Dr Sarath Obeysekera

March 29, 2019, 7:54 pm

From left MD CDC Events & travels ( Pvt). Ltd.Imran Hassen, Harith Perera, Minister John Amaratunga, Kishu Gomes, Chairman, Sancharaka Udawa 2019, Nishad Wijetunga Pic by Samana Ranaweera

By Steve A. Morrell

Visa – on – arrival and visa – free travel in Sri Lanka are now possible for all in-bound tourists, Minister of Tourism Development, Wildlife and Chistian Religious Affairs, John Amaratunga said.

Hurrah ,Finally politicians have understood the necessity . There are few other steps need to be taken.

• Airport should have fleet of metered taxis like in all other countries for tourists to hail as soon as they arrive
• Regular Train service to re commence from airport to Colombo with change over in Ragama to go to East and mid country
• Regular bus service from Karutanayake to Colombo for back packers
• Proper eating places outside airport at a reasonable price
• When super luxury passenger vessels  arrive in Colombo Harbour  high quality terminal to be built with dedicated walkway and entrance for them to go out from Port
• At the exit of the main  gate of the Colombo port Old Customs building to be converted for night life and pubs etc
• Legalised Canabi smoking place to be established for tourists to enjoy in this building
• Legalise cannabis in selected areas in Colombo (So much of drugs coming in with no control)
• Chatam Streel and Bristol street in Colombo to be a walking area with many eating stalls like in Thailand and Singapore
• Russian and Thai lasses to be given special discounts to Come to Colombo and legalize the oldest trade in the world

Dr Sarath Obeysekera

This essay carries four statements made by Mahinda Rajapaksa

STATEMENT NO 1 YAHAPALANA GOVERNMENT” (Island 9.1.18)   

In a statement issued to media on 9.1.18 the former President said: On 9 January 2018, the so-called Yahapalana government completes three years in office. During this short period they have created numerous crises running through virtually every sector in Sri Lanka. The main subject of public discussion today is the bond scam and the attempts being made by the Yahapalana leaders to sweep it under the carpet.

We are awaiting the release of the full report of the Bond Commission. The bond scam is only one of the many disasters brought upon this country by the Yahapalana government. As this government marks its third anniversary, I wish to draw the attention of the public to another danger they have brought upon this country.

During the short period of 36 months that this government has been in power, they have borrowed over USD 14.6 billion in foreign currency loans alone, the breakdown of which would be as follows – USD 7.2 billion through the issue of Sri Lanka Development Bonds from January 2015 onwards, USD 3.6 billion from sovereign bonds issued in 2015 and 2017, USD 2.2 billion through currency swap arrangements with India in 2015 and 2016, USD 1.7 billion through syndicated loans arranged through several international banks in 2016 and 2017 and USD 1.5 billion from the IMF Extended Fund Facility in 2016. No previous government has borrowed so much money through foreign currency loans in such a short period of time.

Even though 14.6 billion USD would suffice to build five Norochcholai power plants, five Hambantota harbours with enough money being left over to build two more Southern Expressways, the Yahapalana government has not built even a culvert with that money.

 I have made reference so far only to foreign currency loans. From January 2015 to date, the Yahapalana government has borrowed well over Rs. 5.7 trillion in Rupee loans as well, through the issue of treasury bills and treasury bonds. The government commissioned the Moragahakanda project and opened the Rajagiriya flyover to coincide with its third anniversary so as to answer the critics who say that the Yahapalana government has not built anything tangible despite massive foreign borrowings.

However, the Moragahakanda project was planned, financial allocations were made and construction commenced under my government way back in 2007 in accordance with the 2005 Mahinda Chintana programme. Likewise the Rajagiriya flyover was planned and money was allocated for its construction by my government. Cabinet approval was granted to call for bids to select contractors for the construction of the flyovers in Rajagiriya, Polgahawela and Ganemulla at the cabinet meeting held on 4 December 2014.

The Yahapalana government has marked its third anniversary by claiming credit for projects for which money was allocated and started by the previous government. They came into power in 2015 claiming that there was a debt crisis in the country due to the loans taken by my government to build power plants, harbours, airports, expressways etcetera. However the total cost of these major development projects were as follows: USD 1,350 million for all three phases of the Norochcholai power plant; USD 740 million for the Southern Expressway from Kottawa to Matara; USD 1,300 million for phases I and II of the Hambantota harbour and its bunkering facility; USD 292 million for the Colombo-Katunayake expressway and USD 209 for the Mattala airport.

All these development projects put together cost less than USD 3.9 billion. The claim that the present government has been forced to borrow heavily to repay the project loans taken by my government is a complete lie. With the 14.6 billion USD in foreign currency loans that this government has borrowed up to now, the loans taken for all the above mentioned development projects could have been repaid four times over.

 The debt now being incurred is used to meet the day to day expenses of the Yahapalana government and not to repay the project loans taken by my government. From January 2015, there was a massive and unplanned increase in government expenditure as a result of state funds being utilized to meet political objectives. The present debt crisis came about due to the Yahapalana government borrowing heavily in Rupees and in foreign currency in order to meet this increased expenditure.

Foreign currency loans should always be taken with the utmost care. Since it is necessary to purchase foreign currency to repay such loans, even a slight change in the exchange rate can give rise to a massive increase in a country’s indebtedness. According to the 2015 and 2016 Central Bank reports, due to the depreciation in the value of the Rupee as a result of the economic downturn that took place after the Yahapalana government took office, an extra Rs. 478 billion has been added to the national debt. It should be noted that the increase in the interest rate by about 50% due to the bond scam, has also added to the debt burden.

My government was always very careful in taking foreign currency loans. According to the Finance Ministry, the repayment of foreign loan installments plus interest during the period 2008-2014 was as follows:

2008 – USD 881 million

2009 – USD 1,041 million

2010 – USD 826 million

2011 – USD 971 million

2012 – USD 1,620 million

2013 – USD 1,160 million

2014 – USD 1,306 million

Since these are not unmanageable amounts, my government never had a problem with foreign loan repayments. The present crisis is entirely a creation of the Yahapalana government. The foreign loan installments and interest thereon that have to be paid after 2015 is as follows:

2015 –  USD 1,828 million

2016 – USD 1,604 million

2017 –  USD 2,132 million

2018 –  USD 2,891 million

2019 –  USD 4,217 million

2020 –  USD 3,699 million

2021 –  USD 3,344 million

2022 –  USD 3,743 million

2023 –  USD 2,120 million

2024 –  USD 2,067 million

2025 – USD 4,155 million

2026 – USD 2,758 million

2027 – USD 3,448 million

These figures amply explain the difference before and after the change of government in 2015. The immediate increase in repayments from 2015 onwards is due to the huge short term commercial loans taken by the Yahapalana government to be repaid in a few months or one or two years.

 What Sri Lanka experienced in 2015 was a borrowing frenzy. Central Bank records indicate that before the Yahapalana government came into power, Sri Lanka Development Bonds were issued only twice a year with the amount borrowed per year not averaging even USD 350 million between 2010 and 2014. It should be borne in mind that this was at the height of the biggest infrastructure building programme in recent history.

 But in the year 2015 without a single new infrastructure project being initiated, the Yahapalana government issued Sri Lanka Development Bonds on no less than nine occasions. The number of SLDB issues made in 2016 were six, with four being made in 2017.

The government has now obtained cabinet approval to borrow a further USD 5 billion in foreign currency commercial loans in 2018 as well. In order to repay these loans taken for consumption purposes, the government has increased the tax burden on the people to an unbearable level by increasing the VAT, vehicle import duties, commodity import taxes, various levies and fines and stamp duties etcetera. From April 2018 onwards, the government will commence a programme to bring virtually every adult in the country into the income tax net.    

Since the massive loans taken by the Yahapalana government cannot be repaid simply by increasing taxes, they have now started selling off all available national assets ranging from government owned hotels to harbours, expressways to power plants. Though the government claims that the Hambantota port was sold off because the loan taken to build it could not be repaid, the proceeds of the sale have not been used to repay the project loan but is to be sent instead to the Treasury to be spent on consumption – which reveals the actual motive in selling off these assets. Since the Hambantota harbour was built with long term loans at concessionary rates of interest, the government is in no hurry to repay the loan taken to build it.

However there is an urgent need to repay the short term foreign currency commercial loans taken by this government for consumption purposes even if the payment has to be made with the money realised through the sale of national assets. If such commitments are not met on time, Sri Lanka will get locked out of the international financial markets. I request all voters to use the opportunity that will come their way on 10 February to register their protest at the disaster brought upon the financial system of this country by this corrupt, incompetent government.   END

STATEMENT NO 2.  HAMBANTOTA”( Island 11.1.17)

Former President Mahinda Rajapaksa     issued a statement in January 2017 regarding his much maligned Hambantota project. Since the future of the Hambantota port is now under discussion, I wish to explain to the public, my position on this matter. The loans taken for the construction of this harbour were 450 million USD for the first phase, 70 million USD for the bunkering facility and 802 million USD for the second phase bringing the total to around 1,322 million USD. When complete the harbour would have four terminals and 12 berths. This was meant to be a free port covering an area of 2,000 hectares where goods could be manufactured or value added and shipped overseas. All the necessary feasibility studies were done before these loans were taken and the annual interest plus capital repayments would amount to about 111 million USD. My government had planned to raise that money through the Ports Authority itself.

The first phase of the Hambantota harbour became partially operational in 2011. The transshipment of vehicles began in 2012 with 70% of the vehicles coming into Hambantota being transshipped to other countries. In 2014, 335 vessels called at the Hambantota harbour followed by 295 in 2015. The port made an operating profit of Rs. 900 million in 2014 and Rs 1.2 billion in 2015. These are investments that last centuries and a new harbour cannot be expected to produce large profits in the first few years. Our plan was to break even within ten years.

My government had signed a Supply Operate and Transfer (SOT) management contract with a joint venture between China Harbour Co and China Merchant Co to supply equipment such as cranes and operate the Hambantota container terminal for 40 years. The Ports Authority was to receive a rental of 35,000 USD per hectare per year for the 56 hectares in the container terminal (a total of 1.96 million USD per year), a royalty of 2.5 USD on every container loaded or unloaded, warfrage of 30 USD per container for cargo coming into Sri Lanka and all other usual harbour charges for navigation, piloting, tonnage, etc.  Other than the container terminal, all other terminals in the harbour and the 2,000 hectare industrial zone was to be controlled by the Ports Authority and they would have derived the income from the cargo of the free port passing through their terminals.

The new government made some unwise decisions. Firstly, they disregarded the management contract for the Hambantota container terminal entered into by my government with China Harbour Co and China Merchant Co. Secondly, the Ports Authority had developed the Colombo East container terminal and upon its completion by 2016, this terminal would have produced a revenue of more than 100 million USD a year which the Ports Authority had earmarked to pay off the Hambantota loan until the latter generated sufficient income. The Yahapalana government halted the Colombo East terminal development. Thirdly, by the end of 2014, my government had signed agreements with several foreign and local companies to lease out about 80 hectares in the Hambantota port industrial zone at the minimum rate of 50,000 USD per year per hectare with minimum guaranteed volumes of cargo and minimum guaranteed royalties. All those agreements were disregarded by the new government.

Then the government said the Hambantota port was a white elephant and that it had to be privatized to raise the money to pay off the loans taken to build it. They called for bids, not just for harbour operations but for the rights of the landlord over the entire 2,000 hectare free port so that whoever takes the long lease will operate the entire harbour and have complete control over the industrial zone as well. The two companies China Harbour Co and China Merchant Co which made a joint proposal to lease out the Hambantota container terminal for 40 years during my government are the same companies that have made rival bids to lease the entire free port under the present government.

A framework agreement has been signed by the govt. with China Merchant Co to lease out the entire free port for 99 years for a payment of 1.08 billion USD on an 80%-20% equity sharing basis. No other income will accrue to the Ports Authority for 15 years, after which they will receive dividends for their 20% stake only if dividends are declared. The lease will be extendable for another 99 years and a 44 hectare artificial island outside the port has been included in the deal. There is provision for the construction of another 20+ berths and the rights over these too have been given to the lessee.

 The amount of the lease seems to have been based only on the construction cost of the port without an accredited international valuation reflecting the strategic location value of the port, the value of the 99 year period, its 2,000 hectare land, the oil tank farm and the value of its present commercial operations.

This bid has been accepted in a situation where the other company China Harbour Co. had (according to information available to us) put in a much more favorable bid to lease the free port on a 65-35 equity sharing basis for 50 years with an upfront payment of 750 million USD plus the payment of all the charges they had earlier agreed to with regard to the container terminal management contract. The government has chosen the least favorable bid despite (according to information available to us) the Ports Authority having recommended the other bidder. Details of how the two proposals were evaluated have not been disclosed.

A 99 year lease impinges on Sri Lanka’s sovereign rights because a foreign company will enjoy the rights of the landlord over the 2,000 hectare free port while operating the entire harbour as well. This is not an issue with China or with foreign investors. It is about getting the best deal for Sri Lanka. The agreement that my government negotiated with both China Harbour Co and China Merchant Co to manage the Hambantota container terminal for 40 years is the best deal yet. The bid made by China Harbour Co for a 50 year lease is obviously more favorable than the bid made by the other company.

 As a matter of principle, I am against the leasing of the entire harbour for 99 years and giving the rights of the landlord over the industrial zone to a foreign private company. The industrial zone and the harbour should be controlled by the Ports Authority while harbour operations may be given on management contracts to the private sector. For example, the Colombo port is run by the Ports Authority and two private operators. The Ports Authority has full control over the Colombo harbour as well as equity in the two privately run terminals. I believe this should be the approach to the Hambantota port as well.

Apart from the entire Hambantota free port, the government has decided to lease a further 15,000 acres outside the free port to a foreign company for 99 years. In a situation where even the 2,000 hectares within the free port have not been utilized yet, on what grounds can we justify the leasing of another 15,000 acres to a foreign company?

The total land area of all the Board of Investment economic zones in the country at present put together do not amount to 2,000 hectares. A 15,000 acre zone in Hambantota will be disproportionate to our country’s economy. Furthermore, the disruption caused to the people of the area will be immense if 15,000 acres of land were to be acquired for this purpose.

 The government should fill the free port with investments first before opening more zones. Furthermore the government should have supervision over the kind of factories that will be opened in these industrial zones, the fuel they use and the waste they produce. My government agreed only to the use of LNG gas, even though some potential investors wanted to use coal.

The Hambantota dispute is not an issue that can be resolved by baton-charging or tear gassing protesters or having them assaulted by thugs and remanded. There are real issues relating to the financial benefits that will accrue to the country from this deal, and issues of control and sovereignty over the free port and possible environmental issues that need to be addressed said Mahinda Rajapaksa concluding his statement. END

 STATEMENT NO 3. HAMBANTOTA” ( Island 2.8.17)

Former President Mahinda Rajapaksa, condemning the way Hambantota port had been handed over to a Chinese company, said  the incumbent administration was selling of what his government had built.

The manner in which the government privatised the Hambantota port has shocked the nation. Parliament was not allowed to debate the Agreement to privatise one of Sri Lanka’s most important strategic assets. No one knows who did the valuation of this asset. No one appears to have seen any technical/financial evaluation report. The government has also not explained to the public on what criteria they selected the company that won the bid when there was clear evidence that the other bid was much more favourable.

This headlong quest to sell state assets is a direct result of the economic crisis that the government has plunged this country into. After the yahapalakayas lied their way to the presidency in January 2015, they knew it would not be possible to win the parliamentary election that was soon due by the same means, so they increased the salaries of government servants, reduced the price of fuel, gas and certain foodstuffs in order to bamboozle the people in a different way.

Thereby, they increased government expenditure while simultaneously reducing revenue, creating the present financial crisis. According to the Auditor General’s reports, the Budget deficit which was 5.7% of the GDP in 2014, had almost doubled to 10.5% in 2015 in just one calendar year. The lack of money to meet day to day expenses including the salaries and pensions of state sector employees resulted in massive foreign currency borrowings.

In just two and a half years, the Yahapalana government has taken foreign currency loans amounting to over USD 13.7 billion. All this money has been spent on consumption. USD 13.7 billion is the equivalent of ten Norochcholai power plants or ten Hambantota Ports, or more than twenty Southern Highways. But the government has nothing to show for all this money that has been borrowed and spent.

Under IMF instructions, the value added tax and other taxes were increased in 2016 to raise money to repay these debts. After imposing taxes even on terminally ill patients, the government was still not able to raise enough money to repay the USD 13.7 billion they borrowed and they have now resorted to increasing non-tax revenue through the sale of state owned assets.

The Budget proposals of the Yahapalana government make it clear that they intend privatising all state owned assets ranging from non-strategic business establishments like the Colombo Hilton to strategic assets like the Norochcholai power plant. The sale of the Hambantota port was just the beginning.

 The Prime Minister has already announced that the Mattala airport would be next. Other assets like the Colombo -Katunayake Highway, Southern Highway, Water Board and Electricity Board are also due to be privatised.

In their desperation to justify the sale of government owned assets, the government has been deliberately running down the enterprises they want to sell, as for instance by stopping bunkering operations in the Hambantota port. The total amount that has to be paid for the Hambantota port is USD 1,266 million capital + USD 495 million in interest – a total of USD 1,761 million by 2036. By the end of 2016, nearly USD 500 million of this total amount had already been repaid.

 There was never any problem about meeting the payments for the Hambantota port because it was paid out of the profits of the Ports Authority. With its privatisation however, the loan taken to build the Hambantota port will be transferred from the Ports Authority to the Treasury to be paid by the tax payer.  

The government has been trying to justify the privatisation of the Hambantota port  on the grounds that the land for the Shangri La hotel was sold outright by my government. The few acres on which a non-strategic asset like a hotel is built cannot be compared to a strategically important port with four terminals, 12 berths and a 5,000 acre industrial park. The Shangri La land moreover was given on the specific condition that it can be used only for a hotel in accordance with the government’s urban development plan.

 The government has also been saying that my government gave land to a Chinese company in the Port City. The Port City is new land that is being reclaimed from the sea. This land has commercial value but is not of strategic importance like a major harbour.

Once the new land mass was created, the company carrying out the construction was to have the use of a very small part of it subject to Sri Lankan law, in lieu of payment. The entire project would not have cost the Sri Lankan government anything.

 It should also be borne in mind that my government enacted the Land (Restrictions on Alienation) Act No: 38 of 2014 which restricts the ability of foreigners and foreign owned companies to buy land in Sri Lanka but the present government removed all such restrictions by Land (Restrictions on Alienation) (Amendment) Act No 3 of 2017.

 My government built or created new things. The present government is making a living by selling what my government built. The government will not be using the 1.12 billion USD that comes from the lease of the port to pay the loan taken to build the port. Instead the money is to go to the treasury to meet the day to day expenditure of the government.

 The USD 1.12 billion raised from the privatisation of the Hambantota port is small change for this government and will soon vanish just like the USD 13.7 billion they raised earlier.

 As public indignation mounts at the manner in which the Hambantota port was privatised, Yahapalana ministers are now going around saying that my government too had planned to sell the entire Hambantota port to the  Chinese. This is a diabolical lie. Everyone knows that my government had an explicit anti-privatisation policy. Not only did my government refrain from privatising any State assets, we reacquired several important assets that had been privatised by previous governments.

 STATEMENT NO 4.   UMA OYA”  (Island 11.1.17)

Former President Mahinda Rajapaksa says he would like to remind those who are blaming his government for implementing the Uma Oya project that successive governments since 1959 had tried to launch it. 

The Uma Oya project has come in for much criticism in recent times. A few days ago it was reported in the media that the Kirindi Oya tributary which flows past Bandarawela had suddenly gone dry as a result of this project. The leader of the JVP stated in Parliament some weeks ago that as a result of ground water seeping into a tunnel being constructed as part of the Uma Oya project, 2,333 wells, streams and springs in the Bandarawela area had run dry, and cracks had appeared in 4,625 houses, six temples, one mosque and three schools in the area due to the change in ground conditions, and further that thousands of acres of agricultural land have been affected.

 After things started going wrong, members of the JVP, ministers in the Yahapalana government and various NGO activists have been making statements aimed at laying the blame for all this on me and my government. One minister said that this situation had come about because I had wanted to divert water to Hambantota to irrigate land in my village. The President also stated that this project had been carried out due to ‘political requirements’.

 The Uma Oya project consists of constructing a dam and reservoir across the Uma Oya at Puhulpola from where water would be diverted via a 4 km tunnel to another dam and reservoir constructed across the Mahatotilla Oya in Dyraaba. Water from this second reservoir would be channeled through a 15.3 km tunnel to a hydroelectricity powerhouse. The outflow from the powerhouse is to be diverted via a 4 km tunnel into the Kirindi Oya, to provide water to parts of the Moneragala and Hambantota districts.

 The diversion of the Uma Oya has been under discussion for well over sixty years. The idea was first mooted in 1959 in a study carried out by the United States Operations Mission and the Canadian Hunting Survey Corporation. It also featured in the United Nations Development Programme/Food and Agriculture Organisation Master Plan (1968-1969) for the Mahaweli project. Studies regarding the Uma Oya diversion project were also carried out by the Lahmeyer International Company of Germany in 1989, by the Central Engineering Consultancy Bureau (CECB) in 1991 and by SNC Lavalin Inc of Canada in collaboration with the CECB in 2000.

 During the UNP led government of 2001-2004, at inter-ministerial meetings held in December 2003 and February 2004, chaired by the then ministers of power and energy and irrigation Karu Jayasuriya and Jayawickrema Perera with the participation of all the ministers and MPs of the Uva province, it was decided to implement the proposed Uma Oya scheme as a high priority project.  On 26 January 2005, under the Chandrika Kumaratunga government, Cabinet approval was granted to proceed with the Uma Oya project, based on a cabinet paper submitted by the then Minister of Agriculture, Livestock, Land and Irrigation, Anura Kumara Dissanayake. The Deputy Minister of this ministry at that time was Bimal Ratnayake.

 The JVP Minister’s Cabinet Paper bearing No: 05/0036/039/002 dated 4 January 2005 stated the following: “For the development of the South East Dry Zone in Sri Lanka, (particularly Hambantota and Moneragala districts) there is no other alternative unless water is diverted from Uma Oya to the South East Dry Zone.” “Strategy for economic development of both Hambantota and Moneragala districts changed during the recent past and diversion of Uma Oya to Kirindi Oya is now seen in the perspective of recently conceived Ruhunupura development.

The infrastructure of Ruhunupura development consists of the development of the Hambantota harbour into one of the modern harbours in the region, international airport in the Moneragala district, and an oil refinery. It is expected that the Hambantota harbour will attract a large number of ships sailing in the Indian Ocean. Also a large number of industrial activities are expected to take place in and around Hambantota including tourism. For all these new developments, projected water requirement has been estimated as 100 MCM in the year 2030.

In the absence of a reliable source of water in the area, water from Uma Oya is seen as the only alternative to supplement this requirement.””Therefore high priority should be given for this project.”   It was only after all of the above had taken place under previous governments that the Uma Oya project appeared in my 2005 presidential election manifesto as a priority project.

The JVP supported my candidacy at the 2005 presidential elections and Uma Oya was made a priority project of my government. From winning the war against terrorism to building highways, harbours and power plants, my government did many things that previous governments had only been able to dream about, but never implement. Uma Oya was one such project.

 On 27 November 2007, consequent to consultations held earlier that year by the then Minister for Enterprises Development Sarath Amunugama and the then Minister for Power and Energy John Seneviratne with the Export Development Board of Iran (EDBI) and Farab Company of Iran, an MOU was signed with the Iranian government under the terms of which the EDBI would finance the project and Farab Company, would prepare the detailed engineering design and carry out the physical construction. 

The contractor Farab Company is owned by the Iranian government and a team of engineers from the Irrigation Ministry, CEB and CECB had checked the credentials of this company and its experience in handling similar projects. In 2008 a Cabinet Appointed Negotiating Committee got the contract price fixed at USD 514 million. Though the contract was signed in 2008, construction did not commence until 29 November 2011 until the Central Environmental Authority gave it clearance and a full feasibility report acceptable to the engineers of the Irrigation Ministry, Ceylon Electricity Board and the Central Engineering Consultancy Bureau had been received.

 Ground water seepage is inevitable when drilling tunnels and measures have to be taken to prevent it. According to information available to me, the water seepage has taken place because the German manufactured drilling machine did not have the additional components to fully seal the tunnel as it moved forward. This was apparently due to the project consultants failing to provide the correct advice.

The first seepage of water had taken place only in late December 2014 just days before the present government came into power. The environmental harm it has caused could have been averted if remedial measures had been taken in time. However the new government took no action because they were too busy persecuting the opposition.

The JVP was also too busy persecuting the Rajapaksas and helping the UNP to run the FCID to make representations to the government to rectify a problem that had arisen in the only major project ever initiated by a JVP Minister.  I now learn that the necessary equipment has been obtained from Germany. 

 Whenever a large scale infrastructure project is implemented, there will be communities that are adversely affected. When the accelerated Mahaweli project was implemented, the entire Maskeliya town had to be shifted to make way for the Maussakele reservoir and the Teldeniya town had to be shifted to make way for the Victoria reservoir.

The extent of water seepage during the drilling of the Uma Oya tunnel may not have been anticipated. But in projects of this magnitude, even unanticipated contingencies have to be provided for. Many large projects were implemented during the nine year tenure of my government, and some displacement of people did take place, but there was no public unrest because problems were identified early on, and compensation packages provided to the satisfaction of those

of the affected. Such alertness and efficiency is however lacking under the present government.

Today, the situation is such that if a citizen loses his house in a landslide or flood or some man-made disaster, he will be living in a tent or a school until the next government comes into power. There is now agitation over issues that have emerged in the construction of the Central Highway which have not been resolved by the government. Those affected by the unforeseen problems that have emerged in the implementation of the Uma Oya project have had to endure the consequences inherent inefficiency of the present government.[1]  (continued)

---

[1] Island 29.9.17 p 4 Modern used no 18 .

By Udaya P Gammanpila Courtesy Ceylon Today

MP M.A. Sumanthiran recently threatened in Parliament to take the Sri Lankan Government before an International Criminal Tribunal unless it establishes a hybrid justice system to inquire into war crime allegations. A hybrid justice system means participation of foreigners as judges, prosecutors and investigators. In a criminal investigation, Police Officers conduct the investigation and collect evidence and witnesses. Usually, the Attorney General prosecutes the defendants in Courts.

Judges deliver judgments after hearing both sides. Tamil separatists demand to get foreign Police Officers, prosecutors and Judges involved in inquiring war crime allegations.

Reason

MP Sumanthiran had reason to make this threat. The resolution cosponsored by Sri Lanka in October 2015 contained a demand to establish a hybrid justice system to probe alleged war crimes. The new resolution co-sponsored by the Government in March 2019 contains the same demand. The only difference is the Foreign Minister’s stand. Although Minister Managala Samaraweera fully endorsed this demand in his speeches at the UNHRC, Minister Tilak Marapana, at its 40th session held in this month, refused to establish a hybrid justice system claiming it was unconstitutional. Minister Marapana’s speech made Tamil separatists frustrated and furious. That is why MP Sumanthiran was compelled to make the above-mentioned speech in Parliament.

He is a brilliant lawyer and a knowledgeable person. Hence, he is fully aware of the facts about international tribunals. In this backdrop, why does he make this baseless threat? Obviously, he wants to instil fear in the minds of Government leaders. He has good understanding about behaviour of the leaders of the present Government. Because of their inferiority complex in respect of their former colonial masters, they are in fear of Western nations. They are ready to even betray the motherland to appease these vicious forces. Therefore, the Government may take this threat seriously. Hence, let us look at legal and political aspects of establishing war crime tribunals.

Criminal tribunals
International Criminal Tribunals can be established only by adopting a resolution at the UN Security Council. The Security Council has established two such criminal tribunals to prosecute leaders in former Yugoslavia and Rwanda.
The Security Council consists of fifteen members of which five are permanent. 

Permanent members are USA, UK, France, Russia and China. These members have veto power to reject a resolution. Hence, in addition to support of at least nine members, the resolution should not be opposed by any permanent member, to ensure its adoption. A large number of resolutions brought before the Security Council against Israel failed to see the daylight since the USA exercised its veto power

There is a risk of mooting a resolution to establish an International Criminal Tribunal against Sri Lanka in the Security Council. Since two permanent members, namely, USA and UK, have brought resolutions against Sri Lanka in the UNHRC, these States are capable of repeating it in the Security Council because of lobbying by Tamil separatists. However, there are two permanent members with veto power in the council who are of the opinion that Sri Lanka has not committed war crimes or genocide attempts. These States are China and Russia.

China and Russia have been continuously voting with Sri Lanka in the UNHRC since 2009. These States never deserted Sri Lanka when Sri Lanka was facing humiliating defeats at votes. Present Government betrayed and embarrassed these friendly nations by cosponsoring the anti-Sri Lanka resolutions brought by our enemies.

When Sri Lanka co-sponsored anti-Sri Lanka resolutions, it was obviously a slap on the faces of nations who supported Sri Lanka for previous resolutions. By siding with the enemy, Sri Lanka has told its friends that those nations have committed a blunder by supporting Sri Lanka for the previous resolutions.
Fortunately, these nations have realised Sri Lanka is presently under the control of its enemies and it is a temporary turbulent situation. 

Their sympathy and support towards Sri Lanka was reflected in their speeches in the UNHRC in the recent past. In this backdrop, Sri Lanka can confidently expect its friendly permanent members of the Security Council, China and Russia, to veto any resolution to establish a tribunal to punish Sri Lanka. Collective veto by China and Russia is a common feature in the council in the recent past.

In the light of the above, the Government should not panic and commit irreversible mistakes by establishing Hybrid Courts. Instead, the Government should avoid any action or inaction which could question the independence of the judiciary.

The conduct of the Constitutional Council is crucial in this regard. The Parliament and public vehemently criticised the appointments made by the Constitutional Council to the Superior Courts. The Council failed to provide reasons for ignoring several senior Judges when it recommended junior Judges as the Chief Justice and Presidents of the Court of Appeal. Similarly, they ignored senior Judges in the High Court when appointments were made to the Court of Appeal.

Biased conduct

The Constitutional Council’s biased conduct was not limited to the Judiciary. It was extended to other branches of the justice system.

When the head of prosecution (Attorney General) and the head of investigation (Inspector General of Police) were appointed, the council ignored the senior officers without any valid reason.

Hence, speculation is rife that the Council was politically motivated in recommending persons for high posts in the justice system.

 Hence, we are in genuine fear that the Constitutional Council is on a deliberate attempt to discredit our justice system with a view to justifying the hybrid justice system with foreign Judges, prosecutors and investigators.

