Navy used to sabotage a strike for the first time – Mahinda

December 16th, 2016

– By Yusuf Ariff Adaderana

Former President Mahinda Rajapaksa says that the recent incident at the Hambantota Port can be seen as the first instance of the navy being used to sabotage a strike action.

He said that the current Commander of the Sri Lanka Navy, who has been accused of assaulting a journalist during the protest, was a very talented officer during the war.

Rajapaksa said that he believes the navy chief was probably sent there and made to do what he did by people who wanted to make the people level accusations against the navy.

The Kurunegala District UPFA MP added that when the young port employees came to visit him he told them that they will be employed “as soon as we come to power” and “if there is anything remaining in the Ports Authority.”

em if it remains because what is the point of an authority once all the ports are sold,” he told reporters in Colombo.

Rajapaksa also stated that they are being accused of making “deals” with the government even if they talk against the government or if they meet an MP or a minister. “Either Mahinda Rajapaksa’s deal or Basil Rajapaksa’s deal.”

This is the easiest way to create internal rifts, he said.

– See more at: http://www.adaderana.lk/news/38244/navy-used-to-sabotage-a-strike-for-the-first-time-mahinda#sthash.1ugRfMcC.dpuf

Journalists stage protest in Colombo over Hambantota Port incident

December 16th, 2016

හම්බන්තොටදී පහර දීමට එරෙහිව මාධ්‍යවේදීන් කොළඹදී විරෝධය පළ කරමින්…

The mess-up in Geneva

December 16th, 2016

U. Pethiyagoda Courtesy The Island

The predicament of Sri Lanka in Geneva is that of a snake swallowing its own tail. Following on domestic experiences, we have been inconsistent, contradictory and dilatory. A good brief has been lost. Alarmingly, there are no indications of serious preparations to meet the deadline of next year, which will soon be on us. We are immersed in various petty irrelevancies and political games instead.

Sri Lanka has adopted an inconsistent and puzzling position. At first, as expected efforts were directed towards preventing the damaging Resolutions, and member countries were canvassed to vote against. Having failed, there was an inexplicable reversal and Sri became a joint signatory! At first glance, this seems insane, but the trouble is that several glances later, it still remains insane! Two questions need to be addressed: What were efforts aimed at and how better could we have approached the problem?. A sub-issue is, who should be blamed for the mess? Unquestionably, the Foreign Ministry under both administrations have a major share.

First an inconclusive series of “Peace Talks, in various salubrious climates was a predictable and expensive failure. Both parties were in it for the ride. Then came Geneva. A number of people figured in the delegations. Their joint efforts were a failure. What precise arguments were presented in support of our case, are at best obscure. Was enough homework done to promote our cause? We shall never know, other than that they were ineffective and eventually resulted in a peculiar reversal. We joined the US, who until then was the devil incarnate, became our buddy and co-signatory! Why? This will never be acceptably explained.

The more important question is: How could we have approached our problem better? The major issue seems to be that our forces are accused of being guilty of excesses, indiscriminate slaughter of civilians and Genocide aimed at the Tamils. This is patently untrue. There was agreement that the LTTE were a bunch of criminals who had to be subdued. They had by their brutality and savagery, richly qualified to be exterminated. Regarding civilian deaths, there is much controversy about numbers. Although even a single death is one too many, there have never been violent uprisings or wars ever, where no non-combatants were sadly killed. Ours was special as aptly summed up by an Indian journalist, who said that “where an armed group resorted to violence while in disguise, and among civilians, they forfeit the right to subsequently whimper about “civilian casualties” If such occurred, they and only they are to be blamed. Well said, our delegations would not have placed before the UNHRC, the barbarity of the attacks on the Central Bank, Sri Maha Bodhi, the Kattankudy mosque, Dalada Maligawa, Aranthalawa, the slaughter of over 600 unarmed policemen ordered to surrender by stupid superiors, and countless other actions of incredible brutality and destruction, detailed in scores of publications as in the writings of S.L.Gunasekera, Shamindra Ferdinando, M.Iqbal, by active participants like Retd General Kamal Gunaratne in his Nandikadal, and several others who were able to portray the sheer horror that the troops had to face: Material that would have convinced, even the most committed supporter to understand the mood of soldiers who had braved indescribable deprivation and trauma when they finally faced their targeted enemy. Surely, even a fraction of the atrocities committed by the LTTE , would have kindled the natural impulse of vengeance.

Also, with the extermination of the LTTE leadership, there are none to answer the long litany of terror. The possible exceptions of Karuna, Pillayan and Kumaran Ratnam have been embraced and mollycoddled by Governments rewarding them with Ministerships, Diplomatic Passports,Office Bearerships in Political Parties, Chief Ministerships and heaven knows what else. Craftily, the proponents of the truly inimical Resolutions proclaim grandly that “both sides” stand accused. Idiocy fails to recognize that one team – a bunch of criminals – is now off the field!

U. Pethiyagoda

Roosevelt Deceived the American Citizens and Congress

December 16th, 2016

An Interview with Hiromichi Moteki Courtesy The LibertyWeb

“Society for the Dissemination of Historical Fact”, Head of Office

Born 1941, Tokyo. After graduating from Tokyo University, Department of Economics, worked for Fuji Electric. Through the International Wool Office work set up the “Sekai Shuppan” Co., Ltd. in 1990. CEO of the company. Executive Director of “Society for the Dissemination of Historical Fact”. His works include, “Shougakko ni Eigo wa Hitsuyou Nai,” (Kodansha), “Bunkasho ga Eigo o Kowasu,” (Chukoshinsho), and has translated, “Japanese Military Strategy in the Pacific War: Was Defeat Inevitable?” (WAC), “Radiation Hormesis” (Nisshin News), etc.

Roosevelt Deceived the American Citizens and Congress

“The whole Japanese war was a madman’s(Roosevelt’s) desire to get into war.”
These words were stated in the work (note 1) of the American President Hoover, who came before Roosevelt. The ex-President stated that, “It was not Japan, but Roosevelt who initiated the Pacific War.”

Furthermore, Congressman Hamilton Fish, who was opposed to entering the war, gave a passionate speech for supporting the war against Japan, after hearing Roosevelt’s speech post Pearl Harbor attack, changing his opinion. However, after the war he realized that he was deceived by Roosevelt and stated that he takes it all back.

How exactly did Roosevelt “deceive”? The authority to declare war lies with Congress in America. However, Roosevelt had not reported important information to Congress. According to the research on public opinion at the time, 85% of Americans were against the war. That changed 180 degrees after the Pearl Harbor attack. However, not only the citizens, but also Congress were not aware that America had given Japan an ultimatum with the “Hull note”.

Moreover, in July of 1941 Roosevelt had signed off on the plan to bomb the Japanese mainland, five months before the Pearl Harbor attack (note 2). This was a concrete order to attack, and it consisted of a plan to fly bombers from China. The bombing was delayed as the bombers had to suddenly be redirected to Britain. Thus Roosevelt only gave an appearance of being on the side of peace, while in reality he had deceived both the citizens and Congress, and was intent on starting war while avoiding criticism.

8168_02
Hiromichi Moteki

He Thought That Japan Had to Be Crushed

Racial discrimination was also in the background of Roosevelt’s initiation of war with Japan. He really believed that Japan to be a backwards, feudalistic, monarchical country, with a malicious militarism, that should be crushed by whatever means necessary.

Certainly such racial prejudice had something to do with the dropping of the atom bomb. The atomic bomb was initially developed against Germany, but dropping it on Germany was not studied concretely. The plan was to drop it on Japan from the beginning.

On the other hand Roosevelt saw China as being a republic and a democratic country. This was not unique to Roosevelt, but the general view of Americans at the time.

Even more, Roosevelt felt sympathetic to communism. Five presidents, up until Hoover, did not recognize the communist nation of Soviet Socialist Republic, but as soon as he entered office Roosevelt recognized the communists, and after that he continually capitulated to the Soviets. If the United States had properly recognized the threat of communism, then history would have been very different.

 

A True Alliance Between Japan and the States Should Be Realized

Many Americans admire Roosevelt today. That is because he won a “righteous war” for America. In recent years, the lies are being uncovered, little by little, but it must be difficult for Americans to admit. Of course there are those like Hoover and Fish who sincerely recognized the truth, but most Americans, even now, believe that they fought a just war.

However, they ought not to think “the war started because Japan was bad.” Unlike some countries, Japan does not ask American leaders to stand on the ground in Hiroshima and apologize. I just want to say that America should properly understand history. An alliance built on a lie can crumble at any time. I think Japan must speak out on matters that ought to be discussed and rethought.

Journalists across the country in protest against the Navy Commander while Prime Minister Ranil Wickremasinghe admits that he personally directed Navy commander to break up,the strike.

December 15th, 2016

Sri Lanka News Brief

Journalists across the country began a massive protest in front of the Fort in Colombo today to protest against the Navy Commander for attacking journalists while they were reporting the tense atmosphere prevailed between the Magampura port workers and Navy  a few days ago.

Media Employees Trade Union Federation, Working Journalists Association, Sri Lanka Association of Young Journalists, Tamil Journalists Association, Sri Lanka Association Media photographers, and several members of the media organizations took part in the protest.

Rural Journalist also from Colombo district, Ampara, Kandy, Moratuwa, Galle, Matara, Hambantota, Kurunegala, Dambulla, Matale and Vavuniya, Anuradhapura, Kegalle joined the protest..

Another agitation against the attack on the journalist were held by the Hewagama korale Media Association (15) in Godagama.

Meanwhile speaking to reporters after meeting with the Sri Lanka Navy Commander Vice Admiral Ravindra Wijegunaratne, who handed over a report detailing the recent navy operation carried out at the Hambantota,  the  prime minister said two shipping companies called me and asked that their ships, which were prevented from leaving, be protected and safeguard from any harm.

 “After discussing with the President and the Defence Secretary, I asked the Navy Commander to go and protect those ships and helped them leave the harbour.”

“Because we have to hand over this port to a new company on January 7th,” Prime Minister said the government has to protect these ports according to the international agreements and that ships will not return to Sri Lanka if those are not implemented.

“We asked the Navy Commander to act on that. The navy faced obstacles when attempting to clear the ships. However, they managed to remove them from there.”

He said that a permanent navy camp will be established at the Hambantota Port because unlike Colombo, a petroleum refinery and a LNG plant will be established in Hambantota  He, however, emphasized that this incident caused harm to the country and created a problem regarding the Hambantota Port.

He also said that the government has now been asked to pay damages for the losses incurred by the shipping companies.

The Prime Miniter further said that legal action will be pursued against anyone who is found to have damaged property or violated the law in any manner. –

Meanwhile Former President Mahinda Rajapaksa says that the recent incident at the Hambantota Port can be seen as the first instance of the navy being used to sabotage a strike action.

He said that the current Commander of the Sri Lanka Navy, who has been accused of assaulting a journalist during the protest, was a very talented officer during the war.

Rajapaksa said that he believes the navy chief was probably sent there and made to do what he did by people who wanted to make the people level accusations against the navy. 

The Kurunegala District UPFA MP added that when the young port employees came to visit him he told them that they will be employed “as soon as we come to power” and “if there is anything remaining in the Ports Authority.”  “I told them if it remains because what is the point of an authority once all the ports are sold,” he told reporters in Colombo. Rajapaksa also stated that they are being accused of making “deals” with the government even if they talk against the government or if they meet an MP or a minister. “Either Mahinda Rajapaksa’s deal or Basil Rajapaksa’s deal.” –

මාගම්පුර වරායේ සේවකයින් හා නාවික හමුදාව අතර ඇතිවූ උණුසුම්කාරී වාතාවරණය වාර්තා කිරීමට ගිය මාධ්‍යවේදියකුට නාවික හමුදාපති පහරදීම සම්බන්ධයෙන් විරෝධය පළ කරමින් දිවයින පුරා සිටින මාධ්‍යවේදීහු අද (15) කොළඹ කොටුව ඉදිරිපිට උද්ඝෝෂණයක් ඇරඹුහ.

මාධ්‍ය සේවක වෘත්තීය සමිති සම්මේලනය,  වෘත්තීය පත්‍ර කලාවේදීන්ගේ සංගමය, ශ්‍රී ලංකා තරුණ ජනමාධ්‍යවේදීන්ගේ සංගමය, දෙමළ මාධ්‍යවේදීන්ගේ සංගමය, ශ්‍රී ලංකා ජනමාධ්‍ය ඡායාරූප ශිල්පීන්ගේ සංගමය ඇතුළු මාධ්‍ය සංවිධාන ගණනාවක සාමාජිකයෝ ඊට එක් වුහ.

කොළඹ, අම්පාර, මහනුවර, මොරටුව, ගාල්ල, මාතර, හම්බන්තොට, කුරුණෑගල, දඹුල්ල, මාතලේ, වව්නියාව, අනුරාධපුර, කෑගල්ල ආදී ප්‍රදේශ රැසකින් පැමිණි මාධ්‍යවේදීහු උද්ඝෝෂණයට එක්ව සිටියහ.

හේවාගම කෝරලේ ජනමාධ්‍ය සංගමය මගින් ද මාධ්‍යවේදියාට පහර දීම සම්බන්ධයෙන්  උද්ඝෝෂණයක් අද (15) ගොඩගම දී පැවැත්වුහ.

0-02-06-1dff3eb46ddd764bfcafdb122793b883e4757f241f2dbe86177bf68c06e75962_full 0-02-06-371d3df43f7991d7ffc57e6a8a7f7f061e1c6b3bd03c81daa9b56b426ec8dc3f_full 0-02-06-d512995c6db1d4452854d444394c0edcebeff23c11479a8fdc7f615a14d655d5_full

ජායාරූප – අකිල බද්දේවිතාන

 

DSC09740 DSC09732 DSC09737

ජායාරූප – රේඛා තරංගනී ෆොන්සේකා

IMG_7988 IMG_8026 IMG_8076 IMG_8083 IMG_8118 IMG_8150

ඡායාරූප – ලහිරු හර්ෂණ

IMG_0736[1] IMG_0740[1] IMG_0744[1] IMG_0749[1]

විඩියෝ – සෙනරත් බණ්ඩාර

Punishing Venerable Ampitiye Sumanarathana Thero Sets a Bigger Judicial Precedence against Tamil and Muslim Ultra Racists

December 15th, 2016

Dilrook Kannangara

The Minister of Justice raised a few eye brows when he decided to sort out matters connected to Venerable Ampitiye Sumanarathana Thero outside the legal system. Tamil, Muslim and Sinhala MPs questioned his rationale behind his action. They argued that the venerable Buddhist monk should be punished for hate speech and arousing ethnic tensions. Minister of Justice deflected their demands and pointed out how they shamelessly remained with the Cabinet of the former President despite what happened in Aluthgama . By not taking legal action against the venerable monk, the Minister of Justice actually saves some key Tamil and Muslim politicians!

If legal action is taken against Venerable Ampitiye Sumanarathana Thero, it sets a judicial precedence which can be used against Tamil and Muslim leaders that regularly rely on racism to win votes. TNA leaders regularly cry “Sinhala colonization” creating hatred against Sinhala people living in the north and east and spreading their assumed restriction against Sinhalese living in the north and east. These are extremely racist rantings that unfortunately go unpunished. Certain Muslim leaders have also engaged in racism. One of them called Buddhist monks saffron terrorists not very long ago. He too went unpunished. If Sri Lanka takes action against arousing racial hatred, most Tamil and Muslim leaders will be behind bars before Venerable Ampitiye Sumanarathana Thero. This was why the Minister of Justice wants the matter sorted out without going to court.

The Sri Lankan society has double standards on racism. Due to perennial racism sowed by Tamil politicians since 1920s, people are numb and immune to its ugliness. As a result they don’t call it racism. However, Sinhala politicians rarely use racism in politics. Therefore, even if someone talks about injustices to Sinhalese, people would be quick to brand him/her a racist!

However, this doesn’t work in law. In law, everyone is equal (at least on paper). A Tamil, Muslim or a Sinhalese will be judged on an equal footing in a court of law. Society’s high tolerance of Tamil racism and low tolerance of Sinhala racism will be dumped in the rubbish bin in a court of law. One yardstick will be used to measure all. Therefore, although Tamil and Muslim leaders always escaped being branded and punished for racism in the society, their luck runs out in a court of law. Sinhalese sometimes branded as racists by the society for innocently standing up for just rights in fact commit no offence legally.

This has profound implications on religious texts as well. If hate speech is illegalized sufficiently and meaningfully, many verses in Hindu and Islamic texts and a considerable number of Biblical texts will have to be hidden, deleted, creatively interpreted or otherwise toned down to escape hate speech laws. Since Buddhism has no hate arousing texts, it escapes the law. For this reason, although the government made a huge cry about banning hate speech, it has been unable to bring meaningful legal restrictions that would cause collateral damage against Hindu and Islamic texts.

Venerable Ampitiye Sumanarathana Thero is a bigger hero than appears. He has routed Tamil and Muslim ultra racists and trapped them into laws against hate speech and racially inflammable expressions. If he is punished, Tamil and Muslim ultra racists must be punished too. In fact proving their guilt is much easier than proving Venerable Ampitiye Sumanarathana’s guilt.

The government is in a conundrum. Hopefully they will not continue to bend the law (as they infamously boast) to punish one at the same time saving worse others. If they continue to do so, people will completely lose faith in the legal system and rely on alternative approaches to deliver justice.

Sri Lanka’s New Constitutional Proposals – Comparisons with LTTE’s 2003 ISGA Proposals

December 15th, 2016

Shenali D Waduge

The ISGA (Interim Self Governing Authority) was proposed by globally proscribed terrorists in October 2003 for power sharing of merged NorthEast province. The proposal was titled “Proposal by the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam on behalf of the Tamil people for an agreement to establish an interim self-governing authority for the North East of the island of Sri Lanka” These proposals were said to be in lieu of their demand for a Tamil Eelam. The cuckoos in government that agreed to the proposals have agreed to give Eelam all but in name as can be seen by the nature of power the GOSL has abdicated without so much as seeking approval from the citizens of Sri Lanka. LTTE may be no more but their proxy the TNA remains uninvestigated and the question of it continuing the demands under the camouflage of parliamentary privileges cannot be ignored. In comparing the present proposals by various parties aligned to demands similar to what LTTE proposed through the ISGA reveals that we should be in no hurry to pass any new constitution until all demands similar to those made by the separatists even those who are posed as federalists and secularists are thrown to the dustbin as these proposals should not be allowed to make any entry to any proposal that affects the unitary nature of the constitution and the sovereignty of an island nation that should not under ANY NAME be divided, demarcated or devolved. These proposals are simply interim options paving the way for ultimate secession. No one can ignore the case in the Supreme Court challenging the ITAK constitution claiming its aims and objectives are confederal. If so these are aligned to the proposals for the provinces to function as regions with full sovereignty abdicated to them.

Background information

  • 5 December 2001 Parliamentary Elections – Ranil Wickremasinghe led UNF victory.
  • LTTE immediately announces ceasefire
  • Norway mediates a permanent ceasefire – CFA signed on 22 February 2002
  • September 2002 Peace Talks in Phuket, Thailand
  • April 2003 LTTE suspends talks
  • 31 October 2003 LTTE forwards ISGA proposals giving a broad range of powers that included right to impose rule of law, collect taxes, run administration, oversea rehabilitation process – everything a sovereign nation does though the propaganda projected LTTE had dropped the Eelam demand.
  • Jayantha Dhanapala became the head of the peace secretariat from June 1, 2004 till November 2005 and also functioned as President Kumaratunga’s Senior Advisor.

Please note at the time of the ISGA proposals the NorthEast was not demerged. So LTTE’s proposals were applicable to both provinces though Tamils were not the majority in the East.

LTTE’s proposals also noted that the Tamil people had mandated their elected representatives to establish an independent sovereign, secular State for the Tamil people in elections subsequent to the Vaddukoddai Resolution of 1976 (Is this really so – a question Tamils need to openly say YES or NO)

What is also laughable is that in the proposals the LTTE claims to have indulged in ‘non-violent and peaceful constitutional struggle’ – who committed over 300 suicide attacks!!!

Features of the ISGA (note the new constitutional proposals claim not to remerge the N&E but is proposing a new demarcation of boundaries)

  • 8 districts (Amparai, Batticoloa, Jaffna, Kilinochchi, Mannar, Mullaitivu, Trincomalee and Vavuniya)

Composition of the ISGA

  • Members appointed by LTTE (who will be Tamil)
  • Members appointed by GOSL (no guarantee that they will be Sinhalese)
  • Members appointed by Muslims (who will be Muslim)
  • LTTE must have absolute majority in ISGA (LTTE appointees have to be more than the combined appointees of GOSL & Muslims)
  • Chairperson & CEO of ISGA will be LTTE nominee because he has to be elected by majority vote – when LTTE holds majority automatically LTTE nominee becomes Chairperson
  • ISGA will appoint Independent Election Commission (in other words LTTE will appoint and LTTE will conduct ‘free and fair elections’ J)

Secularism / ISGA

  • No religion given foremost place in NE (note present constitution apart from 2 all other members were in favour of Buddhism not being given foremost place)

Jurisdiction/ISGA

  • Governance over resettlement, rehabilitation, reconstruction, development including improvement, upgrading, raising revenue, imposing taxes, levies duties, law & order and over land (all elements covered by the 1995-6 GL-Neelan Union of Regions devolution package and recommendations made by committee drafting new constitution)

Separation of Powers

  • Justice in NE will be separate (1995-6 GL-Neelan devolution proposals and current proposals advocate same)

Finance

  • Financial Commission appointed by ISGA (With LTTE in majority – only LTTE approved members will be nominated)
  • GOSL has agreed that ISGA is allowed full control over all expenitures

NorthEast General Fund – Under control of ISGA (in other words under LTTE control)

  • ISGA will control all grants/loans made by GOSL and all other loans too
  • ISGA will control all allocations by GOSL from agreements with states/institutions and other organizations

NorthEast Reconstruction Fund to be transferred to ISGA (in other words to LTTE)

  • All grants given to NERF will be determined and supervised by ISGA

 

ISGA will have powers to borrow, receive aid and trade (GL-Neelan Package proposed same as is the new constitutional proposals to the provinces)

  • ISGA to borrow internally & externally, provide guarantees and indemnities, receive direct aid, engage in or regulate internal and external trade.
  • ISGA to appoint Auditor General (GL-Neelan Proposed same)

 

District Committees

  • Created to carry out administration in districts with powers delegated by ISGA
  • District Committees will function directly under ISGA (LTTE control)
  • ISGA to appoint Chairpersons & members to committees

 

Administration

  • ISGA will have full control over all administrative structures and personnel in NorthEast (in other words LTTE will control all administration in the 2 provinces)
  • ISGA at its discretion can create expert advisory committees in areas NOT LIMITED TO – economic affairs, financial affairs, judicial affairs, resettlement and rehabilitation affairs, development infrastructure and essential services. (in short majority LTTE controlled ISGA will rule NorthEast while the GOSL and Muslims look on as members!)

Land

  • ISGA holds power to alienate and determine use of ALL LAND in NorthEast that is not privately owned
  • ISGA to be responsible for resettlement and rehabilitation of displaced civilians and refugees (so it is not terrorists who are being rehabilitated but civilians and rehabilitation by the terrorists J)

Marine & Off-shore resources

  • ISGA to control marine and offshore resources in adjacent seas and will hold power to regulate access

Natural Resources & Water

  • ISGA to control natural resources in NE region. Existing agreements related to natural resources will continue but all monies due under such agreements to be paid to ISGA. Future agreements will be through ISGA.
  • GOSL to agree on distribution to international requirements.

Elections

  • Independent Election Commission appointed by ISGA

Facts remain stubborn for those unwilling to accept truth

Tamil Homeland theory and the claim of a historical homeland of the Tamil people is nothing but a myth given a Goebbels twist (say a lie long enough and people begin to believe). The same ethnic group cannot evolve in two different countries – i.e. Tamils cannot evolve/originate in both South India AND Sri Lanka. If Tamils evolved or originated in Sri Lanka then those born in South India have to be referred to by another ethnic name and vice versa. Both these ethnic groups are claiming for self-determination and homeland though South India’s started before the initiative began in Sri Lanka. This quest cannot be inter-twined or incorporated into any constitution to satisfy the aspiration of an ethnic minority that has no historical basis to claim homeland in Sri Lanka. LTTE claims the Tamil people mandated their ‘elected’ representatives to establish an independent sovereign, secular State for the Tamil people by the Vaddukoddai Resolution of 1976 – but who or how was LTTE mandated?

You have to wonder at the mentality of the leaders and the officials who actually endorsed the LTTE agreement totally disregarding what the implications of the agreement meant.

By signing the 2002 ceasefire agreement, Sri Lanka had placed a terrorist organization on par with a national army. No other country in the world had done so. LTTE had a carte blanche with territory to call their own and the October 2003 ISGA proposals were to seal their Eelam in all but name.

For some good fortune the then President suspended Parliament after taking over the ministries of Defence, Interior & Information when the then PM Ranil Wickremasinghe was overseas.

What kind of government agrees to give monies from the SL Govt consolidated funds to the LTTE controlled NE when the amount of money is not even determined?

What kind of government agrees to give non-state actors money that is given by multi/bilateral institutes?

What kind of government agrees to violate the country’s sovereignty and internal affairs by following a procedure similar to Bosnia by appointing an ICC member for arbitrations between LTTE and SLG?

What kind of government agrees to allow a globally proscribed terrorist group to borrow internally and externally, provide guarantees and indemnities, receive aid directly and engage in internal & external trade?

What kind of government would agree to allowing LTTE absolute majority in the ISGA and give no quota to the Sinhalese who comprise 7 out of 10 people in Sri Lanka

What kind of government allows the LTTE to be head of the ISGA, and appoint all important positions

What kind of government agrees to remove the foremost place given even by colonial rulers to Buddhism without which the country would not be what it is today. The island was built following the doctrines and principles of Buddhist governance for 2600 years.

What kind of government agrees to allow a terrorist organization to head a Financial Commission wherein the GOSL is bound by ‘good faith’ to implement its recommendations?

What kind of government agrees to take loans (and the people have to pay the interest) but the money is given to LTTE controlled ISGA?

What kind of government abdicates all state land to a terrorist organization?

What kind of government agrees to remove its army from 2 provinces and give power to LTTE controlled ISGA while the GOSL has to compensate owners?

What kind of government agrees to allow LTTE controlled ISGA to take control over marine and offshore resources when LTTE ran its own merchant fleet and LTTE’s illegal network continues to exist?

What kind of government allows to give LTTE controlled ISGA to control all natural resources in NE?

A government given a carrot of USD5billion would agree to abdicate its sovereignty!

What is poignant about the ISGA and its comparisons with the present proposals for the new constitution is that the TNA told Donald Camp Deputy US Assistant Secretary of State for South Asian Affairs that LTTE wanted a written undertaking that the GOSL would give priority to the ISGA.

https://www.tamilnet.com/art.html?catid=13&artid=12379

shenali1412201601shenali1412201602

These examples are lessons that we cannot afford to erase from memory. The players are the same. Their demands have not changed. They are simply sugar-coated to come repackaged under different nomenclatures. These clauses are very much alive in the current proposals being toyed and it is most likely that some carrots will again be thrown. We have seen how Santa is going overboard flooding MPs with gifts when people are fighting to make ends meet – rice is now sold at Rs.95 a kilo!

Not surprisingly the response of the international community

shenali1412201603

shenali1412201604

Some of these characters are today drafting the new constitution!

Shenali D Waduge

 

Galle Face Christmas Tree -The Tallest Christmas Tree in the World 2016

December 15th, 2016

Asoka Weerasinghe Kings Gove Crescent .  Gloucester . Ontario . K1J 6G1 . Canada

Hounarable Mithripala Sirisena
President of Sri Lanka
Presidential Secretariat
Galle Face
Colombo 1
Sri Lanka

Archbishop of Colombo, Malcolm Cardinal Ranjith

Re:  The Tallest Christmas Tree in the World 2016

Dear President Sirisena:

When I read that this stupid ChristmasTree Project costing 12 million rupees is back on track after the intervention of Prime Minister Ranil Wickramesinghe, I was shocked with disgust and gasped, “Sweet Mother of Jesus, speak to these fools who think that this Christmas Tree will pack planes with Tourists flying in from all quarters of the world to look at it.   A tourist attraction, they like to believe.  Sweet Mother of Jesus, tell these Sri Lankan politicos that this is a foolish dream when they could utilize that money to feed the poor of all communities all over Sri Lanka.

Sweet Mother of Jesus, please convince the President of the island to use that 12 million rupees to put together Christmas hampers and distribute them among the poor from buildings which display a cross on their façade which will recognize it as a Christian church.

To celebrate this charitable Christmas event I will gladly sing my Christmas Carol to you and Archbishop Malcolm Cardinal Ranjith on Christmas day.  Archbishop knows the tune.  Join me.

“O Christmas Tree, O Christmas Tree
Who said, you’ll ever be unchanging.
A symbol of goodwill and love,
Who said, you’ll ever be unchanging.

 This year in Colombo
The Christmas tree will be taller
Costing 12 million rupees
And keeping poor stomachs in limbo

 O Christmas Tree, O Christmas tree
Such pleasure do you bring me,
O Christmas Tree, O Christmas Tree
But this year you have angered me

 With each shining light
Each silver bell
This is how
Yahapalanayos
Spread Christmas cheer well

 O Christmas Tree, O Christmas tree
Who said, you are so unchanging.”

Here is a true story, Mr. President, when I promoted the dignity of the poor people in Sri Lanka, pooh, poohing the decadence of the Canadian bureaucrats. And I swear that this incident did happen.

The year was 1972, a working weekday in the Summer.

The place was 150 Kent Street in Ottawa, where the National Film Board was located,

I was the Head,Thematic Research Section for the National Museums coordinating the production of 15 brand new Halls at the Victoria Memorial Museum where the National Museum of Man was located.

On the third floor of the right wing we were designing the History Hall – The Four Acres of Snow.

On this particular day, the Director of the National Museum of Man, Dr. William (Bill) Taylor and a few other ‘higher-up’s were summoned to the National Film Board to approve the rough-cut of the film for the History Hall that was presented by the producer of the film and the curator responsible for the History Hall.  No one present liked it, and nor did I and it was rejected,

The lights of the auditorium came on.  The Curator responsible for the film said, “Oh, the rough cut has only cost us $60,000,” as if to say so what! It is no big deal.

My immediate visceral reaction was, “Don’t you ever repeat those words again, it shows the Canadian decadence.  With that money I could feed all the poor people in Sri Lanka three meals a day for one whole month.”  And there was a big silence among the 20-odd people who had assembled to approve this rough cut.

After a three minute silence, Dr. Bill Taylor got up, looked at me and said, “Asoka, come out, I want to speak to you.”  A thin film of sweat covered my whole body not knowing whether I had spoken out of turn and that I would lose my job.

When in the foyer, Dr. Taylor told me, “ I am sorry we angered You.  I understand your punishing statement and I am embarrassed for the Canadians.   Listen, I want you to take over the production of the film, and I will put in that $60,000 from the Director’s slush fund.”

And my response was, “Thanks for respecting my words of frustration.  I couldn’t help but speak out for the dignity of poor people who have no voice, and I was brought up in a poor country.”

Mr. President, and that is why my Christmas Carol and pleas to Sweet Mother of Jesus.

I was disappointed in Archbishop Malcolm Cardinal Ranjith with his skewed logic.  He felt that the Catholic church should protest as he had thought the project was funded by the Government, which happened to be the Tax payers money.  No sooner he was told by the Prime Minister Ranil Wickeramasinghe that it was sponsored money and it only cost 12 million rupees, he found it OK,  That was strange and silly, wasn’t it, Mr. President.  I thought it was a protest on a principle than the genesis from where the funds came from.  Surely, doesn’t the Archbishop have a conscience?

Mr. President, you have every right to ask me, “Who are you, and if you are fighting for the dignity of Sri Lanka’s poor, what have you done for them so far?”

You know what Mr. President, my response to you will be, “I have not renewed my bragging license, but let me whisper in to your ears what I have done for the poor in Sri Lanka.”

Mr. President, how stupid can your Yahapalanayo’s be.  For God’s sake tighten up their reins, because the Good Governance lily-whites with halos over their heads are losing it and their halos are getting tarnished by the day with their own actions.  Don’t tell me that you didn’t know it!

I hope the New Year will let you bring more honesty to your people who are no fools, especially the poor who do not have a voice, and are tired of vindictive

politics.

Sincerely,

Asoka Weerasinghe (Mr.)

Impact of Ranil’s apology

December 15th, 2016

By Shivanthi Ranasinghe Courtesy Ceylon Today

Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe expressed his regret for the Jaffna Library’s destruction in 1982. Though many misconstrued his expressed regret as an apology, very few commended him for it. This is because the list of wrongs done during the UNP tenures, especially since the 1977 Constitution, is long. Instead, he is buried under an avalanche of reminders of all these depravities, demanding he apologies for these as well. However, the fact is, he did not apologize for the Jaffna Library either.
He was speaking on the third reading stage debate on Budget 2017. The Joint Opposition (JO) heckled him for his remarks that the government had created employment opportunities and restored industrial development in the North. In reaction, he expressed his regret thus, and challenged the JO to do the same.

His challenging the JO and even sharing his sentiments with them is curious. JO is not the injured party. For that matter, neither is the Tamil National Alliance (TNA). The injured party is the Jaffna community.

Injured party

Expressing regret to a party who is not the injured party is not an apology. Furthermore, he failed to explain the circumstances that led to the destruction, the challenges the government failed to prevent it or pledge to prevent a recurrence.
The previous administration (the present JO), took decisive steps to end the terrors that culminated in setting fire to the Jaffna Library and other greater atrocities. Until then, the most victimized was the Northern community than any other in Sri Lanka. In these events, the TNA played a role uglier than any other political party. Therefore, Wickremesinghe should have challenged the TNA and not the JO.

Tendering an apology should not be taken lightly, nor done on impulse. While apologizing for a wrong is the decent thing to do, the other party too must be gracious – especially on national matters. If the apology was used as fodder to browbeat the apologizing party, further exacerbating the circumstances that led to the unfortunate incident in the first place, then conditions are not ripe for an apology.

Strange silence

Whether the Jaffna community is ready to accept the apology is questionable. As a community, they are strangely silent. A signature of a free society is its cacophony of voices, expressing a wide spectrum of opinions. This is not heard from the North. The only voice heard is hailing separatism, portraying terrorists as heroes and political prisoners, when the world has proscribed them as terrorists. It is obvious that the power is back in the hands of the separatists, and the Northern man is again their hostage.

Even in the best of circumstances, merits and demerits of apologizing must be carefully weighed. US President Obama drew much flak from political analysts for his stance that US must atone for its past policies. American leadership is not a popularity contest and Obama should not seek to improve his personal ratings across the world by undermining the world’s superpower, argues Dr. Nile Gardiner, Director Margaret Thatcher Centre for Freedom and Morgan Roach, Researchers at the Douglas and Sarah Allison Centre for Foreign and National Security Policy.

Obama apologized on behalf of his country to US allies, but not without regard to these concerns. The underlining theme of his apologies is, “we made some mistakes, but we are not bad guys; our intention had always been good, we just messed up a bit on the execution; we’ve had good relations before and there’s nothing to stop us resuming it.”

Obamas top 10 apologies

This is evidenced in the list ‘Obama’s top 10 apologies’ by Dr. Gardiner and Roach:
To France and Europe, speech at Strasbourg, France, 3 April 2009: “America has shown arrogance.”
To the Muslim world, interview with Al Arabiya, 27 January 2009: “We have not been perfect.”
To the Summit of the Americas, opening ceremony address, 17 April 2009: “At times we sought to dictate our terms.”
At the G-20 Summit of World Leaders, London, 2 April 2009: “Some restoration of America’s standing in the world.”
For the War on Terror, speech at the National Archives, Washington DC, 21 May 2009: “We went off course.”
For Guantanamo in France, at Strasbourg speech: “Sacrificing your values.”

Before the Turkish Parliament, 6 April 2009: “Our own darker periods in our history.”
For US policy towards the Americas, 16 April 2009: “The US has not pursued and sustained engagement with our neighbours.”
For the mistakes of CIA, CIA Headquarters, 20 April 2009: “Potentially we’ve made some mistakes.”
For Guantanamo in Washington, 21 May 2009: “Instead of serving as a tool to counter terrorism, it is a rallying cry for our enemies.”

Expert opinion

Before his visit to Hiroshima, the expert opinion was that he must not apologize for the atomic bombing. This, despite the horrific consequences Hiroshima still experiences with high rates of cancer, abnormal births and other birth defects. This, despite the good relations America is currently enjoying with Japan.
Dr. Peter Kuznick, Professor of History, Director of the Nuclear Studies Institute at American University and co-author of The Untold History of the United States says, “Imagine, if the Nazi Germany had developed the bomb first and used it. The world would look upon the atomic bomb, nuclear weapons with appropriate horror. We’d say that this is the kind of weapon that a fascist country would use.”

America is the only country to have used atomic bombs and to continue to threaten the world with nuclear weapons. Yet, their stance is that the victimized party was ‘smacked’ for its own good. Even in Hiroshima, Obama’s message was, “It was tragic in some ways, but at least it ended the war.” True, it did save half a million American lives, but what about the Japanese lives, asks Dr. Kuznick.

Flimsy apology

It is because of this justification that the world hears a flimsy apology, without seeing a change in the US foreign policy. America continues to “show arrogance” as they interfere with our Constitution, “seek to dictate terms” as they insist on war crime tribunals against our military, and “go off course” as they support terrorism to manipulate legitimate governments perceived unfriendly as seen during the final days of our war against terrorism and now in Aleppo. Indeed, if a nation needs to be ‘smacked’ again, the US would not hesitate to do so. One would be mistaken to think that Wickremesinghe’s regret would pressurize the TNA to return the sentiment. TNA had never apologized for anything. They had inflicted much injury to our country, but cleverly had always maintained to be the injured party.

