New Drug First Major Breakthrough for Alzheimer’s in the Past Decade

Music therapist surprised at Alzheimer's patient's reaction.

by PHILIP PERRY-November 4, 2016

Amyloid beta plaques are gooey globs that clump together, stick to neurons inside the brain and kill them off, outright. The slow but steady accumulation of these plaques leads to Alzheimer’s disease. Tau protein tangles aid them by cutting off the brain’s supply lines, as the plaques march across white and gray matter, taking out the memory and cognitive ability, and wreaking havoc on the patient and their family. No treatment can halt this invasion once it occurs. But now, a small trial for an experimental drug is lending patients and loved ones hope.

This drug inhibits the production of these plaques, according to a small study. Scientists at Merck Research Laboratories have announced the drug Verubecestat. In a small, phase I trial it “switched off” the production of the amyloid proteins that form these plaques. This in turn slowed the progression of the disease.  

University College London neuroscientist John Hardy, who played a role in amyloid plaque’s implication in Alzheimer’s, warned in an interview with The Guardian, that it is too soon to start breaking out the champagne. The results are from this phase I clinical trial including a mere 32 participants.  

Even so, team leader for the Merck project, Matthew Kennedy, told Scientific American that this was the first effective BACE1 inhibitor that also maintained a good safety profile. Two follow-up trials, currently ongoing, including together 3,500 participants, should give us more insight into its efficacy and safety profile, long-term. Each will last 18 months or longer. One includes 1,500 prodromal patients, where the disease is in its seminal stages, and the other with 2,000 patients who each have mild-to-moderate disease. The first trial ends in 2019, while the second will show results next year.

Enzyme snipping amyloid precursor proteins.

If effective, Verubecestat will be the first breakthrough treatment for Alzheimer’s in a decade. For the phase I trial, each participant took the medication in pill form, once a day for a week. A control group who did not have Alzheimer’s, took the drug daily for two weeks. No side effects were reported.

Enzymes in the body produce proteins. This drug is designed to inhibit the enzyme BACE1. By doing so, the production of amyloid proteins is halted. BACE1 is thought to slice amyloid precursor proteins (APP) to bits, which go on and form globules that gunk up the gray and white matter. These two trials should also help solve a longstanding debate among the Alzheimer’s research community. There is a split over whether amyloid beta protein or tau tangles are the primary driver of the disease. Most believe amyloid protein is.

These findings arrived at an auspicious time. President Barack Obama recently dubbed November national Alzheimer’s awareness month. The administration has set the lofty goal of preventing or curing Alzheimer’s by 2025. Several treatments in the works may reap results. This BACE1 inhibitor is among the most promising.

On another front, in a study published in the journal Nature, antibody therapies were shown to break up existing amyloid plaque buildup. In that study, the drug Aducanumab was used. Researchers speculate that this could be combined with a BACE1 inhibitor like Verubecestat in order to recoup areas of the brain already affected, while at the same time, blocking the production of amyloid protein. Though dead neurons cannot be revived, living ones can be salvaged.

To learn more about Alzheimer’s treatment click here: 

SRI LANKA: COPE TO BAT FOR JOURNALISTS

05/11/2016

In light of reports that members of the Committee on Public Enterprises (COPE) had violated the Parliament ACT by making statements to the media before the submission of the report, its Chairman, MP Sunil Handunnetti said that he would suggest the possibility of opening the proceedings to the media to avoid misinterpretation.

Speaking to the Weekend Nation, Handunnetti said that he would suggest to the Speaker on the possibility of opening the proceedings to the media where they would function as mere observers.

“However, the privacy of the officials giving evidence should be respected. Therefore, there needs to be a code of ethics for journalists if it is to be opened,” Handunnetti said.

Meanwhile, former chairman of the COPE, DEW Gunasekera said that there would be both positive and negative impacts if the proceedings were opened up for the media. “It should be done carefully. Not all proceedings can be open to the media. Therefore, it should be done with certain restrictions and instructions,” he said.

Proceedings of both COPE and Committee on Public Accounts which are the most prominent parliamentary oversight committees have traditionally not been open to the media and only the final reports are published once they are presented in parliament.

The task of the Committee on Public Accounts is to probe the managerial efficiency and financial discipline of the Government, its Ministries, Departments, Provincial Councils and Local Authorities.

The duty of cope is to report to Parliament on accounts examined, budgets and estimates, financial procedures, performance and management of Corporations and other Government Business Undertakings.

