The Need To Revisit The 19th Amendment 

By Neville Ladduwahetty-January 3, 2019, 9:07 pm 

Recent political developments have brought into sharp focus the need to revisit the 19th Amendment (19A) despite the unanimous approval it had received in Parliament in May 2015, with the notable exception of one brave Naval Officer Rear Admiral MP Sarath Weerasekara. The primary aim of the 19A was to transfer power from an Executive President to a Prime Minister and a Cabinet of Ministers. The first attempt to indulge in such an exercise was in 2002. Having failed in 2002 a fresh attempt was made in 2015. The 2015 attempt succeeded subject to the Supreme Court determining that some named provisions required approval of the people at a Referendum. Notwithstanding this judicial intervention the fact that certain provisions that should have received the attention it deserved escaped attention makes it necessary to revisit 19A in order to address at least some of the omissions that matter for the sake of clarity.

A few key issues that have a significant bearing on the functioning of the State are:

1. Article 33A: The President shall be responsible to Parliament.

2. Article 42 (2) The Cabinet of Ministers shall be responsible to Parliament

3. Article 33 (2) (c) and Article 70 relating to dissolution of Parliament

4. Chapter VIIA – The Constitutional Council

5. Article 46 (5) Composition of a National Government.

Although each of these issues had been addressed in previous publications they are herein presented collectively to emphasize the need to revisit these issues in order to prevent confusion of the sort that prevailed in the fifty plus days since October 26, 2018. Therefore, repeating material already published is inevitable for which I seek the reader’s indulgence.

1. ARTICLE 33A: PRESIDENT responsible to PARLIAMENT

Article 33A states: ""The President shall be responsible to Parliament for the exercise, performance and discharge of his powers, duties and functions under the Constitution…".

The Supreme Court conveying its opinion on the 19th Amendment of 2015 stated:

"In fact Mr. Sumanthiran contended that Article 42 (1978 Constitution) is identical to the provision in the 1st Republican Constitution of 1972, which stated in Article 91 that ‘the President shall be responsible to the National State Assembly for the due execution and performance of the powers and functions of his office under the Constitution…Thus the position of the President vis-à-vis the legislature, in which the President is responsible to the legislature, was introduced by the 1978 Constitution"(S.D. No. 04/2015).

However, while the proposition that "the President is responsible to the National State Assembly" is appropriate for a Parliamentary system that collectively exercises legislative and executive powers, it is conceptually inconsistent within a Presidential system where legislative and executive powers are exercised by separate organs of government with equal status. In the particular case of the 1972 Constitution the President was a citizen "nominated by the Prime Minister for the Office" (Article 25). Such a "nominated" President should be responsible to the National State Assembly that is responsible for exercising the sovereignty of the People as the "the supreme instrument of State power of the Republic" (Articles 4 and 5 of the 1072 Constitution).

This is in sharp contrast to a President that is directly elected by the People and on whom the People have conferred their sovereign executive power as stated in the 1978 Constitution. This power starts with the sovereignty of the People as stated in Article 3 (below) of the 1978 Constitution.

Article 3 states: "In the Republic of Sri Lanka sovereignty is in the People and is inalienable. Sovereignty includes the powers of government, fundamental rights and the franchise".

Article 4 states" "The sovereignty of the People shall be exercised and enjoyed in the following manner:

(a) "the legislative power of the People shall be exercised by Parliament, consisting of elected representatives of the People and by the People at a Referendum"

(b) "the executive power of the People, including the defence of Sri Lanka, shall be exercised by the President of the Republic elected by the People"

If the first rule when interpreting a Constitution as stated unanimously by a seven member Supreme Court (SC FR 351-3612/2018) is that "words in a statute must be given their ordinary meaning", it is clearly evident from the foregoing that the sovereignty of the People in respect of their Legislative and Executive power are to be exercised separately. Furthermore, based on the opinion of the Court relating to the relationship between the general and the specific, while Article 3 – an entrenched Article is the general provision relating to sovereignty the specific form and manner in which the sovereignty of the People is exercised is in Article 4. Therefore Article 3 has to be read with Article 4; a fact accepted and repeated by the Courts. Therefore, since powers under such a system are separate and inalienable, a President as the directly elected Head of one organ of government that is responsible for the exercise of Executive powers of the People cannot be responsible to a separate organ of government that is responsible for the inalienable Legislative power of the People.

Whatever opinion one may have of Montesquieu and the theory of distribution of power applying the "ordinary meaning" to the words in Article 3read with Article 4 is what matters. The blind incorporation of an Article from a Parliamentary system into a Presidential system as in the 1978 Constitution and repeated in 19A without awareness of the altered context reflects poorly on the framers of both and all those who cite it repeatedly without question. Therefore, Article 42 in the 1978 Constitution and Article 33A in the 19th Amendment should thus be repealed for constitutional correctness and clarity.

Article 42 (2) - CABINET of MINISTERS shall be responsible to PARLIAMENT.

Article 42(2) of the 19th Amendment states:"The Cabinet of Ministers shall be collectively responsible and answerable to Parliament" and Article 42(3) states: "the President shall be a member of the Cabinet of Ministers and shall be the Head of the Cabinet of Ministers". This is a direct carryover of a relic from the 1972 Parliamentary system (Article 92) and transposed out of context into a Presidential system in 1978; a practice of cut and paste common to Sri Lanka’s framers of Constitutions and Constitutional Amendments.

