A woman eats fish and chips at Jack's Fish & Chips in west London May 18, 2012. REUTERS/Eddie Keogh/Files
MAY 4, 2018
GENEVA (Reuters) - Adults and children should consume a maximum of 10 percent of their daily calories in the form of saturated fat such as meat and butter and one percent from trans fats to reduce the risk of heart disease, the World Health Organization said on Friday.
The draft recommendations, the first since 2002, are aimed at reducing non-communicable diseases, led by cardiovascular diseases, blamed for 72 percent of the 54.7 million estimated deaths worldwide every year, many before the age of 70.
“Dietary saturated fatty acids and trans-fatty acids are of particular concern because high levels of intake are correlated with increased risk of cardiovascular diseases,” Dr. Francesco Branca, Director of WHO’s Department of Nutrition for Health and Development, told reporters.
The dietary recommendations are based on scientific evidence developed in the last 15 years, he added.
The United Nations agency has invited public comments until June 1 on the recommendations, which it expects to finalise by year-end.
Saturated fat is found in foods from animal sources such as butter, cow’s milk, meat, salmon and egg yolks, and in some plant-derived products such as chocolate, cocoa butter, coconut, palm and palm kernel oils.
An active adult needs about 2,500 calories per day, Branca said.
“So we are talking about 250 calories coming from saturated fat and that is approximately a bit less than 30 grams of saturated fat,” he said.
That amount of fat could be found in 50 grams (1.76 oz) of butter, 130-150 grams of cheese with 30 percent fat, a litre of full fat milk, or in 50 grams of palm oil, he said.
TRANS FATS
Trans fats occur naturally in meat and dairy products. But the predominant source is industrially-produced and contained in baked and fried foods such as fries and doughnuts, snacks, and partially hydrogenated cooking oils and fats often used by restaurants and street vendors.
In explicit new advice, WHO said that excessive amounts of saturated fat and trans fat should be replaced by polyunsaturated fats, such as fish, canola and olive oils.
“Reduced intake of saturated fatty acids have been associated with a significant reduction in risk of coronary heart disease when replaced with polyunsaturated fatty acids or carbohydrates from whole grains,” it said.
A meal of a "Monster"-sized A.1. Peppercorn burger, Bottomless Steak Fries, and Monster Salted Caramel Milkshake is seen at a Red Robin restaurant in Foxboro, Massachusetts July 30, 2014. REUTERS/Dominick Reuter/Files
Total fat consumption should not exceed 30 percent of total energy intake to avoid unhealthy weight gain, it added.
The recommendations complement other WHO guidelines including limiting intake of free sugars and sodium.
At the 37th session of the Human Rights Council, which met in Geneva in February and March 2018, the High Commissioner for United Nations Human Rights Commission (UNHRC) Zeid Ra’ad Al-Hussein urged member states to explore other avenues to foster accountability in Sri Lanka including the application of universal jurisdiction. The call was made in an attempt to bring about accountability for alleged war crimes committed during Sri Lanka’s civil war in view of Sri Lanka’s reluctance to comply with resolutions passed since March 2012.
The UNHRC High Commissioner explained the reasons for the postponement, given the changing context in Sri Lanka where a regime change had resulted in Rajapaksa being ousted and Maithripala Sirisena installed as president. The resolution passed at the September 2015 sessions called for a domestic accountability mechanism with international involvement.
In March 2017 at the 34th session of the Human Rights Council, Colombo was granted a further extension of two years to probe alleged war crimes committed during the civil war. Instead, the Sri Lankan regime not only failed to implement the resolution it had co-sponsored in September 2015, but in January 2016, President Sirisena during an interview with Al Jazeera’s Hoda Abdel-Hamid flatly denied the war crimes allegation, referring only to “human rights violations.” Later, in November 2017, Sirisena went a step further declaring “There won’t be electric chairs, international tribunals or foreign judges. That book is closed.”
The High Commissioner’s Call for ‘Other Avenues’
Faced with this defiance, UNHRC’s High Commissioner in despair called upon member states to explore other avenues to foster accountability in Sri Lanka.
Sri Lanka is a signatory to the Geneva Convention, which prohibits war crimes. However, Sri Lanka is not a signatory to the Rome Statute that created the International Criminal Court (ICC) in 2002 to prosecute individuals for serious crimes, such as war crimes. As such, for Sri Lanka’s alleged war criminals to be brought before the ICC, the UN Security Council has to refer Sri Lanka to the ICC. This matter is fraught with geopolitical interests of various parties, primarily China and the United who are permanent members of the Security Council and are committed to strengthen their own relationships with Colombo.
