A shell shocked world: More cuts on the private sphere

A shell shocked world: More cuts on the private sphere

Posted by Uditha Devapriya-Friday, December 15, 2017

The private sphere of this country and of most other postcolonial societies, even India, did not open up fully to the Westernised paradigm of modernity and progress that it was supposed to open up to. What we got instead was a fatal contradiction, since that sphere, in whatever form and sector (even education) uprooted itself from cultural sensibilities and at the same time followed the worst elements of a patriarchal, quasi-feudalistic world. When CEOs of global companies from our part of the world contend, in front of a panel or interviewers, that it is good karma for women not to ask for pay rises, they are pandering to the superficial elements of a culture, any culture, which does not require them to let go of their Westernised outlook. The cosmetics of such cultures (the “pansakulaya, malwatti, and upparawatti” as Professor Nalin de Silva memorably wrote) appeal to those who believe that even in the private sphere, a balance must be struck between the need to be “nationalised” and also “globalised.”

This was largely a legacy of the split in the Buddhist order, firstly between the laity and the clergy achieved by the British after we were colonised, and secondly between the traditionalists and the reformists, the wielders of the faith and the wielders of a new secularism, that the intrusion of Theosophy brought about. By this I am not belittling the attempts of Colonel Olcott or Helena Blavatsky, rather I am pointing out that in the Theosophist movement we see a sustained division between the worldly and the otherworldly (noted by William Ames and Heinz Bechert) that found its way to postcolonial societies like ours. By artificially creating a rift between culture and society, the proponents of this new secularism had found a rationale for their offspring and even they themselves to wallow in the materialism, the crass consumerism, and Westernisation which their parents and grandparents had fervently opposed in 1956.

The new secularists, who were veritable champions of the cosmetic elements of culture, were the “children of the children” (as I pointed out in last week’s column): they let themselves be overwhelmed by the new culture of social upliftment. It was a new way of thinking, of looking at the world (they would call this “positive thinking” as the years went by), and the result of it all was that they were only too willing to target those who shared that worldview. The emergence and creation of an alternative education sector, free from the constraints of the Ministry of Education, was one method of catering to that worldview, and our new secularists, whose own children would go beyond them in being Westernised and uprooted, soon became shrewd businessman. Those who went through this alternative education sector from the nineties can attest that these institutions were never preoccupied with the profit motive – and those behind them were not enamoured of that profit motive either, yet – because they didn’t need to be: they had targeted the perfect single market, less a market, in fact, than a collective inhibited by an inferiority complex.

Gunadasa Amarasekara writes about this collective and milieu in many of his novels after Yali Upannemi and Karumakkarayo (the last two he wrote before he renounced the Western conception of literature he had been entranced by), particularly (though I have not read them yet) the cycle of stories revolving around Piyadasa (Gamanaka Mula, Gamanaka Mada, etc). He subtly points out the gulf between the idealists and the pragmatists, between the devotees and the secularists, between the nationalists and the “nationalists”. It’s an interesting phenomenon, certainly, one which shows us that no matter how universally feasible globalisation may be, all it does at the end of the day is destroy entire collectives while preserving the cosmetic elements of the cultures of those collectives: Keats’s Grecian Urn, Lawrence’s Arabia. For the West the East can only be salvaged through those cosmetics, an attitude largely shared by the new secularists who emphasised on rote learning history and religion in their institutions.

History is not a series of dates that need to be remembered, and religion is not a series of sermons and chants that need to be memorised. They are more, much more, than what their surfaces will have you believe. The children of the children were guilty for having abandoned in their professional lives their faith and heritage, so when they targeted the cultural sensibility they themselves acceded to, they tried to ensure that both faith and heritage would remain (ostensibly) core elements of their curriculum. I remember one of these new secularists, who had sent her child to one of these institutions at the behest of an aunt, impatiently glaring at one of those commentators who on television frequently reiterated the need to know one’s language properly. By denying their children a proper space to learn that language, the maw basa, they were in effect turning the need into an option: it was no longer mandatory to seep oneself in the past as before, it was rather a choice that had to be made by their children.

It was a half-baked world but one can’t blame those who were resident in it because no culture, in this postcolonial phase of history, can survive the inhibitions of those who imbibe the Western paradigm of development and modernism. Limited to one or two periods, the maw basa (Sinhala and Tamil), the agama (particularly Buddhism), and the sanskruthiya (based largely on extracurricular activities like dancing, music, and the Hewisi Band) were by and by afterthoughts of the new secularists who wanted a premium education for their children, even though these subjects and activities had the effect of entrancing those children to the culture their elders were repudiating. The world had moved on, and the elders were still very much behind. They wanted their children to learn faster, to let go of any affiliations to their country and even live abroad. Even our nationalist politicians see no contradiction in subscribing to this attitude when it comes to the education of their offspring. It’s an elephant in the room.

The debate over the international school system has so far been conducted by the rabid nationalists and the would-be modernists: the former decry any attempt at opening an alternative space in our education sector, while the latter see in that space a veritable chance of redeeming their inhibitions, their sense of inferiority, by westernising their children. No proper debate, consequently, has followed our international schools because the extremists, on either side, have so far headed it. It is my contention that the international school system as is present in Sri Lanka, particularly with respect to schools which target a bourgeoning middle class, opens up a complex interrelationship between the imperatives of culture and the imperatives of the material world, an interrelationship that I believe deserves another article.

Raids to catch 30,000 quacks

2017-12-17

Island wide raids would be conducted from January 2018 by the officials of the Health and Indigenous Medicine Ministry backed by Police to nab 30,000 quacks in the country, Health and Indigenous Medicine Minister Dr. Rajitha Senaratne said.

“The quacks have become a menace and contribute to health-related mishaps with pseudo-medical practitioners on the rise,” Minister Senaratne said.

“All qualified doctors, who are engaged in private practice, must ensure to get their registration at the Private Health Services Regulatory Council (PMSRC) to prevent any inconvenience, when officials visit private medical centers and clinics,” he said.

“We have information that nearly 30,000 individuals without any medical qualification are practicing medicine, masquerading as doctors. Statistics indicate that there are about 30,000 such persons and many of them practice in rural areas. We are also aware that a large number of illegal abortions are performed by those quacks putting the life of women at risk. A majority of abortion- related deaths are taking place after an abortion performed by a quack,” he said.

