Peace for the World

Peace for the World
First democratic leader of Justice the Godfather of the Sri Lankan Tamil Struggle: Honourable Samuel James Veluppillai Chelvanayakam

Tuesday, December 5, 2017

Tensions in Mannar as Sri Lankan Navy detains 25 Tamil fishermen

Home05Dec 2017
Hundreds of residents of a coastal Mannar village gathered outside a Sri Lankan Navy camp to protest the arrest of 25 Tamil fishermen on Monday.
The Navy arrested 25 fishermen on 5 boats in the sea off Thalvupadu and detained them in the navy camp.
While detained fishermen have been fishing for thirty years using traditional methods, the Navy personnel told locals they had been arrested for failing to produce the appropriate permits.
Thalvupadu residents gathered outside the navy camp demanding the immediate release of the fishermen.
With tensions escalating by Monday afternoon, police and fisheries department officials were called to the scene.
However protesting residents said they would not move from the camp until the detainees had been released.
Officials from Mannar police department eventually defused the situation by taking custody of the fishermen and transferring them to Mannar police station.
Thalvupadu locals however remain angry, stating that their community is frequently harassed and victimised by Sri Lankan Navy personnel.

ATTACKS ON UTHAYAN NEWSPAPER: OPEN LETTER TO SRI LANKA MINISTER SAGALA RATHNAYAKA

Image: Minster Sagala Rathnaya taking to Uthayan editor Premananth at the UNESCO confernece. ( Credit: @NalakaG)

Sri Lanka Brief05/12/2017

Speaking to Uthayan editor T. Premananth during the UNESCO press freedom event held in  Colombo, Sri Lanka minister for law and order Sagala Rathnayake has requested to provide him with a report of all attacks taken place against the newspaper.  Nalaka Gunawardana who moderated the session on Sri Lanka at the UNESCO conference has tweeted on the requested made by the minister:
 
What data is used on  crimes against journalists? @UthayanPrint editor T Premananth asked on my panel why so many attacks on his paper are not being probed. @SagalaRatnayaka then asked for info dossier to follow up.
More  action needed!
 
What fellows is short summary of the attacks against the Uthayan Newspaper which has been in the public domain for long time.

In October 1995, as the Sri Lankan military launched a military offensive to recapture the Jaffna peninsula from the LTTE, virtually the entire population of the Valikamam region fled to other parts of the peninsula and the VanniUthayan staff fled from their Jaffna offices, taking printing machine, a generator and newsprint on a truck.[4] They set up a temporary office in Sarasalai, Thenmarachchi from where they published the paper until April 1996.[4] Then the paper returned to Jaffna after the military had recaptured most of the peninsula including Jaffna city.[4] By 1996 the Uthayan was the only newspaper published from Jaffna.[4]

Uthayan was shut down by the Sri Lankan government on 19 May 2000 using the recently passed draconian law – the Emergency (Miscellaneous Provisions and Powers) Regulation No.1 of 2000.[5] The Sri Lanka Army cut off the phone lines, locked the offices and took away the keys.[6] The newspaper re-opened 45 days later on 4 July 2000 after the government lifted its ban.[7][8]

Sub-editor N. Vithyatharan was interrogated by the police for two hours at his offices 20 January 2001 regarding an interview with Anton Balasingham, the LTTE’s chief negotiator and political advisor.[9]

After the civil war resumed the Sri Lankan military closed the A9 road which was the main road link between the Jaffna peninsula and the rest of the country. This resulted in an acute shortage of food, fuel, medicine and other supplies, including newsprint and printing ink, on the peninsula. Uthayan was forced to drastically cut its number of pages and the copies printed – it went from 20,000 copies of a 12-page paper to 7,500 copies of a 4-page paper.[10]

Editor N. Vithyatharan was arrested by the police without a warrant on 26 February 2009 as he attended a funeral in Mount Lavinia without a warrant and allegedly beaten in custody.[11][12] As international criticism of the arrest intensified the Sri Lankan government claimed Vithyatharan had been arrested in connections with the LTTE air raid on Colombo.[13][14] Vithyatharan was released on 24 April 2009 after the Colombo Crimes Division informed the court that there was no evidence connecting him to the air raid.[15][16] Vithyatharan alleged that he had been detained in order to prevent him highlighting the plight of the civilians in the Vanni.[17][18]

Attacks

Stephen J. Rapp, the United States Ambassador-at-Large for War Crimes Issues and Michele J. Sison, US ambassador to Sri Lanka are discussing with E. Saravanapavan, Managing Director of the Uthayan newspaper and M. V. Kanamaylnathan, Editor-in-chief at Uthayan Newspapers’s Office in Jaffna on 8 January 2014. Some of the bullet holes and portraits of slain staff are visible on the wall behind them.

