Abuse, intimidation, violence and the Kalama Sutta
NOTEBOOK OF A NOBODY
July 20, 2012, 6:46 pm , the island
by Shanie
"I do not agree with what you have to say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."
- Voltaire (1694-1778)
"Go, go, go, said the bird: human kind
cannot bear very much reality.
Time past and time future
What might have been and what has been
point to one end, which is always present."
- T S Eliot (1888-1965)
The first quote has been attributed to Francois-Marie Arouet (who wrote under the pen name Voltaire) as a classic affirmation of one of the pillars of democracy – the right to freedom of expression. Voltaire was one of the leading figures of the French Enlightenment in pre-revolutionary France and emerged as one of the stoutest defenders of civil liberties. He would not compromise on what he believed to be right. This was of course not acceptable to the corrupt and authoritarian regime at that time in France. He was in prison without trial and spent several periods of exile. His first exile was in Britain after which he wrote a series of Letters which were published as ‘Lettres Philosophique’. In these letters, he praised the constitutional monarchy in Britain and the respect in that country for democracy, tolerance and human rights. These letters were taken as criticism of the absolute monarchy in France, his books burnt and Voltaire was again forced to flee. But as he stated in the above quote, till his death he defended the right to free speech, even if he disapproved of what was being written by others. Unfortunately, Voltaire died a decade before the revolution that overthrew the monarchy
Eliot’s poem is a philosophical one. But the meaning of it is best captured by a critic who wrote after her own daughter’s death: ‘There is another reality out there. There must be. It is a reality in which my daughter exists. I search for this reality. I catch fleeting glimpses as it rushes past the kitchen window or runs across the backyard. If I could only peek behind me fast enough, I could catch that other reality. It can’t be that far away.
‘This place here, where I live, does not seem real. It is a reality in which I wait for the ‘other’ to appear. I bide my time by going to work, taking my sons places, doing ‘normal’ things that ‘normal’ people do but I am simply waiting. I am not taking part in these events. I am a bystander to the action. I am one of the spectators. I am waiting for the time to pass so that eventually I, too, enter that other reality.
‘There was another reality once. It was the reality in which Clea existed. It was the one where I had three happy children who played together and fought together; where the photos we took of them showed unrestrained happiness. It was the one where their father was involved in their lives and it was the one where I was involved in their lives as well. I know it exists but I can’t find it.’
The Reality in Sri Lanka today
The two quotes are relevant to our situation in Sri Lanka today. We have come to a critical situation where our people cannot afford to ignore the reality and pretend that the law and order situation will someday revert to normalcy, or hope that someone else will take the lead to ensure a return to normalcy. Many feel impotent to take the lead themselves; so they shut their eyes and plug their ears for fear of treading on the toes of the powerful. That has been happening in the North and East for several decades. If you did not shut your eyes and plug your ears and dared to speak up about human rights you were either subject to violence and death or you had to seek sanctuary elsewhere. Today the LTTE has disappeared but reality remains the same not only for the people in the North and East but in many parts of the country as well.
What else are we to make of the outburst, the threats and intimidation of the editor of the Sunday Leader. Many may perhaps not approve of the standards of journalism practised by this editor. But like Voltaire, even if we do not agree with her journalistic positions, we have to defend her right to hold those positions, however wrong we may hold them to be. In the latest act of intimidation, the Defence Secretary has shamelessly used expletives and used threats about physically eliminating her. He cannot now take cover saying that he only said the "people", not he, would do so. The citizens of this country only know too well that the "people" who killed this editor’s predecessor, Lasantha Wickrematunge, still roam free.
As this column has stated before, although he is President’s brother, as Defence Secretary, Gotabhaya Rajapaksa is a public servant. As a public servant he cannot be exempt from the rules governing other public servants or being subject to the disciplinary procedures of the Public Services Commission. This column advised that he should take a leaf from the book of Lalith Weeratunge, President’s Secretary and another public servant handpicked by the President. The latter maintains in his actions and speech the dignity that is required of anyone dealing with people. Instead, in his speech and actions, Gotabhya Rajapaksa seems to be following his soul-mate, the much despised politician from Kelaniya. Gotabhaya’s conduct is totally unacceptable and it is surprising that President Mahinda Rajapaksa, a grass roots politician who knows the consequences of such conduct on the public mind, is unable or unwilling to control his brother.
