Book Launch: The Good Life An Introduction to Religion and Consciousness by Iromi Dharmawardhane

January 19th, 2016

Book Launch: 

The Good Life An Introduction to Religion and Consciousness by Iromi Dharmawardhane was launched on 9th of January 2016 at the Lakshman Kadirgamar Institute by Stamford Lake Publications. The book launch attracted a full audience comprising members of the academia and NGO sector as well as students and many other interested individuals, young and old.

The guest speakers were Venerable Olande Ananda Thero who is well-known in Sri Lanka and worldwide as a veteran in conducting meditation sessions, and Prof. Kalinga Tudor Silva who is Professor Emeritus of Sociology at the University of Peradeniya.

booklaunchLeft-to-Right:Ven. Kanagasabapathy Krishnanathan Kurukkal, Hindu Priest of Sivan Temple, Modhara (Special Guest); Ven. Olande Ananda Thero, Resident Meditation Teacher at the Pagoda Meditation Centre (Speaker); Prof. Kalinga Tudor Silva, Professor Emeritus of Sociology at the University of Peradeniya (Speaker); and Ms. Iromi Dharmawardhane (Author) seated at the head table at the launch of The Good Life An Introduction to Religion and Consciousness at the Lakshman Kadirgamar Institute, Colombo on 9th January, 2016.

The Ven. Olande Ananda Thero stressed the importance of meditation practice in religion as well as the need for an individual to understand the full depth of one’s own religion, as highlighted in the book by Ms. Iromi Dharmawardhane. “Those with limited knowledge and understanding are those who quarrel,” he said. Ven. Ananda Thero also emphasised the positive effects of human consciousness in the form of compassion or “loving-kindness” upon the individual and society, as well as the environment at large, citing scientific research studies conducted by Japanese researcher Masaru Emoto and others. He also spoke of how meditation in the form of “mindfulness” or observation of the mind in daily living is important for all individuals, not only for monks and clergy persons  ̶  the practices of which are explained in the book.

booklaunch2

Prof. Kalinga Tudor Silva provided a book review, sharing short overviews of each chapter of the book. He stated that while “there is wider relevance in light of the religious turn of social and political tension in the world, this book has special relevance to Sri Lanka,” the author being Sri Lankan and the four world religions examined in the work also being the four main religions of Sri Lanka. Prof. Silva believes that “this book is essential reading for the students of religion, philosophy and social sciences as well as the general public.” He said that its translation into Sinhala and Tamil is needed forthwith, to make the book more accessible to the readership in Sri Lanka.

 

The event concluded with a book reading by the author, Ms. Iromi Dharmawardhane. She read from chapters which discussed the four religions of Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism and Islam, providing glimpses of the philosophy and meditation practices of each. She stated that the main aims of her book were “to encourage an individual to understand her or his religion in its full, profound depth as well as to engage in the scientific practice of meditation to harness the full potential of one’s mind and consciousness.” She stated that, “Science and religion are not conflicting; both disciplines are about gaining understanding through observation and investigation.” She thanked the speakers, reviewers and the publisher for their support as well as her family who provided inspiration to write the book.

 

Iromi Dharmawardhane’s elegantly written The Good Life: An Introduction to Religion and Consciousness comprises thirteen chapters (essays). Eight of the chapters focus on the four major religions of the world (and Sri Lanka): Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism and Islam. Of these eight chapters, four show that meditation practice is central to and similar among these religions and four chapters take on a day of major religious observance to depict the spiritual and philosophical relevance of each. The other chapters are also religious or philosophical in nature and deal with issues of contemporary relevance. In relation to the chapters on religion, the work can be considered a theme-based work of exegesis, where holistic and coherent meanings are arrived at through an understanding of the original religious texts. The book’s key advantages are its focus on meditation which appeals to both ‘religious’ and ‘scientific’ minds, promotion of tolerance between different religious groups by highlighting philosophical commonalities of the major religions, and its comparatively small size and reader-friendly language.

 

The book is available for purchase at the Lake House Bookshop at its Liberty Plaza outlet as well as main bookstore at 100, Sir Chittampalam A. Gardiner Mw., Colombo 2. The book is available for online purchase at www.lakehousebookshop.com, and will soon be available at all leading bookshops and retailers.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Seated Left-to-Right: Ven. Kanagasabapathy Krishnanathan Kurukkal, Hindu Priest of Sivan Temple, Modhara (Special Guest); Ven. Olande Ananda Thero, Resident Meditation Teacher at the Pagoda Meditation Centre (Speaker); Prof. Kalinga Tudor Silva, Professor Emeritus of Sociology at the University of Peradeniya (Speaker); and Ms. Iromi Dharmawardhane (Author) seated at the head table at the launch of The Good Life An Introduction to Religion and Consciousness at the Lakshman Kadirgamar Institute, Colombo on 9th January, 2016. Master of Ceremonies, Mr. Miles Brohier is addressing the audience at the start of the launch.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The author, Ms. Iromi Dharmawardhane giving a book reading at the launch. Ven. Kanagasabapathy Krishnanathan Kurukkal (Special Guest); Ven. Olande Ananda Thero (Speaker); and Prof. Kalinga Tudor Silva (Speaker) seated at the head table look on.

 

 

Iromi Dharmawardhane is the author of The Good Life An Introduction to Religion and Consciousness. Iromi Dharmawardhane’s areas of interest and research include religion, philosophy, international relations, South Asian studies, political violence and terrorism, educational psychology and gender studies. She has published journal articles, book chapters and commentaries in these areas. She has a Bachelor of Arts Degree in international Studies and a Master’s Degree in Commerce. She grew up mainly in Sri Lanka and USA, and was born in Prague in the Czech Republic. She has lived for periods in Singapore and Egypt, and shorter periods in Malaysia, Bangladesh and Pakistan.

 

 

 

ලෝක උරුම සිංහරාජයට අයත් දෙල්ලව වැසිවනාන්තරයත් වනසා ජලවිදුලි බලාගාරයක් ඉදිකරයි

January 19th, 2016

පේශල පසන් කරුණාරත්න වැසිවනාන්තර සුරකින්නන්ගේ සාමජික

නෙළුව ප්‍රාදේශීය ලේකම් කොට්ඨාශයට අයත් ගිං ගඟෙහි අතු ගංගාවක් වන ආඳා දොල පෞද්ගලික කුඩා ජල විදුලි බලාගාර ඉදිකිරීම් ව්‍යාපෘතියේ නවතම ගොදුර බවට පත්වී තිබේ. මෙහි හරස් බැම්ම (weir) හා කොන්ක්‍රීට් අනුමඟෙහි (penstock) කිලෝමීටර 2.5 ක විශාල කොටසක් පාරිසරකව සිංහරාජ වනාන්තර සංකීර්ණයට අයත් දෙල්ලව වැසිවනාන්තරය තුල ඉදිකෙරෙමින් පවතී. රක්ෂිත වැසිවනාන්තරයක් තුල පරිසර නීතිරීති උල්ලංඝනය කරමින් සිදුවන මෙම ව්‍යාපෘතිය නිසා ප්‍රදේශයේ පරිසරයට බලවත් හානියක් සිදුවී ඇත. මෙම බැම්ම නිසා ආඳා දොලෙහි කිලෝමිටර් 6.5 ක දිගැති ප්‍රමාණයක් සම්පූර්ණයෙන් සිඳී යාමට නියමිත අතර මෙහි ප්‍රතිඵලයක් ලෙස ආඳා දොලෙහි වෙසෙන ශ්‍රීලංකාවට ආවේනික පතිරණ සාලයා (Devario pathirana) හා මල්පුලුට්ටා (Malpulutta kretseri) වැනි ඉතා දුර්ලභ මත්ස්‍ය විශේෂයන් ප්‍රදේශයෙන් සදහටම වඳවී යාමේ තර්ජනයට මුහුණ පා ඇත.

sinharaja05

මෙහි ඉදිකිරීම කටයුතුවලදී රක්ෂිත ප්‍රදේශයේ ශ්‍රී ලංකාවට ආවේනික ඉතා දුර්ලභ හොර (Dipterocarpus zeylanicus), තිනිය දුන් (Shorea trapezifolia), යකහලු (Shorea dyeri) වැනි වටිනා දැවැන්ත වැසිවනාන්තර ශාඛ රැසක් කපා ඉවත් කර ඇත. IUCN රතු දත්ත පොතට අනුව මෙම ශ්‍රීලංකාවට ආවේනික දුර්ලභ ශාඛ ලෝකයෙන් තුරන් වීමට බොහෝ සෙයින් ඉඩ තිබේ. දැවැන්ත ශාඛ කපා ඉවත් කිරීම හා කැණීම් කටයුතු නිසා මෙම ඉදිකිරීම් කෙරෙන ප්‍රදේශයේ පාංශු ඛාදනය හා නාය‍යෑම් දැනටමත් සිදුවී ඇති බව පැහැදිලිය. මීට අමතරව ජලය ගෙන යාම සඳහා ප්‍රදේශයේ කන්දක් හරහා ගැඹුරු කාණුවක් ලෙස පස් කපා ඉවත් කිරීම හේතුවෙන් කන්දේ අස්ථාවර තත්වයක් ඇතිවී ඇති අතර නොබෝ දිනකින් විශාල න්‍යායයාමක් සිදුවීමට ඉඩ තිබේ.

sinharaja06

මෙම ව්‍යාපෘතිය මගින් උත්පාදනය කිරීමට නියමිත විදුලිය මෙගාවොට් 0.77 ක් පමණ සුළු ප්‍රමාණයක් වන නමුත් ඉන් සදාකාලිකව පරිසරයට වන හානිය මිල කල නොහැකිය. මින් රක්ෂිත වැසිවනාන්තරය හා භූගත ජල පද්ධතියට වන හානිය නිසා ඉතා කෙටි වියලි කාලයකදි වුවත් ආඳා දොල සම්පුර්ණයෙන් හිඳී යාමට හැකි බව ප්‍රදේශ වාසීන්ගේ මතයයි. එවැනි තත්වයකදී ආඳා දොලෙහි ජලය මත යැපෙන ප්‍රදේශවාසීන්ට ඉතා අසීරු ගැටළු රැසකට මුහුණ පෑමට සිදුවන අතර විදුලිය උත්පාදනයද අත්හිටුවීමට සිදුවනු ඇත. රක්ෂිත වැසිවනාන්තර විනාශ කර පෞද්ගලික කුඩා ජල විදුලි බලාගාර ඉදිකිරීමට ශ්‍රීලංකා සුනිත්‍ය බලශක්ති අධිකාරිය, විදුලිබල හා බලශක්ති අමාත්‍යාංශය හා මධ්‍යම පරිසර අධිකාරිය එකතුව අනුබල දී ඇත්දැයි ගැටලු සහගතය. සූර්ය, කසළ හා සුළං යන මූලාශ්‍රයන් මගින් පරිසර හිතකාමීව බලශක්තිය නිපදවීම සඳහා අවධානය යොමුකර ශ්‍රීලංකාවේ තෙත් කලාපයේ දිය ඇලි, ගංගා, දොල හා වැසිවනාන්තර විනාශ කරමින් සිදු කෙරෙන මෙවැනි කුඩා ජල විදුලි ව්‍යාපෘති වගකිව යුතු බලධාරීන් විසින් වහා අත්හිටවිය යුතුය. මේ පිළිබඳ සියලු බලධාරීන්ගෙන් අවධානය යොමු වී සිදුවන විනාශය සියලු බලය යොදා වහාම නවත්වන යැයි වැසි වනාන්තර සුරකින්නන්ගේ සංවිධානය  (http://www.RainforestProtectors.org) වන අපි කාරුණිකව ඉල්ලා සිටිමු.

sinharaja04

Massive Environmental Destruction due to Anda Dola Mini-Hydro Project

January 19th, 2016

Rainforest Protectors of Sri Lanka

Anda Dola, a tributary of Gin Ganga in Neluwa Divisional Secretariat in the district of Galle is the latest victim of rapidly spreading mini-hydro projects throughout the wet zone. The weir and 2.5 km section of penstock (concrete channel) has been constructed within Dellawa Rainforest which is ecologically part of the Sinharaja Rainforest Complex. Due to construction happening within the protected forest reserve and negligence in part by the developer, the project is causing massive environmental destruction affecting the stream, rainforest, soil and endemic fish in the region. The mini-hydro project will destroy a total 6.5 km stretch of Anda Dola, as water is being diverted off from the weir to the powerhouse several kilometers away. This will result in local extinction of many endemic and endangered fish species recorded in Anda Dola, such as the Barred Danio (Devario pathirana) and Ornate Paradisefish (Malpulutta kretseri).

sinharaja01

Many mature endemic and endangered trees such as Hora (Dipterocarpus Zeylanicus), Thiniya Dun (Shorea trapezifolia) and Yakahalu (Shorea dyeri) have been cut down during construction at the weir and along penstock to the powerhouse within protected forest reserve. Many of these endemic trees in the region are listed in the IUCN red-list of endangered species and in danger of going extinct. The project site has already experienced severe soil erosion and earth slips due to removal of these large rainforest trees. Further, a massive trench dug through a hill has jeopardized the stability of the soil mass which may soon result in a severe landslide.

sinharaja02

While the project developer has submitted an Initial Environmental Assessment (IEE) report to the authorities, an unbiased Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) with a public comment period has not been carried out although construction is taking place within a protected forest reserve. Therefore, approval given to this project by Forest Conservation Department is questionable.

sinharaja03

The project is expected to generate a mere 0.77 MW energy but at an enormous cost to the biodiversity of the sensitive rainforest habitat and possible extinction of many freshwater endemic and endangered fauna. With the continued destruction of the rainforest and diminishing groundwater reserves, “Anda Dola” is in danger of completely drying up even during a short dry season which will further reduce the practical capacity of this project. It is puzzling why Sustainable Energy Authority and Ministry of Power and Energy are continuing to push destructive mini-hydro projects within protected rainforest reserves, instead of promoting environmentally friendly and drought tolerant alternatives such as rooftop solar, waste to energy and offshore wind. Relevant authorities are urged to take immediate corrective action to stop further destruction due to this project and ensure the national policy on renewable energy focuses on technologies that do not cause ecological destruction to our vital catchment areas.

sinharaja04

FIrst session of the CPRC to begin on Jan.18

January 19th, 2016

The first session of the Committee of Public Representations on the Constitution (CPRC) will be held in Colombo from January 18 to 22 from 8.30 a.m. to 4.30 p.m at Visumpaya, staple street, Colombo 02.

The public are invited to present their proposals and opinions for the new constitution at this session which is open for all. The committee requests from the public to provide their proposals in writing with a summary if those are presented orally.

The committee members will visit across the island to gather public opinions. Proposals also could be submitted via the telephone, fax , e-mail and websites. These sources will enable the Sri Lankans overseas to express their ideas,the committee said.

The final report prepared by the committee will be submitted to the Parliament before the end of April.

Public opinion could be sent by Telephone – 0112437676 / Fax – 0112328780 / e-mail- constitutionalreforms@gmail.com / Web – yourconstitution.lk and written submissions to Chairman, The Committee of Public Representations on the Constitution (CPRC) Secretariat office, staple street, Colombo 02.

Mahinda comments on ‘Theravada Bhikkhu Dialogue’ act

January 19th, 2016

Former President Mahinda Rajapaksa comments on ‘Theravada Bhikkhu Dialogue’ act.

ඉදිරියේදී ගෙන ඒමට අදහස් කරන්නේ මහා සංඝරත්නය නිහඬ කිරීමේ පනතක්ද යන්න පැනයක් පැනනගින බව හිටපු ජනපති මහින්ද රාජපක්ෂ මහතා පවසයි.

How the UNP came to adopt Maithripala Sirisena

January 19th, 2016

Eran Wickramaratne Courtesy The Daily Mirror

January 8 is remembered for change. First there was the brutal killing in broad daylight of Journalist and Editor Lasantha Wickramatunga who stood out exposing the excesses of the Rajapaksa regime. Lasantha was killed in a high -security environment near an armed forces installation. He died brave and unbowed.

By the Aluth Avurudda in April 2014, the authoritarianism of the MR regime had reached its zenith. After serving on the Committee of Public Enterprises (COPE) for four years, rather naively, I went to inspect the progress or lack thereof on the Mattala Airport and Magampura Harbour in Hambantota along with a group of UNP backbenchers.  We were confronted by a gun-toting Mayor of Hambantota, who had assembled a mob who reminded one of the thinking of the defeated LTTE — ‘this is our land and you are not welcome here’. The picture of the gun-wielding Mayor threatening the MPs galvanized the country. It strengthened the resolve of the UNP backbench that the regime had to go.

We went around the country speaking to our rank and file and also to many disillusioned floating voters who wanted a change but did not believe that it was really possible. Our message was clear and simple. We all have a common problem – the increasing authoritarianism, accompanied by its colossal corruption, the collapse of the Rule of Law, a slow- growing real economy with lack of opportunities particularly for the youth. President Rajapaksa had to go at the end of his legal two terms. The problem had no colour – it was not blue, green or red. It was a common problem. We needed a common solution.

The UNP had been through much internal turmoil in the preceding period, which led to much soul searching. There were many divergent views as to how the problem should be addressed. Some advocated a change of leadership, but most believed that the problems that had engulfed the country were far greater than the issue of getting the UNP back in power. There was a recognition that we had to align ourselves with all the socio-political movements to confront the regime.

The movement for Social Justice led by the highly-respected late Ven. Maduluwave Sobitha Thera and the UNP came together in their common quest to make a change. Civil Society, professionals and religious leaders were increasingly drawn into the movement. Ranil Wickremesinghe, the UNP leader, skilfully held together the UNP, while bringing smaller parties into the coalition and merged them with the Civil Society movements. It was Wickremesinghe’s political experience that stood out while he had to face differing views from within the UNP. The ground was being prepared countrywide.

The Uva Provincial Council election was announced. It was a decisive moment for the Party. Wickremesinghe was of the clear view that Harin Fernando must be convinced to take on the leadership of the election campaign for the Uva Provincial Council. The Party overwhelmingly welcomed the move. Harin was taking the biggest risk of his political career and the UNP backbench backed him to the hilt by relocating to Uva during this time.

Harin beat Sashindra Rajapakse overwhelmingly on the Preference Count. There was a marked shift of votes of government employees and service personnel to the Opposition and the impregnable UPFA had begun to look weak for the first time.
It was now clear that the momentum had to be maintained. The UNP went through many discussions as to who should be its Presidential Candidate. A consensus was emerging that the dissident voices from the UPFA should be accommodated in the movement for change. This was the biggest mental and emotional barrier the party had to cross. Many SLFP front -benchers had been in discussion with UNP functionaries. It was clear that MR and his close group, containing family and key officials, were resented by the long-standing SLFP politician. The space for discussion, dissent and political ascension had been shut on these SLFP stalwarts.

Former President Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaranatunga became a rallying point for these forces. She also became the bridge between them and the UNP. The UNP leader was confident of her judgement.  Most MPs in the UNP had now come to terms with the fact that change was needed, that the country had to be prioritized over party, and therefore, a common candidate should be inducted. Ranil Wickremesinghe was willing but was also rightly concerned that the Party should be kept united.

Maithripala Sirisena’s name was proposed by CBK. To most in the UNP it was ‘Maithri who?’ or ‘Why Maithri?’ As has been said before, Ranil Wickremesinghe and Maithripala Sirisena, both Members of Parliament for over three decades, had never previously interacted with each other in a meaningful sense. So there were many doubts and questions.

It was CBK who underwrote the acceptance of Maithripala Sirisena to the UNP. Once when I questioned her about the suitability of Maithripala Sirisena, she said ‘I am surprised at his resolve to come out and stand for change’. After a couple of days of dilly dallying and internal consultation amongst UNP MPs, the decision was taken by Wickremesinghe that this is the way to go. Maitripala Sirisena was proposed by Wickremesinghe and the UNP’s Working Committee resolved to back his candidacy. He publicly announced his decision to contest the very same day.

The Party was upbeat. A Campaign Committee was appointed. The overall strategy was co-ordinated by the Campaign Committee, while each party and Civil Society Organization took responsibility for their constituencies. Naturally, the major responsibility fell on the UNP.
Tissa Attanayake who was involved at the beginning began to pull in a different direction and suddenly announced that he was supporting the MR candidacy. At the outset, it came as a shock to those who did not follow the campaign closely. However to others, it came as relief.

Maithripala Sirisena and Ranil Wickremesinghe were due to address a Press Conference a few hours after Tissa made his decision public. A few minutes prior to that, Ranil Wickremesinghe walked into a room in the office of the Leader of the Opposition. Malik Samarawickreme, Kabir Hashim who was the Chairman and myself as the Treasurer of the party were in discussion on minimizing the impact of Tissa’s departure. Wickremesinghe was on his way to address the regular campaign press conference, when he asked “What shall we do?”  Both Malik and I were of the view that a new General Secretary be appointed immediately so that the campaign could proceed uninterrupted. We suggested that Kabir should be the new General Secretary, even though Kabir appeared initially reluctant.

Ranil sent a word from the Press Conference that he wanted us to join him.   A short while later he announced the departure of Tissa and that Kabir Hashim was the new General Secretary of the UNP. This was the fastest decision on a weighty matter that I had seen the UNP leader took and it proved to be the best decision too. Kabir with his management background gave leadership to organizing and energizing the party with the ‘Jana Jaya’ programme. The party was galvanized bottom up.

The UNP’s countrywide branch network was delivering leaflets, canvassing door-to-door and conducting tens of thousands of small propaganda meetings. It was the UNP’s branch and polling booth organization that protected the vote against malpractices. We owe it to the UNP’s die hard supporters. But most of all, it is Maithripala Sirisena who owes it to the UNP’s rank and file. He always gratefully acknowledges the fact.

The new President and the Prime Minister set priorities for the first 100 days, most of which were achieved. Amongst them were the reduction in presidential power through the 19th Amendment. This was something that had been unthinkable a few months before.  In fact MR had made himself all powerful through abolishing the presidential term limit. The 19A went further by de-politicizing the elections process, the Police Department, the public sector and other spheres. This was achieved through the appointment of a Constitutional Council which included members of the Civil Society and it was essentially a reform agenda.

We had a new President but a minority government led by Ranil Wickremesinghe with about 60 MP’s in a Parliament of 225. The achievements in the first 100 days were significant given this context. Sri Lanka moved from international isolation to taking its due place on the world stage through skilful handling of its foreign policies by Sirisena, Wickremesinghe and Mangala Samaraweera.

The Parliamentary Election on August 17 gave the United National Front led by the UNP 107 seats. The UNF and the SLFP coalition gave the government an overwhelming majority. The reason for the two major parties coming together in government for a period of time could only be justified on the basis of a Reform Agenda. Democracy is best defended by a multi-party system. So the experiment of the present coalition government will be justified on the basis of a resolution of the national question, a macro economic stabilization programme, reform of the educational system where an increasing percentage of GDP is invested in this sector while welcoming the participation of non-governmental players, and finally economic reform including labour markets, competition and land ownership. With a consensus on the resolution of the national question and the adoption of economic reforms, the investment that would be unleashed will no doubt multiply. The present FDI which is about US$ 1 billion per annum will grow 3 or 4 fold within a few years.

President Mahinda Rajapakse will be remembered for the leadership he gave in eradicating terrorism. His place in history is assured, but that legacy could be diminished by meddling in the on-going political battles. Similarly, President Sirisena will be remembered as the person who restored democracy and reconciled a nation. The unfinished work must be completed during his term. The challenge before the country now is for economic growth and inclusive development. Premier Ranil Wickremesinghe is laying the foundation for that future. It is everyone’s responsibility to keep faith as it is the beginning of a long journey.

The Party was upbeat. A Campaign Committee was appointed. The overall strategy was co-ordinated by the Campaign Committee, while each party and Civil Society Organization took responsibility for their constituencies. Naturally, the major responsibility fell on the UNP. Tissa Attanayake who was involved at the beginning began to pull in a different direction and suddenly announced that he was supporting the MR candidacy.

At the outset, it came as a shock to those who did not follow the campaign closely. However to others, it came as relief. Maithripala Sirisena and Ranil Wickremesinghe were due to address a Press Conference a few hours after Tissa made his decision public.

A few minutes prior to that, Ranil Wickremesinghe walked into a room in the office of the Leader of the Opposition. Malik Samarawickreme, Kabir Hashim who was the Chairman and myself as the Treasurer of the party were in discussion on minimizing the impact of Tissa’s departure. Wickremesinghe was on his way to address the regular campaign press conference, when he asked “What shall we do?” Both Malik and I were of the view that a new General Secretary be appointed immediately so that the campaign could proceed uninterrupted. We suggested that Kabir should be the new General Secretary, even though Kabir appeared initially reluctant. Ranil sent a word from the Press Conference that he wanted us to join him.

