SL State agencies, occupying military accelerate Sinhalicisation in Madu

[TamilNet, Sunday, 19 April 2015, 20:18 GMT]
Two departments of the occupying Sri Lankan State, the Wildlife Department and the Forest Department, have been blocking the uprooted Eezham Tamils from resettling and owning lands in the four villages that come under Poomalarnthaan GS division, which is one of the 17 GS areas of Madu division in the Mannaar District, the uprooted Tamil villagers complain. The policy of social engineering targeting Sinhalicisation of Madu division has not changed under the ‘new’ regime, as these departments seem to compete with each other in the occupation of the lands. The threatening presence of Sinhala soldiers in the villages and the jungles facilitates the occupation. The programme of Sinhalicisation is accelerated following the commencing of railway line to Mannaar, the civil sources said. 

The sources also added the SL State has been channelling the funds being obtained from the foreign countries into the demographic genocide against Eezham Tamils in Madu. 

A house built by the People's Bank which ‘celebrated’ its golden jubilee in 2011 by settling 31 Sinhala families in the 50 houses constructed at Poomalarnthaan.

A community hall built with external funding at the site of the Sinhala colonisation at Madu Road in Poomalarnthaan GS division in Madu

SL State Agencies, Occupying Military Accelerate Sinhalicisation in Madu by Thavam Ratna

Requirements for Tamil contribution to sustainable national change

by Jehan Perera-April 20, 2015, 6:23 pm 

The inability of the government to force through its decisions, and the appearance of opposition forces supportive of former President Mahinda Rajapaksa gaining ground, has generated concerns about the government’s long term stability. The defeat of the government’s money bill in Parliament has highlighted the structural weakness of the government. The difficulty that the government has been experiencing in fulfilling its main election promises, catching the corrupt and passing the 19th Amendment, has eroded public confidence in the government’s strength. Currently the SLFP has a majority in Parliament with 126 seats while the UNP plays the role of a ‘minority government’ with 41 Parliamentary seats from a total of 225 seats. Without the assistance of the SLFP, the government is unable to obtain even a simple majority of votes to implement its plans. If the opposition parliamentarians could have their way it would be former President Mahinda Rajapaksa who would be the Prime Minister.

The anxiety about the government’s stability is especially articulated in the ethnic minority-dominated North and East. Whether in Jaffna, Mannar or Batticaloa the question that people worry about is whether former President Mahinda Rajapaksa is about to stage a comeback. Those are the parts of the country that delivered the biggest majorities to President Maithripala Sirisena at the presidential elections held four months ago. The Tamil voters of the North and East in particular had to contend with boycott calls from within the Tamil polity itself. They also had to overcome the apprehension that the incumbent government would take some action that would prevent them from expressing their will at those elections. But the voters there were prepared to take risks in voting against the incumbent government because they strongly desired change.

Those from the Tamil polity who wanted the Rajapaksa government to continue and therefore called for a Tamil boycott of the elections were basing their advocacy on a certain logic. They could see the Rajapaksa government was antagonising the international community and wanted this to continue till a point was reached when the international community directly intervened against the Sri Lankan government. This logic is in accordance with a belief in sections of the Tamil polity that nothing positive can be expected from the Sinhalese-dominated Sri Lankan polity with regard to their grievances and aspirations. Therefore, they look towards the international community and to international intervention as their only hope of getting what they want.

REJECTED BOYCOTT

The large voter turnout in the North and East at the presidential election, however, showed that the Tamil voter did not accept the boycott argument. They had already seen the devastating impact of an earlier Tamil boycott that took place in 2005. The LTTE imposed the boycott at the point of the gun, reduced the Tamil vote that would have gone to Ranil Wickremesinghe and effectively assisted Mahinda Rajapaksa to become the president, a position of concentrated power he held for ten years until his election defeat. Like the present day promoters of a Tamil boycott, the LTTE too thought that the international community would support them against the nationalism of President Rajapaksa. The reality was different and the Tamil population on the ground was at the receiving end.

