Columns

• President Dissanayake and his NPP dominate the year, but implementation of election pledges remains a significant challenge
• SJB leader Premadasa’s handling of affairs draws criticism; Bakeer Markar presents proposals for party’s revival
• With main opposition party lacking momentum, social media plays a bigger role in political activism
• NPP-UNP dialogue on state matters continues; local media’s absence in President’s India visit seen as a major drawback
• UNP’s digitalised restructure faces practical problems; SLPP and SLFP mull new strategies

By Our Political Editor

As the last Sunday of 2024 fades away, the most tumultuous and momentous event to emerge in the country’s political landscape is easily the outcome of the presidential and parliamentary elections.

Anura Kumara Dissanayake from the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP)-led National People’s Power won the September 21 presidential election. It brought home the message that people were fed up with the traditional political parties that took turns at governance. Mounting shortages and rising food prices hit their stomachs. Law and order had descended to a new low. Bribery and corruption continued unabated. His campaign capitalised on the public’s frustration.

Dissanayake had secured only a paltry 3.16% of the vote (or 418,553), from 13.2 million votes polled at the November 17, 2019, presidential election. It was even more remarkable that he polled 42.31 % (or 5,634,9115) from over 13.3 million votes cast in the September 21 election. In the ensuing mass wave of support for the National People’s Power (NPP), barely two months later, they won 159 of the 225 seat Parliament. The outcome underscored a pivotal moment in Sri Lanka’s political history, highlighting the electorate’s desire for change and a break from the status quo.

Campaigners for Sajith Premadasa, leader of the Samagi Jana Balavegaya (SJB), widely billed him as a likely winner. Sharing that view was also the Colombo-based Western diplomatic community. Others were equally confident that Ranil Wickremesinghe, who contested as the candidate of a collective of parties under the New Democratic Front (NDF), and the gas cylinder symbol, would emerge victorious. He was placed at a distinct advantage since he held the presidency.

The decline in support for Premadasa from 41.99% in 2019 to 32.76% in 2024 is indeed significant. The SJB struggled to present compelling pledges, focusing instead on criticising Dissanayake and Wickremesinghe. This strategy seemed to backfire, especially during the parliamentary election campaign, where they sought only to establish a strong opposition. They failed to offer new solutions. It appears that the electorate’s rejection of their previous pledges left them with little to offer in the 2024 elections. This shift in voter sentiment highlights the importance of presenting clear, actionable plans rather than relying solely on criticism of opponents or the much-touted hereditary expectations.

Ranil Wickremesinghe exchanging views with Rahul Gandhi, leader of the Congress Party. The former President met him when he went to pay his last respects to onetime Indian Prime Minister, Manmohan Singh who passed away this week. The meeting took place at the residence of Dr. Singh

Ranil Wickremesinghe’s campaign for the presidency was indeed high-profile, with significant international attention and support. Despite his efforts, including donating land deeds and granting liquor licences, he only secured a mere 17.27%, amounting to 2,299,767 votes. This was a stark contrast to Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s historic win in 2019, where he polled 6,924,255 votes, or 52.25%, before fleeing the country amidst public protests and resigning from Singapore. The events that followed shaped the course of political developments. Wickremesinghe’s campaign, heavily covered on social media, ultimately did not resonate enough with the electorate to secure a win. This outcome highlights the complexities and unpredictability of political campaigns and voter sentiment in Sri Lanka. Though credited with restoring normalcy after the public protests virtually crippled life, it had little impact on the electorate. Nor did his ending mile-long queues for fuel and cooking gas. These lay bare the reality that high-pitched and much-publicised campaigns or propaganda do not always lead to victory. It only makes those who carry it out richer. In contrast, the NPP demonstrated what is required—a well-focused strategy on the ground, at the grassroots, effectively matched by continued interaction with the voters.

The political landscape in Sri Lanka has indeed seen significant changes. The birth of new parties, that telescoped into prominence from the old ones, is of interest. They flourished or floundered this year. The split of the United National Party (UNP) and the formation of the Samagi Jana Balavegaya (SJB), in February 2020, is a notable example. Despite initial expectations, the SJB, under the leadership of Sajith Premadasa, has struggled to secure victories in presidential or parliamentary elections. It has still not succeeded in securing power for governance.

Premadasa’s leadership has faced criticism, particularly his lack of engagement with national and social media during election campaigns. This approach, coupled with internal party issues, has affected his popularity. The upcoming local and provincial council elections will be crucial for the SJB and Premadasa’s leadership. The SJB’s challenges highlight the complexities of political dynamics and the importance of effective leadership and communication. It will be interesting to see how he navigates these challenges moving forward.

