Creating ethnic and religious harmony in Sri Lanka

 The Easter Sunday massacre of innocent church goers and the subsequent attacks on Muslim households and business establishments have confirmed that Sri Lankan society is still a primitive cluster of tribal groups which clash with each other from time to time – Pic by Chamila Karunarathne 

• Most urgent need for creating socio-political stability and an economic take off

       Wednesday, 12 June 2019

The purpose of this article is to discuss ways and means of creating harmony among the various ethnic and religious communities in Sri Lanka (SL) in order to lay a stable foundation for speedy economic recovery mainly to alleviate poverty.

The Easter Sunday massacre of innocent church goers and the subsequent attacks on Muslim households and business establishments have confirmed that Sri Lankan society is still a primitive cluster of tribal groups which clash with each other from time to time. The realisation that history may repeat itself in this manner after the Black July of 1983, the subsequent 30-year-war and the attacks on innocent Muslims in and around Aluthgama, Teldeniya, Nattandiya, etc., recently has kept foreign direct investors out of this country as pointed out by this writer several times as against the assertion on the part of the some authorities that it is due to inconsistency of policies.

In fact by 2016 according to UNCTAD, the stock of foreign direct investments attracted by SL was only $ 9.7 billion (used mostly for construction and not for manufacturing), while those attracted by the stable governments in East Asia amounted to more than a trillion dollars as in the case of Singapore and Hong Kong and over a hundred billions dollars where South Korea, Thailand and Malaysia are concerned. This inadequacy of investment for creation of employment and production for export is the main reason why SL is still poor compared to the East Asian nations, (per capita income of SL by 2017 was $ 4,074 while those of South Korea and Singapore were $ 29,743 and $ 57,714 respectively).

It is indeed due to history repeating itself that SL is still poor and the economy has collapsed as of 2018. This is due to a series of events that took place after the 1956 ascension of S.W.R.D. Bandaranaike as Prime Minister supported mainly by a group of Sinhala Buddhist activists (some of whom were extremists who assassinated him later).

The next main event of this nature was the Black July of 1983 when innocent Tamils were terrorised; the JRJ government at the time did nothing to stop it. The SLFP governments that ruled the country after that, again drew their support mainly from Sinhala Buddhists and therefore (even the UNF government that came to power in 2015) did nothing to bring social harmony among the different ethnic and religious groups; the only deliberate act was perhaps the Prevention of Terrorism Act of 1978 (made permanent in 1982).

That apparently is why the various attacks on Muslims recently by Sinhala Buddhist mobs and the massacre of churchgoers on Easter Sunday by Muslim extremists took place again: history repeating itself.

In other words these violent events have taken place mainly on account of leadership failure to bring about harmony among the different communities in the country as a foundation for speedy economic growth in contrast to other governments in the region.

Social harmony in Singapore

The government of Singapore led by its great leader Lee Kwan Yew on the other hand took deliberate constructive action especially to enshrine Multiculturalism, Secularism and Meritocracy in the 1965 Constitution to bring about social harmony and integrate the Chinese, Malay Muslim, Indian and other communities into a single integrated nation after the Chinese-Malay clashes of July 1964; secularism (meaning religion should not be part of the affairs of state) was actually intended to protect religious freedom so long as it does not clash with public order.

This was buttressed by, a) the National Pledge of 1966 which introduced English as the common language of the nation, b) the Presidential Council for Minority Rights in 1970 to prevent discrimination against any race or religion, c) the Ethnic Integration Policy of 1989 for Housing to ensure a certain proportion of housing units in an apartment block is set apart for ownership by persons belonging to the various ethnic/religious groups so that they are sort of compelled to share of common facilities leading to building of trust and friendships, d) the Maintenance of Religious Harmony Act of 1990 which introduced legal measures to combat threats to social harmony and introduced a national military service for males, e) the Community Centres with facilities for common activities in urban areas in 1990, f) the Racial Confidence Circles composed of leaders from the various communities in every constituency in 2002 and g) the Community Engagement Programme, 2006 to create trust, understanding and cooperation among the various ethnic and religious groups.

It may be noticed that all these are positive constructive measures to bring about social harmony and not necessarily for preventing terrorism only. It should also be mentioned that these may have resulted in a strong foundation of communal harmony which created the political stability required for the well-known spectacular economic take off in Singapore
.
New Zealand (NZ) 

Though NZ has no state religion, the NZ Bill of Rights of 1990 and the Human Rights Act of 1993 ensure the right to religion and the right to freedom from discrimination on the basis of religion. The Human Rights Commission of NZ and the NZ Office of Ethnic Affairs have in addition prepared programs to promote harmonious relations among the different ethnic and religious communities. There is no doubt that such constructive laws may have contributed to peace and harmony that led to prosperity in NZ.
India
An emphasis on secularism, more specifically encouragement of religious freedom is also seen in Chapter 111 of the Indian Constitution as amended in 1976; it prevents the state from identifying itself with any religion to ensure equal treatment of all religions. Article 3.6 of the constitution in fact declares that activities promoting religious disharmony is an offence punishable with imprisonment for three years as well as a fine or both.

The Indian constitution makers also decided wisely to retain English as the official language of the country by its Official Languages Act of 1963 until any change is made on account of the existence of about 2,000 ethnic groups speaking different languages. This huge democratic country thus gives an answer to those who wonder how it manages to tick along with a very satisfactory economic growth rate in contrast to little SL populated with only a few racial and religious communities.

Promoting social harmony in Sri Lanka

Therefore it is high time Sri Lanka resorts to constructive means to promote social harmony especially to attract investment to rescue its collapsing economy. The proposals made in this connection are:

The professionals and the clergy particularly the Buddhist priests who desire to assist in overcoming the current political crisis, could advise the candidates appearing for the forthcoming Presidential Election and the leaders of candidates contesting the General Election to declare in their manifestoes that constructive constitutional and other measures to bring about social harmony among the different ethnic and religious groups to create a stable environment required for economic growth and poverty alleviation.

They could request the candidates and leaders to spell out what these measures are in their campaigns and why these are necessary. Main among these should obviously be the enactment of a new constitution, as the 1972 and 1978 were not drawn up to create an integrated and well governed SL especially by uniting the various ‘tribal’ groups. The specific measures to be included in the new constitution could include:

One of them is the improvement of the electoral system and the introduction of a method to regulate the political parties. The unit of parliamentary elections was the district and therefore campaigning expenditure was so large that the candidates once elected did not hesitate to recover this expenditure by robbing from allocated state funds or by resort to taking bribes. Under a new constitution parliamentary elections therefore should be based on the smaller constituencies as before; since there were frequent clashes among the candidates of the same party under Proportional Representation, future elections should be held under the First Past the Post system.

In addition the 1978 constitution allowed the leaders of the political parties to field their candidates for election on the basis of loyalty to him/her and not on their ability reflected by their educational qualifications and experience; there was also no provision in the constitution to regulate the actions of the political parties by the state to ensure a better quality of governance. The political party system has therefore produced a situation where new elections would result in the emergence of the same type of mediocre MPs. A new constitution thus should contain details of selection of candidates for election with a passion and ability based on qualifications and working experience to serve the people of their constituencies and of the country; there should also be provision for monitoring the activities of political parties particularly the requirement of submitting annual reports of all their activities with an audited statement of accounts.