Courtesy NewsIn.Asia

New Delhi/Colombo, March 29 (Reuters): An agreement to build a proposed $3.85 billion oil refinery in Sri Lanka will take at least a year to be finalized as its main investor, India’s Accord Group, says it is yet to recruit partners and conduct an assessment of the plan’s viability.

The comments add to confusion about the project, which was announced last week by the Sri Lankan government as the nation’s largest single foreign direct investment ever, but has since been the subject of conflicting statements by various parties.

Accord’s Chairman S Jagatrakshakan, a former Indian government minister, said he has submitted a preliminary proposal to the Sri Lankan government to invest in the project but has not finalized any terms of the deal.

The project assessment and financial viability assessment will take at least a year. We have not sorted out any of the equity partners for the projects, but are in talks with investors from many countries,” he told Reuters over the phone from the southern Indian state of Tamil Nadu.

The 68-year old politician is campaigning in Tamil Nadu for a seat in the current general election. He was an MP and minister in the last Congress-led government in 2009-2014.

CHINA-INDIA STRUGGLE

When the Sri Lankan government made the announcement on March 19, it said the oil refinery would be a joint venture between Oman’s oil ministry and Accord and cost $3.85 billion.

A day later, Omani officials denied involvement in the project, but the middle eastern country’s oil minister arrived in Sri Lanka three days later and said he was excited” to inaugurate the project though there was no indication of a firm deal in place.

India and China have been vying for political influence in Sri Lanka in recent years, with investment a key part of the battleground.

The refinery’s proposed site is 585 acres of land near the site of the new Humbantota International port and a related industrial zone – both run by Chinese entities – on Sri Lanka’s southern coast.

A Sri Lankan government document seen by Reuters showed the previously proposed deal would have a debt to equity ratio of 51:49, and said the Accord Group’s Singapore entity, Silver Park International Pte Ltd, would fund 70 percent of the equity, with Oman funding the rest.

However, Jagatrakshakan said he expected 70 percent of the project to be bankrolled by debt from financial institutions, adding that Silver Park would get more investors to fund the equity stake.

We are looking at getting 20-30 investors on board for the 30 percent equity investment in the project. We expect 70 percent of the project to be bankrolled by debt from financial institutions,” he said.

POTENTIAL RISK

A senior official at Sri Lanka’s Strategic Development and International Trade ministry, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said he was confident of the terms of the deal as originally announced by the government.

He said Jagatrakshakan’s son Sandeep was also present when the deal was signed. Sandeep Jagatrakshakan did not respond to repeated calls seeking comment.

China is the biggest buyer of Omani oil, importing about 80 percent of the Middle Eastern nation’s overall crude exports in January, according to Oman government data.

– Kumari Courtesy Ceylon Today

The question in the minds of the teaching fraternity and parents of children around the age of ten, island-wide, is: Is it on or is it out? Is the Grade Five Scholarship Examination scrapped or is it going to be held this year too. (At the time of writing 27 March)

The confusion is justified. The President announces one action; education officials seem to pronounce another; the President was shown on TV news to emphatically and definitely say that he has decided to scrap the examination for these young kids. This was on Tuesday (26).  

He said he recommended the cancellation and now is declaring the examination non-existent. The same news broadcast announced that an Education Department big-wig said no decision had been taken.  So that’s where we are. But, Kumari assumes and presumes HE the President will have his say and way.

History

The Scholarship Examination (also known as the Grade 5 Exam) is a highly competitive Sri Lankan examination conducted by the Department of Examinations of the Ministry of Education. It is optional for students to undertake it during the final year of Primary School (Grade 5, usually ages nine to10)). Based on the results of the exam, students could transfer to prominent National Schools. The exams are held in two mediums: Sinhala and Tamil. The examination was introduced by the late Dr. C.W.W. Kannangara, who took the initiative in establishing Free Education when he was the Minister of Education. Under this initiative the Government established Madhya Maha Vidyalayas (MMV – Central Colleges) that were scattered around the island. The Scholarship Examination was a means for gifted students from villages to move to better schools with Government scholarships.”

That was the Wikipedia article retrieved by googling. Leaves much to be desired, as no dates are given so vital for factual histories.  Also, a list of Colombo boys schools is given with the cut off marks – Royal 187 (of 200 we presume); the mark being the cut off dividing those who are eligible for entry to a better school. I was avid to see what the mark was for Kandy schools, rural schools – those in backward areas. No info.

Free education came in the latish 1950s and the Central Schools were excellent, one in each province or district, I believe. These schools produced many who shone in Sri Lanka, mostly in the public sector.  From the scholarship exam being a feeder to the MMVs in the district or province, it soon became a means to get into Grade A1 Schools in cities, like Royal and Visakha being the utopias.

Negatives and positives

The exam now is a torture to kids, having encouraged unhealthy competition and over-ambitious parents, mothers more particularly, slave driving their young kids of Grades 4 and 5 to study, study and study. And in many cases, woe betides if the little one fails to be above the cut-off point. Also glory, too much attention and prizes with banks sponsoring those who top the lists. This too is not so healthy for an impressionable kid. Very many Grade 5 children have no childhood; they jump or crawl mentally damaged from early childhood to teenage. Tuition is resorted to, for kids who have only outgrown infancy!

Of course the positives are present: Teachers and kids work hard at the Grade 4 and 5 levels and the very original aim of the scheme – education in a better endowed school with competent teaching faculty.  Here again it’s we humans who have distorted the good intentions.

The best and almost the only solution that should follow the scrapping of the exam, is better equipping rural and small town schools. The National School scheme is fine where smaller schools are feeders to the best school in the district – the model National School. Cut-off need not be a highly competitive exam. It could be judging a child’s ability, intelligence and so forth through sustained checking over a period of two years – Grades 4 and 5 of Primary School.

Steps have been taken recently to have better teachers and amenities and school buildings have been constructed or refurbished. But with less than 10 per cent of the annual Budget allocated  to the Ministry of Education, wide as its responsibilities are, how much  progress can be made to have at least a  Mahanama College  if not a Royal in every Province?

Prof. Rajiva Wijesinha Courtesy Ceylon Today

Given what Dayan had told me about what the Americans were up to, given too that Bob Blake, who had been more positive about us previously than the British, had changed and explained that this was because he now served a different administration, I was wary about the new Ambassador, Patricia Butenis. And the first time I saw her in action seemed to justify this, for she was clearly plotting with the EU Ambassador, Julian Wilson, a crafty creature, and Mr Sambanthan, the leader of the Tamil National Alliance.

This was at a Boxing Day party given by the American Political Affairs Officer, Paul Carter. He had been cultivating me assiduously, doubtless having noted that the Embassy had a very positive view of me – Blake having asked me, along with just a few others he described as close friends of the United States; to the party he threw for Obama’s inauguration, way back in January. And again I was one of the few people asked to dinner by his Deputy, Valerie Fowler, to meet him informally, when he paid a visit to Sri Lanka in December 2009. He had by then been elevated to the position of Assistant-Secretary of State for South and Central Asian Affairs.

Carter soon enough found that, though I was committed to pluralism, I was not the sort who would let down the Government I worked for to other countries. While, I would argue for more forceful efforts to promote reconciliation, which included investigation of particular incidents during the war, I was certainly not going to acquiesce in indiscriminate attacks on our forces as having engaged in war crimes.

By 2010 Carter had realised this, after one more lunch meeting at which I was brusque with him than previously.

This was because I had sensed what he was up to at the Boxing Day Party, which he had been keen I attend, to enjoy what he called traditional Southern hospitality. He was from Georgia, and served excellent mint juleps, but I was surprised to find that I was about the only person there from the Government. And it was clear, when I went to join Patricia and her friends, in the garden, that I was intruding.

Paul steered me away and I spent some time talking to Shavindra Fernando, a Thomian I had known previously, who now worked in the Political Affairs section. And then I left quite early, to get to my cottage that night, but when the TNA soon afterwards announced that it would support Sarath Fonseka, who had expressed excessively chauvinist views during the war, I realised what had happened.

American plans

I should note though that I believe initially the Americans had had a different plan, which was getting Sarath Fonseka to stand to split what it thought of as the chauvinist vote.

I say this because, at a Christmas drinks party given by the British Deputy Head of Mission, Mark Gooding, and Paikiasothy Saravanamuttu, who was evidently not happy about having to support Sarath Fonseka, told me that it was all Ranil’s fault for withdrawing.

Ranil had of course realised that he had no chance of winning, but the Western hope had been that he would come through with Mahinda Rajapaksa and Sarath Fonseka splitting the Sinhala Buddhist vote. I think they had assumed extremists such as Champika Ranawaka and Wimal Weerawansa would support Fonseka, and perhaps it was because they stuck with him that Mahinda allowed them undue influence after he won the election.

They had been given great prominence during the campaign, as when Weerawansa dominated the press conference to deal with Sarath Fonseka’s allegations about the killing of those who surrendered, instead of the moderate Mahinda Samarasinghe.

Gooding’s party had been small and again, I was, I think the only person from Government who had been asked. Amongst the other guests was the American Deputy Chief of Mission,  James Moore, whom I rather liked though I knew he was more critical of the Rajapaksa Government than Bob Blake had been.

Patricia Butenis

But Moore too soon went away and was replaced by a lady who seemed more moderate. And Patricia Butenis also seemed to change after Mahinda Rajapaksa won the Presidential Election easily. She was a professional rather than a partisan diplomat, and knew she had to work with the new Government. While obviously she would have wanted it to move on a political solution to Tamil problems, and to work positively towards reconciliation, she was not the sort to, therefore, concentrate on support for the Opposition.

So, I think on Jeff’s recommendation, she hosted several gatherings to bring Government and Opposition personalities together, and in fact participated more actively in discussion, than other diplomats did. 

Obviously, she had a particular perspective to advance, and this sometimes led to criticism, I suspect because some of those I asked, such as Thilanga Sumathipala, knew that what happened would be reported back to the President, and they wanted to affirm their own total support for him. But on the whole the meetings were lively and productive, and as time passed she and I got quite close. I still recall her being quite solicitous when I dropped in on her to discuss progress just before I was due to go abroad.
I was suffering from a bad cold, and was fed hot lemon and honey with great care and attention.

I would like to think we might have been able to do much together to develop better understanding between the two countries as well as facilitating provision of American support for those who had suffered in the war, without seeming to be partisan and hyper-critical of the forces that had won. She was deeply concerned for instance about the former combatants who were being rehabilitated, and quite prepared to accept what Government was doing. This was made easier, I should add, by the International Organisation for Migration, essentially a body the Americans had set up when they thought the United Nations High Commission for Refugees was unreliable, being actively involved in the rehabilitation process.

This was what made nonsensical the claim of the Europeans that we were ill-treating the former combatants, who were held in secret. Unfortunately, because of suspicions about the conduct of some ICRC officials during the war, the ICRC had been banned from the centres, even though it had been initially involved in the registration of these combatants. But IOM was in regular attendance, and confirmed that the combatants were able to have visitors, and indeed when I checked I found that practically all those being detained had been in touch with their families.

Paul Carter

But Patricia’s positive approach was set at naught by Paul Carter. He was determined to undermine the Government, and for this purpose he sought to subvert officials, still thinking on the lines American covert agencies had adopted with regard to Sarath Fonseka.

I have no idea what else he did in this respect, but matters came to a head when he tried to win over the military spokesman Prasad Samarasinghe, by offering him passage to America and care for his family.

Sadly, Gotabaya was not able or willing to raise the issue publicly, and G.L. Peiris was quite incapable as Minister of External Affairs of advising him sensibly or taking up the issue himself. So Patricia could take the initiative, when she realised Carter had blundered, and she went to the Ministry of Defence and told Gotabaya that there had been a misunderstanding. Gotabaya did not take the matter further, but it obviously simmered, and that put paid to any hopes of a better relationship between the two countries.

My view was that such matters needed to be exposed and so I wrote about the incident. The result was that, when I was next due to meet Patricia, I was asked to come to the Embassy, where Jeff told me that she was deeply upset. So she was, and there almost seemed a catch in her voice when she told me that she could not work with me again, because I had made an allegation that was untrue.

Both she and I knew what had happened, but obviously Carter had demanded action and, given his position, she had to stand by him. Jeff seemed very upset and, though he could not take my side, he did say when I left that there were some very strange people in the Embassy.
Carter was not deterred by Prasad reporting him, for some months later it was reported that he had tried the same thing with Maithripala Sirisena, who was the Secretary of the SLFP. Sirisena promptly reported the effort to suborn him to the President, and once again Patricia had to engage in damage control.

Though we were no longer working together, we were civil when we met – and indeed I kept in touch with her after she had gone back to the States – and I asked her what had happened. Her answer was that Sirisena did not understand English, and the conversation had been through interpreters so a misunderstanding had occurred. But when I checked with Sirisena, the first time indeed that I spoke to him, he told me there had been no misunderstanding at all, and an effort had been made to get him to dissociate himself from the Government. 

By Lisa Fuller Courtesy Ceylon Today

Plantations in Sri Lanka that supply tea stamped slavery-free to top global companies are under investigation by ethical label groups, after an expose found illegal wage deductions that have left some workers ill and unable to afford healthcare.

An investigation by the Thomson Reuters Foundation found some workers at tea estates, certified by Rainforest Alliance and Fairtrade, were  taking home as little as 26 Sri Lankan Rupees (14 US cents) a day after fees and deductions levied without consent.

Wage slips from 17 workers at nine Rainforest certified tea estates, six of which were also backed by Fairtrade, showed daily earnings widely being cut by more than three-quarters for debt repayments, salary advances and a laundry list of fees.

Labourers in Nuwara Eliya, a district in Sri Lanka’s central highlands, said their wages were also halved if they failed to meet a daily picking quota or arrived to work late.

Such deductions violate several labour laws – the Industrial Disputes Act, Wages Board Ordinance and the Allowances to Plantation Workers Act, said four lawyers including Lahiru Dissanayake, who used to work at the Attorney General’s Department.

The Labour Ministry declined to comment on the findings despite repeated requests over a two-week period.

The Minister of Plantation Industries, Navin Dissanayake, said he “disagreed” that workers’ wages were being halved.

Rainforest Alliance and Fairtrade both said they were investigating the findings as deducting wages without workers’ consent was not allowed by law and contravened their standards.

“The allegations you have reported to us … if confirmed, represent serious violations of the Fairtrade Standards,” said a Fairtrade spokeswoman, adding that the group’s independent certifier, FLOCERT, would follow up on the findings.

Investigations launched

A spokeswoman for Rainforest Alliance said it was investigating the findings, and the estates in question could “have their certification status suspended or cancelled”.

Consumer goods giant Unilever – which owns a dozen well-known tea brands from PG Tips to Lipton – said it was “deeply concerned” and would investigate.

Major tea company Tetley – which is owned by India’s Tata Global Beverages – said it was in touch with the Rainforest Alliance regarding the findings.

The expose raises questions about the effectiveness of ethical label schemes – which are used by major tea brands and can mean higher prices – and their ability to detect and combat labour abuses of workers at the bottom of global supply chains.

“Tea estate workers are still not treated as citizens,” said lawyer Thambiah Eliyathamby, adding that halving workers’ wages violated the legally binding collective bargaining agreement between Estates and Unions within the Industrial Disputes Act.

“They are treated as inferior and face discrimination,” said Eliyathamby, who heads Thambiah Law Associates, a private firm, and is General Secretary of the People’s Workers’ Union.

Dissanayake, who was appointed Minister of Plantations in 2015, said he was unaware of earnings being cut over quotas.

“(However) I concede that estate workers are one of the most impoverished communities with the highest rate of malnourishment,” he said. “The situation has improved over the past 20 to 30 years, but that doesn’t mean we should be happy.”

Sri Lanka is the world’s third biggest tea exporter behind China and India, earning $1.4 billion last year, and about 4 per cent of a 21 million population live and work in tea estates.

Wages halved

Sumathi, 25, a tea picker who works on a Rainforest Alliance and Fairtrade-certified estate, said her daughter was born with a heart condition and needed frequent medical care.

The deductions on her monthly payslip – taken without her consent – amounted to $35, enough for 10 trips to hospital.

“Why would I let them take my money when I don’t even have enough to bring my baby to the doctor?” she said.

Tharshini, 51, who also works on an estate backed by the two certifiers, said she was suffering from malnutrition and anaemia.

Her most recent monthly payslip showed she took home $4.50 after the estate deducted 87 per cent of her earnings for debt repayment and various fees to pay towards an estate funeral fund, a co-op fund, tea and the salary slip itself.

“I’m sick a lot because I don’t have enough money to buy food or medicine,” she said.

Tharshini said if she picked less than 18 kg of tea, the estate paid her for a half-day; regardless of how many hours she worked, adding that she rarely met the quota due to exhaustion.

The same quota policy was in effect at several other tea estates, according to both estate managers and workers. Wages were also halved if workers arrived late by just 15 minutes.

According to the payslips gathered by the Thomson Reuters Foundation, workers at Fairtrade-certified estates were subject to 74 per cent wage deductions on average, while those at Rainforest Alliance-backed estates saw 65 per cent taken away.

Several of the payslips showed deductions of over 75 per cent – and slashing wages by more than three-quarters is illegal under the Wages Board Ordinance and the Allowances to Plantation Workers Act, said Lahiru Dissanayake.

The 17 wage slips showed labourers taking home an average of US $1.54 daily after debt repayments, salary advances, and fees. In reality, some workers earned less, as wages being halved for not meeting quotas or arriving late, does not appear on the payslips.

Several labourers also complained that their estates only abided by the certifiers’ ethical standards during audits but they were afraid of reprisals if they revealed this to auditors.

“Normally we don’t wear the protective gear when we spray chemicals, but on the day that Fairtrade comes, the manager tells us we have to,” one worker said on condition of anonymity.

Four tea estate managers defended their working conditions, with one saying his plantation did not do anything to prepare for audits because “we implement the standards perfectly”.

“I’m under pressure from the workers on one side, and from the management on the other side to maximize profits,” said one of the estate managers, declining to be identified.

Indra Gallearachchi, deputy general manager at the Rainforest Alliance-certified Robgill Estate, said wage deductions paid for services to make “workers’ lives easier”.

Bottom of the chain

Major tea companies have increasingly relied on certification schemes to assure consumers over ethical produce. Some firms are now setting their own standards, but, leading brands, including Tetley and Twinings, still say they source all or most of their tea via Rainforest Alliance and Fairtrade.
Tetley said it was in contact with Rainforest Alliance but had not sourced tea from the certified estates visited by the Thomson Reuters Foundation in the past year, although seven of them feature on Tetley’s supplier list that is available online.

Twinings’ Head of Social Impact, Céline Gilart, said the firm was fully committed to ethical sourcing, but that it has “limited leverage” because it does not own the tea estates.

The Thomson Reuters Foundation’s investigation echoed a 2018 report by Britain’s Sheffield University, which found little difference in the conditions of 600 tea workers on certified and non-certified farms in Assam and Kerala, in India. Genevieve LeBaron, a politics professor who led the two-year research, said major tea companies must shoulder some of the blame for labour exploitation on plantations.

“There just simply isn’t enough money going to the bottom end of the supply chain,” she said.

“Companies could most certainly address that if … they paid enough for tea to ensure that workers had a living wage.” 

Courtesy Adaderana

The United Nations Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture is set to carry out its first visit to Sri Lanka from 2 to 12 April to examine the treatment of people deprived of their liberty and the safeguards in place for their protection against torture and ill-treatment.

The four-member delegation will meet government officials and hold discussions with relevant ministries, as well as meeting with the Human Rights Commission and civil society organizations, a press release said. 

Their talks in Colombo will focus on advising and assisting the Sri Lankan authorities regarding the measures they must take to be in compliance with the obligations contained in the Optional Protocol to the UN Convention against Torture.

The Subcommittee will be visiting places of deprivation of liberty and will hold discussions on Sri Lanka establishing an independent National Preventive Mechanism. The Optional Protocol, which Sri Lanka ratified in 2017, requires such a mechanism to be established with the authority and capacity to undertake preventive visits to any place where persons may be deprived of their liberty.

During our visit we will be exploring the steps Sri Lanka needs to take to effectively prevent torture and ill-treatment of people deprived of their liberty,” said Victor Zaharia, who will head the delegation. We will also advise the authorities on the full implementation of their treaty obligations, including how they can best establish a national independent body to visit places of detention.”

The delegation will be composed of Victor Zaharia, Head of Delegation (Republic of Moldova), Satyabhooshun Gupt Domah (Mauritius), Petros Michaelides (Cyprus), and June Lopez (Philippines).

Courtesy NewsIn.Asia

Colombo, March 28 (newsin.asia) – The Sri Lanka Tourism Development Authority (SLTDA), on Thursday said it had launched 22 new police units in tourist areas across the island to ensure the safety of tourists and locals.

In a statement, the SLTDA said that presently there were 11 tourist police units in the country and another 22 new Tourist Police Units had been established.

Due to the lack of lands, the police units have been set up using containers in a small area of land.

Locals and foreigners who face any difficulties are able to seek the assistance of the police who are deployed in these special police units.

Sri Lanka’s tourism sector has faced criticism in recent months due to a rising number of sexual harassment allegations and fraud.

Tourism Development and Christian Religious Affairs Minister, John Amaratunga said recently that the government would take immediate measures to provide a safe environment for tourists to the island nation.

Amaratunga said the tourism industry was concerned about the increasing number of complaints of exploitation and harassment of foreign tourists and pledged to take stern action against those involved.

The Minister added that with tourist arrivals hitting record figures in recent years, the number of complaints was also increasing.We are very much aware of the ground situation and plan to take stern measures so that the good name of theindustry and the country is not spoiled by a few miscreants,” he had said.

Sri Lanka’s tourism industry, which was once heavily scarred by a 30-year civil conflict, has emerged as the leading foreign exchange earner with an increasing number of tourists.China has emerged as one of the leading markets for Sri Lanka Tourism.

By Sisira Kumara/Lanka.com Courtesy NewsIn.Asia

Known as the pearl of the Indian Ocean, Sri Lanka is a wondrous island endowed with a plethora of resources such as an bundant biodiversity, rich culture, great history, varied landscapes and many more. However, when we talk about the wildlife of the island, it is the jumbos that come to mind at once.

An iconic constituent of the country’s wildlife, elephants have over thousands of years been living in Sri Lanka where they have been revered for centuries. What’s more, it is Sri Lanka that cares for the world’s largest herd of orphaned elephants. So, if you have planned a trip to Sri Lanka, you will without a doubt take home fond memories of these gigantic yet gentle mammals.

Globally there are mainly two extant species of elephants – the African elephant (Loxodonta) and the Asian elephant (Elephas maximus), but after recent extensive studies and DNA testing, the African elephant was further subdivided into two distinct species called African bush elephant (Loxodonta africana) and African forest elephant (Loxodonta cyclotis).

The Asian elephant falls into three distinct subspecies: Elephas maximus maximus (living in Sri Lanka), Elephas maximus indicus (living in mainland Asia), and Elephas maximus sumatranus (living in the island of Sumatra). All these species of elephants are of the Elephantidae family and The Proboscidea order.

However, the largest of the Asian elephant’ genus, Elephas maximus (Linnaeus, 1758) is found only in Sri Lanka and it is a distinct subspecies of the Asian elephant while thought to be closely related to the Indian elephant. When compared with the African elephant, the Sri Lankan elephant is smaller in size but more attractive in appearance. It possesses smaller ears with dorsal borders folded laterally. The skin of this species is relatively smoother and darker with larger and more distinct patches of depigmentation on ears, face, trunk and belly.

They have two humps on their forehead and the back is arched and convex while the trunk is more rigid with less rings ending in a single lip, a finger-like projection with which it can scoop tiny objects up. Lighter in weight, weighing between 2 and 5.5 tons, an adult male of the Sri Lankan species stands from 2.5m to 3.5m tall at the shoulder.

Elephants in Colombo for the Perahera at the Gangarmaya Buddhist temple: Video -Tang Lu

Inhabiting tropical forests of the island, mainly lowland dry deciduous woodlands, scrubs etc. and frequenting nearby grasslands and cropped lands, the Sri Lankan elephants, whose lifespan lies between 55 and 70 years, travel in cohesive herds that consist of about 8-12 individuals especially female adults and their offspring headed by the matriarch, but herd sizes can vary.

Elephants in Colombo for the Perahera at the Gangarmaya Buddhist temple: Video -Tang Lu/Xinhua

Anyway, males who leave natal herds when they reach sexual maturity can be sighted wandering on their own or in temporary bachelor herds. Their cohesiveness is enforced by a complex communication system. A range of vocalizations, from low rumblings to high-pitched screams and trumpets, along with assorted visual signals is employed when they are close to each other. Some of their rumbling, growling, bellowing, and moaning sounds of varied low frequency may travel long distances.

These herbivorous proboscideans, that wander miles a day mostly in search of food and water, feed on a wide variety of vegetation including grasses, leaves, climbers, shoots, barks, roots, fruits, nuts and seeds and a large number of plant species have been identified to be fed on by elephants in Sri Lanka. Besides, an adult elephant can consume up to about 300 pounds of vegetation on a day.

Anyway, a high degree of sexual dimorphism is seen between the two sexes. The bull elephant is larger than the cow. A bull elephant has large trunk bases, bulges below and in front of their eyes, and swelling above the eyes as well. The cow elephant on the other hand has narrower trunk bases and lacks the prominent bulge above eyes. Bull’s back is more rounded and curves more gradually into its hindquarters but the cow’s is straighter and boxier with vertical hindquarters.

A female elephant usually becomes reproductive when she reaches about 9 – 12 years of age and can calve every 2 1/2 to 4 years, while less favorable conditions includes 5-8 years allowing for about 7 offspring during her lifespan. Males become sexually mature at about their 14th — 15th year, sometimes at the age of 9 years, but bulls do not mate until their twenties due to social hierarchy. Cows come into oestrus every 3 months, during which they are receptive to mating.

When a female becomes pregnant, her oestrus cycle halts and she does not mate. Soon after she calves, her oestrus cycle begins again and she mates even if she is nursing. Anyway, after a 22-month gestation period, the longest of any mammal, they give birth to a single calf (very rarely twins) which weighs between 75-115kg standing 2.5-3.5 ft tall.

A baby elephant that may consume about 12 litres of milk a day is taken care of not only by its mother but also by other cows in the herd whilst being weaned usually between 2 and 4 years of age. When referring to males, it is the oldest and largest ones that do most of the breeding during any time of the year. Bull elephants tend to breed during musth” because during this period they become sexually active as well as extremely aggressive.

Furthermore, Sri Lankan elephants are highly intelligent, self-aware, social, emotional as well as strong. It is reported that they move to safer places when natural disasters occur. A classic example is that in 2004 when the tsunami hit the island, elephants that were roaming in the coastal areas at the time had moved inland moments before the tsunami reached after sensing the looming calamity.

These emotional beasts express their emotions using their trunk, ears, head, and tail. Also these species can easily be tamed and is capable of working under human instructions.

In Sri Lanka, elephants have been domesticated and used for various purposes over thousands of years. These powerful beasts have been used for transportation of people on their back, carrying, hauling and lifting logs and other heavy objects like stones used for construction purposes. In addition, these majestic proboscideans have been used for religious and cultural as well as other ceremonial occasions and this human-elephant relationship dates back to a period of over 5,000 years.

Ancient Sinhalese kings of Sri Lanka used captive elephants even to wage war.

Currently, in Sri Lanka elephants are mostly used for ceremonial occasions while they are rarely used for hauling and heavy labour. elephants, colourfully decorated in elegant costumes, are a common sight in Buddhist festivals especially Peraheras (processions) held by Buddhist temples all around the island. Among these grand festivals, the Kandy Esala Perahera” is the most well known festival in which a large number of nicely adorned majestic march along.

The most magnificent tusker (usually the longest-tusked) carries the casket of the Sacred Tooth Relic with pride and dignity, an opportunity enjoyed by only a few tuskers in Sri Lanka. This procession is annually held by the Temple of the Sacred Tooth Relic in Kandy since ancient times while it is the grandest and the most popular not only locally but internationally as well. Moreover, the elephant has today become part and parcel of Sri Lanka’s ecotourism.

The most unique feature of this animal is its tusks which give a sense of true majesty above other animals. The tusks are being used for various tasks. It is their incisor teeth that develop into tusks which grows up to about 6 feet throughout the animal’s life and elephants are usually right- or left-tusked as humans.

The Sri Lankan elephant’s tusk which is slimmer and lighter can weigh up to about 35kg. Of the Sri Lankan elephants, only the bull has long tusks, though many bulls have no tusks at all. Cows have short tusks usually hidden under their rashes. The only other teeth they have are four molars that are replaced seven times throughout their lives.

As the animal ages and the teeth are worn away with use, they are replaced from behind with the next set. If an elephant lives long enough to have used up all of its teeth, it then may starve to death. Anyway, of Sri Lankan elephants only a few bear tusks and the tusker population in Sri Lanka stands at less than 3% of the total population of elephants.

Nonetheless, Sri Lanka was once home the Asia’s longest-tusked elephant known as Millangoda Raja” who carried the casket of the Sacred Tooth Relic in the Kandy Esala Perahera for about four decades until he died in 2011 at the age of 70 years.

This gigantic herbivorous mammal needs a large amount of habitat as they need enormous quantities of food and water to sustain their massive bodies, but unfortunately they are currently threatened primarily by the loss of habitat, in addition to habitat degradation and fragmentation.

Deforestation for human settlements and cropping, leads to the loss and increased fragmentation of the elephant habitat in Sri Lanka.

Every year in Sri Lanka, nearly 120 wild lephants are killed by people in order to protect their crops and houses and also to hunt for ivory. However when elephants roam to settlements and are not often killed, in return about 65 people die annually after being attacked by elephants.

These numbers of deaths may be higher in certain years, with about 160 jumbos being reported to have been killed in 2006 alone. Besides, this human-elephant conflict is compounded by the elephant’s predilection for crops, such as sugarcane, bananas and other fruits grown by farmers.

Even during the 19th and 20th centuries, elephants of this island had undergone very pathetic circumstances. During British rule, Sri Lanka lost a remarkable percentage of her elephant population; Major Thomas Rogers, famously known as 1400 & lost count”, had ruthlessly killed over 1400 elephants including more than 60 tuskers, at least one jumbo per day until he was killed by a stroke of lightning.

In addition, during the same era, Major Thomas Skinner and Capt Galway had gunned down over 600 and 700 jumbos respectively for their sporting pleasure.

Meanwhile, in 2004 a rare albino elephant was for the first time spotted in Sri Lanka wandering in the Yala National Park, while this pale skinned jumbo was a member of a herd that comprised of about 17 elephants. The elephant has been sighted many times during the recent past. Albinism is a condition characterized by insufficient melanin production of the body. It is the melanin that gives colours to skin, hair and eyes. Albinism can be observed rarely among the animals, reptiles and birds due to various genetic reasons.

