Maithri’s Political lesson to Zeid

BY GAGANI WEERAKOON-2017-09-24

The success of the United Nations depends upon the independent strength of its members. To overcome the perils of the present, and to achieve the promise of the future, we must begin with the wisdom of the past. Our success depends on a coalition of strong and independent nations that embrace their sovereignty, to promote security, prosperity and peace, for themselves and for the world. We do not expect diverse countries to share the same cultures, traditions, or even systems of government, but we do expect all nations to uphold these two core sovereign duties, to respect the interests of their own people and the rights of every other sovereign nation, President of the United States of America Donald Trump said in his maiden speech to the United Nations General Assembly moments before he called North Korean leader Kim Jung Un "rocket man," and described him as being on "a suicide mission for himself and for his regime." He also threatened to "totally destroy" North Korea if the US finds itself "forced to defend itself or its allies."

The tone and the language used by Trump in a place like the United Nations, where peace and tolerance were supposedly upheld, came under criticism by many. However, Trump's emphasis on independent nations being entitled for their sovereignty came as a blessing for Sri Lanka when President Maithripala Sirisena took the podium to tell international community and especially the UN and its affiliates that Sri Lanka needs its due space in addressing local issues.

Prior to his speech President Sirisena met US President Trump on the corridors to the main auditorium and extended his greetings.

President Sirisena congratulated Trump for his being elected as US President while, Trump expressed what a beautiful country Sri Lanka is.

"I must mention here that, at a moment when Sri Lanka is committed to a course of good governance by strengthening democracy, human rights, and fundamental rights while winning the goodwill of the international community, I look forward to the kind support of the United Nations. We have been a member of United Nations for 62 years. Sri Lanka has always been a country that has respected its treaties and conventions, agreements and rules and regulations while taking action to improve such relations further. As such, in our country's journey where we protect our independence and sovereignty, we respectfully request the support of the international community for us to go on a moderate but steady path to achieve our targets in order to find sustainable solutions to the allegations levelled against us," he said.

Some extremist groups are expecting a high speed. Some extremist groups want radical solutions. However, as a country that has faced a three decade long war, where deep divisions have existed, I request the support of all of you to promote peace and fraternity, so that my beloved country and its people can rise from the current situation. That is why I emphasize that it is for a slow and a successful journey that we need support, President Sirisena said while making quite a few wonder whether the High Commissioner of UN Human Rights Council also was involved in the 'some extremist groups' he mentioned. It was not long ago that Prince Zeid Al-Hussein said he was frustrated about the delays in Sri Lanka's reconciliation process.

"We all have heard that speedy journey is a dangerous journey. Therefore, I believe that you will understand the complex nature of issues that hinder the instant and radical solutions that some impatient groups are asking for. As such, I reiterate with respect the need of support from the United Nations and its member states for my country to ensure the non-recurrence of war by fostering peace and harmony among all communities in Sri Lanka," President Sirisena urged.

President Sirisena and First Lady Jayanthi Sirisena were amongst world leaders invited for the reception hosted by US President Trump and First Lady Melania Trump which was held at the New York Palace Hotel.

Bilateral meetings

President Maithripala Sirisena used the opportunity of being in New York to meet two new leaders in the South Asian region – Nepal Prime Minister Sher Bahadur Deuba and Pakistan Prime Minister Shahid Khaqan Abbasi.

Sirisena who met Pakistan's new Prime Minister Shahid Khaqan Abbasi in his first bilateral discussion alongside the 72nd UN General Assembly session on Tuesday (19), expressed his gratitude to Pakistan for standing by Sri Lanka through thick and thin.

Premier Abbasi assured President Maithripala Sirisena that Pakistan would continue to assist Sri Lanka.

He further said that Pakistan will commit itself to take the economic and trade relationship between the two countries to a stronger level through a new approach.

During this meeting both leaders recalled the long-standing bilateral relations between Sri Lanka and Pakistan and emphasized the need for further consolidating the relationship.

President Sirisena stated that former Pakistani Premier Nawaz Sharif is a good friend of his and recalled the friendly cooperation of Sharif towards him and Sri Lanka. The President appreciated assistance provided by Pakistan to Sri Lanka as a true friend, during the period of conflict in the country.

He also expressed special thanks for the assistance given by Pakistan to Sri Lanka in the United Nations Human Rights Council.

The two leaders discussed about the ways to promote economic and commercial relations between the two countries. They focused on the fields of gas and oil.

Sri Lankan President and Pakistani Premier agreed to promote tourism and continue the cooperation in security affairs.

During his meeting with Nepal Prime Minister Deuba, President emphasized the need for strengthening the activities of the SAARC.

The Nepal Premier said that the commitment shown by Sri Lankan President Maithripala Sirisena for the activities of the SAARC is significant and the gratitude of all the SAARC countries must go to him in this regard.

The leaders paid their special attention to further developing bilateral relations between the two countries in all the fields, at a time Nepal and Sri Lanka celebrate the 60th anniversary of establishing bilateral relations between them.

It was discussed in detail on taking forward the economic, trade as well as religious and cultural ties between the two nations.

The President recalled the meeting he had with the Nepal President when she visited Sri Lanka to attend the International Buddhist Conference, to further promote the bilateral relations and said that he is expected to visit Nepal next October accepting the invitation extended to him by the Nepal President during her visit to Sri Lanka.

The Nepal Prime Minister emphasized that they are ready to provide their assistance to Sri Lanka when needed and said that Nepal always provides assistance to Sri Lanka in issues of human rights.
During the meeting the President extended his deep concern for the hardships faced by Nepal due to the recent earthquake and said that as a friendly country Sri Lanka took steps to provide every possible assistance to Nepal.

The Nepal Prime Minister also extended his gratitude in this regard and said that he is very pleased about this meeting as two important countries in the SAARC as well as friendly states which have long history.

Maithri on challenges

Ahead of his scheduled meeting with UNHRC High Commissioner Zied Al-Hussein, President Maithripala Sirisena sought continued assistance from the USA in rebuilding Sri Lanka politically, socially and economically in the post-war period, when the US Under Secretary for Political Affairs, Thomas A. Shannon called on the President for bilateral talks in New York on Thursday (21).
While commending Sri Lanka for the political, social and economic rebuilding process of Sri Lanka in the post- conflict era said, America is happy about the current 'friendly' foreign policy adopted by the government.

