Monday, November 28, 2016

WHY EVERY JOURNALIST, ACTIVIST & DISSENTER IN SRI LANKA MUST OPPOSE THE NEW DRAFT COUNTERTERRORISM LAW

Gehan Gunatilleke.-28/11/2016

A year ago, Sri Lanka promised the world that it would repeal its current Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA). In a historic co-sponsored resolution, it assured the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) that it would replace the PTA with counterterrorism legislation that complies with international best practices. The current PTA is described as ‘draconian’, and has been used to target human rights defenders, journalists and political opponents of the state. Meanwhile, the framework for a new counterterrorism law was recently unveiled in the Sri Lankan press. The framework contains a number of serious problems, including the denial of prompt access to legal counsel and the admissibility of confessions potentially obtained through torture. This post examines another disturbing feature of the framework: the criminalisation of speech that ‘threatens unity’ and the disclosure of confidential information.
Sri Lankan civil society together with the Human Rights Commission must now prepare for yet another battle to resist repressive legislation. (Image credit: Agent Provocateur via Flickr)

Saying or writing anything that could cause ‘communal disharmony’ is criminalised under section 2(1)(h) of the current PTA. This provision has a notorious history of abuse. In 2009, it was used to convict journalist J.S. Tissainayagam for accusing the armed forces of committing war crimes. The new framework contains a similar provision, which is potentially worse than the PTA. Clause xviii of the section on ‘terrorism-related offences’ criminalises ‘words either spoken or intended to be read’, that ‘threaten the unity’ of Sri Lanka. The clause could therefore outlaw criticism of state policies that favour one community over another. For example, a journalist who criticises a discriminatory language policy in the public sector could be accused of ‘threatening the unity’ of the country. Moreover, civil society advocates who press for the prosecution of war criminals and perpetrators of religious violence could be accused of ‘threatening unity’ through their advocacy. This clause, if enacted, could seriously impede free speech in Sri Lanka and restrict the space for resisting impunity and the abuse of power.

The new framework in fact goes a step further. It also criminalises gathering or providing ‘confidential information’ with the knowledge that such information will be used for the commission of any offence under the new law. For example, providing confidential information with the knowledge that it will be used to say or write something that ‘threatens unity’ is deemed to be ‘espionage’ and carries a prison term of ten years. This provision has serious implications for whistleblowers, who are vital to revealing state corruption and abuses. It also contradicts Sri Lanka’s new Right to Information Act, which specifically prohibits the punishment of whistleblowers who disclose information held by public authorities. Hence the espionage offence could be particularly devastating when combined with the offence of ‘threatening unity’.

The present government’s persistence in introducing repressive legislation in the face of human rights commitments is certainly disturbing. In fact, this is not even the first time it has attempted to re-enact a provision similar to section 2(1)(h) of the PTA. In December 2015, it attempted to introduce an amendment to the Penal Code, purportedly to criminalise hate speech. The proposed legislation replicated section 2(1)(h), but was withdrawn following opposition from civil society and the Human Rights Commission. Moreover, in August 2016, the Minister of Justice gazetted a Bill that sought to deny suspects the right to access legal counsel until police interrogations are completed. Fortunately, this Bill was also shelved following civil society opposition and the intervention of the Human Rights Commission.

This trend reveals a darker side to the present Sri Lankan government, which has thus far characterised itself as progressive and committed to human rights. It reveals the fact that government actors with repressive interests wield enormous influence over the reform agenda. These interests shape legislation to retain a pervasive national security apparatus – the very apparatus that the present government promised it would dismantle.

The new counterterrorism framework appears to perpetuate this trend. Sri Lankan civil society together with the Human Rights Commission must now prepare for yet another battle to resist repressive legislation. As they reflect on a frustrating year since that historic resolution, they can acknowledge one silver lining. It is the fact that Sri Lanka still affords space for resistance through civil society activism and independent institutions. This space must be safeguarded. Thus the battle against this new counterterrorism framework is not merely against repressive legislation. It is a battle to maintain this space for resistance.

—————

Gehan Gunatilleke (@GehanDG) is a human rights lawyer based in Colombo, Sri Lanka, and the Research Director of Verité Research. He is the author of The Chronic and the Acute: Post-War Religious Violence in Sri Lanka. He is also a Commonwealth scholar at New College, University of Oxford.

original caption: Speech and Spies: Why Sri Lanka’s New Counterterrorism Law is a Terrible Idea
ohrh.law.ox.ac.uk

The Significance Of Maaveerar Naal

By Pitasanna Shanmugathas –November 28, 2016

Pitasanna Shanmugathas

I look at Maaveerar Naal with an immense sense of sadness for the thousands of lives that were needlessly killed and sacrificed, all for an unattainable and counterproductive goal of a separate state. If only the Sri Lankan people had listened to the peaceful voices of dissent, throughout Sri Lanka’s independent history, calling for pluralistic unity—we as a people would undoubtedly be in a better place today.

There was a peaceful voice of dissent coming from a man named Senator Murugeysen Tiruchelvam, who throughout the 1950s, 60s, and 70s, strongly voiced objection to dividing the country and believed in solving the ethnic tensions under a united Sri Lanka. November 23rd marked the 40th death anniversary of Senator Murugeysen Tiruchelvam. Senator Murugeysen Tiruchelvam, throughout his career, was a strong proponent of federalism. Tiruchelvam was opposed to the Vaddukoddai resolution, an overwhelmingly mandate calling for a separate state of Tamil Eelam in the North and East of Sri Lanka, and strongly advised SJV Chelvanayakam against it.

