Friday, December 9, 2016

CID tells court Interpol rejected red alert warrant request against LeN editor

Poor reflection on magistrate Kaveendra..!

(Lanka-e-News- 09.Dec.2016, 11.30PM) The CID today informed Gampaha court that since no charges had been filed against Lanka e News editor Sandaruwan Senadheera , the Interpol had stated a red alert warrant cannot be issued to arrest Sandaruwan.

The CID also told court the Interpol had notified there are no provisions to implement an international warrant against Sandaruwan,

Previously charges were falsely mounted against Lanka e news that the latter published a photograph of suspect Premananda Udalagama who attacked former Rivira editor Upali Tennekoon (the suspect was identified by the victim) prior to the identification parade in court , and based on those charges a warrant was issued to arrest Sandaruwan on the grounds that the latter thereby committed contempt of court. The Gampaha chief magistrate issued a warrant to be given effect through the Interpol , and also gave a directive to the Immigration and Emigration department to arrest Sandaruwan when he arrives here.

This magistrate Kaveendra Nanayakkara who gave illegal orders on that day took leave and kept away from attending court today when the case was taken up . Lawyer Hemantha Warnakulasuriya who intruded from nowhere on that day too was not present in court.

Today, the case was heard by acting magistrate Ms. Chandima Jayadevi Amarasinghe . From next week there is a one month long , end of the year court vacation , and when the court resumes sittings next year , Kaveendra who gave this illegal order would not be there to hear the case as she is transferred to Pugoda courts. Hence she will not be hearing this case again.

The mass crimes division of the CID also informed acting magistrate Ms. Jayadevi Amarasinghe today ,that Sandaruwan was not at the address mentioned in the warrant issued by court.

The CID while informing court that the investigation into the assault launched on Upali Tennekoon is continuing , requested another date be fixed to report its progress . The next date of the case was fixed for April 2017.

It is significant to note this was the first occasion the Interpol rejected a request for a warrant made by a Sri Lankan court, sources say. This is a poor reflection on the judge.

---------------------------
by (2016-12-09 21:35:21)

SRI LANKA NEWS WEBSITE ALLEGEDLY BLOCKED, MINSTER TO MAKE A STATEMENT

09/12/2016

Parliamentary Reforms and Mass Media Minister Gayantha Karunathilake has said that he had inquired from the Telecommunication and Regulatory Commission (TRC) over allegations that a news website had been blocked, accoridng to state owned Daily News.

Minister had said that he would make a statement in Parliament on the alleged blocking of the site: www.breakingnews.lk, no sooner than the Commission provided him the report.

Minister Karunathilake made these observations in response to Joint Opposition member and MEP leader Dinesh Gunawardena, who demanded to know why the said website being blocking.

MP Gunawardane who raised the issue under Standing Order 23 (2), said the website had been blocked by the TRC since December 3, 2016, and asked that the government restore it.

“Is the minister of Mass Media aware of this move?” MP Gunawardena said. “The owner of the website has been trying to get the website registered for a long time and had applied with the required papers.”

Minister of Mass Media Gayantha Karunatilleke responding to MP Gunawardena said that he would make a statement on the matter in the House tomorrow/

“I have directed the matter before the TRC and I think I would get the answer today and make the statement tomorrow (10),” Minister Karunathilake said.

Daily News

Reply To Thisuri In “Response To Mahinda Rajapaksa’s Grievance On Government Media Repression”

By Thivanka Amarakoon –December 9, 2016

Thivanka Amarakoon

It seems like you do not have a clear idea about what democracy is, let me explain what it is, it is “a system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives” that is the meaning of so called Democracy. Please tell me, does this present parliament reflect the democratic requirements of all Sri Lankans? Any country with democracy has to fulfill the aspirations of whole population and in doing so has the right to talk, hear & know about what is happening. It doesn’t matter whether he or she is or was a current leader or a past leader. When considering your statements none of them prove that you believe that the Ex- President promoted free and fair elections and the establishing of democracy in a country that couldn’t dream of such a democratic transformation prior to 19th May 2009.

Thisuri Wanniarachchi in your state of dementia you have naively focused on the past 4 years, whereby as you highlight the Sri Lankan society was deprived of any kind of freedom, be it thought, movement or gathering. During the period of your adulthood you have conveniently forgotten that there was also a period of dark, despicable and undemocratic behavior by the very same UNP Yahaplanaya regime members that you now support and raise your vocal cords for. A refreshing is in order as like you there are those who have forgotten the period of July 1983 or ‘Black July’ which brought about the scourges of racism and terrorism to the entire country. Along with the rise of LTTE terrorism and racism post Black July, the suppression of democratic gathering in 1989 of the Southerners saw one of the bloodiest reprisal by the then UNP Yahapalanya regime members against the bright youth of this country. The mournful reference that you make in terms of the response to protest to water is only but a drop of water considering the rivers of blood that washed across this country which was caused by the UNP Yahapalanya regime members during these periods (i.e.1983 and 1989). Thisuri your rebuttal toward the Ex-President on the topic of democratic lack of freedom of assembly and the present government’s approach is matter of hysteria, “You see, this government happens to encourage the democratic freedom of assembly, an act that was met with real bullets during your tenure, killing innocent civilians whose demands were as simple as access to clean water”. Little do you know that the then government which the current President was also a Cabinet Minister was part of the team that made tangible progress in providing access to pipe borne water supply to households increasing it from 35 percent in 2010 to 60 percent by 2017. This was to be done by increasing the consumer base by 175,000 connections annually. Therefore, similar to the Ex-President the current President too takes unequivocally responsible for the good, bad and ugly actions and thus cannot be absolved from all forms of just and unjust behavior because now he has changed his color from a once Blue to now a Green member of government.

