Surrendering your NIC ahead of polls

Acouple of years ago during a local government election campaign, a group of activists from the then ruling party came visiting houses in the Nugegoda/ Nawala area with the usual greetings and one ‘ strange’ question: “How many of the occupants registered as voters are working abroad or living abroad?”

When they walked into the garden of a journalist, his angry response to this, then peculiar question coming from a group that was not authorized to ask such questions, was, “Why do you want to know. What authority do you have?” First surprised with the response, they hemmed and hawed with an ‘ Err … Sir … just… No, for our information…” When the journalist went on the offensive, declaring that “they were trying to elicit this information to note the number of voters overseas, and then use these votes illegally…,” they beat a hasty retreat.

A few months ago, a policeman in a particular village in the Puttalam district was repeatedly harassing a livealone woman whose husband was working abroad and demanding sexual favours. Fearing for her safety, she filed a complaint with a higher police authority and eventually the corrupt officer was transferred.

These are some of the serious issues that would arise and threaten the safety and security of families where one parent is living abroad, if the Government goes ahead with a decision asking Sri Lankans to surrender their NIC ( identity card) to the Commissioner of the Registration of Persons Department or his designated nominees ( that is the Police or other authorised persons) if they are staying abroad for over six months.

The decision, reported in our sister Sunday newspaper Deshaya last week, says that under an early- 1971 amendment to the Registration of Persons Act, the department is authorised to ask citizens to hand over their NICs if they plan to stay overseas for more than six months.

This provision in the law hasn’t been enforced ( as far as we are aware) in the past nearly 40 years and was introduced at a time when overseas travel was not only a luxury but restricted ( during Sirimavo Bandaranaike’s 1970- 1977 closeddoors economic policy when foreign exchange was limited). It was an era where there was no free market, no Sri Lankan migrant workers and travel restrictions. This provision was apparently introduced at a time when the then- JVP during the 1971 insurgency were forcibly collecting ID cards and the Government wanted to prevent this situation.

The situation today has taken a 360-degree turn with more than two million Sri Lankans (one out of every 20 persons) working or resident overseas and another million of more travelling overseas every year on holiday, business or short- term assignments. Imagine enforcing the rule in today’s (as-described earlier) environment? It is on one side unmanageable, to say the least, and on the other ( more serious) hand, dangerous and a threat to an individual and his family, and their privacy.

The newspaper report said this provision was being applied from November onwards. It was apparently announced at a media briefing by M. Sarath Kumara, the Commissioner of the Registration of Person Department and is effective from November 1.

Yet there are no public no- tices in the media or through a gazette notification ( as far as we are aware) to inform the people.

Laws need to be attuned to modern needs and this administrative decision is incongruous with present day needs particularly since a war situation doesn’t arise today. The Government has its own reasons for this but rationale thinking is certainly not part of it. Stupidity, deviousness and for political reasons, yes!

One can only surmise that in the absence of any public notices of a very serious decision, this could be connected to forthcoming presidential elections and, hence is a politically- related move. How? Using the ‘votes’ of the 1-2 million people!

Look at the scenario that would evolve if this is already in force (and hopefully it is not as yet): Word gets out from the nearest police station ( and that’s not too difficult to fathom in today’s ‘ rule of law and its selective application process) that people are away or some members of the family are away.

This is just the kind of information for criminal elements to rob, resort to rape or other harm, threaten and extort money, and other unimaginable crimes.

In today’s context a safe and secure environment to live peacefully asserting one’s rights under the Constitution of Sri Lanka is still not fully existent.

Law- enforcing authorities (most of the officers at least) are either corrupt or take a long time to investigate a complaint, and that too impartially. Political influence and the right connections take precedence over the enforcement of the law in many instances. That’s an absolute fact.

During an election, this information ( of voters being abroad) could be used by any political party to use the absence of voters for vote rigging and bogus persons casting ballots. It has happened in the past and this time there is a level of desperation amongst government politicians.

No more would ruffiantype groups, promoting their political masters, come to your homes seeking information on whether any inmates are abroad.

With the right ( political) connections that information is available and easily gettable at the police station or even the Grama Sevaka ( who may be an authorised person to receive surrendered NICs).

The next time when these ruffians come to your home it won’t be at daytime or through a knock on the door and an invitation to come inside.

It would be at night, breaking a window or easing open the door for robbery or other unlawful purposes. There is no way the authorities can convince the public that the surrender of an individual’s NIC under the provisions of the law is aimed at eliminating some kind of abuse ( of the kind not stated in this editorial). Rather it paves the way for more crimes to happen with the activation of this process being offered on a platter and an incentive to criminals, rapists and voteriggers.

Unfortunately Sri Lanka’s opposition is not smart enough or ineffective to spot these dangerous trends. Civil society groups have also not raised their voice – rather more pre- occupied with the forthcoming polls.

As it often happens, the public at large is at the mercy of another dangerous law that has escaped the attention of today’s do- gooders in society to even register a meet protest.