Their portrayal of the 1983 riots is a case in point. They have milked it for maximum effect, without once acknowledging the true facts of the case.

Prof. Gerald Peiris writes to this writer, “I happen to be an eye-witness to a few incidents of violence in both Colombo as well as Kandy. I think the overwhelming majority of all ethnic groups were horrified at what was happening. Those who had the capacity to avert or mitigate did what they could. Many remained impotent.

Refugee camp

“For instance, the rioting broke out in Kandy on the third day. Immediately, the university campus was converted to a refugee camp, and at the initiative of the academic community here, with the help of key government officers (senior officers of the Sinha Regiment stationed in Kandy, Frank de Silva – the DIG Central Province and quite a few of whom were Peradeniya alumnae), thousands of likely victims were transported to the halls of residence, provided with security and other basic needs.”
His answer to whether this was an attack against the Tamils by the Sinhalese was, “The violence was perpetuated by mobs that consisted almost entirely of Sinhalese (although numerically the mobs could not have totalled up to more than a microscopic segment of the Sinhalese population), and the victims were almost entirely those of the two Tamil ethnic groups living in some of the Sinhalese-majority areas of the island.

Looting

“Here in Kandy (Colombo Street and Primrose Road) where I saw some of the rioting, the main impulse appeared to be looting. The eastern end of Colombo Street – a locality of retail trade outlets in textile and clothing, jewellery, domestic utensils, electronic goods, and hardware; owned for the most part by ‘Indian’ Tamils and Muslims – (most of which had evidently been emptied the previous night by their owners in anticipation of the riots) the sole objective appeared to be looting whatever was left.

“There were large crowds which made it difficult to separate the rioters from the onlookers and those who happened to be in town for various legitimate reasons. Two or three buildings were damaged by arson. At some point the fire brigade arrived, but I did not see any policemen. According to Frank, no riot-related deaths were reported from Kandy.

“Primrose Road – one of the residential localities of mixed ethnicity – was invaded by a mob of about 50 early morning of the third day. Two Tamil residences were looted, and fittings and furniture smashed, prior to the entire structures being burnt down. One of the families – an old woman, her ageing servant and their ageing German Shepherd – were hiding in our home. The other house, a few doors next, the residence of the owner of a confectionery factory in Kandy, was burnt down.

“Our (i.e. Dr. Ismail – a popular General Practitioner, Rev. Harold Fernando of the Methodist Church, Dissanayake the president of a Dyaka Sabhaā in a temple close-by, and I) efforts to persuade the crowd to abandon their attack, and to contact the fire brigade and the Police were unsuccessful. Frank, when phoned, told me “You can’t even imagine what I have in my hands, but I’ll try to do something”.

Ruffians

“The mob consisted of formidable looking ruffians, some in a state of drunkenness (or pretended to be so), and a whole lot of youth (including a few from “respectable” homes in our neighbourhood who were enjoying the fun) – all of them Sinhalese, as far as I was able to identify. Some of them were armed with metal rods and clubs; there were a few swords and make-shift weapons, and petrol cans. There were no personal injuries among the victims in both these riot scenes. The mob departed at about 10.30 or 11.

“My cousin, who knows Colombo very well says that in the low-income areas of Colombo North some Muslims participated in the attacks on Tamils. That part of the city and the Slave Island area are localities where underworld gangs operate. The gangs (some of whom are of mixed ethnicity) usually have links with politicians and the Police.
“A somewhat different perspective is provided by the following extracts from a monograph authored by two Peradeniya sociologists (Silva and Athukorala, 1991: 124-125):

“The watta dwellers, now comprising a bulk of the population of Colombo and other cities (sic.), appear to have been in the forefront of the riots (anti-Tamil violence of July 1983). Despite the fact that the ethnic minorities themselves are widely present within the wattas, sections of the urban poor made use of this opportunity to attack segments of the upper classes. To a large extent, the urban riots of July 1983 may be seen as an occasion where the gang activities of the watta-dwellers spread over most cities of Sri Lanka. (However) one important but hitherto neglected aspect of the riots was the attitude of the rioters towards their fellow watta-dwellers who were Tamils.

Along ethnic lines

The view that during the riots the watta-dwellers turned against themselves along ethnic lines is simply not supported by our data. There were no attacks whatsoever on the Tamil watta-dwellers in any of the four communities studied. On the contrary, the rioters came forward to give protection to the fellow watta-dwellers who were Tamils where the latter were under some kind of threat from those in the surrounding communities”.

The account exposes the falsehood separatists like TNA maintain to justify their dishonorable intentions. There is little doubt how they will interpret the regret Wickremesinghe so carelessly slipped out. Our tragedy is, we are so busy brandishing lists of wrongdoings of our political rivals to embarrass and gain a political mileage, we do not have time for our real enemies.
ranasingheshivanthi@gmail.com

Irresponsible Rhetoric Of State Minister Could Set A Dangerous Precedent .

December 14th, 2016

Insight By Sunil Kumar

Dec,14th 2016

Given the reality that there is indeed a degree of unrest amongst the Muslims in Sri Lanka it seems hardly acceptable that State Minister of Resettlement and Rehabilitation Mr. M. L. A. M. Hizbullah, who represents the Eastern Province should suggest that if the government fails to settle the issue of hate speech in the East, it may even result in Muslim youths taking up arms.

This is a downright irresponsible statement and sounds almost inflammatory as he needs to qualify the degree of responsibility in his statement where there seems to be none !
He has said in Parliament that quote” if they ( obviously refering to the Government ) do not take any action to stop such statements,  and if it continues at this rate, Muslim youth will not tolerate it. Unless the Government takes firm action, we cannot stop Muslims also taking up arms. If they take up arms, they will shoot us, the Muslim leaders, first, similar to how the Tamil youth shot their leaders. We have experienced history.”

So what exactly is the Minister implying? Another militant armed uprising  where the Nation is still recovering from the horrendous damage done by the Tamil Tiger insurgents and their allies?

Such inflammatory words are hardly becoming of a respected member of the Legislature and perhaps he needs to word his rhetoric in a manner conducive to the issues at hand relative to Muslim dissent through responsible dialogue and interaction without inviting a call to arms or a state of unrest where in the event of such unfortunate circumstances (although such an eventuality seems  a distinct impossibility) within then State of Sri Lanka today, he could still be held responsible together with those who whether inadvertently or not promote it or collude to initiate it, which seems to be the case here and could be construed as a security threat to the Sovereignity of Sri Lanka where lessons need to be learned from the not too distant past and apropriate remedial or preventive action taken if necesary by the authorities!

That there could be dire reprisals for such rhetoric seems an understatement as It seems a salient reality that there are indeed certain elements within the Muslim community ever ready to take the law into their own hands whether it be Sharia , Roman Dutch, better still Napoleonic as it caters to their needs and given the state the World is in today relative to happenings orchestrated by the so called Muslim Agitators causing mayhem and destruction globally it is totally unacceptable that a member of the Sri Lankan Legislature has had the audacity to make such statements in public.

Bearing in mind that Sri Lanka is a majority Buddhist Nation there is no room for tolerance from minority communities, religions or cultures attempting to ursurp the smooth functioning of the Nation and these types should be thankful for the freedoms and prvileges granted them through a just and compassionate administration and should always endeavour to negotiate for peace and harmony through rational means rather than aggressive dissent.

Following are excerpts of the interview:

?: How do you view the series of hate speeches being used against the Muslim community recently, especially in the Eastern Province?

A: Not just now, but it has been continuing since 2012. However, especially within the last month, the Bodu Bala Sena General Secretary Venerable Gnanasara Thera had made such statements in his speech especially against the Muslims, the Quran and against Almighty God.

Normally when there is any sort of hate speech against Almighty God, Allah, not only the Muslims in Sri Lanka but those in the entire world will feel upset. Hate speech has to be stopped. Everybody has the right to speak about their religion but nobody has the right to attack or insult another religion.

When the Sri Lanka Thawheed Jamath (SLTJ) Secretary Abdul Razik made a statement, everybody was upset with his speech and thus he was arrested. Later with many conditions he was bailed out. In the meantime, there were many incidents that took place where Islam and Muslims were attacked with hate speech, but none of those who made such statements were arrested. If it is justice it should be equal to all. However, these days, the law has to be enforced to control such activities.

?: You being part of the administration, why do you think you were not able to pressurize the government to take legal action against those who are involved in hate speech against Islam and the Muslim community?

A: Hate speech by the Ampitiye Sumanaratne Thera in the Batticaloa District has created many problems. We are not against Buddhism or any religion we are ready to treat everyone equally. The Ampitiye Thera has also created violence yet no proper action has been taken to date. We have taken the matter up with the government and the Police on many occasions but no action has been taken.

However, when Hindu Priests called for the arrest of Ampitiye Thera, they were arrested and jailed by the Batticaloa Magistrate.
So, the one who creates problems, attacking officers and especially who insults senior State officials is allowed to go free. He had even used obscene language at the Batticaloa District Secretary. Therefore, it is high time the government takes action and inform the Police to carry out their legal obligations, if not it will be very difficult to control such activities in future.

But the government is not taking any steps. The Minister of Justice Wijeyadasa Rajapakshe has stated that the law cannot be enforced at this time, because the future consequences must be considered. He actually tried to say that such arrests are impossible. He cannot say that. He is the Minister of Justice, and has to maintain law and order in the country. But however, they have not taken any action until now.

?: In the current context, why did you warn Parliament against creating a situation where the Muslims will take to arms as well?

A: The government has to control this situation. We have requested the President, Prime Minister and other representatives to control the situation. Even when Minister Wijeyadasa Rajapakshe met the Gnanasara Thera, he made promises that he will not make any hate speeches and he had agreed for dialogue. We do not want him arrested but we want him to stop such hate speech statements. We don’t want to punish anyone. But after all, such promises he still creates big problems.
Later he met the President along with other religious leaders, and made many issues. However, the President said we will have a dialogue to solve the issue and agreed to discuss the matter at committee level. But following this meeting he criticized our Almighty God at a press conference.

Referring all these incidents I urged the Minister of Justice to stop these actions. Venerable Gnanasara Thera said that Muslims can live in this country but cannot practice Islam. He also continued to say that we cannot pray five times or worship at the Mosque on Fridays. Muslims don’t want to live without practicing Islam. We will not live, we cannot live and we have to live with the Islam practice.

I further said in Parliament, if they do not take any action to stop such statements, if it continues at this rate, the Muslim youth will not tolerate. Even currently the Muslim youth claim that the Muslim Parliamentarians are sleeping, they are not talking on behalf of the community and they have refrained from their duty. They claim that the Muslim representatives go to parliament only to eat. The youth also say we are not taking any action but hungry for power. Not only the youth but others in our community are attacking and scolding the Muslim Leaders, including me. Unless the government takes firm action, we cannot stop Muslims also taking up arms. If they take up arms, first they will shoot us, the Muslim leaders similar to how the Tamil youth shot their leaders. We have experienced that history.

Therefore, I urged the government to take some suitable action to avoid such incidents in future. I did not say that they will take up arms immediately but if the problems are ignored nobody can stop such developments.

?: At the current juncture, how do you view the relationship between both minority communities, the Tamils and Muslims? How do you view the initiatives taken by both community representatives to maintain unity?

A: There are issues within each community itself. Tamil leaders are united but the Muslim leaders are not united. Tamil leaders are united because there were armed groups like the LTTE, thus the leaders were under pressure and they stayed united. But in the current context the situation has changed even the Tamil leaders are not united.

I feel that the Muslim leaders are not united as they represent different parties. But we all must unite and work together. I hope necessary steps will be taken and we hope for the best.

But both communities working together will have to face many issues and challenges. We want to unite with the Tamil leaders, in certain issues we can work with them and we have to work with them.

If you take the Tamil community representatives especially the TNA they only represent two provinces that are the North and East. But the Muslims are not confined to a particular region but we represent the entire country. Our members are from every part of the country. Therefore, when the Muslim representatives take a decision we must keep in mind that our people live all over the country.

?: Why do some Muslim representatives from the Eastern Province reject the idea of a North-East merger?

A: North-East merger is impossible, it should be decided by a referendum. As first instance, it is necessary to obtain a 2/3 majority in Parliament to go for a referendum. It is impossible to obtain a 2/3 majority. No Muslim will vote for it. In the second instance we have to go for a referendum, if we do so then 80 per cent of the Sinhalese in the country will not vote for it and 10 per cent of the Muslims do the same. Therefore, it will be quite difficult to pass the merger Bill through Parliament or by referendum.

Another important fact is that the Eastern Province Muslims, will never support the merger. Why will they ask for a merger? There is no proper reason. We have the Northern Province with a separate council and a Chief Minister and the Eastern Province also has the same set up. A Muslim can become a chief minister only in the Eastern Province. Northern Province is full of Tamil representatives, and the rest of the Provincial Councils have Sinhala representatives, they are the Chief Ministers and Provincial Ministers. Not a single Muslim has the opportunity become a Provincial Minister in any of the other councils.

This country consists 10 per cent of Muslims, we must safeguard the Muslims. Only in the Eastern Province a person from any community can become a Chief Minister since all communities are living with equal opportunities. Therefore, only in the Eastern Province a Muslim can become a Chief Minister or a Provincial Minister. All three communities are living together, there is no issue.

There is 35 per cent of Muslims in the East, but after a merger it will reduce to 16 per cent. So why do we need a merger?

?: You say that all communities are living equally in the Eastern Province, but there are so many allegations that youth from the Tamil community are facing discriminations in employment opportunities. What have you to say?

A: The employment opportunities are decided by the provincial government. There are Tamil representatives in the Council to look into it. The education and agriculture ministers are Tamils. How can they say there are discriminations? It cannot be accepted. All the minor employments are decided by the Council. So, the two ministers can look into the matter.

?: As you know there are allegations that most of those who have joined the ISIS recently are from the Eastern Province. What is your reaction to these allegations?

A: Minster of Justice Wijeyadasa Rajapakshe said there are 32 Sri Lankans who have joined the ISIS, but the government denied it the next day.

Whether it is 32 or 32,000 the government must arrest them immediately and take all necessary action. I categorically said in Parliament too, that ISIS are not Muslims, they have no connections with the Muslims and have nothing to do with them. They are international anti-Muslim forces. These forces are used to destroy the Islamic countries.

?: What are the reforms you suggest for Muslim personal law?

A: One is Sharia Law, which is written in the Quran. The other is the personal law which is followed with Sharia. For example, dowry is against Islam, but is followed by Muslims of this country. There are certain things we follow like the age of marriage. Certain rules are very clearly mentioned in Sharia Law according to the Quran, we will never allow it to be changed.
But there are certain other laws that is practised by Muslims and changed from time to time. Such laws can be discussed and reformed.

State Minister of Resettlement and Rehabilitation M. L. A. M. Hizbullah says Muslim youths might take up arms.

December 14th, 2016

Sudath Gunasekara

Dear All,

Look at the  following statement by Hisbulla, a Minister of this Government Why not him be told that he will end up the same way Prabhakararn did, if they take to arms.

Let him also be reminded that this is not Arabia. This was the land of the Sinhala Buddhists for the past 2600 years Kohewath  yana nai allala redda asse dagena, nawaten diila ape mahapolawath  deel, munta genuth deela turulle dagatta  Senarath rajage patan hema ekatama sapawenta one.

Why dont the Sinhala Buddhists of this country ask the President to sack this man from the cabinet for inciting racial hatredness

The government has to arrest this humiliation immediately before it is too late

Sudath Gunasekara

BY Mirudhula Thambiah

State Minister of Resettlement and Rehabilitation M. L. A. M. Hizbullah, who represents the Eastern Province said, if the government fails to settle the issue of hate speech in the East, it may even result in Muslim youths taking up arms.
“I said in Parliament, if they do not take any action to stop such statements, if it continues at this rate, Muslim youth will not tolerate it. Unless the government takes firm action, we cannot stop Muslims also taking up arms. If they take up arms, they will shoot us, the Muslim leaders, first, similar to how the Tamil youth shot their leaders. We have experienced history.”

Following are excerpts of the interview:

?: How do you view the series of hate speeches being used against the Muslim community recently, especially in the Eastern Province?

A: Not just now, but it has been continuing since 2012. However, especially within the last month, the Bodu Bala Sena General Secretary Venerable Gnanasara Thera had made such statements in his speech especially against the Muslims, the Quran and against Almighty God.

Normally when there is any sort of hate speech against Almighty God, Allah, not only the Muslims in Sri Lanka but those in the entire world will feel upset. Hate speech has to be stopped. Everybody has the right to speak about their religion but nobody has the right to attack or insult another religion.

When the Sri Lanka Thawheed Jamath (SLTJ) Secretary Abdul Razik made a statement, everybody was upset with his speech and thus he was arrested. Later with many conditions he was bailed out. In the meantime, there were many incidents that took place where Islam and Muslims were attacked with hate speech, but none of those who made such statements were arrested. If it is justice it should be equal to all. However, these days, the law has to be enforced to control such activities.

?: You being part of the administration, why do you think you were not able to pressurize the government to take legal action against those who are involved in hate speech against Islam and the Muslim community?

A: Hate speech by the Ampitiye Sumanaratne Thera in the Batticaloa District has created many problems. We are not against Buddhism or any religion we are ready to treat everyone equally. The Ampitiye Thera has also created violence yet no proper action has been taken to date. We have taken the matter up with the government and the Police on many occasions but no action has been taken.

However, when Hindu Priests called for the arrest of Ampitiye Thera, they were arrested and jailed by the Batticaloa Magistrate.
So, the one who creates problems, attacking officers and especially who insults senior State officials is allowed to go free. He had even used obscene language at the Batticaloa District Secretary. Therefore, it is high time the government takes action and inform the Police to carry out their legal obligations, if not it will be very difficult to control such activities in future.

But the government is not taking any steps. The Minister of Justice Wijeyadasa Rajapakshe has stated that the law cannot be enforced at this time, because the future consequences must be considered. He actually tried to say that such arrests are impossible. He cannot say that. He is the Minister of Justice, and has to maintain law and order in the country. But however, they have not taken any action until now.

?: In the current context, why did you warn Parliament against creating a situation where the Muslims will take to arms as well?

A: The government has to control this situation. We have requested the President, Prime Minister and other representatives to control the situation. Even when Minister Wijeyadasa Rajapakshe met the Gnanasara Thera, he made promises that he will not make any hate speeches and he had agreed for dialogue. We do not want him arrested but we want him to stop such hate speech statements. We don’t want to punish anyone. But after all, such promises he still creates big problems.
Later he met the President along with other religious leaders, and made many issues. However, the President said we will have a dialogue to solve the issue and agreed to discuss the matter at committee level. But following this meeting he criticized our Almighty God at a press conference.

Referring all these incidents I urged the Minister of Justice to stop these actions. Venerable Gnanasara Thera said that Muslims can live in this country but cannot practice Islam. He also continued to say that we cannot pray five times or worship at the Mosque on Fridays. Muslims don’t want to live without practicing Islam. We will not live, we cannot live and we have to live with the Islam practice.

I further said in Parliament, if they do not take any action to stop such statements, if it continues at this rate, the Muslim youth will not tolerate. Even currently the Muslim youth claim that the Muslim Parliamentarians are sleeping, they are not talking on behalf of the community and they have refrained from their duty. They claim that the Muslim representatives go to parliament only to eat. The youth also say we are not taking any action but hungry for power. Not only the youth but others in our community are attacking and scolding the Muslim Leaders, including me. Unless the government takes firm action, we cannot stop Muslims also taking up arms. If they take up arms, first they will shoot us, the Muslim leaders similar to how the Tamil youth shot their leaders. We have experienced that history.

Therefore, I urged the government to take some suitable action to avoid such incidents in future. I did not say that they will take up arms immediately but if the problems are ignored nobody can stop such developments.

?: At the current juncture, how do you view the relationship between both minority communities, the Tamils and Muslims? How do you view the initiatives taken by both community representatives to maintain unity?

A: There are issues within each community itself. Tamil leaders are united but the Muslim leaders are not united. Tamil leaders are united because there were armed groups like the LTTE, thus the leaders were under pressure and they stayed united. But in the current context the situation has changed even the Tamil leaders are not united.

I feel that the Muslim leaders are not united as they represent different parties. But we all must unite and work together. I hope necessary steps will be taken and we hope for the best.

But both communities working together will have to face many issues and challenges. We want to unite with the Tamil leaders, in certain issues we can work with them and we have to work with them.

If you take the Tamil community representatives especially the TNA they only represent two provinces that are the North and East. But the Muslims are not confined to a particular region but we represent the entire country. Our members are from every part of the country. Therefore, when the Muslim representatives take a decision we must keep in mind that our people live all over the country.

?: Why do some Muslim representatives from the Eastern Province reject the idea of a North-East merger?

A: North-East merger is impossible, it should be decided by a referendum. As first instance, it is necessary to obtain a 2/3 majority in Parliament to go for a referendum. It is impossible to obtain a 2/3 majority. No Muslim will vote for it. In the second instance we have to go for a referendum, if we do so then 80 per cent of the Sinhalese in the country will not vote for it and 10 per cent of the Muslims do the same. Therefore, it will be quite difficult to pass the merger Bill through Parliament or by referendum.

Another important fact is that the Eastern Province Muslims, will never support the merger. Why will they ask for a merger? There is no proper reason. We have the Northern Province with a separate council and a Chief Minister and the Eastern Province also has the same set up. A Muslim can become a chief minister only in the Eastern Province. Northern Province is full of Tamil representatives, and the rest of the Provincial Councils have Sinhala representatives, they are the Chief Ministers and Provincial Ministers. Not a single Muslim has the opportunity become a Provincial Minister in any of the other councils.

This country consists 10 per cent of Muslims, we must safeguard the Muslims. Only in the Eastern Province a person from any community can become a Chief Minister since all communities are living with equal opportunities. Therefore, only in the Eastern Province a Muslim can become a Chief Minister or a Provincial Minister. All three communities are living together, there is no issue.

There is 35 per cent of Muslims in the East, but after a merger it will reduce to 16 per cent. So why do we need a merger?

?: You say that all communities are living equally in the Eastern Province, but there are so many allegations that youth from the Tamil community are facing discriminations in employment opportunities. What have you to say?

A: The employment opportunities are decided by the provincial government. There are Tamil representatives in the Council to look into it. The education and agriculture ministers are Tamils. How can they say there are discriminations? It cannot be accepted. All the minor employments are decided by the Council. So, the two ministers can look into the matter.

?: As you know there are allegations that most of those who have joined the ISIS recently are from the Eastern Province. What is your reaction to these allegations?

A: Minster of Justice Wijeyadasa Rajapakshe said there are 32 Sri Lankans who have joined the ISIS, but the government denied it the next day.

Whether it is 32 or 32,000 the government must arrest them immediately and take all necessary action. I categorically said in Parliament too, that ISIS are not Muslims, they have no connections with the Muslims and have nothing to do with them. They are international anti-Muslim forces. These forces are used to destroy the Islamic countries.

?: What are the reforms you suggest for Muslim personal law?

A: One is Sharia Law, which is written in the Quran. The other is the personal law which is followed with Sharia. For example, dowry is against Islam, but is followed by Muslims of this country. There are certain things we follow like the age of marriage. Certain rules are very clearly mentioned in Sharia Law according to the Quran, we will never allow it to be changed.
But there are certain other laws that is practised by Muslims and changed from time to time. Such laws can be discussed and reformed.

Email:che.myhero@gmail.com

 

මාධ්‍යයන් විසින්ද හඳුනා ගතයුතු යුතුකම් හා වගකීම්

December 14th, 2016

තේජා ගොඩකන්දෙආරච්චි

අලුතින් බඳවා ගන්නා ලද රේගු අධිකාරීවරුන්ට පත්වීම් ලිපි ලබාදීම සඳහා පැවති උත්සවයකදී, අගමැති රනිල් වික්රමසිංහ විසින් ප්රථම වතාවට යුද්ධයේ අවසන් අදියර සඳහා ගිය වියදම හා රට සංවර්ධනය කරන්නට ගිය වියදම් සමග විදේශ ණය ප්රමානය සැසඳීමට කටයුතු කලේය. වෙනදා නම් මෙවන් අවස්ථාවලදී ඔහු, පසුගිය රජය රට ණය කලේ යයි පවසමින් රාජපක්ෂ රජයට චෝදනා නගන්නේය. මේ කතාව ඩීල් හෝ වෙන යමක් නිසා කලා වුනත් එහි තර්කයක් තිබේ. ‘රණ මග ඔස්සේ නන්දිකඩාල්නම් පොතේ කතුවරයා වන මේජර් ජෙනරල් කමල් ගුණරත්න යනු වර්ගවාදී යුද්ධය ආරම්භයේදී හමුදාවට බැඳී එහි අවසන් නිමේෂය දක්වා ක්රියාකාරී ලෙස යුද්ධයට සහභාගී වූ අයෙකි. මේ අරගලය යුද්ධයක් ලෙස ඇරඹෙත්දී ජනාධිපතිව සිටියේ අතිගරු ජේ. ආර්. ජයවර්ධන ජනාධිපති උතුමාණන් වහන්සේය. ඉන්පසු විවිධ ජනාධිපතිවරුන්ගේ පාලන සමයන් ඔස්සේ ඇදී ගිය යුද්ධය ගරු ජනාධිපති මහින්ද රාජපක්ෂ මැතිතුමාගේ පාලන සමයේ කෙලවර විය. (පසුව ඔහු රජු ලෙසින් අභිශේක කලේ කවුරුන්දැයි නොකිව මනාය) කෙසේ හෝ මේ සියලු යුගයන්හිදී යුද්ධය සිදු කෙරුන ආකාරය මේ කතුවරයාට ලැබුන ප්රායෝගික අත්දැකීම්ය. කතුවරයා පවසනුයේ යුද්ධය ජයග්රහණයෙන් නිම කිරීමට හේතු වූ ප්රධානතම සහය නම් යුද බිමට අඛණ්ඩව සැපයුනු මිනිස් බලය බවයි. තම පොත එලි දක්වන දා ඔහු, යුද්ධයේ භයංකර බව පෙනි පෙනීත් තම දරුවන් යුද බිමට පුදකල දෙමව්පියන්ට ස්තුති කලේ එහෙයිනි. එමෙන්ම යුද්ධය කෙමෙන් ලං වනවිට ලැබුන දිරිය නිසා හමුදාව අතහැර පලා යන පිරිස අඩුවිය. යුද්ධය පැවති සමයේදී වරක් යුද පෙරමුණේ සිටි සෙබලුන් මාධ් වෙත පැවසූ කතාවක් යලි සිහි කරනු කැමැත්තෙමි. එකල තද වැසි වැටුන සමයකි. වැසි දියෙන් තෙතබරිත වන නිළ ඇඳුම් සහ අනිකුත් අඩුම කුඩුම සහිතව කිලෝ 40 පමන බරක් දරාගෙන ඉදිරියට යන්නට සෙබලුන්ට සිදුව තිබිනි. නමුත් ආරක්ෂක අමාත්යංශය මගින් හීටර් යන්ත් සවිකල විශාල කන්ටේනර් 2 ක් යුද බිමට එවීමට ක්රියාකල අතර, තම තෙත බරිත නිළ ඇඳුම් විනාඩි කිහිපයකදී වේලා ගැනීමේ පහසුකම ඔවුන් වෙත ලැබින. එදා ගැන යුද සෙබලුන් කතාකලේ හද පිරි කෘතඥභාවයෙනි. තමන් පිලිබඳව ඉහල තැන්වලින් මෙතරම් දුරට සැලකිලිමත් වූ පලමු වතාව බව ඔවුහු පැවසූහ. නිළ ඇඳුම් වේලුනාටත් වඩා තමන් හුදෙකලා නොවූ බවටත්, තමන්ගේ දුෂ්කරතා ගැන සිතන ප්රධානීන් සිතන බවටත් ඇති වූ හැඟීම මේ සෙබලුන්ව දිරිමත් කර තිබිනි.

 

මේ අයුරින් යුද්ධය පිලිබඳ කතා කරන කල්හි සැබැවින්ම අඛණ්ඩ මිනිස් බලය මෙන්ම අනිකුත් සැපයුම් වෙනුවෙන් රජයට දරන්නට වන වියදම ගැන අප වටහා ගත යුතුය. මිනිස් බලයේ සිට මෙවන් සැපයුම් අතින් ඔබ දුර්වල වේගෙන යන බව සතුරාට දැනුනහොත් එය කඩා වැටීමක ආරම්භයයි. වරක් හිටපු ජනාධිපති මහින්ද රාජපක්ෂ පැවසූ යමක් විය. 2009 දී යුද්ධය අවසන් වූ වහාම ශ්රී ලංකාව ආර්ථිකව වැටෙන්නට ගිය ප්රපාතයේදී ලිබියාවේ හිටපු නායක මුවම්මර් අල් ගඩාෆි තම සහය ලබා දුන් අයුරුය. එක දුරකථන ඇමතුමකින් කල ඉල්ලීමක් ඔස්සේ ඩොලර් මිලියන 500 ක් ලබා දීමයි. තුල ක්ෂනික කඩා වැටීමකට ඉඩ නොදී ආර්ථිකය යම් මට්ටමක තබා ගැනීමට රජය සමත්විය. 2012 දී ගඩාෆිට අත් වූ ඉරණමද, ඊට මග පෑදූ පුද්ගලයින්ද ගැන සිතන විට අද අප රටට අත්වන්නට යන කල දසාවද පිලිබඳව අග මුල ගැට ගසාගත හැක.

 

කෙසේ  හෝ යුද්ධය අවසන්ය. රත්රන් හෝ ප්ලැටිනම් අතුරා අධිවේගී මාර්ග තැනුනි. කාපට්  ඇතිරූ මාර්ග පද්ධතිද, එතෙක් විශාල හා කුඩා ප්රමානයේ පාලම් පාරු යොදාගෙන එගොඩ මෙගොඩ ගිය කොඩ්ඩියාර් බොක්ක ඇතුලු මුහුදු බොකුවලට පාලම්ද ලැබිනි. යාපන අර්ධද්වීපය රටේ අනිත් කොටස හා යා කරන එලිෆන්ට් පාස් මාර්ගය නෙතට ප්රිය . යුද සමයේ විනාශ වූ දුම්රිය මාගර්ප්රතිසංස්කරණය විය. අද උතුර දකුණ යා කරන සන්හිඳියා චාරිකා යන්නේ මේ මාර්ග ඔස්සේය. හම්බන්තොට ඉදි වූ වරාය හා  ගුවන් තොටුපල වැඩකට නැති ඉදිකිරීම් ලෙස මොවුන් එදා ජනතාවට පෙන්වූවත් චීනය එම ප්රදේශය වෙනුවෙන් තැබූ ලංසුව නිසා එය එසේ නොවන බව පැහැදිලි වේ. එසේ බලත්දී එදා වර්ගවාදී යුද සමය තුල විනාශ වී ගිය යටිතල පහසුකම් නගා සිටුවන්නට ගිය වියදම්ද අප සැලකිල්ලට ගත යුතුය. එමෙන්ම නිමා වූ යුද්ධයෙන් පසු ජයග්රාහී මානසිකත්වයකින් පසුවූ හමුදා සාමාජිකයන් සතු ජීව ගුණය මෙන්ම හමුදාව තුල ඔවුන් ලබන විනයද එකට සංයෝගකර කොළඹ නගරය පිරිසිදු හා සුන්දර ස්ථානයක් බවට පත්කල ආකාරය හා රටේ විවිධ ස්ථානවල ඉදිකල සංචාරක හෝටල් සහ නිවාඩු නිකේතනද මතකයට නගා ගත යුතුය. අද රටට ඇදී එන සංචාරකයන් සංඛ්යාව ගැන උදම් අනන ජෝන් අමරතුංග ඇමතිවරයාට සඳහා ඉහත සඳහන් දේ තුල ලැබුන දායකත්වය අමතකව ගිය සේය.

 

2015 දී පැවති රජය පරාජය වූ අතර මෙවන් ව්යාපෘතීන් තුල සිදුවූ මහා පරිමාණ වංචා සහ දූෂණ පිලිබඳ කතිකාවක් රට තුල ඇතිවිය. මේ චෝදනා අවංක සිතින් කලා නම්ද, අලුත් රජය නිසා එම අක්රමිකතාවන් කෙලවරක් වුනේ නම්ද, දැන් එම බල පෙරලියට වසර 2ක් පිරෙන්නට යන තැන ජනතාවට යම් සහනයක් සැලසී තිබිය යුතුය. නමුත් අවාසනාවකට රටේ තත්වය එන්න එන්නම පිරිහෙයි. ආර්ථිකමය අතින් (ජනතාවගේ) පමනක් නොව සමාජමය අතින්ද මෙම පිරිහීම දක්නට ලැබේ. මත්ද්රව් ජාවාරම පමනක් නොව තම ශරීර අවයව පවා විකුණා මුදල් සෙවීමට මිනිසුන් පෙලඹෙන්නේ මේ නිසාය. විනයක් නැතිකම මෙන්ම පාතාල ක්රියාකාරකම්ද වැඩි වෙමින් පවතී. සංඛ්යා ලේඛණ දක්වන්නේ ළමා අපචාරද වසරින් වසර ඉහල යන බවකි. එක පසෙකින් ආගම් මුල් කරගෙන විවිධ පිරිස් මරාගන්නට යත්දී අන්තර් ජාලයේ කාම වෙබ් අඩවිවලට පිවිසීම සම්බන්ධව පිට පිට 5 වන වරටත් ශ්රී ලංකාවට කිරුළ හිමිව තිබේ. මේ සියලු ප්රශ්න මෙසේ තිබියදී රජයේ වගකිවයුත්තන් තවමත් පසුගිය රජය පතුරු ඇරීම හෝ සුරංගනා කතා පවසමින් ජනතාව මුලා කිරීම නම් නැවතී නැත. මෙවන් දේ සම්බන්ධව මාධ්යයන්හි හැසිරීමද ප්රෙහෙලිකා සහගතව ඇත්තේ එදිනෙදා අලෙවි කරගත හැකි යමකින් ඔබ්බට යන අඛණ්ඩ අවධානයක් මෙවන් ප්රශ්න කෙරෙහි දක්වන බවක් නොපෙනෙන නිසාය.

 

පසුගිය සතියක පැවති වෙෙද්යවරුන්ගේ වැඩ වර්ජනයේදී මාධ් වෙතින් සිදුකලේ පුරුදු පරිදි මහජනතාවගේ කෝපය වෙෙද්යවරුන් වෙතට යොමු කිරීමය. වැඩ වර්ජනය ගැන මහජන අදහස් අසන විට සමහර අය කෝපයෙන්ද, තවත් සමහරු හැඬූ කඳුලින්ද වෙෙද්යවරුන්ට බැන වැදුනහ. නමුත් කිසිදු මාධ්යවේදියෙකු මේ වැඩ වර්ජනයට හේතුව කුමක්දැයි ඔවුන්ගෙන් ඇසුවේ නැත. සමගම රජය ගත් ක්රියාමාර්ගයක ප්රතිඵලයක් ලෙස තමන්ට මෙවන් තත්වයකට මුහුණ දෙන්නට සිදුව තිබියදී රජයේ මැති ඇමතිලාගේ මල්ල පිරුන හැටි දන්නවාදැයි විමසුවේ නැත. පාර්ලිමේන්තු සැසි වාරවලට සහභාගි වීම සඳහා ගෙවන දීමනාව රු. 2500 දක්වා වැඩි වූ හැටි, මන්ත්රී කාර්යාල පවත්වාගෙන යාමට මාසිකව රුපියල් ලක්ෂය බැගින්ද, මන්ත්රී නිළ නිවාස හොඳ තත්වයේ නැතැයි කියා ඔවුන්ට ගෙවල් කුලියට ගන්නට තවත් රුපියල් ලක්ෂය බැගින්ද ලබා දීමට තීීරණය කර ඇත. ජනතාව තම රෝගාබාධවලට ප්රතිකාර ගැන්මට මෙසේ දුක් ගැහැට විඳිනවිට, පසුගිය දිනෙක අය වැය විවාදයේදී සෞඛ් ඇමතිවරයාට ප්රතිකාර ගැන්ම සඳහා ජනාධිපති අරමුදලින් රු. ලක්ෂ 100  ක් වෙන්කල  පුවත මතුවූ අතර පසුගිය රජය සමයේ කෙහෙලිය රඹුක්වැල්ල හිටපු ඇමතිවරයාට ඔස්ට්රේලියාවේ හෝටලයකදී සිදුවූ අනතුරකදී මෙවැනිම මුදලක් ගෙවූ බව පැවසුනි. ඊලඟට දබරය අැවිලුනේකොටු පනින්නට ගොස් අත පය කඩා ගත්තායි කීමෙන්ය. එ් ඔස්සේ අපේ මැති සබයේ සිටිනපිරිමින්ගේ හැකි නොහැකියාවන් පිලිබඳ ප්රසිද්ධියේ එකිනෙකාට අපහාස කර ගත්හ. මේ ප්රශ්නවලින් මිරිකෙන  රටක හා එහි ජනතාවගේ පැවැත්ම සඳහා තීරණාත්මක සාධකයක් වන අය වැය විවාදයයි !

