By Ajith Rajapaksa –

Ajith Rajapaksa

Political Upheaval and Public Reactions

The arrest and remanding of former President Ranil Wickremesinghe has triggered significant political upheaval across the country. For many, particularly outside the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP) and National People’s Power (NPP), the development has been deeply unsettling. In contrast, supporters of the JVP and NPP have expressed open delight, as evident from their reactions on social media.

Some interpret the arrest as proof that the law is finally being applied equally to all. Others, especially within the opposition, dismiss it as little more than political revenge.

Equal Justice vs. Selective Targeting

If crimes have been committed, the law must apply equally to all. That is not up for debate. The case of Keheliya Rambukwella, the former Health Minister, is one such example.

Ranil Wickremesinghe is accused of attending his wife’s graduation ceremony while returning from an official overseas visit, allegedly misusing state resources. Arresting and remanding him over this appears disproportionate. A more sensible approach would have been to conduct a thorough investigation and, if the trip was indeed personal, demand repayment of the relevant expenses along with an appropriate fine before taking legal action, an approach commonly followed in many countries.

If a former head of state is to face charges, the allegations must be of a significantly more serious nature. Otherwise, the action risks being seen not as impartial law enforcement but as selective political manoeuvring.

Examples from developed democracies show that misuse of state resources is not unique to Sri Lanka. In 2014, Australia’s Speaker of the House, Bronwyn Bishop, was accused of using a helicopter for a private event, costing taxpayers $5,227.27. Investigations later revealed she had also spent over $80,000 on a private European trip. She was forced to resign and ordered to repay the full amount plus a 25% penalty.

In Australia, at the federal level, no Prime Minister or Cabinet Minister has ever gone to jail for misappropriation of funds. Allegations of rorts (sports grants, car allowances, travel claims, etc.) usually result in resignation, but not criminal conviction.

In fact, there were more serious allegations against Wickremesinghe, particularly his alleged links to detention centres, death squads, and the Central Bank bond scam. These are grave matters on which accountability should be pursued. Instead, he has been charged over the relatively minor issue of misusing state funds. Reports suggest the case was initiated by the Presidential Secretariat specifically to target him. The leaking of the planned arrest to a YouTuber linked to the government further raised concerns.

Regardless, this marks the first time in Sri Lanka’s history that a former head of state has been arrested and remanded for corruption. The decision to single out Wickremesinghe, while ignoring others notorious for corruption and abuse of state assets, raises troubling questions about political victimization.

Dangerous Precedents in Governance

Some commentators on social media have compared this episode to Julius Caesar’s crossing of the Rubicon, which shattered Roman laws and traditions and triggered the demise of the Republic.

Ultimately, it is for the courts to determine whether a President is constitutionally entitled to travel expenses and security arrangements during private visits that coincide with official ones. However, this action appears more like a political act designed to entertain the government’s support base and retain its popularity.

Wickremesinghe, a seasoned and shrewd politician, was always seen as an ideological rival to the government, unlike many other opposition leaders. His arrest, therefore, seems intended to silence him and destroy any chance of a political comeback. Facing difficulty in delivering economic relief to the masses, the government appears eager to sustain its popularity by showcasing an anti-corruption stance.

Blurred Boundaries Between Official and Private Duties

In Sri Lanka, drawing a clear line between the private and official activities of Presidents and Prime Ministers is extremely difficult. Leaders are expected to attend numerous ceremonies, receptions, personal events, political campaigns and religious functions, blurring the boundary between duty and obligation. Even President Anura Kumara Dissanayake has undertaken trips that, under a strict legal definition, might be classified as misuse of state resources.

If such rigid standards were applied retroactively, every past leader could be charged. There are countless precedents. The critical question, then, is whether the government wishes to create a standard that could one day ensnare every future leader, including themselves.

Opposition Unity and Political Opportunism

The arrest of Ranil Wickremesinghe has resulted in a rare moment of unity among opposition parties. It has revitalized the long-fractured United National Party (UNP) and prompted many Tamil and Muslim leaders to express concern, labelling the move as political victimization.

