1099 ACRES OF STATE LAND IN THE NORTHERN PROVINCE, USED AS ARMY FARMS TO BE RELEASED

31/12/2018

In addition to the ongoing process of releasing private and state lands in the North and East, hitherto being used by the Army with no impact on national security needs, HE the President has directed further to release state lands, being used as Army farms in those provinces without delay.

Accordingly, 1099 acres of state land in the Northern Province, used as Army farms have been identified for release within a short period as stated below:

a. A total of 194 acres, belonging to the Forest Conservation Department in Jayapuram North Grama Niladhari Division of the Punakari Divisional Secretariat in Kilinochchi District (Nachchikuda)
b. Another land of 285 acres, belonging to the Forest Conservation Department in Jayapuram North Grama Niladhari Division of the Punakari Divisional Secretariat in Kilinochchi District (Nachchikuda)

c. A total of 120 acres, belonging to the Forest Conservation Department in Udayarkattukulam Grama Niladhari Division of the Puthukudiyrippu Divisional Secretariat in Mullaittivu District
d. 500 acres out of a total of 600 in acreage, belonging to the Forest Conservation Department in Wellankulam Grama Niladhari Division of the Manthai West Divisional Secretariat in Mannar District

In the second week of January 2019, documents pertaining to the release of above-mentioned land plots are scheduled to be formally delivered to the District Secretary for Kilinochchi, District Secretary for Mullaittivu and the District Secretary for Mannar during a brief ceremony, headed by the Governor of the Northern Province.
-SL Army

(Above image is a file photo )

CID prepares to file murder charges on soldiers in Eknaligoda case

December 30, 2018 

The Criminal Investigations Department (CID) is to seek the advise of the Attorney General (AG) to file legal action against military intelligence officers that stand accused in the abduction and disappearance of cartoonist Prageeth Eknaligoda.

Sources at the Police Headquarters have told The Sunday Morning newspaper that ongoing investigations had concluded that Eknaligoda was last in Army custody before he went missing.

 

Police sources said that the Army had not been giving its full backing to the ongoing investigations as the main suspects were military intelligence officers.

“We have not been receiving the full cooperation of the Army. They can easily take action against the officers accused. We are now going to seek the AG’s advise to file murder charges on the accused officers,” Police sources said.

Sources said that the investigations had stalled as Army assistance was required to take the case further.

“The investigations cannot move further without Army assistance,” Police sources added.

However, when The Sunday Morning contacted Army Spokesman Brigadier Sumith Atapattu, he insisted that the Army had been assisting the investigations.

He said that if there was evidence against any Army officer then the Army would take action against the officer.

However, the Army Spokesman also stated that if murder charges were filed against any officer without evidence then the military would use its legal division to protect those officers.

Eknaligoda was reported missing on 24 January, 2010 – two days before the presidential elections.

Impeachment or censure; a moral imperative

President Maithripala Sirisena delivered a belligerent broadside to the UNF hierarchy after the unenthusiastic reinstatement of Ranil Wickremesinghe as Prime Minister

• “I did not have sexual relations with that woman” – Bill Clinton
• “Everybody in the country knows I am not a lawyer” – Maithripala Sirisena
  

Tuesday, 1 January 2019

After the unenthusiastic reinstatement of Ranil Wickremesinghe as Prime Minister, the President delivered a belligerent broadside to the UNF hierarchy. He made some revealing pronouncements.

They represented the core values of the man we mistakenly elected as our President to abolish the executive presidency. They insinuate deeply held beliefs – cultural traits or taken for granted core values so stubbornly held and powerfully expressed, that they are beyond debate and negotiation.

“…there are certain very strong and powerful forces related to religion, customs, language, etc. Mostly, it is those cultural forces, more than political forces, that make or break governments. I clearly pointed this out in the recent past, in the matter regarding filing cases against Bhikkhus, which needs to be done carefully.

“There were no elephants for the perahera from temples or dewala, and that resulted in a major socio-religious and cultural resistance over this. As such, I asked to study the legality and release the elephants. Over this issue, we lost the support of the entire Bhikkhu community.”


Are we saddled with a law breaker at the helm?

He expounds these views after the Supreme Court gave its ruling that gave “tangible and effective life and meaning to the sovereignty of the people”. It is an exculpatory explanation.

In short, they explain why Sirisena decided to unmake Ranil Wickremesinghe and break his Government with a cavalier disdain for constitutional good order.

If you can get the endorsement of those powerful forces that make or break governments, you can do whatever fiddle diddle with the Constitution!

The proclamation dissolving Parliament was in violation of the Constitution. When the President insists that there are other social forces with power to make or break governments that need to be appeased, it is time for us to take note of where he intends to go.

Are we saddled with a law breaker at the helm of our republic? If so, what are we doing about it?


Put-on piety

Politicians parade a put-on piety when addressing the ‘Maha Sangha’. President Sirisena relies on two adjectives – Vandaneeya and Poojaneeya. Sajith Premadasa adds a third ‘Gavuraneeya’ to beat him to the post. Mahinda Rajapaksa is content with ‘Apey Hamudurwane’. His style of piety is his own patent and patently proprietary. He has them in the bag. Others are compelled to compete.

This is pure fraudulent religiosity customised to serve individual political interests.

The submissive humility is devout roguery. Sajith Premadasa has a vast repertoire of adjectives for all occasions. After the Presidential outburst following the swearing-in of the Prime Minister, Sajith decorously addressed the President as ‘Srimath Janadhipathithuma’. After the harangue it was an odd hurrah!

The purpose of this essay is to demand that Parliament must now instruct the President on the sanctity of the Constitution. That the sovereignty of the people too is a Vandaneeya, Pujaneeya and Gauveravaneeya concept that cannot be trifled with.

The President must be informed that the prefix ‘Srimath’ has to be earned by upholding the Constitution in both letter and spirit.


The truth about 26 October

To understand the truth about 26 October we must expose its falsehoods. It is only by stripping away the false claims that we can reveal the truth about the constitutional coup.

Only a motion to impeach or censure the President can make the plain truth plain enough for the people. A parliamentary resolution to impeach or censure the President is a bottom-line imperative to secure our parliamentary democracy.

“Everybody in the country knows that I am not a lawyer. I didn’t issue the Gazette on my own. Eminent President’s Counsels were involved in this. All these Gazette notifications were released after holding discussions with them.”

“When I issued some Gazette notifications recently, I did so with the advice of expert lawyers and constitutional experts. All what I did was done with utmost good faith. I didn’t do any of those acts with malice or with an intention of violating the Constitution.”

Clearly the man is impervious to logic and reason. These are value determinations by the President of our republic. They must not be ignored.

Information that properly belongs to the public should not or must not be withheld by those in power. These Presidential pronouncements call for a detailed scrutiny by a competent body. A motion of impeachment or censure signed by 113 Members of Parliament is the only means that will make it happen.

He did not take our democracy by its throat and strangle it. He did better. He demanded obedience and compliance from Parliament; 122 parliamentarians resisted. They refused to become accomplices of Maithripala Sirisena’s constitutional jiggery-pokery. He now claims that all his actions were based on good honest advice of erudite jurists. We have a right to demand who they are.


MS is a threat to our democracy and constitutional order

First things first. Maithripala Sirisena the President presents a clear, defined, deliberate threat to our democracy and constitutional order. Not moving a resolution to impeach or censure him places an errant President above the law. He attempted violence on our constitutional order.

The parliamentary majority that resisted his intimidatory manoeuvring to bend its will may not have the 150 votes required to pass a resolution to impeach and remove him from office. But it can pass a motion of censure by a simple majority.

The Parliament has the numbers to initiate proceedings. That must be done forthwith irrespective of its outcome.

