The unprecedented economic crisis in Sri Lanka has led to a serious, ongoing crisis of governance. The country has no dollars, no access to international markets for finance, record-breaking depreciation of the rupee, spiralling inflation, 13-hour power cuts and shortages of fuel, gas, drugs, milk powder and other essentials. All of this has been brought to a head by the massive and spontaneous street protests by ordinary citizens with one simple message – President Gotabaya Rajapaksa and his family must go. They must leave politics and be held accountable for the money they have stolen. They are lacking in both capacity and integrity as far as governance and government are concerned. People have defied the emergency and curfew — now withdrawn — to protest.
Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s slide into ignominy has been fast. In November 2019, 6.9 million voted for his presidency, followed in August 2020 by his party winning a two-thirds majority in the parliament election. Then came the Twentieth Amendment to the Constitution, removing all checks and balances on the exercise of presidential power and authority. His government shrank the tax base and decided to turn agriculture away from chemical to organic fertiliser overnight, resulting in serious disruptions to the food supply.
As the early signs of the crisis appeared, Rajapaksa’s government adamantly refused to go to the IMF to restructure Sri Lanka’s debt. The country continued to pay its international sovereign bonds, which make up the bulk of its dollar-denominated debt, receiving bail-outs from India, China and Bangladesh in particular and ran out of dollars for the import of essentials. In the wake of the protests, the President has decided to go to the IMF. Sri Lanka will have to pay almost $ 7 billion annually for the next three years in sovereign bond payments with foreign exchange earnings from tourism and tea having already suffered due to the war in Ukraine, in addition to the Covid-19 pandemic and the 2019 Easter Sunday atrocity which killed over 250 civilians.
Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s presidential bid was announced on the heels of the 2019 Easter bombings. He projected himself as a strong, decisive leader who, as defence secretary under his brother President Mahinda Rajapaksa, defeated the LTTE and was thus well placed to tackle other forms of terrorism and extremism. His legitimacy was sanctioned by the Buddhist clergy and the army where he had served. Rajapaksa brought into his administration a host of technocrats and retired and serving army officers. They were put in charge of the pandemic management and appointed as secretaries to ministries. They were also appointed to a number of presidential task forces to look into the restoration of ancient Buddhist sites and to oversee his One Country, One Law programme. The task forces are widely seen to target the minority communities — the One Country, One Law task force is headed by a Buddhist monk who was charged with contempt of court but pardoned by the president. Gotabaya Rajapaksa has taken a firm stand against the accountability of members of the forces for alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity and vowed that the heroes in the fight against the LTTE will not be turned into war criminals. In addition, a series of cases of corruption and rights violations against officials of both Rajapaksa regimes have been dismissed.
The question now is: Will Rajapaksa resign? What happens if he does and what happens if he does not?
Rajapaksa is fighting for his survival. He will lose any immunity from prosecution that he enjoys as head of state and the government that succeeds him will likely accede to the public sentiment of holding him and his associates accountable for corruption as well as war crimes.
Given the dire economic situation and fast-dwindling foreign exchange reserves, the president and the Opposition have to act fast. He has to write to the IMF, formally seeking assistance, and their board, in turn, has to agree and inform the Sri Lankan government accordingly. Once the agreement is in hand for debt restructuring, Sri Lanka can obtain bridging finance from the World Bank and access the international markets.
As far as the people are concerned, the issue is about the president. Any government he heads will lack credibility and legitimacy. Consequently, his attempts to form an interim government made up of all parties will fail; so too would any attempt to allow him to go into exile and escape accountability. Opposition parties have rejected his invitation to join the government and now he has lost even a simple majority in parliament.
According to the constitution, he can hold a presidential election in 2023 if he decides to stand for a second term. He can be impeached, but this is a lengthy process. Intensified and sustained public protest can force him to resign. Then the parliament can move immediately to appoint his successor, seal an agreement with the IMF, abolish the executive presidency which fosters autocracy and move to a presidential election.
For all of this to happen, the Opposition must agree. There are too many among them who harbour presidential ambitions. They must understand the gravity of the situation and think beyond their interests.
Sri Lanka seems to be going the way of Greece. There are severe structural problems in the economy that have to be rectified — they include a bloated public service and massive loss-making state-owned enterprises. The Rajapaksas did not create the economic crisis, apart from the tax cuts, but they certainly aggravated and grossly mismanaged it.
Their greed and ineptitude have brought Sri Lanka to its knees. They have brought themselves to their final reckoning. The protests will and must continue. They must be peaceful and guard against infiltration by the regime to create a law and order situation which could prompt the military to act.
Time is of the essence.
This column first appeared in the print edition on April 13, 2022 under the title ‘Rajapaksa’s reckoning’. The writer is the founder Executive Director of the Centre for Policy Alternatives, Colombo
