Blood and gold in the Philippines: Tampakan and the B’laan resistance

A B'laan woman (left) joins other Lumad during the Manilakbayan (Journey to Manila) in October 2016. About 500 B'laans joined the protest caravan in Manila, Philipppines to demand justice for abuses committed by Sagittarus Mines, Inc. Source: Mark Ambay III/IPMSDL)

21st December 2016

THE B’laan people are one of 18 indigenous groups living in the southern Philippine island of Mindanao. With a population of around 450,000, they are largely concentrated in the provinces of South Cotabato, Davao del Sur and Sultan Kudarat. Most of them are still engaged in subsistence farming, with corn and rice being the main produce.

Blood and gold in the Philippines.docx by Thavam Ratna on Scribd

U.S. And Them

Devika Brendon-Tue 20 December 2016

The United States and Sri Lanka are both Republics. Both countries call themselves democratic societies. In the U.S., 300 million citizens of diverse ethnic origin occupy part of a vast continent. In Sri Lanka, 21 million citizens of diverse ethnic origin inhabit a small island state. The societies of both the United States and Sri Lanka have been disrupted by intermittent civil unrest and violence, due to the anger and disaffection of their ethnic minority groups, and both have suffered terrorist attacks. The U.S. has experienced sporadic race riots, in specific cities, but Sri Lanka has endured almost 30 years of a Civil War which has affected the entire nation. In contrast with American culture, which is individualistic, and values free expression, Sri Lanka is founded on socialist principles, and embedded in its culture is an expectation that individuals in its society will conform to traditional societal and familial norms.

The United States has, time and again, been held up to the rest of the world as a model democracy. Image courtesy australiannationalreview.com

U.S. And Them.docx by Thavam Ratna on Scribd

Trump sons will not attend high-dollar fundraiser that raised questions about access-peddling

Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump were touted as honorary co-chairmen of the Opening Day 45 fundraiser. (Robyn Beck/Agence France-Presse via Getty Images)-This post has been updated.

By Matea Gold and David A. Fahrenthold December 21 at 1:22 PM

Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump will not attend a high-priced fundraiser in Washington on their father's first full day in office amid questions about whether the “camouflage & cufflinks"-themed event was peddling access to the new president and his family.

President-elect Donald Trump's sons were touted as “honorary co-chairmen” of the Opening Day 45 event, which was organized by two of their close friends and scheduled to be held the evening of Jan. 21. But a Trump transition official confirmed Wednesday that Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump will not make an appearance at the fundraiser after all.

Organizers of the function did not respond to questions about whether it would go forward without them. “The group is committed to and supportive of conservation causes,” spokesman Mark Brinkerhoff said. “We are excited to create positive change.”

The Trump brothers' decision to bow out came after revelations that they were listed in Texas corporate filings as directors of a newly formed nonprofit, the Opening Day Foundation, that was putting on the function. But transition officials said the brothers' names had been used without permission and sought to separate the family from the event.

[Offer of access to Trump and family at fundraiser is pulled back, but ties remain]

On Tuesday, Trump spokeswoman Hope Hicks said the family had not approved an early draft of the invitation that offered contributors who gave at least $500,000 a private reception with the new president and a hunting or fishing expedition with one of his sons. She said Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump were “not involved in any capacity” with the event.

But those involved in the planning said the brothers took part in discussions about the fundraiser. Dallas private equity investor Tom Hicks Jr., a longtime friend of the Trump brothers, told The Washington Post that Donald Trump Jr. had spearheaded the plans with another mutual friend, hedge fund manager Gentry Beach. The men, all avid hunters, have been friends for 15 years. Beach is the godfather to one of Donald Trump Jr.'s children, according to the Dallas Morning News.

By Wednesday, there were efforts to distance the Trump brothers from the event. The official Opening Day website, which prominently featured their names, was taken down after briefly going live Tuesday. And the Eventbrite ticket page that listed Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump as “organizer” of Opening Day on Tuesday was changed.

A spokeswoman for the Texas secretary of state said Wednesday that new paperwork had been filed, removing Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump as officers of the Opening Day Foundation.

Another challenge facing Opening Day: It is still unclear where the money from donors would go. The Jan. 21 event was supposed to be the kickoff fundraiser for the Opening Day Foundation, which is in the process of seeking recognition by the Internal Revenue Service to operate as a 501(c)(3) charitable organization. In the meantime, Brinkerhoff said, it was operating as a project of the Montana-based Boone and Crockett Club Foundation.

Preparations are underway in Washington, D.C., for the inauguration of Donald Trump as president. (Reuters)

Preparations are underway in Washington, D.C., for the inauguration of Donald Trump as president. (Reuters)

But Greg Duncan, a spokesman for the club — which sponsors conservation-education programs, advocates for wilderness conservation and maintains a database of North American records for big-game hunting — reiterated Wednesday that the group had not decided whether to take part in the fundraiser.

Wealthy donors will still have exclusive opportunities to mingle with the new president and his family. The 58th Presidential Inaugural Committee is offering contributors who give $1 million and more to help put on the inauguration festivities a slew of perks, including eight tickets to a “candlelight dinner” that will feature “special appearances” by Trump and Vice President-elect Mike Pence, along with their respective spouses, Melania and Karen.

