Yes or no to Paris Accord; let us reassess climate change

By K.C. Somaratna-Friday, 23 June 2017

Introduction

I attended an international conference titled ‘Climate Change: Facing the challenge beyond COP 21’ in Colombo in February 2017. The conference attracted climate scientists from many countries and the keynote speech titled ‘Carbon Cycle Feedback: A primary source of uncertainty in the 21st Century’ was made by Prof. A.S. Denning, Monfort Professor, Department of Atmospheric Science, Colorado State University, the US.

Yes or no to Paris Accord let us reassess climate change.docx by Thavam Ratna on Scribd

12 Healthy Foods That Help You Burn Fat

Several natural foods and beverages have been shown to increase metabolism and promote fat loss.

Photo Credit: notsuperstar/Shutterstock

By Franziska Spritzler / Authority Nutrition-June 23, 2017

Boosting your metabolic rate can help you lose body fat.

However, most “fat-burning” supplements on the market are either unsafe, ineffective or both.
Fortunately, several natural foods and beverages have been shown to increase your metabolism [3] and promote fat loss.

12 Healthy Foods That Help You Burn Fat.docx by Thavam Ratna on Scribd

Prophecies of Bandaranaike

 2017-06-24

• Sinhalese did not object to making Ceylon a Federal State as propounded by Bandaranaike but Tamils without exception opposed Federalism and supported a Unitary State
• Bandaranaike declared that ‘the majority of us feel that in view of the local conditions, particularly racial differences, the most satisfactory method to minimise and gradually remove such differences was a Federal System of Government. 
• Bandaranaike said that in a Federal Government, each unit had complete power over itself yet they could stand united and had one or two assemblies to discuss matters affecting the whole country. 
• Bandaranaike...in 1925 and formed a political party, named the Progressive National Party and advocated a Federal State in preference to a Unitary One. 

S.W.R.D Bandaranaike as Prime Minister enacted the Sinhala Only Policy and declared in Parliament “We will finally emerge stronger, more mindful and truly progressive people than we have been hitherto”.

However, the Sinhala Only policy failed to unite the people but it had brought disunity, discord and pushed the Pearl of Asia into deep mire, drenched with thunderstorms and spread a flood of blood, throughout the country.

Bandaranaike the most constructive politician.

Though Bandaranaike allowed the country by his Sinhala Only Policy to soak in blood, he was the most constructive politician Sri Lanka has ever produced. During the period of the State Council, he attempted to legislate many progressive and constructive Bills. One of them was the Regional Councils Bill. That Bill was modified to give the Northern and Eastern Provinces Regional Councils.
Thus, the Bandaranaike-Chelvanayagam Pact was signed by the two leaders on 25.07.1957, granting among other matters, Regional Councils for the Northern and Eastern Provinces.

Opposition to the Bandaranaike-Chelvanayagam Pact was growing in the South. J.R. Jayewardene organised Kandy March in protest of the pact. 

The procession to Kandy was stopped at Imbulgoda by the then Member of the Gampaha Electorate S.D. Bandaranayake.

Prophesy of Bandaranaike
Some of the politically motivated Buddhist Monks too were forcing the Prime Minister to abandon the Pact. In the presence of those Buddhist Monks the Prime Minister announced unilaterally the abrogation of the Pact. On that occasion, the Prime Minister was reported to have said prophetically to the Buddhist Monks,
“If you are against the Pact, I would certainly tear it up but it will endanger the future of the country, you have to think about it”.

The politically motivated Buddhist Monks never appreciated or understood the seriousness, effect of the prophetic statement of Prime Minister Bandaranaike.

Bandaranaike was a brilliant student of Christ College, Oxford. He returned to the Island in 1925 and formed a political party, named the Progressive National Party and advocated a Federal State in preference to a Unitary One. 

His erstwhile friend, Dr. T. James Rutnam was the General Secretary of the Progressive National Party. He opposed the concept and wrote several articles in support of Unitary State.
Bandaranaike’s Federal formula and the Tamils’ opposition.

The Sinhalese did not object to making Ceylon a Federal State as propounded by Bandaranaike but the Tamils without exception opposed the federalism and supported a Unitary State
Bandaranaike declared that ‘the majority of us feel that in view of the local conditions, particularly racial differences, the most satisfactory method to minimise and gradually remove such differences was a Federal System of Government. Switzerland tended national unity. We feel that the present arrangement of nine provinces should remain and be the basis of the Federal System’.

Bandaranaike said that in a Federal Government, each unit had complete power over itself yet they could stand united and have one or two assemblies to discuss matters affecting the whole country. All self-governing dominions, Australia, South Africa and Canada had the same system. Switzerland was a small country but three races lived there, the French, Germans and Italians and the Federal form of Government was very successful in that country. 

