The Economist - USA (2020-11-28)

32 Asia The EconomistNovember 28th 2020

2

1

Some see an element of hypocrisy in

this. Early in his term Mr Moon was fo-

cused on breaking the power of big busi-

ness and remedying the corrupt habits of

his predecessor, and made it clear that

prosecutors had his support in using their

sweeping powers in this effort. “That has

made it harder to implement prosecution

reform, which involves taking away some

of these powers,” says Park Myung-lim of

Yonsei University.

Mr Moon appointed Mr Yoon to his post

because of his reputation as a hard-nosed,

independent prosecutor who did not shy

away from cases that the government

would rather leave untouched: for in-

stance, investigating the national intelli-

gence service while Ms Park was still in of-

fice. Mr Yoon says that the president

encouraged him to apply the same scrutiny

to Mr Moon’s own associates. He has done

so with gusto, particularly when it comes

to the officials working to curb the power of

his own agency. Cho Kuk, Ms Choo’s prede-

cessor as minister of justice, was forced to

resign last year after prosecutors began in-

vestigating his family for nepotism and al-

leged financial irregularities. Ms Choo her-

self has come under scrutiny for allegedly

seeking favourable treatment for her son

during his military service.

None of these investigations has result-

ed in any convictions, prompting accusa-

tions from Mr Moon’s supporters that,

rather than being scrupulously indepen-

dent, Mr Yoon is using his powers to under-

mine the president’s reforms, perhaps to

further his political career or to deflect

scrutiny from his own associates. (Mr

Yoon’s mother-in-law was indicted on

charges of fraud on November 24th, fol-

lowing an investigation from which he had

to recuse himself.) The government’s crit-

ics, however, point to Ms Choo’s repeated

interventions in investigations that could

become awkward for the government.

They charge that the government is revert-

ing to the tactics of its predecessors, using

prosecution reform as a pretext to protect

the president’s allies. The reform has be-

come “a shield to cover up whatever misde-

meanours Moon’s colleagues commit”, as-

serts Jun Sung-in of Hongik University.

Despite such claims, most South Kore-

ans seem to support the reforms. But the

power struggle between Mr Yoon and Ms

Choo has done little to turn the prosecu-

tion service into a duller, more workaday

agency. Mr Park of Yonsei University thinks

that Mr Yoon’s suspension may convince

the entire prosecution service to take their

boss’s side, which would not only defeat

the intention of the reforms, but also po-

tentially paralyse Mr Moon’s administra-

tion through endless prosecutions. If Ms

Choo manages to assert herself, in con-

trast, the service may revert to doing the

government’s bidding, says Park Kyung-sin

ofKoreaUniversityLawSchool.

ForMrMoonhimself,themostimpor-

tantquestionmaybewhetherthesituation

increasesthedangerthathewillsharethe

fateofhisjailedpredecessors.Sofar,not

evenhisfiercestcriticshaveaccusedthe

president of crimes that could match

theirs.Ashistermdrawstoa close,hemay

neverthelessfindhimselfundergrowing

scrutinybyprosecutorswhoaremiffedat

hiseffortstocurbtheirpower,yetretain

enoughofit tocausehimmisery. 7

H

anging abovethe desk of Emmanuel

Arnold, the mayor of Jaffna, are images

of three Hindu deities, as well as the

Buddha, Jesus and the Mosque of the Pro-

phet in Medina. He has to respect all the re-

ligions of his city, he explains. Most Sinha-

lese, the country’s biggest ethnic group, are

Buddhist; Tamils, who predominate in the

north, including Jaffna, tend to be Hindu,

and there are also small Christian and Mus-

lim minorities. (Mr Arnold himself is

Christian.) The ecumenical display, how-

ever, prompted griping from his staff: there

is little sense of unity in Jaffna these days,

even among the Tamil majority, let alone

between religions and ethnicities.

Tamil hopes for an independent home-

land were dashed in 2009, when the gov-

ernment defeated the Tamil Tigers, a ruth-

less separatist insurgency. But many in the

north still hanker for autonomy, as prom-

ised by amendments to the constitution

adopted in 1987 but never fully implement-

ed. Anxieties about majority rule have

swelled since the election last year as presi-

dent of Gotabaya Rajapaksa, who as num-

ber two in the Ministry of Defence presided

over the defeat of the Tigers in a campaign

in which many Tamil civilians also died.

For almost 20 years the main standard-

bearer for Tamils in Sri Lankan politics has

been the Tamil National Alliance (tna), a

multi-party union led by Mr Arnold’s Illan-

kai Tamil Arasu Kachchi (itak). But in elec-

tions in August, it slumped from 16 seats in

the 225-seat parliament to ten. (Mr Arnold

was one of its losing candidates.)

Mathiaparanan Sumanthiran, the tna’s

spokesman and an mp, blames this “very

serious setback” on popular disillusion-

ment after the tnafailed to strike a deal on

autonomy with the previous president,

Maithripala Sirisena. The alliance had been

instrumental in Mr Sirisena’s surprise vic-

tory over Mahinda Rajapaksa, the brother

of Gotabaya, in presidential elections in

2015. Yet reconstruction and development
      of the north after the long civil war was ne-
      glected under Mr Sirisena. Equally galling-
      ly, an assembly to draft a new constitution
      came and went without making a specific
      proposal. Mr Sirisena began feuding with
      his prime minister, and most reforms went
      out of the window. “We put all our eggs in
      one basket,” laments Mr Sumanthiran.
      The result has been a fracturing of Tamil
      politics. Canagasabapathy Wigneswaran, a
      retired Supreme Court judge who had
      served as the chief minister of Northern
      Province, of which Jaffna is the capital, left
      the tnato form his own party. He won a
      seat in parliament in August, as did Gajen-
      drakumar Ponnamabalam, another Tamil
      nationalist who split from itak. Others
      threw their lot in with the Rajapaksa broth-
      ers’ party, the Sri Lanka People’s Front
      (slpf), on the basis that it could at least
      provide funds for development. One of
      them, Angajan Ramanathan, also won a
      seat. Velupillai Sivagnam, a provincial
      councillor with itakwho is in his 70s, can-
      not remember a time when there were so
      many different Tamil parties.
      In his maiden speech in parliament, Mr
      Wigneswaran demanded self-determina-
      tion for Tamils, who he insisted were “the
      first indigenous inhabitants of this coun-
      try”, reigniting a long-running and futile
      argument over whether Sinhalese or Tam-
      ils could claim dibs on the island. But that,
      says Singaravelu Kumaravel, a Tamil activ-
      ist, is what many Tamils want: representa-
      tives who will rail on their behalf.
      Many younger Tamils, however, are not
      interested in the separatist cause. They
      have no memory of the 26 years of civil war,
      says Sivasubramaniam Raguram of Jaffna
      University. They simply hope for better
      jobs, which draws them to the slpf. With-
      out more energised youngsters, however,

JAFFNA

Tamil politics is badly fractured—but

the new government may change that

Sri Lanka’s Tamils

The war within

Peace but not prosperity