Let’s Not Insult Women Devolving Powers to Women is no Burden

By S. Ratnajeevan H. Hoole-2018-02-28

There have been recent calls to not implement fully the legal requirement of having at least 25% women in each local government authority. The Daily News (15 Feb.) reports that "The Election Commission is to ask that the Local Authorities Elections (Amendment) Act No. 22 of 2012 to be amended to allow councils to be established even without the mandatory 25 per cent quota under special circumstances." This is incorrect for two reasons. First, the 25% quota is of very recent origin and is from Act No. 16 of 2017. And second, no such decision was ever taken at any meeting of the commission.

The Island (16 Feb.) has a statement by women's groups that speaks of "moves to change the 25% quota for women" and of "recognizing the exceptions in the quota." The Financial Times (15 Feb.) says "Fresh amendments for the Local Authorities Elections Act would be essential to allow local governing bodies to establish councils, even without the mandatory 25% quota for women, under unique conditions."

Colombo's Mayor-elect, Rosy Senanayake says, according to the Daily Mirror (16 Feb.) the implementation of the 25% quota for women in local government elections being uncertain, and urges that steps be taken to implement the 25% Quota for Women in LG polls immediately."

Quota is the law

Speaking for myself, as a member of the Election Commission (and not for the Commission) I say that the women are right; in feeling their long-fought-for gains are threatened. Indeed, I do not see any lacunae in the law. When the quota is the law, we cannot have exceptions. In my view, backdating changes to the law to affect the elections that have already been conducted is improper.

The problem that many see is from the fact that the Local Authorities Election Act states-
27F. (1) Notwithstanding any provision to the contrary in this Ordinance, not less than twenty five per centum of the total number of members in each local authority shall be women members
That is, if we do not have 25% women as members in a local authority, that authority has no standing.

This would not be an issue (and in my view is not a serious issue) if not for the exemptions provided
65AA. (1) Where the number of members elected from any recognized political party or independent group for a Local Authority results in an overhang and thereby exceeds the number ascertained to be elected and returned as members under [subsection] (3) of section 65(3), and such number of members so elected [does] not include any women members, then the provisions of subsections (3) and (4) of this section shall not apply to such recognized political party or independent group.

(2) Where any recognized political party or independent group has received less than twenty per centum of the total number of votes polled in a local authority area, and [note well the word and] has less than three members elected or returned, then the provisions of subsections (3) and (4) of this section [which are on the method of apportionment of members] shall not apply to such recognized political party or independent group.

First note that the exemption applies only to parties fulfilling both conditions – receiving less than 20% of the vote and getting fewer than 3 representatives. The purpose is to give such small parties wide choice in putting forward their best nominees for the few seats they have.

These conditions are often misstated as exemptions for meeting either condition as in one of the news articles cited above. There is also the wrong idea that ward candidates contest and that those on the PR list do not contest. In fact, they all contest. In English, a voter elected is returned; but some official documents in Sri Lanka use elected and returned as being of different meanings. We voted only for the party of our choice and that led to the election of both ward candidates and PR candidates. To ensure their getting in, the PR list candidates also had to campaign – so they too are elected. Therefore it is incorrect to suggest that choosing a person from the PR list is choosing a person who did not contest.

Then what is the problem today? As seen by many, it is twofold. First, it is that the methodology specified by Parliament is unlike what one would expect – that 60% of seats are filled from the wards and 40% from PR. To explain, let me take the Ambalangoda UC results that all three Commission Members sat down together to check the method employed by our staff:

PR eligibility list

After the finalized PR eligibility list is computed by the prescribed method, the number of wards won by a party or a group is taken into account. Thus the Podujana Peramuna, which has won 10 wards, is eligible for 09 PR seats but gets no actual PR seats (that extra seat is what is called an overhang). So it gets no PR seat and since all 10 of its representatives are directly elected, any contribution from it to the women's quota can be only if any of the 10 elected /returned persons happens to be a woman.
The second alleged problem is that small groupings in a chamber (with less than 20% of the vote and fewer than 3 members) are exempted from having to nominate women.

Thus in Ambalangoda, the Podujana Peramuna cannot contribute to the women's quota, the PLF (People's Liberation Front) cannot be asked to contribute because they have only 2 members and 7.5% of the vote, and the UNFF has no seat. So the women's quota (with the exception of any women elected to wards from the Podujana Peramuna) will have to come only from the UNP and UPFA. In Batticaloa, the ITAK with the most seats by far had all its ward winners' men with no PR member.

This might be unfair, only insofar as the parties that need to contribute have less choice than the smaller groupings in choosing whom to nominate from among the pool of men and women on their lists. To call that a burden or unfair is a stretch. It is an insult to women – recall strong and determined women who ruled us effectively (if not always justly) such as from Queen Victoria to Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga. It would never be a burden if the parties had chosen their best women and not their relatives.

Is it really a burden or unfair to name a woman instead of a man? It shows that we men, especially we old men, do not want to let go. We imagine (because it fits our prejudices) that the 25% quota is a set quota. It really is a minimum standard to exceed which is no crime. We think it is a burden. That by itself shows we really need our women to be liberated from such insulting caricatures.

There is talk of having to amend the laws. The Local Authorities Elections Act as recently amended reads-

27F. (2) The [Elections Commission] shall by notice published in the gazette, specify the number of women candidates to be nominated in respect of each local authority."

Thus the Commission has the authority to force the groupings that can, to nominate more than 25% women.

The term overhang

The so-called problem is said to stem from the concept of the opposite of an overhang defined in the ordinance as "overhang" means the number of candidates elected for a local authority from any recognized political party or independent group in excess of the number of such recognized political party or independent group is entitled to have elected in terms of subsection (3) of section 65B of this Ordinance;"

A party has to nominate a woman after the declaration of results only when it wins fewer ward seats than by PR. So why complain even if they all have to be women, especially when they are the party's own nominees? Besides, even here, the above referenced Act gives the Commission the authority to decide on its own:

"65B (4) Upon ascertaining the number of candidates entitled to be elected and returned as members of that local authority by each recognized political party or independent group, as the case may be, in terms of subsection (3) [which states how to arrive at the figures], if it is found that the number of members elected from such recognized political party or independent group for that local authority—
(a) exceeds the number ascertained to be elected and returned as members under subsection (3), then such overhang shall be determined by the [Elections Commission].

