“The campaign of fear is intensifying.” This is part of a joint statement issued by 10 international human rights organizations in August 2020 in response to moves by the Sri Lankan government. The government’s “campaign of fear” targets lawyers, human rights defenders, and journalists, and threats and arrests against them are increasing. In particular, violence and intimidation against journalists have surged since 2019, shaking the very foundations of democracy.
In fact, the suppression of press freedom has been a persistent problem throughout Sri Lanka’s modern history. In recent years, however, the sense of crisis has heightened further. This article looks back at the long-suppressed history of press freedom in Sri Lanka and examines the crisis it currently faces.
A person commemorating murdered journalists (Photo: Vikalpa | Groundviews | Maatram | CPA / Flickr [CC BY 2.0])
目次
Sri Lanka’s history: colonial rule and conflict
Sri Lanka is a multi-ethnic country inhabited by the Sinhalese, who are predominantly Buddhist; Tamils, who are predominantly Hindu; as well as Sri Lankan Moors and others. The Sinhalese are said to have roots in North India and the Tamils in South India, reflecting the country’s deep ties with neighboring India historically. After periods of Portuguese and Dutch colonial rule during the Age of Discovery, it came under British rule from 1802. Sri Lanka gained independence in 1948 as a dominion within the British Commonwealth and achieved full independence in 1972. However, the roughly 150 years of British rule employed divide-and-rule (Note 1), such as favoring the minority Tamils for civil service posts to administer the Sinhalese, which fueled tensions.
Created based on a map by Vemaps.com
Another reason for the deepening ethnic rifts in Sri Lanka was the 1956 election after independence as a dominion within the Commonwealth, in which Solomon Bandaranaike, who campaigned on policies favoring the Sinhalese, became prime minister, provoking opposition among some Tamils. With the advent of self-rule, power shifted to the Sinhalese majority. Thereafter, riots by people opposing discriminatory policies became frequent, and some radicalized Tamils formed the anti-government “Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE),” demanding independence for the northern and eastern parts of Sri Lanka. By 1983, the situation had escalated into full-scale conflict.
In the late 1980s, as the conflict intensified, tensions also escalated between both the Sri Lankan government and the LTTE on one side and journalists on the other. The 1980s saw the establishment of an authoritarian political system with strong media control imposed. Meanwhile, under LTTE control, journalists who reported critically on the group faced threats and assaults as well, and pressure on the press was constant. Behind this repression of journalists lies the fact that wartime information can affect group morale—boosting one’s own while lowering the enemy’s. It also serves as a means of consolidating and strengthening political power through information control. As a result, press freedom was deprived across Sri Lanka.
2005 to 2015: the “dark decade” for press freedom
In 2005, with the conflict continuing despite repeated peace talks, Mahinda Rajapaksa of the Sri Lanka Freedom Party became president, and his brother Gotabaya Rajapaksa became defense secretary. During the campaign, Mahinda Rajapaksa took a hardline stance against the LTTE, and the authoritarian system further solidified. Consequently, from 2005 onward, violence and intimidation against journalists, as well as interference with various media including partial internet shutdowns, increased further.
A major event under the Mahinda Rajapaksa administration was the declaration in 2009 of the end of the nearly 30-year conflict. However, this was not the result of a peace agreement but an end brought about by the destruction of the LTTE. Moreover, the end of the war did not resolve everything; there are various allegations that the government was involved in war crimes and human rights violations up to the end of the conflict. Despite the government’s claim of zero civilian casualties, the civilian deaths caused by brutal government attacks became apparent. Especially in the final stages, the LTTE‘s use of civilians as human shields also led to many civilian casualties, and the total number of deaths, including civilians, across the conflict is estimated at 80,000 to 100,000.
Journalists also became targets of various attacks. In addition to the threats under LTTE control noted above, one particularly notorious operation on the government side was the so-called “White Van Commandos.” In this operation, journalists and activists critical of the government were suddenly abducted on the street by men in white vans and murdered; at least 66 people fell victim. Gotabaya Rajapaksa, then defense secretary, was said to have been involved. In another case, in 2009, the editor of a weekly newspaper who reportedly had evidence of corruption by the defense secretary was killed. Even after the end of the war was declared, journalists continued to be targeted, and ahead of the 2010 presidential election, media critical of the Rajapaksa brothers were subjected to various threats.
