Lasantha Wickrematunge was clearly
among the most colourful media personalities of his generation. He was in fact
so colourful in his typically uni-colour-political way that he was more than a
media person. The test of fast-colour, however, is a post-death thing and as
much as many would want him to paint ‘The After’ he left behind, it really
didn’t happen. That itself is an indicator of impact.
He was not only the Editor-in-Chief
of the Sunday Leader, he WAS the Sunday Leader and clearly much loved by his
staff. I’ve even heard of people who worked under him considering him as a
father figure. It was however not for fathering or leadership that he was best
known. Lasantha was political but less in an ideological sense than as a party
man, and this is true of his time with the Sri Lanka Freedom Party and with the
United National Party. He wore colour and symbol with pride and without
apology; that his newspaper consequently acquired party branding is another
matter altogether.
He was clearly fearless whenever he
attacked individual or collective, party or institution. He knew how to get a
story, how to gather facts and how to lay it all out so that there was a
greater likelihood of realizing the objective that spurred him. He was among
the best investigative journalists the country has seen in the last two
decades. It is tragic that he consistently allowed political allegiances (to
party and to individuals within parties) inform editorial direction. There were
numerous times when this selectivity detracted from his overall journalistic skill,
especially when he toned down or even stopped critique altogether when a
particular individual switched political loyalties.
In his defence, however, it must be
kept in mind that Lasantha was not one of those journalists who feign
neutrality but are in reality diehard foot soldiers for this or that political
party. Unfortunately, this particular fixation forced him to fashion and
refashion editorial policy in according to ideological, political and policy
shifts of the UNP. He went ‘soft’ during the time Ranil Wickremesinghe was
Prime Minister, with hardly a word of criticism leveled against the Ceasefire
Agreement with the LTTE. He was rabidly anti-government after the SLFP-led UPFA
came to power and especially after Mahinda Rajapaksa became President.
I met him once in 1984, i.e. a few
weeks after the Sunday Leader was launched, to submit an article but my better
memories are of his performance in Geneva during the Government-LTTE talks in
February 2006. Attending a media conference called by Rohitha Bogollagama, who led the Government delegation, Lasantha was only
interested in seeking to establish that the very fact of ‘talking’ was an
endorsement of UNP policy, i.e. negotiations with the LTTE.
Events proved that unlike in the
Ranil-LTTE talks, the Government did not end up co-signing Balasingham’s agenda
but used the moment to maneuver to positions of advantage, on the ground and in
the political debate. The Government had no illusions about the LTTE and events
showed that nothing was lost when the inevitable that Lasantha was never ready
to entertain happened, the resumption of hostilities courtesy LTTE belligerence
and intractability. In fact when it all came back to guns, bullets, bombs and
suicide attacks, it was that very CFA that proved to have helped the LTTE most.
Lasantha was a day-to-day political activist and was not too worried about
‘later-fallout’. He operated on the dictum ‘My enemy’s enemy is my friend’ and
this is perhaps why he gave Anton Balasingham a thumbs-up signal just before
talks began in Celigny, Switzerland. I was there, I saw it and I wrote about it
and Lasantha never countered.
That kind of misplaced loyalty which
put party before nation and people was never Lasantha’s preserve, however.
There are many who were blue and red in colour who did worse and whose failings
on this account were not compensated for by the kind f journalism that Lasantha
was capable of. Speaking strictly for myself, it is sad that Lasantha, who had
all the attributes to be larger than party chose to be framed by such
loyalties. It is in fact this party-fixation that rendered ineffective even the
legitimate criticisms he leveled at his political opponents. Divested of colour
and embellishment, he did come up with a lot of stories that the public needed
to know. Unfortunately, he was too politically tainted to be taken notice of by
sections of the readership that were not politically inclined either way. As
such his missives did little more than titillate the like-minded and offer
temporary relief to the politically depressed.
Nothing of this made Lasantha
deserve the death he suffered. Indeed, if any of this was fault enough to be
punished by murder then there would be a long list of journalists and others on
someone’s list of targets. When he was murdered three years ago, naturally the
accusing finger was directed at the Government and especially those he had
attacked venomously. It was only later that it came to be known that Lasantha,
for all his fierce attacks on the Government, remained a close friend of the
President. Lasantha was political and it was natural for his murder to lend itself
into quick transformation into political capital. Even today the incident is
used as case-in-point by those who claim there’s a war on media freedom. No one
has been found guilty, though, and even making allowance for the fact that
murder-clues do not materialize with finger-snap (it took 2 years to find a
suspect in the attempt to assassinate the Defence Secretary, after all), the
unresolved nature of the investigation will continue to haunt the Government.
Lasantha was not the only journalist
who can be said to have irked people in high places. While I would count out
spies for foreign countries and cheerleaders for terrorists among those of our
tribe who suffered threats and bodily harm, people like Keith Noyhr and Upali
Tennekoon were never accused of being thus integrity-deficient. They were
moreover not even like Lasanths in that they didn’t turn newspapers into party
rags. They were both attacked and the attackers in both cases are yet to be apprehended
and brought before the law. The longer it takes to find out what really
happened the greater the likelihood of blame being directed at the Government,
even if such finger-pointing is unwarranted.
Lasantha and I exchanged
pleasantries in Geneva. We didn’t see eye to eye obviously. He was high-profile
back then and I was new to newspapers. I doubt he knew of me, but I certainly
read his paper. I kept notes. I wouldn’t run a paper the way he did but
then again I doubt I ever could. He was one of a kind. Even though all things
considered he bit himself much more than he bit others, he entertained, he gave
some zip to the media industry and splashed a lot of colour too. It is a pity
that we have to talk about what he could have achieved, less because he’s no
more than because of who he was. Perhaps this is why he is now largely
forgotten (while Ajith Samaranayake is not, for example). Still, I think we are
poorer as a tribe for his absence.
*This was written 2 years ago on the
3rd anniversary of his assassination.
1 comments:
Was Lasanther "A Caesar" presiding in an assembly of journalists, was there a Brutus amongst them? Did he soar above at a higher pitch? , Were there those who wanted to clip his wings? or was it "Et Tu Brutus?" at the end! As Marc anthony said "I am not here to praise Caeser" For me Lasantha as you so rightfully say was an exemplary journalist his talent was incomparable,his convictions were human and admirable, his failings if any were likewise human! I rather would like to see a man of convictions than a man who would display someone else's convictions for personal benefit or glory! Wasantha was a man of principle someone who fearlessly fought for what he thought was right! Thank you Malinda for this fine article !
Post a Comment