Alleged War Crimes: Domestic Probe After Talks With All

(A man walks past a mural depicting fighting during the war in Colombo April 27, 2011.Reuters/Andrew Caballero-Reynolds)

07/06/2015

A final decision on an independent mechanism to address issues of missing persons and alleged violations of human rights and humanitarian law will be taken after discussions with all concerned, including civil society and victims, a Foreign Ministry spokesperson said.

All international partners, including the United Nations Human Rights High Commissioner Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein, appreciate that, for any mechanism to succeed, all those concerned must be consulted, said Mahishini Colonne, who also heads the Foreign Ministry’s UN Division. She said such mechanisms must be evolved through mindful and careful deliberation as opposed to being rushed.

Last month, President Maithripala Sirisena told newspaper editors that a domestic mechanism would be set up by June as the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) was to release in September the results of an investigation into war crimes allegations against Sri Lanka.

Consultations were continuing, but there was nothing on paper yet, Ms. Colonne said. “The setting up of an independent mechanism to address issues relating to missing persons is being discussed. Similarly, the most appropriate ways to address issues of alleged violations of human rights and humanitarian law are also being discussed.”

She said a lack of “mindful and careful deliberation” was the reason for the failure of many past mechanisms. In February, Foreign Minister Mangala Samaraweera requested the OHCHR to postpone the release of the results of its investigation.

The Minister had said discussions were already underway “on the kind of domestic mechanism that should be put in place and the nature of the assistance that would be required from your office and other international partners”. The deferral was granted. As such, it was widely expected that a domestic mechanism would be in place before the scheduled release of the report.

Minister Samaraweera was in London this week and held talks with Tamil diaspora groups, including the Global Tamil Forum which has been broadly supportive of President Maithripala Sirisena’s reconciliation and post-war efforts. TNA Parliamentarian M. Sumanthiran and other Tamil diaspora groups are reported to have participated.

Erik Solheim, a former Norwegian Government negotiator in the Sri Lankan peace process, and a representative of the South African Government were also present. The Sri Lanka Foreign Ministry did not release details, saying it was “a private visit”.

President Sirisena, too, met Tamil diaspora groups during his official visit to London in March. The Government wants to continue engagement with all segments in its search for reconciliation and a viable domestic mechanism, official sources said.

Sunday Times

Whither laws ? Lands of Tamils in Mulaitivu forcibly acquired to build Temples where no Buddhists live –protestors arrested

(Lanka-e-News -07.June.2015, 10.30AM) When  a fast was staged Friday (05) against the construction of a Buddhist temple on lands in Kokilai , Mulaitivu belonging to the Tamils , four organizers of the fast  were arrested by the Mulaitivu police.

Among those arrested is a journalist of Mulaitivu district by the name of S. Judeson . As his land  too had been forcibly acquired for the temple construction , he had gone to demonstrate his protest when he too was arrested, according to him.  

Though a group of politicians of the area had arrived and got those arrested freed after discussions with the police , the latter had only released them after obtaining a written document from them that they will not stage  such protests again, the journalist Judeson revealed. Not here , even in many other lands in Mulaitivu ,Buddhist monks are forcibly constructing temples , towards which the army are giving fullest support , Judeson pointed out.

The media spokesman ASP  Ruwan Gunasekera however said , so far he has not received any information in this regard.

The Human rights organization Oakland, in California last week via a report had pointed out that the army in Sri Lanka are constructing temples on lands of the Tamils where no Buddhists are living, whereby  there is a danger of the Tamils losing their lands.

Upon inquiries made into this by us, it has come to light , not only in the north but even in the east  , the lands of the Tamil residents  are being used to build Buddhist temples forcibly with the assistance of the army and the government.

It was pinpointed by the residents   , since the Tamil residents are not envious of any other religion including Buddhism or opposing them , the appropriation of lands of the Tamils forcibly cannot be approved under any circumstance.

In connection with the injustice that is being meted out in the north and east , though two letters have been sent to the president , so far there had been neither a  response to them nor  any signs of relief , Sivasakthy Anandan M.P expressed with deep regret.

Dinasena Rathugamage from Vavuniya 
Translated by Jeff

Civil Society Demands Urgent Dissolution of House

07/06/2015

Leading civil society organizations and actors have called for an urgent parliamentary election to overcome the current political deadlock.

* In a joint statement 17 organizations and 52 reputed activists have collectively claimed that, it is more than a month after the 23 April 2015, the date promised for the dissolution of Parliament in the 100-Day Program of the National Democratic Front presidential election manifesto.

