Peace for the World

Peace for the World
First democratic leader of Justice the Godfather of the Sri Lankan Tamil Struggle: Honourable Samuel James Veluppillai Chelvanayakam

Saturday, February 23, 2019

Where Jesus once preached, the holy waters are draining away

The Sea of Galilee has been eternalised in the holy texts of three ancient religions. Photograph: Ronen Zvulun/Reuters


Climate change and conflict have left the river Jordan a stagnant stream and the Sea of Galilee critically low

If Jesus were alive today, he might reconsider a baptism in the river Jordan; there’s a good chance he’d pick up an eye infection. Faecal bacteria in the pungent, murky waters have risen in recent years to up to six times the recommended levels.

Once a raging torrent, the lower Jordan has been starved of water to become a stagnant stream, filled with sewage and dirty run-off from farms. Around 95% of its historical flow has been diverted by agriculture during the past half-century. And the river’s primary source, the Sea of Galilee – where Christians believe the son of God walked on water – has for years been dammed to prevent its demise.

Biblical bodies of water in the Holy Land, eternalised in Christian, Jewish and Muslim ancient texts as godly, are now facing very human threats: climate change, mismanagement and conflict.
Following five consecutive years of drought, the Sea of Galilee has sunk to a 100-year low. A number of small islands have emerged at the water’s surface, and several holiday homes that were built on the shoreline now stand at least 100 metres from the boggy edge.

Overuse has also taken its toll. Last summer, the level of the lake dropped close to a black line, a level at which it could lose its status as a freshwater body. “The black line is our best guess of that point,” says Gidon Bromberg, the Israeli director of EcoPeace, an organisation of Israeli, Palestinian and Jordanian environmentalists. “It was tens of centimetres above the black line,” he says, adding that such a shallow depth has not been seen in records taken over the past century.

As the lake’s level falls, it cannot wash away salt fast enough, and its salinity rises. If the Sea of Galilee’s waters were left to hover around the black line, its flora and fauna would start to perish. A glimpse of the lake’s grim future might be seen 350km downriver at the lowest place on the planet: the Dead Sea, a body almost devoid of fish and plant life. “Once the lake becomes saline, that could be irreversible,” says Bromberg, speaking at the muddy edge of the water, reeds poking up behind him.

As Israel’s largest lake, the Sea of Galilee – which locals call the Kinneret, its Hebrew name – has long been the country’s main source of fresh water. But it cannot be relied on any more, says Yoav Barkay-Arbel, an engineer for Mekorot, the national water company. Standing at the Eshkol water pumping station on the peak of a hill, Barkay-Arbel looks across a series of reservoirs and intricate piping systems. Zionists in the early 1920s had intended to use the lake in the green, lush north to supply water to the arid south and “make the desert bloom”. A network of pipes from the Sea of Galilee, which is 214 metres below sea level, link to surrounding hills and then down towards the coast.

At its peak, the installation pumped billions of cubic metres of water from Galilee to the rest of Israel. As fears grew that such volumes would deplete the lake, the plant has reduced to moving just 20m cubic metres per year. “That is zero. That is nothing. It’ll remain practically zero for the next couple of years,” says Barkay-Arbel, adding that Galilee supplies will now only be used in emergencies.

Christians from around the world flock to the Sea of Galilee, where they believe Jesus walked on water. Photograph: Quique Kierszenbaum/The Observer

In a rush to save the lake, Israel is now looking at reversing the flow. Over the next few years it will spend millions of shekels moving seawater, desalinated at plants on the coast, 75km up to the Sea of Galilee.

Israel is a world leader in desalination, with five plants built along the Mediterranean coast. However, the Eshkol station was never meant to move water east instead of west. Open canals, built by engineers in the 1950s at a slight angle to improve water flow, still cut through the land. But they are at the wrong angle, and so a new pipe is being constructed along their side. “They never thought they would have to fill the lake with artificial water,” says Barkay-Arbel. “That is crazy. You cannot count on nature.” Nevertheless, the current plan is to be moving water in the next couple of years.

Saving the Sea of Galilee could, in turn, save the river Jordan, says Bromberg. He has campaigned to reopen the dam that blocks the lake from flowing into the Jordan. Without it, the river’s fragile ecosystem will deteriorate drastically and it could turn into a dry river bed. Five years ago, Israel agreed to release 9m cubic metres from the Sea of Galilee, a tiny amount of water, the first time its waters had run uninterrupted into the river since the 1960s. But hundreds of cubic metres will be needed to fully rehabilitate the river.

The source of the river is now a small creek, with two pipes each less than half a metre wide that pump out water. A third pipe releases yellowish liquid. This is treated sewage – not ideal, Bromberg says, but better than nothing.

As long as the Sea of Galilee is under threat, the river Jordan will be too. And their eventual deaths could have explosive ramifications as water in this region has been a key source of conflict. The river Jordan is shared by Israel, the occupied Palestinian territories, Jordan and Syria, all of which use its depleting reserves.

Islands have become exposed as water levels fall. Photograph: Ahmad Gharabli/AFP/Getty Images

“Israel takes half, Syria and Jordan take the other half,” says Bromberg. “Because it’s a war zone, they take everything … The mindset of conflict leads to the complete demise of the river Jordan.”

In 2000, Syria’s then president, Hafez al-Assad, father of the current president, Bashar, turned down a deal to end three decades of on-off war on the basis that Israel refused to give him back access to the north-eastern shore of the Sea of Galilee. The prime minister at the time, Ehud Barak, ran on the campaign slogan: “No Syrian soldiers will splash their feet in the Kinneret.” Israeli forces had taken over the entire area in 1967.

