Video: Many dangerous operative paragraphs in resolution-MR
Posted on October 27th, 2015

Courtesy Daily Mirror

Claiming that there are many dangerous operative paragraphs in theGeneva resolution on Sri Lanka, Former President Mahinda Rajapaksa today said that all Sri Lankans should be vigilant about what some powerful forces are trying to achieve by jailing thewar heroes, sacking through an administrative process those who cannot be jailed, and breaking the back of the nation.

Issuing a statement during a press conference at the Abhayaramaya, Narahenpita, the former President said that according to operative paragraph 6 of the Geneva resolution the government has agreed to establish a judicial mechanism to try war crimes. They have also agreed to the participation of foreign judges, prosecutors, investigators and lawyers in that judicial mechanism. What this means in effect is the setting up of an entirely new parallel criminal justice system in this country outside the existing system.

According to operative paragraph 4 of the Geneva resolution, the Sri Lankan government has already agreed to allow these mechanisms that are to be set up to ‘deal with the past’ to obtain financial assistance from foreign countries. What this means is that the mechanisms that will be set up to look into allegations of war crimes and other matters will be paid for and maintained by the Western powers.

If the Geneva resolution is implemented, the countries that sponsored resolutions against Sri Lanka in the Human Rights Council, will be the same countries that provide funding for the judicial mechanisms set up under that resolution and who provide the judges, prosecutors, investigators and lawyers to man those mechanisms. These will also be the same countries that tried their level best to stop the final phase of the war and failed. By what stretch of the imagination are we to believe that the cause of justice will be served by such an arrangement?

The government has been putting forward various arguments to justify their decision to implement the Geneva resolution. The appointment by Mrs Sirima Bandaranaike of an Egyptian judge to the Commission of Inquiry to probe the S.W.R.D. Bandaranaike assassination is taken as an example of a foreign judge participating in the Sri Lankan judicial system.

However Mrs Bandaranaike appointed that Egyptian judge to a Commission of Inquiry appointed under the Commissions of Inquiry Act and not to a court of law. The criminal case relating to the Bandaranaike assassination was heard in the ordinary courts of the country. Similarly the instance of the Commission of Inquiry into Missing Persons (Maxwell Paranagama Commission) appointed by me, being allowed to seek the legal opinions of several foreign experts in the law of armed conflict is also mentioned as a precedent for the participation of foreign legal experts in a Sri Lankan legal process.

My government did make arrangements for the Maxwell Paranagama Commission to obtain written legal opinions from several foreign experts on a written request made by the Chairman of that Commission.  Sir Desmond de Silva QC, Sir Geoffrey Nice QC, Professor David Crane, Professor Michael Newton and Rodney Dixon – all experts in the law of armed conflict – and Major General John Holmes formerly of the British SAS provided some very valuable written opinions to the Paranagama Commission. It should be borne in mind that we are referring here not to the Maxwell Paranagama Commission Report which was tabled in parliament recently, but to the legal opinions provided to it by the foreign experts.  The government should have circulated the written opinions of these international experts to the members of the UN Human Rights Council. There was plenty of time to do so before the UNHRC sessions but the government deliberately refrained from doing so.”

Various views were expressed about the report of the Maxwell Paranagama Commission appointed to look into Complaints of Missing Persons during the recent debate in parliament. I heard this commission being referred to as Rajapaksa’s Commission”. I saw some politicians trying to justify their own plans by saying that Rajapaksa’s own commission had made such and such recommendation. I appointed the Paranagama Commission to look into Complaints of Missing Persons in August 2013. After January this year it has functioned under the present government. It is now a commission of the present government. From January this year the incumbent President had the power to make any changes he wanted in the functions of this Commission. So it is not correct to say that was a ‘Rajapaksa commission’. In any event what is of importance to us here are the implications of the Geneva resolution.

The involvement of foreign judges, prosecutors, investigators and lawyers implies the creation of a new criminal justice system parallel to the existing one. I am totally opposed to any such arrangement.  I regard that very suggestion to be an insult to our courts system, legal profession, Attorney General’s Department and investigative bodies.