Furthermore, its astonishing to note that you also do not seem to know that the Ex-President had received 5.7Mn votes from the Sri Lankan voters, while the incumbent President Maithripala Sirisena had received 6.2Mn, therefore, I personally fail to understand how you calculated the whole 22.0 Mn population as against the Ex-President. This would mean that you are ignorant or unaware of the age limit of universal suffrage in order to participate in the democratic election process, which you seem to take pride in given the US allegiance (which incidentally was not made available to the USA even after the Emancipation Act of 1863, taking it nearly 100 years to recognize the rights of the ‘Black Americans’) or you may be having your own American version of democracy which you hope to infect Sri Lanka with, given that it was disclosed recently by RT News that the US government had approved a funding line of USD 585 million for such propaganda activity during 2015 (RT News, 18th November 2016).

It is also astonishing to find that Thisuri may have been in hibernation when this very nice, democratic, assembly loving Yahapalanya regime was out beating university students, Buddhist priest’s, and Disabled Army soldiers. I know you are not up to date with these incidents, as you seem to be preoccupied displacing historic facts and the bloodshed caused by the UNP Yahapalanya regime. Did you know that it was these very same army personnel that were humiliated by the adopting of the Co-sponsored UN resolution and subsequently assaulted were those who in pure abnegation sacrificed their bodies and souls to bring an end to the racism and ethnic conflict which were caused by the incumbent members of the UNP Yahapalanya regime? Where were you after having witnessed these incidents which occurred in Sri Lanka? Yet you seem to be extremely displeased at Ex President, Mahinda Rajapaksa, for having saved this country from the scourges of terrorism and racism but take pride in highlighting the lack of media freedom during his tenure. If there was a lack of press freedom it was only claimed by the US/Western funded ‘good governance’s activist, individuals and institutions.

(Lanka-e-News- 09.Dec.2016, 11.30PM) Hemantha Warnakulasuriya the lawyer in deep distress following the failure to get a red alert Interpol warrant against Lanka e news editor Sandaruwan Senadheera apparently is trying to vainly prove he is a lawyer who believes in the old adage ‘failures are the pillars of success’ when all his subterfuges to drive Sandaruwan to doom and despair have boomeranged on him.

This black coated cut throat monster had filed a case with 14 charges in the Supreme court (SC) against Sandaruwan alleging that the latter has committed contempt of court. These are based on the 14 affidavits filed on the 23 rd of November in the SC by former deputy mayor of Kotte , Madura Vitharnage.

---------------------------
by (2016-12-09 21:39:21)

Anti-Muslim campaign again – Why? – 2

by Izeth Hussain-December 9, 2016, 7:26 pm

I began the first part of this article by focusing on the point that the ongoing anti-Muslim campaign should be seen in the context of the global spread of what has come to be known as identity politics (Island of December 3). Identity politics have such virulence and such spread today that the recrudescence of the anti-Muslim campaign, after a lull of a couple of years, is not at all surprising. These facts suggest that identity politics are not the sort of problem that can be expected to go away if it is ignored. Unfortunately, that precisely is what the Government evidently believes. No other conclusion can be drawn from the fact that it has been refusing to take adequate legal action to counter the shrill genocidal hate speech that has been becoming ever more strident. Probably the Government believes that doing so would lead to a loss of votes at the local government elections that cannot be postponed for ever.

What should be done? Obviously the civil society, which proved to be a redoubtable countervailing force during the earlier anti-Muslim campaign, should try to pressurize the Government to go beyond the making of rhetorical noises and take effective counter-action against the BBS and its clones. The starting point, I think, should be to convince the Government and the public that the present anti-Muslim campaign is potentially far more dangerous than the previous one. The latter began with the backing of Norwegian Islamophobes and possibly others, and was co-opted by the Rajapakses in the mistaken belief that it would help consolidate and maintain their power. Two facts have to be noted about that anti-Muslim campaign. It failed to ignite the masses into another 1983 holocaust. The other fact is that the Rajapakses themselves would not have wanted another 1983: they were not so stupid as not to be able to understand that it would be counter-productive to their interests.

Today I am not at all sure that the ongoing anti-Muslim campaign will again fail to ignite another 1983. One factor is that the present Government has been steadily losing credibility, so that a fairly considerable segment of the Sinhalese could be prepared to take people’s level action to topple the Government. Another factor, a more important one, is that the economic hardship of a considerable segment of the Sinhalese people can be expected to go on increasing. It is a situation in which both the generality of the Sinhalese and the Tamils can come to misperceive the Muslims as scapegoats mainly responsible for the economic and other ills of the country. It is well known that the scapegoat syndrome can be extremely dangerous because it can spread uncontrollably like wild-fire.

As for the second fact that I have mentioned above, Rajapakse backing for the BBS short of allowing another 1983, the present Government cannot be suspected of anything like that. But the Opposition in which are embedded the Rajapakses could well want another 1983 this time around. The reason for this is to be found in something that is unique in our politics. Hitherto our politicians in the Opposition have been content to bide their time until their turn comes round again to enjoy power. But today powerful members of the Opposition as well as others have to dread inculpation under the law followed by jail sentences and even death sentences, something unprecedented in our politics. They could therefore desperately want a destabilization program to overthrow the Government, for which purpose they could have powerful backing in the armed forces and elsewhere. Another 1983 could most excellently serve the purpose of destabilization. So, the present anti-Muslim campaign has the potential for becoming far more dangerous than the previous one.

What precisely should the civil society do to make the Government take meaningful counter-action on the anti-Muslim campaign? The usual idiocies about breeding terrorists for the IS or the Muslims multiplying so fast that before long Sri Lanka will become a predominantly Muslim country can all be held in abeyance for the time being. The focus should be on the economic and political consequences of the government failing to take effective counter-action. On the economic consequences I can do no better than cite a reputed professional economist since I am not one myself: "No single factor has retarded the country’s economic development than communal violence. The current communal tensions in several parts of the country could create instability and uncertainty that would destabilize the economy beyond recovery and mark the death knell of the country’s efforts to resolve the current economic crisis". He goes on to say "Orchestrated no doubt with intent to destabilize the Government and pave the way for regime change, the roused communal feelings would aggravate the current economic crisis and cause enormous hardships to the livelihoods of the people. The containment of these communal tensions is imperative for economic growth and recovery". That was Dr. Nimal Sanderatne in the Sunday Times of December 4.