No tinkering required

Let's please not see problems where there is none. Let's not delay the inauguration of these long awaited local authorities by waiting for Parliament to tinker where no tinkering is required. Any legal change would be required only if even with all free PR candidates nominated by the parties able to do so are women, the 25% quota is not met.

Women have a right to be representatives knowing better than us men the special needs faced by women, children, and the elderly; and knowing and possessing the skills to address as well as us men the general needs of all of us in society.

They worked hard for this miserly 25% quota. Let's not haggle over having to cede just a little more to be in mandatory compliance with the law.

The world over, devolution of powers is seen as the way to include everyone in decisions that concern them. Local authority decisions must be taken at local level and further delays in the inauguration of these bodies cannot be brooked. We men have been deciding all these years with just 1.8% women in our midst in local government. It is time to devolve our powers and let women too have a say.

Inhibitions on the Way forward for Govt

2018-03-01

The routine discussion of papers went on as usual during the first half of Tuesday’s Cabinet meeting, the first time after the reshuffle on Sunday. But the second half, meant for the discussion of currently important matters, turned out to be stormy as President Maithripala Sirisena, backed by some Cabinet Ministers, showered criticism on the Cabinet Committee on Economic Management (CCEM) headed by Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe. 

The CCEM was established shortly after formation of the 100-day government following the Presidential Elections on January 8, 2015. 

Any Cabinet paper related to economic affairs is supposed to be referred to this body headed by the Prime Minister and attended by the key Ministers and officials. Any proposal could be implemented only if it got the go-ahead from the CCEM. It was seen by some as a Cabinet within the Cabinet. 

Most Cabinet Ministers appeared to have been averse to this procedure of clearing economic and investment proposals with the participation of a coterie of Ministers and officials. Other ministers feel that they are denied the chance to weigh the pros and cons of any economic matter. Incensed by the CCEM calling the shots in this manner, these Ministers complained to the President. 

After being patient for some time, President Sirisena timed his criticism on the CCEM at Tuesday’s Cabinet meeting.

“Today, I have to raise one matter. I received a whole lot of complaints against the CCEM taking economic decisions. Even some Ministers representing the UNP brought this to my notice,” he said. 
Then, the President suggested that such decision making should happen at the Cabinet, and therefore, the CCEM should be disbanded forthwith. 

The Prime Minister resisted the President’s idea. He defended the establishment of CCEM saying such a body was absolutely needed for the discussion of economic matters with the participation of key government officials who couldn’t be convened otherwise to the Cabinet sessions routinely. 
In his counter argument, the President, however, said the Cabinet subcommittees could be appointed to serve I accommodate officials if that was the case.

This led to a storm of arguments hurled back and forth by the Cabinet ministers. Finance Minister Mangala Samaraweera and Development Strategies and International Trade Minister Malik Samarawickrama stood for the Prime Minister’s position. Nevertheless, Health Minister Dr. Rajitha Senaratne, Sports Minister Dayasiri Jayasekara, Megapolis and Western Development Minister Patali Champika Ranawaka aired out their views in support of the President - more or less. 

President says UNP deceived people on Volkswagen 

The cross talks dragged on for a while, and at one point, the President became furious. In a veiled threat, he said, “I have a lot to be revealed if you persist with your stance in this manner.” Consequently, he was even harsher in his criticism directed towards the UNP’s handling of economic affairs. 
He rebuffed the UNP for misleading the public by promising to put up a Volkswagen car manufacturing plant in Kurunegala. 

With his eyes staring at Education Minister Akila Viraj Kariyawasam, he said, “You claimed that Volkswagen would invest. You took us to the groundbreaking ceremony. Immediately after that, we received a message that Volkswagen Company would not be investing here. It is deception of people.

That is how you hoodwinked people.”

The Prime Minister reportedly responded to the President saying that investment proposal had nothing to do with the CCEM.

It was cited as a project approved by the Board of Investment (BoI), not the CCEM. Afterwards, the President threw his glance at Malik Samarawickrama and levelled similar criticism at the UNP on the much-hyped tyre factory in Horana. 

Dayasiri bemoans ‘Battery Cage’ housing for egg laying hens 

After the President, Minister Jayasekara seized the opportunity to unleash his criticism on the UNP policies during the last three years. He spoke of the introduction of  the ‘Battery Cage’ system for poultry farmers in his Kurunegala district which is virtually the egg basket of Sri Lanka. 

It is a system for the housing of egg laying hens in rows and columns of cages connected to each other. The natural movement of birds is restricted. There was a storm of opposition from poultry farmers to this system introduced under the new government. 

“These poultry farmers were loyal to the UNP right throughout. But, you antagonized them by introducing this system. At the LG polls, they all voted for the Lotus Bud as a protest,” he said. 
Finally, the Cabinet meeting ended with indecision on the CCEM. This is yet another example of inhibition in the government, particularly after the electoral defeat at the local government polls. The two parties have decided to forge ahead despite differences, but the way forward is inhibited by many issues. 

Two-fold crisis for UNP

For the UNP, it is a period of two-fold crisis. One is from within the government. Besides, it is afflicted with an internal problem as some Ministers are openly revolting against the party hierarchy. Already, State Ministers Palitha Range Bandara and Vasantha Senanayake have threatened to bring a vote of no confidence against the PM. 

 

  

GL, PM chat with each other 

Chairman of Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna (SLPP) Prof. G.L. Peiris is a harsh critic of the PM at political events and press conferences. The duo happened to meet with each other on Tuesday at an event to mark the launch of a book written by Munchee Biscuits chairman Mickey Wickramasinghe. Prof. Peiris was seated on the left of the writer and the PM to his right. Despite political differences, the two were seen chatting with each other.     

Cabinet reshuffle fell below expectations: Rajitha

By Chathuri Dissanayake-Thursday, 1 March 2018

A subdued Rajitha Senaratne yesterday admitted that the cabinet reshuffle did not go as many anticipated, saying that more significant changes were expected by Government Ministers, including him.

