Sri Lanka: Enforce Commission Directives on Terror Detainees

Speed Up Repeal of Prevention of Terrorism Act

JUNE 13, 2016

(New York) – The Sri Lankan government should abide by National Human Rights Commission guidelines on arrest and detention while taking urgent steps to repeal the draconian Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA), Human Rights Watch said today. Sri Lankan authorities have continued to use the PTA to detain individuals without charge, despite pledging to revoke the law at the United Nations Human Rights Council in Geneva in October 2015.

EXPAND

Special task force police officers stand guard outside a jail in Colombo, Sri Lanka on November 7, 2010.

© 2010 Reuters

The PTA was used widely during the country’s decades-long civil war, primarily against those suspected of involvement with the separatist Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam. Exact numbers of those still held under the PTA are unknown, with estimates ranging from 120 to 162 detainees. Since April 2016, the government has arrested at least 11 people under the PTA for alleged terrorist activities instead of using appropriate provisions under the criminal code.

“It is encouraging that the government has taken preliminary steps to abolish the Prevention of Terrorism Act, but the process is moving too slowly,” said Brad Adams, Asia director. “Until it is repealed, the government should announce a moratorium on the use of the PTA and instead rely on the criminal code, which does not allow indefinite detention without charge or trial.”

The PTA allows for arrests for unspecified “unlawful activities” without warrant and permits detention for up to 18 months without producing the suspect before a court. People detained under the PTA have been held without charge for years. The law also provides immunity for government officials responsible for abuses if deemed acting in good faith or fulfilling an order under the act. Although the government has been more transparent about recent PTA arrests, the tremendous powers given to the security forces under the PTA facilitate abuses.

Following a scathing report by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights in September 2015, the government agreed to a resolution at the Human Rights Council in which it made many pledges toward accountability and justice. Paragraph 12 of the resolution committed the government to review and repeal the PTA and enact a law in line with international best practices. The government is working on a new bill to replace the PTA but there is no sign that this will be passed soon, and little transparency or consultation about the process.

Revoking the PTA is absolutely crucial for ensuring respect for the basic rights of criminal suspects and the rule of law in Sri Lanka.

Brad Adams

Asia Director

Recent arrests under the PTA in Chavakachcheri in the Northern Province prompted Sri Lanka’s National Human Rights Commission to issue Directives on Arrest and Detention under the Prevention of Terrorism (Temporary Provisions) Act No. 48 of 1979 on May 18, 2016. This comprehensive list ofdirectives is intended to protect detainees against the security forces’ broad powers under the PTA, particularly at the time of arrest and ensuing detention. These include guarantees of medical and legal assistance, registration of arrest, right to language of the detainee’s choice, security from torture and other ill-treatment, and special protection for women and children. The directives also reassert the commission’s mandate to be promptly informed of all PTA arrests, to access any person arrested or detained under the PTA, and to access any place of detention at any time.

The government has made substantial progress on many cases of prior PTA detainees. The authorities have released some PTA detainees on bail, “rehabilitated” others, and promised to charge and prosecute the remainder. However, the government has still not put forward a plan to provide redress for those unjustly detained under the PTA, or addressed the issue of detainees charged and prosecuted solely on the basis of coerced confessions obtained during detention.

“So long as the PTA is in place and being used, the Sri Lankan government will have a hard time convincing the Human Rights Council that it is keeping its commitments,” Adams said. “Revoking the PTA is absolutely crucial for ensuring respect for the basic rights of criminal suspects and the rule of law in Sri Lanka.”

REPORT:WHAT IS HAPPENING WITH THE PTA DETAINEES IN SRI LANKA NOW?

13/06/2016

Centre for Human Rights and Research (CHR) Sri Lanka has unveiled its comprehensive report on the Prevention of Terrorism act (PTA) ‘What is happening with the detainees now? The forgotten political prisoners under the Yahapalanaya.

In the report CHR puts the PTA in context of Sri Lankan history, analyzes the draconian anature of the law, provides case studies of how PTA has affected those detained under it and their families and details how the ‘good governance’ administration has tackled the PTA issue. Civil Sociaty Organizations (CSOs) who played a main role in ensuring the victory of this government has been insisting for decades to repeal the law. While the current administration has remarked that it will amend the PTA according to international norms, it has not taken proactive steps to ameliorate those affected by the PTA.

Report What is Happening With the Pta Detainees in Sri Lanka Now by Thavam Ratna

Those many Chequered irons in the ‘yahapalanaya’ fire

Sunday, June 12, 2016

It is tragic but telling that within a relatively short period, lofty expectations regarding the performance of the Sirisena-Wickremesinghe Government have dwindled into an abject murmuring of ‘well, at least it is better than the Rajapaksa regime.’

As comforting as this may be to our bruised and battered ears, there is a singular danger in such complacency. Quite apart from the fact that Rajapaksa rule cannot be used to measure the performance of its ‘yahapalanaya’ (good governance) successor given that there was essentially no standard to be compared against, there are other perils in this line of thought.

A subtle undermining of the Rule of Law

Put directly, the one good thing about the Rajapaksas was their unmitigated crudity and complete unconcern in professing even a nodding acquaintance with basic governance. Shocking as this was, it also constituted a good platform to expose the excesses of a single family’s ransacking of Sri Lanka’s coffers. The critical democratic mass in January 2015 rejecting that regime was precisely as a result of that abysmal crudity. Had the Rajapaksas deigned to be just a tad more subtle, that result may have been immeasurably harder to achieve.

