Clarifying the nature of official trips and ethical considerations: Response to Dr. Jayalath Adikarige

President Wickremesinghe’s 2023 itinerary was comprehensive and clearly official 

When a writer, or thought-leaders, attempt to defend this Government’s actions, it is imperative to consider all facts objectively. The President’s 2023 UK trip was official in its entirety and aligned fully with international diplomatic protocols. Ethical scrutiny should focus on substantive matters, especially those involving visits and meetings that deviate from standard diplomatic practices

•  Following is a response to Dr. Jayalath Bandara Adikarige’s article in the Daily FT, titled “Accountability is not petty” (https://www.ft.lk/columns/Accountability-is-not-petty-Response-to-Dr-Dayan-Jayatilleka/4-781081)

The recent article published which attempted to address the allegations surrounding former President Ranil Wickremesinghe’s 2023 trip to the United Kingdom warrants a clear and factual clarification. The entire journey, including the visit to the UK, must be understood within the context of official international duties and protocol.

President Wickremesinghe’s 2023 itinerary was comprehensive and clearly official. Prior to reaching the United Kingdom, the former President visited Havana in Cuba, where he attended the G-77 summit. Following the summit, the President and his official delegation travelled to New York, where he addressed the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA)—an event where attendance is not by invitation but by member state representation. At times the Head of State may choose to address the General Assembly, which former President Wickremesinghe did. Following the conclusion of the visit to New York, the President returned to Colombo, which involved a transit through London with an overnight stay, part of an official itinerary that continued seamlessly after the UK visit. 

Following the former President’s return to Colombo engagements with the International Monetary Fund (IMF) were held in Sri Lanka. Following which the President travelled to Berlin, where he met the Chancellor of Germany before returning home. 

These visits were uniformly regarded as official, and it is inconsistent and incorrect to assert that the trip was official only until before the London transit and not beyond.

In matters of protocol and security, it is standard practice that any presidential travel, whether public or private, includes necessary protection such as security personnel, a medical team, and a chief of protocol. Given the demanding schedule and extensive meetings in Havana and New York, these arrangements were part of the official travel requirements. Contrary to claims suggesting ethical impropriety, there is no ethical issue in these arrangements or the nature of the travel itself.

A point of controversy was the President’s attendance at a graduation ceremony in England, an event he attended upon the invitation of Lord Swaraj Paul. Lord Paul is a distinguished Labour peer with strong connections in the United Kingdom who supported Sri Lanka. The ceremony marked the 25th anniversary of Lord Paul’s tenure as Chancellor, an event that was the graduation ceremony. The presence of dignitaries such as the Consul-General for India, and the Mayor and Mayoress of Wolverhampton underscores the official recognition of the event. The Indian Consul’s attendance was not predicated on the Sri Lankan President’s presence, but because these functions held wider diplomatic significance, related to Lord Paul.

With the unfounded allegations raising against President Wickremesinghe, critics have raised questions about the ethical propriety of President Anura Kumara Disanayake’s visit to Germany earlier this year. 

During this visit to Germany, President Disanayake held discussions with the German President, who unlike the Executive Heads in many countries, primarily serves a ceremonial role without operational government powers. In India the constitution vests executive power in the President, who must act on the advice of the Prime Minister. In Germany the President does not exercise any executive power. President Disanayake held discussions with the President of Germany, who holds a position no greater than one which is symbolic and holds neither constitutional nor executive powers. However, President Disanayake did not, however, meet with the German Chancellor who is the Head of Government and leads the Federal Cabinet of Ministers. Under article 59 (1) the Federal President represents the Federation, he does not even have a space to decide on the Chancellor.  

The absence of a meeting with the Chancellor is a departure from protocol, which contrasts with previous visits by Sri Lankan leaders, who typically meet the Chancellor. When President Wickremesinghe visited Germany in 2023, he held discussions with Chancellor Olaf Schultz, he did not call on the German President. An Executive President calls on the German President only when it is a state visit.

Questions about why President Disanayake chose to meet the President instead of the Chancellor and the substance of their discussions remain unaddressed publicly. Alongside the meeting with the President, President Disanayake also held talks with Ministers, which is further deviation of diplomatic protocol as it is unusual for a Head of State to visit another country to meet that country’s Ministers. It is crucial that during such a visit, the Executive President holds discussions with the Chancellor, under normal circumstance the Federal Ministers could have visited Colombo if there was no important issue to be taken up.

The only important meeting seems to have been an NPP/JVP meeting, was this visit a cover for that meeting? In lieu of the questions over President Disanayake’s visit to Germany, the question whether ethical grounds have been breached requires a transparent clarification. 

When a writer, or thought-leaders, attempt to defend this Government’s actions, it is imperative to consider all facts objectively. The President’s 2023 UK trip was official in its entirety and aligned fully with international diplomatic protocols. Ethical scrutiny should focus on substantive matters, especially those involving visits and meetings that deviate from standard diplomatic practices. Clarity and transparency on such issues will strengthen public trust in governance and international relations.

(The writer is an Attorney-at-Law.)