Sri Lanka: 20A presents a logical and rational way out of the vicious political circus

So far the President has ignored the JVP’s 20th Amendment initiative to transform the executive presidential form of government into the old parliamentary-cabinet form of government.

by Rajan Philips- Jun 3, 2018

( June 3, 2018, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) President Sirisena once again stole his own political thunder last week with a headlines grabbing outburst while appearing uninvited at a commemoration event to mark the 76th birth anniversary of the late Sobitha Thera. The outburst and the news reports of it are remarkable for not what the President said at the meeting, but for what he failed to say. He gravely omitted to mention the SINGLE ISSUE for which Sobitha Thera launched a movement and even sacrificed his life, namely, the abolition of the executive presidency. Instead, the President used the occasion for pouring vitriolic sarcasm on the Prime Minister and grandstanding that the late Thera “never asked the common candidate to loot the Central Bank” as one daily reported.

The outburst was also full of outright lies – about the 100-day Programme, dissolving parliament etc., which have since been publicly repudiated for what they are by Lal Wijeynayake, well known Lawyer and LSSPer, and the UNP’s Kabir Hashim. Mr. Sirisena took credit for swearing in, in his first act as President in January 2015, Ranil Wickremesinghe as Prime Minister even though the UNP had only 47 MPs in parliament. What the President did not say is the fact that the SLFP/UPFA who had a near two-thirds majority did not challenge Ranil Wickremesinghe’s lack of majority in parliament to be Prime Minister, because the SLFP MPs accepted the meaning of the defeat of President Rajapaksa to be a defeat of the whole SLFP/UPFA government. The tragic-comic yahapalanaya story is that after three years in office, it was President Sirisena who unsuccessfully tried to get the SLFPers (split between the government and opposition) to vote against his own Prime Minister in a motion of no confidence in parliament.

The President flung another boomeranging bombshell at the commemoration event. He contended that anyone who is interested in knowing the truth about the investigation into what is now officially acknowledged as the murder of (Rugger Player) Wasim Thajudeen, should only ask the late Thajudeen’s family members or the Lawyers looking after their interests. Why so? If the President has knowledge of interference in police work and if he knows that the police are being prevented from exposing the suspects and filing charges against them, shouldn’t he put an end to these interferences and allow the police to complete their work. Is there someone else more powerful than the President who can overrule the President and stop the police and prosecutors from completing their investigation and prosecuting the accused in court? Hasn’t the family of Thajudeen been traumatized enough through the wild-goose-chase of an investigation, and shouldn’t they be at the least spared of public references from political platforms?

As for the SINGLE ISSUE that the President singularly omitted mentioning at the commemoration, where does the President stand after three years in office and less than two years remaining? So far the President has ignored the JVP’s 20th Amendment initiative to transform the executive presidential form of government into the old parliamentary-cabinet form of government. However, his two proxies, the SLFP in government and SLFP in the opposition, have indicated their dislike for the JVP’s initiative. Neither of the two SLFPs was with him (Sirisena) when he was riding the common candidate horse to victory in the 2015 presidential race. But the JVP was with him all the way punching well above its electoral weight to expose and discredit the Rajapaksa decadence. The civil society organizations, which were mentored by Sobitha Thera and which played a significant role in the election of Miathripala Sirisena as President, have all come out in support of the JVP’s 20th Amendment initiative.

Hence the question: on whose side is the President? Is he with those who got him elected to transform the executive presidency, or with the SLFPers who opposed his election and want to preserve the presidency? The truth of the matter is that if the President decides to support the 20th Amendment, which he must if he is sincere about honouring the legacy of Sobitha Thera, the SLFPers on either side of the parliamentary aisle will follow suit and support it themselves.

Where do the Prime Minister and the Rajapaksas stand?

We have not heard anything from the Prime Minister either on the 20th Amendment. But that has not stopped his detractors and the critics of the JVP’s initiative from alleging that Ranil Wickremesinghe is using the JVP as a proxy to advance his own constitutional agenda. I don’t think there is any truth in this, but by his on-again off-again approach to the constitutional file, like perhaps to every other file, the Prime Minister has been sending too many mixed signals. The government’s initiative on comprehensive constitutional changes is now dead in the water because of (a) lackadaisical government leadership so far; and (b) it would be virtually impossible to mobilize parliamentary consensus on a major comprehensive reform given the toxic divisions within the government and in the parliament. Even Lal Wijeynayake who spearheaded the public consultation process on constitutional reform, has conceded that it would be impossible to carry forward the government’s constitutional reform project and is now supporting the JVP’s limited proposals.

There is no assurance that the 20th Amendment will secure the required two-thirds majority in parliament. It certainly will not get the necessary votes without the joint support of both the Prime Minister and the President. The JVP is fully aware of this and may have hoped that the two leaders will wholeheartedly support their initiative. The UNP, at least its leader, would appear to be in two minds – whether to remove the elected presidency or to run in the next presidential election. No one can fathom what is on the President’s mind. As I have said earlier, Maithripala Sirisena could position himself to become the first unelected President and Head of State after the 20th Amendment, by using his current office to facilitate the passage of the amendment. If the President were to declare his support for the JVP’s initiative, the Prime Minister will have no option but extend his support as well.

The Joint Opposition and the SLPP would appear to be in multiple minds as well on the JVP’s initiative. First, Bandula Gunawardena let it be known that the JO/SLPP might support the 20th Amendment to transform the presidency if it also provided for the immediate dissolution of parliament and new parliamentary elections thereafter. Then Mr. Gunawardena was directed to take back his first statement. More recently, Udaya Gammanpila and Wimal Weerawansa have indicated that the Joint Opposition was not supportive of the JVP’s 20th Amendment because the next presidential election is the only election that the present government cannot postpone, unlike the provincial and even the parliamentary elections which are or could be mired in the transition between the proportional and mixed systems of election.

This is a curious argument, because on the one hand the JO seems to be letting the government off the hook on the timing of the provincial council elections. On the other hand, there is no question of postponing the parliamentary elections because there is no legislation in place to change the proportional system for parliamentary elections. In fact, that is one of the criticisms of the JVP’s initiative – that its 20th Amendment proposal does not address electoral reform. The real reason for the JO being caught in multiple minds on the 20th Amendment could be that there are too many Rajapaksas vying to be the next presidential candidate for the SLPP and the Joint Opposition.