The Supreme Court demonstrated that the rule of law can supersede the rule of power.

It is a decade of the rule of power that we ended on 8 January 2015. That we only managed to inscribe it on a slippery slate with the 19th Amendment is neither here nor there. What mattered is that it served its purpose. We must preserve those gains.

Rule of law resists the rule of power. The attempted dissolution of Parliament was ‘outside legal limits’ and a violation of the citizens’ right to be ‘protected from any arbitrary exercise of power’.

This idea has clearly evaded the grasp of Maithripala Sirisena the President. He continues to insist that his powers are not subject to constitutional constraints.

By remaining silent instead of moving a resolution to impeach or censure the President, the 122 parliamentarians who defied the President are now turning in to expedient accomplices of Sirisena’s holier-than-thou hocus pocus.

In addition to making them opportunistic cowards, the failure to move an impeachment will make the 122 parliamentarians willing collaborators of Sirisena’s claim that he acted in good faith.

They would be condoning his duplicitous conduct of insisting that the Speaker should strictly comply with parliamentary procedure, while he studiously avoided restraining or condemning the hooligans who threw the book and candle at the speaker’s rostrum.

He made the Bible-throwing Weerawansa a cabinet minister and appeared with him on the same platform at a public event held at the Sugathadasa stadium.

The purpose of this essay is to demand that Parliament must now instruct the President on the sanctity of the Constitution. That the sovereignty of the people too is a Vandaneeya, Pujaneeya and Gauveravaneeya concept that cannot be trifled with. The President must be informed that the prefix ‘Srimath’ has to be earned by upholding the Constitution in both letter and spirit

Lessons to be learnt
There are lessons to be learnt. Ravi Karunanayake regaining cabinet rank or Sajith Premadasa minding the cultural portfolio has no relevance to our Constitution good order.

One is the Deputy Leader of the UNP and the other is the Assistant Leader of the party led by Ranil Wickremesinghe, the acknowledged, undisputed bête noire of Maithripala Sirisena, the President.


Every politician has a self-serving bias. The Assistant Leader and the Deputy Leader of the UNP are believably blessed with more than the usual dose of self-serving bias. Self-interest is what drives those practicing the vocation of politics.

Self-interest can and does alter a person›s assessments of policy. It can and usually does succeed in changing a person›s mind about what is right and wrong.

Ranil has retained his acolytes Sagala, Akila and Malik in his cabinet. Range Bandra who exposed S.B. Dissanayake’s shocking palm greasing attempts on tape has been left out.

Ranil has decided that John alone can straighten up the leisure and pleasure sector. The plain-speaking parliamentarian from Puttalam, Range Bandara has publicly stated that some things are decidedly rotten in the UNP.

There is a difference between Range Bandara and Ravi Karunanayake. One records conversations. The other’s capacity to recall conversations is constricted.

I refuse to believe that either Sajith Premadasa or Ravi Katunayake greeted the unfolding events of the evening of Friday 26 October with paroxysms of disbelief.

Their reactions were far removed from the indignation expressed by other seniors such as Mangala Samaraweera or Ranjith Madduma Bandara.

The closing of ranks by UNP backbenchers and the accurate reading of the dangers of constitutional gerrymandering by the JVP and Tamil and Muslim minority parties no doubt surprised the Deputy Leader and the Assistant Leader of the UNP.

Clearly President Sirisena man is impervious to logic and reason. These are value determinations by the President of our republic. They must not be ignored. He did not take our democracy by its throat and strangle it. He did better. He demanded obedience and compliance from Parliament; 122 parliamentarians resisted. They refused to become accomplices of Maithripala Sirisena’s constitutional jiggery-pokery. He now claims that all his actions were based on good honest advice of erudite jurists. We have a right to demand who they are

It is reported that both Sajith Premadasa and Ravi Karunanayake wanted to boycott their swearing-in ceremonies for their own reasons but took the trouble of informing the President that they meant no disrespect to him.
Such commendable propriety on their part seems peculiarly disconnected with Ranil Wickremesinghe’s body language during Sirisena’s sermon, where his rolling eyeballs appealed to high heavens to spare him the humbug of the preacher.

If Sajith Premadasa is serious about his added assignment as Minister of Culture and National Heritage, he should print the Sinhala version of the 88-page main judgment of the Supreme Court and the 20-page judgement of Justice Sisira de Abrew for distribution to all members of the ‘Poojaniya Vandaneeya’ Maha Sangha.

By doing so, he would be heeding the advice of the President whom he addresses with such decorous servility – “Srimath Jandhipathithuma”.


The rule of law

The rule of law is the opposite of the rule of power. The rule of law rejects the supremacy of the will of an individual.

This dreadful man did not force himself on us. We elected Maithripala Sirisena as an interim replacement for Mahinda Rajapaksa who planned to rule for life and thereafter entrench a dynastic rule of his family.

The pernicious presidency of Maithripala Sirisena is a product of a deeper crisis. It is the still unresolved and unaddressed crisis we confront in grappling with the monolith that Mahinda Rajapaksa built on a foundation of tribal hatreds, unreason and an all-pervasive corruption of our political discourse.

The great American jurist Felix Frankfurter said it with luminous lucidity.

“There can be no free society without law administered through an independent judiciary. If one man can be allowed to determine for himself what is law, every man can. That means first chaos, then tyranny.”

Maithripala Sirisena has violated the Constitution. When he states brazenly that there are other social forces with power to make or break governments that need to be appeased, it is time for us to take note of where he intends to go.

Are we saddled with a law breaker at the helm of our republic? If so, what are we doing about it?

A resolution to impeach or censure President Maithripala Sirisena must be moved in Parliament and debated. The resolution must be voted on by name. We owe posterity that duty.

Let justice be done though heavens may fall. Sirisena the President is a reaffirmation of the epigram – ‘man is not what he thinks he is. He is the man he hides.’ What is man? Man is a miserable little pile of secrets.

Mano wants inclusion of Tamil language in signboards

2018-12-31 

Minister of National Integration, Official Languages and Social Progress Mano Ganesan requested the Chinese Embassy in Sri Lanka to ensure the inclusion of Tamil language in signboards erected at Chinese funded development projects. He said the signboards had been written in Chinese, English and Sinhala only.

Minister Ganesan told Daily Mirror that he decided to explain to the officials of Chinese embassy about the languages used on signboards after seeing the signboard of Metro Colombo Solid Waste Project only in Sinhala, Chinese and in English. “This is not the only sign where one or two Sri Lanka languages are missing. I have noticed that there are signboards without Sinhala wordings. Therefore, I decided to explain things to the officials of the Chinese Embassy and tell them that signboards should carry wordings in all three Sri Lankan languages as the Language Act of Sri Lanka.

“We are receiving complaints on signboards at Chinese projects using only Mandarin and English ignoring one of the two local languages,” the Minister added. (Yohan Perera)

CBSL’s Misleading Response To Misleading Newspaper Article

By Hema Senanayake –DECEMBER 30, 2018

Hema Senanayake

The rupee is depreciating fast. This has been happening for a while now. Former governor of the central bank Ajith Nivard Cabraal squarely blamed the “Good-governance Government” and the Central Bank for rupee depreciation. His article on this subject titled “Government and CB have abdicated vital statutory duty by not being able to deal with rupee depreciation” has been published in a few newspapers on 08th and 09thOctober 2018, just 18 days prior to the beginning of constitutional crisis. On October 11th, the Central Bank issued a communique to the media insisting that Cabraal’s article was misleading. To my mind Cabraal’s article was misleading and the CB’s response too, is misleading, in the sense that both arguments would not stabilize the rupee putting the macroeconomic fundamentals in good shape.

