Parliamentary control of public finance

January 25, 2019, 12:00 pm 

Parliament has appointed opposition (JVP) MP Sunil Handunnetti as the chairman of the Parliamentary Committee on Public Enterprises (COPE). He was appointed the Chairman of the COPE, after August 2015 Parliamentary election deviating from the practice of appointing government Ministers as Chairmen of these Committees. MP Lasantha Alagiyawanna (UPFA), another opposition MP, is appointed the Chairman of the Committee on Public Accounts (COPA). The Committees with oversight responsibility for financial discipline of government institutions are chaired by Opposition MPs, strengthens the Parliamentary control and oversight of Public Finance.

Parliament; the "Custodian of the public purse" exercises oversight in the financial performance in the Public Sector institutions. The Parliament is the sole authority to approve spending of people’s money and collection of taxes from the people. It cast upon the parliament the responsibility to scrutinize how the government Ministries, Departments and other government agencies spend money approved by the Parliament. The annual Budget and other finance bills presented to parliament for approval provides the opportunity to Parliamentary scrutiny of Public finance.

The annual Budget (Appropriation Bill) is presented to the parliament each year and the budget document contains information that outlines the policies underlying tax and spending proposals. The Budget debate provides the Members of Parliament the opportunity to exercise this most crucial function of the Parliament. The standing orders allow for not more than Twenty-six days for the consideration (debate) of the Appropriation Bill, of which not more than seven days and not more than twenty two days are allotted to the Second reading and the Committee stage discussions respectively. This provides approximately 200 hours of discussion and final approval of over 300 Heads of expenditure relating to government Ministries, Departments and other government Agencies.

The financial information is provided by the Treasury and Government Agencies. The MPs sometimes question the accuracy and the reliability of the information. The Parliament’s role demands Parliamentarians to take an active role in this process. It allows the Parliament to keep a check on government’s spending of public money and hold the government to account. Lack of access to accurate, reliable and in-depth budgetary information, time constrains and multitude of other constrains is a significant challenge to this crucial function of Public Finance Oversight and it has become less effective. In this challenging situation, scrutinizing, as supposed to do, with due diligence 300 Expenditure Heads is a daunting task and hardly ever the MPs could go into the fiscal implications of the proposals.

This is a sharp disconnect between the formal power and the actual budgetary role of the Parliament. Key reasons for this disconnect may be, apart from other constrains, is the limited knowledge and capacity of legislators to scrutinise fiscal matters; most Parliamentarians don’t possess the knowledge and skills to understand a complex budget and to analyse it. Research capacity in the legislature is almost non-existent. Budget related information remains the monopoly of the executive; the Treasury. The legislature depends on the information provided by the executive.

PARLIAMENTARY BUDGET OFFICE (PBO)

These challenges are addressed by taking measures to provide parliamentarians with institutional capacity to carry out their legislative and public finance oversight functions more actively and effectively. To that end, establishing PARLIAMENTARY BUDGET OFFICE (PBO) would strengthen the MPs’ role of carrying out financial oversight. The PBOs in OCED countries, many Asian, African and South American countries have been successful in their role.

The Parliamentary Budget Officer (PBO) is an independent position similar to the Auditor General, reports to the Parliament. The Auditor General and the Parliamentary Committees; COPE and the COPA, all take a retrospective view of the public accounts and play an assurance role. The Parliamentary Budget Officer’s work is largely prospective in nature and in a decision support role for Parliament. The PBO provides un-biased, independent analysis on the state of the nation's finances and the government's estimates to the Parliament independent of the executive; the Treasury.

ROLE OF PARLIAMENTARY BUDGET OFFICE (PBO)

The PBO’s main functions would be Economic and Fiscal analysis and expenditure and revenue analysis and improve budget transparency. PBO will support Parliament in exercising its oversight role in the government’s stewardship of public funds and ensures budget transparency with an aim to implement sound economic and fiscal policies. PBO advices independently, objectively and is non-partition. PBO’s reports are made openly available to committees and Parliamentarians; and with the permission of the Parliament, to the public.

The PBO’s work involves financial analysis and broadly on fiscal policy, analyses programme costs and estimates and provide cost estimates on Parliamentary proposals. Upon request from a committee of the Parliament or any Parliamentarian (MP), estimates the financial cost of any proposal over which Parliament has jurisdiction. PBO provides distinct complementary service to support Parliament and Parliamentary Committees; especially financial expertise to COPE and COPA. It provides research and analytical support to individual MP’s and complies with their requests and works with Parliamentary committees.

The PBO plays an important role helping Legislators (MPs), and can significantly assist MPs in understanding the budget process, assists legislators to critically analyze program budgets, performance indicators and results (annual performance reports) to evaluate the Budget proposals, making the Budget to become more effective and meaningful.

ADVANTAGES OF PARLIAMENTARY

BUDGET OFFICE (PBO)

The Parliament, through the PBO is able to scrutinize the results of the approved spending. The Legislature is afforded increased opportunity to examine the effectiveness of government policies and programs and greater transparency and accountability of the Executive for the results of public spending. It leads the Executive to driving performance improvements in the public sector, including explanations for not achieving results and alert committee members to poor performance. The issues raised in PBO’s reports would have a substantive impact on the country’s economy. It would contribute to improvement in financial decisions and improved value for money in public services. Control wastage and extravagant expenditure in Public Sector Institutions.

The PBO strengthens and reassert MPs role as more active players in budget process and raises the quality of debate. Improve government transparency and accountability and brings financial accountability on public spending. PBO in the Parliament is a measure to strengthen the role of parliament in budgetary governance and to enhance the credibility of the whole budgetary process.

RAJA WICKRAMASINGHE

4th February 2019 – Celebrating 71 Years Of What?

By Sharmini Serasinghe –JANUARY 27, 2019

Sharmini Serasinghe

An Open letter to Minister Mangala Samaraweera by Sharmini Serasinghe on behalf of the Voiceless & Faceless Citizens of Sri Lanka

Dear Minister Mangala Samaraweera,

Hope you don’t mind me not referring to you as Hon. Mangala Samaraweera because those of us who know you are honourable don’t need a reminder. Also, many of your colleagues – MPs – also referred to as Hon. bla bla bla are extremely dishonourable dolts, hence it is more of an insult to you than an honour.

The reason I decided to appeal to you on behalf of the Voiceless & Faceless Citizens of Sri Lanka is because unlike our Prime Minster who appears to have his head permanently in the clouds, and that shameless man who continues to masquerade as our ‘Chief Servant’, you my friend have your head screwed on right and above all, you have a conscience. Hence my utmost faith in you to do what is right by the people of our country.

