Monday, December 26, 2016

Sri Lanka: Media Ministry Secretary to be Replaced!

( December 26, 2016, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) Mass Media and Parliamentary Affairs Ministry Secretary Nimal Bopage is likely to be replaced, highly placed Government sources said yesterday.

A new official will be appointed early next month, these sources said.

Mr. Bopage is alleged to have embarrassed the Government through a news conference he held early this week.

The purpose of the news conference was to provide details of an alleged plot to assassinate President Maithripala Sirisena. The claim was based on a forecast made by an astrologer though most of his colleagues say it is bunkum. This forecast has been made in the Facebook page by Vijitha Rohana, a one-time naval rating who attempted to assault the then Indian Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi during a guard of honour in Colombo in July 1987.

Secretary Bopage held the news conference together with an astrologer he had brought along. The latter was to say that President Sirisena’s erashthraka or malefic period was different from other assassinated political leaders including the late Rajiv Gandhi, Minister Lalith Athulathmudali and President Ranasinghe Premadasa. He said therefore Vijitha Rohana’s claims were wrong.

Mr. Bopage said he had earlier written to Police Chief Pujith Jayasundera asking him to investigate the matter. However, there has been no response. A Police Headquarters official said, “if we are to probe every astrological forecast, we may have to have a new division.”

A state run television network aired Mr. Bopage’s assassination claim in its early evening news bulletin. By then, officials in the President’s Media Division have spoken to other media organisations and appealed to them not to run the story. They explained that President Sirisena did not share the views expressed by Mr. Bopage.

At the same news conference, the Secretary said he had not heeded a request from Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe to sign a letter to facilitate the issue of Sports Utility Vehicles (SUVs) for 58 MPs to carry out development work. Mr Bopage said Premier Wickremesinghe had said if he could not place his signature, he should resign. A Government Minister said Wickremesinghe’s request came only after he obtained official sanction to provide the MPs with the luxury vehicles.

Mr. Bopage had said that he had been asked to sign for the lease of the vehicles in question for 60 months when the tenure of the Government was only 45 more months. This position was dismissed by ministers who pointed

out that there were other similar transactions where contracts had been signed for 60 months.

Premier Wickremesinghe, Government sources said, had also raised issue with President Sirisena over Mr. Bopage’s conduct. He has pointed out that by officially holding a news conference and making statements, he had given credence to claims by the Opposition that there was a rift in the Government. No official at Secretary level is allowed to hold news conferences without the permission of the Government, he had pointed out.

Police News: Police says IGP did not issue such order

2016-12-26

The Police Department today announced that IGP Pujith Jayasundara had not issued an order to restrict sending daily Police news to private media institutions.

“Several media outlets had reported stating that the IGP had instructed the daily updates be sent only to State media institutions,” the Police said in a statement.

However, the statement did not mention the reason for not sending daily Police news updates to media institutions from December 21.

Earlier, the National Police Commission (NPC) Secretary Ariyadasa Cooray said that Police was under obligation to provide news to private media institutions, especially when the Right to Information (RTI) Act is in effect in the country.

TRIAL BY JURY NOT SUITABLE FOR POLITICALLY SENSITIVE CASES, SAYS LEADING TAMIL LAWYER

By Editor-26/12/2016

Colombo, December 25 (The New Indian Express): Trial by jury is not suitable for politically sensitive cases in which the defendants are Security Forces personnel and the victims seeking justice are from a minority community, says the leading Sri Lankan Tamil lawyer and Member of Parliament, M.A.Sumanthiran.

“Given the consistent pattern of the juries acquitting the accused in cases where these are Security Forces personnel and the victims are Tamils, it is better to go for a Trial-at-Bar in which the judge gives the verdict,” Sumanthiran told Express on Sunday.

In the case of trial by jury, the jury does not have to give reasons for its verdict but in the case of a Trial-at-Bar, the judge will have to give reasons. In a Trial-at-Bar, there are three judges.

In trials under ordinary law, there is a provision for the accused to seek a Sinhalese-speaking, or a Tamil-speaking or an English-speaking jury, which can be used to get a particular kind of verdict in a communally charged or a politically sensitive context, Sumanthiran said.

Kumarapuram Acquittal
In the famous Kumarapuram massacre case, six army officers were accused of massacring 26 unarmed Tamil civilians of Kumarapuram in Kiliveddi in Trincomalee on February 11, 1996. The victims included six women, five men and 13 children.

