இத்தருணத்தில் அரசாங்கத்தின் மக்கள் ஆதரவு துரிதமாக வீழ்ச்சியடைந்து வருகின்றது. இந்தளவுக்கு மகத்தான மக்கள் ஆதரவுடன் ஆட்சிக்கு வந்த அரசாங்கமொன்று இரண்டு வருடங்கள் கழிவதற்கு முன்னராக மக்களின் வெறுப்புக்கு இலக்காதலை நாங்கள் அண்மைக்கால வரலாற்றில் கேள்விப்பட்டதில்லை. அதைப்போலவே பல நெருக்கடிகள் உருவாகி வருகின்றன. தமது தோல்விநிலையின் மத்தியில் மக்களின் கவனத்தை திசைதிருப்புவதற்காக பலவற்றைச் செய்வதையே 73 வருடங்களாக அரசாங்கங்கள் செய்தன. அதுதான் இனவாதத்தை தூண்டிவிடுவது. மக்கள் மத்தியில் பிளவுகளை உண்டாக்குவது இந்த அரசியல் கட்சிகளின் தந்திரோபாயமாகும். அதனால் மனித […]
இத்தருணத்தில் அரசாங்கத்தின் மக்கள் ஆதரவு துரிதமாக வீழ்ச்சியடைந்து வருகின்றது. இந்தளவுக்கு மகத்தான மக்கள் ஆதரவுடன் ஆட்சிக்கு வந்த அரசாங்கமொன்று இரண்டு வருடங்கள் கழிவதற்கு முன்னராக மக்களின் வெறுப்புக்கு இலக்காதலை நாங்கள் அண்மைக்கால வரலாற்றில் கேள்விப்பட்டதில்லை. அதைப்போலவே பல நெருக்கடிகள் உருவாகி வருகின்றன.
தமது தோல்விநிலையின் மத்தியில் மக்களின் கவனத்தை திசைதிருப்புவதற்காக பலவற்றைச் செய்வதையே 73 வருடங்களாக அரசாங்கங்கள் செய்தன. அதுதான் இனவாதத்தை தூண்டிவிடுவது. மக்கள் மத்தியில் பிளவுகளை உண்டாக்குவது இந்த அரசியல் கட்சிகளின் தந்திரோபாயமாகும். அதனால் மனித உயிர்கள் இழக்கப்படுவது இரத்தம் சிந்துவது ஆட்சியாளர்களுக்கு ஏற்புடையதல்ல. அவர்களின் அதிகார கருத்திட்டத்திற்காக எந்தவொரு வேலையையும் செய்வார்கள். அதேபோல் இந்த அரசாங்கமும் இனவாத முரண்பாடுகளை ஏற்படுத்துகின்ற வகையிலான தீர்மானங்களையும் முடிவுகளையும் எடுத்துவருகின்றது. அது மாத்திரமல்ல நாட்டில் சனநாயகத்தை இல்லாதொழிக்கின்ற வழிமுறைகளை கடைப்பிடித்து வருவதை நாங்கள் அவதானித்து வருகின்றோம்.
அத்துடன் அவர்கள் சட்டத்திற்கும் பல்வேறு அழுத்தங்களைக் கொடுத்துவருவதையும் நாங்கள் காண்கிறோம். அரசாங்கத்தின் எதிரிகளுக்கு விமர்சிப்பவர்களுக்கு ஒரு சட்டமும் தமது நண்பர்களுக்கும் சகபாடிகளுக்கும் மற்றுமொரு சட்டமும் அமுலாக்கப்படுகின்றது. ஒரு நாடு – ஒரு சட்டம் எனக்கூறி ஆட்சிக்கு வந்த அரசாங்கம் இன்றளவில் தெளிவாகவே மக்களுக்கு ஒரு சட்டத்தையும் தமது நண்பர்களுக்கும் சகபாடிகளுக்கும் மற்றுமொரு சட்டத்தையும் அமுலாக்குவதுதான் இதில் மிகப்பெரிய கேலிக்கூத்து. கொத்தலாவல சட்டத்திற்கு எதிராக போராடிய பத்து அரசியல் செயற்பாட்டாளர்கள் 100 நாட்களுக்கு மேலாக விளக்கமறியலில் வைக்கப்பட்டுள்ளார்கள். அதைப்போலவே உயிர்த்தஞாயிறு தாக்குதல் சம்பந்தமாக அபிப்பிராயம் தெரிவித்த மதத்தலைவர்களுக்கு அச்சுறுத்தல் விடுக்கப்பட்டு வருகின்றது. அருட்தந்தை சிறில் காமிணியை கைதுசெய்வதற்காக முஸ்தீபு நிலவுவதாக அவரே கூறியிருக்கிறார். அவ்வாறு இடம்பெறுகையில் மிகவும் துரிதமாக அரசாங்கத்தின் அன்புக்குரியவர்களினதும் அரசாங்கத்தின் அமைச்சர்களினதும் வழக்குகள் வாபஸ்பெறப்பட்டு வருகின்றன. இது ஒரு பாரதூரமான நிலைமையாகும். அதனால் சட்டம், நீதிமன்றம் பற்றிய நம்பிக்கை சிதைவடைந்து வருகின்றது. சான்றுகள் சகிதமே இந்த வழக்குகள் தாக்கல் செய்யப்படுகின்றன. அரசாங்கம் மாறும்போது சான்றுகள் எவ்வாறு மாறும்? அது ஒரு புதிர். அதனால் சர்வதேச நற்பெயருக்கும் களங்கம் எற்படுகின்றது. இந்த வழக்குகள் மனித உரிமைகள் மீறப்பட்ட, பாரியளவில் பேசப்பட்ட வழக்குகளும் வாபஸ்பெறப்பட்டுள்ளன.
