Saturday, August 4, 2018

IPKF massacre in Valvai remembered

02Aug 2018

The massacre of 63 Tamils in cold-blood by Indian Peace Keeping Forces (IPKF) in Valvai on August 2, 1989 was remembered today 29 years on.

IPKF officers, led by Brigadier Sankar Prasath, entered homes in the region after imposing a curfew and shot and stabbed residents to death.

Some young men were dragged to the local junction where they were shot and killed.

No one has been held accountable for the deaths of the men, women and children to this day.

A memorial built in their memory near Theeruvil crematorium was demolished by Sri Lankan army soldiers in 2010. Read more here.

THE GOVERNMENT MUST TAKE A FIRM STAND & ADOPT A NEW CONSTITUTION – SAMPANTHAN

(TNA Press Release/03 August 2018.)

03/08/2018

The visiting Commonwealth Secretary-General Rt. Hon Patricia Scotland met with the Leader of the Opposition and the Tamil National Alliance Mr Sampanthan at the office of the Leader of the Opposition in Parliament today (3rd August 2018).

Briefing the Secretary-General Mr Sampanthan pointed out that even though the war has come to an end, we still don’t have complete peace and harmony among the people. Further speaking Mr Sampanthan said, “people had a great deal of hope with the change of Government particularly the minorities. They expected the government to deliver on the promises it made both locally and internationally. A new Constitution which will alter the structure of the governance and give more powers to the regions, ascertainment of truth and justice, reparation, dealing with missing persons, return of civilians lands occupied by the armed forces, release of people held in custody under the draconian Prevention of Terrorism Act are some of those promises but the delivery on these matters has been slow and inadequate said Mr Sampanthan.

Mr Sampanthan highlighted that there is a commitment to make a new Constitution, “a unanimous resolution was adopted in Parliament in this regard, on account of political factors there is a delay on the part of the Government in pursuing this matter said Mr Sampanthan.

Speaking further Mr Sampanthan said “there were reasons why this country faced a war, one cannot address these reasons by not being firm, one cannot abandon these issues being addressed because of extreme elements. The Government must take a firm stand and lead the country in the right direction.

Adopting a new Constitution will be a big step in taking the country forward said Mr Sampanthan.
The Secretary-General briefed the Opposition Leader on the continuous support provided by the Commonwealth to Sri Lanka to promote Democracy, Rule of Law, Good Governance and Environmental related issues and said that the Commonwealth will continue to support the new Constitution making processes. Further, the Secretary-General appreciated Mr Sampanthan for his moderation and for being an ambassador for peace.

Assuring his continuous support Mr Sampanthan said, “we will extend our fullest support to achieve true peace and harmony in this country”. further Mr Sampanthan urged that the International community including the Commonwealth has a role to play in achieving harmony amongst the people.

A Constitution Or A Con-Situation?

By Raj Gonsalkorale –AUGUST 2, 2018

Raj Gonsalkorale

Recent years have witnessed renewed attention to constitutions by both academics and policy makers. This is hardly surprising given that constitutions are the foundation for government in virtually every society around the world. They simultaneously create, empower, and limit the institutions that govern society. In doing so, they are intimately linked to the provision of public goods &services. Outcomes, like democracy, economic performance and human rights protection, are all associated with the contents of countries’ constitutions. It is little wonder, then, that constitutions are often blamed for poor economic and political outcomes or that such outcomes commonly result in constitutional change. ~ Constitution Unit, UCL University, UK

The late Walter Murphy, one of the most distinguished scholars of constitutional law, was of the view that the written text is not perfectly contiguous with the larger constitutional order of a country, an order that might include “super-statutes,” decisions of judges and agencies, and even informal institutions. If one is to understand the difference between a country’s written constitution and its larger constitutional order, it is important to distinguish between the functions of a constitution and its form.

The proponents of a new constitution as a panacea for all ills in Sri Lanka should seriously consider whether they are more concerned with the functions of a constitution or its form. Of course one has a relationship to the other, but a form could exist without functionality although functionality cannot exist without a form.as the legitimacy of functionality (what people can and cannot do) has to be within the framework of a constitution.