Cabraal had in his article argued that, “during the nine years from 2006 to 2014, the Central Bank successfully intervened in the Forex market (in accordance with its statutory duty) with a net supply of Forex of $ 2,283m, while simultaneously building-up its Reserves by a substantial $ 5,473m. By doing so, the Central Bank was able to limit the depreciation of the rupee to a manageable 2.8% per year over the nine years 2006 to 2014; by far the lowest average depreciation since 1977.” These statistics are true. His argument is that during his period as the governor of CB, the interventions made in the Forex market by way of supplying and absorbing foreign exchange to and from the market, he and Rajapaksa regime were able to limit the rupee depreciation for 2.8% per year. This is what is false and misleading. We will discuss it later.

On the contrary CB argues, that they too, intervene in the Forex market initially under Good-governance government and has given it up now. I quote; “…during 2011, 2012, 2015 and 2016, the Central Bank has supplied to the market US dollars 3,184 million, US dollars 1,797 million, US dollars 3,429 million and US dollars 1,900 million, respectively, on a gross basis. In spite of these interventions, the rupee depreciated by 10.4 per cent in 2012 and 9.0 per cent in 2015.” This is interesting. CB concludes that interventions in Forex market did not help in stabilizing rupee in 2012 and 2015. So, the CB has changed the course.

CB argues that, “… the Central Bank has increasingly realized that efforts to artificially stabilize the exchange rate extensively by supplying foreign exchange out of its official international reserves have only worsened Sri Lanka’s macroeconomic conditions and medium-term prospects. Propping up the exchange rate through intervention makes imports artificially cheaper, contributing to a continued widening of the trade deficit and leaving the country vulnerable to exogeneous shocks. Moreover, the loss of reserves due to such intervention has been replenished mostly by commercial borrowing including the issuance of International Sovereign Bonds.” In general, all points are valid but useless in practical sense because free float of rupee will not strengthen macroeconomic conditions instead improved macroeconomic conditions would strengthen the rupee.

Let us continue with the CB’s argument further. It argues that, there are a few more factors that affect to the recent depreciation of rupee. Those are, (1) reduction in foreign investment inflows to the government securities market, (2) increased foreign currency debt service obligations of the government, (3) favorable global market conditions prevailed previously during periods of quantitative easing by major economies have now been reversed. 

Finally, justifying recent rupee depreciation, CB points out that most international currencies have depreciated against US dollar in 2018, for example Indian rupee depreciated 13 per cent, Indonesian rupiah depreciated 10.8 per cent, Australian dollar depreciated 9.4 per cent where as Sri Lankan rupee depreciated 10.1 per cent. However, missing point is that Indian currency depreciated by 5 per cent in 2015 while Sri Lankan rupee depreciated by 9.0 per cent and in addition it has further depreciated by 10.1 per cent in 2018 too. Also, some countries allow their currencies to depreciate due to various reasons such as to reduce capital outflow, to increase international competitiveness, to support (accidental) reflation etc. Hence comparing data out-of-context is not scholarly. In fact, this is what both CB and Cabraal did in their arguments. What the country need is a solution, not fake arguments.

Let me ask a fairly simple question. CB and Cabraal have agreed that in 2012 and in 2015 in spite of heavy intervention made in supplying foreign exchange to the market, the rupee depreciated 10.4 per cent and 9.0 per cent respectively. Why? We did not find any convincing answer to this question from CB’s response or in Cabraals article other than CB concluding that intervention in Forex market would not stabilize rupee. 

Now, in 2015, I pointed out that if the new government wanted to increase the salaries by Rs. 10,000/=, then the CB had to reduce the domestic credit growth, so that increased salaries would not badly affect to the country’s current account. If the CB, operates with a macroeconomic view, this was what they should have done. In the year 2014, the credit growth to private sector was 8.8 per cent and in 2015 the credit growth to private sector amounted to 25.1 per cent. In 2015 rupee depreciated by 9.0 per cent. This was the primary causal effect to depreciate the rupee in 2015 and this parameter has nothing to do with the reasons mentioned by the CB.

Read More

PM, UNF leaders unanimously decide foremost place for Buddhism and unitary state in new constitution 

Mon, Dec 31, 2018, 10:35 pm SL Time, ColomboPage News Desk, Sri Lanka.


Dec 31, Colombo: United National Party (UNP) leader Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe and the leaders of the United National Front (UNF) have unanimously decided not to make any changes to the Article 9 of the present Constitution, which secures foremost place given to Buddhism, in the new constitution to be drafted.

In addition, the UNF leaders have decided state the clause declaring Sri Lanka as a unitary state in all three - Sinhala, Tamil and English- versions of the new Constitution.

The Article 9 of the Constitution says the Republic of Sri Lanka shall give to Buddhism the foremost place and accordingly it shall be the duty of the State to protect and foster the Buddha Sasana, while assuring to all religions the rights.

The decisions have been taken following a special discussion between party leaders of the United National Front led by Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe at Temple Trees today.

The Premier last Friday assured the Chief Prelates of Malwatte and Asgiriya Chapters that the foremost place given to Buddhism and the unitary state policy will not be changed when formulating a new constitution or amending the existing Constitution.


The government intends to begin discussions on the proposed new constitution with the Tamil National Alliance (TNA) and the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP) which are represented in the parliament.

CRISIS OF POLITICAL CHARACTERS

Fr. Augustine Fernando-Tuesday, January 1, 2019

The days from October 26 to December 16 were days of crisis never before seen in Sri Lanka since Independence. This unprecedented situation made the unanimous judgement of the seven judges of the Supreme Court one of extraordinary significance for democracy. It was also an expression of the national conscience. While it was also a clear censure of unjust and unacceptable legalisms supportive of outdated, feudal monarchical conceptions and autocratic notions of presidential power, the Supreme Court judgement brought about constitutional sanity, upheld the sovereignty of the people vested in the judiciary and vibrantly reaffirmed the rule of law that every citizen, including the President, is subject to the Law.

Those who venture today into the political arena in Sri Lanka are from various social strata and backgrounds who have had their education in urban, rural schools and private schools. Most have been educated in Sinhala or Tamil while some have acquired a capability also in the English language. A few have also had an education abroad. There are among the party politicians Buddhist monks, university professors, school teachers, lawyers, doctors, accountants, entrepreneurs,
businessmen of small, medium and large enterprises and some who have served in the Police and the Security Forces. But the majority of them are insufficiently educated, far too many not having had a sound integral education nor passed even the G.C.E. Ordinary Level and Advanced/Level examinations.

These people do not have the intellectual capacity nor the temperament and required interest even to read and understand the Constitution besides the documented material coming before them relating to religio-cultural, socio-political, economic, financial and international relations. Then there are parliamentarians who are supposed to have passed their exams by cunningly getting their companions to answer their examinations or secured a privilege of sitting examinations in special places apart from the others sitting the same exam – a peculiar Sri Lankan aberration!

Some others have politically ‘succeeded’ in their ventures by hook or by crook to absolve their corrupt ways. These people lack principles, are devoid of intellectual capacity and moral character and integrity required to be at the helm of national affairs.

At present citizens do not need any educational qualifications to enter even the national legislature or even to contest the presidency except a qualifying age. Unless debarred due to the loss of civic rights, persons even with major social and character flaws could contest elections, be elected to parliament. It has been said in and out of parliament that murderers, rapists, gold chain snatchers, illegal drug traffickers, money launderers and others engaging in unlawful activities have been and are sitting in parliament.

Recently we have seen MPs inside the Chamber of Parliament engaging in brawls, using sharp knives and throwing sacred books along with chillie powder against other members, pouring water on the Speaker’s chair and dragging it away, blocking the Speaker’s entrance, assaulting policemen and creating pandemonium in the House. They showed that they are not mature enough to think reasonably, to debate coherently or act politely.