* The statement stated: It is becoming increasingly clear that the momentum generated by the historic January 2015 presidential election is being exhausted, and that the minority government appointed for the sole purpose of executing the 100-Day Program is drifting aimlessly.

After the enactment of the Nineteenth Amendment, the reform process itself has become mired in an ambiguous and perplexing morass of competing political self-interests.

The current balance of power in the institutions of the state is incongruous and unsustainable, with a President elected in 2015 to undertake thoroughgoing constitutional reforms, on the one hand, and a Parliament elected in 2010 under entirely different circumstances, on the other.

In this context, the need for a Twentieth Amendment embodying electoral reforms before the dissolution of Parliament, arose as a necessary quid pro quo in exchange for the support of the UPFA parliamentary majority for the Nineteenth Amendment.

Given the lack of a coherent position on the part of the UPFA on electoral reforms, it is now even clearer than before that this demand was entirely tactical.

Moreover, there has been absolutely no transparency or public consultation in the preparation of the Twentieth Amendment and if current proposals serve to undermine the principle of proportional representation, that would constitute regression not progress from the current system.

We value President Sirisena’s courage in coming forward as the common opposition candidate in what was a challenging political environment under the previous regime, and applaud his demonstrable commitment to successfully enacting reforms to the executive presidency, even if they have not gone far enough. What is most important to remember about the democratic mandate of the last presidential election, however, is that the people of Sri Lanka voted for fundamental reforms to strengthen and consolidate democracy as much or more than they voted for the winning candidate.

This mandate requires not only substantive reforms but also a transformation in the way government and governance is conducted. It cannot be squandered because of political indecisiveness or expediency, repeating the mistakes of the past where Sri Lanka’s enormous potential has been retarded time and again due to the absence of leadership and political maturity.

The signatories urged that in the current context, there is a rising perception of crisis and instability, and the economy was unable to afford the current lack of political direction,, and as importantly, the hope and aspiration created by the change of government in January demands both clarity in promises being kept and further progress in reforms, especially with regard to devolution and power-sharing.

The time is ripe therefore for fresh parliamentary elections which would allow the people of Sri Lanka to have their say on reforms already enacted and to mandate the direction of the government for the next five years it added, urging for the immediate dissolution of parliament.
SO

Judicial Reform in the 21st Century -From Independence to Accountability 

(Based on a presentation made at the Conference of the Asian Society of International Law on "The Rule of Law and Development Nexus: A New Deal for Asia?" in Bangkok last week.)

by Dr Nihal Jayawickrama-June 6, 2015

In the early 1970s, while still a young lawyer practising in Sri Lanka, I was invited by the new Prime Minister to serve as Permanent Secretary to the Ministry of Justice. She asked me to be, not merely an administrator, but also an innovator. We had a judicial system introduced in the mid-19th century by the British colonial government to serve the needs of a country of two million people. It had remained unchanged, notwithstanding Independence and a ten-fold population increase. The trial rolls in original courts were long. The backlog in the appellate court was enormous. The prisons were overcrowded. Litigation was expensive. And the citizen groped, often for decades, in his search for justice, administered in a language he did not understand, by strange men garbed in scarlet and ermine robes, whose heads were covered in wigs made of white horse-hair. That was the majesty of British justice that we had preserved in its pristine purity. To adapt it to the mid-twentieth century was the challenge that had to be met. It was a challenge that was compounded by the fact that a privileged legal profession comfortably ensconced in the archaic system was quite content to leave it as it was. What was called for was systemic reform. There was not even a whisper that the stakeholders in the justice system were corrupt.

We met that challenge with three new Acts of Parliament that established a new court structure, new civil, criminal and appellate procedures, and unified a two-tier legal profession. The reforms had a dramatic impact, not only on the administration of justice, but also on the life-styles of lawyers and judges. For example, the compulsory requirement of resorting to conciliation prior to the institution of proceedings in court resulted in over 50% of civil disputes being settled without the intervention of lawyers. Unfortunately the reform package had a relatively short life span. Three years later, following a general election in which the legal profession played an active role, and a change of government, the reform legislation almost in its entirety was repealed and the hundred year-old 19th century systems were restored.

