lanka C news

අගමැතිවරයාට එරෙහිව පැවති විශ්වාස භංග ඡන්ද විමසීමේදී ඒකාබද්ද විපක්‍ෂය ජයග‍්‍රහණ ලබා ඇති බව හිටපු ජනාධිපති මහින්ද රාජපක්‍ෂ මහතා පවසයි.

අගමැතිවරයාට තමන්ගේ තනතුර බේරා ගත්තද ශ‍්‍රී ලංකා නිදහස් පක්‍ෂයේ සියළු දෙනාම එක්ව ඡුන්දය දුන්නේ නම් ප‍්‍රතිඵලය වෙනස් වන බවද ඔහු සදහන් කරයි.

තමන් මීට පෙර කියූ පරිදි ජනාධිපතිවරයා සිටි පාර්ශවය විශ්වාස භංගයෙන් ජයගත් බවද රාජපක්‍ෂ මහතා කියා සිටියේය. 

උපුටා ගැන්ම දිවයින

විශ්වාසභංග යෝජනාවේදී අගමැතිවරයාට පක්‌ෂව ඡන්දය පාවිච්චි කිරීම සඳහා දෙමළ ජාතික සන්ධානය ඉදිරිපත් කළ යෝජනා දහයකට අගමැතිවරයා එකඟතාව පළ කළ බව එම සන්ධානයේ වන්නි දිස්‌ත්‍රික්‌ පාර්ලිමේන්තු මන්ත්‍රී සෙල්වම් අඩෛකලනාදන් මහතා පැවසීය. 

එම යෝජනා ඉදිරිපත් කළ විට අගමැති රනිල් වික්‍රමසිංහ මහතා ඇතැම් යෝජනා පිළිගැනීමට අකැමැති වූ අවස්‌ථාවේදී එම සාකච්ඡාවට සහභාගි වී සිටි දෙමළ ජාතික සන්ධානයේ බොහෝ මන්ත්‍රීවරුන්ගෙන් උණුසුම් වචන පවා හුවමාරු වී දැඩි නොසන්සුන් තත්ත්වයක්‌ හටගත් බව ද සෙල්වම් අඩෛකලනාදන් මන්ත්‍රීවරයා පැවසීය.

කෙසේ නමුත් යෝජනා කීපයක්‌ ප්‍රතික්‌ෂේප වීමෙන් පසුව අවසානයේදී යෝජනා දහයකට අගමැතිවරයා එකඟ වූ බවද හෙතෙම කියා සිටියේය. අගමැතිවරයා විසින් දෙමළ ජාතික සන්ධානයට ඉටු කිරීමට පොරොන්දු වී ඇති යෝජනා මෙසේය.

1.උතුරු නැගෙනහිර ප්‍රශ්නයට කඩිනමින් දේශපාලන විසඳුමක්‌ ලබාදීම,

2.මීළඟ මැතිවරණයකට පෙර නව ආණ්‌ඩුක්‍රම ව්‍යවස්‌ථාව පාර්ලිමේන්තුවේ තුනෙන් දෙකක බහුතරයකින් සම්මත කර ගැනීම,

3.යුද හමුදාව විසින් පරිහරණය කරනු ලබන උතුරු නැගෙනහිර වැසියන්ගේ සියලු ඉඩම් ආපසු ලබාදීම,

4.දේශපාලන සිරකරුවන් සියලු දෙනාම පොදු සමාවක්‌ යටතේ නිදහස්‌ කිරීම,

5.යුද සමයේදී අතුරුදන් වූ පුද්ගලයන් පිළිබඳව සොයා බැලීම හා ඔවුන්ගේ පවුල්වලට සාධාරණය ඉටු කිරීම,

6.උතුරු නැගෙනහිර ජනතාවගේ අයිතිවාසිකම් සුරක්‌ෂිත කිරීම, එම පළාතේ තරුණ තරුණියන්ට සුදුසු රැකියා ලබාදීම,

7.උතුරු නැගෙනහිර පළාත්වල රැකියා දීමේදී එම පළාත්වල සුදුසුකම් ඇති අය සිටියදී දකුණේ අයට උතුරු හා නැගෙනහිර පළාත්වල රැකියා ලබාදීම නතර කිරීම,

8.උතුරු නැගෙනහිර ප්‍රධාන දිස්‌ත්‍රික්‌ක අට සඳහා දිස්‌ත්‍රික්‌ ලේකම්වරුන් ලෙස දෙමළ ජාතිකයන් පත් කිරීම

9උතුරු නැගෙනහිර පළාත් සංවර්ධනය කිරීමේදී එම පළාත් සභා දෙකේ මන්aත්‍රීවරුන්ගේ මතවලට ගරු කිරීමද

10.එම පළාත් සභාවල ව්‍යාපෘති සඳහා ප්‍රමුඛත්වය ලබාදීමද

මේ යෝජනා අතර .වේ.

ඇම්  ඩී  පී   දිසානායක

අගමැති කම ලැබුනු නැතැයි අපි ළග නැහැ වළි             ජල්ලී

ලැබුනු තරම් හරි ලස්සන බරට බරේ   රට                   සල්ලී

සාටකයේ ගොන් වැඩකින් පින පෑදුනු   මන                 කල්හී

රනිල් මොකද? නිමල් මොකද?  රට යනවා රැගෙන        සල්ලී

By M D P DISSANAYAKE

Even before the vote was taken, those who listened to Mr Wimal Weerawansa’s speech  undoubtedly came to the conclusion that the Prime Minister will win the battle.  Anura Kumara’s speech was totally confusing, whilst supporting the motion, as a face saving strategy, he was reading JVP’s own list of complaints against Mr Nandasena Gotabaya Rajapakse, instead of Mr Ranil Wickremasinghe.  Anura Kumara is a political discard.

The numbers game has been played very well jointly by the PM and Prez. Sirisena.  The President Sirisena has carefully evaluated a cross section of SLFP MPs, whom Joint Opposition may also  be reluctant to take to their camp,  after they vote for the Motion. And they were:

1. Dayasiri Jayasekera
2. S B Dissanayake
3. Susil Premajayantha
4. Anura Priyadarshana Yapa
5. Chandima Weerakkody
6. Thilanga Sumathipala
7. Dilan Perera
8. Susantha Punchi Nilame
9. Sudarshani Fernandopulle

In other words, Prez. Maithreepala has  virtually  challenged the JO,  ” if you want, you can have my thrash folder of  9 MPs, with my compliments.  Neither Prime Minister nor myself want them in the government”. 

John Seneviratne, Lakshman Yapa Abeywardene, T B Ekanayake, Anuradha Jayaratne, Sumedha Jayasena, Wasantha Perera, Saranath Basnayake had always been unofficial birds of MR camp, but sitting on Maithreepala’s Pay Roll.

If JO by any chance accommodate these discarded MPs, it will ruin its image in the short run.    But in the long run, the damage to the JO will be far more serious, because none of the above can be trusted, they will build an underground bridge with the President, to ruin JO’s  chances  in future.

Quite frankly, who ever initiated the idea of No Confidence Motion, has been fooled by the President.  The President might have used Mr Susil Premajantha  to encourage JO to bring the motion well ahead.

After winning the local government election, the value of SLPP  stock in trade was very high.  In my personal opinion, a considerable damage had been done to the SLPP’s standing, as a consequence of failed No Confidence Motion.

Quite frankly, President Maithreepala has made the Joint Opposition  a bunch of fools or political novices.  

By Kusal Perera Courtesy The Daily Mirror

As Rajapaksa said, they did strengthen their hold in politics, further weakening President Sirisena, who now remains pushed to the wall. 

There is a strong demand within the UNP Parliamentary group, to remove all SLFP Ministers, who voted for the NCM and against the PM

The Constitution now says the head of government is the PM” and Wickremesinghe has come out stronger than he was before the NCM

The Diyawanna Reality Show came to a happy ending for UNP and PM Wickremesinghe two days ago on the night of Wednesday 04 April 2018. The No Confidence Motion (NCM) was voted out with 122 MPs saying they have confidence in PM Wickremesinghe. The Joint Opposition (JO) mooted NCM against PM Wickremesinghe was voted for by 76 MPs that included the JVP too.

Though without Mahinda Rajapaksa playing a lead role, the JO was able to reduce the SLFP bloc that President Sirisena was holding on to.

They increased from 51 out of the 55 that signed the NCM to 71 without the JVP votes.

The JO would now have a strong bid for the Leader of the Opposition post to oust TNA leader R. Sampanthan.

As Rajapaksa said, they did strengthen their hold in politics, further weakening President Sirisena, who now remains pushed to the wall.

Sirisena cannot demand” but could only plead” with Wickremesinghe who came out of the NCM consolidating his position within the UNP and in Government. The LG elections that proved Sirisena has no ground support, cannot now say he runs the SLFP as its leader, reduced to 24 MPs, who absented from voting and would hereafter decide politics on their own. Backdoor dealings will thus begin in how the Government would constitute with a new Cabinet, despite PM Wickremesinghe promising to continue with the ‘Unity’ Government to honour the January 8 mandate given by the people.

There is a strong demand within the UNP parliamentary group, to remove all SLFP Ministers, who voted for the NCM and against the PM.

There are also efforts by this group of SLFP Ministers to hold on to their ministerial portfolios on the argument, feeble though, it is the President who would decide their positions as head of government”. The Constitution now says the head of government is the PM” and Wickremesinghe has come out stronger than he was before the NCM.

Sirisena is thus left weak with two formidable opponents in Wickremesinghe and Rajapaksa.

PM Wickremesinghe now stands firm, not because he was adamant and smart, but because MR was in no hurry to form a Government within this Parliament, as I wrote after the LG elections and before this NCM (DM article March 30) that MR, was on a different agenda, gunning for a Parliamentary election. That would now be decided between Wickremesinghe and Rajapaksa; both unable to go for a Presidential poll for two different reasons.

Many would now have other interpretations of the outcome of the NCM. All interpretations and explanations would be on the fate of this Government, the fate of President Sirisena and how the President and PM would continue in partnership hereafter. Most would want to say the defeat of the NCM signals the fall of the JO as well. Within all such talk, there are questions that have not been asked and answered with due seriousness.

Why did the JO bring this NCM in such haste immediately after the LG polls? Was it because this Government failed in carrying out its mandate given by the people in January 2015? Was it because the Government continues with all Chinese projects including the Colombo Port city that it promised to immediately stop? Was it because this government has all this time failed to solve the SAITM issue? Was it because this government has failed to properly and independently investigate all corruption of the previous Rajapaksa government and punish the guilty? Was it because this government does not honour the UNHRC Resolution 30/1 it co-sponsored? None of those issues held any worthy importance in the NCM.

The NCM was all about the Bond Scam and PM Wickremesinghe’s complicity in it. Of 14 listed reasons for no confidence, 11 were on the Bond Scam, two on holding onto subjects that violated the Fiscal Law and one on Digana Violence.

The whole debate (sic) on the NCM was on corruption” with the JVP accusing PM, the UNP leadership in Government and the President for going lenient on Rajapaksas.

On the flip side, why didn’t PM Wickremesinghe resign under so much pressure? Was it because he wanted to continue serving the people? Was it because the people wanted him to continue serving them? He and the UNP stood firm on the argument they hold a majority and the UNP leadership is decided by them and no one else.

The question is, was all that public money spent for Parliamentary activity in having this 11-hour debate, worth it?

This NCM had a glaring omission. It was not about people. Was not about issues that burden people, and have to be provided with stable and positive answers. It was all about usurping and continuing in power.

The promise to continue with the January 2015 mandate holds no water. Samasamajist in the UNP, talking about the Government having to correct its course, is simply a joke. Despite what people wanted from this ‘Yahapalana’ Government, despite what Colombo ‘pundits’ said about reforms and democracy”, this was no alliance that could deliver on any of those promises.

It was common sense, a breakaway group from Rajapaksa that was complicit in all corruption, in all Sinhala Buddhist extremism and bending of the law, forming a Government with a long starving UNP with plenty of backing by the filthy rich” would not be a Government that can deliver what was promised to gain votes.
It was insane for anyone to have believed, this unholy, unprincipled alliance between two groups of corrupt politicians that knows nothing about democracy and good governance would behave as honest leaders in a Government, simply because they were labelled Yahapalanaya”.

There is absolutely no purpose in wasting time with this Government that is not capable and is not willed to meet the challenges faced by this society.

Let us be open about these political parties and their existence in electoral politics. None has a vision for the country and have a membership with democratic participation in deciding their political programme.

They are all corrupt groups funded by equally corrupt business dealers who run political parties that are registered with the Election Commission to qualify to contest elections.

Whom people elect is whom these political parties offer as candidates and requests for right and honest candidates to be voted has no validity within this system.
No more proof is necessary than checking how many Attorneys at Law, Financial Experts, Professionals and Academics are there in the present Parliament.
It is worth asking the difference there was between Professors and Mervyns in politics. It makes no sense in waiting for another year and a half to see if they would deliver. They simply will not and cannot serve the people.

Neither the vast majority in the South and those in the North-East.

The ITAK leaders still sticking with this Wickremesinghe Government expecting their demands would be met, is betraying those men and women demanding answers for their immediate issues; their land, their family members held without charges, their missing persons and the security forces encroaching into their livelihood and civil life.

The new Constitution the ITAK leaders think they can smuggle through with this Government is dreaming in daylight. The Colombo pundits who think this Government can leave Rajapaksa out of politics are fake democrats. Their belief that Rajapaksa can be defeated with this coalition, is dumb to all the Sinhala Buddhist extremism this Government is touting around with. They provide Rajapaksa more legitimacy to ride his Sinhala racist caravan.

Thus it is now time to ask this Government, what’s its answer to reforming education that is fast declining? Where’s its programme to develop the health sector? How will it develop the rural economy and agriculture? Where is comfortable and efficient public commuting in this horrible traffic jams, that waste hours of productive time on roads?

How would it create the political environment in defeating Sinhala Buddhist extremism and answer political and social issues of the Tamil and Muslim people?

It is time these issues are taken up seriously in society, instead of giving ear to all the petty issues the Government and the JO create for their survival.

It is time the mainstream media become more socially responsible in taking up issues that have to be found answers for.

It is time too for society to demand development programmes for education, health, public transport, rural economy and housing. We are lacking that social dialogue trapped in petty issues wanting this yahapalanaya” to correct its course that can never happen.

We are too late in realising that name and face” changes in politics have failed us all along our electoral history. We keep choosing people instead of a seriously discussed National Programme” for development. We got to change before we think of changing Governments.

By Dr. DAYAN JAYATILLEKA Courtesy The Island

Who won the battle of the no-confidence motion? There were a two winners, not one. One of them won tactically and the other strategically. There were also many losers.

At the most obvious level, Prime Minister Wickremesinghe won. His party, or at least its parliamentary group and working committee rallied solidly behind him. The dissidents were silenced or fell silent. Ranil Wickremesinghe has homogenized his party at its upper levels. He is its undisputed leader for now, and no further challenge to his leadership will arise until the Presidential election next year. It is likely that the momentum of his recent victory will see him through to the candidacy of his party. It is also likely that his most obvious successor will stick to his original timeline of not accepting party leadership till after the 2019-2020 election season, when the results make the realities manifest and indisputable. So Ranil now has a clear run up to 2020. The battle to change the UNP leadership is over for now and has been won by Ranil.

The second victory was in Parliament. The Prime Minister clearly demonstrated his majority in the House. The Tamil and Muslim parties, with the exception of Mr. Arumugam Thondaman, rallied to his defense. Even more significantly, the bulk of the SLFP parliamentary group failed to rebel against him.

His third victory was in the power struggle with President Sirisena. That game is over, as is the game to dislodge him in parliament, which was in fact, the same game. Mr. Wickremesinghe won. President Sirisena lost.

The upshot is that the UNP remains as it is and what it is, while Prime Minister Wickremesinghe remains where he is. Once again, the effort to change the UNP leadership has failed (the earliest attempt I recall was in the late 1990s), this time, together with the effort to change him as PM. This is because Mr. Wickremesinghe obviously fits the self-image of the UNP’s decision-making strata, even while he fails to enthuse the UNP voters, leave alone voters in general.