– The Nation

The Dress Rehearsal In Trincomalee

By Rajan Hoole –November 5, 2016

Dr. Rajan Hoole

“…it is clear that under natural ecological conditions intra-species aggression is seen in defence of territory or as nature’s solution to over-population. However, in the animal world, aggression rarely ends in actual death, there being some inborn inhibition to killing. It is pertinent to ask why such inhibitions do not operate in man, virtually the only ‘unhinged killer’…there were several incidents during racial riots and the war itself, of direct slaughter of civilians. This kind of ‘unhinged killing’appears to take place usually where human warfare occurs as reactive rage.” – Daya Somasundaram, from Scarred Minds

The New Frontiersmen

Elections to the District Development Councils were scheduled for early June 1981. These were being hailed by the Government and its supporters as a means to finding a political solution to the Tamil problem. Despite this, the UNP government of the day chose a strange way to usher in the DDCs. It may be explained, in part, as a perverse reaction to the attack on UNP and non-TULF candidates by Tamil militants, and the TULF’s silence on these. These included the killing of Mr. Thiagarajah, former MP for Vaddukoddai, and some policemen.

A train-load of election staff was sent from the South, many of whom did not have a clue to what election duty meant. The train stopped at Kurunegala. Minister. G.M. Premachandra, and Jayewickrema Perera, both top UNPers, addressed the election staff through loud speakers. They told them, “You are our frontier forces, you must come back with victory.” This trumpet-call was recounted by a man from Galle, who was then on election duty. He was reminded of this while witnessing the violence at the North-Western Provincial Council elections under the PA government in 1999.

In Jaffna there was a high-powered team including Ministers Gamini Dissanayake, Cyril Mathew & Festus Perera, G.P.V. Samarasinghe, secretary to the cabinet, Chandrananda de Silva, later commissioner of elections and subsequently defence secretary, and Colonel Dharmapala, defence secretary. There were also a large number of policemen brought into Jaffna under DIG Edward Gunawardene. The mindset implicit in this exercise also throws some light on the 1983 violence. Gamini Dissanayake addressed the election staff. He told them, according to the man from Galle above, to close the polling booths at 10.00 AM and cast the remaining votes. Some innocent guy asked him, “For whom should we cast them?” The Minister replied, “Why, to the animal (i.e. elephant) of course!”

The operation was so botched up that the UNP got no benefit out of it. A high point of the exercise was the burning of the Jaffna Public Library by Edward Gunawardene’s men. There had of course been militant attacks on policemen. But the considered opinion of some senior police colleagues was that Ponnambalam (Brute) Mahendran, who was DIG, Jaffna, would have handled the situation competently if not for the presence of Gunawardene and his men. The operation did achieve, however, something notable.

Until this time, with all the reservations the Tamils had about the State, there was hope that a political solution would be arrived at through negotiations between the Government and the TULF. The Government’s conduct during the elections to the DDCs – the much awaited political solution – greatly tarnished that hope. Two months later there was anti-Tamil violence in the South where the President himself blamed a section of his own party. The outrage among the Tamils occasioned by the burning of the library and the press of the Eelanadu – the only independent provincial daily in this country – was smothered in the Colombo press. What was left of liberal traditions could not be contained by the developing polarisation in the country. To responsible Tamils, both here and abroad, it seemed clear that the Tamils needed English journals of their own to highlight their concerns.

One group of Tamils in London who were associated with the Standing Committee of Tamils – a charitable group supporting work among Tamil refugees – collected contributions and started the Tamil Times. Despite the misrepresentation in this country, it has been a responsible and moderate monthly, which never supported the separatist cause in its editorial outlook. It is nearing 20 years of publication without missing a month, resisting all attempts by the LTTE to control it. About the same time, another group around the late K. Kanthasamy started the Saturday Review in Jaffna.

Read More

More (legal) horrors of the counter-terror draft

Sunday, November 06, 2016

The Government’s proposed draft on a new counter-terror law for Sri Lanka is rather like a thoroughly unpleasant case discovery. Each time that one revisits afresh, new horrors are unearthed.

Several other fiendish offences

Drawn reluctantly back to this document following representations from several quarters, it may be said that absorbing its contents could well qualify as being subjected to cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment within the meaning of Article 11 of the Constitution. Possibly, this exercise may not warrant that necessary degree of severity amounting to an infliction of torture. But even that is debatable, given that psychological torture is encompassed within the modern definition of the term.

This accusation is warranted by the draft’s atrociously wide reach of acts classified as offences which, in whole, would prohibit the entire range of democratic activity. A few such offences were commented upon in these column spaces following extracts of the draft being exclusively published in this newspaper, (see ‘Is this counter-terrorism in a far deadlier garb?’ the Sunday Times, October 16, 2016). Apart from these, several other fiendishly contrived offences are also included as ‘terrorism related offences’ and ‘associated offences’ which carry stiff penalties. I will return to this later.

