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.
A new constitution is being planned and a committee
comprised of leading intellectuals has been appointed to draft it. One of the
difficult issues the committee would have to grapple with would be the ethnic
issue. Several aspects of the ethnic issue may have to be taken into
consideration when tackling this matter; its genesis and evolution, involvement of foreign powers, attempts at
resolution, 13th Amendment and Provincial Councils may be some of
these aspects.
Genesis and Evolution
Origin and growth of the Tamil ultra-nationalism could
be traced back to the times before independence in the 1920s. During that time
there had been cordial relations among leaders of all three communities and
they had formed the Ceylon National Congress with Ponnambalam Arunachalam, a
Tamil, as its president. The Tamil leaders felt quite comfortable in the
Legislative Council as they had equal representation with the Sinhalese though
they were a minority community. The devide-and-rule policy of the British
rulers had caused this anomaly in the composition of the Legislative
Council. This was due to the fact that
only the English educated people were entitled to vote and there were
proportionately more English educated Tamils than Sinhalese. However when the
Colonial authorities granted voting rights for swabasha” educated people also
in 1921 the number entitled to vote increased from 3013 in 1917, to 54207 and
this number grew to 189335 by 1924. The Tamil leadership resented the idea of the Tamils becoming a minority in the
Legislative Council . In 1917 they were equal in number to the Sinhalese but by
1921 their proportion fell to 1/4th. This they could not stomach and
consequently the Tamil leaders left the Ceylon National Congress. They formed their
own Tamil National Congress thereby perhaps causing the first rupture in
national unity.
The Tamil leaders did not stop at that, Ponnambalam
Ramanathan went to London to request the British authorities not to grant the
Donoughmore Commission recommendations in 1931 which included scrapping the
communal based voting system and implimenting population based franchise. Tamils could not reconcile to the fact that
Sinhalese becoming a majority and Tamils a minority would be the natural
outcome of universal franchise. Tamils did not want to give the rightful place
to the Sinhalese as the majority in the country. GG Ponnambalam asked for a 50%
represetation for the Tamils in the legislature.
When independence was being considered in 1947 GG
Ponnambalam petitioned the British authorities demanding a separate state for
the Tamils and if that is not possible not to grant independence to Sri Lanka.
Ramanathan as far back as 1916 together with Ambalavanar Kanagasabe had been for some time engaged in
communal politics (see K M de Silva, A History of Sri Lanka, p 393). These
activities perhaps were the cause and origin of Tamil communal politics and
separatism in Sri Lanka. Sinhalese at that stage were not at all involved in its causation. Though there were
several Sinhalese organisations such as Theosophical Society of Ceylon”,
Ceylon National Association” and Anagarika Dharmapala’s anti-alcohol
organisation, they had nothing to do with the seeds of dissention and conflict
being sown by the Tamil leaders.
As a result of this intransigence of the Tamil
leadership and the development of ideas about autonomy the Donoughmore
Commission and also the Sinhalese leaders like SWRD started to talk about
devolving political and administrative power to provincial councils as a means
of appeasing the Tamils. Leaders like SJV Chelvanayagam carried these ideas
forward and in 1957 at Vadukodai took the extreme stand of calling the Tamil
youth to take up arms to win their rights. This call came to fruition and the
LTTE was born in the 1980s. India helped the LTTE to wage an armed struggle.
This India did for geopolitical reasons and eventually they forced the JRJ
government to accept the 13th Amendment and provincial councils as a
political solution to the ethnic problem.
However provincial councils and regional autonomy
though had been in discussion since 1920s
could never be granted by leaders like SWRD, Dudley, JRJ all of whom
withdrew their proposals because they knew granting it was political harakiri.
That is how finally it came to be forced down our throats by Rajiv Gandhi who
had his local South Indian politics and also geopolitical issues to contend with. However, there was
opposition to this high handed act within the government ranks and the JVP
organized wide spread riots which had to be controlled by a declaration of
curfew. The people of Sri Lanka have never endorsed the 13th A or
regional autonomy.
Western involvement
Western powers for geopolitical reasons have got
involved in our internal affairs. They would like to have a foothold on Sri
Lanka. They have an intimate knowledge of the ethnic conflict and would not
hesitate to make use of it to destabilize the country and create opportunities
for their involvement and interference.