Commenting on how the Cabinet of Ministers derives its power the Supreme Court in 2015 stated:

"It is in this backdrop the Court in the Nineteenth Amendment Determination came to the conclusion that the transfer, relinquishment or removal of a power attributed to one organ of government to another organ or body would be inconsistent with Article 3 read with Article 4 of the Constitution. Though Article 4 provides the form and manner of exercise of the sovereignty of the people, the ultimate act or decision of the executive functions must be retained by the President. So long as the President remains the Head of the Executive, the exercise of his powers remain (sic) supreme or sovereign in the executive field and others to whom such power is given must derive the authority from the President or exercise the Executive power vested in the President as a delegate of the President" (S.D. No. 04/2015).

If the President in a Presidential system cannot be constitutionally "responsible" or "answerable" to any other organ of government, how can the Cabinet that "derives its authority from the President be "collectively responsible and answerable to Parliament"? Furthermore, the fact that if the President is not satisfied with the "direction and control of the Government", he is entitled to "at any time change the assignment of subjects and functions and the composition of the Cabinet of Ministers…" as provided in Article 43(3) of the 19th Amendment and Article 44(3) of the 1978 Constitution) means the Cabinet of Ministers derive their powers and function as agents of the President.

Therefore, while the undue importance given to the Prime Minister regarding the selection of Cabinet Ministers is misplaced his primary function is to secure the support and approval of Parliament whenever needed.

In the particular context of Sri Lanka the Cabinet is made up of Members of Parliament. They do not sever their connections with Parliament when they become part of the Cabinet. Consequently, there is a conflict of interest between their constitutional Legislative responsibilities and delegated functions as part of the executive under the President. The only way to overcome such conflicts of interest is to make the Cabinet independent of Parliament; a principle accepted by the USA and France. Therefore, Article 42 (2) of 19A should be revised and the manner of selecting the Cabinet of Ministers should be revisited; an issue raised earlier and more recently by Prof. Rajiva Wijesinha (The Island, December 21, 2018).

2. DISSOLUTION of PARLIAMENT

The debate that prevailed in the country following the dissolution of Parliament on November 9th 2018 was resolved by the unanimous decision of a Supreme Court panel of seven judges. Their judgment addressed the relationship between Articles 33(2)(c) and 70. The key feature of the Court’s determination was:

"Thus it is evident that while article 33(2)(c) is by way of general provision in which the President’s power of summoning, proroguing and dissolving Parliament is enumerated in Article 33(2) along with seven other powers vested in the President, the specific and detailed provisions of Article 70(1) to Article 70(7) comprehensively specify the manner and method by which the President may lawfully exercise his power of summoning, proroguing and dissolving Parliament".

The Court also stated: "The resulting conclusion must be that the President’s power…can only be exercised under and in terms of the scheme set out in Article 70 and is circumscribed and limited by the provisions of Article 70 and can be exercised only within and in conformity with the provisions of Article 70".

The relationship between the general and specific also exists between Articles 3 and Article 4 of the Constitution. While the general provision in Article 3 is that "sovereignty is in the People and is inalienable" the specific form and manner in which it is exercised is in Article 4. Hence the often repeated statement by Courts that Article 3 must be read with Article 4. Applying this concept to Article 33(2)(c) and Article 70 (1) to Article 70 (7) the former is the general provision and the latter is the specific form and manner in which Parliament is to dissolved. Therefore, the two Articles must be read together and not separately as implied by the Court’s determination because the Article 70 states that the President "may by Proclamation …dissolve Parliament".

The Gazette notification of November 9th 2018 states that it is a Proclamation by the President. The Proclamation states: "KNOW YE that by virtue of the powers vested in me by paragraph (5) of Article 70 of the Constitution…to be read with paragraph (2)(c) of Article 33 of the Constitution…" thus confirming that both Articles need to be read together and not separately.

The context in which the above Proclamation came into being was when the UPFA officially withdrew on October 26, 2018 from the "National Government" that had functioned for nearly three plus years. This was followed by the removal of the Prime Minister of the National Government that had existed from August 2015 and the appointment of a new Prime Minister on 26th October. Neither Prime Minister was able to muster a majority in Parliament to form a functioning government. Consequently there was no functioning government from October 26th until November 13th when a Court order staying the operation of the President’s action to dissolve Parliament was issued.

According to the Court’s determination the options open to the President are either to wait however long it takes for the formation of a functioning government or wait for Parliament to secure a two third majority and "request" him to dissolve Parliament hoping that a fresh election would return a functioning government. The Court’s determination that "the President’s power…can only be exercised under and in terms of the scheme set out in Article 70" means that the President’s powers have been severely curtailed to the point that he is made impotent and reduced to the position of an agent of Parliament with power to dissolve Parliament when asked to do so any time within four and a half years. The claim "that Article 33(2)(c) was intentionally inserted…as a new provision to preserve with the President a power to dissolve Parliament at any time at his sole discretion" was found unacceptable to the 2018 Court: a fact that disturbs the needed balance between different organs that represent the sovereignty of the people.

Since Courts have interpreted such removals and transfers of power from one organ to another as being "inconsistent with Article 3 read with Article 4, should not the provisions in 19A relating to dissolution of Parliament be a matter that should have been determined by the People at a Referendum (S.D. No. 04/2015)? Despite the Court’s opinion cited above the Court in 2015 did not find this issue among others to be a "matter that would require consideration" notwithstanding its significance. The reason perhaps being that there was no erosion of Presidential power because of the inclusion of Article 33(2)(c) as part of additional Presidential power that did not exist prior to 19A, thus endorsing that the general provision of 33(2)(c) must be read with the specific of Article 70. In such a background, the ruling by the Court in 2018 is a significant departure from judicial precedence that prevailed until 2018. As far as the public is concerned the divergence in the interpretation between the Court of 2015 that President’s power in relation to dissolution of power was not affected and the interpretation by the Court of 2018 that the President’s power is in fact circumscribed and limited by Article 70 is bound to have far reaching ramifications.

