NEC guidelines on new appointments must extend to demands of striking workers, too
With the announcement last week that the UNPs Presidential candidate will be Sajith Premadasa, there will be an inevitable increase in the tempo of campaigning by the respective aspirants, for the plum on November 17.
The onus will now shift to the National Elections Commission (NEC), whose main task will be to create a level playing field, which will enable all contestants to get their messages across to the people, so that, the voter will be able to make an informed decision, when exercising his/her franchise.
At the last Presidential Election, the NEC played a major role in ensuring that the election process was not distorted in favour of one party or the other. With the opening up of the democratic space in the country, after January 2015, the NEC will be better positioned to ensure that all contenders conform to election rules and refrain from election malpractices.
One of the already visible interventions of the NEC is in the area of Government appointments and filling of vacancies in Government Departments. It has already clearly laid down the rule that no new appointments can be made, nor can a new recruitment process be started, now that the run up to the Presidential Elections has commenced. Only appointments made after a process, that began well before the Presidential Elections process began, will be permitted. The NEC has already directed that several appointments, which, in its opinion, do not conform to these guidelines, be put on hold.
The rationale behind such thinking is that, such appointments made after the Election process has commenced, could give an undue advantage to the Government in office, and could be an attempt to unduly influence the electoral process.
The question that immediately comes to mind is whether the same considerations should be applied by the NEC, when responding to the rash of strikes and satyagrahas that have suddenly been launched.
Disabled soldiers have been engaged in a satyagraha for nearly 3 weeks. The Railway workers, the Teachers trade unions, the Doctors unions and the administrative staff of government departments have suddenly launched strike action to win over various salary demands, as well as to correct salary anomalies. Other than in the case of the disabled soldiers, where there is little or no inconvenience caused to the public, all the other trade union actions are causing a great deal of difficulties for the citizenry, by resorting to strike action in this manner.
There are also allegations that some of these strikes are orchestrated for political purposes, to create a sense of anarchy that will reflect on the Government’s capacity to govern.
In the case of the disabled soldiers, what lends credence to these allegations is the identity of those who visit the satyagrahis, to express solidarity and support for their cause. Almost all of them are politicians and former military officers drawn from the Opposition ranks.
Besides, the question also arises with regard to the timing of the satyagraha. The armed conflict ended in 2009, and the issue of payment of full salaries to such disabled officers, until their death, could have been addressed immediately after the conclusion of the armed conflict.
The fact that this reasonable claim is sought to be canvassed on the eve of a Presidential Election, suggests that it is designed to embarrass the Government, rather than actually win such a demand. The fact that once the Government took a decision to grant the demand of full salaries during their entire lifetime for disabled soldiers, a fresh demand is now being made for such salaries to be paid to their dependents, upon the death of the disabled soldier, is suggestive of a hidden political hand being behind such a move.
The demands made by the other striking workers also gives rise to several issues. There is no real urgency for the demands to be granted on the eve of the Elections. It very much looks like an attempt to coerce the Government and extract the proverbial pound of flesh, at a time when an incumbent Government is vulnerable, just prior to an election.
The question will also arise whether the same considerations that apply with regard to new appointments, will apply, if the Government grants the demands of any of the trade unions. Such action on the part of the Government can be construed as ensuring an advantage to an incumbent regime, by influencing the benefiting workers to support the incumbent Government. Additionally, a reckless or irresponsible Government can simply give in to these demands, without a proper evaluation of the demands and its impact on the economy.
If the NEC intervenes and persuades the striking trade unions to desist from strike action now, it will benefit the long suffering public, by enabling them to get about their day to day lives, without inconvenience. The workers interests could be safeguarded by ensuring that the new President, if he is of the view that the demands are reasonable and should be granted, does so with retrospective effect from the date the action was launched.
From a future perspective, it may be wise for an incoming Government to bring in Legislation to ensure that all defined trade union action ceases 3 months before the due date of an election.
The other big challenge the NEC faces is how it is going to ensure that the media plays its part in helping the voter to make informed decisions, in the exercise of his/ her franchise. The NEC will have to ensure, not only a balanced coverage, where all parties can take their message to the people, but also make sure that false and distorted news are not published, so as to mislead voters.
When issuing media guidelines, the NEC will also have to be mindful of the likelihood of the propagation of hate speech, which is likely to be used to promote the electoral fortunes of a candidate. Taking the past record of the Elections Department, as well as the NEC, the voter can be confident that the NEC will take a strong stand on these matters. ( javidyusuf@gmail.com)