Israel has retained hold of all the water resources in the Palestinian territories, where residents suffer regular shortages and often have to pay large amounts for private water lorry deliveries. In Gaza, which is under a tight Israeli-Egyptian blockade, most water is unsafe to drink.

“While Israel has become a trailblazer in the field of water technology, the failure to reach a fair water allocation and management agreement between Israelis and Palestinians is putting the Palestinian water sector under huge stress and continues to breed animosity that will only accelerate under climate change,” says a recent report by EcoPeace.

Israel also relied on the Sea of Galilee’s waters to forge a 1994 peace treatywith Jordan, agreeing to pump 55m cubic metres a year to its former enemy. That continues today, a deal that cannot be broken without diplomatic fallout, making the desalination project ever more critical.

EcoPeace hopes that good water management will spur on peace to the region. Bromberg is now advocating for a deal in which Israel, which is on the Mediterranean, supplies desalinated water to Jordan. In exchange, Jordan, which is low on water but full of open desert with 320 sunny days a year, will supply solar power.

 Ethiopian pilgrims in the polluted Jordan river at the site considered the place where Jesus was baptised by John the Baptist. Photograph: Quique Kierszenbaum

In the meantime, the river Jordan remains polluted. Most Christian pilgrims who want to be baptised in the holy waters do not venture to the original sitewhere John the Baptist is believed to have led Jesus into the water. That location is in the occupied Palestinian territories next to Jordan, and the Israeli army mined it decades ago. Pilgrims were only allowed to return some years ago.

Authorities have instead promoted another attraction about 110km north in Israel. The Yardenit baptismal site was built in the early 1980s and welcomes half a million visitors each year. Here the water is clean as it is pumped from the Sea of Galilee into a holding area. Bromberg calls it a “man-made swimming pool”. Dozens of people in white gowns wait in line, walking through metal fences into the water, before being plunged below. A colossal gift shop sells bibles and religious trinkets, and customers can buy small bottles filled with water and stones from the plunge pool – three for 57 shekels, or around £12. Visitors can buy or rent white gowns for baptisms. A cafe outside sells ice-cream.

One day, the masses may return to the original site. And as the end of the winter approaches, authorities say an unusually rainy season has given the Sea of Galilee some relief and broken a five-year drought. As the snow melts in the north, they hope the water level will continue to rise.

But a rainy winter goes against the trend, and in a few short months the hot summer will evaporate the lake again, possibly taking it back down or below the black line. “It would be an ecological disaster,” says Bromberg.

Bootleg liquor kills at least 84 in Assam, 200 hospitalised


A paramedic tends to a tea plantation worker, who consumed bootleg liquor, inside a government-run hospital in Golaghat in Assam, India, February 23, 2019. REUTERS/Anuwar Hazarika

Zarir Hussain-FEBRUARY 22, 2019 

GUWAHATI, India (Reuters) - At least 84 people have died from drinking toxic bootleg liquor in Assam, and around 200 others have been hospitalised, a state government minister said on Saturday.

The deaths come less than two weeks after more than 100 people died from drinking tainted alcohol in two northern Indian states, Uttarkhand and Uttar Pradesh.

Police have arrested twelve people in connection with making bootleg alcohol in Assam, a practice local politicians say is rampant in the area’s tea estates, where its is drunk by poorly-paid labourers after a tough day’s work in the plantations.

“Every 10 minutes we are getting reports of casualties from different places. So far about 200 people are in hospital with many of them critical,” Assam Health Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma told Reuters via telephone.

“Doctors from nearby districts and other medical colleges have been rushed in to deal with the crisis,” said Sarma, after visiting patients at Jorhat, located some 300 kilometres east of the state’s financial hub, Guwahati.

Deaths from illegally produced alcohol, known locally as hooch or country liquor, are common in India, where many cannot afford branded spirits.

The death tolls from the two recent incidents, however, are believed to be the deadliest since a similar case killed 172 in West Bengal in 2011.

Dilip Rajbnonshi, a doctor at the government hospital in Golaghat, located some 40 kilometres southwest of Jorhat said the deaths were due to “spurious country liquor”.

A number of women are among the casualties. Many of those that drank the liquor were tea plantation workers who had just received their weekly wages, according to another state government official.

“I asked some of the patients why they consume liquor almost everyday and they said after a hard day’s work in the plantations they drink to relieve stress and tiredness,” health minister Sarma said.
Mrinal Saikia, a local lawmaker from the Bharatiya Janata Party - which is in control of the federal and Assam state governments - said alcohol, often laced with cattle feed and battery acid, is being supplied “in gallons” to tea plantation workers.

“This is a big business in areas surrounding tea gardens where people set up illegal distilleries to make country liquor,” he said.

Reporting by Zarir Hussain; Writing by Euan Rocha and Alasdair Pal; Editing by William Maclean; Jacqueline Wong and Toby Chopra

Does APAC need to regulate data-driven healthcare providers?


