Containing communalism emerging as key challenge

By Lynn Ockersz

(July 09, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) President Mahinda Rajapaksa is on record that he has cautioned sections of his ruling coalition against stoking communal disharmony and this position would, no doubt, be widely welcomed by the ‘moral majority’ in Sri Lanka whose hearts are in a future that would be shared among Sri Lanka’s communities. We have had no ominous indications, so far, of communal friction of any kind erupting in the wake of some already hotly debated ‘post-war issues’, such as the full implementation of the 13th amendment, but complacency carries its perils and it is gratifying that the President has sought to pre-empt stirrings of a communal kind which could make short work of the current widespread Lankan hopes of a stable future.

Admonitions of this kind need to be issued more than occasionally from government leaders for the preparation of the collective consciousness of the people for taking on the exacting but largely untouched challenge of nation-building in this country but it is best that verbal exhortations and moral persuasion are backed by relevant legislation and other legal instruments to prohibit and ‘outlaw’ the lethal cancer that has been assailing the local body politic over the decades. Such legislative and legal deterrents, besides helping to contain communalism, would have the added positive effect of building trust and mutual acceptance among our communities.

A political solution to our conflict, which would address in full the issue of empowering our communities and making them equal stakeholders in the Lankan state, is one of the most urgent national priorities currently, but governments have been notoriously slow-footed in delivering on this score and only the politically naïve would expect an accelerated drive for a political solution this time around too, particularly now that the LTTE has been militarily crushed and the perception seems to be gaining ground among some that a political solution would, indeed, be superfluous or needless. However, international pressure has been mounting on Sri Lanka over the months for a political solution and such pressure cannot be shrugged-off, particularly if there is substantial dependence on the part of the Lankan state on the world community for financial and development assistance and, this, of course, is very much the case. But if past experience in ‘peace-making’ is anything to go by, one cannot expect the Lankan government to be in what may be described as a mighty hurry to work out a solution, although some moves could be expected in this direction.

However, if the government has acquired a clear and comprehensive understanding of the national interest, it would not indulge in any more feet-dragging on this issue and the President, through his recent warning to sections of his governing coalition, on the question of rousing communal passions, indicates that he, indeed, has grasped the gravity of delivering a political package without inordinate delays. Regardless of whether this solution is ‘homegrown’ or otherwise and irrespective of whether it provides for a state dispensation containing ‘federal’ or ‘unitary’ features, the political package would need to address in full the felt need among the minorities for equal citizenship and empowerment, in all its dimensions. Anything short of these requirements would leave the National Question hugely unanswered and ensure that the challenge of nation-building continues to remain unaddressed. For, equal empowerment and citizenship, along with substantial group rights for minorities, are essential ingredients in nation-building. Without these binding elements Sri Lanka would remain disunited.

Hopefully, then, the recently formed All Party Development and Reconciliation forum would prove productive and result-oriented, although it is not clear at present whether this widely representative, somewhat clumsily large forum would be charged with addressing the question of a political solution. Nor is there any intimation of what the future of the APRC would be, although we have been told it has been working on a political solution for well over two years. Getting its act together is a matter for the state and this it would need to get round to if it is in earnest when it says that it is for a political solution.

While it would be realistic to expect a meandering forward drive to a political solution, given the highly contradictory pulls and pressures on the government, it cannot be excused for not putting in place policies and practices in the short term, that would help in paving the way to the expeditious working out of a political solution. Some such measures have already been touched on and they relate to the containing of communalism. It needs to be noted that a head-on confrontation of communalism in all its forms by the state, could help in furthering national integration and thereby lay the basis for nation-building. Besides, putting in place the legal machinery, for instance, to contain communal violence in all its manifestations, why cannot the state make race-hate speeches and utterances, a principal offence?

We should see moves in these directions by the state if the foundation is to be laid for closer national integration and the expeditious working out of a political solution. Besides, these measures would prove immensely effective confidence-building steps in inter-communal relations.

It would also prove advantageous, from the viewpoint of communal amity, for the Lankan state to have a close look at legislation, such as, Britain’s Race Relations Act of 1976. Britain has been at the receiving end of charges in some quarters over the decades, that it has not been doing enough to curb racial intolerance and violence within its boundaries. Whatever the merits or otherwise of these charges, Britain could produce concrete proof that it has in place the legal and other relevant machinery to handle racial intolerance and violence and one piece of evidence to prove this is the just mentioned Act.

Of special interest under this category of legislation, is the creation of Race Relations Councils, under The Race Relations (Amendment) Act 2000, which, among other things, are charged with eliminating unlawful discrimination in local authority areas, promoting equal opportunities and promoting good race relations between persons of different racial groups.

What is presented here is a brief overview of the relevant legal machinery and legislation and a more in depth look at them is necessary to ascertain how they could be adopted to suit Sri Lanka’s conditions and requirements. From the point of view of rectifying communalism, even India, we are certain, could prove useful, if one would only care to study the relevant institutional mechanisms and other relevant arrangements.

There is hope in some quarters that the Tamil groups currently partnering the government, would prove a boon in working towards a better deal for the Tamil community and in taking the country forward to a more progressive future. Well, one way in which Karuna, Douglas Devananda and Anandasangaree could make a positive contribution is by at least helping to decommunalize social relations. They will need to prove that are indeed capable of improving the lot of the Tamil people.

-Sri Lanka Guardian