අලූත් විගණන පනතින් විගණකාධිපතිගේ බලතල විශාල ලෙස කපලා..කෝප් කමිටුවට වාර්තා දෙන්නත් බෑ..

March 19th, 2017

යසවර්ධන රුද්රිගු– Deshaya.lk

සංශෝධිත විගණන පනත මගින් විගණකාධිපති ආණ්ඩුවේ වෛරක්කාරයකු ලෙස සලකා කටයුතු කර ඇති බව පෙනෙන්නට තිබෙන නිසා තමා සංශෝධිත විගණන පනතට නිරීක්ෂණ ඉදිරිපත් කිරීමෙන් වැළකී සිටි බව විගණකාධිපති ගාමිණී විජේසිංහ පැවසුවේය.

තමාගේ නිරීක්ෂණ සඳහා එවා ඇති සංශෝධිත විගණන පනතේ අවසාන කෙටුම්පත පිළිබඳ තමා කිසිදු මතයක් ඉදිරිපත් නොකරන බව වාචිකව දැනුම් දුන්නේ යැයි ඔහු කීවේය. මුලින් කෙටුම්පත් කළ විගණන පනතට දීර්ඝ කාලයක් තිස්සේ විටින් විට සංශෝධන එක් කිරීම නිසා එය කිසිදු බලයක් නොමැති ලියැවිල්ලක් බවට පත්ව ඇතැයි ඔහු කීය. පනතේ සංශෝධන සිදුකර ඇත්තේ තවත් වෙනසක් කිරීමට ඉඩ නොලැබෙන පරිදි යැයි ඔහු සඳහන් කරයි. විගණකාධිපති දෙපාර්තමේන්තුවේ ප්‍රධානියා වශයෙන් තමා සතු ස්වාධීන බලතල පවා සංශෝධන මගින් අහිමිකර ඇති බව පවසන විගණකාධිපතිවරයා තවදුරටත් අවධාරණය කරන්නේ විගණනය කිරීමෙන් පසු විගණක මතය ඉදිරිපත් කිරීමේ බලතල පවා විගණන කොමිසමට පවරා ඇති බවයි.

කෝප් කමිටු ආදී පාර්ලිමේන්තු කමිටුවලට සහය දීමේ බලය විගණකාධිපතිගේ රාජකාරියක් ලෙස මුල් පනතේ සඳහන් කර තිබුණද, සංශෝධනය කිරීමේදී එම මුළු ඡේදයම ඉවත්කර තිබීම නිසා තම මතය එම කමිටුවලට ලබාගැනීම අහිමිකර ඇති බව ඔහු පවසයි. කැඳවීමක් ලැබුණහොත් පමණක් තමාට එම කමිටුවලට පැමිණීමට හැකිවන බවද ඔහු පෙන්වා දෙයි. මෙලෙස සංශෝධනය කර තම බලතල කප්පාදුවට ලක්කර ඇත්තේ විගණකාධිපති රාජ්‍ය අංශයේ පවතින දූෂණ, වංචා සහ අවිධිමත් ක්‍රියා නිරතුරුව හෙළිකිරීම නිසා දූෂිත නිලධාරීන්ට ඒවායේ නිරතවීම අපහසුවීම නිසා යැයි ඔහු හෙළි කළේය. මෙම විගණන පනත ගැසට් මගින් ප්‍රකාශයට පත්කළද, එයට දැඩි ලෙස විරෝධතා එල්ලවීමට ඉඩ ඇති නිසා කිසිදු විටෙක එය ක්‍රියාත්මක කළ නොහැකි වනු ඇතැයි තමා විශ්වාස කරන බව හෙතෙම පැවසීය.


Gota, Navi Pillay clash over clash over

March 19th, 2017

By Sulochana Ramiah Mohan Courtesy Ceylon Today

Former United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Navi pillay told Ceylon Today, that when she met former Defence Secretary Gotabaya Rajapaksa during her visit to Sri Lanka and urged him to maintain investigations to establish where about of missing persons, he had stated, These people do not want to accept that their families are dead

She added that Rajapaksa then called her to a meeting with a Sinhalese father, who had lost his son who was serving as a soldier. “The weeping father told us of his anguish in not knowing what happened to his only son and wanted the body produced.

Gotabaya told him in no uncertain words, ‘your son is dead and you must accept that,'” Pillay said.

She added: “The authorities quite clearly know or presume death, of those missing. It would be absurd not to do so bearing in mind the context of war and the non-return of persons (allowing for a small number who may have fled to shelter or detention outside the country).” At the moment, Sri Lanka is embattled with allegations of human rights violations and facing a tough time at the 34th session of the UNHRC in Geneva. Pillay was contacted by Ceylon Today after ‘years of attempts’ to get her views on the progress seen in the island since the war came to an end in 2009.

She also said the goals of reconciliation and nation- building cannot be served without justice and accountability, and reparation for victims.

She further stated: “I would say that the primary purpose of documenting lists of the names of ‘missing’ persons is to begin and sustain investigations until justice is done.” She added it should not be an exercise on its own to shelve, or dust one’s hands off the imperative for proper investigation, prosecution and punishment of crimes.

“Where factual or witness accounts are available, and your list of individuals and groups indicate this, that should be grounds for immediate investigations, for purposes of prosecution,” Pillay added. She also said this procedure was held in Rwanda after the genocide there. “The Government of Rwanda asked the UNSC to set up the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR).

“The Court relied on factual accounts by witnesses of the killings. Nobody was produced, no forensic evidence of deaths, no way of determining the numbers of persons killed or the numbers of mass graves. The Court respected the Rwandese cultural aversion to exhumations.

“The Court accepted testimony of witnesses that thousands of Tutsi were killed – because the people they knew were not around any longer.

“The Court looked at the context of conflict and war and evidence from eyewitnesses as well as observers and experts. The ICTR and the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) are precedents that fair trials and impartial justice can be rendered even though a full documentation of all missing persons, presumed killed, in the war were not available,” Pillay added.

Response from Gotabaya Rajapaksa

Former Defence Secretary Gotabaya Rajapaksa admitted that when he met Pillay, he pointed out to her a Sinhalese who did not want to accept his son’s death.

He, however, noted that Pillay had only stated one side of the entire story of the missing persons, which he revealed to her.

In his response, Rajapaksa said, “There are many events related to the missing persons and what I pointed out to her was ‘one aspect’ of it, how parents did not want to accept their families died in the war and they think they are ‘alive’.”

He said when people joined the LTTE to fight, their families were elsewhere. “They had no knowledge where these combatants were. That is the fact and when they died in the battlefield and their bodies were not recovered but buried, and parents think they are still living.”

He noted that these parents then claimed their children were in the detention camps when there were no such secret camps anywhere. “When Pillay went to meet the people in the North, she was told that their children are kept in secret camps and she was also under the same impression.

“I told Pillay, ‘no’, there aren’t anyone other than the persons taken into custody and their names are in our database and these detainees were in Galle at that time and no parents were willing to accept that other than this listed documented detainees. Others are not living. This happened during the JVP times too,” Rajapaksa explained.

His view was that some of those who went missing are now living overseas and had pointed out to Pillay an example where a missing person was found to be living in Canada.

He also noted that ‘missing persons’ is not a simple matter to probe as it is quite complicated and he added that ‘it does not mean it applies to ‘everybody’.

“One aspect of the missing persons is what I am elaborating here,” Rajapaksa said.

Talking about the people who surrendered to the military he said ‘there is no evidence’ where anyone surrendered or not. “People only came up with various stories based on rumours. They claimed that some saw surrendering or heard from others, but none saw for themselves physically surrendering. This is the reality of war. One cannot believe these claims,” Rajapaksa said. He said when the war in the North began, nearly 5,000 troupes died and said, “If a powerful army lost so many, imagine how many from the LTTE side would have perished. They did not have the fire power or a powerful army like ours.” When pointed out that there were victims who mentioned names of military officials to whom their loved ones had surrendered, Rajapaksa responded: “Can you believe they know these officers? I don’t think even the Army Commander knows his officials on the battlefield. These claims were created later, way after the war ended.

“Tamil people in remote areas cannot even identify (any) President or Prime Minister of our country. How can they point at a military officer and mention their names?” he questioned.

“In such an atmosphere, the government is about to establish an Office of the Missing Persons, which I would say, is unrealistic,” Rajapaksa said.

Western Remedies for Lanka’s Ills: Lessons From History

March 19th, 2017

By Dr Palitha Kohona (Former Ambassador and Permanent Representative of Sri Lanka to the UN) Courtesy Ceylon Today

Sri Lanka commemorated a dark day in its long and proud history earlier this month. We recalled the cession of our sovereignty to King George III of Britain following the signature of the Kandyan Convention on 2/3 March 1815 in the historic Audience Hall.

On 1 March 2017, in the same Audience Hall, President Sirisena made the much belated pronouncement to remove from the list of traitors in the government Gazette those who valiantly but vainly struggled against the troops of George III two years later to recover the sovereignty that we had lost through a combination of factors, mostly beyond our control.

Among others, a lack of awareness of the momentous developments in the contemporary world now dominated by the superpower, Britain, debilitating economic pressures, sheer exhaustion after having resisted foreign efforts to subvert our independence for over three centuries, a lack of confidence in the king, petty jealousies, a paucity of trust among the leaders, internal squabbling and, very importantly, a naive belief by some that prescriptions by external entities, essentially by European expansionist powers, would somehow be a panacea for our problems. Two years later, as Britain blithely reneged on its treaty commitments, our vain efforts to regain the country’s sovereignty, spearheaded by the Kandyan aristocracy, were ruthlessly crushed with unmitigated brutality, even though the rebellion dragged on for over one year. Hundreds were executed, thousands killed in the fighting or displaced and their possessions expropriated by the British crown. The Perfidious Albion had yet to discover human rights, war crimes and the rules of war.

History can teach us much. But those who refuse to learn from history or are dismissive of its lessons are condemned to relive history with all its attendant miseries.

Today we are witnessing events with familiar echoes to those that resulted in the cession of our sovereignty in 1815, unfolding in slow motion, including a worrying willingness to unquestioningly comply with the prescriptions of Western powers and their willing tools, such as the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights and pliant NGOs. Although in 1815, the leaders of Kandy, menacingly hemmed in by a hostile world power, had little access to developments in the external world, today this is not the case.

Compromising sovereignty

After having eliminated the brutal terrorist challenge to its sovereignty and unitary existence in 2009, Sri Lanka seems to be again drifting in the direction of compromising on the very sovereignty that it sacrificed the lives of 21,000 young men and women to defend. Worryingly, the economy is under considerable pressure, internal divisions and a lack of confidence in the government are widespread and the selfish goals of power, privilege and wealth are taking precedence over national interest.

Meanwhile, demands for compromises on the country’s right to manage its own domestic affairs and its sovereignty are becoming shrill by the day, based essentially on the UNHRC resolution of 1 October 2015 on Sri Lanka, particularly from the leadership of the Tamil minority some of whom blindly complied with the dictates of the LTTE, the NGO community and some international journalists. The names of Taylor Dilbert of the Huffington Post and Callum Macrae of Channel 4, Yasmin Sooka and the International Crisis Group come immediately to mind. Media outlets spread far and wide, from The Economist and the AFP, to the Gulf News and journals as far away as the Philippines tend to pick up these lopsided views without question generating global public opinion in the process.

Simultaneously, we observe signs of seething resentment seeping through the majority community. These two tendencies should worry the government which has mostly tended to respond sympathetically or without comment to the demands of pressure groups using the Resolution and this can only bode ill for the future of the country. As is evident from recent experiences elsewhere in the world, once the hounds of conflict are let loose, the purveyors of advice (and demands) for settling our problems will not have much to offer and will make themselves scarce. Think of South Sudan, Syria and Libya.

Prudently, President Sirisena, conscious of the growing unease in the country, has ruled out the use of foreign judges to determine cases against service personnel subjected to allegations of war crimes. He has said that he, “is not going to allow non-governmental organizations to dictate how to run (his) government.” A day after the UN HCHR criticized Sri Lanka’s “worryingly slow” progress in facing its ‘war time’ past, he emphatically stated, “I will not listen to their calls to prosecute my troops.” The Prime Minister has taken a similar position. The Foreign Minister, on the other hand, nuanced the message when he recently said in Geneva: ‘In the face of roadblocks and other obstacles in the day to day world of realpolitik, there may have to be detours from time to time, but the destination will remain the same. Our resolve to see the transitional justice process through has not diminished.’ Thus leaving serious doubts about what the President meant.

LTTE atrocities

It is nevertheless curious that the international media and the NGOs continue to noisily harp on human rights violations and war crimes allegedly committed by service personnel, while the endless massacres of villagers, bombings of sacred sites, buses, trains and busy cities, the slaughter of devotees and monks at places of pilgrimage, extensive ethnic cleansing, and the recruitment of thousands of child combatants by the LTTE are hardly mentioned. Those who collected funds for the LTTE to purchase weapons, explosives to carry out the dastardly bombings, recruit children for combat purposes and who continue to live comfortably in Western countries do not get mentioned in the think pieces, pained reports and press releases. The motives of these entities remain seriously suspect due to their lopsided campaign.

Many a commentator has asked whether it was necessary for Sri Lanka to have accepted the terms of the UNHRC resolution of 1 October 2015 and proceeded to cosponsor it with such eager enthusiasm given the largely one sided and onerous nature of some of its provisions and the distinct risk of aggravating dormant ethnic tensions within the country. Did Sri Lanka have no option but to accommodate the demands of certain countries of the West led by the US, the reasons for whose single minded targeting of Sri Lanka have never been convincingly explained, and who were egged on by the vociferous and well resourced Tamil lobby overseas and the NGOs. Was the decision, inter alia, to agree to a constitutional reform process, to reduce the number of national security forces in the North and the East, to allow mechanisms established in accordance with the Resolution to obtain assistance, including financial, from international sources, to establish an independent judicial and prosecutorial mechanism with the participation of foreign personnel, including judges, to repeal security related legislation which had served its purposes well in the past, to create mechanisms designed to investigate primarily the infractions allegedly committed by the security forces, as dictated by the Western drafters of the resolution, well considered given the implications for Sri Lanka’s sovereign right to manage its own internal affairs and its domestic ethnic harmony. The endless commentary demonizing the soldiers who rid the country of terrorism, while having an undoubted demoralizing effect (perhaps intended) is also creating widespread disenchantment of the government.

While the UNHRC adopts resolutions selectively against targeted countries, usually those that have fallen into disfavour with the West and least capable of defending themselves, these are regularly ignored, Sri Lanka proceeded to cosponsor the resolution creating at least a moral obligation to comply with it. The moral obligation so blithely accepted will hang over not only the present government but also future governments. If cosponsoring was the favoured option of the government, and in view of the sympathy that existed for the newly elected President, were all possibilities for mitigating the provisions of the resolution explored?

Global currents

It would be difficult to contend in the contemporary world that the leaders of the government were unaware of existing global currents when it agreed to cosponsor the resolution.

The effects of resolutions of the UNHRC are well known. The UNHRC or the High Commissioner have no powers of enforcement and the other target countries have highlighted this reality.

If generating goodwill in the West to replace existing sources of development finance with new ones, and attracting investments, were among the objectives for cosponsoring the resolution, that would be a case of not properly appreciating global realities. The West was in no condition to replace China as a key source of development funding and this has now become embarrassingly obvious. Many countries of the West are themselves lining up at the gates of Beijing looking for trading opportunities and investments. Furthermore, the need to keep traditional friends on side was brusquely ignored in accepting Western prescriptions (demands?), setting unmanageable precedents, and creating problems not only for the present but for future governments as well. Given that many developing countries, given their own circumstances, were traditionally inclined to sympathize with Sri Lanka, keeping them on side by adopting a more nuanced approach would have been the strategically sensible thing to do.

While one could fault the confrontational approach of the previous Rajapaksa administration, the ready willingness of the current managers of foreign relations to accommodate the dictates of the West, raises serious issues. Had a more nuanced approach been adopted, it would have been possible to exploit the opportunity presented by the departure of UK’s David Cameron and Secretary of State Clinton, to Sri Lanka’s advantage. For one, the messianic pursuit of Sri Lanka by Cameron (Cameron was under pressure from the Tamil voter bloc in the UK and Tamil contributors to the Conservative election funds) and those who served Clinton (the human rights activists in diplomatic positions appointed by Obama were hell bent on pursuing the Rajapaksas) would have ended. Not only do those who replaced the human rights warriors of the previous administrations have other more important fish to fry, they also may not have the same commitment to causes that occupied the thinking of the previous tormentors of Sri Lanka. According to reports, the US has even threatened to withdraw from the UNHRC.

The current effort to seek extra time to implement the provisions of the resolution will only strengthen the hand of those who will continue to exert pressure to have those commitments discharged to the letter and more. Note the demonstrations being staged in front of the security establishments in Mullaitivu and Iranamadu. These demands are being justified on the basis of the resolution cosponsored by Sri Lanka itself on 1 October 2015. The same demonstrators were conspicuously absent when the LTTE built those installations. In addition, seeking a time frame creates the distinct possibility of keeping alive issues that may not be foremost in the minds of the majority of Sri Lankans. With the economy posing an unprecedented challenge to the country and the government, it would have been more prudent to make that the priority of the government rather than Geneva.

Dr P .Saravanamuttu at the Military Academy

March 19th, 2017


Any person with an iota of IQ would have hidden his head in utter shame seeing garlanded Dr Pakiyasothi Saravanmuttu being welcomed to the John Kothalawala Military academy as a guest of honour by the Principal of the institution.

To recognize Dr PS is simply a case of Sri Lanka military authorities leaping upon the sacred alter either through compulsion by the higher political movers or an act of putting one’s foot in it perpetrated by the military men seeking short term favours from their masters. In either scenario, it is indeed an ugly act which sticks in one’s gullet.

Dr PS career speaks volumes about his direct and indirect support of the objectives and agenda which contradicts Sri Lankan armed forces core values and issues faced during the last three decades. The most critical issue which confronted Sri Lankan armed forces was to tackle LTTE terrorism backed by the separatists. Dr PS  was firmly on the side opposite the Sri Lankan armed forces and was highly critical of the role played by them. After the war Dr PS had been riding the high horse in his numerous tasks in running down the achievements of the military to please his separatist’s bloc and paymasters. One glaring example is the his push for the foreign judges to investigate the ‘war crimes’ said to be committed by the members of the Sri Lankan armed forces. Given below is a report of Dr PS’s views which does not take into account the sovereign rights of the nation and its Parliament. I quote,

Addressing the media at the Government Information Department, Secretary to the group of activists Dr. Paikiasothy Saravanamuttu said that particular recommendation had been made in accordance with the Geneva Resolution adopted in Oct, 2015. The Executive Director of the Centre for Policy Alternatives (CPA) underscored the full participation of foreign personnel while emphasizing the pivotal importance of a proper selection process for both local and foreign judges and other personnel.”

This is how Dr PS attempted to bend the constitutional rights of the Nation to suit his narrow agenda. On another piece on Dr PK, a writer comments,

   Dr. Pakiasothy Saravanamuthy (Secretary)

Dr. Pakiasothy is the Executive Director of the CPA. CPA has since its inception been at the forefront of the advocacy of federalism as a political and constitutional idea for addressing many of the constitutional problems and anomalies that characterize the Sri Lankan State.” (www.cpalanka.org)

CPA was at the forefront of the 2002 Norwegian backed Cease Fire Agreement and recipient of Rs. 272.31 mn during the three-year period. Some of these funding sources Norwegian Embassy, Commission Des Communautes (Norway), European Commission, European Union, National Endowment for Democracy (US),

Donors to CPA include USAID, Canadian International Development Agency, EU, Ford Foundation, GTZ, National Democratic Institute, NORAD, OXFAM, Save the Children Sri Lanka, Asia Foundation, Berghof Foundation, Friedrich-Naumann-Stiftung, UNICEF, UNDP, UNHCR

He was openly critical of the GOSL banning 16 LTTE fronts under UNSC Resolution 1373 in 2014 though not calling that they be investigated to prove their links to the LTTE and thereafter have them removed if not..”

To add insult to the injury Dr PK ‘s handling of the activities and especially the administration of the vast funds donated by numerous sources to his CPA has opened many a query.

Quoting Colombo Telegraph Dr Saravanamuttu is himself accused of similar kinds of corruption – billing for un-held workshops, double billing scandals; i.e getting grants from two donors to do the same task and duplicating receipts, hotel bills and other bills to submit to donors (perhaps even submitting same bills to multiple donors), and hoodwinking donors by filing expenses under safe cost columns.” www.colombotelegraph.com
Paikiasothy Saravanamuttu & CPA Slip White-Collar Crime Under ‘Executive-Summary’ Carpet www.colombotelegraph.com….”

Whistleblowers continue to send us information that indicates that there is fraud, nepotism, favoritism, selective punishment, signature forgeries and other serious problems in the CPA.  We are in the process of investigating these allegations. We have given more than enough time to CPA to respond.  It is up to the CPA to reply and clear its name. It is European Union’s and UNESCO’S duty to compare the project proposals and the bills which the CPA and IFJ have submitted and make them public. What we have shown is how people pocket NGO money and how they cheat the donors by producing forged bills. The story is still unfolding.

