24 September, 2020

Blog

Iran: An Example Too Early For Sri Lanka?

By Laksiri Fernando

Dr. Laksiri Fernando

If there is any example that Sri Lanka could emulate as a result of the Iranian presidential election held on 14 June, then that is to strengthen the prospects of moderate ‘cleric’ Ven. Maduluwawe Sobitha winning the next presidential election against the Sri Lankan counterpart and friend of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, President Mahinda Rajapaksa. Only snag seems to be that the example is little too early for the Sri Lankan voters to emulate even if our presidential election is held in 2014 or otherwise, the divide between the ‘conservatives’ and the ‘moderates’ in Sri Lanka would be very much similar to Iran at present.

There are obviously similarities and differences of the two cases. Unlike our Man (President) extending his term limit beyond the two terms stipulated in the Constitution, Ahmadinejad didn’t do so by bringing a dishonourable constitutional amendment like the 18A. Therefore, he didn’t contest at the last election at all and the electoral apparatus as a result remained fairly neutral unlike in the 2009 presidential election. Judging by all present indications and past behaviour of our present regime, any keenly contested election including elections for Provincial Councils would be manipulated let alone a future presidential election. This was exactly the case in Iran in 2009 and the main contenders of Ahmadinejad disputed the results until recently and the voters flocked to the streets in protest. The slogan was ‘Where is my vote?’

Better Than Sri Lanka

Iran’s presidential system at least appears to be better than the Sri Lankan system. No President could hold the office for more than two terms and a single term is restricted to only four years unlike in Sri Lanka. Six years for one term is obviously too long and this is a matter that JR Jayewardene himself expressed reservations on, of course after he completed full twelve years (1977-1989)! With the term limit completely removed through the inglorious 18A, the thinking of the Rajapaksa regime is obviously to keep a continuous grip on presidential powers as a ‘royal’ or family prerogative, if there is no viable contender like Hassan Rohani at the next election or through complete rigging of elections if it at all possible.

Whatever criticisms one could extend to the Iranian political system on human rights and democratic practice, it has proved to be a flexible system than Sri Lanka at least as far as the possibilities of ‘regime change’ are concerned. As an engineer and a former teacher from a poor background, Ahmadinejad also was a modest leader, although an arch conservative, unlike his friend in Sri Lanka was concerned. There were no direct allegations against him like ‘Helping Hambantota’ although he was severely questioned by the Iranian Parliament on corruption allegations last year while he was in office as the President of the country.

This is something unimaginable in Sri Lanka given President’s constitutional impunity and political culture of parliamentarians both within the government and the opposition at present. This is no way of saying that Ahmadinejad was a democratic leader. He may have to answer many charges against human rights and other violations and he has already been summoned by a Criminal Court in Tehran.

Example

It is in the above background that the presidential election in Iran last Friday was exemplary for Sri Lanka to emulate in the future to break away from the present political impasse. The opposition which was built up against the 2009 election rigging through the Green Movement managed to achieve two key objectives. First was to ensure that at least voting and counting should be free and fair as much as possible although even at the election thuggery and harassment were predominant tactics of the conservative candidates and the ruling coalition. Second and most important was to enlist confidence among the voters that their participation matters and they could make a change from conservatism to moderation. This was achieved through massive campaigns throughout the country. People were asking for freedom and rights accompanied by social and economic justice.

Out of 50.5 million registered voters, there was an impressive turnout of 36.7 million or 72.7 per cent. Hassan Rohani, a moderate cleric and a former nuclear negotiator won the election outright, polling 18.6 million votes or 50.68 per cent of ballots cast. The most decisive at the election was that there was only one moderate candidate and all others were conservatives, splitting their vote bank among themselves. This may be difficult to achieve in the Sri Lankan context, given our perennial party and personal rivalries, but that should be the aim as much as possible. Otherwise there could be a second count in which the Rajapaksa regime would be in a better position to manipulate. It is high time that all aspirants to the presidential position give up their personal ambitions for a national cause.

