The true test
of a Sri Lankan is neither the waving of a Sri Lankan National flag nor the
singing of the National Anthem nor the composing of Music for the YouTube such
as ‘We are Sri Lanka’, but it is much more than that.
It is the
willingness to ensure that any manifestation of your religion or belief in
worship, observance, practice and teaching, should be carried out in peace and
harmony with Buddhism, and such conduct should not cause hurt to the moral
sensitivities of the Sinhala Buddhists, who constitute the overwhelming majority
of people (70%) of Sri Lanka.
These two historical identities –
Sinhala and Buddhism – are rooted in the national identity of the people whose
ancestors, being Sinhala Buddhists, built an unique Buddhist civilization over
a period in excess of 2000 years in the country that is now called Sri Lanka.
It is an
extraordinary civilization that has always won the admiration of the world.
The proposition ‘when in Rome you must do as
Rome does’ has a certain reasonableness attached to it. It is the adaptation to
a foundational culture and acceptance of religious practices that are deeply
embedded in a country that would make inter – racial and inter – religious
peaceful co – existence possible, and not by trying to replace them at the
behest of third parties, which would generate both conflict and violence as we
have seen in the recent past.
Over the past several days, we have been hearing various criticisms of the 20A by members of the opposition as well as from pro-government quarters. Some members of the government audit service too came out against certain provisions in the 20A. Are these criticisms valid or are we missing something? If we grade the criticisms that have got the most amount of media coverage from the most serious to the irrelevant, the most serious allegation relates to the issues concerning the Auditor General and the Audit Service Commission.
The decision of the government to abolish the Audit Service Commission and to make changes in the 19th Amendment provisions relating to the Auditor General are being portrayed as preparations for grand larceny on a hitherto unprecedented scale by the new Rajapaksa government. This is due to a misconception about the role of the Audit Service Commission. Many people are obviously under the impression that the Audit Service Commission is similar to the Elections Commission that the 19A created.
We all know that the Elections Commission is the body that’s responsible for holding elections and after an election, all three members of the Elections Commission sign the Gazette announcing the names of those who have won seats. The Audit Service Commission that the 19A created was not a body like that. It’s not an Audit Commission but an Audit ‘Service’ Commission. According to Article 153C(1) of the Constitution introduced by the 19A, the sole purpose of the Audit Service Commission is to preside over the appointment, promotion, transfer, disciplinary control and dismissal of the members belonging to the Sri Lanka State Audit Service. The only other task it has been assigned is to prepare the annual estimates of the National Audit Office, but you don’t need an Audit Service Commission for that.
In other words, the Audit Service Commission was created simply to duplicate the work already being done by the Public Service Commission. The question that has to be asked is, why have a clone of the Public Service Commission just to cater to the rather limited number of employees in the government audit service? Furthermore, if the Auditor General’s subordinates come under a specially created Audit Service Commission, shouldn’t the subordinates of the Attorney General also come under an AG’s Dept. Service Commission? If taken to its logical conclusion, there will be as many ‘service commissions’ as there are divisions of the government service. The decision to abolish the Audit Service Commission is therefore obviously a housekeeping measure so as not to needlessly duplicate work already being done by other bodies such as the Public Service Commission.
Powers of the Auditor General
Changes have also been proposed to the provisions relating to the Auditor General. Under the 19th Amendment, the provisions relating to the powers of the Auditor General reads as follows:
154(1)The Auditor-General shall audit all departments of the Government, the Office of the Secretary to the President, the Office of the Secretary to the Prime Minister, the Offices of the Cabinet of Ministers, the Judicial Services Commission, the Constitutional Council, the Commissions referred to in the Schedule to Article 41B, the Parliamentary Commissioner for Administration, the Secretary-General of Parliament, local authorities, public corporations, business and other undertakings vested in the Government under any written law and companies registered or deemed to be registered under the Companies Act, No. 7 of 2007 in which the Government or a public corporation or local authority holds fifty per centum or more of the shares of that company including the accounts thereof.”
Under the proposed 20A, the above provision is to be replaced with the following:
154(1) The Auditor-General shall audit the accounts of all departments of Government, the Offices of the Cabinet of Ministers, the Judicial Service Commission, the Public Service Commission, the Provincial Public Service Commissions, the Parliamentary Commissioner for Administration, the Secretary-General of Parliament and the Commissioner of Elections, local authorities, public corporations and business or other undertakings vested in the Government under any written law.”
We see that under the changes contemplated by the 20A, references to the Office of the Secretary to the President, the Office of the Secretary to the Prime Minister is being taken out of Article 154(1). We also see that companies in which the government owns more than 50% of the shares has also been taken out of Article 154(1) by the 20A Bill. These changes are being portrayed as moves by the President and Prime Minister to create an environment conducive to engaging in grand larceny with complete impunity. The removal of the reference to companies in which the government owns more than 50% of the shares in the 20A is also being portrayed as a situation where all these companies will be placed outside the ambit of the Auditor General. But is that true? It has to be understood that all that the 20A seeks to do with regard to Article 154(1) which deals with the powers of the Auditor General is to restore the status quo ante before the 19th Amendment was enacted – nothing more. Before the 19th Amendment was enacted, the old Article 154(1) was identical to that which is now being proposed in the 20A.
Does this mean that before the 19th Amendment was enacted, the Offices of the President and Prime Minister and companies in which the state owned more than 50% of the shares, were exempt from the scrutiny of the Auditor General? To make any such assertion would be to be unfair to President J.R.Jayewardene and the UNP which promulgated the 1978 Constitution. The President’s Office and the Prime Minister’s Office were ALWAYS under the purview of the Auditor General under the 1978 Constitution. The reference to all departments of Government” in the pre-19th Amendment Article 154(1) includes the Offices of the President and Prime Minister. Any pre-19th Amendment version of the Government Financial Regulations will bear this out. This writer is in possession of an old 1992 copy of the government Financial Regulations in which Appendix 10 on pages 411-43 lists the Presidential Secretariat under ‘A Class’ government departments and the Prime Minister’s Office and the Cabinet Office under ‘B Class’ departments. The Office of Former Presidents is also categorized as a ‘B Class’ government department.
So all these bodies were always under the purview of the Auditor General. This writer can distinctly recall that there were exchanges between members of the opposition and the government regarding the Auditor General’s reports on the President’s Fund during the previous Rajapaksa government long before the 19th Amendment was enacted. All that the 19th Amendment did was to specify the inclusion of the Offices of the President and Prime Minister under Article 154(1) in a situation where they already came under that provision anyway. This a bit like the 19th Amendment repealing Article 42 of JRJ’s 1978 Constitution, and re-enacting it as Article 33A without changing a single word or comma and then claiming that it was the yahapalana government that made the President responsible to Parliament!
The actual fact was that from the time the 1978 Constitution was first promulgated, the President had always been responsible to Parliament under old Article 42! (It may be stated as an aside that the 20A has sought to undo this piece of chicanery by repealing Article 33A and restoring JRJ’s old Article 42 to its rightful place.) If the yahapalanites fraudulently sought to claim credit for making the President responsible to Parliament by engaging in such blatant manipulation, it’s only to be expected that they would try to do the same when it comes to the changes made to Article 154(1).
Government owned companies
Another criticism being made is that while the 19th Amendment brought companies in which the government owns more than 50% of the shares within the ambit of the Auditor General, the 20A seeks to abolish that provision. To be sure, the 19th Amendment has included under Article 154(1) business and other undertakings vested in the Government in which the Government or a public corporation or local authority holds fifty per centum or more of the shares”. The 20A replaces this with the more general phrase business and other undertakings vested in the Government”. Some members of the government audit service even went to see the Ven. Mahanayake Theras and complained that all the companies in which the government owns more than 50% of the shares were to be taken out of the ambit of the Auditor General. That too is a false assertion. Companies in which the government owns more than 50% of the shares refers to business undertakings like Lake House and Lanka Mineral Sands Ltd. The Auditor General did audit the accounts of such companies even in the pre-19th Amendment era.
However both before and after the 19th Amendment, it was not mandatory for any business undertaking in which the government held shares over 50% to use the services of the Auditor General. Article 154 (2) of the Constitution as introduced by the 19th Amendment reads as follows:
154 (2) Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph (1) of this Article, the Minister in charge of any such public corporation, business or other undertaking or a company referred to in paragraph (1) may, with the concurrence of the Minister in charge of the subject of Finance and in consultation with the Auditor-General, appoint a qualified auditor or auditors to audit the accounts of such public corporation, business or other undertaking or a company referred to in paragraph (1). Where such appointment has been made by the Minister, the Auditor General may, in writing, inform such auditor or auditors that he proposes to utilize his or their services for the performance and discharge of the Auditor-General’s duties and functions in relation to such public corporation, business or other undertaking or a company referred to in paragraph (1) and thereupon such auditor or auditors shall act under the direction and control of the Auditor-General.”
Before the 19th Amendment, the old Article 154(2) read as follows:
154 (2) Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph (1) of this Article, the Minister in charge of any such public corporation or business or other undertaking may, with the concurrence of the Minister in charge of the subject of Finance, and in consultation with the Auditor-General, appoint a qualified auditor or auditors to audit the accounts of such public corporation or business or other undertaking. Where such appointment has been made by the Minister, the Auditor-General may, in writing, inform such auditor or auditors that he proposes to utilize his or their services for the performance and discharge of the Auditor-General’s duties and functions in relation to such public corporation, business or other undertaking and thereupon such auditor or auditors shall act under the direction and control of the Auditor-General.”
Readers will note that the content of the two provisions are identical. Both before and after the 19th Amendment, the Minister in charge of the subject may appoint an audit firm to audit the accounts of a government owned company. In doing so, he is required to obtain the concurrence of the Minister of finance, and to consult the Auditor General. After an audit company has been appointed to audit the accounts of a mostly government owned company, the Auditor General can write to that audit company and make them perform their duties under the direction of the Auditor General. Nothing has changed in this regard before and after the 19th Amendment. So if anyone claims that the 20th Amendment seeks to take companies in which the government owns more than 50% of the shares out of the ambit of the Auditor General, that’s a complete falsehood.
Urgent Bills and dual citizenship
One of the changes made by the 19th Amendment was to amend Article 78 so that the time that had to lapse between Gazetting a Bill and presenting it to Parliament was increased from seven days to fourteen days. The 19A also repealed Article 122 which made provision for urgent Bills. Under the provisions of old Article 122, if the Cabinet certifies a Bill as being urgent in the national interest, the provision that a certain number of days has to lapse between the time a Bill is gazetted and presented in Parliament will have no application. The provision of Article 121 which enabled citizens to challenge the constitutionality of a Bill within one week of it being placed on the order paper of Parliament also ceased to apply. When Article 122 was invoked in the case of urgent Bills, the President could write to the Chief Justice requesting him to issue a special determination on the constitutionality of that Bill and the Supreme Court had to make their determination within 24 hours or a period not exceeding three days, as specified by the President.
The 20A proposes to revive the provision for urgent Bills by re-enacting the old Article 122. The 20A also proposes to amend Article 78 so as to shorten the time between the gazetting of a Bill and its introduction in Parliament from fourteen days to seven days as it was in the pre-19th Amendment days. The proposed reintroduction of this provision for urgent Bills by the 20A has also run into much criticism. According to this writer’s recollection, nobody had any real issue with the provision for urgent Bills in Article 122 until for more than three decades until the 18th Amendment to the Constitution was brought forward as an urgent Bill in 2010. The NGO lobby which seeks to hit out at the government with everything they can lay their hands on, raised a hue and cry about the 18th Amendment being introduced as an urgent Bill. However in actual fact, even if the 18th Amendment had been introduced as an ordinary Bill, and gazetted seven days before it was presented in Parliament, as per the provisions of Article 78, the end result would be the same.
Even urgent Bills have to go before the Supreme Court. If there was anything unconstitutional in the 18th Amendment, it would have been shot down by the SC. If it was not shot down by the SC, then it was going to be passed anyway because the 2010 government had a steamroller majority in Parliament. The fact that it was brought as an urgent Bill had little or no impact on how things finally turned out. Yet the provision for urgent Bills itself became a target of those opposed to the Rajapaksas. As a matter of principle, every country should be able to introduce urgent legislation when the need arises. This is a necessary safeguard and a fallback position. The antipathy to the provision for urgent Bills stemmed from the fact that it was used to bring in a constitutional amendment. However the proposed Article 122 in the 20A has taken this into consideration and introduced a totally new clause 122(3) which states that the provisions relating to urgent Bills will not apply to any Bill for the amendment of the Constitution. If the 20A is passed into law, the provision for urgent Bills cannot be used to bring in constitutional amendments.
The 20A also seeks to repeal Article 91(1)(d)(xiii) by which the 19th Amendment added dual citizenship to the list of disqualifications for election to Parliament. Nobody in this country had any issue with dual citizens contesting elections. This became an issue only because the yahapalana government wanted to remove Gotabaya and Basil Rajapaksa from politics. To countenance this will mean wholesale surrender to yahapalana thinking. The yahapalana side is trying to pass off one of the most egregious outrages they committed as a virtue. We have heard some people citing the instance of Arjuna Mahendran to justify the ban on dual citizens contesting elections. However, Mahendran was not a dual citizen. He was a Singaporean not holding any kind of Sri Lankan citizenship.
By Lakshman I. Keerthisinghe Courtesy Ceylon Today
This is a new dawn for Sri Lanka, a fresh era creating the opportunity for the country to come together…Now is the time for the West to understand the new mood in Sri Lanka, the desire on all sides for reconciliation to become realistic without any interference from the West or the UN Human Rights Council.” – Lord Naseby President-All Party British Sri Lanka Parliamentary Group in UK.
Ceylon Today reported on 18 September that Cabinet Spokesman Keheliya Rambukwella, while concurring with the position that Sri Lanka should pull out from United Nations Human Rights Council said Foreign Minister Dinesh Gunawardena informing the UNHRC of the withdrawal from co-sponsorship of resolution 30/1 was the initial step in the process. Incidentally, addressing National Ranaviru Day commemoration last May President Gotabaya Rajapaksa expressed similar views that he would not hesitate to withdraw from any international body or organisation if such entities target the country and war heroes using baseless allegations.
Bachelet’s baseless allegations
Criticising the UNHRC, cabinet co-spokesman Dr.Ramesh Pathirana has pointed out that Sri Lanka’s Acting Permanent Representative to the United Nations, Dayani Mendis had dismissed the allegations against Sri Lanka made by UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Michelle Bachelet pointing out that such allegations are baseless.
