Establishing Accountability Is The Path To Reconciliation In Sri Lanka
Dr. G K Nathan
The pressure from world leaders on President Mahinda Rajapaksa of Sri Lanka, during his last term in office, to conduct an investigation on what happened during the last phase of the military conflict that ended in May 2009, was getting too hot to face and his claims that army fought an “anti-terrorists war” with “zero civilian casualties”, did not hold water with the world leaders nor with independent organizations. Rather than working cooperatively with the world leaders and the United Nation affiliated organizations, the ex-President Rajapaksa took the biggest gamble of his political career and called for a Presidential election two years ahead of the scheduled date, to meet the challenge from the world bodies with the mandate from the people. Timing of the election was determined by his astrologer and his hope of appealing to Sinhala Buddhist chauvinists to carry him over the line for a third victory in the last Presidential election; but his gamble failed and was voted out of office. The
majority of people voted against him because they disapproved, setting up of a totalitarian regime and establishing a family dynasty in Sri Lanka; also big majority of multilingual, multireligious and multiethnic people of Sri Lanka wanted to live in harmony and in a free democracy showed their disapproval by voting against him and vent their revenge for their plight. This has happened in Sri Lanka at an election for the second time in the post independence era of Sri Lanka, where all the people joined hands and installed MrMaithripala Sirisena as the new President of Sri Lanka. President Sirisena has promised to abolish the authoritarian Presidential system of government in Sri Lanka and said he will be only President for one term, which him more freedom to act; contrary to what ex-President Rajapaksa was trying to establish a life time presidency leading to family dynasty, like in North Korea. President Sirisena has many challenges to face and the hope of the country, but he was able to gain the confidence of the world leaders because of his humility, honesty and dignity shown, which led to acceptance in the world, in the shortest period after his election to the office of presidency. This was made possible with support coming from the immediate neighbour India and others like, the United States of America, the United Kingdom etc happened in the hope the situation in Sri Lanka will positively change for the good of the country and its people. Initial success arose from the efforts of new External Affairs Ministers Mangala Samaraweera who visited the key capitals of the world, in support of President Sirisena and conveyed a convincing message to the world leaders that determined the initial success. Now the onus is on the new National government to carry out all the “unknown promises” made to the world leaders that will be a challenge to President Sirisena. In Sri Lanka, President has said nothing publicly about resolving the long standing demands for recognition of Tamils’ rights nor responded to the call for accountability for what occurred during the military conflict, though agreed for an internal inquiry, the evidence from his election manifesto and the inaugural Presidential address given by him is less than convincing to bring about reconciliation. People have given the benefit of doubt to President Sirisena in the hope that he will be recognized as the President of Sri Lanka, who had brought unity among people?Read More