Hardly anyone in the Tamil polity was willing or able to oppose the LTTE at that time, when they were at the peak of their power and arrogance, shooting dead those who differed from them. Many democratic Tamil leaders lost their lives for being traitors according to the LTTE. One of the few Tamil leaders to take a different posture publicly was the Bishop of Mannar, Rayappu Joseph, who together with his fellow Tamil Bishop of Jaffna, Thomas Savundranayagam, opposed the LTTE’s boycott. The moral authority and courage of the two bishops was not sufficient to overcome the fear psychosis that gripped the Tamil community at the 2005 presidential elections in the face of the LTTE’s military power and the propaganda of Tamil nationalists both locally and living abroad.

During the run-up to the presidential elections of 2015, when the call of a Tamil boycott once again reared its head, Bishop Rayappu Joseph stepped forward a second time to oppose the boycott call. He urged the Tamil people that the way forward was by participating in the democratic process and being part of the process of change that they wanted. This time around, with no LTTE guns to back up the boycott call, the Tamil people rejected the siren call to remain separate and uninvolved in the electoral process. Instead they heeded the call of democracy and, together with their Sinhalese and Muslim co-voters, participated in bringing about the change they wanted.

BRIDGING ROLE

The anxiety that exists in the North and East of the country today is about a possibility of the return of the old order, in which the ethnic minorities are mistrusted and mistreated and ethnic majority nationalism prevails. When Tamil political leaders make extremist and Tamil nationalist statements they will only give a boost to those who promote extremist nationalism on all sides. Instead, the Tamil leadership needs to reassure the Tamil people and give them, and the rest of the country, the message that they wish to participate in the process of bringing constructive change in the country together, and not separately with the international community. The attempt of sections of the Tamil polity to utilise the international community to achieve their ends increases Sinhalese apprehensions, is counterproductive and can bring about the very situation that the Tamil community fears.

There is a need for the Tamil polity to convey to the people in the rest of the country their needs, fears and aspirations. When I met him recently Bishop of Mannar Rayappu Joseph said that it was his intention to engage in this vocation and that he was gathering a team for this purpose. At the same time it is important that the Tamil polity should learn about the needs, fears and aspirations of the others who live in Sri Lanka. The Tamils, Sinhalese and Muslims all need to get to know each other through dialogue and communication. The government appears determined to work with South Africa on the issue of dealing with the past. It has promised that it will establish a domestic mechanism that will meet international standards. In South Africa, there were many who gave leadership to this dialogue, but the person who gave the symbolic leadership due to his moral authority was Bishop Desmond Tutu who was appointed Chairperson of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. In African and Asian societies religious clergy continue to enjoy a great deal of respect, and are also close to the people.

In Sri Lanka, one of those who could be a leader in this dialogue of truth and reconciliation is Bishop Rayappu Joseph. A week ago he celebrated his 75th birthday in Mannar at an event that was attended by the Chief Minister of the North, C V Wigneswaran who gave recognition to the important role that the Bishop has played in the life of the Northern Tamil community. He stood in opposition to violence in all its forms and was always for a negotiated political solution. He needs to be recognised for his contribution to supporting democratic institutions when they were under threat. Catholic bishops are required to retire at the age of 75 though there is provision for extension of service. At a time when Sri Lanka is turning the corner and democratic politics that respects human rights is on the ascendant, it is important that a Tamil religious leader of Bishop Joseph’s calibre should stay on in service as an educator and help to bridge the communal divide by getting us to know each other better.

260 MPs ? Reform Process Should Be Democratic First

By Kusal Perera –April 20, 2015

Kusal Perara

There are close door deliberations among leading politicians of many hues (hardly any shades of political differences in them now), none of whom can be taken as serious and honest wo/men to decide how our Constitutional and Electoral reforms should take shape.

The very arguments/reasons attached to their decisions to either postpone or fast forward the process prove how selfish they are in sticking to power. These wo/men have proposed to increase parliament numbers to 260, with a hybrid of FPP and PR systems.

Unfortunately some Colombo men and women who have chosen to wear the mantle of “civil society” representation, wants to push electoral reforms with any large parliament as long as they can be part of the reform discussions. And these reform discussions are never made open to the public and almost all drafts are in English only. Thus leaving the Sinhala and Tamil polity completely out of the scene. The most tragic part is that, this co-habitation could make the people carry the burden of a still larger parliament in the name of “democracy” as they wish to define, for their own self satisfaction.

SO, let’s quickly run through pros and cons of this proposal to have a still larger parliament of 260 dud coins, in all possibility.

