Thursday, January 24, 2019

SRI LANKA JOURNALISTS ORGS WANT UN TO PERSIST IN PRESSURING THE GOVERNMENT TO TAKE ACCOUNTABILITY FORWARD.

23/01/2019

In a letter to Ms. Hanaa Singer, Resident Coordinator of the United Nations, Sri Lanka, media organistations says that ” We do not want the assurances of the United Nations. We want it to take and compel action. The undersigned believe it is essential for the UN to persist in pressuring the Sri Lankan government to take accountability forward. A first step would be to ensure that the current government fulfills the many promises it made with regard accountability for crimes committed against journalists. This enduring violence and culture of impunity must end. We trust you will take decisive, sustained action to ensure that Media Freedom and Freedom of Expression are installed to the fullest in Sri Lanka.”
The text of the letter follows:
January 14, 2019,
Resident Coordinator of the United Nations,
Sri Lanka.
Dear Ms. Hanaa Singer,

Continued inaction, impunity and insensitivity in murder and violence against journalists.

Four years after President Sirisena was elected to office, in part anchored to promises to address Sri Lanka’s awful record of freedom of expression and violence against journalists during and after the war, little to no progress is evident in any investigation to bring the culprits to book. Disappointingly, despite an enjoyment and expression of human rights not remotely possible under the former regime, the undersigned note with concern, disappointment and growing anger that meaningful progress in investigations remains elusive.

The Black January Movement, comprising of The Sri Lanka Working Journalists Association, The Free Media Movement, Federation of Media Employees’ Trade Union, Sri Lanka Young Journalists’ Association, The Tamil Media Alliance, The Muslim Media Forum, Internet Media Action and Media Movement for Democracy and campaigning organisations recall the violent, dangerous time for journalists during the war and even after May 2009, especially for those working in the North. Investigative journalists and those who wrote on the military, high level corruption, political developments and high-ranking government officials were repeatedly threatened, abducted, murdered and tortured. Media institutions were blocked, banned, bombed and burned. The context was overwhelmingly one of anxiety and fear, underwritten by government, overseen by the military, supported by intelligence services and condoned by those in power. We recall the white vans that served – aside from their use to abduct journalists in broad daylight – as a symbol that represented a culture of impunity. All this was recorded meticulously by the United Nations, including by the Special Rapporteur for the Freedom of Expression and other key mandate holders.

Few left Sri Lanka, Others stopped writing, or switched to a tone that didn’t expose them to violence. The lack of any meaningful progress around accountability and, of late, the growing political instability, contributes to many journalists who left, not returning.

As the Committee to Protect Journalists notes, despite so many journalists being killed over nearly thirty years of war, there have been no investigations to hold perpetrators accountable.

Successive governments have only made promises. No meaningful progress is visible. We also recall that in the years before 2004, journalists as well as several artists were murdered simply for exercising their freedom of expression. Even those in power today do not seem interested in ensuring justice for them.

We believe that, in the interest of upholding media freedom, the State has the responsibility to collect and publicly acknowledge facts around crimes committed against individuals exercising their right to expression; be they journalists, media workers or media organisations.

As a collective of media organisations we also believe that the State has the responsibility to investigate and deliver justice in the cases of murders, abductions, disappearances and attacks against journalists, media workers and media organisations. This could be done by way of an independent commission that inquires and gathers all information necessary, to aid in the process of accountability. Given the marked failure of so many commissions in the past to have their recommendations translated into policy or practice, we stress that any independent commission or investigative process requires what remains tragically elusive in Sri Lanka – political will.

The delay in justice for these cases is indicative of the culture of impunity that prevails in Sri Lanka. We have had promises, statements, commitments, high-level visits, negotiations, condemnations, diplomatic pressure, International solidarity, commissions of inquiry, investigative reporting, and presentations to bilateral and multilateral fora, and briefings to governments. We have voted in successive governments based on promises to bring an end to impunity. We have been assured, without feeling assured. Victims, survivors, families, friends and colleagues have had to live in the hope of justice, despite the faintest of hope and that too, dying away.

We do not want the assurances of the United Nations. We want it to take and compel action. The undersigned believe it is essential for the UN to persist in pressuring the Sri Lankan government to take accountability forward. A first step would be to ensure that the current government fulfills the many promises it made with regard accountability for crimes committed against journalists.
This enduring violence and culture of impunity must end. We trust you will take decisive, sustained action to ensure that Media Freedom and Freedom of Expression are installed to the fullest in Sri Lanka.

Singed by

The Sri Lanka Working Journalists Association, The Free Media Movement, Federation of Media Employees’ Trade Union, Sri Lanka Young Journalists’ Association, The Tamil Media Alliance, The Muslim Media Forum, Internet Media Action and Media Movement for Democracy.

UNP’s Astounding Complacency & Sirisena’s Callous Disregard For Government Functions

By Rasika Jayakody –JANUARY 23, 2019

Rasika Jayakody

President Maithripala Sirisena sent a strong message to the UNP when he took a group of SLFP MPs with him as part of the Presidential delegation while on an official visit to the Philippines this month.

Accordingly, Dilan Perera, Lasantha Alagiyawanna, Nishantha Muthuhettigama, Sarathi Dushmantha Mithrapala, Lakshman Perera, Angajan Ramanadan and Sriyani Wijewickrama were the recipients of an textravagant holiday in the Philippines at the expense of the taxpayer.

