Krishantha speaks his heart out on national politics and media

• Says presidential poll 2015 was David-Goliath fight

The Daily FT spoke with UNP Working Committee Member, Media Director and Political Strategist for the Opposition, Krishantha Cooray about what led to the fall of a seemingly-invincible President Mahinda Rajapaksa and what the new political regime in the country under President Maithripala Sirisena and Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe could herald for Sri Lanka’s beleaguered and suppressed media fraternity. Following are excerpts:

UNP Working Committee Member, Media Director and Political Strategist for the Opposition, Krishantha Cooray  

Q Why did Mahinda Rajapaksa lose the election? A: When I used to tell people that Mahinda Rajapaksa would never serve a third term in office, they would laugh in my face. But this election proved me right. The signs were all there that the incumbent was outplaying his hand and the forces of opposition against him were becoming unstoppable and they were only waiting for their chance. In 2005 Mahinda Rajapaksa became President of this country by violating the rights of the northern and eastern people to vote. He kick-started his presidency by violating people’s rights. In 2010, people voted for him in gratitude for winning the war. In 2015, with two years left in his second term, he wanted a mandate for eight more years. In fact he went two years earlier than he had to because he was afraid that his popularity was on the wane. He lacked the skill to take advantage of Sri Lanka’s defeat of terrorism. He may have been an effective Commander-in-Chief in war time, but he was no unifier of the country; in peacetime, he was a terrible leader. He was so drunk on power, he believed he was invincible. Anyone who crossed his path, anyone who had a different opinion from his regime, was cornered and made to suffer. Dissent was dying in Sri Lanka. SarathFonseka contested him and he ended up in jail. ShiraniBandaranayake issued a judgment that was not to his satisfaction and she was sacked illegally. So this man, who portrayed himself as being a populist and a man of the people, ended his nine years in office convinced that it was better to be feared than respected. A man who claimed he was only a custodian and not the owner of this country when he became presidentled a totally contradictory life as a leader. It seemed that in fact President Rajapaksa and his family honestly believed that they were the sole proprietors and owners of this country. He called for elections and he thought that his popularity, his unlimited spending power, his unlimited politicalpower and his callous disregard for the laws of this country would help him to prevail. He and his advisors thought that the Winston Churchill situation would never be possible in Sri Lanka – wherea war-winning president could be defeated. He underestimated the Sri Lankan voter. He thought that money and power and the projection of victory would sway the voter. He played Santa Claus and gave out every handout that he could. He bought over every possible private media outfit and abused the State media in an unprecedented way. Throughout this campaign, he thought – andperhaps quite rightly – thatin addition to his own considerable resources, the business community backing would also help him to swing this election. He prevented the business community from assisting the Opposition in anyway. In some cases, high profile businessmen openly endorsed Mahinda Rajapaksa’s candidacy in companies that had huge workforces. In so many ways, this presidential election was a real David and Goliath sort of fight. Mahinda Rajapaksa underestimated the Opposition. He underestimated the fight left in the UNP voter. He didn’t realise that it was his own actions over the past nine years, of sidelining, marginalising and terrorising people, had created a huge common enemy that he could not overcome. This common enemy was made up of political parties and also completely non-political entities. The forces rallying against the Mahinda Rajapaksa presidency had been building quietly but solidly for several years. By declaring this election, President Rajapaksa allowed these forces to galvanise and finally come together. So the message on 8January was very loud and clear. Q: What was that message? A: The people of this country gave a message not only to Mahinda Rajapaksa. The message given has relevance to all politicians. It was for today and for the future. The message from voters on 8 January was ‘don’t take things for granted’. The people cannot be hoodwinked forever. The message was also a rejection of communal politics of the type that Mahinda Rajapaksa in the final leg of his campaign and throughout his tenure tried to propagate. In fact, unfortunately, even after his defeat, he continues to try to flog this dead horse, that it is the minorities who defeated him. This was a President who after nine years never realised that the minorities are also equal citizens of this country. That they are not mere guests, but stakeholders in the destiny of this nation. And statistically, it is very clear that Mahinda Rajapaksa lost not because the minorities voted against him, as they have done at every election – butbecause a significant portion of the Sinhalese majority also rejected him. In the 2010 election Mahinda Rajapaksa obtained 65% of the Sinhalese vote and carried the election. In 2015, his majority among the Sinhala constituencies reduced to 55%. So even among the Sinhalese, Mahinda’s communal rhetoric held less power. In my view it was his abuse of power, corruption and mismanagement of the economy that moved the Sinhalese people also to say enough is enough. Mahinda Rajapaksa’s big mistake was that after the war he thought that infrastructure alone would solve all the