National integration
would mean that in a country which is inhabited by several ethnic communities
everyone would harbour similar feelings and thinking about matters of national
interest like independence, territorial integrity, sovereignty etc. Development
of such sentiments cannot be forced on a people. In this regard what the Indian
philosopher S. Radhakrishna said may be of relevance. He has said national integration cannot be
made by brick and mortar but should be allowed to develop through education.
Without a mutual feeling of respect for one another’s language, religion and
culture among people national integration of the type defined above is
impossible to achieve. Such feelings would come only with education. It is
perhaps this truism that made Radhakrishna utter those words of wisdom. Laws
and Constitutions cannot impose something that only education could instill by
a gradual process. There may not be any
other method, or substitute, capable of bringing about such a change.
The Constitution of
a country should not be an obstacle to the development of such feelings in
people of different faiths, languages and cultures. It must ensure that all are
equally treated by government institutions, have equal opportunity in
education, employment, and space for economic and cultural development.
However, the Constitution, whatever form it may take, cannot force national
integration on people whether they are a majority or a minority. A Constitution
can only provide for laws that would prevent obstacles being put in the way to
national integration. For instance discrimination of a particular communal
group would be an obstacle to national integration. The Constitution must provide for the enactment of laws that act
against discrimination.
It is in this
context that the 13th Amendment should be viewed. It is often said
that the implementation of the 13th Amendment to the Constitution
which came into being as a result of the Indo-Lanka Accord entered into in July
1987, would result in national integration. The 13th A provides for
Provincial Councils which attempts power-sharing at provincial level. As
mentioned above the Constitution if it is to facilitate national integration it
must treat all the ethnic communities equally and must not try to satisfy one
group at the expense of another. If it does it would be an obstacle rather than
a facilitator for national integration. This may happen if political
power-sharing is attempted with the provinces as the unit of devolution. Most
of the Provinces in Sri Lanka have multi-ethnic populations where one ethnic
community is in the majority while there are enclaves of other communities who
would be minorities in a particular province. Creation of autonomous
territorial units out of these provinces would result in these minority groups
losing their umbilical connection with the central government to a significant degree and being brought
under a provincial power. In other words a law which attempts to solve the
problems of minority communities would create new minorities with attendant issues in each of
these Provinces. For instance in the Eastern Province Sinhalese would be a
minority with regard to political power and they may be concerned of being
discriminated. Such an eventuality may not facilitate national integration.
Further, several
authoritative world wide surveys have shown that power-sharing measures as a
solution to ethnic conflict have not been successful. There had been 78
countries in Asia, Africa, Middle East,
Eastern Europe, former USSR and the Caribbean which were in intense ethnic
conflict during 1980 to 2010. Of these only 20 managed to conclude inter-ethnic
power sharing arrangements, many failed, some experienced genocide eh. Rwanda
in 1993 and others ended with secession eg. Sudan in 2005. Only 4 to 6 achieved
stable arrangements but even these have serious political instability (Horowitz
D, 2014).
Following are few
extracts from these research works; The core reason why power-sharing cannot
resolve ethnic conflict is that it is voluntaristic; it requires conscious
decisions by elites to cooperate to avoid ethnic strife. Under conditions of
hypernationalist mobilisation and real security threats, group leaders are
unlikely to be receptive to compromise and even if they are they cannot act
without being discredited and replaced by harder-line rivals” (Kaufmann, 1997).
Proposals for devolution abound, but more often than not devolution agreements
are difficult to reach and once reached soon abort” (Horowitz, 1985).
That Sri Lanka
provides ample evidence in support of the above research findings could easily
be seen in its experience with its own Provincial Councils. Of the nine PCs the
worst failure was seen in relation to the Northern PC where it was supposed to
be essential for the solution of the ethnic conflict. Its Chief Minister after
willingly contesting for the post, made use of the opportunity to loudly engage
in secessionist rhetoric and propaganda. Some Tamil leaders who engage in such
treacherous activity are believed to be funded by pro-LTTE Tamil Diaspora. How
could anybody believe that the full implementation of the 13th A
would not provide greater opportunity
for such secessionist activity with greater collusion between internal and
external separatist elements.
In consideration of
the above what would be more suitable for Sri Lanka is a power-sharing
mechanism at the centre which would suit its geography of ethnicity where in
most areas there is a mixture of ethnic groups and 50% of minorities live
outside the North and the East. If all possibility of discrimination of
majority or minority communities is avoided and people are allowed to learn to
respect each other’s different cultures there would develop common feelings and
thinking about national issues which would be the national integration that has
eluded us all these years.
After the 2015 election, the US got into several critical sectors,
the Sri Lanka‘s economy, Sri Lanka‘s Parliament and Sri Lanka‘s armed forces.
‘We want to see Sri Lanka as a truly democratic, prosperous, happy and
reconciled country in the future,’ US said. .
The House Democracy Partnership of the US House of
Representatives is a bipartisan,
twenty-member commission of the U.S. House of Representatives that works directly with partner countries
around the world to support the development of effective, independent, and
responsive legislative institutions. Partner states are eligible to participate
in training seminars for staff, peer-to-peer exchange programs with the U.S.
House of Representatives and receive capacity building assistance in critical
areas such as constituent relations, legislative oversight, committee
operations, and research and library services.
In 2017, the House
Democracy Partnership was implementing projects in Afghanistan, Myanmar,
Colombia, Georgia, Haiti, Indonesia, Iraq, Kenya, Kosovo, Kyrgyzstan, Lebanon,
Liberia, Macedonia, Mongolia, Pakistan, Peru, Timo-Leste and Ukraine.
House
Democracy Partnership of the US House of Representatives launched a Collaboration Agreement with the
Parliament of Sri Lanka. The purpose
was to strengthen the partnership between the two legislatures. Speaker
Karu Jayasuriya signed for Sri Lanka. Elsewhere it was said that the
Partnership was signed on September 14, 2016 in Washington D.C.
The US / Sri Lanka Partnership Dialogue, is a regular policy
consultation designed to discuss and identify opportunities for cooperation
across the full range of bilateral and regional issues, the US said. US Under Secretary for Political Affairs
ambassador Shannon was scheduled to visit Sri Lanka in November 2017 to take
part in the next round of the Partnership talks.
There was a media
conference in Washington in February 2016 to formally announce the start of the
Partnership Dialogue. The participants were US Secretary of State John Kerry and
Foreign minister Mangala Samaraweera.
Kerry told
the cameras that this was the start of a strategic dialogue with Sri Lanka.
Mangala Samaraweera said the cordial relations between USA and Sri Lanka was
now elevated to a new level. He was looking forward to the inaugural meeting of
the US-Sri Lanka Partnership Dialogue. Mangala was not his usual bouncy self,
he looked nervous and strained. This clip is available on Youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQ7SdFkhcdg
A delegation
from the U.S. House of Representatives came in February 2017 for three days of
meetings, as part of the House Democracy Partnership (HDP) . The 8 member
delegation is the largest ever US Congress Group to visit Sri Lanka. It
included 4 each from Democratic and
Republican Parties. The aim of the visit was to promote the on-going
partnership between HDP and the Sri Lanka Parliament and deepen bilateral relations. The visit serves to underscore the strong
support for Sri Lanka by both parties in
the U.S. Congress, US said.
The delegation consisted of three American Congress members,
members of the Congressional staff , one member each from House Democracy
Partnership Majority and House Democracy
Partnership Minority, and Chaplain of the US House of Representatives. The delegation
was accompanied by a US military escort.
The delegation
met President Sirisena and held discussions about the steps to be taken
to further strengthen bilateral relations. The delegation told President Sirisena that USA will stand
by Sri Lanka in its challenging journey towards economic development. The
delegation also met Minister of Foreign Affairs, Mangala Samaraweera and
discussed issues of mutual interest. The
US delegation visited Hambantota sea port and Yala national sanctuary.
Yahapalana government also joined another US project, ‘Strengthening Democratic Governance
and Accountability Project’ (SDGAP). This
is a project for the reform Sri
Lanka’s public sector. USAID
allocated USD 13 million for the project in September 2016 and the program was launched in
November 2016. SDGAP was subject to the laws and regulations
of the United States, with oversight from USAID’s Office of Inspector General.
US selected a private US
company Development Alternatives, Inc (DAI) of Maryland, to implement the
project. DAI would work closely with the Parliament, Independent Commissions
and related ministries. This decision was
heavily criticized.
DAI has been speedily denounced in Sri Lanka as a CIA front. Lasanda Kurukulasuriya
described DAI as a CIA front
organization dedicated to destabilizing governments unfavorable to US
interests.’ She noted that under the terms of the agreement, the SDGAP project
is not subject to Sri Lankan law but to the laws and regulations of the US. It
does not come under the purview of Sri Lanka’s Auditor General.
Development Alternatives Incorporated is a known CIA front. Its
specialty is ‘democracy promotion’ said Kamal
Wickremasinghe. US funds are transferred to opposition parties and
other pro-American groups in countries of strategic interest, such as Sri Lanka
, using the pretext of ‘promoting democracy’.
The pretext of promoting democracy” is a modern form of CIA subversion
tactics, added Lasanda, seeking to infiltrate and penetrate civil society
groups and provide funding to encourage regime change” in strategically
important nations.
Development Alternatives Incorporated carries out the ‘dirty work’ of CIA’s Office
of Transition Initiatives(OTI) that sits at the head of a network of front
entities which include International Republican Institute (IRI), National
Endowment for Democracy (NED), National Democratic Institute for International
Affairs (NDI), Freedom House and numerous others, said Kamal Wickremasinghe.
The OTI’s charter is to
finance the formation of, and deep infiltration of civil society groups (NGOs)
for use in their subversive activities including regime change in strategically
important nations with governments unwilling to succumb to US dictates.
Wickremasinghe observes that DAI also plans to ‘engage’ with the
Sri Lanka Institute of Development Administration to introduce international
best practices into the role of public servants in policy development and
implementation. It will provide
technical assistance and grants to support government and civil society
stakeholders to address priority laws and policies identified as affecting the
rights of women and under-represented groups.
These words reveal, says Wickremasinghe, to the discerning reader, the
ulterior motives behind the impending US intervention in our country.
Analyst observed that the CIA has been here for ages, under the
ground. We all know that. The political NGOs in the island, working in
human rights, ethnic studies, social science, women, children, poverty and so
on were funded indirectly by the CIA. The JVP was considered a CIA
creation. Until now such support was
covert. Now it has become overt. USA is getting more confident in Sri Lanka.
Sri
Lanka joined the Open government Partnership of the USA in 2015.The Open
Government Partnership is a multilateral initiative by the United
States launched in 2011 to provide an international platform for domestic
reformers committed to making their governments more open, accountable, and
responsive to citizens. From its initial 8 countries – Brazil,
Indonesia, Mexico, Norway, Philippines, South Africa, United Kingdom, United
States – the OGP has now grown to 69 participating
countries. Sri Lanka is the only South Asian participating country in the
OGP.
The first step towards full OGP participation
is meeting the OGP eligibility criteria. In order to be eligible to participate
in OGP, governments must demonstrate a minimum level of commitment to open
government principles in four key areas of Fiscal Transparency, Access to
Information, Income and Asset Disclosures, and Citizen Engagement. Sri Lanka
became eligible to join early in 2015 having met the required criteria and
scoring 14 of a total of 16 points.
Membership in
the OGP is by invitation only and Sri Lanka’s Yahapalana government was invited
to join the OGP, the first South Asian nation to have qualified and to have
joined the OGP. Sri Lanka joined the OGP in October
2015. Through the endorsement of the OGP declaration, member countries
commit, essentially to foster a domestic culture which empowers a country’s
citizens and delivers better governance for them.
OGP
is overseen by a Steering Committee, which includes
representatives of governments and civil society organizations. The key
instrument for the implementation of open governance in Sri Lanka is the OGP
National Action Plan (NAP). This plan was carefully prepared with community
based dialogues in all nine provinces of the country. The National Action Plan
contains policy reform commitments in about nine different thematic areas of
governance including but not limited to education, health, environment, ICT,
right to information and women’s affairs. For education the objective is
transparent and impartial teacher recruitment policy. For Health it is CKDU and two other
objectives.
The NGOs
involved in the OGP in Sri Lanka include
Center for Policy Alternatives, (CPA)
International center for Ethnic studies (ICES), Sarvodaya, Transparency
International , Management Development Centre, (a Sri Lankan NGO providing
training for the Development of the Community by enhancing the Knowledge,
Skills and Attitudes) and Consortium of Humanitarian Agencies (CHA) .
