Counter-accounts of the absent state: accounting for violence, silence and resistance

Purpose This paper examines the gap between idealized accountability and governance realities during crises, focusing on Sri Lanka’s mandatory cremation policy amid COVID-19. It shows how states exploit crises to entrench informality, evade accountability and marginalize vulnerable groups. Design/methodology/approach Drawing on Ananya Roy’s concept of state informality, the paper traces how the Sri Lankan state bypassed legal and scientific norms, framing an exclusionary directive as public health policy. A qualitative case study approach analyses government statements, legal texts, media and social media to examine how the cremation mandate was constructed, contested and overturned. Findings The policy enabled authoritarian consolidation through informality, disproportionately targeting Muslim and Christian minorities and deepening existing inequities. However, civil society mobilized counter-accounts – via protest, legal action and transnational advocacy – reclaiming democratic space and prompting the policy’s reversal. Practical implications Policymakers must recognize the dangers of informal rule during emergencies. Transparent, inclusive governance is vital to preventing discriminatory crisis responses. Social implications The case highlights civil society’s role in resisting authoritarianism and reasserting accountability in times of crisis. Civic voice and solidarity are key to defending democratic values. Originality/value The paper theorizes dissonant accountability to show how crises both dismantle and provoke new forms of accountability, especially in postcolonial contexts.