Impeaching the President

By Faizer Shaheid-2018-02-01

Elections are only a few days away and the politicians are at it again trying to tear each other apart. The political rivalries have stood the challenge of time, continuing to appeal to summon the inner hopes of the people despite their anticlimactic approach.

Two weeks ago, a fresh saga unveiled when President Maithripala Sirisena marched out from a Cabinet meeting in disgust that Members of the United National Party (UNP) were slinging mud at him regularly. Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe had to make a statement requesting UNP members from casting aspersions at Sirisena. Still, the cracks began to show.

Although Sirisena had warned the UNP against expressing any dissent to his actions, the President's own Party, the Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP) continued to express anti-UNP sentiments. Especially following the Bond Scam revelations, Sirisena had asserted that he would take the finance related ministries under his wing and maintain control of the economy through a special economic council.

Going even further than this, rumours had been flying around that President Sirisena also wished to replace Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe with a new person at the helm. UNP Parliamentarian Chaminda Wijesiri expressed his outrage with an out and out challenge. He stated that if President Sirisena did replace Ranil Wickremesinghe as Prime Minister, the UNP will prepare to impeach President Sirisena in Parliament.

Procedure of impeachment

Impeachment can be considered the only check that Parliament maintains to counter the extensive powers of the Executive President. It is far-fetched and nearly impossible to execute given the odds. To impeach the President, a Member of Parliament will have to follow the procedure laid down in Article 38 (2) of the Constitution.

Article 38 (2) (a) states that any Parliamentarian may give a notice of resolution to the Speaker on the grounds that the President is unable to execute his functions due to mental or physical infirmity, or if the President is found guilty of certain acts. These actions include intentional violation of the Constitution, treason, bribery, misconduct or corruption involving abuse of power of the President, or any offence involving moral turpitude.

Under Article 38 (2) (b), the Speaker cannot entertain the resolution unless the resolution is signed by not less than two-thirds of the Members of Parliament. If the resolution cannot obtain two-thirds of the signatures, then at least one-half of the Parliamentarians should have signed it and the Speaker must be satisfied that the allegations warrant an enquiry.

Practicality of resolution

The primary challenge in executing an impeachment is to find an allegation that is sufficiently promising. President Sirisena does not appear to have any mental or physical ailments. Therefore, the UNP can only charge him on merit of guilt for a particular offence.

As of now, Sirisena has not been guilty of treason where he has betrayed the country so blatantly. Therefore, treason will not weigh for much. Bribery is a possible charge considering the allegations that have been levelled against President Sirisena for his affiliation with a prominent electronic media organization. The Australian allegation of corruption, also known as the SMEC scandal, which was never investigated, was alleged to have occurred prior to Presidency and therefore cannot be accounted for in an impeachment.

Misconduct or abuse of powers of the office of the President is also a fairly absurd charge unless the UNP can make startling revelations of corruption by the President. However, this too will not stand at the moment. President Sirisena has also not found himself involved in any offence of moral turpitude, nor is it likely to happen, judging by the general calm of President Sirisena.

However, President Sirisena may be charged with intentional violation of the Constitution on multiple counts. Firstly, for the action of appointing Ranil Wickremesinghe as Prime Minister in 2015 without formally removing D.M. Jayaratne in writing first. This was an express violation of the Constitution which states in Article 46 (2) (Article 47 of the Constitution prior to the amendment) that the Prime Minister shall continue until he is removed in writing.

The President is also guilty of removing the former Chief Justice, Mohan Peiris from office without having impeached constitutionally. Every Judge holds the right to stay in office until and unless he is impeached in Parliament in accordance with the procedure laid down in Section 107 (2) of the Constitution.

Likewise, there are a few other Constitutional violations that may warrant an investigation, for which President Sirisena may be impeached. Apart from these, there are no charges at present against Sirisena that may draw the interest of the Speaker. This is unless the UNP can reveal a few of the secrets that may still lay hidden to the general public.

Presenting the resolution

While the UNP may continue to have a definite 106 Parliamentarians in office, this is still short of the simple majority required as a minimum requirement to present a resolution to the Speaker. Even if 106 members stand united with strong allegations in hand, they may still require a further seven members of Parliament. The Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP) will not be willing to align with the UNP unless the allegations are strong, while the Tamil National Alliance (TNA) appears to be much more in favour of President Sirisena and Prime Minister Wickremesinghe. The Joint Opposition is far less likely to support either of the two factions, as they would gain from neither.

However, if the UNP can gain a simple majority and hold strong allegations against the President, the Speaker is likely to consider it. This is especially considering that the Speaker is also a stalwart of the UNP.

The problem, however, lies in the fact that there does not appear to be too many allegations against the President that could potentially have Sirisena considered as being unfit to be President. If the allegations are vague, they will need the support of the Joint Opposition, so as to form a two-third majority. However, to imagine this, given the current circumstances is to be delusional.

Further constitutional requirements

If all of the requirements of presenting an impeachment motion against the President is satisfied, then the Speaker will have to act on it by forwarding the allegations to the Supreme Court for investigation. At that juncture, it will matter if the allegations were true or merely an ambitious plot to oust the President from office.

Once the Supreme Court has considered the case, the President will be summoned to appear in person or with an Attorney-at-Law to present his case. The Supreme Court will only make its determination after this. Even after the Supreme Court determination has been made, the resolution will once again stand for voting in Parliament. It must pass with a positive votefrom two-third of the Parliamentarians, and only then can the President be ousted.

The likelihood of failure

During the interim period, the President will continue in his capacity undeterred and he will be very much capable of negotiating with parties or Parliamentarians to alter their vote. He could appoint 30 new ministers and 40 deputy ministers from the opposing lot, so as to keep them on his side or promise them luxuries like never before.