The Consortium of Humanitarian Agencies (CHA) est. April 1997 is
an association of agencies working in, and supporting work in, Sri Lanka for
peace building and humanitarian work. It
has a fully-fledged secretariat with its own specific capabilities. it helps
disseminate information, bring weight in discussions related to the conflict
situation of the country and lobbying through a large membership, maintaining
links bottom-up and across tires, providing convenient access to information on
needs of specific conflict-affected communities, government policies regarding
pertinent issues, and international agencies working in the country.
CHA believes in respecting diversity and the promotion and
achievement of fundamental rights and freedom, which provides equal
opportunities for development for all Sri Lankans. Areas of operation are Vavuniya, Trincomalee, Puttalam, Matara, Mannar, Kalutara, Jaffna,
Hambantota, Galle, Badulla and Ampara.
US
then went on to meddle with Sri Lanka ‘s economy. A 3 year
economic plan for Sri Lanka, put together by a team of foreign and local
experts led by Ricardo Hausmann, Director of Harvard’s centre for International
development was presented at Sri Lanka Economic Forum, January 2016. The plan would be funded by the Open Society
Foundation of George Soros. Soros was also one of the main participants along
with Harvard’s Joseph Stieglitz.
Local
economists and social scientist criticized this plan and wanted it dismissed. Hausmann’s presentation was compared to a
power point presentation of a postgraduate student. Hausmann has offered no sound policy
alternative to Sri Lanka problems. He has used Venezuela as an example, the
participants said. Stieglitz fared no better. His analysis is defective,
participants said. He showed no understanding of the country’s needs.
Soros will set up an office here. He was looking for investment in Sri Lanka as well as assist the government economic
progamme. Soros presence will boost foreign investment, said
Yahapalana, enthusiastically. Critics pointed out that Soros is a financial
speculator who has made his money by manipulating currency markets. He is the last person we need here, they
said.
Ricardo Hausmann and Robert Z. Lawrence, Professor of International trade and
investment were in Sri Lanka for over a year, starting 2016, to restructure
exports, reported the media. They
have been looking at ways to improve
growth using Export Development Board,, Board of Investment, Sri Lanka
Tourism development Board and Ministry
of Development Strategies. Further, Harvard Business School and World Bank were advising the BOI.
the Harvard Centre for International Development (HCID) is helping
Sri Lanka in attracting foreign direct investments (FDIs) promoting emerging
exports, targeting new non-existent industries, identifying and engaging with
potential new investors, fixing the investment climate for new emerging
industries and figuring out how to create new tourist destinations. Five teams
of experts are working with Harvard, all focused on issues relating to exports
and FDIs.BOI staff has also been receiving training programmes conducted by
Harvard University’s Centre for International Development, McKinsey Consulting
and the World Bank Group.
The media also observed in 2016 that
there were two teams heading to Harvard for a Harvard study
programme, each unaware of the other,
one from Prime Minister’s Office and the
other from the Finance ministry. ( Continued)
US intervened
in the two Presidential elections of in January 2010 and January 2015. US wished
to somehow defeat Mahinda Rajapaksa and put a US puppet on the throne. It is
well known that the US meddled in the Presidential elections of 2010 and 2015,
said the media. US ambassador Michelle Sisson was openly talking politics at
embassy functions. She was adamant that the candidate to challenge Mahinda
Rajapaksa in 2015 should not be a UNP candidate but a common candidate.
The US
funding of Sirisena campaign in 2014/2015 is not a secret though identities of
recipients remained confidential, said Shamindra Ferdinando. US Secretary of State John Kerry said a
massive USD 585 million was spent in Nigeria, Myanmar and Sri Lanka to ‘restore
democracy’. Some of this has been given, in Sri Lanka to civil society, citizen
movements and faith leaders.
Sarath
Fonseka, the US candidate for 2010, failed to win. But in
2015, Maitripala Sirisena became President and Ranil Wickremesinghe was made
Prime Minister. At long last, US was in control in Sri Lanka.
USA planned
to entrench itself comfortably in Sri Lanka. ‘What we offer Sri Lanka is a true
and transparent partnership, particularly in terms of development and
infrastructure, avoiding unsustainable debts,’ said USA. ‘Your country stands
to gain substantially from these opportunities.’
Top US
officials bounced into Sri Lanka with confidence. US Secretary of State, John
Kerry, was the first to visit. The
Secretary of State is the highest ranking member of the US Cabinet. Sri Lanka
had a highly publicized, triumphant visit from Kerry, In May 2015.
Kerry did not
hide the fact that Sri Lanka was of great strategic importance to Washington.
He said, “Your country sits at the crossroads of Africa, South Asia, and
East Asia. The Indian Ocean is the world’s most important commercial highway.
And with its strategic location near deep-water ports in India and Myanmar, Sri
Lanka could serve as the fulcrum of a modern and dynamic Indo-Pacific region.
The US could play a leadership role in making this happen.” .
Other officials
followed. Nisha Biswal, Assistant secretary
of State for South and Central Asian Affairs, had visited Sri Lanka six times
by July 2016. Alice Wells, who replaced
her, was in Sri Lanka in August 2017. Samantha
Power [US ambassador to the UN], Thomas Shannon, [US Deputy Secretary Defense],
Tom Malinowski [US assistant Secretary for democracy and Human rights] and US
Secretary of the Navy, Ray Mabus, also visited Sri Lanka. There is a photograph
of Foreign Minister Mangala Samaraweera holding hands with Biswal and
Malinowski.
US supporters in Sri Lanka were pleased. America is very important
to us, said Minister Harsha de Silva. 25% of our exports go to US and 70% of
that is garments. Changes in US trade policy have a large repercussion on Sri
Lanka, because of our dependency on the US economy, he added.
Mangala Samaraweera said, ‘Obama would
come up to President Sirisena to say ‘Hello’ at whichever international forum
they used to meet. This shows how far American relations have improved during
the recent times.’
Others were not pleased. They saw the Yahapalana government as a
puppet government of the USA. Yahapalana government is a ‘fully pro-Washington regime’ said Tamara
Kunanayagam. Tissa Vitarana said that Ranil Wickremesinghe was going to make
Sri Lanka a puppet of the USA like the Philippines. Loyal supporters of the USA are
ridiculed. Mangala Samaraweera is America’s poodle and the West’s darling,
said Rajeewa Jayaweera.
The current government appears to be highly dependent on the West
for its political survival, said analysts. This link will not benefit the
country. Over a thousand so-called independent
“Think Tanks” have been established both in the USA and in other
countries to influence governments towards USA projects. Institute of
Policy Studies and Advocata are playing that role in Sri Lanka, said Tissa
Vitarana.
USA is not
that admired and welcomed in Sri Lanka. Critics seem to outnumber admirers. Even the USA
embassy in Colombo is criticized. USA is
at present completing a huge embassy on Galle Road, amalgamating the old
British embassy site. The new complex appears to extend from the Kollupitiya
junction to the old Colombo Swimming Club area, covering the entire length of
the front wall of the Temple Trees, said critics. Within months of Yahapalana government
coming to power, the application form for a fixed deposit in a state bank asked
‘are you a US person.
From a triumphal, highly visible start in 2015, with prominent
visits by Secretary of State John Kerry and other high ranking officials, the
USA went into low profile. Visits from US
officials continued, but without much
publicity.
Prime
Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe paid a quiet visit to New York in July 2017. The Prime Minister was in New York
primarily, we are told, for a medical checkup. He had been earlier checked up
and fully cleared in Singapore. He was
declared fit by the New York medical panel too.
Since
Wickremesinghe happened to be in New York ,he would also meet with two
officials from the White House, who would represent President Donald Trump..Wickremesinghe
was also scheduled to address the United
Nations Ocean Conference. This indicates that the visit was planned well
ahead. Usually when Sri Lanka’s Prime
Minister goes on a visit abroad, there is much publicity, including television
and photos. This time there was none.
US Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo was to
travel to Sri Lanka on a short visit, in June 2019.
US Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo was to
travel to Sri Lanka on a short visit, in June 2019. Pompeo was accompanying
President Trump for the G-20 summit in Osaka. The purpose of Pompeo’s visit was
to pressure Sri Lanka into signing SOFA. But he did not come. He cancelled his
visit.
The reason, said analysts was the growing
protests against the Status of Forces (SOFA) Agreement and strong objections to
an American military base in Sri Lanka. The public opposed SOFA since it would
give the US forces unrestricted access to Sri Lanka as well as diplomatic
immunity. “
USA now had to
engage in soft power all over again. However, a few items of popular American
culture were already in place. They seem to date from the year 2000. Valentine’s
Day came to Sri Lanka. This took off with a bang. Personal love was emphasized.
Then in 2002
a session of Free love or something was planned in Vihara Maha Devi Park in
May, the month of Wesak. The Maha Sangha
intervened and squashed it. The Sangha said that this project was not an
innocent one. It had an ulterior motive. It was intended to subvert, to
overturn the local culture.
Mothers Day
started around 2010, followed much later by Fathers Day. In Sri Lanka too, like
in America, these events were intended mainly to help sell merchandise. The
motive was commercial. Children of elite westernized families in Colombo are
now starting to hold Halloween parties, and Colombo has started eating dough nuts.
Some caterers specialize in only doughnuts.
The U.S. Embassy launched
an American Innovation Hub (iHub) in Matara in March 2018 in partnership with
the Matara District Chamber of Commerce and Industry. The iHub is located in
the Matara Chamber of Commerce building.
The iHub offers thematic programs, all free of charge, and a selection
of U.S. books and DVDs. It is intended to promote English language learning,
encourage study in the United States, and introduce the local community to
American culture and values.
The U.S.
embassy thereafter signed a Memorandum
of Understanding with the Matara Chamber of Industry and Commerce in September
2018 to open an American Corner in Matara. This will replace the IHub.
The American Corner will offer free programs
and training. Programs will include English classes, coding and computer
skills, leadership and public speaking training, and a range of film screenings
and cultural opportunities.” This
has attracted audiences of different ages and diverse backgrounds.”
Mo’ Mojo, an
American zydeco band, came in February 2017 on a U.S. Embassy sponsored visit
.There were public performances in Jaffna and Colombo; workshops for music
students; and master classes for Sri Lankan musicians.We bring American
musicians here to increase understanding of the United States diverse musical
heritage and to strengthen our cultural connections with Sri Lankans,” the
embassy said.
To mark seven decades of diplomatic relations betwixt Washington
and Colombo, the US had a series of performance by trombonist Wycliffe Gordon
and the International All Stars in March 2018. They performed in Colombo, Galle
and Matara.
The band played before all sorts of people, who ranged from those
that were merely curious about a band playing out there, to those who were able
to recognize the inherent value in hearing and seeing a sophisticated musical
exploration in improvised music, by a group of consummate professionals with
authenticity behind every note they played, said Arun Dias Bandaranaike.
This soft
power was urgently needed, because another election was looming. USA is clearly
going to play a role in the 2019 Presidential poll, said analysts. There were
at least three Presidential candidates who were considered pro-USA. The UNP
candidate, the JVP candidate and a private candidate, former Army Commander Mahesh
Senanayake. There is speculation to why JVP has presented a candidate this
time, said critics. JVP last contested
the presidency in 1999.
Mahesh
Senanayake left the country after 2010 election. He was in the Fonseka group.
He returned in 2015. Many do not know
where he went, said Former Army Major Ajit Prasanna.
Senanayake had gone to USA where he worked on intelligence in
Afghanistan and Libya, then held a senior position in the American embassy in
Dubai. He served USA for five years,
said Ajit
Prasanna on television news.
Following
Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s victory in 2019 US Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo issued
a statement saying the US is ready to work with the new government. The west
then turned to the next election, the General election.
Western governments took a keen interest in the outcome of the
General election of August 2020, said the media. Western diplomats had been speaking to all the
key players in the election. Most of the diplomats went to Jaffna. They were
sounding out the current thinking and public mood in the Jaffna peninsula.
One western
diplomat had asked several prominent Tamil candidates about the prospects of a
future alliance of minority political parties, Tamils, Muslims and Christians, would
it have political clout. One diplomat had
held all his meetings at Jetwing North Hotel in Jaffna.
When the 2020
General election ended, U.S. Embassy in Colombo issued a statement, saying they
looked forward to partnering with the government and new Parliament. The United
States congratulates Sri Lanka on conducting the elections in a peaceful and
orderly manner, despite the challenges posed by the COVID-19 pandemic, US said.
US sees Sri
Lanka as a valuable partner, one that will contribute to regional stability
and prosperity as a hub of the Indo-Pacific region.” We look forward to partnering with the
government and the new parliament. US reminded the new government to uphold
human rights and the rule of law. ( Continued)
When J.R. Jayewardene
(Yankee Dickie”) became President, 1977- 1978 and 1978 – 1989, there was an
open tilt towards the USA. JR paid a state visit to USA in June 1984, during
his second term in office. This was the first state visit to USA by a Sri Lanka
Head of state. It is also the only state visit
to US by the Head of state of Sri Lanka to date.