The Uthayan and its employees have been subject to numerous attacks during its existence. In 1987, the Sri Lankan security forces attacked the Navalar Road in Jaffna, where the Uthayan offices were located, using artillery. Two Uthayan employees were injured and 40 others in the area were killed. In 1990, the Uthayan’s offices were hit by an air raid killing one employee and injuring five.[7]

A Journalist named Velupillai Thavachelvam was attacked on 29 August 1998 at his home in Sembianpattu, Vadamarachchi.[19] Thavachelvam had written a report critical of the local authority.[19] The following year, two grenades were thrown into the newspaper’s offices, exploding near the printing machines and injuring security guard S. Selvarajah.[20][21][22]The Eelam People’s Democratic Party (EPDP), a government backed paramilitary group, was blamed for the attack.[23][24] The Uthayan had recently criticised government-backed paramilitary groups.[24]

On 20 August 2005, two grenades were thrown into the advertising office of the Uthayan and Sudar Oli in Wellawatte, but failed to explode.[7][25][26]

Suresh Kumar (B. G. Sahayathasan) and Ranjith Kumar, two employees of the newspaper, were killed on 2 May 2006 when armed men burst into the newspaper’s offices and opened fire indiscriminately.[2][27][28] The attack followed the newspaper publishing a cartoon mocking Douglas Devananda, the leader of the EPDP.[29]

A delivery driver and an agent named Sathasivam Baskaran was shot dead at the wheel of his delivery truck on 15 August 2006 at Puttur junction near Achchuveli.[30][31] Baskaran was shot in an area controlled by the Sri Lankan military.[32] Three days later, on 18 August 2006, a warehouse in Kopay was burnt down by armed men as a curfew was in place.[30][33]According to a diplomatic cable leaked to Wikileaks, Sri Lankan Presidential Advisor Basil Rajapaksa had told the then American Ambassador Robert O. Blake that the EPDP and the Sri Lanka Navy had perpetrated the arson.[34]

Armed men entered the Uthayan offices on 7 September 2006 and ordered staff to publish a statement urging Jaffna’s students to call off their strike, threatening “severe reprisals” if the statement wasn’t published.[35][36] A few days later, on 10 September 2006, two armed men who entered into the Uthayanoffices were arrested by the policemen who were guarding the building. But they were released within hours.[35]
 
Journalist Selvarajah Rajivarnam, an Uthayan reporter for 6 months prior to his death, was shot dead in Jaffna close to a military checkpoint on 29 April 2007.[37][38][39] The EPDP was blamed for Rajivarnam’s murder.[40] A Proof reader, Vadivelu Nirmalaraj was abducted on 17 November 2007 near Jaffna as he returned home after work.[41][42][43]

A grenade was thrown into the newspaper’s office in Jaffna on 24 March 2009 causing extensive damage and injuring a security guard.[44][45][46] Same year, on 25 June, thousands of copies of the UthayanThinakkural and Valampuri were burnt in the street by armed men, after the papers had refused to print a statement against the LTTE.[47][48]

A Staff Correspondent of the newspaper, S. Kavitharan was attacked by a group of men on 28 May 2011 as he cycled to work.[49][50] Kavitharan had written articles critical of the security in Jaffna and the actions of government backed paramilitary groups whose members had previously threatened Kavitharan.[49] On 29 July, the same year, Uthayan’s chief news editor Gnanasundaram Kuganathan was brutally attacked as he walked home from the office in Jaffna.[51][52][53] The EPDP was blamed for the attack.[54] Between 2006 and 2010 Kuganathan lived in the Uthayan offices out of fear for his life but had recently moved back to his family home after assurances were given by the government.[51]

Nagesh Pratheepan and two other Uthayan distributors were attacked and newspapers torched by four men on two motorbikes on 10 January 2013 as they were distributing them in the Valvettithurai area.[55][56]