This leaves UNHRC with the other option: universal jurisdiction. The term refers to the idea that a national court may prosecute individuals for any serious crime against international law — such as crimes against humanity, war crimes, genocide, and torture — based on the principle that such crimes harm the international community or international order itself.
But, actions do not succeed where the alleged criminal enjoys diplomatic immunity.
On October 24, 2011, an Australian citizen, Arunachalam Jegatheeswaran, filed an indictment against Sri Lanka’s President Mahinda Rajapaksa, Jegatheeswaran alleged that Rajapaksa had deliberately targeted civilians and civilian infrastructure (hospitals, schools and community centers) in 2007 and 2008 and that this amounted to war crimes and crimes against humanity. The charges were laid in the Melbourne Magistrates’ Court on the eve of Rajapaksa’s arrival in Australia for the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting (CHOGM). Within a day of filing the indictment, the case was quashed by the Attorney-General on the grounds that “continuation of the proceedings would be in breach of domestic law and Australia’s obligations under international law” specifically that the prosecution of Rajapaksa would breach Australian and international laws that provide immunity from criminal prosecution for heads of state.
Jagath Dias, a former Sri Lankan Army Commander was withdrawn from the Sri Lankan Embassy in Berlin in September 2011 where he had held the position of a deputy ambassador for Germany, Switzerland and the Vatican. The withdrawal followed the submission of a comprehensive dossier substantiating war crimes committed by Dias to the German Federal Foreign Office by the European Center for Constitutional and Human Rights (ECCHR) in January 2011.
Universal jurisdiction, unlike the ICC, is a blunt instrument when it comes to bringing alleged war criminals to trial. It can at times help, but is hampered by diplomatic immunity where the alleged war criminal is a diplomat or a head of state. Even when the alleged perpetrator is not protected by diplomatic immunity, states are reluctant to permit the application of universal jurisdiction as it can harm state-to-state relations. As Frances Harrison of the ITJP pointed out in an interview with the Sri Lanka-based think tank, Centre for Strategic Studies Trincomalee, “it would be good if the diplomats, donors, judicial authorities and UN had a more coordinated approach – one that continues to pressure the government of Sri Lanka to act on its transitional justice commitments while developing a parallel track of really supporting universal jurisdiction actions.”
Ana Pararajasingham was Director-Programmes with the Centre for Just Peace and Democracy (CJPD). He is the author of “Sri Lanka’s Endangered Peace Process and the Way Forward” (2007) and editor of “Sri Lanka 60 Years of ‘independence and Beyond” (2009).
Journalists and media workers who have been killed by Sri Lankan state forces were remembered on Thursday, marking Press Freedom Day.
A memorial event, organised by Jaffna Press Club, took place at the memorial erected for massacred media workers in Jaffna, whilst another event was organised at an art gallery in Jaffna.
Sri Lanka ranks 131 on the Reporters Without Borders 2018 World Press Freedom Index, an improvement of 10 points in the space of a year. The reason for this may be the line of red zeros within the country report – no journalists, citizen journalists or media assistants were killed in Sri Lanka 2018. However, as the Index notes, many of the investigations into killings in the past have gone unpunished. The world has already begun to forget. In 2016, Sri Lanka dropped off the Committee to Protect Journalist’s Impunity Index for the first time.
Yet, answers for past killings and abductions have not been forthcoming. April 28, 2018 marks 13 years since Dharmaretnam (alias “Taraki”) Sivaram was abducted. Journalists in the North and East staged protests, highlighting the continued call for answers in his case. From 2017 to 2018, there have been continued restrictions on freedom of expression in areas like Mannar and Mullaitivu where journalists and activists have been detained or assaulted over the past year.
journalists from north and east staged a demonstration today in batticaloa calling for justice for murdered Tamil journalist Dharmeratnam Sivaram and 43 author journalist
A point often made when speaking of press freedom in Sri Lanka is the progress made in the case of Lasantha Wickrematunge. This year, there has also been significant progress in the case of Keith Noyahr, with direct links made to former military intelligence and to Defense Secretary Gotabhaya Rajapakse. These markers of progress are indeed encouraging. Yet this erases the long wait families of journalists like Sivaram, Prageeth Eknaligoda, Mylvaganam Nimalarajan and others.