Successes & Failures of 2016 U.S. Elections — Part 2

by Sunil J. Wimalawansa-Dec 21, 2016

Click here to read the part one of this series 

( December 21, 2016, Washington DC, Sri Lanka Guardian) By November 8^th, just over half of the Americans voted for Ms. Clinton as the Democratic party nominee.  Mostly of her voters were elite folks from wealthy regions; especially from the west-coast and the north-east.  However, her agenda was out of date and out of touch with the needs of the working class of American public, particularly those who live in the Rust Belt.

Why did Secretary Clinton fail her second attempt for the U. S. presidency?

Secretary Clinton had tremendous advantage of having decades of lead time to prepare herself as a presidential candidate.  She also had experience, necessary connections, advisors, the machinery to raise funds for the campaign, and over thirty-years of cumulated experience in the government.  She made clear to the pubic during the last few weeks of her campaign that she was betting for a “third term” for the Democratic party¾to continue the Obama doctrine.

Instead of being an asset, her long government experience became a liability for her.  Hiatus of having new ideas, relevant and exciting policies, she failed to excite the voters.  Moreover, she failed to come out of the negative image that she created herself during her tenure as the Secretary of State.  Culmination of these features, worked against her candidacy.

Moreover, some of the key policies she championed during her time as the Secretary of State and eight-years of Obama administration, also failed.  The economy was in shambles with millions of Americans unemployed and under-employed, and was in angry mode; constituents were desperate and frustrated.  Therefore, the outcome of the election was not surprising.

Obama factor: 

Originally, Secretary Clinton didn’t want to bring the sitting president, Mr. Obama and the former president, Mr. Clinton, into her campaign.  Therefore, she opted to run the operation under her own brand, keeping two presidents away from the campaign.  However, the polls narrowed during the month before the election; this happened even before the letter to the Congress by the director of Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Mr. Comey.  She apparently had no choice but to modify her policy, and invited the two presidents to directly involved in her campaign to bolster her poll numbers.

She took a major gamble on the decision, to rely on two presidents to promote her campaign.  

Incongruously, both Secretary Clinton and President Obama could not stay apart any longer, as both had much to lose by doing so.  Although the actions needed by them were the same, two of them had different motives and goals.  Nevertheless, she underestimated the fact that the mainstream media, not by the public, created and propagated the inflated ‘ratings’ of the sitting president.  Mr. Obama was brought in as an “activist campaigner” against Mr. Trump, but not necessarily to promote the campaign of Ms. Clinton.

Political interjections by the president to Clinton campaign:

The president Obama jumped into this opportunity as a political narrator with the selfish attitude of protecting his own legacy than doing what is good for the country.  With his ability for public speaking and connecting with the community, he vividly appealed to the American public to vote for Ms. Clinton, to protect his legacy.

However, attempt by Secretary Clinton to exploit the popular image of president Obama to boost her own campaign, backfired.  Evidence suggest that the public rejected his plea, and revolted against the president’s plea.  His inability to make right decisions promptly, deviation from his commitments, and failed policies during his presidency may have contributed to this.  Instead of becoming an asset, the President, as well as the sitting Vice-President and the former President, Mr. Clinton, apparently became liabilities for Secretary Clinton’s election campaign.

For example, President Clinton openly, perhaps unwittingly, criticized Obamacare as one of the worst legislators in recent years.  Ironically, President Obama and Secretary Clinton highly relied upon this law as one of their key achievements during her election campaign.

Why the populous voted for Mr. Trump:  

The stagnant economy and the current high unemployment rate (in fact, the true rate reaching 10%) continues to haunt people.  In addition, the administrative decision not to prosecute the perpetrators of the 2008 subprime crisis that led to unprecedented foreclosures and business failures, and mortgage meltdown, inflamed the silent anger of millions of affected Americans.

In his wisdom, Mr. Trump was successful in converting this public outrage to a successful political movement.  Nevertheless, the Republican Party establishment took an awfully long time to come home and almost lost the opportunity at the 2016 election; but finally, they did it on the election day.  

Despite all these efforts by The Clintons, there is no evidence that bringing the president (for the first time, a sitting president became a campaign activist) or celebrities had any perceptible effects on voters or favorable voter turnout.  The masses did not like either of these arrangements at this election, thus, showed their revulsion against both through the ballot box.

Hope, this is an important lesson for all future political campaigns.  With strategic approaches, a candidate or a party can win with fewer spending and less wastage of funds.  More is not always the best.  The next article (Part 3) discuss what influenced the 2016 election outcome.

\Professor Sunil J. Wimalawansa MD, PhD, MBA, DSc, is a  Physician-Scientist, Social Entrepreneur, Philanthropist, and Educator with strategic long-term vision.  Author can be reached via wimalawansa.org

Taxmen raid T.N. Chief Secretary

CRPF men deployed outside the residence of Tamil Nadu Chief Secretary P. Rama Mohana Rao at Anna Nagar in Chennai on Wednesday.  