The paper’s office in Kilinochchi were attacked by a group of six masked Sinhala speaking men on 3 April 2013.[57][58] Five employees were injured, two seriously, and equipment and vehicles damaged.[59][60][61] The newspaper blamed the security forces for the attack.[62] The attack came after the paper published a series of articles highlighting seizure of Tamil owned land by the army.[63] Ten days later, on 13 April 2013, three men came to the paper’s office in Jaffna and threatened security guards before damaging equipment and setting the printing press ablaze.[64][65][66]

Commentary on attacks by notable media/personalities/entities[edit]

“These attacks on the offices of Uthayan have been going on for years and typify the threats faced by the Tamil press in Sri Lanka,” said CPJ Asia Program Coordinator Bob Dietz.[67]
“At least five of its employees have been killed this year, two of them in an attack on the newspaper on the eve of World Press Freedom Day. The press that prints the Colombo edition was the target of an arson attack in September. In Jaffna, the newspaper has twice been forced to publish communiqués at gunpoint,” RSF said.[68]
“As we continue our free the press campaign we will highlight the case of Uthayan, a Tamil language newspaper in Sri Lanka. Uthayan has seen its personnel beaten, its newspaper shipments burned, its equipment destroyed and its offices set ablaze in the past month alone. The assault on a free press in Sri Lanka extends beyond Uthayan” Speaking at the US State Department‘s daily press briefing in Washington, the Department’s Acting Deputy Spokesperson, Patrick Ventrell, expressed.[69][70]
The Rajapaksa government has a long history of media harassment and attacks on journalists critical of the government, Human Rights Watch said. Publications − including electronic media − that oppose government policies have been subject to censorship, and some have been forced to close down. The leading Tamil opposition newspaper, Uthayan, has faced repeated physical attacks against its journalists and property.[71]
“The International Federation of Journalists (IFJ) joins partners and affiliates in Sri Lanka in unequivocally condemning the repeated targeting of the Tamil newspaper Uthayan………. The effort to silence Uthayan after the country’s long civil war was formally declared over in May 2009, ‘is seen as a direct attack on post-war democracy and media freedom in the country, aimed at suppressing the dissemination of important information and diverse views among the public’.[72]
“The newspaper has supported self-rule for Tamils and its staff has repeatedly faced threats and violence, the most serious in 2006 when gunmen stormed its offices and killed two staffers.”[73]
“…..I also saw the bullet holes above the sofa in the office of the editor of a Tamil language newspaper in Jaffna. Days after we visited the paper, its offices were trashed and employees beaten.” – Hugh Segal.[74]
– Wiki

PM: Some media groups working overtime to bring MR back to power

Sagala: Lasantha assassination probe focussed on persons who used six telephone numbers


article_image
By Shamindra Ferdinando- 

Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe yesterday alleged that an influential section of the media was working overtime to bring back the Rajapaksas to power regardless of the irreparable losses caused by the previous administration to the media.

Delivering the keynote address at a UNESCO Conference on Regional Cooperation to Promote Freedom of Expression and the Rule of Law in Asia through Ending Impunity for Crimes Against Journalists at the Taj Samudra, PM Wickremesinghe, referring to a spate of killings and other incidents, including the assassination of The Sunday Leader editor Lasantha Wickrematunga, disappearance of Prageeth Ekneligoda and brutal assaults on the Deputy Editor of The Nation Keith Noyar and Rivira Editor Upali Tennakoon, said that the absence of owners of media organisations as well as editors, except for two heads of state-owned institutions and editor of a privately run media organisation, at the event, revealed their lack of interest.

The PM pointed out that those who were not present there turned a blind eye to repeated attacks on the Jaffna-based Uthayan and other Tamil media.

The UNP leader asked whether the lukewarm response of the top media personnel as well as owners to the UNESCO event was an indication they didn’t want media freedom, whether they want the Rajapaksas back in power or restore the Rajapaksa rule by destroying the incumbent government.

Alleging the media had never inquired from him what had happened to Lasantha Wickrematunga, PM Wickremesinghe claimed that they ignored atrocities perpetrated on the media.

Wickrematunga’s wife, Sonali Samarasinghe Wickrematunga, Minister, Sri Lanka’s Permanent Mission in New York was among the audience.

