.png)
.jpg)
All of Sri Lanka and all Sri Lankans can congratulate themselves for the smooth power transfer at the end of an eventful decade of President Mahinda Rajapaksa’s rule and the ushering in of his elected successor in President Maithripala Sirisena.
They have reassured themselves and the rest of the world, “the king is out, long live the king”, which is still the underlying principle of a constitutional, pluralistic democracy.
Much of the apprehensions on the conduct of free and fair elections and a smooth power transfer should the incumbent lose the elections, and narrowly, had come from outsiders. External governments and the media from outside had exhibited their ignorance of the Sri Lankan scheme, its democratic viabilities and alternatives, had caused aspersions on the poll process and President Rajapaksa’s willingness to exit gracefully should the occasion arise.
The sad thing about Sri Lanka is that such doomsdayers did get a lot of encouragement and inputs from Sri Lankans – political party leaders, academics and civil society outfits -- mostly based on speculation being palmed off as information.
Defending the ‘indefensible’
In doing so, they ended up questioning the integrity of the nation’s Election Commission, and in this case as during the last presidential polls of 2010, the nation’s professionally-run armed forces as well. Left to defend the ‘indefensible’ of a different kind, the outgoing government, particularly the Foreign Office, could not but escape going aggressive.
It was thus that President Rajapaksa’s government reacted to UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon’s call to then external affairs minister G.L. Peiris, and a later day public statement, calling for free and fair elections. On the very eve of the poll, US Secretary of State John Kerry talked likewise to President Rajapaksa.
The government of the day dubbed the UN statement ‘misplaced’ – and the subsequent events proved it right. Secretary Kerry has since joined the new rulers of Sri Lanka in publicly congratulating President Rajapaksa in facilitating the smooth power transfer. So have some of the other world nations and Sri Lanka’s friends, starting with Japan.
The smooth transition was what has made Sri Lankan democracy what it is, despite the stray episode of the losing presidential candidate, Sarath Fonseka, purportedly claiming otherwise after the results were announced in 2010. The message for the international community, particularly at the time of the exit of President Rajapaksa – which at least some of them had desired – is clear.
They now need to take a fresh look at themselves and their ‘unimpeachable’ sources in Sri Lanka (and other Third World nations, too), from which Wikipedia-like internal communication are generated for not just the US, but all foreign governments to rely upon. It would be half the problem solved, as far as Sri Lanka’s post-poll relation with the international community is concerned.
Political reconciliation
The smooth power transfer has set the stage for political reconciliation, post-poll. It did not happen post-war, as was hoped for. President Sirisena and his newly-appointed Prime Minister, Ranil Wickremesinghe, have returned President Rajapaksa’s gesture – which anyway was the constitutional scheme – by promising him legal support.
Translated, it could mean that the new government would stand by him – and the nation’s victorious, yet much-maligned armed forces – in matters of the ongoing United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) probe on ‘accountability issues’ flowing from allegations of ‘war crimes’ relating to the military decimation of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) terror group. With the UNHRC session due in March, the new government’s immediate steps would be watched with interest and/or concern, depending on which side one is looking at – and looking from.
Needless to point out, it would require a lot of political negotiations nearer home (particularly with the Tamils) and diplomatic skills at the international level before an ‘acceptable closure’ is effected to what could still threaten the Sri Lankan nation and its institution as a whole. It would require genuine gestures to the Tamil minorities – like the appointment of a ‘civilian’ as governor of the Northern Province, and replacement of the chief secretary with one chosen by Chief Minister C.V. Wigneswaran.
However, larger issues would have to go beyond the immediacy of the sweeping Tamil support for the ‘common opposition candidate’ -- which made Sirisena’s victory possible -- before preparing the ground for political negotiations. Like the Tamils, the Muslims too had voted Sirisena wholesale. Even without this, the new government, with post-poll ethnic and political reconciliation as its electoral message, needs to find ways to end the sudden alienation of the nation’s Muslims, who felt threatened and insecure after the unprovoked and unchecked attacks by the Sinhala-Buddhist ‘majoritarian’ Bodu Bala Sena (BBS).
Pope’s visit and message
Sri Lanka could not have asked for more, nor could have President Rajapaksa done more. Independent of his government’s perceived electoral motives involved in inviting the Pope, the Holy See’s visit to Sri Lanka on Jan 13-14, within the first week of the new government, has a message of its own in terms of ethnic and communal reconciliation in every which way.
The Pope will also be the first VVIP to visit Sri Lanka post-poll. As a head of state, the Pope will be received by President Sirisena and Prime Minister Wickremesinghe. The Pope’s Holy Mass at the sprawling Galle Face Green in Colombo on Jan 13, and more so at the renovated Maddu Church in the Tamil North, which the LTTE had used as a bunker through the decades of war and violence, the next day will be keenly watched for the message that they convey in terms of ethnic and communal reconciliation.
