Features
Some incomprehensible lapses in Easter Attack Commission Report
By Kalyananda Tiranagama
The Presidential Commission of Inquiry on Easter Sunday Attack (PCoI) had the difficult and challenging task of going through a vast amount of evidence, both oral and documentary, of several hundred witnesses, identifying the persons and organizations involved in the attack and the circumstances that brought about the situation culminating in the attack, and the political leaders and state officials whose dereliction of duty and responsibility resulting in the failure to take necessary action to prevent the attack in time and making necessary recommendations for taking legal action against them and for preventing recurrence of such situations.
In its Final Report submitted to the government, the PCoI had made a large number of relevant, important, useful and implementable recommendations, some of which the government has already taken steps to implement such as arresting some of the persons and proscribing some organizations mentioned therein. The Commission has done a commendable job by presenting this report.
While the Commission was conducting its inquiries summoning witnesses and recording their evidence at length giving wide publicity through the media, the people of the country expected that the Commission would identify all the culprits responsible for the attack, not only those who carried out the terrorist acts, but all those who were involved in or contributed to it directly or indirectly in various ways by facilitating, aiding and abetting, providing financial, material or moral support, within the country and from outside, to the terrorist group that carried out the attack; the links they had with communalist Muslim political parties and their leaders; and the foreign involvements in the attack. The people also expected it to identify the political leaders and public officials accountable for this attack by their failure to take necessary action to prevent it even after having received information in advance and deal with them according to law.
However, when a person with some legal background reads this report with an analytical mind, one finds that there are several incomprehensible lapses, omissions and lacunae in it. The purpose of this article is to point out some of the lapses that one would come across while going through this report.
Persons directly connected to terrorist attacks
In its Final Report the Commission has identified 14 persons as persons directly connected with the terrorist acts that took place on Easter Sunday. Out of them 11 persons are dead:
Zaharan and Ilham Ibrahim – suicide bombers in Shangrila attack;
Inshaf Ibrahim – Cinnamon Grand bomber; Mubarak – Kingsbury bomber;
Jameel – Dehiwala Tropical Inn bomber; Muath – Kochchikade bomber;
Hasthun – Katuwapitiya bomber;
Azad – Batticaloa Zion Church bomber;
Rilwan, Shaini and Niyas – died in Saindumarudu explosion.
Only three persons remain in custody to be prosecuted:”
(i)
Mohammed Ibrahim Mohammed Naufer – who has lectured on IS ideology and its activities in all the training camps conducted by Zaharan group;
(ii) (ii) Hayathu Mohammadu Ahamadu Milhan – who has acted as the weapons trainer in about 12 training camps conducted by Zaharan, played a key role in establishing the training camp at Wanathavilluwa and preparing explososives and procuring chemicals for the manufacture of bombs and taken part in the killing of two Police officers at Vavunativu in November 2018.
(iii) (iii) Mohomed Ibrahim Sadeeq Abdulla – an active member of Jamaath Islamia Students Movement (SLJISM), who had gone to Syria via Turkey in 2014 and undergone arms training; and participated in two training camps conducted by Zaharan and conducted some more camps in 2017 and 2018 on his own.
Persons and Organisations that contributed to terrorist acts
The PCoI has identified
the following as organizations and persons that contributed to the terrorist attacks by aiding and abetting actions which caused racial and religious disturbances or by giving support to such acts within the country and created public unrest and disturbed social order:
(i) Sri Lanka Jamaat-e-Islami (SLJI)
SLJI is an organization working on the same ideology as Muslim Brotherhood, a terrorist organization banned in Egypt, and having close connections with persons and organizations having the same ideology in Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar, India and Pakistan. The final goal of the SLJI is establishment of an Islam state in Sri Lanka. The official publication of SLJI, Al Hassanat has over the years carried articles glorifying jihad. In February 1990 it has published an article stating that the establishment of an Islamic state cannot be done without waging jihad. In November 1999 it has carried an editorial criticizing the worshipping of statues and praising those who break them. In February 2001 it has published an article extolling people who sacrifice their lives for Islam and stating that they will be given 72 virgins in heaven. In June 2008 it has stated quoting Egyptian terrorist Al Qardawi that a suicide attack is a great act of jihad. It has established Arabic Schools in Madampe, Mawanella and Kalkudah. At the Arabic School in Madampe students were taught about the establishment of an Islamic state and it was compulsory to learn to fight with weapons – P. 227 – 228.
(ii) Sri Lanka Jamaat-e-Islami Students Movement (SLJISM)
SLJISM is the students’ wing of the SLJI. Many of the participants in training programmes conducted by Zaharan and several of the suspects in custody over the Easter Sunday attacks are members of the SLJI. About 15 members of the SLJISM are in custody over the Easter attack, some of them have gone to Syria for arms training and Mufees, the person who provided the land at Wanathavilluwa where explosives and weapons found was a member of SLJISM. – P. 238
The COI has recommended proscription of SLJI and SLJISM.