Thus, Switzerland afforded a better example for Ceylon.

Bandaranaike said that he opposed a Unitary Constitution for Ceylon and put forward the Federal Constitution as it was more suitable for conditions prevailing in Ceylon.

Languages in the Centre and Federal Units
He observed that it was easy at the Federal Centre to declare what languages should be the official languages. It was really in keeping with the federal form of Government where each unit could use one language for its work but the Federal Centre could use more than one language. Bandaranaike described the difficulties that could arise under a centralised system of Government. 

He said that he knew no part of the world, where a Government was carried on under such conflicting circumstances as would be experienced in Ceylon. 

Those would be the troubles if a centralised form of Government was introduced into countries with large communal differences.

A thousand and one objections
Thus, at the meeting held in Jaffna on 17.07.1926, presided by Dr. Isaac Thyambyah, Bandaranaike professed that:

“A thousand and one objections could be raised against the system but when the objections are dissipated, I am convinced that some form of Federal Government be the only solution”.
The present Government led by President Maithripala Sirisena and Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe is earnestly taking steps to make a New Constitution. 

It is reliably believed that the President desires to fulfil the prophetic dream of Bandaranaike ‘that some form of Federal Government be the only answer to meet the demands of the Tamils.
Would there be a hope of spring that President Maithripala Sirisena could translate the Federal dream of Bandaranaike into action as the President himself fits to the prophetic poem of Rudyard Kipling titled If-:

If you can keep your head when all about you,
Are losing theirs and blaming it on you,
If you can trust yourself when all men doubt you,
But make allowance for their doubting too;
If you can wait and not be tired by waiting,
Or being lied about, don’t deal in lies,
Or being hated, don’t give way to hating,
And yet don’t look too good, nor talk too wise:
If you can dream—and not make dreams your master;
If you can think—and not make thoughts your aim;
If you can meet with Triumph and Disaster
And treat those two impostors just the same;
If you can bear to hear the truth you’ve spoken
Twisted by knaves to make a trap for fools,
Or watch the things you gave your life to, broken,
And stoop and build ’em up with worn-out tools:
If you can make one heap of all your winnings
And risk it on one turn of pitch-and-toss,
And lose, and start again at your beginnings
And never breathe a word about your loss;
If you can force your heart and nerve and sinew
To serve your turn long after they are gone,
And so hold on when there is nothing in you
Except the Will which says to them: ‘Hold on!’
If you can talk with crowds and keep your virtue,
Or walk with Kings—nor lose the common touch,
If neither foes nor loving friends can hurt you,
If all men count with you, but none too much;
If you can fill the unforgiving minute
With sixty seconds’ worth of distance run,
Yours is the Earth and everything that’s in it,
And—which is more—you’ll be a Man, my son! 

Monk calls for cash-rich temples to donate earnings to other temples

By Binoy Suriyaarachchi-June 25, 2017

It would be a timely decision to acquire excess supplies and money of the temples which have a high income and allocate it for the benefit of temples in rural areas, a senior monk said Sunday.

Venerable Wanawasi Rahula Thero, founder of the Jathika Namal Uyana, made this remark while speaking at a press conference held in Anuradhapura.

Rahula Thero pointed out according to reports, the money some temples receive as a donation per a day exceeds Rs.3.5 million.

“In the meantime, the monks of some temples don’t even have robes to wear,” he added.

The Thero also went on to say he stands with the government in this effort, if the authorities would implement a proper method to manage the process.

Sri Lanka: Establish Office on Missing Persons immediately

23 June 2017

Amnesty International calls on the Sri Lankan authorities to immediately implement the much delayed Office on Missing Persons.

“The people of Sri Lanka cannot wait any longer. Tens of thousands of families, from all communities, have waited far too long already. The Office on Missing Persons must be established as soon as possible,” said Biraj Patnaik, Amnesty International’s South Asia Director.

“It is encouraging that both the President and the Prime Minister have reached out to families of the disappeared over recent days. But soothing words must be followed by decisive action. Only justice can heal the wounds of Sri Lankans.”

Background

Amnesty International has called on the Sri Lankan authorities to ensure that the Office on Missing Persons (OMP) gives full effect to the rights of victims.

The human rights organization has called on authorities to ensure that evidence of crimes under international law are forwarded for further investigation and prosecution; for there to be gender balance among members of the OMP; to ensure accessibility and public outreach across the country; and ensure there is forensic expertise and the requisite capacity and authority for the OMP to be effective.

RTI: President gives people access to Cabinet decisions

Sunday, April 23, 2017

In a note presented by President Maithripala Sirisena and approved by the Cabinet recently, the President has informed all Ministers that all Cabinet decisions and Memoranda not falling within excepted categories under the Right to Information (RTI) Act, No 12 of 2016, have to be made available to a citizen upon request.

