Government wades into battle with facts, figures and projections
In an extraordinary hard-hitting rejoinder to Moody’s downgrade of their Sri Lanka rating from B2 to Caa1 with a stable outlook, the Ministry of Finance, State Ministry of Money, Capital Markets and Public Enterprise Reforms (headed by former Central Bank Governor Ajith Nivard Cabraal) and the Central Bank accused the well-known rating agency of an unwarranted and erroneous” finding that suggests a reckless reaction.”
It said that instead of understanding the economic turnaround as well as awaiting the Budget that is due in November, the downgrade of SL at the beginning of the Economic Revival is inexplicable.”
This hasty rating action seems similar to the previous premature and reckless downgrades by rating agencies in the immediate aftermath of the ending of the internal conflict in 2009 and during the political impasse at the end of 2018. In both instances, the rating actions were proven to be hasty and erroneous, and those actions only resulted in several investors suffering unnecessary loses and missing out on emerging opportunities.”
Moody’s rating downgrade fails to recognize and do justice to the ground reality of the ongoing rapid economic recovery backed by vastly improved business confidence arising from the return of political stability and policy stability after a lapse of five years,” the presentation said.
It went on to stress that Sri Lanka, like many of its peers in the emerging market group, experienced initial capital outflows, exchange rate depreciation, showdown in activity and pressure on government finances in response to the effects of the Covid-19 pandemic.
But, the swiftness with which decisions were taken followed by the landslide victory of the government, enabled Sri Lanka to move along a recovery path towards growth and stability,” it said.
Since May, merchandise exports had bounced back, and by July, had returned to pre-Covid monthly averages of USD one billion, the presentation supported by graphs and charts said.
It argued that SL recognized the probable external sector pressure early, and decisively curtailed non-essential imports in order to prioritize external debt service obligations. The cumulative trade deficit by end December is expected to be around only USD 5.8 billion, significantly down from USD eight billion the previous year.
The savings on the import bill due to the curtailment of non-essential imports as well as significant reductions in the fuel import bill is expected to be over USD 2.0 billion,” the presentation said.
Discussing the vital tourism sector, it said that although inbound tourist movements are yet not possible given the global pandemic situation, other service exports, including IT services and shipping remain robust. It added that workers’ remittances have recorded a sharp increase in spite of the initial expectations of a slowdown and at current trends, the cumulative decline in workers remittances is likely to be marginal, compared to previous expectations of a decline of 15%.”
On foreign direct investment, it admitted that FDI inflows had slowed, but the investment pipeline is strengthening. While FDI slowed in the first half of this year (from a peak of USD 2,000 billion in 2018), looking ahead prospects were promising particularly with expected inflows into the Port City project and for new manufacturing projects.
The expected finalization of new legislation for the Port City within a month will result in the realization of investment by those who have already completed due diligence on such investment,” the presentation said. Other expected investments include import alternative industries as well as investments by international financial institutions.”
FDI inflows during 2020 are expected to be over USD 750 million, which is only about USD 400 million less that in 2019. At the start of the pandemic, FDIs were expected to be only around USD 300 million for the year 2020.”
The presentation further said that stock market indices have improved dramatically to pre-Covid levels and are likely to gain further momentum. Also, foreign inflows to the government securities market have already showed signs of resumption and according to initial responses, are likely to increase in the coming months, particularly in the wake of the attractive SWAP arrangements offered by the SL authorities.
With increased emphasis on domestic agriculture, agro-based industries and resource-based industries, domestic economic activities have turned around remarkably and recorded V-shaped recoveries. A bumper Yala crop was expected to follow the bumper Maha. Industrial production has rebounded, electricity generation is normalizing with greater reliance on hydropower generation and the construction sector has gradually gathered pace.
The exchange rate had appreciated sharply since mid-April and remains stable at appreciated levels, allowing the Central Bank to accumulate reserves through market purchases of foreign exchange. Foreign inflows following the Moody’s downgrade enabled the Central Bank to purchase USD 30 million from the forex market on Sept. 29.
The presentation further said that the Debt to GDP ration which increased in recent years is expected to improve in the medium term; that envisaged financing inflows for 2020 favours domestic markets and strategic foreign financing; and that foreign Treasury bills and bonds holdings are likely to attract a substantial volume of investments in coming months.
Other positives outlined includes that official reserves of CBSL had increased to USD 7.4 bn. by end August 2020; a policy environment facilitating high economic growth beyond the recovery stage while preserving macro-economic stability and a deep and unwavering commitment to our investors.”
The 16-year-old daughter of the COVID-19 patient detected from Divulapitiya earlier today also tested positive for the Coronavirus, Army Commander Shavendra Silva said.
The 39-year-old woman of four children from Divulapitiya had been admitted to the Gampaha Hospital after falling ill while working on September 30.
She had returned home on October 2 after being subjected to a PCR test on October 1 after which she had tested positive and was admitted to the IDH Hospital.
The woman’s father, husband and four children were taken to the quarantine centre in Habaraduwa.
Army Commander Shavendra Silva today urged people who have visited Divulapitiya and Minuwangoda areas recently to be very cautious after the apparel factory supervisor from Divulapitiya tested positive for Covid-19.
Police curfew was imposed in Divulapitiya and Minuwangoda police areas after she was tested positive for Covid-19.
We do not know how she was infected. At this hour we have not been able to trace the source. But we are looking,” the Commander said. (Darshana Sanjeewa Balasuriya and Ajith Siriwardana)
Police curfew has been imposed in the Veyangoda Police division as well with immediate effect until further notice, Army Commander Shavendra Siva told Daily Mirror.
Earlier, Police curfew was imposed in the Divulapitiya and Minuwangoda police division following the detection of a Covid-19 patien
Archbishop of Colombo Malcolm Cardinal Ranjith today expressed his dissatisfaction on the release of certain suspects held over involvement in the Easter Sunday attacks.
Cardinal Ranjith told a press conference that it is sad to note the release of a suspect held in connection with the attacks.
“It is sad and unfortunate that those who are alleged to have been involved in the attack is released and cleared” Cardinal Ranjith said.
“There are those who were affected by the attack and others who have become physically and mentally challenged. They are waiting till justice is meted out. Therefore it is unfortunate that the investigations are not going the way it should” he added.
He said that police itself contradicting their own statement. At the press conference Cardinal Ranjith also played a video in which Police Spokesman had admitted that the Police have clear evidence against Riyaj Bathiudeen’s (brother of former Minister Rishad Bathiudeen) connection to the Easter Sunday attacks.(Yohan Perera)
Govt
cannot escape Indian pressure”: Sampanthan TNA Leader (news item)
This is the latest statement from
Sambandan on the ongoing debate about the abolition of the 13th
Amendment. Although this is nothing new going by the regular statements and
appeals they have made to the Indian Government and the so-called anti-Sri
Lankan and anti-Sinhala Buddhist International community. I raised this issue firstly,
to open a public debate on this subject and secondly, to draw the serious
attention of the Government to put these anti–Sinhala and Anti-Sri Lankan
Tamils in their correct place. Thirdly to request both India and International
lobbying groups to advice the Tamil politician, to sort out these internal
matters with the Government of this country and mind their own business without
interfering unnecessarily in our domestic matters.
I also request the general public of
this country to tell the Government they have elected to ask these Tamil
politicians to think and behave like citizens of this country or get back to
their ancestral motherlands without creating unnecessary problems for us. None
of these Tamils making and issuing such
traitorous statements, making representations and appeals to India and the
West have voted this Government. In this backdrop it is the government of the
country that has to take proper steps to stop this nuisance.
It is high time at least now these
mad minorities realize the political realities within this Island nation and learn
to co-exist with native Sinhalese without continuing to be a painful thorn in
their eyes.
‘At least since Rousseau’s Social Contract and the end of
the divine right of kings, the state has been seen as party to a contract with
the people – a contract to guarantee or supply the necessary order in society.
Without the state’s soldiers, police and the apparatus of control, we are told,
gangs or brigands would take over our streets. Extortion, rape, robbery and
murder would rip away the last threads of the thin veneer of civilization.”’ –
Alvin Toffler, Powershift, 1990.
The late Alvin Toffler (American writer, journalist, educator, and
businessman) says this while reflecting on the nature of power as one of the
most basic social phenomena. ‘Power……implies a world that combines both
chance, necessity, chaos and order.’ According to him, we humans ‘share an
irrepressible, biologically rooted craving for a modicum of order in our daily
lives, along with a hunger for novelty. It is the need for order that provides
the main justification for the very existence of government’.
Sri Lankans are currently experiencing, in the raw, a taste of the
evils that Toffler says absence of order would breed (a part of the
lingering legacy of the yahapalanaya), which makes constitution making
interesting for them. But what is a constitution? Google offers a simple
definition of the term: ‘a body of fundamental principles or established precedents
according to which a state or other organization is acknowledged to be
governed’.
Now, Professor Jayadeva Uyangoda (‘A very wrong approach to
Constitution-making’/The Island/September 29, 2020) opines that the proposed
20A has ‘several major defects’. One key fault, according to him, is that the
approach adopted for drafting the amendment is ‘very wrong’. JU offers a number
of reasons to explain this alleged wrongness of the ‘approach’: the ‘sponsors
and framers’ (I suppose the phrase means the politicians and the legal experts
behind the drafting of 20A) refuse to learn ‘constructive lessons from past
constitutional reform experiments’, but they have learned some ‘partisan,
narrow-minded, politically short-sighted ones’. What he probably means by this
becomes clear (not clear enough though) in the rest of his article, but it is
doubtful whether his sense of right and wrong in the context is shared by many
outside the now diminished anti-nationalist coterie who occupied the parliament
for four and a half years and hexed it with the controversial 19A. JU’s piece
first appeared (September 28) in an online publication that serves as a
propaganda mouthpiece for the particular cabal.
