Face Off – SDIG Latiff Vs. FM Sarath Fonseka & Rtd. SDIG Nimal Lewke

By Muhammed Fazl –AUGUST 29, 2018

Muhammed Fazl

“Power Does Not Corrupt, Fear Does. Perhaps The Fear Of A Loss Of Power” – John Steinbeck

Contemplated defusing the situation in private, but changed my mind when matters looked a lot more complicated. It all started (at least in the open), when National List MP and Field Marshall Sarath Fonseka (SF) made a statement at the Parliament on August 24, 2018, vilifying Senior DIG Latiff for the arrest of his supporters few weeks prior for allegedly having links to underworld crimes and/or for engaging in the narcotics trade.

While it is a common practice for the Sri Lankan Police Department to frame innocent people and implant narcotics as evidence, it is always welcome when real kingpins and dealers are nabbed in the process. A month ago, I personally had to intervene at the Mount Lavinia Police Station when a dozen teenagers were arrested at a party by the beach for confronting the police team when their party was raided. And not surprisingly and maliciously they were charged for possessing Ganja (weed) for which the sentences would have been a jail time and/or permanent criminal record should they decide to admit guilt and save the hassle of a litigation. As a result of behind-the-scene attempts, the DIG of Mirihana Police intervened and the case was withdrawn and I believe the arresting officer(s) was interdicted. I let the matter to rest once the detainees were discharged at the courts.

But many such victims are not fortunate enough to have such an audience to listen to their desperate pleas or have funds to pay for lawyers. And when SF berated in public over the arrest of some of his supporters over a similar circumstance, it did draw my attention.

Latiff

President Sirisena calling for the death penalty and PM Ranil Wickremesinghe having a zero-tolerance policy for drug offences has indeed driven the Special Task Force (STF) and the Police Narcotics Bureau (PNB) to expand their efforts. But when the STF, PNB and fighting organized crimes falls under the purview of one single man – SDIG Latiff, and when teams under him in their enthusiasm target only supporters of SF when similar anti-social elements identifying themselves with other Parliamentarians are left alone, I believe SF’s frustration is justified…, especially when some of the criminal charges are cooked up.

When police teams raid or arrest particular suspects, the SDIG in charge is not informed prior to such actions necessarily. Hence, the SDIG cannot be held responsible for such actions as a rule. It must be also mentioned that SL Police Department is highly politicized and can act and they certainly do act in most cases under instructions from political masters. A clear example would be the current ‘Yes-Sir, No-Sir, Three-Bags-Full-Sir’ Inspector General of Police (IGP), Pujith Jayasundara who promises to prevent the imminent arrest of a particular Nilame under strict political instructions from then-Minister of Law and Order, Sagala Rathnayake.

Fortunately, SDIG Latiff does not hail from such a background and is known for being honest and fearless and was never known to have bowed down to politicians or their influences when carrying out his duties. But unfortunately, he is less tactful when he has to maneuver through political waters. And it is this handicap and honorable conduct of this SDIG Latiff that made me do a bit of investigations and pen the following…,

Fonseka

Field Marshal Sarath Fonseka – Minister of Sustainable Development, Wildlife & Regional Development

SDIG Latiff being verbally attacked by SF should not come as a surprise. SF is on record to have said many things of importance and only to have retracted later on or said something on the contrary after some time. And during his last speech at the Parliament, SF accused a relative of SDIG Latiff of being complicit in a drug heist. And on August 25, 2018, I called SF on his mobile phone and I asked him to provide evidence to support his accusations. He merely gives me the B-report number of a police case and nothing more. Now I am not sure if SF has memory loss issues or if it is related to a possible Post-Traumatic-Stress-Disorder (PTSD) experienced after his retirement from military service. Either case, I believe it would be helpful if he is reminded of the following:-

• Praises the ex-Secretary to Minister of Defense, Gotabaya Rajapaksa to the hilt soon after the war, only to run him down when SF becomes a Presidential candidate in 2010.
• Praises the current President and helps him win the Presidential Elections in 2015, only to berate him later for not being appointed the Minister of Law and Order.
• Goes out all against the Rajapaksas but accepts a pardon from the same.
• Claims Sri Lanka belongs to the Sinhalese while soliciting for votes of minority communities and claiming to be the rightful leader of a multi-racial, multi-religious nation.
• Claims to fight for a corruption-free nation, but helps his son-in-law win a questionable 200,000 USD plus contract to supply equipment to the military.
• Claims to be transparent in financial dealings, but questions remain unanswered to-date over Rs. 75 million in foreign currency found stashed in a bank deposit box, supposedly to be that of illegal campaign funds being used for personal use.
• In his blind hatred towards the Rajapaksas, confides to then Editor of Sunday Leader of the validity of the ‘white-flag’ incident at the last stages of the war, only to retract it later when realizing that he too would be implicated should there be an International War Crimes Tribunal.
• I saved the best for last. SF makes a big hue and cry over the recent arrests and claims they were innocent supporters and absolves them of any crimes. But SF’s most trusted lieutenant and Secretary during SF’s Presidential bid was none other than Senaka Haripriya De Silva, an army officer who was convicted of armed robbery and who spent 3 plus years from a lengthy sentence behind bars. He is also wanted in Belgium over a cheating case for which the Sri Lankan government failed to extradite him due to the absence of an Extradition Treaty between the two nations. Interestingly, when a thief and a cheat currently lives at JAIC Hilton Residencies, would it also not beg the question of how he sustains himself? For SF’s sake, I just hope 2010 Presidential Elections campaign funds have nothing to do with it. Maybe it is about time we sign that Extradition Treaty with Belgium after all.