We conclude this by quoting the anti-corruption activist, a retired civil servant who checked the documents against the allegations: When you first spoke to me about these allegations I couldn’t believe something like this could’ve happened under Dr Sara, but after the investigation I can say, ‘the CPA is a CESSPIT OF BILE”’.”

Above is a thumb sketch of Dr PS who was invited as a guest of honour and dully garlanded by Sri Lanka’s premier military academy.

It should be clear to any discriminating reader that Dr PS is not an astute member of the civil society nor a person who recognizes the importance of the Nation State. He is indeed a Devil’s advocate or a Devil dodger. The persons of his calibre if invited to important occasions of the armed forces let alone any other nationally significant functions will only bring disgrace and humiliation,

It is not too late to identify properly the individuals who carry fire in one hand and water in the other.


Root Cause of SriLankan Tribulations

March 19th, 2017

Kanthar P Balanathan, Australia

This article is in response to a video prepared and circulated by Dr. Mahipal Sing Rathore. The talk can be viewed on YouTube page ref: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yBeT2OcAiyw

Although the narrator attempts to focus on some issues, Mahipal has disregarded to discuss the main issues and problems generated by Tamils attempt at every nodal point. Mahipal has forgotten the stumbles during the State Council period and how the Tamil politicians did muddy up the political atmosphere in SriLanka (SL).

GG Ponnambalam (GGP) after returning from the UK with a first class degree in natural sciences and a MA, LLB, became a leading criminal lawyer. However, he made a marathon crusade for 50/50 speech in the state council. In a marathon speech, GGP made an notorious demand of 50-50% representation in governance on the 15th March 1939. Ie. 50% Sinhalese and 50% the rest.

Here any educated literate and or an intellectual, who has knowledge in democratic principles, will understand how democracy works. GGP with all his excellence, certificates from the UK, failed to understand the democratic principles. One will only presume that GGP has failed to acquire adequate appreciation of the theoretical and practical training with his studies in science, law etc. And that’s from the UK. How could a lawyer fail to understand the democratic principles?

This demand he made does not reveal whether his lack of appreciation in the theoretical and practical training he obtained did fail or he was instigated by an external influence to demand to stir up the SriLankan politics. Whatever it is, GGP should not have placed that demand. Further an exceprt is given below of GGP’s ignorance;

Publisher of the book, Dr. K. Indra Kumar makes the note below:

Ref: https://docs.google.com/viewerng/viewer?url=http://new.sangam.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/Ponnambalam-50-50-Speech1.pdf

This is the highest degree of duplicity and folly.


Instead, GGP could have demanded a separate country for the Tamils, and if GGP loved the Burgers and Muslims he could have stated that Tamils will embrace the above two into their own separate land. Why did he not demand a separate state, but 50-50 representation? GGP with his educational knowledge and being domiciled in the North, knew very well, that Tamils cannot survive without the help of the resources of the Sinhala, which is human, natural, and production resources. It is a shame on the Tamils to play this fox cunning theme.

Naturally, the majority of a country will generate fear and threat to their survival and governance.

Then once he became a minister, he voted to disfranchise one million Indian Tamils. This is a pure indication of a confused mind of GGP and power hunger. The principles in his mind ended up with conflicts. What has his supporters to say now? If the Tamil politicians did not support the disfranchisement, then they should have taken it to the Privy Council, which they did not. Internally in their mind they wanted disfranchisement of the Indian Tamils.

On education and schools: The British always did practice, divide and rule, wherever they ruled. The Tamils sucked into the British to get what they wanted. The Sinhales did not suck into the British. However, who did get good education? All the elites from the Tamil community did get good education, whereas 100% of the low cast Tamils failed to get good education. After few years the British knew the main issues among the Tamils and allowed Tamils to get education. However, the education was limited.

Therefore it is not the Tamils or Sinhales who built good schools in the North and East. It is the British who built the schools in the N&E. The Sinhales failed here.

In 1949, SJVC floated his Federal Party and started his satyagraha and the disobedience campaign, and gave immense problem to the government.

In 1970, indirectly the Tamil Students Peravai stared the arms struggle by floating Kuttimani & Thangathurai to take up arms. They were smugglers from Valvettiturai. Prabakaran was not seen in the armed environment until 1972, when he was demanded to show his capability by shooting someone. Thats when Prabakaran shot Alfred Duraiyappa in 1974 to prove his capability. He was then absorbed into the Tamil New Tigers led by Uma Maheswaran. Subsequent to the Vaddukoddai resolution in 1976, TNT converged as LTTE under the leadership of Uma Maheswaran. Uma Maheswaran and Prabakaran exchanged shots in Pandi Bajar in 1981 to eliminate to grab leadership. Failure of Uma Maheswaran instigated him to float PLOTE.

Prabakaran was educated only up to 8th standard and did not complete his 9th grade. Therefore anyone states Prabakaran is genius, the writer has questions about the person’s competency in the topic and integrity.

Dr Mahipal S Rathore states in his video that Prabakaran was ideology driven, organised and disciplined, ran a shadow government etc. Well I can agree to some point only. He was not 100% ideology driven. Anton Balasingham educated him and several cadre of the LTTE. In some areas Prabakaran was disciplined etc., but to be ideology driven, he should have proved himself. To murder Hundreds and hundreds of people, politicians and particularly Rajiv Ghandi, non-one can say that he is ideology driven. If a group converges to be a terrorist group then the group is not led by an Ideologist. Prabakaran placed an order that no one in the LTTE cadre should marry. However, in 1974 he got married and that’s with love.

Prabakaran did not run a shadow government in Mullaittivu. He ran a terrorist outfit. He had to depend on SriLankan government on food, medical supplies and removed all assets belonging to the SL government in the North.

If the SriLankan government wanted to defeat the LTTE then they could have done without any difficulty. However, the then timid government who were slaves to the west were ordered not to. This gave the LTTE to boast and run a terrorist outfit. Who financed the LTTE? Do we think the Tamil Diaspora had that amount of resources to finance the LTTE to purchase planes and ships? Everyone knows who finance terrorists around the world.

As far as Tamil Nadu is concerned the Tamil Nadu politicians used the SriLankan Tamil issues as a trump card for their politics. They can easily demand a separate country from India, which they are not prepared to. Why would they demand a separate country in SriLanka, knowing the scarcity of resources in the N&E? All internal and cunning politics.

It may appear to someone that someone may have prepared this video contents which Dr Mahipal Sing Rathore has uploaded onto YouTube.

It is a polite request that anyone who want to talk about the SriLankan issues, please do a bit of research before you conclude on your views. Because it may project an imprudent and irrational image on the Tamils of SriLanka.

Indian interventions in Sri Lanka

March 19th, 2017

Sultan M Hali

As far as Sri Lanka is concerned, the inhabitants of the Indian State of Tamil Nadu identify with the Sri Lankan Tamils who comprise 18 percent of Sri Lanka and are considered a minority. Sri Lanka was embroiled in a Civil War which commenced on July 23, 1983. It comprised an intermittent insurgency against the Sri Lankan government by the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), also known as the Tamil Tigers”, which fought to create an independent Tamil state called Tamil Eelam in the north and the east of the island. After a 26-year military campaign, the Sri Lankan military defeated the Tamil Tigers in May 2009, bringing the civil war to an end.

Sultan M Hali

It is believed that during the process of the breakup of East Pakistan, India staged the drama of hijacking its own passenger aircraft in January 1971 and landing it at Lahore before setting it on fire. Blaming Pakistan for the air piracy, India used it as an excuse to stop the over-flight of Pakistani military and civil aircraft over Indian airspace to block logistic support of East Pakistan from the West. Sri Lanka stepped in to permit landing rights for Pakistani aircraft to maintain the air-link between the two wings of Pakistan. After creation of Bangladesh, Indira Gandhi directed its spy agency RAW to take punitive action against Sri Lanka. RAW provided arms, training and monetary support to six Sri Lankan Tamil militant groups including LTTE.

India became more actively involved in the late 1980s, and on June 05, 1987 the Indian Air Force airdropped food parcels as well as weapons to Jaffna while it was under siege by Sri Lankan forces. At a time when the Sri Lankan government stated it was close to defeating the LTTE, India dropped 25 tons of food and medicine by parachute into areas held by the LTTE in a direct move of support to the rebels.

Indian interference was renewed under the watch of Narendra Modi, who was especially suspicious of Chinese investments in Sri Lanka. China had already completed the maritime port of Hambantota and was poised for further investments, when India interfered in the Sri Lankan elections and blocked the re-election of pro-Chinese Rajapaksa. Modi became the first Indian Prime Minister to visit Sri Lanka and in a bid to counter Chinese influence, especially Sri Lankan participation in the Maritime Silk Route coerced the new Sri Lankan government to suspend China’s US$ 1.4 billion Colombo Port project that broke ground during Chinese President Xi Jinping’s visit to the island.

India is also trying to block Chinese and Pakistani military hardware exports to Sri Lanka. Modi tends to gloss over India’s foray into military aviation exports, which have been plagued by missteps, shortfalls in support and poor communications. Dhruv helicopters supplied to Ecuador were withdrawn from use after a number of crashes and poor spares support from Hindustan Aeronautics Limited. Sale of Chetaks to Suriname was plagued by poor contract management and financial and administrative obstacles”, which led to helicopters being ready long before pilots were ready to be trained, leading to a delay in delivery of helicopters.

Pakistan was on the verge of finalising the sale of JF-17 Thunder fighter aircraft to the highly depleted Sri Lankan Air Force but once again Modi prevailed through an aggressive counter offer of its obsolete even before they entered service, Light Combat Aircraft Tejas. Indian Tamil are being infiltrated as visitors and refugees and being provided with Sri Lankan passports with the help of Indian Consulate General, Jaffna. Reportedly, an amount of $6,000/- is paid to Sri Lankan authorities for obtaining Sri Lankan Identity Card and passport.

A pro-Indian member of Sri Lankan parliament is supporting installation of statues of Indian/ Hindu dignitaries including Mahatma Gandhi. According to media reports, a statue of Mr. Gandhi was installed in the North which was later knocked down by unknown persons. The incident reflects the tense situation prevailing in the area as a result of ethnic conflict. Indian government is asking the Sri Lankan government to develop and maintain the Palaly Airport, Jaffna (Northern Province) to strengthen the links between Tamil population of Jaffna and Tamil Nadu. The feasibility study of the same was already conducted by an Indian company about six months back, however, the construction work did not commence. Sri Lankan government is still indecisive since the airport houses Sri

Lankan Air Force (SLAF) run facilities and is used for military flights. Continued Indian intervention in Sri Lanka will only antagonize the island state and isolate India.
—The writer is retired PAF Group Captain and a TV talk show host.
Email: sm_hali@yahoo.com

Idiots close down the Indian Consular Offices in Jaffna and Hambantota Immediately, lest they become another set of agency houses of Eelam and centers of Indian expansionism

March 19th, 2017

Dr Sudath Gunasekara


It was reported that the recently opened Indian Consular Office in Jaffna is providing forged documents to South India Tamils to migrate to northern Sri Lanka. This is a very serious threat to the security of the country that call for the immediate attention of all Sinhala people. T What hey have reported is only what they know. It could be only the tip of the iceberg.I have no doubt that the conspiracy in invading this country is being done in many different and subtle ways.. This is made easier in the present context of absolute anarchy and a Government doing everything to satisfy the Tamils, the Indian Government and the so called Tamil Diaspora the well known LTTE agents

I was surprised when the government opened two Indian Consular Offices  for this small Island of 25,000 Sq miles while there is already Assistant Commissioners office in the hill capital-Kandy that was opened long time ago to cater to needs of Estate Indian Labour  going to India to deposit their earnings and also those getting repatriated as Indian Citizens when the India and Pakistan citizenship Act was in operation. Now since the UNP Government of JR gave Sri Lankan Citizenship violating all existing laws  regarding grant of citizenship I personally don’t think there is a need even for this to continue in Kandy unless they want to firstly show their importance of being present here and also to carry out their subversive activities among the estate Tamils against the Sri Lankan Government. Under this situation I cannot  understand as to why these foolish Governments ,past as well as present agreed to open two more Consular Offices, one in Hambantota and another in Jaffna knowing the subversive agenda of the Indian Government and danger of giving the sword to the monkey. If these foolish politician knew the intentions of modern India and their past history they will never dream of putting more Indian serpents under their loin cloth.

All patriotic people must make a public cry for their closure

මංගල අස් නොකරන්නේ ඇයි?

March 19th, 2017

නලින් ද සිල්වා

මංගල සමරවීර විදේශ ඇමති. මෛත්‍රිපාල සිරිසේන ජනාධිපති. රනිල් වික්‍රමසිංහ අගමැති. මේ තුන් දෙනා විදේශ විනිසුරුවන්, දෙමුහුන් විනිසුරුවන්, ගැන කියන්නේ එකක් ම ද?. ඒ සියල්ල ඇත්ත විය හැකි ද? ඒ සඳහා ඉඩකඩක් තිබේ ද? මෛත්‍රිපාල නම් කියන්නේ විදේශ විනිසුරුවන් පත් නොකරන බවයි. රනිල් කියන එකෙහි තේරුම විදේශ විනිසුරුවන් පත් කිරීමට ඉඩක් නැති බවයි. එනම් ආණ්ඩුක්‍රම ව්‍යවස්ථාවට අනුව විදේශ විනිසුරුවන් පත් කිරීමට නොහැකි බවයි. ඒ දෙදෙනා ම තම ප්‍රකාශ කරන්නේ ලංකාවේ දී. මංගල ජෙනීවා ගොස් කියන්නේ ගිය වසරේ ආණ්ඩුව අනුග්‍රහය දැක් වූ ඊනියා ජාත්‍යන්තර යෝජනාව ක්‍රියාත්මක කිරීමට අවුරුදු දෙකක් කල් දිය යුතු බවයි. වෙනත් වචනවලින් කිවුවොත් විදෙස් විනිසුරුවන් පත් කිරීමට තව අවුරුදු දෙකක් කල් දිය යුතු බවයි. එංගලන්තය එයට එකඟයි. දෙමළ ජාතික සංධානය නම් එකඟ නැහැ. ඔවුන්ට දෙමුහුන් අද ම ඕන.

දැන් කාට හරි හිතෙන්න පුළුවන් මංගල ජෙනීවා ගොස් ආණ්ඩුවට විරුද්ධ මතයක් ප්‍රකාශ කර ඇතැයි කියා. එවිට ප්‍රශ්නය වන්නේ එහෙනම් මංගල තව දුරටත් විදේශ ඇමති ලෙස රඳවා ගෙන සිටින්නේ ඇයි ද යන්නයි. ඇමතියකුට ජාත්‍යන්තර මණ්ඩලයක ආණ්ඩුවට විරුද්ධ මතයක් ප්‍රකාශ කළ හැකි ද? ඊනියා කැබිනට් සාමූහික වගකීම මංගලට අදාළ නැද්ද? ජාත්‍යන්තරයට බොරු කියා ඔවුන් රැවටිය හැකි ද? මහින්ද ජාත්‍යන්තරයට බොරු කිවුව කියලා නේ චෝදනා කරන්නෙ.

මෙහි දී කරුණු දෙකක් සඳහන් කළ යුතුයි. එකක් මහින්ද ගැනයි. මහින්ද 13+ දෙන බවට විවිධ අයට පෙරොන්දු වුණු බව කියනවා. විශේෂයෙන් ම ඔහු ම ඉන්දියාවට ඒ පොරොන්දුව දුන් බව කියනවා. 13 දෙන බවට පොරොන්දුවක් වූ බවත් කියනවා. 13 දෙන බවට පොරොන්දු නොවී නම් ඉන්දියාව කොටි පරද්දන්න  උදවු නොදීමට තිබූ බව කියන දේශපාලන විචාරකයන් ද සිටිනවා. ඉන්දියාව කොටි පරද්දන්න උදවු නොදීම හෝ දීම හෝ කියන්නේ කුමක් ද? ඉන්දියාව ප්‍රභාකරන් නිදහස් කිරීමට බල කිරීම ද?

ඒ අවස්ථාවේ එංගලන්තයේ හා ප්‍රංශයේ විදේශ ඇමතිවරුන් තකහනියක් ලංකාවට ආවේ කොටි පරද්දන්න එපා කියන්න. එහෙත් මහින්ද සිංහල ජනමතය සමග සිටියේ ඉතා ශක්තිමත් තැනක. ඔහු විදේශ ඇමතිවරුන් දෙදෙනා ඇඹීලිපිටයට ගෙන්නා ආපසු ඇරියා. ඇතැමුන් ඒ වෙලාවෙ මහින්ද රාජ්‍ය තාන්ත්‍රික සම්බන්ධකම් දන්නේ නැතැයි කියමින් දොස් පැවරුවා.  ඉන්දියාව කොටි පරාද කරන්න එපා කියලා කිවුව නම් මහින්ද ඒ වෙලාවෙ එහෙයි කියාවි ද? එංගලන්තයයි ප්‍රංශයයි කිවුවට පස්සෙත් හිස නොනැමූ මහින්ද ඉන්දියාවට හිස නමයි ද? මහින්ද පිටුපස සිංහල ජනතාවගෙන් ඉතා වැඩි පිරිස සිටියා. එය ඔහුගේ ශක්තිය වුණා. ජාත්‍යන්තර දේශපාලනයේ දී ජාතියෙන් ලැබෙන ශක්තිය ගැන බටහිර දේශපාලන විද්‍යාඥයන්ට තේරුමක් නැහැ. ඔවුන් දන්නේ වෙන රටවල් ක්‍රියාකරන විධිය පමණයි. ඒවා බලපාන්නෙ අප නිවට නම්. නිවට කරණැවෑමියා දුටුවම එළුවත් නිකට පානවළු! සිංහල සංස්කෘතිය ගැන මෙළෝ හසරක් නොදන්න විචාරකයන්ට ඒක තේරෙන එකක් නැහැ. ඉන්දියාවට ප්‍රභාකරන් ඝාතනය කිරීමේ වුවමනාව තිබුණ. ඒ රජිව් ගාන්ධි ඝාතනය සම්බන්ධයෙන්. ප්‍රභාකරන් පිටුපස බටහිරයන් සිටි බව ඉන්දියාව දැන සිටින්න ඇති. ඉන්දියාවට ඉන්දියන් සාගරයේ බලවතුන් අවශ්‍ය නැහැ. ඉන්දියාව ප්‍රභාකරන්ටත් මහින්දටත් විරුද්ධයි. ඉන්දියාව ප්‍රභාකරන් පරද්දන්න විරුද්ධ නූණෙ දහතුන දෙනවයි කිවුව හින්ද නො වෙයි. කොහොමත් මහින්ද ලව්ව දහතුන හරි 13+ හරි දෙනවයි කියෙව්වෙ කවුද? ඔහු වටා සිටි උපදේශකයන්, විදේශ ඇමතිවරුන්, තානාපතිවරුන්, දේශපාලන විශාරදයන් කවුද? දහතුන දෙනවයි කීම ගැන ඔවුන් වග කියන්න ඕන. එහෙම කියලා තිබුණත් නන්දිකඩාල් ජයග්‍රහණයෙන් පස්සෙ ඒ ඔක්කොම ඉවරයි. නන්දිකඩාල් ජයග්‍රහණයෙන් පස්සෙත් දහතුන ගැන කියෙවුව අය අප හඳුනගන්න ඕන.

දෙවැනි කරුණ තමයි ඒකාබද්ධ විපක්‍ෂෙ ජාත්‍යන්තරයට දෙන තැන. පහුගිය දා ජී එල් පීරිස් කියලා තිබුණා පළාත් පාලන මැතිවරණ පැවැත්වීම දිගින් දිගට ම කල් දැම්මොත් යුරෝපා සංගමයට ගිහින් කියනව කියලා. මේ මනුස්සයා ගැන විශ්වාසයක් තබන්න පුළුවන් ද? ඒ වැඩෙන් වෙන්නෙ ජාත්‍යන්තරයට අපේ රටට ඇඟිලි ගහන්න තව තවත් අයිතිය ලබා දෙන එක. අද කළ යුතුව ඇත්තේ ට්‍රම්ප් හමු වී අපේ රටට ඇඟිලි ගැසීමෙන් වැළකී සිටිමට කීම බව අප කීහිප වතාවක් ම කියා තිබෙනවා. මේ ජී එල් ම තමයි පහුගිය දවසක සමගාමී ලැයිස්තුව ඉවත් කරන ලෙසට ලිපියක් භාර දුන්නෙ. අපේ ප්‍රශ්න විසඳන්න කියන්න අප ජාත්‍යන්තරයට, එනම් බටහිර රටවලට යන්නෙ අහවල් එහෙකට ද?  චන්ද්‍රිකා එක්ක පැකේජ් ගිය අය දැන් තමන් බලය බෙදීමට විරුද්ධය කියාත් එසේ කරන්නේ ඇයි කියාත් පිළිගත හැකි ප්‍රසිද්ධ ප්‍රකාශ කරන තෙක් ඔවුන් ගැන විශ්වාසයක් නොතැබිය යුතුයි.

