Potential of local government system in contributing to ethnic reconciliation

By Dr. Laksiri Fernando

Asian Tribune: Two of the major requirements of ethnic reconciliation in Sri Lanka at present are ‘democratisation’ and ‘development,’ particularly in the north and the east, and rest of the country. Both of these objectives require multilayered and multifaceted approaches and the present article highlights the potential of the local government system in contributing to both of these objectives.

In addition, the local government institutions can conduct educational and multicultural programmes to bring different communities together, for example, like in many parts of Australia.

As the last article by the same author on ‘Strengthening of Horizontal Democracy Can be a Way of Reconciliation in Sri Lanka’ (Asian Tribune, 1 July 2011) has argued, the postponement and withholding of elections to the local government institutions between 1977 and 1988, among other related matters, could be considered one of the ‘root causes’ that led to the Tamil insurgency in the country. The suppression of democratic space at local level was the reason.

Thereafter, the civil war conditions in the north east prevented the holding of elections, while the local government institutions in other areas were functioning.

It is in this backdrop that the holding of the local government elections for the remaining 67 councils today (23 July 2011) should be completely ‘free and fair’ and the alleged military interference at a Tamil National Alliance (TNA) meeting in Jaffna on 16 June is completely counterproductive to the reconciliation efforts to say the least.

Present system

The local government system in Sri Lanka has a long and a strong history whatever the deviations in recent times. Although the ancient and the British introduced system differed greatly in form and detail, the essence was to recognise the importance of local people in governance depending on the period, circumstances and political principles. The present system is a combination of different influences, and a system in transition.

The initial five layer system (1924-1987) was converted into a three layer system in 1987 and what exist at present are Divisional Councils (Pradeshiya Sabhas), Urban Councils and Municipal Councils. In this conversion, the earlier village councils and town councils were amalgamated to create Divisional Councils and they could be considered the backbone of the local government system in the island representing over 85 per cent of the population. There are 79 local government councils in the North and the East.

Although the territorial areas of some of the Divisional Councils may appear unduly large for normal local governance as several of former village councils were amalgamated together to create one divisional council, one merit is the convergence between those areas and the areas of the Divisional Secretariats. The Divisional Secretariats are the primary units of the general state administration after the District from the Centre.

The concurrence between the central administration and local governance might not be that important in a developed country. However, in a transitional society, and economy, like in Sri Lanka, a close cooperation between these two layers or any other intermediary layer like the Provincial Councils is important. Close synergy should be the principle. What has to be careful about nevertheless in the process of reconciliation is not to interfere in the local government activities by the Centre through the Divisional Secretariats or any other way, other than cooperation and coordination. The principle of ‘subsidiarity’ is important. What the local government could do should not be done by the Centre or even by the Provincial Councils.

Ethnic reconciliation and towards that objective, ‘democratisation’ and ‘development,’ should be worked out primarily at three levels of (1) national (2) provincial and (3) local. In other words, the effort should be to strengthen ‘horizontal democracy’ through provincial and local councils as the last article argued. The three layers of institutions that are responsible for these levels are the (1) Central Government (2) Provincial Councils and (3) Local Governments.

Any road map for reconciliation should take into account the necessary synergies between the three levels and workout policies, measures and strategies to achieve tangible reconciliation within a given time frame incrementally. The present placing of the local government system within the purview of the Provincial Councils under the 13th Amendment is an advantage in this respect.

The potential

The potential of local governments in ethnic reconciliation rests primarily on two factors. The first factor highlights not only the possibility but also the need. Around 80 per cent of local council areas are multiethnic in social composition to mean that over five per cent of the population comprises what could be called minorities. If the religion is also taken into account the above percentage is much higher. Even in the apparent homogeneous areas with less than five per cent of overall minorities, there are pockets of wards or townships which are multiethnic.