Lewke

I can live with all of the above…, but when SF in a fit of anger accused the relative of SDIG Latiff being involved in a drug raid that took place a couple of years back, the first question that came to my mind was how on earth did SF come to know of such and the case number particularly of the B-Report. Based on my investigations, the alleged suspect(s) in the drug raid happens to be a SIM card customer of a vendor who also happens to be a CCTV installer for the said relative. Phew, some connection that is. And if SF have some problems or a special interest about this particular slow pace of this case, he should have contacted the AG’s office or got in touch with the concerned prosecuting authority. Instead, he uses his parliamentary privileges and shoots his loose cannon of a mouth not knowing that it would boomerang on him eventually. And as for the rat who leaked the case number etc., enter SDIG Nimal Lewke!

Read More

TOO MANY RAJAPAKSAS, TOO LONG TOO? – N. SATHIYA MOORTHY

29/08/2018

Can he, can’t he? That’s the question. The 19th Amendment issue on the possibility of Mahinda Rajapaksa contesting the presidential polls has turned national attention on the man all over again, even to the exclusion of brother, Gotabaya Rajapaksa, the war-victorious Defence Secretary, who was being marketed as the replacement, in-between. Independent of what his SLPP-JO followers may say, repeated over-exposure and attendant controversies of every kind can cut both ways, even if either or both of them become qualified to contest.

For Mahinda, it is now being argued that the 19th Amendment that restored the two-term constitutional upper-limit for presidency, would not apply to him. So, would it be to his predecessor Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga, the Rajapaksa camp has been charitable enough to submit in her favour.

Imagine a situation in which the two contest each other.

Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga, of course, as the candidate of the present-day ruling combine, and the picture is complete. It would of course be a repeat of the previous two presidential polls, where the combined Opposition of the time demonstrated that none of them could take on Mahinda Rajapaksa on their own. In the second attempt, they actually defeated him despite the 18th Amendment protection Mahinda had given himself to try and stay on for a third term.

‘Spirit’ of the Constitution

Does it mean that Mahinda is actually a ‘spent force’? If so, why is the SLPP-JO pining for him? If not, why all this sudden talk of moving the Supreme Court for clarifying whether the 19th Amendment has a retrospective effect or not? If there is no retrospective effect to the restoration of the two-term upper-limit, then alone Mahinda (and by extension Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga) could contest the elections, if they wanted. Otherwise, it is a firm ‘no.’

Independent of what the Supreme Court may have to say, if and when moved, to the ordinary voter, it may still be the ‘spirit’ of the Constitution and the restorative 19th Amendment would matter more. Minus the current controversy, maybe freedom for Mahinda to contest again may not become the campaign-platform, but without it, the non-committed voter pool, from which the Rajapaksas would still have to draw their victory margin?

Such a construct pre-supposes that the Rajapaksas would be able to retain the 45 per cent vote-share that they had polled thrice in as many years, namely, the presidential and parliamentary polls, both in 2015, which again they retained for another three years, up to the Local Government (LG) Elections, earlier this year. Through these three outings, they also could not make that extra 5-7 per cent vote-share on all three occasions.

It was only in the absence of that ‘minor share’ that Mahinda could not make it to the presidency a third time. The rest, including the 19th Amendment followed. Even the LG Poll results showed up as much. If the idea thus is for the SLPP-JO to hope that Mahinda alone could make the difference, then, the current controversy needed avoiding, from the start.

What’s more, they need to attract these many voters only from the pool that was opposed to the Rajapaksas’ ways of governance and politics!

Political vendetta

There may be some truth in Mahinda’s claim that the incumbent government is resorting to ‘political vindictiveness.’ There may still be differences and distinctions in details, as far as specific cases and speciality approaches in investigations may be concerned.

There can be no questioning of the legitimacy or the credibility of the ‘Special Courts’ appointed under a fast-track law, to fast-track criminal cases, especially from Mahinda’s term as President. However, it is anybody’s guess why this Government has not thought of bringing other criminal cases, including that of the ‘Bond Scam’ kind before those Special High Courts, or date it back to the pre-Rajapaksa regime.

It is nobody’s case that the incumbent political leadership of the Government should not go after the Rajapaksas, especially since that was their electoral plank twice in 2015. They won both and their constituencies expected them to deliver on the promises.

The problem, however, is the delays that the Government too seemed to have engineered in fast-tracking these very same cases, investigations and prosecutions. It is not clear if the delay owed to a perception that they would need the Rajapaksas around on the other side of the electoral fence, and needed to ‘fix’ them, for winning polls five years hence.

The more plausible cause for the fast-tracking seems to be the Mahinda-led SLPP-JO’s big victory in the Local Government Poll of February this year. Either way, the fast-tracking of the criminal cases against the Rajapaksas is not innocent and borne out of any honesty of purpose.

Whither Gota?

For close to a decade and a half, the Rajapaksas have been on both sides of the news, positive and negative, when in office and out of it. However, they cannot just now blame the social media, including motivated political campaigns on the medium possibly launched by their adversaries, if they are always on the ‘other side’ of the news.

There are one too many Rajapaksas in public life, and too much of news (only) about them, all the time. So much so very few Sri Lankans knew and fewer remembered that there was a quieter sole back home, Chandra Rajapaksa, the 70-year-old younger brother of Mahinda Rajapaksa, until he breathed his last in native Tangalle, on Tuesday, 21 August.

Time was not many weeks ago when there were clear hints that Mahinda’s other brother, Gotabaya Rajapaksa, was being considered for the presidential poll, if only to circumvent the 19th Amendment restriction on the former. Gota only added fuel to the fire by declaring that he would consider giving up American citizenship (only) if he was first promised the presidential ticket, if not the seat. Today, no one, including Gota, is talking about Gota for presidency.

The idea seemed to be that Gota could get elected as President, and Mahinda, like Vladimir Putin, in distant Russia, could become Prime Minister. The question whether the Constitution would be amended, to withdraw Executive powers from the President and confer it on the Prime Minister remained unanswered.

Through this discourse, no one from the Rajapaksa camp seemed to have considered the possibility of either or both the brothers not being able to make it in the elections. The worse scenario is Gota becoming President and the SLPP-JO combine being unable to obtain parliamentary majority, for Mahinda Rajapaksa to become Prime Minister.