On January 8 this year, I delivered this speech to mark 9 years since my Uncle was shot while driving to work. In light of World Press Freedom Day, I believe it is important to share, to highlight continued challenges Sri Lanka faces in this arena, and also to note the fallacy of flagging progress in symbolic cases, when so many others remain unresolved and unexamined.
“When I think of my uncle, or Baappi as my sister and I called him, my first image is of him pirouetting and saying “I’m a ballerina!” This was in response to me asking him why he had such a special affinity for pink, because the last three times I had seen him, he was wearing a pale pink shirt. To me, that memory best sums up Baappi’s spirit – irrepressible, charming, mischievous.
There are other images too. Images of him asking “What’s for dinner?” while poking his fingers into saucepans in our kitchen, of prank calls (especially on April the 1st, which I think was his favourite holiday). Or of him telling someone, for the hundredth time, that it would be a disaster if I married someone whose last name was Soysa, because I’d become Raisa Soysa, a joke which he cracked ever since he first heard about my parents choice of name, and which never failed to annoy me.
Memories of him seriously telling me that my biggest test in the newsroom would be making the perfect cup of tea. I have to add that the reason I was in the newsroom at all was largely thanks to him, and his encouragement. Whenever he came to our house, he took the time to talk to the shy, awkward child sitting in her room with her nose in a book. I never thought he noticed me any further than that – so I was surprised when he coaxed my parents to allow me to join the Sunday Leader. In doing so, he gave me a gift I can never hope to repay. Not just the ability to express myself, but also the ability to widen my own world-view by opening my eyes to the many stories of poverty and injustice that surrounded me, and to which I would otherwise have remained oblivious.
I find it difficult to talk about these memories. Over the years, I have come to feel like those memories are treasured possessions. I worry that as time passes I might somehow lose the memory of his laugh, or the way it felt when he ruffled my hair. This is partly why it has been so difficult for me to speak at these services. It is a strange thing to find yourself being asked to examine your private memories and speak them aloud in this way.
But I am not unaware that at least, people are listening. My Uncle happened to be killed in broad daylight, in Colombo, near an Air Force checkpoint and next to a high security zone. The way he was killed was clearly premeditated. When they speak about Baappi’s case, they call it “emblematic”. A symbol. I discovered just how symbolic when I was covering the International Day to end Crimes of Impunity Against Journalists two years ago. As part of the piece I did for Groundviews, I spoke to Sandya Eknaligoda and the editor of the Sunday Thinnakural, Bharathi Rajanayagam. On both occasions, it gave me a jolt to see photos of my uncle; pinned to the noticeboard in the Sunday Thinnakural, and on a wall in Sandya’s home. Both of them spoke about Baappi’s case but also about the many others that have remained unresolved, to date.
According to CPJ, there are 19 journalists whose killings were due to the work they carried out, and under very trying circumstances.
The Journalists for Democracy in Sri Lanka have different figures, counting over 40 journalists and media workers killed, abducted or tortured while carrying out their work.
Each of those journalists had a family. Each of them have treasured memories of their loved ones, as I do. And they have the added pain that, apart from the one day a year that marked their death or disappearance, and some sporadic coverage on those days, their names and their work has been forgotten. So much so that, to my great shame when I visited the Sunday Thinnakural office, there were names and stories that I did not recognise.
Subramaniyam Sugitharajah, January 2006, Sudar Oli. Subash Chandraboas, April 2007. Mylvaganam Nimalarajan, October 2000. These names, and others don’t receive the same attention or coverage as my uncle’s case. Why have we forgotten them?
I realise that what I say has political implications. I have always shied away from the idea that the uncle I so loved should symbolise anything other than himself. This, too, has been the main reason why I did not speak out until now.
And yet the large crowds at his funeral, the rally outside on that day, the photos of my uncle pinned on the walls of the Sunday Thinnakural, and the people who attend this service speak otherwise.
I believe that, if Baappi were alive, he would not want us to forget those names. I believe that his voice would join mine, if he were still here. But he paid a price for his outspokenness. And so did all the others. I think that is important to remember on this day. Today marks nine years since Baappi decided to drive to work, even though there were men on motorbikes following him. In 2016, CPJ dropped Sri Lanka from its Impunity Index – largely due to the passage of time.
While the rest of the world moves on, we as family members continue to keep time. Certain days for me, will always have a painful significance. April Fool’s Day, the day when Baappi would prank call my mother, April 5, his birthday. And now, January 8. Over nine years, there has been little in terms of tangible progress in bringing the perpetrators of his murder to account. And we are the lucky ones – interest and investigations into so many of the other cases are not sustained.