 

ඉතින් වැඩ වර්ජනවල යෙදෙන දිළිඳු දුම්රිය හරස්මග මුරකරුවාට පවා දොස් පවරන ජනතාවට මේ අසාධාරණයන් ගැන පවසන්නට කෙනෙකු නැත. රටේ බොහෝ ප්රදේශවල යමින් එමින් ප්රජාව සමග වැඩ කල නිසාම මට සැමවිටම සිතෙන දෙයක් ඇත. බොහෝ අයට පොලිටික්ස් බෝරිං බවය. තමන් මුහුණ දෙන සියලුම ප්රශ්නවලට පාහේ දේශපාලන තීන්දු ගෑවී යන බව වැටහුනත් තම ඇස්, කන් හා මොලය පාවිච්චිකර මේවා විශ්ලේෂණය කරන්නේ ඉතා සුලු පිරිසකි. අද කොපමන බැන වැදුනත් ඊලඟ මැතිවරණයකදී යලි එකම මුහුණු ටිකම මැති සබයට යන්නේ එහෙයිනි. දුර බැහැර පාසල්වල දරුවනට ඉඳගන්නට පුටුු නැතිව, උගන්වන්නට ගුරුවරු නැතිව, යන්න එන්නට ප්රවාහන ක්රමයක් නැතිව අධ්යාපනය කඩා වැටෙන තැනට පත් වත්දී  අමාත්යංශ ලේකම් ඇතුලු ඉහල නිළධාරීන්ට රු. කෝටි 9 1/2 ක් වැය කරමින් වාහන ලබා දෙන්නේ අමාත්යංශය සතු හොඳ තත්වයේ වාහන තිබියදීය. තමන් ලබා ගන්නට යන අලුත් වාහන පිලිබඳව සාධාරණීකරනය කරන සෞඛ් ඇමති තම ප්රතිකාර සඳහා රජයෙන් ලබා ගත් රු. ලක්ෂ 100 තම වරප්රසාදයක් බවට පවසයි. මේ ලිපිය ආරම්භයේදී සඳහන් වූ අගමැතිගේ කතාව තුල මෙවන් මුදල් වැය කිරීම් ගැන අදහසක් තිබිනිද යන්න සැක සහිතය. එක අතකට එය එසේ වෙන්නට නොහැකිය.පාර්ලිමේන්තුවේදී මැති ඇමතිලාගේ නැති බැරි කමේ දුක පලමුවෙන්ම පෙනුනේද අගමැතිටය. තමන්ගේ වැටුප තම බිරිඳගේ වැටුපට වඩා අඩු බව පවසමිනි. එය ඔහුට මදිකමක් විය. එසේ වෙයි නම් ඔහු තවමත් ගතානුගතිකස්ත්රී පුරුෂ සමාජ භාවීය ස්ථිකයන්හිඑල්ලී සිටින්නෙකි. නමුත් ඔහුගේ බිරිඳ එම විෂය පිලිබඳ විශේෂඥවරියකි. අගමැතිට එම අධ්යාපනය බිරිඳ වෙතින් නොලැබීමේ අඩුව බරපතල වන්නේ ශ්රී ලාංකික ජනතාව මෙතරම් ආර්ථික අපහසුතාවලින් පෙලෙද්දී අගමැතිවරයා තම ගතානුගතික චිත්තාවේගයන් ඔස්සේ යමින් මැති ඇමති වරප්රසාද වැඩි කරලීම සඳහා යොදා ගන්නා කල්හිය.

 

මේ සියල්ල මෙලෙස වෙත්දී පසුගිය දිනෙක මනුසත් දෙරණලිට්ල් හාට්ස්නම් ව්යාපෘතියට ආධාර පිනිස රටේ පුංචි දරුවන් රුපියල දෙක දමමින් මුදල් රැස්කල කැට පරිත්යාග කරන්නට උනන්දු කරවනු පෙනුනි. තමන්ට ලැබෙන මූල්යමය වරප්ර්රසාද සහ යාන වාහන තම අයිතියක් බවට සාධාරණීකරනය කරන සෞඛ් ඇමතිවරයෙකු , පෙනෙන්නට දැනෙන්නට කිසිවක් නොකර නිකම්ම ජනතාවගේ බදු මුදලින් සුඛෝපභෝගී ජීවන රටාවක් ගෙනයන ඇමතිවරු අති විශාල සංඛ්යාවක්ද අපට සිටිති. මොවුන්ගේ කාර්ය මණ්ඩල වැටුප්ද බොහෝවිට පවුලේ පතටමය. ලිට්ල් හාට්ස් ව්යාපෘතිය අද මුල පුරා ඇත්තේ මේ පිංගුත්තර රැහේ වුන් විිසින් කල යුතු නමුුත් නොකර මගහැර සිටින කටයුත්තකටය.

 

මේ ගැන මතක් වන්නේ නැති නිසාදැයි නොදනිමි. රිජ්වේ ළමා රෝහලේ වෙෙද්යවරයකු ජනතාවගෙන් ආධාර ඉල්ලමින් කියා සිටියේ ශ්රී ලංකාවේ ජනතාව මිලියන 14 ක් ජංගම දුරකථන පාවිච්චි කරන බවත් මේ අයුරින්නිකරුණේවියදම් කරන මුදල්වලින් මාස්පතා රු.100 බැගින් ලබා දෙන්නේ නම් තම අරමුදල ඉක්මනින් සම්පූර්ණ වනු ඇති බවත්ය. මේ ජනතාව දැනටමත් ගෙවන බදු කන්දරාව මොවුන්ට නොපෙනේද? ජංගම දුරකථන ගැනම කතා කලොත් රු.100 සිම් පතකින් රු. 49 ක් දැනටමත් ඔවුන් බදු ගෙවති. ජලය, විදුලිය, ප්රවාහන වියදම් ඉතාම වැඩිය. රටේ සෞඛ් සේවා පද්ධතියේ අාකාරය අනුව චැනල් සේවාවන් සඳහාද බදු  ගෙවන්නට සිදුව ඇත. ඉතින් මේ අය නිකරුණේ වියදම් කරනවාය කියන්නේ කෙසේද? අද මේ මැති ඇමති ගණයා ජීවත් කරන්නේද ජනතාවමය.

 

මේ  අරමුදලට දරුවන්ගේ කැට සල්ලි ලබා දීම, දරුවන්ට කුඩා කල සිටම පරිත්යාගය හුරු කරවන්නට කරන දෙයකැයි ඔබට කිව හැක. එක අතකට එය සැබෑවකි. එවන් පරපුරක් ඇති කිරීම මෙසේ අරඹයි නම් එය ඔවුන් කරන්නට යන ව්යාපෘතිය සේම සද් කාර්යයකි. හැබැයි එම කාර්යයේ සද්භාවය සම්පූර්ණ වන්නට නම් මාධ්යය කල යුතු එක දෙයක් ඇත.

 

මේ කැට රැගෙන එන දරුවන්ගේ වැඩිහිටියන් පසෙකට කැඳවාගන්න. ඊලඟට මේ පරිත්යාගය සඳහා හේතු පාදක වූ යතාර්ථය ඔවුනට වටහා දිය හැක. එතැන රූපවාහිනියෙන් තම රුව ප්රචාරය වුනාට වඩා වැඩි යමක් තිබෙන බව මේ වැඩිහිටියන්ට මතක් වනු ඇත. මෙසේ තම පුුංචි දරුවන් අහිංසක අපේක්ෂා පුරවාගෙන රුපියල දෙක දමමින් එකතු කල කැටය අද මෙසේ පරිත්යාග කරන්නේ වත්මන් පාලන තන්ත්රයේ කවර  අඩුපාඩු සපුරාලීමටද කියා ඔවුන් සිතන්නට පුරුදු වනු නියතය. අනුව තම පරම අයිතිය වන ඡන්දය ප්රකාශ කිරීමේදී මීට වඩා සුලු හෝ සැලකිල්ලක් ඔවුන් දක්වනු ඇත.

 

ජනතාව මෙවන් ක්රියාකාරකම් සඳහා තම පූර්ණ අනුග්රහය දැක්වූ වෙනත් ව්යාපෘතිද තිබේ. නමුත් අගමැති ඇතුලු මැති ඇමතිවරුන්ට, තම පම්පෝරිය ගසන විට මේවා කලේ තම රජයද, පසුුගිය රජයද, ජනතාවද කියා මතකයේ ඇති බවක් නොපෙනේ. පාරේ පදිකයන්ට මාරු වීමට අඳින කහ ඉර සුදු පාටකර ඒකටත් උත්සවයක් තබා මතින් ඇවිද යන ඇමතිවරු සිටින රටක ජනතාව තම වගකීම් පමනක් නොව තමන් තෝරා පත්කර රජගෙදරට යවන ඇත්තන්ගේ වගකීම් පැහැදිලිව දැන සිටිය යුතුය. මාධ්යයන්ගේ වගකීම ජනතාව තම යුතුකම් වෙතට පමනක් තල්ලු නොකර සියලු පාර්ශ්වයන්හි වගකීම් අදාල පරිදි වටහා දීමයි.

 

තම බලපත්රය අහෝසි කරනවාට බයේ තම සේවාවන් පරාසය සීමා නොකර, අද මෙසේ තමන්ගේ පුංචි ඉතුරුම් මුදල පරිත්යාග කරන පොඩිවුන්ගේ අනාගතය සුවපත් කරන්නට නම් මාධ් විසින් මේ වගකීම තමන්ට පවරා ගත යුතුය.

 

No clear Govt reaction to Executive Presidency

December 14th, 2016

By Ravi Ladduwahetty Courtesy Ceylon Today

Chairman of the Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna Prof. G.L. Peiris, in an interview with the Ceylon Today said, the government has not yet declared its official stance on the Executive Presidency
The government must tell us what stand it has adopted on the Executive Presidency; whether it will abolish it as promised, or whether it has decided to retain it with limited powers, or whether it has changed its mind, Prof. Peiris said.

He also said the processes leading to the 1972 and 1978 Constitutions were transparent and filled the lacuna of those times in Sri Lanka’s contemporary history, but there was no transparency in the current one where the Opposition views were not even considered and given a fair hearing.
Here, he is in conversation with the Ceylon Today.

?: Ideally a Constitution of a nation should represent the aspirations and hopes of the masses. If you consider the Sri Lankan Constitutions of 1972 and 1978, do you think that Constitution makers have addressed the aspirations of masses in the 1972 and 1978 Constitutions?

A: Those were entirely different constitutional processes which were very carefully done where Dr. Colvin R. De Silva as Minister of Constitutional Affairs, dealt with the reform process in 1972. It was an entirely open process. The process began with some basic resolutions which were placed before the representatives of the people. Those were debated at length and all points were expressed.

Substantive provisions were drafted thereafter. It was a logical and coherent process. The 1978 Constitution also took a great deal of time in the making. This is a totally different process. We feel that the views of the Opposition are not seriously taken into account. All the work has been done behind the scene. We have every reason to believe that everything has been prepared and ready. What has been prepared is a charade.

Even according to the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Prince Zeid Al Hussain, who has been very critical of Sri Lanka in his last report, the entire process of the Government of Sri Lanka lacks transparency.

He also made some critical comments on the Office of the Missing Persons Bill. These must be inclusive in character. You must bring in people from all parts of the country and listen to all points of view. Many people have told us that the Lal Wijenayake Committee has sadly failed to do this.

Without consulting all views of the people all round the country, they were busier unloading their views on the people. More people have said that they did not get the opportunity to express their views to the Lal Wijenayake Committee. These are some of the serious flaws in the current constitutional reform process.

?: In your opinion, does the 1972 Constitution fulfil the original objectives of the Constitution other than changing the official name of the country from Ceylon to Sri Lanka?

A: No. It did a lot more than that. It is the 1972 Constitution that severed the British Crown and the Government of Sri Lanka. It brought about fundamental changes in a very meaningful way. The 1972 Constitution was very valuable. It served the priorities at that time. But, 45 years or half a century has elapsed since then. There are new challenges that need to be addressed, then.

?: As envisioned in the 1972 Constitution, does the Constitution enable us as a nation to follow an independentforeign policy?

A: Independent foreign policy has nothing to do with Constitutions. It has to do with the political will and the resolve of the government in power. It is not linked to the Constitution. In our time, we upheld the sovereignty, identity and dignity of our country. The formulation of the foreign policy was based on that. Today, we have seen an entirely different situation where we have lined ourselves up as the junior partners of a power block. Therefore, we are taken for granted. That is no way of getting an influential voice in international relations. We think it was entirely wrong for the government to issue the kind of statement and to adopt the stand it did, with regard to the Islamabad SAARC Summit. Also the way that this government has been handling the Palestine Issue and the Non Aligned Movement, does not meet our acceptance at all. Sri Lanka has abandoned an independent outlook on foreign relations and we think that it is a great pity. But, that does not meet the stand of Constitution making.

?: K.M. de Silva writes in his History of Sri Lanka, “the survival of the Soulbury Constitution after 1956 was…not so much a matter of conviction as of convenience.” And some described it as “The 1972 Constitution was in many ways a symbolic assertion of nationalism, twenty-five years after independence. This was manifested in the political rhetoric which heralded the new Constitution as an autochthonous Constitution drafted by a Constituent Assembly.” How would you comment on this?

A: Yes. Nationalism of course was a force. The Soulbury Constitution came into being in1948. The 1956 political changes were an upsurge of national feeling. That is why the 1972 Constitution took into account those developments in an appropriate manner. The autochthonous Constitution was drafted in this country and on the soil of this country. That is why we ceased to have the British Crown as the Head of State in Sri Lanka. Up to then, the Governor-General was the Representative of the Queen – from 1948 till 1972. Until then, Sri Lanka was a Dominion. All those were suitable changes according to the mood of the public at that time. A Constitution must necessarily meet the aspirations of the people.

But what is wrong with the proposed Constitution is that it lacks the local character and the domestic flavour, which was very much a character of the Constitution of 1972.

?: The 1978 Constitution also marked the birth of the powerful office of Executive President. The new Constitution, promulgated on 7 September 1978, provided for a unicameral Parliament and an Executive President. The term of office of the President and the duration of Parliament were both set at six years. The new Constitution also introduced a form of multi-member proportional representation for elections to Parliament, which was to consist of 196 members (subsequently increased to 225 by the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution). The two seminal developments that took place with the promulgation of the 1978 Constitution were the introduction of the office of Executive Presidency and the introduction of proportional representation. How would you revisit those seminal developments?

A: Yes. I agree that the main features of the 1978 Constitution were the introduction of the Executive Presidency and the Proportional Representation System. The rationale of the 1978 Constitution has been spelt out in Prof. A.J. Wilson’s book, ‘The Gaullist System in Asia’. It has been written about French President Charles de Gaulle. His main purpose was to give the President, powers, especially in the sphere of economic development without being interrupted for a period of six years. The idea of that was, to have strong development, you need a strong Executive. It is not buffeted by wind and waves. That was the rationale of the Executive Presidency.

Since then, there has been a great deal of displeasure about the vast powers vested in the Executive Presidency. Today, there is a wave of opinion that those powers are far too excessive and today, there is a debate on constitutional reform. But, it is also surprising that the government has not announced its stand on the Executive Presidency. Is it going to be abolished or whether it is going to be reformed with reduced powers? The government has not said anything specific yet.

The First Past the Post system was what we had until the Proportional Representation System. That was there from the time Sri Lanka got adult franchise in 1931 and even before Independence in 1948. It came with the Donoughmore Constitution in 1931.
The county saw the flaws in the First Past the Post System, the distorted relationship between the number of votes that a Party got and the number of seats to which it was elected. This resulted in steamroller majorities. For instance, the SLFP, in 1977, which reaped 30% of the votes, was reduced to a mere eight seats in Parliament.

The same thing happened to the UNP in 1970 which got a third of the vote, but had to be content with 17 seats. That is why that system was seen as a distorted system and that was why changes were seen to be necessary. Now, having seen this for almost three decades, we are beginning to see the serious flaws in the Proportional Representation System as well. For instance, there is no relationship between the person elected and his constituency. The PR system also gives room for and the licence to corruption. For instance, a candidate cannot contest from Ratmalana, Moratuwa or Panadura. He has to contest from the entire Colombo District. That calls for large resources, such as pasting posters round the district, opening election offices and deploying vehicles and so on and candidates get obliged to Financiers.

The PR system gives rise to corruption. The system also does not give an opportunity for by- elections. So, a government does not have an opportunity of testing its popularity during its tenure of office. These are some of the major flaws in the PR system. That is why there is a thought of establishing a Hybrid System. There has been a study of the German system.
The government has not thought of these in the proposed Constitutional Reform process

?: How would you analyze long term repercussions of both the Executive Presidency and Proportional Representation electoral system?

A: Both the Executive Presidency and the PR system have to be reformed. We expected some concrete reforms from the government during the proceedings of the Committees and we are disappointed that nothing has emanated from it.

?: The President is a dominant political figure in Sri Lanka. The office was created in 1972, as more of a ceremonial position. However, it was empowered with executive powers by the 1978 Constitution introduced by J. R. Jayewardene. The office of Executive Presidency has, over the years become a proverbial bone of contention. On the one hand some are praising the Executive Presidency as the saviour of the nation, when it faced a crisis from the overarching foreign influences and others are of the view that it should be immediately abolished as unlimited power concentrate in it. Your comments?

A: Let us wait for what the government has to say. After all, they are the government. It is not our responsibility to draft the new Constitution. The government gave a clear set of promises to the country at the time of the Presidential election. They promised to abolish the Executive Presidency. They must tell us whether they have changed their minds. There must be honour and candour on their part. Let them define their position. We will react to it then.

?: Another seminal juncture in the evolution of constitution-making in Sri Lanka is the 13th Amendment to the Constitution of Sri Lanka which created Provincial Councils in Sri Lanka. This also made Sinhala and Tamil as the official languages of the country and English as link language. What are your thoughts on this?

A: All that has happened in the past. Now, it is up to the government to tell us what was happening. We don’t see anything happening in a meaningful way.

?: Creation of Provincial Councils marks the first initiative towards accommodating the long-agitated needs of the minorities for power-sharing by way of devolving power to the provinces. In your opinion, does the 13th Amendment to the Constitution serve its objectives or has it created more issues?

A: There is also an opinion in the country that of the monies that have been allocated for the Provincial Councils, much of it has been spent on Establishment expenses. Then there is also the unacceptable behaviour of the NPC Chief Minister of passing resolutions for genocide charges against the Armed Forces and calling for foreign powers to intervene in the running of the NPC. All that will create suspicions in the manner in which the Provincial Councils are functioning.

?: Finally, as a former Minister of Ethnic Affairs and National Integration, how do you see a lasting and sustainable solution to the national question?

A: The government is lopsided in its approach. It is not balanced in its approach. It has not done anything to allay the fears of the public. What it is doing is to suppress the media and pressurize them not to be critical of the government. You cannot blame the media. The media portrays the reality. It is of no use blaming the critics. There is much to criticize. What is required is to turn the searchlight inwards and address the issues, instead of being critical of the people who criticize those who need to be criticized.

The International Federation of Journalists demands action against Sri Lanka Navy chief

December 14th, 2016

Source: PTI

December 14, 2016  11:46 am

The International Federation of Journalists today demanded “immediate action” against Sri Lankan Navy chief who allegedly assaulted a journalist who was covering a strike by port workers in the country’s southern Hambantota port.

“The International Federation of Journalists (IFJ) is seriously concerned by the assault of a journalist by the head of a security force and demands immediate action against him from the Sri Lankan government. Such an incident, if allowed to pass, not only undermines press freedom and the rights of the media but also has a chilling effect on free press,” the global body said in statement.

“The IFJ demands immediate action against the commander. Navy Commander Vice Admiral Ravindra Wijegunaratne assaulted a journalist while he was reporting navy action to open the port blocked by protesting port workers. Video footage recorded by other journalists showed the navy commander darting towards Gunasekera, assaulting him and using foul language,” the statement said.

The incident happened on December 10 at the southern port of Hambantota during a strike by port workers demanding job security.

The Navy had said they freed a vessel held by the striking workers preventing it leaving from the port.

Source: PTI

-Agencies

– See more at: http://www.adaderana.lk/news/38227/ifj-demands-action-against-sri-lanka-navy-chief#sthash.04gACQeD.dpuf

A yahapalana snafu

December 14th, 2016

Editorial Courtesy The Island

A large number of Hambantota residents took to the streets yesterday against a government move to lease out a vast extent of land in the area to some Chinese companies. These protests and the Hambantota Port workers’ agitation are likely to snowball if the government resorts to coercive methods to neutralise them without addressing the root causes of people’s unrest.

Navy Commander Vice Admiral Ravi Wijegunaratne continues to draw heavy flak for Saturday’s crackdown on protesting Hambantota Port workers. It is unfortunate that a battle-hardened naval officer who proved his mettle in many a daring encounter with terrorists and reached the pinnacle of his career through sheer hard work happened to behave like Captain Haddock. He is in the soup, so to speak, because he went overboard. High ranking police and military officers had better learn from his costly blunder.

It is a supreme irony that the top guns of the previous government, responsible for the Rathupaswala brutal military crackdown in 2013, have condemned the naval action at the Hambantota Port, where thankfully nobody was harmed. Had the port workers resorted to a protest of this nature before last year’s regime change Eraj and Mervyn, with the help of their private armies, would have brought the situation under control in next to no time. They are now with the present administration which has, however, refrained from ‘deploying’ them. So far so good!

Director General of Government Information Ranga Kalansooriya has sought to apportion the blame for Saturday’s incident to the journalist manhandled by the Navy. He says the victim violated media ethics by entering a restricted area, provoking the attack. His argument makes one wonder whether Bovine King Kekille actually lived here and his descendants have got into high posts under the present government. For, no one with an iota of common sense will demand that journalists obey the dictates of military and police officers.

The yahapalana Goebbels who have secured high posts thanks to their boot-licking skills mastered while they were members of the kept press are apparently trying to promote embedded journalism in peacetime as well. Journalists have to gain access to even restricted areas, at times, in the line of duty as is common knowledge. No one has a right to assault or kill such enterprising scribes for doing that.

The Hambantota Port workers overstepped their limits, as we argued in this space the other day. Their right to protest cannot be cited in extenuation of the serious offence of seizing a foreign vessel and holding its crew members incommunicado. Their modus operandi, which should be condemned unreservedly, has ruined the image of the country. But, the naval reaction was manifestly disproportionate to the workers’ action. The strength of the navy team consisting of heavily armed seaborne commandos who took part in Saturday’s raid would have been sufficient even to overrun an LTTE base during the war!

The government which promised to scrap the Chinese funded Port City project has shamelessly handed over a port in a strategic location to the Chinese! Worse, while pontificating about the virtues of the Liccavi method of resolving conflicts peacefully it is bulldozing its way through. It has caused the country to get entangled in a foreign policy snafu through its disastrous Hambantota deal with China.

The late J. R. Jayewardene, who in trying to curry favour with the US, blundered on the foreign policy front and antagonised India, thus plunging the country into a protracted war. India’s former National Security Advisor Shivshankar Menon is reported to have said in his new book, Choices: Inside the making of India’s foreign policy, that Sri Lanka’s internal war cost as much as USD 200 billion. One wonders whether this is the amount India, which created, trained, armed and funded terrorists including the LTTE, owes this country by way of reparation. How much the Sirisena-Wickremesinghe government’s foreign policy bungling which is likely to turn the country into a battleground of superpowers will cost remains to be seen.

The government is playing a very dangerous game by allowing powerful nations to secure the control of seaports and airports here. Unless it stops this practice forthwith the country will be in the same predicament as the proverbial monkey which, in its wisdom, placed itself between two enraged elephants battling for supremacy and got crushed in the process. Is the genie already out of the bottle?

The government must meet the protesting port workers and find a negotiated solution. Port and Shipping Minister Arjuna Ranatunga, while constructing a huge Christmas tree purportedly to promote reconciliation, is threatening to sack the Hambantota strikers unless they fall in line. He must practice what he preaches. Instead, he sounds just like the late JRJ, who unflinchingly terminated about 100,000 strikers overnight in 1980 for demanding a pay hike.

What causes the government to act in this suicidal manner may be called political autoimmune disease. It has become its own enemy! It may have the pleasure of destroying itself but it must not seek expedient solutions to its politico-economic problems at the expense of the country’s interests.

අයියෝ වරාය! අයියෝ රට

December 14th, 2016

වංශපුර දේවගේ ජානක-යුතුකම සංවාද කවය

එජාප රජයක් බලයට ආපු හැම අවස්ථාවකම රටේ සම්පත් විකුණුවා, ප්‍රාග්ධනය හොයන්ඩ. නමුත් එහෙම විකුනල හොයපු ප්‍රාග්ධනයෙන් වැඩක් ගන්ඩ සමත් කමක් එජාපෙට කවදාවත් තිබිල නැහැ. ආණ්ඩුවේ ධූර කාලය ඇතුලෙම ඔවුන් ඒ සල්ලි කබාසීනියා කරලා දැම්මා. ඒකට මූලික හේතුව නායකයින්ගේ අසමත්කම. සාමාන්‍යයෙන් එජාප ආණ්ඩුවක තීරණ ගැනීමේ බලය තියෙන දෙතුන් දෙනා කොළඹ නගරයේ ප්‍රසිද්ධ පාසලක අධ්‍යාපනය ලැබීම පමණක් සුදුසුකම කරගත් අදක්‍ෂයින්. මේ රටේ මෙවැනි පුද්ගලයින්ට වැඩ කාරයෝ හැටියට ප්‍රතිරූපයක් ගොඩනඟා ගන්ඩ අපහසු නෑ. නමුත් ඇත්තටම මේ අයට වැඩ බෑ. රටේ ප්‍රධාන ආර්ථික මර්මස්ථානයක සියයට 80ක් අවුරුදු 198කට විදේශ රටකට බදු දෙන්ඩ දක්‍ෂයෙක් වෙන්ඩ ඕනෙද?

මේ රටේ ලොකුම ප්‍රාග්ධනය මේ රටේ මිනිස්සු. වෙනත් බොහෝ රටවලට වඩා මේ රටේ මේ ප්‍රාග්ධනය එකතු කරගන්ඩත් පුළුවන්. අපිට ඒ පුරුද්ද තියෙනවා. අපි ගොවිතැන් කලේ තනි තනිව නෙවෙයි ගමක් හැටියට අඩු තරමින් යායක් හැටියට. සාමුහිකත්වය ගොඩනඟමින් සිදු කෙරෙන මහා පරිමාණ ආර්ථික ක්‍රියාවලි හරහා මේ රට දියුණු කරන්ඩ පුළුවන්. අද රට යන විදිහට තමන්ගේ මඩි තරකරනවුන් වීම හැරෙන්ඩ මිනිස්සුන්ගෙන් වෙන වැදගත් කාර්යයක් නැහැ. මේ රටේ මිනිස්සුන්ට මේ විදිහට තනියෙන් යන්ඩ දීලා ආර්ථිකය දියුණු වෙන්නේ නෑ සාමූහිකත්වය පදනම් කරගෙන මිනිස්සු ආර්ථික ක්‍රියාවලි වලට සහභාගී කරවා ගන්ඩ ඕනෙ. මේ රටේ තියෙන විශාලම ප්‍රාග්ධනය රට වෙනුවෙන් යොදවා ගන්ඩ හරි හමන් දැක්මක් තියෙන හරි හමන් නායකයෙක් අවශ්‍යයි.

හරිහමන් නායකයෙක් ගොඩනඟා ගන්නකන් තව තවත් රටේ සම්පත් විකිණේවි. රට විකිනීමට එරෙහිව ජනතාව අවදි කලයුතුයි. ඒකාබද්ධ විපක්‍ෂයේ වගකීම එයයි. හම්බන්තොට වරායේ අභ්‍යාසලාභීන්ගේ රැකියාව පිළිබඳ ප්‍රශ්ණයයි වරාය විකිනීමයි දෙකක්. වරාය සහ හම්බන්තොට ඉඩම් විදේශිකයින්ට මේ සා කාලයකට දෙනවා කියන්නේ පරම්පරා ගණනකට මේ සම්පත් අපට අහිමි වෙන බවයි. රටේ වෙනත් වරායනුත් මේ වගේ විකිනෙයිද? තිරිකුණාමලේ කාටද? වරායවල් වෙලඳ වටිනාකමකින් යුතු වුනත් ඒවාට යුධමය වටිනාකමකුත් තියෙනවා නේද? වරායවල් විදේශයන්ට විකිනීම ගැන නාවික හමුදාපතිතුමාට කීමට ඇත්තේ කුමක්ද?
මගේ රට

WATERS EDGE ,UDA AND SPORTS MINISTRY TO ESTABLISH A LEISURE SPORTS ISLAND…..New Items Does right hand of  Magapolis  know what  left hand is doing ???

December 14th, 2016

Dr Sarath Obeysekera

When I read above new item where UDA chairman exchanging MOU in the presence of the Megapolis Minister and the Sports Minister to establish Leisure Sports Island in the lake next to Waters Edge. Few week back during a presentation , Megapolis  Minister clearly  indicated that the starting point of the Canal Transport Project to take passengers from Battaramulle to Wellawatte should be at the same location behind the Waters Edge Lake next to Integerated Megapois development area .

SLLRDC which is the authority of the Diyawanna Lake and entrusted to implement the Canal Project  has no clue that Sports Island should be established in the same location .

New sports venture envisages to have 40 types of sports such as Kayaking,archery ,sailing ,air rifles ,horse trekking etc in the same location .

sarath141216a

I wonder how you intend to implement such a program when boats carrying 50 over passengers  in each boat plan to ply through the lake every 5 minutes or even every three minutes ??

They will have to manoeuvre the canal boats in Zig Zag pattern to avoid hitting the kayakers ??

People keep wondering why professionals who advise the ministers suggest to take such adhoc decisions without interacting with other agencies who are stakeholders of the Megapoils devlo[ment plan  ?

No wonder we are sailing in troubled waters sometimes “rudderless”

Joseph Stalin – Psychopathology of a Dictator

December 14th, 2016

Ruwan M Jayatunge M.D.

Joseph Stalin was one of the main architects of creating a collective trauma in the Soviet Union. His actions and policies brought immense suffering to the people. The aftermath of Stalin’s repression still impacts the post Soviet Society. However despite all the negative consequences Stalin is still remembered in Russia as a great hero who saved the Soviet Union from Hitler’s Fascist aggression and transformed the country in to a super power. The Stalinist past still shapes the Russian society today (Gouldner 2009). A survey commissioned by the Carnegie Endowment in 2012, suggested that Soviet dictator Josef Stalin has remained widely admired in Russia and other former Soviet nations (The Moscow Times, 2013).

Some historians and social scientists have considered the Soviet regime under Joseph Stalin during the 1930 s to be the embodiment of “totalitarianism,” a term which describes a political system in which power is concentrated at the top and the entire population is mobilized to undertake a sweeping transformation of society (Schmaltz, 2007).

Joseph Stalin was the leader of the Soviet Union from the mid-1920s until his death in 1953 ruled the country with an iron fist. According to Professor Harold Shukman of all the dictators the world endured in the twentieth century, Joseph Stalin was unquestionably the mightiest.  Nisbet (1986) describes Joseph Stalin as a low-born revolutionist and bandit from early years, successor by sheer ruthlessness to Lenin as absolute ruler of the Soviet Union, liquidator of the Kulak class in the Ukraine, purger of his own party and totalitarian to the core.

Joseph Stalin’s political strategy to construct socialism is known as Stalinism. Stalinist policies in the Soviet Union included: state terror, authoritarianism, rapid industrialization and the theory of socialism in one country, a centralized state and collectivization of agriculture (Bottomore, 1991). According to Gouldner (2009) Stalinism is historically analyzed as a regime of terror in furtherance of a property transfer which utilized a personal dictatorship and a burgeoning bureaucracy.

Many Soviet and the international politicians observed certain abnormal traits in Stalin’s character. Vladimir Ilyich Lenin saw Stalin as a rude unsympathetic person. Leon Trotsky noticed Stalin’s unstable emotions. Nikolai Bukharin identified his insatiable desire for power disregarding moral values. Among the international politicians Winston Churchill become aware of Stalin’s coldness when he laughed and joked about the killing of hundreds of thousands of Soviet Kulaks while dining with him in 1942 at the Yalta conference. The Yugoslav Communist politician Milovan Đilas perceived inappropriate humor, sycophancy, vulgarity and extreme manipulativeness in Stalin.

Mental capacity of Joseph Stalin was questioned by the Soviet and the foreign experts. Dr Vladimir Bekhterev detected paranoid symptoms in Stalin in 1927. Stalin’s physician Dr.  Alexander Myasnikov who treated him in 1953 believed that atherosclerosis of the cerebral arteries caused abnormal behavior and impaired judgment in the Soviet dictator. There are a number of theories that intensely discuss Stalin’s terrorizing behavior and long lasting paranoia.  As indicated by Birt (1993) paranoia often begins during childhood in a situation in which the child feels both dependent on and threatened by the father. Birt  (1993) further states that severe emotional ambivalence that Stalin experienced in his childhood may have caused lasting impact on him.

Stalin was born in 1879 in Gori -Georgia. His real name was Joseph Djugashvili. Stalin had a turbulent childhood. As a young child Stalin underwent severe physical and psychological distresses that affected his adult life in huge capacity. His father Vissarion (Beso) Djugashvili was a cobbler and an alcoholic. His clients paid him partly in wine which was so plentiful in Georgia that many workers received alcohol instead of cash. Furthermore, he did some business in the corner of a friend’s dukhan (tavern), which encouraged him to drink too much (Montefiore, 2007). He was a violent man and was killed in a bar fight.

Stalin feared his alcoholic father who physically and verbally abused him and his mother. Brackman (2003) states that the neighbors long remembered Vissarion’s brutal beatings of the boy and on one occasion out of rage Vissarion threw a hammer at the boy, barely missing him.  Stalin frequently witnessed family violence. At the age of nine little Stalin was sent to a workshop to work as a child labourer by his father. When he refused to work he was severely punished by Vissarion. Since his childhood he had unresolved psychological conflicts with his father. Stalin’s violent tendencies developed in part due to his father’s behavior (Stal, 2013).

Stalin never received the love that he expected from his mother. His mother Yekaterina Geladze was an illiterate woman. She wanted Stalin to become a priest. He was sent to a Seminary in Tbilisi. But young Stalin was expelled from the Seminary due to his poor performance and for reading Marxist books.

The Seminary life made a huge impact on his life in the later years. He frequently underwent physical beatings by the priests. He saw their double standards and found nothing sacred in life itself. Progressively he was captivated by reading Charles Darwin and Karl Marx.

Toward the end of 1898, Stalin’s relations with seminary officials became increasingly hostile. He refused to bow to the inspector, who complained to the Board of Supervisors. An entry in the Seminary’s records states that in the course of a search of the fifth-grade dormitories, ‘Iosif Dzhugashvili tried several times to enter into an  argument with seminary officials, expressing dissatisfaction with the repeated searches of  students, and declaring that such searches were never made in other seminaries. What the record book fails to mention is that Koba’s (Stalin’s) actions were directly responsible for the search.  Koba tried to induce some of his fellow students to drop out of the Seminary and join the revolutionary underground (Brackman, 2003).

Stalin grew up alone and he had no siblings. His mother gave birth to three children who either died in early infancy or were stillborn. In later years she once mentioned that she had two sons and another time she spoke of three babies, which suggests that one of them was a girl.  The causes of their deaths and even their names remain unknown (Brackman, 2003).

Stalin had attachment problems with his mother. (According to some sources Stalin’s mother had an affair with his God father Yakov Egnatashvili and Stalin’s real father was not Vissarion Djugashvili the cobbler). Stalin’s mother used to work in David Pismamedov’s house. Pismamedov was a Jewish businessman in Gori and some residents suspected an illicit affair between David Pismamedov and Stalin’s mother Yekaterina Geladze.

In Georgia—illegitimacy has long been considered a disgrace and the ultimate insult among Georgians with their traditions of family ties, kinship and honor (Brackman, 2003). When young Stalin heard these rumors he became offended. The roots of Stalin’s anti-Semitic feelings may have started from these personal embarrassments.

Josef Davrichewy, the son of Gori’s police chief, claims in his memoirs that ‘the birth was gossiped about in the neighborhood – that the real father of the child was Koba Egnatashvili… or my own father Damian Davrichewy’. This could not have helped Beso, whom Davrichewy calls ‘a manically jealous runt’, already sinking into alcoholism (Montefiore, 2007). On the other hand there were rumors circulating during Stalin’s lifetime that his real father was the explorer Przhevalsky. People uttering these rumors during Stalin’s reign of terror were not murdered because Stalin enjoyed the association. Przhevalsky was a well known Russian hero (Lerner, 2014).

Stalin gradually distanced himself from his mother and hardly visited her. When Stalin got angry he often used derogatory names to insult her. Stalin’s mother Yekaterina died in 1937 Stalin did not attend the funeral and he only sent a wreath.

Young Stalin had a negative self image and was plagued by the inferiority complex. His face was badly scarred by smallpox. He had a defect in his left arm. The left arm was shorter than the other and it was half-paralyzed. Fingers on his left foot fused may be due to a congenital defect. These physical defects gave a bizarre “Stalin” gait. He was 165 cm tall and looked short. Glad (2002) hypothesized that Stalin had a “basic inferiority complex.

Stalin later invented much about his life: his official birthday was 21 of December 1879 over a year later, an invented date. He generally stuck to 6 December 1879 until an interview in 1920 with a Swedish newspaper. In 1925 he ordered his secretary Tovstukha to formalize the 1879 date. There are several explanations, including his desire to recreate himself (Montefiore, 2007).

In his entire life Stalin struggled to overcome his negative self image and inferiority complexes by inflating defensive high self-esteem. The culmination of defensive high self-esteem transpired with the creation of cult of Stalin.

