Coconut oil 'as unhealthy as beef fat and butter'

Coconut oil is as unhealthy as beef dripping and butter, say US heart experts.

16 June 2017

It is packed with saturated fat which can raise "bad" cholesterol, says the American Heart Association in updated advice.

Coconut oil is commonly sold as a health food and some claim the fat in it may be better for us than other saturated fats.

The AHA, however, says there are no good studies to support this.

• The health benefits of coconut oil

Healthy myth?

The advice around which fats to eat can be very confusing.

Animal fats, such as lard, are generally seen as bad, while plant oils, such as olive and sunflower, are seen as healthier options.

That theory is based on how much of one particular type of fat - saturated fat or "sat fat" - these products contain.

Sat fat

Saturated fat is said to be bad for our health, although not everyone agrees.

Eating a diet high in saturated fat can raise the level of "bad" (LDL) cholesterol in the blood, which, in turn, may clog the arteries and increase the risk of heart disease and stroke.

According to the AHA, 82% of the fat in coconut oil is saturated. That's more than in butter (63%), beef fat (50%) and pork lard (39%). And, like other saturated fats, studies show it can increase "bad" cholesterol.

Some claim that the mixture of fats in coconut oil still make it a healthy option, but the AHA says there is no good-quality evidence for this.

It says people should limit how much saturated fat they eat, replacing some of it with unsaturated vegetable oils - olive oil and sunflower oil, and their spreads.

Healthy swaps

According to the AHA, studies show swaps such as this can lower cholesterol by the same magnitude as cholesterol-lowering drugs.

Dr Frank Sacks, lead author of the AHA advice, said: "We want to set the record straight on why well-conducted scientific research overwhelmingly supports limiting saturated fat in the diet to prevent diseases of the heart and blood vessels."

In the UK, Public Health England advises people to cut down on saturated fat:

• the average man should eat no more than 30g of saturated fat a day
• the average woman should eat no more than 20g of saturated fat a day

Nutritional labels on food display how much saturated fat is in products.

But experts stress that fat is still an essential part of a healthy, balanced diet. We shouldn't cut out too much. Fat is a source of essential fatty acids and helps the body absorb vitamins, such as A, D and E.

Victoria Taylor from the British Heart Foundation said: "To eat well for your heart health it is not just about reducing fat but reducing specific types of fat and taking care over what these are replaced with - unsaturated fats and wholegrains, rather than sugars and refined carbohydrates.

"Any change should be viewed in the context of a whole diet approach. The traditional Mediterranean diet has benefits for a range of risk factors for heart disease, not just cholesterol levels.

"We recommend replacing the saturated fats in the diet with unsaturated fats - using oils instead of butter and choosing foods like avocado, oily fish, nuts and seeds instead of foods high in saturated fats like cakes, biscuits, chocolate and fatty meat."

Low fat tips

• Grill, bake, poach or steam food rather than deep frying or roasting
• Trim visible fat and take skin off meat before cooking
• Spoon off fats and oils from roasts, casseroles, stews and curries
• When making sandwiches, try leaving out the butter or spread: you might not need it if you're using a moist filling

Good fat vs bad fat

• Cholesterol is a fatty substance that can be found in some foods
• Low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol is said to be 'bad' because it can be deposited in the walls of arteries and cause hard plaques to build up that can cause blockages, resulting in heart attacks and stroke
• High-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol is 'good' because it carries LDL cholesterol to your liver where it is disposed of. A high ratio of good to bad cholesterol is healthiest

Need for Interreligious Dialogue for Peace and Reconciliation

Interreligious dialogue at various levels of religious leaders, practitioners and followers, could bring communities together to iron out their misunderstandings, ill feelings or grievances, if the dialogues are conducted in a proper manner.

by Laksiri Fernando-Jun 16, 2017

( June 16, 2017, Sydney, Sri Lanka Guardian) The task for national reconciliation in Sri Lanka embodies not only building bridges between ethnic communities but also religions. Many interethnic issues overlap closely with interreligious differences, suspicions, misunderstandings and frictions. Therefore, I would propose that the Office for National Unity and Reconciliation (ONUR) and the Ministry of National Coexistence and Dialogue should undertake such activities to promote interreligious dialogue at various levels in order that religious amity, co-existence and peace prevail in the country.

I have not mentioned the Ministry of National Integration and Reconciliation separately, as I understand, ONRU is pivotal in that ministry. The other ministries that should come together for this purpose might be the ministries in charge of various religious affairs. These are scattered among different ministers/ministries. That also shows the gravity of the separation or distance between religions, and the need for interreligious dialogue. There are around twenty-five countries with ministries on religious affairs, but none with separate ministries for different religions. For example, in Indonesia there is one ministry but different directorates for different religions including for Buddhism.