I believe that a special emphasis should be placed on the importance of foreign direct investment for economic recovery. We have all been conscious after 1983 of the horribly deleterious consequences of the ethnic problem for the Sri Lankan economy. I believe that it is only recently that the full importance of FDI has come to be realised. Sanderatne quotes another reputed economist, Dr. Saman Kelegama, as follows: "The uncertainty created by the war was the main deterrent to foreign investment – which acted as a catalyst to the growth process. Some examples would suffice to indicate the missed opportunities". Two major electronic multinational companies, Motorola and the Harris Corporation, which were about to start operations in Sri Lanka folded up and fled in 1983. Sanderatne mentions in addition the following multinationals as having abandoned plans to invest in Sri Lanka after 1983: Marubeni, Sony, Sanya, Bank of Tokyo, and the Chase Manhattan Bank. I must mention also that recently Prime Minister Wickremasinghe stated that Japan had plans to invest something like twenty eight billion dollars in Sri Lanka and elsewhere. Sri Lanka was excluded from that capital after 1983. So, anti-Tamil racism in 1983 proved to be extremely deleterious to the economic interests of the Sinhalese, not just of the minorities. Now, anti-Muslim racism can also be extremely deleterious to Sinhalese, economic interests. That seems to me a powerful, indeed irrefutable argument to make the Government to stop shilly shallying and to take really meaningful; action against the BBS and its clones.

I can be brief on the possible political consequences of the Government failing to take such action. In the first part of this article I posed the question who benefited from the anti-Muslim campaign. Certainly the Tamils would be among the major beneficiaries. If the Islamophobic campaigners manage to bring off a 1983, which is well within the bounds of possibility as I have argued above, the Muslims who escape massacre will have no alternative but to seek safe havens somewhere. As Pakistan and Bangladesh are too far away, they will have to hook it to the Eastern Province and hope for the best. Two consequences could follow. One is that Sinhalese businessmen will gleefully take over Fashion Bug and No Limit. The other is that there could be a coming together of the Tamils and the Muslims in a unity of the Tamil-speaking peoples, which the Tamils have been advocating for decades. India could welcome that development because it could lead to a solid and enduring pro-Indian enclave in the North East, welcome because of geopolitical imperatives consequent to the rise of the yellow giant, China. The second consequence arises from the fact that the Muslims have been abjectly submissive to the Sinhalese majority, even to the extent that Muslim politicians have been for the most part the happy shoe shine boys of the Sinhalese racist politicos. The international community could well conclude that if such a minority is subjected to repeated shrill genocidal hate campaigns, the Sinhalese are incapable of giving fair and equal treatment to any of the minorities. That could lead irresistibly to the notion that the Tamils are entitled to a very wide measure of devolution, a confederal arrangement that would amount to a de facto Eelam.

I have come to believe that it is futile to plead for fair and equal treatment for the minorities on moral grounds. Racists, whether Sinhalese, Tamils, or Muslims just don’t have the moral antennae to be able to grasp such arguments. The best argument would be to establish the horribly deleterious economic and other consequences of Sinhalese racism for the Sinhalese people. That would show that the greatest enemy of the Sinhalese people is not the Tamil or the Muslim or India or the West. The greatest enemy of the Sinhalese people is the Sinhalese racist. The tiger is within the gates.

izethhussain@gmail.com

GOVT. LOSING BATTLE TO QUELL EXTREMIST GROUPS, WARNS JVP

BBS Gnanasara led civil and robed extremists showing their strength in Kandy, in Nov 2016.

09/12/2016

The JVP yesterday slammed the Government for failing to protect the religious rights of Sri Lankans and accused it of providing validation for extremist organisations that are still working to whip up ethnic disharmony in the country while calling for an investigation into how these organisations are funded.

JVP MP Vijitha Herath yesterday made an impassioned speech in Parliament calling on the Government to probe alleged links between the former Government headed by President Mahinda Rajapaksa and organisations such as the Bodu Bala Sena (BBS).

“There were credible allegations that certain extremist organisations were assisted by the military mechanism under the former Government. It was clear that these entities, which sprang up overnight, had impressive resources at their command. Where did these come from? Who supplied them? Are these still in operation? It is the best way to reveal the true part played by these organisations in the political arena to the public,” he said.

Participating in the Budget debate for the Buddha Sasana Ministry, Herath was biting in his criticism of the Government’s failure to decisively act in situations that trigger ethnic tension. Drawing examples from Batticaloa and Kilinochchi, he questioned as to why the Government had failed to make a clear statement and condemn the extremist organisations on both sides of the divide while working to present the truth to the public.

“The Government’s duty is to protect the rights of each citizen to follow the religion of their choice. Not to promote one religion over another or encourage different organisations. It not enough to merely allocate money to religious ministries. The Government must have a clear policy on how to deal with these extremist elements without merely giving them validation.”

Trotting out more examples, Herath recalled the statement made by Justice Minister Wijeyadasa Rajapakshe about Sri Lankans allegedly joining Islamic State, which was later rejected by Cabinet spokesman and Health Minister Dr. Rajitha Herath. He also warned the Government to diffuse possible tensions arising from Nainathivu being renamed ‘Nagadeepam’ that was proposed under a Gazette issued under the previous Government.

“There are simple ways to resolve these things but the Government is not doing anything substantial. Instead they are letting extremist elements set the agenda by creating issues where none existed before.

No one has any opposition to Sinhalese calling this area Nagadeepa and Tamils calling it Nainathivu.

These are all artificially created problems. We saw very clearly during the former Government attempts by these groups to subvert key policy problems on education, healthcare, food and housing by rousing religious issues instead.”

The JVP parliamentarian did not spare the present administration from using the “electric chair in Geneva” as a bogeyman to get public support. Herath also warned that the Government is fast losing the support of minorities and moderate Buddhists by not implementing the law against extremist groups in both the north and south.