He said public cooperation was extremely important to apprehend quacks as those impersonators could not practice as qualified doctors if the public try to identify them and complained to the PMSRC. (Sandun A Jayasekera)

Special island wide police operation nabs over 1800 persons, seizes illegal liquor, drugs

Sun, Dec 17, 2017, 11:08 pm SL Time, ColomboPage News Desk, Sri Lanka.

Dec 17, Colombo: A special four-hour operation launched Saturday (16) night covering all police divisions across the island has made over 1800 arrests and seized consignments of illegal drugs and alcohol.
The special police operation under the direction of Inspector General of Police (IGP) Pujith Jayasundera was carried out between 1:00 a.m. and 5:00 a.m. Saturday by all police stations in the country.
Police Headquarters said that 14,706 police officers and 10 police dogs took part in the operation.
As a result of the operation, 559 people with arrest warrants and 92 suspects wanted for crimes have been arrested. Another 720 persons have been arrested on suspicion.
Police conducted 586 raids on places selling illicit liquor and narcotics and seized more than 24 milligrams of heroin and more than eight kilograms of cannabis. They have seized 26,239 liters of illegal liquor following the raids.
The police also cited 4,472 traffic violations during the island wide operation and arrested 501 drunk drivers.

Police have seized six illegal firearm during the operation.

M12M on the campaign trail Spotlight on polls and criminal elements

By Kavindya Chris Thomas-2017-12-17

There was a time when dirty politics and Sri Lanka were almost synonymous. Elections would send waves of fear and paranoia among the public, armed gangs would rule the streets, notorious crime lords would discard their stereotypical hiked up sarong and cover up their prison tattoos with the white, clean national suit.

Yet, the present is not so obvious and not so hopeless. We have – we would like to think – surpassed the innate apprehension towards corrupt and violent ridden elections. Sri Lanka has witnessed two almost peaceful elections since 2015, but they too experienced some bouts of violence. The root cause for this lies with the social outcry that erupted since then that demanded the grand transition from dirty to clean politics. This was when our masses dawned on the realization that it is not only possible to have elections without the fear of riots and murder, assassinations and armed groups, but it is also possible to be satisfied of their elected representatives.

Clean politics

This change of ideology and fears was partially called into existence by the March 12 Movement, which was set up two years ago for clean politics, good governance, more checks and balances to consolidate democracy and to eventually move towards a just society. The Movement is seeking the support of civic-conscious citizens, the State and private media groups for the 25-day countrywide campaign starting on 13 March to achieve the vision and goals for which the people voted for at the presidential election on 8 January 2015.

The M12M, as the Movement is known believes that it is vital to carry the message to the grassroots level and that it is the reason why it is going countrywide. People's Action for Free and Fair Elections (PAFFREL) Executive Director Rohana Hettiarachchi told a news conference this week that M12M has announced that they were already in possession of accumulated evidence against certain political parties that are sponsoring convicted criminals as candidates at the forthcoming Local Government elections.

Maithripala Sirisena

Pushing its 2015 initiative to bring about a clean political culture within the country once again, the March 12 Movement noted that despite many of the leading political parties following in the footsteps of President Maithripala Sirisena and agreeing not to nominate candidates who are packing criminal records and to engage in politics certain groups have however, gone back on their word.
The Movement has so far collected over 20 complaints regarding tainted candidates who have received nominations from the two leading political parties. Hettiarachchi noted that the Movement has recorded two complaints from Ampara District, one from Polonnaruwa, two each from Kurunegala, Galle and Kegalle while five complaints against one candidate was received from Puttalam.

These individuals have been accused of a variety of illegal activities which include fraud, trafficking in narcotics, lumber, sand and wildlife, prostitution, gambling and various other misdeeds. Information has been provided anonymously and in some cases with crucial evidence accompanied with police reports. Some information has even been provided by members of the party who had been forced to remain silent during the selection process. More often than not, the party's district leader when contacted would be against providing nominations to these individuals as Hettiarachchi noted, yet the final decision on the nominations lies in the hand of the electorate organizer of that party, which leaves the rest of the candidates helpless.

Hettiarachchi said that if the political parties failed to put forward politically clean candidates at the upcoming Local Government elections, it will be in violation of public aspirations. The Movement further opined that under the new electoral system, the public's franchise is thoroughly hindered when it comes to electing the right candidate. This, added with the sudden increase of candidates for the election, from 4,000 to almost 9,000, will further frustrate the public, they noted. "The increased number of candidates that are elected are to be sustained by the nation's wealth; the monies of the people. If the right candidate - the clean candidate - is elected in, then the people won't complain about having to spend on them. If this does not change it'll be the responsibility of each and every political party and the electoral organizers."

Tainted candidates

Hettiarachchi further said, "We have already received information about candidates who have been engaged in narcotic trafficking, illegal sand mining and various other crimes, that have received nominations from parties that are contesting the election."

The Movement further noted that a draft of the proposed campaign Finance Act, with the recommendations of the Elections Commission, had been submitted to the President, who is yet to present it to the Cabinet of Ministers.

In giving nominations, PAFFREL has proposed certain criteria and standards so, that in Parliament, Provincial and Local Councils we will see sincere, selfless and sacrificial representatives who will be servants of the people, instead of plundering and pillaging the wealth of the country. PAFFREL, which for many years has played a leading role as an election observer, now hopes to expand its scope of duties and responsibilities. It says the aim is to bring about a constructive change in the prevailing political culture at a time when the country has reached a crucial moment in its political history.

Among the criteria for the nomination of candidates are:

Should not be a person who had served a jail sentence for a crime or a person who had received a suspended sentence.

Should not be a person who had been found guilty of bribery or corruption and should be acceptable to society and a person of good character. Be cautious when considering candidates allegedly involved in bribery or corruption.

Should not be a person who is engaging or had engaged in trades such as alcohol, drugs, gambling, casinos and prostitution.

Should not be a person who is engaging or had engaged in trade which destroys the ecological life support system.

Should not be a person who has abused political power.

Should not be a person who had entered into financial agreements prejudicial to the country.

Legal arena

These accusations against these candidates and those who violate the above criteria - should be met in a legal arena, accused and challenged at a Court. But the question remains, who is going to do that? The Movement has announced that they would file legal action against any such tainted persons who receives nominations.

