|
Online edition of India's National Newspaper Friday, August 17, 2001 |
|
Front Page |
National |
Southern States |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Entertainment |
Miscellaneous |
Features |
Classifieds |
Employment |
Index |
Home |
|
Opinion
| Next
A change of course in Sri Lanka?
SRI LANKA'S PRESIDENT, Ms. Chandrika Kumaratunga, is in a
conciliatory mood which the Opposition parties in that hapless
country's mainstream political arena are now scrutinising for
signs of any hidden agenda. By postponing a planned referendum on
the need for a new Constitution, she seems to have surprised her
adversaries in conventional politics. Ms. Kumaratunga's
willingness to delay consulting the sovereign people is being
packaged variously on her behalf. It is being portrayed as a non-
partisan quest for consensus and also as a declaration of the
President's courage of conviction. Discernible beyond such hype
by Ms. Kumaratunga's friends and allies is her democratic
climbdown from the pedestal of an imperious autocracy that she
herself had shaped in the place of her popular mandate. Now,
irrespective of her new tactics and strategy, the emerging
reality, insofar as it might last, should be fair to the people
of Sri Lanka. Two inter-related reasons have been cited
officially to justify the deferral of a referendum that was
ordered in a highly surcharged political environment. Underlined
is the President's belief that any appeal to the people ``at this
time'' for their opinion ``might exacerbate confrontation at
various levels rather than facilitate the evolving consensus on
constitutional reforms''. The reasoning is noteworthy for what it
conceals and not just for what it reveals.
The President's latest sighting of an ``evolving consensus on
constitutional reforms'' must be seen in the context of her
belief that political parties might support urgent constitutional
amendments to fulfill her ``wishes'' even ``without a
referendum''. Most Opposition parties at first viewed her
plebiscite ploy as a means to bypass Parliament which had in
recent months gone beyond her control and to evoke people's
sympathy on the basis of a vague proposition about the necessity
of an altogether new statutory framework for the polity. Not
surprisingly, the campaign towards the now-deferred referendum
was dominated by perceptions about Ms. Kumaratunga's gameplans.
It is in this context that she is seeking to gain a respite
before fine-tuning a strategy to stamp her presidential will over
any measure that Parliament itself or even the people might
endorse in respect of constitutional changes.
A redress of the genuine grievances of Sri Lanka's minority
Tamils and the political-ethical question of a rightful place for
them in the polity constitute a key aspect of the grand
constitutional debate. An almost endemic search for a viable
system of checks and balances as also frequent doubts over the
relative merits of a Gaullist-style presidency and a prime
ministerial government have also defined the political discourse
over time. While the battle over ideas was often scintillatingly
high-minded in the past, even as Neelan Tiruchelvam and Prof.
G.L. Peiris raised the quality of the discussions, the current
phase of the constitutional debate has remained bereft of
inspirational resonance. The President, too, wanted the people to
act the arbiter only after proroguing Parliament where her
coalition was known to have been reduced to a minority. Now, by
postponing the proposed referendum, Ms. Kumaratunga is hoping to
bring about a realignment of forces within the House. The Janata
Vimukti Peramuna, an ultra-nationalist outfit of the majority
Sinhala community, is trying to engage the President in political
negotiations with unpredictable consequences. Mr. Ranil
Wickremesinghe, the main Opposition leader, seems convinced that
a confident executive President must be able to function in
conjunction with a less powerful Prime Minister from an
adversarial camp. The notion of a national government, too, is in
focus pending the settlement of the constitutional question.
However, any such dispensation will be meaningless if it is based
entirely on a bargain among the Sinhala-oriented parties. No case
can be made to exclude the moderate and reformed Tamil political
groups. Hardly addressed in the current debate is the strategic
presence of the subterranean kind which the Liberation Tigers of
Tamil Eelam (LTTE) commands.
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail
|
|
Section : Opinion Next : Rage and penalties | |
|
Front Page |
National |
Southern States |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Entertainment |
Miscellaneous |
Features |
Classifieds |
Employment |
Index |
Home | |
|
Copyrights © 2001 The Hindu Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu |
|