By Uditha Jayasinghe / www.ft.lk

The Faceless God Discombobulates Gnanasara Thero

By Mass L. Usuf –December 9, 2016

Mass Usuf

“To imagine something which occupies neither space nor time and is immune to alteration or change is impossible.” ~ (George Lister, Introduction to Philosophical Principles)

In one of the many recent diatribes against the Muslims, Galagoda Atte Gnanasara Thero calls the God that the Muslims believe in as a faceless God. The mens rea of this statement is clear. Denunciation, condemnation and hate filled much to the displeasure of the Muslims and the decent Buddhists. However, personally, I see it differently. Though his intention was patently not clean, I congratulate him for he has spoken the truth at least in stating that Allah is faceless.

We all know that there is the smallest and biggest in everything. If I say, and it is true, that the smallest country in the world is less than ½ of a square mile and it is a world-famous place; Curiosity will kick in to know which is this tiny country.

The faceless God is no exception to this curiosity. There are many things in life which we take for granted. One of which is that like everyone has a face, God also has a face. To learn otherwise, is strange and strange things evince interest. The God of the Muslims, addressed in the Arabic language as ‘Allah’, does not have a face like we humans or animals do. Gnanasara therefore, for once has uttered the truth but he is discombobulated (fanciful coinage for confusion…).

The Eternal, Absolute

Theism (Belief in the existence of God) is an interesting subject which has also courted much controversy among a few namely the atheists (do not believe in any god) and agnostics (do not know if any god exist or not). A classification of theism informs us of Polytheism (belief in multiple gods), Pantheism (belief that everything is god), Henotheism (belief in a particular god without disbelieving in the existence of others) and Monotheism (belief in only One God).

Ever since the thero’s expression of his confused state of mind about the faceless God of the Muslims, honest inquiry has occupied the thinking of many normal folks. To find an answer, I will have to seek the help of the Quran to explain this phenomenon of the faceless God. A reading of the foundation of Islam reveals that Islam is a strictly monotheistic religion. The monotheistic nature of the God in Islam and His facelessness is succinctly encapsulated in a beautiful formula, which reads as:

“Say: He is Allah, the One and Only;
Allah, the Eternal, Absolute;
He begets not, nor was He begotten;
Nor is there to Him any equivalent.”
(Chapter 112 of the Quran)

The uniqueness of Allah is in His Oneness. Therefore, in Islam there is no polytheistic, pantheistic or henotheistic beliefs. Allah is not the son of anyone nor does He have a son. Linked with the idea of monotheism is the belief in the Unity of Allah. Allah as One in person. Allah as the only Creator. He is the One who sustains and nourishes, it is only Allah who deserves to be worshipped and adored and so on.

BBS leader Galagodaatte Gnanasara said that he and the three other monks were not guilty of any offence [AP]

Photo via Al Jazeera

RAASHID RIZA on 12/09/2016

As Groundviews turns ten, Sri Lankan Muslims are at a crossroads. The last ten years were predominantly about tensions between Sinhalese and Tamils, Muslims seem to now be the new bogey.

Despite having been inhabitants of the island for more than a millennium, and descending from Sinhalese and Tamil women who married Arab traders and with an ethnic history that predates Islam itself, Muslims are finding themselves increasingly referred to as outsiders. Muslims in many immigrant nations are wrongly considered to be outsiders due to the fact that they consist predominantly of communities whose roots do not stem beyond a few generations. However, the same cannot be said of Sri Lankan Muslims, who bear resemblance to their Sri Lankan counterparts in every aspect other than their religious faith. While Sri Lankan Muslims are a numerical minority, their claim to Sri Lanka’s heritage is by no means a recent phenomenon.

However, it is increasingly evident that it is this fallacious narrative of otherness that the Bodu Bala Sena (BBS) led Sinhalese Buddhist extremists seem to want to embed deeply within the majoritarian mentality. There is a dual impact that this seeks to achieve; a majoritarian mind-set of extremist Buddhists emboldens their rhetoric, which in turn seeks to weaken a community who would be beset by minoritarian (for want of a word) feelings of otherness.

Although Sri Lankan Muslims are a community with far greater and unmatched soft power in comparison to the Burmese Rohingya, the BBS are well and truly looking at the Burmese template for stirring anti-Muslim vitriol – going so far as to hosting in Colombo Ashin Wirathu, the spiritual leader of the anti-Muslim 969 movement in Burma whose violent attacks and anti-Muslim death squads are well documented.

The influence of monks within the Sri Lankan societal and political apparatus is not to be underestimated. In 1956, Prime Minister SWRD Bandaranaike, a secretary of the Oxford Union no less, ran on a nationalist platform and included the monks in his election campaign as one of his so called pentamerous forces, in no small part due to the inordinate influence they had on the Sinhalese electorate. Ironically, he was later assassinated by a monk.

Buddhism is enshrined in the Sri Lankan constitution as being given the ‘foremost place’, paving way for the excessive sense of entitlement of militant monks. The perceived dearth of Buddhist political leadership led to Buddhist monks entering parliament in the general elections of 2004 and monks were instrumental in invoking nationalist fervour as a potent ingredient for military recruitment in the last phases of the war that ended in 2009. Thus, monks are seen to be the vanguards of Sinhalese Buddhist interests and this apparently insurmountable grassroots link is that which is being exploited by some militant monks.

Government Inaction

Extremist Buddhist monks have been leading provocative protests in predominantly Muslim areas. Violent slogans have been employed, and police watch meekly as they are bullied by the monks and their baying crowds, despite clear jurisprudential guidance for enacting laws against hate speech which do not exempt the clergy. Extremist Sinhalese youth groups are mushrooming around the country, fuelling and fuelled by fictitious stories of Muslim colonisation, and openly threaten Muslims with death and immolation. All this venom is kept alive by the oxygen of social media, and is fodder to the extremist groups and their followers who are inebriated with racism.

