Colombo brings 1500 Sinhalese from South to Mannaar

[TamilNet, Tuesday, 21 May 2013, 22:11 GMT]
Stepping up the process of colonisation of the country of Eezham Tamils, the occupying Sri Lanka has brought in 1,500 Sinhalese in buses to Musali DS division in Mannaar District, which is bordering the North Western and North Central provinces. The occupying Colombo government had already planned to settle down five thousand Sinhalese families from the South in Mannaar district in an attempt to change the demography of the district before holding the Northern Provincial Council election, according to a confidential document received by the Mannaar district secretariat. 

The Sinhalese colonizers brought in have been settled in temporary sheds, news sources in Mannaar said. 

The latest move by Colombo comes while the uprooted Tamils and Muslims from the Musali area are still residing as refugees in temporary huts without basic facilities.

The Tamil National Alliance (TNA) in participation with Tamil and Muslim civil representatives is to conduct a detailed discussion shortly on the land appropriation in Mannaar district, said TNA parliamentarian Mr Selvam Adaikkalanathan.

Indian housing aid to be used for demographic genocide in East

[TamilNet, Tuesday, 21 May 2013, 23:53 GMT]
A part of the 50,000 housing aid promised by New Delhi for the war-affected people in the North and East is planned to be used for demographic genocide in the East at the village of Kachchat-kodi in the Paddip-pazhai division of Batticaloa district, according to Eastern Provincial council member R. Thurairatnam. The village, which was predominantly Tamil a few years ago and was affected by displacement during the war, now has 2 new Sinhala Buddhist Viharas constructed and a number of Sinhala families brought from outside settled with the assistance of Buddhist priests. 

75 houses are being constructed for the settlers with the financial assistance of Buddhist establishments. In addition, the Indian housing assistance also would be used in settling the newcomers. There were only 12 Sinhala families in that village before the war. 

The assistance, coming from the Buddhist establishment, is being channelled to the Sinhala settlers without involving the divisional administration and without informing the GS officer or the Divisional Secretary. 

The colonisation scheme is situated between 19th Mile Post and 21st Mile Post along both the sides of a 3 km long road in the Paddip-pazhai division. 

The Sinhala settlers have been brought from Uhana, Piyangala, Nugelanda, Ampaa'rai, Maha-Oya and 36th Colony.

Impeachment Ruling Appeal To SC: AG Violates Procedure And Gets Leave To Appeal Behind Back Of Shirani B And Others

May 23, 2013 

The latest development following the illegal ousting by the Rajapaksa regime of Chief Justice Dr. Shirani Bandaranayake and installation of Mohan Pieris as de facto Chief Justice despite an Appeal Court ruling declaring the purported impeachment process invalid, is irregular steps being taken by the Attorney General to appeal the ruling, with certain judges of the Supreme Court accommodating such a move in blatant violation of the rights of parties to the case to be noticed and heard on whether special leave to appeal should be granted, the Colombo Telegraph is able to reveal today.

Chief Justice Bandaranayake

Vijitha Herath, Member of Parliament through the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna has filed a motion dated 22.05.2013 along with an affidavit to the Supreme Court, highlighting how the Attorney General has violated compulsory requirements of notice to other parties in making this unusual appeal.

In short, special leave to appeal has been sought by the Attorney General  and granted by judges allocated under de facto Chief Justice Mohan Pieris to consider the matter.

In this way, special leave to appeal has been granted, without even so much as noticing or hearing (even) Dr. Shirani Bandaranayake, who is the most personally affected party in the case, The Colombo Telegraph is reliably informed.

Normally, all parties to a case have a right to be noticed and heard in objection to grant of special leave to appeal before any order granting special leave to appeal is given. It is only if the Supreme Court (after hearing all parties) feels that there is a matter that should be gone deeper into, that special leave to appeal is granted and a case is set down for final hearing on specific matters raised by parties to the case and accepted by the court as requiring reconsideration.

The parties in the Appeal Court case who were entitled to be noticed, are as follows: Dr. Shirani Anshumala Bandaranayake (Petitioner), Chamal Rajapaksa (Speaker of Parliament), Anura Priyadharshana Yapa, Nimal Siripala De Silva, Susil Premajayantha, Rajitha Senaratne, Wimal Weerawansa, Dilan Perera, Neomal Perera, Lakshman Kiriella, John Amaratunga, R. Sampanthan, Vijitha Herath (Chairman & Members of the ‘PSC’) and W. B. D. Dassanayake (Secretary General of Parliament).

The Attorney General was only requested by the Appeal Court to make submissions to assist the court on a (now inapplicable) notion that the Attorney General would make objective submissions devoid of political expediency or partisanism. Such a possibility was effectively erased by the ruling regime through its 18th Amendment to the Constitution.

Herath has moved  the Supreme Court to set aside the illegal, improper and irregular order granting special leave to appeal and have the case taken off the list of cases to be argued on 29.05.2013.

His affidavit states as follows:

I, VIJITHA HERATH  of No. 44/3, Medawatta Road, Mudungoda, Miriswatta, Gampaha being a Buddhist do hereby solemnly, sincerely, truly declare and affirm as follows:-

1. I am the Affirmant and the 12th Respondent in the CA Writ Application 411/2012 and in this “Appeal”.

2. I learnt from media that the Hon. Attorney General, who is not a party to the Court of Appeal application bearing No. 411/2012, had  submitted an appeal to Your Lordships’ Court and the Supreme Court had granted Leave to Appeal ex-parte. At no stage, I received any papers including the Petition, Affidavit or annexures,  pertaining to the instant “Appeal”.