So, here goes!

Next week, Sri Lanka will be “celebrating” 71 years since the British fled our shores for their dear lives. And, for 71 years since then we the people of this country have been led down the garden path by our noses, by successive governments of the two dominant political parties who used us, fooled us, abused us and now, driven our country down into the debt-ridden dark hole it is in today. You, as the Minister of Finance know exactly how deep and dark that hole is. 

As a sensible and wise man I’m sure you would agree, Mangala, February 4th should actually be a day of mourning for us Sri Lankans. 71 years since the British fled our shores which we call “independence” and where are we today? We the people of Sri Lanka have achieved nothing, really. We have lost far more than we ever gained, really!

The only ones who benefited are the politicians who we, our parents and grandparents voted for over the past 71 years, who in turn made an utter mess of our lives by polarising all of us based on language, ethnicity, religion etc. which ultimately led to a war amongst our own people. Well, that’s hopefully history now. Further, we have had and still have those we voted into power to serve us – our servants – who in turn served and keep serving themselves, their families and sycophants at OUR expense, used and abused the Buddha Sasana in this county – the cradle of Theravada Buddhism – made racist idiots of many gullible Sinhalese – an obvious joke in the eyes of the Other – destroyed our ancient and sacred values, polluted the Buddhist clergy, created divisiveness, communal and religious disharmony, brainwashed our youth with a racist Sinhala-Buddhist ideology – the future generations of our country – by introducing and encouraging a culture of vile and disgraceful behaviour. 

Is this what we will be “celebrating” on 4th February?

On this day – 4th February – we will witness yet another annually repeated spectacle – ‘Independence Day celebrations’ – for which WE the people of Sri Lanka must eventually foot the bill. Do we want OUR money spent on this senseless performance to boost the egos of our ‘Servants’, WE voted into power? NO, we DO NOT!

The star performer of this show will be our ‘Chief Servant’ – the traitor, Maithripala Sirisena – who ought to have been shoved into the dustbin of history and the lid tightly shut after he repeatedly violated our Constitution with obvious impunity. The 6.25 million of us who voted for this onetime political nonentity and who betrayed us on the 26th of October, 2018, do we want OUR money spent to boost the ego of this treacherous servant of ours? NO, we DO NOT!

As the Minister of Finance you are well aware that Sirsena’s act of treason which unconstitutionally brought the Rajapaksa oligarchy back into power through the backdoor cost our debt ridden country – us, its citizens – billions of Rupees, directly and indirectly, during the 51 days of illegal Rajapaksa misrule. Also, as the Minister of Finance you know only too well that the financial losses of Sirisena’s treachery will ultimately have to be borne by US – the people of Sri Lanka. Hence our cost of living will undoubtedly rise in leaps and bounds in the near future under all kinds of guises.

Very soon, we will be asked to tighten our belts further, which incidentally is so tight now it’s about to disjoint us at the waist. So, how about setting the example at the top – Sevaka Sirisena downwards – and start tightening all your belts for a change? 

A great place to start would be to cancel all plans to “celebrate” the nonsensical 71st anniversary of independence. After all, it is OUR money that will be squandered on this senseless event, rehearsals et al, isn’t it? I don’t recall any of our servants in government requesting our permission to spend OUR money on this spectacle.

Read More

‘CC always been impartial, transparent’

Disna Mudalige and Amali Mallawaarachchi-Saturday, January 26, 2019

The Constitutional Council (CC) considers not only the seniority but also the recommendation of the Chief Justice and the recognition to them in the field when appointing Superior Court judges, CC Chairman and Speaker Karu Jayasuriya said.

The Speaker, making a special announcement in Parliament yesterday on the request of the CC, said the CC has always been impartial, transparent, fair and independent in all its decisions.

He added that all the CC members are allowed to freely express their opinions on the appointments to independent commissions and high posts, and that a final decision is arrived impartially after evaluating all of the opinions.

“Certain criticisms of the MPs may lead to public misunderstanding on the conduct of the CC. When approving names for the independent commissions we use the same criteria stipulated in the 17th Amendment to the Constitution. However, we requested proposals from the MPs if any revision to those criteria is needed in 2016, but to-date we have not received a single proposal. I tabled a report in December, 2016 including the criteria being followed by the CC,” he noted.

“Some MPs resorted to criticize the judges’ private affairs which are not related to their duty and it was very harmful. The High Court Judges’ Association commended the method we follow in appointing superior court judges. Those appointments are done with the agreement of all members in the CC,” the Speaker explained.

He pointed out that most of the appointments made by the CC so far including the Attorney General and the IGP appointments were unanimous decisions of the CC. He added that the preliminary selections for all the appointments are done by the three civil society members.

“There had been instances where we rejected the President’s nomination, but when we explained the reasons, the President accepted our stance. We never made any appointment based on the political allegiance or the appearance of candidates. I wrote to the President also stating that we can discuss and settle any issue. The CC is an independent body and I have to safe guard that independence. I have to respect the opinions of the CC members,” the Speaker explained.

The Speaker also noted that it was former Opposition Leader R Sampanthan who appointed former Speaker Chamal Rajapaksa to the CC, adding that many were surprised and thanked Sampanthan for his stance.

UPFA MP Dinesh Gunawardena said the Opposition Leader’s views must be sought when deciding the composition of CC. “Of late, the CC has been repeatedly rejecting the President’s nomination for important posts. The current controversy is due to this rejection. We have repeatedly questioned as to what criteria the CC follows in making those appointments.

Disregarding the seniority, the CC makes appointments by a secret vote. The political allegiance matters in those appointments by the CC. It is not proper for the CC to reject the President’s nomination. The President respected the Supreme Court decision and acted according to it to avoid a crisis. Does not the CC try to make a new constitutional crisis? The composition of the CC must change,” MP Gunawardena complained.

Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe while refuting that the CC acts partially in favour of one political party, added that no party has a majority in the CC.

“The Prime Minister and the Opposition Leader can appoint 5 members to the CC. Then we have to speak to all the political parties. When R.Sampanthan was the Opposition Leader, we gave the opportunity to former Speaker Chamal Rajapaksa who represents the UPFA. But now he has resigned and we thank him for that. That vacancy must be filled after holding discussions with all other parties,” the Premier said.

The Prime Minister commenting on considering the seniority of the judges said, “Had you considered the seniority, late Justice Mark Fernando should have been the CJ, but Justice Sarath N.Silva was appointed instead. We all saw what former Chief Justice Shirani Bandaranayake went through. The CC was introduced from the 17th Amendment, but this

became defunct with the 18th Amendment presented by former President Mahinda Rajapaksa,” the PM explained.

