Democracy has gone to the dogs - Dayasiri Jayasekara

UNP firebrand - MP Dayasiri Jayasekara who was recently in the middle of a major controversy speaks to the Daily Mirror about his allegiance, political future, the issue surrounding the alleged assault of an Army officer, the reason behind the lack of political alternatives to the people and much more

Q: What were the positions offered to you by the government?

To be honest the President didn’t offer me anything. There was never a discussion between us, but there were certain people who have urged me to join the government.  Apart from that there has never been a discussion of any sort. I didn’t meet the President nor was there any discussion with him.  This was a fabrication of the media helped by a few individuals.

Q: Leading up the recent controversy- can you tell us if there wasn’t any sort of discussion or negotiation between you and the government?

I have made it very clear to the people that I would never join the government. I have never made a statement or done anything to the contrary at any point of time. I continued to make statements to the effect that I would always be with the UNP because I never had an intention of joining the government. However, I was hurt and disgusted about the rumours that were being spread about me which is why I made an emotional speech in Anuradhapura. I was in the UNP and I will continue to be an UNPer. There are very few MPs who have taken on the government like I have. Even today I don’t have any dealings with the government. Dayasiri Jayasekara is not a person who will play double games with the government. I haven’t kept one foot there and one foot with the UNP. I’m clearly with the opposition taking on the current regime.

Q: But compared to how you attacked the government before, have you not currently taken a laid back approach?

No, there is no change in the approach; I have continued to attack the government at every possible chance. For example during the last provincial council elections, I was barred by the leadership from speaking at rallies. However, the people wanted me and so did the candidates. I haven’t attacked anyone except the government. I didn’t speak of the internal dispute within the party publicly during these rallies. We only have one common enemy and that is the present government. I will continue to attack the government like I have done at all times.

Q: What is the current status of the internal dispute within your party?

Well, I have always taken the stance that this revenge mechanism currently existing within the party must stop immediately. All of us have to unite- and our leader has to take the mantle in order to do so. I have told this to him personally as well. All of us have to meet at one table and discuss the issues that each one of us has. It is only after such discussions will this continuous bickering stop. Through a discussion we can recognize the real problems that everyone has, and come to some sort of consensus.

Q: Are you saying that you are willing to continue to work under the current leadership?

Yes, we haven’t at any point wanted the current leader to leave but we always wanted him to join us in our common endeavours. At one occasion however, we challenged his leadership as provided for in the constitution of the party just like it is done within the labour, conservative, democratic and republican parties. After Karu Jayasuriya lost the election we have now accepted that Ranil Wickremesinghe is our leader and there are no questions about that. But you can’t continue to harbour any anger within you and work. The reason there is a provision in the constitution to enable somebody who isn’t happy to contest  the leadership. We can’t work on the agendas of a single person but we have to form a collective body where all the people can voice their opinion; and in this process our leader should be Ranil Wickremesinghe.

Q: Do you think that the party has a future with the status quo?

Yes, we can’t blame the leadership for all the problems. There are certain issues that have arisen as a result of the leadership but everything cannot be blamed on that alone. Therefore, we shouldn’t only focus on the leadership but on the other aspects as well. We can’t continue to be divided because it is the President and his government who will benefit from this division.

Q: You were Sajith Premadasa's right hand man for quite awhile, is there a breakdown in your relationship with him?

No there is no such breakdown. There are differences between us but I don’t work on people’s characteristics but on their principles. As soon as there is a problem on policy or principle with any leader I will voice my opinion. I’m not going to agree 100 per cent with anyone.

Q: You have been seen with the former Army Commander Sarath Fonseka and the former Chief Justice recently, is there some sort of dialogue going on between you’ll?

This is something I have to be clear about because there were people who had said that I was joining forces with the former Army Commander. There is no reason for me get on to the stage of the former Army Commander. But, when we come across instances where we could work together on common principles I believe that we should. What happened that day was that. I was present at an event organized by the JSS. Sarath Fonseka can go on his political journey and he has the right to have his own party and views. But I’m not going to be a part of that  What we now need is politics based on principle and not on individuals.

Q: One of the main issues you raised during this recent controversy was the fact that the leadership period was extended to six years. However, it later transpired that it was only a proposal and not an amendment. What are your views on the hue and cry that was created?

 I believed that this proposal was wrong. However, the party in its statements said that the constitution was amended. But we know that it doesn’t have such power to amend the constitution. When we pointed it out in court that the working committee does not have such power, it transpired that it was not an amendment but only a proposal which will be put forward at the next convention. By this, fallacy which was created to the effect that the working committee could change the constitution as and when it wanted was dismissed.

Q: Do you believe that the current political culture prevalent in the country is in shambles with politicians leaving behind the country and ensuring that their personal development is at the forefront of their agendas?