3. I state that through my Attorney-at-Law, I made inquiries from Supreme Court Registry on 09th May 2013 and found that the papers relevant to the Special leave application had not been even posted to me. The Registrar of Supreme Court on that date had admitted that the papers were never sent to me and all papers were in the docket, which had been kept in her personal custody.

4. I state that I have not received any of the papers pertaining to this “Appeal” except the amended caption and the notice  dated 15-3-2013.

5. I am advised to state that this “Appeal” made by Attorney General is contrary to law or practice of Court and therefore all orders made in this “Appeal” by the Supreme Court should be set aside.

Background

The Attorney General was never a party to the Appeal Court case (CA Writ 411/2012) which was filed by Chief Justice Bandaranayake seeking relief against what she alleged were illegal, unlawful steps taken to purportedly impeach her by a process that lacked all requirements of propriety, integrity, honesty and the Principles of Natural Justice. The Appeal Court invited the Attorney General to assist the court as ‘amicus curiae’ (meaning – friend of court) and make submissions on the applicable law and legal principles. The post of Attorney General is widely considered as highly politicised, with the 18th Amendment to the Constitution effectively granting the Executive President Mahinda Rajapaksa the power to make appointment to the post (and other high judicial and civil service positions) entirely at his whim or fancy. In the given context, the role of the officers of the Attorney General’s Department in this case was to try and justify to the Appeal Court, the methodology being adopted by the Rajapaksa Regime.

However, the Court of Appeal, having heard all parties and the Attorney General, ruled that the so-called inquiry held by a Parliamentary Select Committee (PSC) that was used to throw up apparent grounds for impeachment was illegal, ultra vires and set aside the so-called findings of the PSC. The members of the PSC from the Opposition walked out and refused to participate when they realised that the process was completely flawed, improper and even abusive. However, the Rajapaksa regime disregarded the court ruling and moved to take steps to hurriedly push through the Rajapaksa controlled Parliament, a Resolution to impeach Dr. Bandaranayake. Using this rubber stamp of the legislature, Dr. Bandaranayake was excluded from exercising her functions as Chief Justice and Mohan Pieris, a close associate of the Rajapaksa regime (esp. the Defence Secretary who is President Rajapaksa’s brother) and against whom there were many corruption allegations was installed in the Chief Justice’s chambers with military presence in Hulftsdorp, amidst heavy protests and resolutions of a vast majority of the legal profession. The Bar Association of Sri Lanka condemned the move, and even passed (and carried out) a resolution not to welcome the substitution of the office of Chief Justice with a de facto Chief Justice. The Colombo Telegraph has exclusively published proof of some of these allegations, previously.

In this way, the Rajapaksa regime drew widespread condemnation for what was widely accepted locally and internationally as a major failure of the rule of law – where the Executive failed to respect an order of court and deliberately acted in contempt of it, using the Legislature as a mere rubber stamp. It is a fact that the Appeal Court ruling was not appealed on to the Supreme Court by the regime through its nominees in the Parliamentary Select Committee or the Speaker of Parliament (who is also a brother of President Rajapaksa) who were all parties to the case.

Appeal and illegal orders now canvassed through Attorney General

The Appeal Court ruling is now curiously being specially canvassed in appeal by the Attorney General through SC (Special) LA 24/2013, with de facto Chief Justice Mohan Pieris heading other Supreme Court judges, who are only too aware that his views reflect the desires of the Rajapaksa regime. One Supreme Court Judge, P. A. Ratnayake, PC (a relative of Sir Baron Jayathilake) is due to retire prematurely shortly on request, after Pieris was installed in the office of CJ.

According to a very senior President’s Counsel contacted by The Colombo Telegraph who spoke on condition of anonymity, “It is highly undesirable at best and most inappropriate at worst for the Attorney General to make an appeal, in a case that he was never a party to. This is particularly so, since the parties to the case proper have the right to make an appeal.”

Several senior lawyers told The Colombo Telegraph that the taking of steps by the regime to appeal the ruling through the Attorney General is a reflection of how much of a cats paw the once highly regarded AG’s Department has been reduced to by the regime.

A political analyst said this slight of hand tactic was part of a move by the Rajapaksa regime to have the Appeal Court ruling reversed by the Supreme Court now controlled by Pieris (de facto CJ) in order to try and defend mounting international criticism of the serious breach of judicial independence by excluding Bandaranayake from the office of CJ without due process. The Colombo Telegraph is reliably informed that the new case number allocated to the appeal after the controversial grant of special leave to appeal in SC (Special) 24/2013, is SC (Appeal) No. 67/2013.

Herath’s Motion to SC

We reproduce below for the benefit of our readers, the wording of the Motion filed by the lawyers for Vijitha Herath (12th Respondent) which outlines clearly the nature and gravity of the serious breach of procedure complained of, and the court rulings sought by Herath to reverse the wrong:

On this 22nd day of May 2013.

WHEREAS the 12th Respondent – Respondent  received a notice dated 13thMay 2013 informing him that Your Lordships’ Court has granted special leave to appeal in this matter and that the appeal will be heard on 29th May 2013;

AND WHEREAS this is the first time a formal notice from the Registrar of Your Lordships’ Court has been received by the 12th Respondent – Respondent, apart from a photocopy of a Motion seeking to amend the caption that was received previously;

AND WHEREAS the 12th Respondent – Respondent has not been served with the petition, affidavit, document or any other papers until now, which fact is born out from the affidavit submitted with this Motion.

AND WHEREAS Rule 8 of the Supreme Court Rules 1990 stipulates as follows:

“(1) Upon an application for special leave to appeal being lodged in the Registry of the Supreme Court, the Registrar shall forthwith give notice, by registered post, of such application to each of the respondents, in the manner hereinafter set out. There shall be attached to the notice a copy of the petition, a copy of the judgment against which the application for special leave to appeal is preferred, and copies of affidavits and annexures filed therewith.