Although there had been no civilian-involved ethnic riots or conflicts in Sri Lanka after 1983 at the national level, there had been several recurrent ethnic riots between the Sinhalese and the Muslims or the Sinhalese and the hill-country Tamils in several localities in the South. Some of them are Mawanella, Bulathsinhala, Galle, Moneragala and Beruwela – to mention a few. In the conflict areas of the north and the east, the interethnic situation had been much worse. By 1985, all Sinhalese living in Jaffna had left.

In the Eastern Province, Kattankudi had been a major flash point in Tamil-Muslim relations and Trincomalee between the Tamils and the Sinhalese. In 1990, the infamous ethnic cleansing of the Muslims from the LTTE controlled areas took place. In ‘border’ areas of the north and the east there had always been ethnic tension and attacks.

In Colombo, a large number of Tamils are living side by side the Sinhalese and the Muslims, and Wellawatte is a very good example. Kandy is the same with a different ethnic composition. Although there had been no riots or overt conflicts since 1983 in these two major cities, the relations could not be considered cordial or warm. This is where the local councils could do much to improve ethnic reconciliation.

If there had been multiethnic or multicultural programmes in existence – suitable to the conditions in Sri Lanka – in the past, conducted by the local councils, the riots and conflicts in places like Bulathsinhala or Beruwela could have been possibly avoided. Similar programmes in Colombo and Kandy could have gone a long way in ameliorating the adverse ethnic relations in general.

The second factor that speaks to the potential role of the local government institutions in ethnic reconciliation highlights the largely underutilised tasks of the local councils in democratisation and development. There cannot be any doubt that the local councils are the primary (formal) institutions of democracy in Sri Lanka. This is recognised by the ‘Mahinda Chinthana,’ the political programme of the present ruling party and the President.

Local politics is the nursery for national politics. If reconciliation cannot be forged at the local levels, it would fail to materialise at the national level. There are some encouraging signs. The present local council election legislation prescribes that the parties which contest elections should nominate at least 40 per cent of candidates who are below the age of 35. Although this is not a guarantee for their elections, the past experience shows a good balance between the ‘old and the young’ in local councils as a result. Research also indicates that young generations are more positive on reconciliation than the older ones.

Unfortunately there is no similar prescription or quota for women in local councils, for example, like Panchayat in India. This should come through legislation or political party policy soon and it could go a long way in strengthening the role of the local councils in ethnic reconciliation. The conflicts apparently have a male underpinning. Female, if not feminist, perspectives might give a different approach to ethnic reconciliation.

A major flow of the present election system to local councils is connected with the Proportional Representation (PR). Apparently a good system in theory has created much distortion because of the abolition of ‘wards’ or ‘constituencies’ and the introduction of preferential voting. Without direct responsibility to a particular ward or constituency, the representatives can easily evade duty and commitment unlike in the past.

The preferential voting also has given rise to much undue competition and electoral violence. These are inimical to any reconciliation. Change of the electoral system sooner than later agreed now by many parties could strengthen the reconciliation process to the extent that it could be achieved by local councils.

Reconstruction and development

Traditionally, the role and functions of local government institutions included (1) health and sanitation, (2) construction and maintenance of local roads, (3) housing and matters related to housing, (4) public markets, parks, libraries, and (5) other utility services to the citizens. All these matters are listed in detail in respective Ordinances for Divisional Councils, Urban Councils and Municipal Councils under “promotion of comfort, convenience, and welfare of the people”.

For example, Section 3 of the Pradeshiya Sabha (Divisional Council) Ordinance particularly says the following: “The Pradeshiya Sabha constituted for each Pradeshiya Sabha area shall be the local authority within such area and be charged with the regulation, control and administration of all matters relating to public health, public utility services and public thoroughfares and generally with the protection and promotion of the comfort, convenience and welfare of the people and all amenities within such area.”

The above functions per se would not contribute to ethnic reconciliation, even if the elected councils do possess enough resources to get involved in the reconstruction process in the North and the East. As a result of the long drawn out war in these areas, public health, public utility services or public thoroughfares are completely devastated not to speak of ‘comforts or conveniences’ of the public.

