Friday, November 9, 2018

'Remarkable' decline in fertility rates

By James GallagherHealth and science correspondent, BBC News-9 November 2018

There has been a remarkable global decline in the number of children women are having, say researchers.

Their report found fertility rate falls meant nearly half of countries were now facing a "baby bust" - meaning there are insufficient children to maintain their population size.

The researchers said the findings were a "huge surprise".

And there would be profound consequences for societies with "more grandparents than grandchildren".

How big has the fall been?

The study, published in the Lancet, followed trends in every country from 1950 to 2017.

In 1950, women were having an average of 4.7 children in their lifetime. The fertility rate all but halved to 2.4 children per woman by last year.

But that masks huge variation between nations.

The fertility rate in Niger, west Africa, is 7.1, but in the Mediterranean island of Cyprus women are having one child, on average.

In the UK, the rate is 1.7, similar to most Western European countries.

How high does the fertility rate have to be?

The total fertility rate is the average number of children a woman gives birth to in their lifetime (it's different to the birth rate which is the number of children born per thousand people each year).

Whenever a country's rate drops below approximately 2.1 then populations will eventually start to shrink (this "baby bust" figure is significantly higher in countries which have high rates of death in childhood).

At the start of the study, in 1950, there were zero nations in this position.

Prof Christopher Murray, the director of the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation at the University of Washington, told the BBC: "We've reached this watershed where half of countries have fertility rates below the replacement level, so if nothing happens the populations will decline in those countries.

"It's a remarkable transition.

"It's a surprise even to people like myself, the idea that it's half the countries in the world will be a huge surprise to people."

Which countries are affected?

More economically developed countries including most of Europe, the US, South Korea and Australia have lower fertility rates.

It does not mean the number of people living in these countries is falling, at least not yet as the size of a population is a mix of the fertility rate, death rate and migration.

It can also take a generation for changes in fertility rate to take hold.

But Prof Murray said: "We will soon be transitioning to a point where societies are grappling with a declining population."

Half the world's nations are still producing enough children to grow, but as more countries advance economically, more will have lower fertility rates.

'We'd rather give our daughter the best of everything'

Rachael Jacobs, 38, of Kent, had her first and only child seven years ago

I'd always focused on my career. When I was pregnant I was still focusing on my career.

I know now that we can survive on what we earn as a family and still go on holiday every year. If we had more than one child we couldn't go on holiday.

We'd rather give our daughter the best of everything than have multiple children that we can just about feed and clothe.

My partner and I are also thinking about the future. We want to be in a position where we can help her financially with university or housing. I don't want to ever have to say that she can't go to a party or have a new Christmas jumper.

Why is the fertility rate falling?

The fall in fertility rate is not down to sperm counts or any of the things that normally come to mind when thinking of fertility.

Instead it is being put down to three key factors:

Fewer deaths in childhood meaning women have fewer babies
Greater access to contraception
More women in education and work

In many ways, falling fertility rates are a success story.

What will the impact be?

Without migration, countries will face ageing and shrinking populations.

Dr George Leeson, director of the Oxford Institute of Population Ageing, says that does not have to be a bad thing, as long as the whole of society adjusts to the massive demographic change.

He told the BBC: "Demography impacts on every single aspect of our lives, just look out of your window at the people on the streets, the houses, the traffic, the consumption, it is all driven by demography.

"Everything we plan for is not just driven by the numbers in the population, but also the age structure and that is changing, so fundamentally we haven't got our heads around it."

He thinks workplaces are going to have to change and even the idea of retiring at 68, the current maximum in the UK, will be unsustainable.

The report, part of the Global Burden of Diseases analysis, says affected countries will need to consider increasing immigration, which can create its own problems, or introducing policies to encourage women to have more children, which often fail.

A doctor checks foetal heart rate in a pregnant woman

The fertility rate in Niger, west Africa, is 7.1

Report author Prof Murray argues: "On current trends there will be very few children and lots of people over the age of 65 and that's very difficult to sustain global society.

"Think of all the profound social and economic consequences of a society structured like that with more grandparents than grandchildren.

"I think Japan is very aware of this, they're facing declining populations, but I don't think it's hit many countries in the West, because low fertility has been compensated with migration.

"At a global level there is no migration solution," Prof Murray says.

But while the change may challenge societies, it may also have environmental benefits given the impact of our species.

What about China?

China has seen huge population growth since 1950, going from around half a billion inhabitants to 1.4 billion.

But it too is facing the challenge of fertility rates, which stood at only 1.5 in 2017, and has recently moved away from its famous one child policy.

