Democracy without people

• The Government shows no interest in engaging people in creating important laws
• Two instances prove the Government is now people-less in all its workings

The Government is not prosecuting any employer for violating immigration law 

Working towards importing labour is also polar opposite to what this Government kept promising

The second is in how very serious policy decisions are made without people

The larger majority thus remains uninterested. That allows for the question, “Who wants a new Constitution?”

Freedom to import labour is different and is a demand from the export oriented manufacturing sector

2017-10-20

This is sheer common sense. No law, no bill passed in Parliament without any opportunity for people to feel an ownership to, will even be implemented the right way and efficiently too. 

Without people feeling they have a stake in them, there will be no compulsion for the Government and the State agencies to have them implemented independently. It begins with the Constitution and holds true with all important laws and bills like Electoral Reforms, Provincial Councils and power sharing, e-NIC Act, Labour Law reforms, the Audit Bill and others of such importance. 

Lack of any interest in society on such laws and bills also says much about the democratic process in the country.

To date, this Government has not shown any interest in engaging the people in creating important laws and bills brought to Parliament. In making serious policy decisions with people involved and implementing them. 

Let me take two serious instances to prove the Government is now “people-less” in all its workings.

The first is the Constitution making process that is without “People”. The much hyped “public consultation” over the new Constitution had no “public consultation”. It was mere collecting of ‘proposals and suggestions’. The Committee appointed was only a “collecting centre”. They received proposals, made a report out of them with their own comments and handed them over to the PM. There was no serious and open public discourse allowed on the proposals received to make it a public consultative process. The Government restricted the drafting process to a Steering Committee in Parliament. Is is not a body representing the people? Does society has social trust on its competency to create a Constitution? 

What society is seeing is a mighty haste in Government to have a Constitution passed in Parliament by whatever means possible.

The lack of public participation in drafting the Constitution is being covered by saying the people will vote on the Constitution at a Referendum. That again is not public consultation in creating a Constitution. Referendum is asking the people to consent to a Constitution drafted by a small group and given a two thirds majority in a Parliament that can shift allegiance either way. Absence of “People” in creating their own future Constitution, allows Sinhala Buddhist elements to oppose government’s proposals as anti Sinhala Buddhist, as anti Unitary and with allegations it would pave for separation. 
On the flip side, Tamil North is given good reason to reject the draft as inadequate in answering their long standing political grievances. 

Around 100,000 young women migrate to the Mid East as house maids annually, instead of seeking employment in BOI approved factories that Upul Jayasuriya said was short of 200,000 workers

The larger majority thus remains uninterested. That allows for the question, “Who wants a new Constitution?” The joint statement by the two high priests of Malwatte and Asgiriya reflects this social ignorance. They would not have had space for such intervention, had the Constitution making process been a ‘people centred’ process.
The second is in how very serious policy decisions are made without people. State Minister of Finance, Eran Wickramaratne went on record to say, the Government is taking steps to remove barriers for employers to import foreign labour. 

This is a fundamental change in labour policy. Importing foreign labour is more serious than even working out a new Constitution. 

With or without a new Constitution, this is about the economic life of people. It is about “right to livelihood” guaranteed in our Constitution.

Working towards importing labour is also polar opposite to what this Government kept promising. 

At the August 2015 elections as UNP leader, Wickremesinghe promised one million jobs to Sri Lankan youth. Again on November 5, 2015 unveiling the Government’s economic strategy in Parliament, PM reiterated the promise of creating one million jobs for Sri Lankans. 

Contradicting this promise it is now said, foreign labour would be allowed to be brought in for vacancies available. That policy shift means, all future vacancies could also go for imported labour. This is only because employers ask for cheap and unorganised labour they can exploit to the last copper.

There are over 200,000 foreign workers from mostly India and China at present who are illegally employed by employers. 

The Government is not prosecuting any employer for violating immigration law in using illegally brought in foreign labour. Instead what State Minister Eran Wickramaratne says is, the Government will be regularising and legalising presently resorted to illegal importing of labour into the country. Making the ground for such, former Chairman of the BOI-SL Upul Jayasuriya told media in early August 2016, there were over 200,000 job vacancies within BOI approved factories alone. At the same media briefing, Minister Samarawickrama said, industrial zone of the Hambantota Port once in operation would create one million more job opportunities in that region. 

The 200,000 vacancies former BOI Chairman spoke about and these millions of job opportunities promised are not vacancies for professionals.

Contracting foreign “professionals” that State Minister Eran Wickramaratne said would be possible once legal issues are cleared, is just plain bluff. 