In his character Stalin lacked empathy. When his first wife Ekaterina Svanidze (Stalin called her Kato) died of Typhus Stalin was emotionally devastated. After this heartbreaking event Stalin became emotionally numbed and said to his friends “my last warm feelings for humanity died”. This emotional numbness became the central feature of his character.

After Kato’s death Stalin became aimless. He abandoned his first born infant child Yakov Dzhugashvili and went for revolutionary activities. Stalin organized a number of armed robberies to raise funds for the party. Gradually he was turning in to a brutal person.  Some unofficial reports concur that Stalin cold-bloodedly killed people in armed robberies. After he came in to power Stalin wiped out most of his old gang members. Hence he erased his criminal history from the records.

Stalin was arrested for revolutionary activities and exiled to Siberia. There he underwent awful human conditions which further deteriorated his emotional wellbeing. But he managed to escape in 1904.

He worked with the Bolsheviks. But unlike Lenin or Trotsky, Stalin had no profound theoretical knowledge in Marxism. Stalin was famously weak in his Marxism on a personal and interpersonal level (Amadon, 2011).  He was not a revolutionary hero either. However he was a pragmatic activist and was highly manipulative. Stalin was able to win Lenin’s trust. He had organizational skills and worked with an iron will. He knew the importance of terror in achieving the goals and defending the Revolution. Stalin used ruthless measures during the Russian Civil War earning a fearsome name.

The American journalist and socialist activist best known for his first-hand account of the Bolshevik Revolution “Ten Days that Shook the World” John Reed once gave a brief description about Stalin. Reed concluded: He’s not an intellectual like the other people you will meet. He’s not even particularly well informed, but he knows what he wants.

In 1922, Stalin became the Secretary General of the Party. It was only an insignificant bureaucratic position, but Stalin transformed it into a very important post (Lerner, 2014). Stalin was rude, intolerable and had a bad temper. Lenin denounced him when Stalin verbally abused his wife Krupskaya. Lenin demanded an apology from Stalin.

Shortly before his death in 1924 Lenin wrote to the Central Committee that Stalin must be removed from the post of General Secretary of the Communist Party of the USSR and be replaced by another who was “more loyal, more courteous, and more considerate of comrades, less capricious. But this decision was overruled by Stalin with the help of his supporters in the Politburo. As the General Secretary Stalin could control the party members. Thus he was able to put his own supporters into place and establish himself a strong base for support (Daniels 1953).

After Stalin became the leader of the Soviet Union he unleashed his cruelty to his supporters. He condemned most of the people who supported him and got rid of them. He eliminated any person who could be a potential threat. Stalin used numerous unorthodox methods to suppress his opponents.

Trotsky was an intellectual and respected by the party members. Trotsky had demonstrated his loyalty to the revolutionary cause during two stints of imprisonment and exile under the tsar. He played a role in the 1905 Revolution as vice-chairman of the first St. Petersburg Soviet. During the October Revolution of 1917 Trotsky directed much of the power seizure in the Russian capital while serving as chairman of the Bolshevik majority Petrograd Soviet (Kelsey, 2011).Trotsky created the Red Army from the Red Guards. He was the Commissar for Civil War and one of the outstanding orators.

Stalin’s jealousy and insecurity grew vastly and he saw Trotsky as a potential threat. After Lenin’s death it appeared that it was Trotsky who had the biggest aspirations on becoming the new leader (Daniels 1953, p. 154). Together with Kamenev and Zinoviev, Stalin formed a `triumvirate’ in order to put pressure on Trotsky. Stalin hated Trotsky’s use of former Tsarist officers in his division of the red army. In December Stalin proposed his concept of Socialism in one country” in order to launch an attack on Trotsky (Kliesch, 2007).

After Lenin’s death Trotsky’s position became vulnerable. As Trotsky’s political prowess decreased, Stalin began to diverge from Zinoviev and Kamenev, and began to develop a new alliance with Bukharin (Westwood, 2002). Trotsky was exiled from the Soviet Union in 1929 and later he was assassinated in 1940 in Mexico on Stalin’s orders.

When Trotsky’s death was confirmed, Stalin wrote an editorial for Pravda, headed ‘The Death of An International Spy’. Stalin declared that Trotsky ‘was finished off by the same terrorists whom he had taught to murder from behind a corner’ and that he had ‘worked for the intelligence services and general staffs of England, France, Germany, Japan…’ and that having ‘organized the villainous murders of Kirov, Kuibyshev, Maxim Gorky, he became the victim of his own intrigues, betrayals, treason, evil deeds…  (Brackman, 2003).

When Kirov emerged as a new member of the communist party it might have threatened Stalin’s rule (Kliesch, 2007). Sergey Kirov was a young popular Bolshevik. He was in charge of the party organization in Leningrad and also the chief of the Leningrad Party. Astoundingly Stalin became very close to Sergey Kirov. Kirov spent time in Stalin’s dacha drinking and dining together. Stalin showed a great affection towards Kirov. In 1934, Kirov was assassinated by a lone gunman. Many suspected Stalin behind the assassination. Apparently Stalin benefitted by Kirov’s murder. Kirov’s death gave him a vast opportunity to hunt down his rivals.

Immediately following the death of Kirov, Josef Stalin unleashed one of the greatest political purges in history. The show trials organized by the Communist Party implicated thousands of political opponents in the conspiracy to kill Sergey Kirov. This information coupled with the fact that Stalin may have seen Kirov as a political rival, as well as the strange circumstances surrounding the assassination, has led many to assert that Stalin played a role in the murder (Lalor, 2006).

Stalin arrested two prominent Politburo members- Zinoviev and Kamenev on false charges. They were tortured heavily by the Stalin’s Secret Police. Kamenev and Zinoviev confessed that they were the key conspirators behind the murder of Sergey Kirov. During the interrogation Zinoviev could not bear the physical and psychological anguish and went in to an acute stress reaction. Although Stalin gave them a personal assurance that their lives would be spared both were shot in 1936.

Yet Stalin’s hunt was not over. Following Stalin’s terror Mikhail Tomsky who was the leader of the trade union movement committed suicide in 1936. Mikhail Tukhachevsky –the former Red Army chief-of-staff arrested in 1937 and shot. Sergo Ordzhonikidze – Commissar for Heavy Industry ended his life in 1937 as a result of forced suicide instigated by Stalin. The Politburo member Jānis Rudzutaks was accused of Trotskyism and espionage for Nazi Germany shot in 1938. Stalin purged more than 40, 000 Red Army Officers. Some of them were active participants of the 1917 Bolshevik Revolution and heroes of the Russian Civil War.

Aleksandr Orlov –the Ex NKVD officer and the author of the famous book “the Secret History of Stalin’s Crimes” of the view that Stalin’s envy of all the old Bolshevik leaders may have been a large part of his motivation to destroy them.

Stalin’s behavior in the power struggle was ambiguous. It might well be that his sudden change in policy, especially on the economic policy, was due to the social and economic developments and constraints, and his own opinion. However, it seems that Stalin operated tactically, rather than ideologically, and his moves were mainly intended to play out his competitors against each other. He placed himself in the centre of the debate, initially proposing moderate views (Daniels 1953; Kliesch, 2007).

The Revolutionary intellectual Nikolai Bukharin once stated:” Stalin is a Genghis Khan, an unscrupulous intriguer, who sacrifices everything else to the preservation of power.

Bukharin was a major figure in both the political and philosophical development of Marxism (Sheehan, 2007). He was a cosmopolitan intellectual, exposed to an array of intellectual influences and accustomed to mixing with intellectuals of many points of view and arguing the case for Marxism in such milieux (Sheehan, 2002). Undoubtedly Stalin felt jealous of Bukharin’s charisma. In his xenophobic conspiracious mind Stalin perceived Bukharin as an imminent threat that had to be eliminated.

Bukharin stood for what he called ‘socialist humanism’, socialism with a human face, socialism with an open mind, socialism with an honest voice, socialism with an outstretched hand. He advocated a more evolutionary path to socialism, an opening of a process where a society would grow into socialism, where those who questioned might be persuaded and not necessarily coerced or executed, where theoretical questions were settled by theoretical debates and not by accusations of treason, purges of editorial boards and disappearances in the night (Sheehan, 2002). But Stalin had a different view on social construction and he twisted Marxism for his own advantage.

After Kirov’s death Bukharin’s days were numbered. Stalin wanted Bukharin dead. Stalin played with Bukharin expressing admiration and affection, all the while scheming against him, jealous of his intellectual acuity and all round popularity and vengeful against any alternative to his absolute authority, as his megalomania swept all into a hurricane of destruction. They lived and worked in close proximity to each other, first in exile and later in the Metropol and Kremlin. After Stalin’s wife Nadezhda Alilueva committed suicide, Stalin asked Bukharin to change apartments with him, as the memory was too painful. In the same bedroom, where she was driven to her death, Bukharin went through his last agony before his arrest, feeling all the possibilities of life closing down on him (Sheehan, 2004).

Bukharin was arrested on false charges. Stalin was manipulating the entire case against Bukharin fabricating allegations against him. The case of Nikolai Bukharin was set during the last of the Moscow Show Trials. Prior to his false confession Bukharin was severely tortured and intimidated. Several times Stalin visited the Show Trial to observe his victim -physically and mentally shattered Bukharin.

Stalin’s presence in these show trials in the 1930s, were confirmed by many of his former associates. He used to sit in a darkened room and watching the anguish of the accused who had been his comrades and associates (Tucker, 1990, pp. 500-501).  Stalin relished their agonies. He laughed immoderately on seeing an imitation of the old Bolshevik leader Grigori Zinoviev being dragged to his execution, making pleas for mercy with obscenities (Glad, 2002). Stalin derived sadistic satisfaction by watching these tormenting episodes. He may have felt superior over them.

Bukharin was a psychologically strong person and Nikolai Yezhov the head of the NKVD (People’s Commissariat for Internal Affairs) could not crack his morale. Stalin became uneasy and got Lavrentiy Beria to break Bukharin’s strength of mind. Beria threatened to kill his wife Anna Larina. To spare the life of his young wife Anna Larina Nikolai Bukharin agreed to sign a false confession. Bukharin admitted a large number of crimes which he never committed.  He was shot in the Lubyanka. Anna Larina was sent to a Gulag. After nearly fifty years of Bukharin’s execution in 1988 Bukharin was finally “rehabilitated” and cleared of all charges by the Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev.

After the Moscow Show Trials whole history of the Revolution was rewritten. Books of Bukharin, indeed of all the purged, disappeared from libraries. Photographs were doctored to erase their presence from seminal events. Soon after the trial came the publication of The History of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (Bolshevik): Short Course. It set the trials within the panorama of a brazenly falsified version of soviet history. Millions of copies were printed and it became the basic text for the study of Marxism in the USSR (Sheehan, 2004).

Before facing the death penalty Bukharin sent a small note to Stalin: Koba, zachem tebye nuzhna moya smert’ ( Koba why do you need my death?) But Stalin was unemotional. After Stalin’s death this small note was found on his desk. He may have kept it as a trophy.

According to some reports Stalin actively engaged in signing death warrants.  Stalin personally ordered and signed tens of thousands of death sentences. On just one day in December 1937, he approved 3,167 death sentences, and then watched a movie (Conquest, 1991, pp. 203, 207; Glad, 2002). Like the NAZI s Stalin hugely lacked empathy. [The American Psychologist Gustavo Gilbert analyzed many NAZI leaders including Hermann Goering at the Nuremberg Trial and concluded that the NAZIs lacked empathy (Jayatunge , 2010) ]

Stalin’s emotional coldness and fascination for certain kind of moves indicate the dual nature of the dictator’s mind. He loved to watch the musical comedy Volga Volga. He liked Charlie Chaplin’s comedies and frequently watched American gangster movies. After signing death warrants he could calmly watch a movie and enjoy it to the fullest extent.

No member of Soviet society was left untouched by these purges, which brought down countless numbers of diplomats, writers, scientists, industrial managers, scholars, and officials of the Comintern. Stalin’s political purges seriously alarmed all military officers, industrialists, and researchers in the Soviet Union (Cheong, 2000).  He maneuvered fear tactics like Ivan the Terrible and Peter the Great.

Stalin came to power in the absence of a broad consensus on the legitimacy and necessity of his personal rule. Indeed the ruling party did  not yet enjoy a firm ideological or cultural hegemony among the population,  and repression and even mass terror had been-periodically used, as in the Civil War and the collectivization of agriculture, to enforce the power of the   state and remove-potential sources of opposition ( Suny,1991).

Stalin encountered series of identity crisis throughout his life probably due to insecurities that vastly affected him.  In his young days he adopted the name Koba -a Georgian fictional hero. According to Lerner (2014) Koba -the name of hero from the1883 novel, The Patricide by Alexander Kazbegi. Stalin very liked this book and he used the name as pseudonym).  then Stalin (man of steel), Thovarisch Stalin (Comrade Stalin), Velikiy Stalin (Great Stalin), nash Velikiy Vozhd’ (Our Great Leader) and finally Otets Narodov (Father of the Nation). He was troubled by his Georgian heritage ruling the Russian masses.  He spoke Russian with a thick notable accent.

Stalin was highly sensitive to criticism.  He was unable to accept any jokes about himself. Even his short stature was compensated for by wearing built-up shoes (Tucker, 1973, p. 438). Stalin suggested Maxim Gorky to write his biography. But Gorky declined his request. Hitherto in 1935 the Soviet Writer Nikolai Ostrovsky wrote to Stalin: Dear, beloved Comrade Stalin! I want to address to you–our leader and teacher, the dearest human being for me etc. Nikolai Ostrovsky was in ill health for a long period and died in 1936.

Stalin’s cronies tried to induce Gorky to write a biography of ‘The Great Stalin’. Yagoda, who bribed Gorky with privileges, ordered an NKVD officer by the name of Pogrebinsky to convince Gorky to write the biography.  Stalin also ordered Yagoda to ask Gorky to write an article titled ‘Lenin and Stalin’ for Pravda on the occasion of the seventeenth anniversary of the October Revolution, but Gorky refused. He also refused to write articles against Kamenev and Zinoviev, whom Stalin accused of instigating the murder of Kirov, and of other crimes. Stalin used his secret police to suppress Gorky. In a letter to the French Communist writer Romaine Rolland, Gorky complained that he was trapped and felt like an ‘old bear with a ring in my nose’. (Brackman, 2003).

Maxim Gorky once wrote a short story narrating the daring attitude of the great Conquer Tamerlane’s poet. The valiant poet could boldly comment on Tamerlane’s idiocy. But Stalin needed blind followers. Maxim Gorky died in 1936 many suspected Stalin’s involvement. Some believed that Gorky had been administered cardiac stimulants in large quantities by the Stalin’s secret police. However Stalin blamed Trotsky and other ex Politburo members including Bukharin for murdering Maxim Gorky.

Stalin wanted to use the literary skills of the great novelist Mikhail Sholokhov to glorify his image. When Stalin invited him for a meeting Sholokhov drank a bottle of Konyak and went to the meeting under the influence. The meeting became unsuccessful (Ivanov, 1988)

Sholokhov respected Stalin for leading the victory over Fascist Germany and liberating the USSR. But he refused to worship Stalin blindly like many others. On the contrary, he challenged Stalin’s prejudices that were projected on the Russian POWs. According to Stalin POW s were traitors who did not fulfill their sacred military task. Many POW s were executed or deported by Stalin when they returned to their motherland. Sholokhov disagreed with Stalin on this point. In his outstanding short story “Sud’ba Cheloveka” (Destiny of a Man) Mikhail Sholokhov, discloses a character named Andrey Sokolov- a Red Army POW who escaped from the Fascists with a heroic effort.

Stalin used numerous methods to inflate his personality via the Soviet media. His defensive high self-esteem created a new cult in the Soviet Union. He launched anti-religious campaign against the Russian Orthodox Church. The Stalin’s picture replaced the God’s image and he became a Demigod. He destroyed churches and religious monuments to proliferate Cult of Stalin.

Between the late 1920s and the early 1950s, one of the most persuasive personality cults of all times saturated Soviet public space with images of Stalin. A torrent of portraits, posters, statues, films, plays, songs, and poems galvanized the Soviet population and inspired leftist activists around the world (Plamper, 2012). For Communists of the old guard, the Stalin cult was probably something of an embarrassment. Yet in their eyes too, he was becoming a charismatic leader, though of a somewhat different kind than for the broad public. Stalin’s public image in the 1930s, like the Tsars’ before him was that of a quasi-sacred leader, font of justice and mercy, and benevolent protector of the weak; he was often photographed smiling paternally on shy peasant women and children (Fitzpatrick, 2000).

The actor Alexei Dikiy played the role of Stalin in propaganda films. The Soviet public saw great Stalin in fields and in factories encouraging and motivating masses.  When the picture of Stalin appeared on the screen people hailed with elation. The public were galvanized by watching the God like man – Great Stalin.  Although Alexei Dikiy made grand films about Stalin he could not escape the dictator’s repression. His other films were censored and Dikiy was banned from public performances in the latter stages. Banished from his theatrical work Alexei Dikiy found no aim in his life. He suffered from depression and died in 1955.

Stalin was not the genuine successor to Lenin. Stalin attempted to construct legitimacy through the development of a ‘cult of personality (Stronga & Killingsworthb, 2011). Koeneke   (2010) identifies that the major factor in the success of Stalin was his establishment of a major personality cult. The cult of Stalin as Communism’s first philosopher in succession to Marx, Engels, and Lenin had now been founded. But this was not all. Embryonic in this development was the monolithism that became a hallmark of Stalinist intellectual culture in all fields and that distinguished it from pre-Stalinist Bolshevism (Tucker   1979).

By the time of the Teheran Conference, Stalin felt confident of victory. The German Army had suffered defeat at Stalingrad and had been driven from the Caucasus which opened the route for delivery of aid through Iran by his Western allies. On 6 March 1943 Stalin bestowed upon himself the rank of ‘Marshal of the Soviet Union’, and he was proclaimed ‘the greatest strategist of all times and all peoples (Brackman, 2003). But Stalin never had any military training or never served in the Army.

Although Stalin was depicted as a great leader with an inimitable vision and outstanding intelligence, in real life he was shortsighted and took erroneous decisions in a number of times. His decisions made thousands to suffer in vain.

Joseph Stalin’s economic plans swallowed human lives in gigantic proportions. His actions weakened the Red Army and it gravely affected the Winter War with Finland in 1939. He miscalculated Hitler’s intensions. Stalin disregarded reports from the Red Army military intelligence. On 3 April 1941 Churchill sent a message to Stalin, informing him of Hitler’s intention to invade the Soviet Union. Stalin was receiving similar warnings from various sources, but shrugged them off as attempts by Britain to sow discord between him and Hitler. A former Czech agent in Berlin, code-named ‘Shkvor’, reported to Soviet intelligence the concentration of German troops along Soviet borders. Stalin read Shkvor’s report and wrote on it in red pencil, ‘English provocation’. He ordered the NKVD to assassinate Shkvor (Brackman, 2003).

Although Stalin found enemies everywhere he failed to see his biggest enemy. He thought that he could ally with Hitler. When Hitler invaded the Soviet Union Stalin went in to despair. He abandoned all his work and hid from the public eye. Paradoxically, the war years were psychologically the most normal time during Stalin’s rule: for once, the country was not fighting ‘enemies of the people’ who were figments of his imagination (Brackman, 2003).

During the Great Patriotic War Stalin used to disrupt the military campaigns giving unnecessary deadlines. He tried to control everything on the front-line with the help of the Communist Party commissars. This had disastrous results as the Germans came close to capturing Moscow (Owen, 2014).

The General Georgy Zhukov who planned the major military strategy to defeat Hitler’s forces had to fight two war fronts simultaneously. He fought one against Hitler and other one against Stalin’s ego. However Hitler’s Moscow invasion made the man of steal nervous and the General Zhukov was given more power and liberty to control the armed forces. But soon after the war General Zhukov was sidelined and sent to Odessa. He was partially denounced using the term Bonapartism of Zhukov.  If not for his popularity Stalin would have purged one of the proficient military generals of all time.

Stalin’s mass projects that glorified him consumed millions of human lives. His sanity and leadership were secretly questioned by some of the party leaders. But many feared him and maintained the conspiracy of silence. In 1932 Martemyan Ryutin – Russian Marxist revolutionary wrote a thesis titled Stalin and the Crisis of the Proletarian Dictatorship. Ryutin argued that the party and the dictatorship of the proletariat have been led into an unknown blind alley by Stalin and his retinue and are now living through a mortally dangerous crisis. For this thesis Ryutin paid heavily. Martemyan Ryutin was shot in 1937 with his two sons.

Stalin’s paranoid defense grew more and more. He saw spies, saboteurs, foreign collaborators, Trotskyites, etc everywhere. Stalin feared his own shadow and trusted no-one, even him-self. He increasingly withdrew from official functions and he muttered menacingly to his close associates that it was time for another purge. (Hachinski, 1999) His list of enemies became extensively long.  His rational thinking was obscured by fear and paranoia.

Stalin was a covert anti semite. Although in 1930 Stalin publicly stated that Anti-semitism is an extreme form of racial chauvinism he took a number of measures to suppress Jewish people in the Soviet Union.  After his defection Stalin’s personal secretary Boris Bazhanov revealed that Stalin made crude antisemitic outbursts even before Lenin’s death (Miklós, 2003). Conquest (1991) indicated that Stalin, from his earliest days as a seminary student in Tiflis, demonstrated anti-Semitic feelings.

One of the most bizarre aspects of Stalin’s anti-Semitism was its explosion precisely at a time when he was pursuing a policy of support for the newborn State of Israel. He hoped to turn Israel into a Soviet satellite similar to the ‘Popular Democracies’ he was setting up in Eastern Europe (Brackman, 2003). Stalin established Jewish autonomous oblast in 1934.

However his antisemitic feelings were evident. Stalin arrested Molotov’s Jewish wife Polina Zhemchuzhina for greeting in Yiddish to the first Israeli ambassador to Moscow- Golda Meir at a Kremlin reception. He invented “Delo Vrachey” (Doctors’ plot) and arrested prominent Jewish doctors like Dr. Kogan, Feldman, Ettinger,  Vovsi, Grinstein, Ginzburg, and many others. He had a plan to deport all the Soviet Jews to Birobidjan in Siberia. After Stalin’s death the whole world would hear of the deportation planned by Stalin (Goldberg& Mayer, 1961).

During the Stalinist period intelligentsia were exposed to reprisals. Stalin executed thirteen Jewish intellectuals who were academics, writers and poets active in various cultural realms. The Soviet poet Vladimir Mayakovsky became disillusioned with Stalin’s repressions committed suicide in 1930. Stalin banned Boris Pasternak’s novels and poems condemning it as anti-Soviet literature. Pasternak’s partner Olga Vsevolodovna Ivinskaya who was an editor at “Novy Mir” magazine was arrested in 1949. She was sentenced to five years in prison. Olga became the main inspiration for the character of Lara Antipova in Pasternak’s novel Doctor Zhivago.

Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn was arrested in 1945 for criticizing Stalin in a letter. He was sent to a Gulag.  Solzhenitsyn described his personal experiences in Lubianka –the central Soviet political prison– through Innokentii Volodin in The First Circle. Interrogations started in late February 1945 with the obligatory sleepless nights, bright lights, the box, and total isolation from other human beings. Solzhenitsyn’s eight-year camp experience opened his eyes to the reality of the Soviet Union’s economic foundation, of which prison labor made up a third (Fedyashin & Kondoyanidi, 2009). In the later years Solzhenitsyn vividly described the victims of the infamous “political Article 58” and exiled inhabitants of the Kolyma. His books: the Gulag Archipelago and One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich are testimonials of Stalinist horror.

Stalin suppressed a number of research work in the Soviet Union.  The suppression of research began during the Stalin era and scientists who engaged in research labeled as “idealistic” or “bourgeois   (Graham, 2004). Stalin banned Genetics Research in the Soviet Union. The famous Soviet geneticists –Professor Vavilov, Professor Koltsov, and Professor Serebrovski were removed from the academia. The official ban on Mendelian genetics was an example of pernicious political interference in science during Stalinist era.

Stalinist culture was dominating the Soviet science. Sociology and the other academic disciplines were gradually “politicized, Bolshevisized and eventually, Stalinized (Weinberg, 1974). Stalin despised Psychology. The Freudian Psychoanalysis was considered as a Bourgeois pseudoscience. The Russian psychoanalyst Nikolay Y. Ossipov who personally knew Sigmund Freud and Carl Jung left the country in 1921 and his work was banned in the Stalinist USSR. Under the Stalin’s orders the Russian psychologist Lev Vygotsky’s books were prohibited. Stalinist censure even reached the works of Fyodor Dostoyevsky.

Stalin felt intimidated by the presence of intellectuals and men with charismatic personality. He deliberately kept people with weak personalities in his inner circle. Although the high ranking officials feared Lavrentiy Beria he was not largely respected and they used to spread rumors about his sexual deviant behaviors. Lazar Kaganovich was a dogmatic Stalinist and blindly followed Stalin’s orders. Nikita Khrushchev was considered as an ill-mannered peasant from Ukraine. Stalin often ridiculed at Vyacheslav Molotov and sometimes called him an idiot. Mikhail Kalinin often became the laughing stock due to his senile diminished behavior. Although Kliment Voroshilov was a Civil War hero sometimes Stalin used to verbally abuse him. He used Georgy Malenkov to insult military leaders like Zhukov, Semyon Budyonniy , Konstantin Rokossovsky, Semyon Timoshenko etc. Among the inner circle Stalin behaved with an exaggerated pride often embarrassing and degrading others.

The inner circle gathered frequently and dined together. But very seldom they had intellectually stimulating conversations. Stalin’s daughter Svetlana Alliluyeva recalls how in the period after the war the whole of the Politburo dined with Stalin almost every night. During a visit to Sochi in 1947, she found the whole group coming to dinner and spent three or four boring and tiring hours listening to the banal and repetitive conversation with little connection to what was happening in the world and the session continuing late into the night. Even in her last visit to her father at the end of 1952, she found the same set of cronies, repeating the same jokes and asides she had been hearing for years (Alliluyeva, 1967, pp. 21, 208; Glad, 2002).

Stalin often felt grave emptiness inside may be due to his inferiority complex. Boredom and monotony struck him vigorously. Very seldom he left Moscow and most of the time he stayed in his dacha in Kuntsevo surrounded by same people almost all the time. In such a tedious environment he was determining the destiny of millions of people. Sending them before a firing squad or sending them to a labor camp gave him immense sense of power and control internally and externally. He felt omnipotent supremacy within himself.

Stalin was an impulsive character. As described by Khrushchev (1970) sudden impulses decided large-scale public projects such as the building of canals or momentous political decisions such as the postwar partition of Germany. Associates would be suddenly summoned and meetings would be ended abruptly or the agenda switched at the whim of Stalin. Without regular meetings of the governing bodies Khrushchev noted, “the government virtually ceased to function.” Stalin often postponed for months dealing with critical problems that needed to be solved urgently (Khrushchev, 1970, p. 297; Glad, 2002).

Stalin’s neurotic traits were known to the professionals as early as in 1927. The Great Russian Psychologist Vladimir Mikhailovic Bekhterev (1857–1927) was ordered to examine Josef Stalin in December 1927 during the First All-Russian Neurological Congress in Moscow (Kesselring, 2011). Vladimir Bektharev found psychopathology in Stalin. Bekhterev said only one word “paranoiac” (Antonov-Ovseyenko, 1981). Vladimir Bektharev’s diagnosis of Stalin was paranoia. After making this diagnosis Bekhterev had less than 24 hours to live. He died mysteriously and without a post mortem his body was cremated. His family members suspected foul play (Lerner et al., 2005).

The Kremlin doctor – Professor D. Pletnev knew Stalin for a long time. According to Professor Pletnev Stalin was vindictive and had a strong tendency to adventurism and delusions of persecution (Lerner, 2014). Professor Pletnev was arrested in 1937 on Stalin’s orders. He was tortured and his tormentors forced him to sign a false confession stating that he was involved in the murder of Maxim Gorkey. Pletnev was shot in 1941 in Medvedevsky forest.

In the later years some  prominent Soviet psychiatrists  suggested a  number of other definitions of Stalin’s malady: ‘paranoid schizophrenia, delirious  condition, derived from paranoid psychopathy, heavy psychopathy’, placing Stalin in the  category of ‘epileptic-psychopaths’ During a panel discussion a psychiatrist stated that Stalin was ‘cruel, devoid of any feeling of pity, completely amoral, easily excitable. I personally consider [his condition] a psychical monstrosity, a moral depravity. It is an anomaly but not a sickness.’ Another psychiatrist reminded the audience of Hamlet’s ‘method in the madness’, adding that Stalin was afflicted with ‘megalomania of a limitless scale (Brackman, 2003).

The Western Professionals too analyzed Stalin’s behavior. Robert Tucker in his authoritative biographical study of Josef Stalin suggested that Karen Horney’s theory of neurosis can be used to explain his grandiosity and insecurities (Tucker, 1990, pp. 3-5; Glad, 2002).  Karen Horney held that neurosis originates in emotional insecurity. The neurotic forms an unrealistic ideal of what the person should be which is separated from the actual innate capacities and the concrete circumstances of the person and traps the neurotic in an impossible task (Gudan, 2007). Stalin suffered emotional insecurities since his young days. Following his emotional insecurity Stalin fixated on a narrow view and had apathy, isolation, arrogance, increased fear and suspicion.

Professor Russell V. Lee of the Stanford University Medical School wrote: In Russia there was Joseph Stalin, the man of steel  and ruthless slayer of millions of his own people; completely devoid of  scruples of any kind, he was a sociopath, a moral imbecile, and in  complete control of Russia (Lee, 1974).

Although many experts commented on Stalin’s mental status his skills and achievements cannot be overlooked. The sheer scale of Stalin’s achievements and institutionalized terror has prompted some authors to label him as a paranoid megalomaniac. Whatever the merits of this diagnosis, his undeniable accomplishments and the rationality of many of his actions cannot be explained by the workings of a disturbed mind (Hachinski, 1999).

Stalin used brutal but effective measures during the Russian Civil War defeating the White Grads. In early stages he could became one of the trusted men’s of Lenin. He was manipulative and had the convincing power to form allies with Politburo members isolating Trotsky. After dealing with Trotsky he targeted remaining Politburo members eliminating all possible threats for power. Stalin’s unmatched craftiness demonstrates his eagerness to achieve his goal.

Ironically Stalin became an internationally recognized figure. He was considered as one of the great Marxist pragmatists by radicals. The ideas of Stalin were not confined to the borders of the USSR. They exerted a decisive influence on countries “liberated” by the Red Army from German fascism and Japanese imperialism after World War II. The fact that the Stalinist version of Marxism-Leninism played an important role in the formation of the North Korean ideological system was confirmed by Kim Il Sung in his speech delivered on the occasion of Stalin’s death in March 1953 (Seong-Chang Cheong, 2000). Stalinism influenced Mao Zedong notably. Mao’s 1953 First Five-Year Plan followed the Soviet model (Worden et al., 1987). The East German official state security service “Stasi” adopted many Stalinist -NKVD interrogative systems and Cambodian communist revolutionary Pol Pot used Ukrainian Holodomor type genocide in Cambodia deporting the people of Phnom Penh in to the killing fields.

When Stalin came in to power the Soviet Union was a semi feudal state. He transformed the country in to a nuclear super power. He made the Soviet Union to enter in to the Space age. He did many things that unsound mind could not even imagine of. However there was another part of Stalin that was pathological and noxious.

Stalin had a mind of a murderer. Stalin was allegedly involved in many murders on a personal basis even before the October Revolution. He meticulously planned the assassination of Leon Trotsky in 1940. After the Moscow Trials it was inevitable that Stalin should make a desperate effort to kill Trotsky. Trotsky was the man Stalin feared and hated most. Stalin’s determination to get rid of Trotsky must have increased ten-fold after his pact with Hitler and after war was declared. Envy, hate and desire for revenge play a large role in his make-up (Goldman, 2010).

The historians have ample evidence to show that Stalin was behind the Katyn Forest massacre in which the NKVD killed 22,000 Polish officers who were taken prisoner during the 1939 Soviet invasion of Poland. Stalin blamed the Nazis for the massacre, but then in 1990 the Russian authorities admitted Stalin’s involvement. The orders for the mass murder had been given by Lavrenty Beria, the head of NKVD and had been signed and approved by the Soviet Politburo including its leader Joseph Stalin (Sterio, 2012).

It was estimated that nearly three million German prisoners of war were captured by the Soviet Union during World War II. In the Battle of Stalingrad Field Marshal Friedrich Wilhelm Ernst Paulus surrendered to the Soviet forces with 91,000 German soldiers.  But only 6,000 returned home (Werth, et.al, 1999). According to Overy (2004) 356,000 out of 2,880,000   German prisoners of war died in the Soviet labor camps.

Some investigators believe that Stalin knew the plight of Raoul Wallenberg – the Swedish diplomat. In 1945 Raoul Wallenberg left Budapest for a meeting with the Soviet commander, Marshal Malinovsky to discuss matters relating to the surviving Hungarian Jews. Wallenberg was arrested by the NKVD. Stalin who had decided the fate of   individual people, ethnic groups and entire populations did not hesitate to decide the destiny of Raoul Wallenberg. He was killed in Lubyanka. Reemerging Raoul Wallenberg the Nobel Peace Prize Laureate Andrei Sakharov stated: Raoul Wallenberg was one of those people who make not just all of Sweden but all of humanity proud. But for Stalin he was just a number.

Stalin disliked Josip Broz Tito. Tito did not trust Stalin and he refused to agree on Stalin’s proposal of making Yugoslavia a Soviet satellite state. Stalin became furious.  Tito–Stalin split resulted heavy tension between both countries. The Soviet state security and intelligence organs devised a multitude of secret plots to assassinate Tito. If Stalin had lived longer, he would eventually have ordered Soviet troops to occupy Yugoslavia. There is considerable evidence that in the final two years of his life he was seeking the capability for a decisive military move in Europe, possibly against Yugoslavia (Kramer, 1993).

Stalin could disconnect himself from warm human emotions. Stalin’s ability to psychologically cut himself off from individuals who had once seemed to be close to him was one of the sources of his cruelty (Glad, 2002). He drove his second wife Nadezhda Allilueva to commit suicide. He had shallow feelings for his son Yakov from his first marriage. When Yakov became a POW during the Battle of Smolensk in 1941 Stalin did not make any attempt to release or comfort him. Yakov committed suicide at the Sachsenhausen death camp in 1943. Stalin’s malevolent attitude towards his other children affected them detrimentally. Vasily Stalin died of chronic alcoholism.  Svetlana Allilueva (Lana Peters) defected to the West in 1967.

Stalin was a self centered person and an isolated character who had no value in friendships. He could harm his close associates without any personal feelings. One refinement of Stalin’s sadistic cruelty was to reassure personally some of his colleagues and subordinates that they were safe to the extent of toasting their “brotherhood,” and then have them arrested shortly afterward sometimes the very same day (Fromm, 1973, p. 285; Glad, 2002). Sergo Ordzhonikidze was one of his old comrades. But Stalin gave Sergo only two options: either to denounce Nikolai Bukharin and testify against him or to commit suicide. After removing Yagoda Stalin appointed Yezhov as the NKVD chief showing him friendship and brotherhood. He was known as Stalin’s faithful friend. In December 1938 Yezhov was removed accusing him as an enemy of the people. Yezhov was shot in 1939. Stalin made his old Georgian friend Alexander Egnatashvili as his personal bodyguard. He served Stalin with utmost loyalty. He disappeared somewhere in 1953. He was probably shot on Stalin’s orders.

Stalin was troubled by delusions of conspiracy and feelings of victimization. He saw enemies everywhere.  He suspected Red Army Marshal Vasily Blyukher was a Japanese spy and he was killed in 1938. He thought the Foreign Minister Vyacheslav Molotov, was an American agent. He constantly accused Beria for being an English spy. He thought that his personal physician Professor Vinogradov was an agent of British intelligence. Stalin fantasized the doctors’ plot in 1953. General Vlasik, the head of Stalin’s bodyguards was arrested on false charges in connection with the Doctors’ plot. As Khrushchev recalled, Stalin “instilled in … us all the suspicion that we were all surrounded by enemies” (Khrushchev, 1970, p. 299; Glad, 2002).  Trotsky intensely documented Stalin‘s unstable moods and mood swings. According to Trotsky Stalin had unpredictable moods. Lazar Kaganovich one of the main associates of Joseph Stalin remarked: he was a “different man at different times … I knew no less than five or six Stalins.

Stalin ruled the Soviet Union creating mass fear and anxiety. From the top government officials to the ordinary peasants and labourers lived under constant fear and tension. Soviet mass media publicized the names and addresses of the people who were charged with espionage, sabotage and being involved in anti Soviet activities. These enemies of the state were publicly denounced. The victims were arrested, then tortured and often shot or sent to subhuman habitats known as Gulags. This social havoc was similar to the European Witch Craze of the 14th to 17th Centuries. People became suspicious of their neighbors, friend’s even family members.  Anybody could betray anyone at anytime.

Denunciations became a part of the political mechanism. Workers denounced their co workers and family members denounced family members. Social relationships disintegrated.  Denunciation by neighbors, colleagues, and schoolmates was a common hazard in the lives of people with bad social origins. The child of a kulak, adopted and educated by her aunt and uncle, was denounced in a letter from the village to her Komsomol organization. Later she was denounced again in a letter sent to a newspaper; its publication led to her dismissal from her job and the breaking of her engagement to a Communist, who was given an ultimatum by the party (Fitzpatrick, 2000).