But what we have now in contrast is infinitely more sophisticated game playing with Sri Lanka’s economy, the democratic system and the piteous wails of the Tamil polity in the Wanni awaiting that long promised justice. At each level, there is a specific contradiction that gives the unmistakable lie to the rhetoric though only a few will be dealt with here due to space constraints.

Let us take basic Rule of Law challenges. So at one point we have Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe expounding on the importance of Parliament regaining control of finance in the best traditions of Westminister governance. But juxtaposed with that assertion, the Parliamentary Committee on Public Enterprise (COPE) has disturbingly this week proclaimed its indignation regarding the refusal of the Governor of the Central Bank of Sri Lanka (CBSL), the Prime Minister’s handpicked choice, to provide information relating to Treasury Bond issuances from 2015. This was following a special investigation undertaken by COPE given serious allegations of insider trading and profiteering. These reports, quoting the Chairman of COPE, Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna parliamentarian Sunil Handunetti, have not been denied so far.

Testing RTI against the CBSL

Scandalously, anti-corruption activists have also pointed to a surreptitious destroying of information and data in the Central Bank records relating to the issuance of the two Treasury Bonds. If such allegation is subsequently proved, relevant public officials will be held accountable thereof. In fact, if this Government holds good to its promise to enact the Right to Information (RTI) law this month, the first priority of anti-corruption activists should be to test the strength of the enactment by filing a spate of RTI applications against the CBSL. Contrary to the excitable pronouncements of some, the CBSL is not exempted from the RTI law. Indeed, this would be an excellent test case to assess the vitality of the public interest disclosure clause which constitutes the most important part of the RTI Bill and which mandates compulsory disclosure.

In general, the issue of the Governorship of the Central Bank has become a litmus test on the Rule of Law for this coalition Government. So far it has failed quite spectacularly to demonstrate its bona fides. Where the Prime Minister is concerned, what emerges is a ringing tone of stubborn disapproval in regard to imposing external accountability of the CBSL. This was well illustrated last year when the Prime Ministerial finger was directed at newspapers which had published extracts from an earlier interim report of COPE in its previous term, threatening the editors with parliamentary privilege.

The role of President Sirisena in this regard is scarcely better. His weak suggestion in July last year to the Government that the Central Bank Governor be asked to resign from his post was an attempt to restore public faith in the Presidency just prior to the parliamentary election. This explanation was following the Treasury Bond fracas earlier that year where bonds were sold at unreasonably higher interest rates to a company connected to the Central Bank Governor`s son-in-law. But except this ‘suggestion’, precious little else was done. This year, anti-corruption activists alleged another bond deal in similarly inauspicious circumstances.

Other ‘yahapalanaya’ contradictions galore

Cumulatively the Government’s conduct in this regard exemplifies the paradox of expounding on the importance of financial accountability on the one hand while undermining it on the other by treating the CBSL as the proverbial sacred cow.

On his own part, Governor Arjun Mahendran has vigorously refuted charges against him, utilizing an order of the Supreme Court in which leave to proceed in a petition challenging his functioning was refused. However, no substantive hearing of the petition on its merits took place. This indicates the dangers of filing hasty and (legally) ill considered applications in court given the damage that takes place thereafter as a result of strategic propaganda.

In this context, President Sirisena’s stand in the forthcoming reappointment of the Central Bank Governor will no doubt, be crucial. But the Governorship of the CBSL is by no means the only chequered iron in the ‘yahapalanaya’ fire. Last year, this administration’s Minister of Justice thought fit to boast that he had ‘prevented’ a frontline Rajapaksa from being arrested on charges of corruption. Now we hear of instructions emanating from the Presidential Secretariat regarding a ‘go-slow’ of the arrest of public officials who had been complicit in corrupt deals of the previous regime. What nonsense is this?

Shadow boxing with ‘yahapalanaya’

Meanwhile piling insult on injury, the Government announced an outrageously massive supplementary estimate for ministerial luxury cars this week even as the displaced in Aranayake, Kosgama and the floods camped out in dirt and mud.

The Prime Minister’s reassurance that this would be ‘temporarily’ held back till the displaced are settled did nothing to alleviate this blinding sense of injustice. What is needed is a permanent withholding until Sri Lanka’s economic woes are dealt with. This is what is meant by shadow boxing with ‘yahapalanaya.’
The sooner we recognize this, the better if a challenge is to be mounted to the failures of democratic governance that increase day by day.

Abeykoon Bandara turns jittery; in panic transfers 61 Presidential secretariat officers

(Lanka-e-News- 13.June.2016, 10.00PM)  Following the exposure of the corrupt activities  and his secret  ties with the Rajapakses , the secretary to the president Abeykoon Bandara has turned jittery , and in a panic stricken state had suddenly transferred out  61 Management assistants  of the presidential secretariat to the ministry of public administration.

The reason cited  by Abeykoon in support of these transfers is : these are staff members who had been working for a long period – 8 to 9 years in the presidential secretariat . But the true position is , these officers have been in the secretariat even during the Rajapkse era , and because they  know fully well  all the perfidies and treacheries of Abeykoon, the latter has got alarmed.

These officers have no political  affiliations and are of the joint services. If these officers have worked for more than five years as alleged by Abeykoon , it is he should hold himself responsible and answerable for that because  Abeykoon the infamous renegade  before he pole vaulted to the side of good governance was the secretary of public administration . Since he is  amassing colossal sums of black money  through his sidekicks and stooges planted in the Customs , Immigration  and Emigration , and RMV ,  he does not want to  go on pension despite his senile decay , and incapacitated  state. 