It is not necessary to read further into JU’s article to be
able to infer where his own inexcusable biases lie. He is obviously in favour
of 13A and 19A forced on the nation from outside, and is against the present
government’s sincere effort to remove the obstacles placed on its path by the
departing yahapalanaya through its ill conceived constitutional mixed bag that
is 19A, where what is bad is by choice, and what is good is by chance. This is
not to argue that the new 20A is perfect in comparison. I share many objections
raised in different quarters against the proposed 20A, but I believe that the
moot points will be satisfactorily sorted out by the present leaders before
they manage to get it through parliament.
The opposition critics of 20A quite well know that it is, after
all, only a stopgap measure to clear the way for the unhindered implementation
of the government’s development plans. The government will introduce a
completely new constitution within a year or two. JU’s advice as a political
scientist will come in handy then.
The proposed 20A is not an arbitrary piece of legislation that the
government is introducing behind the back of the people. There is considerable
opposition to some of its articles even within the government ranks. Unlike in
the case of 19A, the passage of 20A will be a democratic, above board affair.
The Minister of Justice on behalf of the government issued it as a draft bill
for public view and review in all three languages on September 2, 2020. The
document clearly specifies what is to be amended, repealed, or replaced. The
yahapalana constitutional fraud in the form of 19A is not being repeated. Over
this 4-week period, some thirty-nine petitions have been filed challenging
20A’s constitutionality before the Supreme Court and they were being taken up
for consideration by a bench of five judges for the third day running today at
the time of writing (October 2). The government has already declared that it
will abide by the court decision by duly adjusting its response to it. JU’s
alarms and warnings are uncalled for.
By the phrase ‘past constitutional reform experiments’, JU must be
referring to the making of the first and second republican constitutions (of
1972 and 1978 respectively) and the substantial number of opportune as well as
ad hoc amendments introduced by successive governments since, some of them
questionable and controversial, where 19A stands in a class by itself as the
best example of the worst type of constitutional reform introduced in Sri Lanka
to date. What prompts him to describe them as experiments is probably the fact that
he is a political scientist with his indispensable toolkit of academic
analysis. My interest as a lay citizen modestly informed about the original
construction and subsequent reform of a constitution is concerned with how good
it is going to be for the largest number of the people of the country, as its
supreme law, in the context of the more or less stable social and political
realities that are prevailing.
As a constitution is not holy writ, it is open to appropriate
amendments from time to time in compliance with the will of the people as and
when these realities change; a constitution specifies the legal way to reform
or replace it as the case may be. The current 1978 republican
constitution as amended up to 2015 (Chapter XII/Articles 82-84) specifies the
procedure for amending or repealing the constitution. The people whose memory
of the yahapalana misadventure is still fresh are anxiously aware of the necessity
of passing the 20A.
Contrary to what JU asserts, the political leaders and the legal
luminaries responsible for drafting the proposed 20A have not forgotten the
constructive lessons left by their respective predecessors in the form of
Sirimavo Bandaranaike and Colvin R. de Silva (1972), and J.R. Jayawardane and
A.J. Wilson (1978). Though political antagonists, both Bandaranaike and
Jayawardane cared about the country, the people, and the culture. Both
displayed firm leadership in governing, and a high level of intellect in statecraft.
Bandaranaike had a sound basic education enhanced by her native wit, and
Jayawardane possessed above average intelligence sharpened by a good education.
In April 1971, Bandaranaike nipped the JVP terrorism in the bud, not without
some violence, though, that she never intended. Opposition leader Jayawardane
approved of her actions, saying, ‘yes, a government must rule’. For her
courage, firmness, and composure, she was described by someone as the only man
in the male dominated cabinet. The contribution of the inspiration provided by
Bandaranaike’s political leadership to the making of the first republican
constitution, the principal architect of which was de Silva, must have been
immense and indispensable. Later, hadn’t Jayawardane got Wilson to write the
powerful institution of executive presidency into the second republican
constitution (1978) as the main anchor to the unitary state, the sovereign Sri
Lankan republic that Bandaranaike and de Silva created for the people
would have disintegrated and drifted into wilderness and oblivion by now.
Incidentally, how credible is this pie in the sky constitution
making political science professor? (This is not mudslinging against someone.
This is stating facts about them.) JU himself has a revolutionary past of
heroic proportions, as opposed to the different (needless to say unpatriotic)
key roles that he has been playing in the foreign funded NGO circuit justifying
separatism. He provoked the just anger of the nationalists by uttering the
outrageous falsehood that the Sinhalese imbibed racism at their mother’s
breast! As an undergraduate of the Peradeniya University, in his
pre-pro-separatist past, he was a prominent leader, a politburo member,
of the JVP. During the 1971 insurrection he earned fame or notoriety as the 3rd
of the 41 accused in the cause célèbre that was instituted
to try them. JU was held responsible for planned attacks in Colombo on April 5,
though, for some reason,I’d be loath to say, it was for the purpose of saving
his own skin, he had failed to join his rebel comrades (some 800 schoolchildren
and university students), effectively leaving them high and dry, for they
had gathered there on his command, tasked to take over Colombo, while prime
minister Sirima Bandaranaike was out of the island on an official foreign tour.
He was arrested by the police at Kollupitiya while on his way to the British
Council library there on August 2 (This information is based on personal memory
and facts derived from veteran bilingual journalist Dharman Wickremaratne’s
‘Ja Vi Pe 2 Veni Kaerella Vol. I’/2016).
Renowned scholar and sociologist Susantha Goonatilake has a brief
account on Jayadeva Uyangoda as ‘a key link in the filtering matrix’ connected
with foreign funded NGO activism on p. 180 of his (SG’s) study of foreign
funded NGOs in Sri Lanka (2006), where the phrase ‘filtering matrix’
refers to a set of individuals/authors who are employed to distort the Sri
Lankan reality so as to ‘skew Western academic perspectives on Sri Lanka’ (as
Goonatilake puts it). JU’s article is evidence that that filtering matrix is
still alive. Goonatilake tells us about how the judge (This was Justice
A.C. Alles) who tried the April 1971 insurrectionists passes severe strictures
on Uyangoda’s ‘callous irresponsibility’ towards the innocent young followers
under his command in a book of memoirs that the judge published in 1990.
Justice Alles recalls how Uyangoda, by failing to turn up at the critical
moment thereby forsaking his comrades, left the young boys ‘with the responsibility
of performing the impossible task of trying to capture Colombo,and remarks that
‘this callous irresponsibility shown to the youthful students deserves the
severest condemnation’”.
JU ends his article by ‘Alerting our Honourable Justices, who make
up the much revered public institution that is the last bastion of citizens’
freedom and democracy, should also be a part of the struggle for re-inheriting
and defending our own best legacies of political and social modernity’.
Is this hilarious or just outrageous?
Be that as it may. Let’s get back to the point. The second alleged
defect that JU asserts without any evidence to support his opinion is that ‘the
framers of the 20A are not motivated by the broader democratic interests of all
Sri Lankan people but the ‘political self-interest’ (of someone or group that
JU avoids mentioning). But it anticipates his conclusion: ‘Sri Lankan
constitution-makers should not consider the South-East Asian developmentalist
authoritarian state model as a new constitutional template for Sri Lanka,
because it goes against our own progressive constitutionalist legacy evolved
during the past century or so’. Actually, this so-called ‘South-East Asian
developmentalist state model is what the president is aiming at, people will be
even more enamoured of. JU’s frivolous pedantry that denounces it hardly
deserves a reply. A third defect, JU identifies the Amendment’s supposed
lack of ‘a democratic formative framework relevant to our society and its own
progressive-modernist legacies of constitutionalism .. (together with the fact
that).. it builds itself on one or two dreadful and destructive experiments of
constitution-making in the recent past’. This is as close to clear as I can get
in interpreting JU here. To illustrate the ‘one or two dreadful and destructive
experiments of constitution-making in the recent past’, I think, he draws upon
what he, assuming a kind of arbitrary academic license, calls the ‘relatively
long history of unmaking, making, and amending constitutions’ that includes the
1972 and 1978 exercises on the one hand, and the 1978C and 18A on the
other. JU’s adjectives ‘dreadful and destructive’ could be justifiably
applied to the passage of 19A and other such ‘experiments’ in constitutional
reform as contained, for example, in Chapter IV of the Constitution of the
Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka (As amended up to 15th May 2015)
(Revised Edition – 2015) issued by the Parliamentary Secretariat. Chapter IV –
Language covers Articles 18-25. One is bewildered by what the crafty,
ill-meaning, ‘sponsors and framers’ have from time to time done to
degrade Sinhala in its official status with the uncomprehending
concurrence of some self-seeking Sinhala MPs in the House. This, of course,
would be an iconic piece of constitution-making for a theorist with his head in
the clouds.
The practical reality is that the operative meaning of any Article
(whether this is legally contested or not) is implicitly embodied in the
English text (though, according to the present constitution Sinhala and Tamil
are both official languages, while English is the link language.). So, it is
vitally important to translate the draft document that is the Constitution into
precise, unambiguous, formal and legally acceptable and uncontestable Sinhala
and Tamil. I detected a couple of stark discrepancies between the original
English draft and the Sinhala translation (not relating to the particular
context – Chapter IV – mentioned above) when I made a very random comparison
between the two versions while researching an article at the time, but I don’t
remember whether I dwelt on the subject long enough for it to be taken notice
of by the reader as something important though beyond the central scope of that
article. Apart from this, those sufficiently informed did not fail to see how
some Tamil lawmakers wanted to openly hoodwink the Sinhalas with the word
‘akeeya’ stripped of its intended original meaning of unitary, but falsely
insisting that the English term ‘unitary’ was not its equivalent and was not
suitable as a translation, and started talking about an Orumiththa Nadu,
reminiscent of Tamil Nadu. How the question which version should prevail in
case of an incongruence between the Sinhala and Tamil texts should be resolved,
I can’t remember having been discussed. But the last item (58) of the published
draft of 20A runs: ‘In the event of any inconsistency between the Sinhala and
Tamil texts of this Act, the Sinhala text shall prevail.’
