It has been four years since Mangala Samaraweera passed away. He was 65 at the time, but he was much younger at heart. Maybe this is why everyone who knew him felt that he went all too early.
Younger politicians looked up to Mangala and took their political cues from him. Even those who opposed him respected Mangala. They would take his criticisms seriously. His passing was lamented by many who did not share his political views or did not identify with his political choices.
Mangala was a friend but more than that a political mentor
Mangala was a friend but more than that a political mentor. Looking back, I realise how much I’ve learnt from him and depended on him for political reasons. No one is ever completely happy with the decisions made by leaders in any organisation, and it was the same with me. Internal debate is an important part of a healthy organisation, especially a political party. Such discussions are healthy and constructive but only if those who choose to speak have the courage of their convictions and will not bear a grudge with those they disagree with. Mangala exemplified such qualities.
Mangala spoke his mind at all times. He would submit to the majority view even if he thought differently, but only up to a point. If one studies his political journey, it would be clear that each time he chose to part ways with a party or its leader, it was because he felt that the fundamental principles of the particular organisation or leader were being compromised by those responsible for upholding them. He left because he felt that course-correction was not possible.
Those who left the United National Party and helped form the Samagi Jana Balavegaya may have had many reasons to do so. I believe I speak for the majority when I say that one of the most compelling reasons was the strength of the arguments put forward by Mangala Samaraweera. There may have been some who thought that if Mangala says something it must be right, but then again it was not too difficult to agree with his arguments in this case because the truth was quite obvious. He was a democrat and therefore abhorred anything that seemed dictatorial. He would argue and protest to the end, and if he felt that things cannot be changed, he would simply leave.
Minister of Foreign Affairs Mangala Samaraweera and Minister of Foreign Employment Thalatha Athukorala handing over compensation and salary dues to family members of deceased and injured migrant workers in 2016.
It cost him dearly, but Mangala Samaraweera seldom factored political benefits into his decisions. Those who enter politics for personal advancement probably found Mangala’s decisions puzzling. Indeed, even voters who are used to politicians being mostly concerned about what they can get out of it, may have been surprised by such moves. But that was Mangala. He wanted no part in things that were disagreeable.
When Mangala left the SJB I was saddened because I knew the strength he brought to the party. People of his stature are so rare that his very presence raised the party’s profile and its prospects. His departure diminished the SJB considerably. Personally, it was crushing not to have a friend and mentor of Mangala’s caliber in the party.
Three years have passed since Mangala Samaraweera left us. The political landscape has changed so much that we can only speculate about where he would be standing, and with whom, had he been around, but we can nevertheless assess the worth of his decision with better perspective.
He left the party in its early days. He had nothing to gain by tendering his resignation. In fact, he could have easily retained his parliamentary seat had he contested on the SJB ticket. Clearly he knew something that others did not. In fact he saw things earlier than others did. HIs concerns were not acknowledged and therefore not addressed. As a man of principles, he had no other option but to resign. He knew that all that was wrong with the UNP and its leadership at the time had found a new home in the SJB. It was the same thing, with a different name.
Mangala Samaraweera knew that if he remained, it would simply mean that he had put personal benefits such as a parliamentary seat or a cabinet post ahead of his principles. He knew that if the SJB was the UNP with a different name, the entire exercise of creating a new party was meaningless.
Mangala did not want to be associated with meaningless things. He left. That is the lesson he left behind. It is a lesson that teaches us about principles and the constant need to ask ourselves a simple question — ‘am I being driven by personal interests or not?’ It is a question that every single UNPer who left the party to join the SJB should ask himself or herself.
Thalatha Athukorala