---------------------------
by     (2016-06-13 16:50:29)

Tame Rising Militant Racism Before It Tames The Government And The Country

By Latheef Farook –June 12, 2016

Latheef Farook

Isn’t it time that the government and the mainstream Sinhalese community wake up and tame militant racist mercenaries before they tame the government and turn the country into a killing field?

It appears that racist mercenaries who persecuted Muslims during Mahinda Rajapaksa regime seem to be raising their heads to destabilise President Maithripala Sirisena’s government. Perhaps they are trying to help defeated political forces to stage a comeback by trying to exploit the unstable political and economic situation especially in view of the government’s failure or refusal to fulfil its promises.

This also includes the government’s failure to pass the much talked about and expected hate speech bill which could deter racist elements.

During the past months few militant racists who do not represent mainstream Sinhalese community or Buddhism as they claim, have started violent attacks on Muslims, especially their religious and educational institutions.

Protest against te construction of a junior school in Dambawinna-Welimada

It is common knowledge that these racists, suspected to have been funded by local and foreign forces hostile to Muslims, have been used by Rajapaksa regime and foreign forces to unleash violence on Muslims in violation of the very same teachings of Buddhism they claim to profess and protect.

The atrocities they committed on Muslims during Rajapaksa regime remain fresh in the minds of all. Muslims too set aside their sufferings and began to rebuild their lives under the peaceful environment brought in by President Sirisena’s government. They didn’t even call for a commission to probe into these shameful activities during Rajapaksa regime.

Racists remained subdued ever since Maithripala Sirisena was elected as president on 8 January 2015. Now they seem to be raising their heads.

Minaret issue in Kandy Mosque

A group of people led by Buddhist monks protested against the construction of a minaret at a mosque in Kandy stating that it will be taller than the Tooth Relic Temple. Called Line Mosque and built in 1860, in close proximity to Central Market, the mosque is located in a low area. The top most point of the minaret, on completion, will be far below the ground level of the Tooth Relic Temple and even much below the adjoining building complex.

Thus the protest led by militant monks and lay people on 05.06.2016 in front of the mosque is simply based on fiction. Threatening the Muslims a Buddhist monk addressing the crowd said “let them raise an inch in the minaret we will take care of them! “.

Read More

Reason for depreciation of Sri Lankan Rupee in recent past and implications to economy 

Tuesday, 14 June 2016

Analysis of merchandise imports and exports data of Sri Lanka reveals that the trade deficit (import export gap) has widened over the years. The deficit had in fact doubled since 2007. Despite a number of initiatives taken by the successive governments, the country has failed to increase its exports significantly. Since 2007, exports have grown a mere 4.1% ($ 2.9 billion) while non-oil imports have grown at a faster rate of 8% ($ 7.5 billion).

The new government elected in early 2015 has emphasised the need to follow a growth model driven by exports. The government plans to develop special economic zones (SEZ) around the already-existing infrastructure as well as plan future infrastructure projects to make those investments commercially viable. To achieve a growth driven by exports, the country needs to strengthen its competitiveness in the international market. Maintaining competitiveness in the input cost, restructuring the labour market and development of skills in the labour force, easy access to development finance, maintaining competitive exchange rate policy and bilateral and multilateral trade partnerships (i.e. Free Trade Agreements – FTA) are among the priorities.

As identified above, a competitive currency is a critical success factor for the export competitiveness of the country. There were instances in the past where, the exporters raised serious concern over exchange rate policy maintained by the Central Bank of Sri Lanka (CBSL) which has contributed towards erosion of the country’s competitiveness vis-à-vis its peer group. On this backdrop, it is important to look at the current exchange rate policy and its implications which have also drawn lots of criticism from various groups.

Exchange Rate Policy

As published in the official website of the Central Bank of Sri Lanka (CBSL), the country has adopted a floating exchange rate system since 2001 which allowed an independent adjustment of the exchange rate according to the market forces of demand and supply. In the event of excess volatility in the exchange rate, the CBSL would intend to intervene to curb such excess volatility. In order to ensure an orderly functioning of the market, the CBSL prescribes maximum net open position (NOP) limits for Commercial Banks (LCBs) and closely monitors the activities in the domestic foreign exchange market.

However, market participants observe that the CBSL, in practice has deviated from this stated policy in many occasions and has intervened to stabilise the exchange rate. At the extreme, analysts argue that the CBSL in certain times has maintained soft peg exchange rate policy completely deviating from the stated floating exchange rate policy. Exporters have expressed their displeasure over this soft peg exchange rate policy which was viewed as impediment to maintaining country’s export competitiveness.

The CBSL has allowed exchange rate to depreciate at the time of economic crisis in the past. The Budget 2012 proposed to devalue the exchange rate by 3%, by passing the mandate of the Central Bank of Sri Lanka. The proposal for devaluation surprised foreign exchange market. Soon after, the CBSL stopped intervention into foreign exchange market and subsequently the exchange rate depreciated by 12% during the year 2012. After the sharp depreciation, experienced in 2012 the exchange rate stabilised for the following two years (2013 and 2014), showing only marginal depreciation of 2%.

However, Indian Rupee (INR), the currency of our largest trading partner, depreciated by 14% against United States Dollars (USD) during the above same period. Figure 01-A demonstrates annual depreciation of Sri Lankan Rupee (LKR) and Indian Rupee (INR), against United State Dollars (USD).

Exchange Rate Movement in the Peer Group

The general public is perturbed by the exchange rate depreciation experienced in Sri Lanka since the assumption of the new government in January 2015. Critics attribute this adverse movement to presumed bad economic policy of the present government, without clear fundamentals. Analysis of the performance of peer group currencies against USD reveals depreciation of LKR against USD is identical as the case with the currencies of the peer group.