Through operative paragraph 8 of the Geneva resolution, the government has already agreed to remove from office members of the armed suspected of having committed human rights violations   through an ‘administrative process’ even if there is no evidence against him that can be placed before a court of law. Some ministers claimed in parliament that there is no such recommendation in the Geneva resolution. I state with the utmost responsibility that operative paragraph 4 of the resolution requires exactly that and nothing else.

However, one of the most sacrosanct principles of criminal law is that a deed that was not a crime when it was committed should not be declared a crime through new legislation and punishment meted out retroactively. Even though the constitution allows retroactive legislation, this is never resorted to except in the most extreme circumstances.

The last time retroactive legislation was passed in was in the 1980s when SepalaEkanayake hijacked an Alitalia plane. At that time hijacking a plane was not an offence in our law. So the government at that time had to bring in retroactive legislation to make hijacking a crime and to punish Ekanayake. But there is no such issue here. If any member of the armed forces has committed murder there are laws against that in our country. Likewise if there are allegations, of torture, assault, rape or threatening of people against any member of the armed forces, all those crimes can be dealt with under our law.

If any of these crimes can be punished in our law, many would be left wondering why new criminal laws would be necessary at all. If new laws are introduced, that will be for only one purpose – to water down the evidentiary requirements and to enable the expeditious jailing of our war heroes. This is similar to wanting to remove from office through an administrative process even those members of the armed forces against whom there is no evidence, but are suspected of having violated human rights. The evidentiary rules in international war crimes tribunals have a lower benchmark than in our courts and the national legal systems of most countries. Life sentences can be handed down on little evidence.

This is one of the main reasons why the United States of America has prohibited international war crimes tribunals from ever trying any of its citizens. In 2002 the American government passed the American Servicemen’s Protection Act” which empowers the American president to use force if necessary to obtain the release of any American citizen taken before an international war crimes tribunal. That is how the Americans protect their war veterans and other citizens. But what we see here are politicians falling over one another in their eagerness to betray our war heroes. One of the main reasons why the Americans are against any of its citizens being taken before these international war crimes tribunals is because of the glaring shortcomings in the international law relating to  war crimes and the procedures of the war crimes tribunals.   

The present attempt being made in this country is to introduce these faulty laws and procedures to Sri Lanka and to jail our war heroes expeditiously. No self-respecting citizen should allow this to happen. If any member of the armed forces has done anything wrong, he should be tried according to our law and only in our courts.

It is my belief that we as a nation are now faced with the most perilous moment since independence in 1948. We are all duty bound to come forward on behalf of the nation at a time like this.

Full statement as follows;

I address you thus, at a time of great peril to our nation. Various views have been expressed about the resolution passed against Sri Lanka in the Human Rights Council in Geneva. There was a debate in parliament about it as well. Some contentious points have been raised with regard to this resolution and as the former President and Commander in Chief I am duty bound to explain to the public my views on this resolution. The people of this country should be aware of the challenge confronting the country as a result of the government co-sponsoring the Geneva resolution against Sri Lanka.

I must first draw your attention to the operative paragraphs in the Geneva resolution which will have the most serious implications for this country. There are many dangerous operative paragraphs in this resolution. I wish to draw your attention to three of the most serious and unacceptable recommendations.

According to operative paragraph 6 of the Geneva resolution the government has agreed to establish a judicial mechanism to try war crimes. They have also agreed to the participation of foreign judges, prosecutors, investigators and lawyers in that judicial mechanism. What this means in effect is the setting up of an entirely new parallel criminal justice system in this country outside the existing system.

According to operative paragraph 4 of the Geneva resolution, the Sri Lankan government has already agreed to allow these mechanisms that are to be set up to ‘deal with the past’ to obtain financial assistance from foreign countries. What this means is that the mechanisms that will be set up to look into allegations of war crimes and other matters will be paid for and maintained by the Western powers.

If the Geneva resolution is implemented, the countries that sponsored resolutions against Sri Lanka in the Human Rights Council, will be the same countries that provide funding for the judicial mechanisms set up under that resolution and who provide the judges, prosecutors, investigators and lawyers to man those mechanisms. These will also be the same countries that tried their level best to stop the final phase of the war and failed. By what stretch of the imagination are we to believe that the cause of justice will be served by such an arrangement?