In terms of this note, the Cabinet has also been formally apprised of the appointment of an Information Officer (IO) and a Designated Officer (DO) for the Cabinet in terms of the RTI Act. The President has stated that previously, all Cabinet decisions were considered as confidential documents, conveyed only to the Secretary to the relevant Ministry, the parties who are directly involved in the implementation. These decisions were also informed to a limited number of others, including the Attorney General when required in regard to legal matters.

However, with changes brought about by the passing of the RTI Act, President Sirisena has noted that when requests are received from a ‘citizen’ in accordance with RTI Regulations and Rules, necessary action needs to be taken by the Secretary to the Cabinet. He has also pointed out that in conformity with proactive disclosure obligations under the RTI regime, Cabinet decisions and other facts required to be published therein are carried on the website of the Cabinet Office.

Sri Lanka’s RTI Act, along with Regulations and Rules on Fee and Appeals of the independent RTI Commission, was operationalised on February 3 this year. According to Section 23(1)(a) of the RTI Act, every Public Authority must appoint within three months of the date of operationalising the Act, one or more IOs as well as a DO to hear the first appeal. Where an IO and a DO are in place, it is mandatory that a citizen seeking information should approach those officers first and then only appeal to the RTI Commission and thereafter, to the courts.

In terms of a government policy decision, in instances where a Public Authority has appointed an IO but has failed to appoint a DO, the relevant administrative superior will become the DO. The Act, meanwhile, provides that if an IO is not appointed, then the Head or the CEO of the Public Authority is deemed to be the IO. In this case, appeal from a decision of the IO will lie directly to the Commission.

Following inquiries made to the Mass Media and Parliamentary Affairs Ministry which is the implementing nodal agency, the Sunday Times learns that a considerable number of Public Authorities and other private entities falling within the Act have complied with the mandatory requirement to appoint IOs and DOs. However, Public Authorities still failing to comply include the University Grants Commission (UGC), the Higher Education Ministry, ‘all courts, tribunals and institutions created for the administration of justice’ and the Judicial Service Commission (JSC). Other independent constitutional Commissions and Commissions created under written law have also complied with the requirements of the RTI Act.

What Is A Bar Association For?

By Basil Fernando –JUNE 24, 2017

Basil Fernando

Last week, two troubling events took place for the Sri Lankan legal profession: First, the Minister of Justice threatened a lawyer who made a comment in a television discussion regarding some attacks on churches. The Minister said he will take steps to remove the lawyer from practice. Subsequently, the lawyer was mentioned by name by one of the members of the Asgiriya Karaka Sabahawa in a televised interview. These incidents raise questions about the role of the Bar Association.

Professional associations are there primarily to protect the interests of its members. Such interests include the defence of professional integrity and the protection of the capacity to practice one’s profession without fear or favour.

Professional associations are not meant to be driven by ideological considerations or by political affiliations. A professional association must decide its actions on the basis of well-entrenched principles. Each profession has its own requirements so that members of each profession can do their work only on the basis of those professional norms and standards.

Therefore, on this particular occasion, the only consideration should be the defence of a particular lawyer who has been unjustly attacked. Like in other professions, members of the legal profession also, in their own personal and private capacities, may belong to whatever political groups they wish to belong to. They can also have their own personal idiosyncrasies.

An essential aspect of professional conduct is to be able to separate those matters that are of a personal nature and those matters that are relevant to the practice of the profession.

Therefore, in this particular instance, it should be considered a matter of honour that every elected member of the Bar Association will act in unison to defend what is fundamental to their profession.

In the past, we have seen lawyers being murdered for no other reason except the practice of their profession on behalf of their clients. After these things happen, the Bar Association usually makes statements of condolences and subsequently keeps on referring to those victims of violence.

However, what is needed is to act before foreseeable wrongs are done, thereby preventing the consequences of such actions.

A member of the Bar Association should be able to have an expectation that the professional association that he belongs to will stand by him when he faces dangers and threats, and that he will not be betrayed by the Association and its leaders.

Read More

Sri Lanka: BBS, Extremism, Incitement to Violence and a Proposal Again for Rajapaksa Family Rule!

by Laksiri Fernando-Jun 25, 2017

( June 25, 2017, Sydney, Sri Lanka Guardian) We have an ‘analysis’ of all in one basket. I am referring to Dayan Jayatilleka’s (DJ) article in The Island (21 June) perhaps incorrectly titled “The issue is incitement: The BBS, Champika & the Gota factor.” The ‘family proposal’ does not appear in the title for some reason. It was previously published in the Colombo Telegraph as two articles, then they became ‘two in one’ in The Island. Let me try to dissect.