Sri Lanka due to its strategic importance has become an arena for global
hegemonic rivalry in the Indian Ocean region. Western powers want to thwart the
rising power and influence of China in the region. The LTTE was a useful tool
in their hands, they helped it to raise funds in their countries and purchase
arms. The Tamil Diaspora domiciled in these countries developed into politically influential pressure groups and
consequently politicians in these countries started to raise a voice for the
Tamil course. They spoke on their behalf not only in their parliaments but also
in UN bodies. Some called for a separate Tamil state. Trumped up charges of
human rights violations were liberally utilized to pressure Sri Lanka to fall
in line and support their agendas.
Thus the so called Tamil problem was blown out of
proportion in the global context. Western countries could not see evidence of
discremination or oppression of Tamils in Sri Lanka yet they got involved
because of Indian Ocean geopolitics and local politics in their own countries
due to the presence of a substantial vote base of Tamil Diaspora. India was
involved for similar geopolitical reasons.
Thus the global involvement is not due to the true
nature of the Tamil problem in Sri Lanka or its seriousness or importance but
due to the hegemonic agendas of the
global and regional powers. Therefore the question arises whether Sri Lanka
should take into serious consideration and be influenced by the position taken
up by the Western countries regarding the Tamil problem.
The present state of the global power situation will
also have to be taken into consideration. How much pressure could the Western
countries excert on Sri Lanka, how much could Sri Lanka resist and what would
India’s and China’s stand be in this regard are going to be the factors that
govern the determination of the course of action Sri Lanka has to adopt. Sri
Lanka had to capitulate when India
forced the 13th A on us as USA or any other world power
opposed to India did not come to the rescue of Sri Lanka. Today the situation
is different, the West is not as powerful as before, China has enormous stake
in Sri Lanka in connection with its Belt and Road project and India may not
want to get involved as much as it did earlier. Western countries and India
would not want to resort to military intervention. The worst they would do is
enforcement of trade sanctions. Economic effects of such an action would be
mitigated to some degree by Chinese inputs for the latter would not want Sri
Lanka to collapse.
Attempts at resolution and their failure
From the time of its origin there had been serious
discussions to find a solution to the Tamil problem. It is unfortunate that the
Tamil leadership has refused to understand the real nature of the Tamil problem
and see the unfairness of the position they take up when negotiating for a settlement, for example the non-negotiable
conditions comprising Four Principles put forward at Thimphu talks and the
proposal for merger of North and East. Moreover the reluctance of governments
to grant what is agreed upon at discussions and withdrawal from pacts entered
into must also be taken into consideration with greater understanding by the
Tamil leaders.
For example SWRD Bandaranayake withdrew from the pact
he entered into with SJV Chelvanayagam and so did Dudley Senanayake. JR
Jayawardena had discussions with Tamil leaders and also with Rajiv Gandhi and
had the 10th Amendment
drafted as a solution but did not take steps to implement any decisions they
may have agreed upon until the latter forced him to accept the 13th
Amendment. Often the reluctance of Sinhala leaders to implement devolution
policies are misconstrued as lacking in political courage and ideological
strength whereas the correct reading would be that they did not want to commit
political suicide. Even the forceful introduction of the 13th A
caused lot of opposition within the government as well as riots by the JVP and
boycotts by the SLFP. Further the full
implimentation of the 13th A has not been possible and the once merged
North and East PCs have been demerged.
The previous government presented to the parliament a
new constitution with federal features. What happened to those responsible for
this deceitful deed must be taken into serious consideration by the Tamil political
leadership. They were wiped out from the political scene and people gave a 2/3rd
majority to the new government to ensure that such things will not happen in
the future and a new constitution would be enacted that would secure the
integrity of the people’s single sovereignty and the territory of their
country.
The Sinhalese may never agree to allow a minority
community to have special rights over part of the land that belongs to
everybody. Further it is not the fair and just method to solve the ethnic
problem. As more than half of the Tamils live outside the North a provincial
arrangement with devolved administrative and political powers would obviously
be not the best way to solve their problem. There may be better options of
sharing political power that suits the country and the people.