In Iran, there were five conservative candidates; two of those predicted as likely winners, Mohammad Qalibaf polling 16.55 per cent and Saeed Jalili only 11.3 per cent. The others were well behind. There is opinion to perceive that the ‘regime change’ in Iran has come about as a result of the UN and Western sanctions on the nuclear issue. This may well be the case considering that Qalibaf and Jalili being nuclear hardliners following Ahmadinejad and Rohani promising to negotiate with the West, preserving Iran’s legitimate right to pursue nuclear power for civilian purposes.

Rohani has a credible track record on this matter being the chief negotiator during the reformist President Mohammad Khatami’s last years during 2003 and 2005, before the hardliner Mahmoud Ahmadinejad took over like Mahinda Rajapaksa taking over from reformist Chandrika Kumaratunga in 2005, even well before the constitutionally legitimate period. That is a different inglorious story altogether. It is also important to mention that Rohani obtained the endorsement of another former President of Iran, Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani (1989-1997), who is also considered as a moderate at least in relative terms apart from Khatami.

Drawing from this experience, it is important to note that whoever could effectively challenge Mahinda Rajapaksa at the next presidential election should have not only the endorsement or blessings of CBK but also the active support, unless she herself opt to challenge, which is in my opinion an unlikely scenario. CBK is the only living former President in Sri Lanka also with credentials as a moderate and a reformist or even a radical, whatever the weaknesses and mistakes during her tenure. She is the only person who could create a timely wedge within the SLFP and the UPFA, against the family dominance of the Rajapaksas to effectively engineer a regime change.

Role of UNP

Under normal circumstances, the leader of the alternative or the opposition party and that is Ranil Wickramasinghe of the UNP who should challenge the incumbent President Mahinda Rajapaksa from the other dominant party, the SLFP. Wickramasinghe or RW undoubtedly is a moderate leader with experience and capabilities. He deserves a chance more than anybody else, if that is a criterion in Sri Lankan politics. However, the UNP has now come up with a ‘Constitutional Reform Proposal’ which categorically intends to abolish the presidential system and therefore there is no much point in the UNP leader becoming the presidential candidate to lead this transition.

This should be left for a better figurehead and even if the opposition fails to obtain the required 2/3 majority in Parliament to change the Constitution that figurehead could serve as a Ceremonial President somewhat like how President DB Wijetunga acted during 1993/94. There is no constitutional impediment for this eventuality if necessary. However, even a defeated or a reformed SLFP might be agreeable for a profound constitutional changes and the abolition of the presidential system, if a regime change can be effected ousting the Rajapaksa family which is undoubtedly has become a major fetter in the democratic system in Sri Lanka.

The role of the UNP and RW could be different in winning the parliamentary elections and forming a viable and an effective democratic government through a genuine coalition of (present) oppositional parties without playing mere power politics as in the past. It has to be admitted, however, that the UNP’s recent constitutional reform proposals are not that attractive except the objective to abolish the presidential system. The leading opposition party by this time should have come up with a more extensive and attractive program of action, countering Mahinda Chinthana for example. However unfortunately this is not the case at present.

As an alternative to the present Presidential System what might be required is a simple or straight forward Parliamentary System (no need to say Westminster) the people could understand and related to, even by referring to a basic ‘civics text book’ of SF de Silva or AJ Wilson vintage in the good old days. Why complicate matters when there are simple and viable solutions to put forward? Any advanced constitutional revisions could be undertaken by consensus later or it should be left for a much longer evolutionary process. Back to the basics is the present requirement.

The UNP proposals have unfortunately given much prominence for the ‘unitary state’ quite unnecessarily and as a result has attracted with much glee the far right wing forces of the JHU for discussions. This is not the way to forge a ‘moderate opposition’ to the right wing regime of Rajapaksas clocked as left wing and/or nationalist. A major task of a regime change should be genuine national reconciliation and people centred development.