The initial hearings in this case were held in Muttur, a Tamil area in Trincomalee. Eye witnesses identified the army personnel who were then serving at the Dehiwatte camp in Trincomalee. But citing the war situation, the case was transferred to Anuradhapura High Court in a Sinhalese area, where proceedings commenced after 20 years.

The accused were indicted by the Attorney General on 101 separate charges. But in July 2016, the Jury consisting of six Sinhalese declared the six accused not guilty. All six army Corporals were acquitted of all charges by the Anuradhapura High Court Judge Manjula Thilakaratne.

Impact on UNHRC
Commenting on the issue, Northern Provincial Councilor M.K Sivajilingam had said that the acquittal had badly disappointed the Tamil people, who were fighting for justice in many such cases.

“The Anuradhapura High Court Judge has delivered this judgment despite the victims identifying the perpetrators. This clearly shows that justice cannot be expected in a local judicial mechanism. This has further intensified the call for an international investigation into war crimes,” he said.

The survivors of the massacre and the families of the victims urged President Maithripala Sirisena to reopen the case and retry the accused before a Trial-at-Bar. Following this the State went to the Court of Appeal where it is pending.

Asked if the acquittal in the Raviraj case would figure in the proceedings of the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) in Geneva in Mach 2017, Sumanthiran said that it would strengthen the Tamils’ demand for an international judicial mechanism to try war crimes cases.

The Minister for National Languages and Dialogue Mano Ganeshan said that the conduct of the Attorney General in this case was disappointing and the issue of getting justice in trials in Sri Lanka will figure in the UNHRC session in March next.

Victimes of Kumarapuram shooting cry out for justice

Command Responsibility

One of the lawyers who appeared for the aggrieved party in the Raviraj assassination case, said that there are other structural issues in the Sri Lankan judicial system which need to be addressed to get a fair trial.
One of them is the non-recognition of “command responsibility” for any action taken on the ground by junior personnel.

He said that it is more important to know who commanded an action or under whose watch an action had taken place than to know who pulled trigger. If a commander had not taken steps to prevent a wrong action or had not punished a subordinate for wrong doing, he becomes responsible for the action and is liable to be punished. But in the Sri Lankan system, command responsibility is not recognized, the lawyer said.

NIE

All the accused acquitted in Raviraj murder ! Eye witness testimony ignored !!

-This further confirms erosion of faith in courts : lawyer Sumenthiran

(Lanka-e-News -25.Dec.2016, 11.55PM) It is a well known fact that even though Raviraj was murdered during the Rajapakse regime , no investigations were duly conducted into it by the regime . However after the good governance government coming into power , following a lengthy investigation into the murder by the CID , 6 suspects including three members of the Navy were indicted and the trial was begun. As the prime suspect Fabian Roysten Christopher Toussaint was absconding courts the case was heard sans his presence.

The trial was conducted before a jury panel which was appointed at the request of the defense . But as all the members of the jury appointed were Sinhala speaking , the Tamil political parties and the Human Rights Commission even before the trial raised their objections to this.

This case was heard 23rd until after midnight and the verdict was delivered yesterday (24). This was something unprecedented in Sri Lanka ‘s history ! This morning the panel of jury declared that the members of the jury have unanimously decided to acquit all the accused thereby exonerating them of all charges.

During the trial it came to light based on the evidence of PC Liyanarachchige Abeyaratne of the Intelligence division that ex defense secretary Gotabaya Rajapakse paid a sum of Rs. 50 million to the Karuna group involved in the murder as kick back. Despite it Gotabaya was not even summoned as a witness.

Unbelievably , even after Preethi Viraj Manamperi a police driver of the presidential security division then, testified to having seen the suspect , the navy officer Gamini Seneviratne shooting, the panel of jury decided to acquit every one of the accused in the case.

Lawyer M. Sumenthiran M.P. who appeared on behalf of the aggrieved party said, the judgment is not a matter for shock since the public faith and confidence reposed in courts had already evaporated . It is because of such situations that assistance of international courts have become necessary and is being urged outside of the judges of the local courts , he asserted.

Sumenthiran also said , as the lawyer for the victim in this case he shall be filing an appeal against the decision. When it was inquired from Sumenthiran M.P. whether the decision cannot be accepted because it is the conviction that the case has been filed by the accused who are the alleged murderers of Raviraj ? He replied, though he may not say that , it is a matter for regret that it had not been possible to duly punish the culprits even after several years have elapsed since the time of the murder that was committed in broad daylight.

