Sri Lanka strangled to death by the by-chance UNP government”  leader  29 times rejected by the people, and his yes man” the President.

April 27th, 2015

By Charles.S.Perera

The Government of  UNP leader Ranil Wickramasinghe  unconstitutionally sworn in as Prime Minister by the President Maithripala Siriena hoisted to the office  by the Tamil and Muslim voters is strangling  Sri Lanka to death .  The intention is to replace it with a robotic Island subservient to  USA , the West and India.

The sole intention of the UNP Government of President Sirisena who in turn is being strangled by Ranil Wickramasinghe, Chandrika Kumaratunaga, John Kerry, David Cameron and Indian Modi is to eliminate Rajapakse family from politics.

Rajapaksas have become a thorn in the flesh of  ambitious Ranil Wickramasinghe, Chandrika Kumaratunga, Champika Ranawaka, Anura Kumara Dissanayake, Nimal Siripala de Silva, Rajitha Senaratne all who have Presidential ambitions.  As long as Mahinda Rajapakse is living, the ambitions of these set of hangmen of Sri Lanka  will remain  unfulfilled. The only alternative is to eliminate him from contesting a Presidential election in future, or see him languishing in a prison cell.

Maithripala Sirisena who became  President by chance has admitted he is not a free man but a political prisoner of USA, the West and India, without guts to say no either to the west or  to Ranil and Madam Chandrika. What a glum situation for him         and what a sad situation for the people of Sri Lanka the Sinhala Buddhists in particular ?

The unconstitutional, therefore illegal UNP Government of Maithripala Sirisena put forward an ambitious 100 day program which produced nothing but a non stop hunt for bribe takers, commission takers, fraudsters of the previous government of President Mahinda Rajapakse, but  where are the arrested and where is the bounty supposed to have been hidden in foreign banks by the former President Mahinda Rajapakse .

To culminate their mad  hunt for thieves they have finally got the Bribery Commission to call the former President to be interrogated not for taking bribes, commissions or  stealing money but simply for making the former Secretary of UNP who crossedover  the  Ministerial of Health.

Whose idea was it ,  Ranil Wickramasinghe’s ? Chandrika’s ? Mangala’s ? John Kerry’s ?or  Narendra Modi’s?   Who ever was behind it, it  is the most ridiculous, undignified blatantly stupid  act of all .  It was merely to culminate their unsuccessful hunt for thieves in the Mahinda Rajapakse government, merely to make USA,the West and India happy.

John Kerry, Hillary Clinton or Barrack Obama who never wanted to visit a then prosperous fast developing  Sri Lanka under President Mahinda Rajapakse seem to be falling over each other to visit Sri Lanka which changed over night on the 8th of January, 2015, the  moment  Ranil Wickramasinghe was sworn in as Prime Minister to a puppet regime of the West and India.  It was a clever  manoeuvring by USA and the West and RAW of India for a  successful regime change.

USA, the West and India tried their best to change the Government of President Rajapakse  by staging an uprising of the people as  it was in Egypt and Tunisia with the Arab Spring  or  by sporadic rebel attacks as they did to topple Colonel Gaddafi with a  USA and West aided rebel groups they set up beginning  from Bengazzi.

How did the USA and the West manage the Regime Change in Sri Lanka ?  There is no doubt about the hand of the West in it, David Milliband’s New year Greetings to Sri Lanka Tamils speak a lot .  Now it is evident why David Miliband and Bernard Kouchner came during the  final stage of terrorist war in Sri Lanka to demand a cease fire and a request to visit the terrorist leaders in the no-fire zone.

They had no love for Sri Lanka or the Tamils,  but they wanted to make Sri Lanka a puppet banana state  depending  completely on USA and the West, separated from China and Russia, which they have now successfully achieved.

USA and the West worked for the regime change of  the then President Mahinda Rajapakse’s Government and Armed Forces branding them as violators of human rights and committing  war crimes during the last phase of the war against terrorists.

How did the USA, the West and India do it ?  They had been working at it secretly taking Ranil Wickramasinghe and the UNP stalwarts like Kabir Hachim, Mangala Samaraweera, Lakshman Kiriella, Harsha de Silva , Chandrika, Rajitha Senaratne, the JVP and Jathika Hela Urumaya to their confidence.  It was simply raising  the corruption issue of a  Rajapakse Regimaya incessantly pronounced at every given opportunity by Ranil Wickramasingheand his cohorts. Raising a huge cry of enrichment of the  Rajapakse family.  JVP and the JHU joined in. 

They went on making the naïve  people believe in it and wished for a  change a venesa” It was simply that the invented  corruption issue that toppled the Mahinda Rajapakse Government.

But the Maithripala Sirisena- Ranil Wickramasinghe  Government  has not still found evidence of such mega corruption by the President Mahinda Rajapakse, his brothers or his Ministers or Heads of Companies.   Maithripala Sirisena and Ranil Wickramasinghe went beating bushes  with the whole UNP Cabinet of Ministers looking for bribe takers, commission earners and thieves who misappropriated government funds. They were able only to put Basil Rajapakse and a few others in  remand jail, without  any substantial evidence of any theft or misappropriation against them.

Ironically it turned out that the greatest theft in the  banking history of Sri Lanka   had been committed by Arjuna Mahendran –  the  Governor of the Central Bank selected by Ranil Wickramasinghe.

The greatest racketeer and money launderer turned out to be none other than the Christian Tamil Finance Minister Ravi Karunanayake who helped launder three million Dollars of blood money belonging to Raja Rajaratnam the the financial supporter of the Sri Lanka terrorists., the case against him is  being shelved.

It is not the Rajapakses or any of their family members or any of  his Ministers , that should be in prison under yahapalanaya, but Ravi Karunanayake and Arjuna Mahendran

This Government of Maithripala Sirisena is not a government to be proud of  by the Sri Lankans. It is the most shameful government that was ever set up in Sri Lanka.

The UNP Ministers have done nothing credible  or beneficial to the country  during the past 100 days other than hunting for thieves of the previous government of Mahinda Rajapakse without any success despite having their own Tamil Chief Justice; the judges and magistrates, the  police,  Commissioner of Bribery and Corruption and the SLBA at their call

The Government of Maithripala Sirisena  has changed the face of Sri Lanka which Mahinda Rajapakse  shaped with untiring  effort  despite the continuous difficulties put before him by the USA and the West with accusation of violation of human rights  with resolutions after resolutions at the UNHRC.

Maitripala Sirisena and his UNP Government have  strangled Sri Lanka squeezing the last breath of life, turning Sri Lanka into  a Zombie  now being manipulated  by USA, the West and India. 

Neither  Maigthripala Sirisena nor Rani Wickrmasinghe  can even dream of giving Back to Sri Laka what it had received from Mahinda Rajapaksa and a few dedicated Ministers.  Maithripala Sirisena’s Government has neither the ability nor the intelligence to develop Sri Lanka as it was done by the President Mahinda Rajapakse. 

This Government of Maithripala Sirisena lacks any innovative ideas, and the President is a name board without any intelligence or the moral strength to stand against his   handlers”- USA, the West, India, Ranil Wickramasinghe, Chandrika Kumaratunga, Champika Ranawaka, Mangala Samaraweera or Rajitha Senaratne.

The life squeezed out” Sri Lanka is today being prepared for a Tamil State without any security against a future revitalisation of terrorism.  The fishing rights of the Sri Lanka Tamil fishermen in the Sri Lankan waters have been partially denied to them giving the Indian fishermen a legal right to fish in the Sri Lankan waters

Maithripala Sirisena , Ranil Wickramasinghe, Chandrika, Mangala Samaraweera are preparing the ground to eliminate  Mahinda Rajapakse, his family, and all those who hold any allegiance to them from contesting future elections paving  the way for a UNP Government to come into power.

Nimal Siripala Silva and the some of the  stupid SLFP leaders and power greedy SLFP Ministers who have secured Ministries in Ranil Wickramasinghe’s cabinet are shamelessly selling their self respect to support Maithripala Sirisena and Ranil Wickramasinghe  to pass  the dangerous 19th Amendment to the Constitution kicking aside  democratic norms and any respect to the Constitution of Sri Lanka.

Now Maitripala Sirisena and Ranil Wickramasinghe are using their police , their judges and magistrates to accuse those who took part in manifestations carrying a flag without the two green and orange stripes of the National flag ( the stripes which only indicates the division of the country according to Communities in Sri Lanka, but not a symbol of unification of  communities), when the whole history of Maithripala-Ranil Wickramasinghe Government is of blatant disregard to the Constitution of Sri Lanka, without any respect for  moral rights,and norms.

  1. i) appointment of Ranil Wickramasinghe  Prime Minister of Sri Lanka  by Maithripala Sirisena  disregarding the Constitution when there was already a Prime Minister of an elected Government,
  2. ii) allowing the Tamils to sing the Sri Lanka National anthem in Tamil,

iii)                appointing a National of Singapore as the Governor of the Central Bank conferring on him a Sri Lankan Citizenship in 24 hours,

  1. iv) Dismissing the Chief Justice Mohan Pieris and appointing a Tamil as the Chief justice without following the Constitutional procedures,
  2. v) Summoning  a former President of Sri Lanka to the Bribery Commission to record a Statement,
  3. vi) Not searching and arresting the person who hoisted a LTTE flag in Jaffna,

vii)              Appointing a person accused of laundering LTTE money, against whom a case is pending- Ravi Karunanayake as the Finance Minister of Sri Lanka,

viii)            Appointing a family friend of the(pseudo) Prime Minister Ranil Wicramasinghe as the Commissioner of Bribery and Corruption,

  1. ix) Threatening the dissolution of Parliament as a threat to force MPs to vote in favour of the 19th Amendment,
  2. x) Allowing a Christian Deputy Minister to enter into a Buddhist Meditation Centre to investigate corruption,
  1. xi)       Above all the false accusations of corruption against the President Mahinda Rajapakse; Gotabhaya Rajapakse, Wimal Weerawansa, and many others

without a semblance of evidence against them, yet giving publicity before any investigations against them had been made with the intention  to damage their reputation  and popularity,

Maithripala Sirisena is now inviting John Kerry the USA Secretary of State to declare open a Weska thorana.  What relation has John Kerry to a Wesak thorana and Sri Lanka as a matter of fact against which they passed  Resolutions in the UNHRC ?

Chandrika the double  Agent for CIA and MI6 has come out with a new theory of the ethnic conflict in Sri Lanka.  It was reported as follows in the New Indian Express of 26th April, 2015, In her SJV Chelvanayakam oration on Winning the war is not establishing peace” held under the auspices of the Ilankai Tamil Arasu Katchi, Kumaratunga said the root cause of the unending ethnic conflict in Lanka is the monopolisation of the political, economic and social resources of the country by the majority Sinhala community to the exclusion of the minority communities……”.

What a concocted lie to please a Tamil audience !!!

Every country in the world has a majority  Community and a minority Communities and in every one of those countries the minority Communities accept the language, the flag,  the National Anthem of the majority Community and submit to their customs , practices and laws. It is only in Sri Lanka that the majority has bent backwards to please the minority Tamils and Muslims.   Therefore this woman Chandrika plays her non-patriotic Western double Agent card to destroy the Sinhala majority for the benefit of who ever she serves.

In the Parliament today the President Maithripala Sirisena made a speech in support of the  19 Amendment  explaining its value to strengthen democracy in Sri Lanka, make a beneficial good governance for the benefit of the people.  But of course either he himself does not know  or he knows but in obedience to those he serves he does not want to speak of the  evil other side of the 19th Amendment with its plethora of  Commissions.

Of course the UNP and other Minority political parties will support it, as it benefits them what ever repercussions it will have to Sri Lanka and its people.  But the Members of the SLFP and the UPFA if they have a modicum of brain to think of the evil of the 19th Amendment should vote against it, as the better thing to do is not to make ad hoc Amendments to the Constitution , but to  prepare a new constitution  removing the obnoxious Amendments such as the 13 Amendment.

It is still not wise to do away with the  Executive Presidency, while the 13th Amendment remains in the Constitution of Sri Lanka.  Therefore the SLFP Parliamentarians should vote against it, as it is patriotic to do so.

 Voting to pass the 19th Amendment to please the  President Maithripla Sirisena is being a traitor to the motherland.  The motherland Sri Lanka is not ready for the 19th Amendment and the patriotic Parliamentarians  should oppose it without fear or fervour.

To write a new Constitution  the Parliamentary elections should be held and the New Parliament  should sit as a Constitutional Body and write the Constitution with the Participation of all the Parliamentarians.  This is  what the SLFP and the UPFA should propose while voting against the 19th Amendment.

It is time that some thing is done to revitalise Sri Lanka and bring back to it the glory that was there before the 9th January, 2015. We should begin this upward task by first voting against the 19th Amendment.

Repeating What the JRJ Did

April 27th, 2015

Jay Deshabandu

The 19th amendment would be tabled in the parliament very soon. The Sobitha Thera’s Sathyagrha” or the protest against those who oppose the passing of the 19th amendment in its present form could perhaps get the attention of the Sinhala Buddhist and a few others.  For one thing, he is wearing a yellow rob and for another he is a respected clergy among the Buddhist circles.  I too have a respect for him.

But the honorable monk is not following, in this instance, what the Lord Buddha has taught us:  do not believe or accept anything unless you have seen it and convinced it for yourself.   If he wants to convince us,  he must educate the public on the content of the 19th agreement.

He should not ask people to believe in the contents of the 19th amendment just because he thinks he is a righteous Buddhist monk and a leader of an organization.  Can someone ask to take Buddhism as a religion without explaining what the Buddha has taught?

Is he forcing us to believe that appointing, without electing, an executive prime minister as right and democratic?  In India, for example, the executive prime minister is elected by the people. Should our people give up their right to choose an executive prime minister?  Are we a dysfunctional nation? Are our standards below that of Indians?

According to media, even President Sirisena , and many SLFP VIP members did not approve some aspects and contents of the 19th amendment.  Fortunately, it is comforting to note that some corrections and insertions will be added to it to be proper.

But our good Buddhist monk,  Sobitha Thera does not show any reservation on any content of the amendment and he is forcing us to believe it blindly from its inception in the incubation period.

Mr. Sirisena should not do anything similar to what the The greatest the grate honorable” JRJ did, whose curse ruined our young lives and led us to be in this mess today.

I believe that corrected final version of the 19th amendment and its contents should be available and explained to the members of the parliament before the beginning of a debate so that members of the parliament will be able to reflect the  nature of the ghost before putting their hands up!

Response to CBK’S recent speech at the Chelvanayagam memorial

April 27th, 2015

VIJECK

CBK the architect of the political coup that subverted Sri Lanka’s Constitution on 08 Jan 15, as usual is parroting the US line. It was she who spread the slogan that ‘the war is unwinnable’; it was she who castrated the military with her Norwegian’ ‘Sudu Nelum’ street dramas that made it impossible to recruit people to the military; it was she (with RW) who gave financial and political control of the North and the East to the US with her PTOMS.

The US hijacked the Eelam terrorist movement from India when they took control of the LTTE around 1985; the US piggy backed on the LTTE and made their imperial war (to establish a foothold on the island) Sri Lanka’s ethnic war.

It is impossible for the US to restart the proxy war they waged on Sri Lanka for 30 years because their proxy terrorists were decimated and terrorists like Prabhakaran are not born dime a dozen.

Diplomacy is the continuation of war by other means when proxy war is impossible; the objective of diplomacy remains the same and that is what the result of 08 Jan 15 was about..

‘Majoritarian’ rule is a slogan pushed by the US and parroted by CBK, NGOs and others of their ilk.

60% of the Tamil Community is happy to live outside the North and the East with the other communities who in turn are happy to live with their Tamil brothers and sisters.

The US is eager to create conflict so that their Conflict Resoluters can ‘diplomatically’ realise US goals which they lost with the decimation of their proxy terrorists

‘The Durable Peace’ line is a veiled threat. The country does not have to worry about that threat pushed by US through CBK, NGOs and others. There are no proxy Sri Lankan terrorists ‘worthy of their salt,’ The Sri Lankan military will handle them very effectively.

CBK’s stance is understandable; she works with the ultra right of the Western world; she works with the Indonesian Darusman (of ‘Darusman Report on Sri Lanka’ ill fame) in a secretive and exclusive NGO called ‘The Global leadership Foundation’; some of her bedfellows in this organisation of about 38 are Gareth Evans, Thomas Pickering, Chester Crocker, Tom Daschle, Elisabeth Rehn and Javier Solana, the latter being a one time Secretary General of the NATO and High Representative for EU Foreign Policy; the Foundation was founded by apartheidist F W de Klerk and its patron is George H W Bush.

If CBK wins a ‘Nobel Prize for peace she will personally be richer by one Million USD.

The 19th Amendment which will weaken the Sri Lankan State and pushed by CBK must be voted against and CBK should be investigated.

Maithripala – The New ‘Queen’ of Sri Lanka!

April 27th, 2015

-Metteyya Brahmana

Many astute observers said before the January 8th election, including Mahinda Rajapaksa, that Maithripala Sirisena is simply a puppet of Ranil” – the front guy who enables Ranil Wickramasinge and the UNP to run Sri Lanka through the backdoor.  In fact, Rajapaksa, after his defeat, did not even include Maithripala in the organized transfer of power, and instead dealt only with Ranil.

Now, after 100 days, these observations appear to be spot-on, and even suggest that Maithripala is  taking on a new role as ‘ceremonial president’ – a president with no substantive power but who occupies the position for historical reasons and to create the appearance that constitutional duties are being carried out as prescribed.  Certainly, no real president who is ‘head of the cabinet’ as indicated in the Sri Lankan constitution would dare outsource the appointment of nearly all of the important cabinet positions to his Prime Minister unless he were simply a figurehead.

The problem with the ceremonial president is that Maithripala never indicated to the voters in the January election that this was the role he wished to undertake.  He never said that by appointing Ranil as his Prime Minister he was going to give him de facto control of the Sri Lankan government.  Had he said this, there is a good chance that he would have lost the election given the super-slim 51% victory.  In other words, unilaterally changing the role of the president to a mere ceremonial role defrauds the Sri Lankan voter.  Granted, many of these voters did not want the president to be a ‘dictator’, but going to the opposite extreme by creating a ceremonial president is not something the voter endorsed.

There are also serious constitutional problems with outsourcing the duties, functions, and power of the president.  Article 43(2) requires the president to be the ‘head of the cabinet’, 43(3) requires the president to appoint the person as Prime Minister who ‘most likely is able to command the confidence of Parliament’, and 37(1) restricts the president from outsourcing his duties and power unless he is ill or incapacitated in some way.  It is clear that Maithripala is violating both the spirit and letter of all of these constitutional provisions, as Ranil is the de facto head of the cabinet.  In fact, in one case, Maithripala simply told a complaining state minister – Rajiva Wijesinha – who sought a cabinet position in the new government to talk to Chandrika and to Ranil as it is they who decide on the cabinet”.  Ranil would also lose an up-or-down vote on the confidence issue, which is why he is bribing SLFP members with minor minister positions under the guise of a ‘unity government’. Maithripala is not ill or incapacitated in some way, so the de facto transfer of presidential power to Ranil is plainly unconstitutional.

One can’t help but reflect on Maithripala’s recent visit with the Queen of England, and how impressed he was with her, as we look at his new role as the ceremonial president.  Under the Westminister model in the UK, the Queen does appoint the prime minister who contested as a national candidate from the party who garnered the most votes in the general election, and gives him and his party the first crack at forming a coalition government if they got less than a majority of votes.  Except for times of crises in which the ‘Royal Prerogative’ can be exercised, the Queen does not disturb the running of the government by the Prime Minister and his cabinet of ministers.  Unfortunately for Maithripala, the Westminister model was never adopted in Sri Lanka, and such a major change in how Sri Lanka is governed must be put to the voters in a referendum, not forced upon them through backroom deals with Ranil.  Moreover, even if we were to apply the Westminister model, Ranil never faced the voter as a national candidate of his party, and had he done so, he certainly would have lost again, and this is why he chose Maithripala as the common candidate rather than contest from his own party as president.

It is still too early to tell how this will turn out in the upcoming general election, but if I were Ranil Wickramasinghe, I would face the voters directly this time and accept the result.  And if Maithripala admires the Queen of England as much as he says he does, and Mahinda contests as Prime Minister in the upcoming election and wins with the most seats in parliament, he must act like the Queen and acknowledge that the people have decided that they want Mahinda to be the Prime Minister, and that he is therefore most likely to command the confidence of Parliament.   And like the Queen, Maithripala has to put personal differences aside, and let Mahinda and his cabinet run Sri Lanka just like he is doing now with Ranil.

The SLFP stood for the Sinhala Masses: It stood up for Socialism and Progress.

April 27th, 2015

By Garvin Karunaratne

In today’s context when some of our own leaders have thought it fit to balkanize the SLFP, it is necessary for the current leaders as well as the Sinhala masses to  be aware that the SLFP was the only Political Party that stood for the masses of the Sinhala people- the downtrodden- those who have  suffered since  the colonial period. As Rohana Wasala recently said, the SLFP is the only strong national party that honestly works to promote the interests of the majority community while doing the same for the minorities.”

It is up to today’s political leaders of the SLFP to remember  what the SLFP stood for since its inception in 1951. The SLFP was created by SWRD Bandaranayake in 1951, when he resigned from the UNP along with other Ministers and Members of Parliament, A.P.Jayasuriya, Jayaweera Kuruppu,, George R. de Silva, D.A. Rajapaksa and D.S.Gunasekera.  In explaining why he formed a new party, SWRD Bandaranayake said When I helped in the formation of the UNP, encouraged the Sinhala Maha Sabha to join it,   agreed to be a member of this cabinet, it was done with the intention of giving stability to the new Government of the new era. I thought that the socialist ideas  will be promoted step by step in the future and also the problems faced by the country will be solved simultaneously.”

Thus the SLFP stood for socialist ideas from the outset..

It is upto every Sinhala person to realize that the SLFP stood for socialist ideas, the progress of the downtrodden, the poor- the masses and to tell their political leaders that the SLFP has to be resurrected somehow. Many of the Members of Parliament of today  are unaware of the early achievements of the SLFP because most of them were not even born in 1956.

. At the General Election of 1956, the UNP was led by Sir John Kotalawala.  SWRD Bandaranayake of the SLFP formed the Mahajana Eksath Peramuna comprising the SLFP. VLSSP(Viplawakari Lanka Sama samaja Party led by Philip Gunawardena and some other parties. The Sinhala Buddhists fought  a major campaign with Venerable Henpitagedera Gnanasiha Thera. as their leader. He was a great orator and for months he was touring the electorates in his Volkswagon addressing the people.. For some two months, everyday,  he left his Temple at Mudduwa, Ratnapura in the wee hours of the morning and came back around midnight to be greeted by us.  His Motto was: Are you a Sinhalese? Are you a Buddhist? Then vote for the SLFP. The masses were mesmerized with his speeches. There was an awakening in the country and the MEP was victorious..

The SLFP with the support of some leftist parties has ruled Sri Lanka from 1956 to March 1960, from June 1960 to 1965, from 1970 to 1977 and finally from 1994 to 2015. The days when the SLFP ruled is marked with progressive  economic programmes and the creation of economic infrastructure that helped the common people. It is unfortunate that most of these progressive measures  have been neglected today. The leaders of the SLFP tried hard to follow a non aligned policy- to steer clear from belonging either to the forces of imperialism or the socialist block. On the whole the attempt was to help the masses to get them on their feet.

In addition to administering normal economic development programmes and maintaining day to day administration, the main achievements of the SLFP during the periods it ruled the country were:

The Paddy Lands Act

The People’s Bank

The Multi purpose Cooperative Movement

Cooperative Wholesale Establishment

Small Industries Programme including Handlooms and Powerlooms

The Divisional Development Councils Programme

Defeating Terrorism

The Paddy lands Act and the Multipurpose Cooperative Movement was the programme initiated by Mr Philip Gunawardena in 1956. He worked with Mr SWRD Bandaranayake to deliver the peasants from a situation of servitude. Sri Lankan paddy farming is done by a mass of small holders who have no stake as owners. Instead they are tenants who have to pay to the landlord- the owner of the paddy lands 50% of the crop, while it was the tenant that had to bear the cost of finding seed, providing the labour and all cultivation expenses. The PLAct  stipulated that the landlord could claim only a fourth of the crop. In a few Districts the landlords provided the seed paddy etc. The peasants had no security of tenure and could be deprived of the lands they cultivated by the landlord willy nilly. The PLAct specified that the landlord cannot dismiss the tenant. In addition the PLAct specified that paddy lands including the provision of irrigation water was to be administered by a committee( Cultivation Committee) which was bestowed with authority to organize paddy cultivation. The composition of the Cultivation Committee was to be  75% cultivators and 25% landlords. This composition did not rhyme well with the landlords..

This PLAct was a progressive legislation which brought about a major change- a revolution in paddy cultivation and it was resented by the rightist elements in the SLFP itself which led to the resignation of the founder  Mr Philip Gunawardena at  the very intitial stages in May 1959..  An entirely new Department – the Agrarian Services had been formed to implement the PLAct and every single officer recruited was handpicked. I happened to be one of them..  When the leader Philip Gunawardena was removed the mantle of carrying on the PLAct fell on the officers who continued the programme with vehemence.

The Cultivation Committees were elected and they continued to administer paddy cultivation. The success of paddy cultivation, even to the extent of making the country self sufficient in rice was entirely due to the Cultivation Committees. I myself organized the implementation of the PLAct in the Matara, Kegalla and Anuradhapura Distri ct from 1959 and the committees were extremely active in adopting improved methods of cultivation and in addition, the Committees were also entrusted with the repairs and restoration of irrigation works including tanks. The Cultivation Committees for the first time brought the people together to plan paddy cultivation. Earlier it was the agricultural officers who reached the farmers through the Village Headmen and the Vel Vidane. The use of improved seed paddy and new cultivation practices like transplanting, row seeding and application of fertilizers was planned and pursued. The Department of Agrarian Services built fertilizer stores overnight to enable fertilizer to reach the farmer.

The peasants had to receive support in terms of agricultural loans, to finance the purchase of seed paddy and fertilizer and also handle the purchase of paddy for which a premium price almost double the world market price was paid and this economic support was provided by a village level multipurpose cooperative society. Earlier there were a plethora of societies at the village level, one for distributing rations of food, a society to obtain loans, a savings cooperative etc and these functioned independently though in the same village. There was no  apex body to provide support to the village level societies. This was provided at the Divisional level  by creating a Union of Multipurpose Societies, fully equipped with storage and lorries. This Multipurpose Cooperative Movement was also a great progressive movement because it attended to provide economic support to the people.

Unfortunately, the wings of the PLAct was cut off during the UNP regime of President Jayawardena and so died the progressive revolution of the PLAct. With this the Cultivation Committees ceased to function. Today paddy cultivation does not have any organization belonging to the people. It is administered by officials who meet farmers on a casual basis. Under the Paddy lands Act farmers had a voice which has ceased today.

The Multipurpose Cooperatives functioned well. This was an economic commercial organization belonging to the people and though the PLAct was abolished the multipurpose cooperatives continued their functions. As will be shown in the section on the Divisional Development Councils, the Cooperatives played a major role in creating employment.

The Peoples Bank

Banking in Sri Lanka was done by the Bank of Ceylon, a State owned bank and a plethora of foreign banks.  The Bank of Ceylon had a few branches and the SLFP leaders  thought that a State bank should be established to cater to the needs of the  masses. This was done with the establishment of the Peoples Bank with many branches in the village areas. This was the brain child of Minister TB Illangaratne and his Ministry Secretary  Jayantha Kelegama. This Peoples Bank introduced banking to the masses. They delivered a major service to people who were earlier getting loans at very high rates of interest from village money lenders.  The Peoples Bank continues to provide services even today.

The Cooperative Wholesale Establishment(CWE)

In order to enable people to obtain imported goods,- non luxury goods at reasonable rates, the SLFP Government initiated the CWE which was charged with importing essential goods and selling them at retail outlets keeping a very small margin of profit.  This very unofficially controlled the prices at which the Private Sector retailers could sell and was a boon to the masses. The CWE had depots in many rural areas to help the people to obtain their requirements at cheap rates.

The CWE was axed and almost totally abolished during the time that Ranil Wickremasinghe became the Prime Minister in the UNP rule of 2002-2004. It was resurrected  by President Rajapaksa under the name Sathosa, but it did not reach the high levels of activitity during the CWE heydays. Once an organization is axed and dismantled it is costly and a tedious task to re establish it.

Thus it is clear that the SLFP stood for the masses, stood up with progressive ideals and every Member of Parliament should be proud of what has already been achieved. Both the Paddy lands Act as well as the Cooperative Wholesale Establishment were axed by the United National Party, the earlier by President Jayawardena and the latter by Prime Miniater Ranil Wickremasinghe.

The section on the achievement of the SLFP in Small Industries Development,  the Divisional Development Councils Programme and Defeating Terrorism, will follow.

Garvin Karunaratne, former SLAS

25 th April 2015

Petition · Urge Secretary Kerry to Retract Distorted Statement on Sri Lanka · Change.org

April 27th, 2015

Signed by 972 citizens, diaspora and supporters of Sri Lanka

In remarks made February 12, 2015, welcoming Sri Lankan Foreign Minister Mangala Samaraweera to Washington, Secretary of State John Kerry referred to a war that never took place: Sri Lanka’s 30-years of war with the Tamils.” Regretfully, Minister Samaraweera failed to point out this distortion and we, the undersigned, hasten to request that it be corrected.