It is relevant to note that the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) is a United Nations body whose mission is to promote and protect human rights around the world.
The UNHRC has 47 members elected for staggered three-year terms on a regional group basis. The headquarters of UNHRC is in Geneva, Switzerland. The UNHRC investigates allegations of breaches of human rights in United Nations member states, and addresses important thematic human rights issues. The UNHRC was established by the UN General Assembly on 15 March 2006 to replace the UN Commission on Human Rights (UNCHR) that had been strongly criticized for allowing countries with poor human rights records to be members.
Members are selected via the basis of equitable geographic rotation using the United Nations regional grouping system. Members are eligible for re-election for one additional term, after which they must relinquish their seat. The General Assembly can suspend the rights and privileges of any Council member that it decides has persistently committed gross and systematic violations of human rights during its term of membership. The resolution establishing the UNHRC states that “when electing members of the Council, Member States shall take into account the contribution of candidates to the promotion and protection of human rights and their voluntary pledges and commitments made there to” and that “members elected to the Council shall uphold the highest standards in the promotion and protection of human rights”.
The UNHRC holds regular sessions three times a year, in March, June, and September. The UNHRC can decide at any time to hold a special session to address human rights violations and emergencies, at the request of one-third of the member states. As of May 2020, there have been 28 special sessions.
US withdraws
The United States withdrew from the membership of UNHRC in June 2018 stating that the UNHRC adopts a disproportionate focus on allegations of human rights abuses committed by its ally, Israel. In 2006, when the council was established, then-US President George W Bush refused to join because the organisation included members accused by Washington of human rights violations. United States withdrawal from the United Nations refers to various proposals for the United States to terminate its membership in the United Nations, where it is one of the founding members and one of the five Permanent members of the United Nations Security Council.
These proposals are often motivated by a perceived threat to U.S. sovereignty, or theories that the U.N. is a potential World Government. The United States also announced its intention to withdraw from the World Health Organisation on July 6, 2021.
It has been the practice of the UNHRC in the past to level baseless allegations of human rights violations against Sri Lanka’s security forces at the behest of the LTTE based diaspora groups such as the Transitional Government of Tamil Eelam (TGTE) based internationally in the United states of America, Canada, the United Kingdom, Australia, New Zealand, Norway, Germany, Italy, France and Switzerland. Its Prime Minister is Visvanathan Rudrakumaran, the former international legal advisor to the LTTE.
In conclusion, as President Gotabaya Rajapaksa had indicated it is time for Sri Lanka to consider withdrawal from the membership of the UNHRC following the example set by the US as continued membership only results in erosion of the sovereignty of our motherland. As Lord Naseby has very aptly stated as quoted at the outset hereof for reconciliation to become realistic in Sri Lanka, it should be pursued without any interference from the West or the UN Human Rights Council.
The writer is an Attorney-at-Law with LLB. LLM and MPhil(Colombo)
By Lakshman I. Keerthisinghe Courtesy The Ceylon Today
It was settled by the Constitution, the laws, and the whole practice of the Government that the entire executive power is vested in the President of the United States.” – Andrew Jackson-Former US President
Presidential powers are not exercised by a body or group. The Constitution vests ‘all executive power’ in one and only one person – the president.” –William Barr-US
Public Servant
The draft of the Twentieth Amendment to the Constitution has been published in the Government Gazette and made available for public scrutiny. Public excitement has erupted over the proposed provisions of the Bill implying that all executive power has been bestowed on the President granting an autocratic power. As quoted at the outset as Andrew Jackson and William Barr have aptly observed all executive power in the United States is vested in the President. This does not mean that the US is governed by an autocrat or a dictator. The three main pillars of a democratic Government are the legislature the executive and the judiciary according to the doctrine of separation of powers proposed by Montesquieu, French social and political philosopher in, Spirit of the Laws, where political authority of the State is divided into legislative, executive and judicial powers. He asserted that, to most effectively promote liberty, these three powers must be separate and acting independently so as to prevent the concentration of power and provide for checks and balances.
The powers of branches of Government are:
The legislative branch for enacting laws of the State and appropriating money necessary to operate.
The executive branch, for implementing and administering the public policy enacted, funded by the legislative branch.
The judicial branch responsible for interpreting the Constitution and laws and applying their interpretations to controversies brought before it.
Parliamentary Council
The passing of the new Bill on the Twentieth Amendment in Parliament will restore the Executive Presidential powers enjoyed by the President since 1978 until they were diluted in the 19th amendment in 2015. According to the draft, the Constitutional Council (CC) will be replaced with the Parliamentary Council which is comprised of the Prime Minister, the Speaker, Leader of the Opposition, a nominee of the Prime Minister and a nominee of Leader of the Opposition. This will enable the President to hold Cabinet portfolios, to appoint the Cabinet of Ministers.
The President will be vested with powers to appoint Chairmen and members of Commissions: Election Commission, Public Service Commission, the National Police Commission, the Human Rights Commission, Commission to Investigate Allegations of Bribery or Corruption, Finance Commission and Delimitation Commission. The President will also appoint the Attorney-General, the Auditor-General, the Parliamentary Commissioner for Administration and the Secretary-General of Parliament with the observation of the Parliamentary Council.
Dissolving Parliament
A notable amendment in 20A is the President could be a member of the Cabinet of Ministers while being the Head of the Cabinet of Ministers and he can determine the number of Ministers in the Cabinet and Ministries. He can assign subjects and functions to Ministers in consultation with the Prime Minister when necessary.
At present, the President is unable to dissolve Parliament after one year but has to wait for four-and-a-half years to do so. When President Gotabaya Rajapaksa was elected in November 2019, he did not have the support of the Parliament to get an approval for Finance Bills until 2 March 2020 – the day Parliament completed four-and-a- half years of its 5-year term to dissolve it. Under the 20th Amendment, the President would be allowed to dissolve Parliament in a year after it first convenes and would also be vested with the power to remove the Prime Minister.
Due to the 19A, the President’s authority was drastically curtailed in the appointment of members to the Independent Commissions. The Constitutional Council has the power in this regard. In the original draft of 19A, there was a proposal to include five civil society representatives to it, but it was reduced to three at the intervention of the opposition at that time. If not for that, civil society nominees would have been able to supersede elected representatives in the appointment of members to the Independent Commissions.
Political bias
It was evident that political motivation was central to the hasty enactment of the 19th Amendment. The political parties did not have sufficient time for an in-depth studies of the 19A Bill. As a result, the country had to grapple with many a contradiction during the actual implementation of it. The two power centers failed to act in consort on most issues, leading to indecision, ending in unstable governance.
In conclusion, the misconception created in the public mind the Government is heading for an autocracy should be removed as President Gotabaya would undoubtedly lead our motherland into peace, tranquility and prosperity.
(The writer is an Attorney-at-Law with LLB, LLM, MPhil.(Colombo)-keerthisinghel@yahoo.co.uk)
If you introduce that system here, you are talking about 1.5 million people wearing batik clothing
To supplement that we must make use of the Port City
The drug menace and the underworld have to be controlled at any cost
The 13th Amendment needs to be revisited. From 1986 we have been talking about Police powers and land powers
When we are competitive the people will accept what is competitive
The former Government placed much focus on a political solution for the Tamils, fighting corruption and assuring justice for high profile murders and other incidents. In an interview with the Daily Mirror online Media Minister Keheliya Rambukwella asserted that the priorities of the new Government are different.
Excerpts:
QLet me start off by asking you about the composition of this Government. We have a group of Ministers and State Ministers; some with questionable pasts and some with questionable portfolios. Will this Government really meet the expectations of the public?
That’s the intention. Based on that we have mapped out a structure. As we move forward we may encounter a requirement for some changes or else we will stick to it. I believe the authorities would have done a comprehensive study on the promises and how to convert the promises into reality. And for that the structure has been made with the Ministers and Ministries. There are areas where some people may have questions. But I can explain to you if you come out with the names.
QWell you have some Ministers who behaved violently in Parliament during the political crisis and then in the portfolios you have a State Minister for Batik, Handloom and Local Apparel Products
Good that you came out with that. Before the 1983 riots tourism brought the main income to the country. It was really flourishing. And one of the main items at the time was batik. It was so lucrative and there was a huge market for it. I even know that some people who are involved in the batik trade purchased houses in Colombo 7. Food, clothing and housing are three things you need to embark on. Those are areas you will never fail in.
In Indonesia Friday is known as casual day. They are encouraged to wear batik clothing. If you introduce that system here, you are talking about 1.5 million people wearing batik clothing. There is also a demand in the world market. We must pursue that. Then there is also clay and betel leaves. There was a consignment of betel leaves that was sent to Pakistan. So these are markets we have totally neglected. These are things which we have in Sri Lanka. All we need is proper management and modern technology to develop these products.
QAnd what about the faces behind some of these Ministries. There is a concern they would behave like they did during the political crisis.
Well I will not condone such behaviour. But things did happen spontaneously (during the political crisis in 2018). That whole episode of events is not in isolation. There were situations where even the Speaker at that time abused power. So there was no redress and these were natural reactions which I don’t justify. I hope that the entire episode would never take place in the future.
QWhat does this Government hope to accomplish over the next five years?
One is, we are an agriculture based country. We need to view that sector and give priority to areas in agriculture. Industrializing should be agri-based. Then we need Foreign Direct Investment. To supplement that we must make use of the Port City. That’s a money spinner if you really use it well.
On the other side there are other matters we will look into; for example, getting rid of the underworld. The drug menace and the underworld have to be controlled at any cost. We need to make this country livable and lovable by everybody.
QSo your Government will give an assurance to the public that they will not see another Easter Sunday attack?
Well we have proved that. We got rid of thirty years of agony. Ever since we got rid of Prabakaran in May 2009 there was not one incident in the country. In other countries even after a settlement there had been isolated incidents. But in Sri Lanka, until the Easter Sunday incident, we hadn’t had any incident related to terrorism. So we are sure and confident we can maintain that.
QHow would your Government deal with those accused of neglecting their duties which resulted in the Easter attacks?
One country one law. I suppose the law will prevail. Simple answer.
QConsecutive Governments have spoken about addressing issues in the North through a political solution. We have not heard much on that from President Gotabaya Rajapaksa and this Government. Is that an issue which is taking a back seat now?
I think there are only a few people who are talking about a political solution. The need is more for an economic solution. There were 11 people elected from the North and East to Parliament at the recent elections. The people there want their irrigation, a but back guarantee for their products, a solid education system and a healthy relationship with communities. That was broken down at various times. All politicians are equally responsible for this; including people like Gajen Ponnambalam and Wigneswaran. They are promoting disharmony. I am sure people there want to live in harmony with others. This political interest is an interest of a few people. The TNA used to say they are the only representatives of the Tamils. But now I don’t think they have any right to say that.
QAre you ruling out the full implementation of the 13th Amendment to the Constitution and devolution of powers?
The 13th Amendment needs to be revisited. From 1986 we have been talking about Police powers and land powers. I feel you can put a better system in place to bring about harmony.
QSo you are going to tell India that the 13th Amendment isn’t the solution since India has been pushing for this?
My humble opinion is that India was also not really for this. They just wanted to get rid of an issue at that time.
QCOBID-19 has really taken a toll on several businesses and the daily lives of many. Do you see a turnaround any time soon?
You need to have a note of appreciation for the Health sector particularly, then the President’s directives, the defence authorities and all those who were involved. We have controlled it thanks to all sectors who were involved.
Having said that, the drawback we are experiencing as a result of this is terrible. It’s not easy. We are engaged in an uphill task. It’s like the tsunami. But then we had enough and more countries willing to assist us. Here the whole world is affected. So its not easy. One thing we are focusing on is self sufficiency with regards to food items. Then we need to manage the service sector. Then there is tourism and foreign employment.
Extravagances will have to be curtailed. We have to simplify our lives and have confidence in ourselves. It’s a tough job, but self-discipline and finance discipline can bring about a change.
QLets talk about your Ministry. State Media comes under your Ministry. Is State Media just playing the role of being the mouthpiece of the Government or doing more service to the public?
They should be the mouthpiece of the Government. But the interpretation is what matters. If a Government is progressive and there is development taking place, it is the right of the people to know that. If the private media is not doing that it is up to to the State media to do so. All I am saying is lets be competitive. For example if the Government newspaper can provide something people want to read its good. You don’t have solid reading material in most newspapers. You need to strike a balance while giving space for Government opinion. If there is something against the Government that must also be there so we are competitive. When we are competitive the people will accept what is competitive.
QWhat plans do you have for the media in Sri Lanka?
I don’t think you can bring in rules and control the media. That should not be in the system and that should not be the system. It must be on consensus. I should be able to tell you that some article is not right and you should be able to tell me yes maybe that article was not right. We should be able to discuss. That is what you call a beautiful culture. Achieving that might be difficult, but I am trying.
QSo you are guaranteeing media freedom?
I am definitely guaranteeing media freedom.
QSuccessive Governments have given assurances that investigations into the murder of journalist Lasantha Wickremetunga, attacks on journalists and even the murder of rugger player Wasim Thajudeen will be investigated and justice would be served. Your Government has not said a word about these issues since assuming duties. Why is that?
You should ask the former Government about that. They are the people who accused us. They are the people who put the blame on us. They had five years to investigate. We denied our involvement. We investigated. Around the world there are so many murders that have gone without a final finding. I am not trying to justify that. But those are the factors which the former Government used in 2015 and the change took place because of that. One was corruption and the other was these incidents of murder and harassment. Every time they spoke about Thajudeen.
QSo that is of no concern to this Government? Is that what you are saying?
I am saying one country one rule. Justice will prevail. The system in place for justice will have to carry out its investigations.
QSo would the government push for those investigations?
I don’t think we will push for anything. It’s the duty for the institutions to make sure that the final results are there. If not we can question them. We cant tell them do this and do that or don’t do that. Again you become dictators. We say let these institutions be independent, let them carry out their investigations, and if they don’t do that they will need to give a viable explanation as to why that is so. They can say they cannot find the proper witnesses. But then people cannot question that because it has happened all over the world. The former Government was given five years to complete the investigations. I believe what the authorities have said was that there was not sufficient evidence.