(2) Such notice shall be in the prescribed form, and shall specify –

(a) that the respondent, if he intends to oppose the grant of special leave to appeal, shall lodge, within fourteen days of the receipt of such notice, a Caveat indicating such intention; and

(b) the date of hearing of the application (being a date not less than eight weeks after the lodging of the application)

Such notice shall be dispatched within five working days after the application has been lodged.

(3) The Petitioner shall tender with his application such number of notices as is required for service on the respondents and himself together with such number of copies of the documents referred to in sub-rule (1) of this rule as is required for service on the respondents. The petitioner shall enter in such notices the names and addresses of the parties, and the name, address for service and telephone number of his instructing Attorney-at-Law, if any, and the name, address and telephone number, if any, of the attorney-at-law, if any, who has been retained to appear for him at the hearing of the application, and shall tender the required number of stamped addressed envelopes for the service of notice on the respondents by registered post. The petitioner shall forthwith notify the Registrar of any change in such particulars.

(4) Upon an application for special leave to appeal being lodged, the Registrar shall insert in the notices tendered by the petitioner the Supreme Court number allotted to the said application, and the date of hearing of the application, after consulting the petitioner. He shall issue one copy to the petitioner upon request, obtaining a written acknowledgement on the record itself; a copy of such notice shall not be posted to the Petitioner.

(5) The petitioner shall, not less than two weeks and not more than three weeks after the application has been lodged, attend at the Registry in order to verify that such notice has not been returned undelivered. If such notice has been returned undelivered, the petitioner shall furnish the correct address for the service of notice on such respondent. The Registrar shall thereupon dispatch a fresh notice by registered post, and may in addition dispatch another notice, with or without copies of the annexures, by ordinary post.

He may, if he thinks fit, and after consulting the petitioner, substitute a fresh date of hearing, or direct that the matter be called in the Registry, o the date originally fixed for the hearing, for the purpose of fixing a fresh date of hearing.

(6) The respondent shall, within fourteen days of the receipt of such notice, enter an appearance in the Registry of the Supreme Court, and if he intends to oppose the grant of special leave to appeal shall lodge a Caveat indicating such intention.

(7) Not less than twenty one days before the date specified in the aforesaid notice as the date of hearing of the application, any respondent may lodge (with notice to the petitioner and other respondents) a statement, together with three additional copies thereof, setting out his objections to the grant of special leave to appeal or controverting the allegations of fact set out in the petition; where such statement contains allegations of fact which cannot be verified by reference to the judgment or order of the Court of Appeal in respect of which special leave to appeal is sought, affidavits and other relevant documents shall be annexed in support, and the provisions of rule 6 shall apply mutatis mutandis.”

AND WHEREAS several of the above mandatory provisions do not seem to have been complied with, in that, the 12th Respondent – Respondent  was never served with notice of the application for special leave to appeal;

AND WHEREAS the 12th Respondent – Respondent has not been served with the Petition, Affidavit and annexes relating to the said application to date;

AND WHEREAS in the above circumstances the order granting special leave to appeal has been made per incuriam, in violation of the principles of natural justice and in breach of the aforesaid Rule and thus ought to be set aside ex debito justitea;

The 12th Respondent-Respondent respectfully moves that Your Lordships’ Court be pleased to set aside the said order granting special leave to appeal and cause the notice of same to be served on the 11th Respondent – Respondent to enable him to file a Caveat as contemplated under the aforesaid Rule and be heard in opposition to the grant of special leave to appeal on a date to be fixed for that purpose;

The 12th Respondent-Respondent  further moves that this matter be permitted to stand out of the Argument list on 29th May 2012 and be mentioned and that the 12th Respondent-Respondent be permitted to support this motion on that date and set aside all orders made by this Court in respect of this matter.

Registered Attorneys-at-Law for

the 12th Respondent – Respondent

Copy of this Motion has been served on the Party Noticed (Amicus Curiae) – Petitioner – Appellant.

Registered Attorneys-at-Law for

the 12th Respondent – Respondent

Ranil raises CID move to question UNP MPs

WEDNESDAY, 22 MAY 2013 

Opposition leader Ranil Wickremesinghe charged in Parliament today that there was an attempt by the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) to take in a few UNP MPs for questioning over their participation in a workshop organised by the Friedrich Naumann Foundation for Freedom, a German organisation promoting liberal politics in the world.

Mr. Wickremesinghe said the UNP as a party, engaged in electoral politics and undertook training on election campaign management under a workshop conducted by this organisation. He said this Foundation had brought down a resource person to conduct   the workshop, ahead of the Northern Provincial Council Election planned to be held in the near future. (Kelum Bandara)

Badge stolen from Judge’s car

A complaint was lodged at Mirihana Police this morning that a car badge depicting Toyota logo had been stolen from the vehicle belonged to Appeal Court Judge Deepali Wijesundere.

The vehicle had been parked under a tree at Nadukarawatte in Udahamulla. (M.S.Perera and Bimal Shaman Jayasinghe)

A situation exists, similar to attending parliament, visiting 4th floor. Ariyanenthiran MP allege

Tuesday , 21 May 2013

Members of Tamil National Alliance visit parliament twice a month, similarly at least once a month, they had to visit the 4th floor said Tamil National Batticaloa district parliament member P.Ariyanenthiran.

Prayer worship was arranged in remembering the demised relatives at Mullaivaaikal, and he made this statement.

He said, Tamil National parliament members visit parliament two times per month, similarly they had to visit 4th floor once a month.