The provision of an effective public service to the people was also overlooked. The 1978 constitution allows, via article 55, the extension of the power of politicians in the ruling party over the public institutions which had until the enactment of the 1972 constitution, provided the people an efficient service without a political bias, managed by an independent commission; this change led to selection and promotion of officials on political and other bases and not on merit alone as in Singapore. It is obvious that this has had a tremendous unfavourable impact on the efficiency of the public service. The relevant article in the present constitution has therefore to be done away with.

The 1978 constitution also overlooked the creation of social harmony. A new constitution should therefore include provision for the following:

It should contain a full and complete Declaration of Fundamental Rights as the rights in section 14.1 of the constitution are not as complete as that of South Africa. In addition the new constitution has to provide for the setting up of a Human Rights Commission as in NZ to promote harmonious relations among the different communities, and for safeguarding the rights of the minorities. Obviously there should also be a requirement for a link language which should have been English as in the Indian constitution. A Religious Harmony Act should also be enacted to prohibit the use of religion particularly in elections and impose legal action against political parties, other organisations as well as inpiduals who spread religious disharmony. An Ethnic Integration Policy as in Singapore intended for setting up mixed urban settlements to promote better understanding and trust among the ethnic and religious groups should also be formulated for implementation.

The 19th Amendment made the situation worse by creating two executive posts of President of the republic and a Prime Minister of the cabinet of ministers; if they happen to be from two different parties there is bound to be disagreement on the ways and means of governing the country as at present. Therefore the post of President of the Republic should also be abolished in a new constitution.

Candidates also should in addition indicate in their manifestoes ways and means of improving the productivity of factors of production such as land, labour and capital and of enhancing the global competitiveness of goods and services by reducing budget deficits (to lower costs) as well as import tariffs ( as import substitution has failed here in the past) mainly in order to expand exports to rescue the economy from the present state of bankruptcy. They should promise that in addition to long term strategies, short term programs will be implemented to improve rural productivity as people in rural areas have been suffering intensely due to low returns from their farms and poor infrastructure facilities.

Once elected they should promise to implement the measures indicated in Section 2 above within the first year of office.

Conclusion

It is clear now that the efforts of SL leaders to appeal especially to Sinhala Buddhists voters to win elections and their failure to promote harmony among the various ethnic and religious communities have led the country to economic disaster and poverty of all people, (mostly of Sinhala Buddhists since they are the majority community). So the leaders and others concerned including the Buddhist clergy have to grab (perhaps the last) opportunity presented by the forthcoming Presidential and General elections to firmly promise that they will take all the measures such as those mentioned above to bring about harmony among the different ethnic and religious groups in the country to arrive at political and social stability required to overcome the collapse of the economy and extreme poverty.
(The writer is a development economist)

Safeguarding country from recurrence of Easter Sunday bombing

By Jehan Perera-June 10, 2019, 12:00 pm 

Sri Lanka is still trying to emerge out of its three -decade long ethnic war that ended in 2009. Unfortunately, the Easter Sunday bombings linked to the Islamic State (IS), and the damaging reaction to it by those who ought to be responsible political leaders, are taking our country once again in the direction of another ethnic conflict. The bombing has been used to create a great rift in Sri Lankan society. The new ethnic polarization that has set in has led to the first post-independence government in which there is no Muslim representation at the ministerial level.

In this context the Parliamentary Select Committee (PSC) into the Easter Sunday bombing has become a matter of political controversy. President Maithripala Sirisena and several opposition leaders have been voicing their strong opposition to the inquiry. They have expressed their objections as being due to their concern for national security and the exposure of those who are engaged in intelligence operations on behalf of the state. President Sirisena has gone to the extent of asserting that he will not give his consent to serving personnel of the security forces to give evidence before the PSC.

The controversy over the PSC is that it has brought the focus back to the bombings that occurred on Easter Sunday and to the issues of accountability that must necessarily accompany it. This bombing signified the end of the illusion that Sri Lanka had transited from being a country at war to one in which peace was assured. On that fateful day 250 persons died, the country’s economy received a massive set- back and relations between the ethnic and religious communities got sundered. But what followed the bombing was also so serious that the bombings themselves were taken away from the public attention.

MYSTERIOUS SURPRISE

Among the serious issues that followed the Easter Sunday bombing was the eruption of anti-Muslim violence by organized groups, which led to the destruction of places of religious worship, factories and homes. Attention got also focused on the cordon and search operations that targeted members of the Muslim community and the death fast of Ven Athureliya Ratana Thera, which threatened to bring in its wake further polarization in the country.

Although more than seven weeks have passed since the Easter Sunday bombings its antecedents remain shrouded in mystery. Those bombings came as a total surprise to nearly the whole country, to the general public and to those who run the government it seems. But it was not a surprise to all. The PSC investigation is disclosing that President Sirisena played a major role in the failure to act. This is what the evidence given by police chief Pujith Jayasundera, who has been suspended from his job, and defense secretary Hemasiri Fernando who resigned from his job seem to be saying.

The police chief in particular has made damning allegations. One of these is that he was ordered to stop investigating extremist Muslim organisations in April 2018. The president further excluded him from attending National Security Council meetings from early October 2018. This was another fateful period in which the government of Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe was suddenly and unconstitutionally sacked by President Sirisena to the astonishment of the general public who believed that such an act was not possible. The sacked prime minister was replaced by the current opposition leader Mahinda Rajapaksa who formed the new government.

ASCERTAINING TRUTH

The question is why was the order to stop the investigations into extremist Muslim organisations a year before the attacks took place. According to the police chief’s submissions to the Supreme Court, he was asked to stop the investigations so that the State Intelligence Service whose chief directly reported to the president could take charge. President Sirisena is the best person to answer this as he is the head of the security forces, the intelligence services and the police. However, due to the immunity provisions in the constitution, at present he cannot be summoned before the PSC to answer those questions. That opportunity will only arise after he relinquishes his presidential office in January next year.

The importance of ascertaining the truth behind the Easter Sunday bombings sooner rather than later is that it can help to prevent a recurrence of such a terrible possibility. The public apprehension about a second wave of bombings was very high in the immediate aftermath of the Easter Sunday bombings. As those bombings were totally unexpected and inexplicable there was countrywide panic about the likelihood of follow up attacks. The arrest of a large number of suspects and the assurances of the security forces that the terror network has been disabled has allayed fears to a great extent. But the threat remains.

The Easter Sunday bombings done in the name of religion has brought into focus the problem of religious extremism in the country. This problem has generally been focused on the Buddhist majority, sections of which have engaged openly in violence against selected minority targets. But in the case of the Easter Sunday bombings the attack came from the Muslim religious minority against the Christian religious minority. In the longer term coping with this problem will require the management of space in society so that extremists will not have that free space.

RESTRICTING SPA CE

During the three decades that Sri Lanka spent combatting the Tamil separatist movement, it was recognized that political rights of aggrieved communities needed to be respected and that human rights violations could push more people into taking militant positions. There was recognition that political solutions that meet the needs and interests of the different ethnic and religious communities are hard to come by, but need to be strived for. There is today recognition of the need to mininise the push factors of human rights violations and treating others with disrespect that drives more and more people into militancy.

