August 25th, 2015


For the last many weeks, it has been a very popular statement of different politicians, defense analysts and of different TV anchors that the Operation Zarb-e-Azb in Pakistan is reaching its climax. This statement gives an impression that the menace of terrorism has been completely uprooted from the Pakistani society and that there is no more danger from their side now. But the fact of the matter is that the Operation Zarb-e-Azb still needs to be carried on for a long time. Everywhere terrorism is the name of a disease which could never be treated with simple medicines; it always ends up in a surgical treatment followed by a long term follow-up. And in most of the cases this disease adopts the form and shape of a malignant tumor which ultimately becomes a serious threat to life if not properly taken care of. In short one has to be very much offensive in dealing with the menace of terrorism but at the same time it does not mean that the scourge of terrorism is incurable.

Just cast a look at the devastated and ruined lands of Sri Lanka a few years back. The enchanting island of waters and mountains had been the ever-worst victim to the terrorist activities of the LTTE for about three decades. The LTTE began conducting extensive and deadly terrorist attacks against the Sri Lankan government and civilians in 1983. As a result of this brutal terrorism more than 80000 people lost their lives and thousands got seriously injured. The LTTE terrorists pioneered the use of suicide bombings with the help of women and children suicide bombers. The LTTE terrorists did all they could do to destroy the whole of the social structure of the Sri Lankan society. From the ordinary common people to the political leaders, from government officials to the representatives of other countries posted there in Sri Lanka, journalists, Army officers, in short no one was safe at the hands of the Tamil fighters. Under the umbrella of moral and financial support of India, the LTTE’s terror war continued for more than 26 years. At last in May 2009 the Sri Lankan army succeeded in putting an end to this war by killing the LTTE’s main leader Prabhakaran. Talking of the 1983 riots in Sri Lanka, Shenali D Waduge, a world known Sri Lankan analyst on strategic affairs says, “The 1983 July riots said to have been caused as a response to the LTTE killing of 13 soldiers remains a very contentious topic even 30 years later. It was the first time that a large number of military personnel had been slaughtered in one go and was a shock to not only the families of the deceased but a shock to the military itself. Aware of its own limitations in military hardware Sri Lanka was unaware that India had not only been training LTTE and other militant groups but had also been arming them and financially supporting them as well. This means that whatever weapons, ammunition and even LTTE targets had to have been with the explicit knowledge and even instructions of India and its intelligence agencies which were handling them.”

Now same is the situation the people of Pakistan have been passing through for a long time. Whether it is the so-called sectarian blood-shed or suicide attacks on innocent citizens or the brutal slaughtering of the children at the Army Public School Peshawar or the so-called separatist movement in Baluchistan, the Law Enforcement Agencies of Pakistan have solid proofs of Indian interference in all these incidents. So many times these proofs have been presented to the Indian authorities but these authorities never showed a positive response to these proofs. Instead of looking into the matter sympathetically, the Indian authorities have always showed a very soft corner for the terrorists involved in terrorist activities in Pakistan. A recent example in this regard is of granting bail to Swami Aseemanand, the main culprit behind the Samjhota Express tragedy. This culprit had openly admitted that he was involved not only in the Samjhota Express tragedy but also in so many of other terrorist activities. Samjhota Express was bombed in February, 2007 resulting in the death of 42 people. The government of Pakistan and the Military authorities of Pakistan are very well aware of the horrible reality that the terrorists working in Pakistan are enjoying a very strong support and favour from the countries hostile to Pakistan. Terrorism in Pakistan is not the handiwork of a small group of people; it is something far more than that. Recent suicide-attack on Col. (R) Shuja Khanzada is a proof that the terrorists need to be dealt with more ruthless hands. By talking of putting an end to the Operation Zarb-e-Azb, we would do nothing but encourage and support the terrorists.

A serious look at hijacking democracy in this country by appointing defeated and rejected candidates at elections to Parliament via the National List and making them even Cabinet Ministers

August 25th, 2015

 Sudath Gunasekara 21.8.2015

To me the so-called National list concept is a big fraud. In this country it appears to be a combination of the Machiavellian and Kautilyan strategies in state craft with a pinch of salt from JRJ’S political cunningness and acumen. So one can just imagine what kind of vicious political invention it would be. This Sri Lankan invention is the most undemocratic mechanism designed by any to subvert and rob the people’s mandate and install the dictatorship of the politician. It goes even further to the extent of a total negation of the people’s sovereignty which is said to be inalienable at the beginning of the Constitution in article 3.

Looking at the development of this idea in this country, the 1987 Constitution provided for 196 seats in Parliament. In 1988, by the 14 A (24th May 1988) it was increased to 225 as stated in article 99a. But I could not find the words ‘national list members’ under any article or section therein other than in the heading appearing before the Short title of 14th A given below.

(‘The Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of Sri Lanka extended the immunity of the President, increased the number of MPs to 225, provided a 1/8 (12.5%) cut-off for parliamentary representation, and dealt with Delimitation Commission, referendums and national list members. The amendment came into effect on 24 May 1988’.)

Again within 6 months on 17 Dec 1988, 99a of 14th A was repealed by the 15th Amendment and a new mechanism was introduced. Provision for defeated members to be appointed is included in the latter part of para 3 article 8A under the 14th A, most probably on second thought, to take in men rejected by the people but indispensable for the leadership, for various shady reasons. The fact that none in Parliament appears to have objected this underhand provision clearly shows that all the politicians harp on the same common denominator, that is their own survival and self interest rather than the interest of the people. The hurry with which this amendment was passed and the confusion associated further proves their hidden intention behind this provision. That is why I call this provision one of the most undemocratic, unethical and uncivilized constitutional provisions invented by any Parliament anywhere in the world that has humiliated the voter and robbed his fundamental democratic right to elect a desirable and reject an undesirable politician. If you carefully go through the list of people who have been nominated under this provision from the inception you will see what I am trying to say here.  I don’t think you need further proof than the UPFA list just submitted to testify this argument.

The rising public protest and outcry on this issue spearheaded by prominent members of the Mahasangha such as Maduluwave Sobitha Thera clearly shows public disapproval of this mala fide decision taken by the President

‘Rejects are rejects” this is how the Island Editor calls defeated candidates proposed to be appointed to Parliament via the National list in his forthright Editorial of 21st Aug 2015. Not only I, but all sensible people in this country fully agree with you Prabath. Well said and well done. Your editorial is revealing and it should be read by everybody in this country. I suggest you get the Sinhala Divaina to publish it in Sinhala without fail because they are the people who should get this message, although the President and JVP appear to think otherwise. JVP has appointed  Handunhetti and the President Sirisena appointed S.B. Dissanayaka, Vijitamuni Soysa and five others from among defeated candidates to the so-called National list, which I would call an anti-national list out right. Though the 14th A to the Constitution under Sec 8, rather deceptively and undemocratically has made provision for defeated candidates to be appointed to Parliament via the national list, I don’t think one need to continue with this mala fide invention. Though our politicians have numerous ways of humiliating the voters I would say this is the most heinous and treacherous among them. It is undemocratic, unethical, deceptive, dishonest, hypocritical and shameless and it also shatters the very foundation of representative democracy.

The National List (NL) mechanism was originally introduced in 1988 that provided for 29 places out of 225 in Parliament as said before. No qualifications for the national list members have been laid down in the Constitution, although provision for defeated candidates has been introduced under Sec 8 of the14th A, perhaps on second thought. The architects of the Constitution may have left it open and flexible to enable them to name legitimately anyone whom they want. This lack of clarity and flexibility alone shows the hidden agenda they had in mind when they added this provision. The so-called national list is submitted at the time of handing over nominations. Usually it is meant for people with brains and distinguished track records who do not like to enter the fray but whose contribution is very valuable for good governance. Their public image and stature is used as a bait to catch voters. If any party drops those already listed and appoint new people or defeated men and women on second thought for political expedisncy, in the first place, it betrays and rejects the voter who cast his /her vote on the presumption that at least few men of character and education in the said list will be there in Parliament. Secondly definitely representative democracy becomes a big joke with such intruders and rejects being introduced subsequently. Appointing defeated people makes it still worse. Because it tantamount to a total disregard of the people’s vote and their will. No civilized society should allow politicians to murder democracy in broad day light in this manner to fulfill their sinister wants.

As the Island Editor further says “those who vote for a particular political party at parliamentary polls, endorse its NL. Therefore, using the mechanism to appoint candidates rejected by the voters as MPP on second thought is tantamount to a distortion of the will of the electorate”.

Meanwhile I also fully endorse the Editors comment that ‘the UNP’s decision against appointing political rejects to Parliament via the NL is to be highly commended”.

‘Appointment of some of the defeated UPFA candidates in the good books of President Maithripala Sirisena to Parliament through the NL’, as he further says is also deplorable and undemocratic. This is neither democracy no maîtree or yahapalanaya in practice by any standards.

Polls monitors also have condemned the appointment of defeated candidates. ‘A candidate fails to get elected at a general election because voters do not consider him or her fit enough to enter Parliament’.  So under what democratic principle or ethical or moral criterion such people are appointed to Parliament making use of a dirty loophole in the Constitution.

As the Island editorial has correctly pointed out “there is no difference between admitting a student who fails to obtain enough marks at the GCE A/L to a national university and appointing to the national legislature via the NL a candidate who loses an election. Therefore, no one who claims to be a proponent of good governance can endorse the appointment of political rejects to Parliament through the backdoor’.

This type of political chess game in Sri Lanka is no surprise to Sri Lankan people because they know very well the Constitution itself is not designed to safeguard the interests of the people. In other words it is not a people’s constitutions. It is a politicians Constitution drafted behind doors by the politicians for the benefit of politicians.   If you peruse through it carefully you will see how craftily they have masterminded it to safeguard their interests so that they can make use of it to run a “Government by the politicians for the politicians and of the politicians”.  It is designed to safeguard the rights of politicians at every point. This applies to the number of MPP as well as all other aspects such as the election process and enormous privileges granted to politicians like a fat pension within five years. This is why I always argue for a new constitution that safeguards the interests of the people as the first priority. Nevertheless unlike in previous times people should demand that their views are also entertained and embodied in the final document.

First this concept originated as appointed MPP. For example 1948 constitution provided for 6 appointed MPP to provide for the appointment of ‘persons who have rendered distinguished public service or are persons of eminence in professional, commercial, industrial or agricultural life including education, law, medicine science, engineering and banking’. It provided an avenue for eminent persons to enter Parliament without contesting elections which they detest’. But, today sadly, it is used by political parties to appoint any crook or even defeated candidates to the national legislature. At present the list is used only to select the favourites of the political party leadership who can never get in to Parliament through elections. These MPP are mainly used to increase the voting strength and not for any worthy contribution they make. You will see this clearly if you go through the past lists of national list MPP in our Parliament.

The most dangerous part of this process is that they don’t represent the people. They represent only the person who has appointed them and his interests. It follows then that they are answerable and obliged only to the party leadership who appoint them. Rejects are rejects as the Editor says and therefore such people should never be accommodated in the National list. Such accommodations will tantamount to nullification of the people’s democratic right to elect a person they prefer. Such action leads to a complete erosion of the people’s right to franchise and democracy become a joke. Therefore everybody who value democratic principle should vehemently oppose this move. I wonder as to how the Commissioner of Elections declare such people as elected under sec 8 of the 14th A when they have been rejected  and are only actually selected by the Leader of the party. I am surprised as to how one can call this representative democracy.

In my opinion not only defeated persons at elections should not be nominated to Parliament but they also should never be appointed to any other public post at Home or abroad. I reiterate this point as there is a habit of such defeated people being appointed as Ambassadors and Chairmen of corporations etc.

I wish eminent civil society leaders like Rev Maduluwave Sobitha Thera will take up this matter seriously as a national priority and try to convince the political hierarchy not to nominate any political reject to the national list. Secondly to do away with this national list concept that has become an instrument of political expediency rather than a mechanism of public necessity.

Mr President People in this country have voted you on Jan 8 to restore good Governance. Appointing a bunch of sycophants, who have been rejected by the people to Parliament and dropping people like GLP, Dew, Vitarana and Rajiev, from the list, jut to hurt MR  or to take revenge from those who supported him is neither good governance no maîtree Governance either.

President has no ethical right to select National List MPs, says Gammanpila

August 25th, 2015


The President has no ethical right to select Parliamentarians through the National List, Pivithuru Hela Urumaya Leader Udaya Gammanpila says.

The observation was made at a press conference held in Colombo this afternoon (25).

Gammanpila also severely criticised the manner in which the United People’s Freedom Party’s (UPFA) national list MPs were selected.

“It is not a secret that the UPFA supporters are disappointed about the National List,” he added.

Gammanpila also vowed not to contest under the UPFA ticket with the present leadership at a forthcoming election.

He also charged that the new government is attempting to bring an international investigation on the alleged human rights violations in the guise of a domestic mechanism.

Has Sirisena Dug His Road to the Supreme Court to be Doomed for Gross Violation of Human Rights?

August 25th, 2015

by Gandara John

With the winners and losers at the recently concluded elections announced, Sirisena immediately set about to disenfranchise nearly five million UPFA voters, by inserting fresh names in the UPFA National List.

And the fresh names on the list also included seven who had been rejected outright by the UPFA voters.

Millions of voters reposed their faith in the UPFA in the hope that the United People’s Freedom Alliance would form a government that would safeguard the sovereignty of the country or, if not the government, would form a strong opposition in Parliament that would thwart the conspiracy that they strongly believe has been hatched to barter away the sovereignty of the people.

Assuming the election to be genuine the UPFA voters made their choice in voting for their team; their team choice included the list of names on the National List which they found attractive; they believed that those persons on that list would never betray their country.

And while making that choice the near five million of UPFA voters, by choice, rejected outright several UPFA candidates.

Acting like a potty dictator in a banana republic Sirisena slashed the National List violating the Human Rights of a 5 million voters enunciated in and protected by the International Covenant on ‘Civil and Political Rights’ to which Sri Lanka is a signatory.

By substituting a fresh list of names in the National List of the UPFA and including in that list UPFA candidates totally rejected by UPFA voters, Sirisena was making the election a travesty of democracy.

Sirisena, consumed by an indefinable anger and acting irrationally, badly dented the suffrage of the people. Sirisena leaves himself wide open to be hauled before the Supreme Court for the gross violation of Human Rights of 5 million people.

Sirisena’s conduct also gives just cause for the validity and genuineness of the Elections to be challenged.

Article 25 of the ‘International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights of 1976’ paraphrased reads, “Every citizen shall have the right and the opportunity to vote at genuine elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage guaranteeing the free expression of the will of the electors.”

 Surprisingly, the Commissioner General of Elections who thrives in the spotlight of the media was hoarsely silent on this body blow to democracy in Sri Lanka; so were the usually vociferous NGOs and the election monitors paid to pontificate.

Sirisena’s bizarre conduct was preceded by a bout of equally aberrant behavior; in the week before the election he unilaterally sacked the Secretaries of the UPFA and the SLFP and 25 members of the SLFP Central Committee; on 13 Aug 15 he sent an urgent letter to Mahinda Rajapakse which hit the headlines even before it could reach the recipient.

The strongly worded letter was contrived to reduce the vote bank of the UPFA; all this at the height of the election campaign when his actions would have earned a ‘normal’ person prosecution and imprisonment  for the violation of election laws.

One of the major concerns of the voters at this election was the quality of the persons representing them in Parliament; the UPFA voters used great discretion in rejecting the undesirables at the time of voting.

Sirisena however emasculated and enfeebled the voters by dictatorially reversing the decision of the voters and depriving them of their sovereign right to choose their representatives as they deem fit.

Sirisena’s motive is very clear. He, the ship’s captain if he ever were one, is steering his ship towards the rocks to compel those who would not abandon ship to jump ship or be wrecked

The Election has turned out to be a diabolical exercise in stifling democracy in the country. Power is heady and has already inebriated Sirisena. Democracy is at a low ebb. Is Sri Lanka slipping into a dictatorship or will the Supreme Court be Sri Lanka’s saving grace?

Clemency for Sergeant RM Sunil Rathnayake is justified.

August 25th, 2015

Dr Chandrika Iriyagolle

Sri Lanka is a resplendent island, famous for its scenic beauty and its Theravada Buddhist cultural heritage.

Our great nation epitomized the great and good in human nature. Compassion, selflessness, generosity, integrity and, above all, merciful benevolence, are qualities that shine through our long history.  Our culture and lifestyle was based on Buddhism in the most pure form, Theravada Buddhism.

The emergence of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam, a wealthy terrorist group, caused the Buddhist civilisation of this island to become splintered.  At the same time, the New United National Party gained power.  This formerly just and benevolent party became a dangerous and destructive political force.

A young man observed the terrible destructive forces around him that desecrated Buddhist holy places and massacred innocent civilians, and took the noble and courageous decision to serve his nation by joining the army.   His aim was to protect the nation, defend the unitary state of Sri Lanka and its Buddhist cultural heritage. For him, this was an extremely difficult decision, as he was brought up to respect all life.  This brave young man was Sergeant Sunil Ratnayake, who has now been betrayed and condemned to death.   He is not a Royalist or a Thomian.

Although the crime he is alleged to have committed is inhumane, it must be explored and judged in the appropriate context, and it is crucial to take his mental state into account.  Whilst justice has to be rendered to the victims, we must not forget that, in this case, Sergeant Sunil Ratnayake is also a victim himself; not only is he is a victim of the terrorists; he is also a victim of the corrupt political administration and the judiciary.

The emergence of the terrorist groups, and the anarchy and misrule which have resulted have been caused by corrupt and cruel politicians who are driven by greed and ambition.  The duplicity, cowardice and double standards of the politicians, law enforcement agencies and the judiciary should all be held responsible for crimes committed in this state.

The guilty are those politicians who brutalized this nation, resulting in the establishment of a tyrannical state and the construction of torture chambers around the island with scant regard for the Buddhist cultural heritage or humanity. They are also responsible for the forming of death squads, such as PRRA, the Green cats, and the Black cats.   With their white vans, these groups were responsible for a level of savagery hitherto unknown in Sri Lanka (1987-1994).

Double standards and Duplicity of the Judiciary, Law Enforcement agency and the Parliament.

The attitude of the Sinhalese is of profound concern to the civilised world.  Vinayagamoorthy Muralitharan (Karuna Amman), a Tamil Tiger terrorist was appointed as a National List Member of Parliament for the United People’s Freedom Alliance in 2008.   He is guilty of desecration of Buddhist holy places and is behind some of the most brutal atrocities ever committed by the Tamil tiger terrorists.  There were allegations that he was involved in both money laundering and illicit drug trafficking.   Rather than being judged and sentenced to death, he was rewarded for his crimes against the nation and against humanity by being made a member of Parliament and then sworn in as the Minister of National Integration in March 2009!