Suresh Premachandran, Sritharan, Ariyanenthiran, Gajendrakumar Ponnambalam, Selvam Adaikalanathan, Tamil National Alliance parliament members including some have gone to the  4th floor so far.

Meanwhile today, Tuesday, parliament member Sivaskathi Ananthan was called to report to 4th floor.  It is like going to parliament, visiting 4th floor.

Until Tamil people acquire political settlement liberation, our journey will continue. Even though we had to journey many years, still the Tamil national liberation journey will get continued.

Tamil National Alliance parliament members were assassinated. The positions were filled by parliament members from the Tamil National Alliance.  But the Tamil nationality was not eradiated.

By eradicating another race and celebrating is it called war victory celebration? Victory is celebrated when war is against another country and achieved?

Government celebrating war victory establishes that people are still treated like slaves.

We are suppressed and not able to fulfill our religious obligations to our demised beloveds of  Mullivaikkal said Ariyanenthiran.

Our journey will continue until political settlement liberation is given to the Tamil people 

Essential to voice when people suppressed. Leader of Jaffna university teachers federation notify

Wednesday , 22 May 2013

Ordinary citizen today are getting suppressed and oppressed. University teachers federations too have the responsibility to voice functioning as a trade union  against people getting oppressed said Jaffna teachers federation Leader R.Rasakumaran.

Opposing to the electricity tariff hike a token strike was held at the Jaffna university entry and on his participation he said, being in the  teachers trade union of the university, we have the responsibility to voice not only in university, but if an ordinary citizen gets suppressed and oppressed.

We will voice in future when people are harassed and suppressed said federation leader. 

Protest against child rape, Vavuniya

Tamil Guardian 21 May 2013

Protesters held a demonstration in Vavuniya on Monday condemning incidents of rape and calling for the arrest of the rapist of a 7-year-old girl in Nedunkeni. Local sources said that an individual had been arrested in Senapilavu in connection with the assault. In another incident, according to J. Jeyakennedy, officer for child rights improvement, an 18-year-old woman with special needs was sexually assaulted while home alone in Kanakarayankulam, Vavuniya.

Posted by Thavam

WikiLeaks: CPC And CEB – Sri Lanka Is Meeting IMF Targets

May 22, 2013 

“An IMF team conducting its first quarterly assessment has determined that Sri Lanka is meeting the targets of the July IMF standby agreement, and it appears that the IMF staff will recommend release of the second tranche of IMF funds in October. The IMF agreement, combined with optimism from the end of Sri Lanka,s conflict and an improving external economic environment, has encouraged substantial inflows of foreign capital into Sri Lanka. Although the road forward will be challenging, the IMF believes that Sri Lanka is on track to build international foreign reserves, control expenditure, increase government revenue, and reform the banking sector. The IMF will establish an office housed in the Sri Lankan Central Bank to monitor compliance. Overall, the IMF seems more optimistic than several local economists.”the US Embassy Colombo informed Washington. 

IMF Mission Chief Dr. Brian Aitken

The Colombo Telegraph found the related leaked cable from the WikiLeaks database. The unclassified cable recounts the details of the first quarterly review conducted by the IMF  re  Sri Lanka’s progress toward IMF goals.The cable was written on September 23, 2009  by the US Ambassador to Colombo, Patricia A. Butenis.

Ambassador Butenis wrote; “The most difficult challenge will be to increase revenue so that Sri Lanka escapes from chronic balance of payments crisis. Government revenue fell by an estimated 6%  in the first half of 2009, reflecting declining imports (GSL derives a key segment of its revenue from import duties) and a weak domestic economy. The GSL has targeted increasing its revenue by 2% of GDP by 2011, starting from the 14.9% collected in 2008. Aitken was optimist that the GSL is ready to make fundamental reforms to increase revenue, and he noted that Sri Lanka has already increased its “nation building tax” from 1.5 to 3%. Sri Lanka will also benefit from increased revenues as the economy improves and imports increase. GSL has a Presidential Commission to examine ways to increase revenue, focusing on widening the taxpayer base rather than increasing tax rates. Currently there are only 650,000 taxpayers (out of a total 20 million population) but the GSL to start collecting from 1 million taxpayers by 2010.”

“The GSL could meet its IMF target for two key state owned enterprises (SOE) to break even financially by 2011. The Ceylon Petroleum Company (CPC) and Ceylon Electricity Board (CEB) chronically lose money, but the IMF team thought that the GSL has fully committed to reforming these SOEs to stop the drain on government finances. The CPC has benefited from falling international oil prices, while they have kept domestic retail oil prices high. Similarly, the CEB is building a coal fired electricity plant, so they could benefit from moving from high cost oil to cheaper coal. It is not clear that the GSL has planned real reforms of either SOE.” she further wrote.

Placing a comment Butenis wrote; Econoff was surprised by the IMF,s optimistic assessment. Although clearly the GSL has built up its reserves, and private capital is flowing into portfolio investments, many economists and businessmen are skeptical that the GSL will be able to continue to meet its spending and revenue targets. The GSL plans to call Presidential and Parliamentary elections over the next six months, which could lead to excessive spending.”

Read the cable below for further details;

Military rule in east similar to north now. UNP allege

Wednesday , 22 May 2013

Similar to the military rule existing in the north, in east too it is adopted said United National Party provincial council member Mujiboor Rahman.

 

He made this statement on his participation at the media briefing of United National party held in Rajapgiriya yesterday Tuesday.

 

He said, country cannot be divided, however lands are divided and sold to China, India and Pakistan.

 

Army is utilizing the lands confiscated by the government belonging to Tamil and Muslims in the north, is continuing this activity in east also. Mainly the lands belonging to people in Pulmottai are confiscated by the navy.