The Prime Minister added that the CC decided that the Speaker as the Head of the CC must discuss with the President on the prevailing problems with regard to the appointments by the CC. “Your anger is due to the Supreme Court ruling in December last year. The people have no such problem. Who behaved in an anti-democratic way? Who made unnecessary comments on the religious faith of the judges? We saw how the MPs misbehaved in the Chamber during the period of political crisis. The Speaker must give us a report on that incident.

The CC helped to uphold the dignity of the House. There are independent commissions and independent judiciary in this

country. The courts have given rulings unfavourable to the Government also. At such instances, the Opposition commended the judiciary. There had been no issue when appointing the Attorney General or the IGP. We saw how problematic were the appointments made in the past after the 18th Amendment” the PM said.

He also questioned as to why former Minister Prof G L Peiris expressed his intent to go before the Supreme Court on holding the Provincial Council Elections, if they have no confidence in the judiciary.UPFA MP Wimal Weerawansa said that the CC members who were appointed with the agreement between the PM and then Opposition Leader R.Sampanthan must resign as former Speaker Chamal Rajapaksa did. He said new members must be appointed with the agreement between new Opposition Leader Mahinda Rajapaksa and Prime Minister Wickremesinghe.

WHO NEXT?

The reason for the early hype among the political parties and the media on the Presidential election which is not at hand is very clear.

2019-01-25

It is the indecision by the main political parties on the candidates they are going to field that has created this early hullabaloo over the matter.
Among the main political parties, only the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP) seems to be indifferent about it as it is a party that does not place much emphasis on individuals when it comes to elections.
And it is a party that takes decisions collectively, where individuals do not have much say on deciding on candidates.

On the other hand the JVP, despite their rhetoric on election platforms, very well knows that their candidate would not win the election and are merely using the election platform to expose the other parties and to educate the masses on their own policies and strategies. 
Therefore they are not in haste to decide whether to support another party’s candidate or to field a specific candidate of their own.
The other three main parties- the United National Party (UNP), Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP) and the Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna (SLPP) are in some sort of disarray over any coalition to be formed or the candidate they are going to field.

"The SLFP and the United Peoples Freedom Alliance (UPFA) under which he fielded his candidates collectively managed to obtain only about 1.5 million votes or 13 per cent of the valid votes."

In spite of many leaders of the ruling UNP having said that their candidate would definitely be the party leader, Ranil Wickremesinghe a significant section of the grassroots level members and supporters seem to opine in a different way.
Some of them do not hesitate to express those views as the non-Cabinet Minister Ajith P. Perera did last week during a public meeting.
From the stage, he repeatedly called on and encouraged the crowds to speak out for the Party’s Deputy Leader Sajith Premadasa, while speaking about the party’s next Presidential election.

This is one incident where the considerable and fast growth of support for Premadasa among the rank and file of the UNP that was clearly evident during the recent Constitutional and political crisis. Although the party leadership emerged victoriously and was strengthened by the crises, an opinion that it was the leadership that has to take the responsibility for the humiliating defeat at the February 10 local government elections and the alienation of President Maithripala Sirisena was also growing within the party ranks, during the same period.
As far as President Sirisena is concerned, he has come a long way since the beginning of last year to make a claim at the Presidential stakes.
In fact, he was politically nowhere in the wake of his party’s humiliating defeat at the Local Government elections in February last year.
The two parties, the SLFP and the United Peoples Freedom Alliance (UPFA) under which he fielded his candidates collectively managed to obtain only about 1.5 million votes or 13 per cent of the valid votes.

He found himself in a tight corner as on the one hand he was at odds with his partner in the Government, the UNP and on the other, the comeback by Rajapaksas which he feared most was evident to be imminent, in the light of their resounding victory at that election.
Yet, it is interesting to note that President Sirisena has changed the situation to the extent that he even expects to be the presidential candidate of the SLPP, the party unofficially led by former President Mahinda Rajapaksa.
He seems to have valid reasons to stake a claim to the SLPP’s Presidential candidacy.
Mahinda Rajapaksa has been barred from contesting by the 19th Amendment to the Constitution which was passed in April 2015 with the support of his group as well.
And the same Amendment has prevented his two brothers, Basil and Gotabaya from running for the Presidency on the grounds that they are dual citizens of Sri Lanka and the US. 

None of the Presidential aspirants seemed to be concerned about the masses

• It is the SLPP that has the highest chance to succeed in an election

• JVP indifferent; UNP, SLFP SLPP in disarray

• Fast growth of support for Premadasa among the rank and file of the UNP that was clearly evident

• Sirisena changed situation to such an extent now he even expects to be the presidential candidate of the SLPP

• SLPP also faces multiple problems with respect to finding a candidate

The interest of the former Speaker Chamal Rajapaksa in the stakes came up only lately. Thus, it is reasonable for the President who on top of all these has developed a strong bond between himelf and Mahinda Rajapaksa through his October coup to think of staking a claim to the topmost post again.
But, has Mahinda Rajapaksa forgotten all that happened in 2014 which dashed his hopes to hold on to the Presidency until his son Namal grew up to take the baton from him? Has he forgotten President Sirisena’s efforts to put his entire clan behind bars? Will Basil Rajapaksa and other leaders of the SLPP be prepared to parachute Sirisena to the throne forgetting that his ascension to the Chairmanship of the SLFP pushed them to build their own party and taking all these pains in that process?
However, the SLPP also faces multiple problems with respect to finding a candidate. As mentioned above Mahinda Rajapaksa and Basil Rajapaksa are out of the fray due to the hurdles created by the 19th Amendment. But Gotabaya Rajapaksa now says he is prepared, meaning he is prepared to do away with his American citizenship.

Chamal Rajapaksa too has said, interestingly after Gotabaya expressed his willingness to contest, that he is also prepared.
However, the Rajapaksa family is most likely to disappoint the UNP finally by evading a dispute among the family members and as most leaders of the SLPP/ Joint Opposition say, the issue would be sorted out at the discretion of the former President. They would not let the opportunity to go out of the family.
Among all the players, it is the SLPP that has the highest chance to succeed at an election. 
Yet, without the support of the minorities, it would be difficult for the party to get the fifty per cent and one vote required by the law to win a Presidential Election in the first preferential vote count.

