|
|
 |
The report of the Presidential Commission of Inquiry into bond issuance has been published online on the President’s official website.
In a tweet, President Maithripala Sirisena said the report of the Commission was now available online keeping his promise of ensuring transparency.
The English version of the report could be accessed on http://www.presidentsoffice.gov.lk/?p=4978
Moreover the Prime Minister has shown that he relies, not on impartial inquiry and independent investigations when making decisions on important matters but on verbal assurances given to him by his associates.
Tennakoon said that the report of the PCoI states that ‘the question of whether or not the fact that, Mr. Mahendran was not a citizen of Sri Lanka precluded him from being appointed the governor of the CBSL was not a Question of Law. Instead, it was a value judgment, which had to be made by those who considered the wisdom of appointing Mr. Mahendran, who was not a citizen of Sri Lanka, as the Governor of CBSL.
“So it is obvious that the Prime Minister made an erroneous value judgment. He made this decision despite the fact that a number of the most senior cabinet ministers had objected to the appointment. The cabinet Spokesperson Minister Rajitha Senaratne continuously states that he opposed the decision until the Prime Minister requested him to trust his judgment and not to intervene in his decisions. The erroneous value judgment of the Prime Minister has cost the nation over Rs 11 billion,” Tennakoon said.
The CaFFE Executive director added that when the Prime Minister was aware that, Arjuna Mahendran had a conflict of interest, when he was appointed the governor of the CBSL, as his son in law Arjuna Aloysius was in charge of Perpetual Treasuries.
The report states that the Prime Minister ‘has directed that Mr. Mahendran must ensure that, Mr. Arjuna Aloysius resigns form all positions he held in Perpetual Treasuries…Mr. Mahendran has repeatedly assured the Hon. Prime Minister that, Mr. Aloysius ‘would not under any circumstances play any role in the business activities of ‘Perpetual Treasuries. It appears that the Hon. Prime Minister has relied on those assurances given by Mr. Mahendran.’
Tennakoon states that the report adds that the confidence which the Prime Minister has placed on Mahendran was misplaced. The commission states the prudent course of action would have been to independently verify whether ‘Mr. Mahendran was honoring the assurances he gave the Prime Minister. We regret that the Hon. Prime Minister did not take this course of action.’
“Is this the kind of person we can continue to have as the Prime Minister of the country? The report shows that he was not only mislead by Mahendran but also by a number of other officials. This is a man who has made a series of terrible mistakes. Anyone can make mistakes, but these are mistakes that could have been easily avoided because a lot of people were trying to show the Prime Minister what actually transpired. But alas, Wickremesinghe continues to be stubborn as ever and it’s up to the President to decide whether he can entrust the management of this country t such a man,” Tennakoon said.
Media Division/CaFFE
2018 January 17th
Consideration of the 5th and 6th Periodic Reports of Sri Lanka under the Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC) took place at the 77th Session of the Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC) held at the Palais Wilson in Geneva, on 15th January 2018. Mrs. Chandrani Senaratne, Secretary of Women and Child Affairs of Sri Lanka led the Sri Lanka delegation.
The Sri Lanka delegation to the review included Ambassador H.E. Ravinatha Aryasinha, Permanent Representative of Sri Lanka to the United Nations in Geneva, Mr. A. Pathinathan, Chief Secretary, Northern Province, Mrs. T.T. Upulmalee, Acting Additional Secretary, Presidential Secretariat, Mrs. Chandima Sigera, Commissioner Department of Probation and Child Care, Ms. Ayesha Jinasena, Senior Deputy Solicitor General, Attorney General’s Department, Mrs. Samantha Jayasuriya, Deputy Permanent Representative, Permanent Mission of Sri Lanka in Geneva, Mrs. Marini de Livera, Chairperson, National Child Protection Authority, Major General R.M.J.A. Rathnayake, Commissioner General of Rehabilitation, Ms. Badra Withanage, Director of Education, Ministry of Education, Dr. Priyani Senadheera, Director of Maternal and Child Health, Ministry of Health, Nutrition and Indigenous Medicine, Ms. Lanka Amarasinghe, Director , Women and Children Bureau, Sri Lanka Police, Ms. Shashika Somaratne, Minister Counsellor, Ms. Mafusa Lafir, First Secretary and Ms. Dulmini Dahanayake, Second Secretary, Permanent Mission of Sri Lanka in Geneva and Ms. Rajmi Manatunga, Assistant Director, Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
His Excellency Maithripala Sirisena, President of Sri Lanka, Honourable Cabinet Ministers, Deputy Ministers and Heads of Departments,
I received the following Facebook Communication sent out by the Canadian Tamil Congress (CTC) from a friend in Toronto regarding their Thaipongal event scheduled to be held on the 20th of January 2018. The CTC has been a leading spokesperson for the proscribed Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE). It was formed soon after the US State Department listed the Federation of Associations of Canadian Tamils (FACT) as a front organization for the LTTE with a new name and new faces to carry on the propaganda and support services for the LTTE.
What I found to be intriguing is the fact that the Tamil Broadcasting Service of Sri Lanka’s state owned Rupavahini is said to be travelling to Toronto to cover this event. The CTC has stated that they had not invited Rupavahini, but that Rupavahini requested that they be allowed to cover the event, to which they agreed.
I am aware that CTC officials recently travelled to Sri Lanka to meet with government ministers and officials, and most likely sought coverage by Rupavahini of their mono-ethnic Thaipongal celebrations where they may well have a program to remember their heroes in the LTTE who engaged in suicide bombings, ethnic cleansing, assassinations and numerous acts of violence and murder. Father Emmanuel who resides in Germany, who previously compared the LTTE Supremo, Velupillai Prabhakaran to Jesus Christ was also in Sri Lanka at the same time as a VIP, and he too may have nudged the Sri Lankan authorities to send their Rupavahini team to Toronto.
At a time when ordinary Sri Lankans are struggling to survive with escalating living costs relating to higher sales taxes and income taxes, the government of Sri Lanka which has hitherto never covered events organized by the country’s diplomatic missions to improve inter-community relations aimed at building reconciliation have not been covered live by the state media. I suppose the Minister in charge of the Media has good reasons for incurring a large expense in scarce foreign funds for this tamasha in terms of the secret talks he has previously had in Singapore, etc., with the Tamil diaspora represented by the LTTE front organizations operating in western countries.
Yours sincerely,
Mahinda Gunasekera
Toronto, Canada
FOUND A VERY INTERESTING NEWS FROM FACE BOOK.
SL Media ministry Rupavakini TV & the progress of reconciliation efforts by the Sri Lankan government ???
According to CTC News : Rupavahini’s (Sri Lankan TV) Tamil service officials contacted CTC directly ?
WOW – I CANT BELIEVE THIS
or
Rev. FATHER Emmanuel contacted / SRI Lanka MEDIA MINSTER during his visit to CMB:-) ??? He visit CMB every day :-)
Source : F/B social media
15 hrs ·
Canadian Tamil Congress’s (CTC) Pongal festival & Rupavakini…
Dear CTC Members, Supporters and Friends,
Canadian Tamil Congress (CTC) will be proudly hosting its eleventh Annual Thai Pongal Gala Dinner on January 20th 2018.
There are some rumours being spread about the upcoming CTC dinner with the intent of tarnishing the organization. We would like to share with you, the facts in regard to a particular media from Sri Lanka requesting to cover our dinner event.
Rupavahini’s (Sri Lankan TV) Tamil service officials contacted CTC directly and expressed their interest in covering the CTC Pongal dinner. We had informed these Tamil staff at Rupavahini, we will permit them to cover the event the same way we do for all other medias. We will not sponsor any expenses for any of medias covering our dinner event.
CTC advocates for media rights and freedom globally, thus our decisions will always reflect these core democratic principles.
Wishing you a Very Happy, Healthy Holiday Season and a Prosperous New Year.
அன்பான கனடியத் தமிழர் பேரவை உறுப்பினர்களே, ஆதரவாளர்களே, நண்பர்களே,
கனடியத் தமிழர் பேரவை, தனது பதினோராவது பொங்கல் விழா இரா விருந்தை வருகின்ற சனவரி 20, 2018 அன்று பெருமையுடன் நடத்துகின்றது.
இத்தருணத்தில் கனடியத் தமிழர் பேரவையின் பெயருக்கு களங்கம் விளைவிக்கும் வகையில் அவதூறுச் செய்தி பரப்பப்பட்டுவருகின்றது. அதைப்பற்றிய உண்மைத் தகவலை உங்களுக்கு அறிவிக்கவேண்டிய கடப்பாடு எமக்குள்ளது.
கனடியத் தமிழர்களின் அருமை பெருமைகளை தமிழரல்லாதவர்களும், குறிப்பாக கனடிய அரசியல்வாதிகளும் அறியும் வகையில் பொங்கல் விழாவை கடந்த பத்தாண்டுகளாக கனடியத் தமிழர் பேரவை பெருமையுடன் கொண்டாடி வருகின்றது.
சிறிலங்காவில் இயங்கும் ரூபவாகினியின் தமிழ்ச்சேவை கனடியத் தமிழர் பேரவையின் பொங்கல் விழாவை ஒளிபரப்ப அனுமதி கோரியிருந்தது. நாம் ரூபவாகினித் தமிழ்ச் சேவைக்கு, ஏனைய ஊடகங்களுக்கு அளித்த அனுமதியை அவர்களுக்கும் வழங்கமுடியும் என்று கூறினோம். எமது இரா விருந்தை ஒளிபரப்புச் செய்ய எந்த ஊடகத்துக்கும் நாம் பொருளுதவி வழங்கவில்லை.
கனடியத் தமிழர் பேரவை உலகெங்கும் உள்ள ஊடகங்களின் உரிமைக்காகவும், சுதந்திரதிற்காகவும் குரல்கொடுத்து வருகின்றது. அந்தவகையில், எமது முடிவுகள் கனடியத் தமிழர் பேரவையின் மையக்கொள்கையை என்றும் பிரதிபலிக்கும்.
உங்கள் அனைவருக்கும் நலமும், மகிழ்ச்சியும் நிறைந்த விடுமுறைகால, புத்தாண்டு வாழ்த்துகள்.
| Virus-free. www.avg.com |
President Maithripala Sirisena said in Elpitiya that operation number two has begun on the bond commission report as he instructed the Attorney General and other stakeholders to proceed with legal action based on the report.
Speaker’s attention has been drawn to take necessary action against the Committee On Public Enterprises (COPE) members who had conversations with Perpetual Treasuries Limited (PTL) owner Arjun Aloysius during COPE proceedings into Central Bank Bond scam, Presidential Media Unit (PMD) said.
A statement issued by the PMD said it was revealed that certain members of the COPE had conversations with PTL owner Arjun Aloysius during the COPE investigations into Central Bank Bond scam and investigations connected to the Perpetual Treasuries Limited.
Meanwhile, the Bond Commission has recommended that Speaker’s attention should be drawn to impose a special code of ethics for the COPE members.
The group of leaders who came together to get Independence from the colonial powers could not stay united for five years. The destinies of the nation were submerged due to the leaders not sitting together and formulating a vision of national priorities and a practical strategy for the planned and harmonious development of the country and the unification of the people. Their personal shortcomings impinged on the Nation. The majority in the newly formed UNP Cabinet was self-satisfied. The favourable conditions of trade and the balance of payments added to their self-satisfaction and confidence. But, clannish sentiments, the lack of open discussion of national policies and the leaders not having their ear to the ground and lack of a vision contributed to produce unhealthy currents of intrigue at the top-most level.
While the leaders were cocooned in their world, we, as young people, were dreaming of the new horizons opening before us. To us, students in school, thoughts of ethnic and religious tensions and disharmony never entered our minds. We Sinhala, Tamil, Muslims, Malays, Burghers (of the Portuguese and Dutch descent) were studying together, even exchanging superficial innocuous mischief. We separated only in the first period of 45 minutes in the morning when Catholic students had their Religious Knowledge classes and non-Catholics had Moral Science.
Archbishop of Colombo Dr. Bonjean, O.M.I., having fought with the colonial powers, had obtained state assistance for schools of all religious denominations in the 1880s.
Free education became a lively issue in the 1940s. A system of scholarships for students of families of low incomes was suggested. It was also argued why non-payment of school fees should be extended to the well to do who could afford to pay. Though it was not then adopted, subsequent welfare policies, under Janasaviya, Samurdhi and food stamps schemes, adopted the concept of helping those earning less than a certain income. Anyhow, Dr. Kannangara introduced ‘free education’ as well as a system of Central Schools which functioned well.
Though ‘Swabasha’ was very much in the air, abandoning the English language was by some considered a disaster. I, as a very young teacher, teaching Trade and Commerce, Accounting and Baking, Shorthand and Typewriting, etc., wrote to the Evening Observer, in 1952, asking whether P. H. William de Silva, M.P. for Ambalangoda-Balapitiya, or Very Rev. Fr. Peter Pillai, O.M.I., was the more far seeing and perceptive about the usefulness of the English Language. Decades later an ex-Marxist, at Badulla, told me that the M.P., with his Marxist comrades, were more interested in bringing down others of an ‘upper’ class even more than raising up the downtrodden. Ideologies embraced and followed with passion tend to distort reasoning. English came to be made an exclusive language of the privileged and of the top politicians and their children.
Today, even to ‘hew wood and draw water’ for others in foreign lands our expatriate men and women need to a have a smattering of English, besides perhaps learning the language of the country in which they work. Later, Badi-udin Mohammed, in 1959, headed the state take-over of denominational schools while ensuring a proportion greater than they had for Muslims! The schools take-over was an enviously done state plunder of Catholic schools. Opportunism abandons justice and fairness and destroys social stability. It warped education, created the tuition industry that cost the parents more than fee-levying schools. Uneducated and idiotic politicians are silent about these issues. Today, Catholics have to beg for places in the schools they established.
CIRCUMSPECTION AND CLARITY
A rational head of an average household thinks of a 101 things when he gets his monthly salary. He tries to lay aside something to be used in a yet unforeseen emergency. He avoids burdens and debts he cannot carry. A responsible government of reputed individuals and various experts are indeed expected to be wise in overseeing matters that are complex because it has to see, besides the provision of food, clothing and shelter, many undisrupted services to all the people of the country. But due to confusion at the topmost level of government, generations of people have been subject to untold suffering caused by irresponsible burrowing and fiscal policies and the inability to fraternally discuss, and manage the limited resources conserved over the years and carefully work out plans to produce and increase wealth through labour and distribute as fairly as possible what is available.
Now, due to the efficiency of the minister of agriculture we need to import coconuts!
Because respect for human dignity, genuine democratic principles, circumspection in outlook, clarity of thinking, and honest intellectual discussion, debate and honest dedicated work have always eluded our leaders, problems have accumulated and generations of people have suffered. Even after Independence leaders chose to discuss important national issues with a small coterie of clannish top men captivated by emotional sentiments of the moment devoid of dispassionate discussions. They were blind to the long term consequences not disconnected also with possible actual earnings and contingent expenditures. Today this is complicated by leaders surrounding themselves with hapless henchmen and persons capable only of political intrigue, incompetent and inefficient at seeing to the well-being and cohesion of a national community.
ENSLAVED TO PARTIES
Changes of Government in Sri Lanka have taken place not with the objective of adopting better socio-economic and politico cultural policies presented to the people for their responsible choice after well-informed individual and group thinking, deliberation discussion. Rather, leaders were far more interested in winning people to their partisan point of view rather than educating them on national issues and weighing the merits of different options before the people. Changes of government have taken place not on the issues of long-term national policy which even then were placed before the people in a partisan and confused manner. Due to the feeling of being cheated and defrauded and the breaking of promises made in their solemn public declarations by the government in power, people just voted for the opposition.
In their swollen headedness and pride, political leaders never admitted to having made bad forecasts, estimates and assessments of affairs; they never admitted to have made bad judgements, of having made mistakes. They presented themselves as all-knowing supermen, so very confident of their abilities and capabilities when they were only men with bloated egos, selfish in the extreme with a good dose of stupidity and blindness to reality, far too proud to accept the advice of experts subordinate to them but far more qualified than they. Yet with all their very apparent intellectual and psychological limitations and with the pretensions of know-alls, politicos resorted to posing as indispensable and even benevolent personalities while not hiding their desire to have untrammeled power to rule autocratically until death. Unfortunately far too many people in Sri Lanka do not think for themselves but enslave their soul to political parties. 8th January 2015 was fortunately a rare moment when sanity prevailed.
POLARIZING PEOPLE
Those who ushered the changes in 1956 impoverished Sri Lanka by making everyone monolingual and attempted to make everyone culturally monolinear and limited rather than universal and open. Short-sighted leaders who imposed their populist but shallow political policies were not only abysmally ignorant of the intellectual capacity and common sense of the people whatever their knowledge or lack of knowledge of the peoples’ other capacities. Subsequent return to the status quo ante on several policy matters showed how unwise their knee-jerk decisions were. They were incapable of in any way assessing or ascertaining the disastrous repercussions that came along. The sad repercussions were not unexpected nor unforeseen by the wise though the scale of violence and bloodshed may not have been. When half-truths and prejudices are taken advantage of by political opportunists, national disasters are inevitable.
In our land we are familiar with many ordinary people who are able to use two of the three languages, Sinhala, Tamil and English, at least in speaking if not in reading and writing. It looks as if there are proportionately more Tamil people who speak also Sinhala than Sinhala people who speak Tamil. Political leaders were mere opportunists who did not think of what the people are capable of because of their own depravity and the low esteem they had of the people.
In 1956 the population of Sri Lanka was just over 9 million, an easily manageable political unit in a small country malleable to a humane and reconciled political journey and experience. Though S.W.R.D. Bandaranaike’s family background and intellectual training prepared him for a genuinely civilized and urbane political culture, his ambition for leadership twisted his psychological make-up and clouded his understanding, knowledge and judgement and even bent his reasoning to some extent. He became a political opportunist taking advantage of the feelings, not the refined but base feelings at that, of the Sangha-Veda-Guru-Govi-Kamkaru collectivity to come to power.
This was indeed a contradiction inconsistent in a man steeped in the humanities and democratic ideals about which he spoke eloquently at Oxford. It deprived him the courage he needed to stand by his convictions and produce a national vision for Sri Lanka consistent with what he said at the opening of Parliament in February 1948. He polarized the people denying them even a portion of the opportunities he had the privilege to enjoy. He lacked the moral strength to withstand the pressure that he himself had contributed to let loose. If he had the courage of his convictions the history of Sri Lanka would have taken a more homogenously progressive and benevolent path and saved her from the disastrous traumas that she went through with so many miserable consequences.