Anyway, according to the elephant census carried out in 2011 by the Wildlife Conservation Department, Sri Lanka is home to 5,879 elephants out of which 1,107 are babies and 122 are tuskers. However, centuries ago this island had been inhabited by oodles of elephants, but when we look at the current elephant population, we can understand the extent as to why they are endangered by today. Hence, conservation of these valuable animals is a sine qua non of time.

However, tourists who travel to Sri Lanka can have a memorable experience of these gigantic proboscideans of the island. They can enjoy watching, photographing and riding on elephants, in addition to going on elephant back safaris in national parks. Sri Lanka’s main national parks where tourists can watch Sri Lanka’s iconic giants of the wild include: Yala National Park,Minneriya National Park, Kaudulla National Park,Wasgamuwa National Park, Wilpattu National Park, Gal Oya National Park,Udawalawe National Park, andLahugala Kitulana National Park. Minneriya, Kaudulla, Udawalawe and Yala National Parks are more popular for elephant back safaris.

The Elephant Transit Home at theUdawalawe National Parkis also a fantastic place to watch elephants. Here, orphaned elephant babies are rehabilitated and then released back into the jungle after they become strong enough to survive in their natural habitat.

Yet another fantastic place to experience the earth’s biggest land mammals is the world famousPinnawala Elephant Orphanagethat cares for nearly 90 orphaned elephants, the world’s largest herd of captive elephants. Tourists have the opportunity not only to observe the entire herd bathing in the river but also to feed them with fruits and milk. The difference between the elephant transit home and elephant orphanage is that elephant orphanage does not release elephants back into the jungle whereas the transit home releases them.

References: Tourist Directory 2013

(Photos and video by Tang Lu)

KAMALIKA  PIERIS

There were three sets of inquiry into the Central Bank bond scam, the Pitipana committee, the Presidential Commission of Inquiry   and the COPE inquiry. These bodies could only probe and make recommendations. They could not issue charges.

Prime Minister Ranil Wickremasinghe appointed a three-member commission of lawyers, Gamini Pitipana (Chairman) Mahesh Kalugampitiya and Chandimal Mendis.  This committee was critiqued on two counts.  Firstly, they were dubbed UNP lawyers. They had been affiliated to the ruling UNP at one time or the other. Secondly, they knew nothing about the subject. A new committee with relevant expertise should be appointed said critics.  

In Parliament, some of the MPs refused to accept the UNP report. Therefore Speaker Chamal Rajapaksa set up a 13-member COPE team, headed by DEW Gunasekera, to inquire into the matter. This report faced two obstacles. Parliament was dissolved before the COPE report could be presented. Also UNP MP Sujeewa Senasinghe   went to District court of Colombo to obtain an injunction to stop the release of the COPE report ahead of the general election of August 2015.

A Presidential Commission of Inquiry appointed by the President on January 27, 2017. The Presidential Commission of Inquiry was only a fact finding one. It could not declare anyone guilty. It lacked the power to take action against the culprits. Therefore In its present form this Commission would not be able to achieve what the public really wants to see happen, said critics. The Commission should have been appointed in accordance with the Special Presidential Commission of Inquiry Act. The Commission would then have comprised three sitting Supreme Court judges and it would have had greater powers.  The commission sat for 11 months. Its report was handed over to the President and was thereafter submitted to the Attorney General.

The Presidential Commission of Inquiry   and the COPE report provided the eager public with the ‘inside story’ of the Bond scam.  The Presidential Commission of Inquiry, in particular, exposed much information on the bond scam. 

Preparations for the scam had started early. A major shuffling of Department Heads took place in the Central Bank after former Governor Arjun Mahendran took office, said an official at the Presidential inquiry. Altogether, 34 transfers took place in 2015 among 30 CBSL department heads. I have worked under eight governors and never in my entire service did I witness such a major shuffle,” the official said. “The CBSL usually undergoes around 250 Department Head transfers. After Mahendran came, it went up to a 500”. Previously not more than five to six departmental heads and 195 of general staff had been transferred. The internal transfers were done in a justifiable manner without upsetting the workings of the departments. 

14 heads of department had been transferred along with 20 other key persons. “Among those transferred were heads of four vital departments of the Central Bank   the transfers made were not helpful. Head of International Operations was transferred to the Communication Department. The Head of Supervision was transferred to Exchange Control. The Head of Exchange Control was sent to the Regional and so on. Other experienced officers were also removed from their positions. Pathuman of the EPF was transferred to Public Debt Department. He was one of the most experienced officers in the EPF and the head of department wanted him back.

These transfers of key officers had ‘shaken the very foundations of the Central Bank’. Mahendran’s action had caused dissent and dejection among the senior officers of the bank. The earlier practice had been to consult Deputy Governors and Departmental Heads prior to effecting transfers and to appoint persons with relevant expertise to head the departments.

Evidence presented at the Presidential Commission indicated that Mahendran had made these transfers with an ulterior motive. Mahendran had put in place as the Head of the Public Debt Department an officer who was not an expert in the subject. Deepa Seneviratne who was promoted to the post of Superintendent of the Public Debt Department in February 2015 told the Special Presidential Commission of Inquiry that she was surprised when she was appointed to that post because she did not have any experience or knowledge of the duties and functions of that department. It appeared that she had been appointed, so that the Governor could brush her aside and interfere with the decision making process.

From January 2014 till January 2015, money needed for the government was raised mostly through direct placements. Auctions were certainly held during this period, but only for very small amounts compared to the amounts being sold through private placements. But after the new government came into power in January 2015, and especially after March 2015, direct placements ceased completely and bonds are sold exclusively by auction.

 Mahendran told the Commission that it was Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe who gave the directive to stop direct placement method. Mahendran under cross examining stated that Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe ordered him to issue TBs only through public auctions, reported the media.

Doing away with the direct placement method is not within the purview of the Governor, said former Deputy Governor of the Central Bank Dr. W. A. Wijewardene .Governor Mahendran did so without obtaining Monetary Board approval.  He had claimed that the move would bring in foreign investors to the country.  Stopping direct placement also meant that the government could not obtain loans at lower interest rates, Wijewardene said.

 Auditor General observed that the auctions system has increased costs and worked to the benefit of the primary dealers who were able to dispose of their bonds in the secondary market at higher rates. If the government wanted funds immediately to settle payments, a one-year Treasury Bill could have been issued and rolled over periodically.

Central Bank Deputy Governor Dr. Nandalal Weerasinghe, said that the Central Bank had been compelled to print a large amount of money in 2015 and 2016 as the then Governor Arjuna Mahendran opted for long-term bond auctions. Never in the history of the Central Bank had such a large amount of money been printed before.

Governor Arjuna Mahendran had ordered Deepa Seneviratne to accept Rs. 10 billion worth of bids on Treasury bonds. Seneviratne said that the order had been given in the presence of two Deputy Governors and officials of her department and she had been left with no alternative but to comply with the Governor’s order. Governor Mahendran had used the words, “Do it”, in ordering her to proceed with the particular bond sale, Seneviratne said, giving evidence before the Commission.

Additional Director Dr M. Z. M. Azim had tried to point out the negative repercussions of the bond sale, four times but in vain, while the two Deputy Governors were keeping silent, she said. Seneviratne put up a note registering her strong opposition to Mahendran’s move.

Mahendran had walked into the Bank’s Market Operations Committee meeting on February 27, 2015 and told those present that the standard deposit rate of 5 percent would be removed and an auction held to issue 30-year Treasury Bonds. There was no discussion and no reason given. Officials were surprised when Mahendran walked in. CBSL Governors did not usually attend meetings of the Operations Department.  When questioned as to why they followed Mahendran’s orders, officials said that the Governor has enormous power within the CBSL.’ The officers will yield to what the Governor says.’

the need to issue 30-year bonds as opposed to those of shorter tenure was queried at the inquiry. According to Mahendran, the Secretary to the Treasury was facing the crunch” on massive payments including the unpaid bills of the year 2014 which were amounting to a large sum of Rs. 1.4 trillion. 

The decision to scrap the 5 percent deposit rate was highly sensitive and if that information leaked to one of the bidders, it would have given the bidder a definite advantage over others, said the Bank’s Deputy Governor Nandalal Weerasinghe. If a primary dealer had found out that the interest rate had been raised while the bond auction was ongoing, that particular dealer would have stood to profit far more significantly than others who were not privy to the information.

Thereafter, Mahendran instructed the Operations Department to draft a circular raising the rate to 6.5 percent. The instructions were given while a bond auction was taking place.  They were also instructed to take all the bids that had been received. There were dummy bids as well.

The 30 year Bond carrying a fixed interest rate of 12.5% was advertised by the CB for a value of Rs.1 Billion for the Auction to be held on 27th February 2015. Most dealers had made preparations to provide bids for the already announced Rs. 1.0b. . But at the auction, the amount was increased to Rs 10 billion, on the instructions of Mahendran.

 Raising the bids to Rs 10 billion has been done before ,but  the February 27 issue was of a scale) that was totally unprecedented, said Bank officials.  It was ten times the original offer. There was also a difference in the bid offer ratio. This was usually around two to four times the offer, but the bids on February 27 were 20 times the original offer.  In the earlier Rs 10b bids, the Bank had accepted offers which exceeded by 50% at the most, In the February 2015 issue the Bank accepted ten times the amount originally offered.

The media reported that  money markets were in an uproar on Friday, February 27 when the CBSL announced that it was accepting bids worth Rs. 10.0b at 9.50%-12.50% whereas clients and most primary dealers had made bids between 9.50% and 10.50%. Only a few bids, including those by Perpetual Treasuries were made in the 12% range. As a result, Perpetual Treasuries was the successful bidder, getting 50% of that amount at the highest price.

Bonds which would have been sold in the market for Rs.121/= was sold around Rs.91/=to Perpetual Treasuries , causing losses amounting to Rs.1.5 billion immediately to government  This caused heavy losses to other primary dealers and investors too. The biggest loser was the National Savings Bank.

The Bank of Ceylon (BOC) had submitted a bid on behalf of their customers at 9.5% and Rs 121. However, after getting an extension of the closing time of the bid (during the last 30 minutes before the closure of the tender) the same BOC submitted bids at prices ranging between Rs.87 and Rs.97 on behalf of another Primary Dealer, Perpetual Treasuries. The Chief Dealer of BOC when questioned about this strange behavior said that the CEO of Perpetual Treasuries told him Awoth atha thamai” meaning tremendous profits, if successful.

Clearly Perpetual had access toinformation that other dealers did not have, which enabled them to come to the February 27 auction fully prepared to bid for bonds worth Rs 10b or more and also get the Bank of Ceylon to bid on its behalf for an additional Rs 3b.

The Treasury bond dealings had been planned in such a way that the company which gained the most couldn’t be identified. “There was a pattern of trading designed to mask the real beneficiary.” “Through this pattern of trading the lion’s share of profits went to Perpetual Treasuries while the lion’s share of the entire loss went to the EPF. Small net cash inflows went to Pan Asia Bank and DFCC.” Former Pan Asia bank chairman had attempted to influence a witness, regarding giving evidence at the bond scam. (Sunday Times 9.7.17 p 20)  

The pattern of activity of Perpetual Treasuries before, at, and after the auction gives rise to reasonable suspicion of that company having acquired some inside, privileged knowledge, said Samarasinghe and Mendis.

 Perpetual had sold large amounts of bonds in the market on February 26 when the market was under the impression that CBSL policy interest rates would remain unchanged at 5% and were not aware of the CBSL decision to scrap the 5.0%. The abolition of the 5% window meant that those who held the old bonds will see the market value of their bonds halved if they try to sell them before maturity. . Perpetual thereafter purchased bonds in the market the following week thus making a massive profit.

 An official of the Central Bank pointed out that the state had suffered an immediate loss of Rs. 878 million because of decision to raise funds by selling treasury bonds only through auction. Mahendran had ordered that bids for Rs 10 bn be accepted without direct placements and, therefore, the government had received only Rs 9.6 billion. If both direct placements and auction methods had been employed the government could have raised as much as Rs 10.5 billion. The Central Bank could have raised Rs 2.6 billion through auction method and the rest could have been raised through direct placements in accordance with the then current market interest rates, he said.

After the auction, Perpetual Treasuries, along with a few other Primary dealers also made high profits by selling the bonds to the Employees’ Provident Fund, Sri Lanka Insurance Corporation, the University Grants Commission, National Savings Bank and Mahapola Scholarship Fund.

Perpetual Treasuries bought treasury bonds worth Rs. 8,594 million and resold them to Sri Lanka Insurance Corporation for Rs. 12,708 million, within a few days, said the Centre for Human Rights. The company made a profit of Rs. 4,114 million. loss to Sri Lanka Insurance Corporation was over Rs 4.11 billion.

National Savings Bank and Perpetual Treasuries had at least five transactions. The company made a profit of Rs. 819 million while the NSB lost over Rs. 819 million. On March 17, 2015 the Secretary of the University Grants Commission (UGC) issued a gazette to utilize Universities Provident Fund for long and short term investments. UGC invested around Rs. 1 billion in the Bond deal,   said the Centre for Human Rights. the minimum loss made by the UGC was Rs. 146 million. the Centre also said it might not be the only time that Universities Provident Fund (UPF) had been misused in a similar fashion.

The total loss incurred by Employees’ Provident Fund (EPF)  due to the bond scam alone was over Rs. 26 billion said  Campaign for Free and Fair Elections (CaFFE. Employees Provident Fund Department sources at the Central Bank said   EPF had suffered losses due to the bond scam. They attributed the loss to buying Treasury Bonds from primary dealer Perpetual Treasuries without buying them at the auction direct. They said details about the losses had been already reported to the Central Bank and the Bank had launched an inquiry. The CB had initially asked for a committee consisting of outsiders for the probe as some CB employees were also to be investigated.

A special investigation, commissioned by the Monetary Board of the Central Bank of Sri Lanka, in March 2017, showed that bond scams under the current government led to a staggering loss of about Rs. 10 billion to the Employees’ Provident Fund (EPF). the report set out in detail the manner in which the EPF scam had been carried out by the two high ranking CBSL officials. The deals were done directly with the primary dealer or routed through other intermediary primary dealers. The team had looked into the investment of EPF monies in Treasury bonds in 2015 and 2016.

a CB official accused of committing irregularities had submitted his resignation on hearing about the proposed investigation, but the CB hierarchy had not accepted his resignation in view of the investigation.

At the Monetary Board meeting on March 23, board members demanded that the two officials found guilty for swindling public funds be interdicted immediately and disciplinary action taken against them. However, all that was done was sending two ‘show-cause’ letters to the officials, clearly named in the report as offenders. he soft-peddling of the issue and not taking clear action against the corrupt officials and allowing them to remain in the service at the same positions would result in they doing further damage and intimidating other officials who were against corruption, sources said.

One particular name had emerged in the investigations. P.H.I. Saman Kumara was transferred to the EPF on 08 June 2015.( Island 1.8.17 p 6)  The staff at the EPF  warned me against Saman Kumara whom they claimed to be a questionable dealer said Assistant Governor  Jayalath. Dealers carry a big responsibility. So I was scared. I put Saman Kumara in the Risk Management Division of the EPF.”

 Then I received a telephone call from the then Governor Arjun Mahendran, continued Jayalath. He called me and shouted at me for placing Saman Kumara in the Risk Management Division.” Mahendran told him I sent a fellow with CFA qualification and this fellow tells me he was not assigned to the EPF Front Office.”

Mahendran had wanted Saman to be put in the front office. And directed Jayalath to do so. I told Governor Mahendran that we cannot rely on Saman Kumara, concerns have been raised on his conduct. Then Mr. Mahendran asked me whether these rumors had any proof. I told him we do not have proof. Then he asked me ‘so with no proof how can you say Saman Kumara’s conduct as a dealer is questionable?’”

Jayalath was unhappy about the order,  but did not want to shift Saman Kumara to another position because if I (Jayalath) had shifted him (Saman Kumara) I would also have to walk out of my position.” He had heard what happened to some of the persons in the Central Bank who were against the then Governor Mahendran.”

as the Chief Dealer of the EPF ,Saman Kumara was responsible for buying treasury bonds purchased by Perpetual Treasuries in the secondary market. Saman Kumara had violated regulations by conducting dealings exceeding his daily limits. Daily dealing limit for a Chief Dealer in the EPF is Rs.2 billion.

Further, Saman Kumara was difficult to control, said  Jayalath. he was regularly not in his seat and continuously used the mobile phone, disregarding the instruction not to use mobile phones to carry out deals.” Saman Kumara was close to  Governor Mahendran and it seemed Saman Kumara was divulging details of discussions held at the EPF to Mahendran said Jayalath. (Island 1.8.17 p 6)

The government said initially  that it has not incurred any loss because the frozen PTL assets amounts to Rs. 12 billion while the total loss was Rs 11 billion. This was hotly contested. The total loss incurred by the state due to the bond scam was over Rs 33 billion  said Campaign for Free and Fair Elections (CaFFE)  .”Our experts have gone through the transactions and found that the loss to be around Rs. 33 billion.

Nalaka Godahewa, former SEC Chairman,  pointed out that  Rs. 11 billion is just the profit made by Perpetual Treasuries in one year through the bond scam. there are other factors to be taken into account such as the increase in the interest rates. This is no ordinary scam (horakama) but one that has affected the whole country and added to the cost of living of every citizen, Godahewa said.

Lastly, the Treasury bond scam had caused a 10 billion-rupee loss to the government coffers alone, former Deputy Governor of the Central Bank Dr. W. A. Wijewardene  said. there had been an immediate loss of Rs. 532 million to the government and the total loss for the 30 years would be Rs. 10 billion, he said, presenting a document outlining his calculation of the loss.

The loss to the government resulting from the interest rate increase alone is in the range of Rs. 126 billion. Further, he pointed out that as a result of the flight of foreign money from the bond market following this scam and other reasons, the value of the rupee depreciated by about 16% which resulted in the increase of the government foreign debt by about Rs 512 billion. As a result of the increase in the interest rates, the debt of companies and individuals had increased by about Rs. 280 billion. Thus the actual direct and indirect loss to the government and the people of Sri Lanka from the bond scam is over one trillion rupees. 

the Central bank will get back Rs 10.0b in interest earnings in about 8.5 years. Thus Sri Lanka will be paying the amount of the original amount borrowed at least three times over by way of interest payments only. the bond issue also  raised interest rates causing a loss to the taxpayer. The taxpayer is also affected, thought he does not know it.

A second controversial bond auction took place on the 29 march 2016. this second scam,  was even worse than the first scam. Central Bank issued treasury  bonds worth Rs 80 billion in March 2016 after announcing that they will  only issue bonds to Rs 40 million. The amount accepted by the Central Bank at this auction was 07 times greater than the amount accepted in 2015. Bank of Ceylon, the People’s Bank and the National Savings Bank had  twice received instructions    at this auction to make bids at lower rates.

Again Perpetual Treasuries benefited. PTL obtained 34% and 31% of the relevant bonds. Perpetual Treasuries borrowed from the Employees Provident Fund (EPF), the DFCC Bank and the Pan Asia Bank to pay for these bonds. Perpetual  was also helped by the Central Bank  which allowed Perpetual to borrow from the Central Bank under the ‘Intra-day Liquidity Facility’ (ILF).

 Thereafter, Perpetual  had been charged an additional Rs. 88 million  because of  an increase in the market rate. Central bank thereafter returned Rs. 88 million to Perpetual  after the market value went up. the payment of Rs. 88 million had been done with the approval of the Central Bank. Central bank officials said it was against the Central Bank regulations to pay money back  in this way. This had never been done before. it was unusual and unprecedented.

Critics commented, we have now  heard how a  primary dealer borrowed money from the Central Bank at low interest rates to buy high interest yielding bonds issued by the Central Bank itself. Perpetual Treasuries Ltd made a Net Profit of Rs. 5.124 billion in the
Financial Year ended 31 March 2016 and a Net Profit of Rs. 6.365 billion in the Financial Year ended 31 March 2017.

DEW Gunasekera said that if Yahapalana  had allowed  COPE to present its report to Parliament, the second treasury bond scam could have been  prevented. the 2016 scam was much bigger than the one perpetrated soon after the change of government. The PTL had, with political backing, borrowed from the state and then the same funds were given back at a higher interest,  DEW Gunasekera  observed.

The Pitipana commission, though dismissed as ignorant and biased made several very  significant recommendations. The Pitipana Commission said, inter alia, ‘We have  determined that Mr. Mahendran directed that bids to the value of Rs. 10.058 billion be accepted for the improper, wrongful and Bala fide collateral purpose of enabling Perpetual Treasuries Ltd to obtain a high value of Treasury Bonds at that Auction, at low Bid Prices and high Yield Rates’.

We also find that Mr. Mahendran provided inside information (price sensitive information) to Perpetual Treasuries Ltd., which Perpetual Treasuries Ltd used to its benefit at the Treasury Bonds Auction held on 27th February 2015 and that Mr. Mahendran acted in collusion with Perpetual Treasuries Ltd.

 in view of the determinations referred to above. the Commission to Investigate Allegations of Bribery or Corruption and the other appropriate authorities should consider whether the aforesaid acts of Mr. Mahendran amount to acts of “Corruption” as defined in Section 70 of the Bribery Act and, if so. prosecute Mr. Mahendran under the Bribery Act and other applicable law.

the Pitipana Committee continued, Perpetual Treasuries Ltd has made the major part of its profits by using ‘inside information’ (price sensitive information) and by market manipulation in the Secondary Market and, thereby, knowingly violated and acted in breach of the provisions of the Code of Conduct for Primary Dealers, which has been issued by the CBSL under and in terms of the Regulations issued under the Registered Stock and Securities Ordinance No. 7 of 1937.

given the complexity of the task and the expertise needed. a Forensic Audit or similar process should be carried out to accurately estimate the quantum of the sum to which Perpetual Treasuries Ltd gained and benefited from the ‘inside information’ (price sensitive information) at the Treasury Bond Auction on 29th March 2016.

Pitipana committee continued, we recommend that, appropriate proceedings be  instituted against Perpetual Treasuries Ltd for the recovery of these monies. we consider that, the provisions of Section 21D (5) of the Registered Stocks and Securities Ordinance are likely to be relevant.

we recommend that. the Hon. Attorney General and other appropriate authorities consider whether Mr. Arjun Aloysius and Mr. Kasun Palisena are parties to and directly responsible for the commission of an offence under section 56A(1) of the Registered Stock and Securities Ordinance and, if so, proceed against these two persons too, in terms of Section 56B of the Registered Stock and Securities Ordinance, concluded  Pitipana committee. ( continued)

KAMALIKA  PIERIS

CID had been directed by the Commission of Inquiry, to probe links between Aloysius and the MPs who had added footnotes to the  COPE report on the Treasury bond scam. The investigation, conducted by the Criminal Investigation Department (CID), showed a spate of telephone conversations between Arjun Aloysius and some members of the COPE team that probed the bond scams. There were 227 with Sujeewa Senasinghe, 176 with Harshana Rajakaruna, 73 with Hector Appuhamy and 18   with Dayasiri Jayasekara.    Some at least, of these calls,   were taken during the COPE hearings.

The CID informed the Commission of inquiry that Deputy Minister Sujeewa Senasinghe had had the highest number of telephone conversations with Aloysius during the period under investigation. The total number of telephone calls to and from Senasinghe to Aloysius between the periods July 4, 2015 to March 3, 2017, which coincided with COPE sessions,  was 227. Sujeewa Senasinghe had been put onto to the COPE team probing the alleged Central Bank bond scam when Velu Kumar resigned on July 5, 2016. 63 of the calls were during his tenure as a member of the COPE team probing Aloysius.

Sujeewa Senasinghe immediately called a news conference. He said he spoke to Aloysius to obtain information on the book he was writing on the Bond scam. ‘I did not have the information and therefore got details from Arjuna Mahendran and other officials. Is it wrong that I spoke to Aloysius? Aloysius is not an accused anywhere. After the second COPE was set up, I never spoke to him,’ announced Senasinghe.

Sujeewa did not explain, however, why he felt impelled to write a book on the subject whist being a member of COPE, said critics.  It was pointed out also that his book Maha Bankuwe Badhumkara Nikuthuwe Attha Nattha,” was published in 2015. The telephone records  produced by the CID took place during the COPE sittings,  6th May to 28th October 2016. These 62 calls were made one year after his bond book was published.

SLFP MP D. V. Chanaka had asked Sujeewa in Parliament,  whether Sujeewa  can tell the House what he spoke to Aloysius about. Sujeewa replied Merely because we are on the COPE Committee, why cannot we talk to a private person? Tell me a legal reason. Aloysius has not been made an accused. And if I need to get some information from him, why cannot I talk to him?

D.V.Chanaka read from the Senasinghe book on the bond issue. If you have something to buy and if your uncle has a shop, and if that item is available for sale at your uncle’s shop and if you purchase that item from your uncle’s shop in the normal course of trade, then who, in his right mind, can say the transaction was based on family relationship?” D.V. Chanaka then asked Sujeewa, Do you think that this is a case of  a person going to his father in law’s shop and buying a loaf of bread?

Sujeewa Senasinghe   had  also accepted money from Aloysius. He had  accepted three cheques to the tune of Rs. 3 million from W. M. Mendis & Company, belonging to Arjun Aloysius. The first cheque  was for one million rupees, issued from W. M. Mendis Company, a Bank of Ceylon account, to Senasinghe was dated August 24, 2015. The cheque was cashed by Ministerial Security Division (MSD and the money handed over to one of Senasinghe’s aides.

The second cheque also for one million rupees,  was issued on Nov. 12, 2015 from the same account. It  was cashed by Ministerial Security Division (MSD) . It was said by Senasinghe’s campaign team that the  money was spent on the election campaign. They did not know who gave the cheques. However, there was no election at that time. The third one-million-rupee cheque was issued on March 31, 2016 from the same account

There Finance Minister Ravi Karunanayake’s name came up frequently, although he himself denied any special relationship” with    Aloysius,  said Namini Wijedasa. Ravi Karunanayake’s name had come up frequently  in the investigation that Namini had conducted.   The CID   found 387 calls between Finance Minister Ravi Karunanayake and  Arjun Aloysius. You are linked with the Mahendra family , Ravi was told. This is ludicrous, replied Ravi. We have been family friends for years.  His son-in-law and my grandfather were known to each other. (sic)The family are also good friends of Premier Wickremesinghe.

Finance Minister Ravi Karunanayake had at been at a meeting of CEOs of Primary dealers  in March 2015. This  was unprecedented, said Bank officials. Former Deputy Governor of the Central Bank, Ananda Silva,  said he had been informed  on February 26, the day before the  Bond auction that  a meeting would be held at the Central Bank cafeteria   on the 26^th attended by three powerful ministers of the government and he had been asked to attend.

Those present at the meeting chaired by Arjuna Mahendran had  included  Ministers Ravi Karunanayake, Kabir Hashim and Malik Samarawickrama, Finance Ministry Secretary Dr Samaratunge and some officers of the Road Development Authority. The discussion  was on obtaining funds for some road development projects. It was most unusual for politicians to visit the Central Bank and participate in meetings in this manner. The practice was for CB officials to visit the respective ministries and hold discussions with the senior officers or ministers, Silva said.

 Chairmen and senior officials of three major state banks, Bank of Ceylon, the People’s Bank and the National Savings Bank, testifying before the presidential commission of inquiry probing the bond scams  said that on two occasions in 2016,  Finance Minister Ravi Karunanayake had instructed them to make bids at the treasury bond auctions held on March 28, 2016 and March 30,2016, at lower interest (yield) rates. Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe’s Senior Advisor R. Paskaralingam had also been present .As a  result, their institutions had been deprived of an opportunity to make substantial profits.

General Manager of the People’s Bank N. Wasantha Kumara said it was the first time in the country’s history that a finance minister had asked the state banks to bid for treasury bonds at lower interest rates. In answer to a question why the state banks had carried out Karunanayake’s instructions, Hemasiri Fernando of Peoples bank, said the state banks belonged to the Treasury and therefore they had to abide by those instructions. Karunanayake was the line minister therefore they had followed instructions.

The senior officials of the three banks also said that though they had followed the instructions given by Minister Ravi Karunanayake, the latter had failed to honour his promise that the Central Bank would not accept bids at rates higher than the yield rate range he had mentioned to them.

Perpetual Treasuries it  was said,  had   two ‘Things to Do files’ . one   for father in law, Arjuna Mahendran the other for   Ranil Wickremasinghe  . From the beginning, we have repeatedly said Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe is responsible for the bond scams and it happened with is blessings and instructions. Now, his involvement has been proved and he should resign at-least now,” MP Aluthgamage said. there has been enough of evidence before the Commission against those responsible and now it was time to take legal action against them.” Derana news  of 4.1.18 aired the  statement  Ranil must resign.  He appointed Mahendran”.

Business Times (BT)  did an opinion poll on the bond scam in January 2018.  The survey, conducted over just 10 hours, attracted a wide response from a cross-section of people including company directors, public officials, social activists and students. It reflected the public’s anxiety to ascertain the findings of the Commission whose widely-publicized proceedings itself attracted a lot of attention amongst scandalous profit-making by  Perpetual Treasuries. (PTL)

In a quick BT survey through email 82 per cent of the respondents said  Bond Commission’s findings is a fair and independent view of corrupt deals in the disputed bond trades.  a resounding 99 per cent said Yes” when asked whether strong action should be taken against those named in the report as being involved in the corrupt deals, while 90 per cent agreed that the report should be speedily released to the public.

asked whether the Government will definitely take action against the accused persons”, 53 per cent responded with Undecided,” 26 per cent said No” and 21 per cent said Yes”.  Some respondents who did their own polls on a Twitter account found the same result. people are not convinced that the government would take action.

The Commission seems to be too lenient in its statements on the PM’s role, respondent said. The politician mentioned (in the report) will be let off. So will the head of the bank. The rest of the guys named will be punished then bailed out,” said another disappointed respondent people are not convinced that the government would take action. Given the poor track record of this Government in its action against the so-called crooks” of the last regime, taking action” is a debatable point.

There could be some legal hurdles. Can a court of law pass judgment on the basis of the findings of a Commission? Unlikely. So the AG’s Department will have to prove fresh cases against each of the accused. The government may go through the motions for appearances sake, but the chances of all parties being adequately punished are slim, said respondents.

Yahapalana as usual, tried to put the blame on the Rajapaksa regime. There have been issues over bond transactions since 2007/2008 period. Nobody spoke of them,” said President Sirisena in 2017. investigations should cover a ten-year period of bond issues by the CBSL.

