By Mohamed Harees –

Lukman Harees

“Elections belong to the people. It’s their decision. If they decide to turn their back on the fire and burn their behinds, then they will just have to sit on their blisters.”― Abraham Lincoln

The government printer is in the news these days, with  the National Election Commission (EC) announcing that the Government Printer has stated that if funds are not provided, ballot papers will not be printed, posing a fresh hurdle to the upcoming Local Government Elections scheduled to be held on the 9th of March. Opposition circles have accused that there have been pressure from those top in the government to prevent the elections from being held, while the government attributes this to a ‘shortage of funds’ for the elections due to the country’s economic situation. It is still to be seen whether Ranil will opt to follow the bad precedents set by both Sirimavo Bandaranaike in 1975 and JR Jayewardene in 1982 and once again deny the people’s democratic right to elect their representatives enshrined in the Constitution, despite the Supreme Court verdict.

The Supreme Court recently considered two writ petitions filed by few partiesc including Professor G. L. Peiris requesting an order to hold the local government elections and opined that there is no need to issue a mandamus order to hold the election as the Election Commission has already pledged to conduct the local government (LG) election in accordance with the law. The Supreme Court thus appeared to follow precedents in 2016 and 2008 where interventions were made to ensure voting rights. Accordingly, the EC will not be hindered from continuing the election process. Saliya Pieris PC appearing on behalf of the EC in this case, is reported to have stated (later), ‘if the Government Printer refuses to print ballot papers for the LG elections,…what will prevent a Government present or future from bringing a Parliamentary or Presidential elections to a halt saying there are no resources. There are grave dangers of monkeying with the system….’

The inalienable right of the people to democratically elect their representatives from time to time, and express their opinion, should be protected under whatever circumstances, and if  they are deprived of that constitutionally given opportunity, there is a great risk of it manifesting  in different forms including violence. In fact, PAFFREL has been taking up this serious issue with the successive governments. They correctly saw political motive behind LG polls postponement in 2021. The then subject Minister was at that time telling the media that the reason for the postponement was the Covid-19 pandemic. However, it was obvious that any citizen understands that it was not just due to the pandemic situation. PAFFREL says, that the Minister of Finance and the Secretary to the Finance Ministry are constitutionally obligated to provide the funds and that if this does not happen, legal action will be instituted against the competent authority.

The argument that holding elections is not a priority at a time when Sri Lanka is undergoing an unprecedented crisis situation does not hold water. Even when the country was undergoing violence in 1980s and even after the worse ever Tsunami, elections were held. The benefit much outweighs the cost (said to be only a day’s national income) incurred in holding this LC elections, which are already being postponed for a long time. There is every reason to believe that the ruling party has much to gain by postponing these elections on the guise of shortage of funds for the elections, having already lost public credibility due to the totally corrupt and inept Rajapaksa rule over the past few years. Election management bodies (EMBs) have always had to cope with these types of hazards. Because elections are a key element of political system, electoral administrators should protect elections from these types of threats.

In fact, when the national economy is bad, citizens might have more incentives to have their interests represented in the national parliament or local bodies, and would increase the utility that they gain from voting even more. Hence, in a context of economic turmoil, citizens would be more willing to participate if there is a political option that is ideologically aligned with them. There is abundant research on how the state of the economy determines electoral results as voters reward or punish the government depending on the economic performance. Recent research works elsewhere including micro and macro level predictors of votes conclude that a worsening of the economic conditions is associated with higher turnout.

Besides, in times of economic crisis, citizens become more attentive and informed and are more willing to respond to the bad situation. Also, economic hardship boosts information, and citizens learn more about parties’ policy positions. In such a context, in which citizens are more concerned about the situation, turnout is a powerful mechanism to express support or dislike toward the policies implemented by the government. This is what the ruling party fears which is expecting a negative outcome if the elections are held.

Democracy requires more than elections, but a country cannot be a democracy without holding genuine elections. They are the basis for democratic legitimacy. Elections give citizens a means to hold their leaders accountable by voting incumbents out of office or promising to hold to account those leaders successfully elected. Elections are also central to making democracy deliver a better quality of life by linking voters’ interests to those in government and allowing citizens to select representatives who reflect their will. However, the downside of this process has been that the most voters limit this duty to the voting booth and fail to hold their elected representatives to account thereafter, which leads to political corruption and nepotism among other evils.