Having outlined the lessons to be learnt from constitution-making,
-unmaking, and -reforming exercises up to 18A, JU moves on to the many lessons
that he thinks may be drawn from the ‘much maligned’ 19A. He identifies four
key lessons. The first lesson he mentions is that wide public consultation is
useful, and helps ‘improve the level of democratic health in the polity’. I
cannot agree with him that this was true about the drafting of 19A. It was
claimed that the constitutional experts including Jayampathy Wickremaratne,
presumably its principal drafter, toured the country meeting with individuals
and representatives of many minority civil groups during a short period of two
or three months. They had to rush the job, they said, as they were in a hurry
to finish it within a stipulated time frame. About two thousand people were
consulted nevertheless, they claimed. It was obvious that they roamed the
country making it their main aim to pay more attention to the minorities that
they had decided were discriminated against by the majority Sinhalese, as they
wanted the meddling foreign powers to believe in order to justify their
interventionist excesses in the internal and external politics of the
country. Meanwhile they paid only symbolic attention to the Sinhalese
majority. Wickremaratne, the chief architect of the fraudulent document
is now rumoured/reported to have found or is seeking political asylum in
Australia or somewhere (though there is absolutely no possibility of his being
targeted for persecution in Sri Lanka). He has reportedly admitted that 19A is
hugely problematic.
The second lesson that JU asserts he can learn from the making of
19A is that it is ‘better to build consensus across all political parties in
Parliament for a major amendment or a new Constitution’. If he means that 19A
set a negative example of that principle, then he has a case. But in actuality,
19A destroyed the burgeoning interparty consensus in parliament and the growing
intercommunal goodwill in the broader society that the MR government achieved
in the wake of victory over terrorism. It was because of this that ‘for
partisan political reasons, some might later withdraw from the consensus’ as JU
laments.
I agree with JU on the third lesson he derives from his seemingly
iconic amendment, which is that ‘If the consultation and consensus-building
in constitution-making is not politically managed with clarity of purpose, the
overall goals of the constitutional compromise may run the risk of producing a
constitutional scheme with potentially harmful internal anomalies and
contradictions’. Yes, in other words, 19A is a very good illustration of a very
bad constitutional amendment.
The
fourth lesson that 19A offers, according to JU, is that ‘a democratic
constitution-making exercise today needs, more than ever, an unwavering
political leadership to champion it through to the end by innovative and
imaginative democratic means’. In my opinion, this is what the pre-2015
government achieved. 19A, by dismantling it, demonstrated how ill the nation
fared in the absence of such unwavering, innovative, and democratic leadership.
Then, JU starts chewing his own tail, by suggesting a ‘paradoxical’ reason:
‘Alternatives to democracy are also competing with democracy, with enormous
material resources, to gain popular support and loyalty through democratic
means. In this age of right-wing populism, media-manufactured popular consent
and manipulation of public perceptions through information pollution,
post-democratic alternatives tend (to) gain easy currency and public
legitimacy’. ‘Frankly, I can’t make head or tail of this, but it makes me
wonder whether JU is trying to make light of the very real persecution of the
majority community that is hardly recognized by most mainstream politicians,
who feel obliged to find refuge behind political correctness.
The
news about the Presidents’ surprise visit a few days ago, to the Narahenpita
Office of the ‘National Housing Development Authority’ made me pen this short
article.
He is
said to be following a complaint by a customer, who was told by the officers
that they were short of staff. And the President not surprisingly though found
it otherwise that they indeed had enough staff to fulfil their duties properly.
This isn’t the first time that he has done this. He did few unannounced visits
to some other government institutions before. I am not sure what came about
subsequent to those visits: whether anything worth happened such as a visible
attitudinal change of those government employees towards their customers. Or
was it business as usual after the president left. I am sure it was. Reminds me
of a scenario, where a teacher, a strict disciplinarian visiting a class of
merry-making students, who suddenly become well-behaved and quiet on seeing the
teacher. No sooner than the teacher leaves, they are back at their usual
selves, behaving as before.
No
wonder. It is not an easy task to change ones’ work-culture/habits so quickly
let alone in a matter of days. Practises that have been going on for decades
cannot be changed overnight. Even the walls around those offices would speak up
in protest for the change if they could. And as far as many of our government
institutions and organisations that deal with the public, are concerned, the
customer is a nonentity. In fact for many of those employees, the customer is a
pain in the neck getting in the way of their otherwise important businesses
that have nothing to with their duty. And that includes unofficial tea breaks,
extended meal breaks, chit-chatting-over-the-phone breaks and as for the female
employees a bit of nose- powdering and other similar grooming activities as
well (how many times during their office hours, your guess is as good as mine).
However,
this is not to say that we do not have those duty conscious, customer-friendly
government employees anymore. In fact we still do though their numbers are in
rapid decline as can be seen today.
There are many therapies that
can treat this multi-faceted disease: indifference, having absolutely no idea
regarding what customer service is all about, the failure to understand and be
very conscious about fact that the customer is the one, who keeps their jobs
and pays for their jobs, to mention a few.
In my
humble opinion, a full-scale computerisation is one way of reducing this
lethargy, indifference and inefficiency, all of which are synonymous with the
old-fashioned mentality and ways of doing clerical work, such as hard-copy-file
keeping and their retrieval on demand, which is a painfully slow process from a
customers’ point of view. Hard copies can be kept in archives, by all means, if
necessary. Yet there should be data bases built into the system, where any
relevant employee can log into it, access a customers’ file electronically and
serve him/her without delay. So there is no need to have separate
counters/tables manned by dozens of personnel dealing with only a specific set
of customer-queries and other related issues.
And
before going any further, I must not forget our ‘used-to-be-then-ubiquitous
office peon’. There was at least one in each and every office those days. And
then their presence gradually declined, when machine began to replace man over
time. However, they are still there, now in small numbers though, at some
places, those figures usually clad-in-full-white, while being always kept busy
by demands and needs of all above him: from shopping for bosses, tea-making to
file locating and delivering to the appropriate tables, to mention a few.
And then and quite often too, he happened to be the unofficial liaison
(the public were/are well aware of it. ‘Peonwa alluwanam hari. Wede ikmanata
karaganna puluwan’. Talk to the Peon. He will get it done quickly). Offer
plenty of oil to rub his palms and miracles begin to happen. The files that
have been gathering dust somewhere and declared to be hard to locate and
retrieve quickly suddenly make their way to the relevant table/counter in no
time, as if by magic.
And
lastly Mr President please do not make any more jump on the gravy train for a
free ride, which they do at the expense of the tax payer. In fact, you can ask
many of them to climb down and assign/direct them to posts/locations, where
they can do some productive work in return for their pay.
I hope
our President being a strict disciplinarian will be able to change the current
work ethics and habits of many of the employees of our government organisations
and bring in ‘refreshing winds of change’.
The Sri Lanka Customs had seized more than 300 luxury vehicles worth more than Rs.2,000 million which were imported illegally during the COVID-19 pandemic period, Customs Media spokesman and Deputy Director Sunil Jayarathne said.
He told Daily Mirror that the most number of luxury vehicles were imported from Japan and several vehicles were imported from other countries such as the United Kingdom (UK) and Germany. “The vehicles have been imported without a valid Letter of Credit (LC), with changing the Shipped on Board Date and Bill of Lading date. Most of the LCs of the vehicles had not been opened at the due date,” he said.
Certain LCs were issued before the Government imposed regulations and some were issued after the regulations were imposed,” he said. He said the majority of these vehicles were shipped from Europe and Japan to the Colombo and Hambantota Ports.
Usually vehicles were imported from the UK and Germany by containers to the Colombo Harbour. Vehicles from Japan arrived at the Hambantota Harbour in car carriers,” Mr Jayarathne said. “These vehicles were imported during the pandemic period,” he said. Many European vehicles such as BMW, Audi and Mercedez Benz have been illegally imported using vehicle import concessions. Most of the vehicles were imported using duty-free permits and by government officials,” Mr Jayarathne said.
The investigations carried out by the Sri Lanka Customs had already been concluded. Meanwhile, Media Spokesman said there is a possibility of confiscating these vehicles. (Chaturanga Samarawickrama)
His Eminence Malcolm Cardinal Ranjith has raised concerns over the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) releasing Riyaj Bathiudeen, the brother of MP Rishad Bathiudeen, who was detained over the alleged links to the Easter Sunday terror attacks.
Over the last few days, it was observed that the suspects, whose actions were investigated over the allegations pertaining to the Easter Sunday bombings, were released from custody the CID, he remarked.
In a special media briefing held this morning (03) at the Archbishop’s House in Colombo, the Cardinal said it is doubtful whether a political deal” is behind the move.
Surprised and saddened by the CID’s conduct, he urged the authorities to properly carry out the investigations in this regard.
The Cardinal also referred to a statement made by Police Spokesperson SSP Jaliya Senaratne, in which he said that investigations into the carnage have revealed that the parliamentarian’s brother has had maintained direct links with the bombers.
Speaking further, the Cardinal pointed out that the police spokesperson’s statement and the CID’s move are in complete contradiction.
SSP Senaratne in a recent media briefing announced that Riyaj Bathiudeen was released due to lack of evidence” to file a case against him.
Four more persons tested positive for COVID-19 this evening (03), taking the total number of confirmed cases to 3,392.
The Department of Government Information said 02 arrivals from Kuwait and 01 each from Qatar and the United Arab Emirates had tested positive for the virus.
In the meantime, the COVID-19 recoveries tally reached 3,254 earlier today as 09 more infected with the virus returned to health.
According to statistics, 125 active cases are currently receiving treatment at selected hospitals across the island.
I like to thank Mr. C. A. Chandraperuma for
his article ‘Closure Scrutiny of
Criticisms Against 20A’, Sunday Island, 20th Sept. 2020, for
clarifying some of the controversies relating to 20th Amendment. In
fact much of the unwanted speculation and criticisms could have been avoided if
the Govt., had informed at least the Cabinet, let alone the constituents, the
reasons underpinning 20th Amendment at a much earlier date, as the
right to information and sovereignty of the people are fundamental to any
democracy.