PM Wickremesinghe said he wasn’t sure whether his speech would be published. "There would be fresh attacks on me tomorrow but this is the truth," the PM said, strongly condemning the failure on the part of the media to take up Wickremetunga’s assassination with the then government.

The UNP Leader alleged that the media groups that had employed journalists targeted by the previous government were silent about atrocities committed by the Rajapaksa, though his government represented the interests of the media.

The UNP leader alleged that some media organisations were much more interested in doing business with the previous government than protecting those who were employed by them

Declaring that the incumbent government couldn’t protect media freedom on its own, Premier Wickremesinghe alleged that some media organisations were busy trying to bring the Rajapaksas back into power at the expense of democracy.

The PM acknowledged that there could be shortcomings on their part but they remained committed to protect journalists.

The decision on the part of the media not to report certain matters and relentlessly target the government revealed their strategy meant to somehow help the Rajapaksas back into power, he asserted.

The PM said that since the change of government in 2015 January there hadn’t been attacks on journalists.

The UNP leader reiterated his commitment to bringing responsible for attacks on the media to book.

Law and Order and Southern Development Minister Sagala Ratnayake, addressing the second session, which exclusively dealt with the situation in Sri Lanka briefly explained the status of Wickremetunga’s assassination investigation. Minister Ratnayake said that current inquiries had been focused on persons who used six telephone numbers.

Minister Ratnayake also insisted on his commitment to bringing investigations to a successful conclusion.

Ratnayake sought an opportunity to explain the status of investigations after police spokesman SP Ruwan Gunasekera briefed the gathering on the inquiries with the focus on Wickremetunga assassination. The top UNPer called Wickrematunga assassination inquiry a complicated case.

Editor of Uthayan Dewanayagam Premananda challenged the police spokesman’s statement with regard to his paper. He alleged that the police spokesman’s statement wasn’t acceptable and contrary to his assertion that there had been 37 ‘attacks’ during the previous administration.

Premananda subsequently handed over a file containing information regarding those incidents to Minister Ratnayake, who promised to inquire into them.

Memorialization might facilitate reconciliation


Mother of a dead LTTE cadre lights the memorial torch on Great Heroes’ Day, May 27, 2017.Photo. Tamil Guardian

Straws in the wind suggest
  • Blanket permission was given to the Tamils to observe Great Heroes’ Day in the manner the Northern Tamils wanted
  • The students of Jaffna University were the first to show restiveness
  • But the Tamils reacted in a calm and understanding manner

2017-12-05 
The Great Heroes Day (MaaverarNaal) observances this year in the Northern Province was notable, and perhaps path breaking too, in two ways: Firstly, a record number of people participated in the various events in public places including Hindu temples and churches. Secondly, the Government allowed the observances to take place, though the State Minister of Defence Ruwan Wijewardene subsequently stated that participants would be arrested and prosecuted because they had memorialized ‘terrorists’ belonging to the banned Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE).   

Opinion is divided on what these might mean. Those of the “nationalist” bent of mind, mostly in the majority Sinhala community, fear that these might rekindle the fires of militant, armed separatism thought to have been doused by the annihilation of the LTTE’s military machine. And they might stymie efforts to bring about Tamil-Sinhalese integration. But others see it as a welcome development because mass public grieving helps bring out suppressed emotions in a non-violent manner which tend to get expended over a period of time. Or it could take up a “routinized” and therefore harmless form over time.   

Cruel to deny opportunity to remember 
Such observances held in the open, calm the mind and given time, prepare it to accept the adversary in a new light without anger and vengeance.   

The most fundamental thing about tragic events like death and bloody conflict is that their memory can’t be erased, as historical experience shows. As the Roman orator Cicero said: “The life of the dead consists in being present in the minds of the living.”This is why loved ones, famous statesmen, wars and massacres have been memorialized down the ages. It would be cruel to deny a person or a people the right to remember and grieve.   
As Radhika Hettiarachchi put it in her monograph: “Memorialization and Reconciliation in Sri Lanka”, public memorialization acknowledges the sufferers’ or the victims’ personal loss. It assuages them by building a connection between people through empathy and fellowship.   