Even if he refuses to do so, the allegations are likely to be vague at best and will most likely fail in the Supreme Court. Even if it could be successful, the President could utilize his powers of appointment as a Judge to influence a decision.

In spite of everything, the President will also have powers of prorogation according to Article 70 of the Constitution. He could prorogue Parliament for a period of up to two months at a time, and using this he could intentionally delay the impeachment proceedings.

The only time that Parliament had drawn closer to impeaching the President was during the time of President Ranasinghe Premadasa. Politicians of the calibre of Lalith Athulathmudali and Gamini Dissanayake moved to pass an impeachment motion with two-thirds of Parliament in favour of it. However, President Premadasa used his powers of prorogation to delay proceedings and thereafter dissolved Parliament.

At present, the power to dissolve Parliament has not been availed until and unless four years and six months have been completed. Yet, President Sirisena will have plenty of tricks up his sleeve to play around with so as to detract his detractors and keep them at bay.

Conclusion

If any such move is made to impeach the President, the move is very likely to fail. Impeachment is a mere illusion designed by a foxy President to appear as though Parliament had a check over the President. It is not! It is rather a complete waste of time. The probable result will be an eventual no confidence motion against the government, or a failure of a budget vote which would then empower the President to dissolve Parliament earlier than four years and six months.

In any case, Parliamentarian Chaminda Wijesiri is isolated in most of his comments to date. Most UNP Parliamentarians are aware of what such tomfoolery can earn them in the long run.
About the author:

The writer is a Political Analyst and an independent researcher of law. He holds a postgraduate degree in the field of Human Rights and Democratization from the University of Colombo and an undergraduate degree in Law from the University of Northumbria, United Kingdom)
faizer@live.com

Is there LIFE in an old republic?

Friday, 2 February 2018 

I feel something queer come over me, as the actress said to the bishop. There’s a certain je ne sais quoi in the air these days… a balmy in wonderland mixture of introspective nostalgia and prospective newness. Maybe it’s all those fumes from myriad aeroplanes flying overhead in preparation for a seventieth birthday celebration, intoxicating us all with a rich mix of high octane and high-jinks. Perhaps that’s what’s making me airy, light, aethery, and more ready than at other times to overlook the faux pas of my fellow citizens and the petty foibles of our elected representatives.

Be that as it may, before anyone of us gets all sentimental and maudlin about shows of military legerdemain, let me hasten to assure the demographics in our island-nation still marginalised by a long-forgotten war that some of us haven’t forgotten the high cost of conflict. Both to the national interest and state coffers, as well as the price the people of a once peaceful republic paid over issues nascent in any emerging democracy where a colonial ruler had previously applied its notorious divide and conquer strategy. Which is to say that it is not stirring speeches or press cachet about national integrity and sovereign territoriality that stirs the blood. But rather a nagging suspicion that despite the hype and hoopla, and because of discernible strides made in other developmental spheres over the past decade or so, now there is a niggling sense that it is not politicos who contribute most significantly to the spirit of a nation’s birthday celebrations.

With that said, let us deny the devil his due credit. An unwinnable war which was prosecuted in the spirit of a Cato demanding time and again that Carthage must be destroyed must for ever redound to the rather dubious honour of a triad comprising erstwhile president, former senior bureaucrat, and ex-army chief. That trifecta of executive authority, state agency, and military instrumentality in ensuring and maintaining the peace remains a consummation devoutly to be wished in a more effete milieu in which many lament that a glory has passed from the earth. The signal honours due to a duumvirate that has worked – if not very well, at least quite hard – at determining that post-war triumphalism in a failed or failing state must more readily convert into post-conflicttenacity to succeed as a functioning democratic republic must not be withheld grudgingly either.

If one regime then is to be feted for its furious approach to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, perhaps its successors and their supporters are to be allowed a certain freedom to prick that balloon for its most egregious excesses. If another more republican government is to be faulted for its lack of spine in prosecuting crimes past for fear of future backlashes against its perpetuity in power, its more vociferous critics in opposition today may be chided for their churlish lack of recognition of significant accomplishments militating towards democratic institutional reform. Do I sound like I want to have my cake and eat it, which is what many if not most common or garden Sri Lankans desire? Yes, it is that kind of a celebration – a nod to three score and ten; and ten more if the spirit is willing though the flesh be weak… And also no, it is not a craven indulgence of coalition politics for fear any alternative is no better; nor a cowardly ignorance that fails to confront the burning issues of the day which remain despite the best (and/or worst) intentions of our governors and their gremlins in the machine.

Which brings me to the rest of today’s column. The acid tests of yore. An exam which all of us as co-celebrants on the cusp of 70 can take together. Not to try one another’s patience. But to assess the state of the nation as sensed in the nous of its more sensitive denizens such as that which read Daily FT. And evaluate in an arbitrary frame of mind the new trends we might determine to develop in concert with the folks albeit we invited to hold the sceptre over us for a while at least. So do try this set of reflections below for size, and surprise yourself as well as us all.