I could end on that note, and say that things feel hopeless. But I think Baappi would not want me to give up so easily. I think he would not have given up so easily, either.
So instead, I am going to end with one plea. I would ask everyone gathered here, many of whom are here either because you knew and loved my Uncle, or were inspired by him, to raise your voices against the injustice you encounter. I ask that, in whatever way you can, you ask difficult questions about what is right and wrong, not just of others, but also of yourself. And I ask that you work towards righting the wrongs you encounter, in whatever way you can. Let us all work towards a society where critique is responded to with informed debate, not with senseless violence. Let us work towards a society in which all forms of violence are not tolerated or worse, hidden away, because they are inconvenient to examine.
I believe that would be a beautiful way to preserve the memory of my Uncle, who fought passionately for what he believed in.”
2018-05-04
The Criminal Investigation Department (CID) filing a report before the Colombo Magistrate’s Court yesterday sought details from the Navy personnel who had provided security to the members of former President’s family during the period of ruggerite Wasim Thajudeen’s murder.
They sought details of the President’s Internal Affairs Secretary, the telephone messages carried out from the President’s House, the Temple Trees and the Telecommunication Department.
The CID had also sought details of the persons to whom the vehicles bearing registration numbers PD 1387, LD 8180, KA9816, 64 -1476, KD 0124.KA 9268, LW 0573 and PA 7281 were entrusted and the drivers of those vehicles during the month of May 2012.
The CID said that they were further probing on the suspicious messages sent to 14 persons from the mobile phone of Mariana Rashvi De Silva, a participant to the party hosted by Waseem Thajudeen on the night of his death.
The CID also asserted that they did not able to identify from the CCTV footage the two persons, who were in the suspicious vehicle that chased Thajudeen's vehicle on the day he was found dead,
In this case former Senior DIG Anura Senanayake and former Narahenpita Crimes OIC Sumith Perera and retired Colombo Chief JMO Ananda Ssamarasekera were charged under the Penal Code for disappearance of evidence and for fabricating false evidence in order to shield the offenders Further inquiry postponed for June 29.Bodymatter (T. Farook Thajudeen)
One of the pressing questions before the nation is whether Sri Lanka should be governed under an Executive Presidential system or a Parliamentary system of government. Sri Lanka was governed under a Parliamentary system from independence up to 1977. From 1978 until 2015 Sri Lanka was governed under an Executive Presidential system. In 2015 the 19th Amendment reduced the powers of the President that had existed under the Executive Presidential system of 1978 and granted more power to the Prime Minister and Parliament. Thus the three options facing the nation are: (1) To restore the Executive Presidential system of 1978 (2) Continue with the existing system where the executive powers of the President are curtailed and (3) Revert back to a Parliamentary system.
The campaign to revert back to a Parliamentary system was initiated by late Rev. Sobitha and a dedicated band of civil society individuals. The primary compulsion for change was of their belief that the Executive Presidential system by its very nature where all executive power vested in one individual is prone to corruption and abuse of power. Advocates of this proposition never explored institutional mechanisms adopted by other countries to minimize corruption and contain abuse of power or its impact on devolved powers, within the framework of a unitary state. Instead their approach was to get rid of the entire system because of their belief that it was beyond redemption. Therefore, there is an urgent need to explore the pros and cons of each of these two systems of government.
The parameters within which such an exploration should be undertaken are: (1) The reality that future governments would either be coalitions or ones that would enjoy marginal majorities; (2) Given the reality of (1) above, how separation of Executive and Legislative branches, meaning an Executive President and Parliament, function under each of the two systems; and (3) The impact of each system on devolution within a unitary framework.
How these parameters would impact on political stability of the government, upon which depends human development and the territorial integrity of the State, both of which are primary concerns, are addressed below.
POLITICAL STABILITY
The Executive Presidential system incorporated in the 1978 Constitution is founded on the principle of separation of powers, albeit not as strictly as in the USA. Consequently, the President as the head of the Executive is elected nationally and functions separately from the Parliament which is responsible for the exercise of Legislative functions. This feature of a separation of powers enables the Executive branch under the President and his Cabinet of Ministers to administer the executive functions of the State without interruption even if the Parliament has to be dissolved for one reason or another. The weakness in this system however is that if the President and the majority in Parliament represent two politically divergent ideologies implementing a common program presents problems, as occurred in the US under the Obama administration, wherein the President was from the Democratic Party and the majority in Congress was Republican. If, on the other hand, the President and the majority in Parliament represent the same political party the situation is similar to what exists under a Parliamentary system because the Prime Minister and his Cabinet of Ministers and the majority in Parliament would be from the same political party or political formation.
