A leading 19th Century political philosopher and historian, Lord John Emerich Edward Dalberg-Acton, popularly known for his pungent aphorism: “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely,” reminds us that we should reflect on the influential leaders through the history of independent Sri Lanka’s 76 years. 

We had too often trusted the powerful, especially the politicians, to save us from the troubles that they have created with their unsound public policy, false development promises, and regulations that restricted the economic freedom and liberty of the people.

We should learn from the grave mistakes committed in the past, which are the root cause of most of the common problems:

• Prime Minister S.W.R.D. Bandaranaike’s leadership in 1956 for creating the ‘Sinhala Only Act’, deliberately suppressing the Tamil communities from larger democratic and civil participation;
• President J.R. Jayewardene, despite opening the economy as early as 1977, missing the opportunity for reform, and concentrating the immense Executive power on the Presidentship;
• President Ranasinghe Premadasa’s poverty alleviation programmes and decentralisation model of governance, which continue to help the country in being on the good side of social development indexes while preventing opportunities for great leaders to contribute (President’s Counsel and Parliamentarians Lalith William Samarasekera Athulathmudali and Dissanayake Mudiyanse Ralahamilage Lionel Gamini Dissanayake, etc.);
• President Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga developing a coalition with the Marxist Party – the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP) in 2004 and, in turn, promoting Mahinda Rajapaksa to the leadership;
• The Rajapaksa clan (Presidents Mahinda Rajapaksa and Gotabaya Rajapaksa) reminding us how corruption and crony capitalism have caused political chaos and brought the country’s economy to its knees.

The Rajapaksa rule of a decade was run with policies that almost closed the economy (with high import restrictions), suppressed the Tamil communities, curtailed civil society, disappeared or killed journalists, and failed to deliver justice for the victims of the 2019 Easter Sunday attacks.

Equally, the passing of the 20th Amendment to the Constitution undermined the influence of institutions like the National Audit Office and the Commission to Investigate Allegations of Bribery or Corruption with the justification of the need for more Executive power. 

Although having no executive powers, the JVP political Party has always been able to influence the country’s political environment. Promoting Marxist nationalist ideologies often contradicted the socialist and liberal economic policies; thus, the Party often disrupted development attempts of the Island – the impact on higher education through the student movements continues to create unrest in public universities.

More crucially, the armed insurgencies in 1971 and 1988/1989 led by the JVP that killed thousands continue to haunt the people of Sri Lanka and the Party itself, despite its new avatar with the National People’s Power (NPP). Though there are different opinions and debates in this regard, for the record, upon becoming Party Leader, Opposition MP Anura Kumara Dissanayake publicly accepted and apologised in 2014 for the same.

The decision that 17 million Sri Lankans will make is not just a vote for a candidate but a vote for choosing which ideology, values, and principles to lead the country. A country cannot just decide on ideologies and values based on recent past experiences as they have been built into the society over a long period and are modelled through all the ups and downs.

As voters, most of our political biases and experiences have been influenced by the conflict, insurgencies, and, more recently, (maybe) the economic crisis. For decades, most Sri Lankans voted based on policies related to the conflict, then conflict victory-based gratitude, debt-based developments, and lastly, the Easter Sunday attacks.

However, peace and security have always been the deciding factors for voters and, at the same time, the basis for corrupt Governments to fool the voters and continue to gain legitimate power. As a result, the ignorance of voters in prioritising economic growth and development policies in choosing leaders, likewise contributed to experiencing the worst economic crisis in 2022. 

Political ideology is a party’s ethical set of ideals, principles, and doctrines that explain how the society would work under their leadership. It offers a blueprint for a certain social order. Therefore, when we select our leaders, we must decide what social order we expect in our country and society. This is a fundamental truth that voters need to internalise. The parties that used power for corruption and violence will always have their ideologies and approaches induced by their past, regardless of their claim to change with new coalitions and associations. 

Letting a party with a proven record of violence and corruption lead the country based on their claims of renewal (shadowing away from the past) will be the Sri Lankans’ worst decision at this crucial moment. Absolute power stored in such leaders will be misused, opening snowballing problems.

The country needs a social order that values the inclusiveness of all communities, including minorities, a social order with principles of development designed to address the current economic and social challenges and not just limited to statements of incompetent party leaders with unfitting experience. 

At this stage, when we are just days away from deciding the country’s fate, realistic strategies focusing on transparency and accountability are crucial for restoring public trust in the Government. Among the publicly presented manifestos, it is only the Samagi Janana Balawegaya (SJB) that has stated a clear anti-corruption strategy with laws drafted and presented in the Parliament, such as towards establishing an independent public prosecutor’s office and implementing a public procurement law that mandates transparency and efficiency in Government procurement as well as recovering stolen assets (SJB manifesto of this year [2024]).

Other parties, including the JVP/NPP, famous for their anti-corruption statements, do not mention a concrete strategy other than mentioning that laws will be implemented to tackle corruption. 

Voters are responsible for deciding who gets the power to corrupt or develop the nation from 21 September. Let voter decisions be based on policies, expertise, experience, and equally, the values and principles of parties and their candidates.

The 2024 Presidential Election is not just an economic quest but also a moral one. Voters need to prioritise exercising their vote for a free and virtuous nation.

This article was first published in The Morning.

(Meenuka Mathew is a Fellow at CPPR – Programme Design & Evaluation)

Views expressed by the author are personal and need not reflect or represent the views of the Centre for Public Policy Research.

Meenuka Mathew

+ posts

• 2024 Presidential Election: Voters, parties and policy communication
• The world needs local policies to address the global refugee crisis