Monday, June 10, 2019

Post-Easter Rise Of Threats To Media Freedom

By Lucien Rajakarunanayake –JUNE 8, 2019

Lucien Rajakarunanayake

Media Freedom in Sri Lanka faces a major threat with moves to bring back laws on criminal defamation, using the recent Easter Sunday disaster situation.

Sri Lanka revoked the Criminal Defamation Law in 2002, but the government is moving under the shadow of the Easter Sunday tragedy and the politics of ethnic and religious hatred, to bring in special amendments to the Penal Code and Criminal Procedure Code to restore the anti-democratic features of Criminal Defamation legislation.

The prevailing media freedom, albeit with many restrictions, is seen as a threat to the manipulative politics of those in government and opposition, amidst ethno-religious rivalry in post-Easter politics.

The Criminal Defamation Law was revoked in 2002 by the Ranil Wickremesinghe-led UNP Government. It came after the increasing protests at the use of this law by the Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga government to curb, curtail, threaten and punish journalists and the media. The UNP that brought this change is not a political party that had a good record on media freedom and the rights of journalists. It was seeking popularity by attacking the political opponents.

It was the party, with then leader Ranasinghe Premadasa, which saw the killing of journalist Richard de Zoysa, and later prevented his killers being brought to justice in the Courts of our land. Mr. Ranil Wickremesinghe must certainly have considerable mental records of this and other attacks on journalists and the media by the UNP government, which led to rising protests from the public, media and journalist organizations, and trade unions.

The Easter Sunday tragedy has given many opportunities to those who threaten the principles of democracy, especially with regard to social, communal and religious equality. It now appears this tragedy is also being used to pose a major threat to media freedom and the rights of journalists, with moves to amend the Penal Code and Criminal Procedure Code, using the current crisis in governance.

The media is certainly in a far different situation than it was in 2002, when the Criminal Procedure law was revoked. There is a very active Social Media now, posing a major challenge to the regular media. Fake News is now widespread. False reporting is a seriously troublesome aspect in both social and regular media. The use of both social and regular media to spread communal and religious rivalries are realities of major concern.

The solution to this must not be secret and enshrouded moves to bring in repressive legislation, but to have an open and deep public debate on the protection of Media Freedom in the current context; and consider the legislative changes that may be needed to prevent misuse of the media by the manipulators of public thought.

Has the UNP-led government of today, headed by the SLFP’s President Sirisena, given the public any clue as to the provisions of the proposed legislation, and why not? Is the intent to bring it to parliament and rush it through as urgent legislation? We are aware how the electoral system was seriously harmed by rushing through the legislation on Local Government Polls, and also how parliamentary procedure has prevented the timely holding of Provincial Council Elections. This is how democracy has been seriously attacked by this parliament.

It is good to bear in mind that although there is rivalry between the UNP and SLFP, both these parties are not the best known for the protection of Media Freedom. As much as Richard de Zoysa and other journalists and media personnel were killed and attacked by the UNP, we also know how Editor Lasantha Wickrematunge was killed, journalists Keith Noyarh was attacked, and Prageeth Eknaligoda was abducted for killing, by an SLFP led government. We must remember that in 2007, now President, and then Minister Maithripala Sirisena, under the Rajapaksa Regime, said in public the Cabinet had discussed the re-introduction of criminal defamation legislation.

The planned amendments to the Penal Code and Criminal Procedure Code should not be brought to parliament without a proper and thorough public debate. The Government has to be reminded of the Colombo Declaration on Media Freedom and Social Responsibility of 1998, signed by The Editor’s Guild of Sri Lanka, the Newspaper Society of Sri Lanka and the Free Media Movement, supported by the Sri Lanka Working Journalists Association, after an international symposium, which had much to do with the local and foreign democratic pressure brought to have the criminal defamation laws repealed. UNESCO and several international media associations supported the country’s publishers, editors, journalists and media activists’ campaigns for an independent and responsible press in Sri Lanka.

The repeal of this law saw several cases in the superior courts relating to leading journalists such as editors Victor Ivan and Lasantha Wickrematunge being made void.

Of course in today’s context of narrow ‘island centered’ thinking, we may hear voices who oppose such foreign interests in the progress of democracy in this country; forgetting the reality of universal franchise and democracy that we have came to us from abroad, including colonial powers.

The crooked use of the Easter Sunday disaster, and the threats that political manipulators of race and religion have brought to social stability, must not be allowed to bring new threats to Media Freedom, and the rights of journalists. The government should make a careful study of how the developed democracies in the world are seeking to cope with the issues posed by social media, and also how the social structure in our country has to be advanced to strengthen democracy.

Are we a country without ethics, a moral code and shame?

IGP Pujith Jayasundera and former Defence Secretary Hemasiri Fernando appearing before the Parliamentary Select Committee last week. Who is to believe in whom in Sri Lanka today? The IGP has made serious accusations about the President. The former Defence Secretary has also made startling revelations about the dysfunctional nature of our security structure and its operations – Pix by Shehan Gunasekara

Monday, 10 June 2019

The saying ‘dogs may bark but the caravan moves on’ is found in many languages from the Middle East to India. In Turkish and Azerbaijani, it rhymes [it ürür, kervan yürür (in Turkish), and it hürər, karvan keçər (in Azerbaijani)], suggesting that of Turkic languages may be the origin. Some scholars claim that the proverb is originally Arabic.

However, the caravan of democracy in Sri Lanka will not move unless the credibility of the democratic system is restored. In its present form, it might even be better if it does not move although one is not sure about an alternative.

Who is to believe in whom in Sri Lanka today? The IGP has made serious accusations about the President. Prior to that Field Marshal Sarath Fonseka made a comment that the issue of Muslim extremism had been brought before the National Security Council on more than 15 occasions in the presence of the President and that no action had been taken. Other senior intelligence officers have also stated that the President was informed about the situation in the country long before the Easter attack. In spite of all this, the President has stuck to his guns saying he was not informed. Who is lying here?

Dysfunctional security

The former Defence Secretary has also made startling revelations about the dysfunctional nature of our security structure and its operations. However much the Government has been dysfunctional for the last few years, at least one would have expected the country’s leadership to set aside their squabbling and keep security of the country above political differences and jockeying for power.