அதைப்போலவே கடந்த காலத்தில் பொலிஸ் பகிரங்கமாக மக்களைத் தாக்குகின்ற தொந்தரவு செய்கின்ற தருணங்களை நாங்கள் காண்கிறோம். பொலிஸ் உத்தியோத்தர்களின் பிரச்சனையைப் பார்க்கிலும் சட்டம் அமுலாக்கப்படுகின்ற கட்டமைப்பு சீரழிந்துள்ளமையாகவே இதனை நாங்கள் காண்கிறோம். சட்ட அமுலாக்கலின்போது நெறிமுறையோ மனித உரிமைகள் பாதுகாக்கப்படுகின்ற கலாசாரமோ புலனாவதில்லை. இராஜாங்க அமைச்சர் கூறுகின்ற கூற்றுக்களிலிருந்து இந்த நிலைமை மென்மேலும் தீவிரமடைகின்றது. பொலிஸ் சம்பந்தமான மனித உரிமைகள் வழக்குகள் 06 மாதங்களுக்குள் நிறைவடையாவிட்டால் வாபஸ் பெறப்படுவதாக அமைச்சர் கூறுகிறார். இந்த நாட்டில் எந்த வழக்கு 06 மாதங்களில் புலன்விசாரண செய்யப்பட்டது? எனவே இந்த சமிக்ஞைகளிலிருந்து சமூகம் எதனை உணர்கின்றது. சட்டத்தை அமுலாக்குகின்ற உத்தியோகத்தர்களுக்கு அரசியல் அதிகாரத்திற்கு கட்டுப்படாமல் இயங்கமுடியாத நிலை உருவாகி வருகின்றது. இவையூடாக அரசாங்கம் தனது ஆற்றாமையை மூடிமறைத்திட முயற்சிசெய்து வருகின்றது.
மக்கள் இப்போது ஏமாறுகின்ற யுகத்தை நிறைவுசெய்து வருகிறார்களென நாங்கள் நினைக்கிறோம். மக்கள் அண்மைக்கால வரலாற்றில் அதாவது 2015 இலும் 2019 இலும் நிலவுகின்ற அரசியல் பற்றி பாரிய விமர்சனத்துடன் அரசாங்கத்தை மாற்ற ஒன்று திரண்டார்கள். அந்த இரண்டு சந்தர்ப்பங்களிலும் அரசாங்கத்திடம் ஏமாந்தார்கள் மற்றும் மக்கள் நன்றாக பாவிக்கப்பட்டார்கள் என்ற விடயம் தற்போது உரையாடலுக்கு இலக்காகி உள்ளது. மீண்டுமொரு தடவை அவ்வாறு ஏமாற்றப்பட இடமில்லை என நாங்கள் நினைக்கிறோம். மக்களின் பிரதிபலிப்பிலிருந்து நாங்கள் அதனை உணர்கிறோம். இந்நாட்டின் பெரும்பான்மை மக்கள் இனவாதத்ததையோ அநீதியையோ விரும்புபவர்கள் அல்ல. இந்த நாட்டின் அரசியல்வாதிகளே அந்த திசையை நோக்கித் தள்ளுகிறார்கள். மீண்டுமொரு தடவை எங்களை ஏமாற்றிவிட முடியாது என்ற செய்தியை மக்கள் மிகவும் பலம்பொருந்தியவகையில் அரசாங்கத்திற்கு பெற்றுக்கொடுக்க வேண்டும்.
“ඒ වගේම පහුගිය කාලේ පොලිසිය ප්රසිද්ධියේ ජනතාවට පහර දෙන හිරිහැර කරන අවස්ථා අපි දකිනවා. පොලිස් නිලධාරීන්ගේ ප්රශ්නයට වඩා අපි දකින්නේ මෙය නීතිය ක්රියාත්මක වන ව්යූහය කඩා වැටිලා තිබෙනවා යන්නයි. නීතිය ක්රියාත්මක කිරීමේදී සදාචාරවත් බවක් මානව හිමිකම් ආරක්ෂා කරන සංස්කෘතියක් පේන්න නැහැ. රාජ්ය ඇමතිවරයා කරන ප්රකාශවලින් මේ තත්වය තවත් උග්ර අතට හැරෙනවා. පොලිසිය සම්බන්ධ මානව හිමිකම් […]
“ඒ වගේම පහුගිය කාලේ පොලිසිය ප්රසිද්ධියේ ජනතාවට පහර දෙන හිරිහැර කරන අවස්ථා අපි දකිනවා. පොලිස් නිලධාරීන්ගේ ප්රශ්නයට වඩා අපි දකින්නේ මෙය නීතිය ක්රියාත්මක වන ව්යූහය කඩා වැටිලා තිබෙනවා යන්නයි. නීතිය ක්රියාත්මක කිරීමේදී සදාචාරවත් බවක් මානව හිමිකම් ආරක්ෂා කරන සංස්කෘතියක් පේන්න නැහැ. රාජ්ය ඇමතිවරයා කරන ප්රකාශවලින් මේ තත්වය තවත් උග්ර අතට හැරෙනවා. පොලිසිය සම්බන්ධ මානව හිමිකම් නඩු මාස 06ක් ඇතුළුත සම්පූර්ණ වුනේ නැත්නම් ඉවත් කරගන්නවා කියලා ඇමති කියනවා. මේ රටේ මොන නඩුවද මාස 06න් විමර්ශනය කළේ. ඒ නිසා මේ සංඥාවලින් සමාජයට මොකක්ද දැනෙන්නේ. නීතිය ක්රියාත්මක කරන නිලධාරීන්ට දේශපාලන බලයට යට නොවී ක්රියාත්මක වෙන්න නොහැකි තත්වයක් නිර්මාණය වෙමින් යනවා. මේවා තුළින් ආණ්ඩුව තමන්ගේ නොහැකියාව වසාගන්න උත්සහ කරමින් තිබෙනවා.” යැයි ජාතික ජන බලවේගයේ පාර්ලිමේන්තු මන්ත්රීනී ආචාර්ය හරිනි අමරසූරිය පවසයි.
ඇය මේ බව පැවසූවේ බත්තරමුල්ල, පැලවත්ත හි පිහිටි ජනතා විමුක්ති පෙරමුණේ ප්රධාන කාර්යාලයේදී අද (06) පෙරවරුවේ පැවති මාධ්ය හමුවක් අමතමිණි.
එහිදී වැඩිදුරටත් අදහස් දැක්වූ ජාතික ජන බලවේගයේ පාර්ලිමේන්තු මන්ත්රීනී ආචාර්ය හරිනි අමරසූරිය,
“මේ වෙලාවේ ආණ්ඩුවේ ජනප්රියත්වය සීග්රයෙන් පහළ බසිනවා. මේ තරම් ජනතා ප්රසාදයක් මත බලයට පත් වුනු ආණ්ඩුවක් වසර දෙකක් ගත වෙන්න කලින් ජනතා අප්රසාදයට පත්වෙනවා අපි මෑත ඉතිහාසයේ අහල තිබුණේ නැහැ. ඒ වගේම අර්බුද රාශියක් නිර්මාණය වෙමින් තිබෙනවා.