A short while later he announced the departure of Tissa and that Kabir Hashim was the new General Secretary of the UNP. This was the fastest decision on a weighty matter that I had seen the UNP leader took and it proved to be the best decision too. Kabir with his management background gave leadership to organizing and energizing the party with the ‘Jana Jaya’ programme. The party was galvanized bottom up.

The UNP’s countrywide branch network was delivering leaflets, canvassing door-to-door and conducting tens of thousands of small propaganda meetings. It was the UNP’s branch and polling booth organization that protected the vote against malpractices. We owe it to the UNP’s die hard supporters. But most of all, it is Maithripala Sirisena who owes it to the UNP’s rank and file. He always gratefully acknowledges the fact.

The new President and the Prime Minister set priorities for the first 100 days, most of which were achieved. Amongst them were the reduction in presidential power through the 19th Amendment. This was something that had been unthinkable a few months before. In fact MR had made himself all powerful through abolishing the presidential term limit.

The 19A went further by de-politicizing the elections process, the Police Department, the public sector and other spheres. This was achieved through the appointment of a Constitutional Council which included members of the Civil Society and it was essentially a reform agenda. We had a new President but a minority government led by Ranil Wickremesinghe with about 60 MP’s in a Parliament of 225. The achievements in the first 100 days were significant given this context. Sri Lanka moved from international isolation to taking its due place on the world stage through skilful handling of its foreign policies by Sirisena, Wickremesinghe and Mangala Samaraweera.

The Parliamentary Election on August 17 gave the United National Front led by the UNP 107 seats. The UNF and the SLFP coalition gave the government an overwhelming majority. The reason for the two major parties coming together in government for a period of time could only be justified on the basis of a Reform Agenda. Democracy is best defended by a multi-party system.

So the experiment of the present coalition government will be justified on the basis of a resolution of the national question, a macro economic stabilization programme, reform of the educational system where an increasing percentage of GDP is invested in this sector while welcoming the participation of non-governmental players, and finally economic reform including labour markets, competition and land ownership. With a consensus on the resolution of the national question and the adoption of economic reforms, the investment that would be unleashed will no doubt multiply. The present FDI which is about US$ 1 billion per annum will grow 3 or 4 fold within a few years.

President Mahinda Rajapakse will be remembered for the leadership he gave in eradicating terrorism. His place in history is assured, but that legacy could be diminished by meddling in the on-going political battles. Similarly, President Sirisena will be remembered as the person who restored democracy and reconciled a nation. The unfinished work must be completed during his term. The challenge before the country now is for economic growth and inclusive development. Premier Ranil Wickremesinghe is laying the foundation for that future. It is everyone’s responsibility to keep faith as it is the beginning of a long journey.

– See more at: http://www.dailymirror.lk/102391/how-the-unp-came-to-adopt-maithripala-sirisena#sthash.oQLzzvWQ.dpuf

Sri Lanka’s ‘New Constitution’ to satisfy external parties while suppressing views of the majority

January 18th, 2016

Shenali D Waduge

 We need to put into context some key factors. When John Kerry openly admits to being proud of regime change in Sri Lanka, it is a clear indication that the January/August 2015 elections had all the hallmarks of foreign intervention. When UN Secretary General showers praises on the new government inspite of law & order visibly collapsing and the UNHRC is happy to wind up resolutions against Sri Lanka, it shows the US-India drafted resolutions were nothing but a farce. When every decision taken by the good governance government is laboriously trying to please those that funded their journey to power, it spells doom for all the ordinary people of Sri Lanka – Sinhalese, Tamils and Muslims in toto. To seal our fate is a new constitution most likely being drafted elsewhere using a ploy to turn parliament into one assembly making it a piece of cake to pass when all but a handful of MPs are ready to say ‘yes’ so long as they can enjoy perks and power and sell the country to the Indians/West!

 Moreover when the PM says that he is not willing to work with the previous junta he is with one statement slashing the views of some 5.8million voters or 48% of the voters in Sri Lanka. This is a large segment of views to omit from a new constitution !

We seriously need to wonder in whose interest the new constitution is being drafted.

 A constitution without freedom of expression

Where is the freedom of expression today? Is there media freedom? Are the views against the constitution equally balanced? Why is the pro-constitution endorsements not balanced with those trying to caution the govt and the people against it? Who owns the media outlets, how are they politically linked to those in power and how far have these content analysis displayed a targeted attack on all those trying to educate the masses on the simple fact that the new constitution is not meant to satisfy Sinhalese, Muslims and least of all the Tamils? Why are these views being suppressed? Is there anything ‘independent’ happening in the country. Where are the people who were screaming for justice and order now? How far has the judiciary itself been made independent? Not a single person is even questioning on what grounds intelligence officers of the country can be arrested under the PTA!

 What is exactly at stake?

Apart from losing the sovereignty of the country, our leaders are foolish not to realize that they are selling off the nation to the very countries that had been attempting to destabilize it for centuries. They must next wonder what their role will be thereafter and whether any of their mistakes can ever be reversed. All those who want to change the constitution must first put down what in the present constitution needs changing so that only what needs to change can be discussed/debated publicly by all before changing the entire constitution.

 India comes top on the list having funded, trained and armed terrorism. India’s role as state sponsor of terrorism has never been investigated nor have India’s killings in Sri Lanka during the IPKF where 3000 Tamil women were raped and innocent Tamils, Sinhalese and Muslims were killed. Moreover India were even training another militant force inside Sri Lanka.

 If India was able to change Sri Lanka’s constitution in 1987 after the Indo-Lanka Accord it makes the new constitution a walk in the park. Not a single government dared to revoke or dilute the powers of the provincial council system India introduced through the 13th amendment. Thereafter, India has been penetrating into every area of Sri Lanka – economically, politically, socially and with each year expanded its might. India has in its pockets the leaders of most politically parties in Sri Lanka of all the ethnic communities and are able to pull their strings whenever India wishes. These leaders are ready to dance to any tune India plays. The constitution changed according to how India wishes will be the icing on the cake and no different to how India has managed to influence and control fellow neighbours of India through tactics that puts to shame India’s expectation as a regional partner turning India into a regional bully and misfit amongst the Asian nations.

 Then we have the West and its predatory bag of goodies promising ‘democracy, human rights and freedom’. Democracy was promised to both Iraq and Libya now both nations are in a state of ruin and the West has taken over their oil and have managed to use Wahhabi Islam to get Muslims to kill Muslims while the West secures the Middle East and the same is being done in Africa. With the focus now on Asia, India has been co-opted to do the dirty work on behalf of the West, the Hindus obviously clueless about being used to destroy fellow Asian neighbours riding on a silly promise of a permanent seat in the UN Security Council.

 In the meanwhile the man who has funded many of America’s coloured revolutions using his organizations and local staff is given VVIP welcome alongside the international war criminal Blair who is not even welcome by the British Foreign Office! Now every day some foreign official or the other is arriving including those who had close links to the LTTE. If they are not interfering in our internal affairs why are they coming so frequently and why are they issuing statements on Sri Lanka. Britain says it is not interfering in the internal affairs but is trying to restructure our military. With the Sri Lankan Army being the only army to get rid of terrorists militarily if anyone should be doing the training it is the Sri Lankan Forces!

 It is players involved in the constitution making that has most Sri Lankans now worried which has had the PM jump to defend by claiming that Buddhism and the Unitary status will not change. However, at this juncture while we are battling to save Buddhism the Orthodox Christian Church is fighting to survive the Vatican onslaughts! Syria was once part of the Orthodox Christian Byzantine Empire. http://www.veteranstoday.com/2016/01/09/soros-and-the-gang/ Somehow all these manoeuvres have some distinct historical unfulfilled goal to them. While we are told what language to use and not use Cameron is telling Muslim women in UK that they must learn English to integrate. When the majority of people in Sri Lanka speak Sinhalese shouldn’t the rest of the populace learn Sinhala first?

 Nepal’s new constitution also involving the same meddlesome nations took nearly a decade to come into reality. Sri Lanka’s constitution is attempting to make the Guinness book of records by rushing it through as if running for a marathon. What is the hurry? The Sri Lankan people did not ask for it. So who exactly want it to be adopted and why? These are the burning questions that must be asked and answered. The President is likely to find out later than sooner that his presidential powers are to be clipped and handed over to his present PM who will become Executive PM with the same and more Presidential powers. If we know the players drafting the constitution it is most likely that the real version will not be seen by any of us no different to ceasefire agreement signed in 2002 the original version of which no one has seen yet.

 What the public of this country needs to now be alert to is the fact that our country’s constitution is being changed to create a new one that would give free hold to external forces to control and administer all of us as if we are their slaves and the present lot of betrayers most probably will be given their pocketful’s for the service rendered. Having neutralized all the protective layers of the country – the armed forces, the police, the honest public servants and introducing trade agreements that would facilitate the take over by external forces of our land and territory all of us will lose our sovereignty. It is now making sense the calls for IDPs (who did not even own land) to be given land in areas where the Indians/West are eyeing to create their hubs so that they can buy over these lands from the IDPs for tuppence on a 99 year lease.

 If our leaders are literate enough to read and the media is free and independent enough to highlight these dangers we are walking into the damage can be averted. However, with all sane comments omitted from public domain except personal circulation it is a one-horse race for the drafters of the new constitution.

The never ending British Conspiracies against Sri Lanka

January 18th, 2016

Dr Sudarh Gunasekara, President Mahanuwara Senior Citizens Momement

18.1.2016.

The age old British ‘pregnancy craving’ to own Sri Lanka as a permanent Colony of their own and the conspiracies to disintegrate and destabilize Sri Lanka and destroy this Sinhala Buddhist Nation is still not over.

Ever since the British took over this Island from the Dutch in 1796 their main objective was to create disunity among the Sinhala people, set them against the non Sinhala, specially the Tamils, and try to disintegrate the Lankan society on ethnic grounds. For this they used language, religion and even regional differences such as newly created Kandyan and Low country notions. Their first attempt was to create dissentions and disunity among the Sinhala people by dividing them in to two antagonistic groups as Cinglese and Kandyans. They called those who lived in the narrow coastal belt taken over from the Dutch, Cinglese and those who lived in the rest of the country including the hill country, that was called the Kandyan Kingdom by them, Kandyans (People living on the hills).  According to this notion KAndyans are not Sinhala people.Thus in 1803 Robert Percival a British soldier for the first time divided the Sinhala nation in to two groups as Cinglese (Sinhalese) and Kandyans..

This is how he differentiated the two groups. ‘ The Cinglese, who inhabit the low lands and parts contiguous to the coasts, live entirely under the dominion of whatever European nation has been able to acquire possession of that part of the Island. The subjection under which they have lived, while has effaced the feature of barborous independence has at the same time tended to humanize and soften their dispositions. The Cinglese are a quiet, inoffensive people; exceedingly grave, temperate and frugal. The milder virtues form the most prominent features of the Cinglese character. They are gentle, and charitable and friendly and have scarcely any of the false, treacherous and designing arts which are often found among the Candians. On examining the countenance and carriage of these two classes of Celonese it is easy to perceive the difference arising from the respective circumstances, in which they are placed. The countenance of the Kandian is erect, his looks haughty, his mind lofty, and his whole carriage marked by the pride of independence.. The humble yielding deportment of the Cinglese, on the other hand, with the patient or rather abject endurance which is painted in their faces, plainly denotes the dependent and helpless state of which they are reduced. The looks of the Cinglese even denote a degree of effeminacy and cowardice, which excites the contempt of the Candians.’

Percival was the first British on record who perceived the importance of owning this country as a British territory as way back in 1803 when he said ‘the attention and the enterprise of this country a new acquisition of the greatest importance both in a commercial and political point of view I am enabled to affirm that its retention in our hands must prove of the greatest benefit to our East India trade and our commerce in genera…. I was enabled to notice the many advantages to be derived from this valuable possession, so that it would not be given up at any future peace….. for it contains the only harbor on the Coromandel or Malabar coasts in which ships can moor in safety at all seasons of the year and even before it came in to our possession, its internal produce presented rich articles of commerce’. (An account of the Island of Ceylon Robert Percival 1803).

So it is not difficult to understand why British have been craving to possess this Island right from the beginning and why they persistently try to have a control even today over this country. In this backdrop possibly he would have perceived that the first thing they have to do is to divide the Sinhalese people who comprised the majority and may be why he divided them as Kandyans and low  country people leading to a long journey of divide and rule policy of communal politics in this country. Thus Percival may be called the father of ‘the Colonial divide and rule policy in this country.

British invaded the Kandyan Kingdom in 1803 and had to retreat in defeat but succeeded in 1815 under the able espionage of D’oyly who had netted almost all the monks and chieftains in the whole Kandyan Kingdom with his fluency in Sinhala and professional acumen.  Immediately after signing the Kandyan Convention Governor Brownwrigg issued a Royal Proclamation on Nov 21 1818 in the wake of the Uva Rebellion, violating the agreement between the two nations and almost suspended the Kandyan Convention and ruled the country by such Royal enactments thereafter.

In 1833 they divided the Island in to five Provinces as Northern, Western, Southern, Central and Eastern and unified the maritime belts with the Kandyan Kingdom. This is the first time the Island was divided more or less on ethnic basis marking a departure from the 2000 year old conventional geopolitical Tun Helaya or Tun Rata political divisions. Rajakariya was abolished in 1833, Village Councils were disband and maintenance of all irrigation works –the nerve system of local agriculture banned.Native system of temple based education system was replaced with Church based missionary and government school system which was heavily concentrated around Colombo and Jaffna. By 1845, out of a total of 103 English schools in the Island, 45 were located in Jaffna. This clearly shows the hidden agenda of British to elevate a Tamil elite class above the Sinhalese to take over the governance of the country.

In 1840 they began forcible acquisition of native land with the introduction of the Encroachment on Crown Lands Ordinance and took over lands belonging to people, Temples and Devalas. Within the Kandyan areas alone they took over more than 600,000 acres of land mainly belonging to Temples and Devalas, destroyed the prime forest cover on them and started Coffee plantations displacing thousands of native people.

In 1848, after the Matale Rebellion Governor Torrington appealed to the British Government to settle down South Indian Tamil in the Central hill country firstly, to counter the natives and secondly, to build up an Indian Tamil population right at the centre of the country to facilitate their ulterior motive of future divisive politics and destroying Sinhala identity of this country. With the Temple lands Ordinance Ordinance of 1853 they took over the Temple Lands thereby breaking the backbone of the nation, the Buddhist Temple. After the Coffee blight they introduced Tea and brought an army of South Indian labour and settled them all over the central hill country and created a Tamil enclave right at the centre of the country creating an eternal socio-political and economic headache to this nation. In 1897 whatever left was also taken under the Wasteland Ordinance impoverishing the native Sinhalese.

In 1915 when riots between Sinhala and Muslim people took place the then Government took the side of the Muslims and took actions against the Sinhala leaders. When they were compelled to leave the shores with emerging new world political situation they left in 1948 granting nominal independence leaving behind a legacy of over one million Indians on these plantations. They gave us a ‘made in England’ constitution that did not replace the name of the country taken over by them in 1815, that introduced the concept of the presence of many nation in this country with the creation of a political party called UNP which implied there were more than one nation in this country and that made special provisions in the constitution empowering minorities equal rights.  They also left behind their own legal and administrative systems trapping us in an alien system without allowing a new nation to be born.

Even after 67 years since that ‘fake Independence’ they still continue to interfere in our internal matters using political, diplomatic and trade leverage. The ‘pregnancy craving’ they had over this Island in the 18th century as expressed by Percival seems to be still there in their heads. Otherwise why all these big British guns are coming every day to this country. Why Cameron, Blair, Hugo Swire and even their Ambassador in Sri Lanka are so concerned about the Tamils in Sri Lanka. It is only two days ago Hugo Swire in Jaffna said that it was  his dream to see IDPs’ (Tamil) children returning to their original places. He said that it is now a reality in North. Sabapathy IDP camp. No wonder they behave like this when we have a bunch of backboneless and subservient leaders like the present.

My question is when are we going to assert as a free and independent nation and who will take us to that final goal? Why can’t our leaders put a stop to this nuisance and sue the British for all damages they have done to us from 1796 onwards up to date.

JOINT OPPOSITION ALLIANCE –  NOW OR NEVER

January 18th, 2016

By M D P DISSANAYAKE

The   members of SLFP are concerned about losing their seats in the Parliament if they shift to a new political alliance of the opposition.  This fear is clearly the main reason for the delay in the  formation of a new Alliance. The President Mahinda Rajapakse was intentionally mislead   again by President Sirisena  when MR was indirectly coerced in  forming his own political machine prior to the General Election in August 2015 at a time MR  was not a sitting member of the parliament.  This was the first major setback for MR camp since losing power.  John F Kennedy said: “Forgive your enemies, but never forget their names.

The SLFP members of parliament, who are currently supportive of the Pro-MR camp have been clearly identified.  Yet, as a test case, the SLFP members of parliament who voted against the Budget in 2015 were Rohitha Abeygunawardana, Mahinda Yapa Abeywardena, Dallas Alahapperuma and  Mahindananda Aluthgamage.  All other SLFP group of members of parliament who were in the MR camp, abstained from voting or did not attend.  So far the four members who voted against the budget, have not been replaced by the next in line in the order of preferential votes gained by the party. In reality, well over 40 SLFP members were in MR camp at that time and now on the hindsight it may be argued that the entire block of those 40 SLFP members should have voted against the budget, with the MPs of the parties of MEP, NFF, PHU,  etc.     This was the second set back for MR camp for missing out on another  golden opportunity. Winston Churchill said: ” A pessimist sees the difficulty in every opportunity; an optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.” 
The dangers of exposing SLFP members are understood.  As an alternative, MEP, NFF, PHU,  etc can forge an alliance without any further delay.  The habit of making announcements through a temple at the Narahenpita will not create an awareness of the Joint Opposition.

The next best opportunity available is to form the Alliance immediately, without waiting for local government elections.   The nation need to be educated by the opposition from village to village, explaining the dangers of the policies of the government.  New leaders must be found from the grass root levels, set up branches, district committees to take the message in a robust manner.

Now there are indications of a series of planned meetings between  President Maithreepala Sirisena and President Mahinda Rajapakse.  President Sirisena is upholding what Abraham Lincoln said: ” I destroy my enemies when I make them my friends.”

The Joint Opposition has so far failed to provide a forum for the general public to provide hope and future.  The public  is fully aware that MR and GR  will come to their salvation, their absence from active participation from the Joint Opposition campaigns will not be a deterrent.  The general public is always intelligent, but they need a clear vision and an action plan from those who are planning to succeed.

“Effective leadership is not about making speeches or being liked; leadership is defined by results not attributes”.  Management Guru Prof. Peter Drucker

jathika nedahas peramune – press – 2016.01.17 (ජාතික නිදහස් පෙරමුණේ මාධ්‍ය හමුව – 2016.01.17)

January 18th, 2016

* ත්‍රස්තවාදය වැළැක්වීමේ පනත ඉදිරි මාස කිහිපය තුළ අහෝසි කරන්නයි සූදානම
* ‘යන යකා කොරහත් බිදගෙන යනවා‘ වගේදැන් මේ ආණ්ඩුව මහා සංඝරත්නය භේද කිරීමටත් අත ගහලා
* පළාත් පාලන මැතිවරණය වහාම පවත්වන්න. නව පෙරමුණක් යටතේ තරග වදින්න අපි සූදානම්
* ගැටුමක් නිර්මාණය කරලා ලේ වැකි මර්දනයකට ආණ්ඩුව සූදානම් වෙනවා

I am a war criminal

January 18th, 2016

by Fr J.C. Pieris Courtesy The Island

Samantha Power, Soros, Blair and others like them have come and gone and will come again. World powers have begun to show a great interest in our country, especially about our political issues more than about our economic issues. We must be wary when great powers show such concern for it is a dangerous and a warning sign. “Beware of Greeks bearing gifts.” Vergil (Aeneid) If the UNHRC and the international community say that war crimes have been committed in Sri Lanka; I firmly declare to the judicial instrument, whatever its pedigree, ‘hybrid’ or not, that is going to inquire in to the role of the GOSL armed forces in the defeat of the LTTE terrorists and their separatist agenda, that I am a war criminal. I am neither a soldier nor a politician I am a civilian but I am a war criminal. I shall prove that I am so with a quotation from the famous historian Arnold Toynbee.

article_image

“Every participant in an institution has some degree of personal responsibility for the acts committed in his name by the persons who are in control of that institution. If the electorate in the United States were to set up a war tribunal for trying American war criminals in the Vietnam War, I think the prosecution should not be limited to presidents, commanders in chief, and civilian and military subordinates. The American electorate ought to indict the whole of itself, since the electorate bears the ultimate responsibility in a state that has a democratic constitution.” (Choose Life, A dialogue between Toynbee and Ikeda, OUP 1989, page 190)

Of course the American public, the American electorate did not indict itself of the horrible crimes against humanity (My Lai) or of unforgiveable crimes of ecocide committed in Vietnam. (Agent Orange defoliation of whole jungles and hundreds and thousands of acres of forest cover.) More recently in the destruction of Iraq and the killing of Saddam Hussein both Bush and Blair pontificated that there were WMDs (Weapons of Mass Destruction) and acted on those false premises to wage an unjust, ugly war in Iraq. Neither the British electorate nor the American electorate indicted themselves of crimes against humanity. At least they should have taken the responsibility for the totally misleading black lies (WMDs) of the combo of their leaders. The present tragic and bloody chaos in the Levant and terrorism and refugee influx in to Europe, are the direct consequences of the destruction of Saddam by the Anglo-American invasion of Iraq. The Chilcot report on the Iraq war was suppressed, shelved and forgotten for, very probably, it clearly accused the two countries of war crimes. Every Brit and American is a war criminal according to Toynbee. It is good to remember what S.P. Huntington said about the West: “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion (to which few members of other civilizations were converted) but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.” – ‘The clash of civilizations’ page 51. Ergo, as far as UK and USA are concerned the UNHRC plays the monkey game of no see, no hear, no talk.

By the year 2005 we, the peaceful citizens of Sri Lanka, have had enough of the indiscriminate, barbaric, massacres of the LTTE. They were a Satanic, mindless, heartless, horde of zombies who without batting their eyelids bombed, shot, cut, butchered and slaughtered infants, children, women and old men. The world remains shocked by the ISIS terrorist attack in Paris on the 13/11/15 which left over 130 dead and hundreds of others wounded. That sort of thing was our weekly routine experience in Sri Lanka those days and the world did not even notice. I shall list some of the bloody heroics of the LTTE with bombs, guns and machetes.

In Colombo alone: 01. 21/04/1987: Central bus stand bomb, Pettah: 120 civilians of all races, 1 soldier and 2 constables killed and 298 wounded. 02. 09/11/1987: Bomb opposite Maradana railway station: 23 civilians of all races killed and 106 wounded. 03. 13/07/1989: Buller’s Road shooting and killing of Amirthalingam, Yogeswaran and wounding Sivasithamparam. 04. 11/05/1990: Gregory’s Road shooting of Sam Thambimuttu and wife. 05. 01/03/1991: Havelock Road bombing; Ranjan Wijeratne, 19 civilians killed and 56 wounded. 06. 01/05/1993: Armour Street bombing of President Premadasa, 23 civilians killed and 52 injured. 07. 07/08/1995: Maharagama bomb; 08 civilians killed and 23 injured. 08. 23/10/1994: Thotalanga bomb; Gamini Dissanayake, 4 MPs and 51 civilians killed and 40 injured. 09. 07/08/1995: Colombo 7 bomb opposite Chief Minister’s office killing 21 civilians and injuring 44. 10. 31/01/1996: Central Bank bomb killing 86 civilians and injuring 1338. 11. 24/07/1996: Dehiwala railway station bomb killing 63 civilians and injuring 366.

12. 12. 15/10/1997: Hotel Galadari bombing and shooting killing 13 civilians and wounding 94 including 33 foreigners. 13. 05/03/1998: Maradana Junction bombing killing 38 civilians including 2 constables and wounding 270. 14. 29/07/1999: Kynsey Road bombing and killing of Neelan Thiruchelvam, driver and body guard. 15. 20/12/1999: Town Hall bomb killing 33 civilians and injuring 110 including Chandrika Kumaratunga. 16. 07/06/2000: Ratmalana Golumadama Junction bombing and killing CV Gunaratne, wife and 33 others and injuring 30. In Kandy the heart rending bombing of the temple of the sacred Tooth Relic killing the early morning worshippers. In Anuradhapura district 12 such incidents including the killing of the pious devotees at the Sri Maha Bodhi. In the Polonnaruwa district 14. In the Moneragala district 4. In the Puttalam district 3. In the Northern Province 16. In the Trincomalee district 25. In the Ampara district 23. In the Batticaloa district 15. In India 3.