Tens of thousands of people had disappeared under the Stalin’s regime.  The NKVD often used black vehicles to abduct people. These black vehicles were known as Chorniy Voronok – Black Raven. By seeing these vehicles old women used to make sign of cross on their foreheads. It was considered as a bad omen.

During Stalin’s era death was everywhere. The NKVD carried out mass arrests and executions. Sometimes people were shot in public. The NKVD conducted mass killings. According to the historical archives an estimated 100,000–225,000 corpses buried in the Bykivnia Graves in Kiev, Ukraine. Mass graves were also found in Kurapaty (Minsk, Belarus), Sandarmokh (Karelia, Russia), Butovo (Yuzhnoye Butovo District in Russia), Ulan-Ude ( Buryatia) etc.

The NKVD could liquidate anyone on Stalin’s orders. Most of the NKVD men became addictive killers. Rather than anger or prejudice often the murders were committed out of coldness. There were two words -Tibunal (court-martial) and Rasthrel (shoot down) that brought paralyzing fear to the general public. Vasili Blokhin served as the chief executioner of the   NKVD who was handpicked by Stalin. He is known as the history’s most prolific executioner. In later years Blokhin suffered from alcohol-induced psychosis (PTSD?) and committed suicide.

It was like in the kingdom of King Twala – one of the main characters in Sir H. Rider Haggard’s book “the King Solomon’s mines”. In the kingdom of King Twala people lived in extreme fear. The king ruled the country with the help of Gagool the evil old hag. The evil witch used to dance in the King’s court and points out any person who could be a possible threat to the King. Then he would be removed and murdered without a trial. Every night hundreds were sent to death. People feared to think of any evil against the King Twala. They feared that Gagool would know their hidden motives and might select them in the courtyard.

Stalin used similar fear evoking tactics to keep his power among his subjects. Like the King Twala Stalin used Genrikh Yagoda, Nikolai Yezhov and finally Lavrentiy Beria and Viktor Abakumov to do the witch-hunt. Stalin controlled everybody through fear—fear of death, fear of torture, fear of exile. His belief that everyone was plotting against him contributed to him forcing “confessions” out of many innocent people; he felt that if he had a scapegoat, then he was closer to eliminating the prospect of his defeat (Volkogonov, 1988). After inflicting fathomless evil on the society he conveniently found scapegoats. Scapegoating became Stalin’s one of the major political tactics.

The Stalinist state needed terror for its own existence. The regime of terror derived also from its inability to supply material incentives and, also, because the party’s ideology of “scientific socialism” led it to expect that the peasantry would be reluctant to collaborate in building socialism (Gouldner, 2009). Terror became a part of Stalin’s ideology and his paranoia.

Robins & Post (1997) elucidate that when a paranoid leader becomes chief of state his paranoia infects the nation. The Soviet people experienced this phenomenon with Stalin. Stalin injected profound fear and anxiety in to the Soviet society during his reign. One in twenty Soviet subjects would be arrested. People lived with mistrust and disbelief. Social connections and social ties disintegrated. People feared to tell anecdotes; they feared keeping diaries, visiting friends etc. Widespread confusion and fright prevailed in the Soviet society during the Stalinist era and it impacted the later generations.

Stalin had a marked psychopathic personality (Retief & Wessels, 2008).  Stalin demonstrated shallow sentiments, emotional numbing, deep mistrust, paranoia, suspicion, intense rage and urge to seek revenge. The thirst for revenge was stronger than Stalin. In Party circles the story is often mentioned how Stalin one evening in 1923 in Zubalovo said to Dzerzhinsky and Kamenev: ‘to choose the victim, to prepare the blow with care, to slake an implacable vengeance, and then to go to bed…there is nothing sweeter in life.’ Bukharin hinted at this conversation (‘Stalin’s philosophy of sweet vengeance’) in his discussion last year about the struggle with the Stalinists (Brackman, 2003). Stalin never forgave anyone.

Stalin’s delusions and obsessions caused millions to suffer. Stal (2013) hypothesizes that evidence of a troubled upbringing, depression, paranoia, and alcohol abuse suggests psychopathology as an implicating factor behind Stalin’s actions.

The diagnosis of paranoia in the case of Stalin was, no doubt, well founded in the ICD-10 F60.0: paranoid personality disorder; excessive sensitivity to rejection; bearing on slightest suspicion; tendency to distort experiences; neutral or friendly actions of others misinterpreted as hostile or contemptuous; recurring unjustified suspicions regarding sexual fidelity of spouse or sexual partner; contentious and continued insistence on their own rights; inflated self-esteem and frequent, excessive self-absorption ( Kesselring, 2011).

In varying degrees most politicians exhibit forms of paranoia. Political paranoia, as distinct from clinical paranoia, ‘begins as a distortion of an appropriate political response but then far overshoots the mark. . . . The person is always the underdog, always the victim.’ But political paranoia is a label; it is not a clinical diagnosis. The paranoid leader, whether despotic or democratic, is at the centre and everything is self-referenced. He or she tends to be hypersensitive, often self-absorbed and jealous (Owen, 2014). The paranoia that Stalin experienced was not limited towards others, rather it included him; this is allegedly caused by his suspicion that he is not as great as he believes himself to be. This made Stalin dependent on the attitude of others, believing that if they see him as a hero-figure, then it is so (Volkogonov, 1988).

Owen (2014) indicates that the origins of Stalin’s paranoia probably lie in his roots in Georgia. Many of his ruthless, brutal features are better explained as those of a ‘Caucasian chieftain’ rather than deriving from a dogmatic Marxism. In any normal democratic society Stalin, as likely as not, would have ended up in prison. ‘Throughout his life Stalin’s detached magnetism would attract and win the devotion of amoral, unbounded, psychopaths.

Stalin also had all the signs of what was described recently as ‘hubris syndrome (Owen & Davidson 2009; Kesselring, 2011). As clarify by Owen & Davidson (2009) extreme hubristic behavior is a syndrome, constituting a cluster of features (‘symptoms’) evoked by a specific trigger (power), and usually remitting when power fades. The key concept is that hubris syndrome is a disorder of the possession of power, particularly power which has been associated with overwhelming success, held for a period of years and with minimal constraint on the leader.

Hubris syndrome was formulated as a pattern of behavior in a person who: (i) sees the world as a place for self-glorification through the use of power; (ii) has a tendency to take action primarily to enhance personal image; (iii) shows disproportionate concern for image and presentation; (iv) exhibits messianic zeal and exaltation in speech; (v) conflates self with nation or organization; (vi) uses the royal ‘we’ in conversation; (vii) shows excessive self-confidence; (viii) manifestly has contempt for others; (ix) shows accountability only to a higher court (history or God); (x) displays unshakeable belief that they will be vindicated in that court; (xi) loses contact with reality; (xii) resorts to restlessness, recklessness and impulsive actions; (xiii) allows moral rectitude to obviate consideration of practicality, cost or outcome; and (xiv) displays incompetence with disregard for nuts and bolts of policy making (Owen & Davidson, 2009).

Some experts suspect malignant narcissistic syndrome in Joseph Stalin. According to Glad (2002) Stalin’s behavior could be explained through the malignant narcissistic syndrome. His extreme lack of empathic ties is evident in his destruction of people who had been in his inner circle without evident remorse. Stalin exhibited the classic symptoms of narcissism with strong additional elements of sadism and paranoid tendencies. The latter trait quite probably also concealed an element of inferiority and personal cowardice (Retief & Wessels, 2008).

Narcissists are typically not comfortable with their own emotions. They listen only for the kind of information they seek. They don’t learn easily from others. They don’t like to teach but prefer to indoctrinate and make speeches. They dominate meetings with subordinates. They lack empathy and often are emotionally isolated. They are relentless and ruthless in their pursuit of victory ( Maccoby, 2000).

Unlike the reparative narcissist, the malignant narcissist is not bound by a mission he shares with his followers. Rather, he manifests contempt not only for the law, but for the values of his followers as well. Unlike the antisocial personality, however, he does not specialize in minor criminality. As a would-be tyrant he works to create an environment, a social and ideological structure, in which the manifestations of his disorder-cruelty, paranoia, and what would normally be criminal behavior-become legitimized and justified behavior. This is facilitated in the early stages of the tyrant’s career, during his climb to power by the adoption of political and social positions that are shared by other revolutionaries but are contrary to the prevailing values. Thus Stalin’s opposition to the Tsars and the capitalists of the world (Glad, 2002).

Stalin consumed alcohol on regular basis. Stalin suffered from chronic insomnia and many other organic symptoms. He had hypertension and often complained of joint pains. His paranoid delusions led him not to seek medical assistance from doctors. Volkogonov (1988) considered that the combination of paranoid personality disorder, alcohol abuse, intelligence, and a cruel nature created the foundation for Stalin’s infamous mass killings.

The actual numbers of Stalin’s victims are still not known. The Georgian historian Roy Aleksandrovich Medvedev estimates that the total death toll directly attributable to Stalin’s repression could be 20 million.  According to Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn 60 million people perished due to Stalin’s actions. Dyadkin (1983) states that Stalin killed 34 to 49 million people. The British historian Norman Davies believes that the numbers could be high as 50 million.

Stalin was pathologically fascinated by death. He saw deaths in his family and later in the society that he lived. He saw death as a perfect remedy for all social maladies.  He publicly stated yest’ chelovek – yest’ problema: net cheloveka – net problemi” (“[there] is [a] person; [there] is [a] problem: [there] is no person, [there] is no problem.”) He thought that death solves all problems. For Stalin deaths of millions became merely statistics.

Toward the end of his life, Stalin decided to destroy all evidence of his crimes. The task was formidable. He needed, for one thing, to obliterate the ‘burial grounds’ containing the remains of hundreds of thousands of his executed victims so that these mass graves could not be discovered, as had happened with the Katyn Forest graves of Polish officers. To destroy thousands of mass graves all over the Soviet Union was a titanic undertaking and needed time. A number of these graves, such as the one in Kuropaty near Minsk, were excavated and the skeletons destroyed (Brackman, 2003).

Indisputably Stalin was one of the leading tyrants in the modern history. The Greek Philosopher Plato gives vivid descriptions about tyrants. As Plato observed that the tyrant is very likely to get caught up in a cycle of disintegration. His actions are governed by insatiable desire for power. To maintain power tyrants engage in injustices. Hence one injustice breeds another and the tyrant becomes increasingly isolated from the people he would lead. The tyrants constantly live in fear and suspicion. Feeling endangered, he acts with greater and greater impulsivity. His actions become irrational and erroneous. Eventually he ends up “mad” (Plato, 1941). Plato’s description is greatly applicable to Joseph Stalin.

Stalin used numerous methods to achieve power. Stalin’s appointment as party General Secretary in 1922 was crucial to his success in the succession struggle after Lenin’s death (Rees, 2004). Once power is attained, however, a complete system is created (in legal and political terms) that transforms the intrinsically antisocial and criminal behavior of the tyrant and his associates into measures necessary for the preservation of the polity against internal and external enemies. When the tyrant nears his zenith, the criminality takes on massive proportions as in Stalin’s purges (Glad, 2002).

Stalin had a marked xenophobia. His political and cultural repressions were significantly connected with his xenophobic mind-set. Stalin’s drive to isolate the country from foreign influences proved highly detrimental for all fields of academic research. Scholars studying foreign countries, foreign literature, or foreign languages were deemed suspect. Anything smacking of Western influence was potentially grounds for criticism and expulsion–and even arrest. The bizarre nature of the process was evident when a well-known military historian, P. A. Zhilin (who later was elevated to the rank of Lieutenant-General and appointed head of the Institute of Military History), was asked publicly “why he does not use French sources in his work.” To thunderous applause, Zhilin responded, “I do not use enemy materials. (Azadovskii & Egorov, 2002).

The xenophobia that was ignited by Joseph Stalin in the USSR still has a major impact on the Russian society. Goble (2014) reports that Xenophobia and hate crimes in Russia has risen to unprecedented levels. Foreigners, migrants from Central Asia and the Caucasus frequently suffer both from organized attacks and individual violence.

Stalin’s last crime denoted as the Doctors’ Plot. It reveals how his paranoia intensified in his old age. In his last years, however, his life-long suspiciousness became florid paranoia (Hachinski, 1999).

Stalin severely mistrusted doctors (Clarfield, 2002).  He eschewed medical advice, listening to a veterinarian and treating his hypertension with iodine drops (Hachinski, 1999).  His mental and physical health started to deteriorate rapidly. He became more suspicious, irritable and paranoid.

Stalin suffered at least one stroke prior to his fatal intracerebral haemorrhage in 1953. Given his untreated hypertension and the autopsy report, it is probable that he had a number of lacunar strokes. These tend to predominate in the fronto-basal areas, and disconnect the circuits that underpin cognition and behaviour. The most plausible explanation of Stalin’s late behavior is the dimming of a superior intellect and the unleashing of a paranoid personality by a multi-infarct state (Hachinski, 1999).

Late in 1951 Stalin had a regular checkup by his personal physician- Professor V.N.Vinogradov. During the examination Stalin said that the Politburo members A.S.Shcherbakov (in 1946) and A.A.Zhdanov (in 1948) had been poisoned by Kremlin doctors. Stalin mentioned the names of the doctors, all of whom were Jewish.  Vinogradov knew them well and said he had absolute trust in their honesty and professional competence. After the checkup, Vinogradov advised Stalin to rest more and work less. To Stalin this advice had a familiar ring: three decades earlier, plotting to hasten Lenin’s death and pretending to worry about his health, he had insisted that Lenin be kept from his daily duties. Stalin at once suspected Vinogradov of conspiring against him and ordered his arrest (Brackman, 2003).

With his unsound mind in early 1953 Stalin planned to stage a show trial of several doctors most of whom were Jewish and who were falsely accused of acting against the state (Clearfield, 2002). The infamous “Doctors’ Plot” speaks volumes about Soviet politics, Stalin’s role, the persistence of a medieval view of doctors as potential prisoners and the survival of overt anti-Semitism in the Soviet Union (Amis 2002; Heynick ,2002 ;Clarfield, 2002).  Stalin’s sudden death brought the Doctor’s Plot to an end. Although the doctors were released after his death the victims suffered immensely during the interrogations.

According to some reports Stalin was planning another purge. This time he wanted to get rid of his inner circle.  On the 1st  of March 1953 Stalin’s inner circle were invited to dine with him as usual. During the dinner Stalin got drunk and chased all the guests including Lavrenthi Beria, Nikita Khrushchev, Vyacheslav and Molotov.  Expelling the visitors from the dinner table Stalin said “It’s over for all of you”. Then Beria knew that they were doomed. He realized that Stalin was planning another purge. After this incident less than 72 hours Stalin suffered a stroke and became unconscious. He was lying on the floor helplessly. Beria did not call the medics. At the last stage the Doctors wear called but it was too late. Stalin died. Stalin’s son General Vasily Stalin who was present at the Dictator’s death bed accused the top ranking officers (Beria?) for assassinating his father. Later Beria said to Nikita Khrushchev that I saved all of you from Stalin’s final blow. Considering all these accounts its possible suspect that Beria had poisoned Stalin (Jayatunge, 2011).

In having Stalin embalmed, Beria destroyed any traces of poison in Stalin’s body, and he did not destroy the ‘personality cult’ by treating Stalin’s body with the same veneration that had been accorded to Lenin’s remains (Brackman, 2003).

According to Faria (2011) Stalin’s “Post-mortem examination disclosed a large hemorrhage in the sphere of the subcortical nodes of the left hemisphere of the brain. This hemorrhage destroyed important areas of the brain and caused irreversible disorders of respiration and blood circulation. Besides the brain hemorrhage there were established substantial enlargement of the left ventricle of the heart, numerous hemorrhages in the cardiac muscle and in the lining of the stomach and intestine, and arteriosclerotic changes in the blood vessels, expressed especially strongly in the arteries of the brain. These processes were the result of high blood pressure.

The announcement of Stalin’s death came on 5th of March 1953. It linked his name with that of Lenin in an eulogy of the Party as leader of the people. It underscored the “steel-like, monolithic unity” of Party ranks and defined its task as the “guarding of unity’; as the “apple of our eye.   Reuters at the time recalled that Malenkov used this phrase in his October Party Congress speech and suggested that he was the author of the document. The same phrase, however, had appeared in connection with Lenin’s death. Neither Malenkov nor any other associate of Stalin was mentioned in the announcement. (Office of Current Intelligence; Central Intelligence Agency Report released in 2007).

When the death of Stalin was announced the whole county mourned. Tens of thousands of people gathered to pay their last respect to Joseph Stalin. People lined up in cold weather. Even the former victims of Stalinist political repression including their family members were among the crowds. (It had been reported that many prisoners in the Gulags shed tears for the loss of Stalin) Mourning masses wanted to get a glimpse of Stalin’s corpse. Thousands of mounted militiamen, security police and soldiers tried to maintain order, but they could not stop the human avalanche. Large crowds were pouring into Moscow’s streets, stampeding and crushing under their feet thousands of crazed worshipers of Stalin, whom he was dragging along with himself into the grave even after his death (Brackman, 2003).

Stalin transformed the Soviet Union in to a nuclear superpower. Under his leadership the country made tremendous economic, industrial, educational, scientific advances.  But the social cost was extremely high. He stirred fear psychosis in the society deporting massive numbers of people to the Gulags and also killing millions. His slave army built canals, hydro dams, railways and cites and finally perished in to oblivion. The Soviet society achieved its glory via blood and sweat of the millions of innocent people. The psycho social consequences of Stalin’s reign impacted the later generations. The aftermath still echoes in the post Soviet society.

Personal communications

1)      Personal communication with the Right Honourable Doctor the Lord Owen CH PC FRCP MB BChir

2)      Personal communication with  Vladimir Lerner, M.D., Ph.D., Professor of Psychiatry, Ben Gurion University of the Negev, Head of Department Be’er Sheva Mental Health Center

3)      Personal communication with Professor Helena Sheehan Dublin City University Dublin Ireland

4)      Personal communication with the late Professor Alexander Bukhanovskiy  -The former   Professor Head of the Psychiatry and Narcology Department at Rostov State Medical University.

5)       Personal communication with  Roger Brooke, Ph.D., ABPP Professor of Psychology Director, Military Psychological Services Department of Psychology Duquesne University

6)      Personal communication with Marina Stal MA. – Teachers College at Columbia University, New York, NY, USA.

7)      Personal communication with Prof. Mikhail Reshetnikov, MD, PhD, Russia

8)      Personal communication with Professor Alexander Karayani PhD Russia

9)      Personal communication with Ivanov E.I -Senior Teacher in the Soviet History: Vinnitsa Medical University Ukraine

References

Allilueva S. (1968) Twenty Letters To A Friend, Penguin Books, London.

Allilueva, S. (1969) Only One Year, Hutchinson & Company, London.

Amadon, P (2011). How Stalin Distorted Marxism. Retrieved from http://politicalaffairs.net/how-stalin-distorted-marxism-2

Amis M. (2002). Koba the Dread: laughter and the twenty million. New York: Miramax.

Antonov-Obseyenko, A. (1981). The time of Stalin. Portait of a tyranny. New York: Harper & Row.

Azadovskii,K.,  Egorov,B. (2002). “From Anti-Westernism to Anti-Semitism”. Journal of Cold War Studies 4:1.66–80.

Birt, R.(1993). “Personality and Foreign Policy: The Case of Stalin,” Political Psychology 14.4. 607-625.

Bottomore,T.B. (1991). A Dictionary of Marxist thought. Malden, Massaschussetts, USA.

Brackman. , R.(2003). The Secret File of Joseph Stalin: A Hidden Life. Routledge.

Clarfield,A.M. (2002).The Soviet “Doctors’ Plot”—50 years on. BMJ. 325(7378): 1487–1489.

Conquest, R.(1987). The Harvest of Sorrow: Soviet Collectivization and the Terror-Famine Oxford University Press.

Conquest, R. (1991). Stalin: Breaker of nations. New York: Viking.

Daniels, R. V. (1953), `The Soviet succession: Lenin and Stalin’, Russian

Review 12(3), 153{172.

Djilas, M.(1962). Conversations with Stalin. Mariner Books.

Dyadkin, I.G.(1983). Unnatural Deaths in the U.S.S.R.: 1928-1954. Transaction Publishers.

Faria, M.A. (2011).Stalin’s mysterious death. Surg Neurol Int. doi:  10.4103/2152-7806.89876.

Fedyashin, A., Kondoyanidi, A. (2009). THE CONSERVATIVE DISSIDENT: THE EVOLUTION OF ALEXANDER SOLZHENITSYN’S POLITICAL VIEWS.Revista de Instituciones, Ideas y Mercados. pp. 41-72.

Fitzpatrick, S. (2000). Everyday Stalinism: Ordinary Life in Extraordinary Times: Soviet Russia in the 1930s. Oxford University Press.

Fromm, E. (1973). The anatomy of human destructiveness. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

Glad, B.(2002). Why Tyrants Go Too Far: Malignant Narcissism and Absolute Power.Political Psychology, Vol. 23, No. 1.pp. 1-37.

Goble, P. (2014) Xenophobia in Russia at an All-Time High, Experts Say. The Interpreter.

Goldberg, B.Z., Mayer,D. (1961). The Jewish Problem in the Soviet Union: Analysis and Solution. Crown Publishers, New York.

Goldman, A. (2010).  The Assassination of Leon Trotsky: The Proofs of Stalin’s Guilt.Kessinger Publishing.

Gouldner, A.W. (2009). Stalinism: A Study of Internal Colonialism. Retrieved from http://www.autodidactproject.org/other/gouldner-stalinism.pdf

Graham, L.R. (2004) Science in Russia and the Soviet Union. A Short History. Series: Cambridge Studies in the History of Science. Cambridge University Press.

Gudan, E. (2007). KAREN HORNEY AND PERSONAL VOCATION. The Catholic Social Science Review 13.117-127.

Hachinski, V.(1999). Stalin’s last years: delusions or dementia?Eur J Neurol. 129-32.

Heynick F. (2002).Jews and medicine: an epic saga. Hoboken, NJ: KTAV.

Jayatunge, R.M.( 2010). The Psychology Of Nazism. Retrieved from  http://www.srilankaguardian.org/2010/03/psychology-of-nazism.html

Jayatunge, R.M.(2011). The Infamous Lavrenthi Beria.Lanka Web. Retrieved from http://www.lankaweb.com/news/items/2011/03/24/the-infamous-lavrenthi-beria/

Kelsey, J.M. (2011). Lev Trotsky and the Red Army in the Russian Civil War, 1917-1921. Retrieved from http://scholarship.claremont.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1209&context=cmc_theses

Kesselring, J. (2011). Vladimir Mikhailovic Bekhterev (1857–1927):  Strange Circumstances Surrounding the Death of  the Great Russian Neurologist. Eur Neurol.66:14–17.  DOI: 10.1159/000328779.

Khrushchev, N. S. (1970). Khrushchev remembers (S. Talbott, Trans., Ed.). Boston: Little, Brown.

Kliesch, C . (2007). Why did Stalin emerge as Leader of the Soviet Union? Retrieved from file:///C:/Users/nuwanthi/Downloads/Why%20did%20Stalin%20emerge%20as%20Leader%20of%20the%20Soviet%20Union.pdf

Koeneke, M . (2010). The role of the cult of personality in dictatorship. Ann Arbor .USA.

Kramer, M (1993). Stalin, Soviet Policy, and the Consolidation of a Communist Bloc in Eastern Europe, 1944-1953. Retrieved  from

http://iis-db.stanford.edu/evnts/6186/Stalin_and_Eastern_Europe.pdf

Krivosheev, G.I.(1997). Soviet Casualties and Combat Losses. Greenhill . ISBN 978-1-85367-280-4 Page 79.

Lalor, B.J.(2006).Examination of the Kirov Assassination. Retrieved from http://artsci.drake.edu/dussj/2006/lalor.pdf.

Lee,V.R. (1974).  ‘When Insanity Holds the Specter’, The New York Times, 12 April 1974.

Lerner V., Margolin Y., Witztum E. (2005). Vladimir Bekhterev: his life, his work and the mystery of his death. History of Psychiatry, 16:217-227

Maccoby, M. (2000, January-February). The narcissistic leaders. The incredible pros, and the inevitable cons. Harvard Business Review, 78,68-77.

Miklós, K.(2003).Stalin: An Unknown Portrait, Central European University Press.

Montefiore,S.S. (2007). Young Stalin. Weidenfeld & Nicolson. London.

Nisbet, R (1986).  The infamous courtship of a patrician and a revolutionist Retrieved from http://www.mmisi.org/ma/30_02/nisbet.pdf

Orlov, A. (1954). The secret history of Stalin’s crimes. London: Jarrolds.

Overy,R. (2004) The Dictators: Hitler’s Germany and Stalin’s Russia.  W. W. Norton & Company.

Owen, D., Davidson, J.(2009). Hubris syndrome – an acquired personality disorder? A study of US Presidents and UK Prime ministers over the  last 100 years. Brain . 132: 1396–1406.

Plamper, J. (2012). The Stalin Cult: A Study in the Alchemy of Power .Yale University Press.

Plato (1941). The republic (B. Jowett, Trans.). New York: Modern Library/Random House.

Rees, E.A. (2004). The Nature of Stalin’s Dictatorship: The Politburo 1928-1953. Palgrave Macmillan.

Retief, F., Wessels, A.(2008). Was Stalin mad?S Afr Med J. 98(7):526-8.

Robins, R. S., & Post, J. M. (1997). Political paranoia: The psychopolitics of hatred. New Haven, CT:  Yale University Press.

Schmaltz, E.J. (2007).  Soviet “Paradise” Revisited:  Genocide, Dissent, Memory and Denial. Retrived d from http://www.grhs.org/heritage/SovietRepression.pdf

Seong-Chang Cheong(2000). stalinism and Kimilsungism: A Comparative Analysis of Ideology and Power.Asian Perspective 24, no. 1 (2000): 133-61.

Sheehan, H (2007). Marxism & science studies.  International Studies in the Philosophy of Science

Stal, M (2013). Psychopathology of Joseph Stalin. PSYCH.Vol.4.DOI: 10.4236/psych.2013.49A1001.

Stronga, C.,Killingsworthb. M. (2011). Stalin the Charismatic Leader?: Explaining the ‘Cult of Personality’ as a Legitimation Technique. Politics, Religion & Ideology Vol. 12, No. 4, 391 –411.

Suny . R.G. (1991). “Proletarian Dictator  in a Peasant Land:  Stalin as Ruler”Retried from http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/51226/460.pdf

Tucker, R. C. (1973). Stalin as revolutionary, 1879-1929: A study in history and personality. New York:  Norton.

Tucker, R..C. (1979).The Rise of Stalin’s Personality Cult. The American Historical Review, Vol. 84, No. 2.

Tucker, R. C. (1990). Stalin in power: The revolution from above, 1928-1941. New York: Norton.

Volkogonov, D. (1988). Stalin: Triumph and tragedy. London: Grove Weindenfeld. AND Stal, M (2013). Psychopathology of Joseph Stalin. PSYCH.Vol.4.DOI: 10.4236/psych.2013.49A1001

Weinberg,E.A.(1974). The Development of Sociology in the Soviet Union, Taylor & Francis.

Werth,N., Bartošek, K., Panné,J.,   Paczkowski,A.,   Courtois,S. (1999).  The Black Book of Communism: Crimes, Terror, Repression, Harvard University Press.

Westwood, J.N.(2002). Endurance and Endeavour: Russian History 1812-2001. 5th. Oxford, NY:   University Press. Pg 298.

Worden, R  L.,  Savada , A.M.,    Dolan,R.E.(1987).“The Great Leap Forward, 1958-60. China: A Country Study. Washington: GPO for the Library of Congress, 1987.

Former Defence Secretary in Japan

December 14th, 2016

Former Defence Secretary in Japan

Navy chief goes berserk … manhandles Island/Divaina correspondent at Hambantota Port

December 14th, 2016

Courtesy The Island

Peacetime heroics Navy Commander Vice Admiral Ravi Wijayagunaratne and his men manhandling The Island correspondent Roshan Gunasekera at the Hambantota Port. Pic by Dilip N Jayasekera

navycomanderhmanhadle

Image from a video footage of Navy commander attacking journalist held by naval ratings
As a Sathyagraha launched by the Hambantota port workers entered the fourth consecutive day yesterday without any sign of an early solution, media and civil organisations, labour unions and political parties condemned Navy Commander Vice Admiral Ravi Wijayagunaratne for manhandling The Island/Divaina Suriyawewa correspondent Roshan Gunasekera.

Gunasekera said: “I shouted that I was from the media when they held me. Then the person who attacked me said: ‘That is why we hit you.’ I identified the attacker as the incumbent Navy Commander.”

Gunasekera said: “I work as the Suriyawewa correspondent of The Island and Divaina and the TV correspondent of the Hiru. I went to the Magampura Port to report the Satyagraha by the port employees. While I was reporting the event, a naval officer in civvies came to me and asked what I was doing there. I told him I was from media and showed him my media accreditation card. Then he grabbed me by my neck and dragged me to a place where there was another group. The Navy Commander in a T-shirt and shorts came there and I told him, too, that I was from media. He abused me in filthy language and assaulted me. Port workers shouted that I was a journalist and not to attack me. The navy men tried to grab my camera and I ran away. Later, I took treatment from a private medical institute in Suriyawewa. I intend to lodge a complaint at Hambantota ASP office for my protection for now. I fear for my life.”

Gunasekera has lodged a complaint with the police.

The government has said an investigation is underway into the attack on the journalist.

The Sri Lanka Photojournalists’ Association has condemned the Navy commander’s assault on The Island journalist. Association’s secretary Romesh Dhanushka Silva has said in a media statement: “We vehemently condemn the brutal attack by navy commander on a journalist. The Navy commander attacked the journalist while the latter was showing his media accreditation. This is a serious situation. The Navy Commander’s action is a huge slur on hitherto impeccable record of the Sri Lanka Navy. According to the Constitution every citizen is equal before the law. It should be the same with the navy commander, too. We demand justice from the government and call upon it to take immediate action against the Navy commander for assaulting, hindering and obstructing the journalist carrying out his duties.”

Workers Struggle Centre has, in a media release, condemned the high-handed action of the navy in suppressing the trade union action. It said: “Media organisations have published photos and videos of armed navy men attacking unarmed protesters. Navy commander himself attacked journalists. We condemn this assault and demand justice from the government.”

The release signed by Organisational Secretary of the WSC Duminda Nagamuwa said: “This government came to power, promising to ensure democracy. We know how the previous government crushed public protests at Chilaw, Rathupaswala and Katunayake. This government, too, has done the same. It, too, has resorted using military power against the people.”

The JVP has pledged fullest support for the Satyagraha launched by Hambantota port workers against government’s moves to hand over 15,000 acres in the area on a 198 year lease to a Chinese company. JVP Trade Union Wing leader K.D. Lalkantha Friday visited Hambantota and addressing a rally held at Bellagaswewa junction in support of the agitation pledged his party’s support to the protestors.

Meanwhile, a press release issued by the Department of Government Information under the title ‘Alleged assault on a journalist at Hambantota Port’ said: “The government has initiated an inquiry into the alleged assault on a journalist during the protest incident at Hambantota Port Saturday (10). However, according to preliminary inquiries, the concerned journalist violated basic ethical practices when covering sensitive conflict situations. It is highly expected that the journalists adhere to the highest standards of ethical practices when covering these types of conflict situations. Meanwhile, the Navy says that the physical presence of its commander at the scene was mandatory as per the requirements of the International Ship and Port Facility Security (ISPS) Code.”

ONCE MY BROTHER-BANGLADESH

December 14th, 2016

ALI SUKHANVER

Standing along the Line of Control looking across the border into the land belonging to India, we the Pakistanis wish that we were alone and companionless as the company of our closest neighbour India is simply like a pain in the neck. From the war imposed on us in 1965 to the tragic Fall of Dacca in 1971, and then to APS Peshawar massacre on16 December 2015, so many times this closest neighbour of us tried to make us believe with its brutal behaviour that one must be careful of one’s neighbours. To tell you the truth, it is India’s selfish attitude which has simply destroyed the peace and prosperity of the whole region. None of the countries in the Indian neighbourhood is safe at the hands of Indian hegemonic designs. Pakistan, China, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Burma, Bhutan and even India’s bride Bangladesh, there is not even a single country which could say that it has no conflicting issues with India. What is the root cause of India’s enmity with its neighbouring countries, what are the factors which have made India hostile to its neighbours; no one knows. But one thing is very much obvious that the South-Asian region could have been a paradise of peace and prosperity on earth if India had not been so hostile and aggressive to its neighbouring countries.

Some people say that it is Mr. Modi who after coming into power has added fuel to the Indian fire of aggression and hostility to the neighbouring countries but the Indian desire of weakening the neighbouring countries cannot be entitled to Mr. Modi only; it had been the desire of all those who had been ruling India since 1947. Certainly in 1971, Modi was not the Prime Minister of India when Pakistan was divided into two separate portions after a very cunning game of conspiracies. Those were the days when militarily Pakistan was not in such a strong position as it is today but even then the politicians and armed forces of Pakistan did their best to counter Indian conspiracies with their unfathomable courage and passions. Though the Indian authorities have always been denying any of their involvement in separating the East Pakistan from the West Pakistan but credit goes to Mr. Modi that he very openly and boldly rejected this denial. Speaking at the ceremony to receive the award ‘Bangladesh Liberation War Honour’ from President Abdul Hamid in Dacca in June 2015, he said that he was one of the young volunteers who came to Delhi in 1971 to participate in the Satyagraha Movement launched by Jana Sangh to garner support for the Mukti Bahini members. He further admitted that there had been a conspiracy to divide Pakistan; the establishment of Bangladesh was a desire of every Indian and that’s why India’s forces fought along with the Mukti Bahini, thus creating a new country. In short Mr. Modi openly admitted his country’s involvement in creating disturbance in a neighbouring country Pakistan. Conspiracy against the peace, prosperity and solidarity of a country in itself is a very heinous form of terrorism and Mr. Modi admitted that his country had been involved in this type of terrorism. While admitting this crime, Mr. Modi could not remember that he himself had ever been blaming Pakistan of promoting terrorism and sheltering terrorists. During the said hate speech he was so much over-excited that he forgot his own earlier statement in which he had described terrorism as an “enemy of humanity”. He said, “What have terrorists given to the world? Terrorists don’t respect boundaries; they have no ideology, no principles and no culture. They have only one intention – to be the enemy of humanity.” Mr. Modi was very true and honest in his statement because he himself had been a part of the terrorism against a neighbouring country.

But there is another side of the picture too; Modi-like volunteers who were involved in that conspiracy did not know that by dividing Pakistan into two portions, they are adding a new Muslim country Bangladesh to the world map. At present Bangladesh seems playing in the hands of Hasina Wajid but situation would be altogether otherwise when there is no Hasina sitting in India’s lap. Apparently the brave people of Bangladesh are silently observing the atrocities committed by Hasina Wajid, they are witnessing the hanging of old and agile leaders of Jamat-i-Islami, they are passively on looking the cruel game being played by Hasina Wajid and her Indian benefactors; but soon the silently boiling volcano within them is going to explode. Sheikh Hasina will have to pay the price for the bloodshed she is enjoying. One day her own nation shall take her to task for the murder of so many innocent people of Bangladesh who were the real patriots. Some day Hasina will have to pay-off the debt of this brutality.

Drawbacks of the United Nations Human Rights Committee (UNHRC)

December 14th, 2016

By  Hosoya Kiyoshi

” UNHRC Committee members have little motivation to do the right thing and, as I mentioned earlier, no one monitors them. Perhaps that is why they accept invitations to all-expense-paid junkets, and in return, side with anti-Japanese nations and issue recommendations designed to emasculate and demolish Japan. The UN Human Rights Committee should concentrate on addressing human-rights violations occurring today. This is no time for it to be shirking its duties and torturing Japan (for more than 20 years!) about the comfort women controversy. The Committee is infringing upon the human rights of and vilifying the Japanese people. They say, “the Congress dances, but does not progress.” In this case, the UN dances, but does not progress. Actually, what is happening is far worse: the UN Human Rights Committee has become toxic. This is one aspect of the United Nations that needs urgent reform.”
http://www.sdh-fact.com/book-article/872/
…………………………………………

The November 2014 issue of the monthly magazine Seiron carried an article I wrote about the members of the UNHRC (United Nations Human Rights Committee):

From the viewpoint of [anti-Japanese elements] who would attempt to influence [the Committee], members who have little knowledge about Japan, let alone specialized knowledge, are preferable because of their malleability. Because such members don’t know anything about Japan, they have no reticence about making [preposterous] claims about Japan. Self-proclaimed human-rights NGOs attempting to promote their anti-Japanese assertions manipulate Committee members. They are using spurious claims of their own invention to infringe upon the rights of Japan and the Japanese people. That is the unfortunate state of the UN today.

Such was the situation at the UNHRC two years ago, and it has not changed. Without knowing how the Committee operates, one would not have realized how pernicious the recommendation in the CEDAW report was that attempted to meddle in Japan’s imperial system.

The duties of Committee members are (1) examining reports submitted by national governments and evaluating progress made in the implementation of the Convention (Articles 17 and 20), and (2) submitting the results of their investigation to the General Assembly in the form of an annual report (Article 21).

This aspect is misunderstood by those who harbor the mistaken assumption that the Committee examines the Japanese government’s report on the human-rights situation, and then issues recommendations, meaning corrections to be made.

The Committee is decidedly not an examining body. The world is finally beginning to realize that CEDAW’s recommendations have neither legal force nor binding power. Nevertheless, until a few years ago, calls to adhere to UN recommendations were obeyed. Opponents of democracy wanted to perpetuate that misunderstanding, hoping to use the UN to force the Japanese government to implement recommendations, something they could not accomplish within Japan.