වසර 73ක් තිස්සේ ආණ්ඩු කළේ තමන්ගේ ආසාර්ථකත්වය හමුවේ ජනතා අවධානය වෙනතකට යොමු කරන්න විවිධ දේ කරනවා. එකක් තමයි ජාතිවාදය අවුස්සන එක. මිනිසුන් අතර බෙදීම් ඇති කිරීම මේ දේශපාලන පක්ෂවල උපක්රමයක්. එයින් මිනිස් ජීවිත අහිමිවෙන එක ලේ සෙලවෙන එක පාලකයින්ට අදාල නැහැ. ඔවුන්ගේ බල ව්යාපෘතියට ඕනෑම දෙයක් කරනවා. ඒ විදියටම මේ ආණ්ඩුවත් ජාතිවාදී ගැටුම් ඇති කරන ආකාරයේ තීන්දු තීරණ ගනිමින් ඉන්නවා. ඒ විතරක් නෙවෙයි රටේ ප්රජාතන්ත්රවාදය අහෝසි කරන ක්රියාමාර්ග ගනිමින් ඉන්න බව අපිට නිරීක්ෂණය වෙනවා.
එමෙන්ම ඔවුන් නීතියටත් විවිධ බලපෑම් කරමින් ඉන්න බව අපිට පේනවා. ආණ්ඩුවේ ප්රතිවාදීන්ට, විවේචනය කරන්නන්ට එක නීතියකුත් තමන්ගේ යාළු මිත්රයන් වෙනුවෙන් තව නීතියකුත් ක්රියාත්මක කරනවා. මේකේ ලොකුම විහිළුව තමයි එක රටක් එක නීතියක් කියල බලයට ආපු ආණ්ඩුව මේ වෙනකොට පැහැදිලිවම ජනතාවට එක නීතියක් සහ තමන්ගේ යහළු මිත්රාදීන්ට තව නීතියකුත් ක්රියාත්මක කිරීම. කොතලාවල පනතට එරෙහිව අරගල කළ දේශපාලන ක්රියාදරයින් පස්දෙනෙක් දින 100කට අධික කාලයක් රිමාන්ඩ් බන්ධනාගාරයේ තබාගෙන ඉන්නවා. ඒ වගේම පාස්කු ප්රහාරයට පිළිබඳ මතයක් ඉදිරිපත් කළ ආගමික නායකයින්ට තර්ජනය එල්ල කරමින් තිබෙනවා. සිරිල් ගාමිණි පියතුමන්ව අත්අඩංගුවට ගන්න ප්රශ්න කරන්න සූදානමක් තිබෙන බව ඔහුම ප්රකාශ කර තිබෙනවා. එහෙම වෙද්දී ඉතාම සීග්රයෙන් ආණ්ඩුවේ හිතවාදීන්ගේ සහ ආණ්ඩුවේ මැති ඇමතිවරුන්ගේ නඩු ඉවත් වෙමින් තිබෙනවා. මේක බරපතල තත්වයක්. මෙයින් නීතිය අධිකරණය පිළිබඳ විශ්වාසය බිඳවැටෙනවා. මේ නඩු ගොනු කරන්නේ සාක්ෂි සහිතවයි. ආණ්ඩු වෙනස් වෙනකොට සාක්ෂි වෙනස් වෙන්නේ කොහොමද? එය ප්රහේලිකාවක්. මෙයින් ජාත්යන්තර ප්රතිරූපයටත් හානි වෙනවා. මේ නඩු මානව හිමිකම් උල්ලංඝනය වුනු විශාල කතාබහකට ලක්වුණු නඩුත් මේ වෙනකොට ඉල්ලා අස්කරගෙන තිබෙනවා.
ඒ වගේම පහුගිය කාලේ පොලිසිය ප්රසිද්ධියේ ජනතාවට පහර දෙන හිරිහැර කරන අවස්ථා අපි දකිනවා. පොලිස් නිලධාරීන්ගේ ප්රශ්නයට වඩා අපි දකින්නේ මෙය නීතිය ක්රියාත්මක වන ව්යූහය කඩා වැටිලා තිබෙනවා යන්නයි. නීතිය ක්රියාත්මක කිරීමේදී සදාචාරවත් බවක් මානව හිමිකම් ආරක්ෂා කරන සංස්කෘතියක් පේන්න නැහැ. රාජ්ය ඇමතිවරයා කරන ප්රකාශවලින් මේ තත්වය තවත් උග්ර අතට හැරෙනවා. පොලිසිය සම්බන්ධ මානව හිමිකම් නඩු මාස 06ක් ඇතුළුත සම්පූර්ණ වුනේ නැත්නම් ඉවත් කරගන්නවා කියලා ඇමති කියනවා. මේ රටේ මොන නඩුවද මාස 06න් විමර්ශනය කළේ. ඒ නිසා මේ සංඥාවලින් සමාජයට මොකක්ද දැනෙන්නේ. නීතිය ක්රියාත්මක කරන නිලධාරීන්ට දේශපාලන බලයට යට නොවී ක්රියාත්මක වෙන්න නොහැකි තත්වයක් නිර්මාණය වෙමින් යනවා. මේවා තුළින් ආණ්ඩුව තමන්ගේ නොහැකියාව වසාගන්න උත්සහ කරමින් තිබෙනවා.
අපි හිතනවා ජනතාව දැන් රැවටෙන යුගය නිමාකරමින් තිබෙනවා කියලා. ජනතාව මෑත ඉතිහාසයේ එනම් 2015දී සහ 2019දී පවතින දේශපාලනය ගැන විශාල විවේචනයක් සහිතව ආණ්ඩු මාරු කිරීමට එක්රැස් වුනා. ඒ අවස්ථා දෙකේදීම ආණ්ඩුවට රැවටුනා සහ ජනතාව හොඳටම පාවිච්චි වුනා කියන කාරණය දැන් සංවාදයට බඳුන් වෙලා. අපි හිතනවා නැවත වතාවක් එහෙම රවට්ටන්න පුළුවන් කමක් නැහැ කියලා. ජනතාවගේ ප්රතිචාරවලින් අපිට ඒ බව දැනෙනවා. මේ රටේ බහුතර ජනතාව ජාතිවාදයට හෝ අසාධාරණයට කැමැති නැහැ. ඒ දිශාවට තල්ලු කරන්නේ මේ රටේ දේශපාලකයෝ. නැවත වතාවක් අපි රවටන්න බැහැ කියන පණිවිඩය ජනතාව ඉතාම ශක්තිමත්ව ආණ්ඩුවට ලබාදිය යුතුයි.”