While ‘extremism’ and ‘incitement to violence’ are not the same, there is no great wall between the two despite what the author claims. Extremism from any side could easily evolve into violence or incitement to violence. It is true that those who paint the BBS or the behaviour/utterances of Gnanasara Thero as just extremism or equal to other extremisms, misses the point of ‘incitement to violence.’ But in political debates all extremisms should be discouraged, condemned or denounced.

Hate speech and extremism should not be defended under freedom of speech while only ‘incitement to violence’ is condemned. Punishing is a matter for the judiciary and the law enforcement. However, we can point it out or even agitate for it, if it is absent or the law enforcement is defending the culprits. Freedom of speech entails social responsibilities. Ultra-nationalism, chauvinism, Islamophobia and extremism in general breach these social responsibilities. It is true that any one indulging in such extremist propaganda should not be punished off hand, unless there is a direct connection to violence or hate speech. We have hordes of them in our country.

Durban Declaration

DJ says he learned to distinguish the two, ‘extremism and incitement,’ through his experience at the UN and more precisely by chairing the Intergovernmental Working Group (IWG) on the Effective Implementation of the Durban Declaration. The Durban Declaration (2001) was ‘Against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and related Intolerance.’ It was titled as such. In that context, it is incomprehensible how come that a person who chaired the IWG on those issues claims, “Nor is the main issue Islamophobia. While Islamophobia is in and of itself reprehensible, what should be focused on is incitement to violence.” In the Declaration, there is nothing particularly about ‘incitement to violence’ as the crucial issue, of course because it is a declaration. But Article 61, highlights Islamophobia as a crucial issue as follows.

61. We recognize with deep concern the increase in anti-Semitism and Islamophobia in various parts of the world, as well as the emergence of racial and violent movements based on racism and discriminatory ideas against Jewish, Muslim and Arab communities;

DJ was not only the Chair of the particular IWG in 2008, but also the Rapporteur of the sessions. The report of the sixth session (A/HRC/10/82, 26 February 2009) that he has reported does not talk about such a distinction, while it is true that there were divergent views and frictions within the discussions and he was admirably trying to moderate them as far as possible. Most of the debates were on the future agenda of the IWG, the African Group suggesting five themes as follows and the EU delegate expressing objections or reservations. “The suggested themes [were]: (a) effective remedies, recourse, redress, compensatory and other measures at the national, regional and international levels to victims of human rights violations resulting from racism; (b) incitement to racial and/or religious hatred; (c) racial profiling; (d) restoration of human dignity; (e) racism and refugees, migrants, asylum-seekers.” This is in paragraph 33 of the report.

What was proposed in terms of ‘incitement’ was “incitement to racial and/or religious hatred” which in fact goes against what DJ is suggesting for Sri Lanka. (Or is he trying to confuse the Sri Lankan readers arrogantly believing they are ignorant?) It may be the case that he suggested to the EU delegates (during informal discussions) to isolate ‘incitement to violence,’ but what appears in the report is not that. If I am mistaken he should clarify.

Incitement can be for violence or incitement can be for racial or religious hatred, as the African group seems to have maintained. In the latter case, the distinction between extremism (ultra-nationalism, xenophobia, racism) and incitement becomes thinner and thinner. When the African group proposed the above, their intention was to counter Islamophobia spreading in Europe; the EU delegate objecting to it.

When ‘incitement’ is linked only to violence, Islamophobia escapes. This is exactly what DJ is subtly doing in Sri Lanka today. Gnanasara is culpable, but Asgiriya escapes. To fudge the whole effort, he also defends all other extremists including himself. The following statement epitomise his ideology or enterprise.

“It is with this experience and achievement that I make the point that what we should focus upon is not Sinhala and Tamil racism, chauvinism or extremism, but precisely and specifically the incitement to violence, i.e. the rousing of mob violence or individual attacks.”

To him, Sinhala racism, Tamil racism, chauvinism and extremism are all fine, what is wrong (or should focus upon) is only incitement to violence and rousing mob violence. He cannot understand the connection. He cannot or pretend not to understand the cause and effect, or the root causes behind violence and incitement to violence.

Gnanasara Thera and BBS

Let us take the central issue of Gnanasara Thero (GT) and the BBS. At present, that is one of the central issues, I agree. Because many Muslim mosques and shops have been newly attacked. The BBS press briefing first addressed by Dilanthe Vithanage on 15 June did not categorically deny that Thero was involved in violence. What he said was “if to some extent (yamkisi pramnayakate) he was involved, that was because of Champika and Rathana Thero.” He also said, “If he was given some contracts (yam yam conthrath) those were given by Champika and Rathana Thero for their political objectives.” Of course, Vithanage was referring to the past and not to the present. Champika however is clearly implicated.

