The government has two sets of problems coming from the past, one external to it and the other internal, but both interconnected. The external problems include the vulnerable state of the economy which is on the mend by any objective standard. But the government is liable to face growing public disenchantment unless the benefits of development are more widely distributed. However, the last government’s negotiations with international creditors and the agreement with the IMF leave little room for the new government to manoeuvre. The reduction in the debt that was negotiated was around 20 percent overall, which is significantly less than obtained historically from similarly positioned countries. In 2020, Argentina restructured $65 billion in foreign bonds, securing a 50 percent reduction in debt payments over the next decade.
The second set of problems that are internal to the government comes from the fact that those in positions of political authority are mostly new to governance. It will take time for them to become accustomed to the complexities of decision making in complex situations as in Sri Lanka. Due to the self-interestedness and corrupt practices of those who previously held those same positions, the country reached the lowest point three years ago, which resulted in the landslide swing to those entirely new to wielding governmental power.
The problem for the new government is that it needs to face the challenge of rebooting the economy with a team that is new to governance. The unfortunate reality is that the corruption and priority given to parochial interests by the governmental decision makers of the past was accompanied by support and similar compromises by those in the state administration. This has meant that the new government leaders have felt it necessary to appoint a set of new administrators to be in charge of the government machinery. Some of them may take longer than others to learn on the job, with the result that the government machinery is not working as effectively as it could in the short term.
CLEAN LANKA
The problems that recently accompanied the Presidential Task Force for a Clean Sri Lanka and received adverse publicity may be attributed to taking on a mechanism that had its origins in an earlier initiative to deal primarily with environment related problems. According to this model the public sector is the “government or governmental institutions that provide policy directions, regulations and public services”. They are to work in partnership with the private sector which is “Business and private organisations that bring in resources, expertise and technology. They also contribute to the funding, innovation and efficiency of the partnership”. This model gave emphasis to public-private partnerships in which civil society would be the target to be “directly impacted by the partnership outcomes”.
The early initiatives of the Clean Lanka task force did not have the positive impact that was envisaged as it was non-consultative and attempted to enforce its views of the public-private partnership on target groups who felt victimised by the decisions made. The owners and drivers of private buses and trishaws who were the first targets have protested the decisions made. The environmental pollution and dangers to traffic that they were judged to be responsible for, was to them the outcome of their efforts to beautify and upgrade their modes of livelihood and which they had invested money in. The government has now agreed to a compromise where the proposed reforms have been given a time frame of three months to be implemented.
One of the initiatives of the government to deal constructively with this issue post-facto has been to invite civil society organisations to discuss the concept of the Clean Lanka task force and obtain their feedback. The government’s NGO Secretariat acted as the intermediary, inviting a select group of civil society organisations to a dialogue with the task force. This was a positive development as civil society groups have not been invited to participate in many of the government’s new initiatives. This has created an impression that the new government has been marginalising them and relying instead on the government machinery and private sector. This negative impression has been strengthened by the sudden emergence of a set of government regulations that would erode their independence.
MODIFY INTERVENTIONS
Civil society organisations are part of the system of democratic governance, particularly in filling gaps left by the public and private sectors such as in the case of marginalised groups, be they ethnic or religious minority groups, women and those from the LGBTIQ community. They also act as part of the system of checks and balances through the monitoring of abuse of power and human rights violations. The space for CSO/NGOs is constantly under threat worldwide. Their actions are often not appreciated by those in power who find civic groups to be inconvenient and troublesome to them.
CSOs in Sri Lanka have faced multiple attempts to restrict their independence for a variety of reasons. During the period of the war, some of them were accused of supporting the LTTE or undermining the government’s war effort. During the immediate post-war period they were accused of trying to revive the spirit of rebellion in the Tamil people and making the government vulnerable to international sanctions by supporting human rights initiatives. At the present time, there are claims that NGOs pose a threat to international law by engaging in criminal money laundering. A new set of NGO regulations have suddenly emerged to subject them to government control.
Discussions with government leaders, however, presents a more nuanced picture of reality. The government position on CSOs has not been formally conveyed but it is reported that President Anura Kumara Dissanayake has expressed his desire for an NGO-friendly government position. These positive sentiments and intentions will take some time to manifest themselves as the new government leaders and administrators become more familiar with the issues and apply their values and principles to administer the country. In the meantime, interventions coming from the past may need to be altered and modified like the directions of the task force on a clean Sri Lanka to fit in with the values and principles of the new government.
Jehan Perera