In the order of seniority, the names of Chamal, Gotabhaya and Basil have all been bandied for good measure. But news reports yesterday quoted SLPP’s figurehead Chairman GL Peiris as saying that the SLPP was still in the process of identifying a candidate. “This whole issue has become a reactionary manoeuvre. There is still over a year before the next Presidential election, giving us ample time to decide on our candidate,” Peiris reportedly said. That certainly puts paid to the Viyath Maga vision of a smooth path to having Gotabhaya Rajapaksa nominated as candidate and elected as the next President, to usher in the new era of what might be called GR-economics in Sri Lanka – a queer hybrid of the Trump leadership model from America and the socialist market economy from China.

GL Peiris did not leave any doubt as to where the authority for deciding the SLPP candidate for the presidential election rests: “When the time is right, former President Mahinda Rajapaksa will inform us of who our Presidential candidate should be. Thus far, we have not considered anyone.” The SLPP is also toying with the possibility of a landslide parliamentary victory, a constitutional amendment to rescind the presidential term limits restored by the 19th Amendment, and Mahinda Rajapaksa contesting and winning a new presidential election to become President for a third time and more. The UNP has no headache of having to select from too many contenders, because Ranil Wickremesinghe has kept the field clear for him and him alone. Also, because he has no political siblings to contend with as do the Rajapaksas.

If you get my drift, what does all of the above mean for the country, other than a never ending circus? The JVP’s 20th Amendment presents a logical and rational way out of this vicious circus. Mahinda Rajapaksa, Ranil Wickremesinghe and Miathripala Sirsisena could do much good to the country and to their own legacies by endorsing the 20th Amendment and facilitating its passage. They could, but the chances are they won’t. Not unless the organizations that worked with Sobitha Thera reactivate themselves, and persuade the three leaders, one at a time for domino effect, to come together once and for all to transform the executive presidency which each one of them promised to abolish every time they went to the electorate. This might be dismissed as utopian thinking, but the alternative is to make dystopia inevitable.

 

SOBITHA THERA’S CAMPAIGN FOR DEMOCRACY AND FREEDOM

Maduluwawe Sobitha Thero was the architect and spiritual leader of the common opposition movement in 2015

by Maneshka Borham-3 June, 2018

Lal Wijenayake, former Chairman of the Public Representations Committee on a New Constitution and a close associate of the revered monk and spiritual leader of the January 8 movement, talks to the Sunday Observer about Sobitha Thera who gave leadership to a fledgling opposition campaign and explains how the Yahapalanaya Government’s ‘100 day program’ came to be

During a time of complete breakdown of democracy the late Ven. Maduluwawe Sobitha Thera strived to restore freedoms of the Sri Lankan people while focusing on abolishing the executive presidency, close associate of the late monk and civil society member, Lal Wijenayake told the Sunday Observer, this week

This week marked the 75th birth anniversary of Sobitha Thera, the architect and spiritual leader of the 2014 common opposition candidacy that precipitated the fall of the Rajapaksa regime and swept the Yahapalanaya coalition to power in 2015.

Commemorative events held in the monk’s memory this week resulted in a storm of controversy, after President Maithripala Sirisena attended an event at the Sri Lanka Foundation Institute and issued harsh criticism of the coalition government he leads, in his speech, even going so far as to disassociate himself from the 100 day program of the Yahapalanaya Administration which culminated in the enactment of the 19th Amendment.

Wijenayake, who worked with the revered priest in the run up to the January 2015 election and the early days of the reform program, told the Sunday Observer about Sobitha Thera’s hopes for the country, the drafting of the 100 day program and the country’s achievements in recent times, as he puts it, for the sake of political history and to place today’s political dynamics in the proper perspective. Wijenayake also served as Chairman of the Public Representations Committee on the new constitution in 2015.

Three years before the idea of a common candidate was born, to challenge the Rajapaksa regime, the first discussions began on the restoration of democracy in the country, which was facing a complete breakdown of the rule of law, Wijenayake says.

“People were afraid to express their views, the media was under heavy pressure. The white van culture meant that people lived in constant fear,” he explains.

The discussions, spearheaded by Sobitha Thera were poorly attended at first. Only 23 people attended the first day, says Wijenayake. But as time went by, news about the firebrand monk who was sparking new ideas about democratic change spread. Slowly, as the months wore on, more people joined the discussions. The monk’s ‘talks’ and lectures attracted retired civil servants, professionals, judges and lawyers, eventually drawing 49 civil society organizations into his fold.

“The group was always led by Sobitha Thera. The whole thing revolved around him,” Wijenayake recalls.

The focus of all the discussions was how the country was to be salvaged from its then destructive path, under the iron grip of the Rajapaksa administration. After several rounds of talks, the group slowly concluded that the all-powerful executive presidency was at the root of the problem, and the epicenter of corruption and abuse of power. Since it was established in 1978, the executive presidency has been seen as the root of all evil in the political system. Every President elected to office turned out to be worse than his or her predecessor. Under Mahinda Rajapaksa, the presidency had been weaponised to a whole new level, resulting in excess, corruption and brutality that was rotting the entire political system.

The path to achieving democratic transformation then, lay in taking arms against the executive presidency, the monk concluded.

The first phase of this project was to attempt to convince then President Rajapaksa to abolish the presidency and revert to the parliamentary system, where executive power lay with the Cabinet of Ministers headed by a Prime Minister.

If Rajapaksa disagreed, the group decided the only choice was to field a common candidate who would then take the fight to the incumbent regime, and campaign on the restoration of democracy and national reconciliation. Predictably, Rajapaksa refused the monk’s proposition.

And thus began Sobitha Thera’s search for a common opposition candidate to contest against Rajapaksa. Months and months later, following political manoeuverings and negotiations worthy of a James Bond thriller, Mahinda Rajapaksa’s Health Minister stepped out of his Cabinet and joined the opposition, to contest as the common opposition candidate in the 2015 election – and the rest as they say, is history.

It was after President Sirisena joined their ranks, that the group began formulating the ‘100 day program’, together with other civil society groups and political parties and factions.