The government has been putting forward various arguments to justify their decision to implement the Geneva resolution. The appointment by Mrs Sirima Bandaranaike of an Egyptian judge to the Commission of Inquiry to probe the S.W.R.D. Bandaranaike assassination is taken as an example of a foreign judge participating in the Sri Lankan judicial system.

However Mrs Bandaranaike appointed that Egyptian judge to a Commission of Inquiry appointed under the Commissions of Inquiry Act and not to a court of law. The criminal case relating to the Bandaranaike assassination was heard in the ordinary courts of the country. Similarly the instance of the Commission of Inquiry into Missing Persons (Maxwell Paranagama Commission) appointed by me, being allowed to seek the legal opinions of several foreign experts in the law of armed conflict is also mentioned as a precedent for the participation of foreign legal experts in a Sri Lankan legal process.

My government did make arrangements for the Maxwell Paranagama Commission to obtain written legal opinions from several foreign experts on a written request made by the Chairman of that Commission.  Sir Desmond de Silva QC, Sir Geoffrey Nice QC, Professor David Crane, Professor Michael Newton and Rodney Dixon – all experts in the law of armed conflict – and Major General John Holmes formerly of the British SAS provided some very valuable written opinions to the Paranagama Commission. It should be borne in mind that we are referring here not to the Maxwell Paranagama Commission Report which was tabled in parliament recently, but to the legal opinions provided to it by the foreign experts. The government should have circulated the written opinions of these international experts to the members of the UN Human Rights Council. There was plenty of time to do so before the UNHRC sessions but the government deliberately refrained from doing so.

The Island” web edition published all these legal opinions in full some months ago. If the contents of those well-argued legal opinions had been taken into account the war crimes project against Sri Lanka orchestrated by some western countries would have come to an end before it even got off the ground.

The Commission on Missing Persons is also a commission appointed under the Commissions of Inquiry Act and not a court of law. Furthermore the legal experts I mentioned earlier, only provided written legal opinions in an advisory capacity to this commission. All these opinions were very favourable to Sri Lanka. The difference between obtaining advisory opinions about the arguments that can be made in our favour from foreign experts and appointing foreign judges to hear court cases against our war heroes should be clear to everybody.

Various views were expressed about the report of the Maxwell Paranagama Commission appointed to look into Complaints of Missing Persons during the recent debate in parliament. I heard this commission being referred to as Rajapaksa’s Commission”. I saw some politicians trying to justify their own plans by saying that Rajapaksa’s own commission had made such and such recommendation. I appointed the Paranagama Commission to look into Complaints of Missing Persons in August 2013. After January this year it has functioned under the present government. It is now a commission of the present government. From January this year the incumbent President had the power to make any changes he wanted in the functions of this Commission. So it is not correct to say that was a ‘Rajapaksa commission’. In any event what is of importance to us here are the implications of the Geneva resolution.

The involvement of foreign judges, prosecutors, investigators and lawyers implies the creation of a new criminal justice system parallel to the existing one. I am totally opposed to any such arrangement.  I regard that very suggestion to be an insult to our courts system, legal profession, Attorney General’s Department and investigative bodies.

Through operative paragraph 8 of the Geneva resolution, the government has already agreed to remove from office members of the armed suspected of having committed human rights violations   through an ‘administrative process’ even if there is no evidence against him that can be placed before a court of law. Some ministers claimed in parliament that there is no such recommendation in the Geneva resolution. I state with the utmost responsibility that operative paragraph 4 of the resolution requires exactly that and nothing else.

When the Human Rights Commissioner addressed the UNHRC on 30 September the matter on which he placed the most emphasis was the need to remove from office through an administrative process member of the armed forces suspected of having violated human rights. The government has agreed even to implement this patently unfair recommendation. If there is insufficient evidence to place before a court of law, no one can be declared a wrongdoer according to our legal system. On what principle of justice are such individuals to be removed from office through an administrative process? This is nothing but a project to persecute our war heroes.