However, Hettiarachchi adds that memorialization can’t be an end in itself. It has to be part of a multi-pronged and prolonged process aimed at reconciliation between adversaries involving deliverance of justice, psycho-social healing, reparations, and rehabilitation.  She very correctly points out out that memory is “subjective and fluid”. It examines, reinterprets, and addresses the issues of the past, thereby helping the formation of new identities. Therefore, with the passage of time, the Great Heroes’ Day observances may acquire new meanings especially if accompanied by a multi-dimensional reconciliation process.   

Basic demands of Tamils 
Something like this may be happening in Sri Lanka with the establishment of the Good Governance regime of President Maithripala Sirisena and Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe in 2015. Admittedly, the two leaders have been consistently saying that “war heroes” would never be allowed to be haulled before international tribunals for alleged war crimes (rejecting the Tamils’ demand that they should be). And the Tamils’ basic demands are yet to be addressed. But this regime has undeniably been kind in its approach to the Tamils and other minorities.   

One of the signs of this was the blanket permission given to the Tamils to observe Great Heroes’ Day in the manner the Northern Tamils wanted. 

This was not the case between 2009 and 2014 during the Mahinda Rajapaksa regime. After the war ended with the annihilation of the LTTE’s military machine and the North and the East of Sri Lanka in May 2009, observances of the MaaverarNaal, begun by the LTTE in 1989, ceased, because the Government wouldn’t countenance them.   

The Government razed the LTTE’s memorials, monuments, offices and graveyards to the ground. Prabhakaran’s underground house, which became a tourist attraction for a while, was dynamited. The State didn’t want any symbolic rallying point for a revival of the Tiger cult.  
The most fundamental thing about tragic events like death and bloody conflict is that their memory can’t be erased 
 A psychological variant of the systematic destruction of the vestiges of the separatist armed struggle was the “rehabilitation” of 12,000 captured or surrendered LTTE cadres. The year-long rehabilitation process was meant to cleanse the minds of the cadres of all anti-Sri Lankan and anti-Sinhalese thoughts instilled by the LTTE.   
On Great Heroes’ Day this year, the Sri Lankan Army remained confined to barracks and the police controlled traffic instead of preventing people from indulging in public grieving. They looked on as propaganda songs of the LLTE-era were brazenly played over loudspeakers and posters bearing pictures of the LTTE supremo Velupillai Prabhakaran were put up in some places. Red and White coloured flags of the Tamils, popularized by the LTTE, were hoisted everywhere. Churches and Hindu temples performed memorial rites without let or hindrance.   

Northern Chief Minister C.V.Wigneswaran put it in his message on this year’s MaaveerarNaal, the Tamil people were getting increasingly restive and itching to show “commitment” to their cause and also their “collective power”.   
Warning 
They also wanted to warn Tamil politicians in parliament that they shouldn’t abandon the cause of provincial autonomy and meekly accept the crumbs thrown to them by the powers-that-be in Colombo.   

The Great Heroes’ Day observances this year were part of a new series of agitations to press the Government to meet its election promises to the Tamils who had supported the Sirisena-Wickremesinghe combine in the 2015 elections.   

The students of Jaffna University were the first to show restiveness. The Tamil Peoples’ Council (TPC) headed by Chief Minister Wigneswaran held ElugaTamil (Tamils Arise) rallies on the lines of the PonguTamil (Effervescent Tamils) of the LTTE. The large scale observance of MaaveerarNaal followed logically 
True, Minister of Defence Ruwan Wijewardene warned of punitive action. But the Tamils reacted in a calm and understanding manner instead of getting provoked. The Chief Minister of the Northern Province, C.V.Wigneswaran, lost no time in allaying fears of arrest with a statement saying that a Government which had permitted the observances wouldn’t arrest participants. 
The Great Heroes’ Day observances this year were part of a new series of agitations
He appealed to the Tamils to understand that Minister Wijewardene had to threaten participants with arrest in order to placate the Sinhalese majority in South Sri Lanka, the political constituency all Sinhalese leaders have to address.   

Wigneswaran then went on to cite another example of how Sinhalese politicians, who are friendly with Tamils, have made similar statements only to smother criticism in their principal constituency, the Sinhalese majority. President Maithripala Sirisena, he said, is a good and well-meaning Sinhalese leader wanting to address the grievances of the Tamils. But he too had to repeatedly and publicly assure the majority Sinhalese that he wouldn’t allow Sri Lankan soldiers (“war heroes” in the eyes of the majority community) to be haulled up before an international court for “war crimes” allegedly committed against the Tamils. But being a “Good Governance” Government Sirisena had allowed observance MaaveerarNaal this year, Wigneswaran said.   