Corruption in the Judiciary

Let me fast forward to 1997 when, after almost two decades in academia, I came down from the ivory towers to work at Transparency International in Berlin. That non-governmental organization was then in its formative years, and one of its principal objectives was to identify sectors that were vulnerable to corruption, and then to formulate strategies to combat such corruption. It was almost at the turn of the century that credible evidence began to surface of corruption in judicial systems in many countries across the continents; people who participated in public perception surveys considered the judiciary to be only somewhat less corrupt that the police. Litigants who responded in service delivery surveys claimed to have paid bribes to court officials, judges, and even to the opponents’ lawyers. At or about that time several reports were published in which senior judges admitted the prevalence of corruption in their judicial systems. A presidential commission of inquiry into corruption in an African country reported that corruption in the judiciary was so widespread that the ordinary citizen had no faith in the judicial system, with many believing that justice was only for those with money. That report documented numerous proved instances of personal secretaries, typists, court clerks, prosecutors, and magistrates soliciting or accepting bribes. In my own country, a national survey of court users and other stakeholders found that corruption was rampant in the judicial system, and that most judges were aware of its occurrence, and even identified at least five of their colleagues as bribe takers. It was a notorious fact that many a litigant or accused person found it more economical to secure the disappearance of a case record or the absence of a witness than continue to retain counsel for prolonged periods. The phenomenon of judicial corruption had finally arrived.

Undue influence on the Judiciary

Corruption in the judiciary is not limited to conventional bribery. An insidious and equally damaging form of corruption arises from the interaction between the judiciary and the executive, and from the relationship between the judiciary and the legal profession. For example, the political patronage through which a judge acquires his office, a promotion, an extension of service, preferential treatment, or the promise of employment after retirement, can give rise to corruption if and when the executive makes demands on such judge. Similarly, when a family member regularly appears before a judge, or when a judge selectively ignores sentencing guidelines in cases where particular counsel appear, the conduct of the judge gives rise to the suspicion of corruption. So does a high rate of decisions in favour of the executive. Indeed, frequent socializing with particular members of the legal profession, the executive or the legislature, or with litigants or potential litigants, almost certainly raises, in the minds of others, the suspicion that the judge is susceptible to undue influence in the discharge of his duties.

However wrong these public perceptions might have been, there was little doubt that in many countries, the people were losing confidence in their judicial systems. They were frustrated by the failure of the authorities to address the issues that had arisen - the cost of justice; the cumbersome and daunting procedures involved in going to court; the inevitable postponements to accommodate lawyers who needed to be in other courts at the same time. Many saw these as indicators of judicial systems in a perpetual state of crisis. They also saw them as indicators of the prevalence of corruption. In some jurisdictions, they even took the law into their own hands. In Venezuela, for instance, angry citizens took to lynching alleged murderers, rapists and even car-thieves on nearly a weekly basis somewhere in the country. The police recorded an average of 21 murders a day, comparable to casualties in a nation at war.

Judicial Independence

For a very long time it had been thought that independence was the single fundamental requirement for a national judiciary. That independence was secured when the judges were provided with certain constitutional guarantees - security of tenure, non-removability except for proved misbehaviour or incapacity, non-reduction of salaries, and immunity from being sued by dissatisfied litigants. 

(Continued next week)

Probes against corrupt politicians have weakened - JVP

 

June 7, 2015  04:26 pm

A ‘conspiracy’ of the Rajapaksa regime is going smoothly because the Prime Minster tends to ignore the law and order, Constitution of the country and because he does not listen to the ‘public opinion’, Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP) leader Anura Kumara Dissanayake said.

The observation was made at a press conference held in Colombo, this morning (7).

“If this continues, he will have to face the consequences as well,” Dissanayake said.

He went into say that the people voted to defeat the former government in a bid to put the corrupt politicians and top government agents behind the bars. 

“The majority of the people were of the view that the new government must find a way to recover the money that allegedly siphoned off by the previous government. However, that process has now weakened,” he added.

Are we being cast in a Mad Hatter’s tea party?

Sunday, June 07, 2015
If the minority government of the United National Party was not so arrogant in its unshakeable conviction that each and every action taken by it is unreservedly right, we may not be now witnessing this agonizing ebbing away of the high moral ground on which President Maithripala Sirisena won the Presidential election in January 2015.

A precedent lurking in the shadows
Thankfully the President has, by and large, managed to keep his image unsullied excepting one or two horrendously ill-advised actions such as categorizing a Chief Justice’s appointment as null and void by one stroke of the Presidential pen.

Granted, culpability in this regard must be taken in context. This occurred in the immediately tumultuous aftermath of a tense election where no one quite knew what would happen. Responsibility for urging such action indeed lies firmly on the shoulders of the Bar Association and assorted groups who waxed eloquent on observing the Rule of Law but appeared to have little compunction in urging actions outside those parameters when political expediency demanded it.

