he massive crowds that gather at the election meetings of Mr. Mahinda Rajapaksa clearly demonstrate that the so called good governance is not an issue at all at the forthcoming presidential elections. How many people think that Shirani Bandaranayake is still the Chief Justice of Sri Lanka? Except for herself and the good governance people in the opposition nobody would consider this lady as the Chief Justice of Sri Lanka. Then we have Maithripala Sirisena who considers himself as the secretary of the SLFP.
He probably does not remember many things and he should be allowed to believe that he is still the secretary of his former party that has suspended his membership. Recently he said that he would close down the Katunayake airport on the eighth midnight but later within twenty four hours said that he should be having a “mole amaruwa” (deranged mind) if he had said that he would close down the airport on the eighth midnight. It is left to the readers to decide on the state of mind of both the former Chief Justice and the former secretary of the SLFP.
A former vice chancellor of an old university goes on issuing statements as a member of a forum that has no mass base at all except among a small percentage of readers of English language newspapers, and who writes to the English language press on her own laments on lack of good governance forgetting how she went behind politicians and others to get her appointed as the Vice Chancellor of the University.
The council of a university recommends three persons to the post of vice chancellor and after that it is the President who appoints one of them as the Vice Chancellor. The canvassing that goes behind the scene is the same under all the Presidents we have had since the University Act No 16 of 1978 became the law of the country and the good governance luminaries have forgotten how they were appointed to the elite positions.
Some university lecturers have published a full page newspaper supplement under the title Forum of University Teachers without identifying themselves and giving the impression that the university lecturers as a whole support Maithripala Sirisena.
The cost of these advertisements is enormous and these good governance people should explain to the readers of newspapers whether it is “good governance” to mislead the people by giving the impression that the university lecturers as a whole want to defeat Mahinda Rajapaksa at the Presidential elections, and how these poorly paid academics according to FUTA could spend so much money on advertisements. It may be that some of these good governance academics have “big brains” compared to the “little brains” (podi mola karayo in the words of at least two of them) of people such as me who are none other than “nivatayas” and “thakkadiyas”. I as a “podi mola karaya” challenge these “big brain” academics for a debate on good governance either in Peradeniya or Colombo universities, which are not unfamiliar to me.
Good governance as I have argued elsewhere is a Trojan horse that brings us the non national forces (vijathika balawega) to campaign against Mahinda Rajapaksa and undermine our sovereignty. If the “big brain” people were to say sovereignty is not a “national” concept I would say that I am happy with the word “nidahasa” which has been protected by the Sinhala people in their history of more than two thousand years. It is the nidahasa and not good governance that has become the dominant issue at the Presidential Elections, as people understand the issues by intuition, in spite of the pundits.
The “peratugami” (not a member of the “peratugami pakshaya” but the initiator) of the good governance movement Ven. Maduluwawe Sobhitha Thera is not heard of these days and I wonder whether it is good governance to ditch people after “employing” them to do a job of work. The Thera initiated the good governance movement most probably on the advice of “big brain” people and others who are against Mahinda Rajapaksa and defeating the LTTE. Most of the present day good governance people including the leaders of the JHU had been against the “war” at one time or the other and have been advocates of the so called peace movement.
In the early nineties the present day JHU leaders in their previous organisations put up posters against the war and told their followers that “jathiya is a malakandak” (nation is a dead body) that cannot be marketed. They have been oscillating between pseudo nationalism and federalism over the last twenty years or so and one should not be surprised that they are with Mangala Samaraweera, Chandrika Kumaratunga and Co., once again arguing for Tamil racism. They have only recently said that army camps in the Northern province should be removed.
It is the nidahasa of the country that differentiates Mahinda Rajapaksa from Maithripala Sirisena, which is the reason for good governance people get together to defeat the incumbent (and future) President. Mahinda Rajapaksa was able to give political leadership to defeat the LTTE without wavering and dancing according to the tune of the Western powers. On the other hand Ranil Wickremesinghe and Chandrika Kumaratunga signed a so called ceasefire agreement with Prabhakaran giving more than two thirds of the country to the terrorists and the Westerners.
Chandrika Kumaratunga cannot say that she was not responsible for the agreement as it was Ranil Wickremesinghe who signed the agreement on behalf of the government. According to article 33 (e) of the constitution only the President can declare war and peace, and if Chandrika Kumaratunga was against it she could have annulled it. However, she did not do so as she had to obey the High Commissioner for England, which is her second home for all purposes and she was thus against the nidahasa of the country. Further she was responsible for PTOMS, and the JHU leaders have gone back to their early nineties days to be with Chandrika Kumaratunga and Mangala Samaraweera.
It was Mahinda Rajapaksa who gave political leadership to defeat the LTTE, and won nidahasa to the people, in more than one sense, and the vast majority of people unlike the good governance minority have realised this. That is the reason for the ordinary people to rally round the President, wanting Mahinda Rajapaksa to complete the project of defeating Tamil racism operated through the dispersed Tamils, the TNA, the JHU by England led Western powers.
The next step in defeating Tamil racism is based on identifying England as our biggest enemy and getting ready for the economic sanctions that the West will apply after Mahinda Rajapaksa becomes the president for a third time, and also for the various Arab Springs that the West will organise through their “employees” in and outside Sri Lanka. The uncommon opposition that has no declared common policy should declare their policy towards Tamil racism.
The JHU has already told the Tamil language press that the armed forces should be removed from the Northern province and the people are interested in finding out the contents of the pacts that Maithripala Sirisena has signed with various political parties and individuals. Maithripala Sirisena should specifically publish the contents of the pact with the TNA. The JHU now has agreed to go with the TNA as demonstrated by their demand to remove army camps, and all these pacts are detrimental to the nidahasa of the country and people are more concerned with the nidahasa than with so called good governance.
It is clear that the non national forces want “good governance” to be the theme at the Presidential elections only to undermine the real problem, which is none other than protecting the nidahasa of the country by defeating Tamil racism maintained by England and other Western countries. The people understand this by intuition and their verdict on January 8th would be to protect nidahasa through the leadership of Mahinda Rajapaksa.
Nalin De Silva