The criminals being allowed to be free for so long is itself is a grave wrong , and he is absolutely against it , Sumenthiran emphasized

(LeN court correspondent and Dinasena Rathugamage)

Translated by Jeff

---------------------------
by (2016-12-26 01:40:05)

Are We There Yet?

By Emil van der Poorten –December 25, 2016

Emil van der Poorten

The question that constitutes the title of this piece owes its origins to children who are on some exciting journey with their parents and can’t wait to reach the promised destination.

In this instance the “destination” is one of anarchy and the total destruction of democracy as it has developed over, at least, the “last 2500 years of Sinhala Buddhist civilization” which is the context within which all that is good should be viewed as far as those ‘calling the shots’ in Sri Lanka are concerned.

Our modest “Home stay” operation had an European family as guests and what made them different was the fact that the husband/father was a career diplomat who had served in Africa.

He regaled us with humourous (if you didn’t have to live there) stories of law enforcement, if that is the word given to what occurs in some of the East African countries. I hope that by recounting one anecdote at least I don’t provide our local traffic cops with another means of collecting “palm oil.”

He told us how the police in Kenya were known to rent out their uniforms on week-ends to friends on civvy street who could employ them as the accoutrements of choice in the collection of bribes. After all, can you extort money from a member of the public anywhere without being appropriately uniformed? He also gave us a fascinating description of the brutal occupation and destruction of life and property in a large shopping mall in that country. Apparently the government has a crack unit specifically trained to deal with such incidents. Unfortunately, however the plane required to bring them in and which was maintained specifically for that purpose was unavailable. Why? Because a high-ranking officer was using it for his own personal purposes! The end result of that particular calamity was a shoot-out between the army and police for control of the mall – there having been only four (that’s right 4) original terrorists who had been dispatched quickly enough. The battle for control of the retail hub ended up in its total destruction, save for what the (uniformed) looters were able to spirit away. I don’t recall who “won” that particular skirmish but I was informed that it resulted in the total destruction of Kenya’s largest shopping mall.

In the adjacent Tanganyika, the corruption is alleged to be far worse than in Kenya but is kept under wraps by a government that very successfully quashes any sign of exposure of government venality very quickly indeed.

What provoked these thoughts was the fact that Uhuru Kenyatta, the head of the Kenyan state, had recently proclaimed that Kenya had given up the fight to rid itself of corruption because, basically, it was an impossible task given how deeply embedded corruption was in the modern Kenyan culture. The manner in which this statement was reported in the international media suggested that it wasn’t a random outburst brought about by any particularly dramatic event but one born of a series that had constituted a cultural change in the manner in which Kenya chose to govern itself. At least that was the choice of those in the seats of power, because it was rather unlikely that the average Kenyan would opt for something that would take the bread off the table of his family. But where “power comes out of the barrel of a gun” as Mao so aptly put it, Joe Citizen, doesn’t have too many choices.

The “Unuth ekai, munuth ekai” (“six of one and half a dozen of the other”) conditions prevailing in Sri Lanka suggest that we are well on the way down a similar slippery slope.

In a strange twist to the attribute in question, in the so-called “western democracies,” the hypocrisy that is alive and well in the matter of public pronouncements by those running those nations gives one some hope. Why? Because such hypocrisy is a clear indication of the acceptance of public morality, honesty and similar virtues in the conduct of democratic governance as it was once known to exist in theory if not practice!

The convulsion that occurred on January 8th of last year was a clear indication that a majority of our citizenry believed that “good governance” could be our reality; at least a start could be made in that journey. The tragedy is that that is not happening.

I would like to hope that we have enough people of integrity, ready to stand up to be counted even at considerable risk to themselves, who will keep the pressure on the present bunch not to slide into the mire of wholesale theft of what belongs to the nation as did the “movers and shakers” of the previous regime.

What is of immediate urgency, is that those with a primary responsibility for “justice” are not the most inappropriate on the government side of the house to fulfill such obligations. To have a Minister in charge of justice proclaiming that it will be over his dead body that any “harm” befalls any member of a particular family against whom the body of circumstantial evidence of theft of public resources is reaching Himalayan proportions, is beyond acceptable.

Name of the game: Bala Giri Doshaya How miserable are the leaders?

2016-12-26

Police enforce the law to the letter. Could politicians lift our country to Australian standards, based on the way the ‘present regime had started off”?

Prime Minister, Ranil Wickremesinghe, who is experienced, sharp and incredibly designing, in an interview with the Hindu, at the Temple Trees, had said that having created a National government, they had stabilized and prepared a new policy framework.

