Democratic dissent is a legitimate right that entitles people in all democracies to express their disapproval of government action when it takes drastic measures against their wishes.

More often, it happens in third-world democracies, which are few and far between.

Most protests in other countries end in violence and are suppressed by despotic rulers with an iron fist.

In Sri Lanka, though it is a democracy, legitimate protests are met with state oppression and sometimes imprisonment or detention under the draconian Prevention of Terrorism Act.

In the year 1953, a hartal in Sri Lanka cost a prime minister his office. Needless to say, it was at a time when the erosion of democracy had not plunged to its current pitiful state and politics was the realm of gentlemen and gentlewomen.

That hartal, in then-Ceylon, was a general strike which was organised by Marxist parties to express public dissatisfaction over the rise in the cost of living. This was especially true of rice. Because of a severe shortage of rice, the Ceylonese government had rationed rice and introduced government rice subsidies to keep the price of rice stable in the face of a fluctuating world market. By 1952, subsidies had accounted for 20 percent of government expenditure. In July 1953, Prime Minister Dudley Senanayake of the United National Party drastically reduced subsidies, causing the price of rice to triple.

The Marxist parties, unlike today, enjoyed some degree of public confidence and the countrywide strike gained momentum. The Dudley Senanayake government had no option but to contain the opposition-sponsored general strike. The government’s drastic measures to suppress public agitation took their toll and left ten people dead. This forced then Prime Minister Dudley Senanayake, considered the most democratic leader Sri Lanka has ever produced within its short space of history since independence, to resign.

Soon after Senanayake’s resignation, Sir John Kotalawala was sworn in as the new prime minister.  He restored the subsidy partially. The hartal symbolised general public dissatisfaction with the rule of the United National Party. The opposition Marxist-Leninist parties failed to capitalise on the burgeoning situation but were exploited by the SWRD Bandaranaike-led Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP). However, the SLFP was ably supported by the Trotskyite Philip Gunawardene, who at the time was known as the Lion of Boralugoda.

The Sri Lanka Freedom Party, which rose to power at the next general election held in 1956, took populist measures to keep their fivefold force called “pancha maha balawegaya,” comprising the Buddhist religious fraternity—Sangha; the native and ayurvedic doctors—Veda; the teachers that impart knowledge to the children in the Sinhala medium—Guru; and the farmers—Govi, and the working class – Kamkaru- intact.

Bandaranaike formed the Mahajana Eksath Peramuna, a coalition of four parties, along with Philip Gunawardene and other Marxist parties, with a no-contest pact to win the 1956 elections.

He made Sinhala the official language to appease hardline nationalist forces which supported him. He also took steps to break away from the colonial past, but was saddled with many issues relating to governance due to labour unrest.

Late, the prime minister faced the wrath of his close associates including the Ven. Buddharakkitha of the Kelaniya Rajamaha Viharaya over issues involving governance.

Prime SWRD Bandaranaike was assassinated in September 1959 by Talduwe Somarama, one of the Buddhist monks who ostensibly helped Bandaranaike’s political success.

That was the nature of politics, and it was the first time a head of government was assassinated by the very people who elected him.

In 1968, police opened fire at an opposition demonstration, killing young Buddhist monk Damabrawe Ratansara.

State oppression of peaceful demonstrations has been widespread. One of the landmark cases involving the fundamental rights provisions enshrined in the constitution is known to date as the Vivienne Gunawardene case. In this case, the Supreme Court found fault with the Kollupitiya Police for the unlawful arrest of one of the LSSP’s leader’s, Vivienne Gunawardene. She was the sister of Philip Gunawardene and the aunt of current Prime Minister Dinesh Gunawardene.

In this case, the Supreme Court awarded compensation to the petitioner, Vivenne Gunawardene.

After the court found that the Kollupitiya police had violated the fundamental rights of Vivienne Gunawardene, the government promptly promoted the guilty officer and paid the fine. Then it demonstrated against the judges, using SLTB buses to carry the mob.

When it became apparent that the government’s behaviour was anathema to the people, a man named Kalu Lucky appeared at one of the leading newspaper companies, the Lake House. He claimed he was responsible for the demonstration against the judges and that it had nothing to do with the government. However, he wanted to show that anarchy results, when the courts censured the police who dealt firmly with demonstrators.

At the end of the day, a journalist and a photographer from the Sun newspaper visited the house of “Kalu Lucky” to find a picture of the wedding of Kalu Lucky and the bride, with two government VIPs of the day sitting on either side of the couple.