Shannon who is planning to visit Sri Lanka in November this year, also appreciated the cooperative approach carried out by Sri Lanka with the countries in the region, as a country which is positioned in a strategic location in the Indian region, and said that President Sirisena is an exemplary leader who is working closely with all the member States.

President Sirisena, responded stating that the challenges Sri Lanka has to face due to its strategic positioning in the Indian Ocean region is much more than its positive outcomes.

It was obvious that President Sirisena was referring to immense pressure the country is under due to political and economic interests of powerful neighbouring nations like India and China and the USA.
Ultimatum issued?

UNHRC High Commissioner Zeid Al-Hussein called on President Sirisena Friday evening for a meeting expected to be extremely crucial for Sri Lanka.

Diplomats were of the view that the outcome of this meeting is going to be crucial for Sri Lanka with High Commissioner Hussein recently expressing his frustration on delayed reconciliation process in Sri Lanka.

During his opening statement at the 36th session of the UNHRC on Monday (11) he added that the absence of credible action in Sri Lanka, to ensure accountability for alleged violations of international human rights law and international humanitarian law, makes the exercise of universal jurisdiction even more necessary.

He urged the Sri Lanka Government to swiftly operationalize the Office of Missing Persons (OMP) and to move faster on other essential confidence building measures.

This should not be a "box-ticking exercise to placate the Council", Hussein said adding that the Government must consider it as an essential undertaking to address the rights of all Sri Lankans.

However, Hussein apparently did not get much opportunity to push his demands as President Sirisena in his introduction itself brushed off any call to expedite the process.

"I do not want Sri Lanka to be another Myanmar," Sirisena told Hussein while pointing to another set of failed projects of the UNHRC.

Hussein, according to sources has changed his initial tone and had agreed with the President that it failed to ensure the safety of Rohingya people.

President was also expected to meet UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres last morning (23) at the UN Head Quarters.

Asked whether he would once again be put on the spot by the Secretary General as well, President Sirisena said "The meeting mainly would be to exchange pleasantries as the new Secretary General. On the other hand, he was the former Prime Minister of Portugal. I assume he would know what it is like to rule a country and what challenges a government would have to undergo when implementing policies."

Playing Victim

Much has been said about Minister of Regional Development Sarath Fonseka being denied visa to be a part of the Sri Lankan Delegation to UNGA.

Fonseka on Tuesday (19) said he had been denied a visa because of unresolved war crime allegations against the military. He confidently added that he was due to travel to New York this week, but he was the only one in the Sri Lankan delegation not issued a visa.

Fonseka said he could not accompany President Maithripala Sirisena who left Colombo on Sunday to address the United Nations General Assembly.

"I was not given a visa because of the war crimes allegations against the military. That is why I say they must be investigated."

He said the excesses by a "few" during the final stages of the island's Tamil separatist war should not tarnish the image of the Sri Lankan armed forces.

However, inquiries made by Ceylon Today revealed that Fonseka's claim is bit too far from the truth.
It is noteworthy that not a single minister was included in the 'original' delegation to accompany President Sirisena to the UNGA. This includes Foreign Minister Tilak Marapana and the reason for this decision was the need of all ministers and government parliamentarians to be present on Wednesday in Parliament to vote for the 20th Amendment.

The President, in a bid to give a chance for Junior MPs and Deputy Ministers to be a part of the delegation has included Deputy Ministers Ranjan Ramanayake, Bharathi Dushmantha Mithrapala and MPs Tharanath Basnayaka, Chathura Senrathna and S.M. Marikkar in the delegation. However, they too were directed to get onboard only after casting their vote.

Meanwhile, reliable sources confirmed that top diplomats based in Colombo had advised Fonseka not to apply for visa on the grounds he might be in trouble and thereby lead the entire country into a mess if he entered USA.

"If anyone files a case against him, while in the US, we will have to undergo much trouble to salvage him. Authorities who are well aware of the situation politely asked him not to apply for visa," highly placed sources confirmed.

Meanwhile, the Foreign Ministry confirmed Fonseka's name was not considered to be included in the delegation in the first place for him to lose the chance of accompanying the President to UNGA.

Japan's resiliency in overcoming post-war challenges is still a living example: Mangala

- Sep 23, 2017

Japan's resiliency in overcoming post-war challenges is still a living example for us: Minister Mangala

Minister of Finance and Media Mr. Mangala Samaraweera attended the opening day of the 'Japanese Film Festival 2017', yesterday (22), at the National Film Corporation.

The full text of the  speech made by the  Minister  as follows

As Anti-SAITM Protests Intensifies, Susil Premajayanth Endorses New Private-Foreign Biotechnology Degree

SEPTEMBER 23, 2017

Even as hundreds of students and doctors took to the streets against the South Asian Institute of Technology and Medicine more commonly known as SAITM, Minister of Science, Technology and Research Susil Premajayanth endorsed a new biotechnology degree offered by a private university.

Susil Premajayanth

A press release issued by Northumbria University said that Minister of Science, Technology and Research Susil Premajayanth speaking at the launch of the Northumbria’s BSc Honours Degree in Biotechnology at the Business Management School (BMS) in Colombo had emphasized the need for Sri Lanka to plan their educational goals in terms of future developments in applied sciences, and named Northumbria University’s biotechnology degree as a key part of that growth.

In recent weeks, protests against institutions such as SAITM has intensified with trade unions from the education sector also joining university students and the GMOA claiming that by allowing such institutes to issue medical degrees, it can result in a dwindling of standards of the quality of doctors and other medical practitioners produced in Sri Lanka.

Northumbria University, Newcastle has become Sri Lanka’s first UK University to launch a biotechnology degree. The University of Colombo has its own institute of Biochemistry, Molecular Biology and Bio technology, while the University of Sri Jayewardenepura also has a Faculty of Technology which offers Bachelor of Bio-Systems Technology.

