By Fr. Rashmi Madusanka Fernando –
Fr. Rashmi Fernando
Sri Lanka has a rich history of investment in education, reflected in its impressive literacy rate over 93%. However, since gaining independence in 1948, the island nation has struggled with political corruption and mismanagement, leading to increased economic instability and social unrest. According to Transparency International, while the average global Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) is 43/100, Sri Lanka scores 36/100, placing it 101st out of 180 countries and territories. The recent report of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights elaborates on the incumbent situation in the island nation, highlighting ongoing challenges in governance and human rights:
“Lack of accountability at all levels remains the fundamental main human rights problem. Whether it refers to war crime atrocities, post-war emblematic cases, torture and deaths in police custody, excesses in crowd control, corruption and the abuse of power, Sri Lanka suffers from an extraordinary accountability deficit that unless addressed will drag the country further behind” (United Nations General Assembly, 2023).
Political Corruption & Sustainable Development Crisis in Sri Lanka
When discussing the entrenched corruption in Sri Lanka’s political system, it is crucial to understand the intricate connections among its various forces and behavior patterns. Such a preliminary understanding is mandatory for Sri Lanka to progress toward the desired sustainable development. The key vicious cycle identified in the existing political landscape in the island nation could be depicted as follows:
The inception of the vicious cycle of political corruption and sustainable development crisis in Sri Lanka can be attributed to its prolonged historical political legacy and conflicts since gaining independence from colonial rule. The party politics, the civil conflict between the Sri Lankan government and the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) that plagued the nation for over 3 decades, unresolved grievances and tensions stemming from these conflicts, and the continuing legacy of political instability and public mistrust of politicians and their affiliated parties cast a long shadow over the nation’s political landscape until date. This legacy and political conflicts continue to affect the country’s ability to progress toward sustainable development.
This historical baggage feeds into the next stage of the vicious cycle, where political leaders and their parties often resort to weak political manifestos, party frameworks, and election promises aimed merely at garnering votes rather than creating sustainable development in the country. In a bid to secure power, politicians often prioritize personal interests and party gains by addressing historical grievances and appealing to uphold the common good. As a result, executive aggrandizement, constitutional amendments, economic relief, and sustainable development projects have become mere populist election claims that the politicians have repeatedly thrived upon for the past 76 years.
For instance, five years after the Easter Sunday bombings in 2019, definitive justice has yet to be served to the perpetrators, victims, or masterminds behind the attacks. However, the assured justice for the victims is repeatedly sold like hotcakes at election campaigns, including in the ongoing canvassing for the upcoming presidential election this year. This pattern highlights how historical issues are manipulated for electoral gain rather than being genuinely addressed, perpetuating the cycle of political instability and hindering sustainable development in Sri Lanka.
Nepotism and patronage on the part of the politicians further exacerbate corruption as another critical stage in the vicious cycle. Recent history has witnessed numerous instances of political leaders appointing family members or close associates to key positions within the government and public administration in Sri Lanka. Such favoritism not only undermines merit-based decision-making but also entrenches political corruption in the country. This practice of appointing individuals based on relationships rather than qualifications perpetuates inefficiency and lack of accountability within the government, further destabilizing the political and economic landscape of Sri Lanka.
Additionally, Transparency International observes that officials accepting bribes for awarding contracts or siphoning off public funds for personal enrichment are banal in Sri Lanka. This, in turn, fosters a negative perception of the existing political systems among islanders. The absence of robust mechanisms for holding corrupt authorities and government officials accountable, along with their lack of foresight regarding the long-term consequences of their actions, also serves as an immediate cause of the pervasive political corruption in the island of Sri Lanka. This lack of accountability leads to a sense of impunity, where individuals believe they can engage in corrupt practices without facing consequences.
Consequently, institutions that are meant to uphold ethical standards, such as the judiciary, police, and anti-corruption agencies, become weakened in the long run due to political interference, perpetuating institutional erosion, and further corruption. The lack of political accountability and oversight, government officials engaging in bribery and kickbacks by accepting monetary and/or material rewards in exchange for political favors, and their misuse of power, position, and public resources for personal gain aggravate not only institutional erosion and erosion of the public trust but also the sustainable development crisis and public unrest in the island nation. This, in turn, hinders progress and stability, creating an environment where corruption thrives and undermines efforts to build a prosperous and equitable society in Sri Lanka.
