JO wants AG letter on PSC tabled

June 29th, 2019

Yohan Perera and Ajith Siriwardana Courtesy The Daily Mirror

The joint opposition yesterday urged the Speaker to table the letter sent by the Attorney General stating his views on the Parliamentary Select Committee appointed to inquire into the Easter Sunday attacks.

UPFA MP Dinesh Gunawardene who raised this matter said the Speaker should table the letter in the House so that MPs could get to know what the AG had said on the PSC.

Members are unaware about the views expressed by the AG on the PSC so we will like to know about them,” he said. As we understand from the statement made by the President, the AG has informed him that there are issues pertaining to the PSC. We should know about them.”

UPFA MP Nimal Lansa also wanted the AG’s letter tabled in the House saying he was making this request on behalf of the Catholics in Sri Lanka.

Deputy Speaker Ananda Kumarasiri who was in the Chair said he would inform Speaker Karu Jayasuriya about this matter.(

Mannar mass grave: Results of radiocarbon dating report questionable

June 29th, 2019

Courtesy Adaderana

The results of the radiocarbon dating test report carried out by a laboratory in the United States on the bone samples recovered from the mass grave in Mannar are questionable, says Prof. Raj Somadeva of Archaeology at the Postgraduate Institute of the University of Kelaniya.

Prof. Somadeva, speaking to BBC Sinhala, said there are doubts concerning the estimated time period of the bone fragment samples as they were recovered from the same grave but said to have a difference of 231 years.

Mannar mass grave: Results of radiocarbon dating report questionable

Accordingly, the Mannar Magistrate’s Court has informed him to submit a complete forensic report on the bone fragments found from the mass grave, Prof. Somadeva further told BBC Sinhala.

The investigating team expects to submit the said report to the Mannar Magistrate’s Court before the 31st of July, he added.

Testing on the bone fragments have already been commenced to prepare the relevant forensic report and a separate report will be prepared on the other items recovered from the mass grave to estimate the time in order to determine the nature of the mass grave.

Several skeletal remains were discovered on March 26 from a mound of soil in the Emil Nagar area in Mannar, which had been removed from the demolished CWE building and investigations regarding the location were launched subsequently.

The investigations, led by Prof. Raj Somadeva of Archaeology at the Postgraduate Institute of the University of Kelaniya, the officers of the Archaeological Department, Government Analysts and the Judicial Medical Officers including Dr Saminda Rajapaksa, Mannar police officers, were conducted for at the mass grave under the orders of Mannar Magistrate T. Saravanaraja.

The reports said 330 bone fragments have thus far been unearthed from the mass grave.

On 23rd of January, six samples of the unearthed bone fragments were sent for radiocarbon testing at a laboratory in Florida, USA. The report was submitted to the Mannar Magistrate’s Court on March 7th.

According to the report sent by Beta Analytic Inc., a radiocarbon dating laboratory in Miami, USA, the sample bone fragments fall within calendar years of 1450-1650 AD.

State bank makes revelation on Saudi funds received by Batticaloa Campus

June 29th, 2019

Courtesy Adaderana

State bank makes revelation on Saudi funds received by Batticaloa Campus
The Chairman of Bank of Ceylon (BOC) Senarath Bandara says that the Batticaloa Campus Private Limited has never mentioned to the bank that the Rs 3.5 billion deposited to their BOC savings accounts was received as a foreign loan from a Saudi Arabian company to establish the campus.

He stated this yesterday (28) testifying before the Special Parliamentary Select Committee looking into the terror attacks on Easter Sunday.

The BOC general manager told the committee that the Batticaloa Campus Private Limited has three savings accounts in their bank.

Rs 3.5 billion of foreign money, amounting to USD 25 million approximately, has been credited to these accounts, and no repayment of the said amount has been noted thus far.

Subsequently, MP Prof. Ashu Marasinghe said that the request made by the Hira Foundation from the Ministry of Defence in 2012, to register the foundation as a non-governmental organization in Sri Lanka, had received a ‘negative report’ from the intelligence chief.

When asked if the BOC was aware of the matter, Mr Bandara said the bank learned of this following the attacks.

He added that the Hira Foundation too received foreign currency accumulating to Rs 313 million.

Meanwhile, the Director General of the Board of Investment (BOI) also testified before the committee regarding the Batticaloa Campus receiving the BOI approval.

Former Foreign Secretary Dr.Palitha Kohona on why Sri Lanka should reject CTEC and SOFA

June 29th, 2019

Courtesy NewsIn.Asia

Colombo, June 28 ( Dr. Palitha Kohona, a leading member of the opposition organization Eliya” on Thursday expressed opposition to the proposed Colombo-Trincomalee Economic Corridor (CTEC).

Former Foreign Secretary Dr.Palitha Kohona on why Sri Lanka should reject CTEC and SOFA

Dr.Kohona ,who was Sri Lanka’s Foreign Secretary during Eelam War IV, objected to the CTEC on two grounds: Firstly, the CTEC cannot be a priority for the economic development of Sri Lanka because Trincomalee is yet to be developed as a port. A Colombo-Jaffna corridor, on the other hand, would make more sense, he argued.

Secondly, the CTEC would lead to a change in Sri Lanka’s land laws to the detriment of the peasant who is holding a government permit to cultivate a piece of land. The new laws could allow the permit holder to alienate his land to a private party, something which he is not allowed to do now. And the private party buying the land could be a foreign entity.

In Sri Lanka, 80% of the land is State Land, parts of which are parcelled out to peasants to cultivate on the basis of a time-bound but renewable permit. The permit holder can alienate the permit land” only to the State and not to any private party. This is to ensure that peasants have land and landlessness, which is a cause of poverty, is avoided.

It is the right to hold land, along with free education and free medicare which has enabled Sri Lanka to prevent abject poverty. This will be gone if land is made alienable,” Dr. Kohona warned.

According to National Freedom Front (NFF) leader, Wimal Weerawansa, the CTEC envisages the acquisition of 1.2 million acres of land along a 200 km corridor.

Weerawansa alleged that the grant of US$ 480 million from the US Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) is contingent on an agreement to implement the CTEC.


According to the MCC website, the Board of Directors of the Millennium Challenge Corporation ha approved a five-year, U$ 480 million Compact with the Government of Sri Lanka aimed at reducing poverty through economic growth.

The Compact seeks to assist the Sri Lanka Government in addressing two of the country’s binding constraints to economic growth: (1) inadequate transport logistics infrastructure and planning; and (2) lack of access to land for agriculture, the services sector, and industrial investors.”

The compact will be composed of two projects: a Transport Project and a Land Project. The Transport Project aims to increase the relative efficiency and capacity of the road network and bus system in the Colombo Metropolitan Region and to reduce the cost of transporting passengers and goods between the central region of the country and ports and markets in the rest of the country. The goal of the Land Project is to increase the availability of information on private land and underutilized state lands or all land in Sri Lanka to which the Government is lawfully entitled or which may be disposed of by the Government (State Lands”) in order to increase land market activity.”

The Land Project would increase tenure security and tradability of land for smallholders, women, and firms through policy and legal reforms.”

Doubts About MCC

While the Sri Lankan government has accepted the MCC US$ 480 million Compact , it requires Congressional approval in the US and cabinet approval in Sri Lanka.

According to Dr.Kohona, there is no guarantee that the US will actually give US$ 480 million under the MCC fund, as it comes with strings attached. He recalled that in 2006-2007, the US promised US$ 500 million, but not a cent was given.

The US State Department said that the money could not be given because Congress was critical of Sri Lanka’s human rights record. But the fact was that the State Department did not seek Congress approval, ” Dr.Kohona said.


Regarding the two controversial Access and Cross Service Agreements (ACSA) and the yet to be signed Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) Dr. Kohana said that the first ACSA was signed by the Mahinda Rajapaksa government in 2007 when the Lankan armed forces were fighting the LTTE in the Eastern province.

It was a simple eight-page document and it was meant to hold joint military exercises in the Eastern province. There was a clear understanding that the US troops participating in the exercises would not render any military assistance to the Sri Lankan armed forces then fighting the LTTE,” Dr.Kohona said.

While the 2007 ACSA permitted US military vessels to anchor in Sri Lankan ports on a ‘one-off’ basis, when it was renewed in 2017, it became open-ended”, according to Sunday Times.

Dr.Kohona added that the 2017 ACSA was an 83-age document with 50 annexures.

Opposing the SOFA, Dr.Kohona said that it would lead to total violation of Sri Lanka’s sovereignty with US men and material being given free entry into the country. The reciprocity mentioned in the draft is meaningless and impractical given the very limited capabilities of the Lankan armed forces.

According to Dr.Kohona more than two million American troops would theoretically enjoy free entry into Sri Lanka. Sri Lanka could be used to store military material, station men and serve as a Rest and Recreation Center.

The US military presence in Okinawa is still an issue in Japan. The social ills generated by R and R facilities for the US military are well known. But Japanese governments have been unable to ask the Americans to leave because of the defense agreement with the US,” Dr.Kohona said.

He pointed out that many of the countries the US has signed a SOFA with, have defense treaties with the US.

But Sri Lanka is a non-aligned country with no defense pact with any country. No country is threatening Sri Lanka with an invasion. Sri Lanka wants to be friends with all because it does not want to be part of a global conflict. Agreements like SOFA will draw Sri Lanka into regional and global conflicts, especially when the US is explicit about the need to contain resurgent China,” Dr.Kohona said.

Indian Factor

The former Foreign Secretary further said that Sri Lanka would have to think of the consequences of handing over the Trincomalee harbour and the area around it to a US project.

The India-Sri Lanka Accord of 1987 expressly prohibits the Lankan government from allowing any of its ports to be used for military purposes by any foreign country in a manner prejudicial to India’s interests. This is a bilateral agreement which has to be adhered to,” Dr.Kohona said.

He said that he trusts that India will not send its armed forces again.

Sri Lanka and India are not friends, they are part of a family. Members of a family may quarrel on occasion, but they will always reach out to each other in times of trouble. In that sense India is family,” he added.


June 28th, 2019


The 19th amendment to the Constitution of Sri Lanka was passed on 28 April 2015 just four months after Yahapalana government came into being. It was passed near unanimously. Only one person voted against, Rear Admiral MP Sarath Weerasekera. 

Information on how the 19th Amendment was drafted has now come into the public domain.  A cabinet subcommittee headed by Prime Minister Wickremesinghe had initiated the project  and a committee was appointed to draft the Amendment .This committee, according to President Sirisena, consisted of Jayampathy Wickremeratne, M. A. Sumanthiran, Pakiasothy Saravanamuttu and the NGO community. Jayampathy was put in charge of drafting the Amendment.

The purpose of the 19th Amendment was to transfer executive power wholesale to the Prime Minister Ranil Wickremasinghe.  The initial draft, circulated only to a select few, in March 2015, declared that the Prime Minister would be the Head of the Cabinet of Ministers and that   the President shall act on the advice of the Prime Minister regarding the functions assigned to a Minister.

This draft had received Cabinet approval.   The draft was then made available to other political parties and once they studied it there was a discussion at the Presidential Secretariat chaired by President Sirisena, where many found fault with several provisions. They   totally opposed the move to empower Prime Minister at the expense of the President.

Prime Minister Wickremesinghe had been really upset said Jayampathy. Rajiva Wijesinha described this in greater detail. Ranil started to whine, said Rajiva. Ranil then said that he would complain to Chandrika since it had been agreed earlier that Ranil would have executive power. But everyone else was adamant. It was decided instead that the draft should reduce the President’s powers in several particulars, without the wholesale transfer of them to Ranil as Ranil had wanted, concluded Rajiva.

There had also been a special Cabinet meeting and consultations with several officials, as well, including the Attorney General and the Legal Draftsman. These led to further changes. But those supporting Ranil Wickremasinghe did not give in easily. The draft that was gazetted retained the provisions about the Prime Minister being the Head of the Cabinet, and about the Prime Minister determining the number of Ministers.  But Supreme Court squashed this. The Supreme Court wanted certain other sections altered too. These clauses were later brought into the 19A through the back door contrary to the Supreme Court ruling, complained President Sirisena.

19th Amendment contains a few welcome provisions. These have been included to make the Amendment looks good. These welcome provisions include the Right to information, (Article 2 of 19th Amendment) reduction of the term of Parliament from six to five years, (Article 3) and the limit of two terms for any one President (Article 4). Two new independent commissions were created, for Audit and for National Procurement.

The 19th Amendment also has certain laughable contradictions. One clause said President can dissolve Parliament and another clause said he could not. One clause said the President was the Head of State and another clause said he was answerable to Parliament.

 The 19th Amendment has been declared to be a great improvement to the Constitution. Yahapalana admirers say it has brought democracy into an otherwise dictatorial country. It has done nothing of the sort. 19th Amendment contains provisions that seriously violate democratic and sovereign rights.  Let us look at some of these questionable provisions of the 19th Amendment.

19th Amendment created a Parliament that cannot be dissolved. Until the 19th Amendment came, the President could dissolve Parliament at any time after it had functioned for one year.But after the 19th Amendment was passed, Parliament could not be dissolved by President until   four and half years of its five year period, had passed.  During those 4 ½ years, only Parliament could dissolve itself.  Two- thirds of the Parliament had to pass a resolution requesting dissolution.

This is a unique clause, which is not found in other constitutions. All constitutions have provision for the dissolution of Parliament by the head of state. In France the President of the Republic may, after consulting the Prime Minister and the Presidents of the Houses of Parliament, declare the National Assembly dissolved.

 There cannot be such a thing as a Parliament that cannot be dissolved but that is what we have today, said Chandraprema. Only Norway has a Parliament that cannot be dissolved until its five-year term is up. That is because in Norway, the government continues in power until the King gives them permission to leave.

Yahapalana government also wanted to see Ranil Wickremasinghe continue as Prime Minister. 19th Amendment said that the Prime Minister once appointed by the President, cannot be removed thereafter.  He leaves his office only if he resigns or ceases to be an MP. This is an outrageous provision.  In all other constitutions, whether parliamentary or republic, there is provision of some sort for the removal of the Prime Minister.

19th Amendment wanted to reduce the powers of the President. As a start, the 19th Amendment created a set of duties” for the President. This is the first time that Duties” have been assigned to the President of Sri Lanka, said admirers of the 19th Amendment. Duties were not specified anywhere in the constitution before, they said.  That is not surprising.  In any public office, ‘duties’ are implied in the ‘powers’ given to the officer. Powers’ lead to ‘functions’ which lead to ‘duties.’

The first duty” of a President of a country, surely is to ensure law and order, good governance, general welfare. But the duties given to the President in the 19th Amendment do not refer to any of this.

The duties of the President as given in the 19th Amendment are, One, uphold the Constitution, Two, look after the Constitution Council, Three, see to national reconciliation and Four, see that the elections are carried out properly.” The more important functions of a President, that of summoning and dissolving parliament, announcing government policy, declaring war and peace   come second to this absurd concoction .

There is also a serious violation of sovereign powers, in the 19th Amendment. 19th Amendment says There shall be a President of the Republic of Sri Lanka, who is the Head of the State, the Head of the Executive and of the Government and the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces.”  Then it states that President is answerable to Parliament for everything he does. The President shall be responsible to Parliament for the due exercise, performance and discharge of his powers, duties and functions under the Constitution and any written law,” (Article 6 of the Amendment).

  Analysts hooted at this. This meant that Executive branch of government, (President), now came under the legislative branch, (Parliament), they said. They pointed out that Legislative and Executive power are exercised separately.  The Constitution, says   (a) “the legislative power of the People shall be exercised by Parliament, (b) “the executive power of the People, shall be exercised by the President of the Republic.

Then it was the turn of the Cabinet.  19th Amendment said that the Cabinet was also answerable to Parliament. The Cabinet of Ministers shall be collectively responsible and answerable to Parliament” it said. Critics pointed out that this also was not possible. The 19th Amendment itself had said that President shall be a member of the Cabinet of Ministers and shall be the Head of the Cabinet of Ministers.” So the Cabinet was part of the Executive branch of the government and came directly under the President

It is argued that the 19th Amendment created two power centers, one in the hands of the President and the other in the hands of the Prime Minister. That is incorrect. 19th Amendment does not give power to Prime Minister .Any power  exercised by Prime Minister Ranil Wickremasinghe was done outside the 19th Amendment . 19th Amendment keeps certain important powers in the hands of the President. Cabinet of Ministers derive their powers and function as agents of the President.

The President appoints the Cabinet. He is free to decide on the number of Cabinet ministers, and the subjects they hold. He can create ministries as he wishes. He could “at any time change the assignment of subjects and functions and the composition of the Cabinet of Ministers”. He could dismiss Cabinet ministers. He summons Cabinet meetings. 

There is now open opposition to the 19th Amendment. President Maithripala Sirisena has declared that the 19th Amendment to the Constitution was a curse on the country” and should be abolished. The country should have only one leader. Either you must completely abolish the Executive Presidency and give powers to Parliament or give enough powers to the President.          

Milinda Moragoda said it is now apparent to all that the 19th Amendment has created a dysfunctional governance structure in which the Executive President, although directly elected by the people, does not carry much power. He suggests transforming the Executive Presidency into a viable institution with adequate checks and balances. (Continued)

ජයම්පති, සුමන්තිරන් සහ පාක්‍යසෝති යන අයගේ නීතිඥ වෘත්තීය විෂමාචාර ක්‍රියාවන් සම්බන්ධව අගවිනිසුරුවරයාට නීතිඥවරයෙක් පැමිණිලි කරයි.

June 28th, 2019

Law & Order

පසුගියදා පැවති මාධ්‍ය ආයතන ප්‍රධානීන්ගේ මාසික හමුවේදී මෛත්‍රීපාල සිරිසේන ජනාධිපතිවරයා විසින් ප්‍රකාශකර ඇති 19 ව්‍යවස්ථා සංශෝධනය සකස් කළේ නීති විශාරදයන්ද එහෙම නැත්නම් දේශපාලන මකබාස්ලද කියා තමන්ට ප්‍රශ්නයක් ඇති බවද? යන ප්‍රකාශයෙන් නීතීඥවරයන් කිහිප දෙනෙකු විසින් 1988 ශ්‍රේෂ්ඨාධිකරණ (නීතිඥවරයන් සදහා වූ වෘත්තීය පැවැත්ම සහ ආචාර ධර්ම පිළිබද) රීති උල්ලංඝනය කිරීම් සිදුවී ඇති බවත් ජයම්පති වික්‍රමරත්න,එම්. ඒ. සුමන්තිරන් සහ පාක්‍යසෝති සරවනමුත්තු යන නීතිඥවරයන් නීතිඥ වෘත්තිය පිළිබද ඇති සමාජයේ පිළිගැනීම, ගරුත්වය සහ වෘත්තීයභාවය අභිමානය බිද වැටිය හැකි ආකාරයට ක්‍රියාකර ඇති බව දක්වමින් නීතිඥ වෘත්තීය ආචාර ධර්ම උල්ලංඝනය කිරිම සම්බන්ධව සුදුසු ක්‍රියාමාර්ග ගන්නා ලෙස ලෙස ඉල්ලා නීතිඥ අරුණ ලක්සිරි උණවටුන විසින් අගවිනිසුරුවරයා වෙත පැමිණිල්ලක් කර ඇත.

ජනාධිපතිවරයා මාධ්‍යවේදීන් හමුවේ කර ඇති ප්‍රකාශ අනුව නීතිඥවරයන් සියලු කටයුතුවලදී සෘජු ලෙස සහ අවංකව කටයුතු කළ යුතු වීම, සේවාදායකයාට අවාසිදායක හානිකර වන අකාරයකින් ක්‍රියා නොකළ යුතු වා මෙන්ම නීතිඥවරයෙකුට නුසුදුසු ආකාරයකින් කටයුතු නොකිරීමත්, වෘත්තීය කටයුත්තකදී පෞද්ගලික බැදීම් සහ පෞද්ගලික සම්බන්ධතාවලින් එයට බලපෑම් වීමට ඉඩ නොදිය යුතුය යන්නෙන් බැහැරව ජනාධිපතිවරයා සැළකුම් ලබා ඇති බව දක්වමින් ඒ සම්බන්ධව පරීක්ෂා කරන ලෙසද ඉල්ලා ඇත.

වර්ෂ 2015 අප්‍රේල් 27 වන දින පාර්ලිමේන්තුවේ හැන්සාර්ඩ් වාර්තාව අනුව 19 වන ආණ්ඩුක්‍රම ව්‍යවස්ථා සංශෝධනය සම්මත කර ගැනීමේ අවශ්‍යතාවය අවධාරණය කරමින් ජනාධිපතිවරයා පාර්ලිමේන්තුවේදී අදහස් දක්වා ඇති අතර නමුත් පසුගියදා පැවති මාධ්‍ය ආයතන ප්‍රධානීන්ගේ මාසික හමුවේදී ඒ සම්බන්ධව ජනාධිපතිවරයා කර ඇති ප්‍රකාශ මගින් 19 වන ආණ්ඩුක්‍රම ව්‍යවස්ථා සංශෝධනය සම්මත කරන අවස්ථාවේදී එනම් 2015 දී  එතුමා බරපතල ලෙස නීතිමය නොමග යැවීමකට සහ රැවටීමකට ලක්ව සිට ඇති බව පැහැදිලි වන බවත් 19 වන ව්‍යවස්ථා සංශෝධනය මගින් ජනාධිපතිවරයකු සතුවිය යුතු රටේ ආරක්ෂාව සම්බන්ධ විධිවිධාන අහිමිකර ඇති අතර තවද ජනමතවිචාරණය සම්බන්ධව ජනතාව සතුව තිබූ ඡන්ද බලයේ එක් අවස්ථාවක් ජනතාවගේ කැමැත්තෙන් තොරව ඉවත්කර ජනතා පරමාධිපත්‍යය අභිබවා යමින් 19 වන ආණ්ඩුක්‍රම ව්‍යවස්ථා සංශෝධනය සම්මත කර ඇති බවත් අගවිනිසුරුවරයාගේ අවධානයට යොමු කර ඇත.

එකී පැමිණිල්ල පහත දැක්වේ…

ඉදිරියේදී රටට සිදුවිය හැකි අමෙරිකානු බලපෑමේ අනතුර විමල් හෙළි කරයි…Wimal reveals of possible influence on the country from US

June 28th, 2019

Courtesy Adaderana

විපක්ෂයෙන් නව සන්ධානයක්

June 28th, 2019

පොදුජන මාධ්‍ය මධ්‍යස්ථානය

ඉදිරි ජනාධිපතිවරණය ඇතුලූ අනෙකුත් මැතිවරණ සදහා සන්ධානයකින් තරග කිරිමට ශී‍්‍ර ලංකා පොදුජන පෙරමුණ සහ ඒකාබද්ධ විපක්ෂය නියෝජනය කරන දේශපාලන පක්ෂ ඇතුලූ සංවිධාන රැුසක් තීරණය කරයි.
ජනාධිපතිවරණයට පෙර නව සන්ධානය ලියාපදිංචි කිරීම සම්බන්ධයෙන් පුලූල් සාකච්ඡුා මේ වන විට ආරම්භ කර තිබේ.
ප‍්‍රධාන පෙලේ දේශපාලන පක්ෂ, බහුජන සංවිධාන, සිවිල් සංවිධාන, වෘත්තීයවේදින්, ආගමික සංවිධාන රැුසක් නව සන්ධානය සම`ග ඒකාබද්ධ විමට තීරණය කොට ඇත.
ඒ අනුව නව සංධානයෙන් ඉදිරි මැතිවරණ ජයග‍්‍රහණය කිරීම සදහා දිවයින පුරා පුලූල් මැතිවරණ ව්‍යාපාරයක් දියත් කිරීමට ශී‍්‍ර ලංකා පොදුජන පෙරමුණ සියලූ කටයුතු සූදානම් කර ඇත.

