'Dentist of horror' Jacobus van Nierop jailed for eight years

French court also bans Dutchman, 51, who mutilated more than 100 patients in rural Château-Chinon, from profession for life

Dentist’s victims welcome eight-year jail sentence in France

Kim Willsher in Paris-Tuesday 26 April 2016

A Dutch man nicknamed the “dentist of horror”, who mutilated more than 100 patients, has been jailed for eight years by a French court.

Jacobus van Nierop, 51, pulled out healthy teeth, broke patients’ jaws, and caused abscesses and blood poisoning in often unnecessary and painful procedures, judges were told during his trial in March.

He was charged with aggravated assault on vulnerable people and fraud over claims he tried to get money from patients and insurance companies between 2009 and 2012.

As well as the prison term, Van Nierop was banned for life from practising as a dentist.

Van Nierop, who called himself Mark, was welcomed to the rural area of Château-Chinon in 2008, after locals complained of a dearth of medical services. Criticisms of his treatment soon grew. Nicole Martin, a retired teacher, lost several teeth to abscesses caused by operations carried out under general anaesthetic. 

“When it was over, we would find a Post-it note saying to come back for an appointment the next day or the day after,” she said.

Sylviane Boulesteix, 65, saw Van Nierop in March 2012 to have braces fitted. “He gave me seven or eight injections, and pulled out eight teeth in one go. I was gushing blood for three days,” she told the court.

Martin set up a victims’ group in early 2013 to press charges, and it soon grew to 120 members.

Van Nierop was arrested in June 2013, but fled France pending trial. He was traced to a small town in the eastern Canadian province of New Brunswick and arrested under an international arrest warrant in September 2014.

Locals said he tried to cut his throat when police arrived. He fought his extradition, claiming he was suffering from “psychological problems” and was suicidal, but was sent to a psychiatric unit in a jail in the Loiret region, south of Paris. He was not required to plea under French law.

French psychiatrists have disagreed on his state of mind; one found he had “narcissistic tendencies” and was not responsible for his actions, but another declared Van Nierop “perfectly aware of what he was doing”.

State prosecutor Lucile Jaillon-Bru had requested an eight-year prison sentence for Van Nierop, who she said “took pleasure at causing pain”.

Jaillon-Bru told the trial in Nevers that the dentist carried out “useless and painful procedures” on about 100 patients, then had them reimbursed by the patients’ medical insurance.

Bed bugs repulsed by certain colours

By Michelle Roberts-25 April 2016

Bed bugs appear to have a strong preference for particular colours - a quirk that could be used against the troublesome pests, say scientists.

According to the work in the Journal of Medical Entomology, the blood-sucking insects love black and red but hate yellow and green.

This information could help make better traps to lure and catch the bugs.

But it is too soon to say if yellow sheets can stop them nesting in your bed, say the US researchers.

Image copyrightSPL

Bed bugs are tiny and they like to live close to their next meal - your blood. They can hide in the seam of your mattress or a joint in your bed frame. They tend to prefer fabric and wood over plastic and metal.

But Dr Corraine McNeill and colleagues wanted to find out if colours affected where bed bugs might dwell.

They carried out a series of experiments in their lab, placing bed bugs in dishes with different colour shelters made out of card.

Rather than taking cover at random, the bugs appeared to select the shelters according to their colour, showing a preference for black and red.

Image copyrightSPL

Dr McNeill said: "We originally thought the bed bugs might prefer red because blood is red and that's what they feed on.

"However, after doing the study, the main reason we think they preferred red colours is because bed bug themselves appear red, so they go to these harborages because they want to be with other bed bugs."

The bugs appeared to dislike yellow and green shelters, possibly because these bright colours remind them of brightly lit areas that are less safe to hide in, say the researchers.

Past studies have found these two colours are unattractive to other blood-sucking insects such as mosquitoes and sandflies.

Dr McNeill said: "I always joke with people, 'Make sure you get yellow sheets!' But to be very honest, I think that would be stretching the results a little too much.

"I don't know how far I would go to say don't get a red suitcase or red sheets, but the research hasn't been done yet, so we can't really rule that out completely."

How to spot bed bugs:

Inspect the crevices and joints of your mattress and bed frame for any visible bugs - they are flat, oval-shaped and up to 5mm long and are red or brown in colour, depending on when they last fed

Look for black spots on your mattress - dried faeces from the bugs

Adult bugs can produce an unpleasant musty odour that you might be able to smell

Check your sheets for blood spots from squashed bed bugs

Look for any skin rash or itchy bump from bed bug bites

Source: NHS Choices

Follow Michelle on Twitter

iWonder: Is my house crawling with pests?

What Psychiatric Drugs was Germanwings Co-Pilot Andreas Lubitz Taking? A List of Questions That Need to be Answered

By Dr. Gary G. Kohls-April 01, 2015

“Even at normal doses, taking psychiatric drugs can produce suicidal thinking, violent behavior, aggressiveness, extreme anger, hostility, irritability, loss of ability to control impulses, rage reactions, hallucinations, mania, acute psychotic episodes, akathisia, and bizarre, grandiose, highly elaborated destructive plans, including mass murder.