The country and Mr. Wickremesinghe’s political rivals will have to reckon with a more homogenized government with a greater preponderance of UNP influence and ideology for the next 18 months. This is the UNP government and leadership that the Opposition will face. From here on in, it will be a frontal confrontation and zero-sum game, now that the project of intra-governmental change has ended in defeat. We shall now revert to the traditional pattern of Sri Lankan politics, with a UNP government of a predominantly Rightwing character, pushing a free-market fundamentalist and minoritarian agenda, with minoritarian support, and moving aggressively against its political opponents. The content of the parliamentary debate with its marked references to a new Constitution, Transitional Justice and Special Courts, made the policy agenda clear, just as the aggressive tone of the UNP speakers signaled the confrontational character of future politics.

Now all this is fairly visible and obvious. But it fails to adequately answer the question of ‘who won?’ If a person walks into a game or a battle and walks out with less than he had when he went in, he is a loser. Similarly, if a person walks out of a game or a battle with more than he had when he went in, he is a winner.

The only surprise about Mr. Wickremesinghe’s performance was that he didn’t lose most of the support he had. In other words, he retained much of what he had. But not all. As he told the media afterwards, the national unity government will go on, “though we lost some of our people”. By this he meant the significant number of frontline SLFP rebels. Looking at the scorecard, As Prime Minister he could not command the complete support of his government, his Cabinet and his main ally. Mr. Wickremesinghe retained most of what he had but lost some. He did not make a net gain. His was a net loss.

There was however, someone who walked out with more votes for his motion than he walked in, and that’s Mahinda Rajapaksa. When he walked in, the government had an internal struggle underway but it was not openly split. When he walked out, it was. The Unity government was undeniably disunited. It had also probably lost its two-thirds majority in Parliament.

In any serious political battle or indeed war, the crucial factor is constituted by the intermediate forces; those in the ground between the two warring camps. In Sri Lanka today, that factor is the SLFP. There is an old debate in political strategy as to whether the intermediate forces should be the target of political blows or whether they should be won over. Modern political strategy recommended both approaches in a combination known as “magnet and wedge”. Perhaps instinctively, Mahinda Rajapaksa used magnet and wedge to damage and dent the government while retaining every single one of his MPs.

Whether by design or instinctive tactical moves, Mahinda managed to score a major victory. The SLFP, the bulk of which he already had in terms of parliamentarians and votes, split once again. Though the new group of dissidents did not enter his camp, and may not, opting instead to maintain its autonomous identity, they converged with the JO in this crucial battle, and constitute a new foe for the UNP and a new front of opposition to the UNP. This new factor signals the transfer of what remains of the SLFP vote base to Mahinda, probably with these personalities, in an eventual alliance. Those of the SLFP—mainly the Chandrika faction—which chose to abstain, will reap the harvest of being perceived by their traditionally anti-UNP voters as collaborators with Ranil and the UNP.

While Ranil won the no-confidence vote in parliament, it was a tactical victory at great cost. The internal contradictions in the government have intensified. The government is in serious crisis. The SLFP is further splintered. President Sirisena has been gravely weakened. Overall the balance of forces has shifted even further in favor of Mahinda Rajapaksa than it did on Feb 10th. At the all-important level of the voters, it is highly doubtful that Ranil’s victory will enhance his popularity or that of his government. He can keep his party for as long as it wants him and he can keep his Prime Minister-ship until a new President comes along later next year. All this suits his main political challenger the JO, Mahinda Rajapaksa and the latter’s Presidential nominee whoever it is, quite admirably.

Only one man walked out of the parliamentary political arena or casino of the no–confidence motion, with more political chips, more numbers, potentially more political real estate, and an improved balance of forces, than when he walked in. And that man was definitely not Prime Minister Wickremesinghe.

What is more, that man, Mahinda Rajapaksa, has a higher percentage of the country’s vote than does Ranil Wickremesinghe, and that share of the vote will only grow with the SLFP rebellion, while the Prime Minister’s popular vote has yet to show any sign of growth or reversal of decline.

Editorial Courtesy The Island

April 5, 2018, 12:00 pm
The Joint Opposition (JO) suffered a painful pratfall on Wednesday night, when Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe defeated its no-confidence motion. The UNP, however, in spite of its rhetoric and braggadocio, did not expect a comfortable win with a majority of 46. Its desperation knew no bounds. Else, it wouldn’t have gone to the extent of securing the TNA’s support, which has come with strings attached.

PM Wickremesinghe has proved that he commands the confidence of the majority of MPs and, therefore, he has a right to remain in his current post. The JO and all those who sought his removal ought to come to terms with reality and act responsibly. It was wrong for President Maithripala Sirisena to sack the UPFA government after winning the last presidential election in 2015 and appoint Wickremesinghe the PM though the UNP had only 46 seats in Parliament at that time. Similarly, the JO shouldn’t try to dislodge the present government on the basis of local government results.

Prime Minister Wickremesinghe is in seventh heaven. Defeating the no-faith motion with a comfortable majority was no mean achievement. But, the fact remains that the main constituent of the yahapalana government, the UPFA/SLFP, has not reposed its confidence in the PM. The SLFP group first asked him to quit. Subsequently, on Wednesday out of 39 SLFP MPs in the yahapalana government, 23 abstained and 16 voted for the JO’s motion of no confidence. Among those who voted against the PM were Cabinet ministers. The SLFP group should have voted in favour of the PM en bloc if they actually had confidence in him. Abstention cannot be considered an expression of faith in the PM.

The JO, in its wisdom, provided the UNP in disarray with a rallying point in the form of the no-faith motion, which, however, yielded some benefits it didn’t bargain for. The abortive attempt to oust the PM caused a rift in the Sirisena faction of the SLFP, which lost 16 of its prominent members, who voted with the JO for the no-confidence motion. They know which way the wind blows. The motion of no confidence provided them with an opportunity to pledge solidarity with the JO/SLPP, which beat the living daylights out of the SLFP at the local government polls in February.

That President Sirisena himself wanted the PM to resign though he stopped short of asking his MPs to vote for the no-faith motion is only too well known. A request to that effect, endorsed by him, was made to the PM at Tuesday’s Cabinet meeting. Now, the President has had to work with the PM, whom he and his party deemed unfit to hold office!

President Sirisena has lost his bargaining power in the government to a considerable extent. It may not be possible for the UNP to coalesce with the TNA to form a government without the SLFP. But, the UNP can depend on the TNA to prop it up if it ever decides to break ranks with the SLFP and form a minority government. There is also the likelihood of some of the UPFA MPs, who abstained on Wednesday defecting to the UNP, in such an eventuality.

Meanwhile, Finance and Media Minister Mangala Samaraweera, taking part in Wednesday’s parliamentary debate, put up a sturdy defence of Prime Minister Wickremesinghe and voted against the no-confidence motion, which alleges that the latter was involved in bond scams. It was this particular allegation that compelled President Sirisena to remove the Central Bank from the purview of the PM and place it under the Finance Ministry again. The question is how advisable it is to expect the incumbent Finance Minister, who is defending the PM to the hilt, to act independently anent the bond scam probes and audits in the Central Bank. There is also no guarantee that the UNP will stop interfering with that institution. The President’s wisdom of having placed the Central Bank under the Finance Ministry with a UNP minister at the helm stands questioned. How does Sirisena propose to remedy the situation?

Courtesy RT

Sarath Wijesinghe – former Secretary of the Bar Association and former Administer of the Legal Aid Commission

Litigation is expensive anywhere in the world

Litigation is expensive anywhere in the world due to complexity and want of definitions, targets, and to be within rules not familiar with the citizen expected to know the law with adage that” Ignorance of Law is no excuse/defence”. In the west legal education and legal aid is given priority to avoid the citizen rising against the establishment on law, law enforcement laws delays impartiality of the judicial system and judges in resolving their criminal and civil disputes in the society. Sri Lanka It appears that in Sri Lankan the citizen has lost trust and faith in the legal system with the tendency to take law into their own hands when proper Justice is not provided by the governance. The rate of crime is increasing day by day with killings, robbery, and criminal acts taking all over with political patronage or the goons of politicians a fact known to the public who are reluctant to resort to litigation due to fear or loss of trust. Civil Law is complicated with a muddle of Roman Dutch, English, and Personal laws with old and archaic civil and criminal procedure imported in 1800 s complied in a foreign language known to only 4% of the population. Most lawyers are alleged to be incompetent and not living up to the standard of proper professional standards in the absence of continuing legal education and disciplinary inquires by the only professional body Bar Association where every lawyer is an ipso – facto member of the Association.

Legal Aid and Public interest Litigation

Legal Aid and Public interest litigation has emerged to rescue the citizen from being undefended and to face powerful opponents in the Temple of Justice” expected to be impartial. Public and group cases are matters canvassed on behalf others for the public good. Legal Aid is assistance from the government or public spiritual groups to the needy litigants either free or subject to a contribution based on income and having gone through a merit test whether the litigant deserved to be assisted. UK spends billions of pounds when Sri Lanka spends few millions of rupees with foreign aid, on legal aid mainly with government funding. USA and India is famous in canvassing the public interest through group cases sponsored by groups of lawyers and public spirited citizens. Bopal” Tragedy and the group case files with solution to the affected victims of the industrial disaster in Bopal” which is a famous test case in the legal domain. Legal Aid is not a favour. It is a right of the citizen inherent from the governance for access to law” with less complication and at a reasonable or free depending on the capacity for payment of the citizen who are entitled to be represented in the court of law set up for them with no hindrance due to lack of recourses. Public interest litigation is exercising power of people through courts by others other than the aggrieved parties for themselves. Indian courts have developed this concept by extending the facility to entertain selected applications from aggrieved needs litigants or groups with less complicated procedure. There were instances where merely the latter has invoked the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court in deserving cases. Justice Bagwathie”, Justice Krisha”, Justice Malhotra” are some judges in the forefront loved by the citizens and professionals. United Kingdom spends 2.6 billion per year which is huge in the budget and sri Lanka spends Rs 27400000 in addition to grants received from UN US Aid and many other resources to manage the legal aid schemes in Colombo and outstations in reasonable good order manned by well paid staff with all modern facilities headed by a retired supreme Court Judge, but the quality and magnitude of the services are not known to the public as before where there were weekly Legal Aid pages from the legal aid commission and consumer pages form the Consumer Affairs Authority were published on the performances. We dp not hear of any test cases on public interest litigation or group cases most probably due to the over cautious attitude towards the administrative decisions however unjust they are. NGO’s and civic organizations are silent on this are due to their political and human right litigations which brings dollars and pounds in large numbers by periodic press conferences. Currently there is a group case filed regarding a 24 story building built in Etul Kotta”.!

Locus Standi” – Who could bell the Cat

It is not everybody who could initiate litigation. It must be the aggrieved party or a party who has interest on the issue, which has made more clear in Article 14 and Article 126 of Sri Lankan constitution and Article 39A of the Indian constitution which deals with Fundamental Right jurisdiction and the procedure tested from 1978 by celebrated cases with a battery of decided cases linked to international jurisprudence. Water’s Edge Case, Insurance Case case in Sri Lanka ,’ Kapil ‘s case dealing with 40,000 prisoners in India, and ‘Bopal’ blast of industrial giant in India have been landmark cases on” locus standi” ( who has the authority to institute) and other procedural landmark findings which is respectfully followed as guide lines in other courts.

Is it being properly used or misused?

This is an issue mostly raised in India and United States where this concept Is largely implemented with the tacit approval of the judiciary sympatric on the cases promoting the causes of others for the benefit of many in the society in mattes connected to the governance in the areas of development, environment, road winding, health hazards on negative an positive demands for and against, administrative decisions on large scale projects and breach of human rights. The accusation mainly emerges in India being a large number of activist lawyers groups in action with India friendly national minded NGO’s unlike in Sri Lanka, accusing it is a nuisance and prevents development schemes and smooth running of the governance.

Legal Profession and Public Interest

Legal profession is a Nobel profession traditionally and historically conducted by nobles as a service without any remuneration indicating the pockets in the black attire to voluntarily pay at the discretion of the litigant, giving service the priority and money secondary. In the United Kingdom the profession is disciplined and the Law Society and Bar Association are very strict on errant, dishonest lawyers who are promptly prosecuted unlike in Sri Lanka which is not heard of except in criminal proceedings against dishonest lawyers. Sri Lanka follows the British model and the litigant seeking legal aid is limited and it is necessary the citizen to pass the merits and income test to get the

services of an average lawyer at the will of the Commission, unlike in the UK even a QC will be nominated for deserving cases and competent professionals for the clients in need of assistance.

Way Forward

Laws delays, and lack of proper and quick access to justice, denial of due process, cost and complexity of litigation, Language barriers, are common issues confronted by the citizen in litigation with the complex legal structure of a mixture Roman Dutch, English, Personal Laws with complex judicial process of court structure of 40 year old judicature act to be patched ,and the criminal and civil procedure structures imported in 1800 s and litigation mainly conducted in English which is known to only 5% of the population reminds us of the case of Sinude in Walasmulla during colonial administration, narrated in” Lenard Woolf’s” true story of injustice, and no remarkable improvements have been made since then ,indicates the strong need for a vibrant genuine legal aid scheme of quality to prevent uprising of the citizen sandwiched with economic and many other social deficiencies with deprivation on employments, nature and manmade disasters such as environmental destruction with increase of crime drug menace and complicated social inadequacies. Therefor time has come for the governance to take immediate remedial steps to improve the legal aid scheme as a matter of an urgent matter with the legal profession to work hand in hand at least by undertaking one case per year of the 18,000 lawyers and being professional in issuing receipts, clients rights in the first letter, provide a quality service with the Legal Aid Commission and rallying round genuine Sri Lankan friendly public interest groups. Martin Luther King said injustice anywhere will be a threat to justice everywhere”, which is the ideal situation when the citizen has no access to justice freely at a price and justice will be meted before competent judges in an impartial and balanced court of law established in a just society. Public interest litigation, and a strong and an effective legal aid scheme is an integral part of a just state with less crimes and mass scale unjust litigation which will have an direct impact on the economy and peaceful co-existence of the citizen

(Reading materials- Public Interest Litigation Observer 25/8/2009- Supreme Court Public Interest Litigation Guardian 5 July 2001- all by the author, the former Ambassador to UAE and Israel who could be contacted on sarath7@hotmail.co.uk)

By Saman Indrajith, Rathindra Kuruwita and Revata S Silva

* UNP musters 122 and majority of 46
* JO, 15 SLFP MPs loyal to Prez back motion
* JVP votes against Ranil, flays Rajapaksas
* TNA, SLMC support PM en bloc
* Wijeyadasa, Ranga, Wasantha fall in line
* 25 of Maithri loyalists, Rathana Thera abstain
* SLFP ministers who backed motion won’t resign

April 5, 2018, 1:15 am

The no-confidence motion against Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe, for his alleged involvement in treasury bond scams and failure to act promptly to contain ethnic violence in Ampara and Kandy, was defeated in Parliament yesterday with a majority of 46 votes.

At the end of a full day debate from 10 am to 9.30 pm Speaker Karu Jayasuriya moved the House for a vote

The motion against Prime Minister Wickremesinghe received 76 votes in favour and 122 votes against while 26 MPs were absent at the division taken by name. Secretary General of Parliament Dhammika Dassanayake read out the names of 224 MPs (Speaker Jayasuriya not included), and each of them present was asked to state ‘Yes’ or ‘No’. Voting started at 9.30 pm and ended around 10 pm.

The UNF en bloc voted against the motion. But, UNF MP Ven. Rathana Thera was absent. Dissident UNF MP Wijayadasa Rajapaksa voted against the no-faith motion. The minority parties led by Ministers Rauf Hakeem (SLMC), Rishad Bathiudeen (ACMC), Mano Ganesan and P Digambaram (TPA), and the TNA voted against the motion.

The six members of the JVP voted in favour of the motion along with the Joint Opposition MPs.

Former President Mahinda Rajapaksa and his son Namal voted for the motion. The former President did not enter the main chamber of Parliament during the entire debate.

CWC leader Arumugam Thondaman was also a notable absentee.

Government rank SLFP members absent were Mahinda Amaraweera, Sarath Amunugama, Nimal Siripala De Silva, Duminda Dissanayake, Faizer Mustapha, Ranjith Siyambalapitiya, Wijith Wijyamuni Zoysa, Piyasasena Gamage, Mohan Lal Grero, Sriyani Wijewickrama, MALM Hisbullah, AHM Fowzie, Lasantha Alagiyawanna, Manusha Nanayakkara, Nishantha Mutuhettigama, Indika Bandaranayake and Weerakumara Dissanayake.