In this context, it is only right that the life of Sergeant RM Sunil Rathnayake should be spared.   This would be a justifiable act of mercy and clemency; it is the wish and will of this nation.

Why has the United Nations not investigated members of Parliament in Sri Lanka for their alleged crimes against this nation, such as the torture cells constructed in Sri Lanka 1987-1994) and the establishment of death squads?  Have they investigated how the Tamil tigers accumulated so much wealth? Who has been funding the terrorist activities of the Tamil Tigers for 26 years?

Psychiatric Assessment and Evaluation  to Render  Justice.

The necessary procedures and processes should have been followed to ensure that Sergeant Ratnayake received a fair trial.   However, Sergeant RM Sunil was in an extremely hostile environment where he had been fighting for both his country and his own life.   As a result, he suffered years of mental and physical trauma.  These factors may have caused him to suffer from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, leading to a transient imbalance in his mental state with a psychotic episode.   Without a proper psychiatric assessment and evaluation,  he cannot have received a fair trial and is a victim in all aspects.   A sentence to engage in a   programme of rehabilitation would have been appropriate and  justified.

Sergeant Ratnayake has been targeted for punishment, while war criminals are leading a life of freedom and luxury and are not being held to account for their criminal activities.  The nation demands justice, which should be rendered without fear or favour.  Criminals should not be entertained in the highest echelons of Sri Lankan society or permitted to enter Parliament.

Betrayal and treachery are considered to be the most evil acts that can be performed by a human being, a civic society, or a nation.The greatness of a human being, a nation or a civilisation is measured by acts of mercy for the vulnerable in society.  The vulnerable Sergeant Ratnayake was selectively chosen to be sentenced to death by two judges.  It is an act of great betrayal, therefore he shoud be granted clemency to render justice.

 Clemency is justified.

The case against Sergeant Ratnayake has dragged on for over a decade.  Regardless of his guilt or innocence, this in itself has already subjected him to untold mental and physical trauma.

Sergeant RM Sunil Ratnayake should not be made a scapegoat or a martyr, he should be granted a reprieve.

May known and unknown powers protect Sergeant Ratnayake Mudiyanselage Sunil Ratnayake

I wrote that letter, sacked secretaries because I received intelligence reports that UPFA is on the verge of winning .. – President -ලියුම් ලිවුවේත්, ලේකම්වරුන් අස්කලේත් සන්ධානය දිනන බවට ලද වාර්තා නිසා.. – ජනපති කියයි…

August 25th, 2015

lanka C news

ලියුම් ලිවුවේත්, ලේකම්වරුන් අස්කලේත් සන්ධානය දිනන බවට ලද වාර්තා නිසා.. – ජනපති කියයි…

After receiving a national intelligence report that the UPFA is on the verge of winning the election, .President Sirisena said, he sent that infamous letter addressed to the former President informing him that he will not be nominated to the Prime Minister post and then he removed party secretaries as well.

President Sirisena disclosed this at his first meeting with the elected SLFP MPs to the parliament.

According to the National Intelligence  report he received UPFA alliance was expected to win around 110-113 seats in the parliament making it eligible to form a government with a highest number of seats won by single party  President said.

President further claimed that the public remarks made by Danasiri Amaratunga who contested from UPFA, to the effect that they will disrobe him after the elections and also similar statements made by Wimal, Gammampila, Bandula triggered him to send this letter out of fear.

President further confessed that when he realised that the effect was not adequate, then he removed the party secretaries swiftly.

 හිටපු ජනපති මහින්දට අගමැතිකම නොදෙන බවට ලිපියක් මගින් ලියා දැන්වුවේත්, සන්ධානයේ හා ශ‍්‍රීලනිපයේ ලේකම්ලා ධුරයන්ගෙන් ඉවත් කලේත් සන්ධානය මැතිවරණයෙන් ජයගන්නා බවට බුද්ධි තොරතුරු ලද පසු බව ජනාධිපති මෛත‍්‍රීපාල සිරිසේන මහතා පවසා තිබේ.ඔහු මෙසේ පවසා ඇත්තේ පසුගිය මැතිවරණයෙන් ජය ගන්නා ලද සන්ධාන මන්ත‍්‍රීන් පළාත් මට්ටමින් කැඳවමිනි.

මැතිවරණයට සතියකට කලින් තමන් අතට ලැබුනු ජාතික බුද්ධි අංශ වාර්තාවේ සන්ධානය ආසන 110-113ත් අතර ආසන ප‍්‍රමාණයක් ජයගන්නා බව සඳහන් වූ බව එහිදී ජනාධිපතිවරයා පවසා ඇත.

මැතිවරණයෙන් පසු කමන්ගේ රෙදි ගලවා දමන බවට සන්ධානයෙන් මැතිවණයට තරඟ කල ධනසිරි අමරතුංග විසින් කල ප‍්‍රකාශය, බන්දුල විමල් ගම්මන්පිල ආදීන් විසින් කල ඒ හා සමාන ප‍්‍රකාශ නිසා තමන් බියට පත් වූ බැවින් ඒ ආකාරයේ ලිපියක් බැවූ බවද කියා තිබේ.

එය ප‍්‍රමාණයත් නොවන බව මැතිවරණය අවසානය ලං වෙද්දී  තමනට තේරුම් ගිය නිසා ලේකම්වරුන් ඉවත් කල බවද ජනාධිපතිවරයා එහිදී පවසා ඇත.

– සියරට

Welgama is most suitable for post of Opposition leader – President Mahinda Rajapaksa විපක්‍ෂ නායක ධුරයට කුමාර වෙල්ගම සුදුසුයි – මහින්ද රාජපක්‍ෂ

August 25th, 2015

Hot News

Most of the elected members of SLFP parliamentarians believe that MP Kumara Welgama is the most suitable candidate for the opposition leader post, former president Mahinda Rajapakse said in reply to a question raised by Island Newspaper. When the paper contacted Mahinda and asked whether he is willing to take over the post of leader of the opposition, former president said he has no intension of working as the leader of the opposition.

President further said that he will not see any difficulties if some of the elected SLFP members join the government as it is easier to do politics with Ranil Wickremasinghe and he is a person who will never chase you to take a revenge.

පාර්ලිමේන්තු මන්ත්‍රී කුමාර වෙල්ගම මහතා විපක්‍ෂ නායක ධුරය සඳහා සුදුසු බව ශ්‍රී ලංකා නිදහස්‌ පක්‍ෂ මන්ත්‍රීවරුන් රැසක ගේ අදහස වී ඇතැයි හිටපු ජනාධිපති පාර්ලිමේන්තු මන්ත්‍රී මහින්ද රාජපක්‍ෂ මහතා ‘දිවයින’ කළ විමසුමකට පිළිතුරු දෙමින් ඊයේ (24 දා) පැවැසීය. පාර්ලිමේන්තුවේ විපක්‍ෂ නායක ධුරය භාරගන්නවාදැයි අප කළ විමසුමේදී මහින්ද රාජපක්‍ෂ මහතා කියා සිsටියේ ඒ සඳහා තමන්ට කිසිදු අදහසක්‌ නැති බවයි.

ශ්‍රී ලංකා නිදහස්‌ පක්‍ෂ පාර්ලිමේන්තු මන්ත්‍රීවරුන් පිsරිසක්‌ රජයට එක්‌වීම ගැටලුවක්‌ නොවන බවද මහින්ද රාජපක්‍ෂ මහතා සඳහන් කළේය. හිටපු ජනාධිපතිවරයා මෙසේද පැවැසීය. අග්‍රාමාත්‍ය රනිල් වික්‍රමසිංහ මහතා සමඟ දේශපාලනය කිරීම පහසුයි. ඔහු එලව එලවා පලිගන්නේ නැහැ.



Maithri offers to appoint Sanga Sri Lankan High Commissioner to the UK and Sanga declines .

August 25th, 2015

Hot News

President Maithripala Sirisena yesterday offered retiring national cricketer Kumar Sangakkara post of Sri Lanka’s High Commissioner to London, a post last held by top businessman Chris Nonis.

The offer was made in the presence of Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe.

In response to this offer Sangakkara said he has not got sufficient experience and knowledge to accept that offer.

සාධාරණ සාමාජයෙන් මෛත්‍රීට අභියෝගයක් Rev Sobitha challenges Sirisena and blasts move to form jumbo Cabinet

August 25th, 2015

පරාජිත අපේක්ෂකයන් ජාතික ලයිස්තුව හරහා පත්කිරීම කිසිසේත් අනුමත නොකරණ බවත් ඔවුන්ට ඇමතිධූර ලබාදෙන්නේනම් ඊටත් වඩා එරෙහිවන බවත් පවසන සාධාරණ සමාජයක් සදහාවූ ජාතික ව්‍යාපාරය තවදුරටත් ජනතා අපේක්ෂා අනුව කටයුතු නොකරන්නේ නම් ඊට හේතුව ජනතාව ඉදිරියට විත් ප්‍රසිද්ධියේ ප්‍රකාශකරන ලෙස ජනපතිවරයාට වක්‍ර අභියෝගයක් එල්ල කළේය. National Movement for Social Justice (NMSJ) Leader the Ven. Maduluwawe Sobitha Thera today severely criticized appointment of rejected candidates to the parliament , move to appoint ministerial posts to them and move to appoint a large number of ministers for the purpose of accommodating a ‘National Government’.

කොළඹදී පැවැති මෙම මාධ්‍ය හමුවට මාදුළුවාවේ සෝපිත හිමියන් සහ සමන් රත්නප්‍රිය මහතා සහභාගීවී සිටියේය.

The strange MOU between the UNP and the SLFP

August 25th, 2015

By C. A. Chandraprema Courtesy Island

In 1994, the day after the August parliamentary election, this writer visited the then president D. B. Wijetunga at President’s House in the Colombo Fort. When I entered the conference room of the president, Mr Dharmadasa Banda, a minister of the then UNP government was having a conversation with DBW. If my memory does not fail me, Mr P. G.Wilson the private secretary to president Wijetunga was also in the room at that moment. Minister Dharmadasa Banda was suggesting to the president that a national government be formed. The SLFP led People’s Alliance had got 105 seats in parliament and the UNP had got 94 seats – a difference of just 11 seats. But in my presence president Wijetunga turned down Minister Banda’s national government proposal, saying, “The whole country wants this lady”. Those were his exact words!

So, bowing to the people’s will, president Wijetunga invited Chandrika Kumaratunga to form a government as her party had got the highest number of seats in parliament. Furthermore, president Wijetunga did not try to force the PA to give ministries to the defeated UNP. President Wijetunga could have done anything he wanted – it was after all he who had the power to appoint the prime minister and ministers. If he appointed some UNP parliamentarians as ministers, the PA could have done nothing. But like a true democrat, president Wijetunga took a step backwards and gave the PA a free hand to select its Cabinet. When Chandrika Kumaratunga’s PA was in turn defeated at the 2001 December parliamentary election President Kumaratunga, too, took a step backwards and gave the UNP a free hand to appoint its Cabinet.

In November 2003 however, CBK seized control of the finance, media and defence ministries which shows that she took a step backwards in December 2001 only because she had been frightened by the UNP victory and when she managed to screw up the courage to do her usual thing, she made her move and seized control of the three ministries mentioned earlier. Later she dissolved that parliament after just two and a half years. But at least she was democratic enough to get her seizure of three ministries endorsed at an election which her party won. Democracy depends on unwritten protocols as much as it does on written laws. Going by past practice Ranil Wickremesinghe should have been invited to form a government and allowed to distribute ministries as the winning party wished. If RW had wanted to share some of the ministries with other parties including the UPFA, that should have been done only at the UNP’s discretion.

Third party intervention

There should be no need to ‘negotiate’ between the UNP and the SLFP to decide on the ministries they were to share. The UNP won and the SLFP was defeated. The SLFP and its UPFA allies should sit in the Opposition. If the UNP was willing to offer then some portfolios then at that stage the UPFA/SLFP can decide among themselves to accept or reject the offer. But that is not what we are seeing here. We are seeing a third party, the president presiding over negotiations between the UNP and the SLFP on how ministries should be allocated. It is after a period of 20 years that the UNP has come back into power. The 30-month government of 2001-2004 cannot really be counted because it was cut short halfway. This time however that will not happen because parliament cannot be dissolved until the lapse of four and a half years. So the basic tenets of democracy require that those who have been in the wilderness have to be given a free hand to govern otherwise that will be a distortion of the people’s mandate.

We may disagree vehemently with some of the actions of the UNP such as using the FCID to persecute political rivals. Leaving that very important matter for later, the distortion of the people’s mandate is what should occupy our thoughts at this moment. It is not just in relation to the UNP that the people’s mandate is being distorted – the same thing is happening in the UPFA as well. The most recent incident being the appointment of several defeated candidates to parliament through the national list. While defeated candidates loyal to president Sirisena have made it through the backdoor to parliament in that manner, leaders of political parties like the LSSP and the CPSL which have been long standing partners of the UPFA have been kept out. Internal democracy within political parties or alliances may be more a figment of the imagination than a reality in this country. But what has been happening in the UPFA is extreme by even the standards that we are used to.

We may be excused for leaving aside the verbal and written statements made by Maithripala Sirisena before polling day despite the effect they may have had on potential UPFA voters, because there have been earlier instances of party leaders working to defeat their own party as what happened at the presidential elections of 1982. It is the misfortune of the political party in question to have leaders like that. Leaving that aside, the sacking of the secretaries of the SLFP and the UPFA on the eve of the parliamentary election, the sacking of 13 members of the SLFP central committee on the day of the election for the president to wrest control of his party’s main decision making body, the continued sackings of SLFP representatives on the UPFA executive committee in order to wrest control of that decision making body, and the inclusion of several defeated candidates on the national list because of their loyalty to the party leader are all actions of the kind that no political leader in this country has engaged in before.

The arbitrariness shown towards the SLFP and UPFA have now been extended to the UNP as well because the victor has been forced to negotiate and bargain with a faction of the defeated party for portfolios. This is not a situation that will conduce to the promotion of democracy in this country. President Sirisena may be able to claim that it was his guerrilla attacks on the UPFA that enabled the UNP to win a slim majority. But it was the UNP vote that made him president and his first loyalty is to the UNP voter who made him what he is. If you remove all the SLMC, ACMC and Tamil Progressive Alliance votes from the 5 million votes that the UNP got at this election, you can see clearly that well over two thirds of the 6.2 million votes that Sirisena got were solid UNP votes. Therefore after winning 106 seats in parliament, the UNP should not be forced to negotiate for a share of the power with the UPFA. But, that is exactly what is happening.

An MOU distorting people’s will

Has anyone read the memorandum of understanding signed between the UNP and the SLFP last Friday? One would think that when two political parties are about to get together to form a national government, the MOU signed between the two partners would be full of political compromises and agreements. Any such MOU should be full of political details such as the number of ministries that will be held by the respective partners, and possibly some mention of the subjects that would be handled by the partners and that kind of thing. It may also have a list of top priority matters that the national government intends to handle. But when we read the MOU that was signed on Friday, most of its contents are what one would see in an election manifesto.

Why is it necessary to have clauses about the rights of women and children and about increasing the budget allocations for education and health in an MOU between two political parties? It even says that government owned land under the Swarnabhoomi and Jayabhoomi schemes will be allocated on a freehold basis to the present recipients. These are all matters that were dealt with in the manifestos of the UNP and the UPFA. This MOU is full of verbiage about irrelevant matters which have been dealt with in the election manifestos of all political parties. There are only two or three important political matters dealt with in that MOU.

The first is that parliament should be convened as a constituent assembly to bring in a new constitution with a hybrid first past the post and proportional representation system and to ‘review’ the executive presidency and to give more powers to parliament. The other two important political points in this MOU is that the national government will last only two years (and can be renewed on mutual agreement) and during this two year period, crossovers from one party to the other will not be allowed. The day this MOU was signed, a pro-UNP website reported in a headline news story that the clause calling for the abolition of the executive presidency had been dropped from the MOU by the SLFP side. They blamed Nimal Siripala de Silva for this. When looking at the background to what has been happening, it is clear that the MOU has been signed only for three purposes the implications of which raise serious questions for democracy in this country.

The first motive appears to be to prevent the abolition of the executive presidency as promised by the UNP in their manifesto. The second is to limit the term of the government to just two years. Saying that crossovers will be held back for only two years puts the UNP-led government on notice because about 20 of the MPs elected on the UNP ticket are not UNP but members of affiliated parties and groups who can easily shift sides. If these 20 MPs shifted sides and joined the UPFA which has 95 MPs, the latter will be able to form a government. If you view president Sirisena’s moves to wrest control of the SLFP and the UPFA in this context it is easy to see which way things are moving.

The UNP won the election just as well as the winning parties in 1994 and 2001, yet it does not have a free hand in appointing ministers. Then an MOU has been signed which gives the UNP some relief in terms of the block on crossovers for two years, but the limit of two years once again puts the UNP at a disadvantage because they were elected for a five year term which has now been effectively truncated and the question of what happens after the first two years, left hanging in the air. Most importantly, this MOU prevents the UNP from abolishing the executive presidency which would have immensely strengthened the hand of the UNP. We are seeing strange manoeuvres taking place, none of which is conducive to promoting democracy. When the 19th Amendment was whittled down by Sirisena loyalists to prevent the abolition of the executive presidency, the UNP said nothing. Wijedasa Rajapakshe even went on record as hailing the truncated 19th Amendment as equivalent to the Magna Carta. Well, now the UNP is also feeling the effects of the local Magna Carta! The arbitrariness that was applied to the SLFP and UPFA is now being applied in equal measure to the UNP. The big question is what are they going to do about it?