The Need for Dialogue

The need for an interreligious dialogue in Sri Lanka is an urgent task given the recent attacks on several Muslim mosques and shops, and reported assaults on evangelical groups. Certain religious frictions also were reported because of arbitrary/forceful erection of Buddha statues in Hindu dominant localities in the north. Law enforcement undoubtedly is a requirement to curtail the spread of these activities, including bringing clear anti-hate speech and activity laws. Impartial law enforcement, on the other hand, requires education for police officers on interreligious matters and observing impartiality in respect of different religious groups. This could be part of interreligious dialogue, different religious leaders addressing the police officers jointly with other experts.

The need for interreligious dialogue is not only a national priority. It is an overall international task. Religious frictions, conflicts and violence have exacerbated around the world in recent past, primarily because of political reasons and power politics. Certain trends even have gone to the extent of terrorism. Many of the western cities are not safe today as a result. The conflicts are not only between different religions, but also between different sections within the same religion. Although this has been the case almost throughout history, the present stakes are more dramatic given the lethal weapons and methods that the adversaries use, and the vast populations that are affected by these conflicts. Therefore, a country like Sri Lanka, just coming out of a terrible conflict and a devastating war should be extremely careful.

Interreligious dialogue at various levels of religious leaders, practitioners and followers, could bring communities together to iron out their misunderstandings, ill feelings or grievances, if the dialogues are conducted in a proper manner. However, there shouldn’t be any illusion that the violent instigators also could be reformed through these dialogues. The instigators might use these forums to further their objectives and disrupt activities. Therefore, law enforcement is necessary before undertaking such dialogues.

Possible Purposes

The purposes of interreligious dialogues are visualized differently by different people under different circumstances. There are those who advocate interreligious dialogue for theological or simply said religious purposes. The long term and spiritual advantages of such efforts cannot be denied. ‘Interfaith’ dialogue is a more contemporary term for such efforts, for those who wish to learn from all religions or follow all of them. Raimon Panikkar (‘Interreligious Dialogue,’ 1999) came closer to this objective saying,

“In the present world context, one can hardly fail to discover positive and true values – even of the highest order – outside of one’s own tradition. Traditional religions have to face this challenge. ‘Splendid isolation’ is no longer possible.” (p. 6).

Even in a social sense, ‘splendid isolation’ is not an admirable situation. Organized religions and their priests/monks/imams do have social obligations. Those are mostly ethical and moral. This is another aspect of interreligious dialogue, mostly applicable to Sri Lanka or elsewhere under the present circumstances. That is why ‘interreligious dialogue’ should be a part of the ‘National Reconciliation Policy.’

There were such efforts in countries of former Yugoslavia and in the Balkans aftermath of several terrible ethno-religious conflicts. There are books written on these efforts. Those efforts, however, were after the event. Although Sri Lanka is in a post-conflict situation, the past conflict was not purely a religious one. The country therefore needs to be more proactive on the religious front, before unnecessary situations flare up. Interreligious dialogues are generally necessary in multi-religious and plural societies.

UNESCO and even the UN have been promoting interreligious dialogues at one time, particularly after the 9/11 events. However, there are no much activities today at a juncture where these are most necessary and important in the Middle East, North Africa, even in the West and elsewhere. However, Sri Lanka might be able to get some inspirations from some of these UN and particularly UNESCO work.

The UN Resolution

The UN General Assembly adopted a resolution 60/10 in 2005 unanimously and its title is most appropriate for Sri Lanka: “Promotion of Interreligious Dialogue and Cooperation for Peace.” This is exactly what is required in Sri Lanka and ‘National Reconciliation’ could be easily added after ‘Peace.’ The resolution notes around a half a dozen of summits/dialogues carried around the world during 2004-2005 period. It is true that the situation in Sri Lanka was not conducive for such a summit or dialogue at that time. Although there was truce (CFA), it was terribly fragile. The issues were different. However now, the situation is different. Therefore, taking these examples, Sri Lanka might be able to go for one, now in an effective way. This is a suggestion.

More importantly, the resolution highlights the importance of interreligious dialogue in four operational paragraphs and 1 and 3 can be quoted below.

“Recognizing the commitment of all religions to peace,
1. Affirms that mutual understanding and interreligious dialogue constitute important dimensions of the dialogue among civilizations and of the culture of peace;

3. Invites the Secretary-General to continue to bring the promotion of interreligious dialogue to the attention of all Governments, regional organizations and relevant international organizations, including ways to strengthen the linkages and focus more on practical actions in the implementation of the initiatives on interreligious dialogue and cooperation for peace;” (See UN Resolution for 2005).

The above reinforces what I have suggested. (1) As interreligious dialogue is necessary for ‘culture of peace,’ it should take priority in the National Reconciliation Policy. (2) As the UN and UNESCO are committed to this endeavour, Sri Lanka should take the opportunity to seek their assistance. (3) As a member of the UN, Sri Lanka is also duty bound by this resolution as the paragraph 3 indicates.

A Lacuna in the National Policy

It is in the above context, that a lacuna in the now publicized ‘National Policy on Reconciliation and Coexistence’ could be highlighted (See ONRU website). In that document, there is a good understanding on some of the intractable problems, but there are several areas lacking both in diagnosis and in programmatic action. Lack of a strategy for interreligious dialogue is one. In the whole document of 13 pages (in English), there are only five places where religion is even mentioned. Only substantive reference is in the section on ‘National Coexistence and Diversity’ where it says, “…thereby recognizing the existence of more than one religion…” That is all.