Cash, gold seized in searches on official’s premises across 3 States

Sangeetha Kandavel

-DECEMBER 22, 2016 

In simultaneous searches, unprecedented in their scale and nature, the Income Tax Department on Wednesday went through the residential and office premises of Tamil Nadu Chief Secretary P. Rama Mohana Rao in Chennai, Bengaluru and Andhra Pradesh, and seized Rs. 30 lakh cash in new currency and 5 kg of gold. Besides, they unearthed “undisclosed income” to the tune of Rs. 5 crore from the house of Mr. Rao’s son, Vivek Papisetty, in Thiruvanmiyur here.

The raids began early in the morning at Mr. Rao’s two-storied bungalow in Anna Nagar here and extended to 10 other places, including his office in the State Secretariat. Considering that the State police were under the Chief Secretary’s command, the I-T officers, in the afternoon, requisitioned deployment of armed personnel from the Central Reserve Police Force to provide security. Nearly 100 senior officials of the I-T department were involved in the operations.

I-T department sources said the searches were carried out based on evidence gathered during the recent raids at the business and private premises of J. Sekhar Reddy, an expelled member of the Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanam Board-cum-government contractor and his two associates. Reddy, a big-time sand mining contractor, was on Wednesday arrested by the CBI, which registered cases with regard to money laundering and under the Prevention of Corruption Act and the Indian Penal Code and remanded in judicial custody.

Income Tax officials step out of the house of Tamil Nadu Chief Secretary P. Rama Mohana Rao in Chennai on Wednesday night.   | Photo Credit: R. Ragu

A senior official in the Income Tax Investigations Wing in Chennai told The Hindu that more people would come under their scanner. According to the taxmen, the searches were conducted in connection with Mr. Rao’s links to Reddy. On December 8, the I-T department cracked a case of money laundering after scrutinising the premises of Reddy, sand miner K. Sreenivasulu and their associate Prem Kumar. Reddy runs a firm JSR Infra Developers Private Limited.

The I-T department said that during the searches, Rs. 96.89 crore cash in withdrawn high denomination notes and Rs. 9.63 crore in new Rs. 2,000 currency notes, along with gold weighing 127 kg and worth approximately Rs. 36.29 crore, were seized from the trio.

(With inputs from S. Murali in Ongole)

Rahul Gandhi accuses Narendra Modi of taking cash payments

Prime Minister Narendra Modi speaks to the media inside the parliament premises on the first day of the winter session in New Delhi, India, November 16, 2016. REUTERS/Adnan Abidi/File Photo

By Rupam Jain | NEW DELHI-Wed Dec 21, 2016

Prime Minister Narendra Modi's Bharatiya Janata Party denied allegations by Congress politician Rahul Gandhi on Wednesday that Modi had accepted $6 million in suspicious cash payments in the months before winning a 2014 general election.

Gandhi, heir apparent to the leadership of the Congress party that has governed India for most of its seven decades of independence, levelled the allegations at a rally in Modi's home state of Gujarat.

He has threatened for weeks to cause an "earthquake" by exposing what he called Modi's personal corruption. The ensuing row paralysed parliament and caused its winter session to be one of the most acrimonious and unproductive on record.

Yet when Gandhi finally went public with the details it turned out that they were known, and were part of a case now before the Supreme Court that was filed by Prashant Bhushan, a lawyer known for pursuing corruption cases.

Bhushan's case rests on evidence recovered during income-tax raids on two business houses, Aditya Birla Group and Sahara that he alleges contains evidence of cash payments to Modi. Spokesmen for both companies could not be reached when called on their mobile numbers after working hours on Wednesday.

One recipient of alleged payments in late 2013 and early 2014 totalling at least 400 million rupees ($5.9 million) is listed in the records as "Gujarat CM". Bhushan alleges this refers to the chief minister of the western state who was Modi at the time.

Modi has not commented either on the Bhushan suit or Gandhi's allegations but his law minister, Ravi Shankar Prasad, denounced them on Wednesday.

"I condemn the irresponsible, baseless and shameless allegations of Rahul Gandhi," Prasad told a hastily convened news conference in New Delhi.

The heated and increasingly personal exchanges come as Modi faces growing public anger over a six-week-old crackdown on "black money" that seeks to purge the economy of the proceeds of crime, corruption and tax evasion.

Modi's cancellation of high-value banknotes worth 86 percent of the cash in circulation last month has caused disruption to the daily lives of people and businesses and could affect elections in key swing states next year.

"Prime Minister Narendra Modi, demonetisation is not a surgical strike on black money, but against the poor and honest people of this country," Gandhi said in Gujarat, one of the states that goes to the polls next year.

The tax authorities did not pursue investigations at the time because they concluded the entries related to a local company.

"We have proof to show that it is a clear case of personal corruption and the court must investigate the payments made by Sahara and Birla to Modi," Randeep Surjewala, a spokesman for Congress, told Reuters.

Surjewala, addressing a separate news conference, said Modi should come forward and "say whether he took money" from the two companies, and subject himself to an investigation if necessary.