Indications are that the MaaveerarNaal would be allowed in the coming years too. The rituals and other observances, conducted peacefully like this year, might get routinized and lose their cutting edge over time. The Sinhalese majority could get used to it and take it in their stride as another Tamil ritual. And when it does become routinized and gets generally accepted, MaaveerarNaal could pave the way to ethnic reconciliation. 
By Rajiva Wijesinha –December 4 2017 

[Part 3 of this series was published on December 2, 2017]
Question number [26] is as follows-
“[26] In Response to question No. 11, you have stated that the previous government had moved away from a market based system in determining the interest rates in government securities, thereby distorting the market. You also say that there was a loss of investor confidence.
(a) Why have you now permitted a reversal of the fully auction-based system to a hybrid system, notwithstanding those concerns?

(d) Is your reference to investor confidence accurate, as the outflow of foreign funds continued to take place during the pendency of the fully auction-based system?

(e) Is your reference to market confidence accurate, as the evidence shows that the EPF and other State-owned funds have simply shifted large volumes of purchases from the primary market to the secondary market?

(f) When you refer to the market, did you occasion any study with regard to the nature and structure of Sri Lanka’s Government Securities market?”

My reply is as follows-
26 (a) There has not been a reversal of the auction system.

Following past experience, and expert advise, the current modified auction system was devised by the Monetary Board after reviewing the working of the ongoing Auction based system. I had no role in devising the said system.

In fact the first phase of the current system also involves a pure auction.

This is precisely what happened previously, when an auction set a rate, around which the Bank offered direct placements. Mr Mahendran’s so-called pure auction system, in reality a system designed to erode confidence since the figure advertised was increased dramatically when hardly anyone bid except one company believed to be in the know, has been abolished but obviously I cannot admit that we went back to the old system. That system was put in place after a decision by the Monetary Board whereas Mr Mahendran’s sudden change was entirely his own, though he lied about it – and it was never approved by the Board, the Minutes simply record that he said he had made the change.

26 (d) International Capital Flows are influenced by a number of factors such as international trends which are beyond our control. So if my claim that investor confidence was restored is not in accordance with the facts, that is because such matters are beyond my control and you must accept that my blithe generalizations are not really meant to be tested against facts.

Question number [28] is as follows-

“[28] In response to question No. 12 you have also stated that Mr. Mahendran informed you on the evening of 26.02.2015 that he may be able to raise money far in excess of Rs.1 billion through the 27.02.2015 bond auction. in this context

(a) In the history of treasury bond auctions conducted up to that time, generally only 2-3 times more than the advertised amount had ever been raised at previous treasury bond auctions. So, do you know on what basis he gave you this assurance with such confidence?

(b) Did you not raise any concerns about raising volumes far in excess of the amount advertised?
(c) Did you not consider the implications on the interest rates?

(d) Did you not consider it to be a transparency and due process concern, if an amount far in excess of the advertised amount was to be accepted?

(e) Did you question Mr. Mahendran on the tenure of the bond and whether raising large volumes on a long tenor bond was in fact in the best interest of the economy?

(f) Did you satisfy yourself whether the Treasury in fact required such large volumes to be raised through this auction or whether some other funding mechanism would be availed of in respect of the RDA’s request for funds?

(g) There is undisputed evidence that Rs.15 Billion of the Rs.20 Billion worth of bids received at the auction of 27th February 2015 had been submitted by Perpetual Treasuries Ltd. (directly and through Bank of Ceylon). In hindsight, do you consider this as a strange coincidence or a deliberate manipulation?”

Read More

State and govt. not interchangeable: Same goes for revenue and income

hoax of free education and free health services


article_image
By Usvatte-aratchi- 

On 11 November in the evening news, President Maithripala Sirisena claimed that his state (mage rajaya) would not permit anyone who fought in the war against LTTE to be brought to court for his conduct in battle. Leave aside the legality and morality of that statement, no President can claim ownership of this state. Nor can Xi Jining claim that Chong Guo is his state. Sri Lanka is not the President’s state.

