Sunday Times 2
The buck stops with the President
Sri Lankans are slowly beginning to come to terms with the reality that they would face another war on terror after enjoying relative peace for 10 years. Much has been said in the last week and much of it in anger, frustration and fear.
Political opportunism has reached unprecedented levels, with Gotabaya Rajapaksa announcing his presidential bid, thinking that he is the strongman every Sri Lankan dreams of. But what we have failed to do is to identify those who should take the blame and demand action against them. This is not a politically motivated blame game, but an absolute necessity, for those who pushed the country to this abyss have to be identified and dealt with, for discipline to be maintained for the battle ahead.
A shocked prime minister’s first reaction was that he knew nothing about it. It is accepted by the President today that the PM’s security division was not even informed about this threat despite ministerial and former presidential security details being informed. Does not this alone raise questions about the sinister motives of the security establishment?
The president is the Minister of Defence as per the Constitution. But following the October coup, he refused to assign the Ministry of Law and Order to the UNP and kept it for himself. It is believed that one reason was to control the ongoing investigations, especially those against his Chief of Staff.
Earlier requests by the prime minister to appoint Sarath Fonseka had been turned down by him. Therefore, he had taken the entire security of the country into his hands. And if the president took upon himself the power, he has to accept the responsibility that goes along with it.
Details have now emerged of the security information that was available to the authorities from India and other friendly countries. Muslim community leaders have stated how they met the president and gave him details of the NTJ in January. The prime minister and the State Defence Minister were not present at this meeting and only the president and his officials had knowledge of what was disclosed. President Maithripala Sirisena is silent about what happened with this information.
It is against this backdrop that foreign intelligence agencies informed Sri Lankan counterparts of the impending attacks. What about the director of Special Intelligence Services? Did he not think it required action, and did he not think it fit to inform the president when his colleagues were not taking action? We have a scenario where despite the Sri Lankan Muslims giving information, and alerts from foreign intelligence agencies being received, the two ministries chose to do nothing. And who was the head of both ministries? None other than the president himself.
If there had been two ministers, it is likely that some checks and balances would have worked, and a UNP minister would have informed the prime minister and action would have been taken. If the PM’s advice had been followed and Sarath Fonseka was appointed, this sorry state of affairs would not have arisen.
What about the Security Council? Since October, when he was sacked, the prime minister has not attended its meetings. Neither has he been invited. From October to December there was a fake PM who should tell us whether he attended those meetings. In January, there had been only one meeting which the prime minister was not informed of after which no meetings were called. Does this mean that even after Muslim leaders gave them the information, security officials did not think it fit to meet and their leader Maithripala Sirisena did not see the necessity to ask for follow up action or keep his prime minister or Cabinet informed?
The Security Council had refused to meet the prime minister as the bombs started exploding and met on their own. When the PM took the initiative and went to the Ministry of Defence, they refused to meet him. He and the State Minister of Defence were kept waiting while the officials finished their meetings. Did they not consult the president at this time? And did he not ask them to speak to the prime minister? Or will Sirisena try to tell us that nobody called him even then? That would indeed be stretching our imagination a bit too much.
The Security Council, awaiting the arrival of the boss, refused to brief the Cabinet that afternoon despite the ministers having to take decisions regarding the security of the country. What greater insubordination could there be? Were these officials awaiting the arrival of their lord and master from Singapore, confident that he would save them from facing the consequences of their actions?
It becomes clear that only the prime minister acted with responsibility and the thought of the greater good of the people of Sri Lanka: first by risking his life to go across the Fort area, where the bombs were, to the Defence Building when the Security Council refused to meet him; secondly, by imposing a curfew and banning social media which prevented a backlash which would have made matters worse.
The president has made no credible excuse for not returning earlier and attempted to sweep everything under the carpet by saying the Government must take responsibility. Who or what is the Government? He is the head of Government and the minister who took over the security of the country against the advice of his prime minister and in violation of the Constitution. The acts of commission and omission are all his. No other minister is involved. It is a problem caused by the president, and only him, for the country. Can we reasonably expect the prime minister and the Cabinet, and professional security men to work under him at a time like this?
Sri Lanka was just beginning to raise its head after the disaster of the Sirisena-Rajapaksa coup of October and now President Maithripala Sirisena has plunged the country into its darkest hour in a decade.
(The writer is a human rights and governance analyst.)