Through bitter experience, Sobitha Thera had no faith in politicians, says Wijenayake. “He knew that any politician might promise reforms on election campaigns, but may not follow through,” the former PRC Chairman explains, since this had happened many times before.

The irony of Sri Lanka’s executive presidency is that every aspirant to the office campaigns on a platform to abolish it; but eventually, the allure of power defeats the agenda.

“The ‘100 day program’ was aimed at ensuring the campaign promises were fulfilled immediately,” Wijenayake explains, leaving little wiggle room for politicians to sway by insisting on changes in the first heady days of political victory.

The ‘100 day program’ was not the brainchild of a single person, he says, but a collective effort, involving various public figures. Everyone in the common candidacy movement agreed that the five year tenure to implement reforms was unacceptable. “In fact, I first suggested during these discussions that the first 180 days was optimal to demand the government starts working towards fulfilling the expectation of civil society groups and others who backed the opposition project. The idea was that a large number of democratic and constitutional reforms would be undertaken in the first months of a new administration to avoid political wavering.

“The key promise was that the common candidate would bring in constitutional amendments to do away with the Presidential system and revert back to the parliamentary system of government which was in place from 1947 – 1977,” he said. The group decided that this reform would be non-negotiable.

However, the 180 days suggested previously was reduced to 100 as it was revealed during negotiations that parliamentary elections will have to be held prior to that. With a referendum also not being possible during the time to seek the public’s opinion on abolishing the executive presidential system, it was decided that the common candidate within the first 100 days slash the powers of the presidency, which would not require a referendum. Abolishing the presidency would happen subsequently under a new Parliament.

The 100 days were then divided into weeks, setting out various tasks for the new Government in order to reduce the burden on the people and especially, to ensure the democratisation process.

“This plan which was a collective effort of all civil society groups was then presented to the common candidate” he says. The culmination of what Sobitha Thera hoped for, came when the document which contained the essence of the 100 day program was signed on December 1, 2014 between the common candidate, Sobitha Thera and the other groups who helped to draft it in the manifesto.
“On every election platform thereafter, this was the message of the opposition campaign, that the Government that defeats Rajapaksa would fulfil key campaign promises in the first 100 days of its tenure,” says Wijenayake.

After President Sirisena won the elections, a Council was established which met weekly at the Presidential Secretariat in the first 100 days. President Sirisena attended the meetings, while Prime Minister Wickremesinghe was also present whenever possible. The discussion was about implementation of the 100 day program.

Three years later, the executive presidency, albeit with powers weakened significantly remains in place. Hopes of major constitutional reform are also dimming in the face of crisis upon crisis within the ruling coalition which swept to power on a platform of hope and change.

Still, Wijenayake notes, the reform achievements of this Government should not be understated.

Democracy has been restored and some changes in the body politic, particularly, those that happened through the enactment of the 19th Amendment – the Yahapalanaya Government’s landmark legislation – were ‘tremendous’, Wijenayake insists. These changes were only possible because of Sobitha Thera’s vision and leadership, he says.

“No one is scared today even to criticise the President and the Prime Minister. There are no more enforced disappearances,” the former PRC Chairman explains. He acknowledges that grievances with the Government remain and all that was set out to be achieved has not happened.

“Still, the people are free.”

A Nation Led By Petty & Corrupt Ruling Comics!

By Mohamed Harees –JUNE 2, 2018

Lukman Harees

Every nation gets the government it deserves- Joseph de Maistre

What Ayn Rand said in “Atlas Shrugged” succinctly captures what most Sri Lankans feel about their country, – a blessed land with great religious traditions, which history referred to in many flowering terms like the Pearl of the Indian, and Granary of the East, but sadly bastardized and polluted by a corrupt and a petty political class, specially in the Post-Independence era. She said “When you see that in order to produce, you need to obtain permission from men who produce nothing; when you see that money is flowing to those who deal not in goods, but in favors; when you see that men get rich more easily by graft than by work, and your laws no longer protect you against them, but protect them against you. . . you may know that your society is doomed”. Judging by the recent developments in the Post-War period and the petty squabbles within the ranks of the government these days and the re-emergence of the ghosts from the MR era , signs are clear that Sri Lanka is on the way to sure doom if  the intellectuals do not step in now and stem the rot. Actress Anoja Weerasinghe aptly captured the commoners’ feelings about this cursed ruling lot, in a recent  TV interview.                                      

Every Sri Lankan who would have watched the elected Head of State Sirisena ( satirically referred to as Gamaraala) addressing the Commemoration ceremony of the late iconic monk Ven Sobitha Thero day ag , would have felt sick to the bones about the sad state of affairs prevailing in the country; seven decades after Sri Lanka got independence from British colonial rule. It was comical and a political entertainment to say the least; what he did and uttered were unbecoming of his position. Firstly, he says he did not receive an invitation to the event and therefore ‘gate-crashes’ and shamelessly bemoans that this is how he is being treated always and is being kept in the dark. Secondly, H.E  goes on a tirade and delivers a fiery speech much in bad taste letting out his emotions endlessly apparently blaming his ‘other’- PM and his party for his inability to deliver goods to the country. Both reflect that he is indeed a puppet Head of State, little realizing that he is in fact the executive President of the country. He would have felt it imperative that he use this opportunity to play defence strokes when there is a general feeling and perception in the country that he is both a misfit with his credibility at an all-time low and walking the talk has not been his forte, judging by his dismal record of governance, being more interested in the SLFP than the country. He took particular umbrage in his speech at those who tried to blame him for his inaction against the corrupt by comparing him with the track record of the weeks old Malaysia’s Mahathir Mohamed government, which was also elected on a similar platform against a filthily corrupt Najib regime. 

