No flinching from restoration of the rule of law

Quite apart from the exhortation to reconcile and heal, there is a remarkable if implicit message in Pope Francis's recently concluded visit to Sri Lanka for this country's new President.

Difficult decision-making

Even for skeptics who tend to look with a wary eye at organized religious hierarchies, (the excesses of which the Roman Catholic Church best embodies historically), the papacy of Francis represents a refreshing change. This is not merely for the tone of simplicity and the outright rejection of ostentation and pomp that marks his office but for the commanding leadership that he has given to the arduous process of reforming the opaque Vatican Curia.

At the time of his election as Pope, he reminded one of his old human rights activist friends in Buenos Aires to 'be gentle when you have to; be hard when you have to.' This appears to be the singular signature of his papacy itself. With a disarming smile and considerable charm that hides a glint of steel, Pope Francis has set about the immeasurably difficult task of reforming the Holy See, disciplining corrupt cardinals, investigating the infamously myriad Vatican finances and perchance risking the dangerous ire of the Italian Mafia as a result.

This requires a rare intellect as well as canny practical wisdom. This particular Pope appears to possess both these virtues in abundance, coming from a background not confined to dry theological rationalizations which was the province of his predecessor in office. On the contrary, this is a colourful figure who had worked in the Argentine slums, spoken out quietly but nonetheless radi- cally against human rights abuses and functioned, somewhat scandalously, even as a bouncer at a Buenos Aires nightclub at one point.

Pivotal message of the Pope's visit

As Sri Lanka reflects over the papal visit soon after a new era propelled by a peoples' power rebellion against the excesses of a hideously malformed Presidency, we can look at how Pope Francis has tackled the reforms of his papacy. Indeed, 'be gentle when you have to; be hard when you have to' is perhaps an important injunction that President Maithripala Sirisena may keep in mind as he embarks on his burdensome tasks of dismantling the Presidency and starting on the way to institutional reforms.

This much is clear; an awful responsibility rests on him and him alone to ensure the carrying out of the peoples' mandate. Even with the main Opposition party at that time backing him along with the motley collection of crossovers from the Jathika Hela Urumaya and his own party, it was for him that the people voted. This was a largely unknown angel in which the peoples' trust was placed.

Even days after elections, popular vigilance continues with ordinary workers informing the authorities of post-election attempts to cover-up massive abuses by the previous administration, including tip-offs regarding the burning of sensitive files at prominent Ministries and the moving of property out of the homes of Rajapaksa loyalists. But while public awareness must continue, the main task of the Sirisena administration is to enforce the law in its proper form and do so rigorously while avoiding charges of political witch-hunts. The government must stop merely parroting the refrain that people must be vigilant to prevent corruption and highlight abuses. It is time for lofty rhetoric to end and concrete action to be evidenced..

The law must take its course

The primary task must be to restore the integrity and credibility of the Sri Lankan judiciary. The credibility of some superior court judges, quite apart from the incumbent Chief Justice who is now implicated by senior figures of the new government as being involved an eleventh hour attempt to subvert the vote, has been seriously tarnished. Flinching from this task is not an option.

And even as monumental swindlers and frauds from the Rajapaksa government swarm to President Sirisena's side, there must be no compromise that the law must take its course against these offenders. The question thus becomes vital; can an interim government implementing 'maithri' reforms and 'yahapalanaya' accomplish this task on the backs of the very scoundrels who corrupted the systems in the first place, even if to get the requisite head count in Parliament for the 100-day programme? 'Maithri' voters this week in Ahangama, Welimada and elsewhere answered this question vociferously in the negative this week.

This civic anger is important. The fact that voter vigilance has not died down illustrates the depths of cynicism regard- ing political leaders that grips our people. It is good also to see anchors of private television stations being questioned as to why they allowed the Rajapaksa-era Media Ministry to bar selected opposition politicians from public debates. Similarly, the print media should also reflect on how it allowed self-censorship to cripple its independent voice to the extent that certain newspapers, following the Aluthgama riots, published only the plight of the Sinhala affected while ignoring the Muslim afflicted.

Hard questioning must continue

Meanwhile, the local heads of Sri Lanka's Roman Catholic Church may also hearken to the courageous and stern tone of the Francis papacy. During weeks preceding the January 2015 election, the Church was not seen to publicly bestir itself as vigorously as it should have in asserting the imperative need for the restoration of the Rule of Law.

While prayers and inner reflections with the flocks of the faithful may have its own unique power, extraordinary times of danger also require extraordinary courage to reach out to the wider society for the impact to be across all religions. We need to see this in the difficult times ahead as Sri Lanka rebuilds, rejuvenates and restores itself. Mere talk of reconciliation will not do in the wake of the Pope's visit.

In conclusion, a week after the January elections, we can only shudder when contemplating just how perilously close Sri Lanka came to being reduced to that most obnoxious cliché, a tin-pot dictatorship. Hard questioning of Sri Lanka's subverted media culture, the decline in intellectual leadership and a rigorous accounting of our own failures as a society must undoubtedly continue.