by Rajan Philips

The general view seems to be that Anura Kumara Dissanayaka and Sajith Premadasa are the clear front runners, but opinions differ as to who is first and who is second depending on which candidate one is rooting for. The general view is also that Ranil Wickremesinghe is running third, but there is no definite indication of how close or far behind he is. Those who support him say that he is surging. But no one is seriously suggesting that either of the front runners could get over 50% to be declared the winner after the first count.

So, for the first time after eight presidential elections, the winner is likely to be determined based on the 2^nd or 3^rd preferential ranks that voters end up marking for either of the first two candidates on the otherwise discarded ballots of the other 36 candidates including the third placed candidate. Importantly, the preferential ranks marked on the ballots of the first two candidates will be discarded and will not be counted against each other!

A run on the Vote Banks

In the 2019 election, Gotabaya Rajapaksa won 52% of the vote, Sajith Premadasa 42%, Anura Kumara Dissanayake 3%, and all others 3%. With Namal Rajapaksa in the fray, the vote for all candidates other than the first three could be significantly higher at 10% or even 15%, leaving 85% or 90% of the votes to be divided among the three main candidates. The vote proportion that Namal Rajapakse manages to get would critically impact what the three main candidates will be able to draw from GR/SLPP’s 52% vote bank.

The biggest loser already is Ranil Wickremesinghe and will lose big unless he is able to get Mahinda Rajapaksa to soften the filial campaign for his son. There could also be some impact on the vote tally of Anura Kumara Dissanayake who is likely drawing the bulk of his expanded new support from the GR/SLPP vote bank. SP too is hoping to draw votes from the same bank, although his primary efforts must be to preserve as much as possible of the 42% sources that he managed in 2019.

RW’s second predicament is that he is not able to peel away as much he would like to from the SP/SJB vote bank. Further, as an independent candidate RW cannot vigorously canvass on old UNP loyalties. The true UNP loyalty hopes for either SP or RW to give up the contest in favour of one of them standing as a single candidate. That is not going to happen. It is not only too late for that, but the voters will also see the cynical ploy in it and punish them by voting for AKD.

There are musings that a good number of those who vote for RW or SP may not choose either man for their second preference, but AKD instead. The palpable reason seems to be that many non-left voters appreciate AKD’s seeming sincerity and his anti-corruption platform but are wary of casting their (first preference) vote for a leftist candidate; hence, the second preference. Another concern about AKD and the NPP among urban middle class voters would appear to be the paucity of information about AKD’s team – especially who would be his economic advisors and who would be his senior ministers in a potential NPP government after the parliamentary election.

That said, Mr. Dissanayake should be commended for positively clarifying on Wednesday, at a meeting in Divulapitiya (as reported in the Daily Mirror, Sept. 4) that the NPP “will not violate the Constitution if elected on September 21,” and that he will continue with the current parliament and government, as required by the Constitution, until parliament is dissolved after one and a half months. But he has promised to make new appointments to the Boards and Commissions of important state agencies on the very morrow of his potential election. That is all appropriate and the people will get an early flavour of a potential NPP government. But we are getting ahead of ourselves here!

All of this is to say something about the simmering vibes that AKD might get a good chunk of second preferential rankings from those who vote for SP or RW. That may prove crucial if preferential votes are counted to determine a winner after an inconclusive (no one passing the 50% mark). Given the way that the 2019 vote banks of GR/SLPP and SP/SJB are expected to be divvied between the three front runners, no candidate is likely to get more than 40% on the first count. And what is also likely when preferentials are added is that whoever comes first after the first count will remain first and be declared the winner.

There is also a possibility, however remote, that one of the two front runners could end up with a clear (50% +) victory depending on how the two vote banks are drawn from. The dynamic here would be that if those voters who are now leaning towards RW or NR sense that it is either SP or AKD who is going to be the eventual winner, they might abandon RW and NR and migrate to SP or AKD and in numbers sufficient enough to make one of them scale the 50% fence.

This would be a substantial swing in the current situation but quite common in parliamentary elections unlike in presidential elections. Sri Lanka alternates between parliamentary and presidential elections and the former still infects the other. That there will be a parliamentary election immediately following creates a situation of permanent election momentum. This again will favour Sajith Premadasa and Anura Kumara Dissanayake, but not Ranil Wickremesinghe because he is now an independent one-man party with no plan or prospect for the succeeding parliamentary election.