Though Kalu Lucky claimed responsibility for stoning judges’ residences, the Attorney General at the time, Siva Pashupathi, was unable to frame charges against the main suspect Kalu, who was indeed lucky. This was for unknown reasons, or maybe government pressure. In any case, there were no eyewitnesses to the incident or sufficient evidence against the culprits.

Kalu Lucky was a member of the JVP. He was later sentenced to five years’ imprisonment by the Criminal Justice Commission. He was named the 29th accused in the JVP rebellion case. Subsequently, he joined the UNP and was involved in various projects at the Colombo Port.

Another interesting fundamental rights case was filed by Ven. Darmitipola Ratanasara Thero against then Gampha Police Superintendent Premadasa Udugampola. The Gampaha Police had been accused of seizing 20,000 leaflets printed by the Pavadi Handa Organization. These leaflets were against the holding of a referendum to extend the life of parliament in 1982, soon after the presidential election. This was shortly after President J.R. Jayewardene secured the position for a second term.

Compensation was awarded to Pavadi Handa by a Supreme Court bench comprising five judges.

The fundamental rights provision was first incorporated into the constitution in 1978, after then-President J.R. Jayewardene drafted a revised constitution to replace the first republican constitution of 1972.

The provision was incorporated as Article 126 of the constitution with a stipulated time frame to file cases. Since then, there has been a flood of applications over the years. In these applications, the Supreme Court has dispensed justice and upheld the rights of the people whenever they were threatened by repressive regimes in power.

The latest court case has been initiated against two police officers, Roshan Dias and Nalin Dilruk. These officers obstructed mourners taking part in a commemorative ceremony in remembrance of those who sacrificed their lives to the Aragalaya.

The remembrance was held on Galle Face Green until a police party headed by these two officers obstructed it.

Journalist Tahrindu Jayawardana filed a private lawsuit against the two senior police officers, and the court issued notice for their appearance in court.

However, the Attorney General, through a motion, brought the matter up before Fort Magistrate Thilina Gamage on Tuesday. In the motion, the Attorney General said that the complainant had misrepresented material facts to the court and requested the court to recall the summons.

The following day, President of the Bar Association and President’s Counsel Saliya Pieris took up the matter before the Colombo Fort Magistrate’s Court. He made submissions to the effect that the Attorney General was not a person with special privileges.

 

Expressing his dissatisfaction regarding the Attorney General’s request to recall the summons issued to SSP Roshan Dias and ASP Nalin Dilruk, Mr. Pieris said it is a flawed precedent for the Attorney General to obtain an ex-parte order through a motion when he is not a party to a private complaint filed against two police officers.

On October 21, the Colombo Fort Magistrate decided to issue summonses to two police officers over an alleged criminal charge where they wrongly prevented and obstructed a peaceful protest near Galle Face on October 10.

However, filing a motion before the court on Tuesday 1st November, Senior State Counsel Shaminda Wickrema appearing for the Attorney General, moved the court to recall the summons issued against the two senior police officers. He said the order to issue summons had been obtained by misrepresenting facts.

Filing a motion in respect of a private complaint filed by a citizen is a bad precedent created by the Attorney General. BASL President Pieris said the Attorney General should have informed the complainant or the complainant’s lawyer if the case had to be called by motion.

Saliya Pieris PC then moved to reject the Attorney General’s submissions. This was to the effect that the order to issue summonses against two police officers had been obtained by misrepresenting facts.

Lawyers and professionals held a peaceful protest to condemn police behaviour toward those who participated in a commemoration on October 9. This commemoration was to honour those who died and were injured in the Aragalaya protests.

According to Jayawardena, police prevented the participants from proceeding further when they were entitled to do so because they had obtained prior permission.

On Wednesday as well, police obstructed a peaceful protest organised by opposition parties against the rising cost of living and other issues that caused human suffering. This included the need for a parliamentary general election to elect a new government of the people’s choice. The opposition argument was that the mandate given by the people to this government has expired and the shelf life of the government has ended.

US Ambassador Julie Chung in a twitter message, said there should be democratic space for peaceful protests that are considered legitimate in any vibrant democracy.

However, a police team led by Senior Deputy Inspector General of Police Deshabndu Tennekoon directed senior officers in charge of divisions to suppress the demonstration because it may gather momentum throughout the country. The senior police officers in no uncertain terms told the senior DIG that they would be unable to carry out illegal orders and face consequences in a personal capacity. They declined to carry out any order outside the ambit of the Police Ordinance and the normal laws of the country.

The government should explain the rationale behind their action on Wednesday and why they had to act in an unrealistic manner to break a peaceful demonstration to voice the people’s concerns.

Public protests are a way of letting people’s steam off. In that sense, there should be democratic space available for people’s actions.

 

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here