And despite the (convincing or otherwise) explanations offered as justification thereof, this dangerous precedent still remains lurking in the shadows as it were, with all the possibility of future invocation by a more malignantly inclined head of the executive for quite a different purpose than to secure the independence of the Sri Lankan judiciary.

One misstep after another
This was just one of the far too many missteps taken by the ‘yahapalanaya’ administration since that January election result regarding which we cannot but remain concerned. This column had consistently urged that the two most imperative post-election actions should have been to impeach both the pre-January 2015 ‘purported Chief Justice’ and the Chair of the Bribery and Corruption Commission with requisite due process. In the first flush of that magnificent election victory, swift and sure preemptive strokes such as these would have passed the muster of Parliament quite unlike the horse dealing and unhappy compromises that we saw in regard to the 19th Amendment. Perhaps if the Right to Information (RTI) law had been brought before the House also at that time after undergoing a quick revisionary process, it would have been met with a better fate than left hanging in limbo as it is now.

So what happened was only that the ‘purported Chief Justice’ got tossed out by his ear in a manner that left much to be desired while serious concerns about the independence of the Court were left to languish by the way. The lack of legitimate leadership of the Corruption Commission was also not addressed. Instead, this was glossed over by the appointment of a new Director General. The shortsighted nature of this action is now all too apparent as the Commission remains wracked by internal wrangling, the Director General is on record in bitterly complaining that the Commission Chairman had ‘undermined’ her and a Commissioner’s resignation has further complicated the issue.

But was all this not to be expected, one may well exclaim with reasonable bewilderment? Indeed, it seems more and more if we are cast in a veritable Alice in Wonderland saga with the Mad Hatter’s tea party being replicated before our astonished eyes.

Recalling warnings from the past
From one action to the next, it is a difficult choice to decide which acts have been more ham-handed under the hand of this Government. Is it that unholy fiasco over the alleged Central Bank bond scam? Or the establishment of a Financial Crimes Investigation Division (FCID) under an ambiguous provision of the Police Ordinance, directed moreover to act on the advice of a Cabinet sub-committee headed by the Prime Minister? Or is it that, (reportedly), agreement on even the vastly unsatisfactory Constitutional Council as currently constituted, was held up in Parliament on the last occasion by the Government asking for more time to get written agreement by the three non-political nominees? Is this clumsiness unintentional or is it deliberate?

There are good reasons for extreme watchfulness. We must remember that the original Constitutional Council (CC) under the 17th Amendment was stymied not purely as a result of the power hungry ambitions of (then) President Mahinda Rajapaksa. On the contrary, the CC was made dysfunctional through a combination of political forces, including that of the opposition UNP and JVP at that time. The blame for that terrible betrayal of peoples’ expectations was therefore collective.

The simple point was that no political party wanted independent commissions as these bodies were perceived to threaten their political agendas. This was why the independent Police Commission could not function for more than a brief period. Its insistence on interdicting police officers indicted for offences and pursuing rampant police abuse angered politicians of all shades and hues. This was also the reason why an independent Elections Commission was not created due to (then) President Chandrika Kumaratunga refusing to abide by the recommendation of the CC. With such an unhappy history of election-fixing through the manipulation of state resources and personnel, the very idea of an authoritative and independent Elections Commission would scare silly, two-thirds of those unprepossessing characters who constitute the Parliament that we have presently. The same logic applies to an RTI law. What politician would actually want a strong RTI Commission?

Need for continued critical momentum
The 19th Amendment will certainly not miraculously fix the several ills in Sri Lanka’s body politic. We have undergone too much institutional and systemic decay for there to be one-fix solutions. Instead, the path of reform will be arduous. Constant people pressure through independent opinion standing apart from both government and the opposition is critical.

It is unfortunate however that the reform momentum evidenced five months ago has now slowed down, precisely at the point where it is needed the most. These are perilous times for Sri Lanka. The Government and the opposition must be unceasingly called to account on their post-election performances or absence thereof.

In the absence of that critical pressure, expecting political parties in this Mad Hatter’s tea party to act more responsibly is merely a forlorn hope.