A. Essays

If Life (L), Independence (I), Freedom (F), Equality (E), are the main ingredients in our birthday cake, write out a recipe for the rest of the stuff you’d want to have… and eat – bake at 20180F for 70 minutes in a post-conflict oven after having shed your post-war attire and post-colonial hang-ups. Whistle the national anthem while you work… there are no words, so it’s not like someone’s holding a gun to your head at Galle Face Green and saying, “See, it’s in all three national languages – so that must mean we’re united after all…” – think hard about whether LIFE in the still newly rescued republic is legally mandated, or whether the feeling springs spontaneously from all its citizens’ hearts and minds, like a little ethnically nondescript whistle on the lips…

B. Short Answers

i.In a post-war milieu short ambitious folks like the Corsican general turned French Emperor Napoleon might have been the cat’s whiskers with his bon mots like “in any army the holy trinity is infantry, artillery, and cavalry – no single cadre can do without the other”. But if you were invited to stop being infantile about shows of arms, and resist the temptation to trot out your increasingly expensive arsenal at the drop of a hat, would you be cavalier enough to essay different trio in your seventieth birthday celebrations? State clearly whether your new balance of power favours executive, legislature, and judiciary equally. (Perhaps this is a longer answer than short-answer questions warrant. Please invest the time… it is important to get the mix of ingredients right in the fresh constitutional cake…)

ii. If Frozen was the theme of our reformist movement, whom would you like to hear the nation sing ‘Let It Go’ to? (HINT: Ravi, Ranil, rotters like the killers in cold blood of errant editors and unrepentant reporters, rather not write the name of him who shall not be mentioned because heaven knows he’s still evil and might make a comeback if this pusillanimous and party-game-playing regime gets it wrong.)

C. Multiple Choice Questions

1. Life…

a. …is a two-act play in which President and Premier have to pretend to be at loggerheads with one another for the nonce, so that their respective party apparatuses can get into high gear for the hugely confrontational local government polls (it’s all right, dear, we do understand the meaning of managed spectacle)

b. Begins at 70 (70 is the new 50 in the lives of nation-states, so we’re still young.)

c. Continues for the corrupt and criminally insane under a republican government as cynical as the crooked regime it replaced (No? So prove it!)

2. Birthdays are for nation-states…

a. …to anticipate what the state of the nation will look like after another dreary year in which there is nothing new under the sun

b. Be born again, because power is passing from the politicos to the people in a few days’ time

c. …to look back in fear, anger, waking terrors, etc., and resolve: “never again”; unless, of course, we fail to heed the sundry lessons of the past with a more salutary approach to national reconciliation than building venues for the entertainment of a subject people desiring liberté, egalité, fraternité – and jobs… not just for the boys…

3. Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness (to ‘culturally appropriate’ from another constitution) are threatened by:

a. A polity that is treated with disrespect by two bit thugs and their cynical political bosses who naively assume that all the people can be fooled all the time (sadly, almost every election proves that adage virtually irrefutable – so, what’s the alternative? think harder, use extra paper to pour out your thoughts – but under no circumstances attempt to write on both sides of the sheet at once … as some two-timing MPs are prone to do, but get away with it because a former Chief Justice stymied the much needed legislation to prevent our elected representatives from switching horses midstream)

b. Both coalitions in the coalition of coalition government that takes the people’s mandate for sweeping reforms for granted (old brooms could still sweep you out, if the ordinary folks can suspend their stomachs for a few months and bite the bullet of yet another poll)

c. Cynical (I’ve said it three times thus far, but won’t repent of my scepticism vis-à-vis the so-called new political culture until it reforms) politicians masquerading as statesmen or national saviours(sin, men – they can hardly be expected to do any other job properly but wear a mask and indulge their narcissism at state expense)

4. Fill In the Blanks

i. All citizens today are _____ (blessed/cheated/developed/enthused/forgotten) equally in the eyes of their governors

ii. Bond scams, PRECIFAC reports, etc. are _____ (alternative realities/ fake news/ a managed spectacle/ the most pressing issues/ non sequiturs/ what PRECIFAC report I was too busy trying to open up the taverns in the town to my lady friends)

iii. Constitutional changes at hand are _____ (classy/cynical/cheerful/cosmetic)

iv. Democracy is the LIFE to do what _____ (you/someone else/other people/one’s elected representatives/constitutional experts/charlatan statesmen) want to do

5. Quote Completion

“Nationalism is the_____ (last/first/eternal) refuge of the _____(scoundrel/statesman/anything else synonymous with unscrupulous self-serving politico).

One last thing

The last twist of the knife is that there are still far too many people who have not savoured the flavour of the abundant LIFE that successive parties’ manifestos promise. These have-nots include demographics as diverse as ex militants with war wounds of a lifetime on both sides of the divide, forgotten women workers in foreign fields, Sri Lanka’s innocent children who continue to be exploited by the shameful secret sex trade for which we are reputed in dark places overseas. They deserve a slice of the cake the haves are baking this year for the seventieth time…it’s time… it’s time past… in five years’ time we’ll be 75 (75 is the new 25) – and it’s a second chance for Sri Lanka to be 25 once again and shining in the bright spots of its renascent youth.

(A senior journalist, the writer is Editor-at-large of LMD.Today he feels that 50 is the new 30, well all right 40.)

No drones, liquor or free transport …

February 1, 2018

A meeting held by the JVP at Pandiyagala, a small town in Palagala local government administrative area in Anuradhapura District yesterday (31st) was attended by a large crowd.

The speakers said the people who attended the meeting to support the JVP candidates in the area did so without being coaxed with liquor, meals or gifts; they were not transported by buses, there were no drone cameras to take impressive photographs and no TV channels to telecast the event.

 

Who stole the anti-corruption drive?

What is clear is that both political parties are interested in talking about corruptions committed by other party and not really arresting them.

Parliamentary debates against corruption are totally futile.

(But) they serve in creating public awareness and public opinion against corruption, though not immediately

2018-02

A whole week was spent or wasted for a debate on the Parliamentary debate over the reports of Presidential Commissions on the controversial Central Bank bond tractions between 2015 and 2016 and serious frauds committed during the previous regime.

