Breaking the Saffron impunity

Two developments last week offered welcome signs that finally the impunity of the Saffron robe to violate the law is coming to an end. On 10 September, the Supreme Court invalidated the presidential pardon granted in 2019 by former President Maithripala Sirisena to Galagoda Aththe Gnanasara, the General Secretary of the Bodu Bala Sena. Gnanasara had been sentenced to six years’ imprisonment for contempt of court following his conduct during proceedings relating to the disappearance of journalist Prageeth Eknaligoda.

More important than the fate of one monk was the Constitutional principle established by the Court. The judgment stressed that presidential clemency is an exercise of power held in trust for the people and cannot be used for personal, political or other self-serving purposes. That is a significant affirmation of the rule of law.

Gnanasara became one of the most prominent voices of Sinhala-Buddhist nationalism in the post-war period, particularly during the second term of Mahinda Rajapaksa. His repeated inflammatory interventions on issues involving religious and ethnic minorities culminated in 2014 when he incited violence against the Muslim community in Kalutara which led to the deaths of two innocent persons. His Bodu Bala Sena became associated with campaigns that deepened communal divisions and there are allegations that the organisation benefited from links to sections of the State and security establishments which simultaneously funded Muslim extremists’ groups including those who carried out the Easter Sunday attacks.

The second development came from Batticaloa with the arrest of Ampitiye Sumanarathana after an alleged incident at the Geological Survey and Mines Bureau in which officials complained that their duties had been obstructed and that threats had been made. He was remanded by the Batticaloa Magistrate’s Court and subsequently released on strict bail conditions.

The significance of the arrest of Sumanarathana is that for the first time after repeated offences, the Police and courts, finally, treated the allegations as matters requiring investigation and judicial process. The Saffron robe did not, in this instance, constitute a shield against the ordinary operation of the law as it had done on numerous occasions concerning the same individual.

These developments should become the norm rather than the exception. The ongoing case concerning the Atamasthanadhipathi, Pallegama Hemarathana on suspicion in connection with a rape and child abuse will be an acid test on the criminal justice system to finally break the cloak of impunity granted to those who wear the Saffron robe in Sri Lanka.

Buddhism does not require intimidation, political patronage or street power to defend it. Indeed, when individuals exploit religious status to threaten public officials, intimidate opponents, incite hostility towards minorities or interfere with institutions, they do considerable damage to the very religion they claim to represent.

Equal application of the law will not weaken the Buddha Sasana but in fact protect it from the rogue elements that have infiltrated the Sangha in recent years. The best defence of Buddhism is not to place its most aggressive political aggressors beyond scrutiny, but to ensure that those who wear the robe uphold the ethical standards that the robe represents.

The developments from last week will hopefully be a reaffirmation of the norm that the Saffron robe commands respect, but it does not confer immunity.