Even without Vithanage’s revelation, it is well known that Gnanasara was bred and brought up within the JHU political movement. JHU was/is an outright ultra-nationalist movement. Gnanasara contested to the Colombo district as a JHU candidate in 2004 at the parliamentary elections. When the BBS was formed in 2012, under his leadership it was an offshoot of the JHU. Therefore, the connection between the BBS’ ‘ethno-religious fascism,’ and the JHU’s ultra-nationalist extremism is clear. It is not merely a personal connection but an ideological one. One has led to the other.

In terms personal patronage for this movement, there have been several political leaders other than Ranawaka who have patronized and curry favoured with this movement. Gotabaya Rajapaksa is one who inaugurated the BBS training academy in Galle in March 2013. He was the Defence Secretary at that time. When Azad Sally was talking against the BBS, he was arrested under the PTA in May, two months later. Completely correct or not, Gotabaya was implicated in the September 2011 demolition of an Islamic shrine at Anuradhapura. It is well known how he treated Frederica Jansz in 2012, forcing her to leave the country. Gotabaya-Champika connection also was very clear those days whatever happened thereafter. None of these persons could be trusted to lead the country in the future. While in the opposition or out of power, they may appear not so extreme, allowing others to do the job. But when they are in power they almost certainly would emerge as near fascists.

Features of Right-wing Extremism 

Writing on ‘Contemporary British Fascism’ (2004), Nigel Copsey said, “…the extreme right should be viewed as a broad ‘political family’ which possesses an ideology of common constituent parts.” “Adopting this approach, the core defining features of right-wing extremism turn out to be: (ultra) nationalism, racism, xenophobia, anti-democracy and the strong state.” He came to the above conclusion after investigating 26 definitions and at least half of the authors agreeing.

It may be all right as an academic exercise to try and distinguish between different segments of right-wing extremism, including the BBS. But it is dangerous to do so projecting Sri Lanka’s political future based on such distinctions. Because our choices should be democratic and for democracy. It is within such a futile exercise that DJ wants to see a reformed Gotabaya Rajapaksa, from the position of “Right of Mahinda and Right of the regime” to a reformed man, saying “Gotabhya is not the most reactionary, right wing figure in this country.”

The right-wing does not constitute only of ‘ultra-nationalism,’ ‘racism’ or ‘xenophobia.’ It also constitutes the features of ‘anti-democracy’ and ‘advocacy of the strong state.’ Gotabaya qualifies on both counts. He is a former army man. He was the Defence Secretary even after the end of the war, culpable for or overseeing many atrocities including Rathupaswala. As a proposed candidate for the presidency in 2020, his chances would be extremely dim unless he gets an overwhelming majority of the Sinhala votes. To obtain such a vote, he logically must align with ultra-nationalists, racists and xenophobic forces. Anti-Indian xenophobia is already propagated by his supporters! This is the impending danger, not necessarily the present government. With these credentials, it would be an outright scoundrel who could trust him as “the last best hope to deal with this dangerous phenomenon on incitement or any of the myriad of other daily crisis.”

DJ has already started this ultra-right-wing campaign. That is why he has now written on ‘Politics After Asgiriya.’ He is not Alt-Left, but Alt-Right.

Proposal for Rajapaksa Family Rule!  

The present government is undoubtedly weak, lethargic and inefficient. There are also extremists within it. Economic policies are largely erroneous and neo-liberal. Many promises given to the people have not yet been fulfilled. There are no signs of fulfilling them either. Therefore, there should be a better government at the next election through the democratic process. There is no need to bring back the past monsters however. The country should move forward and not backwards. The present government however has kept the democratic processes moving whatever the shortcomings. That is the benefit of the 2015 change. The formation of the Joint Opposition was natural and a good development in this respect. Whoever the ‘official opposition,’ the government also should interact with the JO properly in parliament in addition, and should listen to the just demands of the students and the trade unions.

The danger of DJ’s proposal is not about supporting the JO to come to power at the next election. But to bring back very clearly a much more stronger family rule, Gotabaya as the President and Mahinda as the Prime Minister this time. With such a political science knowledge and international experience, I cannot understand why such a pathetic proposal is put forward. The following is his proposal.

“This is the worst, most dangerous, most unconscionable government I have seen in my country in my lifetime. Whatever their past and present errors, only Mahinda as Prime Minister and Gota as President can get us out of this deep, stinking pit, and put us back on track.”

There is much confusion in this proposal, perhaps guided by emotions and personal antipathies mixed up with Stalinist upbringing. On the emotional side, he uses Trumpian terminology to classify the present government as ‘political evil.’ He is also not sure his personal vengeance against CBK-Ranil could really be achieved. Therefore, he also has the second alternative and says, “If Gotabhaya does not or cannot intervene to stop the spreading cancer, then even more radical methods of intervention by the people themselves—such as in August 1953— may be embarked upon.”