During this speech , in the presence of a representative gathering including the Speaker, he began to wash dirty linen in style, not realizing that he was cutting his nose to spite his face.  In a stroke of ‘ I am holier than thou’, he indicated how he, along with SLFP ministers was able to take up  ‘bold’ positions within a UNP dominated cabinet , for example to save the state banks by overruling the decisions of the UNP to move funds to private banks. In the same breath, he also showed his impotence by repeatedly stating that he was not made aware of vital decisions, for example the decision to provide helicopters to MR after his defeat, to return to Hambantota, regarding which he was not consulted (He apparently forgot the fact that he stated on 09/04/2016 in a speech that it was he, who did so!!. Therefore he either lied or  has been infected with  the ‘Duminda’ syndrome). He also disowned any involvement in drafting the ‘100 day program’ as well. Coming from the common opposition candidate, people will wonder whether to laugh or to cry!.  Ironically, one of my CT articles which appeared before the decisive January 2015 election was titled, “Can Maithri Be An ‘Attlee’ In The Making?” (who came to power defeating  the war veteran PM Churchill); in retrospect, it was a misnomer indeed! 

On the other hand, UNP Stalwart Ajith Perera takes the floor of the House to blast the SLFP partner for all the inefficiencies of the government, citing the ‘Samurdhi program’ as an anti-government project hell-bent on making the UNP dominant government unpopular among the  masses. He charged SLFP ministers of mala-fide and hypocrisy.  He, in a very emotional tone  tried to convince the electorate that this so-called Yahapalana slogan was well-intentioned at the start of the journey; but he bellowed that all plans fell apart due to the half-hearted, uncommitted and hypocritical SLFP/UPFA partners. Although there was some truth in the statement , however, it was common public perception that the efficiency of most  Ministers, in this Jumbo stuffed ‘scientific’ cabinet, was questionable.( we have a minister who think that floods will help the development process).  PM Ranil, with his dictatorial and aristocratic attitudes proved himself to be a Colombo based leader with a top down approach, widely accused of being ignorant of village level realities offering WiFi to village peasants. He rules with an iron fist with his Royal College boy buddies. What he promised in terms of reorganization of the UNP hierarchy just fell by the wayside, limiting them to mere cosmetic changes. Of course, there was more space for freedom of expression compared to the MR times; but there is no proper process in place to deal with dissent ; in short there is organized chaos. Further, this government does not appear to learn lessons from the past in improving the quality of its’ governance and only keeps on justifying their lapses by stating that it is better than the last government in terms of degree and not quality. They fail to realize that it was because of lapses in the MR government that they were elected in the first place.  

Pointedly,  the Yahapalana promises to deal strongly with corruption and racism were observed more in the breach; many cases involving questionable corrupt deals of the previous government and the MR family circles being still pending. The worst scam under this government started off  early in their journey :the infamous Central Bank and still it is licking its’ wounds with many more skeletons in the cupboard emerging at different times. Even the action taken to alleviate the feelings of marginalisation of the minorities were too little with Tamils still feeling alienated and LLRC recommendations too being put in the back burner despite big talk during the initial stages. Even the action taken to stop anti-Muslim violence from Gintota to Digana were considered too little and too late, although this government  may argue( as it  always does) that their track record of arresting the culprits subsequently was better  than the former; so the argument is along the degree of response! Further, treating the symptoms rather than the underlying causes( which is institutionalization of racism in statecraft and use of racism as a political tool) will only sweep the issues under the carpet.    

The country saw another bout of mud-slinging too between the two partners in government when the No-Confidence Motion against the PM was taken up in Parliament. Little did both parties realize that this series of  mudslinging matches and washing dirty linen in public virtually made both of them get drenched in mud, consequently becoming the laughing stock of the nation as well as the world at large. Besides, the nation feels that there is no proper government in charge and is made to wonder where this insanity will lead it to? Reminds of times when CBK and Ranil locked horns! Hope it is still not a point of no return!     

Read More

Why is president lying after reading every clause of 100 days program prior ? Shocked spokesman for movement for Just Society asks

(Lanka-e-News – 02.June.2018, 11.00PM) At the recent death commemoration of late most Ven. Sobitha Thera ,President Pallewatte Gamarala said , he does not know who prepared the 100 days program , and it was a foolish move. 

In this connection, a spokesman for the movement for just society speaking to Lanka e News questioned , then why on earth did this president Gamarala at that time at the Viharamaha  Devi park read every clause after clause in that proposal and held discussions with the party leaders for hours before signing that to give approval ?

These comments were made by the spokesman when we inquired from him about his views regarding  the reckless , rudderless, senseless speech of Gamarala at the commemoration ceremony.

Leading lawyers and  politicians  in order to   form a movement for just society  with a common aim to select a common candidate  had discussions for two years  with Lanka e News which contributed immensely to whip up a  main opposition sentiment  in this direction , together  with every political party , every civil organization , and even organizations operating abroad  .

The members of the  campaign for just society even travelled as far as to London ,  distance notwithstanding , on two occasions to hold final discussions with Lanka e News.

At that time the draft of the 100 days program was prepared headed by  most Ven. Sobitha Thera along along with a large  group which included political parties , civil organizations , the intelligentsia , University lecturers  and  lawyers who were associated with this effort  . It was therefore not the product of  a single individual . That was finally compiled in writing after all the groups arrived at a consensus ,by Dr. Nirmal Ranjith.

In Ranjith’s first compilation it was stipulated that the executive presidency shall be abolished within 180 days, but the  UNP proposed that the period shall be 100 days since 180 days is too long.

It was the proposal of the UNP after whatever are implemented of the 100 days program, the parliament shall be dissolved as early as possible. However nobody proposed that the parliament shall be dissolved on the night of the day  following the common candidate becoming president . All the parties and organizations as well as Ven .Sobitha Thera then agreed that the executive presidency shall be abolished through the existing parliament .

Subsequently , Gamaralalage Maithripala Yapa Sirisena left Mahinda’s  government to field  as a common candidate .The document that was prepared by Dr. Ranjith was distributed by Ven. Sobitha Thera among all political leaders after summoning them . The contents of the document were carefully read clause by clause and discussed on that occasion.  

All party leaders including Ranil , Chandrika and Sajith participated in  this meeting. It was only Sajith who proposed that farmers and villagers of low income should  be provided with basic relief, and  that must be incorporated in the program .

Gamarala however made no proposals ,and agreed in toto without  raising any objection  to any of the clauses.  It was that document – the people’s agreement which was later signed by all the forces including the party leaders at Vihara Maha Devi park.

That was how  the 100 days program with election promises was launched during the presidential elections.

