People’s Choice

Last week, The Sunday Leader, in one of its columns, quoting Chandra Jayaratne, a former chairman of the Ceylon Chamber of Commerce, said that the country needs to have in place four pillars to take it forward.
He listed those in order of priority as being political stability, rule of law and good governance, economic management and good foreign relations.
With reference to having in place the first pillar, i.e. “political stability” in Jayaratne wish list, that will require the election of a strong government, and with political stability, hopefully, all the other three pillars described by Jayaratne as being essential for the sustainable development of the country, would then fall in line, though it need not necessarily be so, as the country’s short history since independence has regrettably shown.
One of the underlining requirements for a strong government is to at least have a simple majority in parliament so that it can pass laws, coupled with the ability of such a government to deal firmly but democratically with the opposition over certain issues, and implement laws that would serve the best interests of the country, without having to fear that it may be toppled the next day.
But since 1956, except during the 17 year period from 1977 to 1994, Sri Lanka has been ruled by coalition governments that included parties subscribing to different political ideologies, or parties built on racial or religious lines, or a mix of both.
Such minority parties, whether having different political ideologies, or having a racial or religious leaning, latch on to the two major parties in the island to form governments, with such governments comprising a mix of political parties built on different ideologies.
The major political party leading such coalition governments at times finds it difficult to implement policies for the betterment of the country, either because of pressure from its coalition partners, or, pressure from the opposition.
A classic case in this regard is successive governments being unable to find a solution to the Tamil question, the cause of most of the country’s woes since 1956, before such actions, or rather inactions, reached a crescendo, culminating in the July 1983 riots.
Weak political leadership too played a pivotal part in the order of things.
Two such instances are the S.L.F.P. led coalition government of 1956 unable to give federalism to the Tamils because of pressure from the main opposition party which was the U.N.P.; and the other, the U.N.P. coalition government of 1965 also being unable to deliver the same due to opposition pressure.
In both of the aforesaid instances, pressure not to implement such policies came from without and not from within, with weak leadership being the main culprit.
Prior to the outbreak of the July 1983 riots which marked a turning point in the country’s short history since independence (well known why it was a turning point, and thus needing no further elaboration), the government of the day which had entrenched itself with a new constitution that introduced the executive presidential system to the country, coupled with a 5/6ths majority in parliament, however lost a golden opportunity of finding a lasting solution to the Tamil problem, despite being one of the strongest governments this island has seen since post independence in 1948, and  not being dependent on any coalition party to prop itself up.
True it introduced the open economy, another watershed in the country’s short history since independence, but it overlooked the Tamil problem, with massive socio-economic consequences for the worst for Sri Lanka as a result.
With the war over, a new vista of hope has dawned upon the country, and last, but certainly not the least, to also find a lasting solution to the Tamil question.
With presidential elections just nine days away, one of the probable expectations of the country is that the president who would be elected, or re-elected to power at the polls, would also give ear to this problem, while at the same time lead the country into the path of accelerated development.
Sri Lanka’s short history of the second republican constitution of 1978 which introduced the executive presidency has shown, that whoever wins a major poll in the country, be it presidential or parliamentary, his party or the presidential candidate which that party backs (i.e. whichever election that follows thereafter), also stands to win the next major poll that shortly follows.
Parliamentary elections are due a few months after the presidential elections, and if the status quo repeats itself, then the party or parties which the newly elected or re-elected president backs, would also win the forthcoming general election.
In a scenario where the L.T.T.E. problem is history, a new president, with his party or coalition of parties commanding the majority in parliament, on whose shoulders the destiny of this country will rest, has the opportunity of implementing the other three objectives that Jayaratne talks of, to take this country forward.
However whether those will be implemented is the question. The country’s destiny is in the hands of the voter. The people get the government they deserve.