Vijayadasa Rajapaksa, the JVP and the SJB’s anti-corruption record come under scrutiny as Sri Lanka’s political alliances and accountability are examined.
The politics of corruption has once again become a central issue in Sri Lanka, with Vijayadasa Rajapaksa, the JVP and the SJB all being drawn into renewed debate over accountability, political history and the consistency of anti-corruption campaigns.
Vijayadasa Rajapaksa first entered Parliament through the United People’s Freedom Alliance (UPFA), the coalition created by the Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP) together with the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP). His name was placed on the UPFA National List with the agreement of Susil Premajayantha, then the UPFA General Secretary, and Tilvin Silva, the JVP General Secretary. At that time, Vijayadasa was a member of Mangala Samaraweera’s political team, which actively promoted the alliance with the JVP. He worked alongside Tilvin Silva, Wimal Weerawansa and Anura Dissanayake in building that coalition.
During the 2005 presidential election, Mahinda Rajapaksa became the UPFA’s candidate. Supporting his candidacy were Vijayadasa Rajapaksa, Tilvin Silva, Anura Dissanayake and Champika Ranawaka. Before Mahinda was nominated, the United National Party (UNP), led at the time by Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe, accused him of corruption, alleging that tsunami relief funds had been deposited into a private bank account. Kabir Hashim, now a senior leader of the Samagi Jana Balawegaya (SJB), was the UNP parliamentarian who raised the allegation. President Chandrika Kumaratunga also wrote to Mahinda Rajapaksa describing the matter as a serious act of fraud. It marked the first occasion in Sri Lankan political history that a president from the same party publicly accused her own prime minister of corruption.
Did the JVP abandon Mahinda Rajapaksa because of those allegations? According to the argument presented here, it did not. Instead, both Chandrika Kumaratunga and the UNP later dismissed the tsunami account controversy as a political conspiracy intended to block Mahinda Rajapaksa’s presidential candidacy, and they defended him. Vijayadasa Rajapaksa was also among those involved in that defence.
Had Tilvin Silva and Anura Dissanayake declared at that time that they represented a clean political movement unwilling to support a candidate facing corruption allegations, Sri Lanka’s political history may have taken a very different course. Instead, Mahinda Rajapaksa was elevated politically, became President and was given legitimacy by lawyers including Vijayadasa Rajapaksa. The article argues that the irony today is that the JVP now attacks Mahinda Rajapaksa over corruption while Vijayadasa Rajapaksa’s own son is facing bribery allegations. It also notes that many politicians who are now imprisoned following investigations supported by the present administration—including Mahindananda Aluthgamage, Sarana Gunawardena and Vijayadasa Rajapaksa himself—first entered Parliament in 2004 with the backing of JVP votes. According to the article, they later became ministers only because the JVP helped Mahinda Rajapaksa secure victory in 2005. It further argues that although the UNP later defeated many of them politically, Ranil Wickremesinghe and the UNP damaged their own political legacy by protecting Rajapaksa ministers accused of corruption after assuming the presidency.
The article contrasts that record with the Samagi Jana Balawegaya, arguing that Sajith Premadasa’s party deliberately separated itself from that political culture and sought to build an alternative centred on accountability. As one example, it points to the SJB bringing a no-confidence motion against former Health Minister Keheliya Rambukwella over the medicine procurement controversy. According to the article, the JVP criticised that effort, arguing that such motions merely strengthened the government. Although the motion failed, the article states that later patient deaths linked to the medicine scandal ultimately validated the SJB’s allegations. Keheliya Rambukwella was subsequently removed from office and later remanded, after which the JVP also began campaigning publicly against him.
The article further argues that the SJB initiated legal action against members of the Rajapaksa family over the country’s economic collapse, while accusing the JVP of limiting its response largely to political speeches without pursuing similar legal proceedings. It also refers to the controversy surrounding former Speaker Ranwala’s academic qualifications, stating that the SJB collected signatures for a no-confidence motion that created political pressure on President Anura Kumara Dissanayake’s administration. According to the article, without that intervention Ranwala would have remained Speaker. It also notes that Foreign Minister Vijitha Herath and Health Minister Nalinda Jayatissa stated that Ranwala had stepped aside until he produced his academic certificates.
Similarly, the article states that the SJB exposed the alleged coal procurement fraud during the current administration and subsequently brought a no-confidence motion against Energy Minister Kumara Jayakody. According to the article, the JVP defended Jayakody in much the same way it had earlier defended Keheliya Rambukwella. Although that motion also failed, the article argues that Jayakody was later removed from his ministerial position, adding that without the SJB’s parliamentary action he would likely have remained in office.
Despite losing the speakership, Ranwala continues to sit as a Member of Parliament, while Kumara Jayakody also remains an MP despite no longer serving as a minister. The article further notes that court proceedings are also pending involving senior ministers including Wasantha Samarasinghe and Deputy Minister Mahinda Jayasinghe.
Following the arrest of Charith Abeysinghe over alleged bribery linked to organised crime figure “Harak Kata”, Sajith Premadasa was asked what action his party would take if wrongdoing were established.
His response was direct:
“No doubt—if he has committed a wrong, we will take disciplinary action.”
The article concludes by asking whether the JVP would provide an equally clear answer regarding figures such as Ranwala, Kumara Jayakody, Wasantha Samarasinghe or Mahinda Jayasinghe, arguing that this remains the true measure of consistency in the fight against corruption.
