Thursday, May 30, 2019

Ultra-processed food linked to early death

By James Gallagher-30 May 2019

Ultra-processed foods - such as chicken nuggets, ice cream and breakfast cereals - have been linked to early death and poor health, scientists say.

Researchers in France and Spain say the amount of such food being eaten has soared.

Their studies are not definite proof of harm but do come hot on the heels of trials suggesting ultra-processed foods lead to overeating.

Experts expressed caution but called for further investigation.

What are ultra-processed foods?

The term comes from a way of classifying food by how much industrial processing it has been through.

The lowest category is "unprocessed or minimally processed foods", which include: • fruit • vegetables • milk • meat • legumes such as lentils • seeds • grains such as rice • eggs

"Processed foods" have been altered to make them last longer or taste better - generally using salt, oil, sugar or fermentation.

This category includes: • cheese • bacon • home-made bread • tinned fruit and vegetables • smoked fish • beer

Then come "ultra-processed foods", which have been through more substantial industrial processing and often have long ingredient lists on the packet, including added preservatives, sweeteners or colour enhancers.

If a product contains more than five ingredients, it is probably ultra-processed, says Prof Maira Bes-Rastrollo, of the University of Navarra, citing a maxim.

Examples include: • processed meat such as sausages and hamburgers • breakfast cereals or cereal bars • instant soups • sugary fizzy drinks • chicken nuggets • cake • chocolate • ice cream • mass-produced bread • many "ready to heat" meals such as pies and pizza | meal-replacement shakes

How bad were the findings?

The first study, by the University of Navarra, in Spain, followed 19,899 people for a decade and assessed their diet every other year. There were 335 deaths during the study.

But for every 10 deaths among those eating the least ultra-processed food, there were 16 deaths among those eating the most (more than four portions a day).

The second study, by the University of Paris, followed 105,159 people for five years and assessed their diet twice a year.

It showed those eating more ultra-processed food had worse heart health.

Rates of cardiovascular disease were 277 per 100,000 people per year among those eating the most ultra-processed food, compared with 242 per 100,000 among those eating the least.

The rapid increase of ultra-processed foods over less processed foods, "may drive a substantial burden of cardiovascular diseases in the next decades," said Dr Mathilde Touvier, of the University of Paris.

So do these foods damage health?

"[The] evidence is accumulating," said Dr Touvier, noting "increasing numbers of independent studies". Prof Bes-Rastrollo said she was "very certain" ultra-processed foods were bad for health.

Last year, a link was made with an increased risk of cancer.

The challenge is being 100% sure. The studies have spotted a pattern between highly processed food and poor health but they cannot prove that one causes the other.

Those who ate the most ultra-processed food were also more likely to have other unhealthy behaviours, such as smoking, which the researchers tried to account for.

But there's no guarantee everything relevant was covered, says Kevin McConway, a professor of statistics at The Open University.

"These studies do increase my confidence that there's something real behind these associations - but I'm still far from sure."

Why might ultra-processed foods be bad?

The first trial of ultra-processed foods showed they led people to eat more and put on weight.

Researchers at the US National Institutes of Health monitored every morsel of food that volunteers ate for a month.

And when given ultra-processed food, they ate 500 calories a day more than when they were given unprocessed meals.

Other suggestions include:

They are energy dense but lacking in nutrients and fibre
While the additives in food have been safety tested, it may be unhealthy to consume lots of additives from different foods
People eat more because they're easy to eat
They push healthier foods such as fruit and vegetables out of diets - who wants a banana when you can have ice cream?

These ideas still need researching.

Is there any useful advice?

While the term ultra-processed food may be new, the health advice will be very familiar: adopt a Mediterranean-style diet.

Such a diet includes plenty of minimally or unprocessed foods, such as fruit, vegetables, fish, nuts and seeds, beans, lentils and wholegrains, said Victoria Taylor, senior dietician at the British Heart Foundation.

"This, along with exercising regularly and not smoking, has been shown to be beneficial for lowering risk of heart and circulatory disease."

Measures such as taxation and marketing restrictions on ultra-processed foods, should be considered, said Prof Bes-Rastrollo, given the weight of evidence.

Is the ultra-processed label a load of nonsense?

Supermarket-sliced loaves and fresh bread from a bakery

Does the type of bread you eat make a difference?

There are certainly a lot of critics.

The labelling of food as ultra-processed could be inconsistent, said Dr Gunter Kuhnle, an expert in nutrition and health at the University of Reading

"It is also not obvious why salami is considered to be ultra-processed, yet cheese, which often requires considerably more processing steps and additives, is not. The classification combines a wide range of foods with very different potential impacts on health, which limits its usefulness as a basis for recommendations."