Senator Tiruchelvam perhaps foresaw that Tamils plunging into a separatist war will result in needless bloodshed, further educational and economic impoverishment of the Tamil people, all for a goal of separatism which was inevitably unattainable. However, Senator Murugeysen, much like his son Neelan Tiruchelvam, was disliked and deeply criticized by fellow Tamil politicians for much of his political career.

Tiruchelvam, while serving as a Senator in Parliament, poignantly stated, “We do not want to divide this country. In no part of the world is it accepted as a political philosophy that a federal form of government divides a country.” Senator Tiruchelvam strongly advocated for the Sinhalese parties to stop fighting amongst each other for narrow political gains and instead he advocated that all parties should come together and unite on behalf of the interests of all the people in Sri Lanka, “We of the Federal Party will be attacked because ‘we have betrayed the Tamils.’ The U.N.P. will be attacked because it has ‘betrayed the Sinhalese.’ But there comes a time in the history of a nation, in the history of a people, when certain circumstances have arisen, when it is all the more necessary for all people to come together to meet such situations and agree on a common programme.” At the time of Tiruchelvam’s death in 1976, his proposals and pleas for ethnic reconciliation were belittled and ridiculed by the political parties of Sri Lanka. Sri Lanka, for decades, would pay a deadly price for its political inaction in peacefully resolving the ethnic tensions.

Constitutional Assembly: Report of the Police, Law and Order Subcommittee

By C. A. Chandraprema-November 28, 2016

Police powers were among the most contentious topics in the whole devolution debate and the provisions of the 13th Amendment in this connection were never implemented by any government over the past three decades, because it would have rendered the country ungovernable. Now however, the Police Law and Order Subcommittee proposes to actually carry out what no previous government even contemplated. This Subcommittee of the Constitutional Assembly has proposed that the Police Ordinance be replaced with a completely new Police Act and that changes be made to the emergency laws – which would take the provincial police and law and order powers even beyond what was envisaged in the 13th Amendment.

The proposed new Police Act will divide the Sri Lanka police force into the Sri Lanka National Police and the Sri Lanka Provincial Police and the latter again into nine separate units. All officers of the Sri Lanka Police shall wear the same uniform and insignia and officers of the Provincial Police will wear a distinctive shoulder flash to indicate the provincial police force to which they are attached. Even though the 13th Amendment had stipulated that the national police would in normal circumstances be in plain clothes while the provincial police will be in uniform, no such provision has been made in this subcommittee report. However due to the limited functions envisaged for the national police, it is unclear where the national police will be on duty in uniforms.

Following the lead of the 13th Amendment, the present Subcommittee has also proposed limiting the role of the national police to exercising jurisdiction over offences against the state, the armed forces, ministers, MPs, judicial officers and public officers, offences relating to elections, offences against diplomatic representatives, offences relating to currency and government stamps, offences against state property and international crimes. Everything else will be the preserve of the provincial police forces. If the national police will not be manning police stations or patrolling the streets and carrying out investigations into day to day complaints made by the public, where would they be serving as uniformed policemen? This is why the 13th Amendment was forthright enough to state that the national police would be in plain clothes in normal circumstances, while only the provincial police would be in uniform.

Sidelining of the national police

It can be observed that the jurisdiction of the national police would be limited to offences that seldom occur which means that even the cadre requirement would be vastly reduced and the national police will become like one of the specialised units such as the special branch that operates within the police dept. today. Even at present, investigations into the type of offences reserved for the national police in the 13th Amendment and the Subcommittee’s proposals would be handled by specialised units within the police department. One point of departure from the 13th Amendment in the proposals of the Subcommittee is the creation of a Colombo metropolitan police division which will be outside the jurisdiction of the Western province police force and will be the exclusive preserve of the national police force. Thus the metropolitan Colombo area will be the only part of the country where one will see the uniformed national police performing normal police functions on a day to day basis.

If police powers had been devolved, as per the 13th Amendment, the leaders of the government and even the IGP himself would have been living under the jurisdiction of the Western province police with everything that entails. That problem seems to have been solved to some extent by the Subcommittee’s proposal to have a Colombo Metropolitan police force which will exercise the powers of both the national police and the Western province police in the Colombo metropolitan area. The Western province police force will not have any jurisdiction in the Colombo Metropolitan area.

There is a difference in the way provision has been made for the referring of investigations to the CID between the devolution proposals in the 13th Amendment and the proposals of the Subcommittee on Police and Law and Order. According to the 13th Amendment, any offence which may ordinarily be investigated by a provincial division may be investigated by the CID or any other unit of the national division if the chief minister makes a request to that effect. If the IGP is of the opinion that an offence should be investigated by the CID in the public interest, he can direct the CID to take over a case ‘in consultation’ with the chief minister, and the approval of the Attorney General. Under the provisions of the 13th Amendment, it was the chief minister who had the final say as to whether a matter would be investigated by the CID or not.

The proposals of the Subcommittee on Police and Law and Order in this regard are that the Criminal Investigation Department can conduct investigations into a matter a) on a direction issued by the Inspector General of Police, b) on the advice of the National Police Commission, c) on the advice of the Attorney General, d) on a request by a Provincial Police Commissioner. This makes it look as if national level officials and institutions such as the IGP, the AG and the national police commission have the discretion to refer matters to the CID. However there is some confusion regarding this proposal as the Subcommittee has included in their report yet another proposal about the manner in which a matter coming under the jurisdiction of the provincial police can be referred to the national police force.