By Harini Amarasuriya Recently, Minister of Lands, S.M. Chandrasena, speaking to the Media said the Government policy on fertiliser – or specifically, the switch to organic fertiliser was an ‘experiment’. If the experiment failed during this current Maha season, they would reverse their policy, he promised. The Minister hails from Anuradhapura, an area that is […]
By Harini Amarasuriya
Recently, Minister of Lands, S.M. Chandrasena, speaking to the Media said the Government policy on fertiliser – or specifically, the switch to organic fertiliser was an ‘experiment’. If the experiment failed during this current Maha season, they would reverse their policy, he promised.
The Minister hails from Anuradhapura, an area that is largely agricultural, where the livelihoods of many are dependent on farming. One would think that he was well aware of the challenges faced by our farming communities, who struggle to make a living at the best of times.
Labour force participation in agriculture is 25 per cent, yet the agriculture sector only contributes approximately 8 per cent to the national GDP. In comparison, the industrial sector contributes around 25 per cent and the service sector almost 60 per cent, according to 2020 figures. This is reflective of the crisis in the agriculture sector, which has been systematically neglected for several decades.
Dependant on the vagaries of weather as well as the market, farming is gradually becoming an unsustainable livelihood. Young people are turning away from agriculture and farming lands are abandoned. Indebtedness, exacerbated by predatory micro-finance companies is high, especially among women. To talk of ‘experimenting’ with such a community, during the main cultivating season, is callous beyond belief. To simply brush off the concerns raised by farmers with glib statements about reversing policy if necessary shows a disconnect with the lives of the people that is shocking even from a jaded and tarnished politician.
But, the stubbornness with which Government Ministers and MPs are defending this agriculture policy, even when it is politically disadvantageous, points to a bigger problem. It is very clear that for some reason the President is absolutely convinced by the decision to shift overnight to organic agriculture, contradicting what is in his own campaign manifesto, which describes a far more realistic, systematic shift towards reducing chemical fertiliser while promoting organic farming.
The basis on which the President made this decision is puzzling to say the least. Apart from the President of the GMOA, Dr. Anuruddha Padeniya, who has been stoutly defending the President’s policy, most specialists in the field of agriculture and food security have expressed concerns about the Government’s strategy. They point out that a switch to organic farming needs to happen systematically, and involves a lot more than simply banning chemical fertilisers. Preparation of the soil, availability of appropriate seeds, determining the types of organic fertiliser required for different crops, teaching farmers appropriate methods, etc., require research, planning and hard work.
Certainly, encouraging organic farming is necessary and clearly the way of the future. The influence of multinational fertiliser and seed companies on agriculture research and policy must be curtailed. Yet, even non-experts in the field will recognise that such a major shift in policy cannot be done cold turkey and that doing so not only places the livelihoods of the farming community at threat, but also the food security of people.
Yet, the Government is simply going ahead with this move with absolutely no consideration of any of the issues that need to be addressed. If we go by the statements by various members of the Government, it is also evident that most have no idea whatsoever about what they say. For instance, the fact that farmers are being given money to produce organic fertiliser is touted as a way of dealing with the fertiliser shortage.
Farmers are promised compensation for their losses. Whether farmers are producing or can produce sufficient fertiliser to meet the requirements for the current season and that fertilisers have to be made to suit the specifications of different crops, etc., seem to have escaped the notice of Government spokespersons. That, farmers have no desire to be compensated but simply want to be able to get on with their livelihoods seems beyond the comprehension of politicians who have got used to thinking of people simply as stooges who can be appeased with handouts.
Why is the Government determinedly pursuing this strategy and also defending it so strenuously? For one, there is a real fear, that this strategy has been adopted to force farmers to abandon farming and their lands thereby making it easier for the Government to acquire farming land and sell it to local and multinational corporations. There is already evidence of farming land being abandoned as farmers are unable to access fertiliser (organic or otherwise) to start their work on time.
The other issue – which is perhaps as alarming – is that we can see the consequences of unchecked Executive power. Although, we remain theoretically a parliamentary democracy, with a Cabinet of Ministers and a Prime Minister accountable to Parliament, after the 20th Amendment, the Executive has been extraordinarily strengthened. Lately, the President has been issuing directives and making policy decisions seemingly without consulting his Cabinet. Consequently, his Government has had to scramble to explain and justify increasingly indefensible decisions.
For instance, the President recently appointed a Task Force to work on law reforms under the theme of ‘one country, one law’. The Task Force is headed by Galagoda Aththe Gnanasara Thera, a monk most famous for his divisive politics and himself out of jail thanks to a pardon from the previous President. There are no women or representation from the Tamil community on the Task Force. Although tasked with law reforms, neither Gnanasara Thera nor the majority of others on it, are legal experts.
Leaving all this aside, this task force was appointed when the Ministry of Justice is already working on legal reforms, including reforms to personal laws which have long drawn attention for violating the general law of the country and certain provisions of the Constitution. There is also a Committee appointed by the President, working on a draft Constitution, an initiative the Minister of Justice, Ali Sabry, often refers to in the context of legal reforms. So where does this latest Task Force fit in with all these other initiatives? Media reports suggest that the Minister for Justice was blindsided by this latest initiative by the President.
Rumblings of discontent have started to emerge from the smaller constituent parties of the ruling coalition, including the SLFP, of the non-consultative nature of decision-making within the Government. That their protests reek of hypocrisy – they all voted in favour of the 20th Amendment, which effectively stripped Parliament, the Cabinet, the Prime Minister and the Judiciary of its independence and powers of oversight – is ironic no doubt. Their motivations for choosing this moment to criticise the Government, when the popularity of the regime is on the wane, also suggests self-interest rather than standing up for any principles. Yet, their criticisms draw attention to the way in which the Executive is able to overlook concerns of other branches of Government – a very dangerous situation.
All of this is evidence of a deepening crisis of governance in the country. Even the most competent and politically astute leader needs to be held accountable and limits must be placed on the exercise of power. President Gotabaya Rajapaksa by now has unfortunately proved himself, neither competent nor politically astute, and is thereby creating an unstable, confused and erratic political environment.
