CMC-the winners should have it

It shows no signs of ending, but the Colombo Municipal Council fiasco has already become a political farce that beat all others for sheer comedy. But, nevertheless the political lessons that can be learnt from it are legion.

Some are obvious, such as the fact that the election laws should be redesigned. But others delve into the core issues of democratic franchise.

As we write, we are not sure what exact shape or form the CMC administration will take. When all the kidnappings are done, and all the resignations filed, there may be a CMC that is largely unrecognizable to the voters, who cast their ballot for those on the list. It's the slow process of fracturing of the democratic process that is leading to the possibility of such a state of affairs in the city.

Nobody who is involved in the process of giving shape to a future CMC administration seems to have stopped for a moment to think of what the voters wanted in the first place. Nomination lists may have been rejected at the outset - and the result would have been the gradual enactment of a farcical election.

But as things stood at the time of the poll, the voters had a clear choice. The race turned out essentially to be one between a group of independents and the candidates from an established political party.

The Independents won, and matters should have worked themselves out to a simple denouement. But in certain quarters, there was no intention of letting the democratic process take its course. In the context of events that took place preceding the poll, the events that took place after it look part of a chaotic plan to short circuit the process of free and democratic franchise with a clear view to get one party to dominate the Council.

The Colombo voter is aghast. He may have voted for the Independents with a certain result in mind, but he never bargained for the total farce that ensued. This has led to a certain condition of cynicism among the Colombo ratepayers. They would think that its largely immaterial how their votes are cast in the matter of deciding who in effect runs the CMC. . Its cabal politics. This is the furthest it can get from democratic practice without recourse to outright violence.

A restoration of faith in the democratic process within the Colombo Municipal precincts needs a change of heart among the key players. Are they opening themselves to a situation that brings more anarchy, more litigation and more insecurity - added to piles more garbage - for the Colombo ratepayers? Do they or do they not want to instill goondaism permanently in the democratic body politic, by subverting democratic process to the point of the unworkable and absurd? If they do, they could incur the wrath of the Colombo voter when the spectator excitement for this kind of electoral sport has worn off.

When more rates are to be paid for less services there will be a plague upon all these houses. The only way out of this ignominy for all sides is to revert back to the fundamentals of democratic process. The party that won the highest number of seats should form the administration in the CMC.

This is not the path of least resistance - it's the path for least stress on the system that has already been stretched beyond capacity.. The form of democracy we know says the winner of the majority of seats should be able to run the body for which elections were held. Any other outcome is a simple subversion of democratic process, and should not be countenanced by those who want a city of Colombo that's functional if not marginally livable.

****

NYT method?

A New York Times writer starts her article on Sri Lanka by saying - in a recent issue of the newspaper -that the bad blood in Sri Lanka began with the Buddha.

No better introduction than this then, to introduce the reader to the general crassness of news feature writing in some of the world's more reputed newspapers. Simply put, there is no need - none whatsoever - to drag the Buddha into a conflict that's between a state and a group that is being increasingly outlawed in a global sense. This is misplaced journalistic ardour of cataclysmic proportions. It makes it pathetic to see that there is media culture that tolerates this kind of crass insensitivity and hyperbole.

It is nothing but exaggeration to place the Buddha in the crosshairs of a very rudimentary conflict between a group of armed men and a government. But the writing is only symptomatic of the larger malaise. If the Buddha can be dragged into the media circus quite like this, it doesn't need a keen imagination to envisage what canons of fairplay govern this kind of journalism that takes place in the New York Times and some other publications in the West which have only one consideration in selling the news - that of the pocketbook.

Sensationalism sells, and crass sensationalism of this sort is fairly the recipe for enhancing tabloid circulation. But the moot issue is, is the New York Times facing a circulation crisis, to end up using these kind of tactics to brighten up the paper's revenue columns?