Persons:
(i) Ahamed Talib Lukman Thalib (father);
(ii) (ii) Lukman Thalib Ahamed (son) – 2 persons of Sri Lankan origin domiciled in Australia –who have facilitated several members of SLJISM to proceed to Syria via Turkey for arms training;
(iii) (iii) one Rimsan, a Sri Lankan connected to Al Qaida. The COI has recommended in the on-going criminal investigations to examine their role, if any, in the Easter Sunday attacks.
(iv) Rasheed Hajjul Akbar – the leader of SLJI from 1994 till August 2018. He was a member of the Shura Council of the SLJI. Hajjul Akbar is one of the main ideologists of Islamic extremism in Sri Lanka, promoting religious hatred and intolerance, application of Sharia law and establishing an Islamic state in Sri Lanka. Under his leadership, the official journal of SLJI Al Hassanat has published articles promoting extremism and terrorism. He had been arrested by the CCD on August 25, 2019 and released on September 27, 2019. His younger brother is Moulavi Rasheed Mohamed Ibrahim. Moulavi Ibrahim and his two sons Sadeek Abdulla and Shahid Abdulla are in custody for damaging Buddha statues in Mawanella in December 2018. The COI has recommended the AG to consider instituting criminal action against Rasheed Hajjul Akbar for conspiring to establish an Islamic state in Sri Lanka.
(v) Dr. Muhamad Zufyan Muhamad Zafras – working at the National Hospital, Colombo who has helped Zaharan’s brother Rilwan to get admitted to Colombo National Hospital for treatment as a person injured in a gas cylinder blast, hiding the fact that he was injured in a blast while experimenting with explosives. The COI has recommended the AG to consider instituting criminal action against Dr. Zafras under S. 5 of the PTA for withholding information.
Accountability of Authorities for Failure to Prevent Attacks
Political Authorities
As for the political authorities in government accountable for the failure to prevent the terrorist attacks, the PCoI has found only President Maithripala Sirisena accountable: President Maithripala Sirisena – failed in his duties and responsibilities, transcending beyond mere civil negligence – P 263. There is criminal liability on his part for the acts or omissions mentioned therein and the COI recommends the Attorney General instituting criminal action under the Penal Code against him. -P 265
Senior Public Officers
The COI has recommended the AG to consider instituting criminal action under any suitable Penal Code provision against three senior public officers:
(i)
Secretary Defence Hemasiri Fernando – P. 284;
(ii)
DIG Sisira Mendis, Chief of National Intelligence – P. 285;
(iii)
SDIG Nilantha Jayawardane, Director, State Intelligence Service – P, 288.
Law Enforcement Officers
Out of the Law Enforcement Officers held accountable by the PCoI for their failure to take necessary steps to prevent the attacks in their respective areas, recommendation has been made only against the Inspector General of Police Pujitha Jayasundara for the AG to consider instituting criminal action under any suitable Penal Code provision. – P. 308
In respect of 6 other Police Officers recommendation has been made for the AG to consider instituting criminal action under any suitable Penal Code provision or S. 82 of the Police Ordinance. The following Police Officers belong to this category:
(i)
SDIG Nandana Munasinghe – Western Province – P. 312;
(ii)
SP Sanjeewa Bandara – Superintendant of Police, Colombo North – P. 314;
(iii)
SSP Negombo – Chandana Athukorala – P. 315;
(iv)
SP B. E. I. Prasanna, Western Province Intelligence Division – P. 315;
(v)
Chief Inspector Sarath Kumarasinghe, Acting OIC, Fort Police Station – P.320;
(vi)
Chief Inspector Sagara Wilegoda Liyanage, OIC, Fort
The AG has the option of instituting criminal action under any suitable Penal Code provision or under S. 82 of the Police Ordinance. If the AG decides to institute action under S. 82 of the Police Ordinance, they will not be indicted and there will be no criminal proceedings against them. They will be charged in the Magistrate’s Court for breach of duty under S. 82 of the Police Ordinance:
–
S. 82 :– Every Police officer (a) guilty of any violation of duty or wilful breach or neglect of any regulations and lawful orders of other competent authority – shall be liable to a penalty not exceeding three month’s pay, or to imprisonment with or without hard labour, for period not exceeding three months, or both.
Against three other Police Officers only disciplinary inquiry has been recommended:
(i)
DIG Deshbandu Tennekone, Colombo North;
(ii)
Negombo ASP Sisila Kumara;
(iii)
Chaminda Nawaratne, OIC, Katana
Accountability of Prime Minister Ranil Wickremasinghe and the Cabinet of Ministers
As for the responsibility and failures of the Prime Minister Ranil Wickremasinghe no such recommendation, as made against the President, has been made.
