Gajalakshmi Paramasivam

12 November 2018

President Sirisena lied to the People

I have learnt through my own experiences that in democracy ‘Majority is Right but the Right Minority has Control’

In democratic business, customer is taken as right. But without the supplier, customers do not get the opportunity to take such a position. The 1975 Australian Dismissal happened due to the senate blocking supply for political purposes. The 2018 Sri Lankan Dismissal happened due to the President desiring to  block supply but without the lawful authority to do so. Those who fail to learn from others experiences, write their own laws – including for punishment.

In politics, Majority citizens are the customers. Minorities in Opposition are the Suppliers. They need to be at Equal status level to complete the whole picture seen by the whole for their own common purposes. What is the level at which this happened for Sri Lankans? – as revealed at Governmental level.

There is a saying in Tamil – that the external enemy is the thorn in the hedge; but the internal enemy is like the sharp nail in the grassy lawn. There were many such nails in the lawn of Prime Minister Wickremesinghe.

As per the Island article headed  – ‘Govt. struggles to justify delayed dissolution

If prez had the powers and wanted the voters to decide why the foot dragging?’ :

[President Sirisena dissolved parliament in the wake of his failure to secure the required number of lawmakers to prove majority in parliament. In spite of repeatedly declaring having the support of over 120 lawmakers, the Sirisena-Rajapaksa combine couldn’t bring the operation to a successful conclusion. Public Administration, Home Affairs and Justice Minister Susil Premjayantha and Housing and Social Welfare Minister Wimal Weerawansa explained that President Sirisena resorted to dissolution after failing to settle the issue by other means. Premjayanth justified the change of premiership on the basis of President Sirisena’s liking to work with a party compatible with him. Weerawansa alleged that President Sirisena acted in terms of constitutional powers enjoyed by him due to the situation created by former Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe and Speaker Karu Jayasuriya.]

Mr Susil Premjayantha who represents the President in this issue – confirms to the Public that Mr Sirisena did what he did due to his personal likes and dislikes. He therefore confirms that the voters who brought him to power and are still backing him are also driven by likes and dislikes. They do not recognize the law to determine whether or not their likes and dislikes would be right and wrongs in the spaces shared with others.

The media played a key role in bringing out the judgment of those in the shared spaces. More powerful than the ‘seen’ spaces and judgments published by the privileged within such spaces, is the true sharing within each section of that alternate space – including social media.  The Truth so invoked would work exponentially – and is beyond the control of even the invokers and the invoked.

 The Truth that Mr Sirisena did not have the numbers was thus invoked and his desire became fear; his liking was reflected as disliking of what would happen if he continued in Parliament as per the structure that was shown to him.

In a free environment we see ourselves in others who seem to be like us and the opposite in those who seem to be different to us. Often people without ownership in the high status that they enjoy – would tend to live in the mental environment that rendered them that status. But as per the system of Truth,  we take only the Energy we developed into the next stage – which is Administrative stage in government. This is also the philosophy of rebirth believed in commonly by Buddhists and Hindus. As a Buddhist Mr Sirisena had the DUTY to demonstrate this to Sri Lankans – who according to Article 9 of the Constitution have to uphold Buddhist belief  when there is conflict in decisions through various pathways – including majority rule and the secular law – the sources of which are from time to time referred to by Mr Sirisena as ‘foreign’ sources.

Article 9 alone is enough to show that Mr Sirisena failed the test of belief by getting attached to majority rule. Mr Wickremesighe was able to invoke the deeper values of governance through his own immediate circles. Whether he wins or loses at the next elections depends on the likes and dislikes of  Sri Lankan voters. The fact that he is an outstanding governor has already been confirmed by him during these difficult times when he remained neutral in terms of ‘blaming’ personalities and invoking their other sides at emotional level – which often becomes violent in Sri Lankan politics. We as a nation certainly have matured through this experience.

President Sirisena lacked the empowerment of Law or Truth to ‘see’ the other side. Hence he lied and lost in the altar of Buddha in him.