Premadasa has come under criticism for his leadership role. Both during the presidential and parliamentary elections, he shied away from both the national and the social media. There were no news conferences. No statements were issued under his name on any important issue. Media requests for interviews to seek answers on national issues were shunned. His popularity in the party took a nosedive after he filled the five national list slots. The angry leader of a partner party had to seek a court ruling to compel Premadasa to honour a pledge he had made. At rallies, however, he denied having made any pledges. The role of a family friend prompting him to make decisions usurping his role as leader became a sore point. That is the fate of the party that forms the main opposition in Parliament.

Though with a reduced number of MPs in the current parliament, the SJB has also failed, as the main opposition, to formulate strategies to keep the ruling party under check—a task which President Anura Kumara Dissanayake welcomed. When he met opposition party leaders, he urged them to engage in “constructive criticism.” A case in point relates to the issue of educational qualifications of former Speaker Ashoka Sapumal Ranwala. The SJB picked up reports in social media challenging the doctorate purportedly held by Ranwala and chose to move a vote of no confidence on the Speaker. It was this move that jolted the government into action and triggered events that forced Ranwala to resign. The SJB appears to have failed to understand the message that underscored this move—that is the fact that the government is sensitive to issues raised and is quick to react. Yet it was lost on the SJB.

The SJB’s inability to proactively address pressing public issues has continued. An example is the dearth of rice and coconut has indeed been a significant public issue. While individual members have voiced their concerns, the lack of a unified, collective response has been noticeable. Premadasa’s reserved approach in raising these issues, both in Parliament and through media statements, has further compounded the problem. The latest issue he faces is from the Chairman of his own party, Imthiaz Bakeer Markar, a onetime media minister in the UNP government. He has forwarded to Premadasa an eleven-point proposal to streamline the party and asked him to discuss the matter at the highest levels. That is yet to happen. Bakeer Markar, who had been assured of a national list slot, was dropped at the last minute. He has called for “greater democracy” and formulation of progressive policies for the SJB and warned that the membership “should not be underestimated.”

An interesting point he has made in a letter to his leader is what he calls “parachutists” landing on the party. His backers say the reference is to the filling of positions in the national list. A recent entrant to the SJB is one of those named. To avoid such controversies, he has proposed that different bodies in the SJB should meet regularly as required. He has identified such bodies to include regular meetings of parliamentarians, office bearers of the party, management committee and executive committee. He has noted that such meetings are not held even periodically. Another matter he has raised is for the party leader to meet senior party members, heads of youth organisations, women’s bodies, and student organisations. He has noted that such meetings do not take place as required.

Another issue over the situation in the party has come from former MP, Lalith Ellawala. He told a news conference on Friday that he was quitting the party since there was no unity. He has accused the SJB leader Premadasa as a “dictator” and declared that he would quit politics.

Defending the role of the SJB, another member who did not wish to be identified, said, “What we do as a party is not mostly seen or heard by the people. We do not have a communications wing. Increasingly, social media is taking over our role to play opposition.” The growing public reliance on social media to fill the void caused by the leading opposition group highlights a disconnect between the party’s leadership and its communication strategy. Additionally, the internal discontent within the SJB, with a faction promoting new leadership, adds to the party’s challenges. This internal strife, coupled with the NPP’s rise as a governance-focused party, has left the SJB in a precarious position. The upcoming local and provincial council elections will be a critical test for the SJB. The party needs to address these internal and external challenges to regain its footing and effectively serve as the main opposition grouping.

The Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP), once a dominant force, experienced a split that led to the formation of the Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna (SLPP) by Basil Rajapaksa. The SLPP’s initial success in the 2015 parliamentary elections has since waned, with the party now reduced to only three MPs, including Namal Rajapaksa, who chose not to contest from Hambantota district. The re-emergence of the SLPP to governing status soon remains a distant dream. Even when President Gotabaya Rajapaksa headed the government, there were rumblings among ministers and parliamentarians. Yet, they held together until Parliament elected Ranil Wickremesinghe to succeed him. A formidable faction thereafter joined the New Democratic Front (NDF) to support Wickremesinghe as their presidential candidate.

Others chose not to contest thus emaciating the SLPP. The dilemma for those who resultantly joined the NDF would be to decide which party they would back in the future—the UNP which its leader Wickremesinghe wants to re-organise or any other entity. The SLPP would find it difficult to regain its former national status. The upcoming local and provincial council elections are expected to bring many new faces from their ranks into the political arena. This evolving political landscape underscores the dynamic nature of Sri Lankan politics and the shifting allegiances and fortunes of its political parties. It will be interesting to see how these changes play out in the upcoming elections and what new dynamics will emerge.