Coming out of this crisis will not be easy – but there are important lessons to be learnt. The crisis must be understood as institutional and structural and not simply one of individual, personal weakness. President Gotabaya Rajapaksa is himself the product of a steady erosion of systems, institutions and the democratic ethos in this country. Disillusionment with politics as usual, drove people to pin their faith on an ‘outsider’, a ‘strong man’: The changes people wanted were going to be delivered by the ultimate ‘anti-system’ man.
Bulldozing homes to make way for walking paths and shopping malls was equated with what it takes to re-build a country in the throes of multiple crises. But, unfortunately, that’s not how it works. The crisis we are facing is political and a political solution is required to get us out of it. Picking the right political solution will be the challenge we will all have to face in the not so distant future. Let us hope that the lessons we are learning at this moment, will not be forgotten then.
By Harini Amarasuriya One of the most prominent slogans the current Government, and particularly, President Gotabaya Rajapaksa, used during election campaigns was “one country, one law”. At first glance, the sentiments behind this slogan are perfectly acceptable. After all, what’s not to like about a promise to implement the law equally for all in the […]
By Harini Amarasuriya
One of the most prominent slogans the current Government, and particularly, President Gotabaya Rajapaksa, used during election campaigns was “one country, one law”. At first glance, the sentiments behind this slogan are perfectly acceptable. After all, what’s not to like about a promise to implement the law equally for all in the country?
As we all know, the law does not apply equally in most instances – privilege triumphs justice each time, and any effort to make the law equitable in its implementation is certainly most laudatory. Except, when this regime touts “one country, one law”, it is not talking about equality before the law for all; rather, the entire campaign for “one country, one law” emerged from a very pointed, anti-Muslim position.
The work that went into propagating this slogan has a long history. Ever since the end of the war in 2009, there was a steady and systematic spread of anti-Muslim sentiment in the country. It started with the anti-Halal campaign. Sinhala-Buddhist nationalist groups protested what they claimed was the imposition of the practice of Halal on non-Muslims. Sinhalese were being force-fed Halal products, claimed these groups, as if Halal was some sort of poisonous substance. This campaign took off to such an extent that rather than advertising or labelling Halal food products (as was the norm), some started advertising the fact that products were not Halal. Consumers would check if the shops sold non-Halal products before purchasing any food. There were calls for boycotting shops and restaurants that sold Halal products.
Then came another “revelation”. Apparently, Muslims did not use helmets when using motorcycles – and while the rest of the country were fined for not using helmets, Muslims were getting away with violating this law scot-free, it was claimed. To top it all off, Muslim women insisted on wearing “offensive clothing”, going against “accepted” cultural norms and traditions. This clothing was a “security threat” no less, as they “prevented” the Police from carrying out their law enforcement duties effectively. It did not matter that there had never been any incident involving burka or hijab-clad women, or men pretending to be women, for that matter, as it was claimed, causing havoc in the country, yet this too became another “example” of Muslims doing their own thing in contravention of the accepted practices and laws of the rest of the country. It is worth remembering that one of the first directives after the Easter Sunday bombings was to ban the burka. The fact that the bombers were all male, looked completely ordinary, and wore clothes that did not set them apart in any way was totally immaterial to the directive that banned the burka.
Muslim personal laws were then taken up as the most pernicious example of Muslim otherness. It was claimed that Muslims were all engaged in bigamy, marrying underage women, and, worse of all, having their own courts. Self-proclaimed law experts warned that Sharia law was being practised in this country, enabling Muslims to escape laws that affected others. It was pointed out that even a university was contemplating teaching Sharia law – a supposed sure indication of the long-term plan of the Muslim community to impose Sharia law on everybody. Suddenly, groups and individuals that had considered women’s rights as a prime example of western imperialism were clamouring for Muslim women’s rights.
Ironically, women’s groups in Sri Lanka, led by Muslim women’s groups in particular, had been campaigning for reform of the Muslim Marriage and Divorce Act (MMDA) for decades. Careful research had gone into building a case for reform, yet, at each point, reform attempts were blocked. Male political leaders from every ethnicity were united in dismissing the claims made by women’s groups. As always, the concerns of women were brushed aside in the interests of patriarchal power games. In fact, the resistance to MMDA reforms from lawmakers provide us with a copy-book case study of the pervasiveness of patriarchal values in Sri Lankan politics.
This was the context within which the “one country, one law” campaign emerged. In other words, it was primarily informed by carefully produced and maintained anti-Muslim sentiments that created an image of a community that ignored common law, lived by its own rules, and was stealthily trying to impose its own rituals and practices on the rest of the country as part of a global Islamic project. Lack of respect for the general law was seen as the most obvious example of Muslim otherness and therefore had to be dealt with summarily. If there is any doubt as to the intent behind this campaign and slogan, the appointment of Galagodaththe Gnanasara Thera as the Chair of the Presidential Task Force appointed to report on the “one country, one law” initiative should settle the matter. Gnanasara Thera was a prime mover behind propagating anti-Muslim sentiments. His views, rhetoric, and actions have been divisive and inflammatory. He has been named in numerous reports and accounts for inciting violence. Let us also not forget that it was a presidential pardon that freed him from a prison sentence for contempt of court on four different counts. Even for a government whose actions are becoming increasingly inexplicable, the appointment of such a person to lead a task force on legal reform is mind-boggling, to say the least.
However, it would be a mistake to dismiss these actions as simply ridiculous. There is a level of arrogance and lack of concern for even an appearance of doing what is right that is highly dangerous. What is most diabolical about this regime is the way in which it is subverting much-needed reform agendas for its own ends. For instance, no one argues about the importance of promoting organic farming and reducing the use of harmful pesticides from entering our food and ecosystems; yet, what the Government is doing today has consequences beyond placing the livelihoods of farmers and food security of a nation at risk. It has also damaged the organic farming movement, which was gradually developing in the country, by making a mockery of the entire exercise. Legitimate concerns have been raised that the organic agriculture policy is a ploy to drive people away from farming lands.
Also, the MMDA reforms are long overdue and women’s voices on this issue have been explicit. Similarly, there is no argument of the need to ensure that everybody is equal before the law. We have far too many examples of how unfairly the law works in this country. Whether it is how the Police implement traffic laws or the deeper, structural inequalities in the Judiciary, there is much work to be done to make sure that the law works without discrimination.