Under a Parliamentary system on the other hand, since the Prime Minister and his Cabinet of Ministers and Parliament are all from the same political party with a majority in Parliament, Executive and Legislative functions would be carried out by the government in power. If such a majority party is a coalition and for one reason or another such a government ceases to enjoy a majority in Parliament, both the Executive and the Legislative branches would cease to exist, and fresh elections are unavoidable. This weakness that is inherent in Parliamentary systems is the primary cause for political instability due to the absence of two vital branches of any government. Opportunities for such weaknesses to manifest themselves are particularly strong during coalition governments.
What is evident from the material presented above is that if the current political formation in Parliament functioned under a Parliamentary system and it failed to forge a stable coalition government it would have no option but to call for fresh elections. The experience in UK under the coalition government of Conservatives and Liberals was so unworkable that fresh elections were inevitable. Similarly, Germany did not have a government for nearly six months due to their inability to forge a coalition government. On the other hand, under a Presidential system however unstable the government is, at least the executive branch under the President would continue to function and the administrative functions of the State would continue to operate. This is the advantage Executive Presidential systems have over Parliamentary systems.
DEVOLUTION UNDER the TWO SYSTEMS
The 13th Amendment under the Presidential system mirrors the separation of executive and legislative functions at the center in regard to the devolved subjects. The legislative powers relating to devolved subjects are exercised by the elected Chief Minister and the Provincial Council, while the Executive functions are exercised by the Governor appointed by the President, thus extending the executive powers of the President to the provinces. This makes the Governor the agent of the Executive President in the province. This arrangement makes it possible for the Governor to exercise executive functions in the province even when Provincial Councils cease to function for whatever reason such as what occurred in the Northern and Eastern Provinces during the armed conflict.
Under a Parliamentary system where executive and legislative powers are exercised by the political party in power in Parliament, the arrangements in the provinces would mirror the arrangements at the center, ONLY if executive and legislative powers relating to devolved subjects are exercised collectively by the Provincial Councils. Such an arrangement would make Sri Lanka a federal State because the provinces would be independent of the center within its sphere of influence in respect of devolved subjects (K.C. Whear, Modern Constitutions). Having a person bearing the title of Governor, but without executive powers, would also amount to creating a federal State.
If Sri Lanka is not to be a federal State it is imperative that executive and legislative powers are exercised separately. Since there cannot be two separate systems, one at the center and a completely different system in the province, it must follow that the system at the center and in the provinces should be based on separation of powers if Sri Lanka is not to become a federal State.
PREFERRED SYSTEM
The current arrangement under the 19th Amendment wherein executive power is shared between the nationally elected President and an elected Prime Minister and a Cabinet of Ministers is proving to be totally unsatisfactory. The unworkability of the current arrangement is evident almost on a daily basis, judging from the lack of consensus on fundamentals between the President and the Prime Minister; a fact that could be compounded by either the weakness in the structural arrangement of sharing executive power or by the ideological differences between the two. Whatever the reason, the current arrangement wherein authority and responsibility relating to executive power are shared is a model that is seldom used as an administrative arrangement for the simple reason that it does not work, because it is similar to arrangements that attempt to share sovereignty.
The preferred model is one where executive authority is exercised solely by the President with the assistance of a Prime Minister and a Cabinet of Ministers and responsible to Parliament as it was under the 1978 Constitution with appropriate amendments to contain tendencies for abuse of power. However, it is imperative that executive actions are monitored and scrutinized independently by Parliament under arrangements such as Oversight Committees of Parliament with power and chaired by the members of the Opposition in Parliament in order to ensure diligent scrutiny.
CONCLUSION
The call for the abolition of the Presidential system was a knee jerk reaction to the abuse of power inherent in the system. Accepting the reality that all systems have positive and negative features scraping one system for another is not prudent. Instead a more prudent approach is to address the weakness of a system while retaining its positive features. Therefore, the preferred system should be one where the separation of executive and legislative powers is clear and distinct together with institutional safeguards to contain the exercise of disproportionate power.
An arrangement that best satisfies such a condition is the Presidential system, because separation of powers are distinct unlike in a Parliamentary system where separation of powers is blurred because both functions, executive and legislative, are exercised by the government in power. Furthermore, because of this distinct separation of powers under Presidential systems at least one branch of government could function at any given time, thus ensuring greater stability than under a Parliamentary system where stability is dependent on the survival of the government.