– “The Wages of Sin”, S.L. Gunasekara, pg 20 ff.

The man in the street lived utterly terrorized and dejected. Parents commuting to work never took the same bus or got in to the same compartment of the train. They travelled separately so that their children may not lose both their mother and father. In every home there was uneasiness and tension till all who went to work or on other business returned home safe in the evening. What fright the country endured! What tragic times they were! It was in that desperate context that the presidential election of 2005 came around. MR and the alliance canvassed under the Betel Leaf for the ending of the war and the elimination of the LTTE. That was what the country desperately needed and what the country had hoped for. RW and the UNP were dilly dallying with the LTTE and did not show any signs of the ability to finish the war. How can they when they did not know the geographical difference between Pamankada and Alimankada, Medawachchiya and Kilinochchiya? I had voted for MR not so much because I trusted him to deliver but because of the JVP and the JHU which I was certain would somehow get the job done. In the year 2009 the job was done, the LTTE was totally eliminated and the war came to a definite halt. In 2010 I voted for the Swan but that is not relevant to this topic.

We never secretly trained and armed rebels and terrorists of other countries as many of our powerful neighbours did. We never interfered in the internal affairs of other countries trying to destabilize them as the powerful countries of the world are constantly doing. We never were bullies. We never invaded or bombed another sovereign country. We only defended ourselves in our own country from the cruelest and vilest terrorist outfit in the world. Self defense has no rules. It was a matter of life or death. We had to safeguard the unitary status of the country which is the sine qua non for the territorial integrity and the sovereignty of our small, island nation. It was all out war but not between two legally constituted conventional armies. One was a terrorist organization that did not recognize or honour any international rule of war.

The peace talks in Thimpu, Phuket and all over the world came to naught. The LTTE talked while getting everything ready for the next massacre. The LTTE was totally unreliable and their barbaric trickery was notorious. The Sri Lanka armed forces had no option but to play the game, often one hand tied behind the back by the international rules of war and the pressure brought on by the self interest of powerful countries. Yet, the SL armed forces fought with superb strategy, intelligence and bravery ultimately winning the war that the international pundits said was unwinnable. Not only the president and the GOSL but the whole country, Sinhala, Muslim and even many Tamils, stood by the armed forces. Toynbee is right: Sri Lanka being a democratic country, we shared the responsibility for the war and whatever consequences that followed.

The Paranagama report says, “The LTTE was principally responsible for the loss of civilian life during the final phase of the armed conflict through their actions which included taking 300,000 to 330,000 civilian hostage, implementing a strategy of killing Tamil civilians to suit their military aims, using civilians as a strategic human buffer leading to considerable loss of civilian life, using hostages to dig trenches and build fortifications thereby exposing them to harm, sacrificing countless civilian hostages to keep the LTTE leadership in power, arming hostages and forcing them into the front line leading to the deaths of large numbers, forcing a great number of children to man the frontlines; deliberately preventing civilians, under their effective control, from fleeting to areas away from the fighting and executing civilian hostages for attempting to escape their captivity; shelling civilian hostages in order that the LTTE might assign those deaths to the SLA for media purposes to provoke international humanitarian intervention; placing their heavy weaponry amid civilians making it inevitable that there would be civilian casualties; killing civilians through the use of suicide bombers; placing mines and other explosive devices that resulted in civilian deaths; causing the deaths of civilians who drowned in an attempt to flee their LTTE captors; and adopting a practice whereby a significant number of its cadres fought in civilian clothes, thus blurring the distinction between combatants and civilians inevitably leading to civilian deaths.”….”Commission is of the view that the principal reason for the loss of civilian life during the final phase of the war was the hostage taking and use of human shields by the LTTE.”

The Paranagama report does not fully exonerate the SL armed forces. For, it was not a ping pong match and there is no gentlemen’s war. War is always ugly, dirty, tragic and unfair. If people are not aware of that cruel truth after two world wars, Auschwitz and Treblinka, Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Vietnam, Iraq, Libya and now Syria, either they are idiots or they are insane. The recent statement of the TNA leadership which has replaced the LTTE as the representatives of the Tamil people in the negotiation process shows that they have accepted that truth: “We also accept and undertake to carry out our responsibility to lead the Tamil people in reflecting on the past, and use this moment as a moment of introspection into our own community’s failures and the unspeakable crimes committed in our name, so as to create an enabling culture and atmosphere in which we could live with dignity and self-respect, as equal citizens of Sri Lanka.”

The Tamil leadership certainly should take the responsibility for the civil war and the destruction it caused as Neville Ladduawahetti explains clearly in an article in The Island on the 04/12/15. “The compulsion for the Tamil community to be separate and distinct from the rest of the Sri Lankans goes way back beyond Vaddukoddai. However, it was only at Vaddukoddais in 1976 that they articulated it as a resolution to establish a separate state based on the right of self-determination. It was this resolution that called “upon the Tamil Nation in general and the Tamil youth in particular to come forward to throw themselves fully into the sacred fight for freedom and to flinch not till the goal of a sovereign state of TAMIL EELAM is reached”. Therefore, the Tamil leadership that initiated the call “to flinch not till the goal of a sovereign state…was reached”, should take full responsibility for the death and destruction they unleashed on the whole nation, and in particular on their own community.”

The “unspeakable crimes” were committed not only against the innocent civilians belonging to all communities especially the Sinhala community but also against their own community destroying almost a generation of Tamil children by sending them to the front lines with guns. So says S.P. Huntington in his book ‘The clash of civilizations’ page 259: “…and the Tamil Tigers, it was reported, were “unique in their reliance on what amounts to a children’s army”, recruiting “boys and girls as young as eleven”, with those killed in fighting “not yet teenagers when they died, only a few older than eighteen.” The Tigers, The Economist observed, were waging an “under-age war”. Some LTTE ideologues dare talk about victimhood and martyrdom. The innocent children were certainly victims of the brutal LTTE but they were not martyred, they were simply tricked in to or forced in to being cannon fodder.

With positive and conciliatory attitudes shown by both sides we can handle our own process of post war mutual forgiveness and the journey towards justice, collaboration, development and peace. All of us, Sinhala, Tamil, Muslim, Malay and Burgher communities, we shall always protect and be proud of our beloved nation; the sovereign, independent, unitary state of Sri Lanka. We do not need any interference and guidance from outside. I wish to remind the countries that habitually poke their noses in to the garbage bins of other countries and accuse them of violating human rights and committing war crimes, the words of Jesus to the hypocrites who accused a poor woman of committing adultery. “Let the one without sin cast the first stone.” The Jews of those days had the grace to feel ashamed and left the woman alone. But those who goad the UNHRC to punish us don’t have that grace; they are those who felt humiliated by the defeat of the Tigers who were their agents, their pets, their cats’ paws; they still want to run the world on the ancient Imperial Roman strategy of ‘divide and rule’. They are the war-mongers, arms merchants and rapacious exploiters of the non renewable resources of the Earth. They have blood on their hands and insatiable greed in their evil hearts. UNHRC or International Community or whoever you are – leave us alone.

 

Concluded

A new constitution for Sri Lanka; a misplaced priority

January 18th, 2016

By Raj Gonsalkorale Asian Tribune

Sri Lanka seems destined to engage in yet another mix up of priorities. Since independence in 1948, the country has been grappling with constitutions or major changes to administrative regulations and not economic priorities. The result has been that a country that was more economically advanced at one time than subsequent Tiger economies like Singapore and Malaysia, has sled back to where it was decades ago.

Sri Lanka could refer to two periods when an economic resurgence gave hope to a brighter future for its current and future generations. That was the liberalization of the economy and the initiation of giant projects like the Mahaveli development project in 1977 under President J R Jayewardene, and in 2009/10, soon after the defeat of the LTTE during the Presidency of Mahinda Rajapakse. The economic boom spearheaded by a hitherto unseen infrastructure development including the development and revamping of irrigation and power, raised Sri Lanka to a lower middle income status increasing the per capita income to more that USD 2700.

The discussion and debate that will ensue about a new constitution for Sri Lanka is by itself not a bad thing. The point is that this appears to be the only discussion and debate that is being promoted by the current regime, and being done at the cost of having no discussion or debate on the economy of the country.

Since the defeat of President Rajapakse, the economy of the country has been at a standstill and running on fuel pumped to the country’s economic engine during the previous regime. One does not have to guess the plight of the country if no new fuel is pumped into its economic engine.

Sri Lanka is back in the hands of those who are good at missing the woods for the trees. It is back in the hands of a select few who are good at engaging in esoteric theories and academic arguments about the rights of individuals and democratic governance. They forget that the future of a country lies in economic development and they forget Bill Clinton’s famous campaign one liner, “it’s the economy stupid!”, that he used effectively to oust George W Bush who had neglected the country’s economy.

The discussion and debate that will ensue about a new constitution for Sri Lanka is by itself not a bad thing. The point that is missing is that this appears to be the only discussion and debate that is being promoted by the current regime, and being done at the cost of having no discussion or debate on the economy of the country.

A skeptic cannot be blamed if one were to say that the reason for this is that the regime has no idea or plan for economic development of the country, and it is engaging in an esoteric, academic exercise in order to cover its nakedness in regard to the void that is evident to its own supporters about the absence of any immediate, medium and long term plans for the economic development of the country.

Sri Lanka is primarily a rural based country and a majority of its people is rural based. If it were to push its economy forward, it is the rural economy that must take the lead in elevating the living standards of its people. Urban centric development will enrich a few and will have a marginal trickledown effect to the periphery and it will not lift the economy of the rural sector.

The previous regime very rightly focused on infrastructure, particularly to repair its degradation after three decades of terrorism and war, and to introduce new roads, bridges, railways, schemes for power generation, water supply and irrigation amongst other initiatives. Its education policy of introducing 1000 specialized teaching facilities in central schools was a commendable initiative, sadly, scuttled by the new regime.

Unfortunately for the country, the previous regime’s own follies coupled with a massive western nation led international intervention ousted it from office, and with it, derailed the economic resurgence witnessed since the end of the war. As it happens when Western nations openly or covertly plan and cause regime changes, they do not include plans post regime change management for the new regimes. Perhaps this is deliberate as the plotters could continue their interference in the internal affairs of the country in the guise of “assisting” them to recover from the “damage” done by the regime they helped to oust.

Sri Lanka could do with administrative devolution in order to provide better services for its people at all levels, in particular to the rural sector. It does not need more politicians as it is their interference that has impacted negatively on the provision of services. It is the administrative structure that needs to be strengthened and the administrators that need to be given the freedom to carry out their duties within policy guidelines determined by the people themselves through their representatives.

Whereas Sri Lankans should be discussing its economic future including the future of its Tea, Rubber and Coconut industry in the next few decades, the future of its overseas worker remittances that keeps the Nation afloat, its industrial policy, its agricultural policy, its irrigation and water management policy, its urban and rural development policy, its health policy, its education policy, its gender policy, all of which are national priorities, the discussion today is about a new constitution, devolution, more politicians, and of course the Rajapaksa’s and their supporters and what to do with them.

It is hoped that the combined Opposition would highlight this mixing of priorities and pressure the new regime to focus on what matters most to Sri Lankans, its economy. This is the discussion that should be exoteric and broad based and should involve all sectors of the country’s economy.

In regard to esoteric discussion on a new constitution, the key elements of political devolution is understood to provide defined geographic units the power to legislate (confined to defined subjects), including in areas of Policing, land management, ability to raise funds (both from taxes as well as from external sources), independent of the national government, for economic activities within the defined geographic area. No doubt there are other features included in political devolution.

Political devolution was essentially driven by the ethnic conflict and it had little or nothing to do with a demand for it from other sources, meaning, there was no demand for it from other communities except the Tamil community, and that too from the Tamil community of the North and the East. Primarily, it was linked to geography and the historical homeland claim of the Northern and Eastern region of the country.

The “need” for political devolution therefore was based on the traditional homeland concept. One could say with some justification that the regular insecurities and inequalities that the Tamil community (the Tamils of recent Indian origin have always been excluded by the more traditional Sri Lankan Tamils from any discussion on their rights, insecurity and gross inequalities) had to face, strengthened the case for some form of self-determination for the traditional Tamils (as distinct to Tamils of more recent Indian origin) within a geographical area.

What was really demanded, initially peacefully, and then with violent means, was asymmetrical political devolution, which concept, due to its non-acceptance by the majority Sinhala community, was broad-based to grant a degree of political devolution throughout the country. The 13th Amendment was not based on need (except by the Northern an Eastern Tamil community) but on the political and security realities in the country at the time.

While the predicaments faced by the Tamil community in a Sinhala dominated political landscape is acknowledged and understood, it is unlikely that political devolution as envisaged will be a solution to the ethnic conflict. It will exacerbate the divisions between the communities and within communities as citizens living a few feet away from each other in two provinces could potentially have different internal laws and regulations to contend with if provinces are given the right to legislate.

The issue of the rights of Tamils living outside the North and the East, where today, due to whatever reason, more Tamils (including Tamils of recent Indian origin) live, has never been addressed. The fact that a majority of Tamils in the country will continue to be minorities in the areas where they live and political devolution would not have given them more rights and more equality in Sinhala dominated areas has been conveniently ignored. In this context, the fact that there will be some Tamils who enjoy more rights than other Tamils has not been addressed by the Tamil political leadership.

Rather than creating further divisions, Sri Lanka should actively move towards the creation of a national identity through central power sharing using a bicameral legislature (Parliament and a Senate with greater provincial representation, and even veto powers granted to the Senate on legislation that, for example, has the potential to discriminate, create inequalities based on ethnicity or religion) strong and independent commissions, a constitutional Council and an executive with defined powers. The executive should also include two Vice Presidents, one from the Tamil community and one from the Muslim community.

Provincial administrations should be granted powers to administrate within national policy guidelines formulated by the bi cameral legislature and approved by the Constitutional Council.

Granting Police powers may be looked at as an administrative issue where a provincial police carries out their duties within national guidelines. Land powers may be similarly devolved as a shared responsibility within national guidelines. Fund raising could also be considered within national guidelines. Provincial councils basically should not have legislative powers, and their focus should be administration rather than legislation.

A solution that has the potential to further divide a divided Nation will not be a solution. It will only be the beginning of another problem. Rather than giving priority to developing a new constitution, the new regime could have united all people and all parties behind a long term economic development plan for the country. It is a relevant argument that democracy and political governance matters little to those who have no means of income, no job, no roof over their heads and those who are perpetually on empty stomachs. Sri Lankan poverty levels have dropped considerably over the past few years, but there are many very poor people in Sri Lanka if one only cares to look around the country.

– Asian Tribune –

 

Constitution in a hurry

January 18th, 2016

Courtesy The Nation

Debate on constitution is in public domain again. Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe has presented a resolution in parliament to set up a Constitutional Assembly of all members for enacting a new constitution for Sri Lanka.

Constitution is the supreme law of a country from which all other laws derive their authority. Therefore drafting of such a document has to be done with utmost care and patience as it needs the tacit approval of all the people.

As the foundation of all laws and the state itself, it needs to be a document that reflects some general consensus among the people of a country. In other words, it has to be a consensus document on how the country is to be governed.

Reaching consensus in a country is a difficult task and it becomes more difficult when it has to be done in a multi-racial, multi-linguistic and multi-religious environment.

The other point that needs to be remembered is that constitutions are made for a long period. The national and international experience is that when such documents are drafted and enacted with the approbation of the people they tend to last long.

However, no constitution is permanent. A country has to undergo changes from time to time and reflecting such changes its constitution also has to undergo changes. Nevertheless, a long lasting constitution is necessary for the stability and unity of a country.

If we look at our own history, it is clear that none of our constitutions have been in operation for long. Independent Ceylon’s first constitution popularly known as the Soulbury Constitution which came into operation in 1948 was more or less a consensus document. It was drafted following consultations with people of all walks of life for several years.

After 25 years of its existence, in 1972 we replaced it with our first republican constitution following the desire of our people to become a fully independent and sovereign republic moving away from the Dominion status granted by the British. For whatever reasons, it was passed by the Constituent Assembly without the participation of the Tamil community.

The first republican constitution lasted only for six years and the second republican constitution which was introduced by the J R Jayewardene government in 1978 has been in operation for thirty seven years. Now, there is general consensus among all political parties that there is a need for a new constitution. Thus, Sri Lanka is going to have its fourth constitution in relatively a short period of sixty six years.

On the contrary, the constitution of the United States has survived for the last two hundred and twenty five years while our neighbouring India’s first republican constitution promulgated in 1950 has lasted to date. These constitutions have received approbation of the people and nobody talks about introducing new constitutions in these countries.

All this makes one thing clear, that is that a constitution need not be promulgated in a hurry. If a new constitution is to receive the approbation of people, its provisions should be drafted after extensive debate and discussion in the country. A rigid time frame of six months or one year should not be a barrier to come up with the proper document. Drafting and adopting the right constitution is vital even if it is going to take a longer period.

Cabinet Door Closed

January 18th, 2016

Courtesy The Nation

Though over 20 SLFP MPs in the Joint Opposition in parliament have had discussions with the top rung in the Maithri-Ranil Government to cross over and support the government, President Maithripala Sirisena and Premier Ranil Wickremesinghe had told them that the numbers in the Cabinet of Ministers would not be expanded at any cost as it violates the 19th amendment, highly placed government sources told Nation.

The two leaders had conveyed to these MPs that a few vacancies exists in the ranks of deputy ministers and state ministers and they could be considered to fill such vacancies in the event they crossed over.

Nations learns that Premier Wickremesinghe had pointed out that more than half of the number of Joint Opposition (SLFP) MPs willing to cross over had voted against the provision to expand the number of cabinet ministers from 30 to 53 under the 19th amendment.

It is further leant that the President who had agreed with the views of the Premier had stated that such MPs cannot vie or aspire for cabinet portfolios having opposed the policy of the government to expand the number to 53 in the Unity Government.

The President had further stated that his government explained the reasons to expand the numbers in the cabinet as he led a Government of Unity comprising both major parties but his own SLFP MPs in the Joint Opposition opposed it.

Latest reports stated that four Joint Opposition SLFP MPs who were cabinet ministers in the Rajapaksa administration have had further talks with senior ministers of the SLFP and UNP and had expressed their willingness to cross over and accept deputy and state ministerial portfolios. ‘However, the President and the Premier have not taken a decision as yet on that development’, sources added.

Meanwhile, Nation learns that a shuffle of subjects under present ministries is on the  cards as the President and the Premier have decided to postpone a reshuffle in the Cabinet.

Sources said a special meeting with the cabinet ministers chaired by the President and Premier is to be held before end July to advise ministers to carry out the instructions of the duo as changes to  top positions in government departments, corporations and institutions are expected to be effected shortly to meet development goals.

They added that all ministers would be told to uphold collective cabinet responsibility to avoid embarrassment to the government and abide by decisions taken at cabinet level.

රුපුසෙන් බිද ජය දද නැංවූ ගෝඨා දේශද්‍රෝහීන් පළවා හැරීමට නව සංධානයේ නායකත්වයට!

January 18th, 2016

උපුටා ගැන්ම හෙළබිම සිංහල පුවත්

ශ්‍රී ලංකා නිදහස් පක්ෂයේ මන්ත්‍රීවරුන් කොටසක්, ජාතික නිදහස් පෙරමුණ, පිවිතුරු හෙළ උරුමය, ප්‍රජාතන්ත්‍රවාදී වාමාංශික පෙරමුණ, ලංකා සමසමාජ පක්ෂය, ශ්‍රී ලංකා කොමියුනිස්ට් පක්ෂය ඇතුළු ඒකාබද්ධ විපක්ෂය නියෝජනය කරන දේශපාලන පක්ෂ එක්ව නිර්මාණය කිරීමට සැරසෙන ‘‘නව ශ්‍රී ලංකා නිදහස් පෙරමුණ’’ යන නම් නව දේශපාලන බලවේගයට නායකත්වය ලබාදීම සදහා හිටපු ජනපති මහින්ද රාජපක්ෂ මහතා ඉදිරිපත් නොවී හිටපු ආරක්ෂක ලේකම් ගෝඨාභය රාජපක්ෂ මහතාට පැවරීමට බොහෝදුරට ඉඩ අැතිබවට දේශපාලන අභ්‍යන්තර අාරංචි මාර්ග සදහන් කරයි.

 හිටපු ජනපති මහින්ද රාජපක්ෂ මහතාට වඩා වැඩි ජනතා අාකර්ෂණයක් හිමිව අැති නමුත් ශ්‍රී ලංකා නිදහස් පක්ෂය දෙකඩ කළ බවට විරුද්ධවාදීන් සිදුකරන චෝදනා හමුවේ ඔහු ව්‍යාපාරය යටින් මෙහෙයවීමට බොහෝදුරට ඉඩ අැති බව විචාරකයන් පවසයි.

30 අවුරුදු ත්‍රස්තවාදී ශාපය ඉවත්කිරීමට නායකත්වය දුන්නාසේම මේ මොහොතේ රට හොබවන පරගැති දේශද්‍රෝහී අාණ්ඩුව පෙරළාදමා ජාතිකවාදී අාණ්ඩුවක් බිහිකිරීමට නායකත්වය දීමට ගෝඨාභය රාජපක්ෂ මහතාට හැකිවනු අැතිබව ඒ්කාබද්ධ විපක්ෂයේ ප්‍රකාශකයෙක් විස්වාසය පළකළේය.

ශ්‍රී ලංකා හමුදාව පාවාදුන් “ජුදාස්‌” ට  විදේශ රටක ඉහළ ධුරයක්‌

January 18th, 2016

කීර්ති වර්ණකුලසූරිය උපුටා ගැන්ම දිවයින

මෙන්න හිටපු මේජර් ජෙනරාල්ගේ පාවාදීම ගැන සාක්කි

ලොව වෙනත් රටවල් නම් එවැනි හමුදා නිලධාරීන්ට රාජද්‍රෝහීත්වය මත නඩු පැවරේ. එහෙත් මෙරට එවැන්නක්‌ සිදු වී නැත. මෙම හිටපු හමුදා මේජර් ජෙනරාල්වරයා ඇමරිකානු රාජ්‍ය දෙපාර්තමේන්තුව හමුවේ සාක්‌කි දී දේශපාලන රැකවරණ පතා තිබුණි. ඔහුගේ දිවුරුම් ප්‍රකාශය නිසා ශ්‍රී ලංකාවට එරෙහිව ජිනීවා මානව හිමිකම් කවුන්සිලය වෙත යෝජනාවක්‌ ගෙන ඒමට ඇමරිකාවට හැකි විය.

ශ්‍රී ලංකා හමුදාව යුද අපරාධ සිදුකළ බවට ඇමරිකානු රාජ්‍ය දෙපාර්තමේන්තුව හමුවේ දිවුරුම් ප්‍රකාශයක්‌ දුන්නේ මෙරට මේජර් ජෙනරාල්වරයෙකි. යුද අපරාධ සියෑසින් දුටු බව ඔහු පවසා නැතත් ඇමරිකානු රාජ්‍ය දෙපාර්තමේන්තුව හමුවේ පැවසූවේ සිවිල් වැසියන්ව හමුදාව මරා දැමූ බවයි. විනය හේතූන් මත මොහුගේ සේවය නතර වූවත් පසුගිය වසරේදී ඔහු දේශපාලන පළිගැනීමකට ලක්‌ වී ඇති බව කියමින් යළිත් සිය ධුරය ලබා ගත්තේය.

යුද හමුදාවේ ඉහළ පෙලේ නිලධාරීන් අතර මොහු “ජුදාස්‌” නමින් ප්‍රසිද්ධියට පත්ව සිටියේය. වන්නි මෙහෙයුම යටතේ තමාට ඕනෑම රහස්‍ය නියෝගයක්‌ ලබා ගැනීමේ බලතල තිබූ බව දක්‌වමින් ඇමරිකානුවන් රැවටූ මේ මේජර් ජෙනරාල්වරයා කොටි හමුදා නායකයන් ඝාතනය කරන ලෙස නිල නොවන අයුරින් නියෝගයක්‌ නිකුත් වූ බව තමාට වාර්තා වූ බව ඇමරිකානුවන් හමුවේ කියා සිටියේය.

