By Rusiripala Tennekoon –

Democracy, workers’ rights and the responsibility of organised society

The prevailing situation in our country calls for serious reflection and a responsible response from organised movements, particularly trade unions, professional associations and independent civil society organisations. The direction in which our laws are evolving, the exercise of governmental powers and the implications of administrative directives deserve close public scrutiny whenever they may affect democratic freedoms, social justice and the rights of ordinary citizens.

This is not merely a question of supporting or opposing a government. It is a question of recognising the responsibilities that organised society must assume in protecting the democratic institutions and freedoms upon which a just and accountable system of governance depends. Trade Unions should be partners in Social Progress.

Beyond the limitations of party politics

The voice of the political opposition can often be diverted from the substance of its arguments by references to the shortcomings and failures of previous administrations. Whatever the merits of such counterarguments, the consequence may be that important questions concerning present-day governance receive insufficient public attention.

Democratic accountability, however, cannot be confined to an examination of the past. Every government must be answerable for its own decisions, legislation and exercise of public power. The shortcomings of a predecessor cannot, by themselves, justify a present measure or exempt it from scrutiny.

When conventional political debate fails to sustain attention on issues of wider public importance, independent organisations outside the party-political framework have a particularly significant role to play.

The pattern behind legislation and government action

The concern that deserves attention is not necessarily confined to any single law, regulation or administrative decision. It is the broader pattern that may emerge when legislation, government actions and administrative directives are considered together.

A measure introduced in the name of efficiency, economic necessity, administrative convenience or national interest must be examined not only in terms of its stated objectives but also in terms of its practical consequences. What powers does it confer? What safeguards does it preserve? What avenues of challenge remain available to citizens? How might it affect the independence of institutions and organisations that have a legitimate role in questioning public authority?

These are reasonable questions in any functioning democracy. They do not imply that every government initiative is objectionable. They reflect the principle that no exercise of public power should be beyond legitimate scrutiny.

Democracy is sustained by more than periodic elections. It also requires respect for the rule of law, freedom of expression and association, institutional independence and the ability of citizens to question decisions that affect their lives without fear of arbitrary interference.

Where developments raise credible concerns about the gradual weakening of these safeguards, the public has a legitimate interest in examining them before their cumulative consequences become more difficult to address.

Why the organised working class must respond

It is in this context that I wish to make my first appeal to the organised working class of Sri Lanka.

Trade unions have historically played a vital role in securing employment rights, improving working conditions and establishing collective bargaining as an essential means of protecting workers against arbitrary treatment. These achievements were not secured merely through individual representations. They depended on organisation, solidarity and the willingness of workers to defend their common interests.

Yet the conditions that make such organisation possible extend beyond the workplace.

Freedom of association, the independence of trade unions, the right to engage in collective bargaining and the ability to express grievances without intimidation depend, in turn, on a wider legal and democratic environment.

The responsibility of trade unions therefore cannot be confined exclusively to wages, allowances, working hours or individual employment disputes. When legislation or government action raises legitimate concerns about the broader rights and freedoms of working people, organised labour has a responsibility to examine those developments and express its views.

This is not a call for trade unions to become instruments of political parties. Nor is it a demand that they oppose every policy of the government of the day. It is an appeal for them to exercise their independence, assess public issues on their merits and defend the principles that enable workers to organise and negotiate collectively.

The danger of leaving a vacuum in public leadership

There is another dimension to this situation that deserves equally serious consideration.

When responsible and established organisations remain silent in the face of developments affecting public rights and democratic freedoms, the consequences may extend well beyond the immediate issues at stake.

A vacuum in legitimate public leadership does not necessarily remain a vacuum for long. Where genuine grievances remain unaddressed and recognised democratic organisations fail to provide an effective channel for public expression, clandestine or unaccountable groups may seek to occupy that space. They may exploit legitimate public concerns to advance objectives that are neither transparent nor necessarily consistent with the interests of the people whose grievances they claim to represent.

This is a danger that should concern all those committed to democracy and social justice.

The answer, however, is not to suppress dissent or discourage public mobilisation. Citizens must retain their right to question authority, express dissatisfaction and demand accountability through peaceful and lawful means.

The answer lies in ensuring that credible, independent and responsible organisations remain active, accessible and responsive to public concerns. They must be prepared to articulate legitimate grievances, scrutinise government action and mobilise public opinion through transparent and democratic processes.

Silence by responsible organisations can unintentionally create opportunities for forces that do not share their democratic principles. Preventing such a vacuum is therefore not merely a responsibility of trade unions and civil society; it is also an essential contribution to democratic stability.

From individual concern to collective responsibility

The responsibility does not rest with organised labour alone. Professional associations, academic communities, independent social organisations and other representative bodies must also recognise the importance of informed public engagement.

These organisations need not share identical political views or agree on every policy question. Their common ground can be the defence of constitutional safeguards, the rule of law, institutional accountability and the fundamental rights of citizens.

They can examine proposed legislation, question administrative decisions, encourage informed public debate and seek explanations from the relevant authorities. Where legitimate concerns arise, they can make representations, engage in dialogue and, where necessary, organise peaceful and lawful collective action.

Such engagement should be based on verifiable facts, careful analysis and a willingness to distinguish genuine threats from disagreements over ordinary policy choices. Responsible scrutiny strengthens democracy; unsubstantiated allegations weaken the credibility of those who raise them.

A timely appeal

I therefore appeal to the established trade unions, particularly those representing the working people of this country, to recognise the wider implications of the present situation and consider how their collective experience, organisational strength and public standing can contribute to a constructive democratic response.

Let this also be an invitation to professional associations and civil society organisations to engage in a wider dialogue on the direction of legislation, the exercise of governmental powers and the preservation of democratic safeguards.

The objective should not be confrontation for its own sake, nor the advancement of any particular political interest. It should be the protection of the public interest through vigilance, accountability and peaceful democratic engagement.

The preservation of democracy is not the exclusive responsibility of elected representatives, political parties or public institutions. It is a continuing responsibility shared by citizens and the organisations through which they exercise their collective voice.

When democratic safeguards and the rights of working people are at stake, silence is not necessarily neutrality. It may leave important public concerns without responsible representation.

The organised working class and civil society must therefore consider not only what they stand to lose by speaking out, but also what society may lose if they fail to fulfil their responsibility.

The time has come for responsible organisations to engage with these questions openly, independently and constructively. Their intervention, guided by facts and democratic principles, can help ensure that legitimate public grievances find expression through accountable institutions and peaceful collective action.

That is not a partisan undertaking. It is a responsibility to the people, to the rule of law and to the future of democracy in Sri Lanka.