DailyMirror – Opinion – by Dr. Pakyasothi Saravanamuttu
Elections are the basic mechanism for choice and change in a functioning democracy. Through the exercise of our fundamental right of the franchise, through elections we choose those who will make the decisions in public affairs that decisively affect our welfare, wellbeing and interest. Accordingly, the integrity of the electoral process is paramount. A flawed or sullied process robs the credibility and legitimacy of those chosen through it and erodes public trust and confidence in the available processes and institutions of representative democracy. As a range of public authorities and political actors have roles and responsibilities for the conduct of elections – the Department of Elections and the Commissioner, the public service and Police, the political parties and civil society and the media – elections also provide a good gauge of the state of governance in the country. In this respect, recent developments in the context of the Presidential Election are cause for grave concern.
As reported in the Daily Mirror of 13 January 2010:
The Election Commissioner Dayananda Dissanayake threatened yesterday to withdraw from his duties related to the Presidential Election asserting that the authorities concerned had not aided him by adhering to the guidelines and regulations issued by him to create an atmosphere conducive to a free and fair election.
The Election Commissioner is the key official entrusted with the responsibility for the conduct of the elections. The Seventeenth Amendment to the Constitution, which is being intentionally violated through non-implementation, provides for the establishment of an Election Commission. It also entrusts the powers of this Commission to the current holder of the post of Election Commissioner until such time as the Commission provided for under the Amendment is established. Amongst these powers is the authority to appoint a Competent Authority for the Sri Lanka Rupavahini Corporation and the Sri Lanka Broadcasting Corporation – both named in the Amendment – should their reportage of the election be deemed to be partisan and biased. The Election Commissioner appointed Mr Hettiarachchi to this post and as reported banned a number of programmes of these two institutions. It has been reported that at the 13th meeting, he also said that he would consider withdrawing the Competent Authority. According to the Daily Mirror report the Commissioner had said that the Competent Authority “had been humiliated by the state media”.
In the matters of the Competent Authority, the removal of posters and cutouts and the flagrant abuse of state resources, the Commissioner by his own admission and despite his best efforts – as exemplified in his directives, guidelines and appeals to the Police, the public service and political parties- has been ineffective. In a context of scant respect throughout government for the rule of law and constitutionalism, it is hardly surprising that this is the case in this historic and important election as well. The overwhelming need to cling onto and consolidate state power hastens the erosion of democratic rights and freedoms, institutions and processes. We are proud of our exercise of the franchise over seven decades. At the same time, we must be aware that we are exercising it in increasingly insalubrious times.
Mr Dissanayake has given vent to his frustration and despair. He may have hoped that this would in turn, have even a mild deterrent effect on those who flout his authority.
One hopes that he will not disengage or withdraw from the process and moreover that there will not be occasion for him to even consider this, in the just under two weeks to polling day. Those who flout his authority should take a break from their hypocrisy and chutzpah and consider for a moment as to what the impact on democratic governance and the rule of law in this country would be if the opposition took the law into their own hands on account of a collapse and the dysfunction of the agencies of the state charged with the responsibility for the conduct of elections? What if vigilante groups spring up to defend and protect opposition interests in levelling the playing field in the face of the inability and/or unwillingness of the agencies of the state to do so?
The spike in the number of incidents of election-related violence as polling day approaches profiled by the murder in Hungama and the clash in Polonnaruwa coupled with the expectation of the great probability of more violence as the race gets tighter, underscores the concerns for the rule of law and the integrity of the electoral process. This is not the first election campaign in which there has been violence nor is it the worst up to date. However it is the first in which the Commissioner has expressed his frustration and despair in the way that he did on the 13th and the worst by all accounts with regard to the scale of the abuse of state resources. It is an election in which there is a considerable polarization of opinion and common consensus on the stakes being very high.
Especially worrying is the speculation over voter and polling agent access to polling stations in certain areas, fears about the count being disrupted, acceptance of the result and post election violence. The current context has fuelled this speculation. Unequivocal action demonstrating commitment to defend the integrity of the electoral process is critically necessary by all concerned including the main candidates, to squash this speculation and ensure that despite the setbacks to the process in the early stages of the campaign, the integrity of the process can not only be salvaged but strengthened beyond doubt as well.
Whilst all sides have the right to fight hard for their cause, they must do so within the law. They cannot be allowed to get away with flouting the law with impunity and with taking the law into their own hands.
The victory of either of the two main candidates must not be at a cost to democratic institutions and processes. This is a very important election and all citizens eligible to vote and who want to, must be able to do so in the fullest confidence that their vote counts.
Whoever wins, it must be without prejudice to the institutions and processes of liberal democracy in Sri Lanka. It is our right and our duty to ensure this.