Ceylon Today Editorial

Fake News and the AIDS Scare

09 May 2017

The spread of fake news has reached an unprecedented level in the recent times. And it hasn't just been local and isolated – only to have occurred in Sri Lanka – but has become a viral and worldwide phenomenon. Of course, it's not the first time it has happened. People tend to spread invalid and wrong information regardless of the situation, the potential consequences that it might lead to and it has been happening since time immemorial. It's nothing new to us. Spreading fake news is a part of human nature.

Recently, there were several reports that circulated via the internet and social media networks about a group of individuals who do home visits under the false pretence of being medical officers of the Ministry of Health, collecting blood samples. The story goes to say that the quack doctors while collecting blood will inject with unsterilized needles that spreads the HIV virus. The story, with all its misplaced good intentions, warned the public not to allow anyone into their homes, who claimed they were from the Ministry of Health conducting a medical health inquiry.

In actuality however, the story has been proven rather inaccurate. The Ministry of Health, upon hearing the news, lodged a complaint with the Criminal Investigation Department requesting to investigate into the source of the false information spread on the internet which they claimed to have "tarnished the credibility of the Ministry". The Ministry was pushed to make an adamant statement on the matter, disregarding the false news and reported that the health officials visit houses at night to collect blood smear samples, as the microfilariae – the minute larvae – that cause lymphatic filariasis, also known as elephantiasis, that circulates in the blood gets active at night.

The ministry noted that the standard method for diagnosing active infection is the identification of microfilariae in a blood smear by microscopic examination and health officials will come in uniforms to take blood samples. Seeing criminal intent in spreading the false news that would cripple the ministry's credibility, Ministry of Health was pushed to make the complaint to the Criminal Investigation Department.

Although it was a rather destructive and risky situation, the incident was a clarion call to the Ministry of Health to be more open and informative when it comes to matters which directly involve the public. It is a clear cut warning sign, not just for the Ministry of Health, but also other ministries of the government, other government institutions and authorities and the government itself. If such institutions were more accountable, more open to the public, informing them and managing public relations properly, this could have been avoided in the first place. In other words, the false news of the HIV spreading medical officers of the Ministry of Health would not have made much of an impact, if the ministry had announced what they were going to do in the first place. It would be sad indeed if we have a government which cannot communicate with its people, in a backdrop where it has extensively promoted concepts such as Right to Information, Freedom of Speech and so on.

Of course there's the other side to this story; the part which attempts to exacerbate this country's irrational fear towards HIV and AIDS.

Last year we saw an entire village turning against a mother and her six-year-old boy due to a misplaced HIV/ AIDS scare that ran rampant. It later involved Minister of Education Akila Viraj Kariyawasam who intervened to resolve the matter but ended up making it worse. Similarly, this year another such case was reported where a young girl was forced to leave her school and eventually her home in that village due to the spread of a false HIV infection story. Like these few instances, this latest addition to the shame of a country we live in, has also spread like wildfire regardless of it being inaccurate.

Why do we do this? Why do we go above and beyond to scare each other by spreading false information that only seeks the isolation of an individual or a group from the society? Yes, HIV/ AIDS has no potential cure as of yet, but since it was first reported in Sri Lanka in 1987 the world has become increasingly developed in addressing the disease. More things that we didn't know about the disease then are known for a fact now. It's just that we are interested in knowing them in the first place!

It's always better to be informed than to be scared. The only way to fight irrational fear is to think rationally. We, as a country, are failing because we cannot think for ourselves. It's because we are ill-informed, uninterested and ignorant. We look for the easy answer no matter how irrational it is and untrue it is. Until we change that attitude, we will never get anywhere.

Daily News Editorial

A victory for France

09 May 2017

The people of France have spoken decisively for inclusion, multiculturalism and European unity by electing Emmanuel Macron as their next President. Centrist Macron, just 39, becomes the youngest leader of France since Napoleon, having won nearly 67 percent of the votes cast.

His term begins on Sunday May 14, just two months shy of the 228th anniversary of Bastille Day and on the cusp of the 60th anniversary of the French Fifth Republic. His victory marks the third time that extremists have been defeated in Europe, starting from Austria and the Netherlands. It is a victory not just for France but also for globalism and democracy.

In the second round of voting held on Sunday, French voters faced a stark choice between two candidates who held vastly different views on the future of France. Macron, a former civil servant, investment banker and Economy Minister, is pro-European Union, pro-immigration and pro-multiculturism. In fact, when his victory was announced Macron strode to the podium to the strains of Beethoven’s “Ode to Joy”, the anthem of the European Union.

His main rival Marine Le Pen (48), daughter of Jean Marie Le Pen, represented the far-right National Front that stood for "Frexit" (taking France out of the European Union and euro Single currency) and drastic cuts in immigration. Her xenophobic “France First” campaign, that uncannily followed US President Donald Trump’s successful “America First” election campaign and the success of the Brexit campaign in the UK, however failed to resonate with French voters, of whom only around 33 percent voted for her. She did manage to get almost double the votes her father received in 2002 at the Presidential polls. Frexit would have been a disaster for France, which is at the heart of Europe and French voters have resoundingly rejected that proposal in a blow to all nationalist parties in Europe.