It appears from the following observations of the PCoI that it has shown a very lenient attitude towards the failures of the Prime Minister. The report states: ‘The reasons for the Prime Minister Ranil Wickremasinghe’s inability to attend meetings of the National Security Council when fixed at short notice due to other commitments – acceptable; Though he did not explain why he did not stay on for some of full meetings, this taken in isolation is insufficient to make any adverse findings against him – P. 268; There are other instances reflecting lenient approach on his part to national security issues: No positive action taken to prevent Wahabi violence against traditional Sufi Muslim community though he was aware of it; Did not accept army intelligence presentations about the rising Islam extremism in the country, particularly in the East – P. 270; He opposed the issue of banning nikab and burkha raised by the Army Commander at the National Security Council without consulting Muslim parties – P. 271; Govt. did not ban IS organization in Sri Lanka as there were no reports stating IS propaganda taking place in Sri Lanka, only reports of individuals spreading IS ideology; It was corroborated by several witnesses that the Govt was reluctant to take strong action against rising Islamic extremism due to its dependence on support of Muslim political parties.’
However, the Report states: ‘The lax approach of the Prime Minister towards Islam extremism was one of the primary reasons for the failure on the part of the government to take proactive steps towards Islam extremism. This facilitated the build-up of Islam extremism to the point of Easter Sunday attacks.’ – P. 277
– If it is so, why no action is recommended against Prime Minister Ranil?
– It has totally ignored the fact that, though Maithripala Sirisena was the President, the Prime Minister Ranil Wickremasinghe had the effective control of the entire government in his hands under the 19th Amendment, controlling the Cabinet and the Parliament.
– Sagala Ratnayake, a close confidante of the Prime Minister in the UNP, was the Minister of Law and Order in charge of the Police.
The Accountability of the Cabinet of Ministers
The PCoI has not given its mind as to whether the Cabinet of Ministers has contributed in any manner to the terrorist attack by its failure to discharge its Constitutional responsibility. When it examined the accountability of the President and the Prime Minister, one finds it difficult to understand why it did not examine the accountability of the governemtn headed by the Cabinet of Ministers, especially in view of the relevant provisions in Article 42 of the Constitution and the evidence placed before it.
Article 42 (1) There shall be a Cabinet of Ministers charged with the direction and control of the government of the Republic;
(2) The Cabinet of Ministers shall be collectively responsible and answerable to Parliament;
(3) The President shall be a member the Cabinet of Ministers and shall be the Head of the Cabinet of Ministers.
IGP Pujitha Jayasundara sent the communication received from Senior DIG Nilantha Jayawardana, Head of the State Intelligence Services and from Sisira Mendis, the Chief of National Intelligence containing detailed information warning about a threat of possible terrorist attack by ISIS terrorists in Sri Lanka received from Indian Intelligence sources with a note stating ‘FNA’ on 09. 04. 2019 itself to four Senior Police Officers: i. SDIG Western Province – Nandana Munasinghe; ii. SDIG Crimes, Organized Crimes and STF – M. Latheef; iii. SDIG Special Protection Range – Priyalal Dasanayake; iv. Director – Counter Terrorism Investigation Division – Waruna Jayasundara – P. 303.
Special Protection Range is the Ministerial Security Division (MSD) which provides security to Ministers of the Cabinet. It was reported in the media that SDIG Priyalal Dasanayake, giving evidence before the Commission, stated that he had conveyed the information received of the threat of possible terrorist attack to all the officers of the Ministerial Security Division on April 9, 2019 itself.
Of the four Senior Officers who received the said communication from the IGP, the PCoI has recommended to the AG to consider instituting criminal action under any suitable Penal Code provision or S. 82 of the Police Ordinance against SDIG Western Province – Nandana Munasinghe;. – P. 312. As for the conduct of SDIG Crimes, Organized Crimes and Commander STF – M. Latheef, the Report contains the following comment: ‘When the COI queried the steps taken with regard to it (the IGP’s communication) the response was that he got in touch with the Indian High Commission and provided security to it. However, it is surprising as to why he did not instruct his intelligence units to work on the intelligence received.’ – P. 309. No recommendation made against him.
However, the final report does not mention anything about the steps taken by SDIG Priyalal Dasanayake on the information conveyed to him. It does not show whether COI made any query as to whether the officers of the Ministerial Security Division conveyed the information received by them to the Ministers to whom they provide security and the reaction of the Ministers concerned. This is highly relevant and a serious lacuna in the report. One cannot expect or believe that none of the officers of the Ministerial Security Division conveyed this information received by them to any of the Ministers. At least we know that Minister Harin Fernando’s father had got this information from a Police officer, and that he conveyed it to his son preventing him from going to church on that fateful day.