The reshuffle, which saw only a few members of the United National Party being reassigned ministries, fell well below expectations, Senaratne said at the weekly Cabinet press briefing. He also confirmed rumours about a move to reassign the Law and Order Ministry, which was assigned to Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe on 25 February.

“We accept that the reshuffle was not completely successful, we wanted changes in some ministries which were underperforming, and we expected changes. But there are some elements that were good, but yes, it was not all successful,” he told reporters.

The Minister claimed that concerns over how certain subjects, such as Higher Education and Highway, have been joined in assigning ministerial posts went unheard even during the reshuffle, as members of the Government were too busy managing the political crisis to address the issues.

“We said we are not happy about how the Ministry subjects have been assigned. A meeting was set up with Finance Minister Mangala Samaraweera, Minister Malik Samarawickrama, and the Ministry secretaries to discuss the issue and figure out how best to couple ministries. But then the political crisis dragged on, and they had to rush for meetings to negotiate the situation, and the meeting never happened,” Senaratne claimed.

Attempting to make light of the displeasure expressed by some members of the Government after Cabinet changes were made last Sunday, the Minister insisted that no politician has ever been happy about their assigned subject after a cabinet reshuffle.

When asked why the Government is struggling to carry out a complete reshuffle resulting in the reforms being dragged on over a two-week period, Senaratne side-stepped the question, saying that the negotiations in the changes to UPFA Cabinet Ministries was an internal matter.

Confirming rumours that Field Marshal Sarath Fonseka, currently functioning as the Minister of Regional Development, is being considered to be appointed the Law and Order Minister, Senaratne admitted the idea has been met with opposition within the Government and the Department of Police.

“The decision to temporarily assign the Ministry to the Prime Minister was because Minister Sarath Fonseka was not in the country. Once the matter is discussed with the person concerned, a concrete decision will be taken and the subject will be reassigned to him when the second part of the reshuffle takes place,” he said. 

MORE POWERS FOR BRIBERY COMMISSION TO PROSECUTE

Ishara Mudugamuwa and Nushka Nafeel-Thursday, March 1, 2018 

Cabinet approval has been granted to empower the Commission to Investigate Allegations of Bribery or Corruption (CIABOC) to file cases based on facts revealed by the Commissions of Inquiry.

Co-Cabinet Spokesman and Health and Indigenous Medicine Minister Dr. Rajitha Senaratne said the decision to transfer the power of filing cases based on facts revealed by the Commissions of Inquiry to the Bribery Commission was approved by the Cabinet of Ministers on Tuesday. Accordingly, Director General of the Bribery Commission will be given the power to file cases under the Bribery Act or Declaration of Assets and Liabilities Law based on the findings of Commissions of Inquiry appointed by the President.

The Legal Draftsman has drafted legislation to amend the Commissions of Inquiry Act No. 17 of 1948 to allow the CIABOC to file cases based on the investigations and facts revealed by the Commissions of Inquiry.

 The Attorney General has informed that the amendment Bill has to be passed by a 2/3 majority in Parliament.

The Cabinet paper submitted by President Maithripala Sirisena seeking to publish the bill in the Gazette and subsequently present it to Parliament. This proposal received the Cabinet approval. Minister Senaratne said that the above amendment to the bill will quicken the process of taking legal action against the wrongdoers.

He assured that the above measure was taken to hear the cases soon and punish the perpetrators involved. According to the Act, the President can appoint Commissions of Inquiry, whenever it appears to him that an investigation or inquiry or both is necessary on the administration, management and functions of any Government institution or the conduct of any public officer. Presidential Commissions of Inquiries can be appointed on any matter relating to the national interest of the public safety or well-being as decided by the President.

Gota Sings A Different Tune On Lasantha Murder

Gotabaya

MARCH 1, 2018

Replying to an article carried in banner headlines in the Island newspaper of 27th February under the caption “Inquiry into Lasantha murder in a muddle” Gotabaya Rajapaksa who was Secretary Defence at the time Lasantha Wickrematunge was brutally murdered offers an explanation as a cover up after his much publicised ” Who is Lasantha?” interview with the BBC shortly after the killing. He also said that he filed action as it was the correct thing to do. Will he file action against the Island? That would also be the correct thing to do by his own admitted standards.

The infamous interview shocked the entire world when Gotabaya arrogantly said “who is Lasantha? He was a tabloid journalist criticising every President. Why ask about one man? There are so many murders”. In his reply carefully crafted as one suspects by a lawyer, he goes on to put the blame on Brigadier Keppetiwalana a known acolyte of Gen Sarath Fonseka when he was the Commander of the Army. If one were to recall, Brigadier Keppetiwalana and some other Army Intelligence personnel were arrested and kept in CID custody after being held by the Military initially. At the time Gotabaya was yet the all powerful Secretary Defence. They were released after a visit by Rohan Guneratne arranged and approved by Gotabaya himself. It is indeed funny that the former Secretary Defence now places the blame at the feet of Keppetiwalana, having lost power but did release him whilst he was in power. Rumour was rife that Keppetiwalana et al were pushed to blame Gen Fonseka of the murder whilst being held but when they capitulated by saying to Guneratne they would speak of other murders if they were pushed. Hey presto, the release took place. The CID would do well to follow up on that lead too.

Lasantha

The Rajapaksa government with Gotabaya as Secretary of all he surveyed did nothing with investigating murders let alone corruption. Thajudeen’s murder was an accident. Lasantha’s murder was done by LTTE and hence pushed to SSP Wakista in the anti terrorism unit. Keith Noyahr was released after a near death experience when calls were made to MR and GR. Ekaneligoda was found wandering around overseas. Forget the Udayan journalists. They had no chance. Shame on you journalists in the South. How is it that the former Secretary Defence now says these crimes need not be investigated? How is it that it is convenient to hide behind statements made by Ranil Wickremesinghe and Joseph Michael Perera that it was Gen Sarath Fonseka who killed Lasantha Wickramatunge,at a time he was in power ? Why did he not believe those statements at that time and take action? He was in power !!!!