13th Amendment
13th A and provincial councils were
introduced to Sri Lanka as a solution to the ethnic problem but they were
created by foreign vested interests to solve their problems than ours. Indira Gandhi was tilted towards the USSR in
the global power equation and JRJ was pro USA.
JRJ’s foreign policy was disliked
in New Delhi and Gandhi wanted to make JRJ realise the realities of regional
geopolitics and she sponsored the Tamil terrorist groups. After she was
assasinated her successor Rajiv continued
her policies. Rajiv Gandhi had two issues regarding Sri Lanka which he had
inherited from his mother. One was the danger of Sri Lanka’s
political leadership allowing the USA to use Sri Lanka to destabilize
India and the other was the need to keep the South Indian politicians appeased
with regard to the Tamil problem in Sri Lanka. He tried to achieve both goals
by forcing JRJ to accept the 13th A which was designed to grant
regional devolution and also to prevent the USA from using Sri Lanka to act
against the interests of India.
However the LTTE did not accept it and waged war
against the Sri Lankan government. Negotiations with them always failed as
their goal was a seperate state or something close to it. They were militarily
defeated but their idealogy is carried forward by the present Tamil political
leadership. Obviously Tamil politicians have not come to terms with reality,
the impossibility of getting what they want. Or what is more probable is they
are abusing the national emotions of Tamil people for political gain. They
should know that when they resort to demanding the impossible the Sinhalese
will close rank as happened at the recent presidential and general elections
and no government can go beyond what is granted at present i.e. 13th
A without land and police powers. This arrangement, however, does not solve the
problems of the Tamils and other minorities as they are widely distributed in
the country.
The 13th A with its Land and Police powers
hangs over us like a Sword of Damocles which could eventually pave the way for
a separate state.
Provincial Councils
It is utterly absurd to divide this little island into
nine political and administrative areas. It is too small to be divided. More
than 50% of the Tamils, for whom one of these areas are demarcated with some
autonomy, live outside that area, therefore this division does not serve the
purpose.
Several
Provinces have existed without their Councils with no breakdown of essential
services to the people for more than one year due to elections not being held.
PCs were created as a solution to the so called ethnic Tamil problem but the
silence of Tamil politicians on the issue of delay in elections to the Northern
PC is deafening to say the least. If they can do without their PC there cannot
be an ethnic problem of enormous magnitude which necessitated the introduction by force of the 13th A by
India.
Moreover the Provincial Councils do not serve any
useful purpose. Instead it is another bureaucratic barrier to the people that increase
the red tape, inconvenience, number of corrupt politicians that people have to
bribe to get any official work done. The work done by these PCs could easily be
carried out by the GA and the kachcheri system we had previously without the
involvement of politicians. Similarly administrative power could be devolved to
the North through the local government institutions. Thus the 13th A
and its offspring the provincial councils could be done away with bringing
great benefit to the people including Tamils.
Possible methods of resolving the Ethnic problem
What the Tamils want is political and administrative
power that would enable them to manage their own affairs in the areas of their
habitation and also have a say in the affairs of their country. Administration
can be decentralized via the existing local government institutions. These
institutions could be further empowered to attend to the needs of the people at
grass root level. District level administration via district secretaries which
could be similar to the government agent system of yore could also be
strengthened without the yoke of the provincial council. If the local
administration which is the system that has to work in intimacy with the people
and solve their day to day problems could be comprehensively strengthened and
streamlined more than half the problem would be solved. The PCs didn’t do this,
instead they made the local administration more cumbersome.
There are several options for solving the political
power sharing issue. The methods that have been discussed by political
scientists of repute fall under two broad categories: (1) classical” political power sharing which they like to
call Consociationalism and (2) Integrationism which is also called
Centrepetalism (Horowitz, 2000) . The former could have four areas of power
sharing; 1) coalition government, 2) proportionality at all activities like
education, employement etc., 3) minority veto for selected subjects and 4)
autonomy at the periphery for minority groups. Autonomy at the periphery has
been tried in Sri Lanka with little success.
In Integrationism, which is propounded by those who
oppose Consociationalism, there is encouragement for cross ethnic cooperation
and fair allocation of resources. Very often a combination of features from the
two methods are found to be more effective and moreover are found to have
caused less possibility of enhancing ethnic differences and recurrence of
conflict (Waller & Wolf,2011).