Every government in power did its best to bend the rules to further its own interests, to protect its allies, and to harass its opponents. The current regime has taken this practice to another level, if the speed with which cases against the Rajapaksa family and its allies are being dismissed is anything to go by. Today, we have the Attorney General (AG) withdrawing cases filed by his own department, citing technical reasons. In fact, some of the cases that have been withdrawn were filed when the current Chief Justice was heading the AG’s office. How will these actions build confidence in the system of justice and the Judiciary in this country? This whole exercise stinks of perversion of justice and the erosion of the independence of the Judiciary.
For some time now, prisoners at the Welikada Prison have been protesting on this very issue, demanding a review of their cases. Family members of prisoners have been talking to me and presumably to other politicians, asking very pertinent questions: Why is it that only cases that are filed against the rich and powerful seem to be flawed and therefore withdrawn or dismissed? Couldn’t mistakes have been made in other cases as well? If Duminda Silva can be given a presidential pardon because there are questions regarding his trial, why not others? These are valid questions to which there are no valid answers – simply further proof that the law and the system of justice do not function equally in this country.
However, this renewal of interest in “one country, one law”, especially when the Ministry of Justice is apparently in the process of reforming many laws, needs to be understood in the broader context of what this regime is trying to do to revitalise itself.
The President’s recent statements admitting to having disappointed those who brought him to power and pledging to fulfil their aspirations soon, followed by the appointment of the Presidential Task Force chaired by Gnanasara Thera, is a clear indication that the regime is resorting to what worked most effectively in the past for them to regain popularity: Invoking and inciting racism. President Rajapaksa’s entire election campaign and slogans – discipline, one country, one law, national security, saving the nation, a strong leader, etc. – were all premised on a single strategy: Arousing the most fundamental fear among Sinhala-Buddhists of imminent threat and persecution. Sinhala-Buddhists have often been referred to as a “majority with a minority mindset”.
There are historical conditions through which this fear has been produced and maintained. Our colonial experience as well as the post-Independence nation-building project has been one of exclusion and discrimination. Colonial history was one of exploitation and persecution, and independence was supposed to rectify those. What is left out of mainstream renderings of history is how the political elite in this country continually benefitted from divisions based on language, religion, ethnicity, and class, while promising redress for grievances carefully cultivated on those same divisions. Grievances were nurtured and maintained, and redressing those grievances became the basis on which different groups (particularly, Sinhala-Buddhists) were going to be led to promised land. All those who have led this country up to this point have used this method for capturing and holding onto power. President Rajapaksa and his cohort, for all their rhetoric of “being different”, are treading a well-worn path in Sri Lankan politics.
However, we are today at a point where many chickens are coming home to roost. The chaos and crisis that we are facing today on multiple fronts is a result of decades of self-interested and selfish political choices that have essentially been about holding onto power at any cost. People have become and are becoming wise to this – if the chatter on social media as well as on the streets is anything to go by, politicians are being held up to far more scrutiny and treated with far more scepticism than before. This is exactly what is required today – for leaders to be brought down from their lofty heights and images of grandeur, infallibility, and heroism, and seen for what they really are.