Sub-national police forces

If the Inspector General of Police in consultation with the respective Provincial Police Commissioner forms the view that a high degree of expertise may be necessary for the conduct of the investigation, it could be directed to the national police. Furthermore, if the Provincial Police is unable or unwilling or does not carry out the investigation, it can be handled by the national police but only if the provincial police commissioner agrees to such a shift of responsibility. Another way in which the national police will get to investigate something falling under the jurisdiction of the provincial police would be for the provincial police commissioner to make a request to that effect. We see that this second proposal is closer to the original arrangement in the 13th Amendment as we saw above. The CID comes under the national police. If the national police can be brought into an investigation that comes within the jurisdiction of the provincial police only with the provincial police commissioner’s consent, how can the CID be brought into an investigation at the discretion of the IGP, the Attorney General or the National Police Commission as stated above? The Subcommittee has put forward two irreconcilable proposals and this confusion needs to be sorted out.

According to the Subcommittee’s proposals, the Provincial Police Commissioner will be all powerful within his jurisdiction. Even the IGP’s oversight over the provincial police commissioner is limited. The Inspector General of Police may issue directions to the Provincial Police Commissioners on matters relating to the overall management and administration, and the execution of duties and functions of the provincial police. However, the IGP cannot give directions to the provincial police commissioners regarding matters that come under the jurisdiction of the provincial police. According to the Subcommittee report, the provincial police commissioners are to be appointed by the National Police Commission, on a recommendation made by the respective Provincial Police Commissions. The provincial Police Commission in turn will be nominated jointly by the chief minister and leader of the opposition of the provincial councils and given their appointments by the Constitutional Council.

The provincial police units proposed by the Subcommittee have even greater powers than the provincial police units under the 13th Amendment. For example, under the 13A, the training of all police officers both in the national police force as well as the provincial police forces were the exclusive preserve of the national police authorities. But under the Subcommittee’s proposals the provincial police units will have their own training institutes. This is a dangerous provision as some provincial councils will be able to give their police officers the kind of training not available to policemen in other jurisdictions. The danger in such a state of affairs is magnified when viewed in the light of the fact that the new proposals of the Subcommittee seeks to ethnicise and tribalise the police force. When recruiting persons to serve as police officers attached to a provincial police force, the respective Provincial Police Commissions arem a) to have due regard to the ethnic and linguistic ratios of the relevant province b) to give preference to applicants resident in that province c) to ensure that applicants can speak the predominant language of the people of the respective Province.

These provisions will ensure that the police officers in the north and east will be almost exclusively Tamil speakers and those in the south almost exclusively Sinhala speakers. Furthermore when the police force is compartmentalised and organised on provincial lines with no transfer of police officers between provinces, the drawing of battle lines will be complete. This is what makes provincial police training institutes all the more dangerous.

According to the provisions of the 13th Amendment, the nature, type and quantity of fire-arms and ammunition and other equipment for all provincial divisions were to be determined by the National Police Commission after ‘consultation’ with the provincial police commissions. The proposals of the present Subcommittee are that the Provincial Police shall be entitled to carry and use arms and ammunition that may be prescribed from time to time along with the respective quantity, by the IGP. When deciding on such a matter, the IGP is bound to consult the relevant Provincial Police Commissioners. Given what Sri Lanka has experienced, allowing provincial police authorities the final say in what kind of arms their police forces use is nothing short of insanity. This is a matter that should be decided at the national level and handed down to the provincial level.

On the face of it, it appears as if the Subcommittee has included in their proposals certain safeguards in relation to the provincial police force that were not seen in the 13th Amendment. For example, when a state of emergency has been declared in a province, the Inspector General of Police may bring one or more provincial police establishments under his direct command in order to effectively respond to the situation. If the IGP after having consulted the national police commission, the relevant provincial police commission and also having ‘afforded an opportunity’ to the respective Provincial Police Commissioner, has formed the view that there exists systematic and widespread insubordination, wilful violation or neglect of duties, mutiny or riotous conduct, or an attack on the unity, territorial integrity or sovereignty of Sri Lanka, he can with the sanction of the President, suspend the functioning of the relevant Provincial Police, and take steps to disarm officers of the relevant police. He shall thereafter, assign duties and functions of the relevant provincial police to be carried out by the national police force. He can withdraw the suspension when things return to normal.

The state of emergency

If the IGP following consultations with the relevant Governor, Chief Minister and Provincial Police Commissioner forms the view that it would not be appropriate to lift the suspension, he can with the sanction of the President, dissolve the relevant provincial police force and assign the national police force to cover their duties in the province. Following such a dissolution the IGP shall assist the relevant Provincial Police Commission, to reconstitute and activate the relevant Provincial Police. This looks like strong stuff, but means nothing in practical terms. The IGP has to ‘consult’ the provincial police commission and commissioner before deciding that there is a mutinous situation in a provincial police force. He can’t act on his own even if a break down in law and order seems obvious to him. Furthermore before he dissolves a provincial police unit, he has to consult the Governor (who under this new scheme of things will be an appointee of the chief minister) as well as the chief minister himself and the provincial police commissioner.