Struggle Between Two Camps
A political system as hideous and flawed as this gives rise to two camps in constant conflict: corrupt politicians and their allies (the powerful and privileged group) in one camp, and the ordinary masses (the powerless and underprivileged group) in the other. The felt impact of the former on the latter can be explained through the system archetype of ‘success to the successful’. As the rift between these two camps widens, the ordinary masses suffer from the corruption perpetuated by the privileged group.
This dynamic creates a vicious cycle where the powerful become more entrenched in their positions, while the ordinary people become increasingly disillusioned and disenfranchised. The growing disparity ignites social tensions, as the underprivileged masses bear the brunt of corruption and mismanagement. Public demonstrations and strikes become common as people demand accountability and justice, ultimately leading to widespread social and political unrest.
The situation came to a head with the tragic Easter Sunday bombings in 2019, which killed 273 innocent people and injured more than 500, and the youth-led national Aragalaya (struggle) in 2022 wherein citizens from all walks of life united to demand accountability, transparency, and justice from the part of the government. This movement was not just a protest; it highlighted the people’s frustrations with entrenched corruption and the urgent need for systemic change. It was a call for a complete overhaul of the existing political climate to ensure long-term prosperity and equity for all Sri Lankans.
A divided society between politicians and the ordinary public struggles to achieve sustainable development, as the lack of trust in public institutions and leaders hampers collective efforts toward progress. This ongoing conflict between the two camps undermines the stability and unity needed for long-term development and prosperity in Sri Lanka. To that end, the Aragalaya movement exemplified the collective desire for a fair and just society, showcasing the people’s determination to push for meaningful change and a brighter future for Sri Lanka. In one of the recent sessions, the United Nations Deputy High Commissioner for Human Rights explained this situation, underscoring the critical need for reforms to address the deep-seated issues of corruption, mismanagement, and lack of accountability.
“[I]t is crucial to ensure that the burden of reforms does not further compound inequalities. Robust safety nets and social protection measures are needed to shelter the most vulnerable from the negative spillovers of economic restructuring. It is also vital to address the underlying factors of the crisis, including corruption, which was a loud and essential demand of the protests in 2022” (Al-Nashif, 2023).
A Possible Way Out
Given the complex and interconnected nature of the political system in Sri Lanka, achieving sustainable development requires careful consideration of corrective intervention and reinforcing actions. In so doing, there exist at least two considerations that these efforts should focus on. First, a holistic approach is necessary to gradually dismantle the vicious cycle of political corruption and mismanagement over time. Second, it is essential to approach the cause-effect relationships at each nodal juncture with positivity and determination, recognizing that positive changes are achievable, though not inevitable.
As illustrated by the figure above, introducing and implementing sustainable development strategies and interventions—such as public awareness, franchise prudence, judicial independence, constitutional reforms, and education, judicial independence, constitutional reforms, and educational transformations—can transform the existing vicious cycle into a continuous benevolent cycle. When the public becomes more aware of political corruption, when education improves, and when these changes are implemented swiftly, several positive outcomes follow. These include increased positive political legacy and engagement, more credible political manifestos and election promises, greater merit-based opportunities, enhanced political accountability and transparency, healthier institutional climates, more durable sustainable development, and stronger public approval, cooperation, and social stability.
For example, implementing robust anti-corruption laws and ensuring their enforcement can help reduce the influence of corrupt officials. Similarly, investing in education and healthcare can improve the overall well-being of the population, making them less susceptible to manipulation by corrupt leaders. Additionally, fostering a culture of integrity and accountability within political and public institutions, promoting awareness and education about the importance of ethical governance, encouraging civic engagement, and empowering citizens to hold their leaders accountable are crucial steps in the direction of building a more informed and proactive society.
Is it that Simple?
However, it is important to recognize that public agitation, including demonstrations, protests, and strikes, is only one aspect of the broader issue of political corruption. Such actions can sometimes exacerbate the original problem if they escalate to unforeseen extremes, leading to unintended consequences. For instance, when politicians use their power to suppress expressions of public dissent, it can result in increased struggle, violence, lawlessness, and anarchy, thereby worsening the country’s already deteriorating socio-economic conditions.
