Malin Abeyatunge

It was reported in the print media that Mr. Rauff Hakeem of SLMC, currently the Minister of Justice has sent a dossier to UNHRC consisting 50 pages  titled “Religious Violence in Sri Lanka” blaming that under the  present Government there are religious intolerance and hate campaigns citing around 241 anti-Muslim attacks and 52 Christian churches  between the 12 month period from January to December 2013 . Majority of these are not religious attacks but rightful protests against illegal religious activities by the Muslims and the Evangelist sects. These protests cannot be labelled as attacks as cited by Hakeem in his dossier to UNHRC. Also how do we know that some of these committed by another Muslim Sect in the country as it’s happening in Iraq.  It appears that the people using democratic rights of protests for abusing the religious freedom by opening Takrang shed prayers room and calling them mosques, and unauthorised constructions in Buddhist temple lands have also been listed as attacks in the given list to UNHRC. Protests of forcing Halal Meat on the non-Muslim majority community also have been cited in the list as Religious intolerance and hate campaigns by Hakeem and his SLMC. Forcing non-muslims to consume Halal products is like forcing non-muslim women to wear hijab. His report to UNHRC also cited attack on Christian churches. We see opening prayer centres by fundamental Evangelists in every nook and corner of the country which are not really churches  but purely religious conversion centres and can such protests  be labelled as religious intolerance?

Protests of any nature be it political or otherwise is a fundamental democratic right of expression of freedom. There are anti-Government protests seen very frequently on the streets of Sri Lanka these days by political parties, student organisations , women organisations and politically motivated NGOs  with an ulterior motive to add more fuel to the UNHRC resolution against Sri Lanka. Hence any protest against the abusing the Religious tolerance and freedom by the fundamental Muslims and Evangelist Christians cannot be merely labelled as religious intolerance. Recently Minister Hakeem addressing a Government political rally lambasted Bodu Bala Sena a patriotic Buddhist front as an extreme Buddhist front. Hakeem has forgotten that having MUSLIM ethnicity added on to his party Sri Lanka Muslim Congress itself is a symbol of extremism. If he can publicly  lambast  BBS, BBS has the same right to lambast  fundamental muslims or SLMC for inciting religious hatred.

Collective responsibility of a Cabinet

 In fact , even an O’Level student would know that the collective responsibility of a Cabinet is of paramount importance and Hakeem has breached this while being in the Rajapaksa Cabinet and sending this report to UNHRC against the Government he is working with citing Government has not taken action to curb the religious extremists violence in the country. In other words if he finger points at the Government  thro this dossier of the Government’s failure to stop the falsely labelled incidents as religious violence, then he is also accountable if such things happened in the past or are happening now still being a member of the Cabinet. Also, as this dossier is coming from none other than the Minister of Justice, it carries extra weight for UNHRC  who is hell bent to use any materials made available to them to use against Sri Lanka. But, unfortunately while Hakeem says he is ashamed to be part of the Rajapaksa Government but continues to remain as the Minister of Justice without leaving the Government. There is a Sinhala adage „nge Indan Kane Kanawa” and Hakeem is that.

WHY can’t the President strip off this very important portfolio from Hakeem and sack him from the cabinet or demote him to a lesser important portfolio if SLMC still wants to remain in the Government to enjoy the ministerial perks?

Then comes the question whether the President can sustain the two third majority in the Parliament if Hakeem is sacked or SLMC withdraws from the UPFA. Since the Government is not going to repeal the 13 th Amendment in the near future despite all the agitations by the patriotic politicians, individuals  and organisations, why do the Government need a two third majority in the Parliament?  Since no constitutional changes are seen in the near future, other Bills & Acts and even the annual budgets  can be passed with a simple majority. Therefore, sacking SLMC from the UPFA is not going to be a problem for the UPFA Government. Mind you, after the Western & Southern Provincial Elections, there will be enough UNPiers joining the UPFA  to fill a vacuum if created by sacking SLMC from UPFA.

Suffice to mention here how Hakeem sat with Prabhakaran in front of the Tiger Flag and pledged to support him. It’s better to get rid of the two headed serpent than keep him inside the Government.