But first, some general observations are pertinent. On sober consideration, it is the very height of unfounded optimism as expressed by some politicians, to claim that this document can somehow be ‘cleaned up’ during the parliamentary committee process. In fact, there is a distinctly mischievous danger therein, given the eager propensity of even the political representatives of the minorities to conform to unhealthy compromises of the Unity Government. Leaving this draft to their slender mercies carries a high degree of risk.

Government must formally admit ownership

Accordingly the only viable safeguard lies through robust public calls demanding that the Government formally admit to the ownership of this counter-terror draft. Thereafter public discussion must follow on its contents. Timorous complaints that the Government has failed to present the document for public scrutiny really will not do.

And lest the misguided think that this is a concern limited only to the North and East, the contrary is the case. The Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA, 1979), which this new counter-terror law is meant to replace even though it is far worse, was first used against leftist activists of the majority community under the Jayawardene dispensation.

Since then, the PTA has been employed with scant regard to ethnicity, though the decades long Wanni war meant that its victims were predominantly of Tamil ethnicity. In the eighties, ordinary Sinhalese citizens were targeted by the PTA during the so-called ‘period of terror’ in the South. The media was the first victim of the combined ill effects of the PTA and emergency regulations imposed under the Public Security Ordinance (PSO, 1947). Journalists were threatened, assaulted, imprisoned and killed under these laws.

Cardinal fault is ours

Those pontificating on media standards while living in the comfort of their secluded corners amidst retreating in dismayed disorder at the disarray of their much hyped rainbow alliance need to be forcibly reminded that journalists lived (and sometimes died) under the shadow of these laws. From that perspective, it is somewhat miraculous that notwithstanding its considerable racist, communalistic and chauvinistic warts, the mainstream media continues to function at all in this country.

Returning to that era of terror is still very much within the bounds of possibility. The cardinal fault is ours in allowing such a horrendous draft to emerge in the first instance. Secretive legislative drafting in exclusive conclaves, whether in relation to transitional justice, counter-terror or constitutional reform, should have not been tolerated from the inception. This is an exercise which runs directly counter to good governance precepts.

Pulling out ad hoc parts of the transitional justice package rather like a seedy magician with his rabbit’s hat has already led to incendiary resentment on the part of people directly affected by the conflict feeling excluded and marginalized. This miserable experience suffices to illustrate the dangers of complacency, even with the best of intentions. That process must not be repeated where the counter-terror draft is concerned. The repercussions would be exceedingly unfortunate.

Offending the principle of legality

As a matter of law, there is a clear argument why this draft is incapable of being revised to be acceptable. Each and every paragraph offends the first principle of legality which stipulates that a contemplated offence should be clearly defined, described in precise and unambiguous language. This was why in the past, terms such as “threatening or endangering the sovereignty or territorial integrity” of Sri Lanka or effecting “any other political or governmental change” in national security laws were completely contrary to the Rule of Law. The public uproar to revise these arbitrary laws arose from that exact objection.

Quite apart from the draft’s vague definition of terrorist acts, there are terrifyingly familiar echoes in its classification of ‘terrorism related offences.’ This prohibits ‘words either spoken or intended to be read or by signs’ etc which ‘causes or intends to cause the commission of acts of violence between different communities or racial or religious groups. The prohibition is coupled with intent to cause harm to the ‘unity, territorial integrity or sovereignty of Sri Lanka or the peaceful coexistence of the people.’

These were the same clauses used to imprison journalists and dissenters in the past with the importation of additional references to ‘unity’ and ‘peaceful coexistence.’ These prohibitions are contrary to the Johannesburg Principles on National Security, Freedom of Expression and Access to Information which permits expression to be punished only if it incites imminent violence and there is a direct and immediate link thereto.

Disposing of the draft without further ado

Ludicrously the proposed offences also encompass theft of property by the State, including data, intellectual property or ‘other information.’ What exactly is meant by ‘other information’ is a matter for wild surmise.

In sum, this is the worst national security draft ever to be proposed in the history of this country, including under the Executive Presidencies of Jayawardene, Premadasa, Kumaratunga and Rajapaksa. It remains to be seen if President Maithripala Sirisena is desirous of having this dubious honour associated with his celebrated ‘yahapalanaya’ Presidency. The public demand must be to dispose of it unceremoniously and without further ado.