The studies were published in the British Medical Journal.

Follow James on Twitter.

Sri Lankan police assault Tamil journalist in Mullaitivu

28 May 2019

A Tamil Guardian journalist, K. Kumanan, was assaulted by the police officer in charge of the Kokkilai police station in Mullaitivu after he went to Neeraviyadi Pillaiyar temple to report on the lack of progress in fulfilling a court order to remove CCTV cameras.

The officer was reported to have verbally abused him; thrown his camera; taken photos of him; and has physically assaulted him.

Buddhist monks have been illegally occupying the temple and change the name of the temple from "Neeraviyadi Pillaiyar Temple" to "Vishnu Devalaya Katharagama" in devotion to Buddhism. On May 6, the Mullaitivu court ordered the police to return the temple to its original name. The police failed to execute the court's orders.

On May 26, local residents visited the temple and were harassed and questioned by police who had received complaints from monks stationed at the Vihara.

The news coverage and photography reported by Kumanan detailing harassment by the police and monks was vital in supporting this case.

On May 27, lawyers told the courts that monks had installed two new CCTV cameras in the temple which the court subsequently ordered to remove. The name of the temple was returned to its original on May 27 and the cameras were removed on May 28.

Kumanan has since filed a complaint to the Deputy District General of the police in Mullaitivu.

Sri Lanka has historically been one of the most dangerous places in the world for a journalist, with a report by Together Against Genocide finding that from 2004 until 2009 at least 48 journalists were killed. At least 41 of those media workers were Tamil.

Gota summoned to Jaffna in Habeas Corpus probe

Lalith and Kugan

BY AANYA WIPULASENA-26 May, 2019

Rajapaksa has been ordered to give evidence before the Jaffna Magistrate’s Court on June 21 in a Habeas Corpus inquiry into the disappearance of two human rights activists who went missing during his tenure as the Secretary to the Ministry of Defence.

Speaking to the Sunday Observer ex-Defence Secretary’s legal team confirmed that provided there’s no security threat Rajapaksa will appear. He added that the legal team is still studying the file.
Rights and political activists Lalith Kumar Weeraraj and Kugan Muruganandan went missing a day before World Human Rights Day, on December 9, 2011. They were last seen in the Kaitaddy area in Jaffna.

Ironically, Weeraraj and Muruganandan were laboriously documenting disappearances in the Northern Province during and after the end of the war in 2009, when they went missing without a trace.

Seven years ago, a writ of Habeas Corpus was filed in the Court of Appeal to demand the release of Weeraraj and Muruganandan if they were in the custody of the State. An inquiry into the writ commenced at the Jaffna Magistrate’s Court in September 2012.

Crucial evidence of their abductions was initially provided by three eye-witnesses.

All three witnesses retracted their statements and backed out of testifying.

According to their initial statements Weeraraj and Muruganandan, travelling from Point Pedro on a motorbike, were stopped at Kaitaddy

by a group, bundled into a white van and taken away. That was the last time the two activists were seen.

To support the case lawyer Nuwan Bopage has compiled a list of ‘white-van’ abductions. White-van abductions are those believed to be carried out by the military under the order of powerful heads of State during the previous regime. The list consists 56 such incidents reported from across the island.

Weeraraj was also threatened on several occasions before the incident. JVP dissident group member Dimuthu Attygala who was also abducted and later released following international pressure on the government testified regarding the threats.

Though the concerned parties requested relevant officials to investigate into the phone discussions the missing activists had had prior to the incident it has not been conducted to date. Reports from two telecommunication service providers are pending.

The case took a fresh turn when former Media Minister Keheliya Rambukwella told a press briefing that Weeraraj and Muruganandan were alive. ‘Mr. Weeraraj and Mr. Muruganandan have not been disappeared, they are there’.

Giving evidence before courts, the former Minister has said he made the declaration after the Security Council gave information regarding the incident.

Former Defence Secretary Gotabaya Rajapaksa, as head of the Security Council at the time of the abductions, has been called to make a statement next month.

When a protest was organized soon after the activists disappeared, the military had obstructed the demonstrators using wooden poles with nails attached at the end. Lawyer Bopage says there was no reason for the military to behave this way unless it was intent on covering up the crime.

The Sunday Observer learns the duo had gathered information about 4,000 disappearance cases and were involved in discussions on how to obtain justice for the victims.

Before they went missing Weeraraj who resided in the Avissawella area and Muruganandan from Jaffna had been organizing an event to mark World Human Rights Day in Jaffna. Enforced disappearances were to be a key focus at the event.