St. John Usher, Head of Applied Sciences at Northumbria University, said: “Northumbria’s Faculty of Health and Life Sciences has enjoyed a hugely successful working relationship with BMS in Sri Lanka over the years and we’re delighted to be able to announce this latest programme in what is a very exciting and emerging science in Sri Lanka.

“The biotechnology sector of India is currently on a strong growth trajectory and Sri Lanka has recognised the importance of this industry in the growth of its own economy. This is the first year that BMS, in collaboration with Northumbria, has recruited students to the biotechnology programme and it’s great to see that some of the teaching on this degree is being provided by our former Masters students,” he said.

In 2015 approval was given to franchise the final year of the BSc (Hons) Biomedical Science programme to BMS. This has involved extensive development of state of the art laboratories at BMS so that students are assured of a high quality learning experience. This development provides students from Sri Lanka with the opportunity to study in their home country, with a considerable reduction in cost when compared to studying abroad, the press release said.

We publish below the press release in full:

As Sri Lanka looks toward emerging sciences, Northumbria University, Newcastle has become the island’s first UK University to launch a biotechnology degree.

Sri Lanka’s Minister of Science, Technology and Research Susil Premajayantha spoke at the recent launch of Northumbria’s BSc Honours Degree in Biotechnology at the Business Management School (BMS) in Colombo.

Minister Premajayantha emphasised the need for Sri Lanka to plan their educational goals in terms of future developments in applied sciences, and named Northumbria University’s biotechnology degree as a key part of that growth.

The partnership between Northumbria University and BMS has developed over many years with BMS being one of Northumbria’s strategic partners. The School developed a strong partnership with Northumbria University’s Faculty of Health and Life Sciences after the launch of its BSc Honours Degree in Biomedical Science in 2013.

St. John Usher, Head of Applied Sciences at Northumbria University, said: “Northumbria’s Faculty of Health and Life Sciences has enjoyed a hugely successful working relationship with BMS in Sri Lanka over the years and we’re delighted to be able to announce this latest programme in what is a very exciting and emerging science in Sri Lanka.

“The biotechnology sector of India is currently on a strong growth trajectory and Sri Lanka has recognised the importance of this industry in the growth of its own economy.

“This is the first year that BMS, in collaboration with Northumbria, has recruited students to the biotechnology programme and it’s great to see that some of the teaching on this degree is being provided by our former Masters students.”

In 2015 approval was given to franchise the final year of the BSc (Hons) Biomedical Science programme to BMS. This has involved extensive development of state of the art laboratories at BMS so that students are assured of a high quality learning experience.

This development provides students from Sri Lanka with the opportunity to study in their home country, with a considerable reduction in cost when compared to studying abroad.

Meanwhile, the relationship between Newcastle Business School, at Northumbria, and BMS is entering its 12th year and has produced more than 1,000 graduate students.

Dr Wijewardena, President of the Business Management School (BMS), was awarded an Honorary Doctorate of Civil Law by Northumbria University in 2016.

His career at the Central Bank of Sri Lanka lasted 37 years culminating in nine years as the Deputy Governor, responsible for economic research, monetary policy, financial system stability, public debt, rural credit and banking.

Read More

Central Expressway Stage III: Rush to award contract, no rush to answer questions

by Rajan Philips-September 23, 2017, 8:12 pm 

The Minister of Higher Education and Highways (still the world’s oddest ministerial pairing) Lakshman Kiriella has announced that the government will go ahead and sign the contract with the Japanese company Taisei Corporation as early as next week, for the construction of Stage III of the Central Expressway. The government’s contention is that unlike the previous government "awhich gave contracts on building expressways without following tender procedures", the present government has "followed tender procedures and ensured transparency in all matters pertaining to the Central Expressway." According to the Minister, Taisei’s bid "received approval of the Economic Committee, headed by Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe and also the approval of the Cabinet, led by President Maithripala Sirisena. So, there is no shady business in this contract as professed by certain parties with malicious intents." Therein is the rub, in the convenient confusion over what the tender procedures are and what the role of the cabinet is in approving tenders.

‘Everything was done with cabinet approval’ was the mantra that was heard over and over again when the Rajapaksas were in power. And the present power-holders hammered the Rajapaksas over and over again during the 2015 presidential election for giving sole-sourced contracts straight from the cabinet table. Now, contracts are seemingly being offered, if not straight from the cabinet table, but from some convenient sub-committee somewhere in the cabinet room. Not every government contract in the country needs cabinet approval, but every government contract must follow the tender procedure, except for contracts involving amounts lower than a prescribed limit and in emergency situations. To be clear, cabinet approval is not part of the tender procedure, but comes after the tender requirements have been fulfilled by technocrats and bureaucrats. Only contracts involving large sums of money and significant socio-economic considerations come up for cabinet approval.

But every contract requiring cabinet approval must go through layers of review and a hierarchy of recommendations before reaching the cabinet for the final stamp of authority. The trouble is when the process is reversed and contracts start with the stamp of cabinet approval and the bureaucrats and technocrats are ordered to do the paper work ‘after the fact’ to keep up the appearance of ‘tender procedures’. The Rajapaksas were past masters at breaking every government rule when it came to spending government money and awarding contracts. The present government has not done enough to prove that it is managing government money and awarding contracts differently, and properly. We cannot take the government’s word for it, just because the Prime Minister says so in Parliament.

On March 30, 2015, still within 100 days of January 8, 2015, Prime Minister Wickremesinghe reportedly circulated a note to cabinet that categorically stated that "unsolicited proposals in general should not be accepted as a matter of policy. In the future, all proposals should follow the Guidelines on Government Tender Procedure issued in 1998." Alas, and as was reported at that time, the cabinet also decided not to terminate the by-now time-honoured practice of entertaining unsolicited proposals by allowing the Cabinet Sub-Committee on Economic Affairs, to keep reviewing about "35 unsolicited proposals already in the pipeline." Was one of those 35 addressed to the Central Expressway project? How many of those 35 are still left? To digress a little on terminology, what we are talking about here are really not unsolicited proposals, but sole-sourced contracts. No one prepares, let alone submit, an unsolicited tender for a multi-billion rupee contract. And multi-billion rupee government contracts should not be awarded on sole-sourced tenders. Not even invited tenders, as is the case with the Central Expressway.