It was also evident that politicians previously involved in corrupt deals, and now facing imminent charges, saw this as an opportunity to gather support for a broader anti-government movement. For them, it served more as political refuge than principled resistance.

Class Divisions and Political Risks

It is true that corrupt politicians often seek shelter within such alliances, but another dimension to Ranil Wickremesinghe’s arrest cannot be ignored: class divisions. What we are now witnessing is a confrontation between elites and the socio-economic upper tier on one side, and the marginal middle classes on the other.

Engaging in such confrontations is dangerous unless the government is prepared for an uncompromising struggle against elites with the aim of building a socialist order. If, however, the objective is to strengthen a more liberal democratic system, such divisions will ultimately weaken that very project.

Historical Role of Elites in Sri Lanka

Elites have historically played an important role in transforming backward societies into more modern and democratic ones. In Sri Lanka, sections of the elite made significant contributions to political progress. Leaders of the LSSP, such as N.M. Perera, Colvin R. de Silva, and Leslie Goonewardene, came from privileged, Western-educated backgrounds, yet they mobilized socialist ideas and working-class struggles that reshaped the island’s political landscape.

Similarly, D.S. Senanayake, though representing elites, played a central role in negotiating independence and laying the foundations of the parliamentary system. Elite professionals and intellectuals were also instrumental in drafting the Soulbury Constitution, introducing universal franchise, and strengthening parliamentary democracy in the mid-20th century.

Importantly, the left leaders of the past understood this dynamic very well. That is why they were willing to collaborate with elites and bourgeois party leaders to advance social democratic reforms, even while pursuing long-term socialist goals. This pragmatic approach ensured that progressive policies such as free education, stronger labour rights, and early welfare measures were possible within a parliamentary framework.

Hardline Marxists condemned the old left, labelling them as class collaborators who betrayed the socialist project in Sri Lanka. This argument is debatable when we consider what has happened to countries such as Cuba, North Korea, and Nicaragua, which followed that path. The socialist project in those countries has failed miserably.

Had Sri Lanka pursued such a path, especially as a small, trade-dependent island with limited resources and surrounded by capitalist economies, it likely would have faced a similar fate, economic collapse, loss of democratic space, and dependency on foreign patrons for survival.

Economic Contributions and Critiques of the Left

Another perspective, held by some, including former leftists who now embrace capitalism, is that the old left hindered Sri Lanka’s capitalist development. Strong trade union actions and anti-capitalist policies, they argue, turned Sri Lanka into a poor welfare state and made it less attractive to global capital, resulting in stagnation.

On the economic front, elite leadership in the plantation sector, despite its colonial contradictions, helped integrate Sri Lanka into global trade networks, providing revenue and infrastructure that later supported welfare policies. Elites also promoted education, trade unions, and public health reforms, all of which gave Sri Lanka relatively advanced social indicators compared to much of the Global South. These initiatives ensured that, despite its vulnerabilities, the country built a reputation for strong human development outcomes.

The Contradictions of Elite Power

However, the role of elites has always been contradictory. While they acted as agents of modernization and reform, they also remained invested in protecting their privileges and dominance. Elites facilitated progress, but only within limits that safeguarded their own class interests. Any serious democratic or socialist project must recognize both the necessity and the limits of elite participation in social transformation.

Navigating the Present Crisis

Sri Lanka today faces one of its most severe crises: a bankrupt economy weighed down by debt, political instability, and growing geopolitical pressures. In this context, the country must work with elites and corporate capital to stabilize the economy and navigate external challenges. Starting a class war now would not only be premature but also disastrous for the very citizens such struggles claim to represent.

The task, therefore, is not to ignore class contradictions but to manage them strategically in order to rebuild the state and society on firmer ground. At the same time, Sri Lanka must ensure that anti-corruption measures are applied fairly and consistently. Otherwise, selective prosecutions driven by political victimization risk weakening both democracy and the credibility of the anti-corruption fight itself.