Ethnic Accounts

There are two other layers in the two main vote banks from the 2019 election. One is the district account and the other makes up the ethnic accounts. Of the 22 electoral / administrative districts, Gotabaya Rajapaksa won the majority of the votes in 16 districts, and Sajith Premadasa in six districts that included the two districts in the Northern Province, three in the Eastern Province, and the Nuwara Eliya District in the Central Province. Of the 42% SP polled, nearly 26% was from the six districts – three of which are Sri Lankan Tamil Majority districts, two where Tamils and Muslims constitute the majority, and one includes significant numbers of the Malaiyaha Tamil community.

Including the numbers of the three groups in the other districts (mostly in the Western, Central, and to a lesser extent Southern Provinces) Sajith Premadasa’s tally would have included about 30 to 35% of all of what could be collectively called the Tamil speaking voters. Maintaining this support, or how these voters divide themselves between the candidates in this election, would be critical to Mr. Premadasa’s outcome on September 21. To be clear, issues and considerations will be specific to and vary between three groups, or electorally distinct ethnic accounts.

The 16 districts that Gotabaya Rajapaksa won are Sinhala majority districts and accounted for 93.5% of the 6.9 million people who GR repeatedly asserted voted for him. GR ran as an unabashedly Sinhala Buddhist candidate and convincingly won with 52% of the total votes. His victory exploded the plural presuppositions of the elected presidential system – i.e., a winning presidential candidate will require the support of non-Sinhala voters and must reflect their interests.

The redeeming vacuum in this month’s election is that there is no one running as a Sinhala Buddhist candidate of any claim or consequence. Remarkably, Namal Rajapaksa would seem to have closed that chapter for good in the family political book. Ultra nationalists will have to look elsewhere to discover a new authentic candidate. The aftermaths of the 2019 Easter bombings may have their own reverberations on September 21 and influence the voting of the Sinhala Catholics.

But by and large, the Sinhala majority voters are most likely to be concerned over economic conditions and cost of living issues. Even though a sampled majority of them do not think that any of the three front-running candidates has a convincing approach to navigate through the current crisis. One would hope that this unsurprising negativity will not result in a lower voter turnout. That will be unfortunate, for it is the voting shifts within this segment of voters that will determine the fortunes of the front runners and the eventual outcome.

Put another way, what matters is how the two front runners, as well as Ranil Wickremesinghe and Namal Rajapaksa in their side races, will draw on the Sinhala ethnic account to make up the bulk of their vote tallies. To be sure, there are sub-accounts within this segment based primarily on socioeconomic circumstances along with locational factors. Going by the 2019 results, Gotabaya Rajapaksa obtained more than 50% of the vote in 15 of the 16 districts where he got the majority vote. The lone exception was Badulla, where he got 49.29%. He exceeded 60% in four districts – the three southern districts and Monaragala. He barely passed 50% in Kandy (50.43%) and Puttalam (50.83%); and he got close to 60% (59+%) in three districts – Gampaha, Kalutara and Ratnapura.

On the other hand, Sajith Premadasa exceeded 40% in five of the 16 districts (Badulla, Colombo, Kandy, Polonnaruwa and Puttalam), and came close to 40% in Matale. Five of these districts include significant numbers of Tamil speaking voters, which again demonstrates the extent of his support on this voting segment in the 2019 election. The Easter reverberations could be a factor in the Colombo and Gampaha districts.

Of the three front runners, only Sajith Premadasa has a previous vote base in the 16 districts won by Gotabaya Rajapaksa in 2019. How much of that he would be able to keep and how much new votes he could garner in these districts will be critical to his own outcome and the overall result in the election.

The motivations among the Tamil speaking voters will reflect the state of politics among the Tamils, the Muslims and Malaiyaha Tamils. Anura Kumara Dissanayake has insistently taken a direct approach to the three communities and avoided agency mediation through their political organizations. He is also long on the rhetoric of equality but quite short on the specifics of devolution which is an unavoidable spatial frame for achieving equality. That could be a critical factor for the Sri Lankan Tamil voters and among Muslim voters in the Eastern Province.