The Movement has commenced forwarding all such complaints in writing to the secretaries of the relevant political parties. Other complaints concerned those involved in illicit liquor production, sand, soil and stone quarry mining, and obtaining monies for the provision of employment, allegedly being given nominations by political parties.

The Police and the Election Commission can only take action within the legal framework, he noted.

"The political parties must take a decision on what criteria they will adopt when selecting candidates to give nominations and whether they will select those against whom various allegations have been levelled. For the public, we advise them to, regardless of the party, elect only those who are suitable. The public have been invited to send complaints in writing to the March 12 Movement Secretariat, No. 12/3, Robert Terrace, Robert Gunawardena Mawatha, Colombo 6, the latter being the preferable mode of communication or call on 0112-514441/2 or fax to 0112-514443," he explained.

LG Elections: Will Sri Lankans Be Any Wiser?

 

By Mohamed Harees –December 18 2017 

“Elections belong to the people. It’s their decision. If they decide to turn their back on the fire and burn their behinds, then they will just have to sit on their blisters.” ~ Abraham Lincoln

With another election round the corner, posters in various colours and hues with those smiley faces promising milk and honey times for the local electorates are appearing all over, even on social media sites. A rather humorous story appeared in a Sinhala newspaper. A foreign couple visiting Sri Lanka, inquisitively glancing at the election posters in every corner, has asked their Sri Lankan guide whether they were Police ‘wanted list’ posters. When they were told that there were candidates for an election round the corner, they were shocked and have quite innocently inquired whether Sri Lankans will ever vote for these ‘faces’ who pollute the environment in this manner without any care or concern. ‘Wanted List’ type indeed, judging by the quality of candidates the political parties usually field! But to our horror, they end up in the decision making bodies and not in jail or the prison hospital!

Humour apart, the country fatigued by the dismal performance of its’ elected representatives in the past, more because of the stupidity of its’ people, begs to ask this pertinent question yet another time: Will this forthcoming local government elections however be a repeat of another historic blunder of electing morons, cheats and corrupt OR will the Sri Lankan electorate rise up to the challenge of breaking away from previous traditions and elect a set of ‘clean’ people worth their salt? Whichever way, we need to bear the consequences as Abraham Lincoln says in the above quote!    

 

It was during the last Parliamentary Elections in August 2015 that there was a well-orchestrated campaign by many public spirited groups led by that exemplary icon Ven Sobitha asking the electorate to avoid voting for shady characters and corrupt candidates. That campaign did not unfortunately have much significant effect on the conscience of the people, resulting in many of those ‘old’ faces with tainted tracked records once again entering Parliament; some with huge majorities. Some of those of such characters who could not, the so-called Yahapalana government took them in through the rogue route- the national list. Many of them are now senior and junior ministers, and the ‘abuse of power and political corruption’ drama continues to be enacted with NATO ‘no action-talk only’ attitude from a government which promised to clean the stables, hunt the offenders and to maintain a clean sheet.

Thus, Sri Lanka is yet to see their anti-corruption rhetoric leading to strong action, despite the passing of the RTI Act and the adoption of the Open Government Partnership National Action Plan. Controversies such as the Bond issue, the alleged Australian corruption scandal implicating the President and delays in many other corruption related prosecutions involving many bigwigs in the MR Regime, have raised raising serious questions about the government’s commitment towards ‘yahapalanaya’ and anti-corruption. Marred by serious allegations of corruption and mismanagement, Sri Lanka’s much-hyped coalition government therefore appears to have very little to celebrate as it completes almost three years in power.

Break down of credibility of this Yahapalana government despite the big drama in January 2015 is just the latest in a series of worrying blows to the health of our democracy. Trust in governments and political parties has reached a historical low while trust in the institutions of democracy is also visibly declining. Even in the West, political parties – the key players in democracies – are among the least trusted institutions in society. Countless western societies are currently afflicted by what we might call “democratic fatigue syndrome”. Many surveys have found that in the past 10 years, around the world, there has been a considerable increase in calls for a strong leader “who does not have to bother with parliament and elections”. It would appear that people like the idea of democracy but loathe the reality and even the Western electorate seems to be losing their patience with their elected leaders who take them for a ride after elections, fattening their lot and seeking perks at the expense of the tax payers. In Sri Lanka too, this is equally true specially when their representatives in various bodies becoming detached from reality once in power.   

Elections in Sri Lanka too favour the corrupt and the rich. They have become the battleground of personal politics, and thuggery favouring those with financial clout and having access to donors (who expect political favours after the election) to outshine other less privileged candidates, resulting in corruption beginning to pervade our systems of governance. So-called democratic politics has become a conduit for governmental influence-peddling rather than a structure of genuine popular representation and socially beneficial governance. Rather than fulfilling a ‘political compact’ with their electorates, those elected engage in fulfilling their ‘business compacts’ with those rich or powerful donors who helped them contest and win elections, leading to corruption at sky levels. White collar crimes are being committed with impunity without fear or sanction.

There is no culture among Sri Lankan politicos or administrators to resign when their performances fall short of the expectations, while our parliamentary proceedings with ill-educated lawmakers, have become comedy dramas. Whistleblowing is not activated or encouraged in this country; rather they are discouraged or penalized. It is therefore important that public activism is reactivated in the run up to the forthcoming elections to ensure people’s vote is not being bought over once again by the corrupt under this corrupt system to gain their own personal ends. Haven’t we seen much activity among political parties in the recent past, attempting to come together to face this election in this regard? Maithree trying to forge his SLFP with the JO to avoid defeat and many politicians speaking shamelessly from their rear, exposing their double tongued and hypocritical attitudes! There is also forming of united fronts like those self centered Muslim politicos led Rishard Bathiurdeen et el in the interests of the ‘Muslim community’! Sorry! Did they say ‘in the interests of the Muslim community? My foot! These self-serving kind never had the interests of the Muslims, except when the Muslim cause served their personal agendas.       