Is a form, in the generally understood context of a form necessary? For most people, especially abroad, the United Kingdom does not have a constitution at all in the sense most commonly used around the world — a document of fundamental importance setting out the structure of government and its relationship with its citizens. All modern states, saving only the UK, New Zealand and Israel, have adopted a documentary constitution of this kind, the first and most complete model being that of the United States of America in 1788. However, in Britain, they have a constitution, but it is one that exists in an abstract sense, comprising a host of diverse laws, practices and conventions that have evolved over a long period of time. The key landmark is the Bill of Rights (1689), which established the supremacy of Parliament over the Crown following the forcible replacement of King James II (r.1685–88) by William III (r.1689–1702) and Mary (r.1689–94) in the Glorious Revolution (1688). From a comparative perspective, there is, what is known as an ‘unwritten constitution’, although some prefer to describe it as ‘uncodified’ on the basis that many laws of a constitutional nature that are written down in Acts of Parliament or law reports of court judgments. This aspect of the British constitution, its unwritten nature, is its most distinguishing characteristic.

In many ways, the mother of all Parliaments, as some describe the British Parliament as, appears more to focus on functionality rather than a conventional form.

Functionality is a reflection of behaviour and by that it must mean how peoples of a country behave amongst themselves and with other. Behaviour is influenced by many factors such as culture, religion, ethnicity, caste systems, distribution of wealth, power centres etc.

Sri Lankans still have not reached the point of behaving or living with each other within this context, as equals but with the acceptance of what divides them.

In the much discussed and debated need or otherwise for a new constitution, the question to be asked perhaps is whether such a document will address the behavioural issues that Sri Lankans have with each other or whether the country should be looking at other approaches to bridging the behavioural divide.

Will a new constitution facilitate greater equality? The term greater equality is oxy moronic as equality cannot be less or more. Equality is equality. On paper, the existing constitution gives equality to everyone in Sri Lanka irrespective of their divides. So, how would a new constitution give more than what is already given?

The need for a model that provides greater power sharing and a degree of self-determination to the Tamil people in the North, and some argue, to those in the East, is given as a reason why a new constitution is required. Proponents of this model do not seem to regard the Tamil people of the country as a homogenous group, as Tamil people in other parts of the country including the more recent Tamil arrivals in the country, those Tamils living in the central part of the country, are not included in the model that is proposed.

If discrimination of Tamils by the Sinhala dominated governments is the reason why a new model is needed, then such discrimination will not abate in the rest of the country as Tamil people in such areas will continue to be dominated by and large, by Sinhala governments.

It is a fact, one could say due to an accidental arithmetical fact, that Sri Lankan governments since independence have been dominated by the Sinhala Buddhists. In a country where the population is 70% Sinhala Buddhist, this is bound to happen.

The challenge therefore is how one could bring all communities into a governance model so that power is shared equitably, not equally, as there cannot be equal power sharing in unequal arithmetical contexts.

Power sharing could and should mean equity in decision making where a set of people elected as the representatives of a broader mass of people, act in such a manner to ensure those who they represent benefit equitably when decisions are made at national level and sub national level. Authority to make decisions that are equitable on behalf of the people they represent, must therefore be shared at national level and at sub national level (whether it is at provincial or local government level).

The Draft Constitution: Impact on nation and state

By Neville Ladduwahetty-August 2, 2018, 10:16 pm

Documents relating to a draft Constitution intended for "discussion only" are now out in the public domain. These documents are the work of a panel of 10 experts. The Resolution setting up a Constitutional Assembly intended them to synthesize the opinions contained in the reports of the 6 sub-committees appointed by the Steering Committee, into a form that would embody the makings of the draft constitution. Although it was expected that there would be a single report reflecting a consensus among them, what turned up was a multiplicity of reports.

According to media reports, since some who were not part of the expert panel had intervened and attempted to influence the outcome of the scope of the draft, only 6 of the 10 in the expert panel had signed the report. This draft contains 38 chapters and covers the full scope of what is intended to be a discussion paper. Although those who intervened have since been asked to stay out, the consequence of this direction was that there are now an additional 10 unsigned reports covering a variety of subjects.

If what is reported above is factual, the experts and interventionists have not only collectively debased the constitution making process, but have also made the debating task very complex, because members of the Constitutional Assembly would not know whether to accept opinions in the report signed by the 6 experts, or those in the 10 individual reports.