A few years ago, there was a President who acted as if this state was his estate and paid dearly for his folly. Four centuries ago, there was an unwise king dubbed Sun King who claimed ‘L’ etat c’est moi’ (The state, am I) and his successors paid for that folly with their heads on the guillotine. In contrast, this government is the President’s. He created it, at least in law, he preserves it and may destroy it, a sort of three in one, a tihai, of which the President is very fond. He would have been perfectly lawful had he said, ‘My government will not permit …’, although whether that statement is right or wrong is another matter. In Britain there is no government but Her Majesty’s. That is because for everything that the queen does, there is one of her ministers legally responsible, beginning with the First Minister.

In the US, there is the President’s Administration, with ‘government’ rarely used in that context. This practice, where a President appoints his Cabinet of Secretaries (as they are called, derived from 18th century English usage) subject to approval by Congress (Parliament), is a practically useful one. It is a part of the principle of separation of powers in practice. It answers, in part, to the murmur here that professionals take part in government. (I do not have that faith that professionals are men and women of high integrity implicit in this argument. There are too many instances of corruption and dishonesty among them for me to accept that. In Cabinets we have had professionals, who have displayed the most deplorable traits of character!) What is significant is that given pervasive jealousy in this society (no matter, the recitation several times a day ‘suvaco ch’assa mudu anatimani), members of Parliament, who will have lost opportunities to make money hand in fist, will swell to go after ministers to get them by the throat. We may be able to set thieves to catch thieves.

Perhaps, we may be able to reduce abuse of power in including corruption - a double perhaps - because corruption seems to be something well entrenched. (Do we say well enshrined?) in Sri Lanka culture. Abuse and misuse of terms, either out of ignorance or with malice forethought, is quite common here and it is a good beginning to start correction with an instance from the President of the Republic.

Governments, the most stable of them, are short-lived. In some states, it is written in to the basic law of the state that government shall not live beyond a short specified period of time, for instance four years in US. In others, governments end when those who created a government indirectly, tell it that they do not support it to last anymore. That happens when a majority of members in Parliament pass a vote of no confidence in a government. In some, a government may end when the army or the people rebel against the continuance of that government. The most recent instance is the revolt against Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe. We have seen many times over governments in Asia change in similar processes, Thailand most frequently. The state of Lanka has existed for a very long time, although with interruptions. The state of the United States of America has existed continuously since 1776. The Republic of India is a young state. Some states have disintegrated as did USSR in1989 and Yugoslavia a few years later. Others have merged with another, e.g. GDR with West Germany. State and government are separate and distinct entities and to confuse one with the other misleads the reader. The terms in Sinhala are rajaya (state) and anduva (government) and are used entirely without care.

Government revenue and income

That same day in Parliament, Minister Pathali Ranawaka, one of the most intelligent and well instructed men in the House, spoke of income of government from taxation. A highly reputed tuition master in economics made the same remark at a press conference. Surely, both these men knew, better than most, that revenue of government was not its income. Anyone who runs a kade (chaiwala) knows that revenue is different from income. Income comprises wages, profits, interest and rent. Tax receipts of government are none of these and are a part of the income of taxpayers. A government collects profits when an enterprise it owns, earns them. It collects interest on the money it lends to its employees. It collects rent when it leases its buildings or land. It does not earn wages though it pays out a lot. Total annual income of government in our country does not exceed 4% of its annual revenue. All students in Year 12 in school and university men and women who study Economics or Commerce know that. Why confuse everybody when with a little bit of sense (a little bit of sense, as Alfred Doolittle, the dustman, might have sung, with a step, after a beer, which the good minister has made cheaper) in the use of common terms, that confusion can be avoided?