HEALTHCARE providers across the Asia Pacific (APAC) region are building systems that are artificially intelligent, powered by data, and capture and analyse information in real time to produce actionable insights.
There are also several technology companies in the healthcare space, creating data-driven solutions to support customers and improve their experience.
It is therefore surprising that there are no laws to specifically regulate how all of these businesses manage data and use it to build their offering, usually with some degree of AI-built in.
True, there are personal data protection laws in Singapore, Malaysia, and other countries in the APAC, but none are particularly sensitive to the complexities of data this sector.
This is something that has suddenly become a question consumers and businesses are asking in light of the new announcement by the Department of Health and Social Care in the UK.
Created with input from industry, academics and patient groups, the code encourages technology companies to meet a gold-standard set of principles to protect patient data to the highest standards.
“The aim is to make it easier for suppliers to develop technologies that tackle some of the biggest issues in healthcare, such as dementia, obesity, and cancer. It will also help health and care providers choose safe, effective and secure technology to improve the services they provide,” said a press release.
000_17T5OV
(L-R) Cyber Security Agency CEO David Koh, MCI Permanent Secretary Gabriel Lim, Minister for Communications and Information S. Iswaran, Health Minister Gan Kim Yong, Ministry of Health Permanent Secretary Chan Heng Kee and SingHealth CEO Ivy Ng attend a press conference regarding the SingHealth cyber attack in Singapore. July 20, 2018. Source: The Straits Times/AFP
The new code is of particular interest to businesses in this space because those who comply will be eligible to access data from the NHS’ data pool, allowing them to accelerate the development of products and services.
“This new code sets the bar companies will need to meet to bring their products into the NHS so we can ensure patients can benefit from not just the best new technology, but also the safest and most secure,” explained UK’s Chief Clinical Information Officer for Health and Care Simon Eccles.
The department expects that the code will allow the government to work with suppliers to guide the development of new technology so products are suitable for the NHS in the future.
Further, it is also hoped that the code will help make sure the NHS get a fair deal from the commercialisation of its data resources — benefitting the people of the country as a whole.
“Artificial intelligence has the potential to save lives, but also brings challenges that must be addressed. We need to create an ecosystem of innovation to allow this type of technology to flourish in the NHS and support our incredible workforce to save lives, by equipping clinicians with the tools to provide personalised treatments,” said UK Health and Social Care Secretary Matt Hancock.
“AI must be used responsibly and our code of conduct sets a gold-standard set of rules to ensure patient data is always protected and the systems we use are some of the safest in the world.”
Back home in the APAC region, there seem to be far more companies looking to invest in and set up innovative products and solutions in the healthcare space — and such a law will clearly be beneficial.
In the meanwhile, companies looking to benefit from the boom in healthcare-tech should aspire for strong data privacy standards in order to instill confidence among customers that their data will be kept safe.
This article originally appeared on our sister site Tech Wire Asia

Asthma: Young people in the UK 'more likely to die'

Young woman with an inhaler

  • 20 February 2019
  •  
    Young people in the UK are more likely to die from asthma than those in other wealthy countries, a report has found.
    Death rates for asthma in 10 to 24-year-olds was highest in the UK among all 14 European nations included in an analysis of 19 high-income countries.
    The UK also had the highest obesity rates for 15 to 19-year-olds among the European nations.
    The government said it had "world-leading plans" to safeguard child health.
    Overall, the report found the UK to be lagging behind other nations across a number of health indicators.
    The study, from the Nuffield Trust think tank and and the Association for Young People's Health, analysed 17 measures of health and wellbeing for 10 to 24-year-olds in countries that included Germany, France and Italy, as well as Japan, the US and Australia.
    It found that while young people in the UK are making some healthier choices, such as drinking less alcohol and smoking less, more are entering adulthood with long-term health conditions.
    Nearly one in five young people in the UK is estimated to be living with a longstanding health condition, such as type 2 diabetes, the report finds. In England, the figure has gone from 13.5% in 2008 to 18% in 2016.

    'Appalling'

    The UK was also found to be one of the worst countries for young people to suffer from years lost to ill-health and the burden of their diseases, with only Australia, the US and New Zealand being worse.
    Children and young people in the UK are also far more likely to be obese if they are poor, with the UK having some of the highest inequalities between the richest and poorest when it comes to the proportion that are obese, the study found.
    On poverty among older age groups, the report said: "Despite living in the world's fifth largest economy, young people aged 20 to 24 in the UK are experiencing one of the highest rates of severe material deprivation among the countries in our international comparison.
    "Reducing poverty among young people is key to improving their health outcomes in the UK."
    Young woman smoking
    The report finds young people are smoking less and drinking less alcohol
    Overall, the UK sits in the bottom third of countries in nine out of 17 indicators, and in the top third in three.
    In four of the 17 measures, trends have been getting worse, while in five areas previous improvements have stalled.
    Nigel Edwards, chief executive of the Nuffield Trust, said the study suggested health services in the UK were "getting something badly wrong".
    He said: "I worry this reflects a dangerous complacency.
    "Young people in the UK are entering adulthood with more long-term health conditions and, as a result a poorer quality of life, storing up problems further down the line.
    "If we don't take action now, the next generation will be entering adulthood sicker than the one before it."
    Asthma UK said it was "appalling" that people were more likely to die from asthma in the UK than in other European countries.

    'Greater understanding'

    The charity said its research has previously found that millennials - typically those born between the early 1980s and mid-1990s - get the worse asthma care of any age group.
    Dr Samantha Walker, director of research and policy at Asthma UK, said: "We are now urging the NHS to move with the times and put technology at the heart of asthma management, helping to engage this tech-savvy generation."
    Emma Rigby, chief executive at the Association for Young People's Health, said there needed to be a greater understanding of young people's health needs.
    Researchers analysed data from the mid-1990s to the last year for which data was comparable with other countries, 2016.
    The 19 countries were: The UK, the Netherlands, Denmark, France, Ireland, Portugal, Greece, Germany, Spain, Austria, Belgium, Finland, Italy, Sweden, Japan, US, New Zealand, Australia, and Canada.
    A Department of Health and Social Care spokeswoman said: "We have world-leading plans in place to safeguard child health by combating obesity, improving mental health and vaccinating against some of the world's deadliest diseases.
    "Prevention is at the heart of the NHS Long Term Plan, and as part of this we are increasing funding by an average 3.4% per year, meaning that by 2023-24 it will receive £20.5bn a year more than it currently does."