Whether we like it or not, according to the Gallop Poll 2008, Sri Lanka is the third most religious country in the world. Therefore, religious animosities to the extent that they exist, are unhealthy for peace and national reconciliation. The four main world religions, Christianity (31.5 percent), Islam (23.2 percent), Hinduism (15.0 percent) and Buddhism (7.1 percent) are in this county, but in the opposite order. According to the 2011 census, 70.19 percent of Sri Lankans are Buddhists, 12.6 percent Hindus, 9.7 percent Muslims and 7.4 percent Christians. This opposite order could be one reason for the perceived antipathy. No one can be hundred percent sure.

The National Policy on Reconciliation and Coexistence was approved by the Cabinet on 2 May, last month. This is exactly the period where apparent religious tensions surfaced, of course instigated by some political activists in the name of Buddhism. However, if there were proper understanding and cooperation between the true leaders of these religions, most of these attacks could have been nipped in the bud. At least the law enforcement agencies could have acted more effectively.

The National Policy document is more on general principles, and action in the political sphere, but not so much on social action. It is weak in the ‘Implementation Strategy’ and in that section, only five policy areas are mentioned also in general terms. It is highly state/government centred. It is in this section, however, that action for Interreligious Dialogue should have come in, of course highlighting the need for religious amity and peace as a requirement in national unity, peace and reconciliation in other sections.

Summary and Possibilities

Dialogue is an accepted methodology in knowledge building and understanding each other. This is something we use day to day in a rudimentary form. Most of the Buddha’s teachings, in my understanding, were in a dialogical method. When Rhys Davids translated many of the Pali canon, he called them ‘Dialogues of the Buddha.’ Secular tradition of the method goes back to Socrates and Plato. This is an accepted methodology in all religions. What is important is not monologue but dialogue in trying conditions such as Sri Lanka today.

Interreligious dialogue is not about religious leaders amicably participating at state functions such as Independence Day or Republican Day. It is also not about an enactment of another ‘Panadura Vadaya’ (Panadura Debates. The purpose should be to come together, respecting the differences between each other, and advising the followers to adhere to ‘peace and non-violence’ that are fundamentals of all religions. The task is moral and ethical, and not definitely political. In addition, the religious leaders can advise the adherents to follow the ‘rule of law’ of the country, because under modern circumstances, we all are in organized societies where there is a state and even an elected government in charge. The freedom of expression and other rights should prevail, but the miscreants should not be allowed to create violence or chaos.

Interreligious dialogue is not unknown to Sri Lanka. Even at present, there is an Inter Religious Council. This could be the potential. But it can go beyond that limited participation and agendas. In late 1990s and early 2000s, during President Kurmaratunga’s time, I myself participated at many of the discussions at various levels attended by different ranking religious dignitaries of all religions. I have seen them interacting most amicably, promoting peace and harmony.

It is possible that what President Maithripala Sirisena said, meeting with the Inter Religious Council, on the 31st May was misunderstood or misinterpreted. What he said was, as clearly reported in his website, “All religious leaders should come to a single stage to solve religious conflicts.” This is about interreligious dialogue. This is not instead of enforcing law and order when violence is perpetrated by activists, but in addition, for long term peace and harmony in the country. There can be various ways of implementing interreligious dialogue for peace, harmony and reconciliation. There can be a centre to promote the dialogue at various levels. Religious scholars also should take part. There can be a website. There can be meetings and statements and even publications. These are preliminary ideas.

Commemorating the anti-Muslim violence of June 2014: An urgent call for accountability and reconciliation

Photo by Thyagi Ruwanpathirana

FARZANA HANIFFA on 06/16/2017

The 15th of June 2017 marks the 3rd anniversary of the orchestrated anti-Muslim violence in Dharga Town, Aluthgama and several other areas in the south. After a steady buildup of hate sentiment in the public domain over several months in both 2013 and 2014, an inflammatory meeting chaired by the Venerable Galabodathe Gnanasara, Aluthgama descended into violence on June 15th.  The events resulted in three deaths and the widespread and selective destruction of Muslim property. Hundreds of persons including children were traumatized, Muslim businesses were destroyed, Muslim and Sinhala families lost their livelihoods, and relations among neighbors were severely strained.

While the military was mobilized to rebuild the damaged and destroyed homes as a result of Civil Society lobbying, no proper investigation into the event or the murders has been conducted to date and no perpetrators have been prosecuted..  Activist lawyers working on the cases are alleging that the Police are deliberately delaying taking the cases forward.