Acting arbitrarily and violently they displayed they have not learnt what priorities should rule anyone’s parliamentary life. In their home upbringing and in whatever education they have had in their schools they have lacked what was needed to make them humanly decent and not beastly. These are louts. They are never fit to do any kind of governing anywhere. The politicians’ flawed characters producing personal hostility towards rivals conspire to grab power for their personal benefit, flouting even the Constitution they have sworn to uphold. They become not servers of the people but their oppressors. When they fail miserably, they justify their patently unjust attempts, destabilize the country and ruin it economically!

Such rowdies as those who brawled in the Parliamentary Chamber, lacking human, intellectual, moral and spiritual qualities, cannot contribute anything to bring dignity and self-respect to our people, bring economic progress to the nation and raise her to an honourable and respectable level in the modern world.

They are an utter disgrace to Sri Lanka. The people think that these rowdy characters of awful behaviour should be expelled and debarred from ever entering the Parliamentary Chamber. In any case it is up to the party leaders, unless they themselves are in collusion with such characters of low behaviour, not to nominate them hereafter as candidates for any election. Even if they are nominated, the decent citizens should outvote them along with their party leaders.

PREVENT ROWDIES ENTERING PARLIAMENT

In Sri Lanka, politics and the fabric of the State attracts various individuals including the uneducated, defectively-educated but loquacious characters who conceive the State as a mine to be dug into or an enterprise the order and rules of which could be adjusted or treated according to one’s whim and fancy. And they go on to interpret the functions of politics and even the Constitution in their own boorish ways. They keep jumping opportunistically from one side to the other just to survive and carry on crookedly.

In the present context in which we citizens are, merely showing our strong displeasure, mere condemning the criminal wrongdoers are not at all sufficient. Strong and definite steps should be taken to nip in the bud the wrong that takes place not only in the country in general but also in the August Chamber of Parliament in particular. Documents have been set on fire in the Parliamentary Chamber. Coffins have been brought into it and mock funeral wakes held. MPs have been occupying the parliamentary Chamber and sleeping in the well of the house and occupying the Speaker’s chair and pretending to preside.

The recent brawls we witnessed in parliament are the latest crude examples of their insolent behaviour. They not only did not understand what Parliament is about, they wished to prevent orderly debate and by force set up and install an illegal government and thus prevent the investigations into cases of corruption and swindling of government money when these boisterous parliamentarians under their patrons exercised power. Those seemingly accommodating the MPs’ monstrous misbehaviour and not condemning it outright is not only sad but outrageous.

The people call on the government to put a definitive stop to all unparliamentary behaviour within the Parliamentary Chamber whether Parliament is in session or not. The atmosphere of inviolability, respect and honour that the very premises of the August Assembly deserve should be preserved intact.

Those who infringe the acceptable norms of behaviour and defile the Chamber should be severely punished. Otherwise, rowdies who become MPs will think that they could get away even with murder inside the Parliamentary Chamber.

We are facing a national crisis of character. This crisis has its roots in the chauvinist and corrupt wolfish politicians. It has ramified to such an extent into the high rungs of all government agencies, public administration and diplomacy that even some judges had resorted to demanding unacceptable favours from litigants and university dons demanding illicit favours from students appearing before them. No one, whether clergyman, judge, professor, highly placed administrator, politician or policeman should have the power to blackmail any citizen.

REFINED POLITICAL CULTURE

A leader has said that now we need to do in one year the work of ten years to recover from the economic losses of the 51 days of crisis. Our country needs the services of astute and wise men and women who are never lured to veer away from upright conduct. Seven leaders of unassailable integrity could vanquish a corrupt horde twelve times their number and become a beacon of righteousness to the whole nation and the rest of the world!

The more erudite leaders in society should prepare the fellow citizens through sound and unbiased civic, ethical and political education and critical guidance. They need prudent counsel to discard outright the rowdy rebels and elect well educated, honest, sensible and decent men and women who have a sagacious civic consciousness and a keen responsibility towards the whole national community and a compassionate sensitivity towards the marginalized and the helpless poor of our society.

The patriotic citizens’ groups concerned about the sustainable and long-term well-being of all the people of Sri Lanka who are already active should courageously continue their good work and give leadership to the people. It is only by maintaining and building of a responsible civic consciousness that the people would be able to conserve the democratic gains they have accrued and prevent tyranny overpowering them. These gains should not be frittered away by compromising on low nationalistic, racial prejudices and irreligious biases supported and propagated by the defeated conspiratorial political combine. Those proven to be corrupt who have embezzled what belonged to the people, mismanaged and wasted away state resources have shown themselves to be incompetent and inefficient in running a government. They should never be allowed to manoeuvre themselves to state power again.

The corrupt political syndicate craving for power, have a greed for money they get from illicit imports of ethanol, heroin, banned drugs and from lust in addition to siphons from procurements at inflated prices. They with their patrons fail to keep an intelligent, lucid and uncontaminated mind that is needed for genuine service to the nation.

As we cannot keep always waiting for an ideal moment to come, the new year that sees the launch of a new political beginning seems a good time as any to usher a new political culture not using it as a another political slogan but as a genuine attempt at inaugurating a new phenomenon. Culture is a cultivation of refinement of behaviour and an elevation in the hearts of people.

Launching a refined political culture should mean that the large majority of citizens, conscious of their human dignity, law abiding, morally and politically maturing nature are being further stimulated properly in various ways. They as an active majority would be able to elevate the well-educated and wise, unselfish and decent, honest and sincere, dedicated and committed lovers of all the people of Sri Lanka to the highest judicial, legislative and executive offices of the country, to serve everyone justly and fairly. 

Preferred future vs Possible futures How 2019 would shape Sri Lanka’s destiny

2019-01-01

Any day is important, and some days are extra- special. However, the events that unfold on that special day would be fermented for over the years. Some years are extra-special too. The year 2019 is one such year. As the presidency enters into its fifth year, this would be the election year.  

This is also a crucial year on its own, rising from the ruins of the crumbled political alliance of Yahapalanaya and four years of economic stagnation. Causal effects of the not-yet-fully resolved political upheaval may also suggest that this year is an extension of the previous year, with all its ugliness and polarization.   

However, none of the implied and predicted adversities is set in stone. They can be overcome. How that is achieved would need a bit of common sense, and grassroots touch.There are many possible futures, and among them are more likely ‘ plausible’ and ‘probable’ futures. These probable scenarios are based on flow of events, personal/ political preferences and prejudices of leaders, and major events.  

The widening gulf between President Maithripala Sirisena and the UNP/UNF government of Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe would likely overshadow this year. President Sirisena lost his political gamble, and beat a retreat, for the time being. But a man who in his teens set ablaze a paddy field to settle scores with his grand father, may not take it lying down.  

PM Wickremesinghe’s over blown ego does not help either. Add to this is the President’s temperament and rash judgements. This conflicting dynamic portends another show down in the immediate future. The country and economy would take the brunt of the fall out.  

Second scenario is that even if he did not opt for a direct show down, President Sirisena would play the role of saboteur of the government’s economic policies and proposed constitutional reforms. That would also lead to a political stalemate.   

Third scenario is a potential impeachment of the president, which may lead to a tit -for-tat prorogation of Parliament and another long political stalemate.  
Fourth, the economy is unlikely to perform better. Economic growth of 2018 is expected to be below 4%, (the growth rate of 2017 was 3.1%) The government has effectively presided over two consecutive years of growth that is below the post-independent average of the country.  

The government lacks decisiveness and pro-activeness in its economic handling. Its vacillation in the implementation of development projects, allegations of corruption and red tape associated with Foreign Direct Investment projects, and the deficit of populist legitimacy have heralded a period of economic stagnation.  
All these factors would come to play in the final scenario: elections. Sri Lanka goes to a presidential election due by January next year (2020). The UNP, already fraught with internal rivalries and, maligned by a poor economic record would be compelled to pick a candidate. Whoever the selected candidate was, would also be the prospective leader of the UNP after the election.   