In the circumstances , President Gamarala recently at the Foundation Institute  most brazenly saying he does not know who founded the 100 days program , and that was a foolish move ,is most deplorable and despicable , let alone a gross betrayal , the Just society movement spokesman further pointed out. After holding discussions with the chiefs of the organization  , an answer shall be furnished to the president , the spokesman  said further.

The full text of the  speech made by president Gamarala at the commemoration ceremony of  late most Ven. Sobitha Thera can be viewed hereunder.

---------------------------
by     (2018-06-02 20:19:35)

Why can’t politicians work together for country’s good?

 JUN 01 2018

This editorial is written on behalf of the common man of Sri Lanka who is trying to make sense of the recent speech by President Maithripala Sirisena during the 76th birth anniversary of Ven. Maduluwawe Sobhitha Thera on Wednesday (30).
Several media outlets have focused on various aspects of his speech, but the bottom-line was that he was critical of various actions of his own Government.

He spoke of the Central Bank Bonds scam and of the 100-day programme among many things. He even went on to state that he was unaware who had drafted the 100-day programme, which was introduced soon after he was elected President in 2015. He did not spare the United National Party (UNP) which is the majority component of the Coalition Government as well.

Yes, there are serious drawbacks in the Government and the public is aware of it. What the public would not have expected is for the President to point fingers at his own Government. One could say that he was accusing the UNP for the issues within the Government.

Even though he is accusing the UNP, he is the Head of the Government and he should take full responsibility for the actions, and the inactions of the Government.
The common man expects a President to be confident, fearless and one who listens to the public and addresses the issues within the Government. Not a President who comes to a public platform, loses his cool, and confuses the public already befuddled by a Government that looks and sounds lost.

What the President might not understand is the fact that his criticism of his own Government would not paint a good picture, especially, among the international community.
Over the past three years this Government has been notorious for confusing the masses by contradicting and retracting statements and decisions.

Wednesday’s speech by the President not only implies, but also worsens the already existing political crisis. What makes it worse is the fact that the President made these scathing remarks on a platform to which he was not invited for.
Those who once backed him to be President are slowly moving away because of the current confusing and volatile situation.

Did the President really have to do this at this time? Is this the right time for him to make such a speech which sheds bad light not only on him, but the entire country?
Ever since the Government came into power it had been accused of lacking clear policies pertaining to key aspects such as the economy.

Economic experts pointed out that Sri Lanka had lost many investment opportunities due to lack of clear vision. The contradictions and confusions within the National Government did play a key role in Sri Lanka losing out on such opportunities.

We need a President who takes the blame for the blunders of the Government.
For the common man it does not matter whether it is Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP) or the UNP which runs the Government. All politicians claim that the people come first. If that is so, why is it hard for politicians to work together for the good of the country?
If they could all work together to win the elections, why can’t they work together to take the country forward?

President deals a knuckle punch to PM

ECONOMYNEXT --June 2, 2018, 8:33 pm 

President Maithripala Sirisena launched his most ferocious attack against the Prime Minister last week when he challenged his senior coalition partner to debate failures of their three-and-a-half-year-old administration.

An emotional Sirisena lambasted Ranil Wickremesinghe accusing him of making concessions to former president Mahinda Rajapaksa and delaying prosecutions of corrupt members of the former regime.

He was speaking at a ceremony at the Sri Lanka Foundation Institute to commemorate venerable Maaduluwawe Sobitha, an architect of the movement that propelled Sirisena to power in January 2015. Sirisena said he had not been invited for the event, but he was gate crashing anyway. However, the organisers said they had invited the President not once, but thrice and invitations had been hand delivered.

The President discounted allegations that troubles in the administration started when he attempted to take the leadership of the Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP) after quitting it in late 2014 to contest the 2015 presidential election as a common opposition candidate.

Several United National Party (UNP) stalwarts have said that Sirisena’s bid to seize the SLFP leadership triggered tensions within the fragile coalition and caused fissures which have now come out into the open.

"There are people who are trying to make out that it is I who obstruct the prosecution of corrupt members of the former regime. If you want to know the truth, ask the relatives of Wasim Thajudeen and their lawyers," Sirisena said.

Through innuendo he suggested that Wickremesinghe had cut deals with the Rajapaksas and were protecting the corrupt.

He said he had telephoned the air force chief on Wednesday morning to ask who ordered the release of helicopters for former president Rajapaksa to travel to Tangalle soon after his defeat in January 2015.

"I was told that the then Air Force commander had been told that I wanted helicopters given, but they didn’t even inform me about such a thing," he said suggesting that it was done by Wickremesinghe.

However, in 2016 Sirisena had publicly declared that it was he who granted two helicopters for the outgoing president and his family to travel to Tangalle.  Videos of President Sirisena’s 2016 speech were juxtaposed with his latest outburst and spread over social media sites such as facebook and twitter.  

 Sirisena said this week that he was also unaware of the 100-day program unveiled by the UNP-led government soon after his election.

"What they should have done was ask for parliamentary elections the day after my victory," Sirisena said. "They did not do that."

However, UNP officials noted that it was Sirisena who had wanted to delay parliamentary elections till he took control of the SLFP, but Premier Wickremesinghe had told his party seniors not to engage in a public debate with the President. Hence, there was no official reaction from the UNP to the President’s unusual outburst.

The President threw an open challenge to any UNP leader to publicly debate with him about the failures of the current administration.

He said when the late Sobitha thera organised a civil society movement to end the corrupt rule of the Rajapaksas, he did not ask the new government to "break the central bank." The President hinted that the UNP was responsible for looting the central bank.

He said the UNP government had also attempted to sell off state banks and it was he who stopped it.

BREAKING FAST AND MENDING THE PAST

Sunday, 03 June 2018

“The question whether objective truth can be attributed to human thinking is not a question of theory but is a practical question. Man must prove the truth, i.e., the reality and power, the worldliness of his thinking in practice. The dispute over the reality or non-reality of thinking which is isolated from practice is a purely scholastic question.”

Karl Marx -Theses on Feuerbach 1845

Gotabaya Rajapaksa may or may not have read Karl Marx. But he is certainly proving that Marx is right about power and the reality of power.

He is in a quest for power. The people in general have a pretty good idea of how he would use power, if he gets it and when he gets it.

