Kicking the corrupt out of contention

AS voters pick out which candidate to cast their votes for and political parties scramble to present their best selves to the public, we enter a phase of unparalleled importance where the fate of the good governance ideology hangs in the balance.

Amongst the candidates are most of the usual suspects who held seats in the previous Parliament as well as the major party stalwarts. Some candidates such as Duminda Silva, Mervyn Silva, Sarana Gunawardena and Sajin Vass Gunawardena have been shunned by their party; though some may consider this a brave move towards cleaning up the corridors of power, a closer look at the nomination lists would prove otherwise.

Although the celebrity thugs and crooks have been seemingly ostracised, the exercise is possibly one that is largely cosmetic in reality. The fact that Sarana Gunawardena’s wife was given a nomination instead reveals the farcical elements to this largely-token measure. It is safe to assume that after years of fielding Mervyn Silva, no recent development has rendered him of poorer quality than ever before. It is instead highly likely that he took himself out of the running after falling out with the alliance. Duminda Silva, who will run independently, will also await his chance to join the coalition once a new government is formed.

The nomination lists in the meantime are still littered with candidates who have been accused of fraud and corruption as well as a dazzling array of other offences. Hambantota Mayor Eraj Fernando, who was charged with assault, and UPFA former Ratnapura District Minister Premalal Jayasekara, who was in remand in connection with the murder of a UNP supporter during the last election, have also been granted nominations by the UPFA.

The nomination lists also provide insight into the significance of the Code of Conduct for Politicians, which was issued by PAFFREL back in March. The significance being the utter disregard for its regulations despite all major parties having endorsed it with open arms during the post-election good governance frenzy that engulfed Sri Lankan politics. Although the valuable guideline was never strong enough to do it on its own, the thought of the political parties backing its ideals meant future generations of politicians would be chosen from a comparatively honest pool of candidates. That reality however seems just as far away as it was a year ago.

Dr. Sarath Amunugama recently stated the nomination lists contain murderers, rapists, swindlers and bribe takers, with the whole Penal Code being represented in modern-day politics. He also claimed the country has to therefore depend on the intelligence of voters to keep them out of power, adding he was pessimistic about the outcome.

In this context it cannot be denied that most corrupt politicians still hold the support of their constituencies. If by lack of choice, intimidation or sheer indifference, the corrupt leaders who hold power also hold the confidence of the people. The only conceivable way to stamp out corruption from entering the political sphere is therefore by implementing a series of policies that ensure the corrupt stay out and the door is open for professionals to enter the political fray. Political parties fielding candidates of questionable repute should also be held accountable for doing so.

Before we rest our heads on the thought that we deserve who we elect, we need to ensure that the choices presented before us are held to minimum standard of integrity.