SELF-ABSORBED, FOSSILIZED
Many of today’s uneducated political scum who cannot sit in parliament and discuss, not only lack the capacity, they are completely unsuited to envision a national programme of unity and reconciliation so very necessary for any meaningful and overall development and progress of all the people of this Country. One begins to wonder who the ones who are really suited to sit there are. Their sense of human dignity, equality and respect due to people leave much to be desired, as they themselves lack self-respect and are devoid of decent bearing. They have made themselves privileged as well as the laughing stock and the object of contempt of the people. Many of these already privileged people of Sri Lanka wish to preserve a bloated sense of a false superiority. The supposed to be educated like the GMOA – another unintended fall-out from 1956 – are so blinded by the privileges that have accrued to them over the years, they take them for granted. They place themselves so high above the people by whose taxes they have been educated and yet to keep their privileges dare to blatantly ignore the people when they resort to their trade union actions.
These self-absorbed people are fossilized and have no sense of democracy or new thinking let alone a sense of learning from history. They have no positive contribution to make to bring about a new and vibrant state of affairs and raise the lives of the people and renew Sri Lanka. They only have the capacity to be political opportunists who fish in troubled waters. These opportunist uncouth roguish elements, whether they wear the clean national dress with their brand of ‘satakaya’ – when cunning politicians wear it, it is called the kapati suit – or the lounge suit with the shiny tie should be totally discarded forthwith. Pioneering thinkers who are true patriots should come forward to redeem Sri Lanka from the grip of the corrupt totalitarian mindset which has sunk deep root into its politicians who undermine the freedom of the people and harm their fraternal relationships.
“There is great disorder under heaven. The situation is excellent!”—Mao Zedong
“A Change is Gonna Come…”–Sam Cooke
We have just commenced Yahapalana Year 4. The third anniversary of Yahapalanaya is also the third anniversary of the defeat of the Rajapaksa regime. Both anniversaries coincide happily with the imminence of an island-wide election, the first since 2015. The Yahapalana government is also well past its halfway mark. The occasion therefore permits a reflection on the record of Yahapalanaya and the prospects ahead, especially in the light of the upcoming election.
The most damning indictments of Yahapalana were made by DS Senanayake’s great grandson Vasanatha Senanayake when he said that as our State Minister for Foreign Affairs it seems to him that Sri Lanka’s foreign policy is made elsewhere, by foreign countries. His whistle-blowing was preceded a few months ago by JR Jayewardene grandson Pradip’s denunciatory interviews in which he said that under its present leadership the UNP had abandoned the core values of his grandfather’s party, beginning with the strong role of the state in the economy.
The IMF has just called for ‘structural and state reform’ by Sri Lanka. The Indian Army chief declares that India must “not allow” Sri Lanka and other neighbors to “drift towards China”. The UNP plans to Indianize the Trincomalee-Mannar-Mattala triangle.
The good news though is that the hegemonic moment of the neoliberal globalist project of January 2015 has long evaporated, the hegemonic model sought to be erected has been blocked. The strategic counter offensive by the nationalist-populist forces has begun and will crest in 2020.
The road seems clear for a Mahinda Rajapaksa comeback. How so? The Supreme Court judgment suddenly shifted politics on its axis. The mere fact that the Presidential election is next year (2019) brings the prospect of the end of the Yahapalana model and policy regime closer.
So it’s all good, except that the Left is failing to fulfil its full potential. It can learn from experiences as diverse as Nepal and Britain. If the JVP and FSP can present a united front under a collective leadership, incorporating student, worker and peasant organizations, Lankan politics would have a strong Left Opposition and government-in-waiting. This is an indispensable positive factor in any scenario whatsoever.
The most recent Supreme Court ruling is not the end of the road for President Sirisena and perhaps not even for the Yahapalana experiment, but most certainly for the 2015-2017 Yahapalana model.
Either the present Yahapalana model ends after February 10th or the entire Yahapalana experiment and the Sirisena Presidency can end at the end of next year.
If President Sirisena wants to run for re-election he has to drop Ranil and Chandrika after February 10th and reposition himself in new centrist alliance with either (I) a reconfigured UNP, the SLFP and the JO, or (II) with the SLFP-SLPP/J and elements of the UNP.
If it is Scenario I, Mahinda Rajapaksa has to be accorded his rightful place as the Leader of the Opposition on Feb 11th and publicly pledged the Prime Ministership next year.
If it is Scenario II, Mahinda Rajapaksa has to be made Prime Minister after February 10th.
The road map draws itself clearly for the Mahinda-led JO/Pohottuwa:
Step 1. Win the Local Government elections or clearly dominate the Opposition space as the main anti-UNP force. Establish an alignment with the SLFP or not.
Step 2. Win the Provincial Council elections later this year or clearly dominate the Opposition space as the main anti-UNP force. Establish an alignment with the SLFP or not.
Step 3. Push in and outside of Parliament for the dissolution as per the 19th amendment when the four years are over, i.e. in August 2019, before the Presidential election.
Step 4. Amend the 19th amendment bringing it into line with international norms by retaining the two-term limit but establishing a bar only to a previous President contesting for a third consecutive term.
Step 5a. Endgame: Launch Mahinda as the Presidential candidate in November 2019.
Step 5b. Endgame: If Step 4 and Step 5a are not possible, launch ‘Operation Gota 2019’, with Mahinda as the main motor force and Prime Minister-designate with all the powers of the existing 19A.
The Establishment has to decide on whether it was a soft landing or a hard landing. As they say, we can do this the easy way or we can do this the hard way. The soft option or the hard option. There are two easy ways. One is a Sirisena-Mahinda Rajapaksa equation. The other is a Mahinda Rajapaksa restoration via the revision of 19A.
Then there is the hard way. Gota 2019: GR Next Year. It’s that close.
Top Joint Opposition (JO) spokesman Prof. G.L. Peiris yesterday welcomed the unanimous Supreme Court decision that President Maithripala Sirisena’s term of office was five years.
Prof. Peiris said so when The Island asked him at the JO regular media briefing at Punchi Borella whether it accepted that in spite of accusations Attorney General Jayantha Jayasuriya had made representations before the Supreme Court on behalf of President Sirisena in accordance with an understanding between the UNP and the SLFP, the apex court had done its duty.
Asked whether the JO was prepared to examine the SC decision against the backdrop of the removal of Chief Justice Dr. Shirani Bandaranayake, PC, by the Rajapaksa administration, Prof. Peiris said that the ruling couldn’t have been given at a better time. The former External Affairs Minister was flanked by members of parliament Bandula Gunawardena (Colombo District) and Sisira Jayakody (Gampaha District).
The matter was taken up before a five-judge-bench comprising Chief Justice Priyasath Dep, Justice Eva Wanasundara, Justice Buwaneka Aluvihare, Justice Sisira de Abrew and Justice K.T. Chitrasiri
Justice Chitrasiri was the Chairman of the three-member presidential commission of inquiry that probed treasury bond scams of 2015 and 2016 involving the Central Bank and Perpetual Treasuries Limited (PTL). The Island asked MP Gunawardena whether parliament, especially in the wake of the recent brawl in the well of the House, would draw inspiration from the Supreme Court action. The JO economic affairs spokesman said that they respected the Supreme Court and sought its intervention on many occasions.
Prof. Peiris said that he didn’t want to comment on the continuing crisis in the Indian Supreme Court or SC of any other country. The former Law Professor and Vice Chancellor of the Colombo University said so when The Island sought his views on four senior Supreme Court judges publicly expressing their grievances against the Chief Justice of India (CJI) Dipak Misra and how he was assigning cases.
Justice Jasti Chelameswar, Justice Ranjan Gogoi, Justice Madan Lokur and Justice Kurian Joseph went to the extent of calling a press conference.
Prof Peiris asserted that it would be the responsibility of the Supreme Court here to avert such damaging situations
Prof. Peiris underscored the importance of the unanimous Supreme Court verdict against the backdrop of the shocking stand taken by the Attorney General as well as the UNP’s silence on the matter.
Attorney General could have had advised President Sirisena against seeking clarification from the Supreme Court with regard to length of his term, Prof. Peiris said, adding that in accordance with section 49 (1) (b) of the 19th Amendment, the incumbent President couldn’t have under any circumstances enjoyed the original six year term.
The Attorney General’s role should be now examined as to how he had refrained from advising President Sirisena not to seek Supreme Court clarification on the basis of the clear cut 19 Amendment, Prof. Peiris said. Pointing out that National List MP Dr. Jayampathy Wickremaratne, who had played a pivotal role in fashioning 19 Amendment was on record as having denied six year presidential term in line with the new law, Prof. Peiris said that the UNP conveniently remained silent. “We moved the Supreme Court against President Sirisena’s move whereas the UNP shirked its responsibility,” Prof. Peiris said.
Prof. Peiris asserted that Dr. Wickremaratne on behalf of the UNP should explain their stand.
Prof. Peiris pointed out that several government members had declared that the Supreme Court would rule in favour of President Sirisena on the eve of historic ruling. Obviously, they had been so confident of receiving SC’s consent there hadn’t been any hesitation on their part making the desired result public, the veteran law academic and former External Affairs Minister noted.
Maithripala Sirisena in the run up to the 2015 Presidential Election and when he became the President of this country made several personal pledges (forget about the all violated political pledges) which included that he will abolish the executive presidency, he will not seek a second term, he will not stay at the President’s House and rule the country from his house in Polonnaruwa, he will not use helicopters for his travel, he will not crown any of hus family members and there will not be any room for nepotism and cronyism under his rule etc.
During the last three years he breached all these promises and after a statement made by the former President Mr. Mahinds Rajapaksa on 13th December saying that Sirisena can be the President of this country only for another 18 months he suddenly got awaken, disturbed and sought opinion of the Supreme Court whether his term of office is valid for five years or six years?
Unlike the ignoramus former Gramasevaka Sirisena, the genius Attorney at Law Mr. Mahinda Rajapaaksa in his December statement stated that nominations have now been accepted for the local government elections which were delayed for nearly three years by the government owing to the fears they had to go before the people. Althugh the local government election is not an election that would not changee the power in the country this election has a special significant importance as it is the first time the people of this country get the opportunity of exercising their franchise to register their opposition to thee present government. The last election held under the so-called yahapalana administrators was the 2015 general election. The President made the United Nationl Party to win that election by destabilizing the United People’s Freedom Alliance’s election campaign by taking several measures adverse to the UPFA which included issuing a few days before the election public statements detrimental to the UPFA and removing the General Secretries of both the Sri Lanka Freedom Party and the United People’s Freedom Alliance.
The message sent to the whole country by these actions was that since that the spoon is in the hand of the President it is the United National Party that will become victorious even if they lose from the election. It was how the current President of the Sri Lanka Freedom Party made the United National Party to win from that election. That is why the joint opposition is facing this local governement election from a different organization and from a different symbol. The objective of thee joint opposition is to provide a political alternative for the anti government forces. Although the SLFP group in the government makes various public criticisms of the UNP they remain together in the Cabinet and provide all assistance for sustaining this coalition government.
The SLFP members vote for the UNP budget every year. The whole country witnessed a few days ago that they voted for the 2018 UNP Budget. Both groups act in cooperation even in matters related to the sale of national resources. When the Minister of Ports and Shipping appointed by the UNP opposed the sale of Hambaantotaa Port he was replaced by the Minster from the SLFP and the unfavourable deal initiated by the UNP was concluded. The whole country witnessed recenty the Prime Minister dancing with the specimen of the U.S.Dolar 292 Million cheque received from the Chinese company and SLFP Ministers clapping their hands jubilantly.
The SLFP Group seems to be working in collaboration with the UNP to bring a new constitution to divide this country to nine units equal to independent states. The SLFP group in the government is only opposed to abolition of the executive presidency in the proposed constitution. The SLFP group in the government has also not expressed any objection to the ETCA agreement to be signed by the UNP with India. The whole country also witnessed that the SLFP group in the government collaborating with the UNP in the postponement of the local government aand provincial council elections. Has the SLFP President shown any objection when the war heroes who gave leadership to the war against terrorism were taken into custody colossally instead of cooperating in those acts?
Although the JVP is acting like an opposition party it is also a main partner in the yahaapalana combine. This government has received the cooperation of the JVP for all its anti democratic activities from the very beginning. The JVP leader was a member of the committee comprising yahapalna Ministers, politicians, and activitists of the NGOs which was steerig the FCID. They criticize the Joint Opposition drastically while criticizing the government only in a very mild anner. The JVP is also supportive of the new constitution to be brought in by the coalition government. It was the JVP that provided the 2/3 majority in the Parliament to facilitate the government not to hold the provincial council elections which was already due.
Prior to that, the JVP also supported the government completely against the constitution of the country and against the standing orders of the Parliament to change legislations related to the election of local government institutions. The JVP which under the leadership of Mr. Somawansa Amarasinghe supported me in the 2005 presidential election to prevent Ranil Wickremasinghe coming to power has now become a cat’s paw of the UNP under a different leadership. Therefore all the voters should understand that the joint opposition is the only anti-government force in the forthcoming local government elections.
The local government election that is to be hl on 10th February will be the beginning of a chain of elections until the next presidential election. The 19th amendment to the constitution changing the Article 30(2) of the constitution reduced the term of office of the President to 5 years. Article 49(1)(B) of the 19th amendment has made special provision for this change with retrospective effect applicable to the incumbent President as well. Therefore the term of office of the incumbent President ends on 9th January 2020. As per Article 31(3) of our constitution a presidential election should be held in a period which should be not more than two months and not less than one month of the end of the term of office of the incumbent President. As per these constitutional provisions the next presidential election should be held in between 9th November 2019 and 9th December 2019.
When taken into consideration with the provisions of the 1981 Presidential Election Act related to exercise of the franchise and calling for nominations the process of holding the next presidential election should start by October 2019. Accordingly there is only about 18 months between the start of the process of holding the next presidential election by October 2019 and holding the local government elections in February 2018.
Before holdig the presidential election the government will also have to hold the Provincial Ciuncil elections that have been postponed. The provincial councils of Sabaragamuwa, North Cetral and the East have already become dissolved. The North and Northwestern (Wayambaa) provincial councils will get automatically dissolved in next year. Since this government came to power with the majority votes received from the North and East the present rulers will not be able to face a presidential election without the provincial councils of those two areas.
Accordingly we can expect that after the local government elections in February 2018, provincial council elections will come within a few months, and a few months after that the presidential election will be held.
No elaboration is needed to tell about the misery this coalition government has caused to the country after they acquired power. All the voters should think well why they ask for the power in the villages after it has been proved well before our eyes that this UNP-SLFP coalition government cannot ruke the country. I appeal to all voters to exercise their franchise only on the basis of whether you favour or oppose this UNP-SLFP coalition government”.
The five memer bench of the Supreme Court headed by the Chief Justice Priyasath Dep has made a unanimous ruling that the President’s term was restricted only to five years. The bench comprised Chief Justice Priyasath Dep, Eva Wanasundare, Buvaneka Aluvihare, Sisira de Abrew and K. Chitrasiri.
In this saga it seems that Sirisena has swallowed the dead rope of the Attorney General his own appointee Jayanth Jayasuriya and sought the Supreme Court opinion in spite of the explanation given by Mr. Mahinda Rajapaksa which can be clearly understood even by a G.C.E.(O/L) student. The Attorney General had argued that the President had been elected on 9 January for a term of office of six years and that this power emanated from the sovereignty of the people and that the 19th Amendment to the Constitution was promulgated and made operative only after the incumbent President was elected for a term of six years by the people. He has assertee#d that there cannot be retrospective effect unless it has been specifically made retrospective.
As per Sunday Island political analysts the veteran journalist C.A.Chandraprema, who is also an Attorney at Law, the crux of the Attorney General’s argument was that the President had received a mandate from the people for a six-year term in office, and that any change in that would affect the sovereignty of the people. However, in his argument, the AG has ignored some important matters. Firstly, Section 49(1)(b) of the 19th Amendment states: “49. (1) For the avoidance of doubt it is hereby declared that,– (b) the persons holding office respectively, as the President and Prime Minister on the day preceding April 22, 2015 shall continue to hold such office after such date, subject to the provisions of the Constitution as amended by this Act.”
The AG has not explained what Section 49(1)(b) means if it is not to be taken as making the 19th Amendment applicable to president Maithripala Sirisena as well. Section 3 of the 19th Amendment had repealed the earlier Article 30(2) of the Constitution and substituted in its place the following “The President of the Republic shall be elected by the People and shall hold office for a term of five years.” If the AG argues that the shortening of the term of the President does not apply to the incumbent President despite the transitional provision in Section 49(1)(b) of the 19th Amendment, because Sirisena was elected and sworn in before the 19th Amendment was passed, that puts many other provisions in this Constitutional Amendment in jeopardy. For example, Chandraprema says the main limitation on presidential power imposed by the 19th Amendment is to make it mandatory for the president to appoint key officers of the state such as the Attorney General, Judges of the Supreme Court and the members of the independent commissions from among persons nominated by the Constitutional Council.
Raising the question does anything at all in 19A apply to Sirisena? Chandraprema explains if the 19th Amendment does not apply to President Sirisena because he was elected and sworn into office before the 19th Amendment was promulgated, then it follows that he is under no obligation to follow the procedure laid down in the 19th Amendment in making appointments to key state offices and independent commissions either. However the President has already made appointments based on recommendations made to him by the constitutional council in accordance with the provisions of the 19th Amendment. Examples of this would be the present IGP and the Attorney General himself. One assumes that the President made these appointments in accordance with the 19th Amendment because of the transitional provision in Section 49(1)(b) of the 19th Amendment which clearly states that the incumbent president will hold office after the promulgation of the 19th Amendment, only in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution as amended by the 19th Amendment.
He argues if the transitional provision in Section 49(1)(b) is deemed not to apply to President Sirisena, an anomalous situation will arise where the Constitutional Council and the independent commissions will be set up under the 19th Amendment but the President will be under no obligation to take any of the recommendations of the CC into account in making key state appointments because the president was elected and sworn in under the 18th Amendment and the 19th Amendment does not apply to him. If we take Section 49(1)(b) of the 19th Amendment which has been reproduced above, the phrases used “For the avoidance of doubt it is hereby declared”; “the persons holding office respectively, as the President and Prime Minister”, “shall continue to hold such office after such date, subject to the provisions of the Constitution as amended by this Act.” do not leave any doubt whatsoever as to the fact that the President and Prime Minister now hold office only in accordance with the Constitution as amended by the 19th Amendment.