Prime Minister Ranil Wickremasinghe  said that bond sales had been made from 2008 to 2014 on private placements without informing the Monetary Board of the Central Bank or Parliament.  90 percent of these had been done on private placements using EPF, ETF and National Savings Bank funds. ”  Ranil Wickremasinghe announced that  the government would launch a special probe into bond sales related issues from 2008 to 2014 to the tune of Rs 5,147,751,210,000. 

Ajit Nivard Cabraal replied these allegations. My attention is drawn to the statement made by President Sirisena on 3rd January 2018, on the Report of the Presidential Commission of Inquiry. In his statement, it is said, inter alia, that the “Commission is of the opinion that similar incidents as revealed in the Commission Report had happened even in 2008. The Commission recommends that the Central Bank of Sri Lanka should first conduct a forensic audit with regard to the alleged fraud and corrupt practices from 2008 and based on such findings legal steps should be taken”

Cabraal said that he did not see  any references to improper Bond issues of 2008 to 2014, emerging in the Commissions proceedings. however, if President Sirisena wishes to ascertain for himself as to whether there have been “fraud and corrupt practices from 2008” and whether such practices had caused losses to the government he has only to refer to the Auditor General’s Special Examination Report.

Cabraal observed that Prime Minister Ranil Wickremasinghe in Parliament referred to the time-tested and highly-effective “auction cum direct-placement” method of issuing Treasury Bills and Bonds as a corrupt and un-regulated “private placement” system and   said that massive frauds took place  in  the Rajapaksa period  due to this method.

Cabraal replied, the “auction cum direct placement” system that was in place from 1997 up to 27th February 2015 enabled the Central Bank to obtain the best possible interest rates and consequently borrow at the least cost to the Government. That system also ensured that no undue advantage was enjoyed by any primary dealer, since all dealers were required to invest in the Government Securities at around the prevailing market yield curve. Accordingly, this time-tested, transparent and well-thought-out system (contrary to the baseless allegations of the Prime Minister), enabled the Government to issue Treasury Bills and Bonds through the Central Bank without any substantiated allegations of fraud and/or misconduct and/or major controversy for over 18 years!

Cabraal said that at the invitation of the Bond Commission, on 25th October 2017, he  submitted a comprehensive assessment of the loss suffered by the Bond scam, which places the direct loss to the Government,  (using Auditor general’s data), at Rs.1,674 million, and the loss due to the increase in the interest burden of the Government as a result of the unnecessary and unwarranted increase in interest rates at Rs. 144,598 million. In addition, there is also the loss suffered by the general public due to the increase in interest rates, losses suffered by the economy due to the erosion of confidence as a result of the bond scam, as well as the losses suffered by the EPF and other Government institutions.

in response to President Sirisena’s comments about the Treasury Bond issues from 2008 to 2014, former President Mahinda Rajapaksa has already stated that he would welcome a forensic audit on the bond issues pertaining to the period of the UPFA government. In like manner, I would also welcome any examination or investigation in order that the suspicions raised by the Prime Minister relating to the bond issues during the period that President Sirisena himself was a senior Cabinet Minister, could be either confirmed or dismissed.

 Lastly, Cabraal pointed out that  Perpetual Treasuries  did not rob  money from the EPF and other government institutions at gunpoint or by breaking their safes. These institutions willingly handed over funds to PTL  in return for personal benefit. In such a case, aren’t they the real culprits who caused losses to the government?

I believe the existing laws are adequate to prosecute them if the government has the will.PTL was able to make this enormous profits only because of the help it got from insiders in these government institutions, who probably were well compensated. It was a game played by PTL together with insider in these government institutions to siphon off public funds. Therefore, without pointing the finger at PTL alone, authorities should immediately prosecute the relevant officials in these other institutions for aiding and abetting PTL for robbing them. They should also be made liable to pay back the money they earned through these transactions.( continued)

Chandre Dharmawardana

A 2016 talk by an engineer which may be accessed at:

(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F0NEaPTu9oI&feature=youtu.be) gives a wake-up call” about-the danger of cell-phone use and Wi-Fi radiation. It is titled:

Wireless wake-up call | Jeromy Johnson | TEDxBerkeley

A Silicon-valley engineer turned technology-health advocate, Jeromy Johnson discusses our attachment to technology.

This video is  once again making the e-mail rounds. Some of you may have seen this before, and our discussion then. Such talks are found in the internet all the time. Of course, it is better to be safe than sorry, and so one may wish to take some precautions if the risk is substantial. But is it?

At every stage of human existence, humans had to judge the amount of risk they have to face, in order to exist and move forward. This was true for the hunter gatherers as well as the first people who learnt how to tame fire.

Is the radiation from smart power meters, cell phones, home wif-fi etc.  dangerous, carcinogenic, or capable of causing nausea, sleeplessness etc, and incapacitate you as stated in these reports?

The main-stream professional and scientific organizations do not support the view that there is any risk from Wi-Fi radiation. Of course, the frightened public will immediately point out to examples of collusion between industry and scientific regulatory bodies. This can be significant in the USA where Capitalism is King.   Nevertheless, when the professional and academic associations of a majority of countries say the same thing, I prefer to follow main-stream science instead of claims made by small, seemingly very concerned groups using anecdotal accounts.

So let us look at the science from the main-stream point of view.

The American Cancer Association, and other professional associations do not support the view that radiation from smart meters or cell phones cause cancer.

Smart Meters  transmit the reading to the power company at frequent intervals (e.g., every hour or in full real time). See, for example, the ACA’s comments on smart meters.

(https://www.cancer.org/cancer/cancer-causes/radiation-exposure/smart-meters.html)

The amount of radiation that we get from the sun at all frequencies is a usually many  times higher than what comes from these devices and from cell phones. The sun radiates at low frequencies as well as at very high frequencies, and it is the very high frequencies (short wavelengths) that are most dangerous,

compared to Wi-Fi and radio waves.

1.  Johnson’s argument that the radiation density has substantially increased because of Wi-Fi is not correct. Typical cell-phone or smart-meter radiation is at 2.4 GHz which is about 12.5 cm. The sun radiates at wavelengths of 100 nanometers to about 1 mm strongly, and beyond into radio frequencies as well. So it is radiating in the Wi-Fi range as well. In fact, 52% of the sun’s radiant energy is in the near infra red and millimeter range.

A Wi-Fi wave of 12.5 cm is more than 10 million times larger than a micron sized cell in the body or in the brain. Think of a boat in the ocean, and a wave which takes a very long time to swell up because its wavelength is a million times longer than the boat. The boat  merely gets gently lifted up, and nothing happens. It is only if the wavelength is comparable to the boat and turbulent (i.e., many short wavelengths and eddies mixed up with long ones) that the boat gets into trouble. So Wi-Fi radiation, which is largely monochromatic (single wavelength) near 12.5 cm cannot latch onto the electric circuits of the cell either due to size based electrodynamic effects, Q-cavity effects, or due to resonance effects unlike a cell phone which picks up” the wave as it is constructed to have a circuit  in resonance with the 12.5 radiation.

One may imagine that if the wave were very strong (i.e.,if  it had a large amplitude), as wold be the case near a Wi-Fi tower, then its effect would be correspondingly stronger. This is in fact not so, as Einstein showed in 1905. Unlike with ordinary water waves or sound waves, it is the quantum theory that controls the interaction of radiation with matter, and here it is the frequency, and not the amplitude that matters.

2. The total number of cell phones and Wi-Fi sources in the world is over 5 billion according to some estimates. Such radiation is in my view a negligible increment over the existing background. But you can make your own estimates. Also,  such cell phones have existed now for several decades. Scientists haven’t still been able to pin point any cases (e.g., of brain cancer) exactly linked to the illness and the presence of cell phone radiation – i.e., there is no evidence. There has been NO INCREASE in brain cancer while the amount of Wi-Fi has increased exponentially. In fact the incidence of brain cancer in the US has slightly decreased, over the years.

3. Of the 3 billion users, let us say we have perhaps a some thousands of  people who complain of nausea, inability to sleep etc., as stated by this engineer Jeromy Johnson. He refers to a paper by an Australian Doctor  Frederica Lamech published in 2014 in a fringe journal known as “Alternative therapies“. The report is anecdotal, and does not compare a group of patients with a control group. There are many such reports, published in predatory” journals which have no scientific standing, and reveal  poor “experiments” that are simply not up to scientific standards. We have the same problem in many environmental studies. A most notorious case is that of a Sri Lankan Psychic Lady from kelaniya publishing a paper with  academics from the Rajarata University, claiming that kidney disease in the Rajarata is caused by arsenic acting together with residues of the  herbicide glyphosate claimed to present in the hard water of the region.  No evidence was presented, but a hypothesis” was published in a predatory journal. The  journal  had no connection with a learned society or professional body, but it is maintained by a Chinese businessman who publishes what is  sent to the journal as long as you pay a page charge, although there may even be a pretense of peer review”..

Do you know of ANYONE who has faced the conditions described by Engineer Johnson that you can be ascribed to the use of a cell phone? Most people  don’t.

However, let us we assume that there is actually a problem, and that 5,000 such people have been definitively identified, and that there are 5 billion sources of Wi-Fi radiation in the world. Then we have  5,000/(5 billion) = 5/5000,000,000 gives us one chance in a million that this is probably going to affect us within the next decade. There is a much bigger risk from second hand smoke, and an even bigger risk from fumes from motor vehicles, or falling in your bath tub. The risk for getting hit in the street by a car and dying is about 30 times higher (for New York, and much higher in Colombo or Cairo). Ten times more kids are killed in bath tub accidents in the US alone, compared to the 5000 that we assumed here. That figure may be contested. If so, any one is free to use their own figures and make the risk calculation, and do it in a more sophisticated way using advanced notions of probability distributions etc.

4. So, even if the fringe science reports are not up to standard, it is important to check if there is a danger, by carrying out good experiments with double-blind controls. The WHO has sponsored or carried out several such studies on the effect of cell phone radiation. In 2015, the European-Commission Scientific Committee on Emerging and Newly Identified Health Risks concluded that, overall, the epidemiological studies on cell phone radio-frequency electromagnetic radiation exposure do not show an increased risk of brain tumors or of other cancers of the head and neck region.

Cell Phones and Cancer Risk. See:

(https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/causes-prevention/risk/radiation/cell-phones-fact-sheet)

This is a WHO fact sheet that outlines the available evidence regarding use of cellular/mobile telephones and cancer risk, but does not indicate a definite risk. And yet this engineer seems to say that the WHO arrived at the opposite conclusion. So what he says is, in my view,  incorrect.

5. The engineer Jeromy Johnson says that our body is electric, and that cells communicate by electric signals, and so this some how makes wi-fi dangerous. This is a truly naive argument.

Cells communicate using chemicals at the synapses of the neurons. The chemicals shoot across the synaptic gap when the tiny currents in neuron circuits exceed certain thresholds. Unless the thresholds are exceeded, nothing happens.

We can follow all the electric signals in the body using ECG, EEG and other such devices. Modern fitness trackers, wristbands, optical heart-rate monitors, photo-plethysmography devices etc are now quite commonplace. More sophisticated PET and brain NMR are also now available to clinical researchers. In-body telemetry, as attempted in using  sensors which are a mere one millimetre in size (e.g., those  named “neural dust”), may also be used to monitor organs in real-time, as well as their being using to stimulate nerves and muscles.

No one has seen any effects on these bodily electric signals, PET or NMR signals being affected when the cell phone rings. There is no justification for calling for a ban claiming a precautionary principle”. In fact the correct use of the precautionary principle is to not to ban the product, but to take some simple precautions to minimize exposure if you have worries about the Wi-Fi radiation.

In my view,   one should wait for reliable evidence, since the current estimated risk is about 1 parts in a million,  instead of acting in fear, like the animals in the Dadabba Jataka.

Chandre Dharmawardana

[The author is a professor of Physics at the University of Montreal and a Principal Research Scientist  in the Quantum Theory group of the National Research Council of Canada.]

By Garvin Karunaratne

The Power Game: How we get bluffed.

Dr. Mahela Gunaratne

Suggestions for proper future candidates and a fight against corruption

We Sri Lankans have become lost. 70 plus years after independence, having started off as one of the most prosperous nations in Asia, led by honest and decent gentleman such as the Father of our nation and educated visionary people during our early years as a free nation once more, we have now been reduced to an impoverished state run by the corrupt and for the corrupt only.

Having had a neighbour finance terror against us, we now have spineless traitorous leaders in all the parties from this government, and the last one who openly appease the very same nation at the expense of relations with ALL OTHER NATIONS (notably the US and China) and at the expense of our own people and their advancement . Recycling the same politicians for the last decade and more has gotten us nowhere. Whilst we will be grateful to those who freed us from terror, we cannot blindly support people who lack the will to do what is necessary, or have their own selfish vested interests at heart above the nation.

I am most happy that several new candidates have put themselves forward for the next election in the year 2020 which hopefully will be a turning point for our great country and put us back on the path we had at independence. However this will take a serious non-political approach recognising genuine corruption. 

Notably there are some organisations fighting against corruption. I commend several names who have appeared on the media recently and the few media organisations who try to report some kind of policy based news rather than the trashy tabloid style reporting by most who do nothing but worship certain political clans. Names that come to mind who could bring hope to our nation include:

1. Nagananda Kodituwakku

2. Malinda Seneviratne

3. Maithra Gunaratne

4. Rohan Pallewatte

Notably as if often talked about on this forum, unlike a certain Gotabaya and a certain oft talked about political family, as well as the goons/traitors like RW currently in power today, many of the above and their associates have said they WILL abolish the Provincial Council systems and establish proper clean governance. 

I urge genuine patriots to share amongst friends and family the names of such new candidates who do seem to be gaining support amongst the people. Because as everyone is beginning to see, the whole lot of the current political class are taking us for a ride and in the same boat.

Here are two videos that are interesting. Without supporting one of the old parties, let us support such people to fight corruption by the well known names:

May Sri Lanka properly develop and may people assess who they should vote for based on policies and character, not on being a character from a certain family, or party who are all the same”

ලංකා ගුරුසේවා සංගමය – Ceylon Teachers’ Services Union
Senaka Mahinda Jayasinghe

2019. 03. 28

ජනමාධ්‍ය නිවේදනයයි
ගරු අධ්‍යාපන අමාත්‍ය,
අකිල විරාජ් කාරියවසම් මහතා,
අධ්‍යාපන අමාත්‍යංශය,
ඉසුරුපාය,
බත්තරමුල්ල.

අමාත්‍යතුමණි,

ග‍්‍රාමීය පාසල් දරුවන්ගේ අධ්‍යාපනය වෙනුවෙන් කැපවන ගුරු, විදුහල්පති දුෂ්කර දීමනා සම්බන්ධවයි

දුෂ්කර ග‍්‍රාමීය පාසල් වල සේවයේ නියුතු ගුරුවරුන්ට හා විදුහල්පතිවරුන්ට මේ වන විට මසකට ගෙවනු ලබන රු: 1500 ක දුෂ්කර දීමනාව හා රු: 2500 ක දුෂ්කර දීමනාව ප‍්‍රමාණවත් පරිදි වැඩි කිරීමට වහා පියවර ගන්නා ලෙස ලංකා ගුරුසේවා සංගමය ඉතා  ඕනෑකමින් යුතුව ඉල්ලා සිටිමු. මෙම දීමනා මීට වසර ගණනාවකට පෙර ගෙවන ලද්දක් වන අතර වර්තමාන තත්ත්වයන් සම`ග එය කිසිසේත් ප‍්‍රමාණවත් නොවේ.

2.    විශේෂයෙන් ප‍්‍රධාන නගර වල සිට බස්රථයක් පවා හරිහැටි ධාවනය නොවන ප‍්‍රමාණවත් පරිදි නාවාතැන් පහසුකම් හෝ ගුරු නිවාස නොමැති දුෂ්කර ග‍්‍රාමීය පාසල් වෙත නියමිත වේලාවට සේවයට වාර්තා කිරීමට යන ගුරුවරුන්ට දවස් කිහිපයක් කුලියට ගැනෙන ත‍්‍රීවිල් රථවලට ගෙවීමට පවා මෙම මුදල ප‍්‍රමාණවත් නොවේ.

3.    මෙවැනි වටපිටාවක් තුළ දුෂ්කර ග‍්‍රාමීය පාසල් වලට පත්වීම් ලබන ගුරුවරුන්, විදුහල්පතිවරුන් බොහෝමයක් නැවත පහසු ප‍්‍රදේශ වල පාසල් වෙත ස්ථාන මාරුවීමට හෝ සේවය හැර යාමට පෙළඹි ඇත. මේ නිසා මෙම පළාත් වල උග‍්‍ර ගුරු හි`ගයට මෙය හේතුවක් බවත්, අප ඔබට අමුතුවෙන් පැහැදිලි කර දිය යුතු නැත.

4.    ඒ අනුව දශක කිහිපයක් පැවති මෙම ගැටළු නිසා අධ්‍යාපන අමාත්‍යාංශය පැවැත් වු පසුගිය සමීක්ෂණ වලින් හෙලි වී ඇත්තේ 1 වන ශ්‍රේණියට කිසිදු අයදුම්පතක් ඉදිරිපත් නොවු දුෂ්කර ප‍්‍රාථමික පාසල් 350 ක් පමණ ඇති බවත්, තවත් පාසල් 3000 ක පමණ අධ්‍යාපන ලබනුයේ සිසුන් 100 – 150 ක් අතර අඩු ප‍්‍රමාණයක් බවයි.

5.    මෙවැනි වටපිටාවක් තුළ පාසල් හැර ගිය සිසුන් ප‍්‍රමාණයද ඉතා ඉහළ අගයක් වන අතර කෝටිගණන් මුදල් වැය කර උත්සව පවත්වන 1-13 අනිවාර්ය අධ්‍යාපනය යථාර්ථයක් නොවන බවද පෙන්වා දිය යුතුව ඇත.

එහෙයින් මෙම බොහෝ ගැටළු වලට විසදුම් ගැනීම වෙනුවෙන් හා ගුරුවරුන්ට හා විදුහල්පතිවරුන්ට දුෂ්කර දීමනා හා අනෙකුත් දීමනා වැඩි කිරීමට වහා පියවර ගන්නා ලෙස නැවතත් ඉතා  ඕනෑකමින් යුතුව ඉල්ලා සිටිමු.

ස්තූතියි.

මෙයට,

විධායක සභාව වෙනුවෙන්,
මහින්ද ජයසිංහ
ප‍්‍රධාන ලේකම්
ලංකා ගුරුසේවා සංගමය           

අද (28) දින පැවැති මාධ්‍ය හමුව

නැවතත් ජාතික ආන්ඩුවක් බිහිවන සලකුණක්වත් නැහැ

ශ්‍රී දරන්ට අවශ්‍ය කෙනා අපේ ජනාධිපති අපෙක්ෂකයා වෙන්නේ නැහැ

පාර්ලිමේන්තු මන්ත්‍රී ජානක වක්කුඹුර මහතා 

ජිනීවා හි තානාපති අෂීස් මහතා නැවතත් 30-1 යෝජනාවට අත්සන් කර නැවත වරක් මේ රට පාවාදෙන බව අපි පහුගිය කාලයේ දිගින් දිගටම ප්‍රකාශ කළා. වත්මන් මුදල් ඇමැතිවරයා විදේශ ඇමැතිවරයා සමයේදි මේ යෝජනාව හරහා රට පාවා දෙන බවත් අපි ප්‍රකාශ කළා. දැන් වත්මන් ජනාධිපති මෛත්‍රිපාල සිරිසේන මහතාම ප්‍රකාශ කරනවා රටත් හමුදාවත් ජනතාවත් සියලුදේමත් ජිනීවාවල ඉන්න තානාපතිවරයා පාවාදි ඇති බව. මේක විදේශ කටයුතු අමාත්‍යංශය දන්නෙත් නැහැ. විදේශ කටයුතු ලේකම්වරයා දන්නෙත් නැහැලු. රටේ නායකයා විදියට ජනාධිපතිවරයායි මේ සියලු පත්කිරීම් කරන්නේ. මේ යෝජනාවට අත්සන් කිරිම හරහා රට පාවාදිමක් සිදුවෙන බව අපි කරපු ප්‍රකාශය අද ජනාධිපතිවරයාම ප්‍රකාශ කිරිම හරහා පැහැදිලි වන්නේ පහුගිය කාලය පුරාම අපි කියපු කතාව සත්‍යයක් බවයි. වත්මන් ජනාධීපතිවරයා මේ ප්‍රකාශය කිරීම ගැන අපි සතුටු වෙනවා. 

එදා ඔස්ට්‍රියාවේ හිටපු තානාපතිවරිය වුනු ප්‍රියානි විජේසේකර මහත්මියව ජනාධිපතිතුමාට පැයගාණක් දුරකතනයෙන් සම්බන්ධ කරගැනීමට නොහැකි වීම හේතුවෙන් නැවත මෙරටට කැදවිමට පියවර ගත්තා. තානාපති කෙනෙක්ට කතා කරන්න බැරි නකම් ඒ තානාපතිගෙන් වැඩක් නැහැ. අද තියෙන්නේ දුරකතනයෙන් සම්බන්ධ කර ගැනීමට නොහැකි වීම වගෙ කාරණයක් නෙවෙයි. රට පාවා දීම සම්බන්ධයෙන් චෝදනාවක්. මේ රටේ රාජ්‍ය නායකයා වගේම පත්කිරිම් සදහා ව්‍යවස්ථාවෙන් බලය තියෙන පුද්ගලයා විදියට ජිනිවා වල ඉන්න මේ තානාපතිවරයාව නැවත මෙරටට කැදවන්න කියලා අපි ඉල්ලා සිටිනවා. තානාපතිවරයා කරපු දේ හෙළාදැකලා, ඔහුට විරුද්ධව අදහස් දැක්වූ ආකාරය අපි දැක්කා. ඒ කතා කරා වගේම රට පාවාදුන් තානාපතිවරයා මෙරටට කැදවා රට වෙනුවෙන් කතා කරන්න පුලුවන් කෙනෙක් ඒ රටේ තානාපති විදියට පත්කරන්න. 

එජාප ආණ්ඩුවේ අය කිව්වා මේ රටේ දෙමුහුන් අධිකරණයක් ඇති කරන්න ඉඩ දෙන්නේ නැහැ. අපේ විදේශ කටයුතු ඇමැතිවරයා කෙළින් කතා කළාලු.නමුත් ජනාධිපතිවරයා කිව්වා විදේශ කටයුතු ඇමැතිවරයා කතාකරපු හැටි. ජනාධිපතිතුමා මේ කතාව හදලා දුන්නේ නැත්නම් විදේශ කටයුතු ඇමැතිවරයා කියන්නේ මිට වඩා වෙනස් කතාවක් බව කිව්වා. රටේ දෙමුහුන් අධිකරණයක් ඇතිවිම වැලැක්විම සදහා ජනාධිපතිවරයා මේ විදියට මැදිහත් වීමත් අපි අගය කරනවා. එදා 2001 චන්ද්‍රිකා මැතිණිය ජනාධිපතිවරයා සමයේ රනිල් වික්‍රමසිංහ අගමැතිවරා වුනා. එදා පාර්ලිමෙන්තුවත් , කැබිනට් එකවත් දන්නේ නැතිව ප්‍රභාකරන් එක්ක සටන් විරාම අත්සන් කලේමේ රනිල් වික්‍රමසිංහමයි. එතුමා කවදාවත් රටේ අගමැතිවරයා වුනාම ජනාධිපතිවරයා ගණන් ගන්නේ නැහැ. මේකට අගමැතිවරයාගේ මුලිකත්වය නොතිබුනා නම් කෙරෙන දෙයක් නෙවෙයි. පත්තරවල ගියා ආයෙත් ජාතික ආන්ඩුවක් හැදෙන කතාවක්. මේ තත්ත්වය අනුව එවැනි දෙයක් වෙයි කියලා අපි හිතන්නේ නැහැ.

ඉස්සර මත්ද්‍රව්‍ය ඇල්ලුවේ ග්රෑම්වලින්. ඒවා කිරන්න ගෙන ගියේ පොඩි තරාදි. දැන් පිටකොටුවේ තියෙන බලාන්ස ගෙනියන්න වෙලා කුඩු කිරන්න. ඒ තරම් කුඩු අල්ලනවා පොලීසිය. මේ විදියට සේවය කරන පොලීසියේ බටා එක වැඩි කරන්න කියලා පොලීසිය භාර ඇමැතිවරයා විදියට ජනාධිපතිවරයා සදහන් කළා. රුපියල් 400 ගණනේ 24ක් දෙන එක 800 ගානේ 21 දක්වා වැඩිකළා. 400 ගානේ 24ක් කියන්නේ 9600යි. ජනාධිපතිතුමා කිව්වා 800 ගානේ 21ක් , ඒ කියන්නේ 16800ක් වැඩියෙන් දෙන්න කියලා. දැන් ආන්ඩුව ඒ චක්‍රලේඛණය වෙනස් කරලා 800 ගානේ 14ක් කියලු අලුත් චක්‍රලේඛණයක් යවනවා. ඒ කියන්නේ 11200යි. වැඩිවෙලා තියෙන්නේ 1200යි.  ජනාදීපතිතුමා වැඩිකරපු එකෙන් 5600ක් අඩු කරලා. මේකෙන් පේන්නේ මතුද්‍රව්‍ය උවදුර මේ රටෙන් තුරන් කරන එක වළක්වන්න ආන්ඩුව උත්සාහ කරන බවයි. ඒ වුනාට පාර්ලිමේන්තුවේදි කියනවා අපි තමයි පොලිසියේ බටා එක වැඩිකලේ කියලා. ඒ වුනාට ජනාධිපතිතුමා දෙන්න කියපු එකවත් ඒ විදියට දෙන්නේ නැහැ. ආන්ඩුව මැදිහත් වෙලා කපනවා. ජනාධිපතිතුමා කිසියම් පියවරක් ගත්තොත් ආන්ඩුවේ ඉන්න ඇමැතිවරු ඒවා වෙනස් කරනවා. ජනාධිපතිගේ වැය ශීර්ෂය පැරැද්දුවේ නැති වුනාට කියන්න තියෙන සියලුම දේවල් ටික කිව්වා. හැම අතින්ම මේ රට යන්නේ ආගාධයට. අපි මාධ්‍ය හමු තියලා මොන දේවල් කිව්වාත් නිව්ස් බලන්න විදුලිය නැහැ. 

නැවතත් රටේ විධායක ජනාධිපති විදියට, ආන්ඩුවේ ප්‍රධානියා විදියට ආන්ඩු ක්‍රම ව්‍යවස්ථාවේ ප්‍රතිපාදන අනුව රට පාවාදුන් තානාපතිවරයා මේ රටට කැදවන්නයි කියල ඉල්ලීම ජනාධිපතිවරයාගෙන් කරනවා. 

■             මීට වසර 4ට පෙර දකුණු ආසියාවේ පැය 24ම නොකඩවා විදුලිය දුන්න අපේ රට අද පැය ගානක් විදුලිය කපන රටක් බවට පත්වෙලා.

■             මාධ්‍ය සංදර්ශන වෙනුවට නොකඩවා විදුලිය දෙන්න යෝජනාවක් පාර්ලිමේන්තුවට ගේන්න. අපි විපක්ෂය විදියට සහාය දෙනවා.

පාර්ලිමේන්තු මන්ත්‍රී තේණුක විධානගමගේ මහතා 

අද රට විදුලි අර්බුදයකට මුහුණ දිලා. දවසකට පැය ගාණක් විදුලිය කපනවා. ව්‍යාපාරිකයින් ඇතුළු සියලුම ජනතාවට මේක ප්‍රශ්නයක්. මීට වසර 4ට කළින් මේ රටේ අඛණ්ඩව පැය 24 පුරාම විදුලිය ලබා දුන්න රට බවට අපේ රට පත්වෙලා තිබුණා. ඒ රට අද දවසකට පැය ගාණක් විදුලිය විසන්දි කරන රට වෙලා. එදා දකුණු ආසියාවේ විදුලි කප්පාදු කරපු රටවල් අද වෙද්දි අඛණ්ඩව ජනතාවට විදුලිය දෙන රටක් බවට පත්වෙලා. ලංකාව හා නේපාලයි අද විදුලි කප්පාදු කරන රටවල් වෙලා තියෙන්නේ. බොරුවට මාධ්‍ය සංදර්ශන තියනවා විතරයි. පහුගිය වසර 4ක කාලය පුරා ජනතාවට අඛණ්ඩව විදුලිය දෙන්න ක්‍රමවේදයක් ඇති කරන්න ආණ්ඩුව කිසිදු පියවරක් අරන් නැහැ. මිට අවුරුදු ගාණකට කලිනුත් අද වගේ විදුලිය කැපුවා. ඒ විතරක් නෙවෙයි විදුලි අර්බුදයට විසදුමක් විදියට ඔරලෝසු කටුවත් කරකවපු කාලයක් තිබුණා. මේ රජය පත්වුනදා ඉදලා ජනතාවට ප්‍රශ්න. පහුගිය දවසක අගමැතිගේ උපන් දිනයට අත්සවයක් තිබ්බා.ඊට කලින් වොක්ස්වැගන් කර්මාන්ත ශාලාව ඉදිකරවයා කියලා මුල්ගලක් තිබ්බා. ටයර් කර්මාන්ත ශාලාවක් හදනවා කියලා මුල් ගලක් තිබ්බා. ඒ කිසිවක් වුනේ නැහැ. ආයෝජකයෝ කියලා ගෙන්වා ගෙන තියපු මුල්ගලත් මුල්ගලත් විතරයි. මාධ්‍ය සංදර්ශන නවතලා ජනතාවට විදුලිය දෙන්න අවශ්‍ය පියවර ගන්න. යෝජනාවක් ගේන්න නැවත මේ රටට නොකඩවා විදුලිය ලබාදනෙ. විපක්ෂය විදියට අපිත් අත ඔසවනවා. පහුගිය කාලයේ රටේ වුනුවිනාශයන් සියල්ලට මේ රජය වගකිව යුතුයි. 

ප්‍රශන – ශ්‍රී දරන් මන්ත්‍රීවරයා කියනවා ඔබලාගේ අපේක්සකයෙක්ට බලයට එන්න දෙන්නේ නැහැ කියලා. 