A study carried out on 62 African and Asian countries
has shown that horizontal power sharing, (which means power sharing at the
centre), was more successful than vertical power sharing, (which means power
sharing at the perphary) (Linder & Bachtiger 2005). Instead of political
power devolution at the periphery which has proved to be a failure in Sri Lanka
and which doesn’t solve the problem that pertains to the minorities distributed
all over the country, an arrangement at the centre may be more suitable.
Sri Lanka may benefit from a method that combines power
sharing at the centre and the principle of proportionality in all allocations
and appointments. The former could be institutionlized either with a second
chamber or ensuring minority representation in proportion to their population
ratios in all three arms of the government; the executive, the legislature and
the judiciary. The power of the sovereignty which belongs to the people is
placed in the custody of the president in a presidential system of government.
The president delegates this power to the cabinet, the parliament and to the
judiciary. This tenet need not be changed so that the single sovereignty is not
jeopardised.
Proportionality which is the other major arm of the
power sharing mechanism suitable for Sri Lanka, which has to be based on ethnic
ratios as mentioned earlier, could be adopted with constitutional guarantee,
with regard to appointments to high posts and allocation of resources for
education, employement, culture and religious matters and other vital subjects.
Unfortunately for
India, PM Modi follows the outdated approach of using Tamil problems as a
negotiation tool with Sri Lanka. It never worked and does not work today. Tamil
interests are neither in Sri Lanka’s nor India’s favour. Rajiv Gandhi did
manage to gain some temporary leverage in 1985 and 1987 at a time when China
played a minor role beyond its boundaries and USA was the biggest threat to
India. Even then Sri Lanka reached out to Pakistan and China to counter Tamil
interests. In 2009 India made another 1987-style last ditch attempt to save
Tamil terrorists but having learned from 1987, Sri Lankan military very
cleverly checkmated India. Had India invaded Lanka in 2009 as it did in 1987, a
large number of Tamils in Menik Farm and Jaffna would have died in the
crossfire. It couldn’t have saved the LTTE anyway and would have implicated
India in war crimes.
India’s real
interests are in safeguarding maritime trade routes, keeping Indian territory
safe from attacks and warding off separatism. Sri Lanka’s national interest
perfectly aligns with that of India in all these aspects. Therefore, India must
engage Sri Lanka at the national interest level only which will be a
sustainable win-win for both countries.
India is
basically an island with no land trade routes. This is because India has
offended all its neighbors! A sad plight due to India’s appetite to interfere
in domestic affairs of neighboring countries. If war breaks out, India will be
totally isolated with only sea routes taking and bringing in trade. An
adversary only has to attack India’s few ports and Delhi will be forced to
surrender (or suffer massive economic and social upheaval). Given these facts,
India must not get distracted with wayside issues like Tamil problems.
India’s
reliance on USA is not as rock-solid as its past reliance on the Soviet Union.
USA will not defend India against an attack but will use India to achieve US
interests and then leave it high and dry. The same happened to Pakistan, Iraq,
South Vietnam, Georgia, Ukraine, etc. US interests are best served by dividing
India. Southern states have the largest economies, most pro-US views, biggest
business with USA and no border wars. Splitting India into north and south
works best for USA.
Another
headache India has is the role of nuclear-armed Pakistan. An India-China war
will sufficiently ruin India that it will struggle to face off against Pakistan
if another war breaks out over its Pakistani border.
Should India
make another enemy towards its south?
If India
wants dependable and sustainable safety from its south front, it must shed
Tamil issues and negotiate with Sri Lanka on the basis of national interests
only. Tamils are without a nation for a very good reason. India must not take
it upon itself to change Tamil destiny. All those who attempted it before ended
up in the rubbish bin of history.
Sri Lanka’s debt to GDP ratio is expected to be more than 90% this year, and Moody’s have downgraded Sri Lanka’s sovereign credit rating by two notches, saying the South Asian nation would be hard-pressed to secure funding to service its huge foreign debt. Sri Lanka was pushed down from “B2” (high credit risk) to “Caa1” (very high credit risk), as the coronavirus pandemic compounded its economic woes, Moody’s said in a statement.