Foreign professionals are required rarely and can be employed even today, if employers can justify their necessity. Protests against the CEPA (Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement) and the ETCA (Economic and Technology Cooperative Agreement) were not totally based on professionals coming into Sri Lanka. 
It was more because local producers feared to compete with Indian products that could come to the local market. Both the Rajapaksa Government then and the present Yahapalana Government avoid social dialogue on these issues. It is social ignorance that allows continued opposition to these bi-lateral proposals.

Freedom to import labour is different and is a demand from the export oriented manufacturing sector. 

They were asking for this freedom from President Rajapaksa too, who was hesitant, not because of professional protests against CEPA, but because it could affect his vote bank. 

There was a feeling among his own close confidantes, large numbers of foreign labour in the country could be interpreted as stealing “our jobs”. The Trumpian argument so to say, one hears against immigrants in the US and in European countries.
Importing of labour from countries like India, Bangladesh, China and Myanmar, is argued on shortage of labour for the apparel and other manufacturing industries. 
There is no dialogue and discussions on this issue with relevant Trade Unions before policy decisions are taken. There is no dialogue as to why there is a shortage of labour for these sectors. Active TUs like the FTZ and General Services Employees’ Union has raised different issues as reasons for shortage of labour. In all FTZ factories counting around 300 and in other BOI approved factories that may total to about 2,700 in all, female workers total over 70 per cent. It can be over 80 per cent in the apparel sector.
There is an unanswered question here. Around 100,000 young women migrate to the Mid East as house maids annually, instead of seeking employment in BOI approved factories that Upul Jayasuriya said was short of 200,000 workers. 

Why don’t these young women consider employment in these factories? Why do they prefer Mid East employment as house maids, ignoring all adverse publicity about working conditions in the Mid East?

The FTZ trade union argues it is all about establishing decent workplaces with labour rights honoured, an undertaking the Government has given the EU in accepting EU GSP “Plus” benefits. Can this Government honour EU GSP “Plus” conditions with imported labour?

As much as politicians and other policymakers, the local business community too is old fashioned and backward. There is this contradiction where Sri Lanka is being flaunted as a “hi-tech” hub while the local management outlook is ancient. They still believe in employing men and women who could be ordered around as paid slaves. They don’t understand that we live in a modern civilised world where improving production through modern management and collaborative practices that allow for an efficient, satisfied labour force is the accepted norm.  

In simple language, what State Minister Wickramaratne is making way for, are demands of a primitive business community, which does not want to honour labour laws, workers’ rights and fundamental rights enshrined in our Constitution and established through ILO Conventions 87 and 98. 

Conventions this country is signatory to and have been ratified. All that a civilised, modern world believes should be guaranteed without discrimination.

Worst is the fact, which this manufacturing industry is provided with special infrastructure facilities, tax holidays, tax waivers, tax concessions at the expense of Sri Lankans. What State Minister Wickramaratne says is, Sri Lankan taxpayers’ money will go to provide jobs to those in neighbouring countries, because that’s what investors want. In essence, this Government would provide what investors want and not what people want. Sadly, the past 40 years has proved, this investor approach has not developed the country for the people of the country.

From the Constitution to all legislation and to policy decisions, what is very apparent is, everything without social dialogue, ultimately goes against the people. It is this factor that erodes public trust this Government gained at the last August 2015 elections and is held against the Government as breaking all election promises. It is not just accountability and transparency in governance that matters. It is giving democracy a functional importance with people’s participation that matters most.  Democracy without people is freedom of exploitation and freedom of looting a nation.

Sri Lanka: Endless Debate — Ekiya or unitary or unary?

*The Long Term Solution To Sri Lanka’s Ethnic Problem

*Will Sri Lanka Follow The Example Of Nepal?

Now, let us look what it is meant by “unitary”. According to the Oxford Dictionary, unitary means forming a single or uniform entity –relating to a system of government or organization in which the powers of the constituent parts are vested in a central body.

by Priyantha Wijayatunga-Oct 20, 2017

( October 20, 2017, Stockholm, Sri Lanka Guardian) As we all may know, “Republic of Sri Lanka is a unitary state” according to the current Constitution of Sri Lanka. Therefore, we believe that Sri Lanka is an undivided and single state, by definition. However, it is learnt that in the draft English document/report that is being highly discussed currently by many parties and individuals on a possible future constitution of Sri Lanka, it is stated that Sri Lanka is a free, sovereign and independent republic which is an Eekiiya Rajya/ Urumitta Nadu. The word “unitary” is not being used any longer and also not any replacement with an appropriate English word appears there. And proponents of the document claim that “Urumita Nadu” means “Eekiiya Rata”, whereas opponent of it claim that it means united country implying that it consists of several states, similar to a federal state such as the one in USA; therefore the word “unitary” should be used instead, like in the current Constitution to make sure that Sri Lanka is an undivided and single country.