Sri Lanka’s 30-year turmoil can best be summed up using President Obama’s ISIS analogy: it was a war on a terrorist group, not on the people it claimed to represent.

The Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) waged a brutal and lengthy armed campaign for a separate state, and the Sri Lankan government responded with military force, eventually eliminating it.

Any serious effort by the US or others to help Sri Lanka on its path to further reconciliation must start with this recognition: Sri Lanka was no more at war with its Tamil population than the American people with Muslims. The distinction is fundamental to the narratives of both nations.

In the case of Sri Lanka, especially the Sinhalese ethnic majority, separating a terrorist group from the broader religious/ethnic community it claims to represent, went beyond the realm of rhetoric and gruesome pictures of beheadings in a far off place. For Sri Lankans, it was a daily test of resolve in their very homes, streets, and work places as the LTTE carried out suicide bombings targeted at civilians, assassination of government ministers and political leaders (even a Sri Lankan President), killings of at least 400 Buddhist monks, and destruction of property, including sacred religious sites.

That 60% of Sri Lanka’s Tamil population lived, worked, and engaged in business among the Sinhalese in the south, away from the LTTE-controlled North, is testimony to that resolve. Additionally, upholding a policy unprecedented in a war situation anywhere in the world, successive Sri Lankan governments continued to send food supplies to the LTTE for the benefit of the civilian population in areas under its control. Does that sound like a war on the Tamil people?

We respectfully urge Secretary Kerry to retract the reference from his statement and substitute it with fact, viz., that Sri Lanka waged 30-years of war with the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam, a ruthless terrorist group.

Signed by 972 citizens, diaspora and supporters of Sri Lanka

Continued Rape of the Wilpattu National Park and Establishment of Unauthorised Settlements

April 27th, 2015

Mahinda Gunasekera

By E-mail
His Excellency, Maithripala Sirisena
President of Sri Lanka
and Minister of Mahaweli Dev & Environment
Presidential Secretariat
Colombo 1
Copy to: Hon. Ranil Wickremasinghe   Prime Minister of Sri Lanka
Your Excellency,
Continued Rape of the Wilpattu National Park and
Establishment of Unauthorised Settlements  

I am writing to bring to your notice the continuing rape of the Wilpattu National Park that is taking place at this very moment, whilst the authorities responsible for the conservation of forests and protection of the environment are hibernating in their comfortable offices in the capital city.  When this matter was brought up earlier by another group of concerned citizens with photo evidence, they pointed a finger at a minister of the state whom I believe was  Mr. Rishad Badthiutheen, as being the person responsible for the encroachment and  construction of houses for settling members of his community.  I note that Mr. Badthiutheen
is once again holding a cabinet rank in your administration as well.

I am giving below a link to a 5 minute 51 second video which shows the construction of roads and permanent houses within the Wilpattu National Park. This is a clear violation of the  existing laws relating to conservation of the limited forest cover in the island needed for climatic  reasons as well as provision of areas for our wild life to freely roam in safety as envisioned by our wise rulers from ancient times.   Please click on the link to view the video:
https://www.facebook.com/438356542898780/videos/636685536399212/?fref=nf

You will observe paved roads and permanent houses already in place, with road extension and house construction underway.  A board has been erected denoting this illegal housing project on encroached crown land in a conservation area as ‘JASSIM CITY’ comprising a total of 179 houses. The funding has been provided according to the signboard by Sheikh Jassim Bin Jabor Al-Thani Charitable Foundation based in Doha, Qatar.  Does the law allow foreign organizations to establish cities for members of a particular community on Sri Lanka’s sovereign territory involving the deforestation of national parks which are deemed conservation zones? Such funds should instead be direted to the government to resettle Muslims and others who were internally displaced in their former places of residence.

The usual reason given for such illegal action is that there has been a delay on the part of the government to re-settle members of the Muslim community who had been forcibly evicted by the LTTE from their abode in the northern province.  There were also over 27,000 Sinhala people who had also been evicted from the north by the separatist Tamil terror groups between 1971 and 1981, none of whom have been resettled by the state, except for a handful of about 25 families who have staked out their temporary homesteads in Navattakuly without any assistance from the state. The right of return of those who had been forcibly evicted by the Tamil terror groups who carried out ethnic cleansing of non-Tamils in both the north and east must be honoured by the government.

While there are an abundance of laws established in Sri Lanka, the failure to prevent wrongdoing is mainly due to the non-enforcement of the laws by the authorities concerned.  Could this be as a result of political interference which prevents officials from carrying out their entrusted duties? I have also been made aware of similar encroachments in the Eastern Province by members of the Muslim community into strictly conservation areas such as the forests surrounding the estuaries of waterways flowing to the sea, and even producing bogus deeds prepared by members of their own community working in the kachcheri or district office administering the area.  We are also aware of  the ‘Ashraf Nagar’ where 500 houses were built on land close to the Deegavapi Temple complex in
the Ampara district supposedly to house 89 Moslem families who had been displaced by the 2004 tsunami, nearly 30 miles inland from their original place of residence with funding from the Middle East.

I trust that you would initiate an investigation immediately and take appropriate action against who  so ever has had a hand in this unlawful venture to build unauthorized houses by encroaching into  conservation properties belonging to the state.  These houses have to give way to the preservation of the National Park, and steps taken to restore the forest cover without delay.  Notwithstanding  ethnicity, the government must uphold the law in order to win the trust and confidence of the people.

Yours sincerely,

Mahinda Gunasekera

Copies to: Senior officials of the Forest Dept. and Ministry of the Environment
”      ”    Sri Lankan Media

Substance Use in Borderline Personality Disorder

April 27th, 2015

Ruwan M Jayatunge M.D.

A personality disorder is an enduring pattern of inner experience, of seeing the world and relating to others in a manner that markedly deviates from cultural expectations, and includes, and results in, problematic and habitual behaviours that are pervasive and inflexible (APA). The first clinical conceptualization of the Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD) was provided in 1975 by Gunderson and Singer.  By 1980, the construct of BPD was considered developed and validated to the extent that the disorder was included in the third edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-III; American Psychiatric Association 1980) (Ogrodniczuk &Sierra Hernandez, 2010).

According to Stern (1938) the term ‘borderline’ originally referred to a group of mental illnesses characterized by psychopathology with features of both psychosis and neurosis, but which did not clearly meet historical criteria for either group of conditions. Borderline Personality Disorder is a severe Axis II personality disorder characterized by intense and significant instability across a number of domains (Rizvi et al., 2011). BPD is the most frequent personality disorder (Oumaya et al., 2008). It is diagnosed predominantly in women, with an estimated gender ratio of 3:1. The disorder may be missed in men, who may instead receive diagnoses of antisocial or narcissistic personality disorder (APA). Borderline symptoms are thought to emerge from the interaction of temperamental factors and environmental stressors. Both parental invalidation and attachment disorganization have been hypothesized to play an etiological role (Lyons-Ruth et al., 2014).

Borderline Personality Disorder is characterized by severe functional impairments, a high risk of suicide, a negative effect on the course of depressive disorders, extensive use of treatment (Leichsenring et al., 2011). There is a high rate of stigma associated with BPD (Aviram et al., 2006). Persistent feelings of emptiness are often expressed by individuals with BPD. They are usually unable to express their aspirations and desires (Ogrodniczuk &Sierra Hernandez, 2010).   In addition BPD is marked by impulsivity, instability of mood (Paris, 2005) and deficits in the capacity to work and to maintain meaningful relationships (Levy et al., 2006).  It is a complex disorder associated with substantial morbidity, mortality, and public health costs (Stanley & Siever, 2010).

BPD has shown a strong association with substance use disorders (Gunderson & Links, 2008). BPD patients have particularly high vulnerability for the development of Substance Use Disorders over the course of time (Walter et al., 2009). Many of the core features of BPD are also independent risk factors for the development of SUD (Lubman et al., 2011). Persons with borderline personality disorder often abuse substances in an impulsive fashion that contributes to lowering the threshold for other self-destructive behavior such as body mutilation, sexual promiscuity, or provocative behavior that incites assault (including homicidal assault) (APA).

According to Few and colleagues (2014) both genetic and individual-specific environmental factors contribute to comorbidity between borderline personality features and substance use disorders i.e. that both are impulse spectrum disorders.  Cheetham and colleagues (2010) believe that impulsivity and affective dysregulation play a key role in the development and maintenance of addictive disorders. In addition childhood attachment problems, past trauma, poor sense of self, profound state of unease and dissatisfaction help to maintain addictive behaviors. BPD patients often use dependence-producing substances in an attempt to mitigate emotions perceived as overwhelmingly negative or to replace these by a pleasant state, such as feeling intoxicated (self-medication hypothesis). Apart from that, the use of addictive substances can also be triggered by factors related to the social environment, such as peer pressure (Kienast et al., 2014).  Substance Use Disorders significantly reduces the likelihood of clinical remission of BPD (Zanarini et al., 2004; Lubman et al., 2011).

 Challenges Faced by the Health Care Workers

 With patients with borderline personality disorder there is a risk of boundary crossings and violations (APA). Moreover substance use disorder often complicates the Negative counter-transference or the unconscious development of negative feelings toward the patient on the part of the clinician (Lubman et al., 2011). Negative counter-transference is one of the hindering factors found by the therapists while working with clients diagnosed with BPD (Beatson et al., 2010). The self-destructive behaviors, anger, mood instability, and pervasive fear of abandonment all interfere with a clinician’s ability to establish a therapeutic alliance and sustain a successful treatment (Goodman, & Siever, 2012). BPD patients have been described as highly vigilant for social stimuli, especially for social cues that signal social threat or rejection (Linehan, 1995; Domes et al., 2009). Also they have disturbed sense of identity Jørgensen, 2006).

According to Holmes (2003) BPD sufferers lack of meaning in their lives because they are unable to play ‘language games’ with their potential intimates, resorting to actions rather than words to express feelings.  Therefore therapeutic communication could become substandard. On the other hand BPD sufferers frequently jeopardize their relationships with the health care providers creating a deep void in the treatment procedures. As indicated by Lubman and collogues (2011) management of co-occurring substance use disorder and borderline personality disorder within primary care is further compounded by negative attitudes and practices in responding to people with these conditions, which can lead to a fractured patient-doctor relationship.    

BPD patients often present with quickly fluctuating complaints and symptoms. Many of the clinical characteristics of patients with borderline personality disorder may be seen as consequences of disordered self-organization and a limited rudimentary capacity to think about behavior in mental state terms (Fonagy, Target & Gergely 2000). Sometimes they blame their therapists for not addressing fluctuating complaints and symptoms.   

 BPD patients are psychologically fragile. Psychological trauma is deeply embedded in PBD. As indicated by Arntz (1994). It is assumed that chronic traumatic abuse or neglect in childhood has led to the development of almost unshakeable fundamental assumptions about others (dangerous and malignant), about one’s own capabilities (powerless and vulnerable) and upon one’s value as a person (bad and unacceptable).

 Suicidal behavior often accompanies borderline personality disorder (Zeng et al., 2015).  Although recurrent suicidal threats, gestures or behaviour or self-mutilation are common in patients suffering from borderline personality disorder they often lack systematic suicidal intentions.  (Oumaya et al., 2008).  However BPD complicated by substance use disorders could lead to complete suicides.

Management

The management of patients with borderline personality disorder may be difficult, because these patients often make disproportionate demands on the physician’s time and they tend to experience complicated and/or incomplete recovery from organic or functional illness (Sansone & Sansone, 1991).  Nonetheless management of the patient-therapist relationship is paramount and may be in itself the most effective and safe treatment for both crisis situations and longer therapy (Dawson, 1988).

Patients with borderline personality disorder and comorbid addiction should be treated as early as possible for both conditions in a thematically hierarchical manner ( Kienast et al., 2014). Psychotherapy is regarded as the first-line treatment for people with borderline personality disorder (Stoffers et al., 2012). Drug counseling is a useful component in the treatment process.

Lieb et al (2010),  have suggested that mood stabilisers and second-generation antipsychotics may be effective for treating specific symptoms of BPD and associated pathology  A positive therapeutic relationship plays a central role in the management of both BPD and SUD (Lubman et al., 2011).

Brown and Shapiro (2006) provide preliminary evidence for use of EMDR in the treatment of Borderline Personality Disorder. van der Hart and collogues (2010) highlight the significance    of  EMDR in  trauma-related borderline personality disorder. Wesselmann and team (2012) point out that EMDR is a treatment mode to improve attachment status in adults and children.

Wetzelaer and colleagues (2014) indicate the efficacy of Schema therapy in BPD.  According to Rizvi, and colleagues (2011) Dialectical behavior therapy (DBT) has received strong empirical support and is practiced widely as a treatment for borderline personality disorder (BPD) and BPD with comorbid substance use disorders (BPD-SUD). Furthermore ongoing communication between all treatment providers is essential for a coordinated treatment approach and a designated case coordinator, who is responsible for managing communication between professionals, is recommended to ensure splitting does not occur (Lubman et al., 2011). In adding together other interventions such as Psycho-education, Family therapy also plays an important role in managing BPD.

Conclusion

Individuals with borderline personality disorder (BPD) often experience severe functional impairments, Interpersonal difficulties   higher levels of depressive symptoms, Identity diffusion, feelings of emptiness, parasuicidal behaviors and many other psychosocial difficulties. In BPD often the Comorbidity is associated with substance use disorders and it leads to a complex mental disorder. Although BPD is difficult to treat, patient – therapist relationship is paramount to provide services.

References

APA. (2010). Practice guideline for the treatment of patients with borderline personality disorder.

Arntz, A. (1994). Treatment of borderline personality disorder: A challenge for cognitive-behavioural therapyBehaviour Research and Therapy32(4), 419–430.

Aviram, R.B., Brodsky, B.S., Stanley, B.(2006). Borderline personality disorder, stigma and treatment implications. Harv Rev Psychiatry.14:249–56.

Beatson, J., Rao, S., Watson, C.(2010).Borderline personality disorder: towards effective treatment. Melbourne: Australian Postgraduate Medicine.

Brown, S.,Shapiro, F. (2006). EMDR in the treatment of borderline personality disorder.Clinical Case Studies, 5,403-420.

Cheetham, A., Allen, N.B., Yucel, M., Lubman, D.I.(2010). The role of affective dysregulation in drug addiction. Clin Psychol Rev.30:621–34.

Dawson, D.F .(1988).Treatment of the borderline patient, relationship management.Can J Psychiatry. ;33(5):370-4.

Domes, G., Schulze, L.,  Herpertz ,S.C. (2009) Emotion recognition in borderline personality disorder: a review of the literature Journal of Personality Disorders, 21, 6-19.

Few ,L.R., Grant, J.D., Trull, T.J., Statham, D.J., Martin, N.G., Lynskey, M.T., Agrawal, A. (2014).Genetic variation in personality traits explains genetic overlap between borderline personality features and substance use disorders. Addiction. ;109(12):2118-27.

Fonagy P, Target M, Gergely G.(2000). Psychiatr Clin North Am.  ;23(1):103-22, vii-viii.Attachment and borderline personality disorder. A theory and some evidence.

Goodman, M ., Siever, L.(2012). Current Psychological and Psychopharmacologic Treatments of Borderline Personality Disorder. Retrieved from http://icahn.mssm.edu/static_files/MSSM/Files/Research/Programs/Mood%20and%20Personality%20Disorders%20Research%20Program/treatment.pdf

Gunderson, J.G., Singer, M.T. (1975). Defining borderline patients: An overview. American Journal of Psychiatry 132:1-9.

Gunderson, J. G., Links P. S.(2008) Borderline Personality Disorder. A Clinical Guide, 2nd edn. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Press.

Holmes, J. (2003). Borderline personality disorder and the search for meaning: an attachment perspective. Aust N Z J Psychiatry.  ;37(5):524-31.

Jørgensen, C.R.(2006). Disturbed sense of identity in Borderline Personality Disorder. Journal of Personality Disorders. ;20(6):618–644

Kienast, T; Stoffers, J., Bermpohl, F.,Lieb, K.(2014). Borderline Personality Disorder and Comorbid Addiction: Epidemiology and TreatmentDtsch Arztebl Int ;111(16): 280-6.

Leichsenring, F., Leibing, E., Kruse, J., New, A.S., Leweke ,F.(2011). Borderline personaality disorder.Lancet.  1;377(9759):74-84.

Levy, K.N., Clarkin, J.F., Yeomans, F.E., Scott, L.N., Wasserman, R.H., Kernberg, O.F.(2006).The mechanisms of change in the treatment of borderline personality disorder with transference focused psychotherapy.J Clin Psychol.  ;62(4):481-501.

Lieb, K., Völlm, B., Rücke,r G., Timmer. A., Stoffers, J.M . (2010). Pharmacotherapy for borderline personality disorder: Cochrane systematic review of randomised trials. British Journal of Psychiatry 196:4 -12.

Linehan, M. M. (1995). Understanding borderline personality disorder. New York:Guilford Press.

Lyons-Ruth, K., Brumariu, L.E., Bureau, J.F., Hennighausen, K., Holmes, B.(2014). Role Confusion and Disorientation in Young Adult-Parent Interaction Among Individuals With Borderline Symptomatology. J Pers Disord.  23:1-22.

LubmanD.I.,HallK., Pennay, A., RaoS. (2011). Managing borderline personality disorder and substance use: An integrated approachAustralian Family Physician, 40(6):376-381.

Ogrodniczuk J.S, Sierra Hernandez, C.A. (2010). Borderline Personality Disorder. In: JH Stone, M Blouin, editors. International Encyclopedia of Rehabilitation. Available online: http://cirrie.buffalo.edu/encyclopedia/en/article/223/

Oumaya ,M., Friedman, S., Pham, A., Abou Abdallah, T., Guelfi. J.D., Rouillon, F. (2008).Borderline personality disorder, self-mutilation and suicide: literature review. Encephale. 34(5):452-8.

Paris, J. (2005). Borderline personality disorder.CMAJ. 7;172(12):1579-83.

Rizvi, S.L., Dim­eff, L.A., Skutch, J., Car­roll, D.,  Line­han, M.M. (2011)  A pilot study of the DBT Coach: An inter­ac­tive mobile phone appli­ca­tion for indi­vid­u­als with bor­der­line per­son­al­ity dis­or­der and sub­stance use dis­or­der. Behav­ior Ther­apy, 42, 589–600.

Sansone, R.A. , Sansone, L.A.(1991). Borderline personality disorder: office diagnosis and management. Am Fam Physician. ;44(1):194-8.

Stanley, B., Siever, L.J.(2010). The interpersonal dimension of borderline personality disorder: toward a neuropeptide model.Am J Psychiatry.  ;167(1):24-39.

Stern, A. (1938). Psychoanalytic investigation and therapy in the border line group of neuroses. Psychoanal Q 1938; 7: 467-489.

Stoffers, J.M., Völlm, B.A., Rücke,r G., Timmer, A., Huband, N., Lieb, K.(2012). Cochrane Database Syst Rev.  15;8:CD005652. Psychological therapies for people with borderline personality disorder

van der Hart, 0., Nijenhuis, E., 81 Solomon, R. (2010). Dissociation of the personality in complex trauma-related disorders and EMDR: Theoretical considerations. journal of EMDR Practice and Research, 4(2), 76—92. 9.

Walter, M., Gunderson, J.G., Zanarini, M.C., Sanislow, C.A., Grilo, C.M., McGlashan, T.H., Morey, L.C., Yen, S., Stout, R.L., Skodol, A.E. (2009). New onsets of substance use disorders in borderline personality disorder over 7 years of follow-ups: findings from the Collaborative Longitudinal Personality Disorders Study. Addiction. ;104(1):97-103.

Wesselmann, D., Davidson, M., Armstrong, S., Schweitzer, C., Bruckner & Potter, A. (2012). EMDR as a treatment for improving attachment status in adults and children. European Review of Applied Psychology, 62, 223-230.

Wetzelaer, P., Farrell, J., Evers, S., Jacob, G.A., Lee, C.W., Brand, O., van Breukelen, G., Fassbinder, E., Fretwell, H., Harper ,R., Lavender, A., Lockwood, G., Malogiannis, I.A,, Schweiger, U., Startup, H., Stevenson, T., Zarbock, G., Arntz, A.(2014).Design of an international multicentre RCT on group schema therapy for borderline personality disorder.   BMC Psychiatry.  18;14(1):319.

Zanarini, M.C., Frankenburg, F.R., Hennen, J., Reich, D.B., Silk, K.R. (2004). Axis I comorbidity in patients with borderline personality disorder: 6-year follow-up and prediction of time to remission. Am J Psychiatry.161:2108–14.

Zeng, R ., Cohen, .LJ. , Tanis, T. , Qizilbash, A. , Lopatyuk, Y. , Yaseen ,Z.S. , Galynker, I. (2015). Assessing the contribution of borderline personality disorder and features to suicide risk in psychiatric inpatients with bipolar disorder, major depression and schizoaffective disorder. Psychiatry Res.  pii: S0165-1781(15)00062-1.

Zhou to Xi carrying forward the Bandung spirit

April 27th, 2015

By Asanga Abeyagoonasekera

The recent visit to Pakistan by Chinese President Xi Jing Ping  secured $46b for development of power and infrastructure sector. This sizeable Chinese foreign investment will help Pakistan’s economy significantly. The elevation from “iron friends” to an all weather strategic partnership relationship between the two nations was significant. After signing more than 50 cooperation deals between the two countries promises to raise the bilateral trade from $16b to $20b over three years was planned.

The proposed development plan of China Pakistan Economic corridor where the Silk Road Economic Belt and the 21st Century Maritime Silk Road meet is significant. It will affect the entire south Asian region.  According Xi “We need to form a ‘1+4′ cooperation structure with the CPEC at the center and the Gwadar Port, transport infrastructure, energy and industrial cooperation being the four key areas to achieve a win-win result and common development,” This statement reflects the deep interest and commitment of China to support nations such as Pakistan. Similar initiatives launched in other South Asian nations such as Sri Lanka’s Hambanthota port will contribute immensely to regional economic and trade enhancement and intensification .

ZhouEnlai
Premier and foreign minister Zhou Enlai signs autographs for admirers on the sidelines of the Asian-African Conference, also known as the Bandung Conference, Bandung, Indonesia in April 1955. [Photo/Xinhua]

China, a giant neighbour to South Asia will work closely and strengthen its relationship with South Asia over the next decade. Pakistan and China who assisted Sri Lanka to defeat the terrorist LTTE could work together on further improving and contributing toward international counter terrorism efforts and enhancing counter terrorism capacity building in the region.

The large scale flow of Chinese assistance to developing nations in South Asia and Africa will be a great relief to these nations who battle to improve the economic conditions.

President Xi’s next stop was Indonesia, participating in the 60th Anniversary of the Bandung Conference. Bandung was the first panAsia- Africa conference in which Sri Lanka and many countries freshly out of British colonialism played a significant role. This landmark conference took place in 1955 and created a new era in South-South international relations. The conference represented one-quarter of the Earth’s land surface and a total population of 1.5 billion people.

Today again ( just as the spirit of Bandung) it is important to strengthen Afro -Asian South-South connections with the existing geo strategic landscape .The US pivot to Asia and China’s One road one belt strategy are existing global indicators to this necessary shift from Western dependence to global internationalism . Both existing powers and emerging powers have shown their deep interest in Afro-Asia economic development. It is important to collaborate and strengthen Afro-Asian security threats specially in the struggle against local and global terrorism. In Asia, two dozen groups support IS. Over 1000 recruits from Central Asia, South Asia, Southeast Asia, China, Australia and New Zealand have traveled to Syria and Iraq. The al Qaeda centric threat landscape is eclipsed by an al Qaeda-IS hybrid global threat. Today, al Qaeda and IS compete for supremacy of the terrorist movement. The recent massacre in Kenya is a humanitarian disgrace and we should look at multinational, multi-pronged, multi-agency, and a multi-jurisdictional framework to fight upstream counter radicalization and downstream de-radicalization. At Bandung its important to look at the present geo security situation which has threaten the entire world.

China with its one road one belt strategy will definitely assist many countries in Asia and Africa. China with its large investments to developing nations in Asia and Africa has contributed immensely for the economic development and has improved millions of lives. You could see this in Sri Lanka and how the nation has benefited immensely from Chinese investments on infrastructure including the first high way, ports etc. China was a friend at the time when the nation was battling with terrorism.

At Bandung in 1955 China played an important role in the conference and strengthened its relations with other Afro-Asian nations. Chinese premier Zhou Enlai held a very positive attitude and support to strengthen Afro Asian relations. Zhou stated he had come to seek unity and not to quarrel, to seek common ground and not to create divergence, he invited the participants to visit China saying: “It is better to see for oneself rather than to hear many times.” The 18 minute speech won acclaim at that time.

Unlike in the past defending its position to secure communism in the present day China’s new role is  reawakening the sleeping giant the Maritime Silk Road (MSR) which will benefit many nations and global trade. President Xi wished to strengthen this cooperation as good friends and brothers. This is a very important remark at a time both Asia and Africa is facing many challenges to improve the economic environment in many nations including Sri Lanka. This will definitely assist south south cooperation as mentioned by President Xi.

The developed world has an important role to strengthen this cooperation and could assist to narrow the South North gap  between the developed and developing nations without seeing it as a threat. Sri Lanka as one of the initial members of Bandung with Sir John Kothalawella’s presence at the conference during the time we came out of the colonial rule was the initial step for the non aligned summit held in Sri Lanka. Today we live in interesting time where China is reviving the ancient MSR the one road one belt strategy and United States pivot to Asia, Sri Lanka should look at playing a positive sum game with the existing and the emerging powers.

Eelam War IV and Issue of Collateral Damage & Civilian Deaths in International Law: Laduwahetty summarizes Desmond De Silva’s ‘Treatise’

April 27th, 2015

Neville Laduwahetty,

in The Island, 19 April 2015, where the title is War crimes: A comment on what experts say” … with illustrations and emphases in the text added by Thuppahi

The comments presented below are in response to an edited and abbreviated version of a legal opinion by Sir Desmond de Silva on Permissible parameters of collateral damage” carried by The Island of April 10, 2015. The article states: Currently whether or not an attack that results in civilian deaths is legal under international humanitarian law depends on whether the attack meets the requirements of three principles: (1) Distinction; (2) Military Necessity and (3) Proportionality. A violation of international humanitarian law only occurs if there is an intentional attack directed against civilians, or if an attack is launched on a military objective with knowledge that the incidental civilian injuries would be clearly excessive in relation to the anticipated military advantage”.

WAR  ZONE- late April ICGThe War Theatre in mid-late April 2009 and Illustration of the Penultimate SLA Operation in Late april 2008 —Map courtesy of International Crisis Group

The comments given below are based on the following parameters:

  1. The conflict in Sri Lanka was a Non-International Armed Conflict. This fact was acknowledged by the UN sponsored Panel of Experts in their Report based on a definition of an Armed Conflict established by the International Tribunal for former Yugoslavia.
  2. Non-International Armed Conflicts are governed by International Humanitarian Law the custodian of which is the ICRC. Distinction; Military Necessity and Proportionality that form the core principles of International Humanitarian Law are interconnected. For instance, clear distinction between combatants and non-combatants (civilians) makes evaluating military gains in proportion to incidental loss of civilians fairly straightforward. On the other hand, when distinctions between combatants and non-combatants become blurred, the task of evaluating military gain in relation to incidental loss of civilians as a result of the measures adopted to secure that gain is not only not easy” as admitted in the article but also highly subjective.

ICRC rules of customary law relating to each of the core principles cited above are presented below.

DISTINCTION

Rule 1. The parties to the conflict must at all times distinguish between civilians and combatants. Attacks may only be directed against combatants. Attacks must not be directed against civilians.

Rule 6. Civilians are protected against attack, unless and for such time as they take a direct part in hostilities.

Rule 7. Parties to the conflict must at all times distinguish between civilian objects and military objectives. Attacks may only be directed against military objectives. Attacks must not be directed against civilian objects.

Rule 10. Civilian objects are protected against attack, unless and for such time as they are military objectives.

PROPORTIONALITY in ATTACK

Rule 14. Launching an attack which may be expected to cause incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians, damage to civilian objects, or a combination thereof, which would be excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated, is prohibited.

Rule 23. Each party to the conflict must, to the extent feasible, avoid locating military objectives within or near densely populated areas.

Rule 24. Each party to the conflict must, to the extent feasible, remove civilian persons and objects under its control from the vicinity of military objectives.

PROHIBITED ZONES

Rule 36. Directing an attack against a demilitarized zone agreed upon between the parties to the conflict is prohibited.

ACCESS TO HUMANITARIAN RELIEF

Rule 55. The parties to the conflict must allow and facilitate rapid and unimpeded passage of humanitarian relief for civilians in need, which is impartial in character and conducted without any adverse distinction, subject to their right of control.

FUNDAMENTAL GUARANTEES

Rule 96. Taking of hostages is prohibited.

Rule 97. Use of human shields is prohibited.

ICRC RULES in the CONTEXT of SRI LANKA’S ARMED CONFLICT

There is irrefutable evidence that at the final stage of the conflict there were in addition to the regular LTTE cadres in uniform, 5 other categories present in the conflict zone.