SIGNIFICANT FEATURES

in the DRAFT

Despite the chicanery associated with preparation of the draft constitution, what is of great significance to the nation is the direction the draft constitution is taking judging from recommendations common to most reports. For instance, some of the specific recommendations are:

1. The State would cease to be Unitary. Instead, it would be described as being ‘undivided and indivisible’. The Legislative, Executive and Judicial powers of the People shall be exercised as per the Constitution. The territory of Sri Lanka would be its geographical territory including the Provinces, thus identifying the territory in terms of the Province. The National Anthem is to be sung in 2 languages.

2. The President to be elected by two chambers of Parliament. President’s powers diluted to that of a figurehead to the point that he acts on the advice of the Prime Minister.

3. A second chamber represented by 5 members from each Province and 10 others.

4. The powers of the Governor of each Province diluted to the point that he acts on the advice of the Chief Minister.

5. The Executive and Legislative powers of the Province shall be exercised by the Chief Minister and the Council.

6. The Central Government shall be entitled to the use of State land only in the Capital Territory, and every Provincial Council shall be entitled to the use of all other State land.

7. The provision for two or three adjoining Provinces to merge based on a referendum limited to each Province concerned.

In summary, the draft constitution weakens the powers of the President elected by two chambers of Parliament and makes the Prime Minister the head of the Executive, the consequence of which is to weaken the powers of the Governor, strengthen the Province with Legislative and Executive powers and recognize the Province as the unit that describes the territory of Sri Lanka, with a provision also for 2 or 3 Provinces to merge, based on a referendum limited to each Province concerned.

DIRECTION of the DRAFT CONSTITUTION

The first paragraph of the Resolution establishing the Constitutional Assembly states that the President "…in his desire to give effect to the will of the People expressed at the aforesaid Presidential Election by enacting a new Constitution that, inter alia, abolishing the Executive Presidency…..".

Abolishing the Executive Presidency is therefore justified on the basis of giving "effect to the will of the People". The question is: Which "People"? In this instance the "People" has to mean those who elected the President. Considering that the President is committed to "give effect" to several issues during the run up to the election, how legitimate is it to single out an issue such as abolishing the Executive Presidency out of the many issues pledged, and justify it on the basis that it gives effect to the "will of the People", without an exclusive referendum.

In the absence of such clear and definitive determination the need to abolish the current Executive Presidential system is nothing but the fulfillment of a personal commitment of the political leadership regardless of whether it serves the interests of the Nation and State. As far as the leadership in the North is concerned, the direction of the draft constitution facilitates the inexorable movement towards federalism to start with, and a separate State at a time of their choosing, encouraged by the provision in Article 176 for 2 or 3 adjoining Provinces to merge based on a referendum limited to each Province concerned.

VIOLATION of FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS

What the draft embodies is a diabolical attempt to dismantle the core values of what is of significant importance to the Sri Lankan nation as a whole, and replacing it with aspirations of a segment of the population, thereby violating the right that "All Peoples" have, namely, the right of self-determination of the collective nation to determine its form of government and its political arrangements.

The 13th Amendment with the Province as the unit was definitely not such a collective determination. Furthermore, no opportunity was given by successive governments for the nation to exercise its right to self-determination regarding devolution as a concept, with its unit as the Province. That denial has compelled the nation to accept a form of government at the periphery that is operationally dysfunctional, and at a cost that diverts much needed funds for human development from the nation as a whole.

Territorial integrity is another determination that is sacrosanct to the majority of the nation. The proposal for 2 or 3 adjoining Provinces to merge based on a referendum limited to each Province concerned is a violation of the right of self-determination of the rest of the country. The architecture that would result from this provision is to create a single political unit consisting of the Northern and Eastern Provinces. Territorially such a unit would consist of one-third of the land mass of Sri Lanka and two-thirds of its coast line with Legislative and Executive powers, beside 7 separate Provincial units in the rest of the country. Words in a Constitution such as "undivided" and "indivisible" would not protect the territorial integrity of Sri Lanka under such a set-up.