These four stages of the Central Expressway constitute Phase 1 in the broad scheme of Sri Lankan expressway planning. Phase 2 will involve new expressway connections from Dambulla going north and going east. These will add to the already completed expressway, namely, the Southern Expressway, the Colombo-Katunayake Expressway, and the Colombo Outer Circular Highway which will connect to the Central Expressway at Kadawatha. The new expressways are expensive by-passes to the much congested old roadways radiating from Colombo to Galle, Kandy and Negombo. There is a case for by-pass routes for faster travel, but the economic and cost-benefit questions are about the timing and the cost of other lost or delayed public investment opportunities. In the Sri Lankan situation, the increase in public debt and the diversion of foreign exchange reserves are bigger worries than the cost of lost opportunities.

From the standpoint of traffic management, how successful are the already built Southern Expressway and the Colombo-Katunayake Expressway in diverting traffic from the old Galle Road and the Negombo Road? With their toll revenues, the expressways have become cash cows to the government and an attraction for soliciting suitors looking for privatization of public infrastructure. The government is denying highway privatization allegations, but you can bet your last rupee that unsolicited proposals have entered the pipeline and are waiting for political stars to come into right configuration for review by a Cabinet sub-committee. Privatization-suitors are like barnacles, who cannot be scrubbed off easily even through elections and government changes. And toll revenues are not the full measure of the economic efficiency of a highway.

How much traffic is there on the Southern Expressway, or the Katunayake Expressway, relative to their capacities? It is fair to say that for the most part of the day you could fire a cannon down either of the roads without hurting anyone – as the saying goes to describe what is known as the empty-road syndrome. And there is no easing of the congestion on the old roads. The fact of the matter is that many vehicle owners cannot afford the toll charges, and most travelers are in buses and vans that still ply the old roads. Will it be any different with the new expressway to Kandy, which takes somewhat of a detour from Colombo – going as far as Kurunegala before diverting off Pothuhera to Galagedara (Stage III of the Central Expressway). And god speed from Galagedera to Kandy, just as it is god speed now from any of the expressways into Colombo. And places like Kegalle and Kadugannawa are left on no man’s route, and the Ambepussa link will not bring much relief to them. One is also curious about the circuitousness of going from Colombo to Dambulla to go to Jaffna. Whatever happened to the old Colombo-Puttalam-Anuradhapura route?

These are questions at the highway planning stage, and these questions were quite pertinently asked when the government started rushing Stage III of the Central Expressway contract for construction from Pothuhera to Galagedara, especially given the tortuous terrain and construction challenges. Characteristically cavalierly, the Prime Minister dismissed these questions in parliament, insisting that "All alternatives, including the construction of an airport in Kandy were looked at by the government, but it is not possible to change the plans to construct the central expressway." Economically, it might make more sense to build an airport for small planes or helipads for helicopters in Kandy to save time for travelling ministers and bureaucrats, than building a new expressway. And for the travelling public, selected improvements such as flyovers at bottle-neck locations might bring greater benefit than out-of-the-way expressways. The entire Colombo-Kandy Road could benefit from flyovers such as the so called "Spanish Flyovers", three of which are in progress at Rajagiriya, Ganemulla and Polgahawala with funding and technical support from Spain. And expressways, or one-way roads, will not solve the urban transportation problems within Colombo or Kandy. They require mass public transportation (buses and trains) and active private (walking and cycling) transportation solutions befitting a wise, healthy and even wealthy society in the age of the internet and climate change.

Central Expressway Contracts

With all due apologies for the rather long middle (or muddle) section in this article, let me turn to awarding of the contract for Central Expressway Stage III. In fact, not only Stage III, but also Stage I and Stage II have stirred up questions and controversy. There was already a 2013 contract for a section of Stage I given to the Chinese contractor, Metallurgical Construction Corporation (MCC), as an extension, courtesy of course the Rajapaksas, of their ongoing of their contract for a section of the Colombo Outer Circular Highway. The shenanigans involving these earlier awards received much exposure and criticisms from the Common Opposition during the 2014/15 presidential election. But just as it has done in the case of the Port City and Hambantota, the new (now old enough) government awarded the contract for the whole of Stage I to MCC by another handsome extension. This was in August 2015, before the parliamentary election but not long after the PM’s March 30 cabinet note disavowing ‘unsolicited proposals’, or sole-sourced contracts. As I noted earlier, entertaining unsolicited proposals is as bad as awarding sole-sourced contracts.

Stage II contracts are equally interesting, but with a local touch. The Stage II section was divided into four parts, and each part was given to a different consortium of local contractors, in November 2016. There was no competitive bidding and concerns over award prices exceeding estimates were brushed aside. And the Cabinet paper recommending the award(s), as was reported in the media, is classic cover-your-backside material: "The Cabinet Appointed Negotiating Committee after having considered the recommendations of the Procurement Committee and the outcome of the negotiations with the bidders decided to recommend for the approval of the Cabinet that the respective contract packages be awarded to the respective consortium of contractors which has submitted the bid for the relevant package at the corresponding negotiated bid price."

It will not be too cynical to speculate that practically every local contractor capable (hopefully so) of handling highway construction was given a piece of the (Stage II) pie through sweet heart negotiations without the sweat of competition. I am still a pupil of the old Darwin-Engels school that considers free competition and the struggle for survival are part of the animal world, but sweet heart deals are neither here (in socialism) nor there (in free market), and they should have no place in the school of good governance. More so, when one comes across this gem in the government’s Vision 2025: "We will stamp out corruption by encouraging competition and enabling transparency to give all Sri Lankans an equal chance at prosperity."

And now to Stage III.There has been plenty of media coverage on this in recent weeks and it is enough here to highlight some key discrepancies in the government’s narrative. Anonymous RDA officials have been quoted as saying that the government insisted on "rushing it through." The Sunday Observer of December 25, 2016, named and quoted an RDA official as saying that there were bids from four contractors and three consultants for Stage III of the Central Expressway, and that a decision would be made by mid-January 2017. This reporting is at odds what was going on with regard to tender solicitations involving Japanese companies. There is nothing transparent about the solicitation process despite the Prime Minister’s statement in parliament. There are still unanswered questions. The feasibility study and the Environmental Impact Assessment were carried out by two Sri Lankan universities. Without questioning the technical capabilities of individuals, it is fair to ask whether universities meet the requirements of professional liability in undertaking significant engineering projects. It would also seem that the two studies were still under review when the solicitation for Japanese contractors got under way.