  1. Category 1: Former LTTE cadres who had discarded their distinguishable uniforms in exchange for regular civilian clothes and continued to directly participated in the hostilities.
  2. Category 2: Non-LTTE cadres in civilian clothes who volunteered to directly participated in the hostilities.
  3. Category 3: Non-LTTE cadres who had voluntarily rendered services that directly contributed to advance the military efforts of the LTTE thereby directly participating in the hostilities.
  4. Category 4: Non-LTTE cadres who were coerced into rendering services that contributed to advance the military efforts of the LTTE.
  5. Category 5. Non-combatants – civilians.

The regular LTTE cadres and categories 1 to 4 lose their right of protection under rules of ICRC because of their participation in the hostilities.

Under the circumstances presented above, establishing who was a combatant and who was a civilian is realistically not possible due to the blurring of Distinctions. However, under rules of customary International Humanitarian Law all 4 categories including regular LTTE cadres should be counted as combatants since it was not possible to distinguish those who contributed voluntarily from those who were coerced into participating in the hostilities. Since establishing who was a combatant and who was a non-combatant makes compliance with ICRC rules 1 to 10 cited above an impossible task, determining how many non-combatant (civilians) died during the final stages of the conflict is not possible with any credibility.

6-Tent City-daru 27Tent City east of Nandikadal Lagoon — Pic from N PoE Report92a--Pokkanai_area_seaside_01--29 MARCH Congestion along main road, coastal strip east of lagoon, March-April 2009 – TamilNet 29 March 2009

63b-miltitia with gunsMakkal Padai: civilian training units during LTTE rule in Thamililam circa 2004-0864-armed militia

The inability to distinguish between combatants and civilians complicates the Principle of Proportionality. If the Principle of Proportionality depends on the ability to measure military gain anticipated against possible civilian casualties, it is realistically not possible to make an assessment of likely loss of civilian casualties involved as required by ICRC Rule 14 due to the inability to distinguish between combatant and non-combatants.

Sir Desmond’s opinion is that the principle of proportionality is to relate means to ends”. He further states: It is not easy to assess what attacks are disproportionate, to a large degree the answer depends on the interpretation of the circumstances prevailing at the time, the expected military advantage gained by striking a certain military target, and other context-specific considerations”(Ibid).

The material presented above clearly conveys that the issue is not the difficulty of assessing what attacks are disproportionate or interpreting circumstances, but rather, that it is simply not possible to ascertain the cost of the means” because of the inability to distinguish combatants from non-combatants. Therefore, with all due respect to Sir Desmond how relevant is the concept of proportionality in the context of the particularities in Sri Lanka?.

VIOLATIONS of INTERNATIONAL HUMANITARIAN LAW

The essence of International Humanitarian Law is the protection of civilians during conflicts. Since the conflict in Sri Lanka was an Armed Conflict and the LTTE was a party to the conflict they were required by provisions of International Humanitarian Law to ensure the protection of the civilians in their midst. Attempts by the Sri Lankan Government to create mutually agreed No Fire Zones for the protection of the civilians was rejected by the LTTE. Consequently, the entire area became a zone of conflict. By shooting any civilians who attempted to escape, the entire conflict zone was transformed into one where combatants and non-combatants were forced to coexist with the latter as hostages becoming a protective shield for the LTTE in violation of ICRC Rules 96 and 97.

The feasibility of meeting the threshold set by the core principles of International Humanitarian Law namely, Distinction, Military necessity and Proportionality must be realistically evaluated within such a context.

The executive Summary of the UN Panel of Experts report states: From February 2009 onwards, the LTTE started point-blank shooting of civilians who attempted to escape the conflict zone, significantly adding to the death toll in the final stages of the war. It also fired artillery in proximity to large groups of internally displaced persons (IDPs) and fired from, or stored military equipment near, IDPs or civilian installations such as hospitals”. The tactics deployed by the LTTE is a clear violation of ICRC Rules 23 and 24. Furthermore the fact that such activities were carried out behind protective bunds and barriers erected at the command of the LTTE means it is humanly not possible to ascertain the likely extent of incidental civilian injuries that would result in the event the security forces responded to the artillery fire of the LTTE. Even the deployment of aerial reconnaissance or other technologies would not help to ascertain possible extent of collateral damage due to lack of distinction between combatants and non-combatants. Under these circumstances principles of proportionality has no relevance.

The allegation of killing civilians through widespread shelling has to originate from those who survived. They would not be in a position to know whether the response to the artillery fire from the LTTE was in proportion or not. Considering the fact that 4 categories outside the regular LTTE cadres participated in the military operations means that once dead no one would be in a position to know who was a combatant and who was not, who directly participated in hostilities and who did not. Under circumstances where distinctions are blurred the tendency would be to categorize all dead who were not in uniform as a civilians”. Such attempts to establish the number of dead civilians” under these circumstances would lead to seriously flawed estimates.

Charges of War Crimes have been leveled for depriving humanitarian aid to those in the conflict zone. According to ICRC Rule 55, parties to a conflict are not expected to furnish humanitarian aid – only allow and facilitate rapid and unimpeded passage of humanitarian relief”, and that too only to the civilians meaning non-combatants. Since it is not possible to establish who were non-combatant and how many of them were there, a charge of War Crimes on grounds of depriving humanitarian aid becomes baseless.

CONCLUSION

During the final stages the conflict zone consisted of a mix of 6 categories other than the security forces. They were: 1. Regular LTTE cadres in uniform; 2. Former LTTE cadres who had discarded their distinguishable uniforms in exchange for regular civilian clothes; 3. Non-LTTE cadres in civilian clothes who volunteered to be combatants; 4. Non-LTTE cadres who had voluntarily rendered services that directly contributed to advance the military efforts of the LTTE; 5. Non-LTTE cadres who were coerced into rendering services that contributed to advance the military efforts of the LTTE; 6. Non-combatants (civilians). No one however astute would be in a position to ascertain the relative proportion of each category due to the absence of distinction between combatants and non-combatants. Under such circumstances, the principle of proportionality is only a theoretical concept without practical relevance in the particular context of Sri Lanka. However, the need to respond to LTTE artillery fire was a military necessity purely on grounds of self-defence, without the ability to ascertain the consequences involved due to the particularities of the situation.

Expert opinion is that the 3 core principles of International Humanitarian Law are: (1) Distinction; (2) Military Necessity; (3) Proportionality. Violation of International Humanitarian Law could be serious enough to reach the threshold of War Crimes. If as the experts say violation of international humanitarian law only occurs if there is an intentional attack directed against civilians”, and if it is not practically possible to distinguish combatants from non-combatants (civilians), there is no basis for any inquiry, national or international, to establish that intentional attacks were directed at civilians” in violation of International Humanitarian Laws.

The exercise of counting how many civilians” died in the final stages of the conflict becomes meaningless due to the inability to distinguish combatants from non-combatants/civilians. Therefore, except for those in uniform, all others dead would be erroneously counted as civilians. All that could be ascertained with any degree of certainty is the Total Number (i.e., combatants plus non-combatants/civilians) who perished during the final stages of the conflict.

More elaborate clarification of the Images inserted in this post can be found inMichael Roberts: Tamil Person and State. Pictorial, Colombo: Vijitha Yapa Publications, 2014, ISBN 978-955-665-231-4

       ALSO SEE

Mango 2013 KIA-WIA Ratios – Conjuring with the Dead and Ignoring the Wounded,” 8 April 2013,http://thecarthaginiansolution.wordpress.com/2013/04/08/kiawia-ratios-conjuring-with-the-dead-and-ignoring-the-wounded/

Gray, David 2009 A Day at the Front Line in Sri Lanka (Photographer’s Blog),” 27 April 2009, http://blogs.reuters.com/photographers-blog/2009/04/27/a-day-at-the-front-line-in-sri-lanka/

Reddy, B. Muralidhar 2009d An Escape from Hellhole,”http://www.hindu.com/ 2009/04/25/stories/2009042558390100.html

De Silva-Ranasinghe, Sergei 2009b The Battle for the Vanni Pocket,” Asia-Pacific Defence Reporter, March 2009, Vol. 35/2, pp. 17-19,http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/aulimp/citations/gsa/ 2009157395/156554.html

Al-Jazeera 2009b SL army closes in on Tamil Tigers,” 1 February 2009.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CZc_Am5HUSs

Reddy, B. Muralidhar 2009a Cornered Tigers. The Sri Lanka Army takes control of the administrative and political capital of the LTTE,” Frontline, 26/2, 17-30 Jan 2009.

Jeyaraj, DBS 2009 Wretched of the Wanni Earth break Free of Bondage,”http://dbsjeyaraj.com/dbsj/archives/380 and Daily Mirror, 25 April 2009.

Times 2011 TIMES Aerial Images, NFZ Last Redoubt, 23 May 2009,”http://www.flickr.com/ photos/thuppahi/sets/72157626922360092/

[LTTE] 2014 LTTE War Video recovered by the Government–Revealing Episode,” https://thuppahi.wordpress.com/2014/02/13/ltte-war-video-recovered-by-the-government-revealing-episodes/

Narendran, Rajasingham 2014 Harsh Ground Realities in War: Decomposing Bodies and Missing Persons and Soldiers,” 28 January 2014,https://thuppahi.wordpress.com/2014/01/28/11702/

Noble, Kath 2013b Numbers Game reviewed by Kath Noble: The Full Monty,” 14 July 2013, https://thuppahi.wordpress.com/2013/07/14/numbers-game-reviewed-by-kath-noble-the-full-monty/

Prasad, Kanchan [2009] Mullivaikkal Hospital in NFZ Last Redoubt,”http://www.flickr.com/photos/thuppahi/sets/72157626797848747/

Shanmugarajah, V. 2014 Dr. Veerakanthipillai Shanmugarajah’s Affidavit Description of Conditions in the Vanni Pocket in Refutation of Channel Four,” 5 January 2014,https://thuppahi.wordpress.com/2014/01/05/drveerakanthipillai-shanmugarajahs-affidavit-description-of-conditionsin-the-vanni-pocket-in-refutation-of-channel-four/

Roberts, M. 2012c Velupillai Pirapāharan: Veera Maranam,” 26 November 2012, https://thuppahi.wordpress.com/2012/11/26/velupillai-pirapaharan-veera-maranam/

Roberts, M. 2013 Estimates of the Tamil Civilian Death Toll during the Last Phase of Eelam War IV in 2009: Appendix I for ‘BBC Blind’,”https://thuppahi.wordpress.com/2013/12/08/estimates-of-the-tamil-civilian-death-toll-during-the-last-phase-of-eelam-war-iv-in-2009-appendix-i-for-bbc-blind/#more-11226

Roberts, M.  2013 Congestion in the Vanni Pocket” January-May 2009: Appendix IV for BBC Blind,”https://thuppahi.wordpress.com/2013/12/09/congestion-in-the-vanni-pocket-january-may-2009-appendix-iv-for-bbc-blind/

Roberts, M. 2014 Generating Calamity, 2008-2014: An Overview of Tamil Nationalist Operations and Their Marvels,” 10 April 2014,http://groundviews.org/2014/04/10/generating-calamity-2008-2014-an-overview-of-tamil-nationalist-operations-and-their-marvels/

Roberts, Michael 2014 The War in Sri Lanka and Post-War Propaganda,” 8 November 2014, https://thuppahi.wordpress.com/2014/11/18/the-war-in-sri-lanka-and-propaganda-debates/

Roberts, Michael 2014 Cartographic & Photographic Illustrations in support of the Memorandum Analysing the War in Sri Lanka and Its Propaganda Debates,” 18 November 2014

ශ්‍රී ල නි ප දිනවීමට මෛත්‍රිපාලට බැහැ

April 27th, 2015

නලින් ද සිල්වා

මෛත්‍රිපාල සිරිසේන රසිකයෙකි. ඔහුට කවි හා විරිදු කීමට හැකි ය. ඔහු ඉඳහිට විහිළු ද කරයි. ජනතාව ඔහුගේ විහිළුවලින් රසයක් විඳිති. එහි වරදක් නැත. ජනාධිපති ජනතාව සතුටු කළ යුතු ය. ඔහු බොරු කියන්නේ යැයි මම නො කියමි. රහතන් වහන්සේට අනුව නම් අප වැනි පෘථග්ජනයන්ගේ සියළු දැනුම් මුසා ය. එහෙත් මා මෙහි දී බොරු යන වචනය යොදන්නේ ඒ අරුතෙන් නො වේ.

සම්මතය හා සම්මුතිය අනුව මා ගෙදර යමින් ගෙදර යනවා යැයි කීම රහතන් වහන්සේට අනුව මුසාවක් වුවත් පෘථගාජන අපට අනුව මුසාවාදා සිකපදයට අයත් වන මුසාවක් නො වේ. එහෙත් සම්මතය හා සම්මුතිය අනුව වුව ද මා කාර්යාලයට යමින් ගෙදර යනවා යැයි කීම මුසාවකි. මෙරට බොහෝ පඬියන්ට ඒ අවස්ථා අතර වෙනස තේරුම් ගැනීමට නො හැකි ය. 

මෛත්‍රිපාල සිරිසේන කියා තිබුණේ ඔහු ශ්‍රී ල නි පක්‍ෂයේ සභාපතිකම භාරගත්තේ මහත් වගකීමකින් බව ය. සභාපතිකම භාරගත්තේ ශ්‍රී ල නි පක්‍ෂය දිනවීමට බව ද ඔහු කියයි. එහෙත් ඔහු නොකියන වැදගත් කරුණු දෙකක් වෙයි. එකක් නම් ඔහු ශ්‍රි ල නි පක්‍ෂයේ සභාපති නොවන බව ය. එනම් ඔහුට නී්‍යානුකූල ව  ශ්‍රී ල නි පක්‍ෂයේ සභාපතිකම නොලැබුණු බව ය. අප කිහිප වතාවක් ම පෙන්වා දී ඇත්තේ ශ්‍රී ල නි ප ව්‍යවස්ථාව අනුව  පක්‍ෂයෙන් හෝ පක්‍ෂය නායකත්වය දරණ සන්ධානයකින් ජනාධිපති අපේක්‍ෂක ලෙස ඉදිරිපත් වී ජයග්‍රහණය කරන පුද්ගලයකු පක්‍ෂයේ සභාපතිකමට පත්වෙයි. එසේත් නැතහොත් පක්‍ෂයේ විධායක සභාව විසින් යම් පුද්ගලයකු පක්‍ෂ සභාපතිත්වයට පත්කරගනු ලැබිය යුතු ය. 

එහෙත් මේ දෙකෙන් එකක්වත් මෛත්‍රිපාල සිරිසේන සම්බන්ධයෙන් ඉටු වී නැත. ඔහු ජනාධිපති වූයේ ශ්‍රී ල නි පක්‍ෂයට එරෙහි ව තරග කරය. එබැවින් ඔහු ශ්‍රී ල නි පක්‍ෂයේ සභාපතිත්වයට පත් වී නැත. මහින්ද රාජපක්‍ෂට නොව ශක්‍රයාටවත් මෛත්‍රිපාලට ශ්‍රී ල නි පක්‍ෂයේ සභාපතිකම භාරදිය නො හැකි ය. රනිල් වික්‍රමසිංහ අගමැතිකම පික්පොකට් ගසා ඇති අන්දමට මෛත්‍රිපාල සිරිසේන ශ්‍රී ල නි පක්‍ෂයේ සභාපතිකම පික්පොකට් ගසා ඇත. මෛතිපාල තමා ශ්‍රී ල නි පක්‍ෂයේ සභාපති යැයි කීම රහතන් වහන්සේට අනුව මෙන් ම පෘථග්ජනයන්ගේ සම්මුතිය හා සම්මතය අනුව ද මුසාවකි. 

දෙවැන්න බටහිර රටවල ද ඉන්දියාවේ ද මෙරට විජාතික බලවේගවල ද ආධාරයෙන් හා අනුග්‍රයෙන් දෙමළ ජාතිවාදී හා මුස්ලිම් ආගමිකවාදී පක්‍ෂවල සහාය ඇතිව ශ්‍රී ල නි පක්‍ෂය ප්‍රමුඛ සංධානය පැරදවීමට මෛත්‍රිපාල දායක විය. ශ්‍රී ල නි පක්‍ෂය දෙකඩ කිරීමට ඔහු ක්‍රියා කෙළේ ය. ඔහුට අද ශ්‍රී ල නි පක්‍ෂයේ නායකත්වයක් නැත. ඔහුට ශ්‍රී ල නි පක්‍ෂය මෙහෙයවිය නො හැකි ය. ඔහු කියන දෙයට බොහෝ පක්‍ෂ සාමාජිකයන් සවන් නොදෙන බව පැහැදිලි ය. 

එවැනි මෛත්‍රිපාල සිරිසේන කෙනකු ශ්‍රී ල නි පක්‍ෂය දිනවන්නේ කෙසේ ද? නුදුරු අනාගතයේ දී නිල වශයෙන් ශ්‍රී ල නි පක්‍ෂ දෙකක් ඇතිවුවහොත් මෛත්‍රිපාලගේ ශ්‍රී ල නි පක්‍ෂය මැතිවරණයක දී අන්ත පරාජයක් ලැබීමට නියමිත ය. මෛත්‍රිපාලට ශ්‍රී ල නි පක්‍ෂයක් දිනවීමට නො හැකි ය. මෛත්‍රිපාල බොරු කියන්නේ ද විහිළු කරන්නේ ද යන්න තීරණය කිරීමට ත්‍රිපුද්ගල නීතිඥ කමිටුවක් පත්කරන ලෙස රනිල්ගෙන් ඉල්ලා සිටිය යුතු ය.

නලින් ද සිල්වා

2015 අප්‍රේල් 27

19 ට පෙර 20 ගත යුතු ය

April 27th, 2015

නලින් ද සිල්වා

මාතෘකාව දුටු විගස ම මගේ අංකගණිත දැනුම ගැන ප්‍රශ්න කිරීමට ඉදිරිපත් වන්නෙක් සිටියි. වාසනාවකට ඔහු සිටින්නේ කැනඩාවේ ය. එහෙත් එයින් කියැවෙන්නේ එවැන්නන් ලංකාවේ නැති බව නො වේ. සිංහල බෞද්ධයන්ට නිරවුල් ව පැහැදිලි ව කල්පනා කිරීමට නොහැකි බව මා තේරුම් ගෙන බොහෝ කල් ය. අප රටේ ව්‍යාකූලත්වයට එක් හේතුවක් වන්නේ ද එය ය. ඇතැම් සිංහල බෞද්ධයෝ අභිධර්මය දනිති. ඇතැම්හු විසුද්ධි මාර්ගය ද තේරුම් කර දෙති. එහෙත් ඔවුහු මා යන්න බොරුවක් බව  නො දනිති. බටහිර විද්‍යාව පට්ටපල් බොරු යැයි කී විට ඔවුහු අහස්යානය, දුරථනය, පරිගණකය බොරු දැයි අසති.

කාලෝ ෆොන්සේකා මහතා වැනි අබෞද්ධ සංස්කෘතියක හැදී වැඩුණු අයකු එසේ ප්‍රශ්න කිරීම පුදුමයක් නො වේ. අභිධර්මය විසුද්ධි මාර්ගය ගැන වැටහීමක් ඇති  සිංහල බෞද්ධයෝ ද ඒ ප්‍රශ්න අසති. ඔවුහු අදාළ පොතපත කියවා ඇතත් කල්පනා කර පුරුද්දක් නැත්තෝ වෙති. මා යනුවෙන් පවතින්නකු ඇතැයි යන්න මුසාවක්, මායාවක් බව ඔවුහු නො දනිති. එසේ ගැනීම ම අවිද්‍යාව බවත් එය ම අපේ සසර ගමනට හේතුවන බවත් අවිජ්ජා පච්චයා සංකාරා යනුවෙන් පටිච්චසමුප්පාදය වනපොත් කර ඇති ඔවුහු නො දනිිති. වනපොත් කරන්නෝ පොත් වන කරති. ඔවුහු කල්පනා නො කරති.  

මම ගෙදර යමි යන්න රහතන් වහන්සේට අනුව වෑරදි ය. මා යනුවෙන් කෙනකුවත් ගෙදර යනුවෙන් තැනක්වත් යෑම යනුවෙන් ක්‍රියාවක්වත් නැත , එහෙත් අප වැනි පෘථග්ජනයෝ ඒ එසේ යැයි ගනිති. ඒ අනුව ක්‍රියා කරති. ඒ අනුව අපට ගෙදර යෑමට ද පුළුවන. එයින් වැඩ ගනිති. එහෙත් රහතන් වහන්සේට අනුව ඒ සියල්ල වැරදි ය. අහස් යානය ආදිය අපට ප්‍රයෝජනවත් වුවත් ඒ සංකල්පයෙන් අපට වැඩ ගත හැකි වුවත් ඒ වැරදි ය. අපි එය තේරුම් නො ගනිමු. ඒ සංකල්ප සියල්ල අපේ නිර්මාණ බවත් රහතන් වහන්සේට අනුව ඒ වැරදි බවත් අපි කල්පනා නො කරමු. ඒ වෙනුවට පටිච්චසමුප්පාදය පාඩම් කර ගනිමු. 

සිංහල බෞද්ධයනට වියුක්ත ව සිතීම ඉතාම අපහසු ය. වියුක්ත යන්නෙන් මා අදහස් කරන්නේ සිතෙන් මවා ගැනීමට නො හැකි අදහස් සංකල්ප ප්‍රවාද ආදිය ය. මවා ගැනීම යනු සිතීම නො වේ. සරල රේඛාව යන්න වියුක්ත සංකල්පයකි. පළලක් හෝ ඝනකමක් හෝ නොමැති සරල රේඛාවක් සිතෙන් මවා ගන්නේ කෙසේ ද? එහෙත් සිංහල බෞද්ධයන්ගෙන් අති විශාල පිරිසක් කියනු ඇත්තේ තමන් සරල රේඛා සිතෙන් මවාගෙන ඇත පමණක් නොව සරල රේඛා ඇඳ ඇති බව ය. පඬියන් වීමට කැමති අය කියනු ඇත්තේ තමන් සන්නිකර්ෂණ වශයෙන් සරල රේඛා ඇඳ ඇති බව ය. පළලක් නැති තැන සන්නිකර්ෂණ වශයෙන් පළලක් තිබිය නොහැකි බව ඔවුන්ගේ පඬි මනසට නො තේරෙයි. 

මේ සියල්ල කීවේ 19වැනි සංශෝධනයට  පෙර 20වැනි සංශෝධනය ගෙන ඒමට නොහැකි යැයි තර්ක කිරීමට ඉදිරිපත් විය හැකි පඬියන් වෙනුවෙනි. 19 යනු ජනාධිපති විධායක බලතලවලින් කොටසක් අගමැතිට ලබාදීමට ගෙන එන ව්‍යවස්ථා සංශෝධනයකි. 20 වැනි සංශෝධනය යනු පාර්ලිමේන්තු මැතිවරණ ක්‍රමය වෙනස් කිරීම සඳහා ගෙනෙන ව්‍යවස්ථා සංශෝධනයකි.   අද කළ යුත්තේ එහි අංක මාරු කර අද 20 යනුවෙන් හැඳින්වෙන්න පළමුව පාර්ලිමේන්තුවට ඉදිරිපත් කිරීම ය. අද වඩා වැදගත් වන්නේ මැතිවරණ ක්‍රමය ලබන මැතිවරණයට පෙර වෙනස් කිරීම ය.

අද මැතිවරණ දුෂණ බොහොමයකට හේතුව පවත්නා සමානුපාතික මැතිවරණ ක්‍රමය වෙයි. 13 වැනි සංශෝධනයෙන් පළාත්සභාවලට දී ඇති බලතල කප්පාදු නොකර විධායක ජනාධිපති බලතල කප්පාදු කිරීම දෙමළ ජාතිවාදයට උඩගෙඩි දීමකි. අද රට ඒකීයභාවයේ රඳවා ගෙන ඇත්තේ විධායක ජනාධිපති ක්‍රමය මගිනි. 13 වැනි සංශෝධනයෙන් කෙරෙන්නේ සන්ධීය රාජ්‍යයක් ඇතිකිරීමට මග පෑදීම ය. 13 සංශෝධනය නොකර විධායක ජනාධිපති බලතල කප්පදු කිරීම රට බෙදීමකට මග පාදයි. එබැවින් පළමුව කළ යුත්තේ 13 සංශෝධනය කර පොලිස් බලතල ඉඩම් බලතල ආදිය පළාත්සභාවලට අධිකරණයෙන් නොව ව්‍යවස්ථා සංශෝධනයකින් ම අහිමි කිරීම ය. එහෙත් මැතිවරණ දූෂණ අවම කිරීම සඳහා කේවල හා සමානුපාත මිශ්‍ර ක්‍රමයකට මැතිවරණයකට පෙර යා යුතු ය. එහි දී පහත සඳහන් කරුණු ද ඉදිරිපත් කිරීමට කැමැත්තෙමු. මේ සියල්ල ඉදිරිපත් කරන්නේ හෙට අනිද්දා පාර්ලිමේන්තුව විසුරුවා නොහරින්නේ ය යන්න උපකල්පනය කරමිනි. එහෙත් එය වෙනස්වීමට ඉඩ ඇත.

නීති විරෝධීව අගමැති ලෙස පත් වී සිටින රනිල් වික්‍රමසිංහ මහතා වහාම අගමැති ධුරයෙන් පහකිරීමට මෛත්‍රිපාල  සිරිසේන මහතා පාර්ලිමේන්තුව හා එක් ව ක්‍රියා කළ යුතු ය. හැකිනම් මහින්ද රාජපක්‍ෂ මහතා ජාතික ලැයිස්තුවෙන් පාර්ලිමේන්තුවට පත්කර ඔහු අගමැති කළ යුතු ය. රනිල් වික්‍රමසිංහ මහතා අගමැතිව සිටින තාක් 19 වැනි ව්‍යවස්ථා සංශෝධනය 20 වැනි සංශෝධනයක් ඇතිව හෝ නැතිව හෝ ඉදිරිපත් නොකළ යුතු ය. සිංහල බෞද්ධ විරෝධියකු වූ රනිල් වික්‍රමසිංහ මහතාට බලතල දීම ප්‍රජාතන්ත්‍රවාදය  තහවුරු කිරීමක් නොව දෙමළ ජාතිවාදය ශක්තිමත් කිරීමකි. (රෝ ඔත්තු සේවයේ අවශ්‍යතා ඉටු කරන ජාතික හෙළ උරුමය කොන්දේසි විරහිත ව 19 ට පක්‍ෂ වෙයි. ඒ පක්‍ෂය ද අද දෙමළ ජාතිවාදය වෙනුවෙන් පෙනී සිටියි. දෙමළ ජාතික සංධානය අනුව යමින් ජාතික හෙළ උරුමය තම නම දෙමළ ජාතික උරුමය ලෙස වෙනස් කිරීම කාලෝචිත ය.) 

13 වැනි ව්‍යවස්ථා සංශෝධනයේ පළාත්සභාවලට දී ඇති බලතල කප්පාදු කළ යුතු ය. විශේෂයෙන් ම ඉඩම් හා පොලිස් බලතල ව්‍යවස්ථා සංශෝධනයකින් පළාත්සභාවලට අහිමි කළ යුතු ය. මීළඟ ව්‍යවස්ථා සංශෝධනය සම්මත කරගත යුත්තේ 13 කප්පාදු කිරීමට ය. පළාත්සභා බලතල කප්පාදු නොකර විධායක ජනාධිපති බලතලවලට අත නොතැබිය යුතු ය. පළාත් සභා බලතල කප්පාදු නොකර විධායක ජනාධිපති බලතල අඩුකිරීම විජාතික බලවේගවල අවශ්‍යතාව පරිදි දෙමළ ජාතිවාදයට කප්පන් දීමකි. අද 19 පිටුපස ඇත්තේ ඊනියා රාජ්‍ය නොවන සංවිධාන ඇතුළු දෙමළ ජාතිවාදී බලවේග ය. අද වනවිට ජාතික හෙළ උරුමය ද ඒ ගණයට වැටී ඇත. මාදොළුවාවේ සෝභිත හිමියන් ඒ ගණයට වැඩම කර බොහෝ කල් ය. 

