Getting modalities right for SJB/NPP debate crucial

The two main opposition parties, the Samagi Jana Balawegaya (SJB) and the JVP-led National People’s Power (NPP) have been going to and fro on the proposed debate between the leaders of the two parties, namely Sajith Premadasa and Anura Kumara Dissanayake.

In the latest twist, the NPP has given several dates in May during which the party says Dissanayake will be available for the debate. SJB MP Nalin Bandara who was appointed to coordinate the proposed debate on behalf of Premadasa is yet non-committal on if the dates will be acceptable to the SJB or not.

One to one debates between candidates who are running for the office of President in Sri Lanka are a novelty. So far all we have had are candidates challenging one another to a debate and then making every possible excuse to avoid such a debate. Misgivings politicians have over such a debate are understandable given it is not clear how and who would conduct such a debate.

In the United States where presidential debates take centre stage ahead of elections to the Office of President, they have been sponsored, since 1988, by the Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD), a private, independent organisation which is not controlled by any political party or outside organisation, and does not endorse, support, or oppose political candidates or parties.

The CPD’s primary mission is to ensure, for the benefit of the American electorate, that election debates are held every four years between and among the leading candidates for the offices of President and Vice President of the United States.

In Sri Lanka we have no such independent organisation.

So far, many media organisations have reached out to both Premadasa and Dissanayake saying they are willing to sponsor the debate. In the US, the CPD selects the moderators several weeks before the debates and those chosen are based on their familiarity with the candidates and the major issues of the presidential campaign, extensive experience in live television broadcast news, and an understanding that the debate should focus maximum time and attention on the candidates and their views.

These are tough conditions to fulfil in a Sri Lanka context because getting all media organisations to agree on who should moderate is going to be even more difficult than getting the candidates to agree to such a debate.

The purpose of such a debate is to educate the voter and give the public the opportunity to get a clearer view of the policies of each candidate. Hence the focus should be on that and not on pushing the agendas of either the candidates or the organisations involved.

We can assume the debate will be conducted in Sinhala but there must be simultaneous translations into Tamil and English so that the debate has wide reach while it must also be decided as to who would be the participants from among the public and if they would have the opportunity to ask questions from the candidates as well.

Even if such a debate is to take place, it is too early given that the presidential election is not due till October and there would be other candidates who will vie for the office of President. Hence a debate between these two candidates is premature given they are yet to release their election manifestos, the contents of which should be the focus of any such debate.

While transparency and openness among candidates is welcome, getting the modalities right for such a debate is more important if it is to be a credible process. Otherwise instead of public praise, it could draw public ridicule.