ජනපති සමග සිටගැනීමේ වාසි – අවාසි

June 28th, 2019

උපුටාගැණීම ලංකාදීප

මහින්ද රාජපක්ෂ විපක්ෂයේදී පසුගිය බ‍්‍රහස්පතින්දා දේශපාලන පක්ෂ නායකයන් කණ්ඩායමක් හමුවූ අතර, ශී‍්‍ර ලංකා නිදහස් පක්ෂ මහලේකම් දයාසිරි ජයසේකර මහතා අනුගමනය කරමින් සිටින විරෝධී ආකල්පය එහිදී සාකච්ඡාවට බදුන් විය. ශී‍්‍ර ලංකා පොදු ජන පෙරමුණේ සාමාජිකයන් වන සී.බී.රත්නායක සහ කෙහෙළිය රඹුක්වැල්ල යන මහත්වරුන් මෙහි දී දැඩි විවේචනාත්මකව අදහස් දැක්වූහ. බහුතරයක්ගේ අදහස් ද එවැනි විය. 

දයාසිරි නැවතත් එක්සත් ජාතික පක්ෂය හා එක්වීමට ඉඩ ඇතැයි ඇතැමෙක් කීහ.

විපක්ෂයේ දේශපාලන පක්ෂ සහ ශී‍්‍ර ලංකා පොදු ජන පෙරමුණේ සාමාජිකයන් අවසානයේ තීරණය කළේ එළැඹෙන ජනපතිවරණයේ ජයග‍්‍රහණය තහවුරු කරගැනීම සදහා සහාය ලබාගත යුත්තේ කවුරුන්ගෙන් ද යන්න තීරණය කිරීමේ බලය මහින්ද රාජපක්ෂට මහතාටම පැවරීමටය. ඒ අනුව සුදුසු තීරණ ගැනීමේ බලය දැන් හිමිව තිබෙන්නේ ඔහුටය. 

ශී‍්‍ර ලංකා නිදහස් පක්ෂය සහ ශී‍්‍ර ලංකා පොදු ජන පෙරමුණ අතර පොදු සන්ධානයක් පිහිටුවා ගැනීම යථාර්ථයක් බවට පත්වුවහොත්, ඒ හරහා ප‍්‍රබල සාමාජිකයෙක් ලෙස ජනපති සිරිසේනව දිනාගත හැකිවීම අරබයා යහපත් මෙන්ම අයහපත් ප‍්‍රවණතාවයන් දෙවර්ගයම පවතී. 

යහපත් වන්නේ, එවැනි අවස්ථාවක, සුදුසු යැයි තීරණය කරගැනෙන කුමන හෝ ව්‍යුහයක් යටතේ තවදුරටත් දේශපාලන ක්ෂේත‍්‍රයේ කටයුතු කිරීමට සහ විපක්ෂයේ ජනපති අපේක්ෂකයාගේ ජයග‍්‍රහණය ඉලක්ක කරගත් සැළකිය යුතු වැඩකොටසක් ඉටුකරදීමට ජනපති සිරිසේන මහතාට අවස්ථාව හිමිවීමය. ඒ හරහා නිතැතින්ම ඔහුගේ සහ ඔහුගේ පවුලේ සාමාජිකයන්ගේ ආරක්ෂාව ද සහතික වේ. 

අයහපත් ප‍්‍රවණතාවය වන්නේ, ජනපතිවරයා අනුගමනය කරන එවැනි පියවරක් ශී‍්‍ර ලංකා නිදහස් පක්ෂයට එල්ල කෙරෙන ප‍්‍රබල මරු පහරක් වීමය. ඔහු හැරෙන්නට ජනපති අපේක්ෂකයකු ලෙස ඉදිරිපත් කළ හැකි තවත් අයෙක් ශී‍්‍ර ලංකා නිදහස් පක්ෂයට නොමැති වීම තවත් එකකි. දියාරුවී ගොස් තිබෙන පක්ෂයේ තවදුරත් රැදී සිටින සාමාජිකයන් ඉදිරි පාර්ලිමේන්තු මැතිවරණයක දී පක්ෂ සාමාජිකත්වය ලබාගත හැකිදැයි ශී‍්‍ර ලංකා පොදු ජන පෙරමුණ සහ එක්සත් ජාතික පක්ෂය සමග දැනටමත් තිරය පසුපස සාකච්ඡා පවත්වමින් සිටී. 

පළමුවෙන්ම මෙම පක්ෂවල දොරට තට්ටු කළෝ දැනට ධූර කාලය අවසන්ව තිබෙන පළාත් සභාවලට පත්ව සිටි ශී‍්‍ර ලංකා නිදහස් පක්ෂ සාමාජිකයෝ සහ දැනට කි‍්‍රයාත්මක පළාත් සභාවලට පත්ව සිටින ශී‍්‍ර ලංකා නිදහස් පක්ෂ සාමාජිකයෝය. එවැනි වාතාවරණයක් හිටපු ජනපතිනි චන්ද්‍රිකා බණ්ඩානායක කුමාරතුංග මහත්මිය නැවත වරක් සකී‍්‍රය දේශපාලනයට කැදවනු ඇතිදැයි පැනයන් නැගෙමින් පවතී. 

ශී‍්‍ර ලංකා නිදහස් පක්ෂයේ උපදේශකවරියක ලෙස අද වන විට කටයුතු කරමින් සිටින ඇය, පක්ෂය මිය යන්නට නොදී ආරක්ෂා කරගත යුතුව ඇතැයි සිය පෞද්ගලික හිතවතුන් හමුවේ පවසා තිබෙන බව දැනගන්නට ඇත. නමුත් දැනට ශී‍්‍ර ලංකා නිදහස් පක්ෂය නියෝජනය කරන පාර්ලිමේන්තු මන්තී‍්‍රවරුන් කී දෙනෙක් නම් ඇය පසුපස සිටිනු ඇති ද?, සිය ධූරයන් සමඟ අහිමිවන වරදාන සහ වරප‍්‍රසාදයන් ඔවුන්ව අධෛර්යමත් කරනු නොමැති ද?

ජනපති සිරිසේන මහතාගේ අපේක්ෂා ලැයිස්තුවේ වූ, යතාර්ථයක් බවට පත්කරගත නුහුණු පළමු කාරණා 4 සමානව, පස්වැනි කාරණාව ද අසාර්ථක වීමට ඉඩ ඇත. නමුත් එයට යම් ජීවයක් සපයා තිබෙන්නේ පොදු සන්ධානයක් ඇතිකරගැනීම අරබයා දිගින් දිගටම සාකච්ඡා  පැවැත්වීමට දෙපාර්ශවයටම තිබෙන වුවමනාවයි. කෙසේනමුත් මෙම සාකච්ඡා පැවැත්වෙමින් තිබෙන්නේ ශී‍්‍ර ලංකා පොදු ජන පෙරමුණ, ශී‍්‍ර ලංකා නිදහස් පක්ෂය කෙරේ දනවාගෙන සිටින ඉතාම දැඩි සැක සංකා මධ්‍යයේ බව කිව යුතුය. 

මෙම තත්ත්වයට ඌණ පූර්ණයක් සපයා තිබෙන්නේ ශී‍්‍ර ලංකා නිදහස් පක්ෂ මහලේකම්වරයා ප‍්‍රසිද්ධියේ දක්වන අදහස් වේ. ගෝඨාභය රාජපක්ෂ ජනපති වුවහොත්, කැබිනට් මණ්ඩලය රාජපක්ෂ පවුලේ සාමාජිකයන් 7 දෙනෙකුගෙන් සමන්විත වනු ඇති බවට ඔහු පසුගිය අගහරුවාදා පැවැති මාධ්‍ය හමුවක දී කළ ප‍්‍රකාශය එවැන්නකි. 

සන්ධානයේ ජනපති අපේක්ෂකයා ලෙස ජනපති සිරිසේන මහතාව පිළිගන්නා ලෙසට කරන ඉල්ලීමක් ලෙස අගවමින් දෝ හෝ ඔහු වැඩිදුරටත් කියා සිටියේ, තනිවම තරග වැදීම පිළිබදව මේ දක්වාම අවසන් තීරණයක් ගෙන නොමැති බවය.

2018 වසරේ පැවැති පළාත් පාලන මැතිවරණයේ දී ශී‍්‍ර ලංකා පොදු ජන පෙරමුණ දිනාගත් ලක්ෂ 50ක ඡන්ද, එක්සත් ජාතික පක්ෂය දිනාගත් ලක්ෂ 65ක ඡන්ද, සහ එක්සත් ජනතා නිදහස් සන්ධානය දිනාගත් ලක්ෂ 14ක පමණ ඡන්ද, ගෙනහැර දැක්වූ ජයසේකර මහතා එම සංඛ්‍යා මත පිහිටා තර්කානුකූල අදහස් දැක්වීමක යෙදුනේ ය.

”ජයග‍්‍රහණය කරන්නට නම් ජනපති අපේක්ෂකයාට ඡුන්ද ලක්ෂ 60ත්- 65ත් අතර ප‍්‍රමාණයක් ලැබෙන්නට  ඕනේ. ඒ නිසා තමයි අපි කියන්නේ දෙපාර්ශවය එක්විය යුතු බව. ඔහු පෙන්වා දුන්නේ ය.

මේ යටතේ ජනපති සිරිසේන මහතා වෙනුවෙන් ජයසේකර මහතා තර්කානුකූල පදනමක් සකස් කිරීමේ යෙදෙන බවක් පෙනෙන්නට ඇත. ගෝඨාභයට එරෙහිව ගොනු කර තිබෙන චෝදනාවලට අදාළ නඩු කටයුතු කඩිනම් කරන ලෙස ජනපතිවරයා දැනටමත් නීතිපතිවරයාට උපදෙස් දී තිබෙන අතර, එහි පීඩනය යොදවා යෝජිත පොදු සන්ධානයේ අපේක්ෂකයා ලෙස තමාව තෝරා ගැනීම සදහා ශී‍්‍ර ලංකා පොදු ජන පෙරමුණ නම්මා ගැනීම ඔහුගේ අපේක්ෂාවයි. කෙසේවුවත් මෙය එම පක්ෂයේ අතීත කටයුතු කිසිසේත්ම වෙනස් කරන්නක් නොවනු ඇත. 

ගෝඨාභයට නැගී තිබෙන චෝදනා සහ ඒවා සම්බන්ධයෙන් කටයුතු කිරීමට යන ආකාරය මත පිහිටා ජනපති සිරිසේනට දේශපාලනමය වශයෙන් සුදුසු පදනමක් ගොඩනගාදීම කෙරේ දෙපාර්ශවය ඇතැම් විට එකගවීමට ඉඩ තිබේ.පසුගිය සදුදා පැවැත්වීමට නියමිතව තිබූ ශී‍්‍ර ලංකා නිදහස් පක්ෂ – ශී‍්‍ර ලංකා පොදු ජන පෙරමුණු සාකච්ඡd, නිදහස් පක්ෂයේ සාමාජික තිලංග සුමතිපාල මහතා, ශී‍්‍ර ලංකා පොදු ජන පෙරමුණේ සාමාජික ඩලස් අලහප්පෙරුම මහතාගෙන් කළ ඉල්ලීමක් ප‍්‍රකාරව කල් දැමිණ.

ශී‍්‍ර ලංකා නිදහස් පක්ෂයේ  ජ්‍යෙෂ්ඨ නියෝජ්‍ය නායක නිමල් සිරිපාල ද සිල්වා මහතා පොදු සන්ධානයක් ඇතිකර ගැනීම අරබයා ඉදිරිපත් කළ ව්‍යවස්ථා කෙටුම්පත ශී‍්‍ර ලංකා පොදු ජන පෙරමුණ මේ වන විට සම්පූර්ණයෙන්ම අධ්‍යනය කර අවසන්ව තිබේ.  ඊළග පියවර වන්නේ කෙටුම්පත අධ්‍යනය කිරීම සදහා පත්කෙරෙන ඒකාබද්ධ කමිටුවකට දෙපාර්ශවයෙන් එක් සාමාජිකයෙක් බැගින් නම් කර ඔවුන් හරහා එක් එක් පාර්ශවයේ යෝජනා ඉදිරිපත් කිරීමයි. 

ව්‍යවස්ථාව අරබයා ශී‍්‍ර ලංකා නිදහස් පක්ෂය සමග එකගතාවයක් ඇතිකර ගැනීමෙන් පසුව තමන් නියෝජනය කරන අනෙක් දේශපාලන පක්ෂවල සහාය එය කෙරේ දිනාගැනීමට ශී‍්‍ර ලංකා පොදු ජන පෙරමුණ කටයුතු කරනු ඇත. ඒ සම්බන්ධයෙන් දැනටමත් පොදු අවබෝධයක් ගොඩනැගී තිබේ. ක්ෂණිකව වෙනස් වන වර්තමාන දේශපාලන පරිසරයේ, විශේෂයෙන්ම පශ්චාත් පාස්කු ඉරිදා සංහාරය සමයේ, අවිනිශ්චිතතාව යනු ප‍්‍රධාන ලක්ෂණයකි. කෙසේවුවත්, ජනපතිවරණ අපේක්ෂකයකු ලෙස ඉදිරිපත් නොවීමට ජනපති සිරිසේන මහතා තීරණය කර තිබෙන බවක් පෙනෙන්නට ඇත. එවැනි තීරණයක් ඔහු ගෙන තිබෙන්නේ ඔහුට සහාය දක්වන ශී‍්‍ර ලංකා නිදහස් පක්ෂ පාර්ලිමේන්තු මන්තී‍්‍රවරුන් 24 දෙනෙකුගේ සහ තවත් සුළු පිරිසකගේ සහායෙනි.  පරාජය තමා පිළිගන්නට බලා සිටින බව ඔහු හොදින්ම දනී.

ලෝක කුසලාන තරගාවලියට එක්ව සිටින අපගේ ශී‍්‍ර ලංකා කි‍්‍රකට් කණ්ඩායම හා සමානවම ඔහු තරග රැසක් කී‍්‍රඩා කර ඇතත්, ඒ සෑම අවස්ථාවකදීම ජනපතිවරයා පරාජයේ ඉම දක්වා කොටු කිරීමට සමර්ථකම් දක්වා තිබෙන්නේ විපක්ෂය නොව ඔහුගේම ආණ්ඩු සගයා වන එක්සත් ජාතික පක්ෂයයි. කොතරම් පන්දු යැව්ව ද, සම්පූර්ණ එක්සත් ජාතික පක්ෂයම දවා ගැනීමට ඔහුට මේ දක්වාම හැකියාවක් ලැබී නොමැත. කෙසේවුවත්, නොයෙක් බාධා මැද කඩුල්ලේ රැදී සිටියේ ඔහුම බැවින් තරගයේ වීරයා ලෙස තමන්ව හදුන්වාගැනීමට ද ජනපතිවරයාට සාධාරණ හැකියාවක් තිබේ.

අනෙක් පසින්, එක්සත් ජාතික පක්ෂය නියෝජනය කරමින් පිටියට පිවිස සිටින අගමැති රනිල් වික‍්‍රමසිංහ මහතා, දේශපාලන පිටියේ දක්ෂ පිතිකරුවකු මෙන්ම පන්දු යවන්නකු ලෙසට ඔහුට අත්ව තිබෙන කීර්තිය එළෙසම රදවා ගනිමින් ජනපතිවරයා යොමු කරන සෑම අභියෝගයකටම සාර්ථකව මුහුණ දුන්නේය. දැන් ඔහුගේ කණ්ඩායමේ බොහෝ දෙනෙකුට අවශ්‍යව තිබෙන්නේ නායක පුටුව දිනාගැනීමටය. ඒ අරබයා දැනටමත් ප‍්‍රචාරණ ව්‍යාපාර කි‍්‍රයාත්මකය.  ශී‍්‍ර ලංකාවේ මේ දිනවල කි‍්‍රයාත්මක දේශපාලනය ලෝක කුසලාන තරගාවලියේ ස්වභාවය වැනිය. පේ‍්‍රක්ෂකයෝ, හෙවත් ඡන්ද දායකයෝ බලා සිටින්නේ ජයග‍්‍රාහකයා කවුරුන් වනු ඇතිදැයි දැනගැනීමට මැතිවරණයක් පැමිණෙන තෙක්ය. එසේ එන මැතිවරණය, දෙපාර්ශවයේ කිසිවෙකුටත් ලෙහෙසි පහසු අභියෝගයක් නම් නොවනු ඇත.

Women’s dress code

June 28th, 2019

By Dr. Tilak S. Fernando Courtesy Ceylon Today

Women’s dress code in Sri Lanka, especially after the Easter Sunday massacre, has become the talk of the town. This was attributed to the carnage carried out by young Islamic Terrorists (Wahhabis) espousing suicide bombers. Being educated and hailing from comfortable families, it remains an unresolved setback as to how those young hearts impregnated with celestial fire were converted into terrorists, and to the extent of completely brainwashing, to believe in a theory of dying as martyrs for Islam and religion would take them through the portals of Heaven in a beeline!

This goes to prove the harsh reality of brainwashing done by warped minds of Wahhabis, as no religion on earth would advocate killing of another person or committing suicide and self-destruction, the punishment for which is known to be directly to Hell.

The Abaya

The question of women’s dress code came to the forefront after a man dressed in an Abaya was arrested by Police, immediately after the Easter Sunday massacre. Abaya is a long and loose black garment covering the entire body, whereas a niqab is a veil covering a woman’s face, ears, and hair leaving only the eyes exposed. This is most common across the Muslim world where fashionable women wear hijabs or scarves in the presence of any male outside of their immediate family. Some women, of course, wear hijabs not having a choice, as it’s their culture or families mandate. Generally Muslim women cover their head and the face because they chose to, as an expression of their modesty towards religious conviction and devotion to Allah.

After a man was arrested wearing an Abaya following the unfortunate calamity,  it was natural for the general public to generate a certain amount of  fear psychosis, the worst being some assumptions were allowed to gain control by assuming that ‘every Muslim person is a terrorist’! This was a spontaneous feeling among the citizenry when caches of weapons and ammunition were detected by Security Forces immediately after the massacre, but the veracity of it was that most of the tip-offs came from the Muslim Sufis themselves.

Official circular

Following the unpleasant incident of 21 April,  the Ministry of Public Administration made it compulsory for all female employees in Government Institutions to wear saris or Kandyan ; males had to  wear shirts and trousers, or national dress. Immediately, the Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka received complaints against the Public Administration Circular No.13/2019 for violating fundamental rights of female officers, particularly. The Ministry later announced that the Circular was issued to ensure the security of public officers at Government institutions.

This unprompted situation surfaced as some of the Muslim women in Sri Lanka had decided to wear the Abaya as part of their daily dress, of late, after being influenced by  Saudi Arabian Wahhabis. Sufis believe in angels as opposed to Wahhabis who do not entertain such ideas, but act against anyone who denigrates Islam and believes should be eradicated ! The Islamic community in Sri Lanka has been an entirely different breed from those in Saudi Arabian Wahhabis.

In a broad generalisation, it is a woman’s prerogative to enjoy privileges for protection and self-defence. By nature, the woman is protected by a self defence system where women will be able to accuse or blame any man and get away with ‘murder’, which expresses in an English idiom as,  ‘hell has no fury  like  a woman scorned,’ meaning there is nothing unpleasant as a woman  turned nasty when offended! That may be the reason why in a Court of Law or inside a Police station, women are at an advantage over any third-party asseverations!

For centuries women have been given a raw deal in search of righteousness and beauty, particularly in the Middle Eastern countries. In Saudi Arabia, for example, where religion has become a pedantic tool, women have had to put up with numerous restraints. Women there are apparently treated as men’s slaves and believe that a woman’s role is only to breed!!!

In Turkey, hijab is usually considered chic and elegant, so women wear coloured fabrics and silk scarves with beautiful prints. Persian women wear loose rusari scarves,  in preference to black chadors preferred by conservative Shiite women in Iran. In northern Sudan, the law requires women to dress in moderation or risk whipping or flogging. Women in the Gulf Arab usually wear both the abaya and niqab in public and in mixed company. It is also said that for a woman in ‘Afghanistan not wearing a headscarf is almost as scandalous as a woman in America appearing naked in public.’

Female elegance

The elegance of a female figure is projected when she wears a sari as opposed to any other dress. The origin of the sari goes back to an ancient Indus Valley Civilisation in  Pakistan  and the Northwest  of India. The dress evolved from a three-piece ensemble comprising the lower garment, the tail end worn over the shoulder, and a blouse covering the chest. This is recorded in the 6th century B.C.  Subsequently, the lower garment and the veil merged to form single apparel called the sari.  

The sari, therefore, being one of the oldest forms of women’s attire, dating back to 5000 years, is draped in different styles in various regions of Asia. Likewise, osariya is well known in Sri Lanka as the Kandyan sari, which has its unique style of draping and is often considered as the national dress in Sri Lanka, particularly among the Kandyan women. In India the draping of the sari is wide and varied according to many styles dependant on the area one lives in .For example, the most popular style is known as the Bengali styles of Nivi and Kappulu arrangement, which is common in Andhra Pradesh. Mekhela drape comes from Assam, Nauvari drape from Maharashtra, Mohini attam drape from Kerala, Seedha Pallu drape in Gujarat, Uttar Pradesh and Odisha and Surguja drape in Chhattisgarh.

The Osariya worn by Sri Lankan women originated from fashions in South India. It is believed to have had an influence on Nayakkar Kings who were the rulers of Kandyan Kingdom between 1739 and 1815, prior to the arrival of the British rule. What makes the Osariya divergent from other styles of sari draping in India is its additional elaborate frill at the side of the waist, which is called the   ‘Odokkuwa’ and the frilled boards of the shoulder, which is commonly known as the ‘ Osari Pota’.

The length of a sari drape varies from five to nine yards in length and two to four feet in breadth and is typically enfolded around the waist, with one end arranged over the shoulder, baring the midriff. A woman’s navel has always been symbolic feature with her sensuality, and the sari does a perfect job in highlighting, it in a subtle, yet sexy way to create a sensuous look. Hipster style is ideal for slimmer shapely women with a deep round navel, while their hips ripple when they walk! Such women may be able  send onlookers aghast as opposed to some women, who do  not have a faintest sense of their figure, with a pot belly  (no offence intended) wearing hipster sari for the sake of being fashionable, influenced by the ‘sexy chicks’ who expose their belly buttons and midriffs, a few inches  below the navel!

There are still a few women who adopt a style of their own to cover the entire midriff with the jacket material. There are many theories about the women’s dress code. The Government in Sri Lanka has made it compulsory for women officials in Government service to wear saris after the carnage on the Easter Sunday. There are many choices and fashions, when it comes to draping a sari that is personal to each woman. Some would like to wear deep neck and backless blouses, while others may feel wearing a backless blouse to an office is vulgar or indecent and sari blouses that expose an uplifted bustier and the deep cleavage, with the third button undone, is only appropriate in a frenzied social gatherings!

However, the society has changed to such an extent that, currently many girls as well as middle-aged women don’t feel shy to flaunt their bodies, wear a hipster exposing their six-inch midriff in order exhibit the belly button (at times with a colourful stud) or their deep cleavage as fashion at parties and wedding ceremonies.

[email protected]

Twists and turns in Sirisena Memories

June 28th, 2019

By Lucian Rajakarunanayake Courtesy The Island

June 28, 2019, 8:41 pm 


Is the Head of State and Government, the Commander-in-Chief of forces one who is mentally suitable to hold such office?

Recent statements by President Sirisena have raised major questions about the status of mind of the person, and his commitment to both the process and the principles that saw his election as President of this country. The most striking of these is his call to remove both the 18th and 19th Amendments to the Constitution.

Let us be kind, and consider him as a forgetful person, on his call to remove the 18th Amendment. It has been repealed, and was so done under his leadership in adopting the 19th Amendment, and that was passed in Parliament on May 15, 2015. Does he not remember the statement he made to the nation on his own role in getting this adopted with a huge majority in Parliament? Such forgetfulness could be one of political expediency and not that of mental unsuitability.