The mutiny of an entire police force is a serious situation. If any such situation takes place in Sri Lanka, the chief minister and his Governor as well as the provincial police brass will almost certainly be involved in the disturbances. Furthermore given the pusillanimous manner in which this government has reacted to incidents such as the attack on Sinhala students in the Jaffna university, it is only too plain that these ‘strong’ provisions will be just a dead letter. If an existing police force is to be disbanded and reconstituted, it will have to be reconstituted from within that same province, from within the same population. By what stretch of the imagination are we to assume that disbanding an existing police force and reconstituting from within that same provincial population will in any way improve matters?

Furthermore, all this talk of being able to even dissolve a provincial police force becomes nonsensical when looked at in juxtaposition with the recommendations the Subcommittee has made with regard to the declaration of an emergency. If a state of emergency is to be in force continuously for a period in excess of 3 months or for a period of more than 90 days within a period of 180 days, the extension of the state of emergency will require a ‘special majority’ in parliament. The Subcommittee has not specified what this ‘special majority’ is but they are convinced that a simple majority will not suffice to extend the emergency beyond a certain number of days. Furthermore, whenever a state of emergency is declared, any person may petition the supreme court challenging the declaration of emergency and even the emergency regulations. The supreme court can declare the declaration of emergency invalid and that the emergency regulations to be ultra vires.

The judicial review of declarations of emergency is not a practical proposition in any country. Declaring an emergency and taking steps to meet a difficult situation is the exclusive preserve of the executive arm of the state. The judiciary is not equipped to determine whether a situation warrants a declaration of emergency or not, just as they are not competent to alter emergency regulations because the judiciary does not handle day to day work relating to the maintenance of law and order. This is why there is a separation between the judicial, legislative and executive arms of the state. If the proposals put forward by the Subcommittee on Police and Law and Order ever see the light of day, this will facilitate the divisive agenda laid down by the Subcommittee on Centre-Periphery Relations.

Militant Buddhism and shadowy Salafism Govt. should fight both

2016-11-29

he outbursts of Sinhala-Buddhist ultra-nationalism in the South have often been
In the early 2000’s, while the country was facing an existential threat from terrorism, a quasi-militant form of Sinhala-Buddhist radicalism sprung up with their primary target being the alleged aggressive proselytizing by evangelical Christian missionaries. A series of makeshift churches were attacked. Then in 2011, while the country was still reeling from the after-effects of a devastating war, another episode of ultra-nationalist Sinhala Buddhism popped up. This time the target was Muslims: Halal certificates, cow slaughter and the allegations of growing Islamic radicalism.
None of the above perceived concerns of Sinhala-Buddhist radicals was a grievance of the majority Sinhalese. However, ultra-nationalists managed to smuggle in their sinister agenda into the mainstream discourse. It is always dangerous to let bigots set or manipulate the national agenda. But, how did that happen in this country, not once, but periodically?
The problem has always been the government’s lethargy towards the creeping radicalism or covert cooperation with Sinhala-Buddhist ultra-nationalism. That was partly due to electoral calculations. The success of the Jathika Hela Urumaya in some of Colombo suburbs such as Maharagama and

Kaduwela, which were otherwise traditional Centre Right electorates generally favorable to the UNP, highlighted the appeal of religious nationalism even to the urbanites. And cognitive bias of Rajapaksas also made them embrace religious radicalism of the Bodu Bala Sena (BBS). The bottom line was that the successive governments did not really consider Sinhala ultra-nationalism as a credible threat, instead viewed it as a useful ally.
In the early 2000s, when churches were attacked, Chandrika Kumaratunga administration, cracked down on militant Buddhism, making several arrests. However, even then the government did not wish to get to the bottom of the problem. No arrests were made in a bomb attack on a musical concert which killed two in Colombo.

cyclical. They take place with the connivance, and when it was not the case, complacency of the government in power. A closer look at this periodic rage would also reveal, since the Black July in 1983, which was facilitated by the government’s inaction and active collaboration of some of its ministers, subsequent episodes of Sinhala-Buddhist ultra-nationalism have taken place broadly without any association with the terrorist war of the LTTE.

"The problem has always been the government’s lethargy towards the creeping radicalism or covert cooperation with Sinhala-Buddhist ultra-nationalism"

Now the intelligence agencies say there are 40 odd extremist groups operating in the country- including the BBS and Thawheed Jamath, the ultra-orthodox Islamic group which is growing in number and influence within the Muslim community. Those groups operate openly as well as in the shadows. They do not appear prominently in the national security agenda, partly because the current mainstream dialogue itself downplays national security imperatives for the sake of reconciliation and democratization. The danger in that approach is that neither reconciliation nor democracy can be sustainable without national security for there will always be groups that exploit the vacuum to advance their sinister agendas.
It was the failure of the intelligence and security apparatus, partly due to inadequacy of resources, to monitor the threats of Tamil militancy in the North and JVP in the South that helped those incipient threats to grow into monstrous proportions which convulsed this country in three brutal rebellions. It was the same failure that led to beleaguered governments to deploy extra-judicial means to fight terrorism and insurgency for the sake of long term stability. Now the government should not take chances. Intelligence services should be given adequate clearance to monitor these groups, both Sinhala-Buddhist and Muslims and make arrests where necessary.
In the past, fighting extremism within criminal justice laws was considered to be the best practice, however, more often than not, such laws proved to be inadequate and played into the hands of terrorists.The current political discourse does not favour the Prevention of Terrorism Act, for it was at times abused, but also helped lock up potentially dangerous terrorists, who if they had stayed at large, could have blown up a couple of more bombs. The civil society also opposed a proposed legislation on banning hate-speech for it could affect free speech. But the same groups now cry foul only when the Sinhala-bigots spew hatred.