“Withdrawal from psychiatric drugs can cause agitation, severe depression, hallucinations, aggressiveness, hypomania, akathisia, fear, terror, panic, fear of insanity, failing self-confidence, restlessness, irritability, aggression, an urge to destroy and, in the worst cases, an urge to kill.” – From Preventive Psychiatry E-Newsletter # 296: “Drug Studies Connecting Psychotropic Drugs with Acts of Violence” – unpublished.

Anybody with an inquiring mind and a bit of common sense already suspects that psychiatric drugs were likely the most important contributing factor in the aberrant Lufthansa airline crash last Tuesday (3-24-15). Many truth-seekers have been frustrated by the road blocks that the “authorities” – including those who manage the media – have inserted that has kept the obvious part of the story out into the open. It has now been seven days since co-pilot Andreas Lubitz intentionally, murderously and suicidally crashed the Germanwings airliner into the French Alps, instantly killing him and 149 innocent passengers and crew members.

What could possibly have been among the motivational triggers that finally made this obviously troubled and angry young man to plan and then execute such a heinous mass murder/suicide? So far the most likely candidate is being cunningly evaded by every entity that has control of the known information.
There has actually been a number of tantalizing details that have been carefully metered out to the press, including the fact that the 26-year-old co-pilot had been in a psychiatric hospital – allegedly for suicidal thinking – years before he qualified for his pilot’s license.

It was also reported that Lubitz had recently been, for undisclosed reasons, “seeing neurologists and psychiatrists” (known for their propensity to use a lot of synthetic brain-altering drugs). It is safe to assume that it was those physicians who prescribed “the plethora of medicines that were taken from his apartment in Dusseldorf and from his parental home”.

 The “plethora of drugs” was found by investigators on Day One. But so far, there has been no mention of what precisely were the drugs that were found nor has there been any public comment from the physicians or clinics detailing the reasons the drugs were prescribed. Good forensic psychologists, investigative journalists – not to mention the rest of us heathen – need to know this information.

Read More

Chelva was the Tamil people; Tamils were Chelva

2016-04-26

amuel James Veluppillai (SJV) Chelvanayakam was born on March 31, 1898 in Ipoh, Malaya. He passed away on April 26, 1977. Today is his 39th Death Anniversary.
SJV received his secondary education at the Union College, Tellippalai and later became a student at St. Thomas College, Mt. Lavinia. At the age of 19, he secured a Bachelor’s degree in Science. While being a teacher, he pursued his studies in law at the Law College. He became an advocate in 1923 and became a Queen’s Counsel in 1947.
He never intended to play a role for himself in the Tamil political movement. He was at the fringes of Tamil politics. In 1944, Soulbury Commission visited Ceylon. G.G. Ponnambalam, a charismatic leader and an orator was in the forefront of Tamil politics. Ponnambalam advocated a formula for balanced communal representation, popularly known as fifty-fifty demand for the minorities within a unitary character of the Constitution.
SJV was a great admirer and supporter of Ponnambalam. He convened an ad hoc body in 1944 at Zahira College, Colombo to support the formula of fifty-fifty demand. Earnest efforts were made to bring all groups of varying political opinions among the Tamil under this ad hoc body to present a united demand before the Soulbury Commission.  This ad hoc body was later evolved into Tamil Congress Party of which G. G. Ponnambalam became its undisputed leader and SJV became his deputy.  

"You referred to my religion as Christian and therefore I had little in common with Tamils, who were mainly Hindus by religion. It stands to the credit of the Hindu people that they have not forced me or other Christians to change our faith before we lead them."

G.G. Ponnambalam led the Tamil Congress at the General Election of 1947 and sought the mandate from the Tamils to reject the Soulbury Commission Report. The Ceylon Tamil voters rejected it and gave Ponnambalam an overwhelming mandate. Later, Ponnambalam articulated the mandate as the mandate of ‘responsive co-operation’ with progressive-minded Sinhalese parties in the South and joined the D. S. Senanayake Government on September 4, 1948.  
SJV has, on the other hand, desired to use Tamil co-operation as a stepping-stone to secure ‘an acceptable resolution of the Tamil concerns relating to (a) citizenship rights for the Indian Tamil plantation workers, (b) parity of status for the Sinhala and Tamil languages, (c) an acceptable National Flag and (d) the cessation of state-aided colonization of the Tamil-speaking areas with
Sinhala colonists’.
He was advancing a federal system of government. However, could not receive sufficient support from the Tamils as against the charismatic leadership of G. G. Ponnambalam.
When Ponnambalam became a Minister in the D. S. Senanayake government, SJV did not resign from the Tamil Congress but continued the tug-of-war of making claim to the Tamil Congress till he inaugurated the Federal Party on December 18, 1949. In the General Election of 1952, the newly-formed Federal Party won two parliamentary seats, Kopay and Trincomalee, and Ponnambalam emerged as the undisputable leader of the Tamils till 1956.
The Sinhala only wave of 1956 gave a new political life to SJV. From 1956 till his death on April 26, 1977, he became the undisputed and acknowledged leader of the Tamils for an uninterrupted period of 21 years.