මේ “ජුදාස්‌” ගැන තොරතුරු හෙළිවෙත්ම ඔහු යුද හමුදා සේවයෙන් විශ්‍රාම ගියේය. ඉන් පසු ඔහු සිය වාසගම වෙනස්‌ කළේය. අද ඔහු විදේශ රටක ශ්‍රී ලංකා තානාපති කාර්යාලයේ ඉහළම ධුරයකට පත් වී සිටී.

මේ නිසා මෙම නිලධාරියාගේ පාවාදීම ගැන තොරතුරු දන්නා හමුදාවේ නිලධාරීන් මවිතයට පත් වී ඇත. මෙම පසුබිම මැද රාජ්‍ය රහස්‌ පනත උල්ලංඝණය කළ මොහුට එම පනතට එරෙහිවීම ගැන නඩු පැවරුනේ නැත. සිය අතීතය වසන් කර ගැනීම සඳහා මේ හිටපු මේජර් ජෙනරාල්වරයා සිය පැරණි වෙස්‌ මුහුණ වෙනුවට අලුත් වෙස්‌ මුහුණක්‌ දාගත්තේය. එහෙත් ඔහු ශ්‍රී ලංකා හමුදාව විදේශිකයන්ට පාවාදීම යටපත් කළ හැකිද?

වන්නි මෙහෙයුමේ අවසාන සතියේ සිදු වූ බව කියන යුද අපරාධ පිළිබඳ විමර්ශනය සඳහා ශ්‍රී ලංකා රජය දේශීය යාන්ත්‍රණයක්‌ ආරම්භ කිරීමට තීරණය කර තිබියදී ශ්‍රී ලංකා හමුදාව පාවාදුන් හිටපු මේජර්ජෙනරාල්වරයාට ඉහළ ධුරයක්‌ ලැබීම අනුමත කළ හැකිද?

ලොව වෙනත් රටවල් නම් එවැනි හමුදා නිලධාරීන්ට රාජද්‍රෝහීත්වය මත නඩු පැවරේ. එහෙත් මෙරට එවැන්නක්‌ සිදු වී නැත.

මෙම හිටපු හමුදා මේජර් ජෙනරාල්වරයා ඇමරිකානු රාජ්‍ය දෙපාර්තමේන්තුව හමුවේ සාක්‌කි දී දේශපාලන රැකවරණ පතා තිබුණි. ඔහුගේ දිවුරුම් ප්‍රකාශය නිසා ශ්‍රී ලංකාවට එරෙහිව ජිනීවා මානව හිමිකම් කවුන්සිලය වෙත යෝජනාවක්‌ ගෙන ඒමට ඇමරිකාවට හැකි විය.

පසුගිය දිනෙක ඔහු වෙබ් අඩවියක තමා පිළිබඳ තොරතුරු පළ කර ගනිමින් හමුදාවේ සිටි අත්දැකීම් ලැබූ නිලධාරියා තමා බව පෙන්නුම් කිරීමට ක්‍රියා කළේය.

යුද හමුදාව තුළ මෙතෙක්‌ භාවිතා කළ නම වෙනුවට වෙනත් නමක්‌ ඔහු භාවිතා කළත් හමුදාවේ නිලධාරීහු ඔහු කව්දැයි හඳුනා ගනු ලැබීය. මේ තත්ත්වය මත රජයේ යාන්ත්‍රණයේ මෙන්ම ආරක්‍ෂක අමාත්‍යාංශයේ මූලික වගකීම විය යුත්තේ මේ හිටපු මේජර් ජෙනරාල්වරයා පිළිබඳ විමර්ශනය කිරීමයි. එහෙත් ආරක්‍ෂක බලධාරීන් මෙතෙක්‌ ඒ ගැන කිසි අවධානයක්‌ යොමු කර නැත.

මෙරට සේනාධිනායක ජනාධිපති මෛත්‍රිපාල සිරිසේන මහතා ද මේ හිටපු හමුදා මේජර් ජෙනරාල්වරයාගේ අතීතය හා ඔහු කළ ද්‍රෝහිකම් ගැන දැඩි අවධානය යොමු කරනු ඇතැයි බලාපොරොත්තු වෙමි.

රාජ්‍ය රහස්‌ හෙළි කළ බවට චෝදනා එල්ල වූ ඇමරිකානු හිටපු සී. අයි. ඒ. නිලධාරි ස්‌නෝඩන් අල්ලා ඇමරිකාවට ගෙනවුත් නඩු ඇසීමට ඇමරිකානු බලධාරීන් තවදුරටත් උත්සාහ කරන බව හෙළි වී ඇත.

එසේ නම් ඇමරිකානු රාජ්‍ය දෙපාර්තමේන්තුව හමුවේ දිවුරුම් ප්‍රකාශයක්‌ දුන් මෙම හිටපු හමුදා නිලධාරියාද දඬුවම් ලැබිය යුතුයි.

එහෙත් ඔහුට තානාපති සේවයේ ඉහළ ධුරයක්‌ ලැබීම විශ්මයජනක ක්‍රියාවකි.

මෙයට පෙර අතුරුගිරියේ මිලේනියම් සිටි බුද්ධි නිවස පරීක්‍ෂා කළ හිටපු සහකාර පොලිස්‌ අධිකාරී කුලසිරි උඩුගම්පොළට එරෙහිව රාජ්‍ය රහස්‌ පනත උල්ලංඝණය කිරීම සම්බන්ධව නඩු පවරා තිබුණි.

එකී නීතිමය ක්‍රියාදාමය ඉහත කී හිටපු මේජර් ජෙනරාල්ටත් බලපායි. එහෙත් නඩුත් හාමුදුරුවන්ගේ බඩුත් හාමුදුරුවන්ගේ ක්‍රියාදාමය පිළිඹිබු කරමින් එම හිටපු මේජර් ජෙනරාල් නීතියෙන් ගැල වී ඇත.

එහෙත් මෙරට ජාතික ආරක්‍ෂාවේ සිට දේශපාලන කටයුතු සඳහා මැදිහත් වන විවිධ රාජ්‍ය නොවන සංවිධාන හා මෑතකදී අටවාගත් සංවිධාන මුනිවත රකින බව සනාථ වී ඇත.

කීර්ති වර්ණකුලසූරිය

ෆෙඩරල් දී රට බෙදන්න පාර කපන හවුල් ආණ්ඩුවේ ද්‍රෝහියෝ…

January 18th, 2016

 සාකච්ඡා කළේ – දයා ලංකාපුර -යුතුකම සංවාද කවය

 “රට ෆෙඩරල් කරන්නයි මේ හදන්නේ ” – දිනේෂ් කියයි

නව ව්‍යවස්‌ථාවක්‌ සකස්‌ කිරීම සඳහා ව්‍යවස්‌ථාදායක මණ්‌ඩලයක්‌ පත් කිරීමට යැම ව්‍යවස්‌ථාව මගින් පාර්ලිමේන්තුවට ලබාදී තිබෙන බලය නැතිකර දැමීමක්‌ බවත් පාර්ලිමේන්තුවක්‌ නොවන ආයතනයකින් ව්‍යවස්‌ථාවක්‌ සකස්‌ කිරීම ඉතා භයානක බවත් මහජන එක්‌සත් පෙරමුණේ නායක පාර්ලිමේන්තු මන්ත්‍රී දිනේෂ් ගුණවර්ධන මහතා  පැවසීය.

‘දිවයින ඉරිදා සංග්‍රහය’ සමඟ පැවැති සාකච්ඡාවේදී ඒ මහතා පළ කළ අදහස්‌ මෙසේය.

ප්‍රශ්නය – මේ ආණ්‌ඩුව බලයට පත්වෙලා අවුරුද්දක්‌ ගත වුණා. මේ අවුරුද්දේ ආණ්‌ඩුව විසින් කරන ලද වැඩ පිළිබඳව ඔබට සෑහීමකට පත් විය හැකිද?

පිළිතුර – ඇත්ත වශයෙන් ජනාධිපතිතුමා පත්වී වසරක්‌ ගත වී තිබෙනවා. මහ ඡන්දෙන් පස්‌සෙ අලුත් ආණ්‌ඩුවකුත් පත් වුණා. ඒත් කලින් දින 100 ආණ්‌ඩුවේ හිටියෙත් මේ ආණ්‌ඩුවේ ඉන්නෙත් එකම පිරිසමයි. ආණ්‌ඩුව ප්‍රකාශ කරන ලද ජනතාවට බලාපොරොත්තු දෙන ලද යහපාලනය ක්‍රියාත්මක නොවන බව රට පුරා දෙපාර්තමේන්තු කඩාවැටීම, සාධාරණය ඉෂ්ට නොවීම ආදියෙන් ඉතා පැහැදිලිවම පෙනෙනවා මේ කාලපරිච්ඡේදය තුළ ආර්ථිකයත්, සංවර්ධන කටයුතුත් සම්පූර්ණයෙන්ම නැවතිලා. දින 100 තුළදී ක්‍රියාත්මක කරන බවට ජනතාවට දුන් පොරොන්දු ඉටුකිරීමට ආණ්‌ඩුවට නොහැකි වුණා. ඒ නිසා පාර්ලිමේන්තු මැතිවරණයත් ප්‍රමාද කළා. එය පැවැත්වුවේ දින 120 ක්‌ ගත වූ පසුවයි. දැන් පළාත් පාලන ඡන්දයත් කල් දාලා.

නීතියට මැදිහත් වෙන්නේ නැත කියපු ආණ්‌ඩුව දැන් විවිධ ආකාරයෙන් නීතිය ක්‍රියාත්මක කිරීමේදී මැදිහත් වෙනවා. මේ නිසා සමස්‌ත ප්‍රජාතන්ත්‍රවාදී සමාජයට දෙන ලද බලාපොරොත්තු බිඳවැටී තිබෙනවා.

ජනාධිපතිතුමා 19 වැනි සංශෝධනය ගෙනැවිත් ඒ තුළින් යම් කිසි බලතල ප්‍රමාණයක්‌ පාර්ලිමේන්තුවට පැවරුවා. නව ඡන්ද ක්‍රමය ගේන්න. ජනාධිපතිතුමාට ආණ්‌ඩුව ඇතුළෙන්ම ඉඩ දුන්නේ නැහැ.

ප්‍රශ්නය – 20 වැනි සංශෝධනය ගේන්න ගියේ ඡන්ද ක්‍රමය වෙනස්‌ කරන්න නේද?

පිළිතුර – එයින් බලාපොරොත්තු වුණේ නව මැතිවරණ ක්‍රමයක්‌ ගේන්න. එයට විපක්‍ෂයේ අපි සම්පූර්ණ සහයෝගය පළ කළා. එහෙත් එක්‌සත් ජාතික පක්‍ෂය එයට විරුද්ධව ආණ්‌ඩුව තුළම කැරලි ගැසීම නිසා එම සංශෝධනය ගේන්න බැරි වුණා.

ආණ්‌ඩුව දුන් පොරොන්දු ඉටුකරන්න ඉඩ නොදෙන්නේ විපක්‍ෂය බවට කරන චෝදනාව බොරු බව මෙයින්ම පෙනී යනවා.

ප්‍රශ්නය – ආණ්‌ඩුව අලුත් ආණ්‌ඩුක්‍රම ව්‍යවස්‌ථාවක්‌ ගේන්න යනවා. ඒකාබද්ධ විපක්‍ෂය එයට විරුද්ධ වන්නේ ඇයි?
පිළිතුර – ආණ්‌ඩුක්‍රම ව්‍යවස්‌ථාවක්‌ සම්පාදනය කිරීමට පාර්ලිමේන්තුවට බලය තියෙනවා. ඒ අනුව තමයි 19 වැනි සංශෝධනය ගෙනාවේ. ජනාධිපතිගේ බලතල අඩු කිරීමට. එතකොට 20 වැනි සංශෝධනය ගෙනාවේ පාර්ලිමේන්තු මැතිවරණ ක්‍රමය වෙනස්‌ කිරීමට. මේ දෙක අරගෙන බලන්න. මේ ගේන්න හදන යෝජනාවෙත් තියෙන්නෙ විධායක ජනාධිපති ක්‍රමය අහෝසි කිරීමයි. මැතිවරණ ක්‍රමය වෙනස්‌ කිරීමයි. අනික්‌ එක ජාතික ප්‍රශ්නය සහ සංහිඳියාවට විසඳුම් ඇති කිරීම මේ පළමුවැනි දෙක සම්මත කරන්න පාර්ලිමේන්තුවට පුළුවන්නේ. පාර්ලිමේන්තුවට පනත් හැටියට ඒවා ගේන්න පුළුවන්. ඇයි ආණ්‌ඩුව ඒක කරන්නෙ නැතුව මේ වෙන මාර්ගයකට යන්නේ. තුන්වැනි කාරණය ප්‍රධාන වශයෙන් විස¹ ගැනීමට ආණ්‌ඩුවේ යෝජනා තිබෙනවා නම් ඒවා ගේන්න පුළුවන්නේ. ජිනීවා යෝජනාවෙන් පස්‌සෙ ආණ්‌ඩුව සම්පූර්ණයෙන්ම යටත් වුණා. යටත්වෙලා ඇතිකර ගත්තු ගිවිසුම් අනුව නම් කටයුතු කරන්නේ ආණ්‌ඩුවට පුළුවන් ඒ පිළිබඳ තමන්ගේ කෙටුම්පත පාර්ලිමේන්තුවට ඉදිරිපත් කරන්න. එතකොට මේ කෙටුම්පත් තුන අනුව ව්‍යවස්‌ථාව අනුව ගමන් කරන්න පුළුවන්. අද කරන්න හදන්නේ කාලය නාස්‌ති කරන අර්බුදයක්‌ රටේ ඇති කර ඒ අර්බුදය තුළින් දේශපාලනයේ ජීවත් වීමට රජය උත්සාහ කිරීම තමයි ඉතා පැහැදිලිව පෙනීයන්නේ.

විපක්‍ෂයේ අපට ඡන්ද ක්‍රමයට පක්‍ෂව ඡන්දය දීම කිසි ගැටලුවක්‌ නැහැ. අපි දැක්‌ක 19 වැනි සංශෝධනය. අපි දැක්‌ක 20 වැනි සංශෝධනය ගැන ශ්‍රේෂ්ඨාධිකරණයේ තීරණ ශ්‍රේෂ්ඨාධිකරණය කිව්වා. 19 සංශෝධනය සමහර වගන්ති ක්‍රියාත්මක කරනවා නම් ඊට ජනමත විචාරණයක්‌ තියල ජනතාවගේ අනුමැතිය ගන්න ඕන කියල. එසේ කියල දැන් අවුරුද්දකුත් ගතවෙන්න එනවා ඇයි ආණ්‌ඩුව මෙහෙම හැසිරෙන්නේ.

ප්‍රශ්නය – මේ ගේන්න යන ආණ්‌ඩුක්‍රම ව්‍යවස්‌ථාව මගින් උතුරු නැගෙනහිර පළාත් ඒකාබද්ධ කරන්න යනවා. උතුරට ෙµඩරල් පාලන ක්‍රමයක්‌ ඇතිකරන්න යනවා කියල ඔබ කියනවා එහෙම කියන්නේ මොන පදනමෙන්ද?
පිළිතුර – පාර්ලිමේන්තුවට තියෙන බලයක්‌නේ මෙයින් නැති කරන්න යන්නේ. පාර්ලිමේන්තුවට බලය ලැබිල තියෙන්නේ ව්‍යවස්‌ථාවෙන්. පාර්ලිමේන්තුව ව්‍යවස්‌ථාව හා ස්‌ථාවර නියෝග අනුගමනය කළ යුතුයි. දැන් මේ යෝජනාවෙන් කරන්න හදන්නේ පාර්ලිමේන්තුවක්‌ නොවන ආයතනයක්‌ එළියෙන් හදල, ඒක මගින් ව්‍යවස්‌ථාවක්‌ තමන්ට ඕන පරිදි සකස්‌ කරගෙන ඒක පාර්ලිමේන්තුවට ගෙනැල්ලා ශ්‍රේෂ්ඨාධිකරණයට වත් යන්නෙ නැතුව ජනමත විචාරණයකට ගෙන යනවා කියන මිථ්‍යාව මත රට මාස ගණනාවක්‌ ගෙනියන්න. මම කිව්ව පළමු වැනි කාරණ දෙක හැරෙන්නට තුන් වැනි කාරණාව නිසා තමයි මේ ව්‍යවස්‌ථාව ගේන්න යන්නෙ. තුන් වැනි කාරණය කියන්නෙ, ද්‍රවිඩ ජාතික සන්ධානය ඉල්ලා සිටින උතුරු නැගෙනහිර ඒකාබද්ධ කළ යුතුයි. තමන්ට වෙනම පාලන තන්ත්‍රයක්‌, සම සන්ධීය පාලන තන්ත්‍රයක්‌ දිය යුතුයි කියන යෝජනාව ගේන්න.

මේ වගේ කරුණු පාර්ලිමේන්තුවෙ සාකච්ඡා කරල විසඳ ගන්න පුළුවන් ක්‍රම පාර්ලිමේන්තුවෙ තියෙනවා. නමුත් පාර්ලිමේන්තුවෙන් බාහිර ව්‍යවස්‌ථාදායක සභාව කියන නමින් ඇති කරන මේ අලුත් ක්‍රමවේදය ඉතාම භයානකයි.

ප්‍රශ්නය – ඒ වුණාට මේ පිහිටුවීමට යන ව්‍යවස්‌ථාදායක මණ්‌ඩලයට පාර්ලිමේන්තුවේ මන්ත්‍රීවරුන් 225 දෙනාම ඇතුළත් වන බව ආණ්‌ඩුව කියනවා.

පිළිතුර – මන්ත්‍රීවරුන් 225 ක්‌ සිටියාට ඔවුන්ට අනුගමනය කිරීමට සිදුවන ප්‍රතිපත්තිය සම්පූර්ණයෙන්ම වෙනස්‌ බව අපි පෙන්වා දුන්නා. ස්‌ථාවර නියෝග පවා මේකෙන් අත්හිටුවෙනවා.

ප්‍රශ්නය – අන්තිමේදී මේ ව්‍යවස්‌ථාව ජනමත විචාරණයකට යොමු කරන බව කියනවානේ. විවිධ යෝජනා හා විවිධ කරුණු ඇතුළත් වන ව්‍යවස්‌ථාවක්‌ ‘ඔව්ද’ ‘නැද්ද’ කියල විමසන ජනමත විචාරණයකට යොමු කරන්නේ කොහොමද? මේකෙ හොඳ යෝජනා වගේම අහිතකර යෝජනාත් තිබෙන්න පුළුවන්. එතකොට ඒ එක්‌ එක්‌ වගන්තියට ජනමත විචාරණ තියන්න වේවි නේ?

පිළිතුර – අන්න ඒ අර්බුදය තිබෙනවා ජනමත විචාරණයකදි ඔව්ද නැද්ද කියන එකට විතරයි ඡන්දෙ දෙන්න පුළුවන්. ලංකාවෙ මිනිස්‌සු අවුරුදු 30 කට පමණ පෙර පැවැති ජනමත විචාරණයෙදී ලාම්පුවට හා කළගෙඩියට ඡන්දෙ දුන්නේ ඒ අනුවයි. ඒක අසාධාරණයි. මේ යෝජිත ව්‍යවස්‌ථාවෙ බරපතළ දේවල් අඩංගු වෙන්න පුළුවන්. දැන් තිබෙන ව්‍යවස්‌ථාව අනුව විදේශ නඩුකාරවරු පත් කරන්න බෑ. නමුත් එසේ පත් කරන්න පුළුවන් වගන්ති මේ ව්‍යවස්‌ථාවට ඇතුළු කිරීමට ඉඩ තියෙනවා. එහෙම නැතිනම් විශේෂ යුද අධිකරණ පිහිටුවන්න පුළුවන් වගේ ඕන දෙයක්‌ අපේ ආණ්‌ඩු ක්‍රම ව්‍යවස්‌ථාවට ඇතුල් කරන්න ඉඩ තිබෙනවා. මන්ද ආණ්‌ඩුව මේ වන විට දැඩි පීඩනයකට අසුවෙලයි ඉන්නෙ. එක එක රටවලින් බලපෑම් එනවා. ඇමරිකාවෙන් මාසෙට කිහිප වරක්‌ එනවා. ඉන්දියාවෙන් එනවා. දැන් නෝර්වෙනුත් නියෝජිතයෙක්‌ ඇවිත් ඉන්නවා. මේ ඔක්‌කොම ඇවිල්ල ආණ්‌ඩුවට කියන්නෙ සුබදායක දේවල් නොවෙයි. මෙහෙම කියන කොට අවුල් වැඩි වෙනවා.

ඒ නිසා අපි ඒකාබද්ධ විපක්‍ෂය වශයෙන් අපි අගමැතිතුමාටයි, ජනාධිපතිතුමාටයි වගකීමෙන් කියන්නෙ ආණ්‌ඩුක්‍රම ව්‍යවස්‌ථාව ප්‍රකාර සහ මහජන අදහස්‌ හරිහැටි දැනගැනීමට පුළුවන් විධියට ඕන මේ ක්‍රමවේදය ගෙනියන්න.

ප්‍රශ්නය – පාර්ලිමේන්තුවෙ විපක්‍ෂයෙ මන්ත්‍රීවරුන් වැඩි පිරිසක්‌ ඉන්නේ ඒකාබද්ධ විපක්‍ෂයෙ. ඒත් කථානායකතුමා ඒකාබද්ධ විපක්‍ෂය විපක්‍ෂයක්‌ ලෙස පිළිගන්නෙ නැත්තෙ ඇයි?

පිළිතුර – මේක ඉතාම කනගාටුදායක තත්ත්වයක්‌. අපිට අවාසිදායක තත්ත්වයක්‌ තිබෙද්දිත් අපි වගකීමෙන් කටයුතු කරල තියනවා. ඒකාබද්ධ විපක්‍ෂෙ තමයි බුලත් කොළෙන් දිනල ආපු වැඩිම මන්ත්‍රීන් පිරිස ඉන්නෙ. මේ පිරිස රජයට එකතු වුණේ නැති මන්ත්‍රී පිරිසයි. එජාප රජයේ කොටස්‌කාරයන් නොවූ පිරිසයි. මේ අය කණ්‌ඩායමක්‌ ලෙස අත්සන් තබල කථානායකතුමාට ලිපියක්‌ දීල තියෙනවා අපි වෙනම කණ්‌ඩායමක්‌ හැටියට වැඩ කරනවා කියලා. මීට පෙර තිබූ පාර්ලිමේන්තු 7 දීම මේ වගේ අවස්‌ථාවලදී ඉඩ දීල තියෙනවා. මේ සැරේ අපට ඉඩ නොදෙන යහපාලනයක්‌ තමයි තියෙන්නෙ.

ප්‍රශ්නය – ඒකාබද්ධ විපක්‍ෂය විසින් දැන් මේ අලුත් දේශපාලන පක්‍ෂයක්‌ පිහිටුවීමට යන බවට රාවයක්‌ පැතිර යනවා මොකක්‌ද ඒ කෙ තත්ත්වය?

පිළිතුර – එක්‌සත් ජාතික පක්‍ෂයට දෙවැනි වූ තවත් පක්‍ෂයක්‌ ලෙස කටයුතු කරන්න සන්ධානෙ මන්ත්‍රීවරු කැමැති නැහැ. මහජනයා කියන්නෙ අපි සන්ධානෙට ඡන්දෙ දුන්නෙ එක්‌සත් ජාතික පක්‍ෂය සමඟ හවුලේ ආණ්‌ඩුවක්‌ පිහිටුවන්න නොවේ තනිව සන්ධාන ආණ්‌ඩුවක්‌ පිහිටුවන්න කියල.

ඒ අනුව යමින් මේ මන්ත්‍රී කණ්‌ඩායම අලුත් දේශපාලන සංවිධානයක්‌ වීමේ අවශ්‍යතාව පිළිඅරගෙන ඒ සඳහා අපි සූදානම් වෙමින් සිටිනවා. පසුගිය කාලෙ අයවැය විවාදය පුරා අපි එකට කටයුතු කළා. ඒ වගේම තවත් කටයුතු වලදීත් සහයෝගයෙන් වැඩ කරල තියෙනවා. සන්ධානය කියන බලවේගය මෙහෙයවපු සියලු ප්‍රධාන අංශ තියෙන්නෙ මේ ඒකාබද්ධ විපක්‍ෂය තුළයි.