The reason developed countries need a fertility rate of 2.1 is because not all children survive to adulthood and babies are ever so slightly more likely to be male than female.

But in China, the report shows for every 100 girls born there were 117 boys which "imply very substantial sex-selective abortion and even the possibility of female infanticide".

That means even more children need to be born to have a stable population.

Follow James on Twitter.

Gotabhaya hits out at critics and denies that ‘a single Tamil journalist was killed’

Photograph: Johann Mikaelsson via JDSLanka

07Nov 2018

Sri Lanka’s former defence secretary Gotabhaya Rajapaksa denied that any Tamil journalists were killed during his tenure and lashed out at critics in an interview this week.

Speaking with Johan Mikaelsson, Rajapaksa claimed he was “100% sure” that no Tamil journalists were killed or disappeared and lamented that “there is no end to complaints”.

Extracts of the interview with Mikaelsson (JM) and Rajapaksa (GR) are below:

“I don’t think any Tamil journalists were killed during that time,” [GR] said and began talking about the areas controlled by the government and the areas held by the LTTE.

JM: “Yes, but a number of journalists were killed in areas controlled by the government, in Colombo, Batticaloa and ...”

GR: “No.”

JM: “In Trincomalee, Jaffna ...”

GR: “No. No. They were perhaps killed by LTTE, who opposed some of the Tamil journalists. But otherwise I can not see that any Tamil journalists were killed during that period.”

JM: “But there were actually several!”

GR: “No, it’s incorrect information.”

JM: “Tamil journalists were kidnapped and ...”

GR: “If you want to take my word on it: This is incorrect information. Not a single Tamil politician or journalist was murdered during that period in Colombo or Batticaloa. But LTTE tried to kill some. I do not remember the details, because it has been a long time since. I am sure no Tamil journalists were assassinated or disappeared. I am 100 percent sure.”

A report by Together Against Genocide found that since the beginning of the reign of the United People’s Freedom Alliance coalition government in 2004, at least 48 journalists or media workers were killed on the island, making it one of the most dangerous places in the world for reporters.

Rajapaksa, who took up the post of defence secretary in 2015 and headed up the military offensive that killed tens of thousands of Tamil civilians, though justified censorship of the press during his reign.

“If you do not report correctly and think about the country’s best, problems arise. Therefore, the government-imposed restrictions,” he said. “Imposing restrictions on the media was necessary to get people to support the government’s war effort, which was a necessity.”

He also spoke out against efforts in pushing for accountability, stating that “any incident taken up will push people further apart”.

“We have to leave the past behind,” he said.

See the full text of the interview here.

Gotabhaya was Sri Lanka’s defence secretary during the final phase of the armed conflict where Sri Lankan troops systematically shelled hospitals, no fire zones and committed widespread sexual violence. In the past he has defended the military’s bombing of hospitals, and even stands accused of giving direct orders to execute surrendering Tamils.

President has likely been suffering from a mental disorder - Mujibur Rahman

KALANA KRISHANTHA-NOV 08 2018

United National Party (UNP) stated that President Maithripala Sirisena has likely been suffering from a mental disorder, and they requested family members of President to check the mental condition of President and consult a psychiatric doctor.

Addressing a media briefing Today at Temple Trees, UNP parliamentarian Mujibur Rahman said that it was essential to check the psychological condition of the President Sirisena in this crucial moment as whole country has a doubt regarding whether President Sirisena was in proper mental condition or not.

He noted that President`s political decisions were controversial, doubtful and if this continues country will go towards an anarchy.

“He is telling something the morning, say completely different thing in the evening, this puzzle to all of us, why this is happening. It`s terrible that executive President of the country behaving such manner.”, he said.

“President said he had discussed Karu and Sajith to give them prime minister Position, six months ago. And after that he said he removed Prime Minister Wickremesinghe due to a two month old conspiracy claims by some individual. So, why he discussed six months ago with Karu and Sajith to make them Prime Ministers.”, Rahaman questioned.

Reminding previous comments of President Sirisena over Prime Minister Rajapaksa ,Rahman said the change was unbelievable.

“Months ago, he said he would not allow Rajpaksa dynasty to come power again. And said they were robbers, murderers and thugs.Now, he is saying Mahinda Rajapaksa is a real human being.So, we request from the family members Sirisena to consult psychiatric doctor and treat him from proper treatments,if President has any psychological disease.”,Rahman said.

The fault line in our joint fate

STATE: riven – Pic by Shehan Gunasekara

Friday, 9 November 2018

As we struggle to put it down in black and white today, the writing on the wall is still visible if fading. It suggests that Sri Lanka as an emerging democratic republic has been weighed in the scales and found wanting in the balance. And not simply because a despicable coup threw us off equilibrium. But because our myriad responses indicate a nation-state deeply riven.

