Connect with us

Midweek Review

Will the electorate be influenced by MPs switching sides, new alliances and foreign interventions?

Published

on

By Shamindra Ferdinando

Against the backdrop of realignment of political parties represented in Parliament in the run-up to the presidential election on Sept. 21, it would be pertinent to examine the status of the electorate. Would the electorate follow their representatives in Parliament as they switched allegiance to various presidential candidates? Could they be influenced by turncoat parliamentarians whose political intentions generally depend on personal benefits? That is the ugly truth the electorate must come to terms with.

There’ll be about 1.1 million new voters among 17.1 mn eligible to vote at the presidential election.

Before we discuss the forthcoming presidential poll, let me remind the readers of the composition of the current Parliament. The Parliament consists of 196 elected on a district basis and 29 chosen from the National List.

Fifteen recognized political parties are represented in the Parliament. The following are the political parties and the number of seats they won at the last parliamentary election conducted in August 2020. The Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna (SLPP/145 seats), Samagi Jana Balwegaya (SJB/54), Illankai Thamil Arasu Kadchi (ITAK/10), Jathika Jana Balawegaya (JJB/03), Eelam People’s Democratic Party (EPDP/02), Ahila Ilankai Thamil Congress (AITC/02) and the remaining nine parties, namely Thamil Makkal Viduthalai Pulikal (TMVP), Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP), Muslim National Alliance (MNA), Thamil Makkal Thesiya Kuttani (TMTK), All Ceylon Makkal Congress (ACMC), National Congress (NC), Sri Lanka Muslim Congress (SLMC), United National Party (UNP) and Our Power of People Party (OPPP) secured one seat each.

The number of seats mentioned above included National List slots. Of the 29 NL slots, the SLPP secured 17 and the SJB 07 whereas five other parties-ITAK, JJB, AITC, UNP and OPPP obtained one each.

However, the SLPP has been fragmented to such an extent and in disarray, the party faces a catastrophic situation. The Rajapaksas-led SLPP that handsomely won the last Local Government polls (Feb. 2018), Presidential Polls (Nov. 2019) and the General Election (Aug. 2020) is approaching a real moment of truth. In spite of the likes of its National Organizer Namal Rajapaksa, Johnston Fernando and retired Navy Chief of Staff Sarath Weerasekera continuing to put on a brave face, the ground situation is deteriorating rapidly and the party seems to be in dire straits.

The failure on the part of the ruling party to name its presidential candidate, ahead of President Ranil Wickremesinghe’s declaration of him as an independent candidate, exposed the SLPP badly.

The SLPP has repeatedly assured that its candidate would be disclosed today (07). Business tycoon Dhammika Perera, who had been accommodated in the SLPP National List, in June 2022, in place of Basil Rajapaksa, is widely believed to be their choice. Newcomer Perera, who served as Investment Promotion Minister during Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s presidency (June-July 2022), faces a daunting challenge in obtaining a respectable final count if the former people’s president Mahinda Rajapaksa, too, has been abandoned by his ardent supporters.

Lawmaker Namal Rajapaksa seems still confident that their candidate Dhammika Perera, or a last minute change, could still win the presidential race. With the SLPP’s backing, wartime Defence Secretary Gotabaya Rajapaksa, who had absolutely no experience in politics, secured a staggering 6.9 mn at the last presidential poll. With the original SLPP parliamentary group divided among presidential candidates, UNP leader Ranil Wickremesinghe, SJB leader Sajith Premadasa, MJP leader Dilith Jayaweera and yet to be named SLPP contestant, in terms of numbers, the incumbent President seems to be in the lead. But that could be a grave mistake on the part of the Wickremesinghe’s camp. The number of turncoats does not necessarily mean voters will follow especially because of undying loyalty professed by many to ex-President Mahinda. Even after he was trounced at the January 2015 presidential election and he silently withdrew into his Medamulana abode, it was the ordinary Sinhala masses having realized the anti-national frauds who were elected to replace Rajapaksas, went in their hundreds, if not thousands, daily, as if in pilgrimage, to plead with him to return to national politics. What would have swayed the masses was his natural appeal in his ability to interact with them. He was one leader who made Temple Trees an open house for ordinary people to come and have a meal at their leader’s palace, at least on Wesak days each year. He actually showed his mettle to not only to our masses, but to the whole world when he literally told a delegation of powerful entities from the West, like then British Foreign Secretary David Miliband and French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner, to get lost when they tried to arm twist him into saving terrorist numero uno Velupillai Prabhakaran and his band as they were facing total annihilation in Wanni in 2009.

The SLPP appears to be confident that the voters wouldn’t go along with those who had treacherously pledged their support to Wickremesinghe, Premadasa and Dilith Jayaweera at the expense of the party they represented in Parliament. Dr. Wijeyadasa Rajapakshe, PC, another SLPP MP, is in the fray as the candidate of the National Democratic Front (NDF). Former Justice Minister Rajapakshe is unlikely to attract any sitting MPs representing the SLPP or any other party. He must be relying on his sizeable caste vote to make a strong showing rather than an actual victory.

Impact of Aragalaya on voters

In the absence of proper examination of the events leading to Aragalaya, or change of government through unconstitutional means in July 2022, the SLPP or any other political party represented in Parliament lacked understanding of the ground situation. Therefore, political parties face the first national election in less than 50 days without proper comprehension of the developing situation and the forces working behind the scene.

Instead of seeking political advantage, political parties, represented in Parliament, should have sought to examine the circumstances leading to the eruption of the violent public protest campaign outside President Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s residence at Pangiriwatte, Mirihana, on the night of March 31, 2022. Even though the US definitely wanted to oust Gotabaya Rajapaksa, the global power couldn’t have achieved its objectives without the SLPP’s unintentional or deliberately flawed decisions contributing to the crisis with economic hitmen working within.

