Propaganda on ‘Corruption and nepotism’

Opposition, having exhausted its numerous allegations against the Government, commencing from ‘bribing the Tigers’ have now come to thrust their full weight on ‘corruption and nepotism of the Government’

The main theme of polemic and rhetoric at the election platform this time has been the ‘country’. The UNP too, which traditionally promises ‘sprats and dhal’ and ‘bracelets’ to the people is calling ‘country before me’(Mata Pera Rata) this time. Whatever the genuineness of such pious proclamations, it is a very welcome departure that augurs well for the country and the credit for this transformation should go to the President.

However the Opposition, having exhausted its numerous allegations against the Government, commencing from ‘bribing the Tigers’ have now come to thrust their full weight on ‘corruption and nepotism of the Government’.

Corruption charges

There are excesses in any Government and the current Government that was engaged in a war for three out of its four years may not be an exception. When the UNP Government of ’77 - ’94 was accosted with all those corruption charges, they had standard answers like; ‘Development equals Corruption’ and that ‘At a wedding, some corruption and waste is inevitable’ etc. However, if those who parrot corruption charges against the current Government are genuine in their criticism, they should substantiate such charges of unprecedented corruption during the past four years’, and pursue them with all the seriousness to warrant people’s considerations.

Generally, the charges of corruption leveled against politicians, unlike against Government servants are, often subjective and, in the ‘eyes of the beholder’. The former President Chandrilka Bandaranaike often took the stand that, “how could we win the war when the Defence establishment is corrupted to the core?” Hence now that we have won the war, are we to assume that the Rajapaksa regime is less corrupted than that of Chandrika’s? Further during the previous regime all the development activity was put in abeyance due to what was called an ‘ethnic conflict’.

Tamil Diaspora

Road accidents rose alarmingly and there was heavy traffic congestion in the city. Electricity Board was made into a heavy loser from the position of a healthy excess and the country had to depend on diesel for power.

At the end, her period incurred more war losses than any other regime on record. Yet the lady who claimed that she had to borrow second hand clothes in England for her children in 1989 went back to England after 1994, only to be ushered in to numerous palaces of her own. Ranil’s period of three years, interspersed, is no better.

Therefore there is a question of veracity in these charges, when they are made by persons in the calibre of Chandrika, Ranil and Mangala. Further these media men who now brandish charges of corruption against the Government are the same institutions, that belittled the war effort, that connived with pro LTTE Tamil Diaspora on war crimes of Sri Lankan Forces and then accused the Government on ‘non settlement of IDPs’. Time has proved the tendentious nature of all these charges.

On the other hand, if the Rajapaksa Government is as corrupted as it is made out to be they should have ‘money’ as their sole yard stick in the conduct of the Government.

The two most lucrative arms of revenue any Government could have, are alcohol and cigarettes. The present Government has effectively curtailed both those avenues on the grounds of public health and welfare.

This is quite in contrast to the indulgence exhibited by Ranil and Chandrika in this sphere during their tenure.

Hence it should be clear that the present Government has proved beyond doubt that it is much more humane than its predecessors and that its money making is within ethical limits.

The other strident allegation by the Opposition is nepotism which is coined as ‘Brothers Co.’ The fact that the Defence Secretary and the Coordinator of the war ravaged North are brothers of the President may not, by itself tantamount to prevalence of corruption in those functions.

Election time

It is not who they are but what they do that should be of interest to the public and country. Therefore the Opposition, instead of crying horse of a ‘Brothers co.’, should bring tenable charges of corruption against those they consider to be corrupt. On the other hand, it is also a fact that the President would never have achieved what he did in the war front and in the IDP front, if not for the support he received from his brothers. Hence it could also be, that the Opposition is viewing those record accomplishments with a coveted eye and hence this criticism.

However if there is corruption and nepotism in the Government such irregularities have to be arrested and the Opposition has all the rights to highlight the same. But such criticism should not come only in the form of hype during election time and instead the Opposition in keeping with its responsibility should constantly air such irregular deeds in the Parliament.

Further the Opposition is duty bound to take all appropriate action with the credible evidence available to them in order to protect the nation and country from corrupted persons. Unfortunately no such meaningful action appears to have been taken and that makes the charges a mere hype to gain propaganda mileage at election times.

However, corruption in a country is closely linked to the country’s sense of nationalism just as a man’s corruption is linked to his self respect.

The countries that have developed during the past few decades such as China, Malaysia, South Korea and Japan have had strong leaders with an equally strong sense of nationalism.

They believed in their people, their ethos and their traditions and worked hard and sincerely to improve the lot of their nations. Every man wishes to feel proud about his nationality because it is from the character of person’s nationality that he is first and often judged by the rest of the world. Therefore a nationalist leader is always less susceptible to bribery and corruption than a leader who is physically here but culturally and ideologically elsewhere.

The problem in Sri Lanka is that the country did not gain independence after a drawn out battle like India where the true national figures emerged to take the leadership of the country. Instead, independence was gifted on a platter after British were forced out of India.

English speaking class

Hence the power of governance was passed from the white sahibs to the generation of brown sahibs who were anglicized and turn coated by the British. The bureaucracy and the commerce of the country were firmly entrenched in six percent English speaking class produced and nurtured by the missionary schools.

Thus, Sri Lanka though democratic, continued to be ruled for good part of its post independent history, by elite families which were not the best manifestations of the ordinary peoples’ aspirations.

Mahinda Rajapaksa is the first ordinary Sri Lankan to be elected to the office of the President. Of course there was D.B. Wijetunge and R. Premedasa also from the ordinary stock.

Wijetunge was not elected and Premadasa was elected under extraordinary circumstances and could not seek re-election. Premadasa however had urban and obscure roots and hence President Mahinda Rajapaksa is the only man who hailed from a village and was proud of that fact.

Although the people by and by elected politicians from the common stock over the years, the country always had a powerful commercial sector that had refused to shed its colonial upbringing.

Consumer goods

Since this sector formed a vital part of the country’s economy, the successive Governments too were reticent in taking this sector head on. But the fact is that this sector has always continued to exert considerable influence at crucial junctures of the nation and often at election times. Their influence could permeate the Sri Lankan polity from media/propaganda to encountering artificial shortages in day to day consumer goods.

Hence there is a strong undercurrent on the eve of elections to convince the people that the current President and his brothers are (Brothers Company) corrupted and are sapping the nation of its life juices.

Sri Lanka being Asia’s oldest democracy, we may expect the current Sri Lankan Presidential elections to revolve around issues of governance that affect the country. But beyond that veneer of polemic and rhetoric, the elite classes in Colombo are busy asserting their vestiges of class interest.

These powerful owners of big business and media blame President Rajapaksa for what he has done and then they also blame him for what he has not done. Some admit that he did a good job in finishing the war but then again they say that ‘he and his brothers are corrupt to the core’ and therefore is not suitable for re-election.