In 1985
United States Navy super carrier USS Kitty Hawke visited Sri Lanka. It was, I
think, the first US super carrier to visit Sri Lanka. JR permitted US naval
ships to enter Trincomalee. He wanted to
give the Trincomalee oil tanks to America, but India protested.
US said that it wanted to set up a VOA relay transmitter along Sri
Lanka’s western shore. JR’s government
allocated 625 hectare from a government-owned coconut plantation bordering a
predominantly Roman Catholic fishing village, at Iranawila for this purpose. The foundation stone for the VOA station was
laid in 1985.
The next government supported the venture, but reduced the
acreage.VOA started transmitting from Iranawila in 1997. The 520-acre area is
tightly guarded using diplomatic immunity. It is completely run by the US
government and is out-of-bounds for Sri Lankans, complained critics.
JR Jayewardene is remembered with contempt as the person who got
the 13th Amendment accepted in Parliament. At the time, it was
thought that this was forced on Sri Lanka by India, thanks to JR’s poor
diplomacy. It is now found that this was the work of the USA, not India. USA
was behind the India-Sri Lanka accord of 1987, said analysts. This makes sense. The 13th Amendment is
linked to Eelam. It benefits USA, not India.
Izzeth Hussain recalls that
US Ambassador James Spain had sought a meeting with the Minister of Foreign
affairs, on the day of the Indian parippu air drop over Jaffna in 1987.
Ambassador Spain had to convey an urgent message from his government. India was going to suggest something and Sri
Lanka should not over react, Spain said. That ‘something’ was the Accord. Hussain had told W.T. Jayasinghe,
Permanent Secretary, Foreign affairs, that almost certainly a third
party was involved in the Indo-Lanka accord. Jayasinghe, who was present at the
signing, ‘told me later that I was correct.’
Just after the signing of the document, Ambassador Spain handed
over an envelope to RajIv Gandhi, obviously a congratulatory and goodwill
message from Reagan. Clearly the contents of the agreement were already known
to the US government, said Hussain. In
addition, visiting US senator Charles H.
Percy had carried a letter from US President Reagan to President
Jayawardene offering to be of any assistance in conveying a message from J.R.
to Rajiv Gandhi.
US continued to maintain contact with the next heads of state. Prime Minister Ranasinghe
Premadasa met with US President Reagan when he was on a private visit to USA in
April 1983. Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe paid two working visits to USA
in November 2003 and July 2002.
When Chandrika Kumaratunga became President, in November 1994, USA
was able to make a further advance. US and Sri Lanka had an agreement
in 1995, by exchange of diplomatic notes, regarding the status of US
military personnel and civilian employees of the Department of Defence who may be present in Sri Lanka for exercises
or official duties. US had commenced
work on these agreements in 1995, soon after Chandrika Kumaratunga’s election
as President. Letters were exchanged in May, 1995.
One of the letters said: The (Foreign) Ministry is pleased to inform
the above-mentioned personnel that US military personnel, civil employees of
the Department of Defence will be accorded the same status as provided to
technical and administrative staff of the Embassy of the United States. The
Ministry also wishes to inform that this reply shall be considered an agreement
effective May 16, 1995. This was the
start of the agreement known as SOFA.
In 2004, when Kumaratunga was President, the US tried to persuade
Sri Lanka to sign an agreement under the US Tropical Forestry Conservation Act
of 1998. This Act said that if a tropical country has at least one globally
important tropical forest that country can sign an agreement with the United
States to reduce its debt with the US. Under this arrangement the forests will
be managed by a committee of representatives from the US government and
International NGOs.
Some Sri Lankans supported this move, saying that the motive was only to help conserve
tropical forests. Others disagreed. US
would benefit from this in several ways, they said. This agreement would give
US control over all Sri Lankan forest assets against interest on monies
borrowed by Sri Lanka from USA, said critics.
The Sri Lankan cloud forests would belong to the President of the United
States of America.
Under the Kyoto Protocol a country has to either reduce its carbon
emission or buy carbon entitlements from other countries. US could say that it need not reduce its
Carbon dioxide levels because it is protecting so much of tropical forests in
the world. These will act as sinks to absorb the Carbon dioxide which the US
releases.
The agreement will also give US exclusive access to the medicinal
plants in these forests. The search for pharmaceuticals is a
multimillion-dollar industry, carried out mainly by US firms and US pharmaceutical companies are well
known for getting patents for plant based pharmaceuticals.
There were strong
protests from Environmental NGO’s led
by the Wildlife & Nature Protection Society and it was stopped. But there
is nothing to stop the Agreement from raising its head again, as many of the
original players are back in the ring today, critics said in 2017.
Chandrika Kumaratunga
was succeeded by Mahinda Rajapaksa (2005- 2015). US found it was unable to
influence Mahinda Rajapaksa. He refused to stop the war when US asked him to,
instead he went on to win the war.
The US Senate
Committee on Foreign relations sent 2 members to Sri Lanka in November 2009, to
assess the impact of this victory on US
Policy. The team was asked to make recommendations to increase US leverage in
Sri Lanka for securing long term US strategic interests, and expanding the
number of tools available to Washington.
The team
emphasized the strategic importance of Sri Lanka to the US, particularly its
geopolitical location. It said that an alliance must be maintained. And that it
was necessary to recast the foreign policy.
The US was advised to go carefully with Sri Lanka.
The US cannot afford to ‘lose’ Sri Lanka. . This does not mean changing the
relationship overnight, they said. It
means trying new approaches that would increase U.S. leverage. There should be a broader and more robust
U.S. approach to Sri Lanka. An approach
that appreciates the new political and economic realities in Sri Lanka and U.S.
(continued)
As a Democrat from Sri lanka who was not so strongly involved even during school days, wish to suggest, in AMERICA as well as CANADA what we predominantly willing to maintain is UNITY,among all the neighbours,.I was a broadcaster and after my retirement I migrated to CANADA .As I know PM TRUDEAU’S dada,Pierre Trudeau proposed at the House,in October 1971, MULTICULTURALISM, almost with the same target.It is equally necessary for the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.
AMERICA is a vast country crazed with this color bar,despite
all of us are human beings.Civilized human beings,so that great personality like
LINCOLN paved the way for them to come over here.Let us live graciously.If
necessary we may add –ish, like BLACKISH, Brownish or whitish,(as there is no human
colour as WHITE)You are the ideal LEADER – Joe Biden – and with your SECOND IN
COMMAND –Kamala Harris will lead the country courteously! Our Prime
Minister,Trudeau is very cordial with the new American President.That made me
to touch this little comment with sincerely.Particularly ,Trans mountain
pipeline came to my mind.This gives him little bit of headache,along with two
other subjects at the moment.
Well,I was dealing with the Edicts of the Ancient philanthropist Indian king Asoka and prior to getting link up with that, I had to go back to one of the earliest matters.In earliest periods in Lanka, we have very little collection of reliable information on historical matters. History is concerned if we cannot write very accurate accounts better not to touch on false presumpsions.Now our Deepavansa is much better.Those who knew something very accurately have been inserted in the Deepavansa.Mahavansa is concerned major parts are that of a YARN created presumeably by a monk.The area that was taken for the Indian lion to interfeared was genuine as Sihore was the forestry region infested with Indian lion in that bygone era.It is the area of present Indian Prime Minister MODI ruled for three consecutive terms..Locality is known as GUJARATH where ships came on trade and went up to Jawa via Sri Lanka. Thereby area was somewhat familier to Lanka.That’s why I thought lion-Suppadevi and Sinhabahu-Sinhaseevali combinations could be gigantic pictures displayed by Rev.MAHANAMA of DEEGASNDA SENADYPATHI PIRIVENA. ANURADAPURA. If my presumption is false please excuse me as I had no other believable clue.When major clue becomes doubtful you cannot expect to have any other dependable background. Merely because one major creation becomes false,rest also invariably become inaccurate.Because it was only a YARN.i. e.the production of two human figures, SINHABAHU AND SINHASEEVALI. by an animal and human spearm. Production of a human child by a human and an animal sperm is according to science is false.It won’t take place,as such entire episode is beyond accuracy. Still it would have been better if that bit of false creation was not there.Otherwise the combination could be approved without any doubt!Now take for an example, It is a history book,but if historical matters are doubtful,you cannot treat even a singal event as authentic,ACCEPTABLE HISTORY. In ancient time –history-was not so abundance as today! Whole story of the caravan may have been a creation by Rev.Mahanama.Perhaps it may be otherwise.Let’s go into one or two points. A jungle creature or a lion of the forest jumped into a caravan of several carts,trudged from a long way.From Western India to Gujarath, and when a lion pounced upon them,all of them got frightened and ran amok,but this brave girl, Suppadevi, who was living in a palace did not get afraid,stayed all alone without any fear.Because she knew what was propersised by the soothsayer.It happened at the palace according to the yarn. (Perhaps you could believe it to a greater extent.)
Lion was wagging its tail and approached her.She stroked its head and face like a very tamed animal.And then got on to its back and went into the jungle. Lived in a DEN where there were no windows or holes for ventilations.Lived so many years.There was no provision for passing excreta, urine and washing! Stinky!Not one or two days,months and years and boy become big enough to carry mother and sister on his shoulders.Granite door was able to open by the lion only. -just think about this bit of the story! Or think about Vijaya,their son and his supporters who were plundering the village.Time to time several days.People time to time complained to the king!,Ultimately king had to get hold all of them and gave a punishment by shaving one side of their heads and ousted from the country. With 700 altogether.They were the people who were landed near Puttalam.When they landed and they were feeling thirsty.Their were no water in the ship to drink.Went one by one in search of water.Someone caught them.hid in a pond. Where you find water?as they did not return,Vijaya came in search of them.He saw the footprints in the pond. Under the water!Vijaya saw a woman seated in a distance.Went from behind.Kept the sword to the neck and asked about his men? She agreed to return them.Vijaya asked whether they are coming under a king.She answerd they have a king MAHAKALASENA and kingdom, SIRASAWASTHU. It was grand! but appointing Vijaya as the first king in the country? A culprit? ROGUE! Who was under a punishment. Why no question about the position of their KING? Which was announced by Kuveni and revealed their names,Let us go to the end. Our Author monk has made this ROGUE, THE KING OF OUR COUNTRY. Unbelievable! Our Author monk failed to ask anything about their ruling king.Who has migrated with a punishment?Unpardonable? Author Monk,did a bit of good work in his composition but everything were spoiled with this unpleasant work. Anyway that is our History! HISTORY OF THE SINHALA NATION.We have a Lion flag.Very beautiful.We got a name SINGHA-la.Exsisting from that remote era?We have not make any reference to Mahabaratha version.It has started according to Dr.Monier Monier Williams who compiled the very first English Sanskrit Dictionary firmly reveled where the origination as 1200 BC.In the 2nd book of MAHABARATHA,the Saba Parva, the term SINHALA is given clearly.Moreover it was totaly in memory.Writing materials were not available in that era.Even what Dr.Paranavithana mentioned in the footnote of his Sigiri Gee have not taken into consideration.
We as readers have no questions? We all believe What Rev.MAHANAMA
had written.He has made the Rogue,plunderer first king of the country!Our Projenitor!
Well, all of us coming under these jungle people are now
coming under President Hon.Gotabaya Rajapaksa and Prime Minister Hon.Mahinda
Rajapaksa.
Let’s allow our Sinhala people to think about the past
position!Now let us talk little more about King Asoka’s Edicts and further on historical matters!
Because HISTORY prime important matter in a country! That
may be the reason it was taken out of the curriculum by those who provided
Exchange! According to DASATHA,a Sinhala tabloid in CANADA , This was during Sirimao Bandaranayake’s era.
THE BIRTH (The life of Buddha p34 Dr.Edward J.Thomas.) VIEWS ON BUDDHISM pps 112,113
Maya makes no mention of her intention to go to Devadaha,
but merely wished to go and sport in the Lumbini grove.She expresses her wish
to the king inverse,and speaks there of Sal-trees,but in the following prose
she seizes not a Sal branch ,but a plaksha at the moment of birth. Both
LALITHAVISTARA and MAHAVASTHU say that the Bodhisaththa came from her right
side,and particularly add that her right side was uninjured.(There is no birth
canal in the right side-This is the MAHAYANA version- a mystry!)
ASOKA AND VIBHAJJAVADINS – A short history of Buddhism p.36
Dr.Edward Conze –views on Buddhism bk.1
p.173.
It appears that Asoka
sided with VIBHAJ-JAVADINS and that in consequence the Saravastivadins went
North and converted KASHMIR, which remainethe centre for more than a thousand
years.