WikiLeaks: Independent Commissions In Limbo Awaiting Constitutional Council

June 7, 2015 

“Political in-fighting, spearheaded by the Sinhalese nationalist Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP), is hindering formation of the Constitutional Council, the multi-partisan body empowered to nminate members to independent watchdog authoritis like the Human Rights Commission (HRC), PublicService Commission, the Judicial Service Commissin and the National Police Commission (NPC). Without the Constitutional Council, these agencies, set up to monitor government abuse of authority, are unable to appoint new members–and thus perform their crucial watchdog role–as their Commissioners’ terms expire. This has led to the accusation that the Government of Sri Lanka (GSL) may be using the partisan dispute over appointments to the Constitutional Council as a pretext to hamstring these independent agencies.” the US Embassy Colombo informed Washington.

According to the JVP and its ally, the Buddhist monk-led Jathika Hela Urumaya (JHU), because the Prime Minister and Opposition Leader have already nominated representatives from the minority Tamil and Muslim communities, the majority Sinhalese should have the right to nominate a member as well.| File photo

The Colombo Telegraph found the related leaked cable from the WikiLeaks database. The “Confidential” cable is signed by the US Ambassador to Colombo Jeffrey J. Lunstead on April 06, 2006.

The ambassador wrote; “Internal politics–laced with heavy overtones of communalism–underpins the Constitutional Council morass. The Council’s fixed members include the Prime Minister, the Speaker of Parliament, and the Leader of the Opposition. Other members are nominated from the local Tamil and Muslim communities, as directed by the Prime Minister and Opposition Leader. The sixth and final member, according to the Constitution, must be nominated by unspecified ‘minority parties.’ The Marxist nationalist Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP) argues that as the third largest party in Parliament, it–and not the pro-LTTE Tamil National Alliance–should have the right to make that nomination. According to the JVP and its ally, the Buddhist monk-led Jathika Hela Urumaya (JHU), because the Prime Minister and Opposition Leader have already nominated representatives from the minority Tamil and Muslim communities, the majority Sinhalese should have the right to nominate a member as well. The TNA’s position, on the other hand, is that since the JVP contested the 2004 general elections on the ruling party’s ticket, it counts as part of the governing coalition and thus is not a ‘minority’ party. (Note: The JVP left the governing coalition last June. The President has the authority to determine who has the right to nominate the sixth member, but so far has shown no wish to exercise it.)”

Read the cable below for further details;

NM and the Executive Presidency 

by Vijaya Kumar-June 6, 2015

June 6th marked the Birth Anniversary of Dr. N M Perera. This year’s birth anniversary was one that should have been especially celebrated as the passage of the 19th Amendment last month marks the beginning of a process which we hope would completely dismantle the Executive Presidency. NM, who foresaw the dangers of JR’s Constitution, led a campaign against it which included the publication in 1979 of his book, Critical Analysis of the New Constitution of Sri Lanka which made detailed predictions on what the future would be under JR’s constitution. Most importantly, he predicted the gradual move towards dictatorial rule and the weakening of democratic safeguards and institutions as a natural consequence of the JR Constitution.

NM was a political giant who dominated left politics in Sri Lanka since the 1930s. It was NM and the LSSP that provided the leadership for the struggle to win many of the hard fought rights of the people and the working class that we have been enjoying.

Many of these rights have been gradually eroded by a combination of World Bank/IMF pressures, pressures which NM as Finance Minister resisted but with dire consequences to his and the Party’s popularity, the changing balance of power resulting from the 1978 Constitution and the move towards dictatorial government inspired by it.

NM’s prophesies that the JR Constitution would gradually transform our country into a dictatorship were proved correct. While JR took the first steps to consolidate dictatorial power in his Executive Presidency, it had to be left to Mahinda Rajapaksa through his 18th Amendment to complete the process. Although the LSSP following NM’s legacy consistently opposed this move towards dictatorship, its two members of Parliament went against the party decision and shamelessly raised their hands to support the 18th Amendment in September 2010.

Although the LSSP should rejoice that the JR Constitution has been weakened by the 19th Amendment promoted by President Maitripala Sirisena, its two members of Parliament inexplicably are publicly yearning for a return to the rule of Mahinda Rajapaksa. They justify their positions by claiming that their immediate task is to prevent the resurgence of the Big Bad Wolf, the UNP, the representative of international capitalism. The usurpers to NM’s legacy who control the assets of the LSSP accepted quietly the neo-liberalism, crony capitalism and family rule of Mahinda Rajapaksa with hardly a whimper. They forced the LSSP into announcing its support for Mahinda Rajapaksa for a third term long before the election was called or his candidacy announced. So much for their private claims that although they voted for the 18th Amendment because they could not withstand pressures from Rajapaksa, they were opposed to the removal of the Presidential term limit and Rajapaksa’s attempts to strengthen the Presidency. The LSSP of NM would instead have actively supported Maduluwawe Sobitha Thero’s National Movement for a Just Society and its efforts to find a Common Candidate committed to abolishing the Executive Presidency.