The SLPP parliamentary group cannot absolve itself of the responsibility for the ruination of the economy. Similarly, the UNP and SJB, under any circumstances, cannot deny their culpability for the massive Treasury bond scams perpetrated by the Yahapalana regime in 2015 (February) and 2016 (March) under the then Premier Ranil Wickremesinghe’s watch and still unexplained commercial borrowings. Over USD 10,000 million in new International Sovereign Bonds at high interest that were taken between 2015 and 2019 broke the economy.

The truth is an explosive mixture of domestic and international issues brought Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s government under pressure. The operation got underway within a week after Gotabaya Rajapaksa won the 2019 presidential election with the Swiss Embassy, in Colombo, staging the Garnier Francis drama that even captured the attention of the New York Times.

The swift and decisive exposure of the Swiss and their local counterparts should have alerted the Gotabaya Rajapaksa administration. Unfortunately, the powers that be caused a catastrophic situation by a series of ill-fated decisions. The Covid-19 pandemic made the situation far worse, coupled with unprecedented tax cuts, including pruning of Value Added Tax (VAT) from 15% to 8%, crippled the national economy. Who really advised President Gotabaya Rajapaksa not to reverse the decisions in the wake of the Covid-19 crisis? Or was it his pure stubbornness, coming from a military background?

The entire Cabinet-of-Ministers should be held responsible for the outrageous decision to do away with taxes at a time the country was experiencing severe economic difficulties. In fact, Sri Lanka effected tax cuts, regardless of specific warning issued by the IMF. No less than incumbent Central Bank Governor Dr. Nandalal Weerasinghe exposed the guilty lot when he appeared before a parliamentary watchdog committee in May 2022.

The arrival of a ship-load of allegedly toxic Chinese fertiliser, in the wake of a sudden decision to stop all chemical fertiliser imports in May 2021, Sri Lanka’s refusal to accept the consignment that led to a diplomatic tussle and the blacklisting of a State-owned bank, unsettled the country. President Gotabaya Rajapaksa made the ill-fated announcement as regards the ban on chemical fertiliser on April 22, 2021, at the President’s House. The President was flanked by Presidential Secretary Dr. P. B. Jayasundera, Senior Presidential Advisor Lalith Weeratunga and Finance Secretary S.R. Attygalle.

The sugar tax scam, too, contributed to the government’s downfall. Regardless of the relentless media attacks, and with the Opposition taking it up both in and outside Parliament, the government conveniently turned a blind eye as it would have been their way of paying back their election financiers.

Until the announcement of the Presidential Polls results, the impact of Aragalaya wouldn’t be known. Those who had really suffered as a result of the economic-political-social crisis caused in 2022 are likely to be the easiest to manipulate though public and private sector workers and their families are expected to reflect their discontent with the system.

It would be prudent to examine how the ex-military and police, as well as the serving officers and men, respond to political campaigns. The JJB and SJB are engaged in a fierce contest for those votes, with both making headway. The SJB appears to have consolidated its campaign meant to attract ex-military and serving officers and men in the face of JJB making early gains. Both parties seemed to be quite cleverly exploiting the ‘military vote’ bank as other contenders (Wickremesinghe and SLPP) lacked a cohesive strategy to entice them.

Yahapalana Army Chief General Mahesh Senanayake, one of the unsuccessful candidates at the 2019 presidential election, has joined the SJB campaign. Senanayake polled just over 49,000 votes and was placed fourth on the list of candidates. Gotabaya Rajapaksa polled 6,924,255 votes (52.25%) whereas Sajith Premadasa and Anura Kumara Dissanayake obtained 5,564,239 (41.99%) and 418,553 (3.16%), respectively. Senanayake polled a paltry 49,655 (0.37%).

Past Presidential Polls

Field Marshal Sarath Fonseka on Monday (05) declared his intention to join the presidential fray by paying the stipulated deposit. There had never been so many prominent candidates at any previous presidential polls and the contest was always between two major political groups. However, the entry of several prominent candidates may cause quite disturbing impact on the electorate and may impede the contestant polling the highest number of votes reaching 51% of the votes cast.

The war-winning Army Chief suffered a humiliating defeat at the hands of Mahinda Rajapaksa at the 2010 presidential election. Fonseka, in spite of being backed by the UNP-led coalition that included the JVP, TNA, SLMC, and out rightly supported by Western interests, led by the US, was trounced by Mahinda Rajapaksa. Fonseka lost by a staggering 1.8 mn votes and was abandoned by the UNP. The rest is history.

At the first presidential election held on Oct 20, 1982 there were six candidates. J. R. Jayewardene (UNP) 3,450,811 (52.91%), Hector Kobbekaduwa (SLFP) 2,548,438 (39.07%), Rohana Wijeweera (JVP) 273,428 (4.19%), Kumar Ponnambalam (ACTC) 173,934 (2.67%), Colvin R. de Silva (LSSP) 58,531 (0.90%) and Vasudeva Nanayakkara (NSSP) 17,005 (0.26%).

Of them, only Vasudeva Nanayakkara, now 85, represents the current Parliament (SLPP Ratnapura District) and the one-time LSSP/NSSP firebrand is unlikely to contest the next general election.

Close on the heels of the presidential election victory, JRJ, in a disgraceful bid to consolidate power in Parliament, staged a rigged national referendum on December 22, 1982, using state resources to the maximum. The referendum gave JRJ the opportunity to extend the life of Parliament by six years, thereby thwarted the possibility of losing his party UNP’s massive (5/6) supermajority in Parliament that it secured in 1977.