Brief pre Republic Constitutional history
Sri
Lankans should be asking themselves whether the country’s Constitutions have
served them and whether they have provided the structural foundation for its democratic,
economic and social upliftment after 72 years of independence. Leaving aside
COVID and its impact, which is severe and worldwide, it does not appear that
Constitutions have provided this anchor of stability. Obviously, the fault lies
not with a piece of paper but those who drafted that piece of paper.
Sri
Lanka has had some form of constitutional governance for thousands of
years. True, there was no written
constitution, but the numerous Kings and Queens of Sri Lanka, although they had
absolute power, had varying forms of governance. He or she was head of state but would be aided
with high level officials and a board of ministers. The monarch was seen as the
supreme ruler of the areas they ruled. The monarch also held judicial
power and influence. Judicial customs, traditions and moral principles, in the
main, based on Buddhism were used as the basis for the laws promulgated by the Monarchs.
The laws and legal measures were proclaimed by the king, and were to be followed
by the justice administration. However, the king was the final judge in
legal disputes, and all cases against members of the royal family and high
dignitaries of the state were judged by him. Though, the king did have to
exercise this power with care and after consulting with his advisers
(Wikipedia).
One
definition of a constitution is that it is a body of fundamental principles or established precedents
according to which a state or other organization is acknowledged to be
governed. The Merriam Webster Dictionary[A1][A2] defines it as the basic principles and laws
of a nation, state, or social group that determine the powers and duties of the
government and guarantee certain rights to the people in it. Whilst not
conforming strictly with these definitions, historically, Sri Lanka cannot say
it functioned without Constitutions of some description.
To the
best of the writer’s knowledge there was no written constitution in Sri Lanka until
the British attempted to develop a representative government on the
island in 1833 through a constitution that created a legislative council. This
council was largely powerless, and it resigned in 1864 when their censure of
the British government was ignored. The British attempted several other
Constitutions to appease the populace in 1910, 1920, and 1924, but these
constitutions did not provide for local governance by the native population.
The Donoughmore Constitution of 1931 finally
gave some degree of authority to the elected representatives. The Soulbury
Constitution was introduced in 1945 and Sri Lanka, then Ceylon, was granted
independence under that Constitution in 1948. However, the country retained the
Monarch of the United Kingdom as its own Monarch, and exercised that link
through a Governor General as a Dominion. It took the country another 24 years,
till 1972, to come to its own as a Republic.
The Republic of Sri Lanka and thereafter.
The government of Mrs Sirimavo Bandaranaike
elected in 1970 with a two thirds majority established a Constitutional
Assembly comprising of all elected members of Parliament. After much discussion
within and with the civil society, and amidst some opposition from different
quarters, promulgated the new Constitution on the 22nd of May 1972.
A ceremonial Presidency replaced the Governor General and legislative and
executive power was transferred to the Parliament and the Prime Minister.
The government of Mr J R Jayewardene elected in
1977 with a 5/6 majority introduced a new Constitution in 1978 which instituted
a Presidential system of government with an all-powerful Executive President as
the Head of State, Head of the cabinet and the Head of the Armed Forces. The
role of the Prime Minister was reduced to almost nothing and as the Prime
Minister who was appointed by President Jayawardena had reportedly commented,
an Office Assistant (called a Peon), had more power than the Prime Minister”.
Since the enactment of the 1978 Constitution
there have been 19 Amendments to it, with the 20th now tabled in
Parliament. The current government has also appointed a Committee to draft a
new Constitution to replace the 1978 Constitution.
While Sri Lanka struggles with Constitutions and
amendments, it is noteworthy that the Colonial power that introduced formal
Constitutions to Sri Lanka, Britain, operates without a written Constitution, but
by an unwritten one formed of Acts of Parliament, court judgments
and conventions.
Professor Robert Blackburn explains this system,
including Magna Carta’s place within it statingwe certainly say that
we have a constitution, but it is one that exists in an abstract sense,
comprising a host of diverse laws, practices and conventions that have evolved
over a long period of time. The key landmark is the Bill of Rights (1689),
which established the supremacy of Parliament over the Crown following the
forcible replacement of King James II (r. 1685–88) by William III (r.