There is much to be said for democracy: ‘the worst form of government – except for all the others’. It shows. It hurts to know it; to be able to do nothing about it. It has made even the best among us mad, bad and dangerous to know…
One hand

On the one hand the push factor. A president rudely shoving his one-time prime minister and erstwhile coalition partner in the back… in a one-sided public spat after a long private battle perhaps. An inflamed crowd – vanguard of a horde of marauding barbarians at the gate, perhaps – roaring their murderous approval at the undignified exit of a democratically elected government. The shocking way in which strategic or simply silly orators enamoured of their own self-serving rhetoric can privilege hype over reality, hysteria over reason, homophobia over respect.
Iron in the glove
On the other hand an element of pull. An embattled prime minister spewing infuriated principle on the lawn of a once little hallowed precinct, which his political enemies claim is illegally occupied to date. A slumbering party machine that had fallen asleep on our democratic project slowly grinding in ascending gears towards activity on the popular front that might prove too little, too late – to save itself and/or ‘democracy’. Republican mothers and grannies on the mean streets proclaiming liberty even if it did not necessarily equate with the green party. Staunch defenders of the neoliberal faith inviting the public to – or is that inveigling into – rage against the dying of the light.
The body count
But the dichotomies elsewhere are not as clearly remarkable as in the public or political spheres. Behind the scenes, strong partisan feelings and coldly calculated propaganda are framing the issue. Plus moulding and shaping the ongoing national crisis into a golden calf whose image pleases them and their cronies or cabals. These include virtually all stakeholders across the spectrum of civil society.

To supply but one instance of the deep divisions in our society, a single act – the speaker’s convening of parliament on 14 November – has been hailed as ‘defiant’ in a deliberately apolitical newspaper, ‘courageous’ in business circles, ‘unconstitutional’ among legal experts propping up the coup, and ‘traitorous’ by the de facto government spokespersons.

It’s a private and personal sphere of contesting opinions. An arena where, in the shifting sands of ideas, idealism or the utter and entire lack thereof, there are no victors – only a growing number of bodies in the amphitheatre. We only fear that when Caesar grows impatient and the legionaries are sent in, before or after the triumphal parade, the body count will mount geometrically.
Funny ha-ha if not peculiar
And the ironies abound while inconsistencies multiply the present crisis from being a nuisance to a nasty business.

That a supposedly spartan president who groused publicly at the state of snacks on our debt-ridden national airline is willing to splurge millions of taxpayer money in a referendum to endorse his decision is staggering. When the simple expedient of convening the House would settle his mind, to say nothing of ours as a nation.

Then there’s the putative counterrevolution led by the speaker. A venerable archon-in-waiting whose best efforts are so easily stymied by a mere sergeant-at-arms and the obstinacy of a bureaucracy standing their ground over a gazette notification.

Need we mention the ludicrous own goal where by dint of opening his mouth and placing his foot as well as his future in it, a national leader and would-be party-unifier told his supporters that his first and second choices were tantamount to infidelity – even by the shoddy standards of a marriage of convenience founded on the bedrock of realpolitik?

The only comic relief in all of this is an angry statement by a former minister complaining that with two prime ministers competing for legitimacy, the bureaucracy has ground to a halt. “No one in government offices is working these days,” he has lamented loudly in a hilarious jeremiad. Well sir, at least some things never change. O for such constancy in state stability and genuinely national government!
To be whole again
In the meanwhile we all play games. A. Attrition: “Rangé, are you coming this way?” B. Posturing: “They tried to bribe me!” (Tell that to the Marines, please – or the Bribery Commission, better still. C. Rumour-mongering: parliament will be dissolved tonight; parliament may be prorogued again. D. Number-crunching: we have it – UNP; but we’ve 113+ (the prez or de facto PM), 115 (a stage crony), 120-125 (maybe maths fail ex JVP). Even I can’t keep the derision out of my tone.

Not because I’m partisan. But because I think that the proper relationship of a penman to a politico is that of a dog to a lamppost. And even as a dyspeptic media hound I’d hesitate to piddle on democratically elected leaders. De facto governments and their pet poodles are exempt from the tenor of my contempt.

Time will tell. And that’s what’s running out for a nation, coalition government, and a deeply divided state that was staggering along on borrowed time – and money – anyway.