SLTJ’s MMDA Protest And (Un-Islamic) Abusive Criticism

By Mohamed Harees –November 5, 2016

Lukman Harees

‘You who believe! show integrity for the sake of Allah, bearing witness with justice. Do not let hatred for a people incite you into not being just. Be just. That is closer to taqwa. Fear [and respect] Allah. Allah is aware of what you do’. ~ (Quran : Surat al-Maida, 8)

On Thursday, Sri Lanka Thawheed Jama’ath (SLTJ) exercised their constitutional right to protest against the attempts made by the Government to bring about amendments to a historic law relating to the Muslim Marriages and Divorces (MMDA), apparently due to pressure exerted by the EU as a precondition to granting GSP+ to Sri Lanka. Thousands flocked and showed their disapproval and discontent by walking in a procession , carrying placards which culminated in a mass meeting addressed by SLTJ Leaders. There was also another counter- protest staged by a Sinhala group against this SLTJ procession ,which also exercised their constitutional right to express their freedom of expression, which is a healthy sign in a vibrant democracy. ‘Jaw-Jaw’ is better than ‘War-War’ as Churchill once said.

Be that it may, what was however totally deplorable was the abusive manner in which a SLTJ Leader handled criticism and how he referred to Ven Gnanasara Thero in abusive disparaging terms at the meeting. This type of language is not at all acceptable in any civilized society; moreover it is against the basic rules and decorum Islam teaches us- Muslims to adopt in handling criticism , however despicable such criticism may be. True! It is beyond doubt that Ven Gnanasara Thero and his likes went way beyond the basic rules of decorum their own religion – Buddhism teaches them and even breached the tenets of the Vinaya Pitaka too, by being abusive towards not just Muslims, but insulting even their beloved religion of Islam which they along with billions of others in the world hold dear in their hearts. The manner of speech and behaviour particularly Ven Gnanassara Thero was so rough and unrefined , they ultimately earned the wrath of most of the venerable members of the Maha Sangha and the majority of Buddhist brethren.

Read More

COPE: Drama of hope and despair

cross currents - Jayatilleke de silva 

- Nov 05, 2016

The anxiously awaited COPE report has been submitted to Parliament and subsequently sent to the Attorney-General’s department for necessary action. COPE and particularly its Chairman should be congratulated for producing a substantial report after careful deliberation.

The task was not easy in view of the conflicting interests and positions taken up by its members on the controversial Central Bank Bond issue of February 2015 in which the former Governor of the Bank Arjun Mahendran was allegedly involved in influencing the auction and favouring one bidder-the Perpetual Treasuries which has accrued unprecedented and huge profits as a result. This issue was also the subject of two previous investigations and Parliament made a request to COPE to go into the matter. The Report reflected a rare broad consensus despite the inclusion of footnotes with dissenting views on some matters.

The consensus also cut across the political divide and exposed existing and potential fissures inside the ruling coalition. The SLFP has taken a united stand not so much on account of any principled approach against fraud and corruption but with the aim of scoring a point over their partner in the Government at the forthcoming polls. The so-called Joint Opposition has found in the Bond issue a golden opportunity to divert public attention from the alleged misdeeds of its own members and pose as paragons of virtue upholding public interest. The Tamil National Alliance has also fallen in line with the majority upholding public interest.

COPE findings

For the JVP the COPE exercise has raised its stature as a party responsive to public interest and given them training in consensus building, a feature rather wanting in them in the past. However, whether this would translate into commensurate electoral advances for the party is a moot point.

The UNP stands embarrassed over COPE findings, especially in view of attempts by several of its prominent members to derail the findings and cast aspersions on the COPE President. In fact instead of assisting the investigations some were demanding punishment for the prosecution instead of the defendant.

However, it is to the credit of the Government of which the UNP has a majority share that it promptly forwarded the COPE Report to the Attorney-General for necessary action instead of putting it in cold storage as the former government of President Mahinda Rajapaksa has done.

COPE findings have kindled the hopes of the public that at last a beginning has been made in pursing in earnest investigations into fraud and corruption. However, the fate of past COPE reports does not give much room for much optimism. Not only were reports shelved but even its Chairmen were intimidated at times. The lethargy and inefficiency displayed by the Attorney-General’s department too do not add confidence to the hopes of the public.

Central Bank bond issue

Few remarks of a general nature are opportune at this moment.

First, it is necessary to keep in mind that the Central Bank bond issue is neither the only big fraud that took place in the country, nor the biggest in terms of loss to the treasury. To do so would be a manifestation of political bias. There were numerous other instances of big frauds including the infamous VAT scam, the hedging deal etc.

