Wednesday, August 7, 2013

DOCUMENTS / PETITION / PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION SUBMISSIONS

Constitutionality of bill titled ‘The Twenty First Amendment to the Constitution’

by CENTRE FOR POLICY ALTERNATIVES on Aug 6, 2013

A Bill titled “The Twenty First Amendment to the Constitution”, a Private Member’s Bill presented by the Ven. Athuraliye Rathana Thero, M.P. of the Jathika Hela Urumaya (JHU), was placed on the Order Paper of Parliament on 18th June 2013. The proposed Bill, if passed by Parliament would have the effect of repealing Chapter XVIIA of the Constitution, which was introduced by the Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution. The Centre for Policy Alternatives (CPA) filed a petition in the Supreme Court on 24th June 2013 challenging the constitutionality of this Bill.

According to Article 154(G)(2) of the Constitution, no Bill for the amendment or repeal of the provisions of Chapter XVIIA becomes law, unless it has been referred by the President, after its publication in the Gazette and before it is placed to the Order Paper of Parliament, to every Provincial Council. Since no Provincial Council had been consulted in respect of this Bill, CPA contended that it cannot be enacted into law unless there was due compliance with the mandatory provisions of Article 154(G) (2). CPA believes this is an important procedure designed and included in the Constitution to encourage consultation and co-operation between Provincial Councils and the central government, and as a crucial safeguard for provincial autonomy under the scheme of devolution introduced by the Thirteenth Amendment.

During the course of argument before the Supreme Court, the judges hearing the case raised the concern – shared by Counsel representing the Attorney General’s Department as well as the Intervenient-Petitioners – that the Court’s jurisdiction is limited to Article 120 proviso (a) in the case of a Bill for the amendment of the Constitution. In response to this suggestion, CPA in its “further written submissions” contended that Article 154(G)(2) was a specific provision brought about by the Thirteenth Amendment for safeguarding devolution, which was not contemplated at the time of the enactment of Article 120 in 1978. Since Article 154(G) (2) creates a specific requirement of consultation in relation to a specified and limited category of constitutional amendments (i.e., those affecting the provisions of Chapter XVIIA), it seemed clear to us that the specific provisions of Article 154(G) (2) must be given effect to in this case, where the impugned Bill sought to abolish Chapter XVIIA as a whole. This contention was based on the need to give provisions of the Constitution a purposive and workable interpretation, as opposed to an interpretation, which would make certain provisions meaningless and irrelevant. Therefore it was CPA’s position that after the enactment of the Thirteenth Amendment, the restrictive interpretation suggested in relation to Article 120 was no longer reasonably possible.

There was a further objection that Section 3 of the Parliament (Powers and Privileges) Act precludes the Supreme Court from inquiring into the validity of the process by which Bills are placed on the Order Paper of Parliament. In response, CPA contended that the identical objection had been taken up in a previous case in which the Court had dealt exhaustively with the reasons as to why this objection was not correct. CPA also drew the attention of the Court to several of its own judgments, which inquired and pronounced upon the question of as to whether a Bill was properly placed on the Order Paper of Parliament.

In its Special Determination on the Twenty First Amendment to the Constitution Bill, which was placed before Parliament on 12th July 2013, the Supreme Court stated that:

In terms of Section 3 of Parliament (Powers and Privileges) Act incorporated into Article 67 of the Constitution, the placement of the Bill on the Order Paper was part of parliamentary proceedings that took place on 18th June 2013, and that the Supreme Court is denuded of jurisdiction to impeach proceedings in Parliament.
The petition filed by the petitioner is misconceived in law and premised on a footing in contravention of the jurisdiction conferred on the Supreme Court by proviso (a) to Article 120 read with Article 124 of the Constitution.

Beyond this, the Supreme Court did not address any of the arguments addressed to it by CPA (specifically in its further written submissions) and held that it cannot grant the determinations that CPA had prayed for in its petition. Finally, it may also be added that in a curious break from past practice the petitioner’s name does not appear on the face of the record of the Supreme Court’s determination published in the Official Report of the Parliamentary Debates on 12th July 2013, although the names of the Intervenient-Petitioners are as usual mentioned.