Weeraraj was formally a non-academic staffer at the University of Jayawardenapura. He later joined the People’s Liberation Front (JVP) to pursue full time politics. After the end of the war in 2009, when suppression was high, he went to Jaffna as he was fluent in the Tamil language. He joined the Jana Aragala Wiyapaaraya (Movement for People’s Struggle), a dissident faction of the JVP, in 2011, and then the Frontline Socialist Party. Weeraraj met Muruganandan in Jaffna during his Left political movements.

A report by the international rights group, Amnesty International, states that there is a ‘backlog of 60,000 to 100,000 alleged disappearances’ in the country since the late 1980s.

New constitution as a panacea for all ills and people’s mandate

The constitution is the supreme law of any country. The constitution making process, if handled properly, can bring not only political stability of a country; it could even bring economic prosperity and peace and harmony among the people of the country. It can either make the country a more stable and a prosperous nation or totally break it – Pic by Shehan Gunasekara

Wednesday, 29 May 2019

Victor Ivan, one of the proponents of 19A, in his latest edition published in Daily FT on 24 May under the caption ‘Sri Lanka needs urgent surgery,’ has once again advocated a strong argument to bring a new constitution as a solution to the current crisis.

He argued that the next president elected will not have any executive powers. Quote: “Why don’t the prospective candidates of the forthcoming presidential election tell the people this bitter truth? …Do they think that it is not important to arrogate a solemnity to this position and deceive people to win it, although it has only a symbolic value?” Unquote.

It is true that the next Executive President of this country cannot hold and assign himself any ministerial subjects and functions, although the President shall be the Head of the Cabinet (Vide Article 42 (3). This is the position after 19 A of the Constitution. Only the incumbent president may assign to himself the subjects and functions of the ministries specified in Article 51 of the 19A. In addition, under Article 70, he cannot dissolve Parliament during the first 41/2 years (which restriction will expire by 3rd March 2020) unless Parliament members themselves decide by two-third majority to request the President to do so.

Nevertheless, the person elected at the next presidential election due in November will continue to hold the position of ‘Executive Presidency’ in terms of the provisions stipulated in 19A. As we all know, in terms of Article 42(4) the president shall appoint as prime minister the Member of Parliament who, in the president’s opinion, is most likely to command the confidence of Parliament. The future prime minister shall also be appointed by the incumbent executive president at the conclusion of the Parliamentary Election due in 2020. Therefore, it is incorrect to say that the next president elected will not have any executive powers.

The constitution is the supreme law of any country. The constitution making process, if handled properly, can bring not only political stability of a country; it could even bring economic prosperity and peace and harmony among the people of the country. It can either make the country a more stable and a prosperous nation or totally break it.

Unfortunately, 19 A has brought the country into further divisions and lacks clarity. The people are still so confused on the constitutional provisions, some of which are contradictory in nature and there are many inconsistencies. As we all know, there were many changes and amendments brought in during the committee stage before it was passed, and finally the Speaker has certified the 19th Amendment to the Constitution on 15 May 2015.

Reverse thinking of main political parties about Executive Presidential system

Contrary to popular belief, the transition to the Executive Presidential system was in fact effected by the second amendment to the 1972 Republican Constitution, shortly after J.R Jayewardene’s UNP Government was returned to power in 1977 with a massive people’s power thus securing a five-sixths majority in Parliament.

This was opposed by then opposition, SLFP and Dr. Colvin R. De Silva of LSSP drew a parallel with Britain stating that the Parliament representing the people was sovereign. The UNP took a different position and pointed out the sovereign power of the people was vested in the Legislature only in the communist countries.

The rationale of this constitutional amendment is best explained at the debate held in October 1977 by J.R Jayewardene himself. Quote; “I am not against the parliamentary system on the British model, but I think that we have been too long tied to imperialism and that it is time we broke away and thought of our own methods of governance.” Unquote.

The amendment was certified by the Speaker on 20 October 1977. J.R Jayewardene became the first Executive President and subsequently enacted the ‘Constitution of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka’ was certified on 31 August 1978. Under the 1978 Constitution, the sovereignty of the people was further strengthened. Article 4 states that legislative power of the people shall be exercised by Parliament and by the people at a referendum; executive power including the defence of Sri Lanka by the President and the judicial power by the Parliament through courts, thus strengthening the principles of ‘separation of powers’. President J.R. Jayewardene was re-elected once again at the Presidential Elections held in 1982.