Some regional currencies have heavily depreciated against USD. The above comparison suggests the recent depreciation of LKR against USD is not unusual and standalone. USD had unprecedentedly appreciated against almost all market emerging market currencies. For the purpose of comparison, it is worth to note that Indian Rupee (INR) has depreciated 42% against USD since 2010 while Lankan Rupee (LKR) experienced depreciation of 28% during the same period. This comparison with Indian Rupee (INR) is important as the largest trading partner of the country.

As shown in the Panel B of Figure 1, Indian Rupee (INR) has in fact depreciated against Sri Lankan Rupee during past 10 years. Figure 2 shows the depreciation of peer group currencies since 2006.

The hindsight is that the recent depreciation of LKR would help our exporters to remain competitive in tough global environment. Due to the economic slowdown in our major export destinations, primarily the United States and Europe, our exporters face severe competition and could possibly lose market share. The GDP growth, driven by the exports cannot be achieved without maintaining competitive exchange rate. In theory, depreciation of a local currency encourages exports while curbing expensive imports.

If Sri Lankan Rupee (LKR) didn’t adjust appropriately in comparison to its competitors, our competitiveness in the international markets would be seriously eroded as everyone else in the peer group has already adjusted.

Imported inflation

One of the key concerns of the depreciation of Sri Lankan Rupee is imported inflation as many essential goods including fuel, cereal and large number of food items are imported into the country. Sri Lankan rupee depreciated nearly 10% against the USD during 2015. The latest estimate for the consumer price inflation in the country as measured by Colombo Consumer Price Index (CCPI) is 4.8% (May 2016, year on year basis). The inflation in the food category is 5.6% while the non-food category has increased by a lower rate of 4.2%.

The uptick in the inflation has largely emanated from the non-tradable goods. This could be attributed to seasonal variation in food prices due to bad weather prevailed in the country. To put this into perspective, it remains within the comfortable zone of the Central Bank of Sri Lanka. Further analysis of consumer basket of Colombo Consumer Price Index (CCPI) reveals, only 30%-40% of the basket could perhaps be affected by such exchange rate depreciation. Given the administered nature of the fuel price and many imported essential goods, space for such imported inflation is further lessened.

As mentioned earlier, depreciation of currency helps to curb unwanted imports. Even if the prices are not administered, the imported inflation will be less severe as the global oil and commodity prices have significantly plunged. It is a better time to absorb part of the shock now. Such adjustments could have been severe had commodity prices remained elevated.

Valuation of Exchange Rate

 Real value of a currency (exchange rate) is measured through real exchange rate; a broad summary measure of the prices of one country’s goods and services relative to those of another country or group of countries. According to Bank of International Settlement (BIS), a nominal effective exchange rate (NEER) is an index of some weighted average of bilateral exchange rates.

The real effective exchange rate (REER) is the NEER adjusted by some measure of relative prices or costs; changes in the REER, thus take into account both nominal exchange rate developments and the inflation differential vis-à-vis trading partners. The observation of real effective exchange rate (REER) of Sri Lanka and India suggests that recent depreciation of Sri Lankan rupee has allowed the currency to remain in line with its real valuation. If LKR was artificially held fearing imported inflation, REER could have remained above the equilibrium level.

Having understood the need for modernising our export sector, fairly valued currency is a necessity for maintaining the country’s competiveness.

From the policy perspective, the CBSL has raised interest rates and allowed the exchange rate to depreciate significantly in response to weak internal and external environment. The CBSL has stated that there is no need of further tightening of monetary policy at that time indicating the adjustment would take effect with a lag. However, if the Fed (the Central Bank of the United States) decided to raise its reference Federal Funds Rate, the USD may tend to appreciate further. The CBSL may consider it is appropriate action to raise local interest rates in such an environment to manage the impact of possible USD appreciation.

The Central Banks around the world have different mandates. The main objective of a central bank is to maintain price stability. The Central Banks have to carefully navigate the economy in controlling inflation without curtailing economic growth. The CBSL has two core objectives: maintaining economic and price stability and maintaining financial system stability with a view to encourage and promote the development of the productive resources of the country. Analyst argues that the CBSL should focus on interest rate anchor while allowing free movement in LKR, implying such policy would enable the country to maintain healthy growth in exports by maintaining competitive exchange rate policy while facilitating the growth in domestic economy by relatively low interest rate regime.

Conclusion

Despite widespread criticism, the recent depreciation of LKR should be viewed as a necessity from the analyst perspective. It could be attributed to the appreciation of USD against all currencies in the emerging markets and our peer group, rather than standalone weakness of LKR or the underlying economy. The fear of high imported inflation is insignificant at this environment as the international commodity prices have fallen significantly. The depreciation of LKR has helped Sri Lankan exporters to remain competitive in tough global environment as indicated by real value of the currency. 

(The writer is a former Fund Manager at the Employees Provident Fund (of the Central Bank of Sri Lanka) and former Investment Manager (international investments) of Hayat Invest Company in Kuwait.)

Patriotic Gota’s traitorous deeds! 

Jun 13, 2016

Former defence secretary Nandasena Gotabhaya Rajapaksa is planning to play a new role these days, media reports. He is dreaming to become deputy leader of the SLFP under the leadership of president Maithripala Sirisena.

His friends, who are paving the way to make that a reality, claim Gotabjhaya to be a clean character without any accusation of corruption or act of terror. They argue that the allegations against him have not been proven in a court of law.