The president of the country is not entitled to be the defence minister but bound to be the defence minister
President is accountable to people
Education Minister Prof. G.L. Peiris, in an interview with Daily Mirror, comments on the 20th Amendment to the Constitution and responds to questions about it. Excerpts:
QThe 20th Amendment has been the subject of criticism these days. What is the rationale behind the government’s move?
The 20th Amendment has been brought forward to address very practical questions. The opponents of the 20th Amendment are trying to raise various controversies. The rationale is very simple. The 19th Amendment which is sought to be rolled back by the 20th Amendment was an exercise in vengeance. It has no other purpose than wreak vengeance on a particular family to sweep them away from the political field, and if possible, to put them in jail. The price for that folly was paid not by the Rajapaksa family but by the people. The 19th Amendment made governance impossible. As long as you have executive presidency as an institution, the President is empowered to do the job for which he was elected. The rationale of presidency is that a country that needs to have rapid development needs to have a strong executive. The President is elected for five years. He receives a mandate directly from people. He is elected on a particular programme of work- a specific agenda. People of the country endorse that agenda and give him the power to implement it. He has to deliver in keeping with the mandate. The 19th Amendment prevented the President from giving effect the mandate he received from the people. The responsibility is there. What he lacks is the authority to deliver. That is very clearly demonstrated. That is why nothing happened during the Yahapalana years. President Gotabaya Rajapaksa was elected with 6.9 million votes. There is no doubt about his mandate. But, how can he deliver? He cannot hold the defence portfolio. But, he is responsible for maintaining the law and order of the country. How can he deliver if he cannot even dismiss the Inspector General of Police?
The President has no say in the appointment or removal of the IGP. The IGP faced serious allegations. He was brought to court in shackles. The magistrate decided that he should be consigned to remand jail. After all that, the President cannot remove him. He is still the IGP. All that the government can do is to appoint an acting IGP. Then, who is responsible for the defence of the country?
We argue that, in spite of prohibitions contained in the 19th Amendment, the President of the country is not entitled to be the defence minister but bound to be the defence minister.
According to Article 4, defence is an inherent part of the executive power. The President is the repository of executive power, and defence is an integral element of it.
Take the Easter Sunday carnage! Evidence transpiring before the Presidential commission is really horrifying. It is crystal clear that all the facts were known to the government. Indian intelligence has brought this to the notice of the Sri Lankan government not once but many times. All the facts were known, but the government could not do anything at all to prevent this disaster which resulted in the loss of 265 lives. That is because of the creation of two centres of power. In a coalition consisting of different parties, there is a divergence of policies, approaches and a ferocious conflict of personalities. It was the people of the country who paid the price. The result was the state of anarchy. That situation could not have existed before because there was clear attribution of responsibility. That became cloudy.
The 19th Amendment which is sought to be rolled back by the 20th Amendment was an exercise in vengeance. It has no other purpose than wreak vengeance on a particular family to sweep them away from the political field
QWhat is the reason for the proposal to replace the constitutional council with the parliamentary council?
The 20th Amendment substitutes the parliamentary council for the constitutional council. The constitutional council consisted of ten persons. Three out of them had to be nominated from civil society by the Prime Minister and the Opposition Leader. In the unusual circumstances which prevailed in the Yahapalana days, it was possible because the Opposition Leader, for all intentions and purposes, was virtually a member of the government. The Tamil National Alliance (TNA) supported every budget of the Yahapalana government without proposing one single amendment. It was normally an opposition. Therefore, it is not difficult for the government and the opposition to agree on a set of names. In the context of today, it would be difficult for the Prime Minister and the Opposition Leader to agree on names.
QWhy is it inappropriate for civil society to play a role in this case?
You bring people from outside. The constitutional council operates really above the President. The 19th Amendment clearly declared that as far as the commissions are concerned, the commissioners can be appointed only on the recommendations of the constitutional council. Without them, the President cannot act.
Secondly, a series of officers cannot be appointed without the approval of the constitutional council. That means the President cannot discharge those functions without recommendations or approval. There is this myth skillfully cultivated in the country that these are dangerous powers to be entrusted to the President; that it will erode separation of powers, freedom of individuals etc. That has been cultivated. Then, there is absolutely no danger in giving these powers to people from civil society. One must rationally examine this premise.
QHow do you argue against it?
You are empowering the President. The President is elected and accountable to the people of the country. After five years, he has to submit himself to the judgment of people. If the people are not satisfied with his performance, he is defeated. That is the ultimate accountability of the President to the people. What about the people from civil society. From whom have they got the mandate? To whom are they responsible? Where is the accountability? Today, you have a situation in Sri Lanka where the President, the prime minister and the Cabinet have changed. But, one thing that has not changed is the constitutional council. These members from civil society hold office until October, 2021. More than a year from now, they are in office. People cannot change them. Is that upholding of democracy or negation of democracy? These people are a law unto themselves.
President Gotabaya Rajapaksa was elected with 6.9 million votes. There is no doubt about his mandate. But, how can he deliver? He cannot hold the defence portfolio. But, he is responsible for maintaining the law and order of the country. How can he deliver if he cannot even dismiss the Inspector General of Police
QThey argue that the aspiration is good. What is your response?
But, it is obvious that it was not achieved on the ground. Empirical experience of the Yahapalana years demonstrates that beyond any doubt. The objective was to depoliticise all these appointments. Did that really happen in practice? Evidence is very much to the contrary. You have Javid Yusuf. He is above the President. He is expected to be apolitical. Is he objective? He called upon people at a public forum not to give two-thirds majority to an alliance led by SLPP.
He is as much as politicised as anybody else. He is not far removed from politics. Election Commission member Dr.Ratnajeewan Hoole asked people not to vote for the SLPP. Everything they have done so far shows that they have been instruments of the government in power. You have this pretense of impartiality. They say it is dangerous to concentrate too much power in the hands of one individual. Then, what about concentration of power in the hands of people who are not accountable? The problem arises when there is power without accountability. The President is accountable whereas Dr. Hoole is not.
QBut, you need checks and balances in a democracy. What is your response?
Like everything else in life, there must be a sense of balance. We need checks and balances. We accept that. But, if you have checks and balances to the extent that the person elected cannot move this way or that way, it is negating. It destroys their very purpose. The result is inaction. Checks and balances also have a limit. If too much power in the hands of one person is bad, what is the right balance? The President could not act without the approval of the constitutional council. Now, the parliamentary council is proposed to be set up. The President has to refer his appointments to the parliamentary council for observations. That is a check on arbitrary or capricious actions.
He must make the appointments after all. It is he who was elected by the people. If he acts unreasonably, the public opinion will build up against him.
QThere is a whole lot of criticism on the move to do away with the National Audit Commission. Why has it been proposed?
Seven commissions have been retained. The powers of the audit commission have been transferred to the public service commission. It is not that function has disappeared. It is exercised by the public service commission. Many other powers of the police commission are also exercised by the public service commission.
QThe President is always a member of a particular political party. If he gets the authority to appoint members to the election commission, it will affect independence of the body. How do you counter that argument?
The entire tradition since the Soulbury Commission was that. All these bodies were appointed by the government in power. That was never accepted inappropriate since 1948. It was like that. The election commission has to be appointed independently, you said. What happened when Dr. Hoole made this statement on TV that people should not vote for Pohottuwa? The Secretary of SLPP protested in writing and asked for the response of the chairman of the election commission. There was no response at all. Is that being independent?
The President is elected for five years. He receives a mandate directly from people. He is elected on a particular programme of work- a specific agenda. People of the country endorse that agenda and give him the power to implement it. He has to deliver in keeping with the mandate
QWhy have you sought to remove the ceiling on the size of the Cabinet?
There was never a ceiling. That was entirely fictitious. That was a public relations exercise. On the face of it, you have 30 Cabinet Ministers and 40 state and deputy ministers. Simply by signing an agreement with another party, you can knock off all those limits. It was sleight of hand.
QDoes it mean the government will stick to the present number or increase it?
The President will have that power to decide under appropriate circumstances to change numbers this way or that way. It does not mean you must have 30. When the President appointed this Cabinet, the 19th Amendment was in force. But, he did not go up to 30.
He appointed only 28. Actually, the 20th Amendment will preserve the rights of people in a way that did not exist earlier.
Investigations have revealed that the ‘Save the Pearls’ organization, belonging to currently detained Hejaz Hizbullah, has received funds from an institute in Qatar suspected to be funding terrorist activities.
The Criminal Investigation Department (CID) informed the court today (23), that the said institute had deposited an amount of Rs 13 million to the bank account of the ‘Save the Pearls’ organization.
The relevant institute in Qatar has been identified as a banned organization that provides funding to various terror groups.
Therefore, the CID informed the court that further investigations are being carried out with regard to the Qatari institution.
Former IGP Pujith Jayasundara making a statement today before the Presidential Commission of Inquiry into the Easter attacks stated that former President Maithripala Sirisena has instructed him not to conduct any open investigation into Islamic extremist activities.
He was giving evidence before the commission for the second day today
This was when the Commission inquired whether the Prime Minister had been consulted without obtaining advice from the President at any time
Meanwhile, while Pujith Jayasundara was giving evidence, former President Maithripala Sirisena arrived at the commission at around 4.00 pm this afternoon.
Then, as he had done yesterday the former President sat in solitude at the back, observing the hearing and continued to stay there for about 45 minutes before leaving, where journalists questioned the former President.
Meanwhile, former President Maithripala Sirisena and his private secretary were again issued notices today to appear before the Presidential Commission of Inquiry into the Easter attacks.
In addition, notices were issued to the three Auxiliary Bishops of the Archdiocese of Colombo to appear before the Presidential Commission tomorrow.
As of now India is on the best of terms with US and that partnership has etched out the Indo-US Pacific Strategy with India playing a greater role among Quad Nations. That India was a crucial link in US pivot to Asia is without a doubt and the US re-chartering its Asian venture is something that policy makers in both India & Sri Lanka must seriously worry about. The sudden rise in LTTE diaspora voices alongside the Church echoing a subtle ‘time to forgive’ and the silent manner western-government funded faith-organizations are evangelizing India & Sri Lanka is nothing India’s or Sri Lanka’s leader cannot ignore. The innuendo by Democratic VP candidate Kamala Harris on Kashmir and Indian Government’s own admission that Eelam includes Greater Tamil Nadu is a concern and behooves to question why Indian think tanks & Sri Lanka’s advisors are pretending not to see the dangers.
Though India played a major role in regime change in Sri Lanka, India was also well aware of LTTE’s threat on its shores. Now India is also nursing Jihadi terrorism. Though sample testing was done on Sri Lanka on Easter Sunday, India cannot afford to sit pretty thinking India is immune. It is worthwhile for India’s think tanks & strategists to rewind their memories to how LTTE came to be adopted by the West for their geopolitical agendas. Isn’t this why the LTTE Diaspora are happily conducting shows from western shores? Have any western government made any attempts to clip their kitty or stop any of their international illegal rackets?
Simply placing a cosmetic ban, just to show the world LTTE is banned but allowing LTTE remnants to carry on business as usual is just fooling themselves. Let us be realistic, none of the tie-coat LTTE diaspora wish to go to the jungles and dirty their suits taking up arms when a better alternative prevails. The power of money, lobbying and corrupt politicians are the ingredients post-terror groups with a rich kitty have found more powerful than the latest cruise missiles. LTTE Diaspora can hire or retain the world’s best lawyers, get foreign MPs to cry over terrorists killed and even get former UN heads to cry foul over LTTE bogus ‘genocides’.
But when the Indian Central Government & the Tamil Nadu Government tells a tribunal that LTTE continues to nurture a ‘greater Tamil Nadu’ (inclusive of Tamil Nadu, Kerala, Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh & North & East Sri Lanka) in 2014 December, we cannot but stop to wonder why India chose to play a role in regime change in Sri Lanka that brought to power the very coterie of characters who were wining and dining with these separatists. Did the arrival of a Chinese submarine to Sri Lanka, make blind India’s ability to identify the bigger threat? Can India that espouses to become a Permanent Member of the Security Council, even realize this dream if India is balkanized? An India that is continuously drumming ‘Concern for India’s National Security’ must realize that in helping weaken Sri Lanka, it has inadvertently weakened itself.
India may well like to take stock of the many NGOs it has revoked license, what their modus operandi had been, India may also like to look how entire villages across India are getting evangelicalized, even areas in Punjab. It is also happening in Sri Lanka to a lesser degree. But they have revamped their operations by building a set of people pretending to be faithful to the majority religion in both Sri Lanka & India but infiltrating the nationalist camps to draw people into their fold promising money & political positions. The weak and self-conceited always fall prey.
Govt told tribunal LTTE still wants ‘greater Tamil Nadu’ (Dec 2014)
Both India & Sri Lanka in particular must be worried about the dual citizenship aspect of the 20a that enables all LTTE Diaspora to even contest & buy land in Sri Lanka & create that Greater Tamil Eelam for their Western masters and then return to their foreign shores and allow West to dock & turn into a base to challenge and take on their real enemies.
LTTE Diaspora thus will help the West create the Southern-end of their geopolitical pivot.
Kamala Harris & Kashmir
The topic of Kashmir is a thorn in any conversation with an India. It has a bitter past, bitter experiences and is a topic India and Indian officials evade responding to.
It is an open secret that Biden is simply the puppet posed to enable a Democratic victory with Harris being groomed to function as the defacto US President.
While entire India did voice glee at her nomination, the cheers have waned somewhat to being confined to Southern India, where Harris’s maternal family hails from.
Indians and in particular Indian strategists have unusually turned a blind eye to an interesting remark made by Harris on Kashmir.
We have to remind Kashmiris that they are not alone in the world. We are keeping track of the situation. There is a need to interveneif the situation demands,”says U.S. Sen. Kamala Harris.
We all know what US means by ‘intervene’ it is to roll out R2P and this means Kashmir becomes Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria.
It is strange that India is ignoring such a public announcement of future plans.
The reason why we are alert to the US designs on Sri Lanka vis a vis the Pivot to Asia using the 3D approach – Diplomacy (SOFA), Defense (ACSA) and Development (MCC) is that US signaled its designs referring to Sri Lanka as America’s ‘real-estate’.
Sri Lanka occupies some very important real estate in the Indo-Pacific region, and it’s a country of increasing strategic importance in the Indian Ocean region”
Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for South and Central Asian Affairs Alice Wells
This naturally fits into our fears of why US/MCC wishes Sri Lanka to privatize all land including State Land and remove every constitutional & legal impediment to do so & all these changes for a paltry $480 disbursed across 5 years. So why have Sri Lanka’s leaders not realized that US Pivot means acquiring Sri Lanka’s real estate for imperial West to roost as a trade, diplomatic & military hub.