The entire Cabinet of Ministers cannot evade responsibility for their failure in their Constitutional duty. Though they may not be legally accountable, their conduct is highly irresponsible, immoral and blameworthy.
However, the Cabinet Sub-Committee appointed by the present government to study the Report of the COI and identify recommendations for implementation has also expressed its view that the entire government then in power was accountable for the failure to prevent the Easter Attack.
(To be concluded tomorrow)
Securing Sri Lanka’s farming future:
By. Lalin I De Silva
Indra Rupasingha, a senior value chain consultant at Vivonta Green Tech, has collaborated with the World Bank on intercropping spice crops, coffee, and tea. His expertise, enriched by Scandinavian and European agricultural systems, includes environment-controlled agriculture, organic production, and animal husbandry. His extensive experience is further demonstrated by his roles as Director at Sri Lanka State Plantations Corporation, General Manager at John Keels Plantations/Elkaduwa Plantations, and Managing Director at Lipakelle Plantation.
Sri Lanka’s agricultural sector, the backbone of the nation’s economy and food supply, faces unprecedented risks due to climate change and unpredictable policy shifts, such as the abrupt push for organic agriculture, which led to a national crisis. As the 2024 presidential election approaches, it’s imperative that candidates prioritise the creation of a robust, transparent, and effective agricultural insurance system, learning from successful models like those in Canada, New Zealand, the United States, and France. These nations have demonstrated how a well-implemented insurance system can not only protect farmers but also secure the country’s food security. Sri Lanka must follow suit to shield its farmers from disaster and encourage them to continue cultivating for profit.
Sri Lanka’s Agricultural Insurance: A Critical Need for Food Security
In recent years, Sri Lanka’s agricultural sector has suffered heavily from natural disasters and ill-advised policy changes. The overnight shift to organic farming, which lacked proper planning and execution, left farmers in disarray and the nation teetering on the edge of a food shortage. While Sri Lanka has the National Insurance Regulation Authority, it has yet to truly serve the needs of farmers, burdening them with convoluted insurance agreements and inadequate protection. With 29 insurance companies operating in Sri Lanka, only one openly shares its Net Promoter Score (NPS), leaving the rest to operate under a shroud of secrecy. This lack of transparency has eroded trust and failed to provide the safety net that farmers desperately need.
But what if Sri Lanka could learn from other nations that have successfully mitigated agricultural risks? Countries like Canada, New Zealand, the United States, and France have all developed effective agricultural insurance programmes that offer timely payouts, use advanced technology, and provide farmers with peace of mind. Implementing such a system in Sri Lanka could help the nation avoid food shortages and promote continuous, profitable cultivation.
Learning from Canada, New Zealand, the US, and France
In Canada, the AgriInsurance system is a federal-provincial partnership that leverages satellite imagery, AI-based risk assessments, and real-time data monitoring to ensure fast and accurate crop loss evaluations. Farmers in Canada are particularly satisfied with the programme because it is transparent, affordable, and provides swift compensation, allowing them to recover quickly from natural disasters and resume cultivation.
Similarly, New Zealand’s FMG Rural Insurance focuses on customer-centric services, allowing farmers to use mobile apps to report losses and track claims. This ensures minimal delays in payments and fosters trust between insurers and farmers. In the United States, the USDA’s Risk Management Agency (RMA) works with private insurance companies under federal oversight, providing quick and standardized claim processes. Their use of satellite technology and cloud-based systems ensures accurate monitoring and dispute resolution.
In France, Groupama Agricultural Insurance integrates digital platforms that allow farmers to monitor real-time weather data and crop growth. With highly automated claim processes, French farmers enjoy efficient compensation, minimal delays, and high satisfaction.
Justifying the Need for Agricultural Insurance in Sri Lanka
Sri Lanka’s agriculture sector is critical to the country’s food supply and economic stability. However, the risks associated with climate change, fluctuating market prices, and ad-hoc policy changes threaten to destabilise this vital industry. Crop insurance can provide a safety net, allowing farmers to continue cultivation despite the odds.
One of the key barriers to implementing an effective insurance system in Sri Lanka is the bureaucratic red tape, leading to delayed claims and confusion over policy conditions. Farmers are left feeling unsupported, often burdened with agreements they cannot understand without legal assistance. A simplified, transparent, and technology-driven insurance model—like those seen in developed countries—could remove these barriers, instill confidence in farmers, and promote sustained agricultural output.
In addition to protecting farmers from natural disasters, agricultural insurance can also provide a buffer against policy-related risks. As seen during Sri Lanka’s overnight shift to organic agriculture, farmers were unprepared and left vulnerable to losses. A well-drafted insurance scheme would ensure that, even in times of policy shifts, farmers can rely on compensation and return to farming.
