Elections and elections culture

by M.A.Q.M. Ghazzali

Much water has flown under the bridge since we gained independence from colonial rule, in 1948. Since then, for half a century and more years, we have had regular elections.

In these contests, contending leaders have regularly sought the mandate of the people to rule this country.

Such issues as the price of bread and rice and more prominently empty rhetoric, and slogans that rhymed to make for reason, loomed large in the electioneering culture. Not many or indeed any of these promises were meant to be kept, and, so, the nation painfully came to realise by the subsequent conduct of our elected leaders.

This culture of motivating people to commit their support to one candidate or the other on mere promise of empty hope was epitomised by such promises as the ushering in of a Dharmishta regime in 1978, that ended in a nightmare.

In more recent times, the promise to abolish the obnoxious Executive Presidential system of Government, continues to enjoy unabated the pride of place and power. A senior minister was recently quoted saying that election promises are never meant to be kept.

The culture of electioneering on promises that are not meant to be kept or even on holding out vague and unarticulated promises of prosperity, is a luxury that Sri Lanka cannot afford any more.

The impending Presidential Election is in many ways a watershed in the affairs of our nation. Several problems have surfaced and gone beyond sprouting level. Secondary and tertiary level proliferation of problems cry for immediate and courageous solutions, on pain of unsurpassed national disaster upon fault or failure.

The need for a simple and dynamic Constitution based on sound principles of constitutional law is of paramount importance to the country. The ethnic impasse competes with equal intensity. The future of the economy, ripples on the periphery of the judiciary, rampant bribery and corruption, breakdown in law and order, unemployment, education and many more have grown into gigantic proportions.

These problems are literally suffocating this country and have brought it to the throes of death. They all cry and cry aloud for serious attention from the political leadership.

It is in this context that the Presidential hopefuls, who seek the mandate of the people to lead the nation, owe a duty of grave importance to the people of this country. They cannot any more treat the people as unthinking herd, who will in any event exercise the right of vote and victory will come on a favourable persuasion, however shallow or dishonest it may be.

It will not be political transparency for one to say that he will go an extra mile to clinch ethnic peace or that a Parakramabahu era will be ushered in. All the competing candidates must indeed project their stance on all the pressing problems that face the country today. The people have the right to know from each candidate what exactly is his or her programme for the settlement of the ethnic issue.

They have a right to ask that definite proposals be spelt out and to know their chances of being accepted, as determined by genuine feed back from the competing LTTE.

What exactly is the meaning of The Prakramabahu era in the 21st century?

Can we go back to an introvert paddy field economy, with foot path infrastructure? Or is it a new concept that will provide a buffer against the vagaries of international forces ?

Indeed the people have a right to a dynamic programme that will protect them against such forces. They cannot continuously be the lame duck victims and fodder for international inequalities. That we have no control over international forces is a realistic situation for which our ingenuity must provide a solution.

The poster competition between two leading contestants is a competition in cine glamour. It can compete with colours against any Hollywood star. Short of that, they contribute nothing to convey the principles and policies of the contestants.

The people are looking for genuine and professional approach to the issues facing the country, sans mudslinging, slander and buck-passing. The candidates themselves, may make their own list of the problems as they see them. Their task is to tell the people what solutions they can offer. The people will make their choice.