A miracle for the family!

When Arjuna Ranatunga, former cricketer, now the Minister of Ports and Shipping, nominated his own brother Dhammika Ranatunga to head the Ports Authority, the large and economically vital statutory authority coming under the Minister, among the more social conscious there was only consternation. They were gripped by a sense of betrayal, made sharper when committed by a person who by his political stand at the general elections only held just before, stood against nepotism and other such acts of favouritism. 

The Minister was impervious to public sensibilities and went ahead with the appointment. Predictably, it was argued in favour of the nominee that he was competent (in the mind of the Minister) and more importantly, had the trust of the Minister (his brother). 

Dubious reasoning

It was not so long ago that this sort of dubious reasoning was the ‘unofficial’ philosophy of our government. Under the Rajapaksa dispensation, family, meaning the Rajapaksa family, was everything. Now rid of them, it is difficult to imagine that in this 21st Century, in a so-called democracy, in a country boasting of an high rate of literacy, a man elected by the people for a term of office, dared to impose his entire family on the country in that manner. The level of dominance by his family was so unbelievable that they even began to see the country as a miracle, the “miracle of Asia!” 

True, some of them were elected. Basil Rajapaksa, for instance, came in at the general elections of 2010 through the Gampaha District, an area to which he was a total stranger. Prior to that, Basil was an appointed member of parliament. It is no coincidence that his brother Mahinda Rajapaksa, was both President of the country and the leader of the ruling PA (People’s Alliance), when Basil was made an appointed member of parliament and then in 2010 nominated to Gampaha to contest at the general elections. Of course, Basil won Gampaha in 2010, an election in which the PA swept the board country-wide. It is common knowledge that Basil was a “more equal” minister of the Rajapaksa cabinet, commanding an out of proportion budget allocation, but more importantly, much more ‘power’ than his peers.

Mahinda Rajapaksa did not believe in doing things by halves when it came to his family. He nominated his elder brother Chamal to the post of Speaker of Parliament. The PA members of parliament, who commanded an overwhelming majority in parliament at the time, thought it was a splendid nomination by their President. While empowering the siblings, Mahinda Rajapaksa did not neglect his progeny by any means. His son, Namal Rajapaksa too came in to the parliament in 2010 from the Hambantota District. Needless to say, he was very high profile during the father’s regime and perhaps pulled more clout than most others. The young man is said to be blessed with many talents, setting up and leading a large law firm soon after enrolling as a lawyer.

Mahinda Rajapaksa’s nephew Shashindra Rajapaksa was appointed Chief Minister of the large Uva Province. Shasindra is a man with spiritual inclinations, becoming the chief devotee of the famous Kataragama temple, evidently the first in the family to hold this culturally important post. There are numerous others of the Rajapaksa clan who came to hold various public positions during the Mahinda Rajapaksa presidency. Among such appointments were diplomats (generally to the most important countries), heads of banks and other vital public institutions. Naturally, they were all appointed in the capacity of “head” of the various institutions. In the opinion of many, the feckless appointment of his brother in law to guide the destinies of Srilankan Airlines, the hugely wasteful national career, can be understood only as an attempt at being light-hearted in the midst of burdensome duties of State. 

A remarkable feature

There is a remarkable feature here. Mahinda Rajapaksa appears to hail from a family of which nearly every member was ready and willing to accept a public service position at the drop of a hat. If suitably employed, the average person will baulk at a career disruption late in life, inevitable if he were to accept a public service position as a political appointee. Such appointments come with many inherent risks and uncertainties. 

Then there is the ever-prevailing issue of conflict of interest. You may have been in the tea industry working for a particular company. Can you now go as our ambassador to a tea buying country, without competing companies complaining of unfair advantage? The level of conflict of interest inherent in many of the appointments during the Rajapaksa regime was far more serious than this example. Avoidance of conflict of interest situations when holding a public office is a paramount aspect of good governance. Indifference to real or potential conflict of interest situations on the other hand, is a sure pointer to a disintegrating system.

Perhaps it is something else; dozens of unemployed, underemployed and even unemployable family members using public assets to make a comfortable life for themselves with houses chauffeur driven cars and other creature comforts, even diplomatic passports, thrown their way. And no questions were asked about their suitability for the post or the rightness of such appointments. There was too much fear for that.

The person who was directly and principally responsible for the atmosphere of fear that the Rajapaksas engendered was the other brother, Gotabaya Rajapaksa, the all-powerful Defence Secretary, head of the Urban Development Authority and the Apollo Hospital. We read of other instances where the President’s own brother is the defence czar only in relation to some Arab countries or in banana republics. But we too were in that league only a year ago. 

Making a mockery of good governance

In the modern world, no elected ruler will be allowed to treat the country as his private property. A President can give a direction to a public servant based on his political mandate. 

But the public service which gives effect to that direction will act only in accordance with the laws of the country and the rules of their institution. A public servant must implement government policy, objectively and independently. These fundamentals of good governance were made a mockery of by political appointees like Gotabaya Rajapaksa.

