Screen to print by Dinouk Colombage
It’s election year in Sri Lanka; in the next 12 to 15 months, the country will see a presidential election, a parliamentary election, and somewhere during this period, provincial council (PC) elections. It is a vital period of elections as the results will determine the foreseeable future of the country.
On the one hand, the public is given the option of a Government whose biggest failing seems to be their inability to communicate the progress they have made. On the other side of the coin lies the family of a former President whose regime was ousted by the public in 2015 on the back of allegations of numerous crimes including extra-judicial killings and mass-scale corruption.
With public opinion swaying, as both sides geared up for what promises to be a closely-fought election, the Easter Sunday terror attacks struck the country. Over 250 people were killed and several hundred more injured in suicide attacks which targeted Catholic churches and five-star hotels. The reaction was as expected, public opinion swiftly turned against the Government as “top-secret memos” were leaked on social media suggesting that prior knowledge of the attack was shared by the intelligence services.
Following the terror attacks, social media was rife with rumours targeting minority groups, accusing them of further acts of violence. Despite the Government’s efforts to quell the rumours through continual media statements and social media blackouts, fear-mongering has grown exponentially.
Public fear and unrest
Finally, this past week, fear and uncertainty appeared to have boiled over and taken the form of riots. Security forces were deployed on several occasions in the last seven days to disperse violent mobs which targeted Muslims homes and shops.
As the leaders of the country continue to call for calm and for all parties to exercise restraint, the public needs to step back and examine what exactly caused these riots.
The attacks on 21 April were subsequently claimed by ISIS, an extremist Muslim terrorist organisation. The leaders of the Muslim community, along with the general Muslim public, were quick to condemn the actions of the terrorists. With the lack of support amongst the public towards these terrorists, the fear that they would be able to grow in Sri Lanka seems to have abated.
However, groups with vested interests capitalised on these attacks to further their own gains. On Monday night, a media report alleged that SLFP General Secretary Dayasiri Jayasekara had actively intervened to secure the release of four suspects who were taken into police custody over the subsequent riots. Further footage emerged of other prominent political figures at the scene of the riots including Pivithuru Hela Urumaya’s Madumadawa Aravinda and Namal Kumara (an informant for the Police who is under witness protection over an alleged assassination plot against the President).
Jayasekara’s presence at the police station, which was caught on film, caused a stir on social media with many users demanding he be arrested for interference. The Prime Minister and the acting Minister of Defence both instructed the IGP to arrest anyone who attempted to interfere, regardless of political allegiances.
While the public clamours for the arrest of these individuals, the question that needs to be asked is what were they doing there?
A familiar dimension
Jayasekara, for all his faults, has never been considered a racist. In the past, the Kurunegala politician had fashioned himself as a liberal, appealing to a variety of vote banks ranging across ethnic lines. His apparent actions to protect those responsible for the communal riots which swept through the Kurunegala town seem to be at odds with his persona.
As the country prepares to vote, Jayasekara’s actions seem to have taken on a dimension often deployed during election cycles – fear-mongering. Ever since the Easter Sunday terror attacks, the online commentary has been one focused on building a fear psychosis in the public’s mind. Rumours ranging from unverified reports of attacks to stories of terrorists dressing up as members of the security forces were spread online. The members of the Opposition took to the media to continue to accuse the Government of failing to ensure the security of the public.
Mahinda Rajapaksa, as Leader of the Opposition, raised concerns over unverified reports of an attack which was to have taken place on 13 May. While failing to confirm whether this attack would happen or not, Rajapaksa instead chose to heighten the fear of the public by referring to a threat to school children. Speaking to the media, he said: “None of these children are bulletproof. We have bulletproof vehicles and can take cover.”
In fact, the irresponsible statement made by the Opposition Leader went further, as he stated: “It was rumoured that there would be a poisonous gas attack. There are four million children and it is not safe to take them out.”
Rajapaksa, who was President at a time when the city was victim to numerous bombings, including attacks on his brother – the then Defence Secretary – the then Army Commander, and the then Pakistani High Commissioner, never once at the time suggested that the city was unsafe for the children.
However, from Opposition benches, the Rajapaksa camp has decided to capitalise on the fear of the public to try gain further ground in upcoming political battles.
Supporters of Mahinda Rajapaksa have taken to social media calling for resignations of the Government, and for Rajapaksa to take over to ensure security.
Diversions
The Government for their part has been able to make significant progress in the investigations into the terror attacks with multiple arrests made around the country.
Unfortunately, the attention of the authorities and security forces has been turned to the mobs which appear to be instigated with political gains in mind. The disruptions and questions over the safety of the public now no longer appear to emanate from the threat of terror attacks, but instead from the threat of communal riots.
Images of the 1983 anti-Tamil pogrom that left a bloodied mark on the country have been resurrected by the Opposition camp, once again reminding people of the UNP’s unwanted history. Ironically, while Rajapaksa urges the public to refrain from repeating the crimes of the past, political supporters of his are being accused of supporting the mobs.
The fear that has gripped the public is being unleashed in the form of anger directed at the Government. The people, egged on by the Opposition politicians, are continually accusing the Government of failing to ensure their safety; while the presence of soldiers on street corners, sporadic enforcing of curfew in areas of the country, and social media blackouts have further strengthened the argument of the detractors.
As the elections draw closer, the outcome seems to hinge on whether or not the country can move beyond the fear psychosis which laid siege to the capital. For the Opposition, a political group whose success relies on a platform built on security, the recent troubles have given them an advantage; however, whether or not the
Government can demonstrate that they are capable of leading the country beyond the crisis should determine the outcome of the elections.