It is also puzzling that only one response was received (from Taisei) out of the three firms from which prices were originally solicited in June 2016. All three firms were recommended by the Japanese Embassy in Colombo. And government officials rejected Taisei’s bid because Taisei did not submit a bid bond. This is again curious – to expect a bid bond from an ‘invited’ bidder. Then the names of three Japanese individuals enter the picture in canvassing for Fujita Corporation to be included in the solicitation. A second request for quotes went out on 3 November 2016, and another one later to include Fujita Corporation and extending the deadline for submission by two weeks. Only two quotations were received on the second round – from Taisei and Fujita. And the government made, or thinks it has, everyone happy by tacking on Fujita to Taisei and persuading the latter to drop its price from Rs. 159 Billion to Rs. 132 Billion.

There are other questions as well: Fujita’s lack of qualifications to be a bidder, and the shift from the Japanese International Co-operation Agency to the private Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi UFJ Ltd (BTMU). The government might argue that it has no option but to select contractors from a donor country when the latter is the sole donor for a specific project. Even so, there could be and there should be competitive bidding involving qualified firms from the donor country. The Japanese Ambassador in Colombo said as much, according to the Prime Minister’s statement in parliament. When open and competitive bidding is avoided even in single donor projects, questions about transparency and corruption are bound to arise not in one country, but two.

Soldier arrested over alleged sexual assault on 15-year old girl

By Sanchith Karunaratna-September 24, 2017

A soldier has been arrested over alleged counts of sexual abuse on a 15-year old girl in Wanathawilluwa. 

Police Officers attached to the Wanathawilluwa Police station detained a 40-year old soldier who was stationed at a military garrison in Mihintale was accused of the crime.  

Law enforcement authorities received intelligence that the soldier had sexually abused a young girl who lived in a neighboring house, upon returning to Wanathawilluwa on holiday on September 18. 

It has been reported that a medical officer is to examine to young girl for any signs of rape or assault. The Police are currently conducting comprehensive investigations into the incident.     

Lasantha murdered by gang from Tripoly camp

September 23, 2017 

The founding editor of ‘Sunday Leader’ Lasantha Wickrematunge has been murdered by a gang of murderers from Tripoly Army Camp, Maradana, Colombo. 10 say reports.

The investigations regarding the murder are being carried out on information received of a senior official of State Intelligence Service who had given the order for the murder with the knowledge of a higher official of the Defense Ministry.

Statements have been recorded from a large number of people including members of SL Army while certain media reports that an Army officer who is aware of the murder has been appointed to a very high position in the SL Army.

CID officers have recorded a statement from the daughter of Lasantha Wickrematunga. It is learnt that she had told the officers something Mr. Lasantha Wickrematunga had told her before he was murdered.

Lasantha had told his daughter that he could be murdered and the reason for his murder would be his exposure of the MiG aircraft transaction.

How will coins and notes make up 100 million?

2017-09-23

That is the question that has been bothering this small mind of Kumari. Yes, it is about Buddhist monks going pindapatha to collect the Rs 100 million fine imposed on Lalith Weeratunge (poor man) and Anusha Pelpita in the sil redi fiasco that cost the country much money. Everyone was talking about this – the great meritorious act of distributing free sil redi to silaththas and silaththis just before the last presidential elections, supposedly with a picture of one of the candidates and a very broad hint that could not be missed to cast the vote for this individual - the true giver of the white cloth.

He may have indicated he needed merit, but of course everyone knew, even the most senile of the recipients, that the gift came with a request, nay an order –VOTE For ME. 'The individual' is none other than Mahinda Rajapaksa who publicly owned up to giving the order to spend many millions of government money to do a meritorious act which also was supposed to save Buddhism in this pre-eminent Theravada Buddhist country. Oh me! Oh my! What things are done in the name of religion! You will have to stretch your imagination (because sense has no place here) to reason out how giving sil cloths to those oldies who observe the eight or ten precepts on Poya days is to keep Buddhism from dying out of this country. Kumari feels the idiocy of this reasoning and reason for the generosity with other people's money needs no elaboration. The rot is coming from within.

Embezzlement

So the case was heard; the two who opened the kitty and dished out the millions to buy the cloth were found guilty of embezzlement and imprisoned plus fined Rs 50 million each. Then came Mahinda Rajapaksa's admission that he gave the word to do it. The two are out of prison on bail but the money must be found to pay the fine. So some bright spark came up with the idea of utilizing the on-going Vas season where monks spend time in their abodes renewing their Vinaya vows and meditating and going further on the path. Lay people are expected to facilitate both by seeing more assiduously to the needs of the monks for three months: July Poya through October Poya. Their needs are food, clothing, shelter and medicines.

Thus, came the ancient and much revered habit of members of the Sangha going to households and receiving alms, particularly at this season. That bright spark mentioned got the brilliant idea of knocking two aims with one attempt: appear to follow the Buddha's admonitions to the Sangha and lay people by observing a practice that has come down from the Buddha's time and also bring monks to the forefront since like Pavlov's mice salivating at the ring of a bell, Buddhists fall on their knees when a yellow robe approaches and this time with bowl outstretched; NOT, repeat NOT for the traditional cooked rice, curry, fruits et al to be dropped in it but money, bucks, greenbacks, lucre. (Coins, now considered not worth the metal they are made from found in bowls, will be tossed aside, too burdensome to count.)