Short History of Buddhism p.36 Dr.Edward Conze
ASOKA towards other religions
Views on Buddhism.pps. 172.173
One of the most
impressive documents of the Buddhist tolerant attitude is undoubtedly Rock
Edict no.12, of the Emperor Asoka (3rd cent BC) in his vast empire
lived the followers of Brahaminism,Jainism,Aj ivikism,Zoroastrianism and of the
Greek religion.The Emperor himself was a
devout follower of Buddhism.But he respected
all religions, protected the votaries of different religions, and even
liberally patronized religious establishments of different religious
groups.Moreover ,he admonished subjects to live in peace and mutual harmony,to
study different ideologies,and to praise
the religion of other people. He commended the virtue of religious concord.
Buddhist Studies p.129 Prof.L.M.Joshi
ASOKA AND THE WAR-
Asoka’s conversion.For the first 12 years of his reign,Asoka
governed very much as his father and
grand father had done.Then he set out a campaign for the conquest of KALINGA
OR ORISSA.In this cruel war ,
150,000 persons carried away
captive,100,000 were slaves,and many times that number perished from starvation
or disease.Just after this ,Asoka was converted to BUDDHISM.
The Indian people,pp 36,37 H.G.Rowlinson.
ASOKA AFTER THE WAR,
The warrior who had spread devastation and murder throughout
India began to engage in works of
peace,in making roads,in digging of wells and planting trees, in establishing
charities and providing for their business like distribution. Many were the
great monasteries and temples built by the converted Asoka. Throughout the vast
dominion which his conquest had added to his original empire of Magadha, on
pillers and onrocks he engraved the articles of Buddhist belief. These
descriptions are describes as Edicts.They are the only known contemporary
documents for the history of Asoka’s reign and for the study of religion.
Legend of Indian Buddhism.Introduction-Winifred Stephen by Eugene Burnouf Views on Buddhism,Bk one.pps 170,171.
BUDDHISM IS THE BEST. Views on Buddhism p.102
Rhys Davids says:Buddhist or no Buddhist ,I have examind
every one of the great religious systems of the world,and in none of them have
I found anything to surpass,in beauty
and comprehensiveness, the Nobal Eight Fold Path of the Buddha.I am content to
shape my life according to that path.
Quite similer to Rhys
Davids our President Hon.Gotabaya Rajapaksa has a full understanding on
Buddhism,as such he has full faith onSRI MAHA BODHI TREE under which Buddha had
his attaintment.As such he has full faith on Sri Maha Bodhi plant that was
braught by Queen Sangamitththa and planted at Bodhi Maluwa at Anuradhapura.
EIGHT PRINCESS TO PROTECT THE BODHI Views on Buddhism p.166
Asoka sent,according
to tradition, eight princes who were the brother of Asoka’s queen.In other
words they were the sons of Deva Setti of Vedisa city in Avanthi.Both the
pujavaliya and Mahabodhi Vamsa,state that they belonged to the Ksatriya
class.But if we accept the fact that Asoka’s queen belonged to the Vaisya
class,there is no doubt that her eight brothers headed by Sumittha also
belonged to the same class.In sending these eight princes with their families
to protect the Bodhi tree,we may suggest the Asoka also sent ten other families
of equal rank to assist them in their functions,these making the number of Deva
families 18.
SOCIAL HISTORY OF EARLY CEYLON P.32, Dr.Hema Ellawala FAMILIES CAME WITH THE BODHI TREE.
According to Samanthapasadhika and its commentary, these
families were sent in order to perform certain specific duties towards the
Bodhi tree.For the protection of the Bodhi tree (MAHABODHIRAKKANATHTHAYA) 18
Deva families were sent.Eight Families of Ministers were sent for the purpose
of organising different rights connected with the Bodhi tree.Eight Brahmana
families were sent for the purpose of sprinkling water to Bodhi Tree.Eight
families of cowherds were sent in order to supply the necessary to wash the
Bodhi tree.Similarly other families also were entrusted with certain other
duties towards the Bodhi Tree. A perusal of duties assigned to
to different families
and their order of preference in the list clearly indicates that the DEVAKULANI
are considered to be most important of all.
SOCIAL HISTORY OF EARLY CEYLON pp.31,32 Dr.Hema EllawalaAsoka’s missionary efforts – p.168- VIEWS ON BUDDHISM
THE MAHAVANSA DESCRIBES WITH ECSTATIC RAPTURE THE
ENTRY OF MAHINDA TO ANURADHAPURA,AND THE CONSEQUENT CONVERSION OF THE KING ,THE
MEMBERS OF THE ROYAL FAMILY,FAMILIES OF THE NOBILITY AND FINALLY,THE PEOPLE OF
CEYLON. CONVERSION ACHIEVED ITS CLIMAX WHEN ASOKA DECIDED TO SEND HIS DAUGHTER
–SANGAMITTHA- ALSO TO CEYLON.THIS MISSION WAS MOST SUCCESSFUL,AND IT WAS THE
MOST PRODUCTIVE OF THE MISSIONARY EFFORTS OF ASOKA.FOR SANGAMITTHA BROUGHT WITH
HER BRANCH OF THE BODHI TREE AT BUDDHA GAYA WHERE THE BLESSED ONE ATTAINED
WISDOM.HISTORIANS RECORD THE GREAT EVENT IN THESE TERMS;
It is
doubtful if any other single incident in the long story of the SINHALESE RACE
has seized upon the imagination of the Sinhalese with such tenacity as this of
the planting of the BODHI TREE. Like its roots,which find sustenance on the
face of the bare rock and cleave their way through the stoutest fabric,the
influence it represents has penetrated into the innermost being of the people
till the tree itself has become almost human.The loving care of some pious
observer has left on record in sonorous Pali and with minute detail the
incidents of the day when the soil of Ceylon first received it,and today the
descendants of the princely escort who accompanied it from India continue to be
its guardians,The axe of ruthless invaders who for many centuries to come were
destined to spread the ruin throughout the country was reverently withheld from
its base.And even now,on the stillest night,the heartshaped leaves on their
slender stalks ceaselessly quiver and sigh,as they have quivered and sighed for
25 centuries.”
BUDDHISM IN CEYLON UNDER THE CHRISTAIN POWERS—By.Tennakoon Vimalananda Views on Buddhism-Part one.Pp.168,169.
Vanni District TNA MP Selvam Addaikalanathan has declared that the Tamil National Alliance (TNA) is opposed to the move to bury Muslim covid victims in the Mannar District, under any circumstances.
TELO leader Addaikalanathan, issuing a statement on behalf of the TNA said the Tamil community wouldn’t accept burials in predominately Tamil areas.
The Vanni lawmaker emphasized that the TNA opposed the burial of corona victims in any part of the country.
The TNA issued a statement amidst a simmering controversy over the UN intervention on behalf of those pushing the government to allow burial of Muslims.
German police are investigating a doctor who allegedly killed two critically ill Covid-19 patients, who were being treated in intensive care, with a lethal injection, a spokesperson said on Friday.
The doctor, who has worked at Essen University Hospital as a senior physician since February, was arrested on November 18 on suspicion of intentionally fatally injecting the two men, the public prosecutor’s office in Essen said on Friday.
There is a suspicion that the doctor deliberately and illegally administered drugs to seriously ill people in their last phase of life, which led to their immediate death,” investigators said in a statement.
The doctor was brought before a judge on November 19, who ordered that he be placed in pre-trial detention.
Police said the medic had explained that he had administered the lethal injection to one of the patients to stop them and their family suffering” further.
By Kamal Mahendra Weeraratne Courtesy Ceylon Today
A landmark judgment by the Court of Appeal on Thursday (19), became the hot topic of this week.
That was none other than the verdict which acquitted Lalith Weeratunga, former Secretary to President Mahinda Rajapaksa and Anusha Palpita former Director-General of the Telecommunications Regulatory Commission (TRC) from the charges in the controversial Sil Cloth case.
Weeratunga and Palpita were found guilty on three counts by the Colombo High Court earlier for using Rs 600 million of TRC funds to distribute Sil Cloth during the run-up to the 2015 Presidential Election.
On 17 September 2017, Colombo High Court Judge Gihan Kulatunga found them guilty and imposed a sentence of 3 years rigorous imprisonment, a fine of Rs 2 million each and a compensation of Rs 50 million each.
The verdict of the Court of Appeal stated that the above High Court verdict given by Judge Kulatunga was not fair and reasonable.
Drama at Temple Trees
The sole reason behind setting up the Financial Crimes Investigation Division (FCID) by the ‘Good-Governance’ Government was to imprison or give death sentence to those who were named by the Anti-corruption Unit at Temple Trees. The case against Weeratunga and Palpita was one of such cases.
Filing of the case had been handled by Deputy Solicitor General Thusith Mudalige.
Accordingly, the Attorney General’s Department served indictments at the Colombo High Court on 28 August 2015. Following that, Weeratunga and Palpita were produced before the Court after naming them as defendants.
Drama at the Court
This so called ‘Sil Cloth case’ was taken up for the first time before Colombo High Court Judge Kusala Sarojani Weerawardena. Although the FCID requested to remand the defendants after serving them indictments, President’s Counsel Kalinga Indatissa requested the Judge to release them on bail considering their good conduct as State Officials in the past and appreciations they receive for their service which the Judge accepted.
Transfer of the Judge
However, Judge Weerawardena was transferred to the Kandy High Court after a few days. High Court Judge Nishanka Karunathilake was appointed to fill the post according to the seniority. When the case was listed to call before Judge Karunathilake, Judge Gihan Kulatunga who was serving at Kuliyapitiya Court had been appointed to the Court No. 3.
But as he could not be appointed to the Court No. 3 based on seniority, Judge Kulatunga was appointed to Court No. 6. Then in a miracle move two cases: 413/17 and 414/17 against Weeratunga and Palpita were transferred to the Court No. 6.
After that, the case hearing was started before Judge Kulatunga from January 2017. Although the defendants opposed it and made a request to the Chief Justice, it was dismissed.
Judge Kulatunga who was in a firm stance regarding the objections of the defendants’ party, delivered the verdict on 7 September 2017 and announced the defendants were guilty of the offences.
It was following this, Weeratunga and Palpita decided to appeal against this judgment by petitioning the Court of Appeal.
Judgment
Allowing an appeal filed against their conviction by the Colombo High Court (CHC) over the so-called Sil Cloth (white cloth) case, the Court of Appeal on Thursday (19), acquitted former Director General of the Telecommunications Regulatory Commission (TRC), Anusha Palpita and former TRC Chairman and former Secretary to the President, Lalith Weeratunga, and set aside the conviction and sentences thus imposed in connection with the charges of criminal misappropriation, conspiracy, and aiding and abetment.
The appellants in the appeal case (CA 413 – 414/2017) were Palpita and Weeratunga, while the respondent was the Attorney General (AG).
Previously, the first accused Palpita and the second accused Weeratunga were indicted in the High Court (HC 8026/2015) by the Attorney General over alleged criminal misappropriation, conspiracy, and aiding and abetment, under the Penal Code.
The incident connected to the indictments was that between 30 October 2014 and 5 January 2015, Rs 600 million in funds belonging to the TRC had been transferred through the alleged dishonest misappropriation by Palpita to an account in the name of Weeratunga (in his official capacity) for a Sil Cloth (white cloth) distribution programme which was part of a special national project initiative undertaken by the then President Mahinda Rajapaksa and undertaken as per a directive by the latter to Weeratunga due to requests from Monks that those who observed Sil had to be furnished with cloths. Both accused pleaded not guilty to the indictments. The High Court found the accused guilty of the charges. Both accused were then sentenced to one-and-a- half years of rigourous imprisonment (RI) and a fine of Rs 1 million each (if the fine was defaulted, six months of RI), while Palpita and Weeratunga were each given another one- and-a-half years of RI and a fine of Rs 1 million (if the fine was defaulted, six months of RI). Further, both were ordered to pay Rs 50 million each as compensation to the TRC (if defaulted, two years of RI).
The Court of Appeal Bench comprised Justices K.K. Wickremasinghe and Devika Abeyratne. Palpita was represented by Attorneys-at-Law Kanchana Ratwatte, Janaka Ranatunge, Thushari Samanpali Amarasiri and Amani Pilapitiya, while Weeratunga was represented by President’s Counsels Faisz Musthapha, Shavindra Fernando and Faiszer Musthapha, and Attorneys-at-Law Faisza Marker, Shantha Jayawardhana and Keerthi Thilakaratne. Deputy Solicitor General Thusith Mudalige and State Counsel Chathuri Wijesuriya appeared for the AG.
Justice Wickremasinghe’s judgment, which Justice Abeyratne concurred with, observed that the question that arises in the case was whether the grant or appropriation facilitated from the TRC for the distribution of Sil Cloth could expose the accused, who sourced the funds to criminal prosecution and sanctions because Weeratunga wrote to Palpita requesting funds for the said project and the latter directed the transfer of the funds.