Attachments:

Rajapaksa, Cricket And Power Politics In Sri Lanka

By Vaibhav Vats -August 7, 2013

Vaibhav Vats

Until a few years ago, Hambantota was an obscure town in south-central Sri Lanka, around 190 kilometers (118 miles) from the capital Colombo, with a population that barely exceeded 10,000. Its daily rhythms were defined by the twin activities of farming and fishing. But once Mahinda Rajapaksa, one of its native sons, became president in 2005, all that began to change.

Mr Rajapaksa’s dream was to transform his sleepy hometown into a modern industrial city, an urban hub to rival Colombo, the country’s capital. His ambitious plans forHambantota included a 2,000 hectare international airport costing $210 million, while another $360 million were to be spent on the construction of a seaport.

These projects were under way in 2011 when I visited Hambantota while reporting on the cricket World Cup. Of the 13 cities that hosted the tournament, in Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and India, Hambantota was the most unlikely venue of all. In the Colombo newspapers, there was persistent talk of Hambantota’s transformation into a world-class city. But the great claims seemed hollow, because Hambantota was still a largely rural expanse. In one of the tournament’s matches, elephants had appeared at the boundary fence of the stadium.

I had arrived in Hambantota exactly 100 years after Leonard Woolf made a journey in the opposite direction. As a fresh-faced 24-year-old, Mr. Woolf had been inducted into the colonial Ceylon Civil Service. Following spells in Kandy and Jaffna, he arrived in Hambantota in 1908 as the chief administrative and judicial officer. Mr. Woolf was said to be an active civil servant, enthusiastically traversing the district on his pony and occasionally by bicycle. In 1911, after three years in Hambantota, he left for England on leave but subsequently resigned from the job.

In 1913, Mr. Woolf wrote “The Village in the Jungle,” a novel inspired by his years in Hambantota. This was a year after he had married the 30-year-old writer Virginia Stephen — the novel is dedicated to her. Not possessing the literary genius of his rather more famous spouse, it was one of only two novels that Mr. Woolf ever wrote. Later, he was to call that book “a symbol of the anti-imperialism which had been growing upon me more and more in my last years in Ceylon.” Read More

‘Do we matter to India?’ ask Indian-origin Tamils in Sri Lanka

Homes of plantation workers in Watwala, Nuwara Eliya, Central Province, Sri Lanka. In the absence of reasonable accommodation, regular employment and an assured source of income, life is an everyday struggle for Plantation Tamils of Sri Lanka. Photo: Meera Srinivasan

The HinduHomes of plantation workers in Watwala, Nuwara Eliya, Central Province, Sri Lanka. In the absence of reasonable accommodation, regular employment and an assured source of income, life is an everyday struggle for Plantation Tamils of Sri Lanka. Photo: Meera Srinivasan

August 7, 2013

Before I could begin talking to him, Perumal Chandrasekaran had a question for me: “Do you know that we exist?” he asked matter-of-factly.

‘Do we matter to India ask Indian-origin Tamils in Sri Lanka by nelvely

Bishop hits out at attackers

August 6, 2013

The Catholic Archbishop of Colombo Cardinal Malcolm Ranjith today condemned the attack carried out by “some elements of the forces” on people who had sought refuge at St. Anthony’s Church in Weliweriya during the clashes between the army and public in the area last week.

He said that it was sacrilege for anyone to enter such sacred precincts with arms in their hands and to behave in a violent manner there.

“Such actions cannot be accepted by anyone. It is always necessary that we preserve the sanctity of sacred premises of any religion and respect the people who enter such premises seeking protection.” he said.

Cardinal Malcolm Ranjith called on the government to conduct an impartial and just inquiry into the incident where innocent people were killed.

The Bar Association of Sri Lanka (BASL) had earlier said that a priest and a nun at the church were assaulted by troops during the violence in Weliweriya last week.

The BASL said that a team of lawyers had visited Weliweriya and recorded statements from people in the area as well as doctors who had treated the injured.

“The people still live in fear,” an executive member of the BASL had told the Colombo Gazette.

The BASL will be recording more statements over the next few days and will then decide on the next course of action.

