Gajalakshmi Paramasivam
28 October 2017
Dual Citizen’s Mind in
Constitution Making?
Our Australian High Court ruled yesterday
that five of our Politicians were ineligible to be elected to Parliament on the
basis of Section 44(i) of our Constitution which provides as follows:
44.
Any person who -
(i.) Is under any
acknowledgement of allegiance, obedience, or adherence to a foreign power, or
is a subject or a citizen or entitled to the rights or privileges of a subject
or citizen of a foreign power:
shall be incapable of being chosen or of
sitting as a senator or a member of the House of Representatives.
This is the citizen’s parallel of Equal
Opportunity Law which requires zero advantage at the common starting point. The
fundamental theory is based on not having two masters of different mind structures.
Laws that are genuine and valid, help us merge our minds into One. At cultural
level, this becomes difficult as we widen our horizons and hence separations
are needed.
Professor George Williams, Dean of Law
at the University of NSW, said in August during his National Press Club
address: ‘Recent media coverage of the Constitution must come as a
surprise to Australians. After all, many apparently do not know that the
document exists, with a poll taken some years ago for the Constitutional
Commission finding 47 per cent of the community unaware that we have a written
Constitution.’
The disturbance to the Political
structure led to active learning about the Constitution with particular
emphasis on Section 44 ruling. This includes the Tamil Community in Australia. Now
emotions have been elevated to knowledge level on the basis of the
Constitution.
The Sri Lankan Government rejected
foreign judges inquiring into allegations of war-crimes during the war against
the Tamil Tigers in which majority victims were Tamils. That rejection would be
marked ‘right’ by the principles underlying Section 44 (1) of the Australian
Constitution. But it raises also the question of authority for a Government
that carries ‘Buddhism foremost’ in its Constitution and states that ‘it
is the duty of the State to protect and
foster the Buddha Sasana’ , to judge Non-Buddhists – including the Tamil Tigers who were labelled
by Buddhists as ‘Terrorists’. A Buddhist mind is a ‘foreigner’ to a Hindu mind,
a Christian mind or a Muslim mind.
One who votes on the basis of belief is a Natural
owner. One who uses the vote for personal pleasures is a whore. As per Daily
Mirror Report ‘NFF reiterates bombing of parliament’:
[The National Freedom
Front (NFF) today
reiterated that Parliament should be bombed if it approves the Constitution by
a two-thirds majority leading to the division of the country and claimed there
would be no need of a parliament if all the powers were transferred to the
provincial councils.]
The same medium publishes the following by Dr Asanga
Welikala:
[President and Prime Minister must now urgently focus
on a negotiated solution to the differences within the governing
coalition
An uninformed public, especially within the majority
community, can easily be misled by distortion and lies, or frightened into
joining the opposition
Nothing except the constraints of a good and strong
political culture can prevent a paper constitution from being
violated ]
Dr Asanga
Welikala is presented as follows to the readers: ‘ a Lecturer in Public Law at the University of Edinburgh and the
Director of the Edinburgh Centre for Constitutional Law. He is also a Research
Associate of the Institute of Commonwealth Studies, University of London and is
a Research Fellow of the Centre for Policy Alternative (CPA), Sri Lanka.
A lecturer in Public Law and the
Director of foreign institute for Constitutional Law, does not have the
authority to advise Sri Lankan Politicians or the Common Lankan Public on
Public Law or Constitutional Law. To the extent he is, he is causing
disturbance to the minds of his readers & listeners, including the press. A
Sri Lankan has the fundamental right to be measured by fellow Sri Lankan minds –
meaning in terms of law – the mind that is structured as per Sri Lankan
interpretation of a law – be it religious, cultural or secular. One who is not
conscious of ‘foreign’ titles – is entitled to share as an Equal. Dr Asanga Welikala would need to dumb down to merge his mind with the
Lankan political chiefs to travel with them and not lead them if the goal is to
merge with global minds. The way Dr Asanga Welikala’s
mind has been presented, I conclude that
he is taking us back to Colonial times –
to submit to the British mind.
Humility is needed by a British to assist Sri
Lankans in Policy and v.v. If Dr Asanga Welikala is
Buddhist – he would renounce the higher status to become humble and accessible
to the ordinary Sri Lankan or limit his work to the law institutions and leave
the political advocatory roles to British Politicians.
To my mind, Section 44 (i) of the Australian
Constitution is the mother of Racial Discrimination Act 1985. The way
the Judiciary interpreted the law was different to the way Politicians
interpreted that law. The latter was
outcome based. By taking the side of Politicians Professor George Williams confirmed that his was a
‘foreign’ mind to the Judiciary and more importantly that he failed to pay his
dues to his Academic Ancestors whose mind ought to be filled with philosophy
and not temporary matter.
No comments:
Post a Comment