1689–1702) and Mary (r. 1689–94) in the Glorious Revolution (1688)”
Post independent Constitution making in Sri Lanka.
Perhaps with the exception of the 1972 Republican Constitution, it could
be argued that Constitution and amendment making have been significantly
influenced by personalities, and quests to perpetuate their powers. The
1972 Constitution could be described as an ideology driven exercise that freed Ceylon
from the remaining links to its Colonial master Britain, and established the
new Sri Lanka as its own master of destiny. While some may argue otherwise, it
is difficult to see how it enhanced and perpetuated the power of the Prime
Minister who already enjoyed executive power, although answerable to the
Parliament.
The 1978 Constitution on the other hand was a major shift where power was
transferred to a single individual, a President, invested with broad executive
powers and who was not responsible to the Parliament. Legislative power
remained with the Parliament but the 5/6th majority that the
Presidents political party enjoyed ensured that the legislative agenda was in
fact his agenda. In this context, it is difficult to argue against the fact
that the 1978 Constitution was personality driven and was a move to enhance an
individual’s power.
There
have been subsequent attempts to draft new Constitutions and perhaps the most controversial
one being the one authored by late Dr Neelan Tiruchelvam and Professor G L Peiris
during the Chandrika Kumaratunga Presidency. Dr Tiruchelvam paid with his life
for doing this as the LTTE murdered him as its leader Prabakaran regarded Dr
Tiruchelvam as a traitor for doing this.
The
18th and 19th Amendments to the 1978 Constitution show a
significant degree of personality politics. The 18th Amendment did
away with the term limits specified earlier (maximum of two terms to any
individual), and some of its other provisions reverted considerable powers that
were modified in the 17th Amendment. The 19th Amendment
sought to limit the powers of an individual bestowed with such powers in the 18th
Amendment and transferred most executive powers to the Parliament and the Prime
Minister.
Even
the drafters of the 19th Amendment concede that it had shortcomings
and they attribute this to the power rivalry between the President elected in
2015 under the 18th Amendment, and the Prime Minister who wanted
executive power shifted to the Office of the Prime Minister. They were from two
different major political parties in the country, and naturally, neither could
agree on a workable, sustainable solution. Their power rivalry retarded the
economic development of the country that had been gathering pace after the war
against the LTTE, and also resulted in the return of an Islamic terrorist
attack on innocent civilians praying in a Catholic Church killing more than 300
people.
Now,
the country has been presented with a draft of the 20th Amendment
which intends to return executive power back to the President and limiting the
role of the Prime Minister. Besides this, the amendment also changes some other
clauses in the 19th Amendment and reverts to what was in the 18th
Amendment in some instances. Here again, it is difficult to argue against the
contention presented by some that certain clauses in the 20th
Amendment have been introduced in order to strengthen the hand of an individual
rather than as measures to address anomalies in the 19th Amendment.
These contentions also extend to the belief that such clauses erode the
independence of the Independent Commissions.
The
conundrum facing Sri Lankans is the inability of the society and the people’s
representatives to enact a Constitution that is not personality oriented, that
is structurally strong, that is democratic and that acts as the anchor that
holds the ship of State steady when the water is calm and when it is turbulent.
There
are a few fundamental issues that have been pointed out by legal personalities.
Firstly, the question of exercise of people’s sovereignty. They contend that there
is confusion when two seats of power, the President, and the Parliament and the
Prime Minister, claim they represent that sovereignty. While the exercise of
that sovereignty can be more clearly defined, and powers assigned, in practice
it has proven to be a very difficult and challenging task.
The
country witnessed this confusion when Chandrika Kumaratunga was the President
and Ranil Wickremasinghe was the Prime Minister in 2002. Unknown to and without
any approval from the President, the Prime Minister entered into a peace accord
with the LTTE leader Prabakaran. The Parliament too was not consulted and
approval obtained for this.
The
issues between President Sirisena and Prime Minister Wickremasinghe between
2015 to 2019 are too numerous to mention, and they demonstrated the
unworkability of a divided exercise of people’s sovereignty beyond any doubt.