Bhushan, the lawyer, confirmed to Reuters that Gandhi's allegations were based on the evidence he had provided to the Supreme Court. ($1 = 67.8989 Indian rupees)

(Reporting by Rupam Jain; Writing by Douglas Busvine; Editing by Robert Birsel)

Pregnancy causes long-term changes to brain structure, says study

Decrease in volume of grey matter in certain areas of the brain could help boost a mother’s ability to care for her child, research suggests

Nicola Davis-Monday 19 December 2016

Pregnancy appears to trigger long-term changes in brain structure, researchers have revealed, suggesting that the transformations could boost a mother’s ability to care for her newborn baby.

The study, based on brains scans, found that the volume of grey matter in certain regions of the brain decreased in women who had been pregnant – a shift that was found to last for at least two years.

“These changes were remarkably consistent,” said Elseline Hoekzema, co-author of the research from Leiden University. “So consistent that a computer algorithm could automatically identify which of the women in our sample had been pregnant between the sessions and which [had] not.”

The research suggests the changes could help mothers understand the needs of their newborn, and influence mother-child attachment. “Brain changes may sound somewhat intimidating, but our findings suggest that there may be an evolutionary purpose to these changes that may serve you in some way when you become a mother,” said Hoekzema.

Writing in the journal Nature Neuroscience, researchers from the Netherlands and Spain describe how they used magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to compare the brain structure of 25 first-time mothers before and shortly after pregnancy. The scans were also compared with those of 20 women who had not become pregnant, 19 first-time fathers and 17 men without children.

The results reveal that the new mothers experienced a decrease in the volume of grey matter – thought by the authors to imply a fine-tuning of connections – in regions of the brain involved in social processes, with the majority of the changes found to last at least two years after giving birth.

What’s more, the brain regions which showed a drop in grey matter volume were found to overlap with areas linked to the so-called “theory of mind network” –regions of the brain linked to the ability to put oneself in other people’s shoes and imagine how they would think or feel.

“It does make sense that a first time mother is going to have to work really hard to understand their baby’s needs,” said Dr Kirstie Whitaker, an expert in neuroimaging from Cambridge University. “They have theory of mind anyway, they are adult women who are capable of empathising with others, but this is a new stage, this is like another step up in terms of understanding how another being is seeing the world,” said Whitaker, who was not involved in the research.

While there has been much debate over whether pregnancy affects women’s memory, the new study found no differences between the women who became pregnant and the other participants when given a series of verbal and working memory tests. “It is important to stress that our findings do not suggest any link to changes in general cognitive abilities or intelligence,” said Hoekezema.

But the changes in grey matter volume do appear to play a role in levels of attachment between mother and child, the authors note. Furthermore, the areas that showed a drop in grey matter volume partially overlapped with regions of the brain that showed the strongest response when the new mothers were shown images of their new child, compared to other babies.

“These findings provide some [of] the first evidence that these [brain changes] may in some way help a mother to care for her infant,” said Hoekzema.

Despite the study’s small sample size, the research is convincing, says Whitaker. But, she adds, the findings do not necessarily mean that pregnant women are shedding brain cells.

“[It] is not that mothers are losing brain cells, losing grey matter in these regions, it is that they have actually have other cells come in to help reorganize and change up some of those connections to strengthen them, or at least make them more efficient,” she said, pointing to similarities in changes that occur in the teenage brain.

While the researchers say the lack of similar brain changes among new fathers suggests the adjustments are down to biological processes, such as fluctuations in hormones, Whitaker points out that environmental influences could be at play. But she agrees with the authors’ suggestion that decrease in grey matter volume could be linked to evolutionary pressures.

“Being a new mum is hard and you have to adjust an awful lot,” said Whitaker. “Your brain is going to be able to respond to that change and it is going to make it so that you can take care of this newborn bundle of joy.”

SRI LANKA: A MONSTER IN THE MAKING

20/12/2016

Apologists for the incumbent government claim that some powers of the executive presidency have been curtailed. True, there has been some tinkering with the JRJ Constitution. But, the fact remains that the pledge to abolish the executive presidency has been reneged on and the promised radical break from the past has become will-o’-the-wisp. We are being made witness to gross abuse of power, political interference with vital state institutions including the judiciary, the suppression of media rights, corruption, nepotism, cronyism etc.

The 19th Amendment has manifestly failed to yield the desired results. The President can still have a finger in any pie of his choosing. Local government polls have been postponed indefinitely for political reasons and the National Election Commission is helpless. The less said about the police the better! The IGP has been caught with his pants down; he made a public display of his servility to his political masters by promising a minister over his mobile phone that a suspect would not be arrested. The big mouths of the government have made a bigger mess of the issue by trying to defend the IGP and the minister concerned.

The brave knights in shining armour who looked for journalists in distress to save under the previous regime, are now defending attacks on the media. Many thought the Navy Chief would come in for rebuke from the yahapalana leaders for roughing up a beleaguered journalist the other day in Hambantota. Instead, he has received bouquets from the government! The self-proclaimed champions of good governance have thus shown signs of graduating from verbal attacks to assault in their efforts to suppress the media.