Ven. Maduluwawe Sobitha or someone like him might be the best common candidate to challenge Mahinda Rajapaksa at the next presidential election judging from the experience of Iran. ‘Moderates’ and ‘conservatives’ in Sri Lanka might be roughly fifty fifty like in Iran or judging from our own past electoral behaviour. If the moderate forces could properly be mobilized, a change could be definitely effected. It however requires much thought and hard work. RW or any other from the UNP could be the Prime Ministerial candidate if broader consensus could be forged between various present and future oppositional parties, the TNA and the JVP as major constituents. CBK could perhaps play a brokering role between different forces and facilitating forging a viable opposition to the regime behind the scenes.

Unlikely Lesson

There is one lesson that Sri Lanka should not draw from Iran hastily and that is to wait for some external sanctions to come about like ‘Waiting for Godot’ for a regime change. That will never be the case given the present circumstances while maximum and measured pressure (from India, US, EU and UN) could be feasible and useful. The regime at present has a formidable backing from China, for pragmatic reasons on China’s part, and this is something that the opposition should try to alter. It could be done since China does not appear to have a special love for the Rajapaksas other than their self-interests. If a viable opposition is on the move and some external influence is also exerted on China, it will change. At least it is worth trying. While China is moving in a progressive direction, Rajapaksa regime is on the opposite course.

In a way, the Iranian example is little too early to emulate in Sri Lanka as the next presidential election would be little far away from now. It is also possible that a moderate cleric like Hassan Rohani might spoil the chances of guiding the country in a proper direction because the balance of forces within and outside Iran is far too complicated. If there are set-backs for his tenure, it might also be a poor example for Sri Lanka. On the other hand, what is important for Sri Lanka is not necessarily the election lesson, but the process through which the people and the opposition forces chartered their way to the present regime change. That would definitely be a lasting example for Sri Lanka.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Latest comments

  • 0
    0

    I am puzzled by the decision of the Govt to dissolve the NCP and NWP PC’s and hold the elections along with the NP. I feel this an underhand strategy to rig the votes as these two provinces border the NP and there are chances of stuffed ballot boxes being transfered across to counting stations. The elections commissioner and opposition parties must insist on a strictly regulated elections conducted under international supervision.

    • 0
      0

      Safa, Safa, Safa ….
      You have not followed the underline real truth of the the articles by Lakasiri F and Kumar David … At least, they understand the vertically upward battle to challenge MR and his popularity among locals …… They were desparate so much that they propose monk Sobitha to contest …. You think they love Sobita? No no no …They hate monk Sobhitha … Look at how KD writes as “Sobita” without monk or rev … They normally do not mention about rigging because they know it’s not the problem … Problem is MR’s popularity even after his second term with all the problems ….
      So Safa, go beyond their writings … They want a regime change by any means to create chaos in the island …. They hope something they desire would come out from the ashes of the burning country … something they desire, you wonder? Federalism, Ealam are not far away from their desires …..

  • 0
    0

    Ven. Maduluwawe Sobitha or someone like him might be the best common candidate to challenge Mahinda Rajapaksa at the next presidential election

    Many Iranians (especially the younger generation) resent the clerics. That is not the case in Sri Lanka, with the monks. The monks are not as powerful as people think. For example, the final decision on whether enrich uranium in Iranian is in the hands of a cleric. No monk in Sri Lanka holds such sway in defensive or environmental matters.