However, according to Dr. Jayampathy Wickramaratne, MP, one of the chief architects of the draft document, the use of the word “unitary” has some problems. According to him the word “unitary” does not mean that there cannot be a separation of the state. For example, the UK is unitary but it allows its components to break away at their will. Therefore, his opinion is to use no English word but the Sinhala word “Eekiiya Rajya” and “Urumitta Nadu”, which in his opinion is the best Tamil word for the Sinhala word “Eekiiya Rajya”, since there is no best English word to mean “Eekiiya”. Furthermore, according to him there are examples of some countries where terms from respective native languages are used in their English version of the constitution to mean one, single and undivided country. However, it is clear that it is best to use a suitable English word to mean “Eekiiya” in the English version of the future constitution of Sri Lanka, since internationally it will be read, referred and interpreted. Any misinterpretations can lead to controversies internationally, and they could lead to many problems for Sri Lanka, after all being a small country and with some reputation for having various types of pressure from the international community, at least recently.

Now, let us look what it is meant by “unitary”. According to the Oxford Dictionary, unitary means forming a single or uniform entity –relating to a system of government or organization in which the powers of the constituent parts are vested in a central body. This implies that constituent parts exist and they are left with no powers vested in them. And Collins Dictionary gives an example for the word unitary as follows. A unitary country or organization is one in which two or more areas or groups have joined together, have the same aims, and are controlled by a single government. So, the same implication applies here too. In one sense, since the word unitary deals usually with two or more constituent parts with a central body, one day the vested powers in the central body may be sought by these constituent parts, by sharing them, or a similar situation may arise. Note that it may be the case that a unitary country exists as long as its constituent parts hold the same aims. So, in that sense, the opponents of the separation of state dislike the word ‘unitary’. However, the word ‘unitary’ has been used for many years in Sri Lanka to mean “Eekiiya” and, therefore, its meaning is known to the people of Sri Lanka in that sense rather than having it well-defined.

If the word “unitary” to mean “Eekiiya” is not used mainly due to its problems elsewhere in the world and those mentioned above, my suggestion is to use the adjective”unary”. Note that it is very important to use an adjective to describe a state because, otherwise, one may be able to describe it differently by incomplete references even to its own constitution. The word “unary” almost never has been used outside the disciplines of mathematics, computer science and alike; but to my best understanding it means the nature of being oneness or “Eekiiya”. According to the Oxford and Macmillan dictionaries, the word “unary” means consisting of or involving a single component or element (especially of a mathematical operation). Furthermore, according to Collins Dictionary, “unary” means consisting of, or affecting, a single element or component. So, it is clear that the word “unary” means existing or being operated alone or as a single entity. Even though the word “unary” is almost confined to mathematics and related disciplines, it is never impossible to use it in other contexts such as political, sociological and so on. And the best thing about it is that it never refers to either any constituent parts of the entity that it describes or any central body therein. It defines just oneness. Note that wherever there is a central body or centre there are constituent parts or a surrounding environment. If it is needed that Sri Lanka is an undivided and single country, then it needs to remove any traces of possible divisions, such as constituent parts and so on. Thus, the word “unary” serves the purpose well. Here, note that all the quotes from dictionaries referred here are based on their online versions. I wish that my suggestion of the word “unary” to the future constitution of Sri Lanka to describe it as “Eekiiya Rajya” will create some discussion among those who are involved in preparing a new constitution and all other interested parties. Of course, in the event of having no new constitution, but a revision of the current one, the proposed word can be adopted after careful discussion.

( Priyantha Wijayatunga, Ph. D. is a Senior Lecturer at the Umeå University, Sweden)

The Controversial Provincial Councils (Amendment) Act 17 of 2017

Nihal Seneviratne (former Secretary General of Parliament)

October 14, 2017, 6:08 pm 

The Provincial Councils (Amend) Act No. 17 of 2017 was passed in Parliament on Sept. 20 and certified by the Speaker on Sept. 22. There has arisen a great deal of controversy and debate regarding the passage of the Bill and its enactment. The Bill was presented to the House on July 26 and had its first reading on Sept. 20. It was taken up for its second reading and passed with 154 voting for and 43 against. At the end of the Committee Stage and third reading, the Bill was passed with 157 votes for and 37 against. Two days later the Bill was certified by the Speaker and became Act No. 17 of 2017.