    Friday, February 22, 2019

    Mullaitivu residents condemn police inaction


     20 February 2019
    Residents in Mullaitivu condemned police injustice and partiality yesterday, accusing officers of failing to take action on gang violence. 
    Holding a protest in Oddusuddan, residents said the police were partial and lacked neutrality. 
    On February 18, a gang of men on motorbikes and crashed into a woman, who was subsequently admitted to hospital with critical injuries. 
    Despite residents complaining to the police, officers are yet to take action, protesters said. 

    Sri Lanka: In Search Of Truth & Reconciliation

    Mark Salter
    logoIs Sri Lanka on the path to establishing its own Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC)? The answer, at least if Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe is to be believed, is ‘yes’. Speaking at a recent meeting in Kilinochchi – the wartime capital of territory ruled by the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) during its 23 year-long conflict with government forces (1983 – 2009) – Wickremesinghe suggested that setting up an TRC was now a priority, the aim being to establish a process and mechanism for ‘telling the truth related to the war’, ‘expressing regret for the past’ and ‘asking forgiveness in order to establish genuine reconciliation’. Like others before him, too, Wikremesinghe pointed to South Africa as a model for how to design such a process.
    Critics will be quick to detect the hand of instrumental politics in this move. With the next Geneva review session of the UN Human Rights Commission now less than a month away, it is indeed tempting to see an announcement of moves to establish a TRC as a sop designed to keep the international community at bay over demands for demonstrable progress on accountability for alleged war crimes. And given the government’s past record of last-minute official announcements prior to UNHRC review sessions – most recently in 2017, with regard to an Office of Missing Persons(OMP) – a certain measure of political sang-froid over moves to establish a TRC indeed seems in order. 
    That said, it’s important to keep in mind that setting up a TRC was one of four core elements of the wide-ranging and ambitious transitional justice (TJ) strategy outlined by then Foreign Minister Mangala Samaraweera at the UN in autumn 2015: the others being the OMP, an Office of Reparations and – most controversially within Sri Lanka at least – a hybrid court to address war crimes allegations. 
    Samaraweera envisaged an 18-month timeframe for rolling out the new set of TJ instruments. In practice, however, progress on realizing this agenda has been either painfully slow or – in the case of a hybrid court – non-existent. Following seemingly endless debates regarding its mandate and composition the OMP was finally established in May 2018. To date it has held victim consultations and produced an interim report but not much more, compounding suspicions – notably among the northern Tamil population that bore the brunt of the carnage during the conflict’s final stages – that it will prove to be yet another ultimately toothless official instrument incapable of providing victims with the information they most want: the truth regarding the thousands of civilians and combatants still officially ‘missing’ almost 10 years after the war’s ending.
    With regard to an Office for Reparations legislation enabling its establishment finally passed through parliament in October 2018, though there was some criticism of the envisaged mechanism as lacking in independence from government. No doubt at least partially due to the turmoil that descended in the wake of the (ultimately failed) late November takeover attempt by President Sirisena in cahoots with former president Mahinda Rajapaksa, little has been heard of the Reparations Office since, and it remains to be seen what happens once – of if – the Office eventually gets up and running.
    Finally, at this juncture moves towards setting up the hybrid court proposed in 2015 appear to be completely stymied. If anything, indeed, things have moved backwards, with a succession of government officials, President Sirisena included, lining up over the past few years to voice criticism of everything from international judges’ prospective involvement in a court to wholesale rejection of allegations of war crimes committed by Sri Lankan armed forces. 
    In response to this situation, some will argue strongly that unless and until issues of accountability are adequately addressed in Sri Lanka, moves to establish bodies such as a Reparations Office or TRC are little more than window-dressing and should be treated accordingly. A more nuanced position might be to welcome the (limited) progress made to date on implementing the 2015 transitional justice agenda while also urging the government to move forward resolutely on all four pillars.
    At the same time it’s important to underscore the fact that in Sri Lanka, as in all post-conflict contexts, there are critical issues of timing, sequencing and balancing what may sometimes appear to be competing objectives in the context of an overall transitional justice agenda. By its very definition transitional justice implies compromises and as such the delivery of less than perfect outcomes, not least with respect to justice itself. In transitional contexts, in other words, no one, either victors or victims, gets everything they want and/or quite possibly deserve. 

    Read More

    The Big bad bluff

    Constituting the ‘Constitutional Council’ and ‘Civil Society’ Reps

    22 February 2019
    Passing of the 19th Amendment in the most disgusting manner with unwanted, undemocratic provisions smuggled in was yet hailed as democratic victory highlighting the Constitutional Council (CC) and Independent Commissions.
    Importance of the CC and its independence was nevertheless in question from day one.
    The political rivalry that flickered in the cold between President Sirisena and the UNP Government of PM Wickremesinghe from early days of the Yahapalanaya Government that caught fire rapidly has left important appointments to the judiciary at bay. This led President Sirisena to condemn Independent Commissions, the CC and its criteria for selection in his speech made to Parliament on  February 5, 2019.