"The end result is the relative economic stagnation in the country. Hence, in reality, no Presidential aspirant currently under discussion would change the lives of the people or bring lasting peace to the country"

However, no other party can outshine the SLPP in the second preferential vote count either.
The most crucial question that should be raised by the ordinary people, despite it being not raised at any election is which party or which candidate has a vision and a plan for the long-lasting economic development and a roadmap for building the Sri Lankan nation through lasting reconciliation among various communities. The answer is vividly clear, nobody.
The main reason is that from the viewpoint of top leaders of political parties as well as the ordinary people politics is meant for money-making.
Therefore leaders fight for power and portfolios, resulting in high profile corruption always going hand in hand with politics. Their ordinary supporters vie for the leftovers.

There is no vision among the so-called leaders. Hence, development, according to them, is implementing haphazard projects, mainly targeting personal gains, in most cases giving in to the demands of various foreign countries or agencies.
The end result is the relative economic stagnation in the country. Hence, in reality, no Presidential aspirant currently under discussion would change the lives of the people or bring lasting peace to the country.

SRI LANKA: CONTINUING INTERNATIONAL SCRUTINY NECESSARY TO ENSURE JUSTICE FOR WAR VICTIMS – NPC

27/01/2019

In March this year Sri Lanka will report back to the UN Human Rights Council on its implementation of Resolution 30/1 which it co-sponsored in October 2015. This report back will be important as it will determine whether or not international scrutiny of the country on human rights issues will continue or come to an end.

During the past three and a half years the government has implemented several of the commitments it made in terms of the resolution it co-sponsored.  These include establishing an office of missing persons, legalizing the international conventions against torture and enforced disappearances and returning military occupied land to the civilian population.

By co-sponsoring this UNHRC resolution the government gave the international community the opportunity to formally scrutinize the government’s implementation of its commitments.  Some of these commitments, such as to set up a judicial mechanism with the participation of international judges and investigators to ensure accountability in war crimes cases have been especially controversial.

In March 2017 at the request of the Sri Lankan government the UNHRC adopted Resolution 34/1 that extended for a further two years the monitoring mandate of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, with a request for a comprehensive report in March 2019.  Some of the commitments made in October 2015 are difficult ones for any government, but they are necessary if there is to be justice in terms of dealing with the past and in creating a better future for all in the country.

 Unfortunately, the constitutional crisis of October 2018 and the subsequent political configuration is likely to lead to a resurgence of earlier legacies of our difficult and contested past.  The government will require more time to chart its course to deliver on its commitment of March 2017. With crucial elections around the corner the government would want to show the electorate that its strategy of co-sponsoring the resolution has not been damaging to the country’s national interests or sovereignty.

We note that countries such as the UK have stated that they are committed to supporting the Sri Lankan government’s efforts to improve the human rights situation in the country and support Sri Lanka’s commitments to the UNHRC through Resolutions 30/1 and 34/1, as the best way to establish truth, and to achieve justice, restitution and reconciliation.

The National Peace Council believes that the extension of the resolution by a further time period is necessary for good governance in the future which will necessarily include correcting the violations of the past.

Should there be a retirement age for politicians? 

By DR UPATISSA PETHIYAGODA-January 27, 2019, 12:00 pm

All Public Service appointees have a retirement age (50, 55 or 60) years - Politicians do not. This is anomalous and leads to several negative consequences. With the recent doubling of the numbers elected to Local Bodies from 4,000 to 8,000, along with 225 in the Parliament, and heavy increases in emoluments and perks, together constitute a massive drain on the national exchequer. It also has other implications.

The biological reason for a retirement age is clear. With advancing age, a person’s capacity, efficiency and cognitive ability declines – the "best before" date is a valid reality. Since a politician has more impact than that of a clerk, it is reasonable to expect the former to have a lower retirement age than a clerk, driver or peon. The assumption that experience offsets the decline with age is demonstrably false. What is true for the politician must also be so for the clerk or driver.

A retirement benefit represents gratitude for services rendered and provision for sustenance at an appropriate level. The present vast differences between retirement benefits for politicians against others, is reason for widespread envy and anger. Politicians qualify for lifelong pensions after just five years of service (equal to a single term), while the corresponding requirement for others is some thirty or twenty (?) years. One must remember that stringent qualifications for entry into public service contrast with none for those entering politics at any level. This is plainly iniquitous.

Tenacity

It is seen that from the date of entry, the great objective in the politician’s mind is to retain this most rewarded and the least demanding, of vocations. Obviously, (with few exceptions), it is natural that the urge to retain position is the paramount instinct. As a friend once remarked, our "Nation can be compared to a milch cow. Each politician gets hold of a teat and sucks vigorously. There is nobody to feed and bathe the cow". Such an animal steadily declines and suffers a painful death!

Much is said about the much delayed elections to Provincial Councils. This is touted as a serious denial of the people’s franchise. To me, it illustrates the country seems to fare as well without them, as it does with them. Almost every news bulletin on TV shows neglected roads, ill-maintained irrigation channels, lack of water and toilet facilities, dilapidated bridges, ill-equipped schools and hospitals, garbage heaps, illicit tree-felling, sand mining and many such other factors that were the very significant issues cited as justification for the creation of these provincial bodies. Apart from increasing the parasitic load, what have these grand symbols of devolution, decentralization and subsidiarity done for us?

Choice as Democracy

It is claimed that "Policy Differences" justify the existence of many parties. Can any example be offered of such glaring differences between the major ones – the UNP and the SLFP, that justify their identities? If there were, how do these seamless and commonplace cross-overs occur?

As long as Selection Committees (or Party Chiefs) determine candidacies, and the Party Whip operates, there can be no true choice for the voters. Exhortations to pick only quality candidates to represent them, is nothing more than a cruel joke. What is the point of choosing the best, when all they have to do is to raise their hands on party command? True democracy should at least permit a secret ballot. Parliamentary debate should not be a ritual but should provide help in reaching informed decisions. If not, what is the point?

A Cycle of Evil

There is near unanimity that political office has become an expensive carbuncle. The causal circle is as follows: the rewards of politics are absurdly high and do not offer comparison with output, integrity or societal value. When this is so, there is irresistible desire to get elected. The least principled, most wealthy and criminally inclined (drug lords, bootleggers and thugs) will be attracted as a means of avoiding prosecution and concealing ill-gotten wealth. Morals, merit and integrity become irrelevant. Brutal violence and even murder of potential rivals become real. As nomination is in the hands of a few party officials, every effort is made to influence them. This being the reality, it is cruel cynicism that the blame is placed at the door of the electors of such undesirables. They truly have no choice but perhaps to select the "least worse" from the poor options open to them. Progressive deterioration of quality and useful talent is snuffed out. The only avenue for quality material through the "Nominated Members" is grossly abused. Thus, the electoral process and the Party Whip preclude the true exercise of the peoples’ franchise.