During much of its history, Sri Lanka has vacillated between autocracy and democracy. Since 1948, the nation has been a constitutional democracy. It however held regular elections, but sadly power oscillated between two political parties. In 1978, the constitution was however rewritten which bestowed new executive unprecedented power on the President. The Executive Presidency continues to be one of the most contentious issues in Sri’s Lanka’s constitutional and political history. Much of Sri Lanka’s current turmoil points to mismanagement within the Rajapaksa government. The Rajapaksa family are a ruling dynasty which dominated Sri Lankan politics for over twenty years. Under their control, critics described Sri Lanka as a “soft dictatorship, characterised by authoritarianism, democratic backsliding and ethno-majoritarianism.

According to international studies, Sri Lanka is today one among a number of countries in Asia attracting legitimate concerns over the erosion of democratic institutions. Not just economy, democratic values have also been collapsing in Sri Lanka. The recent 22nd Constitutional Amendment, was thought to be a historic and significant political step forward for a country, wrestling with political instability and economic turmoil. Civil society organisations however argue that the amendment fails to markedly alter the current powers of government, curtail certain presidential problems, or address inherent governance defects. Large swathes of power continue to be vested in a single individual holding the presidential office. A large proportion of people want an overhaul of the system. As a Chatham House article in 2019 stated, ‘Under the Rajapaksas, Sri Lanka transformed with astonishing speed from a messy and rambunctious South Asian democracy into a regime that more closely resembled the illiberal autocracies of East Asia. It now looks worryingly as if that style is catching on’.

Surely it did! Ranil’s continuation of oppressive measures to contain public discontent such as arresting activists under barbaric laws and using sinister measures to deprive the people of their right to choose their representatives are clear examples of ‘democrazy’ presently in operation. Ranil Wickremesinghe has already lived up to the reputation he has inadvertently built as an ally and protector of the Rajapaksas. Thus, although the Rajapaksa clan has been dethroned, the enablers and executors remain in power, both in front and behind the scenes. And opportunistic politicians in Parliament are now switching sides or deserting the ruling party ship. Yes! Sri Lanka has traditionally kicked out leaders through the ballot box. However, people waged an Aragalaya in July 2022 and forced powerful Gotabaya Rajapaksa to flee – a conundrum indeed, in that sense, which remains unprecedented in Sri Lanka’s history. The signs are appearing that a second Aragalaya may follow soon, judging by the unravelling events, and in the context of Ranil’s stubborn stance in dealing with public discontent with the establishment. He appears to be playing with fire.

Regarding LG election issue, As Jayadeva Uyangoda writes, ‘Sri Lanka’s local elections are a major threat to the ruling class. Rising anger, prolonged economic crisis, painful IMF-backed policies and the government’s anti-democratic tendencies are creating a volatile mix, with Ranil Wickremesinghe, the Rajapaksas and Sri Lanka’s political elites on alert. The overall political context is also characterised by a new polarisation of Sri Lankan society into two opposing camps – in one, the citizens who want more democracy, and in the other, political elites who want less, or no, democracy. The government’s attempts to subvert the EC’s decision to hold local government elections on 9th March clearly demonstrates the de-democratising intentions of the Wickremesinghe–Rajapaksa ruling coalition’. (Most likely outcome) might also mark the beginning of the end for the Wickremesinghe-Rajapaksa coalition government and the old ruling class they represent, allowing a shift in the political balance in favour of democratic reforms. The negative attitude to local elections of Sri Lanka’s president and his allies indicates a deep anxiety among the ruling elites over the democratic political awakening of the Aragalaya. He thus concludes, ‘the reactivation of the aragalaya in a new and more viable form would be fundamental to keeping the political class in check and sustaining popular hopes for change’.

‘The people of Sri Lanka have an opportunity to rewrite their nation’s destiny’, as Los Angeles Times article wrote in July 2022. ‘Sri Lankans will not forget the excesses of these politicians or how they facilitated and benefited from a political culture that has led to this collapse. Gone are the days of reverence for ministers with titles longer than their resumes. For decades, political parties benefited from pitting one part of the population against another to gain political power. The combustible mix of cronyism, inequality and institutional mistrust that upended a failed government is not unique to Sri Lanka. Exacerbated by the pandemic and pushed to the brink, Sri Lankans have shown how a citizenry will act to correct its course..’ 

Indeed Aragalaya protests have redefined the role of citizens and their relationship to the state. Thus, regardless of the setbacks and uncertainties, people of Sri Lanka have an opportunity to build on their recent gains  meaning, that sustained, innovative, and inclusive citizen mobilization has a chance to transform Sri Lanka and create a new vision for their country. Standing up against the viscous attempts of the reactionary Ranil/Rajapaksa’s government to postpone the LG elections is the need of the hour and  another litmus test of their nerves of steel. The international community including the UN should stand in solidarity with them to ensure that Asia’s oldest democracy does not permanently become a ‘demo-crazy’, as it presently is. Ultimately, citizens should feel secure, and they should feel the state is a protector of their rights rather than a predator.