Read More

Podujana Party off to a wobbly start

*Disappointment among coalition partners*Party headquarters besieged in nomination frenzy*Minor mistakes take toll on new party’s image

C.A.Chandraprema-December 16, 2017, 8:38 pm 

It would not be incorrect to say that that this local government election is all about the Sri Lanka Podujana Party and very little else. Everyone is waiting to see how the SLPP performs as that will define the future of Sri Lankan politics. One may say that that the party that had the most difficult time in finalizing nominations was also the SLPP because of its numerous partners. The UNP would have had an even more difficult time but they seem to have managed to avoid that by dropping some potential partners. It appears as if the parties led by Mano Ganesan and Rishard Baithiudeen will not be a part of the grand coalition under the UNP as envisaged earlier. At the last parliamentary election in August 2015, the SLMC, ACMC, DPF, NUW and UCPF all contested together in one list under the UNP but that does not seem to be possible at this election and two or three of these partners have decided to go their own way.

The SLPP however is in no position to drop any partners. The political parties that make up the Joint Opposition are in fact one for all practical purposes and for any of the partners to drop out will be unthinkable. After the defeat of 8 January 2015, it was leaders like Vasudeva Nanayakkara and Wimal Weerawansa who fired the first salvos in the reorganization beginning with the famous Nugegoda rally that led to the formation of the Joint Opposition under Mahinda Rajapaksa’s leadership.  There was never any doubt that the vast majority of the Joint Opposition rank and file was made up of members of the SLFP but the leaders of the minor parties were in fact a major driving force in the coalition; so much so that it is now a fiction to say that these are separate entities. They are not separate on the ground yet there are multiple command structures within the Joint Opposition. So the effect seen at nomination time was that of a sack full of cats. The beseiged Battaramulla headquarters of the SLPP was more akin to a raucous fish market than a party headquarters after the election was declared with party activists demanding nomination.

One of the reasons why so many SLPP nomination lists were rejected was because of this pressure with arguments continuing all night and into the morning of the day on which nominations closed. One of the reasons for this demand is that there is a palpable anti-government trend in the country and the SLPP has a virtual monopoly over the anti-government vote. However if the SLPP continues make these amateurish mistakes leading to the rejection of their lists that anti-government trend will be of no avail to them. Lists do get rejected in all parties. One of the best known upsets of this kind was the 2006 rejection of the UNP’s list in Colombo when Sirisena Cooray himself was contesting as the Mayoral candidate. Cooray was hardly an amateur. He had been Mayor of Colombo for a decade and was a veteran of many election campaigns. Yet even he made a mistake in submitting nominations in an election in which he was set to make a political come back. If it can happen to Cooray, it can happen to anybody.

Profound embarrassment for SLPP

We learn that in one or two of the instances the rejection was due to the returning officers insisting on requirements that were not in the law and the rejection was due to an error on the part of the official. In such instances, it will be possible to get the rejections reversed. However, any repetition of this abysmal performance in handing in nominations in the next round will do immense damage to the new party’s image. The fact that a nomination paper of the Joint Opposition was rejected because the wrong date was written on it or that the signature of the candidate was taken but his name was not written in front of it, is not going to motivate any anti-government voter to vote for the government. But it will deprive the people of that local government area of the opportunity to vote for the Joint Opposition.

This rejection of SLPP nominations lists also provides an opportunity for an interesting experiment. In the absence of the SLPP, will the anti-government votes in that local government area gravitate towards the SLFP which is a part of the government? Or will they vote for the JVP which is not a apart of the government but a part of the yahapalana coalition which cooperates with this government on certain matters? Or will the anti-government voters in that area vote for the independent lists? In 2006, the UNP supported an independent group to prevent their voters from gravitating towards their main rivals and the UNP voters of Colombo preferred to vote in a trishaw driver as Mayor rather than voting for their rivals.

With the rejection of the SLPP nominations lists in Maharagama and Badulla, the SLFP chief ministers were cock a hoop bellowing that they were going to win the two local government institutions. This will need watching. What has to be observed now is whether their anti-government sentiments will be strong enough to prevent them from voting for the SLFP even though that was their original political party. If the SLFP fails to win in the local government areas where the SLPP lists have been rejected, that will be the clearest sign yet of the SLFP’s demise as a viable political party.    

UNP’s prospects at the LG elections

The most recent election that gave us an indication of the UNP’s standing among voters was the parliamentary election of August 2015. At that election, the UNP got 5,098,916 votes (45.6% of the total votes cast) The UPFA got 4,732,664 votes which works out to 42.4% of the total votes cast. This time however, both sides will be going to the polls with splits in their ranks. At the last parliamentary election, the votes received by the UNP was not just that of the UNP proper, but including those of its allies like the SLMC, Rishard Baithiudeen’s ACMC, V.Radhakrishnan’s Up Country Peoples’s Front, Mano Ganesan’s Democratic People’s Front, P.Digambanram’s National Union of Workers all combined. All these parties contested together in all districts of the North and East as well. As a result not less than 17 of the UNP’s 106 MPs in parliament are from these minority based political parties.

The minority party MPs elected on the UNP list at the August 2015 parliamentary election are as follows: Ameer Ali ACMC, Rishard Baithiudeen ACMC, Cassim Faizal SLMC, A.R.A.Hafeez SLMC, Rauff Haleem SLMC, M.H.M. Harees SLMC, Abdul Rahuman Izak ACMC, M.A.M. Maharoof ACMC, M.I.M.Mansoor SLMC, M.H.M.Navavi ACMC, Velusami Radhakrishnan UCPF, M.H.M. Salman SLMC, M.S.Towfeek SLMC, M.Tilakarajah NUW, M.Velukumar DPF, Mano Ganesan DPF, Palani Digambaram NUW. We have not counted the Sirisena loyalists who allied with the UNP for that election because these people now have little choice but to make the UNP their permanent home and there is little likelihood of them leaving. They may have brought some votes into the UNP as well. For instance in Attanagalla, Chandrika Kumaratunga was openly canvassing for Arjuna Ranatunga who was contesting on the UNP list. The Sirisena loyalists in the UNP are as follows:  Arjuna Ranatunga, Chathura Senaratne, Rajitha Senaratne, Champika Ranawaka, Athureliye Rathana Thera, Jayampathy Wickremeratne, Hirunika Premachandra, S.B.Nawinna, M.K.A.D.S.Gunawardena and his replacement Sarath Fonseka.