However much the Government has been dysfunctional for the last few years, at least one would have expected the country’s leadership to set aside their squabbling and keep security of the country above political differences and jockeying for power

The Prime Minister has complained that he was not invited to the Security Council since October last year. Those who know him will know that he does not wait for invitations if he wants to be somewhere. In any event till October, he attended Security Council meetings and therefore he was present on the more than 15 occasions that Field Marshall Fonseka mentioned and when other security information was provided to the Security Council. Can we believe he too did not know anything about this impending danger? Who is lying here?
The former Defence Secretary has also revealed that the Prime Minister had convened some Security Council meetings and that there has been another committee called the Security Committee.

For heaven’s sake, how dare these leaders forsake the security of the country because of their personal and political differences?

Spectacle of inaction

Then we see the spectacle of inaction on the part of the Government to take any action against Minister Bathiudeen and Governors Sally and Hizbullah against whom allegations of complicity through association with the extremist elements were made.

This inaction leads to Venerable Rathana engaging in a fast on to death in Kandy and the blow hot, blow cold Ven. Gnanasara sitting beside Ven. Rathana and calling on everyone to rally round the cause espoused by Ven. Rathana.

Ven. Rathana gives up his fast when the two Governors resign and when he was given an assurance that the Prime Minister will make a decision about Minister Bathiudeen.

The Muslim ministers, deputies and State ministers then issue a collective resignation until an enquiry could be held forgetting that this is what should have happened in the first place. Not the intent of mass resignation, but the enquiry.

Ven. Gnanasara then changes his tune and attacks Ven. Rathana although the latter had only demanded the resignation of the Minister and the two Governors.

The Mahanayake Theros then wake up and issues a statement urging the Muslim ministers not to resign. To the best of the writer’s knowledge, formal letters of resignation have not been handed over as yet.

Can we believe or have trust in the President, the Prime Minister, the Parliament or the Maha Nayakes? We are led to believe by the President and the PM that life is back to normal. If by normal they mean, we are back to deceit, unethical behaviour, immorality and lack of leadership, yes, then we are back to normalcy. In fact in this sense we were always normal as we have been living in this muck for a long time

In spite of the absence of any leadership qualities and a proven disaster as President, the SLFP Parliamentarians shamelessly request the President to contest the presidency again. Why are they trying to commit hara kiri?
What a joke. What la la land are we in?

Can we believe or have trust in the President, the Prime Minister, the Parliament or the Maha Nayakes? We are led to believe by the President and the PM that life is back to normal. If by normal they mean, we are back to deceit, unethical behaviour, immorality and lack of leadership, yes, then we are back to normalcy. In fact in this sense we were always normal as we have been living in this muck for a long time.

Our parliamentarians cannot go any further thinking their caravan can go on despite the many voices now openly saying they have been taken for a ride for nearly five years. Professor Sarath Wijesuriya, one of the architects of the Yahapalanaya advent, publicly apologised for the mistake he made and the role he played in helping to elect this Government.

Venerable Athuraliye Rathana, another supporter, too publicly echoed similar sentiments. His onetime comrade in arms, Minister Mangala Samaraweera, now refers to Ven. Rathana as the MP in yellow robes.

Failure to deliver

The issue is not about the regime change in 2015 as many who worked for that did so with very good intentions and with much hope. The issue is the failure of the Yahapalanaya leadership to deliver what they promised. They have operated without any moral or ethical standards and in the eyes of many, performed far worse than the regime they changed.

Those who knew about the capabilities of the two leaders who led Yahapalanaya knew what would befall the country and how they would be undermined by the two incapable, ineffective leaders who led, or rather misled them.

Despite the urge to write more about these two leaders and their failures, the writer will pen something down for others to ponder in regard the future of democracy and the parliamentary system in Sri Lanka.

To say that the parliamentarians and the parliamentary system today is derided and virtually spat upon is an understatement like no other.

People probably have more confidence in donkeys than the MPs in the current Parliament of course with some exceptions. Whether it is right or wrong, many amongst the general public would hand over the government to the former President and current Opposition Leader on a platter and beg forgiveness for ousting him. If it were to happen, the two current leaders of the country would be responsible for this elevation.

However, despite its charismatic leader, the issue here is whether a return of the former regime will change anything as regards the perception many have about the Parliamentary system and the quality and credibility of the Parliamentarians.

The issue is not about the regime change in 2015 as many who worked for that did so with very good intentions and with much hope. The issue is the failure of the Yahapalanaya leadership to deliver what they promised. They have operated without any moral or ethical standards and in the eyes of many, performed far worse than the regime they changed

People voted to change the previous regime as they wished to change the shadow of authoritarianism, corruption and the perception of criminality associated with some members of the regime that seemed to follow the regime.
Now, people have realised that none of those expectations have materialised and that the situation has got worse. This writer nor any other need to tell the public that things are worse in Sri Lanka today than they were on 8 January 2015. They know it’s far worse. They can see it, feel it and hear it. They live it.

Given this perilous situation, electing another president or a set of parliamentarians, even a set of decent ones, will not resurrect even a modicum of respect for the presidency, the prime ministership nor the parliamentary system.

Accountable change

The only way to at least attempt to renew some degree of confidence in the system, both the presidency, the prime ministership and the Parliament, and the quality of parliamentarians, would be if aspirants and indeed those who elect aspirants, demonstrate change. Not just change, but accountable change.

One avenue would be for the aspirants to the highest position in the country to present to the public a legally enforceable code of conduct (if such a thing is possible) that he/she will abide by should that person be elected to the high office. The code of conduct should be a contract with the people of the country, and if any member of the public could demonstrate beyond doubt that the contract has been violated, the president should resign or subject himself/herself to impeachment proceedings. While the president may be supported by one or more political parties, he should not belong to any political party once elected to office

The second important change the leaders from the highest position must demonstrate is public knowledge of their wealth and the wealth of their immediate family, meaning the spouse, children and their spouses/partners (if they are married or have partners). Thereafter they should include in their contracts that their wealth statements will be made public on an annual basis.

The third change is the curtailing of their ostentation at public expense. Ministers and MPs should have official vehicles that are standardised and limited to a maximum CIF value of not more than $ 30,000. No minister or MP should be allocated more than two vehicles. No minister or MP should be given a security detail. If these and similar measures discourage any trash wanting to become overnight millionaires, so be it. That will be very good for the country.

At least it will draw people who are genuinely interested in serving the country to come forward to serve people.