The culture of impunity prevails. Pro-government racketeers have got away with their billion-rupee corrupt deals such as the fraudulent release of hundreds of super luxury vehicles taken into custody by the Customs for undervaluation etc, the Central Bank bond scams, paying Rs. 21 million as monthly rent on an unused building and the mega coal racket which even shocked the conscience of the apex court. They have made a mockery of the government’s much avowed commitment to good governance.

The CID, the FCID and the Commission to Investigate Allegations of Bribery or Corruption have chosen to steer clear of some powerful ruling politicians, who have risen above the law. There have been instances where courts were kept open till midnight to remand Opposition politicians and their lackeys; they have also functioned during weekends to bail out government politicians who had to be arrested owing to media pressure. Strangely, civil society groups who helped bring the present regime to power are still unashamedly singing hosannas for the powers that be. If Ven. Maduluwawe Sobitha Thera were alive today he would take to the streets. His successors are mere puppets on strings.

Nothing has, however, damaged the image of the yahapalana dispensation more irreparably than its efforts to create a super ministry with a view to bulldozing its way through on the pretext of accelerating development. It is feared that the proposed ministry with a host of draconian powers to be vested therein will be more powerful than the executive presidency in some respects. Some of the Provincial Councils have already taken exception to the dictatorial provisions in the draft Development (Special Provisions) Bill, which envisages the super ministry. People have suffered at the hands of many a mad monkey with a straight razor since 1977. They must be spared any more suffering.

It is unbecoming of a coalition which secured a popular mandate by promising less government and better governance to create draconian institutions on some flimsy pretexts. President Maithripala Sirisena, who was instrumental in engineering last year’s regime change and undertook to usher in good governance, is duty bound to put paid to some of his subordinates’ attempts at self-aggrandisement. He cannot shift the onus for doing so to anyone else.

It is hoped that political parties will sink their differences and make a concerted effort to abort the super ministry monster in the yahapalana womb.

Editorial, The Island

The UNP: A Simple Majority Vs A Two-Thirds Majority

By Thushara Wanniarachchi –December 20, 2016

Thushara Wanniarachchi

Last Week was a turning point in the Yahapalanaya government rule. This is because the budget was passed in Parliament with 165 votes and more than a two-thirds majority. However, I do not wish to speak about the government’s victory, but rather, about the day preceding the budget vote, where several MPs of the United National Party including Thushara Indunil and Mujibur Rahman held a press conference where strong criticisms were leveled at the previous SLFP regime and its Ministers. They also went on to say that if they could not remain in the system, that they should simply leave. This is a symbolic threat.

I believe that there is a large political significance behind the statement made by the UNP Ministers, just prior to the budget vote. To elaborate further, they are simply stating that the opposition, instead of pulling the leg of the government and enjoying the power and privilege of government jobs and posts, ministerial and state position reserved for the UNP, they should hand those said benefits over and leave. I personally believe that at the time of the press conference, the government had already obtained the votes of TNA MP’s Thondaman and Douglas Devananda’s in favour of the budget and secured its majority.

However, in the days preceding the budget vote, the very same SLFP Ministers who held press conferences and hurled criticisms and accusations towards the Prime Minister and the UNP, voted for the budget without a single muttered protest. This, in a way, is a letdown. Symbolically, they may still enjoy the privileges afforded to them by the government, obstruct and complicate government affairs and create a singular and powerful SLFP government, cancelling out any ability for the rational people to conduct themselves.

The backbenchers and supporters of the United National Party wish for, not a government with a two-thirds majority, but a UNP government, where there is a simple majority, and they not only hold Ministerial positions, but their supporters too are guaranteed with jobs. A Parliament team has been authorized to work in regards to maintaining the Presidency under the UNP working committee decision. Therefore, the ability for the UNP to remain influential has been lost by showing the SLFP a two-thirds majority and threatening to destroy the constitutional reforms. If there are no constitutional reforms in the country, it will prove disastrous for a single UNP government, for the continuation of the Party and the continuation of Sri Lanka. The backbenchers of the UNP state that the UNP, together with the President, can maintain a government for the next three and a half years with a simple majority. The President himself was appointed by UNP supporters, and therefore, they have an inherent respect towards him.

What is now left for the SLFP Ministers to do is to leave behind the state power, contracts, vehicles, living quarters and other benefits which they enjoyed over the last 20 years, and follow the example of Mahinda Rajapakse and get onto the streets and protest, hold conferences, and engage in the difficult act that is politics. If they chose to do so, not only will they be insignificant in the presence of the SLFP supporters, but they will also be subject to vile insults and berating from the public, and be thieves amongst the thieves of the Mahinda Rajapakse led opposition. In my opinion, after this incident, the SLFP ministers lost any ability they possessed to influence the United National Party.

The other incident occurred last week is that of the Magampura Port in Hambantota. As we all now undoubtedly know, contract employees of the port detained two ships transporting goods for more than 72 hours. According to International Maritime Law, this is nothing short of Piracy.

Despite the job security of the contract employees of the government port being guaranteed, the Navy had to be commanded by the government to manage the violent and disruptive behavior by these same employees which was causing immense damage to public property. The Navy Commander had to personally intervene in this matter due to two reasons. The first is that he is a well-trained pilot, and the second is that as the Sri Lankan Naval Commander, he has an immense responsibility in ensuring that the Indian Ocean is devoid of acts of piracy. In the aftermath of the events of Hambantota, despite several protests around the nation against the Navy Commander, the Government has remained firm in its stand to defend and protect him.