Galogodaththe Gnanasara, the loquacious monk from the Bodu Bala Sena was seen threatening law enforcement authorities with the destruction of a predominantly Muslim suburb in Colombo if a Muslim youth whose incendiary rhetoric allegedly against Buddhism was not punished. The youth in question was arrested less than twenty four hours later. If this arrest was not a reaction to the threats of the monk in question, it certainly was too much of a coincidence. The Muslim youth was rightly arrested for ‘insulting worshippers of another faith’. The irony in this is that Gnanasara has been making the vilest threats with such confidence in public, and instead of feeling the full force of the law, he was widely reported to have had a high-level meeting with the Minister of Justice at the parliamentary complex instead. Ampitiye Sumana, another monk from the eastern province of Sri Lanka was seen to publicly remonstrate in the most disrespectful and crudest terms against a Tamil civil servant and a female police officer, has also thus far enjoyed legal impunity.

The Bodu Bala Sena is fast gaining traction amongst Sinhalese Buddhists and the dangers of race riots are increasing under the watch of the government. Unruly mobs are holding many protests soaked with belligerent rhetoric led by extremist Buddhist monks – and despite the abundant evidence of monks disturbing the peace and creating a febrile and disturbing environment for minorities, the government has so far not taken legal action against these monks who have been acting with crass impunity.

However, there are also some important home truths that need to be understood. The Bodu Bala Sena and the phenomenon of extremist monks first surfaced in 2011. They became increasingly dominant and were seen to enjoy state patronage during the regime of Mahinda Rajapakse. They were allowed to act freely and their activities that first began with anti-halal disturbances, reached a zenith with the anti-Muslim riots of Alutgama which resulted in millions of rupees worth of Muslim homes and businesses being torched. Whilst this government has evidently been slow to their feet in taking action against what is very open incitement to racial tension, it is telling that the BBS and other extremist forces are more critical of this government than the last regime. Indeed, there are reasons to believe that groups close to the Mahinda Rajapakse led opposition are galvanising forces such as racist mobs who seek to destabilise the present government.

This does not absolve the government of any responsibility, the government has failed to institutionalise law and order and is so far no different to regimes prior in its attitude towards open crime. It is a damning indictment on the government that the virulent rhetoric of the BBS has now stooped to levels worse than when the Rajapakses were in power.

The Electoral Game

At the elections of 2015, the Muslim community voted en-masse to elect President Maithripala Sirisena and the UNP led coalition government against the ultra-Sinhala Buddhist nationalist Rajapakse regime. As the weaknesses of this government increasingly frustrate the electorate, and the perception of Rajapakse as the saviour looms, the Muslim community is placed in a relatively precarious position in a milieu of political uncertainty.

In light of this, there is a school of thought that Muslims should be patient in the face of concerted efforts by many forces to destabilize this theoretically well-meaning government. This largely stems from the fear that should this government fail, there are neo-Rajapaksaites waiting in the wings to replace them – and then the status quo would be significantly unfavourable. Indeed, patient the Muslims should be, this isn’t the time for insularity and parochialism, and attaining Muslim interests within a holistic national framework should be their anchor. The government truly is battling multi-pronged crises, reminiscent of the protests and chaos President Morsi of Egypt faced before his forced downfall. But the government needs to be pressured to understanding that Sri Lankan Muslims are just as equal and important as any other, and they take Muslim votes for granted at their own peril, as the last regime learned the bitter way.

The government needs to put concerted efforts on governing actively without acting largely to stem the hemorrhaging of votes to the Rajapakse tide.

This is why the Muslim electorate has to intelligently take up issues of racism and violence with their elected representatives. The BBS can still be restrained, it only takes the legal arm to flex its muscles, and order will be reinstated. Grave dangers linger in the complacency of the government for as long as extremists are allowed to run free.

Should the ideological tectonic plates overlap, and the racism of the BBS offsets mainstream Sinhalese values regarding coexistence, the government would have been complicit in irreversible damage. Race riots are waiting to happen and every day Muslims are seen to be publicly threatened with death and destruction, and hardline coalition partners from within the government have already made mob-friendly ideological utterances that places them well to be in positions of leadership should things go awry. Indeed Gnanasara was seen insulting the Muslim God Allah in the most profane and derogatory of terms, a siren call to extremism in most parts of the world, the silence of the Sri Lankan Muslims in the face of this provocation is testament to their sense of civic responsibility.

This government was ushered in on a mandate for good governance and anti-corruption. The sharp decline into an abyss of the government risks the stability and development of a country that is already steeped in a plethora of critical issues. Civil society activists despair at the opportunity squandered to make real change and mourn the loss of strong accountable civil society leadership in the mould of Maduluwawe Sobhitha, the monk who catalysed the downfall of the autocratic Rajapakse regime.

Any individual, irrespective of race or religion should feel the full force of the law when they step over it. There should be no compromise on this and a great nation will never be built on the throes of a feverish government that turns a blind eye to injustice and racism. Should the government not call extremism for what it is and fail to take meaningful steps towards cementing law and order – this will be the death knell of their reform and reconciliation agenda and its haunting chimes will be heard for decades to come.

Forgotten university reforms

By Professor R.P. Gunawardane -December 8, 2016, 9:25 pm

University education reforms and changes to the universities Act of 1978 were hot issues in the run-up to the 2015 Presidential election. Second anniversary of the new government is expected to be celebrated shortly. Yet, no action has been taken or even initiated regarding any reforms in the university sector. It is surprising to note that Federation of University Teachers Association (FUTA), civil societies, the academic community and even the University Grants Commission (UGC) have not taken up this issue seriously in the recent past. Does this mean everything is fine with the current university system?

The answer is an emphatic No. There are many shortcomings in the university system which can be corrected. As in the past the current government or any future government can misuse the existing Universities Act to the detriment of the system. During the previous regimes the Universities Act had been misused extensively particularly in the appointment of Vice-Chancellors, council members and non-academic staff. Thus, a proper legal framework should be established in the Sri Lankan university system in order to implement progressive reforms, to avoid political interference and misuse of power and for the smooth functioning of the universities maintaining highest standards and integrity.