The fact that the draft is a discussion paper, and therefore, this particular proposal or any other could be rejected, is not the issue. The issue is the fact that the ‘expert panel’ did not mind the denial of fundamental rights such as the right of self-determination embodied in international law, in instruments such as the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Social, Economic and Cultural Rights, which form the very bedrock of Human Rights. The least one would expect from such a panel is for them to bring to the attention of the Steering Committee the implications involved, while fulfilling its primary function of synthesizing the opinions in the 6 sub-committee reports.

EXECUTIVE PRESIDENCY

The other all important issue is the abolition of the Executive Presidency. What needs to be understood is that an Executive Presidential system in the context of Sri Lanka and its many Peoples is not another political arrangement of governance. It goes far beyond and symbolizes the unitary nature of the State, because the President, as a person elected by the whole nation is therefore a unifier; a concept that cannot be replaced by words such as "undivided and indivisible". Consequently, the Presidential system is inextricably linked with the unitary character of the State.

A nationally elected President is the protector of the integrity of the State in terms of its physical territory, and ideologically the protector of the core values enshrined in the entrenched Article that includes Article 4 of the 1978 Constitution. Such traditions are an integral part of the memory of Sri Lanka’s heritage in the form of the ruler who was the guardian of the State and the religion. This tradition has to continue with safeguards to meet evolved concepts such as separation of powers between Legislative, Executive and Judicial powers. Such separation of powers is represented at the periphery by the Governor who is responsible for executive action, and as the President’s representative in the periphery, is responsible for guarding the integrity and unitary character of the State in the manner in which the Provinces operate.

CONCLUSION

While the expert panel of 10 was expected to synthesize the opinions in the 6 sub-committee reports into a single unified report, what transpired was a botched up job due to the intervention of a few persons unassociated with the process, with the result that there is now one report signed by only 6 of the 10 experts, and 10 other unsigned reports covering various aspects relating to this draft constitution. The fact that the draft constitution in its present form has been seriously compromised means that the task of debating issues would become a daunting challenge.

Abolishing the Executive Presidency although justified in order to "give effect to the will of the People", has many direct political beneficiaries. One set would be those who are constitutionally barred from contesting a Presidential election. Another set would be those who are unsure of securing a majority at a national Presidential election. For the Tamil leadership it would be an opportunity to weaken the power of the Governor to the point of him acting on the advice of the Chief Minister and the Board of Ministers, thereby transferring Legislative and Executive power to the Council; a process that would be the first step towards federalism (by eliminating the concurrent list), and to eventual separation. The losers would be the People in whose name all this is being done.

The genesis for these incrementally progressive developments is the 13th Amendment with the Province as the peripheral unit. The concept of devolution and its unit of devolution – the Province, never were and have never been the seeking of the nation as a whole. This is a violation of the fundamental right of self-determination that "All Peoples" are entitled to and recognized in the International Instruments that form the bed rock of Human Rights. It is nothing but a top down approach whose cost effectiveness cannot be justified. This injustice has to be corrected not only because it compels a majority to be governed under a system that is not of their choosing, but also the fact that the system is operationally complex because of 2 parallel systems which function at a cost that diverts much needed funds from human development of the collective nation. This too is a violation of Human Rights.

The hope of those whose interests have hitherto been ignored is that at least a third of the Members of Parliament led by a strong leader would have the courage to oppose the draft constitution on moral grounds, because it not only violates fundamentals of justice and equality, but that it also does not represent the core values cherished by the nation as a whole. However, opposition for the sake of opposition is not right either. Therefore, those opposing the draft constitution should follow up and propose an alternative that in principle is for the three major communities to share Legislative and Executive powers at the center with the District as the principal operating unit in the periphery. The nation is waiting for a leadership that would set aside their personal ambitions and fulfill the nation’s long awaited dream of doing what is right by them as a whole, and in the interest of the entire country as well as the generations to come.

SRI LANKA: WHAT IS THE JUDICATURE ACT?

02/08/2018

This brief guide is prepared by the Centre for Policy Alternatives (CPA) to raise awareness on salient points in relation to the Judicature (Amendment) Act No 9 of 2018 enacted in May 2018. As the guide indicates, if fully implemented, the present legislation can address delays with justice with specific cases in Sri Lanka. While this is legislation addresses several areas requiring reforms, CPA also notes several concerns that require further attention and urges the authorities to also consider addressing delays in relation to other areas.
Download in English here.