In Macron, French voters have opted for a political neophyte shorn of any scandals, which is rather unusual in French politics. He did receive a little bit of help in this regard from former Prime Minister François Fillon whose campaign was marred by a series of corruption allegations involving his wife that led to his first round exit. Macron started his campaign virtually from scratch, under the theme En Marche (Onward/On the Move) without the backing of any of the traditional political parties. Macron has the added bonus of being very young and good looking – only the Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau can perhaps beat him in that department. And the French also warmed up to his fairy-tale romance – Macron is married to his former drama teacher Brigitte Trogneux who is 24-years-older.

Macron inherits a France beset with a variety of problems. His predecessor Francois Hollande’s re-election campaign fell by the wayside due to his inability to solve France’s chronic unemployment problem and contain a string of ISIS terror attacks in key French cities. The same problems will no doubt haunt Macron during the next five years at the Elysee. Macron will have to play a key role in the fight against extremism and terrorism and allay the fears over immigration. He has also pledged to cut government spending, reform the tax code, generate employment and loosen up France’s rigid labour markets.

Macron’s first task will be to appoint a Prime Minister and a strong Cabinet, which is likely to include many outsiders just like him. But gaining a Parliamentary majority will be a bigger challenge, because En Marche has never ever contested a Parliamentary election (one is due next month).

In January, Macron announced En Marche! would field candidates in all 577 parliamentary constituencies. He wants half to come from civil society or elected local authorities. All must have a clean criminal record, renounce current political affiliations and campaign as an En Marche! candidate. At least half must be women. This is going to be a very challenging task, because voter apathy was a major factor in the Presidential polls, with millions of voters choosing to stay at home. If he cannot muster enough votes for a Parliamentary majority, Macron may have to strike a deal with some of the bigger traditional parties.

Leaders around the world breathed a sigh of relief as the elections results were announced, because a Le Pen victory would have caused chaos in Europe. They were quick to congratulate Macron on his victory which could dampen the spirits of nationalist and extremist parties everywhere. Stock markets around the world too reacted positively to the news, since France is a leading financial centre.

Relations between Sri Lanka and France have generally been excellent, except for a brief period during and after 2009 when the French Government expressed serious concern over the Human Rights situation in Sri Lanka. Fences have been mended after this Government came to power and France has been very supportive of Sri Lanka’s endeavours for achieving lasting peace and reconciliation. There is no doubt that Sri Lanka-France diplomatic, cultural and social ties will become stronger under Macron with his more enlightened global outlook. Vive La France!

The Island Editorial

Curiouser and curiouser!

09 May 2017

 

The government has made a volte-face anent the latest cut in former President Mahinda Rajapaksa’s security. It usually does not buckle under pressure where action against its political rivals is concerned. What really happened?

On May 03, 42 police personnel attached to Rajapaksa’s security contingent were removed all of a sudden. The Joint Opposition (JO) cried foul, claiming that it was the government’s reaction to Rajapaksa’s successful May Day rally. Minister of Law and Order Sagala Ratnayake sought to rubbish that claim; he told the Parliament that Rajapaksa’s security had been reduced following a proper threat assessment and the latter could manage with 187 guards.

The second cut in Rajapaksa’s security came four days later on Sunday. The government ordered that 50 more police personnel be removed from Rajapaksa’s security detail. The JO let out a howl of protest. After a couple of hours the government changed its mind. One is intrigued. If Rajapaksa’s security is actually reduced in keeping with threat assessments as the government claims, then it logically follows that a fresh threat assessment must have been done on Sunday evening within four days of the first one which led to the May 03 security cut. The question is whether another threat assessment was carried out on Sunday prior to the government’s surprising about-turn. Is it that threats to political leaders are now assessed on an hourly basis? Curiouser and curiouser!

It is being argued in some quarters that the provision of extraordinary security to those out of power amounts to an utter waste of public funds and a severe strain on police though they have become marked targets due to the pivotal role they played in defeating terrorism. If so, the defeated candidates who were taken out of the dustbin of politics after the last general election and appointed to the Cabinet in the most undemocratic manner must not be provided with any security at all. But, they, in spite of being rejected by the people, enjoy the same perks and privileges as their elected counterparts besides drawing attractive salaries for sinecures as ministers. They move about with armed escorts. Shouldn’t they be stripped of at least their security?

One of our readers argues, in a letter published on the opposite page today, that we should be concerned about the security of ordinary people and not that of politicians. True, the law-abiding citizens, especially women and children, are the most vulnerable section of the society vis-à-vis the rising crime rate. The country has come to such a pass over the last three decades or so that it is awash with illegal firearms in the hands of trigger-happy criminal elements. Police do precious little to neutralise criminals, who are having a field day. People are not safe even at home. Their safety must be ensured first of all. However, the fact remains that political stability is a prerequisite for public safety, which becomes the first casualty of anarchical upheavals, as we have argued in a previous comment.

One may recall the unprecedented chaos the Lalith Athulathmudali assassination plunged the country into in April, 1993. But for the tectonic shifts in national politics, triggered by the Premadasa assassination which happened a few days later, anarchy would have been ‘loosed’ upon the country. The credit for preventing a popular uprising should go posthumously to President D. B. Wijetunga, who like a river bar pilot steered the ship of state to safety, by restoring democratic governance and respecting political dissent.

It is hoped that the yahapalana government won’t carry out another ‘threat assessment’ tonight and order drastic cuts in security provided to its rivals in the Opposition.