Archives

by Prof. C. Suriyakumaran

"For Forms of Government Let Fools Contest

Whate'er Is Best Administered Is Best"

With the word federalism having gained currency, and so much in the air now, we have had a plethora of attention, in writings and speeches. Thought to be a magic alternative to 'separation' that the LTTE had as its goal, and which it was now ready to exchange for this new formula, a sense of wide relief immediately followed, along with instantaneous attention from numerous quarters to its contents and formulations. Soon, the same apparent 'solvent' created nearly as many interpretations as there were participants and contributors that abounded.

At one extreme, of the Sinhala perceptions, we have seen both learned and not so learned argumentations that all this is simply a stepping stone to separation.

This, as we shall see below, is the least of the problems in this new solvent. On the other side, in two streams as it were, on the one hand governmental elements and supporters see the federal arrangements as meeting the satisfactions of both an unified center and an autonomous periphery; on the other, the LTTE and related elements see it as providing the essential basis for autonomy under a national constitution, also encouraging their cadres and supporters to go round the world studying parallel provisions.

In all these there is the natural presumption by both parties that the provisions extended to both by the federal solution would, (a) lead to satisfaction of their political fundamentals and (b) make certain that resumption of war will thereafter never take place.

The fact is that all three parties in this exercise are totally wrong - the Sinhala extremists in their fears; the Government in their expectations; and the LTTE in their presumptions.

Federalism anywhere, flowing from a central constitution as it does, has for our purposes here, some main facets.

The first, as in any constitution, are the foundational, introductory clauses on the nature of their State - the sovereignty of the people, and the unitary concept of the country, among others.

The second, again in a few clauses, is on the powers of the State, among others, as represented in the sovereignty of its Parliament, and its power to halt, negate, or reverse certain autonomous functions assigned to the periphery, which in their exercise the periphery may be considered to have abused.

These can range from unilateral declaration of independence, to what the center may consider exercise, beyond determined limits, of functions in crucial areas, whether of security, resources use, finance, or others.

Given this context (i) Sinhala extremists' traumas of independence out of federalism; (ii) Central Government expectations of satisfactions by the periphery with their autonomy; and (iii) the periphery's expectations of meeting their goals as autonomous functionaries, would prove - for all three of them - totally misplaced.

There is no need for the Government or the LTTE to run all over the world, for examples. Every country's constitution has been its own formulation and the product of its own history and conditions.

And so it needs to be, in Sri Lanka, for those problem, at least in special crucial aspects, we have no parallel. We have seen above the inadequacies, for all parties concerned, of 'the normal best provisions' of a federal structure and constitution. The situation for Sri Lanka is a factor few have wanted to address while pursuing their federal solution or opposing it.

The simple situation is that, the central legislature which, as we saw, exercises supreme, unwavering authority, is a peculiarly constructed body in terms of the problem which has created our national crisis. From the beginning of our central legislature, we have had them simply as an 'uni-ethnic' dominated legislature in which, as I have repeatedly pointed out, decisions are made and laws are enacted by a permanent majority based on ethnicity; and not on a majority based on issues.

A change from this single phenomenon, of an uni ethnic majority in central government to multi ethnic participatory government, would effect a sea change that would ensure both unity of the country on the one hand, and satisfaction at the periphery on the other.

The means - as I have repeatedly addressed over the years - is provision by constitution for (a) a Vice President; (b) a Deputy Prime Minister; and (c) up to five 'designated' portfolios as minority held portfolios, imparting (i) a sense of 'true participatory governance' by the majority community; (ii) constitutionally embedded minority satisfactions as co-equal partners in national government; and (ii) security at the periphery against majority community actions in the guise of parliamentary supremacy and the constitution.

Given these and, mutatis mutandis, similar provisions of governance for other minorities at the level of regional government, federalism can neither be the earlier dreaded 'F' word for separation; nor an instrument subservient in the end to a center, without meaning and satisfaction to the region.

There are certain other informal, non-constitutional inter-locutory bodies, which should be envisaged at the level of the center, that would easily pre-empt the use of constitutional authority to resolve center-region differences - informally, even before they emerge or before they have escalated. We do not go into their details at this stage.

Bearing very much on all these, it is important to this whole issue, to deplore the tendency every now and then in certain quarters of our political activism, to recite a studied litany of so-called LTTE criminalities against the Sinhalese. For one thing, as I have said, the Tamils did not create the LTTE. For another, while utterly deploring the ravages caused by LTTE attacks in the South involving human beings - religious or civilian - it would be good to recall the utter destruction - across the board - of lives, temples and churches, extreme human violations, flattening of towns.

The long and short is that all these belong to the lowest elements of human kind; that we all take responsibility for all of these together; that now at this time of trying to look forward, we do not childishly base our thinking, or our future, with these, particularly where they are one sided. What is simply needed is for all to join together - so-called extremists, so-called moderates, and so-called peacemakers, simply as all realists, and mature and sensible human beings.

In a concluding thought, certainly of moment to the hopes of political solution, the so-called suspension of the peace process by the LTTE ensuing the recent Washington Aid Conference has certainly evoked concern - again in some quarters with limited awareness, as if it was just one side to blame. I speak with experience of handling similar situations, although for different fora and needs.

We should however now all put the outbursts, behind us, work together both on the truly horrendous '3Rs' tragedy - 'the hungry sheep (still) look up and are not fed; and get on to the task of our 'Political Framework for Solution' - including development; fiscal devolution; resources use; law and order and security; all not yet fully understood, and all admissable to accommodative solutions.

www.crescat.com

News | Business | Features | Editorial | Security
Politics | World | Letters | Sports | Obituaries |

Produced by Lake House
Copyright 2001 The Associated Newspapers of Ceylon Ltd.
Comments and suggestions to :Web Manager