He also wants to supplement it with an upsurge not only like Russia in 1917 but also Iran in 1979. Would he promote, in the latter case, Gnanasara Thero or somebody else emerging as Ayatollah Khomeini in Sri Lanka? Only the time would say. There are indications of his thinking in that direction in his recent most article on ‘Politics After Asgiriya.’

Media And Christian Organisations Raise Concerns
Justice Minister’s Statement Threatening Lakshan

by Ifham Nizam-JUNE 24, 2017

Attorney-at-Law Lakshan Dias and Wijeyadasa Rajapakshe

Hundreds of prominent individuals covering various spectrums and more than 30 organisations had come hard on a recent statement by Justice Minister Wijeyadasa Rajapakshe threatening to remove an attorney-at-law of the Supreme Court.

Media And Christian Organisations Raise Concerns.docx by Thavam Ratna on Scribd

SRI LANKA/WORLD: Rapid collapse of the secular state

June 23, 2017

The events that unfolded this week shockingly foretells the story of the very rapid collapse of the secular state in Sri Lanka. Although, the events around which a new melodrama unfolded in Sri Lanka were some trivial events of several warrants issued against one Buddhist monk, in which the Sri Lankan state finally proved that it is unable to even execute a warrant issued by a Magistrate on the basis of allegations of crimes committed by the monk submitted by the police. This was followed by a public threat by the country’s Minister of Justice who happened also to be the Minister of Buddha Sasana - publicly stating that he will take steps to disbar an Attorney-at-Law over a statement the lawyer made regarding some attacks on Churches. Finally culminated in the highest Committee of the Asgiriya Chapter presided over by its Chief prelate ( the Mahanayake) - acting in a manner reminding of medieval European Catholic hierarchy, presiding over by the Pope - pronouncing on the rights and wrongs of accusations against the earlier mentioned Buddhist monk and naming some individuals and condemning them and threatening that if necessary, people will be mobilized against the Government to achieve their objectives.

What is known as the period of enlightenment in Europe was a prolonged struggle against the ecclesiastical interference into secular affairs of the states. One of the finest achievements of the enlightenment was the separation of the Church from the state. Much of the progress of Europe in the 18th and 19th Centuries were a result of the success of enlightenment as against the centuries old powerful controls by ecclesiastical authorities.

The absurdities of the ecclesiastical authorities interfering into secular affairs is best illustrated in the Church’s condemnation of Galilio Galilei due to his science based observations on the movement of the earth around the sun, as against the Church’s view of an earth centered universe. The Church pronounced Galilio wrong and therefore, everyone was obligated to believe what the Church proclaimed and to pay blind obedience. It was that type of power relationship that the enlightenment was able to bring to an end – ushering a new period of freedom.

The essential component of the freedom was that on matters of thought it is reason that should prevail and not the authority of anyone including ecclesiastical authorities. The Pope declared himself infallible, but the secular world rejected that claim. The ultimate positive result of it all was that the Church finally was forced to accept the position that on secular matters, opinions and verdicts of the Church is of no consequence.

The achievements of the enlightenment was further enhanced by the democratic revolutions, which took place in Britain and France and which later spread across to the entire Europe and the United States. The development of a democratic state, based on the separation of power principle was a result of the long struggle of the enlightenment and the struggles for equality, liberty, and fraternity for which millions of people paid with their lives. These people thought that liberty is a great enough a cause which should be won at any cost.

One of the principles that emerged from the development of the idea of a secular democratic state was that law is the king. Neither the monarch nor the ecclesiastical authorities were above the law. The stability of the society was built on the foundation of rule of law and the idea of independence of the judiciary; the final arbiter on the matters of law should be the judicial authorities who are committed solely to decide on disputes on the basis of law and reason, which alone was one of the pillars of the modern democratic state.

It was these ideas of enlightenment that was introduced to Sri Lanka and the idea of a secular state was well entrenched in the first constitution under which Sri Lanka became an independent sovereign nation.

The idea of the rule of law and the independence of the judiciary were also accepted as pillars of the modern state in Sri Lanka.

This situation remained well entrenched till the 1978 Constitution in which many of the notions of the enlightenment were rejected in favour of a state structure which the late Dr Colvin R de Silva described as being based on the ideas of the Central African state leader Jean-Bédel Bokassa. The result was the collapse of the democratic state and the gradual descend of the country into anarchy.

The abysmal extent to which the democratic state has collapsed and the anarchy which the country has plunged into was manifest in the events which took place this week, which were described at the commencement of this statement.