Could these two items of evidence alone constitute a manifestation of a dishonest intention to misappropriate,” Justice Wickremasinghe queried, noting that one cannot take items of evidence piecemeal and hold that the mens rea (fault element) and actus reus (physical element of the misappropriation or conversion of moveable property to one’s use) have been established she further noted that evidence has to be holistically looked at in order to ascertain the mens rea.”
Justice Wickremasinghe further observed that particular evidence adduced, Clearly shows that Weeratunga was not the initiator or originator of the Sil Cloth project” and that neither is there evidence to show that he had anything to do with the choice of the project.”
It was noted by the Court that at the time the project was initiated on 20 March 2014 (Weeratunga wrote to Palpita requesting funds for the project on 30 October 2014 by which time no Presidential Poll was declared), the Presidential Election held on 8 January 2015 had not been in sight and had in fact been initiated long before the said Poll was called.
Justice Wickremasinghe added that it would appear that the High Court Judge has not properly appreciated nor assessed the evidentiary value” of certain items of evidence (which it was noted had the effect of unequivocally showing that Weeratunga was not prosecuting an agenda to confer a wrongful benefit or gain to another) and of a culpable omission to take cognisance of certain testimony, because the High Court Judge had arrived at the erroneous finding that the decision to distribute the Sil Cloth was taken by the President after consulting Weeratunga.”
Justice Wickremasinghe opined, This appears to be a vital misdirection on the part of the High Court Judge.”
It was noted that following a discussion with the President and by a way of a minute, Weeratunga had informed the Chief Accountant of the Presidential Secretariat that steps can be taken to obtain an advance of
Rs 600 million from the TRC, but had also made it clear that this grant was subject to reimbursement as soon as the budgetary allocations for 2015 are received by the Presidential Secretariat, before subsequently formally writing to Palpita, making a request for the said sum in order for it to be used for the Sil Cloth project.
These items of evidence show the dutiful conduct of an exemplary public officer,” Justice Wickremasinghe noted. Further, it was mentioned in the judgment that by virtue of the fact that the project was meant to promote the welfare of devotees, it was a charitable project, and that by the time the Coordinating Secretary to the President on Religious Affairs brought it to the attention of Weeratunga, the special Presidential initiative fund did not have sufficient funds and that therefore Weeratunga had decided to source funds from the TRC (which also engaged in social responsibility projects such as assisting the Kotelawala Defence Academy, and made donations for public causes and social welfare) just as anyone in his shoes would do, in such circumstances.”
In no way can this conduct be condemned as blameworthy,” as there was nothing blameworthy in requesting funds from an institution known for its involvement in charitable activities and which had a separate budget for corporate social responsibility (CSR),” Justice Wickremasinghe further pointed out.
The judgment also observed that in December 2014, when vouchers were being submitted for payments to be made to the suppliers of the cloth, Weeratunga had repeated his consistent stance that the TRC must be paid back what it had granted and had reminded the Chief Accountant” by way of a post pasted on the voucher that at least a part payment of Rs 200 million had to be made in the first quarter of 2015.”
There is un-contradicted evidence that Weeratunga had at all times the intention to ensure that the TRC was recouped. He attempted to ensure that there was no wrongful loss to the TRC. His conduct was consistent with an attempt to ensure that there was no wrongful gain to anyone, leave alone the fact that not a dime ever went to him. In my view, it would be a figment of the widest imagination to ever suggest that Weeratunga entertained a dishonest intention. His conduct is anything but dishonest.”
Justice Wickremasinghe: The keenness displayed to source the funds for a social cause and the alacrity to pay back the money that are vital to a finding of the absence of a dishonest intention have gone unnoticed by the High Court Judge and the social spirit shown as a public servant is manifestly clear. How can a man who sticks to his last that the money obtained from the TRC must be a loan be characterised as dishonest? The vital ingredient of dishonesty in the charge has received a manifestly wrong interpretation and I am of the firm view that having regard to the law as well, there is a mis-appreciation of the facts on the part of the High Court Judge.
There is a mis-direction on the mens rea,” Justice Wickremasinghe noted, adding that it is crystal clear that when the intention is recoupment and restitution, it is inconsistent with a guilty mind and would definitely be consistent with an innocent state of mind.”
On the question of there, allegedly being no formal approval before the transmission of the funds from the TRC to the Presidential Secretariat, Justice Wickremasinghe noted that a TRC Board paper, dated 30 October 2014, establishes that the transmission of money was approved verbally prior to the date of transfer (the TRC Act does not place a statutory prohibition against a verbal decision of the Board).
Despite this evidence, the High Court Judge arrives at an erroneous finding that there was no approval for the transfer of money” Justice Wickremasinghe emphasised.
It is to be highlighted that despite the presence of voluntary undertakings and donations that could be engaged in or given by the TRC, Weeratunga had the objective of making this grant a loan subject to the obligation of the Office of the President to reimburse this amount. Evidence is so glaring that Weeratunga only tried to source funds subject to reimbursement long before the Presidential Election was called. He was thus motivated by laudable objectives. It defies logic and common sense that a Chairman of a corporate body who attempted to ensure the recoupment of money belonging to the Corporation should face an ordeal of a sardonic prosecution despite his responsible and prudent decision as the Chairman of the corporate body.”
The Court also observed that no dishonest intention could be attributed to Palpita either. When one holistically analyses the steps taken by Palpita in regard to the request for funds made by Weeratunga, one does not see anything clandestine. He put up a Board paper dated 30 October 2014 giving an introduction and a rationale for the grant. He suggested a donation of Rs 600 million for this purpose in light of the previous engagements of the Corporation in such activities. He also stated that the funds could be sourced from the budgetary allocation for CSR of the TRC. The steps taken by Palpita do not partake of the characteristics of dishonesty.”
It was finally noted that such appropriations as was done in this case for a charitable objective of providing Sil Cloth cannot be classified as misappropriations when donations for charitable causes and disbursements have continued to be authorised by the Board as permissible activities. No Chairman of a corporation and a Director in the position of Palpita and Weeratunga would ever characterise the apportionment of funds for providing needy devotees with clothes as criminally dishonest. I have to observe that if directors of companies or corporate entities are to be visited with prosecutions and sanctions under the Penal Code for making validly authorised donations, no one would ever wish to serve as a director of a company or for that matter as a Director of a corporate body such as the TRC. If directors or a corporation are going to be in peril of a prospective prosecution for a business, judgment or a bona fide engagement in a consistent practice of CSR for which there is a separate budgetary allocation, is to entail prosecution and humiliation, no recognised public servant or anyone distinguished in a profession such as law or accountancy would ever like to run the risk of an appointment on a Board of a Corporation such as the TRC.”
Justice Wickremasinghe also pointed out that it was a collective decision of the Board to appropriate this money for this project and that it was not the individual decision of Palpita or Weeratunga. On 15 December 2014, the decision to give formal approval to the oral approval and the transmission of money was taken by all these four Members present (out of five with the quorum being three). It must be taken that they were all aware of the facts and circumstances of the request and with this knowledge, ratified all these steps. There was nothing done in secrecy and the prosecution witnesses as well as the evidence given from the witness box and the dock statement all establish the inescapable inferences of the absence of dishonest intention. When the money allotted thus became the authorised activity of the Corporation, this Court finds that only Palpita and Weeratunga have been cherry picked and selectively prosecuted. The facts clearly show that these two accused should not have been chased after in the way they were pursued. In this backdrop, the authorised donation became a lawful activity of the TRC and Palpita and Weeratunga could not be said to have intended a wrongful gain or a wrongful loss because if at all a donation was a voluntary disbursement which cannot be classified as wrongful. In such a situation, since the appropriation of the money was authorised, it cannot become a misappropriation. Thus, there is not only an absence of the mens rea but also a lack of the actus reus necessary to constitute the offence of criminal misappropriation. There are no unlawful means that have been employed and an act done in accordance with the consensus of the Board and the provisions of the TRC Act cannot be considered to be a dishonest act, and would not justify the conclusion of the offence of criminal misappropriation.”
There was also no concert or complicity between Palpita and Weeratunga, Justice Wickremasinghe held.
Also, Palpita and Weeratunga had nothing to do with the distribution of Sil Cloth itself, the Court noted.
The Court therefore held that there was neither the mens rea of dishonest intention nor the actus reus of misappropriation.
I hold that the prosecution did not establish its case beyond a reasonable doubt and conclude that there is gross misdirection on the part of the High Court Judge both in fact and law which amounts to a non-direction, and in the circumstances, I conclude that the conviction and sentence of both the accused appellants must be set aside and that they should be acquitted.”
Justice Wickremasinghe, addressing the question of the importation of personal knowledge, noted that the High Court Judge has stated that there was a prevailing political culture during the said regime. There is no evidence to support this observation. The Judge has perhaps imported this knowledge from a Commission of which he was a Member of or even from an unknown source. The importation of this personal knowledge into his conclusions has coloured his judgment and lends credence to the submission that the accused did not have a fair trial. I take the view that on this misdirection of the importation of personal knowledge of an alleged political culture, the judgment stands liable to be quashed and set aside.”
There has also been misdirection by the High Court Judge based on inadmissible evidence Justice Wickremasinghe noted.
On the matter where the High Court Judge was engaged in questioning the witnesses, specially Weeratunga in an inappropriate manner, biased towards the prosecution case, the Court observed that the incessant questioning by the High Court Judge unconsciously dragged him into an uncontrollable stage where he has lost his control over the examination of evidence of the witnesses. It is observed that whilst Weeratunga was giving evidence, the High Court Judge intervened continuously on 66 occasions and had 287 interjections. Looking at the incessant questioning despite the inherent limitations of the powers entrusted to a trial Judge to question witnesses, I take the view that there was an indiscriminate use of the powers of questioning a witness and the complaint made that Weeratunga was denied a fair trial is well founded.”
It was further noted regarding the manner in which the case was transferred, that the procedure followed was in violation of the practices followed in the High Court and that there is no minute or journal entry assigning this case from Court Number Three to Court Number Six. The circumstances in which the presiding High Court Judge came to hear the case created a serious doubt on the impartiality and validity of the proceedings adopted in the case.”
Finally, Justice Wickremasinghe held that the prosecution has failed to establish the ingredients of the offences laid in the indictment. There is no dishonest intention with which both accused appellants have acted. They were not actuated by mens rea or actus reus. There has been a bona fide exercise of their powers and duties. Neither accused was enriched. Whilst the Board authorised a transaction which is protected by law and CSR, it is a travesty of justice that only two Members of the TRC had to endure the traumatic experience of a selective prosecution at a prolonged trial, causing a senior public servant of long years of meritorious public service, humiliation and anguish. Palpita, who only followed the request of his Chairman for assistance, also underwent the infamy of a long drawn out trial. I cannot reach any other conclusion except that of the innocence of the two accused appellants fully vindicated on oral and documentary evidence. ”
Justice Abeyratne also wrote a separate but concurring opinion reaching the same verdict.
Victory to public service
Former Secretary to the President, LalithWeeratunga, who was acquitted and ordered to be released from the controversial Sil Cloth case, by the Court of Appeal, described the verdict as historic for the country’s State sector and public service.
Speaking to the Media soon after the announcement of the verdict, he said it would be a landmark judgment for those engaged in the State sector, as they would be able to perform their duty sans any duress whether political or otherwise henceforth.
Both expressed their gratitude to this newspaper and affirmed that during the aforesaid period both Mawbima and Ceylon Today, had reported the case in its entirety sans any distortions and asserted it had also contributed in no small measure for their ultimate acquittal and release from the high profile case.
They added that the verdict would go a long way to reclaim the lost trust and confidence of the public in the country’s State service.
Both Weeratunga and Palpita urged those in the State sector to repose their trust in the present regime, as it would look to further enrich their lives during the next five-year period.
Speaking further Weeratunga said: I take this opportunity to convey my gratitude and deep appreciation to the Judiciary which decided to issue an order to acquit us from this case. This decision will also further strengthen the State service. The order given by the Colombo High Court only contributed to destabilise this sector, but now this landmark verdict has put the record straight.”
Speaking to the Media, Palpita stated This verdict is not something that has been given to us at a personal level. It will have an impact on the entire State service. During the past five years those in the State service were afraid to take decisions on their own due to being politically victimised by the previous regime. But, this historic verdict would no doubt strengthen this sector. If those in the State service were to take honest and brave decisions on behalf of the people, the Judiciary has proved they will protect them.”
Prime Minister Mahinda Rajapaksa was gifted his first vehicle, a FIAT 124 Sports Coopé, by the family which bought the vehicle from Rajapaksa years ago.