Has he also forgotten what the 18A was and why it had to be removed? Has he completely forgotten what the Ven. Maduluwawe Sobitha Thera had said of the need to remove 18A? Does he not know that 18A was how Mahinda Rajapaksa abolished the two term limit on the presidency, making it possible for him to hold office as long as possible or needed (by him) till his son Namal was groomed for the Office?

Do the twists and turns in presidential thinking make him unaware that it was the abolition of 18A and the adoption of 19A that has made Namal Rajapaksa too young to take over the presidency today at 30; something his father and possibly the rest of the Rajapaksa Regime would have liked?

Forgetfulness of such scope goes beyond mental imbalance, having a strong connect with the politically crooked. Is Maithripala Sirisena trying to prove to us he is not the person the people elected as the Common Candidate in January 2015? He need not try so hard, we know it, and have done so for some time.

He was Rising Star of Crookedness in the politics and governance of Sri Lanka, who has been playing his own game in politics to retain the powers of the Executive Presidency that he certainly helped remove to a large extent in the aurora of a new phase in our politics. When he wants the 18A removed, he must be having touching memories of how he, as so many others, voted to bring in that Amendment, which was disastrous to democracy. Is he now trying to ease such pain of mind by calling for removal of 19A?

Let us not forget, as Sirisena tries to bend our minds, that the 19A saw a return to a more democratic form of government and constitutional politics, in contrast to the crooked authoritarian policies of the Rajapaksa Regime. 19A was certainly not good enough for the majority of voters in January 2015, who sought the abolition of the Executive Presidency. That is a problem the people will have to face and take necessary steps in time to come.

But the Sirisena mindset of political amnesia and survival of the crooked is certainly not the stuff of political necessity today, even after all those failures and disasters in governance we have seen in Yahapalanaya.

Sirisena’s twists and bends in politics and governance is less to do with the people, and much more to do with the Rajapaksas. His mind is engulfed in the move to bring the defeated Mahinda Rajapaksa to office as Prime Minister in that October 26 coup of the crooked last year. Over and over we see that Maithripala Sirisena did not want to defeat Rajapaksa. It just happened, because that is what the people wanted, not what he wanted!

His efforts today are all tied at having some new deal with the Rajapaksas. Issue puzzling statements about him being the next SLFP presidential candidate; Have increased hope in the rising difficulties faced by Gotabaya…the theme goes on with steps in a new political dance of the SLFP and SLPP. The goal is the Presidency, with the reduced powers of the 19A (which he wants removed) and Mahinda Rajapaksa serving as Prime Minister – under Sirisena!

Just now, another presidential term for Sirisena remains in his dream world. But the stuff of crooked politics is such that dreams of such survival are not beyond expectation. Retirement at Polonnaruwa is not the goal of Sirisena today, just as retirement at Hambantota was not that of Mahinda Rajapaksa.

We are at the rise of the Sirisena –Rajapaksa Naadagama, a performance of dirty politics that could take the country to disasters worse than Easter Sunday. Race and Religion are the themes of both performers, with plenty of the corrupt and crooked providing the stagecraft.

We must also not forget the other solo player in the presidential dance. Ranil Wickremesinghe, one who has lost public support, but holding on to party manipulation. Just now, Sirisena has burnt his boats with Ranil. But, the flexing capacity of the crooked leaves room for more convoluted political relations; and Sirisena is a long jumper of the crooked, and not a high jumper of the just.

Getting back to the memories and mindset of Sirisena, he will realize that 18A is no more, and 19A will remain, unless removed by another 2/3 majority in parliament. Sirisena has no call for such a majority today; in fact his reality is one of a decreasing minority.

We will soon have much more of mental instability in the highest seat of Office!

Mahinda says he is personally against death penalty

June 28th, 2019

Courtesy Adaderana

Leader of the Opposition Mahinda Rajapaksa says he is personally against the implementation of the death penalty.

He made this comment addressing the media following a religious event held at Horapawita Sri Vijayasundara Pirivena in Kamburupitiya, Matara today (28).

The event, joined by Mahanayake of Ramanna Maha Nikaya Venerable Napane Pemasiri Thero, was held under the patronage of Opposition Leader Mahinda Rajapaksa.

France, Norway and Germany urge Sri Lanka not to reinstate death penalty

June 28th, 2019

Courtesy Adaderana

Norway and Germany have expressed deep concern regarding the Sri Lankan President’s decision to resume executions in the country for drug offenders.

Norway is deeply concerned that Sri Lanka intends to implement the death penalty, which would put an end to Sri Lanka’s 43-year moratorium on the use of this cruel and irreversible punishment,” the Norwegian Embassy in Colombo said.

The statement said that as recently as December 2018, Sri Lanka was one of 120 countries that voted in favour of a UN General Assembly resolution calling for a moratorium on the use of the death penalty. 

The vote was a tangible sign of the global trend to move away from the use of the death penalty.”

Norway said implementation of the death penalty would negatively affect Sri Lanka’s international reputation and its human rights record.

Norway strongly opposes all use of the death penalty as a matter of principle. We believe that states have a duty to protect the safety, well-being and human rights of all their citizens.”

We have communicated our position and raised our concerns regarding this issue at the highest levels of the Sri Lankan Government, and we urge Sri Lanka to refrain from reinstating the death penalty,” the statement said.

Meanwhile the German Commissioner for Human Rights Barbel Kofler has also issued a statement in response to reports that the Sri Lankan President had publically announced that executions were to take place.

I am extremely concerned by reports that President Sirisena has publically announced that four death sentences are to be carried out,” she said. 

She appealed to the Sri Lankan Government to continue to refrain from carrying out executions following a moratorium lasting more than 40 years, to which Sri Lanka itself expressed its commitment as recently as December 2018. 

Executions would be a considerable setback along the path towards a reconciled and peaceful society, said the Federal Government Commissioner for Human Rights Policy and Humanitarian Aid at the Federal Foreign Office.

The application of the death penalty damages Sri Lanka’s reputation, its ambitions in the area of human rights and the country as a business location, she stressed.

Issuing a statement, the France government also said it is deeply concerned at the announcement and urged the Sri Lankan authorities to maintain the moratorium on the death penalty.

A resumption of executions would be inconsistent with the recent commitments made by Sri Lanka, which voted in support of the resolution calling for a universal moratorium on the use of the death penalty during the most recent UN General Assembly session just six months ago, with the justice minister taking part in the 7th World Congress against the Death Penalty in Brussels in February.”

France reaffirms its opposition to the death penalty everywhere and under all circumstances and encourages Sri Lanka to join the countries that have permanently abolished this inhumane, unjust and ineffective punishment,” the foreign ministry said.

Prisons Dept. gives undertaking not to carry out executions for a week

June 28th, 2019

Courtesy Adaderana

The Commissioner General of Prisons has given an undertaking to the Appeals Court that the death penalty will not be carried out within the next 7 days.

Prisons Commissioner General T.M.J.W. Thennakoon gave this undertaking when he appeared before the court today after being served notice over a writ petition filed against the decision to implement the death penalty in Sri Lanka.

Meanwhile the court decided to take up the petition, seeking a court order preventing the implementation of the death sentence, for consideration on July 02.

The petition was filed by journalist Malinda Seneviratne citing the Commissioner General of Prisons and the Superintendent of the Welikada Prison as its respondents.

In his petition, Mr. Seneviratne says the President had recently stated that he has already signed the relevant documents to impose the death penalty on 4 convicts.

However, he points out implementing the death penalty could lead to violation of human rights.

Hence, the petitioner seeks the Appeals Court to issue an interim order to the Commissioner General of Prisons and the Superintendent of Welikada Prison to prevent the implementation of the death sentence.

ෂාෆි අම්මලා වඳ කරපු හැටි? – Prof. Channa Jayasumana

June 28th, 2019

Noize TV

Sri Lanka’s Foreign Service – Dual Citizen Diplomats, foreign spouses & non-Sri Lankan children

June 27th, 2019

When a plethora of concerns are emerging all revolving around secretly signed agreements compromising Sri Lanka’s sovereignty and officials are not defending the Nation in view of their divided loyalties, it is the right of every taxpaying citizen to pose questions and demand answers. Everyone enjoying perks of office are doing so because of the taxpayer grants them these privileges – is it too much to expect that in return for all that they enjoy, they defend the sovereignty & territorial integrity of Sri Lanka & its People? No taxpayer is burdening themselves to maintain a Government apparatus that makes them facilitate agreements that allows foreign troops to land as & when they like I,n Sri Lanka make use of Sri Lanka’s airports, ports, harbours & land & not be guilty for any violation to Sri Lanka’s territory or its people.

What is the role of a country’s foreign ministry & its diplomats & staff?

A country’s foreign ministry is important for several reasons. It is the channel that formulates the nation’s foreign policy and promotes the policy abroad via social, cultural, economic political interactions while defending the interests of the State and the government at regional & international forums.

In other words, the foreign ministry takes a country to the world and brings the world into his/her country. Essentially, the foreign ministry, its diplomats & staff are expected to be the face of their nation in the international arena. Diplomats & staff are the agents of the State expected to function on behalf of that state and not any other.

It is for this reason that all members of the foreign ministry must be citizens of a country. Dual citizens have divided loyalties. The question of dual citizenship does not arise for ordinary citizens who have worked or lived overseas and at some point in time wish to live in both countries and are monetarily contributing to both countries. However, those in State service must remain only citizens of the country they serve.  

Marriage to foreign nationals – sex, spies & diplomatic immunity

In general, Foreign Service rules in most countries do not allow diplomats to marry foreigners as “there is a risk of state secrets being leaked out”. This rule has over time being tweaked because of favoritism and other factors that have diluted policy objectives.

The rationale takes us back in time to some stories (sleeping with the enemy)

1963 Christine Keeler sex scandal which resulted in the resignation of John Profumo Secretary of State for War after she admitted to passing secrets to the Soviets. Before her death I was a spy… I betrayed my country” – she had been bedding Profumo & Russian spy Yevgeny Ivanov at the same time!

2011 IMF Dominique Strauss-Kahn & the sexual assault on hotel maid – though arrested he was bailed out on diplomatic immunity

2013 sex scandal in Israeli embassy in South America opens a can of worms,7340,L-4414189,00.html

2013 U.S. ambassador to Belgium Howard Gutman accused of soliciting sexual favors from both prostitutes and minor children,”

2016 Saudi diplomat gets immunity inspite of raping maid in India

2018 Australia – deputy prime minister, and leader of the National Party, Barnaby Joyce. Joyce was forced to resign after he left his wife to pursue a relationship with his former media adviser, who is currently five months pregnant with the deputy prime minister’s fifth child. Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull was forced to publicly say ministers… must not engage in sexual relationships with staff.”

Foreign intel officers/agents as diplomats

Foreign Missions also have intelligence officers/agents (as diplomats /business persons or even journalists) who are highly trained in espionage techniques and often under false names. Ironically they do not have diplomatic immunity unless declared a diplomat!

UK agents are known as ‘covert human intelligence source’ & provides information to an intelligence officer. In US an intelligence officer is a member of the CIA or FBI – while agent is an ‘informant’

In 2018 UK kicked out 23 Russian diplomats claiming them to be intelligence officers or rather ‘spies’.

How does anyone differentiate a spy from a good diplomat who falls into these 3 categories:

  • Political – representing one’s country while monitoring developments in the host country
  • Commercial – helping companies in one’s country to trade overseas & promote investments
  • Consular – helping citizens of one’s country as well as those applying to enter one’s country.

The 19a included a clause that the President & Members of Parliament cannot be dual citizens. If so this should trickle down to entire Government service. No public official in any capacity should be a dual citizen.

But the question is how is anyone to know if a MP/public official is a dual citizen or not?

Dual citizens as envoys in Sri Lanka:

The Sunday Times carried an article ‘Dual citizens as envoys: Foreign Secretary makes contradictory statements’

Incidentally, the confusion was as a result of a Minute on November 2016 by Prasad Kariyawasam then Foreign Secretary to Parliament giving 2 contradictory statements

  • that new entrants to foreign service had to be citizens of Sri Lanka only and anyone with dual citizenship had to rescind their foreign nationality to join SL Foreign Service (November 2016)
  • that public service regulations did not prevent any Sri Lankan with dual nationality holding a high post in public service though 19a established a condition that MPs cannot be dual citizens. (9 August 2016 letter sent to Speaker Karu Jayasuriya) following the appointment of Arusha Cooray as Ambassador to Norway. Cooray was an Australian national. Prasad Kariyawasam’s response when the High Posts Committee of Parliament objected was that countries like US & Australia would not accept dual citizens of their country as envoys of Sri Lanka! Arusha Cooray eventually went as Sri Lanka’s Ambassador to Norway, Finland and Iceland in February 2019.

Obviously this was a case of public officials grasping at straws for the lack of national policy in the Foreign Ministry.

Who can answer

  • How many of Sri Lanka’s foreign envoys/diplomats are dual citizens & were selected by Sri Lankan Govt after knowing they were dual citizens?
  • How many of Sri Lanka’s foreign envoys/diplomats are dual citizens but have not disclosed they are dual citizens?
  • How many of Sri Lanka’s foreign envoys/diplomats are dual citizens & married to foreign citizens?
  • How many of Sri Lanka’s foreign envoys/diplomats are dual citizens, married to foreign citizens with children who are non-Sri Lankan citizens?
  • How many of Sri Lanka’s foreign envoys/diplomats are dual citizens, married to foreign citizens and having their non-Sri Lankan children being educated & having their medical bills paid by the poor taxpayers of Sri Lanka
  • How many of these children return to Sri Lanka to serve the nation after draining the taxpayer of so much money?

Do foreign envoys/diplomats, their spouses and children realize the amount of money spent on them by the State which invariably means by the poor taxpayer – all for which the return asked of them is to defend the nation & its people.

How many of today’s diplomats think joining the foreign service is simply a career ladder for themselves instead of proudly defending the history, heritage, international image of Sri Lanka and setting the wrongly promoted image and lies straight.

Shenali D Waduge

19 වන ව්‍යවස්ථා සංශෝධනය නිසා “රාජ්‍ය ආරක්ෂාව” අනතුරේ… නාගානන්ද නිසා “බුද්ධ ශාසනය” අනතුරේ….

June 27th, 2019

නීතිඥ අරුණ ලක්සිරි උණවටුන

ගෙදර ගියොත් අඹු නසී, මග හිටියොත් තෝ නසී! යන්න වෙනුවට ගෙදර ගියත් – මග හිටියත් රට නසී යන්න අදට වඩා ගැලපෙන බව 19 ආණ්ඩුක්‍රම ව්‍යවස්ථාවෙන් රට සහ රාජ්‍ය ආරක්ෂාව පත්වී ඇති තත්ත්වය විමසා බැලීමේදී පැහැදිලිවන බව පෙන්වා දීම මෙම ලිපියෙන් අපේක්ෂා කරයි.

19 වන ආණ්ඩුක්‍රම ව්‍යවස්ථා සංශෝධනය සම්මතවීම මෑතකාලීනව ශ්‍රී ලංකාවේ ප්‍රජාතන්ත්‍රවාදයට ගරු කරන බොහෝ පිරිසකගේ ප්‍රසාදයට ලක් වී ඇති බව කියයි.

ජනාධිපතිවරයාගේ ධූරකාලය, බලතල සීමා කිරීමත්, ඉහළ ධූර සදහා තැනැත්තන් පත් කිරීමේ අභිමතය ඉවත් කරමින් ස්වාධීන කොමිෂන් සභා පිහිටුවීමත්, ජනාධිපතිවරයා පාර්ලිමේන්තුවට වග කිව යුතු බවට විධිවිධානයක් එක් කිරීමත්, ජනාධිපතිවරයා විසින් සිය බලතල ක්‍රියාත්මක කිරීමේදී යම් පුද්ගලයෙකුගේ මුලික අයිතිවාසිකම් කඩ වුවහොත් එවැනි අවස්ථාවක මුලික අයිතිවාසිකම් නඩුවක් ශේෂ්ඨාධිකරණයට ගොනු කල හැකි වීමත්, පාර්ලිමේන්තුව විසිරවීම සීමා කිරීමත්, ජනාධිපතිවරයාට කිසිම ඇමතිධූරයක් දැරීමට නොහැකි බවට පත් කිරීමත් (වත්මන් ජනාධිපතිට පමණක් අමාත්‍යාංශ 03ක් තබා ගත හැකිය) , අවස්ථා 2කට වඩා ජනාධිපති ධූරය දැරිය නොහැකි විධිවිධාන ඇතුළත් කිරීමත් එකී ශ්‍රී ලංකාවේ ප්‍රජාතන්ත්‍රවාදය ගරු කරන අයගේ ප්‍රසාදයට ලක් වී ඇති කාරණා වේ.

ශ්‍රී ලංකාවේ ප්‍රජාතන්ත්‍රවාදය ගරු කරන අය රාජ්‍ය ආරක්ෂාව සම්බන්ධයෙන් කවර ආකාරයෙන් 19 ව්‍යවස්ථා සංශෝධනය සම්බන්ධව සතුටු වන්නේද? යන්න පැහැදිලි නැතත් වර්තමානයේ විධායක සහ ව්‍යවස්ථාදායකය අතර ඇති වී ඇති සීතල යුද්ධය සමග ප්‍රජාතන්ත්‍රවාදය වෙනුවෙන් ගෙන එනු ලැබූ 19 ව්‍යවස්ථා සංශෝධනය සමාජයේ ස්ථායී පැවැත්ම වෙනුවෙන් වන්නක්ද? ඉදිරියේදී රටේ සහ ජනතාවගේ ආරක්ෂාව සම්බන්ධව පැන නගින අර්බුද කවරක් විය හැකිද? යන්නත් අද දවසේ ශ්‍රී ලාංකික බුද්ධිමතුන් විමසා බැලිය යුතුමය.

1978 ආණ්ඩුක්‍රම ව්‍යවස්ථාව පැනවීමත් සමගම ජනමතවිචාරණය ඡන්ද බලය, විධායක ජනාධිපතිධූරය සහ සමානුපාතික ඡන්ද ක්‍රමය රටට හදුන්වා දීමට ජේ. ආර්. ජයවර්ධන ජනාධිපතිවරයා විසින් පියවර ගත්තේ ය.

එහි ශ්‍රී ලංකාව නම් කරන ලද්දේ නිදහස්, ස්වෛරී, ස්වාධීන, ප්‍රජාතාන්තික සමාජවාදී ජනරජයක් ලෙසය. (නම එසේ දක්වා තිබුණත් රටේ නිදහසත් ස්වෛරීත්වයත්, ස්වාධීනත්වයත්, ප්‍රජාතාන්ත්‍රික බවත් කෙතරම් පිරිහීගොස් ඇත්ද යන්න ජනතාව තීරණය කළ යුතුය) එසේම යුද්ධය ප්‍රකාශ කිරීමට හා සාමය ප්‍රකාශ කිරීමට විධායක ජනාධිපතිවරයාට බලය ඇත. එසේම අමාත්‍යාංශ සංඛ්‍යාව තීරණය කිරීමටත්, අමාත්‍යධූර දැරීමටත් විධායක ජනාධිපතිවරයාට බලය තිබුණි. එමෙන්ම ශ්‍රී ලංකා ජනරජය බුද්ධාගමට ප්‍රමුඛස්ථානය පිරිනැමීමත්, බුද්ධ ශාසනය සුරක්ෂිත කොට පෝෂණය කිරීම රජයේ වගකීමක් බවත් එහි දක්වා තිබුණි.

1978 සිට අද දක්වා ආරක්ෂක අමාත්‍යාංශය සදහා සෘජු අධීක්ෂණය පාලනය මෙහෙයවීම ජනාධිපතිවරයා විසින් සිදුකරනු ලැබීය. 2009 බෙදුම්වාදී ත්‍රස්තවාදය පරාජය කිරීමටද ජනාධිපතිවරයා සතුව ආරක්ෂක අමාත්‍යාංශය පැවතීම ප්‍රබල අධාරකයක් විය.

19 වන ආණ්ඩුක්‍රම ව්‍යවස්ථා සංශෝධනය මගින් සිදුකරන ශ්‍රී ලංකාවේ රාජ්‍ය ආරක්ෂාව සම්බන්ධ අනතුර

19 වන ආණ්ඩුක්‍රම ව්‍යවස්ථා සංශෝධනයේ 51 වන වගන්තියේ මෙසේ දැක්වේ…

ආණ්ඩුක්‍රම ව්‍යවස්ථාවේ පටහැනිව කුමක් සඳහන් වුව ද මේ පනත ආරම්භ වන දිනයේ දී ජනාධිපතිවරයා ලෙස ධුර දරන තැනැත්තා එසේ ජනාධිපති ධුරය දරන තාක්කල් රාජ්‍ය ආරක්ෂාවමහවැලි සංවර්ධනය සහ පරිසරය යන විෂය සහ ඒවායේ කර්තව්‍ය තමන්ගේ භාරය වෙත පවරා ගැනීම ද එකී කාර්යය සඳහා ඔහු වෙත පවරා ගත යුතු අමාත්‍යාංශ තීරණය කරනු ලැබීම ද කළ හැකි අතර ඒ අනුව එකී විෂය හෝ කර්තව්‍ය පවරනු ලැබ ඇති අමාත්‍යවරයාට යම් ලිඛිත නීතියක කරනු ලබන යම් සඳහනක්ජනාධිපතිවරයාට කරනු ලබන සඳහනක් ලෙස කියවා තේරුම් ගනු ලැබිය යුත්තේ ය.

ඒ අනුව 2015 ජනාධිපතිවරණයෙන් තේරීපත් වූ මෛත්‍රීපාල සිරිසේන ජනාධිපතිවරයාට

1. රාජ්‍ය ආරක්ෂාව,

2. මහවැලි සංවර්ධනය සහ

3. පරිසරය අමාත්‍යාංශයද

4. එකී කාර්යය සඳහා ඔහු වෙත පවරා ගත යුතු අමාත්‍යාංශ තීරණය කිරීමටද නීතිමය හැකියාව ඇත.

දැන් සළකා බැලිය යුත්තේ ඉදිරියේ ජනාධිපතිවරණයකින් පසු බලයට පත්වන ජනාධිපතිවරයා සම්බන්ධව සහ රාජ්‍ය ආරක්ෂාව සම්බන්ධ අමාත්‍යාංශය හිමිවන්නේ කාටද? යන්නයි.

ඒ සම්බන්ධව විධිවිධාන 19 වන ආණ්ඩුක්‍රම ව්‍යවස්ථා සංශෝධනයේ 43 වන වගන්තියේ මෙසේ දැක්වේ

(1) අග්‍රාමාත්‍යවරයාගේ අදහස් විමසීම අවශ්‍යයැයි ජනාධිපතිවරයා සලකන අවස්ථාවන්හි අග්‍රාමාත්‍යවරයාගේ අදහස් ද විමසාජනාධිපතිවරයා විසින් අමාත්‍ය මණ්ඩලයේ අමාත්‍යවරයන්ගේ සංඛ්‍යාව ද අමාත්‍යාංශ සංඛ්‍යාව ද ඒ අමාත්‍යවරයන්ට පවරන විෂය සහ කාර්ය ද නිශ්චය කළ යුත්තේ ය.

(2) ජනාධිපතිවරයා විසින් එසේ නිශ්චය කරනු ලබන අමාත්‍යාංශ භාරව කටයුතු කිරිම සඳහා අග්‍රාමාත්‍යවරයාගේ උපදෙස් මතපාර්ලිමේන්තු මන්ත්‍රිවරුන් අතුරෙන් අමාත්‍යවරයන් පත් කළ යුත්තේ ය.