(Journalist | Editor-at-large of LMD | Writer #SpeakingTruthToPower)

Military might & slight in Sri Lanka

Implicating war heroes in coup conspiracies, assassination plots and contrived misdemeanours for political reasons undermines the health of Sri Lanka’s military

by Ashok K Mehta-Nov 7, 2018

( November 7, 2018, New Delhi, Sri Lanka Guardian) With no effective Government in Sri Lanka after the soft coup by President Maithripala Sirisena on October 26, a floor test for the two prime ministerial claimants scheduled on November 14, and an insecure President presiding over the shambles, is it surprising that the Colombo Fort Magistrate Ranga Dissanayaka has ordered the arrest of the country’s top military officer, Chief of Defence Staff, Admiral Ravindra Wijegunaratne before November 9. This is not the first time such a remand has been ordered — it was twice earlier too including once when CDS was in Mexico, though Sirisena intervened as Defence Minister and Commander-in-Chief to close the case after Wijegunaratne’s statement had been recorded. Apparently, the case did not close.

There is no National Security Advisor (NSA) in Sri Lanka, only a CDS, appointed under an Act approved in Parliament two years ago. It is suspected that the old regime is behind the plot to oust Wijegunaratne. The court has alleged that the Admiral had protected one Lt Commander Prasad Hettiarachchi, who is the main suspect in killing of 11 Tamil youths between 2008-09.

The officer has been playing truant — caught in March 2017 and escaped in June 2018. According to reports, there is little substance in the alleged charge given there are some 572 Lt Commanders in the Navy across the country and monitoring their movements is not easy. Front page allegations and arrest orders against the CDS are not good for the morale of the Sri Lankan armed forces.

The case highlights how divisive domestic politics can undermine military stature in a country where many senior officers are committed to one or the other party. Sri Lanka Freedom Party’s (SLFP) Sirisena is thought to have appointed former President Mahinda Rajapaksa as Prime Minister mainly because the name of Field Marshal Sarath Fonseka, a UNP Minister in the National Unity Government (NUG) of Sirisena and Ranil Wickremesinghe, had figured in a CID enquiry in an alleged plot to assassinate Sirisena and Gotabhaya Rajapaksa, Mahinda’s younger brother. In the 2015 presidential elections, Sirisena had accused his rival Mahinda of trying to kill him. And now he has made him Prime Minister.

Fonseka has been through this charade before. On February 8, 2010, he was detained, court-martialed, stripped off General rank and jailed. As a former Army Chief, he had dared to contest the presidential election against Mahinda Rajapaksa, which he lost. He was charged with plotting to assassinate Rajapaksa and allegations of attempting a coup with help of India/R&AW were also hurled against him. Despite being one of the pivotal players in the extermination of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), he was disgraced, the main driver for this being his arch rival in the Army, Gotabhaya Rajapaksa. The Army was divided between Gotabhaya’s people and Fonseka supporters and also along party lines.

Alongside Fonseka’s sacking, 30 officers were cashiered, including five Major Generals and two Brigadiers. One of the sacked Generals is the present Army Chief, General Mahesh Senanayake, who had left for Dubai and later worked in Afghanistan. During the civil war, he excelled as a security force commander in Jaffna. Though he was an Engineer officer, he outdid himself in the Special Forces. He is a tough, no-nonsense military leader who was on wrong side of the fence.

After Rajapaksa was defeated in 2015, Sirisena reinstated Fonseka and promoted him as Field Marshal and made him a minister. The political victimization of Fonseka supporters was rectified to some extent by the reinstatement five years on of Senanayaka as Army Chief. On taking over as President on January 8, 2015, Sirisena announced that he would investigate the alleged coup plot by Rajapaksa after the latter had lost the election.

It is said that Rajapaksa tried to get Army and police chiefs to help him stay in power but they did not oblige; Rajapaksa’s days were over. Not that the Army had not toyed with plots and coups earlier. In 1962, was the famous Colonels’ Coup at midnight January 27 against Prime Minister Sirimavo Bandaranaike. At the time, the officer corps was majority Christians, Tamils and Burghers. The Sinhalese push in the composition of the officer corps by Bandaranaike triggered off the abortive coup.

Yoshita Rajapaksa, son of Mahinda Rajapaksa was commissioned in the Sri Lankan Navy a decade ago and he was trained in Dartmouth, UK. His maternal grandfather was Captain EP Wickremesinghe, winner of Burma Cross in World War II for ferrying logistics along the Irrawaddy river. The Captain never made it to Commander of the Navy, who at the time was a Commodore, because he was a Catholic and victim of the 1962 coup. What his grandfather was deprived of, the family, especially his mother Shiranthi, hoped Yoshita would achieve — Commander of Navy. At Dartmouth, he was pampered as son of a head of state and grandson of a Burma Cross winner. As a shareholder of a television company he was allegedly investigated by Financial Crime Department and suspended from the Navy.