Much of the controversy and debate has arisen as a result of many Amendments being moved at the Committee Stage. It is argued that these Amendments were not made available earlier when the Bill was gazetted on Aug. 3 nor were they made available to the Members at the Second Reading stage and so the Members had no opportunity to study in depth the contents of the Amendments. In a sense the argument is correct except that Standing Orders of the House 37-40 provide for in detail the procedure of moving Amendments at the Committee Stage. This is recognized parliamentary procedure and is practiced and followed in all Parliaments throughout the world. Standing Order 38 provides the form in which Amendments can be moved and subsection 3 stipulate that an Amendment must be relevant to the stipulation that each Amendment proposed shall be examined by the Attorney General in terms of Article 77 of the Constitution. This lays down the procedure for the Attorney General to examine every Bill and to lay down the procedure for any provision which cannot be validly passed except by the special majority prescribed by the Constitution. It further states that in the case of an Amendment proposed to a Bill in Parliament, the Attorney General shall communicate his opinion to the Speaker at the stage when the Bill is ready to be put to Parliament for to acceptance.

It is understood that when the Committee Stage Amendments were moved by the Minister on behalf of the Government, the Attorney General had submitted his opinion to the Speaker indicating that all the Amendments required a two thirds majority of the Members.

It is correct that when the original Bill No. 195 was presented to the House on July 26 it carried only two Amendments to the original Act No. 2 of 1988. An Amendment was made to Section 13 of the principal enactment to provide for 30% of the total candidates to be female.

It is also correct that at the Committee Stage of this Bill many Amendments were moved including a clause to set up a Delimitation Committee of five persons to be approved by the President. Other Amendments moved were to the principal enactment relate to names of political parties, election of Members of Provincial Councils, ballot boxes etc.

Erksine May at P 496 under the sub heading object of an amendment and effect on debate states thus:

"The object of an amendment may be either to modify a question in such a way as to increase its acceptability or to present to the House a different proposition as an alternative to the original question"

It should also be borne in mind that the Constitution in Clause 80(3) specifically states thus: "Where a Bill becomes law upon the certificate of the President or the Speaker, as the case may be, being endorsed thereon, no court or tribunal shall inquire into, pronounce upon or in any manner call in question the validity of such Act on any ground whatsoever".

Our attention has been drawn to the move made by the retired Chief Justice Sarath Silva to move a Fundamental Rights Petition in the Supreme Court to contest the validity of the Speaker’s Certificate placed on the Bill and placing before court facts relating to the absence of Amendments moved at Committee Stage in the Bill gazetted or when the Bill was presented to the House or during the second Reading of the Bill. This is correct. In his petition to the Supreme Court, he also calls for court to determine the validity of the Speaker’s Certificate on the Bill. Since this is a matter before the Supreme Court, one presumes that a correct decision will be given and the matter should rest there.

Yahapalana reforms continue - Sirisena throws the gauntlet at his detractors

Oct 19, 2017

Inside Politics with Chanakya

“A ruler’s duty in the internal administration of the country is three fold: raksha or protection of the state from external aggression, palana or maintenance of law and order within the state and yogakshshema or safeguarding the welfare of the people.” – Kautilya - The Arthashastra

The role played by President Maithripala Sirisena in these interesting times is not unenviable given the complexities and unique nature of the current political scenario. Apart from balancing a coalition government formed with his party, the Sri Lanka Freedom Party’s (SLFP) rival, the United National Party (UNP), Sirisena has to also maintain his legitimacy as leader of the SLFP while challenging detractors who were former heavyweights of the party.

The growing external pressures on the country on the whole, especially in the economic sphere, cannot be ignored as well. The Central Bank of Sri Lanka (CBSL) Annual Report of 2016 has indicated that the total general government external debt has grown by 10 percent in 2016 to US$ 27.2 billion.

Sri Lanka definitely is facing interesting times.

As pointed out by SLFP General Secretary and Agriculture Minister, Duminda Dissanayake during a chat with media personnel, the yahapalana government formed in 2015 is in fact a government focused on reforms.

He explained that a closer look at the actions of the government at present would clearly show the reforms undertaken by the government in every sector.

Politically, the unity government led by Sirisena and UNP Leader, Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe is trying to work out a new political culture where usually opposing factions are trying to operate a working administration while maintaining checks and balances on each other.

Also, the draconian piece of legislation in the form of the 18th Amendment to the Constitution introduced by the former Mahinda Rajapaksa regime during its march towards a total dictatorship, was repealed by the 19th Amendment to the Constitution.

Democratically, the government has made sincere efforts in establishing civil liberties that were nonexistent during the Rajapaksa regime. Legislation required ensuring these civil liberties like the Right to Information Bill, the establishment of the Office of Missing Persons, etc., among others were enacted.

On the economic front, it is no secret that the unity government inherited what Finance Minister Mangala Samaraweera has termed as “a monster” from the last administration. External debt taken by the Rajapaksas at commercial interest rates matured and became ready for repayment under the unity government.