"It is always good to promote inter-ethnic dialogue, which seems to be the government’s main strategy"

The government should bring back the proposed ban on hate-speech. It should also consider potential future security concerns and have remedies for such eventualities in its new security law with which it seeks to replace the Prevention of Terrorism Act. The world is not a utopia. Sri Lanka’s past sordid experience should compel a rational policymaker not to take any chances.
A country cannot fight extremism when its laws are inadequate or security agencies have hands tied behind their back. Hate speech could well be free speech, depending on the receptive audience, but the long-term radicalizing effect of such would not be nice. Their adherents in the long run would not operate within democratic parameters. It is better to lock up the trouble makers now under existing laws or new laws, than leave room for a desperate future government to bring backs white vans, when the threat multiplies. Ultra-nationalism does have many forms of utility. The rise of JVP in the mid-80s happened in the backdrop of rising anti-Indian nationalism. Islamic extremism is richly used in the Middle East and Pakistan for regime legitimization. One of those local Muslim politicians could well be tempted to try his or her luck. Once the wheel of radicalization is put into motion, it takes a life of its own.
It is always good to promote inter-ethnic dialogue, which seems to be the government’s main strategy. At the moment, where extremism is still incipient, it could work. But, it could also give an undue national recognition to groups like the BBS. What is equally dangerous is that it could well provide a convenient smoke screen for growing ‘Salafication’ of some sections of Sri Lankan Muslims. That potential radicalization could well be many times more dangerous than the usual Sinhala Buddhist antics of the BBS. It may be politically incorrect to note, but the propensity for violence in the two ideologies differ vastly.
There is another hard fact. Even during its peak, Sinhala-Buddhist ultra-nationalism has been a nuisance, rather than an existential threat to ethnic minorities. Now there are some who try to project it as a mortal threat to the minorities; that is in a way of advancing the narrative concocted by Eelam Tamil separatism. This misrepresentation helps no one, but it has become a pastime of some. It is not just discrediting Sinhalese or Sinhala Buddhist, which is generally the intention, but it could more dangerously radicalize some sections of the Muslim youth, as the Tamil narrative did to zombiefy hordes of Tamil youth into suicide bombers. So that may not be the best strategy, if you only want to pique the Sinhala-Buddhists.

"It was the failure of the intelligence and security apparatus, partly due to inadequacy of resources, to monitor the threats of Tamil militancy in the North and JVP in the South that helped those incipient threats to grow into monstrous proportions which convulsed this country in three brutal rebellions"

Follow RangaJayasuriya @ RangaJayasuriya
on Twitter

- See more at: http://www.dailymirror.lk/article/Militant-Buddhism-and-shadowy-Salafism-Govt-should-fight-both-119881.html#sthash.kbTuTgux.dpuf

The Employees’ Trust Fund: Its concept, misconceptions, and the way forward

Tuesday, 29 November 2016

At a time when the Employees’ Trust Fund is celebrating 35 years of existence, it is time to reflect upon its original concept and perhaps look at any re-orientation needs it requires to be compatible withthe current socio-economic environment.

The Employees’ Trust Fund (ETF) and its sister fund, the Employees’ Provident Fund (EPF), have attracted considerable attention in the recent past. Some concerns are justified while others are unfounded and arise to ignorance. Most often whenever these funds come up in conversations, it is surprising to note the many misconceptions that abound. This article attempts to provide some insights into the original concept and objectives of the ETF, correct some of the misconceptions and finally suggest a way forward to achieve desirable objectives.

The concept of an ETF

The open economy introduced in 1978 created a paradigm shift in Government policy. The private sector was expected to be the engine of growth, the Government was to be a facilitator of economic growth, and a massive infrastructure programme was initiated. It was in this environment that the Employees’ Trust Fund was created. It is common knowledge that the ETF was the brainchild of Lalith Athulathmudali, the then Minister of Trade and Shipping who was instrumental in creating the Sri Lanka Ports Authority by amalgamating three entities, and making the Colombo Port an efficient and sought after port.

The Employees.docx by Siva Thavam on Scribd

Rs. 791,500,000 more to make ministers cozier

November 28, 2016

Rs. 70 million for Dilan and Grero, Rs.70 million for Rajitha, Rs.14 million for Lasantha, Rs.35 million for Lakshman Yapa…

These are monies asked from a supplementary estimate presented to the parliament to buy 28 luxury vehicles for cabinet ministers and the Leader of the Opposition. The supplementary estimate was presented to parliament by the Leader of the House Minister Lakshman Kiriella requesting for Rs. 791,500,000.

This supplementary estimate had been presented earlier but had to be withdrawn due to the explosion at Salawa army camp. Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe said the move to spend money to import vehicles the ministers would be given up due to the situation created by the explosion at Salawa. However, the supplementary estimate was presented to Parliament again on Friday.

Public funds splashed for Mahinda’s jumbo delegations

Nov 28, 2016

The annual tour for the UN General Assembly has become quite a considerable expenditure to the state of Sri Lanka in the recent years. According to reports, recent government have spent more than 1 0 Million Rupees per person in this delegation to the UN General Assembly. Compared to these massive expenses , it hard to say that we have achieved anything fruitful in return.

Since 2005 up until 2016 603 people have represented Sri Lanka in The UN General Assembly. And half of them, numbering 314, have been persons outside the official cohort. Accordingly it is clear that public funds have been openly misused by all the governments by spending as much money for diplomats, on outside non-relevant personnel.