In the shorter term, regaining confidence in Sri Lanka’s institutions, such as the police, and strengthening their independence to act with integrity, will play an important role in ensuring national security. The PSC process will hopefully reveal how the country’s national security system, which stood firmly and fast against the threat of the LTTE, succumbed in this instance despite being in possession of top grade intelligence material provided by the government of India. Was it foreign money, geopolitics or simply venal politics that set the stage for the Easter Sunday bombings, and more to come?

In the case of the Easter Sunday bombings however there is an additional determinant at work. This is the pull factor of global Islam with its religious ideology that is buttressed by enormous economic resources. Since the end of the war in 2009 the space has opened up in Sri Lanka for different philosophical and religious ideologies to enter and for leaders with their own agendas to champion them. These need to be studied. There is a need to probe not only the public officials but also the political leaders who have had connections with the extremists and who have been photographed along with them prior to the Easter Sunday attacks. The PSC process needs to be expanded not stopped and hushed up.

Sri Lanka: WhenMuslims Step Out!

Aboobacker Ahmed With Rishad Bathiudeen

The mass resignation of nine Muslim Ministers and two Governors in the aftermath of the Easter Sunday blasts has deepened fault lines in Sri Lanka.

by S. Binodkumar Singh-2019-06-11

On June 3, 2019, all nine Muslim Ministers and two Muslim Provincial Governors of Sri Lanka resigned, as the fragile Buddhist-majority country grappled with the communal backlash of the Easter Sunday bombings which killed as many as 253 people. The Ministers who resigned include Cabinet Ministers Kabir Hashim, Rauff Hakeem, M.H.A. Haleem and Rishad Bathiudeen; State Ministers Faizal Cassim, H.M.M. Harees, Ameer Ali Shihabdeen and Seyed Ali Zahir Moulana; and Deputy Minister Abdullah Mahrooff. The two Governors who resigned were Azath Salley, Governor of the Western Province and M.L.A.M. Hizbullah, Governor of the Eastern Province. There were 19 Muslim lawmakers in the 225-member Parliament and nine of them – all of whom resigned – held Ministerial positions.

The resignations were in response to a hunger strike by Member of Parliament (MP) Ven. Athuraliye Rathana Thero, a prominent Buddhist monk, who began fasting on May 31, 2019, in front of the iconic Buddhist temple Dalada Maligawa in Kandy, with five demands, including the resignation of Minister Rishad Bathiudeen and the two Governors, whom he accused of having ties with the suicide bombers who had targeted churches and hotels on April 21. A crowd of about 10,000 Buddhists held demonstration at the famous temple on June 3, 2019, raising anti-Muslim slogans. Shops and offices remained closed in the city, while black flags were raised in support of Rathana.

Since the Easter Sunday bombings, tensions have increased between the majority Sinhala community, which constitute 75 percent of Sri Lanka's population, and Muslims who, at 9.7 percent, consider themselves to be a distinct ethnic group in the country. Muslims live in fear after a wave of attacks by Buddhist hardliners swept across wide areas in the aftermath of the Easter Sunday bombings. In spite of a state of emergency on May 12 and 13, Sinhala mobs rampaged through at least 24 towns in western Sri Lanka, looting and attacking Muslim properties with stones, swords and petrol bombs.

According to an assessment by local charities, the mobs killed one Muslim, wounded at least another 14 and destroyed over 540 Muslim-owned houses, shops and mosques, as well as nearly 100 vehicles.

Explaining the resignations, Rauff Hakeem, the former Minister of City Planning, Water Supply and Higher Education observed, on June 6, 2019,

Based on the seriousness of the situation that prevailed in the country last Monday (June 3), we discussed at length with the Prime Minister and a few other senior Cabinet Ministers, trying to select the correct decision. There was a serious risk of putting the lives of Muslims in the country in danger, based on the situation that came up with the hunger strike carried out by MP Ven. Athuraliye Rathana and the statements issued by Ven. Galagoda Aththe Gnanasara, who was recently released from prison. So, in order to maintain peace in the country, all nine of us submitted a letter announcing our resignation.

On June 5, 2019, former Minister of Industry and Commerce Rishad Bathiudeen had stressed that he did not resign for fear of the no-confidence motion against him, but to prevent communal clashes between the Sinhala and Muslim communities.

On June 4, 2019, the Police Headquarters set up a committee consisting of a Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP) and two Superintendents of Police (SP) to obtain complaints against Rishad Bathiudeen and former Governors M.L.A.M. Hizbullah and Azath Salley. The committee will accept written complaints until June 12, 2019. As of June 6, 2019, the three-member committee had received four complaints. Three complaints were received against Bathiudeen, while one compliant was lodged against Salley. The committee received its first complaint on June 5, and the other three on June 6.

The responsibility for the coordinated Easter Sunday bombings was claimed by the Islamic State (IS or Daesh) on April 23, 2019, by its official news outlet Amaq News Agency, which released a video showing the Sri Lanka attackers pledging allegiance to Daesh leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi.

However, on May 1, 2019, 10 days after the attacks, Sri Lanka Police named all nine Easter Sunday suicide bombers as local residents – Zahran Hashim, Ilham Ahmed Mohamed Ibrahim, Inshaf Ahmed, Mohamed Azzam Mubarak Mohamed, Ahmed Muaz, Mohamed Hasthun, Mohamed Nasser Mohamed Asad, Abdul Latheef and Fathima Ilham – tracing all nine to two jihadist organisations, National Thawheed Jamaath (NTJ) and Jamathei Millathu Ibrahim (JMI).

On April 22, 2019, in order to maintain public security and essential services, President Maithripala Sirisena, in a gazette notification, declared a State of Emergency across Sri Lanka. Under the Emergency Regulations, he banned NTJ and JMI on April 27. Further, under the emergency regulations, Muslim women in Sri Lanka were not allowed to wear face veils in public from April 29. On May 5, to prevent the spread of false information following a tense situation, access to social media applications, Facebook, WhatsApp, Viber etc., was temporarily suspended. On May 22, the President issued another special gazette notification, extending the Emergency Regulations for another month. On June 3, Police Media Spokesman SP Ruwan Gunasekara, speaking at a media briefing, disclosed that 2,289 persons had been arrested after the Easter Sunday suicide attacks. Among them, 423 persons had been remanded and another 211 were being detained at Police Stations for questioning, while 1,655 persons had been released on bail.

Meanwhile, admitting that the country suffered due to a gap in sharing of security information and intelligence, Sri Lanka's Army Commander Lieutenant General Mahesh Senanayake, on May 2, 2019, urged the public to have confidence in the Armed Forces. On May 29, the Parliamentary Select Committee (PSC) appointed to inquire into the terrorist attacks on April 21 met for the first time at the Parliament Complex. Defence Secretary Shantha Kottegoda and National Intelligence Chief Sisira Mendis gave evidence before the PSC. National Intelligence Chief, Sisira Mendis testifying before the PSC told that though he briefed the then Defence Secretary Hemasiri Fernando on the impending terrorist attack, the National Security Council (NSC) had not met till the coordinated suicide bombings of April 21. According to Mendis, the NSC last met on February 19, 2019. In the wake of the suicide bombings, President Sirisena appointed Shantha Kottegoda as the Defence Secretary on April 21, succeeding Hemasiri Fernando. Testifying before PSC, Kottegoda stated, “Since 2014, there had been information about the banned extremist outfit National Thawheed Jamaath, but I don’t know how that information was acted upon.” He further disclosed that sharing of intelligence information needed to be strengthened, as lapses and lack of systematic coordination may have led to a breakdown in sharing of information. On June 8, 2019, President Maithripala Sirisena dismissed Mendis, after he indicated that the leader was aware of the Easter bombings.