ජනාධිපති  තුමනි රණවිරු සුනිල් රත්නායක  මරණ  යෙන් බේරාගන්න

August 24th, 2015

 ධර්මසිරි සෙනෙවිරත්න

   දිගුදුර විහිදුම් බල කා යේ  රණවිරු  සුනිල් රත්නායක  රට බේරා දීමට දිවිය කැපකළ විරුවෙකි . දෙමල බෙදුම් වාදීන්ගේ  සාක්ෂි මත පමණක් ඔහු වරදකරුවකු කර ඇත්තේ  නිල ඇඳුම්  නැති සාමාන් වැසියන් ඝාතනය කළේය යන චෝදනාව  ටය . ඔහුව හමුදා උසාවියට ඉදිරිපත් නොකර  සාමාන් උසාවියකට ඉදිරිපත් කලේ  අනෙක් රට ගැන ආදරය ඇති යුද්ධ නීතිය දන්නා  හමුදාවේ විනිසුරුවෝ   සාධාරණය ඉටුකරන බව දන්නා හෙයිනි  . ඩයස්පෝරාවේ අවශ් තාව මත හමුදාව ක්රියා නොකරන බව දන්නා හෙයිනි  .
ත්රස්තයෝ සටන් කලේ නිල ඇඳුම් ලාගෙන නොවේ   ප්රේම දාස මැරුවේ  චන්ද්රිකාට බෝම්බ ගැසුවේ රජීව් මැරුවේ නිල ඇඳුම් ඇඟ  ලාගත් නොවේ  කොටි සෙබළුන් අතර සරම් ඇඳගත්  සෙබළු මෙන්ම කොටින්ගේ ඔත්තු බලන්නොත් ඇතරණ විරුවා අවස්ථාවට අනුව   තීරනයගෙන   උන් මරා නොදමන්නේ නම්  කියන්නේ කොස් කොටන්නටද .   වෙන රට වල නම් සුනිල් මෙන්  විශේෂ සුදුසු කම්  ඇති රණවිරුවන්ට දහසින් බැඳී පියලි දී   ගරු සම්මාන  ලබාදෙනු ඇතඑහෙත්   රණවිරුවන්ට උසුළුවිසුළු කල වුන්ට ආවශ්ශ්ය  දෙමලු සතුටු කිරීමට රණ විරුවා බිලිදීමටය

             මයිත්රී  ජනපත තුමනි ඔබ රණවිරුවන්ට උසුළු කලේ නැත  දැන්  ඔබේ මයිත්ත්රිය සුනිල් පෙන්විය යුතුය  දේශපාලනයේදී මොනවා කලත්  මේ රණ විරුවා මරණයෙන් බේරා ජනාධිපති සමාව දෙන්න . මහා බැංකු කොල්ල කරුවන් නිදැල්ලේ පසුවන විට  ඔබ උන් නොඑ ලවනවිට  මේ  දුප්පතා  මරණයට දක්කන්නේ ය්  මොහුට ජනාධිපති සමාව දුන්නොත්   එය ඔබේ කීර්ති නාමයටත්  හොඳය සීගිරි ගලේ පහරු දෙමල්ච්චියට සමාව දුන් ඔබ  මේ ශ්රේෂ්ට රණවිරුවාට  ජීවිතය දෙයය් අපි බලාපොරොත්තුවෙමු
සියලු ලන්කාවාසීනි පෙත්සම් මගින් මේ රණවිරුවා බේරා දෙන ලෙස ජනපති ආයාචනා කරන්න    සුනිල් ඔබට ධීර්ගායු වේවා

Corrupting of Voters Verdict

August 24th, 2015

Professor Nishan Wijesinha

I noticed that several personalities who lost their seats at the general elections of SRI LANKA held on 2015 August 17, by the verdict of the voters; their names have been nominated back from the national list. This is what I call ‘ Corrupting of Voters Verdict’; which is detrimental to all democratic principles, of “Just Governance”; and a violation to the rule of law. And when the head of state of a nation is directly responsible for such violations of the law; where will that nation head to?  which was once built under the fear of the rule of law by its former head of state Honorable . Mahinda Rajapakse?

යමපාවාදීම ඇරඹෙයි 

August 24th, 2015

නලින් ද සිල්වා

අද කෙරීගෙන යන සියල්ල ම මෙන් අපි කල්තියා දුටුවෙමු. ඒ බව එකල ම කීවෙමු. ඊනියා මහින්ද මෛත්‍රී එකතුව විපතක් මිස ජයග්‍රහණයක් නොවන බව අප කියද්දී, වෙන ම තරග කිරීම සුදුසු ම ක්‍රියා මාර්ගය බව අප යෝජනා කරද්දී අපේ පිළේ පඬියෝ ම අපට සිනහසුණහ. අගොස්තු 17 වැනි දා පැවැත්වීමට නියමිත ව තිබූ මැතිවරණය මෙතෙක් ලංකාවේ පැවැත්වෙන දුෂිත ම මැතිවරණය බව අප කලකට පෙර ප්‍රකාශ කරද්දී යහපාලනයේ අනුශාසකයෝ පෝස්ටර් නැති වීම ගැන කතා කළහ. මැතිවරණයක් දුෂිත ද නැත් ද යන්න තීරණය කෙරෙන ප්‍රධාන නිර්ණායකය පෝස්ටර් ඇත් ද නැත් ද යන්න නොවන බව මැතිවරණ කොමසාරිස් නො දන්නේ ද? මෛත්‍රිපාලගේ නායකත්වයෙන් එ ජ නි සංධානයේ ජාතික ලැයිස්තුවට ඇතුළත්  කළ මගේ නම ඉල්ලා අස්කර ගත්විට බොහෝ දෙනා මට දොස් කීවෝ ය. මෛත්‍රිපාලගේ භූමිකාව මා දැනගත්තේ අද ඊයේ නො වේ. මම චම්පක මෙන් ම මෛත්‍රිපාල ද හඳුනමි. එමෙන් ම තවත් ඊනියා දේශහිතෛශීන් ද හඳුනමි.

තවමත් අසනීප තත්ත්වය තිබිය දී වුව ද,  ලිපියක් ලිවීම අත්‍යවශ්‍ය වෙයි. මෙරට ප්‍රජාතන්ත්‍රවාදය විශිෂ්ට මට්ටමක පවතින බවට බටහිර රටවල් හා ඉන්දියාව ලවා සහතික නිකුත් කරවා ගැනීම රනිල්ට හා මෛත්‍රිපාලට අපහසු නොවන්නේ ඔවුන් ඒ ඒ රටවල ඉත්තන් හා ගැත්තන් බැවිනි. මහජනයා විසින් ප්‍රතික්‍ෂෙප කරනු ලැබූ අප්පච්චි මළා කණ්ඩායමේ (මහින්ද විරෝධී ශ්‍රී ල නි ප කණ්ඩායම ම එනමින් හඳුන්වමු) අය ජාතික ලැයිස්තුව මගින් පාර්ලිමේන්තුවට පත්කිරීම ප්‍රජාතන්ත්‍රවදය, යහපාලනය නැත්නම් අහවල් එකදැයි සෝභිත හාමුදුරුවෝ අපට තේරුම් කර දෙන සේක් ද? හැමදාම කරන පරිදි බොරු පුවත්පත් ප්‍රකාශන මගින් සෝභිත හිමියන්ට රනිල් මෛත්‍රි දුස්සංයෝගය ආරක්‍ෂා කරගත නො හැකි ය. ඊනියා යහපාලනය වෙනුවෙන් සො ්භිත

හිමියන්ගේ අපවත්වීමාන්තික උපවාසය ඇරඹෙන්නේ කවදා ද?

මැතිවරණයේ අවසාන සතියේ දී මෛත්‍රිපාල මහින්දට යැවූ ලිපිය, ශ්‍රී ල නි ප මධ්‍යම කාරක සභාව තම හිතුමතයට වෙනස් කිරීම, වාරණ නියෝග ලබා ගැනීමට කටයුතු කිරීම, පක්‍ෂ හා සංධාන ලේකම්වරුන් වෙනස් කිරීම ආදී මෛත්‍රි සහගත නොවන ක්‍රියාමාර්ග මගින් රටේ ජනාධිපති ක්‍රියා කරද්දී මහානායක හිමිවරු යමපාලනය වෙනුවෙන් එක්කෝ මුනිවත රැක්කාහ. නැති්නම් ඒ අනුමත කළහ. සිංහල ථෙරවාද බුදුසසුන මහානාම හිමියන්ගෙන් අවුරුදු එක්දහස් පන්සියයකට පමණ පසුව තම ආයුකාලය අවසන් කරමින් සිටින බව ඊනියා යථාර්ථවාදී බෞද්ධයන්ට වැටහෙන විට ඒ ප්‍රමාද වැඩිවනු ඇත.

අද ලෝකයේ සියළු මහින්ද විරෝධීන්ගේ එකතුවක් දැකිය හැකි ය. බටහිර ලෝකයේ හා ඉන්දියාවේ එවැනි එකතුවක් දැකිය හැක්කේ මහින්ද රාජපක්‍ෂට එරෙහිවීම එක්තරා අතකින් ගත්කල මහින්දගේ ජයග්‍රහණයක් බව ද කියා පාමිණි.  රුසියාවේ පුටින්ටවත් ඒ අතින් ලංකාවේ මහින්ද පරාජය කළ නො හැකි ය. සිංහල බෞද්ධයෝ නැවතත් මහින්ද රැකගත්තෝ ය. ජ වි පෙරමුණ, එ ජ නි සංධානයේ ඡන්ද යම් ප්‍රමාණයකට නොකඩන්නට සංධානය මැතිවරණයෙන් ජයග්‍රහණය කිරීමට තිබිණි. ජ වි පෙ මොන බයිලා කීව ද ඔවුහු ද තමන්ට විශේෂිත වූ පොතේගුරු න්‍යායකට අනුව මහින්ද විරෝධි වෙති. ජ වි පෙරමුණට මැතිවරණයේ දී ඡන්දය දුන්නෝ ජනාධිපතිවරණයේ දී මෛත්‍රිපාලට ජ වි පෙරමුණ වෙනුවෙන් ඡන්දය දුන් අය ම නො වෙති. 

මහින්ද විරෝධය යනු අවසාන විග්‍රහයේ දී යටත්විජිත ගැති බව වෙයි. තිස්ස විතාරණට හා ඩිව් ගුණසේකරට ඇති යටත්විජිත විරෝධය මෛත්‍රිපාල සිරිසේනටවත්, චම්පක රණවකටවත්, අනුර දිසානායකටවත්, වික්‍රමබාහු කරුණාරත්නටවත් නැත. යටත්විජිත ගැති බව එක් අතෙකින් පැන නගින්නේ සිංහල බෞද්ධ විරෝධය මගිනි. මෙයින් කියැවෙන්නේ තිස්ස විතාරණ හා ඩිව් ගුණසේකර සිංහල බෞද්ධයනට පක්‍ෂපාති බව නො වේ. අද මහින්ද විරෝධීන්ගේ කාර්යභාරය වී ඇත්තේ මරා දැමුණු ශ්‍රී ල නි ප වළලා දැමීම ය. එහි දී ඔවුහු මෛත්‍රිපාල සිරිසේන උපරිම ලෙස යොදා ගනිති.

අප බොහෝවිට කියා ඇති පරිදි ශ්‍රී ල නි ප මෙරට ජාතිකත්වයේ පක්‍ෂය බවට පත්වීම ඇරඹුයේ පනහේ දශකයේ මුල මින්නේරිය අතුරු මැතිවරණයෙන් පසුව ය. එයින් පසු එහි ගමන්මග වෙනස්කිරීමට මින්නේරියට පසු කලෙක තරග කළ සිංහල බෞද්ධ විරෝධී විජය කුමාරතුංග, ජනවේග කල්ලියේ කමාර් රුපසිංහ, චන්ද්‍රිකා කුමාරතුංග ආදීහු උත්සාහ කළහ. එහෙත් ඔවුහු අසාර්ථක වූහ. ශ්‍රී ල නි පක්‍ෂය නමැති කැලේ  නැසීමට කැලේ ගසක් යොදා ගැනීම ගැන මෛත්‍රිපාල කදිම උදාහරණයක් සපයයි. එය පිටුපස අප ගැන හොඳින් දන්නා ඉන්දියාව වෙයි.  

ශ්‍රී ල නි ප මරා දමා ඇත. මහින්ද කණ්ඩායම තම මාරයා යටතේ තරග කිරීමට ගොස් වැඩ වරද්දා ගෙන ඇත. ශ්‍රී ල නි පක්‍ෂයේ කණ්ඩායම් දෙකක් ඇති කළේ මහින්ද නොව ඉන්දියාව හා මෛත්‍රිපාල ය. මෝදි ඉන්දියානු ජාතිකත්වයට ගරු කළත් නැතත් ඔහු සිංහල බුද්ධාගමට විරුද්ධ ය. ඉන්දියානු දේශපාලනඥයන් අනුරාධපුර අභයගිරියේ සමාධි පිළිම වහන්සේ ඉදිරියේ කරන ප්‍රකාශ අප සතපහකට ගණන් ගත යුතු නො වේ. අභයගිරිය දුර්වල කෙරී අවුරුදු එක්දහස් පන්සියයකට පමණ පසුව, එකල දඹදිවේ ආධාරයෙන් ලංකාවේ ඇති කෙරුණු බුදුසසුන නැතිකිරීම සඳහා අද ඉන්දියාව බටහිර රටවල ද ආධාරයෙන් යම් ප්‍රමාණයකට සාර්ථක ව ක්‍රියා කරමින් සිටියි. ඉන්දියාව රනිල් මෛත්‍රි ජයග්‍රහණය ගැන ද මහින්ද පරාජය ගැන ද සතුටු වෙයි.

රනිල් පොදුවේ ගත්කල බටහිරට ද මෛත්‍රිපාල පොදුවේ ගත්කල ඉන්දියාවට ද පක්‍ෂපාති වෙති. ඔවුන් අතර විරසක ද වෙයි. ඉන්දියාව හා ලංකාව අතර පාළම ඉදිරි අවුරුදු දෙක ඇතුළත නිම කරගැනීමට ඉන්දියාව උත්සාහ දරනු ඇත. විවිධ වෙළෙඳ ගිවිසුම් මගින් ලංකාව ඉන්දියාවේ සංස්කෘතික පමණක් නොව දේශපාලන හා ආර්ථික යටත්විජිතයක් කර ගැනීමට ඉන්දියාව උත්සාහ දරනු ඇත. අප දැනටමත් එක්තරා ආකාරයකින් දෙමළ සංස්කෘතික ආධිපත්‍යයකට අඩුම තරමින් චිත්‍රපටි නැරඹීම අතින් හසු වී සිටින්නේ සිංහල සිනමාවේ මුල් දකුණු ඉන්දියානු යුගය සිහිගන්වමිනි. පනස්හයේ ලෙස්ටර සරච්චන්ද්‍ර සංස්කෘතික විප්ලවය ව්‍යාජ එකක් බව ඉදිරියේ දී තවත් පැහැදිලි වනු ඇත. එය සිහිගන්වන්නේ මාර්ටින් වික්‍රමසිංහගේ ඊනියා යථාර්ථවාදී ව්‍යාජ සාහිත්‍ය විප්ලවය ය. 

බටහිර හා ඉන්දියාව අතර චීනය සම්බන්ධයෙන් ගත්කල එකඟත්වයක් ඇති නමුත් ඉන්දියාව වඩාත් බලවත් වීම ගැන බටහිර තදබල කැමැත්තක් නො දක්වයි. මේ සියලු පරස්පර අතර රනිල් හා රනිල් අතර පරස්පර ද වෙයි. ලිච්ඡවින්ගේ රනිල් බස්නාහිර පළාත ඉන්දියානු සාගරයේ මෙගානගරය (මහා පතරංග නගරය) බවට පත්කිරීමක් ගැන කතාකරයි. මෙය එතරම් ගණන් ගත යුතු දෙයක් නොවන්නේ මෙරට තරුණයන්ට තවමත් හප හපා සිටීමට චුවිං ගම් හා පැළඳීමට බ්‍රෙස්ට්ලට් ලැබී නොමැති බැවිනි. ඒ කෙසේ වෙතත් ලිච්ඡවි රජදරුවෝ ඉතා කුඩා පාලන ඒකකයක මහාසම්මතවාදී භාරකරුවෝ පමණක් වූහ. ඔවුහු මහා පතරංග නගර ගැන නො සිතූහ. රනිල්ට ලිච්ඡවින් ගැන තව බොහෝ දේ ඉගෙනීමට ඇත. 

අද එ ජා ප හා ශ්‍රී ල නි ප අතර ඊනියා ජාතික ආණ්ඩුවක් නිර්මාණය වෙමින් පවතින්නේ යැයි කියැවෙයි. කණින් කොණින් ඒ ගැන දැන ගන්නා ජනමාධ්‍යවේදීහු පු්‍රළුල් ප්‍රචාරයක් ලබා දෙති. එහෙත් දහනවවැනි ව්‍යවස්ථා සංශෝධනයෙන් පක්‍ෂ දෙකක් අතර ජාතික ආණ්ඩුවක් ගැන නො කියැවෙයි. පක්‍ෂ දෙකක් හෝ කිහිපයක් හෝ අතර ඇතිවිය හැක්කේ හවුල් (සභාග) ආණ්ඩුවක් පමණකි. දහනවවැනි ව්‍යවස්ථා සංශෝධනයේ 46(5) ව්‍යවස්ථාව අනුව ජාතික ආණ්ඩුවක් යනු පාර්ලිමේන්තුවේ වැඩිම ආසන සංඛ්‍යාවක් ලබාගන්නා දේශපාලන පක්‍ෂය හෝ කණ්ඩායම හෝ අනෙක් දේශපාලන පක්‍ෂ හා කණ්ඩායම් සමග පිහිටුවන ආණ්ඩුවකි. මේ පිහිටුවීමට යන ආණ්ඩුවට දේශපාලන පක්‍ෂ කොපමණ අයත්විය යුතු ද? ජාතික ආණ්ඩුවකට විරුද්ධ පක්‍ෂයක් තිබිය හැකි ද? ඒ පිළිබඳ අර්ථනිරූපණයක් ලබා ගැනීමට අධිකරණයට යා යුතු ද? 46(5) ව්‍යවස්ථාවට ඊනියා වාස්තවික අර්ථකථනයක් නමටවත් දිය නො හැකි ය. එය ඒ තරමට ම දියාරු ලෙස කෙටුම්පත් කෙරී ඇත. පසුගිය පාර්ලිමේන්තුව නීති විශාරදයන් අඩු තැනක් වී යැයි කිව නො හැකි ය. ජාතික ආණ්ඩු සංකල්පය රනිල් මෛතී්‍ර යමපාලනයේ තවත් ව්‍යාජයක් පමණකි. එයින් සිදුවන්නේ හවුල් ආණ්ඩුවකට ඊනියා ජාතික ආණ්ඩු සංකල්පයක් පට බැඳී ඇමතිවරුන් සංඛ්‍යාව වැඩිකර යමපාවාදීමකට මග පෑදීම පමණකි. ඊනියා ජාතිවාදයකට විරුද්ධව කතා කිරීමට පටන්ගෙන ඇති මෛත්‍රිපාල සාම්පූර් ඉඩම් බෙදීම දැනටමත් ආරම්භ කර ඇත. අපට මෛත්‍රිපාල ඇතුළු ඊනියා මානව හිතවාදීන්ගෙන් අසන්නට ඇත්තේ එකම එක ප්‍රශ්නයක් පමණකි. එංගලන්තයේ ක්‍රිස්තියානි සංස්කෘතියට හිමි තැන ලංකාවේ කිනම් වුව බෞද්ධ සංස්කෘතියකට තිබේ ද? ඒ ප්‍රශ්නයට දෙන පිළිතුර අනුව අපි ජාතිවාදය ගැන සාකච්ඡාවක් ආරම්භ කරමු. 