In between came another ghost, in the form of Gota’s American citizenship. There again, the question of possible refusal by the US to accept his surrender of citizenship became the issue. Once again, there was the question of Gota having to move Sri Lankan Courts, just as it has been suggested for Mahinda or a voter (on his behalf) seeking the required judicial clarification on the 19th Amendment.

Inalienable right or what

Maybe Minister Wijeyadasa Rajapakshe is right when he says that under the Constitution, the President alone can seek the ‘opinion’ of the Supreme Court on constitutional matters. In contrast, Mahinda or a voter on his behalf, saying his franchise had been neutralised/challenged, if and only when the Election Commission had rejected the former’s nomination, citing the 19th Amendment.

The same may be the case for Gota and his American citizenship. Here again, the 19th Amendment clause/clarification, barring Sri Lankans with ‘dual citizenship’ from contesting the presidency was aimed only at denying Gota his place in the sun, just as other provisions barred Mahinda from contesting a fourth time (after the 2015 defeat). Thus, Sri Lanka’s 19th Amendment may be the only constitutional provision anywhere in the world that is aimed at denying any two/three siblings from occupying that very Nation’s highest elected office.

That way, unless there is a specific provision for Gota having to register his surrender of American citizenship in a Sri Lankan Court, there is no way he or anyone on his behalf could move the Supreme Court for the purpose. The challenge could come up if and only if the Election Commission rejected his nomination, if and when filed.

Even keeping Mahinda’s parliamentarian-son Namal out of the discourse just now, there are two other Rajapaksa siblings that are also in public. Of them, the eldest one, Chamal Rajapaksa’s name has been the social media alternative to Mahinda and Gota, especially if either of them is unable to contest the presidency. The fourth one, Basil Rajapaksa is also a US citizen, but neither he, nor any section of the SLPP-JO or the social media has put up his name as a presidential candidate. To him also applies the ‘foreigner’ clause in the 19th Amendment.

In this background, it is one thing for a Rajapaksa to stake his claim to become the Nation’s President, and leave it to the voters to decide. They have every right to occupy that seat, as any other. Some may even argue that in the light of war-victory, they may have a greater lien still on the seat than most other politicians of the Nation.

But then, it is for the voters to say it, not for the Rajapaksas to claim it, as if it were an inalienable right, a problem in a democracy, not just for democracy, but for those presupposes of such a situation too. In this, overdoing the political vendetta card could well backfire on its perpetrators, not the Rajapaksas, but those in this Government, instead!

It is not without reason, for, a mere Special Court conviction and sentencing of one or many Rajapaksas cannot be the endgame for their electoral politics. These decisions have to go through the Appellate Judiciary, all the way up to the Supreme Court. In all those paths, the case could well rest, until after the polls are over.

About the author :

The writer is Director, Chennai Chapter of the Observer Research Foundation, the multi-disciplinary Indian public-policy think-tank, headquartered in New Delhi.

sathiyam54@nsathiyamoorthy.com

MPs vehicle abuse case: Amended application to SC to be taken up on Aug. 31-Toyota Land Cruiser most preferred vehicle...

By Shamindra Ferdinando-August 28, 2018, 12:00 pm 

A high profile case involving members of all political parties represented in parliament, except the JVP, abusing duty free vehicle permits will be taken up in the Supreme Court on Aug. 31. The recipients included UNP and its coalition partners, SLMC, ACMC et al, SLFP, Group of 16, Joint Opposition and the four-party Tamil National Alliance (TNA)

Attorney-at-law and public interest litigation activist Nagananda Kodituwakku on Monday (Aug 27) filed an amended application in respect of the MPs’ vehicle abuse case seeking a ruling of contempt of court in accordance with Article 105 (3) of the Constitution.

 Commission to Investigate Allegations of Bribery or Corruption (CIABOC), T.B. Weerasuriya, Chairman to the Commission, Lal Ranjith Silva, member of the Commission, Chandranath Neville Guruge, member of the Commission, Sarath Jayamanne, PC, Director General of the Commission, Dilrukshi Dias Wickramasingle, Deputy Solicitor General and Attorney General Jayantha Jayasuriya have been cited as the respondents.

 In addition to the ruling of contempt of court for the deliberate failure on the part of the CIABOC to carrying out a proper investigation into the MPs’ vehicle abuse case, Koddituwakku prayed for the reinstatement of case against MPs and a directive to the CIABOC to conduct a thorough inquiry.

 An amendment has been submitted in response to the Court directive. The Supreme Court also called for the filing of Attorney General’s submissions made on behalf of the CIABOC some time ago. The AG assured the Supreme Court that the CIABOC would conduct investigation into the original complaint received by the authority.

 In the Amended application petitioner Kodituwakku said that the transfer of vehicles imported under special tax free scheme that had been made available to MPs was contrary to Excise (Special Provision) (Amendment) 8 of 1994 that dealt with the exemption of certain articles from payment of excise duty.

 According to the amended petition, Kodituwakku has complained to the CIABOC on Dec 11, 2014 in the run-up to the last presidential election calling for what he called credible and independent investigation. The CIABOC has, by letter dated March 4, 2015, in the run-up to the last parliamentary polls in 2015 Aug, informed the petitioner that as the issuance of duty free permits was in line with government policy, any loss caused to the state as a result of such did not come within the scope of Section 70 of the Bribery Act.

 In spite of the CIABOC refusal to initiate an inquiry, the petitioner has again complained to the same authority on Aug 26, 2016.

 According to the amended petition, (a) the Sirisena-Wickremesinghe government, in its first fiscal policy statement on Nov 20, 2015 assured parliament that the duty-free permit scheme would be abolished (b) Parliamentary Reforms and Mass Media Secretary in Feb 2016 issued permits to those elected at the Aug 2015 parliamentary polls though he lacked legal authority to do and  (c) subsequently a gazette notification was issued in accordance with Section 3C of the Excise (Special Provisions) Act No 13 of 1989 (as amended by 08 of 1994) empowered the Parliamentary Reforms and Mass Media Secretary to grant total tax exemptions to MPs.