The Sirisena-Wickremesinghe duo has had to become innovative when handling non-performing assets that have huge debts to be settled like the Mattala Airport and the Hambantota Port. Despite criticism over the government’s move to look for public private partnerships of joint ventures to operate these assets, the search for alternative options have also drawn a zero given the lean state coffers.

Be that as it may, as stated by Dissanayake, the unity government is set with a reforms agenda trying to set the country back on the right path while mending relations with the international community that were beyond strained during the decade prior to 2015.

LG polls drama

 Another key challenge faced by the government is the holding of elections to local government bodies that is now overdue.

Elections Commission officials stated that electing members to 335 local councils – 271 Pradeshiya Sabhas, 41 Urban Councils and 23 Municipal Councils is to take place on January 20. However, the delay in gazetting the Local Government Elections Amendments Act by the Local Government and Provincial Councils Minister Faizer Mustapha might result in pushing the holding of LG polls further from January.

The Elections Commission is unable to announce the polls date and other related dates until the gazette is published.

An increase in the number of local government bodies in the Nuwara Eliya District and the government’s move to introduce another amendment to the LG polls legislation on two bodies in the Northern Province – Puthukuduirippu and Maritime Pattu, which have not faced polls since 2010 – have caused a delay in issuing the gazette notification.

Nevertheless, the growing concerns over the delay in holding local government elections have compelled Mustapha to personally push for the holding of polls. Last week during a discussion of SLFP organizers led by the President, Mustapha had pointed out that there was growing dissention among many over the delay in holding local government elections and any further delay would not bode well for the government.

It is learnt that the President has now intervened and requested the authorities to resolve the issues that are delaying the publishing of the gazette.

Party reforms

 Nevertheless, 2018 will be a year of elections. The government will have no option but to hold the local government and provincial council polls next year.

The biggest challenge in facing polls is before the SLFP.

Sirisena’s detractors while riling the SLFP membership against the party leadership and pushing them to call for a united SLFP are on the other hand carrying out promotional work of the G.L. Peiris led, Basil Rajapaksa operated Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna.

A group of SLFP seniors who have continuously pledged to align with the SLFP in the event the party contested separately at elections are now faced with a dilemma.

Sirisena has thrown the ball to their court by stating that the SLFP will contest separately at elections under the United People’s Freedom Alliance (UPFA).

Interestingly, former President, MP Mahinda Rajapaksa, who claims of being a true SLFPer, is in fact the key promoting force of brother Basil’s latest political project, the Podujana Permauna. Not only promotional material, but even the membership cards of the new political party are printed with the party symbol and Mahinda Rajapaksa’s picture.

The impression given to the masses is that the Podujana Permauna is led by Mahinda Rajapaksa.

The SLFP constitution clearly states that a party member cannot be a member of another political party and work for its promotion.

A group of SLFPers calling themselves members of the joint opposition and working for the promotion of the Podujana Peramuna have therefore acted in violation of the SLFP constitution.

This fact was clearly stated by former President, Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumartunge, who has re-entered active politics by taking up the post of SLFP organizer for the Attanagalla electorate. It was formerly held by former Minister Sarana Gunawardena, who is currently in remand custody.

After being appointed as SLFP organizer, Kumaratunge expressing her sentiments on the removal of several senior SLFP organizers said those who have been replaced are ones who have already left the party and promoting another political force.

“When these members are invited for party meetings even the central committee meeting they don’t show up. They are running behind some other party. It is they who have left the party. So now we have appointed new party organizers to work for the SLFP in the electorates,” she said.

Referring to the objections expressed by Minister Susil Premajayantha and John Seneviratne over the removal of some senior SLFP organizers, Kuamartunge responded by saying “why were they silent when these members did the wrong this and went to promote another political party against the SLFP.”

“Rajapaksas are trying to divide the party and defeat it. We will not allow it to happen,” the former President charged.

However, as a last ditch effort at unifying the party, the SLFP leadership has sent out a letter to all detractors calling them for a discussion on the party’s future. The letter was prepared last Friday but a date is yet to be set for the meeting.

Be that as it may, Sirisena has now thrown the proverbial gauntlet at his detractors. Given Sirisena’s actions, Rajapaksas stand to be exposed as a group pushing for a division of the SLFP due to personal animosity and agendas.

 SLFP gets tough

 The fact that ultimately the remote control of power is with him is not lost on the SLFP leadership.

The removal of Kumara Welgama, who is considered a long standing Kalutara District SLFPer who had been affiliated to the party since the time of the late Sirimavo Bandaranaike was an eye opener to many SLFPers standing by Rajapaksa’s Podujana Peramuna.