Those very same opponents of democracy are quick to espouse “defending the Constitution.” Nichibenren (Japan Federation of Bar Associations), which professes to be a champion of law and justice, is one such group; it is a beaming example of hypocrisy. This time, the organization was plotting to introduce sham human rights into Japan’s imperial system, and for a reason far more malicious than the instance from two years ago, which I will demonstrate.

The source of information for the committees is government reports, discussions with government representatives during dialogues, and material provided by NGOs. Of course, some committee members will do research on their own, but they are obligated to examine reports; they are not permitted to incorporate their personal opinions into the reports.

To protect their reputations as intellectuals and human-rights specialists, committee members who are ignorant of the human-rights situation in Japan rely on information provided by Japanese NGOs. After going through the proper formalities, NGOs post information on the relevant committee’s website prior to meetings. This is a very convenient resource for committee members. Nevertheless, at a meeting held two years ago, a member posed a question to a government representative, prefacing it with, “We have heard that … .”

However, what makes the incident relating to the imperial household particularly nefarious is the fact that the attack on Japan’s imperial-succession system in CEDAW’s concluding observations came without warning. There was no mention of imperial succession in the government report submitted to the CEDAW, or in reports from NGOs. Nor was the topic brought up in a dialogue.

For a topic to be broached in the CEDAW’s concluding observations, a decision to that effect must be made by the Committee.

According to Rule 31 (Adoption of Decisions) of the Rules of Procedure governing Committee work,

1. The Committee shall endeavor to reach its decisions by consensus.
2. If and when all efforts to reach consensus have been exhausted, decisions of the Committee shall be taken by a simple majority of the members present and voting.

This is just an hypothesis, but I would venture to say that CEDAW members voted twice on the imperial-succession matter, once before they included it in their concluding observations, and again when they made the decision to respect the Japan’s government request to delete that particular observation. One can only wonder how the members voted each time.

Hayashi Yoko, a Japanese woman, is the chairperson of CEDAW. Committee rules do not allow members to participate in the review of State reports emanating from their native countries. But as chairperson, she must have been involved to some extent. What sort of leadership did she provide on that occasion?

According to Article 17 of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, members shall be “experts of high moral standing and competence in the field covered by the Convention.” However, it appears that CEDAW members ignored the Convention, misrepresenting themselves as “experts of high moral standing,” and engaged in a potential terroristic act by advocating the destruction of the most fundamental of Japan’s social and political system.

There is no system in place to monitor the members or to punish them for violations of the rules. It seems to be the nature of sessional committees to place all their trust in the “high moral standing” of their members. We, its observers, are also to blame for overlooking CEDAW’s collusion with certain NGOs.

Six years have elapsed since my first visit to Geneva to attend a session pertaining to the Convention on the Rights of the Child. At the time, I had the opportunity to speak informally with a committee member from one of Europe’s leading nations. I was surprised to hear him state that, “This job wears me out, and it’s pointless.” He explained that although committee members diligently examine the state of human rights in a particular nation and issue recommendations, the government of that nation tends to ignore them.

Committee members have little motivation to do the right thing and, as I mentioned earlier, no one monitors them. Perhaps that is why they accept invitations to all-expense-paid junkets, and in return, side with anti-Japanese nations and issue recommendations designed to emasculate and demolish Japan. The UN Human Rights Committee should concentrate on addressing human-rights violations occurring today. This is no time for it to be shirking its duties and torturing Japan (for more than 20 years!) about the comfort women controversy. The Committee is infringing upon the human rights of and vilifying the Japanese people. They say, “the Congress dances, but does not progress.” In this case, the UN dances, but does not progress. Actually, what is happening is far worse: the UN Human Rights Committee has become toxic. This is one aspect of the United Nations that needs urgent reform.

Precedence Jumbled, Tablets instead of Toilets

December 14th, 2016

Sunil Thenabadu Brisbane Australia

tell-your-manthrithuma

SAD STATE OF PUBLIC SERVICE IN SRI LANKA ………

December 14th, 2016

Dr Sarath Obeysekera

We have nowhere to go >>>>>>>>>>

Today I am about to leave home to Road Development Authority to meet the legal division which I counted (it may be the 10th time)( to expedite the eviction of some encroachers along the road reservation in Galle next to Maglle bridge .The reservation is to have  access to our land where we intend to establish a foreign funded Marina related Investment.

The encroachers do not live in the huts bur rented out for various businesses. This  reservation clearly   belongs to RDA and I have requested RDA to evict them and no action was taken .I took the matter up at the OEDB chaired by Hon Minister who advised RDA to take action .RDA directors who attend these meetings undertake to take action and nothing happened for the last two years .Then under my pressure and after meeting with Director Legal ,RDA issued eviction letters and promised to take legal action ,still no result

I went to RDA office several times and explained to them that our investment is  held up due to the obstruction and so far RDA head office and Galle RDA office is playing cat and mouse games blaming each other .

I hope today I will meet the Director and request again ,I waited two years !!

Afterwards  I plan to meet UDA Chairman  to expedite Preliminary Planning approval for a mixed development related to Marina investment in Galle next to harbour .Galle UDA office being unable to take a decisions has sent the papers to UDA head officer ,I called UDA chairman and seeking  an appointment to  meet him to expedite approval as  the Director in charge of Southern are is not taking any interest .

Hopefully I will meet him today -Wednesday ,which is the public day ,despite the fact that  secretary did not want to give me the appointment as she had to speak to him !

Problem faced by every citizen and investor is that Government Officers do not give a hoot about the importance of investments.

I keep wondering whether I should resort to un ethical action to persuade them ?

May the state can abolish FCID for a while so that these officers can take bold decisions without fear of being prosecuted?

I am not sure where we are heading?

Dr Sarath Obeysekera

Persecution of Ahmadis in Pakistan continues – Mob attacks Ahmadiyya Mosque in Pakistan  whereas 4 Ahmadis arrested during Rabwah Raid.

December 14th, 2016

PRESS RELEASE. A. Abdul Aziz  Press Secretary. AHMADIYYA  MUSLIM  JAMA’AT – SRI LANKA

In the name of Allah, most Gracious and ever Merciful

It is with devastating shock that we wish to bring to your attention the report that we have received regarding the police raid on Ahamadiyya Head Quarters campus Rabwah, Pakistan and their horrifying brutal atrocities. 

Four Ahmadis were arrested Monday afternoon (5/12/2016) in Pakistan, during a raid on the offices of Ahmadiyya Muslim Community.

The arrests were carried out in the Ahmadiyya majority town of Rabwah by the CTD (Counter-Terrorism Department) of Punjab Police. CTD is responsible for investigating terrorism and sectarian-related incidents.

Three police vans with 28 heavily armed officers forced their way into the ‘Tehrik-e-Jadid’ building and ‘slammed’ the workers onto the ground according to witnesses. At the same time, another group of officers made their way up to the publishing office on the second floor of the building, where they arrested four office workers affiliated with the Ahmadiyya community’s magazine. Officers also sealed the community’s printing press which was used to publish the Community’s daily Newspaper AL FAZL  and the ‘Tehrik-e-Jadid’ magazine, both of which are ‘banned’ according to the Police.

Another CTD unit entered the building’s security room and brutally assaulted the security manager on duty, due to the severity of his injuries, the manager had to be treated at a local hospital. Before leaving, the CTD officers also disabled the CCTV system and took away office equipment including computers, cell phones, and several books. Witnesses say Police officers refused to show any search or arrest warrants.

Media Reports indicate that five workers were also booked under Sections 298-B, 298-B (a) and 298-C of Pakistan Penal Code (PPC) and 9-II (w) of Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA).

The reports reaching us indicate that the magazines were banned in December 2014, but the Pakistan court subsequently granted a stay in June 2015. “Since then the magazine is being published,” it is learnt, according to the Spokesperson of Ahmadiyya Community Pakistan.

It is a heart -rending painful incident and demonstrates the blatant audacity of the authorities of the government of Pakistan to mercilessly stampede the honour, dignity and basic civilian rights of Ahmadis in Pakistan.

Moreover, the reports reaching us confirms that on Monday 12 December 2016, the place of worship located in the limits of the Chowas Saidan Shah police station area in Chakwal’s Dhalmial district was ‘attacked’ by nearly 1,000 people,

A mob armed with batons and weapons was throwing stones and firing on the premises. The mob was “attempting to seize Ahmadiyya property,” the report indicates.

The mob hurled stones and bricks at the place of worship before storming the building, and gunmen opened fire on Ahmadis in the area. The police later dispersed the crowd and secured the building. The mob also set fire to part of the building, according to local police.

The Ahmadiyya Pakistan spokesperson, confirmed that there had been one killed in the incident,

We urge the International Community to condemn this horrible humiliating act of cruelty. This is unfortunately another horrible page in the ongoing persecution and malicious treatment of Pakistan Authorities. This will continue until the government to restrain the hate mongering Mullahs of Pakistan and control the spread of hate and violence amongst the people.

We urge the Government of Pakistan to take adequate security measures to protect the life and properties and worship places of Ahmadiyya Community in Pakistan.

The Ahmadiyya Muslim Community in Islam was founded in 1889 in a small town Qadian, in Punjab, India.  Its founder, Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (1835-1908) claimed to be the Promised Reformer of the age.  Ahmadiyya Muslim Community stands for the brotherhood of mankind and tries to establish peace on earth through love, persuasion and tolerance.  It is a spiritual Community and has no political agenda.

Sri Lanka Navy Abuses Innocent Sinhalese While Meekly Surrendering to Tamil and Muslim Aggressors

December 13th, 2016

Dilrook Kannangara

Shameful and cowardly conduct of the Sri Lanka Navy should be roundly condemned. No less than the Navy Commander used raw filth and violence against unarmed innocent Sinhala civilians in Hambantota. His words perfectly describe his own conduct and descent.

What is surprising is the meekly surrender the same navy suffered in Silawathurai and Trincomalee! In Silawathurai, Tamil thugs armed with clubs and machetes assaulted three naval ratings severely injuring them and keeping one of them in their custody. They agreed to release the navy personnel kept in their custody in exchange for immunity. Alas! Immunity was granted to these terror wielding hooligans. It was a mini episode of a prisoner exchange! To make matters worse for the little men in blue uniform, police protection was given the navy camp.

Then there was the incident involving the Muslim Chief Minister of the east who publicly abused a navy officer. Not just the navy brushed it under the carpet, it also replaced the area commander and even invited the offending Chief Minister and his clique for lunch.

The navy has been unable to halt Tamil Nadu illegal fishermen venturing into Lankan waters. This conduct is consistent with other incidents.

This discriminatory, filthy and cowardly conduct of the navy raises very serious issues. Is it the product of closer ties with the US navy Sri Lanka has cultivated recently? Okinawa has seen similar conduct displayed by US troops against natives (lets not talk about Diego Garcia). Looks like the Sri Lanka navy has been reduced to a ragtag group of men willingly surrendering to Tamil and Muslim abuse while abusing Sinhala civilians. They must be reminded of the repercussions of losing public trust and the need to treat everyone equally irrespective of ethnicity.

If he has any professionalism left, the navy commander must step down.

Sri Lanka Navy’s poor attempt to white wash the Shameful and cowardly conduct (Latest)

December 13th, 2016

News Review

In a poor and distasteful attempt to justify the Shameful and cowardly attack on unarmed group of innocent journalists, the Sri Lanka Navy and the government are now in defensive mode and issuing conflicting reasons to justify the attack..

This is not Lichchavi approach, more looks like Kalinga Magha’s – Dullas

නාවික හමුදාපතිවරයා 66 වසරක කීර්තිය වැනසීම

කීර්ති වර්ණකුලසූරිය උපුටා ගැන්ම දිවයින

විදේශ නෞකාවක්‌ කිසිදු ලෙසකින් ප්‍රාණ ඇපයට තබාගැනීමට කිසිවකුටත් හිමිකමක්‌ නැත. එවන් ක්‍රියා සිදුකරන්නේ මුහුදු කොල්ලකරුවන්ය. එහෙත් හම්බන්තොට වරායේ තිබූ හයිපේරියන් හයිවේ නමැති නැව මෝටර් රථ ගොඩබා ආපසු ආජන්ටිනාව බලා යැමට උත්සාහ කළ අවස්‌ථාවේ එම නැවේ ගමන වැළැක්‌වීමට වරායේ වැඩවර්ජිත පිරිසක්‌ ක්‍රියා කළහ.

ගාලු වරායේ තිබූ ඇවන්ගාඩ් නැව සම්බන්ධයෙන් ගත් අධිකරණ ක්‍රියාමාර්ගය මෙම හම්බන්තොට වරායේ තිබූ නැව සම්බන්ධව ගැනීමට පොලිසිය කටයුතු කළේ නැත.

එසේම වර්ජනයේ යෙදෙන පිරිස විදේශ නැව්වලට රැකවරණ සැපයීමේ ජාත්‍යන්තර නෞකා වරාය පහසුකම් ආරක්‌ෂක නීතිරීති (ෂීඡී) ක්‍රියාත්මක වන බව තේරුම්ගත යුතුව තිබිණි.

තමන් දියත් කළ වර්ජනයට විදේශ නැව් ප්‍රාණ ඇපකරුවන් ලෙස තබාගැනීමට නොහැකි බව මෙම පිරිසට අවබෝධ කර ගැනීමට නොහැකිවූයේ මන්ද?

මෙවැනි ක්‍රියාවලින් නෞකාවේ රක්‌ෂණ ගාස්‌තු වැඩිවිය හැකිය. ආරංචි මාර්ග දක්‌වන අන්දමට දැනටමත් ප්‍රමාද ගාස්‌තු ගෙවීමට සිදුවී තිබේ. එසේම ලන්ඩන් නුවර ලොයිඩ්ස්‌ රක්‌ෂණ සමාගම මෙම වරාය අවදානම් ස්‌ථානයක්‌ ලෙසට හැඳින්වීම සඳහා ක්‍රියාකිරීමට ඉඩ තිබිණි.

මේ පසුබිම මත නාවික හමුදාපතිවරයා සිවිල් ඇඳුමින් සැරසී වරායේ අර්බුදයට මැදිහත්වීම බරපතළ ප්‍රශ්නයක්‌ බවට පත්විය.

ඉන්දියාවේ මුම්බායි වරායේ වර්ජන රැල්ලක්‌ ඇතිවූ විට එරට නාවික හමුදාපතිවරයා ඊට මැදිහත්වූයේ නැත.

නාවික හමුදාව කෙරේ ජනතාව තුළ මහත් ප්‍රසාදයක්‌ ඇතිවූයේ කොටි ත්‍රස්‌තයන් වැනසීමේ උත්කෘෂ්ඨ ක්‍රියාවලියට සම්බන්ධවීම නිසාය.

සිසිල් තිසේරා, දයා සඳගිරි, සෝමතිලක දිසානායක, කරන්නාගොඩ, තිසර සමරසිංහ, ජයන්ත පෙරේරා සහ ජයනාත් කොළඹගේ යන නාවික හමුදාපතිවරු කෙරේ ජනතා ප්‍රසාදය හිමිවූයේ ඔවුන් අනවශ්‍ය ප්‍රශ්නවලට මැදිහත් නොවීම නිසාය.

එහෙත් ඇත්ත කතා කළ යුතුය. පාර්ලිමේන්තු මන්ත්‍රී දිනේෂ් ගුණවර්ධන මහතා හමුදා කුමන්ත්‍රණයක්‌ ගැන කතා කළ විට ඊට ප්‍රතිචාරය දැක්‌වූයේ වත්මන් නාවික හමුදාපතිවරයායි. ඔහුට ඒ සඳහා ප්‍රතිචාර දැක්‌වීමට කිසිදු හිමිකමක්‌ නැත.

ඉන්පසු මාගම්පුර වරායේ වර්ජනයට ඔහු මැදිහත්විය. ප්‍රාණ ඇපයට ගෙන ඇති විදේශ නැව් මුදාගැනීම නාවික හමුදාවේ වගකීමකි. නමුත් වත්මන් නාවික හමුදාපතිවරයා මාධ්‍යයට ප්‍රහාර එල්ලකරනු ලැබුවේ මන්ද?

මෙය මුළු ලොව පුරා විකාශනය වූයේ ශ්‍රී ලංකා නාවික හමුදාවට අවමානයක්‌ ඇතිකරමිනි. ඔහුගේ හැසිරීම පිස්‌සු වැටුණු අයකුට සමාන විය.

එසේම රජයේ ප්‍රවෘත්ති දෙපාර්තමේන්තුව හාස්‍ය ජනක නිවේදනයක්‌ ප්‍රකාශයට පත්කළේය. සංවේදී කටයුත්තකදී මාධ්‍ය විසින් සදාචාරමය නීති උල්ලංඝනය කර ඇති බව එම නිවේදනයේ දැක්‌විණි.

එසේ නම් කොටුවේදී ආබාධිත සෙබළුන්ට පොලිස්‌ ප්‍රහාර එල්ලවීම සංවේදී ක්‍රියාමාර්ගයක්‌ නොවුණේද?

රතු පස්‌වල සිද්ධියට හමුදාව ද සම්බන්ධ විය. එම අවස්‌ථාව සංවේදී නොවුණේද?

මෙයට මාස ගණනකට පෙර නැගෙනහිර මහ ඇමැතිවරයා ප්‍රසිද්ධ වේදිකාවකදී නාවික නිලධාරියකුට බරපතළ ලෙස අවමන් කළේය. එහෙත් එම සිද්ධිය යටපත් විය.

මන්නාරමේ ගංජා ඇල්ලීමට ගිය නාවිකයන් පිරිසකට ප්‍රදේශවාසීන්ගේ පහරදීමක්‌ සිදුවිය. නාවික හමුදාපතිවරයා එම ස්‌ථානයට ගියේ නැත.

මේ තත්ත්වය මත මතුවන ප්‍රශ්නය නම් සිවිල් ඇඳුමින් සැරසී යම් මෙහෙයුමකට සම්බන්ධවීමට වත්මන් නාවික හමුදාපතිට නීතියෙන් ඉඩක්‌ තිබේද යන්නයි.

විදේශ නැව් ප්‍රාණ ඇපයට ගැනීමට වර්ජකයන්ට කිසිදු හිමිකමක්‌ නැත්තා සේම නාවික හමුදාපතිට සිවිල් ඇඳුමින් සැරසී එම අර්බුදයට මැදිහත්වීමට කිසිදු හිමිකමක්‌ නැත.

මෙය ඉතාමත් කනගාටුදායක තත්ත්වයකි. එසේම තවත් හාස්‍යජනක කරුණක්‌ නම් මාගම්පුර වරායේ සිද්ධිය ගැන තමා නාවික හමුදාපතිගෙන් වාර්තාවක්‌ ඉල්ලන බව ආරක්‌ෂක ලේකම් කරුණාසේන හෙට්‌ටිආරච්චි මහතා පැවසීමයි.

මාධ්‍යයට පහරදීමේ සිද්ධියේ චූදිතයා නාවික හමුදාපතිවරයාවේ. ඔහු වර්ජකයන් අතර හැසිරුණේ නාවික හමුදාපතිවරයකු මෙන් නොව මැරවරයකු ලෙස බව ජනතාවට පැහැදිලිය.

මෙම සිද්ධිය මත නාවික හමුදාපති ඉල්ලා අස්‌විය යුතු බවට හඬක්‌ නඟා ඇත. එහෙත් අපේ රටේ දේශපාලකයන් ඉල්ලා අස්‌නොවන විට නාවික හමුදාපති ඉල්ලා අස්‌වේද?

විදේශ නැව මුදාගැනීමට දකුණ ප්‍රදේශය භාර ආඥපතිවරයාට පැවරිය යුතුව තිබූ අතර නාවික හමුදාපති ඊට මැදිහත්වූයේ කාගේ නියෝගය මතද?

එසේම මාධ්‍යවලට පහරදීමට කටයුතු කිරීමට නාවික හමුදාපතිවරයා ක්‍රියාකළේ අනිකුත් නාවිකයන් මාධ්‍ය පාර්ශ්ව විසින් අල්ලා ගෙන සිටියදීය.

මේ දීන ක්‍රියාකලාපය ගැන ඩොලර් අරමුදල් ලබන රාජ්‍ය නොවන සංවිධාන කිසිදු හඬක්‌ නඟා නැත.

මෙම තත්ත්වය මත ජනතාවගෙන් වැටුප් ලබන නාවික හමුදාපතිවරයා යුද්ධාධිකරණයක්‌ වෙත පැමිණිය යුතුව ඇත.

ඔහු නාවික හමුදාපතිවරයකුට සුදුසු නොවන ලෙසින් මැරයකු ලෙස කටයුතු කිරීම සහ නාවික හමුදාවේ කීර්තිය වැනසීම යන චෝදනාවලට ඔහු වරදකරු වේ.

නාවික හමුදාවට වසර 66 ක්‌ සපිරෙන අවස්‌ථාවේ වත්මන් නාවික හමුදාපතිවරයා සිදුකළේ කිරි කළයට ගොම දැමීමක්‌ වැනි අශෝභන ක්‍රියාවකි. එසේම ඔහු නාවික හමුදා ඉතිහාසය ආපස්‌සට දැමුවේය.

පසුගිය කාලය තුළ ලොව රටවල් රැසක වරායන්හි වැඩ වර්ජන ඇතිවුවත් එම රටවල නාවික හමුදාපතිවරුන් ඊට මැදිහත්වූයේ නැත.

එහෙත් නාවික හමුදා ඉතිහාසයේ මුල්වරට නාවික හමුදාපතිවරයා බොරු වීරයකු වීමට ක්‍රියාකළේය. ඔහු මාගම්පුර වරායේදී දැක්‌වූ රංගනය තුළින් අපට සිහිවූයේ සුප්‍රකට ටින් ටින් කාටුන් චිත්‍ර කතා මාලාවේ එන කපිතාන් හැඩොක්‌ගේ චරිතයයි.

 

නාවික හමුදාපතිගේ හම්බන්තොට ප‍්‍රහාරයෙන් රජය අවුලක.. නිල ඇදුම් නැතිව එහෙම කරන්න බෑ.. – විජේදාස

හම්බන්තොට වරයේ පැවති විරෝධතාවය පාලනය කිරීමට පැමිණි අවස්ථාවේ නාවික හමුදාපතිවරයා සිවිල් ඇදුමින් පැමිණි සිටීම බරපතල තත්වයක් බව අධිකරණ ඇමති විජේදාස රාජපක්‍ෂ මහතා පවසයි.

මහනුවරදී මාධ්‍ය වෙත අදහස් පල කරමින් ඇමතිවරයා කියා සිටියේ සන්නද්ධ හමුදා බල ඇණියක් සමග ගිය නාවික හමුදාපතිවරයා රාජකාරියේ නිරතව සිටි මාධ්‍යවේදියකුට පහර දීමෙන් රජය ගැටලුවකට මුහුණ පා සිටින බවය.

නාවික හමුදාපතිගේ හම්බන්තොට මෙහෙයුම නිසා UN ඉදිරියේ ශ‍්‍රී ලංකා හමුදාව අවදානමේ..

පාර්ලිමේන්තු මන්ත‍්‍රී උදය ගම්මන්පිල මහතා පිවිතුරු හෙල උරුමය මූලස්ථානයේ පැවති මාධ්‍ය හමුවකදී මෙසේ අදහස් පල කලේය.

අද රටේ හැමෝම කතාවෙන පසුගිය දා සිදුවුණ නාවික හමුදාපතිවරයාගේ මැදිහත් වීමෙන් මාධ්‍යවේදින්ටත් වැඩවර්ජකයන්ටත් පහරදීම සම්බන්දව අපි දකින්නේ ඉතාමත් වෙනස් විදිහකට. නාවික හමුදාපතිවරයාගේ හැසිරීම තවත් එක් හුදකලා සිදුවීමක් නෙවෙයි. නාවික හමුදාපතිවරයා විතරක් තනියම වගකිව යුතු නෑ. මරදානේ චෝප්පේ වගේ හමුදාපතිවරයාට හැසිරෙන්න අවශ්‍ය පරිසරය නිර්මාණය කළේ රටේ අගමැතිතුමා ඇතුළු ආණ්ඩුව. මාධවේදීන්ගේ නම් කියමින් අගමැතිතුමා පාර්ලිමේන්තුවේ දී අපහාස කරනවා අපි දැක්කා. මාධ්‍යවේදීන්ට රිරියාකා, මහසොහොනා, සට්ටැබිරාල වගේ කියන්න පුළුවන් අපහාසාත්මක නම් සේම කියලා මේ මාධ්‍ය කියන්නේ නරක, පහර දිය යුතු හෙලා දැකිය යුතු සමාජයට විෂබිජයක් බවට අවශ්‍ය මතය මානසිකත්වය නාවික හමුදාවෙත් සමාජයෙත් ගොඩනගන්න අගමැතිතුමා ඇතුළු ආණ්ඩුවේ නායකයින් කටයුතු කරා. මාධ්‍ය අමාත්‍යංශයේ ලේකම්වරයා එකවරක් ඒකාබද්ධ විපක්ෂය කියන නම පාවිච්චි කොලොත් බලාගෙනයි කියලා ලියුම් දානවා. CSN නාලිකාවේ බලපත්‍රය අහෝසි කරනවා. හිරු සහ දෙරණ නාලිකා වල බලපත්‍රය අහෝසි නොකිරීමට නිදහසට කරුණු අහනවා. මේ මාධ්‍ය කියන්නේ මහ කරදරකාරයෝ ටිකක් රට ඉදිරියට යන එකකට බාධා කරන පිරිසත් මුන්ට දෙකක් නෙලන්න ඕනේ කියන මානසික මට්ටම අවුරුදු දෙකක කාලයක සිටන් ක්‍රමානුකුලව ගොඩනැගුවා. අපි දන්නවා බෝට්ටුවක අනුනව දෙනෙක් නැගලා ඉදලා බෝට්ටුව දැන් තියෙන්නේ වතුර මට්ටමට ගෑවෙන්න සියවෙනියා නැග්ග ගමන් බෝට්ටුව ගිලෙනවා දැන් හැමෝම බනින්නේ අර සියවෙනියට. අර අනුනවයම නැතුව සියවෙනියා නැග්ගම බෝට්ටුව ගිලෙනවද නෑ ඒවගේ තමයි අද නාවික හමුදාපතිවරයාට ඇගිල්ල දිගු වුණාට මේක මාධ්‍ය මර්ධනය සදහා අවුරුදු දෙකක් තිස්සේ ආණ්ඩුව ගෙන යන තවත් එක් දිගුවක් විදිහටයි අපි දකින්නේ. නාවික හමුදාපතිවරයා මේකට වගකිව යුතු වගේ, ඔහු ඉල්ලා අස්විය යුතු වගේම, අගමැතිතුමා ඇතුළු ආණ්ඩුවේ ප්‍රධානින් මේ මාධ්‍යෙව්දින්ටත් වැඩවර්ජකයන්ටත් පහර දීමේ වගකීම බාරගත යුතුයි කියන එක තමයි පිවිතුරු හෙළ උරුමයේ ස්තාවරය.

මා මිත්‍ර රුවන් විජේවර්ධන මහතා මේක ආරක්ෂා කරන්න කියලා තිබුණා මේක මුහුදේ සිද්ධ වුණ දෙයක් නැවක් වෙත කෙනෙක් බලහත්කාරයෙන් අත්පත් කර ගත්තාම නාවික හමුදාව තමයි කැදවන්නේ. සම්පුර්ණ ඇත්ත හැබැයි මේ ප්‍රශ්න සහිත කාරණය සිද්ධ වුණේ නැවේ නෙවෙයි ගොඩබිම. නාවික හමුදාපතිවරයා පහර දෙන්නේ ඔවුන්ව ඇදගෙන යන්නේ මේක සිද්ධ වෙන්නේ නැවේ දී නෙවෙයි. නැව නිදහස් කර ගැනීමේ ක්‍රියාවලියේ දී නෙවෙයි. අපි අහන්නේ ලෝක ඉතිහාසයේම නාවික හමුදාපතිවරයෙක් නිල වශයෙන් රාජකාරියේ යෙදිලා ඉන්න කොට කොට කලිසමයි ටී ෂර්ට් එකයි ඇදගෙන රාජකාරි කරපු එකම එක වතාවක් පෙන්වන්න කියලා අපි ආණ්ඩුවට අභියෝග කරනවා. කොටිත් එක්ක යුද්ධ කරන සමයේ නම් හමුදාව වෙස්වලාගෙන යනවා නිල ඇදුමෙන් ගියාම පහර දීමට ලක්වෙන නිසා නමුත් සමාන්‍ය ජනතාව අතරට යන විට නාවික නෙවෙයි ඔනේම හමුදාවක් නිල ඇදුමෙන් සිටිය යුතුයි. නැත්නම් ජනතාව දන්නේ කොහෙමද නාවික හමුදාවේ ද නැත්නම් මැර හමුදාවේ ද කියලා. පෙනුම වචන හැසිරීම යන තුනම එකට ගත්තාම මම සතුටු වෙනවා නාවික හමුදාපතිවරයා ගුටිනොකා බේරීම පිළිබදව. ජනතාව වටවෙලා පහර දෙන්නත් තිබුණා කොහේදෝ යන රස්තියාදුකාරයෙක් කියලා. මේ ක්‍රියාව නිසා අද නාවික හමුදාවේ කිර්තීනාමය අද පළදුවෙලා තියෙනවා. අපේ රණවිරුවා කියන්නේ මහා මැර අහිංසක ජනතාව මරණ කියන ඒක්සත් ජාතින්ගේ මානව හිමිකම් මණ්ඩලය හරහා ලෝකය පුරා ස්තාපිත කරන්න දෙමළ බෙදුම්වාදීන් උත්සහ කරන මෙහොතක තමයි නාවික හමුදාපතිවරයා මෙසේ හැසිරුනේ. රණවිරුවන් අප කිර්තියට පත් කිරිම සදහා අපේ නාවික හමුදාපතිවරයා දැන හෝ නොදැන කොටස්කරුවෙක් බවට පත්වෙලා තියෙනවා. නාවික හමුදාපතිවරයාගේ මේ ක්‍රියාව නිසා අපි දැක්කා වැඩ වර්ජනයේ යෙදි සිටිය වරායේ සේවකයන් අඩ අඩ කියා සිටියේ අපේ ඉඩම් නැති වුණා දැන් රස්සාව නැතිවෙන්න හදන්නේ එකයි අපි පාරට බැස්සේ ඇයි තුවක්කු අරන් අපිට ගහන්න එන්නේ ඔබ උතුරේ යුද්ධ කරද්දි ලේ දුන්නේ අපි. බොධි පුජා කරේ අපි එහෙම කරපු අපට ද මේ ගහන්නේ කියලා ප්‍රශ්න කරන අපි දැක්කා. මේ කරන්න හදන්නේඅතුරුදහන් වුවන්ගේ කාර්යාල හරහා යුධ අපරාධ ක්‍රියාවලිය හරහා රණවිරුවන් දංගෙඩියට ගෙන යද්දි පාරට බහින්න ඉන්න ජනතාව සහ රණවිරුවන් අතර ආරවුලක් ඇති කරලා දුරස් කරන්නයි මේ සුදානම් වෙන්නේ. ආණ්ඩුවේ පැත්ත අරන් අපිට ගහන්න ආපු කෙනා විදිහට රණවිරුවන් පේනවා නම් අපි සමස්ත හමුදාවටම කියනවා ඔබේ වගකීම ආණ්ඩුව රැකීම නෙවෙයි රට සහ ජනතාව රැකීමයි. ඔබ ආණ්ඩුව රකින්න ගියොත් ජනතාව ඔබව නොසලකා හරින්න පුළුවන්. රණවිරුවා රැක ගන්න පාරට බහින්න ඉන්න ජනතාවගේ හැගීම් මරා දැමිම තමයි ඊළග අරමුණ.

අපි කිව්වා මේ ආණ්ඩුවට විරුද්ධව දැවැන්ත ජනතා රැල්ලක් තියෙනවා කියලා දැන් ජනාධිපතිතුමත් කියනවා. ඒවගේම අපි දැක්කා ගරු පා ච රණවක ඇමතිතුමත් කිව්වා ජනමත විචාරණයක් තිබ්බොත් පාරාදයි කියනවා. එම නිසා ආණ්ඩුවට සිද්ධ වෙනවා ඉදිරි වසර තුන ජනතාව ප්‍රතිමුර්ත වන ආණ්ඩුවක් පත් කර ගන්න පාර්ලිමේන්තුව විසුරුවා හැරලා ඡන්දයකට යන්න ඔනේ. එහෙම නැත්නම් එක විකල්පයක් තියෙනවා හමුදාව සහ පොලිසිය යොදා ගෙන ජනතාවගේ හඬ යටපත් කරගෙන ඉදිරි වසර තුන මේ රට පාලනය කිරීමට. හම්බන්තොට දී නාවික හමුදාව යොදා ගනිමින් පෙන්නුවේ මේ ආණ්ඩුව 1987 දී ජේ ආර් ජයවර්ධන ජනාධිපතිතුමා කටයුතු කල ආකාරයට හමුදා බලයෙන් පොලිස් බලයෙන් මැර බලයෙන් ජනතාව යටපත් කරගෙන ආණ්ඩුව පවත්වාගෙන යාමට සුදානම් කියන පණිවිඩයයි ලැබුණේ. ජනමත විචාරණයේ දීත් 1982 කල ආකාරයටම ලාම්පු කළ ගෙඩි සෙල්ලමක් හරහා මේ ව්‍යවස්ථාව බලහත්කාරයෙන් සම්මත කර ගන්න ඉඩ තියෙනවා. ජේ ආර් ජනාධිපතිවරයා දැක්කා ජනමත විචාරනය පරදිනවා කියලා ඒක නිසා මැර බලයෙන් දුෂිත ආකාරයට ජනමත විචාරනය ජයග්‍රහනය කර ගත්තේ. මැතිවරණ කොමසාරිස්වරයා ලිඛිත වාර්තාවක් ඉදිරිපත් කරලා කිව්වා එතෙක් ලංකාවේ පැවැති දුෂිතම මැතිවරණය මෙයයි කියලා. මේ සිද්ධිය පිටුපස ලංකාව අදුරෙන් අදුරට යන අදුරු සෙවනැලි තියෙනවා කියන අනතුරු ඇගවීම තමයි අපේ විග්‍රහය.

– අරවින්ද අතුකෝරල

ධුරයෙන් ඉල්ලා අස්වෙන්න සූදානම්.. – නාවික හමුදාපති

– රිවිර

නෞකාව මුදා හැරීම නිසා ජාත්‍යන්තර සමුද්‍රීය නාවික සංවිධානයෙන් මට සහතිකයක් ලැබුණා
මෙරටට එන නැව් ගැන මට වගකීමක් තියෙනවා
මට දේශපාලනයක් නෑ: මම අණ පිළිපදින්නෙක්

හම්බන්තොට මාගම් රුහුණුපුර වරායේ පසුගිය සෙනසුරාදා ඇතිවූ සිද්ධිය සම්බන්ධයෙන් පවත්වන පරීක්‍ෂණ මණ්ඩලයේදී තමන් වැරදිකරු කරන්නේ නම් නාවික හමුදාපති ධුරයෙන් ඉල්ලා අස්වන බව නාවික හමුදාපති වයිස් අද්මිරාල් රවීන්ද්‍ර විජේගුණරත්න මහතා සඳහන් කළේය.

මාධ්‍යවේදියාට පහර දුන් බව පවසමින් එම ස්ථානයේ ඇතිව තිබූ බියකරු තත්ත්වය වාර්තා නොකිරීම කනගාටුදායක බවත් විජේගුණරත්න මහතා පැවැසීය.

මාගම් රුහුණුපුර වරායේ විරෝධතාකරුවන් විසින් දින හතරක් තිස්සේ රඳවාගෙන තිබූ හයිපෙරියොන් හයිවේ නමැති ලොව තෙවැනි විශාලතම වාහන ප්‍රවාහන නෞකාව මුදා හැරීම හේතුවෙන් තමන්ට ජාත්‍යන්තර සමුද්‍රිය නාවුක සංවිධානය විසින් මේ වනවිට සහතිකයක් පවා ලබා දී ඇති බව හෙතෙම හෙළි කළේය. ඒ අනුව අදාළ නෞකාව ඊයේ වන විට ඩුබායි දක්වා දියත්වී තිබිණි.