 The amended petition also brought to the notice of the Supreme Court the illegality of third parties receiving tax exemptions granted to elected and appointed members under Section 3C of the Excise (Special Provisions) Act No 13 of 1989 (as amended by Act No 08 of 1994).

 The petitioner also filed in court the latest entire list of members of parliament, including ministers who obtained the duty free facility, under the Right to Information (RTI) law. The list contained the names of those who had acquired the MPs’ vehicles. According to the list available with The Island, Japanese built Toyota Land Cruiser with tax exemption of over Rs 30 mn is the most preferred among MPs. In addition to that Mercedez Benz S 350, Mercedez Benz jeep and Mercedez Benz S 350 diesel.

 The petitioner has calculated the loss of state revenue due to fraudulent transactions involving the duty free permits made available to the members of the current parliament amounted to approximately Rs 7 bn.

SRILANKAN PAID EMBASSY Rs 24 MN FOR RUSSIA FLIGHTS LAUNCH - WITNESS

Kamani Alwis-Thursday, August 30, 2018

Former Defence Secretary Gotabhaya Rajapaksa, former Secretary to the President Lalith Weeratunge and Treasury Secretary Dr. P.B Jayasundera at the Presidential Commission probing into malpractices at SriLankan Airlines at the BMICH yesterday. Pictures by

SriLankan Airlines paid USD 184,700 (nearly Rs 24 million) to the Sri Lankan Embassy in Russia in 2011 to inaugurate direct flights to Moscow while former Ambassador to Russia Udayanga Weeratunga held office, the Presidential Commission of Inquiry was told yesterday.

Sri Lankan Airlines’ Revenue Accounting Senior Manager Upekha Avanthi Abeysekera presenting documents before the Commission probing into the financial irregularities in the SriLankan and Mihin Lanka Airlines and SriLankan Catering Ltd yesterday said it was the first time that the Airlines transferred money to an Embassy for such a purpose.

She said USD 100,000 of the total sum was spent on Ritz-Carlton hotel in Russia, while another USD 34,000 was spent on proving facilities to VVIPs. She said USD 50,000 of the total sum was spent on those who were involved in the tourism sector.

She said that she was not aware of the names of the VVIPs who participated in the event, but added that usually the President and top rung members of the Government are called VVIPs. She was also not aware as to whether an audit report related to the above mentioned transaction was available. She said the payments had been approved by former SriLankan Airlines Chairman Nishantha Wickremasinghe and former SriLankan Airlines CEO Kapila Chandrasena.

Former Secretary to the President Lalith Weeratunga, former Defence Secretary and founding Chairman of Mihin Lanka Airlines Gotabhaya Rajapaksa and former Treasury Secretary Dr. P B Jayasundara appeared before Presidential Commission of Inquiry yesterday.

The Commission probing into the financial irregularities in the Sri Lankan and Mihin Lanka Airlines and Sri Lankan Catering Ltd recorded statements from them.

Sri Lanka sinks deeper into Chinese debt ocean

Colombo to borrow $1bn from China and issue $250mn Panda bonds before year-end

by Marwaan Macan-Markar-Aug 29, 2018Aug 29, 2018

Courtesy: asia.nikkei.com

( August 29, 2018, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) Sri Lanka has again turned to China for a fresh injection of cash, which will come during the final quarter of 2018, as it prepares for a crippling debt repayment cycle that will begin in 2019. But the $1.25 billion in loans will push Sri Lanka deeper into Beijing’s grasp.

China is already the largest lender to the South Asian island.

The Central Bank of Sri Lanka is working with its Chinese counterpart, the People’s Bank of China, to issue the equivalent of $250 million worth of yuan-denominated Panda bonds. Sri Lanka has already secured a $1 billion syndicated loan from China Development Bank on terms the central bank says were more favorable than what Western international lenders were offering. The first $500 million tranche is due to be transferred this week.

Sri Lanka retains an affinity for Chinese loans rather than international sovereign bonds, loans from the International Monetary Fund or other funding options. At the same time, it is being warned that its foreign reserves, now at $8.5 billion, are inadequate.

Between 2019 and 2023, Sri Lanka has to come up with $17 billion for maturing foreign loans and debt servicing. Its lenders include the China Development Bank, the governments of Japan and India as well as multilateral institutions like the World Bank and Asian Development Bank.

Central bank Gov. Indrajit Coomaraswamy said Sri Lanka diversified away from a tradition of only raising money through dollar-denominated international sovereign bonds in an effort to better handle external debt pressure. “Our debt dynamics are challenging, but manageable,” Coomaraswamy told the Nikkei Asian Review. “The debt servicing next year will be a little over $4 billion, including an ISB of $1.5 billion, Sri Lanka development bonds and payments for bilateral and multilateral debts.”

Sri Lanka, which has an $87 billion economy, will actually have to grapple with more debt payments in 2019. Its current-account deficit of 2.2% of gross domestic product will push its total debt burden to be paid for the year to $7 billion. “We are an outlier in terms of our debt indicators amongst our ratings peers,” Coomaraswamy said, referring to central bank figures that say the country’s debt is 77% of its GDP. This is higher than the debt-to-GDP ratio of neighbors India, Pakistan, Malaysia and Thailand.

The country’s accumulated foreign debt is estimated at $55 billion. Chinese lenders hold 10% of this total, Japan accounts for 12%, the Asian Development Bank 14% and the World Bank 11%.

Sri Lanka’s mounting burden has earned it some notoriety, with some observers saying the country is falling into a debt trap of Chinese design. This view gained currency last year, after $1.1 billion in debt was written off in exchange for a long-term lease on the deep-water port of Hambantota, near the southern tip of Sri Lanka. Chinese loans worth $1.5 billion were used to build the port, the lease to which is held by a state-owned Chinese company.