Stupendous amount

However, the question is: how to collect the stupendous amount of Rs 100 million with money dropped in as alms in the pindapatha monks' bowls. Why you infidel, the religious side of Kumari admonished (not Muslim though the word 'infidel' is used; a word that sends militant Alla worshippers berserk to draw out their guns, knives, bombs, whatever). The religious side of Kumari quoted a poem learnt long ago as a tot: Terry Morgan's words of wisdom though difficult to believe:
"Little drops of water,
Little grains of sand,
Make the mighty ocean
And the pleasant land.
So the little moments,
Humble though they be,
Make the mighty ages"
So those who sent the monks, some of them old and surely learned and some mere children in yellow robes to collect money, hope the little drops and grains collected will add upto 100 million or even a considerable part of it. Kumari bets not even a hundred thousand will be thus collected. Kumari cannot even count up to 100 million, so how have little bits of money make the mighty fines. Added to coins and notes will be other sundry goods. Dare any heathen place a rotten tomato or egg in a bowl? Kumari thinks this kind of plan deserves this type of derogatory response.

Maybe the Joint Opposition's instigated or at least, blessed idea is to serve as a token, a message, a hint. Hopefully, philanthropists, mostly those who make money by cheating, and overpricing may want to collect some non-material currency for the next birth. They might donate a Rs 1,000, a lakh, even a million to this fund and hope he who gives his blessings to this project and keeps his money safe, notes the giver for future favours; and the devas who may guide the spirit of the philanthropist to the next birth will look kindly on him and give him a rebirth not less than a cat's or dog's on the scale of rebirth hierarchy.

Final conclusion: The monk's bowl is very unfortunately discredited. Buddhism is given a bad blow. – Kumari

"The Sil redi judgment" – a plea for its correct analysis

 

by a Legal Correspondent-September 23, 2017, 5:50 pm

As a lawyer, I have carefully read and studied the 63-page Judgment of the Colombo High Court Judge Gihan Kulatunga in the so called Sil Redi Case. The Judgment is in Sinhalese and so were the proceedings. Some people have expressed erroneous views about the Judgment without reading it. This article attempts to provide what I think is a correct analysis of the Judgment.

Why it is an excellent Judgement?

After a trial of over 25 days former Secretary to the President Lalith Weeratunga and former Director General of the Telecommunication Regulatory Commission (TRC) Anusha Palpita were sentenced to three years rigorous imprisonment on being found guilty to the charge of criminal misappropriation of Rs.600 million belonging to the TRC which money had been transferred to the President’s Secretary’s Account No. 7040016 at the Taprobane Branch of the Bank of Ceylon to be used for distribution of "Sil Redi" during the 2015 Presidential Election campaign where Mahinda Rajapaksa was a candidate seeking election for a third term. The Elections Commissioner had gazette the Proclamation for the Election on November 20, 2014 calling for Nominations on December 8, 2014.

By all accounts it is an excellent Judgment. Every page of it is relevant to the facts of the case and the evidence and the legal implications. There are no unnecessary comments or remarks by the Judge, which is sometimes found in original Court Judgments delivered by Judges of lesser experience. Mr. Gihan Kulatunga is a highly respected Judge of the highest integrity and judicial independence. His father was a Supreme Court Judge. Judge Gihan Kulatunga’s Judgments have rarely been appealed from.

Judge Explains the Charges

The High Court Judgment is excellent in many ways. In the Introductory pages of the 63-page Judgment, the Judge refers to the three charges against the two accused (Lalith Weeratunga and Anusha Palpita). He outlines the charges very carefully and in an elementary way. Next in pages 3-7 of the Judgment, the Judge outlines the basic principles of the criminal law applicable to the three charges and refers to the relevant sections of our Penal Code. He first starts with section 386 of the Penal Code which is the main charge and which relates to criminal misappropriation of movable property. This case relate to "movable property" in the sense of money. Under section 386 a person who dishonestly misappropriates any moveable property commits a crime as explained under that section. He then quite rightly refers to other relevant sections of the Penal Code such as sections 21, 22 and 23. Section 21 defines "wrongful gain and wrongful loss", section 22 defines the meaning of the term "dishonestly" and section 23 explains what is meant by "fraudulently".

The Judge then goes on to refer to sections 100, 101 and 102 of the Penal Code which deals with the Abetment of a criminal act, because in this case there were two accused and both had allegedly joined together (abetted each other) in committing the crime. Lastly, the Judge deals with section 113 of the Penal Code. This section relates to Conspiracy to commit a crime. This section becomes relevant because the prosecution alleged that both accused had taken part in a conspiracy or conspired to commit this crime which was the misappropriation of Rs.600 million of TRC funds.

Judge Explains Legal Defences Available

Having set out the law and legal provisions applicable, Justice Kulatunga in a remarkable manner outlines some of the basic legal principles which are present in our law to guarantee the freedom of any person accused of a crime. The elucidation of these legal principles is more relevant today because currently the public are saying that those who committed financial crimes under the previous regime of Mahinda Rajapaksa have not been charged and convicted of such alleged crimes. This public perception may have induced Justice Kulatunga to set-out in a few pages the right of citizens to the protection of law and the important features that protect their innocence, unless and until they are proved guilty. In that context, Justice Kulatunga devotes about three pages of the Introductory Part of his Judgment in explaining these salient principles. Firstly, he clearly states that in the case before him the prosecution must prove their charges beyond all reasonable doubt. If at the end of the Prosecution case there is some doubt about the guilt of the accused then they are entitled to be acquitted and go free even without a Judge having to call for any explanation from them.

Secondly, the Judge states that the accused need not give any evidence and no criticism can be made on any accused remaining silent. On the other hand, if the accused does wish to give evidence or make any statement in open Court, he may do so.

Judge sets out the Prosecution Case

Having outlined these principles in the Judgment, the Judge moves on to look at the Prosecution case, the witnesses and the documents and the totality of the Prosecution evidence. The Prosecution was very ably and honorably conducted for the Attorney -General’s Department by Deputy Solicitor General Mudalige.

According to the Judgment there were about 17 witnesses listed to give evidence at the trial. However, only 10 were called by the Prosecution. Three of these witnesses testified that they were the main people who supplied the Sil Redi in this instance. All of them dealt in the supply of textiles mainly on government and public tenders. They were registered suppliers with the Ministry of Commerce and the Ministry of Trade. There was no problem about any one of these witnesses as regard to their credibility etc.

