Sri Lanka’s squandered opportunities
By Editorial Board,
ALMOST FOUR years ago, the Sri Lankan government of President Mahinda Rajapaksa won a decisive victory in a 26-year-long civil war with rebels from the island’s minority Tamil community. The cost was horrific: A United Nations investigation subsequently found that up to 40,000 civilians may have died in the government's final offensive. But the triumph made Mr. Rajapaksa a hero among the majority Sinhalese community and gave him an opportunity to modernize his country while healing its ethnic rift.
Unfortunately,
the president and his family — two brothers hold cabinet
positions — have pursued just the opposite course. Having acquired a two-thirds
parliamentary majority by inducing the defection of opposition representatives,
the ruling party rewrote the constitution to eliminate a two-term limit on the
president. Government critics in the press, civil society organizations and the
judiciary have been threatened and sometimes attacked by pro-government
thugs. According to Human Rights Watch, several thousand people
are detained without charge, and state security forces have continued to abuse
Tamil activists, including through torture and sexual assault.
The
regime has meanwhile brushed off demands by the U.N. Human Rights Council that
it conduct a serious investigation into crimes that may have been committed in
the final months of the war. Last week the U.N. High Commissioner for Human
Rights, NaviPillay, said that no mechanism had been established to
trace people who went missing and that investigations of disappearances had not
led to arrests or prosecutions.
This
year Mr. Rajapaksa has taken two more big steps in the wrong direction. Last
month he ratified the impeachment of the chief justice of the supreme court and
installed a close follower in her place, neutering the judiciary’s independence.
The president’s legislative majority initiated the impeachment after the court
ruled against an economic development initiative by one of the Rajapaksa
brothers; the plan ignored constitutionally guaranteed rights for local
governments.
Mr.
Rajapaksa had promised to expand that local autonomy as a way of addressing the
legitimate interests of Tamils, who form a majority in parts of the north and
east. But this month he celebrated Sri Lanka’s independence day by delivering a
speech that reneged on the pledge. The government is now signaling that it
may repeal the constitutional provision on local rights.
The
United States and other Western governments have repeatedly and publicly
protested Mr. Rajapaksa’s retrograde measures, but their words have fallen on
deaf ears. Human Rights Watch points out that the Commonwealth community of
nations may have some leverage, because Sri Lanka is due to host the bloc’s
summit in November — a high-prestige event for a small country. By threatening
to move or boycott the summit and Sri Lanka’s assumption of the Commonwealth
chairmanship, governments such as Britain, Canada and Australia could send a
clear message to Mr. Rajapaksa that his policies are unacceptable to democratic
nations.