Separation of powers – A cardinal feature of democracy

The framers when designing constitutions, generally give comprehensive consideration to strengthen the principles of ‘separation of powers’ and ensuring issues of public policy and social welfare of the people.

The term ‘separation of powers’ was coined by a French social and political philosopher. His publication, Spirit of the Laws, is considered one of the great works in the history of political theory and jurisprudence, and it inspired the Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Constitution of the United States. Under his model, the political authority of the state is divided into legislative, executive and judicial powers. He asserted that, to most effectively promote liberty, these three powers must be separate and acting independently.

The legislative power has the task of passing laws and supervising their implementation. It is exercised by Parliament. The implementation of laws is the task of the executive. It comprises the president, cabinet of ministers and all authorities including the police and the armed forces. The judges administer justice, viz. they decide disputes independently and impartially. It is their task to ensure that laws are complied with.

The Executive – in the person of the president – has the right to dissolve the Parliament subject to constitutional provisions. Laws passed by the Parliament can be checked by the Supreme Court and declared null and void if they are found to be unconstitutional. The only influence the Legislature has on the judiciary is that it passes the laws that the courts have to comply with.

Promote economic growth, social well-being and national unity

The separation of powers is also affected by the realities of the political party system in all democratic countries. The members of government are members of those parties which have a majority in Parliament. One important democratic task is; more and more powers are taken over by the opposition parties: controlling the Government. The classical separation of powers is given a new dimension – the confrontation of the governing majority and the opposition. While this aspect is not enshrined in the written Constitution, it is a fact of political reality.

Professor A.J. Wilson, a key architect of JRJ’s Constitution, has observed that the 1978 Constitution is a hybrid, cross between French and British styles of government with a little bit of the United States thrown in. More importantly, it is an effort in the direction of depoliticised government, the prime purpose being to promote economic growth and national unity.

As stated above, Sri Lanka is a Democratic Socialist Republic and the leaders of government policy preach that they continue to practice social-market economy. Under Article 27 of the Constitution, the State is pledged to establish in Sri Lanka a democratic socialist society and shall ensure that the economic system in operation does not result in the concentration of wealth and the means of production to the common detriment.

According to Dr. Colvin R. De Silva, the architect of the first Republican Constitution of the United Front Government which came in to power in 1970, the name and title of the 1978 Constitution is a misnomer. Quote: “As for socialism, the whole design is to obstruct and prevent the march of the people to socialism. The description of the so called democratic socialist society makes it clear that the new constitution is an instrument for the preservation and development of a capitalist society.” Unquote.

Is the present UNF’s governance model acceptable to majority of people?

One of the measures to see the role of government in the social sector is to look at the total tax collection from the rich and the subsidies afforded to the less privileged people in society. In Sri Lanka, our tax revenue is around 13% percent and how much do we spend on education and health?

According to the Central Bank Report 2018 the Government spent only 3.4 % of GDP on health and education, where more than 25% of our people live below the poverty line or poor. In fact, there has been a reduction in the capital expenditure on health and education during the last three to four years. Our health and education services are fast deteriorating to a level where we could end up in having unhealthy and less educated children similar to the population living in least developed countries. We need to be mindful that these ‘social infrastructure’ activities are interwoven with socio-political fabric of the society. It is in this context only that a clear strategy of increasing public investments in education, at least 3% of the GDP should be viewed.

The goal is to give equal access to these basic goods: every child should have access to education, regardless of his or her parents’ income, and everyone should have access to health care. The proponents of 19A before the last PE in January insisted that government must invest more than 5% of GDP on education, which they have now forgotten.

In my view, there seem to be two different governance models that are based on distinctly separate ideologies recognised and preached by the two main political forces in this country. The proponents of the neo-liberal economic model coupled with Western-backed Westminster style parliamentary system of governance advocating near federal style of constitution are in the process of bringing more and more constitutional and economic reforms and those who oppose such moves are reliant on more socialist oriented market based economic development model coupled with a strong presidential system of governance with little devolution of power to the periphery. It seems that the proponents of 19A are now advocating the first model.

Since the future presidents cannot hold and assign subjects and functions of any single ministry including the Ministry of Defence, the Constitution should have made provisions empowering the president to dissolve Parliament, in the event of any serious crisis situation thus providing much needed ‘checks and balances’ for smooth functioning of the government. This is because the president shall be appointed by the entire people of this country in order to exercise people’s sovereignty.

I understand that a legal counsel to one of the additional respondents has made submissions at the SC hearing challenging the dissolution gazette in November 2018 pointing out the SC determination in 2002 when a similar 19A was presented as a bill – on a fundamental rights infringement case – it was determined that the duration of the president’s power to dissolve, which was originally only after the expiry of one year, should get extended only up to three years without reference to people at a referendum. I couldn’t find in the SC determination as to how it was finally interpreted in the SC judgement.