Usually the annual delegation to the UN General Assembly is headed by the President. The official delegation is normally consisted of the minister for External Affairs, the first lady, MPs or Ministers and the officials of the foreign ministry. Apart from that in the recent past, many others have been included to this delegation as "other agents". This was clearly seen during the Rajapaksa regime. But the state bears all the expenses for these other agents as well. They include travel expenses, accommodation and all other expenses.

Between 2005 and 2015, 2011 has been recorded as the year where the highest amount of public funds has been spent on the UN delegation. It amounts to a staggering 169,124,899.30. It is roughly 160 Million Rupees. The delegation has included 98people and 68 of them were non-related personnel. Accordingly each person has been taken in by spending 1.7 million Rupees. After that in 2010 Rs. 129,891,525 for 105 members, in 2013Rs. 125,215,891 for 82 members has been spent. In 2010 65 government officials have taken part in the tour. And in 2013 42of them were non-official personnel.

Further in 2010, the delegation had included the then first lady Shiranthi Rajapaksa and the Rajapaksa's youngest son Rohitha. Here many criticisms were made regarding the presence of the President's son as he had no business being a delegate in the UN.

In 2006, then President Mahinda Rajapaksa took first lady, Ministers, Mangala Samaraweera, Anura Priyadarshana Yapa, Sripathi Suriyarachchi, Rishad Bathiuddin, MahindaSamarasinghe, Gunarathna Weerakoon, Athawuda Senewiratne, Nimal Siripala De Silva, Dullus Alahapperuma, NirmalaKothalawala, Douglus Devananda, Jeyaraj Fernandopulle, SusilPremjayanth, Arumugam Thondaman, Wishwa Warnapala, Geethanjana Gunawardhana and several other Ministers and MPs to the UN General Assembly with an expense of 494,464,601.

IN 2007 the then President Rajapaksa repeated his tradition by taking a bunch of his allies in the UN ride inclding RohithaBogollagama, DOuglas Devananda, Anura Yapa, T.B. Ekanayake, CHampika Ranawaka and C.B. Rathnayake. This time too the total expenses had grossed over 60 Million Rupees. His grand expenditure on the UN delegation soon went through the roof as titanic sums like 120 Million and 160 Million Rupees were spent on the delegations during 2010 and 2011. IN 2012and 2013

two groups visited New York under the leadership of then President Rajapaksa and they too spent equal amounts of money on the tour.

The lowest sum President Rajapaksa has spent on these UN tours is 30,143,017 in 2012. The delegation had only consisted of 18 people. Here the speciality is that it was former Minister G.L. Peiris that had led the delegation in that year.

During these years it is clearly visible that over half of the delegation has been comprised with outsiders. The last UN General Assembly was special to Sri Lanka as the alleged war crimes issue was taken into discussion at that event. But unfortunately the delegation was not able to make a considerable difference at the assembly. It has now been realized that many of the delegates are considering this a free shopping tour rather than an international event. This was recently raised by JVP MP Nalinda Jayatissa as well. Responding to that query, foreign minister Mangala Samaraweera produced a report, but the names of those who had taken part in these tours have not been revealed. Accordingly it has been mentioned that during 2005 - 2015 115 state officials and 126 other agents have taken part in these delegations. The finally headcount in all these events amounts to 647.

In 2005 the then President Chandrika Kumarathunga led the Sri Lankan delegation along with Lakshman Kadirgamar, Dew Gunasekera, Pavithra Wanniarachchi, and 7 other MPs. It has cost the state 20 Million Rupees.

However, during the election the Yahapalana administration continuously claimed that they would take steps to prevent misusing public funds for these unnecessary expenses. Accordingly in 2015 President Maithripala Sirisena was given the public mandate to bring a new change to this system Accordingly the first Sri LAnkan delegation to UN headed by President Maithripala Sirisena contained 44 personnel with the expense of 90 Million Rupees. This contained 15 other agents as well.

It has now been clear that though the faces have changed the policies have remained unchanged. Even though the Yahapalanagovernment accused Mahainda Rajapaksa for taking large crowds at state's expense to UN assembly, little has changed in the way the new government is acting at present. One may argue that the delegation needs other agents to cover a large area of scope. But it is problematic as to what relatives; friends of the top brass are going to do to expand this scope. It is a known secret that these delegations enjoy the best treatments abroad. Hence it is clear that these investments have not given us back any considerable profit.

However, we still remain optimistic about the future as the government has now realized the need to cut down unnecessary costs to balance its budget. However it may be misusing public funds is an unforgivable crime. Hence we are watching as to how the Yahapalanaya is going to deal with this issue.

AshWaru Colombo

PM defends adding Rs 100,000 to MPs’ monthly allowances

By Saman Indrajith-November 28, 2016, 10:21 pm

Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe told Parliament yesterday that the government had decided to add Rs. 100,000 to the monthly allowances for MPs so as to enable them to help people in their constituencies.

"This is not meant to be a take home allowance. The MPs have to attend wedding ceremonies and funerals where they are expected to give gifts and cash donations. The salary drawn by an MP is not enough to meet all such expenses. So they obtain money from others. I ask you which is better; enabling these MPs to help their constituents or to let them obtain money from others? Do not go back to the old system. My opinion is that the salaries of MPs too should be increased. Some journalists draw higher salaries than MPs. Editors of newspapers get higher salaries than MPs.