The President’s actions indicated to the UNP that he remained unrepentant about his decision to oust Ranil Wickremesinghe from the Premiership on October 26, 2018. He also demonstrated his callous disregard for the UNP and its Cabinet ministers whom he appointed in December 2018, after the constitutional coup he instigated backfired.

But can the UNP blame the President for acting in absolute contempt of the party? Certainly not. In fact, the UNP that earned this treatment by acting in an opportunistic and expedient manner after the reinstatement of the Prime Minister and the UNP-led government nearly a month ago.

The UNP did not raise objections to the lambasting speech by the President after the re-appointment of Wickremesinghe on December 16, 2018. Several prominent UNP ministers who were highly vociferous during the political turmoil pandered to the President’s irrational behavior by passing off his jibes as “mere critical remarks.”

They lauded UNP Deputy Leader Sajith Premadasa—who colluded with Sirisena in this ignominious exercise—as a “noble peacemaker”. They craftily turned a blind eye to the fact that Premadasa’s ‘puppet masters’ were the same people who advised Sirisena during the 51-day political turmoil.

During the 51-day battle for the restoration of a legal government, the UNP repeatedly promised they would hold President Sirisena and other co-conspirators accountable for their actions. They also demanded the appointment of a parliamentary committee to probe “black media “ that supported the chain of unconstitutional actions and the functioning of an illegal government.

Ironically, on the day of Wickremesinghe’s re-appointment, Sajith Premadasa subserviently reassured Sirisena that there would not be an attempt by the UNP to bring an impeachment motion against the President. By making this statement, Premadasa quashed the hopes of all pro-Democratic forces that took to the streets against the President’s unconstitutional and despotic conduct. Without stopping at that, some UNP State Ministers did a 180-degree turn and stood on the side of “Black Media”, unabashedly defending its conduct.

Parliament

Dinesh urges CB to take action against cheque fraud

Disna Mudalige and Camelia Nathaniel-Thursday, January 24, 2019

UPFA-MP Dinesh Gunawardena said cheque fraud is a billion rupee problem facing the Central Bank (CB) today. Many businessmen and traders issue cheques without adequate funds.

“In the Colombo city limits alone, there are thousands of people caught up in this issue. So why is the Central Bank not taking action? Why is the banking law silent? Nothing is being done and as a result the chain of the economy is coming to a standstill in these areas and this is a very grave situation.”

He said the Debt Conciliation Board had taken many measures during the past several years to reduce the backlog of cases pertaining to debt related disputes. But, it is doubtful whether this issue can be resolved by merely increasing the staff numbers. The reason is that almost every village in the country is caught up in the short term loan trap, especially the elderly. Then there are the pensioners, those engaged in the labour trade and the housewives. All of them are caught up in the debt trap, the MP noted.

Giving an example he said, “In Pettah daily there are lenders who give money on interest and for Rs.1000 the daily interest is Rs. 100 which is multiplied by 30 if it is for a month. This is the same method that has gradually crept into villages as well and there are upper banks that give out housing loans under this same method. He commended Justice Minister Thalatha Atukorale for taking measures to mediate in resolving this issue.”

Joining the Debt Conciliation Amendment Bill debate in Parliament yesterday, Gunawardena said there are many unregulated loan schemes and some companies go to every village and town and give sell goods on such schemes and in some instances, people have to pay around 40% in interest. The majority of those who get lured into such schemes are the women folk.

“Even in villages, prior to sowing their fields, they pawn their lands and obtain loans in addition to the government loans. Hence, it is a very dangerous predicament for many, especially those with limited income,” MP Gunawardena added.

While commending the efforts of the Justice Minister to introduce measures to address the issue of resolving the disputes pertaining to obtaining of loans, he called on her to revisit this issue and take further measures to address the broader issue, in terms of obtaining and offering loans.

He also brought up the issue of cooperative association funds that they have lent to finance companies, which have since collapsed and the monies of the depositors are lost. He pointed out to the Justice Minister that the offenders have so far not been brought to book.

Banks should subsume technology before technology subsumes them

Dr. W.A. Wijewardena delivering the convocation address

Returning to IBSL is like ‘coming home’

Monday, 21 January 2019

It is a privilege for me to return to the Institute of Bankers of Sri Lanka, popularly known as IBSL, after the lapse of some 10 years. I had a long association with IBSL from its very beginning – from around 1977. Therefore, it is closely and inseparably linked to me.

Banks should subsume techno... by on Scribd

Sri Lanka: On Draft Constitution placed before the Assembly

by H.M. G.B.. M. Kotakadeniya and Lt Col Anil Amarasekera (Rtd)-Jan 24, 2019

The Government has now placed before the Constitutional assembly a draft constitution consisting of a Preamble and 399 Articles arranged through 40 chapters. The structure of the draft is similar to the present constitution although the content is different. Therefore the Government’s denial that there exists no Draft Constitution is dishonest and erroneous. The Government call this Draft Constitution “A report prepared by the Panel of experts for the Steering committee which is based on the interim report, six sub-committee reports, and the report of Ad hoc sub-committee”. This so called report does not express the views of the Expert Panel except the 399 Articles of the proposed constitution. The said interim report of the steering committee dated 21 September 2017 was printed by the Government printer and was placed before the Constitutional assembly few months ago. The Draft Constitution now before the public (which the Government prefers to call it an expert report) propose the same provisions suggested in the said interim report prepared by the steering committee of which the PM is the head which propose to replace the existing Article 2 (dealing with the unitary state) and Article 9 (dealing with Buddhism).