historical problems in the north and east. He gave the Tamil people roads but he took away their self-respect and dignity. The Muslims did not vote for Mahinda Rajapaksa because of his attitude towards religious freedom and attacks against the Muslim community over the past 18 months. There is also a message here for the Opposition. Although they focused entirely on good governance and anti-corruption drives, they also must think more about reconciliation and national unity. This presidency truly belongs to all people of this country. Q: From a strategic point of view, what was the formula that finally worked to defeat the Rajapaksa political juggernaut? A: People from different walks of life and different political ideologiescame together and looked at this election in a very mature way. This election really was a contest between democratic and anti-democratic forces. Political parties joining the common alliance came to the realisation that if Mahinda Rajapaksa continued in office for another eight years, there would be no democratic space, no country left in which to do politics. And that realisation helped them to reach consensus on the immediate priorities – democracy, rule of law, good governance. Everything else took a backseat. This election, the commonality of the Opposition, proved how Sri Lankans can come together in times of national crisis, how they can put aside all their differences and focus on a single common goal and the greater good. In many ways, I think it was a sort of coming of age for Sri Lankan political parties and groups, starting with the historic rivals, the SLFP and the UNP. Q: The Rajapaksa Government always portrayed the common alliance as a case of too many cooks. Wasn’t it difficult to manage so many different egos, personalities and ideologies during a six-week campaign? A: I think that was really wishful thinking by the defeated regime. The fact is that the common alliance ultimately was a perfect storm of personalities and circumstances. It was SobithaThero started this campaign for abolishing the executive presidency and bit by bit, he negotiated and talked people into it over two years. Karu Jayasuriya, the UNP Leadership Council Chairman, really was one of the first to embrace this idea of de-politicisation and good governance and he also played a major role towards building consensus about a common candidacy. Obviously the UNP as the main Opposition made the biggest sacrifice and biggest contribution. Ranil Wickremesinghe sacrificed his candidature so that everybody could agree on a common candidate. That was a big decision. Here is a man who was defeated in 2005 only because Mahinda Rajapaksa bribed the LTTE to prevent the north and east from voting. In 1999, the LTTE attacked his opponent in the presidential race and ensured he lost the election. On both occasions had it not been for these unexpected things, Ranil would have been elected president. In 2010, he bowed to the request of other political leaders and gave SarathFonseka the ticket. And here again, he made the supreme sacrifice, and a sacrifice President Maithripala Sirisena has reiterated right throughout the campaign. Chandrika Kumaratunga had a huge role to play, in galvanising the SLFP to finally act against years of injustice by the ruling family that had usurped the party.SarathFonseka and the JHU ensured that Mahinda Rajapaksa’s traitor and Tiger cards would not stick on the Opposition candidate. They were able to come and tell the country who the real traitors were.Despite all this, there was a great fear among the electorate that Mahinda Rajapaksa would win this election by hook or by crook. And to dispel this idea, the JVP played a huge role. Essentially they got on their platforms and told the people to go and vote against dictatorship and gave the people an assurance that from the moment they casttheir vote till the final results were released, the JVP cadres would maintain a protective presence to secure the integrity of the ballot. This created public confidence that Mahinda Rajapaksa would not be allowed to play games with the count and steal the election. Anura Kumara Dissanayake, the JVP Leader,reallyhas to be given a great deal of credit for taking the Rajapaksa regime on head-on. It was Dissanayakewho broke this phobia people had about speaking out honestly about the abuse of power and corruption by the Rajapaksa regime. This gave people confidence to come out and vote against a very powerful incumbency. Suddenly, the Rajapaksas were not sacred cows. Breaking that fear psychosis was the first step towards victory on 9January. The TNA, which has been fighting to restore the dignity of its people, gave its people the confidence to vote despite the threat of intimidation and the heavy military presence. We can’t also forget the PurawesiBalaya, a group made up of artistes and activists who played a huge role to bring about change. This group was full of true artistes who genuinely love this country, not the boot-lickers who surrounded the former Government in order to have their productions promoted and funded. In a media culture that was repressed and intimidated, social media played a huge role in this change. It was social media that really got the Opposition message out to the grassroots. We forget how connected Sri Lanka is now, even down to the smallest village, because of the entry of mobile phones. The Opposition campaign had meagre resources and we could not match the Rajapaksa campaign’s propaganda blitz in any way. But on social media, because that was just people spreading the word, erratically and with no coordination, the Opposition campaign was streets ahead of the UPFA one. Then of course the military and the Police played their role so independently in the end to ensure that the people’swill triumphed. Despite all this, it