My logic has always been that this system must be changed; there is no point in changing the people without changing the system. Every time we tried to change the system through people we have failed. For example President Bandaranaike went back on her promise of changing the executive presidency even after setting specific dates for it. President Rajapaksa also came forward with the same agendas and now he has acquired even more power. So, we have to make a decision whether we are going to continue with the system or we are going to get away from politics and pursue a different career path. If we work on the principle of changing this system, I believe that we can find a leader that can lead us towards this.

Q: So don’t you think that you are also another link in this very system?

Clearly. That is why I said that we have to arrive at a  decision whether we are to continue with this system or  that we are going to move aside and live our lives peacefully.

Q: What concrete measures have you personally taken to ensure a change in the system?

The shift in ideology must come from the civil society. It has to come from intellectuals, journalists, and other likeminded people who have the power to change the way the people think.  If we are able to form a collective ideology from within the civil society itself I believe that we can triumph in this pursuit of a paradigm shift.

Q: There is an opinion that you are a character with no substance but someone who has been puffed up by the media?

I’m not a character that has been puffed up by the media. When I speak on issues that are relevant to the people these issues are highlighted in the media. The media can’t puff people up with no substance in them. The only reason the media reports what I say is because it is relevant to the people. There are many who are jealous of this and that is why they spread nonsense of this sort. I have attacked this government with a lot of substance during the past few years; I have taken radical decisions which were highlighted by the media. People might think that I’m swimming against the tide but that is how I will be and that might prompt people to say things like this.

Q: What are your views on the current status of law and order in the country?

The breakdown of law and order has been an integral part of the governance of the current regime. From the time Minister Mervyn Silva tied a man to a tree to the Mulleriyawa shootout, and now most recently the Malaka Silva drama have  all resulted in the government actually telling the country not to mess with the powerful. If you mess with the powerful the law will work against you- this is the message that the government has given the country. This country has fallen to these depths. Democracy and the law have both gone to the dogs. The law today is used according to how the politicians want it used. Many government members also are against the status quo. A minister, who personally spoke to me after I raised this issue in parliament, told me that I said exactly what he had in mind. I asked him why he didn’t state any of this publicly and he told me that he wasn’t in a position to do so. This incident in itself speaks volumes of the depths of the breakdown in law and order.

Q: You are a parliamentarian, who is recognized nationally, why weren’t your more vociferous with regard to this issue?

As soon as this incident happened we spoke on behalf of the Major but the next day the Major recanted his statement making all of us look like fools. This is the tragedy where the person we represented wakes up the next day and goes back on his previous allegation.

Q:  But that isn’t the real tragedy, is it Mr. Jayasekara? The real tragedy is the fact that this officer was pressured to the level of recanting his allegation, isn’t it?

Yes but he should have had the courage to stick by what he said. He had done this in order to save his job. If we have one or two people who have the backbone and the courage, then we could actually fight for them. For instance, the parties affected by the death of Baratha Lakshman have also joined the government. Isn’t there a person who has the courage to come out and fight and keep his word about the injustice that was committed?

Q: But everyone who tried to fight has ended up been political non-entities. Even the former Army Commander came out with this same venom and today isn’t he being pushed into political wilderness?

Yes that’s true. But as the country’s opposition we have to give these people a platform to voice their opinion. We have to educate the people about how we will protect the rule of law when we are in power. But we must create a social force with people who have been made to face this type of injustice. Sarath Fonseka to this day hasn’t stopped his fight and has continued with it even after he was released, despite his civil rights being taken away. If we have a few more people with that sort of courage I think we would help create some sort of social force.

Q: You are known to bring out an issue and then the public doesn’t see a follow up. For example you brought up the issue about the Hambanthota port but after a while the whole issue died a natural death. Why is this?

Issues arise in this country everyday and I speak accordingly. If we take the Hambanthota port I don’t think there has been any other ship that has come to the Harbour after the first one. A friend recently told me that he saw a few vehicles parked beside the port and that was it. So while trying to highlight the issues of the past I try to grapple with the new issues that come before us.

Q: Do you think that the people have no political alternative because of what has taken place in the opposition during the past few years?

Yes true. The people of this country have been left with no real alternative. This is because of the furthering of personal agendas by many people as opposed to furthering of a common agenda. Some people want to be leaders for as long as they can, some want to topple the leadership, some want to play a waiting game

Q: What do you want to do?

I only want to topple this government but that isn’t something that I can do alone. Our leader has to be a part of it together with people like Sarath Fonseka and others in order to achieve this. You can’t have personal agendas at the forefront if we are to achieve this.

Q: But my question was- are you not responsible in this entire process that culminated in the people of this country not having a coherent political alternative?

No I wasn’t. What happened is that due to our internal disputes the people of this country felt that there was no vibrant opposition to take on this government and for this each and every one of us must be held responsible.

Q: What does the future hold for Dayasiri Jayasekara?

My future will be policy driven. All of us have to unite to abolish the executive presidency, to uphold the 17th amendment to the Constitution, to give power to the bribery commission and corruption in order to put an end to the rampant corruption prevalent in this country. These will be the main principles I will dedicate myself to and fight for while being a part of the UNP.