Coming out of this crisis requires leaders who have demonstrated their connection to the people they represent – not through relationships of patronage (which the Rajapaksas have developed to a fine art), but through relationships of mutual respect and reciprocity. If this regime thinks that resorting to the tired old tactics of whipping up racism and catering to the worst human instincts within us will work again, they are doomed to fail. In fact, as citizens, it is essential that we ensure that they fail. It is only then that we can begin to rebuild this country based on the recognition of all that brings us together rather than that which divides us.
1. ගුරු විදුහල්පති වෘත්තීය අරගලය නිසා මාර්ගගත අධ්යාපනය හෝ නොලැබීම හේතුවෙන් දරුවන්ගේ අධ්යාපනය පසුබෑමකට ලක් වීම ඔබ දකින්නේ කෙසේද? “වසර දෙකක සිට දරුවන්ගේ අධ්යාපනය අඩාළ වුණා. කොවිඩ් වයිරසය පැතිරීමත් සමඟ පාසල් වසාදැම්මත් දරුවන්ට උගන්වන්න රජයට කිසිදු සැලසුමක් තිබුණේ නැහැ. මාර්ගගත අධ්යාපනයත් ගුරුවරුන් විසින් ආරම්භ කරන ලද්දක් මිසක; රජය පහසුකම් ලබාදී ආරම්භ කරන ලද දෙයක් නොවෙයි. මාර්ගගත අධ්යාපන ක්රමයට […]
“වසර දෙකක සිට දරුවන්ගේ අධ්යාපනය අඩාළ වුණා. කොවිඩ් වයිරසය පැතිරීමත් සමඟ පාසල් වසාදැම්මත් දරුවන්ට උගන්වන්න රජයට කිසිදු සැලසුමක් තිබුණේ නැහැ. මාර්ගගත අධ්යාපනයත් ගුරුවරුන් විසින් ආරම්භ කරන ලද්දක් මිසක; රජය පහසුකම් ලබාදී ආරම්භ කරන ලද දෙයක් නොවෙයි. මාර්ගගත අධ්යාපන ක්රමයට අවශ්ය පහසුකම් ගුරුවරුන්ට හෝ දරුවන්ට තිබුණේ නැති නිසා ඒ අධ්යාපනය සාර්ථකයි කියලා අපිට හිතන්න බැහැ. අපිට හිතන්න තියන දේ තමයි, දරුවන්ගෙන් අතිබහුතරයකට අධ්යාපනය ඇණ හිටියා කියන කරුණ. මේ ඇත්ත භාර අරගෙන තමයි අපිට ඉදිරියට යන්න වෙන්නේ. අධ්යාපනය අඩාළ වූ කාලය ගැන ආණ්ඩුව වගකිව යුතුයි. ඒ අතරම විශාල කාලයක් තිස්සේ නොවිසඳුණු ගුරු අරගලය ආවා. ඒ අරගලය ආරම්භ වන අවස්ථාවෙත් පාසල් වසාදමා තිබුණේ. ඒ නිසා ගුරු අරගලය නිසා අධ්යාපනයට පාඩුවක් වුණේ නැහැ. වෘත්තිය සමිති නායකත්වය අත්අඩංගුවට ගැනීමත් සමඟයි ස්වේච්ඡාවෙන් ආරම්භ කළ මාර්ගගත අධ්යාපන කටයුතුත් නතර කිරීමට ගුරුවරුන් තීරණය කළේ. දරුවන්ට අධ්යාපනය ලබාදීමට ක්රමවේදයක් සැලසුම් කිරීම අත්යවශ්යයි. ඒ හැර වෙනත් විකල්ප නැහැ. සාමාන්ය පෙළ සහ උසස්පෙළ පන්තිවලට විශේෂ අවධානය යෙදවිය යුතුයි . කොවිඩ් තවම ඉවර වෙලා නැහැ ; ඒ තත්ත්වයත් හිතට අරගෙනයි මේ දේවල් කළ යුතු වන්නේ; සංචාරක ව්යාපාරය විවෘත කර තිිබෙන නිසා කොවිඩ් තවම පවතිනවා කියන අදහසින් අධ්යාපනය කෙසේ පවත්වාගෙන යා යුතු ද කියා සැලසුම් කළ යුතුයි. ගුරුඅරගලයත් සමඟ ආණ්ඩුව දැනට අරන් තියන ක්රියාමාර්ග නම් හරියන්නේ නැහැ.. ගුරු අරගලයට සාකච්ඡා මාර්ගයෙන් හොඳ විසඳුමක් ලබාදීම අත්යවශ්යයි”
“ගුරුවරුන්ට පාසල ආරම්භ කිරීම පිළිබඳව කිසිදු ගැටලුවක් තිබුණේ නැහැ. ඒ අය ඉල්ලන්නේ ඒ අයගේ සාධාරණ ඉල්ලීමයි. වෘත්තිය සමිති තීරණය කර තිබෙනවා, 25 වනවිට රාජකාරියට යන්න. 23, 24 පමණයි; ඒ අය වැඩවර්ජනයක් කරන්නේ. ගුරුවරුන්ගේ ඉල්ලීම් වෙනුවෙන් කටයුතු කරන අතරම දරුවන් වෙනුවෙන් පාසල් ආරම්භ කිරීමට ආණ්ඩුව කටයුතු කළ යුතුයි”
“ගුරුවරුන්ගේ ප්රශ්නය විසඳගන්න රටේ ආර්ථික තත්ත්වය විසඳගන්න කුරු බලා ඉන්න බැහැ. ගුරුවරුන් අවුරුදු 23ක් මේ ප්රශ්න සමඟ හිටියා. මෙතැනදී වැදගත් වන්නේ ප්රමුඛතාවයි. රටේ අනෙක් දේවල්ද දරුවන්ගේ අධ්යාපනය ද ප්රමුඛ වන්නේ කියා සලකා බැලිය යුතුයි. දරුවන්ගේ ගුණාත්මක භාවය රඳා පතින්නේ ගුරුවරුන් මතයි. ඔවුන් අධෛර්යමත්ව ඉන්නවා නම් අධ්යාපනය සාර්ථක වෙන්නේ කොහොමද? හොඳම කුසලතා සහ සුදුසුකම් තිබෙන අය නැතිනම් අපිට ගුරු වෘත්තියේ ගුණාත්මක භාවය ඉහළ දාන්න බැහැ . පසුගිය 2011- 2012 විශ්වවිද්යාල ගුරුඅරගලය පිටුපස තිබුණු ප්රධාන කාරණාවක් නම් සුදුසුම පිරිස විශ්වවිද්යාල තුළ රඳවාගන්නට අවශ්ය නම් ඊට හොඳ වැටුපක් අවශ්ය බවයි . ගුරුවරුන්ටත් ඒ අදාළ වෘත්තිමය ඇගැයීම් ලබා දිය යුතුයි. එය වැටුපෙන් පමණක් කරන්න අපහසුයි. සේවය ඇගැයීම වැනි දේවල් කළ යුතුයි. මේ පවතින ආණ්ඩුවේ වාමාශික පක්ෂ කිහිපයක් ඉන්නවා. වෘත්තිය සමිති ක්රියාකාරින් රැසක් ඉන්න පක්ෂයක එහෙම දේශපාලන ව්යාපාරයක් මේ වගේ ගුරුවෘත්තිය අරගලයකදී හැසිරිම කිසිසේත් අනුමත කරන්න බැහැ. මේ විදිහට වෘත්තිය සමිති සමඟ හැප්පෙන එක සහ මර්දනය කිරීම ඉතාමත් කනගාටුදායකයි.”
“ගුරුවරුන් ස්වේච්ඡාවෙන් කරපු මාර්ගගත අධ්යාපනයෙන් ඉවත් වුණා. මාර්ගගත ක්රමය ඒ අයට රජය පැවරූ රාජකාරියක් නොවෙයි. වැටුප් අරගලය සම්බන්ධයෙන් ඒ අයගේ ගැටලු සමාජයට ඉදිරිපත් කිරීමට දීර්ඝ කාලයක් කටයුතු කළා. ආණ්ඩුව විවේචනය කරන සියලු දෙනා කඩාකප්පල්කාරීන් කියලයි මේ ආණ්ඩුව කියන්නේ.. මේ ගුරු වර්ජනය ඇතුළෙත් බහුතරයක් ඉන්නේ මේ ආණ්ඩුවට ඡන්දය දුන්න පිරිසක්. මොන පක්ෂයකටවත් බලහත්කාරයෙන් මිනිසුන් අරගලවලට ගේන්න බැහැ. වෘත්තිය හෝ වෙනත් ගැටලු නොතිබුණා නම් ගුරුවරයා අරගල කරන්නේ නැහැ. ඒ අයගේ නොවිසඳුණු ගැටලු තිබෙනවා. ගුරුවරුන් කියන්නේ විපක්ෂවලට හිතුණ ගමන් පාරට බස්සන්න පුළුවන් අය නොවෙයි. ඒ අය පාරට බැස්සේ දේශපාලනයකින් තොරව සාධාරණ ඉල්ලිම් රැසක් දිනා ගන්න. වෘත්තිය සමිති හැටියට සාමජිකයන්ගේ ඉල්ලීම්වලට ඇහුම්කන් නොදී වෘත්තිය සමිති ව්යාපාර මෙහෙයවීම වරදක්. ඒ නිසා වෘත්තිය සමිති නායකත්වය මේ වෙනුවෙන් පෙනී සිටිනවා. ප්රශ්න නිර්මාණය කරන්න වෘත්තිය සමිති ව්යාපාරයකටවත් දේශපාලන පක්ෂයකටවත් බැහැ. ජනතාව එවැනි ක්රියාමාර්ගවලට යොමුවෙන්නේ ඒ අයගේ අයිතිවාසිකම් අහිමි වූ විටයි”
“වෘත්තිය සමිති ඉන්නේ ආණ්ඩුව සතුටු කරන්න නොවෙයි. සාමාජිකයන්ගේ සාධාරණ ඉල්ලීම වෙනුවෙන් පෙනී සිටීමයි වෘත්තිය සමිති නායකත්වයේ වගකීම. වෘත්තිය සමිති ව්යාපාර කියන්නේ ප්රජාත්රාන්තික ව්යුහයක් තුළ නීතියෙන් පිළිගත් ආරක්ෂා වූ සංවිධානයන්. ඒ අය සමඟ ගනුදෙනු කිරීම ආණ්ඩුවේ වගකීමක්. නිහඬව නොසිට ආණ්ඩු වෘත්තිකයන්ගේ ප්රශ්න විසඳිය යුතුයි.”