The first witness was H. Hettiarachchi, the proprietor of a business called Subhatex. The next supplier called to the witness stand was Firoze Hadji Anwer and was the proprietor of Chiptex textiles and the third supplier called was Advani Yusuf, who also owned a textile firm in Colombo. All three of these textile traders gave evidence to say that they were registered suppliers to the government and that they were asked to tender for white cloth to be used as Sil Redi and be packaged in five-meters lengths with a label placed in each parcel. These labels were to be supplied to them from a printing establishment in Borella. These textile suppliers were further told that a Buddhist Priest by the name of Rev. Vattinapaha Somananda who was a Coordinator working in the Presidential Secretariat will be responsible and will co-ordinate this entire Sil Redi distribution. The ultimate target was about 700,000 to 800,000 packages of five meter lengths of cloth in each to be distributed island wide mainly through temples prior to the Presidential Election in January 2015. A meter of such Sil Redi was normally to cost about Rs. 165/= but the suppliers had been able to negotiate a lesser price of Rs.150/=.

The evidence supported the view that the Sil Redi distribution will be completed by the month of December 2014. The textile suppliers were to be paid by the President’s Secretary once they had completed their tasks.

The next important evidence that was given was that of Rev. Somananda who stated that he worked at the Presidential Secretariat as a Coordinator to President Rajapaks and that he had been entrusted with the task of co-ordinating the distribution of the 700,000 to 800,000 packs of Sil Redi prior to the Presidential Election. He was in touch with the textile merchants who were to deliver the Sil Redi parcels to him for distribution. Rev. Somananda and the textile traders admitted and confirmed that in each pack carried a label which read as follows:x

Judge Explains How the "Misappropriation" Originated

Having explained in his Judgment the whole physical operation relating to the distribution of Sil Redi, the learned High Court Judge discusses in his Judgment how the money of Rs.600 million was found for this project. The Presidential Secretariat which was ordering and paying for distribution of the Sil Redi had no funds to meet the cost of this operation. Here, the Senior Accountant of the Presidential Secretariat (one Mr. Gunaratne) had looked into the finances at the Presidential Secretariat and found that it had no money whatsoever to meet the cost of such a Sil Redi distribution. This absence or lack of money had been conveyed to Lalith Weeratunga who was then the Secretary to President Mahinda Rajapaksa.

Although no reference whatsoever was made by the Prosecution or by the Judge in this case, the public are aware that there was also another Senior Official in the Presidential Secretariat namely Gamini Senarath who was the President’s Chief-of-Staff. But there is no mention or reference to the involvement of Gamini Senarath in this Sil Redi Prosecution or case. All roads in the Presidential Secretariat led to Lalith Weeratunga, the Secretary to the President.

When Lalith Weeratunga was told that there were no funds for the Sil Redi operation in the Presidential Secretariat, what did he do? The High Court Judge was told by the Prosecution that if the Sil Redi was a normal distribution of the government like say school books, and there was a short supply of sil redi or school books in the country and the President wanted to rectify such a shortage, the President was entitled and empowered to ask for a Supplementary Estimate from the Treasury. That is the correct and legal way to meet such an emergency requirement.

Lalith Weeratunga Seeking Rs. 600 million from the TRC

However, Mr. Lalith Weeratunga did not think in that way or did not act in that way. He himself would have thought of getting the funds from another institution over which the President and he had control. The only obvious institution to him was the Telecommunication Regulatory Commission. Why the TRC?. From its inception in 1996 the Telecommunication Regulatory Commission which is established under the Sri Lanka Telecommunication Act comes under the President. Many Sri Lankans are not aware of this fact. The TRC is a Regulatory Body like the Central Bank which regulates the banking institutions and the Insurance Board which regulates the insurance institutions. The TRC regulates all institutions involved in radio, TV and telephones and what is important is that the TRC gets its funds not from the Treasury but from a CESS contributed by all institutions regulated by it. When we pay tax on each mobile phone that tax is credited by the mobile phone operators (Dialog, Mobitel, Estisalat,etc) and it is to be remitted to the TRC as a CESS.

What is significant in the Sil Redi case is that the Minister in charge of the TRC is the President. Even today it is so.

Accordingly, under the TRC Act there are five Board members. The Chairman of the Board is the Secretary of the Ministry in charge of the TRC – automatically Lalith Weeratunga became the Chairman. The Director General is appointed by the Minister, who is the President and Anusha Palpita a former Director of Information of the Government was appointed by the President as Director General TRC and it was Lalith Weeratunga who issued that letter of appointment. Other three members of the TRC under Mahinda Rajapakse were Porf. Sampath Amaratunga, the Vice Chancellor Sri Jayewardenapura University, next Mr. Prasanna de Silva, a Board Member and Mr. S S Sahabandu, also a Board member. Director General Anusha Palpita is also a Board Member.

From what is stated above it is obvious that the TRC was like the Presidential Secretariat. It was completely under the President and both the Board and its Director General would unhesitatingly abide and follow the instructions from the President’s office. A wish from the Presidential Secretariat would be a command to them. Thus, when Lalith Weeratunga was looking for money for the Sil Redi operation he naturally looked to the TRC where he was the Chairman. Anusha Palpita the Director General had been appointed by him with the President’s approval and the other three members Prof. Sampath Amaratunga, Mr. Prasanna de Silva, and Mr. S S Sahabandu would not hesitate to act on a request from the Presidential Secretariat.

In that situation Justice Kulatunga’s Judgment clearly shows how Lalith Weeratunga sent a written directive on December 5, 2014 to Anusha Palpita to remit Rs.600 million to Lalith Weeratunga’s account at the Presidential Secretariat for distribution of Sil Redi. On the same day that he got the written directive from his Chairman Lalith Weeratunga, Anusha Palpita sent by electronic transfer the requested sum of Rs.600 million to the account of Lalith Weeratunga held at the Taprobane Branch of the Bank of Ceylon. It was this money of Rs. 600 million totally owned by TRC that Lalith Weeratunga obtained and authorized for the purchase and distribution of Sil Redi.

