Lifting of Emergency and the end to impunity

Three events of great importance took place last Thursday, two of them in Parliament. The first was the announcement by President Mahinda Rajapaksa of the lifting of the state of emergency. The second was Opposition Leader Ranil Wickremesinghe’s response to the lifting of the emergency.

The third, although extra-Parliamentary, was not unrelated. It was the sentencing by the High Court of four policemen charged with abduction and murder of two inmates at the Angulana Police station. The convicted persons were three Police Constables and, significantly the Officer in Charge at the time.

Sri Lanka has been ruled under a state of emergency, well nigh continuously for the past few decades. This helped to inculcate in the apparatus for enforcing law and order a sense of impunity.

Extra-judicial punishment

The Angulana double murder was a case in point. The accused policemen had taken the law into their own hands. They had meted out extra-judicial punishment at its most extreme.

As happened recently in Tottenham in England, the relatives and friends of the murdered persons protested against Police brutality. Unlike in Tottenham, the authorities here took steps to punish the perpetrators.

Thirty four years ago, the country entered a dark tunnel. In 1977, JR Jayewardene’s UNP won by a landslide at the general election. So far so good, the democratic right of the people to elect a government of their choice was vindicated.

However, it was what happened afterwards that was the problem. The Police were given a holiday. A generalised assault was launched by UNP blackshirts on the supporters of the Opposition. This degenerated (as if it were not degenerate enough) into an anti-Tamil pogrom.

Thus was established a pattern of violence and impunity, the repercussions of which lasted well beyond the Jayewardene era. The abduction and extra-judicial killing of Richard de Zoysa by Police was symbolic of what was wrong with our polity.

Woman politician

A key incident in the build-up of this atmosphere of impunity was the treatment by the government of the Vivienne Goonewardena assault case. Vivi, a veteran of the independence struggle and a famous woman politician was assaulted by a Police officer during a demonstration.

The Supreme Court found the Police officer guilty of violating her human rights. The government responded by paying the officer’s fine and giving him a double promotion. The houses of the judges who made the ruling were stoned by thugs.

The impunity on the part of the government was mirrored (and surpassed) by the murderous rule of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam. Richard’s extra-judicial execution was in fact pre-figured by the murder by the Tigers of a string of Tamil politicians.

The LTTE went so far in taking the law into their own hands as to appoint an under-age child as a ‘judge’. This was an unnecessary adjunct to their forced conscription of child soldiers. The defeat of the LTTE was an essential pre-requisite to restoring the rule of law.

The road back from that dark era began at the point when Richard’s mother Manoranee Saravanamuttu, together with Mahinda Rajapaksa, then a relatively junior parliamentarian, led the Mother’s Front on a march against the disappearances.

We have a long way left to go yet. The country is plagued by outbreaks of violence here and there, by suspicious characters and the like, by rumours of violence and mayhem. Until we are free of these relics of the age of terror, we cannot be truly free.

But there is light at the end of the tunnel of darkness. The lifting of the state of emergency and the sentencing of the Angulana accused symbolise the end of the era of impunity, in much the same way that Richard’s murder was iconic of that epoch.

Terrorism menace

It is in this context that the speech in Parliament by the Leader of the Opposition is of consequence. Ranil welcomed the lifting of the emergency. He suggested that, since the terrorism menace had been eradicated, the national problem should be solved politically.

He also advised that steps to consolidate democratic rule should take place in Parliament. Furthermore, co-operation between the government and the Opposition would minimise external threats.

Ranil has responded positively to the President’s entreaty that the Opposition also engage in the defence of the country and the healing of our society. Moreover, he has endorsed the President’s position that the arena for formulating solutions to national problems is the national legislature.

This does not mean that Ranil has joined the government! Far from it. There remain great ideological differences between the government and the main Opposition UNP.

A democracy requires a strong, functioning Opposition to highlight the faults of the government. Accordingly, last Thursday’s proceedings in the House included spirited attacks on the government by UNP MPs.

Nevertheless, Ranil’s words represent a clear shift in emphasis. While keeping loyal to the fundamental nature of a Parliamentary Opposition and to the essence of debate, the UNP will henceforth co-operate in principle in matters of national importance.

There is a world of difference between opposing simply to oppose and opposing as a means of steering towards a better solution. It is the latter position that Ranil has adopted.

Hitherto the country has been bedevilled by partisan approaches to the solution of national problems. It is to be hoped that there will now be a bi-partisan approach or, even better, a multi-partisan approach to finding a way out of the country’s tribulations.