SRI LANKA WHAT IS THE JUDICATURE ACT.docx by Thavam on Scribd

Police confront Mullaitivu fishermen protesting against illegal Sinhala fishing

Riot police confronted fishermen in Mullaitivu protesting against illegal fishing by Sinhala fishermen.

02Aug 2018

Fishermen tried to enter the Department of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources, accusing the Department of accepting bribes from Sinhala fishermen to allow them to fish in the region unlawfully.

Stones were thrown at the building as demonstrating fishermen expressed their anger and frustration at their livelihoods being destroyed by Sinhala fishermen, who they said were aided by the military and state bodies.

The protest, organised by the Mullaitivu District Fishermen Association, began with at Tsunami remembrance memorial in Mullaitivu. Families of the fishermen joined them in their protest, whilst local businesses remain closed to express their support.

Sri Lankan Air Force to overhaul Ukrainian Antonovs in Russia

by Our Diplomatic Editor-Aug 3, 2018

(August 3, 2018, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) Sri Lankan Air Force has a little reputation for their anti-graft mission, but, the institute has well-established records for corruption. Like in the past new defence deal has been approved by the top where they are going to overhaul three Ukrainian Antonov flight, AN-32B brand, in Russin soil.

“Tender has tricked as usual, but this time in a different shape”, a reliable source in the Ministry of Defence said.

“According to the recommendation by the top of the institute, the tender was won by a Russian company called, MFG. But, Antanov brand is from Ukraine. It is well known the prevailing diplomatic rift between these two countries. Ukraine has never given any authorization to Russian entity to overhaul their defence production,” the source added.

“Who is the local agent of this Russian MFG, and what is his/her motivations and involvements with the Sri Lankan Air Force? is the million dollar question,” the source mocked.

Upgrading an An-32 of the Sri Lankan Air Force.- in Kiev – Ukraine – April 25, 2009

ALTERNATIVE TO HANGING

EDWARD GUNAWARDENA-Friday, August 3, 2018

To Sri Lanka’s underworld whose income and power are mainly derived from the narcotics trade, nothing seems to be impossible. In this land like no other, not many moons ago was not an underworld character or a politician able to get a letter sent out from the then Prime Minister’s office ordering the customs to release a container that happened to contain narcotics? What happened to the character who was powerful enough to get this letter out to the Customs? What is the office that the crooked official who was in the Prime Minister’s office now holds? What explanation if any did the Prime Minister of the time offer? The country remains in the dark; and none appears to be one bit bothered.

If one crook could have taken the office of a Prime Minister for a ride, it is unimaginable what several kings of the underworld enjoying the safety and security of prison cannot do.

Way back in 1959 when I was attached to the CID undergoing training as an ASP I headed a surveillance team that detected Eddie Perera the notorious opium smuggler who was in prison custody leaving his General Hospital bed to which he had been chained and guarded by a prisons officer. He and the jail guard were picked up at 10 p.m. by an attractive woman who drove into the hospital premises unchecked. Having occupied a house in Colpetty until 5 a.m. they returned to the hospital. On a report made by the CID to the Commissioner of Prisons the guard was sacked and the latter’s immediate Superior a jailor was reprimanded for his laxity of supervision.

Corrupt prison staff

Today, it is public knowledge that with millions being lavished on the custodians, narcotics king-pins in death raw enjoy the best of luxuries within as well as outside the prison walls. But the dangerous and most disturbing factor is their ability, equipped with sophisticated communications equipment to direct underworld activities with the assistance of corrupt prison staff.

What is the government’s rationale behind the decision to hang the underworld narcotics kings? These powerful few have become the de facto administrators of the prisons in which they are incarcerated. All responsible for this chaotic state of affairs inside the prisons from the top officials down to the junior most guard must be held responsible. They have failed miserably to enforce the punishment of imprisonment resulting in hardcore inmates having their own way

A government that cannot say ‘boo’ to a goose and cringes in the face of heartless strikes by the arrogant medical fraternity, protesting students and even village women demanding repairs to their roads, that has failed to keep smart phones getting into the heads of prisoners has decided to make an absurd decision nay a hilarious one; hang all those who have outsmarted the Prisons administration!
True to form the government has begun to realize the imprudence of hanging after making the decision. The EU has only to say “We don’t want your fish,” and the hangmen probably proud products of our universities will have to hang themselves!