S. A. Amarasiri who had purchased the vehicle from Mr. Rajapaksa had owned the vehicle until his demise. Mr. Amarasiri had also won a motor rally held in India, in which he participated with the FIAT, which is now a valuable 50 year old vintage motor car.
Mr. Amarasiri’s son and family have returned the vehicle to it’s first owner, Premier Rajapaksa today, following a request from the Prime Minister’s son Yoshitha Rajapaksa, to commemorate his 75th birthday.
An indictment filed by the Attorney General against Minister Janaka Bandara Tennakoon over a murder that took place in 1999 has been revoked by the Court of Appeal.
The verdict was delivered by the President of Appeals Court, Justice A.H.M.D. Nawaz and Justice Sobitha Rajakaruna today (20).
In a writ application, Minister Tennakoon had sought the Appeals Court to quash the indictment filed by the Attorney General against him.
He stated that the Government of Good Governance had filed a lawsuit against him in 2015 over his alleged involvement in a murder which took place in 1999 in Mahawela area. The case had been lodged before the Kandy High Court.
Appeals Court President, delivering the verdict, annulled the murder charges filed against the minister, ruling them to be contrary to the law.
The police are seeking public assistance to locate the Covid-19 positive woman who escaped from the Infectious Disease Hospital (IDH) in Angoda last night (19).
The 25-year-old had fled from the hospital at around 9.10 pm yesterday, along with her two-year-old son who was also under medical care for novel coronavirus.
However, the police managed to find the child from a house in Eheliyagoda earlier today (20). It was revealed that the mother had handed over her child to one of her relatives residing in the area.
The police have made necessary arrangements to readmit the child to the IDH.
Reports further revealed that the woman in question is linked to large-scale drug racketeering.
A search operation is currently in underway to apprehend the escapee.
Lalith Weeratunga, former President’s Secretary and Anusha Palpita, former DG of Telecommunications Regulatory Commission were acquitted and released from the charges by the Court of Appeal on 19 November 2020. The conviction by the Colombo High Court has been set aside. Both were sentenced to 3year rigorous imprisonment for misappropriation of Rs.600m in violation of Section 386 of Penal Code, a verdict given by High Court Judge Gihan Kulatunga claimed the accused were guilty beyond reasonable doubt. Both were ordered to pay Rs.50m each as compensation to the TRC and a fine of Rs.2m each & if payment was defaulted they would serve an additional year in prison. This was the first judgement by a High Court on an indictment filed by AG following FCID investigation. Given the same argument, why is there a deafening silence over the conduct of M.M. Zuhair who was appointed as DG of TRC in February 2015. Zuhair misused his position as DG of TRCSL and improperly, despite the objections of the Audit Dept. of the Finance Division of the TRC, siphoned away Rs.80million of TRC funds to produce a film that was partial to Muslims and that had nothing to do with the objectives of the TRCSL which is a statutorily incorporated body.
The film was called Thanapathi Gedara” and its entire theme was a distortion of the national history of the country by fictitiously portraying the presence of an Islamic Embassy in Anuradhapura at the height of the Anuradhapura era.Zuhair hired a highly paid Consultant (out of TRCSL funds) to produce films glorifying Islam and Muslims under the pretense of promoting Reconciliation and discharging Corporate Social Responsibility.
The employees of the TRCSL were shocked by the corruption of M.M. Zuhair and misuse of public funds that they collectively made a complaint to powerful Ministers of the Yahapalanaya Govt. Fortunately, President Sirisena had Zuhair removed within 24 hours of the complaint being made. The evidence of misuse of TRCSL funds by Zuhair in association with one or two Directors of TRCSL, who misinterpreted the statute to give the sanction to Zuhair to go ahead with his crazy film productions distorting national history, is still available with the Audit Dept. of the TRCSL. This matter of corruption by Zuhair and misuse of public funds must be investigated by the AG’s Dept.
Like it or not, Article 9 of the Constitution affords the foremost place to Buddhism while it does not in any way impede the practice of any other faith. Article 9 empowers the State to foster ONLY Buddhism and no other religion.The State is bound to protect all religions but the duty to foster is confined to Buddhism only. This is a continuation of the role of the State from the time of King Devanampiyatissa, 2300 years ago.
As Attorney Senaka Weeraratna argues the fostering of the Buddha Sasana under Article 9 of the Constitution (e.g. distribution of Sil Redi ) falls outside Election Laws.
The President of Sri Lanka can foster the Buddha Sasana at any time of his choosing under the Constitution.
Motive is irrelevant when complying with Article 9.
If an act of the State or President helps to foster the Buddha Sasana then the purpose of Article 9 is served.
That is the test.
Article 9 is not meant to function like a white elephant.
Article 9 is an integral part of the Constitution.
It supersedes all other laws.
The Constitution is the Supreme Law.
No one can overrule a President acting directly under the Constitution.
In an article under the title ‘Following the orders of his superior has been accepted as a valid defense by some Courts of law.’ Senaka Weeraratna has said as follows:
In the case involving Lalith Weeratunga and Anusha Palpita, the application of moral choice would be having to choose between serving the interests of the Buddha Sasana under Article 9 of the Constitution which is a mandatory duty imposed on all public servants (irrespective of religion) or not serve the Buddha Sasana and thereby violate the Constitution.Theduty imposed by the Constitution of Sri Lanka under Article 9 is an inviolable duty and supersedes all other obligations or rules set out under ordinary municipal law or international law.
A Presidential Pardon should be given because of the special nature of the case.
These two ‘convicts’ carried out an Order that was issued directly by a sitting President.
The defence of following orders is a valid defense, though it failed at Nuremberg because the orders to kill innocent people, both Jews and non – Jews, were stricto sensu immoral. There is no question of immorality in distributing ‘ Sil Reddi ‘ to the Buddhist public. Article 9 of the Constitution clearly specifies and gives a mandate to the State to give foremost place to Buddhism. Article 9 is not meant to be treated like a white elephant. It is a living provision and embeds a 2300 year tradition of requirement on the part of the State to serve the Buddha Sasana. All our past rulers before the colonial era served the cause of Buddhism as one of their primary obligations. The motive is irrelevant when performing a service to the Buddhist public.
Attorney Senaka Weeraratna further says:
” To cripple the functioning of Article 9 by narrow or restrictive interpretation is tantamount to betrayal of the Constitution.
The Judges have an obligation like everyone else to creatively interpret Article 9 in such a way that it is made functional and not non – functional or dis-functional.
To reduce Article 9 to the level of a white elephant does not speak well of the Judiciary’s respect for the Constitution.
Buddhism more than any other factor has held this country together.
All our Kings in the pre-colonial era fostered the Buddha Sasana. It is a Royal Prerogative from ancient times.
It is an inviolable duty imposed on the President and Government of Sri Lanka which is enshrined in Article 9 .
Thus, the sil redi verdict delivering 3 years of rigorous imprisonment to the former Presidents Secretary Lalith Weeratunga & the TRC Director General Anusha Palpita left a shock to the country’s majority and the 1.4 million government servants. What was equally shocking was that Mr. Weeratunga had to pay Rs.52million not for taking any state money but simply because his signature was placed for the sil redi to Buddhist worshippers. The foreigner responsible for 2 bond scams and with signature on currency used in Sri Lanka, remains a free man still!
Clean hands doctrine – those who have not sinned cast the first stone
The regime change that brought UNP to power in particular was tasked to break the spine of the public servants and military. This is the same party that stoned homes of judges when rulings were against them. The tactic was to send a message that the Government wanted only ‘Yes Sir’ secretaries and public officials. The prestige of the public sector has thus declined over the years with all governments following the path UNP introduced.
No political party in power or their representatives & public officials should abuse state property or influence state officials.
Let’s relook at the incident & the case
7 September 2015 – High Court declares Lalith Weeratunga & Anusha Palpita guilty
11 September 2015 – Bail granted
Misappropriation of Rs.600m from the TRC spent on sil redi – no part of that money was taken by Lalith Weeratunga or Anusha Palpita
Both were never charged under Presidential elections law as the allegation was that the Sil Redi was given during election campaigning. (Sections 72 85, & 68(1)(e) of Presidential Elections Act 15 of 1981 was not violated.
The sil redi distribution project was in a minute written 20 March 2014 by Lalith Weeratunga & to be distributed to 11,000 temples countrywide.
The money for the project was to be taken from the President’s Special Development Fund but owing to inavailability of funds it was decided to take funds from TRC. Transferring of funds from different ministries is nothing new. President Premadasa borrowed money for his Gam Udawa programs from CMC and money was reimbursed by the Treasury. CMC Ratnasiri Rajapakse was accused of the same but exonerated.
Weeratunga had written to the DG of TRC on 30 October 2014 seeking Rs.600m, TRC DG had written to Board seeking Board approval to allocate Rs.600m to the TRC CSR budget and approve donation to the President’s Special Development Fund. This was done on 5 December 2014. There is also a note from Weeratunga to say that the amount to TRC would be reimbursed with Rs.200m paid back in first quarter of 2015. There is a minute from Weeratunga to the Chief Accountant of the Presidential Secretariat on 29 December 2014 that the money is to be paid back to the TRC. None of the minutes written by Weeratunga was taken into account by the Court.
The judgement held that TRC Act did not empower it to spend money for a sil redi distribution. But the Rs.600m was not a CSR expense of the TRC – it was merely a loan to the Presidential Secretariat.
Even the announcement of the Presidential Election in January 2015 was a surprise to all.
The e-registers and the legislative path required to administer the e-register works well in developed nations, because of the effort made by specially trained legal academics who have been specially trained in electronics, registration law and modern property law. They are committed to evaluate the repercussions of the major reforms objectively without looking at the short-term funding and political consideration. In Sri Lanka, the Bar Association was informed suddenly that e-registration will commence with the hybrid foreign law from January 2021. They had to submit their bio-data without any data protection laws to the Registrar of Lands. Courts – Lawyers & Land Owners omitted in setting up e-Land-Register has led to confusion amongst owners and lawyers
As always, Sri Lanka operates with quick fix solutions as soon as funds arrive from foreign agencies without any legal solutions to suite the local land market to build the e register. This has resulted in lawyers being driven to discontinue the existing land laws, create confusion in courts with an extra judicial adjudication process, which had surprisingly limited the judicial authority of the judges.
Result of quick fix solutions lawyers are compelled to follow foreign laws —–
Repeal of the Common law practiced in the country for over 100 years, has resulted in the repeal of deeds. In lieu of deeds,a set of Instruments used in foreign nations has been introduced as per gazette number 1886 /58 – 31 October 2014.
Who drafted the new instruments for land transactions and who ordered the gazette notification?
Even USA, South Africa and Netherlands continue with the deed system to operate their e-register without the entry of foreign laws in an ad hoc manner.
Shocking news is that the transition to Instruments will operate the e-register without modern laws and data protection laws.The old colonial laws, the Notaries Ordinance of 1907 that has no law to prevent fraud and the Registration of Documents Ordinance of 1927 where the Registrar has to register valid and invalid forged deeds apply to the e-register. [ Section 7 of Registration of Documents Ordinance of 1927.]
Equally shocking is that together with the absence of laws to prevent fraud and data protection, the e-land Register is to be governed by Bim Saviya which removes the landowners’ fundamental rights access court if the land owners are affected by fraud.
Under Bim Saviya – Counsels cannot move forinjunctions & other restraining orders from the Court once lands are registered in the e-land register.
E-register is a major economic burden to the government.The government has to maintain a STATUTORY FUND to pay compensation to owners in lieu of access to court. For example, if A loses his land ownership right with the registration of a forged deed then A’s solution is to obtain compensation from the Government but not have his/her land returned.
Can the government compensate the value of land?
Another major problem for land owners. is having to spend for 2 survey plan. Cadastral plans drawn to be registered in the e-land register excludes what is on the ground, such as plantation buildings etc. The local authorities therefore refuse to accept the plans drawn under the cadastral system. Land owners end up having to spend for 2 survey plans – one for the e-land register and one for the local authority, otherwise banks refuse to give loans.
The e register does not register the rights of ownership that are practiced for centuries by local farmers.
The rights that cannot be registered are:
* Ande cultivation – a system to own paddy land
* Right of pre-emption, essential for lands in Northern province to eliminate crop production being discontinued
* co-ownership rights of inheritance and rights required for chena cultivation
* planters share Tatamaru possession,
* water rights to wells,
* legal rights required for chena cultivation
1.9million people could not enter the register accordingly says the Title Commissioners Report 2018.
The World Bank had confirmed in its World Bank’s ICR Reports that ‘Sri Lanka’s title project is a failure as only titles for parcels with clear land rights were issued.
Titles could not be issued for problem parcel lands and no one was keen to solve the problem.
Since the old colonial law governing the e-register does not make the e-register a compulsory register to register all ownership rights in the country, the hybrid law & e register will be not conclusive.