Mahinda Rajapaksa, the former president of Sri Lanka who presided over the end of a nearly 30-year civil war, opened the door to Chinese lenders.

From 2010 till 2015, Rajapaksa’s final years in office, Chinese poured $4.8 billion worth of loans into building the Hambantota port, a new airport, a coal-fired power plant and highways. By 2016, Chinese had loaned Sri Lanka $6 billion, fueling an infrastructure-building spree.

But the largest slice of debt that will mature over the next five years predates the Chinese lending boom. Multilateral institutions gave Sri Lanka 10-year grace periods and 30- to 40-year maturities on loan deals signed when the Indian Ocean nation was considered to have successfully embraced an open, liberal economy.

“We were a bit of a donor darling because, after Chile in 1974, we were second, and got a lot of concessional loans from the World Bank and the Asian Development Bank as a low-income country that had opted to liberalize,” Coomaraswamy said. A “significant portion of the debt stock is that concessional money that came from multilateral and bilateral financial sources.”

Sri Lanka’s debt has dogged the coalition government of President Maithripala Sirisena. After nearly four years in office, the government has little to show in the way of foreign direct investment. It attracted $1.7 billion worth of FDI in 2017, far lower than the ambitious target of $2.5 billion. Likewise, the government has failed to improve the country’s global ranking for ease of doing business. Sri Lanka sits in 111th place.

Its multibillion dollar trade deficit has been another drag.

Equally troubling, the government has made little headway against burdensome state-owned enterprises. They include Ceylon Petroleum Corporation, Ceylon Electricity Board, the Sri Lanka Ports Authority and Sri Lankan, the national carrier, whose combined debt is estimated at $7.93 billion, according to the IMF.

Coomaraswamy is banking on government policies beyond fiscal commitments to slow the rising tide of red ink. “To overcome the situation we need to get nondebt creating inflows,” he said. “We need to get more FDI and to boost export growth.”

Japan’s interest in Trincomalee and the ‘great game’ in the Indian Ocean

  

Japanese Defence Minister Itsunori Onodera photographed with Indian Defence Minister Nirmala Sitharaman in New Delhi

2018-08-30

The visit of Japan’s Defence Minister Itsunori Onodera to Sri Lanka (Aug 20-22) has significance that goes beyond the fact that it is the first ever by a Japanese Defence Minister to this country. Onodera’s visit took the form of a tour of Sri Lanka’s major ports – Colombo, Trincomalee and Hambantota. It took place within a web of other developments internationally, pointing to heightened geo-strategic interest in the Indian Ocean region.
 
It is not without significance that Onodera, before his arrival in Sri Lanka, held talks with India’s Defence Minister Nirmala Sitharaman in Delhi, where the two sides reportedly agreed to start talks on an ‘Acquisition and Cross Service Agreement’. Among other measures to “counter China’s growing influence in South Asia” they also discussed preparations for the first joint exercise by Japan’s Ground Self Defence Force and the Indian Army, according to Japan Times. It’s no secret that the US, India and Japan have apprehensions over China’s investments in Sri Lanka including strategic assets like ports, roads and railways, seen as part of its ‘Belt and Road Initiative’. The status of Hambantota port in particular, after the government gave its operation to China on a 99-year lease, was followed by accelerated responses designed to counter China. 

---

• Onodera, before his arrival in Sri Lanka, held talks with India’s Defence Minister Nirmala Sitharaman in Delhi
• Colombage warns that strategic assets like ports, airports and roads “should not be given to country A, B or C. 
• The assertions by some government ministers that Onodera’s visit had ‘no defence or political’ aspect, sound disingenuous

---

Japan depends on sea lanes of the Indian and Pacific Oceans for the import of all its energy requirements, and this has led to its vigorous promotion of a ‘free and open Indo-Pacific’ concept, endorsed by the US. On 20th August Alice Wells, US Deputy Assistant Secretary for South and Central Asian Affairs held a press briefing in Washington on ‘US Policy in the Indian Ocean Region’ where she drew attention to the US’s recently announced $300 million in security funding for the region. In this context she mentioned the US’s Bay of Bengal initiative (not to be confused with BIMSTEC) which she said “will enhance the capacity of Bangladesh and Sri Lanka to share shipping information with other partners in the region such as India…” It’s also relevant that in response to a journalist’s question, Wells remarked “… I think one of the great new elements of our relationship with India is that we are working in third parties and third countries.” 

It would seem that all of these developments taking place around the same time, are too much of a coincidence to be a coincidence. The visit of a Japanese warship to Trincomalee port during Onodera’s visit, was followed by the arrival of the amphibious transport dock USS Anchorage - part of the US 7th fleet - in Trincomalee, for a visit that included exercises with the SL Navy and Marines. The strategic motives behind frequent US naval ship visits to Sri Lanka’s ports were laid bare in the remarks of the US embassy’s Charge d’Affaires Robert Hilton who said: “We’re also excited to try out the air logistics hub concept which utilizes Sri Lanka’s strategic location in the Indian Ocean to ensure the quick availability of relief supplies, equipment and other material when needed by the U.S. and partner militaries and humanitarian organizations.” The military overtones though not explicit, were clear. 

The fear that China will use Hambantota as a military base persists, in spite of assurances to the contrary from both Sri Lanka and China. This was obviously the concern underlying Onodero’s remark to NHK World:“Despite China’s long term lease, it is internationally acknowledged that the port should be free and open to the public.”

Questioning the assumptions behind this comment Admiral (Prof) Jayanath Colombage, Director of the Centre for Indo-Lanka initiatives and Law of the Sea at the Pathfinder Foundation asked “Why should someone tell us what to do? We are an open country, we welcome (ships from) all. None of the Sri Lankan ports should be used by anyone for military purposes.” Pointing out that in the period 2009–2018 warships from no less than 27 countries visited Sri Lanka, the former Navy Commander asked “What is meant by ‘military purposes?’ If a ship calls in a port for fuel, water etc it’s not military but a goodwill visit. If they come to act against another country, that is military” he said. “We welcome anyone, only they shouldn’t come with the intention of harming anyone, especially India.” 

