Reflection

Conflict of interest: Does the concept even exist in Sri Lankan sport?

Over the years, many of the generation now approaching the proverbial biblical life span of “three score and ten” years, have sought to define the generation gap and what constitutes that gap in the land of 2553 Years of Sinhala Buddhist Civilization.

One characteristic that defines the current generation of “movers and shakers” is the singular absence of any understanding of the principle of conflict of interest.  It seems that, yet again, the horror that epitomizes the U.S-based culture of the Paris Hiltons and Lindsay Lohans is in one’s face.  “If you have it, flaunt it,” appears to be the rule. 

And it seems that the capacity to flaunt is in inverse ratio to what is available for flaunting! Clustered around this ‘flaunting’ is what can be accurately described as a compulsion to use all possible means to advance what is seen as one’s personal interests.

Even in sport, or maybe one should say, particularly in sport, the same seems to prevail.  The head of what, in colonial French North Africa would have been the “Paras” decides to break the civil mode of succession in the hierarchy of a game ill-fitted to the Sri Lankan physique — rugby. 

In the culture of force, power and intimidation prevailing in the country, he succeeded, steam rolling the opposition and forcing the individual who, in the previous mode of succession would have advanced to the premier position into withdrawing in advance of the potential competition.  Then (coincidence! coincidence!) off goes his son to the holy grail of that sport in the antipodes on a full sport scholarship.  Bad enough? 

No, there’s more to follow.  Soon, there is what is the apex international competition in that sport and even though this same youth is part of a national training group preparing for a regional competition in the same sport, he breaks training and traipses off to Europe to be a spectator at an international event.

Dissolved

The consequences? The Selection Committee ends up dissolved because they refuse to countenance this act of indiscipline.  Junior is not excluded from selection to the national squad and the Sri Lankan rugby world unfolds in duly ordained fashion.

As a post-script to this little scenario, more recent headlines in the sporting pages celebrate the appointment of this same young man as captain of the national rugby team, setting off another contretemps in rugby circles. The short-term and unbelievably stupid compromise is that the “selected one” skippers one international match and the “anointed one” captains the other. 

Ultimately, the continuing farce approaches tragedy and the Sports Minister is forced to get rid of the source of trouble.  However, this results in the victim of the firing going public with paeans of praise about, you guessed it, himself and his son.  This takes the form of a lengthy media release which, among other things, suggests that the services of a professional in that field should have been secured prior to it going to the public. 

However, it seems like the new appointment to the position continues to bode ill for the future of this sport which, like so many others in Sri Lanka, had a reputation for decency, fairness, honourable practice and all those other virtues now virtually invisible in “the land like no other.”  It appears that the Minister has only re-arranged the deck-chairs on the Titanic, with the newly-appointed head honcho giving promise of bringing his own agenda and a further set of conflicts to the table.

More recently yet, the body with responsibility for appointing the captain of the national rugby squad decides, after due process, on who this should be.  However, an individual who heads up what appears to be the apex sports body for the country decides that his son should be the chosen one.

Boycott

In short order, the Selection Committee is fired/resigns (take your choice) and the Omnipotent One has his way, except that a majority of the players in the pool decide to boycott the tournament and forego a trip to foreign climes, in protest.  Another bunch of players fill in at short notice and off they go to the Middle East to compete in the tourney.  The air is filled with threats of lifetime bans against those responsible for the boycott.

This stuff is sordid in the extreme, to state the obvious, and the tragedy is that it is not confined to this one sport but seems to be the rule and not the exception in every sport.  Political influence and venality prevail and anything approaching principled conduct is viewed as weakness.

The old adage that “it is not what you know, but whom you know,” is not even what prevails in Sri Lanka today.  In these days it is, “bloodlines and family relationships shall prevail.”

The French Revolution was based on “Liberte, Egalite, Fraternite.”  Our Sri Lankan ‘evolution’ of the late 20th and early 21st Centuries is singularly lacking even one of those concepts.  Perhaps the constant invocation of Dutugemunu and the ancient kings of Sri Lanka is not accidental and does, in fact, reflect a return to feudal times of privilege and family and the naked power of the sword. 

The fact that the politician wielding the most power in the area of sports appears to be singularly without knowledge of those sports and the great traditions that they bring forward from years past seems the least of the problems.  Rather, the biggest problem is either a complete refusal to act in a fair and principled manner or an abysmal ignorance of what fairness and principle are.  Take your choice.