The two reports, though accidentally as President Maithripala Sirisena claimed were handed over to him by the members of the two Commissions almost at the same time (within a week).

This coincidence provided the country with a good opportunity to gauge the commitment of the two main political parties that have run the economy since Independence in eradicating corruption

What is clear is that both parties are interested in talking about corruption perpetrated by other party and not really arresting them.

When the Bond Commission report was handed over to the President on December 30 the Opposition parties, especially the Joint Opposition loyal to former President Mahinda Rajapaksa showed an unusual haste to debate it in the Parliament and they agitated for it even without it being made available to them.

When the UNP allowed a debate also with the knowledge that there cannot be a debate without the report being studied by the members, pandemonium reigned in the House with members engaging in an ugly fisticuff.

When the President stopped that investigation on the ground that internecine rivalry at the highest levels of the Police was causing serious problems, Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe had appointed two days later an official committee to probe delays at the FCID and the Attorney General’s Department. Nothing was heard about that after that.

The whole episode vividly manifested how irresponsible were the two main parties towards the people of this country, who elected them and pay for their salaries and wasteful perks.

The UNP could have protested to have a debate without a copy of the report being made available to the members before the meeting, and the Joint Opposition too, had they wanted an agitation, could have demanded a copy of the report immediately, without demanding to convene the House.

Both sides wanted to play to the gallery wasting about Rs. 4 million, a day’s cost of Parliament meetings.

Then the second report, the report of the Presidential Commission of Inquiry into serious acts of Fraud, Corruption and Abuse of Power (PRECIFAC) which investigated the corruption charges against the leaders of the former regime also sent to the Parliament along with the bond commission report by the President.

The Joint Opposition then seemed to have lost its interest to have a Parliamentary debate on corruption. Both parties agreed to debate both reports on February 20, ten days after the local government elections.

President Sirisena, who has been dropping bombshells these days, on a daily basis, embarrassing both the Joint Opposition and his partner in governance, the UNP charged that neither of those parties were prepared to hold the debate before the elections and claimed that an unholy alliance of elite robbers (Chaura Prabhu Sandanaya) both in the Government and the Opposition had managed to delay the debate.

He challenged them to hold it before the upcoming Local Government Elections.

Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe accepting this challenge had unilaterally decided to hold it on February 8 and requested the Speaker of the Parliament to convene the House on that date.

As the Chairman of the Elections Commission Mahinda Deshapriya expressed his reservations on holding a Parliamentary debate might have a bearing on certain political parties during the 48-hour “silence period” before the elections, party leaders again decided to hold it on February 6. 
Interestingly, the President, who threw the challenge to have a debate before the elections, now says a hasty debate would be a gimmick or a stunt.

In fact, the question as to whether it is before the elections or after it that the debate should be held is immaterial as the impact of it on the general voter is minimal. Sri Lankan voters are not moved by the national issue to change their allegiance to their political parties unless there is a long drawn campaign on those issues.

It is interesting and in a way pathetic, to note that the two leaders at the highest level of the Government, even three years after they had taken over the reins of the country, were clueless about the delays in the investigations into the major corruption cases

The only exception in the recent past was the war victory of the armed forces over the LTTE (Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam) during the tenure of President Mahinda Rajapaksa where he swept the electorate at the two post war national elections in 2010.

We rarely find a UNP supporter, especially a member of the Employees Provident Fund (EPF) who is concerned about his contribution to the fund that is said to have been used by the bond scammers.

Rather, UNP supporters, even the so-called educated ones and those who voiced against the high profile corruption committed during the Rajapaksa regime are interested in denying the bond scam or defending the culprits.

They are hurt by the revelation of the scam and not by the very fraud involving some of their leaders. Therefore UNP voters are highly unlikely to change their mind to vote for another party due to any new revelation during the Parliamentary debate.

This applies to the supporters of the Joint Opposition or the members of the SLFP or any other political party as well. 5.8 million voters had voted for Mahinda Rajapaksa at the last Presidential Election and 4.7 million of them voted to make him Prime Minister at the subsequent Parliamentary Elections in 2015, despite the seemingly credible revelations that millions, if not billions of rupees of monies belonging to them had been plundered through the alleged scams in the MiG Deal, hedging deal, Greek Bond Deal and many other such controversial transactions.

They, even the members of the EPF were unmoved by the killing of Roshen Chanaka, the Katunayake Free Trade Zone employee during a demonstration against a controversial plan by the Rajapaksa Government to bring in a pension scheme in place of the EPF.

However, it does not mean that Parliamentary debates against corruption are totally futile. They would serve in creating public awareness and public opinion against corruption, though not immediately but in the long run.

For instance, despite the large majority of the United People’s Freedom Alliance (UPFA) having endorsed all the highhanded acts and acts of corruption by former regime, a sizable number of them had been impacted by a long drawn campaign by the then Opposition, to vote against Mahinda Rajapaksa, which resulted in a regime change in 2015.

It was the public opinion that also led to the appointment of the bond commission by President Maithripala Sirisena and to the UNP finally accepting that there had been a scam and its Deputy Leader Ravi Karunanayake might have some hand in the controversial transaction.
Hence, Public opinions has to be created not only against corruption, but also against the present regime that does not seem to take tangible action to bring to book those plundered millions and billions of monies belonging to the people during the last regime as well as the present regime.

President Sirisena has been accusing his partner in governance, the UNP, since 2016 for stalling or delaying action against corruption. This week too, he stated that all the important Ministries that were entrusted with arresting corruption were under the UNP Ministers. At the same time, UNP also is or pretends to be, at a loss as to why the machinery against corruption is not moving.