 

Such activities are carried out in Trincomalee, Batticaloa and  Amparai district.  A dangerous situation is cropping up, country getting pushed for another war, said Mujiboor Rahman

The Govt's next target?

By Chrishanthi Christopher-2013-05-21 

In recent times, National Freedom Front Leader, and Minister of Construction, Engineering Services, Housing and Common Amenities, Wimal Weerawansa, has been vociferously attacking Treasury Secretary, P.B. Jayasundera, blaming him for all the economic woes of the government, alleging high levels of corruption in the Finance Ministry. The allegations against Jayasundera have been endless since early February this year.

MR Air Port: Planes only in the drawing

However, many observers are of the view that Weerawansa has picked up cudgels with Jayasundera, as he cannot directly blame the Finance Minister who happens to be President Mahinda Rajapaksa, for the country's economic ills. On the other hand, many wonder how Jayasundera could be looked upon as being more powerful than the Finance Minister or the Cabinet of Minister, as Weerawansa who is a Cabinet Minister, has seemingly overlooked that the onus of ensuring the economic prospects of the country is that of the Finance Minister in particular, and the Cabinet of Ministers in general.

IMF agenda

The latest salvo from Weerawansa is that Jayasundera is behind the controversial electricity tariff hike which is threatening to blow up into a major problem.

While the allegations against the Treasury Secretary are several, Weerawansa singles him out as the sole perpetrator of all wrong policies adopted by the government. Weerawansa claims the government is becoming unpopular among the people because of the foolhardy policies of the Treasury Secretary.

Interestingly, the accusations range from the decisions to introduce plastic craters to transport vegetables to inhibiting foreign cash flows into the country. He also claims that Jayasundera is a manipulated tool of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and is using the powers vested in him by the President to carry out the IMF agenda.

But critics argue otherwise. They say that bad decisions and mismanagement of funds by the UPFA Government had led to the present economic maladies. Ever since the government came into power in 2005, it has been spending billions of rupees on unnecessary projects that have brought no tangible returns. It is estimated that loans along with the high interest rates at which they are obtained for projects runs into millions of dollars, adding that the repayment of the same will fall on the shoulders of the people of the country, who are already reeling under a gamut of taxes imposed on them for almost every essential services and goods.

The mega projects, all of which are concentrated in the Rajapaksa constituency, lie forlorn without generating any income. Many argue the projects will no doubt place Rajapaksa, and his home town Hambantota, prominently in history, but whether the ill-thought out projects would bring in revenue to compensate the repayments of loans obtained at high interest rates for the construction of these projects, remains to be seen.

Failed projects

The Magampura Mahinda Rajapaksa Port which was built at a cost of US$ 1,300 million is to be an alternative to the Colombo Harbour. The harbour lies abandoned since its opening in 2010. Critics say that global shippers agencies are apprehensive of using the harbour which they believe does not conform to international standards.

The Hambantota Port has fallen short of its targeted revenue, generating only Rs 132 million last year. The Sri Lanka Ports Authority (SLPA) had set a target of Rs 500 – Rs 600 million in revenue but at present, the SLPA is siphoning out monies generated by the Colombo Port to service the loan borrowed from the Exim China Bank for the construction of the Hambantota Port.

Next is the Mahinda Rajapaksa International Cricket Stadium built at a cost of Rs 700 million in Suriyawewa, Hambantota, which was opened in 2011 for the World Cup matches. The complex, with a seating capacity of 32,000, and standing on 47 acres of land, is hardly used. Except for the two World Cup cricket matches and a few isolated matches played there, the stadium stands desolate.

Another project is the Mattala Rajapaksa International Airport (MRIA), opened at the beginning of the year. Standing on 2,000 hectares of land, it was built at a cost of
Rs 26 billion. The airport, which is 43 km from Hambantota town is close to an elephant infested jungle. Although the government is offering free landing and parking for airlines, and a 50% discount on handling fees, the concessions go abegging. Hitherto, no international airline has come forward to add Hambantota Airport as its destination. The only airline (Air Arabia) that was operating from the airport has now decided to withdraw from this month citing that it is not profitable to fly via MRIA, and therefore, not feasible to continue with flights to the country's second international airport. As such, SriLankan Airlines has stepped into boost the activities of the airport and has daily flights from Katunayake to Mattala. It is argued that the much-needed second airport for the country has been constructed in the wrong place and at the wrong time.

The Hambantota Sports Zone, exclusively designed for the 2018 Commonwealth Games for which Sri Lanka vied, is another let down for the government. The project, which cost Rs 15 billion, is the third largest development zone in Suriyawewa, Hambantota, close to the new international cricket stadium. Hambantota lost the right to host the Commonwealth Games to the Gold Coast in Australia. Nevertheless, it is being prepared to host the Asian Youth Sports Festival scheduled to be held in 2017. The project is expected to be completed in 2016.

The Norochcholai Power Plant built with the honourable intention of providing cheap power to the people at minimum tariff has also become a white elephant. The plant, built at a cost of US$ 1,350 million is in a state of perpetual breakdown, and sources said the plant had broken down for the 19th time, last week. The government, which is unable to pay the loans borrowed for its construction, is considering transferring the power plant to the stakeholders (China) as a debt-equity swap.

Another of the failed enterprises is the Mahinda Rajapaksa National Tele Cinema Park built on 235 acres in Ranminitenna, Hambantota, at a cost of Rs 2 billion. It was opened in 2010. The park was constructed with money received from taxes on foreign films and teledramas. It is said there is little or no shooting taking place at the centre despite the concessions on offer.