In India’s frenzy to rub shoulders with the West and crown itself a partner in Quad against China, India has unfortunately ignored the dangers lurking and this is likely to end up India becoming another Yugoslavia & Soviet Union. India will no longer command the power and presence it yields currently even among the South Asian nations. How could India’s strategists ignore the writings on the wall. Sri Lanka’s strategists by chirping ‘India First’ are only showcasing their ignorance of the ground realities.
It was reported
in the media (September 8, 2020) that prime minister Mahinda Rajapaksa’s
proposal for a ban on cattle slaughter received cabinet approval as well as the
approval of the government parliamentary group. Some Buddhist monks and allied
groups who have long been agitating for such legislation to be enacted raised
euphoric cries and invoked blessings on the prime minister and the president. I
don’t know how the two privately reacted to the acclamation they received on
the basis of a controversial measure tentatively proposed, but not finally
agreed upon: Did they accept the still unearned accolades with a feeling of
exultant self-vindication or with a sense of gnawing doubt that the whole thing
might misfire? They are more likely to experience the latter state of mind,
because this ban cannot be imposed without harmful repercussions, given the
unalterable ground realities that must be recognized and accommodated before
enacting and implementing the proposed ban. This is so particularly in relation
to the prevailing economic and political crises in today’s globalized world, of
which Sri Lanka is a small member, hardly noticed except for her strategic
location and her beleaguered state due to the same circumstance, trapped
between three superpowers, two global and one regional. The domestic fallout
could be even more critical. This is the worst imaginable time for such a
radical measure to be implemented, however popular it could be among a section
of the people.
But let’s not
be too alarmed. Media minister and Cabinet spokesman Keheliya Rambukwella (a
good choice for the latter job, in my view) managed to assuage the fears of
sceptics like me who are not convinced about the actual benefits, but are
really concerned about the possible unsavoury economic, socio-cultural, and
political consequences, of a ban being imposed on cattle slaughter, when
Rambukwelle told the local media that prime minister Rajapaksa ‘hopes to ban
cattle slaughter’ and that ‘he would decide when to submit the proposal
to the government’. The government announced that a final decision will be
delayed by a month (as reported in the online Istanbul/Turkey based TRT News
Magazine). Rajapaksa’s cautious non-commitment hints at the possibility
of a reassessment of the pros and cons of the move and points towards the
likelihood of sanity finally prevailing. But this will need a lot of reverse
convincing to do among the convinced (I mean, among those who are for the ban).
From my point
of view (for what it is worth), it is vitally important to be mindful of how
the ban would be viewed abroad as well as among domestic non-Buddhist religious
minorities, though it might go down well with a majority of Buddhists and
Hindus. There is no question about trying to assert our rights as an
independent sovereign nation and to pursue political and economic policies that
we believe serve the best interest of our people. However, divisive party
politics of the recent years have landed Sri Lanka in such a vulnerable
situation globally that any government that even occasionally dares to
defy undue superpower pressures in order to accommodate the legitimate demands
of its own people gets labelled as undemocratic, autocratic, oppressive, and
therefore ripe for replacement. For a Sri Lankan government to be on its best
behaviour is no guarantor of its survival in a context where India, China, and
America are each looking after their own national interest in a competitive
relationship with one another at the expense of Sri Lanka’s very survival. But
what can we do about it? I think that the present government under the
joint leadership of the president and the prime minister is doing what it can
in these internationally beleaguered and internally treacherous times.
Insisting on passing potentially divisive legislation is no way to help
them.
Today, with
Gotabaya Rajapaksa as President, we have the first executive head of government
since independence who has found a way to consult with the Maha Sangha as a
monolithic entity through non-political, non-sectarian interaction. He
appointed a board of monks called the Bauddha Upadeshaka Sabhawa (the Buddhist
Advisory Council) to advise him and had its first meeting on April 24, 2020. It
consists of the Mahanayake Theras of the Three Nikayas and a group of prominent
scholar monks, who are specialists in various fields connected with the Buddha
Sasana in which they have time-honoured claims and commitments. The monks meet
with the president on the third Friday of every month. In their last meeting on
September 18, they commended the president for taking steps, in accordance with
their proposals, for, among other things, the protection of historical sites of
archaeological importance, development of Pirivena education, designing of a
national educational policy, control of the drug menace, etc. But, as far as
the Derana TV news coverage was concerned, there was no mention of the cow
slaughter ban proposal. Can’t this be an indication that it is not being perceived
as such a pressing issue?
There is no
gainsaying the fact that Buddhist monks worked tirelessly for the victory of
the nationalist camp, and they did not do so for any personal benefit. There
are a number of activist monk groups each articulating different issues of
broad national interest such as environment protection in addition to the
central issue of the threat to the Buddha Sasana, the predominantly Buddhist
nation (the people) and the unitary state that comes from the handful of
foreign sponsored separatist racists and religious extremists among the
peaceful mainstream Tamil and Muslim minorities respectively. These traitorous
elements dominated the previous regime. The president appointed the Buddhist
Advisory Council partly in recognition of the service they did in helping to
save the country from misgovernance, but primarily in fulfilment of the
constitutional requirement of giving foremost place to Buddhism. We can expect
nothing but good from this interaction between the prominent Nayake and
scholarly monks and the president. Is it likely that they will fail to
understand the problematic nature of the proposed ban on cattle
slaughter?
Be that as it
may, we can’t overlook the fact that some well known leading activists, heads
of some animal rights and public health maintenance related organizations,
welcomed the proposal with great enthusiasm, despite the principal proponent’s
non-committal stance. These included such prominent personalities as the
Justice for Animals and Nature Organization chairman Ven. Dr Omalpe
Sobhita Thera, founder of Sarvodaya Dr A.T. Ariyaratne, and GMOA head, medical
specialist Dr Anuruddha Padeniya. They published a public announcement
cum invitation to ‘all professional and civil organizations’ asking them to attend
a meeting at the ‘Sangha Headquarters’ on Alvitigala Mawatha on September
20. They are urging the enforcement of the ban proposal. An announcement cum
invitation was issued on September 17, the day that marked the 156th birth
anniversary of Anagarika Dharmapala who had pioneered the agitation for putting
an end to cattle slaughter. In his time, probably, it was more meaningful and
less controversial to do so than today. This announcement appeared in the
online Lankaweb Forum page the same day, where I read it. It must have been
published elsewhere, too. The author and principal signatory to the document,
Ven. Sobhita, wrote (in translation): ‘It need hardly be stressed that the
principled, determined and fearless enactment of the praiseworthy decision taken
by the government MPs headed by the prime minister requires the approval and
support of the general public. We believe that we are going to get your fullest
cooperation in this regard. We intend to call a meeting of delegates from such
organizations and take decisions in connection with organizing the relevant
future activities to achieve this aim.’
Personally, I
have the highest respect for these three eminent persons (who have already done
much commendable service to Mother Lanka in their different capacities) and the
others mentioned in the document and also empathize fully with their commitment
to the cause they believe in, but I do not share their conviction about
the feasibility, the functionality or the actual benefits of the proposition
that they are wholeheartedly supporting. I would support a movement with the
same devotion to stop animal slaughter in general, not just cattle slaughter,
if there was such a movement, but I know that it is an unlikely initiative, an
impossibility even. I don’t see any rationality in such a project. The kind of
free rational thinking that the Buddha advised the young Kalamas to adopt
without blindly following him – the way to Enlightenment, budh,rational
intelligence, that Narendra Modi, invoking the common intellectual heritage of
India which we too share through Buddhism, meant in the quote at the top, as
opposed to yudh, war/conflict, as the best way to resolve problems – seems to
be at a premium – there is paradoxically little available of it – in the sacred
Treasury of Theravada Buddhism that Sri Lanka is often claimed to be.
Occasional submergence of practical rational thinking as in this case – our
rational faculty sometimes becomes manifest in its humblest form of common
sense – could prove costly in more than one sense for the whole country.
Rational minds
can conceive of alternative ways of dealing with a problem, when sometimes the
most direct solution is likely to create worse problems than the original
problem itself like the cattle slaughter ban, if implemented, will certainly
do. It is not likely to contribute towards enhancing intercommunal goodwill as
already implied above. Many Muslims are employed in the meat industry, and
there are secondary industries like tanning (making leather out of animal
hides), shoe making, and the manufacture of leather products such handbags,
waist belts, saddles, some percussion instruments, etc. Import of beef from
abroad will lead to increase in prices, in addition to the loss of jobs, and
the drain on scarce foreign exchange that it will entail. We may easily imagine
the problematic implications for the important dairy milk industry, the
development of which is essential for stopping the import of toxic milk powder.
Desperate times
call for desperate measures. For all communities in general who make Sri Lanka
their home, and for the majority community in particular, these are desperate
times indeed. However, cattle slaughter is not one of the burning problems that
make the times desperate for them. There are much more serious problems they
are faced with such as the menacing, so-called MMC Compact, the deleterious Yahapalana
constitutional legacy – 19A – that prevents the executive and the legislature
from readily restoring the democracy,the independence of the judiciary, and the
rule of law and the communal harmony that it effectively destroyed, the
inevitable Covid-19 related economic consequences in the form of devastating
blows on large income generating sources such as the tourism based hospitality
industry and skilled and unskilled foreign employment, disruption of domestic
industries due to mandatory lockdowns, social distancing, and other health
restrictions imposed on physical movements in order to meet the pandemic
emergency, all leading to the new administration’s devoted attempts to
eliminate the drug menace and other forms of crime and corruption even more challenging
and even more difficult than they are.
Don’t the Ven.
Mahanayake monks and leading lay Buddhists have to devote their attention
to barefaced threats to the Buddha Sasana both within it and outside of it,
such as bogus Arhants explaining the Dhamma in idiosyncratic ways that confuse
the average Buddhists with little education in the philosophy of Buddhism (the
majority) for whom it is a religion like any other, and even egg them towards
looking more promising faiths; disguised non-Buddhist men and women in yellow
robes spreading superstitious beliefs and practices under the label of
Buddhism; proselytising preachers and faith healers misappropriating Buddhist
symbol to enmesh credulous innocent Buddhists in their superstitions; some
truly ignorant or sincerely ill-meaning You Tubers circulating the patent myth
that Gautama Buddha was born, attained Enlightenment, and preached the Dhamma
in Sri Lanka, ignoring the abundance of established historical evidence that
proves that he was indeed from the subcontinent, and making money by turning
out videos that feature illiterate ‘scholars’ who save their skin by hiding
behind the hypocritical slogan ‘Here is the evidence. Believe it or leave it’,
but there is only fake evidence. The Buddhist leaders must put their own house
in order before driving our beleaguered nation into further crisis by trying to
reform the world.
It is not that
the monks and lay Buddhists who are agitating for a ban on cattle slaughter
have forgotten what they can learn in this regard from the Buddha Gautama’s own
policy of not forcing morality on people, but of helping them adopt moral
behaviour by understanding evil as evil and good as good through self
realization as illustrated in the story about Chunda Sukara/Sukarika
(Chunda the pig killer/keeper/professional pork seller). This pig keeper
slaughtered his pigs after torturing them in unimaginably cruel ways. And he
was a neighbour of the great sage. But he never responded to his teaching of
avihimsa and eventually died a wretched death, unreformed.
Perhaps we can
learn something from India in this regard. According to the Wikipedia,
India (pop.1.3 billion) is nearly 80% Hindu (with 14% Muslim, and 6%
others). Beef eating is generally taboo for Hindus. It’s been estimated that
the number of vegetarians in India equals the number of vegetarians in the rest
of the world put together. But it seems to adopt a relaxed attitude towards
cattle slaughter. The law governing cattle slaughter varies from state to
state, and is flexible in some states. On 26 May 2017, the Ministry of Environment
of the Government of India led by Bharatiya Janata Party imposed a ban on the
sale and purchase of cattle for slaughter at animal markets across India, under
Prevention of Cruelty to Animals statutes, although Supreme Court of India
suspended the ban on sale of cattle in its judgement in July 2017, giving
relief to beef and leather industries”. So, the cattle slaughter ban in India
was made ineffective even before it was hardly implemented.
No doubt, this
was a disappointment to prime minister Modi, his BJP, and others who supported
the ban. It is no less so, it is interesting to learn, to most Muslims of India
as well. Researchers Naghmar Sahar and Rashid Kidwai of the Observer Research
Foundation of India say: The majority of Muslim leadership in India has, all
along, been always in favour of a nationwide ban on cow slaughter, but somehow
successive regimes have refrained from banning it” (India Matters/Aug. 12,
2019/ ‘A century of giving up beef: Muslims demand nationwide ban on cow
slaughter’). Muslims have been making this demand in deference to Hindu
sentiment, in the interest of peaceful coexistence with Hindus. The useful
lesson in common sense we can learn from India’s experience with cattle
slaughter banning is too obvious to need explaining.
Can’t the
Buddhists, Hindus, Muslims and Christians who disapprove of cattle slaughter
think of a more efficient and easier way to minimise it (as eliminating is
impossible) than trying to impose unenforceable legislation to ban it
altogether? Just stop eating beef!
Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna ( Pohottu) had a sweeping victory at the General Election of 2020. Pohottu got 59.09 %of the total vote and 145 seats. Nobody expected such a landslide victory and it was promptly dubbed the ‘mother of all landslides’.Voter turnout island-wide was 71%. It would have been more, but Pohottu supporters from abroad were unable to attend due to Covid 19.. They have won a ‘super majority’, said BBC. The two-and-half-year-old SLPP has placed a firm footprint in Sri Lanka’s political firmament, said analysts. That remains to be seen.
Cartoon is from
Sunday Times 9.8.20
The
general election is Pohottu’s third win. Pohottu did
well at its very first election,
Local Government elections in February
2018. It polled 44.65% of the total
votes polled and won the highest number of seats and local authorities. Pohottu got 231 out of 338 Local
Government bodies. Then at the presidential election in
November, last year, SLPP candidate Gotabaya Rajapaksa won 52.25% or 6.9
million votes.The
SLPP has secured a steamroller majority in Parliament and needs only a single
crossover from the Opposition benches to have two-thirds of MPs on its side,
said analysts. It has 145 seats, and its allies which contested separately in
some areas have four seats among them.