Now, the highest Committee of the Asgiriya Chapter stands above the law. It could dictate its terms on the Courts and judicial proceedings. It could declare who should be arrested, and who should not be arrested. It could ex- cathedra declare some persons as wrong doers and condemn the state for not subduing those individuals.

This week marked a very dangerous week for the future of democracy, rule of law, the independence of the judiciary, and the very existence of the secular state in Sri Lanka. The Buddhist leaders who took part in this act claim that they are doing this motivated by patriotism. In fact, this is one of the most unpatriotic actions, which will have its impact both on the present generation and generations to come. This week Sri Lanka took a giant step towards a march into the dark ages.

We earnestly urge the highest Committee of the Asgiriya Chapter to seriously reflect on the move that they have made. We also urge all right-thinking people to reflect on the enormous danger which the country is walking into.

BBS-Yahapalana link proved

* Gnansara Thera breaks Hirunika’s record
* Yahapalana stalwart Ulapane Sumangala Thera roots for BBS
* The risk taken by the Asgiriya Mahanayake Thera

Gnanasara Thera near a courthouse

 by C.A.Chandraprema-June 24, 2017, 12:00 pm 

The events that people saw unfolding last Wednesday proved beyond a shadow of doubt what this writer said in the last two columns – that the latest spate of anti-Muslim violence unleashed by the Bodu Bala Sena has been orchestrated by elements within the yahapalana government that are trying to win over a section of the Sinhala Buddhist vote which has been gravitating heavily to the Joint Opposition. We pointed out that both Champika Ranawaka and President Maithripala Sirisena had an interest in using the Bodu Bala Sena to split the Sinhala Buddhist vote and that the impunity enjoyed by the BBS in the past several weeks is due to patronage at the highest levels of the government. Last Wednesday Gnansara Thera created legal history by obtaining bail on three occasions in the course of a single day. In one case he was formally arrested and a statement was recorded from him and he was presented before a Magistrate and released on bail all within minutes.

Thus Gnanasara Thera broke the record set earlier by Hirunika Premachandra in the abduction case against her. Some people may be under the impression that all that was because of the broadside fired by the Ven. Mahanayake of the Asgiriya Chapter against the government last Tuesday. Gnansara Thera came out of hiding the very next day. However there was no causal link between the statement made by the Ven Mahanayake Thera and Karaka Sanga Sabha of the Asgiriya Chapter and Gnanasara Thera’s release. His surrender to courts had been under discussion for days. This week’s Ravaya has in fact revealed that the police had through a hurriedly filed motion, amended their B report so that the offence for which he was to be arrested would be made bailable. Earlier it had been the ICCPR Act that had been cited which makes the incitement of ethnic or religious tensions a non-bailable offence. With the amendment of the B-report a different law had been invoked and it had been made possible to grant bail to Gnanasara Thera. 

 In fact the Bodu Bala Sena said at a press conference held on 16 June that Gnanasara Thera may surrender to courts in due course. Then at the press conference held by the BBS on 20 June, they stated more definitely that he would be present in courts the next day. It would have been inconceivable for the yahapalana government to put him behind bars. As we said last week, Ganansara Thera did spend some time behind bars under this government, but that was an unscheduled event which took place not due to any action taken by this government but due to steps taken by the Homagama Magistrate.

 The reason why he has the same immunity under this government that he enjoyed under the Rajapaksa government is because the same elements under whose patronage he functioned under the previous government are protecting him under the present government as well. The missing or invisible link is the Jathika Hela Urumaya. Last Wednesday, a yahapalana stalwart, Ven. Ulapane Sumangala was present at the Fort Magistrate’s court when bail was granted to Gnanasara Thera. Some days earlier, speaking as a member of the Anti-Corruption Front, he had criticized the attempt that was being made at that time to arrest Gnanasara Thera without arresting members of other communities who also had made statements that were plainly inimical to harmony between the ethnic and religious communities living in this country.

 That was taken a step further when Sumangala Thera turned up at The Fort Magistrate’s court when Gnanasara Thera surrendered. Ranjith Keerthi Tennakoon has resigned from the Anti-Corruption Front in protest at the stand taken by Sumangala Thera. All this while, the live wire behind the Anti-Corruption Front was Tennakoon. We were not able to contact Tennakoon for his comments. So we see that the exposure of the yahapalana link to the BBS is causing angst in some quarters.

 Asgiriya initiative to save Maha Sangha

 The statement made by the Ven Mahanayake of the Asgiriya Chapter is one of the most important political interventions made by the Bhikku community in recent times. This lead was soon followed by the Ramanna Nikaya also making a statement on similar terms. While the Asgiriya Chapter statement dealt with many matters of national importance, the riskiest part of that statement was the part that pertained to Gnansara Thera.  Basically, what the Asgiriya Chapter statement said about Gnansara Thera is that they do not approve or condone his behaviour but that they will not dismiss the issues that he has been raising and that the government should find out whether there is any truth in what that monk has been saying. The statement also took exception to Gnanasara Thera being singled out while inflammatory statements had been made by members of other communities who had got off Scot free. The statement also took exception to people referring to Ganansara Thera only by name.