The incitement of ethnic tensions for political gain is an age-old and time-tested mechanism in Sri Lankan politics that contributed towards three decades of war. The “riot” was part of the repertoire of methods used in such politics. Today it seems as if some sections of our political elite are resorting once again to the same strategy—this time with the Muslims as the chosen target. Aluthgama, while a huge shock to the affected community, seemed an inevitability to many when taking Sri Lanka’s long history of “riots” into account. Conflagrations accompanied political hard times throughout our independent history. Gal Oya 1958, Puttalam 1976, Countrywide 1977, Galle 1982, Countrywide July 1983, Eastern Province 1985, Mawanella 2001, and Aluthgama 2014 are just some pivotal moments of political difficulty where “riots” came in to play. Today, Muslims are forced once again to live in fear of another such conflagration.

January 2015 saw the electoral defeat of Mahinda Rajapaksa whose regime fostered anti-minority sentiment and fear mongering in the country.  The Sirisena-Wickremasinghe Yahapalanaya Government promised much in its early days. While the public impetus for reform was mostly against the rampant corruption and excesses of the Rajapaksa regime, the wave of goodwill in the wake of the election suggested the possibility of better ethnic relations as well. Reconciliation and even accountability was on the agenda at the time. For most Muslims it felt like the time of hate mongering monks was past. Sri Lanka seemed to be on a new path and poised to move away from the legacy of politics that mobilized destructive ethnic animosities. (It is worth noting, however, that the violence against Evangelical Christians continued throughout the glory days of Yahapalanaya as  well. )

Features of the Yahapalanaya promise included the rhetoric of inclusivity from the leadership, setting up of the many ministries and mechanisms dealing with unity, coexistence and reconciliation and the Government’s commitment to an accountability process mediated by the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC).

The reemergence of organized and well funded anti Muslim sentiment with acts of arson against Muslim businesses reported almost everyday remains the greatest indication of the disintegration of this promise. The many delays by the Police to arrest and prosecute those responsible for both the incitement and the acts of arson speak volumes about the state of law and order in the country.

The rhetoric of inclusivity and all citizens’ common humanity that we saw in the early days of the regime is no longer heard as loudly from most politicians. The recognition that we needed to recoup and move forward from a time of war where ethnic animosity was the norm, no longer resonates from public platforms. Our leaders are not articulating the crying need of the hour- that we must come together as a country that recognizes the humanity of all its peoples. Those in charge of law and order are dragging their feet and political manipulation of anti minority sentiment is being permitted to flourish.

The government today looks and acts as if in disarray on a variety of fronts. And the lack of direction, commitment and firm leadership that characterizes most government actions is evident in its dealings with this anti Muslim problem as well. For several weeks there were no strong statements against the acts from either the Prime Minister or the President, no clear action against either the crimes committed against Muslim property or the monk spewing hate rhetoric.  Closed-door meetings with Muslim community representatives and promises to do something ultimately went nowhere. The 13th June statement by the cabinet of ministers and the 14th June statement by the Prime minister, however are on-point in reaffirming the government’s recognition of the horrors of war and its refusal of a politics of ethno religious incitement. It is imperative that the statements are followed up with the necessary actions.

The roots of the anti Muslim issue and the politicization of ethnic animosity run deep and without decisive action by the regime at this point in time we are going to have to live with the reality of politicized anti-minority hate for the foreseeable future.  The spreading of hate sentiment and rhetoric was done with such masterful skill and planning by the BBS under the Rajapaksa regime that the groundwork was laid for its easy mobilization. And that is what we are seeing today. The regime, while arguably committed to a politics that rejects ethno-religious incitement seemed initially at a loss as to what to do with it when it emerged.  The phenomenon remains a test for the government and its future might arguably be decided on how it handles things now.

There is a strong link between what is happening to Muslims and the moribund reconciliation and accountability process in the country. While there seems to be some work carried out by the many government institutions tasked with reconciliation, the UNHRC process that the Government committed to, is at a standstill. We see no progress in relation to the four mechanisms that the government committed to establish. Sri Lanka is in the unenviable position of being the country with the 2nd largest number of disappearances as recorded by United Nations Working Group on Enforced and Involuntary Disappearances. The ICRC has a record of 16075 missing persons. The Paranagama Commission recorded 23,000 cases. In August 2016 the Government passed legislation to establish an Office of Missing Persons. The office however, is still to be set up; and we see no progress at all in relation to the Accountability Mechanism.

The above processes are necessary in order that the rule of law is established once again in the country and the equal access to justice for all of the country’s citizens is assured and we finally come to terms with the brutal legacy of the war.  In addition, the Government must take the responsibility of informing and guiding the citizenry towards recognizing the need for such mechanisms.  And most importantly, the manipulation of ethnic sentiment for short-term political gain must be condemned and those engaging in such politics immediately dealt with to the fullest extent of the law. If not we will be compelled to repeat the mistakes of the past.

Today, we are urgently in need of forward thinking and visionary leadership in a difficult global and local context. National political leaders must recognize urgency of this challenge and take decisive action for the sake of all our futures.

