by
Dilrukshi Handunnetti
Outspoken politician and Minister of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources Development, Dr. Rajitha Senaratne claims Sri Lanka should learn from her past political mistakes and cautions against drastic decision-making with regard to the 13th Amendment to the Constitution. He feels such moves would be to the detriment of the country.
Excerpts:
Q:
You strike an emotional note when speaking of the moves to alter the 13th Amendment? Why?
A: There is reason for me to be so. The sacrifices made and the suffering some of us underwent to promote and maintain the topic of power devolution in the political agenda, makes some of us react to the current debate with strong sentiments. It had not been easy to mainstream the idea and to convince the populace that sharing power is the solution to our problem. People have had to make sacrifices for taking such a stance.
During our Sri Lanka Mahajana Party (SLMP) days, we were vilified as promoters of near separatism. Our claims were based on principles of equity and correcting historical wrongs. We have come this far and a political fringe should not be allowed to dominate the discussion and force us to take backward steps. It will be detrimental to the national interest.
Q:
Why do you say it would be detrimental to the national interest?
A: This is the only constitutional provision we have introduced to devolve power to the periphery. Governments have been reluctant to implement it fully. This is also the basis on which, post war, we can build a strong platform for reconciliation.
Instead of taking backward steps, we should implement the existing amendment and in fact, build on it. That should be our political comment at this point of time.
Q:
What is the level of support you have within the government? Defending the 13th Amendment does not appear popular at present?
A: There are plenty of government members who feel this way. Some of them have been sporadically vocal. Many don’t speak because there is no need to – they have never altered their position on this despite the current efforts to have the 13th Amendment pruned – because none of them have altered their positions or their party stances. Silence does not mean there is tacit approval.
Q:
Will there be enough members, if the need arises, to defeat a bill to amend the 13th Amendment?
A: Yes.
Q:
Would you like to mention the individual members and parties?
A: It is not rocket science after all. The political parties are well known because they have made their position clear. They have not alerted their position either.
As for the individuals, enough to say there are enough ‘noes’ to defeat the ‘ayes.’
Q:
Nevertheless, there appears to be enough support for the call to amend the constitution, within and outside of the government?
A: There is a discussion generated and apparent mobilization towards achieving that objective. But silence should never be interpreted as tacit consent. Besides the vocal few who demand urgent amendments to the important provisions, there is a silent majority within and outside government, I believe, who would speak at the correct time, and decisively so.
Q;
Do you think the resistance is due to a strong belief the specific constitutional amendment was introduced at the behest of India and has never been approved by the people and its implications never explained to them, which makes people reject it as an act of interference and political bulldozing by India?
A: Some parties felt this way initially. I am hoping all of us have matured with time to understand that despite the manner of its introduction, this provides us with a baseline, a foundation to build a political solution to the conflict. This is the time to do that, without squabbling in this manner.
Q:
Is the president committed to sharing power?
A: I think he has taken a moderate, cautious and prudent stance on the matter. He has not made rhetorical statements, particularly and has never expressed a wish to tinker with the 13th Amendment.
Q:
Then whose political sentiments found expression within the recently submitted Cabinet Note, proposing drastic amendments to the 13th Amendment?
A: Some have been actively lobbying for it and the Cabinet note is a mere recognition of that expression.
Q:
Our political history is replete with examples of the majority’s aversion to share power and they haven’t. Why should things be different now?
A: Because at least now, things have to be different. How many have died demanding the recognition of their political identity in this country? How many southern political parties have suffered due to Tamil militancy? Do we want more carnage and another generation committed to violence?
To move forward now, we have to think of new approaches. We need to act mature to prevent irreversible situations in the future.
Q:
Do you think this haste to have the 13th Amendment tinkered is to reduce specific powers devolved to the provinces before conducting the Northern Provincial Council (NPC) elections? Is it because of the large possibility that the NPC will be secured by North-based Tamil political parties?
A: That is a question best answered by those who act with political haste.
Q:
Do you feel Sri Lanka is under pressure from India to implement the 13th Amendment fully and the resistance is towards that?
A: We are not under pressure to implement it but we are mindful of the need to seek a solution to the national question. The absence of power sharing – the root cause of Tamil militancy – needs to be addressed.
I have no doubt India is deeply concerned about the situation here. The 13th Amendment is projected as the mother of all ills which it is not. For India, there are domestic political compulsions as well.
Q:
If the 13th Amendment is diluted and the provincial councils have their powers pruned, could there be repercussions at the international level?
A: The absence of actual devolution of power has always been an issue raised by the international community. It has also been highlighted by those proposing solutions to the conflict, with words of encouragement to devolve power as a solution. Besides, concerned citizens too believe in the same. All of us want a peaceful country and it is very important that we play a positive and constructive role before it is too late.
As for India, we should closely work with our neighbour. We both have strategic interest in each other and share a culture and history. We cannot remain adversarial under any circumstances.
COURTESY:CEYLON TODAY