The main Muslim organizations appear to have joined the camp of Sajith Premadasa, but an aragalaya of young Muslim voters are being anticipated to support Dissanayake. The Malaiyaha Tamil organizations are divided between SP and RW, some of them exchanging blows on television, while AKD would seem to have made direct inroads into this group and might be able draw from their account.

The Sri Lankan Tamil political organizations are in a state of indecision, if not disarray, over deciding whom to support in the election. Last Sunday, there was a formal announcement that the ITAK (Ilankai Tamil Arasu Kadchchi) would be supporting Sajith Premadasa and not the Common Tamil Candidate, P. Ariyanenthiran of the Tamil National Common Structure alliance. The IIAK announcement was soon repudiated and is now expected to be reversed in favour of Mr. Ariyanenthiran. That could have consequences for the election. All in all, it is quite a pathetic manifestation of self-determination.

By Sanjeewa Jayaweera

With less than three weeks left to choose a President who will lead our country for the next five years, the urgency of our decision is palpable. Many of us, including myself, are still weighing our options. We often chose the ‘lesser of two evils’ in past elections. However, this time, the issue of corruption seems to be taking precedence over economic stability for a significant number of voters.

Many I have spoken to, particularly among the working class, have stated, “I am planning to vote for the NPP as the others have done nothing but steal when in power, and we feel that only the NPP will tackle the issue of corruption among those in power.”

It’s evident that Ranil Wickramasinghe (RW), the current President, is struggling to convince the public of his commitment to fighting corruption. This is particularly disheartening given the widespread public outcry, including from the corporate sector, expressed in the ‘Aragalaya.’ The economic crisis was a catalyst for this public demand for action. People were fed up with rampant corruption and how politicians have run the country since independence. This collective frustration is not just palpable, it’s a clear sign of the public’s dissatisfaction and the urgent need for change.

The depths to which corruption among politicians had taken root was demonstrated when the former auditor general Gamini Wijesinghe, leading up to the 2019 presidential election, publicly stated that the country would benefit even if the concerned minister were paid a 10% commission on projects promoted rather than allowing the project to go ahead, as the financial burden for the people would be significantly less if the project were not undertaken. Undoubtedly, his comments were based on what he had witnessed over several decades of public service.

Regrettably, this sentiment is shared by a majority of voters, and RW and his cabinet of ministers have not taken any substantial steps against corruption in the past two years. Despite the country’s dire economic situation, this prevailing belief only reinforces the notion that corruption continues to thrive and is a significant factor in our economic woes. This lack of action against corruption is not just a source of disappointment, it’s a cause for disillusionment for many.

The ongoing case against the former Minister of Health and several others involved in importing substandard medicines is a case in point. The concerned minister was allowed to retain the portfolio despite a motion of no confidence against him brought by the opposition in parliament and various other accusations being leveled against him. When the heat was too intense, he was relieved of his portfolio and made the minister of the environment! The fact that he was not banished from the cabinet only fortified the feeling that RW was not serious about tackling corruption.

The controversy surrounding the decision to outsource the visa-granting process to a foreign service provider at a significantly higher cost has deepened the public’s skepticism about corruption within the government. The Supreme Court’s decision to overturn the cabinet’s ruling until the case is resolved only adds weight to the argument that the process was flawed. The recent cabinet decision to allow citizens of 38 countries to be granted a visa on arrival seems to confirm the government’s mistake in outsourcing the visa-granting process at a higher cost to the tourist.

RW has consistently failed to dispel the widely held belief that he was involved in the “Central Bank Fraud.” In addition, the wholehearted support for him by several cabinet ministers perceived by the public as corrupt has further contributed to the public’s disillusionment with RW.

RW has publicly said that he is prepared to prosecute anyone against whom there is hard evidence of corruption. I presume he means that he will ensure that the Attorney General’s department prosecutes the case. It is a bit difficult to agree with him, given that during the last two years under his administration, no progress has been made in the case against a former CEO of Sri Lankan Airlines, who stands accused of having received payments of US $2 million to his wife’s bank account in Singapore.

RW based his campaign on the fact that he took up the Prime Minister’s post and then the President’s post when the country was in dire straits, and no one else was prepared to do so. He states in parrot fashion that Sajith Premadasa ran away from the responsibility and did not have the guts to take on the job. Whether he deserves any credit for that, given that it was a position that he drooled over for many decades but understood that he could not attain through a popular vote, is worthy of analysis outside this article.