Against the backdrop of a fast changing external environment, how well have Sri Lanka’s political leaders and policy makers steered the course? Regrettably, rather than skillfully balancing diplomacy with economic and defence priorities, the government appears to be trying to set off investment opportunities given to one foreign power against concessions granted to another, in an ad hoc manner, lacking any consistent policy designed to serve the national interest. “Sri Lanka tried to allay New Delhi’s fears over Hambantota by entering into a joint venture with India’s airports authority to lease out the Hambantota international airport to manage it,” said a PTI report, reflecting this perception. 
Colombage warns that strategic assets like ports, airports and roads “should not be given to country A, B or C. 

They should be developed as joint ventures or with foreign direct investment but their ownership should be with Sri Lanka.” 

The downplaying of Onodera’s visit to the Trincomalee Oil Tank Farm – which was not mentioned as part of his itinerary in any of the official statements - is another puzzle. More so because this site has historical significance. In the course of World War II,on 9th April 1942 one of the tanks was hit and completely destroyed by Japanese kamikaze suicide pilots, during an attack on Trincomalee naval base in which hundreds of airmen are said to have been killed. The oil tank farm is “the largest tank farm in South Asia and of great strategic value as it falls between West Asia and Singapore,” according to a 2013 PTI report. The use of the remaining 99 tanks, in which India has a partial stake, has also been subject to some controversy. 


At a time when the defence dimension has become inextricably entangled with Sri Lanka’s infrastructure development involving strategic assets, the assertions by some government ministers that Onodera’s visit had ‘no defence or political’ aspect, sound disingenuous. The Trincomalee leg of his tour - handled by the SLN and not the Sri Lanka Ports Authority - clearly had a defence dimension, buttressed by the Japanese ship visit during the tour. Defence cooperation and maritime security were key elements in the statements by President Sirisena and Prime Minister Wickremesinghe following their meetings with the Japanese Defence Minister. The PM’s statement in fact started with reference to the importance ‘developing defence ties’ and an ‘MoU on Defence’ (‘avabodataa givisumak’). It may be inferred that any such agreement would be consonant with US and Indian objectives in the region. 

The efforts to deflect attention away from Trincomalee, the most strategically important stop in Onodera’s tour, only give rise to more speculation as to whether a defence agreement was discussed.

Instead of blaming media for carrying misleading reports, the government would do better to demonstrate transparency regarding agreements it reaches, or hopes to reach, with other countries, no matter whether they relate to trade, investment or defence.   

Selecting a competent construction worker: A conjecture?

Thursday, 30 August 2018

Once, I wanted the service of a plumber to install a new, natural gas line for an outdoor built-in barbeque structure. This was as an extension to the existing gas supply line. It is noted here that, in Australia, where I live, natural gas supply lines are available at the road side and the installation of gas lines is a plumbing activity.

It was an expensive job, not due to the complexity of the job but due to the need of a licenced installer to carry out the work. At the completion of the installation, I was issued with a compliance certificate, attesting that the work had been carried out according to the Australian Standards and the Building Code of Australia. A copy of the compliance certificate had been uploaded to the website of the utility authority by the plumber, as a compulsory official record of the work.

By the way, while progressing with the installation, I asked the plumber whether he could also install a water connection point near a water-closet so that I could later connect a douche (flexible hose spray unit). He initially refused to do it saying that it would be an illegal work. Then, he explained me that if I really wanted it at that location, it must be accompanied with a back-flow prevention device at the connection to the supply line. This device was needed to prevent contamination of drinking water supply due to back flow effect of unhygienic water in the toilet. I had to abandon the idea due to the high cost involved and the compliance issues.

The message I received was twofold.

In Australia, only licenced tradesmen are allowed to carry out significant construction works and they should abide by the legislative requirements and national quality standards.

If any illegal construction works are done, there will be legal consequences to the executor (the worker) as well as the receptor of the illegal work.

Finding a competent construction worker (a good bass-un-nahe)

During my recent visit to Sri Lanka, an ardent reader of Daily FT (a close relative of mine as well) opened up a discussion on the inability to recognise good workmen as there is no systematic and reliable method to do so.

In Sri Lanka, one has to rely upon personal recommendations and references to select a tradesman such as a mason, a carpenter, an electrician or a painter. The inherent issue here is that there is no established quality benchmark that comes with the personal recommendation. The recommender’s assertions such as “good, bad, alright” are relative assessments and these recommendations are only valid under a particular set of operating conditions in a given work environment. “Good” under certain operating conditions is not necessarily “good enough” under a different operating environment. Hence, until the worker finishes the construction work, no one could envisage what would be the quality of the outcome.

This is not a healthy situation for a developing country. The construction industry needs a comprehensively assessed qualified, skilled and competent workforce. Hence, what a country needs is an established worker skill and competency assessment process and a regulatory system of issuing relevant work category licences. This would guarantee that the licenced workers possess the minimum required levels of knowledge, skills and experience to perform specified tasks, in a safe manner.


Overseas initiatives

It took a while for me to understand how the Australian education system operates and how migrants’ overseas qualifications and training components are assessed and recognised for accreditation purposes. This understanding was enhanced through my personal involvement of getting my own professional qualification assessed and also selecting different study courses, during the last 20 years. I must confess that this information may not be complete enough to cover the whole system set-up but as a catalyst, this would be good enough for Sri Lankan authorities to initiate a professional discussion on this subject. The Australian Qualifications Framework (AQF) is the national policy for regulated qualifications in Australian education and training. Anyone could follow a formal educational study program and or a training program provided by an educational institute but what matters at the end of the day, is whether the particular study or training program could be slotted into the Australian Qualifications Framework and whether the program is formally recognised under the AQF.

