FUTA Media Statement on suspending Grade 5 Scholarship

Click here for the link

The North’s AL ‘high’ and the ‘gratitude’ factor

January 2, 2014, 8:49 pm , The Island

By Lynn Ockersz

May be, if Sri Lankans stop ‘honouring’ politicians and refrain from paying veritable ritual homage to them, politicians may get it into their heads not to expect the public to be beholden to them for whatever reason. An issue bedeviling the Lankan public is that they do not adequately exact accountability from those they vote into public office. May be due to a semi-feudal mindset, sections of our public hero-worship politicians who do not constantly remind them that they are public servants with the mandate to go the extra mile in serving the people. Politicians need to be judged on the basis of how effectively they carry out their duties and they must be seen as succeeding or failing purely on this foundation. None could be viewed even appreciatively merely because they hold public office.

Youngsters of the North are undoubtedly reaping a ‘bountiful harvest’ in these post-conflict times in the form of noteworthy academic achievements. As is known, the highest success rate at the latest GCE Advanced Level examination comes from the Northern Province and it is plain that this should be attributed, to some measure, to the stable law and order situation the military elimination of the LTTE by the Lankan security forces made possible.

But it would be relevant to remember that the youngsters of the North have always enjoyed a reputation for academic distinction. It is possible that they would have scored even more impressively at the AL examination if the ‘ground situation’ permitted unhindered academic activities over the years. These facts need to be borne in mind when assessing the causes that could have led to the Northern Province leading from the front as regards the success rate at the recent AL examination.

But it needs to be accepted that until recently, the highly volatile law and order situation in the North-East rendered sustained academic pursuits by northern primary and secondary students very difficult and credit must be given to the Lankan law-enforcement authorities for the effective management of the security situation in the relevant areas over the years. If not for the currently prevalent stable law and order situation, schools and educational institutions would have encountered continual difficulties in operating in the North, and the noteworthy successes achieved by the secondary school students of the North are substantial proof that a high degree of normalcy has been brought about in Northern civilian life since May 2009.

The right-thinking of this country, to be sure, need to be appreciative of the role the Lankan security forces and police played in improving Sri Lanka’s law and order situation, but it does not follow from this position that the security forces’ presence in the North should not be progressively reduced from now on. In proportion to which normalcy is brought to the North, the troop presence there, for instance, must be brought down and this point must be borne in mind by the authorities. Ideally, law and order functions must revert entirely to the police and it is such a situation which is fully synonymous with normalcy. Until then, it cannot be claimed that absolute normalcy has returned to the North.

Accordingly, the stark contradiction between militarization and normalcy must be recognized by the Lankan state. If ‘terror’ is no more in the North, a state military presence would be meaningless and superfluous. The state should draw the relevant inferences from this anomaly and do what is needed to further ease the lot of northern civilians.

Meanwhile, while it is only right that the state and the Lankan public should be appreciative of the role played by our law-enforcers in establishing internal law and order, it would be questionable, from an ethical viewpoint, to expect the people of the North to be ‘grateful’ to the law-enforcers and connected quarters, for discharging these tasks which they are obliged, in terms of their mandates, to accomplish. While the role of the law-enforcers must be appreciated, it would amount to demeaning any section of the Lankan public to expect it to be ‘grateful’ to an official quarter for services the latter is expected to perform, in terms of its responsibilities. However, the point is taken that most law-enforcers acted selflessly and courageously during the armed conflict in the North-East. Countless numbers of these personnel laid down their lives for the people and for this they must be saluted by the country.

These observations need to be made in view of the opinion in some sections that ‘gratitude’, rather than appreciation, is due to those who handled the law and order situation in the North over the past few years and who, thereby, enabled academic activities to be pursued uninterruptedly.

However, the same line of thought applies to those governmental quarters which wax lyrical about the relief they claim they have brought to the North. It needs to be understood that the governments of Sri Lanka were, and are, obliged to serve the public of this country, wherever the latter may reside. Governments are elected to office to do just that. They are expected to selflessly and impartially serve the public and cannot expect the people of this country to be beholden to them. The services of conscientious political leaders may, perhaps, be appreciated, if there are any among us. This is not synonymous with anyone being ‘grateful’ to them for functions they are duty-bound to perform.

May be, if Sri Lankans stop ‘honouring’ politicians and refrain from paying veritable ritual homage to them, politicians may get it into their heads not to expect the public to be beholden to them for whatever reason. An issue bedeviling the Lankan public is that they do not adequately exact accountability from those they vote into public office. May be due to a semi-feudal mindset, sections of our public hero-worship politicians who do not constantly remind them that they are public servants with the mandate to go the extra mile in serving the people. Politicians need to be judged on the basis of how effectively they carry out their duties and they must be seen as succeeding or failing purely on this foundation. None could be viewed even appreciatively merely because they hold public office.

We, the public, could make some changes to this political culture of near servility to the office bearer and the perceived top decision- makers, by giving them less importance in our consciousness and in our day-to-day lives. To begin with, the public could refrain from inviting politicians and others holding top public office, to our each and every function and public occasion, regardless of the nature of these events. Why, for instance, should politicians and numerous ‘hangers-on’ and officials be invited to religious and cultural events about which they may know nothing or very little? Why should they be asked to ‘sign’ at weddings? Why should they be invited to school events to which they may have no relevance?

Needless acts of this kind on the part of the public, which bespeak an attitude of servility towards politicians and the like, among other things, create an environment of impunity, wherein politicians engage in power abuse and other misdemeanours which progressively disempower citizens and render them pliant tools in the hands of those who are seen as powerful.

Hopefully, civil society would forthrightly address these issues and launch the necessary remedial action. We need to create a political culture which will enable the people to consistently empower themselves in relation to those who are bent on power abuse. However, those persons deserving public recognition and appreciation need to be always given their due. But being beholden to them is clearly an abnormal state of mind.