Second, these frauds are not necessarily solely due to the fault of individuals. They show the fault of the system of political administration and economic management, which breeds a culture of treating corruption and fraud as an inevitable concomitant of development. Ignoring this systematic failure would leave room for repetition of such incidents in future too. Unregulated markets do breed corruption as experience worldwide shows. Neo-liberal market fundamentalism has failed and there is a need for chartering an independent path of economic development based on innovative thinking and selective integration with the world economy.

Third, Sri Lankan legislation on combatting financial crime is inadequate and has to be updated to modern standards.

Fourth, the urgency and imperative need of constituting an independent and powerful Audit Commission as pledged by the present rulers at election time cannot be over-emphasized. There is also a danger of the government reneging on this promise due to pressure from vested interests from politicians and privileged sections of the bureaucracy.

Fifth, relentless public pressure is essential to compel the government to act decisively against corruption and fraud. It is only then that errant politicians and officials could be apprehended and punished. Here again the latter has launched a crusade against independent commissions and investigative authorities and even civil society organizations caricaturing them in evil terms and alleging foreign involvement. Unfortunately such voices do emanate from the government ranks too. In this respect the disparaging remarks on civil society leaders by Ministers and party spokesmen as well as the arrogant assertions of certain ministers against public agitation point to continuation of practices and traditions of yesteryear. It is no wonder since some of these spokespersons represented the former regime at election time, though they crossed-over to the Government later for reasons quite obvious.

Sixth, more transparency in government would lessen the possibilities of fraud. To do so it would be advisable to be more specific in identifying the exceptions to the divulging of information in the Right to Information Act lest errant officials could hide behind the vaguely worded exclusions such as national defence and contractual economic secrecy.

Seventh, an unbridled Rule of Law is a sine qua non of good governance or yahapalanaya. Not only politicians and administrators but also law enforcement officers and members of the judiciary itself too should uphold the fundamental tenets of a just judiciary. Diverse and at times even contradictory decisions in judicial decisions on similar complaints have caused public anxiety and would lead to an erosion of their confidence in the judiciary. For example, there is a clearly discernible bias in the granting of bail to suspects in favour of those with financial or political clout.

courtesy - Dailynews.lk

No paradise for the dragon

Ambassador Yi denied it saying talks were still on. Chinese think tanks have opposed any move to buy into loss makingventures in Sri Lanka, especially when Chinese companies have to work with the “inefficient and corrupt Sri Lankan public sector institutions”. China might like to continue with the present arrangement as regards Hambantota port, where China has exclusive use of four berths. China already has under its control, the profitable Colombo South Container terminal.

by P K Balachandran

Courtesy: The New Indian Express

( November 5, 2016, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian)  In Sri Lanka’s political folklore, no two countries can be friendlier than China and Sri Lanka. Indeed, for six decades from 1952 to 2014, Sino-Lankan relations could not have been warmer. But in the last two years, the two countries have drifted apart, with hot words exchanged between Chinese Ambassador Yi Xianliang and Sri Lankan Finance Minister Ravi Karunanayake recently.

The contentious issues have their roots in the extraordinary influence China enjoyed in Sri Lanka in the second phase of President Mahinda Rajapaksa’s regime, an influence which in the view of the present government, casts a heavy financial burden on Sri Lanka. The Rajapaksa government, which fought the Tamil militants with Chinese weapons, and got USD 15.5 billion from China for post-war development projects when the West was hounding it for human rights violations, returned Beijing’s favour by allegedly allowing Chinese companies to overinvoice the cost of their projects, and took loans from Chinese banks at very high rates of interest.

But a significant section of the Sri Lankan polity began to ask inconvenient questions about Rajapaksa’s China-funded projects. The post-war anti- Rajapaksa movement, which initially focused on his authoritarianism, nepotism and corruption, grew into an anti-China movement with opposition leaders and media exposing serious financial flaws in Sino- Lankan deals. Projects worth millions of dollars had been given without competitive bidding.

Matters came to a head when, in the January 8, 2015 presidential election, Rajapaksa lost to the joint opposition candidate Maithripala Sirisena. The pro- Sirisena United National Party (UNP) then won the July 2015 parliamentary elections.

Among the first post-election steps taken by Sirisena and Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe, was the suspension of projects funded and executed by China. This shook Beijing particularly because the iconic USD 1.4 billion Colombo Port City had been inaugurated only a few months earlier by President Xi Jinping. In its defense, China said that every project was cleared by the concerned Sri Lankan government agencies, the Cabinet and Parliament.