Given a clear-cut alternative of a Mahinda Rajapaksa clinging on to the Executive Presidency and a Maitripala Sirisena campaigning on a programme of opposition to the Executive Presidency, one would have expected the LSSP to have jumped at the opportunity to join the bandwagon to abolish the Executive Presidency, but it did not, apparently afraid of the Big Bad Wolf associated with Maitripala. Perhaps we may have a better idea on the background for the stance of the LSSP once investigations are complete on the fate of the Divi Neguma funds alleged to have been robbed by Basil.

The LSSP of NM was a party of independence and courage, unafraid of Big Bad Wolves, even those in sheep’s clothing, ever prepared to confront them on their own turf. However, subservience to years of Rajapaksa rule has transformed the party into a parasitic unit, unable to survive without playing a submissive role to more powerful political entities.

What other explanation can be there for its present alignment to the Mahinda Rajapaksa camp? The main instrument this camp is using to regain power for Mahinda is the hidden but now well-publicized crass communalism of Mahinda Rajapaksa, reinforced by even more extremist positions held by those of the likes of Dinesh Gunawardena, Wimal Weerawansa and Gammanpila. When the United Peoples’ Freedom Alliance (UPFA) was formed in 2004, the LSSP and the CP deliberately decided against joining it as it did not want to be associated with such elements, preferring to continue with the arrangement of coming to an electoral agreement with it through the SLFP. NM who always stood for a fair solution to the national problem and opposed communalism tooth and nail must be turning in his grave seeing the strange bedfellows his party has been forced to keep to try to bring Mahinda back to power. Political memories are short indeed. Would anybody in his right mind who had experienced the dictatorial power, total disregard of human rights, widespread corruption and family rule that marked Mahinda’s last term as President work towards or even yearn for his return to power?

The 19th Amendment which removed powers of the executive presidency was passed last month. However the struggle against JR’s constitution begun by NM cannot end because the 19th Amendment which was passed by Parliament still retains the basic framework of the JR Constitution. It does not provide a guarantee that a scheming future President cannot move the country back on a dictatorial track. While removing much of the bad effects of the 18th Amendment, the present amendment has not gone far enough to remove the powers of the Executive Presidency to the extent required to prevent the growth of a yet another dictatorship. Sobitha Thero’s dream of abolishing the Executive Presidency is still to be achieved. The galaxy of lawyers represented in the SLFP including the infamous Professor of Law who never once questioned the 18th Amendment or the impeachment motion against the Chief Justice found their collective voices to surmount an attack on several clauses of the original draft to effectively dilute the effect of the amendment on the Executive Presidency. Many of its powers still remain, the Right to Information clauses originally planned have been weakened and the independence of the Constitutional Council and thereby those of the other bodies appointed by it have been deeply compromised by insisting that its membership should have a majority of Parliamentarians.

The struggle to achieve the task which NM felt was necessary to safeguard the rights of the people of Sri Lanka – completely abolishing the Executive Presidency and drafting a new people-friendly constitution - remains ahead. An opportunity will be provided at the next election for the people to rid themselves of the parliamentary scum longing for benefits they have derived and hope to continue to derive by prolonging the powers of the Executive Presidency. The greatest honour the people of Sri Lanka can do NM is to ensure that the JR Constitution and its Executive Presidency will remain only in the history books when NM’s next birthday is due to be celebrated in 2016.

(Prof. Vijaya Kumar is Professor Emeritus of the University of Peradeniya and President of the Lanka Estate Workers’ Union)

We are ready to create allegiance with UNP and discuss – Dr. Wicramabahu

 

Sunday, 07 June 2015

Q : As a socialist you are ready to work with the extreme rightist but you don’t have any dealings with the moderate UPFA. Why is that?

A : At present there is no meaning in the identities given for each parties. Under the context although UNP was regressive before now it is speaking the truth and has come to the democratic mainstream within the capitalist societal culture. Ranil Wicramasinghe has become a radical leader in a capitalist society. Meantime the former president and the former leader of the SLFP became an extreme fascist administrator. To tell the truth he came to a situation that he sold and gourmandized the country’s wealth.

Q : If my memory is wrong once the leftist parties in France abstained from elections and told the public to vote for Rightist parties. Are you at a similar situation like this performing the left composition of your politically inanimate friend Vasudewa.
A : In a way in order to defeat the fascists we can join with the liberalists and fight. That is a combative method used by Trotskyism.