As the experience of the limited number of elected local councils in the Eastern Province since 2008 shows they did not have (enough) resources and the reconstruction process under the ‘Nagenahira Navodaya’ (‘Eastern Awakening’) was largely conducted from Colombo.

This might be the case even in the north in respect of what is called ‘Uthuru Wasanthaya’ or ‘Northern Spring’ even after the election of all local councils in the north in the near future. This is an area where more constructive cooperation should be established between the efforts of the central government and the local government system. Even if the major projects are conducted by the line ministry/ministries, the active participation of local councils would be immensely useful to establish confidence, ownership and accountability. Transparency might be another benefit of the cooperation.

 

(Dr. Laksiri Fernando is currently a Visiting Scholar at the University of Sydney.)

There is a clear objective in the ‘Mahinda Chinthana’ to transform 16,000 existing villages into prosperous economic units by 2016. This might not be feasible without the active cooperation of the local councils. Moreover, there is the objective of building 150,000 homes for the internally displaced people (IDP) particularly in the north and the east.

Beyond reconstruction, the development of the north and the east and also other provinces is of primary importance for ethnic reconciliation at the national level. If uneven development was a major reason why the relatively deprived youth joined the armed separatist insurrection, ‘balanced regional development’ is the only way for long term ethnic and social reconciliation.

There are areas where the local government institutions could contribute in economic development and employment programmes. Section 19 of the Act in this respect is quite flexible. Paragraph 20 empowers the councils “to organise employment programmes for the inhabitants of the Pradeshiya Sabha area”.

Paragraph 24 specifies in which areas the councils could “engage in commercial and industrial enterprises for the manufacture and production of such machinery, equipment, articles; materials and goods”. These are at present limited to materials and goods “required for the public services or the public utility services”.

However a more liberal interpretation of the above and other sections and the possibility of Provincial Councils or Colombo approving the required projects might give the local councils particularly in the north and the east to engage extensively in reconstruction and development work in the respective areas. Allowing them to engage in such activities also might be a way of reconciliation of relations and confidence between Colombo and the north east.

Reconciliation

Ethnic reconciliation in any country is a constructive task that should be performed with a sense of commitment and expertise. Whether that commitment or expertise would be readily available in local councils after their elections is still a questionable matter. This is irrespective of the potential of the local government system in contributing to ethnic reconciliation.

So far there is no single known party contesting the forthcoming local government elections which has given a clear pledge for reconciliation in the country or in its area of contest. It might be the result of lack of commitment on the matter or lack of knowledge about the potential of the local government system in forging ethnic reconciliation. The elections are being held on the premises of traditional party politics and policies.

Nevertheless, the potential of converting the situation for a reconciliation process is not unlikely or impossible. The politicians need to be educated if reconciliation needs to be achieved. There is ample room for a strong ‘reconciliation movement’ in Sri Lanka as all the political parties at least overtly pronounce it as an objective. There are party members and many more followers in almost all the political parties recognising ‘ethnic reconciliation’ as a primary necessity. There are many more committed people among the general public.

There is at least one institution that is supposed to educate and train the local council members and the officials on such issues pertinent to the objectives of local government institutions. That is the Sri Lanka Institute of Local Governance (SLILG) which was created in 1995 particularly to promote good governance and public accountability. Reconciliation could be considered a part of good governance. Moreover, the legislation on local government institutions allows such councils to conduct multicultural activities within the rubric of ‘culture and religion’.

The relevant paragraph in Section 19 again specifies that the Divisional Councils have powers ‘to spend any part of their funds in the promotion of religion and culture… and the establishment of cultural centres, the organisation of literary and cultural festivals, the publication of books of literary and cultural value and the award of prizes to artists, authors and craftsmen’. While there is a clear bias in the said paragraph elsewhere towards the religion and culture of the majority, nevertheless it allows in the present circumstances to promote multicultural and if necessary multi-religious activities towards ethnic reconciliation.