Before putting the cart before the horse, Sri Lanka’s land lawyers must research &revise the laws with the following simple changes. Foreign laws will take over 100 years to fully implement.
Foremost is that Sri Lanka must simply stop implementing land law changes simply because it comes with a carrot of dollars.
Enhance the value of the currently used deed system incorporating changes as given in the 2006 Electronic Transaction Act 19. USA, Netherlands and South Africa have improved the deed system to operate the e register. Thy have not introduced foreign laws like Sri Lanka.
Repeal the foreign law introduced by Act 21 of 1998. It is a copy and paste of 1858 Australian Torren Law, without any of the amendments that are currently passed in Australia to prevent land fraud and protects data.
Accommodate all land ownership rights of farmers, personal laws and Chena cultivators to the e register.
Protect land owner’s data.The foreign law will destroy notarised instruments This should not be allowed. No modern laws or biometric laws should be allowed to destroy data. Data must be protected. Repeal Section 7 of the Registration of Documents Ordinance.
Introduce legal education – Research Centre (for lawyers/ Officials handling land matters) regarding e-registration with future technology changes & automation of land registries with improved deeds, new property law as in other nation which practice Common Law. Even many states in the USA have rejected Bim Saviya and wish to continue with deed system primarily because the bim saviya repeals fundamental rights of land owners.
The above article is written having consulted a Senior Lawyer specialized in Electronic Conveyancing, Digitalisation of land registries, registration system of other nations specifically of USA, Australia [Bim Saviya], UK, India and Malaysia, contributing to several publications & public presentations nationally & internationally.
The Government must learn to not only tap such legal luminaries but nurture more by extending the syllabuses of the Faculty of Law and Law College to draw up the land laws of Sri Lanka and not depend on foreigners to do so.
Sri Lanka does not require to be running a relay or be in competition with itself to implement changes without legal consideration of their ramifications & repercussions.
Everything is being rushed into implementation – ex: new Constitution etc …. Why?
Why are we in such a hurry to please or appease the foreigners without realizing the damage we are doing to the country & our People as a result.
US replaced
Britain as the dominant power in the world when World War II ended. The baton was transferred from UK to
USA. For USA too, Sri Lanka was a highly
desirable country. It had two military advantages, its location in the Indian
Ocean and the harbor at Trincomalee.
However, Sri Lanka in 1948 was rejoicing in
its newly independent statehood. It was not advisable for US to invade and take
it over. USA concentrated instead on developing a close relationship with newly
independent Sri Lanka. Diplomatic relations with the United States of America
was established on 29 October 1948, with Sir Claude
Corea as Ambassador.
Sri Lanka
continued to consider Britain as the
model even after Independence. Therefore it was necessary first of all, to make
Sri Lanka aware of the USA. USA set up
the United States Information Service (USIS) with cultural centers in Colombo,
Kandy and Jaffna. Each center had a substantial lending library of American books, especially fiction, as well as
records of American music, especially musicals. American films were shown.
These Centers
were a valuable source of American
culture. They were free and were eagerly used by us, then seniors in school.
Sarath Amunugama in his biography, ‘The Kandy Man’, appreciatively recalls
using the American Center in Kandy.
These Centers would have been set up in Sri
Lanka sometime after 1953. The United States Information Agency (USIA) which administers
this in Washington was made a separate agency in 1953. Department of State
advised on foreign policy.
USIS
libraries were expected to build understanding
of the United States as a nation, its institutions, culture and ideals, to create
the respect and confidence needed for the US to carry out its world role’.
The Centers
in Kandy and Colombo were very active up to the 1980s, I visited them
regularly. They had designated heads at the time, lots of staff, space, a
regular supply of new books, journals and showed lovely films.
In the 1950s,
the US Information Centre distributed free to
select homes, an anti-Communist magazine ‘Free World’ which featured Southeast
Asia. It said that Communism was bad and America was good. This was the time of
the Cold War between USA and Russia.
Sri Lanka was
also given the very pleasing experience of authentic American culture.
American artists were brought on tour. Martha Graham Dance Company,
including Martha Graham herself, performed in Colombo in 1956. I was taken to
see her dance. Graham did a lot of floor work. I remember that even now. J.H. Esterline
said the performance appealed to the Colombo fine arts cognoscenti, ‘which was
exactly the opinion-setting audience we sought.’
The Golden
Gate quartet visited in the late 1950s.
Marian Anderson came in 1957. These
performers sang in Colombo and Kandy to appreciative audiences. I heard
the Golden Gate quartet at the Kandy American Centre and I still recall
it with pleasure. Forget what I thought of Marian Anderson. I had never heard a contralto before. Duke
Ellington performed at University of Peradeniya in 1963. The performance was well attended.
Sport was not
forgotten. A team of American tennis
players including Althea Gibson came to play exhibition tennis matches in
Colombo, in 1956. Gibson was the first African American to win the French, US,
Australian and Wimbledon championships.
There was
American aid. The Ford Foundation regional office in India, set up in 1952, served
Nepal and Sri Lanka as well. This Foundation later established
an office in Colombo. The Ford Foundation was set up to help in economic
improvement, education, freedom and democracy, human behavior, and world peace.
The US Agency for
International Development (USAID) set up a branch in Colombo in 1956. This agency is still very active.
The US- Sri Lanka
Fulbright Commission was founded in 1952 by an agreement between the Government
of the United States of America and the Government of Ceylon for the
administration of educational exchange programmes in Sri Lanka. The programmes
aimed to promote cultural understanding between the United States and Sri Lanka
through mutual academic exchange. Fulbright scholarships were offered for
postgraduate study in America. They were considered prestigious and much sought
after. Teachers from
American universities came to Peradeniya on assignment.
Sri Lanka
started to receive flour under the PL–480 (Public Law 480) programme in 1956. Public
Law 480 permitted the President of the USA to authorize the shipment of surplus
commodities to friendly” nations, either on concessional or grant terms. USA
negotiated PL–480 agreements with countries to stop them from accepting
assistance from Communist countries. In 1972 ‘Triposha’ was provided under PL
480.
USA needed communication
bases in Asia. In 1951 Ceylon signed an agreement with the US to relay Voice of
America (VOA) programmes over Radio Ceylon, which was then a popular radio station
heard all over India. In return Radio
Ceylon would get modern, new broadcasting equipment. VOA used the facility to broadcast to all of
Asia, including Central Asia. Its first
relay station was in Ekala.
USA quietly
set the ground for future American intervention in Sri Lanka .Ceylonese who
could become future leaders in Ceylon were invited to visit the US at US
government expense. Each was given a custom made itinerary. I recall that from the early 1950s,
conversations in drawing rooms, on Sri Lanka politics, included the observation
that Trincomalee harbor could comfortably hold the 7th Fleet of the
American Navy, which was its Pacific fleet. This was repeated decade after
decade.
The
US created an office for itself. An American NGO, CARE, had been invited by the
UNP government to distribute milk powder. CARE was an acronym for Cooperative
for American Relief Everywhere’. A CARE
office, controlled by USA, was set up to do this distribution.
In 1956 when the MEP government came to power,
Philip Gunawardene objected to CARE distributing milk powder. It could be done
by local agencies. What was the need
for CARE to set up an office here, for the mere supervision of the
distribution, he asked. Why did the
previous government allow a voluntary organization to set up a branch office in
Ceylon. Philip had tried to change the agreement,
but found that was not possible. ‘I looked,’ he said. Philip was suspicious. ‘I fear the Greeks even
when they offer gifts ‘‘
US
objected to the 1956 Rubber-Rice pact with China and promptly cut
off aid to Sri Lanka, under its rule of not giving aid to countries that sold
strategic materials to Communist countries. USA also made France, Italy and
Japan withhold their supply of sulphur
fungicide, badly needed by Sri Lanka’s rubber
plantations. US
had earlier turned down a request from Ceylon for a 50 million dollar aid. J.R.Jaywardene, known as Yankee Dickie”,
supported the US viewpoint and strongly opposed the Rubber-Rice Pact.
The Peace
Corp of the USA kept coming and going. Peace Corps was in Sri Lanka 1962–1964,
1967–1970, 1983–1998. Prime Minister Sirima Bandaranaike kicked them out after
she became Prime Minister in 1970. The US Peace
Corps volunteers were booted out in 1970 as CIA agents”, said analysts. They
came back in 1983 and were sent away in
1998.
The US Peace
Corps evolved from a CIA front known as the International Voluntary
Services during preparations for the
war against Vietnam. The US Peace Corps has been expelled from a number of
countries for spying for the CIA, meddling in local politics, and running drugs. Indonesia ordered them out in 1965, after 16
months. Pakistan and India refused to
renew approval of PC projects in their countries in the early 1970s.
However, US
never really made inroads in Sri Lanka like it did in the rest of Asia said
analysts. Left-wing parties saw to that. The Voice of America relay station in Sri
Lanka was called a US propaganda tool beaming to Asia. PL 480 was dubbed a
trick to get the people to eat American bread rather than rice. When
the UNP Government of 1965-70 was invited to join the US-led ASEAN (Association
of South East Asian Nations), the left objected and Prime Minister Dudley
Senanayake bowed to the left wing opposition.
Initially,
US did not need to worry about Sri Lanka’s political orientation. The first
Prime Ministers of Ceylon, DS Senanayake and John Kotelawala were openly anti-Communist
and anti-Russia. The situation changed with the MEP government of 1956.The MEP
government established diplomatic relations
with Russia and China. The US had to
intervene.
The 1960s was
marked by a proliferation of underground political violent movements among the
Sinhala youth such as Gini pupura and
Peradiga Sulanga, said Gamini Samaranayake . These
were splinter groups from CP or LSSP. At least one of these groups later showed
allegiance to the USA, therefore there is the possibility that there was US interference
in this area, he said. 1970 saw the rise of the JVP. The JVP was CIA,
said NM Perera. It was alleged that Rohana Wijeweera was recruited by America
when he was studying in Russia. (continued)
Covid-19
has no doubt played a very important role in adding to the miseries of already
troubled people all around the world. The worst impact of this pandemic is that
from US to Afghanistan, the situation of law & order in different countries
is getting horrible day by day. Unfortunately there are a few countries which
are taking benefit of this horrible pandemic and exploiting the situation in
their own interest; the worst example of it is India. According to different
reports, since the beginning days of the Covid-19 till now, a shocking rise
could be noticed in the incidents of Indian interference into Pakistan and
intensity in Indian atrocities against the helpless people of the Indian
Occupied Kashmir. Recently in the second week of October, the Indian troops
from across the restive Line of Control (LoC) started shelling in several areas
of Azad Jammu and Kashmir. Five civilians and a Pakistan Army soldier were
martyred as a result of this unprovoked and indiscriminate shelling. At least
30 other civilians and five soldiers also sustained injuries in this act of
brutality. Military sources say ‘it was the
biggest escalation in hostilities on the de facto border in months’. In
Pakistan’s ‘befitting reply’ to this aggression, India also had to suffer
substantial losses in terms of troops and material. A newspaper published from
India, The Hindu also confirmed the death of three India army soldiers and one from
Border Security Force (BSF) as result of Pakistan’s response to India’s
aggression. In short India’s terrorist activity took many precious lives. After
India’s latest violation of the cease-fire Pakistan called on the international
community to take notice of Indian sponsorship of terrorism in the Pakistan. It
is not only the matter of ceasefire-violation along the LoC, India’s Research
& Analysis Wing has been operating a network of agents and training camps
through its diplomatic missions in Afghanistan since long without the consent
of the Afghanistan government. These agents are training, equipping and financing
militants operating inside Pakistan.
On
14th October 2020 a joint press conference of Inter-Services Public
Relations (ISPR) and the Foreign Ministry was addressed by Director General
ISPR Maj. Gen. Babar Iftikhar and the Foreign Minister of Pakistan Mr. Shah
Mehmood Qureshi. The speakers condemned not only the recent ceasefire
violations by India across the Line of Control but also condemned India’s
interference in Pakistan through the RAW agents. A dossier containing
irrefutable evidences was also unveiled in this context. It was also told to
the media-men at the press-conference that Pakistan has obtained documents that
showed New Delhi had met with and funded members of the Pakistani Taliban, as
well as Baloch insurgent groups from the southern province of Balochistan who
have claimed responsibility for attacks on Chinese interests as part of an
effort to sabotage China’s $65 billion Belt and Road investment plan in
Pakistan.
The
Foreign Minister alarmed the international authorities that for a long term
peace and stability in South Asia, a stern check will have to be put on India’s
‘terrorist’ activities in the region. Certainly at this point we cannot ignore
a very important question; who is going to bell the cat? Is there any
possibility of stopping the world’s biggest democracy from behaving like a rogue
state? The most interesting thing in this entire episode is that after the
press-conference when the Reuters tried to get the reaction of India’s foreign
ministry on the allegations leveled by Pakistan, the whole of the India’s
Foreign Ministry remained silent.