Five key Recommendations to Make Agriculture Insurance Popular and Effective in Sri Lanka
Introduce a Farmer-Friendly Insurance Policy: Develop a simplified insurance agreement that is easy to understand, without the need for legal expertise. Make the terms and conditions clear, concise, and accessible in local languages to encourage widespread adoption.
Leverage Advanced Technology for Crop Monitoring and Claim Processing:Adopt satellite imagery, AI tools, and mobile apps to monitor crop health and assess losses. These technologies will provide real-time data, ensure accurate assessments, and expedite claim settlements, creating a transparent system.
Implement Government-Backed Reinsurance to Guarantee Payouts: Ensure that the government partners with private insurance companies to back up the claims process. This would help maintain timely payouts, build trust among farmers, and reduce the risk of disputes.
Tailor Insurance Solutions to Local Agricultural Needs: Offer insurance policies that cater to Sri Lanka’s diverse crops and regional differences. Whether it’s paddy fields or tea plantations, the insurance system should be flexible enough to cover various risks specific to each agricultural zone.
Government Subsidies to Make Premiums Affordable:Provide government-subsidised premiums to make agricultural insurance affordable for smallholder farmers, who form the majority of Sri Lanka’s agricultural workforce. This would ensure that all farmers, regardless of size or income, can access insurance coverage.
Conclusion
As the 2024 presidential election draws near, Sri Lanka’s leaders must recognize the importance of agricultural insurance in safeguarding the nation’s food security. By learning from global examples like Canada, New Zealand, the US, and France, Sri Lanka can create an effective, transparent, and technology-driven system that protects farmers and encourages them to continue cultivation in the face of adversity. Implementing these reforms will not only benefit farmers but also ensure the long-term sustainability of the country’s agricultural sector – an outcome vital to Sri Lankas future.
Lalin I De Silva, former Senior Planter, Agricultural Advisor / Consultant, Secretary General of the Ceylon planters Society, Editor of the Ceylon Planters Society Bulletin and freelance journalist.
By Dr Matara Gunapala
During the reign of King Parakramabahu (1153-1186), Sri Lanka earned the distinguished title of the ‘granary of the Orient,’ reflecting its unparalleled agricultural abundance. The island’s breathtaking landscapes, fertile soil, and bountiful resources—including precious stones, renowned tea, rubber, and coconut—alongside its strategic deep harbours, made it a crucial hub in maritime trade. These resources drew foreign powers’ attention, and Sri Lanka experienced successive periods of colonial dominance under the Portuguese, Dutch, and eventually the British from 1815 to 1948.
British rule shifted Sri Lanka’s focus to export-oriented plantations and infrastructure primarily to benefit colonial interests. By independence in 1948, the Sri Lankan rupee was valued at approximately Rs 3.33 to the US dollar. However, economic mismanagement in the 75 years, following independence, has led to unprecedented economic crises and currency depreciation. As of February 2024, the rupee has plummeted to around Rs 310 against the US dollar, with only a slight improvement to Rs 300 by August 2024, plunging Sri Lanka into the ranks of the world’s 22 most heavily indebted nations.
Since Sri Lanka adopted an executive presidency, a cascade of constitutional amendments has fostered an environment where corruption and misconduct flourish, compromising democratic governance, destabilising the economy, and undermining the rule of law. The urgency of the situation cannot be overstated. Politicians wielding excessive power have exploited their positions, undermining institutions like the Central Bank and judiciary, eroding accountability, and distorting justice, leading to degraded public services and denying equitable access to opportunities, a distant dream for ordinary citizens.
While those in power and their associates revel in luxury and foreign travel, many Sri Lankans grapple with soaring prices and shortages of basic necessities. Therefore, Sri Lanka must embark on a transformative journey without delay to restore its economic health and political integrity, paving the way for a prosperous future.
Constitutional Reform
The Constitution is the bedrock of a nation’s governance, shaping the balance of power and safeguarding citizens’ rights. In Sri Lanka, however, the Constitution has been amended over 20 times, often in ways that have concentrated power in the hands of politicians, eroded judicial independence, and compromised economic stability and public service effectiveness. These changes have frequently undermined ethno-religious unity and hindered equal opportunities for all citizens. Recent attempts to further amend it to delay presidential elections have only deepened concerns about the current Constitution and the need for its drastic reform.
A few have advocated for significant changes for constitutional reform. Former President Chandrika Kumaratunga, presidential candidate Nagahananda Kodituwakku, and the Collective for Democracy and Rule of Law (CDRL)—a coalition of senior academics, professionals, and activists—have proposed new constitutional reform. The National Peoples Power (NPP) party has highlighted the urgent need for constitutional reform in its policy statements.