මිය ගිය ශ්‍රී ල නි පක්‍ෂයට යළි පණදිය නො හැකි ය. අද නැවතත් ජාතිකත්වයේ පක්‍ෂයක් පිහිටුවීමට අවස්ථාව එළඹී ඇත. එහෙත් එය ශ්‍රී ල නි පක්‍ෂයට විරුද්ධ වූ ජාතිකත්වයේ ව්‍යාජ නායකයන් අතින් සිදුවිය හැක්කක් නො වේ. රනිල් මෛත්‍රී ආණ්ඩුව ඊනියා ජාතික ආණ්ඩුවක් නොවූවත් තුනෙන් දෙකේ බලයක් ලබාගෙන වරදකාර මන්ත්‍රීන් බියගන්වා පළිගැනීම් ක්‍රියා මාර්ගයකට එළඹෙනු ඇත. එහි දී ව්‍යාජ නායකයන් හෙළිදරවු වනු ඇත.  

අද තිබෙන තත්ත්වය අනුව බටහිර නූතනත්වයේ නිව්ටෝනීය සුසමාදර්ශයේ දැනුම් ආධිපත්‍යය මගින් අප පාලනය කරනු ලැබෙයි. මේ සුසමාදර්ශය ථෙරවාදය සමග ගැලැප්පීම කලක සිට මෙරට බෞද්ධ උගතුන්ගේ කාර්යභාරයක් වී ඇත. බටහිරයන්ට කෑලිවලට (කොටස්වලට) නොකඩන සමස්තය ගැන කතාකිරීමට උත්සාහ දරණ ක්වොන්ටම් සුසමාදර්ශය පවා අවබෝධ කර ගැනීමට නො හැකි වී ඇත. ඔවුන් සිංහල බෞද්ධ සුසමාදර්ශයක්, චින්තනයක් ගැන අවබෝධ කර ගැනීම ගැන කවර කතා ද?  සිංහල වෙදකමේ සුසමාදර්ශය බටහිර වෙදකමේ නිව්ටෝනීය සුසමාදර්ශයේ දැනුම් ආධිපත්‍යය හමුවේ දේශපාලනික ව පොඩිපට්ටම් කෙරෙනු මගේ අසනීපය සමග මම නැවතත් අත්විඳිමින් සිටිමි. එය සංස්කෘතික ආධිපත්‍යයේ කොටසකි. 

මගේ ලිපි නාභිගත (focused) නොවන විසිරුණු ලිපි යැයි බටහිර අනුකාරක පඬියකු කියනු ඇත. නාභිගත වීම සිංහල බෞද්ධ සංස්කෘතියෙහි ලක්‍ෂණයක් නොවේ. ඒ බව ධර්මදේශනාවලට සවන් දෙන්නෝ දනිති. අපට ඉගෙන ගැනීමට බොහෝ දේ ඇත. පනස්හයේ වැරදුණු තැන් අපට නිවැරදි කර ගැනීමට සිදු වී ඇත. ඒ කළ හැක්කේ කෙසේ ද? කාගේ නායකත්වයෙන් ද? ශ්‍රී ල නි පක්‍ෂය මරා දමා ඇති නමුත් ථෙරවාදය තම  ආයු කාලය අවසන් කරමින් සිටින නමුත් සිංහල බුද්ධාගම මැරී නැත. අප නැවතත් චුල්ලහත්ථිපදොපම සූත්‍රයට (උගත් බෞද්ධයන්ගේ එනමින් හැඳින්වෙන සූත්‍රයට නොව) පමණක් නොව දම්සක් පැවතුම් සූත්‍රයටත් මධ්‍යම ප්‍රතිපදාවටත් ආපසු යා යුතු ය. 

ශ්‍රී ල නි පක්‍ෂය බණ්ඩාරනායක මහතාගේ කාලයෙහි සිට මධ්‍යම ප්‍රතිපදාව ගැන කතා කරයි. චන්ද්‍රිකාට හෝ මෛත්‍රිපාලට හෝ ඇති මධ්‍යම ප්‍රතිපදාවක් නැත. මහින්ද රාජපක්‍ෂගේ කෙතරම් අඩුපාඩුකම් තිබුණත් සිංහල බුද්ධාගමකට වඩා සම්ප ඔහු ය. අද මහින්ද හැඳින්වීම සඳහා බටහිර ගැත්තන් නියෝෆැසිස්ට් බෞද්ධයා ආදී ප්‍රකාශන යොදා ගන්නේ නිකමට නො වේ. මේ ඊනියා ජාතික ආණ්ඩුව සිංහල බෞද්ධ විරෝධී ආණ්ඩුවක් මිස වෙනත් දෙයක් නො වේ. 

අවුරුදු දෙකක් කරගෙන යෑමට බලාපොරොත්තුවන නමුදු සිංහල බෞද්ධ විරෝධී ආණ්ඩුවට එතරම් ආයුකාලයක් නැත. එකිනෙකා අවිශ්වාස කරන පළිගැනීම හා ගසාකෑම මිස වෙනත් අරමුණු නැති ගැත්තන්ගේ ආණ්ඩුවකට පරස්පර විරෝධතා මත වැඩිකලක් පැවතිය නො හැකි ය. බටහිර හා ඉන්දියාව ලංකා වසන්තය මගින් ඉටුකර ගැනීමට බලාපොරොත්තුවන දේ සිංහල බුද්ධාගමට පරාජය කළ හැකි ය. එහෙත් අපි ඒ සඳහා පළමුව සිංහල බෞද්ධ චින්තනය හඳුනාගෙන බටහිර  ව්‍යාජ ප්‍රජාතන්ත්‍රවාදයෙන් ගැලවිය යුතු ය. මේ ව්‍යාජ ප්‍රජාතන්ත්‍රවාදයෙන් බිහි වී ඇත්තේ ආත්මාර්ථකාමී කපටි රැළක් මිස මහාසම්මතය ගරු කරන පිරිසක් නො වේ.  මහාසම්මතය යනු කෙසේ නමුත් සියල්ලන් එකතු කිරීම නොවන බව මහින්ද රාජපක්‍ෂ තේරුම් ගැනීම මෙහි දී වැදගත් වෙයි. මහින්ද සමග මුල දී එකතුවන ශ්‍රී ල නි ප මන්ත්‍රීන් සංඛ්‍යාව සුළු විය හැකි ය. එහෙත් ඒ ප්‍රශ්නයක් නො වේ.

නලින් ද සිල්වා

2015 අගෝස්තු 24

No legal basis for international investigation within Sri Lanka; it has to be domestic – PM

August 24th, 2015

Courtesy  Adaderana

There is no legal basis for international investigation within Sri Lanka; it has to be domestic, Prime Minister Ranil Wickremasinghe said in an interview to the Hindu. The reason some of the people have been calling for international investigation is the loss of confidence in the judiciary, he added.

The Sri Lankan political situation has taken an interesting turn with the fairly narrow victory of the United National Party in the general election, its leader Ranil Wickremesinghe being sworn in as Prime Minister for the fourth time, and the signing of a Memorandum of Understanding between the two main parties, the UNP and the Sri Lanka Freedom Party, paving the way for a ‘unity’ or national government. A day after he assumed office, Prime Minister Wickremesinghe spoke to The Hindu in the Prime Minister’s office at Temple Trees on a wide range of issues, including the project of working out a new Constitution for Sri Lanka, finding an enduring political solution to the Tamil question, and livelihood, development, and human rights issues. Excerpts from the interview by N. Ram:

Prime Minister, you announced a very ambitious task: working out a new Constitution for Sri Lanka. The last Constitution of course was in 1978 – you also were part of that process – and before that in 1972. There is a lot of experience going into this. But will this not take a long time?

Well, the SLFP [Sri Lanka Freedom Party] thinks it will take one year and we [the United National Party] think it should take six months. The main issue will be the new system of elections. We are all agreed that it should be a mixed proportional system. But we still haven’t agreed on the break-up between the constituencies and those who come on the general list. There is also the issue of the presidency, with the citizens’ group wanting the executive presidency to be abolished completely while the SLFP is opposed to it. So we said we would have to review the whole thing and then see how we strengthen Parliament. The more we strengthen Parliament… the executive presidency will be whittled away. But we also have to look at the Provincial Councils and how we make them really work. There is a general feeling that it is a white elephant but we have to make them work. Those are the main issues we will have to go into.

So you are confident it can be done within this time-frame?

I think the areas are narrow. If we want to, we can do it. If we get over the issue of electoral representation, then I think we can put the other things into place.

Do you have any strong, clear views on electoral representation?

It has to be a mixed-member proportional system. We will have to bridge the gap between the two main parties which are looking at stability and the smaller parties which want to increase their share, so they will have a bigger say. But the general trend at this election seems to be working towards a three-party system, two major parties and maybe one smaller party.

You have seen what has happened in Nepal, where there was a lot of promise and then they have got stuck on this Constituent Assembly. But you can do it differently?

I think we can. We have a Constitution. It’s a question of replacing it. Nepal had no Constitution. And there’s agreement [here] that we have to change the system. But when you go to change the electoral system, the different interests come into play – regional parties, small parties, big parties.

On Cabinet formation: you have a limit of 30.

It is now 30, unless there is a national government. When we brought this 19th Amendment in and we limited the size to 30, some of us – I was one of them – said, ‘Look, we may try to form a unity government, in which case the reality is that 30 won’t suffice.’ So Parliament went into this and added the provision that if you have a national government, then you can exceed 30 but Parliament will fix the number. So we will exceed 30 and now we are negotiating on the number.

The key posts will be Finance, Foreign Affairs, Justice…

There are many Ministries that are important. But the development Ministries are the ones that people will look at.

The international community will be looking to you to provide strong leadership, particularly on the economy.

I think we will go ahead and do well. But I would like to get a consensus – because then it will stay on long after we finish politics.

There is a feeling that the present political situation provides an opportunity to move fairly quickly towards a political solution to what is regarded as your principal national question – the Tamil question in the North and East. You have been emphasizing the need for this over a long period. You have supported devolution. What are the prospects of making progress towards a permanent political solution? A lot of time was lost after the war ended in 2009.

There have been a lot of administrative barriers, which have to be removed. Secondly, there has been a request by some of the Provincial Councils that as far as the powers exercised jointly, by both the Centre and the Provinces, concurrent powers, are concerned, some of it could be transferred to the Provinces. Those are the main issues and we have to work this out. We have to discuss this, the two main parties and the TNA [Tamil National Alliance], the third one. They will be the three key players in formulating [the proposals].

And the SLMC [Sri Lanka Muslim Congress]?

The SLMC will come along. They will look at how they are going to protect the interests of the SLMC and the ACMC [All Ceylon Muslim Congress], Muslims in the East and the North.

Over a long period, the Tamils have been emphasizing the need to empower the Provincial Council or Councils with respect to land and police powers. There were efforts to resolve these issues but nothing came of them.

I think a lot of people are satisfied with land. The real issue in the North and the East now is re-settlement of people who got evicted from their land – in Jaffna and in the East. We say that subject to the main issues of national security, we will release the land. The services, the armed forces, are working out the modalities. As far as police powers are concerned, I think there is a lot of re-thinking going on – on the politicisation of the police and that we should not allow that. So let the Independent Police Commission be strengthened further and look at this, then see what role the Provincial Councils play. To take one example, it is quite possible that had the 13th Amendment operated in full in respect of police powers, the TNA might have got locked up in the Eastern Province and there was little we could have done! We all have had our experiences – the politicisation of the police under President [Mahinda] Rajapaksa. We will all work at it. We accept the fact that the Provincial Council must have a say in the law and order situation, no going back on that. But at the same time, how do you work this out in a practical way so that the police are freed from political influence and the Inspector-General of Police can lay down national policy and insist and ensure that law and order is enforced? And he has to report to Parliament.

As for the issue of merger of the North and the East, that was struck down [in 2006] by the judiciary, the Supreme Court of Sri Lanka. Has it come on to the agenda?

That was a temporary merger; there was no permanent merger. The Constitution provides that two Provinces or more can be merged if it is passed by the Provincial Councils and accepted at a referendum held in the respective Provinces separately. So that formula stays as it is.

The terminological gap remains. One side speaks of a ‘federal’ solution. Earlier the demand was for a separatist solution, a separate state, but the real, longstanding demand on the Tamil side has been federalism. The Constitution on the other hand provides for a ‘unitary’ state. Is it not possible to avoid getting caught in a terminological dispute but instead concentrate on the substance of what you call ‘devolution’ or what perhaps can be called ‘a substantial measure of self-administering opportunities within a united and undivided Sri Lanka’? As you know, the Indian Constitution doesn’t mention federalism at all. It is a Union of States. Is it not possible to get round that issue and focus just on the substance?

Substance is what we have to look at. Actually even today, the devolved powers in Sri Lanka are sometimes more than the powers given in federal Constitutions. So let us look at how we could work this whole system out and go ahead. The formula which was accepted by India also, let’s see how we work it out within the 13th Amendment, maximise it. Let’s build on this. That’s what we are talking about now.

Some far-going constitutional proposals were made during the Chandrika Kumaratunga presidency. Do they hold something worthwhile, you think?

There has been a lot of discussion behind the scenes in the last few years. It is a question now of putting that together and how we work it out.

So you are confident about making progress?

I think we should be able to do that.

And on the human rights issues, there is a demand for an international investigation. But clearly there is a consensus in Sri Lanka that the investigation should be domestic.

We have agreed it is domestic for the simple reason that we did not sign the Statute of Rome. The commitment that was given by the Rajapaksa administration to the U.N. Human Rights Council (UNHRC) in 2009 could be interpreted in many ways. At one stage they were moving towards international investigation. But we always said, the UNP, that there was no legal basis for international investigation within Sri Lanka; it had to be domestic. The reason some of the people have been calling for international investigation is the loss of confidence in the judiciary. We’ve had this problem before, in the North and in the South. People did not question the independence of the judiciary and of the law enforcement machinery. But that machinery ceased to function properly. The call has come for international investigation. We would like to put forward a domestic mechanism which would be within the four corners of our Constitution but would also be acceptable to all the communities in Sri Lanka plus the international community.

So that would be the key difference between your approach and the approach of the previous administration?

We would look at a strong, independent internal judicial mechanism. Independent and one that is acceptable to all ethnic groups in Sri Lanka and to the international community. This is also a way for us to build up independence of the judiciary within Sri Lanka.

What kind of role do you see former President Kumaratunga playing at this juncture?

She heads the Office for National Unity. She is also now playing a leading role in the SLFP. And she chaired the Committee which drafted the MoU from their side. President Maithripala Sirisena and the former President Kumaratunga have a moderating influence in the SLFP and I think they are spearheading a movement to revive the SLFP brand, as we call it. We the UNP never gave up identity; we may have alliances but we never gave up identity. The SLFP is suffering the consequence of submerging their identity in the UPFA and having their personality cults.

She can also play in helping forge a political solution [to the Tamil question in the North and the East]. When she was President, there were some good ideas in the constitutional proposals made at that time.

She has. She and Rev. Maduluwave Sobitha [Thero] have been working in one group. We have one group. Others have different views. So let’s look at common meeting points. I have tried to keep the UNP position flexible so that we can bridge the differences.

The plantation Tamils have made a real difference to the election outcome, contributed substantial votes to the UNP victory. Some of them told me they were a little disappointed that they didn’t get even one preference seat, a seat on your national list.

They are well represented. The Tamils living in the hill country will have their own communities to live with, and they get integrated with the communities. I think they have made a lot of advancement in the last few months compared to earlier. But we have to go ahead. I prefer to call them Sri Lankan Tamils living in the hill country rather than plantation Tamils, because I don’t know how long this plantation system can carry on. From a few schools which did A-level science in the Tamil medium, we have added 25 more. In the next ten years, with more and more people going towards the science and the maths stream, there will be a reluctance to be involved in the plantation system. We have to accept the fact that the plantation system as we know it now may not be there. To call them the plantation community will be like trying to identify a ghetto. Many of them will move out into other areas, to Colombo and some other developed areas. And that’s the way it should be. Finally, all the people in the hill country, whether those who worked earlier in the plantations or those who worked in the villages, are all citizens of Sri Lanka.

There was an attempt in the recent general election campaign to send out the message to voters that this political change was the work of the minorities, ganging up, and that if you allowed it to go further, there would be a threat of the revival or return of the LTTE [Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam]. Did that make an impact on the elections?

I don’t think so. It may have catered to the hard core of the Rajapaksa supporters. But anyway they would have voted for Rajapaksa. I think communal issues ceased to be an item in this election. They did their best; some of them tried it and finally found it very, very embarrassing. When they accused us of dividing the country, we told them, ‘Look, in the event of the LTTE returning, we have the best Defence Minister available, and that is the President who is your leader!” They had no answer to that. They would have got suspended from their party for accusing their leader! There is enough evidence on how the former regime, President Rajapaksa and others, had contact with the LTTE. I always said, ‘I prefer to go into defeat and spend ten years in the wilderness rather than come to any electoral arrangement with [Velupillai] Prabakaran.’ I had a ceasefire, which was signed formally by me, not with Prabakaran but with the Norway government. I was not willing to enter into any electoral agreement.

Did it cost you victory in the 2005 presidential election?

It cost me ten years.

Is it clear there was a deal?

There was a deal. That is accepted; they have not rejected it. Money was passed, two hundred million [Sri Lankan] rupees initially, well over two billion rupees finally, which went out of government funds, for restoring houses damaged by the tsunami. But no houses had been restored. Payments had gone on till about until the end of 2006 – early 2007.

You are putting all this behind you, are you?

We have put it behind us. Unless someone brings it up, we are not going to raise this subject.

The former President may have surprised some people by coming to your swearing-in [as Prime Minister]. We saw you shake hands and chat with him warmly. What will be his role in the new dispensation?

Mine has been a political rivalry with him. And I said I was going to oppose him for the simple reason I didn’t agree with the way the country was run, especially with regard to national unity and democracy. Other than that, he has got to determine what his role is. I think it will take him some time. As he gets moving, he may want take a back seat and only speak out on the main issues. It is up to him to decide and I think different people are giving him different types of advice.

But there will be a line of communication between him and you as Prime Minister?

Oh yes, I speak to him, he speaks to me, we speak over the telephone. I say it is a political rivalry, nothing personal between the two sides.

What would you say is the main difference, in terms of characterisation of the parties, between the UNP and the SLFP as they stand today?