The Muslims gathered for an Iftar event at Beruwela, last week, encountered firsthand, what Karl Marx meant in stressing that Man must prove the truth- the worldliness of his thinking and practice –relating power to reality.

The Beruwela event demonstrates that Gotabaya Rajapaksa is not only as clever as the devil but is twice as pretty. Just as he reached out to the merchant princes at the Shangri-La, he has now made a convincing overture to the Muslim middle class. The intent was to repair and restore his ties with the Muslim community, disastrously ruptured by his early open and later clandestine support for extreme groups such as, Bodu Bala Sena and Ravana Battalion.

The immediate goal was to allay any lingering Muslim apprehensions over his Presidential bid. Beruwela was a masterpiece of political ice-breaking.

If progress is getting nearer to the place you wish to be in, we must be unidealistic and hardheaded enough to concede that he is making progress. Knowing why he makes progress this fast and at this speed early enough may help us avert the catastrophe of a Gotabaya Rajapaksa presidency. It looks as if his best allies are in the current Government.

A video recording of Presidential aspirant Gotabaya Rajapaksa ushered to a grand ‘Iftar’ function at Beruwela has gone viral. Pundits who poo-poohed his candidacy on the premise of his ill-favoured repute among Muslims are thunderstruck and stupefied. The sight of a saintly Gotabaya daintily keeping step with white robed Mullahs chanting panegyric poems in praise of the Prophet was enough for the eyeballs of his detractors to pop out of their crevices. The pundits are still busy adjusting their dumbstruck eyeballs.

The Beruwela occasion has sent an unambiguous, perspicuous message to both Prime Minster Ranil Wickremesinghe and President Maithripala Sirisena. Their parade is pattering to its presaged expiry. The Muslim minority is not to be taken for granted.

How did he manage the feat? The élan with which he pulled off the electrifying encounter attests to the man’s managerial nimbleness. Gotabaya Rajapaksa is the ultimate repository and authority on conceptual power. He is the kind of man about whom Antonio Gramsci wrote profusely while incarcerated by Benito Mussolini. He is the master of the art of manufacturing coerced consent.
More than a billion Muslims of the world observe the blessed month of Ramadan. It is the month when the Quran was revealed to the Prophet Muhammad. During daylight hours, it’s a month of fasting, no food and even water. It is a process of purification and the month devoted to reflection, both spiritual and material. After sunset the fast is broken.

This writer asked an eminent Muslim academic and an Islamic scholar to explain the meaning of Iftar. Is it a custom or a ritual? He responded “Iftar is neither a ritual nor a custom. You break the fast in the evening preferably with a couple of dates and porridge. Iftar is no more than an Arabic name for breaking fast.”

Today, Iftar has become a high profile social event for the Muslim middle class. This is not a study of the evolution of Muslim middle class social behaviour. This is an attempt to understand how the current Government in the short span of three years has admirably succeeded in alienating core omponents of the coalition that made January 8, 2015 change possible.

Beruwela is a place of ineradicable remembrances with excruciating echoes. To the hosts, they remain gut wrenching recalls. Their honoured guest made no direct reference to the traumatic past. He exuded the bonhomie of a Baron Munchausen.

“Muslims were grossly misled during the Rajapaksa Government. Many elements connived in creating distrust and doubt between Muslims and the Rajapaksas. Now they know better. Muslims have now realised that the rumours spread in the past were absolutely false. Muslims could live in peace and harmony under a future Rajapaksa-led Government.”

So, in the former Defence Secretary’s interpretation, it is the Muslims who have been misled. The Muslims have been the victims of mischief-makers who wished to drive a wedge between them and the Rajapsaksa-led Government.

There is no expression of remorse. Only a matter of making the record clear and erasing misconceptions. The Muslim middle class will buy his proposition because it is a proposition they cannot refuse.

In a velvet voice, he narrated his story. It was clever and imaginative. That it defied logic and common sense is not relevant. The audience was ready to listen. In human history, story-telling has always been a profound tool that allowed both the narrator and the listener to capture and live in illusions. The affair was arranged by a Muslim politician in the ‘Pohottuwa’ party. While the organiser had his own agenda, the participants were certainly in a mood for adjustments and reconciliation.

Gotabaya Rajapaksa argued in Beruwela that the Rajapaksa regime had always been committed to the safety and wellbeing of the Muslim people. When he was handling urban development, he rendered untold assistance to them. Today, the Muslims have realised that they were misled by conspirators and schemers whose only purpose was to alienate them from the then ruling family.

He had a receptive audience. Violence unleashed by ethno religious prejudices in the Central and Eastern Provinces has severely dented minority confidence in the current administration. Indecisive governance usually provokes a yearning for non-democratic forms of authority. Amid the chaos in Kandy and Ampara, the Muslim middle classes in affluent Beruwela have found non-democratic authority not only tolerable but as a desirable alternative. Antonio Gramsci – the seminal Marxist thinker who focused on culture, while incarcerated by the fascist regime of Mussolini has beautifully described how we humans often unwittingly give our consent to be oppressed. When we perceive power as the capacity to instil fear, we become willing collaborators in the game of top down authority.

The Gramsci thesis can be echoed in terms of present day compulsions. People are not routinely forced to submit. Instead, powerful actors with the right resources can manufacture consent. Caught in their grip people forgo their right and forfeit their ability to question. Then they turn into willing collaborators of their own subordination.

That is the totality of the ‘Iftar’ spectacle at Beruwela. 

WORLD: A short comment on Sri Lanka Guardian and its Editor Nilantha Ilangamuwa’s campaign against the AHRC:

By Basil Fernando-June 1, 2018

The story is told in an allegorical form so as to make all the substantial issues clear.

Mr. Nyeahu Nyeahu is a very dangerous enemy that one may be unfortunate enough to have.

He may also be a very dangerous person to deal with if you happen to be in a position where you are forced to decisions against his wrongdoings.

Let’s say, if you happen to be his boss. One day, you are obliged to take actions against him by way of dismissing him from his job.

After that, he can try to make your life very miserable indeed. First of all, he will begin to make false and substance-less allegations against you and send it around with the easy use of modern communication technology, particularly by the emails.

