{"id":169596,"date":"2016-10-27T09:41:42","date_gmt":"2016-10-27T04:11:42","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.colombotelegraph.com\/?p=169596"},"modified":"2016-11-02T10:19:19","modified_gmt":"2016-11-02T04:49:19","slug":"penalty-for-willful-violation-of-social-contracts","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.colombotelegraph.com\/index.php\/penalty-for-willful-violation-of-social-contracts\/","title":{"rendered":"Penalty For Willful Violation Of Social Contracts?"},"content":{"rendered":"

By Chandra Jayaratne<\/a><\/span> \u2013<\/strong><\/p>\n

\"Chandra<\/a>

Chandra Jayaratne<\/p><\/div>\n

\u201cSocial contract theory is based on the idea of a contractual agreement<\/span><\/a> between the individual and the state, under which the power of the sovereign is justified by a hypothetical social contract in which the people agree to obey in all matters in return for a guarantee of peace and security, which they lack in the warlike “state of nature” posited to exist before the contract is made.<\/p>\n

Various philosophers have interpreted social contract theory. For example, John Locke believed that rulers also were obliged to protect private property and the right to freedom of thought, speech, and worship. Jean-Jacques Rousseau didn’t believe that in the state of nature people are warlike, but are undeveloped in reasoning and morality. Therefore, by surrendering their individual freedom, they acquire political liberty and civil rights within a system of laws based on the “general will” of the governed.\u201d<\/p>\n

The Constitutional Commitments<\/strong><\/p>\n

By article 3 of the Constitution sovereignty is in the People and is inalienable. Sovereignty includes the powers of government, fundamental rights and the franchise. By article <\/strong>4. The Sovereignty of the People shall be exercised and enjoyed in the following manner:\u2013<\/p>\n

(a) the legislative power of the People shall be exercised by Parliament, consisting of elected representatives of the People and by the People at a Referendum ;<\/p>\n

(b) the executive power of the People, including the defence of Sri Lanka, shall be exercised by the President of the Republic elected by the People;<\/p>\n

(c) the judicial power of the People shall be exercised by Parliament through courts, tribunals and institutions created and established, or recognized, by the Constitution, or created and established by law, except in regard to matters relating to the privileges, immunities and powers of Parliament and of its Members, wherein the judicial power of the People may be exercised directly by Parliament according to law;<\/p>\n

(d) the fundamental rights which are by the Constitution declared and recognized shall be respected, secured and advanced by all the organs of government and shall not be abridged, restricted or denied, save in the manner and to the extent hereinafter provided; and<\/p>\n

(e) the franchise shall be exercisable at the election of the President of the Republic and of the Members of Parliament and at every Referendum by every citizen who has attained the age of eighteen years and who, being qualified to be an elector as hereinafter provided, has his name entered in the register of electors.\"maithri-ranil-wijeyadasa-pic-via-wijeyadasa-rajapaksa-facebook\"<\/a><\/p>\n

Sovereignty of the People<\/strong><\/p>\n

The sovereign power including the powers of government lie primarily with the people; and the President, the Prime Minister and Cabinet of Ministers, and the Legislators derive their power on being duly elected by the people exercising their franchise; and they must govern for the benefit of the nation and its\u00a0 people, in terms of the social contract created by the exercise of the franchise; thus the President and Members of Parliament must govern duly\u00a0 honouring the promises made in manifestoes and other commitments made prior to elections.<\/strong><\/p>\n

Breaches of the Social Contract<\/strong><\/p>\n

\u201cAlthough the situation of there never having been a social contract is a fairly simple one<\/span><\/a>, the situation of either deceiving another into thinking there is a social contract between them, or of entering into a social contract and then violating its terms, can be much more complicated, and much of law and government is concerned with dealing with such situations<\/strong>.<\/p>\n

In his treatment of the subject, Locke tended to emphasize those violations of the social contract that are so serious that the social contract is entirely broken and the parties enter a state of war in which anything is permitted, including killing the violator. Today we would tend to place violations on a scale of seriousness, only the most extreme of which would permit killing. Some would even go so far as to exclude killing for any transgression, no matter how serious, but that extreme view is both unacceptable to most normal persons and subversive of the social contract itself, which ultimately depends not on mutual understanding and good will, but on a balanced distribution of physical power and the willingness to use it. Sustaining the social contract therefore depends in large part on so ordering the constitution and laws as to avoid unbalanced or excessive concentrations of power, whether in the public or the private sector\u201d.<\/p>\n

With no power of recall by the people of the already granted mandate, until the next elections, it is solely up to the people to demand due accountability and honouring of the social contract by those elected; and where the elected fail in such tasks, the people have a right to express their voice of protests, naming and shaming,\u00a0 right to publicly advocate, agitate, and even take other legitimate actions for due enforcement\u00a0 of \u00a0the social contract. <\/strong><\/p>\n

The Promise and the Consequential Social Contract<\/strong><\/p>\n

The promises made during the 2015 Presidential Elections and the Parliamentary Elections<\/strong> that followed were based on a core vision of establishing compassionate governance and a stable country, leading to showering prosperity on all citizens through sustainable development, peace and harmony and identification of equitable national priorities. These promises were founded on key pillars of eliminating bribery, corruption, fraud, money laundering, waste, and nepotism; and the enactment of a new constitution addressing rights of all communities, electoral reforms, instituting independent commissions; effective good governance, rule of law, equity and environmental protection. Thus a social contract came to be executed between the people and the new regime based on the aforesaid promises, which promises were duly witnessed by the leaders of the civil society who attested the contract.<\/strong><\/p>\n

The Delivery of Promises Embedded in the Social Contract<\/strong><\/p>\n

Twenty one months on from the creation of the social contract, the civil society leaders who witnessed the contract are aghast by the apparent willful violation of the contract by the incumbent President, Prime Minister, Cabinet and Parliamentarians.<\/strong><\/p>\n

The Proof of the Pudding<\/strong><\/p>\n

The key amongst the events and issues leading to the disillusionment of the civil society leaders that the social contract is being willfully violated are the following;<\/p>\n