Given below is just one of the numerous ‘deals’ struck by such a so-called virtuous character.

The presidential secretariat, through a four-member commission, has by now received confirmation as to how Gotabhaya and architect Muditha Jayakody, who claims himself to be the modern Geoffrey Bawa, swindled Rs. 173 million from the Defence Ministry.

As per a cabinet decision on 05 August 2015, an investigation committee chaired by Foreign Employment Bureau’s secretary G.S. Vithanage and also comprising Housing and Construction Ministry director S.D.H. de Silva, Public Finance Department director P.B.S.C. Nonis and H.M. Ajith Chandra investigated the irregularities that had taken place in the security forces headquarters building (Colombo Pentagon) project at Akuregoda in Battaramulla, and handed over its report to the government about six months ago, but the government has not yet implemented the recommendations contained in the report, as Gotabhaya’s invisible hands are still at work at the

Defence Ministry
If the Sri Lanka Association of Architects does not conduct an immediate investigation and take disciplinary action against Jayakody, who compares himself to Deshamanya Geoffrey Bawa, the reputation won by the likes of Geoffrey Bawa for their profession will be destroyed.

Vithanage report on Colombo Pentagon
The investigation report says the cabinet paper that enabled Gotabhaya to give the contract to Jayakody as well as the project proposal by Muditha Jayakody Associates (Pvt.) Ltd. (MJAL) have gone missing from the Defence Ministry. This is a clear indication that Gotabhaya’s invisible hands are still very much alive at the ministry.

The cabinet on 25 January 2011 appointed MJAL as the project consultant without calling for tenders. On 05 April 2006, MJAL was appointed a consultant to the Defence Ministry before it was registered with the Registrar of Companies at Samagam Medura. The MJAL was not a member of the Sri Lanka Institute of Chartered Architects (SLICA) either. It got company registration 27 October 2010 and became a SLICA member on 02 November 2011.

As consultant fee for the project, a 5.5 per cent of the project cost is due to be paid. That is divided as 1.5 pc for MJAL and 4 pc for Central Engineering Consultancy Bureau (CECB) that does the construction part.

Accordingly, the cabinet on 10 July 2014 decided to pay Rs. 606.03 million to MJAL and Rs. 1,556.90 million to CECB. That had been calculated at an estimated cost of Rs. 40 billion for the first phase of the project.

Surplus payments to Muditha with Gota’s approval
MJAL had received Rs. 509.926 million as consultancy fees from the Defence Ministry by 31 May last year. That is 83 pc payment of the approved amount. However, only 30.02 pc of the work is completed. However, MJAL claims it has completed 68.5 pc of its task. On Gotabhaya’s orders, the ministry has made a surplus payment from public funds of Rs. 173.5 million to MJAL, although the entire payment should have been Rs. 347 million. On Gotabhaya’s orders, a surplus Rs. 146.5 million had been paid to CECB.

Gotabhaya and Jayakody are two rogues who have swindled millions of rupees under the cover of patriotism. One tries to take full credit for the war victory, while the other compares himself to Deshamanya Geoffrey Bawa, in order to commit daylight robbery.

There is adequate evidence to punish both as per clauses 403, 386 and 389 of the Penal Code, but to whose wants the FCID and the Attorney General’s Department are yet to act against them? citizens who value justice question.

We are in the possession of all the documents in this shady deal and will publish them soon…

Previous article

JR’s Geoffrey Bawa and Gota’s Muditha!

MC bail order suspended

JUN 13 2016

The Colombo High Court yesterday issued an Interim Order suspending the operation of the Nugegoda Magistrate’s bail order in respect of former Colombo Additional Magistrate Thilina Gamage over the alleged possession of a baby elephant without a valid licence and with regard to several suspicious alterations in the elephant registration.

The Interim Order will be effective until June 21.

High Court Judge Manilal Waidyatilleke made this order consequent to a revision application filed by the Attorney General and the CID challenging the Nugegoda Magistrate’s order on legal grounds.

On June 2, issuing an order directing to release the suspect on bail, Nugegoda Magistrate Kanishka Wijeratne observed that the elephant calf in question cannot be considered as a public property since the Wildlife Director General had issued a licence on a previous occasion. Accordingly, Gamage was ordered to be released on cash bail of Rs. 500,000 with four sureties of Rs. 2.5 million.

Meanwhile, Gamage who had been named as the third respondent in the revision application was noticed to appear in Court on June 21 by the Colombo High Court.

The High Court further issued an order directing the registrar of the Nugegoda Magistrate’s Court that the case records pertaining to the magisterial inquiry be handed over to the High Court.

While supporting the revision application in Court, Senior State Counsel Dileepa Peiris appearing on behalf of the Attorney General informed Court that the Nugegoda Magistrate had issued an illegal order approving the release of Gamage on bail, contrary to the provision of the Public Property Act.

He sought an order to arrest and remand the suspect after revoking the Nugegoda Magistrate’s bail order.
SSC Peiris informed Court that according to the section 22 (12) of the Fauna and Flora Protection (Amendment) Act, No.22 of 2009 any elephant which has not been registered shall be presumed to be taken or removed from the wild without lawful authority or approval and such elephants shall be deemed to be public property.

SSC Peiris complained that the Nugegoda Magistrate has mistakenly mentioned in his order that it was section 23 (12) of Fauna Flora Protection Act the matter is relevant to.

Peiris told Court that the Nugegoda Magistrate had granted bail to Gamage in accordance with the Bail Act without taking into consideration provisions contained in the Public Property Act.