That prospect makes anyone other than PM Wickremesinghe a difficult compromise for his coterie in the UNP. That would also revive the infighting between the Sajith Premadasa loyalists and Wickremesinghe’s. A wrong choice and internal acrimony would weaken the UNP before it goes to election, against, say for instance, Gotabhaya Rajapaksa, or any of MR’s handpicked nominees.  

However, it is not the UNP’s political fortune that is at stake. If it fails the acid test of the presidential election, much of the democratic reforms that were painstakingly achieved so far would be reverted by a future authoritarian president. Sri Lanka will be back to square one. However, there is always a preferred future, and the government should strive to shape events to reach that end.   

The preferred future would be, in the first place, to avert an authoritarian take over of the government through election, and second, fast tracking economic development by the government playing the role of the catalyst.   

PM Wickremesinghe’s over blown ego does not help either. Add to this is the President’s temperament and rash judgements. This conflicting dynamic portends another show down in the immediate future

The first task should be identifying the inadequacies of the government that has caused an erosion of its popularity with the public. The problem lies, partly , in its failure to communicate its vision and achievement to the people. Even the significant achievements of democratic reforms are lost in the nationalist uproar of bigots who see an international conspiracy even in the independent courts. The government’s publicity campaign should be forceful enough to overwhelm the retrograde populism of its opponents.  

The second problem is none other than democratic reforms, this government has nothing to show. The largely rural, conservative electorate in the country needs jobs, infrastructure and better living conditions. When the government is not capable of providing that, they turn to the populist nationalists who reawaken their primordial ugliness.  

 Time is in short supply to do much in this front. Key areas that need concerted reforms if Sri Lanka is to leap frog economically, such as education have been handed over to clowns. Investors have shied away not just due to policy uncertainty and red tapes, but also due to alleged demand for bribes.   

However, even at this late stage, the government can salvage some of its legacy . It should fast track large scale development projects. Expediting the Hambantota FTZ would be a good first step.   

The third is the minority interests. The UNP has a better chance of winning a presidential election than a parliamentary one, thanks to the large swathe of minority voters. The UNP should devise means to sustain their support.  

The fourth is the probability that usually polarized and opportunistic Sri Lankan politics, re-energized under MR would try to scuttle any of the government moves such as those taken to address legitimate grievances and political aspirations of Tamils and Muslims.  

There, PM Wickremesinghe, who reveres JR Jayawardene, who is a sub-par leader of his generation, can learn from far more successful ones, Lee Kuan Yew, Mahathir Mohammed etc.  

They all lessened the corrosive effect of chaotic and polarized local politics by running rings around their opponents. But, they did not do so by turning a blind eye to ethnic pogroms as JR did. Instead, they used courts, which nonetheless were at their beck and call.  

The Rajapaksas themselves and their inner circles are facing series of corruption charges. Potential Presidential contender, Gotabhaya is accused of large scale human rights abuses, including complicity of extra-judicial killings, disappearances and massacre of inmates in the Welikada Prison. 

The government should demand speedy hearing of these cases and allocate resources to the special courts and provide additional financial assistance and expertise to the Attorney General’s Department, CID, anti-corruption commission and other apparatus. Instead of helping, this government has undercut the legal process. It has also been the beginning of the government’s undoing.  

Due process of justice, if undertaken, would remove from the equation individuals who pose a grave danger to Sri Lankan democracy. A government with a shred of realism would have done just that. That is in its self interest too. That would, not necessarily turn Sri Lanka into a paradise. But, it would definitely remove the prospect of some of the dreaded scenarios of probable futures post 2020.  

Follow @RangaJayasuriya on Twitter   

Circles of political vengeance and end of Yahapalanaya!

Maithripala Sirisena was obviously naïve at the beginning. When he realised his predicament, he was rather late. Therefore his anger was doubled, and trebled. Ranil Wickremesinghe has got a lease of life through the Supreme Court and therefore he should either deliver or get out. After another attempt at power as the PM, Mahinda Rajapaksa is again eating humble pie, waiting to be declared as Opposition Leader – Pic by Shehan Gunasekara

• “Men ought either to be indulged or utterly destroyed, for if you merely offend them, they take vengeance” – Machiavelli 
• “Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord” – Romans 12:19 
• “Jesus taught his disciples to turn the other cheek” – Matthew 5:39

How things began

Tuesday, 1 January 2019 

Maithripala Sirisena left Mahinda Rajapaksa four years ago, after a hopper treat, because he was not given due recognition as a Minister, and the PM position. That may be true. Otherwise, he even voted for the 18th Amendment to allow the possibility of Rajapaksa to contest for the presidency again and again without a term-limit. There must have been other reasons to do with family rule or authoritarian handling of things.

The Lord (the people) took vengeance from Rajapaksa on 8 January 2015, and he left for Medamulana on the same night without a whimper, whatever Mangala Samaraweera said about a military coup. Romans as quoted above were correct about the Lord. That was justice. After another attempt at power as the PM on 26 October, Rajapaksa is again eating humble pie, still waiting to be declared as the Leader of the Opposition. Justice often means punishment, and this time by the Supreme Court.

When Sirisena was elected as the President, to the surprise of many, he was quite amicable to Ranil Wickremesinghe, the schemer behind all the political gimmicks since then, and even called the latter ‘Sir’. However, Ranil apparently didn’t like anyone above him and most certainly a ‘gamarala’ from Polonnaruwa. Most disliked was his continuous and rigmarole Sinhala talk. Sirisena was meekly humble at the beginning, and even gave Temple Trees back to the PM. 

Then there was this 100-day program (whoever drafted it!) to clip the presidential powers of anyone above the PM, among other things, and Sirisena was obviously trapped. The only obstacle was the presidential constitution itself which could not be totally changed without people’s consent, a referendum. Therefore, many constitutional jugglery had to be performed, as evident from the 19A. An expert from the left movement was hired for the job, who has some experience in these type of matters.
Naivety and offense 

Sirisena was obviously naïve at the beginning. When he realised his predicament, he was rather late. Therefore his anger was doubled, and trebled. This is where what Machiavelli said about ‘offence’ became true. Sirisena was not destroyed, but offended to the brim.

This is not to relate Machiavelli’s advice literally into democratic politics today. Complete destruction of an enemy is not possible today, except in civil war or by punishing someone for criminal offenses. Now Jaliya Wickramasuriya, Mahinda’s first cousin, is trapped in the USA. Similar things might happen in the near future. Otherwise, politicians have to live with perceived enemies, whether they like it or not. Mahinda Rajapaksa (also his gang) is still there with renewed vigour, although slightly bruised after the abortive attempt at unjustified grabbing of the PM position. Sirisena is to be blamed mainly for this tragicomic happening. 

There is no question that politicians should be punished for financial fraud and corruption. However, this should be done without bias, and equally for one’s own side, and not merely targeting the opposition. Otherwise, the Lord will be angry. The opposite is what has happened since 2015 and the appointment of Ravi Karunanayake would confirm the situation in the eyes of the people. Whatever said against Sirisena, he relatively appears clean in respect of financial matters (so far!). Although called Mr Clean, Wickremesinghe has become a prime suspect in the bond scam.
Revenging in circles 

What has happened since 2015 is revenging in circles, not mere circularity. The reasons are not so byzantine. Politics is understood, or used by politicians as power, and absolute power in the case of some. And power is used for personal interests rather than for public good. Politics should be for justice and public good instead. Sirisena took revenge from Rajapaksa as he was marginalised. Wickremesinghe took revenge from Sirisena as he was not toying his line as anticipated. There were overt or alleged policy differences as well.