Pohottu
is a brand new political party, built
around the Rajapaksa brothers, but primarily, Gotabaya ,not Mahinda. The architect
was Basin Rajapaksa. Basil Rajapaksa formed the Sri Lanka
Podujana Peramuna (SLPP) ahead of the Local Government elections of February 2018.
However,
the Pohottu trade union, ‘Pragathashili
Sevaka Sangamaya’ of Associated Newspapers of Ceylon, ( Lake House) was set up
at ANCL even before the party was established, its chairman said. Support was provided by SLPP National Organizer
Basil Rajapaksa, while MP Gamini Lokuge provided the leadership.We are not
functioning as a traditional trade union; we worked hard for the victory at the
Local Government and Presidential elections,” the Chairman of the Union said,
but he added that Basil Rajapaksa had instructed the trade union to stand for
the rights of the employees.
During
Yahapalana time, Pohottu created two
talk shops, ‘Viyathmaga’ in early 2016 followed by ‘Eliya’. The emergence
of the Viyathmaga, ‘Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s own political organization’, as a political entity at the 2020 general
election was a significant development. Civil society organization Viyathmaga has emerged as an
influential group within the SLPP parliamentary group with eight out of nine
contestants gaining entry into Parliament, said analysts.
Nalaka Godahewa came first on preference votes
in the Gampaha district polling 325,429 and Professor Channa Jayasumana with
125,980 came second in the Anuradhapura district. Rear Admiral Sarath
Weerasekera came first in preference votes winning 328,092 votes in the Colombo
district. Viyathmaga candidates
have also found places in the SLPP National List and were set to become Cabinet
Ministers, said commentators. There hadn’t been a previous instance of a
President fielding a team of his own for parliamentary election said
Sarath Weerasekera.
This is the first
occasion where a landslide victory took place in a country where the
Proportional Representation system (PR) exists. Proportional Representation
system was introduced by President JR Jayawardene to ensure not only that the UNP never lost an
election but also that no party would ever command a two thirds majority in
Parliament. It was thought that PR would prevent stable
governments appearing. The SLPP leaders have given the lie to this claim.
Three measures taken by President Gotabaya ensured him the loving support of the voters. One was the measures taken to
contain the deadly Covid-19 from spreading. At present the number of those
afflicted by the disease remains below 3,000 with only 13 deaths. That is a
feat that could only be achieved by a developed country where the health system
is advanced and modern.
The second is
the major crackdowns he ordered on the illegal drug trade and the bosses who
ran them, even from jails together with an order to crackdown on the
underworld. The third is his meet the
people” election campaign which won him much public support.
BBC commented, Sri Lanka has been one of the
few nations to hold an election despite the corona virus pandemic.Just nine months after his impressive
win in the presidential election, Gotabaya Rajapaksa has led his Sri Lanka
People’s Front to a two-thirds majority. He is hugely popular among the Sinhala
majority for crushing the Tamil Tiger separatist rebels in 2009 when he was Defence
secretary. Many in the country also credit his administration for bringing
stability and successfully containing the corona virus outbreak.
Lord Naseby,
who is also the President and founder of the All Party British Sri Lanka
Parliamentary Group in the UK said, ‘This is a truly remarkable result; yet
again the ordinary people of Sri Lanka have turned out to vote at a level
rarely seen anywhere in the World. This is true democracy at work.
By conducting
a peaceful general election under very strict health precautions (even though
this cost so much of money) Sri Lanka has become a model to the entire world
under the present trying conditions of health and economy all over the world,
said Father Vimal Tirimanne .
The 2020 General Election is a clear
indication that even with regard to local politics, there are quite a number of
positive points that should never be ignored. As a matter of fact, this
election could well be the moment of transition which marks the beginning of a
new political culture in the country, Father Vimal stated.
Mahinda
Rajapaksa was sworn in as Prime
Minister at Kelaniya Raja Maha Vihara.
After taking oaths as Prime Minister Mahinda Rajapaksa visited Vidyalankara Pirivena, Gangaramaya, Abhayaramaya,
Pepiliyana Sunetra Devi Pirivena and Bellanwila Raja Maha Vihara . The Prime Minister was acknowledging the
support given to him by the Maha Sangha.
The
third and last ceremony, the swearing in
of Cabinet of ministers was held in
Kandy, in the Audience hall next to the Dalada Maligawa. This Audience Hall is not a part of the Dalada Maligawa. It is
part of the royal palace. Therefore, the choice of venue is most appropriate.
Both
ceremonies included Pansil and pirit and was watched over by a formidable
number of bhikkhus who sat stolidly through
the whole ceremony. This excessive
emphasis on Buddhist rituals is significant.
It is the
first time since independence that a Sri Lanka government has decided to recognize the island’s
unique Sinhala Buddhist civilization and
emphasis the Buddhist
ethos that accompanies it. This does not mean the start
of Buddhist rule”. There are no theocratic Buddhist states. The Buddhist
philosophy does not make this possible.
In having a ceremony in Kandy, Pohottu is
drawing attention to Sri Lanka ‘s historic Sinhala kingdom. This Sinhala kingdom,
carrying the name Sinhaladvipa, dates from the time of king Panduvasudeva, but
the earliest accepted date is that of Devanampiyatissa, 250BC – 210. This Sinhala kingdom continued
unbroken up to 1815, making a total of
around 2000 years of unbroken, sovereign,
monarchical rule. This is, I think,
unique to both South and South East Asia, with the exception of
China.
The new government has created state ministries for its
agricultural commodities and cottage industries. There are cabinet portfolios
for Batiks and handlooms, Gem and Jewelry, Pharmaceutical Production,
Ornamental Fish Cane, Brass, Clay products. Also for Vegetables, Fruits,
Chilies, Onions, Potatoes, Coconut,
Palmyra, Sugarcane, Maize, Cashew, Pepper, Cinnamon, Cloves and Betel.
This has been
sniggered at. Actually, it is most praiseworthy. It means that each of these ‘village’ subjects will have a specific
budget allocation all to itself. This
will be the first time ever that these village subjects have been given the
financial attention they deserve.
These
‘subjects’ have been highly criticized and laughed at but there is a purpose,
said a Pohottu spokesman. This is a very timely decision taken by the
government to uplift the living standards of people dependent on those
industries and also to expand the country’s export-oriented production,.
Through new
State Ministerial portfolios, it is expected to achieve a considerable growth
in local production. Unlike in the past, now State Ministers too have to play a
key role in the Government’s development agenda. With the assignment of
specific subjects for the State Ministers, the Government can easily monitor
the growth of fields allocated for them, the spokesman concluded.
The Lion Flag of Kandyan Kings
briefly held monopolistic sway and fluttered in the winds of Sinhale over
Senkadagala hills hours before modern day Lanka’s new Government were to be sworn
in and officially come into being in the hallowed precincts of the Sri Dalada,
said the media.
Over enthusiastic municipal workers
were blamed for decorating Kandy town with a set of the now defunct Royal Flag
of the Kandyan Kingdom, with the solitary lion symbolising Sinhala supremacy,
the day before the Government carnival was expected to arrive in this once
historic capital
When the Kandy Municipal Council
finally awoke to the blunder and realised Kandy was awash with lion flags
devoid of the green and orange stripes meant to represent the minority Muslims
and Tamils respectively, an immediate counter operation to hoist down the
offending ‘imposter’ flags, flying ,
from every flag pole in the city was launched.
(continued)
With the
advent of 20A bashing the dual citizens has become a pastime of many. It has
now become a fashionable social phenomena.
Currently
dual citizens are seen as a ‘pariah community’.
They are attacked from left, centre and the right. They are despised in
every corner. They are seen as the reason for every evil of the land.
When we
refer to Sri Lankan dual citizens we largely mean the very large Sinhalese
community who have taken up citizenship in developed western countries like the
USA, Canada, UK, Australia, New Zealand, Italy, Germany, Switzerland and France.
These
people tend to work to preserve the unitary status of Sri Lanka. Though they have left the
motherland permanently, they are genuine patriots.
Some have
returned to the motherland and contribute to the development of Sri Lanka.
True
there are a large number of Tamil dual citizens, but, they are more or less
referred to as the Tamil Diaspora. There is a perception that some of them support
the creation of the separate Tamil Eelam in Sri Lanka.
Over a
million Sinhalese dual citizens live in those western countries. Most of them left Sri Lanka during the war period.
In 1980s to early 2000s hundreds and thousands
of educated Sinhalese left Sri Lanka to western countries to escape the war,
and also in search of greener pastures.
The majority of them settled down well in their newly adopted countries.
They have led exemplary, decent lives. They have mingled well with their respective
western counterparts. They have brought forth much fame and glory to Sri Lanka.
A significant
feature of them is that they have continued to maintain a close tie with the
motherland. Since leaving, most of them have visited the mother country often
as possible. They send millions (perhaps
billions) of valuable foreign remittance to Sri Lanka. They help their kith and
kin in Sri Lanka in numerous ways.
During
the war, the Sinhalese dual citizens fought vehemently hard against the LTTE and
their sympathizers operating in the west. They united themselves as a force. To
bestow goodwill to Sri Lanka they conducted Bodhi Pujas in the temples that
they have built in their adopted countries. Christians have also done similar
things, though to a lesser degree.
It is
also thanks to their struggles that the LTTE was able to be banned easily in
those countries. These good people did
many things like positive lobbying, conducting demonstrations for Sri Lanka and
directly confronting Tamil Tigers and their Sri Lankan and western supporters
who are extremely strong and powerful in those countries. Dual citizens have
fought hard to stop western nations from imposing various sanctions and
restrictions against Sri Lanka.
The meritorious
and righteous things that these dual citizens have done for Sri Lanka is many.
The only ‘sin’ that they have committed is leaving mother Lanka during the time
of the war and acquiring a second citizenship.
As stated
in the beginning, there is a strong resentment in the country today against dual
citizens. This is because 20A attempts
to lift the ban on them from entering the parliament.
Majority
of the people oppose this stand. They correctly argue that dual citizens should
not be allowed to enter the parliament. It is a justified demand. Dual citizens
show allegiance to two nations – Sri Lanka and their newly adopted
country. Such people should not be
allowed to enter the parliament. If they want, they must renounce their second citizenship
first (the biggest joke is that there are a number of dual citizenship holders
in the current parliament; it is rumored that several of TNA MPs hold dual
citizenships. Only Geetha Kumarasinhge
was chased out of the parliament owing to be a dual citizen, and Gotabaya was
compelled to renounce his US citizenship before contesting the Sri Lankan
Presidential election 2019).
There is
a demand that dual citizens should be stopped from holding any high level
government position. This is not fair and reasonable. It is in the government’s
interests that such qualified and highly experienced persons are offered top
positions in the government’s administrative and management hierarchy. It is
the creation of a ‘Win Win’ situation.
Clearly dual
citizens are not enemies of the nation. As pointed out herein, they are genuine
friends of the motherland (true patriots). Some say they love the motherland
more than those who actually live there. As indicated earlier dual citizens
have contributed immensely in the social, cultural and economic development and
wellbeing of Sri Lanka in numerous ways. A separate book can be written about
this!
The
country should be kind to the dual citizens. They should not be attacked at
every nook and corner like now. The writer states that those who attack them
seem to be doing so with a cynical mindset.
Some say if dual citizens are allowed to enter the parliament,
such dubious characters like ex Tamil Tigers and their sympathizers, members of
the Transnational Government of Tamil Eelam
would also enter it. This is a ridiculous argument. This cannot happen in any
way. Some of these people have committed serious crimes against Sri Lanka and
her people. We have existing laws to punish them for their crimes. So, instead
of entering the parliament such criminals when arrive in the country should be presented
with a charge sheet.
Several Party Leaders attached to the SJB alliance had not participated in the protest that was staged in Parliament yesterday (22) by the SJB while Minister of Justice, M.U.M. Ali Sabry, PC was presenting the draft of the proposed 20th Amendment to the Constitution, informed sources said.
Three of the SJB Party Leaders who had been absent during the protest had been the Sri Lanka Muslim Congress Leader Rauff Hakeem, the All Ceylon Makkal Congress Leader Rishad Bathiudeen and the Jathika Hela Urumaya Leader Patali Champika Ranawaka. Although the said trio is noted to occupy front row seats in Parliament in the Opposition, they were not to be seen when the SJB protest was staged in the House.
It is also said that a few of the Parliamentarians from the Parties led by the aforesaid trio had also been absent during the protest.
Though Hakeem was present at the time of the start of the Parliament session yesterday, when the protest against the 20th Amendment was launched by the SJB, he was not to be seen in the seat.
Both, Hakeem and Bathiudeen were also absent during the protest staged in Parliament by the SJB earlier against the decision taken by Speaker of the Parliament to allow death row inmate Premalal Jayasekara to be sworn in as a Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna MP.
7 arrivals from Kuwait, 2 from Saudi Arabia, 2 from UAE, an Indian national & an inmate from Kandakadu Rehabilitation Centre tested positive for Covid-19 raising the total in Sri Lanka to 3,312.
President
Mr. Gotabaya Rajapaksa concerns education reforms, and I posted several
articles on this website, regarding the reforming agenda, and my concern was
directed to declining values in Sri Lanka’s society. If value education included the curriculum
with primary, secondary, and TVET education that could be used accelerating
economic development, and growth, and to create value respected society in the
country. Value education should be practiced from early childhood education to
university education, and it is a broader practice. Many problems in Sri Lanka are a result of
lacking value practice in society. In any society, there may be less than 2% of
people who don’t respect values, and it might associate with the Gene of a
person.
Value
education is a practical aspect of education that direct the development of
positive attitudes, the education reforms agenda has become a talkative
strategy than practical initiatives, and it seems that leaders in reforms are
retired administrator, who were working in the 19th century. Now the
job is a way of making money in the retired status than developing essential
policy forms in the 20th century.
Early
in the first decade of the year 2000, after the 9/11 attack, the Australian
Prime Minister and the Opposition leader opened a new debate on Australian
values, and the Opposition leader suggested that not only migrants to Australia
but also temporary visitors should be required to sign a statement at the time
of applying for the visa that they will respect Australian values during the
stay in the country. Some people expressed views that the debate appeared to be
targeting migrants from certain countries, but it was a view only not a
truth. Many instances, original cultures,
and social behavior of some people socked society, and tragedies experienced by
the western world since the 9/11 attack and showed the way to suspect a certain
type of religious, social, or cultural behavior of people may be a threat to
Australian values.