The past few weeks demonstrate the total depravity of our parliamentary system. The obsession with the "numbers game" illustrates the total substitution of the pretext of concerns and hopes of the people by naked and disgraceful personal ambitions. The chatter about the inducements (often claimed to be in the hundreds of millions), destroys any semblance of respect for our "honourable" representatives. No sense of hope and dignity can obscure the revulsion and disgust at the departure from decency that we seem destined to suffer. We are a failure in the "Good Governance" slogan so often and so loudly touted.

Responsibility overload

While lamenting the paucity of talent in the elected assemblies, the responsibilities are unrealistic. Witness the number of matters that are "referred to Cabinet or Cabinet Sub-Committees" and the huge piles of documents that are presented to each of these bodies. It would be a miracle to expect them to pay close and critical attention. It is probable that this simply cannot happen. Tabling is no guarantee of critical evaluation, leaving aside even being read. The study of the voluminous (more than one thousand pages) of the Presidential Commission to study the "Bond Scam" was laughably and typically delayed until the Tamil and Sinhala translations were made available to all Members of Parliament! One can be assured that thousands of pages were not even thumbed through. The tonnage of paper used in these formal procedures would be enlightening.

A toxic contagion

Hardly a day passes without disclosure of a new scandal. Some are so well known that they cause no surprise. What troubles one is the element of betrayal, when those in whom one reposed much confidence and expected much better, stand accused. Hopefully not "Unuth ekai, Munuth ekai"

What can be done?

In a serious insult to our collective intelligence, it has been argued that Bribery and Rip-offs by elected members can be reduced by lavish rewards. This is palpably false. Quite apart from reducing criminal acquisition of wealth, it has merely whetted the appetite of the venal. Absurd allowances, permitted abuse of vehicle permits, bribes and commissions, false expenditure claims and abuse of privileges, such as limitless foreign jaunts, are silently tolerated. We are told that electioneering is so expensive that means of recouping the outlay, by means fair or foul are inevitable! Simple means of compelling disclosure of electoral expenses, of assets and other indicators of graft will never be done. Small wonder that persons of integrity or talent, will never desire to enter what has become a corrupt conglomerate. Thus, reduction of the spoils of office is paramount. Means of doing so will occur to the meanest intellect.

Political rewards for services rendered are indefensible. Evil will continue to feed on evil. Poor attention to duty is commonplace. Frequent lack of Parliamentary quorum is explained by "When the Minister returns from abroad", suggesting that our Legislators are busy devoting their talents to address other peoples’ problems, neglecting our own. Respectable Agencies committed to rationalizing official travel, requires every traveler on overseas missions to provide a "Back to station Report" sufficient to justify the expenses incurred. It is absolutely vital to reduce useless or inessential travel, Parliament may consider installing a well-appointed "Flight Simulator" with free Liquor, Meals and Hostess service to economize on less than useful air travel.

One could expand the list with many more absurdities – but Editorial restraints and "Reader Fatigue" compels me to end here.

Daily News Digest : Weekly News Roundup

Sunday, January 27, 2019

Taking a look at the news that made it big this week..

Arrest Warrant On Brigadier Priyanka Fernando Withdrawn: ICPPG Expresses Severe Disappointment

JANUARY 26, 2019

The International Centre for Prevention and Prosecution Genocide today expressed severe disappointment with the Westminster Magistrate’s Court’s decision to withdraw the arrest warrant on Brigadier Priyanka Fernando, former Defence Attachè of the Sri Lankan High Commission in the United Kingdon, due to “increasing political pressure.”

The organization, issuing a statement, said, “The Public Interest Law Centre was contacted by Westminster Magistrates’ Court and was informed that the arrest warrant had been withdrawn and the matter relisted on 1 February 2019. The Court did not relist the matter before withdrawing the arrest warrant which is entirely unacceptable.”

“After the 21st January 2019 hearing, it has come to our attention, that the Sri Lankan Government acknowledged the proceedings in November 2018 and elected not to participate in the proceedings. A Sri Lankan Foreign Ministry spokesman, Saroja Sirisena, has also said publicly that the Sri Lankan Government had made submissions to the UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) objecting to the ruling of the court. It is real shame that the Sri Lankan Foreign Ministry spokesman, Army Spokesperson and President’s Counsel Dr. Jayatissa de Costa attempted to knowingly mislead the public and the FCO by falsely claiming that the summons were not served on Brigadier Priyanka Fernando and the trial in absence is against the natural justice despite clear evidence that this is untrue,” the ICPPG added.

“It is also important to note that the objections filed at the FCO are also based on these baseless allegations. Any sensible person would appreciate that a Judge in the UK must have no doubt considered these before proceeding with the trial and raising such objection blindly is childish. According to Mr Sirisena, the FCO then contacted the Westminster Magistrates Court regarding those objections. It is unclear on what basis the FCO has sought to intervene in the judicial process,” the statement also said.

The full statement issued by the ICPPG is as follows:

Arrest Warrant issued against the Former Sri Lankan Military Attaché, Brigadier Priyanka Fernando by the Westminster Magistrate’s Court had been withdrawn due to Political Interference and Pressure! 

A shame to the Independence of the British Judiciary!! 

The International Centre for Prevention and Prosecution of Genocide (ICPPG) is extremely disappointed to announce that the Arrest Warrant issued against Brigadier Priyanka Fernando by the Westminster Magistrates Court had been withdrawn without any due process. We believe this is due to the misleading information fed by the Sri Lankan authorities and the political intervention. This raises serious questions on the independency of the British Legal system and the Judiciary. 