1. This present parliament elected in 2010 April is no more a legitimate institution to decide for the people.

In 2010 April when elected, the UPFA as the Govt. had 144 MPs. The Opposition had 81. In 05 months, September saw the Govt. increasing to 153 MPs. Thereafter with Shirani Bandaranayake as CJ agreeing to allow the 18 A to go without a Referendum, the Govt. number increased yet again to 161 in November 2010.

In December 2014 Govt numbers came down to 152 and the Opposition increased to 73 MPs.

All these changes in numbers deformed the will of the people decided in 2010 April, for no good of the people and with no people’s wish. Is it wrong to assume all changes took place with black money rolling, for perks and privileges and for sheer personal gains? Worst was what happened after the Jan 08 presidential poll. PresidentSirisena appointed Leader of the Opposition as PM of the government with only 64 MPs in a 225 member parliament. With no legal challenges, another 25 from the SLFP joined to be appointed as Ministers and Deputy Ministers, thus making the Wickremesinghe govt still a minority with 89 MPs.

Read More

SRI LANKA: A journalist remanded in Jaffna for merely translating and publishing a story

April 20, 2015

ISSUES: Freedom of expression; impunity; rule of law 
------------------------------------------------------ 

Dear friends,

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has received information that Mr. S. E. Logathayalan, a journalist working for the ‘Uthayan’ and the ‘Thinakkural’ Newspapers in Jaffna was remanded on 8th (Wednesday), April 2015, on orders of the Acting Magistrate, Point Pedro for a period of 09 days. The Magistrate had issued the order following a report submitted by police officers attached to the Nelliyadi Police Station. On 8th April 2015, the Mr. Logathayalan had earlier translated a news item from a popular English language news website, alleging an attempted rape of young girl, by a police officer attached to the Nelliyadi Police station - into Tamil and had published the story in the ‘Uthayan’ Newspaper. Following the publication of the this news, the Editor and Mr. Logathayalan have been summoned to appear before the Nelliyadi Police Station and later produced before the Acting Magistrate of Point Pedro who had remanded Mr. Logathayalan till 17th of April 2015.

SRI LANKA a Journalist Remanded in Jaffna for Merely Translating and Publishing a Story by Thavam Ratna

Reply to the Mahendran’s white wash

Monday, 20 April 2015

I was quite amused and not surprised to read the statement of the Ministry of Planning and Economic Affairs highlighting the findings of an eminent panel regarding the biggest Bond Fraud in Sri Lanka.

Firstly, what is the definition for eminent? Well known and respected or outstanding and respected. The statement says the committee members are people exhibiting eminence. That is now for the reader to decide.

The second point is The Prime Minister is the Minister in charge of the Ministry of Planning and Economic Affairs and Mahendran is his friend and reports to him that alone speaks volumes about the statement of the ministry. Now the committee says Mahendran has had no direct involvement. Are they saying he had indirect involvement? If so, what was the indirect involvement? Did the committee get justification from Mahendran as to why a government of 3 months had to go for a 30-year bond at 12.5% causing a perpetual loss to the taxpayers of Sri Lanka running over a period of 30 years?

Did the committee get credible answers as to how Mahendran’s Son in Law collected over 50% of the issue on that particular day and to bid way above the rest of the bidders? Did the committee get answers as to how BOC approved a credit line of this magnitude to Mahendran’s son-in-law’s company over the counter? Finally what is the state of the issued Bonds, if sold by perpetual, what was the profit to the company?

As the famous saying goes ‘you can fool all the people some of the time and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time. Cheers to Yahapalanaya and to our Governor!

Good governance Activist

Ceylon Chamber Calls on all MPs to Enact Constitutional Amendments

20/04/2015

The Ceylon Chamber of Commerce, in a statement yesterday, said it welcomed the recent constitutional reforms process initiated under the leadership of the President and the Government.

It has also welcomed the proposed 19th Amendment to the Constitution, particularly those provisions addressing the 18th Amendment, the Constitutional Council, independent commissions, urgent Bills and the Right to Information. The Chamber believes these provisions will help strengthen good governance, law and order, independence of the Judiciary and media freedom, all of which are essential elements of a genuine democracy and a society which is committed to equal opportunities for all its citizens. The Chamber believes that these provisions will improve the business climate in the country and pave the way for greater investment, both local and foreign, thereby creating a platform for sustainable growth, greater job opportunities and a higher standard of living for all Sri Lankans.