Bandaranaike’s unwritten law was that only Sinhala Buddhists would be made commanders of the three armed services. Many officers were obliged to change their religion. Recently, a Tamil Christian became a Navy commander but only for two months. The 1966 coup followed Bandaranaike’s defeat in elections when her successor Dudley Senanayake began to undo pro-Sinhala reforms of his predecessor. The Army Commander was arrested but later acquitted by court.

The suspension of legendary then Maj Denzil Kobbekaduwa, who later became Lieutenant General and a war hero and was sent to Royal College of Defence Studies, London by one Government, recalled by another Government and sent back again, was to become LTTE’s nemesis. But Prabhakaran got him on a landmine when he was planning a big operation against the LTTE.

After these two abortive coups, the Government created the Special Branch of the Ceylon Police to obtain early warning of uprisings and insurrections. Unfortunately, on returning to power in 1970, Bandaranaike dismantled the organization resulting in her Government being surprised by the JVP revolt in 1971, in suppressing which the Indian Army played a significant role.

Sri Lanka’s military has been transformed under the dynamic leadership of the likes of Fonseka, Senanayake and Wijegunaratne from a ‘funk’ force to an elite war-winning machine which destroyed the invincible Prabhakaran-led LTTE. In the year 2000, I did a study of the military after its debacle at Elephant Pass and discovered how brittle it was. Implicating war heroes in coup conspiracies, assassination plots and contrived misdemeanours for political compulsions will certainly undermine the health of Sri Lanka’s military.

(The writer is a retired Major General of the Indian Army and founder member of the Defence Planning Staff, currently the revamped Integrated Defence Staff)

The quagmire concerning our Parliament

The Parliament will be able to take all necessary steps to uphold democracy when it is reconvened

Thursday, 8 November 2018

The recent decision by the President to appoint a Prime Minister following a changing of the composition of the Cabinet of Ministers and the simultaneous prorogation of the Parliament has caused a mayhem leading to a tense political situation.

Several parties in addition to the parliamentarians representing different segments of the society seem to be seriously involved in this embroil. Latest is the exacerbation of the confusion consequential to the Speaker’s announcement that he was accepting the status quo of the Parliament prior to the appointment of Mahinda Rajapaksa as the new Prime Minister.

A statement released by the Speaker on 5 November (as reported in the press), contravening a previous statement made by him stating that he would recognise Mahinda Rajapaksa as Prime Minister as his name was gazetted by President Maithripala Sirisena appointing him as the Prime Minister, came as a complete surprise to the country due to its volte-face 180 degrees turnaround from his previous position.

When we examine both these statements in the context of the provisions under the Constitution of the country they appear to be worthless. Because the Constitution provides a prerogative power of appointing a Prime Minister sans any powers of recognition by any one below him. To be more precise, Article 42 in our Constitution (after the 19th Amendment) sub titled, “Prime Minister and the Cabinet of Ministers” in sub section (4) reads as follows;

“The President shall appoint as Prime Minister the Member of Parliament, who in the President’s opinion is most likely to command the confidence of Parliament.”

There are no sub clauses or overriding provisions anywhere else in the Constitution regarding this power. Nor is it stated anywhere that the Speaker has to recognise or approve this appointment. Therefore we are compelled to state with respect that his first position of accepting him as the PM and his second position of refusing to recognise are both redundant. It looks like something confined to an opinion unenforceable.

In so far as the opinion of the President regarding the likelihood of his appointee’s command to win the confidence of the Parliament, it is a matter for the Parliament to prove that it is not so, if it is so! That will have to be done following the laid down Parliamentary procedures. It is not a matter to be pre-empted. Nor should it be left to be decided arbitrarily by any one at his discretion!

Our Constitution is very clear regarding matters where consultation, advice and approvals are required in exercising powers delegated under the Constitution. The Constitution also does not provide for any adoption of practices elsewhere to supplement and undermine clearly stated rights and powers. Therefore trying to challenge an act under the powers of the Constitution is unconstitutional and may be even considered as illegal and punishable.

To the extent of eliminating any doubts or conjectures it is not harmful to make a statement clarifying a position. E.g. The Speaker making an announcement to the effect that the officials in the Parliament are making the necessary arrangements to facilitate the changes necessitated by the Gazette notification is quite in order. But to make a statement which in effect is an overriding of the Presidential powers as given in the Constitution tantamount to a superseding of the Constitutional powers.

