Political Commentary

For decades voters have heard promises of integrity, justice and accountability. These promises have come with every election, but they have invariably ended in disappointment. Investigations have faltered, commissions have been wound up, and the very leaders who promised to end corruption and impunity have too often joined the ranks of those who perpetuated them. The NPP government is now making the point that it will do its utmost to deliver on its promises and commitments. The arrest of former president Ranil Wickremesinghe on charges of mis-spending government resources was perhaps to make this point.

The arrest and remand of former President Ranil Wickremesinghe was unexpected. It seems that the former President did not believe that he would suffer the fate of countless others when he went to the police to be questioned on a Friday. He ended the day in handcuffs and was taken away in the Black Maria used for the transport of criminals to jail. He is currently in the intensive care unit of the National Hospital, Colombo. This episode has caused much controversy and heartburn. The former President is seen by many as the leader who steered the country out of economic collapse and potential political chaos on more than one occasion.

The meeting of 17 major opposition figures to discuss political strategies received wide publicity. Those who attended the meeting denied that it was to oppose the government. They said that it was to exchange ideas about recent political developments and to identify points of common concern. Several participants including former ministers Prof GL Peiris and Mano Ganesan informed the media that the purpose of the discussion was to promote dialogue among democratic forces and to explore ways of strengthening the institutions of democracy. The NPP government’s dominance comes with increasing public expectations, on economic revival, justice for incidents of past violence, and respect for minority rights. If the opposition is to reconnect with voters, they need to hold the government accountable with substance.

Addressing Parliament, President Anura Kumara Dissanayake affirmed the government’s commitment to confronting human rights violations from the past, stating: “We will face these grievous legacies openly, firmly, and with sensitivity to all communities.” He specifically highlighted the Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA), describing it as the “most potent and most misused national-security law in our history.” Introduced 37 years ago during the early stages of the Tamil militant movement, the law was explicitly intended as a temporary safeguard. Yet now 16 years after the end of Sri Lanka’s armed conflict its continued necessity is rightly in serious question, a view shared by numerous local and international human-rights organizations.

The news from the US trade office was better than expected. Sri Lanka, which had been shocked by the sudden imposition of a 44 percent tariff by the U.S. authorities in April 2024, has seen it reduced to 20 percent. This is a major concession for a country that is perceived to have strong trading and political ties with China, which the US views as its main global rival. The revised tariff now brings Sri Lanka more closely to other Asian competitors such as India, Bangladesh, and Pakistan, whose exports faced significantly lower rates under the same policy in April of 27, 37, and 30 percent respectively. The sharp drop in tariffs followed the visit of a high-level Sri Lankan delegation to Washington DC and a virtual discussion in July by President Anura Kumara Dissanayake with US Trade Representative Ambassador Jamieson Greer.

There is a high level of political polarisation in the country today. Specific manifestations of this polarisation can be seen in the criticism of the government’s proposed educational reforms. There is reluctance on the part of the opposition to give the government any credit for what it is doing. Even what it is doing well, such as keeping the economy stable, is downplayed due to a simple following of the policies of former president Ranil Wickremesinghe. Criminal and drug-related violence that have existed in the past, and was worse in the past, is being blamed on the government’s ineffectiveness.

Tomorrow, July 23, will mark the 42nd anniversary of the anti-Tamil rioting in Colombo and throughout the country that led to the deaths of hundreds and the displacement of tens of thousands of Tamil citizens. The trigger for the anti-Tamil rioting that commenced in Colombo on July 23, 1983, was an LTTE ambush of an army patrol in Jaffna, in which 13 soldiers were killed. The truth about the week that followed in July is still difficult to uncover. Among the unresolved issues is the question of how many died during that week in mob violence when law and order broke down and the government appeared paralysed. Much violence was prevented due to protection given to their Tamil neighbors by Sinhalese and Muslim families. The question of responsibility and accountability for the crimes that were committed in July 1983, and not prevented even when they could have been prevented, echoes today’s concerns about the Easter Sunday bombings of 2019 and the Chemmani mass graves dating back to the late 1990s.

There has long been speculation that the Easter bombing of April 2019 had a relationship to Sri Lankan politics. The near simultaneous bombings of three Christian churches and three luxury hotels, with a death toll of 270 and over 500 injured, by Muslim suicide bombers made no sense in Sri Lanka where there has been no history of conflict between the two religions. But a political motivation was suspected on the basis of who would be the beneficiary of an otherwise senseless crime. The bombing immediately discredited the government in power at that time, saw the nomination of the opposition presidential candidate soon after, and paved the way for the crushing defeat of the government at the national elections that followed in a few months.