Considering the importance of the constitutional reforms that have been proposed, the Ceylon Chamber called on all political parties and Members of Parliament committed to democracy, good governance and equal opportunities for all Sri Lankans to:

* Take advantage of the historic opportunity presented by a multi-party Government to strengthen constitutional governance in the country
* Set aside narrow political considerations 
* Support and pass into law the mentioned provisions.

The Ceylon Chamber of Commerce, an institution that has existed in the country for 176 years, is a confederation of 3,500 businesses entities – from small and medium to large conglomerates, both private and quoted and Sri Lankan and multinational – 21 business councils, 21 trade associations and 22 regional, sectoral and other Chambers. It is affiliated to over 120 international chambers worldwide and is recognised as the country’s premier business chamber.

Hold polls fast urges Ceylon Chamber

◾Warns prevailing uncertainty negatively impacts economic and business environment
◾Says to restore confidence and attract investment parliamentary elections must be held expeditiously

The Ceylon Chamber of Commerce, the country’s premier private sector lobby, has urged the conduct of general elections as soon as possible to restore business confidence as prevailing uncertainty was highly detrimental.
In a special statement, the Chamber said it noted and appreciated the many positive steps taken by the President and Government to deal with pressing issues pertaining to constitutional reforms, law and order, independence of the Judiciary and the media, good governance, cost of living and international relations.

Sri Lanka’s Proposed RTI Guarantee Needs To Be Strengthened: Centre For Law And Democracy

April 20, 2015

While welcoming the Sri Lankan government’s proposed right to information (RTI) law and constitutional amendments, in an analysis released today by the Centre for Law and Democracy (CLD), suggests that the proposed constitutional guarantee needs to be strengthened.

Toby Mendel

“Although it is a late-comer to right to information (RTI), the fact that the Sri Lankan government is moving forward simultaneously with both a constitutional guarantee and legislation is very encouraging”, said Toby Mendel, Executive Director of CLD. “It would be a great shame if this clear demonstration of democratic political will were undermined by rules that failed to conform to international standards.”

Key problems with the proposed constitutional guarantees for RTI, identified in CLD’s analysis, including the following:

• It contains an excessively long and broad list of grounds which may justify secrecy, including contempt of court, Parliamentary privilege and “preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence”.
• Amendments proposed by the Attorney General seek to limit the scope of the guarantee to whatever happens to be set out in law.
• The scope of the right is limited to an unduly narrow range of public authorities.

We publish below the analysis in full;

This Note¹ contains the Centre for Law and Democracy’s (CLD) comments on those parts of the Bill entitled “An Act to amend the Constitution of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka” – “19th Amendment to the Constitution” which are concerned with the right to information (proposed guarantee).² The comments in this Note are based on the version of the proposed guarantee which was published online by the Colombo Telegraph, which includes the amendments proposed by the Attorney General.³ This version of the proposed guarantee is attached as an Annex to this Note.                      Read More

19 A: Debate deferred

*CJ to remove President in consultation with Speaker on ‘health grounds’ opposed
Parliament to continue until agreement on 20 A

April 19, 2015, 9:09 pm 

By Shamindra Ferdinando

President Maithripala Sirisena, Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe and Opposition political parties led by the SLFP yesterday agreed to defer the debate on the 19th Amendment to the Constitution by a day to enable them to reach an agreement on both constitutional and electoral reforms, political sources told The Island.

The decision was taken at a meeting held at the Presidential Secretariat in the morning.

The two-day debate would now commence on Tuesday. Earlier, it was to begin today. Parliament however will meet today at 9. 30 am for a few minutes and then adjourn to enable political parties to explore ways and means of reaching agreement on constitutional and electoral reforms.

Among those present at Sunday’s meeting were Opposition Leader Nimal Siripala de Silva, UPFA General Secretary Susil Premjayantha, SLFP General Secretary Anura Priyadarshana Yapa, Prof. G.L. Peiris, John Seneviratne, Dinesh Gunawardena, Rauf Hakeem, Prof. Tissa Vitharana, Ven. Athureliye Rathana, Vasudeva Nanayakkara, Vijitha Herath and A. L. M. Athaulla.

