As Sri Lanka moves towards a recovery path, it cannot afford to sustain past practices of poor-governance and impunity which acted as enablers to push the island nation towards the slippery slope of economic doom.
Despite much chest-pumping by lawmakers on both sides of the political divide, many seem hell-bent on sustaining the old practices which have proven to weaken Sri Lanka’s democracy and governance. 2024, is not the time to repeat such errors. Sri Lanka’s political landscape and the public must stand resolute in preventing such repetitions if we want to stage an effective recovery, and elevate the millions of fellow countrymen who have been pushed below the poverty line due to the economic crisis and mismanagement of the nation.
Today, it is indeed disappointing to see that some groups in Sri Lanka, including some in the highest echelons of religion, continue to perpetuate the corrosive culture of impunity by seeking Presidential Pardon for a firebrand monk who has been jailed for causing harm to national and religious harmony. This, while the convict monk having a long history of sowing racial disharmony, practising ethnic politics and being dismissive of the national mechanism of the Judiciary. The top Buddhist clergy last month made an appeal to President Ranil Wickremesinghe to grant a Presidential Amnesty to Galagoda Aththe Gnanasara who has been sentenced to 4 years of rigorous imprisonment on 8 March. Gnanasara thera had been accused of making a statement on the Kuragala Buddhist Temple during a press briefing in Colombo in 2016 which was ruled by the Colombo High Court to have caused harm to national and religious harmony. The appeal made in the Month of Veska (May), was not honoured by the President, with the firebrand monk not released on Vesak Day last month.
Numerous Presidential Pardons given in the past have drawn strong public criticism, and were not accepted by the general public. The use of Presidential Pardons to aid or ‘get off the hook’ political friends and the powerful, have often been viewed as Executive Presidential actions which were based on political or apparent communal grounds. Be it the pardoning of Mary Juliet Monica Fernando, the wife of a former Minister who was sentenced to death for a double murder in 2005 by former President Mahinda Rajapaksa in March 2009, or the pardoning controversial political figure Duminda Silva, who was also convicted of murder by President Gotabaya Rajapaksa in 2021, and the pardoning of convicted Royal Park murderer Shramantha Jude Anthony Jayamaha by President Mithripala Sirisena, are fitting example of when the Presidency undermined the role of the Judiciary by way of presidential leniency in the recent past.
However, earlier this month, the Judiciary cut to size the abused powers vested in the Executive Presidency, with the Supreme Court (SC) quashing the order to grant a Presidential Pardon by former President Maithripala Sirisena to 2005 Royal Park murder convict Jayamaha, stating that it contravenes provisions under the Constitution. The SC also invalidated the pardon granted to Jayamaha, and ordered that Sirisena, an incumbent Opposition MP to pay compensation of Rs. 1 million to the petitioner, and Rs. 1 million each to the mother and father of the aggrieved young woman, who was the victim of the Royal Park murder. This is the second Presidential Pardon issued by a former President, which the SC has overturned. The SC, which ruled that Sirisena had intentionally violated the Constitution through this act, ordered the Attorney General (AG) to take necessary legal measures for the extradition of the defendant, who is currently overseas.
The public must question why a head of state should grant pardon to a person convicted by a court of law in the first place. Sri Lanka’s track record of Presidential Pardons have always been controversial, and the power to grant them has been abused. The result is that such action undermined the role of the Judiciary, rather than rectifying miscarriages of justice, as the tool of pardons is supposed to do. The continued push to grant Presidential Pardons, and to seek them for individuals who have been divisive and proven before a court of law to sew disharmony, only perpetuates the culture of impunity that has existed in Sri Lanka and weakens the role of the Judiciary. Of course, the ability enshrined in the constitution for those behind bars to seek relief and redress by way of appeal should not be curtailed. However, the political authority, and religious leadership of the island, must look beyond individuals and balance their actions for the broader ‘national good’ when seeking to employ such a mechanism of pardoning. Also, the act of Presidential Pardoning, also needs to be transparent and be explanatory.
Over the years, many Sri Lanka leaders have proved themselves to be morally corrupt, and have shown so in practice by use of executive powers to pardon criminals, and those who have acted maliciously to disrupt the harmony amongst the island’s many communities. Presidents have also by use of pardon’s negated the Judiciaries’ actions against their allies.
If Sri Lanka is to rebuild lost faith in the State, make their public believe in the governance process, and regain international credibility, such abuse of power, and impunity must be checked.