would not have been possible if the Elections Commissioner did not play his role. Mahinda Deshapriya, despite all the pressure and many obstacles, ultimately stood his ground. It was ultimately the perfect formula. If anyone of these links in the chain had proved weak, things could have fallen apart. Q: There is a sense that the people have high expectations from this new Government. What are its biggest priorities going forward to ensure people aren’t disappointed too early? A: First of all, obviously, politicians are not infallible. Today we have the most powerful President in the world because he is facing no opposition. So therefore the people must not disengage. They must keep the pressure on for the implementation of the 100-day plan. The idea is to change or overhaul the system, so that we close the loopholes for politicians to plunder and steal from the people or abuse power. In this country no Minister has ever been prosecuted. There are no corruption free politics in any country. The answer therefore is simple. We have to make sure that corruption is punished, even when politicians are involved. This is about the rule of law and the enforcement of the law, even against persons of rank in a society. We must ensure that no other chief justice will ever be treated the way ShiraniBandaranayake was treated. We must ensure that never again will a chief justice end up becoming a political advisor and that no political advisor ends up becoming a chief justice. We need to stop the politicisation of the public sector – wesaw the results of this politicisation most clearly at this recently-concluded election. So that is a must and independent commissions are the way. People gave President Sirisena a mandate. It was a mandate against corruption and communal politics. It was a mandate against abuse of power. So the new President will have to deliver the goods. Anyone can support President Maithripala Sirisena, but the judicial process to keep politicians from the previous regime accountable must and will continue. The unscrupulous, corrupt and unprincipled business stooges who shared its profits with the Rajapaksa family should not be entertained or tolerated by the new administration. It was not possible to do anything in this country without the blessings of the Rajapaksa family but anyone who has robbed this country with or without the direct support of the Rajapaksa family should be prosecuted. If this President fails to deliver, then the people have already answered. Mahinda Rajapaksa also believed he did not have to answer to the people. Well the people answered him on 8 January. So it’s a good lesson for all politicians. Q: How do you assess the world reaction to this Opposition victory? A: All this time, the world had sympathy towards Sri Lanka. But after the way the electorate responded to an all-powerful leader, unbeatable and unwilling to release his grip on power, the world’s sympathy and disdain really turned into admiration, for the maturity of our democracy and the political astuteness of our citizens. This is really a great country. The world never thought Prabhakaran could be beaten. And our military forces defeated Prabhakaran. We got a bad name internationally not because of the military and the Police, but because of politicians who failed to deliver on reconciliation and completely mismanaged our foreign policy. They lied to the international community over and over again and the credibility of our national leadership was at an all-time low. I think that this new Government has brought new hope about the direction in which Sri Lanka is headed. I think it has restored the world’s faith in our ability to solve our own problems and ensure our leaders live up to certain democratic standards.   Q: You were a person involved totally with the media. What made you get so involved in politics? A: I got involved in the media because a public quoted company started a media outfit that was to be fully independent. We really tried to build something at that publishing house. We managed to hire the country’s top journalists and media professionals. People worked with passion and there was a sense of freedom I think that we fostered and encouraged in a way that no other media outfit had in the past. But obviously, it was the height of the war and our reporting was not to the President’s satisfaction. He used his power and proxies to try to get people to buy the newspaper at first. When those attempts failed, terrible things began to happen. They abducted and brutally assaulted our Deputy Editor Keith Noyahr. It was with the greatest of difficulty and intense lobbying by all kinds of people and agencies that he was returned to us a few hours later. I believe that if not for the pressure, we would have lost Keith that night. I don’t think they ever meant for him to survive. Then Rivira Editor UpaliTennakoon was attacked in broad daylight in his car. Nation Editor Lalith Allahakoon was forced and intimidated into resigning after a Presidential loyalist purchased the newspaper. He was sent to Pakistan against his will and then brought back in five days. It was a pathetic and lowdown thing to do to someone. Lalith’s children did not even have a school when they returned to Colombo. I think perhaps because of the role we all played to get Keith Noyahr released, they started to hound me. They accused me of being behind the attack on the Sirasa studios. Some politicians used Parliamentary privilege to launch lowdown attacks on my reputation. Then the Government also began to suspect that I had a role in Karu Jayasuriya’s re-entry into the UNP as Deputy Leader. When things got really bad, my dear friend Lasantha Wickrematunge virtually forced me to leave the country if I wanted to stay alive. The day after my departure he was killed. The threats against me were