The UPFA MPs, representing the SLFP, who voted in favour of the motion, were Susil Premajayantha, Dayasiri Jayasekara, Dilan Perera, John Seneviratne, Lakshman Wasantha Perera, Dr Sudarshani Fernandopulle, Tharanath Basnayake, Susantha Punchinilame, Anura Yapa, S B Dissanayake, Lakshman Yapa Abeywardena, Chandima Weerakkody, Anuradha Jayaratne, T. B. Ekanayake and Sumedha Jayasena.

SLFP Ministers who voted against Prime Minister Wickremesinghe told a press conference yesterday evening that the head of the government was President Sirisena and, therefor they would remain in the government. “It is the President who would decide whether we should hold ministerial posts or not. Not the UNP,” Minister SB Dissanayake told the media at the Parliament complex, while the debate on the motion was in progress.

Ministers SB Dissanayake, Dayasiri Jayasekera, John Seneviratne, Lakshman Wasantha Perera, Sudarshini Fernandopulle, Tharanath Basnayake, Dilan Perera, Susantha Punchinilame, Anura Priyadarshana Yapa, Susil Premajayantha, Lakshman Yapa Abeywardena, Chanmdima Weerakkody, Sumedha G Jayasena and Anuradha Jayaratne were present at the media briefing.

Opposition Leader R Sampanthan, participating in the debate, on the motion said: “With regard to the Central Bank bond scam, consequent to investigations two persons are in custody and a warrant has been issued against a third person and investigations are in progress. The investigations should be completed as soon as possible and the rule of law should be implemented irrespective of who they are.

“The motion of no confidence seeks to implicate the prime minister with the bond scam. Statements of actions of a general nature are thought to be used in an attempt to implicate the prime minister with the bond scam. The wording of the motion and the timing of the motion are indicative of a pursuit of a political agenda through the motion rather than fixing responsibility with regard to the bond scam. The question must be raised as to why the wording is so weak and lacking in any specific charge against the prime minister pertaining to the bond scam per se. Why should this motion be brought now?

“The wording of the motion is too loose and too general in nature. It could be that the Prime Minister is facing this situation because of the confidence he placed in someone who betrayed him. Where is the evidence or charge against the Prime Minister of involvement in the bond scam per say?  Is the wording of the NCM so loose and so general because of the lack of specific material against the Prime Minister in regard to the bond scam? If that is so, in my submission the motion lacks credibility.

“With regard to the timing of the motion, this bond scam occurred three years ago and it has been the subject of public focus for a long time and why has this motion brought against the PM only now?

This is a plan to bring down, totally and completely, the present government.”

Chief Opposition Whip JVP leader Anura Kumara Dissanayake: “This is a politically motivated no-confidence motion. Our position on this motion’s vote is being questioned by many. Some even made phone calls and asked whether our vote for the motion against Prime Minister would not make us complicit in the crime of strengthening the Rajapaksa camp. Some others demanded to know from us if we voted against the motion whether that wouldn’t amount to approving and take Prime Minister’s camp wouldn’t it amount to approve the bond scams he and his government worthies committed. We took a decision to vote for the motion against the prime minister. We took that decision after considering the current political situation and its dynamics. On the other hand, this motion is against corruption and racism. The JVP is always against corruption and abhors racism. Viewed from that perspective, too, we have made the right decision.

“The whole world knows that those who accuse the Prime Minister of bond scam, committed similar frauds. Those who say that they have no-confidence in him because of his failure to prevent the spread of racial riots in Kandy district are champions of racism. A simple glance at the list of the names of those who signed the no-faith motion would show you the worst racists. They are more racist than the Prime Minister.

“We hold not only the Prime Minister but also the President responsible for the accusations listed in the no confidence motion.

“The motion would have been complete if it had contained a line stating that there was no confidence in the Premier for his deliberate delaying of the investigations against the Rajapaksas.

“Many of those against whom complaints have been lodged with the Commission to Investigate Bribery and Corruption are ministers of the current government. Some of them are ministers of the previous government and were defeated at the last general elections.

Leader of the House Minister Lakshman Kiriella, participating in the debate, said that the no-confidence motion against the PM had, as its basis, baseless allegations.

He said that the premier was not responsible for any of the allegations mentioned in the motion.

“Every time Wickremesinghe became the PM, he always appointed an opposition MP as the chairperson of the Committee on Public Enterprises. In 2002, he appointed late minister Jeyaraj Fernandopulle as the COPE Chairman. This time, he gave that post to the JVP. He also created parliamentary Oversight Committees and gave chairperson posts to both the government and opposition MPs. It was because he thought that there was nothing to hide. Former Presidents Mahinda Rajapaksa and Chandrika Kumaratunga never did that.”

Minister Kiriella said that both the COPE Report and Bond Commission Report had not mentioned the PM was responsible for the Treasury bond scam. Therefore, the motion was invalid, he said.

MEP leader Dinesh Gunawardena, moving the motion said: “There is no confidence in the Prime Minister. Whether the house has confidence in the Prime Minister or not is a very serious issue. Having come into power on January 08, 2015, the government commenced the process of taking over the Central Bank under the purview of the Prime Minister and a Singaporean national was appointed as the Central Bank Governor. There is only one Central Bank in the country and it is a known fact that its Governor has the power to influence the country’s economy. The Central Bank which is traditionally under the Finance Ministry was taken away from the Finance Ministry and placed under the Prime Minister and Mahendran was appointed as the Governor knowing that he would not comply with the country’s financial norms. The Prime Minister recommended the appointment of Mahendran and took the responsibility for it in Parliament.”

Gunawardena said that due to the appointment of appointing Arjun Mahendran as the Central Bank Governor, public faith in the country’s foremost financial institution had been eroded. He said it was a conflict of interest to appoint Mahendran who had close ties with Perpetual Treasuries. “Those responsible cannot absolve themselves of their responsibility. Because of this incident, the Finance Minister had to resign from his post. Those responsible cannot be considered innocent.”

Gunawardena said that though Mahendran was wanted by the Sri Lankan courts government ministers met him in Singapore.

The motion was submitted to the Speaker by the Joint Opposition on March 21 carrying the signatures of 55 MPs including four SLFP members in the government ranks. The defeat of the motion ended a 14-day-long numbers game.

Yesterday’s motion was the 47th no confidence motion in the Sri Lankan Parliament history and the third against a Prime Minister. Previously, two no-confidence motions had been submitted and taken for vote against PMs SWRD Bandaranaike in 1957 and Sirimavo Bandaranaike in 1975. The government sides defeated both of them.

Courtesy RT

Courtesy RT

OPCW said it can provide Moscow with data on the Skripal case only if the UK shows goodwill,” says Russia’s permanent representative to the chemical weapons watchdog. London, however, is not expected to do so, the official said

The Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) has refused to provide Russia with any facts on the investigation into the poisoning of former double agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter, the permanent representative to the organization, Aleksandr Shulgin, said.

Any data can be provided only if the UK shows goodwill” on the matter, which, however, is unlikely, given London’s behavior, Shulgin said.

The official stressed that Moscow is very interested in establishing the truth, since Russian nationals have become victims of actions, closely resembling a terrorist act.”

Russia, along with China and Iran, presented a draft proposal for tackling the Skripal case at the OPCW’s extraordinary session on Wednesday. The plan calls for two key actions: Launch a joint Russia-UK investigation into the Skripal case and instruct the director General of the technical secretariat of the OPCW to support such work, the Russian representative said.

In response to our constructive, calm and emotionless proposition, we’ve received a flow of murky lies, based on a hard-boiled Russophobia,” Shulgin said.

During the extraordinary session, representatives of the UK, US and many of the EU countries released similar statements, claiming that the China-Iran-Russia draft was Moscow’s attempt to evade the polite” questions of London. In fact, Russia has received nothing but a rude ultimatum, urging it to acknowledge guilt in the Skripal incident, Shulgin stressed, while British officials also alleged the existence of a concealed chemical weaponry stockpile in Russia as a given fact.

The official also reminded the attendance that Russia destroyed all of its stockpile last year, ahead of schedule, under the vigilant supervision of the OPCW. Another rich and resourceful country, however, namely the US, is still dragging behind and has not destroyed its chemical arsenal, citing lack of funds,” Shulgin said.

The draft proposition sank during the OPCW session, at which Russia failed to secure a qualified majority. More than a half of the OPCW’s executive council members voted either for it or abstained from voting.

Following this vote, we can positively say that the masks have been thrown out,” Shulgin said. The UK and the US, who pretend to be guarantors of international law, in reality blatantly violate it themselves. Our China-Iran-Russia draft document has been based solely on the principles of international law. It turns out for the US and the UK [that] the Chemical Weapons Convention means nothing and they can use it in any way they want.”

The attitude shown by the western countries towards the draft, Shulgin said, looked like they were not interested in uncovering the truth. He also predicted that, ultimately, they would be held accountable for the anti-Russian slander that has repeatedly issued from them since the beginning of the Skripal scandal.

Russia reminded the western countries about their own record of atrocities, namely the false accusations against Iraq, which led to the destruction of the country, as well as other unjustified and illegal invasions of other sovereign nations. Attempts by western countries to lecture Russia on the alleged misuse of non-existent chemical weaponry is the pot calling the kettle black,” Shulgin said.

Courtesy Newsin.Asia

Colombo, April 4: With the Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP) split  on the No Confidence Motion (NCM) against Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe,  the Joint Opposition’s bid to oust Wickremesinghe seems to be doomed.

The Sri Lankan parliament is currently debating the NCM moved by the Joint Opposition (JO) led by former President Mahnida Rajapaksa on Wednesday. The vote is to take place at 9.30 pm.

As of now, the JO simply does not have the numbers to win the vote.

Under the best circumstances the JO would have got only 101 (54 from its own ranks,  41 from the SLFP, and six from the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna)  making a total of 101.

The United National Party (UNP) and the United National  Front (UNF) headed by Prime Minister Wickremesinghe would have got 112 (106 of its own ranks plus 16 from the Tamil National Alliance).

The UNP/UNF combine had been streets ahead of the JO and SLFP right from the start.

But the current position is that JO will get only a part of the SLFP vote as one section has declared that it will abstain, and  another section has said that it will vote against the motion.

This means that the JO-SLFP will land up with less than originally expected, and the UNP-UNF will get more than expected. Therefore Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesnghe is expected to sail through the NCM debate and voting.

The main reason for the split in the SLFP is President Maithripala Sirisena’s view that the present coalition government should continue till the end of its term in 2020.

Although at odds with Prime Minister Wickremesinghe, the President has come round to the view that Wickremesinghe should be allowed to stay on in his post if he has the required backing in his party and in the parliament.

And Wickremesinghe has proved that he has the near full support of his party UNP and his alliance UNF.

Additionally, the President is aware that the Prime Minister cannot be sacked by him after parliament passed the 19 th.Constititutional Amendment in 2015.

According to the 19 th. Amendment, the Prime Minister will vacate his office only on his death or after he ceases to be a Member of Parliament or after his government” loses the vote on a money or appropriation bill or a No Confidence Motion.

Note that Art 48 (2) clearly states that the NCM will have to be against the government as a whole and not merely against the Prime Minister as a person.

Thus the JO may have made a mistake by filing an NCM against Wickremesinghe personally. The NCM should have been against the government as a whole.

But the JO did not want to file an NCM against the government as a whole, because it wanted to woo the President and his party, the SLFP, to form a united SLFP-JO government without the UNP.

 

 

In the case of Gunaratna Banda, the media has wrongly accused him of dying before he could harm others. Gunaratna Banda does not deserve to have his good name tarnished by a questionable media and editors & owners of the newspapers must at least apologize & compensate his aggrieved family – a wife who would have given birth to her second child who is without a father.

 wife of Gunaratna Banda

 

 

Until & unless people realize that there is a bigger picture to the present rise in communal disharmony we are not going to find answers to its solution. The present coalition government is a result of a successful regime change. Note the personalities placed in various positions are all part of & linked to those that plotted the regime change. The same forces have links & influence over media & virtually every group that connects with people. Anyone claiming these allegations are conspiracy theories probably have not followed any of US covert operations globally.

 

The use of covert action by the US & West & copied by non-Western nations too have proved successful in so far as it denies negative publicity and US involvement.

 

The CIA is only one of sixteen intelligence agencies that make up the U.S. Intelligence Community. However, CIA is the only independent agency not affiliated with other governmental departments or branches of military. It is important that we try to link CIA covert operations to what is taking shape & place in Sri Lanka. CIA covert operations involve

1. Giving political advice
2. Giving subsidies to individuals
3. Giving financial support & technical assistance to political parties/groups
4. Supporting private organizations including labour unions & business firms
5. Designing covert propaganda
6. Giving individual training
7. Designing economic operations
8. Paramilitary or political action to overthrow or support regime change including assassinations.

 

So which of the above are applicable to Sri Lanka & who are the likely beneficiaries of these covert operations via funding, training or other support mechanisms? Can Sri Lankan citizens identify the local individuals, businesses, civil society groups & political parties that have been roped in for US covert operations? Think about it & prepare your own list.

Some of CIA’s operations reveal the lengths taken by US through its intel agencies to protect its geopolitical & trade interests and should make Sri Lankans wonder exactly what is  being rolled out in Sri Lanka and who are the locals, politicians, political parties on payroll.

• Operation AJAX in Iran to topple the democratically elected Mossadeq in 1952 -53 & replaced with a dictator Shah.
• Operation MK-ULTRA – brainwashing program on mind control by giving LSD & other drugs to American subjects without their knowledge. Funded partly by Rockefeller & Ford Foundations.
• Operation PBSUCCESS in Guatemala to unseat the democratically elected Arbenz government in 1953 simply because he planned to nationalize the Rockefeller-owned United Fruit Company in which CIA Director Allen Dulles had shares.
• Interference in Laos democratic elections 1957-73. CIA even dropped more bombs in Laos than bombs used during World War 2
• Operation FUBELT in Chile to overthrow the Allende regime in 1973
• Operation Mockingbird – CIA recruits journalists as spies & disseminators of false information. CIA’s media assets became ABC, NBC, CBS, Time, Newsweek, Associated Press, Reuters – CIA has admitted that at least 25 media & over 400 journalists became CIA assets. Wonder how many Sri Lankan journalists are CIA assets?
• 1959 Haiti – US is silent as its man ‘Papa Doc’ Duvalier creates his own private police force & terrorizes the Haiti populace and his son continues thereafter. No wonder the West was silent during JVP-UNP terror reign of 1980s/90s
• 1961 – Cuba Bay of Pigs invasion when CIA uses Cuban exiles to invade Cuba (Operation Mongoose) the operation was a failure which led to the sacking of the CIA head Allen Dulles
• CIA-backed military, forces democratically elected Ecuador President Jose Velasco to resign & CIA man Carlos Arosemana is replaced. Who are the CIA assets in Sri Lanka’s political system?
• US-UK assassinate Congo’s democratically elected leader Patrice Lumumba… CIA installs Mobutu Seko as dictator
• 1964 Brazil becomes next CIA target overthrowing its democratically elected leader Joao Goulart & replaced by a string of dictators led by General Branco whose deaths squads are said to be trained by CIA! Did the same happen in Sri Lanka?
• 1965 Indonesia – CIA overthrows another democratically elected leader Sukarno & replaces him with Suharto who massacres close to 1m Indonesians whose names are supplied by CIA!
• Greece – CIA helps remove George Papandreous as Prime Minister for failing to support US interests in Greece.
• It was in 1966 that a magazine called Ramparts emerged carrying anti-CIA articles detailing how CIA paid University of Michigan $25m to hire ‘professors’ to train South Vietnamese students in covert police methods. Apparently other universities had also been receiving payments. We have to now wonder how many academics in universities are also on CIA payroll in Sri Lanka?
• Operation CHAOS 1968 – CIA had been illegally spying on US citizens since 1959. CIA agents function as undercover student radicals to disrupt campus – how many student leaders in Sri Lanka are funded ‘radicals’?
• 1970 Cambodia – CIA overthrows popular Prince Sahounek to replace with US puppet Lon Nol
• Bolivia 1971 CIA military coup overthrows President Torres with dictator Banzer who arrests, tortures & executes political opponents without trial. No resolutions by UN
• 1983 Honduras – CIA gives Honduran military the Human Resource Exploitation Training Manual 1983 teaching how to torture people. How many other countries military have been given this manual?
• 1989 Panama – US invades Panama to overthrow Noriega who had been on CIA payroll since 1966 & when they don’t take orders, out they go!
• 1990 Haiti – Catholic priest Jean-Bertrand Aristide wins election but is deposed by CIA backed coup & CIA begins disinformation campaign projecting Aristide as mentally unstable. This shows the levels CIA & agents will stoop to and should make people in Sri Lanka wonder what types of campaigns had been funded in Sri Lanka

 

There are reasons to doubt NGOs & civil society groups too.