The government has been trying to overcome the most serious economic breakdown in the country’s modern history. By negotiating without prevarication with the International Monetary Fund and by allowing the Commission to Investigate Allegations of Bribery or Corruption, the police and the courts to do their work, it has persuaded foreign partners and the general public that it can be trusted. That credibility now gives the government an opportunity that its predecessors failed to obtain. It can and must use the trust it has gained to confront the legacy of war and heal a country that is still divided.

The government’s openness to the international human rights community as witnessed in its welcome to UN Human Rights High Commissioner Volker Türk, and willingness to receive advice from him, perhaps reflects its sense of confidence in its sincerity of purpose to uplift the country politically economically and in terms of the people’s enjoyment of human rights. The government appears to be living Tagore’s dream: “Where the mind is without fear and the head is held high; Where knowledge is free; Where the world has not been broken up into fragments by narrow domestic walls.” In this context, international support is to be welcomed whether in the form of assistance from the IMF, the UN or individual countries.

The government is being judicious in reading the signs of the time. The country continues to be in the throes of the economic crisis that it inherited. It faces formidable challenges in confronting a combined opposition that governed Sri Lanka for the past 76 years. In addition, the world is in crisis with international law being openly disregarded in the joint US‑Israel bombardment of Iran’s nuclear sites. Faced with such turbulence, there is a need to tread carefully in this context and not get out of depth in experimenting with change based on ideological conviction. Governments of small and less developed countries especially need to balance their ideological visions with the structural constraints imposed by global power politics.

The visit of UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Volker Türk, later this month may possibly be overshadowed by the eruption of hostilities in the Middle East following Israel’s attack on Iran. The High Commissioner’s visit to Sri Lanka relates to the series of resolutions passed by the UN Human Rights Council over the past sixteen years since the end of the war. It will highlight the contradiction in the rules-based international order when geopolitical interests override legal commitments. These resolutions highlight the importance of protecting human rights during times of conflict and ensuring accountability for war crimes. They are part of the enduring legacy of international human rights and humanitarian law, as exemplified by the Geneva Conventions and the global post-war consensus that atrocity crimes should not go unpunished.

The people’s mandate at the general election seven months ago was for “system change”. The main hope of those who voted overwhelmingly for the NPP was to improve the economic situation. Those who live in the north and east of the country, where the long civil war took place, voted along with their fellow citizens in other parts of the country for an improvement in their economic circumstances and a break from the decades of exclusion they have experienced. One way they thought this would happen was through the reduction of corruption that took resources away from economic development. The NPP’s central promise was to govern cleanly, hold the corrupt accountable, and recover the billions of dollars allegedly looted and hidden abroad. A common and growing criticism of the government, however, is that this recovery has yet to materialise in any significant form.

The United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Volker Türk, is expected to visit Sri Lanka later this month. This will be an important visit as he will be seeking to assess the progress that the new government has made in implementing resolutions passed by the UN Human Rights Commission which his office facilitates. The last such visit was by former High Commissioner Al Hussein in February 2016, during the period of the Sirisena-Wickremesinghe government. At that time the relations between the Sri Lankan government and the UN Human Rights High Commissioner’s office were mutually supportive as the Sri Lankan government had co-sponsored UNHRC Resolution 30/1 which specifically included international participation in the transitional justice process.

It appears that President Anura Kumara Dissanayake was a reluctant participant at the 16th National War Heroes Commemoration event. The government announced he would attend the event after strong criticism from sections of the opposition and social media. The printed invitations to the event did not contain the president’s name. The government explained this was due to a miscommunication and the president always intended to attend the commemoration. According to the constitution the president is commander-in-chief of the armed forces and the president usually takes on the office of Minister of Defense, with President Dissanayake also following this tradition. As the commander-in-chief of the armed forces and Minister of Defense, his presence was both symbolic and necessary.

The dates May 18-19 highlight a continuing divide in the country with few willing to look at the losses on the other side though they were all Sri Lankans. These two days in particular surface the uncomfortable truth that the country’s people have different memories, including the manner in which the three decade long war ended. The Tamil people have commemorated May 18 as the day on which many of them, including LTTE members, were killed and the war was lost. This year there were commemorations in different parts of the country, including in Colombo. It was not only Tamils who commemorated their loved ones on May 18. Sinhalese did so too at ceremonies they organized. They were all sorrowful occasions.