ඊනියා 20 වැනි සංශෝධනයකට අද විජාතික බලවේග කැමතිවන්නේ 19 ට ශ්‍රී ල නි පක්‍ෂයේ සහය ලබාගැනීමට ය. මෛත්‍රිපාල සිරිසේන මහතා මගින් ඉදිරිපත් කරන මේ ගැටයට ශ්‍රී ල නි පක්‍ෂය හසු නොවිය යුතු ය. අවශ්‍ය නම් 20 එනම් මැතිවරණ ක්‍රමය සංශෝධනය කිරීම, 19ට, එනම් විධායක ජනාධිපති බලතල කප්පාදු කිරීමට කලින් පාර්ලිමේන්තුවට ඉදිරිපත් කිරීමේ බාධාවක් නැත. මීළඟ මැතිවරණය මිශ්‍ර ක්‍රමයකට පැවැත්වීමට ජනතාවගෙන් බහුතරය කැමති වනු නොඅනුමාන ය. එබැවින් 19ට පළමු 20 පාර්ලිමේන්තුවට ඉදිරිපත් කළ යුතු ය. මේ සංශෝධනවල අංක මාරු කිරීම අහස පොළොව ගැටළන ප්‍රශ්නයක් නො වේ.  මැතිවරණ ක්‍රමය සංශෝධනය කළ යුත්තේ මිශ්‍ර ක්‍රමයට මැතිවරණ පැවැත්වීමේ දී යම් දිස්ත්‍රික්කයකින් අනුපාත ක්‍රමයට කණ්ඩායමකින් හෝ පක්‍ෂයකින් හෝ මන්ත්‍රීවරුන් තෝරා පත්කර ගැනීමට නම් අදාළ කණ්ඩායම හෝ පක්‍ෂය හෝ අදාළ දිස්ත්‍රික්කයෙහි වලංගු ඡන්දවලින් 5%ක්වත් ලබාගෙන තිබිය යුතු ය හා කේවළ ක්‍රමයට මන්ත්‍රින් තේරීමේ දී බල ප්‍රදේශයකින් වලංගු ඡන්දවලින්  5%කට අඩු ඡන්ද ප්‍රමාණයක් ලබාගන්නා අපේක්‍ෂකයන්ගේ ඇප රාජසන්තක කළ යුතු ය යන කොන්දේසිවලට යටත් ව ය. 

අද රටේ විද්‍යුත් ජනමාධ්‍ය තැන ලබාදෙන්නේ ඔවුන්ට අළෙවි කිරීමට හැකි අදහස් ඉදිරිපත් කරන දේශපාලනඥයන්ට ය.  ඊනියා සුළු පක්‍ෂ අපේක්‍ෂයන්ට තමන්ට රටේ හිමි ව ඇති ජනපදනම ඉක්මවා යන ආකාරයෙන් විද්‍යුත්මාධ්‍යවල කාලය ලැබෙයි. එය මුළුමනින් ම වැරදි යැයි නො කියමි. එහෙත් දේශපාලන පක්‍ෂවල හෝ සංවිධානවල හෝ නොවන්නන්ට, විශේෂයෙන්ම අළෙවි කළමනාකරුවන් නොවන්නන්ට ද යම් අවස්ථාවක් ලබා දිය යුතු ය. 

ජාතික ගීය ආණ්ඩුක්‍රම ව්‍යවස්ථාව අනුව ගැයිය යුත්තේ සිංහල භාෂාවෙන් පමණකි. එය වෙනත් බසකින් ගයන්නන්ට දැඩි දඬුවම් දීමට හැකි වන පරිදි පනතක් සම්මත කර ගත යුතු ය. එක් භාෂාවකට වඩා කතාකරන ජනයා සිටින රටක ජාතික ගීය ගැයිය යුත්තේ කිනම් බසකින් ද යන ප්‍රශ්නයට පිළිතුරු ලෙස නිර්ණායක කිහිපයක් ඉදිරිපත් කළ නමුත් එය සිංහලයන්ගේ අවධානයට යොමු නො විණි. ප්‍රශ්නයකට පිළිතුරු සෙවීමේ දී ප්‍රශ්නයේ මුළට යෑමට සිංහලයන් දක්වන මැළිකම හේතුවෙන් අපට යමක් සාකච්ඡා කිරීමට ඇති ඉඩකඩ ද නැති වී යයි. 

ව්‍යවස්ථා සංශෝධන සම්බන්ධයෙන් වූ ඉහත සඳහන් සියල්ල හා තවත් කරුණු හෙට අනිද්දා පාර්ලිමේන්තුව විසුරුවා හැරියහොත් වෙනත් තලයක සාකච්ඡා කිරීමට සිදුවෙයි.

නලින් ද සිල්වා

2015 අප්‍රේල් 26

Chinese loan interest rate not high, over 50% of loans only on 2% interest rates: CCCSL spokesperson

April 27th, 2015

Courtesy Adaderana

Referring to an allegation by a high-ranking official of Sri Lanka’s Finance Ministry that the interest rates on Chinese loans are high, the spokesperson of the Chinese Chamber of Commerce in Sri Lanka (CCCSL) told Xinhua that the interest rates of Chinese loans are not high.

During the past 10 years, at the request of Sri Lankan government, China has provided loans amounting to several billions of US dollars in supporting the country’s economic and social development, among which more than half are at the interest rates of only 2%.

China provides preferential loans at low interest rates to developing countries world-wide with the purpose of helping them upgrade infrastructure construction and improve the people’s wellbeing. By granting discount loans, the Chinese government extends its goodwill to developing countries. The interest rates of Chinese commercial loans are also much lower than most of those in the international market or the Sri Lankan commercial banks during the same period, the spokesperson added.

As for the commercial loans, the spokesperson further pointed out that the international financing costs rose in 2007 and the Sri Lankan government issued treasury bonds at the interest rates ranging from 12% to 14% during that period when the island was still in internal conflict. At that time, the relevant Chinese banks provided Sri Lanka with a large amount of preferential loans as well as some commercial loans with 6% interest rates which were quite favorable and reasonable at the time.

The spokesperson stressed that it is the Sri Lankan government which submitted applications for loans from Chinese banks and that no one had forced the Sri Lankan side to apply for loans. The Sri Lankan side always conducted a thorough survey prior to applying for loans from China. The negotiators from the Sri Lankan side were very professional and loyal to their country and its people while negotiating loan agreements with Chinese banks.

The spokesperson said that just as the financial experts have indicated, the interest rates of the loans from some international financial institutions are relatively lower, but however, they can provide only limited amounts of loans which cannot meet the urgent demands of developing countries for their economic development and infrastructure construction. Nevertheless there are certain prerequisites attached to such loans. It is quite difficult and time-consuming to complete the application procedure for these loans. In contrast, the Chinese banks have enough funds and could provide preferential and commercial loans through a comparatively quick examination and approval procedure without any prerequisites. Such timely help and assistance is welcomed by the developing countries including Sri Lanka.

The prompt and abundant Chinese loans at lower interest rates have made great positive contributions to the state reconstruction and development of Sri Lanka. For instance, the Norochcholai Coal Power Plant funded by Chinese loans now generates more than 50% of the whole country’s power and which has completely solved the problem of power shortage for this island, lowered the cost of electricity to a great extent, which are benefiting every family and every economic and social sector. Secondly, over 1,000 kilometers of roads at different levels have been completed with the support of Chinese loans and this has made it easier and more convenient for the local people to travel and do business. Better roads powerfully support the social and economic development of Sri Lanka, pointed out the spokesperson.

Wrongful allegations by some high ranking officials on the interest rates of Chinese loans has damaged the image of Chinese banks in Sri Lanka and have demoralized their enthusiasm of offering preferential loans to the country. We hope the Sri Lankan officials concerned would make their remarks while based on facts, take the people’s well being as the utmost priority and make joint efforts with the Chinese side to maintain the good image of China-Sri Lanka cooperation,” added the spokesperson.

පිස්තෝලයක් සහිතව මෛත්‍රීපාල ළඟටම ආවාද? මෙන්න ඇත්ත.

April 27th, 2015

 Mahinda Rajapaksa  – www.mahinda.info

[1]. මෛත්‍රීපාල සිරිසේන ජනාධිපති තුමාව ඝාතන කිරීමේ ප්‍රවෘත්තියක් ගැන ව්‍යාජ කටකතා එක්සත් ජාතික පක්ෂයේ මාධ්‍ය මඩ කණ්ඩායම විසින් දියත් කරලා තිබෙනවා. අපට වාර්තා වෙන පරිදි එම මඩ මෙහෙයුමේ අරමුණු මෙලෙසයි.

(i). මහින්ද රාජපක්ෂ මැතිතුමාට දී ඇති ආරක්ෂාව අඩු කිරීම සාධාරණීකරනය කිරීම.

(ii). මහින්ද රාජපක්ෂ මහතාට එරෙහිව මඩ ගැසීම.

(iii). තාර්කිකව බලන කල මෛත්‍රීපාල සිරිසේන ජනාධිපති තුමාගේ ආරක්ෂාවට වැඩිම තර්ජනය එල්ල වන්නේ එජාපයෙන් බැවින් (එවිට රනිල් වික්‍රමසිංහ මහතා ඉබේම ජනාධිපති වන නිසා) එතුමාට මොනයම් හෝ හානියක් වුවහොත් එය මහින්ද පාර්ශවයට බැර කිරීමට කල් තියාම පිඹුරුපත් සකසා ගැනීමට එජාප පාර්ශවයට අවශ්‍ය වීම. 

[2]. එහි එක් පියවරක් විදිහට, වත්මන් අගමැති රනිල් වික්‍රමසිංහ මහතාගේ මාමා වන රංජිත් විජයවර්ධන හා මස්සිනා වන රුවන් විජයවර්ධන යන මහත්වරුන්ට අයත් ‘ලංකාදීප’ පුවත්පත මඟින් පළකළ පුවතකුයි පහත දැක්වෙන්නේ.

lankadeepa2

එම පුවත මීටත් වඩා සාහසික ආකාරයෙන් අනෙකුත් එජාප මඩ වෙබ් අඩවි වල පලවී ඇති නමුත් ඒවායේ  අයිතිකරුවන් අප්‍රකාශිත බැවින් කිසිදු වගකීම් සහගත භාවයක් නොමැති නිසා ඔවුන්ට ඕනෑම දෙයක් ලිවීමට හැකි බව මැදහත් ජනතාව වටහා ගන්නවායැයි අප විශ්වාස කරනවා. එනිසා ලංකාදීප පුවත ගැන පමණක් අවධානය යොමු කරමු.

(i). අඟුණුකොළපැළැස්ස්සේ පැවතුනේ ශ්‍රී ලංකා නිදහස් පක්ෂයේ හම්බන්තොට දිස්ත්‍රික් නියෝජිත සම්මේලනයයි. නමුත් එයට සියලුම මහජනතාවට විවෘතව ආරාධනා කර තිබුණා. නාමල් රාජපක්ෂ මන්ත්‍රීවරයාත් හම්බන්තොට දිස්ත්‍රික්කයේ ශ්‍රීලනිප මන්ත්‍රීවරයෙක් බැවින් මෛත්‍රීපාල සිරිසේන ජනාධිපතිතුමාගෙන් එතුමාට ලැබුණ ආරාධනාව පිට එයට සහභාගී වුණා. ඒ බව ලංකාදීප ලිපියේ සඳහන් කරලා නෑ.

(ii). කිසිදු හමුදා කෝප්‍රල් වරයෙක් හෝ වෙනත් හමුදා නිලධාරියෙක් නාමල් රාජපක්ෂ මන්ත්‍රීවරයාට ආරක්ෂකයින් ලෙස වර්තමානයේදී ලබා දී නෑ. ඒ අනුව එකී නිලධාරියා නාමල් රාජපක්ෂ මහතාගේ ආරක්ෂකයෙක් ලෙස දැක්වීම බොරුවක්.

(iii). එලෙස පැමිණි පුද්ගලයා හමුදාවේ නිවාඩු ලබා සිටින රණවිරුවෙක්. ප්‍රදේශයේ රැස්වීමක් නිසාත්, රටේ ජනාධිපතිවරයා, කථානායකවරයා ඇතුළු රටේ ප්‍රභූන් පැමිණ සිටින නිසාත්, එතුමන්ලාව දැකබලා ගැනීම සඳාහ එම රණවිරුවාත් එහි පැමිණ තිබෙනවා. සාමාන්‍ය ජනතාව අසුන් ගත් ප්‍රදේශයේම ඔහුත් වාඩි වී තිබෙනවා.

(iv). ඉතින් ඔහු යුද හමුදවේ සේවය කළ රණවිරුවෙක් නිසා, ජනාධිපති ආරක්ෂක අංශයේ අය (ඔවුනුත් යුද හමුදා සෙබලුන්) ඔහුව හඳුනාගෙන තිබෙනවා. ඒ අනුව ඔහු ආවේ කුමකටදැයි ප්‍රශ්න කර තිබෙනවා. එවිට හේතුව කියා තිබෙනවා. (රටේ ජනාධිපතිවරයා, කථානායකවරයා ආ බැවින් එතුමන්ලාව දැක බලා ගැනීමට පැමිණියා).

(v). ඔහු සතුව කිසි සේත්ම පිස්තෝලයක් තිබී නෑ. එවැනි පිස්තෝලයක් තිබුණානම් එම රැස්වීමට ඇතුළු වීමට ඔහුට කිසි සේත්ම ඉඩක් ලැබෙන්නේත් නෑ.  එම් සිද්ධිය ඇසින් දුටු හම්බන්තොට ශ්‍රීලනිප පාක්ෂිකයින් අපට වාර්තා කළ ආකාරයට එම රණවිරුවා සතුව තිබී ඇත්තේ මුදල් පසුම්බිය, වතුර බෝතලයක් සහ පුද්ගලික ලේන්සුවක් පමණක් බවයි.

(vi). ඉහත ලංකාදීප ලිපියේ මෙලෙස සඳහන්.

පොලිස් විශේෂ බලකාය නාමල්ගේ ආරක්ෂකයන් සෝදිසි කර ඔහු ළඟ පිස්තෝලයක් ඇති බව සොයා ගත්තේය. ඔහු එම ස්ථානයෙන් ඉවත් කැරිණි.

යහපාලන බොරුව අතේ පැලවුණ ප්‍රධානම තැන තමයි ඒ. යම් විදිහකින් රටේ ජනාධිපතිවරයා අසළට අනවසරයෙන් පිස්තෝලයක් හෝ වෙනත් ඕනෑම ආයුධයක් රැගෙන ආවානම් අනිවාරයයෙන්ම ඔහුව අත් අඩංගුවට ගත යුතුයි. ඒත් පවසනවා අදාල සැක කරුව එම ස්ථානයෙන් ඉවත් කැරිණි” කියලා. පිස්තෝලයක් ගෙනාවා කියන කතාව පට්ට පල් බොරුවක් බව ඒකෙන්ම පේනවා.

(vii). එම රණවිරුවාව අත් අඩංගුවට ගෙන නෑ. ඔහු වැරැද්දක් කර නොමැති නිසා (ඒ කියන්නේ ඔහු ඔය කියන විදිහට පිස්තෝලයක් ගෙනැවිත් නැති නිසා) තමයි ඔහුව අත් අඩංගුවට නොගෙන එතනින් යැව්වේ. වඳින්න ගිය දේවාලේ ඉහේ කඩා වැටුන වගේ, රටේ අලුත්ම ජනාධිපතිව දැකබලා ගන්න ආවට පස්සේ ප්‍රශ්න කළාම ඒ රණවිරුවා යන්න ගියා. නිවාඩු ලබා සිටින රණවිරුවෙකුට රටේ ජනාධිපතිවරයා සිටින රැස්වීමකට ඇවිත් වාඩි වෙන්න තහනම් වුණ බවකුයි දැන්නම් අපිට පෙනී යන්නේ.

(viii). වත්මන් ජනාධිපතිවරයාගේ ආරක්ෂක අංශයේ ප්‍රධනියා වන එස් එම් වික්‍රමසිංහ මහතා ගැනත් ලංකාදීප ලිපියේ සඳහන්. යහපාලන කෙප්පයේ දැක්වෙන පරිදි ජනාධිපතිවරයා අසලට පිස්තෝලයක් රැගෙන යාමට ඉඩ හැරියානම් එස් එම් වික්‍රමසිංහ මහතාව ඒ මොහොතේම ක්‍රියාත්මක වන පරිදි සේවය අත් හිටුවා තිබිය යුතුයි. එසේ නොකර ඇත්තේත් එවැනි පිස්තෝල හමුවීමක් නොමැති නිසා.

[3]. මහින්ද රාජපක්ෂ ජනාධිපති තුමානම් තමන්ගේ රැස්වීම් වලට එන නිරායුධ රණවිරුවන්ව කිසිදා හරවා යවන්නේ නෑ. ඒ විතරක් නොවෙයි එතුමා උතුරු නැගෙනහිර යුද වදින රණවිරුවන් ගාවටත් ගියා. ඒ ගියේ එම රණවිරුවන් මැෂින් ගන් ඇතුළු ජීව උණ්ඩ සහිත දරුණු ආයුධ වලින් සන්නද්ධව ඉන්නකොටයි. යුද්ධයක් දිනපු නායකයෙක්ගේ ප්‍රෞධත්වය එයයි. වාකරේ මහ සටන ජයග්‍රහණය කළ රණවිරුවන්ට සුබ පැතීමට මහින්ද රාජපක්ෂ ජනාධිපති තුමා ගිය මොහොත.

[4]. මහින්ද රාජපෂ මහතාට තර්ජනයක් වුණේ කොටි ත්‍රස්තවාදීන් සහ ඔවුන්ගේ හිතවතුන් මිස ශ්‍රී ලංකා හමුදාවන්ගේ සෙබලුන් නොවෙයි. එදා මහින්ද රාජපක්ෂ මහතාගේ ආරක්ෂාවට මුළු ත්‍රිවිධ හමුදාවම සිටියත්, මේ වෙද්දී එතුමාගේ ආරක්ෂාව හොඳටම අඩු කර තිබෙනවා.

(i). ඊට හේතු වී ඇත්තේ මහින්ද රාජපක්ෂ මැතිතුමා යන යන තැන් වල දහස් ගණනින් ජනතාව වටවීමත්, ඒක යහපාලන ආණ්ඩුවේ සමහරුන්ට ඇස් වල කටු ඇනෙනවා වගේ වීමත් නිසයි.

(ii).  දෙමළ ඩයස්පෝරා තහනම ඉවත් කිරීමත් ඒ සමගම විදේශවල සිටින කොටි හිතවාදීන්ට කිසිදු අවහිරතාවයකින් තොරව ශ්‍රී ලංකාවට ඒමට හැකි වීමත් නිසා එතුමාගෙ ආරක්ෂාව මේ වන විට බරපතල අවදානම් තත්ත්වයකයි තිබෙන්නේ.

(iii). ලංකාදීපයේ දැක්වූ ව්‍යාජ පිස්තෝල සිද්ධිය ආකාරයේ කතන්දර, යහපාලන ආණ්ඩුවෙන් ගෙතුවේ අන්න ඒක සාධාරණීකරනය කිරීමටයි.

An Open Letter to President Maithripala Sirisena, Mr. Ranil Wickremasinghe and Former-President Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga

April 26th, 2015

By  ‘The Collective of Concerned Citizens and Academics’, 14 April 2015

(1) Immensely Positive Change on 8 January 2015

We congratulate you two Gentlemen and Lady for bringing about the change of 8 January 2015. You were supported by others such as Mr. Wijedasa Rajapakse, Dr. Rajitha Senaratne and others far too numerous to mention. We too worked behind the scenes to the best of our ability. We of the ‘Collective of Concerned Citizens and Academics’ are heartened by the possibility of a wholesale change in Sri Lanka’s political culture. We support the formation of the Yahapalana ‘National Government’ before the next General Elections. We understand the political imperatives that compelled you to bring SLFP parliamentarians into the new Cabinet. We support the creation of a National Government after the next General Elections as well.

We support your anti-corruption measures, the formation of the independent Commissions, the plans for Economic development and the plan to create 1 Million jobs. We wish you all success and look forward to supporting your National Government now and after the next General Elections. (Note: however, we wish to caution Mr. Ranil Wickremasinghe about the way plans often fall by the wayside. For example, after the electoral victory of December 2001 you planned on the basis that the UNP government would run for a full 6-year term. This was a serious miscalculation on your part. Especially when you knew that the President could dissolve Parliament anytime after December 2002. In any event by mid-2002 serious dysfunctions had begun to emerge and by April 2004 your government ceased to exist.)

In this Letter we are not going to discuss or analyse the Proposed 19th and 20th Amendments to the Constitution. The 19th Amendment is under-going modifications; very little is known about the 20th Amendment other than it is a new Electoral System. As and when necessary we will present our analyses of the above at later dates. The issues we raise below, however, are relevant whatever the final agreement reached about the 19th and 20th Amendments, and whatever new Constitution (if any) comes into being in the future. We are not allied to the JHU, SLFP, UNP, NFF or any other Political Party.

(2) We are Seriously Concerned about the Attempt to Weaken the Executive Arm of Government

We are, however, extremely worried about the ill-thought attempt to weaken the Executive Presidential system and replace it with a Westminster or modified Westminster-type Prime Ministerial system. We write this Letter to warn you and the People of Sri Lanka of the very great dangers ahead if these measures were to be implemented. Consider the following example of a terrible mistake made in the 1978 Constitution. It is in the light of such examples that we write to warn the political leaders and the people at large of the very real dangers ahead if we make mistakes in the forthcoming Constitutional Reforms. This warning is necessary now if we are to avoid making appalling mistakes far worse than the one discussed below.

Sri Lanka must learn from the Past. Consider the mistake in the 1978 Constitution which  made the District the ‘electorate’ that an MP (Member of Parliament) had to deal with. Thereby compelling him/her to mount an election campaign encompassing the entire District. Simultaneously, the Preferential Voting (Panaape) system was also introduced. In 1978, who asked how are MPs to get the funds to campaign throughout a District?” Where are the newspaper articles which anticipated and analysed the nexus that would emerge between aspiring MPs, Drug Smugglers, Policemen, and very senior Political Leaders? Reflect on the corrosive effects this one ill-thought measure – there are many more in the 1978 Constitution – has had on Sri Lankan society and tens of thousands of its people, including thousands of drug addicts. In 1978-1979 who are the Constitutional Lawyers, Politicians, Political Scientists, Social Scientists and Historians who anticipated the horrible results that were to emerge in the years after 1978? Yes, there was a great deal of opposition to the Presidential System. A great deal of this was primarily due to the antipathy towards Mr. J.R. Jayewardene. But where are the analyses of the above Electoral System change? In our assessment the introduction of the Executive Presidential system was a very timely and necessary measure. But Mr. Jayewardene concentrated far too much power in the Office of the Executive President and also did not pay adequate attention to the potential opportunity provided for the systematic Abuse of Power by a sitting President. We now have the incontrovertible empirical evidence from the period January 2010 to January 2015.

What we now need to do is to trim the powers of the Executive President; embed a clause within the Constitution which makes it compulsory for the President to accurately Report all government expenditure to Parliament; make the violation of the above clause an Impeachable Offence by the Executive President; introduce the Independent Commissions; introduce a new Electoral System; introduce and implement other measures of the Yahapalanaya government; and move on.

Yes, we agree that Abolish the Executive Presidential System” was a slogan used during the Maithripala Election Campaign. This was a mistake. Similarly, too, the ‘100 days’ time-table too was a mistake. That mistake was done by 3-4 ‘strategists’. And now the entire Yahapalanaya popular movement is potentially at risk due to this mistake. This mistake can be corrected by asking the people for another 100 days. Remember that Ven. Sobitha Thero, the originator of the popular movement against the Rajapakse Regime said more than 1 year ago that the new government can take 6-months to accomplish its tasks”. He did not say anything about a ‘100-day’ time-table.

The ‘Abolish the Executive Presidential System’ slogan too was/is a mistake. But it is a mistake which is qualitatively more complicated and far less easy to correct than the ‘100-days’ timetable. Yes, we accept that a great number of genuinely democratic persons including Ven. Sobitha Thero are of the opinion that Abolishing (Ahosi-kireema) of the Executive Presidency is the main action that the new Yahapalanaya government must do. This mistake needs to be corrected. Ven. Athureliye Ratana hamuduruwo can do this is a few hours.

Concurrently, the dangers of (an inherently weak) Prime Ministerial system (see (3) below) needs to be explained to the People and to many politicians and activists. The Champika Ranawaka-Athureliye Ratana wing of the JHU (and some others as well) had a correct position before the Election but unfortunately they were not properly understood nor were they even heard by the near-hysterical cacophony raised by the Abolitionists”. Politically, this cacophony may have been necessary for the mobilisation of the anti-Rajapakse movement. ‘Abolish the Presidential System’ could be read (and misread) as a political-synonym for ‘Abolish the Rajapakse Presidency’. And, prior to 8th January 2015, the main issue on the political agenda was to defeat Mr. Rajapakse and for Mr. Sirisena to win.

In any event now the Election has been won and this mistake can be corrected and we can move forward. Educate the People and bring them into your Confidence.

(3) Why Sri Lanka Needs a Executive President whose Powers have been Correctly Trimmed

(3.1) The powers of Sri Lanka’s President are far too Dictatorial: This is a well analysed issue. We will not reiterate the reasons in this Letter as we assume Sri Lanka’s political leaders and adult population are aware of the critiques. The period after the 2010 Presidential Elections and the 18th Amendment to the Constitution the dangers were clear for all to see.

(3.2) We recommend an Executive President who’s powers are correctly trimmed: The powers of the Executive President must reduced from that which prevailed before 8 January 2015. We are in complete agreement with that position. The Executive President’s Powers can (and should be) democratised. This Option has been consistently and correctly articulated very coherently by Minister Champika Ranawaka and the JHU. But reduced” does not mean always having to act on the ‘advise’ of the Prime Minister”!

(3.3) In a Westminster or modified-Westminster system the Prime Minister is a Hostage to the majority in Parliament: The Majority in Parliament can change in a day or in an hour (see 3.6 below). This insecurity is a fact. This cannot be wished away by whatever arguments the Abolitionists” present. If we make the mistake of bringing (or, more accurately, entrapping) the Executive Leader within Parliament, the political stakes to topple a government will become immensely higher than they are at present. Consider how the UNP and JVP conspired to topple the then government in 2007. And the sense of insecurity felt by that government in spite of the fact that the then President’s control over the Executive would have remained untouched. Consider the way cross-overs took place before the 8th January 2015 Elections. Such types of situations will be a weekly or monthly occurrence in a Prime Ministerial system.

When there are crucial policies at stake – for example, when the Unity and Security of the State is threatened – there will be numerous opportunities for several smaller parties to conspire with each other, bribe a few dozen MPs from the larger parties (see 3.6 below) and topple any government.

Will the proposed Legislation to ‘Stop/Abolish Cross-Overs’ solve the above problem? No, it will not. First, it’s Constitutional validity is highly dubious. It will be challenged in the Supreme Court. Second, even if the above measure is embedded in the Constitution (and therefore the Supreme Court will not question its validity), the above provision cannot prevent a government losing a vital Vote, if, suddenly, just a few minutes before a vital Vote, between 30 to 50 MPs cross-over to the Opposition. At that point in time, the government stands defeated. And fresh parliamentary elections have to be held in due course. Whether those MPs are ejected from Parliament or not is a separate matter. Third, the above Legislation assumes that it will have a deterrent effect because MPs want to remain in Parliament. But, that does not consider the very real possibility that there will be numerous MPs who would be prepared to permanently say goodbye to Parliament once they have received a bribe of many hundreds of millions of Rupees or even a Billion Rupees (See 3.6 below). With Rs. 1 Billion they can begin entirely new businesses and careers.

We have heard rumours of Proposed Legislation (or even a Constitutional Provision) that prevents a President from dissolving a government that has lost a vital Vote. That a parliament, once elected, cannot be dissolved for 4 years and 6 months. Will such a measure solve the above problem? No, it will not.

First, such a Constitutional Provision or Law is totally absurd. It is politically unsustainable. After a government is defeated in an important Vote, every subsequent meeting of that Parliament will degenerate into a yelling match between the Opposition (the Majority) and the government (the Minority). Consider the situations that have developed in Provincial Councils in the recent past when the above has happened. Further, all subsequent efforts by Parliament to pass Laws will be frustrated and opposed. The governance of the country – and, most important of all, the economic development programmes – will grind to a halt. Many tens of thousands of government decisions – both large and small – will be stalled and remain stalled for months at a time. Government servants will gradually stop obeying their Ministers and the leaders of the Government. Foreign investors will avoid Sri Lanka.

Second, such a Law or Provision goes against all tenets of Constitutional Law and Political Science. What is the political legitimacy of a government that does not have a majority in Parliament? How does it square with the Sovereignty of the People? On what basis does such a minority government strive to enact new Legislation? True, the allegation will be made that the Opposition won the Vote through bribery and corruption. But that will have to be proved in a Court of Law before the government can eject such MPs and bring new MPs into Parliament. Proving such charges will be immensely difficult and in any event will take months if not years. In the meantime, however, the People of Sri Lanka and the international community will see that within Sri Lanka’s Parliament a majority of the MPs do not support that government. Politically, that is the crux of the issue and it can be resolved only through fresh parliamentary elections. Therefore, we can anticipate an endless stream of parliamentary elections (the history of the parliaments of Italy and Japan should be studied to get an idea of what could happen in Sri Lanka).

We wonder how and why this absurd measure is being considered? It is our deduction that this is, yet again, a result of Mr. Ranil Wickremasinghe’s intervention. President Kumaratunga’s dissolution of Mr. Wickremasinghe’s government in 2004 is probably the underlying reason for this absurd measure. Is Mr. Wickremasinghe trying to embed an Insurance Policy within the Constitution on behalf of a future government where he will be the Prime Minister? If this is the case, then, yet again, Mr. Wickremasinghe is placing his personal interests and the UNP’s interests ahead of the interests of a viable and stable Sri Lanka.

(3.4) If the present PR system remains, then the vulnerability of the Prime Minister is very high: The present UNP – which says that it is the single largest political party in Sri Lanka – may try to gamble that, with Mr. Ranil Wickremasinghe as its Leader, it will be able to form a stable government. Even if that is the case, Mr. Wickremasinghe and those UNPers who support his view must be warned that they are playing with fire. The new Constitution and/or Constitutional Reforms that we make in the near future cannot be tailored to fit Mr. Wickremasinghe or the UNP immediate needs.

