Leader of the Opposition Sajith Premadasa has urged in the Parliament that the government should avoid actions that may harm the honor of religious leaders. He also said that there is a need for the government to act more sensitively and responsibly in matters related to religion, culture and social traditions.
Sajith Premadasa, who addressed the session held in the Parliament, stated that the United People’s Power’s position is to protect the Buddha Shasana and give due space and strength to other religions, races and cultures living in the country.
His comment was related to the incident in which the general secretary of the Podubalasena movement, Kalakoda Athe Gnanasara Thera, was presented in civilian clothes in the court. Sajith’s insistence was that the decisions regarding monastic dress should not be taken merely administratively, but due importance should be given to the opinion of the religious leaders concerned.
Importance of decision of religious leaders
While there is no alternative view that court proceedings should be conducted on the basis of law, Sajith said social and cultural sentiments should also be taken into account in matters related to the dress and traditions of religious leaders.
He pointed to Section 550 of the Prisons Department Ordinance and Section 216 of the Prisons Ordinance. He also mentioned that the monastic garb of the prisoners who are presented in the court cannot be removed.
Sajith also said that the religious leaders should take the decision whether to remove the monastic garment or not. In particular, the idea that actions such as taking religious leaders to court in civilian clothes against their will or without informing the higher authorities of the religious institutions to which they belong should be avoided.
In previous reports on this matter, the main question raised is how to balance religious traditions and legal practices. On the one hand the legal authority of the court must be protected. On the other hand, the view that administrative actions should be taken in a way that does not insult religious symbols and social traditions is also strengthened.
Since every action taken by the government in religious matters can have a wider social impact, the position that pre-emptive consultation is necessary in such situations also emerges.
Sajith reviews farmers, employment and shortage of medicines
Sajith Premadasa did not only raise the issue related to the dignity of religious leaders in Parliament. He has also criticized the government on the country’s economic and social issues.
He accused the government of not paying enough attention to farmers’ issues. He said that the government, which had promised a guaranteed price of Rs 150 per kg of paddy, is now paying only Rs 120 per kg to the farmers. He said that the cost of production was not calculated properly and due to this farmers were facing bankruptcy.
Moreover, Sajith also pointed out that the continued import of rice while the country is said to have sufficient rice reserves will affect the domestic farmers.
Meanwhile, he also mentioned that more than 80 thousand graduates are unemployed in the country. He also said that due to shortage of medicines in government hospitals, patients have to go outside to buy medicines.
Thus, two important aspects of Sajith’s text are intertwined. One is the government’s respect for religious and cultural symbols. Another is the government’s provision of solutions to the day-to-day economic and social problems faced by the people.
The same two aspects appear prominent in the recurring debates surrounding this message. Notable comments are that legal practice and tradition should be balanced in religious matters and priority should be given to basic issues like agriculture, employment and health.
While it is the responsibility of the opposition to criticize the activities of the government, at the same time the government should provide clear explanations for the allegations made and it is an important part of the political debate.
Sajith Premadasa’s parliamentary speech did not focus only on the Gnanasara Thera issue, but covered many issues from the protection of religious traditions to the issues of farmers, unemployed graduates and the health sector. The central theme of his speech was that the government should pay equal attention to the livelihood issues of the people along with protecting the dignity of the religious leaders.