At the onset of the meeting, MP de Silva reiterated the SLFP’s stand that the 20th Amendment containing proposed electoral reforms should be endorsed along with the 19 Amendment which dealt with constitutional reforms. The Opposition Leader emphasized that the SLFP stand wasn’t negotiable.

Sources said that political parties were now examining two documents which dealt with electoral reforms––one from the government and the other from the SLFP. Responding to a query, sources said that political parties would consult Elections Commissioner Mahinda Deshapriya. In case, an agreement could be reached on proposed electoral reforms, it would be presented as the 20th Amendment, they added.Political parties also examined the possibility of commencing the two-day debate today (April 20) as previously scheduled and differ the vote until an agreement could be reached on the 20th Amendment.

SLMC leader Rauf Hakeem strongly opposed the passage of electoral reforms without due consideration given to all relevant factors.

President Maithripala Sirisena assured the gathering he was ready to initiate discussions with all political parties to resolve differences.

Political parties also examined the possibility of Opposition parties extending support to 19th Amendment on the basis of President Maithripala Sirisena giving a public undertaking not to dissolve parliament until the finalization of the 20th Amendment. Sources said that such an arrangement could help break the deadlock. However, the proposal was definitely compatible with President Maithripala Sirisena original move to dissolve parliament early May.

During the 90 minute meeting, the Opposition strongly objected to government attempts to move controversial clauses to 19 Amendment. Prof. G. L. Peiris asserted that changes proposed at committee stages in contravention of the gazetted version of the 19 Amendment weren’t acceptable.

Prof. Peiris strongly criticized a proposal that the Chief Justice in consultation with the Speaker could remove the President on health grounds to pave the way for the Speaker to function as the Acting President. Another proposal opposed by Prof. Peiris, on behalf of the Opposition was controversial suggestion that any member of parliament could act for the President. Prof. Peiris said that the government wanted Prime Minister in consultation with the Opposition Leader to choose any member of the parliament to act for the President in case the Speaker, too, was unavailable. Peiris pointed out that this would enable even a backbencher to act for the President. Peiris backed the original proposal that either the Speaker or Deputy Speaker should function as Acting President.

Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe agreed to withdraw controversial proposals, thereby paving the way for discussions to continue.

The meeting was told that now that the Supreme Court had given its ruling on the petitions filed against the 19 Amendment, fresh clasues in contravention of the SC ruling shouldn’t be proposed. MEP leader Dinesh Gunawardene, Democratic Left front leader Vasudeva Nanayakkara and JHU MP Ven Athureliye Rathana stressed that such an attempt would violate the public will.

No comeback for Mahinda as all roads lead to dead ends

How revamped 19th A will block former president from returning to meaningful position of power

Sunday, April 19, 2015

If it was the closest Ranil Wickremesinghe would get to be President all but in name, it was the nearest Mahinda Rajapaksa could have reached to enjoy executive powers again in a new role as prime minister and act as de facto president. But with the Supreme Court dictated dilution that redefined the 19th Amendment, both men’s hopes to ascend higher ground lie dashed in the dust; and both men’s executive ambitions remain the stuff of vain political pipe dreams.

tive ambitions remain the stuff of vain political pipe dreams.

Mahinda Rajapaksa: No way out as Supreme Court verdict on 19th Amendment puts road blocks on his return path

No Comeback for Mahinda as All Roads Lead to Dead Ends by Thavam Ratna

Update: MPs refuse to withdraw

Update: MPs refuse to withdraw

2015-04-20

Protesting MPs who sat in the well of the parliament said that they will not leave the chamber until they receive a written assurance from the President and the Prime Minister through the Speaker, saying that the government will stop hunting down opposition members and former President.

They also demanded that Prime Minister Ranil Wickramasinghe withdraw his statement saying that, obtaining an injunction from the Supreme Court is the only way to stop the former President being questioned by the Commission to Investigate Allegations of Bribery or Corruption.

Mahinda and Gota summoned by Bribery Commission

2015-04-19
Former President Mahinda Rajapaksa and former Defense Secretary Gotabaya Rajapaksa have been asked to report to the Bribery Commission (BC) this week to record statements over various allegations against them, highly placed sources said.

They said Gotabhaya Rajapaksa was asked to report to the BC on Wednesday, April 22 and 23 while the former President was asked to report to the BC on Friday, April 24.