Elaborating further he says that there is also another very important factor to be considered. After the August 2015 parliamentary election, a government was formed on the basis of the power sharing arrangement between the President and the Prime Minister laid down in the 19A. If the SC accepts the AG’s interpretation of the Constitution, it will also have the effect of throwing the entire basis of the yahapalana power sharing arrangement into jeopardy. For instance, the 19th Amendment states that in appointing cabinet ministers, the President shall, in consultation with the Prime Minister, where he considers such consultation to be necessary, determine the number of Ministers of the Cabinet of Ministers and the Ministries and the assignment of subjects and functions to such Ministers. Thus, when it comes to determining the subjects and the number of ministries, the President has the final say. But when it comes to appointing individuals MPs to fill those cabinet positions, the President has an obligation to act on the advice of the Prime Minister. If the provisions of the 19th Amendment do not apply to President Sirisena because he was elected President before the 19th Amendment was promulgated, he asks what happens to these power sharing provisions?
Sirisena in his lunacy must have written to the Supreme Court with the certinity of the verdict in his favour blinded by the assertionS made by his acolyte AG and with a hidden motive of making use of the verdict as a ploy to castigate the JO and take advantage for his fading SLFP in the elections. The verdict has also assured the colossal defeat for his fading SLFP and what he shoulD do now in the interest of the country is to dismiss the AG immediately as he could make a mockery of the interpretation of the Law in the future.
Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna Chairman Prof. G.L. Peiris, in an interview with the Dailymirror, spoke about the controversial bond transaction, its implications and the Supreme Court’s opinion on the President’s term. Following are excerpts of the interview done with Prof. Peiris.
QWhat is your position on the Supreme Court’s opinion that President Maithripala Sirisena’s term is five years?
This is typical of the quality of advice the President acts upon. The law is crystal clear. The President simply invited a stinging rebuke which no other President received. It is a magnificent victory not only for the Joint Opposition, but also for the integrity of our court system and vitality of democratic system.
There is no difference between the UNP Ministers and the SLFP Ministers. The SLFP Minister admitted that PTL contacted him over the phone. After that the Minister concerned met them. It is already a question of credibility and public confidence in COPE”
QIn the backdrop of the Presidential Commission that probed the Bond Scam presenting its report, how do you view it?
There is no doubt that the two bond scams have shaken up the public opinion in the country. It is by far the largest scam in the history of the country. The fallout from this will affect at least two generations. President Maithripala Sirisena, in his address to the country, raised expectations to a high level that action was to be taken. The damage has been done. The public are going to pay for it through higher interests rates, inflation and devaluation of the rupee.
The President appears to be taking an aggressive stance. It does not matter who is responsible. Whoever it is, the President said the person would be dealt with severely.
What are the minimum things the President has to do? An unavoidable step is to dismiss the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister must resign. Unless he resigns, he has to be removed from office. That is the clear duty of the President. None of the things the President spoke of can be done while the Prime Minister holds office. Simply to say that the report of 1400 pages will be sent to the Attorney General for necessary action means nothing.
QThe Government says the report is now with the Attorney General. It says it is up to the Attorney General. What is your response?
There is further investigation so the Attorney General can proceed with investigations. There is follow-up work to be done prior to the institution of criminal proceedings. There is no way that can be done objectively with the Prime Minister in charge. He has influenced the Attorney General by summoning him to his office. Then, the FCID has a lot of work to do. When it comes to the FCID, the Prime Minister is a critical player. He has been directing operations, giving directives. He is very much a central figure in all of this. As long as he is in office, no tangible action can be expected. There has been extensive debate in the country with regard to the two scams. There is one aspect that has not received the attention that it warrants. That is the orchestrated massive cover-up. The cover-up is a greater offence than the crime itself because it involves the cynical use of the state machinery. That cover-up is bound to continue so long as the Prime Minister continues to be in office.
QHow do you substantiate your allegations in this respect?
The public must remember the sequence of events. The storm broke because it was taken up by the primary dealers. The immediate response was to threaten the primary dealers. After that, the Prime Minister tried to whitewash the entire fraud by appointing three lawyers very close to him at Sirikotha. That was an obviously clumsy effort which attracted no credibility whatsoever. Then, the Joint Opposition became very active in this matter. It was taken up in Parliament. There was a no-confidence motion moved against Arjuna Mahendran. There was an adjournment motion. Then, the Prime Minister and the Leader of the House were flippant on this matter. They were frivolous. These efforts were held up to ridicule. D.E.W. Gunasekara was the then COPE Chairman. The Prime Minister said that Mr. Gunasekara violated the parliamentary convention and that he would be reported to the Speaker. The Prime Minister got the President to dissolve Parliament then. Had that report been submitted at that time, the second fraud which was twice as big as the first fraud would not have taken place. What did the Prime Minister do under the new Parliament?
He got his members in COPE to add footnotes to scuttle these operations. An attempt was made to go to the court and prevent a report from being compiled. He got a member of COPE to step down and be replaced by one of his men. He was then prevailed upon to write a book totally exonerating PTL. This was the extent of the attempted cover-up.
The COPE members made hundreds of telephone calls to Perpetual Treasuries Ltd (PTL). The public must not forget the amount of money PTL was planning to spend on the cover-up. They paid their CEO Kasun Palisena Rs.100 million as bonus for one year. Then, how much would they have paid to influential members of the Government to sweep this under the carpet?
What are the minimum things the President has to do? An unavoidable step is to dismiss the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister must resign. Unless he resigns, he has to be removed from office. That is the clear duty of the President”
The COPE is the custodian of public finances. COPE is investigating PTL. At that time, COPE members were having communication with the main suspect. Some people said they were collecting material to write a book. The book has been published beforehand. The Ministers, Deputy Ministers and State Ministers are in discussion with PTL while sitting as COPE members. There is no difference between the UNP Ministers and the SLFP Ministers. The SLFP Minister admitted that PTL contacted him over the phone. After that the Minister concerned met them. It is already a question of credibility and public confidence in COPE. It is similar to a trail judge meeting with the accused in private. COPE Chairman Sunil Handunnetti said he was unaware that any member met Arjun Aloysius.
If not for the sustained role of the Joint Opposition, these secret meetings would never have been exposed. The JO kept pursuing this all the time. This is the extent of the cover-up.
QBut, it is the President who appointed this Commission?
The President said he was wielding the sword. All these are his ministers. It is he who appointed them. It is he who has power to remove them.
The country is looking to the President to turn his words into action. Is that going to happen or not?
All of these are happening in a particular context. They criticize each other regarding the scam. Yet, there is collusion with each other. They criticize each other virulently. When it comes to the survival of each other, they are all together in order to reap the benefits collectively. Take for example the Finance Minister of the time! The Commission now says two things about him. One is that he must be prosecuted under the Penal Code for forgery for deliberately giving false evidence before the Commission . Then, he must be hauled up before the Bribery Commission. Currency notes of Sri Lanka bears the signatures of Ravi Karunanayake and Arjun Mahendran. Look at the insult to the nation!
Nevertheless, there is a compelling need to continue with this arrangement, to somehow tie it together to prevent it from disintegration. There is a reason for that. In terms of the 19th Amendment, if it is a one party Government, there is constitutional restriction on the number of ministers. That should be 30. You can add 40 odd deputy and state ministers. If they part company, many of them will lose company. In order to retain office and enjoy perks, this arrangement continues. It is simply to share the spoils.
If this is unacceptable to people, there is no point in supporting one party of the Government. Whether you support the blue elephant or the green elephant, they all are together. There is an interval of 13 months between the first scam and the second scam. President Sirisena dissolved Parliament to protect his Prime Minister.
As for the appointment of Ravi Karunanayake as the Finance Minister, it is a very bad appointment from the beginning. It is impossible to disentangle the UNP from the SLFP and palm blames solely and exclusively on the UNP. The public cannot vote for an integral part of the incumbent Government.
QBut the President made references to the Prime Minister. Then, the President said there had been the embezzlement of money from the COPE during the former rule which you also represented. What is your response?
The behaviour of the Presidential Secretariat has been totally inconsistent and confusing. That is a characteristic feature of this Government. They do not know what they are doing. They cannot make up their mind. The President made the statement. Then, a faithful translation of it was published. After that, they removed the paragraphs that were critical of the Prime Minister and the Finance Minister. Again, they put it back on the website with reference to the Prime Minister and omitting the part critical of the Prime Minister. All of that shows how much juggling goes on in regards to this matter. That is a far cry from openness and candor. It is a political game. Now the truth must be discovered. Offenders must be pursued.
The period between 2008 and 2014 was completely outside the terms of reference of the Commission. This is a red herring across the trail. The Prime Minister violated all parliamentary ethics by making a statement on the floor of Parliament when the Commission completed receiving evidence and began the task of preparing the report.
The President said he was wielding the sword. All these are his ministers. It is he who appointed them. It is he who has power to remove them. The country is looking to the President to turn his words into action. Is that going to happen or not? All of these are happening in a particular context. They criticize each other regarding the scam.
Yet, there is collusion with each other”
QAre you trying to say that the President tried to clear the UNP of all allegations, and instead placed the blame on PTL?
I do not think he has made up his mind on what he wants to do. He appears to be in a confused and disturbed state of mind. He wishes to harm the UNP politically. The UNP and his party are now contesting against each other. He has a vested interest in damaging the UNP. His original statement did that up to a point. But, at a certain point, he had to restrain himself. He has to work with the UNP. He is where he is today because of the UNP votes. That is a fundamental fact. In his mind, there are competing forces at work.
His principal aim is to blame the previous Government. There is already a report submitted by the Auditor General. If he wants to go into matters during the 2008/2014 period, he can do that.
QThere is a belief that the President acts in collusion with the Joint Opposition (JO) to bring the UNP to disrepute. What is your view?
The President isn’t cooperating with the JO at all. The JO only forced the President to appoint the Commission. Had it not been for the very vigorous campaign by the JO, it was impossible to believe that this commission would have been appointed.
The appointment of the Commission cannot be presented as the massive virtue. How can one claim to be the paragon of virtue when one has allowed all these frauds to take place during one’s term? One is trying to lock the door once the horse has fled.
Now, Arjuna Mahendran has been allowed to flee the country. He is allowed to come and leave at will.
We do not see this as an act of virtue. It is an act of necessity and expediency.
The failure on our part of the world in adopting commonsensical social reforms has much to do with the political hypocrisy. Competitive politics, of course, mandate that the politicians grasp the public mood, but in our societies, when politicians do that, they often tend to relate to the fringe; the homophobes, puritans, ethnic and religious bigots and when there is none of them, the bottom of the social gutter. (See the types of people who are generally mobilized for election campaigns).
When President Maithripala Sirisena spewed his puritanism before the villagers in Agalawatta, he did exactly the same. There, he told a rally that he had ordered the government to rescind a Gazette notification on revoking the prohibition of selling liquor to females and the time extensions on liquor shops. That is a cheap political gimmick that we are all too familiar with by hordes of successive political leaders. That is also retrograde garbage. Needless to say that this arcane law is discriminatory against women- that it was never implemented may suggest that an average Sri Lankan bartender could perhaps be more enlightened than the Head of State.
The ban on selling alcohol to women was first introduced in 1955, one in a long list of religiously and culturally tinted policy making buffoonery that the independent Sri Lankan leaders indulged in well until whatever prosperity we inherited at the independence slipped through our hand. Having come into effect during the wave of prohibitionist movement, it might even have reflected the public mood at the time, which was much less perfect and less sophisticated than today. But, why keep them now?
Why President Chandrika Kumaratunga, who albeit her other misdemeanours is a social liberal, could not annul this anti- women booze law could well be because no one really knew that it existed. Therefore, the original gazette notification on revoking the ban by Minister Samaraweera is more of a symbolic act. It is also an act of political courage to stand up for very basic liberal values that define any civilized society.
The President’s intervention to rescind the gazette notification would not turn bar tables on the women. However, if this leads to a new kind of vigilantism against women who happened to unwind in a pub or places that served alcohol ( which happened in Mumbai after a puritanical drive by Hindu nationalists), the president should take responsibility.
His remarks threaten to energize the same regressive elements and rhetoric that Sri Lanka should strive to suppress if it is to become a successful modern society. Empowering those fringes at the expense of the aspiring and hardworking Sri Lankans who tend to mind their own business was the curse that led to incremental ruin of this nation.
Sri Lanka should empower the aspiring middle class, who as they become prosperous, also become more socially, economically and politically liberal and accommodating
Sri Lanka should empower the aspiring middle class, who as they become prosperous, also become more socially, economically and politically liberal and accommodating. Government policies should also aim to enable lesser privileged sections, who are also economically and socially less productive to graduate into upper social, economic and cultural ladder. That is not possible if the state policies are overly dictated by political short-termism to celebrate the social and cultural ignorance as bliss.
President Sirisena has been more accommodating towards political aspirations of Tamils. Though whether that political accommodation would in the long run doze the destructive attributes of Tamil exceptionalism- which itself is tribal- is to be seen, the President’s commitment to ethnic pluralism is commendable. However, sadly though, at the same time he had stood on the path of equally important social reforms, which any forward looking government should undertake.
The President may genuinely believe in his social conservatism of the by-gone era. He has all the right to his opinion, as much as women have their right to booze, – and gays’ and lesbians’ to their sexual identity
Earlier, he forced the government to rescind the plans to decriminalize homosexuality. The original government proposal was to revoke the Article 365A of the Penal Code, an arcane Victorian law inherited from the British. Like the ban on serving booze to women, Article 365 A has not been enforced for decades, yet it remains in the book. Expunging these laws signals a state commitment to shed the old baggage and journey towards more accommodating and pluralistic society.
The President may genuinely believe in his social conservatism of the by-gone era. He has all the right to his opinion, as much as women have their right to booze, – and gays’ and lesbians’ to their sexual identity.
But, when he acts upon his dogmatism, he is doing a great disservice to this country and future generations. ( Even the youthful crown prince of Saudi Arabia wants his country to shed its clock of religious ultra -conservatism). If he really cares for the country ( which I believe he does) he should get the government to invest in our education system, modernize our school syllabuses and teach more science, Maths and English to our kids. Set up a presidential committee, hire proven experts internationally, borrow successful practices from East Asian meritocracies, and make the government fund for a concerted progamme of education reforms.
In the meantime, let the women drink their drink, and gays and lesbians mind their own business.
January 15, 2018, 8:56 pm
The Supreme Court (SC) has decided that the length of President Maithripala Sirisena’s term is five years. Why the President ever sought an opinion from the apex court on that non-issue is baffling. Any layman with a nodding acquaintance with the 19-A would have told him he had lost one year of his term and he had to come to terms with that fact. President Sirisena’s right to consult the SC cannot be questioned, but it certainly was a mistake for him to be seen to be desirous of holding office for six years in spite of his boastful claim that he had voluntarily forgone one year of his term. After all, he said no other head of state in the world had done so. No longer can he claim the credit for shortening his term. His critics can now argue that he made a desperate effort to serve a six-year term, but the SC put paid to it.
It was not out of any love for Sirisena that the masterminds of the 2015 regime change handpicked him as the common presidential candidate. Their plan was to weaken the Rajapaksa government from within by engineering crossovers and carry out a frontal attack from without. After luring Sirisena into defecting together with some other prominent SLFPers, they used him as a battering ram against that administration. Their battle plan was clear; they wanted him to lie low after being elected, letting the UNP run the show and bow out at the end of his first term. They, however, took precautions and put him in a constitutional straitjacket aka the 19th Amendment, which restricted his powers and reduced his term by one year. Their strategy reached fruition, but they made two big miscalculations. They underestimated Sirisena’s political acumen and ambitions and never expected the defeated President Mahinda Rajapaksa to attempt a Revenant-style comeback. They apparently thought Sirisena would resign himself to being a single-term, lame-duck President and Rajapaksa would retire.
The UNP must be jubilant. It is obviously smarting from the presidential commission investigation into the bond scams and the disclosure of some of the commission’s findings and recommendations, especially in the run-up to a crucial election. It must be rejoicing at the SC decision.
President Sirisena has crossed the Rubicon in battling against his arch-enemies who are led by his former boss and there is no way he can give up power soon. On the one hand, he has to retain his hold on the SLFP vis-à-vis determined efforts being made by his rivals to grab its leadership and, on the other, he has to prevent the UNP from undermining his position in the government. Worse, he has to steer the SLFP to victory at the forthcoming local government polls if he is to hold the party dissidents at bay. An electoral debacle will render him more vulnerable on both fronts. How he will overcome this problem remains to be seen.
It is being argued in some quarters that the only way President Sirisena can wriggle out of this situation is to take on both SLFP dissidents and the UNP simultaneously and seek a second term. But, it is a tall order. He is now left with only part of the SLFP vote bank. There is no guarantee that the UNP will throw in its lot with him at the next presidential election if it succeeds in outperforming both the SLFP and the Joint Opposition (JO) at the local government polls next month. It is capable of forming a government on its own by engineering a few defections from the UPFA in such an eventuality.
President Sirisena, however, hasn’t yet run out of ammunition. The bond commission probe report has sent the UNP reeling and he is apparently trying to employ the same method to tame the JO. He has declared that he will have alleged frauds involving SriLankan and Mihin Air probed by a presidential commission of inquiry. An all-out anti-corruption drive may help him shore up public support and gain political traction.
Nothing is so certain as the unexpected in politics. It ain’t over until the fat lady sings, as the saying goes. ‘May you live in interesting times!’ is believed to be a Chinese curse. We are already living in interesting times.
MAHINDA KARUNARATNE |
It was a day like today, 18th Jan. 1897 in India, 120 years ago a place called PIPRAWA a city 100 miles South of Lumbini.
A British planter and armature Archeologist by the name William Peppe took the extra length to excavate ruins that was believed to have been the cremation site of Buddha besides a Stupa that was under sand and found deep underground the casket containing Buddha’s relics in well preserved and carved containers. The relics were carefully deposited by Emperor Asoka for the future and for an on behalf of Buddhists.
If not for William Peppe, we would have never been known about Buddha’s relics and the associated history that proved Buddha’s existence. On the other hand it would have been a co-incidence and a miracle itself.
Our credit should go to British despite their colonial rule that had various other impacts on us, but for finding and preserving the buried history both in India and Ceylon.
The Buddhism was destroyed after the demise of Buddha first by Hindus who started to vandalize, ruin and destroy all monuments in a frenzy lead by jealous Hindu priests that was then as continued and concluded by Muslims who even burnt and destroyed to the ground all Buddhist structures and monuments including rock edifices and written cannons that were proofs and legends of Buddhist, would have been a by gone history with no trace if not the British enthusiasts and archeologists who unearthed and found fact of the history and helped establish the Buddhist history and monuments what we witness and deserve now to venerate with respect and pride. Never to forget the Muslims are the biggest and arch enemy of Buddhism during which rule of the Mogul empire about 800 years they did massive damage to Buddhism and Buddhist history in India as well as was erased in Afghanistan, Malaya, Indonesia etc.