Accepting the fact that Sri Lanka has experienced minority governments in 1994, 2000, 2001, 2004 and 2015 and that many more are likely to follow in the future, it is imperative that the prevailing lack of clarity in constitutional provisions are revisited forthwith if Sri Lanka is to protect its People and the dignity of the State. (To be continued)0

Ayubowan 2018/19!

• My new year’s wish – a final rest to ‘ghosts’ of years past!

G’day from down-under.

 Saturday, 5 January 2019

Our customary few lines that usually accompany my New Year’s wish-list this time comes from the land of Skippy the Kangaroo and boxing day MCG cricket (sans the sand-paper of course); hence the slight delay in reaching you, my apologies!

Our extensive travels and the chance to look at things from a more abstract perspective, away from the local body-politic, did once again contribute much to the thought process that preceded these words; reflecting upon the unprecedented roller-coaster ride we went through last year in our socio-political life and the resultant eerie silence that we’re experiencing at present, with almost a fear of not knowing what new surprise awaits us at the next turn.

Looking back at the whirlwind Judicial-Legislative-Executive activity particularly over the last couple of months of last year makes us pose the question ‘why’? Beyond the obvious political self-interests of all concerned parties in this equation which are self-evident to even a novice in the science of politics, a more cogent question to me is why did the system break down? What happened to the so called ‘Yahapalana’ regime that many of us risked life and limb to install and put in place? When I visit this question critically, I am simultaneously alerted to the fact that this year we commemorate for the 10th consecutive time, the brutal slaying of our one time learned friend and better known journalist par excellence Lasantha Wickrematunge (the twain not mutually exclusive nor far divorced from one another in fact, as what happened to Yahapalana has very much to do with what was not delivered as assured); thus with your permission I’d like to dedicate a few paragraphs in his honour, hoping at least this year we’ll set out to rest some of our ‘ghosts of the past’ to final rest!

Do any of them who shouted with us for ‘justice for Lasantha’ on the streets prior to the election (or even Thajudeen and Ekneligoda for that matter) even know what is happening to those cases or prosecutions; or have we once again been taken for a ride and these poor souls not being allowed to rest peacefully even now, after all that struggle? Isn’t that (coupled with many other broken promises) the reason for the Yahapalana regime to face their Waterloo, as they did in November/December last year?

What is happening with ‘Lasantha’?

My mind runs back to that fateful day in January 2009. We too had recently returned from England with a young family to a country with heightened military operations against the LTTE amidst internal political turmoil, having been away for several years and despite many invitations (and opportunities) to remain there; as we felt that our professional presence ‘at home’ was needed more than the selfish demands of greener pastures elsewhere.

Almost immediately on returning to Hulftsdorp I was active again in initiatives driven primarily by ‘legal quarters’ aimed at upholding democratic values and the Rule of Law. That day having just returned from Court, I received a telephone call with the dreadful news and being close to the Kalubowila hospital I remember rushing there with another colleague at the Bar (Prasad). The sorry sight of our slain colleague being rolled on the stretcher in front of our eyes and the news that followed almost immediately that ‘the freedom of the pen’ had been killed was too much to take.

I still remember that sombre walk home, climbing up the staircase and my kids Kiara and Chrishen vividly recall how I took them down to the yard where I had recently taught them how to put up a flag-pole, toggle a knot and raise the national flag; we took the flag down to half-mast and I uttered these words to them – “puthe (daughter/son), today is the day we killed freedom to speak in our country”!

What happened thereafter, our protests and struggles are very much recorded history which is freely available online so I don’t need to repeat it but what is important is that we gave leadership to a movement of the People, a resurgence to demand for what we felt was rightfully our sovereign entitlement; a Government subject to the Rule of Law and principles of democracy, which we finally thought we attained in January 2015, coincidentally also on the 8th day of the month!

What have we done thereafter? Have those persons that we installed in office delivered our desired results or are they so overcome with self-indulgence, having tasted State power after many years, that other than their own pursuits of fast accumulating personal wealth and basically enjoying a jolly gay-life with their merry men, there is nothing much that we the People have secured after all that struggle?

For instance do any of them who shouted with us for ‘justice for Lasantha’ on the streets prior to the election (or even Thajudeen and Ekneligoda for that matter) even know what is happening to those cases or prosecutions; or have we once again been taken for a ride and these poor souls not being allowed to rest peacefully even now, after all that struggle? Isn’t that (coupled with many other broken promises) the reason for the Yahapalana regime to face their Waterloo, as they did in November/December last year?

Judicial independence – Sovereign power of the people

Many a battle over the last few months between the Executive and Legislative arms of Government were fought before the Judicial arm; I daresay there’s many more to come over the following months looking from here at the way tides are moving in Colombo. I’ve stated this publicly before, that this very fact of judicial intervention is an endorsement that our ‘system’ actually works, not to be taken lightly or be subject to ridicule or contempt as a failed State, as some local and foreign players (with manifestly vested interests) would happily castigate us to be.

However is this prompt action to hear and dispose cases within matters of hours or days where larger matters of State are involved enough? Shouldn’t this same judicial activism extend to even settling other (perhaps seen as more unimportant) matters of ordinary citizens as well; as for instance the long-prolonged case of Lasantha’s murder? After all is it not the Judicial Power ‘of the People’ at play, as held in several judgments of the apex court and in that backdrop, is it only politically expedient cases of the day that deserve prominence?