 

Not many Americans may know that their money has been spent to overthrow foreign governments & funnel to NGOs to create mayhem & chaos in these countries.

 

In 1967 Mike Wallace after 45 years of investigations, prepared this video exposing how CIA uses NGOs

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=WrWC7KDpM5E  

 

Programs carried out by CIA linked NGOs – National Democratic Institute for International Affairs, National Endowment for Democracy, Freedom House, International Centre for Journalists, Centre for International Private Enterprise, Millennium Challenge Corporation, USAID are just a handful who funnel money from their budgets to humanitarian organizations, private companies to further US agenda.

 

• fake polio program in Pakistan for intelligence gathering that led to assassination of Osama bin Laden. USAID even funded sterilization camps in India.
• Egypt uprising in 2008 with US embassy in Cairo helping a young dissident attend US sponsored summit for activists in New York & keeping his identity secret from Egyptian police. Who are the Sri Lankan youth sent to US on similar youth programs & what type of training have they been given?

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/egypt/8289686/Egypt-protests-Americas-secret-backing-for-rebel-leaders-behind-uprising.html

• How NGOs helped topple Libya’s Gaddafi is shown in this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=WrWC7KDpM5E
• The National Endowment for Democracy was created by President Reagan in 1983. NED has also been accused of interfering in elections of Panama, Nicaragua, Chile, Costa Rica and Czechoslovakia. NED funded 22 journalists for a program organized by Transparency International Sri Lanka https://www.tisrilanka.org/galle-regional-journalists-trained-in-investigative-journalism/ Throughout 2017 NED has been involved in various programs across Sri Lanka covering human rights, children, land rights, promoting subnational governance, https://www.ned.org/region/asia/sri-lanka-2017/ NED has been funding – Centre for Policy Alternatives, Law & Society Trust, Verite Research, Uva Shakthi Foundation, AFRIEL, The Social Architects, Janawaboda Kendraya, Centre for Human Rights and Development, The International Working Group on Sri Lanka, Viluthu, Center for International Private Enterprise (CIPE), International Republican Institute (IRI), Adayaalam Centre for Policy Research – it would be good to monitor what these entities are really up to.
• Wikileaks cable exposed Jasper Tumuhimbise who suddenly went into hiding after publishing a ‘Fame & Shame’ booklet on Ugandan Government’s corruption. The booklet had been funded by Millennium Challenge Corporation. Anti-corruption drive was another US-funded program and questions the status of similar programs now being rolled out in Sri Lanka. Not surprisingly Millennium Challenge Corporation decides to enter Sri Lanka in 2016 investing $700m in policy stability, access to land, and transport and its project office in inside the Prime Minister’s office!
• In 2012 Egypt’s military government announced that 43 people, including 19 Americans and 14 Egyptians, faced prosecution on charges of using foreign money to influence Egyptian politics. Some of the US officials were even banned from leaving the country on account of the anti-democratic activities they had been involved in. NDI is one of the key funding partners of the Centre for Policy Alternatives. http://www.dailymirror.lk/article/The-US-and-AID-Sri-Lanka-s-dangerous-liaison-122324.html
• Egyptian authorities cracked down on US entities The International Republican Institute (IRI), the National Democratic Institute (NDI), Freedom House http://www.peoplesworld.org/article/egypt-blocks-national-endowment-for-democracy/ In 2009 two month Freedom House training was given to 16 young Egyptians in Washington – they were trained to lead youth movements & social media & alternate computer simcards to evade state surveillance. Who are the Sri Lankan youth given similar training?
• CIA-NED has also been accused of funding three local media outfits to run articles criticizing the Philippine President Duertes. http://www.manilatimes.net/cia-conduit-funding-anti-duterte-media-outfits/355377/ How many such media outfits & journalists have been used in Sri Lanka too?
• CIA role in media is explained in an excellent article by Prof. James Tracy published by GlobalResearch in 2015 https://www.globalresearch.ca/the-cia-and-the-media-50-facts-the-world-needs-to-know/5471956
• USAID The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) was created by Pax Americana to provide a cover for CIA agents under the pretext of helping the 3rd World. https://www.globalresearch.ca/cia-front-usaid-spreading-democracy-gearing-up-in-ukraine-suharto-ii/5381174 / USAID has funded various regime change through social media, twitter, youth programs etc. It is not without reason that USAID has been kicked out of various countries including Russia, Bolivia, Ecuador,
• The Corbett Report highlights CIA role in international narcotic trade https://www.corbettreport.com/the-cia-and-the-drug-trade/
• In 2016 Wikileaks published the biggest secret CIA documents https://www.theguardian.com/media/2017/mar/07/wikileaks-publishes-biggest-ever-leak-of-secret-cia-documents-hacking-surveillance

 

The US political, economic, trade, corporate interests have been safeguarded by a plethora of entities that work in cohesion independently but interconnected and covering covert & overt operations that use various entities funded to interfere in foreign nations through various camouflaged programs that hide their ulterior motives.

 

Every country that has experienced destability & chaos either internally or externally have had some form of US or allied involvement. US & Allies backed rebels that turned Libya into a nightmare ousting its erstwhile leader, The Pentagon spent $500 Million training Syrian rebels. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/02/world/middleeast/cia-syria-rebel-arm-train-trump.html Pentagon had also spent millions producing fake videos. Is it a surprise that we question every allegation being made against Sri Lanka using questionable videos & documentaries.

 

Therefore, it is important that all of us take incidents happening in Sri Lanka & ask some crucial questions

 

When CIA & associate entities have been funding individuals, organizations, political parties, media, unions, rebel groups, youth etc is it not possible that sudden issues, demands, extremes, altercations etc might be planned & executed expecting an outcome that gives those planning it several options & alternatives.

 

Is it not possible that the sudden emergence of ethnic issues might be instigated by these entities funding both parties – Sinhala extremists, Islamic extremists, Tamil extremists, Christian extremists & even Buddhist extremists? Is it not possible that the same entities that encouraged Wahhabi associated extremism among Muslims also funded the Sinhala extremists to go against the rise in the Islamic extremism? Is it also not possible that the same entities that funded & helped LTTE & TNA are also funding the anti-LTTE & anti-TNA lobby – either way the political system of Sri Lanka would be in chaos & turmoil and that is perfect excuse for foreigners to poke their nose into our internal affairs.

 

Is it also not possible that anyone involved in and taking part in these foreign funded campaigns have no love for the country, no love for their ethnicity or religion but are only inspired by the money given to them to cause mischief & mayhem? Can you identify some of these personalities?

 

No community would wish to have the world blame them unless there is a bigger plan and is this not what is taking place – blaming the Sinhalese for Tamil ‘discrimination’ lead to the justification for a separate state, who benefits from that? Blaming the Sinhalese for ‘discrimination; against Muslims also helps justify foreign interference & gives foreign envoys & UN the power, to demand changes to the constitution, changes to laws, penal codes, involvement of foreigners to rule in hybrid set ups etc…

 

Can you now picture the possibilities that we are all being fooled by a group of people manipulating us.

 

 

 

 

Shenali D Waduge

By M D P DISSANAYAKE

Within the ambit of the 1978 Constitution of Sri Lanka,  the entire thrust of the change over from previous Constitution was the centre piece of Executive Prime Minister vis-a-vis Executive President.

PUBLIC MANDATE:

Just prior to 1978 elections, the UNP sought mandate from the People for the transfer of power from the Prime Minister to the Executive President.  The Preamble to the Constitution explicitly legitimise the criteria, and Quote:

” The PEOPLE OF SRI LANKA having, by their Mandate freely expressed and granted on the Sixth day of the waxing moon in the month of Adhi Nikini in the year Two Thousand Five Hundred and Twenty one of the Buddhist Era (being Thursday the Twenty first day of the month of July in the year One Thousand Nine Hundred and Seventy seven), entrusted to and empowered their Representatives elected on that day to draft, adopt and operate a new Republican Constitution in order to achieve the goals of a DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST REPUBLIC, and having solemnly resolved by the grant of such Mandate and the confidence reposed in their said Representatives who were elected by an overwhelming majority, to constitute SRI LANKA into a DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST REPUBLIC whilst ratifying the immutable republican principles of REPRESENTATIVE DEMOCRACY and assuring to all peoples FREEDOM, EQUALITY, JUSTICE, FUNDAMENTAL HUMAN RIGHTS and the INDEPENDENCE OF THE JUDICIARY as the intangible heritage that guarantees the dignity and well-being of succeeding generations of the People of SRI LANKA and of all the people of the World, who come to share with those generations the effort of working for the creation and preservation of a JUST AND FREE SOCIETY: WE, THE FREELY ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES OF THE PEOPLE OF SRI LANKA, in pursuance of such Mandate,humbly acknowledging our obligations to our People and gratefully remembering their heroic and unremitting struggle to regain and preserve their rights and privileges so that the Dignity and Freedom of the Individual may be assured, Just, Social, Economic and Cultural Order attained, the Unity of the Country restored, and Concord established with other Nations, do hereby adopt and enact this CONSTITUTION as the SUPREME LAW of the DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF SRI LANKA.”

However, partial transfer of power from the Executive President to the Executive Prime Minister was carried under 19A, WITHOUT A MANDATE.    There is a school of thought  that the provisions of 19A could be construted as inconsistent with the Constitution, if challenged.

” While presenting his submissions, the Attorney General told the court that the 19th Amendment could be passed with a two-thirds majority in Parliament without calling for a referendum.[24] At that point, the Chief Justice pointed out that in the 19th Amendment the President is depicted as the symbol of national unity. Therefore, the Chief Justice stressed as the national flag is currently depicted as the symbol of national unity, replacing such a position with the President is disputable. The Chief Justice further questioned whether it curtailed the power of the President after the Prime Minister was named as the head of the Cabinet.”

Hopefully, after 4 April 2018,  a new chapter in Sri Lankan politics will emerge.    The legal luminaries will be working hard to initiate the challenge, thus President Mahinda Rajapakse will emerge as the Executive President of Sri Lanka unhindered.

Dilrook Kannangara

Tamils never came to terms with democracy. It is such an alien concept to the Tamil society which was always ruled by caste discrimination, tribalism and other outdated concepts. It is no surprise the Opposition Leader (also the TNA leader) always comes to the rescue of the regime! TNA has become the laughing stock of the democratic world where the task of the Opposition is not to prop up the ruling party but to keep it under check. TNA leader is a disgrace to the House of Legislature. If he has any self respect left, he must resign from his post.

TNA always bet on the wrong horse and cornered itself into the wrong side of history. It strongly backed the LTTE’s political vision until the LTTE was decimated in 2009 bring peace to the island nation after three decades of war. Sadly, TNA still paddles the LTTE vision. This is why TNA supports Ranil at all cost. In supporting Ranil, TNA made a statement which clearly shows why it supports retaining Ranil.

Ranil’s CFA Substance and Indian Commitments Continue

Although the Court of Appeal declared the Ceasefire Agreement between Ranil and the LTTE Leader illegal in 2008, the deal was never officially rescinded by the parties to the agreement. It still stands between the surviving proxies of them. CFA identified a de facto territory in the north and east as controlled and governed by the LTTE and its political wing. This is what TNA harps in its statement in support of Ranil. TNA knows if the No Confidence Motion carries, it will end Ranil’s long and winding leadership at the top. With Chandrika out of active politics, Ranil is TNA’s only hope to advance its de facto claim. This is the real reason for supporting Ranil.

Then there is the India connection. Ranil is India’s choice for power. He has personally undertaken to sign and implement ETCA with India, to turn federal Sri Lanka into a confederated nation, lease Mattala and Trincomalee airport and port to India and enter into a defence alliance with India against China. As India’s proxy, TNA must ensure these things happen.

Patriotic Second Tier of the UNP

There is a clear division between UNP’s first tier made up of a close circle of Ranil associates and his culturally South Indian economics team, and, the UNP second tier. This younger generation of leaders have a close touch with ground reality, far more patriotic and educated. TNA and SLPP mortally fears them for different reasons. TNA fears their patriotism will give it a hard time making separatist demands while the SLPP fears competition in its core vote base.

Although Ranil did his very best to groom a second tier of like-minded UNP leaders, he failed. His choices were either rejected by the people or they turned. This is why LTTE specifically hunted down all patriotic UNP leaders and Ranil’s potential challengers ruthlessly. They include Gamini Dissanaike, Lalith Athulathmudali, General Lucky Algama and General Janaka Perera. TNA is entrusted with the LTTE’s task now. India also intensely dislikes UNP’s patriotic second tier.

Fizzling Out UNP New Leader Before 2019

UNP is extremely unpopular. Economic growth rate has stagnated at just 3.7%. 2018 and 2019 are going to be harder fiscal years as the six year grace period on massive loans obtained in late 2011 to 2013 come to an end. To repay installments, people have to be taxed badly. UNP’s plan was to keep Ranil until late 2019, put all blame on him and push through a popular young leader with a different economic outlook – a pro-poor economic outlook in wide contrast to Ranil’s Cinnamon Gardens economic policy. This was the same trick UNP played in 1988 to replace JR’s Cinnamon Gardens economic policy with Premadasa’s pro-poor Keselwatte economic policy. By sending Ranil home early, UNP loses this option in 2019. It will not have any shock and awe tactics left for 2019 and no new face. TNA knows UNP even at its worse is far more amenable than another party.

Conclusion

Political opportunists except TNA who dream of power by keeping Ranil as PM are in for a rude shock. Only TNA benefits politically by keeping Ranil. TNA has shown its inability to break free from its tribal mentality. A popular political commentator’s concluding remarks on the wrong choices of TNA is appropriate. Israeli diplomat Abba Eban once commented that Arabs “never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity”. So are Tamils. Having bet on the wrong horse again Tamils must not beg for appeasements (including political solutions) when they lose the bet. Instead Tamils must keep their begging bowl clean.

By Charles.S.Perera

Sirisena-Ranil’s Yahapalanaya is a misnomer. It is a palanaya without Yaha. It is Bad Governance . It is utter mismanagement of  Governance.  It was so from the day one – 8th January,2015 of their coming into political power when Maithripala Sirisena was elected President of Sri Lanka.

Of course there were those who expected a Rupees ten thousand salary increase, and others who expected goods rolling in from USA and the West brining in a life of luxury in prosperity who voted to bring this  Yahapalanaya into power.  The cry of  out with the corrupt and the rogues”,  intensified adding  to the hopes of Government coffers getting filled with money that was supposed to have been stolen by the President Mahinda Rajapaksa’s previous governments.

The Media rolled up their shirt sleeves and some like Shauketali in  News First said Oh wow and so he tracked journalists shot them beat em up lies through his teeth and all that is fine is it Mr” Charles???????!!!!!!!!!!”, when he was told that, President Mahinda Rajapakse was a clean politician and he managed  things well during his period of governance”. Many other  English Educated Colombians, and NGOs,  joined the bandwagon hailing the change”  from  corrupt to a  clean” Yahapalanaya.

Three years after, a new political party the SLPP was set up and those following the Yahapalanaya Bandwagon laughed and ridiculed saying the corrupt supporters of a defeated regime are dreaming of a come back to displace a Yahapalanaya by a Clean Mr. Ranil Wickramasinghe and a very pious Buddhist Farmers Son from Polonnaruwa.

Soon the people saw that they –Sirisena, Ranil, Ratana Hamuduruvo, Champika , Chandrika, Mangala, Rajitha-  all calling themselves the good and holy turned out to be the worst band of rogues themselves, or aiding and abetting rogues that Sri Lanka had never seen before.

Except of course for those rogues, plunderers,  and thieves that had Come from India, with some of their  later offsprings turning  out to be terrorists, and yet others escaping to the west to turn out to be separatists , trouble makers, and global theoreticians of divisive politics, proposing to  divide and mutilate Sri Lanka, thrice sanctified by the Buddha and offered by Sinhala Buddhist Kings to Buddha Sasana.

After three years, they –the Yahapalanaya goons,  have plundered the Central Bank, sold our heritage, given our national wealth to foreigners, allowed nationalists, racists and foreigners to decide on the future of our country and how it is to be ruled, write a new Federal constitution dividing the Country of the Sinhala Buddhist, and take the country back to be an undeveloped state, poor and divided,  dependant on the West.