An English daily has published the story about the Rs 100,000 payment to the MPs. Its editor and others requested for a pay hike last year. There is no issue when their salaries are increased, but when salaries of MPs are increased it is wrong," the Prime minister said.

"These newspapers encouraged extremism and hit me as I am not an extremist," he said.

The Prime Minister also responded to a comment made by Chief Opposition Whip Anura Dissanayake, who said the PM had threatened English newspapers several times.

He said he would not hesitate to hit back at the media if they hit him. "I cannot attack Wijeya Newspapers or burn the press. These are properties of my uncle. Sirasa belonging to my one time friend Kili Maharajah attacked me several times and did I burn it?" he queried.

"I will only hit out verbally if the media hit me and will never go beyond that," he said.

Sri Lanka: Nilwala project — Rs. 4,012 Million missing !

Nov 28, 2016

( November 28, 2016, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) President Maithripala Sirisena, addressing a meeting in Galle on Saturday asked whether it was wrong for the government to launch an investigation to find out what had become of a whopping Rs. 4,012 million released by the Treasury the day before the last presidential election to commence work on the Nilwala Project.

The President said the money had been released to the Secretary to the Irrigation Ministry and no one knew what had happened to it.

Elaborating on the issue, the President said: “I was able to retrieve a dossier on the project and according to it in 2012 a cheque for Rs. 1,000 million was issued to a Chinese company for the Nilwala Project while on the eve of the last Presidential election another cheque for Rs. 3012 million was released.

The President demanded to know whether public officials were empowered to release Rs. 3012 million just the day before an election.

Given below is the ‘B’ report:

Lend Us Your Ears to Help Hearing Impaired Children

The Centre for Education of Hearing Impaired Children Centre (CEHIC) which during the past few decades has trained hundreds of hearing impaired children to move into the mainstream of education and employment—is making an urgent appeal for funds from well-wishers to continue this noble mission.

2016-11-28

or the past few months the Dalugama based multi-religious centre has run out of funds even to pay the salaries of teachers and other staff and to maintain basic facilities. In an appeal on behalf of the hearing impaired children, CEHIC is appealing to you to join the Donor Club of benefactors by donating Rs. 1000/- (One Thousand Rupees) at least per month by Bank Standing Order for the purpose of running the Centre situated at Lumbini Mawatha, Dalugama, Kelaniya. Tel: 2910623
The appeal state, “at the CEHIC, children who are ignored and marginalized as deaf and “dumb” are educated and trained using the Auditory – Verbal Method to hear and speak from the youngest pre-school age so that the child enter the mainstream of education.
The CEHIC bases its work with hearing impaired children on five principal areas-

"The driving force of CEHIC is the hope it instills in every hearing impaired child that they too have a positive future as equal partners with every other member of society in building a just, prosperous and peaceful Sri Lanka"

1) The use of the Auditory Verbal Method of Education (and not sign language).
2) The morning Pre School education programme which sets the “deaf” children and their families on the path of becoming creative and full members of our society from the earliest

age.
3) INTEGRATION into the mainstream educational system in Sri Lanka at the school-going age and conducting extra daily classes in the afternoons in the key subjects of the national curriculum for the integrated children from YEAR ONE To YEAR 13 (University entrance)
4) Providing a holistic education which includes training in music, dancing, arts and craft , home science, sewing, woodwork, pottery, gymnastics, sports, etc. and
5) Making the parental involvement in the child’s early education a central pillar of the CEHIC programme. One parent accompanies their child every day, sits in the classroom alongside the child and learns the techniques and processes which are continued in the home. Thus the school becomes the home and the home becomes the school.

Today over 600 of our children are studying in regular schools throughout Sri Lanka. The oldest group of past pupils from CEHIC are now young adults and are facing life in the real world with all its challenges. Those who have the ability are encouraged to go into higher education and some have entered university and obtained degrees. Six of our past pupils have graduated from universities in Sri Lanka and two are currently completing their first degrees. For those who wish to enter the world of work, CEHIC is now planning to develop its Vocational Training and Aftercare Centre. The centre has a full-time complement of teachers, administrative and minor staff and also part-time teachers.
The driving force of CEHIC is the hope it instills in every hearing impaired child that they too have a positive future as equal partners with every other member of society in building a just, prosperous and peaceful Sri Lanka.

Would you not like to be part of this miracle?

From our founding in 1982 we have been helped financially to find our running costs through the generosity of donor institutions, private individuals, friends and well-wishers both here and aboard. However these donations are not continuous and we have to keep seeking funds from month to month for our day-to-day expenses training of teachers.
We are committed to continue providing this very special, very expensive and time-consuming education.

Free of Charge

This is because we are convinced that charging fees from the children would exclude the very poor

from our services. We need to find more than Rs. 450,000 per month for our running costs. The donations will be exempted from taxes. If you agree to join this DONOR Club, please be kind enough to contact the centre at the following email addresses :- info@cehic.lk, gretanewlyn@gmail.com, aloypsj@gmail.com, robertcusz@yahoo.co.uk
You can complete and hand in a Standing Order from at your bank, or let us know the name of your bank and we will collect the form and bring it to you from completion and your signature and if you so wish, take the signed from to your bank ourselves.
Be assured that these children who will benefit from your generosity will bring abundant blessings to you, your family and your work,”.
The CEHIC trustees are Ven. V. Kusaladhamma Nayake Thera, Rev. Sr. Greta Nalawatta, Prof. Sarath Amunugama and Rev. Fr. Aloysius Peieris s.j.