These are questions perhaps that those of us engaged in exercising the Judicial Power of the People ought to ask ourselves in the coming year, so that at least we clean up our act before we criticise the other two organs of government. Whilst here I’ve had occasion to discuss both the State and Federal judicial systems in Australia with many practitioners and there is much that we can learn to expedite our system of administering justice, to make it more user-friendly; that holds as paramount the interests of the citizen seeking assistance at the pure fountains of justice rather than archaic and pompous procedure and rules that only stand to restrict access to the institution itself.

One tends to ponder when travelling through cities where the ‘system works’ as to when we will ever get there? These systems are capable of cushioning the effects of even severe economic downfall and negative growth, the resident is yet assured some basic standard of life and personal freedom

Whither 2019 – Is enough really enough?

One tends to ponder when travelling through cities where the ‘system works’ as to when we will ever get there? These systems are capable of cushioning the effects of even severe economic downfall and negative growth, the resident is yet assured some basic standard of life and personal freedom. In the State of Victoria the city council goes to the extent of ensuring not only that there is at least 15% of greenery within the city limits, with parks and playing fields, etc.; but also that there are sufficient barbecue grills fully equipped with gas supply so that residents may come and enjoy their leisure with their family and friends, all provided by their government structure.

So how do we get ‘our system’ from the hand-to-mouth economy that we are at now to that level where the sovereign Sri Lankan citizen enjoys at least the same perks as their elected representatives do (at the poor tax-payer’s expense)?

We have in our present Constitution (1978) given a limited mandate, in Public Trust that it will not be breached to three institutions to govern us; Article 4 (a) Legislature or Parliament (b) Executive including the President and Cabinet and (c) Judiciary. May I repeat a passage from a New Year’s message a few years ago – “…If this is the quality of life we as a People deserve after almost 70 years as an independent nation, then why do we need governments and spend so much time and energy on elections? We may as well keep our sovereignty intact but contract out the everyday management of our resources to some other country with a proven track-record (thus reduce all the wastage in jumbo sized Cabinets, etc.) and see if we can get a better deal...” In my humble opinion education is the key. The great Madiba (Nelson Mandela) set out to change the liberated South Africa with the vision that ‘education is the weapon with which we can change’; I say it is also true for Sri Lanka.

In my humble opinion education is the key. The great Madiba (Nelson Mandela) set out to change the liberated South Africa with the vision that ‘education is the weapon with which we can change’; I say it is also true for Sri Lanka

As things are progressing this year or definitely by next year we will be given another opportunity to wield that most potent of weapons in a democratic system; our freedom of franchise. Let us see whether the disappointments of the past have taught us anything at all, whether we will still run behind proven non-performers in our party-system and elect the same majority of self-indulgent, self-centred ego-maniacs who have nothing but their own personal gain at heart or will we at least now, lay to rest the mistakes of our past and progress along a pathway to a new Sri Lanka.

Power to the people! Subha Aluth Avuruddak Weva!

Burning Passion for Hunting

The dawn of the New Year was a nightmare for the living organisms in the Muthurajawela Sanctuary. This is because they were caught in a raging fire which commended on the evening of January 1. The fire spread and destroyed more than 100 acres of land in the sanctuary between Pattiyawela and Pubudugama, an area which runs parallel to the Colombo - Katunayaka Expressway.   

2019-01-04

The Air Force, armed forces, the Police and villagers made a collective effort to douse the fire. An MI -17 helicopter was deployed to extinguish the fire. A 2400 litre Bambi bucket was used in eight operations. The helicopter was piloted by Squadron Leader Prasanna Gunaratne and co- piloted by Flight Lieutenant Indika Bandara, according to the SLAF website.   

• "The illegal landfilling occurs during broad daylight, starting from Saturday noon and continuing till Monday morning, all this taking place while government officials are on leave"

• "An MI -17 helicopter was deployed to extinguish the fire"

Deputy Director Pradeep Kodippili of the Early Warning of Disaster Management Centre said in response to a query that the fire had not damaged any property or human lives. 
By the night on January 2, the spreading of the fire was controlled, except in small patches here and there. Pamunugama Police is conducting further investigations. The police suspect that the fire was caused as a result of actions by hunters during their effort to capture the wild animals. 
A source said fires have become a frequent occurrence in the sanctuary close to Pubudugama village; where the drug addicts have increased in their numbers as of late.   

Tortoise meat and shells in custody   

It is said that the drug addicts set fire to small areas in the sanctuary to capture wild animals like the Sri Lankan Spotted Chevrotain (Meeminna), Bengal Monitor (Thalagoya), Fishing Cat (Handun Diviya), Tortoise and a bird species called Vil goya, which weighs around 2 kg. Eventually, the meat is sold to the close-by restaurants in exchange for money to quench their thirst for drugs. 
The villagers said that the fires in the sanctuary started about four years ago. They added that the area is a grassland consisting of reed species like Spear Grass (Iluk) and Ceylon Citronella grass (Maana) as well as Kadol plants (a common native mangroves plant). The dryness in weather, arid grass and the rough winds must have fuelled the escalating fires.   

Large-scale racket   

Meanwhile, the Kandana Police had arrested a suspect involved in a large-scale racket of capturing and killing of tortoises and selling their meat. More than 12 dead tortoises, eggs, meat, and 200 tortoise shells were seized along with the knives used in the activity, some three "weeks ago.   

‘Society of Protecting Muthurajawela Sanctuary’ member Dinusha Nanayakkara, a resident of the area, said that the fires in the sanctuary are more an annual occurrences now. Even during the previous year, a fire broke out and surprisingly the culprits were kids, initiating the fire for no reason.   