Articles 3 and 4 deal with sovereignty of the people, which includes franchise. The executive power of the people, including the defence of Sri Lanka, shall be exercised by the president under Article 4(b). There was an attempt last year by some legislators which includes the UNF, TNA and JVP backed by the proponents of 19A to abolish the executive power of the president without any success. At present, the executive president of the Republic shall be elected by the people, whereas under the proposed constitution, the next President shall be elected by the joint majority of the members of Parliament and the new Senate that will be established.

Can the next President opt for an early dissolution?

One could argue that the real motive of bringing the said constitutional amendment was to prevent holding the next presidential election due in November 2019. Any amendments of this nature would have to be referred to people’s approval at a referendum. The UNF Government may be comfortable to go for a referendum than facing the Presidential Election.

Why should they abolish something that is not in existence as claimed by VI? How can they argue that the next president elected will not have any executive powers? Aren’t the proponents of 19A only paying lip service to democracy by not accepting Articles 3 and 4 in the present Constitution? Of course, if succeeded it would have negated the very principle of separation of powers – a cardinal feature of democracy. This, in my view, is a serious violation of the people’s sovereignty and the fundamental rights.

It is true that under Article 70, the president cannot dissolve Parliament during the ‘first four-and-a-half-year year’ period. However, in my view, one of the presidential candidates if he wishes to do so, could obtain a mandate from the people at the next PE election by way of a manifesto proposal for an ‘early dissolution of the Parliament’ once elected. In the event the mandate is granted by the people at the Presidential Election, the elected president could dissolve the Parliament, as Articles 3 and 4 which deal with sovereignty of the people shall supersede Article 70 under ‘Doctrine of Necessity’. This of course is subject to SC interpretation in the event an election petition is filed – by that time the people’s president is already in power, up and running.

Ven. Gnanasara’s release and the death knell of Good Governance

29 May 2019

So, Ven. Galagodaaththe Gnanasara Thera, is at large now. The President of the Good Governance mandate, has been instrumental in his release. As to why the monk had to be brought out of prison through the back door is yet another interesting topic. But what is of interest is that it came on the decree of a President who was elected by broad sections of the citizens of this country including the over whelming majority from among the minorities, Muslims included and under the watch of a Prime Minister who boasts of being a neoliberal with tolerant attitudes towards racial and religious minorities and harps on communal and racial harmony. That Gnanasara embodied the anathema of all the values that yahapalanaya project envisaged is hardly debatable.

Any one who has been monitoring the movements of the President for the best part of a past year, would not have been surprised by the decision. In fact, it would have been a surprise had he not pardoned the foul-mouthed monk who is well known for his anti-minority rhetoric and active instigation of Sinhala Buddhist extremist elements against Muslims , specially during the Aluthgama riots under the watch of the Rajapakshe regime.

Contempt of worse kind

But what landed Gnanasara in prison, is not his anti-minority vituperative, per se, but an act of contempt of court, of the highest degree, the likes of which has not been seen in this country. It included threatening the Homagama Magistrate, calling the judge and the prosecution counsel ‘eunuchs’, threatening the wife of the journalist on whose behalf a habeas corpus action was being filed in that court and calling the law itself, as the law of the suddas, and thus not applicable to him.

As the Court of Appeal, in dismissing the appeal preferred against the judgement sending Gnanasara to six years initially, reasons out in its judgement, it involves an act of contempt of the worst kind, in a case where he had no involvement or interest at all or standing as the legal jargon goes, to even make an application to intervene. The judgement of the Court of Appeal dismissing the appeal was upheld by the Supreme Court, yet again emphasizing the manner of utter disdain the actions of the monk has exhibited, against judicial dignity and more importantly rule of law.

Meddling with administration of justice

The Presidential pardon, which has come under scrutiny time and again, could be seen as a measure envisaged at correcting a judicial error, or ensuring that humane considerations are taken in to consideration which some times the rigid rules of law might not identify. But that is if one is given to a very charitable explanation of as to why such a provision is in the constitution in the first place. More often, it is seen as a provision that gives way to the whims and fancies of the Executive to meddle with the administration of justice and rule of law.

If the decision of the President to pardon Gnanasara leaves no reason to be surprised, the reaction or more precisely, the non-action of the other partner of the government, the UNF would have come as a surprise to some. But even that should not be a surprise to the keen observer of politics and politicking. The race between the PM and the President in the past year in visiting places of Buddhist worship and being in the ‘good books’ of the leading monks, if anything, would have been a clear indication as to which way the wind was blowing. Good governance with reconciliation, communal consensus and non-discriminatory attitude towards the minorities was beginning to take a back seat.