It’s election year in Sri Lanka; in the next 12 to 15 months, the country will see a presidential election, a parliamentary election, and somewhere during this period, provincial council (PC) elections. It is a vital period of elections as the results will determine the foreseeable future of the country.
On the one hand, the public is given the option of a Government whose biggest failing seems to be their inability to communicate the progress they have made. On the other side of the coin lies the family of a former President whose regime was ousted by the public in 2015 on the back of allegations of numerous crimes including extra-judicial killings and mass-scale corruption.
With public opinion swaying, as both sides geared up for what promises to be a closely-fought election, the Easter Sunday terror attacks struck the country. Over 250 people were killed and several hundred more injured in suicide attacks which targeted Catholic churches and five-star hotels. The reaction was as expected, public opinion swiftly turned against the Government as “top-secret memos” were leaked on social media suggesting that prior knowledge of the attack was shared by the intelligence services.
Following the terror attacks, social media was rife with rumours targeting minority groups, accusing them of further acts of violence. Despite the Government’s efforts to quell the rumours through continual media statements and social media blackouts, fear-mongering has grown exponentially.
Public fear and unrest
Finally, this past week, fear and uncertainty appeared to have boiled over and taken the form of riots. Security forces were deployed on several occasions in the last seven days to disperse violent mobs which targeted Muslims homes and shops.
As the leaders of the country continue to call for calm and for all parties to exercise restraint, the public needs to step back and examine what exactly caused these riots.
The attacks on 21 April were subsequently claimed by ISIS, an extremist Muslim terrorist organisation. The leaders of the Muslim community, along with the general Muslim public, were quick to condemn the actions of the terrorists. With the lack of support amongst the public towards these terrorists, the fear that they would be able to grow in Sri Lanka seems to have abated.
However, groups with vested interests capitalised on these attacks to further their own gains. On Monday night, a media report alleged that SLFP General Secretary Dayasiri Jayasekara had actively intervened to secure the release of four suspects who were taken into police custody over the subsequent riots. Further footage emerged of other prominent political figures at the scene of the riots including Pivithuru Hela Urumaya’s Madumadawa Aravinda and Namal Kumara (an informant for the Police who is under witness protection over an alleged assassination plot against the President).
Jayasekara’s presence at the police station, which was caught on film, caused a stir on social media with many users demanding he be arrested for interference. The Prime Minister and the acting Minister of Defence both instructed the IGP to arrest anyone who attempted to interfere, regardless of political allegiances.
While the public clamours for the arrest of these individuals, the question that needs to be asked is what were they doing there?
A familiar dimension
Jayasekara, for all his faults, has never been considered a racist. In the past, the Kurunegala politician had fashioned himself as a liberal, appealing to a variety of vote banks ranging across ethnic lines. His apparent actions to protect those responsible for the communal riots which swept through the Kurunegala town seem to be at odds with his persona.
As the country prepares to vote, Jayasekara’s actions seem to have taken on a dimension often deployed during election cycles – fear-mongering. Ever since the Easter Sunday terror attacks, the online commentary has been one focused on building a fear psychosis in the public’s mind. Rumours ranging from unverified reports of attacks to stories of terrorists dressing up as members of the security forces were spread online. The members of the Opposition took to the media to continue to accuse the Government of failing to ensure the security of the public.
Mahinda Rajapaksa, as Leader of the Opposition, raised concerns over unverified reports of an attack which was to have taken place on 13 May. While failing to confirm whether this attack would happen or not, Rajapaksa instead chose to heighten the fear of the public by referring to a threat to school children. Speaking to the media, he said: “None of these children are bulletproof. We have bulletproof vehicles and can take cover.”
In fact, the irresponsible statement made by the Opposition Leader went further, as he stated: “It was rumoured that there would be a poisonous gas attack. There are four million children and it is not safe to take them out.”
Rajapaksa, who was President at a time when the city was victim to numerous bombings, including attacks on his brother – the then Defence Secretary – the then Army Commander, and the then Pakistani High Commissioner, never once at the time suggested that the city was unsafe for the children.
However, from Opposition benches, the Rajapaksa camp has decided to capitalise on the fear of the public to try gain further ground in upcoming political battles.
Supporters of Mahinda Rajapaksa have taken to social media calling for resignations of the Government, and for Rajapaksa to take over to ensure security.
Diversions
The Government for their part has been able to make significant progress in the investigations into the terror attacks with multiple arrests made around the country.
Unfortunately, the attention of the authorities and security forces has been turned to the mobs which appear to be instigated with political gains in mind. The disruptions and questions over the safety of the public now no longer appear to emanate from the threat of terror attacks, but instead from the threat of communal riots.
Images of the 1983 anti-Tamil pogrom that left a bloodied mark on the country have been resurrected by the Opposition camp, once again reminding people of the UNP’s unwanted history. Ironically, while Rajapaksa urges the public to refrain from repeating the crimes of the past, political supporters of his are being accused of supporting the mobs.
The fear that has gripped the public is being unleashed in the form of anger directed at the Government. The people, egged on by the Opposition politicians, are continually accusing the Government of failing to ensure their safety; while the presence of soldiers on street corners, sporadic enforcing of curfew in areas of the country, and social media blackouts have further strengthened the argument of the detractors.
As the elections draw closer, the outcome seems to hinge on whether or not the country can move beyond the fear psychosis which laid siege to the capital. For the Opposition, a political group whose success relies on a platform built on security, the recent troubles have given them an advantage; however, whether or not the
Government can demonstrate that they are capable of leading the country beyond the crisis should determine the outcome of the elections.