මංගල කල් ඉල්ලන්නේත් එංගලන්තය කල් දෙන්නේත් බැලූ බැල්මට ආණ්ඩු විරෝධී ප්‍රකාශ කරන මංගල ඇමති මණ්ඩලයෙන් අස් නොකරන්නේත් නොදැන වෙන්න බැහැ. මේ සැලැස්ම නව ව්‍යවස්ථාවක් ගෙනැල්ල ජනතාවගේ අධිකරණ පරමාධිපත්‍යයත් අයින් කරල විදේශීය විනිසුරුවන් ගේන්න වෙන්න පුළුවන්. ඒ සඳහා කල් අවශ්‍ය බව ආණ්ඩුව එංගලන්තයට කියන්න ඇති. අද අර සිවල් සමාජ කැරොල් කරත්තය නැවත වැඩ පටන් අරන්. ඔවුන් නව ව්‍යවස්ථාවක් සඳහා ජාතික ව්‍යාපාරයක් හදලා. ජාතික ව්‍යාපාරය කියන එක අද කිසිම වටිනාකමක් නැති දෙයක් බවට පත් වෙලා. එහි මුල ඇත්තේ සිංහල ජනතාව රැවටීමට ත්‍රස්තවිරෝධී ජාතික ව්‍යාපාරය හදපු රතන හාමුදුැරවන් හා චම්පක.

නව ව්‍යවස්ථාවක් ගෙනාවත් නැතත් ආණ්ඩුව විදෙස් විනිසුරුවන් පත් කරන්න පුළුවන් විධියට ව්‍යවස්ථාව සංශෝධනය කරන්න බොහෝ දුරට ඉඩ තියෙනවා. එවිට මංගල හා රනිල් කියන්නේ දෙකක් නොවන බවත් මංගල අස්කිරීමට අවශ්‍ය නැති බවත් පැහැදිලි වෙනවා. එතකොට මෛත්‍රිපාල ආණ්ඩුවේ ද කියලා අහන්න වෙයි! අප මේ සියල්ල ගැන ජනතාව දැනුවත් කරමු.

Parliament has 94 MPs without O/Ls

March 19th, 2017

Irangika Range Courtesy The Daily News

Wednesday, March 15, 2017

Ninety four MPs have not passed their GEC (O/L) examination while there are only 25 graduates among the 225 legislators in the present Sri Lankan Parliament, former Chancellor of the University of Peradeniya, Prof. M O A de Zoysa said yesterday.

He observed that MPs who have been elected to make laws on behalf of the people must conduct themselves with dignity.

Addressing a media briefing held in Colombo yesterday, he said the conduct of the Joint Opposition MPs since the day the Yahapalana government came to power amounted to a contravention of parliamentary discipline.

Parliament is a place that makes laws. Its members should be dignified, with a knowledge of their subjects, logical intelligence and of impeccable conduct. But, we cannot see these qualities in most of the MPs today,” he said.Taxpayers money is being spent for the welfare of all MPs and a Rs. 2500 Special Attendance Allowance, with the luxury meals, are provided to them for one sitting. Therefore, MPs should bear in mind their responsibilities. But, everyday, when parliament meets, JO members disrupt parliament proceedings for about one or two hours. So how can parliament pass laws on behalf of the people and the country? The conduct of certain senior members is not good and it is disgusting.

They may be senior but, they have not matured. They have been given front seats to set an example to junior MPs,” he said. Senior Lecturer at the University of Sri Jayawardenapura Dr. Terrence Purasinghe said Sri Lanka follows traditions and conventions built over a long period of time in the British Parliament. Apart from these, Standing Orders have laid down how business should be conducted in the House. These are the rules that have to be followed by the MPs. But, most of the MPs do not follow them today.


‘රනිල් සහ සමාගම’ සිවු මසකදී රුපියල් කෝටි 13,000කට වග කියලා..

March 19th, 2017

සිදත් මෙන්ඩිස් – Mawbima.lk

මාස 4ක් වැනි කෙටි කාලයක් තුළ යහපාලන ආණ්ඩුව රුපියල් කෝටි 13000ක පාඩුවක් රටට සිදුකර ඇති බව TOP10 යටතේ හෙළිදරව් කිරීමට හැකි වූ බව ඒකාබද්ධ විපක්ෂය අවධාරණය කරයි.

TOP10 අවසාන හෙළිදරව්ව පිළිබඳ පැහැදිලි කිරීම සදහා ඒකාබද්ධ විපක්ෂය බොරැල්ල ඇන්. එම්. පෙරේරා කේන්ද්‍රයේ කැඳවා තිබූ මාධ්‍ය හමුවට එක් වෙමින් පාර්ලිමේන්තු මන්ත්‍රි මහින්දානන්ද අලුත්ගමගේ මහතා මේ බව පැවැසීය.

නොරොච්චෝලෙ ගල් අඟුරු විදුලි බලාගාරයට ගල් අඟුරු සැපයීමේදී රජයට රුපියල් මිලියන 5000ක පාඩුවක් අග්‍රාමාත්‍ය රනිල් වික්‍රමසිංහ, අමාත්‍ය මලික් සමරවික්‍රම, ආර්. පාස්කරලිංගම් සහ චරිත රත්වත්තේ යන අය සිදුකර ඇති බව හෙතෙම සඳහන් කළේය.

ඒකාබද්ධ විපක්ෂය ඉදිරිපත් කළ පැමිණිලි 10න් අග්‍රාමාත්‍යවරයාට, මුදල් අමාත්‍යවරයාට සහ අමාත්‍ය මලික් සමරවික්‍රම යන අයට පැමිණිලි 3 බැගින් ඉදිරිපත් වී ඇති බවත් ටොප් ටෙන්වල ටොපේ ටෙන් වී ඇති බවත් සඳහන් කළේය.

මහින්දානන්ද අලුත්ගමගේ මෙසේද පැවැසීය.

මේ ආණ්ඩුවේ මහා පරිමාණ වංචා දූෂණ පිළිබඳව අපි මාස 4යි දින 18ක් තුළ වංචා 10ක් හෙළිදරව් කළා. කරපු පැමිණිලි දිහා බැලුවම මට පේන්නේ රනිල් වික්‍රමසිංහ සහ පෞද්ගලික සමාගමට එරෙහිව වැඩි වශයෙන් පැමිණිලි ඉදිරිපත් වෙලා කියලයි. අද රට පාලනය කරන්නේ ඒ සමාගම. TOP10 පැමිණිලි 10ක් කරලා තිබුණත් බැඳුම්කර මංකොල්ලය ගැන විතරයි විමර්ශන කරමින් ඉන්නේ. අපි කළ හැම පැමිණිල්ලක්ම රුපියල් බිලියන 1ට වඩා වැඩියි. බැඳුම්කර සිද්ධිය යට ගහන්න ආණ්ඩුව හැදුවොත් නිරුවත බලාගන්න පුළුවන්. බැඳුම්කරය විමර්ශනය පටන් ගත්ත නිසා තමයි පොඩි රෙදි පොටකින් ආණ්ඩුව නිරුවත වහගෙන ඉන්නේ. ඒකත් ජනාධිපතිවරයාට පින් සිද්ධ වෙන්නයි.

අද ලෝකයම පිළිඅරගෙන තියෙනවා මේ යහපාලන ආණ්ඩුව හොරකම් කරනවා කියලා. පසුගියදා ජාත්‍යන්තර සමීක්ෂණයක් ඒ බව සනාථ කළා. ජනාධිපතිවරයාත් කියනවා මේ ආණ්ඩුවේ දූෂිත අමාත්‍යවරුන් ඉන්නවා කියලා. ඒ නිසා අපි ජනාධිපතිවරයාගෙන් ගෞරවයෙන් ඉල්ලනවා මේ TOP10 පැමිණිලි ගැන අවධානය යොමු කරලා පරීක්ෂණ කඩිනමින් සිදු කරන්න කියලා.

තවත් පැමිණිලි 7ක් අපට කරන්න තියෙනවා. නමුත් පැමිණිලි කිරීම තුළින් ඵලක් නොවන නිසා හොරුන්ට දඬුවම් කිරීමේ දැවැන්ත ව්‍යාපාරයකට යන්න සූදානම්. මන්ත්‍රිවරුන් හැටියට අපි කළ පැමිණිලිවලට අවධානය යොමු නොවීම නිසා මන්ත්‍රි වරප්‍රසාද කඩවීමට එරෙහිව මේ ගැන විමර්ශන කරන්න කියලා කතානායකවරයාට පැමිණිලි කරනවා. දෙවනුව අල්ලස් කොමිසමට එරෙහිව දැවැන්ත අරගලයක් මෙහෙයවනවා. තෙවනුව මේ ගැන අපි ජනාධිපතිවරයාට කියනවා මේ ගැන අවධානය යොමු කරලා හොරුන්ට දඬුවම් දෙන්න කියලා. එසේත් නොවන්නේ නම් සිවුවනුව අපි ජනතාව ඉදිරියට ගිහිල්ලා මේ හොරුන්ට දඬුවම් කරන්න කියලා අරගල කරනවා.

පාර්ලිමේන්තු මන්ත්‍රි විදුර වික්‍රමනායක,

‘නොරොච්චෝලෙ ගල් අඟුරු බලාගාරයට ගල් අඟුරු ලබාදීම සඳහා ප්‍රථම ලංසුව නෝබල් රිසෝසස් සමාගමට හිමිවෙද්දී ඇගයීම් වාර්තාවේ 5 වැනි ස්ථානයේ සිටි ස්විස් සිංගප්පූර් නමැති ලංසුකරු විසින් ප්‍රසම්පාදන මණ්ඩලයට යොමු කරන ලද ඉල්ලීමක් සැලකිල්ලට ගෙන ටෙන්ඩර් වංචාවක් සිදු කරලා තියෙනවා. ලංකා සෝල් සමාගමේ හිටපු සභාපති එක්සත් ජාතික පක්ෂයේ දකුණු පළාත් සභා මන්ත්‍රි ගුණරත්න කියනවා මේ ටෙන්ඩරය හරහා වංචාවක් සිදු වෙලා ඇති නිසා ටෙන්ඩරය අහෝසි කරන්න කියලා. විගණකාධිපති වාර්තාව සඳහන් කරනවා ටෙන්ඩරය හරහා රුපියල් මිලියන 5000කට ආසන්න මුදල් වංවා වෙලා කියලා. ටෙන්ඩරය අහෝසි කරන්න කිව්වත් ඒක කළේ නැහැ’


SL – Indian Interventions……….Pakistan Observer

March 19th, 2017

Mahinda Gunasekera

Please see the annexed article written by a Pakistani observer on the subject of Indian interventions in Sri Lanka. In the penultimate para highlighted in blue, he has stated that the Indian Consulate Office in Jaffna has been providing forged papers for South Indian Tamils from Tamilnadu to travel to Sri Lanka’s north and settle in the region with bogus identities. This is a serious charge and must be fully investigated immediately.

India has also proposed building a bridge linking Tamilnadu with Sri Lanka’s northern region with Sri Lanka bearing part of the cost, and has also been seeking the Sampur region to construct a coal powered electricity generating plant which will spew ACID RAIN that will be carried by the northeast monsoon winds to the NCP where it will fall destroying the magnificent monuments of Sri Lanka’s rich heritage preserved up to now in Sri Lanka’s first capital city of Anuradhapura. Fortunately, there appears to have been some rethinking on the matter and permits not granted to proceed on this ill advised project, which would have dumped more Acid Rain to that which the other coal fired plant on the northwest coast at Norochcholai is liable to produce and blow inland with the south west monsoon winds.

Sri Lanka’s Free Trade Agreement with India has been in operation for the past 18 years with the negative trade balance growing each year in India’s favour, whilst obstacles are placed in Sri Lanka’s attempts to export to India with regulations and tariffs of Union States coming into play, which acts as a disincentive and a costly time consuming process for Sri Lankan exporters seeking to extricate themselves from the messy situation. Only export of arecanuts (Carunka), value added by removing the husky exterior, handled by Indian traders using Sri Lanka as a base to take advantage of the FTA have enhanced their export volumes. Sri Lanka is foolishly seeking to sign the ‘Economic and Technology Co-operation Agreement (ETCA)’ with India, opening the doors for Indians to work and set up business in technical fields such as IT, Marine Engineering, etc., which will become a one way channel for the nearly 40 million less skilled and unemployed and many more under-employed Indians to move to Sri Lanka, whilst Sri Lankans will have to compete with the rest of the billion Indians to gain a footing in that country. We should not fall for these covert designs of India who have not hesitated to engage in military adventures into Sri Lankan soil and air space, and even train and arm the Tamil separatist militants/terrorists to destabilize the country.

Mahinda Gunasekera


Indian interventions in Sri Lanka

March 17, 2017

Sultan M Hali

INDIA has tried to interfere in the affairs of every neighbour and create instability to prove its supremacy. Bangladesh, Bhutan, Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka; all have suffered due to Indian illusions of grandeur. Pakistan, of course is reserved for special treatment, because India never forgave Pakistan for breaking away from mother India”.

As far as Sri Lanka is concerned, the inhabitants of the Indian State of Tamil Nadu identify with the Sri Lankan Tamils who comprise 18 percent of Sri Lanka and are considered a minority. Sri Lanka was embroiled in a Civil War which commenced on July 23, 1983. It comprised an intermittent insurgency against the Sri Lankan government by the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), also known as the Tamil Tigers”, which fought to create an independent Tamil state called Tamil Eelam in the north and the east of the island. After a 26-year military campaign, the Sri Lankan military defeated the Tamil Tigers in May 2009, bringing the civil war to an end.

It is believed that during the process of the breakup of East Pakistan, India staged the drama of hijacking its own passenger aircraft in January 1971 and landing it at Lahore before setting it on fire. Blaming Pakistan for the air piracy, India used it as an excuse to stop the over-flight of Pakistani military and civil aircraft over Indian airspace to block logistic support of East Pakistan from the West. Sri Lanka stepped in to permit landing rights for Pakistani aircraft to maintain the air-link between the two wings of Pakistan. After creation of Bangladesh, Indira Gandhi directed its spy agency RAW to take punitive action against Sri Lanka. RAW provided arms, training and monetary support to six Sri Lankan Tamil militant groups including LTTE.

India became more actively involved in the late 1980s, and on June 05, 1987 the Indian Air Force airdropped food parcels as well as weapons to Jaffna while it was under siege by Sri Lankan forces. At a time when the Sri Lankan government stated it was close to defeating the LTTE, India dropped 25 tons of food and medicine by parachute into areas held by the LTTE in a direct move of support to the rebels.

Indian interference was renewed under the watch of Narendra Modi, who was especially suspicious of Chinese investments in Sri Lanka. China had already completed the maritime port of Hambantota and was poised for further investments, when India interfered in the Sri Lankan elections and blocked the re-election of pro-Chinese Rajapaksa. Modi became the first Indian Prime Minister to visit Sri Lanka and in a bid to counter Chinese influence, especially Sri Lankan participation in the Maritime Silk Route coerced the new Sri Lankan government to suspend China’s US$ 1.4 billion Colombo Port project that broke ground during Chinese President Xi Jinping’s visit to the island.

India is also trying to block Chinese and Pakistani military hardware exports to Sri Lanka. Modi tends to gloss over India’s foray into military aviation exports, which have been plagued by missteps, shortfalls in support and poor communications. Dhruv helicopters supplied to Ecuador were withdrawn from use after a number of crashes and poor spares support from Hindustan Aeronautics Limited. Sale of Chetaks to Suriname was plagued by poor contract management and financial and administrative obstacles”, which led to helicopters being ready long before pilots were ready to be trained, leading to a delay in delivery of helicopters.

Pakistan was on the verge of finalising the sale of JF-17 Thunder fighter aircraft to the highly depleted Sri Lankan Air Force but once again Modi prevailed through an aggressive counter offer of its obsolete even before they entered service, Light Combat Aircraft Tejas.

Indian Tamil are being infiltrated as visitors and refugees and being provided with Sri Lankan passports with the help of Indian Consulate General, Jaffna. Reportedly, an amount of $6,000/- is paid to Sri Lankan authorities for obtaining Sri Lankan Identity Card and passport.

A pro-Indian member of Sri Lankan parliament is supporting installation of statues of Indian/ Hindu dignitaries including Mahatma Gandhi. According to media reports, a statue of Mr. Gandhi was installed in the North which was later knocked down by unknown persons. The incident reflects the tense situation prevailing in the area as a result of ethnic conflict. Indian government is asking the Sri Lankan government to develop and maintain the Palaly Airport, Jaffna (Northern Province) to strengthen the links between Tamil population of Jaffna and Tamil Nadu. The feasibility study of the same was already conducted by an Indian company about six months back, however, the construction work did not commence. Sri Lankan government is still indecisive since the airport houses Sri Lankan Air Force (SLAF) run facilities and is used for military flights. Continued Indian intervention in Sri Lanka will only antagonize the island state and isolate India.

යුද්ධාපරාධ, අධිකරණය හා ව්‍යවස්ථාව

March 19th, 2017

නලින් ද සිල්වා

රනිල් හා මංගල කරන්න යන්නෙ මොකක් ද කියන එක දැන් හොඳට ම පැහැදිලියි. ඒ වෙන මොකක්වත් නොවෙයි එක්කෝ නව ව්‍යවස්ථාවක් සම්මත කිරීම, නැත්නම් ව්‍යවස්ථාව තමන්ට අවශ්‍ය විධියට සංශෝධනය කිරීම. ඒක නවත්වන්න තියෙන එක ක්‍රමයක් තමයි රනිල් අගමැති කමෙන් ඉවත් කිරීම හා මංගල විදේශ ඇමති ධුරයෙන් පහ කිරීම. මේ දෙන්නට ම වුවමනා රට බෙදීම ඒ කියන්නෙ දෙමළ ජාතිවාදීන්ට හා ඔවුන් පිටුපස සිටින එංගලන්තයට හා ඉන්දියාවට අවශ්‍ය විධියට පළාත් සභාවලට බලය බෙදීම. ඒකීය රාජ්‍යයක බලය බෙදීම කියන්නෙ ම ප්‍රෝඩාවක්. දැනටත් මේ රට සරල සංධීය රාජ්‍යයක් ඇති රටක්. රනිල් මංගල දුස්සංයෝගයට අවශ්‍ය තව තවත් බලය බෙදා සහසන්ධීය රාජ්‍යයක් ඇති කිරීම. අප කළ යුත්තේ සරල සංධීය බවත් නැති කර ඒකීය රාජ්‍යයක් බවට පත් කිරීම. ඒක අද කරන්න බැරි බව දේශපාලන විචාරකයන්ට හැර අනෙක් අයට තේරෙනවා. අප අද කරන්නේ ඒ සඳහා උද්ඝෝෂණය කිරීම, ජනමතය සකස් කිරීම ආදියයි.

මංගල ඇතුළු ආණ්ඩුව (මෛත්‍රිපාල ආණ්ඩුවේ ද) කියන කරුණු අපි සලකා බලමු. පළමුවෙන් මෙරට හමුදාවට ලැබී ඇති අපකීර්තියෙන් ඔවුන් මුදවාගැනීම. හමුදාවට අපකීර්තියක් ලැබී ඇත්නම් ඔවුන් ඉන් මුදා ගන්නේ කෙසේ ද? මේ ඊනියා අපකීර්තිය විශේෂයෙන් ම මානුෂික මෙහෙයුම්වල අවසාන සති දෙකේ සිදු වූ යුද්ධාපරාධ නිසා ඇති වූ බව කියනවා. මේ කාලයෙහි වැඩ බලන ආරක්‍ෂක ඇමති මෛත්‍රිපාල සිරිසේන. ඔහු ඒ ඊනියා යුද්ධාපරාධ සිදු වූ බව පිළිගන්නවා ද? නැත්නම් සරත් ෆොන්සේකා පිට පටවනවා ද? සුදු කොඩි කතාවෙන් සරත් ෆොන්සේකා හමුදාවට ම පහරක් එල්ල නො කෙළේ ද? ඒ කතාව සම්බන්ධයෙන් ඔහු හිරභාරයට ගැනීම වැරදි ද? සුදු කොඩි රැගෙන ත්‍රස්තවාදීන් කණ්ඩායමක් එන බවත් ඔවුන්ට සමාව දිය යුතු බවටත් පොරොන්දුවක් තිබිණි ද? තිබිණි නම් ඒ පොරොන්දුව දුන්නේ කවුද? ඕනෑම අයකුට එවැනි පොරොන්දු දිය හැකි ද? ඒසේ පොරොන්දුවක් දුන්නේ නම් ඒ බව වැඩබලන ආරක්‍ෂක ඇමතිට දැනුම් දුන්නේ ද? එවැනි පොරොන්දුවක් ගැන හමුදාවට දන්වා තිබිණි ද? හමුදාව කර ඇති වරද කුමක් දැයි මෛත්‍රිපාල හරි සරත් ෆොන්සේකා හරි කියනවා ද?

