It is reported that compensation is to be paid to UNP supporters who were subjected to election violence down the years. According to Rehabilitation Minister D.M. Swaminathan steps would be taken to grant compensation on behalf of all UNPers who lost their lives and to those who lost their property and belongings due to pre and post election violence. This will also include UNP members whose properties were damaged during the violent incidents in the aftermath of the Nalanda Ellawala killing in Ratnapura in 1995. Compensation will also be paid to the next of kin of the 28 UNP supporters killed alongside Major General Janaka Perera and his wife in Anuradhapura in 2008.
Compensating victims of election violence is well and good. But why does this have to be so? Election violence has been accepted here as a matter of course. Post election violence has been the norm in this country, all along, since Independence. But this state of affairs took a serious turn in 1970 which set the tone for the nature and severity of post election violence that was witnessed since then. Not only were the houses and property of the UNP supporters burnt down, there were also killings and other atrocities committed on the vanquished. Not only that, UNP supporters were driven out of their workplaces and/ or victimized in the way of punishment transfers. The revenge continued in other forms as well and extended even to the artistes who were on the UNP election platform.
Things took a turn for the worse following the UNP's landslide victory in 1977 with post election violence surging to an unprecedented level. The greens, who were languishing in the opposition and the victimized in various ways, had clearly been waiting for their turn. Matters were not helped with JRJ declaring he would give the police one week's leave after the election.
This set the tone for things to come, with the public now accepting election violence as a routine happening in this country. The PR system has exacerbated matters, with post election violence that had hitherto been accepted as the norm giving way to pre-poll violence with intra-party battles for the manapey where members of the same party go for each other's jugular, often ending with violence and even killings.
It is time that something is done to put an end to this shameful state of affairs. Is the state planning to continue paying compensation to the victims after each election? Is so, isn't this suggesting that post election violence is a natural phenomenon in this country and something that has to be taken in its stride? Will there be no end to this? Even in India, with a population of 1.2 billion, one hardly hears of post election killings, although elections are keenly fought in that country. Here we boast of a proud civilization dating back 2500 years and a country which is home to a religion that preaches tolerance and equanimity but whose citizens cannot accept the verdict of an election without killing each other.
It is time that something is done to put an end to election violence in this country. Severe punishment should be meted out to the perpetrators of election violence and the politicians who incite them. Compensation is being paid out of public funds and it is ironic indeed that the general public is called upon to pocket out on behalf of their own representatives who instigate the violence. The quality of the present day politicians too is a major contributory factor in the rising incidents of election violence. The thug, criminal, the bootlegger has taken refuge in politics and invariably find their way into the country's supreme legislature. The manner in which these elements conduct themselves in parliament, the language they use, certainly appeal to the baser instincts of their followers, egging them onto violence. Ironically these characters are indispensable to their party leaders for their muscle power that bring in the votes. What is more, their kith and kin, or progeny, are occupying seats in the provincial councils waiting in the wings to someday replace their papas and mamas in parliament. Things can only go from bad to worse.
The so called election monitors have proved impotent in the face of rampant election violence in recent times. They only mark their presence to earn their dollars, after producing reports that are far removed from the ground situation. Hence an internal mechanism is needed to combat this menace that keeps escalating in intensity. The irony of it all is that while supporters of political parties kill each other during elections the main actors give up their rivalries, once elected, and become bosom pals sharing in the spoils at public expense, ladling themselves the gravy liberally though outwardly posturing as political enemies. This duplicity is amply demonstrated in parliament when friend and foe join hands to vote in favour of the perks.
Be that as it may, concrete measures should be taken to eradicate election violence in this country and put an end to the violent political culture.
Add new comment