The wonderful irony of this is that the very same opposition comprising of the joint opposition, nationalists and representatives of the SLFP, all of whom constantly pledge their allegiance towards fighting for the soldiers, raising money for them and holding press conferences for them, have suddenly done a complete 180 degrees and are now taking the side of the local journalists against that of the Navy Commander and the Navy.

Read More

Curb your enthusiasm

Tuesday, 20 December 2016

Curb Your Enthusiasm’ is the title of a highly-acclaimed comedy series that would fall in to the genre of black comedy. Larry David, the producer and main actor in the series, plays the role of a neurotic but candid character pursuing what he considers the right course of action in various personal as well as social encounters. The effect of his bungling approach is disastrous; leaving a well warranted impression of an irascible and maladjusted personality.

Whether this brand of humour (like most things from far away) will find an appreciative audience in societies very differently evolved; inadequate, tormented and less examined is debatable. The cultural gap may be a bridge too far for complete appreciation or understanding, the differences allowing for only the superficial and even misinterpretation. 

But we too are not without our own enthusiasms, for different things, in different ways. 

Our enthusiasm is at fever pitch when it comes to politics, or should we say its lower manifestations, the spectacle of power and the obeisance thereof.

What was a vocation for a select few at the time of independence has now become a national fixation, with anyone and everyone clamouring to “serve the people”, to give their “rich” talents in the national cause.

Every few years a new government is elected with much fanfare and great expectations. The victors gloat, claim the wisdom of their policies and brag about the strategic genius that brought them victory (most times a close shave and that too only after many tries!) It is not uncommon to see the vanquished beaten, their property damaged or sometimes taken into custody on various charges. Only a few years back, even the main presidential candidate, after his defeat, was arrested within a few days, brought before a court and jailed. The charges pressed against him were esoteric.

Meanwhile, the (newly elected) government is determined to show it is different; committees are appointed, policy statements made, reports called for and various plans unveiled; all this with a lot of ceremony. ‘Our policies will certainly lead the country to the much desired but elusive land called developed status, democracy has been rescued and restored by us, we will stamp out corruption and nepotism’, is the general theme. 

Every government is distinguished by their slogans, getting catchier with time. ‘Grow more food and say no to imports’ , ‘Let us plant and the country will progress’, ‘a true people’s government’, ‘ a fair and just society’, ‘ a government which listens to and consults the people’, ‘ let us stand up for ourselves’, ‘ a government of those who love the country’, ‘ good governance’ are some of the slogans still in our memory.

The people hail every new government, minister, provincial council, governor, corporation chairman, with unqualified enthusiasm. The newly appointed minister (for that matter, every such personality) launches his tenure faithful to a script; in a sparkling white national costume (symbolising both purity and affinity with the masses), smiling, arms raised in salutation the man arrives at the ministry with his wife and family members in a convoy of vehicles to be greeted like a conquering hero by an excited gathering ; Loud speakers come alive, crackers are lit, the organisers scurry about eagerly while the crowd, full of wonderment, humble ; jostle for a better view of the august personages – “he whose eyes may chance upon such an elevated being, is fortunate indeed…”

Then a sudden hush, the festive air turns solemn as the ceremony proceeds to the obligatory religious observances to bless the symbolic ascension to State power. No sense of irony is manifest; any intended enterprise can be blessed; money making, power wielding and even the extra-legal, the plunder. There is no judgment, no discrimination; the religious establishment is neutral in bestowing blessings. 

Naturally, considering the nature of the event, this requisite “spiritual” feature is not without its political arrangements. Every religion practiced in the country is represented, every blessing invoked, but in a particular order. A civil ceremony follows with eloquent speeches welcoming the new minister. Sometimes the follies of the former minister are referred to, but that is now a subject of receding interest. There is the future, and dazzling prospects with an “enlightened” new minister. His praise is sung and oaths of fealty made.

The minister and his entourage are led to his office, the inner sanctum. There, the secretary and other high officials of the ministry, in formal Western attire, anxious to make a favourable impression (yet somehow conveying a sense of the ill-suited, an awkwardness, even of doubtful stature) await, to extend further greetings to the new minister and his family. 

The minister takes his seat at the large table. His first ‘official’ function, to put his signature on a ceremonial document, is only done faithful to a ‘time’ provided by an astrologer. The beaming wife and immediate family members stand behind him forming a solid line, in the context of South Asian family values sanctioning their engagement in the running of the ministry as well as the enjoyment of public assets by them then on – a joyous occasion doubtlessly – one for all, all for one.

Every nation looks to a bright future, to enjoy a better life, to progress. Relative to the rest, some nations, a few, have been able to ensure a very high standard of life for their citizens. Naturally, these successful nations also have good systems in place and effective institutions which have retained their integrity, by and large. Some other nations, particularly in South East Asia, newly emergent, have made remarkable progress from the poverty and squalor they were known for not too long ago to achieve a better standard of life. Regrettably, the performance of almost all South Asian countries have been mediocre; a lot of big talk, but only small deeds. In terms of per capita income, we lag far behind.