ශ්‍රී ලංකාව කියන්නෙ නාවික කේන්ද්‍රස්ථානයක්, ශ්‍රී ලංකා රජයෙනුත් ජාත්‍යන්තර නාවික කටයුතු සම්බන්ධව වගකීමක් දරනවා. ඒ අනුව නාවික හමුදාපති ලෙස මෙරටට සේන්දුවන ජාත්‍යන්තර නෞකා සම්බන්ධයෙන් මට වගකීමක් තිබෙනවා. දවස් හතරක් තිස්සේ මේ හයිපෙරියොන් නෞකාවේ කාර්ය මණ්ඩලයට එහි ඊළඟ ගමනාන්තය දක්වා දියත්වීමට මෙම වර්ජනයේ නිරත පිරිස ඉඩ දී තිබුණේ නැහැ. නාවික හමුදාව මෙම සිද්ධියට එකවරම පැමිණියා නෙමෙයි. ඊට පෙර දිනයෙත් ඔවුන්ට වහාම නැව් දෙක නිදහස් කරන්නැයි ඉල්ලීමක් කළා. ඒවාට මේ වර්ජනයේ නිරත පිරිස් ඇහුම්කම් දුන්නෙ නැහැ. මාධ්‍ය වාර්තා පළවුණා ඉල්ලීම් ඉටු නොකර නැව් නිදහස් කරන්න ආවොත් මරාගෙන මැරෙනවා කියලා. එවැනි අවස්ථාවකයි නාවික හමුදාව මැදිහත් වුණේ. මෙතනදි මට දේශපාලනයක් තිබුණේ නැහැ. මම අණ පිළිපදින්නෙක්. එජාප ආණ්ඩු කාලේ මම එස්.බී.එස් එක හැදුවා. පහුගිය ආණ්ඩුව කාලේ යුද්දෙ ජයගන්න දායක වුණා. දැන් තවත් ආණ්ඩුවක්. හැබැයි මට තීරණ ගන්න වෙන්නෙ රට වෙනුවෙන් නාවික හමුදාව පැත්තෙන්. මුහුදු කොල්ලකෑමක් මැඬලීම, නෞකාවක් යම් කඩාකප්පල්කාරීන් හෝ කොල්ලකරුවන් පිරිසක් සිය අණසකට ගැනීමේ අවස්ථාවක නාවික හමුදාව හැසිරෙන ආකාරය වෙනස්. එදා මාධ්‍යවේදී මහත්තයා මම ගැහුවා කියලා නඩු මගට ගියොත් ඒ නඩුව වෙනුවෙනුත් මම පෙනී සිටිනවා. මගේ පැත්තෙනුත් ඉදිරිපත් කරන්න මෙතෙක් පළ නොවුණ, පෙන්නපු නැති ගොඩක් වීඩියෝ තියෙනවා. නාවික හමුදාපති විධියට මට මාධ්‍ය ප්‍රතිචාර දක්වන විධියට ක්‍ෂණික ප්‍රතිචාර දක්වන්න අවශ්‍යතාවක් නැහැ. පරීක්‍ෂණ මණ්ඩලයක් බදදා (හෙට) සිට පටන් ගන්නවා නම් එය දින තුනක කාලයක් විතර පවත්වාවි. ඒ සඳහා ආරක්‍ෂක ලේකම්තුමා දැනට වාර්තාවකුත් කැඳවලා තියෙනවා. අදාළ තොරතුරු මම ඔහුට ඉදිරිපත් කරනවා. ඉන් අනතුරුව අවශ්‍ය නම් අදාළ අනතුරේ ස්වභාවය හා විරෝධතාකරුවන් හැසිරුණු ආකාරය ගැන මාධ්‍යයට තොරතුරු දෙන්න පුළුවන් යැයි නාවික හමුදාපති වයිස් අද්මිරාල් රවින්ද්‍ර විජේගුණරත්න පැවැසීය

නාවික හමුදාපති දිවයින මාධ්‍යවේදියාට පහර දෙයි –දිවයින

“මම මීඩියා එකෙන් කියලා කිව්වා. ඒ කියද්දිත් මීඩියා හින්දා තමයි යකෝ ගහන්නේ කියලා නාවික හමුදා නිලධාරියෙක්‌ මට ගැහුවා. පස්‌සේ මම දැනගත්තා ඒ ගැහුවේ නාවික හමුදාපතිවරයා කියලා. මේක මට විතරක්‌ නෙවෙයි මුළු මාධ්‍යයටම එල්ල කරපු ප්‍රහාරයක්‌…” යෑයි ‘දිවයින’ සූරියවැව ප්‍රාදේශීය මාධ්‍යවේදී රොෂාන් ගුණසේකර මහතා ‘දිවයින’ ට ඊයේ (11 දා) පැවසීය.

හම්බන්තොට මාගම්පුර වරායේ සේවකයන් ආරම්භ කර තිබූ සත්‍යග්‍රහය ආවරණය කිරීමට ගිය ‘දිවයින’ සූරියවැව ප්‍රාදේශීය මාධ්‍යවේදී රොෂාන් ගුණසේකර මහතාට නාවික හමුදාපතිවරයා විසින් පහරදීමේ සිද්ධිය සම්බන්ධයෙන් තොරතුරු විමසූ අවස්‌ථාවේ ඔහු එසේ කීය.

තවදුරටත් සිද්ධිය විස්‌තර කළ මාධ්‍යවේදී රොෂාන් ගුණසේකර මහතා මෙසේ ද කීය.

“මම දිවයින පත්තරේ සූරියවැව වාර්තාකරු ලෙසත් හිරු ටී. වී. වාර්තාකරු ලෙසත් කටයුතු කරනවා. මම හම්බන්තොට මාගම්පුර වරාය සේවකයන්ගේ සත්‍යග්‍රහය ආවරණය කරන්න 10 වැනිදා උදේ ගියා. ඒ ගිහින් එය ආවරණය කරමින් ඉන්නකොට සිවිල් ඇඳුමින් සැරසී එතනට ආපු නාවික හමුදා නිලධාරියෙක්‌ මොනවද කරන්නේ කියලා ඇහුවා. මම කිව්වා ‘මම මීඩියා එකේ’ කියලා. එහෙම කියද්දිත් මගේ බෙල්ලේ දමාගෙන හිටිය මීඩියා හැඳුනුම්පත් පටියෙන් මාව ඇදගෙන ගියා. ඒත් එක්‌කම කොට කලිසමක්‌ හා ටීෂර්ට්‌ එකක්‌ ඇඳගත් නාවික හමුදා නිලධාරියෙක්‌ මා දෙසට ආවා. මම ඔහුටත් කිව්වා මම මීඩියා එකෙන් කියලා. ඒ කියද්දිත් මීඩියා හින්දා තමයි යකෝ ගහන්නේ කියලා පරුෂ වචනයෙන් බැණ වදිමින් ඔහු මගේ ගෙල ප්‍රදේශයට අතින් පහර දුන්නා.

ඒ වෙලාවේ වරායේ සේවකයන් මේ මීඩියා එකෙන් ගහන්න එපා කියලා කෑගැහුවා. පස්‌සේ මට තේරුණා නාවික හමුදාව මගේ වීඩියෝ කැමරාව ගන්න හදනවා වගේ. මම පහරදීම් හමුවේ ඔවුන්ගෙන් මිදී වෙනත් ස්‌ථානයකට දිව්වා. පසුව මා දැනගත්තා මට පහර දුන්නේ නාවික හමුදාපතිවරයා කියලා.

පස්‌සේ මගේ බෙල්ලේ වේදනාව නිසා මම සූරියවැව පෞද්ගලික වෛද්‍ය ආයතනයකින් බෙහෙත් ගත්තා.

මම ඒ ස්‌ථානයට ගියේ එම ස්‌ථානයේ සිදුවෙන්නේ මොකක්‌ද කියලා රටට කියන්න මිසක්‌ විරෝධතාවේ යෙදෙන්න නෙමෙයි. මම මීඩියා එකේ කියද්දිත් අසභ්‍ය වචනයෙන් බැණවදිමින් නාවික හමුදාපතිවරයා මට පහර දුන්නා. අපි අහන්නේ කෝ මාධ්‍ය නිදහස? කියා. මට විතරක්‌ නෙමේ තවත් මාධ්‍යවේදියකුටත් මේ නාවික හමුදා නිලධාරීන් පහර දුන්නා. මගේ ජීවිත ආරක්‍ෂාව වෙනුවෙන් හම්බන්තොට සහකාර පොලිස්‌ අධිකාරිවරයාට අද පැමිණිලි කරනවා.

මම මාධ්‍යවේදියකුට ගැහුවා නම් ඔහු ඉන්න ඕනෑ රෝහලේ.. ඔහු කා එක්කද හිටියේ කියලා මා දන්නවා – නාවික හමුදාපති දිවයින

හම්බන්තොට වරායට පැමිණ තිබූ විදෙස්‌ නෞකා දෙකක්‌ උද්ඝෝෂකයන් බලහත්කාරයෙන් රඳවාගෙන සිටි නිසා ඒවා මුදාහැරීමට නාවික හමුදාව කටයුතු කළ බව නාවික හමුදාපති වයිස්‌ අද්මිරාල් රවීන්ද්‍ර විඡේගුණරත්න මහතා පැවැසීය.

ජාත්‍යන්තර නෞකා සහ වරාය ආරක්‌ෂක පද්ධති නාවික හමුදාවේ ආරක්‌ෂාව යටතේ පවතින බවත් යම් හෙයකින් ඒවාට මුහුදු කොල්ලකරුවන්ගෙන් හෝ ත්‍රස්‌තවාදීන්ගෙන් ප්‍රහාරයක්‌ එල්ල වේ නම් ආරක්‌ෂා කරදීම නාවික හමුදාවේ වගකීම බවත් ඔහු කීය.

හම්බන්තොට වරායට පැමිණ තිබූ විදෙස්‌ නැව් දෙකෙන් එකක්‌ ලෝකයේ වාහන ප්‍රවාහනය කරන විශාලතම තැන්වැනි නෞකාව බවත් එම නැව හා අනෙක්‌ විදෙස්‌ නෞකාව දින හයක්‌ තිස්‌සේ බලහත්කාරයෙන් රඳවා ගෙන සිටීම මුහුදු මංකොල්ලකරුවන්ගේ ක්‍රියාවකට ගැනෙන බවත් හෙතෙම අවධාරණය කළේය.

වාහන වරායට ගොඩ බෑමෙන් පසු උද්ඝෝෂකයන් විසින් වාහන ප්‍රවාහන නැව සහ අනෙක්‌ නැව බලහත්කාරයෙන් වරායේ රඳවාගෙන සිටී.

එම නිසා වාහන ආනයනය කළ සමාගම්වලට දිනකට ඩොලර් ලක්‌ෂ 04 බැගින් රඳවාගෙන සිටි දින 06 ක්‌ සඳහා ගෙවීමට සිදුවනු ඇතැයිද ඔහු පෙන්වා දුන්නේය. විශාල නෞකාව ශ්‍රී ලංකාවට පැමිණ ඇත්තේ දෙවැනි වතාවට බවද සේවකයන් තම ඉල්ලීම් දිනා ගැනීමට විදෙස්‌ නැව් බලහත්කාරයෙන් රඳවාගෙන අරගල කළ බවද හෙතෙම පැවැසීය.

මෙහිදී මාධ්‍යවේදියකුට පහරදීමක්‌ කළා දැයි නාවික හමුදාපතිවරයාගෙන් “දිවයින” කළ විමසීමකදී ඒ මහතා මෙසේ කීය.

මම මාධ්‍යවේදියකුට පහරදුන්නා නම් ඔහු රෝහල් ගතව ඉන්න ඕනෑ. එයා මාධ්‍යවේදියෙක්‌ නම් කියන්න ඕන මම අහවල් ආයතනයේ මාධ්‍යවේදියෙක්‌ කියලා. එයා මාධ්‍ය ආයතන කිහිපයක ඉන්නවයි කියලා කිව්වා. මෙයා කවුද කියලත් කා සමඟද හිටියේ කියලාත් මා කාලයක සිට දැනගෙන හිටියා.

වත්මන් නාවික හමුදාපති රාජපක්‍ෂලාගේ හිතවතෙක්.. වරද රාජපක්‍ෂගේ.. – ජවිපෙ

වත්මන් නාවුක හමුදාපති රවින්ද්‍ර විජේගුණරත්න යනු පසුගිය රාජපක්‍ෂ පාලනයේ සමීපතමයෙක් බව ජනතා විමුක්ති පෙරමුණු මන්ත‍්‍රී සුනිල් හදුන්නෙත්ති මහතා පවසයි.

රාජපක්‍ෂ කළු දශකයේදී රාජපක්‍ෂ පුතුන්ට නාවික හමුදාවේ අධිකාරී තනතුරැ, විදෙස් ශිෂ්‍යත්ව ලබා දීම වෙනුවෙන් ඔහු කැපවූ අයෙක් බවද මන්ත‍්‍රිවරයා කීය.

හම්බන්තොටදී නාවික හමුදාව වෙඩි තිවුවෙත් නෑ.. ගැහුවෙත් නෑ..

‘යහපාලනය කියන්නේ කොන්ද පණ නැතිකම නෙමෙයි. විශේෂ අධිකරණයක් පිහිටුවලා මේ හොරකම් කරපු තක්කඩි ටික ඇතුලත දාන්න ඕනේ’ යයි පාර්ලිමේන්තු මන්ත්‍රී මරික්කාර් මහතා පවසයි.

ඔහු මෙම අදහස් පළ කරන ලද්දේ කැලණිමුල්ල ගග අසබඩ මාර්ගය කාපට් අතුරා සංවර්ධනය කර ජනතා අයිතියට පැවරීමේ උත්සවයකදීය.

ඒකාබද්ධ කල්ලියේ කට්ටියේ හම්බන්තොට වරායේ සේවකයින්ගේ උද්ඝෝෂණය නතර කරපු ආකාරය අල්ලගෙන විශාල හා හූවක් කලා. මේ ආකරයට කටයුතු කළේ හවස් වෙනකොට අයැවැය 2/3 ආණ්ඩුව දිනන බව දැනගෙන ඒකෙන් ආණ්ඩුවට ලැබෙන ආකර්ෂණය නතර කරන්න තමයි. අපි කියන්න ඕනේ එම උද්ඝෝෂණය වලක්වන්න නාවික හමුදාව දමලා උද්ඝෝෂකයින්ට වෙඩි තිබ්බෙත් නෑ පහර දුන්නෙත් නෑ. ඔය කිඹුල් කදුළු හෙලන අය කටුනායක රෝෂේන් චානක මැරුවේ කොහොමද?, රතුපස්වල දී වතුර ඉල්ලපු ජනතාවට වෙඩි තියලා මිනිස්සුන්ව මැරරුවේ කොහොමද ? හලාවත ධිවරයන්ගේ උද්ඝෝෂණ වලට වෙඩි තියලා මැරුවේ කොහොමද ?අපි වෙඩි තියලත් නෑ පොලු වලින් ගහලත් නෑ. ඒ නිසා කලිසම ඹලුවෙන් දාගෙන ද මේ අය මේවා කතා කරන්නේ. ඒ වගේම හොරු ගිහින් අනිත් අයට හොරු කියනවා. ඒක හරියට ගමේ හොරා ගෙදරකින් හොරකම් කරලා ඒ ගෙදර අයට විරුද්ධව හොරකම් කළ කියලා පැමිණිලි කරනවා වගේ වැඩක්.ඒකාබද්ධ කල්ලිය හිතාගෙන ඉන්නවා යහපාලනයේ කියන්නේ කොන්ද පණ නැති කමක් කියලා. ජනාධිපතිතුමාගෙන් හා අගමැතිතුමාගෙන් ඉල්ලනවා මේ අයගේ පරීක්ෂණ ටික වේගවත් කරලා. විශේෂ අධිකරණයක් හරි පිහිටුවලා මේ හොරකම් කරපු තක්කඩි ටික ඇතුලත දාන්න ඕනේ. ඒක වුනාම මේ නාට්‍ය නාඩගම් මුකුත් නෑ කිඹුල් කදුලුත් නෑ. ප්‍රජාත්‍රන්ත්‍රවාදය රකිනවා කියන්නේ කොන්ද පණ නැති කම නෙමෙයි. හැබැයි කොන්ද පණ තියෙනවා කියන්නේ මිනිස්සුන්ට වෙඩි තියෙන එකයි පොලු වලින් පහර දෙන එකයි.  රට දියුණු කරන්න මේ දෙක අතර මැද ඉදගෙන හරි වැඩේ කළ යුතුයි.

– මිනුර රෂාන්ත

නාවික හමුදාව හම්බන්තොට වරායේ කලේ සංවේදී කටයුත්තක්.. මාධ්‍යවේදීන් එය පටිගත කිරීම වරදක්.. – ආරක්‍ෂක ලේකම්

හම්බන්තොට වරායේ සේවක විරෝධය අතරතුර එහි තිබූ විදේශීය නෞකා දෙක බේරා ගැනීම සදහා නාවික හමුදාව විසින් කලේ සංවේදී කටයුත්තක් බව ආරක්ෂක ලේකම් කරුණාසේන හෙට්ටිආරච්චි මහතා පවසයි.

මාද්‍යවේදීන් විසින් එය පටිගත කර අන්තර්ජාලයේ ප‍්‍රචාරය කිරීමෙන් රටට අපකීර්තියක් සිදුවන නිසා මාධ්‍යවේදීන්ට ඉවත් වන ලෙස දැන්වුවත් ඔවුන් ඉවත් නොවීම නිසා එවැනි උණුසුම් තත්වයක් ඇති වූ බවද ඔහු කියා සිටී.

නාවික හමුදාපතිවරයා විසින් මාධ්‍යවේදියෙකුට පහර දීම සම්බන්ධයෙන් අදහස් පල කරමින් ඔහු මේ අදහස් පල කලේය.

හම්බන්තොට ප‍්‍රහාරයට නාවුක හමුදාවට අණ දුන්නේ කවුද.. අලූත් සේනාධිනායක කවුද.. – ආණ්ඩුව කැළඹේ..

ඊයේ දිනයේ හම්බන්තොට වරායේ සේවක විරෝධතාවය විසුරුවා හැරීමට නාවුක හමුදාවට අණ ලබා දුන්නේ කවුදැයි මේ වන විට දේශපාලන ක්‍ෂෙත‍්‍රය තුල දැඩි කැලඹීමක් ඇතිව තිබේ.

හමුදාවට අණ දීමේ බලය ව්‍යවස්ථාවෙන්ම ඇත්තේ ජනාධිපතිවරයාට පමණක් වුවත් මෙම සිදුවීම පිටුපස තවත් අනියම් සේනාධිනායකයෙක් සිටීදැයි කතාබහක් ඇතිව තිබේ.

මේ අතර වාර්තා වන්නේ ඊයේ දිනයේ මාධ්‍යවේදීනට පවා කුණුහරුපෙයෙන් බැන පහර දෙමින් අහසට පොලවට මුහුදට වෙඩි තබමින් එම ක‍්‍රියාව මෙහෙයවූ නාවික හමුදාපති අද්මිරාල් රවින්ද්‍ර විජේගුණරත්න ආණ්ඩුවේ ප‍්‍රබල ඇමතිවරයෙකුගේ සමීපතම ඥාතියෙකු බවයි.

මාධ්‍යවේදියාට පඩිය මදි.. නාවික හමුදාපතිගෙන් ගුටි කා ඇත්තේ ඒකයි.. – රජයේ ප‍්‍රවෘත්ති දෙපාර්තමේන්තුව – BBC

 සෙනසුරාදා මාගම්පුර වරායේදී මාධ්‍යවේදියකුට පහරදීම දැඩිව හෙලා දකින බව රජයේ ප්‍රවෘත්ති දෙපාර්තමේන්තුවේ අධ්‍යක්ෂ ජනරාල් රංග කලංසූරිය යළිත් වරක් අවධාරණය කරයි.

කෙසේ නමුත් පහරකෑමට ලක් වූ මාධ්‍යවේදියා අතින් එවැනි අවස්ථා වාර්තාකරණය සම්බන්ධ ආචාරධර්ම කිහිපයක් කඩ වී තිබෙන බව ඒ පිළිබඳව ප්‍රවෘත්ති දෙපාර්තමේන්තුව ආරම්භ කළ පරීක්ෂණයේ මූලික නිගමණ අනුව හෙළි වී තිබුණු බවත් ඔහු පැවසීය.

උද්ඝෝෂණයේ යෙදී සිටි මාගම්පුර වරායේ සේවකයන්ගෙන් නෞකා දෙකක් බේරාගැනීම පිණිස නාවික හමුදාව පැමිණි අවස්ථාවේ, එය වාර්තා කළ මාධ්‍යවේදියකුට පහරදුන් බවට නාවික හමුදාපතිවරයාට චෝදනා එල්ල වී තිබේ.

එම පහරදීමට එරෙහිව රටපුරා විවිධ ප්‍රදේශවල මාධ්‍යවේදීන් කළු පටි පැළඳ උද්ඝෝෂණවල නිරතව සිටි අතර, එහිදී මාධ්‍යවේදියා ආචාරධර්ම කඩ කළ බව පවසමින් ආචාර්ය රංග කලංසූරිය ඉරිදා නිකුත් කළ නිවේදනය බොහෝ මාධ්‍යවේදීන්ගේ දැඩි විවේචනයට ලක්විය.

ප්‍රහාරයට ලක් වූ මාධ්‍යවේදියා එසේ කඩ කළ ආචාර්ධර්මය කවරක් දැයි කළ විමසීමට පිළිතුරු දෙමින් ඔහු කියා සිටියේ, ආරක්ෂක හමුදා සම්බන්ධ ඉතා සංවේදී සහ ගැටුම්කාරී තත්වයක් පවතින අවස්ථාවක මාධ්‍යවේදීන් පිළිපැදිය යුතු විශේෂ ආචාරධර්ම පවතින බවයි.

විශේෂයෙන්ම කිසියම් ස්ථානයකින් ඔබ්බට නොයන මෙන් ආරක්ෂක හමුදා උපදෙස් දුන් අවස්තාවක ඒ උපදෙස් නොපිලිපැදීම සහ ඔහුගේම ආරක්ෂාව පිණිස සිය මාධ්‍ය සගයන් සමඟ එක් ස්ථානයක සිටීමට අපොහොසත්වීම මාධ්‍යවේදියා විසින් කඩ කරන ලද ප්‍රධාන ආචාරධර්ම කිහිපයක් බව ප්‍රවෘත්ති දෙපාර්තමේන්තුවේ අධ්‍යක්ෂ ජනරාල්වරයාගේ මතයයි.

“මේ අවස්ථාවේදි මේ මාධ්‍යවේදියා මේ පිරිසෙන් ඈත්වෙලා වෙනම රාජකාරියක් කරන්න ගියා කියල අපිට ආරංචි වෙලා තියෙනවා.”

ප්‍රාදේශීය මාධ්‍යවේදීන්ගේ සේවය ලබාගන්නා ආයතන ඔවුන්ට නිසි වේතනයක් පවා නොගෙවමින් ඔවුන්ගේ සේවය සූරා කෑම ඔවුන් මේ ආකාරයෙන් ‘තරගයක’ යෙදී සිටීමට ප්‍රධානම හේතුව බවත් ප්‍රවෘත්ති අධ්‍යක්ෂ ජනරාල්වරයා පැවසීය.

“මාස දෙක තුනකට පඩි ගෙවල නැති ආයතන තියෙනව. ඒ අයට රැකියා සුරක්ෂිතභාවයක් නෑ.”

එබැවින් තමන් ආරාක්ෂා වී රැකියාවේ නිරතවන්නේ කෙසේ දැයි ඔවුන්ට පුහුණුවක් ලබාදීමේ අවශ්‍යතාවය ඔහු අවධාරණය කරයි.

සෙබළ ආරක්‌ෂක වැට බිඳගෙන පෙරට ගිය නිසා මාධ්‍යවේදියා පහර කෑමට ලක්‌වුණා
– රජයේ ප්‍රවෘත්ති අධක්‍ෂ ජනරාල්

සිරිමන්ත රත්නසේකර

මාගම්පුර වරායේදී ප්‍රාදේශීය මාධ්‍යවේදියකු නාවික හමුදාපතිවරයාගේ පහරකෑමට ලක්‌වන්නේ ඔහු නාවික හමුදා සෙබළුන් විසින් ගොඩනැඟූ සෙබළ ආරක්‍ෂක වැට (Line) කඩා බිඳ දමා පෙරට පැමිණීම නිසා යෑයි රජයේ ප්‍රවෘත්ති අධ්‍යක්‍ෂ ආචාර්ය රංග කලංසූරිය මහතා ඊයේ 
(12 වැනිදා) ‘දිවයින’ ට පැවසීය.

හමුදාවක්‌ ගැටුමක්‌ නිරාකරණය කිරීමට ඉදිරිපත් වන අවස්‌ථාවකදී මාධ්‍යවේදියාගේ ස්‌ථානගතවීම අවම ආචාර ධර්මයෙහි සහ තමන්ගේ ආරක්‍ෂාවේ කොටසක්‌ බවත් හෙතෙම කියා සිටියේය.

කැමරාවක්‌ සහ රජයේ ප්‍රවෘත්ති දෙපාර්තමේන්තුවෙන් නිකුත් කළ හැඳුනුම්පත් අතේ තිබූ පමණින් හමුදා මෙහෙයුමක්‌ වාර්තා කළ නොහැකි බව පැවසූ කලංසූරිය මහතා එහිදී තමන්ගේ වෙනසක්‌ විය යුතු බවත් එසේ නොවන්නේ නම් සිදුවන්නේ එක්‌කෝ මැරුම්කෑමක්‌ හෝ ගුටිකෑමට සිදුවීමක්‌ බවත් පැවසීය.

ඒ කෙසේ වෙතත් ප්‍රාදේශීය මාධ්‍යවේදියාට නාවික හමුදාපතිවරයා විසින් කළ පහරදීම මුළුමනින්ම වැරදි ක්‍රියාවක්‌ බවත් එය තරයේ හෙළාදකින බවත් ආචාර්ය රංග කලංසූරිය මහතා අවධාරණය කළේය.

කිසිවකුට පහරදීමට කිසිවකුට අයිතියක්‌ නැති අතර කිසිවකුගෙන් ගුටි නොකා සිටීමට දැනගත යුතු යෑයි ද හෙතෙම සඳහන් කළේය.

මෙම මාධ්‍යවේදියා පිළිබඳ හඬ නඟන මාධ්‍ය ආයතනවලින් තමාට විමසීමට ඇත්තේ ප්‍රාදේශීය මාධ්‍යවේදියාට කලට වේලාවට ගෙවීම් කළාද? ඔහුගේ රැකියා සුරක්‍ෂිතභාවය හා ජීවිත ආරක්‍ෂාව තහවුරු කළාද යන්න බවත් එසේ සිදුකර මෙසේ පෙනී සිටින්නේ නම් කමක්‌ නැති බවත් පැවසූ රජයේ ප්‍රවෘත්ති අධ්‍යක්‍ෂවරයා ප්‍රාදේශීය මාධ්‍යවේදීන් ගැන සොයා බලන විට ඔවුන්ට මාස තුන හතරකින් ගෙවීම් කර නැති බවත් කියා සිටියේය.

මේ පිළිබඳ සිදුකරන පරීක්‍ෂණයේදී පහරකෑමට ලක්‌වූ මාධ්‍යවේදියා සමඟ එම වාර්තාකරණයට එක්‌වූ තවත් මාධ්‍යවේදීන් සිව්දෙනකුගේ ප්‍රකාශ සටහන් කරගෙන ඇති බවත් එහිදී එම මාධ්‍යවේදීන් පහරකෑමට ලක්‌වූ මාධ්‍යවේදියා හමුදා වළල්ල බිඳගෙන ඉදිරියට ගෙන ගිය බව ප්‍රකාශ ලබා දී ඇති බවත් රජයේ ප්‍රවෘත්ති අධ්‍යක්‍ෂ ජනරාල්වරයා කියා සිටියේය.

රජයේ ප්‍රවෘත්ති දෙපාර්තමේන්තුව විසින් කළ පරීක්‍ෂණයේ මූලික වාර්තාව ඊයේ (12 වැනිදා) තමා අතට පත් වූ බව ද හෙතෙම වැඩිදුරටත් කියා සිටියේය.

 

Govt seeks report from Navy over dock workers protest – -PTI -Agencies

Sri Lanka’s Defence Ministry has sought a report from the Navy over a clash between security forces and striking dock workers who had held up a Japanese vessel at a port demanding job security.  “The ministry of defence has called for a report from the Navy on alleged attack against protesting port workers,” Defence Secretary Karunasena Hettiarachchi said.   “The Navy had done their job to provide security to vessels.

The ships were held for days,” Hettiarachchi said.  Sri Lankan navy fired warning shots to disperse the striking dock workers who had prevented a Japanese vessel from leaving Hambantota port for four days by placing gantry cranes to block its path.  The Navy said it acted within the law to prevent a sea piracy situation.  Opposition legislators told parliament  that eight workers were wounded when the navy stormed the main pier, but the government denied there were casualties.

The Joint Opposition in Parliament carried out a demonstration accusing the government of allegedly using Navy personnel to “assault” employees of the Hambantota Ports authority who were conducting a strike.  The temporary port workers at Hambantota port have been striking since Tuesday demanding that they be taken on as permanent employees of the state-owned Sri Lanka Port Authority after a move by the government to lease the port to China.

Some 483 temporary workers are demanding that they be made permanent before the lease.

Navy Commander Ravi Wijegunaratne was accused of threatening a television reporter during the protest.  Navy Commander Vice Admiral Ravindra Wijegunaratne, has dismissed the allegation, Hettiarachchi said.  Hettiarachchi said he personally looked into the matter after media reports alleged that the Navy Commander had allegedly threatened the journalist.

– See more at: http://www.adaderana.lk/news/38202/govt-seeks-report-from-navy-over-dock-workers-protest#sthash.o7iHMc9O.dpuf

FMM calls for special investigation on dock workers protest

The Free Media Movement, condemning the alleged attack on journalists by the Navy, including the Navy Commander on the International Human Rights Day, urged the President to commence a special investigation and take legal actions.

The Navy had launched a mission to rescue two foreign ships that were held by the protesting employees of Hambantota, Magampura port and the Navy Commander has allegedly attacked the journalists who were reporting the incident, rebuking them using obscene language.

The FMM in a statement said, “This cannot be considered as a mere incident. The attack was led by the Navy Commander, who is one of the three Commanders of the country. He has chased away the journalists who revealed their identity, beating and scolding them using obscene language..

This is a very serious incident. At this moment when the right to information is guaranteed by an Act, it is tragic that these reporters from Hambantota who were reporting an incident have been treated as terrorists.

Even though affirmed to establish a better media culture, such media suppression is a blemish to the whole country. It was revealed not only to the country, but also to the whole world that the Navy Commander’s attempts to suppress media, whose behaviour was even worse than a person with primary knowledge only.

In order to rescue the country from such denounce, the Free Media Movement urges the President Maithripala Sirisena to hold a special investigation on this incident and implement the law, to do the justice for journalists.”

– See more at: http://www.adaderana.lk/news/38209/fmm-calls-for-special-investigation-on-dock-workers-protest#sthash.3x0PHu5b.dpuf

මත්තල ගැහිල්ල සෙවීම දකුණේ ඩීඅයිජීට බාරයි

නාවික හමුදාපති වයිස් අද්මිරාල් රවීන්ද්‍ර විජේගුණරත්න හම්බන්තොට වරායේදී ලංකාදීප මාධ්‍යවේදි රොෂාන් දිලීප් කුමාරට පහරදීම ගැන සොයා බලන ලෙස ඉල්ලමින් ශ්‍රී ලංකා තරුණ ජනමාධ්‍යවේදීන්ගේ සංගමය පොලිස් මූලස්ථානයට කළ පැමිණිල්ලේ විමර්ශන කටයුතු දකුණු පළාත භාර ජ්‍යෙෂ්ඨ නියෝජ්‍ය පොලිස්පති ඩබ්ලිව්.එෆ්.යු ප්‍රනාන්දු මහතාට යොමු කර ඇතැයි පොලිස් මූලස්ථානය කියයි.

නීතිය ඉදිරියේ සියලු දෙනා සමාන බවත් මාධ්‍යවේදියකුට තබා සාමාන්‍ය පුද්ගලයකුටවත් පහර දීමට නාවික හමුදාපතිට බලයක් නැතැයි ශ්‍රී ලංකා තරුණ ජනමාධ්‍යවේදීන්ගේ සංගමය කියයි.

H’tota assault; Journo violates basic media ethics-Govt

 

Government Information Department Director General Ranga Kalansooriya said that the journalist, who was allegedly assaulted during an incident in Hambantota, had violated basic ethical practices when covering sensitive conflict situations.

Issuing a statement said, he said that the government has initiated an inquiry into the alleged assault on a journalist during the protest at Hambantota Port on Saturday.

“It is expected that the journalists adhere to the highest standards of ethical practices when covering these types of conflict situations,” Mr Kalansooriya said.

The statement also said the navy had pointed out that the physical presence of its commander at the scene was mandatory requirement of the International Ship and Port Facility Security (ISPS) Code.

– See more at: http://www.dailymirror.lk/article/H-tota-assault-Journo-violates-basic-media-ethics-Govt-120525.html#sthash.kBdpZ610.dpuf

මූලික අයිතිවාසිකම් සහ භාෂාව රට බෙදීමේ උපකරණයක්ද?

December 13th, 2016

මතුගම සෙනෙවිරුවන්

              ජාත්‍යන්තර වශයෙන් පිළිගත් මූලික අයිතිවාසිකම් නීති මානව හිමිකම් නිතී ආදිය ලංකාවේ රජය විසින් ක්‍රියාත්මක කරනු ලබන්නේ යම් යම් ජගත් සම්මුතීන් වලට අත්සන් තැබීම හේතු කොට ගෙනයි. මේ නීති 1978 ආණ්ඩුක්‍රම ව්‍යවස්ථාව මගින් බලාත්මක විය.මානවයාගේ පැවත්ම සහතික කරන ප්‍රජාතන්ත්‍රීය මූලධර්ම වශයෙන් සළකණු ලබන මෙම නීති ලංකාවේ සමාජයට කෙතරම් දුරට සාධාරණ සහ ස්වීය වශයෙන් වැදගත් වූයේද යන්න පිළිබඳ මෙතෙක් විමර්ශනයක් කර නොමැත. 2007 දී අත්සන් කරන ලද සිවිල් හා දේශපාලන අයිතිවාසිකම් පිළිබඳ ජාත්‍යන්තර සම්මුතිය එවැන්නකි.එය පසුව රටේ නීතියට එකතු කර නොගැනීමට රජය තීරණය කළ නමුත් වත්මන් රජය එය පස්සා දොරෙන් බලාත්මක කිරීමට උත්සාහ කරන බව මහින්ද රාජපක්ෂ මහතා නිවේදනයක් නිකුත් කරමින් පවසා ඇත.එවැනි තත්ත්වයක් තිබුණද වරින් වර අළුත් වන ජාත්‍යන්තර සම්මුති මගින් මෙම නීති යාවත්කාලීන වනු දක්නට හැකිය.

              වර්ෂ 1815 න් එපිට රජුගේ ආධිපත්‍ය මත  ඒකාධිපති පාලනයක් තිබූ  බව බොහෝ දේශපාලන විචාරකයන් පවසති. රජු රදළයන් ඇතුළු ඉහල ප්‍රභූ කට්ටුව මගින් පොදු ජනතාවගේ මූලික අයිතීන් උල්ලංඝණය කරන ලද බව ඔවුහු වැඩිදුරටත් පවසති. එහෙත් ලංකාවේ මූලික රාජ්‍ය ව්‍යුහය පාලනය කරන ලද බෞද්ධ රාජ්‍ය සම්ප්‍රදය මගින් ජනතාව සහ පාලකයා අතර තිබෙන සම්බන්ධය වඩා මට සිලිටි කළ බව මේ විචාරකයන් නොදනිති. එයට හේතුව අපගේ පැරණි සිංහල දේශපාලනය ගැන ප්‍රමාණවත්  අධ්‍යනයක් මෙතෙක් සිදු නොකිරීමයි. මේ තත්ත්වය තුළ පශ්චාත් වැඩවසම් සමාජයකට අවශ්‍ය  මූලික අයිතිවාසිකම් නීති දැඩිව පවත්වාගෙන යා යුතු යැයි ඔවුහු තර්ක කරති.

          1815 සිංහලේ බ්‍රිතාන්‍ය ගිවිසුම ප්‍රකාරව බ්‍රිතාන්‍යයන්ට රට පවරා දී ඇත. එම ගිවිසුමෙන් පසු රට අන්‍යාගමික රජෙකු විසින් පාලනය කිරීමට නියමිත හෙයින් එම ගිවිසුමේ පස්වන වගන්තියෙන් බුද්ධාගමට සහ දේවාගමට පිළිගැනීමක් ලබා දෙන ලෙස භික්ෂූන් වහන්සේලා ගේ ඉල්ලීම විය.නමුත් 1818 ජාතික විමුත්ති අරගලයෙන් පසුව මේ වගන්ති සංශෝධනය කරමින් ඒ අවදියේ දී බැහැරින් පැමිණි අන්‍යාගමිකයන් ගේ අයිතිවාසිකම් සහතික කරන ලදී.බොහෝ දේශපාලන විචාරකයන් මෙය දකින්නේ වඩා ප්‍රජාතන්ත්‍රීය ලක්ෂණයක් ලෙසටය. බ්‍රිතාන්‍යයන් විසින් සෑදූ ව්‍යවස්ථාවේ 29 වන වගන්තියෙන් එය තවත් තහවුරු කරන ලද බව පැවසේ. මෙහිදී පැරණි රාජ්‍ය සම්ප්‍රදාය තුළ බුද්ධශාසනය සහ ආගම අතර තිබූ ඒකාග්‍රතාවය ගැන අවධානය යොමු කර නොමැත. පැරණි දේවාගම් යනු සිංහල ජනතාවගේ ජීවන ක්‍රමය හා සංස්කෘතියට බද්ධ වූ  සශ්‍රීකත්වය වර්ධනය කිරීම උදෙසා පවත්වාගෙන ගිය ක්‍රමයක් බව දැක්විය හැකිය. එසේම විෂ්ණු පත්තිනි සමන් දැඩිමුණ්ඩ අයියනායක වැනි දේවාල ආශ්‍රීතව සිදු කල පුදපූජා සාමාන්‍ය ජනාතාවගේ ලෞකික ජීවිතය ශක්තිමත් කරන්නක් විය. එහෙත් කතෝලික ආගම මෙන්ම ඉස්ලාම් ආගම මගින් එවැනි සංස්කෘතික ඒකාග්‍රතාවයකට අවශ්‍ය පසුබිම ජනිත කලේද යන්න ගැටළුවකි. පවත්නා පැරණි සිද්ධස්ථාන විනාශ කොට ඒ මත නව දේවාස්ථන සාදමින් නව යුරෝපීය සංස්කෘතියක් ජනිත කිරීම ලන්දේසි ඉංග්‍රීසීන් ගේ අරමුණ විය. එවිට ඉංග්‍රීසි නීතියෙන් සිදු වූයේ සාමාන්‍ය සිංහල සංස්කෘතිය කප්පාදුවක්ට ලක් කිරීමයි.