 Out of respect to the Ven Mahanayake and Karaka Sangha Sabha of the Asgiriya Chapter I too will refer to him not simply as ‘Gnanasara’ but as Gnanasara Thera or Ven. Gnanasara not because I have suddenly evinced any respect for this monk but because of the importance of what the Asgiriya Chapter has tried to do. Admittedly, the Asgiriya Chapter has taken the initiative to handle a difficult situation and we all need to cooperate. The respect of the Buddhist dispensation is at stake. Some may say that the action that the Buddhist establishment should have taken would be to remove Ganansara Thera from the monkhood instead of asking the world to show respect to a monk who behaves like a hooligan. Expelling a monk from the Sangha is next to impossible under the present laws and internal rules of the various Nikayas. So the Asgiriya Chapter has started at the other end. Usually, no one is ordained as a monk without a reading of his horoscope to see whether it would be possible for the person concerned to fulfill the vows of a monk. The system has worked fairly well except in the case of rare instances like that of Gnansara Thera when the reading of the horoscope has gone horribly wrong.

 The Asgiriya Chapter has also in a statement that represents not just the Mahanayke Thera but the entire Nikaya said that they do not approve of the way Ganansara Thera behaves. The point that this writer too has always made about Gnanasara Thera is not any issues that he may raise but his behaviour which is that of a thug, not a monk. Even the most boorish and uncivilized politician would baulk at behaving the way Gnanasara Thera does in public. He uses the saffron robe to get away with any outrage he may commit and he claims to be doing it on behalf of the Sinhalese. By calling upon the public not to refer to Gnanasara thera in disrespectful terms, the Asgiriya Chapter has gone out on a limb in an attempt to safeguard the respect of the Maha Sangha. If Gnanasara Thera engages in violence and the uttering of obscenities in public again, that would be a direct affront and a case of treating the entire Asgiriya Chapter with contempt.

 If Gnanasara Thera gets up to his usual antics again, the Asgiriya Chapter will have no option but to issue a ‘sanghaagnawa’ against him. After obtaining bail, Gnanasara Thera went to see the Asgiriya Mahanayke Thera and later said that he will henceforth do as instructed by the Ven Asgiriya Mahanayake Thera. We sincerely hope that he will stick to his word without bringing any further disrepute upon the Maha Sangha. Gnanasara Thera became known to the world only because of his uncouth manner of speech and thuggish behaviour. He has nothing else to distinguish him other than his notoriety as a thug-monk. If he stops behaving in that manner he will not get the media attention that he usually gains. So we have to wait and see whether he is willing to become a nonentity again in order to uphold the respect and authority of the Asgiriya Chapter.

 Other than Gnanasara Thera’s matter, the Asgiriya Chapter statement dealt with several other matters, such as the inflammatory statements made by certain minority community politicians with complete impunity, the various new laws that the government has been introducing that seem to be targeting the Sinhala Buddhist community, the systematic encroachment on state land and forest reserves by certain minority communities, the government’s attempt to assume control over certain key Buddhist sites to promote tourism, and even reported attempts on the part of certain elements to eliminate the Sinhala race. The statement also contained an unequivocal warning to followers of other religions that the Buddhist way of life should not be disrespected. It is rarely indeed that one sees such a broadside against a government by such an important section of the Buddhist establishment. It’s not just Gnanasara Thera who has been put on notice but the government that is using him as well.

A GMOA leader obstructed treatment of injured police officers.! Health ministry officials feared they would be held to ransom –Minister Sagala (Video)

(Lanka-e-News - 24.June.2017, 11.30PM)   It is a leader of the GMOA ( Government medical officers association alias Government medical oppressors association )  of Padeniya who obstructed medical treatment being administered  to the police officers who sustained injuries in the same way as the students when both parties were hospitalized , following the scuffle when the police tried to release the ministry building from the group of  youngsters  who held it hostage like terrorists , said , minister of law and order Sagala Ratnayake. 

One of the injured police officers during the conflict suffered a   heart attack . He was treated immediately and saved. Another police officer was attacked by a flower vase to his head. This attack brings to memory what the student union leader who behaved like a terrorist said after the attack: He was feeling sorry that they could not smash the helmets of the police officers into smithereens .

Minister Sagala Ratnayake who visited the hospital to see the patients receiving treatment also made another important statement that it was feared that the officers of the ministry would be held to ransom .

The video footage of Sagala’s full speech is hereunder 

---------------------------
by     (2017-06-25 01:49:47)