This Mr. Nyeahu Nyeahu knows that the art of having some impact is not merely to circulate some false allegations. The strength of his effort lays in REPETITION OF THE SAME SLANDER OVER AND OVER AGAIN, day after day, weeks after weeks, months after months.

The normal response to the initial receipt of these allegations for the receiver is to ignore them unless there is any substantial allegation in which case the receiver is obliged to inquire from their original contacts by asking for explanations. If the explanation are convincing enough then the matter is closed.

However, Mr. Nyeahu Nyeahu, by the use of method of repetition, ensures that there is no closure. One more of Mr. Nyeahu Nyeahu’s tactics is not merely to send these slanderous material to persons directly concerned but to everyone possible. Suppose, in an organization one person is in charge of dealing with a particular organization; then Mr. Nyeahu Nyeahu would not send his slanderous emails to that person alone but to everyone engaged in the administration from the managing directors to auditors and to everyone else; howsoever long the list may be.

The importance of the last limb of his tactics mentioned above is that most persons will not know the organization that is being slandered against, they may not have even heard about it. As usual, each one may ignore it initially. But then, due to the repeated circulation of the slanderous material, the issue is made into an institutional issue as people usually do- it becomes part of the gossip.

The slanderous material is not only sent within the institution but to the relevant branches of the government- especially the agencies that approve the funds. At the beginning, they may just refer it back to their partners but after a long period of repetition, they may ask why have these people not done something about it.

The aim of this method of repetition is to drag the slander to a point where people may impatiently ask why is this criticism ignored and why is this matter not being settled finally.
Mr. Nyeahu Nyeahu knows that this stage will come one time or the other and all that he has got to do is to do the easy work of just repeating what he has sent by the easy use of modern communication facilities.

And initially a lie created purely from the imagination of Mr. Nyeahu Nyeahu, by way of repeated republishing, becomes an issue of great importance that requires a resolution. THIS IS THE WAY A LIE ACQUIRES AN APPEARANCE OF BEING A POSSIBLE TRUTH. 

Mr. Nyeahu Nyeahu did not invent this methodology. This has been used for centuries, the only difference is that in modern times the power of the communication system is so vast and easy to use and thus this kind of activity can be carried out without much effort.

In political propaganda, particularly at the lowest levels, this methodology is often made use of. This is particularly true in developing countries with weak rule of law systems.

Culture and methodology of repetition:

In more developed cultures, a refinement takes place about the manner in which truth is arrived at. On hearing allegations or anything else for that matter the mind will raise the issue whether this could be true or not. Purely by following logical process it is possible to distinguish truth from falsehood. However, where cultures have not gone through that development any and everything is news howsoever true or fake. And this is why in lesser developed cultures this kind of methodology used by Mr. Nyeahu Nyeahu is more prevalent.

When developed country readers are confronted with false information arising from a less developed culture:

A person who grows in the less developed culture from the point of view of emphasis on truth and falsehood is suspicious about everything he comes to know or hear. S/He suspects every information as probably false unless strongly proven otherwise he or she will ignore or be sometimes amused by this kind of silly propaganda.

However, a developed country reader expects the news he hears to be true or nearly true. This is where often conflicts begin when a developed country reader unable to distinguish a vulgar propaganda, a falsehood arising from a backward culture from kind of news that prevail in his own contexts. This cultural gap and conflict is what people like Mr. Nyeahu Nyeahu try to take advantage of.

Part 2.

Now let’s try to compare the above model that people like Mr. Nyeahu Nyeahu rely upon to our real story we faced with the AHRC. The stages are as follows:
1. Mr. Nyeahu Nyeahu was terminated from employment in March 2017. He first cried and pleaded for the job back.

2. When he found that this failed, he found another way to campaign for his job. That was by spreading slanderous material against the Executive Director of the AHRC.
3. For several months, despite of repeating the slanders, he could make hardly any impact. Those who knew Mr. Nyeahu Nyeahu did not take him seriously at all. Others who did not know him also dismissed his efforts as there was no substantial information to go by.

4. It is at this stage that he came to hit upon a new strategy for his effort which was to direct his repetitious campaign to the funding agencies that support the AHRC’s work across Asia. If he could succeed with them he would have thought that he could cause a financial crisis in the organization and thereby destroy its existence.

5. It is this course of action that he followed for many months.

6. Other part of his strategy was to write to the government agencies, particularly to those involved with investigation into fraud and corruption and tried to make out the case against the AHRC by the use of the same methodology. One government agency, after receiving such material for months, decided to look into the matter by way of a preliminary investigation. What is meant by a preliminary investigation is to whether the complaint is credible enough to go ahead. Thus, the preliminary investigation is concerned with the COMPLAINT and whether it is worthwhile to investigate into.

7. After several months of careful interviews particularly with those that were the target of the allegations the experienced investigators came to the conclusion that the every matter that they raised questions on were satisfactorily answered and therefore there was no basis to implicate these persons in the commission of any offence.

8. While For a funding agency this type of prolonged repetition of allegation may be a rather rare occurrence, the government agencies face these kinds of situations all the time. That is why they have been able to develop to deal with such kind of situation and come to a conclusion very quickly- like they did in this case.
Need for a Code Of Conduct for dealing with such slander

In the years to come, dealing with the kind of allegations and sabotage attempts by the likes of Mr. Nyeahu Nyeahu could become a major problem for the civil society organizations. In fact, this has already become a problem in every area of human rights. Already, large numbers of teen agers have committed suicide in United States and elsewhere purely due to misuse of Facebook and other social media causing them embarrassment, especially on sexual matters. The same tactic has also been sued to break thousands of families across the world. Similar damage is being done in the field of businesses and other things.

Pope Francis captured this problem in his famous speech titled “The truth will set you free” delivered as the Message Of His Holiness Pope Francis forI on 24 January 2018. He had compared it to the serpent in the Garden of Eden in the speech and asked for a decisive action against the same. The whole speech of Pope Francis can be read here.

It is time for all and especially civil society organizations to come together in order to jointly condemn and find ways to deal with these modern social menace.

It will also become necessary for the funding agencies to develop a clear code of conduct in dealing with situations like this which would more and more become very common occurrences. Common code of conduct by the funding agencies in dealing with situations like these will be a guide to everyone and adverse consequences of this kind of propaganda could be minimized by having such code of conduct.

