Sri Lanka’s Presidential Manifestos: What’s Promised for Women?
Sri Lanka is gearing up for its ninth presidential election on September 21, but notably no women candidates are running for the highest office in the country. While having a woman candidate does not necessarily guarantee the prioritization of women’s issues, it is important to consider how the leading contestants plan to address these concerns. With women making up 51.6 percent of the population and 56 percent of registered voters, their votes hold the power to significantly influence the outcome of this election.
A candidate’s manifesto is a reflection of their understanding of the issues faced by their electorate. This analysis looks into the promises made in the manifestoes of the leading candidates – Anura Kumara Dissanayake of the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna, current Leader of the Opposition Sajith Premadasa of the Samagi Jana Balawegaya, and current President Ranil Wickremesinghe of the United National Party – specifically regarding issues affecting women and girls. These reflect their respective stances on gender-based violence, women’s empowerment, support for women-headed households, maternal health, and other issues faced by women. However, a close look at their proposals reveals varying degrees of commitment, specificity, and understanding of the issues faced by women.
Gender-based violence has been identified as a key issue by all three candidates, and rightly so, given the alarming statistics. The 2019 Women’s Wellbeing Survey revealed that two in five women in Sri Lanka have experienced physical, sexual, emotional, and/or economic violence or controlling behaviors by a partner during their lifetime. Additionally, a 2019 UNFPA study found that 90 percent of women have faced harassment on public transport in their lifetime. The effectiveness of measures proposed in candidate manifestos may be limited if they do not address underlying issues such as the patriarchal norms embedded within law enforcement agencies.
Dissanayake takes a comprehensive approach by advocating for a unified structure to stop catcalling, sexual harassment, and gender-based violence. He emphasizes the need for social and psychological support for victims and calls for amending laws and procedures to address these issues effectively. He also proposes to introduce standards and principles to law enforcement authorities regarding how to deal with people across the spectrum of gender. These proposals suggest an understanding of the systemic nature of gender-based violence and the need for both preventive and remedial measures. However, his proposal to “amend laws and procedures to address gender based violence to ensure safety everywhere,” lacks specificity and does not clearly identify critical areas in need of reform, such as the criminalization of marital rape.
Wickremesinghe proposes increasing the number of female police officers and taking measures to prevent violence against women. While increasing representation of women in the police force is a positive step, the proposal lacks detail on how these officers will be trained or sensitized to handle cases of gender-based violence effectively. Moreover, without a clear plan to address the cultural and institutional barriers that women face in reporting violence, this approach may fall short of its intended impact. His proposals are also vague in terms of how he intends to “take measures to prevent violence against women including harassment at home, on the streets and at work.”
Premadasa, on the other hand provides a more specific plan in comparison to the other two, promising to enhance the existing Women’s and Children’s Desks at police stations and establish a presidential task force. While these initiatives are commendable, they rely heavily on existing structures and lack the introduction of significant systemic changes.
All three candidates have identified female-headed households as a priority, which is commendable given that 25 percent of households in Sri Lanka are female-headed, according to 2019 data from the Department of Census and Statistics.
Dissanayake proposes social security measures and access to housing schemes, demonstrating a commitment to economic empowerment and social protection for these households. Premadasa aims to launch an initiative to empower women-headed households but provides little detail on this initiative’s practicality and scope. While the intention is positive, the lack of specificity makes it difficult for voters to make an informed choice. Wickremesinghe suggests providing concessional loans to women-headed families, which could help improve their financial stability. However, this approach implies women would become economically self-sufficient through debt, without addressing the root causes of their financial insecurity.
Legal and policy reforms form the backbone of any substantive change in the rights and status of women in society. Dissanayake proposes comprehensive legal reforms to strengthen protections against gender-based violence and ensure better enforcement of existing laws. He specifically focuses on discriminatory laws related to land ownership, 2012 Legal Commission proposals on safe abortion, and the constitutional right to equality without any discrimination based on gender and sexual orientation. His manifesto suggests amendments to outdated laws and procedures, indicating a proactive approach to creating a more equitable legal framework.
Premadasa also highlights the importance of legal reforms, particularly through the establishment of a presidential task force dedicated to women’s issues. However, the effectiveness of such a task force will depend on its composition, mandate, budgets, and the political will to implement its recommendations. Without clear guidelines and accountability mechanisms, there is a risk that this initiative could become more symbolic than impactful.