The SLFP and UNP components of the government, which have been locking horns on every matter conceivable, seemed to be in unison in the release of the firebrand monk. In fact the Ministers of Justice as well as Budhdha Sasana, both from the UNP were keen accomplices in the act of the pardon.

The release of the extremist monk was the sign that both groups of the government did not give a darn about the yahapalana mandate given to them in 2015

Hate-speaker extraordinaire

The recent attacks on Easter Sunday by the Islamic extremist outfit National Thowheed Ja’math seem to have hastened the hand of the President in releasing Gnanasara, who has been engaged in hate speech openly against the minorities, the Muslims in particular, as the Secretary of the Sinhala extremist group Bodu Bala Sena (BBS). It is common knowledge that he received sponsorship from the previous regime, which in the eyes of the many was responsible for the Aluthgama riots which were aimed at the Muslim community. Yet what escapes reason is as to how the Easter Sunday attacks could serve as the catalyst for the release of a monk, who while being in the hallowed saffron robes has been engaged in a brand of politics which would have lubricated, if anything, the radicalization of Muslim youth from mainstream politics to extremist religious views bordering on fanaticism. It is so ironic that at a time when the government was given to blocking social media to prevent hate speech and racially incendiary content from circulating , in a context where , the general Muslim community came under attack from the Sinhala extremist mobs, who call themselves ‘Buddhists’, deciding to release a monk who had been the most infamous hate-speaker in politics in recent years.

There is hardly any perceptible justification available for the government on the release of Gnanasara.

The peace-loving, tolerant and moderate masses who brought the President as well as the PM to power in 2015 certainly deserve an explanation from their government as to why this shocking decision was taken. Showing its impotence to stop the horrendous attacks that killed around three hundred civilians by failing to act on one of the most detailed intelligence communiques in modern times given by a friendly state weeks before, the government showed it s inability to rule and lack of resolute political will by failing to protect the innocent Muslims community from a minor pogrom three weeks after the attacks. They were tell tale signs that the government was anything but ‘good’. But the release of the extremist monk was the sign that both groups of the government did not give a darn about the yahapalana mandate given to them in 2015.

Race is on!

The UNP as well as the SLFP components of the yahapalana government have abandoned the good governance mandate somewhere down the line and the presidential pardon coupled with the acquiescence of the UNP is the trumpet call that yahapalanaya is dead and buried for sure. Up and alive is the race for the winning post in the next elections whether it be Presidential first and General Elections thereafter or vice versa. Both are eager to ingratiate the Sinhala Buddhist sections who are visibly in the pocket of the Rajapaksas.

With the release of Galagodaaththe Gnanasara Thera, the government has shown that they are willing to play a dangerous game of communal politics at the expense of the future of the country , which has seen more than enough of its fair share of bloodshed and violence after independence. The government has shown that rule of law, proper administration of justice as well as equality before the law are just labels they used for political expedition and not normative principles that form the core of their principles of governance.

Gnanasara is out, and good governance is... Dead!

Sri Lanka: We Shall Overcome!

Time for People's Revolution

by Fr J.C. Pieris-May 28 at 9:42 AM

A revolution is a very sharp change made to something. The word comes from Latin, and is related to the word "revolutio" (which means a turn around). Revolutions are usually political in their nature. But there have been other types of massive changes in human society that are called revolutions for example the agricultural revolution, the industrial revolution and the information revolution. Samples of violent political revolutions are the French, the American, the Bolshevik and the Haitian revolutions causing fundamental changes to existing societies. Then there are the national revolutions seeking freedom from colonial imperialism. Most of the Asian, African and Arab revolutions were of that kind. (Wikipedia)

A sharp change

With the above introduction to revolution in its broadest sense I’d like to discuss a peculiar type of revolution that we in this country need and need immediately. From the above description we learn that a revolution is a sharp change. Changes are not comfortable. In the domestic scene just change the position of a chair, a table or the TV and you will know how uncomfortable everybody feels and they will let you know it in no uncertain terms. Our country needs a change and needs it badly. And it is not a minor change but a sharp or a major change, a 180 degree turn around. If we do not feel this need even after the April 21st carnage we are either idiots or vegetables.

