Crime in Sri Lanka has been a notable issue from the 1970-80’s and has systematically developed to a national security challenge over multiple generations. Organised crime, which was visible during the 1990’s and early 2000’s, especially with links to some political figures, has flourished in the post conflict Sri Lanka. While there have been many attempts to ‘completely root out organised crime’, which going by international experience seems like a utopian dream, the lack of a sustained national effort for crime reduction and prevention is telling. Crime fighting, like many subject areas in Sri Lankan governance, keeps changing policy and operational tempo with the change of each government, minister-in-charge, and the change in leadership of law enforcement agencies. The need for a long-term crime reduction and prevention programme, especially to combat the growing ‘organised crime’ element, is the need of the hour.

Wherever governments take crime fighting seriously and seek to draw the line to curb crime, criminals find profitable ways of crossing it; when governments fail to deliver on human needs, criminals capitalise on people’s desire or despair. Globally, nearly more than three-quarters of the world’s population ‘live in countries with high levels of criminality, and in countries with low resilience to organised crime’ a report said (Global Initiative, 2021). In Sri Lanka and globally the cumulative effect of organised crime and its associated activity, amounts to an illicit form of governance, furnishing alternative services to a wide range of clients. This is a dangerous trend, especially in countries like Sri Lanka, where the State structure and faith in the Government remains weak due to prolonged governance issues, such illicit forms of governance goods and services, snowballs into a serious challenge to national security.

The difficulties in effective crime prevention and crime fighting stems from multiple challenges. Firstly, previous governments and the incumbent one tended to disregard the socio-political drivers of the problem. Secondly, in a desire to ‘show something is being done’ and to make up for shortcomings in doing sound police work which will hold up in court, governments often tend to militarise our ‘law enforcement’ response. In reality, while this may be helpful in the short-term and convince part of the population, the State is indeed taking ‘action’ the ground-level reality, such measures are suppressive and can be counterproductive. Such militarised approaches will likely alienate organised crime figures who are looking for a way out and may be ready to turn into state witness. 

There is also the concern about an increasing number of ‘encounter deaths’, custodial deaths, both which paint the law enforcement effort in a poor light and erodes confidence in the system. Thirdly, any ‘rush’ to show results, means good police work goes out of the window and other narratives, political and personal, take precedence. It also means that due process is often avoided or ignored. Fourthly, the law enforcement authorities and other stakeholders often underinvest in community mobilisation for crime prevention. The lack of a clear long-term strategy or framework also leaves mid-level law enforcement officers unable to proceed without a clear sense of strategy; this triggers the need to ‘show results to the leadership’ and results in cutting corners on field work, and investigations.  

There is a need for an in-depth national study to unpack the sociopolitical underpinnings of organised crime and, together with history and how the threat strategy evolves. Such a process will enable the State and all relevant stakeholders to get a clear strategic mapping of organised crime. Such strategies, designed by experts with analysts’ inputs, can be tailored to respond not just to the problem of criminality, but also to the context that enables such occurrence. Based on such strategic estimates, which can be reviewed and updated according to the evolving situations, the crime prevention and fighting course of action will be able to identify opportunities and vulnerabilities and adjust direction to ensure progress. As such, if the Sri Lankan Government and its law enforcement authorities wish to combat organised crime effectively, they need a national effort based on sound analytics. Ad hoc strategies and practices which navigate around the rule of law and due process to effect crime reduction will only drive criminals to extremes and leave the State more vulnerable in the longer run.