The Way Forward: When the Implementation of Civil Liberties and Rights are Ambiguous

“The ultimate tragedy is not the oppression and cruelty by the bad people but the silence over that by the good people”.

- Martin Luther King Jr. 

Civil liberties are the rights and freedom guaranteed to an individual as protection from any arbitrary actions or interference by the government without due process of law. The United Nations Declaration of Human Rights (UNDHR) is a milestone document in the history of human rights, and was adopted by the United Nations on 10 December 1948. While the universal declaration does not directly create legal obligations for countries, it declares that human rights are universal. The 30 articles in the declaration highlight the various aspects of human rights, including civil, political, economical, social, and cultural rights.

Context of Sri Lanka

Between June 1980 and December 2017, Sri Lanka has ratified/acceded to 13 treaties including the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) and International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights among others. While Sri Lanka has signaled its commitment to uphold human rights law by acceding to these treaties and submitting periodic reports to the United Nations Committee Against Torture (CAT) and the United Nations Human Rights Committee (UNHRC), international agencies have continued to point out the room for improvement in implementing human rights and due diligence processes domestically. Internalization of the international human rights laws in the domestic law has been slow; partly due to the dualist legal system in place. 

In the past years, there has been a lack of transparency and accountability when it came to matters pertaining to respect for integrity of the person (arbitrary deprivation of life, disappearances, degrading treatment and punishments, arbitrary arrests, denial of fair public trial, and property restitution), respect for civil liberty (freedom of expression, freedom of peaceful assembly, freedom of religion, and freedom of movement), corruption, discrimination and societal abuses. Whenever domestic, international and non-governmental agencies have pointed out the alleged abuses of human rights, Sri Lankan officials have vehemently denied or been unreceptive towards the findings; and instead announced the ability to implement domestic processes and home-grown solutions to the problem. While some remain ignorant to these violations, the absence of such knowledge makes it easier for the majority to be vindicated by the government.

The promotion and protection of human rights is at national level, which makes the state a pivotal stakeholder responsible for these tasks. But, in the instance where the implementation of human rights and due diligence processes by the state are equivocal, what mechanisms can the civil society and private sector emplace to address the shortcomings?

1. Citizen Participation

Civil society provides a critical foundation for holding the government accountable, ensuring good governance and promoting human rights. Through political engagement and participation in the decisions that impact public welfare, every citizen plays a role in encouraging the government to respect human rights. Recent events in Sri Lanka have demonstrated the need for participation of citizens in government-led decisions. It is only through participation and active citizenship we can build a society based on human rights, develop social cohesion, make our voice heard to influence decision makers, achieve change, and eventually be the subject and not the object of our own lives.

As of March 2020, there were 341 local government authorities across 9 provinces in Sri Lanka. Despite the copious local government authorities, possibly far more than needed - the concern of many is if these institutions serve the needs of the citizens. The local government divisions could be made far more efficient when groups of citizens representing varying interests are able to make their voice heard in government discussions and thus have a meaningful role in the conduct of public affairs. Collaboration among provincial level authorities and citizens will pave the way for high level public discussions and effective outcomes, through increasing citizen participation and local government accountability. 

An example of such collaboration is ‘participatory budgeting’, followed in countries such as Brazil, where citizen assemblies in each district of a city determine priorities for the use of a part of the city’s revenues. The process was initiated during the early years of re-democratization and decentralization in Brazil, following the end of the military dictatorship in 1985. By facilitating discussions between local government authorities and citizens, local government authorities were able to identify the priorities for investment expenditure and spend the money of taxpayers more responsibly.

Another example of how participation of citizens lead to more effective outcomes is the ‘10-year, $5 billion financial plan’ developed by the Melbourne City Council along with a panel of 43 Melburnians - made up of businesses, residents and students. The panel provided recommendations for the city's spending strategy. A similar process of public involvement in policy development is evident in the Canadian healthcare system as well.

In response to the changing public expectations, the government of Sri Lanka needs to improve its ability to consult, engage, listen, persuade and reframe issues so that the government's work meet the citizens’ expectations and needs. A government-led participatory policy-making process should be established by identifying stakeholders from civil society through an unbiased selection process. A series of consultations and dialogue forums should be held for the public to be informed of the policies and its impact. Equally important is to collect and analyze information, report the findings and implement a communication strategy to inform the public about the outcomes of the policy discussion and publicize the progress in finalizing the policy. The communication of the outcomes and its impact to society should be inclusive, whereby all citizens are aware of the policy and its impact to public welfare. 

2. Consensus Decision-making 

In societies where expressing critical views are likely to be punished by the government, and mass media are repressed and censored, public consensus - particularly online, has been an important technique for decision making. The notion of consensus decision making allows all members of a group to arrive at a mutual agreement. Instead of simply voting for a policy decision, and having the majority of the group (predominantly consisting of powerful politicians and business people) getting their way, decision-making by way of consensus is committed to finding solutions that everyone actively supports, or at least can live with. 