In
addition to this major issue, there is also a question mark as to whether
Parliament actually exercises people’s sovereignty. The current proportional
representation system, while it has its own merits, does not produce
Parliamentarians who effectively and for all intents and purposes, represent
the people who elect them to Parliament. It is a political party or an
independent group that is voted in, and people neither have any say in any
parties promises to the people, and programs nor how candidates are picked by
the parties to contest within a district. The
specific parliamentarians cannot be held accountable to the promises they made,
by the people who elected them.
People
only have the ability to pick amongst the list of such candidates with their
preference votes. Whatever the legal position on this and the view of
Constitutional Pundits, the end result for a voter is that no one directly represents
them in Parliament and people have no avenue to express their sovereign rights.
This major anomaly needs to be addressed.
The
other major issue is about how the rights and interests of minorities and women
find expression in the Constitution. The notion that all are equal in the eyes
of the law and the Constitution is a noble motherhood statement, but in
practice and in reality, this is not so. Both sections of society need
affirmative action to make sure the majority view does not trample on the rights
of these two major groups. Ironically, the female population in Sri Lanka in
fact is the majority population (almost 52%), yet, the country is dominated by
the male population as seen by the fact that there are only
12 female parliamentarians out of the total 225 in the newly elected
Parliament.
While
there is no doubt there are many other challenges, the above mentioned fundamental ones need to be addressed in a future Constitution. As opined
by some, the Constitution should have some key areas protected by law. Firstly,
how people’s sovereignty is to be exercised. Secondly, how the powers of the
President, the Parliament and the Prime Minister are to be assigned. Third, how
affirmative action is to be assured for minorities and women. The Sri Lankan
society will not be a just society unless and until these key policy areas are
addressed.
The
areas more in the limelight are issues like political devolution, and
self-determination for sections of the society. These issues arise due to the
weaknesses and/or lack of a coherent policy on the above mentioned three areas.
Political devolution to the provinces could become superfluous if a policy on
affirmative action for minorities and other disadvantaged groups is enshrined
in the Constitution. In its place, one could have more and more administrative
devolution as that will matter more for people when it comes to their day to
day lives. Something is not right if the President of the country has to
intervene to get a culvert done in a village or to get a leaking water pipe
fixed. These minor administrative matters, no doubt major ones for the
communities involved, has to be attended at grass root level. Administrative
devolution, rather than political devolution, and with the minimum of political
interference will serve the grass roots far more effectively than now.
Empowering
women through an affirmative action program will bring in a kinder society
where respect for them and their worth will be recognised as a requirement by
law. The unpaid contribution made by women to family welfare is enormous but
their contribution is not factored in any economic model. Domestic violence
perpetrated by male members of households should attract serious punitive
measures as preventive measures, and these need to be enshrined in law.
Affirmative
action need not be a permanent feature once its objectives have been achieved,
and there is genuine equality. But without it, there is much less chances of
achieving equality for minorities, disadvantaged groups and women.
The
fundamental test that should be applied to a new Constitution is whether it has
the ability to provide the structural stability to free Sri Lanka from its debt
trap, its perilous economic situation, its social inequities and to move
forward as a Nation that is proud of its people, its cultures and its
languages.
The fundamental duty of all people
living in Sri Lanka is to live in harmony with each other and particularly in
harmony with the pre- dominant religious culture and beliefs and not hurt the
moral sensitivities of the majority, which has made the biggest contribution
throughout history to the building of the country and moreover to the
civilization that sustains the national ethos.
This requirement prevails in all
Countries influenced by Abrahamic religions, especially in Islamic
countries.
This situation also prevailed in Sri
Lanka prior to 1505.
‘When in Rome do as the Romans do’
is a wise way to avoid conflict between communities.
Thisis a proverb attributed to
Saint Augustine. The phrase means that it is advisable to follow the
conventions of the area in which you are residing or visiting.
It is said that Saint
Monica and
her son, Saint
Augustine,
had found out that Saturday was observed as a fast
day in Rome, where they had planned to visit. However, it was not a fast
day where they lived in Milan. They had
consulted Saint
Ambrose who
had then said “When I am here (in Milan) I do not fast on Saturday, when
in Rome I do fast on Saturday.” That reply is said to have led to the
saying “When in Rome, do as the Romans do”
The Romans are no more neither are
we in Sri Lanka related to the ancient Romans.