Easter
Sunday attack in Sri Lanka preceded to suspect activities and behavior of
Muslims in Sri Lanka as a threat to peace-loving religious communities, and the
response of many Muslims reflected that they were in a double stand or playing
a double game in the society. Previous experience broadcasted that when there
were cricket matches between Sri Lanka and Pakistan, although some Muslims who
were citizens of Sri Lanka took the side of Pakistan and barracked against Sri
Lanka. It was not illegal behavior but
the majority Sinhala people felt that it was disloyal to the country. When Sri
Lanka lost games with Pakistan Muslims lighted firecrackers and enjoyed. It was
a giving signal that when a tragedy occurred in the country some Muslims
enjoyed rather than sharing the sorrow of the tragedy with the majority of the
community. The behavior of some Muslims in Sri Lanka showed they did not
respect values, and they are not consistent with even Muslim religious values. Values are not against religions and they are
consistent with all religions, which respect human dignity and equity.
As
civilized and educated people we must understand that people are individually
and collectively different from birth and after death, they will become equal
as ash or soil, which is the ultimate reality of the matter. Many behavioral theories that support to
confirm the reasons to be at variance with behavior. Aristotle stated that people are different
from size, shape, colors, and many other things, but people do share something
universal, which is called HUMANESS”, that exists regardless of any human
differences, and this is the reality of a human being.
People
are born to deviating cultures and societies, which may not their choice, but
it believes that it was the fate or the choices of God.” Buddhism and Hinduism
interpret this as a result of Karma in a previous life.
What
are values? There are various
definitions of values. Sometimes, we can see that the term value is used to
refer to the inherently good things. For example, trust, fidelity, and love are
good in society. The term value also
refers to as conviction, standard, which are used as a guide for behavior or
making judgments about goodness, appropriate or integrity of actions, policies,
or plans. Different kinds of values see
in society and values are not acceptable to other societies. For example, the values of white society
during the apartheid era in South Africa were not acceptable to democratic
societies. One important thing concerning the values is that a person believes,
respects, or adhere to think his or her values are superior and others
inferior. This is a cause for the
origination of conflicts in society.
The
ultimate reality of value is congruous although the culture or society may
differ from each other due to climatic or people in various areas of
civilization or stages of economic growth stated by Rostow.ww. It was shown that some Australian politicians
were dictating migrants, visitors, and citizens that they must respect
Australian values, but no politician explained or initiated to educate
migrants, visitors, and others about Australian values, which are not rhetoric,
should respect and implement in society.
The other important point is politicians attempt to dictate values to
migrants and visitors, but not for businessmen and investors. Why do politicians think that money is more
important than values? They think selling uranium to China or any other country
where they do not respect Australian values to money is ok, whatever happen to
values.
Politicians
in Sri Lanka also behave similar way, for example, the nature of the behavior
of politicians when destroying forest and trees they were either to looked for
meaningless answers or blamed to private landowners thinking the destroying
government forest is harmful but forest given to private investors by a leasing
agreement is not harmful to the value of securing the environment. If money comes to pocket it would not harmful
when the environment is destroyed.
People
should be aware of values, otherwise, they cannot obey them. Without educating them about values mere
rhetoric appears as the other side of the coin of white Australian policy. Therefore, understanding Australian values
would be supported to easily integrate into Australian society. In Sri Lanka, there is no value structure to
educate in schools, TVET institutions, and universities. Disrespecting values and destroying values
are obvious day to day experiences among students in Sri Lanka.
Education
systems in many countries have integrated value education into the school
curriculum. In the USA, Chile, South Africa, Vietnam, Colombia, and the Netherlands,
value education is a specific part of primary and secondary curriculums. This means school children in those countries
gain a full understanding of their values in addition to general education in
schools. In Sri Lanka, value education
is not a part of the school curriculum. Religious education has included school
curriculums, but it is a deviation of educating students according to
religions. Value education is a common
curriculum without religious differences and students in all religions study
together. In Sri Lanka, there is a value
system called SARADHARMA”, they do not consist of democratic values,
sometimes, SARADHARMA” demonstrates a strategy to attract respect to clergy
and elders. Respect is a value but it
doesn’t mean that values limit the practical role to a limited group, it
expands to a broader arena including the religion of self and others, etc.
The
National Framework of Value Education in Australian schools gives two views on
values.
The principles and
fundamental convictions, which act as general guides to behavior, and the
standards, which particular actions are judged as good or desirable (Halstead
&Taylor, 2000).
The deals that give
significance to our lives that are reflected through the priorities that we
choose and, that we act consistently” (Hill 2004).
Sri
Lanka needs to develop a value structure to educate in schools and many
Buddhist values such as Mercy, Compassion, Pity, Apprehension, and benignant
could be included in the value structure. Religious values are similar in all
religions.
There
are nine Australian values in the framework for the school curriculum and they
can adapt to value structure in Sri Lanka.
Care and Compassion –
caring for self and others Care and compassion are vital values in any society.
Do your best – Seeking to
accomplish something worthy and admirable, trying hard, and pursuing
excellence.
Fair Go – Pursuing and
protecting the common good where all people are treated fairly for a just
society.
Freedom – Enjoying all
the rights and privileges of Australian citizenship free from unnecessary
interference or control and stand for the rights of others.
Honesty and
Trustworthiness – Being honest, sincere, and seeking the truth.
Integrity- Acting by
principles of moral, ethical conduct and ensuring consistency between words and
deeds.
Respect – Treating others
with consideration and regard, respect another person’s point of view.
Responsibility – Being
accountable for one’s actions, resolving differences in constructive,
non-violent, and peaceful ways, contributing to society, and civic life, and
taking care of the environment.
Understanding -Tolerance
and Inclusion – Being aware of others and their cultures, accepting diversity
within a democratic society, being included, and including others.
Australian
values are recognized for education in schools and common to every in the
society.
Sri
Lanka needs a Building a value Education structure to educate commonly
students.
(The
author acknowledges the reference made to the National Framework for Values
Education in Australia published by Department of Education, Science, and
Training)
In 2009 the people of Sri Lanka led by their Commander in Chief
Mahinda Rajapakse and his Army, ably led by Sarath Fonseka, decimated
Prabhakaran and his gang of proxy – terrorists who were attempting to carve out
a portion of Sri Lanka to set up the State of ‘Eelam’.
As analysed by several foreign and local intelligence agencies,
the terrorists were backed by America and acted as mercenary soldiers for the
Americans who considered Sri Lanka critical for the American domination of
South Asia.
The Defence Secretary at the time, providing excellent Administration
to the anti-terrorist effort, was Lt Col Gotabe Rajapakse who had retired
prematurely from the Army, about 15 years before, on completing the minimum
number of years required, to secure a pension.
While the war continued unabated, Gota had thereafter worked in
the Sri Lanka Mercantile sector for about 7 years, before migrating to America,
where he obtained American citizenship, after rejecting outright his Sri Lankan
citizenship and pledging loyalties exclusively to America.
Gota returned to Sri Lanka in 2005 to craft the ‘Administration’
required for brother Mahinda’s anti-terrorist campaign.
During this time however, Gota reassured the Americans of his
loyalty to America and its interests by retaining his US Citizenship.
In 2007 Gota secretly negotiated with the American Government and
committed Sri Lanka to America’s military interest and expansionism in the
region by signing the first ACSA Agreement.
With the decimation of Prabhakaran and his ‘invincible’ clique of
proxy terrorists, the American plan to dominate South Asia received a major
body blow.
The Americans perforce had to rechart a new strategy and this they
did when the US bi-partisan Senate Committee for Foreign Relations, sent a
special team to evaluate the damage caused to US Foreign Policy in the region
with the decimation of the terrorists.
The John Kerry Report Sri Lanka: Recharting US Strategy after
the war” was the result of that evaluation and was submitted to the US
Senate in December 2009, just 6 months after the proxy-terrorists were wiped
out.
‘Pivot-to-Asia’, enunciated in 2009
by Obama, was the new strategic plan that evolved in the wake of the collapse
of US Foreign Policy, following the eradication of proxy-terrorism in Sri
Lanka;
Operation ‘MCC -Sri Lanka’ happens to be just one, but crucial, phase of that overall strategic Plan of US, ‘Pivot-to-Asia’
The objective of Operation ‘MCC-Sri Lanka’ is: To create the State
of Eelam by establishing a bridge-head along Line Trincomalee-Colombo.
What the Americans failed to achieve after 30 years of terrorism,
they now appear confident that they could now achieve it through Gota.
The Americans failed because of the commitment and courage of the
people, the political leadership provided by Mahinda Rajapakse and the military
leadership and acumen of Sarath Fonseka.
The question today on many lips is, ‘Are Gota and Basil, acting at
the behest of America, attempting to carve out of Sri Lanka a State of
Eelam?
Considering the perceptions and expectations of the people before
the Elections, the answer to that question would have been a shocked, No”.
In 2019, Gota deceived a 6.9 Million people by posing off as the
champion of the anti-MCC movement. On assuming office, he changed; today,
Gota’s actions are deafeningly louder than his words.
Gota and Basil – using, the MCC, the proposed Amendment 20 to
the Constitution, the mechanism of ‘Dual Citizenship’ and Sri Lanka’s Gazette
of 10th September 2020 – appear to be setting the stage to
establish a State of Eelam carved out from Sri Lanka.
Sri Lanka 2050
The above map, which visually divides the country into a North and
a South, conveys the notion of Eelam, the territory North of the divide; this
map comes very close to the Eelam map of Prabhakaran and was presented by MCC
team leader, Steve Dobrilovic, at a meeting of Bank Lawyers at Temple Trees in
September 2018.
U R De Silva, who has immodest hopes of inspiring
youngsters, was at this meeting at Temple Trees; it is unlikely that he even
inspired a toad on that day, when he chose to remain silent when shown the US
map of Sri Lanka-2050, as was simultaneously shown to all others present.
The Eelam area is clearly defined in the US map; the Eelam border
with ‘Sri Lanka’ would be the two electric fences, on either side of the
electrified railway line running between TCO and CBO, that perforce would have
to be constructed to protect human and elephant lives.
The electrified railway line, a massive project by any yardstick,
will be constructed by Japan, the cornerstone of US military policy in the
Pacific.
Interestingly, one of Gota’s American associates – another
disloyal Sri Lankan – an adventurist businessman dealing in real-estate too, is
Gota’s ambassador designate to Japan.
The electrified railway line runs through the ‘TCO- CBO’ Corridor,
much of which is State Land. Undoubtedly, prior to the construction of the
railway line, there would be lucrative real-estate business and subsequently
there is scope for a great deal of railway contracts.
Amendment 20 is to be presented in Parliament on 22 Sep 20. If Amendment
20 is passed, as it is, it would empower the Diaspora terrorists having dual
citizenship, with tremendous political power.
Amendment 20 would enable Americans of the likes of Raj
Rajaratnams, the Emmanuels, the Rudra Kumarans, the Hooles of the world to
consolidate power in the local political councils in the North and the East and
enable some of these Americans to enter Parliament and aspire for posts
carrying the biggest responsibility.
Thus, political power in the North and East (the territory North
of the TCO – CBO Corridor) would be in American hands, Americans holding
extreme ethnic ideologies.
Parliament too would have its fair crop of American
extremists.
From the latest reports emanating from the Western Capitals,
hordes of diaspora terrorists are lining up, pawing the ground and waiting to
‘invade’ the country on the passing of Amendment 20 in Parliament.
JVP
was out to create a failed
state. Firstly, it set out to weaken government authority at village level. In 1971 insurgency, JVP killed government representatives
in the village, such as GA postmaster, station master, and co-op manager. The
first killing took place in Tangalle.
In 1987 insurgency, even Grama sevakas were
not welcomed in the villages. JVP issued threats to government officials,
followed by killing of such officials and their families. In April 1989
unprecedented number of government officials, grama sevaka, and security forces
were killed. It did not matter whether they were UNP or SLFP.
We had a
small family estate at Mawaramandiya, near Kadawatha, said Garvin Karunaratne. the community
leader of the area was one Wijesinghe. He was the President of the Cooperative
society and was helpful to anyone that wanted anything done. He happened to be
close to the leaders of the United National Party but he helped everyone
irrespective of political party affiliations. I too visited his home when
anyone known to me in the area had to face a problem with the government.
He was hacked to pieces one night. The JVP had
held him guilty of attending the funeral of a victim of its violence.
Wijesinghe had arranged for a proper funeral to take place. The JVP order was
that no funeral be held and the body be carried below the knee level and buried
incognito. Wijesinghe’s murder sent creeps through everyone in the area. His
brothers too left the village and his death left a power vacuum never to be
filled ever again.
JVP also
embarked on a comprehensive agenda to destroy the economy. JVP was instructed
by its handlers, obviously, to create difficult economic conditions that would make
the public rise against the state. A senior academic had designed the blueprint
for this economic destruction to be implemented by JVP.
JVP succeeded
in doing this, and by October 1989 the economy had been crippled. JVP and its
handlers hoped that the resulting hardship would turn the public against the
government. However, this did not
happen. Instead the
academic who had designed the plan
fled the country with his family when the insurgency failed.
A group
wishing to take over and run a country does not start by ruining its economic infrastructure
as JVP did. The JVP burnt down 245 out of 545 agrarian service centers in the
country along with paddy stocks and storage facilities in 1987-89.
Garvin Karunaratne, former GA Matara elaborated on this aspect.
The JVP insurrection of 1986 to 1987 too took a toll of the rural areas, he
said. Thanks to the JVP, the well to do people in the rural areas, the estate
owners, the rice millers, lorry owners and traders all left the rural areas for
the cities.
In my subsequent visits to Matara I met many a rice miller and
many a merchant who were the live wire in their rural habitat in Kamburupitiya,
Hakmana etc. They had got rid of their rural possessions and migrated to the
Matara town.
Many people who had been living happily on their estates left for
good. Some have never stepped into their estates since the JVP uprising of
1987-1989. They have allowed their workers to manage the estates are satisfied
with whatever returns they got.
The development of the rural areas requires the services of every
entrepreneur and entrepreneurs come from the rich families with enough money to
invest. They are not in the rural areas now. That was the legacy left by JVP
with their two insurrections concluded Karunaratne.