Enhancing Employability Of Our Graduates

By R.P. Gunawardane –JUNE 16, 2017

Prof R.P. Gunawardane

Since a large number of students are graduating every year from our 15 state universities and from many other degree awarding institutes operating in Sri Lanka, employability of graduates has become a critical issue. In the year 2015 alone the state university system produced nearly 35,000 graduates (internal degrees-17,000, external degrees-13,000 and Open University degrees-5000 approximately), a large majority of them (67%) are females. During the same year universities granted 7500 postgraduate degrees. Added to this, a fair number of graduates are returning every year to this country after obtaining foreign degrees. Thus, all these graduates are facing a fierce competition to find a suitable employment in a stagnant economy with limited employment opportunities in the state as well as in the private sector. Because of this situation many graduates tend to accept part-time insecure jobs or jobs for which they are over qualified, if they are fortunate enough to find one. In this situation, sound employability skills coupled with experience and exposure to working environments will play a prominent role in finding a suitable employment.

In addition to addressing this issue, it is also vital that the unemployment currently prevailing among our graduates should be given a serious attention and appropriate remedial measures implemented as an urgent priority without allowing the conditions to deteriorate any further. It is necessary that short-term and long-term measures should be taken to tackle both these issues which are interconnected.

Employability of Graduates

Employability in the broadest sense covers the preparation of a person to apply for a suitable position, facing a successful interview and remain in the job with emphasis on professional advancement. Basically, he or she will be empowered with confidence to become a successful person as a life-long learner and a great achiever. He should be able to apply his knowledge, skills and competencies acquired during his training to the relevant employment situation. While in employment they should have willingness to change occupations to follow trends within professions. In general, most employers look for flexible staff who will be able to adapt to dynamic market conditions.

Most local graduates assume that it is the duty of the government to provide employment to graduates, after receiving free education from primary up to university education. This is not the reality, and it does not happen anywhere in the world. However, it is the function of state to facilitate creation of more employment opportunities in the non-state sector, industries and other institutions rather than overstaffing already inefficient and unproductive state institutions.

Undoubtedly, the mismatch between undergraduate training and employment opportunities is widely considered as the prime reason for unemployment among graduates. Traditionally, the universities have been training graduates mainly for public sector employment. This situation has changed over the years with the economic liberalization, rapid expansion of the private sector in almost all the fields including health and education and with increasing effects of globalization. This has resulted in the shrinkage of state-sector employment and increase in employment opportunities in the non-state sector. Thus, there is a great need to re-structure and re-orient our tertiary education system to be consistent with the market driven economy.

Most of our graduates have a sound knowledge of their academic disciplines. Yet, they mostly lack general knowledge, computer literacy, communication and management skills and team work experience etc. required of an ideal university graduate. These skills and experience are required for them to fit into relevant employment situations.

With so many graduates available in the labour market, most employers complain that they have difficulties in finding candidates with the required knowledge, skills and attitudes. It has been reported that most employers prefer foreign graduates over graduates from local universities except in professional disciplines. Foreign graduates have an advantage over local graduates in employment mainly because most of the foreign graduates have acquired the desirable employment skills in their core curriculum and in their extracurricular activities. It is therefore essential that our local graduates also should acquire these skills to be competitive in the current labour market. Graduates in specialized scientific disciplines and in professional fields such as medicine, dentistry, veterinary science, engineering, architecture etc. also need these skills because they are required in the professional dealings with the public whether in government service or self-employment. In addition, these skills will be extremely useful when they seek foreign employment.

Read More

Sumanthiran explains ‘no confidence’ against Wigneswaran

 

June 16, 2017

The Illankai Tamil Arasu Kachchi (ITAK) claims that Chief Minister of the Northern Province C.V. Wigneswaran had attempted to ‘dilute’ the findings of guilt against a provincial minister who was his close confidant, by sacking all four ministers of the provincial council. 

ITAK Assistant General Secretary M.A. Sumanthiran, in an exclusive interview with Ada Derana, today revealed the actual reason behind ITAK members of the Northern Provincial Council presenting a no-confidence motion against the Chief Minister to the Governor of the Northern Province. 

The background to this is that there were serious allegations of fraud and corruption against one particular minister and it is the ITAK members who asked the Chief Minister to inquire into that, he said. 

“They even passed a resolution in the Northern Provincial Council requesting the Chief Minister to do this,” Sumanthiran said. 

However, he charged, without doing that the Chief Minister constituted an inquiry panel of his own and asked all four ministers to face inquiries, which they did. 

But at the end of the day, the minister with allegations against him was found guilty of fraud and corruption while one other minister was found guilty of administrative irregularities, the TNA MP said. 

“Our position was both those ministers should have been removed and we asked the Chief Minister to take immediate action against them.” 

“After delaying this for a long time, the Chief Minister tried to remove all four by which he tried to minimize or dilute the findings of guilt against that one minister who was his close confidant,” he said. 

It is against that act that the members of the ITAK have acted and given a motion of no-confidence, Sumanthiran said. 

“If the Chief Minister will change his ways and act only against those found guilty, then ITAK members will reconsider their position. If not the Chief Minister will be removed from his office.” 