The second presidential election was held on December 19, 1988, amidst countrywide violence with the Indian Army deployed in the Northern and Eastern provinces in terms of the Indo-Lanka accord signed on July 29, 1987. The South was on fire with the JVP-led insurgency in full swing. There had been only three candidates with both the UNP and SLFP in the fray. Ranasinghe Premadasa (UNP) won the contest by polling 2,569,199 (50.43%), Sirimavo Bandaranaike (SLFP) obtained 2,289,86 (44.95%) and Ossie Abeygunasekera (Sri Lanka Mahajana Pakshaya) 235,719 (4.63%).

By the time Sri Lanka went for its third presidential election, on November 09, 1994, the SLFP had been transformed to People’s Alliance (PA) and was able to bring the 17-year-old UNP reign to an end. There had been six contestants again with Srima Dissanayake replacing her assassinated husband Gamini Dissanayake. The LTTE, in an obvious bid to manipulate and influence the electorate, assassinated Dissanayake at a public rally at Thotalanga on the night of October 23, 1994.

PA candidate Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga polled 4,709,205 (62.28%), Srima Dissanayake (UNP) 2,715,283 (35.91%), Hudson Samarasinghe (Independent) 58,886 (0.78%), Harischandra Wijayatunga (Sinhalaye Mahasammatha Bhoomiputra Pakshaya) 32,651 (0.43%), A. J. Ranasinghe (Independent) 22,752 (0.30%) and Nihal Galappaththi (Sri Lanka Progressive Front) 22,749 (0.30%).

The fourth presidential poll was again marred by unprecedented violence. The LTTE made an abortive bid to assassinate PA candidate Kumaratunga on December 19, 1999, just two days before the election, in Colombo, while another suicide attack claimed the life of former Army Chief of Staff Lakshman Algama campaigning for UNP candidate Ranil Wickremesinghe. Altogether there had been 13 candidates with interested parties fielding proxies.

Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga (PA) polled 4,312,157 (51.12%), Ranil Wickremasinghe (UNP) 3,602,743 ( 42.71%), Nandana Gunathilake (JVP) 344,173 (4.08%), Harischandra Wijayatunga (Sinhalaye Mahasammatha Bhoomiputra Pakshaya) 35,854 (0.43%), W.V.M. Ranjith (Independent) 27,052 ( 0.32%), Rajiva Wijesinha (Liberal Party) 25,085 ( (0.30%), Vasudeva Nanayakkara (Left & Democratic Alliance) 23,668 ( 0.28%), Tennyson Edirisuriya (Independent) 21,119 (0.25%), Abdul Rasool (Sri Lanka Muslim Party) 17,359 (0.21%), Kamal Karunadasa (People’s Liberation Solidarity Front) 11,333 (0.13%), Hudson Samarasinghe (Independent) 7,184 (0.09%), Ariyawansa Dissanayaka (Democratic United National Front) 4,039 (0.05%) and A. W. Premawardhana (Bahujana Nidahas Peramuna) 3,983 (0.05%).

The fifth presidential election held on November 17, 2005, was called amidst increased threat posed by the LTTE. Against the backdrop of the assassination of Foreign Minister Lakshman Kadirgamar, the war seemed imminent and unavoidable. Like the previous election, there had been 13 candidates. Initially, there had been serious doubts whether the election would be held at all. As incumbent President Kumaratunga had called the 1999 election one year ahead of schedule, she asserted and argued that the extra year should be appended to her second term. The Supreme Court rejected her move and the election went ahead.

Mahinda Rajapaksa (UPFA) won by polling 4,887,152 (50.29%), Ranil Wickremesinghe (UNP) 4,706,366 (48.43%), Siritunga Jayasuriya (United Socialist Party) 35,425 ( 0.36%), A. A. Suraweera (National Development Front) 31,238 (0.32%), Victor Hettigoda (United Lanka People’s Party) 14,458 (0.15%), Chamil Jayaneththi (New Left Front ) 9,296 (0.10%), Aruna de Soyza (Ruhuna People’s Party) 7,685 (0.08%), Wimal Geeganage (Sri Lanka National Front) 6,639 (0.07%), Anura de Silva (United Lalith Front) 6,357 (0.07%), Ajith Arachchige, (Democratic Unity Alliance) 5,082 (0.05%), Wije Dias Socialist Equality Party 3,500 (0.04%), Nelson Perera (Sri Lanka Progressive Front) 2,525 (0.03%) and Hewaheenipellage Dharmadwaja (United National Alternative Front) 1,316 (0.01%).

However, the sixth presidential election, conducted on January 26, 2010, saw proxies and some seeking to attract limelight (at the previous elections, too, there had been some joining the fray for their own sake). In the absence of any sort of restrictions /safeguards, 22 contested the first presidential poll after the eradication of the LTTE. Mahinda Rajapaksa polled a staggering 6,015,934 (57.88%) to beat General Sarath Fonseka who managed to secure 4,173,185 (40.15%).

At the 2015 presidential that had been convincingly won by Maithripala Sirisena (New Democratic Front) by polling 6,217,162 (51.28%) there were 19 candidates. Mahinda Rajapaksa, who enacted 18th Amendment to enable him to contest, managed to get 5,768,090 (47.58%).

The last presidential election saw a record number of contestants with, for the first time, the number on the ballot paper passing the 30 mark. The election, handsomely won by Gotabaya Rajapaksa, was contested by 35.