The land where the fire broke out is frequented by people who go fishing. Nanayakkara said that capturing of wild animals such as rabbits, porcupines, monitors, and crocodiles is yet another fact which is associated with the fires within the sanctuary.   

• "Drug addicts set fire to small areas in the sanctuary to capture wild animals"

• "The villagers said that the fires in the sanctuary started about four years ago"

• "More than 12 dead tortoises, eggs, meat, and 200 tortoise shells were seized along with the knives used in the activity, some three weeks ago"

“There are no possibilities of wildfires taking place in this area and the cause for them is definitely linked to humans. Eggs of migrant birds are destroyed along with the local animals and their habitats. With the presence of dry weather, the fire spreads fast. I am clueless as to who might have caused the fires this year. Somehow Muthurajawela is being destroyed each day,” he remarked.   

Following the political turmoil experienced during the past few months, the Muthurajawela ecosystem was left to itself, and we realised how political assistance is linked with its’ destruction, he said. 
“The President ordered expansion of the sanctuary up to Negombo, an area that includes the lagoon attaching other areas with an environmental value such as marshlands outside the sanctuary. The new maps already prepared aren’t gazetted yet. The success of this would be a giant step towards protecting the Muthurajawela wetland.” explained Nanayakkara. 
Soon after the president’s visit to Muthurajawela in March last year, illegal activities taking place such as garbage dumping and landfilling were banned and halted. STF units were deployed to safeguard the area.   

STF posts withdrawn   

Sources say the STF posts were withdrawn after six months and landfilling is still continuing in indirect ways.
After the forest is cut and cleared in massive scale, villagers construct roads and dump garbage everywhere. Finally, rotting garbage is covered with loads of soil transported by the tippers. Large-scale landfilling commenced in the Delathura area a few days ago, where more than 100 loads of soil brought from tippers were used in the filling according, to the sources.   

The illegal landfilling occurs during broad daylight, starting from Saturday noon and continuing till Monday morning, all this taking place while government officials are on leave.
The villagers state that the officials of the wildlife office, located in the area, are said to maintain a low profile regardless of whatever happens. 
Colombo has been declared as a Wetland City by the International Ramsar Convention. The presence of the Fishing Cat, (an endangered species of wild cats in Sri Lanka) played an important role in obtaining the wetland certification of Ramsar. Safeguarding urban wetlands for mitigating floods in Colombo metro area was another initiative.   

• Eggs of migrant birds are destroyed along with the local animals and their habitats

• STF posts were withdrawn after six months and landfilling is still continuing

• Ignorant villagers keep destroying the wildlife in Muthurajawela

Meanwhile, ignorant villagers keep destroying the wildlife in Muthurajawela; slaughtering and burning alive the valued Fishing Cat and other wild animals.
The curse of the hunters does not stop there as their activities continue setting fire to one of most precious ecosystems in Sri Lanka. (Additional Reporting by Ja - Ela P.H.P. Perera)

Pics by P. H.P. Perera, 
Dinusha Nanayakkara   

UNP-led combine urged to form govt. or face electorate

‘If not derailed, election would have been held today’

by Shamindra Ferdinando-anuary 4, 2019, 11:25 pm

UPFA Anuradhapura District MP Shehan Semasinghe yesterday called for a consensus among political parties represented in Parliament to go for an early general election.

Semasinghe who represents the Joint Opposition said that fresh parliamentary polls were required to form a stable government.

In a brief interview with The Island, yesterday, Semasinghe said that the UNF-led combine comprising the TNA (16 members), the JVP (6) and SLMC (1) either should form a government or face the electorate without any further delay.

The 95-member UPFA parliamentary group recently lost four, namely Manusha Nanayakkara, A.H.M. Fowzie, Wijith Wijayamuni Zoysa and Piyasena Gamage to the Government.

The UPFA would provide the required support for a motion to enable the dissolution of Parliament immediately. In terms of the 19th Amendment to the Constitution, Parliament cannot be dissolved before completion of four and half years unless it approved a motion to that effect with a two-thirds majority.

Semasinghe said that the UPFA would happily function as the legitimate Opposition. "Let there be a UNP-led government including the TNA and JVP," Semasinghe said, recollecting how they worked and functioned as a coalition at 2010 and 2015 presidential polls.

Pointing out that 122 lawmakers representing the UNP, TNA, JVP and SLMC moved the Court of Appeal successfully against Mahinda Rajapaksa’s appointment as the Prime Minister, Semasinghe said the TNA and JVP shouldn’t hesitate to accept ministerial portfolios.

Having had backed Gen. Fonseka’s candidature at 2010 presidential election after falsely accusing his army of deliberately killing Tamil civilians, the TNA was capable of taking the hardest political decisions, Semasinghe said. "Today, the TNA needs not take the LTTE approval to make a decision thanks to the Sri Lankan military."

The Rajapaksa administration brought the war to a successful conclusion in May a decade ago.

Those who had sought judicial intervention to thwart President Sirisena’s political project to stabilize the country conveniently forgot how the Oct 26, 2018 sacking of Wickremesinghe administration came to be, Semasinghe said. Had the UNP not perpetrated treasury bond scams in 2015 and 2016, delayed Local Government polls for over two years and adopted extremely neo liberal economic policies the ground situation would have been very much different, the MP acknowledged.

The Rajapaksa loyalist said that had the UNP-led combine not thwarted President Sirisena’s plan, the general election would have been held today (January 05). Unfortunately, those who masqueraded as champions of democracy sabotaged early parliamentary polls, Semasinghe said.