The first policy difference between the two was the appointment of Arjuna Mahendran as the Governor to the Central Bank. This reminded Sirisena of old stories about Wickremesinghe – that he is inclined to work with his Royalists. By that time Wickremesinghe has taken over the Central Bank under his wings and was quite determined to control and direct the economy according to his neoliberalism. The obvious immediate result was the Bond Scam.

According to Wickremesinghe ideology, an uncle giving inside information to his nephew is not a big issue. What is important is money to the Treasury. It appears that Wickremesinghe wanted to fudge the situation from the beginning and even Sirisena corroborated by dissolving Parliament in June (2015) before Parliamentary Committee on Public Enterprises (COPE) giving its damning report on the matter. There are so many other people who don’t consider the ‘bond scam’ as a financial fraud or corruption, according to probably their capitalist thinking.

Things soured between the two eventually and much after the general elections of August 2015. Even by that time Sirisena was like a bruised cobra because of the 19th Amendment and other matters. His first major counter attack was the appointment of the Presidential Commission on the Bond Issue in March 2017. Even that was a late reaction. Nevertheless, it was a major turning point of their soured relations. Although the national government marriage continued uneasily even thereafter, it was without a proper direction either from Sirisena or Wickremesinghe.


Overreaction? 

Sirisena appears to be a slow, but an over reactor. As he was leading the SLFP, the party’s performance at the local government election was a major setback. He correctly attributed that set back to his alliance with the UNP and its unpopular economic policies. First, without properly assessing the relative strengths between the opposition and the Wickremesinghe Government, he encouraged the aborted no confidence motion in April 2018.

Then came his major reaction on 26 October. He ousted Wickremesinghe, but Wickremesinghe refused to leave Temple Trees or his position as the PM. Now R. Sampanthan is doing a similar adventure without leaving the office of the Leader of the Opposition. What strength did Wickremesinghe get in October even without a clear majority in Parliament? It is not merely the support of the TNA or the JVP that allowed Wickremesinghe to come back to power. Some of the Western embassies and international NGOs were believed to be behind the comeback, not to speak about the local cohorts. Sampanthan might be banking on the same.

More importantly, it was possible because of the miscalculation on the part of Sirisena that Rajapaksa could muster a majority. S. B. Dissanayake was behind all the machinations based on pre-2015 experience of parliamentary politics. It was not purely a constitutional obstacle, but a political one. Whatever the objectives that the people or even Sirisena had in mind in bringing a change of government in January and also in August 2015, Wickremesinghe government probably survived and survives because of the backing of the Western powers.



This backing is premised largely on the objective of preventing Chinese influence in Sri Lanka. It was not by accident that the Chinese Ambassador was the first and also the last to greet Rajapaksa as the new Prime Minister. This created more fears or anxieties on the part of Western embassies.

Overreaction was accompanied by overconfidence on the part of both Sirisena and Rajapaksa. Rajapaksa’s overreaction became more evident by taking the membership of the SLPP, or allegedly applying for it, without considering possible legal ramifications. When Sirisena’s three trump cards of ‘Dismissal, Prorogation and Dissolution’ came one after the other, at a quick pace, the Western educated middle class or the Colombians also became genuinely alarmed. They were thriving under Wickremesinghe economics.

Sirisena’s actions and boasted overconfidence undoubtedly had an element of authoritarianism. The return of Rajapaksa also united the UNP ranks and it was only for a short while that people like Wasantha Senanayake could flirt with both sides. The UNP/UNF Ministers, State Ministers and Junior Ministers undoubtedly have generously gratified their support base through public funds. This is something that the SLFP had failed to do, giving priority to their acrimonious or talkative politics. There are clear indications that both Sirisena and Rajapaksa have not learnt the lessons of the 2015 democratic change, where people don’t want to go back to authoritarianism or even semblance of it.
A lost opportunity 

When looking back at last four years, it is at best a lost opportunity. It was also a betrayal and treachery from almost all sides. What they promised and delivered as Yahapalanaya were different. When friends (although new) become enemies they obviously become extra bitter. This is what happened to the UNP and the SLFP or more correctly to Sirisena and Wickremesinghe. It was by chance that the UNF government was salvaged thanks to the TNA and the JVP. In actual sense it is still a minority government. No one knows at what time it will fall or disintegrate.

Was it too ideal or impractical to have a national government? Perhaps yes. Primarily because the objectives on the part of the leaders were short sighted or rather opportunistic. Nevertheless the positive achievements or people’s aspirations behind 2015 change should be continued and even enhanced. They are primarily (1) to have independent commissions to oversee not only appointments but also government performance and (2) to resist authoritarian tendencies on the part of the President or even the Prime Minister.

As most of the authoritarian deviations in the future might come from the PM or the new government, the President should step back and allow the PM to expose himself before the people. Unnecessary reactions or attempts at imposition of authority might confuse the situation and boomerang on the President himself. There is a need for a strong opposition in Parliament (not a fake one!) and in the country. Opposition activities in the country should not be destructive, but peaceful, engaging and constructive as much as possible.

There is no question that the so-called Yahapalanaya has exhausted its potential. It is a lost opportunity, par excellence. The problematic however in the New Year would be its alternative. Ranil Wickremesinghe has got a lease of life through the Supreme Court and therefore he should either deliver or get out. Jesus’ advice to his disciples was too ideal, at least on the part of the sovereign people of the country. If their living conditions are attacked, people should not turn their other cheek, but should give a good hammer!

TNA URGES ALL PARTIES TO WORK TOGETHER TO FIND A PERMANENT RESOLUTION TO THE NATIONAL QUESTION IN 2019.

31/12/2018


New Year Greetings.

My heartiest wishes for a Prosperous and a Happy New Year to all Sri Lankan citizens.
As we step into a new year I wish and pray that this new year brings hope and happiness to all the people in this Country. The past year has taught us many lessons through both positive and negative incidents. Let us take the learnings and make it a useful one to our lives and a fruitful one to the others.

In this New Year, let us not give in to the adversities that bring disunity and heartedness among our communities and stand firm against the extremists whose petty political aim is to divide the communities into Ethnic and Religious lines. Moreover, I pray that the affected communities will be provided with solutions to their longstanding issues in this New Year.

I appeal to all Political parties, Religious Leaders and Civil Society to come forward and  within a United, Undivided, Indivisible Sri Lanka on the basis of Justice and Equality.

Happy New Year

R Sampanthan

Leader – Tamil National Alliance 

Was Ms. Vijayakala Maheswaran Wrong?

By Nanda Wanninayaka –DECEMBER 31, 2018

Nanda Wanninayaka

For most of you, this could be stale news. But I thought of writing this piece even at a later time after Vijayakala Maheswaran’s controversial speech. My first hand experiences in the North since June this year made me write this piece. Being 6 months in the North on and off (at least 3 weeks per each month) won’t be enough for me to come to a right conclusion about the subject but I would report what I saw. I don’t speak Tamil but can manage with the little English I know and sometimes in Sinhala as I found many people I meet in the North can speak some Sinhala. Besides, I think I am good at the universal language, the sign language 

I have no connection or whatsoever with the then State Minister of Women and Children’s Affairs, Ms. Vijayakala Maheswaran. I even didn’t know if such one ever existed before her speech came to the limelight. But with all those hullaballoos about her “controversial” speech at Veerasingham Hall Jaffna on July 02, 2018, I thought of reading the full English translation of her speech “for the heck of it.”