"SJV’s dedication to the cause of the Tamils was unquestionable and supreme.  He believed in his cause and translated it into action. Freedom for his people was his goal, from which he could not be distracted by ministerial office or worldly gain. He was a well principled leader"

SJV was a Christian by religion and a Hindu by culture. This reconciliation paved his political way easier to identify himself with the politics of the Tamil people. He never changed his religion to gain advantage for his political leadership. Many of his Sinhalese counterparts -- with the introduction of universal franchise -- gave up Christianity in favour of Buddhism to gain political mileage.
His political opponents criticized him of being a Christian leading a Hindu population. Chelvanayakam sent a fitting reply to a letter of criticism from Ven. Hewanpola Ratnasara Thera, President of the Sinhala Buddhist Organization of the Vidyalankara University which appeared in the Daily News of October 3, 1970. Chelvanayakam replied ‘You referred to my religion as Christian and therefore, I had little in common with Tamils who were mainly Hindus by religion. It stands to the credit of the Hindu people that they have not forced me or other Christians to change our faith before we lead them’.          

SJV was a committed proponent of a Sri Lankan entity which encompassed a Federal State. He was advocating a federal unit for the Tamils in the Northern and Eastern Provinces under a federal system of government. He wanted to attain some autonomy for the Tamils within the framework of ‘a quasi-nationalism’. His political objective of a federal union of all the Sri Lankans gave the Tamils a new political vocabulary of a new idea of a traditional homeland.
He brought unity among the Tamils which he considered as a sacred trust and not to be frittered away in exchange of ministerial benefits and other political perks. It was Thondaman, the renowned leader of the Ceylon Workers’ Congress who had rightly and aptly said at a Meeting held on October 11, 1972 that “Chelvanayakam was the Tamil people; and the Tamil people were Chelvanayakam”.
SJV’s dedication to the cause of the Tamils was unquestionable and supreme.  He believed in his cause and translated it into action. Freedom for his people was his goal, from which he could not be distracted by ministerial office or worldly gain.  He was a well principled leader. He expected that the Sinhala leadership would give reasonable solutions for the problems of the Tamils through parliamentary devices. Chelvanayakam honestly believed to build a united Sri Lanka out of her diversity. It is sad to note that all his democratic non-violent agitations and parliamentary devices met with failure. It was a sad state of political governance of the majority Sinhalese leaders that they declined to compromise with him who demonstrated willingness to settle problems of the Tamils for something far short of his original demands.
Now the new Government has openly declared that the new Constitution would embody proposals, satisfactory of power sharing and it would end for good further conflict or another war. Let us hope peace would dawn with the 39th Death Anniversary of S.J.V. Chelvanayakam and the
new Constitution.

Further Disregard Of Tamil Polity Will Further Justify Federalism

By Jehan Perera –April 25, 2016

Jehan Perera

The Northern Provincial Council led by its Chief Minister C. V. Wigneswaranhas passed a resolution for the government to take up in the constitutional reform process. The main feature of the resolution is to merge the Northern and Eastern provinces into a single federal unit. This has been the long standing position of the Tamil polity which came into national prominence in the aftermath of the passage of the “Sinhala only” law in 1956 by which English was replaced by Sinhala as the sole official language of the country. The language law was a measure that was resisted by the entirety of the Tamil-speaking polity which numbered about 30 percent of the country’s population at that time and wished that Tamil too should be an official language. As the Sinhala population was numerically dominant, the Sinhala only law won easy passage in parliament.

The rationale for federalism in the context of Sinhala-Tamil conflict is that the Tamil people, being a regional majority in the Northern and Eastern provinces, will also be the political majority in those two provinces. They can therefore make their own decisions in the regional unity, without being subordinate to the Sinhala majority in the country taken as a whole. The attractiveness of federalism as a political solution to those who are a numerical minority in the country as a whole but are also a regional majority is that it guarantees that the central authorities cannot arbitrarily and unilaterally impose their decisions of the regional authorities or overrule them. This does not mean that the regional authorities can do anything they want, but it does mean that the powers given to them by the constitution cannot be unilaterally taken away by the central authorities.

The problem of the merger of the Northern and Eastern provinces is, however, compounded by the fact that Muslims who are the largest community in parts of the east, are not in favour of becoming a minority to the Tamils in a merged north-east region. On the other hand, both the issues of federalism and the merger of the Northern and Eastern provinces have been opposed for an equally long period of time by the Sinhala polity as being a precursor to the division of the country and the undermining of national sovereignty. Their apprehension is that federalism will be the first constitutional step towards ultimate secession in the same way that the federal states of the Soviet Union, Eastern Europe and several African countries have ended up becoming two or more countries. Except for some of the ideologically leftist parties and liberal groups whose vote banks are not large, the rest of the Sinhala-dominated political parties have not been prepared to take a stance in favour of a federal solution to Sri Lanka’s ethnic conflict.