The fourth change is that if an MP is elected from one political party and they cross the floor to vote with another party, they resign their seats and re-contest if they wish to return to Parliament

The fifth change is that the country should not have religious or ethnic based political parties. Religion and ethnicity is a personal matter and should not be a vehicle for governance via the Parliament.

The sixth change is that all aspirants from the highest position downwards should during the course of the current Parliament pass a Constitutional change reducing the size of the National Parliament to say 150 members, and 20 ministers and a total ministry not exceeding 50. Provincial councils should be strengthened with administration devolved with some exceptions like defence, income tax, national finance, land, foreign affairs and home affairs.

The seventh change is to establish, within 60 days of forming the next Parliament, a permanent Independent Commission against Corruption with judicial powers to convict those found guilty of corrupt activities. The immunity currently granted to the President that he/she will be above the law when in office should be rescinded.

No doubt many other changes may be needed to restore confidence in the presidency, the prime ministership and the Parliament. However, one could make a start with what has been proposed.

If such changes are not done, it will not be long before the Parliament ceases to exist and governance is taken over by others with a new model that is not democratic. The relatively short tryst with democracy would then be a historical record for the Mahavamsa.

Sinhala Buddhists are (not) racists, didn’t you know?

7 June 2019

When news of the first attack came through, the Twitterati were quick to pounce on the most obvious suspects: Sinhala Buddhists. There was then no talk of the presumption of innocence unless proven otherwise. Instead Sinhala Buddhists, being the obvious perpetrators, had to be singled out, with Gotabaya Rajapaksa as their orchestrator. One tweeter, who lambasted a condolence message by Mahinda and Namal, was scathing in her condemnation of the role played by the family in the rise of Buddhist extremism – until other Twitter-ers pointed out, even more scathingly, that the bombers happened to be non-Sinhala non-Buddhist Islamists.

In Sri Lanka the quickest route to being recognised and celebrated as a radical is by spouting anti-Sinhala anti-Buddhist drivel. The fact that this community had nothing whatsoever to do with the Easter Sunday attacks came as a bit of a disappointment to quite a number of these radicalwadeen, who were conspicuous by their silence: no missives condemning Islamic terrorism were made, and no attempt to bridge the gap between Christians and Muslims was made. Instead we had that excellent actress Deepani Silva infuriating every Christian in the country by claiming that those who had gone on a bombing spree were honda ugath daruwo.
Now imagine if Sinhala Buddhists had bombed those churches. What would Deepani Silva have said? What would those other radicalwadeen have said? What would the liberalwadeen have said? What would the international community have said? Given that these individuals have not stepped down in their anti-Buddhist diatribes though the attackers were of a different faith, we can only imagine.

None of the actors and actresses, none of the political pundits, none of the literati who are now speaking against the mob attacks on Muslim shops made similar statements regarding the church attacks. A friend of mine, a devout Christian herself, purported to speak for everyone when she told me that “for radicals the Christian community does not exist.” She was also enraged that none of the tweets from Western leaders – even Obama and Clinton – identified the victims and attackers in terms of their faith. It takes a Donald Trump to say it for what it is, though no one wants to hear it.
Sinhala Buddhists have been singled out every single time. They do not have the moral upper hand in this, but neither do those who paint them as the extremist devils they are not. The hypocrisy is sometimes too much to put down; at the time when the editor of the Tamil Guardian was publicly smearing Buddhists, for the attacks aboard the BBC, Eric Solheim was happily tweeting that Muslims were among the most peaceful communities in the world. In the local context, the difference between the number of condemnations issued by civil society in the aftermath of the church attacks and the mob attacks on Muslim shops was staggering. It’s as though the former, which led to the deaths of more than 250 people, was more negligible and less condemnation-worthy than the latter. Selectivity, these people should realise, has its limits.

"Those who demonise Sinhala Buddhists have forgotten how to count. They have neglected to identify the ethnicity and the religion professed by most of the soldiers who were deployed at churches, mosques, and temples

Those who demonise Sinhala Buddhists have forgotten how to count. They have neglected to identify the ethnicity and the religion professed by most of the soldiers who were deployed at churches, mosques, and temples following the April 21 attacks. They have laid aside the identity of that majority who sacrificed themselves to end a war which should have ended 30 years ago. They have ignored the fact that each and every time security was threatened in this country, it was the Buddhist monks – and in this case, Catholic priests – who came and made their protests. Those who demonise them continue to write columns lambasting the majority, forgetting that every time we fall, it is the majority, who have to bring it up again.
Which is okay, if the anti-Sinhala Buddhist lobby didn’t at the same time ask that the political representation of the country were divided among all communities. There is of course nothing wrong in making such a demand, but when you talk about rights and come up with the argument that this land belongs to everyone, you are contending that the country was and is protected by everyone, which is not the case and indeed has never been the case, yesterday or today.
Professor Nalin de Silva, in one of his more controversial speeches, fired the first shot when he argued that no non-Sinhala Buddhist took up arms for the sovereignty of the country after 1815. The observation was perhaps a little off the mark, considering that the Jaffna Youth Congress and the likes of V. Karalasingham (the LSSP) did agitate for independence at a time when most of the Sinhalese bourgeoisie were content with constitutional reforms, but for de Silva even that argument could be pre-empted: they were projects of culturally castrated Marxvadiyo.

There’s so much in our history that can and will irk both chauvinists and anti-Sinhala Buddhists. In that same speech, for instance, Professor de Silva pointed out that Sri Wickrama Rajasinghe was a Sinhala King despite his patently South Indian lineage. Radicals will no doubt grill him and point at all the contrary evidence, forgetting that the meaning of the word Sinhala then was quite different to what it is now.
To get accepted as the King of Kandy, it was necessary to speak Sinhala, convert to Buddhism, and advocate both. More than two consorts of the revered Nayakkar Kings turned out to be accomplished Sinhalese poets; despite their Dravidian (Telugu) roots, they were more willing than most to shed their former ethnicity. Besides, the case can be made for Professor de Silva’s point by asking, if it was so easy for a Dravidian to be a ruler in the eyes of a Sinhala Buddhist population, why was it difficult for South Indian aumildars appointed by the British to be accepted by them.
The truth, as always, is elusive and unpalatable. This was a Sinhala society. More specifically, a Sinhala Buddhist society. “Sinhala” and “Buddhist” demarcated certain ethnic and religious affiliations very different to their reconstruction at the hands of romantic historians today, but shed of myth and legend, the truth stands that to be accepted in the eyes of the people, you had to accept the domination of both. It was a nationalism which was inclusive and accommodative, but not one which was devoid of ethnic and religious identifiers. A perusal of the nature of kinship in most Western monarchies will confirm de Silva’s thesis there: as he himself observed, “Elizabeth II is accepted as an English Queen, not a queen of German ancestry.”

