Ranasinghe Premadasa was unique among Sri Lanka’s Sinhala political elites. He was the country’s first low-caste, lower class, inner-urban head of state. He was also the first from a Sinhala speaking household and the first without internationally recognised higher educational qualifications. However, Premadasa was not unique in his (ab)use of Buddhist doctrine to further his own political ambitions and to fuel Buddhist chauvinism. Like others before him and since, Premadasa manipulated legend and folklore to suit his own purposes. According to Josine van de Horst, a Dutch researcher and author of a thought-provoking book on his political style, he was perhaps the most proficient Sinhala politician at fusing Buddhist religious rhetoric and pious public performances with violent practice.

‘Who is he, what is he doing?’ was a slogan used in Premadasa’s 1988 personality based presidential campaign. van der Horst poses the same question but with particular reference to Premadasa’s post-election political image. What concerns her ‘are the rhetoric and the performances with which Premadasa constructed his Presidency’ and his attempts to ‘manage his reputation as a political and religious persona’. The results of her research, conducted in Sri Lanka during the course of Premadasa’s Presidency, raise some interesting questions about the nature and practice of politics in Sri Lanka that remain valid today.

According to van der Horst, Premadasa "wanted to be seen as a man of good character, even as being of the same stature as the ancient Buddhist kings. From early 1990 onwards, after the government’s violent crack-down of the JVP-insurgency, Premadasa insisted on drawing an analogy between the situation in society, and Emperor Asoka’s Buddhist reign 25 centuries ago." (p.3) During his reign over the Indian subcontinent, Asoka is said to have put an end to an era of violence and bloodshed and launched the Conquest of Righteousness based on Buddhist principles. Over two millennia later, Premadasa announced the dawn of a new, non-violent era in Sri Lanka.

Through the course of 1990 he "declared that he followed the policies of Asoka and emulated him, like the Buddhist kings of tradition had done… Premadasa’s aim was more than to have the Sinhalese accept who he was and what he was doing politically or socially. The religious discourse, performances and general symbolism involved in his self-presentation as President, were more than attempts to legitimise his power vis-à-vis the Sinhalese Buddhist people. What he tried to evoke was a reality in which the President and the people participated as ruler and subjects." (p.3)

Premadasa maintained close ties with the Buddhist Sangha, was seen performing Buddhist ritual frequently in public and made sure that his daily meditation and prayer practices were well publicised. He created the Ministry of Buddha Sasana, the body charged with the ‘protection’ of the message of the Buddha and Buddhist doctrine, and nominated himself as the Minister in charge. In doing this he also attempted to emulate a strong tradition of Buddhist kings of the past by convening a vast conference to discuss Buddhist doctrine and he oversaw the publication of a new translation of the Vamsas. Likewise, he emulated traditional Buddhist kings by placing himself responsible for the other prong in this lethal weapon, the Ministry of Defence. Finally, Premadasa continued the tradition of drawing upon the Vamsas to offer a so-called "moral" justification for state violence.

Premadasa tried to emulate Asoka’s "evenhandedness" by outwardly professing to respect all citizens of the land – Buddhist, Hindu, Muslim and Christian; Sinhala, Tamil, Muslim and Burgher. Interestingly, van der Horst notes that Premadasa, unlike any of his predecessors, always referred to country’s people in that order in public addresses. In another tokenistic measure, Premadasa was the first head of state to visit Hindu, Muslim and Christian places of worship as well as the Buddhist relic of the Tooth upon his installation as President and at every anniversary since. His public profile was also shaped to resemble that of a King and not that of an elected President. At special functions he sat on a specially constructed throne-like seat flanked by large ceremonial shields depicting the Sun and the Moon. In Buddhist royal legend, the Sun and the Moon are supposed to revolve around the King. Perhaps the near absolute power that Premadasa enjoyed in the Executive President position was enough to convince him that this was true for him too!

As van der Horst notes, all this did not go unnoticed. There was considerable opposition to Premadasa’s practices. Many saw through his misuse of religious doctrine and tradition as a cynical means of enhancing his image and power. Others stipulated that he was indeed obsessed with religious piety and observance. Rumours abounded about his use of a personal exorcist and his paranoia about the receiving "evil eye".

At the outset of her study, van der Horst’s acknowledges that hers in not a political analysis. However, a political analysis is perhaps the most pertinent one in this case. Whether Premadasa himself was a megalomaniac convinced of his right to rule Lanka or was a obsessive and fundamentalist Buddhist or simply a shrewd politician is only secondary to the wider implications of his behaviour. Premadasa’s attempts to manufacture a political persona based on Buddhist tradition and rhetoric took Sri Lankan political ‘spin doctoring’ to new heights. The juxtaposition of his pious performances with his violent practice raises many of the central political issues that continue to dog Sri Lanka’s future. The role and influence of the Buddhist Sangha, the power of an Executive President, the inability of the media to question the sometimes megalomaniac behaviour of a leader and the continued potency of chauvinistic religious doctrine are all issues that van der Horst’s book raise but leave unanswered.

Premadasa’s "Asokan ideology" was supposed to achieve rehabilitation of society through pacification and peace. However, few would forget that during the course of his Presidency, he oversaw the massacre and disappearance of thousands and thousands of innocent Tamils and Sinhalese and masterminded one of the most brutal counter-insurgencies in history. This is perhaps the most tragic irony for which Premadasa, as a person, will be remembered. Sadly though, the tragedy of a political system continues unabated as later Sri Lankan Presidents have dropped any pretence of pacification or peace and unabashedly adopted aggression and war. Now the pious performances are less important but the violent practice continues.