It denied charges of corruption, overinvoicing and rapaciousness. It pointed out that going back on the agreements would only give Colombo a bad name among foreign investors. But Colombo would not budge. Writing in the Sunday Times, transport and highways expert Prof. Amal S Kumarage of Moratuwa University said costs of China-funded highway projects were 55% higher than the global norm. 

Internationally, the cost should be between USD 7 million to 10 million per km. But in the case of Chinese projects in Lanka, they were 55% to 135%, and five–to–ten times higher than in India.

Economist and Deputy Foreign Minister Dr Harsha de Silva pointed out that the Outer Circular Highway (OCH) costs USD 56 million per km. The China-built Kaduwela-Kadawatha section of the OCH costs USD 43 million per km, but the Japanese/ADB funded Kottawa- Kaduwela section had cost a third of it, he said. The interest on Chinese loans are also higher. Chinese ambassador Yi Xianliang claims that the majority of Chinese loans are at 2% but the Sri Lankans put it at 6%. According to Dr Silva, even 2% is “very high” given the fact that Japanese and ADB loans are available at 0.1 to 1%. The USD 342.8 million loan for the Kelani bridge was taken from Japan at 0.1%. It is to be repaid in 40 years with a 10-year grace period.

The USD 520 million taken from China for the Outer Circular Highway involves an interest of 2% plus 0.25% as service charge. For roads in Hambantota, USD 100 million was taken from China at 3.5%. And interest rates were hiked or brought down without assigning any reason. Initially, the interest on USD 350 million taken for Hambantota Phase I, was 2%. This was subsequently increased to 6.3%. But for Phase II, when USD 808 million was taken in installments, the interest varied from 2 to 4%. In the process of renegotiating interest rates, the Chinese were given exclusive use of four berths in the harbour. While the government was reexamining the terms, Wickremesinghe made two trips to Beijing to persuade China to convert into equity, the USD 1.5 billion debt incurred for the non-performing Hambantota harbour, and the USD 300 million incurred for the non-functioning Mattala airport. Finance Minister Rav i Karunanayake claimed China agreed to take an 80% equity.

But Ambassador Yi denied it saying talks were still on. Chinese think tanks have opposed any move to buy into loss making ventures in Sri Lanka, especially when Chinese companies have to work with the “inefficient and corrupt Sri Lankan public sector institutions”. China might like to continue with the present arrangement as regards Hambantota port, where China has exclusive use of four berths. China already has under its control, the profitable Colombo South Container terminal.

Beijing is now accusing Colombo of being unprofessional and lackadaisical. Ambassador Yi recently lashed out at Karunanayake for his unilateral claim about Hambantota and his contention that China is rapacious.

Yi maintains that China charges only 2% interest, while European countries charge 5%. If indeed China is charging 6 %, why does Colombo ask for more and more loans, he asked. Yi charged Sri Lankans of being inefficient and lackadaisical and also “ungrateful” to China which has already sunk USD 15.5 billion in Sri Lanka. But unfazed, Karunanayake told newsmen, “If China is charging only 2% interest, we will pay only 2%. Isn’t that good for us?”

China takes a hard line

ECONOMYNEXT-November 5, 2016, 9:23 pm 

The highly unusual outburst by China’s ambassador criticising Sri Lanka’s finance minister and the island’s economic policies is being intensively discussed in political and diplomatic circles.

Chinese ambassador Yi Xianliang called a rare press conference Tuesday and criticised Finance Minister Ravi Karunanayake by name, not once, but thrice.

Colombo-based diplomats were surprised while the government was livid and were scrambling to respond to what many saw as an attempt by the Chinese envoy to openly criticise the host nation.

"Chinese diplomats never speak out of turn and if and when they say something it is usually what their government wants them to say," a Colombo-based Asian diplomat said.

Ambassador Yi said minister Ravi Karunanayake was asking for more Chinese loans after publicly criticising the Chinese funding as "expensive loans."

"You know Ravi criticises this issue many times, publicly. I ask him, if you don’t like this one, why you again talk with me about another one (loan)." the ambassador said at his second press meet in as many years.

He said Minister Karunanayake told him about securing a 50-million dollar loan from Europe last year at 5.8 per cent, but was saying the 2.0 per cent Chinese loans were expensive.

The Chinese envoy also referred to "internal issues" within the unity government as holding up development activities, especially Chinese-funded projects.

Minister Karunanayake told reporters in Colombo on Thursday night that the Chinese envoy may have misunderstood what he said.

He said the money Sri Lanka had raised through bond sales (no strings attached financing) could not be compared with project loans which come with many conditions that favour the lender.