"The truth, as always, is elusive and unpalatable. This was a Sinhala society. More specifically, a Sinhala Buddhist society"

If this was a Sinhala and Buddhist society in whatever terms that were applicable at that time, unless a major break with history transpired – as it did in the Maldives in the 12th century when the entire country was converted to Islam, or in England with the ascent of the Anglo-Saxons and later the Normans – it remains that way regardless of legal documents like the Kandyan Convention, which as historians and commentators have noted was adhered to more in the breach than the observance.
And if attempts are made to smear them, the consequences can only be expected in the form of agitation, anger, and reprisal. That is why each and every Buddhist “rebellion” against privileges granted to some minority groups came down to one matter; the State entrenching a colonial elite over a pre-colonial majority. The Buddhists weren’t being violent in their agitation. They were merely asking for what they’d lost. That is where most commentators have got it wrong. Especially the radicalwadeen.
Sinhala Buddhists are not terrorists, at least not a majority of them. They are confronted by a problem other ethno-religious groups do not face; they are a local majority, but yet a global minority. To be a majority in a country that is 1/50th the size of India, which in turn contains 20 times the number of Tamil people we have, is not much of an achievement. But that is all they’ve got. What good can come out of demonising them and questioning their right to their history?
Insecurity is the first step to chauvinism. This we know. To address the latter, it is thus necessary to address the former. Whether our radicals will realise this, or whether they will keep on using Sinhala Buddhists as punching bags, only time can tell.

A fast unlike no other

Athuraliye Rathana hamuduruwaney,-Sunday, June 09, 2019

I thought I must write to you since you are very much in the news these days, staging fasts unto death, and protesting against some governors and ministers continuing in office. You demanded that Aiyo Sirisena should sack them, and threatened to sacrifice your life if your demands were not met.

I must say that all this came as somewhat of a surprise to us, hamuduruwaney. That is because, over the years, we have known you to be critical and outspoken but we haven’t seen you act in a manner that was opportunistic and manipulative, and in a way that brought the saffron robe into disrepute.

Don’t get me wrong, hamuduruwaney. Most right-thinking people felt that the governors – Salley and Hizbullah – and minister Rishard, continuing to hold office was not in the best interests of the country, or indeed for their own community. However, the solution you suggested to that was quite drastic.

In fact, hamuduruwaney, what you were doing was threatening AiyoSirisena. You were saying, ‘You should sack them, or else I will kill myself by starving’. Honestly, when you say and do something like that, I don’t think you are being a good Buddhist, let alone an exemplary Buddhist monk.

What was even more strange, hamuduruwaney, was that you weren’t worried one bit about whether those two governors and the minister were guilty of what they were accused of or not. It seemed that, in your mind, they had already been found guilty because there were many allegations against them.

I know that there are some who consider you a national hero for what you did, but pardon me, what you did makes me quite uneasy, hamuduruwaney. Are we now supposed to dismiss people, just because one person thinks they are guilty, and threatens to fast unto death, unless they are sacked?

Some would even say that, after all the drama of last week, you brought yourself down to the level of others who have recently staged so-called ‘death fasts’. Those were cheap political stunts by equally cheap politicians and until last week, we didn’t think that you belonged in that category.

I am referring to Wimal who staged that ‘fast unto death’ protesting against Ban Ki Moon’s actions, and the Greens’ Palitha who did the same over children being refused admission to a school. It is of some consolation that you were not totally like Wimal – you didn’t have the luxury of Lemon Puff!

What is interesting is the message you were conveying: if someone is Muslim, they must be bad or dangerous – even if that had not been conclusively probed – and therefore they should be isolated and dealt with. By staging your fast, you were reinforcing this belief, whether you realised it or not.

You couldn’t have been unaware, hamuduruwaney, that while you were fasting opposite the Dalada Maligawa, people were staging marches elsewhere in the country supporting you. Their message was blatantly anti-Muslim, threatening them and asking us to boycott everything with any link to Muslims.

Wouldn’t it be quite fascinating, hamuduruwaney, if we could do that? Just imagine, we would then stop getting our oil exports from the Middle East and would have to revert to the era of bullock carts. Thousands of housemaids would also have to return from those countries, instead of working there!

The other question I have for you is hamuduruwaney, if your fast unto death was all about seeking justice and fair play and protecting the interests of our nation, why did you decide to act only now, at a particularly difficult time for all of us, when we are looking over our shoulders for the next attack?

Why is it that, hamuduruwaney, you didn’t stage a fast unto death when Aiyo Sirisena went back on his promise not to run for a second term, despite solemnly promising one of your own kind – the late Sobhitha hamuduruwo – before he got elected, that he would definitely be only a ‘one term’ President?

As if that were not enough, hamuduruwaney, why did you not stage a fast unto death when Aiyo Sirisena unlawfully sacked his Prime Minister, appointed another for that job, and dissolved Parliament, and then had to undo all of those actions, when the Courts told him it was unconstitutional?

Why is it that, hamuduruwaney, you didn’t stage a fast unto death when the chap who held the purse strings for the Greens was caught red handed with his fingers in the till but was still brought back in a powerful and energetic way? Or, worse, still, when the Greens postponed all provincial elections?

If you are still looking for issues to stage death fasts, hamuduruwaney, because you are worried about our nation’s safety, you can do so again after the startling revelations from our ‘interdicted’ Police Chief. He says Aiyo Sirisena threatened him, asking him to take the blame for the Easter attacks.

Do you now realise why we are puzzled by your actions? You haven’t staged a fast unto death while all this happened, yet you stage such a fast now. Now that you have not only got what you wanted but got rid of all our Muslim ministers, the least you can do is give us an explanation, hamuduruwaney!

Yours truly,

Punchi Putha

PS: If we applied your principle of having no dealings with anything linked to Muslims, our World Cup campaign would have been in disarray, hamuduruwaney. Why, we would have not played against Afghanistan and Pakistan and forfeited points to them. Instead, we won against Afghanistan, and the game against Pakistan was washed out – although I still feel we were quite lucky in both games!