The former Secretary Defence goes on to say that the Government is hell bent on incarcerating the self proclaimed War Winning Hero ( forgetting Gen Fonseka) because of his efforts in defeating the LTTE and beautifying Colombo. All by himself. Due to the super performance by his brother at the recent Local Government elections the Yahapalanaya boys have got jittery and are hell bent on “fixing” them, says he. Perhaps Gotabaya has forgotten that his brother got such a mandate mainly because the Yahapalanaya’s did not move against them after making serious charges prior to defeating MR. The people felt that the Rajapaksa clan were now, spring chicken. Close behind is the looming possibility of Field Marshal Fonseka becoming the Law and Order Minister, that has sent shivers down their collective spines. Hence the reply.

The gung ho super hero who commandeered all he surveyed when he was in power seems to be cowering without the tri forces and the police to hide behind. He goes on to explain that he did file action against the late senior journalist and his newspaper for billions over the reporting of the “MiG Deal” as he himself calls it. Observers will do well to remember that Gotabaya in an interview with Hard Talk during his period as Secretary Defence arrogantly said to a question whether he wished The Sunday Leader to shut down as they will not be able to pay billions “Of course”. Watch You Tube interview. Yet when the paper changed hands he accepted an apology from Rajapaksa codger Asanga Seneviratne who was by then the owner. Observers must also remember that Gotabaya was out of power when he accepted the apology. So, the all powerful Secretary Defence who wanted the Leader Newspaper shut down, meekly accepts a contrived apology from his poodle when out of power.

Having set in motion his papers to revoke US citizenship Gotabaya takes his first steps to run for President in 2020. Viyath Maga stands testimony. For the first time Gotabaya accepted in an interview that he was a US citizen. Why? Because he has already set in motion the revoking of his US citizenship. If readers do not believe it please ask Malraj Silva in California who knows inside out of all, We mean ALL of Gotabaya’s affairs in the USA. Maybe the CID should follow that lead too.

Maybe, just maybe The Island carried this on the front page to open the debate for Gotabaya
to respond in this fashion since Field Marshal looms large. The Island has been openly supporting Mahinda Rajapaksa and Gotabaya with Shamindra Ferdinands and Dayan J, leading the cheer squad. If this is as it seems it’s a shame that a newspaper is helping to cover up for a fellow scribe,s murder let alone of a former colleague within their fold.

The script is clear. Mahinda Rajapaksa cannot run for President in 2020. Gotabaya is the choice of the Pohottuwa. As stated early in this article the Yahapalanaya brought this upon themselves. Between President Maithripala Sirisena and PM Wickremesinghe both are guilty of vacillating over the many investigations against the former regime bigwigs. They read it wrong and now there is hardly time but to make haste in getting about what was promised and needed. Thajudeen, Lasantha, Eknaligoda, Udayan journalists and Noyahr, apart from the grand larceny of a corrupt and dictatorial regime.

Read More

Interim order preventing arrest of former IGP

By Yusuf Ariff-February 28, 2018 

The Supreme Court today issued an interim injunction preventing former Inspector General of Police (IGP) Jayantha Wickramaratne from being arrested over the murder of journalist Lasantha Wickramatunga.

The former IGP had petitioned the court seeking a court order preventing his possible arrested in connection with the murder.

On February 14, the Retired Senior DIG Prasanna Nanayakkara was arrested by the Criminal Investigations Department (CID) for allegedly concealing evidence on the murder of Wickremetunga.
Nanayakkara was the Senior DIG in charge of Western Province (South) at the time of Lasantha Wickramatunge’s murder while the area of Mount Lavinia also came under his jurisdiction.

Lasantha Wickramatunge, the founding editor of the Sunday Leader, was murdered on January 08, 2009 in Attidiya, Ratmalana.

Several high-ranking police officers and army intelligence officers have been arrested in connection with the murder case. 

Lenin in Sri Lanka?

“How could you knead sad Russian dough into any sort of shape? Why was he born in that uncouth country? Just because a quarter of his blood was Russian, fate had hitched him to the ramshackle Russian rattletrap. A quarter of his blood, but nothing of his character, his will, his inclinations made him kin to that slovenly, slapdash, eternally drunken country. Lenin knew of nothing more revolting than back-slapping Russian hearties, tearful tavern penitents, self-styled geniuses bewailing their ruined lives. Lenin was a bowstring, or an arrow from the bow. What then tied him to that country? With a little more work he could have mastered three European languages, as he had mastered that semi-tarter tongue. He was tied, you say to Russia by twenty years as a practicing revolutionary? Yes, but by nothing else” – ‘Lenin in Zurich,’ Solzhenitsyn 
Thursday, 1 March 2018

In his acclaimed ‘Lenin in Zurich,’ Solzhenitsyn, the Nobel prize winning writer takes us into the torrential stream of Vladimir Ilyich’s (Lenin) thoughts and feelings just a few months before the world shattering revolution of 1917.

Living in exile in neutral Switzerland (the Great War was in its second bloody year), the idea of returning to Russia, leave alone the prospect of a successful overthrowing of the hated Tsar and the system he represented, seemed hopelessly unrealistic to the implacable revolutionary. Years as a refugee, a life of unremitting denials and hardships, ideological conflicts and schisms, the pressures of guiding the activities of an underground party in that enormous and dangerous country from exile and his ceaseless theoretical work had drained him.

“He was nearing the end of his forty-seventh year, in an anxious, monotonous life of nothing but ink on paper, enmities and alliances, quarrels and agreements that sprang up and faded in a day, or a week, all enormously important, all requiring enormous tact and skill, and always with politicians so much inferior to himself, all of it water into a bottomless bucket, instantly lost and forgotten, labour in vain. In a life of constant agitation, twisting and turning, his whole achievement was to fight his way into an impassable rubbish heap.”

Such was Lenin’s gloomy state of mind, only a few months before the October Revolution of 1917 that shook the world. In the confusion brought about by the misfortunes of the war, the Bolsheviks, led by Lenin and a handful of brilliant and capable individuals seized power of the Russian empire. They were convinced that the process thus set in motion would lead to the creation of a classless society, ending exploitation of man by man, the defining feature of hitherto history. History moves to a preordained pattern, and they were the instruments of history.

