A note on resilience

Sri Lanka is a resilient nation.  The people of Sri Lanka lived through two bloody insurrections, three decades of war, and all manner of natural disasters capped by a tsunami that left hundreds of thousands homeless and over 40,000 dead.  And still we smile. 

 

When we talk of disasters, however, there is one which we routinely overlook: the 1978 Constitution.  This is strange, especially since the 1978 Constitution, both in article and lacuna, veritably presides over the playing out of tensions between the executive and judicial branches of the state (which have spilled over and found expression as tensions between the judicial and legislative branches).

The bone of contention is of course the Parliamentary Select Committee (PSC) appointed to investigate allegations against the Chief Justice (CJ).  The Supreme Court (SC) is currently in the process of hearing a petition querying the constitutionality of the PSC, a process which rebels against the principle of natural justice (where the CJ essentially is part of a process determining the legality of a course of action initiated against her).  Those against this move offer that it is pregnant with selectivity and vengeance.  Parliament has summoned the CJ to respond to charges and the SC seeks to summon the Speaker. 

As things stand, if the contentions of lawyers petitioning the SC are upheld, we would have to conclude that the CJ is above the law.  Since integrity, ethics and respect for institutions and posts such as the ‘Chief Justice’ have left the building a long time ago it is unlikely that any of the parties will back down from positions.  In a post-1978 Sri Lanka where the executive, legislative and judicial arms of the state have on numerous occasions encroached on one another’s territory, acted in high handed manner, shown unconscionable parochialism, selectivity and malice, the only word to describe things is ‘unfortunate’.  One should qualify thus: the only ‘generous’ word. 

All this serves only to turn playing ground into happy hunting ground for forces pursuing narrow political agenda which could very well result in Sri Lanka’s sovereignty being compromised and the people’s vulnerabilities further exacerbated.  The issue has been politicized from the beginning by all key players, a state of affairs which naturally provides a lot of ammunition for detractors of the regime and general Sri Lanka haters. 

Much of it is beyond control of course.  Sections of the Opposition, for example, sorely lacking in the proverbial straws to cling to, would naturally find in the CJ a new pretender (like it flirted with former CJ Sarath N Silva and like it leased out, in Sajith Premadasa’s now famous words, the presidential candidacy to Sarath Fonseka).   Those who saw the LTTE as a convenient ally in destabilizing the country (and later the Rajapaksa regime) and who now have lost that little money-spinning toy are likewise straw-clutching.  Let there be no doubt whatsoever that this issue will be taken up in Geneva in March 2013, even though there is nothing ‘unprecedented’ or horrific about a CJ being impeached. 

The best that the Government can do is to resist temptation to play the politicization game. 

The poster that was put up in Colombo this morning, with the legend ‘Lajjai Methiniyani’ (Shameful, Lady!), referring unabashedly to the CJ is an example of unnecessary (and distasteful!) politicization of the issue.  There is constitutional provision, one can argue.  If there isn’t then there is room for relevant amendment.  There is a process that’s underway.  The Government ought to let it run its course without frilling process and feeding those elements that would make things darker than they really are. 

To get back to resilience, it is pertinent to ask whether the current ‘impasse’, so-called, has the attention of the masses that some may say it deserves.  If there is ‘concern’, it seems largely hidden.  As prominent lawyer and political commentator Gomin Dayasri pointed out if the CJ is not ‘hero-to-be-followed’ in the way that Sarath Fonseka was (for some at least and for some time at least), it has something to do with how the people view the judiciary and the Army respectively.  The latter, people feel, they owe something to.  Not the former. 

What’s happening in the SC and in Parliament therefore has not prompted anything close to mass objection.  Moves against the CJ is not covering anyone in glory, true, but on the other hand the CJ’s moves to turn the Judicial Services Commission into a trade union is not eliciting any cheers either.  Lawyers and judges have already desecrated the courts by turning them into places where coconuts are smashed to obtain succor from deities who are supposedly amenable to vengeance extracting contracts.  The Parliament is and has been home to a lot of hooliganism.  If there’s more ugliness in store it wouldn’t surprise anyone.  It probably will spill into Geneva in March but that won’t surprise anyone either. 

Regimes thrive, become unpopular, survive unpopularity and give way.  It has happened throughout history, and as President Mahinda Rajapaksa is reported to have recently told MPs of his party, no one should harbor the illusion of political immortality.   Judges, likewise, have and will have their day. They too will pass. 

The people remain.  They have suffered much and survived much.  They are resilient.