Confirming that the NSC last met on February 19, 2019, former Defence Secretary Hemasiri Fernando, giving evidence before the PSC on June 6, disclosed that NSC had been convened four times after he assumed duties as Defence Secretary – on November 13, 2018; December 3, 2018; January 4, 2019 and February 19, 2019. The PSC was appointed on May 23, 2019, to probe and report to Parliament on the Easter Sunday terrorist attacks after Rishad Bathiudeen, addressing Parliament on May 10, 2019, called for a PSC to clear his name of the allegations against him in the aftermath of the Easter Sunday bombings. Bathiudeen asserted, “The people who make allegations against me knowingly or unknowingly safeguard the real terrorists and fundamentalists. Their actions result in me highlighted while the attention on the real terrorists shifts. We are strong believers of Islam. Allah does not approve terrorism or fundamentalism.”

On June 5, 2019, in order to restore stability in the country, leading Chief Prelates and the Maha Sangha of the three main Buddhist chapters held a special discussion at the Asgiriya Maha Viharaya. The Prelates held a lengthy discussion on the prevailing situation in the country and drafted a 15-point proposal to restore stability. The Chief Prelate of Asgiriya Chapter, the Most Venerable Warakagoda Sri Gnanarathana Thera presided over the discussion. Speaking to the media, the Anunayake of the Malwatte Chapter, Venerable Niyangoda Vijithasiri Thera, observed, “We think the departure of the Muslim Ministers from the Government should not have happened. Therefore, we request those Muslim leaders to return to the administration and resume their responsibilities.” The Thera also said that if the challenges are not well understood and remedial action taken, external influences will enter the country and the hard earned peace and economic stability will be lost, with disastrous consequences.

Meanwhile, on June 3, 2019, President Sirisena urged all communities in the country to work together to resolve the communal issues and ensure peace, and noted, “If conflicts arise due to different ethnicities, the country will be doomed and all should work together with mutual understanding and contribute in ensuring the peace of the country.” Similarly, cautioning that raising anti-Muslim communalism would only support Islamic State terrorism, Prime Minister Wickremesinghe pointed out on June 4, 2019, “The Muslim community was together with us during the 30-year war. If the whole Muslim community is pushed away because of a few who were misled, then the task of eliminating ISIS terrorism will become much more difficult.” The Premier further stated that, for the first time since independence, Sri Lanka has a Government that does not have a Minister from the Muslim community. Although few people are happy about it, this is not to the advantage of the country.

The mass resignation of nine Muslim Ministers and two Governors in the aftermath of the Easter Sunday blasts has deepened fault lines in Sri Lanka. NTJ, the group behind the blasts, which included suicide bombers and was led by the radical preacher Zahran Hashim, has been dismantled. Moreover, hundreds have been arrested and the plot possibly inspired by the Islamic State has been unravelled. The Government has initiated action against many of those who failed to act on advance intelligence, and ongoing investigations are likely to bring others to account.

Sri Lanka’s tragedy can only be compounded by the communal targeting of Muslims. Having emerged from a destructive civil war the Island nation needs to focus on rebuilding inter-ethnic trust and ushering in a new egalitarian order. It will be ill-served by a conflict between the Buddhists and Muslims.

( The writer is a Research Associate, Institute for Conflict Management, India )

President promised to clear me and give a DPL post if I resigned: Pujith

• Mr. Jayasundara revealed that he was not invited to participate in the National Security Council meeting. He said he was kept out of the Security Council meeting from October 2018
• Hemasiri Fernando telephoned him on April 20 and warned there would be an attack on the following day and again telephoned around 7.30 am on Easter Sunday
• IGP says he got DIG Nalaka Silva to brief President Sirisena on the impending threats from NTJ on three occasions  

By Yohan Perera and Ajith Siriwardana   -07 Jun 2019

IGP Pujith Jayasundara, who testified before the select committee appointed to look into the Easter Sunday attacks, yesterday revealed that President Maithripala Sirisena had offered to give him an ambassador’s post if he accepts the responsibility for the failure to prevent the bomb attacks on April 21 and resigned from his post. 

He said President had promised to clear his name if he resigned. Following are excerpts of the testimony of IGP Jayasundara. In it he revealed that he had not been allowed to participate in security council meetings since October 2018 but was called in once to discuss the transfer of an officer. Mr. Jayasundara claimed that he was being used an a scapegoat in this scenario.  