  • 0
    0

    *on whether to enrich uranium in Iran

  • 0
    0

    Lakksiri deserves thanks for focussing attention on Iranian Presidential elections where the moderate cleric Hasan Rohani, former Nuclear negotiator, won the race in the very first round. His assessment that the victory of the moderate candidate was easy because of absence of a division in moderate ranks in Iran and the division among the conservative vote among a number of contenders is right.
    However, there are problems in accepting some of the other views offered by Laksiri especially the analogy he has drawn and comparisons made with the Sri Lankan Presidential system. This I say as I am familiar with the Iranian constitutional system and the mind of the Iranian electorate in general, a knowledge I gathered during my three year residence in Tehran as Sri Lanka’s first Ambassador there.
    As I have found, for all the criticism heaped on the Iranian politics, their Constitution, is one which provides far more checks and balances than any other constitution in the world.At the Presidential election, it is not possible there for every Tom, Dick and Harry to come forward as a Presidential candidate.There is a rigorous screening process by a Constitutional body which results in eliminating undesirable candidates. Under the Western model of democracy,which places restrictions only on the basis of age, sanity of the individual and certain legal/moral applications, this may be considered an infringement of individual rights. Also, the present restriction on females aspiring for the presidency also may not fit into the western model.Then there is the Constitutional restriction of strict application of “two terms” and the short four -year term which apply to the presidency.
    Above all, there is misconception that the Iranian president is all powerful as the Sri Lankan President who enjoys more powers than the President of France.There is the Supreme Leader (S/L), Ayotullah, Khameni at present,who stands above who not only decides on war and peace but also exercises considerable influence on the direction of other affairs. Any President of Iran would see to it that he does not ruffle the feathers of the Supreme leader. As it turned out, in the last stages, relations between the S/L and President Ahmedinejad were so cordial. The President also, faced the opposition of the Majlis which is a highly assertive body. There is no case of the President’s party enjoying overall support in the Majlis. In fact, the outgoing President had to meet stiff resistance of the Majlis and will soon face corruption charges in Courts.
    In short, the President of Iran is no more than a Prime Minister of a Westminister type democracy, but he has the ceremonial duties like receiving/appointing Ambassadors and in foreign policy stakes and a powerful presence in shaping political/cultural opinion.

    I would not go to comment at present on other comparisons made by Laksiri.
    The President of Iran, credentials -wise, unlike here, is a person well qualified for the high office. It would not be easy to meet the conditions of the selecting body, otherwise. Ahmedinejad,in that respect, was a lesser man in the hierarchy, having had only an engineer’s background about him and a less spoken role in the American Embassy affair. Others like President Rafsanjani, the cleric whom I was fortunate to meet several times,was not only a charming personality but a highly perceptive one. So was President Larjani who represented the moderates later.
    One important difference that Laksiri missed was that the President of Iran besides his own quality,is fortunate as having Cabinet Ministers who are very highly qualified men around him. When I first visited Iran as the principal negotiator in Prime Minister D.B.Wijetunge’s team before I was appointed Ambassador,I remember reading in as American publication the names/qualifications of Cabinet Ministers. All of them, invariably, held double -degree qualifications, many having foreign degrees as well. The long-time Foreign Minister, Dr.Velayuthi, was a medical specialist in child care. This is a situation that one never saw in Sri Lankan context except, perhaps,in the very early years of D.S.Senanayake government, or for that matter, even in UK or USA. I had the opportunity to interact with these gentlemen except the Minister in charge of Oil who was more out of the country.

    Nor is Laksiri’s assumption that the Constitution of Iran could be easily changed as done here to extend the President’s term with ‘dishonourable constitutional amendments” as Laksiri says, with an accommodating Parliament. One owes it to this highly educated and politically sensitive nation in Iran and the quality of its members elected to the Majlis to recognise that fact. There is no case also of promoting dynastic rule in that highly civilised land in contrast to Sri Lanka. It is a country that threw out feudalism with the expulsion of the Shah.

    Bandu de Silva, Former Sri Lankan Ambassador to Iran.

    • 0
      0

      Bandu de Silva,

      Thanks for your extensive contribution based on intimate knowledge on the Iranian system. You may be right on certain points where I was not so precise. Good to see a decent and a well-balanced response; after all our effort should be to educate the people and educate ourselves in the process.

