President Mahinda Rajapaksa said that if anyone has done anything wrong that person needs to be punished, whether or not the concerned individual carries a picture of the president on his or her person. He pointed out that under cover of his photograph there are people who produce moonshine, operate buses without permit.
It is perhaps an indication of the power vested in the
office of the Executive President in the 1978 Constitution that Mahinda
Rajapaksa is called upon to resolve all matters big and small. This could also mean that relevant officials
are either incompetent or scared to be found ‘erring’ in the presidential
eye. The flip side, either way, is that
if the all-powerful can right wrongs (and wrong rights too!) then the shortest
cut to getting anything done (right or wrong) is obtaining presidential
approval or endorsement, or else feigning to have got it.
We can blame J.R. Jayewardene for this state of affairs;
after all the use and abuse of name and image is not a feature particular to
this regime. We saw it during the tenure of Chandrika Kumaratunga and that of
Ranasinghe Premadasa as well. If in the
case of Mahinda Rajapaksa, name and image appear to have greater weight, it can
be attributed to his signature achievement, that of freeing the country of
terrorism.
On the other hand, the natural add-on of that victory has
been enhanced in the process of stating and re-stating that obvious edge over
predecessors, in and out of context, by friend and foe alike; the former for
purposes of self-preservation and career-advancement and the latter in the rush
to paint him into a larger-than-life monster.
Both types have carefully avoided riders, qualifiers that offer the true
dimensions of the man, that which is praiseworthy and that which is not.
The point is that the President’s face and name have been
framed and uttered respectively all over the country and through all
media. From giant hoardings during
elections through endorsement-claim in posters and leaflets by politicians in
his party in elections regional and national (as glory-rub) to inserts in
project-announcing and project-completion ads (mega and buddy sized projects
both) there’s nowhere to escape the all-powerful image. Then we have the name salaamed by one and all, as preface in the manner of ‘Under the
direction and guidance of…’, and endnote thanks. Finally there are the name boards; Mahinda
Rajapaksa this and Mahinda Rajapaksa that for road, building, airport, theatre,
initiative and whatnot, perhaps without direction from the man but certainly
with indulgence.
It indicates, as pointed out, the power of the office and
the personality of the individual. It is
also an indication of sycophantic dimensions.
The bottom line is this: if the country is flooded with the president’s
photograph and if his name falls like rain on every inch of ground then it is
natural that image and name will be picked up by those who find in them a
useful tool to get what they want.
It is in this context that the President’s observation on
the phenomenon and his consequent warning to disregard has to be
appreciated. The process may have done
its work (good and bad) to a point where reversal is not possible, but there is
no harm in attempting to rectify matters.
President Mahinda Rajapaksa, perhaps more than any
politician in the post-Independence period, can well afford to erase name and
image and yet remain ‘present’ in the minds and hearts of the population, for
the good he has done and the bad that has happened under his watch. He can take much from the tombstone epitaph
of Sir Christopher Wren, who designed new churches and supervised
reconstruction after the Great Fire of London.
‘Underneath lies buried Christopher
Wren, the builder of this church and city; who lived beyond the age of ninety
years, not for himself, but for the public good. If you seek his memorial, look
about you.’
Most importantly, he will not have
every two-bit thug and petty thief (not to mention grandmasters of swindle and underworld
kings) abusing his name and office.
0 comments:
Post a Comment