The university education in Sri Lanka went through a process of rapid and unplanned expansion during the last four decades. It appears that the expansion has taken place in response to social demand for increased access coupled with political considerations. Currently, Sri Lankan university system consists of 15 universities of which 14 are conventional universities and one Open University. It is important to note that access to university education is broadened considerably by having universities in all nine provinces. There are five other State Universities established by Acts of Parliament but operating outside the UGC under different ministries. In addition, there are several other Degree Awarding Institutions established by Acts of Parliament or by the recognition of the UGC.

Need for Reforms

It is evident that the proliferation of university system has taken place with minimum attention to diversification to satisfy national needs and disregarding the need for quality assurance. Except for some professional degrees, most degree programmes are not geared to market needs resulting in a conspicuous mismatch between the demand and supply of graduates. Furthermore, there is apparent duplication of degree programmes which are not demand-oriented, leading to a waste of available resources. As a result, unemployment of graduates is rampant. Most employers prefer foreign graduates over graduates from local universities particularly in humanities and social sciences. This leads us to the question of relevance and quality of our degree programmes. Sri Lankan University system does not have a proper mechanism for assurance of quality and relevance of the degree programmes.

Furthermore, it is also apparent that within the ill-equipped universities excessive fragmentation to small departments, units, centers have taken place due mainly to extraneous reasons rather than any demonstrated need or valid academic reasons. The appointment of the members to the governing councils and the positions of Vice-Chancellor are highly politicized leading to extremely inefficient, disorganized and sometimes corrupt administrations.

The other important issue is the problem with regard to limited access to University education. A large number of deserving students are denied admission to our University system. As a result, many students are seeking admission to foreign universities. Recent survey shows that the amount of foreign exchange spent by Sri Lankans studying abroad far exceeds the annual budget on higher education. Substantial increase of government expenditure in this sector is highly unlikely in the foreseeable future. Therefore, it is very clear that the State alone is not in a position to provide sufficient opportunities to satisfy the current and future demand for university education.

During the period 2000-2004 attempts have been made to implement a university reforms package based on a Presidential Task Force recommendations followed by extensive consultations with all the stake holders. A series of workshops have been held in this regard. On the basis of the recommendations, an action plan had been prepared and a Monitoring Committee was also appointed. However, due to series of government and ministerial changes that took place during this period prevent the progress of implementation.

Thus, almost after 12 years of initiation of University reforms it is regrettable that most of the objectives of the proposed reforms are yet to be achieved by the Sri Lankan University system.

Furthermore, lack of suitable legal framework has prevented the implementation of other major reforms which involves more autonomy for the individual Universities. Therefore, it appears that identified reforms have to be introduced urgently in order to transform the present ailing system into a productive and an efficient system. The major components of the reforms package may be presented under (i) governance reforms, (ii) enhancing quality and relevance of degree programs, (iii) reforms in financing and (iv) increasing access to university education.

Governance Reforms

The Universities Act no.16 of 1978 has defects and limitations for the operation and the development of the university system in the current context. This Act has centralized the powers and decision making at the UGC restricting administrative and financial autonomy of the individual universities. Thus, it is absolutely necessary to implement a new Universities Act granting more autonomy and independence to universities to run their own affairs. Similarly, the Institutes also should be granted complete autonomy under the new legislation. Their attachment to the parent university should only be for the purpose of granting degrees and monitoring academic standards.

In the new legal framework, the UGC should be an independent commission and its membership should be appointed by the Constitutional Council. The role of the UGC should be restricted to its traditional funding role and the coordination and monitoring the Sri Lankan university system in keeping with the national policy. Independence and accountability of the universities should be assured. The universities should be held responsible and accountable strictly with regard to quality and relevance of their degree programs, student performance and more importantly, employability of graduates produced by them.

It is expected that the UGC should increase its role as a monitoring body relating to strategic planning, maintaining academic standards and effectiveness of the university system. It is also the duty of the UGC to negotiate and receive adequate funding from the Government and other sources and apportionment of the funds to individual universities. For the purpose of maintaining uniformity and standards the UGC will formulate general guidelines for recruitment, promotion and salary structure of all grades and set a fixed academic year. In addition, the UGC should develop a transparent mechanism, strict guidelines and ensure the appointment of highly qualified professionals to the university councils. New Universities in the state sector should be established only on the recommendation of the UGC following a comprehensive study on the need and all other considerations by a group of experts.

Role of Universities

In addition to granting maximum autonomy to the universities with regard to administrative and financial matters, academic freedom should be further strengthened by giving the universities powers to conduct any new programs and to establish, if they so wish, new Faculties, Departments, Centers, and Units etc. Creation of positions and appointment and promotion of all the staff should be the matters for the university councils within their budgets. Universities also should implement Merit Award schemes to honour good teachers and productive researchers annually.

Periodic assessment and monitoring of quality of teaching and research in faculties and departments should be a function of the university councils. Self-evaluation, peer evaluation, external evaluation and teacher evaluations by the students may be used to assess the performance of individual teachers. It should be mandatory to obtain teacher evaluations by the students after each course.

This can be done electronically by the university administration. These evaluations should be given special consideration in merit award schemes for good teachers.

Appointment of Vice-Chancellor should be made more democratic and free from political interference. This will help Vice-Chancellor to perform his duties impartially and effectively. Therefore, it is better if the Vice-Chancellor is appointed after an open advertisement, a screening process followed by an election by an Electoral Body consisting of the membership of the University Council and the Senate. Eligibility for election to the post of Dean should not be restricted to Heads of Departments. It should be open to all senior members of the faculty.

More importantly, it is of urgent necessity to rationalize the university system to make it more efficient, cost effective and demand driven. This has to be done by the individual universities through reorganization which may involve major structural changes such as closing down or amalgamation of departments/units. Such rationalization process cannot be imposed from above. It has to be initiated and developed cautiously and in close collaboration with the academic community.

Quality Assurance

Improvement of quality and relevance of the courses is a continuing process. It must be emphasized that the real impact of the reforms will be felt only if the reforms in curricula and degree programmes are properly implemented by the universities.