In the AQF, there are 10 progressive levels that are described in terms of knowledge and skills. A person who achieves the Level One has the foundational knowledge and foundational cognitive, technical and communication skills. That individual has the ability to apply this knowledge and skills in highly structured and stable work environments. On the contrary, the Level 10 would give a person systematic and complex body of knowledge and expert cognitive, technical and research skills. Such a person can apply his or her knowledge and skills with autonomy and makes expert judgements as a leading practitioner of the chosen profession.

Then, there is a hierarchical qualification list under the AQF and the aforementioned levels are incorporated into the types of qualifications. It starts with the Certificate I, II, III, IV and progresses with Diploma, Advanced Diploma, Associate Degree, Bachelor Degree, Bachelor Honours Degree, Graduate Certificate, Graduate Diploma, Masters Degree and Doctoral Degree. My focus here is the certificate level qualifications.  Certificate level qualifications are highly relevant to the workers who follow instructions and carry out operational level works. A developing country must pay attention to this area as the quality of the construction outputs depends on how organised the system administration processes at this level.

It must be emphasised that in Australia, just having the educational certificates would not be enough to become a licensed tradesperson such as a plumber, carpenter or an electrician. The formal qualifications at this lower spectrum of the framework only covers the educational requirements for a potential licensee.

After obtaining formal educational and training qualifications, to qualify for a licence, one must work for a nominated period as an apprentice, under a licenced tradesman of the relevant trade category. Upon evaluation of both qualifications and apprentice’s training components, the relevant licensing authority would issue an annually renewable trade licence which would ‘only’ allow the person to work as a contractor (tradesperson) under the supervision of a licenced supervisor.

After gaining the nominated period of work experience as a contract tradesperson, the particular individual can apply for a supervisor’s licence which would allow him or her to work as an independent tradesperson without someone hovering behind as a supervisor. The licence holders have strict work conditions imposed by the licencing authority, warning them not to carry out non-compliance, unsafe and un-licenced works. Any proven complaints and legal actions taken against a licenced tradesperson are recorded under the name of licence holder and these records are open for public scrutiny. Anyone could check on the trade licence number and find out whether the licence is currently valid and or whether there are any previous non-compliances or complaints recorded against the licenced person.


Assessment of qualifications and experience

Australian society is multi-ethnic and multicultural. People migrate to Australia from many countries. Obviously, many of these immigrants have a wide variety of formal qualifications, training, experience and skills. However, these credentials are not exactly equivalent to the same, within the Australian system.

‘Giving a fair go’, ‘recognition of practical ability to perform tasks over the paper qualifications’ and ‘safety first’ are the three main concepts in focus during the assessment process. No overseas qualifications are directly accepted for issuing a trade licence in NSW, Australia. The applicants who obtained overseas training have the responsibility to demonstrate their skills and knowledge through a structured assessment process to obtain licences.

Australian Skills Quality Authority registers training providers and they are called Registered Training Providers (RTO). There are around 5,000 regulatory authority registered training organisations in Australia who are providers of quality assured, nationally recognised training and qualification. Also, the Trades Recognition Australia (TRA) is a skills assessment service provider specialising in assessments for people with trade skills gained overseas or in Australia. TRA also registers and approves training providers.


Quo Vadis Sri Lanka?

Where is Sri Lanka heading? This is the question the general public asks from the Government regulatory authorities that are responsible for formulating and administration of construction sector regulations.

The quality of life of a nation heavily depends on fulfilment of their basic needs. The availability of reliable, compliant, quality basic utility services at affordable prices is an essential ingredient of this quest. In the developed countries, the public authorities work hard to ensure properly commissioned utility services are available at the front of each property so that the residents can engage a utility service provider to make the necessary connections. Residents of newly developed suburbs in Australia have underground-laid services such as water, gas, electricity, high speed broadband internet, telephone, pay TV located in the road reserve in front of each property.

This should be Sri Lanka’s long term aim.

In Australia, it is the responsibility of the residential and commercial property owners to install own utility service lines within their land and extend such service lines up to the boundary of the road reserve so that the utility authorities could approve the service connections, when requested. Utility authorities would not approve the connections, if the builders have not completed the construction works according to the Australian Standards. This means that only the licenced builders, plumbers, carpenters, electricians are allowed to install such service lines and carry out construction and building works.

To streamline this process, there should be a well-qualified workforce and also a comprehensive regulatory system to train people, issue licences and re-train them periodically, in line with the changes to the quality standards and the legislative provisions. In Australia, such a system is in place. Sri Lanka needs one.

Sri Lankan general public wants the value for money spent on construction works. They expect quality and compliant work. Sri Lankan authorities have a duty to ensure the public receives this.

I understand that there are so many capable Sri Lankan tradesmen who don’t have paper qualifications. That is perfectly fine as the ability to do the job matters the most. However, what is required is an assessment process of their practical capabilities, skills and knowledge and place them on a “Quality Scale”. They must be educated on what tasks are allowed for them to perform, how works are done safely maintaining acceptable minimum quality. Especially, the trained workers should know their knowledge and proficiency limitations and when and for which, they should seek assistance from a supervisor or an expert.

In Sri Lanka, especially in out-stations, untrained, unqualified workers rip-off the general public by undertaking works outside their capability domain. Often, some engineering assistants pretend as assistant engineers, draft-persons act as architects, masons act as construction officers and electricians act as electrical designers without undergoing any accreditation process before attempting relevant works.

A cook is not a chef. While a cook can follow a recipe and make a meal, a chef could use a variety of ingredients, develop an innovative recipe and make a delicious meal. In the Sri Lankan construction sector, many cooks act as chefs producing inedible meals. The whole country is getting sick. This is an alarming situation.

I am not against the people with practical experience over formal qualifications. My request is to implement an assessment and accreditation process and issue them relevant licences. Hence, there should be a licencing system in place for Sri Lankan skilled workers for each trade-work category. This must be implemented within a sound legal framework to crack down unlicensed works and to take legal actions against violators.

The ball is travelling fast towards the regulatory authorities’ bat. Play it or let it pass to the keeper is their choice. The country’s future prosperity depends on their choice.