Read More

Transforming from ‘Ethnicity’ to ‘Common Humanity’: The long march necessary

By Laksiri Fernando-April 25, 2016

"How is an antagonism to be resolved? By making it impossible."- Karl Marx

There is no mystery about ethnicity. Ethnicity is a product of social history and there is no eternity about it. Evolution of a language, sometimes a religion or religious beliefs, living together in a geographical proximity, development of a close customs and traditions, and political formations, if not states, are the forces that create ethnicities or ethnic communities. There are over 5,000 identifiable ethnic communities in the world, but all are not in conflict.

Most of the above attributes or forces have been present in the formation of the Sinhalese, the Tamil sor the Muslims in Sri Lanka. The formation of the Sinhalese ethnicity has primarily been within the confines of the island while the Tamil ethnicity in its formation has been overlapping with the developments in the adjacent subcontinent. Even the Sinhala formation cannot deny the influences of the subcontinent. The key factor in the Muslim ethnic formation undoubtedly is the religion, while migrant communities initiating the process.

None of these communities can claim complete homogeneity, while the differentiations with the others also being relative and overlapping. They all have evolved interacting with each other in their separate as well as combined developments.

Similarities and Differences

It may be true that the Sinhalese formation absorbed or assimilated more from the Tamil formation than the other way round. The reasons perhaps being (1) the predominance of the Tamil culture in the closest areas of the subcontinent, making inroads within the island since historical times, and (2) the Sinhala formation primarily being a ‘hybrid’ nature, based on proto-‘Aryan’ as well as proto-‘Dravidian’ groups in the initial or even latter stages. The ‘Aryan’ influence also cannot be denied in the formation of the vast Tamilian ethnicity/ethnicities in the subcontinent particularly in the case of religion and culture. The ‘Aryan’ and ‘Dravidian’ distinction here is made primarily based on language, however not without other attributes including ‘relatively racial’ characteristics.

Read More...

The Saviour

Photography courtesy The Daily Beast

INDHIRAAon 04/25/2016

Tamils in Sri Lanka are having important conversations every day, in person and through social media and the blogosphere. In some instances, the impact is swift.

For example, on 25th January, the Arts Faculty of the University of Jaffna issued a circular indicating that, commencing the 26th, the Senate of the University would be enforcing a dress code for all its students and staff. Men were to be banned from wearing jeans or t-shirts into lecture halls and had to present themselves without beards, and women had to wear sarees every Friday. The pushback was immediate as outrage ensued on Tamil Facebook and the Tamil blogosphere. The circular was rescinded within 24 hours.

In an unrelated incident the very next day, a senior Tamil journalist was asked to apologize after making a casteist slur against a Tamil commentator from Tamil Nadu, India. Again, Tamil Facebook and bloggers called for a boycott and condemned the decision of IBC Tamil to felicitate the journalist with a lifetime achievement award.

Tamils are continuously having important conversations on caste, sexual violence, feminism, sexism, patriarchy, sexuality, accountability, enforced disappearances, psychosocial care for survivors, the legacy of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), other Tamil militant and paramilitary groups, the wider discourse on Tamil nationalism, the vital need for building solidarity with the Tamil diaspora, combating the prejudices and stereotypes perpetuated by the Tamil movie industry, the direction of the Tamil National Alliance (TNA), political alternatives to the TNA, the need to move beyond electoral politics and build social movements, and so much more.

We are also building solidarity with Muslims and Upcountry Tamils on this island, Kurds, Palestinians, and our sisters and brothers from across the Palk Strait. For decades, Tamils in Sri Lanka have also counted on allies from among Periyar’s egalitarian, anti-caste Dravidian movements in Tamil Nadu. We continue to have crucial dialogues with them to this day.

Many of us Tamils in Sri Lanka are building solidarity with people who identify oppressive and racist State structures, people who’ve been violently subjugated by such structures and who actively battle these structures. We know our sisters and brothers in the Tamil diaspora too are engaging with like minded friends and allies. We realize these solidarities are different from those with friends in Sri Lanka who are privileged and who directly benefit from the privileges afforded to them by a hierarchical State. Our discourse cannot be centered anymore around the feelings or entitlement of those who directly benefit from a racist State and who unconsciously reinforce structural and systematic racism or the need to educate those privileged. Hence, this short missive to our Sinhala friends in Sri Lanka.

Dear Sinhalese allies,

We know it is painful to have this conversation, but we are not looking for saviours. Allow us to have these conversations amongst ourselves — in the democratic space you claim to have provided to us. Then again, how is it truly democratic when the privileged afford us space?

Most of you are privileged in Sri Lanka by virtue of your ethnicity and religion. Most of you are less likely to disappear or be subject to mass surveillance, less likely to have grown up in a war zone for three generations, and more likely to be saved by your privileges in this country. Acknowledge and understand your privileges every day. Use your privileges to amplify our voices rather than displace them with your own. Demonstrate why (rather than demand) we should trust you. Speak to us, listen to us, believe us; and do not speak over us.