The interim report includes 8 annexures marked as 1A to 1H submitted by some of the member groups and/or political parties represented in the steering committee expressing their views to the interim report. They are the SLFP, JVP, TNA, JHU, Joint Opposition, ACMC and EPDP. In addition Dr. Jayampathi Wickramarathne P.C has submitted his views agreeing with the contents of the report. It is only the UNP that has not formally submitted their views separately for the obvious reason that it is common knowledge that Dr. Jayampathi Wickramarathne UNP national list MP drafted these proposals for the steering committee with the blessings of the PM who is the head of the steering committee.

We can well understand the PM’s and his party’s reluctance to acknowledge their involvement with this draft with the mounting opposition to these proposals including that of the Mahanayakas of the three Maha Nikayas. The JVP made a public pronouncement the previous week that there is no draft constitution prepared so far. However this is now proved to be a false assertion. We are not surprised with that position when considering their conduct extending their support to the government and to the TNA in the recent past.

The proposals seek to replace inter alia Article 2 & 9 of the Constitution to which the JO, SLFP & JHU has categorically opposed. The JVP does not in any way oppose the alternative provisions proposed in place of Article 2 & 9. Therefore it is clear that they are in agreement with the formula suggested in the Interim Report and in the Draft Constitution to replace Article 2 & 9.

The Government is now denying that, they had any intention of changing the unitary character of the state or the place given to Buddhism. If that is their position one wonders as to why those alternative proposals to Article 2 & 9 were ever made. Obviously the attempt was to alter the existing provisions.

The present Article 2 of the Constitution states in a simple sentence “The Republic of Sri Lanka is a Unitary State”. It is now proposed to change this wording to read as ‘Sri Lanka (Ceylon) is a free, sovereign, and independent Republic which is an aekiya rajyaya/orumitta nadu, consisting of the institutions of the Centre and of the provinces which shall exercise powers as laid down in the Constitution’’. The alternative proposal completely omits the word ‘unitary’ which has been interpreted time and again universally including our own Supreme Court in the 13th Amendment bill determination. Supreme Court decisions are given in the English Language and it is the word ‘unitary’ that has been interpreted by Courts and other Jurists. Then why remove the very term that has been interpreted by our Supreme Court? The word ‘unitary’ is now proposed to be removed from the English text of the Constitution. Obviously this is done to deviate from the accepted interpretation given to this term.

The Sinhala term ‘aekiya’ is given a new interpretation unknown to the law. The alternative proposal states ‘in this article aekiya rajyaya/orumitta nadu means a state which is undivided and indivisible and in which the power to amend the constitution or to repeal and replace the constitution, shall remain with the legislature and the people of Sri Lanka as provided in this constitution’. So we have now a new interpretation peculiar to “this article”. It is needless to say that even a federal state cannot be divided. Can the United States or India be divided? The divisibility has nothing to do with the question whether a country is unitary or federal. The power to repeal the constitution is any way with the legislature that enacted it. It is obvious that the interpretation offered is a deliberate attempt to convert Sri Lanka into a Federal state with an erroneous label attached to it.

Further the introduction of the word “orumitta nadu” meaning “united” which is different from the word “ottriachchi” in the existing Tamil text of the present constitution which means “unitary”, is mischievous. It is unfortunate that the Government has dived to this depth to satisfy the TNA, the Tamil diaspora and their Western masters and sacrificing the sovereignty of the people of this country. It is shameful for a Government to stoop to this depth and sacrifice the interest of the nation in this manner.

It is not only the change of the wording of Article 2 that we are concerned of, but the substance of these proposals, which seeks to convert Sri Lanka into a federal state. The abolition of the office of Executive President and the proposal to require the governer to act only on the advice of the Chief Minister and his board of ministers will undoubtedly create independent states out of the control of the government of Sri Lanka. The requirement of a referendum to change a law passed by a Provincial Government makes it impossible to intervene against wrongful acts of a Provincial Government. This is another characteristic change made in that direction.

Another false representation made by the Government is that they are not going to change Article 9. The two alternative proposals made in this Draft are different from the existing article 9. The first alternative proposal removes the word ‘Republic’ from the article so that the commitment of the state to give Buddhism the foremost place is taken away. The effect of this is that whilst Sri Lanka and its people treat Buddhism as foremost, the state itself does not recognize so. In the 2nd alternative proposal the words “while treating all religions….. without discrimination” are added to reverse the very meaning and effect of Article 9.

Moreover, apart from altering Article 9, the Government Draft proposes numerous clauses which will permit unethical conversion. Under the present Constitution a citizen has only the right to manifest his religion. However, the new draft seeks to permit propagation of religion not only by citizens but even by foreigners. Similarly, cultural rights which was limited to citizens is now sought to be extended to foreigners as well.

This type of surreptitious tinkering and meddling with the provision is dishonest and fraudulent. These manoeuvres have taken away the trust that the people have (if any) in those who drafted these proposals. Therefore we earnestly request to remove these so called experts and the ghost writers who have produced this fraudulent document from the constitution Drafting Process, forthwith.