ජානක වක්කුඹුර – නැහැ . එහෙම නෙවේ. ශ්‍රී දරන් කියන්නේ රාජපක්ෂවරුන්ට නැවත බලයට එන්න දෙන්නේ නැති බවයි. ඒ නිසාලු ආන්ඩුවට සහාය දෙන්නේ. ඇයි ශ්‍රී දරන්ලාගේ ඉල්ලීම තමයි මේ ජිනීවාවල ඉල්ලන්නේ. එහෙම නැතිව අයවැය ගැන ප්‍රශ්නයක් නෙවෙයි. ජිනීවා වලට ආන්ඩුව සහාය දෙනවා. ආන්ඩුව සහයා දුන්න නිසයි රාජපක්ෂවරුන්ට එන්න දෙන්නේ නැහැ කියන්නේ. මේ හඩ ආන්ඩුව ඒ අය එක්ක ඉන්නව නිසයි. ඒ අයත් අද නිදහසේ කතා කරන්නේ මහින්ද රාජපක්ෂමහතා රට නිදහස් කරගන්න දේශපාලන නායකත්වය දුන්න නිසයි. ගෝඨාභය රාජපක්ෂ කියන්නේ සියලු දෙනාට එක විදියට සලකන කෙනෙක්. සිංහල, දෙමළ , මුස්ලිම් කියන බේධයක් එතුමා ළග නැහැ. ශ්‍රී දරන්ලා කවදාවත් අපේ ආන්ඩුවකට සහාය දුන්නේ නැහැ.ආන්ඩුව ගත්ත වෙලේ ඉදන්කරන්න තියෙන සියලුම දේ කලා. පාර්ලිමේන්තුව ගැන තීන්දුවක් ගන්න අධිකරණයට යද්දි අපේ අධීකරණය ස්වාධීනයි. නමුත් ජිනීවා ගිහින් කියනවා අධීකරණය ස්වාධීන නැහැලු. ජනාධිපති පාර්ලිමේන්තුව විසුරවද්දි ගිහින තීන්දුව ගනිද්දි අධීකරණය ස්වාධීනයි කිව්වා. ශ්‍රී දරන්ලාට අවහ්‍ය විදියට අපි වැඩ කරනනේ නැහැ. නමුත් ද්‍රවිඩ ජනතාවගේ සැබෑ අවශ්‍යතාවයන් වෙනුවෙන් කැපවෙනවා. උතුරු නැගෙනහිර විදුලිය නැතිව තියෙන කොට මහින්ද රාජපක්ෂ මහතාගේ රජයෙන් සියලු ජනතාවට විදුලිය ලබා දුන්නා. දැන් විදුලි ඉංජිනේරුවරු කියන්නේ අලුතින් බලාගාරයක් හදනවා නම්වසර හතරක් යන බවයි. ඒ වුනාට වාර්ෂිකව විදුලි අවහ්‍යතාවය වැඩිවෙනවා. එදා නොරොච්චෝලේ හදන කොට කිව්වේ චිනය අයින් කරපු යකඩ ගොඩක් කියලයි. නමුත් විගණකාධිපතිතුමා කිව්වා ඒ වියදම් කළා වගේ දස ගුණයක් ලාභයිලු. අපි භය වුනේ නැතිව විදුලි බලාගාරය හැදුවා. එදා කරූ ජයසූරිය මහත්තයා විදුලි බලාගාරය හදන්න මුල්ගල් තියන්න ගියේ නැහැ බයට. ඒ ව්‍යාපෘතිය නොකලා නම් රටේ දෙකෙන් පංගුවකට විදුලිය නැහැ. මහින්ද රාජපක්ෂ මහත්තයා අර්බුදය වේලාසන දැකලා පිළියම් කළා. මේ ආන්ඩුවට ඒ වගේ දැක්මක් නැහැ. අපි ශ්‍රිදරන්ට අවශ්‍ය විදියේ නායකයෙක් පත්තරන්නේ නැහැ. දෙමළ සන්ධානය කවදත් රාජපක්ෂවරුන් එක්ක විරුද්ධයි. 

මාධ්‍ය – පුද්ගලික අංශයෙන් විදුලිය මිලදී ගන්න හැකියාව තියෙනවාද

ජානක වක්කුඹුර – පුද්ගලික අංශයේ විදුලි බලාගාර පිහිටවපු කතාවක් විදුලි බල මණ්ඩලයේ පිරිසක් කියනවා. ඒ අය මේ පිටුපස ඉන්න බවයි කියන්නේ. විදුලිය හිටි අඩියේ ඉන්දියාවෙන් ගේන්නද. අපිම විදුලිය උත්පාදනය කරලා තමයි දෙන්න වෙන්නේ. මේක යට මාපියාවක් තියෙන බව පේනවා. දැන් හදපුවාගෙන් ගන්න නම් සම්බන්ධයක් තියෙන්න අවශ්‍යයි. මේවායින් විදුලිය ගන්න ගියාම වසර 20ට පමණ ගිවිසුම් අත්සන් කරන්න වෙනවා. විදුලිය ගත්තත් නොගත්තත් ගෙවන්න වෙනවා. ඒ කියන්නේ රට අර්බුදයෙන් අර්බුදයට යනවා. 

තේණුක විදානගමගේ මහතා – රවි කරුණානායනක මහතා කියන්නේ අප්‍රියෙල් 25 වෙද්දි අර්බුදය විසදන බවයි. මේ වෙද්දි නැවක් ඇවිත් තියෙනවා. අමාත්‍යවරයාපහුගිය කාලයේ එතුමා දරපු අමාත්‍යංශ දිහා බලන්න. සතොස වහලාම දැම්මා. මුදල් අමාත්‍යංශයට ගිහින් වුනු දේ දැක්කානේ. දැන් විදුලිබල ඇමැති වෙලා මොකක් හරි කරයි. වරාය අවට ජෙනරේටර් තියෙන නැවක් ස්ථාපනය වෙලා තියෙන නිසා ඒ හරහා විදුලිය දෙන්න සූදානම් වෙනවා කියලා අපිට සැකයි. 

මාධ්‍ය – ඒ කියන්නේ පුද්ගලික අංශයෙන් විදුලිය මිලදි ගැනීමේ උත්සාහයක් තියෙනවාද

ජානක වක්කුඹුර – කැබිනට් පත්‍රිකාවක් දාලා ගෙදරක විදුලි බල්බ දෙකක් නිවාදාන්න. දැන් පොලීසියෙන් යවන්න වෙනාව වහපු විදුලිබල්බ බලන්න. මේවා කරන්න පුලුවන් වැඩද. විදුලිය කළමණාකරණය ක්‍රමවේදයක් අවශ්‍යයි. විදුලි පහන් දෙකක් නිව්වා කියලා මේ ප්‍රශ්නයට විසදුමක් ලැබෙන්නේ නැහැ. මේ අර්බුදය එන බව කිව්වේ මිට වසර ගානක ඉදලයි. ඒ නිසා ඒ කලෙම විදුලිය එකතු කර ගැනීමේ ක්‍රමවේදයක් අවශ්‍යයි. පෝර්ට් සිටියට විදුලිය කෝ. කර්මාන්ත පුරයක් හැදුවාම විදුලිය කෝ. අද ගමේ ට්‍රේලර් සාප්පුවට වැඩ කර ගන්න විදියක් නැතිව ඉන්නවා. කොළඹට විදුලිය නොකැපුවාට අනෙක් පැතිවල විදුලිය නැහැ. ඉතින් කර්මාන්තරුවෙක් මේ රටට එයිද. වෙල් වලට සුර්ය කෝෂ දෙනවාලු. ඒකෙන් බදු ගහනවා. ලක්ෂ අටක්විතර වැය කරලා සුර්ය කෝෂ සවිකර ගන්නාව වෙනුවට ජාතික පද්ධතියෙන් විදුලිය ගන්න එක හොදයි කියලා මිනිස්සු තීරණය කරනවා.වැඩපිළීවෙලක් නැති ආන්ඩුව වසර ගානකින්පස්සේ රට කලුවරේ තිබ්බා. ඉල්ලාඅස්වෙලා වැඩක් කරන්න පුලුවන් ආන්ඩුවක් පත්කර ගන්න අව්සථාව දෙන්න. 

තේනුක විධානගමෙග් – නොරොච්චෝලේ බලාගාරය පාඩු ලබන අසාර්ථක ආයතනයක් කිව්වා. පහුගිය කාලයේ බලාගාරය බිදවැටුනේ දෙවරයි. රජයටනිසියාකාර වැඩපිළීවෙලක් තිබුණා නම් අද වෙද්දි අලුතින් බලාගාර ඉදිවෙනවා. මහින්ද රාජපක්ෂ රජය සමයේ මේ රටේ දැවැන්ත සංවර්ධනයක් සිද්ධ වුනා. දැන් රටේ සම්පත් විකුණනවා විතරයි. 

BY MAJORIE CHIEW Courtesy Star2

Bhante Saranapala has a bigger dream. He said: One day, I hope there will be United Kindful Nations (something like a United Nations).” Photo: The Star/ Chan Tak KongPEOPLEHomePeople

Four years ago, a Facebook post of a group of Canadian police officers sitting in a lotus position, alongside a Buddhist monk, went viral. People were curious about it.

The world had never seen a big group of police officers doing meditation with a monk before, and soon the news spread. Even people in other countries started talking about it – in Europe, as far as the island of Corsica!” said Venerable Bhante Saranapala, 46.

The media called him to find out more.

He said that at first, two police officers actually came to see him for advice to build community relationships.

Then, 47 police officers from Peel Regional Police Ontario turned up for his meditation session.

image: http://www1.star2.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/str2_mccanadamonk_ev_4.jpg

The world had never seen a big group of police officers doing meditation with a monk and soon news spread, said Bhante Saranapala about a Facebook post of him leading a meditation session with Canadian police officers four years ago. Photo: Bhante Saranapala

Saranapala, the deputy abbot of West End Buddhist Temple and Meditation Centre in Mississauga, Canada, has been its resident monk for the past 23 years. He is presently on a three-week teaching tour in Malaysia and staying at the Buddhist Maha Vihara in Brickfields, Kuala Lumpur.

Remedy for stress

The public, he added, thinks that highly stressed police are emotionally reacting when they become violent.

The police officers, he said, are out there to protect the people. However, they, too, need help to protect themselves from difficulties in their lives.

Meditation is good for everyone, especially the police officers whose high-stress jobs could lead to mental struggles, anxiety or panic attacks, depression or even post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). It could help them to de-stress, sustain calmness and get relief from their daily struggles,” he said.

Following suit, the Toronto Police Headquarters, the Toronto Police Training College and the Niagara region paramedics requested for similar sessions. The Ontario Provincial Police and Ottawa Police Headquarters also invited him to hold such sessions.

Saranapala recalled that, during this time, cases of police brutality were reported in Chicago and Dallas in the United States.

People were saying the police should be practising meditation as it is good for them,” he said.

Later, Cable News Network (CNN) also talked about this.

The next thing he knew, he was invited by Morton Grove Police Department in Chicago to conduct a similar session.

image: http://www1.star2.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/str2_mccanadamonk_ev_2-e1553504276716.jpg

Bhante Saranapala said: To be mindful is to be kind to yourself and others,” he stressed. It’s similar to the principle, I’m okay, you’re okay. Photo: The Star/ Chan Tak Kong

Saranapala suggested that one should devote at least 15 minutes a day to meditation. Medicine can heal your body but you need meditation to heal your mind,” he said.

Saving a life

Through meditation and kindness, Saranapala saved a man’s life three years ago.

Part-time actor and model Ryan Joseph, then 38, had lost hope after his relationship failed. He was in depression and attempted to take his life.

On the day he came to see me, he was thinking of taking his own life. I could see cuts and bruises on his hands. I talked to him for over an hour, and changed his mindset,” said Saranapala.

On Jan 30 this year, Joseph’s story of how Saranapala saved his life was featured on Canada’s CTV National News.

Saranapala (urbanbuddhistmonk.com) is a global public speaker, meditation teacher and spiritual counsellor.

A decade ago, he was given the monicker the urban Buddhist monk”. These days, he jokes about his identity: I’m a Bengali Sri Lankanised Canadian urban Buddhist monk.”

He said a devotee suggested the nickname as Saranapala was no longer a forest monk but had since become an urban monk.

Receiving his calling

image: http://www1.star2.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/str2_mccanadamonk_ev_1.jpg

Bhante Saranapala puts on shades to cut off the glare as he poses in front of the iconic Petronas Twin Towers in Kuala Lumpur. Photo: Sisira Ranjit

Born in Chittagong, Bangladesh, Saranapala is the middle child in his family. He has three elder brothers, two younger brothers and a younger sister. His late father was a tailor, and his mother, a typical housewife; both were devout Buddhists.

At 10, Saranapala became a novice monk. After two months, he was sent to further his monastic and secular studies in Sri Lanka for 11 years, from 1984.

As a teen monk, Saranapala knew that being a monk was the right decision for him.

One day while doing early morning chanting with 100 monks in Sri Lanka, I stopped chanting to listen instead to other monks who were chanting. I felt very relaxed and happy. From that moment, I found my true calling. Growing up as a teen monk was tough but I got through,” he said.

In 1992, the West End Buddhist Temple and Meditation Centre in Mississauga was set up.

In 1995, the centre was looking for a young monk to serve the community. Saranapala was invited by the founders – his Sri Lankan teachers – to be a resident monk.I never dreamt of going to the West. It just happened,” said Saranapala.

He also pursued further studies in Canada. He has a degree in World Religion, Western Philosophy and Psychology from the University of Toronto, a Master’s degree in Religious Studies from McMaster University in Hamilton, and a PhD in Religious Studies from the University of Toronto.

Saranapala is also principal of its Sunday Dhamma School and director of its Youth Forum that conducts a Soup Kitchen Project/Sharing is Caring, now in its 16th year, in collaboration with the Good Shepherd Centre in Downtown Toronto.

Saranapala was appointed the Buddhist chaplain of University of Toronto in 1999.

image: http://www1.star2.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/str2_mccanadamonk_ev_3.jpg

Bhante Saranapala, the deputy abbot of West End Buddhist Temple and Meditation Centre in Mississauga, Canada, has been a resident monk for the past 23 years. Photo: The Star/ Chan Tak Kong

When he was counselling people, he listened to their personal struggles and offered his advice.

They found it to be immensely helpful and managed to overcome their personal struggles. It was then that I decided to remain as a monk to help people from all ages and walks of life for the rest of my life,” he said.

Asked what he would rather be if he were not a monk, he said: I could be a famous singer or musician. I love singing. I have a good singing and chanting voice.

I wished I had gone to music school and learnt to play the piano and guitar but I have no time,” he said.

As a Buddhist monk, he said, he could not pursue his childhood dream to learn music due to a monastic rule of refraining from entertainment.

Kind nation

He is also the founder/president of the non-profit organisation Canada A Mindful and Kind Nation, set up three years ago. Its role is to promote good values, kindness, mindfulness and mental health.

He said: My effort is to build a kindful nation and world. One day, I would like to call Malaysia a mindful and kind nation. This is not a religious thing. The word kindfulness comes from the words kindness and mindfulness.

To be mindful is to be kind to yourself and others,” he stressed. It’s similar to the principle, I’m OK, you’re OK.”

Saranapala is trying to build kindful people” and kindful nations”.

image: http://www1.star2.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/str2_mccanadamonk_3_maj_1.jpg

Bhante Saranapala is very happy working towards the building of a kindful nation and thinking about calling every country a mindful and kind nation.” Photo: Bhante Saranapala

In recognition of his work, Saranapala has been given several awards: the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Canada 150 Medal and Sesquicentennial Community Award (for promoting good values and mental health) from the government of Canada, and the Spirit Award from the provincial government of Ontario (for his humanitarian services, particularly towards tsunami victims).

Saranapala said: I am very happy to be able to create a greater global mission which is good for everyone, and to be able to create a new direction for police forces, paramedics and fire marshals who are now thinking of incorporating meditation (in their work/lives).”

However, his biggest dream is to build a kindful world.

One day, I hope there will be a United Kindful Nations, and it starts with (the building of) a kindful person …”

Read more at https://www.star2.com/people/2019/03/26/urban-buddhist-monk-heart-for-kindness/#5MtQlM12C3RVp6Ac.99

KAMALIKA  PIERIS

The Bond scam saga is not over. It is still going on and looks as though it will go on forever. Those responsible, such as former Central Bank   Governor Arjuna Mahendran and his son in law Arjun Aloysius have not been arrested and the matter is still pending.  There is no sign of any action being taken against anyone regarding the 2015 bond scam.

Investment banker Arjuna Mahendran is the son of Charlie Mahendran, a retired Foreign Service diplomat who had joined the United National Party after returning from his last posting as Ambassador to China, said the media. When Ranil Wickremesinghe became Premier in 2001,  Charlie Mahendran went to New York as Sri Lanka’s Permanent Representative to the United Nations. Arjuna Mahendran was simultaneously made Chairman of the Board of Investment (BOI). In January 2015,  eleven days after the Sirisena-Wickremesinghe Cabinet was installed. Arjuna was appointed Governor of the Central Bank .

The media said that Arjuna Mahendran was a UNP insider who was privy to all the secret deals that were hatched with regard to the Yahapalana conspiracy. It was probably at his house in Singapore that members of the Rajapaksa government had finalized their deals to join the other side. Therefore the UNP would never go against him.  

Governor Mahendra’s period as Governor, Central Bank has been a turbulent period. He  was not interested in running the Central Bank in the traditional manner. He had ,  for instance,  engaged  in a verbal spat over transfers with officials. CB officers of Grade 4 and above,  the highest ranking officers after the Deputy Governors, were having a noon day meeting in a committee room to discuss concerns about new transfers and plans to hire retired bank staff as consultants.    Governor Mahendran had walked  in and confronted the officers.

Discussions of this sort should not be held, he observed. The officials had said that they had held meetings like this earlier too. Next day the authority to book committee rooms including the one used was transferred to the Governor’s Secretariat.

The validity of currency notes signed by  Governor Arjun Mahendran  was questioned in Parliament. Arjun Mahendran is a Singaporean citizen. A Singaporean citizen could not obtain a dual citizenship. Despite that, Mahendran was appointed the CB Governor and currency notes were issued under his signature. Mahendran had not even taken oaths as per the Constitution when he assumed duties,   MP Bandula Gunawardene said.Mahendran  had said that  he did not take the oath mandatory to heads of department as stated in the schedule to the Constitution. He said he did not know.

Mahendran was not frightened of the Commission of inquiry  on the Bond issue. He attended the  Commission’s sittings with a  panel of legal representatives.  His attorney, Romesh de Silva PC made an application on behalf of Mahendra to allow access to the evidence and records of proceedings in possession of the Commission, especially the documents, including the Monetary Board minutes. According to de Silva the CBSL had let Mahendran know,  that if the Commission permits, he can have access to the minutes of the Monetary Board.

Additional solicitor general De Livera pointed out the difficulty of providing l the documents as some of these are strictly confidential. He further said CBSL should  be told before handing over confidential documents, to a possible witness to the Commission. These are official documents. The CBSL has certain objections in giving these documents, so I am only saying the CBSL should hear about this, if the Commission is giving an order,” de Livera said. The Commission directed de Livera to consult with the Attorney-General and the CBSL and let the Commission know their response.

 On another occasion, Mahendran’s attorney submitted to the Commission a confidential document belonging to the Central Bank .   It was  a draft pertaining to future plans on the issuance of Central Bank treasury bonds with technical advice from the World Bank and the IMF. The Commission permitted Mahendran to use it to question the Central Bank. Commission  decided to hold the questioning behind closed doors. Media personnel and others who were present there were asked to leave the place temporarily.

the Presidential Commission of Inquiry  came to the conclusion that Former Central Bank Governor Arjuna Mahendran acted in mala fide and fraudulently, in gross breach of his duties as Governor of the CBSL at that bond auction.  Sri Lanka is now  trying to get Mahendran back to answer charges on the Bond scam.

INTERPOL has issued a red notice on April 19, 2018 (Sunday Times 23.3.19 p 1). Sri Lanka made an official request on May 28 2018, through the Defence Ministry Secretary to extradite Mr. Mahendran to Sri Lanka. Singapore’s Foreign Ministry called for further information over the extradition request. The Attorney General’s Department is now compiling a further detailed statement supporting the request for  extradition, on the instructions of the President, said the  President’s secretariat in March 2019.

Arjun Aloysius, the head of Perpetual Treasuries,  is   married to Arjuna Mahendran’s daughter.  Arjun is the grandson of Kattar Aloysius, who started out as a dry fish exporter and ended up as one of Sri Lanka ‘s most successful businessmen. Kattar founded the Free Lanka Group and was a significant shareholder in several companies at the time of his death in 2013. Kattar was close to Premadasa, said an informant. Kattar must not be confused with ‘Aloysius mudalali’ who was also very close to Premadasa.  Kattar had first got to know Premadasa when Preme was PM. Kattar had good PR skills was a great networker and would often assist Premadasa for free such as providing food for functions, said the informant. The Kattar family  hailed from South India .  They are Catholic.

Namini Wijedasa said that every one she interviewed  said that Aloysius was well-connected, both with the previous administration and the present government. One source related how Arjun  had hired a limousine for an influential Government minister in London  in2015, during an investment road show.The minister wanted to eat Chinese food but the restaurant at the hotel wasn’t that great,” he narrated. So, Arjun Aloysius took the minister out to dinner in his limousine to China Town. That’s just the tip of the iceberg.

 Arjun nurtures his relationships and was frequently seen with this Minister during last year’s campaign for the parliamentary election.”He has covered his bases, whatever the party,” said a senior political source. He is confident enough.” Aloysius’s connections, through his father-in-law and of his own making, are too strong, for him to be toppled   Arjun and Arjuna have too strong an influence with the Yahapalana to be shaken easily, they said.

Arjun is a deal maker, said one investment analyst. He gets things done by using contacts, forging alliances, or by other means. Perpetual made a lot of its money by establishing connections, and flogging certain shares at high prices. If you have connections, you can sell to anyone,” the investor said. You don’t need half a brain to do that. These are deals. If you know someone who knows someone, you can make it happen.” However, Arjun’s firm was not openly identified as part of the well connected   stock market mafia.  He remained in low    profile.

Perpetual Treasuries” began business  in 2013 with an investment of just  three hundred million rupees.  Perpetual Asset Management (Pvt) Limited, the holding company,  recorded a net loss of 2.8 billion as to March 31, 2012. But in  2017 Perpetual Treasuries    showed a profit of four billion rupees, while their three years profit was 12.5 billion. How could PTL manage to  show such high profits in such a short time. The phenomenal growth of Perpetual Treasuries  was  because  it wielded political influence at the highest level, said DEW Gunasekera.  

Perpetual has substantial stakes in HDFC, Central Finance, Lanka Ashok Leyland, Bairaha, Dimo and CIC and took control of WM Mendis.  In 2016, Perpetual was  planning to expand further. There is speculation that it wants to buy a stock brokerage. Religare Capital Markets has been mentioned, reported the media. It is eyeing a television station. Journalists are already being recruited for a national newspaper project. It is  well known that Aloysius has been helping to keep afloat a newspaper house which has been in financial difficulties for months on end.

His manager had told the editorial staff that his task was to protect his investor’s interests. The money, around Rs 1 million a month, comes in via Perpetual Group advertisements. Employees recently went unpaid for two months after the money failed to come in, said Namini Wijedasa in 2016.   Perpetual has a ‘deal’ portfolio that they flip to the EPF at multiples of the market price, they have a separate strategic portfolio and  said a senior stock broking source.  Only when the stock market bubble burst did they shift their attention to the bond market, said informants.”

 Perpetual Treasuries”  is not highly regarded in  investment circles.  Some laughed when asked about Perpetual’s business practices,”  reported Namini Wijedasa  . An investor who studies trends said I’m not entirely convinced that they are smart investors who do their research well.” Perpetual  holds on to certain portfolios and sells them when the market is down. Perpetual Capital made losses on Bairaha which it sold in stages. Perpetual could have earned substantially more on the stock exchange had he sold Perpetual’s stakes in some companies when the respective share prices were peaking.

In 2011, Perpetual Capital acquired a large stake in Lanka Ashok Leyland held by an investor, Perera. This longstanding shareholder had bought 27.8 percent of the company over a period of time. But he was in debt to a private bank. Perpetual arranged with the bank to repossess a section of  Perera’s bloc. The bank force-sold around 12 percent of  the stake to Perpetual at a massive discount.” The share was trading at Rs. 3000 when Perpetual lapped it up at Rs. 1000, causing shockwaves in the industry. The sale was carried out ostensibly to settle  Perera’s dues. But Perera  found that the bank had disposed of far more than necessary.  He was sad about losing something he had collected for so many years,  said the informant.” Days later,  Perera,  bubbly, self-made man”, died of a heart attack. He was in his early 50s.

Perpetual Capital and Perpetual Asset Management joined a tiny posse of companies, including Ceylon Grain Elevators and Lanka Orix leasing, that were helping to pump up the value of certain shares and unload them on to the EPF.  Some shares were taken up to     500% to sell to EPF.  Then the price crashed back to the original level.

Perpetual acquired shares of Grain Elevators for around 50-80 rupees each at the end of 2010. On March 3-4 the following year, EPF bought five million of these shares from Perpetual at Rs 205. The price then fell dramatically to original levels, slaying everyone else that had put money into  Grain Elevators,  after having observed it rise (artificially) in value. Among those affected in a similar manner were some friends of  Aloysius. After helping to inflate or pump up” the prices, they lost millions when the share prices plummeted following his sales.

Perpetual Asset Management employed a similar strategy to sell shares of LOLC to EPF and Bank of Ceylon. A study of historic stock market data, including daily price sheets and trading information, shows this. One stockbroker estimated that Perpetual made Rs 700-800 million profit from each or about Rs 1.5 billion from both, Grain Elevators  and LOLC.

Analysts had  noted that EPF was investing in non blue chip companies in a questionable manner. There was an  ‘inside ring’ consisting of certain officials within the EPF and Central Bank, they said.

Perpetual Treasuries Limited Chief Dealer told the Commission that Perpetual Treasuries Limited was bribing informants to get confidential information from the Employees’ Provident Fund and the Employees’ Trust Fund and other institutes. PTL has been paying for its informants continuously from its commencement as a Primary Dealer in 2014. These informants were paid bribes in millions when former Governor of the Central Bank Ajith Nivard Cabraal was in office as well. In the period July 17, 2014 to December 31, 2014, the informants were paid by the PTL more than Rs. 94 million.

Public Debt Department has not been concerned about the track record of the full shareholder of the Perpetual Treasuries (Pvt) Limited when issuing Primary Dealers’s license to it. When a director of a Primary Dealer company is a close relative of a CBSL top ranking official, it creates a conflict of interest.  The Code of Conduct to the Primary Dealers, states that  in the wake of such a conflict of interest, the Public Debt Department can withhold or cancel the license of a Primary Dealer.

Journalist Namini Wijedasa observed that just three days after the       2015 presidential election, someone predicted on an online website for stock market investors,  that the Bond scam would happen. The man wrote on Sri Lanka Equity Forum: Perpetual Treasuries owned by Free Lanka Capital Holdings owners will mostly get a large amount of business volumes of Treasury Bills and Treasury Bonds business in new ‘Yahapalana Government’ of Maithripala-Ranil Regime since the  new Governor of Central Bank is tipped to be Free Lanka Capital’s driving force Arjun Aloysius’s father-in-law Arjuna Mahendran who is also the top Economic Advisor of Ranil Wickremasinghe [sic] since old times.” 

He was proved right at the Central Bank bond auction of late February 2015.. The Government was not two months old when Bond scam occurred.  For those of us who knew how Perpetual did business, it didn’t come as a total shock,” said one investment management source. Perpetual Treasuries  were connected with pumping up stocks and dumping them at high prices on the Employees’ Provident Fund, which appeared to be a willing participant in this scheme. What shook us was that the new Government had  allowed what  happened at the bond auction. ( Continued)

UN News

UN Photo/Violaine MartinMichelle Bachelet, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, addressing the Human Rights Council on the state of global human rights, 6 March, 2019.

The UN’s top rights official on Wednesday rejected claims by Sri Lankan officials that she distanced herself from a report on the country and instructed her staff to be more cautious” in future, before stressing her commitment to justice for victims of grave abuses during the civil war.

In a statement issued one week after the Human Rights Council’s 47 Member States heard the report, and passed a resolution giving Sri Lanka another two years to deliver reforms originally agreed in 2015, High Commissioner Michelle Bachelet dismissed a newspaper story which quoted a senior Government official.

I am deeply disappointed by the spin that has been put on my discussion with the Sri Lankan Government delegation,” she said in her statement. Either the newspaper misunderstood the Governor, or the Governor misunderstood – or misquoted – me.”

According to an article in Sri Lanka’s Daily Mirror newspaper, a member of the Government delegation, Northern Province Governor Dr. Suren Raghaven, claimed that the High Commissioner admitted that certain facts incorporated in the UNHRC (UN Human Rights Council) report against Sri Lanka could not be condoned whatsoever”, Ms. Bachelet said.

The article also quoted his claim that the High Commissioner had advised two of her senior officials who attended the meeting to be more responsible and cautious hereafter”.

Neither of these claims are true,” Ms. Bachelet said.

Reforms welcomed, but should be ‘accelerated’

When presenting the report on Sri Lanka to the Human Rights Council on 20 March, Ms. Bachelet welcomed the Government’s commitment to broad institutional and reform measures” aimed at bringing the country together, after a brutal civil war that ended in 2009.

However, she also highlighted concerns about the appointment of military officers who were implicated in alleged serious rights violations and the lack of progress” in setting up a special tribunal to deal with the worst crimes.

Implementation of all measures contained in the 2015 Human Rights Council resolution 30/1 need to be more consistent, comprehensive and accelerated”, she insisted.

As a former Minister of Defence who has worked in the context of a transition, I can highlight the importance of security sector reform as part of a transitional justice process,” Ms. Bachelet told the Human Rights Council, referring to her previous political experience in Chile, where she was also twice elected President. These reforms should include a vetting process to remove officers with questionable human rights records. The recent appointment to a senior position in the Sri Lankan Army of Major General Shavendra Silva, implicated in alleged serious violations of international humanitarian and human rights law, is a worrying development.”

Human Rights Council ‘significantly misrepresented’ in Sri Lanka

Other news outlets in Sri Lanka were also continuing to significantly misrepresent” the Human Rights Council process in Geneva, Ms. Bachelet added, noting that the country report had been shared with the Sri Lankan authorities before publication, as is normal practice.

The Government’s views were taken into account when finalizing the report,” Ms. Bachelet said, explaining that a delegation of senior UN human rights officials had discussed its contents with a wide range” of officials during a visit to the country in February.

Underlining the importance of accountability to the people of Sri Lanka, Ms. Bachelet told the Human Rights Council that continuing impunity risks fuelling communal or inter-ethnic violence, and instability”.

Resolving these cases and bringing the perpetrators of past crimes to justice is necessary to restore the confidence of victims from all communities, she insisted.