Easter Attacks PSC: Speaker Dismisses Sirisena’s Allegations

JUNE 8, 2019

The Speaker dismissed allegations levelled against him yesterday by President Sirisena, where he claimed the Speaker did not grant due recognition nor take any action regarding an official communique he shared with the Speaker, in which he asked for suspension of Parliamentary Select Committee (PSC) hearings due to impact on national security.

Speaker Karu Jayasuriya

The Speaker’s office has addressed Sirisena’s allegations in a letter,noting although Sirisena claims he ordered suspension of the PSC in a letter, it was in fact a letter from the Presidents Secretary notifying him of the concerns Attorney General had raised on impacts to ongoing cases in the Supreme Court.

The Speaker’s Office further noted taking the contents of the letter into account, measures were taken to bring it before the attention of the PSC members promptly in order to further ensure the proceedings dont result in any impact on national security. The letter notes there was no requirement for the contents regarding a select committee to be tabled before the Parliament.

The Speaker’s office also emphazises on the fact that he is not authorized to suspend hearings of the PSC and its sole authority lies with the Parliament.

We publish below the letter in full:

Nine Muslim Ministers still retain their privileges

RUCHIRA DILAN MADUSANKA- JUN 06 2019

A senior source in the Government said, there is no change in the privileges given to the nine Muslim Ministers, though a statement has been made that they resigned.

Their security, official vehicles, staff, and Parliament privileges remain as it is.
Deputy Inspector General of Police, of the Ministers’ Security Division said, the security staff of the Cabinet Ministers, State and Deputy Ministers, who had resigned, have not been removed yet.

Furthermore, former Cabinet Ministers Rauff Hakeem, Rishad Bathiudeen, and Kabir Hashim have been given 10 security officers each and have additionally been provided Special Task Force security due to the security threats. Other State Ministers and Deputy Ministers have been given six security officers each.

He added that this will be discussed at the security council meeting today (6), with the participation of the Defence Secretary.

In addition, it has been decided to offer front bench seats to Bathiudeen, Hakeem, and Hashim.

Source from Parliament said that the office of the Leader of the House has informed that Bathiudeen and Hakeem, as Party Leaders and Hashim as the United National Party Chairman be given seats.

It is reported that this had been approved at the Party Leaders’ meeting.

However, the back-bench seats will be provided for the rest of those who resigned from their posts.

The sources added that those seats would be allocated after the Parliament General Secretary is informed by the Presidential Secretariat.

However, the Speaker took steps to offer a back-bench seat to Parliamentarian Ravi Karunanayake when he was removed from his Ministerial post. Karunanayake is currently a Minister.

The Joint Opposition complains that if the seats are offered on the Party Leader basis, Udaya Gammanpila, Chandrasiri Gajadeera, V. Radhakrishnan and Palani Digambaram also should be offered the front seats.

They will draw the attention of the Speaker regarding this issue today in Parliament.

It is also reported that none of the resigned Ministers have given their official vehicles back.

In addition, the sources added that the official vehicles and offices used by the private staff of the said Ministers are also still used by them.

What the PSC portends

The special Parliament Select Committee probing the April 21 Easter Sunday terror attacks met at parliamentary complex.

by Sanjana Hattotuwa-June 8, 2019, 7:14 pm

For a few interested in and used to confirmation hearings or congressional sessions into individual or institutional activities in the US, the Parliamentary Select Committee (PSC) hearings in Sri Lanka, at first broadcast live, is something of a novelty.

Videos featuring Kamala Harris or Mazie Hirono questioning Brett Kavanaugh, Dianne Feinstein questioning Willian Barr or the now more frequent clips of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez questioning federal employees including high-ranking FBI officials and CEOs have gone viral even in Sri Lankafor a variety of reasons. One, it is an entirely alien political culture for us. Even with a puerile, offensive Commander in Chief and Executive Branch, other sections of government in the US hold accountable public institutions and public officials in ways we don’t even have constitutional provisions for, or the political imagination to construct and enact. There is something ennobling about the proceedings – of public officials and industry giants being questioned on policies and practices. We are unused to this scrutiny and questioning, given a political culture unaccountable to voters once in power and Parliament. Two Cs – commissions and committees – defying both decency and democracy, define and draw outrageous political impunity in Sri Lanka, for decades. The most egregious abuse of power, negligence of public duty, corruption and nepotism, carry on with impunity even after very public announcements into their investigation through mechanisms that invariably fade into oblivion.

Dare we hope to believe that the PSC in to the Easter Sunday terrorism marks a change from this? The live broadcast of the proceedings as well as questioning of the State Intelligence Services (SIS) by the PSC has already upset the Executive. This is a good thing. The office of the Executive in Sri Lanka is too powerful to be left in comfort and happiness. Till there is meaningful constitutional redress, the incumbent and any who follow must be made as uncomfortable as possible and the exercise of Executive power – only mildly checked by the 19th Amendment – as difficult as possible. The PSC isn’t perfect. Tellingly, there is not a single woman on it. This matters in a context where Muslim women have suffered the brunt of misguided official policies and practicesafter Easter Sunday. Late March, around three weeks prior to Easter Sunday, the Speaker of Parliament who constituted the PSC unveiled a poster of Sirimavo Bandaranaike at an event organised by the Women Parliamentarian Caucus. The speech by him on this occasion underscored the vital role and relevance of women in public and parliamentary life. Compare and contrast what he said then with what the PSC looks and sounds like today.

The live broadcasts were decried by some who said that intelligence gathering operations were placed at risk. It is unclear how much of a problem this really was, given that those called upon to give testimony could ask for the cameras to be switched off when discussing such matters, or refuse to answer the PSC’s questions based on national security considerations. Ultimately, what transpired was political drama new to Sri Lankans, and this is saying something. Unscripted, broadcast or recorded live and entirely unrehearsed, the PSC’s questions placed the subjects in positions they had never before been subject to. Given the nature of the revelations, untempered and unedited, it is entirely unsurprising that our President, not known for adulting, immediately went into tantrums and was last heard noting that he would ban allcarpentry sheds, chainsaws and timber mills. As a close friend of mine opined on social media, it is unclear whether this pronouncement – especially in the context of the PSC proceedings - was a manifestation of madness or character.