In the current context it has become necessary to establish an independent and autonomous Accreditation and Quality Assurance Council (AQAC) for the purpose of accreditation of higher education Institutions and their programs and to ensure quality of the programs. It should be a completely independent body and it should not come under the purview of the UGC. It will set standards and perform regulatory functions in respect of state as well as non-state sector university level institutions. Appropriate standards and procedures will be developed by the AQAC conforming to international practices and in association with relevant professional bodies. The AQAC will prepare guidelines for accreditation mechanism and carry out inspection in collaboration with professional organizations. Grading of the universities, faculties, departments etc. on regular basis will also be undertaken by the AQAC.

As guided by the AQAC the structural changes to the courses should be effected by broad-basing the degree programmes and introducing sufficient flexibility. In order to build up innovative approaches, analytical thinking and self-confidence it is necessary to incorporate independent studies, project work and internships. In designing new degree programmes multidisciplinary approach should be promoted since the traditional subject boundaries are fast disappearing. A credit transfer mechanism, cross-faculty course combinations, and inter-university degree programmes should be introduced facilitating the mobility of students in the university system.

Drastic and radical changes are necessary in the teaching and learning process in our universities. It is essential to introduce modern interactive teaching methodologies with the extensive use of IT. Extensive use of educational software, web based teaching and assignments/ homework, advanced audiovisual techniques and videoconferencing should be promoted. All teachers should be trained adequately to use these interactive tools.

Financing Universities

Current budget provision for higher education is grossly inadequate. A target of about 1.0% GDP should be earmarked for the state universities. Financial framework should include financial autonomy to universities, funding mechanism based on a scientific financing formula, competitive fund for novel projects and incentives for cost recovery and income generation.

This necessitates the establishment of a separate Competitive Fund at the UGC level for novel projects in the universities. It is also envisaged to develop a financing formula to allocate resources to universities based on unit cost per student and also considering other factors such as their performance. The universities also should be encouraged to establish Consultancy Centers, Companies etc. in order to engage them in income generating activities while providing services to the community. Additional income generated by the universities should be allowed to retain by them for their developmental activities. It is only this way innovation can be promoted and the state universities will then be in a position to compete with non-state sector institutions.

Increasing Access

It is evident that the state monopoly on university education hinders expansion, diversification and innovation. As such, in line with global trends, the tertiary education sector should be opened up to non-governmental and private sector with a national accreditation and a monitoring scheme. Joint ventures between the state universities and private sector, professional organizations, nonprofit foundations, foreign universities etc. also should be promoted for expansion. Furthermore, government initiative is needed to encourage and promote this expansion through a package of facilitating policies, tax incentives etc.

However, it must be stressed that the opening and regularizing the university education to non-state sector should necessarily be accompanied by, (i) an independent accreditation and quality assurance mechanism and (ii) need-based scholarships, vouchers and loan schemes for needy students. The broad-basing the providers of tertiary education also introduces an element of competition to the system, which is expected to improve quality, provide more variety and reduce cost of training. With the liberalization, the policies should be directed towards facilitating the expansion and diversification of tertiary education to reach about 20% (age cohort) participation rate by the year 2020.

When those who can afford have the opportunity to enter non-state sector institutions, it is possible to increase access to others in the state system. Thus, state funds can be targeted more towards helping the disadvantaged gain access to high quality tertiary education. It is most desirable, as far as possible, to have a merit based admission and need-based financial aid for all those who are admitted to universities. This will ensure fair play and justice and will not leave out any candidate for university entry because of financial hardships.

(The author is a Professor Emeritus, University of Peradeniya, formerly Secretary, Ministry of Education and Higher Education and Chairman, National Education Commission)

Governance: On the bus! Or has it missed the bus?

‘ISSARAHA BAHINAWAA’ – civil society’s proclivity is bow out of a crowded bus when private interests and partisan agendas win the argument over reason and responsibility; but now, more than ever perhaps, is the time for those who paid the price and bought the ticket to our pre-arranged destination to stay on the buses

Friday, 9 December 2016

By the time you read this, the long-suffering Sri Lankan commuters’ “private bus strike” would have been resolved – for want of a better concept to describe the shambles which such a resolution entailed. “There’s been a host of compromisin’,” the parties concerned – especially the chief executive – might say, “on the road to my horizon.” How ‘Good Governance’ – for want of a better concept to describe the shambles which the republic encapsulates these days – can live with itself, is anyone’s guess; especially that of our President and his Secretariat.

There have been many comments made in sundry media about the state of the nation and the decline and fall of any semblance of strong governance since that shameful compromise reached by and between the parties concerned in the imbroglio. Some bear summarising. For one, that the stiff penalties proposed to curb errant motorists including manic private bus-drivers should have come through an amendment to the Motor Traffic Act than a Ministry of Finance initiative. Another, that the Ministry of Transport missed a trick to strengthen the arm of the CTB, while breaking the back of not only private bus operators associations, but also pre-empting such potentially crippling strike action by other unions organised around services key to nation-state.

My favourite, last but by no means least, is the outrage on social media which less than charitably credits the powers that be with a singular lack of testicular fortitude. That’s balls to you, Mr. Private Bus Mudalali cum MP, Provincial Councillor, or transport mogul, smiling all the way to the bank, hospital, mortuary, or grave.

Be that as it may, the analysis that has garnered the most attention and interest so far is the putative fallout for the incumbent administration: As essayed by an academic with incisive insights and critical engagement: Dr. Jayadeva Uyangoda. In a hard-hitting piece – perhaps inspired by the strike resolution fiasco – which spares the coalition government no blushes he notes that a private bus is a bus is a bus while the CTB is a good smoke. Or in simpler language, which does justice to academia as much as marketplace, that the government has missed the bus in more ways than one. In a nutshell he virtually irrefutably suggested that the punctures in our power and politics infrastructure is showing in four key tyres:

A. A growing and unheeded alienation of government from its own voter bases.

B. Power failure perpetrated by both the President and the Prime Minister in terms of more proactively and purposefully steering the ship of state through present troubled waters.