In accordance with President Sirisena’s plan the new parliament was scheduled to meet on January 17, 2019.

The enactment of the 19th Amendment to the Constitution in late April 2015 reduced both parliamentary and presidential terms from six to five years.

Semasinghe said the UNP couldn’t secure a simple majority in parliament in the wake of Mahinda Rajapaksa quitting premiership on Dec 15, 2018. Although 122 lawmakers representing the UNP, TNA, JVP and SLMC filed quo warranto petition in the Court of Appeal against Mahinda Rajapaksa’s appointment, only 102 voted for a Vote on Account on Dec 21, 2018 to cover expenses for a four moth period (January-April, 2019), the lawmaker said.

Presidential and parliamentary polls are scheduled for 2019 and 2020, respectively. In terms of the 19th Amendment, President Sirisena can call early presidential poll anytime after next Tuesday (January 08).

Asked whether the UPFA was ready to face presidential election ahead of parliamentary polls, Semasinghe said that they could face any election. Feb 10,2018 outcome at the Local Government polls proved beyond doubt that the JO was in command and was capable of winning national elections, the MP said. Following the unification of the JO and the SLFP following Oct 26, 2018 sacking of the Wickremesinghe’s government, they were in a position to rout the UNP and its allies.

Citing simmering internal strife within the UNP over various issues such as the restriction of the number of ministers to 30 and non-cabinet ministers to 40, the SLFPer asserted that the UNP was facing a catastrophe at presidential, parliamentary and Provincial Council polls.

Semasinghe claimed the UNP leadership was struggling to cope up with the situation. Already six Provincial Councils namely Sabaragamuwa, East, North Central, Central, North Western and Northern had lapsed. The last to lapse was the Northern Provincial Council, Semasinghe said, adding that the Southern, Western and Uva Provincial Councils would stand dissolved on April 04, April 21 and Oct 08, 2019, respectively.

Semasinghe warned of dire consequences if the government resorted to underhand tactics to secure a two-thirds majority necessary to adopt draft constitution.

The SLFPer said that constitution making process couldn’t be influenced and fashioned to appease a particular party and foreign powers. Unfortunately, those publicly spearheading the project were solely interested in transforming the present constitution to pave the way for a Federal structure at the expense of unitary status of the country.

TNA spokesperson and Jaffna District MP M.A. Sumanthiran seemed too confident in presenting the draft constitution before the forthcoming independence day.

Even if all those who had campaigned against Mahinda Rajapaksa’s premiership voted for the draft constitution, they would still need as many as 28 additional votes, Semasinghe said.

Referring to recent public statements by JVP leader Anura Kumara Dissanayake, Semasinghe pointed out that the JVPer frowned on reports pertaining to presentation of the draft constitution before independence day.

Semasinghe said that the UNP was in such a chaotic state it couldn’t sustain constitution drafting project though being pressurized by Western powers and other interested parties.

The lawmaker said that no less a person than Human Rights Commissioner in June 2016 had called for far reaching constitutional changes. Geneva owed an explanation why Sri Lanka had to amend/change its constitution on the basis of unsubstantiated war crimes allegations.

Semasinghe said that the UNP should now review its strategies. The lawmaker questioned the justification in presenting budget 2019 on March 05 when the UNP knew it was on a shaky wicket. How could the TNA vote for the budget if it felt uncomfortable in joining Wickremesinghe’s government.

Semasinghe urged civil society groups affiliated to the UNP and various Western embassies to reveal their stand on current political status. Having campaigned against President Sirisena’s effort to restore stability by having early general election, they couldn’t remain silent now, Semasinghe said.

The Failed “Political Marriage” 

By Gamini Jayaweera –JANUARY 4, 2019

Gamini Jayaweera

The Hon. President Mr. Maithripala Sirisena has publicly announced that he is currently writing a book about his failed “Political Marriage” to the Hon. Prime Minister Mr. Ranil Wickremesinghe. He has stated that he is going to reveal all the details which have led to his decision of sacking Mr. Wickremesinghe and appointing former President, Mr. Mahinda Rajapaksa as the Prime Minister. Millions of people who supported the “Political Marriage” between Maithri and Ranil had high hopes that the two partners would deliver the promises given in the presidential and general elections. The aim of this brief analysis is to remind the Hon. President of some factual information about the “Failed Political Marriage” which have been witnessed by the public during the last four years. I believe that any help that could be given to the Hon. President to write his forthcoming book accurately and honestly, is considered as providing a great service to the nation. I would be pleased if this brief account could make a small contribution towards that goal.

The “Political Marriage” between Maithri and Ranil was established in 2014 with the blessings of the well-known Buddhist monk late Ven. Sobitha thero, former President Madam Chandrika Kumaratunga, and selfless members of several Civil Societies. The primary goal was to ensure that the country would be free from potential dictatorship amongst other important issues which were crippling the democratic values in our society. Having defeated the authoritarian previous regime, the nation expected the newly “married” partners Maithri and Ranil together with their “Blue and Green relatives” to work in partnership to restore the good governance in our society. 

The main objective of the “marriage” is to remove the powers granted under the constitution for an executive president to act as a dictator if he wishes to exercise his authority. It is now crystal clear that after nearly four years in power, the Hon. President in particular has failed to implement his pledge which he has made at the funeral of the late Ven. Sobitha thero to abolish the executive presidency. Instead of fulfilling the main objectives of the previous “marriage”, the nation had witnessed in horror how the Hon. President justified his illegal “marriage” to the former President Mr. Mahinda Rajapakse without going through the proper “divorce proceedings” to end his legitimate “marriage” to the Hon. Prime Minster Mr. Ranil Wickremesinghe in an ethical, moral, and legal manner. 