The United National Party (UNP), the grand old party with a rich history since independence, sad enough, has turned out to be Colombo-centric. Its membership has reduced dramatically. Its grassroots level organisations have crumbled. At the last parliamentary elections, not one member representing the UNP was elected. The only exception, however, is Jeevan Thondaman, leader of the Ceylon Workers Congress, the plantation sector trade union. He contested the Nuwara Eliya district under the Elephant (UNP) symbol and won. To the less literate among the plantation labour, elephant reminded them of a god they venerated, Lord Ganesh. In October, last year, at the end of the special sessions of the UNP, leader Wickremesinghe declared to the media the party would become a “digital political party with the introduction of digital groups. Any member of the party can form digital groups after obtaining approval from the party hierarchy. Digital groups can come up at the constituency level and at the national level.”

Wickremesinghe was in New Delhi for the seventh Atal Bihari Vajpayee lecture. It took place on Friday at the Stein Auditorium of the India Habitat Centre. His host was India Foundation led by BJP stalwart Ram Madhav. The event was presided over by former union Civil Aviation Minister Suresh Prabhu. Wickremesinghe also paid his respects on the death of onetime Prime Minister of India, Manmohan Singh, credited for shaping India’s economy, at his residence. There he met opposition Congress Party leader, Rahul Gandhi with whom he exchanged views. Also, Manmohan Singh’s household to pay his respects was Namal Rajapaksa MP. Wickremesinghe then travelled to Lumbini, the birthplace of Lord Buddha in Nepal. This shift towards digitalization in a bid to become relevant in the political firmament is no easy task. Members at the grassroots level would not be willing to pay their own money for internet services and remain active members of a political party. On the other hand, recourse to digital methods would entail a bigger cost for the party than building support groups at the grassroots level.

Wickremesinghe has already told senior members to come up with proposals upon his return to strengthen the party at the grassroots level. The move comes amidst indications that the NDF which he led for presidential and parliamentary elections faces collapse. This, however, does not mean the end of the NDF since there are two of their nominees now in Parliament on the national list. They are Ravi Karunanayake and Faiszer Musthapa. Moreover they function as a separate political party sans the coalition. At the constituency and electorate levels, the internet has not spread far and wide. Hence, a linkage in cyberspace before the upcoming elections will not materialize. The NPP has ensconced itself at the grassroots level and will be a challenge to both the UNP and the SJB.

As reported last week, two key partners of NDF met at the Darley Road headquarters of the Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP). They formed members of the Podujana Eksath Peramuna (PEP). They decided to contest the upcoming local council elections under the chair symbol.

Now to the advent of the National People’s Party (NPP) government. It happened after the protests (aragalaya) of 2022. Significant enough, Anura Kumara Dissanayake was elected the public-mandated President, and a later parliamentary election gave his party 159 seats. This ended political instability. During the public uprising earlier, Wickremesinghe was voted by Parliament to be President. That was to complete the remaining term of President Gotabaya Rajapaksa. His party at that time had only one other UNP MP in Parliament. However, MPs of the SLPP rallied around him for two main reasons, political survival and personal safety. None in the government then wanted to go for a poll to test their strength or what they stood for. Even a pending local and provincial council election was put off. There was also a feeble move to put off presidential elections based on an argument that revolved around the term of the president. This was clarified effectively by the Supreme Court.

Before dealing with other issues, a factor that needs cognizance by the elected NPP leaders should be mentioned. As previously pointed out, there remains a high degree of amateurism among some ministers and bureaucrats. Take the case of Justice Minister Harshana Nanayakkara. He made an unprecedented move by complaining to the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) about a conspiracy. He opined that the Parliament website had added the title Dr. before his name when he did not possess a doctorate. As is the case when a minister complains, a CID team investigated the matter at lightning speed. It came to light that on December 5, 2024, the Office of the Leader of the House sent the Parliament Secretary General a letter, giving the names of nine MPs as members of the Committee of Parliament business. In the letter, Nanayakkara has been referred to as Dr. Nanayakkara. It was a case of one arm of the government not knowing what the other did.

If Nanayakkara, who has shut himself off from media interviews saying he requires “permission from the top,” had only checked with the Office of the Leader of the House, he would easily have known the answer. Regarding permission, his cabinet colleague Media Minister Nalinda Jayatissa declared this week that no permission was needed, and they were free to speak out. Who is right? In the wake of the election pledges made by the government, the people are interested in finding answers from the Justice Minister on several issues. Quite clearly, a conspiracy over a doctorate cannot emanate from the Office of the Leader of the House. He is not alone in making accusations of conspiracies. Rather, unfortunately, uncomfortable disclosures have made even others in places high in the government make the same accusation. To them, truth is stranger than fiction.

Another area where there was some inadequacy is the groundbreaking India visit of President Anura Kumara Dissanayake. As revealed in these columns last week, he won encomiums all round for his first state visit. He carved a niche for himself as a notable Asian leader and won the plaudits of many Indian politicians. He cannot be blamed for focusing largely and strictly on cost-cutting by taking along a small delegation to New Delhi. That frugality has been influenced by the extravagance of previous governments. However, the sad reality is that there was no one, not even a minister, to advise him on an important aspect that must be weighed against this move.

