While it is hard to identify all of the issues that drove Sri Lankans during the country’s recent – and for many observers, surprising – elections, a cry for change was evident. Voters had clearly grown tired of corruption, cronyism, and authoritarianism, and there have been widespread calls for investigations into a range of alleged human rights abuses.
On January 8, in an unexpected turn of events, 15 million Sri Lankans, representing a 75 percent voter turnout, went to the polls and ousted incumbent President Mahinda Rajapaksa in favor of Maithripala Sirisena, Rajapaksa’s former Health Minister who shocked many by declaring his intent to run for office. Rajapaksa, who was South Asia’s longest-serving political head of state, in office since 2005, had turned increasingly authoritarian. He called these elections two years early, seeking a third term. It seems unlikely that he anticipated the defection of Sirisena and a number of other parliamentarians.
As a former minister with Rajapaksa’s government for nearly 10 years, Sirisena has strong connections to the prior regime. Thus, the shift does not necessarily signal a radical new direction. But there is the strong possibility of, and hope for, change for Sri Lanka.
Rajapaksa’s popularity and power base came from the majority Sinhalese population. He was credited with ending Sri Lanka’s 26-year long civil war in 2009 and stimulating a seven percent growth rate in 2013, in part through the return of the country’s tourism industry. However, there is mounting evidence that Rajapaksa and his family, as well as the military, oversaw the growth of deeply-entrenched corruption in all facets of the economy. Some estimate that the Rajapaksa family has control over two-thirds of the national budget.
His rule was also marked by an increasingly oppressive authoritarian methods in dealing with not only minority Tamils and Muslims, but anyone who challenged him. For instance, the military was given control over the police force and other civilian institutions.
Indeed, during a campaign rally in the Tamil-dominated areas of northeastern Sri Lanka – far from his power base among the majority Sinhalese – Rajapaksa said, “I am the known devil, so please vote for me.”
Sirisena ran a campaign focused on fighting corruption and reinvigorating democracy, and sought to style himself as a sharp contrast to Rajapaksa, who had emphasized stability while compromising rights. The public’s disdain for the status quo and a clear “growing mood for change,” galvanized Sirisena’s message of less corruption and nepotism.
Since the election Sirisena has pledged to “abolish the executive presidency” and institute a “100-day work program” in order to create better systems of governance. In particular, he plans independent committees to ensure the impartiality of the police and judiciary. One result in the elections was particularly promising: despite Sirisena’s support for some Buddhist fundamentalist parties, he gained the support of the major parties representing Tamils and Muslims, who account for 30 percent of the country’s population. This could bode well for reconciliation efforts in the aftermath of the civil war.
Much, of course, remains to be seen. Deep reforms are need to improve Sri Lanka’s institutions, encourage national unity, transcend ethnic barriers, and heal a popular psyche still damaged from war and abuse allegations. Sirisena’s ability to effect change might be limited by a need to appease a variety of ethnic coalition groups that supported him. Attempts to repeal harsh laws that provide immunity to military and police could cost him the support of the military, a powerful stakeholder during the Rajapaksa years.
It is notable that Sirisena, who at one time served as Acting Defense Minister, has so far stated that, like Rajapaksa, he would not permit international investigation into the allegations of war crimes committed against Tamils at the end of the war. Thus while there is a new atmosphere of hope and potential openness in Sri Lanka, much will depend on the work of civil society groups to hold the new government accountable for its promises of change.
Janani Ramachandran is a Program Assistant for Eurasia and South Asia at CIPE.
Published Date: January 22, 2015