There is another ethical issue here. This war was fought in Sri Lanka. If our war heroes are to be punished for war crimes, many things that were not crimes according to our law during the time of the war will have to be entered into our laws as crimes and given effect retroactively. Our constitution does permit retroactive legislation especially to give effect to international law in this country.

However, one of the most sacrosanct principles of criminal law is that a deed that was not a crime when it was committed should not be declared a crime through new legislation and punishment meted out retroactively. Even though the constitution allows retroactive legislation, this is never resorted to except in the most extreme circumstances.

The last time retroactive legislation was passed in was in the 1980s when SepalaEkanayake hijacked an Alitalia plane. At that time hijacking a plane was not an offence in our law. So the government at that time had to bring in retroactive legislation to make hijacking a crime and to punish Ekanayake. But there is no such issue here. If any member of the armed forces has committed murder there are laws against that in our country. Likewise if there are allegations, of torture, assault, rape or threatening of people against any member of the armed forces, all those crimes can be dealt with under our law.

If any of these crimes can be punished in our law, many would be left wondering why new criminal laws would be necessary at all. If new laws are introduced, that will be for only one purpose – to water down the evidentiary requirements and to enable the expeditious jailing of our war heroes. This is similar to wanting to remove from office through an administrative process even those members of the armed forces against whom there is no evidence, but are suspected of having violated human rights. The evidentiary rules in international war crimes tribunals have a lower benchmark than in our courts and the national legal systems of most countries. Life sentences can be handed down on little evidence.

This is one of the main reasons why the United States of America has prohibited international war crimes tribunals from ever trying any of its citizens. In 2002 the American government passed the American Servicemen’s Protection Act” which empowers the American president to use force if necessary to obtain the release of any American citizen taken before an international war crimes tribunal. That is how the Americans protect their war veterans and other citizens. But what we see here are politicians falling over one another in their eagerness to betray our war heroes. One of the main reasons why the Americans are against any of its citizens being taken before these international war crimes tribunals is because of the glaring shortcomings in the international law relating to  war crimes and the procedures of the war crimes tribunals.

The present attempt being made in this country is to introduce these faulty laws and procedures to Sri Lanka and to jail our war heroes expeditiously. No self-respecting citizen should allow this to happen. If any member of the armed forces has done anything wrong, he should be tried according to our law and only in our courts.

In ruling a country governments do come under pressure from overseas. The government of the day has to find ways and means of dealing with that. There is no need for a government if we are going to agree to everything said by other countries.

The government has co-sponsored the Geneva resolution without considering its implications and without informing parliament and appraising the people about it. If a separate criminal justice apparatus is to be set up with foreign judges, prosecutors and investigators, our ordinary law as well as the constitution itself will have to be amended. Last week in an interview with The Straits Times in Singapore, the Prime Minister had said that foreign judges will in fact be involved in war crimes trials here.

The laws will be changed in this manner for the sole purpose of punishing our war heroes. Changing the constitution itself to punish the war heroes who brought an end to terrorism which had been stalking this land for forty years and which embroiled the country in a raging internal war for 30 years is a dastardly act. People belonging to all communities are now able to live in peace in this country because of the sacrifices made by our war heroes.

If we change the law to enable foreign judges, prosecutors and investigators to serve in our legal system, what happens after they finish jailing our war heroes? If the amendments to the law continues to remain even after jailing the war heroes, foreign judges, prosecutors, investigators and especially lawyers will continue to work in Sri Lanka and that may pose a major problem for the legal profession. There are many lawyers in parliament. I too am a lawyer.

One of the matters under discussion in this country with regard to the CEPA agreement with India was the provision made for Indian professionals of all categories including lawyers to work in Sri Lanka. If the laws are amended as envisaged to punish our war heroes, one of the unintended consequences of that will be the opening up of the Sri Lankan legal profession to foreigners even without CEPA.

If however, the law is changed only to punish our war heroes and after all the war heroes are jailed the laws are amended once again to restore the status quo ante, then it will become obvious to the people that this government amended the law only to punish our war heroes. That is not an acceptable situation at all.