Mahinda Rajapaksa during his presidency (Photo: Mahinda Rajapaksa / Flickr [CC BY-NC 2.0])
2015 to 2019: a faint glimmer of hope
Shrouded by the authoritarian regime of the Rajapaksa brothers, Sri Lanka saw a slight improvement in security after the conflict ended. Furthermore, when Maithripala Sirisena, who had left the ruling party to run as an opposition candidate, won the presidential election in 2015, the situation improved further. Sirisena welcomed his former political rival Ranil Wickremesinghe as prime minister, forming an unprecedented political arrangement, and relinquished some presidential powers that had been strengthened under the Rajapaksa administration. The Sirisena administration also pledged to restore long-suppressed press freedom. Through constitutional amendments, it recognized the right to access information as a citizen’s right and eased media controls by lifting blocks on news sites imposed by the previous administration. In addition, an independent commission was established to investigate the arbitrary arrests and disappearances of journalists that had occurred under the previous regime, working to uncover the truth about past cases.
Newspapers in Sri Lanka (Photo: Denish C / Flickr [CC BY-NC-ND 2.0])
However, the bright signs did not last long. When President Sirisena took over as leader of the Sri Lanka Freedom Party, the ruling party of the previous administration from which he had once defected, members of the former regime joined the cabinet and began to wield influence within his administration again. In addition, amid a debt crisis, the economy slumped and political tensions rose, and Sirisena gradually lost support. Perhaps due to this governmental turmoil, from around 2017 some parts of the internet were blocked again, and the investigative commission mentioned above ended without functioning effectively as the Sirisena administration came to a close.
Since 2019: the Rajapaksa brothers team up again
The press freedom that seemed to be returning under the Sirisena administration faced renewed threats from October 2018. Mahinda Rajapaksa temporarily returned to power as prime minister (Note 2). Immediately after he took office, multiple media outlets were taken over by his supporters. In November 2019, Gotabaya Rajapaksa became president and Mahinda Rajapaksa became prime minister. President Gotabaya Rajapaksa appointed a series of individuals alleged to have been involved in wartime crimes to senior government posts. With the brothers’ return to power, a sharp increase in violence and threats against journalists was reported, and restrictions on press freedom grew more severe by the day.
Moreover, under Gotabaya Rajapaksa, there have been moves to bury numerous misdeeds committed during the Mahinda Rajapaksa administration. In 2020, senior police officers investigating killings and disappearances under Mahinda were removed, including through forced exile, and the government announced that it would withdraw its co-sponsorship of the 2015 UN Human Rights Council resolution that committed to reparations and accountability for victims of Sri Lankan military abuses. The nightmare of the “dark 10 years” that lasted until 2015 is haunting Sri Lanka once again.
People protesting violence against journalists (Photo: Vikalpa | Groundviews | CPA from Sri Lanka / Wikimedia Commons [CC BY 2.0])
The “culture of impunity” and the press
One reason why the issue of press freedom is so serious in Sri Lanka is the “culture of impunity” that has permeated not only to the top of government but down to lower levels over years of repression. In Sri Lanka, journalists and activists are often attacked not only by the state directly but also by “unidentified” individuals, and in many cases the perpetrators are not investigated or prosecuted at all. In fact, from 2008 to 2014, for seven consecutive years Sri Lanka ranked in the top 10 of countries on the Committee to Protect Journalists’ (CPJ) Impunity Index, which ranks countries by the number of unsolved journalist murders as a percentage of population.
In this way, Sri Lanka’s culture of impunity has been passed down, and in recent years it has been further entrenched. The 20th amendment to the constitution, passed by parliament in October 2020, strengthened the presidential powers that had been weakened under the Sirisena administration. As a result, the president now wields strong authority over judicial and police appointments, and the “culture of impunity” is taking deeper root in the justice system and law enforcement.
As long as this culture remains, despair follows—there is no remedy from public authorities even if one suffers threats or violence because of what one has said—and the fear of reprisals and intimidation makes it difficult to grasp the true scale of the harm. The reality that those who criticize the government can be targeted by unknown actors, and that such acts are not properly punished, effectively forces journalists and media outlets into self-censorship.
The internet and the press
As noted, during the conflict in Sri Lanka, many media outlets faced the fear of threats and violence. Under such circumstances, reporting on government-linked human rights abuses and war crimes fell silent. In response, journalists resisting oppression began disseminating information online. Amid government information control and the hollowing out of mainstream media, citizens sought accurate information by sharing and spreading news online, expressing opinions and engaging in lively debate. During the 2014 riots incited by radicalized Buddhists (Note 3), independent journalists published on Facebook and Twitter their on-the-ground reporting, while the country’s major media failed to provide details. Citizens amplified this reporting. Police inaction and ties between the government and organizations espousing extreme nationalism were exposed online, and open criticism of the government is thought to have influenced public opinion to some extent.