As of 12 April 2015, Mr. Wickremasinghe’s backroom machinations and tactics from 10th January to early 12 April 2015 have created a huge amount of confusion and suspicion amongst the ordinary Voters and Supporters of the Yahapalana government. These are Voters from many political parties – UNP, SLFP, JVP, JHU, and members of other parties as well. They are confused and disappointed. Concurrently, the Pro-Rajapakse groups have got somewhat strengthened. Mr. Wickremasinghe must bear 100% responsibility for causing this damage to the Yahapalanaya Movement. However, the Supreme Court’s recent judgements are excellent lessons to Mr. Wickremasinghe. We hope he learns from these. And, if necessary, more such lessons are in the pipeline. (Note: President Sirisena and Former-President Kumaratunga, it is incumbent upon both of you to debate these matters with Mr. Wickremasinghe and oppose these machinations.)

(3.5) Will the situation be improved if a new Electoral System which incorporates a mixture of PR and First-Past-the-Post system is introduced (i.e. the 20th Amendment)? Allegedly this Amendment is based on the mixed” system incorporated in the Dinesh Gunewardena Report.

In our assessment: ‘No’. The Reasons are:

(a) As it is, this proposed new system is a HYBRID that is quite heavily weighed towards PR. Therefore, immediately the insecurity mentioned in (3.4) above makes its entrance.

(b) What will finally emerge after a long and gruelling debate will, most probably, be even more weighed towards PR. We of the ‘Collective of Concerned Citizens and Academics’ are not opposed to this PROVIDED the Executive President, as in (3.2) above, is retained. We call upon all thinking Voters to analyse our arguments and Support our View.

(c) Smaller Political parties have already begun to mobilize to retain the PR system or to retain as much of the PR system as possible. Upcountry Tamil political parties have already begun politically mobilizing for the PR system. They say that a great injustice would be done to them if PR is changed. They make no mention of the Executive Presidential system. They give the distinct impression that they do not care, as long as their ability to gain elected office remains as high as they can possibly make it!

(d) The JVP, JHU, SLMC, Peratugami Party, etc are all small parties. They too may clamour to retain as much of PR as possible in the new Electoral System. And eventually because of the clamour of all these parties Sri Lanka may end up with a hideous HYBRID system which is 60%-70% PR. And that will open the door to endless machinations, intrigue and cross-overs.

(e) If the Yahapalanaya government insists on a Westminster type system, then Abolish the PR System. Or, at the very least, like Germany, have a high ‘cut-off’ percentage of 12.5% of the Votes cast. According to very well known principles of Political Science a governmental system cannot have a strong and secure Prime Minister while, concurrently, having a PR system which opens the floodgates to a  multiplicity of Parties in Parliament. If you want a Westminster type system, then reconcile yourselves to shutting out small parties like the JVP, JHU, Upcountry Peoples Party, Peratugami Party, and Independent Groups. (Note: even with the abolition of the PR system the Prime Minister will not be secure in Parliament. Refresh your minds with the constant crises which beset SWRD Bandaranaike’s government (1956-1959); Mrs Bandaranaike (1960-1965. During that time she had to have three Cabinet re-shuffles. And even then was defeated by a cross-over); and Mr Dudley Senanayake (1965-1970).

But, if you consider it important to include the above mentioned smaller Political Parties within Parliament then you must have a separately elected (and adequately powerful) Executive President.

Consider the Israeli system. The Israeli Prime Minister is in a permanent state of insecurity.   The ONLY reason why Israel manages to function is because of the larger Threat it faces from ALL its Arab neighbour states. The Israeli system also breeds extremism and brinkmanship within the Prime Ministers’ Office itself (a similar situation can easily develop in Sri Lanka as well). Look at the way Netanyahu used the most extreme slogans to appeal to right-wing voters in the recent Parliamentary Elections in Israel. He and his aides assessed that he had to do so to be able to win the capacity to build a coalition.

(3.6) The Impact of US $ 1 Billion of Bribery Money on Sri Lanka’s Parliamentary System

In the public discussions in Newspapers, TV and Radio we have not seen any mention of the havoc that will be created in Parliament through the bribery of MPs. We wish to draw the attention of Sri Lankan voters, Political Leaders, Academics, Newspaper Editors and Political Analysts to this very real threat.

Within the context of the Government Budgets of rich Countries in the World how much does one (01) Billion US Dollars matter? In alphabetical order consider: China? France? India? Iran? Kuwait? Maldives? Pakistan? Qatar? Russia? Saudi Arabia? UAE? UK? USA? Funds from Kuwait, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, UAE can be channeled via Pakistan, Maldives and/or India.  (Note: Due to the need to keep this Letter as brief as possible we request the reader to please access the Internet and find out for themselves the Government Budgets of all the above countries, and what percentage 01 (one) Billion US Dollars is, of those Budgets.)

One Billion US Dollars is equal to Rs.130 Billion (at the present Rate of Exchange). This is Sri Lanka Rupees 130,000,000,000. Any one of the above mentioned Countries (or a group of them together) can operate within Sri Lanka. They will operate via covert local network(s) of Sri Lankan citizens who may pose as political ‘power brokers’ and/or political party leaders and/or political party members and/or pretend to be ‘businessmen’. There can be more than one such covert group deployed in Sri Lanka, each unaware of the existence or work of the other(s).

Let us assume that the total Budget for such a Covert Intervention in Sri Lanka’s Parliament is Rs.130 Billion for a period of, say 2-3 years. Let us assume that an MP can be offered a Bribe of Rs.1 (one) Billion. Such a scenario will enable the change of allegiance of 130 MPs over a period of 2-3 years.

Furthermore, why should we assume a Budget of US Dollars 1 (one) Billion? Why not 2..3..or even 5  Billion US Dollars? If the stakes are high enough what is the value of being able to control the destiny of the Country of Sri Lanka via its Parliament?

(4) A Brief Analysis of the Political Movements and Individuals who wish a Total Abolishing of the Executive President. 

A wide range of Political Parties, citizens groups, opinion makers and individuals are involved in the Campaign to completely abolish the Executive President. When taken together they constitute a veritable witches brew of disparate groups. Some are genuine (but naïve) democratically minded citizens; others are have a blind hatred of J.R. Jayewardene; others are simple-minded souls ignorant of the basics of political science and comparative Constitutional Systems; others seem to have sinister plans to capture State power from a weakened Sri Lankan Executive in the future.

(4.1) Hatred of Mr J.R. Jayewardene: The hatred towards Mr Jayewardene is a significant factor in the present cacophony of Abolish, abolish, abolish the Presidential System”. Politicians and academics of such diverse origins such as Vasudewa Nanayakkara, Dr. Rajitha Senaratne, Mrs Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga, Dr. Wickremabahu Karunaratne, and Dr. Jayampathy Wickremaratne say with pride that we were against the 1978 Presidential System from 1978 itself”. But merely having opposed the Presidential system from 1978 does not make their position coherent. We too agree that there was/is a great deal that was wrong about J.R. Jayewardene’s formulation. So let us rectify these mistakes – as mentioned 3.2 above –  and move forward without destroying the main Executive backbone of the Sri Lankan governmental system.

(4.2) A Section of the UNP: A section of the UNP have now jumped the Abolish, Abolish” bandwagon. Among them are Mr. Ranil Wickremasinghe, Minister Kirielle and a whole host of opportunistic UNPers who want to hold high Office in the next (supposedly UNP dominated) National Government, and therefore want to be on Mr.Wickramasinghe’s good books.

 (4.3) A Section of the SLFP: Some in the SLFP too are making statements about totally abolishing the Executive Presidency. Our assessment is that these people too want to ensure high Office in the next (supposedly UNP dominated) National Government, and therefore want to be on Mr.Wickramasinghe’s good books.

(4.4) The JVP: The JVP is for totally abolishing the Executive President. It has implacably articulated this position from 1978, and from the Elections of 1994 onwards. There are two possibilities for the JVP’s position. First, that the JVP is naïve and unable to understand the political virtues of the Executive Presidency. The JVP reiterates ad nauseum about the need to strengthen democracy and therefore the need to abolish the Executive Presidential system. If this is the reason, then well and good. But the second possibility is far more sinister and potentially destructive. Which is that the JVP wants a weak Executive branch in the Sri Lankan governmental system to facilitate an extra-legal attempt to capture State Power in the future. Only time will enable us to tell which was the real reason.

(4.5) The Peratugami Party: Basic positions similar to the JVP, above. With the added ambition of trying to woo as many JVPers to join its ranks.

(4.6) Individuals Such as Dr. Nirmal Ranjith Devasiri, Professor Chandragupta Thenuwara, J.C. Weliamuna, Mr Gamini Viyangoda, etc: These are, by and large, well-intentioned opinion makers from ‘civil society’. They are mistaken when they advocate the total abolishing of the Executive Presidency. It is hoped that they will study the issues at stake and change their views. Or that their flawed counsel will not be heeded by President Sirisena, Former-President Kumaratunga and Mr. Wickremasinghe.

(5) Our Recommendations To President Sirisena, Former-President Kumaratunga and Mr. Wickremasinghe

(5.1) Get the Issues Regarding Weakening The Executive Clarified in Your Minds: Examine the post-World War II history of the Italian parliament: to date more than 60+ governments. Examine the post-WW II history of the Japanese Parliament: many Dozens of governments. During the last 6-8 years alone approximately 7 Prime Ministers.

Talk and Debate with Minister Champika Ranawaka, Rev. Athureliye Ratana Hamuduruwo and Dr. Dayan Jayatilleke. We have identified these three individuals as having very deep and accurate assessments of the dangers created by a weak Executive. Meet them one at a time. Or meet them all together. (Note: we have deep and fundamental disagreements with Dr. Jayatilleke’s assessment of the Rajapakse Regime and his continued support of that cabal. But, that should not blind us to the very accurate assessments that he makes of the consequences of the weakening of the Executive arm of Sri Lanka’s Government.)

(5.2) A Closed-Door Debate: President Sirisena, Ex-President Kumaratunga and Prime Minister Wickremasinghe,  consider holding a Debate between yourselves on the one hand, and Minister Champika Ranawaka, Rev. Athureliye Ratana Hamuduruwo and Dr. Dayan Jayatilleke on the other. A one-day Debate with the above three individuals would be very productive. Dr. Jayatilleke may not wish to sit along with Minister Ranawaka and Rev. Athureliye Ratana, and vice versa. That can be easily accommodated. They can sit separately and it can be a 3-cornered Debate. This Debate must be held behind closed-doors. It must not be a public debate. If that were to happen then the discussion and debate will not productive as the first issue on the minds of each person will be the impression he/she is making on the watching national audience. Te main purpose of this Debate is to get all the issues clarified in the minds of all the participants. Allow the main participants to bring a selection of their aides. For example, from the government side Dr. Jayampathy Wickremaratne, Minister Wijedasa Rajapakse and others. Similarly, allow Minister Champika Ranawaka, Rev. Athureliye Ratana Hamuduruwo and Dr. Dayan Jayatilleke to bring a selection of their aides and secretaries.

An ideal venue would be the Presidential Secretariat. The entire Debate could be video filmed but the Video footage should be kept under the personal control of President Sirisena. The programme need not be broadcast immediately. An Embargo of 3-5 years or more may be placed on the Video Film. Or if there is consensus, it may be broadcast in a few days, weeks or months time. In any event, video filming of the Debate should not be allowed to displace the main purpose of the Debate. If done at all, it should be done for the purpose of historical Record.

(6) Other Miscellaneous Issues Relevant to the Yahapalana Government

(6.1) Begin Working Immediately on Economic Development: The countries economy has not witnessed any appreciable economic up-turn after 8 January 2015. Yes, we understand that it is still only a few months after the victory. But the peoples’ expectations are very high. You have to make an effort and be seen by the people to be doing so. We have done, and continue to do surveys by ourselves. small scale industrialists, hardware merchants, general grocery owners are already beginning to grumble that the Yahapalana government is only talk, talk, talk about Constitutional Reform. And that their Economic woes are becoming worse. There is a great deal of truth in the above.

We suggest the appointment of a dynamic MP such as Dr. Harsha De Silva. Stop him from having to attend countless TV talk shows. Limit it to one talk show every 2 weeks. He should be given a good staff and should get to work. On the day of the Election victory itself the Volkswagen Chairman was seen on TV discussing with Dr. De Silva. That was the last we saw of the Volkswagen CEO.

(6.2) Discontinue Arjuna Mahendran as Governor of the Central Bank: This issue has done considerable damage to the Yahapalanaya Government. Arjuna Mahendran is terminally damaged. There is no way in which he can work as the Governor in the future, whatever the findings of the investigations Committee. President Sirisena and Ex-President Kumaratunga, you will need to draw the line on this matter if Mr. Wickremasinghe is unable or reluctant to act on this matter due to intra-UNP politics and personal friendship with Mr Charlie Mahendran, former UNP Ambassador and Arjuna Mahendran’s father.

(7) Conclusions: The Jury is Still Deliberating. History Will Judge”

(7.1) President Maithripala Sirisena, Mr. Ranil Wickremasinghe and Former-President Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga, the three of you have re-democratised Sri Lanka in a manner which was unthinkable 6 months ago. You have done a tremendous service to Sri Lanka.

(7.2) But this is just the beginning – there is a great deal of work to be done. The Rajapakse cabal is organising. Some among you have given ammunition to the Rajapakses. If mistakes pile up one upon the other, the whole Yahapalanaya movement could get derailed. You have still not accomplished even 10% of what the people expect from you. The Jury is still out. History will be the judge, and if you mess it all up History’s judgement will be very harsh. Take another 100 days to finish the 1st Phase of the work that must be done before the next General Elections. Don’t allow the UNP’s rush you into a quick election – the UNP is under the impression that it will emerge victorious. Don’t allow the UNP to stampede the Yahapalanaya Movement into a fatal error.

(7.3) Former President Kumaratunga, you have played a remarkable role in facilitating the rejuvenation and revitalisation of the SLFP. The role that you played in persuading Mr. Sirisena to risk all is quite outstanding. But its vital that you – and the other 2 top leaders realise that a great deal remains to be done. You have to ‘read’ Mr Wickremasinghe very carefully. Of the three of you he is the one who can upset the whole Yahapalanaya Project.

(7.4) Prime Minister Ranil Wickremasinghe, during the last 3 months you have showed your very considerable administrative and governmental skills and capabilities. But you have also given ammunition to the Rajapakse cabal as well. Of the three Leaders it is you who could – in your haste to give the UNP a winning ‘edge’ in the forthcoming Elections – inadvertently pave the path for the destruction of the Yahapalanaya movement.

(7.5) Lastly, and most important of all, President Sirisena. There is a huge Responsibility on your Shoulders. YOU are the Person we Elected. YOU are – as at present – the best President we have ever had. YOU are the person to whom we gave an Unquestionable Mandate.

We request you to kindly consider the following:

  • Do not allow the Executive Presidential System to be weakened beyond the necessary degree. (What that necessary degree” can be determined. Pay close attention to Minister Champika Ranawaka, Ven. Athureliye Ratana Thero and Dr Dayan Jayatilleke.
  • There will never be consensus and complete agreement between Mr Sampanthan, Mr Sumanthiran, Vasudewa Nanayakkara, Dr Rajitha Senaratne, Mr. Rauff Hakeem, Mrs Kumaratunga, Ven. Sobitha Thero, Dr.Jayampathy Wickremaratne, Champika Ranawaka, Ven. Athureliye Ratana Thero, Dr. Dayan Jayatilleke, J.C. Weliamuna, etc etc.
  • At some point a Leader must decide. Must draw the line. And that Leader is YOU. You have to prepare yourself for this challenge which will surely come in the future.
  • Sirisena, Stand for a 2nd Term as President.

Mr. President, it is our assessment that you running for a 2nd Presidential Term would be greatly beneficial for Sri Lanka and the changes that were begun on 8 January 2015. These changes have only begun; there is a great deal more to be done. These changes need to be firmly established within the political culture of Sri Lanka. That will take years. The deleterious effects from 1978 onwards, and more seriously, from 2010 onwards cannot be neutralized in a few months. Therefore, your hand on the Rudder of the Sri Lanka State will ensure that the Yahapalanaya movement keeps to its correct path. 

If you insist on not running for a 2nd Term, then you risk the possibility of rapidly becoming a ‘Lame Duck’ President. By 2018 and 2019 politicians will begin to start thinking and plotting about who the next President could be. That is something the Sri Lanka cannot afford. Therefore, whatever your qualms and personal preferences, give the Country the stability of your Leadership for the period 2020 to 2025.

Complete you 1st Term in January 2020. Then put yourself forward to as a Candidate for a 2nd Term. We hope that you will be able to win that Election. Your 2nd Term will run till January 2025. Then we an be assured that your mature and solid Leadership will be available to the Country till 2025. By that time we would have been able to put behind us the deleterious effects of the previous Regime.

Thank you,

‘The Collective of Concerned Citizens and Academics’

End Sinhala Monopoly, Says Kumaratunga

April 26th, 2015

By P K Balachandran Courtesy Indian Express

Published: 26th April 2015 06:03 AM

Last Updated: 26th April 2015 06:03 AM

COLOMBO:

Former Lankan President Chandrika Kumaratunga said here on Saturday, that the dismantling of Sinhala majoritarian politics, government structures and laws, is essential for the establishment of durable peace in the island nation.

In her SJV Chelvanayakam oration on Winning the war is not establishing peace” held under the auspices of the Ilankai Tamil Arasu Katchi, Kumaratunga said the root cause of the unending ethnic conflict in Lanka is the monopolisation of the political, economic and social resources of the country by the majority Sinhala community to the exclusion of the minority communities.

In her view, the Sinhala Only Act of 1956 is not the root cause. The root cause is that the other two languages, namely Tamil and English, were neglected. The country’s ancient genius will have been truly and fully realised if the Act had been an inclusive one, she said. In the context of the fear and distrust plaguing ethnic relations in Lanka, Kumaratunga urged Lankans not to harp on the bitter past and indulge in a blame game but get down to building an inclusive, democratic and cohesive society.

 

Sirisena pitches for early Parliamentary elections

April 26th, 2015

Courtesy Adaderana

Sri Lankan President Maithripala Sirisena has apparently decided to order early Parliamentary elections in the hope that it will yield a  Legislature which will enable him to fulfill his poll promises, informed sources said. This is after he found the current Parliament to be a hard nut to crack.

Elections will be ordered whether or not Sirisena’s pet project, the 19th Constitutional Amendment (19A) to reduce the powers of the Executive Presidency and depoliticise government institutions, is passed by Parliament in the coming week, the sources said.

Sirisena’s  governmental partner, the United National Party (UNP) led by

Ranil Wickremesinghe, is also of the same view.

The UNP is keen on quick polls to exploit the divisions in the opposition Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP). Apart from the conflict between the pro and anti-Rajapaksa factions in the SLFP, there are contradictions between Sirisena and what is supposedly his own group in the SLFP, the one led by the Leader of Opposition, Nimal Sripala de Silva.

The Nimal group has two aims: one is to prevent Rajapaksa from staging a comeback, and the other is to get Sirisena to ditch the UNP and form an SLFP government, using the party’s status as the single largest group in parliament. The applecart will be upset if there are early elections.

To force Sirisena into submission, groups which have differences with him have threatened to deny him the two-third majority required to pass the 19A.

They insist that electoral reforms be introduced along with with the 19A, when Sirisena and the UNP have said that electoral reforms, being complicated, should wait. The dissidents are planning to move amendments to the 19A which government cannot accept. To bring about a split between Sirisena and Wickremesinghe, they tried to get Sirisena and Rajapaksa to meet privately and patch up. (New Indian Express reported)

Opposition resists bid to rush RI Bill through Parliament – GL Legislative wrangle over 19A

April 26th, 2015

By Shamindra Ferdinando  Courtesy Island

article_image

The proposed 19 Amendment to the Constitution is facing a fresh hurdle with a section of the Opposition strongly objecting to the ‘Right to Information Bill’ which is part of the Amendment being presented as an urgent bill.

UPFA parliamentarian Prof. G. L. Peiris yesterday accused the government of acting contrary to its much touted public pronouncements as regards right to information. He told The Island in the wake of President Maithripala Sirisena handing over copies of the 19 Amendment to the Constitution to prelates of Asgiriya and Malwatte Chapters Sunday morning.

President Maithripala Sirisena late last week referred the ‘Right to Information Bill’ to the Supreme Court for a determination. The Court will consider the Bill on April 28, 2015 and convey its finding to the President.

The bench will comprise Chief Justice K. Sripavan, Justice Rohini Marasinghe and Justice Priyantha Jayewardena.

Prof. Peiris said that in case of an urgent bill the Supreme Court would have to announce its decision within 24 hours, whereas the proper procedure allowed the apex body to make its determination in three weeks.The controversial move should be examined against the backdrop of the Right to Information Bill being part of the proposed 19 Amendment to the Constitution now scheduled to be debated today and tomorrow. Prof. Peiris said: “Obviously, the government intends to secure the Supreme Court determination before the parliament vote on the 19 Amendment tomorrow night. When right to information is recognised as a fundamental right in the proposed 19 Amendment, there cannot be any justification in rushing through the Right to Information Bill ahead of the Committee Stage of the 19 Amendment.”

Responding to a question Prof. Peiris asserted that the Supreme Court should never have been tasked to decide within 24 hours whether provisions in the ‘Right to Information Bill’ were consistent with the Constitution or required a referendum.

The former External Affairs Minister pointed out the absurdity in the government presenting an urgent bill when the 19 Amendment was meant to abolish the provision for such procedures. MP Peiris said that the government couldn’t resort to measures in contravention of the Supreme Court ruling on the 19 Amendment. The Supreme Court in no uncertain terms had directed that certain provisions in the 19 Amendment required a referendum; therefore the government shouldn’t manipulate the process to transform the proposed Amendment.

The Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC) appointed by former President Mahinda Rajapaksa had also called for an end to the practice of presenting urgent bills, Prof. Peiris said. The SLFP would strongly oppose any move to expand the 19 Amendment in contravention of the Supreme Court ruling, Prof. Peiris said. Asked whether the SLFP had received the backing of other political parties, Prof. Peiris emphasised that those pushing for the 19 Amendment should advise the UNP not to undermine the process by resorting to changes.

Prof. Peiris reiterated that the government should accommodate changes the SLFP had made to the latest draft of the 19 Amendment. The former law professor said that consultations among political parties were continuing in a bid to reach agreement before twice postponed debate on 19 Amendment on Monday.

Presidential powers now used by others – MR

April 26th, 2015

By S.K. Kaluarachchi and Lalith Chaminda  Courtesy Island

Power that the people had given go to President Maithripala Sirisena was being used by others, former President Mahinda Rajapaksa said on Saturday.

The former President, addressing a Daham Hamuwa, at Kacchiwatte Purana Rajamaha Vihara in Galle said: “I was told by one of the participants at this ceremony short while ago that during my tenure the number of members in the cabinet was high but now the number of executive presidents in the country was high. There is some truth in that saying. There is a national executive council. There is no provision for such a thing even in the Constitution. That council has become a play pen of the JVP and TNA members. The JVP has become a branch of the UNP today. Not all the JVPers approve this situation. JVP leader Anura Kumara Dissanayake has a room in Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe’s office. That was revealed to our members none other than the incumbent president. Although I cannot believe this, we have to accept it when it is said by the President!

“I love the SLFP but do not want to see that the SLFP members fall into the lap of the UNP. The SLFP is our life. Many fled this party but I never left it. So, none can tell me that I am not an SLFPer.”We are saddened by the recent developments in the national security affairs. The security of the country is in danger. I saw what is happening at Vilapattu jungles when it was shown by media. The government cannot continue to keep mum on these issues.

“Basil has been remanded for giving Rs. 2,500 each to Samrudhi beneficiaries and for paying gratuity allowances to the government servants. These were done after obtaining the approval of the Cabinet of Ministers. Now, these have been interpreted as swindling public money. I told Basil not to come back because I knew that he would be framed on false charges. But, he told me that he preferred to go to jail rather than giving credence to false charges. I have been accused of giving a ministerial portfolio to Tissa Attanayake. It was done in keeping with powers granted to the president by the Constitution. I have no problem with going before the bribery commission.”

Among those present were the Sanghannayaka of the Daskhina Lanka, Vice Chancellor of the Ruhuna University Ven Pallatthara Sumanajothi Thera, Senior Lecturer of the University of Sri Jayewardenepura and Chief incumbent of the Sunethradevi Pirivena, Pepiliyana Ven Medagama Abhayatissa, Ven Uluvitake Bodhisinghe Thera. The event was organized by the Hela Bodu Saviya of Galle and MP Manusha Nanayakkara, and was attended by Chief Minister of the Southern Province Shan Vijayalal de Silva, Deputy Speaker Chandima Weerakkody, Galle District MPs Nishantha Mutuhettigama, Mohan P de Silva, Ramesh Pathirana and a large number of local government members of the district.

Chinese Chamber fo Commerce rejects high interest rates allegation for Chinese loans to Sri Lanka

April 26th, 2015

Xinhua

COLOMBO, April 26 (Xinhua) — The Chinese Chamber of Commerce in Sri Lanka (CCCSL) on Sunday rejected Sri Lankan Financial Minister Ravi Karunanayake’s allegation of the so-called high interest rates of Chinese loan.

Spokesperson of the Chinese Chamber of Commerce in Sri Lanka ( CCCSL) Chen Chuan told Xinhua that the interest rates of Chinese loans are not high. During the past 10 years, at the request of the Sri Lankan government, China has provided loans amounting several billion US dollars in supporting of Sri Lanka’s economic and social development, among which more than half are at the interest rates of only 2 percent. China provides preferential loans at low interest rates to the developing countries all around the world with the purpose of helping them upgrade infrastructure construction and improve the people’s well-being. By granting discount loans, the Chinese government extends goodwill to the developing countries. The interest rates of Chinese commercial loans are also much lower than most of that in the international market or in the Sri Lankan commercial banks at the same period.

As for the commercial loans, Chen further pointed out that the international financing costs hiked in 2007, and the Sri Lankan government issued treasury bonds at the interest rates ranging from 12 percent to 14 percent during that period when Sri Lanka was still in internal conflict. At that time, Chinese relevant banks provided Sri Lanka with a large amount of preferential loans as well as some commercial loans with 6 percent interest rates which were quite favorable and reasonable at the time.

The spokesperson stressed that it is the Sri Lankan government that submitted applications for loans from Chinese banks and no one forced the Sri Lankan side to apply for loans. The Sri Lankan side always conducted a thorough survey prior to applying for loans from China. The negotiators from the Sri Lankan side were very professional and loyal to their country and the people while negotiating loan agreements with Chinese banks.

Just as what the financial experts have indicated, the interest rates of the loans from some international financial institutions are relatively lower. however, they can provide only limited amount of loans which are not able to meet the urgent demands of the developing countries for economic development and infrastructure construction, nevertheless to say there are certain prerequisites attached to such loans. It is quite difficult and time-consuming to complete the application procedure for these loans. By contrast, the Chinese banks have enough funds, and could provide preferential loans and commercial loans through a comparatively quick examining and approving procedure without any prerequisites. Such timely help and assistance is welcomed by the developing countries, including Sri Lanka, Chen said.

Chen said the prompt and abundant Chinese loans at lower interest rates have made great positive contribution to the state reconstruction and development of Sri Lanka. For instance, the Norochcholai Coal Power Plant funded by the Chinese loans now generates more than 50 percent of the whole country’s power, which has completely solved the problem of power shortage for this island country, lowered the cost of electricity to a great extent, thus benefiting every family, everyone and every economic and social sector. besides, Over 1,000 km roads at different levels finished construction with the support of Chinese loans, which made easier and more convenient for the local people to travel and do business. Better roads are strong support to the social and economic development of Sri Lanka.

Some high ranking official’s wrong allegations on interest rates of Chinese loans have damaged the images of Chinese banks in Sri Lanka and demotivated their enthusiasm of offering preferential loans to the country, said the spokesperson.

“We hope that Sri Lankan official concerned will make remarks based on the facts, take the people’s well-being as first priority and make joint efforts with the Chinese side to maintain the good environment of China-Sri Lanka pragmatic cooperation.”