You are afforded to watch the full episode from how it was found in the attached Video courtesy to YouTube and National Geographic. Our heartfelt thanks to National Geographic’s for narrating the episode as it were happened 120 years ago giving the spectator on hand experience.
Let us wish William Peppe and all other British’s alike of that time, May they attain Nibbana for this great meritorious deed done on behalf of entire mankind.
රාත්රි 10.00 තෙක් මත්පැන් අලෙවිසැල් විවෘතව තැබීම හා කාන්තාවන්ට ඒවායේ රැුකියා කිරීමට, මත්පැන් මිලදී ගැනීමට ගැසට් නිවේදන නිකුත් කිරීම සම්බන්ධයෙන්
පිටකොන්දක් ඇතිනම් මෙය කර පෙන්වනු..- මෛත්රිගෙන් මහින්දට විවෘත අභියෝගයක්..
පිටකොන්දක් ඇතිනම් ශ්රී ලංකා නිදහස් පක්ෂයෙන් ඉල්ලා අස්වී ශ්රි ලංකා පොදුජන පෙරමුණට බැදෙන ලෙස ජනාධිපති මෛත්රිපාල සිරිසේන මහතා අභියෝග කරයි.
අපේ උන් අලි හොරු.. ආව ගමන් කෙලගෙන කෙලගෙන ගියා..- රන්ජන් ජනපති සමග එක් වෙයි..[Video]
අපේ එවුනුත් ලේසි නෑ. අවුරුදු විස්සක් හිටියේ විපක්ෂයෙනෙ. ඒ හන්ද කෙලගෙන කෙලගෙන ගියා. ඒක තමයි ඇත්ත කතාව. මම එක්සත් ජාතික පක්ෂයේ
ගහන්න පුළුවන් අන්තිම මඩ බෝලෙත් ගැහුව අපට බැදුම්කර මගුලක් ගෙනැල්ල. මටත් මඩ ගැහුව.. පොත් ලිවුව කියල මඩ ගැහුව. අපි චණ්ඩිකම්
උතුරු දුම්රිය යාපනයේදී ගිනි ගනී.. මගීන් පැන දුවයි..[Photo]
කොළඹ සිට යාපනය කන්කසන්තුරෙයි දක්වා ධාවනය වෙමින් තිබූ අති සුඛෝපභෝගී දුම්රිය යාපනය චාවකච්චෙරි ප්රදේශයේදී හදිසියේම ගින්නක් හටගෙන
ඡන්ද රැස්වීමක LTTE ගීත ගයති..
විමුක්ති කොටි වැනි වදන් පළාත් පාලන මැතිවරණයේදී යොදා නොගන්නා ලෙස මැතිවරණ කොමසාරිස්වරයා උපදෙස් දී තිබියදී යාපනයේ එවැනි තත්ත්වයක් ඇති වීම
ජනපති මෛත්රිගේ යුගය වාසනාවන්ත යුගයක්.. ආණ්ඩුව වෙනස් කිරීම ඉබ්බාගෙන් පිහාටු ගන්නවා වගේ..
මහින්ද රාජපක්ෂගෙන් ආප්ප කා ඔහුට කෙලියා වගේ අපේ පිහිටෙන් ජනාධිපති වී අපට කෙලින්නට හිතාගෙන ඉන්නා බව එජාප පාර්ලිමේන්තු මන්ත්රී එස්.එම්. මරික්කාර්
අවුරුදු 70 ක් දේශපාලකයෝ රට කෑව නිසා ජනතාවට දේශපාලනය තිත්ත වුණා – අනුර කුමාර දිසානායක
දූෂිත දේශපාලකයන් ඉන්න තුරු රට ගොඩගන්න එක ලේසි නෑ – ජනාධිපති මෛත්රිපාල සිරිසේන දඹුල්ලේදී කියයි
මේක මගේ බලකොටුවයි කොළඹ පදික වෙළෙඳුන්ට ෆයිසර්ගෙන් කොළඑළියක් faizer
කොළඹ පිටකොටුවේ පදික වෙළෙඳුන් එළවීමට කිසිවකුටත් තමා ඉඩ දෙන්නේ නැතැයි පළාත් සභා හා පළාත් පාලන ඇමැති ෆයිසර් මුස්තාපා මහතා පෙරේදා (13 දා) පැවැසීය. පදික වෙළෙඳුන්ගේ ගැටලු නිරාකරණය කිරීමට තමන්…
අපේ රටේ තියෙනවා මැතිවරණ ගණනාවක්. පළාත් පාලන මැතිවරණය තියෙනවා. පළාත් සභා මැතිවරණය තිබෙනවා. පාර්ලිමේන්තු මැතිවරණය තියෙනවා.
එළ හරකයි මී හරකයි වගේ හවුල් ආණ්ඩුව තවත් බෑ.. ඡන්දෙන් පසු එජාප ආණ්ඩුවක් නැතිනම් එජාපය විපක්ෂයට..
ලබන 10 වැනිදා පැවැත්වෙන පළාත් පාලන මැතිවරණය අවසන් වූ පසු තව දුරටත් ශ්රීලනිපය හා හවුල් ආණ්ඩුව කිසිසේත්ම පවත්වාගෙන යා යුතු නැති බව එක්සත් ජාතික
මං තාමත් නල්ලතන්නියේ බලාගෙන ඉන්නවා.. මහින්දලා වැදලා බහිනකොට එකට බහිනවා..
ශ්රීලනිපයෙන් කැඩි ගිය සියළු දෙනා එක්ක එකට සිරිපාදේ නගින්න තමන් තවමත් නල්ලතන්නියේ බලා සිටින බව ශ්රීලනිප මාධ්ය ප්රකාශක, රාජ්ය ඇමති
මහින්ද රාජපක්ෂගෙන් ආප්ප කා ඔහුට කෙලියා වගේ අපේ පිහිටෙන් ජනාධිපති වී අපට කෙලින්නට හිතාගෙන ඉන්නා බව එජාප පාර්ලිමේන්තු මන්ත්රී එස්.එම්. මරික්කාර්
එජාපයේ ඉරණම ජනාධිපති අතේ.. ජනාධිපතිගේ ඉරණම එජාපය අතේ…
මොන විහිලුද මේවා? මේ වගේ විහිලු ආණ්ඩු ලෝකයේ කොහේවත් නැතුව ඇති. මේ විහිලුවට ඉඩ දුන්නා දැන් හොඳටම ඇති. රටේ අනාගතය විනාශ කරමින් නටන
බැදුම්කර වංචාවට අගමැති ඉල්ලා අස්විය යුතුයි.. නැතොත් ජනාධිපති විසින් ධුරයෙන් නෙරපිය යුතුයි..
ජනාධිපති කොමිෂන් වාර්තාව එළිදකින්නට පෙර මහබැංකු අධිපතිවරයා ලෙස අග්රාමාත්ය වරයාගේ සමීප මිත්රයෙකු වන සිංගප්පුරු පුරවැසි අර්ජුන මහේන්ද්රන් පත්
පොලිස් මත්ද්රව්ය නාශක කාර්යාංශය අත්අඩංගුවට ගත් කොකේන් කිලෝග්රෑම් 928 ක් කටුනායක ආයෝජන ප්රවර්ධන කලාපයේ පිහිටුවා ඇති පරිශ්රයක දී විනාශ කිරීම ආරම්භ කර තිබේ. එම අවස්ථාව නිරීක්ෂණය කිරීම සඳහා ජනාධිපති මෛත්රිපාල සිරිසේන ද පැමිණ සිටින අතර පොලීසිය පැවසුවේ, මෙම කොකේන් තොගය දියර බවට පත්කර අනතුරුව මුළුමනින්ම දහනය කිරීමට පියවර ගෙන ඇති බවයි.2016 වසරේ දෙසැම්බර් 09 වන දින පොලිස් මත්ද්රව්ය නාශක කාර්යාංශය විසින් මෙම කොකේන් තොගය අත් අඩංගුවට ගනු ලැබුවේ කොළඹ වරායට පැමිණි නෞකාවක තිබියදී යි.
Almost a ton of Cocaine is being destroyed in Sri Lanka……..
I have a wild idea ! Sri Lanka has a huge problems of filling the short fall in the budget expenditure running to billions of rupees .Cocaine can be used to make medicines to cure various deceases and generate income to fill our budget gap ?
See below
As cocaine became a popular ingredient in alcoholic drinks, scientists and pharmaceutical companies were investigating possible medical uses for this drug.
German pharmaceutical company Merck began producing very small amounts of the drug in the early 1860s. Total output through the late 1870s was only about 50 grams a year. In the US, pharmaceutical company Parke Davis also began producing the drug.
Then in the 1880s, medical uses of the drug began to be revealed. For example, Merck’s promotional materials touted the drug as a remedy for the morphine addiction suffered by many former Civil War soldiers.
One of the early enthusiasts for the drug was Sigmund Freud who was eager to gain fame and wealth so he could marry. He was interested in the opportunity offered by this new drug and began to experiment on himself and friends. He wrote to his fiancee, I take very small doses of it regularly against depression and against indigestion and with the most brilliant of success.” Dr. Freud used this drug on himself and his associates for the next decade and wrote his glowing praise for cocaine in the 70-page report Uber Cocaine.”
In 1884, cocaine’s value in performing eye surgery were discovered by Freud’s friend Dr. Koller. The drug not only numbed the eye but restricted bleeding because it tightened up blood vessels. This development was another step forward in the popularity of cocaine in medical use.
Production of cocaine began to increase greatly in response to increased medical use. In 1883, Merck produced only four-tenths of a kilo of the drug. By 1885, their production had rocketed to 83,343 kg. This increase began just two months after Dr. Koller’s report on cocaine for eye surgery was published.
As further applications (valid or not) were discovered, the popularity of this drug grew rapidly. Along with pharmaceutical applications, over the counter preparations also began to include cocaine.
Patent medications containing cocaine:
Cocaine toothache drops, Instantaneous Cure!”
Metcalf’s Coca Wine for fatigue of mind or body”
Voice Tabloids” with cocaine, chlorate of potash and borax
Chemists at Parke Davis developed a refinement system that called for partial refinement on site in South America, with the remaining refining taking place at the pharmaceutical company. This discovery made the cocaine industry much more viable, as potency would not be lost while shipping the coca leaves from South America to the US or Europe.
In 1887, the US Surgeon General recommended that cocaine be used to treat depression, claiming that there was no such thing as cocaine addiction.
In one incident after another, cocaine’s addictiveness and physical damage began to show up. Young New York surgeon William Halsted began to investigate its use in surgical procedures. He tested the drug by injecting it into his own arms and legs and the limbs of friends and students, using the hypodermic needle invented in the mid-1800s. Halsted quickly became a non-functional addict and could not practice medicine any longer.
Freud’s experimentation had its hazards, too. One associate, Ernst von Fleischl-Marxzow, had been dealing with a hand injury with large doses of morphine. Dr. Freud’s administration of cocaine as a solution for the man’s morphine addiction turned him into an addled, morphine-cocaine addict who died seven years later. He was the first person known to suffer the paranoia and delusions of bugs crawling under the skin that are common to heavy cocaine addicts.
In 1895, Freud was still abusing cocaine. While under the influence, he and a colleague performed surgery on Emma Eckstein. The surgery went bad, in part because of the Freud’s cocaine abuse. While Emma survived, this nearly-fatal error seems to have haunted Freud and led him eventually to give the drug up, despite all its apparent benefits. But by the time Freud gave up the drug, its use had already spread far and wide.
It would be another 17 years before the danger of the drug was recognized sufficiently to make it a controlled substance.
In 1914, the Harrison Narcotics Act rounded up a list of drugs that had been used in patent medicines or pharmaceutical compounds and put them under federal control. Cocaine was on the list. This change meant that those who were now addicted to cocaine could be arrested if they possessed the drug.
Despite reports of some increased use during Prohibition, cocaine was not a newsworthy topic until the second half of the Twentieth Century when cocaine began pouring into the US from South America.
For the ham-fisted pharmaceutical industry of the time, cocaine became a super product. Here was an ancient substance that could change the world, a ‘miracle cure’ prescribed for, intriguingly enough drug addiction, alcoholism, depression and fatigue.
Endless cocaine syrups, pastilles, wines, tonics, and elixirs appeared, alongside toothache drops, hemorrhoid creams, balms, ointments and cordials. These products usually contained huge amounts of cocaine. Rayno’s Hay Fever remedy, for example, was basically a pure cocaine solution. The bottle recommended that you take it “two to ten times a day.”
By 1900, cocaine was in the top five pharmaceutical products in the US and was selling for around $2.50 per gram.
I SUGGEST THE GOVERNMENT TO INVITE LARGE PHARMACEUTICAL COMPANIES TO OPEN UP A RESEARCH LABORATORY IN ORDER TO CARRY OUT STUDIES TO PUT THE CONFISCATED COCAINE FOR A USEFUL PURPOSE FOR THE MANKIND RATHER THAN DETROYING ?
Few years back ,government destroyed a much expensive load of ivory in Galle face ,and yet we have not been able to curtail ivory trade and culling elephants in Sri Lanka .
All these natural products can be used as a commodity to develop various medicines
Or
These publicity stunt could have been more meaningful if the importer of the cocaine is also set fire or culled with the consignment which is destroyed !!
Dr Saarth Obeysekera
The response from Sri Lanka ‘s top guardians of the good governance, the President, the Prime Minister and the Speaker to the report of the much talked about Bond Commission were dull witted and attempts to put up a smoke screen.
The President failed in his duty towards the public who were awaiting for the tabling of the bond commission report in the country’s legislative assembly when he opted not to do so. He owed the tabling of the report to the public who were blatantly robbed by a team of white collar thieves led by a foreigner and ably guided by a well identified ‘unseen hand’. They wished that the story of the great bank robbery will be discussed and analysed by the people’s representatives taking the issue to the next phase of investigations. Their hopes were dashed by the President’s inaction.
The Prime Minister in his normal style was off the hooks. He purposely misdirected the debate by attempting to kick up a dust when he diluted the issue with extraneous facts and thus let down the public who were keen to find out how he would defend himself of his actions and inactions relating to the bond scam. He simply acted selfishly in an uncouth manner by wrecking the hopes of the public to hear his side of the story of the colossal, systematic swindling of Central Bank.
The Speaker who has the ultimate responsibility in the proper conduct of the proceeding in the Parliament too failed miserably In his duty to the public by not requesting a copy of the bond commission report to be tabled in the Parliament and allowing the House to run amok and choosing to work as a dead horse, He was a willing supervisor of scandalous behaviour of the MPs and he was merely a participant in a prior edited political drams.
The issue of searching for the bond robbers, recovering the billions lost and punishing those responsible are critical to the public and when they find the top guardians of governance fail miserably to uphold their just expectations, they are bound to react as hard as nails.
RANJITH SOYSA
වත්මන් ජනාධිපති මෛත්රීපාල සිරිසේන මහතා 2015 ජනවාරි මස 08 දින පැවති ජනාධිපතිවරණයෙන් ජයගෙන ශ්රේෂ්ඨාධිකරණ විනිසුරුව සිටි කේ. ශ්රීපවන් මහතා ඉදිරියේ 2015 ජනවාරි 09 දින සවස් යාමයේ නිදහස් චතුරශ්රයේ දී ශ්රී ලංකා ප්රජාතාන්ත්රික සමාජවාදී ජනරජයේ ජනාධිපතිවරයා ලෙස දිව්රුම් දෙන ලදී.
ජනාධිපතිවරයා ලෙස දිව්රුම් දුන් අවස්ථාවේ සිට ජනාධිපති මෛත්රීපාල සිරිසේන මහතා විසින් ආණ්ඩුක්රම ව්යවස්ථාව උල්ලංඝණය කළ අවස්ථා 1 හෝ 2ක් නොව බොහොමයකි. ඒ සියලු අවස්ථාවන් වලදී ශ්රී ලංකා නීතීඥ සංගමය කිසිත් සිදු නොවුණා ලෙස සිය කටයුතු කරගෙන යාම ජනතාව උපේක්ෂාවෙන් බලා සිටියේ ය.
2015 ජනවාරි 09 දින ජනාධිපතිවරයා ලෙස දිව්රුම් දී ඉතා සුළු මොහොතකින් එවකටත් පාර්ලිමේන්තුවේ 2/3ක මන්ත්රීවරුන්ගේ කැමැත්තෙන් අගමැතිව සිටි දි.මු. ජයරත්න අගමැති ධුරයෙන් ඉවත් කිරීමක් හෝ නොකර පාර්ලිමේන්තු මන්ත්රීවරුන් 42ක ගේ කැමැත්ත තිබූ රනිල් වික්රමසිංහ මහතා අගමැති ලෙස පත් කර ගත්තේ ය.
ඒ ආකාරයට තමන්ට අභිමත සහ අධිපති පාලන ක්රමයක් ආරම්භ කළ ජනාධිපතිවරයා එවකටත් වලංගුව ක්රියාත්මකව තිබූ 18 වැනි ආණ්ඩුක්රම ව්යවස්ථා සංශෝධනයෙන් බලාත්මකව වූ 41අ.(1) ව්යවස්ථාව අනුව පිහිටුවා තිබූ “පාර්ලිමේන්තු සභාවේ” නිරීක්ෂණ ලබා ගැනීමෙන් පසු පත් කර සිටි අගවිනිසුරු මොහාන් පීරීස් මහතා අගවිනිසුරු ධුරයෙන් පමණක් නොව ශ්රේෂ්ඨාධිකරණ විනිසුරු ධුරයෙන්ද නෙරපා හරිනු ලැබීය. ඉන්පසු “පාර්ලිමේන්තු සභාවේ” නිරීක්ෂණ ලබා ගැනීමක් පවා සිදු නොකර 2015 ජනවාරි 09 දින සවස් යාමයේ නිදහස් චතුරශ්රයේ දී ශ්රී ලංකා ප්රජාතාන්ත්රික සමාජවාදී ජනරජයේ ජනාධිපතිවරයා ලෙස දිව්රුම් ලබා ගත් කේ. ශ්රී පවන් මහතාව අගවිනිසුරු ලෙස 2015 ජනවාරි 30 දින 44වන අගවිනිසුරු ලෙස තමන් ඉදිරියේ දිව්රුම් දීමට සළස්වන ලදී.