යුද්ධාපරාධ පෞද්ගලිකව හෝ පොදුවේ හෝ සිදුවිය හැකියි. පෞද්ගලික ව හමුදා භටයකු අත්තනෝමතිකව අණක් ඇතිව හෝ නැතිව හෝ යුද්ධාපරාධයක් කළ හැකියි. අණක් නැත්නම් භටයා ඒ අපරාධයට (අපරාධයක් සිදු වී ඇතැයි උපකල්පනය කර) දඬුවම් චිදිය යුතුයි. අණක් ඇත්නම් අණ දුන් තැනැත්තා දඬුවම් විඳිය යුතුයි. පොදුවේ යුද්ධාපරාධ කෙරෙන්නේ අණක් දුන්විටයි. ඊනියා ජාත්‍යන්තරය කියන පොදු යුද්ධාපරාධ වේ නම් ඒ මෛත්‍රිපාල ආරක්‍ෂක ඇමති් ලෙස වැඩ බැලූ කාලයේ සිදු වූ දේ. ඊනියා යුද්ධාපරාධ සඳහා අවසානයේ දී අණ දුන්නේ ඔහු ද? ඔහු ඒ පිළිබඳ දැනුවත් ව සිටියේ ද? 

අවසාන දින කිහිපයෙහි කොටි ත්‍රස්තවාදීන් ජනතාව ලක්‍ෂ ගණනක් මිනිස් වළල්ලක් ලෙස යොදා ගත් බව ප්‍රසිද්ධ කරුණක්. ඒ බව ඊනියා ජාත්‍යන්තරයත් මංගලත් රනිලුත් දන්නවා. කොටි වළල්ලෙන් මිදී පැන යෑමට ජනතාවට ඉඩ දුන්නේ නැහැ. ජනතාව වළල්ලෙන් පැන ඒද්දී කොටි වෙඩි තැබුවා. එකී ජනතාව දහස් ගණනින් (දස දහස් ගණනින් නොව) ඝාතනය වූයේ කොටි වෙඩි පහරින්. යුද්ධාපරාධ කර ඇත්තේ කොටි බව අප කලිනුත් කියා තිබෙනවා. කොටි කළ යුද්ධාපරාධ හමුදාව හා රාජපක්‍ෂවරුන් මත පැටවීමට එංගලන්තය උත්සාහ ගන්නවා. ජෙනීවාහි හුසේන් කුමාරයා හෙවත් සේනා (හමුදා) මාරයා එයට සහාය දෙනවා. අද මෛත්‍රිපාල කළ යුත්තේ මේ ඊනියා යුද්ධාපරාධවලින් තමනුත් රණවිරුවනුත් නිදහස් කිරීමයි.  එය කැප්පෙටිපොළ දිසාව ඇතුළු පිරිස දේශද්‍රෝහී නොවන බව කීමට වඩා වැදගත් වේවි. එදා සිට ම යුද්ධාපරාධ කර ඇත්තේ කොටි. ඒ පිළිබඳ ව කොටින්ට ආධාර කළ කොටි වෙනුවෙන් පාර්ලිමේන්තුවේ පෙනී සිටි සම්බන්ධන්ලාට, පාක්‍යසෝතිලා ඇතුළු සිවල් සාමාජිකයන්ට කළ යුත්තේ කුමක් ද කියා වත්මන් සේනාධිනායක මෛත්‍රිපාල කියනවා ද?

මංගලගේ තර්කය ඊනියා යුද්ධාපරාධ විභාග නොකිරීමෙන් මෙරට අධිකරණය අපකීර්තියට ලක් වී ඇති බව මත පදනම් වෙනවා. අධිකරණය ඇත්තේ තමන් හමුවට ගෙනෙන පැමිණිළි පිළිබඳ තීන්දු දීමට මිස නගර ගානේ ගෙවල් ගානේ ගොස් පැමිණිළි ඇත් ද කියා සොයා බැලීමට නො වෙයි. අධිකරණය තමන් ඉදිරියට පැමිණි ඊනියා යුද්ධාපරාධයක් ගැන විනිශ්චය දීම අත්හැර දමා තිබෙනවා ද? එසේත් නැත්නම් පක්‍ෂපාති තීන්දුවක් දී තිබෙනවා ද? මහින්දගේ කාලයේ අධිකරණය අපකීර්තියට ලක් වී යැයි මංගල කියන්නේ මෙලෝ දෙයක් දැන ගෙන ද? අධිකරණයට දේශපාලන ඇඟීලි ගැසීම් හා අධිකරණය අපකීර්තියට පත්වීම කියන්නේ දෙකක්. අද අධිකරණයට දේශපාලන ඇඟිලි ගැසීම් නැත් ද කියා අලුත්කඩේ පැත්තෙන් දැනගන්න පුළුවන්. 

ඊනියා යුද්ධාපරාධ ගැන චෝදනා ඉදිරිපත් කෙරී නැත්නම් කළ යුත්තේ නීතිපති දෙපාර්තමේන්තුව මගින් අධිකරණයට චෝදනා ගොනු කිරීමයි. අදත් එය කළ හැකියි. එය අධිකරණයේ කටයුත්තක් නො වෙයි. ඒ සඳහා දෙමුහුන් අධිකරණ අලුතෙන් අවශ්‍ය නැහැ. අද පාක්‍යසෝතිට ආරක්‍ෂක විශ්වවිද්‍යාලයේ හමුදා නිලධාරීන් ප්‍රධාන අමුත්තා ලෙස ආරාධනය කරන්නේත් ඔහු ඒ ආරාධනය පිළිගන්නේත් ඊනියා යුද්ධාපරාධ චෝදනා තිබිය දී ද? යුද්ධාපරාධ ගැන මහින්දගේ කාලයේ අධිකරණය අපකීර්තියට ලක් වී ඇත්තේ කෙසේ දැයි පළමුව මංගල හා රනිල් අපට කියා දිය යුතුයි.

වත්මන් ආණ්ඩුව දිනාගත් ජාත්‍යන්තර කීර්තියක් නැහැ. බටහිරයන්ට බැළ මෙහෙවර කරන ආණ්ඩුවකට අත්වෙන කීර්තිය කුමක් ද? බටහිරයන් මේ ආණ්ඩුව ලවා තමන්ට අවශ්‍ය දේ කරවා ගන්නවා. එසේ කරවා ගෙන ගුඩ් ජොබ් කියා කියනවා. එපමණයි. සෝමාලියාවේ පැහැර ගත් නැව බේරා ගත්තේ මේ ආණ්ඩුවේ ඊනියා ජාත්‍යන්තර සම්බන්ධතා උඩ නො වෙයි. සෝමාලියා රාජ්‍යය කොල්ලකරුවන්ට වෙඩි තබා ඔවුන් යටත් කරගෙන. ආණ්ඩුව අලින්නෙ අපේ කතාවක් කියනවා. අදාළ නැවියන් ලංකාවට ආපසු ඔවුන් ලවා බොරු කියවා ගන්නත් ඉඩ තියෙනවා.

එංගලන්තය හා ඉන්දියාව මහින්ද ගෙදර යවා මේ ආණ්ඩුව බලයට පත් කර ගත්තේ දෙමළ ජාතිවාදයට කප්පන් දීම සඳහා ව්‍යවස්ථාවක් සම්පාදනය කර ගැනීමට හා සිංහල බෞද්ධ සංස්කෘතිය නැති කිරීමට, ඒ බැරි නම් දුර්වල කිරීමට. මංගල හොරගල් අහුලන්නේ මේ ව්‍යවස්ථාව සඳහායි. ඒකාබද්ධ විපක්‍ෂය මෙයට වඩා ව්‍යවස්ථා ප්‍රශ්නයට මැදිහත් විය යුතුයි. ව්‍යවස්ථාව පාර්ලිමේන්තුවට නොගෙනවිත් ඊනියා ව්‍යවස්ථා මණ්ඩලයේ පමණක් සම්මත කර ගැනීමටත් ඉඩක් තිබෙනවා. ඒකාබද්ධ විපක්‍ෂය ව්‍යවස්ථා මණ්ඩලයේ අනුකමිටුවලින් ඉවත්වීමට ගත් තීරණය ජනතාවගේ පැසුමට ලක් වුණා මදි. ඒකාබද්ධ විපක්‍ෂය මේ සමස්ත ව්‍යවස්ථා මණ්ඩල ක්‍රියාවලියෙන් ම ඉවත් විය යුතුයි.

Staying in power and staying power

March 19th, 2017


It has become a tradition for Ranil Wickremesinghe to visit various signature tents at the Royal-Thomian and respond to questions put to him.  It’s all light-hearted.  The questions are often tongue-in-cheek stuff and the responses are calculated to generate some laughter, one feels.
It was no different this year.  Two questions stood out because they were as serious as they were light.  The responses, similarly, drew laughter and also provided food for thought.
One question was about prosecuting wrongdoers (of the previous regime).  The Prime Minister was essentially asked when they would be brought to justice.  The response was light: 
We are investigating, we are going to courts and we are allowing the lawyers to make money.”  He then added, as afterthought, lawyers have been big supporters of our party, so we can’t let them down.” 
[See the Big Match interview here]
He was obviously joking about helping lawyer loyalists, but he was correct in terms of the tangible outcomes of the process so far.  What we do know and can appreciate is that such processes take time, perhaps longer than necessary but certainly better long than short for haste makes for error and perforce cannot service the cause of justice.  What we do not appreciate is the selectivity that is so pronounced in the process.  The focus is on allegations against the previous regime or rather key personalities in that regime.  There have been serious violations, clearly, but some of them would fall into petty thievery compared to the daylight robbery associated with the Central Bank bond scam.  If petty thieves deserve arrest, how come those accused of scheming to make billions are allowed to roam around free, is the question that many ask.  

Some trophies are hard to secure and even harder to keep
But it was all light-hearted and we can leave it at that.  As light-hearted was the question put to him earlier, ‘Now that you are in power, what’s your next step?’  Pat came the answer: 
The next step is to stay in power.”
It was not an answer typical of politicians.  It was, in contrast, an honest response.  That’s what politics and politicians are all about.  Power.  Striving to obtain it and thereafter fighting to keep it.  Only, they don’t say it.  Kudos to the Prime Minister, even if it was said in jest and even though it was a slick way of spelling out things.  Not the time nor the place, one might say in his defense.
The match is done and dusted or rather was rained out.  We can return to the response with more sobriety now.  
Power.  Some say it is about longevity and out-living the competition.  That might explain J.R. Jayewardena and to a certain degree Mahinda Rajapaksa and their respective ascents.  It certainly holds for Ranil Wickremesinghe.  Luck, they say, can also figure in the equation.  In Wickremesinghe’s case it was as much longevity as the lack of it among potential rivals within his party.  Whether it is correct to call it luck is debatable, but he was lucky when part of the ruling coalition ‘fell into his lap,’ so to speak, in 2001.  He was lucky when Maithripala Sirisena entered the fray in late 2014.  On the other hand, perhaps luck is about being positioned well when events unfold in ways that opportunities are created.  He was there at the right place and at the right time.  That takes staying power.  
Staying in power is a different kettle of fish.  Today, for all his luck, if you want to call it, the most powerful individual in the country is Maithripala Sirisena.  
Power, in this sense, is best ascertained by the answer to a simple question — who can alter the political equation or landscape most with the least effort?   This is why ‘staying in power’ is a challenge.  There’s no light-heartedness here; certainly not in the sordid theatre called politics.   
It’s a big challenge.  Things have got so bad that those posing as ‘left intellectuals’ and ‘liberals’ (NGO personalities mostly in the latter category) are getting their respective knickers twisted in their plaintive cries of support for the Sirisena-Wickremesinghe union.  Left intellectuals who brutally criticised leftist parties for tying up with the previous regime, throwing in a lot of Marxist terms and drawing heavily from ‘revolutionary’ history, are keeping mum about these very parties supporting what would in their lingo be a ‘rightist government’.   Those who mocked these parties for hanging on to the sari-pota and thesaatakaya don’t seem to mind the current penchant for hanging on to the edges of the various jackets of the current regime.   As for the ‘liberals’ who were horrified at the slightest infringement on liberties not too long ago, they are pretty quiet when this regime makes a mockery of its own doctrine ofyahapalanaya.  
It’s either about unspoken love for the ruling coalition or rather the UNP segment of it, or else it is a matter of ignoring anything or everything that goes against things they’ve claimed to hold sacrosanct including the principle ‘ends do not justify the means,’ in the belief that their not-so-veiled anti-Sinhala and anti-Buddhist outcome preferences are best served by this regime.  
The staying-in-power business is not being served by that lot and Wickremesinghe ought to know this very well, considering what happened in 2004 and 2005.  He has disappointed the business community (they do not see this as a Maithripala-Wickremesinghe government, but a UNP regime).  Trade unions, academics and professionals don’t make such distinctions, but they are not as gung-ho about yahapalanaya as they were two years ago.  It has become increasingly hard for the so-called moderate Tamils to support this regime.  In short, things have changed much since the euphoria of January 8, 2015.  Perhaps the best sign of all this is the fact that this government has had to argue that the yahapaalanists are actually Sri Lankan Bolsheviks of the 21st century.
They weren’t being light-hearted.  They were serious.  They were hilarious, but they didn’t know it.  What it demonstrated was a regime that’s clinging to straws and trying to convince a doubting citizenry that it is revolutionary.  The interesting thing is that the people are not exactly hungry for a revolution.  Talk about being ‘out of step’! What more should one say about ‘the next step’ of ‘staying in power’?  Well, there is one thing: if you have to say it, it demonstrates self-doubt.  
Yes, the Royal-Thomian is done and dusted or rather was rained out.  Wickremesinghe’s response speaks not just for the UNP but the entire regime.  The next step is all that this regime seems to be worrying about right now.  And, the seriousness of it all is best evidenced by the fact that they’ve lost sight of theyahapalana principles in their political day-to-day.  The 19th and the RTI will not carry them at an election, Wickremesinghe probably knows this.   ‘Staying in power’ is not just the next step, it’s a trace that will mark each step and when it comes to this then one doesn’t really know whether steps taken are in the right direction or not.  ‘Losing the plot’ did someone say?  ‘Lost it already!’ did someone quip? 
Malinda Seneviratne is a freelance writer.  Email: malindasenevi@gmail.com.  Twitter: malindasene

Recognizing the yahapalanaya party

March 19th, 2017

by Malinda Seneviratne

Arjuna Mahendran, the former Governor of the Central Bank, is reported to have transferred out some 500 members of his staff.  The Government is all set to demarcate specific areas for protests.  The Government got some egg on its face with the appointment and removal of judges.  There’s the bond issue scandal.  The big boys in the Government ranted and raved about Port City and the Hambantota Port when in power, and all but showed the middle finger to China while campaigning to oust Mahinda Rajapaksa.  Today the very same worthies are crawling on all fours before China and appear to be brain-faded about the aforementioned projects.

Just imagine!

What if all of the above could be placed at the Responsibility Door of Mahinda Rajapaksa?  What if it was the USA and not China?  How would the champions of yahapalanaya have responded?  Well, we are not hearing any shrieks of horror. We are not seeing any terse comments from the US State Department or the British Foreign Secretary.  The yahapalana apologists for this Government have all gone quiet.  Well, not all of them.  Jehan Perera has been reduced to quoting Otto von Bismarck: “politics is the art of the possible”.  Bismarck, interestingly, also observed, “The great questions of the time will not be resolved by speeches and majority decisions but by iron and blood.”

Let none of this surprise anyone.  It’s not about right or wrong.  It’s not about ethics.  It’s not about doing things right or better.  It’s not about good governance.  It’s all about power and those whose faces you prefer to see and those you despise for whatever reason.  This is best demonstrated by the parliamentary machinations we have seen courtesy the yahapalanists.

Maithripala Sirisena, leader of the Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP), sacked the Secretary of his party and the Secretary of the coalition his party led (the UPFA) days before the General Election and moved to stop the respective central committees from convening.  Did the good governance advocates mutter ‘tut-tut’?  Nope.  That’s yahapalana democracy, the ‘politics of the possible,’ and decisions by iron (we are yet to get to ‘blood’ but don’t be surprised if we do). The end, so to say, always justified means.

Just the other day Speaker Karu Jayasuriya stated that the National Freedom Front (NFF) led by Wimal Weerawansa could not be accepted as a separate party in Parliament as it was not gazetted as one that contested at the last general election.

Fine.  Now let’s rewind to a moment in late 2015, i.e. just after the General Election.  This was when a coalition government was formed.  It was misnamed ‘national government’, a deliberate slip which we will revisit presently.  It was a coalition made of which parties, does anyone remember.  Pause for a moment.  Remember the names of the parties?  Write them down.  Did you write ‘SLFP and UNP (United National Party)?’  Are you sure?  Yes?

Let’s go back to the election.  The UNP, which made a big do of a ‘grand coalition’ with other parties and political groups and called itself publicly ‘United National Front for Good Governance’ secured 106 seats.  Another party secured 95 seats.  Was it the SLFP?  No.  It was the UPFA (United People’s Freedom Alliance).  The SLFP did not contest!

And yet, this government was formed (as per provisions in the 19th Amendment we were told) following an agreement signed between the UNP and the SLFP, and the latter, let us repeat, did not even contest the election.  The Speaker, in delivering his decision on the NPP has said that he was not concerned over the internal agreements entered into among parties within those which officially contested and found representation in Parliament.

It’s that trivial, folks.  The point is that the numbers and composition are of utmost importance in parliamentary affair including composition of committees, representation in party leaders’ meetings, time allocation in parliamentary debates etc.

It’s a classic case of doing the convenient as per political preferences and quite unbecoming of the Speaker who happens to be a man noted to uphold principles in a manner uncommon among his contemporaries.

Again, why should anyone be surprised?  Well, the lack of comment from all those lovely people who would shout and scream at the slightest transgression on ‘democratic practice’ by the previous regime, is by now understandable.  Forget them, few eyebrows were raised when the 19th came into effect.  No one seemed to mind the vagueness deliberately scripted in with respect to the notion of a ‘national government’.  Let’s revisit.

Here’s Article 46 (5) defines ‘National Government’: “A Government formed by the recognized political party or the independent group which obtains the highest number of seats in Parliament together with the other recognized political parties or the independent groups”.

It does not say ‘any other’, which would have made this Cabinet legitimate.  Of course neither does it say ‘all other’ (which would have made this Cabinet illegitimate).  The wording is vague and shows carelessness and incompetence.  Well, we should actually use the word ‘pernicious’ here.

So we have the UNP as the party obtaining the highest number of seats.  Nothing wrong there.  Then we have other recognized political parties.  What’s the ‘recognized’ political party in this national government, so-called?  The SLFP?  Well, the Speaker would say if he was asked politely that the SLFP did not contest the election and perforce he cannot recognize it.  And yet, we have a UNP-SLFP ‘national’ government!

Just so we know what this is all about, the ‘national government’ clause has little to do with nation.  It’s about ministerial posts and a neat method of subverting both election promise and the article relevant to the maximum number of portfolios.  Thirty, they said.  Thirty, they wrote into the constitution.  But Article 46(4) allows Parliament to approve a number beyond the ’30’ legislated under 46(1)a and 46(1)b.  ‘Beyond’ goes against the spirit of limitation because theoretically all those parliamentarians who are members of the political parties and independent groups that make the ‘national government’ can be appointed to the cabinet of ministers.  Quite ‘yaha’ in the ‘palana’ sense, what!

So, what should we take out of all this?  We should first and foremost stop being shocked about what was done with the Central Bank bond issue, about the self-righteousness and subsequent silence on Port City and the Hambantota Port, about nepotism and corruption and other things that don’t really sit well with the notion of ‘good governance’ (in word and deed).

If this is yahapalanaya at the age of two years, it would be prudent to extrapolate to what the baby would have grow up to come 2020 or even earlier.   We have to conclude, ‘politicians will be politicians’.  More importantly, we have to understand that their approvers and in fact all those who uttered notions such as good governance with sober faces and in grave tones during the Rajapaksas are essentially a bunch of hypocrites.

As for parties and their recognition, it’s probably best to go with the commonsense definition: a social gathering of invited guests, typically involving eating, drinking, and entertainment.

Malinda Seneviratne is a freelance writer. Email: malindasenevi@gmail.com.  Twitter: malindasene.  Blog: www.malindawords.blogspot.com.

We will take our complaints to Geneva – Rohitha

March 19th, 2017

Ada Derana Black & White

– 2017.03.18

Ruffling feathers

March 19th, 2017

Editorial Courtesy The Island

Whether public interest activist Nagananda Kodituwakku will succeed or not in his attempt to end the long-running practice of enriching legislators by the issue of duty free permits must await the determination of a three-judge bench of the Supreme Court headed by Chief Justice Priyasath Dep. However that be, Kodituwakku’s efforts certainly enjoy the support of public opinion which successive governments have totally ignored in continuing to bestow this benefit on the political class. The sunshine has been lavishly spread around to senior public officials, state-employed professionals, university dons and some others who have also benefited from these permits. Whether there is a reliable figure on the resulting revenue loss to the state (and aggrandizement of the beneficiaries) or not, we do not know. But Kodituwakku has placed a figure running into the billions on what the perk had cost treasury coffers on the issue of these permits to MPs.

A former customs officer and an attorney-at-law, Kodituwakku is arguing his case himself. He has used the Right to Information law (RTI) to good effect and obtained from the Department of Motor Traffic the names of 85 Members of Parliament belonging to both the Government and Opposition who have made full use of the scheme and stuffed their pockets. He has told court that most of the vehicles have first been registered in the names of the permit-holding MPs and then transferred to the buyer immediately thereafter. It appears that the buyers had funded the imports too and the sellers have coolly pocketed the huge difference between the cost price and the agreed sale price! It is not only MPs who have sold vehicle import permits. Other beneficiaries, including those issued permits on the basis that they were big income tax payers over many years, have also done that. They have been allowed to do so and such sales were not illegal, as far as we know. The taxpayer privilege has now been discontinued after it was in operation for a limited number of years.

