Good Governance: Failure of a five-pillared

process?

Friday, 9 June 2017

When troubles come, they come not single spies but in battalions. And these
days, the woes of the State as well as those of the Government are legion. Two
months ago, the tragic collapse of that colossal trash-heap let loose a stink about
the way this and successive previous administrations have mismanaged garbage
disposal much to the dismay of petty politicos whod rather not have their
electorates know how laws are made, or domestic dirt-bags disposed of.

Then, a deluge, in the wake of which the flotsam- and jetsam-approach of

ministries and departments mandated to safeguard public health and wellbeing
were shown up for the third year running to be sorry travesties of what they
could or should be if were serious about ourselves as a modern nation-state
and not some monsoon-swamped boondocks.

Quite rightly, public ire has focused on an absentee minister for the number of
preventable deaths his ministrys negligence or carelessness caused. Nothing
changes. Certainly not the entrenched political culture and calcified values of a
blas ethos! So the mandarin stays put in situ, in office, in clover while his
wards and charges went to watery graves. Aprs moi, le deluge?

In the limit, Government is looking increasingly like a right bunch of tits who know
less and less about more and more. An unnecessary cabinet reshuffle. A kerfuffle
over ministers missing in action and premiers pointedly pursuing their own life
and liberty. The deferment of that obnoxious tax-burden the supplementary
estimate as if to highlight how noble our self-sacrificing legislators who prop up
Government are, to have postponed their cupidity super-luxury cars at the
taxpayers expense to visit sick and dying electorates!

To add insult to injury, the devastating revelations in this very newspaper that
when it comes to managing the Treasury with the requisite accountability and
transparency, there is little to separate one regime from another regimen. A
Monstrous Regiment of Mismanagement in the Republic just about sums up the
sentiments of thoroughly fed up citizens. Was it ever thus?

New hope,

old fear
Somewhere between the hope that things would change for the better sooner
than later, and the reality that the more some things change the more they
remain the same, fell that shadow. Somewhere extant between the crushing blow
of realpolitik that laid low the hopes of a far more glorious democratic-
republicanism, and the bellows whereby conscientious defenders of the faith
keeping fanning the flame of preserving with our worthwhile project, rises a new
hope.

Despite there being much to be said on both sides, and despite much being said
and done, damnably little has been done and been seen to be done to restore
public confidence in a short- to medium-term project (Rescue Sri Lanka) that
originated with a peoples mandate and, for a while at least, looked like it was
gaining traction as a movement that would leave behind a monument to those
who sought their fame courtesy its name.

Even though it has been manifest that a bickering opposition and opprobrious
bureaucracy have stymied much of our present governors good intentions to
restore the rule OF law and order (as opposed to rule THROUGH law and order
and some designed chaos) there is some justification one dares essay to the
carping and cavilling that goes on in caf- and civil-societies. Especially (as the
coffee klatsch republic of Facebook and cocktail circuit claques that clique and
tweet together on Twitter and other social media feel) not to put too fine a
point on it in the aftermath of marauding floods and Finance Ministry fiascoes
that wedak naehae, okkoma ekai , okkoma horu, okkoma boru...

Egregious ennui and disgruntlement and mores the pity because by now, the
tide of discontent (and imbroglios and impasses) should have turned; and we
should be past the rapids which beset new administrations mid-term, mid-flow,
mid-stream, where the horses cannot be changed.

Move on or

move over?
 Could it be the case that parts of the political process theory provide
insights into why Good Governance has demonstrably failed in many respects or,
at least, is arguably failing in some vital spheres? (This theory, familiar to political
scholars, scrutinises the worldviews, situations, and doings, which make a social
movement influential, successful, paradigm-changing.)

There is little if any doubt that an unprecedented political opportunity for change
presented itself in the starry-eyed decision of a past president to prematurely call
for elections. The sociopolitical movement that subsequently sprang up to try and
achieve a sea-change in the ethos of national governance began well enough,
with broad swathes of support across several crucial demographics. But has since
seemed to run out of steam such that its lack of staying power portends a return
of the egregious regime that preceded this coalitions promising politics

Perhaps, in the national interest, key stakeholders in the movement loosely

known and now increasingly lacklustrely referred to as Good Governance would
do well to ask why the desired and demanded changes to existing political
structures and processes have not happened in quite the way supporters
expectantly hoped or the movements opposition anxiously anticipated it would.
In todays column, your writer attempts to superimpose the five pillars of Political
Process Theory on the sociopolitical movement that is or was Good Governance
to determine its success or failure.

Political opportunity
Good Governances most important political opportunity presented itself not by
its own design, but by default. The fault lay in the stars, and the stars were faulty
 or rather, the stargazer who convinced a president to compromise himself with
premature elections was to be faulted at least in part.

The success of the ensuing social movement an opportunistic one, in the more
salutary sense of the word was made possible because of this chink in the
armour of a politico-military-constitutional juggernaut. That thinkers and planners
exploited the vulnerability in the monoliths machinery is to their credit. And to
the great relief of a burdened civil society conscientised enough to feel the
tyranny setting in, the movers and shakers themselves were shaken and removed
from office.

