Sri Lanka’s Determined Reformer

On January 10, Maithripala Sirisena was sworn in as Sri Lanka’s new president. Riding a wave of optimism after an upset victory against Mahinda Rajapaksa, Sri Lanka’s former heavy-handed president, Sirisena set out to deliver on the series of promises he made during his campaign. Sirisena, who ran for office on a platform of delivering “compassionate governance” for all Sri Lankans, was seen both domestically and internationally as a leader who would positively influence Sri Lanka’s fragile national healing process following almost 30 years of constant ethnic conflict and war. Additionally, he was envisaged as someone who could restore the country’s eroded democratic institutions after a decade of neglect under Rajapaksa. Over the course of his first month in office, Sirisena has offered observers of Sri Lankan affairs cause for optimism, demonstrating both political will and competence in addressing long-standing fundamental issues. However, a number of challenges still remain before the new Sri Lankan president can convincingly deliver on his campaign promises.

Sirisena’s policy moves since coming to power in Sri Lanka should be evaluated in the context of Sri Lanka’s recent political history. He takes over the presidency after a decade of rule by Mahinda Rajapaksa. Rajapaksa, who sought to secure a third six-year term for himself (following a controversial constitutional amendment on term limits), led the administration that suppressed Sri Lanka’s Tamil insurgency and brought an end to the country’s 25-year civil war in 2009. The ethnic fissures between the country’s minority Tamils and majority Sinhalese that were exposed and exploited over the course of the civil war continue to play a salient role in Sri Lankan politics. For example, Sri Lanka’s minorities, including its Tamils, overwhelmingly supported Sirisena’s candidacy. Sirisena, a Sinhala himself and a former member of the Rajapaksa administration, did not make minority rights a major plank in his campaign platform. However, since taking his oath of office, the president has demonstrated a dynamic approach to addressing deficits in minority rights and democratic governance.

Indeed, several actions taken by Sirisena over his first 45 days in office have assuaged skeptics of Sri Lanka’s reform prospects. For example, Sirisena has replaced several Rajapaksa-era officials with individuals more sensitive to his government’s approach to minority issues. He removed the former military governor of Sri Lanka’s Northern Province, an area where Tamils compose a majority, inserting in his place H.M.G.S. Palihakkara, a veteran diplomat who represented Sri Lanka at the United Nations Human Rights Council. Additionally, for the first time in more than two decades, Sri Lanka’s chief justice will be a Tamil: Kanagasabapathy Sripavan was appointed to the position shortly after the new administration took over. Moreover, Sirisena tapped Ranil Wickremesinghe for prime minister. Wickremesinghe, who has been prime minister in the past, has been sensitive to the concerns of Sri Lanka’s minorities.

Sirisena’s administration is particularly keen to address growing international criticism of Sri Lanka. During Rajapaksa’s final four years in office, the country came under the international spotlight after a 2011 UN report highlighted atrocities committed by both the Sri Lankan government and the Liberation Tamil Tigers of Eelam (LTTE) in the final years of the country’s civil war. Rajapaksa acknowledged the criticism but remained recalcitrant when it came to cooperating with international investigators. Instead, his government established investigative commissions that were subsequently criticized for their lack of independence, loose evaluative standards, and feeble mandates. Not surprisingly, Rajapaksa’s approach to international investigations galvanized Sri Lanka’s minorities to turn out in record numbers for January’s election. Sirisena, during his campaign for the presidency, emphasized that he would protect Rajapaksa and Sri Lankan leaders from international scrutiny for war crimes. However, he never went quite as far as Rajapaksa, who outright asked Tamil voters to “forget the past,” in offending Sri Lanka’s minorities.

The new government has reversed several Rajapaksa-era policies that could help improve Sri Lanka’s international reputation. Among them was the Rajapaksa government’s ban on travel by non-Sri Lankans to the country’s Northern Province amid concerns that independent observers would gather evidence of wartime wrongdoing by the government. Sirisena lifted the ban but also stated during his campaign that he would set up additional government investigative commissions to investigate war crimes. Sirisena dispatched Jayantha Dhanapala, an adviser on foreign affairs to the new government and former UN under-secretary-general, to brief the UN High Commissioner on Human Rights Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein on his government’s approach to postwar accountability. While he hasn’t gone as far as to grant visas to UN investigators, the move suggests greater transparency from the Sri Lankan government. Sirisena’s government is also working to identify and return land that was appropriated from civilians for military use in the Tamil-majority north during the war. Beyond these moves, the president has not gone as far as entirely demilitarizing the country’s north or inviting in independent international investigators. Still, the new government’s approach to postwar accountability is a far cry from the intransigence of the Rajapaksa era.

Beyond the sensitive issues of minority rights and civil war accountability, Sirisena’s government has indicated other ambitious plans for reform. These plans are encapsulated in an announced 100-day program in which the government set out a series of goals to roll back Rajapaksa-era policies. Most significantly, Sirisena may be on track to accomplish an important objective articulated during his campaign: abolishing Sri Lanka’s executive presidency, which tended toward authoritarianism under Rajapaksa, and replacing it with a parliamentary system. As per the government’s own 100-day program, April 23, 2015 has been set as the ambitious early deadline for “free and fair elections [to be] held under a caretaker government” – a date that will determine whether Sirisena’s longer-term vision for a new Sri Lanka will sink or swim.

There remains considerable risk in Sirisena’s propositions for political reform. Senior legislators and cabinet members continue to disagree on the extent to which drastic reforms to the presidency are necessary. Sirisena has by no means consolidated the necessary political capital to make his vision for political reform a reality; late-February and March will put his ability to navigate high Sri Lankan politics to the test. Sirisena’s 100-day program could lead to his own undoing. His supporters, who see him as a less corrupt alternative to Rajapaksa, may grow disenchanted with a government that fails to deliver quickly on grand promises. Certainly, Sirisena has shown great vision for what he’d like to accomplish with the democratic mandate he’s been given. However, as reformers the world over have learned, often the hard way, the path to change rewards those who tread both with care and determination. If Sirisena succeeds in his grand endeavor, he’ll cement perceptions that Sri Lanka has entered a new era in its post-civil war political evolution. Leaving war and corruption in the past, he could be the one to ease Sri Lanka’s path into a peaceful and prosperous 21st century.