His other claim is that he stabilized the economy and ensured it did not go the same way as Lebanon, which is undoubtedly correct. I was someone who supported an IMF programme to overcome the economic crisis. That was the only pragmatic solution then, and RW had no hesitation in accepting such a solution that involved enforcing some harsh measures, which is a credit to him.

In an insightful article titled “The Hard Truth; Supporting Ranil Now Could Trigger the Next Crisis”, the author Ravi Ratnasabapathy states, “It required substantial behind-the-scenes work, most of it quite invisible to the public, and this is not appreciated. It is notable for what was avoided, most critically a domestic banking crisis, for much as what transpired. A domestic banking crisis is frequently associated with a crisis of this nature, and its avoidance was a mean feat.”

In his article, the author argues for the continuity of RW’s economic policy. However, given his unpopularity with the voters, he proposes that RW withdraw from the election, following in Biden’s footsteps, and his votes be cast for Sajith. This strategy would prevent Anura Kumara Dissanayake (AKD) from winning the election.

There is a valid concern that AKD and his party’s economic policies will trigger another financial crisis that might be worse than the one we endured in the first half of 2022. We must be mindful that the experiment of electing Gotabhaya Rajapaksa as President in 2019 was a disaster. His inexperience in governance and economics was a significant cause of the economic crisis. We must be mindful that a president with hardly any experience holding high office and an inexperienced cabinet (assuming NPP will win the general elections) will be a gamble.

The NPP and ADK have responded by saying that those who claim to have previous experience holding high office are responsible for the economic downfall, which is also valid.

As I write this article, the news that the cabinet has approved for public servants’ salaries to be increased by about 25% effective 01st January 2025 is yet another confirmation that nothing much has changed about how our politicians perceive the public and try to deceive them by making unrealistic promises. That this announcement was made a couple of days before the postal voting by public servants is deplorable. Come the 21st of September, it will undoubtedly be Hobson’s choice for most of the electorate.

Nations Trust WNPS Monthly Lecture

By Mendis & Nethu Wickramasinghe

Wednesday the 11th of September, 6 pm at Jasmine Hall, BMICH

The Nations Trust WNPS Monthly Lecture for the month of September will delve into the fascinating world of blind snakes, shedding light on their biology, diversity, and ecological importance. Mendis, an expert in taxonomy, will guide participants through the identification and classification of blind snakes, sharing insights from his extensive fieldwork. Nethu, a researcher in molecular phylogenetics, will complement this by explaining the genetic relationships among blind snake species, unveiling their evolutionary history and the significance of molecular techniques in understanding these cryptic creatures.

Together, they will emphasize the critical role of blind snakes in maintaining ecological balance and discuss the urgent need for their conservation in the face of habitat loss and other threats. Participants will also learn about the latest research techniques and how they can contribute to conservation efforts.

L. J. Mendis Wickramasinghe

Mendis

Mendis Wickramasinghe is a renowned herpetologist with nearly 30 years of field research experience on the reptiles and amphibians of Sri Lanka. He has discovered 33 new species and re-discovered three previously thought extinct. His work, which includes serving as an Ecologist at the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), has significantly contributed to biodiversity conservation efforts. He is a member of multiple specialist groups and serves as an advisor for national and international conservation projects. As the founder of the Herpetological Foundation of Sri Lanka, Mendis continues to advance research and mentor young herpetologists.

Nethu Wickramasinghe

Nethu

Nethu Wickramasinghe is a distinguished educationist, scientist, writer, and naturalist with expertise in molecular biology. As the founder of Education Without Boundaries, she is a pioneer in holistic education, providing innovative, integrated learning experiences. Her scientific work includes describing 17 new species of snakes and amphibians and rediscovering species once thought extinct. A homeschooling mother of three, Nethu has a decade of experience in alternative teaching strategies. Her current PhD research focuses on the molecular phylogeny of blind snakes in Sri Lanka, aiming to provide a comprehensive taxonomic revision of this group, potentially uncovering new species and enhancing scientific understanding.

The lecture is open to both members and non-members, ENTRANCE FREE.