Of the UNP’s minority allies however, all except Mano Ganesan have a history of seeking office under any government that may happen to be in power and it is a certainty that they will all dump the UNP if the latter loses power. Hence none of these minority party allies can be considered to be a part of the UNP. Besides, at the forthcoming local government elections, the SLMC has decided to contest together with the UNP in all districts outside the north and east while they will contest in the north and east under their own symbol. Digambaram and Radhakrishnan will contest on the UNP list in the Nuwara Eliya and other districts. The ACMC is to go it alone throughout the country.  Mano Ganesan is to contest separately. All this will take huge chunks out of the UNP’s vote bank.

In contrast, the Mahinda Rajapaksa camp will lose only Mutu Sivalingam (CWC), and Arumugam Thondaman (CWC) who both contested on the UPFA ticket at the 2015 parliamentary election. In fact nobody will really gain from the CWC not contesting with the Mahinda Rajapaksa camp because the CWC will contest the Nuwara Eliya district under its own symbol. (The CWC will however contest together with the UPFA in the Badulla district and that will add some votes to the SLFP camp.) While the UNP will lose a large number of votes when its minority party allies go their separate ways at this local government election, the Rajapaksa camp will not lose that many votes when the CWC goes its own way. What the Rajapaksa camp will have to watch out for however is the number of votes that the SLFP will be able to siphon off from them. The SLFP group in the government has the Presidency and the best ministries. There will definitely be a proportion of the SLFP vote that they can command.

Even though the Rajapaksa camp will lose the CWC’s votes and those going to the SLFP Sirisena camp, the biggest advantage that Joint Opposition has is that they have a near monopoly of the anti-government vote in a situation where the pro-government vote will be split between the UNP and the SLFP Sirisena camp. Even though the UNP got just over five million votes with the SLMC, ACMC, UCPF, DPF, NUW all contesting under its banner at the last parliamentary election, this time the UNP is not going to get anywhere near that number of votes with their allies contesting separately. Furthermore much water has flown under the bridge since August 2015. Between January and August 2015, the UNP was generally on a good wicket because they had the best ministries in the government. Furthermore, that was the period in which the new UNP led government had increased government servants salaries by Rs. 10,000 and reduced the prices of fuel, electricity, gas and several essential foodstuffs.

After the parliamentary election however, things have gone downhill for the UNP they have got only the leftovers after President Sirisena gave the best ministries to his SLFP loyalists and in the past two years, the UNP rank and file has been complaining that they cannot contact or meet any UNP minister quite apart from getting anything done. In this respect the situation today is much worse for the UNP than it was back in 2004. For most UNP activists and rank and file members, there is no difference in being in government or the opposition. So for all the reasons stated above, it is highly unlikely that the UNP will be able to get anywhere near the number of votes they got at the August 2015 parliamentary election. The likelihood is that even a section of the UNP’s hardcore vote will abstain from voting this time. As far as the Podujana Peramuna is concerned, The thing to watch out for is how many votes the Rajapaksa camp will lose because of the SLFP fielding separate lists and how much they will gain by being able to have a near monopoly over the anti-government vote. Whichever way one looks at this, the centre of attention in this whole election is the Podujana Peramuna.

Disciplinary action against JO a pie in the sky

Former President Mahinda Rajapaksa’s statement issued after nominations closed on Thursday was specifically aimed at rallying the anti-government vote across all party lines. In this statement, the former President explained why the Podujana Peramuna was going it alone this time without an alliance with the SLFP. When the group supporting him contested the August 2015 Parliamentary election under the UPFA which was effectively controlled by the President through his control over the SLFP, that placed the President in a position of power over the Mahinda group. MR’s statement drew attention to the manner in which this power was abused by President Maithripala Sirisena to destablise Mahinda’s election campaign firstly by writing an open letter to him saying more or less that he will not be appointed Prime Minister even if he wins the election and then sacking the general secretaries of the SLFP and the UPFA on the eve of the poll.

The former President stated, "Thereby the message that was conveyed to the whole country was that since it is the President who calls the shots, the UNP will ultimately end up triumphant even if they lose the election. That was the manner in which the present leader of the SLFP ensured the victory of the UNP at the last parliamentary election. This is why the Joint Opposition is contesting this local government election under a different symbol and a different political alliance. The objective of the Joint Opposition is to provide all those opposed to this government with a political alternative."

Having thus explained why he decided to go it alone at this election, the former President pitched into both the SLFP Sirisena faction and the JVP stating that while the SLFP group in the government criticizes the UNP, they serve in the same Cabinet and keep the coalition government going. They unfailingly vote for the UNP’s Budget. They had voted in favour of the UNP’s 2018 Budget as well just days ago. The SLFP and the UNP had cooperated in selling off the Hambantota Port as well. When the UNP minister of ports and shipping objected to the Hambantota port deal, the President removed him and appointed an SLFP minister to that position to push through the unfavourable deal entered into by the UNP. The two partners in government cooperate with one another in the constitutional reform process aimed at creating nine semi-independent federal states.

For the first time President Rajapaksa publicly criticized the JVP as well, accusing them of being an integral part of the yahapalana collective and cooperating in running the FCID, helping the government to change the electoral system to avoid holding the provincial council elections, helping the government to pass amendments to the local government elections law in contravention of the Constitution and the Standing Orders of Parliament etc. MR said that back in 2005, the JVP which was then under the leadership of Somawansa Amarasinghe threw its weight behind him in order to prevent Ranil Wickremesinghe from coming into power but today, under a different leadership, the JVP has become a cat’s paw of the UNP. Therefore, the voting public should be mindful of the fact that the only real opposition to this government is the Joint Opposition.

The most important part of MR’s statement was the section where he pointed out that the next presidential election process will begin just 18 months after the dust settles on the local government election which is to be held in February 2018. The former President’s statement made the following observations: "According to the change effected by the 19th Amendment to Article 30(2) of the Constitution, the term of office of the President was reduced to five years. By the provisions of Section 49(1)(b) of the 19th Amendment, that change has been made specifically applicable to the incumbent President as well. Hence the term of office of the incumbent President ends on 9 January 2020.According to Article 31(3) of our Constitution, a Presidential election has to be held not more than two months and not less than one month before the incumbent President’s term of office expires. Hence the next presidential election will have to be held between 9 November and 9 December 2019. When the mandatory periods between the declaration of the election, calling for nominations and the subsequent period up to the poll laid down in the Presidential Elections Act of 1981 are taken into account, the next presidential election process will have to begin by October 2019.Hence there will only be around 18 months between the local government elections of February 2018 and the beginning of the next Presidential elections process in 2019."