---

 Dr. Jayampathi Wickramaratne acting Chairman of the Select Committee: Mr. Jayasundara tell us about your career 
IGP: I joined as an Assistant Superintendent of Police in 1985. Two others were recruited together with me. After training I was promoted as a Superintendent of Police in 1994 and then became an SSP in 1996. I was promoted as a DIG in 2005. I became the IGP on April 20, 2016. 
Dr. Jayampathi Wickramaratne: Are there any divisions which come directly under you?
IGP: Yes the DIG in charge of the CID was placed under me. I took the TID under my purview as the need arose. Nalaka Silva was in charge of it at that time. I cannot remember the date. Maybe in 2017.   
Dr. Wickramaratne: Send us a chart
IGP: Acting IGP will do it if you ask. I don’t have the power to do it now   
Dr. Wickramaratne: The SIS Director reports to you?
IGP: No. The Police came under the Defence Ministry initially. Then the need arose to work with the tri forces as a result of terrorism. A Law and Order Ministry was created later. The Police came under his purview.   
Dr. Wickramaratne: The norm is that the police comes under another ministry not the Defence Ministry 
Yes. Police was put under the purview of the Defence Ministry later. SIS officers were under the Defence Ministry though they were police officers.   
Field Marshal Sarath Fonskea:  To whom does the SIS Director report to ?
To the Secretary, Ministry of Defence.   
MP M. A Sumanthiran –You are saying that SIS officers, though they belong to the police, come under another ministry 
It was sort of a setting.   
MP Sumanthiran – Was there a formal setting? 
I don’t know. I have never been to intelligence offices as the IGP. I tried to build a relationship with that unit but there were no results.   
Dr. Wickramaratne 
In what era did the reporting to the Defence Secretary, even if you belong to another ministry, begin? 
I cannot remember clearly. It was the form during the early stages of my career.   
Field Marshal Fonseka- If a SIS Director receive any information he has to report to the Defence Secretary ?
Yes that’s how it should be done. However there are instances the where the form is changed.   
DR Nalinda Jayatissa- What’s the procedure to be followed when the police needs support for an operation ?
It depends on the information that is available. It is possible to talk with the relevant SDIG. STF support could be sought.   
MP Ashu Marasinghe – Does the weekly reports of the SIS come to you? 
Not on a weekly basis but according to it’s importances. The SIS is bound to send reports to the Defence Secretary   
MP Marasinghe Do you get those reports? 
No not all   
MP Marasinghe –When you get a report what do you do ?
I ask for a review. However I have delegated the responsibility to my senior DIGs to deal with it in an emergency. I don’t put the letterhead on it on these occasions.   
Dr. Wickramaratne – You are a member of the Security Council? 
Yes   
Dr. Wickramaratne –Did you participate in all the Security Council meetings from the time you were appointed IGP? 
I participated from April 20, 2016 till October 2018. However, I came there on October 23 to discuss a transfer of an officer. I was advised by members of the select committee that I was not needed at the meeting.   
You said several members of the select committee told you not to stay, who are they? 
I was advised verbally by the then Defence Secretary Kapila Waidyaratne not to stay. He said I was not needed. I then asked whether I should send a representative to the meetings. They said there was no need for it.
Dr Rajitha Senaratne – Is the IGP a permanent member of the National Security Council? 
Yes   
Dr Senaratne –How can such an important member be excluded and how can you stay away just because someone told you not to attend. 
It was not just somebody. It was our Defence Secretary. How can I question his reasons for it?   
Field Marshal Fonseka- You did not participate in the security council meetings until the April 21 tragedy took place?
I participated on October 23, 2018. I suspected that they did not trust me. On that day the discussion was about a transfer of an officer. We agreed and disagreed.   
MP Sumanthiran –You think you were excluded because of the issues pertaining to the transfer?   
I don’t know   
MP Sumanthiran – Transfer was regarding IP Nishantha Silva 
Yes. The transfer was originated by me and it was I who cancelled it. I gave the transfer with the consent of the police commission. IP Nishantha was involved in several abduction cases. It may be that they wanted him out of the investigations.   
MP Sumanthiran -Was there any pressure for you transfer him? 
Yes, from the President.   
Dr. Senaratne –Did the President give any reason for this?
No, However I think it may be because of the investigations that were ongoing.   
MP Jayatissa –Did DIG Nalaka Silva recommended banning the National Thowheed Jamaath ?
There are documents. Give me time to give a detailed explanation. There was a notion just after the Easter Sunday attacks that the IGP was responsible. This is the very first opportunity I am getting a chance to state my case. The State Intelligence Service (SIS) report contradicts the Terrorrist Investigation Department (TID) report. I was informed of the impending attacks on April 9, 2019. The TID report was specific about the attacks as it mentioned the plan to attack churches and the Indian High Commission. He said the SIS report which he received on the same day wasn’t specific about the places that were targeted. The intelligence report went public through an officer. It went to this officer because I took action. There was a meeting at the Defence Ministry on April 9, 2019. I participated in it. The intelligence report was not discussed. They said the progress will be notified later.   
Rauff Hakeem-This was not discussed as a main topic? 
Yes. Then I got a letter from the SIS Director. It contained same information. There was information on a suicide attack on important churches. However they were not named. They have mentioned the Indian High Commission. The information specified was sketchy, but I was ordered to take action.   
MP Jayatissa–The Chief of National Intelligence who wanted you to take action on this information comes under the Defence Secretary? 
Whatever it was he issued an order. Then I decided to inform four DIGs including DIG Western Province, Kandy and Head of the STF about the threat. There was an investigation going on into an organisation called National Thowheed Jamaath but it had been stopped for some reason. Islamic extremists started their activities from 2012/2013. Nalaka Silva was appointed at that time. He was a capable officer. SIS reports say there was no information on the specific targets of Zaharan. We however provided STF protection to the Indian High Commission.   
At this point IGP Jayasundara was allowed to make a statement on what happened after April 21. He continued the statement despite minor interruptions whenever slight clarifications were needed.   
The members asked about the Security Council meeting he attended on April 23, 2019 and the meeting he had with the President. Mr. Jayasundara initially refused to discuss these matters in front of the cameras but MP Sumanthiran said he should testify as details have gone in the affidavit he had submitted to courts.   
MP Sumanthiran – What is stated in the affidavit is now public 
I did not publish anything.   
MP Sumanthiran-It goes public after it is submitted to court 
Dr. Wickramaratne –These are not sensitive information that affects the security of the country. 
President Sirisena called me on April 23 this year and wanted me to come and meet him later on that day. I did meet him later that day. He informed me that I as the IGP was responsible for the tragedy. He said he cannot accept the responsibility for it as he was not informed of the impending bomb attacks beforehand. Therefore he said I have to accept the responsibility. The President added that I will be definitely found guilty by the three member commission which he was going to appoint. He said I will be cleared if I resigned. He said I will go without a pension if I am found guilty. He offered me an ambassador’s post if I agreed to his request. “I served the police for 35 years. Therefore I did not want to betray the department. Then I thought of my family including the fate they would suffer if I lose my pension. After taking all this into consideration I decided against resigning. I got another phone call from the President. He seemed to be annoyed. He said he had not got an answer from me regarding his request for me to resign. I was sent on compulsory leave later. I was used as a scapegoat. I did not testify to score marks or to put anyone in difficulty,” he said. 
Field Marshal Sarath Fonseka -Grass route level officials in the defence establishments cannot take action on their own without orders from those who are in charge of the defence sector. The decision to go for a war to get Mavil Aru opened was made by those in the highest echelons of the defence sector. 
I agree   
Field Marshal Fonseka - Did DIG Nalaka Silva  obtain an open warrant  against National Thowheed Jamaath (NTJ) Leader Zaharan? Yes. DIG Nalaka did obtain an open warrant against Zaharan and then went on to get a blue notice from the Interpol. I got him to brief President Sirisena on the impending threats from the NTJ on three separate occasions.   
 I had information on the Easter Sunday attacks on April 18 and 19. The then Defence Secretary Hemasiri Fernando phoned me on April 21 and warned him that there would be an attack the following day. Additionally, Defence Secretary at around 7.30 am on Easter Sunday warned that something would happen on that day. I informed the DIGs in all provinces from the day I received a prior warning. Security was beefed up around the Indian High Commissioner. Security officers of VIPs were informed about the attacks. They are usually informed but these matters are not revealed to the VIPs themselves.   