Suspending MPs without taking legal action useless: Deputy Speaker

2019-01-23

Deputy Speaker J. M. Ananda Kumarasiri said simply suspending MPs who misbehaved in Parliament in November last year would be useless if no legal action was taken against them.

He said the report on the incident would be useless if the MPs were simply suspended without taking action against them.

The report on the incident was handed over to the Speaker yesterday

He said that none of the MPs identity or political parties was revealed yet but many MPs have involved the incident.

“I believe that action will be taken according to the Parliamentary Privileges Act and their such incidents would be prevented in the future.

“No proposal could be made on legal action taken against MPs but certain punishments should be given to the MPs who were found to be involved in the incident,” he said.

Speaker Karu Jayasuriya appointed a committee of six members consisting of former Speaker Chamal Rajapaksa and MPs including Ranjith Maddumabandara, Chandrasiri Gajadeera, Bimal Rathnayake and Mavai S. Senathirajah to investigate the incident.

“We had meetings covering the entire incident that took place in Parliament but Chamal Rajapaksa and Chandrasiri Gajadeera did not take part in the committee.

“Seven sessions have been taken to take into all the video footage that had happened within the Chamber. Later, we managed to identify the MPs who have involved the incident,” Deputy Speaker Kumarasiri said.

“A list of the MPs had been compiled. We requested the Criminal Investigations Department (CID) to hold a separate investigation with regard to the incident to identify whether the public property was damaged and officials of the Government were harassed.

“Investigations were carried out regarding the incident based on the Parliamentary Privilege Act,” he said.

“On that basis, a report was submitted to the Speaker last afternoon, it was handed over to the Attorney General’s Department. After that, the AG will look into the report and action would be taken after he written back to the Speaker. Apart from that, the CID had also submitted a report over their investigations was handed over to the Speaker.

“Based on the investigations on the parliamentary powers and privilege Act, if the AG feels that there were pieces of evidence or facts that he could conduct on the basis of the report he would take actions on that. The AG can proceed the case to the Supreme Court to get a ruling on the entire process. (Indika Sri Aravinda)

Wednesday, January 23, 2019

Political Economy Of Post-Coup Yahapālana

By Ameer Ali –JANUARY 23, 2019

Dr. Ameer Ali

The fifty-two days torment the nation endured since President Sirisena (MS) sacked Prime Minister Wickremesinghe (RW) on October 26th last year, has cost the country’s economy immensely. Capital flight, rupee depreciation, decline in tourist arrivals and above all investor uncertainty and external confidence are the direct result of Sirisena’s impetuous and unconstitutional action. Although RW and his government have been reinstated the political situation is not back to normal. There is continuous turbulence and MS, still smarting under defeat from his constitutional fiasco and public ignominy arising from it, continues to undermine the smooth functioning of an elected government. At the same time, the opposition led by the Rajapakse clan and its SLPP, which is hankering for power at any cost, is adding fuel to fire. The ultimate victim of this power play is the nation’s economy. No one seems to care about this victim.

“Neither a borrower nor a lender be” said Polonius in Shakespesare’s Hamlet. In one of the episodes in the Tamil epic Ramayanam of Kampan, King Ravana’s torment was compared to that of a person in deep financial debt. Instead of a Ravana today, Sri Lanka itself is tormented with a debt burden mounting to more than 70% of the value of all what she is producing. May be the Minister of Finance Mangala Samaraweera, has become a modern day Ravana to be tormented by an escalating national debt and a slow moving economy. In a sense, the debt burden is mostly an inherited one, but to which his government has contributed a fair share. Already, at least one lender has demanded and acquired one of the nation’s real assets, the Hambantota Harbour, ostensibly on a ninety-nine year lease. Will this asset ever revert to Sri Lanka? There is also no guaranty that more such acquisitions will not occur if Sri Lanka fails to free itself from its mounting foreign debt. The minister is now begging another lender, the IMF, to show mercy in renegotiating the terms of repayment for existing loans while beseeching IMF to lend even more.

Lending and borrowing are normal state of economic behaviour in modern life whether for an individual, corporation, institution or nation. However, if one wants to borrow one should first think of the reason for borrowing and of the ways and means of settling the loan. Without going into the economics behind public and private sector deficits, one can state in simple terms that a government borrows either to cover a temporary disequilibrium in its finances or to embark on specific development projects to increase the nation’s production capabilities that would earn more revenue in the future. Samaraweera believes that he could resurrect the ailing economy by attracting more foreign investment, spending on development projects such as his gamperaliya, reducing budget deficit and giving more incentives to the private sector, while at the same time bringing down the cost of living for struggling Sri Lankans. This is no less than a Herculean task and his options to accomplish it are severely constrained because of domestic political realities. No economy can operate independently of its political environment.

The most important issue facing the minister is to achieve fiscal consolidation to satisfy IMF monitors. This has to be achieved through cutting expenditure and increasing tax revenue. Even with increased flow of foreign investment to encourage production and export, which in any case is a medium to long term option to yield result, budgetary savings cannot be avoided. The question is ow is he going to reduce budget deficit especially when his government has just about a year to face a general election? Which expenditure to curtail and who to tax are sensitive issues especially for a government that is facing the polls soon. Political expediency is sure to overwhelm economic rationality in the forthcoming budget.