It has all changed now. General elections are campaigns between the UNP and anti-UNP groups. But in the presidential election in January, because of what President Rajapaksa did, it became a campaign between pro–Mahinda Rajapaksa and anti–Mahinda Rajapaksa groups. In this [parliamentary] election, there was confusion within the SLFP fold. Some of them, having opposed Mahinda Rajapaksa, came over to the UNP, those who would otherwise not have joined with the UNP. There ceased to be an anti-UNP bloc. And within the UPFA (United People’s Freedom Alliance), one group was a strong Mahinda Rajapaksa group, the other was not with Mahinda Rajapaksa. It’s a question of how the numbers play out. But the President’s leadership has not been challenged.

The arrangement that you have initiated, that you and the President perhaps have initiated, rules out what would have been unseemly defection, some MPs breaking away from the SLFP to join you. Was that ever on? There was speculation in the media about this.

We decided that wouldn’t be the way. We could have got ten or fifteen people over from the other side but then again, it would have put the President in a very, very embarrassing position. But if we could cooperate with the SLFP, that was far more advantageous to us than getting fifteen of them over. Because we are trying to set a national framework for at least the next ten years. We will try and work this out.

Will this arrangement, which needs to be firmed up, send a positive message to the Tamils? Will they be reassured by this?

I think they will be re-assured.

Not worried by this?

We didn’t have an overall majority in Parliament. But then we had to have a working system. Now, if you look at India, the BJP [Bharatiya Janata Party] has an overall majority, a clear majority, in the Lok Sabha but they are in a minority in the Rajya Sabha. So everything is divided, nothing is moving. I didn’t want to come to that state or to be fighting for every piece of main legislation. It’s better we agree and get this through and see how it works out. If it succeeds, every one will be on board. If it doesn’t succeed, people will go their own way. But I am a hundred per cent confident that we can succeed. We have tremendous issues to resolve, more than our personal or political rivalries. The employment issue; how you are going to fit into the international economy; restoring national democracy; working on national unity; upgrading our system of education; free education, free health; and the national debt. Instead of shouting at who was responsible, let’s see how we get out of where we are.

Finally, on international relations. There were problems earlier. Relations with western powers deteriorated. There were some issues in relations with India. Is there going to be a real change in approach now?

A lot of people are unhappy about the approach taken by President Rajapaksa. I think that was a mistake; we shouldn’t have antagonised the west. Our approach is: we get back to having the close relations we had with the west and with India while maintaining our relationship with China, which has also been a longstanding one. And looking at our own role in the region and what stand we will take on some of the main international issues.

Since there is so much on your plate by way of domestic issues, will you be able to devote time to some of your favourite projects, like the land bridge between Sri Lanka and India? Or will that take some time?

We will first have to get the country moving – that’s the priority – and then to look at all other issues.

Courtesy the Hindu

India not capable of providing large investment and loans to SL?

August 24th, 2015

Courtesy Adaderana

August 24, 2015  11:40 pm

 China’s state media today said Sri Lanka should retain friendship with cash-rich China as India is “not capable of providing large investment and loans”, in the first commentary following the defeat of pro-Beijing Mahinda Rajapaksa in the recent parliamentary elections.

As the new Sri Lankan government seeks to reverse the pro-China policy pursued by Rajapaksa, an article by a state- run thinktank said the former president turned pro-China only after he was pressured by India and the West over alleged human rights violations following the war with the LTTE.

Rajapaksa, 69, was defeated politically for the second time by an alliance led by Prime Minister Ranil Wickramasinghe who was backed by President Maithripala Sirisena.

Rajapaks’a defeat in the August 17 polls has cemented the hold of Sirisena over the government and the opposition United Peoples’ Freedom Alliance (UPFA) and its main constituent, the Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP), analysts say.

“Sirisena’s wish to get investment and assistance from India is unrealistic. India itself needs enormous funds to improve its own basic infrastructure. Despite (Prime Minister) Modi’s ambition, the Indian government is not capable of providing large investment and loans,” the article in Global Times said.

It said: “Besides, Indian enterprises, especially in the construction and infrastructure sectors, cannot compete with Chinese ones in either funds or technology and can hardly replace the Chinese ones in Sri Lanka.”

“It is not that Rajapaksa didn’t want close ties with India. But when Rajapaksa asked for funding and contracts from India when the country built the Hambantota Port, India declined to help and Rajapaksa had no choice but to turn to China.”

The article said that India is “willing to see Sirisena reduce his dependency on China with an omni-directional diplomacy, but India doesn’t like it unless Sri Lanka puts India first.”

It said despite rivalry with Japan, China is “willing to see” more Japanese investments in Sri Lanka as “the two have common interests in safeguarding freedom of navigation in the Indian Ocean.”

“China is willing to see Japan provide assistance to Sri Lanka. At the same time, India is not against Japan’s presence in the Indian Ocean,” it said.

“The growing importance of the Indian Ocean has made Sri Lanka of greater interest to big powers, which will bring huge development opportunities for the country. Sirisena should retain a good relationship with China, and meanwhile warm up ties with the West, India and Japan.

“He should inject new impetus to the country’s development rather than striking a poor balance with these partners at the cost of relations with China,” it said.

The Chinese media has earlier blamed western and Indian media for projecting Rajapaksa’s pro-China. Sri Lanka had secured a USD 5 billion loan for strategic projects from China during Rajapaksa’s tenure, expanding Beijing’s influence in India’s backyard. (PTI)

Khalifa of Islam makes announcement during UK Convention-International Initiation Ceremony.

August 24th, 2015

by A. Abdul Aziz.

Press Secretary,

According to media rep[orts, on 22 August 2015, the World Head of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community, the Fifth Khalifa (Caliph), His Holiness, Hazrat Mirza Masroor Ahmad announced that over 567,000 have joined the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community during the past year.
His Holiness made the announcement during his afternoon address at the 49th Jalsa Salana (Annual Convention) of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community in the UK, held in Hampshire.
His Holiness also announced that the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community had built over 400 new Mosques across the world during the past year.
His Holiness further announced that the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community was now established in 207 countries of the world.
His Holiness announced that the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community has now translated the Holy Quran into 74 languages.
Hazrat Mirza Masroor Ahmad also gave a report of the activities and continued progress of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community in all parts of the world.

Earlier in the day, Hazrat Mirza Masroor Ahmad addressed members of Lajna Imaillah (Ladies Auxiliary organisation) where he said that Islam had granted true freedoms and independence to women.

 This three-day Convention included a world-wide Initiation (Bai’at) Ceremony that is held every year at the time of Annual Convention in which large numbers of people from different countries gather at some places in their respective countries and then via satellite take an oath of allegiance at the hand of the Caliph of the Ahmadfiyya Muslim Community Hazrat Mirza Masroor Ahmad.  This historical ceremony was held on Sunday 23rd of August 2015 (last day of the Convention) at 5.30 P.M. local time. In Sri Lanka too, Ahmadi Muslims across the country assembling in their mosques situated at Colombo, Negombo, Pasyala and Polonnaruawa and taking part in this Initiation Ceremony via MTA (Muslim Television Ahmadiyya) – Community’s FREE satellite TV.   The convention concluded on the same day with the Concluding Address of His Holiness, Hadrat Mirza Masroor Ahmad followed by a silent prayer in thanks to God Almighty.
In an interview with BBC London, the leader of the Muslim Ahmadiyya community has called for the authorities in the UK to monitor what happens in mosques and madrassas or Islamic religious schools, to help counter radicalisation.

Ahmadiyya Muslims number many million across the world, and are a movement that started in India more than 100 years ago, the reports added.

Petition seeks re-appointment of Yapa and Susil

August 24th, 2015

Courtesy Adaderana

A petition has been filed at the Colombo District Court requesting to revoke the previous enjoining order issued to prevent Anura Priyadharshana Yapa and Susil Premajayantha from acting and discharging duties as the General Secretaries of the SLFP and UPFA.

The petition was filed by Attorney at Law Aruna Laksiri, Ada Derana reporter said.

The District Court earlier issued the enjoining order to prevent Yapa and Premajayantha from acting and discharging duties as the General Secretaries of the SLFP and UPFA respectively until August 28, 2015.

President Maithripala Sirisena in his capacity as the Chairman of the SLFP and UPFA has suspended the party memberships of Yapa and Premajayantha and has also removed them from the posts of General Secretary.

The President later appointed Minister Duminda Dissanayake as the Acting General Secretary of the SLFP and ex-Minister Prof. Vishwa Warnapala as Acting General Secretary of UPFA.

Consequently Duminda Dissanayake and Prof. Warnapala have sought an enjoining order to prevent the former General Secretaries from carrying out duties in their former capacities.

The petition will be taken up for hearing on 28 August.

Sri Lanka War Crimes Farce: US Law of War Manual on Human Shields

August 23rd, 2015

Shenali D Waduge

In June 2015 the US released the Law of War Manual. Some of its contents are legally and morally indefensible which is why there is need to selectively pick items relevant to Sri Lanka. Nonetheless, it reading through the contents of proportionality and how the US Department of Defense views involuntary human shields, the Sri Lankan case needs to be clearly disassociated to highlight that the precautions and actions taken by Sri Lanka’s military stood out and continues to remain morally and legally defensible though Western media and Western funded international reports and envoys project an opposite notion. Has Sri Lanka adopted the thinking in the US Law of War manual the military offensive would not have gone on for over 3 months, Sri Lankan military would not have needed to rescue close to 300,000 Tamils (some of them were LTTE in civilian clothing) and lose close to 2500 soldiers, put up reception centres manned with Tamil speaking soldiers, send tonnes of food, medicines and essentials to the conflict areas much of which were confiscated by the LTTE and not given to the civilians. So no amount of reports and training bogus witnesses whose identities are kept hidden for 20 years cannot press war crimes charges until and unless 40,000 names are produced as being killed. It doesn’t matter if the figures are 200,000 but they must have names and addresses to claim that they have been killed. Showing 45 witnesses and projecting that as being sufficient to have killed 40,000 is creating laws of insanity!

US Law of War Manual takes the position that hostage-taking is prohibited by international law that “civilians must not be used as shields or as hostages.” Refer paragraphs., 5.16.3,, and 11.6.1. In addition paragraph 5.3.2 says that civilians — including hostages — must not be made the object of an attack.

The manual also says “wanton disregard for civilian casualties or harm to other protected persons and objects is clearly prohibited.” paragraph

What is relevant to Sri Lanka are the lines in the manual that says “in some cases, a party to a conflict may attempt to use the presence or movement of the civilian population or individual civilians in order to shield military objectives from seizure or attack.” Is this not what the LTTE committed in using civilians to shield itself from attack and attacking from among civilians?

The question that the Sri Lankan military will be asked is to answer inspite of LTTE committing above whether precautions were taken. “enemy persons engage in such behavior, commanders should continue to seek to discriminate in conducting attacks and to take feasible precautions to reduce the risk of harm to the civilian population and civilian objects” (para. 5.4.4)

What LTTE stands guilty of and has no excuse against is the fact that LTTE did keep civilians by force. Evidence to prove this is the UNSG’s appeal to release civilians, Foreign Envoys appeal to release civilians, civilian witness accounts that those attempting to flee were shot at by LTTE, the embedded journalist accounts (Murali Reddy), Ban Ki Moon’s Panel of Expert report.

The US Laws of Manual states this about human shields: Harm to Human Shields. Use of human shields violates the rule that civilians may not be used to shield, favor, or impede military operations. The party that employs human shields in an attempt to shield military objectives from attack assumes responsibility for their injury, provided that the attacker takes feasible precautions in conducting its attack.

The Defense Department apparently thinks that it may lawfully kill an unlimited number of civilians forced to serve as involuntary human shields in order to achieve even a trivial military advantage. The Manual draws no distinction between civilians who voluntarily choose to serve as human shields and civilians who are involuntarily forced to serve as human shields. The Manual draws no distinction between civilians who actively shield combatants carrying out an attack and civilians who passively shield military objectives from attack. Finally, the Manual draws no distinction between civilians whose presence creates potential physical obstacles to military operations and civilians whose presence creates potential legal obstacles to military operations. According to the Manual, all of these count for nothing in determining proportionality under international law.

As an example the US feels that it can destroy a residential building and kill its civilian inhabitants to eliminate a single combatant hiding inside or firing from the roof and such an attack is not disproportionate if the combatant enters the building with the intent to use the civilians as passive, involuntary human shields. US manual denies these civilians legal protection from excessive incidental harm.

One then wonders on what grounds the US is actually co-championing the UNHRC resolutions against Sri Lanka if the US position is clear as given above.

However, Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions prohibits the use of human shields. The US law of war manual upholds the view that if a defending force (ex LTTE) violates the prohibition on using civilians as involuntary human shields then the attacking force (ex Sri Lanka Military) is in effect, released from its obligation not to inflict excessive incidental harm on those civilians. US is not a signatory to Protocol 1 but is bound by customary international law which entails that international humanitarian law (IHL) applies unconditionally to each party to an armed conflict irrespective of the conduct of opposing parties.

Laws of non-international armed conflict & principle of proportionality

  • parties to the conflict must not launch an attack against lawful military objectives if the attack ‘may be expected’ to result in excessive civilian harm (deaths, injuries, or damage to civilian objects, or a combination thereof) compared to the ‘concrete and direct military advantage anticipated’. If conducted intentionally a disproportionate attack may constitute a war crime.

Wiki cable clearly exonerates Sri Lanka Army from the false allegations being made

The relevance of this cable is that it was the US Ambassador himself sending a memo after his meeting with ICRC head of operations which clearly indicated that the army did not deliberately shell and in fact delayed the inevitable victory taking to consideration the civilian factor while the LTTE purposely kept civilians or kept themselves among the civilians. Proof of this was evident when a suicide bomber dressed as a civilian blew herself up near a makeshift refugee reception center killing military personnel as well as Tamil civilians.

Wiki cable by US Ambassador to Geneva Clint Williamson on July 15, 2009 after meeting with Jacque de Maio, ICRC Head of Operations for South Asia on 9 July 2009.

“On the LTTE, de Maio said that it had tried to keep civilians in the middle of a permanent state of violence. It (LTTE) saw the civilian population as a ‘protective asset’ and kept its fighters embedded amongst them. De Maio said that the LTTE commanders, objective was to keep the distinction between civilian and military assets blurred. They would often respond positively when ICRC complained to the LTTE about stationing weapons at a hospital, for example. The LTTE would move the assets away, but as they were constantly shifting these assets, they might just show up in another unacceptable place shortly thereafter.”

“De Maio said it would be hard to state that there was a systematic order to LTTE fighters to stick with civilians in order to draw fire. Civilians were indeed under ‘physical coercion not to go here or there,’ he said. Thus, the dynamics of the conflict were that civilians were present all the time. This makes it very difficult to determine though at what point such a situation becomes a case of ‘human shields.’ –  (If civilians were kept by force while LTTE was fighting with the Sri Lankan Army, the LTTE must shoulder all blame for putting civilians in harms way. Numerous appeals both international and local were made to the LTTE to release these civilians – LTTE refused to do so. Not stopping at that LTTE even used these civilians in combat and in an armed conflict these civilians automatically become combatants)

“The army was determined not to let the LTTE escape from its shrinking territory, even though this meant the civilians being kept hostage by the LTTE were at increasing risk….de Maio said, while one could safely say that there were ‘serious, widespread violations of IHL,’ by the Sri Lankan forces, it did not amount to genocide. He could site examples of where the army had stopped shelling when ICRC informed them it was killing civilians. In fact, the army actually could have won the military battle faster with higher civilian casualties, yet chosen a slower approach which led to a greater number of Sri Lankan military deaths. He concluded however, by asserting that the GSL failed to recognize its obligation to protect civilians despite the approach leading to higher military casualties. From his standpoint, a soldier at war should be more likely to die than a civilian.” (What is significant about what the ICRC head said to the US ambassador was that there was NO GENOCIDE committed by the Sri Lankan Army, that in desiring to save civilians the Army took longer to finish the operation thus compromising its own soldiers who died as a result. The military objective was to destroy the LTTE while also attempting to save the civilians kept by force or civilians staying voluntarily with the LTTE – this is something Western armies will not understand because their superiors order them to ‘shoot everything that moves’ or soldiers are ordered to engage in “360 degree rotational fire“)

Lets put things into context

  • Sri Lanka’s 30 years of terrorism started out by India functioning as state sponsor in clandestinely training unemployed Sri Lankan Tamil youth in armed warfare
  • These armed groups were initially trained, armed and funded by India eventually LTTE becoming supreme after bumping off leaders of the other armed groups
  • Over time LTTE became contracted to parties that were linked to external sources that began to use LTTE as a smokescreen for a bigger agenda. Terrorism became a convenient camouflage that would enable these external parties to send their representatives regularly to Sri Lanka to work on the bigger agenda while pretending to help solve the conflict
  • It is important that we view these solutions being offered as being part of a bigger agenda/plan that has nothing to do with peace building, conflict resolution, peaceful coexistence among any of the communities in Sri Lanka. Until and unless Sri Lankans can realize this the whole nation remains doomed and vulnerable.
  • The unexpected end to terror shook the plans and it is this anger that has turned to revenge coming with venom in the form of a personally commissioned report by the UNSG which has become the foundation to successive illegal resolutions, western government funded reports projected as being ‘independent’ highlighting poor ethics, western owned media providing the necessary negative publicity against the targeted enemy, foreign funded panel discussions, documentaries, book releases, foreign statements all spending a lot of money on propaganda but not one of them caring to answer fundamental and basic questions

The questions left unanswered

  • If the Sri Lankan military was ordered to kill (disregarding all laws of war) why did they save close to 300,000 while sacrificing 2500 soldiers over 5 months of attempting to liberate the civilians said to be kept hostage by the LTTE
  • If the propaganda of 40,000 to 200,000 said to have been killed by the Sri Lanka military is true why have those giving the numbers failed to give at least 100 names of the dead including their details? If they can give a number of dead surely they can give their names!
  • On what grounds can the producing of anonymous 45 supposed ‘witnesses’ whose identities are sealed for 20 years be accepted to press war crimes charges for killing x number of people when again we don’t know whether they were killed or even born! Leave aside naming the dead there are no skeletons even found after 6 years! And we know how the US/NATO lied about mass graves during the Yugoslavia conflict, so we are not going to fall for media hype and bogus lies by the same envoys unless there is proof.

These are factors that the new Sri Lankan Government must be realistically looking at. We are not saying to exonerate anyone of any crime. But any crime must have evidence. Just because some foreign funded reports are emerging with anonymous witnesses we can’t except that has a legal reason to claim war crimes were committed and 40,000 or more were killed when so far none of these names are lodged with the Presidential Commission on Missing Persons with a mandate to investigate missing from 1983 to 2009.

Therefore, in looking at all the Western-backed UN war crimes charges and realizing that the war crimes are for every leader other than the US/UK and their allies the people of Sri Lanka must be aware of the lies that went into accuse other nations of war crimes and have their leaders either locked up or killed. This is a gross violation of the entire justice system.