On 4th February 2018, the Sri Lankan Diplomat, Brigadier Priyanka Fernando, who is a known war criminal in Sri Lanka, was filmed issuing death threats to the diaspora Tamils and British Citizens who were peacefully demonstrating outside the Sri Lankan High Commission in London.  Several diaspora Tamils and British Citizens felt intimidated and reported to the British Police. The International Centre for Prevention and Prosecution of Genocide (ICPPG) initiated a high-level diplomatic campaign urging UK Government and the FCO to declare the Sri Lankan Military Attaché, Brigadier Priyanka Fernando, the known War Criminal, a “Persona Non Grata”, for committing criminal offences under the British law on the 70th Independence Day of Sri Lanka and 70 years of Genocide of Tamils. Given the British Police refused to arrest him on the basis of the diplomatic immunity, the ICPPG encouraged the victims and assisted them to seek legal advice and open a private prosecution under the guidance of our legal advisor Geeth Kulasegaram. Accordingly, a private prosecution was filed at the Westminster Magistrates Court on 06th February 2018. Paul Heron and Helen Mowatt of Public Interest Law Centre of The Public Interest Law Centre was instructed to advise and represent the prosecutors during the proceedings The Sri Lankan Diplomat, Brigadier Priyanka Fernando, was found guilty in absentia on Monday, 21st January 2019 in Westminster Magistrate’s Court of two charges under the Public Order Act (sections 4a and 5) for thrice making throat slitting gestures against Tamil demonstrators outside the High Commission in London on 4th February 2018. He was found guilty of intending to and causing harassment, alarm and distress with his gestures, which were made after he had taken photos and videoed Tamil protestors. The panel of three honourable British Judges, headed by the Chief Magistrate Ms Sonia Henley, who carefully considered the evidence, found Brigadier Priyanka Fernando guilty and issued an Arrest Warrant, without bail.  

Read More

Gotabaya’s alternative vision challenges Sri Lanka’s democracy

Gotabaya Rajapaksa

BY PROF. S.W.R.DE A. SAMARASINGHE-27 January, 2019

 Rajapaksa recently announced at a meeting of Viyath Maga, of which he is president that he was ready to contest the next Presidential Election that must be held this year.

In his speech to the assembled professionals and business people he asserted that Sri Lanka must have national unity (Jaathikathwaya) and rejected sectarian division (Jaathiwaadaya). The Viyath Maga website makes all the right statements on good governance such as “steer the country in the correct path with accountability; inculcate democratic values...”, and so on. Rajapaksa also stressed the importance of solving ‘social problems’ focusing on poverty reduction. All of the above are desirable political goals for the country. They are also not new. The UNF in 2015, and earlier leaders, made similar promises that were largely ignored once in office.

Rajapaksa’s readiness to contest the Presidency has been complicated by at least three factors. First, if the Executive Presidency is abolished before the end of the year, an election will be redundant.

Second, the eldest of the Rajapaksa siblings, Chamal Rajapaksa, has also announced his availability to contest the Presidency. This may be either a cunning ploy to confuse other potential candidates or a reflection of a family feud.

Divided Executive

Third, and most importantly, if the Constitution remains unchanged the country faces the grim prospect of having a divided executive branch, with the President and Prime Minister competing for power.

However, if a Rajapaksa contesting on the Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna (SLPP) ticket wins the Presidency there is a good chance that the SLPP will also win the parliamentary election that is to follow and Mahinda Rajapaksa will be Prime Minister. Then one family will wield formidable political power laying the foundation for a family dynasty and possibly a more authoritarian regime of the type that the 18th Amendment facilitated. It is not clear if voters would want that to happen.

When Mahinda Rajapaksa spoke to the nation after he lost the premiership last December, he claimed that the political forces that he represents account for 54% of the electorate.

This roughly is the arithmetical total of the votes that the SLPP and the SLFP polled at the February 2018 Local Government elections. If it holds in the Presidential Election the candidate that Mahinda Rajapaksa backs would win the Presidency. But the electoral dynamic usually does not replicate itself in that manner.

The Rajapaksas do not have much support from the minorities that account for 25% of the electorate. The anti-Muslim incidents in the Ampara and Kandy districts last year and Mahinda Rajapaksa’s pointed remark last December that the TNA has the ‘remote control’ over the current Ranil Wickremesinghe administration won’t help a Rajapaksa candidacy.

Good Governance

The second major challenge that Gotabaya faces concerns the issue of good governance. Voters rejected the Mahinda Rajapaksa administration in which Gotabaya played a major role because of bad governance. The Yaha Paalanaya administration had disappointed its supporters on good governance. But that does not exonerate the Rajapaksas of their bad track record.

The third major issue that Gotabaya faces concerns his vision for the country if he were to be elected President. He stresses the importance of eradicating poverty. He prefers what he calls the ‘Asian Model’ that Sri Lanka should follow to achieve economic and social success.

There are a number of problems that arise if we were to take his pronouncement at its face value. First, Gotabaya claims that about 60% of the Sri Lankan population is poor or that they believe they are poor.

The latest estimate from the Department of Census and Statistics based on an all-island random sample survey of households is that about 4.1% (around 850,000 or just one-fifteenth of Gotabaya’s estimate) of Sri Lanka’s population lived below the official poverty line (Headcount Index) in 2016. Even if the official number is doubled or trebled allowing for estimation errors, Gotabaya Rajapaksa obviously exaggerates.

However, we can accept the argument that Sri Lanka needs to accelerate economic growth and increase incomes. But the policy prescription that Gotabaya proposes to advance that goal can undermine Sri Lanka’s democracy. Here is why.

Rajapaksa’s proposal is to give precedence to ‘social problems’ over ‘individual rights’ to reduce poverty and increase incomes. He describes individual rights as an imposition on us from the West that impede poverty reduction and economic progress. That is a false formulation, at least in respect of Sri Lanka. In this country social progress and individual rights have complemented each other as explained below.

Individual rights include the right to vote, freedom of speech, and the right to be treated equally under the rule of law. We have elected Governments through the ballot for 88 years starting in 1931. The events after October 26, 2018 showed that Sri Lankans value their democracy more than they are prepared to admit. Our democracy is far from perfect. But as Churchill once remarked, “Democracy is the worst from of government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.”

Undoubtedly, Sri Lanka has not realized its full potential in economic growth. The reasons for that are complex. But, Sri Lanka has made considerable economic progress since independence.

Economic growth

Since Independence in 1948, Sri Lanka experienced negative (-1.5%) economic growth only in one year, 2001. The country’s GDP per capita income was about $ 116 in 1950. In 2017 it was $ 4,065, a 35-fold increase. Excluding the Maldives (population 450,000) Sri Lanka is the only South Asian country that has reached lower middle-income status to date, a threshold that we crossed in 1997 (per capita GDP $800).

Sri Lanka’s outstanding success among developing countries first noticed in the mid 1970s was in education as measured by adult literacy rate, and health as measured by life expectancy at birth. In 1976 Sri Lanka, a ‘low-income’ country with a $200 per capita income GDP had an adult literacy rate of 76% and life expectancy at birth of 68 years that matched European upper middle-income countries such as Yugoslavia and Portugal with a $17,000per capita income GDP. The power of the ballot and the numbers on education and health are connected. The Government has to take care of the basic needs of the people to win elections.