Welgama was replaced by Samitha Priyangani Abeydheera.

Former Minister Mahindananda Aluthgamage was also removed as organises for Nawalapitiya in the major party restructuring operation. He was replaced by H.A. Ranasinghe, who had backed the UNP at the last parliamentary elections.

Interestingly, both Welgama and Aluthgamage face court cases over allegations of financial irregularities.

A recent report noted that there were several other changes to be moved by the SLFP that will be formalized in the near future. Among them is the appointment of Udith Anuradha for Matale. He had commenced his political work with the late Vijaya Kumaratunga and then worked with the SLFP before joining the UNP to contest the last parliamentary elections. He contested under the UNP after resigning from the SLFP over the removal of former Minister Janka Bandara Tennakoon as the Dambulla SLFP organizer. However, he is tipped to replace former Minister Rohana Dissanayake.

UPFA National List MP Malith Jayatillake, a staunch Sirisena loyalist, has already replaced Nimal Chandraratna as the SLFP’s Bandaragama organizer.

Chinthana Ekanayake, son of former Minister Nandamithra Ekanayake, has been appointed as the Rattota organiser.

Southern Provincial Councilor Manoj Sirisena, son of Minister H.G. Sirisena, is to be appointed organiser for Akuressa. It was a just a few weeks back when Rajapaksa had visited the Sirisena’s Akuressa home to meet the ailing senior.

Ananda Sarath Kumara, the North Western Provincial Councilor who once ordered a teacher to kneel before him as punishment, has been named the Anamaduwa organizer replacing former Minister Priyankara Jayaratne.

UNP setting battle lines

The UNP meanwhile is strategizing to gain maximum mileage from the division of the SLFP at next year’s polls.

One of the Prime Minister’s immediate tasks after returning to the country after his European tour was to focus on the pending local government polls. Wickremesinghe summoned a meeting of the Working Committee. The Committee is to meet today (19). The meeting is expected to focus on making preparations for the local government elections where the party is fielding candidates to almost all 335 local councils.

The UNP seniors are planning for an elaborate polls campaign.

The party leadership is likely to put forward the proposal to the Working Committee to contest under the United National Front (UNF) banner with the smaller parties supporting them.

The Jathika Hela Urumaya (JHU) has already decided to contest the next elections under the UNF along with the rest of the parties that contested under the alliance, which fielded candidates at the last general election.

TNA looks for options

 Meanwhile, the growing conflict between the Tamil National Alliance (TNA) and Northern Province Chief Minister C.V. Wigneswaran has resulted in the TNA inviting former Chief Justice K. Sripavan to contest at the next Northern Provincial Council elections, it is learnt.

A group of senior TNA members have extended the invitation during a meeting they held with Sripavan recently.

However, it is learnt that Sripavan is yet to decide on the invitation.

He donated his own land to house displaced persons in Aranayake 

2017-10-20 

It is everybody’s dream to live in a house of his own. There are many who believe that realization of this dream rests with one’s own destiny. At a time when there are so many who spend their entire life to realize their dream of owning a house, an individual has stepped forward to donate a portion of the small land he had purchased through his meagre earnings.  

Sometime back many were moved and in anguish in the aftermath of the severe landslide that occurred in Aranayake in the Samasara mountain. Many lives and belongings were buried under the mounds of earth that slide down the hill. The screams of those affected were heard all over, and the stories of those who lost their lives and dwellings had spread all over the country. The shocking disaster aroused the feelings of one individual who rose to the occasion and declared that he could help some of the destitute families in finding new homes. He is Edirisinghe Mudiyanselage Kapuru Banda a resident of Padeniya, Wariyapola.  

The shocking disaster aroused the feelings of one individual who rose to the occasion and declared that he could help some of the destitute families in finding new homes

He was prepared to donate a land belonging to him to put up houses to accommodate the displaced persons of Aranayake. Accompanied by the Padeniya Rajamahaviharadhipathy Ven. Katumulle Sumanarathne Thera he met the Wariyapola Divisional Secretary and presented his idea, and as an initial step the proposed land was first vested with the State.  

However, only one family from among the displaced families of Aranayaka was willing to reside in the land Kapuru Banda so willingly donated. Later a decision was taken to distribute the land among 14 families selected from Wariyapola at 15 perches each. The National Housing Authority agreed to provide them with a loan facility to construct the houses, but as the families were not earning a regular income the settlement of such loans was an issue. The difficulty in repaying such loans was pointed out by Kapuru Banda and several others and it was finally agreed to give Rs 500,000 each to the families to construct the houses.  