Of them, only Gotabaya Rajapaksa and Sajith Premadasa polled more than 500,000 votes. Anura Kumara Dissanayake polled over 400,000 and the rest polled less than 50,000, ranging from 900 to 49,000.

The forthcoming presidential poll that’ll decide Sri Lanka’s fate depends on its outcome and the workable agenda for a bankrupt country.

External interventions will play a crucial role in the election with geopolitics being a key factor in post-Aragalaya Sri Lanka. Two major parties involved in the Aragalaya – the JVP-led JJB and Jana Aragala Sandhanaya that fields lawyer Nuwan Bopage should attract public attention as the importance of their strategic role cannot be underestimated.

****

Is recent history repeating in the South Asia region?

The longest serving Premier of Bangladesh Sheihk Hasina, of the Awami League party, was forced to resign on Monday in the face of a mounting wave of protests and counter action by her government that killed nearly 300 people since mid-July. She took refuge in India after fleeing aboard a Bangladesh Air Force C 130.

The relatively new country Bangladesh was created in 1971 following a successful rebellion against high handed Pakistani rule over Bengalis in the then East Pakistan, launched by her late father Sheikh Mujibur Rahman after Islamabad refused to recognize his popular election victory with predominantly Bengali votes of East Pakistan and jailed by the then rulers.

Most unfortunately Sheikh Mujibur Rahman himself was killed by disgruntled elements in his own Army, along with his entire family, barring Hasina and her sister Rezhana during a subsequent coup in August 1975.

Many compared the 76-year-old leader’s ouster with the forcing out of President Gotabaya Rajapaksa following a similar protest campaign alleged to have been backed by the US. Rajapaksa resigned though India advised him against doing so.

Over two years after Rajapaksa’s ouster the circumstances leading to his ouster remained uninvestigated and unexamined. The role of the Muslim community as a whole in Rajapaksa’s ouster in the wake of the Easter Sunday repercussions and cremation of Covid-19 victims, as well as the Catholic Church interventions, remained to be properly examined. Perhaps, against the backdrop of Hasina’s ouster, Sri Lanka can take a fresh look at the Aragalaya as well as post-Aragalaya issues.



Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Midweek Review

Three high-profile alleged suicides shaping key investigations

Published

on

Former IGP Chandana Deepal Wickramaratne, 63, succumbed to gunshot injury he received at his residence at Parakrama Mawatha, in Thalahena, Malabe, on 17 July. Wickramaratne, the 35th IGP (25 November, 2020, to 23th November, 2025), was pronounced dead at the Mulleriyawa Hospital.

The incident triggered speculation regarding the circumstances leading to the ex-IGP’s death. Some declared that Wickramaratne shot himself with a weapon issued to his bodyguard. Others alleged that Wickramaratne had been deeply depressed over divorce proceedings, involving his son and daughter-in-law, and accusations directed at his son over domestic violence. They claimed that the situation may have had unexpected bearing on Wickramaratne.

There are also lingering concerns regarding the impact of the ongoing investigations into the 2019 Easter Sunday carnage, on Wickramaratne’s demise, the third such incident after the last presidential elections held in September, 2024.

Assistant Director of the External Resources Department of the Ministry of Finance, Ranga Nishantha Rajapaksa, 50, was found dead in the garden of his Kuliyapitiya home on 30 April, 2026. At the time of Rajapaksa’s alleged suicide, blamed on injuries he supposedly inflicted on himself using a knife, while he was under suspension over the USD 2.5 mn heist from the Treasury. He was the official who lodged a complaint with the CID regarding the unprecedented theft.

Former Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of SriLankan Airlines, Kapila Chandrasena, 61, was found dead at No. 38, Pedris Road, Kollupitiya, on 8 May, 2026. Authorities declared Chandrasena died by hanging. Chandrasena was the prime suspect in the SriLankan Airlines bribery case, exposed by the UK Serious Fraud Office (SFO), in a joint investigation carried out with US and French authorities. At the time of his death, he was out on bail but faced re-arrest over alleged violations of bail conditions.

The Finance Ministry official and ex-IGP died as a result of ‘incidents’ at their respective homes, while Chandrasena allegedly took his own life at the posh residence of his brother-in-law Aravinda de Silva. Their deaths are mired in controversy for obvious reasons. One of the major issues at hand is whether their deaths impacted the ongoing politically sensitive cases.

The USD 2.5 mn theft sent shockwaves through the National People’s Power (NPP) government, struggling to cope up with a spate of other sensitive developments, such as the massive coal scam that led to the resignation of Energy Minister Kumara Jayakody, and the controversial release of 323 red flagged containers from the Colombo port, without any checks, in addition to two containers carrying narcotics.

The police faced the challenging task of conducting transparent investigations into the deaths of Ranga Nishantha Rajapaksa, Kapila Chandrasena and C.D. Wickramaratne.

Although the Finance Ministry official’s death was caused by cardiorespiratory failure due to heavy loss of blood, many questioned how he inflicted grievous cut wounds on his legs and on his left wrist. The judicial post mortem report that was made available within 24 hours after the alleged suicide raised concerns. The Opposition expressed suspicions. A section of the media, too, weren’t satisfied with the way the government handled the case. The truth is in spite of a post mortem examination conducted by a four-member expert panel, suspicions remain regarding the Finance Ministry official’s death.

It would be pertinent to mention that The Sunday Leader Editor Lasantha Wickrematunga was stabbed to death though police and all others concerned initially claimed firearms attack caused his death. The Attorney-at-Law was killed inside his car that he was driving on the Attidiiya Road, Ratmalana, on 8 January, 2009. Over 17 years after the still unresolved killing of the one-time The Island staffer, the vast majority of people still believe Wickrematunga was shot dead. Wickrematunga’s case is just among several high profile investigations hampered by deliberate falsification of relevant autopsy reports.