He further sought an order to determine whether this offence that comes under the Public Property Act would provide provisions to release such a suspect on bail.

He complained that the Nugegoda Magistrate had misused the judicial process after breaching the fundamental legal principle that all are equal before the law.

SSC Peiris further stated that the Nugegoda Magistrate had allowed the suspect to go home without letting him to fulfill his bail conditions such as a cash bail of Rs.500,000 and surety bail.

He further alleged that the Nugegoda Magistrate did not take into consideration the behaviour of the suspect who evaded the CID on several occasions, when releasing the suspect on bail.

“The suspect Thilina Gamage had used his judicial power and social status to cover up this offence. He illegally kept this elephant calf in his possession for a period of three years without a valid lisence,” SSC Peiris added.

He further questioned as to how the Nugegoda Magistrate drafted a bail order consisting 30 pages within an hour after adjourning Court proceedings around 5.00 p.m. on June 2.

He said the bail order was handed out around 6.20 p.m. but the Magistrate did not properly answer to the prosecution’s preliminary objections against the Magistrate for taking up this case on the grounds that the suspect and the Magistrate are very intimate friends.

The revision application was filed along with an affidavit given by the OIC of the Special Investigations Unit of the CID.

The elephant calf was named Sakura (Reg. No. 334). The value of the elephant calf was estimated as Rs. 6.9 million.

The prosecution maintained that Chandraratne Bandara Yatawara was the first owner of the elephant calf named Sakura (Reg. No. 334). The SSC said according to available documents, Chandraratne Bandara Yatawara who claimed himself to be a traditional elephant owner had submitted an application to the Wildlife Department for a licence for a three-year-old female elephant in 2008.

SSC Peiris said investigations revealed that the person called Yatawara was not a traditional elephant owner but a welder by profession.

He said the elephant calf was not a female as mentioned in the application.

Udayanga surfaces with Mahinda

yet.

MONDAY, 13 JUNE 2016

Udayanga Weeratunga, accused of supplying arms to Ukraine rebels while he was the Ambassador of Sri Lanka in Russia during Mahinda Rajapaksa regime, is a member of the Mahinda Rajapaksa retinue in Japan.

Earlier too he joined Mr. Mahinda Rajapaksa when he visited Thailand and media reported that he was seen with Mr. Rajapaaksa in Uganda as well.

Udayanga Weeratunga had released a media announcement criticizing the legal process of the present government and stating there was a plan to arrest him if he returned to Sri Lanka.

Udayanga Weeratunga is a suspect of the killing of Ranaweera Kaluarachchige Noel who was serving in Sri Lanka’s Embassy in Russia and Udayanga’s diplomatic passport given to him while he was the ambassador in Russia has not been invalidated yet.

Meanwhile, he has been asked to appear before FCID to take a statement from him regarding the serious financial fraud that has occurred when buying 4 ‘MIG’ aircraft for SL Air Force and Colombo Fort Magistrates Court has issued an order for him to appear in court on 15th July. Despite there is a possibility of warranting him, no warrant has been issued against him yet.

Bond Mahendran’s ‘circus’ of 22 foreign junkets at State expense within just 12 months..! -list...

(Lanka-e-News -13.June.2016, 10.15PM) Believe it or not ! this is not a record taken out from the book of Ripleys . Rather ,this is a record breaking feat , inglorious though of Sri Lanka ‘s Governor of Central Bank ‘Bond  Mahendran’ alias Arjun Mahendran who travelled abroad as many as 22 times at public expense just within a period of 12 months  – February 2015 to February 2016 ! based on details garnered  by  Lanka e news. 

Though these foreign junkets are claimed by him as official , many of them have been for his private purposes . It is on business class air tickets he has made these junkets and stayed in super luxury hotels . All these expenses of Bond Mahendran have been met out of State funds. (It is on one of these junkets he bought a dress for Rs. 1.2 million out of state funds !)  

On one occasion in order to portray that he was on an official tour he had taken an ordinary employee of the Central Bank on the  foreign tour . He too had been provided with a business class air ticket and super luxury hotel comforts – all at public expense !

According to Central bank rules and regulations , though an ordinary employee cannot be provided with such facilities , Bond Mahendran who went on foreign junkets as often as he changed his lankots , had not paid heed to  these rules. In addition , on some occasions , in order to cover  his foreign tour he has taken a photographer to whom the air ticket and hotel facilities were provided at state expense. But it has come to light on those occasions , the organizers of those Institutions have spent for the coverage . In this era in which taking a photograph is as simple as chewing betel,  Bond Mahendran  on the contrary taking  an individual from SL spending state funds immensely to take just a photograph when speaking at the meeting  is the joke of the century .

Of course if ‘Bond Mahendran’ alias ‘Pythiaguras’ (mad mentor) is the Head of State , his taking along such individuals is understandable , but  Bond Mehendran is only a Government officer . Hence his profligacy wasting public funds recklessly at a time when SL ‘s national income is slender , and the country is  head over heels in debt and hard put to repay, is unpardonable under any circumstances .

Moreover after Bond Mahendran became the Central Bank governor he has not only lost his headquarters which has gone into hiding in his hindquarters , he has also lost his memory having forgotten his travel on land. Imitating original James Bond , this spurious ‘Bond’, for  his travel (including his family ) within the country has been using the Air Force helicopter , and it is Central bank that has defrayed the expenses. These expenses have exceeded those of even the president . Despite the fact Bond Mahendran has only two weeks left before his term ends , even then he has arranged for 8 helicopter journeys ,based on Air Force sources.