Considering our consistently low rate of growth since independence, it will be difficult to argue that any politician or political party has made a crucial difference. Occasionally we have achieved a hopeful rate of growth but only too soon to see the prospects destroyed by political blunders and turmoil. On the other hand, the bungling actions of those in power have had the most unfortunate effects on the present as well as our future prospects. 

Our political history since independence belies the enthusiasm so evident at every political event. The glamour and glitter of these occasions and the grandiose statements emanating from the stage only point to an immaturity in the national psyche, deep seated, and legitimised by the prevailing mediocrity. These are not events to be celebrated but are only tragicomedies, peculiar to a certain culture. If we can develop a better sense of an occasion and curb our enthusiasm for the false gods of politics – these life time professional politicians, curb our inclination to participate in the falsity of the political carnival, we may begin to see things differently, in better perspective, clearer.

Law abiding citizens duped ;corrupt unpunished ; new constitution in doubt -Prof. Wijesuriya bemoans (Audio and Video)

- A united citizens’ revival campaign imperative

(Lanka-e-News- 20.Dec.2016, 10.05 PM) It is now clear that the agreement signed by the two constituent groups of the ruling government with the people which was  led by Late Ven. Sobitha Thera on 8 th January 2015 , have been blatantly  violated , a result of which the law abiding citizens have been  ruthlessly duped  , while the crooks , the corrupt and murderers are going unpunished . Even the new constitution which is the final hope  of the people is day by day evaporating .Hence a most vigorous united citizens’ revival campaign has to be launched to combat this situation , said , professor Sarath Wijesuriya , the convener of the  national campaign for just society when he attended the commemoration ceremony  of Late Ven. Sobitha Thera at Kurunegala on the 16 th.

The professor elucidated in detail  , how the people had been duped after 8th January 2015 from the very outset . Though Late Ven Sobitha Thera who was supposed to have been appointed to the organization- the so called   National executive council , never a day was he  extended an invitation , and the council took no action, meaning that Ven. Sobitha was deceived, the professor lamented.

The 100 days program was a proposal of the UNP , and since the UNP will lose if it had gone  for elections at that juncture , it was decided to offer unlimited relief during  the short period as a strategy . However , because the unlimited relief was offered sans a plan , the government is now having no financial resources to carry on the government , the professor pointed out.

Although it was said , the post of president of the SLFP was granted to Maitrhripala Sirisena , there wasn’t such a  special appointment, because by law  by virtue of the mere fact he is  the president of the country , he was entitled to hold  that post. Maithripala after becoming the president of the SLFP , gave nominations to all the corrupt except three , thereby pulverizing all the cherished  aspirations  of the people .

It is now confirmed that both parties are not meting out punishment to the corrupt , the professor pinpointed while expressing shock and dismay at the invitation extended to Gotabaya  along with the president and the P.M. for the unveiling of late Dudley Senanayake’s statue . It is the president or the P.M. who must  have invited Gotabaya the criminal who in fact ought to be in jail. While Gotabaya is directly responsible for the murders committed during the previous government , measures are now being taken to rescue him , the professor bemoaned while supporting his allegations with evidence. 

The forces of the 8th January rainbow revolution cannot  get  disillusioned based on these . Whether the SLFP  or the UNP should be elected in 2020 is  of no use for the masses , but under no circumstances should room be created for the deposed and defeated  Rajapakses to rear  their   heads again , and to ensure this  the citizens must unite as one force on  a renaissance  campaign, the professor observed.  

If you wish to save the data, click here and listen to the audio speech only

Video footage of speech of Professor Sarath Wijesuriya is  hereunder 

---------------------------
by     (2016-12-20 17:02:28)

SLPF’s message to the SLFP on the ‘Super Minister’ Bill 

By C. A. Chandraprema-December 20, 2016, 7:59 pm

In a statement to The Island, the interim leader of the Sri Lanka People’s Front and member of the Joint Opposition Prof. G. L. Peiris lashed out at the ‘Development Special Provisions’ Bill referring to it as a dictatorial piece of legislation and charged that it brings into being not one, but two super ministers. The objectionable features of this proposed legislation according to Prof. Peiris are as follows.

1. Section 17 of the proposed Bill, seeks to create a powerful Development Agency under the super minister styled ‘Minister for National Policy and Economic Development’. This agency will have the power to give directions to a number of important institutions including the Board of Investment, the Export Development Board, the Information and Communication Technology Authority, the Civil Aviation Authority, the Sri Lanka Ports Authority, the National Water Supply and Drainage Board and the Sri Lanka Tourism Promotion Bureau. These bodies have been created under particular statutes which confer certain powers and responsibilities on them. Section 17 says that these bodies cannot on their own exercise the powers conferred on them by the statutes that created them. They must exercise those powers at the behest of and in accordance with the directions issued to them by the Development Agency. This means that the ministers in charge of those bodies will no longer have control over those bodies. Section 17 goes on to say that when for example the Board of Investment wishes to develop a project, they must apply to this authority to seek approval for such a project. This gives rise to a fundamental question of accountability. It is the minister under whose purview these institutions come under who is responsible for their proper functioning to parliament. For example the Export Development Board comes under the purview of the minister for trade who is responsible to parliament for the functioning of the EDB. This basic principle which is a pillar of constitutional government will no longer apply under this Bill. Now all these bodies come under the authority of the super minister. The other ministers will cease to have any real authority.