Governments are generally formed and
un-formed at the will of the people and the will of the people is largely dependent
on the information at their disposal. Misinformation and non-information can
ruin the fortunes of many a government. The Govt. needs to respect the cliché
that ‘Information is Power’ and take necessary steps to provide relevant information
to the public in a timely manner except for national security reasons. Needless
to say that Sri Lankans have vivid memories of 2015 experience where the govt.
in power was defeated, in part, due to the slow reaction to possible alleged
misinformation pertaining to fraud and corruption against the previous govt.
ranks.
Currently the govt. is fortunate to have a
near 2/3 majority in parliament, after an extraordinary campaign by patriots
including religious leaders, who believed in the security and sovereignty of
the country. It is important that the Govt. retains this confidence and not
lull into a false sense of security and allow conjecture and speculation rule
the day, as it had done in the last few weeks for not responding to the criticisms
on 20th Amendment. I hope the fears of the public would be allayed
during the respective parliamentary debate.
In terms of the opinions expressed by Mr.
Chandraperuma, in the said article, I wish to differ on the questions of
appointment of auditors to govt. owned companies by the Minister and the
provision of dual citizens to contest parliamentary elections for the following
reasons.
Financial or management auditing of a govt.
department or a govt. enterprise needs to be an independent function without
any intervention by management. The appointment of Audit firms and Auditors
need to be under the control of the Auditor General. As a Manager of a State
public enterprise in Australia, I am fully aware of the widespread ligation and
class actions against private sector audit firms, including the Big 4 firms
with regard to private sector enterprises and corporations. The appointment of
independent Audit service within the govt. sector is mainly to avoid the
potential for conflicts of interest and lack of independence needed for the
function. For example, Mr. Chandraperuma writes, 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, s/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”.
The fact that there is management
intervention in the appointment of Auditors compromises the authority of the
Auditor General, to have an independent control over the audit function, even-though
the audit has to be conducted under his direction. The audit sample testing
undertaken and the conclusions drawn can be biased in favour of the enterprise at
least to retain future contracts, even if there were no fraudulent intentions. The
fact that this provision is in the 19th amendment does not
recompense for the independence of the audit function. The audit function
should therefore needs be under the control of the Auditor General.
The argument as of dual citizens is equally compelling as
citizenship in an adopted country is generally conditional on an allegiance to
that country. Many countries like Australia have banned dual citizens entering
their respective parliaments as well as the public service. The provision for
dual citizens to be elected as parliamentarians has the potential risk for conflicts
of interest as interested parties in adopted countries can influence them to be
supportive of their respective agendas in times of need. This indeed is a risk
that needs to be avoided, when taking into consideration the extent of foreign interference
Sri Lanka has had in its internal politics during the yahapalana regime.
There is much hype about a corporate development entity under the US Government known as MCC offering Sri Lanka a ‘GIFT’ of $480m. We are supposed to be on our knees in gratitude. While the land project allocation is just $67m, Sri Lanka has to not only agree to a set of preconditions that include privatizing all state land, but amend our constitution, change our land laws, and even have the agreement passed by Sri Lanka’s Parliament – all these changes & more, just to have a disbursement of $480 across 5 years to a private company and for MCC to do 7 districts covering just 28% land area. What is the big deal in this MCC project?
Key preconditions to the disbursement of $480m & to make avail of just $67m for the land project include:
Privatizing all state land(84% of land belongs to the People with Government as custodian of the land) If all of Sri Lanka’s land becomes private land, what is the use of a government & how can a government function without land to tax?
MCC demands transferring all deeds into Title Registration – The Government has to undertake to not only transfer private deeds to title registration (bim saviya) but do the same for State lands as well. Only temple lands have been omitted after opposition. Conversion to bim saviya started in 2006 but only less than 1m title registrations have been completed in view of the legal issues, complicated by the legal restrictions in the bim saviya (title registration) after transfer.
For $480m out of which only $67million is given to the land project, Sri Lanka has to
Sign and pass MCC Agreement in Parliament making a bilateral agreement into domestic law but agreeing not to apply Sri Lankan law but international law as well as agree to a host of shocking exemptions, immunities and privileges to MCC
After signing and passing MCC Agreement, Sri Lanka has to set up a private company to which MCC funding will get disbursed across 5 years (the annual disbursements are already given in the MCC Agreement)
MCC funding is not going to be handed to the Sri Lankan Treasury but to a private bank that MCC chooses
Sri Lanka has to amend our constitution & repeal existing land laws/statutes
Attorney General must issue a letter, worded to the satisfaction of MCC that the Agreement is valid & does not violate Sri Lanka’s constitution. Such a letter was signed by the former AG during the previous government (present CJ)
MCC wishes to set up a LandPolicyResearch Group to amend existing land laws
MCC also wishes to have amendments to the Title Registration Act (Bim Saviya) to accommodate its objectives
After agreeing to all the above & much more, for a paltry $480m out of which just $67million is being allocated to the land project, MCC is agreeing to do only 7 TARGETED” Districts which are
Anuradhapura
Kandy
Kegalle
Kurunegala
Matale
Polonnaruwa
Trincomalee
MCC will allocate the $67million for these 7 districts that cover 28% land area & 10 land registries.
There are 25 districts in Sri Lanka. If MCC is agreeing to fund only 7 districts – that means the GoSL has to undertake to fund the remaining 18 districts. How much is this cost for the GoSL?
There are 45 land registries in Sri Lanka. If MCC is agreeing to fund only 10 land registries – that means the GoSL has to undertake to fund the remaining 35 land registries. How much is this cost for the GoSL?
We are told this MCC $480m is a gift” for all of Sri Lanka.
However, from the land project it is clear that we are in for a raw deal. After privatizing the People’s land (that belongs to future generations as well) the MCC is undertaking to do only 7 districts and 10 land registries. So this gift” is actually only for the 7 districts only! While the GoSL will have to fund the bulk but how the GoSL will fund anything would be baffling when it finds it has no land to even tax!
Those who are suggesting that MCC can be signed after amendments should relook at the agreement as ‘amendments’ are claimed to have been done on 18 June 2018. Therefore, MCC is unlikely to agree to further amendments.
The shortsightedness of politicians confounded by corrupt political advisors will soon turn our island nation into a foreign corporate colony & our people will be landless as the Native Hawaiians. White businessmen in 1887 forced the Hawaiian king at gunpoint to sign a new constitution (Bayonet Constitution) gave foreigners the right to vote and restricted voting for Natives. Pearl Harbour was turned into a US Naval Refueling station in 1887 (US is eyeing Trinco for same). 1898 US annexed Hawaii. Lands were taken from natives who lacked satisfactory documentation to prove the land belonged to them. The entire island of Lāna‘i was sold off to Jim Dole for a pineapple plantation.
How the US stole HAWAII — GOING TO HAPPEN TO SRI LANKA TOO???
https://youtu.be/XK2MBnw6RlY
These examples suffice for Sri Lanka to be cautious knowing too well why Sri Lanka’s geopolitical positioning has been a target by external elements. Any agreements should be viewed from the prism of what their real objectives are and taking stock of what they have done to other countries too.
Sixty-one years ago on
September 25, 1959 Solomon West Ridgeway Dias Bandaranaike (SWRDB) the Prime
Minister of Sri Lanka known as Ceylon then was shot and seriously wounded by a
Buddhist monk. Prime Minister SWRD Bandaranaike succumbed to his injuries and passed
away the following day. Therefore September 26, 1959 got etched as an important
date in the post-independence history annals of Sri Lanka.
SWRD
Bandaranaike
The
impact of that single assassination was tremendous at that time. The murder of
a prime minister was sensationally shocking news. It was the first major
political assassination experienced by the Island nation in the
post-Independence era. In later years, political assassinations became a
regular feature in Sri Lanka.. The death was an event of great historical
importance too as it was the first ever assassination of a major political
personality in the Island nation at that time. Thereafter September 26, 1959
got etched as an important date in the post-independence annals of Sri Lanka.
It is against this backdrop that this column delves into what happened six
decades ago relying to a very great extent on earlier writings in this
regard.
SWRD Bandaranaike as
Premier was officially ensconced in the Prime minister’s official residence
Temple Trees” at Galle Road, Kollupitiya. Bandaranaike also divided his time
between the ancestral manor at Horagolla Walauwe and his private residence
Tintagel” on 65 Rosemead place, Colombo 7. SWRDB was at Tintagel” on the
fateful Friday he was shot.
A Buddhist monk named
Ven. Talduwe Somarama Thero was among those who came to meet Bandaranaike on
the morning of September 25,1959. It was a Friday. The monk was a lecturer at
the Government College of Ayurveda or indigenous medicine in Borella. Somarama
Thero also had an Ayurvedic eye clinic in Borella.The ostensible reason for the
monk wanting to meet the PM was to appraise him of requirements for the
Ayurveda College.
Talduwe Somarama’s
name at birth was Talduwe Ratugama Rallage Weris Singho. He was born on August
27, 1915 to Ratugama Rallage Dieris Appuhamy and Iso Hamy. Weris Singho was
educated at the Talduwe Ihala school and in Dehiowita. He donned the yellow robes
on January 20, 1929 at the age of fourteen. Somarama was ordained in Kandy on
June 25, 1936 at the age of twenty-one.
The premier of the
nation was in the front verandah of his house meeting people who had come to
see him. One batch of people was accommodated inside while others stood in line
outside awaiting their turn to go in. Talduwe Somarama also waited patiently in
the queue for his turn and then was admitted in. There was a group of about 20
persons inside and a queue of around 40 outside.
Talduwe Somarama Thero
Talduwe Somarama Thero
sat on a chair at one corner of the Verandah. He had placed a file and a
handkerchief on a low stool by his side on his left. Seated on his right was
another Buddhist monk from Polonnaruwa named Ananda Thero. The Polonnaruwa monk
accompanied by some farmers had come to see the Prime Minister on a matter
concerning the appointment of a cooperative society manager. Ananda Thero was
later to prove to be a key witness at the trial.
As each person’s name
was announced he or she walked up to the Prime Minister, paid obeisance and
articulated their woes and views. However when Somarama Thero stood up as his
name was announced, Prime Minister Bandaranaike himself got up respectfully,
walked up to him and bowed reverentially as was the custom in greeting a
Buddhist monk.