Meanwhile, the Southern Expressway, running from Kottawa to Galle, too, has incurred huge losses to date. The vast expanse of 95 km stretch built at a cost of
Rs 776 billion was expected to yield substantial income, that will cover the cost and generate profit. However, the annual revenue collected from vehicles using the highway is only Rs 1 billion, while debt service and maintenance cost is around Rs 6.5 billion, incurring a loss of Rs 5.5 billion, annually. Opposition parties say it is hilarious to note that the government which said Dr. P.B. Jayasundera is important to run the day-to-day financial affairs of the country, and that he is not expendable, has one of its ministers projecting him as the villain. A UNP Parliamentarian described Wimal Weerawansa as the 'fence of duplicity' maintained by the Rajapaksa Government. The MP said, if the government wants to send the Treasury Secretary home, it is welcome to do so. "They sent the Chief Justice home in 24 hours; why cannot they send the 'economic hitman' as referred to by Weerawansa, within an hour?" he asked, adding, "Why keep him ... kick him off!"

The MP said Jayasundera, for some reason, has become a scapegoat and he dared Weerawansa to remove the Central Bank Governor, Ajith Nivard Cabraal.

Drama to divert people's attention

However, critics see a similarity in the pattern of how Weerawansa attacks Jayasundera and have started comparing this with the ousting of the Chief Justice, Shirani Bandaranayake. The rhetoric they believe comes with the blessings of the hierarchy and this could be the beginning of ousting another important bureaucrat from his position.

However, the Finance Secretary seems unperturbed, and is carrying out business as usual. He is taking all the adverse remarks made against him in his stride, and just labels them 'as politics.' Again, some believe that the outbursts of accusations may be a drama to divert the people's attention from the numerous problems infesting the country.

Another opposition MP said that Weerawansa, if he actually means
Dr. Jayasundera should be removed from his post, should sit and talk with the President and his Cabinet colleaguesin pursuit of a solution. "Instead, he is venting his venom to the media," he added.

The MP further said Dr. Jayasundera is a bureaucrat who was found guilty by the Supreme Court and was ordered not to take up any post in the public sector. But the government found him indispensable and reappointed him as the Secretary to the Treasury. "We cannot hire and fire officials ... let them do it," he said.

A Stand For Solidarity

By Kamaya Jayatissa -May 22, 2013

Kamaya Jayatissa

“A man’s true wealth hereafter is the good that he does in this world to his fellows.” – Molière

Some may call it charity; I would rather call it solidarity or even responsibility towards the ones in need. This week was for me a reminder of what generosity towards one another truly means and mostly a dreadful reminder of what it is not to have sometimes the most basic things in life.

Having attended two successive events organized by Candle Aid Lanka(formerly AFLAC International), I was both inspired and impressed, to say the least, by the work accomplished by Capt. Elmo Jayawardena and his volunteers. Founded in 1995 by Gratiaen Prize winner, pilot and humanitarian Capt. Jayawardena, the Candle Aid organization aims at fighting poverty through health, shelter, food and community development. With 700 volunteers from around the world, the foundation keeps on growing with a variety of projects such as libraries, health clinics, student sponsorships, and shelters.

Last Tuesday, May 14th, marked for the organization another landmark opportunity to prove its dedication to children with the inauguration of an incredibly challenging and inspiring initiative, the DAS programme (Differently Abled Swimmers). To be honest, this Tuesday was the very first time I heard about Candle Aid. It was also the first time I met the man behind the scene, Capt. Jayawardena, a man of great generosity and commitment.

The DAS programme is, I must say, one of a kind. It all started post-tsunami, in 2007, when the Foundation built a small pool at St Sebastian’s College, in Moratuwa, and started “Swim for Safety”, an initiative aiming to train children who did not have the means to learn to swim. Having successfully trained over 5000 children, the programme moved one step forward last week by bringing altogether a new concept: teaching the visually handicapped, hearing and speech-impaired children to swim.

Sounds impossible, right? Well, while all of us present on that day, including the Chief Guest, Justice Weeramantry, wondered how the swimming coach would actually manage to get those children to swim, I am pretty sure that none of us would have expected it to look that easy. The half an hour practice session was indeed done with such an ease that after a few minutes we almost forgot that the upcoming athletes who were in the pool that day were actually sight impaired and could not see where they were going; having for direction only the voice and instructions given by their coach. More impressively, for these newly trained swimmers, it is not only about overcoming their fears in an environment which may seem unsafe for the most of us, water. It is also about achieving in sports as their peers have, as explained to us in sign language by one of the youngsters.

The second event took place this Saturday at the Rajagiriya Church where a distribution of bags, books and toys was co-organized by Candle Aid for children who are less fortunate; all of them residing in shanties located close to the Church. Despite their young age, most of the children present that day were experiencing some of the cruelest forms of poverty with very little access to education. For most of them, their parents are unable to even assist them with homework due to their poor level of literacy. Being financially deprived with no access to private tuitions these children –around 90 of them- follow the free tuition classes given by a few volunteer teachers who take two hours of their time every Saturday to provide them with educational assistance in English, Sinhalese, Tamil and Maths; irrespective of their ethnicity or religion.

The work done by these teachers is commendable and needs to be pointed out. Though this might seem very little for some or even common to others, I wonder how many of us would actually take the time and concern to take a break from our own lives to simply help the ones in need. We sometimes even forget that, in spite of a steady economic growth, poverty remains a major issue in Sri Lanka where wealth is unequally distributed both in terms of space and sector. This is unfortunately not only the case in rural and estate sectors but also in the capital itself where for some parents, each day becomes another fight for survival; and in the middle of it are their children who still strive for a better chance.

Both these programmes, among many others carried out by Candle Aid, proved to be quite successful and inclusive. Not only do they help those children to build up their confidence but it also takes away their fear by teaching them responsibilities and self-dependency. Similarly, it teaches us to become better human beings by taking the time to actually make a change by helping the ones who truly need it.