The government has been engaged in an attempt to justify the position they have taken. One argument they have brought forward is that everything that is happening now had been agreed to in the joint statement made by the UN Secretary General and myself on May 23, 2009. They have been misquoting the final paragraph of that joint statement to find justification for their own actions. That final paragraph went as follows:

Sri Lanka reiterated its strongest commitment to the promotion and protection of human rights, in keeping with international human rights standards and Sri Lanka’s international obligations. The Secretary-General underlined the importance of an accountability process for addressing violations of international humanitarian and human rights law.  The Government will take measures to address those grievances.”

Joint statements contain the ideas of both parties signing it. The positions taken by Sri Lanka and the UN Secretary General are clearly stated. Sri Lanka has accepted that she is committed to upholding human rights to an international standard and we are doing that. We have a whole chapter on fundamental rights in our constitution. The UN Secretary General speaks about the need for an accountability process. We never accepted that. All that we did was to look into any grievances in that regard.

We never undertook to set up war crimes tribunals or to man them with foreign judges and prosecutors or to sack members of the armed forces who have not been proven guilty of any wrongdoing through an administrative process. As per the pledge we made we appointed the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission and the Commission to look into Complaints of Missing Persons.

These plans that are being made to persecute members of our armed forces cannot be implemented without amending the law. Parliament has the power to thwart all these plans being made to victimise our war heroes who sacrificed so much in the war against terror. I appeal to all Members of Parliament regardless of party affiliation, not to allow the passage of any legislation aimed at persecuting members of our armed forces. This is a matter that goes beyond politics and is about our country, our nation, our sovereignty and our self-respect.

The people should be vigilant about what these powerful forces are trying to achieve by jailing our war heroes, sacking through an administrative process those who cannot be jailed, and breaking the back of this nation. It is my belief that we as a nation are now faced with the most perilous moment since independence in 1948. We are all duty bound to come forward on behalf of the nation at a time like this.

Video by Buddhi – See more at: http://www.dailymirror.lk/92527/many-dangerous-operative-paragraphs-in-resolution-mr#sthash.x1UiI3Bc.dpuf

11 Responses to “Video: Many dangerous operative paragraphs in resolution-MR”

  1. LANKAPUTHRA Says:

    I hope article writers like Dilrook and comment writers like Lorenzo and Fran Diaz will read the last paragraph of MR’s statement. One can not be perfect, and I have a problem with this statement. MR commenting about a government, but this is not a government. Until the Old constitution was brought in to the Parliament and RANIL PUNK IS arrested and jailed without a trial for treason this type of comments will go no where. Muslim OBAMA had CIA / FBI/ state Department operative in HUNDU KUSH building a MOSQUE, for this earthquake all the workman working on the project all eight of them died when the three story building clasped.

  2. LANKAPUTHRA Says:

    It was a 7.5 magnitude earth Quake and was centered in HINDU KUSH (Kill the HINDUS) Valley. Srinagar Police Inspector General said many bridges and buildings are damaged over 200 bodies have been recovered so far.

    2. Associated Press states that Russian Jets attacked a Military compound used by US trained terrorist to attack Syria was flattened by attack and many fled to Turkey and later to go to Europe. US state department said that these are moderate Muslims and not terrorists. But Russians said that these are Eastern Libyans and Tunisian Criminals that US trained to fight in Ukraine.

  3. Lorenzo Says:

    We need MR to come out and explain to people these things.

    Good to see daily mirror a little less PRO-UNP nowadays.

  4. Independent Says:

    President’s Office Expenditure – Yaha Palanaya ?

    The Appropriation Bill 2016 has slashed financial provisions for the office of the incumbent president by a whopping Rs. 9.6 billion, allocating a mere Rs. 2.3 billion as compared to the Rs 11.9 billion allocated to the same office by the UPFA Government last year. The estimated expenditure for the President’s office for 2016 is Rs 2.3 billion

    (Rs. 2,392,075,000) which is less than Rs. 9.6 billion allocated to former President Mahinda Rajapaksa’s office in the 2015 Budget.