It must not be forgotten that the MR regime, after having won the war, had been thrown out of power, due to nepotism, misrule, corruption, and authoritarianism......

PM had also said “We have sort of created the stability and the way. (For the benefit of parliamentarians?) Now, next year is when we must deliver our promises. (To the people?) …..
The President is now focussing on the rural poor. (Who is focussing on the urban dweller, including urban-poor) … I would say the next two years is important for us to consolidate the gains we have made”.

Let me add that I have carefully chosen the prefix “Mr. Prime Minister” like in developed countries such as Australia, New Zealand, UK, USA, and Canada.
Mr. PM, has reassured that within the next two years after ‘consolidating the gains” and “getting the investments, creating more employment, increasing income levels, reviving the rural poor and the economy”, he is “confident the way we started off”.

It must not be forgotten that the MR regime, after having won the war, had been thrown out of power, due to nepotism, misrule, corruption, and authoritarianism.

Their words and actions did not agree with the reality. MS/RW therefore campaigned together during elections that they would boldly root out corruption, restore law and order, nepotism to prevent the rot.

In the 2005 Election Manifesto in Mahinda Chinthana, Mathata Thitha /End to Alcoholism, was another captivating slogan.

However, no tangible improvement was seen other than the enactment of the Act entitled ‘National Authority on Tobacco and Alcohol’. Astonishingly, during the latter part, consumption of liquor in public places too had drastically increased.

In Australia, consumption of intoxicating liquor is completely prohibited in public places, which has been prominently displayed. Police enforce the law to the letter. Could politicians lift our country to Australian standards, based on the way the ‘present regime had started off”?

The President having accepted the SLFP leadership, formed a so called ‘coalition’ and expanded the size of the Cabinet of Ministers beyond the Constitutional restriction, despite an assurance given to eschew government spending. As the leader of the SLFP, defeated candidates too were nominated to Parliament through the National List. Surprisingly, most of these who had been appointed to hold ministerial posts were in several ways linked to corruption.

Furthermore, the well-known human rights lawyer J.C. Weliamuna, sometime back accused the government that the failure of the present government to enact the legislation pertaining to ‘electoral reforms’ is ‘a complete reversal of the mandate of the people’. Let me ask the question – Is the government genuinely concerned about making the changes?

However, the newly elected government has brought about numerous changes having granted relief to the people in several areas such as salary increases to public servants, pensioners, reduction of fuel prices and cooking LPG. It is encouraging that both the President and Prime Minister have been trying hard in this area to foster post-war reconciliation.

It is my doubt however whether the present government too has introduced necessary measures satisfactorily to embark on social and economic reforms to ensure prosperity to the Nation, despite the claims PM had made at the interview referred to above. The leadership has so far failed to engage the Sri Lankan people, which no doubt would be the heart for improving democratic governance. Now that both the President and the Prime Minister had been involved in politics very long, I cannot imagine why they have permitted the elected representatives to have their say, when in fact it should be the other way about. Both these leaders should now experiment on how to create a people- friendly, accessible government to take the country forward.

And shouldn’t they learn from the mistakes of the previous regime, if they needed to do it better.
I have no doubt unprofessional, selfish, power-hungry, unenlightened politicos had been preferred for contesting elections by the corrupt political leadership.

Time has therefore come to change the total outlook to take the country forward. The two leaders prior to elections assured that the necessary independence would be given to the public sector, police and the judiciary. I am convinced that the institutions responsible to investigate corruption have also not been appropriately strengthened, with the necessary powers to independently conduct their investigations against corruption.

I met the President personally during my days in PRECIFAC and requested that the PRECIFAC be strengthened and empowered to investigate the present administration too. Let me be frank – “It is simply lip service and nothing beyond that”. The law should apply to everybody alike – why only those prior to January, 2015? What a waste of government funds in the name of ‘investigation of serious frauds corruption and abuse of power”!

Prior to the elections they promised that a Cabinet of not more than 25 members, from all political parties would be appointed with RW as the PM. They also announced that in order to strengthen democracy, a National Advisory Council would be set up inclusive of representatives of parties represented in Parliament as well as Civil Society Organizations.

After nearly 70 years since Independence, the new coalition government had been mandated to deliver its promises to build a strong prosperous country through good governance and establishing rule of law.

They have purposefully ignored and thereby failed to introduce policies to curb waste, corruption, mismanagement, inefficiency etc. They do not want to improve the delivery of all public services to the betterment of the country and its people.