According to the Sunday Times, Minister Sagala Ratnayake, towards the end of the last year had ordered an investigation conducted by the Police Special Investigation Unit (SIU) into the Financial Crimes Division to determine whether there was any inaction on its part that delayed taking action over high profile cases.

When the President stopped that investigation on the ground that internecine rivalry at the highest levels of the Police was causing serious problems, Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe had appointed two days later an official committee to probe delays at the FCID and the Attorney General’s Department. Nothing was heard about that after that.

It is interesting and in a way pathetic, to note that the two leaders at the highest level of the Government, even three years after they had taken over the reins of the country, were clueless about the delays in the investigations into the major corruption cases.

Corruption seems to have crept into the very core of the anti-corruption drive. Finally, it is the public who is going to be hoodwinked.

‘Religious Doctrine’ & ‘Religion’: Sharing Some Thoughts

By Charles Ponnuthurai Sarvan –February 1, 2018

The following is consequent to reading ‘What the Qur’an Meant and Why It Matters’ by Garry Wills, New York, 2017. (The touch of ambiguity in the title’s anaphoric pronoun is surely deliberate.) Page reference, unless otherwise stated, is to this book. Professor Wills, now retired, once studied for the Roman-Catholic priesthood; later, he taught Greek and History.

Thirty-one percent of the world’s population is Christian; twenty-three is Muslim (p. 4) and growing. The word “Islam” means submission to Allah, and to Muslims Allah’s will is expressed in the Qur’an: Professor Abdel Haleem in his translation of the Qur’an (Oxford University Press) states that the sacred book is the supreme authority in Islam. The Qur’an is essentially an oral text, audibly received; orally transmitted. The revelations to the Prophet were made over several years, and their ordering in the Qur’an is neither chronological nor topical. This means there is no narrative thread for the reader to follow with ease.  Further, “Some things in the book are off-putting – slavery, patriarchal attitudes toward women, religious militarism. But the same can be said of the biblical Torah” (pp. 5-6).

The Qur’an is a fungible and fraternal text, the latter in that it respects earlier prophets. One of the Prophet’s wives, Safiyya bint Huyayy, was a Jew and one of his concubines, Marya al-Qibtiyya, a Christian (p. 127).  The Qur’an explicitly states: “There is no compulsion in religion” (Sura 2:256). At the commencement of any undertaking, Muslims recite: Bismillah rahmani Rahim (In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful), and every chapter of the Qur’an, except the Ninth, commences with this formulaic dedication. Even a cursory reading of the Qur’an will reveal the emphasis laid on the understanding and forgiving nature of Allah. Pope Francis wrote that authentic Islam is opposed to every form of violence (p. 3): the emphasis, I presume, falls on “authentic”. Yet in the minds of many, the Qur’an and Muslims are associated with violence, if not cruelty; with outdated, barbaric, notions and attitudes. People and groups with influence, either through ignorance or malice, distort the religion: the title of Jonathan Brown’s book, Misquoting Muhammad (2014), comes to my mind. Before we make statements about Islam; before we adopt a position, Professor Wills urges that we read the Qur’an and inform ourselves. It’s unjust and foolish to comment on Islam without reading the book which is its foundation. It’s said that seeing is believing but believing can also lead to seeing in the sense that if we have a prejudice about a group – be it on grounds of ‘race’, colour, religion or sex – then we are predisposed to “see” negatives in them. (The ‘Implicit-Association test’ is of relevance here.) Yuri Slezkine in his The Jewish Century notes “the growing Western antipathy” towards Islam and Muslims (Princeton and Oxford, 2004, p. 365).

Among the several misconceptions Wills attempts to correct two are about Shari’ah Law and the wearing of the hijab. The term “Shari’ah” occurs only once in the Qur’an, and there it hasn’t to do with law but means the right path. Subsequently, “the vague and sketchy elements of law in the Qur’an” (p. 147) were clarified and filled out by “sunnah (the Prophet’s reported behaviour), ahadith (the Prophet’s reported sayings), qiyas (analogical extensions), ijma (scholars’ consensus)”. So it is as absurd to call generally for the banning of Shari’ah law as to demand the banning of Christian law (p. 147). Where clothing is concerned, there were so many calling on the Prophet that it was necessary to afford the female members of his household a measure of extra privacy. The intention was to elevate – not to suppress. For an extended treatment, see Professor Leila Ahmed’s A Quiet Revolution, Yale University Press (commented on by me under the title ‘The Islamic hijab and veil’, Colombo Telegraph, 26 March 2017). Words from the Qur’an are taken out of context, leading to gross misrepresentation. For example, “Kill them wherever you encounter them and drive them out” (Sura 2:191) meant: You must not fight on sacred ground but if you are attacked, then retaliate (p. 133). One may add that the word Jihad does not mean war but struggle, and struggle can take many different forms: the Prophet referred to the major Jihad as being the struggle for self-control and moral betterment.

*******

But I wonder whether the equation of the Qur’an and Islam is valid. For example, if we say that Christianity is a gentle, or Buddhism a compassionate, religion what we mean is these faiths as they were taught – not as they are practiced in private and public life. Writing on Graham E. Fuller’s, A World Without Islam (Colombo Telegraph, 27 May 2016), I suggested a distinction between religious doctrine and religion with its rituals, paraphernalia, hierarchy, myths and superstitions. Religious doctrine has a divine or semi-divine origin or is from an exalted, exceptional, individual. Simplifying, one could say: While religious doctrine is ‘divine’; religion is a human construct.  Religion being human helps explain why the same religion in the same country can be gentle and tolerant and, at another time in its history, be vicious and hegemonic. Fuller asks, if there weren’t Islam would there be peace? Is the conflict between Jews and Christians on the one side, and Muslims on the other really based on differing theological beliefs? Islam has nothing whatsoever to do with the creation of the Palestinian problem. “The crime of the Holocaust” lies entirely on European shoulders: Palestinians are paying the price for European sins over the centuries, culminating in the Holocaust (Fuller, p. 303). The so-called “Palestinian problem” is one created for the Palestinians by Israel: the Palestinians are the victims and not the originators of this “problem”.