Malgovernance

The manager of a super luxury hotel in the South confided to me that by the 23rd April they had cancellations of 259 nights of confirmed bookings. The loss to the hotel is over 20 million. No new bookings are coming at present. Hotels are retrenching majority of their workers. Some small ones simply closed down. Daily wages earners and casual labourers are badly hurt. The week after the New Year, of course, all were in a holiday mood, even the casual workers. They expected to get back to work after Easter Sunday. But the country came to a standstill, the hospitality trade, a major component of the economy of the South, died with the Catholics and the tourists. It took one whole month for children to trickle back into schools, how can a school function without students? There is a ‘moosala’ mood of fear, uncertainty, anger and despair. People are numbed. They do not know what to think or what to do. Every time either the Ali Baba or the 225 thieves open their mouths they put both their feet into their mouths. Nobody takes them seriously any longer. They are despised and cursed. They dare not go into the street without their body guards or their bullet proof vehicles. Everybody accepts, even the Veddah Chief, that a change is absolutely necessary, a sharp change, a revolutionary change.

The political nature of the change

The second salient feature of a revolution is that it is of a political nature. It is politics that decide whether we live or die, eat or starve. Therefore, invariably, a revolution is an operation to vanquish the present political regime and set up a new one. To do this non-violently we need a general election. Even before the 21st April people had almost decided that "Enough is enough" and we must get rid of the present lot of rascals, robbers and rogues. I called them, soon after the notorious Bond Scam, Ali Baba and the 225 thieves. And they must be sent to jail or home permanently. But after the Bloody Easter there is no doubt in anybody’s mind that these 225 nincompoops and baboons should GO! So, we come to the next presidential election and the consequent general election and the big question - what shall we do?

Fundamental changes to society

The third salient feature of a revolution is a fundamental change to the existing socio-ethical patterns and trends. Let us ponder on some of the current socio-ethical patterns and trends that slowly seeped into our way of life after the JR era and corrupted it and got completely rotten after the MR era. Selfishness has become a virtue. This was noticed first by teachers among the students. The OL and AL students do not like to show or share their notes with others. If one’s classmate had being sick and missed class they do not show the notes to them. Even the little ones working their sums cover them with their hands not to show them to the companion sitting next to them. How strange? It is unbelievable. Remember, children copy and imitate their adults. They are a faithful reflection of the adult society!

The culture of corruption and selfishness seems to begin in school with small children. The famous children’s poem "Me gase boho…" was originally meant to inculcate non-greed and concern for others and sharing the oranges even with birds and squirrels, but later it was changed to mean let’s eat as much as we can and sell the rest to make money! It is money and profits that matter.

During the previous regime people from the gutter and the underworld began to take over the country’s leadership. Murderers and gang-rapists (Tangalle), murderers and drug traffickers (Hikkaduwa), maniacs with intractable sex urges throwing parties celebrating the 100th woman-victim (Akuressa), big time drug traffickers (Negombo) were the politicians of the country supported and protected by the so called national leaders. As the retired DIG Edward Gunawardana once said famously: "Seluwa aniwarya kara ethi rataka Saluwa vihiluwak bawata pathvee etha." We need to break out of the indecent Seluwa-culture and get back to the civilized Saluwa-culture. And that is not going to be an easy exercise for it will be a revolutionary change.

Changing the context

The only way to make a bloodless revolutionary change is to change the context of the present ugly, rotten system. The present rotten system thrives in the context of the present weak and corrupted constitution. Throw this constitution completely out and bring in a new, firm, uncorrupted and decent constitution. In which context the ugly present politico-cultural indecent system will not be able to survive.

It will never be possible to bring about such a new constitution with the present set of Ali Baba and the 225 thieves. That is clear from what happened to the Lal Wijenayake draft of the constitution; whatever people may suggest finally it goes to the parliamentary sub-committees where it gets diluted, adulterated and corrupted. We have seen this happening.

The doctrine of necessity

Therefore according to the doctrine of necessity we can and should find a way out of the present dangerous mess we have got into. If USA is going to set up military bases in this our land, we are really and truly in a very dangerous mess. Now is the time to seek the help of such an extra-legal intervention which is wholly beneficial to the people and the country – The doctrine of necessity. "The doctrine of necessity is the basis on which extra-legal actions by state actors, which are designed to restore order, are found to be constitutional. It also includes the ability of a private person to violate a law without punishment where the violation of law was necessary to prevent even worse harm. The maxim on which the doctrine is based originated in the writings of the medieval jurist Henry de Bracton, and similar justifications for this kind of extra-legal action have been advanced by more recent legal authorities, including William Blackstone.