    Former President Rajapaksa who kept all Independent Commissions ineffective using ambiguity in the 17th Amendment and then brought them under his thumb with the 18th Amendment, has also joined President Sirisena in condemning the CC.
    Speaker Karu Jayasuriya as Chairman of the CC responded to President Sirisena’s allegations with a statement made in Parliament the following day. He explained the criteria in selecting nominees for posts the CC is mandated to recommend under Article 41(b) and in approving nominees sent by the President under Article 41(c). The Speaker told parliament, (quote) It shall be mentioned that seniority, integrity, independence and impartiality of persons are considered in addition to the said guidelines in appointing persons to respective positions (unquote).

    He also said, a Report of the CC with guidelines for selections was tabled by him on 08 December 2016 and promised (quote) the report containing the aforesaid guidelines would be tabled in Parliament tomorrow for the information of Hon. Members (unquote).
    These guidelines are not in the public domain yet. Speaker’s repeated tabling of the ‘Report with guidelines’ only proves MPs are not serious and have not debated and endorsed them.
    That apart, the “guidelines” and other criteria mentioned by the Speaker have not been always adhered to. There is also the political factor that would not endorse Speaker’s lavish praise for the CC and the Independent Commissions (the HRCSL and the RTI Commissions being very rare exceptions). The method of constituting the CC with a dominating political presence itself negates Speaker.

    Members of the first CC established in September 2015 for three years clearly prove his statement that all political parties in Parliament are represented in the CC with no majority to any, is baseless. Seven politicians in the first CC were Speaker Karu Jayasuriya, PM Wickremesinghe, Leader of the Opposition Sampanthan as ex-officio members, with Minister Champika Ranawaka nominated by President, Minister Wijedasa Rajapaksa nominated by PM and then replaced with Thilak Marapana on December 29, 2017, Minister John Seneviratne nominated by the Leader of the Opposition and VijithaHerath agreed upon by minority parties not belonging to the main opposition party. The three ‘civil society’ members were Dr. A.T. Ariyaratne, Dr. Radhika Coomaraswamy and Shibly Aziz.

    The CC is the remedy agreed upon in society to de-politicise the State and appointments to high posts, through Independent Commissions. It is, therefore, a total contradiction to have seven out of ten CC members appointed from parliamentary politicians. Of them in the first CC, four including the PM were Cabinet Ministers, who would never compromise political interests of their government with the independence of Commissions and high posts. Worst is when a quorum of five allows the four ministers and their erstwhile ally Sampanthan as Leader of the Opposition to sit with the Speaker if they want to, to conduct business and decide as the CC. Speaker Jayasuriya, PM Wickremesinghe, Ministers Ranawaka, Wijedasa Rajapaksa and Marapana who later replaced Rajapaksa, are all UNP members in Parliament who contested under the symbol ‘Elephant’.

    • Importance of the CC and its independence was nevertheless in question from day one

    • Rivalry between Govt. and President leaves important appointments to the judiciary at bay

    • Speaker’s repeated tabling of the report only proves MPs are not serious 


    Though on the Speaker’s chair Jayasuriya is expected to be ‘independent’, his role during the October fiasco, was without a doubt played out in favour of the UNP government and Wickremesinghe’s premiership. It goes to prove, when it comes to real politics, Jayasuriya is not the ‘independent’ Speaker he should be, but all time UNP member, eagerly waiting on the wings to take flight as the next UNP presidential candidate, given an opportunity.
    If anyone says all that was a necessary compromise to replace the 18th Amendment with the new 19 Amendment, it only means any junk is ‘good junk’ in replacing Rajapaksa.
    Yet, the 18 Amendment painted as a frighteningly huge vulture carrying the provision for a never-ending Rajapaksa dynasty, was only xenophobia. At the 2015 January, presidential poll Rajapaksa was ousted with a popular vote after his second term. The 18 Amendment meant nothing.
    There was apparently no political compromise on the 19 Amendment other than to allow President Sirisena to continue as the “executive” he was, but with an irrelevant clause that says he would be responsible to parliament. What was achieved in the bargain was a Parliament that could not be dissolved for 04 years and 06 months without a 2/3 majority that keeps this Wickremesinghe government going.

    Much of the contradictory provisions out of over 70 clauses that made the 19th Amendment, were smuggled in a mighty hurry in the most unparliamentary manner led by the expert on “Latimer House” Principles and went beyond that compromise. 
    That was also how the CC was turned into the opposite of what it has to be; the mechanism for depoliticising of the State and high posts.
    Over three years ago on  October 27, 2015 I wrote for the website “Ground Views” (quote) There are serious allegations against persons appointed and in how the appointments were made thus far to the four Commissions established. Two members appointed to the Police Commission are far too old to be efficient and credible members in any public commission with a very heavy responsibility. In fact, one is alleged to have been accused in a bribery case during the period of Ms Nelum Gamage as DG of the Bribery Commission. Another appointee to the CIABoC itself is questionable say lawyers at Hulftsdorp. Another issue is the appointment of lawyer Gazali Hussain to the HRCSL who was the counsel for former Eastern Province CM and TMVP leader Sivanesathurai Chandrakanthan better known as Pillaiyan. The issue is not about the right of Pillaiyan to retain a lawyer of his choice and that of a lawyer to appear on behalf of any client he or she wishes to, in his or her professional career. The issue is in appointing a lawyer to the HRCSL who appears for clients accused of violating the law, human rights and investigated for extrajudicial killings, ……(unquote).