To engage in ‘counterfactual thinking’ (a counterfactual is a conditional containing an if-clause followed by what is contrary to fact), if Tamils had been Buddhists, would history have been different? Given the affinity between Hinduism and Buddhism; given that elements of Hinduism have been taken over into the Buddhist religion (in blatant contradiction of Buddhist doctrine, that is, of the Buddha’s teaching), is this not evidence that ethnicity is more potent that religion? Durkheim (credited with formally establishing the academic discipline of Sociology and being, together with Marx and Weber, one of the principal architects of the social sciences) argued that finally in religion the object of worship is society itself. Abdullah Ocalan, in his Prison Writings: The Roots of Civilization, argues that religion is identical with the concept of politics. Edward Gibbon in Volume 1 of his classic work, The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, comments on the collusion between state and religion. Both religion (not religious doctrine) and politics have to do with power; with power, respect and influence. So if we comment on Islam or on any other religion, we should make clear whether the reference is to religion as actually practised or as originally preached.

Read More

Towards a National Economic Policy

Friday, February 2, 2018 

Except among professional economists and the like problems of the country’s economy are hardly the subject of public discourse. Even students of economics and their teachers are concerned more with text book content and they shun practical or applied economics. This situation has become a boon for politicians and pseudo-economists to pontificate on economic issues superficially and even weave grandiose development projects which never materialize. Such for example, is the construction of a parallel southern coastal railway line as defense against future tsunamis, cable car to reach Sri Pada, car assembly plant in Kurunegala, use of luxury liners for round the island tourist travel etc.

Let us start with the ground realities. Sri Lanka is a small island with its 21.2 million inhabitants occupying 65. 6 km2 territory. It has, however, a 200m maritime economic zone covering 517,000 km2 space.

Though largely an agricultural society its agriculture is lagging behind contributing less than 10 percent to the GDP. Service sector dominates over production, both industrial and agricultural (including fisheries and forestry). Female participation in the labor force is about 30 percent.
A considerable part of the labor force is under-employed or unemployed. The latter equals 300,000 at present. Though literacy is high functional literacy of the population is below par.
The Yahapalana Government has so far failed to produce a National Economic Policy (NEP) for development as promised when forming the ruling alliance. Instead it is drifting along without a NEP like its predecessor. To make matters worse planning mechanisms that were earlier in place have been dismantled in embracing the neo-liberal economic model lock stock and barrel.
Economic development

It has been an obsession with our governments to make Sri Lanka another Singapore, which is impossible for the simple reason that it is vastly different in many aspects – geography, political history, culture and demography et al. It is not possible to replicate another country and its economy. Sri Lanka has to find its own independent path of economic development. In formulating such a NEP there are few home truths that should be kept in mind. We wish to mention a few.

Firstly, the Sri Lankan internal market is so small that it cannot absorb our production as a whole. Hence, it is imperative that production should be geared for export. In today’s globalized world no country could stand in isolation. It is to the extent that it participates in the international division of labor that a country could prosper from trade. To trade in the world market our goods should be competitive. However, due to high costs of production our goods are at a disadvantage for the average prices there are lower than our production cost.

Therefore, it is necessary to enhance the productivity of labor by resorting to higher and improved technology. This in turn, necessitates allocation of more resources for Research and Development (R& D). At present Sri Lanka lags far behind most South Asian countries in R & D, with budget allocations less than 2 percent of the GDP. It would also be prudent if new technology is applied to key industries which have the potential of lowering the production costs below the average prices in the world market. Otherwise, the benefits of export orientation would be lost.

Sri Lanka is blessed with a skilled work force but it should not be satisfied with it. There is a growing demand for human resource development, especially in new fields of investment as well as to replace outdated labour practices with modern ones. This entails the development of academic as well as vocational education and introduction of methodologies to inculcate a habit of entrepreneurship and innovation overcoming the inherent inertia among the students.

Expenditure on education should be viewed as an investment instead of consumption. All developed countries have spent substantially on education in the years preceding their development. e.g., Malaysia, China, South Korea.

Having a debt burden for the servicing of which much more than the total income of the country would be necessary in 2019, Sri Lanka would have to depend inevitably on foreign investments as our savings and investments are insufficient. However, we have to be selective in deciding upon the type of investments required so as not to endanger nascent as well as mature local industries. Contrary to the practice of the last Government foreign investments should be primarily production oriented so that their utilization would generate new wealth.

Power politics

On the one hand, unsolicited proposals from foreign investors should be subjected to rational cost-benefit analysis and environmental feasibility while on the other hand; the craze for mega projects for political expediency or considerations of power politics should be abandoned.

At the present juncture what is most suited for Sri Lanka is a mixed economy instead of the State withdrawing completely from business, a practice found nowhere in the world. Strategic industries and key services affecting national security and financial stability should remain in the hands of the State. Nor should the State abdicate its vital role of regulating various industries and services to ensure fair play and efficiency.

It is very important to install a national planning infrastructure to work out, coordinate and implement the NEP. Also a holistic approach towards planning is necessary. Planning is related to all spheres of economic and social activity. Nor could one separate politics and economics. They are inter-connected.