Most of these children are deprived of many rights: the right to play with other children and to enjoy their childhood like other children of their age or simply the right to opportunities. With these two programmes, Candle Aid succeeded in promoting their development and helping them realize their full potential. Moreover, one may observe that the organization’s achievements cannot be dissociated from its founder president, Capt. Elmo Jayawardena, and its volunteers whose commitments are exemplary to all of us. To me, their generosity has given a set of wings for these children to fly.

Sri Lanka remembers to forget

AMBIKA SATKUNANATHAN 21 May 2013

Celebrations to mark the end of Sri Lanka’s civil war perform the function of collective forgetting. If the country looked back at recommendations made in the past, Sri Lankans might understand better how to go forward.

On 18 May 2013 the government of Sri Lanka ‘celebrated’ the fourth Victory Day, or as the state-owned newspaper the Daily News referred to it, ‘Humanitarian Victory Day’. On the same day in Vavuniya in the North, members of the public along with politicians organised an event in memory of those who lost their lives during the last stages of the armed conflict in 2009. The government ceremonies were a show of pomp, military might and triumphalism. In these celebrations, although state forces that lost their lives were remembered and honoured, any mention of civilians who were killed and those who are still missing was absent.

This is not surprising. As Marita Sturken states in her paper on the Vietnam Veterans Memorial and memorialisation in American society, ‘discourses of public commemoration have become inextricably tied to the question of how war is brought to a closure’. The commemoration events held on 18 May are an extension into the post-war era of the ethos upon which the war strategy was founded, and the manner in which the armed conflict was brought to an end.

An example of this is the government's plan to ‘erect nine monumental Stupas (Buddhist commemorative monument) in each province of the country in appreciation of the noble service rendered by the armed forces and Police to defeat terrorism and bring lasting peace to the country’. The happy union of militarisation and Sinhala Buddhist nationalism is evident in the message posted on the Ministry of Defence website, which calls for donations for the building project and directs those with inquiries about the project to officers at the Ministry of Defence, which is co-ordinating the project. The title of the project is ‘Sandahiru Seya: The triumphant Stupa’.

Forced forgetting

At the crux of the government’s theory of reconciliation lies the need to ‘move on’ and ‘bring closure’, all euphemisms for closing off public discussion about violations of human rights and humanitarian law during the last stages of the armed conflict. According to this theory, forgetting is an integral aspect of bringing about reconciliation. On the contrary, acknowledgment, remembering and memorialising are important components of any reconciliation initiative, and should be viewed as forms of symbolic reparation. As the report on ‘Memory and Memorialisation in post-conflict Uganda’, published by the International Centre for Transitional Justice, states, ‘Symbolic reparations aim to show understanding of and empathy with pain and loss and acknowledge suffering and injustice’.

Arthur Danto, quoted in Sturken, points out that, ‘We erect monuments so that we shall always remember, and build memorials so that we shall never forget. Monuments are not generally built to commemorate defeats; the defeated dead are remembered in memorials. While a monument most often signifies victory, a memorial refers to the life or lives sacrificed for a particular set of values’.

The statues of soldiers, guns and armoured tanks that one sees dotted all over the North are therefore monuments, built to remember the great war victory, not memorials. Scant regard is paid to the need to acknowledge and commemorate the loss of lives, property and livelihoods, and the suffering and trauma of the war affected population, particularly those caught in the last stages of the armed conflict. If anything, the use of the word ‘celebration’ to describe the ceremonies on 18 May, defies the public to even feel grief, let alone express it. Even families of the Sri Lanka armed forces are expected to show only pride in and happiness about the achievements of their departed family members; they too are expected not to express their loss, loneliness and grief.

Like in most post-war contexts, the question of who can be remembered is controversial. For instance, can families of slain LTTE cadres engage in private memorial activities to remember their loved ones, not in order to glorify or remember the LTTE, but to remember the individual as a family member? On 18 May, the Daily News quoted the Army Commander of the northern Vanni region,who declared that ‘Any citizen has the right to commemorate their loved ones but no one can commemorate terrorists who were disloyal to the government.’ Hence, families whose loved ones were members of the LTTE (whether they joined voluntarily or were forcibly conscripted) will likely not observe his or her death anniversary in a visible manner due to fear of state censure and harassment, since the act is viewed as an act supportive of the LTTE, and hence a threat to national security.

Even within communities the act of remembering and forgetting can cause tension, conflict and animosity. For instance, former LTTE cadres state that during the armed conflict they were willing to sacrifice their lives for the armed struggle, yet now due to numerous reasons, including military surveillance, their sacrifices are not remembered or respected by the Tamil community, and they often receive little community support in re-integrating into society. It could be argued that the sections of the Tamil community which supported the LTTE are ‘forgetting’ due to fear of state retaliation, or did the community always have a utilitarian relationship with the LTTE?

Many former cadres claim that at rehabilitation centres they were instructed to forget the past. Yet, constant interrogation by the Sri Lanka Army (SLA) and surveillance and monitoring of ex-cadres force them to remember their past. Some cadres said ‘they asked us to forget the past and now when we are trying to move forward, they won’t let us. They continue to ask us about our time in the LTTE’.

Internecine violence has also not been forgotten by the Tamil people. Even today, there are those who express anger towards the LTTE, as well as non-LTTE armed groups that were responsible for violations in the past; this is often directed towards former members of these groups who now hold positions of power within the government. In terms of reparation, internecine violence raises many complex questions. For instance, who apologises and provides restitution for the violations committed by the LTTE and other Tamil armed groups? Who apologises and provides restitution for the crimes committed against the Muslim community by the LTTE? What is the role of Tamil political parties, particularly members of these parties who were previously members of armed groups? What about the right to reparation of the families of those who disappeared during the JVP insurrection?

