Mangala touch in Fonseka manifesto

By Jayashika Padmasiri

With the presidential polls round the corner, and everyone at the edge of their seats awaiting the outcome, last week the Common Opposition Candidate, General (rtd) Sarath Fonseka launched his election manifesto titled Visvasaneeya Venasak. We spoke to some academics to obtain their views on this brand new docuiment:
Presidential Advisor, Harinda Vidanage, said that as far he was concerned he felt that General(rtd) Sarath Fonseka’s election manifesto was in total contrast to his character and had a Mangala Samaraweera touch.
“I feel that this manifesto is not like General Sarath Fonseka and does not contain any of Sarath Fonseka’s political aspirations. Though it is called a Vishwasaneeya Wenasak, I do not see any change in real terms in the manifesto. My inference is that this manifesto does not show any Sarath Fonseka characteristics and is totally alien to him. Even the title is in a way alien to Fonseka. This is more akin to a Mangala Samaraweera manifesto. When one reads it excepting for the title, you find that there isn’t anything new --- nor is there any palpable change as the title claims,” he said.

Reactionary political document

Speaking further Vidanage added, “I see this document more as a reactionary political document much more than being a visionary political manifesto. The general claims that he has a plan, but I definitely do not see any plan in the manifesto. There is nothing substantial in the programs envisaged in the manifesto. I do not believe that general Fonseka has understood the existing political realities of this nation, or identified the challenges faced by the country. He has failed to find a way to address those challenges too. What he has merely done is just to find fault with the present regime.”
Speaking about economic policies in the manifesto, Vidanage pointed out that the policies in the Fonseka manifesto were also contradictory.

Economic policies

“The economic policies General Sarath Fonseka has come up with are incongruous. I say this because some policies are more like UNP ploys; in the instance where Fonseka speaks of rapid economic growth in the country for example. He also speaks of equal distribution among the people, which is more a JVP sentiment. Because of this reason, I find these policies contradicting one another, and there being no consistency. It is similar to the manner in which they have formed the United National Front (UNF) which is a clear example of this. Two opposing parties that share different views; the JVP and the UNP, have come together ---- a political alliance that can never be understood!” Vidanage concluded.
Though this is the criticism over Fonseka’s manifesto, there are completely opposing views as well. Executive Director, National Peace Council of Sri Lanka, Jehan Perera speaking to LAKBIMAnEWS said that he believes the manifesto of General Sarath Fonseka is a sensible, easily understandable and rational document which should be implemented without merely using it as a pamphlet to win votes.
When questioned what he had to say about the Mahinda Chinthanaya 2 which has not been launched yet, Perera answered, “President Rajapaksa has said that his manifesto will be an extension of the existing Mahinda Chinthanaya. So I believe that with President Rajapaksa’s manifesto, we can expect more of the same things as has been expressed in the former manifesto.”
Meanwhile, senior lecturer at the Colombo Law Faculty, Prathiba Mahanama, voiced similar sentiments regarding the Sarath Fonseka manifesto. However, among the many reasons he attributed for finding the Fonseka manifesto credible, Mahanama said that Fonseka has respected the Supreme Court judgments in his document.
“That kind of respect for law and order will definitely usher in a better era for the country. He has promised to increase the wages of every government servant which is a very good thing to do. General Fonseka has accepted the 17th amendment to the constitution, and promised to implement it, which then will solve the ethic issue in our country.”
However on economic policies, Mahanama found both good and bad in the Fonseka manifesto. Speaking further Mahanama said, “Nevertheless I like the decisions General Fonseka has taken regarding implementing the information bill which I believe is absolutely essential, and also his decisions regarding combating fraud and corruption and the decision to establish an Independent Parliamentary Ethics Commissioner. These are things that are very essential to our country, and these policies should be implemented.”
On the other hand, Damma Dissanayake from the Department of Political Science and Public Policy, a senior lecturer, Colombo University, said that he does not believe that the Sarath Fonseka manifesto was a manifesto in the real sense of the word .

Difference

“I do not see any of the qualities that should be seen in an election manifesto in it. Instead, this document is only a list of promises. One should take note and remember that there is a vast difference between policies and promises. For example, what is their economic policy? Fonseka has listed a number of projects that he is hoping to implement. So I do believe that it is wrong to call this document a manifesto, when all it is really a list of promises,” he said.
Speaking further Dissanayake added that he had seen three good election manifestos in the past, and that they were the election manifesto presented by the Peace Front in 1970, the election manifesto of the Lanka Sama Samaja Party in 1935, and the 2005 election manifesto -- the Mahinda Chinthanaya presented by President Mahinda Rajapaksa.