JVP carefully
and methodically hit the key sectors in the economy. Tea estates in the Uva
Badulla areas and coconut and rubber estates in the south were badly hit. Over
2,09,000 kilograms of tea were destroyed by the JVP in the central provinces.
The JVP targeted the transport sector
and this paralyzed the country
and brought it to a standstill. Public and
private transport was reduced to such
low levels that food shortages threatened.
The two
tactics used by JVP to hit the economy were orders to close
factories and work places and secondly, order to workers to strike. In 1987
Ramya Weerakoon’s apparel business was contacted by the JVP. Little notes were
delivered to the security guard in the factory by JVP errand boys, she said. Close the factory today with full pay for
workers the notes said. A slip usually came on Friday or Monday, Ramya
recalled.
If the two
adjoining factories were also losing, she also closed her factory. The days of
lost production hit them hard but they had to obey. A factory owner had defied
the JVP order and they ordered him to shut down for a week. Another factory in Horana
was burned down.
Between 1987
and 1989, JVP called many strikes. In September 1988, JVP ordered nationwide
strikes with widespread compliance. Shops, transport, hospitals and government
services were shut. Bank, Postal
and telecommunications virtually halted. On
15 August 1989, the JVP called for a total island wide general strike on Indian
Independence Day.
Some 90,000
tea plantation workers in the southern Ratnapura district went on a week-long
strike from 7 September 1989 in response to a JVP call. Neither the imposition of emergency nor the threat of dismissal
had any effect on the workers, possibly
because of the terror the JVP inspired. The striking workers also could not be
dismissed as that might have resulted in a wave of sympathy strikes in other
sectors.
Employees of
the government road transport service went on strike, demanding higher wages.
They were later joined by the private run mini-buses and railways crippling the
public transport.
The transport
strike was followed by several token and one-day strikes. On 26 June 1989 the
JVP called for a 24 hour general strike to sympathize with the 52,000 striking
transport workers. Telecommunications
and postal workers had walked out of their posts in support of the bus workers
demands. Port workers and state sector workers staged a wildcat strike. Oil
refineries remained closed due to JVP instigated strikes.
Twelve key
trade unions had announced that they would launch agitations to seek Sri Lankan
Rs. 2,500 as basic minimum wages, the amount which was being offered to the Jan
Saviya families under the poverty line. The JVP had instigated these strikes.
JVP also took
an anti India stance. Wijeweera, set a
deadline of 14 June 1989 for a complete boycott of Indian goods, departure of
all Indians of Sri Lankan and Indian origin.
This call had a devastating effect on the economy and
bring the country to a standstill. Not only is Sri Lanka dependent on India for
certain essential goods, there were eighteen private and public sector Indian
companies operating in Sri Lanka, including state Bank of India, Indian
Overseas Bank, Indian Airlines Air India, Pugoda Textiles, Bombay Dyeing and the Taj
group of hotels. Over 70 per
cent of the state Transport Board buses were of Indian make and the Sinhala
drivers could not defy the JVP boycott call. (Continued)
The Committee on High Posts Parliament of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka Parliament Approach Road, Sri Jayawardenepura Kotte
APPOINTMENT OF ASOKA MILINDA MORAGODA AS
THE HIGH COMMISSIONER FOR THE REPUBLIC OF INDIA WITH SPECIAL CABINET RANK
We would like to
bring to your notice the shocking and appalling points relevant to the above
mentioned appointment which the Government of Sri Lanka does not seem to have
taken into consideration in selecting the candidate Milinda Moragoda
Allegations of
Corruption, Abuse of Power and Working for the American Government as an
informant when working in the Sri Lankan government (to put it in simple
language he is an American spy in the Sri Lankan political establishment). We would like to
bring to your notice what is said in ”Wikipedia”” about Milinda Moragoda
regarding his Corruption, Abuse of Power
and Spying for the American Government while working in the Sri Lankan
Government
Milnda Moragoda as a
Government minister in the UNF government proposed that Sri Lanka move out of
the Non-Align Group and form a Group of Nations Aligned to his masters the USA.
Had this happened this would have had serious repercussions to Sri Lanka Foreign
Policy and Security. The website referred below gives information in this
regard.
We would also like to bring to your notice that MIlinda Moragoda is a
dual citizen (i.e. a citizen of USA and Sri Lanka) while his spouse is an American
citizen by birth. His appointment as the Sri Lankan High commissioner for India
therefore is in violation of the constitution of Sri Lanka where under
amendment 19A Dual Citizens cannot be a MP, and since MP’s are public
representatives of the people, accordingly we interpret that High Commissioners
and Ambassadors of the country who are representatives of the people cannot
have dual loyalties.
USA is a superpower
that has hegemonic and invasive designs on Sri Lanka and has intentions to
evict Chinese interests from Sri Lanka as part of their Indo-Pacific Quad
lateral Axis consisting of India, USA, Australia, & Japan. Therefore we
believe that appointing Milinda Moragoda to a country which is part of this
axis, would seriously compromise the foreign relations with other power blocs
in bi-polar world such as China, Russia, Pakistan, Iran, Cuba etc.
Major General
Kamal Guneratna (Retd) the current Secretary to the Ministry of Defense in his
magnum opus, Rana Maga Osse, states that Minister Milinda Moragoda had tried to
convince General Guneratna to give up a forward position at the request of the
LTTE and had bluntly declared that the Army could never defeat the LTTE.
General Guneratna, in his book, quotes Milinda Moragoda as having told him that
the Army could never win this war. He had further declared that although, the
army had waged war for about 20 years, it could never bring the war to a
successful conclusion. He had also said since the Army couldn’t achieve
success, in the future, the government was going ahead with negotiations.
In a matter
of concern which needs to be checked out by your committee it is alleged that during
the Peace Talk Process with the LTTE Milinda Moragoda was promoting a request
made by the LTTE for Air Topology Maps of Sri lanka” that are highly classified
under National Security. The request came through Milinda Moragoda on behalf of
the LTTE in the pretext that these details were needed for the Twin Otter
Aircraft flight that brought Anton Balasingham which landed in Iranamadu Tank
runway. It was flown by two Canadian Pilots. This request for Air Topology
Maps of Sri lanka” by Milinda Moragoda on behalf of the LTTE was refused by the
MOD as it would pose a grave national security risk by making Sri Lanka
extremely vulnerable to air attacks by her enemies. However, we have been
reliably made to understand that Milinda Moragoda had subsequently approached
the Civil Aviation Authorities and they had provided the full set of Air
Topology Maps which Moragoda had handed over to the LTTE. It is said that
these maps were used by the LTTE to carry out the Air Attacks on the City of
Colombo. That being the case, if this allegation is proven to be true and
accurate then Milinda Moragoda has a history of being instrumental in giving
out Nationally Classified Secret Information to the enemy of Sri Lanka and it
is our contention that such a person is in no way suitable to represent Sri
Lanka in a country like India.
In
view and consideration of the information given above the National Joint Committee
is of the firm view that Milinda Moragoda is no longer suitable to any position
in the government of Sri Lanka, due to his dual citizenship, his allegiances to
USA and track record of treacherous action against Sri Lanka.
We
hope the members of this committee will consider our representation and prevent
Milinda Moragoda from taking the position of High Commissioner of India with
special Cabinet rank.
Thank you
Yours faithfully.
Lt Col. Anil Amarasekera (Retd.) Mr. K. M. B. Kotakadeniya (Retd. Senior DIG) Co-Presidents National Joint Commission
The Constitutional
Council (CC) is a 10 member constitutional authority tasked with
maintaining the Independent Commissions and monitoring their affairs.
The CC is
aimed at depoliticising the public service.
The CC was first
established in 2000 under the Seventeenth Amendment to the Constitution.
In 2010 President Mahinda Rajapaksa replaced it with a Parliamentary Council, under
the Eighteenth Amendment. After Maithripala Sirisena was elected as the
President, the then Prime Minister Ranil Wickramasinghe presented reforms to
reinstate a new Constitutional Council in 2015 under the Nineteenth Amendment.
Five
independent commissions are established under the CC. They are the Public Service
Commission, Election Commission, National Police Commission, Bribery or Corruption Commission, Human Rights
Commission and the Finance Commission.
No doubt that
establishing them (CC and the 5 Independent Commissions) was done in good
faith. The objective was to minimise the Executive’s influence over those vital
bodies and depoliticise the public
service.
Are these
objectives good? Have we achieved them?
The answers to these two questions are Yes and No
respectively.
As
stated before the composition of the CC consists of ten members. Three of them
are ex- officio members and the rest are appointed. As per Chapter VIIA,
Article 41, of the Nineteenth Amendment to the Constitution, members of
the CC consists of the following:
(a)
the Prime Minister;
(b)
the Speaker of the Parliament;
(c)
the Leader of the Opposition;
(d)
one person appointed by the President;
(e)
five persons appointed by the President, on the nomination of both the Prime
Minister and the Leader of the Opposition; and
(f)
one person nominated by agreement of the majority of the Members of the Parliament
belonging to political parties or independent groups, other than the respective
political parties or independent groups to which the Prime Minister and the
Leader of the Opposition belong, and appointed by the President.
The CC makes the important
appointments such as the Elections Commissioner, Public Service Commissioner,
the Chief Justice, Attorney General, Chairman and members of the Police
Commission, Bribery or Corruption Commissioner etc.
A simple glance at the CC’s mechanism shows
that it is a mess.
Do we really need it?
Why should we go to such a lengthy extent to
create a CC that comprised of 10 members?
It is like instead of driving on the Galle
Road from Colombo to reach Galle, one taking the circuitous route of Ratnapura,
Embilipiitya, Tangalle and Matara to arrive in Galle.
Though the end result is the same – the
process to appoint personnel to the Commission is bizarre
and cumbersome.
One would argue that despite the difficulties,
we could achieve a system that this independent and impartial.
The writer agrees with this argument.
But, unfortunately the manner in which the
CC has operated in the past has shown that they have not been independent nor
impartial.
The CC seems to have acted to please those
who had appointed them in those plum positions.
A CC and Independent Commissions may work
well to a degree in a country like UK,
France or New Zealand, but unfortunately not in Sri Lanka where corruption is
rampant. If the object is to
depoliticise the public service, the best way to achieve this is by way of
trying to eliminate bribery and corruption that is so endemic in our system. The
existing laws must be enforced to the letter.
The fact that majority of the lay members
are appointed directly or indirectly by the government shows that the process
has lapses. Those members are likely to side with the government. Others would
side with the party that appointed them.
Sadly, this is the human nature.
Recent examples have shown that CC had
rarely rejected nominations submitted to it by the governments (except on very few
occasions). After the present government came to power in November 2019, every
single nomination submitted to it had been promptly approved.
This shows that CC had operated in a way
to ‘rubber stamp’ the nominations sent to it by the government. Then, why should we maintain such a complex
and an arduous process; at such an enormous expense?
When looking at the 5 Commissions, it has
been obvious that some of the Commissions have not operated independently at
all. They have worked according to the whim and fancy of the politicians. They
have worked quite partially towards the incumbent governments. A leading Sri Lankan website
alleged that a Chairman of one of the key Independent Commissions solicited
huge personal favours from the country’s Chief Executive. There had been media reports that recommendations
made by the Police Commission had not been carried out by the Police Chiefs. There
had been stories of impropriety by the Commissioners of the Independent
Commissions.
It is significant that at least 6/10
members of the CC are lay people – not MPs elected by the people. Then what legal or moral authority do they
have to go on to make such important appointments (to fill vacancies of the
country’s most important public service positions)?
Again, why should such an unelected body
of people be given such enormous power? Isn’t
it contrary to the accepted principles of representative democracy?
The President, is the head of State of Sri
Lanka. She/he is elected by the people at a Presidential Election. But she/he
is not even a member of the CC!
The President should have the free hand to
appoint personnel that she/he wants. Otherwise how can she/he fulfills the
promises made to the people at the Presidential election? Why should the
President be deprived of the opportunity to appoint personnel that she/he wants
in the public service? It is his/her government (this is akin to a father being
denied the opportunity of disciplining his children and that task given to an
outsider).
It is the standard practice adopted in
most democracies – the elected head of state fills the appointments of the important
government positions (eg. President of the USA, Prime Minister & the
Cabinet of the UK/Australia). These countries do not have CCs.
If the President makes wrong decisions
she/he could be ousted at the following Presidential election.
Re other provisions of draft 20A, the
writer shall express his views/position in a separate article, to be published
in Lankaweb. While the writer intends to make a comprehensive analysis about
them, for the time being states that it is good that the President’s term of
office will continue to remain for 5 years and that his/her limit to hold the
office is restricted to two terms. The
writer states that the Nineteenth amendment removed some of the immunity
available for the President (Article 35 (3), and that this should remain the
same.
VICE World News host Zing Tsjeng explores how the City of London and its financial institutions profited from slavery in America long after the slave trade was abolished.
Empires of Dirt is a show about Europeans getting rich at the expense of everyone else. VICE World News host Zing Tsjeng uncovers the ugly history of the European colonial empires they don’t teach us in schools.
Countries around the world were looted for their treasures, people were oppressed and exploited and European powers relentlessly profited. The far-reaching repercussions of colonialism are all around us, from our financial institutions to the food we have in our cupboards at home – and it’s about time we took notice.
Watch the next episode from Empires of Dirt, in which we look at how Britain stole $45 trillion from India during its long and oppressive rule: https://youtu.be/x_jGPf764d0
When the US was there and sponsoring resolutions, as it did between 2012 and 2014, they got sufficient votes. But since the US has opted out of the UNHRC, the onus of getting a resolution passed will be on less powerful countries.”
Colombo, September 20: The absence of the US in the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) is going to make it difficult for the Sri Lankan Tamil lobby to get a resolution against Sri Lanka passed in the March 2021 session of the Council when the current resolution expires.
Informed political sources said that geo-political realities in the absence of the US will militate against any resolution censuring Sri Lanka.
When the US was there, and sponsoring resolutions as it did between 2012 an 2014, they got sufficient votes. But since the US has opted out of the UNHRC, the onus of getting a resolution passed will be on less powerful countries. These do not have the clout to get it passed,” a source said.
The resource, which did not want to be named, recalled that when the European Union wanted to sponsor a resolution in 2011, it realized that it did not have enough backers in the Council. So, it backed out. It was only when the US took up the case in 2012 that the Council could pass a resolution against Sri Lanka. Every time the US backed the resolution, it was passed. From 2015 onwards till the previous Lankan government fell in 2019, Sri Lanka co-sponsored the resolutions (against itself) and they were passed without a vote.