C. The emergence of the military like a phoenix from its ashes to hover threateningly over many spheres in the nation-state once again, despite a tentative dismantling of the same apparatus in the early stages of this government’s administration.

D. That shadow cast over good governance and genuine democratic-republicanism by the resurrection of certain elements of the former regime, poised to pose a challenge to the incumbents and stage a potential recapturing of important elements of national political life.

Of course I paraphrase the good Dr U. I hope he won’t mind my making a mouthful of his far more elegant prose and lucid expression. Nor the mincemeat I might introduce as addenda to his seminal thinking on the state of the nation. This I shall strive to essay below as three other noteworthy developments of late that are driving the bus of state off the edge of a precipice, which its conductors don’t seem to notice or care much about.

State power as a force for stability qua the status quo

This is not necessarily as positive a development as it sounds it might or could be. There is every reason to believe that the status quo is not salutary, and that stability is only guaranteed for the central powers. For, as under a previous less tolerant regime, those off the grid (e.g. the indigent poor who are not even ‘lower socioeconomic class’) or far from the axis of power (e.g. war widows and other victims of an oppressive regime still awaiting state reparations) continue to find themselves marginalised and unfulfilled by expediency (the truly poor don’t vote) or political agendas (prosecuting war criminals in high places, on both sides of the political party divide, could compromise a mutually agreed upon pact to play the game).

In the limit nothing much about the manner in which power is distributed and potential is made available to everyone under a republican sun has changed. It is only a sense that nothing drastic, dramatic, or truly disastrous can ever happen under this government’s watch that has kept dissent alive and dissidence assured of survival. No one really notices that the democratic-republicanism we voted in so that fundamental transformation can take place – in mindset, as much as in media and marketplace – has become the very thing it was intended to replace.

Uyangoda has argued that ‘regime normalisation’ means that the agents of change have succumbed to the temptations of the flesh those whom they ousted craved and enjoyed. I feel with a rising sense of futility – as I have maintained in these columns since March 2015 – that the more some things change, the more they stay the same. Worse, change – as in transformation – was never ever truly intended. It was simply a challenge – the information that an agenda with corresponding actors was available – that was communicated to a gullible public (the demographic that our academic is pleased to call a “mature polity”). Worst of all, the dawning realisation – for many if not most now, as some of us way back then – that the ‘nature of the beast’ of national politics in our island-republic resists change (leave alone transformation) like billy-o.

The forms of power and the functions they serve – let alone the effervescent friends they protect, and the extended family they still promote – has lost the support of enthusiastic fans and the eternal faith they seemed to have that here! at last! was the very thing we’d been waiting all our political life for. No. The new political culture is the old political culture with mutton dressed as lamb. Nothing has changed. Something must. A new social contract outside the constructs of power will have to be drawn up by a smorgasbord of players if Project Sri Lanka is to be saved from its well-meaning but wonderfully flawed architects.

Social media as a sort of a Fifth Estate of some significance

In milieus such as these, alternative media become viable options for much work in keeping the spirit of dissent and critical engagement alive. It might not have played a major role in Tiananmen Square, but it was clearly instrumental in fomenting the popular uprising which led to Tahrir Square. In Sri Lanka, it is not fermenting rebellion by any means. It is feeding the shifting patterns of local politics with an eclectic flavour. In my experience, everyone who is anyone in Sri Lanka – from presidents to the person next to me on the bus to the poor lottery seller round the corner with his decade-outdated smart-phone – has some modicum of access to Facebook. It is a place for meeting like minds as much as a wall in Wittenberg for nailing 95 theses – or a 9-to-5 never-ending chat about the pitfalls of two-bit, two-timing, politics – on an increasingly scribbled upon and public wall.

On that wall I see the writing growing increasingly clear about the state of the nation as much as the state of things to come… a President pursuing his power struggle with profound threatening zen or stoic calm; which frightens me a lot more than a flippant Prime Minister making idle threats against the media while simultaneously making a mockery of the high esteem in which café society at least held him; also a Police Chief saying that he advocates a bending – not a breaking – of the law; and private buses continuing – off the roads, on security cameras, posted to the horror of dismayed millions of viewers, ploughing with state-ratified speed through the terrified tattered remains of passengers and pedestrians and passersby. It is a revolution in the making – not so much being televised, but ‘teleposted’; building up a head of steam that one day not far away from now could scythe through the electoral hopes of lackadaisical administrations whose hearts have grown fat with pride and ears dull with the praise of their sycophants.

Subversive agendas masquerading as being mainstream with meaning

There is counter-revolution in place, though. The less essayed about it the better, however. Just keep in mind that most media houses are bought and sold as readily as real houses exchange hands on the property market. Just the other day I read that the Prime Minister and his Finance Minister had taken to task the Governor of the Central Bank whom the President was keen to appoint to replace a disgraced UNP party favourite. First, I was really alarmed at the possibility that the new CBSL had missed the bus re monetary policy. Then, I remembered that even ‘leaders’ in mainstream media can or must be owned or operated by someone with the moolah to make it momentarily viable. And, sadly, I recognised that the only thing “bloody and unbowed” at the moment is the head of militant chauvinism in Sri Lanka today. Everybody and everything else has bent the knee to expediency, enthusiasm about the latent promise of the present powers, and enervating lost hope as regards the fast fading prospects of good governance to keep the bus of state on the fast track to state reform with meaning.

The private bus operators’ strike saga ended in a fiasco for the powers that be. Let’s hope the larger project of keeping Sri Lanka on the costly superhighway for a destination to which we all (well, half of us) bought a ticket doesn’t similarly get dumped at some wayside bus-halt back of beyond in bright burning sunshine without the sunglasses of vision anywhere in sight. Keep that ticket. It might come in handy one of these days. A government that yielded to bus operators’ pressure can still be made to see and correct the error of its ways sooner than later: By more legit passengers who are critically engaged in the national interest, rather than hangers-on or riders in the wind on the bus for the profitable ride…