Prof. N.A.de S. Amaratunga DSc

Tamils and also Muslims to a degree in the North, East, Centre and Colombo voted for this government rejecting their own ethnic political parties which helped the government to get more than two thirds majority. The significance of this change of heart, if it is that, should be understood by the government as well as all political leaders of the country. It could mean that what they want is apart from solving of the problems common to all communities such as the economic, education, employement, health issues etc., a different approach to the ethnic problem which had been all these years exploited by their politicians for their own political survival. Moreover they may have realized the inadequacy of benefits of  Provincial Councils when the huge expenditure they entail is considered. They may have experienced the ills of PCs when the Northern PC was run by their own politicians.

The Provincial Councils do not serve any useful purpose. One cannot see a single project or beneficial outcome that has resulted from PC activity anywhere in the country. Instead it is another bureaucratic barrier to the people that increase the red tape, inconvenience, waste of time, money and energy of the people. Further it has increased the number of corrupt politicians that people have to bribe to get any official work done. The devolution of power via these PCs is totally redundant as shown by the inability of the Northern PC, which was formed for the very purpose of solving the Tamil problem, to make use of the opportunity to serve the people. The work done by these PCs could easily be carried out by the GA and the kachcheri system we had previously without the involvement of politicians. Similarly administrative power could be devolved to the North through the local government institutions.

Total revenue from PCs in 2020 was Rs.331 billion and the expenditure was a similar amount. Thus financially there was no gain for the country and there is nothing to show as benefits. This revenue could have anyway accrued via other existing institutions like the katcheri system, local government etc. By this means the expenditure would have been cut down to a minimum while retaining the revenue. These PCs have functioned under the Govenor and the seceretary without the politicians for the  last three to four years showing that this tier of political rulers are redundent and a burden to the poor people.

Further, several authoritative world wide surveys have shown that power-sharing measures as a solution to ethnic conflict have not been successful. There had been 78 countries in Asia, Africa,  Middle East, Eastern Europe, former USSR and the Caribbean which were in intense ethnic conflict during 1980 to 2010. Of these only 20 managed to conclude inter-ethnic power sharing arrangements, many failed, some experienced genocide eg. Rwanda in 1993 and others ended with secession eg. Sudan in 2005. Only 4 to 6 achieved stable arrangements but even these have serious political instability (Horowitz D, 2014).

Following are few extracts from these research works; The core reason why power-sharing cannot resolve ethnic conflict is that it is voluntaristic; it requires conscious decisions by elites to cooperate to avoid ethnic strife. Under conditions of hypernationalist mobilisation and real security threats, group leaders are unlikely to be receptive to compromise and even if they are they cannot act without being discredited and replaced by harder-line rivals” (Kaufmann, 1997). Proposals for devolution abound, but more often than not devolution agreements are difficult to reach and once reached soon abort” (Horowitz, 1985).

That Sri Lanka provides ample evidence in support of the above research findings could easily be seen in its experience with its own Provincial Councils. Of the nine PCs the worst failure was seen in relation to the previous Northern PC where it was supposed to be essential for the solution of the ethnic conflict. Its Chief Minister after willingly contesting for the post, made use of the opportunity to loudly engage in secessionist rhetoric and propaganda. He did not make use of the government grants for the development of the North.

In consideration of the above what would be more suitable for Sri Lanka is a power-sharing mechanism at the centre which would suit its geography of ethnicity where in most areas there is a mixture of ethnic groups and 50% of minorities live outside the North and the East. If all possibility of discrimination of majority or minority communities is avoided and people are allowed to learn to respect each other’s different cultures there would develop common feelings and thinking about national issues which would be the national integration that has eluded us all these years.

The Tamils who voted for this government and a majority of them did so, may prefer such a system of power sharing at the centre which may  make them feel integrated and belonging to their country more than the PC system which make them more separate and parochial in their own country. A new group of Tamil politicians may emerge who would like to be responsible for the whole country rather than an enclave in the far North.

The government has a two thirds majority and could bring in the necessary constitutional changes without a hassle to eleminate the presidential system, get rid of the 13^th Amendment and extablish an institution for power sharing at the centre. If the minorities agree India will not mind the removal of the 13^th A which they forced on us as they see no need for it in the present geo-political context. It is significant that no mention of the full implementation of the 13^th A was made in the joint statement issued by the Indian and Sri lankan leaders during the latter’s recent visit to India, an issue which was always taken up by the Indian side whenever the leaders of the two countries met in the past. Now may be the opportunity to solve the ethnic problem to the satisfaction of everybody and bring about lasting peace and national integration.