Q : I think it contradicts to the “unending Trotsky and Luxembourg revolution” you always tell.
A : That is the way you see but in Germany Trotsky clearly said to immediately join with the capitalist party and face the fascism to defeat them. If they come to power that would be the end of everything.

Q : Are you satisfied for choosing you for the Executive Council and the decisions taken there?
A : Yes! I do not know until I was chosen to the Executive Council because the executive council was formed due to the people’s uproar. That was not a definite one. Only the leaders who remained from the former battle field were acquired.

Q : Now although the 100 days programme is over still the parliament is not dissolved. How do you see this situation? I should indicate at this moment that once minister Ravi Karunanayake during an interview told that the parliament would be dissolved on 24th April.
A : This delay is only causing the problem. Due to this delay we have entangled in a series of problems. Now we should dissolve the parliament and go for an election. Following the election when we form a new parliament this temporary solutions and the National Executive Council is not necessary. However we have not able to achieve this because still the SLFP is holding a regressive agenda about the electoral system. They are trying to remove the proportional voting pattern with the preferential system. That is harmful. Preferential system is very bad that has to be removed but we cannot throw the baby, we should be able to wash the baby and remove the dirt and keep the baby.
Q : Former Chief Justice Sarath N. Silva who extensively campaigned for the defeat of Mahinda Rajapaksa during a meeting in Colombo said he has never seen such a chaotic government whatsoever in the past. What do you have to say about his opinion?
A : When you listen to his statements in the recent past I can see he himself is a chaos. I would never agree that he is an intellectual. He is only a deceitful scholar. I don’t like to speak about him.
Q : You can be a socialist until you die but your clothes you wear is a signature of feudalism. Isn’t it?
A : I choose these clothes as a modern art which was once used by our village people. I was able to change this suit matching to our chieftain.
Q : If the elections are held following the 20th amendment and the pro Rajapaksa choose him as the Prime Minister what would you think the situation of the country?
A : Mahinda Rajapaksa cannot come to power that easy. However I know there is a separate group campaigning for him in the SLFP. Fraudsters have plenty money. They get money from Multi National companies. They want such people to come to power to fulfill their filthy lucre. However they were defeated once. Meantime we should defeat them once again and show.
Q : Are you satisfied in establishing the independent commissions through the 19th amendment?
A : We able to succeed at least this minimum with a greater struggle because Mahinda Rajapaksa is still struggling to come to power. He disrupted that, but many parts joined and made a change. I was imprisoned for raising black flags in 1978. I believe that our voice came out vibrating the society through this 19th amendment.
Q : Do you think there would be an election with the new electoral system following the draft bill of the 20th amendment?
When the 20th amendment is brought it takes nearly six months to reach the people. If there is an election after six months this would be feasible. However if there is an immediate election the current method should be used.
Q : How do you see Maithripala SIrisena as the leader of the SLFP?
A : It is a real victory for the people able to remove a bestial person like Mahinda Rajapaksa and appoint Maithripala Sirisena.
Q : Would you create an allegiance with the UNP in the coming election?
A : No, We are going to gather all leftists and contest. We invite whoever interested to come for discussions.
Q : What do you have to say about your old friend Vasudewa?
A : He died long back in 1994 but there is an evil demon within his effigy. The evil demon has grabbed his politics into a bloody world.
Basura Jayawardana
Translated by Ali asghar

Sri Lanka starts process to regain EU’s GSP Plus

 

March 28, 2015  10:44 am

 

 

Strengthened by previous positive vibes from the European Union, the Government of Sri Lanka has started the process to regain the generalised system of preferences plus (GSP Plus) status, according to an official statement.

An eight-member EU Trade Working Group (TWG), a senior delegation on GSP Plus led by a very senior trade official of EU, held discussions with Sri Lankan officials this week, in Colombo.

The EU-Sri Lanka Working Group on Trade and Economic Cooperation was held in a “friendly and constructive atmosphere”. It was co-chaired by RDS Kumararatne, director general of commerce, for Sri Lanka and Marc Vanheukelen, director, European Commission directorate general for trade, for the EU.

The joint statement issued at the end of the meeting said: “Sri Lanka and the EU discussed issues related to promoting bilateral trade and investment. In particular they started the process that may lead to the re-admission of Sri Lanka to the status of GSP Plus under the European Union’s new GSP regulation. They also discussed bilateral matters related to investment facilities, import duties and fishery exports from Sri Lanka to the EU.”