සාකච්ඡා කළේ – දයා ලංකාපුර

-යුතුකම සංවාද කවය

The Big Short illustrates need for Glass-Steagall

January 18th, 2016

Australian Alert Service,

The new movie The Big Short, presently in cinemas, tells the story of the financial fraud and gambling mania that led to the meltdown of the global financial system in 2008. Even the heroes in the movie are gamblers—fund managers who were just smarter than the other gamblers and bet correctly that the US property market would tank and bring down the pyramid of fraudulent mortgage securities and derivatives bets that were based on that market. The Big Short accurately paints a picture of the financial system as a casino in which all of the games are rigged—from the level of get-rich-quick mortgage brokers to the thoroughly corrupt ratings agencies to the bank managers who knowingly sold worthless investments to their clients. And nobody went to jail for any of this.

The movie ends when the banks were bailed out in October 2008, when it became obvious that the mortgage securities that brought down Lehman Brothers were actually just the smaller detonator of the much bigger market in derivatives side-bets on whether those mortgages would fail, called credit default swaps, which threatened to bring down all banks. For those who watch it, know this: aside from some window-dressing pretend reform, such as Dodd-Frank in the US and “ring-fencing” in the UK, essentially nothing has changed in the banking system; the banks are still too-big-to-fail, and thus able to hold to ransom the jobs, savings, businesses, services etc. of billions of people in the real economy. However, now when their gambling blows up, the first action to prop them up won’t be government bail-outs, but creditor—including depositor—”bail-ins”: their innocent, unsuspecting customers who’ve entrusted their hard-earned savings with those banks will lose their money, just so a bankrupt bank does not renege on its derivatives bets with other banks.

The CEC published a lengthy movie review of The Big Short in the current issue of the Australian Alert Service magazine, which also features a detailed analysis of the bail-in regime that is now in force across the EU and US, and effectively operational in Australia. The movie illustrates for the lay person what the CEC and others already knew—without a full Glass-Steagall separation of banking that will split off all such gambling and fraud from any contact with the real economy, the system is doomed. Watch the movie and read the Australian Alert Service, and then join the fight for Glass-Steagall.

Constitutional reforms shouldn’t be mixed up with other issues: Former President Mahinda Rajapaksa

January 18th, 2016

Courtesy The Daily Mirror

Former President Mahinda Rajapaksa said changes to the constitution should not be mixed up with the two key issues of abolishing the executive presidential system and electoral reforms, over which widespread consensus has built up over a period of time.

He said the constitutional reform should proceed in stages, taking up the abolition of the executive presidency and the reform of the electoral system first, and then going on to other matters.

17 January 2016

 
MEDIA RELEASE

 Abolishing the executive presidential system, electoral reform and constitutional change

 (Text of a speech made by former President Mahinda Rajapksa at the AbeyaramaTemple in Narahenpita.)
 
Venerable members of the Maha Sangha, clergymen of other faiths, party leaders,members of parliament and local government institutions, and other distinguished guests,
Steps have been taken by the government to initiate the process of promulgating a new constitution for Sri Lanka. Since this is a matter that will touch the lives of all Sri Lankans, this process should receive as much public participation as possible.
Controversies have emerged about the procedure to be adopted in making changes to the constitution. The opposition has suggested that the process of constitutional change should be within the provisions of the present constitution and the standing orders of parliament. I believe the government will be flexible on this matter. This is not the firsttime that changes have been made to the present constitution. By keeping matters within the available parliamentary mechanisms, everybody will be able get on with the task at hand.
My manifesto for the 2015 presidential election “Mahinda Chintana lowa dinana maga”also pledged to take steps to formulate a new constitution for Sri Lanka. Earlier in 2011,my government had appointed a Parliamentary Select Committee under thechairmanship of Hon. Nimal Siripala de Silva to look into the changes that need to bemade to the constitution including changes relating to the executive presidential system.That responsibility now lies with the present government. The single most importantpledge on which the present government was elected into power was the abolition ofthe executive presidential system. The 19
th Amendment to the constitution passed last year purported to reduce the powers of the presidency, but the executive powers of the president still remain intact.
The preamble of the resolution introduced in parliament last Saturday by the prime minister repeatedly stressed that the main objective of the new constitution would be to abolish the executive presidential system and to institute electoral reform. Theseobjectives should receive our fullest support. The executive presidential system wasmired in controversy from the beginning. The SLFP opposed it even when it was firstinstituted. Now when the very UNP that created this position is putting forwardproposals to abolish it, we in the SLFP cannot oppose it. Furthermore, it’s a nephew of J.R.Jayewardene, the founder of this system who is putting forward proposals to abolish the executive presidential system.
I must stress that this should not be another attempt to hoodwink the masses. If theintention of the government is to simply deflect public attention from the myriadproblems facing the country by making loud noises about constitutional change andabolishing the executive presidential system, such an attempt will not succeed. Peopleare now tired of the lies and deception of this government. It is only because the President publicly made a solemn oath over the body of the late Venerable Maduluwawe Sobitha Thero that the executive presidential system will be totally abolished that I felt that perhaps the government is serious about constitutional change this time.
I wish to strongly suggest that other constitutional changes should not be mixed up with the two key issues of abolishing the executive presidential system and electoral reform,over which widespread consensus has built up over a period of time. The constitutional reform process should proceed in stages, taking up the abolition of the executive presidency and the reform of the electoral system first, and then going on to other matters.
The executive presidency was first brought in as the second amendment to the 1972 constitution which was passed around October 1977. The then Prime MinisterJ.R.Jayewardene was sworn in as the first executive president of Sri Lanka on 4February 1978 on the basis of that amendment. It was after the executive presidentialsystem was created that the 1978 constitution was promulgated incorporating the newlycreated executive presidency. Because of the special circumstances that we face today,I believe a similar two-stage approach will have to be adopted in abolishing the executive presidential system as well.
It is only through a referendum that certain entrenched provisions of the constitution can be changed and if a whole new constitution is presented to the people at a referendum,many of the entrenched provisions can be changed in one fell swoop. People havesuspicions that provisions inimical to the unitary character of the Sri Lankan state mayfind their way into the new constitution if it is passed as a single document. We mustensure that the whole constitution making process is not hampered due to thesemisgivings. There is no doubt that a referendum would be necessary if the presidentialsystem is to be abolished. The Supreme Court has already given a determination on thematter. On the other hand, the president has already assured parliament that the unitarycharacter of the state and the special status accorded to Buddhism in the constitutionwill not be touched. If such is the case, no other entrenched provision need be changedand the only matter that will require a referendum will be the abolition of the executivepresidency. So by breaking up the constitution making process into different stages, wewill be able to get the provisions that require a referendum passed first, leaving the restto be dealt with later.
Ever since the Supreme Court delivered its determination on the 13th Amendment in 1987, the executive presidency has been seen as the institution that keeps the country together in the context of the powers devolved to the provincial councils. So there arecertain misgivings about abolishing this institution. In this context, a study should bedone of the Indian constitution and of the powers vested in the Indian president, thecabinet of ministers and the Indian parliament (including the upper house of parliament)in relation to the Indian states, and similar provisions with additional safeguards ifnecessary, should be made applicable in relation to the provincial councils in Sri Lanka.While the provincial councils system was based on the Indian model of devolution,many of the safeguards available to the Indian central government to maintain the unityof the country were not made available to the Sri Lankan government through the13
th Amendment. These shortcomings will have to be addressed. Apart from the abolition of the executive presidency, electoral reform was the secondmost important pledge given by the present government to the people. In this regard, Iwish to point out that the hybrid proportional representation and first past the postsystem proposed by the Parliamentary Select Committee headed by Hon. DineshGunawardene in 2008 was introduced at the local government level by my government.The next local government election will be held according to this new system. All thatremains to be done is to introduce this system to the provincial council andparliamentary levels as well. In order to prevent controversies over the delineation ofconstituencies as we saw at the local government level, I suggest that theconstituencies should be delineated first before the electoral reforms are introduced.
 
The devolution of power in the new constitution should not exceed the provisions of the 13th Amendment that have been implemented at present. There should also be nomerging of provinces. The police and land powers accorded to the provincial councils through the 13th Amendment need to be re-examined. The safeguards available to the Indian central government in relation to the utilisation of land are not available to the Sri Lankan government. In the 1962 case of State of West Bengal v Union of India, theIndian Supreme Court affirmed that the central government could acquire any land inany state for any purpose of the central government without the concurrence of thestate government. But Appendix II of the Ninth Schedule of our constitution says that the government of Sri Lanka has to ‘consult’ the provincial council to utilise land within that province for a purpose of the government.
The implications of such a provision in the Sri Lankan context should be clear to everybody. Therefore I suggest that the landmark judgement by the Supreme Court inthe 2013 case of The Ministry of Plantation Industries v Solaimuttu Rasu delivered byChief Justice Mohan Peris, Justice (now Chief Justice) Sripavan and Justice EvaWanasundara be incorporated in the new constitution and powers over state landvested in the government and not the provincial councils. The significant fact about this case was that the three judges delivered separate judgments which concurred with one another. 
Appendix I of the Ninth Schedule of the present constitution which was introduced through the 13th Amendment outlines the police powers accorded to the provincial councils. If these provisions are implemented, the national police force as we know itwill cease to exist and all important day to day police functions will pass onto nineseparate provincial police forces. I wish to suggest that while such a system may work in a large country like India where the states are bigger than most other nations, it cannot be practically implemented in a small country like Sri Lanka. Indian states suchas Tamil Nadu which are several times the size of Sri Lanka have only one police force.

 
We will be making a bad mistake if we try to implement systems that are in place on asub-continental scale within the Union of India in a country smaller than some of thesmallest Indian states. In the three decades since the provincial councils system was introduced, we have seen many changes of government, but no leader implemented the police powers accorded to the provincial councils through the 13th Amendment because that would have rendered the country ungovernable. So we should proceed verycautiously on this matter. Unworkable provisions in our existing constitution should be discarded in formulating the new constitution.
I also wish to propose that in thinking about devolution, we should seek to empower the grass roots level bodies such as the local government institutions as far as is practically feasible so that the people of the area have a say in the way they are governed.Leaders on both sides of the political divide have at various times expressed such viewsand this matter should receive closer attention in the process of constitution making.
 
The Sixth Amendment to the present constitution which was brought in to preventseparatism should be reviewed. It can be observed that the 16th Amendment to the constitution of India which was brought in by Jawaharlal Nehru much earlier for the same purpose has been more successful in keeping separatist tendencies and separatist ideology in check in India than the 6th Amendment in Sri Lanka. How is it that the TNA takes up positions in Sri Lanka that the AIADMK would never dream of taking in India? This is another matter that needs to be looked into.
It can be seen from the comments that have already been made about the constitution making process, that some sections of the public wish to invoke the constitutional jurisdiction of the Supreme Court to ensure that the unitary character of the state is not undermined. In this context, if the cabinet bypasses the Supreme Court by designatingthe Bill brought to amend the constitution in terms of Article 120(b) as “a Bill to bepassed with a two thirds majority plus a referendum”, there will be misgivings all around.So I suggest that while the constitution making process is split up into segments as proposed earlier, each segment is designated under Article 120(a) simply as “a Bill for the amendment of the constitution”, so that the constitutional jurisdiction of the Supreme Court remains intact, and members of the public will be able to invoke the SC to satisfy themselves that no provisions have been introduced which affect the unitary characterof the state.
Once the new constitution is passed into law, it may be appropriate to hold an election to elect a new government under the new constitution.
 
Thank you.

TN entrepreneurs eye opportunities in Eastern Lanka

January 18th, 2016

Courtesy Adaderana

As many as 125 entrepreneurs from Tamil Nadu will be among 400 from the world over, attending the Second International Investor Forum on Eastern Sri Lanka to be held here on January 28 and 29.

Naseer Ahamed, the dynamic Chief Minister of the multi-ethnic Eastern Province, where Tamils form a third of the population, told the Foreign Correspondents Association, that out of the 125 from TN, a hundred are from the Madurai-based Tamil Nadu Chamber of Commerce. There will also be 20 participants from Bangalore and 30 from Delhi and Maharashtra.

“Getting the Pune-based poultry giant Venky’s, was a major breakthrough for us. They will be investing in Uppuveli. Other Indian firms are interested in putting up units to make auto parts, solar power equipment and pharmaceuticals,” Ahamed said.

A successful businessman himself, the Chief Minister said that he has got  Colombo to allow the Provincial Council to set up a Board of Investment to give investors all help at a single window. (NIE)

Sri Lanka targets USD5 bn FDI in next three years: Malik

January 18th, 2016

Courtesy Lanka Business Online

Jan 18, 2016 (LBO) – Sri Lanka is targeting five billion US dollars worth of foreign direct investments (FDI) in the next three years, Minister of Development Strategies and International Trade said.

“We are targeting 5-6 billion US dollars in FDI the next three and I am quite optimistic that we will get there,”Malik Samarawickrama, Minister of Development Strategies and International Trade told reporters in Colombo, Monday.

“It will no doubt be a challenge with the prevailing global climate but we are very positive because now Sri Lanka is well placed to attract this kind of investment as people are also looking for new places,’

“Of course you can’t do things over night and we have a plan for it. Investors want consistent policy not so much the tax breaks. They don’t want the policy to change each time the government changes.”

The Minister says that several road shows have also been planned for this year.

“We have a program to attract investments country wise and will have road shows in Mumbai, Tokyo, Beijing and even Europe and the United States and so on,”

“So within the course of this year we hope to cover 5-6 major countries and at the same time I have been invited to China,”

“They will come up with a program to set up industries – particularly in the Southern and Western regions. They want to have economic zones and bring in the investors themselves.”

He also said that in 2015 FDI was below one billion US dollars.

“FDI was less than a billion US dollars about 700 – 800 million US dollars last year – this is very low.”

Data shows that in 2014 FDI was 1650 million US dollars.

MR: Hold fresh polls to elect new government once new constitution is promulgated

January 18th, 2016

‘Divide constitution making process into segments’

Once the new Constitution is passed into law, it may be appropriate to hold parliamentary polls to elect a new government under the new Constitution, former President Mahinda Rajapaksa has said in a special statement on the constitution making process.

The former President has called for splitting the constitution making process into with each designated under Article 120(a) simply as “a Bill for the amendment of the constitution” so that the constitutional jurisdiction of the Supreme Court remains intact, and members of the public will be able to invoke the SC to satisfy themselves that no provisions have been introduced which affect the unitary character of the state. “People have suspicions that provisions inimical to the unitary character of the Sri Lankan state may find their way into the new Constitution if it is passed as a single document.”

article_image

Rajapaksa has said that other constitutional amendments should not be mixed up with the abolition of the executive presidency and electoral reforms.

The devolution of power in the new Constitution should not exceed the provisions of the 13th Amendment that have been implemented at present, the former President has said, stressing that here should also be no merging of provinces. The police and land powers accorded to the Provincial Councils through the 13th Amendment need to be re-examined, argues. “Indian Supreme Court affirmed that the central government could acquire any land in any state for any purpose of the central government without the concurrence of the state government. But, Appendix II of the Ninth Schedule of our Constitution says that the government of Sri Lanka has to ‘consult’ the provincial council to utilise land within that province for a purpose of the government.”

The country will be plunged into chaos if police powers are granted to the provincial councils, Rajapaksa says, noting that what is in practice in India is not suitable for a country which is smaller than its states. That is why successive governments have not done so, he maintains.

Mega cycle rally in Assam

January 18th, 2016

By NJ Thakuria

Guwahati: A mega cycle rally with the message of cycling for health & environment was organized on Sunday morning in various parts of Assam including the central function held at historic Latasil playground in then heart of the city. About 250 participants took part in the rally that marched through the pre-historic city where as similar cycle rallies were organised at Nagaon, Bongaigaon, Jorhat and Dibrugarh also.

“The best way to maintain a good health, beat traffic snarls, prevent accidents and minimize pollution is pedaling a cycle,” said Assam chief minister Tarun Gogoi while flagging off the cycle rally at Latasil.

Megacycle01

He also added that at a time when the State in particular and the world at large is confronted with natural disasters, pollution and climate change, the best way to arrest the disturbing trend is taking to cycling in a big way. Cycling can help keeping the environment clean by reducing pollution, ensures good health and also prevents accidents, asserted Gogoi.

“Cycle was an indispensable part of my life. I used to pedal 8 to 10 miles on my way to school and later to college. I also started my political life on a cycle campaigning from house to house when I contested the municipal elections. I saw my father going out on a cycle treating patients,” fondly remembered the Congress veteran.

Organized by a Guwahati based satellite news channel, the rally attracted a number of young cyclists, both boys and girls, from the city. Many of them, while talking to the media, emphasized on creating a permanent cycle lane adjacent to the streets of Guwahati to encourage the practice of cycling in the day-to-day life of interested citizens.

Rajapaksa wants election for new govt under new constitution

January 17th, 2016

Courtesy Adaderana

January 17, 2016  04:21 pm

Former President Mahinda Rajapaksa says that if the intention of the government is to simply deflect public attention from the myriad problems facing the country by making loud noises about constitutional change and abolishing the executive presidential system, such an attempt will not succeed.

“People are now tired of the lies and deception of this government,” he said, delivering a speech at the Abeyarama Temple in Narahenpita today (17).

He state that it is only because the President publicly made a solemn oath over the body of the late Venerable Maduluwawe Sobitha Thero that the executive presidential system will be totally abolished that he felt that perhaps the government is serious about constitutional change this time.

“I wish to strongly suggest that other constitutional changes should not be mixed up with the two key issues of abolishing the executive presidential system and electoral reform, over which widespread consensus has built up over a period of time,” he said.

The constitutional reform process should proceed in stages, taking up the abolition of the executive presidency and the reform of the electoral system first, and then going on to other matters, the Kurunegala District MP said.

People have suspicions that provisions inimical to the unitary character of the Sri Lankan state may find their way into the new constitution if it is passed as a single document, he said, adding “we must ensure that the whole constitution making process is not hampered due to these misgivings.”

Rajapaksa further said that once the new constitution is passed into law, it may be appropriate to hold an election to elect a new government under the new constitution.
Text of Full Speech:

Steps have been taken by the government to initiate the process of promulgating a new constitution for Sri Lanka. Since this is a matter that will touch the lives of all Sri Lankans, this process should receive as much public participation as possible.

Controversies have emerged about the procedure to be adopted in making changes to the constitution. The opposition has suggested that the process of constitutional change should be within the provisions of the present constitution and the standing orders of parliament. I believe the government will be flexible on this matter. This is not the first time that changes have been made to the present constitution. By keeping matters within the available parliamentary mechanisms, everybody will be able get on with the task at hand.

My manifesto for the 2015 presidential election “Mahinda Chintana Lowa Dinana Maga” also pledged to take steps to formulate a new constitution for Sri Lanka. Earlier in 2011, my government had appointed a Parliamentary Select Committee under the chairmanship of Hon. Nimal Siripala de Silva to look into the changes that need to be made to the constitution including changes relating to the executive presidential system. That responsibility now lies with the present government. The single most important pledge on which the present government was elected into power was the abolition of the executive presidential system.  The 19th Amendment to the constitution passed last year purported to reduce the powers of the presidency, but the executive powers of the president still remain intact.

The preamble of the resolution introduced in parliament last Saturday by the prime minister repeatedly stressed that the main objective of the new constitution would be to abolish the executive presidential system and to institute electoral reform.  These objectives should receive our fullest support. The executive presidential system was mired in controversy from the beginning. The SLFP opposed it even when it was first instituted. Now when the very UNP that created this position is putting forward proposals to abolish it, we in the SLFP cannot oppose it. Furthermore, it’s a nephew of J.R. Jayewardene, the founder of this system who is putting forward proposals to abolish the executive presidential system.

I must stress that this should not be another attempt to hoodwink the masses. If the intention of the government is to simply deflect public attention from the myriad problems facing the country by making loud noises about constitutional change and abolishing the executive presidential system, such an attempt will not succeed. People are now tired of the lies and deception of this government. It is only because the President publicly made a solemn oath over the body of the late Venerable MaduluwaweSobithaThero that the executive presidential system will be totally abolished that I felt that perhaps the government is serious about constitutional change this time.

I wish to strongly suggest that other constitutional changes should not be mixed up with the two key issues of abolishing the executive presidential system and electoral reform, over which widespread consensus has built up over a period of time. The constitutional reform process should proceed in stages, taking up the abolition of the executive presidency and the reform of the electoral system first, and then going on to other matters.

The executive presidency was first brought in as the second amendment to the 1972 constitution which was passed around October 1977. The then Prime Minister J.R. Jayewardene was sworn in as the first executive president of Sri Lanka on 4 February 1978 on the basis of that amendment.  It was after the executive presidential system was created that the 1978 constitution was promulgated incorporating the newly created executive presidency. Because of the special circumstances that we face today, I believe a similar two-stage approach will have to be adopted in abolishing the executive presidential system as well.

It is only through a referendum that certain entrenched provisions of the constitution can be changed and if a whole new constitution is presented to the people at a referendum, many of the entrenched provisions can be changed in one fell swoop. People have suspicions that provisions inimical to the unitary character of the Sri Lankan state may find their way into the new constitution if it is passed as a single document. We must ensure that the whole constitution making process is not hampered due to these misgivings. There is no doubt that a referendum would be necessary if the presidential system is to be abolished. The Supreme Court has already given a determination on the matter. On the other hand, the president has already assured parliament that the unitary character of the state and the special status accorded to Buddhism in the constitution will not be touched. If such is the case, no other entrenched provision need be changed and the only matter that will require a referendum will be the abolition of the executive presidency. So by breaking up the constitution making process into different stages, we will be able to get the provisions that require a referendum passed first, leaving the rest to be dealt with later.

Ever since the Supreme Court delivered its determination on the 13th Amendment in 1987, the executive presidency has been seen as the institution that keeps the country together in the context of the powers devolved to the provincial councils. So there are certain misgivings about abolishing this institution.  In this context, a study should be done of the Indian constitution and of the powers vested in the Indian president, the cabinet of ministers and the Indian parliament (including the upper house of parliament) in relation to the Indian states, and similar provisions with additional safeguards if necessary, should be made applicable in relation to the provincial councils in Sri Lanka. While the provincial councils system was based on the Indian model of devolution, many of the safeguards available to the Indian central government to maintain the unity of the country were not made available to the Sri Lankan government through the 13th Amendment. These shortcomings will have to be addressed.

Apart from the abolition of the executive presidency, electoral reform was the second most important pledge given by the present government to the people. In this regard, I wish to point out that the hybrid proportional representation and first past the post system proposed by the Parliamentary Select Committee headed by Hon. Dinesh Gunawardene in 2008 was introduced at the local government level by my government. The next local government election will be held according to this new system. All that remains to be done is to introduce this system to the provincial council and parliamentary levels as well. In order to prevent controversies over the delineation of constituencies as we saw at the local government level, I suggest that the constituencies should be delineated first before the electoral reforms are introduced.

The devolution of power in the new constitution should not exceed the provisions of the 13th Amendment  that have been implemented at present. There should also be no merging of provinces.  The police and land powers accorded to the provincial councils through the 13th Amendment need to be re-examined. The safeguards available to the Indian central government in relation to the utilisation of land are not available to the Sri Lankan government. In the 1962 case of State of West Bengal v Union of India, the Indian Supreme Court affirmed that the central government could acquire any land in any state for any purpose of the central government without the concurrence of the state government. But Appendix II of the Ninth Schedule of our constitution says that the government of Sri Lanka has to ‘consult’ the provincial council to utilise land within that province for a purpose of the government.

The implications of such a provision in the Sri Lankan context should be clear to everybody.  Therefore I suggest that the landmark judgement by the  Supreme Court in the 2013 case of The Ministry of Plantation Industries v SolaimuttuRasu delivered by Chief Justice Mohan Peiris, Justice (now Chief Justice) Sripavan and Justice Eva Wanasundara be incorporated in the new constitution and powers over state land vested in the government and not the provincial councils. The significant fact about this case was that the three judges delivered separate judgments which concurred with one another.

Appendix I of the Ninth Schedule of the present constitution which was introduced through the 13th Amendment outlines the police powers accorded to the provincial councils. If these provisions are implemented, the national police force as we know it will cease to exist and all important day to day police functions will pass onto nine separate provincial police forces. I wish to suggest that while such a system may work in a large country like India where the states are bigger than most other nations, it cannot be practically implemented in a small country like Sri Lanka. Indian states such as Tamil Nadu which are several times the size of Sri Lanka have only one police force.