Destabilizing
Pakistan is an old dream of the world’s self-claimed ‘biggest democracy’. To keep
her neighboring countries continuously in a state of trouble and turmoil by
patronizing terrorist organizations particularly in Pakistan has always
remained India’s priority. It is the result of India’s support to the terrorist
organization that Pakistan lost the lives of its more than 38000 citizens and
more than 98000 have yet been injured. No other country has ever been such a
horrible victim to terrorist activities. The total number of the affected ones
must be somewhere more than half a million because every person injured or
martyred in such incidents is financial supporter of a family of three to four
persons on average. Experts say that the economic loss faced by Pakistan as a
result of terrorist activities would be in billions and billions. If the
security forces of Pakistan had not been professionally so competent and
strong, the loss could have been many times greater. Now India has once again
started its malicious efforts to revive terrorism in Pakistan. It has been
pointed out by the Intelligence Agencies of Pakistan that it is India’s grand
plan to target prominent civilians, politicians, clerics and personnel from the
security forces in November and December. Let us see to what extant India
succeeds in achievement of her heinous desires.
Sri Lanka and Israel are among several countries that have been added to the UK’s list of travel corridors.
Transport Secretary Grant Shapps announced that Namibia, Rwanda and Uruguay are also now on the list.
It marks the first time any African countries have been added to the travel corridors list. No destinations have been removed this week.
People arriving in England, Wales and Northern Ireland from the islands of Bonaire, St Eustatius, Saba and the Northern Mariana Islands and the US Virgin Islands, will be also exempt from the 14-day quarantine requirement from 4am on Saturday.
The Department for Transport (DfT) said the additions are due to a decrease in risk from coronavirus in these countries”.
Leisure travel is currently banned under England’s second national lockdown, limiting the impact of the quarantine policy.
Scotland will not be making any changes to its travel corridors this week given their current domestic situation”, the DfT said.
The quarantine exemption applies to Israel and Jerusalem in their entirety. For the Occupied Palestinian Territories, only East Jerusalem is included.
Paul Charles, chief executive of travel consultants The PC Agency welcomed the announcement.
He said: The Government has rightly listened to the urgent calls for opening up corridors to Africa.
The UK market is a lifeline for so many African countries which rely on vital tourism spend to grow their communities.
Rwanda has done an amazing job on effectively testing its people and keeping Covid cases to a minimum.
Despite more travel corridors opening up, we still need to see a major reduction in the quarantine period for those returning to the UK from high-risk countries.
This would boost confidence to book and help many people see their friends and family again overseas.”
A system allowing travellers to be released from quarantine if they test negative for coronavirus around five days after arriving in the UK is expected to be unveiled by the Government next week.
The Police Media stated that a former Chairman of Sri Lanka Fertiliser Company arrested by the Criminal Investigation Department over an alleged Rs. 90 million financial fraud for purchasing fertiliser from a private company in 2017.
UN Resident Coordinator Ms Hanaa Singer’s outrageously meddlesome
missive offering unsolicited advice on governance (November 12, 2020) to Prime
Minister Mr Mahinda Rajapaksa, with copies to the Minister of Foreign Relations
Mr Dinesh Gunawardane, and Minister of Health, Nutrition and Indigenous
Medicine Mrs Pavithra Wanniarachchi hasn’t still elicited an official response
from the Government; neither has it drawn any comment from the Opposition, at
least by the time of writing.(No doubt, they have genuine reasons for their
silence.) But concerned Buddhist monks and lay activists and other ordinary
citizens who really care about the country, active in the social media,
have already expressed strong disapproval of what they consider to be her brash
overstepping of the legitimate boundaries of diplomatic protocol relating to
her job in Sri Lanka as an employee of the United Nations. They are within
their rights for they are the well informed nationals of the democratic Sri
Lankan state, where every citizen has an inviolable claim to a share in its
sovereignty, and can question the legitimacy of words and actions of a
non-citizen of whatever capacity who seems to dictate terms to the least of
them, let alone to those lawfully and democratically elected to execute
sovereign power on behalf of all the citizens.
Ms Hanaa Singer is the most senior UN official in Sri Lanka. When
she presented her credentials to the then president Mr Maithripala Sirisena in
September 2018, she assumed duties in a dual capacity as UN’s Resident
Coordinator and UN’s Development Programme Resident Representative for Sri
Lanka. However, as a result of a UN reform process in January 2019, the second
job was given to another UN functionary, and since then Ms Singer has held only
the key post of UN’s Resident Coordinator for Sri Lanka. In that capacity, she
leads the UN Country Team of 22 Resident and Non-Resident UN Agencies.
She represents the UN Secretary-General in Sri Lanka.
Before her assignment to Colombo Ms Singer held a number of senior
managerial positions in the UNICEF offices across the globe, particularly in
Asia and Africa. She was Associate Regional Director UNICEF Geneva; she was
Country Representative for UNICEF in Syria, Nepal, Kazakhstan and Azerbaijan.
Ms Singer also led humanitarian programmes in Burundi and Haiti, and managed
cross border operations including those to Afghanistan and Iraq. Ms Singer
claims nearly thirty years of experience with the UN. As she comes from Egypt,
she may be expected to be familiar with the problem of Islamic extremism that
is plaguing the whole world. An estimated 90% of Egyptians are Muslims,
and most of them are Sunnis, with a small minority of Shia Muslims, and an even
smaller minority of officially unrecognized Ahmadis.
Until recently, the majority of the mainstream traditional Muslims
used to be Sufis who were sufficiently, almost seamlessly, integrated into the
very tolerant Buddhist and Hindu cultural communities. Unfortunately, that
peaceful religious coexistence is being threatened by the recent incursions of
Salafist and Wahhabist extremists allegedly sponsored by Sunni Islamist Saudi
Arabia. The 2019 April Easter Sunday church and hotel bombings which killed
over 250 and injured more than 500 innocent men, women, and chidren, leaving
some maimed for life, were carried out by some young Muslim suicide bombers who
had been indoctrinated and trained by these extremist ideologists. There is a
danger of such extremists exploiting the volatile sensitivities of sorrow stricken
Muslims in this Covid-19 situation who, like people of other religions, are in
need of emotional succour and are looking towards the traditional source that
provides it (religion).
While expressing her/UN’s readiness ‘to provide any relevant
support on this matter’ (the burial problem), Ms Hanaa Singer tells the PM that
‘dignified handling of bodies of persons dead of Covid-19 virus has been an
important part of the COVID-19 response’ (as if he is unaware of this). What
material support can she provide on the burial matter? She reiterates ‘the
concern of the United Nations with the existing Ministry of Health guidelines
which stipulate cremation as the only method for the disposal of bodies
suspected of COVID-19 infection’. Why should the UN be ‘concerned’ about the
Health Ministry guidelines which order cremation bodies of persons
scientifically confirmed dead of COVID-19? It is not a case of disposing of
bodies ‘suspected of COVID-19 infection’. Ms Hanaa’s ‘concern’ reveals
her unfounded suspicion that the government is abusing this situation to
discriminate against Muslims. The government and the rest of the population
have other prob;ems to worry about.
Ms Singer refers to WHO circulars issued on March 24, 2020 and
later that claim that ‘…..based on current knowledge of the symptoms of
Covid-19 and its main modes of transmission (droplets/contact), the likelihood
of transmission when handling human remains is low….’. This sort of harebrained
wisdom, though it comes from the WHO (which is also manned by ordinary
mortals), is unacceptable in a lethal situation. Let’s take a domestic example.
Suppose you have a child who is allergic to peanuts, and that once, feeding him
a peanut containing yoghurt almost killed him. Now, a friendly visitor brings him
a chocolate. But before giving it to him you check whether it is safe for him
to eat it, so you look at the wrapper and read the cautionary information
printed there: it says ‘This product may have traces of peanut oil’. Will you
allow your child to eat the chocolate? No, not at all. Why expose your child’s
health, or even his life, to danger for the sake of a chocolate? In the
current pandemic situation, while obeying the broad WHO guidelines, each
country must adopt measures that best suit local conditions as determined by
qualified local experts, not by interfering politicians or diplomats.
Burial of infected bodies in the current situation is dangerous
because of its potential for contamination of the aquifers, which, in most
parts of the country are quite shallow. In Sri Lanka, around 80% of the
population in the villages and some people even in Colombo and suburbs obtain
their drinking water from wells.The Covid-19 virus is a dangerous new virus
which is still being studied by scientists. If the expert scientific opinion
right now is that there is a real danger or even a likelihood (be it high or
low) of groundwater contamination with this deadly virus as a result of burying
corpses of Covid-19 victims, then religious sentiment will give way to science
in any civilised country where the vast majority of people depend on
groundwater for drinking and other domestic purposes. This applies
equally to people of all faiths.
It is not only the Muslims who traditionally only bury their dead;
Christians also do. Buddhists and Hindus either bury or cremate, though they
prefer the latter mode of disposing of the dead, after the performance of
elaborate funeral rites, which in the case of Hindus take the longest time to
complete among the four religious communities. They also feel as acutely as
Muslims do in situations of bereavement.
Apparently forgetting this Ms Singer warns our Prime Minister: ‘In
the same context, I deem it important to inform you that I have received
impassioned appeals from within and outside the Muslim community that perceive
the current policy on burials as discriminatory. Against this background, I
fear that not allowing burials is having a negative effect on social cohesion
and more importantly, could also adversely impact the measures for containing
the spread of the virus as it may discourage people to access medical care where
they have symptoms or (a) history of contact.’
Instead of so undiplomatically lecturing to the PM, Ms Singer,
should have educated the Muslims and others who, she says, appealed to her for
undue intervention in a domestic nonissue like this about the fact that
subjecting Muslims and others to the same health guideline which makes
cremation mandatory is not discrimination and that the Sri Lankan leaders are
not so mean or so lacking in selfconfidence as to make the Covid-19 pandemic
emergency a pretext for discriminating against a minority. Ms Singer, it is not
‘not allowing burials (that) is having a negative effect on social cohesion’,
it is cases of unwarranted intervention like yours that tend to destroy Sri
Lanka’s social cohesion.
Her parting shot is: ‘I recognize that during epidemics, for
reasons of public health, Governments often need to take difficult, and at
times unpopular measures. However, in this case, the negative consequences of
not allowing burials seem to outweigh any potential epidemiological benefit.
Considering the evidenced-based (sic) guidance of World Health Organization, as
well as the commitments of the Government of Sri Lanka to uphold the rights of
all communities, I therefore express my hope that the existing policy be
revised so as to allow the safe and dignified burial of COVOD-19 victims’. In
view of what I have written above, Ms Singer’s argument has little merit here.
It only shows her own bias. How justified is she in allowing her personal
biases to get in her way of judgement in the performance of her duties as an
international civil servant who is certainly not a plenipotentiary?
Articles 1 and 2 are described under Chapter 1 of the Charter of
the United Nations signed in San Francisco on June 26, 1945 (Kindle version of
the UN Charter published in the US by Praetorian Press, LLC 2011)
which deals with the purposes and principles that determine its mandate.
Article 1 is about maintaining international peace and security through
collective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to peace, to
develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of
equal rights and self-determination of peoples, to achieve international
co-operation in solving international problems of an economic, social,
cultural, or humanitarian character, and to be a centre for harmonizing the
actions of nations in the attainment of these common ends, etc. The
‘international’ nature of the UN’s responsibility should not be forgotten. The
UN cannot poke its nose into a country’s internal affairs on somebody’s whim.
Article 2 stipulates the principles in accordance which the
purposes stated in Article 1 are to be pursued: Item No 1 of Article 2 states
the crucial principle of the sovereign equality of the member states: ’The
Organization is based on the principle of the sovereign equality of all its
Members’. This and the other six principles specified in Article 2 implicitly
emphasize the necessity for the UN as a single body and for all its individual
members to desist from interfering in the internal affairs of member states.
Items 4, 5, and 7 of Article 2 are especially important in this
connection.
However,
the important Item No 7 contains an exception to the observance of this
principle. Here is Item No 7 in full: ‘Nothing contained in the present
Charter shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which are
essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state or shall require the
Members to submit such matters to settlement under the present Charter; but
this principle shall not prejudice the application of enforcement measures
under Chapter VII’. When we read Chapter VII (i.e., Articles 39-51), it becomes
clear that for any intervention or interference (which should only be of a non-military
kind – such as, in the form of travel embargoes, trade sanctions, etc.) to be
imposed, the unsettling domestic issues must be on a scale that calls for UN
Security Council involvement. The burial (non)issue is not likely to assume
such importance.