What this means is that after the local government elections next February, jockeying for the presidency will begin in earnest. Even though some members of the SLFP have been trying to intimidate parliamentarians of the Joint Opposition by saying that disciplinary action will be taken against them for supporting a different political party at the local government elections, that’s hardly likely to happen for many reasons. In the first place the disciplinary process and the inevitable court procedures together will take more than 18 months. Furthermore, after the local government elections, there will be renewed moves being made for reunification of all SLFP factions for the Presidential election. Even though re-unification moves failed at the LG level for many reasons such as not being able to carry out a joint election campaign against the government with a partner of that same government, and because the Joint Opposition could not possibly accommodate any outsiders as there was not enough even for the partners of the JO itself. Reunification becomes easier the higher the level of the election.

Even the UNP was able to get everyone on board for the last parliamentary elections as recounted above, it was compelled to drop some at the LG level because of their inability to accommodate all the candidates. But joining up will become marginally easier at the provincial council level and easier still at the parliamentary level; with it being easiest at the presidential level. If at the level of the presidential candidacy, some members of the government either as individuals or as organized groups are willing to support the Joint Opposition candidate, nobody is going to object to that. In such an instance, the very act of supporting the opposition candidate will constitute a parting of ways with the government.     

Sirisena declares war on SLPP, disciplinary action threatened against party dissidents

By Our Political Editor-Sunday, December 17, 2017

• President to give top priority to polls campaign and address meetings in all districts
• Rajapaksa hits out at Sirisena accusing him of helping the UNP win the last parliamentary election
• Malaysian PM coming today, but three major foreign investment projects withdrawn by Sri Lanka at the last moment
• 
  

Personal initiatives by President Maithripala Sirisena to re-unify the Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP) ahead of the local polls have all ended in failure.

Now, he has declared political war on the rival faction for repeatedly snubbing his overtures. Sirisena told his ministers and other SLFP stalwarts this week he would nominate a person for each electorate to monitor the activities of the rival group. Their tasks include gathering audio and video evidence of those taking part in the ‘Joint Opposition’ campaign on behalf of the Sri Lanka Podujana (People’s) Party (SLPP). At the same time Sirisena also declared that other than attending weekly Cabinet meetings, his priority in the coming weeks would be to take part in every district level meeting for the local polls. He will address 22 meetings countrywide.

Several nomination lists were rejected for the elections to 93 local councils. One of the major rejections was the Sri Lanka Podujana Pakshaya (SLPP) list for Maharagama, a stronghold of ‘JO” and MEP leader Dinesh Goonewardene. Pic by Indika Handuwala

In the wake of his inability to reunite with the rival faction of the SLFP, a fuller involvement in the campaign has become imperative for him. Though his rationale is based on the premise that every candidate has been named by him and he had to therefore to back them to the fullest, there are even more important reasons. He is conscious of the impact of the polls’ outcome on the Presidency and the need for his party to perform equally well if not better than his coalition partner, the United National Party (UNP).

The move to deal with SLFP dissidents is a prelude to initiating disciplinary inquiries prior to expulsion from the SLFP. Whether he could face the fallout of such a mass scale expulsion remains a critical question and he has threatened to do this many times before, but Sirisena is quite clearly piqued by the snub at the hands of leaders of the rival group. It was only last week, as revealed exclusively in these columns, that he spoke on the telephone with Sri Lanka Podujana Party (SLPP) chief strategist Basil Rajapaksa, seemingly on his own initiative. This was after Ven. Medagoda Abeytissa Thera, the chief incumbent of the Sunethra Devi Pirivena in Kohuwala and one of the many emissaries, took a call and handed over the mobile phone to Sirisena. It was one final throw of the dice. “That is now over. There are larger sections of the public who expect our party to give voice to their concerns and highlight their grievances. They are looking to us in confidence,” Basil Rajapaksa told the Sunday Times this week He had confided in a close friend that Sirisena spoke to him after four and half years, which meant they were not on talking terms even when they were ministers in the Mahinda Rajapaksa cabinet. Strange enough Sirisena was General Secretary of the SLFP and Rajapaksa the National Organiser of the same party.

An emissary who has been equally active last week was Ven. Athureliye Rathana Thera. Though regarded as representing the Jathika Hela Urumaya (JHU), he is on the National List of the United National Party (UNP) in Parliament. He made last ditch attempts throughout last Sunday, shuttling between Sirisena and many ‘JO’ leaders. That was to ensure an electoral deal just 24 hours before last Monday when nominations began for 93 local authorities. In fact, Sirisena had awaited a response before Monday. He had ensured that the SLFP candidates including those from the rival faction could contest under the Chair symbol. This is the symbol of the People’s Alliance (PA) where Mahinda Rajapaksa is the leader and former Prime Minister D.M. Jayaratne the General Secretary. This is besides the SLFP which is also fielding candidates under the Hand and Betel Leaf symbols. This was not to be.

Premajayantha’s last-ditch efforts
One of the official Government spokesperson’s (SLFP) Dayasiri Jayasekera told Wednesday’s news conference that he was among those who also held talks with Basil Rajapaksa. “Dilan Perera (SLFP spokesperson and State Minister) pleaded for re-unity. I did not plead. There are people who did not want this to happen. G.L. Peiris has said so publicly. He was at the talks. Peiris said ‘we don’t have time, work is done’. Then he said he is sleepy and left the talks,” Jayasekera told the media.

The reunification effort did not end there. With nominations due for 248 more local authorities from December 18 to 21, Minister Susil Premajayantha made another desperate attempt last Wednesday. He met ‘JO’ leader Mahinda Rajapaksa to ascertain whether there was still a possibility of an electoral alliance. Rajapaksa not only rejected the new overtures brought by Premajayantha but the very next day (Thursday), issued a strongly worded three-page statement that roundly criticised the Sirisena-Wickremesinghe Government and its allies.