Three people have died so far and many others sustained injuries during the “battle for water” at Weliweriya.

The Sri Lanka Human Rights Commission has also launched an investigation into the incident. (Colombo Gazette)

Deadly assault on protesters calls for military and corporate accountability - JDS

POST 06 AUGUST 2013

Journalists for Democracy in Sri Lanka vehemently condemns the latest deadly and barbaric attack by Sri Lanka military on unarmed civilians and journalists as an extension of systematic crimes continuously committed against democratic protests by the armed forces led by President Mahinda Rajapaksa and Defence secretary Gotabhaya Rajapaksa. It also calls for accountability from Sri Lankan and international corporations whose market ventures poisoned the drinking water of Sri Lankan citizens.

On the first of August, armed forces in battle gear fired live bullets at men, women and children demanding clean water in the Gampaha district of western Sri Lanka. Demonstrators at Weliweriya were assaulted with hefty makeshift clubs and a variety of weapons. Official figures suggest that three teenagers were killed while it is feared that the death toll could be at least seven. Several among the injured dozens admitted to hospital are in a critical condition. JDS has received reliable information that a majority of dead and injured have head and chest injuries caused by bullets and blunt weapons. Female and male journalists covering the protest on a major highway were intimidated and had their camera equipments and footage forcibly destroyed.

Thousands from the Gampaha district rallied to protest on the Colombo - Kandy highway after talks with senior government leaders and factory managers held on the 29th of July broke down. Villagers were urging the closure of factory owned by a blue chip company discharging toxic waste contaminating ground water. The health of over 10,000 families have been affected due to the contamination of ground water by a Hayleys group subsidiary, Dipped Products PLC that produces rubber gloves and sells them to United States of America, the United Kingdom, Australia and a large market in the European Union.

Military forces led by Brigadier Deshapriya Gunawardena and Col.Shyamal Silva were deployed to launch an attack on protestors, villagers and bystanders. Lieutenant General Daya Ratnayake who took over the responsibility of commanding Sri Lanka Army on the day of this brutal attack announced the appointment of a board of inquiry ‘to look into all aspects of the incident’ led by adjutant general of the military Major General Jagath Dias. Brigadier Gunawardena and Major General Dias were senior officers attached to 58 and 57 Divisions of the Sri Lanka Army accused by leading international bodies of genocidal crimes against Tamils during the Sri Lanka government war with Tamil Tigers. It is highly unlikely that an inquiry by partners in an alleged war crime will deliver justice to victims in Weliweriya.

While this brutal attack and the government response calls for an independent inquiry, once again it confirms the demand to investigate Sri Lanka’s military and its political leadership on crimes against humanity committed during the protracted war against the Tamil people. JDS also calls upon worldwide partners of Hayleys group to call for corporate accountability and justice for victims.

Journalists for Democracy in Sri Lanka

Pillay may examine HR issues in Weliweriya: Karu

WEDNESDAY, 07 AUGUST 2013

UNP MP Karu Jayasuriya today said UNHR Chief Navi Pillay who is scheduled to visit Sri Lanka at the end of this month would have a reason to inspect Weliweriya over human rights issues without visiting the North.

“The unfortunate Weliweriya incident has created an opportunity for her to visit the area to examine Human Rights violations instead of visiting the North. The security forces had taken action to shower live bullets at the protestors in Weliveriya by-passing all other methods of controlling protesters such the use of tear gas, water cannons or rubber bullets,” he said.

Mr. Jayasuriya said this incident was disadvantageous to the country which was on the verge of hosting the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting (CHOGM) in November.

He said the issue would also be discussed at the United Nations Human Rights Council sessions to be held in September. (LSP)

Boycott CHOGM in Colombo: DMK tells Congress

TUESDAY, 06 AUGUST 2013

The DMK has made the Centre's response to its demand for boycotting the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting (CHOGM) central to its dealings with the Congress.

"Our party chief M Karunanidhi has asked the government to boycott the November conference of CHOGM. We cannot have normal relations with a government that is insensitive to the demands of Sri Lankan Tamils," DMK spokesman and MP TKS Elangovan told ET.

