By Amila Muthukutti –

Amila Muthukutti

Unlike those days when you pen down something against the government, you would see a white van near your home. Everyone is free to express their views on the government which is people’s government not only elected by the citizens but also most wanted by the law-abiding citizens in the country. Hence, forcibly retired politicians can hold media briefings at their home and private media channels can follow their own agendas. However, all these things need to be in the ethical and legal framework, without misusing the privileges of democracy. Moreover, needless to say that those who voted for President Dissanayake and his government did not expect miracles, given the plight of the nation at that time. Their intention was to change the political culture which was considered the root-cause for economic repercussions. See it has happened. It has happened more than we expected.

Forcibly retired and defeated politicians seem to be trying to paint a gloomy picture about the government and convince the public that they could have done better. Certain TV channels are waiting at their gates to get a voice cut from them, as they are no longer in parliament. If you watch news only from those TV channels, your pessimism can make you badly ill, thinking that commodity prices go through the roof, rice shortage will result in a famine, and all the things are happening in the country as planned by the popularly known grandfather and former president Ranil Wickremasinghe so and so forth. When you compare something against something, you should have a benchmark to compare with. Consequently, my question is, what is your benchmark to be compared with the performance of the current regime? Is it Ranil’s tenure, Gota’s tenure? Or any other benchmark?

The presidential contest was obviously between Anura and Sajith. Ranil was a dummy refuge for “Pohottu people” and not a challenging candidate. It is under that circumstance that Sajith Premadasa and his team should be taken as the benchmark to be compared with the performance of the current regime. Sajith Premadasa has been rejected twice at presidential elections by the public. Nevertheless, at the last presidential election, if Anura was defeated, Sajith would have become the president by this time. Just imagine how Sri Lanka could have been under his leadership. Comparing Anura with past leaders is useless and unfair, as the ground to play is completely different.

Sajith donated a number of buses to schools and promised lots of subsidies to the poor. Even his sister was actively involved in the presidential campaign, especially at a time when the public wanted politicians to get rid of their relatives in their politics. His speeches were baseless but good for humor. Finally, he requested people not to vote for Ranil, as a vote for Ranil equals to a vote for Anura. The same person and same team now seem to be planning to join with the United National Party which is already dead in the political sense. He wanted to put forward his economist Dr. Harsha De Silva with the economic committee of the NPP, when he was asked to debate with his main opponent – Anura Kumara Dissanayake, he boycotted the debate. However, he is now saying he could have done this and that, if elected. Even if those who voted for Gotabhaya Rajapakse in 2019 were blamed for their action, when their second-best alternative that was Sajith Premadasa was taken into account, we cannot rule out the opinion that people had chosen the best person given candidates at the presidential election.

By all accounts, it is too early to come into a conclusion that President Dissanayake and his government have failed, while constructive criticisms should be welcome. Willingly or unwillingly, the public have no other choice other than giving them at least a year to deliver their promises, before evaluating their performance. Mistakes can happen only when you do something.