The President recently accused that the tender processes were being manipulated and politicians were even now contravening public policy to favour their kith and kin. This is after nearly two years in office.

If so, why did they fail to put in place the policy foundations to establish a country – better Sri Lanka that the majority voted for.

Are they in a right royal mess for several good reasons? As far as I could imagine, there had been numerous revelations where UNP, UPFA leaders have been discredited for corruption.
Let me quote the President’s own words:

“We should promote good governance and democracy, the rule of law and equal administration of justice, transparent institutions with strong civil societies, and respect for human rights. Because democracy and economic growth go hand in hand”. PM too has always expressed similar sentiments. Is it happening in real life? Our leaders do not know that discipline is doing the right thing even though you do not like it.

How miserable are the leaders?

‘Yoshitha-Sagala union is a shame for us ‘

- Dec 26, 2016

A group of joint opposition MPs has complained to Mahinda Rajapaksa that Yoshitha Rajapaksa had conducted himself in a very appalling manner before law and order minister Sagala Ratnayake during a funeral recently, say sources in the group.

Yoshitha had been at the funeral of the wife of businessman Jayantha Dharmadasa, when minister Ratnayake arrived. Yoshitha had gone to the minister, addressed him as ‘Sagala Aiya’, bowed to him and thanked him for all the help given by him. Several JO MPs as well as government politicians witnessed the incident and expressed surprise over a member of the Rajapaksa family behaving in such a submissive manner, said an MP to us.

Now, the FCID investigations with regard to Yoshitha have been covered up. Accused under the money laundering act over his failure to prove with evidence as to how he had received money to invest in CSN, he has told the investigators that he had received the money from his grandmother, Daisy. Nothing has been made public about the investigation after a statement was obtained from her.

Food For Thought For Constitution Making

By Nagananda Kodituwakku –December 26, 2016

Nagananda Kodituwakku

On 07th July 2016, the Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe launched a calculated attack on the INDEPENDENCE OF THE JUDICIARY, in the Parliament, requesting the Speaker to overrule a judgment (Singarasa vs Attorney General – SC/SPL/LA/182/99) pronounced by the Supreme Court. Any right thinking person would perceive this action as an encroachment of people’s judicial power only vested in the judiciary. Referring to the Supreme Court and claiming supremacy over the judiciary Ranil Wickremesinghe said, “…the Court does not even have to exercise the judicial power of the people. The Parliament has it and the Court does it on its behalf…’

It is quite apparent that this utterly irresponsible statement has been made for a purpose; that is to keep the judiciary under the firm grip of utterly self-centred people holding office in the Executive and the legislature, who habitually violate inalienable sovereign rights of the people for their private benefit.

They have already achieved their desire by reserving right to appoint 7 MPs to the 10-member Constitutional Council, whilst appointing only three members with integrity and eminence to it, a process whereby the MPs retains the veto power over the judicial appointments, effectively denying the people of their right to an independent judiciary.

This appalling conduct of the so-called people’s representatives also violates the pledge they have made to the people at the adoption of the Constitution ‘to respect the immutable republican principles, which include the FREEDOM, JUSTICE and the INDEPENDENCE OF THE JUDICIARY’.

Therefore, people shall demand that the judicial power of the people shall only be exercised by the Judiciary with no strings attached (not through the parliament) and there shall be no place at all for any MP in the Constitutional Council, which shall only be consisted with people of eminence and integrity, without which people will have no hope from the judiciary to act fearlessly with no fear or favour in the face of blatant injustice.

How the democracy prevails in the mother of democracy

In the Great Britain, the epitome of democracy, the independence and the integrity of the judiciary are always respected. The Executive and Legislature do not attempt to undermine the authority and the independence of the judiciary.

The best example is the Brexit judgement pronounced by the High Court in November 2016, which ruled that the Executive has no authority to give notice of withdrawal from the EU, after people opted to be out from the EU.

Sri Lankan woman in the now sanctioned sari and a blouse with sleeves.

By P K Balachandran -26th December 2016

COLOMBO: Female staff of the Sri Lankan parliament are barred from entering the Public Officers’ Box if they are wearing a sleeveless blouse, according to a report in The Sunday Times of December 25.

“A trilingual notice freshly placed on the door to the Public Officer’s Box in Parliament stipulated the dress code for female public officers as being saree and a blouse with long-sleeves. And so, a number of female public officers who came to discharge their duties during the budget debate were barred from entering the Box and thus prevented from performing their official functions on the grounds that they were not properly dressed,” the paper said.