Elangovan also cited protests from countries including Australia against holding the meeting in Colombo to drive home his party's point that several countries are uneasy with the conduct of the Sri Lankan government. Lankan president Mahinda Rajapaksa will remain as head of Commonwealth for two years and there could be problems in initiating a probe against him for war crimes," Elangovan said.

With the alleged atrocities against Lankan Tamils becoming an emotive issue in Tamil Nadu, the DMK is finding it difficult to associate itself with the Congress, which has been resisting its ally's attempts to intervene in the Centre's foreign policy.

The AIADMK has raised the stakes high for the DMK by getting the state assembly to pass a resolution asking the Centre to stop treating Sri Lanka as a friendly nation. Although the Centre rejected this demand, the AIADMK managed to make it stance clear on an issue that has considerable traction in the state.

"We will lose heavily if we are seen to be backing the Centre's stand," said a DMK leader, who did not wish to be named. He repeated Elangovan's stand that the DMK could deal with the Congress only if the Centre agreed to take an aggressive position against Colombo.

DMK's Elangovan also attacked DMDK chief Vijayakanth for not backing its efforts to corner the J Jayalalithaa government in the state. "Six DMDMK MLAs have left the party to join the AIADMK. But Vijayakanth is not able to perform the role of an effective opposition," he said.

With the Left keen to join forces with the AIADMK, an alliance against Jayalalithaa would require major concessions against the government. But the stated position of the Centre is against accepting the demand for imposing sanctions against Sri Lanka and treating the neighbour as anything but a friend. (Source: Economic Times)

Video: Army Cannot Be Used In This Manner – Sobitha Thero

Army cannot be used in this manner with no emergency laws – Sobitha Thero-August 7, 2013 |

My Father Pointed Out The Difference Between The LTTE And The Tamil People

Ossie

By Asanga Abeyagoonasekera -August 7, 2013

Asanga Abeygoonasekera

As Camus writes in his book The Rebel: An Essay on Man in Revolt, “Rebellion cannot exist without a strange form of love.” My father had a strange form of love for his fellow countrymen, which was deemed rebellious due to the political situation that existed during that time. Many of the political decisions he made at that time made him unpopular, but in such a volatile time I believe the decisions he made were the right thing to do.

Today marks the 63rd birth anniversary of my father, the late Ossie Abeyagoonasekera, and to commemorate his life I have initiated a foundation called “Diri Saviya.” The foundations slogan is “to empower your community” and our vision is to “create a harmonious society with dignity.” My late father’s dear friend Carlo Fonseka will launch the foundation and it will be my platform to carry out my work as a Young Global Leader (www.asanga.org.lk)

For those of you who have forgot or never heard of, let me remind you of some of my father’s political courage and rebellious character during his short life. At the time of the first provincial council elections in 1989, at a time of insurrection where the supporters of the 13th amendment were called traitors and gunned down, my father, Ossie led his party the Sri Lanka Mahajana Party, after the death of his dear friend Vijaya Kumaranatunga. There were 117 members who were assassinated from the Sri Lanka Mahajana Party and my father was targeted many times, one example was the Kosgashandiya Kadawatha political rally’s where he was seated with Vasudewa Nanayakkara and Vikramabahu, narrowly escaping from the assassins bullets. During a time when people were afraid to talk about devolution, my father Ossie, spoke of the importance of it. My father, Ossie, at a time where the political climate was tense was not afraid to stand up for what he believed in, he was a fearless leader who

Students carry the coffin of their colleague, Akila Dinesh Jayawardena who was shot dead during
an army crackdown against people protesting tainted ground water in the village of Weliweriya

SANJAYA-

Wednesday, August 7, 2013
Although Government authorities are downplaying the details about civilian casualties in the Weliweriya violence where soldiers of the 58 division and crack commando regiments launched a barbaric attack on unarmed civilians protesting against pollution of drinking water by emission of acid from a factory manufacturing gloves ,informed sources say the number of deaths and injuries is much higher than what is being officially stated.

