TRUE DEMOCRATIC PRINCIPLES!!! AND TRADITIONS!!!

Good examples ignored


Setting an example for all countries that seek to follow democratic principles and traditions of owning moral responsibility for any administrative shortcomings or misadventures that occur in the institutions functioning under their purview, two main Indan leaders relinquished their duties following the Mumbai tragedy. Although they are not directly responsible for the disaster India’s Home Minister Shivraj Patil and National Security Advisor M.K. Narayanan offered their resignations accepting their "moral responsibility" for the tragedy. Such gestures, of course, are not infrequent in mature democracies.
However, these examples are completely ignored, trivialized or even ridiculed in countries where fig-leaf democracy is in vogue. Most politicians playing roles in the ’drama’ of democratic politics in these countries are ‘accidental democrats’ and not true and genuine democrats. It is well known that if this hallowed concept of democracy is to succeed, the practitioners have to be democrats in temperament and disposition because democracy is not only a method of government but a way of life. It requires the participants to be endowed with certain qualities that enable them to participate in the democratic process in the required manner.

One may ask whether the type that is practised in this country is not genuine democracy. We have political parties, political meetings are conducted, elections are held, governments are changed and institutions such as parliament, law courts and judicial systems are in existence. True, all these are features that characterize democracies. But their presence alone is not sufficient to make fully-fledged democracy. These features and institutions have to function in the proper way for them to enrich the standard of democratic practice.

Unfortunately, the way these features operate in this country leaves much to be desired. Does the way our political parties function conform to the cherished ideals of democracy? Some would say yes. But the fact remains that the conduct of these parties does not reach the standards expected of democratic political parties. A recent study conducted into the working of political parties has revealed that party structures have become increasingly centralized and they lack a “reasonable” level of democracy.

The researchers have come to this conclusion after inquiring into the governance structures within three main political parties, the United National Party (UNP), Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP) and the Sri Lanka Muslim Congress (SLMC). They have looked into the levels of inclusiveness, decentralization and proceduralism as indicators for measuring the level of democracy within these parties. These weaknesses are clearly evident from periodic upheavals occurring in these parties.

The way the election campaigns are conducted is another aspect that betrays the low levels of democracy practised by these parties. Their commitments to free and fair elections are confined to words . The role that money and muscle play makes a mockery of the ideal of democratic elections. The convenience with which politicians change sides after being elected is another insult to democracy.

It is therefore unimaginable that our political leaders who are eternally hankering after high political office and clinging on to such positions like leeches after acquiring them, have any inclination to honour cherished democratic practices. Only two politicians in recent times had lived up to such democratic traditions. One was the late Prime Minister Dudley Senanayake who resigned following the tragic events of the 1953 harthal. The other was Gamani Jayasuriya who relinquished his office as minister when he disagreed with President J.R. Jayewardene over the signing of the Indo-Lanka Agreement.

However, if our political leaders choose, by any chance, to emulate Indian leaders who resigned, the country’s administration will be devoid of sufficient personnel to carry on the administration judging from the widespread nature of charges and allegations that are hauled against those at the helm of affairs.

This is the level of corruption, irresponsibility and brazenness that our leaders have reached. Following the example of their political leaders, even the officers working for them cling on to their posts until they are compelled to move out. It is some consolation, in this context, that the country’s judiciary has lately assumed a more active role in guaranteeing to the people at least some degree of good governance.

It is interesting that similar active roles are being played by judiciaries in other countries too. In the face of endless anti-government public protests, the Thai Constitutional Court ordered the dissolution of the country’s ruling party and banned Premier Somchai Wongsavat from politics for five years. The deposed Prime Minister, the brother-in-law of exiled former premier Thaksin Shinawatra, however says that all that he had done had been for the country and not for himself. It is indeed for the people of the country to make their own judgements about his claims.
courtesy:Editor/dailymirror.lk