It is not necessary to labor the point that motor vehicles imported into the country have been expensive to buyers even in the spacious early post-Independence years. This is because governments, seeing an excellent revenue stream in vehicle imports, have always taxed them heavily. Taxes then were, of course, nowhere near what they are today when high-end vehicles may be taxed 200-300 percent of their cif (cost, insurance freight) value. Incomes then too were not what they are now; so also the exchange rates and the country’s money supply. There was a time when there was some reduction in the very high duty rates imposed on vehicle imports. That was due to the treasury finding that sky high duties necessarily reduced the quantum of imports and what was gained on the duty swings was more than lost in the roundabouts with fewer vehicles brought into the country. Eventually a balance of sorts was achieved although it is obvious to all that our roads lack the capacity to handle even a fraction of the loads they carry.

Quite apart from the lack of equity, which must necessarily be among the first principles of taxation, governments have bestowed vehicle perks unaffordable to an economy with limited resources on its employees. If a government official, be he/she a minister or somebody lower down the political or bureaucratic hierarchy, is provided an official vehicle that is chauffeured and fuelled at taxpayer expense, why should that official be given a duty free or concessionary duty permit worth lakhs if not millions of rupees to import a private vehicle? It is no secret that official vehicles are freely abused for private purposes and little or no effort is made to curb such malpractices. Time was when not even ministers, permanent secretaries, heads of departments etc. were allotted official cars. They drove from their homes to their offices and back in their own private vehicles and paid their drivers (they were not grandly called chauffeurs in those days) out of their own pockets. Government servants at a particular level were given car loans – we do not know whether these were interest free or low interest – and they used them for official travel claiming mileage at specified rates. Older public servants would remember that these claims were quite sufficient to meet the loan installments. But times have changed and vehicle privileges bestowed on employees of both the public and private sectors here are far ahead of what prevails even in the rich developed countries.

Be that as it may, the result of the litigation Kodituwakku has initiated is awaited with wide anticipation. He has sought a writ calling upon the court to direct the Bribery Commission to initiated “a credible and independent” investigation into the abuse of the tax-free permits by the MPs he has cited. While the Attorney General’s representative appearing in this matter had informed court that an investigation into the complaint to the Bribery Commission had begun, the petitioner had rejected this assurance saying nothing was happening. The court must, of course, look at this matter from the standpoint of the law rather than other considerations including what people think. However it may be said that some judicial activism in matters such as this, as seen for example in India, will not be out of place. Courts often do not grant what petitioners seek in actions before them. But they have been known to make what is called obiter dicta, a judge’s expression of opinion uttered in court or in a written judgment, but not essential to the decision and therefore not legally binding as a precedent. Such expression of opinion has often signaled the right direction.

If there is no legal barrier, there will be no course correction. That much we can be sure of. It is very difficult to take back what has been granted – especially to influential sections of the polity and the bureaucracy. One reason why President Premadasa faced an impeachment attempt was because he was trying to stamp down on MPs selling their duty free vehicle permits on so-called ‘open papers.’ He backed down on that attempt. Whether he wins or loses, Mr. Nagananda Kodituwakku must be congratulated for his efforts. His action has ruffled feathers in many dovecotes.

APFEJ urges New Delhi to be reverent  to BBC

March 19th, 2017

By Our Correspondent

Dhaka: Asia-Pacific Forum Environmental Journalists (APFEJ), in the backdrop of Indian government’s recent decision to ban a British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) scribe on filming in its tiger reserves, has urged New Delhi to be reverent to the global media outlets respecting the democratic spirit of the country. The environment media forum also appealed to the Indian authority not to think of evoking the British scribe’s visa at any cost.

It may be noted that the controversy erupted after the  BBC’s south Asia correspondent Justin Rowlatt prepared a news feature on Assam’s well-known Kaziranga National Park where he claimed that forest guards of the abode of precious one-horned rhinos were indulging in extra judicial killings in the name of conservation.

Rowlatt pointed out that the park, which hosted UK’s Prince William and Katherine  in April 2016, witnessed the killing of almost two people per month under the brutal conservation policy since 2013. The year 2015 witnessed the encounter killings of 23 people in Kaziranga in contrast to 18 rhinos poached by the criminals.

Innocent villagers, mostly tribal people, have been caught up in the conflict (between the poachers and forest guards) and the problem is mostly because the park rangers are indiscriminate in applying brutal force, and they are given immunity from prosecution,” said the BBC feature.

Rowlatt, who lives with his family  in New Delhi, also clarified that despite his initiative, both the environment ministries in New Delhi and Dispur (responsible for the protection of forest and wildlife), the National Tiger Conservation Authority and Assam forest department did not respond to his necessary queries.

Once the BBC aired the item titled ‘Our World: Killing for Conservation’ on 11 February 2017, the government and people of Assam raised serious concern over its content. Various non-government nature &wildlife protection groups came forward scolding the London based news channel for propagating a wrong image to Kaziranga to the international audience.

Encouraged with the development, the Indian authority barred the BBC journalist Rowlatt from filming in any of India’s 50 tiger reserves for five years. Later the Union environment ministry even requested the external affairs ministry to revoke the visas of Rowlatt along with his associates who shot the film.

But it tempted the global tribal people’s rights body Survival International to  launch a boycott campaign against the park that attracts over some 150,000 annual visitors including over 11,000 foreign tourists, till the Kaziranga  authority retains its shoot-on-sight policy.  It has already written to various tour operators in western countries to evade Kaziranga that gives shelter to over 2430 rhinos, 167 Royal Bengal tigers along with other wildlife.

We appeal to Survival International to lift the boycott call against

Kaziranga such that the   success achieved by the Indian forest

department is not subdued by the controversy,” said a statement issued by APFEJ president Quamrul Islam Chowdhury and secretary Nava Thakuria, adding that Assam forest department should also come out with specific clarification to the BBC news feature.


March 19th, 2017

Here are some interesting videos. If you go into one of these, you will see many more videos on the side


Keheliya wants President to issue clarification on Mangala’s speech

March 19th, 2017

Keheliya wants President to issue clarification on Mangala’s speech මංගල සමරවීර හරිද, වැරදි ද ජනපතිතුමනි රටට කියන්න…?

Avant-Garde is a world-renowned company – Mahinda Rajapaksa

March 19th, 2017

Avant-Garde is a world-renowned company – Mahinda Rajapaksa
ඇවන්ගාඩ් කියන්නේ ලෝකය පිළිගත්ත සමාගමක්… හිටපු ජනපති මහින්ද කියයි.

Even govt admits there is no money to run country – Tilvin

March 19th, 2017

ආණ්ඩුවම කියනවා, රට කරගෙන යන්න සල්ලි නැහැ කියලා… ටිල්වින් සිල්වා

නළාවේ අයිතිය හොඳහිතට!

March 18th, 2017

වරුණ චන්ද්‍රකීර්ති


අපේ රටේ තරම් ප්‍රශ්න තියෙන තවත් රටක් මේ ලෝකයේ තියෙනවා කියලා හිතන්න අමාරුයි. මිනිස්සු කාට කාටත් ප්‍රශ්න තියෙන එක ඇත්ත. ඒත් මිනිස්සු ඒ ප්‍රශ්නවලට විසඳුම් හොයාගන්නවා. එහෙම නැතිව කාකොටාගන්නවා කියන්නේ තියෙන ප්‍රශ්න තව තවත් අලුත් කරගන්න එකයි, නැති ප්‍රශ්න ඇති කරගන්න එකයි. අපේ රටේ තියෙන මේ අවුල ගැන අමුතුවෙන් කියන්න ඕන නෑ. මේ ගැන සඳහන් කරන්න පුළුවන් හොඳම උදාහරණය තමයි සයිටම් ප්‍රශ්නය. මේ සයිටම් කතාව අපේ අයට දැන් අප්‍රසන්න වෙලා තියෙන්නේ, තිත්ත වෙලා තියෙන්නේ. උදේටත් සයිටම්, දවල්ටත් සයිටම්, රෑටත් සයිටම්! මේ මංගල්ලේ ඉවරවෙන පාටකුත් නෑ. ඉතින් කාට හරි හිතෙන්න පුළුවන් මේ සයිටම් ප්‍රශ්නයට තියෙන හොඳ ම විසඳුම තමයි පුළුවන් තරම් ඉක්මනින් මේ ලෝකෙන් චුතවෙලා යන එක කියලා.

දැනට මේ ප්‍රශ්නයට විසඳුම් දෙකක් යෝජනා වෙලා තියෙනවා. එකක් තමයි තියෙන විදිහට ම සයිටම් එක පවත්වා ගෙන යන එක. අනිත් එක තමයි මේක රාජසන්තක කරලා දාන එක. ඉතින් දෙගොල්ල කඹ අඳිනවා. මහා උගත්තු ඉන්නවා කියලා කියන රටක මේ වගේ පොඩි ප්‍රශ්නයකට විසඳුමක් දෙන්න බැරිවෙලා තියෙනවා. මේ කියපු විසඳුම් දෙකට අමතර ව මේ ප්‍රශ්නයට වෙන විසඳුමක් නැති ද? දෙගොල්ල ම සතුටුකරන විදිහක් නැති ද? හැමෝ ම සතුටුකරන්න පුළුවන් විදිහක් නැති ද? එහෙම ක්‍රම කොහෙද තියෙන්නේ කියලා කාට හරි අහන්න පුළුවන්. ඒක ඇත්ත. ඒත් මේ වැඩේට සම්බන්ධ ප්‍රධාන පාර්ශ්ව දෙකක් ඉන්නවානේ. ඉතින් ඒ දෙපාර්ශ්වය සතුටුකරන්න පුළුවන්කමක් තියෙනවා නම් ලොකු දෙයක්නේ.

ඉතින් මේ කියන්නේ ඒ විදිහේ විසඳුමක් ගැන. තවත් කල් මරන්නේ නැතිව ඒ ගැන කියන්නම්.

රජයට නෙවෙයි – ජනතාවට

අද අපේ විශ්වවිද්‍යාල ඔක්කොම වගේ අයිති රජයට. ඒ කියන්නේ ජනතාවට අයිතියි කියන එක ද? එහෙම හිතන එක වැරැදියි. මිනිස්සුන් ගේ බදුවලිනුයි ආණ්ඩුව ගන්න ණයවලිනුයි මේවා පවත්වාගෙන ගියාට මේ ආයතන ජනතාවට අයිතියි කියලා හිතන එක තමන්ව ම රවට්ටා ගැනීමක්. ඉතින් කරන්න පුළුවන් හොඳ ම වැඩේ තමයි මේ ආයතන විශාල ජන සහභාගීත්වයකින් පවත්වාගෙන යෑමට ක්‍රමයක් සකස්කරන එක. ඒ කියන්නේ මුදලාලිලා දෙන්නෙක්, තුන්දෙනෙක් අතට මේවා පවරලා දෙන එක නෙවෙයි. පුළුවන් තරම් විශාල පිරිසකට මේවා ගේ අයිතිය භාරදෙන එක.

එහෙම කරන්නේ කොහොම ද? ඒක එච්චර අමාරු වැඩක් නෙවෙයි. මොකද ලාභ ලබන ආයතනයක පාර්ශ්වීය හිමිකාරයෙක් වෙන්න අකමැති කෙනෙක් නැහැනේ. ඒ විදිහට හිමිකාරකමක් ලබාදෙන්න පුළුවන් මුදලකට. ඉතින් සයිටම් එක කොටස් වෙළෙඳපොලේ විකුණන්න පුළුවන්. වැඩි පිරිසකට අයිතිය පවරන්න ඕන හින්දා එක් අයකුට මිළදීගන්න පුළුවන් කොටස් ගණන (ප්‍රතිශතය) නීතියෙන් සීමාකරන්න පුළුවන්.

ඒ විතරක් නෙවෙයි. මේ කොටස් විකිණිල්ලේ දී මිළදීගැනීමේ ප්‍රමුඛතාව ලැබෙන්න ඕන ඒ ක්‍ෂේත්‍රය ගැන දැනුමක් තියෙන අයට. විශේෂයෙන් ම වෛද්‍යවරුන්ට. ඒ කියන්නේ සයිටම් කොටස්වල අයිතිය හිමිකරගැනීමේ ප්‍රමුඛතාව රජයේ ලියාපදිංචි වෛද්‍යවරුන්ට හිමිවෙන්න ඕන. වෛද්‍යවරු කියන්නේ තරමක මුදල් හයියක් තියෙන පිරිසක් හින්දා ඒ අයට මේ වැඩේ වෙනුවෙන් මුදලක් ආයෝජනයක් කරන එක අමාරු වැඩක් නෙවෙයි.

එහෙම වුනා ම සයිටම් කියන්නේ වෘත්තීය සුදුසුකම තියෙන අය ගේ අධීක්‍ෂණය යටතේ පාලනය වන ආයතනයක් බවට පත්වෙනවා. ඉතින් ඒ විදිහට පාලනය වෙන ආයතනයකින් බිහිවෙන වෛද්‍යවරු නුසුදුස්සන් කියලා කියන්න, නිසි පුහුණුවක් නැති අය කියලා කියන්න කාටවත් පුළුවන්කමක් නෑ.

සයිටම් කියන්නේ මුදල් අයකරලා අධ්‍යාපනය ලබාදෙන ආයතනයක්. ඉතින් මේ ආයතනයේ මුදල් ආයෝජනය කරපු වෛද්‍යවරුන් ප්‍රමුඛ පිරිසට අලාභයක් වෙන්න විදිහක් නෑ. ලැබෙන ආයෝජනවලින් නෙවිල් ප්‍රනාන්දු දොස්තර මහත්තයා කරලා තියෙන වියදම් ඒ මහත්තයාට ආපහු ගෙවලා දාන්න පුළුවන්. ඒ මහත්තයා ආරම්භක සභාපති හින්දා ඒකට ගරුකරලා එතුමාට වැඩි කොටස් ප්‍රමාණයක් සහ පරිපාලන බලයක් ලබාදෙන්නත් පුළුවන්.

ඒ විතරක් නෙවෙයි. ආණ්ඩුවේ වෛද්‍ය විද්‍යාල වුනත් මේ විදිහට පිහිටුවන පොදු අයිතිය තියෙන සමාගමට ම පවරන්න පුළුවන්.

එතකොට නිදහස් අධ්‍යාපනය ..?

එහෙම කළා ම නිදහස් අධ්‍යාපනයට මොකද වෙන්නේ කියලා කාට හරි අහන්න පුළුවන්. අපි නිදහස් අධ්‍යාපනය කියලා කියන්නේ මොකක් ද? විශ්වවිද්‍යාල සම්බන්ධයෙන් ගත්තොත් ඒකෙන් කියැවෙන්නේ උසස් පෙළ විභාගයෙන් වැඩි සුදුසුකම් ලබාගත්ත ශිෂ්‍ය ශිෂ්‍යාවන් යම් ප්‍රමාණයකට නොමිලේ අධ්‍යාපනය ලබාගැනීමට අවස්ථාවක් ලබාදෙන එකනේ. ඒ වෙනුවෙන් ආණ්ඩුව වියදම්කරනවා.

ඉතින් ආණ්ඩුවේ වෛද්‍ය විද්‍යාල පොදු අයිතිය තියෙන සමාගමකට විකුණුවාම ඒ අවස්ථාව නැතිවෙන්න පුළුවන් කියලා කාට හරි කියන්න පුළුවන්. එහෙම වෙන්නේ නෑ. ආණ්ඩුවට පුළුවන් දැනට බඳවාගන්නා ශිෂ්‍ය ප්‍රමාණයටත් වැඩි ගණනකට ඒ අවස්ථාව ලබාදෙන්න. ඒ කොහොම ද? ඒක මහ වැඩක් නෙවෙයි. ඒ වෙනුවෙන් කරන්න ඕන දැනට අවුරුද්දකට වෛද්‍ය විද්‍යාලවලට බඳවාගන්නේ ශිෂ්‍යයන් 2000 ක් නම්, ඒ විදිහට ම ඒ අය ව තෝරගෙන ඒ ඒ ශිෂ්‍යයා ගේ අධ්‍යාපනික වියදම ශිෂ්‍යත්වයක ආකාරයෙන් අර විදිහට පිහිටුවන පොදු සමාගමට ලබාදෙන එක. වෛද්‍ය උපාධි පාඨමාලාවක් වෙනුවෙන් අය කළ යුතු ගාස්තුව කීය ද කියන එක ආණ්ඩුවේ නියාමනය යටතේ තීරණයකරන්න පුළුවන්.

මේ ක්‍රමය අනුගමනය කරද්දී ආණ්ඩුව වියදම්කරන්න ඕන ශිෂ්‍යයන් ගේ ශිෂ්‍යත්ව වෙනුවෙන් විතරයි. ගුරුවරුන් ගේ පඩි ගෙවන්න, ගොඩනැගිලි ආදිය පවත්වාගෙන යන්න, පරිපාලන වියදම් දරන්න වෙන්නේ මේ පොදු සමාගමට. ඉතින් මේ විදිහේ අමතර වියදම් අඩුවෙන හින්දා ආණ්ඩුවට පුළුවන් රජයේ ශිෂ්‍යත්ව මත බඳවාගැනීමට සළස්වන ප්‍රමාණය වැඩිකරන්න. ඒ කියන්නේ, දැන් බඳවාගන්නේ 2000 ක් නම් ඒක 3000 ක් දක්වා වැඩිකරන්න.

ඒත් මේ වැඩේට සමාගමක්, සමාගමක් කියලා කිව්වා හරි කැතයිනේ කියලා කාට හරි කියන්න පුළුවන්. ඉතින් ඒකට කරන්න ඕන හොඳ නමක් දාගන්න එකනේ. මේකට කියන්න පුළුවන් ශ්‍රී ලංකා වෛද්‍ය විද්‍යාලය කියලා. එහෙමත් නැතිනම් ඊටත් වඩා ගරු ගාම්භීර නමක් හොයාගන්න පුළුවන්.

දැනට තියෙන වෛද්‍ය පීඨ ..?

එතකොට දැන් තියෙන වෛද්‍ය පීඨවලට මොකද කරන්නේ? ඒවා ඉතින් මේ විදිහට ඇතිකරන ශ්‍රී ලංකා වෛද්‍ය විද්‍යාලයේ පීඨ බවට පත්කරන්න පුළුවන්නේ. අදාළ ගොඩනැගිලි මේ වැඩේට පාවිච්චි කරන එක වෙනුවෙන් ඒවා පිහිටුවලා තියෙන විශ්වවිද්‍යාලවලට කුලියක් ගෙවන්නත් පුළුවන්. ඉතින් ඒක ඒ විශ්වවිද්‍යාලවලට ආදායමක්. එහෙම ආදායමක් ලැබෙන එක රජයටත් හොඳයි. රජයට බදු ගෙවන ජනතාවටත් හොඳයි.

මේ විදිහට කළා ම ශ්‍රී ලංකා වෛද්‍ය විද්‍යාලය කියන්නේ රට වටේ ම පීඨ තියෙන පොදු ආයතනයක් බවට පත්වෙනවා. තියෙන සම්පත් සාධාරණ විදිහට බෙදා හදාගන්නත් පුළුවන්. දැන් සමහර වෛද්‍ය පීඨවල මහාචාර්යවරු ඉන්නවා. ඒත් අයට ප්‍රමාණවත් තරම් ශිෂ්‍යයෝ නෑ. සමහර වෛද්‍ය පීඨවල ශිෂ්‍යයෝ ඉන්නවා. ඒ අයට අවශ්‍ය කරන ගුරුවරු නෑ. ඉතින් මේ ඔක්කොම එක අයතනයක පිරිස් බවට පත්වුනා ම සම්පත් බෙදාගැනිල්ල හරි ම පහසුවෙන් කරන්න පුළුවන්නේ.

අදාළ කාල සීමාවේ ඉගෙනගන්න දේට ගැලපෙන විදිහට ශිෂ්‍යයන්ටත් පුළුවන්නේ පීඨයෙන් පීඨයට යන්න. රට වටේ ම ඉන්න එක ම විෂයය ඉගෙනගන්න අයට ඒකට අදාළ පොදු පංතිවලට සහභාගීවෙන්න පුළුවන්. සමහර පාඨමාලා පැවැත්වෙන්නේ කොළඹ. තවත් සමහර පාඨමාලා පැවැත්වෙන්නේ පිට පළාත්වල. ප්‍රායෝගික පුහුණුවීම්වලට, සායනික පුහුණුවීම්වලට  අදාළ පහසුකම් වුනත් බෙදා හදාගන්න පුළුවන්නේ. මේක තැනකින් තැනකට යන්න බැරි තරම් විශාල රටකුත් නෙවෙයිනේ.

මේ කියන්නේ අධ්‍යාපනය විකුණන්න කියන එක ද?