Sarah Jasmine factor

Among those who paid their last respects to Wickremaratne at a funeral parlour in Colombo was former President Ranil Wickremesinghe. Former Minister Sagala Ratnayake accompanied the UNP leader.

One of the issues that received public and media attention, following Wickremaratne’s demise, was the controversial third DNA test conducted in spite of two previous DNA tests confirming that Pulastini Rajendran, alias Sarah Jasmine, was not among the dead caused by a series of explosions at Sainthamaruthu, in the East, a week after the 2019 Easter Sunday carnage.

She was married to Achchi Muhammadu Mohammadu Hasthun, the National Thowheeth Jaamath (NTJ) operative who carried out the suicide blast in St. Sebastian Church, Katuwapitiya.

The CID questioned Wickremaratne as he served as the IGP at the time of the third DNA test. Controversy surrounds the decision to call for a third DNA test and, in addition to Wickremaratne, the CID questioned former Deputy IGP of the CID Prasad Ranasinghe in the second week of December last year. Public Security and Parliamentary Affairs Minister Ananda Wiejapala commented on the issue at hand in Parliament in early June, 2025.

There had been contradictory claims on Sarah, a Batticaloa Tamil convert to Islam, who lived with the extremist group. In spite of investigations, controversy still surrounds her fate, though both Sri Lanka and Indian intelligence services investigated the circumstances of her ‘disappearance.’

There had been claims that she was taken out of the country by Indian intelligence. Let me remind you what the DSJB lawmaker Mujibur Rahuman said in Parliament on 10 November, 2022, during Ranil Wickremesinghe’s presidency. Declaring that Sarah had taken refuge in India, the outspoken parliamentarian alleged that the Wickremesinghe-Rajapaksa government was struggling to prove she died in the Sainthamaruthu blasts, on the night of 26 April, 2019.

Rajarathnam Kavitha, mother of Sarah, is on record as having told the Presidential Commission of Inquiry (PCoI) that her daughter had been with Zharan Hashim’s wife, Fatima, from early February, 2019, to 26 April, 2019, the day remnants of the NTJ group triggered the Sainthamaruthu blasts.

Sarah’s mysterious status remains a key factor in the overall investigation, with retired Major General Suresh Sallay named a suspect in the high profile case. Sallay served as the Director of State Intelligence Service (SIS) from November, 2019, to October, 2024. The CID arrested the one-time head of the Directorate of Military Intelligence (DMI/ 2012 to 2016) in late February 2026, under the Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA).

Archbishop of Colombo, Malcolm Cardinal Ranjith, recently filed an intervening petition before the Court of Appeal in respect of the petition filed by Sallay challenging his arrest and detention under the PTA. Cardinal Ranjith sought permission to make submissions regarding Sallay’s petition while requesting the court to dismiss the latter’s petition.

The Church intervened after several prominent Buddhist monks, religious and civil society organisations filed intervenient petitions seeking leave to intervene in Sallay’s writ application, filed by the retired top intelligence officer, challenging the legality of his arrest and detention.

They highlighted the following points:

• The Supreme Court and the PCoI identified Zahran Hashim and the ISIS-inspired NTJ as the perpetrators of the 2019 Easter Sunday carnage while attributing responsibility to State officials for failing to act on prior intelligence.

• None of the official investigations or judicial findings implicated Sallay in planning or facilitating the Easter Sunday attacks.

• The PCoI recorded that Major General Sallay had warned authorities about the rise of Islamist extremism before the attacks.

• The intervening petitions expressed concerns that unsubstantiated allegations have created a public narrative suggesting a wider conspiracy involving Sinhala Buddhist military and intelligence officers, contrary to the findings of the Supreme Court and the PCoI.

• The petitions argued that such unsupported narratives risk undermining public confidence, damaging communal harmony, and unfairly tarnishing the reputation of individuals and institutions without credible evidentiary foundation.

Ex-IGP’s statement

In his statement to the CID, Wickremaratne explained that he directed the senior police officer, in charge of Ampara, to secure the military and STF backing for the Sainthamaruthu operation that led to the death of some inner remnants of Zahran’s group. The Ampara-based officer, identified as Samantha Wijesekera, had got in touch with the Department’s number two officer, as IGP Jayasundera couldn’t be contacted over the phone. That statement dealt with the measures taken by them to ascertain Sarah’s status and the final assertion on the basis of the Government Analyst’s findings (third DNA test) that she was among those who perished in the Sainthamaruthu suicide blast.

The then Police Spokesman DIG, Nihal Thalduwa, has been directed by Wickremaratne to issue a press release confirming Sarah’s death. In his statement to the CID, Wickremaratne explained the deep interest shown by the head of the Indian Intelligence, based in Colombo, regarding Sarah’s status, underscoring their requirement to know whether she was dead or alive. The Indian official has repeatedly emphasised the pivotal importance of establishing Sarah’s status and, according to Wickremaratne, never tried to hide their interest in knowing her fate.

Did India accept the findings of the third DNA test? The possibility of Sarah being an Indian informant cannot be ruled out as India was able to alert Sri Lanka of the impending attacks. SJB Colombo District MP Rahuman has often commented on this possibility. Or, perhaps, India knew of Sarah’s status but raised the issue with Wickremaratne in a bid to indicate they, too, weren’t aware. Perhaps, we’ll never know the truth.

Sri Lanka received three specific warnings on 4, 20 and 21 April regarding impending dastardly NTJ operation. The last warning was received several hours before the NTJ struck hotels and Churches in Colombo, Katana and Batticaloa. The blasts killed 270 persons and wounded about 500.

