Colombo Erupts in Polito-Security Crisis as Opposition MPs Demands Personal Firearms Following Political Assassination

The assassination of a prominent local council chairman has plunged Sri Lanka’s political environment into a crisis of security and accountability, culminating in the unprecedented demand by opposition Members of Parliament (MPs) for personal firearms for self-protection. The chilling request underscores a deepening fear among elected officials of a return to a culture of political violence, threatening to unravel the fragile democratic space in a nation still recovering from economic collapse and mass protests.

The immediate trigger for the clamour for pistols was the assassination of Lasantha Wickramasekara, the Chairman of the Weligama Pradeshiya Sabha, with links to the underworld, a local council in the Southern Province, who was gunned down inside his office this week. Wickramasekara belonged to the main opposition party, the Samagi Jana Balawegaya (SJB). Opposition Leader Sajith Premadasa has warned that the murder highlights how opposition representatives are being left without adequate security, saying that “The Chairman of the Weligama Pradeshiya Sabha was shot dead as he was not provided the necessary security, despite making requests to the Police. Several MPs are facing similar situations. What can be done when someone is killed? We should learn from the Weligama incident.” This tragedy has now led to multiple opposition MPs, including Jagath Withana, publicly stating they have received death threats and warning of assassination plots, which they claim the state security apparatus has failed to address despite formal written complaints. MP Ramanathan Arjunan, having been previously denied a request for a pistol and even a ‘spray gun’ for protection, revealed he now keeps a sword for his safety, a dramatic statement considering his family ties to the terrorist organization LTTE.

The response from the government, led by the National People’s Power (NPP) administration, has been to downplay the political nature of the killing. Minister of Public Security Ananda Wijepala, speaking in Parliament, swiftly rejected allegations of a political motive, instead claiming Lasantha Wickramasekara had links to the underworld. Wijepala stated, “Although he was elected as a public representative, he was an underworld figure with six court cases against him,” and asserted that the murder was a result of an “evident clash between organised crime groups in the country who are in possession of weapons.” The Minister’s remarks, however, drew sharp criticism from the opposition, who accused him of attempting to justify the murder of an elected representative. In the face of mounting pressure, the Inspector General of Police (IGP), Priyantha Weerasuriya, was summoned to Parliament and reportedly agreed to provide security assistance to all MPs who request it, a commitment seen as a significant acknowledgment of the prevailing security concerns. However, the government’s earlier decision, implemented as an austerity measure, to withdraw personal protection details for most politicians, who were previously entitled to two police officers, is now being heavily scrutinised as a dangerous miscalculation.

The demand for state-issued personal firearms has sent waves of concerns through civil society, which views any increased proliferation of arms, even in the hands of legislators, as a dangerous regression for democracy. Independent civil society voices have long tracked the fraught relationship between political power and violence in the island nation. Analysts from local civil society groups have consistently highlighted the dangers of an unstable political climate, where even in a post-conflict era, political violence and impunity remain a constant spectre. Although not directly commenting on the pistol request, organizations like the International Center for Not-for-Profit Law (ICNL), which monitors civic space, note in their recent assessments that civil society organizations (CSOs) working on sensitive issues face “heightened surveillance, intimidation, and bureaucratic obstacles.” This is part of a broader, precarious environment for rights-based work, suggesting that threats and an atmosphere of fear extend well beyond the political establishment. Furthermore, the Human Rights Accountability Coalition (HRAC), a group of local human rights organisations, has a long history of documenting political and ethnic violence, demonstrating the deep-rooted nature of security concerns that are now resurfacing to haunt elected officials. The civil society consensus points to the need for institutional security reform and accountability, not a move toward individual self-arming. Opposition Leader Premadasa has warned that if the government fails to implement adequate security protocols, the Opposition will inform international organisations and diplomatic missions about the situation, further internationalising an issue that the government would prefer to frame as a mere ‘underworld’ clash. For the international community watching Sri Lanka’s precarious path to recovery, this push for personal sidearms by its legislators is a flashing red signal that the democratic processes themselves are under palpable, physical threat, transforming the legislature from a forum for debate into a potential target. The debate over who has the right to carry a weapon in Parliament is rapidly becoming a symbol of the deepest insecurities within Sri Lanka’s political heart.