To make the minister’s task even more difficult, MS has determined to take revenge on RW and his UNF government, which is hanging on to power because of support from the Tamil National Alliance (TNA). MS’s decision to establish a Presidential Commission of Inquiry to probe UNF government’s performance between 2015-2018 while excluding a similar probe into the regime of Mahinda Rajapakse (MR), as promised to the people when MS was elected as president, is a deliberate ploy to tarnish the image of RW and redirect his government’s attention more on countering MS’s and SLPP’s political manoeuvres than on concentrating on economic development.

As mentioned already, the economy is the chief victim of planned political instability and reckless competition for power among the chief contestants, RW, MS and MR, not to mention Gotabaya Rajapaksa who is waiting in the wings. Currently, neither MS nor MR seems to worry about the economy, and neither of their parties SLFP and SLPP respectively has any economic blueprint for the future.

More tensions as opening of illegal Buddha statue in Mullaitivu rushed through

Buddhist monks harass Tamil politicians and journalists

24 January 2019

A large Buddha statue being illegally constructed in the land of a Tamil Hindu temple in Mullaitivu was hurriedly declared open by Sinhala Buddhist monks on Wednesday, with the aid of Sri Lankan police and the archaeology department.

Sri Lankan police offered protection for the illegal event

While a a Right to Information (RTI) request to Karaithuraipattu (Maritimepattu) divisional council confirmed that the monks had no permission or land rights to build the statue, the Mullaitivu magistrates court was due to hear about the illegal constructions on Thursday (Jan 24), leading locals to accuse the monks of rushing through the statue opening before a potential injunction served by the court.

Monks and Sinhalese visitors confront and harass Tamil journalists

As well as police officers, army personnel and archaeology department officials, among other visitors from the south, a professor from Peradeniya University, Kapila Gunawardene, also attended the opening. Also in attendance were Buddhist monks who had seized the lands of Muslims and established a vihara in Arisimalai, in Pulmoddai, Trincomalee.

Army personnel photographing Tamil journalists and locals

Tamil journalists covering the opening were harassed by the attendees, including the monks, and were harangued about how information about the Buddha statue had been circulated to local media. Tamil journalists have regularly been harassed and intimidated while covering the construction of the statue, by construction workers and other officials. Former Northern Provincial Council member T Ravikaran was also harassed during the event.

A dispute over the statue in Neeraviyadi in the Semmalai area of Karaithuraipattu division (Maritimepattu) had been ongoing for over five years. Locals and local authorities had prevented attempts to construct a vihara and other Buddhist infrastructure for a long period, however Buddhist monks were accused of pushing through the construction of a large Buddha statue towards the end of 2018, when local authorities were distracted by Sri Lanka’s political crisis and the heavy floods in the North.

While local Tamils claim the Neeraviyadi Pillaiyaar Kovil had been at the site for generations, a gazette notification declaring its lands as archaeological premises had reportedly been issued in or around 2013, when a Sinhala Buddhist monk named Colombe Medalange had taken up residence near the premises with the help of the occupying Sri Lankan army.

The resumption of works to the Buddha statue had been a cause of heightened tensions in the area, with a recent confrontation breaking out last week when Buddhist monks stormed and disrupted Thai Pongal rituals at the Hindu temple. Following this incident Mullaitivu police filed charges against both the Hindu temple administration and the Buddhist monks for disturbing the peace. While the case went before the Mullaitivu magistrates court on Tuesday, Tamil representatives presented evidence of the illegality of the monks’ project, which is due to be taken up by the court on Thursday.

Responding to a Right to Information (RTI) request, the divisional council confirmed that the construction of the Buddha statue and the monk’s residence in the land was indeed illegal.

The document in response to a request made in September 2018 stated that:

- There was no evidence of Buddhists ever having lived permanently in the area.
- No lands had been allocated for the construction of a vihara in the stated premises.
- The divisional council had not granted permission for the current construction work being carried out by the monk.
- No applications had been submitted to the council for the construction of a vihara on state land.
- The divisional council had not provided any land permit documents to the Buddhist monk for his residence on the specified state land.
- The council did not grant any permission for the gravel excavation that had taken place next to the specified land between 2012 and 2013.

The divisional council also said it was currently engaging in efforts to gather comprehensive information about the rightful landowners of the disputed lands.

Vocal opposition to the ongoing Sinhalisation - by way of of Sinhala settlements and Buddhist constructions - of Mullaitivu, and the North-East overall, has been growing among locals. Tamil groups say the problem remains unaccounted for as the state uses several different fronts including the archaeology department, Mahaweli authority and forest department to carry out land seizures and occupations.

Notice served on former CJ Sarath Silva

Lakmal Sooriyagoda-Thursday, January 24, 2019

The Supreme Court yesterday directed the petitioners to serve notices on former Chief Justice Sarath N. Silva regarding a Contempt of Court action filed against him by three professors.

The Supreme Court three-judge-bench comprising Justice Vijith Malalgoda, Justice Murdu Fernando and Justice S. Thurairajah fixed the matter for support on February 7.

The petitioners were directed to serve notices on former Chief Justice Sarath N.Silva and the Attorney General.

This petition had been filed by senior Prof.Chandraguptha Thenuwara, Prof. Hewa Waduge Cyril and senior Prof. Don Prisantha Gunawardena.