TRC had No Legal Power to give

the Money

Next the Judgment clearly shows that the entire request from Lalith Weeratunga to Anusha Palpita of the TRC was wrong. He had no authority to do so. The TRC Act is very clear that its funds can only be used for specific purposes and a remittance of Rs.600 million for a Sil Redi distribution was unlawful and illegal. The TRC is responsible for television, radio and telephones (including mobiles). What has "Sil Redi" got to do with the TRC? Additionally, it is very clear that there was no approval of the TRC Board of Directors for this remittance. Both Weeratunga and Palpita in their evidence before the High court made an attempt to state that this authorization had been approved by the Board by "Circulation of Board Papers". But this view was not acceptable to the Court. Also the evidence of the TRC Commission Secretary (Ms. Gunaratne) which was given at the trial by the Prosecution discounted any assertion by the accused that the TRC Board had approved this remittance of Rs.600 million to the President’s office. However, as stated earlier the Board could not do so by Statute and the TRC was also not empowered to give donations of any kind.

The other important issue which is evidenced from a careful study of Justice Kulatunga’s Judgment is that Lalith Weeratunga did not try to argue that what he did, namely ordering TRC to remit Rs.600 million for Sil Redi, was because of a directive from the President and therefore, he had no alternative but to obey such a directive of his boss.

Did Weeratunga Blindly

follow Orders?

Many newspaper columnists have commented on the Sil Redi case on the basis that a Senior Public Servant (Weeratunga) was compelled to carry out an illegal directive of his superior, namely the President. Accordingly, these same columnists put forward Justice Kulatunga’s Judgment as a warning to all public servants not to carry out illegal orders. A former Auditor General has also gone on record saying that in this particular Sil Redi case Lalith Weeratunga had the option not to obey the President’s directive and not implement it even at the cost of losing his job.

However, the evidence in this case does not disclose that Lalith Weeratunga took up such a position in his defence. Lalith Weeratunga gave evidence in this case. Here again one or two columnists have said that he made a Dock statement. A Dock statement is different from giving evidence in the witness box. If an accused chooses to give a Dock statement he cannot be cross-examined and his Dock statement has to be accepted as an explanation from him. According to established judicial views, Dock statements have little evidentiary value. In the Sil Redi case it was Anusha Palpita who gave the Dock statement and the Dock statement was commented on adversely by the Judge because he said that the TRC Board had approved this remittance when in fact the officer of the Commission had earlier stated that there was no such approval and that statement had preceded Palpita’s Dock statement.

Lalith Weeratunga did not give a Dock statement, but gave evidence from the witness box and he was cross-examined. Regrettably, for him, the learned Judge was not impressed with Weeratunga’s evidence. The Judge did not go to the extent of saying that Weeratunga told untruths and was a liar. The Judge gave him the benefit of the doubt but concluded that he was not impressed with Lalith Weeratunga’s evidence. This is a scar that Lalith Weeraunga will have to carry even in later years namely, that his evidence did not impress the Trial Judge who can see the demeanour of a witness unlike an Appellate Court Judge who does not see the witness.

Weeratunga Did Not Say

He was Compelled

Coming back to the earlier point, nowhere did Lalith Weeratunga say that what he did was merely to carry out the President’s orders and therefore he himself is not to blame. Even to consider the legal position of an employee saying that he was compelled by his boss to do a wrong thing does not come into the picture in this case because Weeratunga never said that he was only carrying out orders and that he had no freedom to act on his own. The Prosecution case clearly shows that Lalith Weeratunga acted on his own. In fact, as the Judge remarked at that time there were Media statements by Lalith Weeratunga which indicated that he supported the President’s re-election. In other words Weeratunga had become "A Political Public Servant" who was very keen on the election of his boss for a third term. Weeratunga’s act of directing the sum of Rs.600 million from the TRC was a voluntary act of his and not done by compulsion of the President and to argue that it was involuntary and that he had no option is not supported by his evidence. Also of importance is the evidence of the Election Commissioner Mahinda Deshapriya who very clearly said that any type of distribution of any sort of gifts or handouts, religious or otherwise on behalf of one candidate was a clear election offence.

In this writer’s view Lalith Weeratunga never thought that his boss will lose the election and therefore the money taken from the TRC could always be repaid by a Supplementary Estimate and the whole episode would be covered up.

Another, comment about Justice Kulatunga’s excellent Judgment in this writer’s view is that it will become one of the leading Judgment’s in the country not only for public servants, but also for law students and will find a place in the legal syllabuses on criminal law. What is fascinating about this Judgment is that Justice Kulatunga does not venture into unnecessary comments or remarks. Some Judges fall into this trap. It is this unnecessary or irrelevant remarks which give the cue to Appeal Court Lawyers to attack the Judgment.

This correspondent could only notice two matters where Justice Kulatunga had made a statement not entirely related to the case. First, he appears to have said that there was a culture during the time of the previous regime of President Rajapakse for public servant to obey the wishes and orders of their political superiors.

The other matter is humorous aside at page 30 of his Judgment. The learned Judge could not help but say about this Sil Redi distribution in December 2014:-

"In our Society everyone knows that the distribution of Sil Redi occurs during Wesak, Poson or Esala season and it does not normally occur in the months of December/January".

A smile may appear on his face when Justice Kulatunga reads this comment he himself made!

Can an Appeal Succeed?

One cannot predict the arguments that will be put before an Appeal Court. No doubt President’s Counsel will appear and no doubt the Attorney General’s department will defend the judgment and ask that the appeal be dismissed.

In this connection it is significant to note that neither of the two accused benefited financially from this misappropriation. They did not take or get one cent. As their Counsel said they did not take home even one Sil Redi packet. Is such financial gain a requirement of crime?

This is a matter that would be canvassed at before the Appeal Court.

On the other hand if President Rajapaksa was re-elected, both the accused could enjoy high positions at State expense for themselves and their families. That is how the political system works!

The other possible ground for appeal is that both accused, were only obeying orders and had no "wrongful mind" or (mens rea) of their own. They had no option but to comply – especially when such a directive came from the former President! Such a ground may not hold water because the evidence of both accused at the trial did not support such a view.

As stated earlier any new argument can be taken up at the Appeal to obtain relief for the accused who are now on conditional bail pending the Appeal. We have to wait and see.