But this is not the first time that dress became an issue in the Sri Lankan parliament.

In 2009, a Tamil National Alliance MP from Batticaloa, Thangeswary Kathiraman, was asked to leave the House because she was in Shalwar-Kameez. She had broken a rule which said that female MPs must be in a sari. Thangeswary’s plea that she could not come in a sari because of a large surgical scar on her midriff was rejected.

(Traditional Sri Lankan woman in a sarong and sleeveless blouse)

Asked how the Muslim lady MP of the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP), A.R.Anjan Umma, was allowed to come in an Abaya and a Hijab it was said that prior permission had been obtained to enable Muslim MPs to come in their religiously prescribed dress.

Outside parliament too, some institutions have tried to impose a dress code on women. This year, St.Joseph’s College, a boys’ school in Colombo, had put up a board at the gate prescribing the acceptable dress for mothers who come to drop and pick up their children. Short skirts and revealing dresses, tights, jeans and sleeveless tops were banned on the grounds that boys would get distracted if they saw young mothers in revealing clothes. But hostile media coverage of the code resulted in the government’s barring schools from prescribing dresses for mothers and other visitors.

At the height of anti-Muslim feelings in 2014, the Bodu Bala Sena (BBS), an extremist Buddhist monks’ organization, carried out a campaign against the Abaya and Hijab, especially the Hijab which covers the entire face. Fully covered up people were seen as a “security threat”.

Since the BBS had the tacit support of the Mahinda Rajapaksa regime, the Muslim Council of Sri Lanka started a scheme to exchange back Abayas and Hijabs for colorful ones so that the full covered women did not appear to be threatening. The movement died out with the exist of the Rajapaksa regime in January 2015.

Buddhist monks tell Ranil not to remove shrines from North-East

Photograph: The Island

25 Dec 2016

Senior Buddhist monks met with Sri Lankan Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe on Saturday, to urge him not to remove Buddhist shrines from the Tamil North-East and ensure that Buddhism continues to receive the foremost place in the island’s constitution.

Mahanayake Theras of Malwatte and Asgiriya met with Mr Wickremesinghe in Kandy and complained that “archaeological sites” in the North-East “had been encroached upon by unscrupulous elements,” according to The Island.

The Mahanayake Thera of Malwatte went on to state that the chief monks reiterated “the need to retain the unitary status of the country in the new constitution” adding that “Buddhism should be given the foremost place and the government should fulfil the responsibility to foster Buddha Sasasana”.

See more from The Island here and ColomboPage here.

Related Articles:

Buddhist monks protest against changes to Sri Lankan constitution

Sri Lankan president discusses protecting ‘historical sites’ with BBS

Police and the RTI Act - EDITORIAL

2016-12-27

The Right to Information that has been much hyped by the leaders of the Yahapalanaya government in the recent past seems to be one of the main issues not or less understood by the same leaders and the officials under them. Some bigwigs arrogantly scorn at and ridicule the media men in public when the latter question them about important matters involving public interest. They justify the recent assault on a journalist by the Navy Commander citing ethical and legal grounds. Now the Inspector General of Police (IGP) Pujith Jayasundera has imposed some sort of ban on the private media.

The police had announced that the police news would not be sent daily to private media institutions through emails with effect from December 21. The Police Chief had also instructed his officers not to invite private media representatives to any function held at the Police Headquarters in the future. The decision has ludicrously taken after the uproar in the country that followed a telephone conversation between the IGP and a “sir” during a recent public meeting in Ratnapura. The conversation with visual was telecast on a private media channel raising many questions on government’s much hyped anti-corruption drive and the independence of the police.

To explain the Police Chief’s decision through an example involving the police themselves, it amounts to a gambler scolding a policeman for arresting him. In his opinion it was the media which caught him on camera answering a telephone call before a microphone in an apparently submissive tone that had faulted. It is unfortunate that he cannot realize that it was his action and not that of the media that created the controversy over the manner in which “good governance” is at work.

   Firstly, one should not answer telephone calls before a microphone as it might involve personal matters of the person at the other end or others and create ethical issues. Besides, it is an insult to the audience behind the microphone. Secondly, as an independent officer he should not have given assurances to anybody that somebody would be or would not be arrested. What media reported was just the fact that involved public interest.