Partnership – A Marriage 

It is widely established that a successful partnership in any field would depend on by observing certain essential criteria such as honesty, openness, integrity, humility, and sharing praise & blame equally by the partners to the agreement. It is like a marriage. Two people from entirely different backgrounds get married to live as partners in a new relationship on common objectives while recognising and adapting their different cultures, values and obligations under the new partnership. 

A successful marriage is not measured by the marriage certificate or trying to fulfil the requirements of the relatives and friends of both partners at the expense of their core objectives of the marriage. Extra marital activities and marrying another person without obtaining a divorce from the first marriage are unethical, immoral, or illegal under the prevailing law in Sri Lanka.

It has been said that to have a successful marriage the couple need to put the marriage certificate beneath the bed and they must concentrate on the activities on the bed. So, where did it go wrong for Maithri and Ranil? 

Equal Partners

Read More

A Great Tree Has Fallen: Father Harry Miller S.J. Passes On

Featured image by Kannan Arunasalam

SARALA EMMANUEL-01/02/2019

As the New Year dawned in 2019, I received the news that Father Harry Miller had died. Members of the Batticaloa Peace Committee had been visiting him in recent weeks, and had shared that he had stopped eating and drinking and was slowly fading away. Even so, it was deeply saddening to hear the news. I kept thinking of the Maya Angelo Poem…When Great Trees Fall.…particularly the last lines…

’They existed. They existed. We can be. Be and be better. For they existed’.

I heard the poem last at a memorial lecture for Neelan Tiruchelvam in 2001.

I got to know Father Miller when I became a part of the Batticaloa Peace Committee (BPC). I cannot remember the exact year, but it was sometime after the 2004 tsunami disaster.  I remember the power of his personality and the invisible but very real shield of protection his presence gave all of us who were witnessing, visiting, supporting and documenting the stories of abductions, disappearances, killings, arrests, child recruitment, forced displacements, communal tensions, violence and rape in Batticaloa. At each check point we were questioned at, we would say we work with Father Miller of the Batticaloa Peace Committee. We would give the Peace Committee address when we were asked where we were from. We would inform Father Miller over the phone about where we were going as our own protection strategy.

This is how we visited houses where children had been forcibly recruited by different armed groups, even as those armed groups were still moving around the villages, watching if outsiders were visiting.

During those years, we would regularly meet each incoming local head of Police and introduce ourselves as the Batticaloa Peace Committee, so we had some connection to the Police when people were arrested, abducted, detained or killed. Father Miller would be at the centre of our team in his white cassock, introducing us, and sharing the history of the work of the Peace Committee.

In 2008, five men had been taken from a shop in Batticaloa town and were being held at the Batticaloa Town Police station. One was the husband of one of my colleagues from the Suriya Women’s Development Centre. She was terrified that her husband and the others would be disappeared from custody and was staying at the station for as long each day as she was allowed. Then we heard that indeed two of the men had gone missing from the Police station one night. There was terrible fear about what might happened to them and urgency to find out where they were. Father Miller immediately agreed to come with some of us and the family members to meet the local head of Police. He demanded that the Police tell us where they were. The head of Police assured us they were alive at another location. Later that day, the bodies of the two men washed up on the nearby beach. Father Miller also later came with us to the courts, as we sat with the families who were devastated by the killing of their loved ones.

In his last years at the BPC, Father Miller expressed a sense of hopelessness as he felt there was great impunity and no political commitment towards truth and justice. He made a submission on behalf of the Batticaloa Peace Committee to the LLRC, appealing strongly again, for the government to investigate the 8000 complaints of disappearances and deaths that had been documented by the Batticaloa Peace Committee.

Father Miller was awarded the Citizen’s Peace Award in 2014 by the National Peace Council for his lifetime of work and commitment to human rights and peace.  In the citation for the award it notes “In recognition of its non-partisan role, the security forces gave PBC the role of conduit to hand over released prisoners….During the period of ceasefire in 2002 and until its breakdown, the government appointment Father Miller to be its nominee for the Sri Lanka Monitoring Mission for Batticaloa. As the founder member of the BPC, Father Miller showed himself to be a fearless human rights activist who encouraged and strengthened civil society in Batticaloa to take up the cause of the victims of human rights abuses.” (p.5)

My daughter and Father Miller share a birthday. Since she was 5 years old, I have taken her each year to celebrate Father Miller’s birthday. I wanted her to know this man, the history and commitment of his work, and the importance of what he did. In simple ways, I have tried to explain this to her and how precious it was that she celebrated her birthday with him. This year too, we went together and they blew out each others’ birthday candles on a cake.

On the evening of the 1st of January 2019, as we sat in a beautiful quiet space at the St Michael’s church where Father Miller’s body lay, his oldest fellow priest Father Lorio sat quietly beside him, many different groups of people came to pay their last respects to this remarkable man – from the Muslim community, Catholic community, students, and friends – a testament to his work and life towards peace and human rights. My twelve year old daughter sat next to me quietly, sad that her fellow birthday friend had passed on.

The loss of Father Harry Miller feels like the end of an era.  My grief is about losing a remarkably courageous and generous elder in our community. But its also about the loss of history, of the stories of people who lived bravely in dark times. Who will now tell their stories? Will we remember their humour, their warmth, their humanity in the face of unspeakable violence, as we strive to continue the work they did so valiantly?

Sarala Emmanuel is a member of the Batticaloa Peace Committee

Watch a short video on Father Miller, filmed and edited by Kannan Arunasalam, directly on Vimeo here or embedded below.

