Two extremely politically significant events are listed for this week and the fallout from them will no doubt influence patterns of voting at the next major national elections which, if it is a presidential election in 2024, is just over one year away according to the estimates of most political observers.
The first of these is the documentary aired by Channel 4, the British television network. This focuses on the 2019 Easter terror attacks, claiming it was a conspiracy hatched allegedly with the involvement of Sri Lankan officials. The entire documentary is based on the evidence of a few individuals.
One individual is identified as Hanzeer Azad Maulana, an aide to parliamentarian Sivanesathurai Chandrakanthan, better known as Pillayan a former member of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) who later formed his own organisation, the Tamil Makkal Viduthalai Pulikal (TMVP).
The documentary implies, through Maulana’s links to Pillayan and Pillayan’s association with the then main opposition party that it was a highly orchestrated conspiracy to create a climate of fear in the country that would facilitate the return of the opposition to power at national elections.
Analysts have noted that much of the claims made in the documentary hinges on statements attributed to a few persons with questionable credentials. There is no hard evidence to corroborate these claims. Besides, a response from Sri Lankan authorities to these allegations have not been given prominence.
The documentary was originally scheduled to be broadcast at an earlier date. However, following representations made by Sri Lankan officials, it was delayed. It is also understood that, after considering the objections that were raised, the title of the documentary was changed.
Nevertheless, the political impact of this documentary cannot be underestimated. That is especially in the context of the head of the Catholic Church in Sri Lanka, Cardinal Malcolm Ranjith again recently calling for an impartial, comprehensive and international investigation into the Easter attacks.
Though not directly implicated, much attention will focus on the response of the Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna (SLPP). The party has been rather tenuously linked by association to the Easter attacks in the documentary. The SLPP which has a majority in Parliament is likely to strongly deny the claims.
Being free of terrorism for ten years after the end of the Eelam war, the Easter attacks in 2019 led to communal tensions in the country. However, to claim the attacks were a conspiracy is to take the discourse to a different level.
It must be noted that Channel 4, the British network that broadcast the documentary is the same broadcaster that produced ‘Sri Lanka’s Killing Fields’, another documentary that reported on human rights abuses that allegedly occurred during the final phase of the Eelam war in May 2009.
That documentary was widely publicised but did not attract much public support or sympathy in Sri Lanka because of its biased nature. It appeared to undermine the gains made by the country due to the end of the Eelam war and denigrate the role of the Sri Lankan political and military establishments.
In fact, the standing of those who led the war effort against the LTTE rose remarkably in the wake of that documentary and contributed to the rise in the popularity of the United Peoples’ Freedom Alliance (UPFA) in the post-Eelam war years, culminating in resounding election victories in 2010.
A similar impact from the documentary broadcast this week cannot be ruled out. There are many theories as to who masterminded the Easter attacks but this documentary could well allow the SLPP to reprise its role as being the main advocates for national security while opposing western interests.
What will be also interesting is how political parties in Sri Lanka will use this issue and how the voting public will react to it. What is different with this documentary is that this is a day and age where the reach of social media is far and wide. Therefore its impact could be quite significant.
The other major issue pre-occupying the Government this week is the No-Confidence Motion (NCM) against Health Minister Keheliya Rambukwella. The motion is sponsored by the main opposition party, the Samagi Jana Balavegaya (SJB) but most other opposition parties have endorsed it as well.
It is being forwarded by the SJB citing several issues that currently affect the state health sector. These include deaths of patients allegedly due to the import of low-quality drugs, the lack of efficiency in the National Medicines Regulatory Authority and the mass migration of doctors.
The opposition claims that there is also large-scale bribery and corruption in the health sector, especially in the import of medications.
Health Minister Rambukwella maintains that all these issues have their roots in the economic crisis that engulfed the country last year and that all steps that are practically possible have been taken to prevent the crisis from deteriorating further. He has strongly resisted calls to resign from his portfolio.
The Government parliamentary group is confident that it can prevail at the vote of the NCM. It has had the support of President Ranil Wickremesinghe in this regard. Last week, the President cancelled overseas leave for several MPs and ministers, requesting them to stay back for the vote on the NCM.
Adding another political dimension to the NCM is the SJB’s Rajitha Senaratne, himself a former Minister of Health who has been critical of Rambukwella.
Senaratne has made no secret that he covets the Health portfolio. In public he has gone so far as to say that if it is offered to him, he would accept it. As a result, a faction of the SJB was initially wary about moving a NCM against Rambukwella, fearing it could pave the way for Senaratne’s cross-over.
The SJB finally decided to proceed with the NCM despite these reservations and has been successful in obtaining the support of fellow opposition parliamentarians. What is most interesting, even more so than the final outcome of the NCM, will be the voting pattern of parliamentarians on this issue.
It is understood that even the SJB is resigned to the fact that Minister Rambukwella will in all probability survive the vote. However the way how some parliamentarians of the ruling SLPP will vote will be watched with great interest, given the ongoing speculation about their changing loyalties.
The SLPP parliamentary group is no longer the strong entity with a near two-thirds majority that it once was, soon after the 2020 general election. It has now splintered into several factions, the most notable being the Nidahasa Janatha Sabhawa (NJS) and the Uththara Lanka Sabhagaya (ULS).
In addition, another faction is reported to be emerging. This consists of parliamentarians disgruntled with both the SLPP as well as the Sri Lanka Freedom Party to which they originally belonged. Reports emerged last week that the de facto leader of this group is Anura Priyadarshana Yapa.
This group however is firmly aligned with the programme and policies of President Ranil Wickremesinghe. As such, they are very unlikely to support a NCM against Minister Rambukwella. Most parliamentarians from the NJS and the ULS in contrast are more likely to support the NCM.
This contest will be watched with interest not because it will determine the outcome of the NCM which appears to be a foregone conclusion but because it will provide pointers to the shifting allegiances of the so-called ‘independent’ MPs which will become crucial in the months to come.
In a political climate where potential candidates for the next presidential election are attempting to get a feel of their prospects and the support they enjoy, this will be of critical importance. It could also provide an indication as to the way in which new political alliances will emerge for a Presidential poll.
The vote on the NCM, after the motion is debated for a full three days, is due to be taken at 5.30 p.m. tomorrow. Even in the likely event that Health Minister Keheliya Rambukwella survives the NCM, it could set the trend for new political allies to emerge in preparation for next year’s national elections.
