Will Sri Lanka Elect A Moral Leader In 2020?

By Niranjan Canagasooryam –AUGUST 8, 2018

Niranjan Canagasooryam

With the end of the civil war in 2009, the Rajapaksas’ deceitful claim of zero civilian casualties had inadvertently trapped their regime into an irreversible position. This absurd claim meant the inability to acknowledge the losses of a battered society that suffered the brunt of terrorism and faced the horror of the unacceptable death toll of their loved ones during the final stages of the war. It also resulted in the missing of a historic opportunity for a genuine reconciliation. It is estimated around 100,000 civilians died from the inception of the civil war in 1983 (although the uprisings commenced much earlier) with further estimates of up to 60,000 lives brutally lost in the final stages of the war. The majority of the victims were from the minority Tamil ethnicity. The tragic loss of lives of their loved ones is not easy to let go and the Sri Lankan government must address this and deploy an action plan to have a genuine and sincere reconciliation to ensure that this tragedy does not reoccur.

Successive governments have failed to carry out genuine reconciliation. Instead, there was the casual public display of unity among communities by merely showcasing acts such as Independence Day celebrations with children from all communities parading in their unique cultural dresses, religious leaders from all communities seated next to each other and heads of states making great speeches of unity as their commitment towards reconciliation. None of these public displays and speeches has addressed the true grievances of a minority community or resulted in the execution of any reconciliation actions that have had a real impact to the society at large.  

Genuine Reconciliation 

Though true reconciliation and the healing process may take decades, the following could serve as a starting point. 

Acknowledging the Truth – The first step is acknowledgement. The government should utilise the strong roots of democracy to reach out to the marginalised society by acknowledging the tragedy and informing the truth to the victims. This is the only way the people who lost their loved ones will be able to accept and commence the process to move on. GOSL should not shy away from publicly seeking and delivering the truth in fear of extremist and ultra nationalist reactions taking political mileage. Grief cannot, and should not, be suppressed. If GOSL omits this initial step of delivering the truth, it is accepting to its fellow citizens the notion that some lives matter less.

Though it frequently is viewed from this perspective, seeking and delivering the truth is not to be taken as revenge or to bring the perpetrators to justice. It needs to be carefully noted that this process is indeed different. Instead, pardoning by way of granting amnesty from both civil and criminal prosecution should be applied. Perpetrators are to be forgiven, provided there is an equal attempt to restore the honour and dignity of the victims and to give effect to repatriations.

Whilst this may seem idealistic, a similar approach was carried out quite successfully in South Africa. The Truth and Reconciliation Commission was set up in 1994 where victims of gross human rights violations by the Apartheid regime were invited to give statements about their experiences, and some selected for public hearings. Perpetrators of violence could also give testimony and request for general amnesty. This was hauled a great success in the healing process and South Africa moving forward. This is unlike the Nuremberg style prosecution of violators where perpetrators were sentenced depending on the level of injustice carried out.

National Apology – The head of state must deliver a national apology representing the country to all citizens, particularly to those who have lost their loved ones. It is not a personal responsibility but a claim of nationalistic sorrow for all the people, your people, who were unfairly affected by this civil war. 

Read More