Lest we forget, it was during the constitutional crisis engineered and enacted by the President late last year that many, this columnist included, championed impeachment. Calls for impeachment were strongly and publicly resisted not by the SLPP or SLFP, but by the Deputy Leader of the UNP. Major media and TV networks, through terrestrial broadcast, SMS alerts and their significant capture of social media audiences, continue to support this unholy duo, including by shifting public focus to other, more trivial matters and not covering PSC proceedings to the degree and depth it merits. The degree to which this is happening isn’t well-known (and that’s the point), but its continuation has major implications for electoral contests in the future.

On Twitter, those associated with the SLPP including Namal Rajapaksa have since Easter Sunday been increasingly and openly critical of the Executive. What is conveniently forgotten in tweets by them that now generate a lot of engagement - given much how they speak to and reflect larger public sentiment - is what happened on the night of 26th October 2018, where overnight, the President turned from pariah to patron and sinner to saviour. But principles aren’t what either of the two Ps in SLPP stand for, so this hypocrisy is entirely expected of charlatans no better than the Executive they now find useful to deride.

But why didn’t the UNP more robustly pursue accountability for what the President did late 2018? If multiple subjects brought before the PSC today reveal that the incredible disarray of the intelligence community and systemic failures in prevention and response were the result of and anchored to the constitutional crisis, it is clear that the impunity the President enjoyed contributed to the loss of hundreds of lives. Well before Easter Sunday, those who rallied behind the UNP and the PM entirely independent of partisan loyalty late last year called for a complete overhaul of the country’s political culture. The PM promised much by way of internal party reform as well as a new political culture. Nothing has happened. Nothing.

The PSC’s revelations in this regard resonate far beyond holding the Executive accountable. Officials now complaining they were left out were part of a system that failed. Where does ultimate command and control, and political accountability, reside? If for months on end, one was part of a vital institutional framework that was clearly dysfunctional, does it take the catastrophic loss of life to come out in public against it? What did the PM know about the issues now in the public domain? Will he be questioned robustly? Sri Lanka’s worst communal riots, the violence against and on-going stigmatisation of the Muslim community, hundreds dead, hundreds more injured, countless more struggling for their livelihoods, innocents arrested, the ICCPR abused, the law unevenly applied – these are much more colour the government’s response to terrorism. So it’s not just the President to blame. Those with and around him, those who secured his power after last year, those that want to see him continue in office and opposed impeachment, foreign governments who directly support the President through technologies that place all citizens at greater risk, politicians and party cadre who instigate hate and violence – let’s call them all out for what they are. Murderers. Enemies of the state. Racists. Individuals unfit to lead. Individuals unfit to hold public office.

The PSC is anchored to a single event but is more than just about a single individual or institution. The proceedings last week shed light on the awful nature of a public service we have allowed to grow under successive governments and Presidents, overwhelmingly in the service of political paymasters. The proceedings may see the start of a movement towards reform. They may not. But at the end of it all, we cannot say we were ignorant of what the status quo has brought and wrought.

Scientiapontetia est. Knowledge is power. The PSC’s proceedings give us a power we didn’t have before. We must now choose if and how to exercise it.

Sunday, June 9, 2019

Gubernatorial and Ministerial resignations, monks and law

If the ministers and deputies who have resigned want something positive to happen as a result of their action, they should give up the ministerial privileges, remain in the back bench and allow the law to take its course – Pic by Ruwan Walpola

Monday, 10 June 2019

The resignation en masse of two Muslim governors and all Muslim ministers and deputies is an unprecedented political act in the history of Sri Lankan democracy and Muslim politics.

If they had not relinquished their privileges yet, as some reports suggest, and in accordance with the official requirement of such resignations, they should do it immediately to make their action above board.

The only acceptable reason for the resignation was to prevent a highly probable island-wide anti-Muslim riot sparked by one monk who was fasting unto death, and another, until two Muslim provincial governors and a Muslim minister removed from their positions.

Now, another group of high priests have requested those ministers to resume duties and serve the nation. In between the monks and the ministers the laws of the country seem to have gone on holiday.

To start with, if the Muslim ministers and governors were seriously concerned about the safety and welfare of their community, they should have resigned immediately after the Aluthgama riots during the former regime or Digana under the current one.

One of the ministers who has resigned now was the Minister of Justice in the previous regime. Why didn’t he and his colleagues resign then and why did they resign now needs credible answers. In the previous regime, no Muslim minister or governor was accused of any illegal or corrupt behaviour.

Now three of them are facing allegations. This difference adds substance to the view from certain quarters that all Muslim power-holders are trying to protect the alleged three.

Be that as it may, allegations are not proven facts for action. Those allegations must be backed by solid evidence and should be produced before the courts so that legal proceedings can begin and the accused face trial. Instead, if monks are going to decide who is innocent and who is guilty, why have laws, courts and judges?

In the interest of the nation and Buddhism the Mahanayakas must cleanse the Sangha. Let us not forget that this country was the home of such Buddhist luminaries like Ven. Velivita Saranakara Thero, Ven. Walpita Rahula Thero and Ven. Maduluwawe Sobitha Thero, just to name a few. There are several like them even now. They should come out and speak in public to save this nation from descending to kakistocracy.

No one should be above the law, including the President. If the resigned were to resume duties now, just because the prelates have asked them to do so, the original argument by one of the ministers that they did not want to remain in office to be accused of impeding with any investigation into the allegations loses its credibility.

They have given a time limit of one month and want the CID to conduct the investigation. That is a valuable suggestion. If the CID finds credible evidence against any one or more of them, they should be brought before the law and be judged and punished if found guilty.

The President pardons and releases a monk without asking for any advice from the Judiciary. Just three days after the release that very monk threatened to bring down the regime unless his demands were met.

Similarly, the Government declared Emergency and even imposed curfew to control communal violence, but that Emergency appears to have no power to control firebrands instigating mass protest and violence?

Also, how does one explain the freedom for thugs to roam around during curfew hours, looting business premises and destroying properties? Some of them were arrested of course.

If the ministers and deputies who have resigned want something positive to happen as a result of their action, they should give up the ministerial privileges, remain in the back bench and allow the law to take its course. Let that be their lasting contribution to the independence of the Judiciary in this country.

(The writer is attached to the School of Governance, Murdoch University, Western Australia.)