Official sources said a senior aide to the minister had raised the issue with the Chinese ambassador who reportedly denied having made the remarks attributed to him in the local media.

However, Sri Lankan authorities had secured both audio and video recordings of the ambassador’s press conference and raised it with the foreign ministry.

The Rajapaksa-faction of the Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP) seized on the ambassador’s remarks and told reporters on Thursday that they were delighted.

Former foreign minister G. L. Peiris said the current government was taking an anti-China line.

Sources close to the government said they were more concerned about the timing of the Chinese envoy’s remarks coming at a time when there were simmering tensions within the "unity" government and moves by the SLFP to topple the Prime Minister.

In a further sign of Beijing keeping its options open with the remnants of the Rajapaksa regime, former defence secretary Gotabhaya Rajapaksa, had been invited to attend a defence conference in China last month.

It is not clear on what basis Beijing invited Gotabhaya, who is currently under investigation for corruption, but he was apparently treated on par with current defence secretary Karunasena Hettiarachchi, an official who has reportedly earned the wrath of the president and the government with his ill-timed comments on the killing of two students in Jaffna and several other issues.

China had a cosy relationship with the Rajapaksa regime and secured free access to Chinese submarines at the Colombo port much to the discomfort of regional super power and Sri Lanka’s immediate neighbour India.

A return of a Rajapaksa-backed regime could take Sri Lanka closer to China’s orbit and away from India, according to political observers.

The Chinese envoy made his displeasure known over alleged losses incurred due to the new administration’s suspension of projects initiated under the former regime of Rajapaksa.

Ambassador Yi said he maintained good relations with the former president as well as his successor and Prime Minister Wickremesinghe but was miffed with the alleged negative publicity China received in the local media.

He said he had sent four delegations of Sri Lankan journalists to China in recent times, but yet the coverage was "negative."

SriLankan Airlines: Fresh Tender Bids Called For The Supply Of In Flight Duty Free

November 5, 2016

SriLankan Airlines has called for tenders for the supply and provision of duty free goods for sale on board its aircraft as a total solution on a concessionaire basis with the closing date fixed for the 15th November 2016.

Chairman Ajit Dias

The tenders have been called as the current controversial duty free supplier Duty Free Partners’ contract with the national carrier ends November 2016 and the ongoing programme eventually concludes on 31st March 2017.

The bids have been called as the current contract signed between SriLankan Airlines and Duty Free Partners state that the existing contract could be extended for two more years if both parties amicably agree to it.

However SriLankan Airlines portraying that they are not interested to carry on, have advertised seeking a new partner for a fresh five year period.

Duty Free Partners initially known as Phoenix Rising Ventures took over the supply of both wines and duty free for SriLankan Airlines out of tender procedures in 2011. This was during the reign of the former Rajapaksa regime when President Mahinda Rajapaksa’s brother in law and Chairman Nishantha Wickremasinghe was alleged to have received monies and a Rolex wristwatch for offering the deal to Duty Free Partners a company that had no prior experience in running a duty free business.

Duty Free Partners’ operations with SriLankan Airlines was then and is currently run by by Sri Lankan born Canadian national and CEO Rumesh Dilan Wirasinghe whose name recently appeared in the offshore leaks database released by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ). The ICIJ report states that Rumesh Dilan Wirasinghe has two off shore accounts linked to Canada.

The operation in Colombo is run by its Managing Director Raju Chandiram. Chandiram also previously served as a Director of the national carrier.

However controversy still surrounds the awarding of the contract with alleged rumours been spread by Duty Free Partners that they have the “first right of refusal” and ” offer to match” any better bid placed by any prospective bidder.

This rumour is believed to have been spread to put off any prospective bidder with days left to the closing date.

A very reliable source speaking to Colombo Telegraph said “It is strange that Rashmore Ferdinands the Manager In Flight Services and Duty Free has been appointed as a key player in this bid. Ferdinands himself was one of the signatories representing the national carrier when this controversial deal was awarded to Duty Free Partners at the inception. Ferdinands over the last five years was positioned at In Flight Services to specifically ensure that the duty free business ran smoothly more for the supplier rather than the airline he represents. Even all his other duties pertaining to In Flight Services was handed over to Senaka De Soysa, who was subsequently promoted to Ferdinand’s grade. It can be confirmed that Rashmore Ferdinands was looked after handsomely and even receiving Christmas hampers containing champagne, cash vouchers to dine at Maharajah Palace Restaurant and goodies purchased from ODEL during the festive season from Duty Free Partners. So how can he be appointed to be involved in this bid? He is bound to do what it takes to fix this bid for Duty Free Partners. This is absurd!”