   Besides, showing the true face of Yahapalanaya, the controversy is almost swept under the carpet now. The statements made by leaders that the matter would be investigated seem to have gone into thin air. It is the IGP who now seems to want to rejuvenate it by imposing a ban on private media, which is, in a way, good.
The Police Chief has no right to deprive the people of their right to information which is implemented by both the state as well as the private media. Even National Police Commission (NPC) Secretary Ariyadasa Cooray had told that police should provide news to private media institutions when the Right to Information (RTI) Act was in force.

The country must know whether the IGP’s decision to officially dissociate the private media has been sanctioned by the political leadership of the country. The leaders of the government including those who scorn at the media men in public must remember that they would not have come to power had there not been the private media during the last Presidential election. For instance, it must be remembered that it was the private media that exposed the attack on them by the provincial leaders of the last regime at the Mattala airport. It must also be remembered that the journalists covered that incident without permission as they did during the recent Hambantota Port strike. They wanted to bring in a Right to Information Act then keeping in mind especially the private media and not the state media or the general public, as they professed.

Now the pendulum seems to have turned. It is time for the UNP which was advocating media rights when it was in the Opposition to talk about media ethics and find fault with media and for the UPFA led by the leaders of the former regime who had hitherto been accused of suppression of media to be champions of media freedom. However, media would brave all the odds including bans so long as the masses are thirsty for information.

Ministry secretary-Salusala chairman in dispute over school uniform material

- Dec 26, 2016

Industries and commerce ministry secretary T.M.K.B. Tennakoon has informed the Treasury secretary by fax to remove Salusala chairman K.K. Chandrasiri over a dispute among tender owners with regard to the supply of school uniform material for difficult areas, reports say.

According to reports reaching us, following is what has happened:

Since people in difficult areas are unable to obtain school uniform material for their children through the voucher method, a decision was taken to provide them with the material through Salusala. But, the institution did not possess the financial capability to handle such a job, and the education ministry has instructed that the required clothing material be obtained through an Indian company named Vachesvi and issue same to the schoolchildren.

However, secretary Tennakoon had refused to implement that decision and instructed that the services of a local agent be obtained. Tennakoon himself has proposed the name of a person, one Sarath Pathirana, who runs a money lending business at Mirihana.

The Indian company and Sarath’s side entered into an agreement and supplied the clothing material to Salusala, which was entitled to a 3.5 per cent commission for distributing the same to schools in difficult areas. However, what Sarath had done was to issue the clothing material he had ordered, instead of the clothing material supplied by the Indian company. Clothing material worth Rs. 5.6 million had been issued.

Coming to know about this violation of the agreement, the Indian company informed education minister Akila Viraj Kariyawasam, who instructed Salusala to halt the deal. The institution followed the instruction, but Sarath’s side wanted the vouchers for the clothing material he had supplied if the deal was to be halted. The Salusala chairman has informed Sarath’s side that that could not be done as the deal has been halted on the education minister’s instructions.

Thereafter, Sarath’s side has informed secretary Tennakoon. His instruction to release the vouchers was rejected by the Salusala chairman.

According to reports reaching us, the Salusala chairman is an appointee of state minister Champika Premadasa, and the other side alleges he had halted the deal on the instructions of the education minister.

According to reports reaching us, both the Indian company and Sarath’s side had been chosen to supply the clothing material without following the tender procedures. The Salusala chairman declined to comment when contacted over the phone, while ministry secretary Tennakoon could not be reached.

-Sathhanda-

Is The Yahapālanaya Revolution Being Usurped?

By Shyamon Jayasinghe –December 25, 2016

Shyamon Jayasinghe

“That’s what happens in revolutions. Once the regime is toppled, they’re often usurped” – Waleed Aly

Prime Minister, Ranil Wickremesinghe, and his wife going before old Tirupathi alias Balaji in the Andhra Pradesh temple to beg for help comes as a fearful apprehension to me. I am baffled, as I look up to Ranil as someone who is on the right side of matters. Many view him as an informed, intelligent and rational person. The recollection that former President Mahinda Rajapaksa also made the trip to this part of La La Land about six months before he was deposed is frightening indeed.

Tiru didn’t help Mahinda despite the gold placed before the latter. Tiru cannot help Ranil either. Why? Because Tiru doesn’t exist other than in the clouded mythical world of primitive Indians. Australians will show the middle finger to Tiru when magical claims are being made on his behalf. Sri Lankan leaders must learn from Aussies that when it comes to a problem one must find solutions on one’s own. Why? didn’t Sakyamuni Buddha say the same thing? Be a lamp unto yourselves?

