“The greatest victory is the victory of Righteousness...” declares Emperor Dharmashoka in his 13th Rock Edict, and in his first Pillar Edict affirms: “...this is my role - to govern by righteousness, administer by righteousness ...”. Influenced as we are by the same Doctrine embraced and espoused by the great emperor, we, Sri Lankans, have long upheld the importance of good governance in the management of affairs of society.
The Mahavamsa also clearly favours those rulers who were dedicated to the welfare of the people and castigates those who brought oppression and hardship to their subjects.
In yet another rock edict, Emperor Dharmashoka exhorted his administrators that “impartiality” was key to good governance, key to managerial success in ensuring social stability in the realm. Nurtured in this great South Asian political culture,it was natural that, at some point, the concern of the Sri Lankan voter focussed on the mounting problems of bad governance that was experienced in the country during the years of the Mahinda Rajapakse regime.
That was why, despite the dramatic military defeat of the LTTE insurgency, the presidential elections of January 2015 saw the issue of ‘Good Governance’ take precedence in the minds of the Sri Lankan electorate. After all, a military victory is an event that, over time, fades into a memory, while governance is an on-going process and a constant human experience.
On January 8, three years ago, the citizenry looked beyond that memory of a military success and, examining their state of existence, of Sri Lankan society, and of prospects for harmony and progress, decided to vote for the political forces that sought to take the country out of the morass of bad governance. The Rajapaksa regime epitomised too much the features of bad governance for its popularity to endure the fading memory of a military victory.
For the people, the the present-day social realities of continuing ethnic tensions - indeed the broadening scope of ethnic targeting - and ballooning losses of immense corruption, nepotism and mismanagement, were what counted when choosing the future political leadership.
It was not surprising, therefore, that, while some people remained diverted by the repeated fanfares of military triumph, a majority of citizens opted for an end to that large-scale misgovernance and put into power a political coalition that promised change. Hence, the historic presidential victory of Maithripala Sirisena and the cementing of a national coalition of political leaders across the spectrum whose primary goal was the re-imposition of ‘good governance’ in the country.
It was the National Unity governing coalition led by the United National Party that then subsequently went on to win a parliamentary majority to govern in the general elections held the following August.
What has been the performance record of the regime so far in achieving its declared goals of Yahapaalanaya?
To different sets of people there were, and are, different priorities in the achievement of good governance in Sri Lanka. Perhaps the broadest consensus on a national priority was about the ending of nepotism and a return to the normal rule of law. This aspiration was common to both the ethnic majority Sinhalese as well as to the ethnic minorities.
The ethnic minorities understood that progress toward post-war inter-ethnic reconciliation also depended on a return to a more open, transparent, and disciplined governance.After all, it is such institutionalised and rational administration that enabled attainment of such goals as social justice, fundamental rights and social security.
With the departure of the Rajapaksa regime, so ended a decades-long rule of a single family whose networks of power grew within the Sri Lankan State as much as the size of the Rajapaksa extended family would allow it. Even the most ardent admirers of the Rajapaksa-led military victory were outraged by the degree of nepotism that pervaded the Sri Lankan polity - a polity that prided itself in its post-colonial modernist progress.
The ending of that family rule ensured a quick return to a more normal ‘rule of law’ but was not enough to seal it. Much more had to be done in the form of the renewal of state institutions with fresh managements that comprised professionally competent personnel rather than friends and relations of politicians.
Also, the first steps toward dismantling autocratic government took the form of the design of a structure of oversight bodies that brought in non-political civil society representation to ensure checks and balances that prevented too much political influence.
The passing of the 19th Amendment to the Constitution in April 2015 was critical for the achievement of this aspect of Good Governance.
The 19th Amendment did much to repair that enormous damage done by the 18th Amendment engineered by the Rajapaksa regime which further consolidated autocratic presidential rule.
The 19th Amendment provided for the reduction in the tenures of President and Parliament from six years to five years; re-introduction of a two-term limit for the individual holding presidential office; empowered the President to dissolve Parliament only after four and a half years [unlike one year, as previously provided]; the revival of the Constitutional Council and the establishment of independent commissions. The most immediate impact on the polity and on society has been by the independent commissions. The independent functioning of the Police Commission, the Elections Commission and the Public Service Commission have all had the salutary effect of returning the political management of the country to some degree of transparency.
The rigorous practice of oversight and scrutiny by the civil society representatives now serving on these commissions has served to instil public confidence in the general running of the country.
Today, even if there are instances of police misbehaviour, the public has the confidence that redress action begins fairly promptly even if the process of inquiry remains slow. Even in the case of politicians’ misbehaviour, as some recent incidents have demonstrated, political loyalties and kinship has not served to block redress by the aggrieved parties.
For the first time in decades, politicians have begun serving jail terms while others are awaiting prosecution.
More importantly, the prosecution of politician and bureaucrat miscreants has not been reserved for appointees of the past regime - where, perhaps the most miscreants are to be found.
As the Central Bank Bonds scam report exemplifies, this government has fulfilled its Yahapaalanaya promise by acting swiftly to redress malpractice within the current regime.
The ending of harassment of news media enterprises and professionals, a hallmark of the Rajapaksa era, now provides for a vociferously critical media. Today, the din of the anti-government criticism is such that those citizens unused to such critical journalism have the impression that the government is unpopular - solely because, in the aftermath of autocracy, criticism is more sensational than praise.
More needs to be done in the area of media structure reform, especially in the state sector news media.
The consolidation of the ‘Good Governance’ regime enabled work to begin earnest on post-war inter-ethnic reconciliation.
The essential confidence building measures for such reconciliation, such as redress for past human rights violations, atrocities and ethnic discrimination, could not have been done without the new structure of transparent and disciplined administration enabled by the independent oversight commissions.
Meanwhile, the Office of Missing Persons is a crucial step that needs swift implementation, and the return of private lands taken over for security purposes also needs to be expedited.
The new Right of Information law is a vital mechanism for public inquiry and direct accountability. All kinds of sectors of society, ranging from rural communities to business start-ups to giant corporates to professional groups to civil rights organisations, will soon realise the enormous potential of the RTI mechanism for a freer, more empowered society.
Perhaps the most political influential ‘good governance’ measure taken by the Unity Government so far is that of electoral reform. The new system of voting and many other changes will shortly be put to the test when citizens go to the polls to elect local government bodies. In addition to the hybrid voting method combining the Proportional Representation method with the First-Past-the-Post method, citizens will also be voting for a bigger presence of women activists in the local bodies.
Also, from now on, local government bodies will all be elected in single election cycle.
Of course there is much more to be done and this regime cannot sit back with things only half-done.What is most important is that the current leadership sets a trend and provides inspiration for new generations of leaders to emulate.
Add new comment