He then asked the monk
what he could do for him. Somarama – who seemed tensed up according to Ananda
Thero – told the PM that certain improvements were needed at the Ayurveda
College. Bandaranaike then replied that he could get the Health Minister A.P.
Jayasuriya to attend to it if the venerable monk stated the requirements in
writing and submitted it to him.
The time then was 9.45
am. Somarama Thero sat down and fumbled with the file on the stool by his side
as if he was going to pull out a memorandum to be given to the Prime Minister.
As the Prime Minister was getting ready to receive what he may have thought
were some papers, the Buddhist monk took out a pistol concealed in his robes and
fired twice at point blank range hitting Bandaranaike in the chest and
abdomen.The Prime minister made a loud sound like a gasp or moan and went down.
He then got up slowly and with great difficulty tried to stagger back inside
the house.
When a shocked Ananda
Thero got up from his chair, a thoroughly excited Somarama stood up and pointed
his gun at the priest from Polonnaruwa. An agitated Ananda Thero shouted Ammo”
(mother). Somarama then turned around and followed Bandaranaike, shooting at
him wildly. He fired four more shots thus emptying the magazine. One bullet
injured the Prime minister’s hand. Another hit a school teacher named Gunaratne
who had also come to see the Prime minister on that morning. A third shot
smashed the glass pane on a door. The fourth struck a flower pot breaking it.
Somarama Thero had used a .45 Webly Mark VI revolver to fire the six
shots including the fatal ones.
Meanwhile there was
pandemonium as the people on the verandah started scattering here and there in
fear. Ananda Thero ran out and shouted to the policeman on duty at the gate
that a monk was shooting at the prime minister. The Policeman who had already
started running towards the house upon hearing the shots came inside and fired
at Somarama Thero injuring him in the thigh.
Country, race and
religion”
Realising what had
happened, enraged people surrounded Somarama who was shouting excitedly that he
had done so for the country, race and religion”. After a scuffle in which
Somarama was manhandled by the people, the monk was formally arrested.
The bleeding
Bandaranaike lying on the floor had urged the people not to harm the monk in
any way. The apprehended monk was taken away by the police to the Harbour
Police station amidst tight security. SWRD Bandaranaike was rushed to the
General Hospital at Borella and taken to the operating theatre .
Tragically,
Bandaranaike never suspected any threat to his person and was unbelievably
unconcerned about security. Given the levels of security available to VVIP’s
today it is mind boggling to know that only a police sergeant was in charge of
the Prime Minister’s security then. Even the sergeant-in-charge was not on duty
that morning. Only a constable had been at the gates.
Parliament was in
session at Galle Face when news of the assassination attempt reached the house.
Education Minister Dr. W. Dahanayake who was to later succeed Bandaranaike as
Prime minister later wanted Parliament to be adjourned but the majority of the
honourable members disagreed. Opposition leader Dr. N.M. Perera stated there
was no need to panic”. Several Ministers and MP’s from both the Government and
opposition left the house and made a bee-line to Borella to see how the premier
was faring.
Sir Oliver
Goonetilleke
The Governor General
of the time was Sir Oliver Goonetilleke. When news reached him of the shooting
incident Sir Oliver was at Queens House” swearing in the new Italian
Ambassador Count Paolo di Michelis di Sloughhello. Sir Oliver stopped the
ceremony and rushed to Rosmead Place. Thereafter he sent a message to Parliament
that it continue to function in a business as usual”manner.
The Governor-General
known and respected for his political wisdom and statesmanship took the
initiative of declaring a state of emergency as a precautionary measure. It may
be recalled that it was Sir Oliver who acted decisively and declared emergency
in May 1958 when anti –Tamil violence erupted in a situation where Prime
Minister Bandaranaike vacillated.
A state of emergency
was declared at 11 a.m. on September 25 by Governor-General Sir Oliver
Goonetilleka and the Army, Navy and Air Force units including volunteers were
mobilised and placed in readiness throughout the island. Later events
demonstrated that Sir Oliver’s anticipation of trouble and declaration of
emergency was indeed commendable.
What happened was that
Bandaranaike after surgery was admitted to the Merchants’ Ward. He issued a
message to the nation from his hospital bed in the Merchants’ Ward. In the
message the Prime Minister was extremely magnanimous towards the man who had
shot him. Instead of referring to him directly as a Buddhist priest, SWRDB
described him as a foolish man dressed in the robes of a monk”. The premier
also called upon the government and authorities to show compassion to this man
and not try to wreak vengeance on him”.
This well-intentioned
magnanimity may have had unintended, dangerous consequences but for the prompt
action of Sir Oliver Goonetilleke who had declared emergency before the
statement was issued. Anticipating another round of 1958 type of violence the
Governor-General issued strict instructions to the police to be vigilant
against any sign of violence erupting.
Given the prevailing
political atmosphere of the time where anti-Tamil feelings were running high
the immediate suspicion was that the assassin was a Tamil. News began spreading
that the name of the man who shot the premier was Somaraman”. A Tamilised
version of Somarama. So when Bandaranaike spoke of a man dressed in the robes
of a monk” rumours started to circulate that a Tamil had dressed up as a
Buddhist priest and shot the Prime Minister.
Tamils in Colombo were
very nervous then but thanks to the police being vigilant nothing untoward
happened. Thanks to Sir Oliver the media was advised” to reveal very clearly
without delay that the assassin was not a Tamil. The anti-Tamil feelings began
subsiding. A replay of the 1958 anti-Tamil violence was averted at that point
of time.
Surgery for five hours
Some of the top
doctors in Colombo performed surgery on Bandaranaike for more than five long
hours. Dr. M. V. P. Peries, Dr. P. R. Anthonis, Dr. L. O. Silva and Dr. Noel
Bartholomeusz were the doctors in the operating theatre. Dr. L.O. Silva was
quoted by the media later as observing that the first 24 hours after the
operation was very crucial.”
The Prime
Minister had recovered consciousness a few hours after the operation and was
cheerful. He had joked with the doctors and nurses around his bedside. He had
asked one of the nurses How am I doing?” She replied You are doing fine,
Sir”. Yes I am an old man and have undergone a five hour stomach operation but
I still have guts,” the PM had declared. He had also dictated a message to the
nation from the hospital.
Things however took a
turn for the worse in the early hours of the morning. Three senior doctors –
Dr. P. R. Anthonis, Dr. T. D. H. Perera and Dr. M. J. A. Sandrasagara were on
hand doing their best but there was no improvement. The fourth Prime Minister
of Independent Ceylon passed away on September 26, 1959 exactly twenty-two
hours after he had been shot.
The official bulletin
issued after his death stated as follows The condition of the Prime Minister
suddenly took a turn for the worse about 7 a.m. There was a sudden alteration
of the action of the heart and his condition deteriorated very rapidly. He
passed off peacefully about 8 o’ clock.” It was signed by Dr. P. R. Anthonis,
Dr. T. D. H. Perera and Dr. M. J. A. Sandrasagara.
Subsequently a verdict
of homicide was recorded by the City Coroner J. N. C. Tiruchelvam, J. P. U. M.
at the inquest. He said death was due to shock and haemorrhage resulting from
multiple injuries to the thoracic and abdominal organs.”
Sanga, Veda and Guru”
The tripartite forces
who campaigned effectively for Bandaranaike in 1956 were Buddhist priests,
Ayurvedic medical practitioners and teachers. It was said that Sanga, Veda and
Guru” were responsible for installing Bandaranaike as Prime Minister. The
bitter irony was that Bandaranaike’s assassin was a three-in-one” personality
representing all three. Somarama was a Bhikku, an Ayurvedic doctor and a
lecturer in the Ayurvedic College. The tripartite forces who brought SWRDB
to power were now personified in the man who killed him.
After Bandaranaike’s
death, the Education Minister Wijayananda Dahanayake had been sworn in as Prime
Minister. Detectives from Scotland Yard in Britain were brought down to assist
the Ceylon Police in the investigations. The then DIG-CID, D.C.T. Pate, SP
Rajasooriya, S.S.I.K. Iyer ASP, IP Abeywardena, IP A.M. Seneviratne and IP
Tyrell Goonetilleke were responsible for the intensive Police
investigation.
November 26, 1959 saw
seven persons being charged in the chief magistrate’s court of Colombo on a
charge of conspiring to murder SWRD Bandaranaike. They were
1. Mapitigama Buddharakkitha
Thero
2. Hemachandra Piyasena
Jayawardena
3. Pallihakarage Anura de Silva
4. Talduwe Somarama Thero
5. Weerasooriya Arachchige Newton
Perera
6. Vimala Wijewardene
7. Amerasinghe Arachchige Carolis
Amerasinghe
In addition to this
Somarama Thero the fourth accused was also charged with commitment of murder.
Incidently Somarama Thero had confessed to committing the murder in his
statements to the Police and to the chief magistrate. However he changed his
position at the Supreme court trial. I did not shoot the Prime Minister. It is
untrue that the 1st and 2nd accused or either of them requested me to do so. If
I said so to the Magistrate, it is false. My statement to the Magistrate was
not made of my own free will. I am not guilty,” stated Somarama in the Supreme
Court later.
Within a short time
the seventh accused A.A.C. Amerasinghe (Kolonnawa urban councillor) received a
conditional pardon in terms of section 283 of the Criminal procedure code and
thereafter became a witness for the prosecution. Non-summary proceedings began
and after a long magisterial inquiry, the sixth accused Vimala Wijewardene was
cleared of all charges of conspiracy and deemed innocent of any complicity. She
was discharged on July 15, 1960. Vimala Wijewardene was the first woman cabinet
minister of the country and had served as Minister of Health in SWRD
Bandaranaike’s Government.
The Magisterial
Inquiry under Colombo Chief Magistrate N.A. de S. Wijesekara went on for 124
days with 193 witnesses testifying. The Chief Magistrate committed the first
five accused to stand trial before Supreme Court on charges of conspiracy and
murder.
Supreme Court Trial
The Supreme Court
trial began against the five accused on February 22, 1961 before Justice
T.S. Fernando QC OBE. The foreman of the seven member English speaking jury was
D.W.L. Lieversz snr. Ninety-seven witnesses testified and were cross examined.