Political crisis in Northern Province will lead to realignment of Tamil parties 

Saturday, 17 June 2017

The ongoing political crisis in Sri Lanka’s Tamil-majority Northern Province will lead to a realignment of Tamil political parties. Among other things, the present crisis shows that the existing political alignments are extremely weak and shaky and are as good as broken.

Looking at the current trend, it is likely that the ruling Tamil National Alliance (TNA) will break into two groups by the time the next Northern Provincial Council (NPC) elections are held 15 months from now.

The Ilankai Tamil Arasu Katchi (ITAK) led by veteran R. Sampanthan, the largest of the parties in the TNA, will go it alone, and is, in fact, determined to do so. The others in the TNA – such as the Eelam People’s Revolutionary Liberation Front (EPRLF) led by Suresh Premachandran, the People’s Liberation Organization of Tamil Eelam (PLOTE) led by D. Siddharthan, and the Tamil Eelam Liberation Organization (TELO) led by Selvam Adaikalanathan – may form an alliance. Fringe parties like the Tamil National People’s Front (TNPF) led by Gajendrakumar Ponnambalam are likely to join the anti-ITAK front.

The leader or mascot of the anti-ITAK forces will be the Northern Province Chief Minister C.V. Wigneswaran. This is because Wigneswaran has been having a longstanding feud with the troika ruling the ITAK and the TNA, namely, R. Sampanthan, Mavai Senathirajah and M.A. Sumanthiran. In the feud, Wigneswaran has been having the support of all non-ITAK parties.

In the NPC, the TNA is split in the middle, with 15 or 16 of the 30 TNA members supporting the ITAK’s No-Confidence Motion against the Chief Minister, and the rest opposing it.

The NPC was elected (for the first time in history) in September 2013. The TNA swept the polls winning 30 of the 38 seats and the non-political retired Supreme Court Judge, C.V. Wigneswaran, was made Chief Minister in view of his social stature and legal eminence.


Differences

Initially, a common opposition to the then President Mahinda Rajapaksa, seen as a warmonger by the Tamils, ensured unity within the TNA. But once the common enemy was vanquished by Maithripala Sirisena in the January 2015 presidential election; differences arose within the TNA, especially between Chief Minister Wigneswaran and the TNA and ITAK stalwart Sampanthan.

While Sampanthan and the rest of the ITAK/TNA top brass wanted to cooperate with the more liberal Sirisena-Ranil Wickremesinghe regime, Wigneswaran wanted to continue with the politics of confrontation. He exploited the lack of progress in constitutional reforms and new Government’s backtracking from other promises, to press for a hard line.

When he was unable to get the TNA leaders to adopt the hard line, Wigneswaran became even more radical and confrontationist to the great embarrassment of the TNA’s leadership. In December 2015, he floated the Tamil People’s Council (TPC) as an alternative to the ITAK/TNA. The TPC attracted radical Tamil groups, university students and teachers, besides the media.

Meanwhile, the non-ITAK parties in the TNA accused the ITAK of monopolising decision making. The ITAK argued that it has to have primacy because it is the single largest party, the oldest party and the only consistently democratic and non-militant outfit in the TNA. All the other parties have had a history of participating in the armed struggle for a separate Tamil Eelam. While, the other TNA constituents wanted the TNA to be registered as a political party, the ITAK rejected the demand saying that it would prefer to keep its distinct identity as it is its separate identity as “ITAK” which is fetching it votes.


Radicalisation

The radicalisation of the Chief Minister and the groups around him was helped by the manifest lack of progress in drafting a new constitution; in rendering justice to the victims of war; in the matter of returning lands seized by the military during the war; and in tracing disappeared persons. With the international community and the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) becoming soft on Colombo after the latter shed its hostility towards them post-Rajapaksa, Colombo became even tardier in fulfilling its promises to the Tamils made in the run up to the January 2015 Presidential election.

To the disappointment of radical Tamils, the UNHRC recently gave Colombo two years to implement its pledges given in September 2015. There is also no sign that the UNHRC will press for the establishment of a Judicial Mechanism with international judges to go into allegations of war crimes against the Sri Lankan armed forces.

Meanwhile, in 2016, a new issue arose, which helped the TNA to take on Wigneswaran. The issue was corruption and maladministration in the Northern Province under his charge. Sixteen NPC members petitioned the Chief Minister for action against all the four members of his Board of Ministers.

Wigneswaran promptly appointed a three man commission of distinguished retired persons to investigate the charges. The commission found two of the Ministers, P. Ayngaranesan (Agriculture), and T. Kurukularaja (Education), guilty, and two others, P. Sathiyalingam (Health), and B. Deniswaran (Fisheries), not guilty.

But this Wednesday, Wigneswaran announced that he is asking the two indicted ministers to resign and the other two to “take leave” as the inquiry against them is not complete. In his statement, Wigneswaran also clearly indicated that the whole issue of corruption and maladministration was raised to tarnish the image of his government and charged that it was a move of some person to oust him from the Chief Minister’s post.