Under the shock of the revolution, the existing State structure of the gigantic empire had collapsed entirely. Civil war raged over much of Russia, hunger and lawlessness gripped the land. The revolutionary government had no money and the outside world was solidly hostile. Their task was enormous, an undertaking only for men of super-human skills, stamina and courage. For those of us, living our unremarkable prosaic lives, the sheer scope and ambition of the Bolshevik enterprise is mind-boggling. Although the great man in exile despaired of the Russian character, history was to prove him wrong; they were made of sterner stuff.

The mighty land that produced men of the calibre of Lenin and Trotsky, writers with the skills of Tolstoy and Dostoevsky, rulers of the scope of Peter the Great and Empress Catherine, outstanding military men such as Zhukov, Bagration and Kutuzov, brilliant inventors and scientists like Popov and Leontiev is not to be sniffed at. In time, the Soviet Union that Lenin established was to become a superpower, the second most powerful country in the world (in only 30 years after the revolution).

True, all this was achieved at a prohibitive price, as so poignantly exposed subsequently by writers like Solzhenitsyn and Pasternak. Man is not some malleable dough to be kneaded into a historically determined automaton. As it evolved, the ideology that the Bolsheviks so ardently embraced proved to be both false in respect of several of its primary premises as well as oppressive in practice. But that does not take away from the integrity and the passion of the original revolutionaries, who gave their all for a greater cause.

On 22 June 1941 when the awesome German army crashed into the Soviet Union in a gigantic thrust, most observers expected the Union to collapse in a few months, if not weeks. Within three short months more than three million Soviet soldiers were captured by the relentless German war machine (almost all prisoners were to perish in captivity). The death and destruction that the Germans unleashed on the Soviet Union is unimaginable.

In four years of fighting Russia was to suffer 25 million dead (equally large numbers were injured or went missing). The titanic struggle for the city of Stalingrad alone, a no-holds-barred battle that went on for six months, resulted in nearly two million dead, civilians included. But the Russians, despite the fearsome mauling they received, did not lay down their arms. With an enormous sacrifice in blood, toil and tears they stopped the Germans, and thereby surely saved the world from a descent into a long night of barbarism.

For perspective, we may contrast the scale of fighting and the Russian losses with the casualties of our own 30-year war with the LTTE which is said to have resulted in approximately 100,000 casualties in this period. That three-decade-long struggle nearly unhinged the Sri Lankan State, its political, economic and social structure brought to near breaking point. After the war’s successful conclusion it seems we can only refer to it in hyperbolic terms. (The world’s best General fighting the world’s most ferocious terrorist group and so on.)

As far as I am aware, Sri Lanka has never caught either Solzhenitsyn’s imagination or Lenin’s intellectual attention. We were too far away and too small to be of any interest to the Russian giants. Perhaps, it is for the best. Had a man of Solzhenitsyn’s sensibilities looked at the ‘thoughts and feelings’ of any of our leaders, he would assuredly be unable to cover the banality of it all in one small volume!

I do not know whether there is an undiscovered Sri Lankan Lenin wringing his hands in frustration at the pathetic realities of his country in Zurich or a more welcoming destination for the natives like Dubai or Singapore (visa on arrival!). Seeing the poor quality of leadership we have produced hitherto, this prospect seems most unlikely (SriLankan Lenin in Dubai!).

But during the years when we were flirting with the Socialist bloc, a story of a particular piquancy did the rounds. Sirima Bandaranaike (the leader of two-thirds of the nations on this earth, as she was described by the Government-owned newspapers in reference to her purely titular position of the then active non-aligned movement) was Prime Minister (1970-77).

The Soviet Union, grateful for the support given by little Sri Lanka at international forums decided to shown its appreciation by asking us to participate in space exploration, an area where it was dominant at the time. Russia was planning to send a rocket far into space and thought it appropriate to allow us gift a dog which would be sent in the rocket and thus earn the honour of being the country from where the first dog to travel in space originated from.

Our Government was elated by this show of favour. Immediately a meeting of high-powered ministers was called to decide on the selection of the lucky dog. The ministers rushed to Temple Trees, helped along by the pilot cars and armed soldiers who cleared the road for them.

As expected of responsible men of the world, the ministers examined the matter deeply and from different angles, leaving no aspect unexamined. Several meetings were held, many of them till late in the night. Small sub-committees were appointed to look into specific areas.

Where should the dog come from, urban or rural? How old should it be? What kind of name should the dog have? Should it have a pedigree? How accurate are the records maintained by the Kennel Club in respect of pedigrees? Having years of experience in electoral campaigns, the ministers exhibited a comforting familiarity with the substance and nuances of such questions.

Eventually, after prolonged discussions, the matter was resolved, with all ministers unanimously agreeing that a pet owned by a relative of the Prime Minister should be the most appropriate dog to represent the country.

Unlike now, the Foreign Ministry then boasted of much talent. A very senior secretary was tasked with the duty of informing Russia of our achievement.

His message to the Kremlin was brief, in the tone of a party which had done all the hard work.

“We have found the dog! Just get the rocket ready!”

Israel uses online blackmail to recruit collaborators

Palestinian students walk past a banner in Gaza City announcing the launch of a campaign calling on informants to Israel to repent, March 2013.Ashraf AmraAPA images

Hamza Abu Eltarabesh- 27 February 2018

In June 2015, Ibrahim Muhammad, 24, graduated from the Islamic University of Gaza with a degree in English literature. The eldest son in a family of 11 with a disabled father who had been unemployed since 2003, he needed work, and fast, to support his family.

Like thousands of graduates in Gaza, however, Ibrahim had no luck finding a job. Israel’s siege – which along with three major military assaults has destroyed the Strip’s economy – rendered him unable to leave Gaza to pursue opportunities elsewhere.

Educated and in his 20s, he found himself devoid of work or money and rapidly losing hope. For nearly a year, he was stuck in his room with his cell phone on a 30-year-old bed that had belonged to his dead grandmother.

Days became hazy. He spent the mornings sleeping and nights awake. He started trawling social media and it was during one of those nights that he met a young woman called Suha.

Ibrahim is not this young man’s real name and some elements of this story have been changed to protect his family. The details of his story were related to The Electronic Intifada by two separate security sources as well as members of Ibrahim’s family.

Suha lived in Spain, she wrote him in one of many chats that soon turned into an online relationship, including a virtual sexual one. She began to send him money every month, sometimes as much as $500, as a token of her sympathy and love.