Editors Note: Also read ‘The Story of One: On some lives erased and others that give hope‘

An open letter to Rev. Fr. Emmanuel Fernando OMI

‘A Religious Response to Chronic Kidney Disease in NCP’

 2019-01-05

This refers to an article that appeared in  on 31.12.2018 on the above title written by Rev. Father Emmanuel Fernando OMI. As a scientist deeply interested in the subject of  Chronic Kidney Disease of Uncertain Aetiology (CKDu) that is plaguing the people of  Rajarata and some neighbouring areas, I wish to express my sincere appreciation of the assistance provided by the good father in collaboration with the Regional Religious Unit (RRU) and other associates to CKDu patients. At the same time, Prof. Channa Jayasumana’s (CJ) input too should be appreciated in helping the activities of RRU. 

Water quality and CKDu 
However, CJ’s contention expressed by the Rev. Father that “medical research has proved that the disease is caused by excessive use of chemical fertilizers and pesticides” is incorrect. There is no scientific evidence to date to implicate any agrochemicals in the causation of CKDu. This is the clear message emanating from authentic research published to date. On the other hand, CJ is right in saying that “non-availability of safe drinking water” is a problem affecting the people of  Rajarata. In fact, it is now established with a high degree of certainty that the disease is associated with the quality of drinking water. Research in the last several years has established that whereas people drinking dug well water in the upland areas of Rajarata contaminate the disease those drinking surface water from reservoirs or streams do not. For example, city dwellers of Anuradhapura and Polonnaruwa who consume pipe-borne water from reservoirs do not contaminate the disease but the villagers/farmers in the peripheral areas who drink water from certain wells do. 

That the source of potable water is the cause has been established dramatically by a simple experiment conducted in the village  of Ginnoruwa, Girandurukotte, a hot bed of CKDu. In Ginnoruwa, there are two small villages; Badulupura and Sarabhumi. The latter village is situated in a plain close to a reservoir and the people consume water from the reservoir or a stream or from wells dug close to the reservoir. By contrast, Badulupura is situated on high ground and the dwellers consume water from sunk wells. Both eat the same rice and vegetables cultivated in the lowlands in Sarabhumi. Whereas Badulupura people are afflicted with CKDu, no CKDu cases have been reported from Sarabhumi. Plastic water tanks were provided to Badulupura households for harvesting of rainwater some three years ago and the indication is that there are now no new cases of  CKDu reported therefrom. Moreover, there is clear evidence according to the medical officer of the area that as a consequence of people now being educated about the role of water in CKDu, the incidence of the disease in terms of new patient numbers has declined. Also, according to a leading nephrologist dealing with CKDu, hospital records reveal declining numbers of new patients from high incidence CKDu areas such as Medawachchiya, Padaviya (NCP) and Girandurukotte (UvaProvince). 

CJ’s contention expressed by the Rev. Father that “medical research has proved that the disease is caused by excessive use of chemical fertilizers and pesticides” is incorrect

It is now the consensus among the majority of scientists that fluoride and hard water are a cause for CKDu. The water in wells on high ground generally has high levels of fluoride especially in the dry periods, and there is scientific evidence indicative of fluoride in conjunction with magnesium from the hard water causing CKDu. Recent research at the University  of Peradeniya has provided evidence to this effect in trials with mice. 

The RRU is reported to have installed a water purifying filter with a capacity of 500 litres per day at the Mihintale Hospital. While this is undoubtedly a commendable deed, given the fact that the filters often need servicing and other running repairs, an alternative and far cheaper approach should be to provide access to surface water or rain water for drinking and cooking. 

CKDu and agrochemicals 
Whilst research has not proved that agrochemicals are the cause of CKDu, their role cannot be totally ruled out in that disease may be multi-factorial as adverted to by many. The 2013 WHO report indicated that cadmium may play a role in CKDu and several nephrotoxic pesticides are also above reference limits in the urine of CKDu subjects. However, that study, though it had analysed pesticide residues in both the CKDu and control (non-CKDu) subjects, the data for the latter group from a non-CKDu area (Hambantota) were not published for some unknown reason. Subsequent analysis of raw data obtained from the National Science Foundation was shocking in that the incidence of above reference limit pesticide residue subjects were far greater in the control group than the CKDu group. Interestingly, the number of subjects with the above reference Glyphosate limit was double (7%) in the control group compared to the CKDu group (3.5%). A subsequent International Expert Consultation Meeting in 2017 also concluded that there was no tangible evidence to implicate any agrochemical in CKDu causation. 

The agrochemical saga however has taken a heavy toll on the agriculture of this country consequent on the ban of Glyphosate, the most widely used weed killer in the world, apparently based on a hypothesis that Glyphosate complexing with some toxic heavy metals was responsible for causation of CKDu. The hypothesis propounded by CJ and two other authors and published in an open access, fee-levying journal was however heavily criticised as being faulty in terms of the chemistry. Further there has been no other research evidence or publications to support it.

However, it was able to hoodwink two presidents of this country leading initially, in 2013, to the ban of the weed killer in the CKDu areas and later in 2015 in the entire country. The consequent economic loss for the tea industry alone has been estimated by the Tea Research Institute to be of the order of Rs.19 billion per annum. Fortunately, the ban has been now lifted for tea and rubber, again a highly short sighted decision by the government in that coconut needs Glyphosate far more than rubber, and so do the arable crops. The government must as a matter of urgency totally lift the ban. 

CKDu or not there is no argument that excessive use of agrochemicals should be stopped, as they can be harmful to health. In this regard, the government should take more effective preventive action through comprehensive farmer education programmes on judicious agrochemical use.