The Yahapalanaya goons have ruined Sri Lanka  reducing it to being another  poor country of the world. Under Yahaplanaya, moral standards are falling to zero, the underworld mafia has come out into to the open, life has lost its value, men , women and children die  or get killed like cats and dogs, fathers abuse daughters, and a new culture is building around, drugs, alcohol, prostitution and contract murders.

The political priests have left behind the Buddhist Scriptures and instead  teach greed, hatred and delusion from political platforms.  The sense of gratitude, generosity, love  amoung the people is fast deteriorating.  There is no rule of law, no sense of justice and fair play. Yahaplanaya is making, revenge, jealousy , conspiracy, lies, and murder a social trend.

In three years Sirisena –Ranil Government has made Sri Lanka unrecognisable from what it was before they took over power on the  8^th January,2015.

For three years they did nothing but found ways and means to ruin Sri Lanka, its Sinhala Buddhist Culture, which was the base on which all other cultures in Sri Lanka thrived , on which the unity amoung different ethnic groups existed, where every one lived in freedom speaking their language, praying to their respective Gods , and lived their lives the way they had accepted it from their fathers and forefathers.

The Colombo Centred Media, the English Educated Colombians,  want only  the  thieves they presume were in the Governments of the President Mahinda Rajapakse punished and put into prison.

But they hail Yahapalanaya, for giving them freedom of the  press, freedom to criticise the government, freedom to  introduce Western Culture in to Sri Lanka, freedom to make Sri Lanka a secular country. They demand not to give any special recognition to Buddhism, have no- Wesak Pandals, and demand  the arrest  of Buddhist Monks  who demand the  government to protect the Sinhala Language, and the Buddhist Culture.

They of the Yahapalanaya do not want the history of Sri Lanka taught in Schools. They want to teach children sexology in schools, and introduce Western culture into Society.

In the world,  Cuba existed as Cuba hemmed between  USA and the West, Taiwan, remained Taiwan, Singapore stayed Singapore, Malayasia remained Malaysia… but Yahapalanaya goons  want Sri Lanka modernised making Sri Lanka-a Singapore, a Malaysia, a small England.  They do not want it to be any more the Sri Lanka with its unique culture , its unique Buddhist Generosity, its  way of life, its unique unity with Communities with their  different cultures.

Sri Lanka  under Sirisena Ranil Yahapalanaya is fast moving toward decadence. Before Sri Lanka reaches a point of no return from degeneration, the people have to wake up to  take  Sri Lanka back to what it had been before the 8^th January,2015- a Sri Lanka which was developing fast, as a unique nation of its own despite an unfriendly Indian neighbour and an interfering  west using the UN Stystem to make Sri Lanka a poor country dependent on the scheming rogue states of the West.

Before that happens the progressive Parliamentarians should wake up to pass the presented No Confidence Motion against the Prime Minister of Sri Lanka and force  Sri Lanka back in to the progressive and developing past from which it had been wrenched by the Vicious Sirisena Ranil Chandrika  Yahapalanaya following a USA Western Agenda.

For the Yahapalanaya Government of Sirisena- Ranil, reconciliation with Tamils has taken paramount importance. Every thing of ancient Sinhala Culture  is being sacrificed for a mirage of a reconciliation with the Tamils. Neither Sirisena nor Ranil seem to understand that more they give into reconciliation with the Tamils, the Tamils tenaciously stand by their demand for more devolution and instead of reconciling with the Sinhala they strengthen their separatist ideology, condemning the Sinhala and demanding a federal Constitution to create there own federal provinces in the North and East..

Even the writing of a new constitution under Ranil Sirisena Government is no more an affair of the Sinhala people. A new Constitution to Sri Lanka  is being prepared  under the supervision and direction of the  US Ambassador Athul Keshup, Indian Government, Global Tamil Federation , Sampanthan, Sumanthiran, Wigneswaran  and Mano Ganeshan.

How could we under the so called Yahapalanaya Government of Sirisena –Ranil,  get back the now lost pride, and glory of Sri Lanka and  prepare its approach to modernity preserving its unique Buddhist culture ?

A strong Sinhala Buddhist Cultural background,  assures unity of different cultures and create a healthy multicultural relationship amoung the peoples of Sri Lanka. We have people like Mohammed Musamil, Karuna Amman , Kanthar Balanathan, Radha Manohar who understand the reality of  good relation ship with all communities sharing Sri Lanka as their motherland without causing antoganism between the major and minority Communities. A healthy majority, would assure a healthy minority..

The Yahaplanaya Government has damaged the sovereignty, independence and the national pride of Sri Lanka. This Yahapalanaya Governments  accepting on its knees  a resolution against Sri Lanka and its Armed Forces  presented by America and the West, was a sell off of Sri Lanka to foreign powers.

It is high time that the people of Sri Lanka rise  against  this Yahapalanaya government and get rid of it for good.

It would therefore be  a beginning to vote for the  No Confidence Motion against the Prime Minister Ranil Wickramasinghe  which is to be debated in Parliament on the 4^th April,2018.the

පාලිත ආරියරත්න

දැන් දැන් නැවතත් අමුතුම තලේ එකමුතුවක් (උදාහරණ : අපි ඔක්කොම රජවරු, අපි මිනිස්සු, ජාතිවාදී නොවෙමු, ඔක්කොටම මේ රට අයිතියි,කොයි ආගමත් එකයි, හැට දෙලක්ෂය සහ අපි) ජාතික ඒකා බද්ධතා සතියක් යනුයි අලුත් සංකල්පයක් රට පුරා දිවයයි (දිවගියේය )

මේ එකමුතු තාවය දිහා විපරම් කර බලන විට බුද්ධිමතුන් හට වැටහෙන එකම කාරණයනම් මෙම කුඨ උපක්ක්‍රමය විවධ බලපෑම් කිරීමෙන් (දේශපාලනිකව, ආගමිකව හා සාමාජිකව තවද මානසිකව ) අප රටතුල ගොඩ නැගීමට යන අමුතුඑගත්වයක් බවයි , ආගම් කලවම ප්‍රථමව දියත් කොට දැන් ජාතියේ කලවම පටන්ගෙන ඇත. මේවා කොහින්  කෙලවර වෙයි දැයි අප නොදනිමු.

දේශපාලකයන් යනු චින්තකයන් නොවේ. ඔවුන් ගේ පරම චින්තනය වන්නේ  තමන්ගේ පිල වැඩි කරගැනීමය ( චන්දයෙන් තම පක්ෂය පුරවා ගැනීමටයි) අපි මොවුන්ගේ මතවලට ඉත්තන් හෝ එහියන් නොවිය යුතුය.

වර්ෂ 2500 කට වැඩි කලක් අප විසින් උකුලේ හොවා, කිරි පොවා, ඇස් මස් ලේ දන් දෙමින් රැකගත් සිංහල බවුද්ධ සංස්කෘතිය පනමෙන් අප රැක ගත යුතුය. ඊට ප්‍රධානම හේතුවනම් රටේ කිනම් හෝ අභාග්ග්‍ය කාල පරිච්චෙදයකදී රුදුරු පර සතුරු වියසනයන්ගෙන් අපව ගලවාගන්නා දියසේන කුමාරවරු , දුටු ගැමුණු රජවරු හා මෙහි කියූ නොකී විරෝධාර අභීත සෙන්පතියන් නිර්මාණය කලේ හෙළ බොදු සංස්කෘතියෙන් බැවිනි.

ඕනෑම රටක තම තමන්ගේ ජාතීන්ට අයත් පාසැල් තිබේ එය ලන්ඩනයේද,අමෙරිකාවේද , ඉන්දියාවේද , නැත හෝත් ආරාබි කරයේද, තමිල් නාඩු ප්‍රාන්තයේද එසේමය එය මනුෂ්‍ය සමාජයේ අඩුපාඩුවක් හෝ වරද කාරී අධ්‍යයපන ක්‍රමයක් නොවේ. පසුගිය යුද්ධයද නැවැත්තුවේ ඉහත කි ජාතික වැදගත්කමක් ඇති ඒක ජාතික පාසැල් වල දුවා දරුවන්ගේ ඇට ලේමස් තම ජාතිය ගොඩනැගීමට කැප කිරීමෙනි. දැන් දැන් මේ කියවෙන සන්හැදියා මත අනුව ජාතික පාසල්වල උගෙනගත් පසු ගිය යුද්ධය සාර්ථකව දිනාගැනීමට ජීවිතය කැප කළ සියලු දු පුතුන් අඹු දරු සියලන්ම කලේ වරදක්ද ?, නැතහොත් ඔවුන් ඉත්තන්ද ?.

අල්ලාගත් දමිළ කොටියන්ට හෝ අපරට තුල ජීවත්වෙන වෙනත් ජාතීන්ට දියයුතු
අධ්‍යයපනය මහා ජාතියට බලයෙන් කැවීමට උත්සහා කිරීම හරියට ම ඔලුවටම වදිනසේ  අප හට ගැසූ මාරු පහරක්ය. අප සංස්කෘතිය, භාෂාව, ආගම  කෙනෙකුට අප්ප්‍රිය සහගත විය හැක. අපි ඊට කනස්සලු නොවෙමු. හොඳ නරක කුමක්දැයි හදුනා ගැනීමට නුවණ ඇති, දියුණු නොදියුණු කුමක්දැයි වටහා ගැනීමට සිංහල උත්පත්තියෙන්ම හැකියාව ඇති සිංහල අපි, සිංහල ජාතිය අප්ප්‍රිය කරන සංස්කෘතීන් දුරාචාරය කර බැඳගත් පහත් සංස්කෘතීන් ඉගෙන ගැනීමට අප හට වුවමානවක් නැත. අපි සැමදා අපේ සිහල බොදු සංස්කෘතියට ලොබ බදිමු.

සිංහල වශයෙන් පෙනී සිට(සමහර තැන්හිදී සිවුරට මුවාවිද )වල් භූත දොඩවනා දේශපාලකයන් දැනගත යුත්තේ පිල් ගැනම කත් අදින පිලටම ගැති චන්ද දායකයන් සිත්හි තබගෙන ඔබ විසින් කරනා උප්පරවැට්ටි, මායම්, කතා හා සබික වැකි, උගත් බුද්ධිමත් හා ලොව හා එහි සංස්කෘතීන් ගොඩ නැගෙන හා එහි හරාත්මක භාවය හා හොඳ නරක දන්නා බුද්ධිමතුන් වන අපහට නොදිරවනා බවයි.
එ මන්ද යතහොත් සමාජය රැවටීමේ දේශපාලන උප්පරවැට්ටි අප දන්නා බැවිනි, ලංකවට විදේශයන් සිට ආ විජතින් විසින් ඇතිකළ පසු ගිය යුද්ධයද දේශ පාලනික හා ආගමික  උප්පරවැට්ටියක් මිස අන්කිසිවක් නොවේ.

ඉගෙනගන්නා ළමයෙකුට තම ජාතික හා සංස්කෘතික අනන්‍යතාවය ඇති පාසලකට  යාමට ඇත්නම්  එය එතා අගනේය. එය අට සමත් පුද්ගලයෙකුට වුවද වැටහෙන කාරණයකි. තිරිසන් කුලේ සතෙකුට වුවද තමාට සංවර වීමට උගන්වන එඩේර පට්ටියේ මිහරකුන්, එළහරකුන්,ගෙම්බන්, කොටියන්,හිවලුන් හා මල්කවුඩන් සියල්ලම එකට සිටිනම්  තමා තෝරාගතයුතු පිලිවෙත, හැදී වැඩිය යුතු ආකාරය කුමක් ද කියා දැනගත නොහැකිය.

අපහසුවෙන් හෝ උගත්තේද එය වටිනා සංස්කෘතියක් නොවේ. කලවම් කොට හදාගත් නව සංස්කෘතික ක්‍රම වේදයක් පමණි. එයින්ද ලෝක යුද්ධ හෝ තම ආශාව හෝ දේව මත ඔස්සේ ලෝකය තුල ගොඩ නැගී ඇති යුද්ධ නැවැත්විය නොහැක. විවධ හෙතුම් මත විවිධ රජ්ජ්‍යන් තුල කළ කොහෝලාළ ඇතිවේ. මෙවන් ගනයේ යුද්ධ බුදුන් වහන්සේගේ කාලයේ පවා තිබිණ. එම කාලවල සිටි මහා උගතුන් සංස්කෘතික කලවමෙන් හෝ ජාතික කලවමෙන් හෝ අධ්‍යයපන කලවමෙන් මනා සබැදියාවක් ගොඩනගා ගත හැකි හෝ එවන් ක්‍රම ඉතා සාර්ථක ක්‍රම වසයෙන් දක්වා නැත. මේ නව පුගුළන් හුදෙක් පවසන්නේ බටහිර මතයකි. නමුත් බටහිරද මෙම මත පසෙකලා තම ජාතීන්ගේ අනන්න්‍යතාවය සුරක්ෂිත කරනා මගපිලිවෙලවල් ගෙන ඇතිබව මෙම නව ගනයේ ලාංකීය පුගුළන් නොදනති.  මෙම කලවමේ භයානකම නම් තුන් ජාතියම නැතිවී බටහිරයන්ට බන්දේසියක තබා අප මවුබිම පුජා කරන අනාගතයේ රට පාවාදෙන කලවම් ජාතියක් බිහිවීමය. 

කොදු නාරටියක් නැති ජාතියක් මෙම රට තුල භිහිකරගැනීමට අපේක්ෂාවෙන පෙර උතුරේ යුද්ධය පිටුපස සාන්තුවර ස්වරුපයෙන් සිටි පුජකයන් ගැන ද  අපි හොදින් දනී, ඔවුන් හින්දු හෝ, කතෝලික හෝ ක්‍රිස්තියානි හෝ ඉවන්ජෙලිකල් විය හැක, තවද බෞද්ධ ස්වරුපයෙන් සිටි සිංහල ගොබ්බයන්ද විය හැක. නමුත් යුද්ධය පරාජය කළ අපි මේවා දැඩි ලෙස ප්‍රතික්ෂේප කරන්නෙමු. වතු කම්කරුවන් හා වෙළද කණ්ඩායම් වසයෙන් අප ලක් දෙරණ මතා පදිංචි වී  සිටින බහු තරයකට ඇත්තේ අපට සදා හුරුපුරුදුවූ සිංහල බොදු ගතිගුණය. ලොව වෙනත් රවල
සංචාරය කර අත්දැකීම් වසයෙන් එම කරණය සම්බන්දයෙන් විමසන්නැයි මෙම ලිපියේදීම ඉල්ලා සිටින්නෙමු.

අවසාන වසයෙන් පවසන්නේ මෙම ලිපිය ලියු කතෘවන මමද සිංහල බෞද්ධ
පාසලකට ගිය අතර කිසිදාක මාගේ ගුරු මෑණිවරුන්, ගුරු පියවරුන් සුළු ජාතියකට තල පෙළා දැමීමට උගන්වා නැති අතර, අපා, දෙපා, සිවු පා, දඟලන, නලියන හෝ ඇසට නොපෙන කිසිදු ජීවියෙකුට ෛවර කිරීමට ද උගන්වා නැති බව සඳහන්
කිරීමට ඉදිරපත් වෙමු.

අතීතයේ තිබු පන්සල් පාඨ ශාලා අහිමුවූ හෙළ බොදු අප හට අපගේ අනන්‍යතාවය හා බොදු වපසරිය ඇතුව ඉගෙනගැනීමට ඉතා උත්සහයක් දරා නිර්මාණය කරගත් නව පාඨ ශාලා ක්‍රමවෙදයද නැතිව්දොයි භියක් හඟියි. අප බොදු සංස්කෘතිය නැසීමට ඇති හොඳම ක්‍රම වෙදයනම් සිහළ අධ්‍යයපන ක්‍රමය නැසීම හා සිහල බොදු මනෝ මුලික අධ්‍යයපන ක්‍රම අප ළමා පරපුරෙන් ඉවත් කිරීමය. 

සිංහල කම, බොදු කම, ආරක්ෂා කිරීමට කතිකා කිරීමට මේ කාලයයි. අප සැවොම එක්වී බුද්ධිමත්ව තීරණය ගෙන වැරැද්ද නිවැරැද්ද කිරීමට කලය පැමිණ ඇති බව දේශපාලකයන් හට වටහා දෙමු.

ඇස් මස් ලේ දන් දෙමින් රැකගත් සිංහල බෞද්ධ සංස්කෘතිය පනමෙන් රැක ගනිමු!.