Sri Lanka fought the LTTE fair and square. They were given 3 times to lay down and surrender. All 3 times they refused to comply. The conflict was fought fair and the fact that the 11000 LTTE cadres who surrendered have been rehabilitated and reintegrated except those that refused show how fair the Sri Lankan authorities have been even beyond the end of the conflict. The fact that the North is today a developed area from the stone age look it had during LTTE reign in just 5 years also goes to show how much loans and grants the GOSL took to improve the lives of the North.

The people of Sri Lanka must stand up for those that liberated the country and not fall for the lies being hatched.

Shenali D Waduge

Use of human shields: LTTE violated int’l humanitarian laws

ICRC Sri Lanka during final phase of war

Sri Lanka Missing Persons Commission: 40,000-225,000 accused of being killed but only 18,590 missing complaints filed



National Government or opposition: President grants freedom to decide

August 23rd, 2015

Courtesy Adaderana

The MP-elects of the Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP) have been given freedom to choose whether to join the National Government or function in the opposition, MP-elect Mahinda Amaraweera quoted the President as saying.

President Maithripala Sirisena has made the observation during a meeting held at the President’s official residence in Colombo this evening (23), said Amaraweera.

However, sources close to the SLFP told Ada Derana that many MP-elects including Wimal Weerawansam, Dinesh Gunawardena, Vasudeva Nanayakkara, and Udaya Gammanpila have already decided to function in the opposition.

If PM Ranil Wickremasinghe pledged not to divide Sri Lanka so must all MPs including TNA

August 23rd, 2015

Shenali D Waduge

Immediately following taking oaths as Prime Minister, Mr. Ranil Wickremasinghe took a second oath reading out Article 157A, Seventh Schedule under the 6th amendment to the Sri Lankan Constitution in 1983. “I, …………………………….. do solemnly declare and affirm swear that I will uphold and defend ‘the Constitution of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka and that I will not, directly or indirectly, in or outside Sri Lanka, support, espouse, promote, finance, encourage or advocate the establishment of a separate State within the territory of Sri Lanka.” It was in 1983 that the TULF 18 MPs refused to read out these very lines and walked out of Parliament forfeiting their seats. It would be interesting to see what TNA 16 MPs decides to do.

What is contained in the 6th amendment/Article 157A Prohibition against violation of territorial integrity of Sri Lanka

  1. No one can directly/indirectly in or outside Sri Lanka support, espouse, promote, finance, encourage or advocate the establishment of a separate state within the territory of Sri Lanka
  2. No political party or association/organization can have as its aims or objectives the establishment of a separate state within the territory of Sri Lanka
  3. Anyone who contravenes paragraph (1) if convicted by Court of Appeal will
    1. May lose civic rights for 7 years
    2. Lose movable and immovable property
    3. Not be entitled to civic rights for 7 years
    4. If a MP cease to be a Member. If a state officer lose that status
  4. A political party/association or organization if having as its aims and objectives the establishment of a separate State within the territory of Sri Lanka any person came appeal to the Supreme Court for a declaration that such political party/association is aiming to establish a separate state. The secretary of that party/association will be a respondent
  5. If Supreme Court makes a declaration under 4. in relation to a political party/association
    1. That party/association will be proscribed including its members. If a MP he will be made to vacate seat in Parliament
    2. All those holding office in these parties/association will be deemed guilty and upon conviction by Court of Appeal be
      1. Subject to civic disability for 7 years
      2. Forfeit movable/immovable property
  • Not be entitled to civic rights for 7 years
  1. If an MP cease to be a Member and if officer cease to hold office
  1. Punishments imposed under (3) & (5b) shall not be stayed or suspended pending any appeal against such punishment
  2. Every officer (required by Articles 32, 53, 61, 107, 165, 169(12) to take and subscribe oath who serve in local authority, Development Council, Pradeshiya Mandalaya, Gramodaya Mandalaya or public corporation and every attorney at law shall
    1. Take oath as per seventh schedule
    2. Within one month of taking office
  3. a) Every MP shall not be entitled to sit and vote in Parliament unless he takes and subscribes to oath in seventh schedule
  4. b) Elected or nominated MPs shall not be entitled to sit and vote in Parliament unless he takes oath in seventh schedule.
  5. No person can take any other oath prior to taking oath of seventh schedule
  6. Parliament may pass resolution to determine categories of persons/officers in relation to paragraph (7)
  7. Jurisdiction of Court of Appeal shall apply to Article (5 iv)
  8. “civic rights” is
    1. Right to obtain a passport
    2. Right to sit for any public examination
    3. Right to own any immovable property
    4. Right to engage in any trade/profession which requires a license, registration or other authorization by written law

The TULF headed by Amirthalingam walked out of Parliament refusing to take the oath. Why would they refuse to take an oath that commits them to not directly or indirectly promoting, financing, advocating the establishing of a separate state within the territory of Sri Lanka? Thankfully the words ‘within the territory of Sri Lanka’ nullifies the present promotion of the one nation two state concept for it would be a violation of the 6th amendment. Moreover, a case is pending questioning the aims and objectives of the ITAK constitution where the party is doing their best to wriggle out of confirming that its constitution is federal when it appears to be taking a confederal stand in its aims and objectives.

When the TULF walked out in 1983 forfeiting their 18 seats in Parliament refusing to take this oath pledging not to create separate state within the territory of Sri Lanka, it would be most interesting to see what the TNA with 16 MPs will do when Ranil Wickremasinghe asks all MPs to read out the same oath.

We would very much like to see a live telecast of the TNA MPs reading out the oath in the seventh schedule which Prime Minister Wickremasinghe read out.

Shenali D Waduge



Amend the 6th or find them guilty –

After Stalling Colombo and Hambantota Ports Development, India Builds Vizhinjam Deep Sea Port

August 23rd, 2015

Dilrook Kannangara

Singapore and India succeeded in disrupting the development of Hambantota and Colombo port development projects. Had these gone ahead, a substantial amount of prosperity would have shifted to Sri Lanka depriving India and Singapore. That was why India and Singapore engineered the regime change operation. Now they are satisfied Sri Lanka’s Chinese funded shipping growth strategy has flopped, they are developing their own ports. Sri Lanka is once again doomed to live in poverty and misery thanks to the UNP and its foreign financiers.

Singapore’s Jealous Action of 1967 Repeats

A retired Thai diplomat, Sompong Sucharitkul, who witnessed it firsthand revealed how the representative of Singapore (Sinnathamby Rajaratnam, a Tamil from Jaffna and Singapore’s first Foreign Minister) opposed the inclusion of Sri Lanka in the initial ASEAN group. Needless to say the relevance of the Singapore port drastically reduces if the Hambantota port operates at desired capacity. A larger number of ships pass close to Hambantota than Malacca Strait. Ships ultimately reaching Japan, South Korea or China from Europe or the Middle East have little need for a stopover in Singapore if they can replenish in Hambantota. This is why Sri Lanka was an important hub in the ancient Silk Road and comparatively, Malacca Strait was not.

Singapore’s jealous action also prevents the much hyped Kra Isthmus canal from becoming a reality. Although an ambitious project, it is highly profitable which can turn Thailand into a developed country overnight at the expense of Singapore. To prevent all possibilities of it happening, Singapore funds political unrest in Thailand. It is no wonder the current UNP regime was hatched in Singapore in 2013!

Yahapalanaya plan was plotted in Singapore. Their action plan came to be known as Singapore Principles. Suffice it is to quote from Tamilnet what really happened at the 2013 event.

“Mr M.A. Sumanthiran, the non-elected national list ITAK parliamentarian and Mr V.T. Thamilmaran, the dean of the Faculty of Law at the University of Colombo were the Tamil representatives from the island while representatives of the so-called Global Tamil Forum (GTF) were representing the Diaspora Tamils at a meeting in Singapore in 2013 when Dr Jayampathy Wickramaratne came with his proposal points to agree upon a conceptual framework aimed at regime change, the removal of Executive Presidency and other arrangements targeting good governance. Dr Jayampathy Wickramaratne was an adviser to Sri Lanka’s past two Presidents.

Mangala Samaraweera came as a ‘beggar’ urging Tamil support for regime change and abolition of the executive presidency. It was 2013,” said one of the participants, reflecting on the Singapore meeting.”

India the Eternal Enemy of Sri Lanka

It is no secret Tamil terrorism was conceived and delivered by India as a Cold War tool. Tamil terrorism robbed Sri Lanka of likely benefits of being the first nation to open its economy. Sri Lanka’s shipping development was always envied by India. China’s involvement in Sri Lanka was always opposed by India. Pro Indian groups opposed the Colombo Port development project and Hambantota projects. The first thing the Indian funded UNP regime did was to suspend it. Having achieved its objectives, India is now developing a deep sea port – the first of its kind in South Western India. Vizhinjam is a deep sea port under aggressive development in Kerala which will rival Colombo. It will steal Colombo’s transshipment business (3.8 million TEUs a year with many times higher potential).

Although UNP must take most of the blame, the Rajapaksa regime also must take some blame for delaying Chinese projects due to Indian pressure. Had Sri Lanka moved faster on the Colombo port project or delayed the presidential election by a year allowing China a permanent naval docking station, Indian interference would have reduced.

Now Sri Lanka is cursed with underdevelopment, poverty, disintegration and possibly Indian engineered national collapse. Prosperity of India including that of Indian groups in Sri Lanka, and, prosperity of Sri Lanka is a zero sum game. Only one will succeed and it will be at the expense of the other.

Under the acid rain of the Devil’s hypocrisy

August 23rd, 2015

Courtesy The Nation

When President Maithripala Sirisena repeated his earlier speech in a six-page letter and added venom to the message that he would not ask Mahinda Rajapaksa to form a government as Premier had delivered the kiss of death to the UPFA’s chances

Yet, this perfidy is called good governance and democracy in this topsy-turvy land of moral Lilliputians who see, speak or hear no evil.

It is all done and dusted. That is the cliche at least. It is convenient. People want to move on, the victors, vanquished, and passers-by.

To destroy an entire party, their own party, with serial perfidy needs special types of dagger wielders — persons who have no morals, absolutely no sense of shame, nor loyalty

Even so, it is dangerous to transition to the future sans a processing of all the information, without a proper stock taking, and devoid of a serious, truth-telling account of what really happened at this very important 2015 August elections just past us.

The numbers indicate that the United National Party finally managed to win a major election, in its own right under the leadership of Ranil Wickremesinghe. It’s a feat by itself that is in the order of the sun rising from the West.

It was a victory, but to put it in the simplest of terms, how it was achieved does punch a Parakrama Samudra sized hole in this previously improbable narrative.

The Asipatha CutsWhen President Maithripala Sirisena repeated his earlier speech in a six-page letter and added venom to the message that he would not ask Mahinda Rajapaksa to form a government as Premier under any circumstances, in many people’s opinion, he as the leader of Rajapaksa’s UPFA, had delivered the kiss of death to the UPFA’s chances.
If they only knew what was coming …!

The two General Secretaries of the party were sacked by Court enjoining order three days before the election and the entire Central Committee of the UPFA was similarly dispatched the day before people were scheduled to cast their ballots.

This pulling the rug from under the feet of Rajapaksa and his promising outfit of troopers by the ‘party leader’ was enough to cause the ten seat difference that stood between a UPFA Government, and a UNP one.

It was considered so repugnant that even bleeding heart ‘liberal’, but in reality dyed in wool UNP-biased columnists such as Namini Wijedasa of the Sunday Times tweeted, ‘I wonder what the reaction would have been if @PresRajapaksa had sacked his central committee on the eve of election results.’

Such ridiculous and totally beyond the pale actions as those of Maithripala’s, would not have been acceptable for instance in a mature democracy such as Britain, or Australia for instance, where a stab in the back so flagrant, audacious and utterly morally degenerate, no matter from which side of the party divide, would have effectively caused political paralysis due to the public reaction.

In Sri Lanka, such perfidy was not seen as morally repugnant. Civil society kept quiet. In circles that are peopled with those who scream themselves insane about democracy, there wasn’t a meow, let alone one measly tweet, as that from Namini Wijedasa.

This won’t do. This columnist makes bold to say, that this obnoxious crucifixion of democracy and crude, calculated act of treachery by Maithripala Sirisena makes this election result effectively null and void in the court of public opinion.

That is how it should be, and that is how it is, no matter which potentate or preening pundit says what. (Incidentally, for the UPFA, it was a very respectable ‘defeat.’)
What is worse than a President who controls both opposition and Government as if lording over his private fiefdom? It’s the same President, in the cheapest political act of treachery of all time, in any country, ensuring that a quarter of his party’s supporters stay home because they are led to believe that voting for their party’s campaign leader, is futile.

Anyone in his right mind would agree that those in his own party, that suffered the damage, did not have time to respond.

Neither were they legally allowed to do so, which means in essence, that the laws were abused for this treachery, by the person who holds the highest position in this land.
Worse of course, is what he has done to his party! It’s was a work of black magic and witchcraft crossed with cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment. He back stabbed his way to ensuring not just one but two defeats for his SLFP and the large coalition, and this is an act of perfidy not paralleled anywhere, in any country, in any political narrative remembered in the civilized world.

His party members, from the lowliest party workers at ground level, to the highest ranking Minister in the pre 2015 Government, now wallow in defeat, due to serial acts of abominable subterfuge by their ‘leader.’

Those who had it written in stone that they would be Ministers, would not be, due to him. Those from potentate to peon, who desperately wanted to see their progressive policies come to fruition, are suffering the indignity of rule by a previously moribund and wretched opposition, because of this one person and his henchmen and women, one of them that answers to the name of ‘Chandrika.’

To destroy an entire party, their own party, with serial perfidy needs special types of dagger wielders — persons who have no morals, absolutely no sense of shame, nor loyalty.

Yet, this perfidy is called good governance and democracy in this topsy-turvy land of moral Lilliputians who see, speak or hear no evil.

This will not do. A government formed through serial perfidy, has no moral legitimacy, leave alone the right to occupy the moral high ground.

A victory blatantly stolen — two victories serially stolen — the last one in infinitely more morally repugnant fashion than the first, would be monumentally pyrrhic.

The mealy mouthed moral bankruptcy and hypocrisy of those who applaud this gruesome farce, this crazed daylight stab at the heart of our democracy is so absurd, one wonders whether it’s best to laugh or to cry under the surreal circumstances?

Despite the song and the dance, the empty congratulations for the victor, the mealy mouthed celebrations of ‘democracy’ in the international media, and the rest of the overkill and hoopla, the remaining narrative in the face of this perfidy, is insignificant, and very much in the nature of detail.

In a country in which there is nary a person to call this bluff, nary an individual who is not cowed by the tyranny of the herd, the perpetrators of this state of affairs await their karma.

The natural retribution, the ricochet effect of karma for this cowardly murder of democracy would come surely, and would be devastating when it does. It has to be an act of God!
The mills of Justice grind slowly, but they surely do. The two unclothed emperors at the top of our country’s living walking farce of a good-government, would be unmasked over time.

Their political detractors are two cowed and too tired to do it.

They are also too benumbed by the surreal nature of the ‘astute public opinion’, both national and international, calling this appalling nadir the high point in democracy!
But when comeuppance comes, when it surely will, and morning inevitably follows the long dark night, the good people of this country would be left wondering what happened to their voices, their conscience, their God-given obligation to speak the truth under the most surreal, absurd and repugnant of circumstances.

It could be later rather than sooner, but the unmasking is certain, and it would leave the cheer leaders of the two naked Emperors as buck naked as their more degenerate ‘leaders’ themselves who are in a masquerade worthy of just two celebrated agents and entities in the narrative of our human family — the devil himself, and Salvador Dali.

Fingaporean Hind Insertion and Terminal Fibbergasption

August 23rd, 2015

By Sudat Pasqual -Courtesy The Nation

Fingaporean Hind Insertion is that uniquely Sri Lankan political art of inserting the rejected through the hind.

The 2015 general Election is mercifully over. Seriously, how much fibs can one nation endure? It is a miracle that Sri Lankans were not dropping like flies from fibbergasption.
WTF is fibbergasption?

Fibbergasption occurs when an individual cannot absorb any more political lies and half-truths and  just gives in to the inevitable bleakness that is about to envelop their existence.

 The election of Maithripala Sirisena as President was meant to bring about a new political order. An order based on fairness, transparency and decency. Sirisena promised the country that his cards will always be laid down face up

Let’s get to the crux of the matter; post-election perversion of democracy in Sri Lanka.
In a democracy, people get to choose who will represent their interests. Those who want to represent their fellow travellers will declare their intentions and seek support at an election. Those who get the most number of votes get to attend to matters of their constituents. Others figure out a way to keep themselves occupied till the next election. There are winners and there are losers. Democracy is definitive that way. Or, is it?
You see, in Sri Lanka there is this political monster called the National List. Actually, the original thinking behind the National List was quite honorable. The National List allowed a political party the means to include a person or persons from underrepresented sectors of the population or persons who were in possession of skills and knowledge that were of vital importance to the well-being of the nation. However, in actuality the National List is putty in the hands of party leaders and their parasitic groupies. Many a time, the National List has been used to sneak in unelectable losers who offered unquestioned support to the party hierarchy. This has been the way the cookie crumbled ever since the List was introduced back in the 1980’s.

The election of Maithripala Sirisena as President was meant to bring about a new political order. An order based on fairness, transparency and decency. Sirisena promised the country that his cards will always be laid down face up. Sirisena’s main groupies in the form of the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna(JVP) and the United National Party(UNP) said ditto. They said or implied that the National List will not be used to launder unpalatable politicians back into the system. The JVP was the most vociferous in their support of the idea. They harped on the importance of the political conscience.

Well, on August 18, 2015 the JVP found out that talk was cheap and very few had been listening to their spiel. The country voted in a mere 3 JVP candidates. All others were rejected. JVP did receive the right to nominate 2 more from the National List based on the % of votes they received. In spite of their promise to heed their political conscience and the will of the people, JVP nominated a person through their National List who was categorically rejected by the voter. Apparently the JVP conscience became unconscious during deliberations.

There is similar talk in the UNP circles as well. There is a concerted move by a group of people to exert pressure on the leadership to bring in individuals through the National List who were rejected by the voter. It must be acknowledged that this has not been confirmed since the UNP has not finalised their List, yet.

