Archbishop of Colombo His Eminence Malcolm Cardinal Ranjith has, for the umpteenth time, called upon the government to take legal action against all those held accountable by the Presidential Commission of Inquiry (PCoI), which probed the Easter Sunday terrorist attacks, and trace the masterminds of the carnage. He finds himself in an unenviable position. In the aftermath of the 2019 carnage, he together with other Catholic priests acted swiftly to prevent a backlash, and undertook to have justice served expeditiously. He gave a solemn pledge to his flock that the Catholic clergy would not hesitate even to take to the streets if other means of achieving their goal failed. About three years on, he and his colleagues are still campaigning for justice without much success.
Catholics sounded church bells in protest against the delay in the process of dispensation of justice. They also held a black flag protest. Covid-19 intervened, and their agitations had to be put on hold for health reasons. The Catholic clergy have been under pressure from the families of the victims of the Easter Sunday attacks to fulfill their pledge and cannot afford to stand by while the government is dragging its feet on the implementation of the PCoI recommendations.
Perhaps, what has prompted the Cardinal to express concern once again about the delays in the process of implementing the Easter Sunday PCoI recommendations is former President Maithripala Sirisena’s recent statement that there is no evidence to send him to jail over the 2019 terror attacks. This, Sirisena has said while the Catholic clergy and laity are urging the government to institute criminal proceedings against him as recommended by the Easter Sunday PCoI.
The case against former Defense Secretary Hamasiri Fernando for his failure to prevent the Easter Sunday attacks has reached a critical stage; the prosecution has concluded calling witnesses, and the Colombo High Court Trial-at-Bar has fixed for 18 Feb. 2022 the announcement of its decision on whether to call for a defense statement or acquit Fernando. It is being speculated in legal circles that the case against him is weak, but what matters is the opinion of the judiciary and not that of lawyers and others. A case has also been filed against former IGP Pujuth Jayasundera, who has also been charged with failure to prevent the Easter Sunday attacks. It will be interesting to see the fate of Fernando, and we have to wait until next month.
The Cardinal has warned the government that the church will be left with no alternative but to launch an international campaign seeking justice if it continues to ignore its calls. This is a worrisome proposition for the government, whose response is not yet known.
Sirisena throws down the gauntlet
Former President Sirisena shows signs of going on the offensive in dealing with the government, some of whose senior members have turned hostile towards him and the SLFP. He usually gives evasive answers to media queries, but has for once refrained from prevarication in a press interview.
In an interview with the Irida Lankadeepa newspaper of 23 Jan., Sirisena has come out with some bold answers and made an attempt to absolve the SLFP and himself of responsibility for the government’s blunders. He says vital government decisions are taken by a few persons; not a single meeting of the Sri Lanka Podujana Sandanaya, formed by the SLPP, the SLFP and their allies, has so far been held although three years have elapsed since its formation, and what the constituents agreed on has not been implemented. He says he is the President of Sri Lanka Podujana Sandanaya registered with the Election Commission, and Prime Minister Mahinda Rajapaksa its leader. All members of that alliance contested the last general election on the SLPP ticket.
Sirisena has specifically mentioned, in the aforesaid interview, that the agreement among the members of the Sri Lanka Podujana Sandanaya does not prevent the coalition partners from expressing their views freely. He has thus defended the SLPP dissidents’ right to strike discordant notes. His contention could be viewed as a veiled threat to resort to legal action if the SLPP sacks any of its MPs for expressing dissenting views.
Sirisena has also been critical of the government’s agricultural policy and its handling of the economy. One may recall that his views are similar in most respects to what he said in justification of his exit from the Mahinda Rajapaksa government in late 2014. Asked by the Lankadeepa journalist when the SLFP will break ranks with the government, Sirisena has said he cannot make predictions; his party will continue to take up issues affecting the public and its Central Committee will decide whether to leave the government, he has said, noting that in the same breath that the SLFP will not be at any disadvantage even if it breaks away.
The sting is said to be in the tail. In answer to the final question in the newspaper interview–whether expected members of the SJB and the SLPP to join in case of the SLFP breakaway from the government and forming a new political alliance–Sirisena has very confidently said that some SLPP members will join it. This seems to be his answer to those who have warned the SLFP that if it leaves the government, some of its prominent members will switch their allegiance to the SLPP.
Sirisena’s confidence
Sirisena used to doge questions on the Easter Sunday PCoL recommendations against him. He could not have been unaware of the political fallout of criminal proceedings recommended by the commission, and he was at the mercy of the ruling family, which could have him prosecuted at will. How come he has become so bold as to say that he cannot be sent to prison over the Easter Sunday attacks?
After studying some flaws in the cases against the former Defense Secretary and the former IGP and evidence against them, Sirisena’s lawyers may have concluded that no strong case could be built against him. Or, Sirisena may be thinking that it is too late for the government to have him prosecuted because such action will be seen to be politically motivated, given the ongoing clash between the SLPP and the SLFP. It could even be that Sirisena thinks the government, having joined forces with him and obtained his support to win elections, does not want to open a can of worms by having criminal proceedings initiated against him. Whatever the reason, Sirisena is now ready to take on the government and even leave it if push comes to shove. Given this situation, the SLFP may be able to up the ante in negotiations over nominations, positions, etc., if it happens to stay in the SLPP coalition longer and contest future elections together.
Govt.’s dilemma
It was politically and electorally advantageous for the SLPP to coalesce with the SLFP and have Sirisena as a partner prior to the presidential and parliamentary polls, but the SLPP leaders must now be regretting having done so. The SLFP is trying to recover lost ground on the political front at the expense of the SLPP, and the government is under pressure from the Catholic community to take legal action against Sirisena among others. The Cardinal has publicly attributed the government’s hesitation to initiate criminal proceedings against Sirisena to a political deal. Worse, the church is threatening to seek international help to have justice served. Chances are that it will carry out its threat because it is at its tether’s end, and has lost faith in the government.
Political marriages of convenience are always problematic although they may help further the interests of the parties to them in the short term. The UNP learnt this the hard way. The present regime is also in a similar predicament with Sirisena as a partner. This is the fate that awaits all strange bedfellows that adversity and expediency bring together in politics.