ඒ ආකාරයට සිය පාලනය ආරම්භ කළ ජනාධිපතිවරයා 19 වැනි ආණ්ඩුක්රම ව්යවස්ථා සංශෝධනයෙන් අමාත්යවරු සංඛ්යාව 30කට සහ නියෝජ්ය අමාත්යවරු සංඛ්යාව 40කට සීමා කිරීමට හදුන්වාදුන් විධිවිධානය මගහැර යාම සදහා එනම් ආණ්ඩුක්රම ව්යවස්ථාවේ 46 ව්යවස්ථාවේ දැක්වෙන “ජාතික ආණ්ඩුව” නම් ව්යුහය තනා ගත්තේ පාර්ලිමේන්තුවේ කථානායකවරයා හරහා ආණ්ඩුක්රම ව්යවස්ථාව අර්ථනිරූපණය කර ගනිමින් ය. ආණ්ඩුක්රම ව්යවස්ථාවේ 125 ව්යවස්ථාව අනුව ආණ්ඩුක්රම ව්යවස්ථාව අර්ථනිරූපණය කිරීමේ තනි සහ අනන්ය අධිකරණ බලය ඇත්තේ ශ්රේෂ්ඨාධිකරණයට මිස කථානායකවරයාට නොවේ.
ආණ්ඩුක්රම ව්යවස්ථාවේ 125 ව්යවස්ථාව මෙසේ ය…..*
(2) යොමු කරනු ලැබූ දින සිට මාස දෙකක් ඇතුළත ශ්රේෂ්ඨාධිකරණයවිසින් එම ප්රශ්නය තීරණය කොට අවස්ථානුකූලව අවශ්ය විය හැකි යම් ආනුෂංගික ආඥා ද කළ යුත්තේ ය.*
19 වැනි ආණ්ඩුක්රම ව්යවස්ථා සංශෝධනයෙන් අමාත්යවරු සංඛ්යාව 30කට සහ නියෝජ්ය අමාත්යවරු සංඛ්යාව 40කට සීමා කිරීමට හදුන්වාදුන් විධිවිධානය මගහැර යාම සදහා ආණ්ඩුක්රම ව්යවස්ථාවේ 46.5 ව්යවස්ථාවේ දැක්වෙන “ජාතික ආණ්ඩුව” යන්න කථානායකවරයා මගින් අර්ථනිරූපණය කරගෙන් අමාත්යවරු සහ නියෝජ්ය අමාත්යවරු සංඛ්යාව සීමාකරන විධිවිධානය මගහැර ගියේ ය.
එකී ජාතික ආණ්ඩුව පිහිටුවා දින කීපයක් ඇතුළත එහි නීතිවිරෝධී ක්රියාව සම්බන්ධව මෙම ලිපියේ කර්තෘ විසින් ශ්රේෂ්ඨාධිකරණයේ නඩු පවරා සහන අයද සිටියද, පාර්ලිමේන්තු බලතල හා වරප්රසාද වලට මුවා වී ජනාධිපතිවරයා විසින් අමාත්යවරු සහ නියෝජ්ය අමාත්යවරු පත්කර ගෙන තීබීමෙන් එකී නඩු සාර්ථක කර ගැනීමට නොහැකි විය.
ආණ්ඩුක්රම ව්යවස්ථාවේ 46.5 ව්යවස්ථාවේ දැක්වෙන “ජාතික ආණ්ඩුව” යන්න කථානායකවරයා මගින් අර්ථනිරූපණය කර ගන්නවා වෙනුවට ආණ්ඩුක්රම ව්යවස්ථාවේ 129.1 ව්යවස්ථාව අනුව “ජාතික ආණ්ඩුව” යන්න කුමක්ද යන්න පිළිබද අර්ථනිරූපණයකට ශ්රේෂ්ඨාධිකරණයට යාම ඒ අවස්ථාවේ ජනාධිපතිවරයා ක්රියා කරනු නො ලැබීය.
අමාත්යවරු සංඛ්යාව 30කට සහ නියෝජ්ය අමාත්යවරු සංඛ්යාව 40කට සීමා කිරීමට ඇති විධිවිධානය මගහැරයාමට අවශ්යව තිබූ හෙයින්”ජාතික ආණ්ඩුව” යන්න සම්බන්ධව ආණ්ඩුක්රම ව්යවස්ථාවේ 129.1 ව්යවස්ථාව අනුව අර්ථනිරූපණයකට ශ්රේෂ්ඨාධිකරණයට නොපැමිණි ජනාධිපතිවරයා තමන්ගේ ධුර කාලය වසර 06ක්ද යන්න තීරණය කිරීම සදහා ආණ්ඩුක්රම ව්යවස්ථාවේ 129.1 ව්යවස්ථාව අනුව අර්ථනිරූපණයකට/ මතය විමසීමකට ශ්රේෂ්ඨාධිකරණයට පැමිණියේ ය.
තමන් 2015 ජනවාරි 09 දින පැවති නීතිය අනුව ජනාධිපති ධුරයේ දිව්රුම් දෙන ලද හෙයින් එදින සිට වසර 06ක කාලයක් ජනාධිපති ධුරයේ දැරීමට යම් නො හැකියාවක් තිබේද? යන්න ඉන් ජනාධිපතිවරයා ශ්රේෂ්ඨාධිකරණයෙන් විමසා තිබුණි.
නීතිපතිවරයා විසින් “ආණ්ඩුක්රම ව්යවස්ථා අර්බුදයක්“ නිර්මාණය කිරීම….
2015 ජනවාරි 09 දින පැවති නීතිය අනුව ජනාධිපති ධුරයේ දිව්රුම් දෙන ලද හෙයින් එදින සිට වසර 06ක කාලයක් ජනාධිපති ධුරයේ දැරීමට යම් නො හැකියාවක් තිබේද? යන්න ශ්රේෂ්ඨාධිකරණයේ පංච පුද්ගල විනිසුරු මඩුල්ලක් ඉදිරියේ 2018 ජනවාරි 11 වැනි දින සමාලෝචනයට ලක් කළ අතර ඒ අවස්ථාවේ නීතිපතිවරයාගේ තර්කය වූයේ 2015 ජනවාරි 09 දින පැවති නීතිය අනුව සහ ජනවරම අනුව ජනාධිපතිවරයාගේ ධුර කාලය 2015 ජනවාරි 09 දින සිට ඉදිරියට වසර 06ක් බවයි….
“ජනරජයේ ජනාධිපතිවරයා ජනතාව විසින් තෝරා පත්කර ගත යුත්තේ ය. ජනාධිපතිවරයා සාවුරුදු කාලයක් ධුරය දරන්නේ ය.”**
ජනාධිපතිවරයාගේ ධුරකාලය 2015 ජනවාරි 09 දින සිට ඉදිරියට වසර 06ක් බවට නීතිපතිවරයාගේ ස්ථාවරය සමග බරපතල “ආණ්ඩුක්රම ව්යවස්ථා අර්බුදයක්” හටගෙන තිබුණි. එකී ඉල්ලීමෙන් නීතිපතිවරයා ඉල්ලා සිටින ලද්දේ 2015 මැයි 15 වැනි දින කථානායකවරයා විසින්සහතික කරන ලද 19වන ආණ්ඩුක්රම ව්යවස්ථා සංශෝධන පනතේ විධිවිධාන නොතකා සිටීමට ජනාධිපතිවරයාට හැකි බවත් වසර 06ක් ධුර දැරීමට ජනවරමක් ඇති බවත් ය.
එනම් 2015 මැයි 15 වැනි දින කථානායකවරයා විසින් සහතික කරන ලද 19වන ආණ්ඩුක්රම ව්යවස්ථා සංශෝධන පනතේ 3 වැනි වගන්තියමගින් ජනාධිපතිවරයාගේ ධුර කාලය සම්බන්ධව පෙර පැවති 30.2 ව්යවස්ථාව සංශෝධනය කර ඇති;
“ජනරජයේ ජනාධිපතිවරයා ජනතාව විසින් තෝරා පත්කර ගත යුතු අතර පස් අවුරුදු කාලයක් ධුරය දරන්නේ ය.”
යන විධිවිධානය 2015 ජනවාරි 09 දින දිව්රුම් දුන් ජනාධිපතිවරයාට අදාල නොවන බව නීතිපතිවරයාගේ ස්ථාවරය විය.
2015 මැයි 15 වැනි දින කථානායකවරයා විසින් සහතික කරන ලද 19වන ආණ්ඩුක්රම ව්යවස්ථා සංශෝධන පනතේ ජනාධිපතිවරයාගේ ධුරයට අදාල 3 වැනි වගන්තිය එනම් ආණ්ඩුක්රම ව්යවස්ථාවේ සංශෝධිත 30.2 ව්යවස්ථාව ජනාධිපතිවරයාට අදාල නොවන්නේ නම් සම්පූර්ණ 19වන ආණ්ඩුක්රම ව්යවස්ථා සංශෝධනය ම ජනාධිපතිවරයාට අදාල වන්නේ කෙසේද? යන ව්යවස්ථා අර්බුදය නීතිපතිවරයා විසින් ඇති කරනු ලැබීය. ඒ අවස්ථවේ ජනතාවට සිහි වූයේ “වැටත් නියරත් ගොයම් කා නම් කාට කියනුද ඒ අමාරුව” යන්න ය.
නීතිපතිවරයාගේ එකී ස්ථාවරය සමග 19වන ආණ්ඩුක්රම ව්යවස්ථා සංශෝධනයේ ජනාධිපතිවරයාගේ ධුර කාලයට අදාල අවුරුදු 05 සීමාව 2015 ජනවාරි 09 දින දිව්රුම් දුන් ජනාධිපතිවරයාට අදාල නොවන්නේ නම් 19වන ආණ්ඩුක්රම ව්යවස්ථා සංශෝධනයේ ඇති ජනාධිපතිවරයාට අදාල වෙනත් විධිවිධාන 2015 ජනවාරි 09 දින දිව්රුම් දුන් ජනාධිපතිවරයාට අදාල වන්නේ කෙසේද? යන්න ජනතාවට විසදා ගත ප්රශ්න විය.
එනම්.
උදා….
අ) මැතිවරණ කොමිෂන් සභාව
(ආ) රාජ්ය සේවා කොමිෂන් සභාව
(ඇ) ජාතික පොලිස් කොමිෂන් සභාව
(ඈ) විගණන සේවා කොමිෂන් සභාව
(ඉ) ශ්රී ලංකා මානව හිමිකම් කොමිෂන් සභාව
(ඊ) අල්ලස් හෝ දූෂණ චෝදනා විමර්ශනය කිරීමේ කොමිෂන් සභාව
(උ) මුදල් කොමිෂන් සභාව
(ඌ) සීමා නිර්ණය කොමිෂන් සභාව
(එ) ජාතික ප්රසම්පාදන කොමිෂන් සභාව.
(අ) අග්රවිනිශ්චයකාරවරයා සහ ශ්රේෂ්ඨාධිකරණයේ විනිශ්චයකාරවරයන්
(ආ) අභියාචනාධිකරණයේ සභාපතිවරයා සහ අභියාචනාධිකරණයේ විනිශ්චයකාරවරයන්
(ඇ) අධිකරණ සේවා කොමිෂන් සභාවේ සභාපතිවරයා හැර අනෙකුත් සාමාජිකයන්.
(ඈ) නීතිපතිවරයා
(ඉ) විගණකාධිපතිවරයා
(ඊ) පොලිස්පතිවරයා
(උ) පරිපාලන කටයුතු පිළිබඳ පාර්ලිමේන්තු කොමසාරිස්වරයා (ඔම්බුඩ්ස්මන්)
(ඌ) පාර්ලිමේන්තුවේ මහ ලේකම්වරයා.
මෛත්රීපාල සිරිසේන ජනාධිපතිවරයාට බලපාන්නේ 2015 ජනවාරි 09 දින ජනාධිපතිධූරයේ දිව්රුම් දුන් අවස්ථාවේ පැවති ආණ්ඩුක්රම ව්යවස්ථා විධිවිධාන වන්නේ නම් 2015 මැයි 15 වැනි දිනකථානායකවරයා විසින් සහතික කරන ලද 19වන ආණ්ඩුක්රම ව්යවස්ථා සංශෝධන පනතේ 7 වැනි වගන්තිය මගින් ආණ්ඩුක්රම ව්යවස්ථාවේ 35 ව්යවස්ථාව ඉවත් කරමින් ආදේශකර ඇති ව්යවස්ථාව මගින් ආණ්ඩුක්රම ව්යවස්ථාවට ඇතුළත් කර ඇති “ජනාධිපතිවරයා විසින් ඔහුගේ නිල තත්වයෙහි ලා කරන ලද හෝ නොකර හරින ලද කිසිවක් සම්බන්ධයෙන් නීතිපතිවරයාට විරුද්ධව 126 වන ව්යවස්ථාව යටතේ ඉල්ලීමක් කිරීමට යම් තැනැත්තකුට ඇති අයිතිය සීමා කරන ලෙස මේ අනුව්යවස්ථාවේ කිසිවක්, කියවා තේරුම් නොගත යුත්තේ ය” යන ආණ්ඩුක්රම ව්යවස්ථා විධිවිධානය වලංගු නොවේ.
මන්ද යත් මෛත්රීපාල සිරිසේන ජනාධිපතිවරයාට බලපාන්නේ 2015 ජනවාරි 09 දින ජනාධිපතිධූරයේ දිව්රුම් දුන් අවස්ථාවේ පැවති නීතිමය තත්ත්වය නම් එවැනි ආකාරයේ ජනාධිපතිවරයාට එරෙහිව ආණ්ඩුක්රම ව්යවස්ථාවේ 126 ව්යවස්ථාව යටතේ නඩු පැවරීමක් (මූලික අයිතිවාසිකම් නඩු) සදහා ජනතාවට අයිතිය පිරිනමා නොතිබූ හෙයින් ඔහුට එරෙහිව මූලික අයිතිවාසිකම් නඩු පැවරීමේ නොහැකියාවක් හටගෙන ඇත.
ඉහත කාරණා සම්බන්ධව සැළකීමේ දී ජනාධිපති ධුරය සදහා 19 වැනි ව්යවස්ථා සංශෝධනයේ විධිවිධාන අදාල නොවී ජනාධිපතිවරයා විසින් සිදු කළ යුතු අනෙක් ක්රියා වලංගු වීමට ඇති නීතිමය තත්ත්වය පටලවා ගැනීම ආණ්ඩුක්රම ව්යවස්ථා අර්බුදයක් බවට පත්වේ.
මෙවැනි අර්බුද අවස්ථාවක් වළක්වන ඉතා වැදගත් නීතිමය ප්රතිපාදනයක් 19වන ආණ්ඩුක්රම ව්යවස්ථා සංශෝධන පනතේ සැක දුරුකිරීම සදහා දක්වා ඇති බව නීතිපතිවරයාගේ අවධානයෙන් ගිලිහී තිබුණි. එනම් 49.1.ආ වගන්තිය වන සැක දුරු කිරීම දක්වා ඇති වගන්තියයි.
19වන ආණ්ඩුක්රම ව්යවස්ථා සංශෝධන පනතේ දක්වා ඇති 49.1.ආ වගන්තිය මෙසේ ය.
“2015 අප්රේල් මස 22 වන දිනට පෙර පිළිවෙලින් ජනාධිපති ධුරය සහ අග්රාමාත්ය ධුරය දරන තැනැත්තන් එම දිනෙන් පසු, මෙම පනත මගින් සංශෝධිත ආණ්ඩුක්රම ව්යවස්ථාවේ විධිවිධානවලට යටත්ව එම ධුර දැරිය යුතු වන්නේ ය”
ඇතිවන්නට ගිය ව්යවස්ථා අර්බුදයක් ශ්රේෂ්ඨාධිකරණය විසින් වැළක්වීම
කෙසේ වෙතත් ශ්රේෂ්ඨාධිකරණයේ පංච පුද්ගල විනිසුරු මඩුල්ල නීතිපතිවරයාගේ තර්ක පිළිනොගෙන 2015 ජනවාරි 09 දින දිව්රුම් දුන් ජනාධිපතිවරයාට පවා 19වන ආණ්ඩුක්රම ව්යවස්ථා සංශෝධන පනතේ ජනාධිපති ධුර කාලයට අදාල වසර 05 සීමාව අදාල බවට සිය අධිකරණ මතය ජනාධිපතිවරයාට දක්වා ඇත.
නීතිපතිවරයා ජනාධිපතිවරයාගේ ධුර කාලයට පමණක් ලඝු වී 19වන ආණ්ඩුක්රම ව්යවස්ථා සංශෝධන පනත විග්රහ කිරීමට ගොස් සිදු කරන්නට ගිය බලවත් දෝෂයක්, ව්යවස්ථා අර්බුදයක් ශ්රේෂ්ඨාධිකරණයේ විසින් වළක්වනු ලැබුයේ ඒ ආකාරයටය.
ආණ්ඩුක්රම ව්යවස්ථාවේ 3 වැනි ව්යවස්ථාවේ දක්වා ඇත්තේ ශ්රී ලංකා ජනරජයේ පරමාධිපත්යය ජනතාව කෙරෙහි පිහිටුවා ඇති බවයි. එකී ජනතාව සතු පරමාධිපත්යය අංග වන ජනතාවගේ විධායක බලය, ජනතාවගේ ව්යවස්ථාදායක බලය සහ ජනතාවගේ අධිකරණ බලය භාරයක් විලස පිළිවෙලින් ජනාධිපතිවරයාත්, පාර්ලිමේන්තුවත්, ශ්රේෂ්ඨාධිකරණය ඇතුළු අධිකරණ විසිනුත් ක්රියාත්මක කරන බව ජනතාව නිරන්තරයෙන් සිහි කිරීම ඒ අනුව වැදගත් ය.
මෙවැනිම ව්යවස්ථා අර්බුදයක් එනම් ආණ්ඩුක්රම ව්යවස්ථාව සහ නීතියක් අතර ඇති වන්නට ගිය අවස්ථාවේ ඇමෙරිකානු ශ්රේෂ්ඨාධිකරණයද තීරණාත්මක නඩු තීන්දුවක් ජෝන් මාර්ෂල් අගවිනිසුරුවරයා Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. (1 Cranch) 137 (1803) ලබා දෙමින් එකී ව්යවස්ථා අර්බුදය වළක්වනු ලැබීය. එකී නඩුව සම්බන්ධව සිංහල භාෂාවෙන් පුළුල් විග්රහයක් ඉදිරියේදී කිරීමට බලාපොරොත්තු වන හෙයින් ඒ සම්බන්ධව මෙහි විස්තර කර නැති බව සළකන්න.