At the time of the NTJ operation, the DMI was headed by Brigadier Chula Kodituwakku, who appeared alongside President Maithripala Sirisena when he met the media at the Janadhipathi Mandiraya, several days after the attacks. Now retired, Kodituwakku, in his testimony in courts, declared that the SIS refrained from sharing foreign intelligence with the DMI. In fact, Army Commander Lt. Gen. Mahesh Senanayake, who also addressed the media, explained the difficulties experienced by the Army due to refusal on the part of the SIS to cooperate with the DMI.

According to an appeal filed against an order of the High Court-at-Bar, in terms of the Section 451 (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure Act No. 15 of 1979, as amended, read with Article 128 of the Constitution, in the Supreme Court, India issued the following warning: “As per an input, Sri Lanka based Zahran Hashim of National Thowheeth Jamath and his associates are planning to carry out suicide terror attack in Sri Lanka shortly. They are planning to target some important churches. It is further learnt that they have conducted reconnaissance of the Indian High Commission in Sri Lanka and it is one of the targets for the planned attack.”

No holds barred investigation is required to establish the truth. The Opposition has repeatedly questioned the handing over of the investigation to retired Shani Abeysekera, who had been the Director, CID, at the time of the 2019 Easter Sunday carnage, and accommodating Senior DIG Ravi Seneviratne as the Secretary Public Security Ministry. They had been accused of failing to act on specific intelligence received from the SIS.

Both Abeysekera and Seneviratne, as members of the Retired Police Collective, backed the NPP campaigns in the run-up to the presidential and parliamentary polls, in 2024. Abeysekera, who retired on 30 June, 2021, was recalled and officially reappointed as the Director of the Criminal Investigation Department (CID), on a contract basis, by the NPP.

Political factors

There had never been a case as politicised as the 2019 Easter Sunday carnage. Immediately after the massive security lapse, and negligence on the part of the Sirisena-Wickremesinghe government, facilitated the NTJ operation, the Church threw its weight behind Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s 2019 presidential bid.

The Church backing made a significant difference on the ground. That prompted SJB’s Harin Fernando to directly accuse Malcolm Cardinal Ranjith of ensuring Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s victory at the expense of Sajith Premadasa. Since the SJB’s highly publicised June, 2020, accusations, there had been contradictory statements regarding the Easter Sunday attacks.

In February, 2021, on behalf of the JVP/NPP, Dr. Nalinda Jayatissa (current Health and Media Minister) declared that India masterminded the Easter Sunday attacks.

This accusation was made just a few weeks after the PCoI handed over its report to President Gotabaya Rajapaksa, who, for some strange reason, appointed a six-member committee, consisting of SLPP lawmakers, headed by his elder brother Chamal, than requesting the Attorney General Dappula de Livera, PC, to act on the recommendations.

In May, 2021, Dappula, after having failed to convince President Rajapaksa to extend his term by one year, alleged that the Easter Sunday attack was a grand conspiracy. In spite of growing doubts regarding the delay in implementing the PCoI recommendations, the Church tried to convince the President to act on them. In July 2021, the Church wrote to President Rajapaksa. Against the backdrop of the SLPP’s continuing indifference, by the end of that year, the Church reached a consensus with those opposed to the government.

The Church openly backed the protest campaign, against President Rajapaksa, and remained committed to the operation until the very end.

Two sons of wealthy spice merchant and JVP National List MP, at the 2015 general election Mohamed Yusuf Ibrahim’s sons Ilham Ahamed and Imsath Ibrahim, carrying out suicide attacks, on behalf of the NTJ, made no difference. Ibrahim was later released on bail, in May, 2022, during Wickremesinghe’s tenure as the President. Ilham Ahamed’s heavily pregnant wife detonated an explosive vest, inside their Dematagoda mansion, when the police surrounded the place, soon after the attacks. Did the spice trader know about the despicable NTJ strategy? Zaharan Hashim’s wife Abdul Cader Fathima, who survived the Sainthamaruthu blast too was granted bail in March, 2023, during Wickremesinghe’s presidency.

The Church, at one point, demanded that the Deputy Defence Minister Maj. Gen. Aruna Jayasekera be removed pending conclusion of the investigations. The Church claimed that as Jayasekera served as the Eastern Commander at the time of the Sainthamaruthu blasts, he should give up the Defence portfolio for the time being. The government ignored that demand.

By Shamindra Ferdinando

Continue Reading

Midweek Review

‘The Play’s the Thing’, in Shakespeare

Published

on

Shakespeare. Image courtesy NYT

Exposing Complexities of the Human Condition in Man’s Quest for Power

Shakespeare believed that drama could illuminate truths about human nature more effectively than argument or philosophy. The famous line, “The play’s the thing, wherein I’ll catch the conscience of the king,” expresses not merely Hamlet’s strategy but Shakespeare’s own artistic philosophy – that theatre exposes hidden moral realities and awakens the human conscience.

Shakespeare and the Human Condition

Shakespeare displayed an extraordinary understanding of the human mind, long before psychology emerged as a formal discipline. He possessed an unparalleled gift for revealing human experience through vividly drawn characters and situations they create. He drew from Renaissance historical material as they provided a rich source of dramatic material, and chose themes that reflected musings of the Elizabethan era he lived in, taking his audiences with him.

Complexities of the human condition, regardless of culture, nationality or historical period have endured. As his fellow playwright, Ben Jonson famously proclaimed over four hundred years ago: “He [Shakespeare] is not of an age, but for all time”. He continues to alert our senses and raise our conscience about humanity with all its strengths and weaknesses by way of dramatic expression. Shakespeare is our contemporary.