Separation of powers under Presidential systems enables executive powers relating to devolved subjects to be exercised under the authority of the Executive President, thus ensuring the unitary character of the State. If the unitary character is to be retained, it is imperative that executive powers are exercised separately in the provinces. On the other hand, under Parliamentary systems, since executive and legislative powers are exercised jointly at the center by the government in power, separating them in the provinces would mean that the systems in the center would be different to that in the provinces. Such contradictions are unworkable. If such contradictions are to be avoided under Parliamentary systems, it would be necessary for executive and legislative powers in the provinces to be exercised by the Provincial Council, thereby mirroring the arrangement at the center. This would make Sri Lanka a federal state because the provinces would be independent of the center within their spheres of devolved executive and legislative powers. Therefore, it is imperative that the Presidential system is retained because it has the necessary inherent attributes to prevent Sri Lanka from becoming a federal State.
The level of corruption and the degree of discord under the current arrangement of sharing executive power between the President and Prime Minister should convince the nation of the need to scrap it. If abuse of power is the compelling reason for abolishing the Presidential system, advocates of the Parliamentary system seem oblivious of the fact that abuse of power exists now and could exist under Parliamentary systems as well, since both executive and legislative powers are exercised by the government in power. The better safeguard is to separate the powers so that one branch could monitor the other under strict institutionalized arrangements, as in other countries.
At the end of it all, the choice as to the system of government would be decided by the personal interests of the political leaders and not by which system would serve the interests of the people. This had been Sri Lanka’s history; a history that is bound to repeat once again much to the disappointment of the nation. The nation should unite to introduce a system that ensures political stability and territorial integrity in which human development could prosper.
Groundviews was sent a copy of the Justice Saleem Marsoof (JSM) Committee report on the Muslim Marriage and Divorce Act (MMDA), leaked from a reliable source. Download it here.
The Marsoof Committee was appointed in 2009 by the then Justice Minister Milinda Moragoda, in recognition of the call for reform of Muslim personal law. After lengthy deliberations and many years later, a copy of the Committee’s report was finally handed over to the Minister Thalatha Athukorale on January 24, 2018.
However, the report has not been officially made public to date.
The report has made several recommendations on several issues, including enhancing the status of Quazi courts and Quazis, reforming the Muslim Marriage and Divorce Advisory Board (MMDAB), the appointment of women as Quazis as well as registrars, assessors, counsellors and to the MMDAB, the registration of marriage, the age of marriage, polygamy, divorce and the appearance of attorneys-at-law for witnesses.
Groundviews has extensively covered the impact that the Muslim Marriage and Divorce Act has had on the community, particularly on women. These include personal testimonies of women, in collaboration with Maatram who described struggling to support their families on maintenance payments or being abandoned by former husbands. Several of these women also had to travel long distances for their cases to be heard – and some of their case documentation also went missing, forcing them to make multiple trips in order to receive redress.
It also notes the conflict and lack of consensus many members had in deliberating over the report.
A cursory reading indicates that among the recommendations made by the Committee are,
bringing marriage registration under the Marriage Registration Ordinance (albeit only as a last resort and if amending the MMDA Act in a way which remedies discriminatory provisions in a manner satisfactory to all parties fails),
to elevate and strengthen the Quazi system to the status of a court,
for Quazi members to be Muslim attorneys-at-law with sound knowledge of Muslim law, and with qualifications determined by the Judicial Services Commission.
Some issues were more contentious than others. Unanimity could not be reached on the appointment of female Quazis despite calls for more equal representation within the Quazi system. However, the Committee has recommended removing the word “male” from the relevant Sections in the Act which explicitly excluded women from being appointed to Quazi courts.
Other recommendations were on divorce and maintenance payments after divorce. With regards to maintenance payments, the Committee recommended that the burden of proof on monthly income fall on the part of the husband, and that several factors be considered when calculating these payments – including the socio-economic status and educational attainments of the wife, the duration of the marriage, and the availability of other means of support for the wife. The Committee also had recommendations to allow for khula divorce – without a husband’s consent, where the wife had an ‘incurable aversion’ to her husband.
It also recommends that marriage registration be a pre-condition to the validity of a marriage – given that many child marriages and polygamous marriages remain unregistered. There were special recommendations to prevent the abuse of polygamy, and ensure that such marriages allow for equal treatment and adequate financial support. Another recommendation was around the official consent and signature of the bride on the marriage certificate.
