Sri Lanka’s political landscape was dramatically reshaped in 2024, when a wave of public anger born out of economic collapse propelled President Anura Kumara Dissanayake and his National People’s Power (NPP) coalition to power. Riding on promises of sweeping reform, accountability, and a break from entrenched political traditions, the new administration secured both the presidency and a commanding parliamentary majority. Yet, nearly a year and a half into its tenure, the government is confronting an uncomfortable reality: translating bold rhetoric into meaningful change has proven far more difficult than anticipated.
According to the report by the International Crisis Group issued yesterday, the NPP’s rise was made possible by the dramatic collapse of public trust in Sri Lanka’s traditional political elites, whose reputations had been eroded by years of corruption, economic mismanagement, and failure to address the enduring consequences of the country’s three-decade civil war. That conflict, which ended in 2009 after immense bloodshed, left tens of thousands dead and entrenched ethnic divisions that continue to shape the island’s political fabric.
Founded in 2019, the NPP emerged as a coalition of progressive groups anchored by the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP), a party long associated with both revolutionary left politics and Sinhala nationalist roots. For decades, the JVP remained on the political margins, burdened by its history of violent uprisings. But the economic crisis of 2022, which triggered mass protests and toppled the government, created an opening for political outsiders. Dissanayake, whose personal story of rural hardship and political resilience resonated widely, became the embodiment of a promised national reset.
The elections of September and November 2024 marked a political earthquake. Dissanayake’s presidential victory was followed by a parliamentary landslide that handed the NPP a two-thirds majority, dismantling the dominance of established political dynasties, including the Rajapaksa family. For the first time, a southern-based political force secured representation across all electoral districts, including Tamil-majority areas in the north, suggesting a rare moment of cross-ethnic political alignment.
Yet, as the International Crisis Group notes, this apparent national mandate has proven less stable than it first appeared. By the local government elections of May 2025, the NPP’s share of the vote had declined significantly. While it remained the dominant party, the drop reflected growing skepticism among voters who had initially supported the coalition out of frustration with the old political order rather than deep ideological commitment.
At the core of the government’s struggles is a widening gap between ambition and execution. The NPP campaigned on an expansive platform that promised to eradicate corruption, restore the rule of law, address ethnic grievances, and introduce a new constitution to curb the concentration of presidential power. However, progress on these fronts has been slow and uneven. Internal tensions within the coalition, particularly between the JVP’s traditional ideological instincts and the more liberal vision promoted by newer members, have complicated policymaking.
Economic governance has posed one of the most immediate and consequential challenges. Despite earlier opposition to austerity measures tied to the International Monetary Fund, the NPP has largely adhered to the IMF-backed reform program established after Sri Lanka’s debt default. This pragmatic shift has helped stabilize key economic indicators, including growth, inflation, and foreign reserves. However, it has also limited the government’s ability to provide meaningful relief to a population still grappling with widespread poverty and declining real wages.
The burden of recovery has fallen heavily on lower-income groups, with increased state revenues driven largely by indirect taxation. Meanwhile, Sri Lanka’s debt remains among the highest in the developing world, leaving the country highly vulnerable to external shocks. These vulnerabilities were exposed by the devastating impact of Cyclone Ditwah in late 2025, which caused extensive damage and loss of life, and by subsequent disruptions linked to conflict in the Middle East that strained energy supplies and economic stability.
On the issue of corruption and rule of law, the government has taken some notable steps, including reinvigorating investigations into past abuses and pursuing legal action against former officials. Yet, as highlighted by the International Crisis Group, the distinction between initiating cases and securing convictions remains significant. Concerns have also emerged about whether the administration will apply the same standards of accountability to its own members, particularly in light of allegations surrounding procurement practices and political protection of certain officials.
Efforts to address past political violence, including the 2019 Easter Sunday bombings and earlier cases of enforced disappearances and extrajudicial killings, have faced resistance from entrenched elements within the security apparatus. While some progress has been made, including high-profile arrests, building cases capable of withstanding judicial scrutiny remains a formidable challenge.
The question of wartime accountability presents an even more sensitive test. Investigating alleged atrocities committed during the final stages of the civil war would require confronting the military’s enduring political influence and its standing among the Sinhala majority. At the same time, Tamil communities and human rights advocates continue to report surveillance and intimidation, raising doubts about the government’s commitment to creating a genuinely open environment for reconciliation.
Legal and institutional reforms have also stalled. Promises to repeal or replace controversial security legislation have yet to be fulfilled in a manner that satisfies civil society concerns. Draft proposals for new laws have drawn criticism for potentially expanding state powers rather than curbing them. Similarly, progress toward establishing independent oversight mechanisms and strengthening key institutions has been inconsistent, with funding constraints and political interference undermining their effectiveness.
Perhaps the most ambitious element of the NPP’s agenda—a new constitution—remains largely undefined. While the government holds the parliamentary majority needed to enact sweeping changes, it has yet to present a clear timeline or framework for reform. This has fueled skepticism, particularly among minority communities, about whether meaningful devolution of power and protection of minority rights will materialize.
Despite these challenges, the government retains significant political advantages. Public approval remains relatively strong, and the opposition is fragmented and weakened. As the International Crisis Group observes, this combination provides a rare window of opportunity for meaningful reform, if the administration is willing to take political risks and move beyond cautious incrementalism.
To regain momentum, analysts argue that the government must adopt a more inclusive and less defensive style of governance. Strengthening the independence of oversight institutions, ensuring accountability across all levels of government, and engaging more openly with civil society and independent experts could help rebuild trust. Addressing economic inequality more directly, including through fairer taxation and targeted social support, will also be critical to maintaining public support.