I have endeavoured to examine the great playwright’s work in relation to the treatment of psychological and moral complexities surrounding humanity’s pursuit for power, in order to demonstrate how these works continue to speak with remarkable urgency to our own time. The enduring relevance of this idea becomes apparent in the following three Shakespeare’s plays: Henry V, Macbeth and The Tragedy of Julius Caesar, I have chosen to illustrate my argument.

Henry V: Leadership and the Cost of Glory

It is a reflection on Shakespeare’s stature that he portrays triumphalism of leadership and the anguish of those who pay with their lives in war, in equal measure. In his Historical play, Henry V. King Henry of England makes a claim to the French throne, egged on by church leaders who wish to distract him from domestic issues. Feeling mocked by the French response, Henry declares war. He invades France displaying strong leadership despite hardship and heavy loss of life. On the eve of the pivotal battle of Agincourt, on St. Crispin’s day, he delivers an inspiring speech to his outnumbered troops. The long and poetic speech, which came to be known as the St. Crispin’s day speech – one of the best known in all Shakespeare – strengthened his powerful status in the play.

“…This story shall the good man teach his son;

And Crispin Crispian shall ne’er go by,

From this day to the ending of the world,

But we in it shall be remember’d.

We few, we happy few, we band of brothers;

For he to-day that sheds his blood with me

Shall be my brother; be he ne’er so vile,

This day shall gentle his condition …”

Against the odds, the English defeat the French at Agincourt. The play ends with a note of political and personal triumph, as Henry woos and marries Princess Catherine of France, securing peace between the two nations, at an immense cost to human life.

Macbeth: Ambition and Moral Corruption

In the reign of King Duncan of Scotland, General Macbeth who commands respect as a valiant soldier, returning home with his colleague Banquo following a victorious military expedition, is confronted by three witches who predict cryptically that he is destined to become King of Scotland. Macbeth is urged on by his wife, who, in an ‘’unquenchable desire to become queen’’, attempts to persuade her husband with ‘a humane disposition’ to assassinate the king while he is asleep as a royal guest in their home, and frame the two intoxicated royal aides. Malcolm and Donalbain, King Duncan’s two sons who accompanied him, fled to England.

Macbeth, the play, portrays the tale of a man in pursuit of power destroying anyone on his way, bringing about a collapse in moral order, providing insights into everything inhumane about humankind. The character of Macbeth is first acknowledged as a ‘hero’; his innate desire for power is activated by the prophecy of the witches. But bound by his loyalty to his king, his ‘conscience’ would not allow him the thought of regicide: “If chance will have me king, why, chance may crown me/ without my stir”. Weighed down by fear and guilt, he drags his feet, but the valiant soldier succumbs to the “valour of his wife’s tongue”: “Your hand, your tongue look like th’ innocent flower/ But be the serpent under’t”. She herself did not have the courage to murder her royal guest with her own hand, but was persuasive: morality yields to the pressure of evil desire. Macbeth completes the task, and they feign their lament at the king’s death which they themselves brought about.

Power did not bring in peace, but inner turmoil: “In the affliction of these terrible dreams/ That shake us nightly; better be with the dead/ Whom we, to gain our peace, have sent to peace/ Than on the torture of the mind to lie/ In restless ecstasy”. Fear, guilt and repentance grip the usurper but pride would not allow their expression.

Fear and insecurity bred paranoia in Macbeth. The usurpers became preoccupied with protecting the throne and handing over sovereignty to their progeny which they were yet to produce. With the advice of the witches he arranges the murder of all they suspect would take over rule after him. First they get Banquo, his colleague, ambushed and killed; Fleance, who accompanied his father, escapes. He then learns that Macduff, the feudal lord of Fife, has fled to England to join Malcolm, the son of the slain King Duncan, and, together they are mobilising an army to attack Scotland with the intent of displacing him from the throne. An outraged Macbeth orders the slaughter of Macduff’s wife and children who remained in Scotland, and anyone related to the defector.

Malcolm and Macduff invade Scotland with a powerful army. Lady Macbeth, afflicted with intense guilt, took her own life. Macbeth was slain after a fierce battle and his severed head was presented to the newly crowned king, Malcolm, who proclaimed …”I should/ Pour the sweet milk of concord, into hell? Uproar the universal peace, confound/ All unity on earth”.

In Macbeth, Shakespeare places on stage a disturbing portrayal of humanity with all its base characteristics that compels us to see ourselves in.

Julius Caesar: Political Power, Hypocrisy and Betrayal

The theme of humans competing with each other for power, exercised inappropriately, provides a fertile ground for Shakespeare to explore the complexities of the human condition. Drawing from history, he gives dramatic expression to such a scenario in his popular play, ‘The Tragedy of Julius Caesar’, displaying the patterns of behaviour of the main characters, the focus for interpretation. The propensity to manipulate the truth in political machinations takes centre stage in the play. “Men may examine things after their fashion/ Clean from the purpose of things themselves” [Cicero: Act 1]

Julius Caesar, the Roman military expansionist, emerged as a formidable leader of the territories, following his successful campaigns in Europe. The play begins with Caesar’s triumphant return to Rome after one of his military expeditions, accompanied by generals and political figures – Cassius, Brutus and Antony. They were welcomed by scores of cheering Romans for bringing ‘‘many captives home… whose ransoms, did the general coffers fill’’. The contention for leadership of the territories, in its entirety, between Caesar and Pompey resulted in a bitter civil war with Caesar emerging victorious.

