Gajalakshmi
Paramasivam
14 September 2021
Devolution or Separation?
Democracy ‘happened’ because Autocracy failed. When
democracy fails – autocracy creeps back to continue along its old path. Then
reverse pyramid happens. The Spirit is that of the killed Autocracy but the
body is the young generation who inherit the fruits of Autocracy. Those who are driven by brawn power tend to enjoy
at the physical level while holding high positions of power as per which they have the duty to ‘share’ the
physical on merit basis. The measure of Merit is crucial to reliable
distribution of the physical. In autocracy, it is measured through cleverness
of the ruler. In Democracy it is measured through belief in oneself in one’s
home environment. If we continue to use the ‘cleverness’ measure then we set
aside democracy to that extent. Likewise, if we use belief based democracy,
then we set aside cleverness measures to that extent. Until we transcend and lose
sight of the physical, what happened / physical manifestations are essential. More
essential is the measure used which are often inherited and therefore are
exponential in power– be they positive or negative. The Corona Virus is such an
example. It confirms the that costs also
spread exponentially when they are ‘free’ of their physical form.
Following is an excerpt from the Update on the human rights situation in Sri
Lanka, at the 48th session of the Human Rights Council
Statement by Michelle Bachelet, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, in Geneva
on 13 September 2021:
[The current social, economic and governance challenges faced by Sri
Lanka indicate the corrosive impact that militarisation and the lack of
accountability continue to have on fundamental rights, civic space, democratic
institutions, social cohesion and sustainable development. ]
The measure used is the global secular measure. The measure
that ought to be used is the Constitution of Sri Lanka. That constitution is
incapable of measuring ‘facts’ due to the constitution being relative and not
sovereign. As per science based measure the logic needs to be balanced at the
total level. As per belief based measure the measure is ‘yesterday’s experience’
that has no residual form at present.
The update proceeds as follows:
[A new state of emergency was
declared in Sri Lanka on 30 August, with the stated aim of ensuring food
security and price controls, amid deepening recession. The emergency
regulations are very broad and may further expand the role of the military in
civilian functions. The Office will be closely monitoring their
application.
I note with interest the President’s recent meeting with some civil
society leaders, and I encourage broader dialogue and steps to open Sri Lanka’s
civic space. Regrettably, surveillance, intimidation and judicial
harassment of human rights defenders, journalists and families of the
disappeared has not only continued, but has broadened to a wider spectrum of
students, academics, medical professionals and religious leaders critical of
government policies. Several peaceful protests and commemorations have been met
with excessive use of force and the arrest or detention of demonstrators in
quarantine centres. ]
When the LTTE was eliminated in 2009, it was after a physical fight/war. But
12 years later - the root cause of the war is yet to be discovered and shared
with the People of Sri Lanka and beyond. Each time ‘victory’ is taken by either
side – including through UN sessions, finding the root-cause is sent to the
back-burner. That is why the government without policy changes, fought against Islamic
fundamentalists after the elimination of the LTTE. Fundamentalism confirms
attachment to the physical form of power. So long as this is exercised within
the boundaries of belief – it is harmless and would diffuse itself with time.
The current example is lockdowns within our home areas.
The UN’s approach indicates that the pathway used is ‘inquisitorial’ whereas
in Sri Lanka – the war was through the ‘adversarial’ system which was naturally
established on the basis of the 1972
Constitution. Article 6 of that constitution stated:
6. The Republic of Sri
Lanka shall give to Buddhism the foremost place and accordingly it shall be the
duty of the State to protect and foster Buddhism while assuring to all
religions the rights granted by section 18 (1) (d)
18. (1) In the Republic of Sri Lanka (d)
every citizen shall have the right to freedom of thought, conscience and
religion. This right shall include the freedom to have or to adopt a religion
or belief of his choice, and the freedom, either individually or in community
with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in
worship, observance, practice and teaching;
The Rights under article 18 are in the Fundamental Rights
section.
These articles have been carried through to the 1978
Constitution.
Article 6 is relative and is NOT sovereign in terms of religion.
Article 18 is Sovereign. Hence those covered by article 6 are outside the cover
of article 18. The parallels in the current constitution are articles 9 and - 10 together with 14, - respectively.
Where those in the military are largely Buddhists – the government
has the duty to use the inquisitorial system. Hence Executive Powers are needed
by the President.
The other side to the war are non-Buddhists. They are
entitled to the adversarial system.
At UN level the Buddhist side needs to state the Buddhist
tenets through which the Constitutional Rights were upheld. Likewise the
Non-Buddhist side needs to confirm its belief based measures and then self-assess
and present its own case. The UN lacks jurisdiction to use secular base where
religion is part of the constitution of a country. It can take an impartial observer
position by facilitating both sides to present their cases through UN’s Due Processes.
Within a country - a
judge has to go down to the sovereign part of the Constitution to measure fundamental
rights on Equal footing.
As per my experience, when ‘Buddhism foremost’ article was
introduced – there was hardly any show of opposition by non-Buddhist leaders or
even educated leaders within the Buddhist community. The measure was my previous
experience of opposition to Sinhala-only policy which led to riots in Colombo in
1956 and in 1958. Language is the body of our communications. Belief in the common
value is the natural soul communication. Even after the war no Tamil politician
is known to have presented a Bill to repeal article 9 – the Buddhism foremost
article. This means they are looking for separation and not devolution.
The 13th Amendment failed to include the
repealing of Buddhism Foremost article – so Buddhists also would enjoy the blessings
of Buddhist ancestors who realised their sovereignty through Buddhism. Any
value has to pass the test of ‘zero relativity’ to qualify as a sovereign value
and only such value becomes a heritage. A heritage based law is a naturally just
law. Relativity based law carries the risk of unjust discrimination.
The 13th Amendment effectively opposed Sihala
fundamentalism through physical separation. This had the effect of rendering a
pathway to Tamil Nadu whose political leaders initiated the support for armed
rebellion by Tamils. It did not cure the relative value by opposing Buddhism
foremost article, through Equal status article – similar to the language related
article which is article 18 in the current constitution. Apparent Equality tends
to hide lack of belief in the common whole. Belief works the system naturally.
The above mentioned report by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights
includes:
[Despite
various inquiries, the victims of the Easter Sunday bombings in 2019 and
religious leaders continue to call urgently for truth and justice, and a full
account of the circumstances that permitted those attacks. ]
The question here is which pathway would be used – given that both sides are
non-Buddhists and the current government shows attachment to Buddhist leadership?
In fact the previous President also became a fundamentalist by ‘showing’ strong
attachment to Buddhist looks. In natural justice – this government lacks the
jurisdiction to take an impartial position that would be common to both
communities. It has the jurisdiction to punish as per objectively measurable
evidence through secular pathway but no more. The UN is expecting that which is
not deliverable as a true outcome. Only a true law can deliver a true solution
that would spread itself naturally.
No comments:
Post a Comment