For Sri Lanka to embark on a path to prosperity, a transformative new Constitution must: a) discard the presidential system of governance and curtail politicians’ ability to influence the public sector, limiting their responsibility for policymaking; b) strengthen checks and balances to combat mismanagement and enhance transparency, ensuring accountability with strict penalties for misleading the public or making false promises, c) strengthen judicial independence to uphold justice, d) fair representation to ensure equal opportunity of all ethnic groups in governance, promote unity, and give every citizen an equitable voice, e) ensure Parliament is not a burden to the country. An excessive number of parliamentarians (225 members and the President) has long been a focal point of criticism. Their extensive powers and privileges have frequently burdened the nation. The proliferation of politicians—alongside over 455 provincial councillors and nine governors—has led to inefficiencies and corruption, with many exploiting their ability to misuse administrative and financial powers for personal gain. Therefore, a new Constitution should:
Prevent malpractices by implementing stringent measures to curb corruption and misuse of power, ensuring that public officials are held accountable for every action and expenditure.
Reducing inefficiencies by streamlining the parliamentary system by reducing the number of representatives and establishing an independent body of experts to oversee political conduct, aligning governance with democratic principles and national interests.
Introduction of merit-based appointments
The current economic crisis and rampant corruption are symptoms of a deeper problem: many politicians lack the commitment and capability to serve the nation effectively. The mismanagement of nationalised enterprises has resulted in significant economic losses and weakened public services. For effective governance, members of Parliament and public officials must be selected, based on merit—education, capability, experience, and integrity—rather than nepotism or sectarian interests. Parliamentary members should possess qualifications comparable to a recognised university degree and demonstrate essential leadership skills, including collaboration, critical thinking, and effective communication.
Moreover, political parties must prioritise national unity and development, preventing sectarian policies and political dynasties. Leadership should be determined by merit, honesty, and education rather than family ties, race, or other divisive factors. Embracing principles of meritocracy, pragmatism, and integrity—mirroring the values that contributed to Singapore’s success—can help restore Sri Lanka’s status as the “Pearl of the Indian Ocean” and set it on a path to renewed prosperity.
Strengthening Judiciary
A strong and independent judiciary is essential for upholding social justice and ensuring fair governance, especially in a nation battling widespread corruption, mismanagement, crime, and racial divide. Recently, Sri Lanka’s Supreme Court has highlighted numerous individuals, including influential politicians and their associates, as key players in the country’s ongoing economic crisis. Yet, the judiciary has struggled to enforce the law effectively, allowing wrongdoers to evade accountability and enjoy government-funded luxuries. Consequently, Sri Lanka urgently needs a judicial overhaul to have an independent judiciary that will create an environment where justice prevails, public confidence in the legal system is restored, and governance is transparent and accountable, reinforcing the rule of law.
Education and Skill Development
Education is the cornerstone of a nation’s success, fostering strategic thinking, innovation, and entrepreneurship that drives prosperity and navigates the global landscape. A robust education system equips individuals with the knowledge and skills needed for personal and professional growth and promotes social cohesion. By ensuring that all ethnic and religious groups are represented in every educational institution, education can bridge divides and reduce communal tensions, creating a more unified society.
Moreover, providing opportunities for those who leave school early through technical and vocational training is crucial. These programmes enhance employability and contribute significantly to national development by preparing individuals for the workforce and addressing skill shortages.
Investment in higher education and research institutions is equally vital. Nations experiencing rapid development—such as the United States, China, South Korea, Singapore, the United Kingdom, Australia, Japan, and various European Union countries—are notable for their substantial research and higher education funding. This investment drives innovation, economic growth, and global competitiveness.
Additionally, independent media is crucial in educating the public and informing citizens about significant issues. In Sri Lanka, information suppression has enabled corruption and misuse of power to flourish. An independent media sector encourages critical thinking and impartial analysis, helping to curb government inefficiencies and promote transparency. Independent media, in turn, supports socio-economic development and fosters a more informed and engaged citizenry.
Building a Disciplined Nation
A nation’s prosperity hinges on effective government institutions. Honesty, integrity, capability, and effective communication are essential for creating a thriving society. Despite having limited natural resources, countries like Japan and Singapore have achieved remarkable success primarily due to their strong sense of national discipline and robust legal systems.
In contrast, Sri Lanka has faced numerous challenges rooted in a lack of discipline across various sectors—from the streets to workplaces and even Parliament. This systemic issue has significantly contributed to the country’s struggles since independence. Building a disciplined nation requires a concerted effort to instil and uphold high standards of conduct at all levels of society. By fostering a culture of accountability and ethical behaviour, Sri Lanka can pave the way for sustainable growth and renewed prosperity.
Conclusion
Sri Lanka’s post-independence journey has been marred by corruption, mismanagement, and self-serving politics, culminating in a severe economic crisis. It has squandered countless opportunities for prosperity. Through comprehensive constitutional reform, Sri Lanka must curb politicians’ undue influence over the judiciary and public sector to reverse this decline. Establishing an independent judiciary and promoting disciplined behaviour across all levels of government and society enables racial unity and enhances good governance.