        1972 ව්‍යවස්ථාවේද 1978 ව්‍යවස්ථාවේද බුද්ධාගම පිළිබඳ වගන්තිය එල්ලා තිබෙන නමුදු ව්‍යවස්ථාවේම දහවන වගන්තියෙන් යළිත් මූලික බුදු සසුනට බාධා එල්ල කරමින් සීමා පණවා තිබේ.            ආණ්ඩුක්‍රම ව්‍යවස්ථාවේ නව වන වගන්තියෙන් කියැවෙන ප්‍රමුඛතාවය බුදු සසුනට ඇතැම් අවස්ථාවල නොලැබෙන බව පැහැදිලිය.එයට හේතුව එම වගන්තිය ප්‍රකාරව කිසිවෙකුටත් නීතිය ඉදිරියට යෑමට හැකි නොවීමයි. ඒ වෙනුවට මූලික අයිතිවාසිකම් යටතේ ආගමික නිදහස යනුවෙන් වගන්තියක් ඇතුලත් වී තිබේ.සියළු ආගම් එහිදී එක සමාන වේ.එවිට නවවන වගන්තියට වඩා දහවන වගන්තිය ප්‍රමුඛ තත්ත්වයක ඇත. ඊට හේතුව එම වගන්තිය හරහා නීතිය ඉදිරියට යෑමට පහසුකම් සැලසීමයි.පසුගිය කාලයේ රට පුරාම ඇති කල යාඥා මඩු වලට එරෙහිව බෞද්ධ සමාජය විරෝධතා පළ කල කල්හි බෞද්ධයන් උසාවියට ගෙන යෑමට ඔවුන්ට හැකි විය.නමුත් බෞද්ධ සිද්ධස්ථාන වනසන අන්‍යාගමිකයන් ට එරෙහිව කටයුතු කිරීමට රජය කටයුතු කර තිබෙන්නේ කෙසේද යන්න සාකච්ඡා කළ යුතුය.කූරගල මුස්ලිම් ආගමික ඉඳිකිරීම් පවා ඉවත් කිරීමට කටයුතු කෙරුණේ රජයේ සන්තකය ආපසු ගැනීමේ නීතිය මගිනි.එසේම පූජ්‍ය උඩුවේ ධම්මාලෝක හිමියන්ට එරෙහිව ගත් තීන්දු වලදී නව වන වගන්තියේ රැකවරණය ශූන්‍ය කරඇත. නීතියේ පවතින මේ වෙනස්කම් තවමත් බෞද්ධ සමාජය තේරුම් කර ගෙන නොමැත. තමන්ට රටේ ලෝකයේ ඉහළින්ම බලයක් තිබෙන්නේ යැයි යන උද්දච්ඡ හැඟීමෙන් කලබල කාරී ලෙස හැසිරීමෙන් තව දුරටත් බෞද්ධ සමාජය අසරණ වීම පමණක් සිදුවී ඇත.

      නව ආණ්ඩුක්‍රම ව්‍යවස්ථාවක් නිර්මානය කොට අළුත් රටක් හැදීම වත්මන් යහ පාලනයේ මූලික අරමුණය.ඒ සඳහා  පාර්ලිමේන්තුවම  ව්‍යවස්ථා දායක මණ්ඩලයක් බවට පත් වී තිබේ.මෙම ව්‍යවස්ථාව සෑදිමට කමිටු හයක් පත්කර ඇති අතර මධ්‍ය හා පර්යන්ත අතර සබඳතා  අනු කමිටුවේ යෝජනා ගැන මේ වන විටත් බරපතල ආකාරයෙන් විවේචන එල්ල වී ඇත. එම කමිටුවට දමා ඇති නාමය තුලින්ම ගම්‍ය වන්නේ මධ්‍යම රජයක් සහ පළාත් ආණ්ඩුවක් ඇත යන සංකල්පයයි. එය බෙදුම්වාදය තවතව ශක්තිමත් කරන්නක් බවට පත් කරයි . එසේම මූලික අයිතිවාසිකම්  කමිටු වේ යෝජනා සලකා බලන කල්හිද අපට ගම්‍ය වන්නේ මෙයයි. එම යෝජනා මගින් 1978 ව්‍යවස්ථාවේ තිබෙන සියළු ප්‍රතිපාදන වඩාත් බලාත්මක බවට පත් කිරීමට යෝජනා කර තිබේ. මූලික අයිතිවාසිකම් අනු කමිටු වාර්තාවේ එකොලොස්වන පිටුවේ සඳහන් ආගමික නිදහස යන පරිඡේදය සලකා බලන කල්හි එය තහවුරු වේ.ප්‍රසිද්ධියේ ආගම ඇදහීමේ නිදහස ප්‍රචාරණයේ සහ ඉගැන්වීමේ නිදහස යනු  ක්‍රිස්තියානි ඉස්ලාම් වැනි ආගම් බලහත්කාරයෙන් සිංහල බෞද්ධයන් මත පැටවීම සහතික කරන ආගමික නිදහසකි.  මෙතෙක් අන්‍යාගම් වලට තිබෙන නිදහස මේ වගන්ති වලින් තවත් ශක්තිමත් වෙයි. වත්මන් ව්‍යවස්ථාවේ නවවන වගන්තියේ කුමක් තිබුණද මේ ආගමික නිදහස නමැති පරිඡේදය තුළින් එය තවදුරටත් දුර්වල කරනු ඇත.එසේම පවත්නා ලිඛිත නීති සහ ලිඛිත නොවන නීති ආණ්ඩුක්‍රම ව්‍යවස්ථාව යටතේ කියැවිය යුතුය යන්න නිර්දේශ කරන ගමන් පුද්ගල නීති අදාල නොවන බවටද සඳහනක් කර ඇත. එවිට මතු වන්නේ මෙතෙක් පවත්වාගෙන පැමිණි යම් ආගමික වාර්ගික නීති ව්‍යවස්ථාවට යටත් නොවන බවට අර්ථ නිරූපණයක් ලබා දීමයි.                                                                                                                                                         

            මෙම යෝජනා අතර තවත් භයානකම යෝජනාවක් වන්නේ තිස් එක් වන පිටුවේ සඳහන් ජාතික රාජ්‍ය සහ සම්බන්ධිකරණ භාෂා යන පරිඡෙදයයි. 1957  බණ්ඩාර නායක චෙල්වනායගම් ගිවිසුමෙන් සහ ඩඩ්ලි චෙල්වනායගම් ගිවිසුමෙන් පසු දෙමල භාෂාවට උතුර නැගෙනහිර පළාත් වට හිමිව තිබූ තැන මේ යොජනා මගින් රාජ්‍ය භාෂා තත්ත්වයට  උසස් කරන බව පෙන්වා දිය හැකිය.එය වාර්තාවේ  සඳහන් වන්නේ මෙසේය.සිංහල හා දෙමල භාෂා ජනරජය මුළුල්ලේම පරිපාලන භාෂා වන් විය යුත්තේය.උතුර සහ නැගෙනහිර පළාත් හැර අනෙකුත් සියළුම පළාත්වල ජාතික හා පළාත් රාජ්‍ය ආයතන වල සහ පළාත් පාලන ආයතන වල පොදු වාර්තා පවත්වාගෙන යෑම සඳහා සිංහල භාෂාව භාවිතා කළ යුතු අතර උතුරු සහ නැගෙනහිර පළාත්වල ඒ සඳහා දෙමල භාෂාව භාවිතා කළයුතුය.එසේම යම් උප දිසාපති කොට්ඨසයක සිංහල හෝ දෙමල භාෂාමය සුළුතරය එකී ප්‍ර දේශයේ මුළු ජනගහනයෙන් අටෙන් එකක් ඉක්මවන්නේ නම් සහ ජනාධිපතිවරයා විසින් එසේ ප්‍රකාශයට පත්කොට ඇති අවස්ථාවල පොදු වාර්තා පවත්වාගෙන යෑම සඳා සිංහල දහ දෙමළ යන භාෂා භාවිතා කළ යුතුය යන්න සඳහන් වේ.

       මේ කියන්නේ කුමක්ද උතුරු සහ නැගෙනහිර පළාත් වාර්ගික වශයෙන් තව දුරටත් බෙදා වෙන් කළ කල්හි ඇති වන තත්ත්වයයි.දැනටමත් මෙම පෙදෙස් වල පරිපාලන භාෂා දෙමළ බවට පත් වී ඇත. සිංහලයෙකුට උසාවි නඩු පිටපතක් වුවද ගත හැක්කේ දෙමළ භාෂාවෙන් පමණකි.කමිටුවේ යෝජනා බලාත්මක වුවහොත්  සමස්ත රටේම ජනතාව දෙමල ඉගෙනීමට යොමුකෙරේ.නමුත් උතුරට සහ නැගෙනහිරට පමණක් දෙමළ පරිපාලන භාෂාවක් වේ.සිංහලයන් තවදුරටත් උතුරෙන් සහ නැගෙනහිරෙන් එළවා දැමූ කල්හි. එහි එකම රාජ්‍ය භාෂාව සහ පරිපාලන භාෂාව දෙඹල පමණක් වන්නේය.දැනට කොළඹ නුවර එළිය පුත්තලම ආදී පෙදෙස් වල ජීවත් වන දෙමල මුස්ලිම් සුලුතරය ඉදිරියේදී පළාතේ ජනගහනයෙන් අටෙන් එකකට වැඩි වීමට ඉඩ ඇත. එවිට පොදු වාර්තා තැබීමට දෙමළ භාෂාව ඉස්මතු වනු ඇත. අවසානයේදී සිදු වන්නේ දෙමල මුස්ලිම් බහුතරය මැද සිංහලයන් සුලුතරය බවට පත් වී සිංහල භාෂාවද රාජ්‍ය භාෂා මට්ටමින් ඉවත් වීමයි. එම නිසා මූලික අයිතිවාසිකම් නීතිය අභිබවා බුද්ධ නීතිය ඉදිරියට ගැනීමත් සිංහල බස ට තිබෙන මූලික තත්ත්වය වෙනස් නොකිරීමටත් බලපෑම් කළ යුතුය.

මතුගම සෙනෙවිරුවන්

Freudian and Neo-Analytical Personality Theories

December 13th, 2016

Dr. Ruwan M Jayatunge 

The study of personality focuses on two broad areas: One understands individual differences in particular personality characteristics, such as sociability or irritability. The other is understanding how the various parts of a person come together as a whole (American Psychological Association).  Personality is the entire mental organization of a human being at any stage of his development. It embraces every phase of human character: intellect, temperament, skill, morality, and every attitude that has been built up in the course of one’s life (Warren & Carmichael, 1930). According to Krauskopf and Saunders (1994) personality also refers to the pattern of thoughts, feelings, social adjustments, and behaviors consistently exhibited over time that strongly influences one’s expectations, self-perceptions, values, and attitudes. It also predicts human reactions to other people, problems, and stress.

ruwan13121601

Sigmund Freud can be considered as the father of modern personality theory.  Sigmund Freud developed psychodynamic theories on personality. In his view personality emerges from the conflict between biological instincts and social forces. According to Freud,   personality is composed of three elements known as the id, the ego, and the superego (Freud, 1923).  Freud’s structural theory of personality describes how conflicts among these elements shape behavior and personality.  Freud stated that the personality develops during childhood and is critically shaped through a series of five psychosexual stages. In each stage the subject experiences internal psychological conflict mostly unconscious. The child is experiencing a conflict between biological drives and social expectations.  At each stage, the libido’s pleasure-seeking energy is focused on a different part of the body Freud believed that sexuality is the main driver of human personality development.

As Freud postulated nature of the conflicts among the id, ego, and superego change over time as a person grows from child to adult forming his personality (Freud, 1923).  Furthermore be believed human personality is complex and has more than a single component. Freud believed that certain aspects of   personality are more primal and acts upon basic instincts (Freud, 1920).   According to Freud, the id which is a psychic energy is the primary component of personality.  The id is the only component of personality that is present from birth.  The ego which functions in both the conscious, preconscious, and unconscious mind is responsible for dealing with reality. The superego   which begins to emerge at around age five holds all of our internalized moral standards and ideals that acquire from both parents and society – our sense of right and wrong. The key to a healthy personality is a balance between the id, the ego, and the superego (Freud, 1923).

Freud suggested that mental states are influenced by two competing forces: cathexis and anticathexis.   Cathexis was described as an investment of mental energy in a person, an idea or an object whereas Anticathexis involves the ego blocking the socially unacceptable needs of the id. Freud highlighted the unconscious effects on behavior and believed that unconsciousness was the root of behavior and personality (Friedman & Schustack, 2012). Mataruse and Mwatengahama (2001) assert that according to Freud’s theory of personality development, it is during the first five years that a child’s sexual orientation is developed and determined.

However Freud misdeed the impact of environment, sociology, religion or culture that affects personality. He missed the healthy part of human personality. His ideas were more patriarchal and misogynistic. Torrey (1993) indicates that research has reliably failed to substantiate Freudian concepts.

Neo-Freudians used Freud’s original theories to formulate the theories of     personality.  Neo-freudians persuaded that personality was the product of the social environment as well as biology. They de-emphasized infantile sexuality.

Major neoanalytic theories were presented by Alfred Adler (1870-1937) Carl Jung (1875-1961) Karen Horney (1885-1952) Erik Erikson (1902-1994). These theories de-emphasized sexuality, and the importance of the unconscious. Furthermore   neoanalytic theories highlighted the role of the ego.

Although  Freud believed that  the ego’s primary task was to mediate among the id, superego and external reality the Neo Analysts consider  that  ego is present at birth and involved in adaptation. They indicated how ego interacts with    other individuals, society and culture.

The Neo-Analysists such as Adler, Erikson, Hartmann, Loevinger and White presented personality theories. Adler’s individual psychology postulates the striving for superiority. Alfred Adler (1870-1937) one of the four original members of what was to become the Vienna Psychoanalytic Society, was the first to accept a humanistic-educational model of man in contrast to Freud’s medical model of man (Ansbacher ,1990).

Adler de-emphasised sexual motivation and believed that a striving for superiority was the motivating force in life.   Adler believed that  one’s life style is formed early in life, and is the product of such factors as birth order, constitutional infirmities, and the degree of pampering and neglect received from the parents and other caretakers.   As described by Stern (1971) Adler’s mentally healthy man is the one who, instead of striving for personal power, develops Gemeinschajtsgejuhf, community feeling.  To Adler, however, the development of community feeling was not only an educational, moral requirement, but a therapeutic necessity.

Carl Gustav Jung (1875-1961) was the founder of the analytical psychology. The relationship between Carl Jung and Sigmund Freud began in 1906 and Jung rejected some of Freud’s theories. Jung’s journey into personality began with a journey into the inner workings of his own mind (Burger, 2008; Feist & Feist, 2009). Jung created eight distinct personality types. These orientations are the pairing of two attitudes: introversion and extroversion, and four functions. The four functions included feeling, thinking, sensation, and intuition.

Carl Jung believed that people are dominated by attitudes of either introversion or extraversion.   Jung revealed archetypes such as the anima; the animus; the shadow; and the self. Jung used the terms ‘anima’ and ‘animus’ to classify observed phenomena but did not explore the developmental origins of these phenomena in terms of personal history and experience (Colman, 1996). The anima is the feminine side of the male psyche and the animus is the masculine side of the female psyche. According to shadow is considered to be the unconscious part that is essentially negative.  The self – the central archetype; the striving for unity of all parts of personality.

As described by Jung every person has a persona or a mask which represents a compromise between one’s true self and the expectations of society.  Jung believed in the effects of unconscious and how interpersonal conflicts affect in personality development.

Karen Horney is unique and unparalleled in personality theory (O’Conneil, 1980). She believed that Freud had given too much importance to biology and too little to social factors. As Horney stated personality is significantly affected by the unconscious mind, but she also theorized that both interpersonal relationships and societal factors were key factors contributing to mental development. Karen Horney developed the concept of basic anxiety, which stemmed from the individual’s feelings of isolation and helplessness in a hostile world. For Horney, the fundamental issue for the person is not sexuality but security.

According to Horney, self-realizing people know what they really think, feel, and believe; they are able to take responsibility for themselves and to determine their values and aims in life. Their judgments and decisions are in the best interest both of their own growth and that of other people. They want to have good relations with others and care about their welfare, but they have their center of gravity in themselves and are able to say no if others make irrational demands or attempt to impinge upon their selfhood (Paris, 1999).

Horney further stated that a poor fit between child and environment sets in motion a process of self-alienated development in which an idealized image replaces the real self as the primary source of motivation and sense of identity. People cope with feeling unsafe, unloved, and unvalued by compulsively moving toward, against, and away from others, and by embarking on a “search for glory” in which they try to actualize their idealized image. Compliant people develop an idealized image of themselves as loving, helpful, and forgiving; aggressive people strive to be powerful, ruthless, and triumphant; and detached people pursue freedom, peace, and self-sufficiency. (Paris, 1999).

In Freud’s opinion the roots of the ego, the id, are to be found in body sensations and feelings, but he had to admit that very little was known about these sensations and feelings. Only much later was neuroscience in a position to offer evidence that feelings can be the direct perception of the internal state of the body (Sletvold,     2013). Freud gave less importance to the social inactions.

Harry Stack Sullivan (1892- 1949) developed a theory of personality that emphasized the importance of interpersonal relations.  According to Sullivan personality is shaped almost entirely by the social relationships.Sullivan   viewed that personality cannot be separated from social psychology: the individual’s personality develops in a social context, and expresses itself in social interaction. Sullivan’s interpersonal theory emphasizes tension from two sources: the individual’s needs and social anxiety. Sullivan saw anxiety as existing only as a result of social interactions. He highlighted the importance of current life events to psychopathology. He believed that people acquire certain images of self and other throughout the developmental stages (Sullivan, 1953).

Eric Erikson’s psychosocial theory is viewed as an extension of Freud’s psychosexual theory (Samkange, 2015).  Much like Sigmund Freud, Erikson believed that personality develops in a series of stages. However Freud’s theory of psychosexual stages, Erikson’s theory describes the impact of social experience across the whole lifespan. Freud held the notion that an individual’s personality is established primarily during the first five years, whereas Erikson says that the development of personality is a continuous process throughout an individual’s life. Developing personality is dependent on achieving a healthy ratio or balance between the two opposing disposition that represent each crisis (Meggitt, 2006).

Erikson continues to receive a great deal of credit for recognizing the influence of culture on development (Hoare, 2002).  Erikson agreed with the other Neo-Freudian that the primary issues in personality are social rather than biological. Furthermore he de-emphasized the role of sexuality. Ericson emphasized   the development of ego identity. Ego identity is the conscious sense of self that   develop through social interaction.

Erikson‟s eight stages of psychosocial theory is a follow up of, and was greatly influenced by Sigmund Freud ‟ s psychosexual theory of human development which attributes human development to fixation of sexual attributes at different stages life (McLeod, 2008). He believed that these 8 psychosocial stages and that there is a crisis / conflict at each stage. How people resolve each of these crises determines the direction of their personality development will take. Each stage is characterized by 2 different ways to resolve the crisis: one maladaptive and one adaptive.

Erikson (1968) summarizes with the following statement:  I shall present human growth from the point of view of the conflicts, inner and outer, which the vital personality weathers, reemerging from each crisis with an increased sense of inner unity, with an increase of good judgment, and an increase in the capacity ‘to do well’ according to his own standards and to the standards of those who are significant to him. 

Melanie Klein (the founder of Object Relations Theory) accepted some of Freud’s basic assumptions while rejecting others. The concept of object relations stems from psychoanalytic instinct theory. The “object” of an instinct is the agent through which the instinctual aim is achieved, and the agent is usually conceived as being another person. It is generally agreed that the infant’s first object is his mother (Ainsworth, 1969). Klein has the view that infants suffer a great deal of anxiety and that this is caused by the death instinct within, by the trauma experienced at birth and by experiences of hunger and frustration. Melanie Klein   said that infants internalize, or swallow whole, into their unconscious psyche, categories or representations of reality. These are known as “introjects” or “objects”

John Bowlby was influenced by Freud and he formulated an understanding of human development based on the centrality of human relationships in their specific cultural contexts.

Bowlby introduced the Attachment Theory and believed that attachment behaviors are instinctive and will be activated by any conditions that seem to threaten the achievement of proximity, such as separation, insecurity and fear. Bowlby defined attachment as a ‘lasting psychological connectedness between human beings.  Attachment is a deep and enduring emotional bond that connects one person to another across time and space (Bowlby, 1969).

Bowlby stated that a child has an innate or inborn need to attach to one main attachment figure. A child should receive continuous care from this main attachment figure for approximately the first two years of life. He highlighted the long term consequences of maternal deprivation on personality. Bowlby (1969) stated that attachment does not have to be reciprocal.  One person may have an attachment to an individual which is not shared.  Attachment is characterized by specific behaviors in children, such as seeking proximity with the attachment figure when upset or threatened.

The Great Russian Psychologist L. S. Vygotsky (1896-1934) has long been recognized as a pioneer in developmental psychology. Although Vygotsky was not a neo Freudian he was familiar with Freud’s writings. Vygotsky introduced the sociocultural approach that was disregarded by Sigmund Freud. Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory of human learning describes learning as a social process and the origination of human intelligence in society or culture.  Vygotsky indicated that the children learn behavior and cognitive skills by dealing with more experienced people, such as teachers or older siblings.  According to Vygotsky, learning has its basis in interacting with other people. Once this has occurred, the information is then integrated on the individual level. Vygotsky focused on several different domains of development: human evolution (phylogenesis), development of human cultures (sociocultural history), individual development (ontogenesis) and development which occurs during the course of a learning session or activity or very rapid change in one psychological function (microgenesis) (Wertsch, 1991).

For Vygotsky, the human being is characterized by a ‘primary sociability’. The same idea is expressed more categorically by Henri Wallon: ‘The individual is genetically social’ (Wallon, 1959).    Every function in the child’s cultural development appears twice: first, on the social level, and later, on the individual level; first, between people (interpsychological) and then inside the child (intrapsychological). This applies equally to voluntary attention, to logical memory, and to the formation of concepts. All the higher functions originate as actual relationships between individuals. (Vygotsky, 1930).

Jean Piaget and Freud shared some similar ideas. Both were interest in development and both were stage theorists. Freud underlined the concept of the “Id” but Piaget highlighted the concept of egocentrism. Unlike Freud Paget gathered his data by directly observing children.

Piaget proposed that cognitive development from infant to young adult occurs in four universal and consecutive stages: sensorimotor, preoperational, concrete operations, and formal operations (Woolfolk, A., 2004). Piaget (1955) identified four universal stages of cognitive development theorizing what children comprehend at different ages and deduced that intelligence matures through personally constructed assimilation and accommodation.  He posits that child development is a progressive construction of logically embedded structures and that each stage follows after successful cognitive attainment of the previous stage, always in the same order, and builds upon the child’s ability to learn (Piaget 1955).

In Piaget’s system, the development of children’s cognitive structures is seen as progressing through a universal sequence from sensorimotor, to concrete, to formal logical thought. The data that have been obtained on his measures are problematic in their support for this view, however, because they indicate that adults in traditional societies often fail his formal tasks Okamoto et al., 1996).  Piaget   that children learned best by experimenting for themselves and social interactions among children helped them to overcome their egocentric tendencies (Fleming, 2004).   Critics of Piaget’s work argue that his proposed theory does not offer a complete description of cognitive development (Eggen & Kauchak, 2000).

Erich Fromm (1900 – 1980) was influenced by Freud and Horney. Freud and Fromm were contemporaries and shared some common views. Fromm accepted the importance of unconscious, biological drives, repression and defense mechanisms, but rejected Freud’s theory of id, ego and superego. Freud ignored the effect of religion shaping personality and once stated; “Religion is an illusion and it derives its strength from the fact that it falls in with our instinctual desires.”(Sigmund Freud, New Introductory Lectures on Psychoanalysis, 1933).  Erich Fromm profoundly studied the effects of religion. Fromm (1950) stated that humanistic religious experience has no dimension for a transcending divine being. Thus, the sense of being overwhelmed, “absolute dependence,” or obedience are unfamiliar to this type of religious experience. Humanistic religious experience can accept the concept of God or gods, but only in the sense that ideas of God or gods are no more than another way of expressing a higher part of human being. Fromm (1950) concluded: authoritarian type of religion presupposes the existence of a higher power which takes control over a human being.

Fromm’s humanistic psychoanalysis looks at people from the perspective of psychology, history, and anthropology.  Fromm developed a more culturally oriented theory than Freud’s theory.   Erich Fromm was of the view that Freud underestimated the role of socio-economic culture on development. Fromm extrapolated upon the characteristics of the highest levels of personality development. Moreover he emphasized the significance of society’s norms, customs, and values impacting personality development.

Fromm identified several character orientations found in Western society. The receptive character can only take and not give; the hoarding character, threatened by the outside world, cannot share; the exploitative character satisfies desires through force and deviousness; and the marketing character—created by the impersonal nature of modern society—sees itself as a cog in a machine, or as a commodity to be bought or sold. Contrasting with these negative orientations is the productive character, capable of loving and realizing its full potential, and devoted to the common good of humanity. Fromm later described two additional character types: the necrophilouscharacter, attracted to death, and the biophilous character, drawn to life (Rinner 1989).  Eric Fromm stated that people attempt to relieve their anxiety by escaping from freedom. Therefore he identifies love as the ultimate aim of personality development.

Concluding Thoughts

The development of human personality encompasses physical (biological) development, intellectual development, social development, and emotional development, moral and spiritual development. Nonetheless Sigmund Freud missed important aspects of human personality and personality development. Freud believed in the savage part of the human personality. Whereas Psychologists like Carl Rogers emphasized the positive aspects of human personality. Freud misdeed the impact of environment, sociology, religion or culture that affects personality.  Freud was not interested in individual differences. Conversely the Neo-Freudians used Freud’s original theories to formulate the theories of   personality.  Neo-freudians persuaded that personality was the product of the social environment as well as biology. They de-emphasized infantile sexuality. All these theories specified that human personality is complex and has more than a single component.

 References

Ainsworth, M.D.(1969).Object relations, dependency, and attachment: a theoretical review of the infant-mother relationship. Child Dev 40(4):969-1025.

American Psychiatric Association. (1994). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4th edition). Washington, D.C.

Ansbacher, H.L.(1990).Alfred Adler, pioneer in prevention of mental disorders.J Prim Prev. ;11(1):37-68.

Bowlby, J. (1969), Attachment and loss, Vol. 1: Attachment. New York: Basic Books.

Colman, W. (1996). Aspects of anima and animus in Oedipal development. J Anal Psychol. ;41(1):37-57.

Eggen, P. D., & Kauchak, D. P. (2000). Educational psychology: Windows on classrooms (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Erikson, E. H. (1968). Identity, youth, and crisis. New York: Norton.

Feist, J and Feist, G (2009). Theories of Personality (7th ed.).McGraw-Hill.

Fleming, J.(2004). Piaget and Cognitive Development. Retrieved from  http://swppr.org/Textbook/Ch%204%20Piaget.pdf

Freud, S. (1920). Beyond the Pleasure Principle (The Standard Edition). Trans. James Strachey. New York: Liveright Publishing Corporation, 1961.

Freud, S. (1923) The Ego and the Id. London: The Hogarth Press Ltd.

Friedman, H. S. & Schustack, M. W. (2012). Personality: Classic Theories and Modern Research 5/e. Boston, MA: Pearson.

Fromm, E.(1950). Psychoanalysis and Religion. New Haven: Yale University Press.

Hoare, C. H. (2002). Erikson on development in adulthood: New insights from the unpublished papers. New York: Oxford University Press.

Krauskopf, C.J., Saunders, D.R, (1994) Personality and Ability: The Personality Assessment System. University Press of America, Lanham, Maryland.

Mataruse, K. S. and Mwatengahama, N. (2001). Famous Psychologists and Their Work: Module PSY101: Harare, ZOU Press.

Megigitt, C. (2006).Child Development (7th Ed). New Jersey, Prentice Hall.

O’Conneil, A. N. (1980), Karen Horney: Theorist in Psychoanalysis and Feminine Psychology. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 5: 81–93.

Okamoto, Y., Case,R., Bleiker, C., Henderson, B.(1996). Cross-cultural investigations. Monogr Soc Res Child Dev. ;61(1-2):131-55. ;59(2):157-66; discussion 167-9.

Piaget, J. (1955). The Construction of Reality in the Child. Retrieved November 2016, fromhttp://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/philosophy/works/fr/piaget2.htm

Rainer,F.(1989). Erich Fromm: The Courage to be Human. New York: Human Sciences Press, 1989.

Samkange , W.(2015).personality development within the context of the psychosocial theory. Global Journal of Advanced Research.Vol-2, Issue-11 PP.

Sletvold, J. (2013).  The ego and the id revisited Freud and Damasio on the body ego/self.

Stern, A.(1971).Further considerations on Alfred Adler and Ortega Y Gasset. J Individ Psychol.  ;27(2):139-43.

Sullivan, H.S. (ed) (1953 ) The Interpersonal Theory of Psychiatry . W. W. Norton, New York, USA.

Torrey, E.F.(1993). Freudian Fraud: The Malignant Effect of Fraud’s Theory on American Thought and Culture.  HarperCollins Canada.

Vygotsky, L.S.(1930).  Mind and Society .Published by: Harvard University Press.

Wallon, H. 1959.   [The Role of Others and Self-awareness]. Enfance (Evry, France), p. 27986.

Warren, H. C., Carmichael, L. (1930). Elements of human psychology (Rev. Ed.; Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.

Wertsch, J. V. (1991). Voices of the mind: A sociocultural approach to mediated action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Woolfolk, A . (2004). Educational Psychology. (9th ed). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

CONSUMER RIGHTS IN THE DIGITAL AGE

December 13th, 2016

Sarath Wijesinghe Former Chairman Consumer Affairs Authority and former Ambassador to UAE and Israel

This is the theme of the World Consumer Day celebrating every 15th of March since 1983, when President John F Kennedy made the famous statement that “Consumer by definition includes us all. They are the largest economic group affecting and affected by almost every public and private economic decisions, yet they are the only important group whose views are often not heard.” But the situation has tremendously improved since then in USA and Europe and not in Sri Lanka which is far below the standards in terms of exercising of consumer rights by the citizen. World consumerism activism has proved that the consumer and economy will thrive only with a powerful and organized consumer movement in the country using pressure groups directing the State parties to provide the consumer the rights they are entitled to and deserve. Unfortunately the world trends has not influenced consumerism and the consumer in Sri Lanka despite fast growth of the digitalisation, internet, mobile and the social media is as helpless as ever.

Currently the consumer is expected to be protected by traditional legal and regularly procedures and consumer organizations now not functioning or inactive. Consumer and consumerism – that is consumer activism is a powerful force in the West directing the State, Trader, Industrialist, and the Regulators to protect the consumer and the other sectors to bring about equilibrium in the economy. Unprecedented developments on Technology has bypassed the ordinary regulatory process requiring complete overhaul the field of consumerism in a modern directions to meet the demands of the digital age. Currently consumer is neither protected nor looked after by the State and the organizations including NGOs and INGOs thriving on foreign funds.

Information Technology is an area that is drastically moving forward transforming the traditional way of   protecting the consumer through regulatory process in consumerism to digital area of the human race including consumerism, e-com, e-purchases as a result of fast changes of technology. Life style is fast changing with the increase use of mobile phones, computers, internet, and purchasing locally and via international platforms overlooking the protecting the consumer and the economy due to unprecedented fast movement of the digital age. While consumer computer penetration is high in the other parts of the world providing free facilities Sri Lanka is foolish in charging initially 25% nd about 50% from the mobile phones encouraging  citizen to travel instead of suing the net for day to day life.

While Tesco, Wall Mart, and similar food chains are thriving locally in Europe, International Giants such as E-bay are domination the e -sale business via internet and now through the social network spreading worldwide with no restrictions and regulatory procedure, Sri Lanka too has become a victim of e-purchase, Credit Card usage, local and international e-trade and living on debts with unlimited expenditure with extravagant lifestyle. While the corner shops in the United Kingdom – one time start up units on trade- are diminishing with the ferocious competition the supermarket Giants with their own products at the expense of the small time agriculturists, same situation has arisen in Sri Lanka with the emergence and popularity of the supermarket chains with their own brands and products and the banks lavishly offering credit facilities and credit cards. Europe and the West with wealthy economies and a powerful social security system can afford living on debts, credit cards and modern way patronising supermarkets and International platforms of mega Marts. Sri Lankans and the Banking system comfortably and successfully faced the economic and banking “Tsunami”- as a result of cautious and traditional approach when west underwent destructions periodically due to the western way of livelihood gambling on shares and international trade.

Sri Lanka has 4788751 internet users with 22%of the total population of 2186645 million. Out of 250 million global Populations there are 250 million internet users. It took 75 years for the internet to reach the target or 50 million when Face book and social media took only one year to reach the same target shows how fast the digital age is passing by. World internet users are 3 billion today, when it was only 15%in 1995 penetrated by large percentages worldwide. Sri Lank has 23 million Mobile subscribers, and 3.5 million FB fans, stepping into the digital age adopting modern procedures for the day to day life. Social media is fast growing and active bypassing the traditional ways of communication, publications, and business capable of making drastic changes in the society with incidents spreading viral on the newfound media. What is the position of the consumer and consumerism in the present transitional period and what are the challenges ahead?

Today the main piece of legislation for the consumer in Sri Lank is the Consumer Affairs Authority the main Regulator with enormous powers, to regulate trade under part two of the act no 9 of 2003 with powers to give directions, maintain standards, prosecute errant traders. Initiate dialog and corporation between the trader and consumer and the state, power to organize seminars, consumers by setting of consumer organisations, sometimes assume judicial powers. How active the CAA is a matter for the consumer, business community and the state to decide based on the impact on living, trade, business and the consumer items the citizen is provided with including the service sector. Some other institutions in action on this area are Trade Marks Ordinance, Poison Opium and Dangerous drugs ordinance, Weights and measures ordinance, Food control act, Licencing of traders act, Code of intellectual act, Food Act, Cosmetic devices and drugs act Consumer credit act, Measurements unit, Unfair contract terms act, Local Authorities, Health Department, Public Health Inspectors, Bureau of Standards, Insurance and Finance Ombudsman, National Ombudsman, cooperative movement and the Ministry and the department consumer affairs not active and dormant as CAA the main Regulator.

With the battery of powerful institutions, the consumer is still as helpless as the group whose views are not heard and neglected as stated by President Kennedy. Whilst  fast approaching the digital age the traditional protectionism will become obsolete when citizen adopt new convenient and fast measures and methods on purchase of items and business. Neither CAA, nor the other institution  appear to have addressed the issue in protecting the consumer on new methods adopted in the absence of updated modern regulations with  power to protect by the consumer or the establishment.

It is difficult to swim against the tide on the inflow of technology with the fast growth of technology with globalisation and industrialisation with no boarders. The only remedy and the option available may be to adopt ourselves with cautious approach to protect the consumer trade, trader and the industrialist. There could be opportunities and challenges in the transitional process and it is the duty of those concerned and affected to work together for a line of action to avoid disasters in embracing new words on consumerism. Has innovations and research replace regulation are matters facing the researchers spending millions in this sphere

Data collection and data protection is a dangerous area the consumer is not aware of. In areas of insurance, banking, advertisements, and general e commerce the date is collected and shared with others for a consideration or other purposes until the consumer is faced with bill shocks and other complications on litigations and  various other demands. Are the information received trustworthy and whether the consumer has access to regulators or any institutional support. Digital products delivered in the process of downloading are not considered tangible goods and are in line with the consumers’ right to redress. so that the consumer is exposed to risks and products not suitable is delivered or not delivered at all. Free offers and other shady deals and rampant the legal process is expensive, complicated and evasive.

Are consumers protected and looked after by the regulators or organized network of consumer associations and action /active groups like in other parts of the globe. In Sri Lanka the dilemma faced by the citizen affected by the system and the trader openly exploiting and poisoning the public is the lack of implementation process of the regulatory powers and inactivity of consumer organizations and NGOs busy with more lucrative areas on human rights for foreign funds. Vegetables and fruits we eat are poisonous, water we drink are polluted and contaminated, Country is full of junk food chains and unhealthy cola drinks, Drugs are free and available to school children near schools, cooked food in outlets and unhealthy and mostly not suitable for human consumption, food and consumer items are of no proper slandered and out of reach of the consumer, Private hospitals are of no slandered and extremely expensive, CAA appear to be a  toothless lion, unconcerned or inactive and ineffective and inefficient to meet the expected standards. It has obviously not addressed the current and future demands at the door step of the digital age. At present the key authority  tasked with  safeguarding consumer rights is the CAA, however  given that digital consumerism also encroaches upon  the jurisdiction of  ICT and  ICT related laws it is important that the CAA work closely with ICT regulator, Telecom Regulator, Insurance and Financial Ombudsman, Chambers of commerce and the  Ministry of Consumer Affairs. “Many people wanted   government to protect the consumer though more urgent problem is the protection of the consumer from the inefficient and weak government.- Milton Friedman.” – The author could be reached on sarathdw28@gmail.com for further discussions.”


Copyright © 2017 LankaWeb.com. All Rights Reserved. Powered by Wordpress