We realize that it will be futile to introduce a resolution if there is no guarantee that it will be passed. Therefore, we are discussing the matter with the Core Ggroup led by UK and Germany and plan to engage African, Asian and Latin American countries also,” said a leading Tamil politico.
We are counting on the strong statements made by the High Commissioner Michele Bachelet and the representatives of the Core Group,” the Tamil leader added.
However, other sources said that Bachelet seemed to have let Sri Lanka off the hook in her latest speech. She delivered a ‘watered down’ statement on Sri Lanka merely calling on the Council to give renewed attention to that country, said one media report. Another said she spluttered.”
In her statement to the 45th session of the Human Rights Council which was held a few days ago, Bachelet merely referred to the commitments made by the government in Sri Lanka adding that the Council would give renewed attention to that country in view of the need to prevent threats to peace, reconciliation and sustainable development.”
Unlike in the past, the High Commissioner stopped short of calling for international investigations hinting that the Council might move forward with a watered down engagement with Sri Lanka.
In a similar development, the UK’s International Ambassador for Human Rights, Rita French, delivering a statement on behalf of the Core Group comprising Canada, Germany, North Macedonia, Montenegro and the UK, expressed its strong solidarity with Sri Lanka’s civil society, and human rights defenders, and called on the government to take all steps necessary to allow them to operate freely.
But at the same time, French appreciated Sri Lanka’s continued commitment to fostering reconciliation, justice and peaceful coexistence among Sri Lanka’s diverse communities.”
This kind of blowing hot and cold does not send an encouraging signal to the Tamil lobby, itching to fix the Gotabaya Rajapaksa government. The government, backed by a two thirds majority in parliament, is increasingly using army personnel in civilian jobs and had recently banned the commemoration of an LTTE hero Thileepan who had fasted unto death 33 years ago on September 26, 1987.
Repetition of unsubstantiated allegations in session after session puts in question not just the credibility of the UNHRC’s sources of information but the credibility of the UNHRC itself
Michelle Bachelet, UN Human Rights High Commissioner)
It has been a practice during the last two decades, especially since 2009 for the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) to wake up from its slumber on the eve of its September and March sessions and pick up some issue or the other in Sri Lanka to express ‘concern’.
Continuing the ‘Sri Lanka baiting’, last week at the opening of the UNHRC session, High Commissioner Michelle Bachelet expressed concern about the impact the 20th amendment to the Sri Lankan Constitution would have on the independence of key institutions including the Sri Lanka Human Rights Commission. She decided to jump the gun and make a stern statement, when the actual fact is what the government has put in the gazette is merely a draft proposal which will have to be debated in parliament, amended if necessary and be approved by a two-third majority before it becomes a constitutional amendment.
Sri Lanka strongly refuted the UN human rights chief’s remarks on the proposed 20th amendment as being unwarranted and pre-judgmental”. The draft amendment submitted through parliament will be discussed and debated following a complete democratic process in which all stakeholders will have the opportunity to present their views. Furthermore, it is for the elected law makers of Sri Lanka to decide on what is good for the country and not for an external institution that has been admonished severely for its bias by several countries including the United States.
If the Human Rights Council is going to attack countries that uphold human rights and shield countries that abuse human rights, then America should not provide it with any credibility,” American Ambassador Nikki R Haley said while announcing the US withdrawal from the Council.
In her reference to Sri Lanka last week, Bachelet charged that senior military officials accused of war crimes” had been appointed to key civilian governmental positions and alleged that attempts at the police and judiciary levels were made to thwart investigations into the said war crimes”, which she said set a very negative trend”.
It is a pity that her officials failed to bring to her notice the success of containing the COVID-19 pandemic by the Health Ministry headed by Major General Sanjeewa Munasinghe, a medical practitioner who was the head of the Army Hospital. UNHRC must clarify the demerits, if any, of appointing such a capable military officer as Secretary to the Ministry of Health.
We hope that this council would appreciate that Sri Lanka, while successfully containing the spread of COVID-19 through a balanced, multi-sectoral approach, and despite this challenge, held its commitment to the democratic processes, and conducted parliamentary elections successfully and peacefully, last month, which the EU has acknowledged,” Sri Lankan envoy told the Geneva forum.
Responding to Bachelet’s remarks, Sri Lanka’s acting Permanent Representative said that even as Sri Lanka withdrew from the co-sponsorship of Resolution 30/1, it made it clear that it will remain committed to achieving reconciliation, accountability and human rights within the framework of the Sri Lankan constitution through a domestically designed and executed process in line with the government’s policy framework.
Among other areas that came under Bachelet’s criticism was an alleged surveillance and intimidation of victims, their families, human rights defenders, journalists and lawyers. She called for an immediate end to such activities.
In response, Sri Lankan delegate said that the government has already publicly refuted these allegations and is committed to protecting and promoting freedom of expression and civil society space, and ensuring that complaints received on alleged attacks against journalists, human rights defenders and civil society are investigated and prosecuted.
The prime focus of the incumbent government is to ensure national security, and to uphold the rule of law and order in the country for all its citizens, with the aim of creating ‘an environment where any citizen can live freely without any fear for their safety and that of their families.’
It is indeed unbecoming for the HR High Commissioner to level false and unsubstantiated allegations against military officials in Sri Lanka, when the government has consistently refuted the credibility of these allegations and repeatedly pointed out that domestic processes such as the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC) and Paranagama Commissions which examined these allegations particularly with regard to the last stages of the conflict, have not found substantive evidence against any of the senior military officials referred to in this regard.
In the absence of any substantive proof, Sri Lanka considers that the continued arbitrary accusations on crimes or crimes against humanity made against these senior military officials are unacceptable and a violation of the principles of natural justice,” Sri Lankan representative told UNHRC.
Bachelet’s statement clearly showed the ignorance of the international body about the ground situation in Sri Lanka. It is indeed erroneous that more attention has not been paid to the false information given by agencies including the OHCHR, which is required to seek the truth.
Bachelete has conveniently forgotten the need for allegations to always be subjected to the due process of investigation in accordance with established legal procedures. They should not be hastily credited to support unfounded assumptions.
While the people in North and East Sri Lanka demand more devolution of power and the imperative need to address their grievances, the Human Rights Council laments that Sri Lanka is yet to set up the special judicial mechanism to try so-called ‘war criminals.’ The action by the Sri Lankan Security Forces during the conflict was against a group designated as the most ruthless terrorist organization in the world by many countries, and not against any community. All communities in Sri Lanka were united against terrorism, and are working in unison towards reconciliation and economic progress.
MOSCOW (Sputnik) – Sri Lanka’s Ambassador to Moscow Meegahalande Durage Lamawansa said on Monday he planned getting inoculated with Russia’s vaccine against COVID-19, dubbed Sputnik V, in the near future.
“I am ready to receive Sputnik V vaccine in the near future, as soon as I come back from Sri Lanka. The vaccine is now going through Phase 3 trials, I would be happy to take part in it”, Lamawansa said.
“As a doctor, I want to add that although some countries have recently recorded some decrease in the spreading of COVID-19, the global community should remain vigilant and unite effort to establish full control over the new infection”, the ambassador noted.
Russia became the first country to register a vaccine against the virus that causes COVID-19 in early August. The country has since reached agreements with more than 20 countries to deliver over a billion doses of the vaccine and agreements with five nations for the mass production.
According to the Russian health ministry, Sputnik V is safe and has proven to be capable of building immunity against the virus. The vaccine is yet to complete the required Phase 3 of clinical trials.
The continuation of protectionism by America, the largest economy body in the world, will only result in further contraction of the world economy and aggravation of unemployment, poverty and deprivation, said Luxman Siriwardena, president of the Sri Lanka-based Pathfinder Foundation.
In a recent interview with People’s Daily Online, Siriwardena said that the unilateralism and protectionism currently being championed by the American administration goes against the values the West has promoted since the end of World War II.
When I was undertaking graduate studies at an American university in the 1980s, it would have been totally unacceptable for any of the economic professors to believe that the protectionism in trade and investment would enhance the welfare of the international community,” he recalled, sharing that since the establishment of formal China-Sri Lankan diplomatic relations, China has been the most reliable, all-weather friend of Sri Lanka.
In recent years, Sri Lanka has taken an active role in the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), which, he stressed, is the most logical development strategy for Sri Lanka.
The successful completion of the three major development projects in Sri Lanka under the BRI, namely Colombo Port City Project, Hambantota International Port and proposed Hambantota Industrial Zone, will have a transformative impact on the Sri Lankan economy.
In the post-pandemic era, the BRI is a functional machinery which can substantially contribute to the recovery of the global economy,” he noted, voicing hope that the initiative will have more inclusive and comprehensive programs encompassing a larger amount of countries.
While this is a decisive year for China to complete the building of a moderately prosperous society in all respects and to end extreme poverty, according to Siriwardena, China’s development has been unprecedented” in the history of the entire world.
The process has been inclusive in the sense that China has uplifted hundreds of millions of people out of poverty while achieving advancement in science, technology and culture,” he said, adding that China has addressed the social, economic and environmental dimensions of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development in the recent past, citing the pollution management in the city of Beijing as an example.
Looking ahead, Siriwardena said the two countries will enhance their cooperation in various fields, such as COVID-19 pandemic control and prevention, investment in manufacturing, logistics and services, infrastructure as well as economic digitalization, and people-to-people exchanges.
Faced with the COVID-19 pandemic, Siriwardena pointed out that both China and Sri Lanka have managed to control the virus with relatively minimal loss of life, and praised China’s commitment to distribute the vaccine to the rest of the world, which will contribute to the vision of building a community of health for all in the near future
MP A.L.M. Athaulla displays a copy of a letter he sent to the then President Maithripala Sirisena and PM Wickremesinghe underscoring the need to do away with the 19th Amendment(Pic courtesy National Congress)
… assures support for 20 A
Those who had a hand in engineering President Mahinda Rajapaksa’s defeat at the 2015 presidential election were behind the 2019 Easter Sunday attacks, National Congress MP A. L. M. Athaulla, told a media briefing at his Thalakotuwa Gardens road residence, Narahenpita yesterday (20).
Digamadulla District MP blamed 2014 organised attacks on Muslims in Aluthgama, Beruwela and Darga Town also on the same group hell bent destabilising the country. Instigating ethnic violence was part of their strategy, a one-time UPFA Minister said, urging all communities to be vigilant of despicable efforts to undermine political stability.
Athaulla said so when The Island asked him whether he subscribed to SLMC leader Rauff Hakeem’s recent declaration that the Easter Sunday attacks had been carried out by another force and not the National Thowheed Jamaat or its leader Zahran Hashim.
One-time Justice Minister Attorney-at-law Haleem alleged that the NTJ had been hired to carry out the operation.
SLMC leader Hakeem made the aforesaid claim on September 7 before the Presidential Commission of Inquiry (P CoI) probing Easter Sunday attacks.
Athaulla said that President Gotabaya Rajapaksa would ensure a thorough investigation into Easter Sunday attacks. The MP also expressed confidence in the progress made by the PCoI which the National Congress leader said could reveal the truth.
When The Island pointed out that former Deputy Inspector General (DIG) in charge of the Eastern Range Edison Gunatilleke had recently accused Athaulla, former UPFA politician M H M Hisbullah et al of their involvement with extremists and terrorists, a smiling Athaulla said that there was absolutely no basis for such claims. He challenged Gunatilleke to prove his accusations. Athaulla said he didn’t even know Gunatilleke or even remember calling over the phone.
Lawmaker Athaulla questioned why Gunatilleke had waited so long to complain of political interference in police investigations. Declaring that he was among those politicians who received top level security, including bullet proof vehicles due to serious threats to his life, Athaulla denied ever working against the interests of the country.
Asked whether the unsubstantiated accusations had been levelled against him in a bid to deprive him of a possible cabinet portfolio, the National Congress leader replied in the negative.
Responding to a spate of media queries regarding the SLPP not accommodating him in the cabinet, Athaulla emphasized that he never asked for a cabinet portfolio nor would ever request for one.
MP Athaulla said that their responsibility would be to ensure required consensus in parliament to pave the way for the 20th Amendment in place of the 19th Amendment enacted at the onset of the treacherous yahapalana administration in 2015.
At the commencement of the media briefing, MP Athaulla said that the National Congress had backed the then President Mahinda Rajapaksa three conditions. We asked for the eradication of terrorism. We also sought the demerger of the Eastern Province from the North during President Mahinda Rajapaksa’s presidency and those demands were met.”
Athaulla said that the only request yet to be fulfilled was a Constitution that met aspirations of all Sri Lankans.
He said that the National Congress believed President Gotabaya Rajapaksa, who had been the Defence Secretary during the war and the war winning President Mahinda Rahapaksa, now the Prime Minister, would succeed in introducing a new Constitution. Referring to the 19th Amendment, MP Athaulla pointed out that the controversial piece of legislation caused chaos with political parties having to seek intervention of the Supreme Court to ascertain how powers were shared.
When The Island pointed out that even the SLPP hadn’t been able to settle differences among various sections as regards the 19th Amendment, lawmaker Athaulla said that he was confident the Rajapaksas wouldn’t do anything to harm the country. He denied any ambiguity over his party’s support for the 20th Amendment.
The country couldn’t afford to have the President and the Prime Minister from different political parties under any circumstances, the former minister said, warning of dire consequences in foreign interventions in the making of the new constitution.
Referring to the high profile Oslo peace bid in 2002-2003 during Ranil Wickremesinghe’s tenure as the Prime Minister, Athaulla insisted that constitutional reforms introduced at the behest of foreign powers wouldn’t address local issues. The former minister said that the country’s strategic location attracted foreign interests therefore the country needed to be cautious.
Reiterating his backing for the 20th Amendment, MP Athaulla urged the government to take tangible measures to introduce a new Constitution. Underscoring the importance of the proposed new Constitution being a Sri Lankan effort, Athaulla recalled how the TNA and the SLMC had facilitated foreign intervention.
The former minister dismissed the Opposition’s claims as regards SLPP bid to do away with independent commissions. Independent commissions weren’t certainly independent, the MP alleged, pointing out that they didn’t do their job.
Athaulla however side-stepped a query regarding the 20th Amendment proposing to abolish restrictions on dual citizens contesting parliamentary polls.
