Are You Part of the Revolution That Succeeded? Then You Are a Hero.
If you took part in a revolution that succeeded, you are remembered as a hero. You are honoured as a revolutionary.
History provides many such examples. The Red Revolution of October 1917 in Russia is one. The American War of Independence of 1775 is another. Those who protested, resisted, and fought became national heroes once victory was achieved. This is often called the “Founding Fathers” scenario.
But what if the revolution you joined failed?
Then you become a traitor. You are punished. This is the “Traitor” scenario.
The failed South African struggle of 1962 is a clear example. Nelson Mandela was imprisoned, and many others were sentenced to death. Such is the nature of political struggles and uprisings.
However, history also shows a third path.
Some struggles are neither total victories nor complete failures. They succeed only partially. This creates what may be called the “Amnesty” scenario.
In such situations, the government that comes to power must look at both the revolutionaries and the victims of unrest with fairness and balance.
Yes, protesters may have broken laws. Yes, they may have challenged the state. But the authorities must assess these actions within the broader political, social, and economic context.
Looking Back to 2022
Let us turn back the clock to 2022.
At that time, most Sri Lankans were living in frustration, anger, and despair. The country was experiencing its worst economic collapse. Shortages, inflation, and hopelessness dominated daily life.
Like many others living both in Sri Lanka and abroad, I too supported the protest movement. Many citizens did the same. Of course, some supported the existing political system. That was their democratic right.
The Aragalaya of 2022 became a historic turning point.
The Galle Face protest was largely peaceful. International media described it as one of the most disciplined and non-violent mass movements in recent history. Violence entered the movement mainly after organised groups and political thugs attacked protesters.
Various civil groups, trade unions, and political movements participated. Their central demand was clear: the system had to change.
That demand for systemic reform later paved the way for the National People’s Power (NPP) to win the 2024 elections.
Economic Crisis, Migration, and Political Awareness
The IMF programme and the prolonged economic downturn forced thousands of Sri Lankans to leave the country in search of employment abroad.
Many young people migrated to Europe, the Middle East, Australia, and East Asia. There, they saw how countries are governed by credible, accountable, and transparent leaders. They experienced functioning public services, rule of law, and responsible governance.
These experiences reshaped their political thinking.
They returned home—or influenced their families from abroad—with new expectations. This exposure played a major role in motivating young voters to support the NPP and reject corrupt political traditions.
Responsibility of the Protesters
Can the killing of MP Amarakeerthi Athukorala be justified? No.
It cannot and should not be defended.
But it is also important to understand that this killing did not occur due to personal hatred or private disputes. It happened within a highly volatile political environment created by systemic collapse and state-sponsored violence.
Can we simply blame a handful of individuals and free ourselves from collective responsibility? Personally, I cannot.
Despite criticism and insults, I cannot distance myself from that shared moral responsibility.
Unlike in countries such as Bangladesh or Nepal, where protests often descended into prolonged violence and instability, Sri Lanka’s protest movement largely remained disciplined.
Protesters acted with restraint and civic responsibility. They did not attempt to overthrow the state through armed conflict. They sought reform through mass mobilisation and democratic pressure.
This maturity distinguishes Sri Lanka’s movement in South Asian political history.
The Case for an Amnesty Approach
Shouldn’t Sri Lanka now adopt an “amnesty” approach to the events of 2022?
This does not mean justifying murder or destruction.
It means examining events holistically and delivering justice in a balanced manner.
History offers precedents:
-
Sri Lanka, 1971: Special tribunals after the JVP uprising
-
Chile, 1978: Decree Law 2,191 under Pinochet
-
Argentina, 1983: National Pacification Law
These mechanisms aimed to restore social stability while recognising political realities.
This does not mean that President Anura Kumara Dissanayake’s government should undermine the rule of law. Sri Lankans do not expect authoritarianism.
But considering the extraordinary circumstances, a special legal framework or commission may be appropriate.
Such a mechanism could ensure equal treatment for:
-
The Rambukkana shooting
-
The Amarakeerthi killing
-
The Galle Face attacks
-
The burning of Ranil Wickremesinghe’s private library
Justice must be consistent and impartial.
The government has the authority to pursue this. Perhaps this is its first real test of democratic maturity.
How History Judges Protesters
Ultimately, protesters are not judged only by whether they violated the law.
They are judged by history.
If society accepts that their cause was just, and if their movement succeeds, they become heroes.
If society rejects their cause, or if the movement fails, they are labelled criminals.
That is the final verdict of history.
And in Sri Lanka’s case, the demand for systemic change, the responsible conduct of protesters, the economic awakening of youth, and the democratic victory of 2024 suggest that the Aragalaya has already secured its place on the right side of history.