(Eng. Janaka Seneviratne is a Chartered Professional Engineer, a Fellow and an International Professional Engineer of both the Institution of Engineers, Sri Lanka and Australia. He holds two Masters Degrees in Local Government Engineering and in Engineering Management and at present, works for the Australian NSW Local Government Sector. His mission is to share his 31 years of local and overseas experience to inspire Sri Lankan professionals. He is contactable via senevir15@gmail.com.)

Living in fear, a price too steep for people of Mekong

Flood victims wait for aid in Sanamxai, Attapeu province, on July 26, 2018. Damage from dam collapses have displaced millions of people around throughout history. Source: Kao Nguyen/AFP

THE COLLAPSE of a dam at the Xe Pian -Xe Nam Noy hydropower project was tragic.

By Socheata Sim | 27th August 2018

Immediate assessments say 39 people died, many suffered injuries, and thousands are left homeless, with their means of income lost for the foreseeable future.

However, beyond these numbers, we’re yet to find the real damage. The government will investigate what led to this massive calamity, and we urge them to present the findings to the people of Lao.

Going a step further, the Lao government announced a review of all dams – both fully operational and under construction, suspended the plans for new hydro-dam projects, and committed to re-examining their hydropower strategy and plans.

These are commendable decisions. However, this step in the right direction lost some of its shine due to plans to continue with the assessments for the proposed Pak Lay dam, and it leaves us worried as previously many evaluations have failed to identify the risks correctly.

Parents carry their children as they leave their home during the flood after the hydropower dam collapse on July 26, 2018. Source: Reuters/Soe Zeya Tun

SEE ALSO: 5 ways the global hydropower boom is displacing millions

In working with women and men from the Mekong region for over a decade, what we’ve realised is that positive change can only be achieved through giving communities a say about the development projects.

After all, they should be the intended beneficiaries of development.

However, they unfortunately and too often end up bearing the brunt of consequences when things go wrong. Policy or practice designed by experts, economists, and engineers often lead to mediocre outcomes at best, exactly because they forgot to heed the needs of the communities.

Xe Pian -Xe Nam Noy is not the first dam failure in the region with deadly consequences for the communities felt beyond the national borders.

Yet, there was no transboundary impact assessment done before the dam was built. There was also no such evaluation conducted prior to the construction of the Yali Falls dam, where a sudden release of water into the Sesan River in Vietnam in 2000 resulted in flash floods downstream destroying lives, communities, and livelihoods in Cambodia.

From far away in our urban dwellings across Asia, it’s hard for us to imagine what it must feel like to be living in a community downstream of a dam; for so long they have been touted as milestones of progress.

SEE ALSO: Was climate change a factor in the Laos dam disaster?

But for the people of the Mekong, now acutely aware of the looming threat and having witnessed the worst come true for those just like them, the reality is bleak. Especially given they have little or no power to lessen the risks and take action to protect their family, home and livelihood.

This was a human-made disaster that could and should have been avoided.

There should have been effective and timely warning systems in place. Mistakes have been made, and we hope that there will be an open and public discussion with lessons taken to heart and acted upon.

Communities living downstream of dam projects often pay a steep price when these structures collapse. Source: Oxfam

However, as found out by Oxfam partner My Village, the people of the Mekong have their doubts.

“We are still worried and scared to replant the vegetable crops destroyed during the flood. Villagers who have relatives in Laos claim floods from the dam will come again,” said Pheng Sivath, deputy president of a community-based organisation in Siem Pang District, Stung Treng Province, Cambodia.

Their worries are well justified because there’s a clear lack of functional early warning and information dissemination systems in place.

“Mechanisms for information dissemination, such as disaster warning and flood prevention between Laos and Cambodia for tributary rivers like the Xe Kong, are weak to non-existent,

“Clearly more transboundary cooperation is needed. Perhaps this crisis will drive progress in the conversation,” said Brian Eyler, director of Stimson Center’s Southeast Asia program, in a conversation with South China Morning Post.

SEE ALSO: Are you sure climate change is the real cause of ‘natural disasters’?

These fears and communication breakdowns can easily translate into unbearable economic losses for poverty-stricken communities living downstream in Cambodia struggling to make ends meet.

Losses like these can tip them into indebtedness with negative consequences for their families. Their worries remain intact as they are yet to see any compensation for their losses or moves to allay their fears despite having been directly impacted by last month’s calamity.

Oxfam has been working with communities across Asia and around the world, helping them to reduce risks and make their communities safer.

We find early warning systems where people can access information quickly, reliably, and in ways that make sense to them, to be effective in saving lives and communities.

Properly designed systems allow communities to access the same information as the authorities, and often they cost little.  We are piloting such systems with communities across borders in South Asia; however, sharing information, even about rising water levels, between countries remains a challenge due to sovereignty concerns.

A woman grieves in the flood ravaged village in Sanamxai, Attapeu province, on July 26, 2018. Floodwaters inundated the village after the dam collapsed. Source: Nhac Nhuyen/AFP

Across the region and elsewhere, we are already seeing unexpected repercussions of hydropower dams affecting women and men who live downstream.

Many communities of the Mekong are left worse off due to the reduction of soil fertility exacerbated by climate change, reduced fish stocks impacting their livelihoods and dietary habits, and the resettlement of villages to make way for development. The governments’ and developers’ promises of prosperity have failed to deliver.

SEE ALSO: Laos pushes ahead with Mekong dams despite environmental risks

If we are serious about learning from this catastrophic collapse, we need to think beyond merely pushing the same development agenda with some safety precautions.

We need to look at sustainable, long-term development solutions that put people at the center.

We need initiatives that take into account the communities, their lifestyles, viewpoints, and issues, whether they are up or downstream or across the basin.

If we fail to do that, we’d be left with development that benefits only a few at the cost of the many. And, that is too steep a price to pay.

** This is the personal opinion of the writer and does not reflect the views of Asian Correspondent