All taxes are paid by people. Neither commodities (commodity taxes or goods and services taxes) nor corporations pay taxes. Taxes on imports as well as income taxes are paid by people. All taxes on corporations are paid by its owners. All taxes, however collected, transfer a part of people’s income to government. So, all taxes, no matter direct or indirect or inflation, call forth the same reactions from taxpayers. Consequently, the claim by government that they imposed taxes without burdening the people is baloney. If a government increases the ratio (note well, ratio not proportion) of tax revenue to GDP, there is no way it can do so without increasing the burden of taxation on the people. That verse in budu guna alankaraya, ‘ron aragena semin-yana bingu lesin kusumin- satata duk no demin- ganiti puda panduru pera niyamin’, which some in Parliament sometimes quote, is written out of poetic licence and has no practical relevance. The idea that government earns income may lie behind the common clamour for larger layout for education, health or for higher wages to government servants, without making it explicit that that demand requires that either less is spent on other functions and more commonly that the burden of taxation on the people increase. I am perplexed every time that the President, who is the Head of Government, offers to spend large sums of money without reference to the Ministry of Finance. How can the head of government put his own government in jeopardy with such cavalier commitments? Every demand by the public for increased expenditure by government is by itself (ipso facto) a demand for raising the burden of taxation. When present day citizens pay increased taxes they bear the burden of taxation. People who will live in future will pay out of their earnings when a government borrows now and spends now and pays back the lenders from future tax revenue. Some might find this immoral and unfair. How dare we compel future generations who cannot vote now to pay for our expenses now? One answer could be that we borrow now for repayment later to create irrigation works, power plants, universities and factories all of which will raise incomes of people in the future. That is why it is doubly criminal, when borrowed money goes to add to the private wealth of those now in government and that that money which is black is held overseas providing investible resources in those countries or held in secret domestically, producing no capital. Government may raise expenditure by printing money. That expenditure will permit government to take away real resources from the public. This competition for resources between government and the rest of the economy will raise prices. Resources pass on to government in the same way as taxation does. But unlike taxes which are designed by government to distribute the burden of taxation in some manner, the burden of taxation with price inflation will be distributed haphazardly and probably most unfairly. Inflation is the most unfair tax of all!

Direct and indirect taxes

Most people, both inside and outside Parliament, ask that the proportion of revenue collected from direct taxes be increased because indirect taxes allegedly distribute the burden of taxation unfairly. A friend of mine, last month, bought a small Japanese car, paying $57,000.00. (These prices are crazy, as Crazy Eddy might have said.). His daughter in the US, three months earlier, bought a slightly better car paying only $22,000.00. The father paid $35,000 (= Lkr. 5.2million), more as taxes to government. If he takes a meal at a restaurant, he pays some 12 percent of the bill as taxes to government. His utility bills include high taxes to government. Now my friend is not among the high income earners in this country; nor does ne derive any income from property but lives on savings from earlier employment. High income earners probably pay much more, all as indirect taxes, than low income earners. Those that pay taxes on their income also pay taxes on their expenditure because they like all others pay indirect taxes as well. Taken together high income earners probably pay a greater portion of their income than taxpayers in lower income brackets. Consequently, you cannot say simply that this scheme of taxation is equitable because it relies heavily on direct taxes and that is not equitable because it relies heavily on indirect taxes. It all depends on who pays how much and that you would not know, even approximately, until you have the results of a reliable survey. There is no necessary consequence that all indirect schemes are iniquitous. Even if you have information on which income groups pay what proportion of their income in taxes you cannot conclude that that scheme of taxation is iniquitous. (That income in this country is distributed unequally is a different matter altogether.) Tax revenue is spent to pay for goods and services, provided by government and, of course, for bribes to politicians and bureaucrats. We have to know the benefits that accrue to each income group from government expenditure to know whether fiscal operations increased inequality or reduced inequality.

One of the wise men at a recent seminar sagaciously observed that in our country government expenditure benefited mostly the higher income groups. Where is the information? My casual observation does not support that contention. If you walk past the National Hospital in the morning on a working day you would see mostly poor people waiting in queue to see medical personnel. When the GMOA called out doctors in government hospitals on strike, the men and women who complained before television cameras were mostly poor people. There were no masses of people with capacity to pay who flocked to private sector hospitals, because those people had suffered from the strike of doctors. The rapid fall in average infant, child and maternal mortality rates could not have come about without widespread availability of public health and medical care services. (The rationale for taxing people to provide them with certain services is that some services must be provided collectively. You cannot live free of dengue fever by keeping your own compound free of mosquitoes without our neighbour and his neighbour and so on keeping their compounds dengue mosquito free.) It is at best careless to assume simplistically that any indirect tax is iniquitous. A whole lot more work needs to be done to pronounce on the re-distributional effects of government fiscal operations.

There is no way that the wide variety of services provided by government in this country can be paid for without the large mass of people paying for it. It is a matter of administrative feasibility how you collect those payments. When a large part of the economy runs without its transactions in written form, there is no way that income taxes can be administered effectively. Hence, indirect taxes! Yet, there is much tax evasion and avoidance.

To be continued