(3) ජනාධිපතිවරයා විසින් කවර අවස්ථාවක දී වුව දඅමාත්‍ය මණ්ඩලය වෙත පවරන ලද විෂය සහ කාර්ය වෙනස් කිරස්ම සහ අමාත්‍ය මණ්ඩලයේ සංයුතිය වෙනස් කිරීම ද කරනු ලැබිය හැක්කේ ය. අමාත්‍ය මණ්ඩලයේ අඛණ්ඩ පැවැත්මට සහ පාර්ලිමේන්තුව වෙත අමාත්‍ය මණ්ඩලය දරන වගකීමේ අඛණ්ඩ පැවැත්මට එවැනි වෙනස් කිරීමක් බල නොපාන්නේ ය.

මෙහි ඇති වැදගත් කොටස වන්නේ 19වන ආණ්ඩුක්‍රම ව්‍යවස්ථා සංශෝධනයේ 43.2 අනු වගන්තියේ දැක්වෙන පාර්ලිමේන්තු මන්ත්‍රිවරුන් අතුරෙන් අමාත්‍යවරයන් පත්කළ යුතුය යන්නයි.

එමෙන්ම 19වන ආණ්ඩුක්‍රම ව්‍යවස්ථා සංශෝධනයේ ජනාධිපතිවරයාට අමාත්‍යාංශ පවරා ගැනීමට දැරීමට හැකිබව දක්වා නැති අතර එහි 42.3 අනුවගන්තියේ ජනාධිපතිවරයා අමාත්‍ය මණ්ඩලයේ සාමාජිකයෙක් ද අමාත්‍ය මණ්ඩලයේ ප්‍රධානයාද වන්නේ ය. ” ලෙස දක්වා තිබුණද 19 වන ආණ්ඩුක්‍රම ව්‍යවස්ථා සංශෝධනයේ 43 වන වගන්තිය අභිබවා යාමට ඉන් හැකියාවක් ලබන්නේ නැත. එනම් ජනාධිපතිවරයාට ආරක්ෂක අමාත්‍යාංශය තබා ගත නොහැකිය.

මෙහි ඇති සිනහ උපදවන කාරණය වන්නේ ආණ්ඩුක්‍රම ව්‍යවස්ථාවේ 33 (උ) ව්‍යවස්ථාව අනුව යුද්ධය ප්‍රකාශ කිරීමට හා සාමය ප්‍රකාශ කිරීමට ජනාධිපතිවරයාට ඇති බලය ප්‍රකාශයකට පමණක් සීමා වීමයි.

ඉහත කාරණා අනුව ඉදිරියේ පවත්වන ජනාධිපතිවරණයකින් පසු ආරක්ෂක අමාත්‍යාංශය සිය බාරයේ තබා ගැනිමට ආණ්ඩුක්‍රම ව්‍යවස්ථානුකූල හිමිකමක්/බලයක් ජනාධිපතිවරයාට ලැබෙන්නේ නැත. මෙය ශ්‍රී ලංකා රාජ්‍යයේ ආරක්ෂාවට, සන්නද්ධ හමුදාවල පැවැත්මට, බුද්ධ ශාසනයේ ස්ථාවරත්වයට බලවත් තර්ජනයකි.

බුද්ධ ශාසනය සම්බන්ධව මතු වී ඇති අනතුර

බුද්ධාගම ආරක්ෂා කිරීමේදී වඩා වැදගත් තත්ත්වය වූයේ බුද්ධ ශාසනය” යන වචන ඉංග්‍රීසි ආණ්ඩුක්‍රම ව්‍යවස්ථාවේද ඒ ආකාරයෙන්ම එනම් Buddha Sasana කියා තිබීමත් ඉංග්‍රීසියට පරිවර්තනය කර නොතිබීමත් ය. මෙය එංගලන්ත නීතියෙන් බලවන්තයන් වී ඉන්නා නීති විශාරදයින් කියන අයට විශාල ගැටළුවක් වූයේ ආණ්ඩුක්‍රම ව්‍යවස්ථව සම්බන්ධ අර්ථනිරූපණය කරන අවස්ථාවකදී බුද්ධ ශාසනය” Buddha Sasana සම්බන්ධව එංගලන්ත නීති වාර්තා / All England Law Report මගින් කිසිම සහායක් ගැනීමට නොහැකි වීමයි.

බුද්ධ ශාසනය” වචන ඉංග්‍රීසියෙන් පරිවර්තනය නොවී ඒ ආකාරයෙන්ම ඉංග්‍රීසි ආණ්ඩුක්‍රම ව්‍යවස්ථාවේ පවතින හෙයින් එම වචන අර්ථනිරූපණය කිරීමට එංගලන්තයට හෝ එංගලන්ත නීති වාර්තා වලින් හැකියාවක් නැත. එය අර්ථනිරූපණය කළ යුත්තේ අටුවා, ටිකා සහ පෙරදිග ධර්ම ග්‍රන්ථ මගින් සහ පෙරදිග චින්තකයන්ගේ අදහස් විමසීමෙනි.

බුද්ධ ශාසනය” සම්බන්ධව ගැටලුවක් ඇති වන විට එම වචන අර්ථනිරූපණය කිරීමට පෙරදිග ශිෂ්ටාචරය විමසා බැලිය යුතුය.

නාගානන්ද” ව්‍යවස්ථාවෙන් කරන්නේ එම වචන දෙක එනම් බුද්ධ ශාසනය” වචන ඉවත්කර ඉංග්‍රීසියට පරිවර්තනය කළ හැකි බුද්ධ දර්ශනය” යන වචන ඇතුල් කිරීමයි. එවිට ලංකාව සම්බන්ධව, බුදු දහම සම්බන්ධයෙන් තීරණ ගැනීමට සම්පූර්ණයෙන් බ්‍රිතාන්‍යයට/ බටහිරට පුලුවන. මන්ද බුද්ධ දර්ශනය”යන වචනය ඉංග්‍රීසියට පරිවර්තය කළ හැකි හෙයිනි.

නාගානන්ද” ව්‍යවස්ථාවෙන් සූදානම් වන්නේ බුද්ධ ශාසනය යන්න ඉවත්කර එංගලන්ත නීති වාර්තා වලින් සහ බටහිරට අවශ්‍ය ආකාරයට අර්ථනිරූපණය කළ හැකි බුද්ධ දර්ශනය” යන්න ඇතුල් කිරීමයි. මෙසේ කිරීමෙන් සිදුවන්නේ බුදු දහම සම්බන්ධයෙන් අවසන් තීරණ ගැනීමට එංගලන්තයට අවස්ථාව ලබා දීමයි. එනම් බුදු දහමේ පෙරදිග චින්තනය වෙනුවට අපරදිග චින්තනය ඇතුලු වී බුද්ධ ශාසනය පරිහාණියට පත් වීමයි. පෙරදිග චින්තනයේ සහ පෙරදිග ශිෂ්ටාචරයේ ආරක්ෂාව ලබන්නෝ මෙයට ඉඩදිය යුතු නැති අතර බුද්ධ ශාසනය අනතුරට පත් කළ යුතු නැත.


2009 බෙදුම්වාදය අවසන් කිරීමත් සමග ජිනීවා යුධ අපරාධ පරීක්ෂණ බෙදුම්වාදී ඩයස්ෆෝරාවේ ප්‍රධාන සටන් පාඨය වූ අතර මේ වන විටත් දෙමුහුන් අධිකරණ පිහිටුමේ යාන්ත්‍රණ පිළිබද තත්ත්වය අවසන් වී නැත.

ජනාධිපතිවරයා වෙත ආරක්ෂක අමාත්‍යාංශය පවතින තෙක් යුධ රහස්යුධ තොරතුරු ජාත්‍යන්තරකරණය වීමේ අවස්ථාවක් නොතිබුණදආරක්ෂක අමාත්‍යාංශය සමානුපාතික ඡන්ද ක්‍රමයේ නියෝජනයන් ඉන්නා සහ බෙදුම්වාදී අදහස් ඇති පක්ෂ නියෝජිතයන් ඉන්නා පාර්ලිමේන්තුව අතට පත්වීම සමග තත්ත්වය කෙසේ බරපතල වෙයිද? යන්නත් ඉන් රටට බුද්ධ ශාසනයට සහ ජනතාවයගේ සාමකාමී දිවි පැවැත්මට සිදුකරන බලපෑම සම්බන්ධයෙන් රටට ආදරය ඇති සියලු දෙනා බුද්ධියෙන් විමසිය යුතුය.

නීතිඥ අරුණ ලක්සිරි උණවටුන

B.Sc(Col), PGDC(Col)

විද්‍යුත් ලිපිනය [email protected]


ඛණිජ තෙල් ගොඩබාන නල මාර්ගවල ප‍්‍රතිසංස්කරණ කටයුතු අඩාලවීමෙන් සිදුවිය හැකි හානිය අවධාරණය කිරීමයි.

June 27th, 2019

ශ‍්‍රී ලංකාව තුල ජාතික තෙල් අවශ්‍යතාවය සැපිරීම පිණිස විදේශ රටවලින් ඛණිජ තෙල් අඛණ්ඩව ආනයනය කිරීම අත්‍යවශ්‍ය කරුණකි. ඒ සඳහා ඛණිජ තෙල් නිෂ්පාදන ඇනවුම් කිරීම, නැව් මගින් ප‍්‍රවාහනය කිරීම, ගොඩබිමට පොම්ප කිරීම, වරායේ සිට ගබඩා සංකීර්ණය දක්වා නල මගින් ප‍්‍රවාහනය සිදු කිරීම ඛණිජ තෙල් ක්‍ෂේත‍්‍රය තුල අත්‍යවශ්‍ය අඛණ්ඩ රාජකාරියකි. එය සිදු කිරීම සඳහා වරායේ සිට කොලොන්නාව නිමා සංකීර්ණය දක්වා නල මගින් තෙල් පොම්ප කිරීම සඳහා විවිධ විෂ්කම්බයෙන් යුත් නල මාර්ග 5 ක් පවතී. මෙම නල පද්ධතීන් 5 ම භූගතව ගමන් කරන අතර මෙම නල වසර 75 කට වැඩි කාලයක් භාවිතා කිරීම නිසා ඉතා අබලන් තත්වයටත්, අනතුරුදායක තත්වයටත් පත්ව ඇත. විවිධ අවස්ථාවලදී නල මාර්ග පුපුරා යාම් සිදු වී ඇති අතර එමගින් ගිණි ගැනීම්, ජලයට මුසුවීම්, පරිසර හානි සිදුවී ඇත. අප වෘත්තීය සමිතිය විසින් මෙම තත්වය දිගින් දිගටම පෙන්වා දී ඇති අතර මෙම නල මාර්ග ප‍්‍රතිසංස්කරණය කිරීමේ වගකීම රජයේ මූලික වගකීමක් බවද අවධාරණය කර ඇත. අවසානයේ එක් නල මාර්ගයක් පමණක් ප‍්‍රතිසංස්කරණය කිරීමට අවශ්‍ය මූල්‍යමය ප‍්‍රතිපාදන සහ සැලසුම් ගොඩනගන ලදී.

මෙම ප‍්‍රතිසංස්කරණ ව්‍යාපෘතියේදී මූල්‍යමය ප‍්‍රතිපාදන ක්‍ෂේත‍්‍ර 2 ක් තුල විහිදී යයි. එනම් ඍජු ප‍්‍රතිසංස්කරණ කටයුතු සඳහා සහ ව්‍යාපෘතිය නිසා අවතැන්වන පිරිස් නැවත පදිංචි කිරීම සඳහා ලෙසය.

අවතැන්වුවන් නැවත පදිංචිකරවීමේ ගැටලූවට මුහුණ දීමට සිදුවූයේ දේශපාලකයින්ගේ ආශීර්වාදය මත විවිධ වකවානුවලදී එම භූගත නල මාර්ගය මත නිවාස ඉදිකර ගැනීමට ඉඩ හැරීමයි. පසුව එම පුද්ගලයින් මැතිවරණ ලේඛණයට නම ඇතුළත්ව විදුලිය ලබාගැනීම ආදී ස්ථිර පදිංචිය සඳහා අවශ්‍ය පහසුකම් සපයා ගන්නා ලද්දේද දේශපාලකයින්ගේ ආශීර්වාද මැදය. කෙසේ හෝ අද වන විට ඔවුන් එම ස්ථානවල ස්ථිර පදිංචිකරුවන් වීම නොවැළැක්විය හැකි කරුණක්ව ඇත. ඔවුන්ගේ අයිතිවාසිකම් සුරක්‍ෂිත කිරීම රජයේ ප‍්‍රධාන වගකීමකි.

කෙසේ හෝ මෙම නල මාර්ගයේ ප‍්‍රතිසංස්කරණ කටයුතු ආරම්භ කිරීම සඳහා නැවත පදිිංචි කිරීමට අදාල මූලික ප‍්‍රතිපාදනද මිලියන 1600 කට වැඩි ප‍්‍රමාණයක් වෙන්කර ඇත. එම ඇස්තමේන්තුගත මුදල නිසි පරිදි කළමණාකරනය කර සැබෑ පදිංචිකරුවන් හඳුනා ප‍්‍රතිසංස්කරණ භූමිය වෙන්කර ගැනීම රජයේ ප‍්‍රධානතම වගකීමකි. මේ වන විට ප‍්‍රතිසංස්කරණ කටයුතු ආරම්භ කර ඇති අතර ඒ සඳහා සංස්ථා සේවකයින් සහ ශ‍්‍රී ලංකා හමුදාව ඒකාබද්ධ ව්‍යාපෘතියක් ලෙස කටයුතු සිදු කරමින් සිටී. මෙම ව්‍යාපෘතිය කොලොන්නාව නිමාව දක්වා අවසන් කිරීමට ඉතුරුව ඇත්තේ තව මීටර් 140 ක වැනි ප‍්‍රමාණයක් පමණි. මේ ප‍්‍රදේශය තුල නිවාස 300 කට ආසන්න පදිංචිකරුවන් ඉවත් කරගැනීමට නොහැකිව ව්‍යාපෘතිය අසාර්ථක මට්ටමට ඇද වැටීමට ආසන්නව පවතී.
මෙම ව්‍යාපෘතිය කඩිනමින් අවසන් නොවුවහොත් ඛණිජ තෙල් ගොඩබෑම පිළිබඳව ගැටලූවකට මුහුණ දෙන අතරම ඒ නිසාම රට ඛණිජ තෙල් අර්බුදයකට පත්වීම වැළැක්විය නොහැක. එසේම විදුලි බල මණ්ඩලය වෙත අඛණ්ඩව ඛණිජ තෙල් ලබාදීමද අඩාල විය හැක. එයටත් වඩා මෙම නල මාර්ගය පුපුරා ගියහොත් එයින් වන හානිය මීතොටමුල්ල කුණු කන්ද පුපුරා යාමෙන් සිදු වූ හානයට වඩා වැඩිවිය හැකිය.

රජයේ ප‍්‍රධාන අමාත්‍යවරුන්  එක් පසෙකින් පීඩාවට පත්වන සැබෑ පදිංචිකරුවන්ට සහන ලබා දෙනවා වෙනුවට ඔවුන් ප‍්‍රකෝප වන අයුරින් කටයුතු සිදු කරනු ලබන අතරම අනෙක් පසින් සේවක නොසන්සුන්තාවයක් ඇති වන අයුරින් ප‍්‍රතිසංස්කරණ කටයුතු අඩාල වීමට ඉඩ හැර ඇත.

එබැවින් මෙම ව්‍යාපෘතිය කඩිනමින් අවසන් කිරීම සඳහා අවශ්‍ය නීත්‍යානුකූල තත්වයන් සහ මූල්‍යමය ප‍්‍රතිපාදන කඩිනමින් සපුරාලීම ඛණිජ තෙල් සංස්ථාවේ සහ රජයේ ප‍්‍රධාන වගකීමක් බව දැඩි ලෙස අවධාරණය කර සිටිමු. එසේම සේවක නොසන්සුන්තාවයක් ඇතිවන අයුරින් ව්‍යාපෘතිය අඩාල කර ඒ මතින් පීඩාවට පත්වන ජනතාවගේ අයිතිවාසිකම් නොසලකා හැර කටයුතු කිරීමට සූදානම් වන රජයේ කුමන්ත‍්‍රණකාරී වැඩපිළිවෙල හෙළා දකිමු. ඛණිජ තෙල් නීතිගත සංස්ථාවේත් ක්‍ඡුීඔඛ ආයතනයේත් සේවකයින් මේ පිළිබඳව දැනුවත් කර මෙම ව්‍යාපෘතිය අඩාලවීමට තිබෙන සියලූ ඉඩ ප‍්‍රස්ථා අවහිර කිරීම උදෙසා ගත හැකි සෑම ක‍්‍රියාමාර්ගයකටම අවතීර්ණය වන බව අමාත්‍යාංශ බලධාරීන්ටත් රජයටත් අවධාරණය කර සිටිමු.


අශෝක රංවල
ඛණිජ තෙල් පොදු සේවක සංගමය

බණ්ඩාරගම මුස්ලිම් කාන්තාවකට ෂරියා නීතිය යටතේ දඬුවම් කිරීමට ගිය සැකකරුවන් තවදුරටත් බන්ධනාගාර ගත කෙරේ

June 27th, 2019

ලංකා ආරංචි

සිංහල ජාතික පුරුෂයෙකු සමග විවාහ වීම හේතුවෙන්,  ප්‍රදේශයේ මුස්ලිම් පල්ලියේ පිරිස්වල අඩත්තේට්ටමට ලක්වූ “අබ්දුල් හසන් ෆාතුමා හයිෆා” නැමති කාන්තාව විසින් බණ්ඩාරගම පොලිසියට සිදු කළ පැමිණිලි මත පානදුර අධිකරණයේ විභාගවන  B 64499/19 දරණ නඩුව අද දින යලි කැඳවීය.

බණ්ඩාරගම පොලිසිය විසින් පසුගිය ජූනි 19 වන දින අත්අඩංගුවට ගත් මුස්ලිම් ජාතිකයින් 6 දෙනෙකු පසුගිය 20 වනදා අධිකරණය වෙත ඉදිරිපත් කිරීමෙන් අනතුරුව රක්ෂිත බන්ධනාගාර ගත කරණ ලදි. එම සැකකරුවන් අද(27) දින බන්ධනාගාර නිලධාරීන් විසින් අධිකරණයට ඉදිරිපත් කිරීමෙන් අනතුරුව ජුලි 4 දින දක්වා යලි රක්ෂිත බන්ධනාගාර ගත කිරීමට පානදුර මහේස්ත්‍රාත් සංජය කලන්සුරිය මහතා නියෝග කරන ලදි.

බණ්ඩාරගම අටළුගම ප්‍රදේශයේ ජිවත් වන, සිංහල ජාතික පුද්ගලයෙකු හා විවාහ වී සිටින මෙම මුස්ලිම් කාන්තාවකගේ නිවසට “බලහත්කාරයෙන් පැමිණ ලිංගික හිරිහැර හා නිවසට දැඩි අලාභ හානි සිදුකරමින් තර්ජනය කිරීම් හා බියවැද්දවිම” යන චෝදනා  මත බණ්ඩාරගම පොලීසිය විසින් පරීක්ෂණ මෙහෙයවනු ලබයි.

අද දින නඩුව කැඳවු අවස්ථාවේ අගතියට පත් කාන්තාව වෙනුවෙන් පෙනී සිටි නීතිඥ සංජය ආරියදාස මහතා අධිකරණයේ කරුණු දක්වමින් සඳහන් කර සිටියේ, පසුගිය නඩුවාරය පැවති 20 වැනිදා රාත්‍රියේ කිසියම් පිරිසක් අගතියට පත් කාන්තාවගේ නිවසට ගල් ප්‍රහාර එල්ල කළ බවයි.

අගතියට පත් කාන්තාව විසින් සැකකරුවන් 22කගේ නම් සහ අදාළ සිද්ධිය සිදුවූ දින ජංගම දුරකථන මගින් පටිගත කරණ ලද දර්ශණ පොලීසියට ලබා දී ඇති බවත් මෙම නඩුවේ ප්‍රධාන සැකකරුවන් තවමත් අත්අඩංගුවට ගෙන නොමැති බවත් මෙහිදී නීතිඥ සංජය ආරියදාස මහතා කරුණු දක්වා සිටියා.

මෙම සිද්ධිය හුදකලා සිද්ධියක් නොවන බවත් සිංහල ජාතික පුරුෂයකු සමග විවාහ වීම හේතුවෙන් ප්‍රදේශයේ මුස්ලිම් පල්ලියේ අනුදැනුම මත මෙය සිදුව ඇති බවත් “සිවිල් හා දේශපාලන අයිතිවාසිකම් පිළිබඳ ජාත්‍යන්තර සම්මුතිය” (ICCPR) පනත මගින් සැකකරුවන්ට විරුද්ධව ක්‍රියා කරණ ලෙසත්  නීතිඥවරයා අධිකරණයෙන් ඉල්ලා සිටියා.

විත්තිකාරුවන් වෙනුවෙන් පෙනී සිටි නීතිඥවරිය කරුණු දක්වමින් ඇප පනතේ විදිවිධාන අනුව ඕනෑම කොන්දේසියකට යටත්ව සැකකරුවන් 6 දෙනාට ඇප ලබාදෙන ලෙස ඉල්ලා සිටි අතර පැමිණිලි පාර්ශවය වෙනුවෙන් පෙනී සිටි නීතිඥ සංජය ආරියදාස මහතා සහ පොලීසිය සැකකරුවන්ට ඇප ලබාදීමට විරුද්ධ විය.

දෙපාර්ශවය විසින් ඉදිරිපත් කරණ ලද කරුණු සලකා බැලූ පානදුර මහේස්ත්‍රාත් සංජය කලන්සුරිය මහතා, පොලිස් පරීක්ෂණ පිළිබඳව සැහීමකට පත්විය නොහැකි බවත් මෙම නඩුවේ පරීක්ෂණ කඩිනම් කරණ ලෙසත්  “වින්දිතයන් සහ සාක්ෂිකරුවන් ආරක්ෂා කිරීම” සඳහා වූ පනතේ ප්‍රතිපාදන අනුව කටයුතු කරණ ලෙසත් පොලිසියට නියෝග කර සිටි අතර සැකකරුවන් 6 දෙනා නැවත ජූලි 6වනදා අධිකරණයට ඉදිරිපත් කරණ ලෙස බන්ධනාගාර නිලධාරීන්ට නියෝග කර සිටියා.

මෙම සිද්ධියට මුහුණදුන් අබ්දුල් හසන් ෆාතුමා හයිෆා  පවසන්නේ “ෂරියා නීතිය යටතේ මට වද දීලා, ඇඳුම් ඉරලා, සෙනග පිරුණු පාරේ ඇදගෙන ගියා” යනුවෙනි.

සිංහල ජාතික පුද්ගලයෙකු සමග විවාහ වූ බැවින් දිගින් දිගටම තමාට ප්‍රදේශයේ මුස්ලිම් පල්ලියෙ පිරිස්වලින් බලපෑම් එල්ල වූ බවත්, මේ සම්බන්දයෙන් 2019/03/03 වන දින CIB 2 22/327, 2019/03/25 දින CIB 128/19, 2019/03/26 දින CIB 3 162/146, 2019/03/30 දින CIB 1 340/358 සහ 2019/03/29 දින CIB 2 21/324 දරණ පැමිණිලි බණ්ඩාරගම පොලිස් ස්ථානය වෙත තමන් ඉදිරිපත් කළ බවත් ඇය පවසයි. එම පැමිණිලි පිළිබඳව කඩිනම් විභාගයක් සිදුනොවුණු බැවින් 2019/05/24 වන දින සහ 2019/06/12 කලුතර ජේෂ්ඨ පොලිස් අධිකරිවරයාට පැමිණිලි කල බවත් එහිදී ජේෂ්ඨ පොලිස් අධිකාරිවරයා ප්‍රදේශයේ පල්ලියට අවනත වන ලෙස තමාට ප්‍රකාශ කල බවත් අබ්දුල් හසන් ෆාතුමා හයිෆා සඳහන් කර සිටිනවා.

