do to the existence of such quotas? Many of these schools have a long tradition of catering to succeeding generations with fathers vying to have their sons admitted to their old schools. Royalists sing of the "school where our fathers learnt the way before us" in their college anthem. Will the limited degree of preference currently permitted to children of old boys be taken away under the cloak of equal opportunity?

Why look for trouble in areas where none exist? On one side we have Foreign Minister Lakshman Kadirgamar telling the councils of the world that the Sri Lankan State does not practice discrimination against its citizen. On the other we are preparing legislation to ensure that that there is no discrimination in access to public places, means of transportation, accommodation, etc. This country has never been what South Africa was in the apartheid days. If so, why bring legislation suggesting that we have such problems? We do remember a time that certain so-called depressed castes were not permitted entry to certain Hindu temples like at Mavaddipuram. But despite all the efforts of giants of the day like Mr. C. Suntheralingam, the State conclusively demonstrated exactly where it stood.

Section 12 of the Constitution, under the fundamental rights chapter, categorically asserts that "no citizen shall be discriminated against on the grounds of race, religion, language, caste, sex, political opinion, place of birth or any one of such ground." Where there are lacunae, the Supreme Court, which exercises sole constitutional jurisdiction, has and will continue to make the necessary determination. Why have new bodies like the Equal Opportunity Commissions and Equal Opportunity Tribunals for matters that are adequately cared for already?

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