At Least Three More Persons Dead in Hospital but Govt Not Releasing Full Details of Casualties in Weliweriy... by nelvely


Video: Final kiss to her beloved WEDNESDAY, 07 AUGUST 2013 The weeping mother of 19 year old Ravishan kisses her son one final time before she bids farewell to her beloved. Ravishan was killed during the unrest in Weliveriya after he sustained gunshot injuries on the head.(Pix by Deepa Adikari)

Weliweriya: Who Gave The Army Orders To Fire – 9 Questions By A Group Of Citizens Including Tamara, Dayan And Rajiva

August 7, 2013

In response to the shooting of unarmed civilians in Weliweriya and Balummahara by the Sri Lankan army, today a group of Sri Lankans including two former Ambassadors of Sri Lanka to the United Nations in Geneva issued the statement below;

APPEAL

Justice for Weliweriya :

Time for Indignation!

“Some party hack decreed that the people had lost the government’s confidence and

could only regain it with redoubled effort.  

If that is the case, would it not be simpler If the government simply dissolved the people and

elected another?” - Attributed to Bertolt Brecht, “The Solution” ["Die Lösung"] (c. 1953)

The shooting of unarmed civilians in Weliweriya and Balummahara by army soldiers equipped with T-56 assault rifles, armoured vehicles, and bullet-proof vests, is of unusual gravity for the consequences it will certainly have on the confidence placed by the ordinary citizen on those in power.

What confidence can people have in a State that uses live ammunition against its own unarmed citizens, whose peaceful protest for drinking water cannot by any stretch of imagination be compared with participation in hostilities in an armed conflict situation? They were only exercising their fundamental democratic right to organise and to protest. Their demand was for the basic right to clean drinking water and closure of the export-oriented glove-manufacturing factory Venigros Ltd owned by Dipped Products PLC, a subsidiary of Hayleys Group allegedly responsible for contaminating ground water by disposal of dangerous chemicals. The company must also assume responsibility for the tragedy if it failed deliberately to take timely action to respond to the legitimate concerns of the people.

Why did the members of the Government, and local authorities in charge, fail to take action, and to prevent escalation by ensuring that the company fulfils its responsibilities, despite the matter having brought to their attention?

A number of other pertinent questions arise. Read More

SRI LANKA: Horrible military crimes at Rathupaswala necessitate the arrest of the commanding officers

August 6, 2013

The horrible military killings at Ratupaswala are nothing but mean and horrible killings. Nothing in the military terminology or strategic manuals could ever justify the horrible acts that happened at Rathupaswala. If there is some decency left in the military establishment in Sri Lanka, the first step that should be taken is to arrest the commanding officers who were in charge of these brutal acts of murder and the assaults committed at Rathupaswala. Nothing less than the immediate arrest of the commanding officers would demonstrate that there is any sanity left in the military system in Sri Lanka. If the President, as the Commander in Chief of the armed forces, fails to have these officers arrested and brought before Court Martial for the horrible killings, he himself would be conniving with those who committed these horrible acts.

The people in the villages in Weliweriya are justifiably angry. The vast number of people that attended the funerals of the people who were brutally killed by the military itself shows how angry these people are. What answer has the government to all these people, as well as to all the people of Sri Lanka, who have seen this unspeakably low behavior of the military officers?

It is perhaps irrelevant to go into the history of the issue relating to the water contamination at this moment. Suffice it to say that people denied of water would rise in revolt anywhere in the world, for water and food are the stuff that people need in order to live. When the water they drink and use for other purposes is contaminated, people’s protests and even blocking roads in order to get attention are fully justified. The government should have acted long before people came to the road; they should have intervened and given people alternate ways to get water before anything else. A government that is not even able to provide drinking water cannot complain about people resorting to protest actions in order to get attention to the most basic of their needs.

However, the immediate issue is the behavior of Sri Lanka’s military under the command of some senior officers, who were sent to the spot to keep peace. What they in fact did is to behave worse than the worst of criminals. The price for their criminal behavior has been paid for by two school children and some others. The kind of injuries on the people who were assaulted by the military show the activity of madmen and not of any disciplined military.