“The EU and Sri Lanka also reviewed progress in the WTO Doha Development Agenda negotiations and expressed their hope that the Trade Facilitation Agreement would enter into force at the 10th WTO Ministerial Conference in December 2015,” the statement added.

The statement said European Union is favourably considering Sri Lanka’s proposal for possible funding in the areas of trade-related capacity building and development support for SMEs’ trade competitiveness in regional and EU markets under EU’s Regional Programming for Asia Multiannual Indicative Programme 2014-2020.

Sri Lanka lost the GSP Plus status in 2010 due to the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) alleging violations of Human Rights during the civil war. Subsequently, when the EU evaluated Sri Lanka last year it found that the country was not adhering to 3 of the 27 international covenants that a country must abide to qualify for the consideration of GSP Plus.

However, based on a political commitment by the new Sri Lankan government, the EU will consider Sri Lanka’s case under a special monitoring process. The full application process takes about 10 months. If the status is granted, Sri Lankan exports to the EU will attract lower or no duty.

Last week, Sri Lankan minister of industry and commerce Rishad Bathiudeen said that the country had lost considerable apparel revenue over the past few years as a result of losing GSP Plus.  He said the recovery of GSP Plus would be a great step forward for the country’s competitive apparel sector and its global image.

The EU is Sri Lanka’s largest export market, accounting for one-fourth of all exports, of which garments constitute around 60 per cent. In 2014, Sri Lanka’s apparel exports to the EU increased by 10.5 per cent year-on-year to US$ 2.16 billion. (RKS)

Little white book of Hilmy Cader’s wisdom: Strategic reflections at one’s fingertip!

MTI Consulting CEO Hilmy Cader- Monday, 8 June 2015

Value of sparsity over verbosity
Erudite masters who have contributed to change the world have been very economical about using words.
The Buddha’s Dhammapada has imparted priceless wisdom in stanzas of just four lines. Confucius and Lao Tsu, two philosophers who changed the course of China chose sparsity over verbosity. Sayings of Prophet Muhammad are one or two sentence pieces of wisdom conveyed to anyone who wish to follow them.
Now, joining this exclusive club, Hilmy Cader, strategy guru, has made available his wisdom in short 100 word essays in book form titled ‘Strategic Reflections’. These reflections are in fact a collection of the column he had run in the Daily FT for several years.

Little White Book of Hilmy Cader’s Wisdom Strategic Reflections at One’s Fingertip! by Thavam Ratna

Another Bandaranayake in politics

By Gagani Weerakoon-2015-06-07

Shaveen Bandaranayake Kariyawasam, son of former Chief Justice Dr. Shirani Bandaranayake, in an exclusive interview with Ceylon Today expressed his intention to enter active politics.

When asked whether people would see him in Parliament in the near future, he responded positively, but admitted that he had a few reservations about the political culture prevailing in the country.
He however added that it was very likely that he would enter politics although he felt that he was not the kind of person who was needed in politics even in the immediate foreseeable future under the prevailing system.

Bandaranayake expressed hope that the current political culture would take a turn for the better, so that people of his calibre could play an active role in the political scene of the country.

He made headlines recently after posting a comment in response to a status update by the eldest son of former President Mahinda Rajapaksa, Namal Rajapaksa, regarding his mother (Shiranthi Rajapaksa) being summoned by the Financial Crimes Investigation Division (FCID).

"Mr. Rajapaksa, you tend to forget those who you've left in your wake. My mother, father, aunt, uncle nor I were politicians. Yet, your government moved swiftly to condemn, vilify and harass us throughout the past 2 1/2 years. How must I have felt when my parents were called before the Bribery Commission? How must I have felt seeing them being carted day after day to Court? How must I have felt seeing them being defamed by the government media that you so eloquently manipulated during your rule? Before you seek sympathy or support, 'audi alteram partem'. You're an attorney, look that up..." Shaveen wrote in response.

Exposé – Bandula Gunawardena Corruption Finally Proved..! 

 Sunday, 07 June 2015

The Laska Investigative team has always strived to provide truthful information, finding evidence is no easy task, after 4 months of investigation we give below the ultimate scam perpetrated by Bandula Gunawardena (former Cabinet Minister), and as always we don’t simply inform you, we also have lodged an official complaint with The Financial Crimes Investigations Division (FCID) as in the past we hope justice will prevail.

Exposé – Bandula Gunawardena Corruption Finally Proved..! by Thavam Ratna