Conversely, prolonged exposure to a corrupt political system, such as that in Sri Lanka, can lead to a form of desensitization where corruption and ethical erosion become normalized and perceived as inevitable. In such a scenario, individuals may resign themselves to harmful behaviors, either because they have lost faith in the possibility of a better system or because they feel powerless and fearful to demand change.
Additionally, when addressing political corruption with symptomatic solutions and long-term measures such as public awareness, franchise prudence, constitutional reforms, and educational transformations, there is a risk that key change agents—such as politicians, campaign-financing business entrepreneurs, and popular media—may present biased or incomplete representations of the issues. This often occurs when these agents are motivated by ulterior motives and vested interests, leading them to shift the focus away from corrupt politicians and perpetuate their own agendas.
Need for Authentic Leadership
Sri Lanka, with its urgent need for systemic change, debt restructuring, political transformation, and sustainable development, cannot remain isolated from the global demand for authentic leadership across all spheres. This need may be among the most pressing issues of the early 21st century, perhaps even surpassing concerns like global poverty and environmental crises. Ongoing conflicts worldwide—such as those in Ukraine, Israel-Palestine, and the Republic of Congo—highlight the critical need for compassionate and visionary leadership. Similarly, recent elections in both powerful and developing nations, including France, the United Kingdom, India, Mexico, and Senegal, reveal a significant shift in political leadership from the extreme Right towards the Left. In the United States, the political landscape is already shifting as major democratic and republican forces clash in yet another crucial election season, with results expected by the end of the year. These global political shifts underscore a deep yearning for leaders who can tackle the urgent issues of our time with integrity, empathy, and vision.
Shepherds or Herdsmen
As the island nation of Sri Lanka prepares for its upcoming election(s), the importance of selecting the right leaders cannot be overstated. The political climate is fraught with challenges, making the need for leaders who can steer the nation with wisdom and compassion more critical than ever. We must seek leaders who will prioritize the well-being of the people over personal gain, who are committed to sustainable development, and who uphold the values of fairness, justice, and transparency. To better understand the type of leaders we should elect, let us consider two enduring images that reflect both global and local realities—a shepherd and a herdsman.
A shepherd is one who tends to sheep, leads from the front, carries a staff, and ensures that none of the flock is lost. By guiding and protecting the herd, the shepherd encounters dangers, threats, predators, and wild animals first and uses the staff to fend off these external threats. The shepherd’s role involves self-sacrifice for the well-being of the flock, using the staff not against the sheep but against intruders. With the crook of the staff, the shepherd gently guides the sheep back to the flock if they stray or become lost.
Interestingly, as the shepherd walks in front of the sheep, one might wonder, “What guarantee does he/she have that the sheep will follow?” This leads us to understand the unique relationship between the leader and the followers in shepherding. The shepherd communicates with the sheep through verbal cues, noises, and sounds, which the sheep recognize and respond to. Remarkably, sheep in a particular flock only respond to their master’s voice and ignore other shepherds. Thus, the shepherd’s leadership style is characterized by a relationship of intentional talking, active listening, and respectful mutual communication between the leader and the followers.
In contrast, a herdsman manages livestock such as cattle, goats, and pigs by driving them from behind with a stick. This approach leaves the animals more vulnerable in several ways. For instance, since the herdsman is behind the herd, the animals face any advancing danger first and may suffer as a result. Additionally, the stick is used by the herdsman against his/her own flock to discipline and control the animals, compelling them to follow directives and move as desired. Thus, the leadership style of a herdsman is characterized by a stick-based, autocratic approach, marked by a lack of genuine care and communication between the leader and the flock.
Conclusion
Sri Lanka, the once-promising peal island of Asia, has seen its resources squandered and its people divided by political strife and development crisis. Leaders who have prioritized personal gain over the public good have left the country in disarray, with citizens yearning for genuine leadership. As we busily prepare ourselves to elect the next president and the nation’s leaders, we must ask ourselves: What types of leaders have we had thus far on the island—shepherds or herdsmen? Are the candidates running for the presidential election shepherds or herdsmen? Do they plan to lead us from the front, setting the right examples with virtues and a commitment to the common good, or do they plan to drive us from behind, leaving us ever vulnerable in every sense of the term? What do they already have and what do we desire for them to carry in their hands—staffs of rightful authority and empathy, or sticks of wild coercion and command?
*Rashmi M. Fernando is a Doctoral Fellow at Creighton University, Omaha, USA