“Further Duty Free Partners faulted on many occasions during the last five years where they did not honour their signed contract. Besides purchasing excessive volumes of alcohol, cigarettes and perfumes using the airline’s bar code and selling them to third parties, they even defrauded the Flight Attendants, they very staff who sold their goods on board. From the inception of the contract they had to give the staff a 25% discount on all products purchased on board. However they offered staff on a 10% discount on cigarettes and a 15% discount on alcohol during the first 18 months. This was subsequently rectified when the former Flight Attendants Union President Dinesh Fernando and his Executive Committee met up with Duty Free Partners’ Managing Director Raju Chandiram over dinner at Urban Kitchen and sorted it out. With the top 18 products sold on board being alcohol and cigarettes, the staff was defrauded of over Rs 20 million.

Read More

Customs officer arrested with foreign liquor worth Rs 4 lakh



November 5, 2016

A customs officer has been arrested by the Finance Ministry’s Special Narcotic Raid Unit at York Street in Colombo while illegally transporting a stock of foreign liquor bottles, worth over Rs 400,000 in total. 

 Head of the unit, Wing Commander Ravi Jayasinghe, said that the operation was carried out with assistance from the police Special Task Force (STF), army intelligence division and Sri Lanka Customs.  

The customs officer and his driver were arrested while transporting 60 bottles of liquor by car. They were released on personal bails of Rs 200,000 each after being produced before the Maligakanda Magistrate.  

Jayasinghe said that the department of customs has suspended the customs officer in question while the case will be heard again on Friday. 

Seven children reject 80-year-old mother

2016-11-05

An 80-year-old mother of seven in a complaint to the Bandaragama Police said today that her five daughters and two sons had neglected to take care of her.

 The mother said she had divided all the properties including her properties among all the children.

 When two daughters and a son were summoned to the Police, they had refused to accept their mother. Police said they would report the matter to the Horana Magistrate’s Court. (Bimal Shyaman Jayasinghe)  

Bail refused to Tissa Attanayake

By T. Farook Thajudeen -Saturday, 5 November 2016

The Colombo High Court yesterday refused to grant bail to Former UNP General Secretary Tissa Attanayake who is in remand custody till 5 December for preparing a fraudulent document by forging the signatures of President Maithripala Sirisena and Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe during the 2015 Presidential Election. 

High Court Judge Sarojini Kusala Weerawardena made this pronouncement yesterday delivering her order on the revision application filed in court by Attanayake who sought a revision to the earlier remand order made by the High Court.

Judge Weerawardena observed that Attanayake had attempted to get bail by misrepresenting and distorting facts to the court. 

She said that while the Government Analyst had confirmed in his report that the signatures of President Sirisena and Prime Minister Wicramasinghe’s had been scanned from other documents and inserted into the fraudulent document, Counsel Shavendra Fernando PC had given a wrong impression to the court by misrepresenting facts. She also said that even though the Defense Counsel had mentioned that the CID had not conducted proper investigations, the CID reports confirm that it had, in fact, conducted proper investigations in accordance with the law.

She also said the affidavit of the accused did not contain any reasonable reasons to grant bail to Attanayake. The High Court had remanded Attanayake on charges of preparing a fraudulent document that was displayed in the media during the last Presidential Election for the purpose of affecting the result of then Common Candidate Maithripala Sirisena.

The Attorney General alleged that Attanayake had committed an offence under Section 3 (1) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) Act No. 56 of 2007 by inciting racial or religious hatred among the ethnic communities.

Section 3(1) of the ICCPR cites that no person shall propagate war or advocate national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to cause discrimination, hostility or violence.

The AG further indicted Attanayake for committing a punishable offence under Sections 454 and 459 of the penal Code by forging a document and displaying it to the public as genuine and that the accused had also committed an offience under section 80-C of the Presidential Election Act for displaying a fake document prior to election, for the purpose of affecting the results of that election in relation to the personal character or conduct of any Candidate. 

He was also accused of publicly announcing on 22 December 2014 that there was a secret deal between UNP Leader Wickremasinghe and Common Opposition candidate Sirisena in the run up to the Presidential Elections in 2015. 

Attanayake defected from the UNP extended support to former President Mahinda Rajapaksa in 2015 Presidential Election, soon after which he was appointed Health Minister, a position that was left vacant after Sirisena broke ties with the Rajapaksa government to become the common opposition candidate. - See more at: http://www.ft.lk/article/578453/Bail-refused-to-Tissa-Attanayake#sthash.eGJhVnEd.dpuf