The meaning of prorogation in accepted Parliamentary terms is clearly pronounced. Besides how it is to be done under the applicable laws, practices and procedures, there is no ambiguity with regard to its meaning and application under a universal definition;

E.g. Prorogation. Prorogation (pronounced ‘pro-ro-ga-tion’) marks the end of a Parliamentary session. It is the formal name given to the period between the end of a session of Parliament and the State Opening of Parliament that begins the next session.

Motions (including early day motions) lapse when the House becomes prorogued, questions which have not been answered fall, nothing more will happen with them. If they have not been answered then they will stay unanswered. No motions or questions can be tabled during a prorogation.

The question that comes into our mind is how a meeting of the Parliamentarians was held during this period of recession. Isn’t that itself a violation of the accepted norm? In a real sense Parliamentarians are not expected to exercise any acts devolving on their Parliamentary activities. In such a context why did the Speaker summon or permitted to accommodate a meeting of the MPs in the Parliament? The Speaker who appears to be very seriously concerned about the democracy and the good practices has decided to take decisions based on meetings which ultra-vires the Parliamentary practices. In other words the Speaker is attempting to endorse and give effect to such a decision.

Our humble opinion is, Mr. Speaker, it is undemocratic and un-Parliamentary to do so. If a decision taken by the President is unconstitutional and undemocratic as stated in your statement, such action has to be challenged democratically and under the provisions of the law of the country. Not according to the wishes of a group of MPs usurping Parliamentary procedures.

While accepting that you have a right to consider something as your paramount duty according to your conscience, there are several others who would be held directly responsible for the prevention of the destruction of democracy if there is a real threat to such and you are not isolated. We have no doubt that in your limited area of responsibility you have a vital role to play when it comes to the safeguarding of the rights and privileges of not only the majority but even the minority MPs of the Parliament. But what we fail to understand is at this juncture, there is nothing that we can see as any violation of any provision in black and white enshrined in the Constitution of our country.

You seem to have been unnecessarily driven by an urge to step into some areas and make public statements without any written or authentic confirmations. We feel sorry to note that you have even relied on some statements made by Mahinda Rajapaksa at a meeting he reportedly had with some University teachers about the reconvening date of the Parliament. And also to rely on verbal assurances, as you have stated, made by the President in this regard.

Mr. Speaker, what an irresponsible position is that? How can you make statements about a reconvening date of a Parliament which is prorogued by a gazette proclamation of the President? For some unseen reason, you appear to have been in a hurry to intervene and pronounce something beyond your powers.

The Prorogation proclamation according to our Constitutional provisions did include the date the Parliament was to meet. Leaving all the big accusations aside the effect of this prorogation was only about five days because the Parliament before it was prorogued was scheduled to meet only on 5 November. And after 5 November there were only six working days to the date the Parliament was scheduled to meet after the prorogation. When we look back a big commotion has been made over a trivial matter.

In your statement you have chosen hard words which imply that “lawful summoning of the Parliament has been prevented, rights of members have been usurped, in the name of justice and fair play I have to make my stance known to the world”!

Your statement conveys a completely distorted version of the Constitutional provisions of the country. Unlike UK and Canada, which most of the people who have attempted to justify their stand against the prorogation of the Parliament have taken as examples are gross misrepresentations of the facts?

In Canada the prorogation has to be on the advice of the PM by convention. In UK while it is the prerogative of the Crown to prorogue the Parliament, the speaker is informed about the proclamation because is the accepted practice in the absence of a written constitution. What these critics have forgotten of trying to deliberately suppress is that we have a written constitution and it clearly states the procedure for prorogation of the Parliament. And according to that there is no consultation or prior information that is required for the President to prorogue the Parliament. So how can an act done in accordance with the Constitutional provisions are branded as usurpation of the rights of MPSs?

I wish to reiterate that lawful summoning of the Parliament is not prevented but ensured by the President’s proclamation and we all await a ceremonial opening of a new session of our Parliament under a new government a new cabinet and a new prime minister. The new session can take forward all the democratic functions under the sun in that Parliament.

In the context of repeated references to the Western Parliamentary practices professed to be so sanctimonious, let us look at the reality of some prorogations that have taken place there.

Great Britain: In 1997, British Prime Minister John Major avoided the publication of an embarrassing report on a scandal involving bribes being paid to members of his Government by proroguing the Parliament.

Canada: In 1973 Sir John Mc Donald and his Conservative Government were the subject of investigation by a Parliamentary Committee looking into the scandal surrounding the financing of the Canadian Pacific Railway and bribes being taken by various Government Ministers.

In an attempt to thwart the investigations and to avoid a critical vote in the House of Commons, Mc Donald requested that the Governor General prorogue Parliament. The Government obtained a short reprise but was censured after the house was reconvened 10 weeks later.