    That was a CC appointment to SL Human Rights Commission of all Commissions.
    In the same article, I raised the awful conduct of those who sit in the CC as representatives of the ‘People’. (quote) Far worse is the role of the three members, A.T.Ariyaratne, Ms.Radhika Coomaraswamy and justice Shibly Azeez, who have taken up their appointments as members of the CC to represent the people…..They do have collective responsibility……. Yet that collective responsibility does not run as far as that of the cabinet of ministers if they honestly wish to differ. For their first responsibility is to the people they have constitutionally accepted to represent in the CC. People also have a right to know from these three members in the CC if the allegations made are true or not. It is their sole responsibility to tell the people the truth about all appointments made thus far…..(unquote).

    But they did not and nor do the present three members representing the People.
    It wasn’t just a ‘one-off’ case and was not the only betrayal by the CC. Recommending DIG Pujith Jayasundara for the post of IGP in April 2016 was far more dubious and had no guidelines or selection criteria the Speaker kept stressing. In a very incisively drafted public statements backed by strong reasoning by the activist group Decent Lanka 2015 in which I played the key role, we said the selection and appointment of the IGP ‘was a historical error’.
    Selection of the new IGP was decided on a secret ballot in the absence of two of the three civil society representatives.
    It wasn’t only the irresponsibility of civil society members Radhika Coomaraswamy and Shibly Aziz that was in question.
    We questioned the selection criteria that completely contradicted the selection procedure adopted two months before in recommending the Attorney General. 
    This time, calling for personal profiles from the three DIG candidates nominated by President, they called for interviews but were not interviewed.
    Firmly disagreeing with the PM’s proposal in using the Secret ballot, we said:
    “What the people need from the Council is not a majority decision in appointing a person to a high position, but the appointment of the right person through a credible, open procedure.” We couldn’t but call it ‘nothing but sheer political bluffing’.

    The ‘civil society’ appointees in this present CC are no different from the three members in the first CC.
    They keep compromising with the Government’s political needs and therefore don’t say where they stand on any of the conflicting, controversial issues on recommendations and nominations.
    They are therefore far worse than politicians we know are corrupt. What takes place in the CC as said nearly three years ago is nothing but sheer political bluffing and the three ‘People’s Representatives’ are ‘dumb as dead’ on all crucial issues.
    It has little to do with what the Speaker told Parliament about guidelines and selection criteria. It is the Taxpayer who has to shoulder all that bluff.

    Safeguarding the Temple of Justice


    Friday, February 22, 2019

    The Speech delivered by former President BASL Upul Jayasuriya at the conference organised by Bar Association of India and LawAsia

    Constitution in which ever the part of the world, I don’t think would be in a crisis. After all it’s a piece of paper. It is those who seek to interpret and enforce or seek shelter under the constitution that will be in a crisis.

    Let me quote from Dr. BR Ambedkar, the Chairman of the Constitutional drafting committee also known as the father of the Indian Constitution. “However good a constitution may be, if those who implement the constitution are not good it will prove to be bad, however bad a constitution may be if those who implement the constitution are good it will prove to be good.”

    Sri Lankan Republican Constitution was drafted and promulgated in 1948 was better known as the Soulbury Constitution. This was replaced by the 1972 Republican Constitution removing the allegiance to the queen of England. That was pioneered by Dr. Colvin R De Silva, one of the greatest legal luminaries Sri Lanka produced during the time of Mrs Bandaranaike. Thereafter 1978 Constitution was promulgated by President JR Jayawardene. Those who pioneered the 1978 Constitution were Mark Fernando, HW Jayawardena QC and Lilith Athulathmudali who was later assassinated by the LTTE. One could say that was the creation of a monstrous Executive Presidency which had wide powers even to dissolve the government after one year of the forming of the government after an election. This was how President Chandrika Kumaratunga dissolved Parliament after three years of the election in 2004. Only exception to that rule was if there was an impeachment entertained in the order book then there could be no dissolution until such time the same is voted.

    19th Amendment

    Since 1978, it has had 19 amendments........! Of the amendments most pivotal was the 19th Amendment. It had many salient features. One of its major hallmark was the limitation of the powers vested with the Executive President. This amendment was voted for by all parties including the group led by the deposed President Mahinda Rajapaksa. It was historical. The bill was presented by the President himself. It was voted for by 223 members of Parliament out of 225 the total number of MPs. Up to this moment many successive Presidents vowed to remove or reduce the Executive Powers, but no meaningful action had been taken by Executive or the Parliament except of course the 19th Amendment that came to be tested in the recent past.

    It was a sincere effort taken in the right direction. The President’s name will be emboldened in the history having reduced his own presidential term from 6 years for which he was mandated by the people in 2015 to 5 years. That was an unparalleled effort and step taken to democratize the governance, with all humility by President Maithripala Sirisena. The prerogative that was enjoyed by all the Presidents arbitrarily, in appointing the judges to the superior courts, namely the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court. With the 19th Amendment the said arbitrary power that was once vested with the President was transferred to the Constitutional Council represented by all parties and 3 eminent members of the civil society.

    During the tenure of Chandrika Kumaratunga and Mahinda Rajapaksa presidential prerogative of appointing judges who were unsuitable to hold the coveted position in the apex court was abused in desecrating the Temple of Justice.

    I as the President of the Bar Association of Sri Lanka between 2013-2015, whilst addressing the Ceremonial Sittings of several judges tore apart the appointing process and the will of the executive, hell bent to thrust a subservient and a dependent judiciary. When my good friend Mohan Peries was appointed after illegally removing Shiranee Bandaranayake as the Chief Justice, Sri Lankan Bar represented by the Bar Association of Sri Lanka headed by me refused to recognize Mohan Peries as the Chief Justice. He was my good friend. My son was understudying Mohan Peries’s wife. That was of no concern. I defied the personal relationships and I invited Dr. Shiranee Bandaranayake who has been illegally restrained from functioning as the CJ, to my customary convocation upon my accepting duties as the President of the Bar Association of Sri Lanka ignoring the de-facto Chief Justice Mohan Peries in 2013. When I did that there was hell broke loose.....