Asian model

Rajapaksa recommends what he calls the ‘Asian Model’ for Sri Lanka. The model he refers to cannot be the Indian democracy that is similar to that of Sri Lanka. The only alternative model in broad terms is the Southeast Asian and East Asian authoritarian model found in China, Vietnam and many other Asian countries. This model has several problems.

First they are not democracies. Certainly, Sri Lanka’s minorities will not want an authoritarian government largely run by the majority community. If the revitalization of the UNP in the Sinhalese South after October 26 is any indication, it is very unlikely that there will be a large number of takers even among the Sinhalese voters for an authoritarian government.

Corruption

Second, benevolent, corruption-free and efficient authoritarian regimes are largely a myth. For example, one of President Xi Jinping’s main goals is to eradicate rampant corruption in China.
Malaysia is not a democracy in the normal sense of the term but is often seen as more successful than Sri Lanka economically.

Malaysia’s Prime Minister from 2009 to 2018, Najib Razak was recently charged with corruption involving billions of dollars. Most third world authoritarian regimes exist for the benefit of a small ruling coterie.

Third, the authoritarian Asian model does not guarantee economic success. Singapore is an exception. China is not an appropriate model for Sri Lanka because the countries are very different in size, resources and so forth.

Countries such as Thailand under military governments (1976-1997) and Indonesia under Suharto (1967-98) enjoyed economic bubbles in the 1980s, financed largely with borrowed funds that burst in the Asian financial crisis of the early 1990.

This is no different to the economic bubble the Mahinda Rajapaksa administration created after 2009.

The Government borrowed heavily mainly from China and spent the money partly on large infrastructure projects such as the Mattala Airport, Hambantota Port, an International Cricket Stadium, and Nelum Pokuna that yielded little or no income but created a fiscal and foreign exchange crisis when the loans could not be repaid.

Keep trying

In short, an authoritarian model with individual rights curtailed or even eliminated in exchange for promised economic success to solve social problems is a bad trade that Sri Lankan voters must not accept.

What the voters have to do is exert pressure on politicians using their voting power to improve governance.

As the 2015 Yaha Paalanaya experience has demonstrated this is easier said than done. But we have to keep trying and hope for the best.

President under pressure over Defence Secretary’s ‘war heroes’ remarks

By Gagani Weerakoon-JAN 27 2019

President Maithripala Sirisena was still hero-worshipping his Philippines counterpart Rodrigo Duterte when he vowed not to change the decision to impose capital punishment for drug traffickers while declaring the National Drug Prevention Week at the Vidyananda Maha Vidyalaya, Mulliyawalai, Mullaitivu.
As the President was speaking in the North, his Defence Secretary Hemasiri Fernando was attending a felicitation ceremony organised by his alma mater Nalanda College, Colombo at which he dropped a bombshell.

Noting that no military personnel is above the law of the country, Fernando said that if any soldier commits a crime, he will be tried before a court of law and meted out maximum punishment.

“The day a war hero goes and commits murder, he is no longer a war hero. He is then only a murderer. He has to be brought before Sri Lankan law and given maximum punishment in Sri Lankan Courts,” he said.

The Defence Secretary was basically setting the pitch to declare that 11 military personnel who were involved in a brutal murder that shook the country in the recent past will be prosecuted within next two weeks.

 “Once this happens, the so-called Diaspora that accuses the Sri Lankan Government of doing nothing against military personnel, who had acted in an unacceptable and ruthless manner, will have no more to say. We also urge them to provide us with proof against any military person who is alleged to have violated human rights or conducted himself in a cruel manner, so that we can take legal action against them,” he further said.

He also said that the Government has decided to suspend all licences issued for 9mm pistols and revolvers with immediate effect.

“There are about 4,700 such licences issued but there is no proper method to ascertain on what basis those were issued. All such licences will be suspended and new licences should be obtained from the Ministry of Defence from tomorrow (Wednesday 23), by producing the weapon to the Defence Ministry,” he added.

According to Fernando, only about 1,000 licence holders have the weapon in their possession.

“The rest of licence holders do not have the weapon with them. We have received information that some individuals keep around 17 pistols and revolvers in their possession. A recent intelligence report indicated that most of these weapons are now with underworld and the licence bearer is paid about Rs 50,000 per each day such weapon is kept with underworld figures. This is extremely dangerous and alarming situation,” Fernando noted.

There have been six incidents of shooting, in the first three weeks of 2019, in which four persons were killed.

However, according to political sources UPFA parliamentary group, especially those who were in the Joint Opposition, have expressed their concerns over Fernando’s remarks.

Several MPs including Wimal Weerawansa have brought the matter up with the President and called for an inquiry on Fernando’s remarks stating this will result in alienating Sinhala Buddhist voters from the party.

It is highly unlikely that Defence Secretary Fernando made such explosive remarks without having any evidence in hand or without the knowledge of Commander-in- Chief, President Sirisena.

The wedding  

Youngest son of Opposition Leader and former President Mahinda Rajapaksa , Rohitha Rajapaksa (Chichi) tied the knot with his long-time girlfriend Tatyana Lee at a simple yet elegant wedding ceremony at Rajapaksa’s home in Weeraketiya.

Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe being the guest of honour made the wedding more political than private. Wickremesinghe flew to Weeraketiya in a helicopter after attending to official work in the morning at Temple Trees. Mahinda Rajapaksa’s biggest critic who often engages in scathing political attacks on him, Minister Mangala Samaraweera too, accompanied Prime Minister Wickremesinghe in the chopper to the wedding with his colleagues Ministers Sagala Ratnayake, Kabir Hashim and Ranjith Maddumabandara.  Minister Malik Samarawickrema did not attend the wedding due to a confusion over the invitation and Minister Lakshman Kiriella too, remained in Colombo as he had to perform his duties as the Leader of the House in the absence of the Prime Minister.

Social media went viral with photos leaked from the wedding and each photo followed with political memes created.

The guests were welcomed with thembili (king-coconut) and herbal drinks (belimal and ranawara) which were followed with a vegetarian lunch. The dishes, desserts and sweets were all made by neighbours in Weeraketiya village giving an exciting experience to those who were from the cities and especially to invited foreign dignitaries.

Former Defence Secretary Gotabaya Rajapaksa had been in-charge of the king-coconut counter where he was seen encouraging guests to drink.
UPFA MPs Wimal Weerawansa, Dullas Alahapperuma, Mahindananda Aluthgamage and few others reached the counter and were teasing about the new role Gotabaya had undertaken.

When Aluthgamage invited him for a group selfie while having thembili, Rajapaksa (Gotabaya) had quickly grabbed a king-coconut and posed for the picture prompting Aluthgamage to say: “Oh, now you too acts like politicians and pose.” Rajapaksa too, responded teasingly that he was getting into the mode.