We will be making a bad mistake if we try to implement systems that are in place on a sub-continental scale within the Union of India in a country smaller than some of the smallest Indian states. In the three decades since the provincial councils system was introduced, we have seen many changes of government, but no leader implemented the police powers accorded to the provincial councils through the 13th Amendment because that would have rendered the country ungovernable. So we should proceed very cautiously on this matter. Unworkable provisions in our existing constitution should be discarded in formulating the new constitution.

I also wish to propose that in thinking about devolution, we should seek to empower the grassroots level bodies such as the local government institutions as far as is practically feasible so that the people of the area have a say in the way they are governed. Leaders on both sides of the political divide have at various times expressed such views and this matter should receive closer attention in the process of constitution making.

The Sixth Amendment to the present constitution which was brought in to prevent separatism should be reviewed. It can be observed that the 16th Amendment to the constitution of India which was brought in by Jawaharlal Nehru much earlier for the same purpose has been more successful in keeping separatist tendencies and separatist ideology in check in India than the 6th Amendment in Sri Lanka. How is it that the TNA takes up positions in Sri Lanka that the AIADMK would never dream of taking in India? This is another matter that needs to be looked into.

It can be seen from the comments that have already been made about the constitution making process, that some sections of the public wish to invoke the constitutional jurisdiction of the Supreme Court to ensure that the unitary character of the state is not undermined. In this context, if the cabinet bypasses the Supreme Court by designating the Bill brought to amend the constitution in terms of Article 120(b) as “a Bill to be passed with a two thirds majority plus a referendum”, there will be misgivings all around. So I suggest that while the constitution making process is split up into segments as proposed earlier, each segment is designated under Article 120(a) simply as “a Bill for the amendment of the constitution”, so that the constitutional jurisdiction of the Supreme Court remains intact, and members of the public will be able to invoke the SC to satisfy themselves that no provisions have been introduced which affect the unitary character of the state.

Once the new constitution is passed into law, it may be appropriate to hold an election to elect a new government under the new constitution.

Misleading Editorials

January 17th, 2016

S. Akurugoda

Following section appeared under the  Editorial  of Irida Divaina dated 17 January 2016, titled “මේ ගොනුන් දැක්‌කිය යුත්තේ කවර පට්‌ටියකටද?”

1960 ගණන්වලදී ශ්රීල.නි.. ආණ්ඩුවක්පැවැති කාලයේදී ආණ්ඩු පෙරැළි කුමන්ත්රණයක්සංවිධානය විය. එහෙත් එය ක්රියාත්මක වීමට කලින් සැකකරුවෝ අත්අඩංගුවට ගනු ලැබූහ. එයින් එක්සැකකරුවකු වූයේ එ.ජා.. යේ ප්රබල ආධාරකරුවකු වූ දොඩම්පෙ මුදලාලි ය. යුද හමුදා කෝප්රල් තිලකවර්ධන තවෙකෙකි. මේ දෙදෙනා සී. අයි. ඩි. යේ හතරවන තට්ටුවට ගෙන ගොස්පහර දෙන ලදී. දොඩම්පෙ මුදලාලිට පහරදෙන අතර ඩී. අයි. ජී. කෙනෙක්ඔහු බිම දිගා කර පපුව මතට පැන්නේය. දෙපාර පනින විට මුදලාලි මළේය. යටි බඩට වැදුණු පාපහරකින් කෝප්රල් තිලකවර්ධන මළේය. මේ දෙදෙනාම හතර වන තට්ටුවේ ජනේලයකින් බිමට විසි කළ පොලිසිය ඔවුන් බිමට පැන දිවි නසා ගත් බව කීවේය.

එහෙත් මේ ගැන නඩුව විභාග කළ විනිසුරු වින්සන්ට්ස්වර්ණාධිපති මහතා මෙය සියදිවි හානිකර ගැනීමක්නොව සාවද්ය මනුෂ්ය ඝාතනයක්බව තීරණය කරන ලදී. මෙකල සිටින පොලිස්ගොඩ පෙරකදෝරුවන් මෙවැනි ඉතිහාස කතන්දර අසාවත් තිබේදැයි අපි නොදනිමු

The Editorial says that the  incident happened around 1960 during the SLFP government.  Further it says Dodampe Mudalai was a strong UNPer.

1962 coup against the SLFP government of Mrs Bandaranaike was led by a section of the  top rank officers of the Armed Forces   with Christian Origin including Police officers and not by Dodampe Mudalali and Thilakawardana as stated in the editorial.

Dodampe Mudalali’s  case happened under the 1965-1970 UNP/Fedaral Party government (Another, so-called National government) led by Dudley Senanayake.  The case was against an alleged   coup   led by the then Army Commander Major General Richard Udugama. Other suspects, as I remember, were  Sgt. Hondamuni Captain Sigera and Ven   Henpitagedara Gnanaseeha. According to various credible reports available, at that time, the arrest was orchestrated  by JR Jayawardena.

Major General Udugama was related to Mrs Bandaranayake and was the army commander in Jaffna during  the  riots initiated by the Federal Party.  Major General Udugama was arrested, under a fabricate coup case, to please the Federal Party , very similar to what is happening now.

Hence the above Editorial is misleading.

 

ඉන්දියාවට හා එංගලන්තයට එරෙහිව නව පක්‍ෂයක් හා නායකත්වයක්

January 17th, 2016

නලින් ද සිල්වා

ජනවාරි 17 වැනි දා ඉරිදා රිවිර පුවත්පතට නොලියූ එහෙත් පළ කිරීමට ලබන ඉරිදා වන තුරු බලා සිටීමට නොහැකි කරුණු කිහිපයක් ඉතා කෙටියෙන් පහත දැක්වෙයි.

අද මෛත්‍රිපාල සිරිසේන ක්‍රියා කරන්නේ ජනාධිපති ක්‍රමය අහෝසි කිරීමට නො වේ. ඔහුට ලබන මැතිවරණයෙන් පසු විධායක අගමැතිකම නොලැබෙන බවට රනිල් සහතික වී ඇත. අවුල් ආණ්ඩු දීගය ලබන මැතිවරණය තෙක් කෙසේවත් නොපවතිනු ඇත.

සිරිසේනට අද අවශ්‍ය විධායක ජනාධිපති ක්‍රමය තවදුරටත් (එනම් මීළඟ මැතිවරණයෙන් හා ජනාධිපතිවරණයෙන් පසුව ද) තබා ගැනීම ය. ඔහු ඒ සඳහා නොයෙක් උපාය යොදයි.

විධායක ජනාධිපති ක්‍රමය අහෝසි කිරීමට ජනමත විචාරණයක් අවශ්‍ය නො වේ. ව්‍යවස්ථාවේ 83 වැනි වගන්තියේ ඒ බවක් සඳහන් නො වේ. එසේ වුවත් සිරිසේන තම ජනාධිපතිවරණ ප්‍රකාශනයේ සඳහන් කෙළේ ජනමත විචාරණයක් අවශ්‍ය වගන්ති සංශෝධනය නොකරණ බව ය. සිරිසේනට ඉන්දියාවේ විරුද්ධතාව මත ද ඒ පොරොන්දුව ඉටුකළ හැකි ද? එසේ කර විධායක ජනාධිපති ක්‍රමය අහෝසි නොකර එයට නැවතත් මහින්ද රාජපක්‍ෂ පත්කිරීමට ඉඩ දී ඔහු අගමැති වීමට කැමතිවන්නේ ද? එසේ නොකළහොත් ඔහුට හෝ අද ආණ්ඩුවේ සිටින ශ්‍රී ල නි පක්‍ෂයේ යැයි කියන ඇමතිවරුන්ට (සිරිසේන ශ්‍රී ල නි පක්‍ෂය මරා දැම්මේ ය) හෝ රනිල්ගේ ආණ්ඩුවක කිසිම තැනක් හිමිනොවනු ඇත.

ගාන්ධිගේ ප්‍රකාශයෙන් පැහැදිලි වන්නේ ඉන්දියාව කෙතරම් මෙරට ප්‍රශ්නවලට මැදිහත් වන්නේ ද යන්න ය. අද ලංකාව ක්‍රියාකරන්නේ ඉන්දියාවේ හා එංගලන්තයේ අණ පරිදි ය. ගාන්ධි යුද්ධාපරාධ සම්බන්ධයෙන් ලංකාවට චෝදනා නැගී ය. රනිල් හෝ ඊනියා යුද්ධයේ අවසාන කාලයේ වැඩබලන ආරක්‍ෂක ඇමති වූ සිරිසේන හෝ එයට විරුද්ධව මේ වන තුරු (17 සවස) වචනයක් කියා නැත. ඉන්දියාව දැනට සිරිසේනට විරුද්ධව යුද්ධාපරාධ චෝදනා ඉදිරිපත් නො කරයි. ඒ සිරිසේන ඉන්දියාවට කීකරු ව සිටින තාක් ය.

ලංකාව පකිස්ථානයෙන් ජෙට් යානා මිළ දී ගැනීමට පකිස්ථාන අගමැතිවරයා සමග අත්සන් කළ ගිවිසුම ඉන්දියාවේ අවශ්‍යතාව පරිදි  බිඳ දමා ඇත. දැන්  ලංකාව පකිස්ථානයෙන් ජෙට් මිළ දී නොගනු ඇත.  අප ඉන්දියාවට මෙතරම් වහල්වන්නේ ඇයි? චීනය සමග සම්බන්ධතා දිය කළේ ඉන්දියාවේ හා එංගලන්තයේ අවශ්‍යතාව පරිදි ය.

පැහැදිලිව ම උතුරේ මහ ඇමති විග්නේස්වරන් දෙමළ සංසදය අද (ජනවාරි 17) විසුරුවා හරිනු ඇත්තේ ඉන්දියාවේ අණ පරිදි ය. එය එංගලන්තයට හා එහි විසුරුණු දෙමළ ජනයාට ප්‍රශ්නයක් වුවත් විග්නේස්වරන්ට කළ හැකි දෙයක් නැත.

ආණ්ඩුව නව ව්‍යවස්ථාව කෙටුම්පත් කර අවසන් ය. එහෙත් එය ප්‍රසිද්ධ නොකරයි. ඒ වෙනුවට මහජන මතය විමසීමට යැයි කියමින් බොරු කමිටුවක් පත්කර ඇත. ඒ හැරෙන්නට තවත් කමිටු ද පත්කර ඇත. මේ කමිටුවල වැඩි බලය ඇත්තේ සිංහල බෞද්ධ විරෝධීන්ට ය. ලාල් විජේනායක, ජයම්පති වික්‍රමරත්න, ජයදේව උයන්ගොඩ වැන්නන්ගේ අදහස් කවරේ දැයි අපි අවුරුදු විසිපහකට වැඩි කාලයක් තිස්සේ දන්නෙමු. මහජන මතය කුමක් වුවත් රනිල් ඉදිරිපත් කරනු ඇත්තේ ඉන්දියාවට හා එංගලන්තයට අවශ්‍ය දෙමළ ජාතිවාදයට දොළ පිදේනි දෙන ව්‍යවස්ථාවකි. මහජන මතය විමසන්නේ මහජනයාගේ ඇසට වැලි ගැසීමට ය.

සිංහල බෞද්ධ විරෝධී මාක්ස්වාදීන් හා රනිල්ගේ එ ජා පක්‍ෂය අත්වැල් බැඳගෙන ඇත. රනිල් තමා සිංහල බෞද්ධයකු බව කියයි. අපි ඒ පිළිගනිමු. එහෙත් එ ජා පක්‍ෂය සිංහල බෞද්ධ නොව ඇංග්ලිකන් ක්‍රිස්තියානි පක්‍ෂයකි. එහි සංස්කෘතිය හා චින්තනය ඇංග්ලිකන් ක්‍රිස්තියානි වෙයි. මාක්ස්වාදයේ චින්තනය කතෝලික වෙයි. ප්‍රභාකරන් හින්දු වන්නට ඇත. එහෙත් දෙමළ ජාතිවාදයේ චින්තනය ක්‍රිස්තියානි වෙයි. දෙමළ ජාතිවාදය 1833 දී ඉංගිරිසින් විසින් සිංහල බෞද්ධයනට විරුද්ධ ව දේශපාලනික ව බෞතීස්ම කරන ලද්දකි. (ප්‍රභාකරන් ඔහුගේ සියලා බාප්පලා හා මස්සිනාලා කෘතිය කියවන්න) . රනිල් ප්‍රභාකරන් ක්‍රිස්තියානි නෝර්වේ වුවමනාවට ගිවිසුම් අත්සන් කෙළේ බෞද්ධයන්ගේ හෝ හින්දූන්ගේ හෝ අවශ්‍යතාවට නො වේ. ප්‍රභාකරන්ට කතෝලික පූජකවරු ආධාර නො කළෝ ද? ඒ ගැන සෙවීමට රනිල් කමිටුවක් පත්කරන්නේ ද?  භික්‍ෂූන් වහන්සේලා ක්‍රිස්තියානි නීතිය යටතට පත්කිරීමට රනිල් උත්සාහ කරයි. අද අගමැති පමණක් නොව තත්ත්වාකාරක ජනාධිපති හා කතානායක ද වන ඔහු ක්‍රිස්තියනි රෝම ලන්දේසි නීතිය ආධරයෙන් තත්ත්වාකාරක මහානායක ද වීමට උත්සාහ කරයි. ඒ එංගලන්තයේ ඇංග්ලිකන් පල්ලියේ ආදර්ශය අනුව ය. ඇංග්ලිකන් පල්ලියේ නායකයා කැන්ටබරියේ ආච්බිෂොප්වරයා නොව එලිසබෙත් වින්ඩ්සර් ය.

සිංහල බෞද්ධයනට ප්‍රවාද (ප්‍රමාද නොවේ) ගැන වැටහීමක් නැතිවුවත් ඔවුහු එ ජා පක්‍ෂය ඉවෙන් හඳුනති. නිල වශයෙන් නොවූවත් එ ජා පක්‍ෂයේ ජනාධිපති අපේක්‍ෂකයා වූ සිරිසේනට  2015 ජනවාරි 8වැනි දා පැවති ජනාධිපතිවරණයේ දී සිංහල බෞද්ධයන්ගෙන් 40%කවත් ඡන්දය නො ලැබිණි. සිරිසේන ඒ බව වටහා ගන්නේ නම් මැනවි. රනිල්ට එපමණවත් නොලැබෙනු ඇත. ඔහුට සිරිසේනලාගේ හා සරත් ෆොන්සේකාලාගේ පිහිට අවශ්‍ය වෙයි.  

අද පමා වී වුවත් සිංහල බෞද්ධයන්ගේ හා සිංහලත්වයට ගරුකරන්න අනෙක් අයගේ පක්‍ෂයක් වහාම ඇතිකළ යුතු වෙයි. ඒ නොමැතිව ඉන්දියාවට හා එංගලන්තයට විරුද්ධව සටන් කළ නො හැකි ය. ඒ මහින්ද රාජපක්‍ෂගේ නායකත්වයෙන් ඇති විය යුතු ය. සිරිසේනට දේශපාලන අනාගතයක් අවශ්‍ය නම් මහින්ද රාජපක්‍ෂගේ නායකත්වය පිළිගත හැකි ය. මෙය රනිල්ට විරුද්ධව කරන සටනක් නොව එංගලන්තයට හා ඉන්දියාවට එරෙහිව කරන සටනකි. ඒ සඳහා නායකත්වය දීමට තමාට නොහැකි බව සිරිසේන වුවත් වටහාගත යුතු ය. ඔහු සිංහල බෞද්ධකම අගයන්නේ නම් මහින්ද නැවතත් ජනාධිපති කරගැනීමට කටයුතු කළ යුතු ය. ක්‍රිස්තියානි සංස්කෘතියේ දෙමළ ජාතිවාදය තිබෙනතාක් විධායක ජනාධිපති ක්‍රමය තිබිය යුතු ය. ඒ පදවියට සුදුසු සිංහල බෞද්ධයකු පත්කර ගත යුතු ය.