The issue is as to how the Commander in Chief will respond. Will he not immediately arrest the commanding officers? Will he not demand that the commanding officers reveal all the details relating to the shooting? Who did the shootings that led to these deaths? How much ammunition has been issued and how much has been used? Anyone familiar with the military procedure that should have been observed can raise these questions. The question that the Commander in Chief should answer is whether all the soldiers who took part in this horrible crime should be not dismissed forthwith by the military. These are questions that should be answered first.

The question of justice needs to follow. However, any kind of ‘justice’ would be looked at with complete mistrust, and that would be quite justified if the Commander in Chief does not immediately arrest the commanding officers and take steps to bring them under court martial, together with the officers who did the shooting and other acts of violence at Rathupaswala.

Gota before President

Details: Created On Wednesday, 07 August 2013 05:49; Category: General

The JVP has questioned the reason for delays in carrying out orders issued by the President and has called for an inquiry into the matter.

JVP Central Committee member, parliamentarian Sunil Handunnetti said that there seems to be a delay in implementing orders issued by the President.
He observed that orders issued by other public officials are given precedence than those issued by the President.
Referring to last week’s clash in Weliweriya between security forces personnel and civilians, Handunnetti explained that the President had issued a directive to solve the drinking water problem faced by the Rathupaswala residents while the Defence Secretary had issued the order to shoot at the protestors.
“We believe that there needs to be a separate inquiry to determine the reason for the delay in carrying out the Presidential directive and the reason for giving precedence to a directive issued by a public official,” the JVP parliamentarian said.

Casino King’s Henchmen Intimidating Me: Opposition Lawmaker Dr. Harsha de Silva

UNP MP Dr. Harsha De Silva has made an official complaint in Parliament that the associates of Australian casino mogul James Packer had been engaged in attempts to intimidate him.

Dr. Harsha de Silva

De Silva, a national list MP for the main opposition UNP has been a vocal critic of the Rajapaksa Government’s tax holiday for a massive casino project proposed at D.R. Wijewardane Mawatha in Colombo.

The UNP MP told parliament today that highlighting the Government’s controversial deals had invited threats and intimidation for opposition parliamentarians. He said that he had been intimidated recently at a television station by “henchmen of the casino king who had vested interests.”

He said the incident had taken place at a local TV station while he was waiting for a debate to start.

August 7, 2013 |

United National Party Leader Ranil Wickremesinghe today, evoked the Dhammapada to deliver a lengthy response in Parliament to a scathing statement made by departing UNP MP Dayasiri Jayasekera last week. In a special statement to the House, Wickremesinghe clarified that Jayasekera had been given ample chances by the UNP leadership and had in fact expressed confidence in the party leadership days before his crossover. Jayasekera had misled the House during his speech in parliament to announce his resignation on 24 July, he said. According to Wickremesinghe, Dayasiri Jayasekera had accepted the Party and its Leadership in writing on 11 July and participated in the selection of the candidates for the North Western Province on 23 July before quitting the party on 24 July. “This reflects the depth and trustworthiness of this person,” the UNP Leader said.

Following is the full text of the UNP Leader’s speech:

Hon. Speaker,

I thank you for giving me an opportunity to make a special statement in this House today.

I will start this speech with an excerpt of the first stanza in ‘Yamaka Vagga’ of Dammapada:

Manopubbangama dhamma - manosettha manomaya

Manasa che padutthena - bhasati va karoti va

Tato nam dukkamanveti - chakkamva vahato padam

It means that:

Ranil

All mental phenomena have mind as their forerunner; they have mind as their chief; they are mind-made. If one speaks or acts with an evil mind, dukkha or suffering follows him just as the wheel follows the hoof print of the ox that draws the cart.

Calling to the mind that noble teaching of Lord Buddha I make this statement today under Standing Orders 84 and 19.

Hon. Speaker,

At this instance a stanza in Mahavagga, Second fifty, third part of Angutthara Nikaya comes to my mind:

It mentions that, “If a questioned person conceals one talk by another talk, turns the talk to some external side or shows anger, aversion and dissatisfaction, such person is not suitable for talk”. Even then, as this House has been misled by the talk of that person, I express these views to uncover the truth.

Hon. Speaker, Read More