On the Personal Attack by Basil Fernando of the AHRC in Hong Kong against Sri Lanka Guardian

As we are talking about very serious fundamental issues of human rights, we will not replace Mr. Nyeahu Nyeahu with Mr. Wattala Boar ( Wattala Uura – වත්තල ඌරා)

by Our Special Correspondent- Jun 3, 2018

Jun 3, 2018

( June 3, 2018, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) In what can only be described as a puerile attempt, Mr. Basil Fernando, Director, Policies and Programmes published a statement attacking Nilantha Ilangamuwa, one of the founding editors of the Sri Lanka Guardian on June 1, 2018. It wasn’t the first time, and may not be the last.

We will never lower ourselves to the point to which this so-called human rights defender has crept, by digging up all personal issues. He knows full well, as do others who he really is and how he has ripped off people off to gain personal advantages. This character is best exemplified as Comrade Napoleon, a fictional character and the main antagonist in George Orwell’s Animal Farm.

The bottom line is that his pathetic attempt at a statement shows the world that he has no courage, no dignity and no credibility to face the truth. What a sad affair. By seeing this sort of childish move no one can deny that even dictators such as Pol Pot had more in the way of redeeming features that this than crude version of a human being.

However, the Sri Lanka Guardian is standing by everything we have published about selected people working in the Asian Human Rights Commission and Asian Legal Resource Centre, who, we believe, has no moral authority to work in the field of human rights and spending the hard-earned taxpayers’ money provided by the foreign funding agencies. They must be held accountable for the havoc they have done upon the innocent lives that trusted them.

There is no need for Fernando to be in the situation he now resides in. All that is needed is the courage to face the truth and stop defending alleged perpetrators. He no needs to do this and the best way to prove himself is to answer the 17 questions we posted many months ago. Instead of doing so he has concentrated on finding ways to hide his dirtiness while talking in abstracts and nonsense. Talking about repetition and strategies of spreading slanders is nothing more than that described in, “On Bullshit“, by the philosopher Harry G. Frankfurt, an essay that presents a theory of bullshit that defines the concept and analyzes the applications of bullshit in the contexts of communication. This is a book that Fernando has read, over and over again.

We would like to reiterate the fact that we are standing for what we have exposed and we strongly believe the subjects in our expose’ must be held accountable. The simple question is, how can a man hold the top position in a human rights organisation if he has harassed women who served under him? Do you need to know more; if yes; then read our 17 questions again?

Unlike Fernando, we have no personal issues with anybody but we are fighting for the fundamental principles of human rights ethics and norms, which, we believe, Fernando and his bedfellow, who is now serving as the Executive Director of this NGO, must be held accountable.

He talks about complaints before the authorities made by Mr. Nyeahu Nyeahu but he himself has made numerous complaints against ex-employees based on fabricated charges.

However, we find the article by Fernando was so badly written and it was obvious that no editor had ever laid eyes on it. It was the childish comments that make it so deplorable. Not since his school days has the author seen such nonsense. Fernando refers to Ilangumuwa as Mr. Nyeahu Nyeahu. This is reminiscent of the author’s primary school days when children referred to a student they didn’t like as ‘Mr. Poo-Poo Head’. As we are talking about very serious fundamental issues of human rights, we will not replace Mr. Nyeahu Nyeahu with Mr. Wattala Boar ( Wattala Uura – වත්තල ඌරා).

Fernando goes on to blame Ilangamuwa for every bad thing that has befallen the AHRC since that gentleman was unfairly dismissed by Fernando himself. But, Mr. Ilangamuwa never talks about this unfair termination of the employment in the public domain, despite Fernando who bragged about the damage caused to the lives of the people that trusted him.

“One more of Mr. Nyeahu Nyeahu’s tactics is not merely to send these slanderous material (sic) to persons directly concerned but to everyone possible. Suppose, in an organization one person is in charge of dealing with a particular organization; then Mr. Nyeahu Nyeahu would not send his slanderous emails to that person alone but to everyone engaged in the administration from the managing directors to auditors and to everyone else; howsoever long the list may be.”

The truth of the matter is that Ilangamuwa presented Fernando with information which he would have preferred not to have been made public. Fernando was given numerous opportunities to present his position but quite arrogantly chose to remain silent, believing himself to be indestructible. Fernando only has himself to blame for the present situation of the AHRC, an NGO which is rapidly losing credibility and respect among the International human rights community.

Fernando refers to Sri Lanka Guardian’s reports as slanderous but he has never taken the opportunity to refute any of the comments.  And again, the result is that Fernando only has himself to blame for the situation and writing puerile statements against his detractors simply reveals his failings.

The bottom line is that his pathetic attempt at a statement shows the world that he has no courage, no dignity and no credibility to face the truth. What a sad affair.

***

In a further, very strange situation, Fernando’s daughter, Jessica, has attacked another past employee of the AHRC. In several emails, she accused John Sloan, of attempting to extort another employee and also claiming bankruptcy to avoid a judgement debt. The following are excerpts from emails received by Sloan from Jessica Fernando.

“…and even when you started trying to extort yet another unfortunate employer, Basil defended you, saying you were going through a hard time.” And,

“When you made yourself bankrupt to avoid a judgment debt, and when your wonderful wife was very sick, some strangers stepped in to help you.”

Sloan contacted Jessica Fernando demanding an apology and she very quickly back-pedalled, claiming that she had misunderstood the real situation (which was obviously presented to her by Basil).  She also claimed that she had made these comments in a moment of stress caused by the death of a family friend.

It is a very sad situation indeed, when a previously highly respected human rights figure such as Fernando, the winner of numerous awards including the Right Livelihood Award, lowers himself to making such statements. Previously, Fernando accused Sloan of “looking forward to the day that the AHRC is no more.” However, the downfall of the AHRC, when it occurs will be entirely Fernando’s doing.

We have done our part, now it is time people like Fernando to face the truth. Yes, in most of the scenarios, as Pope Francis noted, the truth will set you free. But there are some instances, especially in post-truth era, the truth will shock you and expose to the world who you really are.

Mr. Fernando, why so much ado, when the truth is out there!