වැඩි විස්තර දැනගැනීම සදහා කියවන්න
මෛත්රීපාල සිරිසේන ජනාධිපතිවරයාට බලපාන්නේ 2015 ජනවාරි 09 දින ජනාධිපති ධුරයේ දිව්රුම් දුන් අවස්ථාවේ පැවති ආණ්ඩුක්රම ව්යවස්ථා විධිවිධාන වන්නේ නම් ඔහු ක්රියා කළ යුතු සහ යටත් විය යුතු සහ පිළිපැදිය යුතු නීතිය සහ තත්ත්වය………..?
නීතීඥ අරුණ ලක්සිරි උණවටුන
B.Sc(Col), PGDC(Col)
2018.01.15
I’m gonna do what’s right,..I want to be unpredictable,
The voters want unpredictability” -Donald J Trump
Trumpism thrives. It influences decisions with a sense of unpredictability and the effects of Trumpism on policy has affected the entire world. The release of the National Security Strategy articulates and reaffirms his policy of America First. Trump’s National Security Advisor HR Macmaster explained to BBC that all decisions are carefully calibrated and security risks considered.
At the centre of the Strategy’s decisions are the recognition of Jerusalem, the City of David as the capital of Israel. The city sits on a plateau in the Judaean Mountains between the Mediterranean and the Dead Sea. Through history, the city has been destroyed, besieged, attacked, captured and recaptured so many times. The city is important for strategic reasons. Geopolitically- it sits at the middle of Middle East. The control of the city has been a constant struggle through time. From 2400 BC , it remains the cradle of the three Abrahamic faiths; Judaism, Christianity and Islam. The walls around the Old City dividing the city into different quarters were set in place by the Ottoman emperor Suleiman the Magnificent.
Moving into 2018, Trumpism spills deeper through the city walls. The unpredictability unfolds threatening and challenging the entire Middle East. US Hegemony was seen by vetoing the UN security council resolution calling for the withdrawal of Trump’s recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital. It was a move backed by every council member.
As promised during his election campaign, Trump’s promise was delivered. This has affected several nations including Sri Lanka. Sri Lankan resistance to this decision came in the form of Palestine Parliamentary association and Sri Lanka committee for solidarity with Palestine holding joint protests and signing a declaration against Trump’s decision.
On the other hand, the US President warns to cut off aid to countries that support and vote against the US resolution. The unfolding events signal the height of geopolitical tensions unfolding at the dawn of the year. Perhaps, as an indirect consequence, and a new year gift, Sri Lanka will lose the GSP for their largest export market, the USA.
From the politics of the geography of city walls of the Middle East, I now shift my focus to the politics of geology along oceanscapes.
Along the Indian Ocean geopolitical hotspot, Rama Setu, geologists have found the stones along the surface that were older than the sand below it. It indicates avenues to perhaps demystifying the ancient mythological tale of the Ramayan. The bridge was human engineered and built and not natural. If this reveals that the bridge was man made, the civilizations of Indo-Lanka will be one of the most ancient. The rocks have been dated back 7000 years.
Despite the antiquity of Indo-Lanka relations, the Chinese sphere of influence is seen in the Island nation due to the strong strategic relationship built over time and China has already become the largest trading partner beating India.Even prior to the full functioning of the grand OBOR project,the ripple effects are already felt in the Island nation. China has acquired 15000 acres, the largest portion of land ever leased out to a foreign investor for an economic zone in the recent time. The Economic Zone closer to Hambanthota Port, the strategic harbour built by Chinese money another pearl in the string of pearls theory speculated to surround India. What China has given to nations like Sri Lanka is connectivity to outside world.
Geopolitically, China has made a significant presence with ports and many other infrastructure projects in the Indian Ocean region including investment in Gwadar Port the ‘crown jewel’ of CPEC corridor with another $230m grant for a new international airport. Geo strategically, the Chinese have already carved out their access to warm Indian Ocean waters.
Several of these projects are completed from Chinese commercial loans.US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson at a recent lecture at CSIS explained that as predatory loans given by China to developing nations, it is important for the US to strengthen its relationship with India to ensure it does not become a region of disorder, conflict, and predatory economics.” Speaking at the monthly Security Salon of the INSS the Security Studies Think Tank, Prof. Patrick Mendis described how there is no stopping China having its military base in Sri Lanka. The present Government and ones after will not have the muscle to stop it. Prime Minister of Sri Lanka denies that he will not allow a Chinese base and further pledging to the Indians to lease out the Chinese built new Airport known as the Ghost Airport will be leased out to India for US$300m for 40 years. India is set to take over the Airport in Mattala to minimize the Chinese influence.
Out of 2 million tourist arrivals Chinese tourist arrivals has been about 13% denoting a significant yearly increase and events such as the recent marriage ceremony of 50 Chinese couples shows Sri Lanka has already become a popular destination adding to OBOR cultural relations between the two nations. Chinese ambassador in Colombo had his farewell bid from a traditional Kung Fu show at the Mahinda Rajapaksa theater, this was also to remember the 60 years of diplomatic relationship and 65th anniversary of the historic 1952 Rubber-Rice Pact.
The Chinese Ambassador Yi Xianliang played crucial role in Sino-Lankan relations as he had to face the newly appointed Sri Lankan Government in 2015.One month after starting the tenure with an anti-Chinese sentiment highlighting large scale corruptions in Chinese projects initiated during Rajapaksa tenure, eventually the new administration found themselves in a minefield having to reverse decisions and rhetoric a presidential election campaign was based upon. The dragon cannot be investigated. Its economic might resonates through the island in a deeply interwoven web of infrastructural support. The speculative argument begs the question if the transfer to predatory loans will become military bases. The Pentagon report released in June that China will establish military bases in Indian Ocean resonates this view.
A view from the Chinese built Lotus Tower presents a deepening of the above mentioned inter connected global issues. An aerial view of the island surrounded by the Indian Ocean presents one of Chinese soft power and diplomacy sweeping through the island, while global forces contend over the waters that have connected the island through time-the waters of the Indian Ocean.
*(The author is a visiting Professor for Geopolitics and Global Leadership at the Northern Kentucky University(USA) and the Director General of the Institute of National Security Studies Sri Lanka, views expressed are the author’s own, the article was initially published by South Asia Journal http://southasiajournal.net/trumpism-and-the-diplomatic-dragon-balancing-interests-in-the-new-year/)
UNIVERSITY OF CEYLON FACULTY OF LAW
2018 Re-union of the 1969 Batch
13th January, 2018
Imperial Room
Mount Lavinia Hotel
Welcome address by Senaka Weeraratna
Distinguished Colleagues, Ladies and Gentlemen
It is with great pleasure that we welcome you all to this venue. Our efforts are to ensure that you revive a spirit of camaraderie by going down memory lane and reminiscing with your former colleagues and batch mates of the good old days we spent at the Colombo Law Faculty in the late 1960s and early 1970’s.
There are those of our batch mates who are unable to be present here tonight but they have already written to us expressing their regrets but nevertheless conveying their strongest support and goodwill for the success of the event. Despite their absence, we consider their presence here in spirit. I have already circulated by email their warm words of praise and good wishes. In that circular I have not forgotten to mention by name seven batch mates who are no longer among the living.
We also welcome several distinguished guests though not in our batch. We are privileged to have with us today Justices Saleem Marsoof, K.T. Chitrasiri (of Bond Commission Fame), Justice Asoka de Silva (former Chief Justice), and Justice R. Sureshchandra (now retired). Also Dr. Palitha Kohona (former Ambassador to the UN), Mr. Laksiri Mendis (former Ambassador and UN expert), and Mr. Anura Tennekoon (former Captain of the Sri Lanka Cricket Team and St. Thomas College in 1966).
We have an interesting programme for you tonight.
It contains:
This event will conclude at 12.30 midnight.
It’s an honor to be able to take you down Memory Lane for a few moments. Our batch mates were born in the 1940s and 1950s. We began our time in the Law Faculty in 1969. We call ourselves as the 1969 batch. It has made some distinctive contributions. It produced at the final year exam held in December 1972 – 9 Classes i.e. 5 upper seconds and four lower seconds. Some of the recipients are here with us tonight.
JURA – Law Faculty News – letter
We published a news – letter called ‘ Jura ‘ which began to be distributed in 1970 under the editorship of A.P. Niles ( now deceased) and followed by Lal Perera. Both being our batch mates. ‘JURA’ – News Letter of the Law Faculty Students’ Union captured the news and views of Law Students on Colombo campus. In hindsight it has historic value as some of the contributors in the inside pages have stormed hallowed portals including the Judiciary, United Nations, World Bank, and the like in later life. A researcher hunting for snippets may find a treasure trove of info to spice a piece of writing. The Editions of JURA stand out as an indisputable reminder of the intellectual inclinations of law students to venture forth with commentaries on life on campus and the political underside, without fear or favour. A gallant attempt that won the admiration of all those who were privileged to read this sheet.
The war in Vietnam dominated the news headlines during our time. The JURA in its special (Freshers) edition dated May 22, 1972 carried an article condemning the manner in which the war was being waged by foreign powers in blatant violation of the principles established by the Nuremberg Tribunal and cardinal rules of International Law. It called on all undergrads to express their deepest moral concern and quoting Bertrand Russel ‘to salute the people of Vietnam’ for their heroic struggle to re-unify North and South Vietnam, liberate their country from foreign aggression, and seek justice.
Incidentally, May 22, 1972 was the day that the pre-existing name of the country ‘Ceylon’ was changed to ‘Sri Lanka’ and declared a Republic. The following day (May 23) all the new comers (freshers) were assembled in the main Lecture room and a Welcoming ceremony was held with three speakers, namely Dr.Osmund Jayaratne (President of the Colombo Campus), Mrs. Savitri Goonesekera (Senior Lecturer in law) and Mr. Senaka Weeraratna (President of the Law Faculty Students’ Union) addressing the gathering. Copies of the new Edition of ‘JURA’ were distributed widely all over the campus on that day.
We need to collate all the issues of JURA and re-distribute copies of the various editions of re-printed versions of this news – letter in time for the golden jubilee anniversary in 2019.
Progressive Front
Another first was the victory of the Progressive Front at several Law Faculty Students’ Union (LFSU) elections and Student Council elections in 1970, 1971 and 1972. Progressive Front (PF) representatives dominated the LFSU and were outspoken on matters relating to the interests and welfare of the students. The Progressive Front was the brain child of the law students during our era.
It must be mentioned here that two members of the Progressive Front with Estate Indian Tamil backgrounds were taken into custody by the Police after the outbreak of the JVP led youth insurrection commencing on April 5, 1971. That was the time that any young man on campus was suspected of being associated with the insurrection. Many young men simply disappeared after being taken custody. The Security Forces were gunning for insurgents. Student Leaders were specially targeted. I was then the Secretary of the LFSU and member of the Students’ Council of the Colombo Campus. One member of the Students Council was killed by the Police in Pindeniya in open combat. Two of his brothers also died around the same time. He was from the Faculty of Social Sciences. He attended the last meeting of the Students Council held before April 5, 1971. The Army came and searched my house for any hidden weapons. I was really worried for the safety of these two Law Faculty colleagues. Risking any threat to my life for making representations on behalf of insurgent suspects, I personally went and met Mr. Nihal Jayawickrema ( then Secretary, Ministry of Justice), and Mr. D.G. Jayalath ( then Senior Assistant Secretary, Ministry of Justice) and got the investigations into the suspected involvement of these two law students expedited. Next to no time they were released and they returned to the Law Faculty safe and sound, and to our great relief. They continued thereafter to be staunch supporters of the Progressive Front.
1960s Era
The 1960s were far different to the scene we have today. There were no computers, no internet, no Face Book, no YouTube, no mobile or smart phones, no photo copying machines, no television, no fax machines. With little gadgetry in our hands, we had more free time. Nevertheless, we had to spend a good part of our time in the law library. It was rote learning at best. Closed Book exams. Not open book exams as we find today. Current students forget the info no sooner they leave the hall after sitting for the open book exam. We had to read a lot. Study hard. Some would call it cramming. We persevered. We digested a lot from our reading and instruction we received from our teachers. We used our spare time for chatting at tuck shops and canteens. We had time for conversation and make friendships that have lasted to this day. Some had time for romance. They were the lucky ones. Today’s students are dependent on machines and external aids to help them. We relied on our memory and our wits to get ahead.
It was the era of Jim Reeves (He’ll Have To Go), Cliff Richards (Bachelor Boy), Beatles (Hey Jude), Shadows (Apache), Harry Belafonte (Jamaica Farewell), Tom Jones (Green Green Grass of Home), Engelbert Humperdinck (Wonderland by Night), Hank Locklin(It’s a Little More Like Heaven), Connie Francis (Send Me The Pillow That You Dream On) among others.
The songs of C.T. Fernando (Pinsidu Wanne, Ma Bala Kale, Bada Gini Wela), Clarence Wijewardene (Kimada Nawe),Maxwell Mendis (ratak watinawa mage maupiyo dedena and mama bohoma bayavuna), H.R. Jothipala (Pem kekula pipi and Pruthugesi Karaya), Indrani Wijebandara (Sudu Sande Eliya), Sunil Shantha(Olu Pipila) and PLA and Chitra Somapala (Udarata Kadukara Siriya, Yamuna Yamuna Sobhana Ganga, Dambulugale, Isurumuniye, Lalitha Kala) dominated the air waves in the 1960s.
India’s Mohammed Rafi (Yeh Hai Bombay Meri Jaan), Hemant Kumar (Hai Apna Dil To Awara Na Jane Kis Pe Aye Ga), Kishore Kumar(Dil Dil Se Mila Kar Dekho),and Lata Mangeshkar (Yaad Kiya Dil Ne Kahan Ho Tum) won the hearts of many and inspired composers and musicians to copy and imitate Hindi film music.
Tamil Films and songs also had a sizeable following in Sri Lanka. Popular songs included Masila Unmai Kathale, Salam babu and Dingiri Dingale meenakshi Dingiri dinkale. The latter was a hit among all communities and invariably sung at baila sessions. M. G. Ramachandran, Shivaji Ganeshan and Gemini Ganeshan were the main stars of the Tamil film scene.
We hope to be listening to the music of the 1950s and 1960s during the DJ sessions tonight to re-activate dormant memories of the joys and spirit of that era.
Our Teachers
We had outstanding teachers. Professor T. Nadaraja, Dean of the Law Faculty for many long years. He is no more. So is Dr. Mark Cooray. They have passed on. Dr. A.R.B. Amerasinghe is another distinguished teacher who has passed on. Justice Dr. H.W. Tambiah also began teaching in 1972. He is no more. We all hold them in high regard.
It was during our time in 1972 that the Law Faculty celebrated the 25th Anniversary of its founding as a Department in the University of Ceylon under the stewardship of Justice Soertsz, Q.C. We took a group photograph in September 1972. Most of our batch mates are in it. That photograph is worthy of being displayed at the Colombo Law Faculty building. It is the oldest photograph of the Staff and Students of the Colombo Law Faculty.
I am making use of this opportunity to make an appeal to the current Dean of the Law Faculty to make every effort to display this invaluable group photograph in the corridors of the Law Faculty in time for the celebration of the 50th anniversary of the 1969 batch which falls in 2019. Copies of this group photograph can be obtained from Plate Studios in Galle Road, Kollupitiye, Colombo 03.
Law Faculty Students’ Union (LFSU)
It must be noted that the Department of Law was converted into a Law Faculty in 1968. It was in the same year that the Law Faculty Students’ Union (LFSU) was established. Charitha Ratwatte was the first President of the LFSU and R. Sureshchandra, first Secretary (LFSU). In 1969, Ranil Wickremasinghe was elected as the President of the LFSU and Graham Hatch as Secretary. In 1970, J.B.L. de Silva was elected as President and Senaka Weeraratna as Secretary (LFSU).In 1971, Senaka Weeraratna was elected as President and Anton Cooray as Secretary (LFSU). It was in 1972 that these two elected officials along with Anil Vitarana (Vice – President) and R.J. de Silva (Treasurer) were able to carry out their duties. In the same year Senaka Weeraratna was elected as the Vice – President of the Students Council of the Colombo Campus and Anil Vitarana as the Treasurer. Both were representatives of the Progressive Front established in the Law Faculty.
I must say resolutely that we are what we are. Many of us have had great success in the fields they have chosen. In the UN System, Mega Shipping companies, legal profession both within and outside Sri Lanka, Judiciary, Academia, in both public and private sectors, they have reached the pinnacle. In addition, we have among us public commentators and activists engaged in the noble form of pro bono advocacy pleading the cause of both the disadvantaged and victimized humans as well as non – human sentient beings who cannot articulate their pain and suffering. They campaign for both Human Rights and Animal Rights in step with our cultural traditions. We are all proud of them. Our former batch – mates have graced high places and enjoy high profile status in public life. This is true not only of our 1969 batch but also of all other batches of the Colombo Law Faculty. A law graduate of the Colombo Law Faculty today can walk with his or her head held high in any part of the world.
Re – Union Committee
We need to remember with appreciation that this idea of a batch re-union was born over a cup of high tea when Chandana Jayaweera Bandara (nee Rajapakse) and Maithri Panagoda met each other in Colombo in July last year. Soon afterwards they began to network and contact Anil, Lal, Senaka, Jezima and few others who all embraced this idea. Again on November 7 last year Chandana, Maithri and Senaka had lunch together on the invitation of Chandana and after further discussion we decided to plan for a re- union within two months when those of our batch mates living overseas were most likely to be in Sri Lanka during their annual vacations. Clement joined us with gusto and Anil joined the group in January 2018 on his visit to Sri Lanka.
We have received support from Lal, Ikram, Jezima, Desmond Jordan, Dushyanathie, Tiru vallal, Vasi, Indra, Dhammika, Shirani Kanagaratnam, Paul, Ifthikar Hassim, Damayanthie, Shirin, Nelun, Sharrada and Padmaraji, among others to go ahead. If I have left out any names by an inadvertence I tender my apologies.
Everyone on the Re-Union Committee pitched in to make this event a memorable one and great success. We should give them all a big “thank you”.
Lastly but not least, today is also a very special day for someone who has come all the way down from England to join us tonight. It is the birthday anniversary of Ramya Samaranayake (nee Chandrasekhar). We will be celebrating Ramya’s birthday in a fitting way this evening. May you have a healthy, happy and enjoyable birthday today, and may you have many, many more.
Finally, I thank you all for your kind presence here tonight and trust you will make best use of this opportunity to engage in fellowship after a long lapse of time and have an enjoyable time this evening.