      Laksiri

    • 0
      0

      Dear Sir;

      I am just a layman who just passed only o/l and ,
      not an intellectual like you acdedemics are;

      As you said in your comments

      ” President of Iran is fortunate, as having Cabinet Ministers who are very highly qualified men around him
      All of them, invariably, held double -degree qualifications, many having foreign degrees as well. The long-time Foreign Minister, Dr.Velayuthi, was a medical specialist in child care. This is a situation that one never saw in Sri Lankan context”

      “one never saw in Sri Lankan context”

      How Dosent it not in Sri lankan context???.

      We canot agree to your idea.
      SEE IN OUR PARLIMENT;
      Exemption is that Sri Lanka’s President is a GRAUATE OF SRI LANKA LOW COLLEGE,
      He has a Degree from a Russian University, I presume.

      His Son Also A Honour Graduate of Sri Lanka Low College.
      Very soon ,He may Get His Master Of LOw digree as well.

      And There is another Law graduate, Professor Gamini Lakshman Peiris, is our Forigen Minister.

      and there is an another Professor Dr Mervin De Silva, who is a vetaran low politician,

      The Honorable education and higher education also with Two graduate Ministers , namly S B DISSANAYEKE AND BANDULA GUNWARDANE.

      and there are many nominated ministers, M Ps and Local Governt M Ps who are graduateted fro local and forigen Acedamies.

      [ SOME LIKE ME, FROM WELIKDA Institution also].

      thanks.

  • 0
    0

    Dr Laksiri

    I think what you are doing is not really “waiting for Godot”, but more like the ackal who was going behind the goat, hoping that the big, juicy “nut” will fall at some time.

    But your problem is that you belong to a minority of about 10 in Sri Lanka, who think that the “liberal democracies” have the solutions!

    Your only interest is self interest. You will not sway many in Sri Lanka.

    • 0
      0

      What is the DEMOCRACY that will sort out the issues in SL tht you could suggest?

  • 0
    0

    Iran is a good example for Lanka to emulate, since we need an EXIT STRATEGY FOR RAJAPASSA – but it is silly to think that a Buddhist monk should not be head of state. This would be bad for Buddhism and bad for Lanka. The POLITICAL CULTURE OF DICTATORSHIP in the SLFP and UNP and all political parties must END.
    Chandrika Bandaranaiayake would be the BEST as joint opposition candidate to get rid of Rajapassa of course with a blessings of Sobitha Thero, SF and the other political parties..
    This is of course HOBSONS’s CHOICE and she needs to have breaks put on her since she was out of control at the end of her Presidency as well.

    All heads of Lanka need to be given a course in EXIT STRATEGIES after 2 terms as head of Party or Courty, particularly that shameless and corrupt clown Ranil Wickramasinghe who has lost so many elections and is destroying the UNP and Lanka in cooperation with Rajapassa.
    She is far more acceptable than Ranil or SF and while she made a mess as the war time president, she would be a great peacetime president for reconicilliation Lanka – but all must insist on abolition of the Executive Presidency as step one and 4 year term limits with a 2 term limit for any head of state.

  • 0
    0

    Iran is a good example for Lanka to emulate, since we need an EXIT STRATEGY FOR RAJAPASSA – but it is silly to think that a Buddhist monk should be head of state!
    This would be bad for Buddhism and bad for Lanka. Buddhist monks should be banned from Parliament as in Thailand.
    What is really necessary is to change the POLITICAL CULTURE OF DICTATORSHIP in the SLFP and UNP and all political parties.

    Chandrika Bandaranaiayake would be the BEST of a bad lot as joint opposition candidate to get rid of Rajapassa – of course with a blessings of Sobitha Thero, SF and the other REFORMIST political parties..
    Choice of CBK of course is HOBSONS’s CHOICE and she needs to have breaks put on her since she was out of control at the end of her Presidency as well.

    All heads of Lanka need to be given a course in EXIT STRATEGIES after 2 terms as head of Party or Courty, particularly that shameless and corrupt clown Ranil Wickramasinghe who has lost so many elections and is destroying the UNP and Lanka in cooperation with Rajapassa.
    She is far more acceptable than Ranil or SF and while she made a mess as the war time president, she would be a great peacetime president for reconicilliation Lanka – but all must insist on abolition of the Executive Presidency as step one and 4 year term limits with a 2 term limit for any head of state.