This insinuation and his ruling on the discharged ministers infuriated the ITAK which promptly went to Governor Reginald Cooray with a petition to move a No Trust vote against the Chief Minister. The ITAK claims the support of 21 of the 38 NPC members. And the non-ITAK parties are claiming the support of 15. The latter have also resolved to take the fight to the streets. Governor Cooray has asked the Chief Minister to prove his majority in the NPC within seven days.


No compromise

Meanwhile, some neutral parties led by PLOTE leader Siddharthan wanted to defuse the crisis through a compromise formula. TNA leader Sampanthan agreed to the formula, according to which the Chief Minister will not ask the two discharged ministers to go on leave pending a fresh inquiry, and in return, the ITAK will withdraw the No Trust motion.

But the Chief Minister, buoyed by expressions of support from Tamil civil society and university students, rejected the compromise proposal and dared the ITAK to go ahead with its No Trust motion. Wigneswaran feels that if he is thrown out, he will emerge as “the” leader of the Tamils and a doughty fighter against corruption, and sweep the next provincial elections.

Jaffna in turmoil

Jaffna Bus Stand: 10 AM, 16 June, 2017

TMP Protesting front of Nallur Temple

By S. Ratnajeevan H. Hoole-June 16, 2017, 9:49 pm

Last night (June 15th) as I went to Jaffna Town to pick up some dinner at the Indian shop Amul, the shopkeeper was concerned whether they should open today in response to the Tamil Makkal Peravai (TMP, Tamil People’s Great Front) call for the closure of all shops in support of the embattled Chief Minister C.V. Wigneswaran (CVW)s.

Daily wage earners were in silent meditation about survival if everything was closed. My baker wondered if his loaves would have buyers today. Valampuri, had already announced in a special Rs. 10 bulletin that shops would close today.

This morning I had to go to the hospital. Many shops, but far fewer than in usual boycotts, had closed. Patients, after years under the LTTE were quiet about their real feelings but their resentment came through as they grumbled about having to use trishaws. A lady who had waited long for her Echo Cardiograph could not miss that because of the trishaw charge.

Jeyasekaram, Chairman Jaffna Chamber of Commerce, commented that normally shopkeepers asked them if they should comply with a boycott request but this time they had not been consulted. The Jaffna bus stand had only one bus. Many shops were doing business as usual with one door open. Said a shopkeeper, "When the TMP usually has a sexual predator from the university who has been detained by the police as their chief speaker, we do not support them but shut our doors in an abundance of caution."

Said an Accountant who heads his firm’s branch in Jaffna, Chief Minister C.V. Wigneswaran was trying to project himself as Prabhakaran’s successor to take over the TNA after R. Sampanthan." He added that there had been corruption of various sorts. Accusations were orchestrated by Ananthi (wife of disappeared LTTE-erElilan). Many of her accusations were meaningless like lack of efficiency but there were some real charges.

CVW said a TNA stalwart was targeting Sampanthan’s loyalist ministers Deneeswaran (nephew of TELO’s Adaikalanathan), Dr. Sathialingam (who has moderated his position from that of his father as the patron of the Vavuniya Yal Ahatru Changam (Be Rid of Jaffna Society) and T. Gurukularajah, who is absolutely a fan of Sampanathan’s. Thrown into the bag was Minister Aingaranesam, who has serious charges against him about being bought by the Chunnakam Power Plant and its dumping oil into the ground water.

CVW then appointed a respectable committee of three, including two retired judges and a retired SLAS officer to look into the charges. In the meantime, CVW’s Minister Ainkaranesan had hired Tamil men who are experts in their own fields but had no expertise in water testing. The team white-washed Aingaranesam. But, once the inquiry committee finally came out with its report all that white-washing was exposed. It found Aingaranesam guilty of corruption, and the Tamil experts who had white-washed him were seen to be without clothes.

Unexpectedly, Gurukularajah was seriously faulted for not heeding accusations against a teacher who had abused his female student. Sathialingman and Deneeswaran were exonerated. CVW now wavered. He sat on the report and wanted time for appeals. Then he declared that all four Ministers had to resign or go on compulsory leave. That is when things exploded.

The TNA now took the position that once an inquiry committee is appointed there was no choice but to follow through on the report. When CVW balked, 15 members of the NPC filed a motion of no confidence against him. The TMP saw its chance and called for the boycott in support of CVW.

As I drove back from hospital along Temple Road, I saw a crowd of 50 or so waiting in front of SLFP MP Angajan Ramanathan’s home for jobs. As I apassed and came to the temple there was a similarly-sized crowd (but smaller if the reporters are discounted) waiting in support of CVW. It was a motley group including Prof. Sittrampalam (Vice President of the FP), Suresh Premachandran (EPRLF) and Gajendrakumar Ponnambalam (Tamil Congress). Typically of that crowd, their slogans were more against Sumanthiran than about the corruption noted a friend in that crowd. That friend said that they said of Sumanthiran that he had been brought up in Colombo counting how many Sri Lankan wickets fell at a cricket match but never trained to count the number of Tamils killed in the war. To me it showed the real target was Sampanthan. Premachandran had his own agenda, said a TNA official, about using CVW to bring his brother Sarveswaran as Minister if Aikaranesan went; recalling that when Ainkaranesan of the EPRLF was appointed as minister instead of Sarveswaran, Premachandran ousted Aikaranesan from the EPRLF.