Meanwhile, she learned everything about Ibrahim, as young lovers might. She asked him about his personal life, the people in the neighborhood and other more general details about life in Gaza. She asked him to take photographs of the mosques in the area, in a bid, she said, to strengthen his bond to prayer and his religion.

The trap shuts

After nine months, Suha told Ibrahim that she would introduce him to her brother who would help him leave Gaza. The three – Ibrahim, Suha and her brother, who was introduced as Abu Zeidan – connected on an online group call to discuss this.

It was after that call that Suha vanished. Ibrahim texted and messaged, but to no avail. In desperation, he texted her brother’s number. Within minutes he got a call from someone who said he was an Israeli officer and that he had sexually explicit videos of him taken during video calls with Suha. He threatened to use them if Ibrahim did not comply with instructions.

Shocked and fearful, Ibrahim hung up the phone and turned it off. One sleepless night later, he turned it back on to find a voice message from an unknown number. On it, Suha implored him to follow Abu Zeidan’s instructions, that they would keep his secret safe and that any requests would be simple and would not affect other people.


A mural at the Palestinian side of Erez checkpoint warns against informing to Israel, March 2017.Mohammed AsadAPA images

Feeling cornered, Ibrahim complied. Soon he was receiving instructions not only from Abu Zeidan, but from other Israeli officers. At the beginning of 2017, however, Ibrahim was apprehended by members of the Qassam Brigades, the military wing of Hamas, who became suspicious when they found him checking out entrances to tunnels used by Gaza’s resistance groups.

After two hours of questioning, Ibrahim confessed, said one of the security officers who spoke to The Electronic Intifada about the case but on condition of anonymity. He was eventually sentenced by a military court to 12 years in prison, avoiding the death penalty only because his information did not lead to the death of anyone in Gaza.

Social media recruitment opportunity

Ibrahim is just one of hundreds of youth recruited by Israeli intelligence via social media, according to Palestinian security officials.

Mahmoud Abu al-Qumsan, a Hamas intelligence officer who works on identifying collaborators, told The Electronic Intifada that Israeli agents target a specific profile, mostly among unemployed youth.

All are men between the ages of 22 and 28 and about a fifth of them hold university degrees.

Abu al-Qumsan refused to give any total for the number of collaborators Israel has recruited through social media but said the number began to increase from the first quarter of 2015.

Israel, according to security sources as well as local media reports, has long exploited social media websites, prominent among them Facebook, to recruit spies. In December, Palestinian media carried reports warningagainst some Arabic-language Facebook groups that give the impression of being sympathetic to resistance groups in Gaza but are likely set up in an attempt to monitor activity and pick out names.

One intelligence source said that by monitoring the comments and behavior of those interacting in such groups, Israeli agents glean information they can use as inducements for potential collaborators, whether that is monetary or help in-kind, like offering permits to travel for medical treatment, education or commerce.

It was through social media that Ashraf Abu Leila, possibly the most notorious of recently convicted collaborators, is said to have first been recruited by Israeli intelligence. Accused with two other men of the assassination of Mazen al-Fuqaha, a senior Qassam Brigades leader who was killed in March last year, Abu Leila was executed on 25 May 2017 after being found guilty by a revolutionary court.
Under questioning, Abu Leila is said to have confessed to being recruited through an online messenger app at the beginning of 2004 by a man who claimed to be a member of al-Qaida. And over time, authorities say, Abu Leila proved a deadly assassin.

A member of Hamas since 2001, Abu Leila reportedly early became close to a Qassam commander, who would unwittingly shield him in the future. During the 2007 fighting in Gaza that led to the ouster of Fatah, Hamas authorities now say he was responsible for the murder of several members of the preventive security forces. He was also accused of another murder, but escaped punishment due to his involvement with Hamas’ military wing.

He subsequently worked in different ministries until 2013, when he became increasingly radicalized and reportedly got close to Gaza’s Doghmush clan and its Salafi Army of Islam group. Indeed, the assassination of al-Fuqaha was initially thought to have been carried out by Salafis, with whom Hamas has been engaged in conflict on and off for more than a decade.

A process without oversight

The lack of transparency around the process that led to Abu Leila’s confession and execution, however, was widely criticized by local and international human rights organizations, the West Bank Palestinian Authorityand the United Nations.

A swift investigation led to the arrests, while confessions were extracted after questioning over which there was no oversight. And while Abu Leila reenacted the crime for investigators, according to Nasser Suleiman, the head of the joint Hamas-Qassam military field court who was party to the investigation and sentencing, justice was dispensed with little delay and no recourse to appeal.

Human rights groups said the process is inherently flawed and the speed with which the revolutionary court reached a verdict in Abu Leila’s case was insufficient for a fair trial.

“We can’t rely on revolutionary courts to serve justice for accused criminals,” Mustafa Ibrahim, a human rights researcher with the Independent Commission for Human Rights, told The Electronic Intifada. “Executing criminals this fast … opened the door of doubt in the procedures of the judgment. Revenge is not justice.”

Ibrahim also noted that executions are only legal under Palestinian law if they receive ratification by the Palestinian Authority president. Since Hamas ousted Fatah from Gaza in 2007, such ratifications have only been granted by Mahmoud Abbas in periods of détente between the two groups, and no ratification was forthcoming for these latest executions.

All executions carried out by Palestinian governments in recent years have taken place in Gaza.
Yahya Musa, a Hamas member of the Palestinian parliament, defended the death penalties that have been handed out, however, citing vital security interests. “Executions are a national necessity to deter collaborators, maintain the security of the Palestinian people and fortify the internal front.”

He also told The Electronic Intifada that popular anger over collaboration would in any case force the hand of authorities.

Collaborators and reconciliation

Certainly, the issue of collaborators is one of the most sensitive among Palestinians. Few tears are spilled when convicted collaborators are executed for all that human rights organizations argue that due process is not guaranteed under present circumstances and, even when due process can be guaranteed, the death penalty is not a better deterrent than imprisonment.