මානුෂිකත්වයට එරෙහිව සිදුකර ඇති සාපරාධි ක්‍රියා

April 26th, 2015

වෛද් රුවන් එම්. ජයතුංග විසින් ලියන ලද The Atrocities Committed Against Humanity ලිපිය ඇසුරෙනි. පරිවර්තනය A S වික්රමසිංහ

මිනිසුන් අසම්මතයන් කෙරෙහි විශ්වාසය තබන තාක්කල් අමානුෂික ක්රියාවන්හි අඛණ්ඩවම නිරත වනු ඇත.” -වෝල්ටෙයර් 

 මානව ඉතිහාසය ප්‍රචණ්ඩත්වයෙන් හා ම්ලේඡ්ත්වයෙන් පිරී පවතී. ප්‍රචණ්ඩකාරී බව මිනිසා තුල පවත්නා නෛසර්ගික ලැදියාවක් ලෙස සැලකිය යුතු බව සමහර උගතුන් විසින් පෙන්වා දී තිබේ. ප්‍රචණ්ඩත්ව මිනිසාගේ මානසිකත්වයට අදාළ ප්‍රධාන සාධකයක් ලෙසින් සිග්මන් ෆ්‍රොයිඩ් විසින් සලකන ලදී. මනෝවිද්‍යාඥ එරික් ෆ්‍රෝම් විසින් ඔහුගේ “මානව ප්‍රචණ්ඩත්වයේ ව්‍යුහය” නම් ග්‍රන්ථයෙන් ප්‍රකාශ කොට ඇත්තේ, ප්‍රචණ්ඩත්වයේ මූලාරම්භය දෙස බලන කල බලගතු සංස්කෘතියක පවත්නා ප්‍රචණ්ඩත්වය ජීව විද්‍යාත්මක නොවන බවයි. ප්‍රචණ්ඩකාරී බව හා විනාශකාරී බව කරා ප්‍රවිශ්ට වනුයේ බහුමාන සංසිද්ධීන් දෙකක් ලෙසටය. මේවා යම් මානවීය තත්ත්වයක දුක්ඛදායක පැතිකඩක් විය හැකිය.

kandybeheading1
 

 පසුගිය වසර 100 ක පමණ ඈත අතීතයක් තුලදී මානුෂිකත්වයට එරෙහි සාමුහික ම්ලේඡ ක්‍රියාවන් රාශියක් සිදුකර ඇත. මෙම ක්‍රියාවන්ගෙන් බොහොමයක් සිදුකරන ලද්දේ තාක්ෂණික වශයෙන් දියුණු වූ ජාතීන් විසිනි. එම ක්‍රියාවන් මගින් විපතට පත් වූවන් දුක් පීඩාවන් විඳි නමුදු ඒවා සිදුකළ අපරාධකරුවන් දෙස කිසිවෙකුගේ නෙත් නොගැටුනි. ඉතිහාසය අපට පාඩමක් උගන්වයි. අතීතයේ කළ වැරදි වලින් පාඩම් ඉගෙන ගැනීමට අසමත් මිනිසුන් තවදුරටත් වැරදි කළහොත් ප්‍රචණ්ඩත්වය හා ම්ලේච්ඡත්වය වත්මන් ශිෂ්ටාචාරය කෙරෙහි ද නොකඩවා බලපානු ඇත.

 කායික වධහිංසා පැමිණවීම්, ශරීරාංග සිඳලීම් , හෝ සිවිල් වැසියන් හෝ සටනෙහි නිරත නොවන්නන් ඝාතනය කිරීම, හමුදාමය නොවන ඉලක්ක විනාශ කිරීම තුවාල ලද යුධ සිරකරුවන්ට හිංසා පීඩා කිරීම හා ඔවුන් මරා දැමීම හා අධිකතර හානි හෝ තුවාල වීම් සිදුවන අන්දමින් ආයුධ භාවිතා කිරීම ආදිය සාමාන්‍යයෙන් ගත් කළ ම්ලේච්ඡ ක්‍රියාවන්ට අදාළ වේ.

 මිනිස් සංහාරයන්

 ඔවුන්ගේ සාමුහික දිවි පැවැත්ම අවසන් කිරීමේ නිශ්චිත අභිලාෂයෙන් මිනිස් සමූහයක් සංවිධානාත්මක ලෙස ඝාතනයට ලක් කිරීම සමූහ මිනිස් සංභාර ලෙසින් හැඳින්වේ. ඒ සඳහා පොදු සැලැස්මක් හා එය ක්‍රියාත්මක කිරීමට යාන්ත්‍රනයක්ද අවශ්‍ය වේ. 

සමූහ ඝාතන නම් අපරාධය වැලැක්වීමේ හා එයට දඬුවම් පැමිණවීමේ එක්සත් ජාතින්ගේ ප්‍රඥප්තිය සමූහ ඝාතන යන්න විස්තර කෙරෙනුයේ පහත දැක්වෙන ආකාරයටය.

 “ජාතික, ජනවාර්ගික, වර්ණවාදී හෝ ආගමික කණ්ඩායම් කොටස් වශයෙන් හෝ මුලූමනින් විනාශ කිරීමට අදාලව සිදුකරන ලබන ක්‍රියාදාමයන්” යනුවෙනි. අතීතයේදී විශ්ව බලයන් මගින් මානුෂිකත්වයට එරෙහිව සිදුකරන ලද අමානුෂික ක්‍රියාවන්ට මෙම නිර්වචන අදාළ වේ.

 ස්පාඤ්ඤ ආක්රමණිකයන් විසින් දකුණු ඇමරිකාවේ දී සිදුකළ මිලේච්ඡ ක්රියාවන්

 1524 වර්ෂයේදී ෆ්‍රැන්සිස්කෝ පිසාරෝ ( Fransisco Pisarro ) මිනිසුන් 80 දෙනෙකු හා අශ්වයින් 40 දෙනෙකු සමග දකුණු ඇමරිකාවේ ස්වදේශික රාජ්‍ය අත්පත් කර ගැනීම සඳහා පිටත් විය. පිසාරෝ උගත් පුද්ගලයෙකු නොවුනද රත්‍රන් සෙවීමේ අතෘප්තිකර ආශාවකින් මෙහෙයවන ලද කුරිරු සෙබලෙකු විය. ෆ්‍රැන්සිස්කෝ පිසාරෝගෝ නායකත්වයෙන් යුත් ස්පාඤ්ඤ ආක්‍රමණිකයින් විසින් මූලූ ශිෂ්ටාචාරයක්ම වනසා දමන ලදී. ඔවුන් විසින් රට වැසියන් මරා දමන ලද අතර ඔවුන්ගේ රත්‍රන් කොල්ලකන්න ලදී. ස්වදේශිකයින්ව සමූහ වශයෙන් මරණයට පත් කිරීමට තුඩු දුන් පැපොල, සරම්ප වැනි රෝග හඳුන්වා දෙමින් ඔවුන් විසින් ජීව විද්‍යාත්මක පහර දීමේ ක්‍රමයක් ද භාවිත කරන ලදී. ක්‍රි: ව: 1650 වන විට බොහෝ ස්වදේශිකයින් මරණයට පත් වූ අතර මිනිසුන්ගෙන් හිස් වූ ගම්මාන වල අතහැර ගිය නිවෙස් තිඛෙනු දක්නා ලදී. සමෘද්ධිමත්, ස්වයං පෝෂිත දකුණු ඇමරිකානු ශිෂ්ටාචාරය අවිද්‍යමාන තත්ත්වයකට පත් විය. මෙම ක්‍රියාදාමය ස්පාඤ්ඤ අක්‍රමණිකයන් විසින් දකුණු ඇමරිකාවේදී සිදුකල භයානක ම්ලේච්ඡත්වයක් විය.

 පෘතුගීසි ආක්රමණිකයන්ගේ කෲර ආයෝමය හස්තය

යටත් විජිතවාදී සුවිශේෂි බලවන්තයින් ලෙසින් පෘතුගීසීහු තමන් යටත්කරනු ලබන ජාතීන් බියවැද්දීම පිළිබඳව ප්‍රසිද්ධියක් ලබා සිටියහ. ආසියාවේ, අප්‍රිකාවේ හා දකුණු ඇමරිකාවේ වැසියන්ටද විරුද්ධව පෘතුගීසින් විසින් බොහෝ කෘෘරකම් කරන ලදී. ලංකාව තුලදී ඔවුහු දැඩි කුරිරු ම්ලේච්ඡ ක්‍රියාවන් සිදු කළහ. ඔවුන් විසින් බොහෝ ආගමික ගොඩනැගිලි ද්වේශ සහගත ලෙස විනාශ කරන ලද අතර, මිනිසුන් සතු ධනයද කොල්ල කන ලදී. ස්වදේශිකයින්ට කෘෘර වද හිංසාවලට ලක් කොට ඔවුන්ගේ සම්ප්‍රදායික ආගම් අතහැර දැමීමට බලකරන ලදී. පුද්ගලයන් හට කායික වද හිංසාවන් කිරීමට පෘතුගීසි හමුදාවට අණ දුන් ලේ පිපාසිත දුෂ්ඨයකුගේ ලකුණක් ලෙස ජෙනරාල් අසවේදුගේ නම තවමත් ලංකා ඉතිහාසයේ සටහන්ව පවතී. පෘතුගීසි හමුදාවන් විසින් අත දරුවන් මරා ලද දමන අතර මිනිසුන් නිරාහාරව තබා මිය යාමට ද සලස්වන ලදී. 

 බ්රිතාන් යුද හමුදාව විසින් සිදු කරන ම්ලේච්ඡ කි්රයාවන්

බ්‍රිතාන්‍ය යුද හමුදාව විසින් අප්‍රිකාව, ඉන්දියාව හා ශ්‍රී ලංකාව තුලද ම්ලේච්ඡ කි්‍රයාවන් ගනනාවක් සිදුකරන ලදී. 1857 පැන නැගුනු සීපෝයි Sepoy කැරැල්ල ඔවුන් විසින් ඉතා කුරිරු ලෙස යටපත් කරන ලදී. 1919 අප්‍රේල් මස 13 වෙනි දින බ්‍රිතාන්‍ය යුද හමුදාවේ ජෙනරාල් ඩයර් විසින් වැඩි වශයෙන් කාන්තාවන්ගෙන් හා ළමයින්ගෙන් සමන්විත වූ නිරායුධ පුද්ගල කණ්ඩායමකට වෙඩි තබන ලෙස අම්රිස්ටාර්හිදී අණ කරන ලදී. පසු කලෙක මෙය ජල්ලියන්වාලා Jallianvala Baga සංහාරය යනුවෙන් ප්‍රසිද්ධියට පත්විය. මෙහිදී 300 කට වඩා මියගොස් දහස් ගණනක් තුවාල ලැබීය. මින් විපතට පත් වූවන් අතර කුඩා ළමුන් සිටියද බ්‍රිතාන්‍ය හමුදාව විසින් ජනරාල් ඩයර්ට විරුද්ධව කිසිම ක්‍රියාමාර්ගයක් නොගන්නා ලදී.

 උඩරට ගිවිසුම අත්සන් කොට ටික කලකට පසුව 1818 දී කන්ද උඩරට වැසියන් බි්‍රතාන්‍ය යටත් විජිත පාලකයින්ට විරුද්ධව නැගී සිටියහ. යුද්ධ නීතිය ප්‍රකාශයට පත් කරන ලද අතර එම කැරැල්ල ඉතාම දරුණු අන්දමින් යටපත් කරන ලදී. බි්‍රතාන්‍ය හමුදාවේ මේජර් මැක්ඩොනල්ඩ් උඩරට වැසියන්ගෙන් පලි ගනිමින් ඔවුන්ගේ ධාන්‍ය අස්වැන්නටද ගිනි තැබීය. කැරැල්ලට සම්බන්ධ වූ බොහෝ දෙනෙකුට වෙඩි තබා මරා දමන ලද අතර සමහරුන්ව රටින් පිටුවහල් කරන ලදී. ඔවුන්ගේ පවුල්වල සාමාජිකයින් පවා සිරකරුවන් ලෙස අල්ලා ගන්නා ලදී. 1918 ඌව කැරැල්ලේදී කැපී පෙනුන නායකයා වූ කැප්පෙටිපොල දිසාවේව මරණයට පත්කරන ලද අතර ඔහුගේ පවුලේ සාමාජිකයින්ව රටින් පිටුවහල් කරන ලදී. කැප්පෙටිපොල දිසාවගේ පුත්‍රයා සිරකරුවකුව සිටියදී මරණයට පත්විය. 

 ගොන්ගාලේගොඩ බණ්ඩා හා පුරන් අප්පු විසින් නායකත්වය දෙන ලද 1848 කැරැල්ල පරාජය කරණු පිණිස බ්‍රිතාන්‍ය හමුදාව විසින් ඉතාම කෘෘර අන්දමින් සිය බලය යොදා ගන්නා ලදී. ගම් වාසින්ට ඉතාම අමානුශික හා දැඩි පීඩාකාරී දඬුවම් පමුනු වන ලද අතර ඔවුන්ගේ හරවත් සමාජ ව්‍යුහය බි්‍රතාන්‍ය යුද්ධ හමුදාව විසින් විනාශ කරන ලදී. බොහෝ දෙනෙකු එදිරිවාදී ක්‍රියාවලට හා කුසගින්නෙන් මිය යන තත්ත්වයකට ගොදුරු විය.

 ඇමරිකාවේ අඳුරු ඉතිහාසය

 ඇමරිකාවේ අලූතෙන් පදිංචි වූ සුදු ජාතිකයන් විසින් එහි පාරම්පරික ගෝත්‍රික ජනතාව වනචාරීන් ලෙස සලකමින් ඔවුන්ව විවිධ ම්ලේච්ඡ කි්‍රයාවන්ට ගොදුරු කරන ලදී. ඔවුන්ගේ ඉඩම් බලෙන්ම අත්පත් කරගන්නා ලද අතර ඔවුන්ගේ සංස්කෘතිය විනාශ කිරීමටද ක්‍රියා කලේය. හොලිිවුඩ් චිත්‍රපටි වලද රතු ඉන්දියානුවන් අතිශයින් දරුණු වනචාරී ප්‍රජාවක් ලෙසට නිරූපණය කරන ලදද ස්වභාවධර්මයා සමග හොඳින් සබඳ වූ නිශ්චිතජීවනෝපායක් ඔවුන් විසින් ගොඩනගාගෙන තිබුණි. රතු ඉන්දියානුවන් ස්වභාව දහමට ආදරය කල අතර වසර දහස් ගණනක් තිස්සේ පරිසරය සුරැකීමට ඔවුන්ගෙන් උදව් උපකාර ලැබිණ.

 ඇමරිකානු ජනාධිපති Franklin Pierce ඉඩම් විකුණන ලෙස ස්වදේශිය ඇමරිකානු නායකයා වූ සියැටල් හට පැවසූ විට ඔහු තමාගේ පුදුමය ප්‍රකාශ කළේය. ඔහු මෙසේ ලිවීය. 

 අහස හෝ භූමියේ උණුසුම මිලට ගන්නේ හෝ විකුණන්නේ කෙසේද? මේ අදහස නම් අපට ඉතාම නුහුරුය. වාතයේ නැවුම් බව, ජලයේ පැහැදිලි බව, අපට අයිති නැතිනම්, ඔබ ඒවා මිලදී ගන්නේ කෙසේද? මෙම භූමියේ සෑම කොටසක්ම මාගේ මිනිසුනට ශුද්ධ වස්තූන්ය. සෑම දිලිසෙන පයින් කටුවක්ම, සෑම වැලි තලාවක්ම, අඳුරු කැලෑ වල ඇති සෑම මීදුම් පටලයක්, පිරිසිදු හා ගුමු නාද දෙන සෑම කෘමියෙක්ම, මාගේ මිනිසුන්ගේ මතකයේ හා අත්දැකීම් තුල රැෙඳන ශුද්ධ වස්තූන්ය. වෘක්ෂ කඳන් තුල ගලා යන සාරය තුල රතු ඉන්දියානුවන්ගේ මතකයන් රැඳී පවතී.”

 1601 වර්ෂයේදී උතුරු ඇමරිකාවේ පළමු ඉංග්‍රීසි ජනපද බිහිවීමක් සමගම ඇමරිකා එක්සත් ජනපදයේ වහල්භාවය යන්නෙහි මූලාරම්භය ඇතිවිය. එම වහල්භාවය 1865 දක්වාම පැවතුනි. වහලූන් හට සලකන ලද්දේ මිනිසුන් නොව භාණ්ඩ ලෙසිනි. ඉතාම රළු තත්ත්වයන් යටතේ ඔවුනට වැඩ කිරීමට සිදු විය. වහල් වෙළඳපොළ තුළ පුරුෂයින් ඔවුන්ගේ භාර්්‍යාවන්ගෙන් වෙන් කරන ලද අතර දරුවන්, මව්වරුන්ගෙන් වෙන් කරන ලදී. ඉතාම සුළු වරදකට පවා වහලූන්ට දඬුවම් කරන ලද අතර, මෙම දඬුවම් වලට සමූලඝාතනය කිරීම, පොලූ මුගුරු වලින් පහර දීම හා සමහර විට ශරීරාංග ඉවත් කිරීමද අන්තර් ගත විය.

 වියට්නාමයේදී හා ඉරාකයේදී සිදුකරන ලද ම්ලේච්ඡ කි්‍රයාවන් සම්බන්ධයෙන්ද ඇමෙරිකානුවන් විවේචයට පාත්‍ර වී තිබේ. වියට්නාම් යුද්ධයේදී ඇමෙරිකානුවන් නේපාම් බෝම්බ භාවිතය කළ බවට චෝදනා එල්ල වී ඇති අතර ඔවුන් විසින් අස්වැන්න විනාශ කිරීමද නිරායුධ සිවිල් වැසියන් ඝාතනය කිරීමද සිදු කොට ඇත. වියට්නාම් යුද්ධයේදී ඇමෙරිකානූ හමුදා විසින් My Lai ගම්මානයේදී සිවිල් වැසියන් ගනනාවක් මරා දමන ලදී.

 ඉරාකයේ සිවිල් වැසියන් මරණයට පත් වූ රටාව බලන කල අධි ආක්‍රමණශිලී ක්‍රමෝපායන්, ජනතාව ජීවත්ව සිටි ප්‍රදේශවල කල අවිචාරවත් කළ වෙඩි තැබීම්, ක‍ෂණික මාරාන්තික බලයන් කෙරේ විශ්වාසය තැබීම ආදියෙන් බලකාමී රටාවක් පෙන්නුම් කෙරෙන බව 2003 මානව හිමිකම් අධීක්ෂණ වාර්තාව තුලින් හෙලි වේ. වාර්තාගතව ඇති සමහර ආරංචි මාර්ග වලින් හෙලිවනුයේ ඉරාකයේ සිවිල් වැසියන් 600, 000 කටත් වඩා මියගිය හා තුවාල ලද බවයි. 

 ඉතාලි ජාතිකයන් විසින් අප්රිකාවේ සිදුකරන ලද අපරාධ

 1911 ඔක්තොම්බර් මාසයේදී ඉතාලි – තුර්කි යුද්ධයේදී අතිවිශාල සංඛ්‍යාවක් ගෝත්‍රික ස්ත්‍රී පුරුෂයන් හා ළමුන්ද ඝාතනය කරමින් ඉතාලි හමුදා විසින් උතුරු අප්‍රිකානු දේශසීමාවන් ආක්‍රමණය කරන ලදී. (වත්මන් ලිබියාව) දෙවනි ලෝක යුධ සමයේදී හා ඉන් පෙරද ලිබියාවේදී හා ඉතියෝපියාවේදී මුසෝලීනීගේ හමුදාව විසින් බොහෝ විට ස්වදේශිකයන්ට පහර දීම සඳහා යුද්ධ ටැංකි, ගුවන් යානා හා

මස්ටර්ඩ් වායුද (රසායනික විෂ වායුවක්) භාවිතා කරන ලදී. 1929 – 1933 අතර කාලයේදී ඉතාලියානු පැසිස්ට්වාදීන් විසින් යටත් විජිත ලිබියාවේ නාසි -යුදෙව් සමූල ඝාතනයට පෙර දේශනපාලන සිරකරුවන් රඳවා තබන වද කඳවුරු ඉදිකරන ලදී. මෙම කඳවුරු වලදී පිරිමින් කායික වද හිංසා පමුණුවා, ස්ත්‍රීන් දූෂණය කොට, ළමුන් කුස ගින්නෙන් මිය යාමට ඉඩ හරින ලදී. ලිබියානු ගෝත්‍රික නායකයා වූ ඕමාර් මුක්තාර් ආක්‍රමණිකයන්ට විරුද්ධව නැගී සිට හොඳින් සන්නද්ධ වූ ඉතාලි හමුදාවට ප්‍රාථමික අවි ආයුධ යොදා ගනිමින් වසර 20 ක් තිස්සේ පැවති ගරිල්ලා යුද්ධයත් දියත් කලේය. ඔහුගේ නිදහස් සටන 1937 දී නිමාවට පත් විය. සටනකදී තුවාල ලද ඔහුව අල්ලාගෙන පසුව ඉතාලියානු හමුදාව විසින් මරු මුවට පත් කරන ලදී.

 උතුරු අප්‍රිකාවේ බලෙන් අල්ලාගත් භූමි වල ඉතාලි – පැසිස්ට් හමුදාව විසින් සංවිධානාත්මක ලෙස ජනවාර්ගික සංහාරයක් කරගෙන යන ලදී. 1935 දී සිදු වූ ඉතාලියානු පැසිස්ට් ආක්‍රමණය හා අනතුරුව ඉතියෝපියාව අල්ලා ගැනීමේ කාලය තුල විවිධ ම්ලේච්ඡ ක්‍රියාවන් සිදු විය. ඉතාලි හමුදාවන් විසින් සිවිල් ඉලක්ක වලට මස්ටර්ඩ් වායුව යෙදූ අතර රෝහල් වලට හා ගම් වලට බෝම්බ හෙලමින් දසදහස් ගණනක් ජනයා මරුමුවට පත් කරන ලදී.

 ඇල්ජීරියාවේ හා ඉන්දු චීනයේප්රංශ ජාතිකයන් සිදුකරන ලද අපරාධ

 ප්‍රංශ ජාතිකයන් විසින් වසර 132 ක් පුරා ඇල්ජීරියාව අත්පත් කරගෙන සිටි අතර දරුණුතම ම්ලේච්ඡ ක්‍රියාවන් සිදුකරන ලද්දේ 1830 – 1862 අතර කාල වකවානුවේදීය. 1870 දී ඇල්ජීරියාවේ ආණ්ඩුකාර තෝමස් බියොනාඩි විසින් ඇල්ජීරියානු සිවිල් වැසියන් හට පහර දීමට පටන් ගත්තේ ඔවුන් සමූල ඝාතනය කරමින් හා රටින් පිටුවහල් කරමිනි. සමහර වාර්තා වලට අනුව සිය ගණන් මිනිසුන් පණ පිටින් පුලූස්සා දමන ලද හෝ ආක්‍රමණික ප්‍රංශ හමුදා වලින් සැඟවීම සඳහා සැඟව සිටි පුද්ගලයන් එම ගුහාතුලදීම නිෂ්පූර්ණ මරණ වලට (ඔක්සිජන් නොමැති වීමෙන් සිදුවන මරණ) ගොදුරු කරන ලදහ. ගම්මානවල සිවිල් වැසියන් මරා දමමින්, කාන්තාවන් දූෂණය කරමින්, ගම්මාන වලට ගිනි ලබන ලදී. ගම් වැසියන් කුස ගින්නෙන් මිය යෑමට ඉඩ හැර, දේපළ, ආහාර හා අස්වැන්න විනාශ කොට දමන ලදී. ප්‍රංශය විසින් ඇල්ජීරියාව අත්පත් කරගෙන සිටි කාලය තුලදී ඇල්ජීරියානු ජාතිකයන් විශාල පිරිසක් දේශපාලන කඳවුරුවලට හෝ “කූඩාරම් නගරවලට” බලෙන් යවන ලදී. 1830-1930 අතර කාල වකවානුව තුළදී ඇල්ජීරියානු ජනගහනයෙන් 15% හා 25% අතර සංඛ්‍යාවක් එබඳු කඳවුරු තුළදී මිය යන ලද බවට වාර්තා වේ.

 දහස්ගණන් ඇල්ජීරියානුවන්ට එරෙහිව ප්‍රංශ යුද හමුදාව හා පොලීසිය විසින් පුළුල් අන්දමින් සිදු කළ ශාරීරික වදහිංසා පැමිණවීම් පිළිබඳව 1957 වසරේදී අන්තර්ජාතික රතුකුරුසය මගින් ලොවට හෙළි කරන ලදී. ප්‍රංශ ජාතිකයින් විසින් කායික වධහිංසා පැමිණවීම් කිරීමට යොදාගත් තාඬණයන් අතර සිරුරේ ඉතාම සංවේදී ඉන්ද්‍රියන්ට විදුලි සැර යෙදීම, ජලයේ ගිල්වීම, වීදුරු හා ලී වස්තූන් සමඟ මෛථූනයේ යෙදවීම, පාද වලින් හා දෑත්වලින් එල්ලා තැබීම හා සිගරට්ටු වලින් පිළිස්සීම ආදිය විය. (මරන්, රීටා (1989) මේ අතරින් වඩාත්ම ප්‍රකෝපකාරී ක්‍රියාව වූයේ 1945 මැයි මාසයේදී අල්ලාගත් ප්‍රංශ හමුදා විසින් ඉතාම සුළු දින කිහිපයක් තුළදී ඇල්ජීරියානුවන් 45,000 ක් පමණ සංහාරයට ලක් කළ ක්‍රියාවයි. 

 ජපාන අධිරාජ්යවාදයේ බියකරු පාර්ශවය

ජපාන අධිරාජ්‍යවාදී යුගයේදී ඔවුන් විසින් අල්ලා ගන්නා ලද ආසියාතික රටවල විශාල වශයෙන් මිලේච්ඡ ක්‍රියාවන් කරන ලදී. ජපාන අධිරාජ්‍යවාදී හමුදා මගින් සතුරු සිවිල් වැසියන් හා සතුරු සටන් වදින්නන්ට එරෙහිව අපරාධ සිදුකරන ලදී. ඉමහත් අපකීර්තියට පත් 1937 නැන්කින් මිනිස් සංහාරයේදී දස දහස් ගණන් චීන සිවිල් වැසියන් ඝාතනය කළ අතර 20,000-80,000 අතර සංඛ්‍යාවක කාන්තාවන් ජපාන යුද සෙබළුන් විසින් දුෂණයට බඳුන් කරන ලදී. අධිරාජ්‍යවාදී යුධ හමුදාව විසින් සුවපහසුව සලසන්නන් හෝ ලිංගික වහලූන් වශයෙන් සේවය කරනු පිණිස චීනයෙන් හා කොරියාවෙන් කාන්තාවන් බලයෙන් පැහැරගෙන යන ලදී. දෙවන ලෝක යුද සමයේදී ඇස්තමේන්තු ගත පරිදි 100,000 සිට 400,000 දක්වා කාන්තා ලිංගික වහලූන් සංඛ්‍යාවක් ජපාන යුද හමුදා භටයින්ට ලිංගික සේවය සලසනු පිණිස බලෙන්ම යොදවා ගන්නා ලදී.

 1937-1945 අතර කාලයේදී 3,000,000 සිට 10,000,000 දක්වා ජනතාවක් බොහෝවිට 6,000,000 ක් චීන ඉන්දුනීසියානු, කොරියානු, පිලිපීන හා ඉන්දු චීන ජාතිකයන්, ජපාන යුද හමුදාව විසින් මරා දමන ලදී.මරණයට පත්කරන ලද අනෙකුත් අය අතර අපරදිග යුද සිරකරුවෝද වූහ. (මහාචාර්ය R.J. Mummel- දේශපාලන විද්‍යාපීඨය – හවායි විශ්ව විද්‍යාලය)

 ඕස්ට්රේලියාවේ අඳුරු අතීතය

ඕස්ට්‍රේලියාවේ නව ජනපද පිහිටවූ යුරෝපීයයන් හට එහි දේශීය ජනතාවගෙන් එතරම් විරෝධතාවන්ට මුහුණදීමට සිදු නොවීය. සමහර ආහාර හිඟවූ අවස්ථාවලදී ආහාර සැපයීමෙන් පවා නව පදිංචිකරුවන්ට උපකාර කිරීමට ඇබරජිනියන්වරුන් ඉදිරිපත් විය. ඇබරජිනියන්වරුන් කිසිසේත්ම හොඳින් සන්නද්ධ වූ යුරෝපීය පදිංචිකරුවන්ට සමකළ නොහැකි විය. ක්‍රමයෙන් මෙම ස්වදේශිකයින්ට පහර දී කාන්තාර ප්‍රදේශවලට පළවා හරින ලදී. අපකීර්තියට පත්ව ඇති 1830 දී සිදු වූ Myall Creet සමූහ ඝාතනයේදී ඇබරීජියානු ළමුන් පවා මරා දමන ලදී.

 1869 සිට 1960 අතර කාලය තුළදී (සමහර ප්‍රදේශවල 1970 තෙක්) ඕස්ට්‍රේලියානු රජය විසින් අර්ධ ඇබරීජියානු ළමුන්, ඔවුන්ගේ මවුවරුන්, දෙමාපියන් පවුල් හා ප්‍රජාවන් බලෙන් පිටමං කරන ලදී. ළමුන් සමහර ආයතනවලට ද යවන ලදී. 1950 සිට සමහර ළමුන් සුදු ජාතික පවුල් සමඟ ද රඳවා තබන ලදී. ඇබරජිනියන් ළමුන් කම්කරුවන් හෝ සේවකයින් විය යුතු බවට බලාපොරොත්තු වන ලදී. විශේෂයෙන් ඇබරජිනියන් දැරියන් ගෘහ සේවයට පුහුණු කිරීම පිණිස මණ්ඩලය මගින් ස්ථාපිත කරන ලද නිවෙස් වලට පිටත් කරන ලදී. මෙම පීඩාවට පත්වූවන් පසුකලෙක “සොරාගන්නා ලද පරම්පරාවක්” ලෙසින් හඳුන්වනු ලැබීය. මෙල්බර්න් විශ්ව විද්‍යාලයේ මනෝචිකිත්සක හා වෛද්‍ය ෙජ්න් මෙකන්ඩි්‍රක් ප්‍රකාශ කොට ඇත්තේ “සොරා ගන්නා ලද පරම්පරාවේ පුද්ගලයින් බෝහෝදෙනෙකු මානසිකව, කායිකව හෝ ලිංගිකව අපචාරයට පත්වූ අයයි,” යනුවෙනි. 