මේ කියන්නේ වෛද්‍ය අධ්‍යාපනය විකුණන්න කියලා කියන එක නේ ද කියලා කාට හරි චෝදනාකරන්න පුළුවන්. ඒ විතරක් නෙවෙයි. අධ්‍යාපනය කියන්නේ භාණ්ඩයක් විදිහට වෙළෙඳපොලේ විකුණන්න බැරි දෙයක් කියලත් ඒ අය කියාවි.

ඒත් ලෝකේ පුරා ම තියෙන අනෙක් රටවල්වල තියෙන වෛද්‍ය විද්‍යාල ගැන හොයලා බැලුවොත් පෙනෙයි නොමිලේ අධ්‍යාපනය ලබාදෙන ආයතන තියෙන්නේ කීයෙන් කීය ද කියලා. ඒ විදිහට ගෙවලා ඉගෙනගන්න පුළුවන් හින්දානේ අපේ අය ඒ රටවල්වලට ගිහිල්ලා සල්ලි ගෙවලා ඉගෙනගෙන එන්නේ. ඇමෙරිකාව, එංගලන්තය, ඕස්ට්‍රේලියාව, කැනඩාව, චීනය, රුසියාව වගේ රටවල ඉන්නේ කිසිම සුදුසුකමක් නැති වෛද්‍යවරු කියලා අපිට කියන්න බෑනේ. ඒ රටවල්වල ඉන්න වෛද්‍යවරුන්ගෙන් අතිමහත් බහුකරයක් මුදල් ගෙවලා ඉගෙනගත්ත අයනේ.

උසස් පෙළ විභාගයෙන් ඉහළ සුදුසුකම් ලබාගන්න අය ගේ වියදම් දරන එක ආණ්ඩුවට කරන්න පුළුවන්නේ. ආණ්ඩුවට විතරක් නෙවෙයි. වෙනත් පුණ්‍ය ආයතනවලට වුනත් ශිෂ්‍යත්ව අරමුදල් ඇතිකරලා තව තවත් ශිෂ්‍යයන්ට උදව් කරන්න පුළුවන්. තමන්ට කියලා ප්‍රමාණවත් මුදලක් නැති පිරිසකට බැංකු ණය ගන්න ක්‍රමයකුත් හදලා දෙන්න පුළුවන්.

මුදල් ගෙවලා ඉගෙනගන්න අය ගේ සුදුසුකම් ..?

එතකොට ඕනෑ ම කෙනෙක්ට මුදල් ගෙවලා ශ්‍රී ලංකා වෛද්‍ය විද්‍යාලයේ ඉගෙනගන්න පුළුවන් ද කියලා කාට හරි අහන්න පුළුවන්. එහෙම වෙන්නේ කොහොම ද? මුදල් ගෙවලා ඉගෙනගන්න බලාපොරොත්තු වෙන අයගෙන් අයැදුම්පත් කැඳවන එකනේ මුලින් ම කරන්න ඕන. ඒ විදිහට අයැදුම්පතක් යොමුකරන්න තියෙන්න ඕන මූලික ම සුදුසුකම තමයි උසස් පෙළ විභාගයට අදාළ විෂයයන්ගෙන් පෙනී ඉඳලා සමත්වෙන එක. අසමත් වෙච්ච අයට එහෙම ඉඩක් දෙන්න විදිහක් නැහැනේ. අයැදුම්පත් ලැබුණාට පස්සේ වැඩි ම ලකුණු ගත්ත පිරිස තෝරාගන්න පුළුවන්. ඒ විදිහට තෝරාගත්ත කඩයිම් ලකුණු මොනවා ද කියලා ප්‍රසිද්ධ කරන්නත් පුළුවන්. එතකොට කාට කාටත් පැහැදිළියි මොකක්ද වෙන්නේ කියන එක.

මේ විදිහට වැඩ කළා ම පටිපාටිය හරි ම පැහැදිළියි. ලකුණු වැඩියෙන් ගත්ත යම් ප්‍රමාණයකට (උදා: 3000 කට) ආණ්ඩුවෙන් ශිෂ්‍යත්ව දෙනවා. ඒ වැඩේ දී දැන් කරන විදිහට ම ඉසෙඩ් ලකුණු, දිස්ත්‍රික් කඩයිම් යොදාගන්න පුළුවන්. ආණ්ඩුවේ ශිෂ්‍යත්ව දිනාගන්න බැරිවෙච්ච අය අතර ඉන්න ඉහළ ම සුදුසුකම් ලබාගත්ත පිරිසකට මුදල් ගෙවලා ඉගෙනගන්න අවස්ථාව ලැබෙනවා. ඉතින් A තුනකුත් තියෙද්දී, සල්ලි ගෙවලාවත් ඉගෙනගන්න බැරිවුනා කියලා කියන්න ඕන නෑ.

වෛද්‍ය අධ්‍යාපනයට විතරක් නෙවෙයි

මේ වගේ ක්‍රමයක් SLIIT, NIBM ආයතනවලටත් හඳුන්වලා දෙන්න පුළුවන්. දැනට ආණ්ඩුවේ විශ්වවිද්‍යාලවල පවත්වගෙන යන පරිගණක, කළමනාකරණ පීඨ පවා ඒ විදිහට පිහිටුවන පොදු ආයතනවල පීඨ බවට පත්කරන්න පුළුවන්. ඒවාට මුදල් ආයෝජන භාරගනිද්දි ප්‍රමුඛතාව දෙන්න ඕන ඒ ඒ ක්‍ෂේත්‍රවල කෙළ පැමිණි අයට. ආණ්ඩුව කරන්න ඕන අදාළ ආයතනවලට ඇතුළුවෙන්න සුදුසුකම් තියෙන ශිෂ්‍යයන් ප්‍රමාණයකට ශිෂ්‍යත්ව ලබාදීලා, අදාළ ආයතන හොඳින් පාලනය වෙනවා ද කියලා නියාමනය කරන එක විතරයි.

වරුණ චන්ද්‍රකීර්ති

Yahapalana brain-fade in Geneva

March 18th, 2017


 Way back when Mahinda Rajapaksa’s government was getting slammed left, right and centre by the ‘international (sic) community’, especially at the UNHRC, his detractors were thrilled.  Little did they care that the accusers were tainted in ways that made Sri Lanka look pretty innocent in terms of (alleged) ‘war crimes’.  Rajapaksa was accused of being moronic in his foreign policy.  Dark stories were spread about impending sanctions.  The removal of the GSP Plus facility was thrown in as evidence and a sign of worse things to come.
The previous regime resisted all moves to interfere in the affairs of the country including direct involvement in judicial processes.  It was a foregone conclusion that Sri Lanka would time and again be bested in votes taken in the UNHRC, apart from the first vote with respect to the conflict when Dayan Jayatilleka was the Permanent Representative in Geneva.  A good battle was fought and lost, as expected.
Rajapaksa didn’t do himself any favours back home.  Corruption, wastage, nepotism, serious compromising of the Rule of Law and other such negatives slowly but surely brought just enough forces together to throw him out of office.  
Today, the very same international community is going easy on the current regime.  Why?  Because they have this government has shown greater commitment to getting things right by way of reconciliation, transitional justice, transparency and what not?  
And ready to brain-fade again, by the looks of it!
What do have now?  We have a regime that is same-same as the Rajapaksas with a key difference.  They’ve adopted Rajapaksa Ways in record speed.  Whereas it took the previous regime more than five years to lose the plot, it has taken this government less than 2 to lose it, if they had a plot in the first place that is.  And this is best evidenced by the short-sighted, irresponsible and sophomoric thinking with respect to dealing with the international community (via the UNHRC) on human rights, transitional justice and so on.  
Prince Zeid has not exactly patted this government on the back, but he’s not swishing any whips either, as was the forte of his predecessor.  He is still calling for hybrid courts.  
What do the President and the Prime Minister have to say?  
The President has clearly said that there will be no foreign judges in judicial procedures to probe war crimes allegations.  That’s a blatant snub on the Consultative Task Force on Reconciliation Mechanisms.  Lakshman Yapa Abeywardene has said that the President and the Government have full confidence in the judiciary and legal processes.  We have extremely eminent and experienced judges and our judges have served in various countries and global organizations that have given much credit to the country,” he said.  The issue of establishing a hybrid court does not arise, as far as that component of this coalition government is concerned.
As for the other half, the Prime Minister has said that a hybrid court was not politically feasible and as such a feasible alternative should be found.  His words:
Setting up a hybrid court is not politically feasible because such a move would need a referendum. Against this back drop, how can we fulfill the expectations of the international community? Let’s get together and think of a feasible alternative for such a court.”  
And what do the strongest backers (and now approvers) of the forces that ousted Rajapaksa have to say?  Jehan Perera, writing about the Governments performance in Geneva puts it well.
During their stay in Geneva, the Sri Lankan delegation was able to meet with most important parties at the side events to the official conference. This included meetings with the UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres and with UN Human Rights Commissioner Prince Zeid bin Ra’ad Zeid al-Hussein and with the ambassadors to the UN of various powerful countries. Some of those who are currently playing a decision-making role in UN processes have had previous engagements with Sri Lanka and are in a position to make a comparative analysis of the situation in Sri Lanka as against other countries. They tend to be impressed at the overall developments in Sri Lanka which they can compare with the deterioration to be found in many parts of the world.”
So now it’s about relative merits.  Sri Lanka is better than Myanmar.  One can’t help observing that Sri Lanka was always better than a lot of countries (including the USA, UK, Canada and the EU) in terms of dealing with terrorism AND, more importantly, in sorting out post-conflict issues such as reconstruction, settlement of the displaced, restoration of democracy and rehabilitating hardcore terrorists, people with a combat history and adjuncts in the cause of terrorism, from whose grasp, let us not forget, some 300,000 civilians held hostage were rescued.  Try beating that!  
But that’s not what this government did.  The UNHRC officially recognized all this and then duly forgot, but then again, the likes of Perera never even acknowledged all this for reasons that are obvious.
The problem with the Government’s current position is what G.L. Peiris has pointed out. Prof Peiris asks, correctly, who approved the UNHRC Resolution that Sri Lanka co-sponsored with the USA?”      That Resolution clearly shows that Sri Lanka is amenable to the involvement of foreign judges.  Didn’t the President and the Prime Minister know back then that a) Sri Lanka has competent judges and a credible judicial process (as the President now claims) and b) that such mechanisms are untenable (as the Prime Minister now claims)?  Were they, like all politicians, merely playing the age old game of seeking the postponement of the inevitable in the absence of a coherent, pragmatic alternative approach?  
it is clear that an international community that is sorely lacking in integrity should not be shown any respect.   This Government was let down by the champions of righteousness (corrupt though they are in this respect).  Today the Government is looking to a less-friendly China for help.  Well, the previous regime appears to have got everything right in this respect.  They knew what the international community was about.  They knew who had the bucks and who had the swagger.  They blew it domestically.  
This government is close to blowing it domestically.  And they’ve read the ‘international’ all wrong.  In Geneva, they suffered a brain-fade.  That’s putting it mildly.  They’ve remained brain-faded since then and demonstrated the fact this year as well.  
In the very least, the Foreign Minister has shown gross negligence, total absence of intelligence, and utter political immaturity.  That’s only if he acted on his own steam, which again is hard to believe.  That particular brain-fade buck floats upwards.   And whether or not it is acknowledged, it sticks. 
Malinda Seneviratne is a freelance writer.  Email: malindasenevi@gmail.com. Twitter: malindasene

පේරාදෙනිය වධකාගාරය නොහොත් Tuol Sleng වධකාගාරයේ කළළ අවස්ථාව

March 17th, 2017

වෛද්‍ය රුවන් එම් ජයතුංග

වධකාගාර ශ්‍රි ලාංකික සමාජයට නවතාවක් නොවේ. හමුදාව විසින් පාලනය කල යටාරෝ කැෆටේ‍රියා වධකාගාරයද කොටින් විසින් පවත්වාගෙන ගිය දේවිපුරම් වධකාගාරයද ශ්‍රි ලාංකිකයන්ට අමතක නොවේ. මේ වධකාගාර වලට වඩා පේරාදෙනිය වධකාගාරය වෙනස් වෙයි. එය පවත්වාගෙන යන ලද්දේ අට සමත් කේඩරයන් නොව විශ්ව විද්‍යාලයට තේරුණු සිසුන් පිරිසක් විසිනි.

මොවුන් රැඩිකල් දේශපාලන පක්‍ෂ වල සොල්දාදුවෝ වෙති. යම් ලෙසකින් මෙම රැඩිකල් දේශපාලන පක්‍ෂ ලංකාවේ බලය අල්ලා ගත්තේ නම් ඔවුන් ලංකාව පාලනය කරන්නේ මෙවැනි වදකාගාර ආකෘතියක් හරහාය​. කෙමරූජ්වරු කාම්පුචියාවේ මෙවැනි වදකාගාර පවත්වාගෙන ගියහ​. කාම්පුචියාවේ Tuol Sleng වධකාගාරය එක් උදාහරණයකි.

පහත ලිපිය උපුටා ගනු ලැබුවේ රාවය පුවත්පතිනි. කාම්පුචියාවේ Tuol Sleng වධකාගාරයේ කළළ අවස්ථාවක් ලෙස පේරාදෙනිය වධකාගාරය නම් කල හැකිය​. 

………පේරාදෙණිය විශ්ව විද්‍යාලයේ පාලනාධිකාරියට මෙම පෞද්ගලික වධකාගාරය පිළිබඳ කණින් කොනින් තොරතුරු ලැබෙමින් තිබී ඇත. පෙබරවාරි 19 දින රාත්‍රියේදී ළමුන් කීපදෙනකු රඳවාගෙන නිරුවත් කර වධදෙන බවට ලැබුණ තොරතුරක් මත ආරක්‍ෂක නිලධාරීන් පෞද්ගලික වාහනයකින් එහි ගොස් නිවෙස වටලා පසුව ආචාර්ය මණ්ඩලයේ කීපදෙනකුද එතනට කැඳවාගෙන තිබේ. ඒ යත්දීත් වධයට බඳුන්වුණ සිසුන් සිට ඇත්තේ නිරුවතිනි.

 නවක සිසුන් හත්දෙනකු එදින වධදීම සඳහා කැඳවාගෙන අවුත් ඇත්තේ චිකාගෝ ක්‍රමයටය. ඒ දුරකථන ඇමතුම් මාර්ගයෙන් පණිවිඩ ලබාදෙමිනි. දහනමවැනි දින එක් සිසුවෙකු විශ්විද්‍යාලයේ නේවාසිකා ගාරයේ සිටිත්දී සිය ජංගම දුරකථනයට ඇමතුමක් ලැබෙන්නේ සවස 2.30ට මහනුවර රෝහල අසලට පැමිණෙන ලෙසටය. ඔහු රෝහල අසලට යනවිටත් දුරකථන ඇමතුමක් ලද ඔහුගේ තවත් මිතුරෙක්ද රෝහල අසල සිටියේය. අනතුරුව මහනුවර ඔරලෝසු කණුව අසලට පැමිණෙන ලෙසට දුරකථන ඇමතුමක් ලැබෙන්නේය.

ඔවුහු දෙදෙනා එතැනට යති. එහිදී සංජීව නම් තවත් අයකු පැමිණෙන බවත් ඔහුත් කැටුව මහනුවර ගුඞ්ෂෙඞ් බස් නැවතුම්පොළට පැමිණෙන ලෙසත් ඊළඟ ඇමතුම ලැබෙන්නේය.

ඊටත් පසුව දෙල්තොට බස්රථයට නැඟ නමය කණුව ළඟින් බසින්නට දුරකථනයෙන් ඇමතුම් ලැබෙන අතර ඔවුහු ඒ නියෝගයට අවනතව අදාළ ස්ථානයෙන් බසිති. යතුරු පැදිවලින් අවුත් ඔවුන් අතුරුමාවත් දිගේ රැගෙන ගොස් මෙම නිවසට රැගෙන යන්නේ දෙවන වසරේ සිසුන් දෙදෙනෙකි.

නිවෙසට කැඳවාගෙන ගොස් වතුර බොන්නට දී ඇඳුම් ගලවන්නට අණකර ඇඳුම් ගැලවූ පසුව කුණුහරුපයෙන් බැණ වැදුණු බවත් විවිධ අඩන්තේට්ටම් කළ බවත් විශ්වවිද්‍යාලයේ ආරක්‍ෂක අංශයේ අය සහ විනයභාර ආචාර්යවරයා පැමිණෙන තෙක්ම නිරුවතින් සිටීමට සිදුවූ බවත් සිසුන් ප්‍රකාශ කර ඇත.

එක් සිසුවෙකු පමණක් අනෙක් අය ඇඳුම් ගලවත්දී තමන්ද ඇඳුම් ගැලවූ බව ප්‍රකාශ කර තිබේ. සිසුන් පිරිස නිරුවත් කළේ ඇයිද යන්නට වධකයන් දී ඇති පිළිතුර අපූරුය. ඒ ඔවුන්ගේ ලජ්ජාව නැතිකරන්නට බවය.

Will Free Trade (FTAs) Lead to a ‘Powerful’ Sri Lanka? THE IMF IN SRI LANKA – Part III

March 17th, 2017

Small & Medium Enterprises (SMEs) – Low Export Viability under FTAs.

In Sri Lanka, approximately 99.8% of domestic sales are the product of small business concerns, and 83% of these are from medium-sized enterprises, both together accounting for more than 50% of GDP, and also 45% of total employment. Research done by the Institute of Policy Studies (IPS) has also shown that SMEs are significant in the employment sphere as employers of women and youth, a disadvantaged minority in our country.

A large number of constraints to the operation and growth of SMEs, which are, therefore, so critically important to the Sri Lankan economy, have not been relieved hitherto by policy makers but difficulties affecting their business prospects will also be aggravated by liberalizing further the country’s trade regime. So also by the proposed adoption of IMF-advised and supported free trade pacts with several countries, which are at a more advanced stage of industrialization. These FTAs are now in almost confidential but active negotiation status, without full consultation with SME representatives, who are potentially the adversely affected stakeholders, vulnerable to increased foreign competition at this early stage of the country’s industrialization.

The research done by IPS has also discovered that “trade barriers, poor access to information, costly requirements in regulations, burdensome customs procedures and shortage of trade finance, as being major barriers to SME’s role in the export trade”. Lack of access to information about border procedures and regulations operative in foreign markets; easy access to trade finance; unfamiliarity with the marketing know-how needed to adapt SMEs’ local products and packaging techniques in order to meet external market requirements; their inability to provide collateral, bank guarantees and credit history, entailing higher interest rates for SMEs; and lack of dedicated trade facilitation-related financial services have variously been identified in the same IPS study. These constraints cumulatively contribute to substantially reduce SMEs’ export potential, and should be ameliorated to stimulate and encourage their ability to compete in foreign markets. Opening domestic production to more sophisticated import competition will operate as a serious drawback to SME business viability.

The gross neglect of these issues by the Government is surprising. Of the constraints identified above and presented by SMEs, not only in formulating trade policy but also in ongoing negotiations for FTAs, which, per se, entail neglect of the prime need to ‘protect’ these SME businesses, employing a large proportion of the population, dependent on employment countrywide by them. Already, the steep increase in living costs resulting from IMF-decreed increased VAT and the imposition of a Nation Building Tax (NBT) on SMEs, which pass on these regressive taxes to consumers, have not only reduced consumer demand, but also contributed substantially to inhibit their export drive, resulting in reduced profitability, and caused problems for the livelihood of a large segment of the people employed in SMEs, importantly women and youth (who already have other constraints in obtaining gainful employment, as commented earlier), and a sizable number of SMEs who are owned and run by women. (This writer is indebted to studies done by IPS, and its outstanding trade policy analysts, for data and related arguments presented in the foregoing section as summarized by Dr Janaka Wijayasiri in ‘The Island’ of 1 December 2016, and also elsewhere in this essay).

Now, the Government has issued mandatory instructions through the Central Bank to all commercial banks urging them to lend at least 10% of their total loan portfolio to SME businesses throughout the country. (Whether the instruction to also lend 10% for agriculture, 5% to women and 5% to youth is complementary to the special lending allocation to qualified SMEs is not clear), but critics have pointed out structural deficiencies in the system, including the lack of information to potential borrowers about which business sectors are profitable; the lack of technical knowledge and skills to undertake businesses in their respective areas; the inability of many borrowers to present their case for loans in a way acceptable to lending banks; the lack among borrowers, especially women and youth, of needed collateral and security demanded by such banks; and the perception among banks that the sector of business identified by potential borrowers may not be a profitable one or the borrower is not creditworthy. A mandatory Central Bank direction to lend a minimum proportion to SMEs, women or youth, without and before policy makers take adequate measures to address these preliminary but significant, structural issues may be doomed to failure.

A substantial proportion of SMEs in rural and suburban areas, are also mainly involved in agro exports, which are inhibited by their own special structural constraints, relating to: failure overseas of Sri Lanka’s food safety standards, governed by an antiquated Food Act, many decades behind modern international standards; a basic focus on primary agro exports with still little or no local value added; inability to make a quick response to changing western and other sophisticated consumer demands, especially since politicians are in the driving seat in our country, unlike in India and other more advanced Asian economies, instead of technocrats. Our country produces not enough food scientists – therefore, the emphasis is on ‘quality’ of exported products, evaluated by unqualified personnel, and not food ‘safety’, which is the significant deciding factor in international commerce. (“Why Sri Lanka is an Agro Export Failure”, CT, 10 March 2017).