නලින් ද සිල්වා

2016 ජනවාරි 17

ආණ්ඩුවේ විජාතික සිංහල බෞද්ධ විරෝධය

January 17th, 2016

නලින් ද සිල්වා

පසුගිය නවවැනිදා සම්මත කරගැනීමට බලාපොරොත්තු වූ ව්‍යවස්ථා සංශෝධන කෙටුම් පත් පණත 12 වැනි දා දක්වා ද ඉන්පසු 26 වැනි දා දක්වා ද කල්තැබීමට ආණ්ඩුවට සිදු වී ඇත. ආණ්ඩුව එක් පියවරක් පස්සට ගෙන ඇත්තේ පසුව පියවර දෙකක් ඉදිරියට තැබීමට ද යන ප්‍රශ්නය අපට ඇත.  ඒකාබද්ධ විපක්‍ෂය කළ යුත්තේ මේ කෙටුම් පත අස්කරගැනීමට ආණ්ඩුවට බල කර සිටීම ය. පාර්ලිමේන්තුවට ඉදිරිපත් කරන ලද කෙටුම්පත කැබිනට් මණ්ඩලයේ සාකච්ඡා කර අනුමත කර නැති බව ආණ්ඩුවේ ම ඇතැම් ඇමතිවරු කියති. ඉතා පැහැදිලිව ම කෙටුම්පත් පනත අගමැතිගේ අවශ්‍යතාවට ඉදිරිපත් කරන ලද්දකි. ඔහුට මේ මොහාතේ අවශ්‍ය විධායක ජනාධිපති බලතල අහෝසිකර ඒ අගමැතිට පවරා ගැනීමත් දෙමළ ජාතිවාදයට දොළ පිදේනි දෙන ව්‍යවස්ථාවක් එංගලන්තයේ අවශ්‍යතාව පරිදි සම්මතකර ගැනීමත් ය. ඉන්දියාවට ද දෙමළ ජාතිවාදය සනසන ව්‍යවස්ථා සංශෝධනයක් අවශ්‍ය වෙයි. එය එංගලන්තයට අවශ්‍ය සංශෝධනය ම වීම අනිවාර්ය නො වේ. ව්‍යවස්ථා සංශෝධනය පිළිබඳ ව අපි 2015 දෙසැම්බර් 30, 2016 ජනවාරි 03 හා 10 දිනවල රිවිර පුවත්පත මගින් සාකච්ඡා කෙළෙමු. 
අප ඒ ලිපිවල මූලික ව කියා සිටියේ අවුල් ආණ්ඩුව හෙවත් ඊනියා ජාතික ආණ්ඩුව පිහිටුවන ලද්දේ ප්‍රධාන චශයෙන් ම ඉන්දියාවේ හා එංගලන්තයේ අවශ්‍යතාවට බවත් ඒ පිටුපස වූයේ ඊනියා දෙමළ ප්‍රශ්නයට ව්‍යවස්ථාව මගින් ම විසඳුමක් ඉදිරිපත් කිරීම බවත් ය. එහෙත් කිසිවකු මේ විසඳන්නට යන ජාතික ප්‍රශ්නය යැයි කියන දෙමළ ප්‍රශ්නය කුමක් දැයි තවමත් කියා නැත. අප දශක දෙකහමාරකටත් වැඩි කලක් තිස්සේ අසන්නේ් දෙමළ ජනයාට දෙමළ වීම නිසා ම පමණක් සිදු වී ඇති අසාධාරණය කුමක් ද යන්න ය. ඉන්දියාව අඩුම තරමෙන් 2005 ජනාධිපතිවරණයේ සිට ශ්‍රී ල නි ප හා එ ජා ප එකතුකිරීමට වෑයම් කෙළේ ය. ඒ එක් පක්‍ෂයක් බලයට පත් වී ඊනියා ජාතික ප්‍රශ්නය විසඳීමට තැත්කළහොත් අනෙක් පක්‍ෂය එයට විරුද්ධ වන බැවින් ය. රෝ ඔත්තු සංවිධානය ද රෝ සංවිධානයේ සිංහල ඒජන්තයෝ ද පක්‍ෂ දෙක එකතු කර ඊනියා ජාතික ප්‍රශ්නයට විසඳුමක් දීමට උත්සාහ කළහ. ශ්‍රී ල නි පක්‍ෂය හා එ ජා පක්‍ෂය එකතුකිරීමේ වාහකය වූයේ මෛත්‍රිපාල සිරිසේන ය. එහෙත් ඔහු ශී්‍ර ල නි පක්‍ෂය අත්හැර ගියේ ශ්‍රී ල නි පක්‍ෂය මරාදමමිනි. අද ශ්‍රී ල නි පක්‍ෂයක් නැත. එබැවින් ඉන්දියාවේ බලාපොරොත්තුව ද ඉටු වී නැත. අද එ ජා පක්‍ෂය සමග එකතු වී ඇත්තේ ශ්‍රී ල නි ප නොව දේශපාලන මළමිනියකි.
පසුගිය මැතිවරණයට පෙර අප කියා සිටියේ සංධානය වෙන ම පක්‍ෂයක් ලෙස තරග කළ යුතු බව ය. අපි ඒ බව ජී එල් පීරිස්, ඩලස් අලහප්පෙරුම, විමල් විරවංශ ආදීන් හමු වී කියා සිටියෙමු. එහෙත් මේ නායකයෝ අප කියන දෙයට සවන් නො දෙති. ඔවුන් කියා සිටියේ ඒ වන විට මෛත්‍රිපාල මහින්ද එකතුවක් ඇති වී තිබූ බවත් ඒ ජයග්‍රහණයක් බවත් එය තවදුරටත් වර්ධනය කළ යුතු බවත් ය. මෛත්‍රිපාල සිරිසේන ගැන විශ්වාසයක් අපට නොතිබුණ ද මේ නායකයන්ට එදා ඔහු විශ්වාස විය. දේශපාලන තීරණ ගැනීමේ දී එක්කෝ යම් ප්‍රචාදයක් (ප්‍රමාදයක් නො වේ) තිබිය යුතු ය. එසේත් නැත්නම් පරිණත අතීත අත්දැකීම් සහිතව අනාගතය  දැකීමට  හැකි විය යුතු ය. මේ නායකයන්ට ඒ එකක්වත් තිබිණි ද යන්න ගැන ඇත්තේ සැකයකි. 
නව ව්‍යවස්ථාවක් සම්මත කර ගැනීමේ චේතනාවෙන් ආණ්ඩුව පසුගිය නවවැනි දා විවාදයට ඉදිරිපත් කළ කෙටුම්පත් පණතේ පූර්විකාවේ වෙනත් දේ අතර  විධායක ජනාධිපති ධුරය අහෝසි කෙරෙන්නාවූ ද, ජාතික ප්‍රශ්නයට ව්‍යවස්ථාමය විසඳුමක් සපයන්නාවූ ද නව ආණ්ඩුක්‍රම ව්‍යවස්ථාවක් සම්පාදනය කරගැනීමේ අවශ්‍යතාව මතු වී ඇතැයි කියැවෙයි. ආණ්ඩුවේ සිටින බොහෝ ඇමතිවරු විදේශික නියෝජිතයන්ට අවශ්‍ය කුමක් දැයි නො දනිති. බොහෝ විට ඔවුහු ලිපි ලේඛන නො කියවති. ඔවුන් දන්නේ ආණ්ඩුවේ ප්‍රධානීන් වාචිකව මැති ඇමතිවරුන්ට දැනගැනීමට සලස්වන දේ පමණ ය. කෙසේ වෙතත් ජාතික ප්‍රශ්නය යනු කුමක් දැයි අර්ථකථනය නොකර එය විසඳීමට යෑම සැකකටයුතු ය. මෛත්‍රිපාල සිරිසේන යනු වෙස්සන්තර කෙනකු යැයි නොසිතිය යුතු ය. ඔහු අවුරුදු පහකින් දේශපාලනික ව විශ්‍රාම යෑමට බලාපොරොත්තු නො වෙයි. ඔහු විධායක ජනාධිපති ධුරය අහෝසි කිරීමට කැමැත්ත දැක්වූයේ මීළඟ අවුල් ආණ්ඩුවේ අගමැති වීමේ බලාපොරොත්තුවෙන් බව පැහැදිලි ය. 
එහෙත් ප්‍රශ්නයක් මතු වී ඇත. අවුල් ආණ්ඩුවේ දීගය ගෙන යන්නේ හොඳින් නොවන බව පැහැදිලි ය. මෛත්‍රිපාල සිරිසේනගේ කණ්ඩායමේ මැති ඇමතිවරු හා  එ ජා පක්‍ෂයේ මැති ඇමතිවරු කුලල් කා ගනිති.  දීගය අවම වශයෙන් අවුරුදු දෙකක් ගෙන යෑමට බලාපොරාත්තු වූ නමුත් ඒ කළහැකි ද යන්න සැකසහිත ය. අත්හැරෙන දීගයේ සෙවණැල්ලත් ඇද බව විවාහකයකු නොවූවත් මංගල සමරවීර දන්නා බවට සැකයක් නැත. මීළඟ මැතිවරණයෙන් පසු ඊනියා ජාතික ආණ්ඩුවක තමන්ට අගමැතිකම නොලැබෙන බව මෛත්‍රිපාල සිරිසේන දනියි. එබැවින් ඔහු මහින්ද රාජපක්‍ෂ සමග සංධානගත වීමට කැමතිවනු ඇත. එහෙත් ඔහුට අවසාන වශයෙන් ක්‍රියාකිරීමට සිදුවනු ඇත්තේ ඉන්දියාවේ අවශ්‍යතාව අනුව ය. 
ආණ්ඩුවේ සිටින ශ්‍රී ල නි ප මළමිනිය උස්සාගෙන යන ඇමතිවරුන්ට හා එ ජා පක්‍ෂයේ සාමාන්‍ය මැති ඇමතිවරුන්ට රනිල් වික්‍රමසිංහගෙන්  එතරම් තොරතුරු නොලැබෙන බව පැහැදිලි ය. අද ආණ්ඩුවට විදේශීය බලපෑම් නැතැයි මේ ඇමැත්තෝ කියති. ඒ ඇමැත්තන් හමුවීමට විදේශීය නියෝජිතයෝ නො පැමිණෙති. ඔවුන් ජෙනීවා ගියත් කළ හැක්කේ ආණ්ඩුවේ උපදෙස් මත ක්‍රියාකිරීම පමණකි. ආණ්ඩුව ක්‍රියා කරන්නේ බටහිර හා ඉන්දියාවේ අවශ්‍යතාව පරිදි ය. අද ආණ්ඩුව ක්‍රියා කරන්නේ ලන්ඩන්, දිල්ලි හා ජෙනීවා අවශ්‍යතා පරිදි ය. විදේශීය නියෝජිතයකු මෙරට නොමැති සතියක් නැත. මේ ලිපිය ලියන මොහොතේ ද ඉන්දීය විදේශ ලේකම් මෙරට ය. බ්ලෙයාර් ජීවත්වන්නේ යාපනයෙහි දැයි ඇසිය යුතුව ඇත. ඔවුන් එන්නේ මංගල සමරවීරගේ මුහුණ බැලීමට නොවන බව ඇමතිවරයා ද දනියි. එහෙත් ඉහත කී ඇමැත්තන්ට මේ සම්බන්ධකම් ගැන කිසිම වැටහීමක් නැත. එබැවින් ඔවුහු විදේශ බලපෑම් නැතැයි කියති. 
අර්ථදක්වා නොමැති ඊනියා ජාතික ප්‍රශ්නයක් විසඳීමට ව්‍යවස්ථාවක් ගෙන එන්නේ් සිංහල ජනතාවට අවශ්‍ය නිසා නොව විජාතිකයන්ට අවශ්‍ය බැවිනි. පසුගිය මැතිවරණයේ දී රනිල් වික්‍රමසිංහ හෝ මෛත්‍රිපාල සිරිසේන හෝ නව ව්‍යවස්ථාවක් ගෙන ඒමට වරමක් නො පැතුවේ ය. එය 1970 මැතිවරණයේ දී බණ්ඩාරනායක මහත්මිය ක්‍රියා කළ ආකාරයෙන් වෙනස් ය. ඇය නව ව්‍යවස්ථාවක් ඇතිකිරීමට වරමක් පැතුවා පමණක් නො වේ. ඇයට ඒ සඳහා තුනෙන් දෙකක වරමක් ද ලැබිණි. එංගලන්ත පාර්ලිමේන්තුවේ සම්මත වූ සෝල්බරි ව්‍යවස්ථාව ඒ ව්‍යවස්ථාව මගින් ම වෙනස් කිරීම යෝග්‍ය නොවන බැවින් හා අවශ්‍ය නොවන බැවින් එදා පාර්ලිමේන්තුවෙන් පිට රැස්වූ ව්‍යවස්ථාදායක මණ්ඩලයක් අවශ්‍ය විය. 
එහෙත් අද තත්වය කුමක් ද? පසුගිය අගොස්තු මැතිවරණයෙහි දී රනිල් මෛත්‍රිපාල නව ව්‍යවස්ථාවක් ගෙන ඒමට වරමක් නො ඉල්ලූහ. දෙදෙනාටම අවශ්‍ය වූයේ විධායක ජනාධිපති ධුරය අහොසි කර විධායක අගමැතිවීමට ය. ඔවුන් වරමක් ඉල්ලුවේ නම් ඒ විධායක ජනාධිපති ධුරය අහෝසි කිරීම සඳහා ය. ජාතික හෙළ උරුමයට ඒ අවශ්‍ය වී ද යන්න වෙන ම ප්‍රශ්නයකි. අප නම් දැන් කලක සිට කියා සිටින්නේ දෙමළ ජාතිචාදය පරාජය කරන තුරු විධායක ජනාධිපති ක්‍රමය තිබිය යුතු බව ය. ඒ දෙමළ ත්‍රස්තවාදය පැරදවීම සමග පටළවා ගත යුතු නො වේ. දෙමළ ත්‍රස්තවාදය පැරදවීමේ දී ද ජනාධිපති ධුරය ආධාරයක් විය. එහෙත් දෙමළ ත්‍රස්තවාදය පරාජය කිරීමෙන් 1833 පමණ  දේශපාලන වශයෙන් ඉංගිරිසි ක්‍රිස්තියානීන් විසින් බෞතීස්ම කරනු ලැබූ දෙමළ ජාතිවාදය අවසන් යැයි නොසිතිය යුතු ය. ඒ කෙසේ වෙතත් නව ව්‍යවස්ථාවක් ගෙන ඒමට නොව විධායක ජනාධිපති ක්‍රමය අහෝසි කිරීමටවත් ජනතාවගෙන්  වරමක් රනිල් මෛත්‍රිපාල අවුලට නො ලැබිණි. මේ අවුල පෙනී සිටියේ සිංහල බෞද්ධ සංස්කෘතියට එරෙහිව බව සිංහල බෞද්ධයෝ ඉවෙන් දැන සිටියහ. ඒ කෙසේ වුවත් රනිල් මෛතිපාල අවුලට සියයට පනහකවත් ඡන්ද නො ලැබිණි. සිරිසේන පසුගිය ජනවාරි නවවැනි දා ව්‍යවස්ථා විරෝධීව රනිල් අගමැති නොකරන්නට අද අවුල් ආණ්ඩුවක් නැත. ව්‍යවස්ථා සංශෝධනයක දී ශ්‍රෙෂ්ඨාධිකරණයට ජනතාව යන්නේ හුදෙක් ජනමත විචාරණයක් සම්බන්ධයෙන් පමණක් නොවන බව නොදන්නා නීතිඥ ඇමතියෝ ආණ්ඩුවේ සිටිති. ආණ්ඩුව ජනමතවිචාරණය ද පැවැත්වීමට යන්නේ සියළු යෝජනා එක පොදියට ගෙන ය. එය ද ව්‍යවස්ථා විරෝධී ය. ආණ්ඩුව ව්‍යවස්ථාවට ගරු නො කරයි.  
ජනාධිපතිවරණයේ දී මෛත්‍රිපාල සිරිසේනට සියයට පනහකට වැඩි ඡන්දයක් ලැබුණු නමුත් ඒ සිංහල බෞද්ධයන්ගෙන් නො වේ. සිරිසේනට ජනාධිපතිවරණයේ දී 52%ක් ඡන්ද ලැබිණි යැයි සිතමු. මෙරට ඡන්දය දීමේ දී ජනවාර්ගිකව සමජාතිය ව ඒ සිදුවන්නේ යැයි ද සිතමු. සිරිසේනට සිංහල බෞද්ධ නොවන ඡන්දවලින් 80%ක් ලැබිණි යැයි ද සිතමු. මේ ප්‍රතිශතය එයට වැඩි විය යුතු බව උතුරු පළාතේ, නැගෙනහිර පළාතේ, කඳුකරයේ, කොළඹ හා මීගමුව මධ්‍යස්ථානය කරගත් කතෝලික පෙදෙසෙහි ඡන්ද ප්‍රතිඵල විශ්ලේෂණය කිරීමේ දී පැහැදිලි වෙයි. මෙරට සිංහල බෞද්ධ නොවන අය 30%ක් පමණ වෙති. මෙයින් කියැවෙන්නේ සිරිසේනගේ ඡන්ද ප්‍රතිශතයෙන් 30 ශ 80/100 = 24ක්් ලැබී ඇත්තේ සිංහල බෞද්ධ නොවන්නන්ගෙන් බව ය. එවිට ඔහුගේ ඡන්ද ප්‍රතිශතයට සිංහල බෞද්ධයන්ගෙන් එකතු වී ඇත්තේ 52-24= 28කි. මෙය සිංහල බෞද්ධයන් වූ 70%කින් ලැබෙන්නකි. එබැවින් සිරිසේනට සිංහල බෞද්ධයන්ගෙන් ලැබී ඇත්තේ 28ශ100/70=40 ක ප්‍රතිශතයකි. වෙනත් වචනවලින් කියන්නේ නම් සිරිසේනට සිංහල බෞද්ධයන්ගේ ඡන්දවලින් 40%ක්වත් ලැබී නැත. 
මේ ආණ්ඩුව සිංහල බෞද්ධ විරෝධී බව සිංහල බෞද්ධයෝ ඉවෙන් මෙන් දනිති. නව ව්‍යවස්ථාව සිංහල බෞද්ධ විරෝධී දෙමළ ජාතිවාදයට දොළ පිදේනි දෙන එකක් බව ඉහත කී ඇමැත්තන් නොදන්නාවට සිංහල බෞද්ධයෝ දනිති. අද කාදිනල්වරයා ආගම්වාදී ජාතිවාදී පක්‍ෂ තහනම් කළ යුතු යැයි කියයි. ගොනා හැරෙන්නේ කුමකට දැයි පැහැදිලි ය. කාදිනල්වරයා පළමුව ජාතිවාදය හා ආගම්වාදය යන්නෙන් අදහස් කරන්නේ කුමක් දැයි පැහැදිලි කරන්නේ නම්  මැනවි. ආණ්ඩුවේ සිංහල බෞද්ධ විරෝධය ඊනියා ථෙරවාද කතිකාවත් කෙටුම්පතින් ද පැහැදිලි වෙයි. මේ පිළිබඳ ව විස්තරාත්මක ව පසුව සඳහන් කළ යුතු ය. දැනට කිව යුත්තේ ආණ්ඩුව භික්‍ෂූන්වහන්සේ ක්‍රිස්තියානි රෝම ලන්දේසි නීතිය යටතට ගැනීමට උත්සාහ කරන බව ය. භික්‍ෂූන් වහන්සේට බලපාන බුද්ධ නීතියක් (විනයක්) ඇත. එය  ක්‍රිස්තියානි රාජ්‍ය නීතියට යටකිරීමට ඉඩ දිය නො හැකි ය.    
නලින් ද සිල්වා
2016 ජනවාරි 14

“විධායකය අහෝසිය නැමති සුරූපිනිය පෙන්නා රට බෙදීම නැමති යක්ෂණිය නොදෙනු” – රට නොබෙදා ව්‍යවස්ථා සංශෝධනය කරන හැටි මහින්ද කියා දෙයි

January 17th, 2016

මහින්ද රාජපක්‍ෂ  හිටපු ජනාධිපති- යුතුකම සංවාද කවය

විධායක ජනාධිපතිධූරය අහෝසි කිරීම සහ නව මැතිවරණ ක්‍රමයක් ගෙන ඒම පිළිබඳ කාරණය වෙනම ගෙන එය මුලින් සම්මත කරගත යුතු බවත් බලය බෙදීම කියන කාරණය එය සමග බද්ධ කර කොලේ යටින් දමා නොගැසිය යුතු බවත් විධායක ජනාධිපතිධූරය අහෝසිය නැමති ඇම ඉදිරියට දමා ඒකීයභවය අහිමි වන ආකාරයේ බලය බෙදීමක් කරා යාම සිදු නොකළ යුතු බවත් මහින්ද රාජපක්ෂ මහතා අවධාරණය කරයි.

13ට එහා පළාත් සභාවලට බලය නොදිය යුතු බවත් , 13න්  දැනට දී ඇති ඉඩම් හා පොලිස් බලතල පවා නැවත මධ්‍යම ආණ්ඩුව සතු කරගත යුතු බවත් ඔහු ප්‍රකාශ කළේ ව්‍යවස්ථා සංශෝධනය පිළිබඳ දේශනයකට එක්වෙමිනි.

යෝජිත ව්‍යවස්ථා සංශෝධන පිළිබදව හිටපු ජනාධිපති මහින්ද රාජපක්‍ෂ මහතා නාරාහේන්පිට අභයාරාම විහාරස්ථානයේ පැවැත්වූ විශේෂ දේශනය.

[2016-01-17]

නව ආණ්ඩුක‍්‍රම ව්‍යවස්ථාවක් සම්පාදනය කිරීමේ ක‍්‍රියාවලියකට ආණ්ඩුව මුලපුරල තියෙනවා. මේක අපේ රටේ මුලූ අනාගතයම වෙනස්කරන ක‍්‍රියාවලියක් නිසා මේකට ජනතාවගේ සහභාගීත්වය උපරිම මට්ටමෙන් තියෙන්න ඕන.
නව ව්‍යවස්ථාව සම්පාදනය කිරීමේදී අනුගමනය කළ යුතු ක‍්‍රියාපටිපාටිය ගැන මතභේදයක් මේ අවස්ථාවේදී පැනනැගිල තියෙනව. වර්ථමාන ව්‍යවස්ථාවට සංශෝධන ගේන පළමු අවස්ථාව මෙය නොවේ. ව්‍යවස්ථාව වෙනස් කිරීමේ ක‍්‍රියාදාමය වත්මන් ව්‍යවස්ථාවේ නිර්දේශ කොට තිබෙන ක‍්‍රියාපටිපාටියට හා පාර්ලිමේන්තුවේ ස්ථාවර නියෝග වලට අනුකූලව සිදුවිය යුතුයි කියල විපක්‍ෂය යෝජනා කරලා තියෙනව. කලින් මේ ව්‍යවස්ථාවට සංශෝධන ගෙනඒමේදී අනුගමනය කළ ක‍්‍රියාපටිපාටියට අනුව කටයුතු කිරීමෙන් අදාල කාරණය සාර්ථකව කළ හැකි බව මම විශ්වාස කරනවා. ආණ්ඩුව මේ සම්බන්ධයෙන් නම්‍යශීලී විය යුතුයි.

2015 ජනාධිපතිවරණය සදහා”මහින්ද චින්තන ලොව දිනන මග” නැමැති මගේ ප‍්‍රතිපත්ති ප‍්‍රකාශනයේද නව ආණ්ඩුක‍්‍රම ව්‍යවස්ථාවක් සම්පාදානය කිරීමට පියවර ගන්නා බව කියල තිබුණා. ඊට කලින් 2011 දී ආණ්ඩුක‍්‍රම ව්‍යවස්ථාවේ සහ විධායක ජනාධිපති ක‍්‍රමය සම්බන්ධයෙන් කළ යුතු වෙනස්කම් ගැන සොයාබලා වාර්තා කරන්න මගේ ආණ්ඩුව නිමල් සිරිපාල ද සිල්වා මහතාගේ ප‍්‍රධානත්වයෙන් පාර්ලිමේන්තුවේ තේරීම් කාරක සභාවක් පත් කරලා තිබුණා. දැන් මේ කටයුතු වල වගකීම තියෙන්නේ වර්ථමාන ආණුඩුවට. මේ ආණ්ඩුව බලයට පැමිණිමේ දී දුන් ප‍්‍රධානම ප‍්‍රතිඥාව තමයි විධායක ජනාධිපති ක‍්‍රමය අහෝසි කරන එක. ගිය අවුරුද්දේ 19 වෙනි සංශෝධනයෙන් විධායක ජනාධිපතිවරයාගේ බලතල අඩු කරන බව කිවුවාට ඒ බලතල දැනුත් ඒ ආකාරයටම පවතිනවා.

පසුගිය සෙනසුරාදා අග‍්‍රාමාත්‍යවරයා විසින් නව ව්‍යවස්ථාවක් සම්පාදනය කිරීමට මුලපුරමින් ඉදිරිපත් කරපු යෝජනාවේ ප‍්‍රස්තාවනාවේ අවධාරණය කරල තිබුණේ මේ සම්පාදනය කරන අලූත් ව්‍යවස්ථාවේ මූලික පරමාර්ථය වෙන්නේ විධායක ජනාධිපති ක‍්‍රමය අහෝසි කිරීමත් මැතිවරණ ක‍්‍රමය සංශෝධනය කිරීමත් වන බවයි. මේ අරමුණු සාක්ශාත් කර ගැනීම සදහා අපි කවුරුත් සහයෝගය දෙන්න ඕන.

විධායක ජනාධිපතිකම කියන්නෙ මුල ඉදලම මතභේදයට ලක්වුණු තනතුරක්. මේක ඇතිකරනකොටත්, ශ‍්‍රී ලංකා නිදහස් පක්‍ෂය විරුද්ධ වුණා. දැන් විධායක ජනාධිපති ධූරය ඇතිකරපු UNP එකම ඒ තනතුර අහෝසි කරන ව්‍යවස්ථා සංශෝධනයක් ඉදිරිපත් කරනකොට ඒකට ශ‍්‍රී ලංකා නිදහස් පක්‍ෂයේ අපිට විරුද්ධ වෙන්න බෑ. මේ තනතුරේ නිර්මාතෘ ජේ.ආර්.ජයවර්ධන මහතාගේම ඥාති පුත‍්‍රයෙක්ම තමයි ඒක අහෝසි කරන්න යෝජනාව ගෙන එන්නෙත්.

ඒ වගේම මම කියන්න ඕන මේක තවත්සැරයක් ජනතාව මෝඩයට අන්දන උත්සාහයක් නොවිය යුතුබව. විධායක ජනාධිපති ධූරය අහෝසකරනවාය, ව්‍යවස්ථාව වෙනස්කරනවාය කියල මහ සද්දයක් දාලා, ආණ්ඩුව මුහුන දෙන දහසකුත් එකක් ප‍්‍රශ්න යට ගහන්න හිතාගෙන ඉන්නව නම් ඒක හරියන්නෙ නැහැ. ආණ්ඩුවෙ බොරු අහලම මිනිස්සුන්ට තිත්ත වෙලා තියෙන්නෙ. ඒ හින්දා ව්‍යවස්ථාව වෙනස්කරන එකවත් අවංකව සිද්ධ වෙන්න ඕන. මාදුළුවාවේ සෝභිත හාමුදුරුන්ගේ ශ‍්‍රී දේහය ඉදිරියේ ජනාධිපතිතුමා ප‍්‍රසිද්ධියේම විධායක ජනාධිපති ක‍්‍රමය මුලූමනින්ම අහෝසි කරනවාය කියල දිවුරපු නිසා, මේවතාවේ නම් ආණ්ඩුව ඒ කාරණය ඉටුකරයි කියලා තමයි මට සිතුනේ.

ඒ වගේම කාලාන්තරයක් මුලූල්ලේ සමාජය තුළ පොදු එකඟතාවයක් ගොඩනැගිලා තියෙන විධායක ජනාධිපති ක‍්‍රමය අහෝසි කිරීම හා මැතිවරණ ක‍්‍රමය සංශෝධනය කිරීම යන මේ ප‍්‍රධාන කාරණා එක්ක වෙන ව්‍යවස්ථාමය සංශෝධන කවලම් කරගතයුතු නැතැයි කියලා තමයි මට හිතෙන්නේ. අලූත් ව්‍යවස්ථාවක් සම්පාදනය කරන මේ ක‍්‍රියාදාමය අදියර කීපයකින් සිදුවෙන්න ඕන. මුල් අදියරේ විධායක ක‍්‍රමය අහෝසි කිරීමත් මැතිවරණ ක‍්‍රමය සංශෝධනය කිරීමත් කරලා අනිත් වෙනස්කම් ඊට පස්සෙ තමයි කරන්න ඕන.

මේකට පූර්වාදර්ශයක් තියෙනවා. විධායක ජනපති ක‍්‍රමය මුලින්ම හදුන්වලා දෙන කොට ඒක ආවේ 1972 ව්‍යවස්ථාවට සිදු කරපු දෙවන සංශෝධනය හැටියට 1977 ඔක්තෝබර් මාසයේ. ජේ.ආර්.ජයවර්ධන මහත්තයා 1978 පෙබරවාරි 04 වන දා ලංකාවේ පළමු විධායක ජනාධිපති හැටියට දිවුරුම් දුන්නේ ඒ සංශෝධනයට අනුවයි. 1978 ව්‍යවස්ථාව සම්පාදනය කලේ විධායක ජනාධිපති ක‍්‍රමය ඇති කළාට පස්සෙ. අලූත් ව්‍යවස්ථාවට අලූතින් ඇති කරපු විධායක ජනාධිපති ක‍්‍රමයත් ඇතුල් කළා. අද මේ රටේ පවතින සුවිශේෂ තත්වය නිසා විධායක ජනාධිපති ක‍්‍රමය අහෝසි කිරීමේදීත් ඒ වගේම අදියර දෙකකින් කරන්න ඕන කියලා තමයි මම හිතන්නෙ.

අපේ ව්‍යවස්ථාවේ පාර්ලිමෙන්තුවේ තුනෙන් දෙකේ බලයට අමතරව ජනමත විචාරණයක් ද නැතුව වෙනස් කරන්න බැරි වගන්ති එකොළහක් තියෙනවා. අලූත් ව්‍යවස්ථාවක් සම්පූර්ණයෙන් කෙටුම්පත් කරලා ඒකට පාර්ලිමේන්තුවේ තුනෙන් දෙකක බලය ලබාගෙන ජනමත විචාරණයකට ඉදිරිපත් කළොත් මේ සුවිශේෂ වගන්ති එකොළහම වුනත් එකසැරේ වෙනස් කරන්න පුලූවන් වෙනවා. ඉතින් හුගක් අයට මේ ගැන සැක පහල වෙලා තියෙනවා. මේ ආකාරයට සියල්ල එක සැරේ වෙනස් කරන්න ඉඩ ලැබුණොත් ලංකාවේ ඒකීය භාවයට හානිකර වගන්ති අලූත් ව්‍යවස්තාවට ඇතුල් වෙයි කියලා සැකයක් පවතිනවා. මේ වගේ සැකයක් තුළින් ව්‍යවස්තා සම්පාදන ක‍්‍රියාවලිය ඇණහිටින තැනට වැඩ සිද්ධවෙන්න ඉඩ තියෙනවා.

විධායක ජනාධිපති ක‍්‍රමය අහෝසි කරන්න නම් අනිවාර්යෙන්ම ජනමත විචාරණයක් පවත්වන්න වෙනවා. ශ්‍රේෂ්ඨාධිකරණය දැනටමත් ඒ ගැන මතයක් පළ කරලා ඉවරයි. අනෙක් අතට රටේ ඒකීය භාවයට හෝ බුදු දහමට තියෙන ප‍්‍රමුඛත්වයට කිසිදු වෙනසක් නොකරන බවට ජනාධිපතිවරයා පාර්ලිමේන්තුවේ දී පොරොන්දු වෙලා තියෙනවා. එනම් ජනමත විචාරණයක් නැතුව වෙනස් කරන්න බැරි ඒ සුවිශේෂී වගන්ති එකොළහ අතරින් ජනමත විචාරණයක් පවත්වන්න වෙන්නේ ජනාධිපති ක‍්‍රමය අහෝසි කරන්න විතරයි. ඉතින් මේ නව ව්‍යවස්තාව සම්පාදනය කිරීමේ ක‍්‍රියාදාමය අදියර දෙකකට කැඞීමෙන් ජනමත විචාරණයක් අවශ්‍ය වන කාරණා මුලින්ම ගෙනල්ලා ඉතුරු ටික පස්සෙ සාමාන්‍ය පරිදි පාර්ලිමේන්තුවේ තුනෙන් දෙකේ බලයෙන් වෙනස් කරන්න පලූවන්.