2. Section 18(5) says that all these powers of the Development Agency will be exercised by a Managing Director who will be an official handpicked by the Minister.

3. Section 16(6)(b) gives this Development Agency the authority to coordinate ALL development plans of the nation and not just of the institutions mentioned above.

4. According to Section 19, the Development Agency can delegate its powers to ‘regional boards’ which brings into play sweeping powers without any limit on delegation.

5. Under section 12(4), the super minister is given the authority to designate any area of the country as an economic development area and to issue a gazette notification to that effect. He also has the power to decide for what purpose land in that area can be utilised. If he declares it to be an agricultural area, non-agricultural activities in that area will be ipso facto barred.

6. Under Section 17(5)(a) the super minister has the power to register investors and those who are registered by him, enjoy exemption from restrictions that apply to other investors in respect of the utilisation of land. This proposed law states specifically that the Land Registration and Alienation Act will not apply to such investors. Not only will this give a certain group of investors privileges not available to other investors but will also be an open invitation to corruption.

7. Section 12(5) deals with the development of areas which are connected with fisheries. Under this section, coastal fisheries and fish farming, offshore fishing, construction of ports for deep sea fisheries, infrastructure, value addition, storage and distribution of fisheries products all comes under the super minister. What then remains for the fisheries minister to do? The present minister of fisheries is the Secretary of the UPFA and one of the most powerful ministers in the government and this is what happens to him under this proposed legislation!

8. According to Section 12(2), when the super minister makes a regulation, that has to be placed before parliament. Later if parliament rejects that regulation, everything done by the minister during that intervening period remains in force notwithstanding the rejection of those regulations by parliament. This places the super minister even above parliament.

9. There is also to be a Policy Development Office established under the super minister. According to Section 11 of this Bill, any officer of this office can call for any information which they claim is related to economic development from ANY individual and there are penal sanctions that attach to non-compliance. Such information can be sought even from any private individual. Not even the president of Sri Lanka has that kind of untrammelled power.

10. Section 7(1) says that the Policy Development Office has the authority to make plans or proposals on any subject ‘including’ economic policy. So the scope of the super minister’s work is not restricted to economic policy - it can be on any subject – there is no limitation.

11. The other super minister under this proposed legislation will be the Minister for International Trade and Development Strategy. There is to be an Agency for International Trade established under him. Section 43(4) of the Bill says that this agency has the power to give binding directions to the Department of Commerce, the Import- Export Control Department, the Tea Board and the Tourism Authority. The Department of Commerce functions under the Minister for Trade and Commerce. The Tea Board functions under a different minister. All these bodies will now have to take instructions not from their respective ministers but from the second super minister. What happens to the responsibility of those ministers to the president of the country and the parliament?

12. It will be the Minister for International Trade and Development Strategy who determines the criteria for tax incentives, not the Minister of Finance. The whole Bill seems to be designed to grab power from other ministers and concentrate power in the hands of a couple of people.

13. Section 51 confers immunity from suit on the Agency for International Trade. That office is made up not only of government officers but also people from the private sector. If they cause any loss to a private citizen who applies to court and gets an award for damages, the Bill says that the damages will have to be paid out of the consolidated fund. This means that the taxpayers will have to pay for the misdeeds not only of government officials but also individuals from the private sector serving on this body.

14. According to Section 1 of the Development Special Provisions Bill, the duration of this mechanism will be limited to a period of three years after which it will cease to exist leaving in its wake what would probably be complete chaos.

Prof. Peiris points out that there are certain provisions in this Bill which will be of interest to Chief Ministers and provincial councils. The 8 th Schedule to the Sri Lankan constitution specifies the nine provinces. According to this proposed legislation, three of these provinces, the North Central Province, Sabaragamuwa Province and the Uva Province are to go off the radar. The Moneragala and Ratnapura Districts will be transferred to the Southern Province. Badulla is to be transferred to the Central Province. Kegalle is to be transferred to Wayamba. Anuradhapura and Polonnaruwa are to be transferred to the Eastern Province. So three provinces will cease to exist for the purposes of this law.

Furthermore, according to Section 21 of the Provincial Councils list of powers, subject to the formulation and implementation of national policy in regard to development and planning, the power to promote, establish and engage in agricultural, industrial, commercial, and trading enterprises and other income generating projects within the province will lie with the Provincial Council. Under the proposed legislation, this power is to be taken over by the super minister and the Development Agency functioning under him. The interim SLPF leader charged that one of the aims of this Bill appears to be to take over all powers to the UNP marginalising all the SLFP ministers serving in the government and even the president himself and he said that the SLFP ministers must familiarise themselves with this Bill and decide whether they approve of all that is to be done under this proposed legislation.