The Solicitor-General A.C. Alles along with deputy solicitor-general A.C.M.
Ameer conducted the case on behalf of the prosecution with senior crown
counsels R.S.Wanasundara and R.I. Obeyesekera assisting.
The third accused
Anura de Silva was acquitted with the jury voting unanimously in his favour.
The fifth accused Newton Perera was acquitted on a divided verdict with five
voting in favour of the accused and two against. The trial concluded on May 12,
1961 after fifty-five days of hearing. The proceedings were well publicised and
extensively reported in the media. Within five days the Jury returned its
verdict.
The Jury found the
first accused Buddharakkitha Thero, second accused H.P. Jayewardena and fourth
accused Somarama Thero guilty by a unanimous verdict. Death sentence was
pronounced on all three of them. All three faced death by hanging. During the
trial Somarama had stopped wearing the yellow robes when appearing in Courts.
All three convicted
persons appealed against their death sentence to the then Court of Criminal
Appeal. The five-judge bench presided over by Chief Justice Hema H. Basnayake
comprised – Justices M.C. Sansoni, H.N.G. Fernando, N. Sinnetamby and L.B. de
Silva.
It was argued on
behalf of Buddharakkitha and Jayewardena that the maximum punishment for the
offence of conspiring to commit murder was rigorous imprisonment for life.
E.G.Wickremanayake, QC, submitted that the Act which re-introduced the death
penalty for murder did not in specific terms re-introduce such penalty for conspiracy
to commit murder.
The Criminal Appeal
court concurred with the submission.The appeal of all three were dismissed but
courts amended the sentences imposed on Buddharakkitha and Jayewardena from
death to rigorous life imprisonment. Thus both of them were saved from the
gallows due to this legal loophole.
Hanged in Welikada
Talduwe Somarama Thero
prepared himself to face death. He thanked in open court his counsel Lucian G.
Weeramanthri who had appeared free for him I thank my counsel who defended me
at this trial like a true lion.”
Weeks before his
execution Somarama was converted to Christianity and was baptised in his cell
by a Priest.He was hanged in the
Welikada gallows on July 6, 1962 at the age of 48. The hanging was undertaken
by State executioner Lewis Singho and his assistant Subatheris Appu.
Which country would not be happy if another country said ‘we have a you-first security policy?’ The cynical have the option of retorting ‘most countries would be terrified if, for example, the USA said something like that.’
The world is not flat. Not all countries are equal in terms of financial might and fire power. So when Sri Lanka says that she has an India-first security policy, it’s almost like saying ‘don’t worry, we will align ourselves with your interests and we will not shift loyalty.’ India-first is essentially ‘China is not first.’
India’s Deputy High Commissioner in Colombo Vinod K Jacob has found this ‘encouraging.’ Would India feel encouraged to be still more in-your-face, is that what he means? He could be thinking ‘encouraged by the prospects for better relations,’ but we know that countries love themselves, not others. Others, they use, if they can, and subdue if they can’t.
The generous reading is as follows: Sri Lanka understanding that India, having cottoned on to the Belt and Road Initiative rather late in the day, is jittery about China (so is the USA and this is what the ‘Quad’ which includes Japan and Australian is all about), offers an assurance, a good neighborly gesture.’
Prime Minister Narendra Modi has responded (and how!) in a virtual bilateral summit with the Sri Lankan Prime Minister Mahinda Rajapaksa. Pleasantries were exchanged first. They did the we-are-old-friends number. Rajapaksa listed recent Indian gifts, said ‘thanks.’ Modi eventually got down to business. He called on the new government ‘to work towards realizing the expectations of Tamils for equality, justice, peace and dignity within a united Sri Lanka by achieving reconciliation nurtured by implementation of the Constitutional provisions (as in the 13th Amendment).’ This, he believes, is non-negotiable if there’s to be peace and reconciliation.
When ‘should’ is used instead of ‘could,’ it is presumptuous. It’s like Modi saying ‘Thanks for having an us-first policy, but we are not saying you-first” and neither are we budging from positions we have taken — just do as we say!’First, the background. India imposed the 13th Amendment on Sri Lanka. India intervened at a point when the Sri Lankan security forces had cornered the LTTE and the military defeat of terrorism was imminent. All this after India had (perhaps worried about the then Sri Lankan government’s pro-US stand) worked tirelessly to harass Sri Lanka; India funded terrorist outfits, armed and trained them. When Sri Lanka took the hits, didn’t collapse and in fact was about to overcome the threat, India moved in. The terrorist threat, which was hours away from being eliminated, flourished for 22 years more. Tens of thousands perished. India hit national dignity. India cost us dearly.
The fact of the matter is that we’ve functioned without the principal product of the amendment, the provincial councils, for several years. No one is complaining.
And yet, Modi pins Tamil aspirations to the 13th Amendment and insists that this is how we get peace and reconciliation! As though India was ever interested in ‘Tamil aspirations’! The then Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi wanted to Bhutanize Sri Lanka. High ups in the Indian Peace Keeping Force said it was a victory to stump Tamil parties and get Trinco and not Jaffna as the capital of the North-East. It was about Indian foreign policy prerogatives. India inserted clauses to subvert Sri Lanka’s right to commerce with other nations on matters of security. The accord sought to concretize random boundary lines in terms of a homeland claim that has no basis in terms of history, archaeological record or demography, effectively helping turn myth into fact. It was illegal to boot.
The bill was presented in part to Parliament. A 9-member bench of the Supreme Court could not conclude on constitutionality. They were divided 4-4. It took a Chief Justice (who happened to be a Tamil) to interpret the opinion of the 9th member in favor of ‘constitutional’. The Provincial Council bill was passed immediately after the Indo-Lanka Accord was signed, as though father and son were birthed together!
Most importantly India failed to deliver on its side of the bargain. India failed to get the LTTE to join the democratic process by laying down arms. The disarming was eventually done by Sri Lanka. So, in effect, Sri Lanka did India’s work for her AND Sri Lanka continues to affirm her side of the bargain as scripted in the Indo-Lanka Accord. A win-win situation for India, a coup some would say.
Modi has told Rajapaksa about a ‘united’ Sri Lanka. He believes the 13th would do it. Well, the LTTE rejected it. They wanted more. Modi forgets that constitutional enactment does not necessarily yield unity and more crucially, ‘united’ is not a constitutional term. It’s descriptive of levels of solidarity within a well-defined sphere. Modi, knowingly or unknowingly has adopted the Eelamist vocabulary. Eelamists use the word ‘united’ to mitigate antipathy regarding the term ‘federal.’ It sounds like ‘unitary’ but has nothing to do with such an arrangement.
So where do we stand now? Sri Lanka has gone the extra mile (the you-first gesture). India has said ‘thank you very much.’ India has not been moved by the gesture. Had India said ‘thanks bro, you do your thing, we won’t interfere — just leave China out of it,’ it would have been enough.
It’s like taking a hand extended in friendship, gripping it firm, emptying the vocabulary of a diplomat’s guidebook and then using the other hand to deliver a slap. It’s all disingenuous. India’s ‘Kashmir Policy’ is a cuss word. One doesn’t have to take sides on the conflict here, but Modi’s moves regarding Kashmir clearly haven’t taken into consideration ‘expectations of Kashmiris for equality, justice, peace and dignity within a united India by achieving reconciliation nurtured by implementation of the Constitutional provisions so necessary for peace and reconciliation.’
Good neighbors often chat during unplanned encounters at property-boundaries. A bad neighbor jumps over the fence, stomps over the flowers and condescendingly tells his/her neighbors that their happiness depends on following his/her blueprint for success, taking care to engineer a situation where the neighbors are hesitant to form/strengthen relations with other neighbors.
Narendra Modi played ‘bad neighbor.’ It’s not a good thing to play one neighbor against another. There’s a commonly used Sinhala phrase that illuminates: apita apey paaduwe inna denna. ‘Paaduwa’ refers to loss. So, it means, ‘alright, we’ll take the hit, but don’t worry about it….just don’t interfere.’
Elephants foraging for food on a refuse facility – Tharmaplan Tilaxan/Cover Images
Dozens of elephants have begun foraging for food at a dump nestled in a Sri Lankan jungle after it encroached on their habitat.
Photographs captured in the eastern Ampara district show the wild herd, which numbers almost 40, searching through mounds of plastic bags, which have since been discovered undigested in their excrement.
Microplastics and non-digestive polythene were also found in the elephants’ stomachs during postmortem examinations. Such waste poses a serious threat to the health of the herd.
It is thought the elephants gained access to the dump through a broken fence, although according to photographer Tharmapalan Tilaxan the garbage is now strewn through the surrounding forest.
He described the phenomenon as a destructive and unhealthy habit” and warned that no action had been taken to prevent the elephants entering the area in search of food.
Postmortems have shown the elephants have plastic products in their stomachs – Tharmaplan Tilaxan/Cover Images
The herd of elephants are now so accustomed to feeding in the area that they have begun crossing into neighbouring villages and paddy fields, adding to existing tensions between them and the locals.
For elephants, ingesting plastic can have devastating consequences.
Microplastics can block digestive tracts, alter feeding behaviour and diminish the urge to eat. Each of these factors can impact on the herd’s ability to reproduce and damage population numbers.
With their stomachs stuffed with plastic bags, herds often die of starvation.
The herd, which numbers just under 40, has turned to rooting through the rubbish dump – Tharmaplan Tilaxan/Cover Images
In 2019, Sri Lanka saw the highest number of elephant deaths since records began in 1948, according to environmental activists.
Around 361 died in Sri Lanka that year, with 85 per cent of these deaths caused by human activity, the Movement for Land and Agricultural Reform said.
It is thought the country has a wild elephant population of around 7,500.
Sri Lanka is ranked as the world’s fifth largest producer of plastic waste, with more than 50m kilograms of plastic wasted per day.
The new upcoming airline was conceived by four former senior captains with SriLankan Airlines and other international airlines, citing a conducive environment to expand aviation in Sri Lanka.