However, the discussion on ‘Hang or not to hang’ that appears to be going on endlessly consuming acres of newspaper space is indeed a soothing saline drip to a government clutching on to a few straws anchored in the mud. Momentarily through, it has smothered the peoples’ concern for the rising cost of essentials; food, fuel, transport, education or even the occasional tot!

Rigorous imprisonment for life

The most sensible alternative to capital punishment is obviously the vigorous enforcement of the punishment of rigorous imprisonment for life. A high security prison equipped with sophisticated security technology, located in an isolated area, managed by specially selected officers where inmates can be held incommunicado without the possibility of access to prohibited items especially communications equipment, drugs and alcohol, is the answer. A case in point is how the Prisons Authority of the Unites States, during the prohibition days of the early Thirties held the notorious Al Capone and other Mafia gangsters in the tiny island of Alcatraz in the San Francisco Bay.

Even if smartphones had existed at that time the supremely isolated nature of Alcatraz would have made ‘Jamming’ feasible without affecting any other facility in the vicinity. Essential official communications could have been maintained (which can be done even today) by the installation of a restricted radio intercom system.

Yahapalana Democracy? Not even Procedural

The role of the EC in holding elections to LG bodies proved it beyond doubt
Why the EC has to abide by the existing laws and hold elections and need not wait for new laws

2018-08-03

or once Prof. G.L has said something worth discussing. He had told media last Monday, his party, the Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna (SLPP) would file a petition in the Supreme Court requesting a Writ against the Elections Commission (EC) over its failure to hold elections for the dissolved Provincial Councils.

The Sabaragamuwa, North Central and the Eastern Provincial Councils stand dissolved for 10 months now, since September 2017.

In two months from now, the North, Wayamba and the Central Provincial Councils would stand dissolved.

He has told media, legal action would be instituted when the Court vacation comes to an end in late August.

Reason for not instituting legal action immediately as he says is because; it is only a week more for Court vacations to begin.

For a politically valid intervention, to stay mute for a month is too cheap a ploy to buy. For a legal luminary in fulltime politics, a week would be more than enough, if the statement made is firm and genuine.

Almost two months ago President Sirisena addressing his faction of the SLFP on June 2 had said the PC elections would be held before the year-end.

The UNP decided at its Working Committee last week to request the EC to hold the PC elections “without delay” (!) either on the old or the new system of electing members.

By then, the Chairman of the Commission Mahinda Deshapriya had on April 25 (2018) told the media (CDN) the Commission would hold elections to PCs in December, once the legal and Constitutional “hindrances are swiftly resolved”.

Neither had they been resolved “swiftly” during the past three months. Nor has the Government chosen any of the four options Deshapriya told the CDN (Ceylon Daily News), Parliament could adopt, to have early PC elections.

“Firstly, Parliament can approve the delimitation report as it is, with a two-thirds majority.
“Secondly, MPs can opt to revise the report by a committee appointed by the Prime Minister. If not, they can change the 50-50 ratio and prepare an early and speedy delimitation report again.

“Or they can go back to the previous Preferential Ratio (PR) vote system,”

He told the CDN, that if Parliament could decide on any one of those options, the EC could hold elections in December before the GCE O/L examinations began.

"The EC is playing with a vacillating and hesitant Government through publicity stunts, proposing options to keep the PC elections postponed"

Now it is August and over three months after the options were spelt out by Chairman EC. No decision had been taken by the Government or by the two main allies in Government, the UNP and the SLFP of President Sirisena as to what option they would go with.

Instead, the UNP wants the EC to hold elections anyway it can and President tells his men they would be December.

In end June the same Minister, who kept tearing off calendar pages one after another for the LG elections, tells the new Delimitation Committee in the presence of Speaker Karu Jayasuriya, it would be December (2018) when the Government could be ready with a Road Map for holding PC elections.
He wouldn’t surely decide on a Road Map for December, on his own. He is definitely in consultation with the President and the PM, is playing it soft with President, while on a collision course on many issues.