Dr. Wickramaratne: The norm is that the police comes under another ministry not the Defence Ministry 
IGP: Yes. Police was put under the purview of the Defence Ministry later. SIS officers were under the Defence Ministry though they were police officers.   
Field Marshal Sarath Fonskea:  To whom does the SIS Director report to ?
IGP: To the Secretary, Ministry of Defence.   
MP M. A Sumanthiran:You are saying that SIS officers, though they belong to the police, come under another ministry? 
IGP: It was sort of a setting.   
MP Sumanthiran : Was there a formal setting? 
IGP: I don’t know. I have never been to intelligence offices as the IGP. I tried to build a relationship with that unit but there were no results.   
Dr. Wickramaratne: 
In what era did the reporting to the Defence Secretary, even if you belong to another ministry, begin? 
IGP: I cannot remember clearly. It was the form during the early stages of my career.   
Field Marshal Fonseka: If a SIS Director receive any information he has to report to the Defence Secretary ?
IGP: Yes that’s how it should be done. However there are instances the where the form is changed.   
Dr. Nalinda Jayatissa: What’s the procedure to be followed when the police needs support for an operation ?
IGP: It depends on the information that is available. It is possible to talk with the relevant SDIG. STF support could be sought.   
MP Ashu Marasinghe : Does the weekly reports of the SIS come to you? 
IGP: Not on a weekly basis but according to it’s importance. The SIS is bound to send reports to the Defence Secretary   
MP Marasinghe Do you get those reports? 
IGP: No not all   
MP Marasinghe :When you get a report what do you do ?
IGP: I ask for a review. However I have delegated the responsibility to my senior DIGs to deal with it in an emergency. I don’t put the letterhead on it on these occasions.   
Dr. Wickramaratne : You are a member of the Security Council? 
IGP: Yes   
Dr. Wickramaratne: Did you participate in all the Security Council meetings from the time you were appointed IGP? 
IGP: I participated from April 20, 2016 till October 2018. However, I came there on October 23 to discuss a transfer of an officer. I was advised by members of the select committee that I was not needed at the meeting.   
Dr. Wickramaratne : You said several members of the select committee told you not to stay, who are they? 
IGP: I was advised verbally by the then Defence Secretary Kapila Waidyaratne not to stay. He said I was not needed. I then asked whether I should send a representative to the meetings. They said there was no need for it.
Dr Rajitha Senaratne : Is the IGP a permanent member of the National Security Council? 
IGP: Yes   
Dr Senaratne :How can such an important member be excluded and how can you stay away just because someone told you not to attend? 
IGP: It was not just somebody. It was our Defence Secretary. How can I question his reasons for it?   
Field Marshal Fonseka: You did not participate in the security council meetings until the April 21 tragedy took place?
IGP: I participated on October 23, 2018. I suspected that they did not trust me. On that day the discussion was about a transfer of an officer. We agreed and disagreed.   
MP Sumanthiran:You think you were excluded because of the issues pertaining to the transfer?   
IGP: I don’t know   
MP Sumanthiran: Transfer was regarding IP Nishantha Silva?
IGP: Yes. The transfer was originated by me and it was I who cancelled it. I gave the transfer with the consent of the police commission. IP Nishantha was involved in several abduction cases. It may be that they wanted him out of the investigations.   
MP Sumanthiran:Was there any pressure for you to transfer him? 
IGP: Yes, from the President.   
Dr. Senaratne:Did the President give any reason for this?
IGP: No, However I think it may be because of the investigations that were ongoing.   
MP Jayatissa: Did DIG Nalaka Silva recommended banning the National Thowheed Jamaath ?
IGP: There are documents. Give me time to give a detailed explanation. There was a notion just after the Easter Sunday attacks that the IGP was responsible. This is the very first opportunity I am getting to state my case. The State Intelligence Service (SIS) report contradicts the Terrorrist Investigation Department (TID) report. I was informed of the impending attacks on April 9, 2019. The TID report was specific about the attacks as it mentioned the plan to attack churches and the Indian High Commission. He said the SIS report which he received on the same day wasn’t specific about the places that were targeted. The intelligence report went public through an officer. It went to this officer because I took action. There was a meeting at the Defence Ministry on April 9, 2019. I participated in it. The intelligence report was not discussed. They said the progress will be notified later.   
Rauff Hakeem-This was not discussed as a main topic? 
IGP: Yes. Then I got a letter from the SIS Director. It contained the same information. There was information on a suicide attack on important churches. However they were not named. They have mentioned the Indian High Commission. The information specified was sketchy, but I was ordered to take action.   
MP Jayatissa:The Chief of National Intelligence who wanted you to take action on this information comes under the Defence Secretary? 
IGP: Whatever it was he issued an order. Then I decided to inform four DIGs including DIG Western Province, Kandy and Head of the STF about the threat. There was an investigation going on into an organisation called National Thowheed Jamaath but it had been stopped for some reason. Islamic extremists started their activities from 2012/2013. Nalaka Silva was appointed at that time. He was a capable officer. SIS reports say there was no information on the specific targets of Zaharan. We however provided STF protection to the Indian High Commission.   
At this point IGP Jayasundara was allowed to make a statement on what happened after April 21. He continued the statement despite minor interruptions whenever slight clarifications were needed.   
The members asked about the Security Council meeting he attended on April 23, 2019 and the meeting he had with the President. Mr. Jayasundara initially refused to discuss these matters in front of the cameras but MP Sumanthiran said he should testify as details have gone in the affidavit he had submitted to courts.   
MP Sumanthiran: What is stated in the affidavit is now public 
IGP: I did not publish anything.   
MP Sumanthiran: It goes public after it is submitted to court 
Dr. Wickramaratne: These are not sensitive information that affects the security of the country. 
IGP: President Sirisena called me on April 23 this year and wanted me to come and meet him later on that day. I did meet him later that day. He informed me that I as the IGP was responsible for the tragedy. He said he cannot accept the responsibility for it as he was not informed of the impending bomb attacks beforehand. Therefore he said I have to accept the responsibility. The President added that I will be definitely found guilty by the three member commission which he was going to appoint. He said I will be cleared if I resigned. He said I will go without a pension if I am found guilty. He offered me an ambassador’s post if I agreed to his request. I served the police for 35 years. Therefore I did not want to betray the department. Then I thought of my family including the fate they would suffer if I lose my pension. After taking all this into consideration I decided against resigning. I got another phone call from the President. He seemed to be annoyed. He said he had not got an answer from me regarding his request for me to resign. I was sent on compulsory leave later. I was used as a scapegoat. I did not testify to score marks or to put anyone in difficulty. 
Field Marshal Sarath Fonseka: Grassroot level officials in the defence establishments cannot take action on their own without orders from those who are in charge of the defence sector. The decision to go for a war to get Mavil Aru opened was made by those in the highest echelons of the defence sector. 
IGP: I agree   
Field Marshal Fonseka: Did DIG Nalaka Silva  obtain an open warrant  against National Thowheed Jamaath (NTJ) Leader Zaharan?
IGP: Yes. DIG Nalaka did obtain an open warrant against Zaharan and then went on to get a blue notice from the Interpol. I got him to brief President Sirisena on the impending threats from the NTJ on three separate occasions. I had information on the Easter Sunday attacks on April 18 and 19. The then Defence Secretary Hemasiri Fernando phoned me on April 21 and warned him that there would be an attack the following day. Additionally, Defence Secretary at around 7.30 am on Easter Sunday warned that something would happen on that day. I informed the DIGs in all provinces from the day I received a prior warning. Security was beefed up around the Indian High Commissioner. Security officers of VIPs were informed about the attacks. They are usually informed but these matters are not revealed to the VIPs themselves.   

Police Harassment in Sri Lanka: Fines, Bribes and Batons

Featured image courtesy ArabNews

BRUNO COOKE-06/11/2019

If you live as a foreigner in Sri Lanka, police hassle is likely part of your reality. Indeed, the majority of those who drive their own vehicle have multiple stories of unwarranted interrogation and arbitrary fining.

Sri Lanka is tightening its traffic laws

In July 2018, Sri Lanka Police bolstered its fines for traffic violations, making misdemeanours like driving without a helmet and driving without a license punishable with on-the-spot fines ranging from Rs. 1000 to Rs. 3,000 (about £4/9/13).

It was proposed in January 2019 to revise penalties for ‘major motor traffic offences’—i.e., driving under the influence of alcohol, driving without a valid driving license, entering a vehicle into a railway crossing irresponsibly, driving under-age and driving without valid insurance—to Rs. 25,000. Such offences are the leading causes of road traffic accidents.

The tightening of traffic laws is welcome to those of us who witness the results of unregulated roads every day. Buses, the indefatigable tanks of Sri Lanka’s road network, with crumpled faces; scooters scattered by trucks; bloodied bumpers and men yelling at each other by the side of the road, desperate to keep it from the police. It is par for the course here, to a degree, though that does not make it any less tragic.