Daily Mirror learns that the BC will record a statement from the former President over the fraudulent document produced by former Health Minister Tissa Attanayake in an attempt to sling mud at President Maithripala Sirisena and Premier Ranil Wickremesinghe in the run-up to the presidential election.

He is also to be questioned about a fresh ministerial post granted to Mr. Attanayake  no sooner he joined the previous government after quitting the UNP of which he was the General Secretary.

Sources said, a statement would be recorded from the former Defence Secretary Defense over certain matters pertaining to his tenure as a Director of several leading institutions.

This is apart from the statement to be recorded from him on a later date with regard to the Avant Garde floating armoury in Galle.

Meanwhile, unconfirmed reports stated that former Economic Development Minister who is scheduled to return to the country tomorrow would also be summoned by the BC to record statements over several complaints against him. (Kurulu Koojana Kariyakarawana)
- See more at: http://www.dailymirror.lk/69563/mahinda-and-gota-summoned-by-bribery-commission#sthash.SxgtBWaY.Udri0QWq.dpuf

Police Bigwig Holds Long Telephone Discussions With MR

20 April 2015

A senior-most official of the Police Department has held prolonged over-the-phone discussions with former president Mahinda Rajapaksa at regular intervals, inside sources of the government said.

This fact has been revealed through telephone records of the official which were obtained by some top echelons of the government. This has come as a surprise to the government as this particular officer was dubbed by certain sections of the media as an officer who did not give
in to political pressure. So it has now been revealed that his election night performance was nothing but a last minute somersault.

Police has been criticized during the past few weeks for its delay in investigating alleged financial fraud and other wrongdoings during the former regime of Mahinda Rajapaksa. Serious doubt arises on the delay of the police, in the light of this revelation.

President Maithripala Sirisena came to power with a pledge to investigate financial fraud during the former regime and punish the wrongdoers. The likes of Patali Champika Ranawaka, who were key speakers in the Sirisena campaign, continuously made allegations of "mega deals" and vowed to punish those who were responsible.

Serious doubt arises whether certain elements in the Police Department are attempting to undermine the investigations due to their loyalty to the former regime.

The Way Forward: Charismatic Leader Or Ordinary Citizens?

The By Ruvan Weerasinghe -April 20, 2015

Dr. Ruvan Weerasinghe

President of Sri Lanka for the next five years (assuming the constitutional reforms are passed in parliament) is Mr. Maithripala Sirisena. However, it appears that the new political race, precisely owing to the reforms, are for the Prime Minister post, and possibly that of the Leader of the Opposition. The same kind of politicking that was there for President, Chief Minister and Mayor is now being played out for the PM post! Even parties within the coalition, including the SLFP and the JHU appear to place their stakes on it, rather than being eager to usher in a new political culture, that this government got the mandate for. Quite ironically, it is those outside the government, namely the JVP and the TNA who see that the only absolute requirement before Parliamentary Elections are called, is to pass the 19th Amendment to the Constitution of Sri Lanka.

It appears from the conversations that I hear in public – particularly within party politics, but also in the corridors of education – that we Sri Lankans are hooked on the notion of a ‘strong leader’. What the leader stands for is almost secondary. The current President’s moderate and democratic rule is considered too ‘soft’ or ‘weak’ and not good for the country. We need a president who can ‘stand up to the Western powers’ is a common sentiment echoed across even the so called intelligentsia (misleading the general public to think that this is even possible for a county of our size). Dr Dayan Jayatillaka is probably one of the best examples of this

 admiration of near-dictatorial leadership as the ‘need of the hour’ (not to mention decade). It seem as if our culture is hard-wired to hero worship such leaders. Any other model of leadership is considered inferior and weak.

This model of leadership has been described using the ‘bus driver’ (and passengers) analogy. The leader is perceived as the bus driver who knows where we are headed, so the passengers (the citizens in our analogy) can be as disinterested as they need to be. Even those concerned about where we’re headed may only make their opinions known, if their opinions are sought, not otherwise. This model is safe as long as the driver is honest in seeking the best interests of all their passengers equally. It has a single point of failure – the driver, and their decision making. It carries the risk that we’d only be aware of being driven to a place far from ideal, far too late. And even in that case, to convince the driver would take too much effort, since they have already been given the mandate to take us to where we thought they would be good for us. Listening to the opinions of the passengers is strictly optional, often considered unnecessary.Read More