The 2015 election was even called a “cyber election” as information exchange was widespread online. Candidates ran campaigns on SNS, while journalists and voters actively gathered and disseminated information online, and uncensored information and opinions spread. These new channels of information are thought to have been one factor in Sirisena’s victory, as voter blocs that had supported the Rajapaksa brothers drifted away.
Of course, the Gotabaya Rajapaksa administration has not left critical information on the internet unchecked. Government regulation of online media was first confirmed in 2007, targeting a site that published news and opinions in Tamil. The government has also at times regarded social media as “a threat to national security.” In January 2021, the Sri Lanka Press Council Law (Note 4) was revised to include new media such as electronic platforms within its scope. When a large-scale terrorist attack occurred in 2019, wide-ranging restrictions were imposed on SNS. The government said the purpose was to prevent the spread of false information, but the measures were controversial. After the 2019 presidential election, threats and arrests for online statements increased. It appears that reporting on the internet faces a rough road as well.
Colombo, Sri Lanka’s largest city (Photo: Nazly Ahmed / Flickr [CC BY-NC-SA 2.0])
Conclusion
We have traced the history and recent state of press freedom in Sri Lanka. While the spread of the internet has ushered in a new phase for Sri Lankan journalism, the internet is of course not without downsides. Fake news; polarization and radicalization; defamation; and manipulative operations by those in power masquerading as ordinary citizens are all concerns online. In fact, incitement to violence via Facebook has been noted in Sri Lanka. Balancing the prevention of incitement to violence and crime with the guarantee of freedom of expression is a highly delicate task that must be handled with great care, and platform companies bear responsibility as well. Even so, amid the suppression of press freedom, the internet can serve as a ray of hope that connects journalists and citizens.
However, for press freedom to be fundamentally guaranteed, government action—legislation and its enforcement—is indispensable. To prompt such action, rigorous scrutiny from abroad is required. This is because, in Sri Lanka where freedom of the press—the very cornerstone of democracy—is already wavering, it is extremely difficult for citizens alone to reclaim it. Pressure from other countries, signaling that actions depriving press freedom will not be tolerated, will be crucial. In January 2021, the Sri Lankan government announced the establishment of a new investigative commission to replace those set up under the Sirisena administration, but considering recent trends, it is hard to believe these will function effectively. A proactive stance by other countries—strict monitoring, criticism when necessary, and a refusal to condone the suppression of press freedom in Sri Lanka—is needed.
Note 1: Divide and rule is a strategy by which rulers govern the ruled by dividing them along ethnic, religious, or geographic lines. By fomenting conflicts among the ruled, it is said to aim at preventing their unity and avoiding putting the rulers in the line of fire, thereby making governance easier.
Note 2: This change of prime minister occurred when President Sirisena, amid a power struggle and deteriorating relations, dismissed Prime Minister Wickremesinghe and appointed Mahinda Rajapaksa. It is believed this appointment was intended to secure Mahinda Rajapaksa’s support for Sirisena’s reelection. However, Wickremesinghe pointed out that the power to dismiss the prime minister was among those Sirisena had relinquished as part of his administration’s policies, and he refused to resign. A court later ruled the change of prime minister unconstitutional, and Wickremesinghe’s status as prime minister was reaffirmed. In the subsequent presidential election, Mahinda Rajapaksa supported his brother Gotabaya Rajapaksa as the presidential candidate rather than Sirisena. In addition to Mahinda Rajapaksa’s support, Gotabaya Rajapaksa also benefited from public dissatisfaction with Sirisena due to economic stagnation and worsening public security, and won the election.
Note 3: In June 2014, some Buddhists radicalized by the hardline Buddhist group Bodu Bala Sena (BBS) launched coordinated attacks targeting Muslims, causing many injuries and deaths. In this series of riots, police inaction and ties between Gotabaya and BBS were alleged. Anti-government activists argue that by turning a blind eye to the violence of BBS and others, the government sought to win votes from the Buddhist majority.
Note 4: The Press Council Law imposes various restrictions on the media, including codes of ethics, and stipulates that the Press Council will function as a media court to check whether reporting violates the law, which some say deprives the media of freedom.
Writer: Yumi Ariyoshi
Graphics: Yumi Ariyoshi
.jpg){kind=link}
0 Comments