Nevertheless, this saying looms
large in a country which is grappling with trying to find a solution to a
seemingly intractable problem of who should prevail or which community should
have the final word or say in recommending standards of conduct for the rest of
the country.
In ancient Rome the majority view
prevailed as it should be in any democracy.
It was accompanied by the
presumption that the minority and any foreigner or visitor would heed the
conventions of the area or the country in which they are living or visiting and
not challenge them or try to replace them, which would invariably develop into
a conflict.
The Easter Sunday attack and the
underlying reasons shown in the attempt to blow up the Buddha statues in
Mawanella clearly demonstrate the threat to the entire community when one group
smaller in number (a minority) try to override the belief system of the group
greater in number (the majority).
This type of conduct has to be
prevented or avoided at all costs.
That is when the proverb ‘ When
in Rome, do as the Romans do’ becomes doubly applicable.
There is no other better way.
This requirement of not trying to
displace the prevailing ethos by a later introduced system of religious beliefs
under the flag of ‘ multiculturalism’ needs
to be stressed to the public by the State in Schools, Media, Public Relations,
and be made part of public policy.
We, in Sri Lanka, can no longer
afford to take chances with failed models and so called ‘Human Rights’
experiments, not of our own making.
Sri Lanka reiterates that apart from operating routine security networks in the interest of national security, particularly after the devastating Easter Sunday terrorist attacks, local security forces and intelligence agencies are not engaged in monitoring specific group of people in the country.
Acting Permanent Representative of Sri Lanka to the United Nations in Geneva, Dayani Gamage made this remark during the Interactive Dialogue with the Assistant Secretary General for Human Rights on the report of the Secretary-General on co-operation with the United Nations, its representatives and mechanisms in the field of human rights, during the 45th session of the UN Human Rights Council.
Sri Lanka also urged any party concerned of the alleged intimidating visits”, surveillance”, complaints of harassment” and reprisals” referred to in the report, to make formal complaints to law enforcement authorities or to independent national institutions such as the Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka or the National Police Commission so that action can be taken to investigate the alleged incidents.
Further, Sri Lanka, noting that the Government has already publicly refuted these allegations, reiterated that it is committed to protecting and promoting freedom of expression and civil society space.
The Government of Sri Lanka is also committed to ensure that complaints received on alleged attacks against journalists, human rights defenders and civil society are investigated and prosecuted, Gamage stressed in her statement.
She also noted that, for any country compromising its national security interests amidst looming sophistication of strategies of radical and extreme elements world around, is bound to face regrettable consequences. Hence, the Government of Sri Lanka requests all parties to be mindful of that ground reality in this context.”
President Gotabaya Rajapaksa today (01) joined the World Children’s Day celebrations, donating libraries to schools in five districts, the President’s Media Division (PMD) said.
President stated that the provision of a library and access to sports will help children to maintain the balance between physical and mental well-being. President added that he was convinced of this fact during his recent visits across the country.
Following requests by children, the construction of a large number of playgrounds in remote areas of the country is now underway. In addition, provision of library facilities for 25 selected schools representing each district has commenced, the PMD added.
The 1st of October, which marks the World Children’s Day, coincides with the beginning of the Reading Month. President Rajapaksa has summoned students from 5 schools and donated 5 libraries with the intention of simultaneously motivating the next generation to read books.
Accordingly, the President symbolically donated 5 libraries for Lunuwila Anuruddha Central College in Puttalam, Dolosbage Kanishta Vidyalaya in Gampola, Government Tamil Mixed School in Tharmapuram, Vijaya Kumaratunga Vidyalaya in Kuruwita and Pilana Vidyarthodaya Maha Vidyalaya in Galle.
Buses that had been out of commission were repaired in an attractive manner as libraries for school children. Each fully-fledged library cost around Rs. 1 million. Mobitel, the telecom firm has provided e-library facilities, thereby enabling students to study Information Technology and refer e-books online.
The project to provide libraries was sponsored by the Sri Lanka Transportation Board (SLTB), Manusath Derana, National Library and Documentation Services Board and SLT Telecom and Mobitel.
The books donated by the publishers at the annual book exhibition at BMICH were also handed over to these libraries.
The President also engaged in cordial conversation with the students and invited them to visit the Presidential Secretariat as well, the PMD said further.