Any ally to Tamils in Sri Lanka should understand why we do not trust the State. Do not regurgitate and churn out the narratives of a State that has had us under siege for decades. Do not tell us we should be happy that the country’s anthem was finally sung in Tamil. Do not expect us to celebrate a few token Tamils and Muslims in high office. Rather than tell us how we should feel, let us tell you how we feel about developments.

Do not hijack our conversations. Do not appropriate our contributions. Do not claim to know more about us or what is best for us than we do. That is just flaunting your privilege and perpetuating the narrative of the establishment. That will not gain our trust. That is not allyship.

Finally, for those who need clarification, our nationalism has always been secular in nature. As our true allies surely understand, we are a traumatized people. When more and more among us reluctantly embrace an ethno-religious identity, it is a flawed defence mechanism against a marauding State determined to silence any argument for Tamil self-determination. Even as we are speaking amongst ourselves of creeping Hindutva among Tamils in Sri Lanka and debating about flaunting of religious identities in Tamil nationalist discourse, most of you who claim to be allies look away from the rapid Army-led Sinhala–Buddhisization in the North-East.

Why do you have a different set of standards for yourselves, your representatives, your co-opted civil society, and your leaders? Why are you keen to make excuses for them but demand a perfect, infallible Tamil leadership? Now, ask yourself if you’re truly and honestly listening to us.

Our community is transphobic. It is patriarchal. It is sexist. It is misogynist. It is homophobic. It is racist. But many of us are fighting tooth and nail to push back, to revise the dominant narratives, and to create spaces of social resurgence. Are you fighting equally hard to question the narrative of the State too? Or are you too busy claiming to save us first from ourselves? Are you too busy imposing upon us the flags and identities you wish we would affirm? Your feminists love to preach to us on the oppression of our women, yet deem the Tamil women who are actually standing up to militarization and patriarchy as being ‘too political’. We are sorry: you cannot have it both ways.

Tamils are having important conversations and impacts without your input. For example, while many of you were busy attending a tone deaf, elitist international literary festival, a Tamil trans author, Nila, had her maiden book launch in the Vanni, before a large local community and a wide spectrum of civil society.

We do not need your saving. We only come to you with the hope of having our voices amplified by your privileges. We are now slowly and sadly cognizant of the fact that anything we say could be held against us when you decide we might not be the ‘good’ Tamils that you were looking for. It is not our responsibility to educate you on our conversations. Know that we are talking. Know that we are debating. Know our spaces. Know, also, that we do not all agree with each other. We are having vital conversations — conversations that you are missing because, playing the saviour, you will not hear them.

PTA reform

Apr 25, 2016

Sri Lanka’s draconian Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA) will be undergoing a much-needed reform with the Government deciding to enact three fresh laws to protect security and promote law and order. However, these new laws have to undergo many rounds of discussions to be adequately transparent and include progressive clauses for the reforms to be successful.

Minister of Law and Order Sagala Ratnayake has informed the UN Counter Terrorism Committee Executive Directorate (CTED) of three new laws to replace PTA. Minister Ratnayake said the Government has decided to enact three new laws relating to the national and public security and law and order, to comprehensively and efficiently respond to the contemporary manifestations and threats of extremism and terrorism, other attacks on national security including organised crime and to address the issues of public order and maintenance of essential services.

Government discussions centered around the revision of anti-terrorism legislation including technical assistance to draft comprehensive counter-terrorism legislation to replace the PTA, in accordance with United Nations Human Rights Council Resolutions and in keeping with international best practices.

The PTA lengthens the detention period of terror suspects, detained under Emergency Regulations promulgated under the Public Security Ordinance. The Police can detain suspects for as long as 18 months without filing charges against them. PTA goes further as to usurp the powers of the detainee to seek relief from the Superior Courts. Section 10 of the PTA specifically states, “Any order made under Section 9 shall be final and shall not be called into question by any Court or tribunal by way of writ or otherwise.”

Furthermore, not only does the PTA undermine the terms in the Constitution but it also disregards various international instruments to which Sri Lanka is party to and is thus bound by ‘international law’ to uphold. Article 9 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states, “No one shall be subject to arbitrary arrest, detention or trial.” Moreover Article 9 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights states, “Everyone has the right to liberty and security, and no one shall be subject to arbitrary arrest or detention.”

Now the war has ended the question which then comes to mind is whether the terms of the Act can be amended to at least reflect the greatly improved security situation in Sri Lanka post-war. Under the Sri Lanka Evidence Ordinance, confessions made to the Police or other public officers and confessions made while in the custody of Police are not admissible as dispositive evidence in ordinary criminal cases, unless they are made in the presence of a Magistrate. But such confessions are admissible under the PTA.

Human rights defenders argue that the practice of making confessions to ordinary Police officers must be changed by which either a Superintendent of Police or a Deputy Inspector General of Police can hear the confessions. These are just a few technical issues that a new set of laws will have to tackle. The larger challenge will be the political difficulties of pushing forward reconciliation when opportunistic politicians will use it as a window to whip up anti-minority hysteria as well as figuring out how best to deal with people already detained under the PTA.