Senaka Weeraratna
Now there are two SLFPs one of Srisena and other of SWRD. Are they the same or are they different ?
Let us see.
SWRD left UNP to form a politically socialist SLFP -different from the Western Capitalist UNP.
Sirisena left the socialist SLFP to join politically different Western Capitalist UNP. Can we draw a political parallel to Srisena and SWRD? No, they are poles apart aren’t they ?
SWRD left a Capitalist political System to form a Socialist political system.
Sirisena left a Socialist political System to join a Western Capitalist political System.
Can Sirisena claim a political similarity to SWRD ? No he cannot .
SWRD formed the SLFP and joined with the MEP,LSSP and the Communist Pa rty.
Sirisena left the Socialist SLFP to join with the Western Capitalist UNP, half-baked Marxist JVP, Tamil Natiuonalist TNA and Nationalist Hela Urumaya, against Socialist left wing MEP,LSSP,CP,NFF, Pivithuru Hela Urumaya.
Is there any political Similarity between Sirisena and SWRD ? Definitely No .
On the 8 January, President Mahinda Rajapakse who was also the President of SWRD’s SLFP was defeated by Sirisena at the Presidential election. On the 16 January, 2015 the President of SLFP Mahinda Rajapakse handed over the Presidency of the SLFP to the new President Maithripala Sirisena.
By that action can Sirisena, who on his own accord left the SLFP to join the Western Capitalist UNP and its right wing politicians, be cleansed of his sin of leaving the SLFP to make of him a legitimate leader of SWRD’s SLFP ? No he cannot be cleansed of the sin of leaving SLFP.
Sirisena’s legal right to be the President of SLFP has not been legally challenged , but what is evident is Sirisena has no Moral right to be the leader of the SLFP.
Now there are two SLFPs one led by President Sirisena and the other SLFP forming a political front with Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna claiming Mahinda Rajapakse as its leader
Can there be two SLFPs one lead by Maithripala Sirisena, and another claiming the leadership of Mahinda Rajapakse ? No there cannot be two SLFPs.
One of SLFP has to be the one that is closest to SWRD’s political philosophy not both.
The SLFP of Maithripala Sirisena is with UNP , and its Allies JVP, TNA, JHU accepting to work with a capitalist political system, distancing itself from the Socialist left wing politics in association with MEP,LSSP,CP, NFF and PHU. This is exactly what SWRD did not want his SLFP to be.
The other SLFP the members of which are with the Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna which claims the leadership of Mahinda Rajapakse, which has refused any cohabitation with the UNP and seeks allegiance with Socialist Left wing politicians , which is what SWRD wanted when he left the Western Capitalist political system of the UNP.
Hence the SLFP with President Maithripala Sirisena is fake, it is NOT what SWRD wanted his SLFP to be.
Therefore the real SLFP containing the political philosophy of SWRD is with the Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna.
It is therefore clear that what President Mahinda Rajapakse handed over to President Maithripala Sirisena on the 16 January,2015 was only the name of SWRD’s political party, but not what it contained –the SWRD’s political philosophy. The ownership of SWRD’s political philosophy is still with Mahinda Rajapakse.
However the Sinhala Buddhists should not listen to English Educated Colombians or Sinhala diaspora who may say vote for Pohottuva if Mahinda Rajapakse accepts to remove the 13 A from the Constitution etc because Mahinda Rajapakse knows what he has to do.
When Mahinda Rajapakse was elected President in 2005 he knew what exactly he was going to do, and none of the English Educated Colombians and the Sinhala Diaspora had to tell him what he had to do.
Though the Western Capitalist UNP started calling him corrupt and that he was a thief, the cry that was taken up by the JVP, were all lies to slander and damage the reputation of an honest man to prepare the way for them to come to political power to plunder the State Coffers, and destroy Sri Lanka developed by Mahinda Rajapakse in a short time after eliminating terrorism.
Mahinda Rajapakse knows what he has to do as he is a man who learns from his experience.
Therefore it would be wise for the Sinhala Buddhists not to be divided and VOTE at the coming Provincial Council Election for the POHOTTUWA of Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna which has the Political System as it had been planned and set up by SWRD Bandaranayake.
The term multiculturalism maybe new but the concept has existed for centuries. People of different ethnic, religious, traditions, cultures, customs etc have been living together for centuries. However, those that have reconceptualized multiculturalism have a preconceived plan to erase customary historical-cultural-religious non-Abrahamic ethos and replace it with a newly created culture or replace it completely with the new cultures that are being imported as a political ploy. Those plugging in these new concepts are generally people who have no sense of their own roots, no respect for a country’s heritage & history and no care for the people who want to protect and foster their traditional heritage without having it diluted, replaced or completely erased. To understand the situation clearly Britain is the best example to take – today a victim of its own policies.
Multiculturalism is a failure in the very countries promoting it. The Irish hate the English. The Scots hate the English & the Welsh hate the English so what are the Brits preaching to the rest of the world when they can’t even force reconciliation amongst their own?
However, the country that once ruled the world and divided the world’s people creating simmering conflicts that were never meant to be solved are now finding that the hen has come home to roost.
While we can empathize with the feelings of the white populace, we can only tell the Brits to tell their Governments to butt out of interfering in affairs of sovereign countries and get their house in order before the white British Government gets usurped without their own knowledge!
Declining white population
Britain’s population in 1950 was 50million (207people per square mile). Today it stands at 64million (268 people per square mile).
According to Policy Exchange Report only 25 % of white Britons identify themselves as British.
In 2014, some 27% of babies in Britain had foreign-born mothers, up from 26.5% in 2013. According to data released in July 2017, 28% of live births the UK are to foreign-born women – even though foreign-born people only make up 8% of the total population.
Census figures show almost a tenth of babies and toddlers in England and Wales are Muslim – nearly twice the proportion in the general population. Of 3.5 million children up to the age of four in England and Wales recorded in the 2011 census, 317,952 (or 9.1%) were Muslim. According to the census figures, 4.8% of the 56.1 million resident population of England and Wales in 2011 were Muslim.
Oxford Professor and population expert DAVID COLEMAN says white Britons could be in the minority by the 2060s – or sooner.
Confounding the issue is that fact that the White British are not marrying and opting to have fewer or no children. 3.6 million white Brits chose not to get married in 2013. 17.8 million people have chosen to remain single. At the same time the number of divorcees also jumped by a fifth to 4.5 million. Same-sex partnerships were 113,000 people in 2011 census.
Estimated number of migrants between 1800 and 1945
| Migrant Group | Migration 1800-1945 (145 years) | Migration 1945-2010 (65 years) |
| Africans | 10,000 | 1,000,000 |
| Americans | 70,000 | 250,000 |
| Arabs | 10,000 | 290,000 |
| Belgians | 240,000 | 40,000 |
| Chinese | 20,000 | 320,000 |
| Cypriots | 2,000 | 80,000 |
| French People | 40,000 | 100,000 |
| Germans | 100,000 | 300,000 |
| Hungarians | 2,000 | 38,000 |
| Irish | 1,500,000 | 700,000 |
| Italians | 40,000 | 160,000 |
| Jews | 220,000 | 80,000 |
| Poles | 5,000 | 500,000 |
| South Asians | 20,000 | 1,000,000 |
| West Indians | 10,000 | 400,000 |
| Others | 50,000 | 1,000,000 |
| Total migration | 2,339,000 | 6,231,000 |
| Average migration per year | 16,131 | 95,862 |
3.3 million immigrants came to the UK from 2001 to 2014.
Minority Ghettos
The UK (England, Scotland, Wales & Northern Ireland) population 64millon of which 52million are white British. Presently, there are 2.8m Muslims in the UK of which over 1m live in London (London consists of 8.17m people) In 2011, 2.71 million Muslims lived in England and Wales In 2001, the Muslim populace was only 1.5m.
According to BBC white Brits are now in a minority in London, making up just 45%. Cities like Birmingham, Leicester, Slough, Luton, Bradford and London have seen the white population reduce by 50%.
The guardian gives a breakdown of where Muslims live, https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/feb/11/muslim-population-england-wales-nearly-doubles-10-years
Coventry is the most dangerous city to live in the UK & according to census 20% of Coventry residents were born overseas. 7.5% residents were Muslims, 3.5% were Hindus and 5% were Sikhs. http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/news/coventry-news/one-five-people-living-coventry-3015765
Britain that is preaching inclusiveness, reconciliation & multiculturalism is struggling to deal with rising ethnic ghetto areas. Magnus Ranstorp of the Centre for the Study of Terrorism and Political Violence at the University of St. Andrews in Scotland says
I think that home-grown terrorism is certainly being accelerated by the growing ‘ghettoification.’ Not just in Britain, but across Europe”
if so it is applicable to Sri Lanka & elsewhere as well.
David Owen a specialist at the University of Warwick says
a proportion of new immigrants belong to an Islamic sect that does not wish to mix with other faiths…. add to the rising ghetto population, as well as boosting high birth rates.”
In 2009, Researchers for the Department of Communities and Local Government asked white British what they felt about immigration. The report quotes a resident: He talks of a few incidents that have occurred over previous years, including a road sign in an area with a high Asian population, on which was sprayed the phrase ‘No Whites after 8.30’.
The response by Dr Mohammed Naseem, the chairman of Birmingham Central Mosque If the white working class in Birmingham do feel betrayed, then it is the fault of successive Governments, it has nothing to do with race or immigration or anything like that.”
Study by Professor Ted Cantle taking the census of 1991, 2001 and 2011 examined the movement of white population in the UK. His report names Slough, Birmingham, Leicester, Luton, Bradford and a series of London boroughs as ‘areas with increasingly dwindling white population’. He says that the proportion of minorities in some parts of Bradford was more than 97 per cent. Blackburn had 95% Asians!
His report further states White people are leaving urban areas in a disproportionate number”… Some made no bones about it — they are moving out because ‘they’ are moving in.”
In London, between 2001 and 2011, around 620,000 white British people left the city, most of whom moved to “whiter” areas.
Prof Cantle predicts the divide between minorities and the white majority will be even greater by the 2021 census. Professor Cantle, after the 2001 riots warned that populations in northern cities were living ‘parallel lives’, produced the report, Is Segregation Increasing In The UK?, with Professor Eric Kaufmann of Birkbeck College.
Prof. Cantle called upon the Government to stop ethnic ghettos – the same call must apply to Sri Lanka as well. It completely demolishes solutions for ethno-religious federalism.
The DalyStar in 2014 covered a story on homes being illegally advertised for rent to Muslims only”. This calls to mind several adverts by minorities in Sri Lanka doing the same.
Other adverts have been Room to let for £400 in Plumstead… ONLY FOR ASIAN FAMILY.”
Two Double Rooms…. MUSLIM FAMILY ONLY.”
There has been over 200 property adverts on websites such as Gumtree, specifying Muslims.
Can the whites complain? Remember the 1950s and 1960s they too had boards ‘whites only’!
Political correctness & segregation
Dame Louise Casey, the government’s community cohesion tsar’s blasted local councils for over worrying” about causing offence. This must be the ‘political correctness’ that most are preaching! https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/2099502/white-british-population-has-fallen-by-more-than-half-in-just-20-years-in-parts-of-uk-as-country-becomes-more-segregated/
Her report reveals thousands of people from all-Muslim enclaves in northern cities such as Bradford, Dewsbury and Blackburn seldom, if ever, leave their areas and have almost no idea of life outside.”
In 2015 almost 4 million voters – about one in 10 of the entire electorate in England and Wales had been born overseas. Two seats – East Ham and Brent North became the first constituencies with a majority of the eligible electorate born abroad. Of this 615,000 were Indians and 118,000 were Sri Lankans. It showed the power of the ‘migrant vote’.
Since 1980s a large number of Asian & Black MPs have been entering UK’s parliament. At local government level too, the number of black and Asian elected councillors has swollen.
Another area that has white Brits angered is the manner non-whites are milking the social welfare benefits. We know too well how LTTE diaspora have mastered this!
Tory MP Peter Bone said the welfare state was being abused. He warned: It would appear that while most migrants come here to work, a disproportionate number are coming for benefits. More than 400,000 now handed payouts that cost taxpayers billions each year. Department for Work and Pensions under the Freedom of Information Act, show a total of 406,900 non-UK nationals were claiming work-related benefits such as jobseekers’ allowance, incapacity benefit and disability living allowance in the year to February 2012.
Education/Jobs
Nonwhites already make up over 25 percent of all school pupils in primary and secondary schools combined, and have increased their numbers by more than 10 percent in the last ten years. There are a total of 8.67 million pupils in all schools in England—which means that there are already in excess of 2.167 million nonwhite pupils.
A study by Manchester University finds that adults from ethnic minority backgrounds are more likely to be educated to degree level than their white British counterparts.
Overall, 26% of white British adults held a degree, compared with 40% of those described as Black African, 42% of Indians and 43% from Chinese backgrounds.
However, findings from a report by the government’s Social Mobility Commission reveals that British Asians are less likely to land top professional jobs despite having best school results.
A report released by the UK Government in 2017 gives some other shocking facts. Of Britain’s 65m populace 30m are employed of which 76% white British have a job. However, Pakistani or Bangladeshi heritage are the least likely to have a job. Police are far more likely to stop and search non-white Britons. Black people are six times more likely to be stopped and searched than white people. White Britons, who comprise 86 percent of the population, account for 94 percent of police officers. About 92 percent of teachers are white. Asian and black teachers account for just six percent. Just 21 percent of black African and 24 percent of Arab Britons are home-owners, compared with 68 percent of white Britons.
Asian countries have had a massive financial influence on the UK economy, and some of the wealthiest British Asians own some of the most powerful companies in the world. Of the 19 richest Asians in the UK topping the list is Gopichand and Srichand Hinduja (and family) — £19 billion.
Who owns London?
MailOnline asked a pertinent question in March 2017 Who owns London” it appears Qataris have 24m sq.feet of prime real estate in the capital. Qatari’s have invested £80billion in UK real estate since 2005 and they have invested in 5 main areas in London – Kensington, Knightsbridge, Mayfair, the City & Canary Wharf. Some of London’s tallest & most iconic buildings are now owned by foreign investors – Qatar has bought over four 5-start luxury hotels – Claridges, the Connaught, the Knightsbridge Berkeley & the Park Lane InterContinental. No wonder the British are annoyed. Qatari’s also own the former US Embassy in Grosvenor Square. Qatari’s own more of London than the Queen herself!
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4323300/Who-owns-London-Qataris-24-MILLION-square-feet.html
The idea of “Britishness” is often raised by conservative and far-right critics, who argue against multiculturalism. As they rally against immigration, they claim ethnic minorities do not contribute positively to society or ever see Britain as their first home.
The white Brits are a minority in its own capital no different to how Sinhalese are a minority in Sri Lanka’s capital Colombo. Much of the Brexit sentiments of white Brits are certainly shared by the Sinhalese.
The white Brits are certainly sitting on a volcano… they may be numerically in the majority but the fact that their politicians are being increasingly influenced by non-whites into bringing legislations and policies that are pro-non-whites will certainly not be tolerated for too long. It is no surprise that violent entities ended up attacking half of all mosques in the UK after just 1 incident. However, there is no shortage to political approvals for mosques and other non-Christian religious centres inspite of UK clinging to its Anglican roots. As statistics have shown increasing number of non-used churches are now being turned into mosques!
Let’s not forget that the immigration crisis has emerged as a result of people fleeing from their countries due to West’s bombing sprees. If the West had not engaged in bombing countries based on lies and fabrications promoted through western-media people would not be fleeing their homes. Having said that, we can find fault with politicians not only in the West but even in Sri Lanka who have become victims of political correctness for their own personal gains against policies that are country-centric and in the national security interest of the country. Brexit sentiments expressed by the Brits are just as valid as the sentiments presented by the Sinhalese. While we may argue at the ‘Britishness’ of the Brits, Sri Lanka certainly has a proud history running to thousands of years to protect and foster and not have it replaced or usurped by foreign cultures and foreign rules.
However, YES, the white-Brits have every right to protect what they feel is their ‘Britishness’ if so the Sinhalese have every right to protect the Sinhala heritage & culture based on which the country was build. The contribution of others came far after.
No liberal concepts can suddenly come into the scene and replace a country’s history, heritage and culture just because those promoting it feels that their ideology should prevail over all others.
If birth controls are being applied all over the while why are Muslim nations omitted from this? What is the long term results when everyone else is having lower births while Muslim births keep increasing worldwide?
While the Christian ethos in most countries remain unchanged the same applies to majority Muslim countries. Vatican will never turn its state into a multicultural state nor will any majority Muslim countries. If so why only non-Abrahamic religions have to comply?
Brexit means Brits want their country back – the majority in Sri Lanka can understand and wish the same.
Shenali D Waduge
Conveying its decision on the reference made by the President, the Supreme Court of Sri Lanka has said that President Maithripala Sirisena’s term in office is five years.
The Supreme Court has conveyed the opinion that the President’s term of office is five years, the PMD confirmed.
The Supreme Court arrived at this opinion after the President sought its opinion with regard to the term of office of the incumbent President.
On reference made by President Maithripala Sirisena, Chief Justice Priyasath Dep appointed a five-judge bench on January 10, to decide whether the President’s term is five or six years.
The Supreme Court held an open court hearing to decide whether the President’s term is five or six years on January 11.
Meanwhile the President’s Media Division, issuing a statement, said that two different views have been expressed in legal, civil and political circles about the duration of the term of Presidency after the enactment of the 19th Amendment to the Constitution.
In order to dispel this confusion, the President has sought the opinion of the Supreme Court regarding the actual term of office.”
According to the powers vested on the President under the Constitution, the President has the right to seek the opinion of the Supreme Court, it said, adding, that the former Presidents who held office had also sought the opinion of the Supreme Court during their tenures.
It is a significant feature in the constitutions of democratic governance.”
Chief Justice Priyasath Dep yesterday appointed a five-judge bench the reference application forwarded by the President seeking an opinion whether it is constitutional for him to serve for a period of six years in the office of President.
The matter was taken up before a Supreme Court five-judge-bench comprising Chief Justice Priyasath Dep, Justice Eva Wanasundara, Justice Buwaneka Aluvihare, Justice Sisira de Abrew and Justice K.T. Chitrasiri.
President Maithripala Sirisena, in terms of Article 129 (1) of the Constitution, has referred to the Supreme Court the following question for consideration and for an opinion to be submitted to the President on or before January 14, 2018.
Whether, in terms of Provisions of the Constitution, I, as the person elected and succeeding to the office of President and having assumed such office in terms of Article 32(1) of the Constitution on January 9 2015, have any impediment to continue in the office of President for a period of six years from January 9 2015, the date on which the result of my election to the office of President was declared.”