September 30 (Simple Flying) – Sri Lanka will be getting a new airline as of February 2021. The new startup, Spark Air, first plans to launch with cargo operations before expanding to carry passengers from the South Asian nation. These activities will be carried out with two dry-leased Airbus A330s.
According to Sri Lankan media outlet DailyFT, Spark Air’s Uditha Danawatta spoke to journalists in Colombo recently. Danwatte, the airline’s Air Head of Safety Management Systems Captain, says that the new upcoming airline was conceived by four former senior captains with SriLankan Airlines and other international airlines, citing a conducive environment to expand aviation in Sri Lanka.
Monetary investments will come from both local and foreign investors, although the amount has not been disclosed.
With this pandemic situation, we have to diversify operations and not just focus on passengers. There is a huge demand for cargo and this was one of the reasons we decided to go ahead with the project. As per our plan, we have many destinations in mind including even Los Angeles and it covers Asia, Europe, Africa and the Far East. We have also received enquiries for transit cargo,” -Captain Uditha Danawatta, Spark Air via DailyFT.
Airline representatives say that leasing companies have slashed prices providing an excellent opportunity for the startup.
Furthermore, Danawatta says that the new Sri Lankan government has been very supportive of this new startup, adding that there is a plan for new facility development, which will drive aviation development. We also have a very positive Director General of Aviation, who is keen to develop aviation in the country.”
What is happening with the airline now?
It’s probably quite generous to call Spark Air an airline now as it still has a long way to go before flying aircraft and generating revenue.
We know that a public notice has been released for Spark Air’s applications for an Air Operator Certificate and Airline License. These will need to be obtained to conduct International regular Transport Operations and Charter Operations carrying passengers, cargo, and mail. The new airline intends to go international right from the beginning, without any plans to operate domestically.
As mentioned above, Spark Air will launch with cargo operations first. However, the startup hopes to also provide MRO (Maintenance, Repair, and Overhaul) services out of the southern airport of Mattala Rajapaksa Hambantota Airport. Also at Mattala will be an office for Spark Air. The company will also have an office in Colombo – the nation’s capital.
Danwatta adds that this will employ over 2,000 highly-skilled locals. Recruitment for some of the company’s services and operations is expected to take place in December.
Providing more capacity for the country?
The airline says that the national carrier, SriLankan, does not have the capacity to ‘cater to everyone’ with its 26 aircraft and 7,000 staff. Danawatta compares and contrasts this with AirAsia, which has 110 aircraft and 2,500 staff.How can SriLankan make profits? The management has clearly not been successful,”he says.
Danawatta goes on to cite the high frequency and capacity offered by Qatar Airways as justification for another airline:
[SriLankan] was lagging with incompetent people; the right people must go for the right job. Qatar Airways flew five times a week to Colombo from Doha using 777 and [A]340 aircraft. They are carrying all our passengers when we could get those passengers into our airlines. Why are we giving all that money to Qatar? But SriLankan cannot cater to that requirement with the available number of aircraft. We can explore operations to many other destinations, it does not have to be destinations already serviced by SriLankan.” -Captain Uditha Danawatta, Spark Air via DailyFT
From the Simple Flying perspective, this premise is a little bit flawed. Yes, there may have been a respectable demand for travel between Colombo and Doha. However, it’s almost guaranteed that a large portion of that passenger traffic was connecting through Doha and travelling onwards to other destinations in Qatar Airways‘ expansive and diverse global network.
Therefore, unless Sri Lanka’s airlines are willing to do the same, it seems unfair to use only Qatar’s frequency to justify the new airline. If Spark Air can identify and secure the most lucrative international routes for both cargo and passengers, and utilize its A330s for them, it might just have a chance at success.
The Chinese and Sri Lankan governments are set to discuss the progress of Colombo Port City project, which is a planned offshore city in Sri Lanka.
The Chinese and Sri Lankan governments are set to discuss the progress of Colombo Port City project, which is a planned offshore city in Sri Lanka.
Valued at $1.4bn, the China Communications Construction Co (CCCC)-funded project was scheduled to be launched on 17 September 2014 by the then Sri Lankan President Mahinda Rajapaska and the Chinese President Xi Jinping.
Under the terms of the agreement between the respective governments, the Chinese developers were due to buy 20 hectares of freehold land under the Port City project.
“China is willing to help Sri Lanka to improve the infrastructure, bring in more employment opportunities and improve the wellbeing of all Sri Lankans.”
However, under the new leadership of Sri Lankan President Maithripala Sirisena, the project remained under review until recently, citing lack of necessary permits and approvals.
According to CCCC, the shutdown of the project would result in losses of more than $380,000 a day, reported Reuters.
Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs division Director and Counsellor Chen Feng was quoted by media sources as saying: “The most important factor is to enhance the mutual understanding between the two countries. I think the two governments are now gradually working towards coming back to the normal track and all the projects will restart soon.
“China is willing to help Sri Lanka to improve the infrastructure, bring in more employment opportunities and improve the wellbeing of all Sri Lankans.”
Last month, the Sri Lankan Cabinet agreed to appoint a new committee to address the issues of the Port City project following a recommendation by Ports and Shipping Minister Arjuna Ranatunga, marking the recommence of the project, reported Xinhua News.
The UK’s new Student route and Child Student route will open on October 5, 2020 to the best and brightest international students from across the globe including from Sri Lanka, the British High Commission said today.
British High Commissioner to Sri Lanka, Sarah Hulton, said, This is a great opportunity for students in Sri Lanka who wish to study in the UK. With four of the world’s top ten universities in the UK and over 150 universities to choose from, the UK offers phenomenal opportunities for students looking for outstanding personal development opportunities.”
The High Commission in a statement said, As a result of coronavirus, some overseas students are choosing to defer their entry onto courses in the UK until the spring semester of 2021. Introducing these new routes now means that students will be able to benefit from the new streamlined process whilst still giving sponsors time to adapt after their autumn intake.
The routes will ensure the UK’s world-leading education sector can continue to welcome talented and high potential students to their globally renowned universities, further education and English language colleges, and independent schools.
There will be no limit on the number of international students who can study in the UK. This will help to increase the total number of international students choosing to study in the UK higher education system each year to 600,000 by 2030, as set out in the International Education Strategy published in March 2019.
Chief Executive of the Russell Group Dr Tim Bradshaw said: We welcome these changes to the immigration rules, which will help to ensure the UK remains an internationally attractive place to study. We will continue to work with the government to ensure our visa system remains flexible and responsive to developing issues, such as those emerging from the coronavirus pandemic.”
The new Student route improves on the previous Tier 4 route by making it more streamlined for sponsoring institutions and their students, creating clearer pathways for students, and ensuring the UK remains competitive in a changing global education market.
Students will require a total of 70 points to be granted leave. They will achieve the required points if they can demonstrate that they have an offer from an approved educational institution, speak English and are able to support themselves during their studies in the UK.
The UK also want to ensure they retain talented students to continue to contribute to the UK post-study, which is why they are launching the Graduate route in the summer of 2021. This additional new route will allow those who have completed a degree at a UK Higher Education provider with a track record of compliance to stay in the UK for two years (three years for PhD graduates) and work at any skill level, and to switch into work routes if they find a suitable job.
Chevening – the UK government’s prestigious fully-funded scholarship programme is now open for applications. Seven scholars are currently making their way to the UK to commence their postgraduate degrees, and the British High Commission are looking forward to receiving a diverse range from Sri Lankan applicants for 2021.
This is a unique opportunity for talented Sri Lankans with leadership potential to develop professionally and academically, network extensively, experience UK culture and build lasting positive relationships with the UK. The application window for Chevening closes on 3 November 2020. Interested applicants can find more information on the programme by visiting www.chevening.org,” the statement said.
Prime Minister Mahinda Rajapaksa today declared open Sri Lanka’s largest pharmaceutical manufacturing and research facility at Pitipana, Homagama.
Morison PLC, the largest oral solid dosage pharmaceutical manufacturer in Sri Lanka and a subsidiary of Hemas Holdings PLC, has invested a total of USD 18.5 million for the new Research and Manufacturing facility.
Several Cabinet Ministers and dignitaries also graced the event as special guests, including Minister of Health Pavithra Wanniarachchi, State Minister of Production, Supply and Regulation of Pharmaceuticals Prof. Channa Jayasumana, State Minister of Skills Development, Vocational Education, Research and Innovation Dr. Seetha Arambepola and Secretary to Minister of Trade Dr. Sunil Navaratne.
The new state-of-the-art manufacturing plant and research & development facility is located within the Sri Lanka Institute of Nano Technology (SLINTEC) Park in Homagama.
It is the first European Union-Good Manufacturing Practice (EU-GMP) compliant oral solid dosage manufacturing plant in Sri Lanka.
The facility is ready to commence validation batches and is expected to start commercial production early next year, supporting the Government’s aim to manufacture essential medicines locally.
The foundation stone for the plant was laid on 15th of June in 2017 in the presence of top management officials.
The Maritime Rescue Coordination Centre (MRCC) in Colombo has granted permission to the owners of the fire-stricken crude oil tanker ‘MT New Diamond’ to tow the vessel away from Sri Lankan maritime border.
Permission has been given subject to the payment of compensation and cost incurred by the Government agencies.
The Spokesperson of Sri Lanka Navy, Captain Indika De Silva said the owners of ‘MT New Diamond’ are already in the process of towing the vessel away from Sri Lankan waters.
It is likely to sail towards the United Arab Emirates (UAE), where its oil cargo would be transferred to another ship for further supplies to Indian Oil Corp.
Two navy ships are shadowing the tanker until it leaves Sri Lanka’s 200 -mile exclusive economic zone,” Captain De Silva added.
At around 8.30 am on September 03, the oil tanker ‘MT New Diamond’, sailing 38 nautical miles off Sangamankanda Point east of Sri Lankan seas, was engulfed by fire following an explosion of a boiler in the main engine room.
The tanker was transporting 270,000 metric tons of crude oil from the port of Mina Al Ahmadi in Kuwait to the Indian port of Paradip when it faced with this unfortunate turn of events. It was also reported that 1,700 metric tons of diesel required for the use of the tanker were stored onboard.