Investing in education, research, skill development, and entrepreneurship will unlock new opportunities and drive national prosperity. Additionally, safeguarding the environment and conserving natural resources are vital for developing Sri Lanka’s tourism industry and enhancing overall quality of life. Without transformative leaders like Mandela or Angela Merkel, it falls to the people to hold politicians accountable, driving them to embrace critical changes. Only then can Sri Lanka harness its true potential, restore integrity to its institutions, and forge a brighter, more equitable future for all its citizens.
by Rajan Philips
As Sri Lanka starts the countdown week before its September 21 presidential vote, the US finished the debate week that is expected to set the campaign tones for the remaining eight weeks before its presidential election on November 5. In a riveting performance last Tuesday, the Democratic candidate Kamala Harris exceeded all expectations and with consummate lawyerly skill laid bare the utter limitations and disqualifications of Donald Trump to be America’s president a second time.
The incoherent and blustering Trump undoubtedly made Harris’s debate tasks a whole lot easier, but the pre-debate onus was on her to show that she could perform in an unscripted engagement just as well as she is showing herself to be in organized rallies and in delivering tele-prompted speeches. And she did that superbly.
As debate politics goes, the big US and little Sri Lanka are at extreme ends. Sri Lankan presidential candidates have studiously avoided the ordeal of a face to face debate in a structured forum and the challenge of responding to independently prepared questions. Instead, they are firing questions and making accusations about one another but only from the security of their own platforms and in front of their own cheerers and hangers on. President Ranil Wickremesinghe would seem to have taken this old approach to a new level in what is fast becoming his last hurrah.
A Lopsided US Method
In the US, on the other hand, self-serving media hype has turned presidential debates into the single most pivotal moment to establish the eligibility of one candidate over the other. The irony of it is that a single debate between two American candidates gets all the hype and attention in what is globally the most consequential political election. Even so, while doing well in the debate was hugely necessary for Kamala Harris to validate her credentials, it is not at all sufficient to ensure her victory in November.
Like her Democratic predecessors, Al Gore, Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden, Harris is certain to win the popular vote; that is the majority of the total votes in the election. But that will not be enough unless she also gets the majority 270 of the 538 Electoral College (EC) votes in the undemocratically calibrated US presidential election system.
Al Gore polled more than George Bush nationally in the 2000 millennial election, but lost the EC vote and the election to Bush, because of his narrow loss in a single state, Florida and its 30 EC votes. Hillary Clinton similarly won the national vote but lost to Donald Trump in 2016 because of her loss in three Midwestern states – Michigan (15 EC votes), Wisconsin (10) and Pennsylvania (19), all of which had been won by Obama in the two previous elections. Biden turned the tables on Trump in 2020 and won all three states and took two more (Arizona and Georgia) from Trump.
Kamala Harris is running strong but tight with Trump in all the above five states that Biden won, and has brought two more into play – North Carolina and Nevada that Trump won in 2020. She has tremendously improved the chances of a Democratic victory since taking over from Biden, but nothing is certain until the votes in the now seven swing states are cast and counted.
The rest of the fifty states are divided between the two parties with baked in support no matter who the candidates are. Identification with and loyalty to either of the two parties is well entrenched in American politics. Democrats are dominant in 18 states, the so called blue states that are more urban, populous and diverse, and account for 225 EC votes. Republicans hold sway in the 25 red states that are relatively less populous, more rural and more white, and carry 219 EC votes.
The challenge for Harris is to win enough of the seven states to get 45 more (270-225) EC votes and prevent Trump from getting the 51(270-219) EC votes he needs from any number of the seven states. The margins of victory in any and all of these states could be a few thousand votes. And those voters will determine who America’s president and the world’s superpower leader will be for the next four years. A rather lopsided method for choosing the world’s most consequential political individual. All the more so, when it could lead to the second election of someone like Donald Trump, whom Kamala Harris clinically dismissed as a national disgrace and a global joke.
The Sri Lankan Variant
The Sri Lankan voters do not have the weight of the world on their hands, but they carry the fate of the country’s economy and its politics at least for the next five years. While Sri Lanka does not have an electoral college screening system as in the US, it has its own undemocratic aspect by virtue of the ranked method to determine the winner if no candidate passes the 50% muster on the first count. As everyone is predicting, the winner next week is likely to be determined after counting the second and the third preferential votes for the first two candidates marked on the ballots of all the other candidates.
The two front runners are widely expected to be Anura Kumara Dissanayake and Sajith Premadasa, with Ranil Wickremesinghe running third – but how close or far behind is still anyone’s guess. While neither of the two front runners is expected to get more than 50% of the vote, it is also likely that whoever comes first will end up the winner even after counting the preferential votes.