1987 දී 13 වන සංශෝධනය ගැන ශ්‍රේෂ්ඨාධිකරනය පළ කරපු මතය නිසා පළාත් සභා වලට පවරල තියෙන බලතල හමුවේ රටේ ඒකීය භාවය රකින ආයතනය හැටියට ඇතැම් අය විධායක ජනාධිපති ක‍්‍රමය දකිනවා. ඉතින් මේ ආයතනය අහෝසි කර දැමීම ගැන ඒ අයතුළ බයක් තියෙනවා. ඉන්දියාවේ ප‍්‍රාන්ත සම්බන්ධයෙන් ඉන්දීය ජනාධිපතිවරයාට, කැබිණට් මණ්ඩලයට හා පාර්ලිමේන්තුවට (ඉන්දීය උත්තර මන්ත‍්‍රී මණ්ඩලයත් ඇතුලූව) පවරා ඇති බලතල ගැන අපි හොදින් හදාරලා බලන්න ඕන. ඒ බලතල අවශ්‍යනම් වැඩිදුරටත් ශක්තිමත් කොට අපේ පළාත් සභා ක‍්‍රමයට ආදේශ කරන්න ඕන. අපේ මේ පළාත් සභා ක‍්‍රමය ඉන්දීයාවේ බලතල බෙදීමේ ක‍්‍රමය මත පදනම් වෙලා තියෙනවා කිවුවට ඉන්දීයාවේ ඒකීය බව රැකීමට ඉන්දීය මධ්‍යම ආණ්ඩුවට ලැබිල තියෙන බලතල සෑහෙන ප‍්‍රමාණයක් ලංකාවේ ආණ්ඩුවට දහතුන්වන සංශෝධනයෙන් ලැබිල නැහැ. මේ අඩුපාඩු ගැන හොයලා බලන්න ඕන.

විධායක ජනාධිපති ක‍්‍රමය අහෝසි කරන එක හැරුණු කොට වත්මන් ආණ්ඩුව ජනතාවට දීපු තවත් ප‍්‍රධාන පොරොන්දුවක් වෙන්නේ මැතිවරණ ක‍්‍රමය සංශෝධනය කරන එකයි. 2008 දී දිනේෂ් ගුණවර්ධන මහතාගේ ප‍්‍රධානත්වයෙන් මැතිවරණ ක‍්‍රමය සංශෝධනය කිරීම ගැන සලකා බැලීමට ඇති කර තිබුණු පාර්ලිමේන්තු තේරීම් කාරක සභාවෙන් යෝජනා කරපු සමානුපාතික හා කේවල ආසන දෙමුහුන් මැතිවරණ ක‍්‍රමය පළාත් පාලන මට්ටමට හදුන්වලා දුන්නේ මාගේ ආණ්ඩුවෙන් බව මෙහිදී මතක් කරලා දෙන්න ඕන. ඊළඟ පළාත් පාලන මැතිවරණය පවත්වන්නේ ඒ අලූත් ක‍්‍රමයට. දැන් ඉතිරිවෙලා තියෙන්නේ මේ ක‍්‍රමය පළාත් සභා හා පාර්ලිමේන්තු මට්ටම් වලටත් හදුන්වලා දෙන එක. පළාත් පාලන මට්ටමෙන් ඡුන්ද කොට්ඨාශ නීර්ණය කිරීමේ දී ඇති වෙච්ච මතභේද වගේ තත්වයන් වළක්වන්න මැතිවරණ ක‍්‍රමයට සංශෝධන ගේන්න කළින් මැතිවරණ කොට්ඨාශ නීර්ණය කරලා තියෙනවනම් හොදයි කියලා තමයි මට හිතෙන්නෙ.

අලූත් ව්‍යවස්ථාවේ බලතල බෙදීම වර්තමානයේ ක‍්‍රියාත්මක කරලා තියෙන 13 වන සංශෝධනයේ වගන්ති වලින් ඔබ්බට නොයා යුතුයි. ඒ වගේම පළාත් ඒකාබද්ධ කිරීමත් කිසි ලෙසකින් නොවිය යුතුයි. 13 වන සංශෝධනයේ පළාත් සභාවලට දීලා තියෙන පොලිස් හා ඉඩම් බලතල ගැන නැවත සලකලා බලන්න ඕන. ඉඩම් සම්බන්ධයෙන් ඉන්දීය මධ්‍යම ආණ්ඩුවට තිබෙන බලතල 13 වන සංශෝධයෙන් ලංකාවේ ආණ්ඩුවට දීල නැහැ. ඉන්දීය ව්‍යවස්තාවට අනුව ඒ රටේ මධ්‍යම ආන්ඩුවට ආදාල කරුණු සදහා ඕනෑම ප‍්‍රාන්තයකින් ඕනෑම ඉඩමක් ප‍්‍රාන්ත ආණ්ඩුවෙන් කිසිම විමසීමකින් තොරව පවරාගන්න පුලූවන් කියලා ඉන්දීය ශ්‍රේෂ්ඨාධිකරණය 1962 දී විභාග කළ බටහිර බෙංගාල ප‍්‍රාන්තය එරෙහිව ඉන්දීය මධ්‍යම ආණ්ඩුව කියන නඩුවේ තින්දු කරලා තිබුණා. නමුත් අපේ ව්‍යවස්තාවේ 9 වැනි පරිශිෂ්ඨයේ දෙවන උප ලේඛනයට අනුව ලංකාවේ ආණ්ඩුවට යමිකිසි පළාතක තියෙන ඉඩමක් ආණ්ඩුවේ වැඩකට ගැනීමට නම් අදාල පළාත් සභාවේ අවසර පැතිය යුතු බව කියලා තියෙනවා.

ලංකාවේ තත්වය හැටියට ඒ වගේ වගන්තියකින් ඇති විය හැකි ප‍්‍රශ්න කාටත් පැහැදිලි වෙන්න ඕන. ඒ නිසා මම මෙහිදී යෝජනා කරනවා 2013 දී විභාග වුණු වැවිළි කර්මාන්ත අමාත්‍යංශය එරෙහිව සොලෙයිමුත්තු රාසු යන නඩුවේ තීන්දුව අලූත් ව්‍යවස්ථාවට අන්තර්ගත කළ යුතුයි කියලා. ඒ අවස්ථාවේ දි ශ්‍රේෂ්ඨාධිකරණය තීන්දු කළේ රජයේ ඉඩම් බලතල ලංකාවේ ආණ්ඩුවට මිස පළාත් සභා වලට අයිති නැති බවයි. ඒ නඩුවේදී එවක අගවිනිසුරු මොහාන් පීරිස් මහතා හා වත්මන් අගවිනිසුරු ශ‍්‍රී පවන් මහතා හා ඒවා වනසුන්දර විනිසුරුතුමිය එකිනෙකා සමග ඒ කරුණ සම්බන්ධයෙන් එකඟ වෙමින් වෙන වෙනම නඩු තීන්දු ප‍්‍රකාශයට පත් කිරීම විශේෂත්වයක් හැටියට අපි සලකන්න ඕන.

අපේ ව්‍යවස්ථාවේ 9 වැනි පරිශිෂ්ඨයේ පළමුවන උප ලේඛණයේ 13 වන සංශෝධනය ප‍්‍රකාරව පළාත් සභාවට ලැබී ඇති පොලිස් බලතල ගැන සදහන් වෙනවා. මේ වගන්ති ක‍්‍රියාත්මක වුනොත් දැනට පවතින ජාතික පොලිස් සේවාව නැති වෙනවා. සියලූම වැදගත් පොලිස් කටයුතු වෙනම ක‍්‍රියාත්මක වන පළාත්බද පොලිස් සේවාවන් 9 කට හිමි වෙනවා. මේ වගේ ක‍්‍රමයක් ඉන්දියාව වැනි විශාල රටක ක‍්‍රියාත්මක කරන්න පුලූවන්. ඉන්දියාවේ ප‍්‍රාන්ත බොහෝ ජාතික රාජ්‍යයන් වලටත් වඩා විශාලයි. ලංකාව වගේ කුඩා රටක ඒ වගේ දෙයක් ක‍්‍රියාත්මක කරන්න බැහැ. ලංකාවට වඩා කිහිප ගුණයක් විශාල තමිල්ණාඩු ප‍්‍රාන්තයේ ක‍්‍රියාත්මක වන්නේත් එක පොලිස් සේවයයි. ඉන්දියාව වැනි රටක උප මහද්වීප මට්ටමෙන් ක‍්‍රියාත්මක වන ක‍්‍රමයක් ඇතැම් කුඩාම ඉන්දීය ප‍්‍රාන්ත වලටත් වඩා කුඩා ලංකාව වැනි රටක් තුළ ක‍්‍රියාත්මක කරන්න හදන එක නුවණට හුරු දෙයක් නෙවෙයි කියලයි මටනම් හිතෙන්නෙ. පළාත් සභා ක‍්‍රමය ඇති කරලා ගතවුණු දශක තුන මුලූල්ලේ ආණ්ඩු වෙනස්කම් ගණනාවක්ම සිදුවුණා. නමුත් 13 වන සංශෝධනයෙන් පළාත් සභාවලට දුන් පොලිස් බලතල කිසිම නායකයෙකු ක‍්‍රියාත්මක නොකලේ එයින් මේ රට සම්පූර්ණයෙන්ම ව්‍යාකූල වන නිසයි. ඉතින් මේ කටයුත්තේ දී බොහොම පරිස්සමින් ක‍්‍රියා කරන්න ඕන. අලූත් ව්‍යවස්ථාවක් සෑදීමේ දී පවතින ව්‍යවස්ථාවේ තිබෙන ක‍්‍රියාත්මක කරන්න බැරි වගන්ති ඉවත් කරන්න ඕන.

ඒ වගේම බලතල බෙදිමේ දී අපි පළාත් පාලන ආයතන වැනි බිම් මට්ටමේ ආයතන හැකිතාක් දුරට බලාත්මක කළ යුතු බවට මම යෝජනා කරනවා. ඒ ඒ ප‍්‍රදේශ වල ජීවත් වන ජනතාවට සැබෑ බලයක් ලැබෙන්නෙ ගම් මට්ටමට බලය බෙදුනොත් විතරයි. ප‍්‍රධාන පක්‍ෂ දෙකේම නායකයන් මේ කාරණය ගැන විවිධ අවස්ථාවල අදහස් දක්වලා තියෙනව. අලූත් ව්‍යවස්ථාව හදන කොට ඒ අදහසුත් සලකලා බලන්න ඕන.

ලංකාවේ බෙදුම්වාදය වැලැක්වීමට ගෙනාපු 6 වැනි සංශෝධනය ගැන අපි විමර්ශනය කරලා බලන්න ඕන. ඉන්දියාව තුල බෙදුම්වාදය පාලනය කිරීමට ජවහර්ල්ලාල් නේරු විසින් ඒ රටේ ව්‍යවස්තාවට හදුන්වා දීපු 16 වන සංශෝධනය අපේ 6 වන සංශෝධනයට වඩා සාර්ථක වෙලා තියෙන බව පේනවා. ඉන්දියාවේ ජයලලිතා ජයරාම්ගේ පක්‍ෂය හීනෙකින් වත් නොගන්නා ස්ථාවර අපේ රටේ දෙමළ ජාතික සංධානය දෙවරක් නොසිතා කිසිදු පැකිලීමකින් තොරව ගන්නේ ඇයි කියලා තමයි අපි විමසලා බලන්න ඕන. ඒ අය ඉන්දියාවේ 16 වන සංශෝධනය වැනි නීතියකට යටත් වුණා නම් ඔය ස්ථාවර ගන්නේ නෑ.

අලූත් ව්‍යවස්ථාව සම්පාදනය කිරීමේ ක‍්‍රියාපටිපාටිය ගැන දැනට ප‍්‍රකාශ වෙලා තියෙන අදහස් දිහා බලන කොට ව්‍යවස්ථා සම්පාදන ක‍්‍රියාවලියට ශ්‍රේෂ්ඨාධිකරණයේ මැදිහත් වීමක් ඇතැම් අය බලාපොරොත්තු වන බව පේනවා. ඒ අයට ඕන අලූත් ව්‍යවස්ථාවෙන් රටේ ඒකීය භාවය වෙනස් වෙනවා ද නැද්ද කියන එක ගැන ශ්‍රේෂ්ඨාධිකරණයේ මතය දැනගන්න. අපේ ව්‍යවස්ථාවේ 120 (ආ) වගන්තියට අනුව කැබිනට් මණ්ඩලය විසින් යම්කිසි ව්‍යවස්ථා සංශෝධනයක් “පාර්ලිමේන්තුවේ තුනෙන් දෙකේ බලයට අමතරව ජනමත විචාරණයකනුත් සම්මත වෙන්න ඕන” කියලා ප‍්‍රකාශ කලොත් ශ්‍රේෂ්ඨාධිකරණයට ඒ පනත් කෙටුම්පත පිළිබදව විමර්ශනය කරන්න බලය නැති වෙනවා. ඒ වගේ තත්වයක් යටතේ බොහෝ අයතුල නොයෙක් සැකයන් පහළ වෙන්න ඉඩ තියෙනවා.

ඉතින් අර මම කලින් ප‍්‍රකාශ කළ ආකාරයට මෙම ව්‍යවස්ථා සම්පාදන ක‍්‍රියාවලිය අදියර කීපයකට කඩන අතරම ඒ එක් එක් අදියර සම්බන්ධයෙන් අවශ්‍ය කෙනෙකුට ශ්‍රේෂ්ඨාධිකරණයෙන් මත විමසන්න ඉඩ ඉතුරු කරගන්න ඕන. ඒ නිසා නව ව්‍යවස්ථාව අදියරෙන් අදියර සම්මත කර ගන්නකොට අදාල කෙටුම්පත් වර්තමාන ව්‍යවස්ථාවේ 120(අ) වගන්තිය ප‍්‍රකාරව “ව්‍යවස්ථාව සංශෝධනය කිරීම සදහා කෙටුම්පතක්” හැටියට පමණක් කැබිනට් මණ්ඩලය විසින් නම්කල යුතු යැයි මම යෝජනා කරනවා. 120 (අ) වගන්තිය යටතේ කෙටුම්පතක් නම් කරනු ලැබීමෙන් ශ්‍රේෂ්ඨාධිකරණයට ඒ කෙටුම්පත සම්බන්ධයෙන් හොයලා බලන්න ඉඩ ඉතුරු වෙනවා. රටේ ඒකීය භාවය ගැන සැලකිළිමත් වන ජනාතාවට ඒක ලොකු අස්වැසිල්ලක් වේවි කියල මම හිතනවා.

අලූත් ව්‍යවස්ථාව සම්පාදනය කෙරුවට පස්සෙ ඒ යටතේ අලූත් ආණ්ඩුවක් පත්කර ගැනීම සදහා ඡන්දයක් පවත්වන එකත් සුදුසුයි කියලා මම යෝජනා කරනවා.

ස්තුතියි.
මහින්ද රාජපක්‍ෂ
හිටපු ජනාධිපති

යුතුකම සංවාද කවය

www.yuthukama.com

මහින්දලාගේ  නව පක්ෂය

January 17th, 2016

ධර්මසිරි සෙනෙවිරත්න

මහින්දලාගේ යනුවෙන් යෙදුයේ මෙය මහින්ද පමණක් මුලික වී ඔහුගේම මහන්සියෙන් හදන පක්ෂයක් නොව මහින්දටත් වඩා රට බේරා ගැනීමට අවශ්ෂ් අනෙක් දේශප්රේමීන් මුල්වී හදන පක්ෂයක් නිසය් . කොටිසමුලඝාතනය කිරීම නිසා පොදුජනයා අතර ජනප්රිය මහින්ද පක්ෂය ඉදිරියට ගෙන යන පෙරමුණේ රාල වී ඇත .. ඇතිවී නැතිවී යන විවිධ දේශප්රේමී  පක්ෂ යය්  කියා ගන්නා  බොහෝ  සංවිධාන වලට වඩා මේ හදන පක්ෂය ඉතා පැහැදිලි ජාතික දර්ශනයකින්  යුක්ත විය යුතුය  එය සිංහල බෞද්ධ සංස්කෘතියේ  විශේෂත්වය පැහැදිලිවම පිළිගන්නා පක්ෂයක් විය යුතුමය  ගැන වහෙන් ඔරෝ නැතුව ඉතා නිරවුල්ව කිවයුතුය .

                                                           සිංහල රාජ්යත්වය අනුව ජීවත්වන රජුගෙන් පසු  රජකම ලැබෙන්නේ සොහොයුරාටය. එනිසා මහින්ද තම සොයුරු ගොතාභය  මීළඟ නායකයා කිරී මට කටයුතුකලයුතුය . මහින්දටත් වඩා ගොඨාභය  ජනප්රියය. මෙය පවුල් රජ කිරීමක් ලෙසින් මේ වතාවේ නොසිතිය යුතුයද්රෝහීන් පැරදවීමට වීරයෙක් අවශ්ශය.
මේ පක්ෂයේ   සරත් වීරසේකරට  ලැබෙන හා දෙන තැන අනුව පක්ෂයේ දර්ශනයේ පැහැදිලිකම පෙනෙනු ඇත ..සරත් වීරසේකර හවුල් පක්ෂ වල නායකයෙක් නොවන නිසා පසුපෙලල දමන්නේ නම් පක්ෂයට ඉදිරිගමනක් නැත .සරත් තරම් ජීවිත පූජාවෙන් රට වෙනුවෙන් සටන් කල වෙනත්  අපේක්ෂකයෙක් දේශපාලනයේ දැන් නැත . ඔහුව දිගා මඩුල්ලෙන් පරදුවේ මුස්ලිම් මිනිස්සුය  . ඔහු නියම සිංහලයෙක් නිසාය  හරිනම් ගම්මන්  පිලලා වැනි අය
තම තනතුරු අත්හැර හෝ සරත්  ඉදිරියට ගත යුතුය . සියලු දේශ ප්රෙමීහු  මේ ගැන බලා සිටිති වාසු   දයාන් ජයතිලක ජී එල් පීරිස්   වැනි ෆෙඩරල් වාදීන්  කොය් වෙලේ අනිත් පැත්ත ගහයදා  කියා සරත් ලා අසගසාගෙන සිටිය යුතුය . මොවුන්    බරහිර හෝ ඉන්දියානු ඉත්තෝ වියහැක .කල්යල් බල මින් සිටින්නෝ විය හැක

පක්ෂයේ දර්ශනය සැකසීමට අනිවාර්යයෙන්ම මහාචාර්ය නලින් සිල්වා  ගතයුතුමයදිනේෂ් නම් පුළුල් දැනුමක් ඇති දේශ ප්රේමීයා  නලින් ගැන හොඳට දන්නා අයෙකි දිනේෂ්  ඔබට විශාල වැඩකොටසක් ඇත .                                            හොඳය්  අපි බලා සිටිමු .

Mr Gopalkrishna Gandhi, your slip is showing !

January 17th, 2016

by Rajeewa Jayaweera Courtesy The Island


The greatest Indian of modern times, Mahatma Gandhi once said “there is a higher court than the court of justice and that is the court of conscience. It supersedes all other courts”. His grandson, Gopalkrishna Gandhi (GG), former diplomat and one time Indian High Commissioner to Sri Lanka, delivered the keynote address at the ceremony to mark the first anniversary of President Sirisena in office. Considering the contents of GG’s address, one could rightfully wonder if he is a man with a conscience and worthy of being referred to as a relative of the great Mahatma.

After praising former President Rajapaksa for giving political leadership to the task of defeating LTTE terrorism, hitherto not given by any of our former Presidents both dead and still alive, GG proceeded to castigate Sri Lanka on the issues of War Crimes and treatment of the Tamil community.

article_image
Mr. Gopalkrishna Gandhi

GG attributed the death of Prabhakaran’s 12-year old son to the GoSL and Sri Lankan Army. By stating, “the killing in cold blood, of a child, for sole reason, that he was his father’s son, has left the world in cold horror”, GG has assumed the roles of prosecutor, judge, and jury all by himself. There is no tangible proof of young Balachandran being executed by SLA. It has not been established if he was executed or a casualty in a crossfire, attempting to cross battle lines while fleeing from SLA. It behooves GG to substantiate his claim with irrefutable proof.

GG must prove his credentials of being a champion against war crimes. When and where has he spoken of war crimes taking place elsewhere, similar to the example he used to castigate Sri Lanka? What was his stand in the case of proven events such as one of Osama Bin Laden’s young sons killed in the shootout, shooting of Osama Bin Laden in the presence of his 12-year old daughter during ‘Operation Neptune Spear’, scores of 12-year olds, both boys and girls in Iraq, Afghanistan and Syria who have lost limb and life during American drone strikes to name a few? Or does he justify such killings by India’s new found ally, the USA, as ‘collateral damage’, but castigate Sri Lanka for a crime yet to be proven? One wonders if GG is aware that his grandfather once said ‘to believe in something, and not to live it, is dishonest’.

GG further stated “if the Ponnambalams and Chelvanayakams had not been disappointed, spurned and marginalized, Velupillai Pirbakaran would not have been required. We may not have those great leaders of Sri Lanka today, but we have in the Tamil leaders of Sri Lanka today, let us not forget, persons who have survived terror. The Tamil Nationalists who has striven to find political solutions within a united Sri Lanka is a terror survivor. The very presence of such a politician is a huge acknowledgement of the efficacy and strength of perseverance”.

Once again, before making such grandiose assertions, should not GG look inside India and ask himself of the status of Muslims in Indian Occupied Kashmir? Why have over 100,000 Kashmiris lost their lives since 1947? For what purpose are 500,000 Indian troops based in Indian Occupied Kashmir, unleashing terror and repression? What of the draconian Indian laws such as Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (TADA), Jammu & Kashmir Public Safety Act 1978, The Armed Forces Special Power Act 1990 (AFSPA), Jammu & Kashmir Disturbed Area Act 1990 and Prevention of Terrorism Act (POTA) 2002 which constitute a repressive tool in the hands of Indian forces to harass and intimidate innocent Kashmiris? The infamous AFSPA protects members of security forces from prosecution for alleged Human Rights abuses and empower security forces to search, detain and use lethal force against any person acting against the law. GG who hails from and has been a representative, of a country involved in such deplorable acts does not have the moral right pass judgement on Sri Lanka’s national question.

GG’s high principled address conveniently left out India’s involvement in nurturing, training, arming and funding LTTE terrorism, the use of force against Sri Lanka to prevent the annihilation of LTTE by SLA in 1987 thus extending Sri Lanka’s misery and agony by another 22 years, the violation of Sri Lanka’s sovereignty followed by the unwanted drop of food over Jaffna, sending an Occupation Force termed as a Peace Keeping Force after having coerced an ‘invitation’ from a weak and hapless President and refusing to even sell armaments, desperately needed by Sri Lanka, even as late as 2000 when GG himself was India’s High Commissioner in Sri Lanka. There was also no mention of the need to investigate if IPKF had committed war crimes during the occupation of the Northern and Eastern Provinces.

This discourse is not an attempt to justify war crimes committed by SLA if any or the injustices meted out to the Tamil community. It is an attempt to highlight a new tendency which has begun to evolve since 08 January 2015. It is that of the Prime Minister, Ministers, officials and in this instance even a retired official from India arriving in Sri Lanka, giving unsolicited advice even in our Parliament, passing strictures on how Sri Lanka conducted its own war on terrorism, its foreign relations and at least one Indian Union Minister making a statement in the Indian Lok Sabha, contradicting our own Prime Ministerial statement in our Parliamenton the Indo-Sri Lanka Bridge issue, to name a few.

Sri Lanka is no doubt a small and powerless country. We need to maintain cordial relations with India for our own good and avoid any acts, detrimental to India’s security. Beyond that, Sri Lanka must retain the freedom to conduct its own foreign and trade relations as it sees fit, without having to kowtow to India. Sri Lanka must retain and must be seen to retain its sovereignty and independence. It cannot be or be seen to being the 30th state of India.

In the Indo – Sri Lanka Relations balance sheet, India had a massive surplus of injustices meted out to Sri Lanka since late 1970s till as recently as 2012. Some of our leaders tend to ignore this fact as their outlook is from a political rather than a national perspective. However, to many ordinary persons without a political or commercial agenda, especially those who lived through the turbulent and traumatic days of the air drop, IPKF etc., the sense of outrage continues and requires a closure. Such a closure is only possible if and when India acknowledges its role and mistakes during Sri Lanka’s war on LTTE terrorism, followed by an apology suitably worded in a manner maintaining India’s own pride and dignity.

This writer would like to conclude by quoting the great Mahatma to GG, “an error does not become truth by reason of multiplied propagation, nor does truth become error because nobody sees it; to India I suppose leadership at one time meant muscles; but today it means getting along with people” and to our own leaders “it is any day better to stand erect with a broken and bandaged head than to crawl on one’s belly, in order to be able to save one’s head”.


Copyright © 2016 LankaWeb.com. All Rights Reserved. Powered by Wordpress