The petitioners stated that on December 3, 2018, the former Chief Justice addressing the large gathering that was present at a public rally at the Maradana junction had made a speech in utter contempt of the Supreme Court.

When the matter came up before the Supreme Court, former Chief Justice Sarath N.Silva was present in court. President’s Counsel Romesh de Silva appearing on behalf of the former Chief Justice informed court that notice had not been served on his client but he was appearing in court without notice.

‘In view of the fact that this is a matter relating to a Contempt of Court, it should be taken up for support today,” Silva said.

President’s Counsel Upul Jayasuriya appearing for petitioners also expressed his willingness to support this matter today. Taking into consideration the facts, the Supreme Court fixed the matter for an early date.

Through this petition, petitioners are urging action be taken against Sarath N. Silva as per Article 105(3) of the Constitution for contempt of the Supreme Court by a speech made by him at the public rally named Jathika Ekamuthuwa on December 3, 2018.

The petitioners also sought an Interim Order restraining the former Chief Justice from making contemptuous statements scandalising the Supreme Court until the conclusion of this case.
The petitioners are urging to charge former Chief Justice on the offence of the Supreme Court under Article 105 (3) of the Constitution.

The petitioners stated that Silva had made this call at a rally organised by the Jathika Ekamuthuwa, a group loyal to Mahinda Rajapaksa in Maradana to gather public support in pursuit of a general election.
The petitioners stated that in said speech, former Chief Justice deliberately, maliciously and contemptuously made statements in relation to court process, the judgment and the conduct of the Supreme Court in the matter relating to Fundamental Rights petition and the order issued by the Court of Appeal in the matter of Quo Warranto petition filed in connection with the No Confidence Motion passed against the purported Prime Minister Mahinda Rajapaksa.

This petition was filed through Samararatna Associates. President’s Counsel Upul Jayasuriya with counsel Kalana Jayasuriya appeared for the petitioners. President’s Counsel Romesh de Silva appeared for the former Chief Justice.

Taking the mindset beyond drugs

President Sirisena (left) and President Philippine Rodrigo Duterte

2019-01-24

Sri Lanka’s efforts to curb drug use in the country could turn out to be harder than instilling some discipline in its lawmakers. Just days ago President Sirisena was full of confidence when stating that he would bring the drug trade that’s causing damage to the society under control. A large truth we need to fathom is that a fair number of politicians are directly or indirectly involved in the drug trade. Presidents can vouch to wipe out drugs from the society. But in this backdrop we also heard recently that the law enforcement authorities had disbanded a special unit checking on the drug trade and operating in Kilinochchi. Its members have been transferred to other police stations. It was also reported that a political bigwig was behind the police transfers.

What’s heartening to hear is that the police have begun an operation to crack down on drug trafficking and have introduced a mobile unit for this purpose. There is also STF support for high ride operations aimed at busting drug rackets.

The roots of the drug trade are spread far and wide. Sirisena has stuck to his stance of implementing the capital punishment on drug racketeers. But the whole drug business in the island has spread like a cancer. The latest we hear of is that the files, which contain the names of drug related prisoners on death row, has gone missing. It seems the drug mafia is large and operates like a well-oiled machine. There are even newspaper reports which state that certain drug kingpins operate their drug businesses from within the prison cells.

The issue with the drug trade is that people who pose as ordinary decent folk are engaged in this business. President Sirisena warned the other day that politicians and officials who posed as gentlemen were involved in the drug business. He also hit out at NGOs which sympathised with drug dealers.

But the whole drug business in the island has spread like a cancer. The latest we hear of is that the files, which contain the names of drug related prisoners on death row, has gone missing. It seems the drug mafia is large and operates like a well-oiled machine

President Sirisena claims that his efforts to eradicate drugs from the society began 45 years ago. That was when he was an ordinary politician. Now he is the most powerful citizen of the country. Recently he visited the Philippines where he grabbed the opportunity to tap their knowledge of how to eradicate drugs from the society. Sirisena has boasted of receiving the support of Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte on this endeavour. But Sirisena is also aware of the fact that Duterte’s drug curbing policies have attracted severe criticism by human rights groups. For the record Duterte’s drug curbing policies saw the police and paid vigilance groups eliminating 5000-12000 people; drug dealers and drug users were among those who perished.

But what we need to fathom is that despite such harsh methods being used, drug use is rampant in the Philippines and drug lords have managed to dodge the police. This is an information era. Before Sirisena returned to Sri Lanka his intensions to control the drug menace back at home flashed in headlines in global newspapers. Those compiling these news reports however didn’t forget to give equal publicity to both the good and the bad factors associated with Duterte’s drug curbing policies.

The problem with drug rehabilitation efforts is that Sri Lankan methods don’t seem to be effective.
Alcohol and Drug Information Centre (ADIC) compiled statistics reveal that as many as 75% of those who undergo rehabilitation return to the use of drugs. For the record 24% Sri Lankans are drug users and as many as 80,000 individuals between the ages 15-64 are hooked on substance abuse. Officials have also warned that there are those who successfully undergo rehabilitation, but can’t avoid returning to the drug community which they once associated with.

One of the annoying issues associated with the drug world is the violent confrontation between rival gangs. Recently there was a fatal shooting incident in Wattala and the violence originated from a feud which began four years ago. As a result of such incidents normal civilians walking on the road are exposed to serious threats at times when there is gunfire.