    According to the Appropriation Bill 2016 presented to Parliament by the Leader of the House, Minister Lakshman Kiriella, on Friday (October 23) , the government’s estimated expenditure for the next year is Rs. 1,941 billion ( Rs.1,941,450,438,000) with the lion’s share of Rs. 306 billion (Rs. 306,657, 824, 000) being allocated for the Ministry of Defence. The Appropriation Bill 2016 will be the first full budget of the National Unity Government, as it had previously presented an interim budget on January 29 under its 100 Day Program. The 2016 Budget will be delivered by Finance Minister Ravi Karunanayake on November 20.

    The debate on the second reading of the budget will last for 12 allotted days from November 21 and the vote on the second reading will be taken on December 5. The Committee Stage Debate will continue for 12 days from December 7 and the third reading vote will be taken on December 19.Of the government’s total expenditure for 2016, Rs. 1,314 billion will be recurrent expenditure and Rs. 626 billion will be capital expenditure.

    The estimated allocation for the Ministry of Education for 2016 is Rs.185.9 billion (Rs.185,976,030,000), which is a fourfold increase compared to the UPFA Government’s allocation of Rs. 47.6 billion in the 2015 Budget. Large allocations have been made for the Ministries of Local Government and Provincial Councils (Rs. 237 billion), University Education and Highways (Rs. 171 billion) Public Administration and Management (Rs. 156 billion), Finance and Planning (Rs.107 billion) and Health, Nutrition and Indigenous Medicine (Rs. 174 billion).
    http://www.sundayobserver.lk/-

  5. Independent Says:

    Despite lot of opposition to his son-in-laws appointment to the London High Commission, the newly crowned Yahapalana Monitoring Governor, Austin Fernando, is still working hard to get all the perks for his relative. With the news breaking exposure by Lanka News Web many thought Austin will try to restore his self made image as ‘an outstanding civil servant’. Even indication that Prime Minister and Foreign Minister are upset about this appointment and may review it has not stopped Austin from wanting to make sure that his daughters family is cared for. Banking on his personal contacts with the President, Austin has been working with Foreign Secretary Chitrangani Wagiswara and the newly appointed ‘nanny’ of his son in law S. Gunaratana to make sure that British citizen Manoj Warnapala is well setup in his new role as a ‘Sri Lankan Diplomat’ in charge of the Consular Section of the High Commission.

    On instructions received from Austin Fernando Wagiswara has been busy trying to put Warnapala in charge of Consular section of the High Commission and to get him all possible allowances and perks. As reported earlier due to some issues raised so far Warnapala has not been put in charge of the Consular section. This has annoyed Austin. Another thing that has annoyed Austin is that London High Commission has asked for some clarifications from the Ministry about the payment of housing allowance to Warnapala. A Foreign Ministry source told that Warnapala cannot ask for the housing allowance if he owns a house in London. Due to this developing situation Austin has asked Wagiswara to send Gunaratna to London without wasting time. Gunaratna who is desperate to go on a posting and knowing that his appointment might be reviewed has been contacting the British visa office in Chennai daily trying to fast track his visa and go to London immediately.

    Lanka News Web reliably understands that together with the exposure in Lanka News Web and the print media reports that Foreign Secretary is going to be appointed as High Commissioner to London the death of the Acting High Commissioner of Sri Lanka in Maldives on 22 October in Male has put Wagiswaras under more pressure. W. A. T. Gunathilaka was seriously ill and she returned to Sri Lanka end of August in a wheel chair to undergo medical treatment. While she was in hospital Foreign Secretary has pressurised her to get back to Maldives. Everyone knows very well that medical services are not good in that country. Gunathilaka died in Male. Now it has come out and officers in the Foreign Ministry are critical of Wagiswara’s action. Wagiswara is also worried that Prime Minister and Foreign Minister will go into detail about Warnapala’s appointment and about Gunathilaka being pressured to get back to Male while being seriously ill. Because of this Wagiswara has got cold feet and is reluctant to immediately go to London. Together with Austin and Gunaratna she has hatched a new plan. The first stage is to get Gunaratna to spread the story that Wagiswara has turned down the offer to go as High Commissioner to London. Gunaratna has already started doing this using his friends and media contacts. Then Wagiswara will wait till things settle down and then make her move to London. Till then Gunaratna will be there in London to do as she and Austin says.