පාලිත ආරියරත්න

Press Release SWARNA HANSA FOUNDATION 262, Denzil Kobbakaduwa Mawatha, Battaramulla Tel 2861981 Fax 2869901 E-mail-: shf@slt.lk

The news appearing in the Island News of Tuesday 3rd April under the heading ‘OIC pledges support for boosting racial amity in Sri Lanka’, again reveals the hidden agenda of Muslims.

In it an organization called the Organization of Islamic Conference in Riyadh has in a letter to the foreign ministry here in this country expressed its immense concern over the recent violence unleashed against some Muslims in Kandy and Ampara. This is totally wrong interpretation of the recent violence. It says recent violence unleashed against some Muslims. No, it is not. It is totally wrong. Who attacked who. It is none other than four Muslims who beastly attacked a Sinhala person, having Failed provoking him to attack them.

The news also says that during the three-day violence mosques, Muslim shops and Muslim houses were attacked, and intentionally says nothing about temples attacked by Muslims. It then goes on to say that OIC like to promote peaceful co-existence with other communities for peaceful living and cooperate with Sri Lanka to conduct interfaith dialogue. But that is not in fact what the Muslims are doing. They are always on aggression and increasing their lot and expanding their land on property hold. If they are so interested in peaceful co-existence, what they should do is to integrate into the Nation and its culture. But that is exactly what they abhor and desist, and for that they have first ensured total support from the government of the country and that gang of International Rogues calling themselves International Community.

The Swarna Hansa Foundation established several decades back to protect Sinhale, the country of Sinhalese, has been able by now to take the message across, and the Sinhala Nation is fast awakening itself to the threat faced by them and is fast realizing the fact, the created impossibility is in reality possible indeed.

Gallege Punyawardana,

Head, Swarna Hansa Foundation.

 

 

Sarath Wijesinghe a former Secretary Bar Association and a former Ambassador to UAE and Israel

Worldwide issue

Laws delays is a worldwide issue currently resolved in many jurisdictions including Commonwealth and United Kingdom we have been inherited with the current adversarial system from. The main players in the system are lawyers, Judges, where the state is providing funds for administration and catalyze independent judicial appointments and independence of the Judiciary, Law enforced institutions, and efficiently run the legal and administrative systems which require efficient and just legal/administrative systems with less delays while maintaining independence of the judiciary. True to the adage Justice delayed justice denied” Sri Lanka still takes few decades to end a civil/criminal matter to the completion. Thousands of unresolved cases are piled on everywhere including the higher courts. Some Land/Partition cases take more years and decades for completion including the appeal procedure.

Complicated system

We are inherited with a complicated system of justice with a mixture of English, Personnel, and Roman Dutch legal systems, with no proper system of compilation when most old and archaic laws are still in force with ad -hoc amendments to suit the political and administrative changes. We still use Civil and Criminal system forced on us by colonial rulers on 1800 s with the court system imported also in 1800 s further amended by the judicature act 40 years ago, still conducted in English with judgments in English by the judges attired in glamorous robes following British customs and convention with the usage of the foreign language in which the standard is fast deteriorating which is not understood by the citizen with 5% English knowledge of the population.

UK and Commonwealth

For a system to run smoothly, efficiently, and fast all the parts of the machine has to work together smoothly with the main stalk holder lawyers and Judges and it is a myth” for one branch to succeed in isolation! If we take one simple example in the procedure of an average magistrate court in the UK with a computer link” to the police stations in the area to exchange information, and court headed by a handsomely paid Judge assisted by a learned court clerk-a lawyer acting as an assistant and researcher- in a disciplined court house where the lawyers are well disciplined by the Bar Association and the Law Society with rigorous punishments on dishonest and behaviors unbecoming of a professional who are expected to conduct the case in full with no excuses as the first few questions by the magistrate of the expected time taken and the brief summary before the commencement of the proceedings, with warnings to all witness, and other institutions to be present with the documents. Magistrates are friendly but firm with no pompous or show off” attitudes like some of our judges in all levels. Magistrates are appointed by the Lord Chancellor with longtime training and surveillance having gone through understudy in the judge’s institute and senior magistrate’s before responsible appointments are given. Emails, transferring files, and digital technology are used in the court procedure and administration with laws delays are not an issue any longer in the court system in the United Kingdom.

40 years old Judicature Act reconditioned to expedite course of justice to find wrongdoers

Currently steps are taken to amend the 40 year old Judicature act with patch work to expedite cases on charges of finance and economic crimes creating new courts of Trial at Bar for selected cases on selected subjects allegedly in order to fulfill the promise made to the people to bring wrongdoers to justice. According’s the judges salaries have been increased, additional perks are given especially to the Attorney General – one of the most expensive unique cars. Since independence only few parliamentarians ( Monnakulama”, Marriakker”, and few others) were convicted during Hon SWRD Bandaranaike’s time (only) with the exiting legislation, and if there is a genuine desire to the governance, it is not difficult to bring the wrongdoers to books quick with existing legislation and citizen wonders whether it is inefficiency or lack of will to fight laws delays. Currently number of cases filed by the Bribery Commission is on the fast tract. Case against former Minister Authgmaga” for improper handling of 1,400,000 rupees is conducted on daily basis having detained in remand prisons can be taken as classic examples to show fast tract proceedings are possible under the current system, when the complaints made by Aluthgamage” against sitting Ministers in the government, for illegal dealings of 1, 32, 000, 00/= rupees none have been taken up by the Commission to date which is amusing and surprising. Bond Saga/Episode is the highest amount alleged to have stolen/robbed in Sri Lanka implicating the sitting Prime Minister for aiding, abetting and direct involvements by giving unwritten instructions to the former Central Bank Governor on the run, which is in the public domain and in commission records.

Proposed Bill – implications complications or/ and advantages?

The salient feathers of the proposed bill are appointment of three permanent High court Judges especially to hear Economic and financial corruption, on daily basis with a bench of three judges chosen for this particular issue in order to curb corruption according to the United Nation Guidelines on preventing Bribery and corruption and to speed up criminal justice with authority to the Attorney General to appoint Judges and provide adequate facilities administrative and professional with his staff to the newly established specialized High Courts, most probably to fulfill the pledges given to the people to find and punish wrong doers where the preliminary investigation by the FCID is now in the verge of completion. The question arises whether the current legislation and the powerful administrative set up with modern police structure appointed by the Constitutional Council is insufficient as in MP Aluthgamaga’s” case dealing with corruption and misuse of 14 million rupees which is heard day to day having remanded long periods be used to all other alleged cases with the existing High Court Judges in the same court system supervised by and appointment of judges by the Chief Justice for expeditious justice system. The political statements made in public by politicians that they are taking steps to fulfill the pledges during the election campaign to bring the wrongdoers to justice soon, sudden increments of salaries of judges, providing one of the most expensive vehicles to the Attorney General who is accused of soft peddling questing the Prime Minister alleged to be a main target in the public domain, raises eyebrows of those in Hulftsdorp” and country wide with eyes and ears open in this complicated and uncertain situations economically, politically with uprisings countrywide. Decision of judiciary is due and the results will be decisive for future deliberations.

Lawyers- Attorneys-at-Laws

There are around 18,000 legal professionals engaged in private practice, State sector including serving and retired Judges employed in private sector ipso- facto members of the Bar Association pledged to serve the nation and while protecting human rights and dignity of the profession, who are expected to maintain highest standards and engage in practice honestly and with due diligence. Misconduct of Attorneys – at- Law is inquired by a committee appointed by the Bar Association – the only statutory body for the lawyers and by a Rule from the Supreme Court. In the U K dishonest corrupt and those who do not live up to the expectations are prosecuted by the Law Society and a considerable numbers are convicted/found guilty and exposure to the media through the Law society Gazette and naming shaming is a common feature. It is a worrying feature that nothing of this nature is heard in Sri Lanka. Quality and competence of all professionals should be monitored by the Organizations of Professional Association which is also an inert body with no protection to the victims of anti-professionalism and the Bar Association – the powerful limb and a main initiator of the OPA.

Way out for Laws Delays- Lawyers Delays?

Reasons for laws delays are multiple and lawyers alone need not be accused of though partially responsible- lack of resources, lack of knowledge, lack of training to judges/lawyers, lack of discipline among lawyers, incompetency, lack of experience and will, lack of training and lack of judicial temperament of judges, Lack of vision and directions from the line minister and ministry and educational institutions including Law College and Faculties of Laws engaged in day to day work in place of academic and professional excellence, lack of coordination among connected institutions such as legal draftsman, A G s Department, Law Commission, Companies House and connected institutions for a united strategy with a will for changes in the interest of the country in turmoil with increase of crime rate out of frustrated litigants, bribery corruption, drug menace due to incompetence of the administration are all parts of the strings of the maize of unfortunate complicated events only a dedicated visionary or a group of visionaries will be able to win over with a new vision – out of politics or political considerations, with complete overhaul of legal education, legal system and the attitudes of stalk holders living in ivory towers. Let me end the article by narrating an unfortunate incident of myself recommending a civil lawyer with 40 year practice to send a letter in a land case of a friend from who made a handsome fee to my friend who Is chasing the lawyer for the last 6 months evading giving flimsy excuses putting me also into an embarrassing situation for recommending him not reachable via any mode of communications. In the UK it is a matter of a telephone call or a letter this to settle matter on few days via Law society. Another lawyer supposed to be transparent has charged nearly 4 million for a simple inquiry of 3 hours of a state flying cooperation losing billions as the remuneration of the regime change operation”, not giving the breakdown of the services rendered as required by law a matter should have been a matter of a mere letter in the law Society in the UK. Therefore it is the duty of the professional bodies to lead the campaign to minimize laws delays for the citizen to have trust and confident of the legal system avoid taking law into their hands out of desperation and anger. (Reading materials- laws delays and rule of law-31/2/2011 Press reader-Laws delays rule of law and good governance 23/8/ 2015 Tamil Information Center 29/6 2008 Observer – Public interest litigation 21/6/2015 Guardian all by the author who could be contacted on sarath7@hotmail.co.uk)

 Dr. Daya Hewapathirane

 The Rohingya Muslim community in Myanmar are not indigenous to Myanmar. Most of these Rohingya Muslims are illicit immigrants who have illegally migrated to Myanmar starting in the British colonial period, from Muslim neighborhood regions of Bengal India. Later they continued to migrate from East Pakistan (present Bangladesh). Being illicit immigrants, the Myanmar governments of the past and present and the public of Myanmar do not consider Rohingya Muslims as legitimate citizens of Myanmar. Myanmar’s Muslims account for about 04% of the total Myanmar population of about 60 million. They live mostly in Myanmar’s western state known officially as Rakhine or Arakan. Rakhine State consists of a population of about 3,8 million, with the indigenous Rakhine people forming the overwhelming majority in the State, who live mainly in the lowland valleys.  Most of the indigenous people living in Rakhine State adhere to Theravada Buddhism. The Muslim community of Rakhine state was estimated to be about 800,000 in 2012. Culturally the Rohingya Muslims are quite different to the indigenous people of Myanmar. The indigenous people of Myanmar are ethno-linguistically Sino-Tibetan and are predominantly Buddhists as opposed to the Rohingya Muslims who are ethno-linguistically related to the Indo-Aryan Bengali people of India and Bangladesh and their religion is Islam. The language spoken by the Rohingya Muslims is different from that of the indigenous people of Myanmar. It is derived from  a Indo-Aryan sub-branch of the greater Indo-European language family and is closely related to the Chittagonian language spoken in the southernmost part of the present Bangladesh bordering Myanmar.

RAKKHITA BUDDHIST COMMUNITY OF ROHANG

Rohang is an important region of Myanmar inhabited from ancient times by the Rakkhita, Rakkha or Rakhaing people, who belong to the indigenous Buddhist community of Burma.  From historic times, this was a highly respected Burmese community, well known for the honourable life they led. They were well known for their contribution to the development and preservation of the national cultural heritage and Buddhist spiritual values.  These Rakkhita people had their own language and their livelihood was strongly based on Buddhist principles. The name of the state Rakhine isderived from the Pali word Rakkhita or Rakkhapura which means “the land of the Rakhasa” or Rakkha or Rakhaing.

It was mostly during the British colonial period that Muslim people illegally crossed the borders and settled in border regions of Burma, concentrating largely in Rohang which was also known as Rakhine or Arakan, located in the immediate neighborhood of Bengal. Their numbers increased substantially during the British colonial period, and thereafter. Despite the government rule limiting Muslims to two children per family, Rohinghas ignored this law and the Muslim population in Myanmar has continued to show an increasing trend. According to historians of Myanmar, the name ‘Rohingya’ is of recent origin and appears to have been created in the1950’s, by the descendants of the Muslim Bengali people who settled down in the Rohang or Arakan region of Myanmar. The name Rohingya has not been used or recognized in the Burma population census conducted by the British in the year 1824.  It is also noteworthy that the name Rohingya is not found in any historical source in any language before the 1950’s.

There were striking differences in the customs, traditions, and livelihood patterns of the two communities – the indigenous Burmese Buddhists of the Arakan region, especially the Rakkhita community and the Muslim immigrants from Bengal. These cultural incompatibilities and differences resulted in open conflicts between the two communities, which were well evident from about the mid-20^thcentury.  Soon violence broke out in the Arakan region and the Muslim Rohingyas became a serious threat to the people of Myanmar. Occasional isolated violence involving Myanmar’s majority Buddhist and minority Muslim communities has occurred for decades, even under the authoritarian military governments that ruled the country from 1962 to 2011.

BRITISH RESPONSIBLE FOR AGGRAVATION OF THE PROBLEM

According to Aye Chan, a historian at the Kanda University, communal violence between the Arakanese or the indigenous Myanmar (Burmese) Buddhists and the Rohingya Muslims began during World War -II in 1942.  The British were primarily responsible for the aggravation of disharmony between the Rohingya Muslims and the indigenous people of Myanmar. During the World War, when the British were retreating, they took action to arm Muslim groups in Northern Arakan to create a buffer zone against the Japanese invasion.  Furthermore, the British promised the Muslims living in Burma (Myanmar) at this time, that if they supported the British during the war, the Muslims will be given their own “national area” within Burma. Once acquiring arms, the Muslim Rohingyas became a serious threat to the people of Myanmar. They soon began a spree of violence against the Buddhists of the Arakan region. They began destroying Buddhist villages in Arakan, using the firearms given to them by the British.  In 1942, a major armed confrontation occurred between the Rohingya Muslims and indigenous Arakanese people which led to many casualties on both sides.  Rohingya Muslims massacred about  20,000 Arakanese in Buthidaung and Maungdaw townships.  In retaliation, about  5,000 Muslims in Minbya and Mrauk-U Townships were killed by the Arakanese.

In the mid-20^th century, Rohingya Muslims living in Arakan organized into several militant groups. They formed an aggressive movement known as the Mujahideen movement which was active during the 1947 to 1961 period.  There were several Mujahideen uprisings in Arakan.  The aim behind the riots of the Rohingya militant groups was to separate the northern part of Arakan, or the Muslim populated Mayu frontier region and create an independent Muslim state for the Rohingya Muslims and annex it to the newly-formed Muslim East Pakistan as an exclusively Muslim country.

In 1947, when a new Islamic country of Pakistan was about to be formed, Rohingya Muslims who had already possessed arms from the British, wanted to obtain a “national area” for them within Burma, in accordance to the assurance given to them by the British. They formed the North Arakan Muslim League  and  met  Mohammad Ali Jinnah, the founder of Pakistan, and requested that Mayu region of Myanmar be annexed to East Pakistan which was about to be formed. Jinnah however, was not in favour of such a move. This did not stop the Rohingya Muslims in their agitation for separation from Myanmar.  During the 1960’s and early 1970’s, there were several uprisings which were popularly known as Arakan State Riots.  A widespread armed insurgency started with the formation of a Muslim political party called Jami-a-tul Ulema-e Islam, demanding separation.

The Burmese central government refused to grant a separate Muslim state in the Mayu region and the Muslim militants of Northern Arakan declared jihad on Burma. The Mujahid militants began their insurgent activities in the Buthidaung and Maungdaw townships within the Mayu region that lies on Burma-East Pakistan border, led by a long-term Muslim criminal named Abdul Kassem who was a leader of the Mujahid movement. There was  widespread violence in the Arakanese villagers and the Buddhist Arakanese inhabitants of Buthidaung and Maungdaw were forced to leave their homes. By June 1949, the Mujahid rebels were in possession of all of northern Arakan. In the meantime, the Mujahid extremists encouraged and supported illegal immigration into the Arakan region of thousands of Muslim Bengali people from the over-populated East Pakistan. 

