Sri Lanka created an example of democracy

A successful and peaceful transfer of power in a swift and orderly manner has appeared to be a symbol of hope for the supporters of democracy all around the world. Newly elected Maithripala Sirisena took oath as the President of Sri Lanka on 9 January, 2015 at the Independence Square in Colombo amidst cheers of a huge crowd. He won the election by only 51.3 percent of votes, and defeated former President Mahindra Rajapakse, who conceded defeat marginally. Mr Rajapakse has not raised any slogan of rigging or manipulation in the election but appreciated all segments of society for casting their ballots freely and prudently. Mr Rajapakse openly lauded and respected the voice of voters and transferred power within 24 hours of election result, making a wonderful instance of democratic norms. He also vacated the President House, making room for his successor to occupy immediately. Mr Rajapakse has followed the rules of the democratic game as a born politician. The President of the USA, Barack Obama highly appreciated this decency, calling it a Symbol of Hope for democracy.

President Maithripala Sirisena was Health Minister in the Cabinet of President Rajapakse since 2010. He started his career as Member of the Parliament in 1989 and earned respect as Leader of the House of the Parliament for his deliberation and openness to opposition. He maintained the spirit of democracy in letter and spirit. The followers of M. Sirisena during election campaign called him angel while supporters of Rajapakse advocated that a devil you know must be better than the unknown angel. What an excellent debate voters have observed. Of course, there were allegations of corruption, increased rate of unemployment, and slow development progress in the country during the regime of Rajapakse. The major blame was about the failure of Rajapakse to bring post-war reconciliation with the Tamil population and establish peace in the country as expected by the people. It might be mentioned that Rajapakse has completely eliminated the LTT movement and stopped the war in Sri Lanka. He was also once the Prime Minister of Sri Lanka.

To uphold the spirit of democracy, political tolerance is a critical issue. Sometimes, political leaders or the party in power refuse to give space to opposition parties and politics and do not tolerate any dissent of views or agitation. But political tolerance is a prime criterion to accept and respect the basic rights and civil liberties of persons and groups whose viewpoints might differ from one's own. Democracy upholds that members of the society should treat each other and be treated equally in expressing views and also being assembled to convince others with their points of discontent or malgovernance of the party in power. Democracy implies respect for the plurality of views and virtues of dialogue as a means of resolving conflicts and contradictions.

Intolerance creates conformist culture and a closed society which narrows citizens' perceptions of politics, and shapes their subsequent behaviour. A culture of tolerance involves debate and dynamic exchange of opinions and argument, whereby people can learn from others, get closer to the truth, and thus benefit from vital public perception. In Pakistan, last year, former cricketer Imran Khan staged a countrywide demonstration with strong agitations against the present prime minister, and that was resolved ultimately through a dialogue following the process of democracy which worked well.

The ideals of democracy are so appealing to citizens around the world, that many have sacrificed their livelihood, even their lives to fight for it. Indeed, our era of civilisation is characterised as much by war and conflict as it is by peace and democracy. At the same time, the democratic system's openness also attracts opportunists with vested interests to use the democratic process and platform as a means to attain power and influence, even if they do not firmly believe democratic principles to be so dear. Therefore, democracy is the most difficult process of governance to practice and ensure development with the diversity of views and opinions.

Thus, democracy requires strong statesmanship with capacity and technique to tackle or respond to opposition's allegations and discontentment. Tolerance is a means but not an end. Leadership in democracy is more difficult a task to mould and win public opinion and respect without making their lives troublesome.

Nepal has made a paradigm shift to democracy after following a long time monarchy, which Bhutan equally started to follow. Sri Lankan practice of democracy is not very old, and based on sound foundations. But recent lessons where opposition's views are tolerated and reconciled with dialogue appear to be very encouraging. The present Bangladesh politics is passing through a critical stage and political parties are not strictly following democratic practices and rules of democratic games. Fortunately, people at large are very much democratic in their behaviour in midst of awful political culture prevailing. This is perhaps the reason for which the public is becoming unhappy with politicians, since they failed to feel the pulse of the people. There is no chivalry in restricting the normal activities of public in the name of democratic movement, to fulfil demands mixed with diversified arguments and controversies.

A few months ago, a survey where young boys and girls were asked to state their aim in life. They were asked to state if they like to be politicians in the future. More than 90 percent stated in the negative and categorically denied to practice politics in their lives. It indicates the declining trend of respect to politicians, whereas a nation needs students of strong caliber to emerge as politicians. Hope our politicians will realise the situation and try to justify their presence to the people through their wisdom and democratic behaviour to honour everyone's views and thoughts.

———————–

Dhiraj Kumar Nath is a former secretary and former adviser to the Caretaker Government of Bangladesh.