    Many in the Foreign Ministry are unhappy and question why Gunaratna was handpicked by Wagiswara overlooking many deserving senior officers who have been serving in the Ministry and are due to go on a posting. According to a Foreign Ministry source Gunaratna’s father was a clerk in the Foreign Ministry for decades and one of the Overseas Administration mafia – those who never leave the division. Even after returning from postings he has remained in Overseas Administration. There was an allegation that after his last posting Gunaratna senior tried to dismantle a vehicle and ship it to Sri Lanka in the heavy baggage container. An inquiry was started. But the subject file ‘disappeared’ and the inquiry was discontinued. During Wagiswara’s junior days in the Ministry Gunaratnas father has done lot of ‘official’ help to Wagiswara. So now it is Wagiswaras turn to give ‘official’ help to junior Gunaratna. A retired Ministry staff member told Lanka News Web that ‘Like father like son. He knows how to change his colours and look after the seniors who in turn will look after him.’

    Meanwhile Lanka News Web understands that many community organisations and individuals in the UK have complained and written against the recent appointments to London High Commission and a review of the appointments may be made. Community members and right thinking Sri Lankan public are wondering whether the foreign service and the government is so bankrupt to appoint persons with such questionable backgrounds to an important place like London.

  6. Fran Diaz Says:

    A very fine speech by former Pres Mahinda Rajapakse. Spoken like a true leader, warning the country of unrevokable and irreparable problems and danger ahead ….

    Our greateful thanks to former Pres MR.

    Wonder what Ranil/CBK have to say about standing by the armed forces of Lanka.

  7. Ancient Sinhalaya Says:

    Why the dark forces are after MR’s blood?
    MR is the only Buddhist politician with a backbone. There is no one else. There is no one else in
    the horizon. So get rid of him with all these lies and utter lies and the Buddhists in the country will be leaderless for a
    long time. This is the hidden agenda. Erase him from the political arena!
    Remember Soma Thero and how the dark forces got rid him?

    Their job has been made a lot easier with a lot of traitor Sinhalese (Sivallun) supporting the UNPatriotics party!
    Those pea-brained, full of themselves Sivallun fall for any lie uttered by the dark forces.

    Sinhalaya (Sivallun) modaya lanu kanna suuraya!

  8. LANKAPUTHRA Says:

    Lorenzo, Daily Mirror is owned by RANIL PUNK’S Uncle! Check it out. For some comments it injects dis-information. Please be aware of it. Example: The famous dis-information “JRJ said that he change a man to a Woman”. Which he never said, but the SL press did state it many times so stupid people believed it. It is like, MR HORA, HORA slogan.

  9. SA Kumar Says:

    Sinhalaya modaya lanu kanna suuraya!- All ok My Chinhala Sakodaraya

    Where is MY Mother Lanka ???

    Indian flag is flying Jaffna sky not your Lion or our Koddiya flag .

    You Chinha modayas -kaput

  10. Fran Diaz Says:

    Neo-Cold War/Resources and Land take over/Eelam (Tamil Caste wars being used for Neo-Cold War purposes and Eelam) taking its toll on Lanka yet again. Those who truly care for the country and the People are being sidelined or villified by the new powers and hired media to confuse the people.

    People Rich or poor, East or West, have to “look within” through Meditation for the solace they seek. No amount of money or power will bring that feeling we humans all want.

    Shame and double shame on spineless leaders of Yahap, misleading the people.

    Lankans, Honor those who deserve to be honored !

  11. Hiranthe Says:

    In the meantime, dear patriots, please read Manoj Abayadeera’s Wednesday column on Divaina on the following link.

    Fantastic exposure of YaMa Palanaya.

    http://www.divaina.com/2015/10/28/manopage.html

    If someone can publish it as a news item, it will have much attention.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

 

 


Copyright © 2018 LankaWeb.com. All Rights Reserved. Powered by Wordpress