The issue is also a bone of contention in reconciliation talks between Hamas and Fatah. Hamas is unhappy with the way the PA under Abbas’ leadership has failed to implement capital punishment for collaboration, said Muhammad Abu Harbid, a lecturer at Gaza’s Al-Ribat University College.

“The file of collaborators is a sensitive one,” Abu Harbid told The Electronic Intifada. “There will be differences between Hamas and the PA, especially when it comes to who will run the investigative and judiciary processes. Hamas adopts a different methodology. The PA has arrested a number of collaborators but their sentences were not satisfactory to Hamas.”

Moreover, said Hisham Mughari, a retired major in the Palestinian security forces and now the dean of al-Awda college, Hamas is worried that, with the PA taking back control of crossings in and out of Gaza, one of its primary ways to caution people about Israeli methods to recruit collaborators has disappeared.

“Hamas worked with passengers in creating awareness of how to deal with the occupation at the crossing,” Mughari said.

Israel’s permit system, which controls Palestinian movement throughout the occupied West Bank and Gaza Strip, is easy to exploit for recruitment, often against vulnerable Palestinians seeking medical treatment in Israel. Mughari suggested PA officers would not be as careful as Hamas security in terms of checking for cash and spying equipment destined for collaborators inside Gaza, which, in turn, could lead to an escalation “against the resistance.”

Those left behind

The stigma against collaboration is so strong that it does not simply condemn the collaborator, but shames his or her entire family.

Mariam, 28, is married to a man who was sentenced to life in prison in 2014 for collaboration. The mother of three has been disowned by most of her own family and has tried to take her life twice with pills as a result of her and her children’s social isolation.

“We are being punished for a crime we had no hand in,” she told The Electronic Intifada. “I fear for my children’s future. People have already made my life hell.”

Mariam, not her real name, lives with her parents, but even they threaten on occasion to throw her out and her wider family has not escaped the stigma of collaboration.

“One day, my oldest brother was insulted by a colleague at work because his sister is the wife of a collaborator. He came back angry, shouted at us and threw us out. I had to spend two nights at a friend’s house.”

Her husband’s family also refuses to care for the children and Mariam finds herself desperate.
“To whom can I turn?”

She fears, she said, a “tragedy.”

“The community is very unjust to people like us. My daughter is only 9 but she stopped going to school because the other students call her the ‘collaborator’s daughter.’ She couldn’t take it anymore.”

Hamza Abu Eltarabesh is a journalist from Gaza.

Iraqi Communists and Shia Sadrists unite to tackle corruption and sectarianism

Iraqi Communist party leaders hail possibility of end of sectarian and ethnic coalitions in war-ravaged country

Supporters of the Iraqi Communist Party hold the communist symbol of the hammer and sickle as they wave flags during a march to celebrate International Workers Day in Baghdad (AFP)

Alex MacDonald-Wednesday 28 February 2018 15:20 UTC

It is perhaps the most unlikely of political alliances, even for a country where electoral rules encourage strange bedfellows. As Iraq prepares for its first post-Islamic State elections, the Communists have thrown their lot in with the Shia conservatives of Muqtada al-Sadr and the result, they promise, is not as bizarre as it may first appear.

Although the pairing of religious conservatives in Sadr's party and the ultra-secular Marxist-Leninists of the Iraqi Communist Party has raised many eyebrows - not least internally - both argue they ultimately draw support from the same social base: the poor, working class and those angry at the rampant cronyism and mismanagement which have seen the country ranked 11th most corrupt in the world by Transparency International.

Both maintain headquarters in the eponymous Sadr City, the highly impoverished and frequently attacked district of Baghdad. And both say they are fighting - politically speaking - for the same future for its three million residents, and the millions of Iraqs beyond.

Salam Ali, a member of the Iraqi Communist Party's central committee, told Middle East Eye that the coalition, named the "Sairoun Alliance", could have a major effect on the nature of Iraqi politics.

"It is a very important development politically in Iraq and, if successful - and that’s a big if because the challenge is great - it will have an impact on politics in the region as well," he explained, speaking to MEE in London.

This coalition is national, civil in character, it opens the possibilities of a change in the political scene

- Salam Ali, Iraqi Communist Party member

The alliance has grown out of on-going street protests - largely beginning in August 2015 - targeting systemic corruption and advocating political reform. These have seen secular activists, under the banner of the Civic Movement, gathering alongside largely Shia Islamists in common cause.

Despite the surprise at the announcement of the coalition, after the communists broke from the secular Civil Democratic Alliancecoalition, Ali said the relationship had been building since 2015.

"It’s not a sudden change," he said. "It is built on cooperation, coordination between this broad civil democratic movement, the protest movement and the Sadrist movement."

He said that it created "a greater climate for open campaigning and to be able to reach out to areas in Baghdad, in the provinces as well, where our party and the other civil democratic forces could not campaign as effectively as it is possible now."

"Now there are examples of coordination with Sadrists in these areas, with young people - now they can coordinate on issues, local issues, like services, the provinicial council, elements of corruption here and there," he said.

In addition, the Communist Party has long championed itself as the one genuinely non-sectarian party in Iraq. This has made Sadr's recent public attempts to cross the sectarian divide and support a unified Iraqi identity another point of common interest.

"This is fundamental - he has distanced himself from sectarian politics," said Salam. "This is the essence of our policy on the protest movement, on its demands, on its electoral strategy as well."

He said that it was possible that, if successful in elections, a "new political map of coalitions" could be formed in Iraq, with further alliances between left-wing forces and what he described as "enlightened, moderate Islamists".

Iraqi women, supporters of Shiite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, take part in a protest outside Baghdad's fortified "Green Zone" on March, 30, 2016, calling on the prime minister for reforms tackling corruption (AFP)

Sadr himself hit back at criticism of the alliance in January, stressing that he was committed to reform and calling for technocrats in place of corrupt ministry officials.

“If we enter into an alliance with the Shia, people say it is a sectarian alliance," he said. "And if we enter an alliance with the Sunnis, people accuse me of Wahhabism, Baathism or loyalty to Saudi Arabia. If we enter into an alliance with the civil society stream, they say we are Communists.

"When we enter into an alliance with parties close to Iran, they accuse us of being Iranian loyalists and when we get closer to Arab parties, they say we are secret agents for them."