ලෞකික සාමය සහා ආරක්ෂාව-අහ්මදියා මුස්ලිම් ප්‍රජාවේ කලීෆා නායක තුමා නෙදර්ලන්ත පාර්ලිමේන්තු ඝර්භයේ කළ ෙඓතිහාසික දේශනය

June 27th, 2019

By Ahmadiyya Muslim Jama’at – Sri Lanka,

පොරොන්දු වූ මෙසායාගේ පස්වැනි අනුප්‍රාප්තිකයා (කලීෆා) වන හස්රත් මිර්සා මස්රූර් අහ්මද් තුමාණන් මෙසේ පැවසුවේය.
බිස්මිල්ලාහිර් රහ්මානිර් රහීම්- මහා කාරුණිකවූද පරම දයාබරවූද අල්ලාහ්ගේ නාමයෙන්
සියලූම ආරාධිත අමුත්තනි, ඔබ සියළු දෙනාට අල්ලාහ්ගේ සාමය හා ආශීර්වාදය අත් වේවාæ ප්‍රථමයෙන්, අද දින මෙහි රැස්ව සිටින පිරිස ඇමතීමට මා හට ආරාධනා කිරීම සම්බන්ධයෙන් මෙම වැඩසටහනේ සංවිධායකයින්ට මාගේ අවංක කෘතඥතාවය පළ කිරීමට මා මෙය අවස්ථාවක් කර ගන්නෙමි. 

අද ලෝකයේ ඇතැම් ගැටලූ, නිරන්තරයෙන් අවධානයට යොමු කරවමින් එමෙන්ම එAවා මෙම යුගයේ ඉතා වැදගත් ප්‍රශ්නයන් බව ඉස්මතු කොට නම් කිරීම අද අපි දකින්නෙමු. නිදසුනක් වශයෙන් සමහරුන් ගෝලීය උෂ්ණත්වය ඉහළ යෑම සහ කාලගුණ විපර්යාසයෙහි භයානකත්වය අවධාරණය කරන්නෝය. 

එමෙන්ම තවත් සමහරුන් විවිධ ගැටුම් උත්සන්න වීම් හා සීඝ්‍රයෙන් වර්ධනය වන්නා වූ ලෝකයේ අවිනිශ්චිත තත්ත්වයන් පිළිබඳව අතිශයින්ම සැලකිලිමත් වන්නෝය.

අප මෙම තත්ත්වය අරමුණක් ඇතිව විශ්ලේෂණය කර බලන්නේ නම් නියතවශයෙන්ම අපේ යුගයේ වඩාත්ම තීරණාත්මක ගැටළුව වන්නේ ලෝක සාමය සහ ආරක්ෂාව බව අප අවබෝධ කර ගනු ඇත. නිසැකවම, ගෙවී යන සෑම දිනයක් පාසාම ලෝකය අස්ථාවර හා භයානක තත්ත්වයකට පත්වෙමින් තිබේ. මෙයට හේතු ගණනාවක් තිබේ. උදාහරණයක් වශයෙන් ලෝකයේ බොහෝ ප්‍රදේශවලට බලපා ඇති මූල්‍ය අර්බුද හා ආර්ථීක අස්ථාවරතා මෙයට එක් ප්‍රධාන සාධකයක් විය හැකිය. 

තවත් එක් මූලික හේතුවක් නම් ඇතැම් ලෝක නායකයින් විසින් තම ජනතාවට හා සෙසු ජනතාවට සාධාරණය ඉටු කිරීමට අපොහොසත් වීමය. ආගමික නායකයින් පොදු යහපතට වඩා තමන්ගේ පෞද්ගලික අභිමතාර්ථ සඳහා මුල් තැන දීමෙන් තමන්ගේ වගකීම් නිසි ආකාරව ඉටු නොකිරීම තවදුරටත් හේතු වන කාරකයක් විය හැකිය. අන්තර්ජාතික සම්බන්ධතා අතින් දුප්පත් සහ පොහොසත් රාජ්‍යයන් අතර ඇති විෂමතාවය ගැටුම් ඇති වීම සඳහා තවත් එක් ප්‍රධාන හේතු කාරකයක් විය හැකිය.

ලෝකයේ බලවත් රාජ්‍යයන් විසින් බොහෝ විට දුප්පත් රාජ්‍යයන්ගේ ස්වාභාවික සම්පත් වලින් ප්‍රයෝජන ගැනීමත් ඔවුන්ගේම වත්කම් වලින් ඔවුන්ට සුදුසු කොටස ලබා නොදීමත් අපට පෙනෙන්නට තිඛෙන කරුණකි. එහෙයින් ලෝක සාමයට බාධා වීමට හේතු විය හැකි කාරණා දීර්ඝ ලැයිස්තුවක් තිබේ. එයින් මා සඳහන් කළේ හේතු කිහිපයක් පමණි. මෙයට හේතු කාරකය කුමක් වුවත් ලෝකයේ සාමය නොමැතිකම මෙම පරපුරෙහි වඩාත් ම අනතුරුදායක ගැටළුවක් බව මා තරයේ විශ්වාස කරමි.

මෙය ඇසීමෙන් අනතුරුව ඔබ අතුරින් බොහෝ දෙනා වැඩියෙන්ම අස්ථාවරත්වය දක්නට ලැඛෙන්නේ මුස්ලිම් රටවල් වල බවත් ලෝක සාමයේ ඌනතාවය මුස්ලිම් ලෝකයේ ඇති කැළඹිලි තත්ත්වයන් සමග මුල් බැස ඇති බවත් පිළිතුරු වශයෙන් පැවසිය හැක. 

නියතවශයෙන්ම ලෝක ව්‍යාප්ත මුස්ලිම් සංවිධානයක් වන අහ්මදිය්යා මුස්ලිම් ජමාතයේ නායකයා ලෙසින් මාත් මෙයට වගකිය යුතු බව ඔබ සිතීමට ඉඩ ඇත. අන්තවාදී කණ්ඩායම් වල ආරම්භය සහ ත්‍රස්තවාදය ඇත්ත වශයෙන්ම ඉස්ලාමීය ඉගැන්වීම් වලින් පෙළඹවූවක් බවටද ඔබ සිතීමට හැක. කෙසේවෙතත් මෙම නොසන්සුන්කාරි තත්ත්වය හා වෛරය සමඟ ඉස්ලාමය සම්බන්ධ කිරීම සම්පූර්ණයෙන්ම අසාධාරණ කටයුත්තකි.

මෙම අවස්ථාවේ දී ආගම්වල ඉතිහාසය පිළිබඳ විස්තරාත්මකව කතා කිරීමට අවශ්‍ය නැත. නමුත් සියලූම ආගම්වල ඉතිහාසයන් අරමුණක් ඇතිව සලකා බැලීමේදී අපට පෙනී යන්නේ, සියලූම ආගම්වල අනුගාමිකයන් කාලයත් සමඟ එම ආගම්වල සැබෑ ඉගැන්වීම් වලින් දුරස් වී ඇති බවත් එය අභ්‍යන්තර ඛෙදුම් සහ ගැටුම් ඇති වීමට හේතු වී ඇති බවත් පෙනී යන්නේය. එසේම බොහෝ මිනිසුන් ඝාතනය වී දැඩි කෘෘර හිංසනවලටද ලක් වී ඇත.

මේ අනූව බලන විට කාලයත් සමඟ මුස්ලිම්වරුන්ද ඉස්ලාමයේ සැබෑ ඉගැන්වීම්වලින් බැහැර වී ඇති බව මා මුළු හදවතින්ම පිළිගන්නෙමි. මෙය වෛරය ඇති කිරීමටත් විරෝධතාවයන් වර්ධනය වීමටත් හේතු කාරක විය. තවද මෙය නිකාය වාදය, ප්‍රචණ්ඩත්වය සහ අයුක්තිය ඇතිවීමට හේතු කාරක විය. කෙසේ වුවද සැබෑ මුස්ලිම්වරයෙකුගේ දෘෂ්ඨි කෝණයෙන් බැලීමේ දී, අද ඉස්ලාමයේ බලාපොරොත්තු සුන් වූ තත්ත්වය නිරීක්ෂණය කිරීමෙන් මගේ විශ්වාසයේ කිසිදු අඩු වීමක් සිදු නොවන්නේය.

මන්දයත් වසර 1400 කට පෙර ඉස්ලාමයේ නිර්මාතෘ වන ශ=ද්ධ වූ මුහම්මද් (සල්) තුමාණන්, ඉස්ලාමයේ සත්‍ය ඉගැන්වීම් ක්‍රමක්‍රමයෙන් දූෂිත වී මුස්ලිම්වරුන් සදාචාරාත්මක පරිහානියකට ලක් වන බවට අනාවැකි පළ කළ හෙයිනි. තවද එවැනි අධ්‍යාත්මික අන්ධකාරයක් ඇති කාලයක, මිනිස් සංහතිය නැවතත් ඉස්ලාමයේ සත්‍ය හා සාමකාමී ඉගැන්වීම් දෙසට මග පෙන්වීම සඳහා සර්ව බලධාරි දෙවියන් සංශෝධකවරයෙකුව පොරොන්දු වූ මෙසායා ලෙසත් ඉමාම් මහ්දි ලෙසිත් පහළ කරන බවටත් එතුමාණන් අනාවැකි පළ කළේය. 

ශ=ද්ධ වූ වක්තෘ මුහම්මද් (සල්) තුමාණන් අනාවැකි පළ කළ ආකාරයට පොරොන්දු වූ මෙසායා (අෙලෙ) තුමා ඉස්ලාමයේ සැබෑ සහ සම්පූර්ණ සාමකාමී ඉගැන්වීම් තුලින් අපට අවබෝධය ලබා දුන්නේය. එබැවින් වර්තමානයේ අහ්මදි මුස්ලිම්වරුන් වන අපි, නොසන්සුන්කාරී තත්ත්වය හා කලබලකාරී තත්ත්වය ඇති කරන්නන් හෝ එයට සහභාගී වන්නන් අතර නොවන්නෙමු. එA වෙනුවට සත්තකින්ම ලෝක සාමය පි්‍රය කරන්නන් අපිම වන්නෙමු.
තවද අපි ලෝක සාමය ඇති කිරීමට උත්සහ කරන ජනතාවක් වන්නෙමු. තවද අපි මිනිස් සංහතිය එක්සත් කිරීමට වැර දරන ජනතාව වන්නෙමු. තවද අපි සියලූම ආවේශයන් හා සතුරුකම් ආදරය හා සෙනෙහසට හැරවීමට වැර දරන ජනතාවක් වන්නෙමු. තවද අපි සත්‍ය වශයෙන්ම, ලෝක සාමය ඇති කිරීම සඳහා වූ ගත හැකි සියලූම පියවර ගන්නා ජනතාවක් වන්නෙමු. ආගමික නායකයෙක් වශයෙන්, එකිනෙකා පෙළඹවීම හා එකිනෙකාට දොස් පැවරීම වෙනුවට ලෝකයේ දීර්ඝ කාලීන සාමයක් ගොඩනැගීම කෙරෙහි අපගේ අවධානය යොමු කළ යුතු බව මා කීමට කැමති වන්නෙමි.

මේ සම්බන්ධයෙන් අහ්මදිය්යා මුස්ලිම් ජමාතයේ නිර්මාතෘවරයාණන් අපට ඉතාමත් වැදගත් මූලධර්මයක් කියා දී ඇත. එනම් සාමය ස්ථාපිත කිරීම සඳහා මනුෂ්‍ය වර්ගයා දෙවියන්ගේ ගුණාංග පිළිගෙන ඒවා අනුගමනය කිරීමට තමන්ගේ උපරිමයෙන් උත්සාහ කිරීම අවශ්‍ය බව එතුමාණන් පැවසුවේය. මෙය මිනිස් වර්ගයාගේ යහපැවැත්ම පවත්වා ගෙන යාම තහවුරු කිරීමට ඇති එකම මාර්ගය බවද එතුමාණන් පවසා සිටියේය. නියතවශයෙන්ම මනුෂ්‍ය වර්ගයාගේ සුබසාධනය හා සෞභාග්‍යය භෞතික වශයෙන් මෙන්ම අධ්‍යාත්මික වශයෙන්ද දෙවියන්ගේ ගුණාංග පිළිපැදීම සමඟ සෘජුවම සම්බන්ධ වන බව එතුමාණන් තවදුරටත් පැහැදිලි කළේය. මන්දයත් සියලූම ආකාරයේ සාමය ඉස්මතු වන්නේ දෙවියන්ගේ ගුණාංගයන් තුලින්ම වන බැවිනි.

දෙවියන්ගේ මැවීම් කෙරෙහි ඔහුගේ ආදරය සහ කරුණාවන්තකම අසමසම සහ අද්විතීය එකකි. තවද ඔහු මහා කාරුණික සහ පරම දයාබරය. ඔහු සාමයේ උල්පත වන්නේය. එබැවින් මුස්ලිම්වරයෙකු සර්ව බලධාරි දෙවියන්ගේ ගුණාංගයන් ධාරණය කර ගැනීමට උත්සාහ ගත යුතු බව ඉස්ලාමය නියම කරද්දී, සත්‍ය මුස්ලිම් වරයෙකුට තවත් කෙනෙකුට හානි පමුණුවීම කළ නොහැක්කක්ය. ඒ වෙනුවට මුස්ලිම්වරයෙකුගේ විශ්වාසයට අනුව මිනිස් සංහතියටම ආදරය දැක්වීම හා සෑම පුද්ගලයකුටම ගෞරවයෙන් යුතුව අනුකම්පාවෙන් හා කරුණාවෙන් සැළකීම අනිවාර්්‍ය වන්නේය.

ඉස්ලාමය සාමයේ ආගමක් නම්, කුර්ආනය යුද්ධයට අවසර ලබා දෙන්නේ මන්දැයි යන්න නිතර අසන ප්‍රශ්නයක් වන්නේය. කෙසේ වුවත් එම අවසරය එහි නිවැරදි සම්බන්ධකම සමග හා මා ටිකකට පෙර පහදා දුන් කරුණු සමග තේරුම් ගත යුත්තකි. දීර්ඝ කාලීන සාමයක් පවත්වා ගෙන යාම අතිශයින්ම වැදගත් වන්නේය. එමෙන්ම ඇතැම් අවස්ථාවන්හිදී ද~ුවම් කිරීම හා අවවාද කිරීම දීර්ඝ කාලීන සාමයක් තහවුරු කිරීම සඳහා අවශ්‍ය වන්නේය.

සර්ව බලධාරි දෙවියන් විසින් යුද්ධය සඳහා අවසර ලබා දෙන කල්හි එය සාමය නැවත ස්ථාපිත කිරීමට සහ ආරක්ෂාව සැලසීම සඳහා පමණක් ලබා දුන් දෙයකි. එබැවින් ඇතැම් පිරිස්, කණ්ඩායම් වශයෙන් හෝ පුද්ගලික වශයෙන් හෝ ශ=ද්ධ වූ කුර්ආනය සහ ශ=ද්ධ වූ වක්තෘ වන මුහම්මද් (එතුමාණන්ට සාමය හා ආශිර්වාදය අත්වේවා) තුමාණන්ව ප්‍රචණ්ඩත්වය සහ කෘෘරත්වය හා සම්බන්ධ කිරීමට උත්සාහ කිරීම ඉතාමත් දරුණු අසාධාරණයකි. අප ශ=ද්ධ වූ කුර්ආනය සහ ශ=ද්ධ වූ වක්තෘ වරයාණන් වන මුහම්මද් (එතුමාණන්ට සාමය හා ආශිර්වාදය අත්වේවා) තුමාණන්ගේ ජීවිතය අපක්ෂපාතීව අධ්‍යනය කළ හොත් ඉස්ලාමය සියලූම ආකාරයේ අන්තවාදයන්ට හා ලේ වැගිරීම් වලට විරුද්ධ බව අපට පෙනී යනු ඇත. 

කාලය සීමිත නිසා මා හට දීර්ඝ වශයෙන් කතා කිරීමට නොහැකි වුවත්, ඉස්ලාමයේ මූලික ඉගැන්වීම් කිහිපයක් මා සඳහන් කරන්නම්. ඒවායින් ඉස්ලාමය සාමයේ ආගමක් බව කිසිදු සැකයකින් තොරව ඔප්පු වනු ඇත. මා කලින් සඳහන් කළ පරිදි බොහෝ විට ඉස්ලාමය වෙත එල්ල වන මූලික හා පොදු චෝදනාවක් නම් එය අන්තවාදයට සහ යුද්ධය ප්‍රවර්ධනය කරන ආගමක් බවය. කෙසේ වෙතත් එහි කිසිදු සත්‍යයතාවයක් නැත. 

2 වැනි පරිච්ඡේදයේ, 191 වන වගන්තියේ අල්ලාහ් දෙවියන් නියෝග කර සිටින්නේ, යුද්ධය සාධාරŒකරණය කළ හැකි එකම හේතුව ආරක්ෂාව සඳහා පමණක් බවය. මෙම කරුණ 22 වැනි පරිච්ඡේදයේ 40 වන වගන්තියේද යළි අවධාරණය කරන්නේ යුද්ධය සඳහා අවසර ඇත්තේ පහර දීමකට ලක් වී යුද්ධය තමන් මතට පැටවී ඇති අයට පමණක් බවය. තවද සර්ව බලධාරි අල්ලාහ් දෙවියන් මුස්ලිම් රාජ්‍යයන්හට යුද්ධය සඳහා අවසර ලබා දී ඇත්තේ නම්, එය ලබා දී ඇත්තේ ආගමික නිදහස සහ විශ්වාස කිරීමේ නිදහස ආරක්ෂා කිරීමට පම‚. එබැවින් 2 වැනි පරිච්ඡේදයේ 194 වැනි වගන්තියේ අල්ලාහ් දෙවියන් මුස්ලිම්වරුන්හට ආගමික නිදහස ඇති කිසිදු පරිසරයක යුද්ධයෙහි හෝ සටනෙහි නිරත නොවන ලෙසට නියෝග කර ඇත්තේය.

එමනිසා කිසිදු මුස්ලිම් රටකට හෝ කණ්ඩායමකට හෝ පුද්ගලයෙකුට, තම රජයට හෝ එහි ජනතාවට එරෙහිව කිසිදු ආකාරයේ ප්‍රචණ්ඩත්වයක හෝ යුද්ධයක හෝ නීති විරෝධී ක්‍රියාවක හෝ නිරත වීමට කිසි අයිතියක් නැත. ඉතා සරලවම යුරෝපයේ සහ බටහිර රටවල්වල රාජ්‍යය පාලනය ආගම මුල්කරගෙන නොකරන බැවින් මුස්ලිම්වරයකුට එම රටේ නීති උල්ලංඝණය කිරීමට හෝ එම රාජ්‍යයන්ට ප්‍රචණ්ඩත්වයෙන් විරුද්ධ වීමට හෝ මොන යම් ආකාරයකින් හෝ කැරැල්ලකට පෙළඹවීමට හෝ කිසිදු අයුරකින් අයිතියක් නොමැත. 

සැබැවින්ම ඉස්ලාමයේ සත්‍ය ඉගැන්වීම්වලට අනුව යම් පුද්ගලයෙකු මුස්ලිම් නොවන රටක ජීවත්ව සිටියදී ඔහුට එහි ආගමික නිදහස නැතැයි සිතුවද, ඔහු එහි නීති විරෝධී ක්‍රියාවන්හි හෝ විරෝධතාවයන්හි නිරත නොවිය යුතුයි. ඒ වෙනුවට ඔවුන් එම රට අත්හැර ඊට වඩා හිතකර වාතාවරණයක් ඇති ස්ථානයකට සංක්‍රමණය කළ යුතුයි.   

ශ=ද්ධ වූ කුර්ආනයේ 16 වන පරිච්ඡේදයේ 127 වන වගන්තියෙහි, මුස්ලිම් රාජ්‍යයන්ට නියෝග කරනු ලබන්නේ, ඔවුන් පහර දීමකට ලක්වන කුමන අවස්ථාවකදී හෝ ඔවුන් එයට ප්‍රතිචාර දැක්විය යුත්තේ එයට සමාන මෙන්ම ආත්මාරක්ෂා කිරීමේ සීමාව තුල පමණි. එබැවින් කුර්ආනය ඉතා පැහැදිලිව පෙන්වා දෙන්නේ ද~ුවම සීමිත විය යුතු බවත්, අපරාධයට සමාන හා ද`ඩුවමක් විය යුතු බවත්ය. ශ=ද්ධ වූ කුර්ආනයේ 8 වන පරිච්ඡේදයේ 62 වගන්තියේ අල්ලාහ් දෙවියන් පවසා ඇත්තේ, ඔබගේ සතුරා නරක අභිප්‍රායකින් ඔබට හානි කිරීමට සැලසුම් කොට, නමුත් ඊට පසුව එයින් වැළකී නැවත සමගි වීමට කටයුතු කරන්නේ නම් ඔවුන්ගේ අරමුණ කුමක් වුවද ඔබ ක‍ෂණිකව ඔවුන්ගේ ඉල්ලීම පිළිගෙන සාමකාමී විසඳුමකට එළඹිය යුතු බවයි.

කුර්ආනයේ මෙම ඉගැන්වීම අන්තර්ජාතික සාමය සහ ආරක්ෂාව පවත්වා ගෙන යාම උදෙසා මූලික ප්‍රතිපත්තියකි. අද ලෝකයේ අන්‍යයින්ගෙන් එල්ල විය හැකි එදිරිවාදිකම් හමුවේ ඉතාමත් දරුණු ක්‍රියාමාර්ග අනුගමනය කරන රටවල් පිළිබඳ නිදසුන් බොහොමයක් පෙනෙන්නට තිබේ. මෙයින් පෙනී යන්නේ, zඔවුන් අපව විනාශ කිරීමට පෙර අප ඔවුන්ව විනාශ කළ යුතුයිZ යන ප්‍රතිපත්තිය ඇතුව ඔවුන් ක්‍රියා කරන බවයි.

කෙසේ වෙතත් ඉස්ලාමය උගන්වන්නේ, සාමය සඳහා ඇති කිසිදු අවස්ථාවක් මග නොහැර, කුඩාම බලාපොරොත්තුවක් ඇති අවස්ථාවක දී වුවත් එය ලබා ගැනීමට උත්සාහ කළ යුතු බවයි. 5 වන පරිච්ඡේදයේ 9 වන වගන්තියේ සර්ව බලධාරි අල්ලාහ් දෙවියන් පවසා සිටින්නේ, වෙනත් ජාතියක් හෝ ජනතාවගේ එදිරිවාදිකම්, අපව සාධාරණත්වය හා යුක්තිගරුක නොවන අයුරින් ක්‍රියා කිරීමට නොපෙළඹ විය යුතු බවයි. ඉස්ලාමය උගන්වන්නේ සියලූම අවස්ථාවන්හිදි කොතරම් අපහසුතාවයක වුවද යුක්තිය සහ අවංක ප්‍රතිපත්ති සමඟ අපි ස්ථීරව බැඳී සිටිය යුතු බවයි. එනිසා යුධමය වාතාවරණයක වුවද යුක්තිය හා සාධාරණත්වය ඉතාමත් වැදගත් වන අතර යුද්ධයක් නිමා වූ විට ජයග්‍රාහකයා සෑමවිටම යුක්තිගරුක විය යුතු අතර කිසි විටෙකත් කෘෘරත්වයෙන් කටයුතු නොකළ යුතුයි.

කෙසේ වුවද අද ලෝකයේ අපට එතරම් ඉහළ මට්ටමේ සදාචාරාත්මක හා අවංකභාවයක් දක්නට ලැඛෙන්නේ නැත. ඒ වෙනුවට යුද්ධයක් අවසානයේ බොහෝ රටවල්, පරාජයට පත්වූ රාජ්‍යයන්ගේ දියුණුව සීමා කරන අන්දමේ සම්බාධක හා සීමා පනවා එම රාජ්‍යයන් සැබෑ නිදහස හා ස්වාධීනත්වය අත්කර ගැනීමෙන් වළක්වන්නේය. මෙවන් ක්‍රියාමාර්ග අන්තර්ජාතික සබඳතාවලට හානි පමුණුවන අතර අසහනය ඉහළ නංවන අතර සෘණාත්මක බලපෑම්ද ඇති වන්නේය. 