Online consensus decision forming was followed in Taiwan when Uber arrived and required the ride-hailing company to be regulated. The government started an online consensus via ‘Pol.is’ to group people together and identify the varying views of the public. Through machine learning technology, the online platform allowed the public to submit proposals. The government amalgamated the near-unanimous views of the public in the nations law and regulations.

As such, the government of Sri Lanka urgently needs a systematic decision making process when implementing laws and regulations that ultimately impact the citizens. Deliberation and open consultations between state authorities and the public should be encouraged in order to understand the expectations of the public. Consensus forming will allow citizens to take collective control over decisions that impact society, protect the needs and opinions of the minority groups whilst weaving together everyone’s best interest and key concerns.

3. Voter Awareness and Civic Education 

Upholding democracy requires active participation of citizens. Citizens are required to participate in the electoral process and make informed decisions when voting. Electing incompetent and irresponsible leaders are one of the biggest hazards of making decisions based on inadequate information. Citizens should not be ignorant, but rather understand why the right to vote is an essential component to a well-functioning democracy. 

Voter awareness is most effective when it is interlinked to civic education. Citizens would be more informed of the policy changes if civic education was embedded in the national education system. However, as national policies require to be progressive, civic education needs to be modern and continuing programs. 

Civic education should be carried out through the school and university system, through civil society organizations and selected state authorities. Civic knowledge should encompass 1) knowledge of government structures and processes, political history, its’ influence on current societal conditions, 2) civic skills involving critical thinking, communication, collaboration, research skills and media literacy, 3) civic dispositions that are crucial for effective democratic engagement and 4) civic engagement through which people apply civic knowledge, skills and dispositions to solve problems and improve civic rights. 

The need for change 

For many years now, politicians have been making laws for the citizens without consulting or assessing the needs of the public. They make sure we abide by their laws, by using the backing of the police, the armed forces and the prison system. What we require is a kind of politics which is responsive to our needs as citizens and avoids the perils of restricted civil liberties that authoritarian populism descends into. 

-END-

The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author. 

Reference

1) City of Melbourne. “10-Year Financial Plan | Participate Melbourne.” City of Melbourne, https://participate.melbourne.vic.gov.au/10yearplan.

2) Civicus - World Alliance for Citizen Participation. “Participatory policy-making.” Civicus, https://www.civicus.org/documents/toolkits/PGX_F_ParticipatoryPolicy%20Making.pdf.

3) Government of Canada. “The Health Canada Policy Toolkit for Public Involvement in Decision Making.” Government of Canada, 14 September 2006, https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/corporate/about-health-canada/reports-publications/health-canada-policy-toolkit-public-involvement-decision-making.html. 

4) Miller, Carl, and Katie Horwich. “Crossing Divides: How a social network could save democracy from deadlock.” BBC, 26 October 2019, https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-50127713

5) Ministry of Foreign Affairs. “Overview.” Ministry of Foreign Affairs – Sri Lanka, 2022, https://mfa.gov.lk/overview/.

6) Ministry of Internal and Home Affairs and Provincial Councils and Local Government. “Local Government Division.” inistry of Internal and Home Affairs and Provincial Councils and Local Government, http://www.lgpc.gov.lk/web/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=69&Itemid=188&lang=en

7) Seed for Change. “Consensus Decision Making.” Seeds for Change, 2022, https://www.seedsforchange.org.uk/consensus 

8) Souza, Celina. “Participatory budgeting in Brazilian cities: limits and possibilities in building democratic institutions.” Environment & Urbanization, vol. 12, no. 1, 2001, pp. 159-184. UCL, https://www.ucl.ac.uk/dpu-projects/drivers_urb_change/urb_governance/pdf_part_budg/IIED_Souza_Budgeting_Brazil.pdf.

9) US Embassy in Sri Lanka. SRI LANKA 2020 HUMAN RIGHTS REPORT. 2020. US Embassy, US Embassy in Sri Lanka, https://lk.usembassy.gov/wp-content/uploads/sites/149/SRI-LANKA-2020-HUMAN-RIGHTS-REPORT.pdf.

10) UN. “Chapter 5.” UN, 2022, https://www.un.org/womenwatch/osagi/wps/publication/Chapter5.htm.

11) United Nations. “Universal Declaration of Human Rights | United Nations.” United Nations, 2022, https://www.un.org/en/about-us/universal-declaration-of-human-rights.

12) World Bank. 2008. Brazil - Toward a More Inclusive and Effective Participatory Budget in Porto Alegre : Volume 1. Main report. World Bank. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/6275