By KRISHAN FRANCIS Associated Press COLOMBO, Sri Lanka Courtesy ABC News

Sri Lanka’s president has distanced himself from the government’s co-sponsorship of a resolution at the U.N. Human Rights Council giving the island nation two more years to fulfil its commitment to investigate alleged abuses during its civil war

Sri Lanka’s president distanced himself on Wednesday from the government’s recent co-sponsorship of a resolution at the U.N. Human Rights Council giving the island nation two more years to fulfil its commitment to investigate alleged abuses during its civil war.

Highlighting factionalism within the government, President Maithripala Siriena said in a speech that the country’s U.N. representative gave Sri Lanka’s consent to the resolution without his knowledge or that of the foreign minister.

He said the action resulted from “wrong decisions by sections of the government,” a reference to Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe, with whom he has had a falling out.

“The president is responsible for the foreign affairs of the country, not anyone else,” Sirisena said.

“I protest and totally reject the document signed behind by back. I see this as a betrayal of the security forces of the country, as a betrayal of the government of Sri Lanka and the people of Sri Lanka.”

Sri Lankan security forces in 2009 defeated Tamil Tiger rebels who had fought to create an independent homeland for the country’s ethnic minority Tamils. The U.N. initially estimated the death toll from 26 years of fighting to be about 100,000 but a U.N. experts’ panel later said some 45,000 ethnic Tamils may have been killed in the last months of the fighting alone.

Government troops and the Tamil Tigers were both accused of grave human rights violations, which prompted local and international calls for investigations.

Sirisena’s predecessor, Mahinda Rajapaksa, who oversaw the military victory, resisted calls for investigations for many years. Sirisena, who was his health minister, defected and allied with Wickremesinghe and successfully contested the presidential election in 2015 promising to investigate the allegations of human rights abuses, take measures to heal the wounds from the conflict and share political power with the Tamil minority.

Months after his election, Sirisena’s government co-sponsored a U.S.-led resolution in which it agreed to investigate abuses and prosecute perpetrators. Among the most contentious issues was the government’s agreement to investigate rights abuses in its own courts with the participation of foreign prosecutors and judges. In 2017 another resolution extended the time by two more years.

However, with Rajapaksa regrouping and rallying majority Buddhist Sinhalese opinion against actions against the security forces, Sirisena took a hard line.

A spat with Wickremesinghe came into open last October, when Sirisena suddenly sacked him and appointed Rajapaksa as prime minister, hoping to form an alliance with him again.

A subsequent seven-week political crisis crippled the country and ended with a Supreme Court ruling that forced Sirisena to reinstate Wickremesinghe.

In a speech in Geneva last week, Foreign Minister Tilak Marapana said the establishment of hybrid courts with local and foreign judges would violate Sri Lanka’s Constitution.

By Dr. Janaka Ratnasiri  Courtesy The Island

While appreciating Dr. Tilak Siyambalapitiya’s article on the present power crisis appearing in The Island of 25.03.2019, I would like to fill in some gaps in his article and also make some comments on the President’s statement about the power crisis as appearing in the media on the 27th.

The three issues

There are three main issues contributing to delay in adding generation capacity to the system. One is the delay in awarding the contract for building a 300 MW dual-fueled combined cycle gas turbine power plant at Kerawalapitiya and the second is the long delay taken to complete negotiations and do a proper environment assessment on the Sampur coal power plant. The third is the delay in building a terminal to import liquefied natural gas (LNG) to the country.

Delay in processing the tender for 300 MW power plant

In respect of the tender for building a 300 MW gas power plant, a call for requests for proposals (RFP) for this project was announced by the Ceylon Electricity Board (CEB) in November 2016. The closing date of the RFP was given initially as 22.02.2017, but later extended by a few months. According to the RFP, the letter of intent (LOI) to the selected bidder was to be issued in August 2017 after receiving approval of the PUCSL and the Cabinet of Ministers. The initial phase of open-cycle operation generating 200 MW is to be completed by mid-2019 and the second phase of combined-cycle operation to be completed by mid-2020.

However, even after more than two years of announcing the RFP, no award for the building of this power plant has been made. A series of articles appeared in The Island of 27th and 28th December 2018 under the caption “Delay in building new power plants – Who’s to be blamed?”, pointing the finger at the CEB for the delay. The article highlighted the fact that the main reason for the delay was the many shortcomings in the 500-page tender documents prepared by the CEB which failed to give the specification targets that should be met by the plant. Neither the CEB management nor the CEB Trade Unions has refuted these allegations. Had the tender evaluated and the award was made promptly according to the schedule, 200 MW of power could have been added to the national grid within a few months’ time. These shortcomings are described in detail in the two articles referred to above which may be accessed via:

http://www.island.lk/index.php?page_cat=article-details&page=article-details&code_title=196713

http://www.island.lk/index.php?page_cat=article-details&page=article-details&code_title=196764

PUCSL not approving the CEB Plan

Both the CEB and the Ministry of Power and Energy were heard over the electronic media recently saying that one reason for the current power crisis was caused by the Public Utilities Commission of Sri Lanka (PUCSL) not approving the CEB’s long term generation plan in time. The latest person to join this campaign against PUCSL is none other than the President himself. This was reported in all the media on the 27th, and according to the Island of 27.03.2019, the President was reported as saying that “some officials of the PUCSL and several Engineers of the CEB had links to the private power plant owners and they obstructed the implementation of the long-term power generation plan”.

Apart from the alleged link between officials and the private plant operators which I am unable to comment on, the statement that the present power crisis is caused by non-implementation of the CEB’s long term generation plan is far from the truth. According to Dr. TS, it was the non-implementation of the proposed Sampur coal power plant that has caused the present power crisis. It may be recalled that it was the President himself who decided to stop the construction of the coal power plant, announcing that he preferred a gas power plant instead. Perhaps, in view of many duties, he seems to have forgotten this.

The PUCSL was only recommending a plan comprising all gas power plants without including any coal power plants for base load generation in compliance with the provisions in the Electricity Act and it would also cause less pollution. Both the CEB management and trade unions vehemently rejected this plan and insisted that coal plants be included in the plan. Even if the PUCSL granted approval for the CEB plan promptly, it would not have prevented the present crisis. It is a pity that officials fail to advise the President and Ministers presenting the correct facts in this regard.

This dispute between the PUCSL and CEB went on for over a year and finally settled by the President by reversing his “no-coal” stand and approving the CEB plan to avoid CEB shutting down power to the country as they threatened intensifying their trade union action if their demand was not acceded. This is certainly not in keeping with ethical conduct expected from among the highest paid professionals in the country selected out of the best achievers at the GCE-A level examination. Was importing of coal a gold mine for them which prompted them to take such a drastic decision and trying to twist President’s arm?

The irony of the situation that though CEB engineers insisted on building more advanced coal power plants, they appear to be incapable of even maintaining the existing coal power plant. The Cabinet of Ministers at its meeting held on 26.02.2019 decided to award the contract for maintenance of boilers and turbines in the 3rd unit of Puttalam coal power plant to China Machinery Engineering Corporation, obviously because the local staff are unable to attend to this work, despite their working with the Chinese technicians for over six years. On the other hand, the existing combined-cycle power plants, one at Kerawalapitiya and two at Kelanitissa, are being operated and maintained by local staff without any problem. Isn’t this one more reason why CEB should opt for gas-fired power plants?

Delaying the commencement of the Sampur power plant

Even if the Sampur power plant was allowed to be built commencing in mid-2016, it would have taken at least five more years (typical period of construction for a coal power plant) to complete and would be available only in 2021. So, it is clear that stopping of the Sampur power plant could not have caused the present crisis as claimed by Dr. TS. Then, what is the real cause for the present power crisis? It may be recalled that the CEB entered into a memorandum of understanding with India’s NTPC Limited in December 2006 for the establishment of a 500 MW coal power plant at Sampur.

Subsequently, negotiations on modalities of executing the project with details of power plant specifications were commenced which continued for nearly five years, presumably because of disagreements between the two parties on such parameters as heat rate or efficiency, technology and unit capacity whether 250 MW or 300 MW. Finally, a Joint Venture was entered into by CEB and NTPC only in September 2011. Now, who is responsible for dragging the negotiations for nearly five years, which should not have taken more than one year, had the officials involved in the negotiations were competent and possessed negotiating skills.

Once the project was agreed upon, the proponent engaged an Indian Company to carry out an Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) which took another four years to complete and was released only in 2015. It took one more year to get CEA approval. In the meantime, work on the project commenced with ground clearing which caused many protests from the public. Subsequently, the matter was taken up by a public-interest organization who filed a court case highlighting many defects in the EIA report that was approved by the CEA.

The case, however, did not proceed in view of the President’s decision to cancel the project.

Disregarding President’s ruling to cancel the Sampur project, the delay in adding capacity to the system causing the present crisis is the undue long delay of over 12 years to complete the negotiations and getting the EIA report approved. Both the CEA and NTPC are totally responsible for this long delay.

If the negotiations completed as well as the EIA completed without any defects within say 5 years from 2006 when the work on the plant could have commenced in 2011 and that was before President Sirisena came to power. If the construction of the plant took all precautions to mitigate adverse impacts on the environment, it could have been completed without facing any protests within another 5 years. Then, by now, the country would have had the benefit of added 500 MW of power in the system. It is pointless blaming others for one’s own faulty decision making, and this applies to CEB and Ministry officials as well as all the ministers who were in charge of the power and energy portfolio.

Unsolicited proposals for building an LNG terminal

The third issue is the delay in deciding on building a terminal for importing liquefied natural gas (LNG). Here, Sri Lanka has been performing like a good-hearted lady who does not want to say no to anyone approaching her, as the local saying goes. First, India approached with an offer for a 500 MW gas power plant and a terminal and the government said “yes”. Next Japan too approached with an offer for a 500 MW gas power plant and a terminal and the government said “yes”. Thirdly, China approached with an offer for a 400 MW gas power plant and a terminal to be built at Hambantota, and the government said “yes”.

Finally, South Korea wanted to install a floating LNG terminal with a capacity of 1 million tonnes per annum at no cost to the government on condition SL purchases the agreed LNG volume from the Korean Company for 20 years at market prices, and pay a penalty if the agreed amount is not purchased. Though the President was keen to say “yes” to the offer as he personally submitted a cabinet paper on it when the offer was first made, the Cabinet has not so far approved the offer for reasons highlighted in Dr. TS’s article. The head of state has apparently signed memoranda of understanding for these projects committing SL for undertaking them, I believe, without any consultation with the relevant authorities.

Out of these 4 offers, apparently only the offer made by China is now proceeding. Initially, the power plant was to supply power to the industrial zone to be built for Chinese investors in Hambantota to be managed entirely by the Chinese. Later, because of the legal requirement that only CEB could operate a transmission line, CEB was drawn into the project as a collaborator. Since a deep jetty is already available at Hambantota Port which is sparsely used, construction of an LNG terminal there could be undertaken with minimum cost. It is not known whether the terminal will import LNG only to feed the 400 MW power plant or import in excess and feed the surplus gas to the industries for use as a source of thermal energy.

With regard to the Indian and Japanese offers, the government established a tripartite negotiating committee to work out the modalities of establishing a joint venture for operating and maintaining a terminal for importing LNG in the western coast. The negotiating committee however does not appear to offer a level playing field for Sri Lanka as representatives with wide experience and knowledge on natural gas and LNG are sitting on one side, while those sitting on SL side lack such experience or knowledge. It is not known how the South Korean offer which came later but pursued by the President would affect the negotiations of the tripartite committee.

Locating a site for the terminal

According to media reports, studies are being undertaken to determine the suitability of Colombo Port to locate the land terminal to be built by the joint venture and the service of a foreign consultant is being sought to assist in this. Even from a layman’s point of view, however, Colombo Port is not the best location to build an LNG terminal, considering its limited extent and the volume of traffic using Port facilities daily. It is an international requirement that any LNG facility should have prescribed exclusion zones away from other activities. There is also the likelihood of the insurance premium for vessels calling at Colombo Port getting enhanced in the event an LNG terminal is located within the Port premises.

The other option of getting a floating terminal installed as proposed by South Korea is also not straight forward. The advertisement inserted by the Ministry calling alternative proposals to challenge the Korean proposal has indicated that the floating terminal could be moored within 9 km from the Port in a North-Western direction. The operation of such a facility in open sea during the South Western monsoon wind regime is not easy as evidenced from the operation of unloading of coal onto barges from coal carrying vessels, which is limited to only the non-monsoon period.

The next best option would be to utilize small vessels with capacity in the range 10,000 – 30,000 cubic metres to transport the LNG to a suitable location on the western coast. These small vessels are shallow and do not need deep jetties unlike the standard LNG carriers having capacity in the range 150,000 – 250,000 cubic metres. These small vessels are widely used today to supply LNG to low-consuming countries where large vessels cannot have access. The necessary LNG requirements could be sourced from any of the neighboring countries trading LNG.

Dr TS mentions about the large number of unsolicited proposals for LNG power plants and terminals. In addition, at government -to- government level, there are several unsolicited proposals. The reason for foreign parties and governments offering such unsolicited proposals for LNG power plants is mainly the inaction by Sri Lankan authorities. They would have seen SL as a potential market for LNG and knowing that the country has no expertise in the field and the lack of initiative by the government to develop the expertise, would have wanted genuinely to assist SL by making the offers.

Conclusion

Once the President ruled out the Sampur coal power plant in favour of a gas power plant, had the government policy makers and stakeholders got together and planned out a strategy to introduce natural gas to the country identifying its requirements in all sectors, followed up by inviting proposals prepared free of defects enabling all interested parties to respond, the present situation of having so many unsolicited proposals in hand could have been avoided. These proposals prepared to suit our requirements could have been then evaluated and the best offer selected on competitive basis without allowing any external hands to influence. Sadly, Sri Lanka lost that opportunity.

By Dinasena Ratugamage Courtesy The Island

Former Defence Secretary, Gotabaya Rajapaksa should stop dreaming of the executive presidency because the Tamil National Alliance (TNA) would ensure that he would never secure it, TNA Kilinochchi District MP, S. Shritharan told media yesterday.

The TNA would also not allow Opposition Leader Mahinda Rajapaksa to become the President, the MP said. “We decided to support the budget 2019 because we want to prevent Mahinda Rajapaksa from returning to power,” he said.

Certain sections were trying to overthrow this government and come into power by defeating the budget, Shritharan said. However the TNA would not allow such an eventuality to happen, he added.

“A large number of people want Mahinda Rajapaksa to become President, but this will never happen as long as we are here,” he said.

Gotabaya has declared his willingness to contest the presidential election and it has been widely speculated that Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna (SLPP) is likely to field former Defence Secretary, Gotabhaya Rajapaksa as their Presidential candidate.

Courtesy Adaderana

Transparency International Sri Lanka (TISL) says the controversy surrounding the proposed USD 3.85 billion oil refinery in Mirijjawila, Hambantota, could have a negative impact on Sri Lanka’s efforts to remove itself from the Financial Action Task Force’s (FATF) ‘Grey List’ of countries vulnerable to money laundering and terrorism financing. 

The main investor in the project, the Singapore based ‘investment vehicle’ Silver Park International PTE Ltd, is a company controlled by the family of Tamil Nadu politician and former Indian Union Minister Dr. S. Jagathrakshakan, whose business interests have previously been implicated by Indian authorities and the media in several alleged corruption scandals, the statement said. 

Of the 40 FATF recommendations which set the international standards on combating money laundering, recommendation 12 requires that reasonable measures are taken to ascertain the source of wealth and source of funds in transactions involving politically exposed persons, it said. 

TISL Executive Director Asoka Obeyesekere said, In light of the efforts being made by the Central Bank of Sri Lanka to get off the FATF Grey List, it is essential that the Board of Investment conducts enhanced due diligence on the Silver Park International investment, given that its directors fall squarely within the FATF definition of politically exposed persons”.  

Given the confusion relating to the parties engaged in the project, TISL also called on all state agencies to ensure adherence to proactive disclosure provisions outlined in the Right to Information Act. Section 9 of the RTI Act requires the line Minister of a given project to publicly communicate all available information relating to the project, three months prior to commencement.  

Obeyesekere concluded, the importance of such information being in the public domain cannot be understated, especially in the case of major foreign direct investment which will have a direct impact on the local economy. Ensuring transparency and accountability in these processes will also enhance the country’s efforts to attract bona fide foreign investment”.

lanka C news

March 28, 2019 at 3:30 am | lanka C news

පසුගිය දා හම්බන්තොට මිරිජ්ජවිල දී මුල්ගල් තැබූ තෙල්පිරිපහදු ව්‍යාපෘතියේ ප්‍රධාන ආයෝජකයා වන සිල්වර්පාක් ඉන්ටර්නැෂනල් පුද්ගලික සමාගම තිබෙන්නේ ආමර් වීදිය ප්‍රදේශයේ බව පාර්ලිමේන්තු මන්ත්‍රී නාමල් රාජපක්ෂ මහතා පවසයි.

පාර්ලමේන්තුවේ දී ඔහු මේ බව පැවසීය.

හම්බන්තොට තෙල් පිරිපහදුවකට මුල් ගල තිබ්බා. ජාත්‍යන්තර මාධ්‍යයක් කිව්වා ඕමාන රජය ඒකට සම්බන්ධ නැහැ කියලා. BOI කියනවා ඕමාන රජයත් සමඟ තවම සාකච්ඡාමය අවස්ථාවේ ඉන්නවා කියලා. මේ මුල්ගලක් තියන්නේ සාකච්ඡාමය අවස්ථාවේ ඉන්නකොට.

සිල්වර්පාක් ඉන්ටර්නැෂනල් ප්‍රයිවට් ලිමිටඩ් කියලා සමාගමක් එක්ක ගනුදෙනුවක් කරනවා. ඒත් එක්කම අනෙක් පැත්තෙන්, සිල්වර්පාක් පෙට්‍රොලියම් ප්‍රයිවට් ලිමිටඩ් කියලා තව සමාගමක් ඔබ තමුන්නාන්සේලා පිහිටුවලා තියෙනවා. දැන් මේ සිල්වර්පාක් ඉන්ටර්නැෂනල් කියන සමාගම ආමර්වීදියේ කඩයක් ළඟ තියෙනවා තියලා තමයි අපිට දැනගන්න ලැබිලා තියෙන්නෙ. සිල්වර්පාක් පෙට්‍රොලියම් කියන එක තිඹිරිගස්යායේ අපාර්ට්මන්ට් එකක තමයි සමාගම රෙජිස්ටර් කරලා තියෙන්නේ. යනුවෙන් මන්ත්‍රීවරයා මෙහිදී වැඩිදුරටත් කියා සිටියේය.

KAMALIKA  PIERIS

BAMBALAPITIYA FLATS

The cabinet has approved a multi-million dollar project to replace the Bambalapitiya Flats, a significant landmark in Colombo, lying on very valuable land. A plan was, floated in 2014 to redevelop the ten-acre land on which the Bambalapitiya flats now stand. UTL Global Projects registered in Singapore made the proposal.  A tripartite MOU was signed between UTL Global Projects, Engineering Projects India and the National Housing Development Authority for this project. The land belongs to the National Housing Development Authority (NHDA). The project did not materialize.

The project was revived, when Yahapalana came in, on the recommendation of Housing and Construction Minister Sajith Premadasa. The Bambalapitiya redevelopment project was ‘a novel and complex project, the likes of which had never been undertaken in this country’, he said.

Cabinet approval was obtained and NHDA wrote to Global Project Pvt and Engineering Projects India Pvt that the Cabinet had approved their joint proposal and they should  incorporate a company in Sri Lanka for this project. Thereupon, a company called City Square Projects was duly incorporated in Sri Lanka. A formal agreement was entered into between the BOI and City Square Projects. Though Engineering Projects India was listed as a partner in the agreement, the agreement was signed only by  the directors of City Square.

In March 2017, on Cabinet approval, National Housing Development Authority signed an agreement with City Square Projects, with the proviso that they had to bring USD 10 million into the country within four to six weeks of signing the agreement.   Once the final project documents are signed, the land on which the Bambalapitiya flats stand will be transferred to City Square Projects  on a 99-year lease.

Minister Sajith Premadasa recommended in November 2016 that a gazette notification be issued immediately to acquire the Bambalapitiya flats site under the Condominium Management Authority law which provides for any condominium that is over 40 years old to be acquired. He further recommended that the Bambalapitiya flats be declared an ‘Urban development Site’ under Section 2 of the Urban Development Projects (Special Provisions) Act No: 2 of 1980. This provision disallows appeals to courts regarding the acquisition of property for development projects.

C.A.Chandraprema of the Island  examined the   Bambalapitiya project agreement and alerted readers to its very serious implications. He pointed out that the main investor, UTL Global Projects  had been incorporated in Singapore only in February 2011 and   its owners are three Indian nationals, Koorapati Premalatha Rani, Meena Pooja and Prashanth Koorapati, members of one family.

They don’t have any known background in construction or real estate development and are not known to have the financial resources to be able to handle a project of this nature either observed Chandraprema.   They definitely lack the financial standing to undertake a project of this magnitude,

City Square Projects is  not a joint project of  Global and Engineering Projects India.  It is   owned by Global alone.  Koorapati confirmed in a letter to the Chairman of the Project Steering Committee of the Bambalapitiya flats redevelopment project”, Ministry of Housing and Construction,  that City Square Projects (Pvt) Ltd is a wholly owned subsidiary of UTL Global Projects Pte Ltd, through its holding company Centennial Holdings” Singapore.

Global Projects,  is just three members of the same family of Indian nationals, with no background in construction or real estate development or the financial resources to be able to handle a project of this nature, repeated Chandraprema. It is a family owned company with no history worth talking about, 

 It is to a subsidiary wholly owned by them, City Square,  that the Bambalapitiya land is to be transferred.  They are going to get 10 acres of the best land in Colombo on a 99-year lease without paying the government any money.  The government is going to give this prime land, Bambalaptiya flats, to a company which does not have the financial clout to be able to handle a project of this nature Chandraprema again observed. As a result, three Indian nationals will hold a 99-year lease on ten acres of the best land in Colombo. emphasized Chandraprema.

Global  had misled the government into thinking that they had brought in a large Indian government owned construction conglomerate,  Engineering Projects India Ltd as their partner to  finance and build the project. BOI, the NHDA and even the tenants of the Bambalapitiya flats appear to be under the impression that Engineering Projects India Ltd has undertaken to invest 300 million USD in this project, said Chandraprema. That is not so, he said.

 Engineering Projects India Ltd, a state owned entity in India, has extensive experience in construction and real estate and solid financial backing. This company is already involved in water projects in Vavuniya and Puttalam with the National Water Supply and Drainage Board. But the company is not involved in this deal.

Since doubts had been expressed, government of Sri Lanka asked for proof that Engineering Projects was actually working with Global.  They asked, is Engineering Projects India Ltd actually in a consortium with UTL Global Projects, if so where is the consortium agreement. There was no consortium agreement with Global. Instead, Koorapati   sent a redacted version of the agreement between Engineering Projects India and City Square to the Project Steering Committee, claiming that the rest of it was ‘highly confidential’.

The version sent was a consortium agreement between City Square and Engineering Projects India Ltd had been signed on 5 March 2016.Engineering Projects India will take up equity in City Square Projects Pvt Ltd after applying for the required permission from the government of India. Till then they will continue to develop the project as a consortium.

Chandraprema  pointed out that  the dates on these letters show that Global wrote to Engineering Projects India Ltd making the initial proposal only on the day that they had applied to the BOI claiming that they were already in a partnership with Engineering Projects India Ltd   for redeveloping the Bambalapitiya flats.     He also pointed out that even if Engineering Projects India Ltd joins City Square Projects later. That too means nothing. They have only a very limited role and the three Indian nationals who own  Global will still be calling all the shots.

Chandraprema observed that the document sent by Koorapati   did not say anything about the financial commitment of Engineering Projects India Ltd to the project. This is a significant omission. The redacted version of the consortium agreement simply  states that Engineering Projects India Ltd will ‘endeavour’ to find a third party to provide the working capital for the project. That does not indicate a financial commitment.

The total project is estimated to cost 500 Million USD. But, Koorapati’s letter to the Project Steering Committee clearly indicates that they do not know where the money for the project is going to come from, said Chandraprema. They have mentioned that the money will have to be raised from third parties but no such third parties have been identified .

Engineering Projects India is a government owned business undertaking. It cannot invest any money overseas without the approval of the Indian Cabinet and other agencies such as the Reserve Bank of India. There is no guarantee that Engineering Projects India Ltd will get the Indian government’s permission for this project  

If the Indian government does not give Engineering Projects permission to go ahead with the project they will drop out of it automatically. Then, three individuals, Koorapati Premalatha Rani, Meena Pooja and Prashanth Koorapati who own  Global Projects  and City Square will be left holding a 99-year lease on 10 acres of land in Bambalapitiya without paying a cent to the government,  said Chandraprema.

 Chandraprema also observed that there are certain legal implications in the agreements signed. According to the requirements of the BOI, both UTL Global Projects Pte Ltd and Engineering Projects India Ltd should have been the joint owners of City Square Projects. The BOI agreement that was signed on 22 June 2016 said that the project would be a joint venture between UTL Global Projects Pte Ltd and Engineering Projects India Ltd.  The agreement between City Square Projects (Pvt) Ltd and the NHDA is also based on the premise that UTL Global Projects Pte Ltd and Engineering Projects India Ltd had jointly formed City Square (Pvt.) Ltd.

However, Engineering Projects India Ltd is not in a consortium with UTL Global Projects     and it is not part of City Square. This is a clear violation of BOI rules. Global’s  argument that even though Engineering Projects India Ltd does not have a consortium agreement with Global, they do have an agreement with City Square,  is  also wrong. The consortium agreement should be between UTL Global Projects Pte Ltd and Engineering Projects India not between Engineering Projects India Ltd and City Square (Pvt.) Ltd.

The government has imposed the condition on City Square that within 4 to 6 weeks of signing the agreement with the NHDA, they will have to bring in USD 10 million to the country. This will not be difficult because City Square Projects (Pvt) Ltd will be able to use that very agreement to obtain money by pledging the land as collateral, said Chandraprema.

City Square Projects Pvt Ltd has said that they have not pledged or mortgaged the land, continued Chandraprema. They haven’t done so because the land has not been transferred to them yet. But the moment the land is transferred to them, that is exactly what is going to happen. Once the land is transferred to City Square Projects Pvt Ltd,  the land may be used as collateral to raise the capital that UTL Global Projects Pte Ltd obviously lacks.

 We have ‘incontrovertible proof’ that what Global intends doing once they get their hands on the land is to mortgage it to third parties, said Chandraprema. They will do so without paying a cent to the government of Sri Lanka. A new group will be left in possession of the Bambalapitiya land for 99 years and the residents of the present Bambalapitiya flats and the government of Sri Lanka will be left high and dry.

The residents of the Bambalapitiya flats have voiced their strong opposition to the project and point out that neither the government nor the developers have had transparent discussions with them on the project. Minister Champika Ranawaka had filed a Cabinet observation in 2016, stating that the financial credentials of the developers did not appear to have been checked and that a proper feasibility study of the project had not been carried out. There is still no feasibility report for the project said Chandraprema in 2017.

Everything about these project smacks of a giant scam said Chandraprema. There is something seriously fishy in this whole business. Anyone can see from a mile away that this is not a project that is ever going to be completed. The fact that the government has not shown any interest in seeing the full agreement signed between City Square and Engineering Projects shows that powerful figures in the government are in on the deal. Such indifference on the part of the government can only be the result of massive kickbacks. 

The government of Sri Lanka should reconsider this project.  Funding for the project should be available upfront before any approvals are granted or the land handed over, said Chandraprema. All agreements entered into by the BOI and the NHDA with UTL Global Projects Pte Ltd or its wholly owned subsidiary City Square Projects (Pvt) Ltd should be suspended and reviewed because they have clearly attempted to deceive the government of Sri Lanka without disclosing material facts.

HAMBANTOTA REFINERY

As this essay goes to press,  a second ‘Bambalapitiya  flat’ issue  is taking place in Hambantota, where   the Yahapalana government has announced  in March 2019, the construction of a USD 4  billion oil refinery at Hambantota on  400acres of land, by Silver Park International  and the Omani government. It was to be the biggest foreign investment in Sri Lanka since Independence. This would provide 565 Sri Lankans direct employment and up to 185 jobs for foreigners.

The original investment proposal was submitted to the BOI in November 10, 2016, as a joint venture between Silver Park International (Pvt) Ltd, Singapore, and the Ministry of Oil and Gas of the Sultanate of Oman”. A Cabinet memorandum dated February 15 2019 reaffirms that Silver Park International (Pte) Ltd of Singapore will hold 70 percent of shares while 30 percent will be owned by the Ministry of Oil and Gas of Sultanate of Oman”.

 A letter dated March 12 2019 from the BOI to Silver Park International in Singapore also refers to an undertaking from Silver Park to set up a project for 10 MMPTA Green Field oil refinery in Hambantota for export market in collaboration with the Sultanate of Oman Ministry of Oil and Gas.

As soon as the deal was announced by the government of Sri Lanka, Oman swiftly denied it had any part in the multibillion dollar investment. Omani Government said it had not invested any funds, nor agreed to invest any money so far on the project. That leaves Silver Park,  like Global, as the star of the show. Thanks to the publicity, the identity of the investors have aroused local interest.

 Silver Park International (Pte) Ltd was incorporated on June 15, 2017, in Singapore. It was, therefore, set up several months after the first investment proposal was submitted to the BOI in Sri Lanka. The directors of Silver Park, like Global, are confined to one family. They are Jegath Rakshagan Sundeep Anand, Jagathrakshakan Sri Nisha and Jagathrakshakan Anusuya. They are the son, daughter and wife of S. Jagathrakshakan, a Tamilnadu politician based in Chennai.

S. Jagathrakshakan has held positions as Minister of State for Information and Broadcasting, Minister of State for New and Renewable Energy and Minister of State for Commerce and Industry.  He has been embroiled in several allegations. It is widely reported that his personal wealth increased by 12 times in just two years from INR 5.9 crore in 2009 to INR 70 crore in 2011. Media reports said this was the highest percentage increase for assets among all ministers in the central Cabinet during that period.  Jagathrakshakan’s name was also associated with the infamous Indian coal allocation scam too.

 This ‘Silver Park’ family have incorporated two companies in Sri Lanka. These two companies are Silver Park International (Pvt) Ltd and Silver Park Petroleum (Pvt) Ltd. There are no Omani nationals or representatives in either company,   reported Namini Wijedasa.

Silver Park International in Sri Lanka was set up on September 10, 2018. Its directors are the same family, Jegath Rakshagan Sundeep Anand, Jagathrakshakan Sri Nisha, Jagathrakshakan Anusuya plus a fourth, Kunasingam Jasoharan of Mullaitivu.