so severe that I could not even return for his funeral. I still live with the regret of that. Over the past nine years, perhaps no other profession has suffered the way the media has. The surveillance, the attacks, the abuse caused a major fear psychosis. My colleagues were afraid to speak on phones, they had to practice self-censorship. So many journalists we knew and respected had to take refuge abroad. Certain media organisationsrather than taking on the Government helped the regime to carry out contracts by spreading false allegations about us in the private media. I myself was accused of being the Channel 4 agent in Sri Lanka by a private newspaper – thatwas a clear attempt to put my security at risk. The Government bought over most of the media in this country and then used them to target individuals that they disliked. People’s careers were wrecked. People like us who were seen as being hunted by the Rajapaksa regime, even employers in the private sector would not touch us. Business people and friends were scared even to be seen with us – theyturned away. For all these reasons there was no point in remaining in the media. So for the last seven years we have been playing a role to change our condition. There was no room in the media to expose any of these things. So politics was the only available avenue. I was personally willing to leave no stone unturned to ensure that change takes place. Q: So you were isolated? A: I think that was the way the regime hoped to hurt us and break our spirit. But, as always, unexpected quarters came forward and stood by us. Some of those people had no personal issues with the previous regime. They could have even benefited from the Government. But having seen what had happened to us, turned against the Rajapaksas. They defied the regime’s unspoken fatwas against us and continued to befriend people like me. While others would shrink away, some people boldly stood with us and were not afraid to be seen with us. I think they appreciated the role we were trying to play to bring change. When I think back, I know that those people made a difference to our survival. The Maharaja Group, for instance, employed people like me even though we were untouchables because the Rajapaksa regime hated us. Although I resigned from the Maharaja Group, I appreciate the opportunity given to me at that time. Q: Now that change has come, what role do you think the media has to play in the post-Rajapaksa era? Do you envision being part of the media in this time? A: Clearly in some instances, due to fear and intimidation, the media failed to play the role of watchdog over the past few years. Perhaps it is understandable. When you watch colleagues die, or be brutally assaulted or disappeared, when you watch journalist after journalist fleeing abroad because of fear for their lives, it alters a profession. It changes the way you report. But now I think the media’s moment is here again. Now we have overcome the biggest obstacle to change. Journalists must rise again to expose not only all that was wrong with the past, but also ensure it plays the role of watchdog for what is to take place in the next 100 days. It is up to the media, which has been freed now from their shackles, to demand that the movement for change reaches fruition. The media must be vigilant and hold this new regime to account. They must regain their lost glory and take their place as the Fourth Estate. Q: This new Government is telling journalists to report freely and lifting restrictions placed on the media. It is inviting foreign journalists back into the country. What kind of reform though is the new regime hoping to pursue? A: Well, to begin with, the 100-day plan has a pledge to enact right to information laws. Sri Lanka is the only country in South Asia without a Right to Information Act. That kind of legislation will empower not only journalists but also citizens and for the first time, people will have a right to demand answers and information from their rulers. I also think that we have witnessed during the last nine years and especially in this past election season, a type of abuse by State media that is unprecedented. The State media is funded by the Sri Lankan taxpayer, not by the ruling party of the day. Yet it behaves like the mouthpiece of the governing party. This culture of sycophancy must change. I think the very phrase ‘State media’ is flawed. Media institutions maintained by Sri Lankan taxpayers must become public broadcasters and publishers, retaining independence and credibility, telecasting things in the public interest, that perhaps commercial broadcasters won’t do. I think that is the best type of media reform we can bring. To remove State media from within the grasp of political parties in power. Just like every other institution, the media also needs to be de-politicised so that it can never become the instrument of such abuse again. Q: Going forward, what kind of role do you hope to play? A: At the moment we are still enjoying the sudden freedom we have obtained. It’s nice to know we are not being followed and that our phones are not being tapped. A huge weight upon us has lifted. Our families were worried when we step out of the house. It’s not easy being watched. You feel that this new found freedom is almost a privilege. We did whatever we had to in this campaign, never expecting positions or privileges. What we fought for was freedom and justice. We wanted to have options in life. We don’t have to run from country to country. We don’t have to worry about which phone we are using and who we are talking to or talking about. Now I can be happy that my daughter will not be living under a dictatorship. I am glad to have played my part like all other voters in this country to vote for change. My greatest joy is being a stakeholder in this historic change.