Sri Lanka’s Bollywood-grade distraction from critical policy reforms and budget focus, the ongoing saga of the woeful tale of Sri Lanka Cricket, yesterday (27) reached its cliff-hanger climax with allegations or conspiracy to murder and finger-pointing galore on the live-to-air stage, which Parliament has become. Following some scandalous allegations against the President’s Chief of Staff and right hand man, Sagala Rathnayaka by now former Sports Minister Roshan Ranasinghe, and got unceremoniously sacked within hours – only to be succeeded in the post(s) of Minister for Sport and Youth affairs role by President’s confidant and Minister of Tourism Harin Fernando. Ranasinghe’s portfolio of Irrigation was handed over to Rajapaksa loyalist Pavithra Wanniarachchci.

While many Sri Lanka’s remain captivated by the ongoing “Cricket saga” critical issues like, the increase in VAT tax, the “feel-good” 2024 Budget, the lack of an IGP, shortfalls in state revenue raising, booming gun crime, cabinet approval for a billion dollar petroleum refinery in Hambantota which the public knows little about, high cost of living and commodity prices anticipated during the upcoming festive season remains unaddressed, and out of sight. One can’t help but think, while Ranasinghe’s claim to becoming a victim of a large-scale corruption at the press conference held following his dismissal from post, was a symbolic firing of a starting gun for his future electoral campaign. If it is so, well played Ranasinghe! However, only time will tell if you will remain a hero for the cricket-loving masses long enough to get you back to Parliament.   

There have long been allegations about corruption in the Sri Lankan sports sector, and in particular Sri Lanka Cricket. There have also been long-standing allegations of corruption in the International Cricket Council (ICC). Was Ranasinghe serious about rooting out corruption from sports, especially cricket? Or was he riding a wave which he knew will win hearts and minds of a voter block? This remains to be seen. Ranasinghe was smart to let his actions and reactions to it play out in the court of public opinion. With such tactics, he may well be a winner at the next election.

Giving a special statement in Parliament yesterday, Ranasinghe claimed that his life was at risk and that in the event anything untoward should happen to him, the President and his Chief of Presidential Staff Sagala Ratnayaka would have to be held responsible. “This is a new rift in politics, and my life may be lost due to it. I could be killed anywhere – it could be today, tomorrow, or the day after. I don’t know. But the President and Ratnayaka will have to be held responsible. Don’t exclude these from the Hansard,” Ranasinghe said in Parliament. The former Sports Minister has been at loggerheads with Sri Lanka Cricket and its President Shammi Silva even before the national cricket team’s humiliating loss to India at the International Cricket Council’s (ICC) Cricket World Cup 2023. Trouble had been brewing since Ranasinghe had appointed an interim committee after sacking the cricket governing body headed by Silva following the national team’s disastrous World Cup campaign. Ranasinghe also appointed former Sri Lanka Captain Arjuna Ranatunga as the head of a seven-member interim committee. But the ICC then suspended the SLC with immediate effect for Government interference and Silva also managed to obtain a court order suspending the interim committee. Ranasinghe had accused Silva and other board members of the SLC of bidding for the ban from the ICC, calling it a “big betrayal of the country”.

Either way, regardless of who betrayed who, it is the public that will be the losers in the long run. Many Sri Lankans, who are clearly distracted by the cricketing saga, will likely allow the politicians the time and space they need to develop the outcomes they want for the pressing issues which are at hand. That is what such theatre performances do, buys time, distracts the masses, and pushes narratives that powerful political groups want to be in the public’s eye. Meanwhile, the crisis continues, and we are less attentive about the changes in governance that we all cried out for. How can change happen in such an environment?