To say that Gotabaya Rajapaksa was a public servant would be in the realm of the absurd. In fact, he even had the temerity to define his role as “a servant of the people” and not a public servant. If a peon in the public service attempted to give his own interpretation to the job, the man would have been sacked for being mentally unstable. This Secretary of Defence indulged in politics, was absolutely partial in implementing policy and even dared to terrorise the people of this country by the misuse of the State machinery.

Dour, self-important, Gotabaya Rajapaksa had no qualms in claiming all the credit for winning the war against the LTTE terrorists. Among true martial races, with much more credible histories of warfare and a profounder grasp of the true nature of human conflict, such sweeping claims are rare. By compulsion, wars are collective and massive efforts by millions of hands and minds with over lapping and interlocking decision making and war related activity. When in a spectacular raid in a third country, America got at their number one target Osama Bin Laden, President Obama exulted, but did not claim the honour. Much more, Winston Churchill, no novice at warfare and a defiant leader of a nation at bay, did not nevertheless attempt to monopolise the glory of the Allied victory over Germany.

As many military historians have emphasised, wars are inevitably decided by resources and manpower, sometimes helped along by clever captains and brave soldiers. In the fog of war, even the victor makes many blunders and wasteful efforts, only to prevail by the preponderance of men and material. But as inevitable in human affairs, here too there is always the crank, the irrational and the absurd. Certain tribes in the past believed that their triumphs over opposing tribes were solely a result of witchcraft! Later, when more advanced races came across these tribes, witchcraft was of no use. They were easily defeated and colonised; the moment of truth.

Political families

Sometimes it is argued by the beneficiaries of dynastic politics that their claims to leadership are based on being ‘political families’, meaning that their fathers and even grandfathers have held leadership status in this society. It is indeed very strange that such an argument is made in a country like this. To gain perspective, if a person from say a country like Eretria, Cambodia, Somalia, Iraq, Syria or any other centre of human misery, claims to come from a “political family” would that filial connection necessarily gain him respect? Should we open the door for him and welcome the bloke as a hereditary leader of “his” people? The human statistics of these countries alone should qualify the guy for a trial before a people’s court for the damage caused, directly or indirectly, by his “political family” to the respective society. 

The measure of failure of “our political families” is easily gauged. Sri Lanka too is a poor country. Most countries treat us with barely concealed contempt and would not issue a travel Visa to a Sri Lankan without subjecting him to abject humiliation. For the average Sri Lankan the only way out of grinding economic conditions is to obtain blue collar employment in the Middle East. Buying a three wheeler is a financial benchmark for many. 

Since independence in 1948 we have had several insurrections, terrorism, almost continuous social unrest and many other social ills. Our two home-made Constitutions (1972 and 1978) are damned, with a vast majority wanting them out, while most of the laws enacted have been found to be faulty or inadequate. Despite adopting various policies and change of guard several times we have never achieved the degree of economic growth necessary to break out of the overall stagnation. The standards in services such as education and health remain low, and perhaps on a downward trend. Primary institutions such as the judiciary, the legislature and of course the State apparatus have lost their lustre, now considered second rate, corrupt or inefficient. But they still talk of “political families’, our hereditary leaders!

We cannot but help view the Ranatunga appointment of brother Ranatunga in this perspective.

Strange transformation 

No politician facing an election will dare declare that he will only trust his own blood when making high public appointments. Before the elections it is just love for and trust in the people that motivate the politician. But once elected and given a Ministry, a strange transformation occurs, the people’s representative now becomes a source of power and patronage. He has the power to enhance or diminish. He can give trust or withdraw his trust. Soon his Ministry is converted into a personal domain, wife, children, brothers, sisters, extended family saunter in regularly, with an air of belonging, exuding ownership. Gradually the Minister assumes the character of a Mafia boss (better portrayed in South Indian gangster movies than the Western counterpart) deciding how best to handle the booty.

Everything in his Ministry is to be decided by whispered conversations among the family members. The public servants are there only to implement the family wishes. 

In the manner that our Ministers operate, there is nothing of the concept of a Ministry as a public institution to be used in the public interest. Instead; the Ministries are turned into family property, secretive and obscure, run by the family, existing only to deify the Minister. 

Our history since 1948 demonstrates one thing; who is appointed or what new policy is heralded matters little in a larger picture of a diminished people, only led by “trusted” family members. In such a scenario, whether it is Twiddle Dee or Twiddle Dum matters not, it’s a dozen of this or 12 of the same; the bankruptcy of a culture only leading to tragedy, followed by more tragedy.

There was yet another Ranatunga brother, Nishantha, in the news recently as a candidate for the presidency of our much discredited Cricket Board. He lost the elections at the Cricket Board. 

But had he (Nishantha) won, going by the argument of Minister Ranatunga that Chairman Dhammika Ranatunga is the most qualified to run the Ports Authority as he ‘trusts’ him, then there is absolutely nothing wrong in Nishantha Ranatunga (if he were elected president of the Cricket Board) in appointing a fourth brother as the CEO of cricket. After all, they can only trust their own brothers.

When it comes to public appointments these political families have any number of brothers ready and willing. That is another aspect of the miracle…