සත්‍යය කුමක්ද කිවහොත් සියලූම සමාජ මට්ටම්වල සාධාරණය ඇති වන තුරු තිරසාර සාමයක් ස්ථාපිත කළ නොහැක්කක් වන බවයි. ශ=ද්ධ වූ කුර්ආනයේ 8 වන පරිච්ඡේදයේ 68 වැනි වගන්තිය පරිදි ඉස්ලාමයේ තවත් එක් වැදගත් ඉගැන්වීමක් නම් යුද්ධය පවතින රාජ්‍යයෙන් පිටතට සිරකරුවන්ව රැගෙන යාමට මුස්ලිම්වරුන්හට අවසර නැති බවය. එබැවින් හේතුවක් නොමැතිව සිරකරුවන් පිටතට රැගෙන යන අන්තවාදීන් හා ත්‍රස්තවාදී කණ්ඩායම් ක්‍රියා කරන්නේ සම්පූර්ණයෙන්ම ඉස්ලාමයේ ඉගැන්වීම වලට පටහැනිවය. වාර්තාවලට අනුව ඔවුන් සිරකරුවන්ව රැගෙන යෑම පමණක් නොව, ඔවුන් කෙරෙහි ඉතා ම්ලේච්ඡ කෘෘරත්වයෙන් යුතුව කි්‍රයා කරන්නෝය.

මෙම ත්‍රස්තවාදී කණ්ඩායම්වල ක්‍රියා කලාපය තරයේ හෙලා දැකිය යුතුය. අනෙක් අතට සිරකරුවන්ව සාධාරණ ආකාරයකින් රැගෙන ගියද හැකි සෑමවිටම ඔවුන්ට පිහිට වී ඔවුන් මුදා හැරීමට කටුයුතු කිරීම සුදුසු බව කුර්ආනය උගන්වන්නේය. ශ=ද්ධ වූ කුර්ආනයේ 49 වන පරිච්ඡේදයේ 10 වන වගන්තියේ සාමය ස්ථාපිත කිරීම සඳහා මහඟ= ප්‍රතිපත්තියක් සඳහන් වේ. එනම් රාජ්‍යයන් අතර හෝ කණ්ඩායම් අතර හෝ ආරවුලක් ඇති වුවහොත්, තෙවැනි පාර්ශවය මැදිහත් වී ගැටුමට සාමකාමී පිළියමක් සලසා දීමට උත්සාහ ගත යුතු බවයි.

ගිවිසුමකට එළඹුණු දෙපාර්ශවයෙන් කිසියම් හෝ එක් පාර්ශවයක් අසාධාරණ ලෙස අනෙක් පාර්ශවය සිය යටතට පත් කර ගෙන ගිවිසුම් උල්ලංඝණය කරන්නේ නම් අනෙකුත් රාජ්‍යයන් එක් වී අවශ්‍ය වුවහොත් බලය යොදා ආක්‍රමණශීලී පාර්ශවය වැළැක්වීමට පියවර ගත යුතුය. කෙසේ වෙතත් ආක්‍රමණශීලී පාර්ශවය පසු බසින විට ඔවුන් කෙරෙහි අනවශ්‍ය ලෙස සම්බාධක පැනවීම් හෝ හෑල්ලූවට ලක් කිරීම හෝ නොකළ යුතුය. ඒ වෙනුවට ඔවුන්ට නිදහස් රාජ්‍යයක් හා නිදහස් සමාජයක් ලෙසට ඉදිරියට යාමට ඉඩ දිය යුතුය. මෙම ප්‍රතිපත්තියට අනුව කි්‍රයා කිරීම අද ලෝකයේ විශිෂ්ට වැදගත්කමක් උසුලන විශේෂයෙන්ම ලෝක ප්‍රධාන බලවතුන් හා එක්සත් ජාතීන් වැනි අන්තර්ජාතික සංවිධානයන්ට වැදගත් කාර්්‍ය භාරය වන්නේය.

ලෝක සාමය ස්ථාපිත කිරීම සඳහා එමෙන්ම විශ්ව ආගමික නිදහස තහවුරු කිරීම පිළිබඳව ඉතාමත් වැදගත් ප්‍රතිපත්තියක් ශ=ද්ධ වූ කුර්ආනයේ 22 වන පරිච්ඡේදයේ 44 වන වගන්තියේ සඳහන් වී ඇත. ශ=ද්ධ වූ කුර්ආනය සඳහන් කරන්නේ එවකට යුද්ධයට අවසර ලබා නොදුන්නේ නම් ඉස්ලාම් දේවස්ථානයන්ට අමතරව ක්‍රිස්තියානි පල්ලි, සිනගෝගයන්, කෝවිල්, පන්සල් සහ සියලූම ආගම්වල දේවස්ථාන බරපතල ලෙසට අනතුරට පත් වන්නට ඉඩ තිබූ බවයි. එබැවින් සර්ව බලධාරි අල්ලාහ් දෙවියන් බලය පාවිච්චි කිරීමට ඉඩ ලබා දී ඇත්තේ එය ඉස්ලාමය ආරක්ෂා කිරීමට පමණක් නොව අනෙකුත් ආගම්ද ආරක්ෂා කිරීම උදෙසාය.

ඇත්තවශයෙන්ම ඉස්ලාමය සියලූම ආගම්වල මිනිසුන්ගේ නිදහස, ස්වාධීනත්වය සහ ආරක්ෂාව තහවුරු කරන්නේය. ඉස්ලාමය පුද්ගලයෙකුට තමන් කැමති විශ්වාසයක් හෝ මාර්ගයක් අනුගමනය කිරීමට ඇති අයිතිය ආරක්ෂා කරන්නේය. මා ඔබ ඉදිරියේ ගෙන හැර දැක්වූයේ ශ=ද්ධ වූ කුර්ආනයේ දැක්වෙන සමාජයේ සියලූ තලයන්හි සහ ලෝකයේ සෑම තැනකම සිටින සියළු මට්ටමෙහි ජනතාවගේ සමගිය පෝෂණය කිරීමේ මාර්ග කිහිපයකි. මේවා ශ=ද්ධ වූ කුර්ආනය මෙලොව මිනිසුන් වෙත ලබා දුන් සාමයේ මහඟ= මූලික ඉගැන්වීම වන්නේය.

මේවා ඉස්ලාමයේ ශ=ද්ධ වූ වක්තෘ මුහම්මද් (සල්) තුමාණන් සහ එතුමාණන්ගේ අනුගාමිකයින් නිසිපරිදි අනුගමනය කළ ඉගැන්වීම් වේ. එබැවින් අවසාන වශයෙන් මා නැවත වරක් කියන්නට කැමති වන්නේ ලෝකයට සාමය හා ආරක්ෂාව පිළිබඳ ඉමහත් අවශ්‍යතාවයක් තිඛෙන බවයි. තවද මෙය අපේ යුගයේ ඉතා හදිසියෙන් විසඳිය යුතු ගැටළුව වන්නේය. 

සියලූ ජාතීන් හා මිනිසුන්ගේ උන්නතිය සඳහා සියළු දෙනා එකතු වී ආගමේ නාමයෙන් හෝ වෙන මොනයම් ආකාරයකින් හෝ කෙරෙන සෑම ආකාරයේ කෘෘරත්වයන්, පීඩාවන් සහ අසාධාරණයන්  නැවැත්වීමට තමන්ට හැකි උපරිම අයුරින් උත්සාහ කළ යුතුයි. මෙහි කලකිරීමට හා අමනාපය ඇති විය හැකි විදියේ කිසියම් ආගමක් විහිළුවට ලක් කිරීම මෙන්ම අන්තවාදී කල්ලි වැරදි ආකාරයට ආගමේ නාමයෙන් සාධාරŒකරණය කිරීමට වැර දරණ ඔවුන්ගේ ද්වේශ ක්‍රියා කලාපයන් ද ඇතුළත් වේ.

තවදුරටත් අප සෑම ජාතියක් සමඟම නිහතමානී වී ඔවුන්ට උපකාර කිරීමට උත්සාහ කළ යුතුයි. එමගින් සෑම රටකටම තම හැකියාවන් හඳුනා ගෙන සමෘද්ධිමත් විය හැකියි. අප දකින ඊර්ෂ්‍යාව හා ක්‍රෝධය හුදෙක් ධන තණ්හාවේ ප්‍රතිඵලයන් වේ. මේ පිළිබඳ ශ=ද්ධ වූ කුර්ආනයේ වටිනා දේශනයක් සඳහන් වී ඇත. එනම් කෙනෙක් තවත් කෙනෙකුගේ ධනය පිළිබඳ ලෝභ කමින් ගිජු නොවිය යුතු බවයි. මෙම ඉගැන්වීම අනුගමනය කිරීමෙන් අපට ලෝක සාමය ප්‍රවර්ධනය කළ හැකි වන්නේය. 

සෑම පුද්ගලයෙකුම කුල, ආගම්, වර්ණ භේදයකින් තොරව ගෞරවාන්විත අයුරින් ඔහුට හෝ ඇයට තම දෙපයින් නැගී සිටීමට හැකියාව ලැඛෙන අයුරින් සමාජයේ සියලූ තලයකම යුක්තියේ අවශ්‍යතාවය සපිරිය යුතුයි. අද ලෝකයේ දියුණු රටවල්, දුප්පත් සහ දියුණු වෙමින් පවතින රටවල් තුල ඔවුන්ගේ ආයෝජනයන් වැඩි කරගෙන යෑම අප දකින්නෙමු.

ඔවුන් සාධාරණත්වයෙන් කටයුතු කිරීමත්, හුදෙක් තම ජාතියේ යහපත හා ලාභය උදෙසා එම රටවල්වල ස්වාභාවික සම්පත් සහ අඩු මිලට ශ්‍රමය යොදා ගැනීමත් නොකර සිටීම අත්‍යාවශ්‍ය කාර්්‍යයක් වන්නේය. තමන් ඒ රටවල් වලින් උපයා ගන්නා දෙයින් බහුතරයක් ඒ රටවල් තුලම නැවත ආයෝජනය කිරීමෙන් එම රටවල්වල ජනයාට දියුණු වීමට හා සමෘද්ධිමත් වීමට උපකාර කිරීමට එම ධනය යොදා ගත යුතුයි.

දියුණු රටවල් මේ අයුරින් ක්‍රියා කළහොත් එය දුප්පත් රාජ්‍යයන්ට පමණක් නොව දෙපාර්ශවයටම ප්‍රයෝජනවත් වනු ඇත. එමගින් විශ්වාසය සහ ප්‍රසාදය වර්ධනය වී දිනෙන් දින වර්ධනය වෙමින් පවතින අසහනකාරී තත්වයන් තුරන් වී යනු ඇත. 

මෙමගින් ධනවත් රාජ්‍යයන් තමන් ගැන පමණක් සිතන බවටත් අසාධාරණ ලෙස දුප්පත් සහ දුර්වලයින්ගේ සම්පත්වලින් ප්‍රයෝජන ගන්නා බවටත් ඇති අදහස් තුරන් වී යනු ඇත. තවද එය දේශීය ආර්ථීකය වැඩි දියුණු කිරීමටත් ඒ හරහා ලෝක ආර්ථීකයන් හා යහපත් මූල්‍ය තත්ත්වයන් නගා සිටුවීමටත් පිටුවහලක් වනු ඇත.

අනිවාර්යෙන්ම එය ගෝලීය ප්‍රජාව පිළිබඳ හැඟීම, අනුකම්පාව සහ මිනිස්කම ස්ථාපිත කිරීමට උදව් වනු ඇත. මේ සැමටම වඩා එය ලෝකයට සත්‍ය සාමය සඳහා වූ අත්තිවාරමක් සපයනු ඇත. අපි මේ ගැන අවධානය නොදක්වන්නේ නම් ලෝකයේ අද පවතින සාමයේ තත්වය පුපුරා ගොස් විනාශකාරී ලෝක යුද්ධයකට තුඩු දෙනු ඇත. එහි අතුරුඵලය ඉදිරියට එන පරම්පරා ගණනාවකට පරාවර්ථනය වී  එමෙන්ම මේ හේතුකොට ගෙන අපගේ අනාගත පරම්පරාව අපහට කිසිදු සමාවක් නොදෙනු ඇත.

මේ වචන ස්වල්පය සමඟින් මා ඔඛෙන් සමු ගන්නෙමි. අල්ලාහ් ලෝකයේ සත්‍ය සාමය ඇතිවීමට අවස්ථාව සලස්වා දෙත්වාæ

ඔබ සියළු දෙනාටම ස්තූතියි.

Dr. Shafi performed 4372 Caesarian surgeries, CID reports to court (English)

June 27th, 2019

Courtesy Adaderana

Explosives discovered through terror suspect Milhan’s revelations

June 27th, 2019

Courtesy Adaderana

No links between NTJ and Dr. Shafi, CID tells court

June 27th, 2019

Courtesy Adaderana

Dr. Mohamed Shafi has performed 4372 Caesarian surgeries at the Kurunegala Teaching Hospital, the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) informed the Kurunegala Magistrate’s Court today (27).

The CID produced a 210 pages long report to the court on the finding of their investigations on the assets of Dr. Shafi and the complaints lodged by mothers who underwent Caesarian surgeries under him.

The CID had recorded statements from over 500 persons on Dr. Shafi with regard to the investigation carried out against him.

However, no evidence was discovered connecting the doctor to the National Thowheed Jamaath (NTJ) or terrorist activities.

The CID informed the court that they refer to the Defense Secretary and take measures to release Dr. Shafi who under currently detained under the Prevention of Terrorism Act.

Meanwhile, the CID reported to the court that 4372 mothers had undergone Caesarian surgeries under Dr. Shafi and that they consist of 3479 Sinhala mothers, 860 Tamil mothers, and 33 Muslim mothers.

It was observed that the doctor had taken a shorter amount of time when performing Caesarian surgeries on Sinhala and Tamil mothers than the usual amount, CID informed the court and that he had sent away the attending staff towards the end of the surgeries, according to the statements received from some doctors and staff at the Kurunegala hospital, said the CID.

Meanwhile, an anaesthetician at the hospital, Dr. Deepani Nandasena had made a complaint to the Assistant Director of the hospital on Dr. Shafi which had resulted in a heated argument between the two doctors on a hospital corridor, reported the CID.

Reportedly, during the argument, Dr. Shafi had told Dr. Nandasena that he possesses he has the power of money as well as political power.

However, the CID has received615 complaints against Dr. Shafi and among them, 468 are based on suspicion, the department relayed to the court.

The remaining 147 complaints are from mothers who experience some complications following the surgery, the CID said.

Accordingly, the CID sought a court order to carry out an SHG test on the affected mothers at the Colombo National Hospital.

The attorneys representing the victimized parties objected to this request stating that the SHG would further deteriorate the health condition of the mothers who already experience complications or infertility.

Therefore, the court rejected the request of the CID and ordered to obtain a report on the matter from the doctors at the Kurunegala hospital including the hospital director and to produce it to the court on the 11th of July.

The attorneys representing the victimized parties stated that the CID has taken the investigations against Dr. Shafi lightly.

The CID further informed the court that the monthly income of Dr. Mohamed Shafi is Rs. 1,923,500 and he has purchased property worth Rs. 53,047,600 in the recent past.

Ven. Athuraliye Rathana Thero, too, attended to hear the court proceeding on Dr. Shafi today.

Navy misled by informant/extortionist SL Navy and the disappearance of 11 persons -Part I

June 27th, 2019

By C. A. Chandraprema Courtesy The Island

June 26, 2019, 8:56 pm 


The case where several officers and other rankers of the Sri Lanka Navy have been implicated in the disappearance of 11 persons during the war in 2008-2009 has made waves both locally as well as internationally. At the international level, when the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) presented its report titled ‘Promoting reconciliation, accountability and human rights in Sri Lanka’ to the Fortieth Session of the UN Human Rights Council in March this year, the case that was the first to find mention in that report as an ‘emblematic’ case of human rights violation was the disappearance of these 11 persons.

This case also gained much attention locally mainly due to the high profile arrests that took place in the course of the CID investigation into the matter. Among the high ranking Navy officers who were arrested during this investigation were, the present Chief of Defence Staff Ravindra Wijegunaratne the highest ranking armed forces officer in the land, D. K. P. Dassanayake, a former Navy Spokesman and Sumith Ranasinghe the then intelligence chief of the Eastern Command. The war time Navy Commander Wasantha Karannagoda was also to be arrested in connection with this case but the Supreme Court issued an order preventing his arrest until the conclusion of a fundamental rights case filed by him.

The supreme irony in that being that this whole investigation into the disappearance of 11 persons began on the basis of a complaint made to the police by Wasantha Karannagoda himself in 2009 when he was the Commander of the Navy. Despite the high profile arrests that have taken place in its connection, the general public knows next to nothing about this case. Indeed even the highest officials in the defence establishment who should have known everything that there was to know about this case, also seemed to be surprisingly ill-informed.

Former defence secretary Hemasiri Fernando once announced in public that indictments were to be filed in relation to one of the most serious violations of human rights that took place during the war and he invited the Tamil diaspora to provide similar details of violations of human rights so that the government can take action to bring the perpetrators to book. Fernando did not refer to this case by name but it was obvious that he meant this case and no other. He was for some reason under the misconception that details of this case had been provided to the government by the Tamil diaspora whereas in actual fact the Tamil diaspora had little or nothing to do with initiating this case and they were, at best, interested spectators. If a defence secretary can be that ill-informed about this case, the general public can only be expected to be completely clueless. We publish here the details of this case which emerge from the B reports filed by the CID before the Fort Magistrate’s Court and other documents pertaining to the court proceedings.

Victims and perpetrators

This case relates to eleven individuals who are said to have been arrested by the Sri Lanka Navy at various times between 25 August 2008 and March 2009. The names of the missing individuals are as follows: Kasthuri

Arachchilage John Reed, Thyagarajah Jegan, Rajiv Naganathan, Susaipulle Amalan Leon, Susaipulle Roshan Stanley Leon, Prageeth Vishwanathan, Tilakeshwara Ramalingam, Mohamed Dilan Jamaldeen, Mohamed Saajin, Mohamed Ali Anver.

The CID has named fourteen suspects, all of the Sri Lanka Navy as being responsible for the disappearance of these eleven individuals. The list of suspects includes high ranking officers as well as other rankers and is as follows: Nilantha Sampath Munsinghe, Sumith Ranasinghe, T. Lakshman Udayakumara, K.P. Nalin Prasanna Wickremasinghe, T. A. Dharmadasa, D. K. P. Dassanayake, Rajapaksa Pathirage Kithsiri, Anura Thushara Mendis,Kasthuri Arachchige Gamini, Chandana Prasad Hettiarachchi, Prabath Sanjeewa Senaratne, Imbulana Liyanage Upul Chaminda, Anton Fernando, Wasantha Karannagoda.

The present Chief of Defence Ravindra Wijegunaratne has not been named as a suspect in this case. He was arrested and remanded on the allegation that he had given Rs.500,000 from a navy fund to Chandana Prasad Hettiarachchi a suspect named in this case, to flee overseas.

As we said earlier, this whole case started with a complaint made to the police by the last named suspect Admiral Wasantha Karannagoda. This is a rare instance where the original complainant himself has ended up being named as a suspect in the course of a criminal investigation. According to the B report filed on 1 June 2009, the first complaint was made to the Criminal Investigation Department by Admiral Wasantha Karannagoda on 28 May

2009 against naval officer Sampath Munasinghe to the effect that this officer was suspected of having maintained links with the LTTE. The original complaint stated that the navy had carried out a preliminary inquiry into the matter and that this officer had gone missing during the inquiry.

Due to the suspicion arising from his disappearance, naval officers had taken steps to search his quarters. Several suspicious documents had been recovered from his quarters including identity cards, passports and cheques. Navy Commander Karannagoda had thereupon requested the Inspector General of Police to make a formal inquiry into the matter. On 30 May 2009, the CID had taken custody of the documents recovered from officer Samapath Munasinghe’s quarters. It was found that four of the national identity cards recovered belonged to four individuals who had been abducted and the next of kin of these persons had made complaints to the Kotahena and Fort police stations about the abductions.

Over one year after the investigation began, the CID’s B report of 28 July 2010 stated that five youth who were suspected to have links with the LTTE had been abducted and inquiries were proceeding in this regard—these five youths were among the 11 persons mentioned in relation to this case—but that no evidence had been found directly linking officer Sampath Munasinghe to the abductions. The B report of 5 January 2011 stated that GovindasamyNaganathan the father of one of the abducted youths Rajiv Naganathan had received a call from a person called Hajiar or Ali saying that his son was in the custody of the navy under an officer named Hettiarachchi and asked for Rs. 10 million to obtain his release. The mobile phone used for this purpose belonged to one Mohamed Anver, who had also subsequently disappeared.

Investigation resumed

After the change of government, the B report of 19 February 2015 reported that the inquiry had been resumed on the orders of the court and that the CID needed to obtain a statement from officer D. K. P. Dassanayake to verify some matters relating to this inquiry. Dassanayake was at that time following a Master’s degree course in counter terrorism policy and strategy in the USA and he was brought back to Sri Lanka to be questioned by the CID.

The B report of 20 April 2015 contained a statement given by naval officer named Crishantha Welagedara. The latter had stated that he had been assigned as the second in command of the intelligence unit of the Navy’s

Eastern Command on 25 March 2009 under the then Lt Commander Sumith Ranasinghe and that Dassanayake was the officer in charge of the Special Intelligence Unit. He had further stated that there were some underground bunkers in a part of the Trincomalee navy base called ‘Gunside’, where detainees were being held and one day when they were brought out for a bath, he had spoken to them and found that Ali Anver, Rajiv Naganathan and Kasthuri Arachchige John Reed were among them. Ali Anver had shown signs of having been beaten and Welagedara stated that he had instructed naval ratings to have the injuries on Anver attended to.

On 22 May 2015, the CID reported to courts that a witness named B.M.Vijeyakanth a former LTTE cadre turned navy informant had declared that he been held in detention at Gunside in the Trincomalee base where he had met two individuals called Shantha Samaraweera of Kegalle and Pradeep of Ibbagamuwa. Shantha Samaraweera had given Vijayakanth a soap wrapper on which some names and telephone numbers had been written to be given to

Shantha’s family. Writing similar to that on the soap wrapper was to be seen on the walls of the detention cells and the CID had sealed off that cell. The pivot on which this whole case was based was the evidence given by officer Crishantha Welagedara and informant B. M. Vijeyakanth.

One year later, on 1 June 2016, the CID reported to courts that the 11 missing individuals had been held before their disappearance at Gunside illegally and in contravention of their human rights and that naval officers Lt Commander Sumith Ranasinghe, Captain Guruge and Navy Commander Wasantha Karannagoda knew of the existence of this detention center. On 27 September 2016, Inspector Nishantha Silva reported to courts that a statement needed to be recorded from former Navy Commander Wasantha Karannagoda but he had not been able to attend to the matter because he was involved in several other investigations such as the abduction of Keith

Nohyr, the murder of Lasantha Wickrematunga, the attack on Upali Tennakoon and the murder of schoolgirl Sivaloganathan Vidya in Jaffna.

Role of Mohamed Ali Anver The B report of 9 February 2017 stated that Mohamed Ali Anver was an informant working with Lt Commaner Sampath Munasinghe and that Ali Anver had given Munasinghe information about Rajiv Naganathan, and Munasinghe had told Lt Commander Hettiarachchi to arrest them. According to the testimony of a naval rating named Aluthgedara Upul Bandara, Sampath Munasinghe had been told by Ali Anver that he had information to the effect that a gang was collecting money for the LTTE by skimming credit cards. Ali Anver had got Rajiv Naganathan down to his house in Dehiwela and got them arrested by the navy. Arrested along with him were four other youths named Pradeep Vishwanathan, Tilakeshwara Ramalingam, Mohamed Dilan and Mohamed Saajin.