Apart from the controversial and illegal part of “reviving the LTTE,” I don’t find anything wrong in what she talked in the rest of her speech. Ms. Maheshwaran must be really lucky not to be in jail for talking about reviving a ruthless terrorist outfit that dragged the country back to the Stone Age, literally. If this speech was made in any other sovereign state, she would have been counting the bars in a cell by now. But Sri Lanka is a funny country with funnier constitution which is less funny than a Kushwant Singh’s sarcastic column! I would refrain from making any comment about judiciary here as, at this age, I don’t have much time left to be in a secluded cell for several years. I have better things to in my life.

About child abuse/rape/killing which Ms. Maheshwaran talks, she is right. It is true these were not committed by the Sri Lankan military but mostly, the people of the neighborhood were the perpetrators. (There are some allegations that Ms. Maheshwaran herself tried to save one such accused of the high school girl Vidya rape and subsequent killing being, I don’t know.) What I do know is that the post-LTTE era has compromised the rigid law and order which had been implemented in the North by the terrorists. So, naturally, maybe the people might think that the “known devil” was better.

It was the same with the extensive substance abuse by the youth and the men at large in the North. The LTTE was trafficking drugs to sustain their organization but they did not sell them in Sri Lanka, well, at least not in the North. Drug trafficking was one of their main ways of illegal fundraising to the so called “liberation struggle” but they ensured the drugs would not make their way to the North. But now, after the conclusion of the bloody war, one can read from the press that large hauls of drugs are being captured by the police and the Special Task Force (STF) in the North and East. I myself have seen numerous times the youth spend hours under street lights in Jaffna just loitering till late hours of the night. I cannot see what they do but I just have a friendly word or two and find most of them are intoxicated. I don’t think this happened during the LTTE era. Terrorism should be condemned at any level, but didn’t the women in the South themselves kind of “approve” the rigid jungle laws implemented by “Deshapremi Janatha Wyaparaya” – the terrorist unit of the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP) for that matter? People, especially women, love to see the men being controlled at least by a terrorist outfit if the authorities cannot do their job any better?

I am not a legal expert. But as everyone knows damn well, atrocities were committed from both sides during and the immediate aftermath of the war. There is no point in harping on these forever. A government military has to abide by the international ethics of war no matter how hard it is. They will be forced to retaliate when the opposite happens from a terrorist group. But this is why a state military is trained how to become a professional military. One cannot justify an illegal retaliatory action a state military commits by pointing at a ruthless terrorist or guerilla group’s heinous acts. This is where the state military has to draw the margin. A terrorist organization has the luxury of ignoring international war ethics. This is why they are called “terrorists.” So, the better thing to do is to forgive and forget. There are allegations and reportedly, hard evidence too, of atrocities committed by both the military and the terrorists according to what I read, hear and see. So, why not we go to a South African model Truth Commission in which all parties are pardoned and integrated to the society? It is never too late, even after 9 years of conclusion of war.

Read More

Will 2019 see abolition of Executive Presidency?

by gagani weerakoon-02:00 AM DEC 

The majority of Cabinet Ministers and Parliamentarians in the Government and Opposition are enjoying vacations overseas with family members for the Christmas and New Year holiday period while, few other MPs were holidaying in the cool climes of Nuwara Eliya and are unlikely to return to Colombo till the dawn of 2019.

Parliament which last convened under Speaker Karu Jayasuriya on 21 December is expected to reconvene only on 8 January 2019. According to sources, they are scheduled to return to the country ahead of the next meeting of the Cabinet headed by the President on 2 January 2019.
President Maithripala Sirisena is also in Bangkok, Thailand on a private visit.

Cabinet crisis

The President and Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe both must have thought of taking a break from the political mess but will return along with others, to another chaotic situation as there are unsettled grouses when allocating Cabinet Ministries in addition to internal matters of their respective political parties.

Puttalam District UNP Parliamentarian Palitha Range Bandara says that he would have to take a stern decision if he does not receive a ministerial portfolio in the new Cabinet within a month.

Addressing an event held in Siyambalawewa, Andigama to distribute essential equipment to people under ‘Gam Peraliya’ project, Range Bandara said he had not received the appreciation he deserves, although he has been praised as the turning point for the United National Party.

He said it has already been a few weeks since the new Cabinet of Ministers was appointed, however, he had not received a ministerial portfolio.

Range Bandara was not the only one to complain. Power and Energy Minister Ravi Karunanayake also revealed that he was deprived of the Finance portfolio due to two or three in the UNP itself going against him.
He said that it is a matter for regret that a jealous and ungrateful clique in the Party rejecting him when the whole world accepts him.

He emphasized that this situation was created by a minority group in his Party itself and not by anyone in the Opposition.

Ravi Karunanayake who said that he would accept the challenge with a happy heart and will see how those who have given the works in ultra modern mode will perform in future.

In order to solve these matters, UNP legal experts are currently contemplating suitable legal action to determine what exactly 19th Amendment says about the number of members in the Cabinet.

Abolishing Executive Presidency

New Year resolution for the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP) and majority of sensible voters and activists would be getting rid of the Executive Presidency by way of introducing the 20th Amendment. Whether it could receive a two-third majority remains a question.

Speaker Karu Jayasuriya requested religious leaders to take the lead in raising a voice, in the New Year, with regard to calling for the abolition of the Executive Presidency, and rejecting racism and religious bigotry.

Apart from taking the lead in this regard, he requested them to provide the requisite guidance too.

Whilst noting that racism and religious bigotry could be seen once again coming to the fore under a political guise led by politicians in various places, including through temples and places of religious worship, he requested that narrow political agendas not be allowed to incite the North and the South. Jayasuriya made this request when he met the chief representatives to the multi-religious summit at the Speaker’s official residence on 26 December.

He pointed out that Parliamentary democracy could not in any way bear the Executive Presidency, adding that the societal public too had for quite some time urged its abolition. Jayasuriya pointed out that he had, since entering politics, appeared on behalf of the same.

He reminded that late Venerable Maduluwawe Sobitha Thera had organized the society against a developing anti-democratic dictatorship not for the purpose of bringing in a common candidate and to once again establish a Presidential position but to make a common policy victorious and to thereby abolish the Executive Presidency and strengthen democracy. He expressed regret at not being able to fulfil the aim of the abolition of the Executive Presidency, despite the establishment of the Constitutional Council, the Independent Commissions and the Independence of the Judiciary, and ensuring the right to information.

Elsewhere, explaining the series of incidents that took place in the recent past in the Parliament to the clergy, he explained that, “The breakdown of the trust between the President and the Prime Minister began after the commencement of the last Local Government Election.
 Early on, because I understood the unfortunate results of this, at all possible times, I continuously intervened to create reconciliation. It is true what the President said, when he said that he had on several occasions attempted to give me the Premiership. Yet, back in the day, we asked for a mandate to appoint Maithripala Sirisena as the President and Ranil Wickremesinghe as the Prime Minister. I didn’t want to accept any post contrary to that mandate.”

He further said, “On 26 October, after the unexpected change in power, I met the President on 27 October.
 He requested me to provide the required facilities to the new Premier appointed as per the Gazette Notification issued by him. Although I could act according to the said Gazette Notification, I requested the President to protect democratic principles by showing within seven days that the new Government possessed the majority. Agreeing to this, he said that he would summon the Parliament on 5 November.

Later, owing to practical difficulties, he changed it to 7 November.
However, for whatever the reason, the Parliament was not summoned on either of the said dates. In the meantime, I received a letter containing the signatures of 117 Parliamentarians who were opposed to the newly established Government.
I could not, as per my duty not listen to the voice of the majority. Everyone could see how attempts to prove the majority in Parliament were continuously disturbed. During this period, MPs were being bought for unbelievable sums of money.”