 දෙවන ලෝක යුද සමයේදී ජර්මන් හමුදා විසින් සිදුකරන ලද ම්ලේච්ඡ ක්රියාවන්

 හිට්ලර්ගේ පාලන සමයේදී NAZI ජර්මනිය විසින් දේශපාලන සිරකඳවුරුවල සිටි යුදෙව්වන් මිලියන 6ක් පමණ සමූල ඝාතනය කරන ලදී. අල්ලා ගත් ප්‍රදේශවල ජර්මානු හමුදා විසින් බරපතල අපරාධ සිදුකරන ලදී. යුදෙව්වන්, පෝලන්ත ජාතිකයින්, රුසියානුන් අහිකුන්ටික ගෝත්‍රිකයන් හට කායික වධහිංසා පැමිණවීම, පිටුවහල් කිරීම, මරණීය දණ්ඩනය දීම ආදී බොහෝ කෘෘර ක්‍රියාවන් සිදු කරන ලදී. 1939-1945 අතර කාලයේදී තමන් අල්ලා ගත් ප්‍රදේශ වල සහයෝගී රාජ්‍යයන් හා අල්ලාගත් රාජ්‍යවලින් හමුදාවට බඳවාගන්නා ලද පිරිසකගේ ද සහාය ලබා සිටි ජර්මන් හමුදාව විසින් මිලියන 11-14 දක්වා සංඛ්‍යාවක් සංවිධානාත්මකව මරුමුවට පත්කරනු ලැබීය. බොහෝ අහිංසක මිනිසුන් කුසගින්නේ මියයාමට ඉඩහැර තබන ලදී. Holocaust (අග්නිහෝමය) මානව ඉතිහාසයේ කලූ පැල්ලමක් ලෙසින් අදට ද සටහන්ව පවතී.

 පලස්තීනයට විරුද්ධව ඊශ්රායල් ප්රචණ්ඩත්වය

 පලස්තීන සිවිල් වැසියන්ට එරෙහිව සංවිධානාත්මකව පහරදීම් දියත්කිරීම සම්බන්ධයෙන් එක්සත් ජාතීන් විසින් (UN )- ඊශ්‍රාලය ගර්හාවට ලක්කරන ලදී. සිවිල් වැසියන් ඝාතනය කරමින්, දහස් ගණන් නිවාස විනාශ කරමින්, මෑතකදී ගාසා තීරයේ කල පහරදීම්, ඊශ්‍රායල හමුදාව විසින් සිදුකරන ලද භයානක මිලේච්ඡ ක්‍රියාවන් හැටියට විස්තර කළ හැකි වේ. පලස්තීනයේ මානව හිමිකම් මධ්‍යස්ථානයට අනුව ඊශ්‍රායල ප්‍රහාරවලදී පලස්තීනුවන්, 1434 දෙනෙකු මරණයට පත්විය. ඔවුන්ගෙන් 960 දෙනෙකු සිවිල් වැසියෝ වූහ. ඒ අතර ළමුන් 288 ක් විය. ගාසා තීරයේ ඊශ්‍රායල් ක්‍රියාකාරකම් මානුෂවාදී බවට මෙන්ම මානව ගරුත්වයට අදාළව ද අර්බුද නිර්මාණය කළේය. මිනිසුන්ගේ ජීවනෝපායට අදාළ මෙම දැවැන්ත විනාශකාරී ක්‍රියාවන් හා යටිතල පහසුකම් පරිහාණියට පත්වීමෙන් අනතුරුව ගාසා තීරයේ ජනගහනයෙන් 80% ක් මේ වන විට වාසය කරන්නේ මානුෂීය ආධාර යටතේය.

මානුෂිකත්වයට එරෙහිව සිදුකර ඇති සාපරාධි ක්රියා නිම කිරීම

ජාත්‍යන්තර අපරාධ අධිකරණයට අදාළ ආඥාපනත මගින් පැහැදිලි කෙරෙන ප්‍රකාශයේ නිර්වචනය වී ඇති පරිදි මානුෂිකත්වයට එරෙහිව සිදු වන අපරාධ යනු විශේෂයෙන් ද්වේෂසහගත, නීති විරෝධී ක්‍රියාවන්ය. එම ක්‍රියාවන් තුළ මානව ගරුත්වයට අදාළ බරපතල පහරදීම් හෝ එක් මිනිසෙකු හෝ මිනිසුන් කිහිපදෙනෙකුට සිදු කරනු ලබන බරපතල අපහාස කිරීම් හෝ පහත්කොට සැළකීමේ ක්‍රියාවන් අන්තර්ගත වී පවතී. ඒවා හුදකලා වූ විසිරී, පවතින සිද්ධීන් නොවේ, එක්කෝ රාජ්‍ය ප්‍රතිපත්තියක කොටසක් හෝ (එම අපරාධකරුවන් එම ප්‍රතිපත්තිය මත තමන් හඳුන්වා නොදෙතත්) රාජ්‍ය හෝ නිශ්චිත අධිකාරියක් මගින් ඉවසා සිටින හෝ ගැරහුම් කරනු ලබන ක්‍රියාවන් වේ. ඝාතනයට ලක්කිරීම්, මිනිස් සංහාරයන්, කායික වධහිංසා වලට ලක්කිරීම, ස්ත්‍රී දූෂණය සහ දේශපාලනික හෝ වර්ගවාදී හෝ ආගමික හිංසනය හා අනෙකුත් අමානුෂික ක්‍රියාවන් මානුෂවාදී බවට විරුද්ධ අපරාධවල එළිපත්ත කරා ලඟා වීමට උපකාරී වේ. එසේ වන්නේ ඒවා ව්‍යාප්තවූ හෝ විධිමත් ආකාරයකින් කරන ලද ක්‍රියාමාර්ගයක් නම් පමණකි. 

 මේ ආකාරයෙන් හුදකලා වූ අමානුෂික ක්‍රියාවන් මගින් මානව හිමිකම්වල දැඩි උල්ලංඝණය වීම් හෝ අදාළ අවස්ථාව අනුව යුධ අපරාධ ලෙස සැළකේ. එතෙක් සමහර අවස්ථාවල කලින් සාකච්ඡා වූ අපරාධ යටතට නොවැටීම සිදුවනු ඇත.

 “මානුෂවාදී බවට විරුද්ධ අපරාධ පිළිබඳ සෙවීමට මුල් පිරීම – ජාත්‍යන්තර අර්බුධ කණ්ඩායම”, යන්නෙහි සභාපති වන ගැරත් එවන්ස් ඔහුගේ අදහස් ප්‍රකාශ කරන්නේ පහත දැක්වෙන ආකාරයටය.

 “ජාත්‍යන්තර සබඳතා හා බලන කල්හි විශේෂයෙන්ම යුද්ධය හා සාමයට අදාළ ගැටලු ප්‍රචණ්ඩත්වය සහ අප විසින් මෙහිදී සැළකිල්ලට බඳුන් කළ අතිශය දරුණු ලෙස සළකන මානව හිමිකම් කඩකිරීම් සම්බන්ධයෙන් ගත් විට සාමාන්‍යයෙන් ශුභවාදී මනසකින් මෙබඳු ක්‍රියාවන් කෙරේ යොමුවන ඕනෑම පුද්ගලයෙකු එක්කෝ මුළුමනින් උමතු නොවේ නම් අසාධනීය ලෙස මුග්ධ විය යුතුවේ. යම් රජයකින් තමාගේම වැසියනට එරෙහිව සෘජුවම සිදුකල හෝ එබඳු ක්‍රියාවන් වැළැක්වීමට අසමත් හෝ අකමැති රජයන් මගින් එසේ කිරීමට ඉඩහල, සමූහ ඝාතන සහ ම්ලේච්ඡත්වයට අදාළ අපරාධ ගත්විට නම්, මුළුමනින්ම උමතු කෙනෙකුට වුවද ශුභවාදීව මෙදෙස බැලිය නොහැකිය. අප ජීවත්වන මේ ලෝකය තුළ නරුම බව, දෙබිඩි පිළිවෙත්, ජාතික වටිනාකම්වලට දැඩිසේ විරුද්ධ වීම, ඉහළ පෙළේ දේශපාලනික ක්‍රියාකාරකම් හා දේශපාලනික වාසි තකා පහත් මට්ටමේ ක්‍රියා කිරීම ආදී ක්‍රියාකාරකම් බහුලව පවතී.

 කුරිරු ජාතීන් ලොව නොමැත

 සෑම ජාතියක්ම එකිනෙකාට එරෙහිව කිසියම් ආකාරයක ප්‍රචණ්ඩ ක්‍රියාවන් සිදුකොට ඇත. පුළුල් අරුතකින් ගත්කල සියලූදෙනාම ආක්‍රමණිකයින් මෙන්ම පීඩාවට පත් වන්නන් ද වූහ. අප සිතන ආකාරයේ කෘෘර ජාතීන් ලෝකයේ නැත. ජනතාව ප්‍රචණ්ඩ ක්‍රියාවන් කිරීමට පොළඹවිය හැක්කේ අගතියට පත් පුද්ගලයින් හටය. එබඳු අඳුරු බලපෑම් කෙරේ ජනතාව සංවේදීව හා අවධියෙන් සිටිය යුතුවේ.

 ජේ. ක්‍රිෂ්ණමූර්ති නම් ඉන්දීය ජාතික දාර්ශනිකයාගේ ප්‍රකාශයකින් ප්‍රචණ්ඩත්වයේ හා අගනිසේ බීජ මිනිස් මනස තුළ මුල්බැස ගන්නා අන්දම පිළිබඳව වඩාත් පුළුල් අවබෝධයක් ලබාදේ. In Freedom from the known ග්‍රන්ථය – පිටු 51-52 

 “ඔබ, ඔබව ඉන්දියානුවෙකු, මුස්ලිම්වරයෙකු, ක්‍රිස්තියානිකාරයෙකු, යුරෝපීය ජාතිකයෙකු හෝ වෙනත් ඔනෑම කෙනෙකු බවට පවසන්නේ නම් ඔබ ප්‍රචණ්ඩය. එය ප්‍රචණ්ඩ වන්නේ මන්දැයි ඔබට පෙනෙන්නෙහිද? අනෙකුත් මිනිස් පිරිස අතුරෙන් ඔබ, ඔබව වෙන් කරයි. ඇදහිලි, ජාතිය හෝ සම්ප්‍රදායන් මත ඔබ වෙන් වෙන විට එය ප්‍රචණ්ඩත්වය කරා මග පාදයි. එබැවින් ප්‍රචණ්ඩත්වය යන්න වටහාගැනීමට තැත් කරන මිනසෙකු කිසිඳු රටකට, කිසිඳු ආගමකට, කිසිඳු දේශපාලන පක්ෂයකට හෝ පක්ෂග්‍රාහී ක්‍රමයකට අයත්නොවේ. ඔහු සැළකිල්ල දක්වනුයේ මිනිසත්බව යන්න මුළුමනින් වටහාගැනීමටය. “

 මිලේච්ඡ ක්රියාවන් හා මිනිස් සංහාර පිළිබඳව මයිකල් ආතර් නිව්ඩව්ගේ : ගේ මතය

 මිනිසුන් එක්දිනෙක සැනින් අවදිව සාමූහික සංහාර නොකරයි. ඔවුන් එය ආරම්භ කරනුයේ ක්‍රම ක්‍රමයෙනි. අන් අයගෙන් සෙමින් ඉවත් වී, යම් විශ්වාසයන්හි ගැලී සිටින අයව එම විශ්වාසයන් හීන කරවීමට තුඩුදෙන අන්දමට ක්‍රියාකරමින් සුළු වංචනික පියවර තබමින් එය ආරම්භ කරයි. ඔවුන් එයට ඉදිරිපත් වනුයේ : “අපි ධාර්මික වෙමු. අපි අන් අයගේ මත ඉවසමු.” යනුවෙන් පවසමිනි. මෙම ඉවසීම කාලය සමඟ හීන වී යත්ම නොවැළැක්විය හැකි හානි සම්බන්ධව සැළකිල්ලට නොගැනී යයි. ‘අපගේ නිදහසට අදාළ ප්‍රථම පියවරේදීම අනතුරු සංඥාවක් ඇතිකරගැනීම සුදුසුය.’ යනුවෙන් ජේම්ස් මැඩිසන් ප්‍රඥාවෙන් යුතුව පවසා ඇත්තේ එබැවිනි. 

 වෛද් රුවන් එම්. ජයතුංග විසින් ලියන ලද The Atrocities Committed Against Humanity ලිපිය ඇසුරෙනි. පරිවර්තනය A S වික්රමසිංහ

තවමත් බෙදන සයිබර් ටොපිය

April 26th, 2015

තිස්ස ගුණතිලක, සිඩ්නි නුවර සිට

රටේ මිනිසුන් ඉතාමත් බියෙන් ජිවත්වූ යුගයක් හමාර කල විප්ලවයක් පසුගිය ජනවාරි අටවනදා සිදුවූබවත් දැන් එවැනි බියක් සමාජය තුල දකින්නට නැතිබවත් දින සියය සමරනුවස් යහපාලන රජය පවසා ඇත. තවද කලින් වහලුන් වු පිරිසක් අනේ අපිව ආයෙමත් වහලුන් කරන්නැයි ඉල්ලා සිටිබවද පැවසෙයි.

 එ අනුව ජනවාරි අටවැනිදාට පෙර ශ්‍රී ලාංකිකයෝ බියෙන් හා අවිනිශ්චිත භාවයෙන්  පසුවී ඇත. රජයේ සේවකයන් මෙන්ම අනෙකුත් වැසියන්ද කටක්හැර මහින්ද ගැන හෝ අනෙකුත් රාජක්‍ෂවරැගැන වරදක් කතාකිරීමට බියවූ කාලපරිච්ඡේදයක් ජනවාරි අටවනදා පසුකර ඇතිබව පුනපුනා මතකකර දෙයි. මෙවැනි භීතියක් රටේ ඇතැයිද ඒ අයව සුදු වෑන්වලින් වන්දනාවේ එක්ක යන බවද සමාජය තුල ප්‍රචරය කලෝ සයිබර් වසන්තය කලමනාකරනය කල යහපාලන මාමලාමැයි. මෙය ඉතා සැලසුම්ගත සයිබර් වසන්තයේ ප්‍රධාන ක්‍රියවලියයි. අරාබි වසන්තය නොහොත් සයිබර් වසන්තය ඇතිවූ සෑම රටකම එවකට සිටි පාලකයින්ගේ ගිනුමට බැරකල රාජ්‍යය භීශණය මෙයයි. එවැනි භීතියක් ශ්‍රී ලංකාවේ නම් රාජපක්‍ෂ සමයේ තිබුනේ නැත. සුදු වෑන් ක්‍රියාත්මක කලේ පුද්ගලික ලාබ ප්‍රයෝජනයක් සදහා වෙනත් පුද්ගල යෙකු බවත් ඔහුට එම කරැන සම්බන්දව නඩුපවරා ඇතිබවත් මුඵ රටම දන්නා කරැනක් වුවත් යහපාලක වරැන්ට එයඉතා පහසුවෙන් අමතකවී ඇතිබව පෙනේ.

 සෑම රජයේ සේවකයෙකුගේම ටෙලිෆෝනවලට සවන්දෙන බවත් මහින්දගේ රජයගැන නම් අනිසි කිසිම දෙයක් නිකම්වත් ටැලිෆෝනයට නොකිවයුතු බවත් මේ පච හා මඩ ප්‍රචාරක අංශ සමාජය තුල පතුරැවා, මහින්ද හා ඔහුගේ රජය කෙරෙහි ජනතාව බිදුවා, සයිබර් වසන්තයේ අඩිතාලම තවත් ශක්තිමත් කිරීමට ක්‍රියා කලෝ අද එහි පල නෙලාගෙන ජනතාවට කතන්දර කියයි. එදා එසේ ටෙලිෆෝන් ටැප්කර සංවාදවලට සවන්දීමට නම් තාක්‍ෂනයෙන් අනූන රජයේ ආයතනයක් හොර රහසේ හෝ තිබිය යුතුය. මෙම ආයතනය අඩුම තරමින් විසිපස්දෙනෙකුගෙන්වත් සමන්විත විය යුතුය. තවද එවැන්නක් සදහා කැබිනට් අනුමැතියක් හා නිතිපති අවසරයක්ද තිබිය යුතුය. මේ එකම අනුමැතියක්වත් නැතත් එහි සේවයකලෝ දොට්ට නොදමුවේනම් ඔවුන් අද ආණ්ඩුවතුල යහතින් වැජබෙනු ඇත. එවනි බියක් එවකට පැවති රජය විසින් මුදාහැර තිබුනේ නම් ඔවුන් අල්ලා දඩුවම් නොදෙන්නේ මන්ද?

 කොහේවත් තිබුනේ නැති බියක් ගැන දින සියය සමරමින් සුරංගනා කතා දේසනා කිරීමෙන් පලක් නැත. සුදු වෑන්වලින් මිනිසුන් අරන්ගියා නම් ටෙලිෆෝන් ටැප්කලා නම් එසේකලවුන්ට යහපාලනය ක්‍රියාත්මක කිරීමට සුභ හෝරාවක් අවශ්‍ය නැත.

 සත්‍යනම් එවැනි එකම දෙයක්වත් මහින්දගේ සමයේ රාජ්‍යය අනුග්‍රහයෙන් නොවු බවය. මෙවා සියල්ලම සයිබර් මාමලා සුලඟේමුදා හරින ලද සුරංගනා කතාය. සුලඟට කොහොම අච්චු කරන්නද?

 කෙසේ හෝ රාජපක්‍ෂ කෙනෙක් දින සියය ගෙවීමට මත්තෙන් සිරභාරයට ගතයුතුය. නැතිනම් යහපාලකයින්ට ජනතාවට පෙන්නන්න යහමින් දෙයක් නැත. කුරිරැ ත්‍රස්තවාදයෙනේ බැටකෑ යුගයක් හමාරකර ජනතාවට ජිවිත දානය ලබාදි රටතුලවු බිය නිමාකිරිමට උරදුන් රාජපක්‍ෂ වරයෙක් රටේ ආර්ථික කලමනාකරනය නිසිලෙස කල ‘වරදට’ අද අත් අඩංගුවට පමුනුවා ඇත. ඇත්තම හේතුව නම් යහපාලනයතුල බැසිල් තරම් දක්‍ෂ ආර්ථිකය කලමනාකරනය කලහැකි අයෙක් අද නැත. ඔහුව අත් අඩංගුවට ගැනීම ලැජ්ජාව වසාගැනීමට කල දෙයක් විය යුතුය.

 හිස් ටින් එකක් වගේවුනු දිනසියය සමරමින් තවත් සුරංගනා කතා මවමින් යහපාලන ටොපී බෙදන මාමලා ගැන බුද්ධියෙන් සිතිය යුතු කාලය පැමින ඇත.

 ඔබට සුභ පැතුම්

 තිස්ස ගුණතිලක, සිඩ්නි නුවර සිට

2015  අප්‍රේල් මස 27දා

 

දහනවවැනි සංශෝධනය කා සඳහා ද?

April 26th, 2015

නලින් ද සිල්වා

දහනවවැනි ව්‍යවස්ථා සංශෝධනය ගෙනෙන්නේ ප්‍රජාතන්ත්‍රවාදය සඳහා බව මාදුළුවාවේ සෝභිත හිමියෝ පවසති. එම සංශෝධනය සම්මත වන තුරු උපවාසයක යෙදීමට ද උන්වහන්සේ බලාපොරෙත්තු වෙති. සෝභිත හිමියන් ප්‍රසිද්ධියට අකමැති නොවන බව අපි දනිමු. උන්වහන්සේගේ යෝජිත උපවාසය ගැන අපි පුදුම නො වෙමු. උන්වහන්සේ ප්‍රජාතන්ත්‍රවාදයට පක්‍ෂ බැවින් විධායක ජනාධිපති  ධුරයේ බලතල කපා දැමීමට පක්‍ෂව උපවාස කරති. එහෙත් උන්වහන්සේ දෙමළ ජාතිවාදයට කප්පන් දෙන දහතුන්වැනි ව්‍යවස්ථා සංශෝධනය හා පළාත්සභා පනත මගින් දෙමළ ජාතිවාදයට දී ඇති බලතල කප්පාදු කිරීමට පක්‍ෂව උපවාස නො කරති. 

මාදුළුවාවේ සෝභිත හිමියන් සමග එදා සිටියෝ ජාතිකවාදීහු ය. අද උන්වහන්සේ සමග සිටින්නේ ඊනියා ලිබරල්වදීන් ය. එසේත් නැත්නම් උන්වහන්සේ සමග පුස් කෑ මාක්ස්වාදීන් බටහිර නියෝජිතයන් වූ ඊනියා රාජ්‍ය නොවන සංවිධානවල සාමාජිකයන් ආදීන් දැකගත හැකි ය. කෙසේ වෙතත් උන්වහන්සේට උපවාසයෙන් ලැබෙන ප්‍රසිද්ධිය පිළිබඳව අපට ඊර්ෂ්‍යාවක් නැත. එහෙත් දෙමළ ජාතිවාදය ශක්තිමත් කිරීම සඳහා උපවාසයෙහි යෙදීම පිළිබඳ ව නම් අපට සතුටු විය නො හැකි ය. 

අපි පසුගිය ලිපි කිහිපයකින් ම දහනවවැනි ව්‍යවස්ථා සංශෝධනය පිටුපස ඇති සිංහල බෞද්ධ විරෝධීන් හඳුන්වාදුන්නෙමු. අද ශ්‍රී ල නි පක්‍ෂයේ නිවට නායකයන් ශ්‍රී ල නි ප පාර්ලිමේන්තු මන්ත්‍රීන්ට දහනවවැනි සංශෝධනය සම්මත කරගැනීම සඳහා බලපෑම් කරන බව අපි දනිමු. මේ මන්ත්‍රීවරුන්ට කිව හැක්කේ එක් කරුණක් පමණකි. දහනවවැනි ව්‍යවස්ථා සංශෝධනයට පක්‍ෂව ඡන්ද්‍ර දී ඔවුන්ට මීළඟ මැතිවරණයෙන් පසු පාර්ලිමේන්තු මන්ත්‍රීවරයකු වීමේ බලාපොරොත්තු අත්හැරීමට සිදුවනු ඇත. 

දහනවවැනි සංශෝධනය ජනාධිපති හා අගමැති අතර විධායක බලතල බෙදා ගැනීමක් පමණකි. විධායක ජනාධිපතිවරයකු වෙනුවට ක්‍රමයෙන් විධායක අගමැතිවරයකු පත්කර ගැනීම හා සිංහලයන් දෙමළ ජාතිවාදයට යට කිරීම දහනවයේ ප්‍රධාන අරමුණු වෙයි. දහනවය මගින් පාර්ලිමේන්තුවට කිසිම බලතලයක් නො පැවරෙයි. ඒ සඳහා උදාහරණ දෙකක් පමණක් ගෙනහැර දක්වමු. 

දහනවවැනි  සංශෝධනයේ 54 (ආ)   වගන්තිය මෙසේ ය. 2015 අප්‍රේල් මස 22 වන දිනට පෙර පිළිවෙළින් ජනාධිපති ධුරය හා අග්‍රාමාත්‍ය ධුරය දරන තැනැත්තන් එම දිනෙන් පසු, මෙම පනත මගින් සංශෝධිත ආණ්ඩුක්‍රම ව්‍යවස්ථාවේ විධිවිධානවලට යටත්ව එම ධුර දැරිය යුතු වන්නේ ය.”  ජනාධිපති ධුරය සඳහා එය එසේ විය හැකි නමුත් අගමැති ද එලෙස ම තම ධුරය දැරිය යුත්තේ ඇයි? අගමැතිවරයකු පත්කිරීම සඳහා වත්මන් ව්‍යවස්ථාවේ ඇති වගන්තිය දහනවයෙන් ද ඉවත් වී නැත. එය දහනවයේ 42 (4) වගන්තියෙන් තහවුරු වෙයි. ඒ වගන්තිය මෙසේ ය. 

ජනාධිපතිවරයාගේ මතය අනුව පාර්ලිමේන්තුවේ විශ්වාසය උපරිම පමණින් ඇති පාර්ලිමේන්තු මන්ත්‍රීවරයා ජනාධිපතිවරයා විසින් අග්‍රාමාත්‍යවරයා ලෙස පත් කරනු ලැබිය යුත්තේ ය. මේ වගන්ති දෙකෙන් පාර්ලිමේන්තුවට බලය ලැබෙන්නේ කෙසේ දැයි සෝභිත හිමියන් අප කෙරෙහි අනුකම්පාවෙන් වදාරන්නේ ද? අද රනිල් මෛත්‍රිපාලගේ සහයෙන් අගමැතිකම පික්පොකට් ගසා ඇත්තේ මේ වගන්තියටත් ශ්‍රී  ල නි ප නිවට නායකයන්ටත් පින් දෙමිනි. මේ වගන්තියෙන් ජනාධිපතිට අභිමත අයකු අගමැති ලෙස පත්කිරීමට හැකි ය. අවශ්‍ය වන්නේ ජනාධිපතිට මතයක් තිබීම පමණකි. 

පාර්ලිමේන්තුවට බලය පවරන්නේ නම් කළ යුත්තේ ඉහත සඳහන් වගන්ති සංශෝධනය කිරීම ය. ජනාධිපති අගමැති ධුරයට පත්කළ යුත්තේ පාර්ලිමේන්තුව විසින් අගමැති ලෙස තෝරාගනු ලබන මන්ත්‍රීවරයකු මිස ජනාධිපතිගේ මතය පරිදි පාර්ලිමේන්තුවේ විශ්වාසය උපරිම අයුරින් දිනාගන්නා අයකු නො වේ. පුද්ගලයකුගේ මතය පමණක් පරිදි අගමැතිවරයකු පත්කරන්නේ කෙසේ ද? අප ඉහත සඳහන් වගන්ති දහනවයෙන් උපුටා දක්වන්නේ ඒ සංශෝධනය මගින් බලතල අගමැති හා ජනාධිපති අතර බෙදා ගැනීමක් මිස පාර්ලිමේන්තුවට බලතල නොලැබෙන බව පෙන්වා දීමට ය. 

නලින් ද සිල්වා

2015 අප්‍රේල් 26

19 හා රනිල්

April 26th, 2015

නලින් ද සිල්වා

19 වැනි ව්‍යවස්ථා සංශෝධනය ගෙන එන්නේ මාදුළුවාවේ සෝභිත හිමියන්ගේ ඊනියා සාධාරණ සමාජයවත් අතුරලියේ රතන හිමියන්ගේ ඊනියා පිවිතුරු හෙටක්වත්් ඇතිකිරීමට නොවන බව අපි දිගිට ම කීවෙමු. සංශෝධනයේ අරමුණ දෙමළ ජාතිවාදීන්ට කප්පන් දීමත් සිංහල බෞද්ධ සංස්කෘතියට මෙරට හිමිතැන තවදුටත් අඩු කිරීමටත් රනිල් වික්‍රමසිංහට විධායක බලතල හැකිතාක් හිමිකර දීමටත් ය. රනිල්ට ජනාධිපතිවරණයකින් ජයගෙන සම්මම ජාතියේ ජනාධිපති විය නො හැකි ය. ඔහුට අද පවත්නා තත්ත්වය යටතේ මැතිවරණයකින් ජයගෙන අගමැති වීමටවත් නො හැකි ය. ඔහු අගමැති වී ඇත්තේ පික්පොකට් ගැසීමෙනි. 

යම් අයුරකින් රනිල්ට ජනාධිපතිවරණයකින් ජයෆෙන ජනාධිපති වීමේ හැකියාව තිබිණි නම් කිසි දිනෙක 19 වැනි ව්‍යවස්ථා සංශෝධනයක් පාර්ලිමේන්තුවට ඉදිරිපත් නොවනු ඇත. මෙය ඉදිරිපත් කෙරෙන්නේ සොභිත හිමියන් පවසන පරිදි මෛත්‍රිපාල ස්වකැමැත්තෙන් විධායක බලතල අත්හැරීමට සූදානම් නිසා නො වේ. ඔහුට එය නොකර බැරි ය. ඔහුට ඊනියා පොදු අපේක්‍ෂකත්වය ලැබුණේ යම් ගනුදෙනුවක ප්‍රතිඵල ලෙස ය. ඒ ගනුදෙනුවට අනුව විධායක බලතල අගමැතිට හිමිකර දිය යුතු ය. අද සිදුවන්නේ ඒ ගනුදෙනුව ය. මෛත්‍රිපාල බලලෝභී නොවන දේශපාලනඥයෙක් නො වේ. ඔහු බලලෝභී නොවන්නකු නොවන බව පෙන්නුම් කෙරෙන්නේ ඔහු අගමැති වීමට ඇල්ලූ පොරයෙනි. ඒ පොරය නිමල් සිරිපාල ද සිල්වා සමග විය. 