Taking a principled stand
This is not the first time that journalists, trade unionists, human rights activists and indeed any outspoken critic of the powerful have been subject to abuse, violence, and even death. A few weeks ago, the President of FUTA, Dr Nirmal Ranjith Dewasiri was at the receiving end of abuse and threats. Despite the apologists for the abusers from even among journalists, these threats and uncouth language will continue unless the civil society and more importantly the religious leaders take an uncompromising stand for democratic rights for all our people. It is reported that the Venerable Mahanayake of the Malwatte Chapter returned a new luxury car that had been sent as a gift to him from the government. How many of our religious leaders, of all faith persuasions, will have the courage and the strength of character to do so. Indeed, we do not know how many of them have already been offered such gifts and accepted them. Now, with the Provincial Council elections fixed for 8th September, we will once again probably have gifts, among other things, in the form of a round of dinner parties with drinks thrown in to opinion-makers, journalists and public officials in the three affected Provinces. How many will have the strength of character to decline these invitations on ethical grounds? It is futile for someone to say that he or she will accept the dinner invitation but that it would not influence the way they vote which would be done in secret. No one who accepts a bribe can plead that he accepted it as a legitimate gift that was not going to sway his or her decision. No reasonable person or a reasonable Court of law will accept such a plea.
The myth of a free election
It was not very long ago that country’s judicial system would have voided an election on the ground that bribery or undue inducement was offered by a candidate or on behalf of a candidate to the elector. But that seems to be now a thing of the past. The Elections Commissioner has himself lamented that the 18th Amendment to the Constitution (shamelessly passed by members of the current Parliament) has taken away many of the powers that were vested in his office to ensure a free and fair election. The senior members of the SLFP and MEP, of the old Left or the dead Left (as Kumar David calls them) who contributed to the passing of the 18th Amendment will, with their tails between their legs, be silent on all the governance issues and tamely and unconvincingly speak about a foreign conspiracy backed by the Tamil diaspora and therefore the need to vote for the UPFA candidates. How long is the country going to tolerate such diversions to avoid reality?
The leadership of the main opposition party is as dead as the dead Left. It is only Sarath Fonseka who has shown much political maturity and wisdom with the statements he has been making since his release from prison. In such a situation, one wonders if the spokesperson of the UNP was being hilarious or if he was making an ass of himself when he asked Fonseka to disband his political movement and join the UNP. Now that Fonseka and his group are not contesting the election, he should lead a protest movement, not on behalf of any political party, but a movement to persuade the electorate to lodge a protest vote against corruption and mismanagement and for a return to the rule of law and justice.
The Kalama Sutra
Any successful political leader, however knowledgeable or experienced he or she may be, needs a team of advisors who will provide him with the necessary resources on the diverse range of subjects that will call for a decision or a comment from the leader. A wise leader will both be careful in the choice of his advisors and also have the discernment to use the advice he receives in the best possible way.
This is why Gautama Buddha propounded what has come to be known as the Kalama Sutra when he visited the Kingdom of Kosala. He told the Kalama people: Do not accept a thing merely because it happens to be traditional, and so on. You should reject a thing when you know for yourself that a thing is harmful and will bring misery to yourself and to others. On the other hand, when a person is not greedy, nor malicious, nor deluded; that is to say is liberal, kindly and wise they will be to his own profit and happiness. And by being liberal, kindly and wise, by becoming self-controlled and refraining from immoral acts of killing and so forth, they will be doing so for their own and for the others’ profit and happiness.
There
are different ways of pooling and the method adopted by the UGC on the
recommendation of the committee of experts was to pool and then
calculate Z scores in each subject and compute the mean Z scores of
students while in 2001 Prof. R. O. Thattil and others recommended the
calculation of the Z scores in each subject separately for the new
syllabus and old syllabus and find the mean Z scores of students first
and then pool to prepare a common list from which admissions were made.
In 2001, there would have been a reason for adopting the method of
Prof. Thattil and others—it has to be remembered that Prof. Thattil
only introduced the Z score standardization to Sri Lanka and not
derived the Z score formula as some people believe—as the subjects were
not common in the two syllabi. In 2011, there was no such problem and
the UGC has to be commended for appointing a committee of experts to
find other ways of pooling. I do not agree with the committee of
experts on the formula suggested by them as it is not correct but I
agree with the committee and the UGC that the pooling should have been
done BEFORE Z scores were calculated.