Export Finance – Role & Significance.

The Government has allocated Rs 10 Billion to establish an EXIM bank in Sri Lanka, now recognized universally as a significant facilitator of export promotion, and helpful in meeting export targets. Export finance has an important role to play in the country’s efforts to revive its declining exports by: facilitating payment and export terms to exporters; help the exporter and buyer to share risks in international transactions; provide export insurance, loans to meet working capital requirements for export as well as for strategic export credit schemes, e.g. credit guarantees, interest rate support, etc; provide buyers’ credit even to the importer; reduce the risk premiums levied on loans to SME exporters, which now increases their borrowing cost; and help incentivize the private sector to explore, access and diversify into new foreign markets and add value to products. (Extracted from a Verite Research Study summary, December 2016).

International Investment – Poor Sri Lanka Experience?

A primary objective of Sri Lanka entering into FTAs with industrialized, more advanced countries is also to mobilize foreign, bilateral investment through an investment component, with attendant technology transfer. In addition, Sri Lanka has entered into separate Bilateral Investment Treaties (BITs) with the same foreign investment objective – 21 in the 1980s-90s, and 5 during the 2000s; of the latter, only one has been ratified and is in force. Evidence does not support the “conclusion of causality between the presence of BITs and increase in FDI flows…and also reveals inconclusive evidence that FDI flows increased after entry into force of a BIT… Sri Lanka avoided finalizing or ratifying any new BIT since 2009…Sri Lanka seems to be very careful in entering into new BITs in the future” (Malalgoda & Samaraweera, “The Experience of Sri Lanka with International Investment Treaties”, South Centre-Investment Policy Brief, December 2016).

Free Trade Policy : Specific Country Issues.

The wisdom of negotiating preferential, supra-national free trade agreements (FTAs) is questionable, without first establishing a viable export industry strong enough to withstand international trade competition, as was done earlier by the ‘miracle’ economies of East Asia, in relation to more industrialized countries. Advisability of proposed FTAs with China, Singapore and India, inter alia, with all of whom Sri Lanka has substantial adverse trade balances, historically as well as currently, has come into serious doubt by both stakeholders like the SMEs as well as by concerned professional associations, like the economists and exporters and Chambers of Commerce (as was pointed out in an earlier part of this essay). The Government, nevertheless, is pushing ahead speedily with finalizing such ill-conceived, anti-national and perverse trade policies which will further decimate business profitability and already declining export prospects, and kill nascent ‘basic’ industrial efforts, which are fully deserving of the import substitution safeguards proposed by local trade experts and professional economists’ associations – early policies which were sponsored during their speedy industrialization by the ‘tiger’ economies of East Asia (see this writer’s “The Development Strategy of the ‘Miracle Economies of East Asia”, The Island, 11February2017). A brief examination of Sri Lanka’s drawbacks in further liberalizing trade through FTAs at this early stage, and the advanced industrial status of the countries with which Sri Lanka is planning to speedily intensify trade liberalization, aimed at increasing export revenues, may be revealing at this point.


This is a country with the most automated industrial sector in Asia, barring Japan; China’s factories are rapidly replacing their workers with robots in an ongoing automation-driven industrial revolution, aimed at accelerating greater production and cutting rising labour costs, for further improving competitiveness. China has bought more industrial robots than any other country since 2013, in a determined quest for cheaper and more reliable industrial mechanics, performed with greater precision. China’s technological revolution has very far to progress, raising the six million dollar question: Can developing economies like Sri Lanka still hope to follow the conventional route to prosperity through enhanced trade liberalization, exporting low end products, e.g. leather goods and garments, to countries like China, now already the world’s biggest exporter of manufactured goods, or even Singapore, another sophisticated manufacturing base?

China’s central planners are offering generous subsidies, spurned by Sri Lanka’s economic guru, the IMF, to industrial concerns both to use and build robots, also upgrade them and capture new export markets – with a proactive Government throwing its full weight behind the domestic robot revolution. Meanwhile, as the demand increases the price of industrial robots is falling and their performance is improving progressively, enabling China to overcome labour shortages and rising costs (“China’s Robot Revolution” from Artificial Intelligence & Robotics).

Elaborating on the related ongoing FTA negotiation, the Sri Lanka/China trade trade between these countries crossed the high $ 4 Billion threshold, 93% (or $ 3.7 Billion) were imports from China into Sri Lanka, while Sri Lanka’s exports to China were valued at a miniscule $ 293 million (or 7%); and plans are to make this quite unbalanced bilateral trading relationship still more stark, and now sought to be further liberalized even more extensively and deeply under an FTA. Moreover, a significant proportion of Sri Lanka’s exports utilize major imported components from China itself, reducing the local value added significantly! During the last eleven years when Sri Lanka/China bilateral trade ballooned nearly six-fold from $ 659 million in 2005, the proportion of Sri Lanka’s exports to China did not increase due to numerous structural factors, adequately detailed and summarized in previous parts of this essay already, extracted from SLEAS and IPS commentaries – but principally relating to the paucity of exportable products generated by a vibrant industrial sector in Sri Lanka, building upon a still-nonexistent, national industrial strategy, detailing a vision of a modern economy’s path to a “powerful” (balagathu) Sri Lanka.

It is relevant to mention here that the Second China Product Export Exhibition, launched last year in Colombo in late-November, and attended by a 120-strong visiting Chinese delegation, was further designed to exploit still more intensively and further expand currently existing trading advantages to China, coming from greater liberalization of even more preferential Sri Lanka/China trade, which is current government policy.

Trade policy analysts have also identified several lessons for Sri Lanka from the Pakistan/China FTA, derived from experience under it during the ten years of its operation, as follows: firstly, tariff concessions extended to Pakistan appear superficially generous, but despite Pakistan’s close and long-standing political and foreign policy relationship, China has awarded better or equal trade concessions to competing ASEAN countries, while also placing Pakistan’s more unique exports in the ‘non-concessional’ category, cumulatively resulting in the FTA eventually benefiting China more than Pakistan. The question arises whether our negotiating authorities have first consulted domestic businesses to ensure that FTA’s concessions are beneficial to Sri Lanka’s trading interests?

Secondly, China appears to benefit more from a number of products covered, and their variety under the FTA than Pakistan. So, is Sri Lanka negotiating an FTA which covers products with high export potential and enjoying competitive advantages in world markets, thereby diversifying its export basket? Thirdly, given the unequal benefits shared under the FTA and Pakistan’s steep adverse trade balance with China, very similar to Sri Lanka, exports from China keep increasing, causing income and revenue loss to Pakistan, necessitating increase in Pakistan’s export lines and expansion of product variety, rather than trying to discourage exports from China – a losing game at all times. Similarly, IPS research (from which these very cogent arguments are extracted), shows close to 300 items of goods imported by China, not being now exported by Sri Lanka, presenting new export potential for innovative domestic entrepreneurs, but they would initially need a ‘protected’ milieu to develop, possibly concessionary Bank credit and government export subsidies, which will cause IMF’s loud megaphone to be turned on again at policymakers – but this was precisely the early strategy of the ‘miracle’ economies to speedy global export success and prosperity, with equity for all.

Lastly, there is a serious potential danger to Sri Lanka from finalizing FTA’s with more industrialized countries – for instance, the FTA with China has resulted in increased imports of finished products into Pakistan, flooding the local market with cheap substitutes to locally crafted goods and reduced their demand and, therefore, profitability; also causing under-utilized capacity among local enterprises. Does Sri Lanka have the time and funds to extend speedy, subsidized support to local industry, rendered vulnerable by cheap Chinese competition flooding the local market? China has famously entered even other highly industrialized countries as well, like the U.S. and wiped out both entrepreneurs, and with it, employment on a large-scale – leading to loss of jobs and impoverishment of workers, one contributory reason for the recent regime change in that country. Sri Lanka is attempting to do what the U.S. industrial powerhouse could not do successfully, may be at similar or even worse costs.

Dr Janaka Wijayasiri, a trade policy expert at IPS, from whose original and imaginative research, the foregoing “Four Lessons of the Pakistan-China FTA for Sri Lanka, (Talking Economics Blog) are derived, has recommended that “Sri lanka should urgently enact legislation against anti-dumping, countervailing and safeguard measures…to ease the transition towards freer trade and protect local industries against unfair trading practices and surges in imports”. So, time is of the essence, but nothing happens that fast in this slow-moving, tropical paradise! In fact, local manufacturers are reported to be irked that a feared 90% tariff liberalization, with only a 10% negative list, covering substantially all trade, will allow cheaper Chinese products to certainly flood the market and adversely affect local industry, and will result in huge job losses. While China wants to fast-track the FTA signing, before India, in a typical Sri Lankan ‘cart before the horse’ scenario, responsible bureaucrats have been, ex post facto directed to undertake a comprehensive sector-wise analysis to identify industries which will be affected, with data on their exports, employment, turnover and production volumes, at this very late stage, after the FTA horse has in fact almost bolted! Better late than never, hardly works at this critical juncture, because, very sadly poor peoples’ livelihoods are at stake here.

To be Continued

 රට බෙදීමට විලිලෑම සහ ඊළම සීසර් කිරීම

March 17th, 2017

මතුගම සෙනෙවිරුවන්   

සිංහලද්වීපය නොහොත් උඩරට ගිවිසුමේ සඳහන් සිංහලේ ට එල්ලවූ විදේශ ආක්‍රමණ ඉතිහාසය පුරාම නිමක් නැතිය. වරෙක මේ ආක්‍රමණිකයන් රට අල්වා ගත්හ.තමන්ට රිසි පරිදි පාලන පහසුවට බෙදා වෙන්කර ගත්හ. යුරෝපීයන්  පෙරදිගට පැමිණීමත් සමගම මේ ආක්‍රමණය නව ස්වරූපයකින් බලවත් විය. මේ නිසා සිංහල රජවරුන්ටද ඇතැම් විට සිදු වූ යේ උඩරට පහතරට වශයෙන් බෙදාගෙන පාලනය කර ගැනීමටයි. නමුත් මේ සෑම අවස්ථාවකදීම බෙදුම්වාදය පරාජයට පත් කරමින් නැවතත් රට එක් සේසත් විය. එහි අදහස නම් එක් රජෙකු යටතේ එක් ධජයක් යටතේ රට පාලනයට පසුබිම් සැකසීමයි.මෙම සිංහලද්වීපය ගිවිසුමකින් බ්‍රිතාන්‍ය රජුට පවරා දීමේ ඓතිහාසික වැරැද්ද සිංහල රදළ වරුන් නොකළා නම් අදත් එක සේසත් රටක් අපට හිමි වන්නට ඉඩ තිබුණි. කෙසේ වෙතත් ගිවිසුමකින් රට පවරා ගත් ඉංග්‍රීසීහු රට පළාත් පහකටද අනතුරුව නවයකටද බෙදා ජාතිය බේද භින්න කිරීම ආරම්භ  කරනු ලැබිණ. එතෙක් පැවති රුහුණු මායා පිහිටි තුන් සිංහලය කැබලි කිරීම ආරම්භ වූයේ එලෙසයි.ලංකාවට සංක්‍රමණිකයන් සහ වහලුන් වූ මලබාර් දෙමළ ජන වර්ගය උතුරේ ස්ථීරව පැලපදියම් කර ඔවුන් හට විශේෂ අධ්‍යාපන අවස්ථා හිමිකර දී සිංහලයන්ට එරෙහිව පෙළ ගස්වන ලද්දේ මෙ කියන ලද ඉංග්‍රීසීන් ගේ වුවමනාව පිටයි.

       පාලන ප්‍රතිසංස්කරණ සඳහා ඉංග්‍රීසීන් අනුදත්  ගමනේ අවස්ථා කීපයකදීම සිංහල ජන ප්‍රධානීන්ට අවස්ථාව නොදී දෙමළ සහ මුස්ලිම් ආගන්තුකයන්ට මුල් තැන් දීම නිසා රාජ්‍ය මන්ත්‍රණ සභා යුගයේදීම ඔවුහු පණහට පණහ ඉල්ලූහ. 1976 වඩුගොඩ දෙමළ සම්මේලනයේ දී සම්මත කර ගත් අදහස් අනුව මේ දෙමළ ජන ප්‍රධානීහු වෙනම ස්වයං පාලන ඒකකයක් ඉල්ලීමට තරම් සාහසික වූහ. මේ බෙදුම්වාදී ස්ථාවරය ඉන්දීය රජයේ ද අනුග්‍රහය ඇතිව ශක්තිමත් කරලීම පිණිස 1985 දී තිම්පු වලදීද 1987 දී නව දිල්ලියේ හා කොළඹදීද 1989 දී නැවත කොළඹදීද 1994 1995 කාලයේදී යාපනයේදීද 2002 -2003 කලයේදී ලෝකයේ විවිධ රටවලදීද කරන ලද සාකච්ඡා මගින් ස්ථීර කර ගෙන ඇත. නමුත් මේ සමග ඇතිවූ කොටි ත්‍රස්තවාදයද ඊළාම් මතවාදයද සුන්නත් දූවිලි කරමින් නන්දිකඩාල් කලපුවේ දී බෙදුම්වාදය සන්නද්ධ වශයෙන් පරාජය කරන ලදී.

         පෙර සඳහන් කළ පරිදි බෙදුම්වාදයට විලිලෑම මෙන්ම ඊළම නමැති ස්වයංපාලන ඒකකය එළියට ගැනීම වරින් වර හදිසියේ කරන්නට උත්සාහ කළ හැටි අපට හොඳ හැටි මතකය. මේ උත්සාහයන් ගෙන ඇත්තේ එකම කල්ලියක කීප දෙනෙකි. දෙමළ මතවාදය ශක්තිමත් කළ ලෝකයේ විවිධ රටවල සිටින දෙමළ ඊළාම් වාදීන් ඔවුන්ගෙන් කප්පම් ලබන රාජ්‍ය නොවන සංවිධාන නියෝජිතයන් මෙන්ම ලංකාවේ සිටින ලිබරල් සහ මාක්ස්වාදී මතධාරීන් මෙලෙස විවිධ අවස්ථාවලදී ඊළම නමැති අවජාතක දරුවා බිහිකරන්නට උත්සාහ ගත්හ. 2004 සුනාමි ව්‍යසනයෙන් පසුව 2005 වසරේදී සිටි ආණ්ඩුව ඒකාබද්ධ යාන්ත්‍රණයක් පිහිටුවා මේ අවජාතක දරුවා බිහිකරන්නට වෑයම් ගනු පෙනුණි. 2005 මැයි 04 දින ඒ සම්බන්ධව පැවති  විවාදයේදී පාර්ලිමෙන්තු මන්ත්‍රී පූජ්‍ය අතුරලියේ රතන හිමියන් දැක්වූ අදහස් මෙහි බහාලීම සුදුසු යැයි සිතේ.

        ගරු කතානායක තුමනි අද අපේ ඉතිහාසය තීරණාත්මක සන්ධිස්ථානයකට පිවිස ඇත. පසුගිය එක්සත් ජාතික පෙරමුණ ආණ්ඩුවද වත්මන් සන්ධාන ආණ්ඩුවද ගෙවී ගිය තුන් වසරක කාලය තුළ විටින් විට  කලේ කොටි ත්‍රස්තවාදීන්ට නිල නොලත් පාලනයක් ලබා දීමේ උත්සාහයයි. දැන්  නැවත වතාවක් එය කරළියට පැමිණ ඇත. පසුගිය ආණ්ඩුව කොටින්ට රට පාවා දුන්නායි කියමින් රට බේරා ගනු වස් ජනතාව ගෙන් වරමක් ගෙන බලයට පත් එක්සත් ජනතා නිදහස් සන්ධානය විසින්ම මේ මහා පාවා දීම කිරීමට කැස කැවීම ගැන අප මවිත වන්නේ නැත. මන්ද ජාතික හෙළ උරුමයෙන් අපි මැතිවරණට පිවිසුණේ මේ තත්ත්වය වැලැක්වීමට වන නිසාය. කොටි සමග ඒකාබද්ධ යාන්ත්‍රණය පිළිබඳ සාකච්ඡාවක් පවතීදැයි අප විසින් මේ සභාවේදී ප්‍රශ්ණ කළ විට නිදහස් සන්ධාන ආණ්ඩුවේ ප්‍රකාශකයා ඒ ප්‍රශ්ණය මග හැර ගියද අද වෙනතුරුත් මේ ජනතා නියෝජිත සභාව හෝ අඩු තරමින් රටේ අගමැති ප්‍රමුඛ ඇමති මණ්ඩලය හෝ එකී යෝජනා නොදනී. ජාතික මට්ටමේ කූඨ මණ්ඩලයක්ද ප්‍රාදේශීය පාලන මණ්ඩලයක්ද දිස්ත්‍රික් සභා වලින්ද විශේෂ අරමුදලකින්ද එය සමන්විත වන බව වාර්තා වී ඇත. වගකිව යුතු කිසිවෙක් ප්‍රතික්ෂේප කර නැති නිසා ඒවා සත්‍යයක් ලෙසට භාර ගැනීමට අපට සිදු විණ. වසර 2002 පෙබරවාරි 22 දා එවකට අගමැතිව සිටි රනිල් වික්‍රමසිංහ මහතා ත්‍රස්තවාදියෙකු වූ ප්‍රභාකරන් සමග ඊනියා සටන් විරාම ගිවිසුමකට එළඹුණ අතර ඉන්පසු සාක්ච්ඡා වාර ගණනාවක් පවත්වන ලදී. 2003 මැයි 21 දාතමින් එවකට අගමැතිව සිටි රනිල් වික්‍රමසිංහ වහතා උතුර හා නැගෙනහිර අන්තර්වාර පාලනයක් සඳහා කූඨ මණ්ඩලයක් යෝජනා කර ඇත. එමෙන්ම එම කාලයේදී විවිධ යෝජනාවන් ද සාකච්ඡා වට ගන්නා ලදුව සුනාමියට මුවාවී මේ යෝජනා කර ඇත්තේද එදා අන්තර් වාර පාලනය සඳහා රහස් සාකච්චා කළ යෝජනාවල සාරාංශයයි. එහෙයින් ඒකාබද්ධ යාන්ත්‍රණය හා සුනාමිය අතර ඇත්තේ කොටින්ගේ අන්තර් පාලනයට සුනාමිය කඩතුරාවක් කර ගැනීම පමණකි.

       අප රටේ ඉහළම නීතිය ව්‍යස්ථාදායකයයි. මේ රටේ ව්‍යවස්ථාවේ 157 වන වගන්තිය අනුව බෙදුම්වාදී සංවිධාන සමග කරන ගනුදෙනු ව්‍යවස්ථා විරෝධීය. 148 වන වගන්තිය අනුව පාර්ලිමේන්තුව රාජ්‍ය මූල්‍ය පාලනයේ මූලික ආයතනයයි. 76 වන වගන්තිය අනුව පාර්ලිමේන්තුව හැර වෙනත් ආයතන වලට නීති තැනීමටද නොහැකිය. උතුර හා නැගෙනහිරට යෝජිත ඒකාබද්ධ යාන්ත්‍රණයෙන් මේ සියළු වගන්ති උල්ලංඝණය වනවා නොවේද  මෙයින් ලබා දෙන නරක පූර්වාදර්ශය නම් රටේ ව්‍යවස්ථාව නීතිය හා ප්‍රජාතන්ත්‍රවාදය ත්‍රස්තවාදයට යට කිරීමට රටේ පාලකයන් සූදානම් බව නොවේද.1994 -1995 කාලය තුළ ජනාධිපතිවරියගේ සාකච්ඡා නිසා මිය ගිය අයද අගමැති රනිල් වික්‍රමසිංහ මහතාගේ සාකච්ඡා නිසා මරාගෙන මැරෙන ගුවන් යානාද කොපමණ ලබා දී ඇතිද. හැමදාම ඒ ද්‍රෝහී ක්‍රියා නිසා වන්දි ගෙව්වේ අපගේ ආරක්ෂක හමුදා සහ අහිංසක දෙමළ ජනතාවයි.එමෙන්ම කොටි සංවිධානය සමග ඒකාබද්ධ යාන්ත්‍රණයකට එන්නැයි අපට බල කෙරෙන එක්සත් ජනපදයයෙන් අප විමසා සිටින්නේ ඉරාකයේ ආණ්ඩුව අල් සර්කාවි එකතු කර නොගන්නේ මන්ද කියාය. එක්සත් යුරොපයෙන් අප විමසා සිටින්නේ අෆ්ඝනිස්ථානය ආණ්ඩුව මුල්ලා ඕමාර් සහ තලේබාන්වරු සමග සාකච්ඡා වලට නොයන්නේ මන්ද කියාය. බටහිර දෙබඩි පිළිවෙත දැන් ලොවට ඉතා පැහැදිලිය.