When the rebellion was becoming intensified the Myanmar government declared martial law and took firm action to contain the militants. This led to the subjugation of the Mujahid insurgency and the Muslim insurgents fled to the jungles of northern Arakan. Between 1950 and 1954, the Burmese army launched major military operations against the Mujahid rebels in Northern Arakan. All major centres of the Mujahids were captured and several of their leaders were subdued. Towards the end of 1961, most Mujahids surrendered, but some formed small armed groups and continued to loot, harass, and terrorize the Burmese Buddhists, especially in remote regions in Northern Arakan.

THE RADICALIST MOVEMENTS (1971-1988)

During Bangladesh Liberation War in 1971, the Rohingya Muslim who resided in the Myanmar-Bangladesh border had the opportunity to collect weapons.  In 1972, the Rohingya Muslims formed the Rohingya Liberation Party (RLP) with activities based in the jungles of Buthidaung.  Military Operation conducted by the Burmese Army in 1974 led to many Muslim insurgents fleeing to neighboring Bangladesh. In March 1978, the Burmese government launched a campaign to check illegal immigrants residing in Burma. This led to many thousands of Rohingyas in the Arakan region crossing the border to Bangladesh.  Arrests of illegal migrants by the Burmese army created unrest in Arakan and as a result, there was a mass exodus of around 252,000 refugees to Bangladesh.

In late 1982, the Burmese Citizenship Law was introduced and most of the Rohingyas were denied Burmese citizenship. Radical Rohingya militant group took this opportunity to recruit many Rohingya Muslims who were occupying the region along the Bangladesh-Burma border. In the early 1980s, radical Muslims formed the Rohingya Solidarity Organization (RSO) which soon became the most militant faction among the Rohingyas on the Burma-Bangladesh border.  Using the Islam religious card, the RSO was able to obtain various forms of assistance and support from the Muslim world, including the JeI in Bangladesh and Pakistan, Gulbuddin Hekmatyar’s Hizb-e-Islami (HeI) in Afghanistan, Hizb-ul-Mujahideen (HM) in the Indian State of Jammu and Kashmir and the Angkatan Belia Islam sa-Malaysia (ABIM), and the Islamic Youth Organization of Malaysia. In 1991 and 1992, there was forced relocation of Muslims by the government and the creation of new Buddhist settlements in Buthidaung and Maungdaw townships. This provoked another mass exodus of Rohingya Muslims to Bangladesh.

CONNECTIONS WITH TALIBAN AND AL-QAEDA (1988-2011)

The military camps of Rohingya Solidarity Organization (RSO) were located in the Cox’s Bazaar district in southern Bangladesh. In 1991, it possessed a large number of military equipment, including light machine-guns, AK-47 assault rifles, RPG-2 rocket launchers, claymore mines and explosives. They were equipped with UK-made 9mm Sterling L2A3 sub-machine guns, M-16 assault rifles and point-303 rifles.  Afghan’s Taliban instructors were associated with RSO camps along the Bangladesh-Burma border. Many RSO rebels were undergoing training in the Afghan province of Khost with Hizb-e-Islami Mujahideen. The expansion of the RSO in the late 1980s and early 1990s made the Burmese government launch a massive counter-offensive to clear up the Burma-Bangladesh border. In December 1991, Burmese troops crossed the border and attacked a Bangladeshi military outpost. The incident developed into a major crisis in Bangladesh-Burma relations, and by April 1992, more than 250,000 Rohingya civilians had been forced out of Arakan, western Burma.

In late 1998, Rohingya Solidarity Organization (RSO) and Arakan Rohingya Islamic Front (ARIF) combined to form the Rohingya National Council (RNC) with its own armed wing, gathering the different Rohingya insurgents into one group. In 2001, they underwent training in Libya and Afghanistan, in guerrilla warfare and the use of a variety of explosives and heavy-weapons. They had several meetings with Al-Qaeda representatives. Throughout 2012 and in 2013, there have been a series of riots and much violence in Northern Arakan in the Rakhine State, between extremist Rohingya Muslims and the indigenous Rakhini or Arakanese people.   Muslim fanatics are largely responsible for the outbreak of violence. The 2012 riots began after a Rakhine teenage girl was brutally raped and cut into pieces by three Muslim fanatics. This immediately led to an outrage and retaliation by the Rakhine community. This was followed by the extremist Muslims resorting to extreme forms of violence, destroying many villages in their entirety, and murdering many innocent people. Those displaced by these riots exceeded 50, 000.  The situation in the Rakhine state remains tense.

In 2013, the worst violence in Myanmar was in Meikhtila city, which resulted in widespread bloodshed and destruction of property, and the displacement of nearly 10,000 people who were forced out of their homes. A State of Emergency was declared, and the army took control of the city.  The devastation was reminiscent of last year’s clashes between ethnic Rakhine Buddhists and Muslim Rohingya that left hundreds of people dead and more than 100,000 displaced. The struggle to contain the violence has become a major challenge to the government.  Buddhist and Muslim communities live in near-total segregation, constantly fearing more violence. The violence in Meikhtila city began once news spread that a Muslim man had killed a Buddhist monk. Soon, Buddhist mobs rampaged through a Muslim neighborhood and the situation quickly became out of control.

RISE IN ISLAMIC FUNDAMANTALISM

In the last few decades, owing to the newfound wealth of oil rich Islamic countries and massive immigration to the West, Islamic fundamentalism has been on the rise and the dormant spirit of Jihadism has been rekindled.  This fervor has been translated into upheavals, revolutions and    terrorism, and world peace has been put in jeopardy. Millions of lives are now in danger. Islam encourages aggressive spirit explicitly.  Muslim believe that he can go to paradise if he kills non-Muslims. The Quran tells Muslims to slay the unbelievers wherever they find them (2:191), do not befriend them (3:28), fight them and show them harshness (9:123), and smite their heads (47:4). It prohibits Muslims to associate with their own brothers and fathers if they are non-believers (9:23), (3:28).

Buddhists have been the most victimized and harassed religious community in the world, owing to actions of Muslims guided by their theistic traditions and beliefs. Throughout the ages the Buddhist religion experienced many calamities.  As far back as in the 10th century, because of the Muslim invasion of what is modern day Afghanistan, Pakistan and India, the Buddhist religion which formed the basis of life of the people of this part of the world, was viciously wiped out in an act of virtual genocide. In some Asian countries indigenous Buddhist spiritual traditions have been severely weakened by decades of persecution. Muslim terror and atrocities have inflicted severe damage to Buddhism in many Asian countries, some of which were exclusively Buddhist at one stage in their histories. The destruction of the colossal Afghan Bahmian Buddha statues is not the first destruction resulting from Muslim fundamentalism.

The biggest problem with Muslims is their belief that Islam is one and only ‘chosen religion’ and Muslims are the one and only ‘chosen people’. In an Islamic state people of other faiths are not tolerated. Non-Muslims cannot establish their shrines or monasteries in any of the Middle Eastern Muslim countries. They cannot hold their religious functions or prayers in public in these countries. No meaningful dialogue on Islam or on the divisive attitudes and activities of Muslims is possible because they unnecessarily feel intimidated whenever legitimate questions on Islam or the Quran are posed. Those who question are immediately branded as racists or anti Muslim. Most Muslims lack the courage to respond to even the most abject injustices evident in Islamic beliefs and practices. No Muslim gives any other religion a status of equality with Islam. They fail to realize that true open-mindedness consists of contemplating all premises and weighing the evidence. Reasoning involves deduction and induction. Why do Muslims cause disharmony and bring about conflicts and confrontational situations in all societies they infiltrate? Why?   Buddhists need to be vigilant and need to initiate actions against the abuse of privileges, aggression, and misdemeanor by Muslims.

ISLAM AND VIOLENCE  

Buddhists cannot consider Islam as a religion of compassion and peace. Those professing Islam have been the biggest enemies of Buddhists and Buddhism throughout history. There are ample historic records which describe vividly the atrocities committed against millions of Buddhists in several countries. Their criminality has not subsided despite their living among other religions in different countries. It is a well-known fact that Buddhism disappeared from India under the sword of Islam. Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, the great Indian Buddhist leader said that there is absolutely no doubt that the fall of Buddhism in India was due to the invasions of the Musalmans or the adherents of Islam. For five centuries, from the 13^th to 17^th centuries, most parts of India were under Muslim rule. Over 50 million Buddhists and Hindus were massacred by Islamists in greater India (which in the past included   Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Afghanistan).

Islam destroyed Buddhism not only in India but wherever it went. Before the onslaught of Islam, Buddhism was the religion of almost the whole of Asia – ancient countries/regions such as Bactria, Parthia, Afghanistan, Gandhar, Chinese Turkestan, along with Tibet and Inner Mongolia were Buddhist nations that formed almost the whole of the Asian continent. Buddhism was the dominant religion of the people of this vast area of the Asian continent. Islam destroyed and eliminated Buddhism from almost all these countries. Those conversant with global affairs, know, especially in recent years, Muslims have become a curse to humanity, resorting to violent and unethical means of serving their religious ends, or to ‘resolve’ their obsessive religion-based issues and self-created problems.  Peace and harmony in many countries in the West and East, have been impaired greatly owing to unwholesome actions of Muslim religious fanatics.

CRIME AGAINST BANGLADESHI BUDDHISTS

In recent years, the indigenous Chakma Buddhists of Bangladesh, inhabiting the Chittagong Hill tracts of Bangladesh have been subject to untold violence by Muslims.  In the early 1990s, Chakma Buddhist monks were subject to persecution and violence and were forced to flee their traditional lands. Successive Muslim governments of Bangladesh were engaged in implementing a policy of ethnic cleansing to eradicate the indigenous Buddhists. The encroachment of land owned and occupied previously by Buddhists has   continued a rapid scale in recent decades. More than 100,000 military and paramilitary personnel are stationed in the Chittagong Hill Tract making life insecure and miserable for the Buddhist community. It has become a region that is extremely crime prone, characterized by arson, killing, rape, land grabbing, and destruction of Buddhist temples, extra-judicial arrest, and detentions. Thousands of Jumma Buddhist families, with many children have been e displaced and left homeless owing to violence, and the number of poverty-stricken Buddhist refugees have increased substantially. Many indigenous Buddhist people of affected villages continue to live in hiding, in dense forests and some have abandoned their ancestral land and had moved to other villages and are leading desperate lives. Since 1986 many Buddhists have fled Bangladesh and sought refuge in the Tripura state of India.

Muslim religious fundamentalism and intolerance of Buddhists and other religious minorities are on the rise in Bangladesh. The country’s military has become ruthless in this regard. In 2006, a group of illicit Muslim settlers led by Rafique Uddin destroyed the Buddhist temple of Challyatali village under Longadu, Rangamati and occupied the temple land. In the last three decades the exclusively Muslim Army of Bangladesh, motivated by religious fanaticism have destroyed many Buddhist shrines and monasteries. Religious persecution takes place in the form of torture, murder, intimidation of Buddhist monks and deliberate and systematic destruction of their places of worship. Fanatical Muslims destroyed and desecrated the renowned “Navajyoti Buddhist Vihara” (Navajyoti Buddhist Temple) at Lalyaghona Village in Baghaichari Upazillact) breaking down many Buddha images.

VIOLENCE AGAINST THE THAI BUDDHISTS

 Muslims are a very small minority settler community in Southern Thailand, smaller than the Muslim settler community of Sri Lanka. Their objective is to have a separate country for Muslims in Sothern Thailand. Buddhist civilians and monks have been frequent targets of Muslim attacks in Southern Thailand in recent years. In late 2005, Muslims again started killing Buddhists in Southern Thailand. The bloodshed here could mark a resurgence of a long-simmering Muslim insurgency and, some officials fear, fertile ground for Islamic terrorists. More than 500 people were killed in 2006, in three southern Thai provinces, including attacks targeting Buddhists in possible bids to drive out non-Muslims.

Authorities are investigating possible links between these Muslim separatist groups and Islamic terrorist organizations such as Jemaah Islamiyah, which seeks a pan-Islamic state in Southeast Asia. It is blamed for attacks including the 2002 bombing in Bali that claimed 202 lives. Thitinan Pongsudhirak, an assistant professor of international relations at Bangkok’s Chulalongkorn University says, “We have not yet seen escalation, “but I still think we may be headed from bad to worse.” “The gruesome fashion of beheadings of Buddhists by Muslim assailants … is not normal violence,” said Pongsudhirak. “It is driven by deep animosity and hatred.”

MUSLIM EXTREMISM IN SRI LANKA

Islamic community in Sri Lanka is a small non-indigenous minority amounting to about 9% of the total population. In recent years, there is clear evidence of disregard and disrespect on the part of most Muslims, for the national Sinhala Buddhist cultural heritage of the country. The fundamentalist Wahhabi” Islam’ is being widely propagated by present day Muslims. This is having serious negative implications not only in terms of national security, but also importantly, as far as the national culture is concerned. Although a small non-indigenous settler community of the island, these Muslims insist on living an alienated and un-integrated life and are agitating for concessions specified by their Islamic religion and Muslim Shariah law. The interests of the country are not their concern, because Sri Lanka is not an Islamic country. They are least interested in joining the national “mainstream” and work towards national unity and well-being. During the last few decades, the Muslims have gained strength in Sri Lanka owing to their increased economic power largely owing to tangible and moral support received from Muslim countries, especially Saudi Arabia, and owing to the political patronage.

The younger generation of Muslims are being brainwashed with extremist Islamic Wahhabism, in the so-called” Madrasas which are exclusively Muslim schools that have sprung up in the country in recent years. What appears to be propagated in these Madrasas have serious negative implications as far as national security and national culture is concerned. Their new male and female attire has changed and reflects their inclination to be exclusive and separate from the nation’s mainstream. This polarization tendency of the Islamic community is self-imposed. There is evidence of destruction of archeological and historic cultural monuments and remains in areas inhabited by Muslims. Muslim encroachment of traditional Sinhala Buddhist temple land and the demolition of historic sites and archeological remains of Buddhist heritage show the sheer lack of respect for Buddhism and related and cultural heritage of the country that gave them shelter.

Dr. Daya Hewapathirane

By Dr. DAYAN JAYATILLEKA Courtesy The Island

It is a simple matter of ethics. If Prime Minister Wickremesinghe hasn’t resigned, it is quite simply because, firstly, he doesn’t know right from wrong and secondly, he doesn’t know how to conduct himself in public affairs in accordance with international norms, including those in Asia and the global South.

He doesn’t think it was wrong to import and implant Arjuna Mahendran, a non-citizen, as Governor of the Central Bank despite the advice of the President and a clear issue of a conflict of interest.

He doesn’t see it as wrong that he defended Mahendran from charges of wrong-doing when the bond scam story gathered momentum and the weight of evidence.

He doesn’t think it was wrong to damage the UNP, the government and the President by his acts of omission and commission (no pun intended) in this regard.

He doesn’t think that he should accept responsibility for a huge error of judgment which led to massive financial losses to the country.

He doesn’t believe in apologizing, taking responsibility for his huge mistake and resigning.

In short his standards of political behavior and conduct in public affairs, leaves much to be desired.

So the no-confidence motion is going down to the wire. Some parties will make their decisions only on the day itself. This isn’t good because it means that there is no compromise in sight—the only possible compromise being the voluntary resignation of the prime Minister, just as the President of Peru resigned a few weeks ago, to spare his government precisely such a trial by fire in the legislature, on grounds of countenancing corruption. The absence of such an exit from the crisis in Sri Lanka reveals the inflexibility and intransigence on the part of the PM and his party, the UNP.

There is a major difference between adherence to principle on the one hand, and rigidity on the other. An analysis of the rise of extremism and the attendant phenomenon of violent upheavals throughout the world and over time show that two factors play a major causative role. One is the inflexibility, rigidity, intransigence, of the establishment. The other is the unwillingness or inability of liberal reformers to prevail over such intransigence.

The Sri Lankan situation is demonstrating the presence of the first of these two factors. We shall see on April 4th whether or not the second factor is also present.

Those of us who do not wish to see the growth of extremism in our society once again have to wish and work for the factor of intransigence to be replaced by flexibility or for the moderate reformers to be willing and able to prevail over the dogmatically inflexible.

Translated into simpler political terms, we have to hope that either the PM steps down or that the SLFP and the UNP dissidents are sufficiently strong, numerous and determined to join the JO in prevailing over the PM’s intransigence and the UNP’s dogmatically conformist loyalty to him.