Courtesy : http://www.ft.lk/

Will we ever get responsible govts under our democracy?

By R. M. B. Senanayake-April 25, 2016,

Statesmen and public interest organizations expected much from the UNP government under Ranil, which came to office on January 8th last year. They have been in office for over a year, but have carried out the same irresponsible populist policies; and done nothing to ensure sound government and fiscal rectitude. They have done nothing to stop the haemorrhage of public funds from loss making State Corporations, seem to be no longer committed to sound fiscal management, and have failed to explain to the people the unsound fiscal and monetary policies of the previous MR government.

Our governments don’t like to restrict public expenditure. They use the dispensation of public funds as a means to win the votes of the people, never mind the contribution to increase the GDP. Of course, the government is always keen to spend other people’s money in the name of development. But we often ignore the fact that if the government has not sought to rectify the revenue and expenditure policies.

The government obtains money to fund its expenditure from taxation or from running government owned public enterprises. But they don’t like to tax people and they are unable to run the public enterprises profitably, because of the need to dispense favours from such enterprises to their supporters. So, they don’t recruit the most suited for any vacancies but only their favourites, from political supporters who are invariably not suited for the jobs. As for income for the government, it must come from taxation. But taxation of the people makes them unpopular and thence they try hard to avoid it. But what other source of income or rather funds, does the government have? It can borrow from both domestic sources or from abroad. The domestic sources could be the people who are savers or from the financial institutions. But the latter do not always lend the savings of the people deposited with them. They can and do create new money to be lent to borrowers, and such new money when spent adds to the Aggregate Expenditure. Aggregate Expenditure must equal Aggregate Income. All private sector spending units can spend only what they earn as income. Of course they can borrow, but lenders will not lend ad lib to private sector borrowers without adequate security, and any private sector unit which borrows more than what it can repay is heading for financial trouble.

But it is not so with the government, which can obtain its income not only from taxation, and it must borrow taking into account the capacity to repay. Generally, revenue from taxation will increase more or less at the similar rate as that of the growth of the Gross National Income or GDP, apart from borrowing of course. Lenders in the private sector will look at the income of a borrower when lending to it. But there is the general presumption that the government will not default on its debt and people believe it. Since they control the government owned banks and financial institutions, they are able to borrow without limit. But economists say there are prudential limits to government borrowing.

Firstly, when the government borrows the savings of the people it reduces the availability of national savings for the private sector, which is often proclaimed as the engine of growth by politicians. But the engine of growth requires money to invest, which alone can provide the necessary growth. Economists talk of Investment as necessary for growth. How much investment? They have calculated the Capital/Output ratio which is considered as 4.5 or four and half times the capital invested produces one unit of growth. The higher the ratio the greater is the amount of capital required to be invested to produce growth. But capital must first be generated before it can be invested. Capital can be created only by savings, and savings to economists means the foregoing of spending on consumption. So savings in money terms must translate to Real savings where there are restrictions on consumption, at least on the freezing of consumption, so economists stress that a country that wants to speed up its investment must also save more in real terms. Our national savings is only about 21% of GDP. But we manage to invest about 29% of GDP because we borrow from foreign sources through direct foreign investment, as when a foreign party sets up a new industry here or from portfolio investments where foreigners by or subscribe to local borrowings by companies or the government. Much foreign borrowings take the form of foreigners buying government securities either in the primary market when they are issued for the first time, or in the secondary market when they are traded by the original subscribers to other investors.

Is there a limit?

Is there a limit to government borrowings? When the government borrows from domestic lenders it merely has to repay the borrowing in rupees, and the government need not be short of rupees for debt repayment since it can borrow afresh to repay the maturing debt. But when government borrowing keeps on increasing, the public may demand higher and higher interest rates. So when the Central Bank conducts public auctions to issue securities for new borrowings, lenders or subscribers to them want higher and higher rates of interest. But the Central Bank, which manages the public debt on behalf of the government, is faced with a conflict of interest. It must seek to reduce the rate of interest on new borrowings to reduce the interest burden on the government. But monetary policy may sometimes require a tightening of interest rates. What matters however is not the nominal rate of interest, but the Real rate of interest which is the nominal rate of interest less the rate of inflation. Inflation has come down in the recent years, but as the demand for government borrowings keeps on increasing, the government as a borrower will have to pay higher and higher rates of nominal interest which translate into higher real rates of interest as well. Higher real rates of interest become a burden on the borrowers. But the lenders will want higher rates of interest. So the government as borrower may then prefer to borrow from the Central Bank and the banking system, but that means the creation of new money, adding to the Money Supply, which then leads either to higher and higher prices or higher deficits in the current account of the balance of payments. So the Central Bank rejects tenders at public auctions where the lenders demand higher rates of interest. But the alternative is for the Central Bank and the banking system to either pay higher interest rates or be the major subscribers to the issue of government securities in the primary market, without raising the interest rates. But borrowings from the Central Bank and the banking system are highly inflationary and/or detrimental to the balance of payments since the banks may create new money to subscribe to them (unless it has savings not invested).