As it goes, PC elections will not be held end 2018 with only a Road Map proposed. The hurdle President Sirisena fears to hold PC elections is no doubt the MR Factor.

As Finance Minister Samaraweera’sGam Peraliya that’s rolled out with gusto to be given a fillip with a populist budget for the year 2019 in November indicates, the UNP is readying itself for the 2020 January Presidential Election and not for PC elections in December.

For Mahinda Rajapaksa, who has in his hands the political network at the local level after LG polls, needs to have with him the next level of political networking at the provincial level to push for Parliamentary Elections in mid or late 2019.

Elections Commission should be held responsible for denying the people their right to elections
The EC that aids and abets the Yahapalana Government to further erode democracy
This makes the ground easy for Rajapaksa to run a totalitarian rule if he returns

There certainly is a difference in calculations within the JO too. Loners like Weerawansa and Gammanpila would want the Presidential and Parliamentary Elections as constitutionally scheduled for 2020 January and anytime after 2020 February, respectively.

They need to be of importance in a Presidential poll to successfully contest Parliamentary Elections thereafter.

Yet, MR’s strategy that is worked on by Basil Rajapaksa is often heard through JO stalwarts like Dinesh Gunawardane and Vasudeva Nanayakkara, who also talk of Parliamentary Elections.

This Government cannot rule a country and that needs to be changed before it is too late, goes their main argument.

The Colombo protest last Wednesday led by the JO targeting the Government as anti-people is perhaps a beginning.

At the rate, the Government is fumbling with every issue without clear decisions made and then the two partners in Government getting into contradicting positions on almost all issues and mega corruption no less than during the Rajapaksas, the frustration building up in urban and semi-urban societies is what MR seems to be banking on.

He perhaps believes there will be the last straw on the camel’s back when people would want a change of Government before a change of presidency.

That’s when the PCs also become important for MR.

It would be a proverbial walk behind the goat, for MR to wait for his SLPP President Prof Peiris to go to Courts to provide him with the PC elections without any further delay.

"Now it is August and no decision has been taken by the Government or by the two main allies in Government, the UNP and the SLFP of President Sirisena as to what option they would go with"

It was this same Professor who was reported in the media a month ago on July 2 saying his SLPP would sue the FCID, the CID, the Rupavahini Corporation and the Associated Newspapers (Ceylon) Limited for a series of alleged defamatory stories that claimed China Harbour Engineering Limited had in 2014 provided US$ 07 million for Mahinda Rajapaksa’s Presidential Election campaign.

At the same media briefing, he was also reported as having said the SLPP would take legal action against the New York Times, for publishing similar defamatory allegations. He doesn’t seem to have done what he said he would, and taking time over Court vacations seems, he would go the same way with this proposed legal action against the EC as well.

In short, it would not be anything more than his statement to media.

Yet, the fact remains, for once, his argument is on solid grounds. Chapter I Article 03 of the Constitution is clear about the right of franchise being an inalienable right of people’s sovereignty.It says”

“In the Republic of Sri Lanka sovereignty is in the People and is inalienable. Sovereignty includes the powers of Government, Fundamental Rights and the franchise.”

That, therefore, is a basic, Fundamental Right of the people, the EC is constitutionally bound to protect and give validity to.

Read along with article 104B (1) of the Constitution, Article 104B (2) says,

“It shall be the duty of the Commission to secure the enforcement of all laws relating to the holding of any such election or the conduct of Referenda and it shall be the duty of all authorities of the State charged with the enforcement of such laws, to co-operate with the Commission to secure such enforcement.”

But has the EC been living with the Constitutional mandate? Sadly not as an Independent Commission constituted under Amendment 19.

The role of the EC in holding elections to LG bodies proved it beyond doubt. According to the Constitution, the EC should treat franchise as an “inalienable. Sovereign” Right of the people and thus should “secure the enforcement of all laws relating to the holding of any such election”
It means ‘laws’ that are valid at the time an election should be duly held is what the EC has to abide by.

It more than implies the EC need not wait for “new laws” the Government is contemplating in bringing or are still in the making.

Thus, if Parliament has not made required law to hold elections on the mixed system of PR (Proportional Representation) and FFP (First-Past-the-Post) with whatever gender representation and with the new delimitation report approved in Parliament at the time the PCs were dissolved, it only means the existing law that allows elections on the PR system is the law the EC has to hold elections to those PCs.