Further, development should also ensure economic democracy. Here should be ways and means of ensuring the participation of the public in economic policy formulation, planning and implementation. Devolution of economic power and decentralization of the economy could attract mass support.

It is also necessary to think outside the box. For example, it is high time to switch over from curator to preventive medicine and integration of Western, Ayurveda, Unani and traditional medicine systems upon a scientific basis.

A pre-requisite for all this is a survey of the country’s resources including those in the Maritime Economic Zone (MEZ).

Finally, economic development must ensure equality as well as equity. For the latter purpose, it may be necessary to implement special programmes to overcome the backwardness of downtrodden and marginalized communities.

Enough piecemeal solutions: A coherent HR policy for the health sector is needed

---

 Friday, 2 February 2018

The anti-SAITM movement was never about SAITM. It was essentially a coming together of statist protectionist segments in society together with the extreme left to stop private higher education of any form.

Watching the Government’s piecemeal responses to Anti-SAITM forces is like watching a train wreck in slow motion. The wreckage Anti-SAITMers want is very clear. Essentially a total wreckage of medical education outside of the 100% examination-based admission process with places offered free of charge by the public universities and those only.

The protestors know the total annihilation they want, i.e. no private higher education of any form, is not achievable, but, medical education monopoly is in their sights and they will not let that go. Any call to take over a private medical education institution resonates with the public sentiments too. Private medical education is too costly for the majority. Why not hundred more prizes in the national lottery which we call a higher education system?

To the credit of anti-private forces, they have a long-term vision and they have got their eyes on their short-term target. Government vision is not articulated and its policies can be best described as reactions. The Rajapaksa Government used a mixed of coherence, cunning and terror to move forward private higher education. Mercifully this Government is off the terror path but it lacks the coherence and the cunning. We have a strange beast of a ministry where highways are lumped with higher education.

When I last checked, Mohan Lal Grero is the State Minister of Higher Education, but he seems to be sleeping on the job. The money we spend maintaining that portfolio should have been used to create scholarships for private medical education.

The President makes off-the-cuff responses and Minister for Health is courting the GMOA as if they are the health sector and health sector is them. The problem is passed on to Dr. Harsha de Silva who is the Deputy Minister of National Policies and Economic Affairs.

As I see it, the transfer of ownership of SAITM to SLIIT negotiated by the Harsha de Silva Committee is only one more step in a series of backtracking by Government on a slippery slope. Ok, we will mandate more clinical training. Ok, ok we will make it non-profit. Ok, ok we will give it a new name. Ok, ok we will not charge fees. Ok, ok we will admit only on their Z-score rank.

The Government can takes steps to pre-empt this sequence of events by addressing medical education issue as a whole, not some token issue thrust upon them.

Offered by a for-profit or non-profit, medical education is expensive, but any education program costing more than million is going to be seen as a way to exclude the deserving poor. Deserving is measured by the results of a flawed examination where crammers come to the top. The result is a medical profession without heart or head of the common sense kind.

One of first steps in a medical education policy process is a thorough evaluation of the current practice recruitment through a Z-score of marks gained in public examination. For all we know, the current system could be sending and graduating psychopaths who should not be allowed near a patient. If the Z-score is not a sufficient, the solution is not to lower the examination criteria, but to find ways to bring in individuals with reasonable academic standards but other competencies as well.

Putting more money into medical education so that student costs can be brought down is also important. A Government which is trillions of dollars into debt should not go about taxing the poor to put a select few through medical college and onto lucrative careers, without receiving some payback into the funding pot. Novel funding mechanisms enrich the medical education funding should be part of a HRH policy.

The strategic master plan 2016-2025 for the health sector is made of separate volumes of Health Master Plan for each major task area – i.e. (I) Preventive Health Services (II) Curative Care (III) Rehabilitative Care (IV) Health Administration and HRH.

According to the HRH chapter, health sector human resources are managed through the line ministry and the provincial health administration. The strategic guidance for overall Human Resource development lies with the Line Ministry. The overall staff is approximately 125,000. In theory, the central ministry plays the lead role in “determining numbers, recruitment, training, deployment and ensuring optimum level of personnel management to ensure that the right numbers of human resources are available in the right place at the right time, and they have the right attitudes and skills and perform to achieve organisation objectives and goals”.

An assessment of the HRD functions of the ministry had been carried out using a tool used by the Management of Health Sciences in Boston shows otherwise. Conclusions from this assessment show a different reality.

“HRD occurs in a fragmented manner within the health system. The functions of HRD are currently scattered in this large organisation and often are not well coordinated. There seems to be poor conception of the strategic issues related to HRD and a more operational approach has been considered in distributing the functions. Different components of HRD are at varying levels of development. d. Given the magnitude of the organisation and large number of staff categories the distribution of HRD functions on the basis of staff categories seem to be relevant. e. Given that HRD functions are scattered within the organisation, there does not seem to be any single unit within the Ministry of Health that is responsible in keeping track of HRD overall.”

From what I have gathered, a new HRD units has been proposed but is not in place yet. Any HRD initiatives at the ministry are proceeding at a snails’ pace with only one person bearing the brunt of responsibilities. Instead of addressing simple structural issues, we have meetings of meetings taking up valuable time ministers and officials, breakdown in public life due to protests and so on.

If we are to get anywhere, the Harsha de Silva committee should take their heads off the SAITM piss-pot and look into broader issues of how we fund medical education in this country. Do we spend public funds to pull up a few lucky ones into the middle class, or use the funds identify kind of doctors we need, how many we need to serve in rural areas and use the carrot of funding to and the stick of penalties to direct medical education for public needs. Right now the Government is bending backwards to meet to demands by a few at the expense of the larger good.