Supply of funds

The supply of funds in the banking system is also not unlimited, and hence when the government takes more of the national savings there is less available on offer to the private sector, which is recognized as the more productive sector of the economy and the engine of productive growth.

Our governments have borrowed vast sums of money to spend on welfare services instead of investing such borrowings to expand the productive capacity of the economy. Normally, such borrowings must be invested to produce a return from which the interest on the borrowings can be repaid. When the borrowings are used to provide welfare services to the people there is no return on such investments, and no possibility of recovering even the borrowings. This is the problem that our governments have since Independence created for themselves - borrowing to spend on welfare services instead of investing. If they have invested they have failed to obtain an adequate return on them. We have constructed expressways but have not seen to it that the beneficiaries pay the cost by way of a fee, so that the investment provides a sufficient return. It is true that tolls are now levied on the use of expressways. This should be the pattern for all future constructions of roads and highways. The principle should be extended from the highways to even the less important roadways, which should of course be built according to modern standards. The same should apply to the construction of new bridges. The principle should be extended to the Provincial Council and Pradeshiya Sabha investments in overheads, such as in the construction of roads and bridges which are presently used by people with much hardship. The people will appreciate the work involved and pay up willingly.

IMF vs. Irresponsible values

The Government is said to be in talks with the IMF for balance of payments support to tide over a looming crisis. All our governments have disregarded the prudential rules of fiscal management. They come to office hoping to spend money that is not there, and fail to address their minds to stop the losses in the commercial undertakings of the State Corporations. They have no commitment to run the public sector with economy and efficiency. They have adopted the irresponsible values of providing benefits without recovering the costs. Plato would have quoted this as the inevitable result of mass democracy. What future is there for a State which is run by such an irresponsible bunch. They only want to expand public expenditure. They turn a blind eye to the colossal losses incurred by State Corporations and are not interested in doing anything to turn them around for they themselves are the cause. There is a Sinhala folk saying about asking the rogue’s mother about the whereabouts of the stolen property. So they will continue to incur losses which have to be reimbursed by the Treasury, which in turn must borrow and pay interest or create money.

The IMF is the only hope to compel our irresponsible governments to reform the public sector. The IMF must insist that the government commit itself to reform of the public sector enterprises to stop the haemorrhage of public money. The problem of losses in State Corporations are caused by the members of the government themselves. They appoint unsuitable political nominees with no expertise or experience in running enterprises and who are knaves.

Sri Lanka recorded a Government Debt to GDP of 75.50 percent of the country's Gross Domestic Product in 2014. Government Debt to GDP in Sri Lanka averaged 90.83 percent from 1990 until 2014, reaching an all time high of 103.20 percent in 2001 and a record low of 75.50 percent in 2014. Government Debt to GDP in Sri Lanka is reported by the Central Bank of Sri Lanka. But this reduction in the ratio is due more to the increase in government income to fund its expenditure rather than to any decrease in borrowing.

CHINA, INDIA TUSSLE FOR INFLUENCE AS SRI LANKA SEEKS INVESTMENT

Gauri Bhatia | Special to CNBC.

25/04/2016

Situated almost in the middle of the Indian Ocean, there is no escaping Sri Lanka’s centrality.

The country lies just a few nautical miles away from the super-busy east-west shipping route, through which an estimated 60,000 ships pass every year, carrying two-thirds of the world’s oil and half of all container shipments.

Now, with Asia’s economic rise, experts say Sri Lanka’s location has become even more alluring. Not only are three Asian powers – China, Japan and India – playing dominant roles in the global economy at the same time for the first time, there are also increasingly attractive markets and trade opportunities in Asia.

“Sri Lanka is the pivotal point for a global grand strategy,” R. Hariharan, a retired Indian army colonel and specialist in South Asian geopolitics, told CNBC. “Sri Lanka’s geography gives it an advantage disproportionate to its size.”

The small island nation with a population of 22 million has been rediscovering its strategic location for the past few years as it comes out of a 26-year civil war that depleted government resources and held back development. As Sri Lanka looks for assistance to reboot its economy, a largely two-way tussle for influence in the country and, in turn, the region is on.

China, India tussle

Ishara S. Kodikara | Getty Images

Activists demonstrate in Colombo in March 2015 over the $1.4B Chinese-funded Port City project, which began construction in 2014 despite claims of the sea reclamation process would cause environmental damage.

China has identified the tear-dropped shaped island as a key point on the Maritime Silk Road, as it plans to build infrastructure along this ancient trade route that extends from China to Africa.

Sri Lanka also holds an attraction for both India and groups that would like access to India. Asia’s third largest economy is within “artillery range” of Sri Lanka, situated some 30 kilometers (19 miles) to the north of the island.

“We are at the doorstep of a dynamic market,” Anushka Wijesinha, chief economist at Ceylon Chamber of Commerce, said. “The Indian middle class market alone is set to be 10 times our entire population. Imagine the opportunities there.”