Groundviews has redacted several sections of the report containing personally identifying information, including affidavits, personal testimonies, email addresses and birth certificates. We do not believe these redactions take away from the substantive parts of the report and its recommendations.
And party reorganisations would not muster people’s support
The UNP and the SLFP are also struggling with their internal problems compelling the leaders of the two parties to dedicate most of their time to sort out those issues
It is not clear whether the Cabinet reshuffle and the UNP reorganisation would serve the purpose of the leaders of the government and the UNP
This week saw another Cabinet reshuffle which was the fourth of the sort for the past three years after the present so-called Yahapalana government assumed office and the third this year. Government ministers told the media before the new ministers were sworn in that this would be a scientific Cabinet and President Maithripala Sirisena also claimed on Monday that what he has appointed was a scientific Cabinet.
2018-05-04
However, this is not a scientific Cabinet as many subjects that should have come under one ministry have been assigned to various ministries. Besides, there cannot be a scientific Cabinet under a so-called National Government as subjects that should be under one ministry gets scattered under several ministries when the number of ministries are increased in order to form the “National Government.”
National governments are meant to face national crises or to implement special programmes under special circumstances and political parties are expected to sacrifice towards this end. Yet under the 19th Amendment to the Constitution political parties can be bribed with portfolios in order to form National Governments, since the expected national governments are not only ones instituted to implement such national programmes or to face such national crises, rather they are also formed just because no party has the absolute majority power in the Parliament to form the government alone.
The Cabinet was not rearranged this time because of the need to institute it on a scientific basis. It was carried out purely as an attempt to continue the so-called unity government which was on the brink of collapse after the no-confidence motion presented by the Joint Opposition last month against Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe.
Nevertheless, it is not clear that this would be the last Cabinet reshuffle in this year as there seem to be members of the ruling coalition, especially in the United National Party (UNP) who are not satisfied with the current allocation of portfolios. It is also a well-known fact that the UNP wants former minister Ravi Karunanayake to be absorbed into the Cabinet, despite the Presidential Commission on the Central Bank bond scam having recommended to take legal action against him. It is said that it was President Maithripala Sirisena who dismissed the UNP’s overture.
This is not a scientific Cabinet as many subjects that should have come under one ministry have been assigned to various ministries
Meanwhile, the two main political parties of the government, the UNP and the Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP) are also struggling with their internal problems compelling the leaders of the two parties to dedicate most of their time to sort out those issues. The UNP is now fresh from a party reorganization process where number of top posts except for the posts of Leader, Deputy Leader and Assistant Leader of the party have been changed. However, it is not clear whether there is a change in the decision making powers of the new office bearers.
The decision for the reorganisaton of the UNP was also not taken collectively by the party hierarchy to face the current political challenges, rather it was a direct upshot of the outcry by some leading members of the party against the leadership following the party’s humiliating defeat at the February 10 local government elections. State Minister Palitha Range Bandara was one openly challenging the party leader and Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe claiming that he would bring in a no-confidence motion against the latter. Deputy Minister Ranjan Ramanayake had stated several times that he wished to see a change in the party leadership. Deputy Minister Eran Wickramarathna opines that all office bearers including the party leader be appointed by vote.
In the wake of the defeat of the two ruling parties at the local council elections Mr. Wickremesinghe responding to the journalists who questioned him about the agitations within the party at a media briefing told that a collective leadership would be formed in the near future. Accordingly, a politburo was appointed apparently to bring in changes in the top posts in the party. However, the politburo was not the top most body of the party as the ones in the leftist parties or not empowered to take final decisions on the party reorganisation.
The politburo had recommended some changes in the top positions of the party and they were ratified by the party’s Working Committee before being implemented. Thus, former General Secretary Kabir Hashim was appointed new Chairman while Education Minister Akila Viraj Kariyawasam being appointed in his former place and Sajith Premadasa and Ravi Karunanayake were reappointed as Deputy Leader and Assistant Leader respectively.
Leaders of the government and the UNP do not have the most important tool, a coherent economic programme to muster the support of the masses
This was not the first time Mr. Wickremesinghe had to come upon rebellions from within his party. Since 2001 several times his leadership was challenged and every time party’s election defeats were cited as reasons behind the agitations. There were two such major revolts in 2001 and 2014 and interestingly the party in both times succeeded in major elections instituting its rule over the country and putting an end to the revolts within months.