Sri Lanka: Why Do They Resigned

Timely needed guidance of most venerable Mahanayake Theras of three Nikayas in Sri Lanka

by SLM Rifai-2019-06-09

It is reported that most venerable Mahanayake Theras of three Nikayas had a special meeting today in Kandy (05/06/2019) to discuss prevailing chaotic situation in Sri Lanka. I personally welcome this timely needed meeting by most venerable prelates of Sri Lankan Nikayas. On behalf of 2 million Sri Lankan Muslims in Sri Lanka and abroad I sincerely extend my gratitude and thanks to all most venerable prelates who started this timely needed peace initiative. While Sri Lankan politicians are disputing and arguing for trivial political issues, the most venerable prelates have sincerity to save this nation from an unwanted communal tension and unrest.

It is not in the interest of any community in Sri Lanka to create a communal tension. This kind of communal violence and unrest will not benefit neither Sinhalese nor Muslim community at all. It will bring destruction to our nation and specially, Sri Lankan economy will suffer a great deal due to this continuous unrest as pointed out by our most venerable prelates of three Nikayas. Yet, some politicians do not care about all this suffering and destruction. All what they want is to come back into power by provoking communal violence and unrest in the country. The most venerable prelates have come forward to solve this serious problem at this crucial juncture in modern Sri Lankan history, Moreover, they have advised Muslim ministers not to resign from their ministerial posts. It is reported that this meeting took place under the patronage of Most Venerable Warakagoda Sri Gnanarathana Thera at the Asgiri Maha Viharaya. The most venerable prelates have highlighted that Sri Lanka is suffering from serious political, financial, social, religious and cultural crisis at this juncture. Moreover, most venerable prelates have demanded all communities (Sinhalese, Tamil, Muslims, Christians) to act responsibly to maintain peace and harmony at this crucial time. The critical situation of the country was highlighted in this meeting. The most venerable prelates have decided to advise Sri Lankan government to take some strong steps to maintain peace and harmony. Yet, will Buddhist extremists listen to these advices and guidance. Many people have been asking this question. Why Buddhist fundamentalists do not listen to their religious leadership as Muslim community has been? There would not be any difference between Zahran’s group and these radicals among Buddhists if all promote violence.

Seeking guidance, advice and wisdom of Maha Sangha is not new precedent in Sri Lankan history. Historically speaking, prelates have been advising and guiding kings and rulers from ancient time in Sri Lankan history. So, there is no reason why Sri Lankan politicians cannot listen and appreciate the advice and wisdom of these venerable prelates. I think Muslim politicians too must listen to advice and guidance of the venerable prelates on this crisis. In the greater interest of Sri Lanka, all political parties of different communities should take some responsibilities and duty consciousness to bring peace and harmony in Sri Lanka. As venerable prelate pointed out the far-reaching consequences of this unrest (if it continues) will be enormous and serious. Some of them are listed here.

Sri Lanka sends more than 2 million Sri Lankans to Middle East countries. Poor Sri Lankans who work in those Middle countries could suffer due to unrest in Sri Lanka. For a long time, BBS members have been insulting religion of Islam and Muslim community. They use filthy words to describe Islamic cultures and faith. In fact, they have used some vulgar words to describe Almighty Allah and the Holy Qur’an: No Arab with any self-respect would tolerate such uncultured words to describe Allah or His prophet. Despite all this, Sri Lankan Muslim community has been maintaining patience without making any legal pursuit or diplomatic complaint about this. Muslim community has been saying that this problem is an internal problem and Muslim community should resolve this issue through dialogues and discussions with Sinhalese community. We do not like to take up our problem with any international groups or any foreign countries. These are our internal problems. Sinhalese and Muslim communities should sit down and resolve any problem we have in Sri Lanka.

Neither Ranil nor Maithri took any actions against these troublemakers. Many Sinhalese politicians except a few, have been supporting these troublemakers. Even law enforcement agents and Sri Lankan judiciary have been complicit. If all this backfire it is not good at all for Sri Lanka. Sri Lankan community who live in Middle East will suffer a lot due to these unwise behaviours of some extremist Sinhalese in Sri Lanka. Under this prevailing situation, we highly appreciate and respect t all these Buddhist prelates who took some strong decision to intervene on this issue.

Secondly, if this unrest continues, our tourism industry will suffer hugely. It has been picking up for some time and yet, the political coup that took place last year has slowed down it. These troublemakers should know that Sri Lankan tourism will suffer for many years if they continue to create problems in Sri Lanka. This is not merely a problem of Muslim community rather it has become a national problem now. It is going to affect each and very Sri Lankan: Thousands of Sinhalese people will suffer if this unrest continues.

Thirdly, Sri Lankan badly needs the support and cooperation of all communities to build this nation. No longer we could live and work in isolation in watertight compartments in Sri Lanka. Each community interacts and integrates very much closely today unlike in the past. Communities are socially, financially, culturally, commercially and politically inter-connected today in this modern world. This is new social phenomenon that humanity can not avoid it at all. Sri Lanka badly needs skills and experience of Sri Lankan Muslim community to boost its economy through trades and business enterprises. Yet, these Buddhist radicals want to bring chaos into Sri Lanka. what is wrong with these people and why do they harm national interest of Sri Lanka in this way.

A ‘STATE-LESS’ Nation Trapped ‘Behind Bars’

Indecision, Lack of sincerity, greed; and an issue blown out of proportion

10 June 2019

As we look around our environs, it’s useful to keep in mind that security has moved into a lot of areas of our lives. It’s particularly important for the places that we go for refuge and shelter and to pray also afford the similar security procedures as other places we visit frequently. The vital components of state machinery are either obsolete, redundant or out of service.

Mohamad Fuzi Harun, their IGP said, “Soon after the shooting in New Zealand, I instructed all senior police officers to inform their subordinates to be on high alert and to observe temples and churches,” Malaysian Local Police announced on March 19, as per the country’s intelligence, that they have increased vigilance at temples and churches throughout the country as they assessed risks of retaliatory violence to non-Muslim places of worship in a most multicultural nations in Southeast Asia.

State-less?