  • 0
    0

    Corection:
    Thesentence should read :
    “as it tuned out, in the last stages, relations between the S/L and the President Ahmedinejad were NOT so cordial”.

  • 0
    0

    Safa:
    You are wrong. It is CP (Central) and not NCP (North Central). NCP polls was held last year. The joining of NWP and CP is for the governing regime to ultimately say that “We won two out of three PCs and our victory is 67%, than loosing one and only and a zero win. NWP and CP could be won by rigging, but in NP the difference will be too greater to cover-up by rigging. (I suppose I am right on this.) It will be a good test to find out what the average Tamils in NP think at the polls, whether they still have faith in those former LTTE leaders – KP, Daya Master, George Master and the like, who betrayed the cause they fought for, by contesting under the ruling coalition. Even a person like Devananda may not contest knowing that it will not be possible for him to become the CM and to sacrifice his cabinet posting for a mere Provincial counselor. If a free and fair elections are held then the government will get exposed to the myth that they go on and on that people are still with them.

  • 0
    0

    Thanks for the correction.

  • 0
    0

    Dear Laksiri,

    I heard that you were one of the prominent supporter to extend Chandrika’s period for another six years under ‘necessity doctrine’.

    Is it true?

    • 0
      0

      Dear Rozan,

      Completely false. I only argued, interpreting the constitution, in the Daily News, that she has one more year to go. But the CJ decided otherwise, in fact in favour of MR, and that was admitted later. It was not a proper judicial decision but a political one.

      Laksiri

      • 0
        0

        Thanks Laksiri for your response,

        There is one more doubt,

        In an academic discussion, some said that you are the one who suggested at the Senate (Uni of Col) to give Doctorate to MaRa and Gota in the aim of getting a Ambassador post in Australia after your retirement.

        Is that true?

        • 0
          0

          If you reveal who said it, then I will answer. Also reveal your full name.

          • 0
            0

            Why it is important to mention here name only in this case?

            • 0
              0

              Rozan,
              It depends … “truths” and “facts” are secondary to the their cause … We all are still learning about these guys … All these bs’es they talk in public have a underlying reason … You, Rozan, pressured the “wrong” nerve …

        • 0
          0

          Looks like Laksiri has been exposed.

  • 0
    0

    It is my opinion that elections in Iran and SL are completely different. Any Iran watcher knows that true power is held by the ‘Revolutionary Guard’ or Pasdaran. The president is only for garnishing. The presidency is purposely diluted and ill defined as precaution against assassination (from the Mossadegh experience). A change of president in Iran means very minimal change in trajectory.

    On the flip side, a change of president in SL is massive. It could and has changed the character of this country. There is no council or power able to check the presidency. Given this backdrop it is unlikely we can glean any meaningful examples from Iran’s ‘stand alone’ type of government.

    On the Sri Lankan side of the article I agree with what Laksiri has to say.

  • 0
    0

    Friends within and outside the theocratic State rather prefer to describe the exercise more as a “Selection” rather than an “Election” -Our Senior friend Mr Bandu de Silva appears to be happy with this
    process of selection of candidates. Having known many learned Iranian ladies and professionals, I believe Iran is no more a medieval society and her women deserve the right of men to contest and decide their future. Iran cannot lay claim to be a modern Nuclear state
    and simultaneously deny its women their due in the modern world. From what I gather, the average Iranians dislike the present Mullah domination – many of them corrupt men working in cohorts with crooked business interests like Rafsanjani.

    There is a complicated system of checks and balances in the system. While much of the power is in the hands of the Supreme Leader of the Revolution there is a Guardian Council, an Assembly of Experts, the Majilis and so on. But invariably one strong individual runs the shows as Ali Khameini does now.