After 24 years in Parliament, Dissanayake won the people’s mandate to be president. His NPP also won 159 seats in Parliament. It is incumbent on him to keep the people of Sri Lanka informed of all matters related to the India visit. That would have led to a much better understanding countrywide. This would have been possible only by asking a select group of media people, picked by his own office, to accompany him. That is both from the print and electronic media. That they were not present denied the government the opportunity to project its foreign policy initiatives at play. On a personal note, it denied to President Dissanayake the recognition he deserved both locally and abroad. There were only a few news releases and photos. This also explains why hardline groups have put out statements, accusing President Dissanayake of engaging in secret deals in India. In this respect, balancing geopolitical requirements has become necessary. This is particularly in view of President Dissanayake’s impending visit to the People’s Republic of China in mid-January. A four-day visit is now being planned.

In addition, he also could have picked at least a handful of credible social media outlets that are at present reporting extensively on government activity. That way he could have not only projected himself as a new leader with a commitment and won more recognition for his government, but also enhanced his own image. The government leaders and bureaucrats are ignorant about this aspect. They are left with the mindset that exposure could be only through news conferences or statements. This is nothing new. There are world leaders who adhere to this practice of the media accompanying them during foreign travel.  It is not wrong to say that at present, there is a vacuum between the people and the government. It is in this backdrop that people have begun raising queries about the non-fulfilment of election pledges. Officially no explanation has been offered. Only very little information, including the reading out of cabinet decisions by Media Minister Jayatissa, reaches them. Here again, there have been many occasions when his remarks have been negative and made no meaning. For example, the questions posed to him over former Speaker Ranwala.

The dialogue between the UNP and JVP leaders years ago—a move that led to the rebranding of the JVP while retaining its original name—is indeed an interesting development. This rebranding resulted in the formation of the National People’s Power (NPP), which has since become a significant political force in Sri Lanka. The continued dialogue between the two parties, especially in formulating strategies and engaging with Indian leaders, highlights the evolving political dynamics in the country. This collaboration and strategic planning have played a crucial role in shaping the current political landscape. It is fascinating to see how these interactions and rebranding efforts have influenced the political scene.

The implementation of election pledges remains a significant challenge. While some investigations suppressed by previous administrations have been revived, the flow of information to the public has been inadequate, leading to speculation. Additionally, there appears to be an ongoing conflict between investigators and prosecutors. Government leaders have been told of delays from the Attorney General’s Department, but the Department contests this, citing inadequate documentation for convictions. This situation highlights the complexities and challenges in fulfilling election promises and ensuring transparency and accountability in governance. It will be crucial for the government to address these issues effectively to maintain public trust and confidence.

A factor that has now become clear is the reality that the NPP government, contrary to its earlier stance, chose to stay within the framework of the International Monetary Fund. This naturally prevents the NPP from implementing measures it pledged during the election campaigns. One such case is the promise to withdraw the Value Added Tax on medicines. However, within the margins available, they have raised the tax threshold from Rs 100,000 to Rs 150,000. The pledge to withdraw the perks of former presidents will have to await the rescinding of a law and an enabling constitutional amendment. It is not immediately clear whether the government would focus on a new constitution or go ahead with these changes first. Already, tri-forces personnel have been withdrawn from security details. They have been replaced by commandos of the Police Special Task Force. It’s a complex situation, and it will be interesting to see how the government navigates these challenges moving forward.

The Online Safety Bill, introduced during President Wickremesinghe’s administration, has indeed been a point of contention. Civil society groups have criticized the previous government for this and other measures which they say have shrunk the space for dissent. Despite promises from Tiran Alles, the then Public Security Minister, to introduce amendments, these changes never materialised. The NPP has been vocal in its criticism of this law, but it remains unclear whether the government will amend or annul it.

The polarization of groups reacting to the government is another significant issue. Tamil minorities and Muslims, particularly in the north and east, heavily supported the NPP during the parliamentary elections. This has led to a polarization of groups in the south, who have formed WhatsApp groups to discuss and raise issues. A case in point is how they raised issue over recent reports that harked back to the cremation of bodies during the Covid-19 pandemic. They queried why the issues were being raised so late. Hardline Tamil political parties in the north are trying to unite voters to push the government to withdraw more security forces camps in the north. President Dissanayake has warned that his government will not tolerate any racism.

As 2025 approaches, there are signs of significant changes and developments. Important arrests related to ongoing investigations are expected, and several changes in government positions, including those in the defence and state sectors, are anticipated. It seems like a dynamic and potentially transformative period for Sri Lanka.