As coincidence would have it, the Pope’s visit to the Tamil North occurs on the day of the ‘Bogi’, the first day of the annual Tamil harvest festival of ‘Thai Pongal’.
‘Non-aligned agenda’
Addressing the nation from the Independence Day Square venue of his swearing-in only hours after the poll results were known, President Sirisena promised to “build bridges aimed at developing friendly relations with the world, based on a non-aligned agenda." It reflects the traditional political stance of the Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP) and his predecessor presidents, Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga, CBK, and Rajapaksa. CBK, needless to recall, too backed Sirisena in his poll campaign.
The world at large, and India as the immediate and concerned neighbour, would be watching keenly as to how and when the new government begins this reorientation to the middle path, from what is seen as an excessive and at times unacceptable tilt towards China, purportedly under the predecessor regime. It will require a balancing and reconciliation of a different kind, as Prime Minister Wickremesinghe and his United National Party (UNP) are often identified with the West, maybe more than required.
For now, however, the new leadership’s focus would be on the domestic front, in making the loose and divergent parties, whose sole interest was to see President Rajapaksa replaced, to work as a cohesive team in government, parliament and outside. It’s not going to be an easy task, as Rajapaksa and his predecessors had found out in their times.
On this score, President Sirisena begins his first 100 days with a commitment to ensure the exit of the Executive Presidency and restore the confidence of the people on governance issues, through appropriate legal and political reforms. It’s easier said than done, as entrenched influence in the nation’s polity, cutting across party lines, would not want to discipline themselves in matters of corruption and mal-governance as all of them come with a price tag of one kind or the other.
The Sirisena-Ranil leadership could not fail itself on this score as they could then be failing their respective parties in the parliamentary polls that is due in the first half of 2016. Given the ‘proportionate representation’ (PR) model of parliamentary polls that the new leadership has promised to replace with a ‘mixed model’ involving the ‘first-past-the-post’ scheme, as well, it’s not going to be an easy task.
Needless to say that in this and other matters of political reforms, the new leadership would be tempted to be guided by the political realities of their times – and also the all-accepted Sri Lankan tradition of personality-driven leadership. How far do they overcome such temptations would also be keenly watched -- in the process accommodating the diverse ‘minority’ interests and aspirations without compromising larger national concerns, which are as real, if not more.
Civil service reforms
Nothing described the post-poll national reconciliation process better than veteran civil servant, Lalith Weeratunga, secretary to the outgoing president discharging his constitutional duties at the swearing in of President Sirisena and Prime Minister Wickremesinghe. In time, he may be replaced by a person of the new leadership’s choice, and rightly so. So may be so many ‘political appointees’ of the previous regime at all levels of public administration, nearer home and abroad.
Simultaneously, Central Bank Governor Ajith Nivard Cabraal has put in his papers. Senior-most Supreme Court Judge S. Sripavan officiated at the swearing-in of the new president after Chief Justice Mohan Peiris came under a cloud when parliament impeached predecessor Sirani Bandaranaike in a hasty and unprecedented move.
Having conferred on the Executive the power to make ‘political appointments’ ad infinitum, and done so while in office earlier, too, the new dispensation could find the promised return to the 17th Amendment appointments ‘Councils’ unworkable, as it was through the years when it was supposed to be in force. It might hence have to find a via media, which could keep the politicians and their chosen nominees out of the process – instead, conferring such powers/responsibilities on an enlarged Public Service Commission after improving its credibility.
‘National government’
Ahead of the elections, candidate Sirisena had said that his would be a ‘national government’ of and for reconciliation. Post-poll, media reports have indicated that the majority SLFP faction (which is also the official group recognised by the Election Commission), would cooperate with the new dispensation. How far and how would they travel in keeping up that commitment, if made, would remain to be seen, particularly in the matter of abolishing the Executive Presidency and the introduction of governance-related reforms.
In between, President Sirisena and fellow SLFP leader Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga should desist the temptation of ‘hijacking’ the official SLFP, which she in particular had charged president Rajapaksa with. If Rajapaksa won the previous election, it’s he who has lost it this time – yet with a 47.48 percent vote-share (almost all of which were votes for the man and his leadership) against President Sirisena’s 51.28 percent (not all of which were anti-Rajapaksa). Thereby hangs a tale, and that’s where to begin ‘national reconciliation’ and mainstreaming of every kind!
By Special Arrangement with : South Asia Monitor (http://www.southasiamonitor.org)