The previous regime had long postponed facing up to a growing crisis of its
legitimacy wherein the civilised general populace (discounting the rabble roused
by rhetoric and the hoi polloi hankering for kos polos) no longer supported the
political, social, and economic milieu. A coalition of pragmatic opportunism was
driven to broaden the political enfranchisement of those denied it and those
previously excluded (like minorities and dissidents). And try through legal and
constitutional reforms to dismantle the repressive, oppressive, suppressive
structures that prevented the people from demanding change or expressing
dissent.

Mobilising structures
In the early stages of its march towards a reformed nation-state, other
organisations political, social, cultural were on the side of the angels, so to
speak. Present among members of the community who wanted no, demanded
change, were venerable monks and veritable mandarins among business
chambers as well as professionals in state and private service as much as
academics across a broad spectrum. These mini and minor movements in their
own right served as mobilising structures for the growing social movement by
providing membership, thought-leadership, discipleship to encourage those
generals (like the current President who would be in the firing line if the best laid
plans ganged aft agley), and fellowship to the foot soldiers of the revolution: the
rank and file of voters notwithstanding.

Those civil society groups, community movements, and sundry organisations

seem to have vanished into thin air these days Show me someone who still
champions the cause of Good Governance as loudly and as lustily as they did in
the heady times when bliss it was that dawn to be alive, to be youthfully
energised was very heaven and I will show you a structure that has cracked and
crumbled, and a soldiery that has been sadly demobilised and lies dead or
demotivated, but for a stubborn or persistent few in the ranks of Tuscany
(Harsha, Eran, Ranil, might no longer quite figure in this pantheon?).

Framing processes
According to Political Process Theory, framing processes are carried out by
leaders of an organisation in order to allow the group or movement to clearly and
persuasively describe the existing problems, articulate why change is necessary,
what changes are desired, and how one can go about achieving them. This our
sociopolitical movement did well before it secured political power, less well once
in office, and maybe not at all and certainly far from frequently and forcefully
enough now that its popularity is on the wane. Where once Good Governances
framing processes served to foster ideological stakeholdership among the
movements members and admirers, these have fallen by the wayside.

External pressure from a ridiculously transparent Joint Opposition playing politics

with the longest suit of self-interest and its jokers stonewalling reform most
stubbornly has not helped true But it is not so much recalcitrant legislators
and their lackeys militating in favour of a return of the Rajapaksas-as-rajahs status
quo which has hamstrung the movement formerly known as Good Governance.
Rather, even its most strident advocates conscious strategic efforts to fashion
shared understandings that legitimate and motivate collective action ring
hollow in the ears of its strongest supporters because of the depths to which
realpolitik has lowered the standards of the previously sea-green incorruptible
stalwarts whose integrity was guaranteed.

Today, it is almost taken for granted that power tends to corrupt, and moderate
power corrupts miserably. It is the bane of moderate democratic-republicanism
held hostage by pragmatic politics and men of principle captive to personal
ambitions of a power-hungry statesman whom they will nobly not critically
engage let alone criticise even in private.

Protest cycles
While protest cycles are an important feature consolidating the rise of a particular
sociopolitical movement, the boot is on the other foot today. All the protests,
strikes, trade-union action, demonstrations, are against never for, as before its
ascendancy to power the values of this coalition and its lamentably renegade
villainy, as the masses see them or it. True enough, these fickle mobs are goaded
by the grim reapers of chaos and anarchy behind the scenes, orchestrating a
possible putsch. But the prolonged opposition to the prevailing political winds and
the passionate intensity of the protestors have left the republic in a heightened
state of stress and tension. So much so that the war-winning jackboot of a retired
general was marshalled in the field against the more vociferous of these
disturbers of the peace!

Granted: in the kind of democracy we all (well, some) craved, these destabilising
activities are par for the course and therefore must be endured as mob-idiocy
cannot be cured even the Rathupaswala-Katunayake-FTZ-Chilaw-fishermen-
shooting way. However, the ideological frames connected to Good Governances
framing process have been shattered and we see through a glass darkly the end
that is almost inevitable. So, the present spate of protests serves not to
strengthen solidarity within the movement or to raise awareness among the
general public about the issues targeted by the movement but to highlight how
unpopular (and therefore how useless, in utilitarian thinking) such novelties and
niceties are. No new members are being recruited to the cause Great is the
pity... It was a good idea as far as ideas go, but as ideas go it went To the dustbin
of history, maybe, as perhaps time will tell soon enough.

Contentious repertoires
Last but by no means least is contentious repertoires: the means through which
the movement makes and stakes its claims. Leave aside the landmark reforms for
a moment if that is safe enough to do under the rule of men entirely great
where the pen is mightier than the sharp poky instrument shoved through gadfly
editors mind-works and what are you left with? Lamentably little by way of a
lasting change to the always prevailing milieu! Laggards in the law and
lackadaisical lackeys are still laughing all the way to their electorates en route an
unnumbered account in an anonymous overseas banking and financial institution.
Leaving a few good men and women true to hold the fort and defend an
increasingly indefensible idea.

Looking to the end, it seems the means are too mediocre to assure anyone that
the reformist agenda can thrive. Looks like it can only hope to survive in a few
stout hearts and cool clear minds, until a phoenix-like resurrection may be
possible under a new dispensation that is not strapped by coalition pragmatism
and more importantly, perhaps, has cleansed its own house of the odour that
august assemblies as much as Augean stables give when the horse has not bolted,
and the Trojans were ransacking the Treasury until very recently.
Posted by Thavam