Thereafter, Ali Anver had phoned Naganathan’s father and asked for Rs. 10 million for his release. He had said that this money needed to be given to officers Sampath Munasinhe and Prasad Hettiarachchi. One day in November 2008, Ali Anver had in fact personally gone to see Govindasamy Naganathan and asked for Rs.10 million to secure the release of his son and they had ultimately agreed on a sum of Rs. 7.5 million. This money however had not been paid. Ali Anver, too, had disappeared in February 2009. Naval rating Aluthgedara Uplul, Bandara stated to the CID that one day in February 2009, the informant Ali Anver had also been arrested on the instructions of Sampath Munasinghe. He was the last of the 11 missing persons to be arrested. In probing the disappearance of navy informant Ali Anver, the CID obtained a statement from Mohamed Siraj Ali, the brother of Ali Anver. Siraj said that his brother had been an informant working under officer Sampath Munasinghe and that Anver had informed him that Sampath Munasinghe had told him to obtain Rs.10 million to release those those abducted. Siraj said that Anver had been in a despondent mood, and when asked about it, he stated that he had given information to the navy to arrest Rajiv Naganathan and four others and that it was Sampath Munasinghe who had told him to collect Rs. 10 million for their release, and that Anver did not like the task he had been given.

Siraj also stated Anver had called him from the detention center and told him that he had been abducted by Sampath Munasinghe and to talk to DIG Kamaldeen and Chief Inspector Lokuhetti to try and obtain his release. Siraj had said that he had put Anver onto CI Lokuhetti on the phone and based on the conversation that took place between them, he realised that Anver had been under threat from Sampath Munasinghe. DIG Abdul Said Kamaldeen said in his statement to the CID that he had got to know Anver Ali when the latter came to his house to study the Koran and that it was Anver who had given the information about the five youths to Sampath Munasinghe. Subsequently, Anver admitted to Kamaldeen that the five youth were not in fact LTTE, and that thereafter Anver had been under death threat from Sampath Munasinghe.

Ahmed Yunoos Imtiaz of Colombo 10, an associate of Anver’s, who knew Rajiv Naganathan had stated to the CID that Anver had made inquiries about Rajiv Naganathan and whether the latter’s father had money and other such details.

SL Navy and the disappearance of 11 persons: Principal witness turns against CID Part II

June 27th, 2019

By C. A. Chandraprema (Continued from yesterday) Courtesy The Island


Navy Sampath

After the abduction of these 11 persons, the details in the B reports submitted by the CID reveal that at least two of them mainly Rajiv Naganathan and Ali Anver had made calls to the outside over mobile phones lent to them by the naval ratings guarding them. The B report of 7 June 2017 stated that the naval ratings on duty guarding the detainees had allowed them to speak to their next of kin in order to let the latter know that they were in detention. They had used SIM cards bought in other people’s names for this purpose. The B report of 20 June 2017 directly stated that it has been revealed that it was those who were guarding the detainees who had obtained extortion money from their next of kin.

Raman Prabhakaran, an uncle of Rajiv Naganathan, had received a call from the latter saying that he was being held in the Navy camp in Trincomalee, and he had given the phone number of a naval rating to his uncle. Then Raman Prabhakaran had received calls from the camp asking for Rs. 8 million for Rajiv Naganathan’s release. This had been negotiated down to Rs. 1 million. (This extortion demand was separate from the earlier demand of Rs. 10 million made by Ali Anver.) Rajiv Naganathan had told his uncle that the boss of the camp where he was being held was Capt. Dassanayake. Rajiv Naganathan’s mother and father had told the CID that the abduction had taken place on the orders of a Navy officer named Sampath.

Samsudeen Nihara the wife of K. A. Anthony stated to the CID that their son K. A. John Reed had been arrested on 8 September 2008 and on 17 October 2008, her husband Anthony had also been arrested. On 30 October 2008, she had got a call on her landline asking for Rs. 1.5 million for the release of the father and son. This was negotiated down to Rs. 500,000. The money had been handed over to the extortionists at a place in Narammala in the Kurunegala District. However the father and son were not released.

Naval rating John Kotelawalage Bandu Kumara stated that Rajiv Naganathan and Anver Ali had been allowed to take calls by him. His superior officers Sumith Ranasinghe and Chishantha Welagedara pulled him up for allowing detainees to take calls. He admitted that he had thought of accepting a payment of Rs. 500,000 from Rajiv Naganathan’s parents and allowing Rajiv to escape, but had given up the idea due to the difficulties involved. Naval rating Bandu Kumara’s plan had been to dress Rajiv Naganathan in new clothes and to get him out of the camp during the Sinhala New Year or Vesak.

Conflicting stories

When questioned on the disappearance of these detainees, the CID was told different stories by different people. B. M. Vijeyakanth, the LTTE cadre turned informant of the navy intelligence unit under officers Sumith Ranasinghe and C. K. Welagedara said that the detainees had been shot, and their bodies tied to concrete fence posts and taken to out to sea and dumped. The head of that intelligence unit, officer Sumith Ranasinghe, told the CID that he had never took charge of any of Sampath Munasinghe’s detainees. He said that a naval rating called Bandara had told him that the detainees arrested by Sampath Munasinghe had been killed and dumped in the Kelani River.

Ranasinghe also said that he was aware that Sampath Munasinghe had been abducting people from various parts of the country and that four of them had been killed in Colombo and the others in Trincomalee. He also said that he was not on good terms with Sampath Munasinghe. For his part the first suspect in this case Munasinghe said that his room (which was searched and from which the ID cards of the disappeared were discovered) had in fact been used by Lt Commander Hettiarachchi and that Hettiarachchi had worked under Dassanayake and further that it was Hettiarachchi who had arrested the five youths (including Rajiv Naganathan) and that those responsible were officers Hettiarachchi and Ranasinghe and that he had nothing to do with it.

Officer Crishantha Welagedara told the CID that one day, he had got to know that some detainees at Gunside had been killed and he gone there to look into the matter. When he arrived at Gunside he saw a parked cab and one Gamini, a naval rating attached to the intelligence unit loading a long black polythene bag onto the vehicle. The shape of the bag led him to believe that this could be a dead body. He surmised that the detainees brought from Colombo had been killed and taken in the cab and disposed of. Nalin Prasanna Wickremasuriya said that Rajiv Naganathan was one of those he questioned and that he had been told by naval rating Bandara that four of the detainees had been strangled to death and dumped in the Kelani River in the Kaduwela area.

Despite a decade of investigations and statements obtained from mutual antagonists within the navy, the B reports do not indicate that anyone, at all, had actually seen these detainees killed or even a dead body after they were killed. The CID told courts that it had been established beyond doubt that the 11 persons abducted in Colombo had been detained at Gunside and that there was no evidence to show that that these people had been rehabilitated or that they have gone abroad. Though it was nine years after the abductions, none of them had come back home either and there is no evidence to show that they are alive. Therefore, there was a justifiable suspicion that these persons had been killed.

Officer Travis Sinniah, who was soon to become the Commander of the Navy, told the CID that on the orders of Wasantha Karannagoda the detention centre at Gunside had been administered by Lt Commander Ranasinghe under the supervision of D. K. P. Dassanayake. Sinniah said that he had been told by Karannagoda not to interfere with the Gunside operation. He also said that Dassanayake controlled ingress and egress to the Gunside detention centre and that vehicles entered and exited without being checked on the orders of Dassanayake. He said that he, too, had heard about some killings that had taken place at Gunside and that Karannagoda and his officers were responsible for everything that took place. According to the B report of 13 July 2017, Sampath Munasinghe also told the CID that the then Navy Commander Karannagoda had been informed of the arrest of these suspects.

First suspect Sampath Munasinghe

The lawyers making written submissions on behalf of the second and third suspects Sumith Ranasinghe and Tilakaratnage Udaya Kumara, pointed out before the Colombo Fort Magistrate’s court on 12 March 2017 that though the ID cards of some of the missing persons had been found in Sampath Munasinghe’s quarters and though the CID had informed courts on several occasions that Munasinghe was directly responsible for the disappearances, at no point, had the CID charged him for murder under Section 296 of the Penal Code or for an offence involving the use of firearms under Section 44 of the Firearms Ordinance. However, after nine years, the CID had charged the second and third suspects for murder under Section 296.

The first suspect Sampath Munasinghe was arrested in 2009 and released on 9.6.2010. He was charged with the lesser offence of kidnapping or abducting a person in order that such person may be murdered under Section 355 of the Penal Code which carried a maximum penalty of 20 years rigorous imprisonment unlike Section 296, which carries the death penalty. However, after the new government came into power, it was decided that an offence under Section 296 and Section 44 of the Firearms Ordinance had taken place. On 26 April 2017, the Colombo Magistrate’s Court issued an order in relation to the request that officer Sampath Munasinghe be re-arrested. The Court observed that the Attorney General’s Department had stated that since the first suspect was already on bail there was no need to re-arrest him. But the lawyer representing the victims requested that he be re-arrested.

The court observed that Munasinghe had first been arrested on10 June 2009 and granted bail on 9 June 2010. Furthermore, the court observed that the CID had informed Court that the IDs found in the first suspect’s room were those of persons who had disappeared but that it had not been ascertained who had abducted those people. The CID further informed Court that the first suspect’s involvement in the abduction of five persons in Dehiwala had not been ascertained. Furthermore, the first suspect had not been identified by the next of kin of the victims. Those were the reasons why he had been granted bail in 2010. The Court therefore rejected the call for re-arresting Sampath Munasinghe.

In the written submissions to Court made on behalf of T. I. G. Dharmadasa, a naval officer, working under Lt Commander Hettiarachchi, his lawyers stated that Dharmadasa had been called to the CID for the first time on 16 February 2015 to give a statement. He had been told by the CID that he could become a state witness if he gave a statement in a certain way. He refused to do so on three occasions. On 21 April 2017, he was named a suspect in the case.

CID guilty of perjury?

Through the B report filed on 22 February 2019, the CID informed Court that Lt Commander Prasad Hettiarachchi had abducted the victims and the then Navy Commander (Karannagoda) had been informed of the arrests. Though he had been in the know about the abductions, Karannagoda had tried to shield the culprits and pass off the blame on Sampath Munasinghe, saying that he was involved in terrorist activities and that the IDs of the victims had been found in his room. The CID told Court that if Karannagoda had exerted due diligence when he first heard about these arrests, the victims could have been saved.

Karannagoda is being investigated by the CID for murder under Section 296 of the Penal Code, under Section 356 for kidnapping or abducting a person with intent to wrongfully confine that person, under Section 388 for criminal breach of trust in dishonestly converting to his own use property entrusted to him and under Section 199 of the Penal Code for intentionally failing to give any information about an offence that he has knowledge of. From the B report of 16 March 2018 and 12 September 2018 the CID referred to officer Chandana Prasad Hettiarachchi as ‘Navy Sampath’ even though the original Navy Sampath was Lt Commander Sampath Munasinghe.

In filing B report dated 12 September 2018, Inspector Nishantha Silva stated that it had been 10 years since the victims in this case had been arrested and their next of kin were in great pain of mind. He stated that as this endeavour is being made to do justice to the next of kin of the victims, the Navy and other concerned parties should extend the fullest cooperation to the investigation. In the B report dated 26 September 2018 Inspector Silva stated that the next of kin of the victims were in a state of deep sorrow and whatever the obstacles he had to face, he would not be discouraged in his endeavor to do justice to the victims’ next of kin.

On 2 January 2018, one of the key witnesses of the CID, B. M. Vijeyakanth, the former LTTE cadre turned navy intelligence operative, made a special statement before the Colombo Fort Magistrate Lanka Jayaratne. He stated that it was officer Chrishantha Welagedara who had taken him into the Navy. One day, officer Welagedara had introduced him to two men one of whom he later learnt was Inspector Nisantha Silva. The two men had shown Vijeyakanth 12 photos and they took down his details and got him to sign a statement. As he was leaving after giving the statement, Vijeyakanth told the men that he did not know the people in the 12 photos. Once he had left, officer Welagedara accosted him and said that he had said that he did not know the people in the photos and sent him right back to tell the CID officers that he did know the people in the 12 photos.

Officer Welagedara instructed Vijeyakanth to tell the CID that he knew one Shantha and the other 11 persons and that they had been in detention together in Trincomalee. The CID officers told Vijeyakanth that he would be taken to a room and questioned and that he should answer as if he were doing it on his own volition and he should not say that he had been coached to say those things. Subsequently, Vijeyakanth was asked to come to the CID headquarters. Inspector Nishantha Silva had not been present but he had reached Vijeyakanth on the land line in the room and told him to give the statement as agreed. Vijayakanth did as instructed and left the CID headquarters.

These, in a nutshell, are the basic details of this ‘emblematic’ case which emerge from the B reports and certain other court records.


Dr Kohona warns of danger ACSA, SOFA pose to Sri Lanka Ranil is the only beneficiary, says Samaranayake

June 27th, 2019

By Ifham Nizam Courtesy The Island

June 27, 2019, 10:06 pm 


Dr. Kohona addressing the media. Mohan Samaranayake looks on(pic courtesy Eliya)

Sri Lanka has no defence agreement with the US and it should be cautious as regards agreements that may put it on a collision course with countries like India, China and Iran, warns former Permanent Secretary of Foreign Affairs, Dr. Palitha Kohona.

Speaking to the media in Colombo yesterday on the Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) and Acquisition and Cross-Servicing agreements (ACSA) between Sri Lanka and the United States of America, former Foreign Secretary and UN official asked why Sri Lanka has to enter into agreements which were not beneficial to it.

“What is our political leadership thinking? The US has over 100 SOFA agreements around the world?’ he asked.

He said the US military personnel could come to Sri Lanka, carry weapon and do anything and they could not be dealt with under the local laws.

Citing examples, Dr. Kohona said US forces faced a number of rape charges in the Philippines, but did not face legal action in that country.

The former top UN staffer said that parliament should have a role in discussing such agreements because they affected sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of the country. Agreements of that nature should be approved by parliament by a two-thirds majority, he added.

“What I say is that we must maintain good relationships with USA, China and India but that it should not mean we should sacrifice our independence,” the former Sri Lanka’s Permanent Representative to UN Headquarters in New York said.

The Acquisition and Cross Services Agreement (ACSA) was signed first in 2007 and renewed in 2017 after being expanded with many controversial annexures.

The ACSA provides for joint military cooperation between Sri Lanka and the United States and includes logistic support, supplies, services and the use of airports and ports during “unforeseen circumstances”, Dr. Kohona said, warned that while the 2007 ACSA permitted US military vessels to enter Sri Lanka ports on a ‘one-off’ basis, the 2017 ACSA appears to be “open ended”.

Senior Journalist and former UN official Mohan Samaranayake said that Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe was the only winner who wanted to promote imperialism and danced to the tune of Western powers.

Citing examples, he said that PM Wickremesinghe was the only leader in the developing world who justified the US invasion of Iraq.

He stressed that Sri Lanka could not antagonise any country but at the same time could not give in to anyone.

Kattankudy detection: NTJ suspect from Saudi leads CID to 1,000 detonators, gelignite

June 27th, 2019

Courtesy The Island

The interrogation of a hardcore National Thowheed Jamaat (NTJ) leader recently extradited from Saudi Arabia has led to the single biggest detection of explosives belonging to the now proscribed organisation.

The police identified the suspect as Hayathu Mohammadu Ahamed Milhan, a close associate of Zahran Hashim, the mastermind of Easter Sunday bombing campaign. Zahran triggered a suicide blast at luxury Shangri-la hotel.

The Criminal Investigation Department (CID) yesterday recovered 1,000 detonators, over 300 gelignite sticks, eight liters of liquid gelignite, detonator code and nearly 500 rounds of T-56 ammunition buried at Ollikulam in the Kattankudy police area.

Police headquarters spokesperson attorney-at-law Ruwan Gunasekera told The Island last night that the CID had taken Milhan to Ollikulam, where the suspect revealed the buried items.

Milhan was among five terrorist suspects deported from Saudi Arabia on June 14 following negotiations between the two governments.

They have left the country before the Easter Sunday attacks.

SP Gunasekera earlier in the day told The Island that Milhan had been involved in the first major terrorist attack carried out by the group on Nov 30, 2018 at Vavnativu, Batticaloa, where NTJ activists killed two police officers.

The NTJ had subsequently damaged several Buddha statues on Dec 22 and 26, 2018 in the Mawanella police area, followed by an attempt to kill Mohamed Rasik Mohamed Naslim at Danagame, Mawanella on March 09, 2019, controlled explosion of a motorcycle at Kattankudy on April 16 and Easter Sunday carnage on April 21, 2019, SP Gunasekera said.

SP Gunasekera said that two brothers responsible for the destruction of Buddha statues had been arrested in the Gampola police area following Easter Sunday attacks. The police official identified them as residents of Delgahagoda, Mawanella. Responding to another query, SP Gunasekera said that the CID had arrested Abo Hanifa Mohamed Mufees, 26, involved with the brothers wanted over destruction of Buddha statues during a raid on Lactos estate in the Puttalam area on January 16, 2019. In addition to Mufees, the CID arrested three others namely Amir Hamza Mohamed Hamaz (25), Mohamed Nafeez Mohammed Navith (20) and Mohamed Nafeez Mohamed Nafrid.

According to SP Gunasekera, the detection made in Kattankudy yesterday was the biggest one since the recovery of NTJ hardware made in Lactos estate where 99 detonators were among the items found.

Of those arrested from Lactos estate, two persons, Mohamed Nafeez Mohammed Navith and Mohamed Nafeez Mohamed Nafrid, were produced before Mawanella Magistrate on April 10, 2019. According to SP Gunasekera, the suspects in terms of the bail conditions, reported to CID on April 27, May 25 and were scheduled to report again tomorrow (29).

An open letter to all people that Wahhabism is not Islam and Islam is not Wahhabism: Part I

June 27th, 2019

By Imtiaz Thaha/Daily FT Courtesy NewsIn.Asia

An open letter to all people that Wahhabism is not Islam and Islam is not Wahhabism: Part I

Easter Sunday seemed to be another peaceful day in Sri Lanka. Then suddenly there was pandemonium as five bombs exploded and a carefully-planned ISIS-oriented bombing resulted in nearly 300 lives being lost to the deadly bombs with scores of people injured. The ISIS had struck in Sri Lanka this time.

The killers were suicide bombers and of Sri Lankan ethnicity. In a matter of hours, the authorities identified the killers as Sri Lankan Muslims belonging to the National Thawheed Jamaat. Suddenly the Sri Lankan Muslims who were hitherto a very peaceful people were now looked upon as merciless killers. Every Muslim was now a suspect and was fearful of communal backlash and riots. A very scary time for them as the majority community looked at them with suspicion and hatred.

How did the Muslims who were a peaceful people get entangled in this mess? They were less than 10% of the population and could be victimised and targeted so very easily. The mobs were screaming for blood. The Government imposed a curfew to contain the situation. It was however a Christian Cardinal who addressed the nation on mainstream media who saved the day and brought about, at least a temporary stop to the mobs running riot. It was his flock that had paid the price. The dead were mostly Christians and foreigners.

Sadly, none of the Muslim politicians or even the President or the Prime Minister or the Cabinet Ministers were able to appease the mobs so that they wouldn’t attack and loot the Muslims. This was however successfully accomplished by the Cardinal with his clever approach.

It would take time for the people and mainly the majority race to find out that these killers were not Muslims who followed Islam, but a group known as the Wahhabis or Salafis with their peculiar brand of interpreting Islam. In this article I shall try to show that the Muslims have nothing to do with Wahhabism, that Wahhabism is not Islam. Islam is against and has always been against Wahhabism.

Islam is a tolerant religion and Wahhabism seeks to terrorise. Islam does not compel others to embrace it. Wahhabism destroys all those opposed to it. Islam seeks to live a good life and Wahhabism seeks to restrict it. Islam respects other religions while the Wahhabis seek the destruction of all ideologies other than theirs. Islam seeks beauty and culture, but the Wahhabis want to destroy all culture, art and civilisation. I can go on and on about the difference in ideologies but suffice it shall be for now.

Islam encourages all faiths to intermingle and integrate among themselves. Islam teaches respect and love between all communities and religions. Islam encourages peace and advancement. Wahhabism is just the opposite of this. The Wahhabis do not tolerate anyone belonging to another faith and treat them like enemies.

My purpose in writing this article is to be able to differentiate between Islam and Wahhabism and to deal with each as they deserve. Let’s start with the very roots and see how far this cancer has eaten into society. Wahhabism is trying to pervert Islam to bring disrepute to it. They want Islam to be hated and made into a terrorist belief so that their political agendas are met. Let’s trace their beginnings and look into their beliefs and ideology in order to understand their motives and plan.

The fanatic – The roots of present-day Wahhabism

It all began with Ibn Taymiyyah. The Wahhabis get their ideology from him. They refer to Ibn Taymiyyah as Sheikh Ul Islam. His full name was Ahmad Ibn Abdul Halim Ibn Abdul Salam Ibn Taymiyyah, he was born in 1263 in Harran, Turkey about 600 years after the Holy Prophet Muhammad (Sal). He died in 1328, aged 65 in Damascus, Syria. This was during the beginning of the Ottoman Empire, which reached great heights due to Islam, as it carried the banner of Islam during this time and which was officially established in 1299. Eturgul and his son Othman, the founders of the Ottoman Empire, lived during his time.

Ibn Taymiyyah was a person who liked to be different and was known for his peculiar and alien beliefs. He was disliked by the mainstream scholars of his time for trying to forge a new ideology that was opposed to the accepted views on Islam, well founded by a rich heritage of Scholars.

We are told that all the Sunni Scholars (the two main divisions in Islam were the Sunnis and Shiites) of that time signed a document that he was preaching harmful and destructive practices and requested that he be put to death. He was accused of spoiling the faith of the Muslims of the time and corrupting Islam. All the Four Schools (Hanafi, Shafi, Maliki and Hanbali Schools of Jurisprudence) of Thought at that time opposed him.

Although the death sentence was not carried out by the Governor of Damascus, Ibn Taymiyyah was jailed for life. He miserably failed to establish his destructive and hate ridden School of Thought and it failed in totality. It was observed that this man was a fanatic and his teachings included intolerance and violence and many were the books written by scholars from both Damascus and Egypt refuting these teachings of his. Thankfully it died a natural death during his time.

Taking advantage of the teachings of a fanatic

Muhammad Ibn al Abdul Wahhab was born In Najd in Arabia and now Saudi Arabia in the year 1703, which was about 375 years after the death of Ibn Taymiyyah. He was the one who succeeded in bringing Ibn Taymiyyah’s teachings to the fore and was highly successful in most of the Arab countries, particularly in Saudi Arabia.

Although the average Wahhabi was trying to say that these teachings were Islam, the name Wahhabism stuck and is still used on those who follow these teachings much to the chagrin of the Wahhabis. There are hardly many differences between what is known as Wahhabi and Salafi. The enemies of Wahhabism used this term in a derogatory sense. So, the Wahhabis coined another name for themselves and called themselves Salafis. The British and Ibn Saud both needed Wahhabism to fulfil their political agendas. Let us shed some light on this.

The British factor

The Ottoman Empire had reached great heights, the Europeans were fighting the Ottoman Empire. The Crusades had happened, and Europe was wary of the Muslims. It was in short, a Christian and Muslim war for supremacy. The British Empire wanted to weaken and destroy the Ottoman Empire, they were always looking for ways and means to divide the Muslims so that they could achieve victory over them. It was during these times that the British made a plan to send in many spies to Turkey, the home of the Ottoman Empire. They planned a strategy to find out the weakest spot in the Ottoman Empire. They sent their spies in.