Consider these statistics. Of the 325,000 or so cohort of children who enter school at age five, only 5-6% get to enjoy free-of-charge higher education. Another 4% or so attend technical and vocational institutions. Therefore 90% of any given youth cohort gets nothing from the Government yet we allow the 5-6% a free hand to disturb the livelihood of the rest with their self-interests.

UN holds back names of Israel settlement profiteers

Israeli media say a UN database of firms involved in Israeli settlements was held back due to US and Israeli pressure, but the UN human rights office says names of the companies will be published.

Mahfouz Abu TurkAPA images

Ali Abunimah- 31 January 2018

The United Nations human rights office has held back a database of companies involved in Israel’s illegal settlements in the occupied West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and Syria’s Golan Heights.

Barak Ravid, the diplomatic correspondent for Israel’s Channel 10, reported that the UN had “indefinitely” postponed publishing the list of firms “after strong pressure” from the United States and Israel.

Barak Ravid

✔@BarakRavid

BREAKING ON @news10: After strong pressure by U.S. & Israel the UN postpones indefinitely the publication of a "Blacklist" of foreign & Israeli companies which operate in the settlements in the West bank & East Jerusalem

7:45 AM - Jan 31, 2018

But the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights said in a report published Wednesday that it still “expects to provide the names of the companies … in a future update.”

The report of the office, which is headed by Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein, states that UN researchers compiled a list of 206 companies that “were subject to further research and consideration” for their activities in the settlements.

It said the majority of these were “domiciled in Israel or the settlements, followed by the United States of America, Germany, the Netherlands and France.”

The UN said it has written to the governments of the 21 home countries of companies on its list and that 15 of them supported the UN contacting the companies directly about their activities.

It said it has contacted more than 60 of the companies but due to time and resource constraints had yet to write to the others in what is described as an ongoing process to determine the nature and extent of the companies’ activities.

Previously, media reports identified companies on the UN list to include such well-known international brands as Coca-Cola, HP, Motorola and Remax, as well as dozens of Israeli firms including major banks.

“Key role” in abuses

The report asserts that “Before the determinations on the companies are made public, [the UN human rights office] will notify the companies concerned.”

According to the report, “businesses play a key role in facilitating the overall settlement enterprise, contributing to Israel’s confiscation of land and the transfer of its population through commercial development.”

The human rights office says that its mandate to compile the database given to it by the UN Human Rights Council “does not extend to companies involved in supplying the Israel Defense Forces with weapons or other equipment used during military operations, nor does it encompass companies involved in controlling access to and from Gaza.”

Bogus excuses

A major argument used by companies to explain their involvement in settlements is that they “provide jobs to Palestinian families and help to support the Palestinian economy,” the report states.

But the UN human rights office refutes this, observing that “this argument does not recognize that the presence of the settlements in the occupied Palestinian territory, which is unlawful, serves to depress the Palestinian economy and to reduce opportunities for Palestinian businesses to thrive.”

Referring to the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, the report offers rebuttals to other arguments companies used to justify their activities.

The report puts the onus on companies’ home states to act. “Given the direct involvement of Israel in establishing, maintaining and expanding the settlements,” the UN human rights office says it “considers that the role of homes states of transnational corporations is essential in assisting both corporations and Israel to ensure that businesses are not involved in human rights abuses.”

There is a growing consensus among human rights defenders and jurists that any activity in the settlements is incompatible with respecting human rights and violates international law.

Amnesty International has said that all states “must ban Israeli settlement products to help end half a century of violations against Palestinians.”

Human Rights Watch has called on businesses to end all activities in or with Israeli settlements.

“Settlement businesses unavoidably contribute to Israeli policies that dispossess and harshly discriminate against Palestinians, while profiting from Israel’s theft of Palestinian land and other resources,” Human Rights Watch’s Arvind Ganesan has said.

Pressure

Whether the UN decision to withhold the names of the companies is merely a technical delay or a political cave-in, there is no doubt that the human rights office has come under intense pressure not to publish the database at all.

What will happen next is uncertain; the work so far has been carried out under the leadership of Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein, but the current high commissioner has announced he will not seek a new mandate when his term expires in September.

That date should therefore be considered a practical deadline for the list to be published.

The UN’s bowing to political pressure to withdraw last year’s landmark report on Israeli apartheid serves as a cautionary example.

The database had originally been expected to be published in December, but when reports surfaced in November that it was being delayed, Human Rights Watch was worried enough that it reiterated the need for it to be made public.

Human Rights Watch welcomed the interim report Wednesday despite the lack of names, but urged that the mission needed to be carried through.

View image on Twitter

Omar Shakir

✔@OmarSShakir

Today @UNHumanRights published an update on its work establishing a database of business operating in illegal Israeli settlements in the West Bank. @hrw responds

10:32 AM - Jan 31, 2018

•  11 Reply
 
•  2121 Retweets
 
•  2222 likes

“Today’s report shows progress in identifying and communicating with companies that contribute to serious abuses in Israeli settlements in the West Bank,” Sari Bashi, the group’s advocacy director for Palestine, said. “The UN should complete the work of advising companies of their human rights responsibilities and publish the names of those who continue to operate in the settlements.”

Dozens of Palestinian human rights and civil society organizations last week called on the UN to “ensure the timely publication and annual update of the database,” which they said would be “an important tool to end corporate complicity in Israel’s prolonged occupation.”

Omar Barghouti, a cofounder of the BDS – boycott, divestment and sanctions – movement for Palestinian rights had previously welcomed the compilation of the database as the UN’s “first concrete, practical step to secure accountability for ongoing Israeli violations of Palestinian human rights.”