Furthermore, he explained, “There was a big challenge before me. This was regarding whether I allow the majority view to prevail or do I allow force to win. I decided that force should not in any way be allowed to prevail.
I knew the risk of it. Threats to the effect that I would be shot inside the Chamber or have acid thrown at me were levelled at me. If I didn’t take up that challenge and risk on behalf of democracy, our Parliamentary system which has an esteemed history, would have been dragged into an extremely dark age.”

The summit representatives noted that although there was some reconciliation to be seen in the politics of the country at present, because there were certain contradictions in the decisions taken by the two poles of power, namely the President and the Prime Minister it could be harmful to the country. They requested Speaker Jayasuriya to intervene and act.          
Western Province Governor Hemakumara Nanayakkara answering a question posed by the Ceylon Today during a special press conference held last week, revealed that President Sirisena is not in agreement with the proposed 20th Amendment to the Constitution, brought by the JVP, seeking the abolition of the Executive Presidency.

Nanayakkara added that the JVP has very limited power in Parliament.
“It was brought by the JVP, but the people at the grassroots level are disturbed by it. We know why they brought it; we know how many people went to have secret discussions with some of these so-called non-governmental organizations. The JVP is a very weak party today. They hasten the process of becoming weaker by bringing in this Amendment,” he added.

He further said that there was also a secret conspiracy to approve a new Constitution, but he would not allow that to happen.

Meanwhile, when queried as to whether it would be the Provincial Councils (PC) Elections or the General/Parliamentary Elections that would be held first, he added that he expected that the PC Polls to be held first owing to the current political situation.

Plus points in a mess

Establishment of the Independence of the Judiciary as being the only light at the end of the tunnel in the context of the recent Constitutional and political crisis, Speaker Karu Jayasuriya said that henceforth, the world would not talk about international judges intervening in Sri Lanka.

The latter was a reference to the call from various stakeholders to have foreign judges involved in a judicial process to try alleged war crimes and human rights abuses and violations, perpetrated and committed during the period of the war.

These views were aired by Jayasuriya when he met the chief representatives of the multi-religious summit at the Speaker’s official residence last week.

Speaker Jayasuriya said so in reference to a landmark judgment interpreting the powers of the Executive President to dissolve the Parliament post-19th Amendment to the Constitution, where a seven-Judge-bench of the Supreme Court on 13 December unanimously quashed President Maithripala Sirisena’s proclamation issued via an extraordinary gazette dissolving the Parliament and calling for a General Election, declaring it null and void, ab initio (from the outset), and sans any force and effect in the law.

Speaking further to the religious representatives, Jayasuriya pointed out that, “It is not important as to who won at the end of the past two months.
This is because the country suffered a major defeat during this period. The prime position that was coming our way in terms of the world’s tourism industry was lost. The Japanese funds for the monorail project of the American Millennium Challenge Corporation and the International Monetary Fund were to be turned back. The respect for our Parliament which has provided examples to the world, suffered a major black mark.
Yet, I see a positive aspect to this. The independence of our judiciary became world famous. Henceforth, the world will not talk about international judges intervening in our country. It was confirmed that we have such an independent, non-partisan judiciary.”

Further, it was understood that political forcefulness could not be made a reality in this country, he noted, adding that it was affirmed that henceforth no leader can do the wrong thing.  

Meanwhile, the JVP is currently engaged in seeking legal advice in connection with proposing new legislation to punish those involved in the 26 October conspiracy against the Constitution, including primarily President Sirisena and opposition leader Mahinda Rajapaksa.

The JVP also noted that they expected Prime Minister Wickremesinghe and/or Minister of Justice Thalatha Atukorale to present a report in Parliament, once Sittings commence, on the Government’s stance on the 20th Amendment to the Constitution, so that a Parliamentary debate on the Bill could commence.

This was revealed by JVP MP Dr. Nalinda Jayatissa when contacted by Ceylon Today.

When questioned as to what the JVP made of Western Province Governor Hemakumara Nanayakkara’s recent statement that President Sirisena was not in agreement with the proposed 20th Amendment to the Constitution, but instead opposed it, and the proposed recommencement of the constitutional reforms process by the Steering Committee of the Constitutional Assembly, Dr. Jayatissa added that while the said reforms process regarding a new Constitution also contained the abolition of the Executive Presidency, the JVP, despite having membership in the said Steering Committee did not have much faith and trust in the process.  

Delay in appointing SC judges

Recommendations, made by the Constitutional Council (CC), to fill vacancies in the Supreme Court and Court of Appeal, have been rejected by President Maithripala Sirisena.

Instead, the President has selected three judges of his choice to fill these vacancies and sent the names for recommendation to the CC. However, recommendations made by the President have been rejected by seven of the ten members of the CC, a source who was present at the meeting told this newspaper.

Former President Mahinda Rajapaksa was present as Leader of the Opposition at the meeting chaired by Speaker Karu Jayasuriya last Friday (21). Leader of the Opposition Rajapaksa, his representative and the President’s representative accepted only recommendations made by the President, he added. Mahinda Samarasinghe MP was the President’s representative.

When inquired from the Speaker, he confirmed that the Constitutional Council met on Friday and former President Mahinda Rajapaksa participated as the Leader of the Opposition. Lengthy discussions took place regarding the appointment of judges to vacant slots in the Supreme and Appeal Courts but a final decision has not yet been taken, he added.

The Supreme Court has only nine judges though it should include eleven. However, the President has rejected Gamini Amarasekara and S. Thurairaja who were recommended by the Constitutional Council, sources said.
He added that the President has named Deepali Wijyesundara and K.K. Wickramasinghe instead and sent the recommendations to the Constitutional Council.

Meanwhile, the President has rejected K.P. Fernando who was recommended by the Constitutional Council as President of the Court of Appeal.

However, under the 19th Amendment, the Independent Commissions and the Constitutional Council wields more power than the President. This had been done to maintain the independence of these Commissions.

In the context of the appointment of Judges to the Apex Courts, if the President refuses to appoint the Judges approved and recommended by the Constitutional Council (CC), it constitutes a Constitutional violation and is also a case of being in contempt of Court, not to mention a violation of the rights of Judges, a Constitutional Council Member said.

Both, the offices of the Constitutional Council and the President are recognized in the Constitution and their authority is derived from the powers vested in the Constitution.
 In the context of appointing Judges to the Superior Courts (the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court), the President as per the Constitution has the power to nominate Judges, while the Constitutional Council, according to the Constitution, has to approve and recommend as Justices, the persons deemed suitable by the Constitutional Council from among the names nominated by the President in the latter’s list to the CC, he pointed out when contacted.

According to him, the Constitutional Council had been unanimous in approving and recommending the Judges they did.

“The President must as per the Constitution appoint Judges approved and recommended by the Constitutional Council. This is a matter that concerns public office. Neither the CC nor the President can act outside the Constitution,” he explained.

He noted that such ultra vires action on the part of the President would also be in violation of the rights of Judges, adding that some of the appointments are two months overdue.

“What is of paramount importance is the question of intention. Intention must be progressive. For example, a book is meant for reading but as was seen in the Parliament recently, it can be thrown as a weapon. This is not the intention as it is not a progressive action. All must act in accordance with the intention as otherwise it is unacceptable.”

He added that the Constitutional Council was scheduled to meet again on 7 January 2019 and when questioned whether the matter of the said judicial appointments would be on the day’s agenda, he noted that though they had yet to receive the agenda for the day, the CC’s work in this regard had been completed, adding further that the ball was now in the President’s Court.

If the President doesn’t take progressive action with regard to this matter at hand, a disgruntled member of the judicial and legal fraternity may challenge it before the Court, and if this happens to be the case, the President would stand no chance, he pointed out.

Article 107 of the Constitution holds that the Chief Justice, the President of the Court of Appeal and every other Judge of the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal shall, subject to the approval of the Constitutional Council, be appointed by the President by warrant under his/her hand.