 The stated objectives  of this company are to carry out the business of manufacturing, importing, exporting, distributorship, intending, brokering, real estates, transportation and wholesale trade; to participate in Government tenders in order to implement the same project and to carry on bulk or wholesale trading activities; to operate as an investment holding company; to act as an agent or representative to any other person or companies; and to carry out any other business whatsoever the company may decide at a directors’ meeting”.

Silver Park Petroleum” was formed on February 21,2019,  six days after Development Strategies and International Trade Minister Malik Samarawickrama submitted his latest Cabinet paper on the subject. Its  directors are the same  family, Sundeep Anand, Sri Nisha, Kunasingham Jasoharan  with a fourth, Dr T.A.G. Gunasekara. ‘Silver Park Petroleum’” was created  to build a 10 MMPTA (million metric tons per annum) petroleum refinery for exports at Hambantota.

The foundation stone was laid for the new oil refinery on 24.3.19 at Hambantota. The Omani Oil and Gas Minister who was visiting Sri Lanka  was also there. The Omani Minister had  met Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe at Temple Trees earlier on. The meeting at Temple Trees was more in the nature of a courtesy call, a spokesman for the Prime Minister’s office said.. No specifics were discussed. This  possible ‘scam’ has been incorrectly  compared to the Volkswagen deal, it is nothing like the Volkswagen deal. It is  like  the Bambalapitiya deal.

APPOINTMENT OF  HIGH COURT JUDGE KANNAN

Ramanathan Kannan   who had failed to get a position as Magistrate was appointed a high court judge by the Yahapalana government, over the heads of all the others on the list. Three legal bodies, the Judicial Services Commission, the Judicial Service Association and the Bar Association of Sri Lanka, reacted strongly to this appointment. They all  said it was irregular. The senior-most judge who should have been promoted was, D. L. A. Manaf, District Judge of Vavuniya. D. L. A. Manaf was promoted to the High Court in March 2017.

Judicial Services Commission (JSC) wrote to the President withdrawing its earlier recommendation that Ramanathan Kannan be appointed a High Court Judge.  JSC said that if the BASL had made ‘no proper recommendation’ on the matter, the recommendation that the JSC had sent earlier to the President had ‘no force or avail in law’.

Article 111(2) (a) of the Constitution stipulates that judges of the High Court can be appointed by the president only on the recommendation of the Judicial Services Commission. This retraction by the JSC therefore made Ramanathan Kannan’s appointment as High Court Judge unconstitutional, said the media, but the JSC did not expressly recommend that Kannan be removed from office.

The Secretary to the President wrote to the Judicial Services Commission seeking a recommendation for the removal of Kannan in terms of Article 111(2) (b) of the Constitution, which provides for the dismissal of High Court judges by the President on the recommendations of the JSC. But JSC  did not make such a recommendation.   JSC said it could intervene only when there is a complaint related to a disciplinary matter. Critics however, observed that once the JSC retracted their recommendation, he should have been removed by the President. However this has not happened.   Kannan l continued to be a High Court Judge.

Judicial Service Association, (JSA), which represents the district judges and magistrates of Sri Lanka, had met the Chief Justice, K Sri Pavan  to discuss the Kannan matter and to inform him of the concerns of the judicial officers of the minor judiciary. JSA requested the Chief Justice and other members of the Judicial Service Commission to reconsider the appointment of Ramanathan Kannan as High Court Judge. Appointing a lawyer practicing at the unofficial bar over the heads of many senior judges who had been serving for more than 16 years was a case of overlooking the rights of the entire subordinate judiciary. A thing that has not happened in recent history.

The JSA also requested the JSC to recommend to the President the removal of   Kannan in terms of Article 111(2)(b) of the Constitution, since the said appointment was made on the misrepresentation of facts. If the need was to appoint a Tamil speaking High Court judge for the north and east, the senior most candidate would be the District Judge of Vavuniya D. L. A. Manaf.  He is a highly qualified judge with LLB and LLM degrees from the University of Colombo and has served as a judge for 17 years .

Judicial Services Association called  a  special General meeting to discuss the  appointment and also the involvement of BASL, in view of the fact that BASL  has no say in the appointment of judges. At the meeting JSA passed a unanimous resolution objecting to the Kannan appointment and declaring it to be an interference with the independence of the judiciary. They asked that the judge be removed and that he be barred from functioning as a judge until he is removed.

The JSA  adopted five resolutions seeking the removal of Ramanathan Kannan from the position of High Court Judge. The first resolution requested President Maithripala Sirisena to remove Ramanathan Kannan from the position of High Court Judge as the appointment has no force or avail in law. Judicial Services Commission (JSC) and the Bar Association of Sri Lanka (BASL) have re-affirmed that the recommendation with regard to the appointment of Kannan has no force or avail in law.

Second resolution requested the JSC to recommend the President to remove Kannan from the position of the High Court Judge.   Third resolution requested the JSC to consider not allowing Kannan to function as High Court Judge till he is officially removed from the said position. The fourth resolution stated that the independence of the judiciary has been violated by the controversial appointment of Kannan and requested the President and the JSC to restore and uphold the integrity and independence of the judiciary.

The last resolution requested the JSC to refrain from recommending nominations submitted to them from the unofficial bar for appointing High Court Judges directly in future. The appointment of Judges for High Court from unofficial Bar undermines the knowledge, experience and sacrifices made by the District Judges and Magistrates who work under immense pressures and difficulties for long periods of time in difficult areas during their career.

The Bar Association came under the spotlight over the Kannan matter. The Judicial Services Association  informed  the Bar Association that the Chief Justice had told them that the appointment had been made due to representations made to the President by the unofficial bar. This request had then been communicated to the Judicial Services Commission and the JSA had acceded to this request. The JSA  stated that it   had  checked with the Bar Association  and was told that neither the Bar Council nor the Executive Committee of the Sri Lanka Bar Association had anything to do with it. Some elements in the Sri Lanka Bar Association have misled the President and the Chief Justice.

The Bar Association was also concerned. Their reputation was at stake. BASL appointed an expert committee to look into the matter. The expert committee consisted of Upul Jaysuriya, Ikram Mohamed, Romesh de Silva, Upali Gunaratna, Nihal Jayamanne, Ajitha Athukorale, W.Dayaratna, Faiz Musthapha and K. Kanageeswaran. Thereafter  BASL held a meeting to discuss the Kannan issue.

This committee informed the Bar Association that  it was not possible to ask for Kannan’s removal as  Kannan had not violated any conditions set out in Article 111 (2) of the Constitution.  If the President was to remove Kannan without due cause, it would set a bad precedence. Also a disciplinary committee would need to be appointed to investigate  the Judge and his actions before any recommendations for his removal are made. The BASL decided that since the BASL did not recommend the appointment, they would now not intervene to either ask for his removal or continuance. 

BASL President, U.R. de Silva, told reporters that the BASL did not approve of the appointment of Kannan to the HC and that the former BASL President Alagaratnam had recommended Kannan in his private capacity, using letterheads of the BASL and that it was wrong to have done so. According to the BASL Constitution, the President of the Association could not issue such letters without the knowledge of the Executive Committee. BASL made it clear that this recommendation was not made by the BASL. BASL has nothing to do with this. A few people from the BASL acting on their own had gone to the President and asked that this appointment be made.

What  really happened  is this, said Chandraprema. A political party had first approached the Minister of Justice regarding the Kannan appointment but he had refused to accommodate them on the grounds that political parties have no role in the appointment of judges. Then this political party approached the Bar Association. Some members of the Bar Association had then written to the President and followed it up with a personal meeting as well. The President, BASL then wrote to the JSC saying that the Bar Association would like this person appointed to the High Court.

Presidential Secretariat said that Geoffrey Alagaratnam had met the President twice to canvass for Kannan’s appointment, not with members of the BASL Executive Committee but with some outsiders. This was denied by Alagaratnam who told the BASL that he did not meet the President. Alagaratnam  also said that despite any canvassing he (Alagaratnam) may have done to the President and to the Chief Justice on behalf of Kannan, it was up to the CJ and the JSC to exercise ‘due diligence’ before recommending Kannan to the President for appointment to the High Court. 

President Maithripala Sirisena stated that he had not made an arbitrary decision in this regard. He stated that this appointment was made following a written request made by the Bar Association of Sri Lanka (BASL). Mahinda Rajapaksa  said that in the nine years that he was President, he had appointed only one Supreme Court judge from the private bar and not a single member of the private bar had been appointed to either the Court of Appeal or the High Court by his government.

The Bar Association is now a highly politicized body with a UNP parliamentarian once functioning as its President, said Chandraprema. BASL President played a major role in the regime change project of 2015 and was given a top political appointment the moment the government changed. Yahapalana was ready to give further powers as a reward for the role played by many lawyers in the regime change project of January 2015.  These lawyers knew exactly what power they wanted, it was the right to appoint judges. A group within the BASL, seeing that Yahapalana was under obligation to them,   exerted this power straightaway. It is they who nominated Kannan, said Chandraprema.  Kannan is obviously being backed by an influential lobby, said Hemantha Warnakulasuriya.

Alagaratnam just before he stepped down from the position of President of the BASL, had written a letter to the new Chief Justice Priyasath Dep  saying  that the BASL has ‘every right’ to make recommendations to the President to appoint eminent members of the bar for judicial appointments and called on the President to consider the recommendations made by the BASL for appointments to the judiciary from time to time.

Unfortunately, there was no provision in the law to enable the Bar Association to make such recommendations. Therefore, the first draft of the 19th Amendment contained a provision that the Constitutional Council would have to consult the Chief Justice and the Bar Association in making appointments to the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal. This was shot down by the Joint Opposition  but re- appeared in the draft prepared by Constitutional  reform committee , which  gave the Bar Association a role in the appointment of judges to the superior courts.

. Lawyers  for Democracy”  in a statement issued in 2017,  justified the appointment of Ramanathan Kannan as a High Court Judge .There have been several appointments of private practitioners to the High Court from 1974 onwards, one of the recent appointments being that of  Paramarajah during Chief Justice Sarath Silva’s tenure of office. One of the reasons being the lack of Tamil-speaking judges .

In our view, when appointing a practicing lawyer to the higher judiciary, views should be obtained only from the President of the Bar Association and not from its committees such as the Bar Council or the Executive Committee. If the whole Bar Council or the Executive Committee is involved there will be canvassing and open debate, compromising the nominee’s independence. The practice has always been for the President of the Bar Association to make such recommendations, whenever suitable candidates are proposed.”The statement was  Signed Lal Wijenayaka, K.S. Ratnavale and JC Weliamuna, on behalf of Lawyers for Democracy.

Hemantha Warnakulasuriya responded. The appointment that was made when Sarath Silva was the CJ  was in 2007 when the High Court judge in Jaffna retired and no other Tamil speaking judge was willing to go there out of fear, he said. Then Sarath  Silva went to Jaffna, and appointed S. Paramarajah a highly respected senior lawyer as a High Court judge. The Jaffna Bar Association and The BASL was not informed that such an appointment was being made. Paramarajah was posted to the Eastern province and the Eastern province High Court judge was posted to the North. That was a special appointment made in difficult circumstances by the JSC so as to keep the Jaffna courts functioning, said. (Island 3.3.17 p 10 )

You have to look at all this from the point of view of the members of the judicial service. Those who join the service as Magistrates serve in various difficult areas and gradually get promoted. Their ultimate aim is to reach the superior courts, after which they retire. That is their chosen career path. To deprive any one of them of a justly earned promotion by appointing an outsider is a crime, Warnakulasuriya added.

Judicial Services Association said that Justice Minister Wijedasa Rajapakshe had told them that a political party had wanted Kannan appointed a high court judge, suspicion naturally centered on the Tamil National Alliance. TNA flatly denied responsibility,  but loudly supported Kannan. TNA but strongly opposed the JSA call to remove Kannan. JSA’s demand amounted to interference in the JSC. HC judge Kannan is still in office, Sumanthiran said.

President Sirisena had made the appointment following JSC recommendation in consultation with the Attorney General. “Therefore, legally, the appointment is valid,  said M.A. Sumanthiran. Kannan’s appointment couldn’t be rescinded by the President.   The Constitution states that once appointed a HC judge could be removed only on disciplinary grounds on the basis of an inquiry carried out by the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) and thereafter on a recommendation made to the President. We don’t see any reason to initiate a disciplinary inquiry in respect of the new HC judge, said Sumanthiran.

Sumanthiran said that appointments to the Supreme Court, Court of Appeal as well as High Court could be made from the judiciary, official bar and unofficial bar. He gave the example of appointment of C. G. Weeramantry from the private bar to the Supreme Court, It is conveniently forgotten that the Kannan appointment was made against the backdrop of a shortage of Tamil speaking judges. Kannan’s appointment was also supported by Tamil lawyers. There was an unusual number of lawyers from Batticaloa at the BASL meeting, ready to defend Alagaratnam, observed the media.  

It is now admitted, said analysts, that Kannan has been appointed as a judge of the High Court by mistake. The former Chief Justice  had assumed that Alagaratnam was speaking on behalf of the BASL.  We now have a preposterous situation where a High Court appointment has been made without the proper procedure being followed. That High Court judge has taken oaths and is now functioning as a High Court Judge. He cannot be removed unless some wrong doing is proved on his part.

The Bar Association of Sri Lanka has no constitutional, legal or moral right to make recommendations for the appointment of judges and that if the private bar is given the power to recommend the appointment of judges, that would corrupt the entire justice system with judges being dependent on the lawyers appearing before them for promotions and appointments, said analysts.

If the judges of this country are going to be dependent on the lawyers appearing before them for appointment and promotion, they will be compelled  to give them the verdicts that they want and it will lead to unimaginable corruption in the judiciary. If a member of the private bar is to be appointed to the judiciary at all, it should never be done on the recommendation of that lawyer’s colleagues.

Judges of the Court of Appeal and the High Court are best appointed through promotion from the lower judiciary or the Attorney General’s Department. Furthermore, if at all a judge is being appointed from the private bar it is best that such appointments be restricted to the Supreme Court. Kannan   in the mean time, continues  as HC judge in Jaffna. (Continued)

Dr Sarath Obeysekera

Traffic congestion, in the Colombo city, cost around one billion rupees a day, Megapolis and Western Development Minister Patali Champika Ranawaka told Parliament, yesterday.Participating in third reading of the budget debate under the expenditure heads of the Ministries of Transport and Civil Aviation and Ports and Shipping, the Minister said that the loss incurred due to the traffic congestion in terms of waste of fuel and time had been estimated by the Moratuwa University to be around Rs. 1,000 million a day.

I predicted this in 2017 !

We should not prohibit Demonstrations but charge for the national losses 

We should not prohibit Demonstrations but charge for the national losses 
Posted on March 2nd, 2017  in Lanka Web  by Dr Sarath Obeysekera

Yesterday I was passing by the road way in front of President’s office and noted some union members of Tamil community holding demonstrations. By 12 noon I was going back and police was trying control another group of people holding placards protesting about something else . Doctors and some medical staff were demonstrating in front Gampaha railway station inconveniencing the public.

We see that it is daily occurrence in our life

We also heard that under the principles of Yahaplanaya ,government is planning to allocate certain designated areas for Demo’s  in order to minimize the inconvenience to the public .We all know that there is massive loss to the country because of loss of man hours of  working people and over consumption of fuel due to traffic jams caused  by road blocks .

There is a solution to avoid or minimize the losses if we carry out following

Government should do a simple calculation of 500-1000 vehicles which burn fuel ( i,e 10 liters per vehicle for 2 hours costing 1500 Rs per vehicle and for 1000 vehicles cost will be Rs 1,500,000 )  .Loss of productive man-hours  ( i.e  3000 people at Rs 200 per manhour costing Rs 400×3000 = Rs  1,200.000 )

Total loss  is minimum  Rs 2,700,000 /= without considering the cost of police force and water used for  cannons !) .You may add another 2,300,000 Rs for maintaining law order including filing action against violators of public peace)

Total cost of one single demonstration for two hours will be 5 million Rs and if one carry on demo for 10 hours in will cost 50 million Rs to the country.

My golden suggestion is not to allow registered unions or political parties to hold demos other than in designated areas and impose a charge of 5 million Rs for two hours –say in Lipton Circle or  Lotus roundabout .

This amount should be paid to National Development Fund.

Total contribution to the national development  fund for a month will exceed  one billion Rupees.  (unions and parties can hold demo’s free during weekends !).

Unions may have to increase membership fees for members including party members to cover the payment charges for holding demo’s !!

I am sure this action by the government will be praised by IMF and World Bank .ADB ,OECF .JAICA etc rather than increasing taxes and price of essential goods .

Dr Sarath Obeysekera

KAMALIKA  PIERIS

REVISED 2.4.19

This essay is a follow up of the matters discussed in the first essay. It is confined to happenings in 2017 and 2018.

NATIONAL IDENTITY CARD

The head of the National Identity Card division was to be removed from office for opposing a racket, said Campaign for Free and Fair Elections (CaFFE). He had refused to award a tender illegally to a company nominated by the Minister to take photos for the proposed electronic identity cards.  Instead of the company which bid Rs 40 per photo the  Minister wanted  the tender given to a company that bid Rs 80.  The company concerned would collect  a whopping Rs 672 million on this.  The minister wanted the commissioner General NIC replaced with one of his lackeys.( Island 25.11.16 p 1)

VEHICLE IMPORTS

The Finance Ministry’s attempt to grant special tax concessions for   selected few persons for the import of luxury vehicles has been thwarted, announced the media. The Finance Ministry ordered the granting of tax relief for 26 persons who opened Letters of Credit  in their names on or before 26.05.2016, under the Excise (Special Provisions) Act. This special tax relief seems to have been given to selected individuals and not to all who might fall into the same category of persons who may have opened LCs on or before 26.05.2016. These orders were awaiting parliamentary approval.

The Sectoral Oversight Committee on Public Accounts  asked Parliament not to approve  the order. The country would be deprived tax revenue of Rs. 104 million by granting these tax concessions, officials said. The Committee decided to request the Minister of Finance to make known to Parliament and to the country the background of each of these individuals, since the list contains relatives such as father and son, also  several medical professionals . (Business Times on Sunday 14.5.17 p 1)

NATIONAL PAYMENT PLATFORM

Many an eyebrow has been raised by a government move to set up a hybrid company as part of the controversial National Payment Platform (NPP) to facilitate ‘single button transactions’, said the media. The Cabinet Committee on Economic Management (CCEM) had decided to recommend that the hybrid company be formed with the involvement of the Central Bank and the Information and Communication Technology Agency (ICTA). In 2015, Finance Minister Ravi Karunanayake allocated from the national budget as much as Rs. 25 billion for the National Payment Platform. 

The project however did not get off the ground. There was opposition. This seems to be a  government move to bypass the banking system in clearing retail payments, critics said. There was the danger of a  private company gaining access to all banking information, if  the NPP is allowed to be formed.

Central Bank Governor Indrajit Coomaraswamy wrote to  the Prime Minister  on the matter, in 2018. He said, ‘I would  like to emphasize that in most countries, there exists only one organization for handling the  clearing of retail payments. For example, National Payments Corporation of India (NPCI) is an umbrella organization for all retail payments in the country. It was set up with the guidance and support of the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) and Indian Banks Association (IBA). NPCI currently caters to a 1,324 billion population in India. It is not advisable to have a  hybrid company [for Sri Lanka ]  with a population of only 21 million.

LankaClear (LCPL) which is owned by the Central Bank of Sri Lanka and all Licensed Commercial Banks (LCBs) operating in Sri Lanka handles retail payment and settlement system in   Sri Lanka . Any new proposed payment platform will need to fulfill the criteria of Principles of Financial Market Infrastructure (PFMI), user confidence, security, ease of use and integration with other systems, etc. Further, failing to adhere to the PFMIs will curtail financial and technical assistance from various donor agencies to Sri Lanka and will have an adverse impact on the stability of financial system, market confidence, investor confidence, credit ratings of the country, etc. Considering all the above, CBSL is of the opinion that a new hybrid company is not required and any functions regarding retail payment and settlement systems can be carried out by the existing national payment infrastructure provider, LankaClear.

CENTRAL BANK DEPUTY GOVERNOR

Financial sector meddling was not confined to LankaClear. Finance Minister Ravi Karunanayake had suggested the appointment of an ‘outsider’ as Central Bank Deputy Governor, reported the media.  Traditionally it is a senior bank officer based on seniority and experience. (Business times on Sunday 5.2.17 p 1)

MONEY LAUNDERING

 Finance Minister Ravi Karunanayake had in 2016 asked for a ‘no questions asked’ policy for large scale remittances.  ‘We will ask no questions in fact we will provide measure to make the investor feel safer’, he is quoted as saying. Central Bank and commercial banks opposed this saying that it went against the anti money laundering policy of the banks. Ravi had asked whether they could at least relax stringent control on foreign deposits or remittance below USD one million and maintain the usual checks for anything above.  Banks said they had to follow the local and international laws on the matter.  There are stringent rules on this. (Sunday Times 17.1.16 p 1 ) 

CUSTOMS, INLAND REVENUE, EXCISE DEPARTMENTS

Customs, Inland Revenue and Excise departments were subject to further interference. The Inland Revenue department  complained that revenue collection was going to be handed over to a private company. Excise unions  complained that the power of the Excise department were whittled away by creating a special unit to do the work of the department. Employees of Customs and Inland Revenue departments protested against the deployment of officials of the Finance Ministry units to supervise their duties.

ENERGY

In 2017, the Anti Corruption Front (ACF) stated that the energy situation  had deteriorated since  Yahapalana took over. Those at the helm of the power sector w were taking decisions severely inimical to the national economy. The ACF  called for reappraisal of the entire power generation plan to prevent an influential few from making a killing at the expense of the national economy.

ACF cited the example of purchasing of coal from Swiss Singapore Overseas Enterprises  at nearly USD 10 per tonne more than the market price as an example. “Each shipment cost Sri Lanka nearly Rs 100 mn more than the current market price,” .”Corruption in the lucrative power sector is second only to the Central Bank bond scam. The country is paying a very heavy price for corruption,” said ACF.

ACF pointed out that the Yahapalana government  was paving the way for gradual re-launch of diesel power generation facilities at a tremendous cost to the country. ACF charged that the Power and Renewable Energy Ministry was favoring costly diesel power generation and that four top officials who had been directly involved in the  Yahapalana regime change of 2015, 2015 were responsible for ruining the power sector today.

 ACF  urged Yahapalana government to immediately review a series of investment proposals to establish liquefied natural gas (LNG) plants. There  were several energy proposals made to Yahapalana which Yahapalana was ignoring. A Hong Kong investor had proposed the setting up of LNG power plants for Katunayake and Biyagama Export processing Zones (EPZs) as well as LNG intake facility at Kerawalapitiya. The proposal worth USD 325 mn made in Nov 2016 had been pending subject to necessary approvals.

Other offers had also come in. In 2016, BOI received two other project proposals from Indian and Chinese investors. The Indian investment worth USD 400 mn was to establish LNG intake and processing facility at Kerawalapitiya and the Chinese investment amounting to USD 728.8 was for Hambantota. Cabinet approval as well as Petroleum Resources Development ministry approval were required the Indian project whereas the Chinese project awaited releasing of land in Hambantota.

There was also the CEB’s controversial move to build a combined cycle power plant at Kerawalapitiya with the intention of transforming it to LNG facility in three years at a colossal cost. This should be examined against the backdrop of long overdue approval for foreign investments in the same sector. CEB was planning to invest nearly Rs 7 bn on the project at a time the government was struggling to meet its overseas loan commitments.

There was corruption in the energy sector long before Yahapalana came in , ACF said. A Canadian project had been held up since 2005 pending CEB approval. The previous government hadn’t been able to secure an investment amounting to US 750 mn from Hong Kong for the establishment of 600 MW LNG plant and LNG intake terminal in June 2008 for want of CEB’s approval. A proposal made in Sept 2011 in respect of an American investment amounting to US 1000 mn couldn’t get off the ground for want of CEB approval. The US investment had been the largest of the five projects and was intended to establish LNG storage and regasification plant as well as 500 MW power plant at Hambantota.

 COAL TENDERS 1.NOBLE RESOURCES

A tender  was called for the supply of 6.75 million tonnes of coal over a period of three years to the Norochcholai power plant, a contract worth well over Rs. 60 billion. The Technical Evaluation Committee had originally recommended to the Standing Cabinet Appointed Procurement Committee that Messrs Noble Resources, Singapore was the lowest bidder. Thereafter the Standing Cabinet Appointed Procurements Committee (SCAPC) had received a letter dated 29 June 2015 from Swiss Singapore Ltd. On the same day the SCAPC had directed the Technical Evaluation Committee to re-evaluate the bids ignoring two of the criteria.

The tender    was thereafter awarded to Messrs Swiss Singapore Ltd, by Cabinet overriding a ruling by the Procurements Appeal Board to cancel the tender and call for fresh bids,  after considering an appeal made by Nobel Resources who charged that the tender criteria had been altered after the bids had been opened.

Nobel Resources  then petitioned the Supreme Court stating among other things that Cabinet had not been informed of the material facts of the case and therefore  Cabinet was unable to make an informed decision about this tender. This was perhaps the court case of the year with the list of counsel appearing for the Petitioner and the Respondents reading like a Who’s Who of the legal elite in this country. (Noble Resources International Pte Limited vs Minister of Power and Renewable Energy (SC FR No. 394/2015)

This is a landmark case because the Supreme Court heard it as a matter of national interest. Chief Justice K. Sripavan stated that the court had decided to go into the merits of the case as some of the events that took place in the award of this tender ‘shocks the conscience of the Court’.

The SC observed in delivering their judgment that the Court had granted leave to proceed in this case even though the Additional Solicitor General, appearing on behalf of the government raised the issue that the Petitioner did not have locus standi to invoke the jurisdiction of the Court because the Petitioner is a Company registered in Singapore which has petitioned the SC without a local representative.

The SC observed that ‘it is essential to the maintenance of the rule of law that every organ of the State must act within the limits of its power’ and that ‘the Court cannot close its eyes and allow the actions of the State or the Public Authority go unchecked in its operations’. And further that ‘If the Petitioner with a good case is turned away, merely because he …. has no locus standi to maintain this application, that means that some government agency is left free to violate the law and this is not only contrary to the public interest but also violates the Rule of Law’.

Having considered the facts of the case the Supreme Court  observed that the Government Procurement Guidelines required that bids have to be ‘evaluated strictly according to the criteria and methodology specified in the bidding documents’. The lower granular size limit was among the two criteria removed from the bidding documents so that more powdery coal would be accepted. Messrs Swiss Singapore Ltd was thereupon awarded the tender by the SCAPC.

The Supreme Court observed that ‘no one, neither the State nor the SCAPC shall act contrary to the bid documents and the Government Procurement Guidelines’ and that ‘it is of utmost importance that all the necessary safeguards laid down therein should be complied with fully and strictly and any departure from them make the evaluation process void’ and that ‘if the SCAPC exceeds its authority, the purported exercise of power may be pronounced invalid’.

The Supreme Court stated that the Standing Cabinet Appointed Procurements Committee should have rejected the bid of Swiss Singapore Ltd for influencing the tender procedure. The Supreme Court determination reproduced, in full, a letter written by Maithri Gunaratne the Chairman of Lanka Coal Company (which procures coal for the Norochcholai plant) to the Secretary of the Ministry of Power and Renewable Energy expressing shock that the SCAPC has disregarded the clause in the company’s bid document which strictly prohibits bidders from contacting anybody involved in the award of the tender from the time of the opening of bids to the time the contract is awarded.

The SC stated that the decision made by the SCAPC was outside its jurisdiction and therefore null and void in this judgment. The highest court in the land had struck at the very citadel of executive power by stating that the decision taken by the Cabinet of Ministers on 22 September 2015 to award the contract to Messrs Swiss Singapore Ltd could not be considered a valid decision.

The SC stated further that the power of the State was conferred on the members of the SCAPC and the Procurement Appeals Board to be held in trust for the benefit of the public. The Supreme Court being the protector and guarantor of fundamental rights cannot refuse to entertain an application seeking protection against the infringement of such rights. The Court must regard it as its solemn duty to protect the fundamental rights jealously and vigilantly. It has an important role to play not only preventing or remedying the wrong or illegal exercise of power by the authorities but has a duty to protect the nation in directing it (the executive) to act within the framework of the law and the Constitution.

 Chairman of Lanka Coal Company LCC Maithri Gunaratne  had flayed the  Special Cabinet Appointed Procurement Committee (SCAPC) and  Secretary Batagoda for awarding a coal tender to Swiss Singapore, which is said to have caused a loss of over four billion rupees to Sri Lanka on an earlier occasion. Gunaratne said the LCC should have sought a clarification from the Supreme Court but the Ministry instead sought an opinion from the Attorney General, who recommended that the Cabinet take whatever decision and went ahead with the deal, Gunaratne alleged. 

 A week later, Power and Renewable Energy Minister Ranjith Siyambalapitiya    removed Maithri Gunaratne from the post of Chairman Lanka Coal Company (LCC), reported the media. Gunaratne had been targeted for speaking out against those involved in mega corruption said CaFFe. In March 2017, Joint Opposition lodged a complaint with CIABOC and the Criminal Investigations Department (CID) against Ranil Wickremasinghe, Malik Samarawickrema, R. Paskaralingam and Charitha Ratwatte over the Swiss Singapore coal deal.

COAL TENDERS  2

The Secretary to Ministry of power and renewable energy, Dr R.M.S.Batagoda  wrote  a strong letter to the CEB chairman  in 2016 on a number of irregularities in the CEB. The coal tender for Lakvijaya coal power plant has been riddled with irregularities and this has led to losses to CEB. The tenders are handled by the Lanka Coal Company which lacks the competence to do this. This tender should be handled directly by the CEB.

The LCC was soundly criticized. The LCC seems unable to get the suppliers to stick to regulations set out in the signed agreement or do the payments in a lawful manner. In several instances the tender documents has been altered to suit the supplier after the tender had been awarded.

 Further, Nobel resources contracted to supply 1.9 million metric tons in 2015 had only supplied 1.6 million. The loss to Sri Lanka is estimated at 12,500 million. However LCC had defended the supplier saying they could not supply the balance due to the monsoons. The supplier should not  be able to get away with such a flimsy excuse.  The matter should have come before a bigger committee. CEB had to bear the loss.

Batagoda also drew attention to Liberty Commodities.  Liberty  was awarded  a tender to supply 165 metric tons of coal  in May 2015, by a cabinet appointed procurement committee. The sulphur and ash content of coal  had been altered to Liberty’s benefit after the tender had been awarded to it.  This is illegal.  It is also a financial crime. But CEB kept quiet and paid huge sums of money to the tenderer.