By Harini Amarasuriya Recently, a friend shared with me an advertisement from a migration consultancy service. The advertisement simply said: “We have 6.9 million reasons for you to migrate to Canada”. Now, that’s quite a bold statement to make, I thought to myself. Yet, it’s indicative of a certain shift in the current mood among […]
By Harini Amarasuriya
Recently, a friend shared with me an advertisement from a migration consultancy service. The advertisement simply said: “We have 6.9 million reasons for you to migrate to Canada”. Now, that’s quite a bold statement to make, I thought to myself. Yet, it’s indicative of a certain shift in the current mood among people. Recently, we have seen images of long queues outside the passport office.
Migration consultants have reported a dramatic increase in the number of inquiries and applications. My former colleagues from the university sector say that the number of reference letters they are writing for students seeking placements and jobs abroad have increased. All this suggests a sense of despair and hopelessness, especially among young people, about the future prospects of this country.
This is in marked contrast with the waves of enthusiasm that swept the country immediately after the last Presidential and General Elections or the frenetic support the SLPP mobilised during the election campaign. Although the Government would like to blame the COVID-19 pandemic for all the woes the country is grappling with, this is simply not correct. Certainly, neither the farmer protests nor the teachers’ protests are due to COVID-19; the first is a consequence of a stupendously ignorant policy decision and the latter is a result of years of neglect exacerbated by an arrogant if not clumsy response to trade union action.
The long lines at the passport office are not a result of a single issue, but driven mostly by a lack of faith and trust that the political leadership in this country are capable of finding solutions for the multiple crises the country is facing. The majority who are seeking to migrate are taking a huge leap of faith. Many are leaving without proper assurances about jobs, security, shelter or support networks. Anti-migrant sentiments are strong across the world as people seek scapegoats to blame for their ills. The fact that people are still willing to face these risks – often alone and in unfamiliar places – speaks volumes for their sense of disillusionment about their own country.
Sri Lanka is a country that seeks to solve problems through commissions: There have been multiple commissions of inquiry, investigation, public representations etc., all searching for answers, people’s views and providing analysis and lofty recommendations. I myself have been on some commissions and fact-seeking committees. I have also read many commission reports. What is glaringly obvious in a majority of these reports is the sense of injustice that citizens feel with regard to the State and its operations.
While most citizens expect the State and the elected Government to mediate on their behalf, to ensure their wellbeing and protection, in their experience, Governments have historically failed to deliver. This has led to increasing mistrust in institutions of the State as well as of politics. This is most eloquently stated in the Presidential Commission on Youth, established in 1990, soon after the UNP-led beeshanaya period. In Chapter 1 of the report, the commissioners say: “The oral and written representations made to the Commission indicated virtual unanimity that politicisation and perceptions about the abuse of political power are some of the main causes of youth unrest in contemporary Sri Lanka.”
The National Human Development Report of 2014, discussing the results of a youth survey conducted in 2013, states that an alarming 89 per cent of those surveyed said they had little trust in political parties compared with 47 per cent in a similar survey in 1999. The Report of the Public Representations Committee on Constitutional Reform in 2016 (of which I too was a member) in its introduction says: “We have failed in the task of building confidence in the organs of the State, in the rule of the law and in each other.
We are once again faced with the task of attempting to atone for past mistakes. Let us therefore not waste this opportunity.” The contents and sentiments expressed in these different reports are distressingly similar. Citizens are consulted, and come before various committees and commissions to share their views, stories and experiences and plead for justice. All the reports suggest that citizens feel marginalised and excluded from power and from the organs of power. Discrimination and exclusion is experienced through a range of factors: age, language, class, status, ethnicity, religion, gender. Many of the reports suggest remedies. All the reports urge the Government to act and to act fast – calls for State and political reforms, reconciliation mechanisms, restoring justice, rule of law, independence of State institutions are common refrains in almost all these reports.
It was the Youth Commission of 1990 that first recommended Independent Commissions to restore trust in the system of governance and to ensure justice and fair play. It is ironic that 31 years on, one of the members of that Commission, Prof G.L. Peiris, as a Cabinet Minister, oversaw the repeal and weakening of those Independent Commissions when he defended and voted for the 20th Amendment to the Constitution.
But this has been our history; this is the cycle that is repeated over and over again. If our leaders have been consistent in anything, it has been to promise the Earth, the moon and the stars before gaining power and to kick the very people who brought them to power in their teeth, and consolidate their power and that of their allies through any means. Is it a wonder then, that the passport office is besieged by disillusioned citizens seeking to flee what they see as a hopeless situation? At the same time, shouldn’t citizens take some responsibility for the situation in which we are now? For all of our leaders were elected democratically and Governments were formed constitutionally.
Arguably, Constitutions, laws and elections have been manipulated to the advantage of those in power, yet – at the end of the day, citizens have also voted for the Governments in power. In some cases, overwhelmingly, like for the current regime. Many people who contact us now, talk about being misled, of being fooled. As much as we hold up politicians for critique, should we also not interrogate our own impulses that propelled those we now criticise, to power? Some of these impulses have been less than laudatory if we are honest with ourselves: Like our propensity to subscribe to racist tropes or our inclinations to safeguard our own at any cost – be it our own in terms of family, caste, class, or even school.
This has meant that the same circles of power have existed for decades, with some superficial changes to provide an illusion of difference. And so we have come to where we are now – a point where especially the young, are ready to give up. And anyone who has the means is talking about leaving the country. But surely, we can do better than this? Thousands of young people sacrificed their lives for this country at several points in our modern history – because they believed in the possibility of transformation. We do not want any more lives lost in the search for change – but we do need to fight. Not with weapons, but with our minds and our hearts. We need to be able to see beyond the noise and the spectacle – and to get to the crux of the matter: That more than seven decades after independence, we have still not been able to free ourselves.