In 2008 Stephen Harper who formed a minority government had to face opposition due to lapses of the Government. In order to avoid defeat and possible loss of power, Harper resorted to the prorogation of Parliament.

Sri Lanka recent events: On 26 June 2015 the Parliament was dissolved on the insistence of PM Wickremesinghe when a COPE report on the bond scam was to be tabled in the Parliament on the following day.

All these were highly flawed events.

Wickremesinghe was sworn in as a Prime Minister when his party had only 46 MPs out of 225.

The current prorogation is not based on any such. The Parliament will be able to take all necessary steps to uphold democracy when it is reconvened.

Counting stars from the gutter

What made the Yahapalanaya coalition a refugee camp of political survivors?

2018-11-09

he teacher asked a Montessori child what’s there in the drawing book drawn in large red, blue and green patches, smudged all over the page.The little one says The Sky.
The teacher stands nonplussed.
“A sky? Why red and green for the sky?”
The kid points to another.
“He put red. So, I put green”.

“And blue?” the teacher asked.
“He gave that pastel”.
No contradictions and doubts here. It is the sky, as the little minds understood. That seems what our Constitution is with 19 Amendments to it made time and again. It is the drawing book of our legislators.
They have drawn as they wished in creating a Constitution. People have to accept it as the supreme law of the land and are called upon to safeguard it too.
On that supreme law called the Constitution, President Sirisena has signed the Gazette notification to convene the prorogued Parliament on Wednesday 14 November.
Parliament was prorogued at midnight on Friday 26 October 2018, immediately after Mahinda Rajapaksa was arbitrarily appointed as PM by President Sirisena.
The “deal” it is said was sealed with President Sirisena accepted as the SLPP-SLFP alliance presidential candidate and Rajapaksa agreeing to lead the campaign says ‘inside information’.

"Parliamentary elections would follow immediately thereafter and allow Rajapaksa to be a powerful PM through another amendment to the Constitution, as Rajapaksa believes he could return with a 2/3 majority on his own"

President Sirisena stands qualified to face an election on 10 January next year they claim, as he completes four years in office on January 8, 2019.
Sirisena would keep the media ministry under him till then.
Parliamentary elections would follow immediately thereafter and allow Rajapaksa to be a powerful PM through another amendment to the Constitution, as Rajapaksa believes he could return with a 2/3s majority on his own.
What makes Rajapaksa so confident of his path to victory? He certainly is the most charismatic Sinhala Buddhist leader in post-independent Sri Lanka as I have said before in these pages. “But how?” is a question, often asked.
Sri Lanka has always asked for Sinhala Buddhist leaders in mainstream national politics with a dominant social psyche that has been publicly Sinhala Buddhist from Anagarika Dharmapala afterwards.

Yet, that was not without demands for socioeconomic answers for development.
Socioeconomic issues left the Sinhala Buddhist psyche moderate though dominant with the urban middle class. This was taken into the provinces by the Buddhist Commission headed by Gunapala Malalasekera, assisted by N.Q. Dias in early 1950s.
Bandaranaike thus becomes its political representation and was voted as PM in 1956, contesting from the MEP in an alliance with Philip Gunawardena’s LSSP (R).
Yet, the socioeconomic issues could not be forfeited for Sinhala Buddhist Nationalism till the 1972 Constitution and Standardisation in University entrance became political issues for Tamil democratic parties.
To sum up a long political history, after 1972, the slogan for a Separate Tamil State, the 1983 July massacre of Tamil people, the escalation of the military conflict, lifted the moderate Sinhala Buddhist psyche into a more ruthless form of anti Tamil ‘patriotism’ dragging in the rural society as well, from where the Sinhala soldiers were recruited.

"From 2015 January corrupt and chaotic politics of Yahapalanaya made Rajapaksa politics dominant and inevitable"

This became Mahinda Rajapaksa’s turf on which he bargained votes for his 2015 Presidential Election campaign.
His political ancestry in the deep South, the very rare honour of being titled Sri Rohana Jana Ranjana by the prestigious Buddhist Sect Shyamopali Siyam Nikaya giving him acceptance among all Buddhist monks and free access to all Buddhist temples, his public acceptance of all superstitious beliefs and rituals of the ordinary Sinhala Buddhist folks makes him an organic leader of the Sinhala rural polity.
Even his attire with the maroon shawl and the thick moustache, make him the icon of Sinhala Buddhist patriarchy, the much-revered father figure the Sinhala Buddhist majority has turned out to believe in.
Beliefs don’t fade off easily in backward cultures. That perhaps explains the pious attraction he has among rural women too.
Meanwhile, the numbers game is still on, in a sordid struggle to give Rajapaksa the majority in Parliament. It has turned out more rough and tough than first expected to be.