Reparations and reconciliation

The discourse on post-war reconciliation has largely been silent on the issue of reparations. According to the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights ‘it is generally understood that the right to reparation has a dual dimension under international law: (a) a substantive dimension to be translated into the duty to provide redress for harm suffered in the form of restitution, compensation, rehabilitation, satisfaction and, as the case may be, guarantees of non-repetition; and (b) a procedural dimension as instrumental in securing this substantive redress.’ It further states that ‘While, under international law, gross violations of human rights and serious violations of international humanitarian law give rise to a right to reparation for victims, implying a duty on the State to make reparations, implementing this right and corresponding duty is in essence a matter of domestic law and policy.’

Therefore, not only does the state have to accept that gross violations of human rights and serious violations of international humanitarian law have taken place but it also needs to acknowledge that doing so is its duty and that persons who have suffered such violations have a right to reparation. Contrast this with the President’s speech at the Victory Day celebration in which he claimed external forces were attempting to destabilize Sri Lanka through calls for ‘independence of the judiciary, media freedom and human rights’. 

Reparation initiatives seek to recognise victims as equal citizens and include a variety of measures, both material (such as compensation for lost property) and symbolic (public apologies and memorialisation), and individual and collective measures. In contrast, the government’s strategy is based on a notion of benevolence of the victor towards the Tamil population, disregard of the need for a political solution to the ethnic conflict, and the supposed provision of economic benefits.

On 18 May, the Tamil newspaper Thinakkural reported that a woman in the North had killed her three young children and attempted to commit suicide due to what appears to be extreme poverty and inability to care for the children. This illustrates the lack of acknowledgment of the continuing marginalisation of the conflict-affected population, which suffers poverty and systemic discrimination. Instead, the conflict-affected population is afforded the opportunity to become part of the state military apparatus, i.e., they are recruited into the army orabsorbed into initiatives implemented by the Civil Security Department that is within the purview of the Ministry of Defence.

According to the Ministry of Defence, this is proof of peace, reconciliation and a new life for those previously oppressed and impoverished.

Looking back to move forward

The chapter on Restitution/Compensation in the report of the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC), a Commission of inquiry that was established by President Rajapaksa in 2010, is disappointingly short, lacks depth and provides no definition of restitution or compensation. By focusing only on the Rehabilitation of Persons, Properties and Industries Authority (REPPIA) and setting out its shortcomings, including lack of funds, which prevent it from paying claims received, the Commission disregards other forms of compensation/restitution that may be required and desirable.

In this regard, it is useful to study the recommendations of past Presidential Commissions, some of which are surprisingly bold.

The Presidential Commission on Ethnic Violence 1981-1984 which was established in 2001 and published its report in 2002, states that compensation is a right and not charity and must be fair and adequate and not nominal or a mere token. It reiterates that every effort must be made to restore the ‘human dignity’ of victims, and that the victim should not be made to feel s/he is receiving charity but is rightly receiving minimum legal dues. It even recommends that delay in the discharge of this duty by the state should be dealt with by the payment of simple legal interest on the amount of compensation, and urges expeditious payments.

The 2001 Commission warns that, ‘For a nation already confounded by political conflicts, ethnic confrontations and constitutional turmoil, the mood for reconciliation can be unnecessarily edged away, by failing to effectively support national reconciliation at the grass root as an on-going process parallel to the peace negotiation.’ It also calls for the need for public recognition of the trauma and suffering the victims had to endure.

The All Island Commission on Disappearances which was established in 1998 and reported in 2001, focuses on symbolic measures of reparation such as the construction of a wall of reconciliation inscribed with the names of those dead and disappeared, whether victims of subversive acts or acts of the security forces. It does not mention the LTTE or the security forces by name, but lists Maaveerar (LTTE martyrs) cemeteries and the memorial in Embilipitiya in the South to the students who disappeared during the JVP insurrection, as examples of memorialisation. The Commission stresses the need for national acknowledgment of the wrongs done, and recognises that another insurrection is a possibility unless the needs of the affected persons are addressed. 

With regard to compensation, it makes a bold recommendation that it should be paid to all irrespective of categorisation of the person as a terrorist, and recommends the amendment of the Public Administration Circular that prohibits the granting of compensation if a court has declared a person a terrorist. The Commission states that this is ‘morally incorrect’ as it amounts to segregation of certain families of victims as ‘terrorist by relationship’. It proposes that the entire society should share responsibility for helping families of the affected and recommends a 2% tax towards this.

The Commission on Disappearances in the Western, Southern and Sabaragamuwa Provinces which was established in January 1988 and published its report in 1997 notes discrimination in the payment of compensation in cases where a person was thought to be a terrorist and states that ‘endemic discriminatory practices are to the detriment of the well-being of dependents of disappeared persons’. It points out that there is no definition of terrorist provided by the state, resulting in the police providing clearance in this regard, i.e., it is not a judicial determination.

The Commission also recommends that those who lost their jobs due to time away from work due to searching for disappeared family members should be re-instated if they could prove the period of absence was spent trying to ascertain the whereabouts of the disappeared person. The Commission calls for the reversal of proof in the case of custodial torture, and urges the recognition of rape/sexual assault in custody as torture. It also notes evidence of sexual violence and points out it is used as a tool to control a community.

In Sri Lanka we might consider beginning our attempts to ‘commemorate a war for which the central narrative is one of division and dissent, a war whose history is highly contested and still in the process of being made…’ not only by looking at the past – at the violence, loss, violations and grief – but also to the past, at the progressive and rather bold, if unimplemented, recommendations of past Presidential Commissions.