Noting that the local council elections had been delayed for nearly three years “due to the Government’s fear of the voting public,” Rajapaksa accused President Sirisena of ensuring “the victory of the UNP at the last parliamentary election.” This is why “the Joint Opposition is contesting this local government election under a different symbol and a different political alliance,” he said. Rajapaksa also charged that the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP), which is also fielding candidates at the local polls, has “fully co-operated in every anti-democratic measure taken by this Government. It was the JVP that provided the two thirds majority that the Government needed to change the electoral system and avoid holding the provincial council elections which should have been held by now,” Rajapaksa added.

Another significant assertion by Rajapaksa related to the change brought about by the introduction of the 19th Amendment to the Constitution. Pointing out that the term of office of the President was reduced to five years, he contended that this “change has been specifically applicable to the incumbent President as well”. Hence, he declared, “the term of office of the incumbent President ends on January 9, 2020.” He said therefore, “a Presidential election has to be held not more than two months and not less than one month before the incumbent President’s term of office expires.”

Hence, the next Presidential election will have to be held between November 9 and December 9, 2019. However, protagonists of Sirisena argue to the contrary saying the Presidential elections are not due till end 2020. Mahinda Amaraweera, General Secretary of the United People’s Freedom Alliance (UPFA), the umbrella organisation under SLFP majority, told a news conference this week, “We are only planning to work for an SLFP Government in 2020.” He noted that “even though other parties say about the continuation of the ‘Yahapalana’ or good governance Government till 2025,” adding that “we take this as a compliment.”
Fuller details of Thursday’s nominations appear elsewhere in this newspaper. As is always the case, internecine issues have dogged practically all political parties in the fray. The inability to adhere to procedures led to 23 nomination papers from different contestants being rejected. The majority of them, 19 were from registered political parties whilst others belonged to independent groups. The Mahajana Eksath Peramuna (MEP) fielded a woman candidate for Maharagama Urban Council but a silly error described her as a male. The entire list was rejected, and Maharagama is the pocket borough of its leader Dinesh Gunawardene and therefore a very strong constituency for the MEP.

The Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna (SLPP) had its nomination papers rejected in respect of the Urban Councils of Maharagama, Panadura and Weligama. Also rejected were its nomination papers for the Pradeshiya Sabhas in Badulla, Agalawatte and Mahiyangana. These would, therefore, see a straight forward UNP-SLFP contest. The SLFP also had its nomination papers rejected for the Pradeshiya Sabhas in Padiyathalawa and Dehiattakandiya. The same fate befell the Tamil United Liberation Front (TULF) in the Trincomalee Town Gravets Council and the Pradeshiya Sabha in Valachchenai. The Ilankai Thamil Arasu Katchi had two of its nomination lists rejected in the Pradeshiya Sabhas of Alawediwembu and Sammanthurai.

“Admittedly, there were errors in a few nomination papers. However, some of the rejections raise questions. We are moving to courts to seek redress,” Dinesh Gunawardena, leader in Parliament for the ‘Joint Opposition’ told the Sunday Times. He said their campaign would centre on many issues including the Government’s incompetence in managing the economy, not delivering on the promises made to the people and the soaring cost of living.

Gunawardena said, “We (Joint Opposition) are the only ones who can publicly criticise this Government. The Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP) and the Tamil National Alliance (TNA) have become appendages of the Government,” he charged. He also said that the Government was facing a financial crisis, a fact admitted by Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) is extending piecemeal support. “People are helpless and corruption is at unprecedented levels,” he added.

The United National Front (UNF), the umbrella organisation of the UNP which is fielding candidates together with its allies under the elephant symbol, has also had its share of issues. This week, UNF leader Premier Wickremesinghe insisted that the prospective mayoral candidate for Colombo Rosie Senanayake should contest a ward. She had been exploring the possibility of being nominated from the proportional representation list after the elections are concluded.

Mano Ganesan’s United Progressive Alliance (UPA), sought the office of Deputy Mayor and found the request rejected. The party has now declared it will field its own candidates. Ganesan told the Sunday Times ; “The coalition of political parties representing Up Country, Tamil community and Colombo based minority communities have decided to field candidates in selected areas including for the Colombo Municipal Council (CMC) under the United Progressive Alliance (UPA). The decision to go it alone in some areas came after extensive discussions with the UNP to contest under their alliance United National Front (UNF) were not successful. The UNP is not willing to allocate more seats to our party candidates where multi-member wards now exist.

“Therefore we have decided to contest under our own United Progressive Alliance (UPA) under ladder symbol. “This doesn’t mean we won’t work with other major parties in future. We are of the view that we will face the election in certain areas alone. We will extend our support to other parties to form the majority in local authorities after polls. We will bargain with them on the basis of the number of seats we win.”

Barring two, the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP) will contest local authorities throughout the country, JVP frontliner Vijitha Herath said yesterday. In the Bandarawela Urban Council and the Pradeshiya Sabha, we have formed a united front with a group which has been campaigning against the huge environmental damage caused by the Uma Oya Project. The JVP has invited non-political interest groups in various towns and villages to join it in the elections.

Herath told the Sunday Times, “Our campaign slogan will be ‘Gama Godanagana, Dushanaya Paradana Jawaya (The force that defeats corruption and builds the village). We have a mixture of candidates including professionals such as doctors, artistes and also those representing the village level such as farmers. We will be telling the voters that the main parties have failed to uplift the standards of villages and therefore give an opportunity for our party to serve the villages. Our campaigns have already started at village level and we have had several major meetings. The campaign will be stepped up in the next few weeks.”

After the parliamentary elections in August 2015, this is the first time that countrywide polls are taking place to elect members to local bodies. That again is after more than two years during which councils have been run by Special Commissioners, causing immense hardship to the public. Local bodies are regarded as nurseries for politicians who aspire for greater heights leading to their becoming Members of Parliament. But with the advent of Provincial Councils these local bodies have become a third tier and not the second tier of political leaders of the future. However, the upcoming local polls, now likely on February 10, has other manifold ramifications. It is the first popularity test for the SLFP-UNP coalition, the ‘JO’ and other opposition parties. More importantly, the sequence of political events that preceded the local polls, particularly the inordinate delays in conducting them, has placed President Sirisena’s own popularity to the test. A win, no doubt, will bolster his position and consolidate his leadership of the SLFP. A loss, on the other hand, will become a serious challenge which portends many ramifications.