In 2001, it was party General Secretary Gamini Athukorale and former Speaker W.J.M. Lokubandara were in the forefront against Mr. Wickremesinghe. There was a failed attempt to oust him while he was in Norway in July 2001. The rebels then wanted to appoint Karu Jayasuriya as the leader. Then in 2010 Sajith Premadasa challenged Wickremsnghe’s leadership and the row lasted till 2014 when Mr. Wickremesinghe appointed a leadership council in order to pacify his adversaries within the party. Though it was not up to the satisfaction of the rebels, the premature Presidential election announced by former President Mahinda Rajapaksa saved the day for Wickremesinghe.
In fact, after the defeat of the UNP at the Presidential as well as the General Election in 1994 following its 17 year rule, the party failed to install a stable government, despite it being voted into power twice. And except for the 2001 Parliamentary election the party had been repeatedly unsuccessful in all national, provincial and local elections.
In spite of the UNP having won the 2001 December General Election its administration came to an abrupt end just in two years and two months when President Chandrika Kumaratunga dissolved the Parliament on February 7, 2004 at the instance of the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna over differences on the peace talks between the government and the LTTE. And this time within three years into its administration the party as well as its government have run into storms threatening the survival of its leadership and the government.
It is not clear whether the Cabinet reshuffle and the UNP reorganisation would serve the purpose of the leaders of the government and the UNP. The professed purpose of them are to win over the people before the next Presidential and General Election. However, leaders of the government and the UNP lack the most important tool, a coherent economic programme to muster the support of the masses.
(Lanka-e-News - 03.May.2018, 11.30PM) The two officers who were nabbed while collecting a bribe of Rs. 20 million at the Colombo Taj Samudra hotel this evening are most close cronies of president Pallewatte Gamarala , and this criminal transaction has taken place with the aiding and abetting of the president himself , based on reports reaching Lanka e news.
The two culprits are : none other than Dr. I.H.K Mahanama the chief of staff of the president and Piyadasa Dissanayake the chairman of state Timber Corporation which is under president Pallewatte Gamarala.
Mahanama formerly was the permanent secretary of Lands ministry where he earned the inglorious distinction as a massive bribe taker. About two months ago he went on retirement. Unbelievably the president Gamarala himself gave this rascal an extension despite his notoriety and putrid antecedence to appoint him as his chief of staff . Gamarala thereafter said , he has taken into his fold the best officer ( best because he serves him best in the crooked activities)
Mahanama and Dissanayake have collected the bribe promising they would obtain the necessary cabinet approval through president Gamarala to entrust the Kantalai sugar factory to an Indian businessman. They have demanded a sum of Rs. 540 million as the bribe to be paid to the president . However that sum was later reduced to Rs. 100 million . It is while they were collecting a sum of Rs. 20 million as an advance they were nabbed by the Bribery and Corruption commission officials this evening. When these two bosom pals of Gamarala were gleefully and blissfully counting the bribe a second time to make sure everything was properly collected their hands were held and arrested. Their ecstasy turned into agony instantly.
It is very evident that the president is involved in this illicit deal because the two officers cannot secure the cabinet approval , and that is possible by the president only. It is obvious officers do not stick their neck out this far and risk their high posts to reach out for this huge bribe unless they know they have a backing , and the loot has to be shared with the one who is backing . Hence it is very clear these two bosom pals of Gamarala have taken this bribe with Gamarala’s aiding and abetting. If president Gamarala has any sense of shame he should resign at once.
It is Lanka e news first with the news and best with the views which exposed earlier on the illicit commission collection deal for the first time of president Gamarala on the Russian warship purchase. It is again Lanka e news which stands by the truth and champions the cause of truth which exposed how Gamarala’s son in law who just had a photo studio became a multi millionaire , and about his billionaire lifestyle wearing clothes and wristlets worth millions of rupees while the people of the country are in abject poverty.
Gamarala who was provoked over these daring and truthful exposures being unable to defend himself banned the Lanka e news website within Sri Lanka unlawfully to conceal his rackets and perfidies.
In today’s criminal bribery transaction too Gamarala moved heaven and earth to suppress it , but because Lanka e news reported this incident first and foremost , his efforts proved futile.
The entire country should salute the bribery and Corruption commission officials for their bravery integrity , honesty and patriotic fervor. It is because of such true patriots , it became possible to nab the traitors irrespective of their position , influence and powerful presidential backing.
--------------------------- by (2018-05-03 20:33:49)
MAY 4, 2018
04
