 
In the aftermath of the Eastern Provincial Council
elections held yesterday, the task of carrying forward the momentum
generated by the elections is now with the Opposition
Free and fair poll:
Bone of contention
Judging by the trend in recent polls, it would appear
that whatever measures that are put in place need to be legislated for
with stringent laws, so that aggrieved parties can seek redress in the
courts of law if they feel they have been wronged. The government in
power would of course be oblivious to demands for such legislative
changes, fearing that it could affect them adversely; but in fact, it
should not be so. The government of today is the opposition of tomorrow,
so it pays to enact judicial safeguards for electoral processes
The outcome of the Eastern Provincial Council elections will be known
when these comments are being read. Nevertheless, the run up to the poll
saw and interesting development: the Supreme Court was petitioned by an
organisation asking for a “free and fair poll,” and specifically
requesting that the use of arms by unauthorised groups be prevented.
Any action that promotes democratic mechanisms such as elections are
most certainly welcome, and the recent trend of seeking the intervention
of the courts of law indicates that we are indeed a vigilant society
where citizens are on the prowl, monitoring social injustices.
This has been made possible to a large extent by progressive steps taken
by the higher courts in recent times, promoting judicial activism. The
courts have been involved with a variety of issues such as regulating
gas prices, school admissions and teacher strikes. This policy has
encouraged more and more citizens to take their grievances before the
law.
In fact, it will be recalled that even the Eastern Provincial Council
elections were made possible only because the courts ordered the
northern and eastern provinces to be separated after a petition was
submitted by the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP).
What is more relevant now though, is the order made on Friday by the
Supreme Court. The Court directed the Commissioner of Elections to
ensure a free and fair poll amidst fears that the contest would be
marred by violence, intimidation and rigging.
It would be pertinent here to recall the climate in the Northern and
Eastern provinces during the last Presidential election. Even though the
region was won by United National Party (UNP) candidate Ranil
Wickremasinghe, the voter turn-out in the two provinces was notoriously
low, arguably due to a boycott called by the Liberation Tigers of Tamil
Eelam (LTTE).
The UNP will no doubt argue that this affected its candidate and quite
possibly the final outcome of the poll. Indeed, if the average voter
turn-out in the rest of the country was extrapolated to the northern and
eastern provinces and votes allocated to the two main contenders
proportionately, this seems a credible argument. But that is an argument
that is only of academic interest now.
But at the time of the Presidential poll, questions were asked as to
whether any interventions could have been undertaken. Could the
Commissioner of Elections have taken a more pro-active role than he did?
Could he have declared that the poll was not free and fair? Could he,
for instance, have ordered a re-poll at least in the affected provinces
and withheld the final results?
Of course, none of that happened. Commissioner Dayananda Dissanayake
simply announced the final results. To be fair by the Commissioner, his
hands were tied by the various laws that governed the elections within
which he had to act. That he pleaded with the victorious candidate
publicly for his retirement soon after announcing the winner, didn’t of
course reflect well on the Commissioner.
Aftermath
Nevertheless, especially in the aftermath of the Eastern Provincial
Council polls, campaigning for elections and the conduct of the
elections themselves become the focus of attention yet again. The
measures to be adopted to ensure a level playing field for all parties
and candidates are the bone of contention.
An issue that came to the limelight at yesterday’s poll was the misuse
of state property: government officials, vehicles, other resources and
of course, the state media which went into overdrive blaring out
pro-government propaganda in the guise of reporting on development
activities in the eastern province.
A Junior Minister, Navin Dissanayake, was on record saying that the use
of state property for election purposes was now almost an accepted
practice. That is stating the obvious but that does not confer
respectability to this trend; and that is why the issue of a level
playing field for all parties assumes even greater significance.
Obviously, an independent elections commission would go a long way in
resolving some of these outstanding issues. But such a commission would
also need to be equipped with sufficient powers to withstand the
pressures that would invariably be brought upon it or else, it would
merely act as a rubber stamp for the government of the day.
Issues such as police transfers, the use of state resources for election
related work, media coverage especially in the state controlled print
and electronic media needs to be addressed in addition to ensuring
reasonable ground conditions for the conduct of the election itself.
And, judging by the trend in recent polls, it would appear that whatever
measures that are put in place need to be legislated for with stringent
laws, so that aggrieved parties can seek redress in the courts of law if
they feel they have been wronged.
The government in power would of course be oblivious to demands for such
legislative changes, fearing that it could affect them adversely; but in
fact, it should not be so. The government of today is the opposition of
tomorrow, so it pays to enact judicial safeguards for electoral
processes. Indeed, the UNP is now finding out that some measures that
are used against them are of their own creation when they were in power!
As the dust settles on the Eastern Provincial Council election, these
are issues that both the government and the opposition will ponder
about. What is important though is not to consign them into the limbo of
forgotten things until the next election, but to carry forward the
momentum generated by this election. That task for the moment at least,
becomes the responsibility of the collective opposition.
****
|