Before Sirisena returned to Sri Lanka his intensions to control the drug menace back at home flashed in headlines in global newspapers. Those compiling these news reports however didn’t forget to give equal publicity to both the good and the bad factors associated with Duterte’s drug curbing policies

What’s heartening to hear is that the police have begun an operation to crack down on drug trafficking and have introduced a mobile unit for this purpose. There is also STF support for high ride operations aimed at busting drug rackets.

For years the Sri Lankan authorities have fought those involved in the drug trade with mixed results. What many positive thinkers opine is that looking at drugs in an entirely negative way has not produced the desired results. Starting from the tobacco filled cigarettes, health authorities have viewed intoxicants with skepticism, but haven’t suggested a good enough alternative for substance use.

Meditation and counter drugs have been prescribed with little results. But there have been great success stories of Indian spiritual masters having gone beyond drugs and achieving mind development; to perform super efficiently when undertaking a task at hand. Most of them were able to kick the drug habit when they found a mechanism within the human body which could be tapped when there was a need to be super conscious of the task at hand.

Dr. Robert Svaboda, author of ‘Aghora-the left hand of God’, is one who writes extensively about substance use and how ancient societies used them to produce positive effects. For the record Dr. Svaboda claimed to be the first Westerner to graduate from a college of Ayurveda and be licensed to practise Ayruveda in India. As much as he talks about the terrible side effects of drugs such as hashish and marijuana, he also talks about a stimulant like tobacco having over 100 important users in Ayurveda. He states in the book that ancient Rishis used certain mantras to ensure the drug helped raise awareness and didn’t ruin the mind. He also talks about knowledgeable drug users using antidotes whenever taking intoxicants. This is of course another side to the subject of drug use. After all the marijuana comes from a plant and is considered a herb.

But today Rishis remain inside jungles and most of the intoxicant drugs in the market are said to be of low quality are sprayed with chemicals to enhance shelf life. These chemicals are said to create havoc in the human body, superceding the effort produced by the drug itself.

What many positive thinkers opine is that looking at drugs in an entirely negative way has not produced the desired results. Starting from the tobacco filled cigarettes, health authorities have viewed intoxicants with skepticism, but haven’t suggested a good enough alternative for substance use

What’s positive about the past is that those who used intoxicants to aid thinking related work were able to later obtain the same effects of the drugs by tuning their minds to a super conscious state. These stories leave a pattern which benefits the observer. The normal healthy person taking to drug use sees his world change from caterpillar to a cocoon. Those who kick the drug habit have emerged as butterflies!

Rolling back big government – The next big challenge

Comparisons with other countries show that we indeed have a monster government with too many public entities depending on the public purse

Thursday, 24 January 2019

Preliminary estimates in the 2019 Budget to be presented on 5 March this year include an income of 2.5 trillion and a debt service requirements of a whopping 2.2 trillion, leaving only a net income of 0.3 trillion.

As for expenditure, the Government estimates it needs 2.3 trillion to support the 25 special accounting units or constitutional bodies, 30 ministries, 105 departments and 634 non-departmental units that constitute the Government. The department count does not include the nine provinces and 25 District Secretariats which are also spending units of the Central Government. The non-departmental units include 234 statutory bodies, and 400 public enterprises reporting to respective ministries.

In short, we are funding a 25-30-105-634 distribution of nearly 800 Government entities with borrowed money to the tune of two trillion.

Development requires deficit spending to make investments and give relief to those affected in the process, no doubt. But, are we investing as needed or are we using the money to feed a monster of a government?

Comparisons with other countries show that we indeed have a monster government with too many public entities depending on the public purse. Some preliminary benchmarking and an analysis of the allocation of departments and non-departmental bodies in cabinets present and past tells me that rolling back to a 25-30-40-200 formula is a workable ideal.
Rolling back to a smaller government

Current 25 constitutional bodies which are accountable to the Parliament include the Cabinet, the Courts, offices of the PM, President and Leader of the House, Auditor General, independent commissions and other independent bodies. I envisage the number to remain more or less the same.

Currently, the number of ministries is fixed at 30. Of those, 15 portfolios – Defence, Finance, Foreign Affairs, Home Affairs, National Planning and Economy, Physical Planning and Infrastructure, Digital Infrastructure and Digital economy, Justice, Labour, Land, Industry and Commerce, Power, Science, Technology and Research, Agriculture, Education, Environment, Health, Housing, Human Services, Cultural Affairs – can designated as ‘ministerial departments’ which are one and the same as the ministries, avoiding duplication between ministries and departments. These 15 ministerial departments would be a suitable amalgamation of any number of existing departments, for a fixed set of portfolios.

Twenty-five other departments would be distributed among fifteen other ministerial portfolios. There would be flexibility here to account for economic, social and political realities. This set of 25 departments too would be reconstituted as an amalgamation of remaining departments.

Who will roll back government to this formula, or close to, is the two trillion rupee question.

Politicians are driven by an electorate which views elections as a lottery for government jobs. Bureaucrats always seek to increase their budgets in order to increase their own power (Niskannen, 1971). Therefore, it is not surprising that our government gets bigger with each election. New units are formed to monitor the performance, but they succumb to the same fate as entities which they are supposed to monitor.

