Can educational qualifications be prescribed for parliamentarians?
Every nation is supposed to have the
government it deserves. Does it mean the type of Parliament we currently have
is what we Sri Lankans deserve? Technically it cannot be so with a highly
literate population and a history of a high level of education even from the
colonial times. Then what went wrong?
By Gamini Abeywardane
The
diminishing standards of our parliamentarians have been a matter of grave
concern to many in the recent times. The apathy of many MPs towards vital
economic and national issues, the poor contribution they make through their
parliamentary speeches and worst of all rowdy and unruly behaviour of some of
them have triggered the question whether it is possible to lay down some
minimum educational qualifications for parliamentarians.
Many ask, if
you need a paper qualification even for the lowest rank job in the public
sector how can one become a member of the highest law making body without any
such qualification. Their question sounds logical and reasonable.
However the
issue is, in a democracy where universal franchise and equality are highly
regarded it is not possible to deprive any person of the opportunity to become
a representative of his or her people purely on the ground of educational
qualifications. Probably that is why most democracies in the world do not have
such limitations.
This
position has been recognized by Section 90
of our Constitution which states that every person who is
qualified to be an elector shall be qualified to be elected as a Member of
Parliament unless he is disqualified under the provisions of Article 91. That
literally means if you have the right to vote you also have the right to stand
for election as a Member of the Parliament.
Therefore
under our law it is not possible to stipulate educational qualifications for
parliamentarians. In our neighbouring India the situation is quite different
although they do not legally stipulate such qualifications. About 75 per cent
of MPs in the current Lok Sabha have at least a graduate degree, while 10 per
cent are only matriculates, according to a report by PRS Legislative Research (https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/topic/PRS)
The Union
Cabinet always consists of highly educated academics and professionals mostly
with multiple qualifications. The current Cabinet of Narendra Modi who himself
holds a Master’s Degree has 25 members out of which two have doctorates, six
have postgraduate qualifications, 12 are
graduates while only five have not received university level education.
Every nation
is supposed to have the government it deserves. Does it mean the type of
Parliament we currently have is what we Sri Lankans deserve? Technically it cannot
be so with a highly literate population and a history of a high level of
education even from the colonial times. Then
what went wrong?
Terrorism factor
There are
several possible reasons and prime among them is the terrorism factor, specifically
that of the LTTE which posed a threat to the ruling class. In short they
eliminated the best of our potential leaders -- men like Lalith Athulathmudali, Gamini
Dissanayake, C V Gooneratne, Denzil Kobbekaduwa, Janaka Perera, Lukshman
Kadirgamar who could have changed the destinies of our country.
When a
country has educated leaders at the top level they in turn tend to attract
like-minded people for the important positions and the chain reaction goes on encouraging
more and more educated and decent professionals into the system. The best way
to weaken a country or its government is to destroy its best leaders both the
current and the potential.
The LTTE
tried to achieve it by eliminating the clever, educated and pragmatic potential
leaders from the south and with that threat no good men entered politics for
several decades. So the vacuum was filled with those closely connected to
existing politicians and their cohorts often promoted from the local and
provincial government levels.
On the other
hand the LTTE was very careful about whom they wanted to eliminate. They
targeted the broadminded and liberal politicians with a vision for sorting out
the main issues confronting the country while leaving out the mediocre ones.
They never touched the peripheral, communal and chauvinistic ones whom they
thought would ultimately help their plans in the north.
PR system of voting
The much
maligned Proportional Representation system of voting is another major reason
which has discouraged good and educated men from entering politics both at
national and local level. In the earlier first- past-the-post system, a good
man with some reputation could always aspire to enter the Parliament with a
reasonable amount of campaigning within his electorate which is geographically
not a vast area.
The
campaigning or canvassing in such an area could be done without much cost and moreover
if the candidate is from the same electorate it became quite easy because the
person is already known in the area. With the introduction of the PR system the
electorate has become larger and now it’s one whole administrative district.
Campaigning
in such an area is not possible without a colossal amount of money and unlike
in the early days soon after independence, now it’s the corrupt that have more
money and inevitably the good and the educated are not able to compete with
such people and win an election.
Then there
is the National List which is expected to be a platform to accommodate some
educated members who are able to make useful contribution to national life
although the Constitution does not lay down any specific criterion for these
appointments. Unfortunately this list is also is being misused as a means of
appointing candidates rejected by the people at national elections as Members
of Parliament.
In such a
situation it is not fair to blame the people for electing wrong members to
Parliament. The kind of Parliament we have now is not what the people deserve,
it is an electoral outcome distorted by the LTTE’s terrorism through its
systematic elimination and made worse by the PR system of voting. Now the LTTE
menace is over and we should at least modify the existing PR system if we want
to have a set of better parliamentarians and consequently a better government.
Yes, we cannot look forward to good governance without a set of good Parliamentarians. Here, I recall a question posed by someone on the Facebook: "How can we vote for horses if they field only donkeys?" Political party leaders are also to be blamed for the current state of sorry affairs. If we are to get the same set of corrupt politicians once again, it would mean the doom of the Parliamentary Democracy!
ReplyDeleteGamini has raised a sane voice! Let it not be a cry in the wilderness!
ReplyDelete