The not so strange rivals
The chances are that the ultimate winner may not even exceed 40% of the vote. He could even win with only a third of the vote and would immediately be stigmatized as the executive president with one-third mandate. In a polity that swears by the two-thirds majority. No matter, the country will have a new president. Unless Ranil Wickremesinghe magically manages in one week to bewitch an electorate that has grown tired of him over several decades. Yet it would have been more democratic, but expensive, to have a second runoff election between the two front runners to elect a president with a clear majority.
There is a second point of difference between the US and Sri Lankan presidential elections. In the US, the president, the whole House of Representatives and a third of the Senate are all elected on the same day. The new administration and the legislature start their new tenure after the inauguration in January following the November election. The Sri Lankan presidential election next week will complete only half the job. The new president will assume office almost immediately after the election, but will be stuck with the old parliament that is crying to be put out of its misery. Again, there are unprecedented possibilities.
Anura Kumara Dissanayake has declared that if elected he would immediately dissolve parliament and call for a general election. There will be a caretaker government until a new parliament is elected. That is a clean as a whistle approach that is consistent with AKD’s promise to start a new chapter for the country. But it is not without perils and pitfalls. The size of his vote will determine the leeway he has in implementing a caretaker government. And the performance of the caretaker government with AKD as president will hugely determine the NPP’s fortunes at the parliamentary election.
The challenges are huge given the NPP’s inexperience in government. Innocence in government ceases to be a virtue once you start making choices and decisions that impact people. There may not be much time for expatriate experts to arrive and take care of a caretaker government before the parliamentary election. Unless there is already a plan in AKD’s back pocket.
Sajith Premadasa, unless I have missed it, has not taken a clear position like AKD on what he will do with the current parliament if he (SP) were elected as president. Unlike AKD, SP has enough numbers in parliament to form an interim cabinet and keep going for a while before calling a general election. He will have the opposite problem to that of AKD. While AKD will have to bring in people whom nobody knows, Sajith Premadasa will have a time excluding people whom everyone hates. It is difficult to see what Ranil Wickremesinghe will do differently if he were to beat all odds and be elected as president. He could certainly savour his lifetime achievement but that will be of no service to the country.
Both Dissanayake and Premadasa will have to figure out a way to implement their promise to eliminate the elected-executive presidential system. The easiest and the surest way would be to start the process immediately and tag a referendum question on the presidency to the general election ballot. That would call for a decision on their own status as president – if they are ready to do the opposite of, and reverse, what JRJ did in 1977/78. Anything less will show their lack of seriousness. There is no point in calling it a betrayal after all the broken promises since 1994.
Traditionally, Sri Lankan voters have been motivated by multiple factors: the ethnic identity, class politics, party loyalty, caste prejudice, candidates’ likeability etc. But these factors have always been woven into an overriding wave of judgment on the performance of the government in power. Until 1977, voters generally and cyclically voted governments out of power and the opposition into power. The cycle has been wrenched up after 1977 in more ways than one.
The upcoming election next week is unique in that there is no one to be judged and thrown out of power. Aragalaya has already done that, and the Rajapaksas are now out of even contention. Ranil Wickremesinghe’s candidacy is also unique in that he doesn’t think that he should be judged for anything, but rewarded for saving the country from the Rajapaksa mess. The problem with that premise is that while he may have cleaned up the economic mess of the Rajapaksas, he has perpetuated their political mess.
For the first time, and uniquely as well, Anura Kumara Dissanayake is presenting himself as the spearhead of a new political force without past political baggage, and is appealing to the expectations of people to have an honest and efficient government. He has won over many people to his promises about the future, but what is not known is how many people are taking him at his word that his organization no longer has any of its old baggage.
There is not much that is unique about Sajith Premadasa, but he has emerged as a fortuitous beneficiary of the disintegration of the country’s traditional political organizations. Dissanayake and Premadasa are the acknowledged frontrunners, but they have distances to go to prove their political mettle both before and more so after the election.
Jackson 5 singer Tito Jackson dead at 70
Dunith Wellalage wins the ICC Men’s Player of the Month award for August 2024.
Harshitha Madavi named ICC Women’s Player of the Month for August 2024
-
Features2 days agoTea trouble brews for Sri Lankan presidential hopefuls
-
News3 days ago
Prez poll 2024: ITAK alleges bid to confuse Tamil electorate, reiterates backing for Sajith
-
News3 days ago
Anura criticises Ranil’s erratic behaviour
-
Features2 days ago
Countdown Week in Sri Lanka and Debate Week in the US
-
Editorial6 days ago
‘Poster boys’ and monsters
-
News4 days ago
ITAK reaffirms support for Sajith Premadasa
-
Features2 days ago
Ranil talks to the Sunday papers, fields wide-ranging questions
-
News3 days ago
Immigration and Emigration Chief ordered to appear before SC for failing to comply with order