Ironically, my source is from one of the spies who made a confession by the name of Hempher. In his Confessions of a British Spy, he detailed that the British planned to gather information and use this information to destroy the Ottoman Empire. The spies found that each Muslim was equal in faith, to one of the Christian priests and that Islam was deeply lodged in their hearts and that their faith was very strong. The spies also reported, to weaken the faith of these Muslims; it would be necessary to plan out a strategy that would destroy Islam from within. With this purpose in mind the spies worked tirelessly to find a way to divide the Muslims. This spy, who I have mentioned above had the good fortune to meet with Muhammad ibn al Abdul Wahhab. In his estimation this scholar was all that they had been looking for.

Abdul Wahhab was a person with a rude disposition and did not have any respect for his peers or for the past scholars who were the Shining Stars of Islam. He looked down on Imam Abu Hanifa, (one of the Imams of the four Islamic Schools of Thought) and the other great Imams of the Islamic Schools of Thought. He was always trying to find fault with them and show that he was superior in intellect to these great religious personalities. He was greedy and was very ambitious. Hempher understood that he appeared to be the ideal tool with which he could contaminate Islam and to this end he began to work relentlessly.

Very soon he had befriended Abdul Wahhab and won his confidence. He begun to lay his trap. He even used two women named Saffiya and Asiya to have sexual relationships with Abdul Wahhab on a temporary marriage basis, which was anyway against Islam. From outside Hempher worked on him and from inside, from the bedrooms, the ladies got at him. The two ladies mentioned here according to Hempher were also funded by the espionage ring.

Slowly, they could see Abdul Wahhab walking into their trap. Because of his nature, Abdul Wahhab was attracted to fanaticism, intolerance and violence. This was the way of Ibn Taymiyyah as explained above. So, he made use of the teachings of Ibn Taymiyyah to corrupt the teachings of Islam. He did this in a systematic and forceful manner and created an ideology which was to later be called by the name of ‘Wahhabism’. I would like to give the reference to the book below so that the readers may have access to the details of the British plan. The pdf is available to be downloaded free of charge below:

The Ibn Saud connection

During this time there was a person called Abdul-Aziz Ibn Abdur-Rahman Ibn Muhammad Al Saud. He was ambitious and was looking for a way to establish his power in Arabia. The British helped him with the most sophisticated arms at that time to win over and conquer the others and to form a Kingdom. They introduced into these regions, the Wahhabi ideology, now propounded by Abdul Wahhab, which they embraced as it also suited their purpose.

To rule in Arabia, and particularly to have the rights over Mecca and Medina, the two most holy places of Islam, it was necessary that the rulers be of the family of The Prophet (Sal) or the Hashemites (those who belong to the tribe of the Prophet known as the tribe of Banu Hashim). Ibn Saud did not fall into this category, so he had to change the ways of the thinking of the populous, so that his rule could be legitimised. Wahhabism gave them that opening.

The Prophet’s (Sal) family was not supposed to be specially respected in accordance with the Wahhabi teachings, as also the earlier Scholars and Saints too were not respected by Wahhabism. Wahhabism believed that personalities in Islam should not be looked up to and only Allah alone should be worshipped. So, this creed suited Ibn Saud to establish his Kingdom. The British got Ibn Saud and Abdul Wahhab into an alliance with each other, where the political backing would be given to Wahhabism by Ibn Saud and Wahhabism would be the official religion of Ibn Saud’s Kingdom, thereby serving both their purposes.

The New World Encyclopaedia summarises the Ibn Saud connection in the following words which gives us a greater insight into the Wahhabi conquest, expansion and rule in Arabia:

In 1744, Ibn Abdul Wahhab sought refuge in the village of Dariyah. This district was ruled by the rebel Muhammad ibn Saud and his family, Al Saud, which was responsible for organised banditry within Najd. The family ruled Dariyah according to its own whims and the village was a place of lawlessness when Abdul Wahhab settled there. In 1747, he made a power-sharing agreement with the family; Abdul Wahhab would become Dariyah’s religious authority, while the Al Saud family would be responsible for the village’s political leadership.

The Al Saud family also benefited from the pact, as the Wahhabi movement and its extreme religious fervor helped to legitimise their rule. The fusion of religious and political control would come to represent the modern Saudi Arabia, as well as mark the break between the Islam of the past, in which traditional Muslim scholars focused on inward contemplation as opposed to focusing on gaining global and political power.

With this new power arrangement in place, Abdul Wahhab and his followers urged a ‘jihad,’ or ‘The Struggle’ to promote the faith, against other Muslims, and thus, the Wahhabis began a blood-soaked campaign for expansion and domination.

Ibn Abdul Wahhab’s views were opposed to the mainstream Muslim scholars of Mecca and Medina of that time. For example, he called intermediation of Muhammad (Sal) an act of polytheism. Ibn Abdul Wahhab went so far as to declare jihad against Muslims who practised so-called acts of polytheism. By 1788, the Wahhab- Saud alliance controlled most of the Arabian Peninsula.

In 1801, the Wahhabis began a campaign to gain control over the two holy cities of Islam. They raided Mecca and Medina and stole holy books, works of art, and other gifts the city had accumulated over the last thousand years. While they controlled the Two Holy Places, they imposed Wahhabism upon the populace, destroyed shrines and cemeteries, closed off the entrances to the holy city, to Ottoman pilgrims, barred pilgrims from performing Hajj and murdered respected citizens in both holy cities.

Through the 1820s to the 1860s, the Wahhabis launched attacks upon the Ottoman Empire, urged on by Great Britain, which was eager to see the collapse of the Turkish Empire and the distribution of its overseas possessions.

The Wahhabis’ power grew and shrank by turns throughout the century, until in 1901, the latest representative of the Al Saud and Wahhabi alliance decided to try and re-seize control over the two holy cities, Mecca and Medina. Ibn Saud journeyed to Riyadh, where he murdered the city’s ruler and took over control of the country. Over the next twenty-five years, he went on to unify the Arabian Peninsula through force. Wahhabism was the only official faith sanctioned in the state that would come to be formed there. To this day, no other religious establishment is allowed in the kingdom of Saudi Arabia.”

Petro-dollars that helped spread Wahhabism to the world

Even though this alliance was made, and both continued successfully and captured various parts of Arabia, and destroyed culture and important shrines of Saints, Sahabas (Companions of Prophet Muhammad, Sal) and even of Prophets, Wahhabism still lacked global acceptance. History records the blood thirsty deeds of the Wahhabis during this time, with many massacres and gruesome deeds accomplished by them and the cruelty perpetrated on the innocent Sunni and Shiite Muslims.

This wasn’t sufficient to get Wahhabism on the map. Even Mecca and Medina were ransacked and thousands were killed. The Wahhabis took over the two most holy places of Islam. They thus became the custodians of Islam in the eyes of the world. But still Wahhabism as such was not spread till after the Arabs became super rich due to the discovery of oil. Once the petro dollars came in, they had all the wealth in the world to propagate this, harsh, cruel and intolerant ideology of Wahhabism to the world, under the guise of propagating true Islam.

The third world countries were especially targeted and large sums of money was spent in spreading Wahhabism to these lands. In 1970 and the period after, the Wahhabis gained a lot of ground by bribing poor countries and using influential individuals in those countries to establish their brand of Islam in the world.

Madrassas or religious schools were funded in these countries where a lot of money was pumped in to educate the children of many countries to Wahhabi doctrines and brainwash their minds into thinking that this was true Islam. Free Wahhabi doctrine books were freely distributed which then slowly became the syllabus of Islamic education in these countries.

Today terrorism and ISIS oriented attacks are a direct result of these teachings and they have nothing to do whatsoever with Islam. Many Muslims were taken in by these teachings and began to think that Islam was what Wahhabism taught. Even the world at large failed to understand that Islam was not Wahhabism, the Wahhabis relentlessly pursued their goal of corrupting and perverting Islam by making it change into the interpretation of Islam, given by Abdul Wahhab and Ibn Taymiyyah.

It is a sad story of how a most peaceful and tolerant Islam was changed to becoming known as a highly intolerant and cruel religion. Bombs begun exploding all over the world and thousands died. Suicide bombers carried out these attacks and the blame was put on the Muslims and on Islam. Islam being the peaceful religion it was, became known as terrorism and all the while it was Wahhabism that was being projected and implemented and not Islam, the Religion of Peace.

This has reached to such alarming proportions that people are fearful of being in the presence of a Muslim as they associate Muslims to be violent terrorists waiting to ignite explosives and bombs. This has caused fear which is now known and called as Islamophobia.

Glorious era of Islamic civilisation and dark doctrine of Wahhabism compared

I give below a few thoughts about the Islamic world given in an article entitled ‘The Islamic world in the middle ages’ (

Throughout the Middle Ages, the Muslim world was more advanced and more civilised than Christian Western Europe, which learned a huge amount from its neighbour.

The ‘Islamic world’ was not a single state in the Middle Ages, but the different countries which formed it, had many things in common.

This fact is hidden from the world today and only very few know about the great Islamic civilisation that was known as the Golden Era.

It was created by the Arab conquests of the 7th and 8th centuries. From the 11th to the 16th centuries many thousands of Turks and Mongols migrated across the vast plains of Central Asia into the Middle East. They also adopted Islam. It stretched from India to Spain. Muslim traders travelled to places as far apart as the Sahara, South Africa, China, Scandinavia and Russia. Muslims traded high-quality goods such as silk, carpets, ivory and spices.

Knowledge of science and medicine in the Islamic world was far more sophisticated than in Western Europe. Cordoba in Muslim Spain was a city of over half a million inhabitants with street lighting and running water. At the same time 10,000 Londoners lived in timber-framed houses and used the river as their sewer.

Muslims were going to beauty parlours, using deodorants and drinking from glasses, at a time when English books of behaviour were still telling pageboys not to pick their noses over their food, spit on the table or throw uneaten food onto the floor.”

The extract quoted above is a short synopsis of how glorious the Islamic world was before the advent of Wahhabism. Many have been the books written on the Golden Era of Islamic civilisation and subsequent Islamic History, extolling the greatness and glory of Islam and its tolerance of other faiths. The world respected the Muslims and its culture.

This glorious period resulted in cultural monuments and architecture reaching to great heights. The romance of the Taj Mahal, the fascinating Arabian Nights, the wonder of Topkapi, and the Great Mosque Architectural Constructions in Cordoba, to mention just a few, all bear witness to this magnificent civilisation.

In contrast today, Wahhabism has cast a shadow of death, mayhem, mass murder, torture, cruelty, genocide, and terrorism over the world. Suicide bombers with no mercy in their hearts have been let loose to go on a rampage, killing the innocents. The world is being terrorised and held to ransom.

The Wahhabis vow that only they shall rule according to their ideology and the rest have to be killed or subjugated. They believe that they should kill the Christians, the Jews, all Non-Muslims like the Hindus and the Buddhists and even other Muslims who do not subscribe to their horrendous beliefs. This is not Islam, or will it ever be Islam. Islam means peace, the very opposite of this. Islam is identified with terrorism today. This is not Islam. Islam has ceased to be Islam and Wahhabism has replaced it.

Need of the hour: True national leader

June 27th, 2019

By Shivanthi Ranasinghe Courtesy Ceylon Today

The drama caused by Muslim politicians, since the decision to leave their Ministerial posts, has taken a new twist. Out of the nine Muslim politicians, who resigned in a huff, two have returned to their posts; almost from the backdoor. 

Kabir Hashim’s and Abdul Haleem’s decisions have caused a rift among the group and in the process they let the cat out of the bag, as to the real reason for this group to take the stand it did when they resigned from their Ministries.

After the collective decision to leave their posts, they held a press conference to explain the reasons to the Sri Lankan public. They told us that it was to facilitate the ongoing investigations into the Easter Sunday massacres, that they were leaving their posts. Even at the time this statement drew much scepticism, for if it was indeed the case, they would have left the Yahapalana Government altogether.

Instead, not only did they opt to stay in Government and to support the Government,  Rauff Hakeem continued to sit in the Presidential Select Committee appointed to probe into the 21/4 tragedy. From the aggressive manner he pursued the Government Circular, regarding the dress code for Government servants; the role he plays in the panel is obvious. Furthermore, despite their pledge to sit as backbenchers, they dominate the front, on flimsy excuses. Instead of revoking their Parliamentary privileges that they were no longer entitled to, as mere Members of Parliament, their security had been enhanced.


These decisions taken by Speaker Karu Jayasuriya are highly questionable indeed and did raise the hackles of Parliamentarians like Udaya Gammanpila. The reason given to justify a front bench seat for Bathiudeen, is applicable to Gammanpila as well. However, Gammapila who was in the Joint Opposition since 2015, and now in the Opposition since the beginning of this year, has been discriminated by the Speaker and forced to sit as a backbencher, despite being the leader of a political Party, the Pivithuru Hela Urumaya. 

 While the official reason for the Muslim politicians to quit was to facilitate the 21/4 investigations, unofficially, another reason was circulated among the public. Apparently, when Eastern Province Governor M.L.A.M. Hizbullah and Western Province Governor Azath Salley resigned, from their posts, on the request of President Maithripala Sirisena, pressure for Rishad Bathiudeen mounted. However, apparently he was obstinate not to follow suit. After much persuasion he had agreed, if all resigns. Therefore, fearing a backlash against the ordinary Muslims by non-Muslim communities, the other eight Muslim politicians opted to resign, en masse, ensuring that Bathiudeen too resigned.

Rathana Thera factor

This might have been palatable had it not been for the sequence of events. Venerable Rathana Thera began a fast-unto-death campaign to pressurise Bathiudeen to leave the Government. Interestingly, Rathana Thera’s campaign came in the backdrop of the Opposition’s call for a No-Confidence Motion against Bathiudeen. This NCM comprised a ten item charge sheet that links Minister Bathiudeen with the terrorists responsible for 21/4.

In the most unexpected manner Rathana Thera’s campaign gained traction. The non-Muslim communities united in this campaign to oust Bathiudeen from the Government. For Rathana Thera this was an incredible rejuvenation from the political wilderness he was stumbling about after the Yahapalana Government he helped to instal proved to be an absolute disaster. However, the reason for the campaign to draw the support, it did, was not because of Rathana Thera but because the animosity Sri Lankans have against Bathiudeen.

Until Rathana Thera took the initiative he was rendered a nonentity in the political arena. By the third day of the fast, however, the Thera’s well-being had become a national concern and even His Eminence Ranjith Cardinal Malcolm visited the fasting monk whose strength was fast deteriorating. By the time Hizbullah and Salley resigned Rathana Thera was almost comatose, but had regained some of his former glory. That may be the reason for the Venerable Thera to quit his campaign, without holding on until Bathiudeen too followed suit.

Nine Ministers

The group of nine Muslim politicians quit their Ministerial posts (but not the Government) after Rathana Thera stopped the campaign and while he was recuperating in hospital. Though they called a press conference and announced their resignation, they had not handed over their resignations even by the time Rathana Thera had left the hospital.

The No-Confidence Motion that was brought by the Opposition was against Minister Bathiudeen. However, as he is no longer a Minister of the Yahapalana Government, this NCM too went into abeyance. Despite Bathiudeen’s continued presence in the Government, Rathana Thera too had lost interest in him and was off to other ventures like storming into the controversial university that is under construction in the East conveniently with a Media crew on tow. However, in the wake of Hashim and Haleem retaking their Ministries their real reason for resigning in the first place was unwittingly revealed. This duo’s return to their posts was obviously done without the knowledge or consent of the other seven Muslim politicians, as this has come as a shock for the rest of the group. It is in their shock that they revealed that it was their collective decision not to return to their Ministries unless Bathiudeen was also reappointed. Therefore, this duo returning to their Ministries without Bathiudeen and the rest is being seen, by the rest of the group, as an act of betrayal.

Bathiudeen factor

If the collective decision was not to accept Ministerial posts unless and until Bathiudeen is also reappointed, then the decision to leave in the first place was obviously to protect Bathiudeen. They were protesting as a group against the call for Bathiudeen’s removal from Government.

It is indeed a pity that these politicians cannot keep track of their own falsehoods. When they thus expose themselves it is their supporters who are left with egg on their faces. Bathiudeen being protected by other Muslim politicians, just because they share the same faith, is a racist act and must be condemned unreservedly. Their collective failure to understand the gravity of the tragedy that befell nearly a thousand Sri Lankan citizens, in just one day within the space of an hour or so, is almost criminal. The explosive material used by Zaharan and his clan causes far more serious burns than the C4 used by the LTTE. Even as this is being written, there are many children still under treatment for their burn injuries. This is only a pinch of the tragic stories that 21/4 caused.

Ranil upset

Yet, most interestingly, it is not only the seven Muslim politicians, still in the group, that has taken exception to this duo’s return to their Ministries. It had riled Ranil Wickremesinghe, as well, as he had alleged that this group took the collective decision after consulting him. However, he had been kept totally in the dark when the two Parliamentarians decided to return to their Ministries. Thus, he obviously finds the decision of this duo most unethical.

The fact that these two had gone behind his back, to his arch enemy Maithripala Sirisena, to be reappointed, had hit Wickremesinghe hard. He had lashed out, at a UNP Working Committee meeting that he as the Prime Minister must consent to the appointment of any Minister, for Sirisena as President to appoint. So, naturally, he is not very happy that this ‘vital’ step had been ignored.  

Most unfortunately, he too had unwittingly exposed his role in this contentious matter. It is obvious from his remarks that he too had played a decisive part in divisive politics to gain block votes at the expense of national security and unity. 

It is indeed incredible the despicable lengths some of our politicians go to, just to get vote blocks, to retain the power base for themselves. It is time we realise, the sheer evilness of our current politicians and that Sri Lanka is in dire need of  a true national leader who has no time for politics or to play this disgusting number game.

[email protected]

Notes To The People Economic Development: An Alternative Perspective

June 27th, 2019

By Sumanasiri Liyanage Courtesy Ceylon Today

Since 1977, Sri Lanka has been following neo-liberal economic policies uninterruptedly. The change of Government has had no major impact on them. A forty-year period is long enough to assess the correctness of economic policies. 

During this four decade period (1977-2019), total production as measured by Gross National Product (GNP) has increased substantially and as a result, per capita income has reached US dollar 4,000 mark. So Sri Lanka has moved from poor country category to lower middle income category. One may argue that this is a remarkable achievement. Many families have either a motor bike or a small car. Almost everyone has a mobile phone. Poverty in the traditional sense is not visible.

However, as we all are aware averages do not tell the entire story and are oftentimes misleading. Let us have an example. If the annual per capita income is US$ 4,000, the average annual income of a four-member family is US$ 16,000, approximately, Rs 2,848,000. So the monthly income of the family is approximately Rs 237,000. According to Income and Expenditure Survey, the monthly income of an average four-member-family is much lower, about Rs 65,000. A substantial number of families receive a monthly income lower than Rs 65,000. So, family indebtedness has increased. The number of hours that a person should work just for survival has increased from the accepted norm of eight hours a day. Nutrition level of the population has lowered. People are generally complaining as they are not happy with their lives. The quality of nature – land, water and sea – has declined. Indebtedness has so far led to 179 suicides. So what looks hunky dory at surface level does not tell the story in its totality.  

Questions to be Asked

Are we allowed to continue with these neo-liberal policies? Will the continuation of these policies take us out of the present impasse? It is clear that the major contenders for power – United National Party-led coalition and the Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna-led coalition – want to continue with the present economic policies backed by the trident – International Monetary Fund, World Bank and the World Trade Organisation. Do these policies represent the interests and aspirations of the lower rung of the Sri Lanka society? No, on the contrary, they served the local and international rich elites. If we look at economic development from the perspective of the workers, peasants, fisherfolks, marginalised people and the like, we have to find an alternative. Alternatives emerge from praxis. Many in the peoples’ movement are still suffering from TINA syndrome. Some tend to think that alternatives exist, but they are not practical in the present international context. So first we should escape from this trap and start to believe that realistic alternatives exist and fighting for them makes them practical.

Alternatives that are Possible

The first and foremost we should move away from the system of exchange value production. In place of the production of exchange value, the country must move to a system of use value production. The most important use values include food, clothes, shelter, transport, health goods, education, culture products and entertainment.

1. Food and beverages: In order to have food autonomy, we need in sufficient quantities rice, red lentils, vegetables, onion, fruits, spices and oil and fish and meat products. Out of this list, except red lentils and garlic, all other items may be locally produced organically.

2. For a person to wear clean, smart and aesthetically designed clothes and garments may be produced locally, may be with some imported raw materials and machines. In this sector we may export some products.

3. Every family should be ensured decent housing with water and electricity. Sri Lanka may move gradually to non-fossil energy production.

4. A quick, comfortable, regular and reasonably priced public transport can reduce fossil fuel imports and consumption. People have the right to keep a private vehicle if they are ready to bear its operating cost.

5. Rigorous implementation of Senaka Bibile proposals and public hospital and health-care system with some essential imports may contribute to provide a better health system. As far as this is concerned mere improvement of the public health system would be adequate.

6. There has been a breakdown of our education system in the last 40 years. Education system should be free, less differentiated and holistic. It should be catered to critical thinking and technical and professional training.

7. Publicly-funded programme of culture production would help to create a new person”. Culture products should be available at a reasonable price.

8. People need like food, clothes and shelter entertainment. So maximum working hours should not exceed eight hours a day. Cheap hotels, vacation centres should be made available.

9. Imports: Some imports are necessary and unavoidable. Imports should be allowed classifying them into three categories. (1) No import duty (2) 10-100 per cent import duty (3) more than 100 per cent duty.

Secondly, we propose to gradually move away from the system of capital to a system beyond capital”. Capital is above all a social relation that situates machines, instruments and money in a dominant position above and over living labour. Placing capital goods such as computers, machines, and other instruments in the process of use value production in itself reduces their position in the labour process. Instruments are being in use from time immemorial. Nonetheless, under the present system, it is machines and instruments that control us in the process of production determining the speed and rhythm of work. In short it is not the fisherman who controls the fishing rod, but the fishing rod starts controlling the fisherman.  

Thirdly, the process of production is controlled and steered by the associated producers. This may be done through multiple ownership and management systems, such as small ownership, cooperatives, producer collectives, State and so on. There have been many examples for successful collective ownership and management all over the world even under the constant threat of capital.

Fourthly, the present system kills our environment, so we propose the protection and improvement of our eco-system which is under serious threat by a system seeking profit. Environment has been made subservient to capital accumulation process. Organic farming, non-or reduced fossil fuel-based energy production, recycling and reusing would be the solution for serious threat to humanity and to existence of all life forms.

 This policy goes with the very advice given by Arhat Mahinda to King Devanampiya Tissa. Arhat Mahinda emphatically warned the king that he (the ruler) was not an owner of the land; he was a just guardian so that it is his duty to protect the land and its vegetation. What Marx had informed about the environment is exactly an improvement of what Arhat Mahinda said. Marx writes: Even a whole society, a nation or even all simultaneously existing societies taken together, are not the owners of the globe. They are only its possessors, its usufructuaries, and like boni patres familias, they must hand it down to succeeding generations in an improved condition.”

Adopting these four principles, we offer a new definition for economic development. Sri Lanka has been seeking to reach US$ 100 billion level of total production. We argue that all Sri Lankans can be given a better living standard with less than US$ 100 billion GNP. According to Income and Expenditure Survey an average family with four members needs a monthly income of about Rs 55,000 to have a reasonable living. Suppose a new economic system gives an opportunity for an average family to get Rs 100,000 a month the annual income should be Rs 1,200,000. Assuming that there are 9 million family units in the country, the country needs an economy with total GNP, less than US$ 70 billion. So each family with the new economic system gets a better standard of living and a better quality of life. Not only that we offer another dimension to economic development. We not only maintain the existing ecological balance, we leave an improved environment for next generation.

Capital will definitely resist this economic programme. Hence it needs new social forces that benefits from it to struggle for the new system.  

The writer is a retired teacher of political economy.

E-mail: [email protected]

 02:00 AM Jun 28 2019

Copyright © 2019 All Rights Reserved. Powered by Wordpress