මෛත්‍රිපාල සියල්ල අත්හැරීමට සූදානම් බෝසතකු නම් කළ යුතුව තිබුණේ ශ්‍රී ල නි පක්‍ෂයේ වර්ධනය සඳහා අගමැති පොරයෙන් ඉවත්වීම ය. එහෙත් ඔහු එසේ නො කෙළේ ය. තමාට අගමැතිකම නොලැබීමේ පළිය ගැනීමට ඔහු විවිධ ඔත්තු සේවාවල අනුග්‍රහයෙන් රනිල් සමග එකතු විය. රනිල් අගමැතිකම පික්පොකට් ගැසීම සඳහා මෛත්‍රිපාල යොදා ගත්තේ ය.  රනිල්ට අවශ්‍ය වූයේ අගමැතිකම පික්පොකට් ගසා විධායක බලතල තම අතට ගැනීම ය. 19 ඇතැම් වගන්තිවලට ජනමතවිචාරණයක් පැවැත්විය යුතු යැයි ශ්‍රෙෂ්ඨාධිකරණය විසින් තීරණය නොවන්නට අගමැතිට තව තවත් විධායක බලතල අයිති වීමට ඉඩ තිබිණි. රනිල් ඒ බලතල ද කෙසේ නමුත් ලබාගැනීමට උත්සාහ දරනු ඇත.

ඕනෑම පනතක සංක්‍රමණීය විධිව්ිධාන වැදගත් වෙයි. 19 වැනි ව්‍යවස්ථා සංශෝධනයේ 54 වැනි වගන්තිය අනුව එය සම්මත වුහොත් එසේ සම්මත වීමෙන් පසු දිනයේ සිට ද  සිටින ජනාධිපති හා අගමැති ඒ තනතුරුවල රැඳී සිටිති. එහෙත් ඇමතිවරුන් සම්බන්ධයෙන් එවැන්නක් නො කියැවෙයි. ජනාධිපති රැඳී සිටීම තේරුම් ගත හැකි ය. නැවත ජනාධිපතිවරණයක් පැවැත්වීම ඉන්නා අයට අසුබ බවත් එයට විශාල වියදමක් යන බවත් පැහැදිලි ය. එහෙත් අගමැති දිගින් දිගට ම රැඳී සිටිය යුත්තේ ඇයි? 19 වැනි ව්‍යවස්ථා සංශෝධනයේ 42 (4) වගන්තිය අනුව ජනාධිපතිට තමන්ගේ අදහස අනුව පාර්ලිමේන්තුවේ විශ්වාසය දිනාගත හැකි පුද්ගලයා අගමැති ලෙස පත්කළ හැකි ය. 

රනිල්ට පැහැදිලිව ම මෛත්‍රිපාල ගැන විශ්වාසයක් නැත. මෛත්‍රිපාල ජනවාරි 9 වැනි දා තමන් අගමැති ලෙස පත්කළ ආකාරයට ම සංශෝධනයෙන් පසු වෙනත් අයකු අගමැති ලෙස පත්කිරීමට ඉඩ ඇති බව රනිල් දනියි. එබැවින් එවැන්නකට ඉඩ නොතබා  සංක්‍රමණීය විධිවිධාන මගින් තමන් මෛත්‍රිපාලගේ ආධාරයෙන් පික්පොකට් ගැසූ අගමැති ධුරය තවදුරටත් තබා ගැනීමට රනිල් කටයුතු කර ඇත. 

ශ්‍රී ල නි පක්‍ෂය කළ යුතුව ඇත්තේ ඉතා පෞද්ගලික හා ජනවාර්ගික හේතු මත ඉදිරිපත් කරන 19 වැනි සංශෝධනයට පක්‍ෂ නො වීම ය. අඩුම වශයෙන් ඔවුන්ට සංශෝධන දෙකක් ඉදිරිපත් කළ හැකි ය. එකක් 54 වැනි වගන්තියේ අගමැති ධුරය යන්න ඉවත්කිරීම ය. දෙවැන්න පාරිලිමේන්තුවට අගමැති තේරීමේ බලය පැවරෙන  ලෙස 42 (4) වගන්තිය සංශෝධනය කිරීම ය. එවිට ජනාධිපතිට නොව පාර්ලිමේන්තුවට අඩුම තරමෙන් අගමැති තේරීමේ බලයවත් හිමිවනු ඇත. 

නලින් ද සිල්වා

2015 අප්‍රේල් 26

What is food intolerance?

April 26th, 2015

Dr Hector Perera       London

In food allergy, an abnormal immune system response results in the body making antibodies to ‘fight off’ a food. However, some people suffer symptoms after eating certain foods even when they are not producing antibodies against them.

Food intolerances are more common than food allergies. The symptoms of food intolerance tend to come on more slowly, often many hours after eating the problem food. Typical symptoms include bloating and stomach cramps.

It’s possible to be intolerant to several different foods. This can make it difficult to identify which foods are causing the problem.

Food intolerances can also be difficult to tell apart from other digestive disorders that produce similar symptoms, such as inflammatory bowel disease, gastrointestinal obstructions or irritable bowel syndrome (IBS).

Symptoms of a food allergy 

This is one of the times of the year where people eat all different types of food, either at home or somewhere else. Some call it Sinhala awrudu holidays and some call it Easter holidays. All the schools are also closed for this time so they might go abroad as well for holidays.

May be some people are not used to some kinds of food but they try out or eat them then sometimes problems can develop. The problem that I referring here is about food allergies. Don’t worry it does not happen to everyone but it is possible to cause some problems to some people, may be children or even adults of any age.

The symptoms of a food allergy almost always develop in a few seconds or minutes after eating a particular food or foods.

 Watch out in eating these

The most common allergenic foods, also known as the ‘big eight’, are: Eggs, fish, milk, nuts from trees (including hazelnuts, walnuts, almonds, and Brazil nuts), peanuts (groundnuts), shellfish (including shrimps, mussels, and crab), soya and wheat. No cashew nuts can cause any problems, do they?

Sometimes it isn’t clear which food is causing a problem. The only reliable way of identifying such a food intolerance is through an exclusion diet, where you cut out certain foods from your diet one at a time to see if there’s an effect. Coeliac disease is a common digestive condition where a person has an adverse reaction to gluten. However, coeliac disease is not an allergy or an intolerance to gluten. It is an autoimmune condition where the immune system mistakes substances found inside gluten as a threat to the body and attacks them.

Gluten is a protein found in wheat, rye and barley that damages the intestine of people with coeliac disease. Symptoms include diarrhoea, bloating and weight loss. Coeliac disease can be accurately diagnosed with a blood test and biopsy. About 1 in 100 people in the UK have coeliac disease, but it’s estimated that around half a million aren’t diagnosed.

Turtle eggs

When my dad was working as a medical doctor in Tangalle hospital, we used to eat lot of sea foods such fish and turtle eggs. Even when boiled these turtle egg white hardly turn to hard white stuff as in chicken eggs. The shells are rubbery unlike chicken eggs. I know we eat not more than two chicken eggs but it’s normal to eat more than two or three turtle eggs at a time. I am not sure if those also can cause allergic reactions.

Lactose intolerance Lactose intolerance, sometimes known as dairy intolerance, occurs when your body can’t digest lactose. Lactose is in milk and dairy products such as yoghurts and soft cheeses.

The main symptoms are diarrhoea and stomach pain. In most cases, your doctor can diagnose lactose intolerance by looking at your symptoms and medical history. Sometimes it is good to have tea without milk and drink black coffee after a meal if you are not quite sure.

Treatments for food allergy and food intolerance

In all cases, always read food labels carefully, and learn where your problem food may be used as an ingredient in other foods.

In the case of a food allergy, you’ll have to avoid the food you’re allergic to. You may be able to eat the cooked versions without any problems, as can be the case with fruit or vegetable allergies. That means certain vegetable when eaten in salads or just raw can cause problems.

With lactose intolerance, you’ll have to reduce the amount of dairy food that you eat. With other forms of food intolerance, you’ll have to stop eating the food for a while, or possibly for life. With the autoimmune condition coeliac disease, you must avoid gluten for life.

Symptoms of food allergy

As stated by the National Health Services in England some of the Symptoms include: Tingling or itching in the mouth, a raised, itchy red rash (urticarial) – in some cases, the skin can turn red and itchy, but without a raised rash, swelling of the face, mouth angioedema or other areas of the body, difficulty swallowing, wheezing or shortness of breath, feeling dizzy and lightheaded, feeling sick (nausea) or vomiting, abdominal pain or diarrhoea, hay-fever like symptoms  such as sneezing or itchy eyes allergic conjunctivitis.

 How they get into food

Sometimes the food prepared might have contaminated with stale food or that are gone off. These kinds of food might be from restaurants, hotels and takeaways. The point is once you are there for a holiday, you might go out to various places and often one has to eat out from hotels, restaurants and take away food. If you are not sure to eat or drink a certain kind of food the best thing is to leave it along. Sometimes some foods are under cooked for example beef, lamb, chicken and fish. These under cooked food might have some hidden germs and bacteria and that might trigger these allergic reactions. Sometimes when the vegetables are not washed properly before cooking might have traces of fertilizers trapped in the leaves such as in leeks, cabbage, mukununwenna, tampala and spinach also in carrots, beet and in sweet potatoes. They must be properly peeled and cleaned to avoid these chemicals, fertilizers, sand particles and many more. I think some hotels and restaurants have little or no attention to the cleanliness of cooking. Then in these instances, the innocent customers become the victims.

Have they properly refrigerated?

Who knows if the meats and fish they bring are properly refrigerated before cooking. When they buy bulk, some are left outside the fridges then germs, bacteria either grow on them or get contaminated with dirty equipment and from the floor where they are dropped. Would they properly wash the containers and cooking pans before cooking? The weather conditions are too hot so these germs and bacteria grow on unattended meat products quite quickly.

Chicken to eat chicken

Campylobacter bacteria are the most common cause of food poisoning in the UK, affecting an estimated 280,000 Britons a year – and are to blame for more cases than E.coli, salmonella and listeria put together.

‘Often people don’t report their symptoms, so the true number of cases is likely to be even higher,’ says Bob Martin, a microbiologist and head of food-borne diseases strategy at the FSA.

Around 80 per cent of these cases have been traced to contaminated poultry – it’s thought that two‑thirds of chicken carries the bacteria. Laboratory tests on samples from infected people have found they contain the same campylobacter DNA found specifically in chicken. Other sources of the bacteria include raw meat, unpasteurised milk and untreated water.

Careful in washing chicken because it can spread

When someone washed chicken that droplets of water carrying campylobacter, and other bugs such as salmonella, can splash onto hands, work surfaces, sinks, clothing, cooking equipment such as chopping boards, sponges and cloths – and even other food that isn’t then cooked, such as salad. Would it possible to happen in hotels and restaurant kitchens? I leave it for your imagination.

‘We know the droplets from washing chicken under a kitchen tap can travel up to a metre,’ says Mr Martin. And just a few campylobacter cells are needed to cause disease and food poisoning, adds Dr Laird.

This won’t occur as soon as you’ve eaten the contaminated foods – it can take between one and five days before you start feeling unwell. The symptoms are caused when the bacteria reach the epithelial cells that line the stomach – ‘they have a toxic effect in us which triggers inflammation, and that causes symptoms,’ explains Dr Laird.

In around half of the cases, the illness starts with 24-hour flu-like symptoms. It progresses to profuse diarrhoea that can contain blood, vomiting, abdominal pains and cramps that may resemble appendicitis. Typically, it lasts around a week.

Your comments are welcomed perera6@hotmail.co.uk

THE WESTERN DESIRE

April 26th, 2015

ALI SUKHANVER

Targeting Mecca and Medina is the only way to save US from the attacks of the Muslims”, said Tom Tancredo, the US presidential candidate in Election 2007. Tom Tancredo belonged to the Republican Party. During his election campaign he earned a lot of popularity among the extremist strata of the American society by suggesting that the sacred Muslim cities of Mecca and Medina should be attacked if America is attacked. According to the various media reports published in different western newspapers of those days, it was not for the first time that Tom Tancredo issued such a conflicting statement.  Earlier in 2005 also he had expressed the same kind of opinion regarding attacks on the sacred cities of the Muslims. In May, 2012, the Daily Mail UK published a report with the title, ‘Bomb Mecca’. The report referred to a course organized for the young U.S. Military officers by US Defense Department’s Joint Forces Staff College in Norfolk, Virginia. While talking to the participants, a lecturer there, Lt. Col. Mathew Dooley said that ‘Hiroshima-style’ attacks on Islam’s holiest cities were needed to win ‘total war’ with Muslim world. One of the participants expressed serious reservation on Col. Mathew’s suggestion and ultimately the course was suspended because the opinion expressed by Col. Mathew was not in accordance with the US state policy. In short the desire of targeting the holy cities of the Muslims has ever been a part of the Anti-Islamic elements.  However, keeping in view the increasing militancy in the Muslim temperament, these elements could never materialize their desire in a direct way. The only option they were left with was to prepare a conspiracy which could drag the Muslims into a battle-field of their own. The present warlike scenario in Yemen and Saudi Arab is the outcome of the same conspiracy-plan. The international media is doing its utmost to portray the Saudi-Yemen conflict as a sectarian conflict between the Shia and Sunni sects of the Muslims and it is also being propagated that these two sects are being supported by Iran and Saudia respectively.

The matter of fact is that the conflict in Yemen has nothing to do with the sectarian conflict. It is purely an internal affair of Yemen which could be harmful to Saudi Arab at some stage as these two countries share a very long border. Yemen enjoys the same strategic position in the Middle East which Afghanistan enjoys in the South   Asia. For so many decades Yemen is facing a situation of internal turmoil. The nature of this turmoil is purely socio-political. This is for the first time that this conflict is being introduced as a sectarian conflict, allegedly because of Iranian support to the Houthis. According to various reports; Yemen had to pass through the same type of conflict in 1962 also. The Egyptians supported the Yemen government with seventy thousand troops against the Houthis. The Houthis Tribes are the 40% of Yemeni population. On the other hand the Houthis were secretly supplied weapons by Israel to fight against the Egyptians. Since then this politico-religious movement of the Houthis took a violent shape under the title of Ansarullah. This internal conflicting situation provided the international forces with a golden opportunity of playing devilish politics in Yemen.

With the help of their paid agents, the anti-Islamic forces have ever been trying their best to weaken and destabilize almost all Islamic countries including Pakistan. Fortunately, they have yet not succeeded in targeting the actual centre of gravity for the whole of the Muslim community, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. By dragging Saudia into the battlefield of Yemen’s internal political turmoil, these anti-Islamic forces are simply trying to weaken this center of gravity and the so-called militant groups of Yemen are playing in their hands.

For Pakistan this warlike situation between two Islamic countries is very much unpleasant. Both the countries are very dear to Pakistan; however the relationship with Saudi Arab is no doubt more close and brotherly cordial; but that does not mean Pakistan’s relationship with Yemen is based on any kind of hostility or enmity. Just at the beginning of the Saudi-Yemen turmoil, some of the political sections in Pakistan were of the opinion that Pakistan must send its military troops to Saudi Arab in case the Houthis rebels try to cross over the Saudi boundaries; fortunately it did not happen. However the political and military hi-ups of Pakistan kept observing the situation with all care and keenness and very wisely decided not to become a part of it by sending its forces to crush the Houthis. Now things are getting better, let us hope for the best. The Prime Minister of Pakistan and the Army Chief visited Saudi Arab to look at the situation personally and to make the Saudi government realize that Pakistan is always on their beck and call. Pakistan has always played a key role in unifying the Muslim world. Saudi Arabia is a brotherly country but at the same time Pakistan has good relationship with Yemen too. Instead of jumping into a war between two Muslim countries, Pakistan must try to pacify the two countries as much as possible, through table talks and negotiations.

BODU BAlA SENA – PRESIDENT MAHINDA RAJAPAKSE’S TIMELY REVEALATIONS

April 25th, 2015

By M D P DISSANAYAKE

Prior to the Presidential Elections, the General Secretary Ven. Galagodaatte Gnanasara Thera  made several attempts to join the Presidential Election campaign of Mr Mahinda Rajapakse.  According to this Buddhist Monk, obtaining 5 million votes for MR through the BBS  would be a easy task.  His calculations were based on the assumptions (a) select 1000 Buddhist Temples supportive of MR  and (b) harness 5000 votes for MR from each of villages attached to the 1000  Temples.   MR was brave enough not to be deceived by this notorious Monk to provide him a platform in his campaign.  MR during his period of Presidency tirelessly worked to bring Sinhalese, Tamils and Muslims into one camp of brotherhood.

BBS General Secretary did create several ugly scenes in Aluthgama and Beruwala areas, harrassing the Muslims, pretending to be a supporter of Mr Gotabaya Rajapakse.   MR and GR had to work hard for the damage control whilst Mr Ranil Wickremasinghe and Mrs Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga made use of the opportunity to alienate Muslims from MR.   Mr Rauf Hakeem being the Minister of Justice of President Mahinda Rajapakse’s regime, did join hands with RW and CBK adding further fuel to the fire.   Consequently, MR did lose the battle to win the votes of Muslims.

The recent remarks by President Mahinda Rajapkse about BBS are therefore based on solid foundation.

Many Buddhists feel that being a Buddhist Monk is an attractive method of deceiving the masses.   Two prominent names in this category are none other than Ven. A(Shobitha) and Ven Galabodaatte Gnanasara Thero.  Even there are some ordinary laymen who take a similar path of at least becoming a Buddhist Monk even for a short period, with the intention of portraying himself as a better Buddhist than others.  One such person is none other than Mr Patali Champika Ranawaka, who on 9 May 2011 shaved his Head and observed Dasa Sil for 10 days at the  Sadaham Sevana Viharaya, Gothami Road, Rajagiriya.  The main objective of becoming a temporary Buddhist Monk ( or known as Heeraluwa, after completing Monkhood) to “engage in meditation and observance of Seela  for all their wordly pleasures  and responsibilities, abstaining from committing  any wrongdoing by way of speech or sight”.  Has Patali, (who is a divorced man with 2 daughters), found peace of mind after the 10 days?  These are the Buddhists who insult the Buddhism, using it for their own benefit and pleasure to attract attention.  

BBS  and its General Secretary has given its full blessings to Mr Patali Champika Ranawaka.  According to BBS, PaCha Ranawaka is the most suitable person to become “Sinhala Buddhist President” of Sri Lanka.

As MR had no connection with BBS, the BBS is now free to campaign for PaCha Ranawaka to make him the “Sinhala Buddhist Executive Prime Minister “.  Sadhu, Sadhu.

Will Right to Information Act prevent Sri Lanka’s economic data being revealed?

April 25th, 2015

Courtesy Adederana

Since there are risks of a situation being created where important economic data that the country has to be aware of being limited through the proposed Right to Information Act, sharp attention has to be drawn towards this issue, say analysts.

Cabinet approval has been granted to the draft Right to Information Act to be presented to Parliament as an urgent bill.

Analysts warn that it is important to examine whether the less transparent Treasury as well as the Central Bank of Sri Lanka which has so far efficiently released economic data, could limit the releasing of economic data by utilizing the provisions of this proposed bill.

This is due to this proposed bill containing certain provisions through which these institutions could limit the release of economic data.

This Bill includes certain provisions through which these institutions could refuse to reveal any data which if revealed would cause serious harm to Sri Lanka’s economy, cause harm to any commercial interests of an individual or to refuse divulging certain information which may expose trade secrets.

Since it is unclear what type of economic data that the phrase ‘severe harm to Sri Lanka’s economy’ really means, this has to be deeply discussed to determine whether it could limit even the economic data thus far released by the Treasury and the Central Bank of Sri Lanka, point out analysts while stating that some could argue that certain data released even now may cause severe harm to the country’s economy.

Though data on the depleting foreign reserves, the widening trade deficit, moves like printing currency etc. have been so far released, in future one could later argue that these could cause severe harm to the country’s economy.

Dangerous Repercussions of the Proposed 19th Amendment

April 25th, 2015

Jay Deshabandu

It is a pool’s paradise in Sri Lanka that we have more than one candidates within a same party contesting for the presidency. Constitution of Sri Lankan Freedom Party clearly allowed this as Mr. Sirisena became the president of Sri Lanka elected by the people for the people.

President has the power to appoint a prime minister whom he thinks could command the majority of the members of the parliament. But President Sirisena’s appointment to the prime minister’s post was pre-arranged under undisclosed conditions which the people of Sri Lanka have the right to know.

It is even more ridiculous to see that the President Sirsena and many others forwarding a bogus anti democratic 19th amendment for a parliament debate while majority of its members and people are unaware of the contents of the amendment. The timing is so quick!

The proposed 19th amendment provides a clear mandate for the president to choose his own boss-the prime minister who may enter the parliament through the backdoor!  The prime minister under the new amendment appoints ministers to the cabinet; and, the president has no say in these appointments and must act according to the fancies of an unelected  prime minister.

What is even more disturbing is the fact that such a power full executive prime minister is not directly elected by the people and for the people. In the future, if the new amendment get approved it will be very possible that any agent in or outside Sri Lanka can bribe a popular person such as a famous actor to be a pawn in securing the kingship, the executive prime minister who can command the Sri Lankans without being elected but becoming a member of the parliament through the backdoor by means of a party list.

The amendment clearly provides flexibility for a regime change if desired by power full nations such as the West!

Under the 19th amendment, the back door list method even entitles a member of parliament who is not elected by the people for the people to become a member of the executive council which leaves enough room for persons of undesired elements who follow the most dangerous terrorist LTTE leader Prabhakaran to saw seeds of hate and racism and providing a flatform for seggragation.

If the 19th amendment gets approved, in addition to all powerful prime minister, it will also make it possible for a person to become a member of the executive council by creating one man’s party having a signboard with a negligible vote base.

The backdoor list of producing parliament members by a party for a party should be abolished for the 19th amendment to make any sense. In essence, the proposed 19th amendment in its current form is a security threat for the sovereignty of Sri Lanka.

I hope that good sense of the members of the parliament would prevail and defeat it at its outset.

අර්ජුන් වැඩ අල්ලයි

April 25th, 2015

නලින් ද සිල්වා

අර්ජුන් මහේන්ද්‍රන් සිංගප්පූරු වැසියෙකි. ඔහු ශ්‍රී ලංකාවේ මහා බැංකුවේ අධිපති ය. ඔහු සිංහල අවුරුද්ද පැවැත්වී දැයි නො දනිමු. එහෙත් ඔහු අවුරුද්දෙන් පසු නැවතත් බැංකුවේ වැඩ අල්ලා ඇත. මහා බැංකු බැඳුම්කර නිකුතුවක් සම්බන්ධයෙන් ඔහුට විරුද්ධව චෝදනාවක් විය. ඔහු ඒ චෝදනාවෙන් නිදහස් වී ඇත. ඉතින් ඔහු වැඩ ඇල්ලීමේ වරදක් ඇතැයි කියන්නේ කෙසේ ද? මුදල් ඇමති රවි කරුණානායක අසන්නේ ද ඒ ප්‍රශ්නයම ය.

මෙහි දී බටහිරයන්ගේ බලපෑමක් සිදු වී ඇතැයි අපි නො කියමු. අඩු තරමෙන් සිංගප්පූරුවෙන්වත් බලපෑමක් සිදු වී ඇතැයි කිව නො හැකි ය. අප එතරම් ම ස්වාධීන රටකි. එහෙත් පසුගිය දා මෛත්‍රිපාල සිරිසේන සංධානයේ නායකයන් අමතමින් තමන්ට බටහිර රටවලින් සිදුවන බලපෑම් ගැන කීවේ ය. එය මෛත්‍රිපාලගේ තවත් ප්‍රකාශයක් ලෙස සලකමු ද?

අර්ජුන් මහේන්ද්‍රන් වැඩ ඇල්ලීමේ දී ජාතික ගීය ගැයූ බවවත් එය ගැයුවේ සිංහලෙන් ද දෙමළෙන් ද මැන්ඩරීන් නැත්නම් වෙනත් බසකින් ද යන්න ගැනවත් වාර්තා වී නැත. ඒ කෙසේ වෙතත් සිංගප්පූරු වැසියකු ලංකාවේ ජාතික ගීය ගැයීමේ අවශ්‍යතාවක් නැත. ඔහු ඇතැම් විට සිංගප්පුරු ජාතික ගීය ගයන්නට ඇත. එහෙත් ඒ එකක්වත් ලංකාණ්ඩුවටවත් ශ්‍රී ලංකා පොලීසියටවත් ප්‍රශ්න නො වේ. ඔවුන්ට අඩුම තරමෙන් විග්නේස්වරන් දෙමළෙන් ලංකාවේ ජාතික ගීය ගැයීමට ඉඩ දීමවත් ප්‍රශ්නයක් නො වේ. ඔවුන්ට අද එයට වඩා ප්‍රශ්න ඇත. 

අල්ලස් හෝ දූෂණ චෝදනා විමර්ශන කමිටුව ඉදිරිපිට පැවති උද්ඝෝෂණයෙහි දී ඩලස් අලහප්පෙරුම අතේ තිබූ කොඩිය ජාතික කොඩිය දැයි සෙවීම අද ප්‍රධාන ප්‍රශ්නය වී ඇත. ඒ පරීක්‍ෂණයෙහි දී ඊනියා රාජ්‍ය නොවන සංවිධානයක පර්යේෂකයන්ගේ සහය ලබාගැනීමට පොලීසියට හැකි යැයි සිතමු. ඒ උද්ඝෝෂණයට ජාතික කොඩි ගෙන එන්නට යැයි කිසිවකු කියා ඇති බවක් අපි නො දනිමු. විවිධ පුද්ගලයන් විවිධ කොඩි ගෙන එන්නට ඇත. ඩලස් අතේ තිබුණේ ගැමුණු කොඩිය ද, සුමංගල හිමි කොඩිය ද, ඩී එස් සේනානායක කොඩිය දැයි කීමට තරම් දැනුමක් අපට නැත. එහෙත් ඒ සොයා ගැනීමට අපට ද අවශ්‍ය වෙයි. 

ඒ සඳහා කළ යුත්තේ නීතිඥයන් තුන් දෙනකුගෙන් සමන්විත කමිටුවක් පත් කිරීම ය. අර්ජුන් මහේන්ද්‍රන් සම්බන්ධයෙන් රනිල් වික්‍රමසිංහ කෙළේ එය ය. රනිල් ජනාධිපති හෝ මුදල් ඇමති හෝ නොවූවත් ඔහු එවැනි කමිටුවක් පත් කෙළේ ය. අර්ජුන් රනිල්ට පමණක් කියා නිවාඩු ගියේ ය. අර්ජුන් වැඩ ඇල්ලුවේ කාට කියා දැයි අපි නො දනිමු. දැන් විධායක ජනාධිපතිවරුන් රාශියක් සිටින බව මහින්ද රාජපක්‍ෂ කියන්නේ ඒ නිසා ද යන්නත් නො දනිමු. එකී විධායක ජනාධිපතිවරුන් කවුරුන් දැයි දැනගැනීමට ද ඒ සමගින් තවත් නීතිඥ කමිටුවක් පත්කළ හැකි ය. නඩු නැති ඇතැම් නීතිඥයන්ට එවැනි කමිටු මගින් විශාල සේවයක් වනු ඇත. 

ඒ කුමක් වුවත් අර්ජුන් මහේන්ද්‍රන් බැඳුම්කර නිකුතුව සම්බන්ධයෙන් සෘජුව වග නොකියන බව කමිටුව සොයාගෙන ඇත. බටහිර විද්‍යාවේ ද සොයාගැනීම් ගැන කියැවෙයි. එහෙත් අප කියන්නේ ඒ සොයාගැනීම් නොව බටහිර විද්‍යාඥයන්ගේ නිර්මාණ කියා ය. අප එසේ කීම ගැන මෙරට බටහිර විද්‍යාඥයෝ කුපිත වෙති. එහෙත් ඔවුන් අතින් සොයාගැනීමක්වත් නිර්මාණයක්වත් කෙරී නැත. අර්ජුන් මහේන්ද්‍රන් සම්බන්ධ කමිටුව නිර්මාණය කෙළේ ද සොයාගත්තේ ද යන්න අපි නො දනිමු. ඒ කුමක් වුවත් අර්ජුන් නිදහස් ය. කාට ද ආඩම්බරේ යැයි ඇසීමට සිතෙන්නේ එවැනි අවස්ථාවල ය. 

අර්ජුන් වක්‍ර ව වගකිව යුතු බවක් කමිටුව සෘජුව නොකියන බව බන්දුල ගුණවර්ධනගේ දැනගැනීම සඳහා කිව යුතු ය. එහෙත් අපි එකක් දනිමු. සතාසිවම් මිනීමැරුමේ වරදකරුවා වංගෙඩිය යැයි එකල කතාවක් තිබිණි. බැඳුම්කර නිකුතුව සම්බන්ධයෙන් වරදකරු අර්ජුන් මහේන්ද්‍රන්ගේ බැණා වූ අර්ජුන් ඇලෝෂියස් අදාළ ඉල්ලුම් පත්‍රයට අත්සන් කළ පෑන විය හැකි ය. 

නලින් ද සිල්වා

2015 අප්‍රේල් 25


Copyright © 2015 LankaWeb.com. All Rights Reserved. Powered by Wordpress