Home / Columnists/ Gubernatorial and Ministerial resignations, monks and law

Gubernatorial and Ministerial resignations, monks and law


Comments / {{hitsCtrl.values.hits}} Views / Monday, 10 June 2019 00:18


If the ministers and deputies who have resigned want something positive to happen as a result of their action, they should give up the ministerial privileges, remain in the back bench and allow the law to take its course – Pic by Ruwan Walpola

The resignation en masse of two Muslim governors and all Muslim ministers and deputies is an unprecedented political act in the history of Sri Lankan democracy and Muslim politics. 

If they had not relinquished their privileges yet, as some reports suggest, and in accordance with the official requirement of such resignations, they should do it immediately to make their action above board.   

The only acceptable reason for the resignation was to prevent a highly probable island-wide anti-Muslim riot sparked by one monk who was fasting unto death, and another, until two Muslim provincial governors and a Muslim minister removed from their positions. 

Now, another group of high priests have requested those ministers to resume duties and serve the nation. In between the monks and the ministers the laws of the country seem to have gone on holiday.   

To start with, if the Muslim ministers and governors were seriously concerned about the safety and welfare of their community, they should have resigned immediately after the Aluthgama riots during the former regime or Digana under the current one. 

One of the ministers who has resigned now was the Minister of Justice in the previous regime. Why didn’t he and his colleagues resign then and why did they resign now needs credible answers. In the previous regime, no Muslim minister or governor was accused of any illegal or corrupt behaviour. 

Now three of them are facing allegations. This difference adds substance to the view from certain quarters that all Muslim power-holders are trying to protect the alleged three. 

Be that as it may, allegations are not proven facts for action. Those allegations must be backed by solid evidence and should be produced before the courts so that legal proceedings can begin and the accused face trial. Instead, if monks are going to decide who is innocent and who is guilty, why have laws, courts and judges? 

In the interest of the nation and Buddhism the Mahanayakas must cleanse the Sangha. Let us not forget that this country was the home of such Buddhist luminaries like Ven. Velivita Saranakara Thero, Ven. Walpita Rahula Thero and Ven. Maduluwawe Sobitha Thero, just to name a few. There are several like them even now. They should come out and speak in public to save this nation from descending to kakistocracy.       

No one should be above the law, including the President. If the resigned were to resume duties now, just because the prelates have asked them to do so, the original argument by one of the ministers that they did not want to remain in office to be accused of impeding with any investigation into the allegations loses its credibility.

They have given a time limit of one month and want the CID to conduct the investigation. That is a valuable suggestion. If the CID finds credible evidence against any one or more of them, they should be brought before the law and be judged and punished if found guilty. 

The President pardons and releases a monk without asking for any advice from the Judiciary. Just three days after the release that very monk threatened to bring down the regime unless his demands were met. 

Similarly, the Government declared Emergency and even imposed curfew to control communal violence, but that Emergency appears to have no power to control firebrands instigating mass protest and violence? 

Also, how does one explain the freedom for thugs to roam around during curfew hours, looting business premises and destroying properties? Some of them were arrested of course.

If the ministers and deputies who have resigned want something positive to happen as a result of their action, they should give up the ministerial privileges, remain in the back bench and allow the law to take its course. Let that be their lasting contribution to the independence of the Judiciary in this country.     

  

(The writer is attached to the School of Governance, Murdoch University, Western Australia.)


Share This Article

Facebook Twitter


DISCLAIMER:

1. All comments will be moderated by the Daily FT Web Editor.

2. Comments that are abusive, obscene, incendiary, defamatory or irrelevant will not be published.

3. We may remove hyperlinks within comments.

4. Kindly use a genuine email ID and provide your name.

5. Spamming the comments section under different user names may result in being blacklisted.

COMMENTS

Today's Columnists

Building your own personal brand

Monday, 9 December 2019

Sunil Gavaskar is one of India’s greatest batsman. But he also has a very unique sense of humour. And he used that tongue-in-cheek humour to make a point at a press conference. This was a time when the Indian cricket team was touring abroad and the


Tax cuts: Control the damage before the unconventional stimulus backfires

Monday, 9 December 2019

Damage control exercise by Finance Ministry In a background of some contrasting signals from various parties regarding the generous tax cuts introduced by the Government, the Finance Ministry has attempted to do a damage control exercise by issuing a


Peace, business and prosperity

Saturday, 7 December 2019

Every nation, every community and each individual is facing the social and political impact along with the impact of violence. Interpersonal violence results in medical, policing and judicial costs immediately after the violent incident occurs and it


‘Data is the new oil’: An introduction to the proposed Data Protection Act

Friday, 6 December 2019

Data protection is not a concept we, in Sri Lanka, are familiar with. Globally, the laws surrounding data protection have been around for about 20 years. And we are only just about getting started. The proposed ‘Data Protection Act’ (hereinafter


Columnists More