    ගරු කතානායක තුමනි. උතුර සහ නැගෙනහිර එක පාලන ප්‍රදේශයක් ලෙස මෙකී යෝජනාවෙන් පිළිගෙන ඇත. දෙමළ බහුතර නියෝජනයක් ලබා දීමෙන් හා එහි නියෝජනය තනිව කොටි ත්‍රස්තවාදයට ලබා දීමෙන් උතුර නැනෙහිර යනු දෙමළ නිජබිමයි. එහි දෙමළ ජාතිය පමණක් ජීවත් වේ. දෙමළ ජාතියේ සෘජු නියෝජනය කොටි සංවිධානයයි. ඔවුන්ගේ එකම නායකයා ප්‍රභාකරන්ය.යන සියළුම මිත්‍යාවන් නිල වශයෙන් පිළි ගැනීම සිදු කර ඇත.

          පූජ්‍ය අතුරලියේ රතන හිමියන් 2005 මැයි මස 03 දින පැවැත්වූ අපරාධ නඩු විධාන සංග්‍රහය සංශෝධන කෙටුම්පත සාකච්ඡා වේදීද ඉතා වැදගත් අදහස් කීපයක් ප්‍රකාශ කර ඇත. ඒවා මෙසේය. සරත් අඹේපිටිය මහතාගේ ඝාතනය තුළින් මේ රටේ පාතාල ලෝකයේ මැරවරයන් ඒ වාගෙම යම් යම් දේශපාලකයන් සහ සම්බන්ධව කටයුතු කරන බවට දැවැන්ත අනාවරණයක් සිද්දවුණා. ඒ කටයුතු තව දුරටත් අධිකරණය තුළ සාකච්ඡා වෙමින් යන කාරණා. මෙන්න මේ තත්ත්වය හමුවේ තමයි මෙවැනි විශේෂ විධිවිධාන පණතක් ගෙන එන්නට ආණ්ඩුව තීරණය කර තිබෙන්නේ. නීතිය කියන්නේ යම්කිසි සම්මුතියක් බව මුලින්ම කියන්න කැමතියි. ඒ සම්මුතීන් ඇති කර ගන්න ප්‍රධාන වන්නේ ව්‍යවස්ථාදායකය නොහොත් පාර්ලිමේන්තුවයි. මේ පාර්ලිමේන්තුවේ නීති කෙටුම්පත් සකස් කර ගැනීමේදී එය සම්මත කර ගැනීමෙදී යම් කිසි ක්‍රියා පටිපාටියක් පිළිවෙතක් තිබෙනවා. විශේෂයෙන් මහජන නොසන්සුන්තාවයක් ඇති කරන බරපතල අපරාධ සම්බන්ධයෙන් පැය 24 ක් රඳවා තබා ගැනීමේ කාලය පැය 48 දක්වා වැඩි කරන්න මේ පණත් කෙටුම්පත් තුළින් යොජනා කර තිබෙනවා.අවුරුදු තිහකට අධික කාලයක් තිස්සේ මේ රටේ බරපතල ත්‍රස්තවාදී යුද්දයක් තිබෙන බව කවුරුත් පිලිගන්න කාරණයක්. මරාගෙන මැරෙන බොම්බ කරුවන් සිටින පොතේ නොලියපු තමන්ගේ සිතට එන දේ කරන ත්‍රස්තවාදී කණ්ඩායමක් අප රටේ ජීවත් වන බව ඇත්තක්. ඒ වගේම මේ රටේ ලොකුම පුස්තකාලය තිබුණු  රටේ ප්‍රධානතම ආයතන වූ මහ බැංකුව ඒකේ ආසියාවේ වැදගත් තොරතුර තිබුණා.ඒ ත්‍රස්තවාදී නායකයා සිය දිවි නසා ගන්න බෝම්බ කරුවන් මගින් බෝම්බ තබා විනාශ කළා. එහිදී ජීවිත ගණනාවක් විනාශ වුණා. ඊට පසුව ඒ පිළිබඳ පරීක්ෂණ පැවැත්වූවා. ඒ පර්යේෂණ ඉතා වැදගත්. මේ බෝම්බ කරුවාගේ සයනයිඩ් කරල පළදාපු පුද්ගලයාගේ ඇඟිලි සළකුණු තිබුණු බව ඉතා වැදගත් රස පරීක්ෂණ වාර්තාවෙන් හෙළිදරව් වුණා.ඒ අනුව ඒ සයනයිඩ් කරල තමයි අපට ඉතා වැදගත් සාධකය බවට පත් වුණේ. එනම් ඒ සයනයිඩ් කරලේ වේලුපිල්ලේ ප්‍රභාකරන් ගේ ඇඟිලි සළකුණු තිබුණා. ඒ අනුව තමයි මේ පුද්ගලයා වසර 200 කට සිර දඬුවමට ලක් කරන්න කොළඹ මහාධිකරණය තීරණය කලේ. ඒ නඩු තීන්දුව දුන් විනිශ්චකාර තුමා තමයි. සරත් අඹෙපිටිය මහතා.

                සැබවින්ම ප්‍රභාකරන් පිළිබඳ අවසාන තීන්දුව ගනු ලැබූවේ නන්දිකඩාල් කලපුවේදීය. ඔහු ඇතුළු ත්‍රස්වාදී ක්‍රියා කළ කොටි සංවිධානය සම්පූර්ණයෙන්ම විනාශ කරනු ලැබිණ.ඒකාබද්ධ යාන්ත්‍රණය ගෙනා මහින්ද රාජපක්ෂ මහතා ගේ නායකත්වය යටතේම මේ තීන්දුව ගනු ලැබූ බවද සිහිපත් කළ යුතුය.එදා දෙමළ බෙදුම්වාදයට එරෙහිව පාර්ලිමේන්තුවේ මෙන්ම පිටතත්  ඉතා ගැඹුරු දේශන පැවැත්වූ පූජ්‍ය අතුරලියේ රතන හිමියන් කොටි සංවිධානය සමග ගිවිසම් ගැසූ එම ස්ථාවරය කවදත් වෙනස් නොකළ වත්මන් අගමැතිවරයා ඉතා හොඳ මහත්මයෙක් යැයි පිළිගෙන  ඔහුගේ පක්ෂයෙන් පාර්ලිමේන්තුවේ වැඩ සිටී.මෙය දෛවයේ සරදමක්ද.  2005 වසරේ මෙන්ම වත්මන් රජයද රට බෙදීමේ න්‍යාය පත්‍රය සාර්ථක කර ගැනීමට කෙටි පාරවල් සොයමින් සිටී.එයින් ඊළම නමැති අවජාතක දරුවෙකු බිහිකරන්නට විලිලන අතර වරින් වර සිසේරියන් සැත්කම් කරන්නටද උත්සාහ දරයි.වත්මන් කතානායක වරයා පසුගිය දා රඟ දැක්වූයේ මේ සිසේරියන් නාටකයට පෙරහුරුවක්ද.සැබැවින්ම දෙමළ ඊළාම් මතවාදයට බෙද්ම්වාදයටද නන්දිකඩාල් කලපුවේ දුන් විසඳුම මෙන්ම තීන්දුවක් දීම දැන් අත්‍යවශ්‍ය වෙයි.ඒ තීන්දුව ලිබරල් මත දරන සිංහල බෙදුම්වාදීන්ටද අදාළ වෙයි.

මතුගම සෙනෙවිරුවන්

POW s with PTSD

March 17th, 2017

Dr Ruwan M Jayatunge

There are a number of POWs of the Eelam War who still carry the psychological scars. Most of them suffer from DDD Syndrome which was delineated by Farber Harlow in 1956. The DDD Syndrome consists of debility, dependency and dread. POWs often show depression, apathy suspicion and fear. Some have large memory gaps and still feel guilty about their POW days.

Lance Corporal U has served 17 years in the Sri Lanka Army. During the Balawegaya operation, he sustained a gun short injury to his leg and became immobile. When the enemy advanced, he could not move and hence he became a prisoner of war. When he was captured, he was severely beaten with the rifle butts and one LTTE senior carder pointed his weapon at him. He was subjected to a mock execution. However, one of the LTTE regional stopped the beatings and sent him for medical treatment.

When the medical treatment was over, he had to undergo vigorous interrogations. He was tortured to get information about his Camp and its inner structure, armory and guard points. He was handcuffed and kept in painful positions for long time. Frequently his guards physically assaulted and humiliated him. However, Lance Corporal U admits that there were some LTTE members who were kind to him and brought extra food sometimes.

From July 1991 to March 1995 L/Cpl U spent his life as a POW facing torture, humiliations and uncertainty. He was kept in a very small cell with forty other prisoners. They had no space to move. The prisoners were allowed to take a bath once in two weeks or sometimes longer than that. Many suffered skin infections. Their meals were not served regularly. Following the intolerable conditions, the prisoners launched a hunger strike and eventually he was released in March 1995 after the interference by the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC).

Although Lance Corporal U became a free man, he often suffered from an unexplainable fear, sometimes panic attacks. The POW days memories hounded him severely. Some nights he used to wake up with fear thinking that he was still in the LTTE prison cell. He was depressed and surrounded by guilty feelings. In order to avoid nightmares he was consuming large volumes of alcohol. More he used alcohol more he became depressed. He often physically abused his spouse. Lance Corporal U began to avoid everything related to his traumatic experiences.

He was suspicious about the surroundings. He lost the ability to trust and feel intimate. He was affected by emotional anesthesia. He had flashbacks and sometimes he could not distinguish reality from fantasy. His physical strength was weakening and slightest exertion gave him an immense body pain. In 2003, he was diagnosed as having PTSD.


Anybody can cook but unless one apply some scientific knowledge, no energy can be saved and cannot stop any cooking aroma depositing while cooking

March 17th, 2017

Dr Hector Perera            London

Most people think that cooking is such a difficult task. There are plenty of reasons to think why cooking is difficult and one of the main reasons is the cooking smell getting on them while cooking. No wonder our Sri Lankan working ladies always employ someone to cook and they are the kussi ammas” who work tremendously hard to prepare food. My mum was a school headmistress and she got her promotion when I was around five years old. Who would say these kinds of professional ladies would have enough time to spend cooking during the week days. Yes in the weekends mum also cooked with the servants but most of the hard work was done by servants.  I never realised why we had servants at home. They did lots of work including looking after my two sisters and myself then cooking or preparing the food to eat. Unlike today there were no supermarkets round the corner, they need to walk looking for ingredients to cook. Only on weekends there was this local Pola” where one can buy plenty of things to cook. One must see the present change, supermarkets or shops with anything are everywhere so shopping is not a difficult task. Some are open till mid night and open early in the morning. Those days we had nothing but firewood stoves to cook and kitchen was often full of smoke, dust and flying pieces of ash. In those conditions I thought cooking is not an easy task. There were no electricity, just kerosene lamps.

Cooking with firewood stoves

When firewood are used for cooking, the kitchen gets filled with smoke. Briefly I can say in the past they had nothing but firewood kitchens and generally the kitchens are fairly hot inside due to radiated energy. Most of the time they cooked in clay pots that means they are poor conductors of heat so most of the heat is lost or radiated. Imagine to stay for few hours very close to the firewood stoves in such kitchens. The servants usually stay fairly close to firewood stoves as they have to control the fire. Sometimes the firewood do not catch fire easily so they need to do many things to get the fire get going. While they attempt to get the fire to cook the food, they had to face so many difficulties. All the time, it gives out smoke, some ash, dust then heat due to radiated energy. As the servants had to stay close to the firewood stoves, the radiated heat makes them sweat, feels very hot the whole body especially the face and the hands.

Asian way of cooking rice and curries

Then the pot of rice might over flow, dribbles all the way to the firewood then she has to open the lid or nebiliya” to stop over flowing as it wet the firewood then she has to blow several times to get it back. To blow on the firewood sometimes they get very close to the firewood stove or used a metal pipe. Just imagine the heat felt on their heads and the faces, perhaps the others do not want to know as long as the food is served in time on the table. Then she has to open the boiling chicken or fish curry then she keeps on stirring them and taste them several times using a long handled Polkatu handa”. That means she has to look after three things at the same times by standing very close to the smoky dusty firewood stoves. She cannot expect the fire to keep going and sometimes, she has to blow on them as to keep the fire going. Apart from cooking curries, she sometimes fry some papadams and dry red chillies”. Already there is enough heat in the kitchen and with that kind of frying, it makes worse. The chillies give out a strong smell that irritates the eyes to drop tears then the smell makes them cough several times then they get a drooling nose as well. The chillies give out a very strong smell that makes you cough and sneeze several times, irritates the nose and eyes. So that tears from eyes and drooling from nose makes it absolutely impossible to stay any longer in the kitchen but they keep on going. I was thinking was that a kind of stress release method introduced to Sri Lanka by India.   Sometimes they get shouted by the lady of the house for not getting the food on the table. I have my doubt if mum was so unkind to her servants, very understanding.

Majority of British TV chefs are good jokers and energy wasters

Quite often they fry dry fish such as sprats that give a very strong smell. I still fry these sprats and dry chillies but I have a technique to avoid any smell depositing while cooking and to avoid any chillies smell irritating the nose and the eyes. Unlike in the past I use a gas cooker to cook but those days these were not available.  If the fire was too much sometimes the frying pan catches fire as well. Believe me some British TV chefs purposely let catch fire to the cooking pans, may be for additional viewer’s attractions. The smell is so much it fills up the kitchen then some of it enters the main house as well. Have I got to mention that some of these smell get deposited on the person who fry these things? Due to these difficulties some houses always employ servants for cooking. I think now most of those servants have left the country for foreign employment for better paid jobs.

In Sri Lanka, now visiting servants

Now there are so called visiting servants who try to work at least in two places per day to get a good living. They are in a hurry so they try and cook as quickly as possible as they have to rush to the next job, in doing so they might waste more energy in cooking. Sometimes the gas flame even burns off the handles of the cooking vessels as they put too much fire while cooking. Unlike in the past now they have gas and electricity to cook but they are not quite making the best of the facilities. The cooking vessels have plastic handles to handle them easily but not to burn them while cooking. Some cooking vessels have metal handles instead of plastic and the reason may be to avoid burning the handles while cooking. Some vessels have glass tops so that one can visually see while they are cooking. I have my doubts if they are making the best use of these facilities.

I also cooked without due care for a while but not any more

Please don’t think that I cook like our good old servant women at home. I have adopted by applying some science. There was a time I also cooked no better than our servant women that was while I was studying for my Advanced level science in Colombo. When I came to England again I had to cook, study and sleep in one room. Fortunately I came across a technique how to avoid these difficulties by applying some science. I didn’t continue to cook in the room where I had to study and sleep but in another room where they used as a storage. Actually it had taps and a sink so that I could use it as a kitchen. Only there I experimented further to find out how to cook without getting smell depositing on me while cooking. Along with that I also found how to use minimum energy to cook. In short my discovery of this scientific energy saving and smell avoiding cooking is not a spring chicken idea but discovered a long time ago. Long before I got my official approval for energy saving cooking from The Sustainable Energy Authority then by The Invention Commission in Sri Lanka, I demonstrated my technique in several TVs in Sri Lanka including one in Sirasa TV. You can still find this cooking demonstration under Google search under my name. If my work was good enough to Sri Lanka Energy Authorities, The Invention Commission and for many TVs to broadcast my work, why not it is good enough to England? If I was proved wrong, I will pay £50,000 yes fifty thousand. Your comments are welcomed perera6@hotmail.co.uk

අපේ තරුණයෝ අමු අමුවේ ඝාතනය කර ළිං වලට වස මුසු කර බොන්න දීපු ,වැව් අමුණු කුඹුරු විනාශ කල සුද්දා අද අපිට , මානව හිමිකම් ගැන උගන්නන්න එනවා … 1818 අපිට මතකයි … එක්සත් ජාතීන්ගේ චෝදනා වලට පිළිතුරු මෙන්න

March 17th, 2017


මානව හිමිකම් කඩ කිරීම සම්බන්ධයෙන් අපට අද උපදෙස් ලබා දෙන්නේ , එදා සිංහල තරුණයන් අමු අමුවේ ඝාතනය කල ,බොන වතුරට පවා ,වස මුසු කල කල පිරිස් බව ,රියර් අද්මිරාල් (විශ්‍රාමික) ආචාර්‍ය සරත් විරසේකර මහතා පවසනවා .

එක්සත් ජාතින් විසින් ශ්‍රි ලංකා යුධ හමුදාවට එල්ල කරන චෝදනා සම්බන්ධයෙන් අදහස් දක්වමින් ඔහු මේ බව කියා සිටියා.

එහිදි වැඩිදුරටත් අදහස් දැක්වූ සරත් වීරසේකර මහතා ,

1818 කැරැල්ලෙන් පස්සේ, දේශද්‍රෝහින් හැටියට බ්‍රිතාන්‍යන් විසින් ,හංවඩු ගැසූ අපේ වීරයන් 60 ක් පමණ , දේශප්‍රේමින් හැටියට ජනාධිපතිතුමා විසින් නම් කළා.ඔවුන් දේශද්‍රෝහින් හැටියට නම් කලේ ඉංග්‍රිසි ජාතිකයින්.ඔවුන් වීරයන් හැටියට අපේ හදවත් තුළ දිගටම හිටියා.

1818 න් පස්සේ ඉංග්‍රිසි ජාතිකයන් මොණවාද කලේ ? අවුරුදු 18-35 අතර සියළුම සිංහලයන් මැරුවා. ඔවුන්ගේ සියළුම කුඹුරු විනාශ කළා . ඔවුන්ගේ සියළුම හරකා -බාන ඝාතනය කළා .ඔවුන්ගේ සියළුම වැව් අමුණු විනාශ කළා . ඔවුන්ගේ සියළුම පළතුරු ගස් කැපුවා .ඔවුන්ගේ සියළුම ළිං වලට වස දැම්මා .එහෙම කරපු ඉංග්‍රිසින් තමා අද අපිට මානව හිමිකම් කඩ කිරීම සම්බන්ධයෙන් උපදෙස් දෙන්නේ.

ඒ ඉංග්‍රිසි බටහිර රටවල්වල කීමට යටත් වෙලා තමා ,අද අපේ මංගල සමරවීර කියන අමාත්‍යවරයා අපේ යුධ වීරයන් දේශද්‍රෝහින් බවට පත් කරන්නේ.

එක අතකින් 1818 කැරැල්ලෙන් පස්සේ ඉංග්‍රිසින් විසින් දේශද්‍රෝහින් හැටියට නම් කල අය දේශප්‍රේමින් කරන අතරම , මේ රණවිරුවන්ව දේශද්‍රෝහින් බවට පත් කරනවා වක්‍රව මේ ආණ්ඩුව.

Read more at http://lankanewsalert.com/archives/61322#RFiIEdjdF4wFEJu3.99

A Factual Appraisal of the OISL Report: A Rebuttal to the Allegations Against the Armed Forces

March 17th, 2017

Author: Dharshan Weerasekera

Commissioned by – The Federation of National Organizations
Sponsored by – The Global Sri Lanka Forum

Editors :  Kalyananda Thiranagama
 Raja Gunaratne

Volume One

Federation of National Organizations
Colombo, Sri Lanka
27th January 2017

Dear Mr. Weerasekera,


We wish to draw your attention to the following matters which form the background to our present request. On 9th February 2016, UN Human Rights High Commissioner Zeid Al Hussein ended his official visit to Sri Lanka with a statement where he said inter alia:

―Let me be as plain as I can: the international community wants to welcome Sri Lanka back into its fold without any lingering reservations. It wants to help Sri Lanka become an economic powerhouse. It wants Sri Lanka‘s armed forced to face up to the stain on their reputation, so that they can once again play a constructive role in international peace-keeping operations, and command the full respect that so many of their members deserve.‖ (‗Statement by UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Zeid Al Hussein, at the end of his mission to Sri Lanka,‘ 9th February 2016, www.reliefweb.int )

We are especially concerned by the High Commissioner‘s assertion that there is a stain on the reputation of Sri Lanka‘s armed forces. The aforesaid ‗stain,‘ presumably, is the allegation that the armed forced are collectively responsible (i.e. where the purported acts can be imputed to the command structure of the armed forces and thereby the State itself) for war crimes and other serious crimes purportedly committed during the last phase of the war.

To the best of our knowledge, the only Report especially one with the imprimatur of the UN or any of its subsidiary organs to level the above allegation is the OISL Report (OHCHR investigation on Sri Lanka), released to the public on 16th September 2015.

The Government of Sri Lanka by note verbale UN/HR/1/30 dated 15th September 2015 endorsed and accepted without reservation the conclusions and recommendations of the said Report. In a one-and-ahalf-page response (it should be noted that the OISL Report is a 260-page document) the GOSL said inter alia:

―Takes note of the Report of the OHCHR Investigation on Sri Lanka (OISL), recognizes fully that this Report represents a human rights investigation and not a criminal investigation, and will ensure that its contents as well as recommendations receive due attention of the relevant authorities including the new mechanisms that are envisaged to be set up‖ (Note Verbale Ref. UN/HR/1/30)

Meanwhile, on 29th September 2015, the GOSL co-sponsored UNHRC resolution A/HRC/30/L.29, which again endorsed without reservation the conclusions and recommendations of the OISL Report. The said resolution was subsequently adopted unanimously by the Council.

On the above occasion, Sri Lanka‘s Permanent Representative to the UNHRC stated inter alia:

II ―You have all seen our written response

Full Report


Also available on the The Global Sri Lanka Forum website

Volume One


Volume Two


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