Said a high Federal Party administrator, the crisis was of Chief Minister C.V. Wigneswaran’s own making. He said that CVW had been negotiating with the allies of the FP in the TNA on defusing the crisis without speaking to Mavai Senathirajah of the FP and when queried why by Sampanthan, responded that he did not have Senathirajah’s telephone number. The official rhetorically asked me, "What do you say about this Chief Minister?"

Apparently, the crisis has been defused with Sampanthan saying that the Inquiry Report has to be implemented – Gurukularajah and Ainkaranesan will resign but Deneeswran and Dr. Sathialingam will stay since they have been cleared. This official said that seemed to be the agreement but CVW did not openly say yes.

We need to wait. While sensible men like Sampanthan are around, the government must settle all outstanding issues with Tamils. Once he goes, there may be only extremists to hold talks with.a

SL’s Bulti Babas alias morons cashing in on rudderless SL ! Chairman chased out from Ports given double promotion !

(Lanka-e-News - 16.June.2017, 10.15PM)  Uneducated corrupt moron Dhammika Ranatunge who was chased out from the Ports authority as unfit has been appointed as the chairman of the Petroleum Corporation as well as  its subsidiaries.

It is well to recall Ajuna Ranatunge  was dismissed from the post of minister of Ports  following the cabinet reshuffle solely because of outrageous nepotism - appointing  his crooked kith and kin to various key positions including his notorious brother Dhammika Ranatunge as the chairman of Ports Authority , and thereby   paving the way for  monumental corruption in the Ports. 

This has now  come now to surface ,  when the corruption running into over a billion rupees  involving the Ranatunge brothers came to light following the new minister of Ports ,its chairman  and new administration   assuming duties, which necessitated them to halt that corrupt transaction forthwith . Incidentally , Dr. Parakrama Dissanayake appointed as the new chairman of Ports by the new minister Mahinda Samarasinghe is an expert who has specialized knowledge in relation to the subject he is handling .

Arjuna Ranatunge  who was thrown out from Ports , in a most rudely shocking move has appointed again infamous Dhammika Ranatunge his most corrupt moronic  brother who has  not even passed GCE  O/ L exam as the new chairman of the Petroleum Corporation , the country’s  economic nucleus of which , Arjuna is the new minister. This has been done as though to deliberately spread the corruption virus to the new ministry too  by  Arjuna. 

When making appointments to the high rungs of important Institutions of the country , those have to be approved by the parliamentary select committee concerning such appointments , and the appointment is  finally made  by the president. 

Even when Dhammika was holding the post of chairman , Ports Authority , a number of petitions  were received by this   Select committee against him (Lanka  e news in fact have published them) pointing out he is unsuitable to hold that post . Yet no decision on that was announced  against Ranatunges , until they were chased out from the Ports ministry recently.

Now, corrupt crook Dhammika  who was proved  unfit  for the post of chairman, Ports Authority has been appointed as chairman of not only Petroleum Corporation but also its subsidiaries. Mind you , that is with the approval of no less a parson than the president.

Previously , a separate chairman was appointed to the subsidiaries of the Petroleum Corporation , namely Ceylon  Petroleum storage terminals(CPSTL) , Ceypetco Aviation , and  Ceypetco Agrichemicals . Now notorious Dhammika has been appointed as chairman for all these as well as  the  Petroleum Corporation. Therefore , it is a crucial question why did the president dismiss Arjuna at all from the former ministry of Ports ?  What is the difference that exists between the appointment  of uneducated infamous Dhammika Ranatunge as chairman, Petroleum ,  and the appointment of uneducated brother of Shiranthi as chairman , Sri Lanka Air by then ex president Mahinda Rajapakse  who was thrown out lock , stock and barrel by the masses for committing  the same  outrageous blunders and ruthless crimes ? 

It is significant to note the Select committee was appointed supposedly with parliamentary powers with the aim and objective  to avert the hitherto controversial appointment of  political henchmen  and stooges. 

 That  committee comprises  the speaker as its chairman by virtue of his official parliamentary post ,  MP’s John Amaratunge, Nimal Siripala De Silva ,  Sarath Amunugama,Rauff Hakeem , Lakshman Kiriella , Wijedasa Rajapakse, Mano Ganeshan , Eran Wickremeratne , Dinesh Gunawardena, Vijitha Herath, Bimal Ratnayake , Mavai Senadhiraja ,Dharmalingam Sidharthan and Sumenthiran as its members. 

Sadly if the good governance government is to go on  functioning  in this manner , a select committee to make  top rung appointments is of no use and serves no purpose. It is  better therefore if it is dismantled . Otherwise the 6.2 million people who voted the government  into power (because they cannot be dismantled) should take off their clothes before the president . 

---------------------------
by     (2017-06-16 16:52:49)