There is a Department of Public Enterprises to oversee the public enterprises. It does its best to document but its jurisdiction ends there. Sri Lanka’s Strategic Enterprises Management Agency (SEMA) was set up in 2004 with the responsibility to improve 13 public enterprises including State Banks, Ceylon Electricity Board (CEB), Ceylon Petroleum Corporation (CPC), State Pharmaceutical Corporation (SPC), Central Transport Board (CTB), Ports Authority, Railways and plantation companies. But, it was used as a vehicle for misguided ‘green’ propaganda by its Chairman until it was shut down in 2018.

The present Government initiated a Ministry of Public Enterprises in 2015 (without abolishing SEMA of course), but it too has been a failure. The Parliamentary Committee on Public Accounts (COPA) and the Committee on Public Enterprises (COPE) are made up parliamentarians with so many demands on their time and a weak support system and the two are not in a position to rationalise the set up.

The annual budget is the place to start, I believe. Thanks to the initiatives by the present government, the budget format is looking more like a performance budget with outputs, outcomes and/or key performance indicators listed for each funded entity. These indicators not adequately articulated with measurable targets, but it is a good start.

Civil society in Sri Lanka has been successful in keeping the present Government more or less on track in regard to law and order, independence of public bodies and right to information. We have not been as successful in curtailing corruption. A focus on performance of government bodies is a necessary condition for that.
Performance budgeting

In public policy we learn about four basic types of budgeting: traditional Line-item budgeting, Program budgeting, Performance budgeting and Zero-based budgeting.

In Line-item budgeting allocation for each line item is based on previous year’s allocation. Whether you increase or decrease and by how much being the main consideration. In Zero-based budgeting, in theory at least, every allocation is set to zero and the allocation has to be justified each year.

In a Performance budget, each line is also broken down into performance units and allocations presented by each unit or program and its expected performance. Without the performance component, the latter would be a Program budget.

You cannot take away funding from a government department for poor performance because of job insecurity that entails, but increments can be tied to performance. However, this kind of minimal accountability will not get us far.

A gradual roll back of present government structure of 25-30-106-634 to more sane levels, with compensation for existing workforce, is essential. In order to push for that we need to understand the present structure better.
Spawning of non-departmental entities

The President recently appointed A. J. M. Muzammil, former Mayor of Colombo, to the Central Environment Authority; Reginald Cooray, a former Governor, to the Gem and Jewellery Authority; and Niluka Ekanayake, another former Governor, to State Timber Corporation as Chairmen.

Another appointment that received media attention was the naming of the brother of a minister as Chairman of the Ports Authority. All four entities are non-departmental entities which are set up to operate outside of the civil service to address various regulator or developmental issues in selected sectors more efficiently and effectively.

In reality, these entities are instruments of power for politicians. Arguments and counter arguments on the merits of these appointment is counterproductive I think. As I said before performance is the more important issue. However, given that we are supporting these entities and more on borrowed money it is time we looked beyond performance to the question of the very existence of some of these entities.

The first non-departmental entity to be formed in Sri Lanka, if I am not mistaken, was the Ceylon Tourist Board established in 1966 as a statutory body. Today we have 234 such bodies, covering almost every sector and sub sector. These bodies can indeed make government function smoother, but the problem is that the departments and even ministries have not down-sized accordingly. There are a further 400 Government-owned companies representing these same sectors. These bodies require a separate evaluation.
Redundant departments

The Cabinet of Ministers after independence consisted of 13 ministries which oversaw a handful of more departments in number. In 1966, when the Tourism Board was established, it replaced the Ceylon Tourism Bureau, a Government department. Some of those who worked in the bureau chose to leave a pensionable service to join the new board and some given the option to remain in the service.

It should have been the practice that for each new statutory body the relevant department is abolished or downsized. Judging by the current number of entities, it has not been the case. When the Central Environment Authority was established in 1980, environment related departments in the Ministry of Environment and other ministries continued to function or further expand.

New reforms require a study of the genesis and the current relevance of each every statutory body or public enterprise and the departments paralleling those to come up with a distribution close to the ideal.
Ministries becoming standalone bureaucracies

A ministry should set policy and monitor performance of implementing bodies. It need not have specialists in each of the areas under its jurisdiction. Over the years ministries have evolved into bureaucracies of their own. In addition to the usual divisions for planning, legal, administration they have additional divisions covering various sectors and sub sectors, with additional secretaries and assistant secretaries and many minions to staff each of these divisions and vehicles and drivers for senior staff. All a ministry needs is a policy planning and monitoring unit with supporting legal and financial units.
Ministries overstepping provincial authority

The Ministry of Education is a classic example of a ministry of the central government expanding into sectors where the administration is devolved to the provinces. The ministry already has under its jurisdiction the implementing bodies it requires – i.e. the Department of Examinations, National Institute of Education, Education Publication Department and the nine Directorates of Education representing each province.

The National Education Commission, a policy making body, unfortunately exists outside of the ministry irrelevant to education. The national school system is the entry point for incursion of line ministry into provincial affairs and the necessity for that system should be closely examined.
United in dysfunction

The culture of our public entities is such that these ministries, departments, statutory bodies and public enterprises seemed to be united in their dysfunction. They compete with each other for light-weight activities such as awareness and training and doling out goodies, and wasting time planning, holding and attending tamashas and waiting around for ever-late ministers.

(With apologies to exemplary Government officials with whom I have had the pleasure to work. You know who you are.)