"Today over 600 of our children are studying in regular schools throughout Sri Lanka. The oldest group of past pupils from CEHIC are now young adults and are facing life in the real world with all its challenges"

Adaptation – Part I

By Ranil Senanayake –November 29, 2016

Dr Ranil Senanayake

Preparing for the future by looking back. Understanding the issues and options before us.

Sri Lanka like all other nations, is faced with a difficult future in terms of climate change, we need to understand the oncoming changes very clearly so that the right options can be implemented. The myth of growth by consumption has exposed us all to a dangerously changing climate. But Sri Lanka is unique in being the only nation whose ancestors had future-proofed our present. If we understand the potential that we have, we can make the future less impactful for our children

In the article ‘Playing with the Future’ (Colombo Telegraph November 8, 2016), some threats we will have to face as a consequence of climate change was discussed. The destructive fires that plagued the mountains during the unusually hot and dry months of September-October were indicative of future changes.

Now that the rains have come, I watch the structure less soil, desiccated by periodic fires, pour down the mountainsides on its way to fill up the small reservoirs and tanks below. A result of poor planning, that saw the mountain forests disappear to be replaced with fire prone and desiccating Pinus and Eucalyptus plantations or the Tea monocultures.

Sri Lankans have lamented on the ignorance of these developers for a long time.

The founding father of this nation the Rt. Hon. D.S. Senanayake wrote the following words in his book Agriculture and Patriotism.

“It is of importance to remember the part played in the conservation of water by the forests of the country. With the evidence daily accumulating of the wisdom of our forefathers, we need scarcely doubt that it was not merely the idea of making the mountain country difficult of approach by the foreign invader that caused them to preserve unfilled and uncleared the dense vegetation of their mountain slopes. We may readily believe that they deliberately left these untouched in order to provide that abundant supply of water on which they might draw for the benefit of man.”

His statement reflects the words of the great king Parakramabahu I who stated “not even a little water that comes from the rain must flow into the ocean without being made useful to man”. He reflected a philosophy popular from the 3rd century BC to 12th century, which saw the construction of about 30,000 reservoirs in lowland Sri Lanka. This amazing engineering effort created sophisticated ‘cascades’ of reservoirs not seen anywhere else in the world. As observed by Parker in his book ‘Ancient Ceylon’: “ but as a matter of fact the notion of reservoir-making appears to have been originated in only one country, and never to have been invented independently elsewhere, at any rate in the Old World”. When compared to the lowland dry zone land area of about 40,000 sq. kilometers, it is almost equivalent to one reservoir for each sq. kilometer. But tragically rather than being managed and conserved many of these tanks are ignored, filled up or constructed over in many watersheds.

It has been calculated that a one-degree increase would eliminate fresh water from a third of the world’s land surface by 2100. This is merely through evaporation. Most countries in the world are not so lucky to have a radial drainage system of rivers from the mountain rainwater catchments that have a massive water retention system represented by the reservoirs built by our ancestors.

Today we destroy this amazing possibility, to restore and utilize this gift of ‘future-proofing’ endowed on us by our ancestors, by mindless ‘development’ projects that cut across watersheds and spew pollutants into our waterways.

Concern for the future should be a fundamental plank of development. Indeed it has produced a tension between words stated at international fora and the national policy process. The statement on biodiversity and the statement on Climate Change provide examples.

toyota executive vice president mitshuhisa kato

Toyota Executive Vice President Mitsuhisa Kato poses with a Toyota new Prius at the Toyota showroom in Tokyo. Pic: AP

by Tech Wire Asia- 25th November 2016

TOYOTA has developed a new way to observe the behavior of lithium ions (Li-ions) in an electrolyte, a world first that could lead to longer battery life for electric vehicles and improve their cruise range by 10-15 percent.

According to the Associated Press, Toyota engineer Hisao Yamashige explained the new method to reporters on Thursday. Li-ions are tiny particles in batteries used to power laptops and smartphones as well as electric cars.

Toyota’s company policy has been to prioritize the manufacture of gas-electric hybrid vehicles like its Prius model, in an effort to stay ahead of the curve when it comes to environmentally-friendly innovations.

SEE ALSO: Japan: Can Toyota’s ‘baby’ robot Kirobo Mini trigger broodiness in young couples?

The resulting hybrid cars are expensive but can deliver the same cruise range as a gas engine – however, increasing the cruise range has been hindered by the fact that powering stations are not yet as common or popular as regular gas stations.

All of Toyota’s cars have been hybrids since it discontinued the iQ subcompact model, which was fully electric, but sold too little to justify its manufacture cost.

Nissan, a rival in Toyota’s home market of Japan, has produced a fully-electric vehicle that can go about 160km on a single charge, called Leaf.

Toyota’s new technology will allow it to experiment with different materials and battery structures, reports AP, as well as work on an improved electric car. Yoshinori Suga, a department manager, said that such a vehicle will be available commercially within the next “several years”.

By 2020, Toyota plans to begin mass production of their electric vehicle in anticipation of more limiting environmental regulations planned in the U.S. and Chiona. The Asahi Shumbun reported on Wednesday that the regulations will be put in gear in the latter half of 2017.

A senior Toyota official was quoted saying: “The decision means we will actively introduce all types of eco-friendly vehicles. We have to accelerate our EV strategy as regulations are expected to be strengthened in California.”