Even more despairing is what seems to be in the works in President Sirisena’s camp. Maithripala Sirisena, the champion of democracy, fairness and decency seems headed to appoint individuals who are willing to do the hatchet work for him through the National List. Sirisena’s sole intention, it seems, is to politically asphyxiate Mahinda Rajapaksa. Sirisena showed his intentions just prior to the elections when he sacked the General Secretaries of his party and the Alliance he was heading and appointed two of his loyalists even though the legality of his actions were in doubt. That was not the actions of a man committed to decency and fair play. It was the action of a man under siege and who was willing to sacrifice his promise of good governance on the altar of political expediency.
Considering, all who have been entrusted with promoting the welfare of the people should step back from the precipice of political hypocrisy and expediency and just do the right thing.

Say no to Fingaporian Hind Insertion and let’s find a permanent cure for Fibbergasption.

Rejects are rejects

August 23rd, 2015

Island Editorial Courtesy Island 

The National List (NL) mechanism was created to help eminent persons enter Parliament without contesting elections which they detest. But, sadly, it continues to be abused to appoint defeated candidates to the national legislature.

Those who vote for a particular political party at parliamentary polls, endorse its NL. Therefore, using the mechanism to appoint as MPs the candidates rejected by the voters is tantamount to a distortion of the will of the electorate.

The UNP’s decision against appointing political rejects to Parliament via the NL is to be highly commended. Even the worst critics of Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe will praise him, albeit grudgingly, for that. It may be recalled that he did not appoint even his trusted lieutenant, Vajira Abeywardene, who lost the 2010 general election, to Parliament through the NL, in spite of pressure from the party and his loyalists. Vajira has won this time.

Regrettably, moves are reportedly being made to appoint some of the defeated UPFA candidates in the good books of President Maithripala Sirisena to Parliament through the NL. True, there is a constitutional provision for making such appointments, but the fact remains that everything that the Constitution provides for does not necessarily conform to democratic norms and the principle of good governance. The 18th Amendment was a case in point. Thankfully, it was abolished. The Constitution is full of such draconian features and those who champion good governance must not make use of them to further their interests. President Mahinda Rajapaksa was hauled over the coals—and rightly so—for using those provisions.

President Sirisena remained neutral at Monday’s election, to all intents and purposes, in spite of being the leader of the SLFP and the UPFA and, worse, his party suffered an ignominious defeat in his home district, Polonnaruwa. Above all, his speeches and letters through which he sought to settle personal scores with his erstwhile boss, Mahinda Rajapaksa, and queer the latter’s pitch, proved inimical to the interests of the UPFA in the run-up to the August 17 election. Therefore, the question is whether he has any moral right to decide on the UPFA NL appointments.

President Sirisena and other champions of good governance condemned Mahinda Rajapaksa for trying to make a comeback after being rejected at the Jan. 08 presidential election. A reject was a reject and he had to gracefully retire, he was told. So, how can they justify their attempts to appoint some of those rejected by the people at the recent general election, to Parliament via the NL? Is it that they think some political rejects are more equal than others?

There has been a campaign against the preferential vote or manape which is blamed for intraparty disputes, election violence and preventing decent men and women entering politics. Even the Rajapaksa loyalists subscribe to this view. What would have happened to them if the August 17 election had been conducted without the preferential vote mechanism? Party leaders including the President would have been able to appoint MPs from the lists of candidates according to their whims and fancies!

A candidate fails to get elected at a general election because voters do not consider him or her fit enough to enter Parliament. Last year, university teachers, the media and the then Opposition raised hell, claiming that a girl who had failed to qualify at the GCE A/L examination for higher education had been admitted to a state university on the basis of a letter issued by MP Namal Rajapaksa. They were justified in letting out a howl of protest.

There is no difference between admitting a student who fails to obtain enough marks at the GCE A/L to a national university and appointing to the national legislature via the NL a candidate who loses an election. Therefore, anyone who claims to be a proponent of good governance cannot endorse the appointment of political rejects to Parliament through the backdoor.


දිවුරුම් පෙත්සම්

August 23rd, 2015

ධර්මසිරි සෙනෙවිරත්න

      අලුත් අගමැති රනිල්  අගමැතිවශයෙන් දිවිරුම් දෙනවිට අලු වැඩක් කර ඇත ””’.රට බෙදීමට තමන්  රිජුව  හෝ වක්රව කටයුතු  නොකරන බවට ”’ ඔහු ජනපතිවෙත දිවුරුම් පෙත්සමක් ඉදිරිපත් කර  ඇත . එය ජනපතිගේ ඉල්ලී මක් නැතහොත් රනිල් හිතාමතාම කලදෙයක් දැය්  නොදනිමු. තමන් කෙරෙහි  ජනතාවගේ විශ්වාසය  ලබා ගැනීමට  රනිල්  මෙය කළා විය හැකඑජාපයේ  පැටිකිරිය දන්නා      ජේ ආර් 13 ව්යවස්ථාව  ගෙන එන විටම  තුර නැගෙන හිර එක්  කරන විට   තේරුම් ගිය කරුණක් වුයේ   නොරටුන්ට බයෙන්  ඔවුන් රට පාවාදී මට තත් කරන බවය  වර්ධරාජා පෙරුමාල්  ඊලම  ප්රකාශ කරන විට  එය සනාත විය . බෙදුම්වාදීන් සමග  ගිවිසුම් ගසන එකතුවන කෙනෙක් රට පාවා නොදෙයය්  සිතිය නොහැකමහවැලියේ සිංහලයන් 40000 ක්  එළවා දැමු ජනපතිටත් පක්ෂයටත් හොරෙන් කොටි සමග සාම ගිවිසුම් අත්සන් කල රනිල් උන්ට කන්ටේනර් පිටින් ආයුධ ගෙන ඒමට  ඉඩ දුන් රනිල්  මිලේනියම් සිටි බුද්ධි අංශය නිරාවරණය කර  සියලු නිලධාරීන් මරා දැමීමට කොටින්ට අවස්තාව උදාකර දුන් රනිල්  ප්රභා මරණ සටනේදී තමන්ගේ ගෝලබාලයන් ලවා  සේනාධිනායකයාටත් රණ විරුවන්ටත් උසුළුවිසුළු කල රනිල්  ගේ පැටිකිරිය දන්නාඅ  රනිල් ඇතුළු එජාපය  අවිශ්වාස කරන බව  ඇත්තය . එනිසාම  පැටිකිරිය නරක ගමේ ගැහැනුන්   ”’ අනේ අම්මා පල් ”’  බුදුන් පල්ල ”’ මගේ දරුවන් පල්ලකියමින්   අතේ දිවුරන පරිදි     රනිලුත් දිවුරන්නේය   ව්යවස්ථාවෙන්ම රට බෙදීම තහනම්ය . මන්ත්රීවරු එසේ දිවුරා ඇත . රටේ නායකයේ ක් රට බෙදන්නට කට යුතු නොකරන්නේයය්  ජනතාව විශ්වාස කරති  එසේ අවිශ්වාස කරන්නේ  බෙදුම් වාදී නායකයෙක් පත් වුනොතය . ඉතින් මෙසේ දිවුරන්නට  රනිල් සිදුවීම පුදුමයක් නොවේ . කෙසේවුවත්  රට නොබෙදීම නම් හොඳය
එසේකරන බවට  කොලේ වහලා ගහන  දිවුරුම් පෙත්සම් කොලය වෙනුවට රනිල් කල යුත්තේ 13 අහෝසි කරන බවත් එය බෙදුම් වාදයට උඩගෙඩි දෙන බවත් ප්රකාශ කර ප්රභා මරා දැමු මානුෂික මෙහෙයුමේදී සේනාධිනායකයාත් රණවිරුවනුත්  උසුලුවිසුලුවලට ලක් කිරීම ගැන  සමාව අයදීමත් .කිලි නොච්චි මැදවච්චි කතා ජනතාවට අමතක වී නැත
සියලු කල්ල තොනීන්ට ප්රේමදාස රටවසිකම් දුන්නේ  දිවුරුම් පෙත්සම් මගිනිලොව කිසි තැනක මෙහෙම රටවසිකම් දෙන්නේ නැත  දැන් උඩරට කල්ලතොනීන්ට අයිතිවී ඇතමේ රට ආරක්ෂා කරන හැටිය . සිරිමාවෝ මැතිනිය විසින් ආපසුයවීමට  සිටි සියලුමකල්ල තොනීන් නවත්වා ගත්තේ ඩඩ්ලි  ජේ ආර්  ප්රේම
දාස  වැනි එජාප නායකයන්ය .. . මහින්ද එළවා දෙමල බෙදුම් වාදීන්ට විපක්ෂ නායක කමත් දෙන්න හදන්නේ  දිවුරුම් පෙත්සම අනුවද  .
සම්මුතිවාදයෙන් රට කරවන්නට නම්  මහින්ද අවශ්යය . විශාල ගණනකින් රනිල් දිනුවානම්  සම්මුතිවාදය වෙනුවට ඒකාධිපති වාදය  රජකරන හැටි  බලන්නට තිබුනේය . . මයිත්ත්රීගේ හැටිත් අනාගතයේදී පෙනෙනු ඇත . මොනවා කාත්    හනුමන් පාලම  නම් හදන්න එපායය්  බැගෑපත්ව ඉල්ලමින් ලිපිය අවසන් කරමි හැදුවොත් එය රටේ අවසානයය් .    දිවුරුම් පෙත්සම්
ධර්මසිරි සෙනෙවිරත්න
අලුත් අගමැති රනිල්  අගමැතිවශයෙන් දිවිරුම් දෙනවිට අලු වැඩක් කර ඇත ””’.රට බෙදීමට තමන්  රිජුව  හෝ වක්රව කටයුතු  නොකරන බවට ”’ ඔහු ජනපතිවෙත දිවුරුම් පෙත්සමක් ඉදිරිපත් කර  ඇත . එය ජනපතිගේ ඉල්ලී මක් නැතහොත් රනිල් හිතාමතාම කලදෙයක් දැය්  නොදනිමු. තමන් කෙරෙහි  ජනතාවගේ විශ්වාසය  ලබා ගැනීමට  රනිල්  මෙය කළා විය හැකඑජාපයේ  පැටිකිරිය දන්නා      ජේ ආර් 13 ව්යවස්ථාව  ගෙන එන විටම  තුර නැගෙන හිර එක්  කරන විට   තේරුම් ගිය කරුණක් වුයේ   නොරටුන්ට බයෙන්  ඔවුන් රට පාවාදී මට තත් කරන බවය  වර්ධරාජා පෙරුමාල්  ඊලම  ප්රකාශ කරන විට  එය සනාත විය . බෙදුම්වාදීන් සමග  ගිවිසුම් ගසන එකතුවන කෙනෙක් රට පාවා නොදෙයය්  සිතිය නොහැකමහවැලියේ සිංහලයන් 40000 ක්  එළවා දැමු ජනපතිටත් පක්ෂයටත් හොරෙන් කොටි සමග සාම ගිවිසුම් අත්සන් කල රනිල් උන්ට කන්ටේනර් පිටින් ආයුධ ගෙන ඒමට  ඉඩ දුන් රනිල්  මිලේනියම් සිටි බුද්ධි අංශය නිරාවරණය කර  සියලු නිලධාරීන් මරා දැමීමට කොටින්ට අවස්තාව උදාකර දුන් රනිල්  ප්රභා මරණ සටනේදී තමන්ගේ ගෝලබාලයන් ලවා  සේනාධිනායකයාටත් රණ විරුවන්ටත් උසුළුවිසුළු කල රනිල්  ගේ පැටිකිරිය දන්නාඅ  රනිල් ඇතුළු එජාපය  අවිශ්වාස කරන බව  ඇත්තය . එනිසාම  පැටිකිරිය නරක ගමේ ගැහැනුන්   ”’ අනේ අම්මා පල් ”’  බුදුන් පල්ල ”’ මගේ දරුවන් පල්ලකියමින්   අතේ දිවුරන පරිදි     රනිලුත් දිවුරන්නේය   ව්යවස්ථාවෙන්ම රට බෙදීම තහනම්ය . මන්ත්රීවරු එසේ දිවුරා ඇත . රටේ නායකයේ ක් රට බෙදන්නට කට යුතු නොකරන්නේයය්  ජනතාව විශ්වාස කරති  එසේ අවිශ්වාස කරන්නේ  බෙදුම් වාදී නායකයෙක් පත් වුනොතය . ඉතින් මෙසේ දිවුරන්නට  රනිල් සිදුවීම පුදුමයක් නොවේ . කෙසේවුවත්  රට නොබෙදීම නම් හොඳය
එසේකරන බවට  කොලේ වහලා ගහන  දිවුරුම් පෙත්සම් කොලය වෙනුවට රනිල් කල යුත්තේ 13 අහෝසි කරන බවත් එය බෙදුම් වාදයට උඩගෙඩි දෙන බවත් ප්රකාශ කර ප්රභා මරා දැමු මානුෂික මෙහෙයුමේදී සේනාධිනායකයාත් රණවිරුවනුත්  උසුලුවිසුලුවලට ලක් කිරීම ගැන  සමාව අයදීමත් .කිලි නොච්චි මැදවච්චි කතා ජනතාවට අමතක වී නැත
සියලු කල්ල තොනීන්ට ප්රේමදාස රටවසිකම් දුන්නේ  දිවුරුම් පෙත්සම් මගිනිලොව කිසි තැනක මෙහෙම රටවසිකම් දෙන්නේ නැත  දැන් උඩරට කල්ලතොනීන්ට අයිතිවී ඇතමේ රට ආරක්ෂා කරන හැටිය . සිරිමාවෝ මැතිනිය විසින් ආපසුයවීමට  සිටි සියලුමකල්ල තොනීන් නවත්වා ගත්තේ ඩඩ්ලි  ජේ ආර්  ප්රේම
දාස  වැනි එජාප නායකයන්ය .. . මහින්ද එළවා දෙමල බෙදුම් වාදීන්ට විපක්ෂ නායක කමත් දෙන්න හදන්නේ  දිවුරුම් පෙත්සම අනුවද  .
සම්මුතිවාදයෙන් රට කරවන්නට නම්  මහින්ද අවශ්යය . විශාල ගණනකින් රනිල් දිනුවානම්  සම්මුතිවාදය වෙනුවට ඒකාධිපති වාදය  රජකරන හැටි  බලන්නට තිබුනේය . . මයිත්ත්රීගේ හැටිත් අනාගතයේදී පෙනෙනු ඇත . මොනවා කාත්    හනුමන් පාලම  නම් හදන්න එපායය්  බැගෑපත්ව ඉල්ලමින් ලිපිය අවසන් කරමි හැදුවොත් එය රටේ අවසානයය් .    දිවුරුම් පෙත්සම්
ධර්මසිරි සෙනෙවිරත්න
අලුත් අගමැති රනිල්  අගමැතිවශයෙන් දිවිරුම් දෙනවිට අලු වැඩක් කර ඇත ””’.රට බෙදීමට තමන්  රිජුව  හෝ වක්රව කටයුතු  නොකරන බවට ”’ ඔහු ජනපතිවෙත දිවුරුම් පෙත්සමක් ඉදිරිපත් කර  ඇත . එය ජනපතිගේ ඉල්ලී මක් නැතහොත් රනිල් හිතාමතාම කලදෙයක් දැය්  නොදනිමු. තමන් කෙරෙහි  ජනතාවගේ විශ්වාසය  ලබා ගැනීමට  රනිල්  මෙය කළා විය හැකඑජාපයේ  පැටිකිරිය දන්නා      ජේ ආර් 13 ව්යවස්ථාව  ගෙන එන විටම  තුර නැගෙන හිර එක්  කරන විට   තේරුම් ගිය කරුණක් වුයේ   නොරටුන්ට බයෙන්  ඔවුන් රට පාවාදී මට තත් කරන බවය  වර්ධරාජා පෙරුමාල්  ඊලම  ප්රකාශ කරන විට  එය සනාත විය . බෙදුම්වාදීන් සමග  ගිවිසුම් ගසන එකතුවන කෙනෙක් රට පාවා නොදෙයය්  සිතිය නොහැකමහවැලියේ සිංහලයන් 40000 ක්  එළවා දැමු ජනපතිටත් පක්ෂයටත් හොරෙන් කොටි සමග සාම ගිවිසුම් අත්සන් කල රනිල් උන්ට කන්ටේනර් පිටින් ආයුධ ගෙන ඒමට  ඉඩ දුන් රනිල්  මිලේනියම් සිටි බුද්ධි අංශය නිරාවරණය කර  සියලු නිලධාරීන් මරා දැමීමට කොටින්ට අවස්තාව උදාකර දුන් රනිල්  ප්රභා මරණ සටනේදී තමන්ගේ ගෝලබාලයන් ලවා  සේනාධිනායකයාටත් රණ විරුවන්ටත් උසුළුවිසුළු කල රනිල්  ගේ පැටිකිරිය දන්නාඅ  රනිල් ඇතුළු එජාපය  අවිශ්වාස කරන බව  ඇත්තය . එනිසාම  පැටිකිරිය නරක ගමේ ගැහැනුන්   ”’ අනේ අම්මා පල් ”’  බුදුන් පල්ල ”’ මගේ දරුවන් පල්ලකියමින්   අතේ දිවුරන පරිදි     රනිලුත් දිවුරන්නේය   ව්යවස්ථාවෙන්ම රට බෙදීම තහනම්ය . මන්ත්රීවරු එසේ දිවුරා ඇත . රටේ නායකයේ ක් රට බෙදන්නට කට යුතු නොකරන්නේයය්  ජනතාව විශ්වාස කරති  එසේ අවිශ්වාස කරන්නේ  බෙදුම් වාදී නායකයෙක් පත් වුනොතය . ඉතින් මෙසේ දිවුරන්නට  රනිල් සිදුවීම පුදුමයක් නොවේ . කෙසේවුවත්  රට නොබෙදීම නම් හොඳය
එසේකරන බවට  කොලේ වහලා ගහන  දිවුරුම් පෙත්සම් කොලය වෙනුවට රනිල් කල යුත්තේ 13 අහෝසි කරන බවත් එය බෙදුම් වාදයට උඩගෙඩි දෙන බවත් ප්රකාශ කර ප්රභා මරා දැමු මානුෂික මෙහෙයුමේදී සේනාධිනායකයාත් රණවිරුවනුත්  උසුලුවිසුලුවලට ලක් කිරීම ගැන  සමාව අයදීමත් .කිලි නොච්චි මැදවච්චි කතා ජනතාවට අමතක වී නැත
සියලු කල්ල තොනීන්ට ප්රේමදාස රටවසිකම් දුන්නේ  දිවුරුම් පෙත්සම් මගිනිලොව කිසි තැනක මෙහෙම රටවසිකම් දෙන්නේ නැත  දැන් උඩරට කල්ලතොනීන්ට අයිතිවී ඇතමේ රට ආරක්ෂා කරන හැටිය . සිරිමාවෝ මැතිනිය විසින් ආපසුයවීමට  සිටි සියලුමකල්ල තොනීන් නවත්වා ගත්තේ ඩඩ්ලි  ජේ ආර්  ප්රේම
දාස  වැනි එජාප නායකයන්ය .. . මහින්ද එළවා දෙමල බෙදුම් වාදීන්ට විපක්ෂ නායක කමත් දෙන්න හදන්නේ  දිවුරුම් පෙත්සම අනුවද  .
සම්මුතිවාදයෙන් රට කරවන්නට නම්  මහින්ද අවශ්යය . විශාල ගණනකින් රනිල් දිනුවානම්  සම්මුතිවාදය වෙනුවට ඒකාධිපති වාදය  රජකරන හැටි  බලන්නට තිබුනේය . . මයිත්ත්රීගේ හැටිත් අනාගතයේදී පෙනෙනු ඇත . මොනවා කාත්    හනුමන් පාලම  නම් හදන්න එපායය්  බැගෑපත්ව ඉල්ලමින් ලිපිය අවසන් කරමි හැදුවොත් එය රටේ අවසානයය් .   