    There is room the believe Hassan Rohani is a compromise choice of the System worried Iran is hurting by the sanctions disfiguring its true potential. It is understood they hope with the change in the Presidency to present a more reformist and liberal face to break-away from the international isolation inflicted upon itself by the earlier obstinate foreign policy and politics. There is also a school of thought that suggests the post-Khomeni Iran regimes have been belligerently anti-Israel and anti-West as a means to continue to lay claim to the leadership of the Islamic world despite their handicap as a minority Shiite country.

    Senguttuvan

  • 0
    0

    I thank Senguttavan for his comments and the acknowlegement of me as a “Senior Friend.” I was very touched. It was not a case of my being happy with the Iranian process of ‘selection’of Presidential candidates or not.I was only trying to share my views with readers on a few point where I saw the writer had inadequately examined the situation for the comparison he was making.Nothing more.

    I pointed to how the system of ‘selection’ stood in the eyes of western/other democratic opinion.That included the exclusion of women from running for the Presidency. True, I did not say it was my own view.It was not my purpose. I had no idea of getting into a political controversy.

    Any views held by other about Iranian leadership or their system of governance is not a matter I was interested in. As a former Ambassador to Iran I had to keep clear of controvery in expressing a public opinion.

    This does not mean that I did not have my private preferences. This can be seen from nuances in my comment. I do not hesitate to say to say that I liked President Rafsanjani as a person. So did I like other Iranian leaders I met,religious or others, and the Iranian people in general whom I found to be highly cultured.

    It is not because of the warmth and the way I was received on my appointment as first Ambassador resident there – I was received by the Foreign Minister within one hour of my arrival and I presented Credentials within 20 hours. That itself was a rare and warm gesture,not towards me personally, but towards my country and its people.When I was leaving President Rafsanjani asked me smilingly: “How was it? (the Innings as we call it). I was not interested in what others thought about him or about other leaders.

    The point I was making about the background and quality of the leadership and the presence of highly qualified technocrats as Cabinet Ministers, was something I thought should attract our attention.

  • 0
    0

    Dr Laksiri need some social recognized and social stature for to maintain his social position in SL upper stater to demonstrator that his ability and capability of his past expriences.
    Is quite natural for human being..That is his hidden dare personal quality!
    But SL political class and ruling circular are working on different agenda on time to time.The both of so-called elites or dark horse elites who support for ruling class and political parties in SL ,having not set of mind cater the that meet their demands people’s aspiration either basis of accomplished task ahead by Capitalist path of development or socialist road or certain cause challenge by people of Sri Lanka.But their mission are confine to effete position and power.Needless to say that history of political power behind of elites last 65 years thought us in our land is no more accept on that merits ground.
    Our political class having own ROAD MAP.The so-called handful elites are NON-efficacious products of our society,and behind hidden political power, its class agenda as well.The serve for game of political corruption and effigy political leaders from inception to end.
    They what ever the political party or class in power selection on elites totally depend on person ground and that personal reasons or purely improper-nepotism not on the ground of talents merit or according his or her ability..

  • 0
    0

    “A Christian to barrack for a Sinhala Buddhist, a monk for that matter, to roll Rajapaksa “..

    It must be desperate times even among the Sinhala Diaspora.

    If Laksiris with their PhDs get dudded by Right Wing Ranil, what hope do the Moderate vigilantes in the Capital and our Mudalalis in Towns have ?.

  • 0
    0

    CBK and her family is the root cause of the present political culture in the country. During her two terms she has done enough damage. It is argued that the President’s term of office should be restricted to two terms of four years each. It is thinking in the right direction and hope that will be a reality soon. CBK has already served two terms messing up the affairs of the country in style and bringing the country into negative growth situation. She also promised to scrap the Presidential system which she did not honour. Given this background it is foolish to think that she is a suitable future presidential candidate.

Leave A Comment

Comments should not exceed 200 words. Embedding external links and writing in capital letters are discouraged. Commenting is automatically disabled after 7 days and approval may take up to 24 hours. Please read our Comments Policy for further details. Your email address will not be published.