Cassius and Brutus who too had leadership ambitions fought with Pompey against Caesar. Caesar in his magnanimity, while being merciful towards his defeated opponents, remained cautious about Cassius. There was growing concern amongst the common folk [plebeians] regarding their newly emerged leader “soar[ing] above the view of men”, and using his supreme power to establish a new monarchy. They were averse to the extravagant lifestyle and corrupt practices of their former monarchical rulers and feared that Caesar may override their desire to form a republican form of governance with greater representation by commoners.

Cassius, envious of Caesar’s might, instigates a plot to remove him from power. He hatches a plot to draw Brutus into the conspiracy to lend respectability to the project as Brutus is held in high regard by the populace. Brutus is faced with having to balance his personal friendship with Caesar against the “general good of the Republic”. He finally overcomes his ambivalence and joins the conspirators in a plot to assassinate Caesar. “Let not our looks put on our purposes/ But bear it as our Roman actors do/ With untir’d spirits and formal constancy”…. “Let’s kill him boldly, but not wrathfully/Let’s carve him as a dish for the Gods”. [Brutus: Act 2. Scene1]. Caesar is stabbed to death by the conspirators, one after the other, on the ‘ides of March’ – the first full moon of the New Year for festivities and sacrifice. Turning to his friend Brutus, Caesar uttered his last words: “et tu Brute?” [Even you Brutus?”].

In a funeral oration that followed, Brutus pacified an agitated crowd by stating that despite his love for Caesar, he loved Rome more, and that Caesar posed a danger to the liberty of the nation. The masses perceived his act of murdering Caesar as a deed of heroism! But, Mark Antony, a loyalist of Caesar, after skilfully negotiating with Brutus, delivers a stirring oration with the starting captivating lines, which lives on: “Friends, Romans, Countrymen” [Act 3, Scene 2]. In his speech replete with irony, while referring to Brutus as “an honourable man”, refuted the claim by Brutus that Caesar acted in ambition and self-interest. An enraged crowd drove away Cassius and Brutus.

The two exiled assassins, Cassius and Brutus, raise an army to combat a newly formed alliance of Antony, Lepidus and Octavius [adopted son of Caesar]. Undeterred by the suicide of his wife, in his absence, Brutus marched on to combat the enemy at Philippi. “There is a tide in the affairs of men/ Which take at the flood, leads on to fortune;/ Omitted on the voyage of their life,/ Is bound in shallows, and I miseries……[Act 4, Scene 2].

Following the poor performance at the Battle of Philippi, and facing defeat, Cassius gets one of his men to kill him with his own sword. Brutus learning about the death of Cassius, commits suicide by running through a sword held by a colleague. The power sharing alliance between Octavius, Antony and Lepidus ended following a struggle for supremacy.

Shakespeare and the Modern World

Shakespeare presents man’s quest for power as a lens through which the complexities of the human condition are revealed. Portraying such a pursuit as a powerful but destructive force, he reveals the tension between honour and ambition, rhetoric and reality, leadership and moral conflict and glory and human suffering – characteristics that are universal and timeless.

Shakespeare, like other great literary artists, does not lecture to us, nor does he offer solutions, but helps us broaden our sense in recognising the humanity we share with the good and the bad, and our desires that lead us into animosity.

We live in a volatile and unpredictable world marked by geopolitical tensions, economic competition, social discontent and armed conflict resulting in global instability. Contemporary societies are currently experiencing a sense of uncertainty, desperate to find answers to establishing world order and peace.

Alongside technological advancement, humankind has developed increasingly lethal weapons with which to wage war to gain power over one another. Warfare has transformed the battlefield from land to the skies, most recently through airborne long-range missiles targeted with the use of AI; and across the oceans both on the surface and beneath it through submarines, transforming the nature of combat at immense cost to human life and property. The loss of innocent civilians, including children, caught in these conflicts has given rise to the troubling yet widely invoked phrase ‘collateral damage’, a term that seeks to justify what remains profoundly deplorable. Powerful nations frequently evade meaningful accountability, despite widespread international condemnation. And, spirituality appears to have done little to awaken human conscience and humans continue to wage conflict over religious ideology.

Although art and literature do not intend to maintain order in the way the military, the laws and institutions do, their influence is subtle yet foundational in shaping how individuals and societies, and especially their leaders envisage justice, empathy and coexistence, and in lifting us out of the moral darkness we are in. Art, including dramatic art, has a transformative influence on humanity.

Conclusion

Human beings possess an enduring duality: they are capable of reason and irrationality, compassion and cruelty, cooperation and conflict, creation and destruction. These fundamental characteristics have remained remarkably constant across history, even as cultures and technologies have changed. Great literature – particularly Shakespeare’s plays – explores this universal human condition, revealing how love, ambition, fear, grief, honour, jealousy, and the desire for power continue to shape individual actions and the course of history.

by DR. Siri Galhenage, Psychiatrist [Retd.]
[sirigalhenage@gmail.com]

Continue Reading

Midweek Review

Stubbornly Staying Posers

Published

on

Forty three years and counting,

Big posers remain unanswered –

For instance, couldn’t the state,

See the bloodletting coming,

When restive young hands of the North,

Opted for the gun and not the ballot?

Couldn’t it be seen that counter-violence,

Would only lead to a wasting conflict,

Wherein ordinary folk of both halves,

Would be cruelly cut down in the cross fire,

And dumped in graves still being opened?

That hands of good will and friendship,

Extended warmly in statesman like fashion,

Over the divide that was seen as enduring,

Would have laid the basis for reconciliation?

Will only ‘the peace of the graveyard’,

Be made to reign in the pauperized Isle?

By Lynn Ockersz

Continue Reading

Trending