On SLFP CABINET QUOTA – Champika – M.K.A.D.S. – Rajitha – Arjuna….

August 23rd, 2015

Courtesy Ceylon Today

The new Cabinet of Ministers of the new government, set to take oaths tomorrow (25) is said to be comprised of 30 MPs including 16 from the United National Party (UNP) and 14 from the Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP).

According to SLFP sources, the 14 ministerial portfolios to be given to the SLFP will include M.K.D.S. Gunawardena who was appointed through the UNP national list along with Arjuna Ranatunga, Patali Champika Ranawaka and Dr. Rajitha Senaratne, all three of whom contested at the General Election from the UNP ticket.

As per provisions in the 19th Amendment to the Constitution, the number of MPs in the Cabinet when establishing a National Government is to be decided by the Parliament and therefore it is expected that the number of ministers in the Cabinet would be exceeding 30 following the Parliament convening on 1, September.

Effects of Colonization

August 23rd, 2015

By Sandra Marker

November 2003

“All the new nations faced severe problems, for political independence did not automatically bring them prosperity and happiness…they were seldom free of external influences. They were still bound to…structures developed earlier by the colonial powers.” —Thomas H. Greer. FromA Brief History of the Western World, 5th edition. San Diego, CA: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich Publishers, 1987, p. 536-37.

Around the world today, intractable conflict is found in many areas that were once colonized or controlled by Western European or Soviet powers (i.e., Africa, the Balkans, Southeast Asia, the Middle East, South America). The source of many of these protracted conflicts, in large part, lies in past colonial or Soviet policies, and especially those regarding territorial boundaries, the treatment of indigenous populations, the privileging of some groups over others, the uneven distribution of wealth, local governmental infrastructures, and the formation of non-democratic or non-participatory governmental systems. It is therefore essential, if one wants to understand intractable conflict and its causes, to examine not only the issues and problems of the moment, but also influential historical factors — most notably, past colonial and Soviet policies — and their lingering effects.

Colonial and Soviet Expansionism

Western colonial expansion began during the 15th century when Spanish and Portuguese explorers conquered “new” lands in the West Indies and the Americas. It continued for over 400 years, and ended with the start of the first World War. By that time western powers such as Great Britain, France, Germany, Italy, Belgium, Portugal and Spain, spurred on by their competitive desire to acquire new lands and resources, had colonized the whole of Africa and the areas that we know today as the Americas, Oceania, Australia, New Zealand, the Caribbean, the Middle East, and many parts of Asia.

Full Story

පරාජිතයින් ජාතික ලැයිස්තුවෙන් යැවීම සදාචාරාත්මක නොවේ!

August 23rd, 2015

මාධ්‍ය ඒකකය කැෆේ සංවිධානය

මහ මැතිවරණයෙන් පාරාජිත  පුද්ගලයින් ජාතික ලැයිස්තුව හරහා පාර්ලිමේන්තුවට පස්ස දොරෙන් රිංගවීම සදාචාරාත්මක නොවන ක්‍රියාවක් බව කැෆේ සංවිධානය අවධාරණය කරයි.එහි විධායක අධ්‍යක්ෂ  කීර්ති තෙන්නකෝන් මහතා සඳහන් කලේ මෙලෙස පරාජිත අපේක්ෂකයින්  ඡාතික ලැයිස්තුවට ඇතුළත් කිරීම මැතිවරණ පනතට අනුව සිදුවන්නක් බවයි. 

එබැවින් මෙහි කිසිදු නීති විරෝධි තත්වයක් දක්නට නොමැති බව තෙන්නකෝන් මහතා කියයි. නීත්‍යානුකූල වුව ද එය සදාචාරාත්මක වශයෙන් පිළිගත නොහැකි ක්‍රියාවක් බව කැෆේ විධායක අධ්‍යක්ෂ වරයා පෙන්වා දී තිබේ.මෙලෙස සදාචාරාත්මක නොවන ක්‍රියා වලට ජනතා විරෝධය මතුවිය යුතු  බවත්  එම විරෝධය ඔස්සේ මැතිවරණ ක්‍රමයේ සංශෝධනයක් සිදු කර මෙවැනි සදාචාර විරෝධි ක්‍රියා වළක්වාලීම දක්වා රට මෙහෙයවිය යුතු බවද තෙන්නකෝන් මහතා පෙන්වා දෙයි. (හඬ පටය අමුණා ඇත )

එක්සත් ජනතා නිදහස් සන්දානය පරාජිතයින් 7 දෙනෙක් තම ජාතික ලැයිස්තුවට එක් කර ඇති අතර,ද්‍රවිඩ ජාතික සන්ධානය පරාජිතයින් දෙදෙනෙක් සහ ජවිපෙ සහ එජාප පරාජිතයින් එක් පුද්ගලයින් බැගින් ජාතික ලැයිස්තුවට එක් කර ඇත.

මාධ්‍ය ඒකකය

කැෆේ සංවිධානය

2015 අගෝස්තු 23

What is Cyril Ramaphosa, Deputy President of South Africa and Senior Advisor to Soros’s ICG doing in Sri Lanka, again?

August 22nd, 2015

Shenali D Waduge

Cyril Ramaphosa is the Deputy President of South Africa and the Deputy President of its ruling party, the African National Congress (ANC). He visited Sri Lanka in 2014 at the invitation of the Rajapakse Government and now immediately following the swearing in of Ranil Wickremasinghe as PM he has once more arrived in Sri Lanka. It is curious to know why?

Let’s just vaguely review the political climate of Sri Lanka. For 30 years Sir Lanka suffered terror by the internationally banned LTTE. That terror period served as a cover for other agendas at play and enabled entities that functioned as aid/charities/humanitarians as front office carried on a more sinister objective back office. These entities comprising local and foreign players were well funded by foreign governments and were often linked to the Church. Naturally the elimination of the LTTE did not augur well for those entities that had not completed the missions given to them. That set off a nasty diplomatic revenge upon the government that defeated the terror making a mockery of the ‘war on terror’. Be that as it may the anger was such that no stone was not turned to make life hell for that government. Everything from illegal UN Resolutions, ridiculous diplomatic statements, funding books, documentaries and reports all aimed at doing a Goebbles that would prepare the ground work in the eventuality that the targeted government was brought back to power. Reconciliation became a battering ram used at every turn now becoming even a joke among the diplomats themselves who are stuck to answer exactly where has humanitarian intervention succeeded, what ‘democracy’ has R2P brought, what success story does the UN and West have to even give as a single example of what they are preaching wasting millions in travel and printed reports!

We cannot be foolish to ignore that none of the humanitarian interventions used citing minority interests as reason for the intervention has given those minorities any reprieve. In fact these minorities have been worse off than the ‘dictators’ they were to be liberated from. Ask the Iraqis, the Libyans, the Kosovars, the Afghans and they would all agree. The entry of Western government funded NGOs were to peddle with the Reconciliation concept that would enable them to remain on ground on the argument that they held the templates and the capacity to monitor the reconciliation taking place.

Despite accepting all these conceptual frameworks we need to seriously ask where is the reconciliation in South Africa? What have the South African blacks actually got? Have their lands been returned? Do they run the economy or is it still in the hands of the white oppressors?

Cyril Ramphosa is a member of George Soro’s International Crisis Group playing the role of senior advisor. His ICG colleagues include Louise Arbor, ICG’s President & CEO who was also the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights from 2004 to 2008 as well as Chief Prosecutor for the International Criminal Tribunals for the Former Yugoslavia and Rwanda. Ramaphosa is also joined in the ICG by Kofi Annan, former UNSG and Nobel Peace Prize winner 2001. Wesley Clark, former NATO supreme allied commander, Gareth Evans, former Foreign Minister of Australia are also members of ICG. Would it also surprise anyone that 2 of the investigators investigating Sri Lankan war crimes are Asma Jahangir and Martti Ahtisaari who is the Chairman Emeriti of the ICG.

Ramaphosa is very much ICG idealism and very much R2P ideology too having compiled the 2001 The Responsibility to Protect Report of the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty.

It is no wonder that even South Africans are wondering exactly which side of the fence Ramaphosa is on. He is no longer the hero of the miners in 1982 for thirty years later he had as board member of Lonmin PLC upheld the decision to shoot at striking miners of whom 34 were killed. He is no longer the trade union leader but a millionaire businessmen and many continue to wonder where his assets are hidden. He is one of Africa’s richest men with a personal fortune of $700m. His companies include being franchise holder for McDonalds and Coca Cola in South Africa.

The man travelling to preach to Sri Lanka about reconciliation is himself another black man pulled by the white man’s strings. We are seeing strings of these now being used by the West who have found that Americanized Asians/Africans go after their own with far more vengeance than the whites.

South Africa’s apartheid and Sri Lanka’s terrorism are two poles apart and there is no comparisons. Whites came to Africa and took over African lands and treated the real land owners as slaves separating and segregating them. The Tamils have no such evidence to remotely suggest that they have been treated any less than equals in certain areas Tamil fare far better than the average Sinhalese. Terrorism affected all the communities in Sri Lanka with terrorists taking the lives of Sinhalese, Tamils, Muslims, Burghers even foreigners. While whites and blacks may have reason to reconcile in South Africa under apartheid policies, in Sri Lanka we do not feel any reason to reconcile with terrorists and we have no reason to reconcile with Tamils because the Sinhalese never fought with the Tamils the enemy at all times were LTTE terrorists. What or who thinks that Sri Lanka should reconcile with Terrorists? Why is that message not getting clearly conveyed to the meddling busy body foreign envoys, the UN and the nosy-parker NGOs/INGOs?

Shenali D Waduge

ලංකාව ඇතුලත වෙනම රාජ්‍යයක් පිහිටුවීමට උදව් නොදීම

August 22nd, 2015

චන්ද්‍රසිරි විජයවික්‍රම

රනිල් වික්‍රමසිංහ මහතා අගමැති වශයෙන් දිවුරුම්දීමේදී ජේ ආර් ජේ ව්‍යවස්ථාවේ 7 වන ෂෙඩූල් එකට අනුව රටතුල වෙනම රජ්‍යයක් පිහිටුවීමට උදව් නොකරණවාය යන දිවුරුම් ප්‍රකාශයද ප්‍රසිද්ධියේ කළේය. මෙය ඔහුගේ අතීත ක්‍රියාවලිය ගැන මහජනයා තුල ඇති මත, ආකල්ප හා සැක දුරුකරලීමේ උපායක් වූවා වියහැකිය.

රටවල් වල නීති හා ගොන් නීති ඇත. කෙරෙන නීති හා නොකෙරෙන නීති ඇත. බොරු නීතිද ඇත. හිතපු නීතිය වෙනුවට හිතපු නැති දෙයක් සිදුවෙන්නටද පුළුවණ. ගැටළු විසඳනවා වෙනුවට පැණවූ නීතිය අළුත් ප්‍රශ්න මතුකලා විය හැකිය. සමහරු දැන දැනම හොර නීති ගේනවාද විය හැකිය. පොතේ ඇති නීතිය කුමක්ද කියා විවරණය කරන්න උසාවි ඇත. එය වෙනම කතාවකි. නඩුකාරයින් අනුව හා කාලය හා අවස්ථාව අනුව විවරණ වෙනස්වේ. මේ මොන පැත්තෙන බැලුවත් ඉහතකී 7 ෂෙඩූල් නීතිය ඇස්බැන්‌දුමක් පමණය. ඉන්දියාවේ, ලංකාවේ හෝ ඇමෙරිකාවේ පොත් වල තිබෙන නීති හරියට ක්‍රියාත්මක වුනා නම්, වෙනවා නම්  ඒ රටවල් මිහිබට සුරපුරවල් නොවන්නේද?

ලංකාවේ 7 ෂෙඩූල් එක ඇස්බැන්‌දුමක්/මුසාවක් යයි කීමට හේතුව කුමක්ද? වෙනම රාජ්‍යයක් පිහිටුවීමට උදව් කරන්නේ කෙසේද යන්න නොසලකා, වෙනම රාජ්‍යයක් පිහිටුවීමට උදව් නොකරන්නේ කෙසේද යන්න විස්තර කල නොහැකි නිසාය. මේ නිසා ඇත්තවශයෙන්ම ලංකාව ඇතුලත වෙනම රාජ්‍යයක් පිහිටුවීම වලක්වන්නට අවශ්‍යනම්, වෙනම රාජ්‍යයක් පිහිටුවීමට උදව් වන කාරණා ලැයිස්තුවක් සාදා ඒවා නොකලයුතු බව 7 ෂෙඩූල් එකේ සඳහන් කල යුතුය.

ලංකාවේ වෙනම රාජ්‍යයක් පිහිටුවීමට උදව් කරන්නේ කෙසේද?

1. වෙනම රාජ්‍යයක් පිහිටුවීමට යෝජනාව මුලින්ම ආවේ 1921 දී පොන්නම්බලම් අරුණාචලම් ගෙනි. 1949 දී චෙල්වනායගම් දෙමළ රාජ්‍ය පක්‍ෂය පිහිටුවේය. 1976 දී වඩ්ඩුකෝඩ්ඩෙයි යෝජනාව ආවේය. 1987 දී ගෙනා 13 වන සංශොධනය අනුව ලංකාවේ දෙමළ නිජ භූමියක් ඇත යන චෙල්වනායගම් මිථ්‍යාවට පණදී ඇත. 2009 දී මේ සියළුම මත යුද්ධ බලයෙන් පරාජය කරණ ලදී. එහෙත් 2014 දී විග්නේශ්වරන් සිංහල ආණ්ඩු 1948 න් පසුව දෙමළ ජනයා සමූලඝාතනය කරන බව කියා සිටියේය. මෙම කතා හා අධස් අතරින් පැහැදිළිවම ප්‍රතික්‍ෂේප වුනේ 1985 තිම්පු යෝජනා හතර පමණය. ඉතින් මේ අදහස් තවදුරටත් කියාගෙන යාමට ඉඩදීම 7 ෂෙඩූල් එකට පටහැනි නැද්ද? මේවා කරගෙන් යද්දී 7 ෂෙඩූල් එක අනුව දිවුරන්න පුළුවන් නොවේද?  මේ අනුව 7 ෂෙඩූල් එක කියන්නේ වළාකුල් වලින් සාදාගත් දැලක් නොවේද? කොටින් තබා මකුළුවෙක් වත් ඊට හසු නොවේ.

2. දැන හෝ නොදැන වෙනම රාජ්‍යයක් පිහිටුවීමට හේතු උපකාරවන ඉණිමං සදාදීම, පාර කපාදීම 7 ෂෙඩූල් එකට පටහැනි නැද්ද? මේ කාරණයේදී වුවත් දෙපැත්තක් ඇත. ඉංගිරිස් වලින් කියනවා නම් කමිෂන් හා ඔමිෂන් ය. කරණය හා අකරණය කියා සිංහලෙන් කියන්නට පුළුවන.

ලංකාවේ පෙඩරල් කාරයින් ඉන්දියාවේ පෙඩරල් කාරයින්ට වෙනස් ය. ලංකාවේ අය ඉල්ලන්නේ ස්වයංපාලන අයිතියද සහිත පෙඩරල් එකය. එසේ ඉල්ලන පෙඩරල් දීමට රනිල් සමග දැන් ඉන්නා රාජිත, ජයම්පති වික්‍රමරත්න, එරාන් වික්‍රමරත්න, මංගල සමරවීර යනාදී පෙරහැරක්ම සිටිති. මෙසේ පෙඩරල් ඉල්ලන අයට 13 සංශොධනය යටතේ ඉදිරියට ගොස් ඉඩම් හා පොළිස් බලතලදීම 7 ෂෙඩූල් එකට අනුකූලද?

කොසොවෝ ආකාරයේ චන්දයක් ඉල්ලුවේ චෙල්වනායගම් කාලයේ සිටමය. එසේ තිබියදී යූ එන් ඒජන්සි හරහා ඉදිරියේ උතුරේ හා නැගෙනහිර ජනමත විචාරණයකට ඉඩ පාදා ගැනීමට ආණ්ඩුවෙන්ම ඉඩදීම 7 ෂෙඩූල් එකට එකඟද?

3. ටැමිල් නාඩ් ලංකාවට යා කරන්න පාලමක් හා බිංගෙයක් හදන්නට යාම ලංකාව ටැමිල් නාඩ් වල කොටසක් කිරීම නොවේද? එසේ නම් එය 7 ෂෙඩූල් එකට ගැලපේද?

4. විග්නේශ්වරන් හා අනිත් අය රට කැඩීමට කෙළින්ම තුඩුදෙන කතා කරද්දී රටේ ඒකීය භාවය රකිනවාය කියන රාජ්‍ය නිලධාරීන් (ජනාධිපති, අගමැති, ඇමතිලා) ඒ ගැන නිහඬව සිටීම (අකරණය) 7 ෂෙඩූල් එකට එකඟද?

මේ කාරණා ගැන හොඳින්ම දන්නා කෙනෙක්නම් දයාන් ජයතිලක මහතාය. මේ කාරණා ගැන කතා කිරීමේ වගකීම ඇත්තේ කාටද? මාදුළුවාවේ සෝභිත හිමිටද? රතන හිමිටද? චම්පික රණවකටද?

මහින්ද පිල මේ ගැන කරන්නට යන්නේ කුමක්ද? බොදු බල සේනාව/බොදු ජන පෙරමුණ මේ ගැන පැහැදිලි කර ගම්වල පත්‍රිකා බෙදන්නට සිතනවාද?

මෙම 7 ෂෙඩූල් එක ඇස්බැන්‌දුමක් පමණක් බව සමහරවිට ජනාධිපතිතුමාවත් නොසිතුවා විය හැකිය.

චන්ද්‍රසිරි විජයවික්‍රම

Copyright © 2016 All Rights Reserved. Powered by Wordpress