Conditions for a fair poll

PRESIDENT Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga's commitment to conduct a free and fair poll coupled with the provision of Rs. 185 million to the Police Department for polls - related duties by the Elections Secretariat augurs well for the future and increases the possibility of Lanka having a "clean" Presidential election. Given the law and order powers of the President, it should not prove difficult to bridge the gap between promise and practice.

It is a common perception that many of the polls we have had over years have been flawed by irregularities and abuses of various kinds. This has had the effect of the polls exercise coming under the intense critical scrutiny of the public and other concerned groups and persons. Consequently, the credibility of the electioneering process has emerged a major public issue.

We need to reverse this sad trend and ensure the absolute credibility of the polling process this time round. It is important to bear in mind that we need to establish ourselves as a "show-case" democracy in South Asia and not as a "facade democracy". The latter appellation has been earned by many a State in the Third World where election irregularities have been rife. Let this not be our lot, is our wish and we hope all local sections would make a determined effort to enhance and sustain Sri Lanka's reputation as a functional democracy.

While the presence of armed groups in the North-East, such as the LTTE, tends to place a question mark on the possibility of holding a violence-free, flawless election in those areas, it is up to the law enforcement agencies and the Elections Commission to ensure that the necessary conditions prevail in those regions which would facilitate a free and fair poll. In this situation, the Lankan State would be justified in using all its legitimate coercive powers to ensure a flawless poll.

Therefore, the Elections Secretariat has done right by siphoning substantial financial resources to the Police Department for the conduct of a peaceful poll. The law enforcement authorities must be equipped and ready to meet emergency situations in these times and a beefing-up of the law enforcers' coercive capability, could be considered a step in the right direction.

Special mention should be made of the State's obligation to ensure that none of its resources is misused in these circumstances. Such resources would also include public sector personnel, including those in the law enforcement agencies. The Elections Commission which is playing a comparatively robust role in the upcoming election needs to consider it a duty to ensure that power is not abused by any quarter.

This is also an opportunity for the National Police Commission to prove its mettle. It can team up with the highest echelons of the Police to ensure that the Police Department is not put to wrongful uses. It is for these reason that we maintain that it would be in the national interest to strengthen the NPC and perhaps even give it more teeth. Could we have a political commitment to strengthen the NPC?

We are also pleased over the priority attached by the authorities to election observation by both local and foreign observers. Hopefully this would have the effect of minimising polls - related irregularities.

However, a vital difference exists between polls observation and polls monitoring. While the former has its uses it is even more crucial to have the latter. Monitoring is a more thorough process than observation and is of a more investigative nature. Hence its importance.

However, we also need to take a leaf from those robust and absolutely accountable democracies, such as India, who conduct trouble-free, credible polls on their own strength. The secret of their success is their vibrantly independent State institutions, such as the Elections Commission.

It cannot be emphasized enough that autonomous and untampered State institutions are an asset to the country. We need to think in terms of exploiting all the potential in the 17th amendment to the constitution.