Instead, the EC is playing with a vacillating and hesitant Government through publicity stunts, proposing options to keep the PC elections postponed, violating its own mandate in the process.

It is the EC that should now be held totally responsible for denying the people their right to elect representative bodies.

It is the EC that aids and abets the Yahapalana Government to further erode democracy when it is there to safeguard democracy.

And thanks to this EC and Yahapalanaya, we don’t even have the procedural democracy there was under Rajapaksa. Perhaps they are making the ground easy for Rajapaksa to run a totalitarian rule if he returns.

The Value Of Mangroves: Ecological Services Of Mangroves In Sri Lanka

By Buddhika Ranadheera –AUGUST 3, 2018

Buddhika Ranadheera

Mangroves are a valuable ecological and economic resource to Sri Lanka. According to the Forest Department, Sri Lanka is home to over 20 mangrove species which extend over an area of 15,670 hectares. However, mangroves represent only 0.2% of the total forest cover.

Mangroves and the Economy

The coastal, inland, and offshore fisheries contributed 1.3% of the GDP of Sri Lanka in 2017. However, there has been a decline in coastal fishery production by 5.3% while inland aquaculture, shrimp, and prawn production declined by 7.9 % and 23.4 % compared to 2016. Mangrove depletion is considered as being among the reasons for this depletion, indicating that the survival and healthy growth of mangroves is a crucial component to the sustainability of the fishing industry.

Mangroves in Sri Lanka provide wood and timber for housing, firewood, and charcoal to coastal households. Almost 75% of the coastal population extracts firewood from mangrove forests. The coastal community also depends on mangroves for bottle caps and ornamental production.

Ecological Services

Mangroves are pivotal coastal ecosystems and play a key role in weathering climate change impacts such as storms, hurricanes, and tsunamis while mitigating its causes. The value of mangroves in carbon sequestration is higher than terrestrial forests. Mangrove forests absorb up to four times more carbon per hectare than other tropical forests. This unique ecosystem also provides a nursery habitat for many wildlife species, including commercial fish and crustaceans, and contributes to sustaining the local abundance of fish and shellfish populations. Mangroves also provide shelter and feeding grounds for many reptiles and nesting grounds for local and migratory birds.

Further, mangroves facilitate the growth of corals and provide shelter for coral species at risk of extinction from coral bleaching. Coral bleaching is one of the calamitous effects of climate change, and it is worsened by the absorption of more carbon by the oceans. Several species such as seagrass beds cannot survive without mangroves, and it is vital to ensure that mangroves are protected as they can withstand sea level rise and help mitigate coastal erosion.

Climate Change Impacts on Mangroves

A large percentage of mangrove populations in Sri Lanka have been subjected to depletion and deforestation as a result of anthropogenic activities as well as natural disasters. They have been threatened by natural disasters while functioning as a buffer and protecting the coast. During the 2004 Tsunami, most of the mangroves along the Southern belt were destroyed. With the intensity of climate change and natural perils rising, more and more mangroves are destroyed and the time needed for recovery gets extended.

The Human Threat

Human settlements in the coastal areas threaten mangroves. With one third of the population in Sri Lanka living along the coastal belt, and human settlements in the coastal areas of Sri Lanka ever expanding, the waste disposals of these human settlements cause a significant threat to coastal ecosystems such as mangroves. Even though mangroves are resilient to disturbances, the pollutants cause considerable damage to them.

Mangroves are highly threatened by the unprecedented and unhealthy growth of the tourism sector. They are being deforested to build tourist resorts and infrastructure as well as to have a better view of the ocean. The roots, fruits, and flowers of particular species of mangroves are also being used to create ornaments and lids at unsustainable levels.

There has been indiscriminate exploitation of mangroves for commercial purposes including deforestation of mangroves to build salt beds, aquaculture ponds, and prawn farms. With increasing consumer demand for shrimps and the expansion of export-oriented prawn farming, more mangrove forests have been lost.

The civil war has also contributed to the destruction of mangroves in the North and the North East of Sri Lanka, which is further impacting the economy of the communities dependent on the ecosystem for their livelihood.