Igniting Culture Wars, Dehumanising The LGBTIQ Community: Hallmarks Of Yahapālanaya, Sirisena Style

By Chamindra Weerawardhana –January 29, 2017

Dr. Chamindra Weerawardhana

Two weeks ago, the cabinet of ministers in Sri Lanka rejected a provision included in the draft human rights action plan that suggested taking prompt steps to prevent discrimination on the basis of a citizen’s sexual orientation. On 25 January 2017, the President of Sri Lanka, Maithripala Sirisena, generally regarded in the West as ‘pro-Western’, if not a ‘friend of the West’ than his predecessor Mahinda Rajapaksa, openly admitted at a public event that it was he who personally ‘binned’ the provision, as well as yet another provision that called for the legalisation of sex work.

What is required?

In the Sri Lankan context, taking measures to prevent discrimination against a citizen’s sexual orientation primarily involves repealing Article 365 of the Penal Code, imposed upon the ‘Ceylonese’ under British colonial rule in the 19th century. In order to ensure adequate legal protections, this needs to be followed by an ‘equality clause’ added to the Constitution, which explicitly states that the fundamental rights of citizens are protected, irrespective of sexual orientation and gender identity. A consultation on this matter, for an equality clause to be included in the proposal ‘new’ constitution – in itself a long shot – has been under way. The President’s homophobia, now out in the open, is a clear sign that under the Sirisena government, the prospects for the passage of such an equality clause (in the present constitution or a in a new constitution) are very bleak.

Understanding the presidential reaction?

What makes Sirisena, Sri Lanka’s first citizen, opt to deny the basic fundamental rights to his fellow citizens on the basis of their sexual orientation? The reasoning behind this can be narrowed down to social conservatism, lack of understanding, and a staggering unfamiliarity with global developments in human rights provision with regards to sexual orientation and gender identity, including in many countries in the South and Southeast Asian region with which Sri Lanka shares strong cultural ties and links of kinship. Next time Sirisena is invited to ‘token-hang out’ with Western leaders at international platforms, his hosts would need considerable rethinking, except if his host is a homophobic, transphobic, xenophobic and blatantly racist politico such as the newly elected president of the part of Turtle Island we know as the USA.

The politics of LGBTIQ equality: Sri Lankan style

There is, however, another explanation to Sirisena’s reaction. He is using LGBTIQ equality for his power-political advantage. Within his government, he collides head-on with his main coalition partner, Ranil Wickremesinghe’s UNP. That party includes a number of LGB people in very senior positions, and is generally perceived, inside and outside Sri Lanka, as most amenable towards LGBTIQ rights. Indeed, whenever a cis-LGB MP (of the UNP) raises any matter in Parliament, opposition MPs often pass horrifically homophobic remarks. These MPs know that their homophobia and transphobia enables them to ‘sell themselves’ to a socially conservative and chauvinistic suburban and rural (and in some cases urban) electorate.

The broader picture of political tensions?

Sirisena’s public comments on LGBTIQ equality were followed by a comment on another deeply divisive issue in the joint government – that of the Central Bank bond scam, for which the UNP leadership is held liable. Sirisena visibly deploys this issue for his political advantage, to distinguish himself as someone who would not hesitate to take action against large-scale corruption. It is also a display of authority ‘above’ Ranil Wickremesinghe, who clearly enjoys more visibility, recognition and popularity on the international scene than Sirisena.

Read More