Colombo, January 15 (newsin.asia): Sri Lankan President Maithripala Sirsena’s bid to get another year in office through a Supreme Court interpretation of the relevant clauses of the 19 th. Amendment (19A) of the Constitution, has failed.
The court has told him that there is a five year constitutional cap on his term.
In a letter to Chief Justice Priyasath Dep dated January 8, Sirisena had sought the court’s opinion on whether there is a constitutional bar on his continuing in office for six hears instead of five. The President had asked for a response to be submitted to him on or before January 14.
Those against the grant of an extra year, like the Center for Policy Alternatives (CPA), told the court on January 11, that Art 30 (2) of the 19th Amendment to the Constitution, passed on May 15, 2015, had clearly stated that: The President of the Republic shall be elected by the People and shall hold office for a term of five years.”
Further, the Amendment’s transitional provisions” had explicitly stated that this five-year term limit applies equally to the sitting President.
Section 49(1)(b) of the 19th Amendment to the Constitution says for the avoidance of doubt it is hereby declared that the persons holding office respectively, as the President and Prime Minister, on the day preceding April 22, 2015, shall continue to hold such office after such date, subject to the provisions of the Constitution as amended by this Act.”
Furthermore the 19th Amendment to the Constitution clearly stated which parts of the amendment would not apply to President Sirisena as the incumbent President and the reduction of the term of office was not such a provision (Section 51 of the 19th Amendment).
Accordingly, President Sirisena’s term must be understood as being for five years from 9 January 2015 (i.e. until 9 January 2020) and not for six years (i.e. until 9 January 2021),” CPA argued.
The CPA also pointed out that in the lead up to the enactment of the 19 th. Amendment in 2015, President Sirisena had himself noted that the reduced Presidential term of five years would apply to himself.
Attorney General’s Argument
However, the Attorney General Jayantha Jayasuriya argued that since Sirisena was elected for a six year term by a nation-wide popular vote on January 9, 2015 prior to the enactment of the 19A, he had a popular mandate to complete the six year term.
What Denial Means
Since the Supreme Court has not given Sirisena an extra year in office, he will have less time to fulfill various political agendas. He has serious issues in regard to his party, the Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP); his coalition partner and colleague, Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe; and his immediate and most potent rival, former President and leader of the opposition Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna (SLPP), Mahinda Rajapaksa.
If he stayed in office in August 2020, Sirisena would have been able to decisively influence the selection of SLFP candidates for the August 2020 parliamentary elections.
The SLFP constitution says that if the President of Sri Lanka is an SLFP member, he or she will automatically be named Chairman of the party also, and given power to have the final say in the distribution of party tickets.
And as President, Sirisena could also have decided who would be the Prime Minister. It is the Executive President’s prerogative to appoint anybody as Prime Minister who, in his view, can command majority support in parliament. Sirisena used this power in January 2015 when he appointed Ranil Wickremesinghe as Prime Minister even though Wickremesinghe’s party, the UNP, had only 41members in the House of 225.
In fact, Sirisena had pre-empted Rajapaksa’s becoming Prime Minister in August 2015 when he publicly declared that he would not appoint him Prime Minister even if his group was the single largest in parliament. The declaration, made prior to polling, had also demoralized Rajapaksa’s supporters and led to many leaders switching sides to Sirisena, to Rajapaksa’s detriment.
An extension of his term by a year would have enabled Sirisena to pursue the corruption charges against Rajapaksa and his henchmen, demoralize the SLPP, and weaken public support for it.
At the moment, Rajapaksa and his SLPP are the greatest threat to Sirisena, and the latter is desperate to mitigate it ahead of the local bodies elections in February and the national elections later.
And given the differences between Sirisena and Prime Minister Wickremesinghe, both in regard to policy and style of functioning, continuation in office for an extra year would have helped Sirisena further build and consolidate his power vis-à-vis Wickremesinghe and his party, the UNP and checkmated them if needed.
People of this country also can remember how he conducted before the CB Commission when he personally led the evidence against Ranil
Adding insult to injury now he has committed a second serious blunder which makes him utterly unfit to hold that public post.
The job of the Attorney General is to give the correct advice to the Government to protect public interest as he is employed and paid by the Public and not by the President or the Prime Minister.
ශ්රී ලාංකන් ගුවන් සේවය ගැන ජනාධිපති කොමිසමක් දමා හෙව්වොත් වත්මන් කලමණාකරනය ගනත් හොඳ හොඳ දේවල් එලියට එනු ඇති බව ආචාර්ය නාලක ගොඩහේවා පෙන්වා දුන්නේ ඉරිදා ශ්රී ජයවර්ධන පුර කෝට්ටේ සිංහ සමාජ ශාලාවේ පැවැත්වුන වෘතිකයින්ගේ සම්මන්ත්රනයක් අමතමනි.
මුරුත්තෙට්ටුවේ ආනන්ද හිමියන් මුලසුන හෙබවූ මෙම සමුලුවට ඇල්ලේ ගුනවංශ හිමි, බැසිල් රාජපක්ෂ, නිවාර්ඩ් කබ් රාල්, මේජර් ජෙනරල් කමල් ගුනරත්න ඇතුලු ආරාධිතයින් විශාල පිරිසක්ද සහභාගී වී සිටියහ.
පසුගියදා සිරිසේන ජනාධිපතිතුමා ප්රකාශයක් කරමින් කියා සිටියා ඔහු බලා පොරොත්තු වෙනවා කියලා ශ්රී ලාංකන් ගුවන් සේවය ගැන ජනාධිපති කොමිසමක් පත්කරල කරුණු හොයන්නට. ඔහු ඉන් ජනතාවට අඟවන්නට උත්සාහ කලේ රාජපක්ෂ සමයේ මේ ආයතන පාඩුවට දිවූ බවයි.
මම කිසිම විටක පසුගිය රජය ශ්රී ලාංකන් ගුවන් සේවය පාලනය කල ආකාරය සුද්ද කරන්න යන්නේ නැහැ. එමිරේට්ස් ගුවන් සමාගමේ කලමනාකරණය ඉවත් කරල ශ්රී ලාංකන් ගුවන් සේවය යලි රජයට පවරා ගැනීමේ තීරණය කුමන හේතුවක් නිසා හෝ ගත්තානම් ඉන්පසු එම ගුවන් සේවය පාලනය කරන්න ක්ශේස්ත්රය ගැන හොද දැනුමක් තිබෙන සභාපතිවරයෙකු ප්රධාන විධායක නිලධාරියෙකු පත් කල යුතුව තිබුනා. ඒ තනතුරුවලට නෑදෑ හිතමිතුරන් පත් කිරීම පසුගිය රජය විසින් ගත් , පුර වැසියෙකු ලෙස මා එකග නොවන තීරණයක්. නමුත් ඒ වරද ගැන දිගින් දිගටම කතා කරමින් ආ යහපාලන රජය එය ඊටත් වඩා නරක ලෙස සිදුකලා. සභාපතිවරයා කලේ අගමැතිගේ පාසැල් මිතුරෙක්. ඊට කලින් කරල තියෙන්නේ ඇදුම් නිශ්පාදනය. ඔන්න පලපුරුද්ද. ප්රදාන විධායක නිලදාරිය කලේ අගමැතිගෙ අඹ යාලුවගේ මල්ලී. ඔහුගෙ වැටුප පසුගිය රජය කාලයේ ගෙව්වා වගේ හතර ගුනයක් කියල ජනතා විමුක්ති පෙරමුනෙ හදුන්හෙට්ටි මහත්තය පසුගියදා පෙන්නල දීල තිබුනා. එතුමා කියන විදියට නව රජය යටතේ පත්කල නිලධාරියෝ ටික ගුවන් සේවයට දරන්න බැරි තරම් පඩි හා වරප්රසාද වැඩි කරගෙන. රුපියල් මිලියන 3 කට වඩා මාසික ආදායමක් ලබන නිලධාරියෝ 4 දෙනෙක් ඉන්නවලු. පසුගියදා ජනාදිපතිතුමාම මේ නිලදාරීන්ගේ වැටුප් විස්තර ඉල්ලුවාම ගුවන් සේවයේ සභාපතිවරය එය ප්රතික්ශේප කලා කියලත් පත්තර වල තිබුනා. ගුවන් සේවය දිගින් දිගටම පාඩු ලබද්දි ප්රධාන විධායක නිලධාරියාට රුපියල් කෝටියක ප්රසාද දීමනවක් දෙන බවකුත් පසුගිය දිනවල වාර්තා වුනා. මොවුන් මේ විදියට ශ්රී ලංකන් ගුවන් සේවය සූරාකන අතර දිගින් දිගටම ගන්නාවැරදි තීරණ නිසා ගුවන් සේවයේ පාඩු දෙගුන තෙගුන වෙලා.
ශ්රී ලංකන් ගුවන් සේවා ඉතිහාසයේ අසාර්ථකම යුගය ආරම්ඹ වුනේ යහපාලනය බලයට ආවට පසුවයි. ඔබ දන්නවා ඇති ගුවන් යානා ක්ශේෂ්ත්රයේ ලොකුම වියදම ඉන්ධන වියදම බව. අපි දන්නවා 2011-2014 කාලයේ ලෝක තෙල් මිල බැරලයකට ඩොලර් 110ක් වැනි ඉතා ඉහල අගයක තිබුනේ. ශ්රී ලාංකන් ගුවන් සේවයට එදා ලාබ ලබන්නට තිබුන මූලිකම බාදාව මේ අධික තෙල් මිලයි. නමුත් 2015 ජනවාරි සිට මේ තෙල් මිල පුදුමාකාර ලෙස අඩුවුනා. බැරලයක මිල ඩොලර් 50 ටත් වඩා පහලට ආවා.
මෙ තත්වය යටතේ හරියට අනෙකුත් වියදම් කලමණාකරනය කරගෙන ගුවන් සේවාව පවත්වාගෙන ගියානම් පසුගිය වසර 3 තුල රටට විශාල ලාබයක් ලැබිය යුතුව තිබුනා. නමුත් ඒ වෙනුවට පසුගිය වසර දෙකේ ශ්රී ලාංකන් ගුවන් සේවය විශාල ලෙස පාඩු ලැබුව. ඒ මේ වැඩ බැරි දාසලාගේ වැඩ බැරි කම නිසයි. හැම වැඩක්ම අනා ගන්නවා.
අද තෙල් මිලේ වාසිය පසුගිය රජය කාලේ තිබුනනම් එදා ලාබය හා අද අලාබය අපට ගනන් හදා බලන්න පුලුවන් මෙන්න මේ ආකාරයට.
ශ්රී ලංකන් එයාර් ලයින්ස් සමාගමේ වත්මන් කලමණාකරනය විසින් පසුගිය රජයේ නිල කාලයේදී කරන ලද නව අහස් යානා ඇණවුම් කිහිපයක් පදනම් රහිතව අත්හිටුවීම නිසා, එම අහස් යානා නිශ්පාදන ආයතනයට රුපියල් කෝටි 1600 ක වන්දියත් නව කලමණාකාරීත්වය යටතේ 2017 වසරේ ශ්රී ලංකන් ගුවන් සේවය ලැබූ පාඩුව රුපියල් කෝටි 1400 ත් දෙකේ එකතුව රුපියල් කෝටි 3000 යි. මෙය මත්තල ගුවන් තොටුපොල සාදා නිමකරන්නට ගිය සම්පූර්ණ මුදලට වැඩි අගයක්.මත්තලට සුදු අලියෙක් කිවූ යහපාලන කෙරුමෝ මෙහි වගකීම ගන්නවාද ? අඩුගානෙ මත්තල තියෙනවා මෙයාලට කෝටි 3000 කට විකුනගන්නවත්
මොකද්ද මේකට හේතුව. වැඩබැරිදාසලට ගුවන් සේවාව කලමණාකරණය කිරීමට බැරි කම පමන නොවෙයි නෑදෑයො යාලුවො තොග වශයෙන් ආයතනයේ ඉහල තනතුරුවලට දමාගෙන එය සූරා කෑමයි. හිතාගන්නවත් බැරි තරම් ඉහල වැටුප් හා විවිධ වරප්රසාද අනුමත කරගෙන ආයතනේ වියදම් විශාල ලෙස ඉහල දමා ගැනීමයි. මේ අයගේ පඩි හා වරප්රසාද මොවද කියල මාධ්ය වලින් ඇහුවහම ආයතනයේ සභාපති කියනවා ඒවා පුද්ගලිකයි රහසිගතයි කියල. හැබැයි මේ කාබාසිනියා කරන්නේ මහජන මුදල්. අපේ රටේ මිනිස්සුන්ට
ලොකු අමාරුවක් තිබුනේ පසු ගිය රජයේ ඥාති සංග්රහ ගැනනේ. ඒව වැරදියි කියමු. ඉස්සර හිටියේ හිටපු ජනාධිපතිතුමාගේ මල්ලිනේ සභාපති ලෙස. එහෙනම් අද මේ යහපාලකයන්ගේ නෑදෑයො මිත්රයො එකතුවෙලා මේ කරන මහජන දේපල විනාශය ගැන මොකද්ද කියන්න තියෙන්නේ ? එදා මෙහෙම පාඩු තිබිල නැහැනේ . තෙල් මිල අද ගානට තිබුනනම් එදා ආයතනය ලාබ ලබනවනේ. අද තෙල් මිල මෙතරම් අඩුවෙලත් මොවුන් ආයතනය විනාශ කරල නේද ? ”
–
Former Central Bank Governor Ajith Nivard Cabraal yesterday said the Sirisena-Wickremesinghe government owed an explanation to the country as to why action hadn’t been taken against any of one of those named in the Presidential Commission of Inquiry report on treasury bond scams of 2015 and 2016.
Cabraal said so in response to a query by The Island yesterday. Pointing out that the report containing the findings and the recommendations had been handed over to President Sirisena on Dec 30, 2017, Cabraal emphasized that there couldn’t be any justification in holding up judicial action. Cabraal was Governor of the Central Bank from July 1 2006 to January 9, 2015.
PCoI’s Chairman Justice K.T. Chitrasiri handed over the report to President Sirisena in the presence of two other members of the Commission, Justice P.S. Jayawardena and retired Deputy Auditor General V. Kandasamy. Secretary to the Commission, Sumathipala Udugamsuriya was also present
Cabraal pointed out that President Sirisena appointed the three-man commission on January 27, 2017 to investigate, inquire into and report on the issuance of treasury bonds during the period February 1, 2015 to March 31 2016.
When The Island pointed out that President Sirisena is on record as having said that the commission had recommended that Sri Lanka should conduct a forensic audit regarding alleged fraudulent and corrupt practices beginning 2008 to 2014, Cabraal said that President Sirisena should release commission findings and recommendations without further delay. “Let the people know the findings as well as recommendations in respect of treasury bond scams involving Perpetual Treasuries Limited. I really want to know the recommendation as regards 2008-2014 period.”
Cabraal said that as he took over the Central Bank in July 2006 it wasn’t clear why the commission didn’t want to inquire into his entire term. Challenging the government to prove wrongdoing on his part during his tenure as the Governor, CBSL, the ex-Governor said that he was eagerly awaiting the release of the findings and the recommendations to compare them with the statement made by President Sirisena on January 3.
Responding to another query, Cabraal said that as Auditor General Gamini Wijesinghe had already dealt with issuance of treasury bonds during 2008-2014 in response to a request by the then Finance Minister Ravi Karunanayake on August 19, 2016, it would be interesting to know whether Chitrasiri’s commission took that into consideration.
The question is whether President Sirisena’s statement actually reflected the findings and recommendations contained in the report, Cabraal said, adding that thanks to wide print and electronic media coverage of the bond commission proceedings the people couldn’t be deceived. The bottom line is that the public knew what the recommendations ought to be, Cabraal said, urging the government to expedite the process.
Cabraal stressed that whatever the parliamentary process in respect of the bond report such procedure shouldn’t either delay or hinder the Attorney General acting on the findings and the recommendations. Cabraal said that so far there hadn’t been any indication whatsoever as regards action taken by the Attorney General. Pointing out that recent special parliamentary session hadn’t in anyway contributed to speed up the inquiry, Cabraal said that it wouldn’t be fair to hold up the judicial process until parliament meets again on January 23.
Referring to President Sirisena’s January 3 statement, Cabraal said that obviously the SLFP leader conveniently refrained from commenting on some critically important matters that had transpired in the commission.
There hadn’t been any reference to the circumstances leading to Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe directing Singaporean Arjuna Mahendran to change fool-proof and time-tested auction cum direct placement system that was in place since 1997, Cabraal pointed out. Cabraal said that for 18 years that system ensured successive governments obtained required funds at the best possible interest rates. On the other hand, that system prevented any primary dealer exploiting it at the expense of the national economy, the accounting professional said.
“Give me one good reason to change the system in place”, Cabraal said, pointing out that had there been exploitation of that during his tenure as the Governor, yahapalana leadership should have said so at the time Premier Wickremesinghe issued instructions to Mahendran to implement auction only system. Cabraal said that the parliament was told of time tested and highly effective auction cum direct placement system being corrupt and unregulated on March 17, 2015. “Obviously, it was propaganda to divert attention.”
Cabraal said that President Sirisena refrained from commenting on several critical matters; ministers Ravi Karunanayake, Malik Samarawickrema and Kabir Hashim attending a meeting at the Central Bank on the day before the first fraudulent transaction, there was also no mention of the role played by the Bank of Ceylon (BoC) in financing Perpetual Treasuries Limited amounting to Rs 10 bn, the Central Bank making available Rs 40 bn via its ‘Intra-day Liquidity Fund (ILF) as well as BoC, People’s Bank and the National Savings Bank having been issued specific instructions by then Finance Minister Karunanayake to bid low for treasury bonds in the presence of incumbent Treasury Secretary Dr. Samaratunga.
Cabraal said those responsible for prosecuting wrongdoers should keep in mind that the country’s biggest annual tender is for the issuance of treasury bills and treasury bonds amounting to staggering Rs 2,000 bn whereas the second tender would be for oil amounting to approximately Rs 375 bn.
He said the SLFP couldn’t take advantage of the bond commission report. That was the undeniable truth, Cabraal said, adding that there was no question as regards the UNP’s culpability in the first bond scam in Feb 2015. For the second far bigger robbery carried out in March 2016, the responsibility lies with all political parties which backed the dissolution of parliament to prevent the then COPE (Committee on Public Enterprises) Chairman Dew Gunasekera from tabling comprehensive report on the first scam, Cabraal said.
Copyright © 2026 LankaWeb.com. All Rights Reserved. Powered by Wordpress