In modern times, the doctrine was first used in a controversial 1954 judgment in which Pakistani Chief Justice Muhammad Munir validated the extra-constitutional use of emergency powers by Governor General, Ghulam Mohammad. In his judgment, the Chief Justice cited Bracton's maxim, 'that which is otherwise not lawful is made lawful by necessity', thereby providing the label that would come to be attached to the judgment and the doctrine that it was establishing.

The doctrine of necessity has since been applied in a number of Commonwealth countries, and in 2010 was invoked to justify extra-legal actions in Nigeria." -Wikipedia.

The doctrine of necessity is supported by the famous jurist Hans Kelsen too. He mentions the dynamic theory of law in his book Pure Theory of Law. The dynamic theory of law is the explicit and very acutely defined mechanism of state by which the process of legislation allows for new law to be created and already established laws to be revised, as a result of political debate in the sociological and cultural domains of activity. – Wikipedia.

The autochthonous constitution (AC)

So we come to the urgent and dire need for a drastic change of the constitutional context of the governing system in the country. This is the whole purpose of a completely new AC. This AC, now being drafted by the people, is in the public domain. I have seen the fourth edition with changes. In the original it had reduced the number of members of parliament from 225 to 125. In the second, third and fourth editions it had come down to 80 members. And the latest change is that it has been brought down to 60. Here is an interesting comparison. In India the Lok Sabha has some 500 + members. In round numbers let us say it is 500 and the population of the country one billion. That is roughly 5 MPs for two million people. We have 20 million in our country. According to the Indian system we should have only 50 MPs. All are invited to send in their comments, suggestions and opinions. That is how the people are drafting the new constitution.

The gist of the AC

The country will be a unitary state. The executive presidency will be abolished. The provincial councils will be abolished. The legislature will be reduced to 60 MPs. The cabinet will be only 15 or less. MPs will not have salaries or pensions only an allowance. Pensions of MPs will be abolished retroactively. The doubled membership in the ‘pradeshiya sabhas’ will again be halved. MPs will not get car permits, petrol shed permits, wine shop permits etc. to sell for millions. MPs will have to be either graduates or have studied up to that level. Nobody with a criminal past or such allegation will be allowed to tender nominations. No person will be qualified to be elected as a MP more than twice. The parliament will be back at Galle Face.

As soon as the new constitution comes into force the judiciary will be dissolved and new people will be appointed by a constitutional council. The constitutional council will consist of 9 eminent, learned people and chaired by the speaker, the only politician. There will be only one law for the whole country. Muslim law, Udarata law and Thesawelami law will be abolished. The national list will be abolished. All court cases will have to be concluded in six months. Only serious crimes like murder, rape, child abuse etc. can go on for one year and not one day more. The punishment for corruption, swindling people’s money, will be gallows. Proportional representation system will be changed to the old, first past the post system. Citizens will be empowered to recall their MPs. There will not be urgent bills. Foreign Service will be strictly restricted to career diplomats. Those who have robbed the people’s wealth will be given one month’s amnesty to return the loot, failing which they will be charged, tried, convicted and jailed. Their properties and the properties of their immediate family, movable and immovable, will be confiscated. Domestication of wild animals will be prohibited. Sovereignty of the people will be inalienable and fully protected.

Good governance

In the new context of the AC, drafted by the people to replace the present rotten constitution, good governance can and will be established. The AC will be presented to the people at the next presidential election with a candidate. The AC will be more visibly in front than the candidate. Citizens will be voting for the AC, not so much for the candidate. But, of course, the candidate certainly will be a man of integrity with a strong character and a clean past. He is not a politician and he doesn’t want to be one. He will be what the ancient Greeks called a philosopher-ruler, or in modern terms, a statesman. When the AC is voted for by the people and receive the 51% majority we shall truly have a democracy as defined by Abraham Lincoln "A government of the people, by the people, for the people." As far as the AC is concerned the next presidential election will be a referendum. It by passes the need for two thirds majority of the legislature which, in this case, is not necessary as the majority of the people has adopted it. The doctrine of necessity validates the AC. The Voice of the People is supreme and above the executive, legislature and the judiciary. All the members in the executive, legislature and the judiciary are mere servants of the people with their salaries paid by the people. It is the sovereignty of the people that decides, there is nothing above it.

How you can participate in the drafting of the AC

Your suggestions, opinions, comments, fears and misgivings can be shared with the drafting committee made up of the initiator of this revolutionary project Mr Nagananda Kodituwakku and his team in the Vinivida Foundation and the NPM, National People’s Movement. Find below how you can contact them:

Vinivida Foundation.

Tel. +94 115 248 322 / +94 701 440 500.

Email: mail@vinivida.lk

Web: www.vinivida.lk