Kapuru Banda the philanthropist lives in a remote area in Padeniya. He is an ideal personality depicting the true villager. He is the father of two daughters. The eldest is twenty three years of age, while the younger daughter is thirteen years old and a student. They are really village folk living a simple village life. Interviewing him and asking him about this noble gesture in donating a land for poor village families, revealed that they are ordinary village folk, believing in the value of sharing with those who are in need.  

QWhat made you decide in making this donation?  
We were sorting out Betel leaves that were plucked from our home plot, when we saw the tragedy on TV about the landslide in Aranayake. We witnessed the cries and suffering of all those poor families who were worse affected. Whenever a tragedy of this nature strikes it is the same story of collecting aid to help the families. I was terribly moved. The first thing that occurred to my mind was to give them some land of my own for them to put up houses to stay. I am now fifty seven years old and only few more years to live. I posed this matter first to my wife. She agreed with me. We always help others in need as far as possible. I gave them three acres and now I have two and half acres left and I think my two daughters would be content with that. This land was not inherited by me, but bought with my earnings and therefore I am very happy now. 

 
QAre you happy with the progress made in this regard? 
Yes, very much. Most of the work of the houses are over. There are issues connected with, provision of water, electricity and roads. I have spoken to the authorities regarding these but there appears to be slow progress.  

QWhat sort of employment you are now engaged in? 
I am a Mason and also attend to other jobs as well. I do painting of houses. What I earn is quite sufficient to live. I will be happy if my elder daughter gets employed. She is applying to obtain suitable employment.  

QWhat are your future hopes? 
I had a desire of performing a meritorious act. I donated this land to invoke blessings on my deceased parents. Now a small Udagama is coming up here. I wish to name it “Punchimenik” Village. My fathers name was Punchi Banda and mothers name Bandimenika.  

Kapuru Bandas wife W. M. Sandhya Kumari when inquired about the husband’s gift towards poor families, she replied that on hearing about the suffering and the catastrophe that struck Aranayake they all agreed to donate this land.  

Their eldest daughter Ireshika Dimuthu Kumari said that she had her initial education at Padeniya Sunanda Maha Vidyalaya and later entered Holy Family Girls College Kurunegala to do her A/L studies. She had done Languages as a subject for A/Levels. She said she wants to get employed in order to assist the family. She also confirmed that her father likes to help everyone who is in need of help.  

Thirteen year old younger daughter of Kapuru Banda studies at Sunanda Madhya Maha Vidyalaya Padeniya.   

A visit to the land where houses are now coming up, and meeting those who are preparing to occupy them was much thought provoking.  

I am a Mason and also attend to other jobs as well. I do painting of houses. What I earn is quite sufficient to live. I will be happy if my elder daughter gets employed. She is applying to obtain suitable employment 

S.M. Podimenike who was terribly moved with the gift of a land and house that their family is about to move in said she and her daughter had been sleeping in a wayside boutique exposed to the elements and after several visits to the Kurunegala Housing Department and meeting Kapuru Banda they are now getting a house of their own. She said that her family is ever grateful to Kapuru Banda for this magnanimous gesture. There several others who extended their heartfelt thanks to Kapuru Banda.  

Now that Kapuru Banda has provided the land and also assisted in building the houses there are other needs such as water, electricity and roads for this housing complex to be called as another reawakening village.     

Colour Of Despotism: Saffron?

By Sarath de Alwis –OCTOBER 20, 2017

Sarath de Alwis

Several broadsheets, Sinhala and English announced in banner headlines that the two Mahanayakes of Asgiriya and Malwatte had torpedoed the Constitutional reform process. For those of us, concerned with the impact, the many scandals will have on the meandering constitutional reform process, it was worrying news.

The new Mahanayake of Asgiriya who succeeded to the position after the demise of his endearingly erudite and sensible predecessor has not disguised his partisan leanings. He has already declared his outright opposition to the constitutional drafting process.

In the case of the far more self-possessed and rational prelate of the Malwatte chapter, the joint opposition suffered a decisive set back. The Mahanayake thero of Malwatte recently advised Dinesh Gunwardena who sought to enlist his support in opposing the process, that it was best to await the draft proposals. In the light of assurances given by the President and Prime minister on the unitary state, primacy of Buddhism etc. there was no need to rush in to warped opinions. 

The immediate purpose of the pretended parley held in some exclusive inner chamber of the Dalada Maligawa was to isolate the Malwatte prelate who was not playing ball with the joint opposition.  It has now come to light, that puppeteer behind the clerical puppetry is none other than the lay custodian of the holy of holies and a loyal Rajapaksa trooper.

The constitutional reform process is a contemporary national imperative. Power devolution, national reconciliation, institutional resilience of state agencies tasked to monitor accountability and transparency are prerequisite for a nation at peace with itself – a precondition for meaningful economic progress. An equitable electoral system in place of the present Neronian version that fiddles with our franchise slowly roasting the land on the slow fire of political deception is a moral necessity that even the Rajapaksa family cannot oppose openly, although a revision may hinder their Mafiosi.