Of course Bond Mahendran the Central Bank Governor is not one who carries a bundle of files under his arms and travels by a three wheeler , but going by his behavior after he became the governor it is clear he does not know  where to draw his line. 

The foreign junkets of Bond Mahendran for the period between February 2015 and February 2016

10-21 February 2015 – America
07-12 March 2015  -  America
27th June to 02 nd July- Singapore and Japan
10-16 July 2015 – New Zealand
20-21 August 2015 – Singapore
25-26 August 2015 -Singapore
01-05 September 2015 - Singapore and New Zealand
15-17 September 2015 - United Arab Emirates
01-04 October  2015 -Singapore
05-06 October 2015 –Maldive Islands
12-18 October – 2015 Singapore
31st October to 01 st November2015  -  Singapore
13-17 November 2015 – Singapore
21-23 November 2015  - India
24-29 November 2015   - Philippines
27  th November  2015  -Philippines and thereafter Singapore
08-12 December 2015 – Singapore
20-23 December 2015 – Saudi Arabia
26-28 December  2015 -India
20-24 January 2016– Switzerland
05-10 February 2016  -France
15-17 February 2016– China 

Does such a State officer who revels and rejoices in wasting public funds be given another one year extension in service ?

The related documentary evidence can be viewed by clicking below  this photograph after magnification 

(Await the exposure by Lanka e news of  the Credit card waste of funds of notorious Bond Mahendran ! ) 

---------------------------
by     (2016-06-13 17:00:20)

Re-Marshalling Of The C 130K Scam

by Nirmala Kannangara-Monday, June 13, 2016

C 130K transport aircraft

Controversy surrounds Sri Lanka Air Force’s (SLAF) plan to purchase two C130K transport aircraft from Marshall Aerospace United Kingdom when the same company allegedly failed to deliver a transport aircraft to SLAF in the late 1990s although the then Ministry of Defence paid several millions of sterling pounds for it.

Three weeks ago President Maithripala Sirisena who is also Defence Minister, submitted a cabinet paper and received cabinet approval to proceed with the SLAF proposal. However an SLAF inside circle believes that higher officials at SLAF kept the Defence Minister in the dark by not informing him of how Marshall Aerospace swindled the Ministry of Defence in the late 1990s.

It is also learnt that Defence Secretary Karunasena Hettiarachchi who is well aware of this matter had vehemently refused to sign the contract with Marshall Aerospace to purchase the two C 130K aircraft claiming that he cannot be accountable for any scam.

It was the former Defence Secretary Chandrananda de Silva who had approved the purchase of three C130 transport aircraft in 1998 for a sum of 11 million sterling pounds but Sri Lanka received only two aircraft and what happened to the third aircraft still remains a mystery.  Despite the bad track record of Marshall Aerospace, it is baffling how SLAF is once again planning to purchase two C 130K aircraft for a cost of US$ 35 million which had been sold to Marshall Aerospace by the Royal Air Force (RAF) UK for scrap metal.

According to an expert at SLAF, the questionable C 130K aircraft, manufactured by Lockheed Martin USA 50 years ago in 1966 are being phased out all over the world although the SLAF wants to purchase these aircraft. According to the sources, the RAF had sold each of these aircraft for US$ 2.5 million for its metal weight. However after refurbishment these aircraft are to be sold to Sri Lanka for US$ 17.5 million per aircraft.

“These two aircraft manufactured in 1966 will cost the SLAF a staggering US $ 35 million when they could be purchased for US$ 5 million direct from the Royal Air Force, UK and refurbished by a recognised refurbishing company by spending another US $ 6 to 7 million maximum for both aircraft,” sources toldThe Sunday Leader on condition of anonymity.

The Sunday Leader in its February 24, 2002 edition exposed this deal in an article titled ‘Where did the third C130 go?’ by Frederica Jansz which showed how the then Defence Secretary Chandrananda de Silva approved the purchase of three C130 transport aircraft in 1998 at a cost of 11 million sterling pounds but only two had arrived. The article further stated, ‘Sri Lanka’s Ministry of Defence (MoD) after sealing this deal also purchased from Marshall Hangers certain ground equipment without any tenders being called.’

The article continued, ‘Taking a personal interest in the purchase, De Silva pushed the deal through. He agreed to pay a total of 11 million sterling pounds for the three aircraft and ordered that 80% of the cash be sent by telegraphic transfer immediately after the contract was signed in late 1998. Curiously, the planes were not collected after the monies had been paid for a well-nigh a year. As a result some 1500 hours of flying time left on each aircraft was lost to the SLAF.

SLAF delegation visits UK

‘At the time of inspection in November 1997, the RAF had agreed to grant an extension of 1500 hours of flying time on each aircraft. However, since the deal was concluded only in late 1998, and the planes not collected for a further one year, all three aircraft by this time required a ‘D’ check which is a comprehensive check of the mechanical and other capabilities of the machine. The RAF had informed the MoD that 700,000 sterling pounds required to carry out the ‘D’ check on each plane. The local MoD did not have additional funds. A ‘D’ check was subsequently carried out on two of the planes which were brought to Sri Lanka.

‘What happened to the third aircraft and over two million sterling pounds remain a mystery. Former Commander of the SLAF Oliver Ranasinghe said that as of now there are only two C130s in the country despite a contract having being signed for three planes. The question that begs answer is what happened to the third C130 that was paid for together with the other two aircraft.’

It is learnt that the two aircraft that arrived are not in good condition as one aircraft had a cracked exhaust pipe and had to remain grounded for a period of six months.