    With so much of frustration set in, I had to steer the BASL on thin ice with caution. On one hand there was a draconian government of Rajapaksa with killer instinct and on the other, a judiciary holding pujas to the executive and hell bent to suck up the government. I took the risk and decided to discharge my duties my way,..... come what may...... I was vocal in courts and outside courts. My criticism and tongue lashing was painful to some and welcomed by those who stood by the principles.

    In one of my speeches at a ceremonial sitting of the Supreme Court I had this to say. This was in reference to a judge called Sri Skandaraja President of the Court of Appeal who was overlooked 5 times in his due promotion to the Supreme Court simply because he held, in a divisional bench that removal of Chief Justice Dr Shiranee Bandaranayake was illegal. He was a heart broken man and died as the President Court of Appeal with a burst of a blood vessel.

    Immediately afterwards I had the opportunity to make another speech in a ceremonial sitting, let me quote from my own speech, “We shall kneel before the altar of Almighty Justice, “Father, forgive them, they know not what they do. Their ill-will has no bounds or confines.” This voice must surely speak to civil society. The deprivation of his due place for that humble simple man who sat behind the bench, was nothing but a travesty of Justice. Are we to blame the “system” and pass the buck?....... No ! The buck must stop here.”

    If the Executive persists in acting in breach of these salutary principles it would be an invitation, persuasion or perversion to the mind of the Judges to cast aside their Judicial Independence and succumb to the invidious pressures of the Executive. Is that what is in the mind of the Executive? To break the back bone of Judicial Independence?

    “The blame cannot be attributed only to the Executive. The persons who do not fall within the time tested and respected criteria, cringe and scrounge brazenly at the feet of the Executive seeking such appointment, whose lame excuse thereafter is that the Executive invitation cannot be turned down; are equally guilty of the transgression against the society. We the Legal Profession and the civil Society and those of us entrusted with that public trust, are also to blame for it.”

    That was what I said in one of the ceremonial sittings of the Supreme Court.

    I hope you may get a feeling of how and what our judiciary was during this autocratic rule of Rajapaksa.

    With the creation of the Constitutional Council which was truly independent, emancipated executive skullduggery that was prevalent until then, in the appoi

    I take pride to say that this was a triumph of the Bar which crusade led by me on a head on collusion path against the totalitarian regime of Rajapaksa. Of course as you know there was no free meal. I had to pay my price. I was not only threatened but was followed by killer squads....... I stuck on. The entire legal profession in Sri Lanka flanked me. We were triumphant at the end. People like Prashanth Kumar, Chris Leone, IBA, ABA, Commonwealth Lawyers Association, British Law Society, Spain etc., etc., urged the Rajapaksa government for sanity.......

    It was our efforts that culminated in achieving the impossible. We reached the distant dawn. With the change of the regime and the introduction of the 19th Amendment and the re-introduction of the Constitutional Council we achieved the most salient factors that helped us in this crisis situation.

    19th Amendment ensured;

    * Appointment of commissioners to Independent commissions on Audit, elections, human rights, bribery and corruption, human rights commission were vested solely with the Constitutional Council.
    * High ranking public officials such as the Attorney General, Inspector General, Commissioner General Elections were also vested with the same Constitutional Council.

    * It became requirement that Appointment of the Cabinet of Ministers were to be done by the Executive President only in consultation with the Prime Minister.

    Number of Ministries to be held by the incumbent President was limited to Defence, Mahaweli and Environment only and in future President can’t hold any ministry.

    Presidential immunity was removed. Presidential power to dissolve the Parliament was restricted until the lapse of 4 1/2 years since the election.

    At the inauguration of the Golden Jubilee Conference in August 2016, I welcomed the President Maithripala Sirisena to the conference and said that the changes he has initiated through the 19th Amendment we would refer him to be the local Mandela!

    Well those were the early years of the Presidency. Between then and now much water has flown under the bridge. There has been substantial mistrust that has developed between the President and the Prime Minister for which both have to take their share of the blame.

    In this backdrop the President took steps to swear-in Rajapaksa as the Prime Minister and bring in his Cabinet of Ministers. Simultaneously the President prorogued the Parliament giving time for Rajapaksa to buy over the MPs from the opposition parties. It was a ugly display of ill gotten money of Rajapaksa. Price of a MP went up from 1/2 million US$ to 3 million US$. They succeeded buying a few but failed to obtain the magical figure of 113 to have majority in Parliament. The President then dissolved the Parliament and called for a General election.

    A fundamental rights application was filed in the Supreme Court challenging the dissolution of the Parliament.

    Rajopavanam Sambandan the Leader of Opposition moved the application in the Supreme Court challenging the dissolution of the Parliament. Matter was taken up before the normal bench fixed for the day, the Chief Justice and two other Judges. It was taken up in the morning and continued till afternoon. At around 6.30 pm the order was delivered staying the gazette dissolving the Parliament and calling for a general election. Parliament resumed on the expected date after the prorogation and continued with the proceedings.

    Wicremesinghe’s party brought in a motion of no confidence in Parliament against the brand new regime of Rajapaksa and holding that the dissolution process and calling for the election was flawed. The Speaker attempted to take a vote by name. As the coterie of MPs organised by Rajapaksa at his behest disrupted the proceedings by brandishing knives and throwing chili powder and breaking the maze of the Parliament. Speaker’s chair was broken and pieces were flying around. It was mayhem and an ugly scene by all means. The Speaker was compelled to take a voice vote. Vote was passed the no confidence on the new Prime Minister Rajapaksa and his regime.