Wickremesinghe on the other hand, offers fewer specifics regarding legal reforms, which raises concerns about the depth of his commitment to addressing the systemic legal barriers that women face. While his manifesto includes some measures to increase female representation in law enforcement, it lacks a broader vision for legal reforms that would protect and empower women across all sectors of society.
Women’s participation in politics is essential for ensuring their voices are heard in decision-making, and this is a key area all three candidates have addressed. Dissanayake emphasizes the need for legal reforms to increase female representation in the political structure to 50 percent, alongside political education and mobilization demonstrating a strong commitment to achieving gender parity in politics.
Premadasa promises to introduce a quota of 25 percent female representation in Parliament, provincial councils, and local government institutions and ensuring women and youth representation in all elected bodies.
In comparison, Wickremesinghe lacks substantial proposals and vaguely mentions implementing “a special program to boost female representation in politics and business” without detailing how this will be accomplished. Without strong legal and policy measures, women’s representation in politics is unlikely to see meaningful improvements.
According to the World Bank, female labor force participation in Sri Lanka stands at just 32 percent, while men’s participation in the formal economy is twice the rate of women. Given this disparity, workplace equality and the recognition of unpaid care work are crucial for achieving gender equity.
Dissanayake addresses these issues by advocating for legal reforms that ensure equal pay and protections for women in the workplace. He also recognizes the importance of identifying unpaid care work as a part of the national economy, though specific policy proposals in this area are limited.
As mentioned earlier, Premadasa proposes that the government bear the cost of maternity leave, which would reduce the financial burden on employers and encourage the hiring of women. He also proposes encouraging entrepreneurs to start daycare centers covering every Grama Niladhari division and providing financial incentives. He suggests that the government too should take steps to provide all necessary support to establish daycare centers in public and private institutions, which will help more women enter and remain in the workforce.
In contrast, Wickremesinghe does not extensively address workplace equality or unpaid care work, missing a crucial opportunity to advocate for reforms that could significantly improve women’s economic status and quality of life.
Dissanayake and Premadasa both address critical issues such as maternal health, women in the workplace, unpaid care work, women’s entrepreneurship, and the impact of microfinancing – topics notably absent from Wickremesinghe’s manifesto. In terms of maternal health, Dissanayake focuses on initiatives that support pregnant mothers and their children, with proposals that indicate an awareness of the need for comprehensive care that extends beyond childbirth.
Premadasa proposes that the government cover maternity leave costs, easing the financial burden on employers and encouraging the hiring of women. This proposal is particularly forward-thinking, as it addresses a significant barrier to women’s participation in the workforce. He also addresses maternal and child malnutrition by planning to restart nutrition programs to distribute “Thriposha” and “Nutrition Packs.”
In contrast, Wickremesinghe’s lack of specific proposals on maternal health suggests a lower prioritization of women’s health, marking a significant oversight in his manifesto.
Dissanayake also focuses on sexual and reproductive health with initiatives to focus on age-appropriate comprehensive sexuality education for all and access to sexual and reproductive health services. He promises to “end period poverty by providing tax reliefs, financial, and other facilities.” His approach recognizes the interconnectedness of reproductive health and women’s rights.
Premadasa on the other hand, fails to go beyond maternal health. For someone who was famously labeled as the “Pad Man” during the 2019 presidential election for his promises to provide free sanitary pads to women, this is an unfortunate oversight in his manifesto. Wickremesinghe places no focus on sexual and reproductive health, which is a notable gap.
The manifestos of Sri Lanka’s presidential candidates reveal varying levels of commitment to addressing women’s issues through legal and policy reforms. Dissanayake presents the most comprehensive approach, with a strong emphasis on legal reforms that could drive systemic change. However, whether all his promises can be implemented within a presidential term remains to be seen. Premadasa offers some promising ideas but his lack of detailed proposals makes it difficult to fully assess their potential impact. Wickremesinghe, with fewer specifics, particularly in critical areas of women’s rights, raises concerns about how much attention these issues will receive if he is elected.
While no candidate can fully ensure anything for Sri Lankan women, the upcoming election is an opportunity to advocate for candidates who not only acknowledge their issues but are also committed to implementing the necessary legal and policy changes. Sustainable and meaningful improvements in women’s rights and well-being will depend on the strength and enforcement of these reforms.