Witnessing these roadside set-tos, it is easy to see men squabbling over money as a symptom of petty greed, or callousness. The real issue is that the larger fines and increases in regulation only add a financial burden to those who are accustomed to the old system, without allowing them the benefits. If you are caught out and can’t pay your way, you are penalised. New policies help, but the problem is still endemic.

Why tighter laws don’t necessarily make for tighter policing

Powers granted to police officers include the ability to enter and inspect homes without a permit, use a firearm if deemed appropriate, and seize a driving license without explanation. In addition, the State of Emergency declared by the President after the Easter Sunday attacks gave significant liberties to the police. The highly criticised Emergency Regulations cover censorship, public gatherings, restrictions on publication and the spreading of “rumours” – maintained with any force necessary.
On top of this, extrajudicial acts, like the public humiliation of three suspects in 2013 and assaulting a student protester who had fallen to the ground in 2015, are seemingly swept under the rug. In the former case, the Superintendent of Police allegedly ‘paraded, and […] thereafter cut the hair of three suspects in public’.

While it is becoming increasingly regulated, policing is still conducted by corrupt individuals who act outside the law. Appeals to local police departments against the unjust or inappropriate behaviour of road traffic officers typically end in chaos, humiliation and dead-ends.

Civilians taking the law into their own hands… whose law?

Little reported (though more so in recent weeks) is the way in which Sri Lanka’s Muslim population has borne the brunt of this approach to policing. There are stories rising to the surface of ministers resigning over harassment, and worshippers being harassed, and people being detained for reading the Qu’ran. Following the burqa and niqab ban, Muslim women stayed indoors to avoid abuse. The government recently set up a hotline exclusively for Muslims to report such incidents.

There have been calls to boycott Muslim-owned shops, amid increasing distrust of Sri Lanka’s Muslims. This hostility has been stoked by Buddhist hardliners, led by the Bodu Bala Sena (BBS), or “Buddhist Power Force”. The group’s chief executive, Dilantha Vithanage, warned that Sri Lankans might be “forced” to deal with what he called “a rise in Islamic extremism” on their own. As quoted in Reuters, he claims “[t]his is a bigger danger than Tamil separatism”.

Buddhist fundamentalism and Islamophobia receives little coverage in the international media – it is drowned out by a focus on and interest in Islamophobia alone. Whether an event is politicised or not depends on which narrative it supports, or undermines. The overarching global story regarding Buddhism is that it can do no wrong; Islam, conversely, is frequently scapegoated. One can see how easy it is for civilians to target Muslims with racist abuse and assaults – they are *protecting their country*.

Radicals scare governments either to submission or oppression.

Ever since independence in 1948, Buddhist fundamentalism has been the driving force behind Sinhala intransigence on the ‘Tamil question’. A Buddhist monk assassinated S.W.R.D. Bandaranaike, the leader of the Sri Lanka Freedom Party and the country’s fourth Prime Minister, in 1959. His crime? Making too many (in fact they were too few) concessions to the country’s large Tamil minority had cost him his life and spawned a dynasty. But the deterrent effect worked. Sinhala politicians of all stripes began to pander to the monks. Anti-Tamil discrimination was institutionalised. It was a tragedy for the island. The notion that these warped methods could produce long-term stability is risible.
—Tariq Ali 

Militarised Islamic fundamentalism has led to increased security throughout the entire country. Military patrols are ubiquitous, spot-checks frequent, places of worship guarded, transport hubs surveilled, and so on. On the other hand, Buddhist fundamentalism – or, for that matter, attacks by white supremacists (Christians) in New Zealand, the US and Norway – rarely prompts such sweeping policy changes.

Where do foreigners fit in? Context

Understanding the way in which the foreign presence fits in requires a little context.

The 2004 tsunami killed 30,000 Sri Lankans and cost the country’s tourism sector Rs. 26 billion ($250 million). In its wake, Sri Lanka’s tourism authorities sought to spin a torn country into an island of upscale resorts. Bounce Back Sri Lanka, set up in close consultation with the private sector, was an international marketing campaign aimed at restoring tourist traffic. Hotels were rebuilt and beaches cleaned. While funds were funnelled into this, little was done to assist genuine recovery.

A year after, thousands of coastal Sri Lankans were still living hand-to-mouth in camps, uncertain of their future. Seemingly ignorant of this, the Sri Lankan Tourist Board was optimistic:

‘In a cruel twist of fate, nature has presented Sri Lanka with a unique opportunity, and out of this great tragedy will come a world class tourism destination.’

The deflation of prices following a disaster leaves local businesses struggling. At the same time, it makes foreign money all the more powerful.
Where do foreigners fit in? Perception

In a country marred by inequality directly connected to race, forced to cow to a burgeoning tourism industry, it is understandable that foreigners receive mixed reviews.

While many locals are very friendly, it is hard to ignore the obvious divide in wealth, opportunity and privilege. The real cost of things is unknown to much of the foreign community, and it is well known among expatriates that, for this reason, many tuk tuk drivers overcharge. There are fights between the local drivers and those who use PickMe (a Sri Lankan equivalent to Uber), because it undercuts those who overprice.

When news breaks of attacks on religious sites or conflicts between religious groups, foreigners get together and discuss. When word gets round of a series of houses being broken into, we keep our doors locked and lights on at night.

Foreigners are assumed rich and often are, assumed to be naïve and promiscuous and to be wearing rose-tinted glasses. Indeed, they/we often are.

We do not speak Sinhalese and we do not understand the nuances of the Sri Lankan legal system. We are vulnerable and moneyed and do not wish to be detained in police custody. Indeed, the extent to which we do not wish to be detained is such that we are willing to play the game and accept the fine, well aware that the money will be immediately pocketed. It is a convenient way to avoid the frightening unknown.

Where do foreigners fit in? Policing

On the 10^th of May, 2019, I was pulled over, with my partner, by two police officers. We were on our way home from an open mic night. It was about 11pm and the road was almost empty.

One of the policemen talks and the other is silent. Despite a congenial introduction, the charges immediately jump from overtaking on a double line, to driving without a license, to driving while under the influence of alcohol. I must pay fines ranging from Rs. 7,500 to Rs. 25,000. I am told to drive to Weligama Police Station, to be breathalysed and arrested, despite being told I am too drunk to drive. My license is at home but I cannot drive there to show them. Returning to the spot where we overtook them, to check the validity of the first claim, is impossible. I am not too drunk to drive.

The silent officer lunges at the motorbike and seizes the keys. Then, as we are manoeuvring the bike off the road, he lunges again to lock the handlebars. He raises a hand at my partner and threatens to hit her.

When I take out my phone and begin to record the incident, the other officer lurches at me and snatches it from my hands. He raises his baton at me and tells me I cannot have it back.

They get back on their motorbike and tell us to follow them to the police station. They leave. We remain, confused, not knowing what exactly we should do, and wondering which of our Sri Lankan friends might be able to help us. Are we hopeless?

Two minutes later we see them driving back. After a brief exchange, we are told to give them all the money we have, in exchange for my phone.

As we are driving away, defeated, I wonder if anyone has won.

When we get home, we learn that two of our friends were mistreated on the same road within an hour of us—separate incidents.

How to respond

In situations like this it is easy to feel numbed and immobilised. Consulting foreign friends of ours, who have had comparable experiences, we are told repeatedly that there is nothing we can do, that reporting it useless and no action will be taken unless it goes right to the top. Sri Lankan friends advise us that an appeal would lead to us being criminalised by any means.    At this time of year, tourism moves its way east to follow the surf. As a result, those who make their money off tourists – tuk tuk drivers, restaurateurs and, yes, the police – want to make a last buck. Besides the police part, this is unsurprising.