A tricky balancing act

India and China are Sri Lanka’s biggest import markets, count among the top three in terms of tourist inflows and provide significant share of the country’s foreign investment.

“Sri Lanka needs to develop its economy using both Indian and Chinese help. We need both markets,” Shiran Fernando, lead economist at Frontier Research, told CNBC.

But China and India have not always been open to sharing influence, with both trying to leverage their “special relationship” with the island.

“The challenge is to find a balance between these two large countries and not take to one bloc,” said Nishan de Mel, executive director at Verite Research. “The pendulum is swinging but should end up in the middle.”

China’s early lead

Buddhika Weerasinghe | Getty Images

Cranes stand still at sunset in October 2015, on the site of a new, Chinese-built hotel in Colombo. A new Sri Lankan government suspended support for a number of Chinese projects in 2015, including the capital’s Port City mega-development.

After the civil war ended in 2009, China led the rebuilding of Sri Lanka’s infrastructure, as India and the West shied away. The West was concerned over alleged human rights violations during the war against insurgent Tamils in the north of the island, while India was politically constrained owing to its ethnic ties with the Tamils.

In this vacuum, China landed contracts to build highways, ports and an airport in the south of the island, from a Sri Lankan government that was at the time open to Chinese expertise and money. India provided assistance in the war torn areas of the north, rebuilding homes and railway tracks, but China was by far the dominant partner.

Among the big-ticket Chinese projects was a port in Hambantota at Sri Lanka’s southern tip, built at a cost of around $360 million, with 85 percent funding from China’s Export-Import Bank. Another key project, a $1.4 billion port city in Colombo, was initiated by then-president Mahinda Rajapaksa’s government in 2014.

Funded by Chinese state-owned company, China Communications Construction, the port city project was due to be the single largest foreign investment in Sri Lanka – a multi-development project with a marina, malls, golf courses and even a Formula 1 track.

But development stalled amid controversy over the tender procedures and on concerns the project, to be built on reclaimed land, would damage the island’s beaches, and it was left in limbo when Rajapaksa’s government was voted out in early 2015, amid promises by the then-opposition, led by Maithripala Sirisena, to scrap the deal entirely.

The pendulum swings

With a new government, headed by President Sirisena, came a more pro-India stance. Sirisena visited India on his first overseas trip and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi reciprocated within a month, using the trip to Sri Lanka to invoke the two countries’ cultural and religious links. He also promised India would develop an oil tank “farm,” offered $318 million in credit for rail works and a $1.5 billion currency swap between the central banks of the two nations, according to reports.

But within a year Sri Lanka was back wooing Chinese investments. The government has revived the port city, and followed up with a visit to China by Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe in April.

The trip was widely read as being aimed at mending relations as well as negotiating better terms on the port city for Sri Lanka, including a reduction in the $125 million penalty it received for previously suspending work on the mega-project.

Wickremesinghe also requested an equity swap on some of Sri Lanka’s $8 billion worth of Chinese loans.

“The government has done a U-turn on the port city project because reality set in,” the Chamber of Commerce’s Wijesinha told CNBC. “If we are to boost investment, we have to look at whoever brings in the investment and clearly China has the money.”

Some commentators maintain that Sri Lanka has cleverly managed its courtship with both India and China.

“At the end of the day, we don’t have a U.S. base on our shores, nor are the Chinese investments a de facto base and neither are we an annexure of India,” said a Colombo-based analyst, implying that the small island state had done well to maintain its sovereignty while balancing diplomatic and trade relations.

– CNBC

Kondayā, Raised To The Status Of Mysterious Criminal

By Basil Fernando –April 25, 2016

Basil Fernando

The name Kondaya is now a household name, following the tragic Sadewmicase, the abduction, rape and murder of a little girl of around 4 years. Discovery of the dead body led to an uproar not only in her village and the neighbouring villages but throughoutthecountry. There was a demand for immediate inquiries and for prosecution and also for vengeance.

As usual the local police failed to make any arrests for some time and instead began to float stories that were reported in the media, and various people were named as possible suspects. The first was the father and the grandfather in the same family, who happen to be the males in the house.

So, simply because they were male, the police developed a suspicion that they might have done this, and before any evidence was collected, their suspicion was transmitted to the media and the media gave it to the whole nation. These days it is not only the whole nation; because of social media and the Internet, it was also discussed in the Sri Lankan circles outside Sri Lanka.

The arrests were made, and later the “suspects” were found to have nothing to do with the crimes relating to the little girls abduction, rape, and murder and they were released.

The next suspect was a young boy, who happened to have a computer and Internetfacilities, and on that basis he was suspected as the possible culprit. Again, the police suspicion was taken as fact and proof, and theinformation was leaked to the media, and again the same kind of publicity greeted the local village, the country, and the Sri Lankan circles abroad.

In the case of Kondaya, the DNA results have themselves proven and confirmed and he was positively identified as the person who could have not committed this crime. And so, the boy was also released, after many days in custody, and after being tortured.

Read More