Chandrika Kumaratunge had also intervened to move her pawns on the chess board against Rajapaksa, leaving him with much less than the 108, Rishad Bathiudeen’s ACMC wants Rajapaksa to prove before the 05 ACMC MPs move in.
From 2015 January 09 evening to 2018 October 26 midnight, corrupt and chaotic politics of Yahapalanaya made Sinhala Buddhist Rajapaksa politics dominant and inevitable.
In an inherently corrupt urban-centred economic model that makes all systems hugely corrupt in this free market economy, nothing else can be expected too.
Cronies who run business in this are not permanently affiliated to political parties. To say it mildly, they fund political parties and leading political personalities. There is thus, long-term obligations politicians have to give in to and compromise on.
The Yahapalanaya coalition was therefore like a refugee camp of political survivors given 100-Days with an extension thereafter to find a permanent place.
A refugee camp of surviving political groups and parties fighting to have permanency in an unprincipled, unplanned-for site they’ve managed to squat on. The 19A, a product of that unholy coalition celebrated as an historic achievement, made the Constitution look like the smudged painting of the little kid’s sky.
The latest Constitutional Coup by Sirisena and Rajapaksa thus made a mockery of the present Parliament and the Constitution with its 19A.
This Constitutional Coup remains a long process that only comes to an end with their decision to have Presidential Poll in January and allow Rajapaksa to be head of a Caretaker Government, though without a clear majority.

"Beliefs don’t fade off easily in backward cultures. That perhaps explains the pious attraction he has among rural women too"

Proving a majority does not arise immediately. On 14 November it would only be a ceremonial opening of a new Parliamentary Session by the President, after which the next date for Parliament sittings would be announced.
That would have to be 05 days from the opening of the new session and therefore will have to be any day after November 19.
It is only then, the Speaker could officially accept the No Confidence Motion against PM Rajapaksa that for once compels the UNP and others to accept Rajapaksa as the PM though argued as illegally appointed.
Accepting the No Confidence Motion does not mean it would be discussed immediately and put to vote.
Party leaders in Parliament will have to agree on a date to have it discussed and put to vote.
That again can be haggled upon and delayed till early December if necessary.
Meanwhile, the Presidential Poll would be announced making the No Confidence Motion irrelevant and dragging the UNP into another squabble in agreeing on a candidate.

Whatever the outcome of schemings and manipulations for numbers and power, a Caretaker Government by Rajapaksa or a UNP led new alliance in Government, will not bring this tragi-comedy to an end, even after Parliament meets on Wednesday, November 14.
Nor will a quick election provide any solace either, with these two mainstream political parties once again vying against each other.
Continuing with this free market economy, they would not have anything new or different in their political thinking.
Their culture of greed fashioned by big money and power would remain too. People cannot impact their political vision, nor on their party decisions.
In short, NO political manoeuvring with these two political parties even with new human faces, male or female, can pull this society out of the gutter.
Nothing short of shelving the free market urban economy with its filthy rich, for a complete paradigm change can lift this society to a decent, civilised life.
That, therefore, demands a new social discourse on what development means to people and their personal and social life.Development should mean the quality of life in terms of time and wages for a cultural life and recreation, every citizen would be entitled to and would have access to with equal opportunities.
We also need to define what democracy should be in its function beyond Rights and elections.

"His political ancestry in the deep south, the very rare honour of being titled Sri Rohana Jana Ranjana, his public acceptance of all superstitious beliefs makes him an organic leader of the Sinhala rural polity"

Democracy needs to be defined and designed as “Participatory democracy with people adopting a national policy on all major necessities like education, health, public transport, through Referendums. We, therefore, need to pull the drafting of the New Constitution out of boardrooms with experts into the public domain as a social exercise, with active local participation, to draft and adopt a Constitution the people could own.
With all political parties and their leaderships incapable and uninterested of even provoking such intellectual discourse in society, it certainly is the burden of the Concerned Citizenry to begin such social dialogue from the beginning.
If at this juncture of disastrous political miscalculations made by self-elected social and public interest activists and a very corrupt, self-serving professional middle class, a new initiative if not initiated by all concerned citizens, then as Oscar Wilde says in the comedy, Lady Windermere’s Fan:
“We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.”
With glee here in Sri Lanka, thinking all’s done right, it is a heavy burden on society no doubt to kick-start a new dialogue, but Development and democracy don’t come for free and without responsibility.