Malaysian PM’s visit and projects

The local polls are not the only issues for Sirisena. The Government has been forced this week to take off from the agenda three different foreign investment projects totalling US$ 350 million (over Rs 5.3 billion) from Malaysia. The Foreign Ministry in Colombo and its counterparts in Kuala Lumpur had worked assiduously in the past many weeks and listed them on the agenda for talks between President Sirisena and Malaysian Prime Minister Dato’ Sri Mohamed Najib bin Tuan Abdul Razak.

Originally scheduled to arrive tonight, Premier Abdul Razak will now arrive in Colombo by private jet this morning. The first visit by a Malaysian Premier in 33 years, it marks the 60th anniversary of diplomatic relations between Sri Lanka and Malaysia.

The Malaysian Prime Minister will be received with a guard of honour opposite the Presidential Secretariat tomorrow ahead of talks. The three collaboration projects listed for signing and unceremoniously pulled out from the agenda are:

1 Supplementary Agreement for an additional investment in the cellular mobile telephone network in Sri Lanka such as mobile data, coverage enhancements, digital services and analytics, charging and customer agreement network, monitoring, quality of service enhancement and others. The project to be undertaken by Dialog PLC (whose parent company Axiata is Malaysian) with the Board of Investment. The cost of the project is US$ 196 million.

2 Memorandum of Understanding to obtain approval/authorisation to operate as an independent company in Sri Lanka. Agreement to be signed between Edotco Services Lanka (Pvt.) and the Telecom Regulatory Commission of Sri Lanka (TRCSL). The cost is US$ 150 million.

3 Supplementary Agreement for an additional investment and project expansion in Television Network Equipment in Sri Lanka. Agreement was to be signed between Dialog Television (Pvt.) Ltd and the Board of Investment. The cost of the project is US$ 4 million.

As a result of the exclusion of these three projects, the official statement from the Foreign Ministry issued on Friday spoke only of “talks covering a wide range of subjects” and declared that only “Three MoUs will be signed in Science, Technology and Innovation; Bio Economy Development Co-operation; and Training for Diplomatic Personnel.” These do not involve any direct investment of funds.

The Sunday Times learnt that the exclusion of the three projects came on the strong protests raised by Sri Lanka Telecom reportedly on the claim that it would lead to a monopoly by one single service provider. Whether this is unfounded or not remains unclear. However, a source at Dialog PLC said there was no barrier whatsoever for any other entity, foreign or local, to invest in their own projects if they so wish. “After all, we have obtained prior approval,” the source added. Raising alarm over the matter are reports that the Board of Directors of the People’s Bank approved a temporary overdraft of Rs 500 million to Sri Lanka Telecom for payment of yearend bonus to employees. Is the SLT now cash strapped? Attempts to reach SLT Chairman P.G. Kumarasinghe to obtain his response were not successful. Telephone calls and SMS messages went unanswered.

The three projects in question were the ones which were to draw foreign investment from Malaysia. The MoU for Science, Technology and Innovation, Foreign Ministry sources said, was between the Government of Sri Lanka and the Malaysian Industry-Government Group for High Technology (MIGHT). Their objectives are (1) the Parties shall encourage and support cooperation between the two countries in the fields of Foresight and S2A in accordance with the provisions of this MoU and in accordance to the prevailing laws and regulations of each country. (2) The parties shall promote the development co-operation in Foresight and S2A between the Parties on the basis of equality, mutual advantage and mutual consent. (3) The Implementing Agencies of this MoU will be COSTI (and its successorss) and MIGHT (and its successorss).”

The MoU for the Bioeconomy Development Cooperation will be a tieup between the Malaysian Bioeconomy Development Corporation and the Coconut Development Authority, Foreign Ministry sources said. The Malaysian company is entrusted to identify value propositions for the bio-based and bio technology ventures via financial support, development and facilitation services.

The training of Sri Lankan diplomatic personnel will be a Government to Government MoU. For the Government of Sri Lanka, it will be through the Bandaranaike International Diplomatic Training Institute of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Training for diplomats will be in the fields of international relations, international organisations, international law, international economic relations, regional issues, consular issues and political science.

According to a Foreign Ministry source, Dialog PLC had obtained Board of Investment approval on November 24 this year to undertake Network Expansion Project as recommended by the Telecom Regulatory Commission of Sri Lanka (TRCSL). This is with an additional investment of US$ 196 million to include 3280 new sites within 24 months.

The Board of Investment had also given approval on November 28 for Dialog Television (Pvt) Ltd to undertake Network Expansion Project as recommended by the TRCSL. The additional envisaged investment is US$ 4 million. For this purpose too, an agreement was to be signed with the Board of Investment.
The third project between Edotco Services Lanka (Private) Ltd. and the Central Environmental Authority of Sri Lanka. Edotco Group Sdn Brhd (EGSB), is an investment holding company operating assets and overseeing the provision of infrastructure solutions for telecommunication and network operators across the Asian region.

The CEA will be the monitoring body for the TowerCo Project and will be responsible for the environmental assessment of the project.
The purpose of this MoU is to outline the roles and conditions of the Participants in promoting the overall Telecommunication and ICT growth in Sri Lanka. Among the arrangements made between the parties to this MoU are:

• Acquire existing tower (ground based, rooftops, street level coverage and camouflage structures) portfolios from other licensed operators.
• Build, own and operate new tower structures and related energy systems; and
• Encourage the commercial sharing of existing and new structures. ESELL and the EDOTCO Company will employ 1,000 persons directly and indirectly.

The investment on the project over three years is US$ 150 million.
At a time when the Government is clamouring for foreign investment to shore up the balance of payments position, the urgent withdrawal from the agenda of projects involving US$ 350 million coming from Premier Abdul Razak’s visit within hours, to say the least, is highly deplorable.

That it sends a wrong signal to would-be investors is one thing. Worse is the fact that the taxpayer would be called upon to pay more taxes to settle foreign debts when a situation worsens.

There are more questions than answers over this week’s developments relating to Premier Abdul Razak’s agenda for talks. It is insulting a guest when he and his Foreign Ministry had been made to believe one thing and they learn it has been changed at the eleventh hour. The repercussions over such issues, like the outcome of the local polls, would reverberate for a long, long time and President Sirisena would have to take note of them. No country in the world bluntly rejects foreign investment but Sri Lanka seems an exception.