While flexibility usually ensures survival either by being as supple as the bamboo or capable of generating change from within, rigidity leaves only three possibilities of change—explosion, implosion or crack-up (rupture).

What does Prime Minister Wickremesinghe and the UNP parliamentary group’s rigidity reveal? It reveals three characteristics. One is ossification—the inability to generate change. They are stagnant and static. The other is that of arrogance. The third is myopia, the inability to see beyond their collective nose.

If the PM does not resign and manages to squeak past the no-confidence motion, how is he going to govern? The SLFP or most of it will leave. The government will crack up.

It will also lose its two-thirds majority. The JO and SLFP will form a strong opposition. The Judicature Act (making for Special Courts) has already been deemed to need a two thirds majority in Parliament since some of its clauses are inconsistent with the Constitution. Even legislation which needs only a simple majority may be blocked by the President.

Soon, the PM and the UNP, with or without the TNA, will run into stormy weather. There have been periods like this when the UNP was well past its midpoint and headed rapidly downhill though it didn’t know that. The years 1953-1956 and 1967-1970 are cases in point. It is not only the UNP that has experienced this accelerated downturn. I vividly recall the United Front government of Madam Bandaranaike in 1974-1977, from the Government Printer’s strike through to the Peradeniya student shooting, the student uprising island-wide, the railway strike, the general strike and the break-up of the government. Radicalization is rife at this stage of the game.

Only Ranasinghe Premadasa was able to turn things around even at this late stage but he had been Prime Minister –and a dissenting one– for a whole decade before he was given the Presidential nomination in 1988. However, if Sajith Premadasa were given the Presidential candidacy in 2019, he would be unable to turn things around, because the damage done by Ranil Wickremesinghe to the economy and the party would be far greater than that done by the Jayewardene administration.

If the PM squeaks through today’s no-confidence motion, he will not regain social legitimacy or popularity, nor will his and Mangala’s economic policies win the government any votes. The UNP will lack the social shock-absorber and human shield that the SLFP provides because it will leave government, so keen is it to put a distance between itself and socially toxic Ranilist UNP which brings in its wake a predictable electoral disaster next year.

Reports disclose that President Sirisena warned the UNP against propping itself up with TNA votes in parliament. Evidently a UNP Minister was shocked and said that the President has forgotten his own reliance on the TNA in January 2015. “Sirisena had also warned the United National Party (UNP) that it would be political suicide for Wickremesinghe to defeat the no-confidence resolution by getting the votes of the Tamil National Alliance (TNA). Leaning on the main minority Tamil party would alienate the nationalist vote of the Sinhalese majority, Sirisena had argued, only to be told that he too had won the January 2015 election thanks to the minorities, including the Tamils.” (EconomyNext, April 03, 2018)

What the UNP fails to understand is that (a) 2018 is not 2015 (b) a Presidential election is not a motion of no-confidence on a vast fraud and (c) Maithripala Sirisena, the General-Secretary of the moderate nationalist SLFP and former acting Defense Minister (on occasion) of a war winning administration, is not Ranil Wickremesinghe. When Maithripala Sirisena obtains TNA support, the optics are quite different from when Ranil Wickremesinghe does so (and on a shameful bond scam too). Sirisena could afford to; Wickremesinghe cannot.

If it is propped up by the TNA today, Ranil’s UNP which already has a target painted on its front will have another painted on its back. TNA support may keep Ranil afloat in Parliament for the moment, but it would sink the UNP at upcoming elections and thereby sink itself as well.

Editorial Courtesy The Island

What started off as an ill-conceived no-confidence motion, initiated by a bunch of cocky Joint Opposition (JO) MPs following their impressive win at the Feb. 10 mini polls, has led to a right royal battle between President Maithripala Sirisena and Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe. The showdown is right Royal because the President and the Prime Minister are both Royalists—the former from Royal College, Polonnaruwa and the latter from Royal College, Colombo 07. The battle lines are now drawn and there is no turning back. Both sides are evenly matched, in our book. A lot of money is changing hands. All signs are that Parliament will be thrown into turmoil today when the no-faith motion is debated and put to the vote. There will be some surprises, according to our sources.

The JO has taken a huge gamble not so much because of the prospect of losing its face in case of a defeat. If the no-faith motion gets carried with PM Wickremesinghe having to step down, the JO worthies may have to face unforeseen trouble. There is the possibility of the SLFP (Sirisena faction) and the UNP gelling once again as a cohesive group and the yahapalana government getting a new lease of life under a different PM also from the UNP; a new face may give the UNP the much-needed turbo boost in time for the Provincial Council elections and the party’s ginger group will be compelled to stop rebelling. The ire of the public, reflected in the UNP’s humiliating loss at last month’s local government elections, is directed at the present party leadership and a new leader may be able to shore up the party’s image, woo the public and regain lost ground at least to some extent. Such a development may not be to the JO’s advantage.

Moreover, if the SLFP and the UNP restore their bonds under a new PM, together they will be able to muster a two-thirds majority for the Judicature Amendment Bill, which the Supreme Court has deemed inconsistent with the Constitution. The passage of this controversial Bill will pave the way for go-kart trials, as it were, against the big guns of the last regime. This must be a worrisome proposition for the JO worthies.

The JO has craftily turned its no-faith motion campaign into a battle between the PM and the President, and the PM has, in a bid to save his skin, pitted the UNP against the President and the SLFP. The UNP is now attacking President Sirisena and his party more than the JO. Even if it succeeds in torpedoing the no-confidence motion today, its victory will be a pyrrhic one. For, the SLFP won’t be able to continue to work with it; there may arise a situation similar to what we witnessed from 2001 to 2004 with President Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga and Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe being at loggerheads, if not each other’s jugular. The 19th Amendment may have stripped the President of the power to sack a prime minister and dislodge a government, but it is only wishful thinking that the UNP will be able to run a government smoothly without the President’s cooperation.

The UNP is a force to be reckoned with in spite of it trouble and poor electoral performance. So is beleaguered Prime Minister Wickremesinghe, who is one of life’s great survivors. Perhaps, he has seen to it that some SLFP MPs will go to the mat for him during today’s debate and even vote for him. The UNP may even be able to engineer some crossovers from the SLFP and muster a working majority to form its own government, but the question is whether it will be able to live up to the expectations of the irate public while settling scores with a hostile President.

The UNP is reported to have presented to President Sirisena, on Monday, an 18-month development plan, which, it says, it intends to implement in case of its victory today. It may look good on paper like all other politicians’ plans, but the problem will be its implementation. The joint government has so far failed to do virtually anything by way of development to impress the voting public, as evident from the mini polls results, and the people will want to know why the UNP failed to do for nearly three and a half years what it has undertaken to do within the next 18 months. Promises are said to be like babies—easy to make but difficult to deliver.

Whoever emerges victorious in today’s contest in Parliament won’t be able to paint the town red; the sobering political reality is bound to cast a shadow on victory. There are unnervingly formidable challenges the parties to the no-confidence battle have to face. The President and the Prime Minister—either Wickremesinghe or anyone else from the UNP—will have their work cut out vis-à-vis the economy in shambles. Their task will be to revive it. The JO and the Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna will have to run the local bodies they have won to the satisfaction of the public and retain their popularity. This is certainly a tall order.

The Supreme Court has informed Speaker Karu Jayasuriya that several sections of the Judicature Bill were inconsistent with the Constitution and therefore, it should be passed by a two-thirds majority in Parliament, if not amended as recommended by the Judiciary.

Speaker Kayasuriya conveyed the Supreme Court opinion to Parliament today.

CSIS Briefs Courtesy Center for Strategic and International Studies

The Issue

• Unable to repay its debt, Sri Lanka gave China a controlling equity stake and a 99-year lease for Hambantota port, which it handed over in December 2017.
• The economic rationale for Hambantota is weak, given existing capacity and expansion plans at Colombo port, fueling concerns that it could become a Chinese naval facility.

Recommendations

• Recipient countries should link infrastructure projects to broader development strategies that assess projects within larger networks and monitor overall debt levels.
• The international community should expand alternatives to Chinese infrastructure financing but cannot and should not support all proposed projects.

---

The view from Hambantota’s Martello Tower says it all. Built by the British in the early 1800s as a lookout post, the small circular fort occupies a hill on Sri Lanka’s southern coast. Look west, along that coastline, and shipping cranes rise above a new port. Look south, out to the Indian Ocean, and hulking ships move cargo along one of the world’s busiest shipping lanes. These images could converge in the coming years, but on most days, they remain miles apart. Last year, only 175 cargo ships arrived at Hambantota’s port.

This gap explains how Hambantota became a cautionary tale in Asia’s infrastructure contest. The port was intended to transform a small fishing town into a major shipping hub. In pursuit of that dream, Sri Lanka relied on Chinese financing. But Sri Lanka could not repay those loans, and in 2017, it agreed to give China a controlling equity stake in the port and a 99-year lease for operating it. On the day of the handover, China’s official news agency tweeted triumphantly, Another milestone along path of #BeltandRoad.”

The challenge, of course, is that political incentives are skewed toward starting big projects sooner without mitigating risks.

Not everyone is celebrating. Negotiations around the port sparked local protests and accusations that Sri Lanka was selling its sovereignty. Some observers worry that China’s infrastructure investments are creating economic dependencies, which are then exploited for strategic purposes. In 2014, a Chinese submarine docked at Colombo, Sri Lanka’s capital, setting off alarms about China’s expanding military footprint. Unlike Colombo, where Sri Lanka’s navy is headquartered, Hambantota is more isolated and could offer Chinese vessels greater independence.

Sri Lankan officials have tried to calm those fears. Sri Lanka headed by President Maithripala Sirisena does not enter into military alliances with any country or make our bases available to foreign countries,” Sri Lankan Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe said in August 2017. In February 2018, Sri Lanka’s highest-ranking military officer said, There had been this widespread claim about the port being earmarked to be used as a military base. . . . No action, whatsoever will be taken in our harbor or in our waters that jeopardizes India’s security concerns.” Sri Lanka’s parliament approved the agreement, but the text has not been made public, allowing suspicions to fester.

Political Ambitions, Economic Realities

As speculation continues about Hambantota’s future, its past provides lessons for Asia’s broader infrastructure competition. For recipient countries, the case underscores the importance of assessing infrastructure projects as part of an overall development strategy. Infrastructure projects often look more attractive in isolation, but their long-term success hinges on being part of a wider network, whether transportation, energy, information, or other systems. A broader approach also draws attention to debt sustainability. The challenge, of course, is that political incentives are skewed toward starting big projects sooner without mitigating risks.

Hambantota’s port did not appear overnight, but resulted from a series of Sri Lankan government decisions. Many Chinese-funded projects in Sri Lanka have been unsolicited, but Hambantota’s port is not one of them. Constructing a port at Hambantota has been part of Sri Lanka’s official development plans since at least 2002. In 2003, SNC Lavalin, a French engineering firm, completed a feasibility study for the port. A Sri Lankan government-appointed task force reviewed and ultimately rejected the study, faulting it for ignoring the port’s potential impact on Colombo Port, which in recent years has handled roughly 95 percent of Sri Lanka’s international trade.

Hambantota’s main challenge came from within Sri Lanka itself.

In 2006, Ramboll, a Danish consulting firm, completed a second feasibility study. It took a relatively optimistic view of the port’s potential, basing traffic projections on Sri Lanka’s future growth and overflow from existing ports at Colombo, Galle, and Trincomalee. Dry and break bulk cargo (commodities and goods loaded individually rather than in standard containers) would provide the main source of traffic until 2030, when the balance would start shifting toward container traffic. By 2040, the port would handle nearly 20 million twenty-foot equivalent units (TEU), roughly as much as the world’s fifth busiest port in2015.

With that assessment in hand, Sri Lankan President Mahina Rajapaksa was even more eager to pursue the project. Elected in 2005, Rajapaksa had promised to develop Sri Lanka’s southern districts, especially his home district of Hambantota, which was among the areas devastated by the 2004 tsunami. During Rajapaksa’s tenure in office, Sri Lanka embarked on a series of ambitious projects. Many of these big-ticket projects—including an international airport, a cricket stadium, and the port—had three things in common: they used Chinese financing, Chinese contractors, and Rajapaksa’s name.

Mattala Rajapaksa International Airport, world’s emptiest airport.” – Photo: Jonathan Hillman/CSISChinese loans were often at high rates. The first phase of the Hambantota port project was a $307 million loan at 6.3 percent interest. Multilateral development banks typically offer loans at rates closer to 2 or 3 percent, and sometimes even closer to zero. One reason China is successful in locking in these higher rates is that better alternatives are often unavailable. Another reason is that Chinese loans, while often requiring the partner to use Chinese contracts, are not as stringent in their requirements for safeguards and reforms. There were no competing offers for Hambantota’s port, suggesting that other potential lenders did not see rewards commensurate with the project’s risks.

Putting political ambitions ahead of market demands, this approach failed to consider Hambantota port within a larger development strategy. Critically, the port at Colombo handled 5.7 million TEU in 2016, has not reached capacity, and will expand in the coming years. If Colombo port’s most ambitious plans are realized, its capacity could expand to 35 million TEU by 2040. Early plans for Hambantota focused on offering fuel services, but under Rajapaksa, it was scaled up to include other activities, many of them already carried out at Colombo. In sum, Hambantota’s main challenge came from within Sri Lanka itself.

The political environment changed in 2015, when Maithripala Sirisena unseated Rajapaksa, but the new government’s options were limited. It reexamined some deals and halted construction at Hambantota’s port. While well-intentioned, this also delayed any revenue the port could generate, effectively making it even more difficult to service the loans. By 2015, some 95 percent of Sri Lanka’s government revenue was going toward servicing its debt, and the government initiated debt renegotiations with China. Talks culminated in the 70 percent equity and 99-year lease deal.

The Path Forward

Highlighting the mistakes that led to Hambantota’s handover is easier than identifying a path forward. But Sri Lanka and its partners are not without options for limiting the damage and preventing similar outcomes in the future.

For its part, the Sri Lankan government could release the full text of the port agreement to help address concerns about the port’s future use. It could also improve government procurement and accounting processes. National debt remains a major concern. In February 2018, Sri Lanka’s auditor general admitted that he could not say with certainty how much public debt the country owed. Greater transparency would help across the board, from evaluating project proposals to contracting and payments.

Advancing a free and open” Indo-Pacific will not come free.

The challenge for Sri Lanka’s partners is to avoid throwing good money after bad. India, for example, has expressed interest in taking over the international airport near Hambantota port. Officials have suggested it could be used as a flight school. The prospect of turning a failing project around is difficult to resist. But if that attempt is unsuccessful, India risks assuming the reputational damage that China would otherwise suffer. Likewise, Indian and Japanese interest in port facilities in Trincomalee, on Sri Lanka’s east coast, should be tempered by Sri Lanka’s debt levels and the existence of competing ports in the region.

Trincomalee, Sri Lanka – Photo: Jonathan Hillman/CSISIndia has another type of leverage, but may not be willing to use it. Its domestic shipping laws do not allow foreign vessels to carry domestic cargo between Indian ports. If those laws were loosened, allowing for greater international participation, India’s own ports would become more active and the need for transshipment services at Sri Lanka’s ports would decline. That would likely cut into a primary source of Hambantota’s future traffic, but also negatively impact Colombo port. Perhaps the biggest barrier to implementation are the interests within India that benefit from these laws and the status quo. But at some point, a stronger response to murky Chinese port investments could include greater openness of India’s own ports.

Clearly, advancing a free and open” Indo-Pacific will not come free. As Sri Lanka’s experience illustrates, it is not enough to warn against embarking on risky projects. When leaders weigh the short-term incentives of starting projects against the long-term risks of debt and subpar performance, the former often wins out. Better financing alternatives could limit recipient countries’ exposure to high interest rates and project terms that create dangerous dependencies. Capacity-building measures could help train governments to evaluate projects and negotiate terms.

But none of this will solve the fundamental challenge of walking away from unviable projects. Better financing alternatives cannot and should not be made available for all proposed projects. Some projects simply should not be pursued. That responsibility falls to government officials, and in democracies, the citizens who elect them. Sri Lanka’s recent local elections suggest its political winds could change yet again, potentially bringing former President Rajapaksa back to power in 2020. When you climb down from Hambantota’s Martello Tower, there is a plaque and picture of him, smiling, at the bottom of the ladder.

Jonathan Hillman is a fellow with the Simon Chair in Political Economy and director of the Reconnecting Asia Project at CSIS.