 Liberty was awarded the tender again in  September 2015 and the price was altered by the LCC. The contract signed by the LCC was not the one approved by the Tender board but what LCC had passed off as an amendment to a previous tender. That is another illegal act. In January 2016 LCC  again altered the tender  document to benefit Liberty and caused losses to the CEB.

The next tender  was awarded to Adani Global. The  supplier failed to supply 113 metric tons of the contracted 260 metric tons causing heavy losses to CEB.  5 out of 6 tenders awarded by the LCC last year had been full of controversy Batagoda concluded.

Batagoda found fault with the  LCC Board of directors for not taking remedial measures and tangible action to avert losses.  Batagoda asked whether the LCC was needed at all. According to the Attorney General’s report  the LCC wasn’t essential for the purchase of coal. LCC’s future should be examined against the backdrop of its failure to take remedial measures as recommended by the AG.  

SRI LANKA – SINGAPORE FREE TRADE AGREEMENT (Business Times on Sunday 20.1.19)

The Sri Lanka – Singapore Free Trade Agreement (SLSFTA) has run into troubled waters following the startling revelations made by the 5-member Presidential Committee of Experts (CoE)) in their 280-page report. President Maithripala Sirisena has called for the suspension of the agreement pending its revision or abolition, as protests by professional associations, public interest groups and stakeholders of international trade over the SLSFTA grows to a boiling point.

The President’s directive comes at a time when the SLSFTA’s validity under the Constitution is being challenged at the Supreme Court by eight petitioners claiming that several professionals including doctors, engineers and lawyers would be affected due to this pact. Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe, the cabinet of ministers and the Attorney General have been cited as respondents in the case.

After these mounting pressures exerted from all fronts especially from the Presidential level, a team of international trade experts is now scrutinising the observations and recommendations contained in the CoE report,. The ministry will submit counter submissions relating to adverse observations contained in the report .however  they are not aware of any directive of the President calling for the suspension of the agreement.

The CoE was of the view that the entire negotiation process was carried out without any feasibility and cost-benefit studies from Sri Lanka’s point of view. It observed that some serious lapses were allowed to occur,  deliberately or inadvertently to expedite matters in the process of signing the SLSFTA by Minister Malik Samarawickrema.The Minister had indeed acted without attending to the conditions laid down by the Cabinet of Ministers in its conditional approval granted to him, the report said. These lapses relate to non-compliance with matters which the Cabinet had clearly indicated had to be fulfilled before signing,said CoE ,while making several other startling revelations.

LAYARDS ROAD DEVELOPMENT (Sunday Times 4.3.18)

The Megapolis Minister has issued a gazette notification, permitting mixed development on the eastern side of Layards Road in Colombo 5, including a section which is at the centre of a legal dispute between a condominium builder and several residents.

The proposed ‘Blue Ocean Layards Road’ is advertised online by the developer as a luxury apartment complex of 14 storeys. But in June 2017, eleven residents of Layards Road filed a petition seeking to quash any preliminary planning clearance issued to Blue Ocean Breeze (Pvt) Ltd or D D Enterprises (Pvt) Ltd by the Urban Development Authority (UDA) or the Colombo Municipality to erect a building of more than five floors

.The basis of the legal challenge was that the plot on which Blue Ocean was putting up the highrise is a ‘Special Primary Residential Zone’ under the 2008 City of Colombo Development Plan (Amendment). The number of storeys allowed within such an area is five or ground plus four floors.

In January this year, the residents once again petitioned the Court of Appeal for an interim order to prevent the developers from starting construction after learning that work was to begin soon. They sought a writ of prohibition to prevent the UDA or the municipality from issuing a fresh preliminary planning clearance or building permit for a construction exceeding five floors. They also want a writ of mandamus compelling the UDA or the municipality to demolish an unauthorised construction” should the developers proceed with the project, especially if it exceeds five floors.

But in a gazette dated January 18, 2018, Minister Champika Ranawaka (who also holds the portfolio of Western Development) has designated the front lots along the eastern side of Layards Road to be a ‘Mixed Development Zone’. This allows for the construction of offices, apartments, entertainment facilities and shops. The Minister’s signature on the gazette is dated July 14, 2017, not long after the residents took the matter to court.The gazette gives effect to a revision of the City of Colombo Development Plan.

 The Urban Development Authority Law empowers the Minister to carry out periodic changes. The amendment now allows Blue Ocean to proceed with its project.The UDA rejected any suggestion that the amendment was introduced to favour a particular developer. But Chairman admitted that Blue Ocean made a request to implement the project in the Special Primary Residential Zone.

The developer pointed out that one side [western] of Layards Road is designated a Mixed Development Zone while the other side [eastern] is a Special Primary Residential Zone,”  he said. The street is the boundary between the two and separate regulations apply to each side. However, the land value on both road-fronts is the same.” The decision was not in favour of anyone,”

The UDA followed a procedure. The Act clearly prescribes how any changes to the Plan must be carried out. There may be certain development needs arising from time to time. These are referred to the Planning Committee appointed by the Minister and they make the decisions.” The Committee, on policy grounds, ruled favourably on the developer’s request, adding that the change applies to all the lots facing Layards Road. This means other companies can now erect buildings on either side of the street.The Committee’s outcome was referred to the Minister for validation through a gazette. The date of his signature was only a coincidence”,. And the gazette was only issued in January because it had been lying in files” at the UDA (Continued)

පාර්ලිමේන්තු මන්ත්‍රී ලක්ෂ්මන් යාපා අබේවර්ධන

විදුලි අර්බුදය සම්බන්ධයෙන් අපි කණගාටු වෙනවා. ලංකාවේ විදුලි බල පද්ධතියෙන් ජනනය කළ හැකි සම්පූර්ණ විදුලි ධාරිතාව මෙගාවොට් 4000යි. සියලුම අංශ උපරිමයෙන් ක්‍රියාතම්ක වුනොත් ජලවිදුලියෙන් මෙගාවොට් 1700යි. ගල් අගුරුවලින් මෙගාවොට් 900යි. තෙල්වලින් මෙගාවොට් 1200කුත් අනෙකුත් පරිසරකාමි විදුලි ජනක ක්‍රමවලින් මෙගාවොට් 200ක් විදියටයි මේ මෙගාවොට් 4000 නිෂ්පාදනය වෙන්නේ. අපි නොරොච්චෝලේ විදුලි බලාගාරය හැදුවාට පස්සේ විදුලි අර්බුදයට මුහුණ දෙන්න කිසිම විදුලි බලාගාරයක් මේ වන තෙක් හැදුවේ නැති ආන්ඩුව සම්පූර්ණයෙන්ම මේ තත්ත්වයට වග කියන්න වෙනවා.

වර්ෂකට සියයට 6ත් 8ත් අතර ප්‍රමාණයක් විදුලි උත්පාදනය වැඩි කරන්න වෙනවා. 2025 වෙද්දි මේ රටේ විදුලි උත්පාදනය මෙගා වොට් 6000ක් නොවුනොත් මේ රටේ ඇති වෙන තත්ත්වය මොකක්ද. ඒ තත්ත්වය තේරුම් ගෙන වැඩපිළීවෙලක් ක්‍රියාත්මක කළ යුතු රටක් මේ වෙද්දි කිසිම මහා පරිමාන විදුලි බලාගාරයක් හැදුවේ නැති නිසා අද රට අදුරේ. 

 අද වෙද්දි ආර්ථික වර්ධනවේගය තියෙන්නේ තුනයි දශම ගානක. මේ විදියට ඉදිරියට ගියොත් එකයි දශම හතකට ආර්ථීක වර්ධන වේගය අඩු වෙන එක වළක්වන්න බැහැ. මේ විදියට ආණ්ඩුව කියන කිසිදෙයක් කරන්න පුලුවන් කමක් නැහැ. මේකට ආන්ඩුවේ ඇමැතිවරයාට බැනලා වැඩක් නැහැ. ආන්ඩුව පත්වුනු දවසේ ඉදලා විදුලි නිෂ්පාදන ක්ෂේත්‍රයට අත නොගැසීම නිසා සහ ආණ්ඩුවට එවැනි දැක්මක් නැති නිසා තමයි ජනතාවත් රටත් මේ තත්ත්වයට පත්වෙලා තියෙන්නේ. 

මේ දිනවල පරිභෝජනය කරන්නේ මෙගාවෝට් 2000යි. නමුත් මෙගාවොට් 2500ක් පමණ ප්‍රමාණයක් රටට අවශ්‍යයි. මේ ආන්ඩුවට ඒ මෙගාවොට් ප්‍රමාණය රටට දෙන්න බැහැ. තෙල් ප්‍රශ්නය නිසා තෙල්මිල වැඩිනිසා තෙල්වලින් විදුලිය ජනනය කරන විදුලි බලාගාර ක්‍රියාත්මක කරන්න බැහැ. වැස්ස නැති නිසා ඒ විදුලි බලාගාර ක්‍රියාත්මක වෙන්නේ නැහැ. නොරොච්චෝලේ පොඩි බිදවැටීමක් වුනොත් ඒකත් විදුලි පද්ධතියට එකතු කරන්න බැහැ. මේ නිසා ඉදිරි කාලයේදී රට නරක තත්ත්වයකට පත්වෙනවා. අපේ ආන්ඩුවක් ඇවිත් සැලැස්මකට වැඩ කරන ක්‍රමවේදයකට යන අතරම මේ භයානක තත්ත්වයන්ට අපිට මුහුණ දෙන්න සිදුවෙනවා. මේ වෙද්දි කර්මාන්ත ශාලාවල වියදම වැඩිවෙලා. අධිවේගී මාර්ගවල මාර්ගවල විදුලිය නැති වෙලා අවධානම් තත්ත්වයක් ඇති වෙලා. කර්මාන්ත ශාලාවල නිෂ්පාදනයට තෙල් වලින් තමන්ගේ විදුලි ජනක යන්ත්‍ර පණ ගන්වන්න වෙලා. නිෂ්පාදන වියදම වැඩිවෙලා. අපනයන ක්සේත්‍රයත්මේ නිසා විශාල බලපෑමක් වෙලා. පාසල්වල විදුලි ජනක නැහැ. උගන්වන්නත් විදියක් නැති වෙනවා. හැම ක්සේත්‍රයකම නිෂ්පාදන මිල වැඩිවෙනවා. ආන්ඩුව මේකට වග කියන්න වෙනවා. හේතු සාධක කියලා වැඩක් නැහැ. 2001 බලයට ආවමත් මෙවැනි තත්ත්වයක් ඇති වුනා. ගෙවුනු අවුරුදු හතරහමාර නිසි කළමණාකාරිත්වයකින් කටයුතු නොකිරිම නිසා අපිට මේ සියලු ප්‍රශ්නවලට මුහුණ දෙන්න සිදුවුනා. 

හැම වර්ෂකම සියයට 6 සිට සියයට 8 දක්වා ප්‍රමාණයකින් විදුලි පරිබෝජනය කරන ප්‍රමාණයේ වැඩිවිමක් සිදුවෙනවා. ඒකට මුහුණ දෙන්න සැලැස්මක් ආන්ඩුවට නැත්නම් තවතවත් ජනතාව විපතට පත්කරන කාරණාවලම ආන්ඩුව යෙදිම කණගාටුවට කරුණක්. මේ නිසා බඩු මිලවැඩිවීම , විරැකියාව, ආයෝජන අඩුවීම, ආර්ථක සේවා බිද වැටීම ණය බර වැඩිවිම වගේ දේවලට මුහුණ දෙන්න වෙලා. 

දැන් බැදුම්කර සිද්ධියට සම්බන්ධ නිලධාරීන් අත් අඩංගුවට ගැනීමක් සිද්ධ වෙනවා. නිලධාරීන්ගේ ඇගට මේ ප්‍රශ්නයට දාලා අත පිහදගන්න හදනවාද කියලා හිතනෙවා. ඒ නිසා නිලධාරීන්ගෙන් අපි ඉල්ලා සිටිනවා මේ සිද්ධියට සම්බන්ධ වුනු, උපදෙස් දුන්න දේශපාලනඥයෝ වහාම හෙළි කරන්න. මේ වෙද්දි ආන්ඩුව අසමත් වෙලා තියෙන්නේ සිංගප්පූරු පුරවැසිභාවය තියෙන අර්ජුන මහේන්ද්‍රන් මේ රටට ගෙන්වන්න අවශ්‍ය ලේඛණ යවන්න. නිලධාරීන් අත් අඩංගුවට ගත්තාම ඔවුන්ට උපදෙස් දුන්න පුද්ගලියින් හෙළි කිරීමේ වගකීමක් තියෙනවා. බැදුම්කර කොමිසමේ දී යම් යම් දේවල් මග හරින ආකාරයට කටයුතු කරපු හැටිත් හෙළි වෙන්න පුලුවන්. එහෙම වුනොත් ඔය සියලු දෙනාගේම නායකයින්ගේ රෙදි ගැලවෙන්නත් පුලුවන්. 

හම්බන්තොට මහාපරිමාන ආයෝජන දෙකක් ගැන කතාකරනවා. මේ සිමෙන්ති ආයෝජනය කාගෙද. සිමෙන්ති ආයෝජනය නන්දන ලොකුවිතාන මහතාගේ. මීට කලින් එතුමා ගැන කිව්වේ මොනවාද. මොහු ආයෝජනය කරන්නේ රාජපක්ෂලාගේ සල්ලි කිව්වා. අද ඔහුගේ ආයෝජනය හොද වෙලා. මේ ආයෝජනය ගෙනාවෙත් අපේ කාලේ ආයෝජන ගෙනාපු නන්දන ලොකුවිතාන මහත්තයායි කියලා කියන්නේ නැහැ. මොහුට විරුද්ධව ඒ දවස්වල පරික්ෂණ කලා. අපි ආයෝජනයින්ට අවස්ථාව දුන්නා. නිීති රිති දාලා ආයෝජකයෝ පීඩාවට පත්කිරිම නිසා කිසිම ආයෝජනයක් එන්නේ නැතිව ගියා. දැන් මහා පරිමානයෙන් ලංකාවේ ලොකුම ආයෝජනය ගෙනාවාලු. මේ ආන්ඩුව එදා අපි ගෙන ගිය වැඩපිළීවෙල ඒ විදියට ක්‍රියාත්මක කළා නම් අද වෙද්දි රටේ මේ වගේ තත්ත්වයක් ඇති වෙන්නේ නැහැ. රටේ ආර්ථික අර්බුදය එන්න එන්න වැඩි වෙමින් තිබුණත් පියවරක් ගන්න ආන්ඩුවට කාලය නැති නිසා ආන්ඩුවට තියෙන එකම විකල්පය මැතිවරණයකට යන එකයි. 

පාර්ලිමේන්තු මන්ත්‍රී අනුර ප්‍රියදර්ශන යාපා මහතා 

අපේ කොටස් වෙලදපොල ඉතාම පසුගාමි තත්ත්වයකයි තියෙන්නේ. කොටස් වෙලද පොලේ පසුබෑම රටේ ආර්ථිකයේ සැබෑ ස්වරූපය දක්වන්නක්. ආයතනවලට වෙලදාමක් නැත්නම් නිෂ්පාදනයකිරීමේ අංශ වැඩි දියුණු වෙන්නේ නැත්නම් සේවා අංශය දුර්වල වෙනවා නම් අවසානයේ කොටස් වෙලදපොල පහත වැටෙනවා. ලංකා ඉතිහාසයේ කිසිමදාක නොවුන විදියට කොටස් වෙලදපොල පහත වැටිලා තියෙන්නේ. දැන් මේ පිලිබදව ආර්ථකමය විග්‍රහයක් නොකරන අගමැතිතුමාගේ උපදේශනය වෙලා තියෙන්නේ ජනතාවගේ ඊ.ටී.එප්, ඊ.පී.එප් මුදල් කොටස් වෙලදපොලේ ආයෝජනය කිරිමයි. කොටස් වෙලදපොලක් වැටෙන්නේ කොටස් වෙලෙදපොලේ කර්මාන්තවල දියුණුවක් නැති වුනාමයි. දියුණුවත් නැති වුනාම කොටස් මිල වැටෙනවා. කොටස් ගැනීම අඩු වෙනාව. ඊලගට කොටස්වෙලද පොල වැටෙනවා. මේ තර්කය අනෙක් පැත්තට දාලා කොටස් වෙලද පොළට මහජනයා එකතු කරන් තියෙන අරමුදල් දාපුවාම වෙන්නේ මහජනතාවගේ මුදලුත් සම්පූර්ණයෙන්ම විනාශ වීමයි. 

විශේෂයෙන්ම මේ දවස්වල ස්වෛරී බැදුම්කර ගණනාවක් නිකුත් කරනවා. මේ වසරෙත් නිකුත් කළා. ඒ බැදුම්කරවල පොලිය සියයට හතහමාරක් පමණ වෙනවා. මේයින් පේන්නේත් අපේ ආර්ථිකයේ දුර්වලතාවයයි. මේ විදියට විශාල පොලියකට අරන් අපි ණය ගෙව්වා වුනත් අපිට ඊළගට තියෙනවා තවත් විශාල ප්‍රශ්නයකට මුහුණ දෙන්න. ඊළගට අපේ ස්වෛරී බැදුම්කරවලට කවුරුත් අවේ නැත්නම් අපි මොකද කරන්නේ. මේ ස්වෛරී බැදුම්කර මිලදි ගන්න ඉල්ලුම් කරන කිසිවෙක් ඉදිරියේදි නැති වෙන්න ඉඩ තියෙනවා. මේ වෙද්දි ආර්ථිකය ප්‍රසාරණය වෙන්නේම නැහැ. එක තැනක හිටලා තියෙන්නේ. ඒ අතරේ විදුලි බල අර්ඩුදයක්. විදුලිය කපන්න වුනේ ඇයි. කපන්නේ නැත්නම් පුද්ගලික අංශයෙන් විදුලිබලය ගන්න වෙනවා. ඒ සදහා බිලියන 60ක් විතර වෙන් කරන්න වෙනවා. ආන්ඩුවට ඒ විදියට විදුලිය මිලදි ගන්න සල්ලි නැති නිසයි විදුලිය කපන්නේ. දවල් වරුවේ පැය 4ක් විතර කපලා රාත්‍රියට පැය දෙකක් විතර කපනවා. ලංකාවේ නියගය ආරම්භ වුනා විතරයි. මේකෙන් පේන්නේත් ආර්ථීකයේ බංකොලොත් භාවයයි. මෙහෙම වුනොත් ආන්ඩුවේ ප්‍රජා සේවා එකින් එක නතර වෙන්න ඉඩ තියෙනවා. මේ ප්‍රශ්නයට රජයට මුහුණ දෙන්න බැහැ. උපදේශකයින්ට මේ සම්බන්ධයෙන් උපදෙස් නැහැ. මේ තත්ත්වය තේරුම් ගෙන රට ඉදිරියට ගෙන යන්න හැකි නව පාලනයටකට රට භාර දෙන්න කියලා අපි රජයෙන් ඉල්ලා සිටිනවා. 

පාර්ලිමේන්තු මන්ත්‍රී එස්. එම්. චන්ද්‍රසේන මහතා 

එජාප පෙරමුණු ආන්ඩුව ගම් වැඩපිළිවෙල ගැන මහ ලොකුවට කතා කළාට නිත්‍යානුකූලව කරන්නේ නැහැ. අපේ රටේ මහජන නියෝජිතයින්  තෝරා ගන්නා ක්‍රමවේදයක් තියෙනවා. ජනාධිපතිවරණයෙන් ජනාධිපතිවරයාත්, මහ මැතිවරණයෙන් පාර්ලිමේන්තු මන්ත්‍රීනවරුනුත්, පළාත් සභා මැතිවරණයෙන් පළාත් සභා මන්ත්‍රීවරුනුත්, ප්‍රදේශිය සභා මැතිවරණයෙන් පළාත්පාලන ආයතන නියෝජතවරුනුත් තෝරා ගන්නවා. මේ ආයතන හතරටම ව්‍යවස්ථාණුකූලව වෙනවෙනම බලතල තියෙනවා. පළාත් පාලන ආයතන යටතේ පාලනය වෙන මාර්ග සහ පොදුකටයුතු වලට ගම්පෙරලිය යටතේ සංවර්ධනය කිරීමට යාමේදි පළාත් පාලන ආයතනවල වගකීම් අමතක කරලා තියෙනවා.  අපේ ආන්ඩුව කාලයේ පළාත් සභා විෂයයන් සංවර්ධනය කිරීමේදී පලාත් සභාව තියෙන්නේ මොන පක්ෂයටද කියලා බැලුවේ නැතිව පළාත් සභාවට භාර දුන්නා. නගර සභාවේ ප්‍රාදේශීය සභාවේ කටයුතු ඒ ආයතනවලට භාරදුන්නා. අද තමන්ගේ පාක්ෂිකයින් සතුටු කරන්න පොඩි පොඩි කොන්ත්‍රාත් තමන්ගේ පාක්ෂිකයින්ට දෙන්න ගිහින් ප්‍රාදේශිය සභාවයි ප්‍රාදේශීය ලේකම්කාර්යාලයි අතර ප්‍රශ්න ඇති වෙලා. නිත්‍යාණුකූල නොවන දේට බලපෑම් කරන නිසා මේවා දාලා යන්න හිතිලා තියෙන බවත් සමහර නිලධාරීන් කියනවා. අගෝස්තු 31 වෙද්දි මේ ව්‍යාපෘති අවසන් කරන්න කිව්වත් පළාත් පාලන ආයතනයේ ඉන්න නිලධාරියා ඒ වැඩපිළිවෙලින් ඉවත් කරලා. මේ ආයතනවලට නීත්‍යාණුකූලව ලැබිලා තියෙන බලතල ස්වාධීනව කරගෙන යන්න ඉඩ දෙන්න කියලා ඉල්ලා සිටිනවා. 

මේ වෙද්දි ගම්වල අය තමන්ගේ ශිතකරණයේ දාලා තියෙන මස්ටික, මාලුටික නරක් වෙනවා කියනවා. ගමේ කුඩා වී මෝල පවත්වා ගෙන යන්න බැහැ. සංචාරක කර්මාන්තට ක්‍රියාත්මක වෙන ප්‍රදේශවල විදුලිය කපපුවාම දැන් තියෙන රස්නය එක්ක සංචාරකයෝ එන්නේ නැහැ. ආන්ඩුව පුරසාරම් දොඩලා අවේ අපමණ අගයක් ලබා දෙනවා කියලා. දැන් විදුලිය කැපිල්ලෙනුත් අපමණ අගයක් ලබා දෙමින් සිටිනවා. 

දැන් ජාතික ආන්ඩුවක් ගැන කතා කරනවා. ජාතික ආන්ඩුවේ ඉදලා ආපු මන්ත්‍රීවරුන් නම් කියන්නේ ආයේ ජාතික ආන්ඩුවකට හේත්තු වෙන්නේ නැති බවයි. ජාතික ආන්ඩුවක් නැවත හදන්න යෝජනා කරන්න පුලුවන්ද. රනිල් වික්‍රමසිංහ ආන්ඩුවත් එක්ක වැඩකරන්න බැහැ.මේ ආන්ඩුව රට විනාශ කළා කියලා ජනාධිපතිතුමා කියද්දි රෙදි ඇද ගෙන ආයෙත් ජාතික ආන්ඩුවක් ගැන කතා කරන්න පුලුවන්ද. මේක පැහැදිලිවම ක්‍රමන්ත්‍රණයක්. කඩන් වැටිලා තියෙන ආණ්ඩුවට ශක්තියක් දෙන්න ජනතාව නොමග යවන්න කරන ප්‍රකාශයක් බව පැහැදිලියි. 

මාධ්‍ය – ජනාධිපතිවරයාගේ අනුදැනුමකින් තොරව ජිනිවා යෝජනාවලට සම අනුග්‍රහය දක්වා තිබෙන බවයි උතුරු පළාත් ආන්ඩුකාරවරයා ප්‍රවෘත්ති සාකච්ඡාවක් පවත්වමින් සදහන්කලේ. 

අනුර ප්‍රියදර්ශන යාපා – සාමාන්‍යයෙන් සම අනුග්‍රහයක් දක්වනවා නම් විදේශ ඇමැතිවරායානේ එය දන්වන්නේ. මේක දන්වලා තියෙන්නේ මුදල් අමාත්‍යංශයේ උපදේශකවරයෙක් වෙන මනෝ තිත්තවැල්ල මහතායි.  එයා තමයි නිත්‍ය නියෝජිත අසීස් මහතාට පනිවිඩය දීලා තියෙන්නේ. එක් එක් අංශ මෙහෙයවීමේ අමනෝඥකම පේනවානේ. නේස්බි සාමිවරයා නිකුත් කළ වාර්තාව මානව හිමිකම් කොමිෂමේ අවධානයට යොමු කලේ නැහැ අපේ රජය. සම අනුග්‍රහය දක්වනවා කියන්නේ ඒ අය කියන විදියේ පිරිසක් අතුරුදන් වෙලා තියෙනවා. ඒ සදහා වගවීමේ ක්‍රියාවලියක් සදහා බැගෑපත්ව අපිට කාලය දෙන්න කියලයි කියන්නේ. නේස්බි සාමිවරයා කියන්නේ ඒ කියන විදියේ ප්‍රමාණ්‍යක් අතුරුදන් වෙලා නැහැ කියලයි. 

ඇමරිකාව ඉරාකයේ බෝම්බ හෙලිම නිසා කුඩා දරුවන් මිය ගිය සිද්ධියක් වාර්තා වුනා. ඒකට මොනවගේ පරික්ෂණයක්ද වෙන්නේ. හැදි දෙකකින්නේ බෙද්න්නේ. 

ලක්ෂ්මන් යාපා අබේවර්ධන – බලයට පත්වෙන්න දුන්න අසිමිත පොරොන්දු මේ ඉටු කරන්නේ නැහැ. ඇමරිකාව මේකෙන් අයින් වුනාම අපි ගිහින් බ්‍රිතාන්‍ය බදාගත්තා. මේ ආන්ඩුව ඊළග ඡන්දෙටත් ජාත්‍යන්තරය පාවිච්චි කරන්නයි හදන්නේ. නිත්‍යානුකූල හමුදාවක් විදියට අපි හිතාමතා කිසිවක් නොකල බව රට පිළිගත්තා. යුද්ධයෙන් පස්සේ ජනතාව නැවතපදිංචි කිරීම, පුනරුත්තාපනය කිරිම, ඔවුන්ගේ පහුසකම් වැඩිදියුණු කිරිම කළ බව පිළීගත්තා. මේ වගේ කෙටි කළක් ඇතුළත යුද්ධයෙන් අවතැන්වුවන්ට පිහිටවුනු ආන්ඩුවක් නැහැ. ඒ අතරේ මේ ආන්ඩුව ගිහින් කල් ඉල්ලන්නේ ඊළග ජනාධිපතිවරණයත් පන්න ගන්න. සාමාන්‍ය ජනතාවට මේකෙන් බේරෙන්න කරන්න තියෙන්නේ මේ ආන්ඩුව පලවා හැරීමේ ක්‍රියාදාමයට එකතු වෙන එකයි. 

එස්. එම්. චන්ද්‍ර‌සේන -එදා චන්ද්‍රිකා බණ්ඩාරනායක ජනාධිපතිවරියගේ සමයේ රට පාවා දෙන ගිවිසුම රනිල් වික්‍රමසිංහ අත්සන් කලේ එවකට විධායක ජනාධිපති චන්ද්‍රිකා බණෟඩාරනායක කුමාරණතුංග මහත්මිය දන්නේ නැතිවයි. මුලු රටේම ජනතාව එක්කයි විධායකය තෝරාගන්නේ. ඒ විධායකය නොදැන ප්‍රභාකරන්ට උතුරු නැගෙනහිර පාවා දුන්නා වගේ මේ රනිල් වික්‍රමසිංහ ආන්ඩුව පුරුද්දකට වගේ මෙවරත් ජිනිවා ගිහින්  ජනාධිපතිවරයා  දැනුම්වත් කිරීමකින් තොරව රට පාවා දුන්නේ. 

සමස්ත ලංකා සුවසේවා සංගමය. – All Ceylon Health Services Union.
ජනමාධ්‍ය නිවේදනයයි

ඌව පළාත් සභාවට අයත් රෝහල් හා සෞඛ්‍ය ආයතනයන් හි සේවය කරනු ලබන සෞඛ්‍ය කාර්යය මණ්ඩලයන් විසින් නිම කර ඇති අති කාල දීමනා අඩු කර ගෙවීමටත්, ගෙවිය යුතු ගමන් වියදම් සීමා කර ගෙවීමටත්,අලුත් අවුරුදු අත්තිකාරම් මදල් අපේ‍්‍රල් මස 11 වන දින ගෙවීමටත් ඌව පළාත් පරිපාලනය විසින් තීරණය කර ඇත.

ඒ අනුව අතිකාල දීමනා සහ ගමන් වියදම් දීමනා කප්පාදුවකින් තොරව ගෙවීමටත්,උත්සව අත්තිකාරම් මාර්තු 31 දිනට පෙර ගෙවීම කටයුතු කරන ලෙසත් අප සංගමය විසින් අවස්ථා ගණනාවකදී ඉල්ලීම් කලද ඒ සදහා මේ වන තෙක් සාධාරණ ප‍්‍රතිචාරයක් නොලැබීම හේතුවෙන් 2019. 03. 26 දින සිට ඌව පළාත් සභාවට අයත් සියළුම රෝහල් කාර්යය මණ්ඩලය පෙරවරුවේ පැය 04ක් සේවයෙන් බැහැරවීමේ වෘත්තීය ක‍්‍රියාමාර්ගයක් ක‍්‍රියාත්මක කිරීමට අප සංගමය කටයුතු කර ඇත.

2019. 03. 26 දින සිට 29 දින තෙක් මෙම වෘත්තීය සමිති ක‍්‍රියාමාර්ගය ක‍්‍රියාත්මක කිරීමටත් ඒ වනතෙක්  නිසි පිළිතුරක් නොදෙන්නේ නම් ඉදිරියේ දී අඛණ්ඩ වෘත්තීය ක‍්‍රියාමාර්ග වෙත එළඹීමටත් අප සංගමයේ විධායක සභාව  විසින් තීරණය කර ඇත.

මේ පිළිබඳව ඔබ මාධ්‍යයේ පුළුල් ප‍්‍රචාරයක් ලබාදීමට කටයුතු කරන ලෙස කාරුණිකව ඉල්ලා සිටිමු.


ස්තුතියි.

මෙයට,
මහින්ද ගුරුගේ – Mahinda Guruge
ප‍්‍රධාන ලේකම්