The vessel was subsequently towed to safe waters and the Sri Lanka Navy, Sri Lanka Air Force, Sri Lanka Ports Authority, Sri Lanka Coast Guard, Indian Defence Forces and the Indian Coast Guard had doused the fire in a joint operation.
Owners and the salvors of the ill-fated crude oil tanker had later agreed to immediately and fully settle the government’s claim Rs 442 million for the costs incurred by the Sri Lankan government in the assistance rendered to the ship and other related matters.
The Attorney General’s Department on Thursday (01) announced that the negotiation pertaining to claim regarding marine pollution caused by the oil tanker are pending and that the other claims are yet to be settled by its owners.
The Marine Environment Protection Authority (MEPA) had meanwhile said that approval cannot be granted to the crude oil tanker to leave Sri Lankan waters until the negotiations conclude.
The Central Bank of Sri Lanka (CBSL) today (02) successfully completed the settlement of the maturing International Sovereign Bond of USD 1 billion along with the due coupon payments, on behalf of the Government of Sri Lanka.
In a statement, the CBSL said this settlement reconfirms the Government’s unwavering commitment to honour its foreign liabilities, thereby bolstering investor confidence and dispelling any concerns foreign investors may have in relation to the Government’s ability and willingness to maintain its unblemished debt servicing record.
The domestic foreign exchange market has already reacted positively to this settlement and other recent positive developments in the Sri Lankan economy, the CBSL added.
With the envisaged inflows to the domestic foreign exchange market supported by proactive measures taken by the Government and the Central Bank of Sri Lanka, the market sentiment is expected to further strengthen in the period ahead, it read further.
Former Defence Secretary Hemasiri Fernando told the Presidential Commission of Inquiry probing the Easter Sunday terror attacks that the value of national security was put on the back burner behind politics by the leaders of the country at the time.
He alleged that the usual national security chain of command was left in tatters owing to certain officials reporting crucial intelligence information directly to then-President Maithripala Sirisena, bypassing the Defence Secretary.
He further alleged that the open animosity between the former President and former Prime Minister left a massive gap in the chain of command.
During the proceedings, the Additional Solicitor General of the Government asked the witness whether his experience as a naval officer was sufficient for the role despite having served as the Defence Secretary.
Fernando replied: Since I served in the Navy, I thought it would be an additional qualification for the position, but now I believe it puts me at a disadvantage.”
The PCoI then asked him, What additional qualifications did you think this gave you? did you think it was an additional qualification to get the post of Defence Secretary?”
In response, Fernando said he considered it a great honour to have served as a naval officer.
When questioned of the reason for not even attempting to telephone the former President Sirisena regarding the intelligence warning received prior to the Easter attack, Fernando replied, I didn’t call him, and I must explain my reasons for that. Two days after assuming the position, I went to meet the then-President to get his signature on some documents. At that time, I had received the first intelligence report from the State Intelligence Service (SIS) which I informed him about. At that point, the President looked at me and said that Nilantha had informed him about it. On a separate occasion when Nilantha gave me another intelligence report, I told the President about it when I went to meet him, but he told me again that Nilantha had already informed him about it.”
Continuing, he said, When I met Nilantha I asked him of the meaning of this procedure to which he responded by saying that he informs the President about every piece of information he receives. And that he also informs the Defence Secretary too. So, I assumed that he must have already told the President about the attack warnings at the time. After the attacks, I went to meet the President to hand over my resignation as the Defence Secretary, he was reading the newspapers at the time. I asked him then as to why Nilantha, who had informed him about everything else, failed to report him about this information. To this, the President did not offer a response and continued to read his newspaper.
Subsequently, the chairman of the PCoI on Easter Sunday attacks asked the witness if he had asked the former SIS director Senior DIG Nilantha Jayawardena whether he had informed the President, when Nilantha gave him the intelligence warning on April 20.
Mahinda Rajapaksa is a democratically elected leader who received a massive mandate of 71% of votes, and he owes nothing to Delhi or Washington for staging his political comeback, observes Ambassador M K Bhadrakumar.
IMAGE: Prime Minister Narendra Damodardas Modi holds a discussion with his Sri Lankan counterpart Mahinda Rajapaksa, September 26, 2020
The virtual summit between the Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi and his Sri Lankan counterpart Mahinda Rajapaksa turned out to be somewhat surreal.
The summit was the first of its kind Modi has had with any South Asian leader.
The expectations were high. But fault lines have appeared.
On the core issue of the Sri Lankan Tamil problem, the joint statement (external link) issued after the September 26 summit says, ‘Prime Minister Modi called on the Government of Sri Lanka to address the aspirations of the Tamil people for equality, justice, peace and respect within a united Sri Lanka including by carrying forward the process of reconciliation with the implementation of the Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution of Sri Lanka. Prime Minister Mahinda Rajapaksa expressed the confidence that Sri Lanka will work towards realising the expectations of all ethnic groups including Tamils, by achieving reconciliation nurtured as per the mandate of the people of Sri Lanka and implementation of the Constitutional provisions.’
Clearly, Rajapaksa failed to give any commitment regarding the implementation of the 13th Amendment enacted by the previous government, which came to power in 2015 after his ouster.
Instead, he has spoken of the ‘expectations of all ethnic groups including Tamils’ and has stated his intention to ‘nurture’ national reconciliation ‘as per the mandate’ he received in the February election and the relevant constitutional provisions.
Interestingly, Rajapaksa also called Modi’s attention to the ‘massive mandate’ that he received from the electorate.
Rajapaksa said, ‘It is our responsibility to work for all, with all.’
In sum, he has conveyed to Modi that the reconciliation process must have acceptability among the majority Sinhala community — implying that Delhi is barking up the wrong tree.
The irony is that the Modi government too practises a majoritarian ideology within India.
There is already a demand from the Sinhalese majority community that the 13th Amendment should be scrapped.
Nonetheless, Modi decided to press ahead. Effectively, Rajapaksa has pushed back at Modi’s emphatic demand that the implementation of the 13th Amendment is ‘essential’.
The Sri Lankan Tamil problem has had a geopolitical dimension, historically.
India has been a star performer on that diplomatic turf.
The Indian intervention took different forms at different times.
Since the late 1970s, for a decade Delhi used the Tamil problem to pressure the pro-western Sri Lankan leadership of then president J R Jayewardene (1978-1989).
But Colombo exhibited exemplary diplomatic skill to ward off India’s intrusive policies.
By the mid-1980s Jayewardene brilliantly outmanoeuvred Delhi by enticing it to jettison its previous role as the mentor of the Tamil militant groups and instead be their terminator, and in the process wearing out Delhi so comprehensively that it somehow extricated itself altogether from the Sri Lankan nationality question, finally, to count its losses.
Through the next two decades, geopolitics took a back seat in the Indian calculus, which immensely helped Colombo to successfully defeat the Tamil separatist groups by 2008 after twenty-six years of conflict.
Enter the Modi government.
Geopolitics began staging a comeback almost overnight in 2014, thanks to the animus against China in the Modi government’s foreign policy.
By January 2015, for the first time in Sri Lankan history, external powers orchestrated a regime change in Colombo ousting the staunchly nationalist leadership of Rajapaksa who was perceived as ‘pro-China’ in Delhi and Washington.
A unique feature of the regime change project was that the Tamils organised under the Tamil National Alliance was grated on to it to overthrow an established Sinhala-led government in Colombo.
The TNA will carry this opprobrium for a long time to come.
It was not in Tamil interests to have identified with what was quintessentially a geopolitical project.
In retrospect, although the futility of the 2015 regime change project soon dawned on them, Delhi and Washington decided to double down on the Sri Lankan turf.
This is so because Rajapaksa’s return to power in Colombo has coincided with the surge of the US-Indian ‘Indo-Pacific strategy’ to contain China.
The new agenda is to bring the Rajapaksa government into the orbit of the Quad (Quadrilateral Alliance between the US, Japan, India and Australia.)
But the Sri Lankan nationalists are unwilling to take sides between the Quad and Beijing — as indeed most countries in the Asian continent.
Hence the renewed use of the Tamil problem to pile pressure on Colombo.
The ‘humanitarian intervention’ in Sri Lanka is in pursuit of a geopolitical agenda. But Mahinda Rajapaksa is a democratically elected leader who received a massive mandate of 71% of votes, and he owes nothing to Delhi or Washington for staging his political comeback.
The virtual summit last week reveals that Sri Lankan nationalism continues to militate against Delhi’s intrusive policy.
Delhi has baited the Sri Lankan religious establishment with a $15 million grant ‘for promotion of Buddhist ties’, but Colombo will remain vigilant about Indian intentions in cultivating the powerful Buddhist clergy.
The modus operandi in the 2014-2015 period to destabilise the incumbent government must be still fresh in memory.
Colombo is in a far better position than at anytime before to counter US-Indian intervention in Sri Lanka’s internal affairs.
Fundamentally, there is a contradiction insofar as while Sri Lanka’s external policies are driven by geo-economic considerations, the agenda pursued by India and the US is paramountly geopolitical, drawn from a perspective that the island is a ‘permanent aircraft carrier’, as a former Indian national security advisor once candidly put it.
The induction of Quad into the Indian Ocean region is an urgent necessity for the US’s Indo-Pacific strategy.
An American military presence in Sri Lanka would enable the US to advance a so-called ‘island chain strategy’ to control the sea lanes of the Indian Ocean, which are of vital importance to China’s foreign trade.
Top US officials have been threatening the Sri Lankan government since last year that unless it cooperated with the Indo-Pacific strategy, its human rights record in the war against Tamil separatists in the 2007-2008 period will be held against it and there will be hell to pay.
Without doubt, Rajapaksa accepted Modi’s invitation to the virtual summit anticipating the likelihood of the Sri Lankan Tamil problem being brought to the forecourt of the bilateral discourse.
He was ready with a response.
Delhi should think hard how far it is in India’s interests to be seen hawking the US’s Indo-Pacific strategy in the South Asian region.
Ambassador M K Bhadrakumar, a frequent contributor to Rediff.com, served the Indian Foreign Service for 29 years.