However, the shift is supposed to be gradual. Coming back a few days after the Easter Sunday bombings was like entering a ghost town. Since the attacks, tourist numbers have plummeted. Within a week, net bookings were down 186% compared to figures from 2018—more cancellations than bookings. Combine this with the seasonal decline and what is left is a recipe for hawkish behaviour.
The atmosphere of unease created by the attacks and ensuing raids is compounded by ubiquitous military deployment. Assault rifles guard bus and gas stations, and patrol the beaches.

But the reasons for the increased vigilance are to keep people safe by locating threats, and reassure people by having a uniformed presence. It is a crying shame that figures of authority are abusing the powers granted them in the wake of a national disaster. On that very same night, one of our friends, whom we had been with in the evening, returned home to find that her scooter had been impounded. She had left it on the side of the road for a few hours. Another woman who we met that night was harassed by police on her way home.

What felt like an arbitrary siege on a group of foreigners may have been a coincidence. However, it raises the question of why police feel entitled to abuse their powers at a time when the government needs people to have faith in its policies, and those who enact them. More than ever, Sri Lanka is in the international spotlight. Law enforcers must act with consistency towards residents. On the same note, Muslims have called this country home since the 7th century AD. They, too, deserve to be treated with respect.

Don’t let national security suffer through PSC proceedings

 Speaker Karu Jayasuriya 

An Open Letter to the Speaker - Wednesday, 12 June 2019

Dear Mr. Speaker,

I write this with reference to the media statement issued by your office, on your behalf, dated 8 June 2019, regarding the current controversies over the proceedings of the Parliamentary Select Committee (PSC) on the Terrorist Attacks of 21 April 2019.

The statement explains the background within which the present PSC is appointed, and no one would have any concerns or objections over the presumed good intentions. As much of the controversies are related to the opening of the proceedings to the media and recordings (now You Tube), I would like to draw your attention to some of the discrepancies between the claims of the statement and the reality.

First, the statement says, “The proceedings of this select committee,conducted according to the new standing orders, Parliament has also approved the opening of those proceedings to the media.” This at best is misleading. Nowhere in the Resolution of the Parliament, adopted on 23 May 2019, says the proceedings would be open to the media let alone electronicrecordings. Now we can see the whole proceedings circulated in the social and other media, many of the matters related to the national security.

Second, in the same paragraph, the statement justifies such open revelations of the matters discussed at the PSC, referring to recent questioning of the Attorney General and the CIA Director of the United States broadcasted all over the world! However there is a difference. Those questionings were not related to an immediate security situation or a terrorist attack.

Third, we are not yet even two months away from the ‘investigated’terrorist attacks. Given the second security lapses on 13 May, the security situation of the country should be considered still not settled. Some of the political rifts leading to the weakening of the national security in April still prevail and enhanced. Therefore, the public revelation of many of the matters and the weaknesses of the security apparatus could further hamper the national security and public safety.

Fourth, if Sri Lanka or the PSC wanted to follow the USA on similar matters, the best example or the model to follow should have been the Congress Commission appointed to investigate the 9/11 Terrorist Attacks in November 2002. Not the recent congressional committees appointed allegedly for political purposes that your media statement refers to.

Fifth, the 9/11 US Congress investigation was conducted after one year and two months of the event, not to jeopardise the ongoing security situation and criminal investigations. The purpose was not simply to find fault with some selected personnel or absolve some others, but thoroughly investigate the failures behind and rectify the future. It was also a bipartisan committee with equal number from the Government and the Opposition. There were women in the committee, unlike the present PSC!  Sixth, your official statement says, “It is clearly notified that everyone who comes before the select committee could give evidence without media coverage, after taking oath,when that evidence could endanger the national security.”

This is of course some precaution. I have also noted some members of the PSC clearly stating to some witnesses that they don’t need to reveal certain matters. However this has not been the case of all or some others. Most clearly, some of the witnesses go loose and talk; and some matters could be quite sensitive. Even at present, major weaknesses of the security system are roundly exposed, and this could be quite detrimental to the national security. The ISIS operatives might be clearly watching.

Seventh, when one goes through the Resolution of the Parliament pertaining to the present PSC, it is very clear that it has not at all considered the possible national security implications of the PSC proceedings. The term ‘national security’ does not appear at all. No mention even about the media coverage and its parameters. It appears the purpose is political and there is a section included to investigate ‘whether allegations levelled against any Member of Parliament, Governors or any otherpersons are true or not’. There can be a conflict of interest between some members and the above matters when investigated.

Eighth, what does it mean by ‘any other persons’? This can be a reflection of bad formulation, but if this section is followed literally, the PSC might try to take over the whole investigations of the terrorist attacks. Any allegations on the MPs or Governors, whether correct or not, also should have been left for the law and order authorities to investigate, whatever their apparent weaknesses. It is not correct for the PSC to intervene and interfere.

Ninth, it has to be stated that the mentioned letter of the Attorney General in the statement which was sent to you by the Secretary to the President should be taken much more seriously, although we are not aware of the full contents.

According to your official statement,“It [the letter] claims that some of the matters that could reveal during the select committee proceedings can hamper the now ongoing investigations” to mean the terrorist attacks and the people who have aided and abetted. This is a serious concern coming from the AG, although your statement mentions that you have informed and advised the PSC to take necessary precautions.

Tenth, it should also be noted that MP Wijeyadasa Rajapakshe (PC) has written to you particularly regarding the implications of the present PSC proceedings on ‘official secrets and national security’ based on the Official Secrets Act. This should also be taken seriously. Not so long ago, he was the Minister of Justice of the present government.

Eleventh, your office statement expresses the opinion that if the Opposition fully participated in the present PSC (particularly the Joint Opposition), most of the present defects and/or controversies could have been ironed out. It may be or may not be the case. This is however a good political wish for cooperation. This is also an admission of defects/weaknesses of the PSC procedures, if not inbuilt dangers. How far and how long are you going to be behind the PSC to rectify the situation?

However my/our concerns are national, security and people’s lives.

Twelfth, with or without the PSC proceedings or the findings, it is very clear that the national security of the country has been in jeopardy mainly because of the infights within the Government. President of the country is pulling in one direction, while the Prime Minister is pulling the other way. Both were elected from the same political sources and for the same purposes of ‘good governance’.It is apparent that many of the security officials are either pided between the two, or paralysed as a result of the infights. Who is the monk that conducted a fast unto death in recent days, adding more fuel to the fire?He is or was a member of the governing party.

Therefore why should the country and Parliament allow the PSC to surreptitiously fuel these infights and personal struggles further? It is obvious that most of the members of the PSC belong to one faction of the Government, directly or indirectly.

As the Speaker of the Parliament, who is supposed to be neutral and should work on broad national interests, I appeal you to intervene to stop this insanity, factionalism and personal agendas and at least try to bring some understanding between the President and the PM until the next elections are held. An interim government and holding of elections soon for both the Presidency and Parliament might be the best. Please don’t let the national security be further damaged.
Yours sincerely,

Dr. Laksiri Fernando

(Former Senior Professor of Political Science and Public Policy, University of Colombo)