"I will participate in elections for the sake of Iraq, to support moderate people and to expel extremists, to achieve reform and to end corruption and nepotism."

Ally with the Devil

At one point the Iraqi Communist party was the largest of its kind in the Middle East and in the 1950s and 1960s exerted a lot of influence on Iraqi politics.

However, the coming to power of the Baath Party, and later Saddam Hussein as president in 1979, led to the repression of the party, often with backing from the CIA.

Salam himself spent the years between 1967 and 2003 in exile in the UK, after coming to the country on a scholarship.

Today everyone who has the desire and the means to become prime minister is prepared to ally themselves even with the devil

- Bahaa al-Araji, former Sadr supporter

Following Saddam's removal after the 2003 invasion (opposed by the Communist Party), the party enjoyed something of a resurgence and although it never regained the influence it previously enjoyed, it is still a presence in Iraqi politics in a way that other Middle Eastern communist parties could only envy.

Despite this, the party still maintains a level of discretion - the internal party structure and membership is secretive. The longstanding perception of communists as atheists and their public criticism of well-connected business interests has made life very difficult in a highly religious and highly corrupt landscape, and the party has had to endure repeated attacks on its offices and the murder of its leaders.

Last year, seven anti-corruption activists with the Civic Movement (a number Communist party members) were kidnapped by unknown gunmen. Although the group were later released, the culprits were never found - though one activist told MEE there were "many corrupted powerful men who could be happy to see them out of the political scene".

Members of the Sairoon Alliance have also faced threats and intimidation - on Sunday, Iraqi media reported that Abbas Adel Khader, a lecturer at the Faculty of Management and Economics at Muthanna University and parliamentary candidate for the coalition, was shot at by a gunmen, who demanded that he withdraw his candidacy.

A man walks towards the political campaign banner of the Communist party used during the 30 January national elections, at their burnt out offices in the poor Baghdad neighborhood of Sadr City (AFP)

While few current Sadrists would publicly disagree with Sadr himself, former supporters of the Sadrist movement have been critical.

Bahaa al-Araji, a former energy minister whom Sadr forced to resign over corruption allegations, slammed the alliance, rhetorically asking on Iraqi TV in January how a party whose slogan was “Workers of the World Unite” could join with a party whose message should be to "send blessings upon the Prophet?"

"Today everyone who has the desire and the means to become prime minister is prepared to ally themselves even with the devil in order to gain the votes of the Iraqi people," he said.

Iran opposition

The alliance also appears to have upset senior figures outside Iraq, including Iran, which has long had a tense relationship with Sadr, who resents Iran's overweaning influence in Iraq.

Speaking at an event alongside former prime minister Nouri al-Maliki - arguably the fiercest rival of Sadr - Ali Velayati, chief advisor to Iran's Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, warned that “the Islamic awakening will not allow the return of communists and liberals to power.”

The intervention was condemned as interference in Iraq's domestic politics.

"Iraq is bigger than you! Iraq is not your state!" wrote Jassim al-Helfi, another Communist Party central committee member.

He also criticised Maliki, who has long been seen as close to Iran, for not speaking out against Velayati's comments.

"It is a legacy of the Iraqi officials, who sat humbly on the speech of Ali Velayati, violating the constitution, attacking political and intellectual pluralism by interfering in Iraq's internal affairs.Without any of them uttering one word of objection!"

The build-up to the elections has already been hit by controversy. Iraqi Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi, riding high after the defeat of the Islamic State group in Mosul, had been seen by many as the best hope of rooting out corruption and breaking the stranglehold of sectarianism in Iraqi politics.

It was a shock therefore when he announced on 14 January that he would be joining an electoral pact with the Victory Alliance, which consists of parties and politicians affiliated to the Hashd al-Shaabi, or Popular Mobilisation Units (PMUs), largely Iran-backed groups who have been accused of carrying out sectarian reprisals against Sunnis.

Sadr, who has repeatedly called for the PMUs to be disbanded, condemned the move as "abhorrent and sectarian" and within 24 hours the alliance had collapsed.

Muqtada al-Sadr with ICP central committee member Jassim al-Halfi, and anti-corruption activist Ahmed Abdul-Huss (Facebook)

But the controversy dampened the belief that Abadi might move to challenge the controversial "sectarian quotas" system which has been one of the main demands of reformists in Iraq.

Under the current system, installed by the US following the 2003 invasion, ministers are appointed to different ministries on the basis of ethnicity and sect, in a fashion similar to Lebanon.

Although this system was never written into the Iraqi constitution, it has remained in place and has angered those who claim appointments should be overseen by the prime minister. But abolishing the system will prove difficult without enraging the highly influential political actors who currently benefit from the system.

"There were hopes, especially when [Abadi] announced this list of political reforms in September 2016, that he would be able to do something - but Abadi’s problem is his fluctuation and faciliation and indecision on the one hand, and the fact that he lacks a power base," said Ali.

"Unlike Maliki, who managed after eight years in powers to really build up his power base in the state, in the security forces, in the ministries."

A 'big political battle'

No matter how assertive the communists and their allies may be, there are few who doubt that Sadr will continue to dominate the electoral alliance.

"There are reasons to be skeptical this will work out," said Kirk Sowell, publisher of the biweekly newsletter Inside Iraqi Politics.

"The secularists were never able to bring out large crowds without the Sadrists, and so they may be viewed as window dressing."

He also pointed out that even at their strongest, the Sadrists still had a hill to climb when it came to electoral success.

"We'll see, but remember that the Sadrist lists got 34 seats in 2014. So unless their alliance with the secularists brings 40-50 seats, this shouldn't be viewed as a big deal," he explained to MEE.

Iraq is still reeling from the defeat of IS and with about two million internally displaced people still to return to their homes, there are fears that the election could still be delayed or carried out in a less-than-representative fashion. There have even been reports of refugees being forcibly returned in order to ensure the elections take place on time.

Salam Ali said the coming months would be a "big political battle" but expressed optimism.

"This coalition is national, civil in character, it opens the possibilities of a change in the political scene in favour of reform of the system, it brings in a new dynamic in the political process and hopefully will give a boost to the protest movement as well," he said.

"And with this from above and below, as they say, this might - might - hopefully open up space for change."