The reform process is not easy. The Ranil Wickremesinghe led administration has now traversed the full length of the blind alley, it entered with the Bond scam in February 2015. Their cheeky chins are now up against the wall, with the writing clear to all except the Leader and the executive committee of the UNP.

It is a shame. Credibility is an essential part of the armour of those who seek foundational reforms.

The mobilization of the ‘Anu Nayakes’ the second tier of the two monastic orders is a brilliant move by the Mahinda Rajapaksa led opposition. It is politics by other means.

Sinhala Buddhist Sangha epitomizes organized religion. It has Sects or ‘Nikayas’ operating their respective franchises, appointing independent retail outlets using their exclusive operating manuals, logos and models. On and off, there are mavericks who compose their own operating manuals as in the case of Pitiduwe Siridhamma thera whose claim to have attained the Arahaht state titillated the piety of affluent middleclass matrons of Colombo who were dazzled by his soprano preaching and mesmeric masculinity. 

It was recently reported that a threat of expulsion has convinced him to surrender his Arahant title. The patent laws seem to be working in our monastic outfits!    

The unique selling proposition of the Sinhala Sangha fraternity is their demonstrated ability to manipulate masses. At a given command they can adopt adversarial positions against other groups and other points of view. They execute their assignments with a laser like centricity on their interpretation of the faith.

Since  1753 when King Keerthi Sri Rajasinghe handed a ‘watapatha’ to a monk indicating a royal mandate after the introduction of the higher ordination from Siam, the feudal monastic orders of the hill kingdom has been in the firm grip of a few  interrelated clans ceaselessly driven by ambition, greed and power. 

This writer, modestly informed of what the Buddha taught, is convinced that the single objective of institutionalized Sangha is to insulate the faithful from learning, understanding and experiencing what the Buddha taught.

Near extortionist interpretation of the concept of giving ‘dana’ has provided them financial self-sufficiency and societal legitimacy. The latest SUV models used by the movers and shakers of the fraternity do not generate envy of the faithful. Instead, such opulence is regarded as the just rewards of a noble vocation.

The Saffron robe, that was once a symbol of renunciation is, now an emblem of authority that intimidates the devout and promotes the  parochial.  Since independence the state has negotiated accommodation, offered patronage and sought reciprocity with the Sinhala Buddhist clerical institutions. Of all leaders, only JRJ and Sirimavo were strong enough to draw their lines on the sand in dealing with them. Premadasa used tribal instincts to carve his own niche of clerical support. Mahinda Rajapaksa adroitly built a network of saffron operatives beholden to the boss rivaling any Sicilian mafia.     

The arrogant finality of the impugned  statement, earned front page exposure. It received greater amplifications the next morning TV shows where garrulous anchors serving political interests of media Moghuls and creatures of Gotabaya Rajapaksa had a field day in constructing a false mass opinion against constitutional reforms driven by a patriotic sangha. 

“We have decided the unsuitability of the proposed Constitution. We say that a new Constitution is not needed. The present Constitution is good for us. We decided that the Maha Sangha should oppose the proposed Constitution,”

The statement, an arbitrary rejection of the sovereignty of the people has one comical connotation. The assertion ‘this constitution is good for us’, elevates J.R.J to the exalted ranks of an Arahath!

The clever maneuvering by the Rajapaksa led opposition has exposed their reliance on the Sangha in an  alliance to redefine the political process in their favour. It is natural and logical. A majority of the Sinhala Sangha community were willing collaborators of the corrupt political system under Mahinda presidency. Despite the ‘Upasaka’ appeal and biting the dust obeisance of his successor, they prefer the ousted despot who promises continuity. There is lesson for us.    

Elevating the Sangha above the democratic debate under the guise of according primacy to Buddhism will have a devastating impact on our ability to keep pace with 21st century human progress.

Dismantling the saffron cartel before its octopus arms could strangle the slender democratic gains is our immediate challenge.

Buddhism is a search for truth. The Buddha advised us that we should believe only “that which is true in the light of our own experience, that which conforms to reason and conducive to the highest good and welfare of all beings.”

It is time for rational Buddhists to realize that Buddha showed us the path. He did not offer to walk it for us. The Sangha in their Pajero SUVs and Mercedes limousines cannot drive us on that path either.

The Mahinda Rajapakse genius was that, he shaped and controlled the Sangha by incentives and coercive tactics as and when necessary. Despite objections, Lamborghinis raced past the ‘Dalada Maligawa.’ 

Read More