The main objective of local councils, according to the legislation is “to provide greater opportunities for the people to participate effectively in decision making relating to administrative and development activities at a local level”. Most important possibility in the local government system towards reconciliation is the resurrection of the ‘committee system of governance’.

When the local government system was reorganised through a series of ordinances in 1936, it was moulded particularly in the form of all inclusive committees rather than having a monotonous ‘governing party’ and an ‘opposition’. This was akin to the British country councils or the Swiss committee system of government.

Although there had been several deviations from the collective system of governance since independence, still the local government legislation specifies rather mandatory committees and other committees even to include ‘competent outsiders’ in assisting the activities of the local governments.

Four mandatory committees under the Divisional Council system are:

(1) the finance and policy making

(2) housing and community development

(3) technical services and

(4) environment and amenities.

These committees may be important in soliciting cooperation of various representatives of different ethnic communities in a council although they might not be purely elected on the basis of ethnicity or religion.

The legislation also permits the Divisional Councils to appoint various other committees consisting of its own members or partly of members and partly of other respected individuals in the larger community. This may be an opportunity to set up ‘committees for ethnic reconciliation’ or related matters even soliciting the assistance of others such as professionals and senior citizens in the larger community.

What might be most important is to have programmes of activity to promote ethnic reconciliation in respective areas focusing on peace education, multiculturalism and tolerance of religion and culture. The language learning programmes of Sinhalese to the Tamils and Tamil to the Sinhalese might be immensely useful.

Conclusion

Ethnic reconciliation in Sri Lanka might not be an impossible task if there is political will and commitment. Political will needs to come from all sides, transcending ethnic affiliation and party politics. The general public appears to be fed up with ethnic rhetoric of all sides and sectarian politics to inflame ethnic passions. The past could be past if there is proper unity for the future. What the public most fear is the recurrence of the past.

While there are so many areas and avenues where ethnic reconciliation could be and should be forged, the present article focused only on one aspect highlighting the potential of the local government system in ethnic reconciliation. The current relevance of the emphasis is the forthcoming elections to the remaining 67 local government councils today (23 July).

The importance of local government institutions in ethnic reconciliation derives from seven main and interrelated reasons. They are:

(1) the fact that over 80 per cent of local government council areas is multiethnic,

(2) the local councils are the most closest to the people,

(3) the withholding of local government elections between 1977 and 1988 was a major ‘root cause’ of the insurgency in the north,

(4) as the experience shows, the localised ethnic conflicts after 1983 could have been avoided if there had been reconciliation efforts at local levels,

(5) the possibility that local government institutions in the north and the east – 79 altogether – could directly participate in the ongoing reconstruction and development activities,

(6) whatever the other weaknesses, the present local council legislation allows the councils to get directly involved in educational, multicultural and multi-religious activities geared to reconciliation and

(7) the strengthening of local government institutions with free and fair elections is the tangible way of democratisation of the country from the bottom to the top.

The above conclusions while speak to the possibilities and potential of local government system in contributing to ethnic reconciliation, the paucity or lack of funding with necessary freedom and/or cooperation might hamper the intended or possible activities.

At present, local governments are the most neglected sector in public administration and governance. While the recurrent expenditure of local councils is drawn from yet meagre budgets of the Provincial Councils, any possible capital expenditure indirectly comes from the Central Government through decentralised budgets and criteria based grants. Except in the case of Municipal Councils and some Urban Councils, the income generated through rates, payments and fines by the Divisional Councils is meagre.

The receipt of indirect funds from the Centre is not at all healthy which largely depends on political contact and patronage. This can be a crucial and a controversial issue in the north and the east which might even jeopardise the reconciliation efforts. Therefore, if the local government system is to contribute to the reconciliation efforts in an effective manner, the funding principles and mechanisms have to be rethought and redesigned in a fair and equitable manner.