State is an idea/concept or a name used to signify a community of people living on a given territory and organised for the exercise of autonomy. State is abstract, cannot be seen, whereas Government is made by the citizens of the State. It is formed by the people’s representatives. It has a specific and defined organisation and form. It is a team of people exercising the power of the State. The independence of the Public service, the importance, the dignity and integrity of the service are lost due to political interference. It should be given its appropriate place as an important ‘State Service’ in charge of the implementation of policies and to play a more active role in the socio-economic growth of the nation. Like in developed nations, the state service ought to be looked up to rather than looked down as a servant, but a distinguished service, taking the accountability and responsibility for all actions. It is a difficult task to be attained, with the men who have been, ridiculed, looked down upon, and at times pressed about, by the politician who wield power—the poorly paid, and not been trained and developed. These officers survive by singing hosannas, yielding to pressure and bending down, rather than challenge the authority and lose the job. Today a good majority thinks in this manner. The former Auditor General is a rare exception. Hence we are a ‘State-less’ nation. All governments since 1970s are responsible for creation of this pathetic state.

Cardinal on Rathana Thera

As reported recently, His Eminence Cardinal Malcolm Ranjith who visited Ven. Athureliye Ratana Thera during his fast unto death has reminded our two Buddhist leaders on this Poson month, the sacred words of Arhant Mihindu who made a similar decree to the then Monarch Devanampiyatissa at Ambasstalaya in Mihintale 2300 years ago.
He stated, “the problem would not have blown out of proportion today if President Maithripala Sirisena and Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe had acted against those who discreetly aided and abetted the terrorist attacks. People have given a mandate to the two leaders and the Cabinet to govern the country for five years. They had not been given a lifetime right to be in office. They have not been given the country on freehold basis. The country belongs to people, not to its rulers. The rulers should be mindful of it. The time has come to take a decision on the President and the Prime Minister: if it were the President and the Prime Minister who could appoint Minister Rishad Bathiudeen, then it was they who had the authority to remove him.”

"I would rather sacrifice my life for this holy island than to witness a part of it being given to the LTTE terrorists - Ven. Omalpe Sobitha"

Continuing, The Cardinal said that there were no proper investigations into the Eastern Sunday attacks so far.
“No one is investigating to find out about those indirectly involved in this attack. Because of that, there should be immediate investigations to find out who were behind this attack. So we call on the President and the Prime Minister to launch a proper inquiry into the attack immediately, I urged the President and the government find out the persons who were creating hatred among the communities and take necessary action against them. I believe Ven. Rathana too conducting this fast because the government had failed to do what the people want in this context,” the Cardinal said.

Fear and Anxiety

The land-of-the-free has become a country of prisons! An unprecedented security drama at temples, churches, mosques, Kovils and schools have created a phobia among people. When fear becomes so severe that they cause anxiety and interfere with our normal life. No matter how devastating or out of management your phobia seems, though, it’s imperative to know that any unfounded fear can be overcome. Ensure that the security checks does not exceed the limits. Ensure that adolescents and children are treated in a manner appropriate to their age, and that they are not subjected to checks. Reduce or eliminate armed guards at places of worship. Ensure that search operations are not biased against any racial, ethnic, or religious group, as for example, in the disproportionate enforcement of security. Today we are protecting the places where our children study, the places of work, and the theaters and reception halls we visit for entertainment. But why should we have armed guards at places that we attend for worship? Churches, temples and mosques have become a target for terrorists and hate crimes, denoting that a place that many people have considered a refuge is no longer resistant to violence.

Ven. Omalpe Sobhitha Thera,JHU parliamentarian commenced a fast unto death on June 6, 2005, at the Dalada Maligawa, in protest against Chandrika Bandaranaike’s proposal for a Joint Mechanism with the LTTE for distribution of Tsunami aid. In an unprecedented move a fast to death was held at the Dalada Maligawa, the holiest Buddhist temple in the country. It was preceded by a Satya Kriya and an all night Pirith chanting by the JHU monks. Lying down inside the Temple of tooth, Ven. Omalpe Sobhitha said, there were several ethnic groups in the country, but, and, there was a risk of dividing the country by blood-thirsty terrorists who had murdered thousands of innocents in as well as men of the security forces.
The Joint Mechanism, popularly known as P-TOMS was in effect an attempt to bring the group back to democratic stream was not without the danger of LTTE dominating the administration of coastal regions of East. “We cannot allow this to happen. Sri Lanka is a country that was granted to the Buddha several times, and I would rather sacrifice my life for this holy island than to witness a part of it being given to the LTTE terrorists,” thundered the ultra-nationalist monk. The Government’s main coalition partner, the JVP declared that they would be leaving the government unless the President decided to drop her plan. Ven Athuraliye Rathana, who after 14 years, followed the footsteps of Sobhitha, but began his fast outside the Maligawa and continued for three and-a-half days under medical care, knowing well that the men around him would never allow him to die of starvation.

"The country belongs to people, not to its rulers. The rulers should be mindful of it - Cardinal Malcolm Ranjith"

Some 200 Buddhist monks surrounded the official residence of President Kumaratunga, crashed through a barrier at President’s House, The representative monks threatened to set themselves on fire unless a presidential envoy made a pledge on behalf of Kumaratunga to ditch the plan which they allege gives acknowledgment to a terrorist group and later assembled opposite ‘Lake House’ in Colombo before they started a march to Kandy, but were forcibly dispersed by the police to prevent an unnecessary provocation and a backlash. Coincidentally, Ven. Galagodadatte Gnanasara, fresh from his release from jail, planned a walk from Kandy to Colombo on the fourth day of Ven. Rathana’s fast, to which the Police functioning under the President, turned a blind eye.

One and a half years before the Maligawa fast, in Dec 2003, Ven. Omalpe Sobhitha and RajawatteWappa Thera began a fast unto death demanding from UNF government legislation banning what they called immoral and unethical conversions of Buddhists by US-based Christian Evangelical fundamentalists. Instead of Dalada Maligawa, they selected pavement opposite Buddha Sasana Ministry for the fast. However, this ended triumphantly, on December 30, when the government gave-in and agreed to enact legislation. Deputy leader of the governing UNF and Minister Karu Jayasuriya agreed to the demand of the fasting monks that a Committee be appointed to draft legislation within two months . The government assured appointment of a Supreme Council of Buddhist monks representing all three sects bringing the number to 15, and a government gazette would announce the Committee within 14 days. Such legislation if necessary would be passed with a two third majority.

People, generally ignored these death fasts in the past. Ven. Rathana skillfully understood the temperament of the masses since Easter Sunday carnage, and he grabbed the opportunity like the expert smith [archarya], which reminds late Ven. Maduluwawe Sobhitha Thera’s wise old saying, ‘THETIYA AND ROTIYA’. A member of Parliament who changed loyalties too often and lost his way became a ‘national hero’ among the nationalists and extremists in 24 hours!