Even though the family was present during the Poruwa Ceremony, Basil Rajapaksa was not seen around. While many wondered what led to his absence, he made a late appearance. He (Basil) was also seen as attesting witness at MP Rohitha Abeygunawardena’s daughter’s wedding on the same day which was held at the Shangri-la Hotel in Colombo.

U.S. Naval base  

JVP MP Bimal Ratnayake on Tuesday (22) in Parliament questioned if the Government by bringing in naval ships and aircraft into commercially active locations are planning to enter into an agreement named SOFA (State of Forces Agreement) with America. He questioned the stance of the Government on the threat posed to our national security as a result.

Ratnayake’s question follows remarks made by General Secretary of the SLFP, Dayasiri Jayasekara on the 18 January raising concern over U.S. military activities taking place in Sri Lanka.

He added that soldiers and military equipment will be brought into the country through this agreement. He further said that the immunity enjoyed by US diplomats in Sri Lanka will be extended to these soldiers as well.

MP Jayasekara went on to claim that preparations are underway to give away the East Container Terminal of the Colombo Port in order to please America. He questioned the fate of the country’s sovereignty and territorial integrity when a naval base is also to be established in Trincomalee.

The US Navy announced in December 2018, the setting up of what it called logistic hub in Sri Lanka to secure support, supplies and services at sea.

Taking advantage of a growing naval partnership with Sri Lanka, the Nimitz-class aircraft carrier USS John C. Stennis (CVN 74) established a logistics hub in Sri Lanka to receive support, supplies and services at sea.

A C-2 Greyhound carrier onboard delivery aircraft accessed the hub’s strategic location before bringing supplies to John C. Stennis. Established on a temporary basis in the island nation, the hub provides logistics support to US Navy ships operating in the Indian Ocean.

The temporary air logistics hub concept allows for a use of an airstrip and storage facilities to receive large-scale shipments to move out in various directions in smaller shipments, allowing ships to continue operating at sea by receiving the right material at the right place and time. The hub can also be established to provide expeditionary logistics support during humanitarian and disaster relief missions (HADR).

“The primary purpose of the operation is to provide mission-critical supplies and services to U.S. Navy ships transiting through and operating in the Indian Ocean,” said Lt. Bryan Ortiz, John C. Stennis’ stock control division officer. “The secondary purpose is to demonstrate the U.S. Navy’s ability to establish a temporary logistics hub ashore where no enduring US Navy logistics footprint exists.”

The air logistics hub was first operated in August 2018 when USS Anchorage (LPD 23) visited Trincomalee and supported the Essex Amphibious Ready Group as it transited the western boundary of the 7th Fleet area of operations.

“The log hub is a great opportunity to leverage private industry in Sri Lanka to enhance the U.S. Navy’s operational reach,” said Lt. Austin Gage, 7th Fleet Logistics Readiness Cell chief. “We are generating standard operating procedures to optimise our supply chain to be more agile and mobile and utilise strategic locations in the Indian Ocean.”

Building the necessary logistical footprint requires cooperation from all sides of the operation.

“In addition to the deployed team, we have had excellent support from the fantastic professionals at the supporting agencies: Naval Supply Systems Command, Commander, Naval Air Forces, US Embassy staff; this has truly been a global effort,” said Gage. “The Sri Lankan people have been incredibly hospitable hosts as we work on this shared endeavour.”

John C. Stennis Sailors play a major role in expanding the logistics hub concept. Moving forward, the team hopes to set a logistical standard for US Navy vessels operating in the Indian Ocean.

“The cumulative efforts of numerous stakeholders to facilitate the logistics hub in Sri Lanka will pay dividends for all future transiting units in addition to making our Navy more sustainable and a more formidable force throughout the Pacific theatre,” said Lt. Cmdr. Frederick Espy, Commander Task Force 70 Maintenance, Material, Logistics, Readiness representative.

Concerns were raised once again in Parliament in this regard with EPDP Leader Douglas Devananda questioning the Government if there was a move for the establishment of a US military base in Trincomalee, through a special statement.

The Government dismissed the allegations that the United States of America (USA) is planning to set up a military base in Trincomalee saying that US had not indicated any interest or any desire to establish a military base in Trincomalee or in any other part of Sri Lanka.

Leader of the House Minister Lakshman Kiriella said: “Our two countries have an excellent multifaceted bilateral relationship. In a regional and global context, Sri Lanka and the USA are committed to building an open and resilient Indo-Pacific region, where all countries can prosper. We are committed to protect international laws, safeguards and standards, and work to protect the sovereignty of our nations as well.”

Prime Minister Wickremesinghe said that those who tried to topple the Government and were unsuccessful now try to spread malicious and false reports. We have already made our stance on the matter clearly. “If anyone wants, we even can give them a debate on the matter as well,” he added.

Meanwhile, the U.S. Embassy in an official statement announced the U.S. Navy will perform a transfer operation to move cargo between planes at Bandaranaike International Airport outside Colombo from 21 to 29 January.
 This is part of a larger temporary cargo transfer initiative that promotes Sri Lanka's efforts to become a regional hub for logistics and commerce.  The January transfers will contribute approximately 25 million Sri Lankan Rupees to the country’s economy.

This is the third iteration of the temporary cargo transfer initiative.  It follows two successful transfers that took place in August 2018 at Bandaranaike International Airport and Trincomalee and in December 2018 at Bandaranaike International Airport.

“Sri Lanka's leaders have outlined their vision for the country’s regional engagement that reflects its location at the nexus of the Indo-Pacific and seizes the opportunities that this unique position presents,” said U.S. Ambassador Alaina B. Teplitz.  “We are happy to support this vision through a range of mutually beneficial initiatives, such as contracting Sri Lankan services and goods to support U.S. military and commercial vessels that often transit the Indo-Pacific’s busy sea lanes.”

 Under the initiative, several U.S. naval aircraft are scheduled to land and depart from the commercial airport, bringing in a variety of non-lethal supplies.  The supplies will be transferred between planes and then flown to the U.S.S. John C. Stennis at sea.  Supplies may include personal mail for sailors, paper goods, spare parts and tools, and other items.  No cargo, military equipment, or personnel associated with this initiative will remain in Sri Lanka after the completion of the cargo transfer.

U.S.-Sri Lanka security cooperation encompasses a variety of joint exercises and training that has developed the skills and interoperability of both countries.  This cooperation was designed by both countries to address our mutual security interests, such as humanitarian assistance and disaster relief and maritime domain awareness.