    A fresh motion was tabled two days later as requested by the President. Speaker had to be surrounded by a group of policemen of at least 25, when he came to the chair as there were rumours that he would be manhandled. That too was disrupted as Rajapaksa didn’t have the numbers. And the motion was carried through with no confidence on the newly formed government.

    On the third occasion 122 MPs out of 225 signed affidavits and gave it to the Speaker saying that they have no confidence on the “Prime Minister” Rajapaksa who has looted power from Wicremesinghe.

    Another application was filed in the Court of Appeal by way of a writ of quo-warranto challenging the Cabinet of Ministers headed by Rajapaksa. The Petitioners were the 122 MPs who had earlier sworn the affidavits. The same day further interim order was issued by the Court of Appeal staying the operation of the Cabinet and the Prime Minister. This was on the 3rd of December. Supreme Court was to begin the arguments on the 4th to 7 on the main matter of the gazette dissolving the Parliament where a stay order has already being granted by the Supreme Court.

    Sarath Silva former Chief Justice made a speech in close proximity to the Supreme Court the day before the Argument began in court on the 4th December which threatened the Supreme Court. Contempt charges have been filed against him and he is currently facing same in the Supreme Court.

    He is the one who desecrated the court during the time he officiated as the Chief Justice. He faced and survived two impeachment motions and a petition by the Ravaya editor to have him dis-enrolled by political skullduggery.

    You will now appreciate the meaningfulness of the efforts of the Bar in doing everything possible to create an independent judiciary with a backbone. In any one of these occasions bench was not divided. It was a triumph for the Sri Lankan judiciary. It was a triumph of the legal profession that created an environment for it. It is a silver line on the dark clouds that were looming on Sri Lanka.

    I can recall an incident in India and a role model. That’s Justice Khanna one of the five judges of the Supreme Court of India who was also the most senior judge of the Supreme Court of India who was due to be promoted as the Chief Justice. In 1970 in this case of Nathwani Vs Commissioner of Police Nani Palkhiwala and Ram Jethmalani, legends of the Indian Bar led a team of Lawyers of more than 150 including Soli Sorabjee who was present with us yesterday, and Anil Divan who has left an indelible legacy to the Legal profession in India starting from his son Shyam Divan.

    The issue was all the opposition political leaders including Jaya Prakash Narayan, Moraj Desai, Vajpayee, were detained without trial. Four Judges held in favour of the government of Mrs Gahndhi justifying the banning of a meeting of two former Chief Justices MC Chagala and MC Shah and Nathwani. In a book named front foot written by Anil Divan, made reference. Let me quote a passage of reference to Justice Khanna, “and yet Justice Khanna preferred the voice of his conscience at enormous personal cost. It was Justice Khanna’s finest hour. He became a beacon and a symbol of selfless courage and lion hearted resolve to standby what he considered to be right without regard to his personal consequences.” In January 1977 Justice Beg who decided in favor of the government in the said Habeas corpus application, was appointed the Chief Justice over Justice Khanna who was the most senior, tendered his resignation.

    In a US Presidential election of George W Bush the federal Supreme Court was partisans. In Britain in the spy catcher case the public opinion was that the House of Lords held with the establishment. It is very crucial and rare where the sitting judges have had the courage and the resilience to hold against the establishment.

    Executive power

    Professor GL Peiris, one time Dean of the Law Faculty of University of Colombo, presently a member of Parliament representing the opposition, commended these salient features of the 19th Amendment in his speech in the Parliament and said that the President’s hands are tied by the 19th Amendment limiting his power to dissolve Parliament until the expiry of 4 1/2 years since election.

    However it was sad to see that such a learned man took a diametrically opposite view when the President prorogued the Parliament first and dissolved the parliament before the date of the reconvening of the parliament much against the spirit of democracy in flagrant violation of the Constitutional provision brought in with the 19th Amendment. This is where D. Ambedkar’s quotation becomes quite relevant to the Sri Lankan situation. It is known through the grapevine, that it was the same genial Professor of Law and the retired Chief Justice Sarath N Silva who has advised the President to do so. It is more appropriate to call it a political crisis than a constitutional crisis.

    We in Sri Lanka were overwhelmed by the support we received from Indian Bar at the initiative of Shyam Divan who invited Fali Nariman to give an opinion of the Constitutional issue that was being raised in our Supreme Court. Let me take this opportunity to place our appreciation on record to Fali Nariman and Shyam Divan and .... all the others who helped in the opinion given.

    Matter was argued for 4 days in the Supreme Court of Sri Lanka during which period your President elect, Prashant Kumar former President LAWASIA and Chris Leone present President LAWASIA came to Sri Lanka on an observation mission. All the parties including those of all who sought to intervene were heard by a full bench of 7 judges. The judgement was historical and unanimous.......
    The Supreme Court finally held that the gazette that was issued by the President dissolving the Parliament and calling for a general election before the expiry of 4 1/2 years from the election was made null and void.

    Sri Lanka has created history with an unprecedented judgement in the entire world. India had produced one Justice Khanna! Whereas Sri Lanka has produced 7 Justice Khannas. We have a judiciary that we can be proud of. We have toiled hard for this creation. We are proud that we have a judiciary that is independent. We are proud that we as the bar has had a hand in it in reaching the distant dawn. We shall not allow the Temple of Justice to be desecrated once again.