Outwardly, the incident is innocuous; inwardly it is suggestive of a deep political crisis within the fold of the Yahapalanaya government that can bring down the global confidence rates of the new regime.

The roots of the crisis in Sri Lanka go back to the very day of the great deposition of Mahinda Rajapaksa – the revolution of January 8th 2015. The party that led the electoral winning campaign, the Grand Old Party UNP, did not get a comfortable enough working majority. The UNP could have gathered a majority, but not enough to usher in the promised revolution that scheduled fundamental changes – the overthrow of the Executive Presidency and restoring Parliamentary supremacy, revamping the electoral system, setting up of Independence Commissions and the re-establishment of the rule of law that was dumped with impunity by the Mahinda Rajapaksa-led ruling elite. Bringing offenders of the Rajapaksa regime to book was the essential prelude to this promised revolution. The popular imagination of the majority in opposition to Mahinda Rajapaksa was overwhelmed by the anticipated drama of the prelude.

Two years have elapsed and the non-performance of that prelude act is sort of surreal. The cycle is all but familiar with alleged offenders (some of them) summoned to the FCID or Bribery Commission, arrested, remanded, bailed out and released. The charges are very serious ones including manipulation of public property and funds, syphoning them for private purposes, and bribery and brutal murder.

“Catch me, if you can,” the alleged offenders seem to say, “and you will never.”

People don’t look for excuses; their vision is short and they are suspicious of anything possible in the longterm given the public experience of politicians. They even fail to acknowledge much of the substantial work-in-progress and the obvious political freedom in the air. As far as most of the vociferous and articulate government backers are concerned, the game is over and the wickets are folding.

Even academics who are vociferous like Professor Sarath Wijesuriya, Gamini Viyangoda and some others seem to see only the lapses and the failings; rather than emboldening the government to go forward. Public scepticism is growing. The bulk of other academics are totally silent and one notices hardly any serious analysts looking at what’s happening. Sri Lanka has lost that tradition.

In the absence of intellectual discourse on the progress of the yahapalanaya government let me try my humble bit to fathom this all out.

I begin with a rhetorical question: “Can a government without a stable non-working majority enter the deeper end of the rest of the program of promised reform without exacting the cooperation of those in opposition?” The most fundamental step toward the revolution would be the setting up of a new constitution that alone can establish the new order by changing the fundamental rules of the game of governance. This would require a two-thirds majority in Parliament and, then, a referendum. I can see the Prime Minister, Ranil Wickremesinghe, working toward this position assiduously so much so that even an ‘Rajapaksa insider’ like Dilan Perera recently praised him for being a true statesman in handling the steering committee for constitutional change.

Arising out of the deficient Parliamentary strength of the active core in the government- the UNP, it seemed obvious that government had to rope in some MPs from the Mahinda Rajapaksa fold onto their side. Such a step also propped up President Maitripala Sirisena’s ambition to lead a revived new SLFP that would invest him with some legitimacy. On the other hand, this step became the first provocation for the critique of the yahapalanaya government. Many of these cross-overs had controversies behind them and had been known conners and strongmen for Mahinda Rajapakse, while some others were beneath public esteem for other reasons. Critics felt letdown. The ordinary rank-and file of yahapalana supporters didn’t see the reason behind the strategy. Nor could those in government possibly explain the circumstances before a public.

However, ‘bad means to a good end,’ worked here. Some important legislative measures were passed in Parliament with the help of added numbers of ‘yes men.’Furthermore, the so-called Joint Opposition were left with less numbers on the floor of Parliament to shout and engage in vocal exercises and possibly carry away the ‘senkole.’

The strategy also had a symbolical value in that it gave credence to the yahapalanaya promise of “Sammuthivaadi Aanduwa.” There are many in the audience that is the electorate who have felt that these party divisions are the bane of the country and that these blocs should ‘work together for the betterment of the country.’ Here it has come at last!

On the other hand, this added component of SLFPers have shown no enthusiasm for the revolution promised. Most of them focus more on the luxury car permits. Naturally, they would pressurise the government against pursing the legal process that is on against their former buddies of the Mahinda Rajapaksa regime. They would threaten; they would cajole. It is evident that Mahinda Rajapaksa is also using them as a kind of third column. This is apparent when one observes some of these SLFPers on and oft talking on behalf of the Rajapakses. The other day, Dilan Perera forecasted that at the next elections Chamal Rajapaksa will be PM!