In a letter dated October 20, 2015 from Director Business Development and Strategy, Marshall Aerospace, Charles A. Hughes to Defence Secretary, Karunasena Hettiarachchi has stated that these two aircraft are of the same configuration as those supplied to SLAF before but with a longer fuselage and will be refurbished with modernised avionics. The letter states further, ‘If the Government of Sri Lanka desires we are able to offer the upgrade of avionics and to carry out due maintenance checks on existing C130K aircraft of SLAF at an affordable price in order to bring these aircrafts to same configuration as of the newly offered aircrafts. We appreciate very much if your honoured self could avail an appointment for a delegation of Marshall Aerospace and British High Commission Officials to meet you in Sri Lanka in order to present our outline proposal’.

Hence on the request, Marshall Aerospace delegation comprising Simon Charles Glynne arrived in Sri Lanka on December 1, 2015 on UL 504. “This delegation stayed at Cinnamon Grand Hotel and met the Defence Secretary and Commander SLAF Gagan Bulathsinghala on December 2, 2015, and had invited the Defence Secretary and specialist officers from SLAF to visit South Wales for an inspection of the aircrafts and a visit to Marshall Facilities at Cambridge to discuss the SLAF requirements.

“In a letter dated December 2, 2015, Charles A. Hughes had invited Defence Secretary and a delegation to Wales to inspect the C130K aircraft to which Defence Secretary Karunasena Hettiarachchi  had nominated Air Marshall Gagan Bulathsinghala (Passport No: D 3644429),  Air Vice Marshall L. H. A. Silva (Passport No: OL 3638384), Wing Commander J. M. D. R. A. P. Jayamaha (Passport No: OL 3639738) and Wing Commander P. N. Fernando (Passport No: N 1731066). Marshall Aerospace had agreed to work closely with the Ministry of Defence UK to arrange internal transportation and security clearances for the visit. Hence the visit was made from January 17 to 23, 2016,” sources claimed. According to the sources, although the SLAF is now trying to mislead the masses to say that this is a government to government purchase, and there are no commissions or wheeler dealings involved, the controversy of this purchase never seems to die.

“It continues to cast a slur on the SLAF. A certain Air Vice Marshal who was a Wing Commander during the 1990s visited Marshall Aerospace for technical inspection of the three C130 aircraft. Having knowledge of how Marshall swindled the SLAF he still recommended these C130K aircraft to the Air Force Commander.

Although the Air Force is now trying to say that there is no deal involved in this purchase as this is a government to government contract, the actual contract will be between Marshall Aerospace and the SLAF. According to the proposed deal, US $ 8 million has to be paid as an advance payment and the second payment of yet another US $ 8 million has to be paid after transferring the aircraft from the RAF to Marshall Aerospace and the final payment of US $ 19 million after SLAF accepts the aircraft from Marshall Aerospace,” sources added. According to the sources, even at a time when the US has lifted the defence embargo on Sri Lanka, it is questionable as to why the SLAF does not want to purchase the newest ‘J’ model from the US Government.

US lifts embargo

“Last month the US lifted the defence embargo posed on Sri Lanka and the US Ambassador invited the Defence Secretary and the Commanders of the tri-forces for a discussion. Since there are no more restrictions on us related to defence, why cannot the SLAF purchase these latest ‘J’ model aircraft from the US government? Even if they purchase these aircraft from RAF for the metal weight and give them to an aircraft refurbishment company in Singapore, Malaysia, Portugal or any other better country and get them refurbished which will not cost more than US $ 3 to 4 million per aircraft with a warranty, the country could save more than US $ 23 million in foreign exchange,” sources said.

However refuting allegations, SLAF Spokesperson, Group Captain Samantha Alwis said the proposed purchase of C130K aircrafts will be carried out transparently with the blessings of the Ministry of Defence.

“This is a government to government deal and there is no fraud involved in this as claimed by certain vested interest parties. We are not making any purchase from the Marshall Aerospace but from the Defence Ministry of UK. We have followed the government procurement guidelines and have forwarded our request to the Defence Ministry seeking a cabinet approval. Once the negotiations are done, SLAF Commander will sign the contract on behalf of the buyer and the Defence Ministry UK as the seller,” the Spokesman said.

When asked as to why SLAF could not go for a much latest model than that of a 50 year old ‘K’ model, the Spokesman said that SLAF would have like to obtain a latest model rather than an old model if the necessary funds are available.

“Why not we would like to go for the best but the issue is lack of money. Marshall Aerospace is only carrying out the services and if required modifications for the Royal Air Force as they have the license and the capability to servicing and modifications. It is the Marshall Aerospace that maintains the RAF fleet of aircrafts. You have been misled by your sources that the SLAF will be purchasing the aircrafts from Marshall Aerospace,” he added.

Asked as to what happened to the third C 130 aircraft that Sri Lanka paid for in 1998 but never returned, Group Captain Alwis said that Sri Lanka although wanted to purchase three C130 aircrafts in late 1990s paid only for two aircrafts due to lack of funds.

“At the time of the negotiations the then Defence Ministry in late 1990s wanted to purchase three aircrafts to a price both Sri Lankan and UK Defence Ministries agreed. However from this end there was a delay in going through the process. By this time the aircrafts had to undergo major services as stipulated by the UK Defence Ministry regulations which cost was so high that the SLAF did not have the funds to absorb the service charges. As a result we deiced to purchase only two aircrafts instead of three. Since the initial plan was to purchase three aircrafts and as only two were delivered, there was a rumour that Marshall Aerospace had swindled the SLAF which is incorrect,” the SLAF Spokesperson added.