Category: Foreign Affairs

By Jehan Perera –

The inability of the government to force via its choices, and the appearance of opposition forces supportive of former President Mahinda Rajapaksa gaining ground, has generated concerns about the government’s longer term stability. The defeat of the government’s income bill in Parliament has highlighted the structural weakness of the government. The difficulty that the government has been experiencing in fulfilling its primary election promises, catching the corrupt and passing the 19th Amendment, has eroded public self-assurance in the government’s strength. At the moment the SLFP has a majority in Parliament with 126 seats while the UNP plays the part of a ‘minority government’ with 41 Parliamentary seats from a total of 225 seats. With no the help of the SLFP, the government is unable to get even a easy majority of votes to implement its plans. If the opposition parliamentarians could have their way it would be former President Mahinda Rajapaksa who would be the Prime Minister.

The anxiousness about the government’s stability is especially articulated in the ethnic minority-dominated North and East. Whether in Jaffna, Mannar or Batticaloa the query that people worry about is regardless of whether former President Mahinda Rajapaksa is about to stage a comeback. Those are the parts of the country that delivered the biggest majorities to President Maithripala Sirisena at the presidential elections held four months ago. The Tamil voters of the North and East in distinct had to contend with boycott calls from within the Tamil polity itself. They also had to overcome the apprehension that the incumbent government would take some action that would prevent them from expressing their will at these elections.   But the voters there were ready to take risks in voting against the incumbent government since they strongly preferred modify.

Those from the Tamil polity who wanted the Rajapaksa government to continue and as a result named for a Tamil boycott of the elections have been basing their advocacy on a certain logic. They could see the Rajapaksa government was antagonising the international community and wanted this to continue till a point was reached when the international community directly intervened against the Sri Lankan government. This logic is in accordance with a belief in sections of the Tamil polity that absolutely nothing constructive can be anticipated from the Sinhalese-dominated Sri Lankan polity with regard to their grievances and aspirations. Consequently, they appear towards the international community and to international intervention as their only hope of receiving what they want.

Rejected boycott

The large voter turnout in the North and East at the presidential election, nevertheless, showed that the Tamil voter did not accept the boycott argument. They had currently noticed the devastating influence of an earlier Tamil boycott that took place in 2005. The LTTE imposed the boycott at the point of the gun, reduced the Tamil vote that would have gone to Ranil Wickremesinghe and successfully assisted Mahinda Rajapaksa to turn out to be the president, a position of concentrated energy he held for ten years till his election defeat. Like the present day promoters of a Tamil boycott, the LTTE as well thought that the international neighborhood would support them against the nationalism of President Rajapaksa. The reality was various and the Tamil population on the ground was at the receiving finish.

Hardly anyone in the Tamil polity was willing or capable to oppose the LTTE at that time, when they had been at the peak of their energy and arrogance, shooting dead these who differed from them. Numerous democratic Tamil leaders lost their lives for getting traitors according to the LTTE. One of the couple of Tamil leaders to take a various posture publicly was the Bishop of Mannar, Rayappu Joseph, who with each other with his fellow Tamil Bishop of Jaffna, Thomas Savundranayagam, opposed the LTTE’s boycott. The moral authority and courage of the two bishops was not sufficient to overcome the fear psychosis that gripped the Tamil neighborhood at the 2005 presidential elections in the face of the LTTE’s military energy and the propaganda of Tamil nationalists both locally and living abroad.

In the course of the run-up to the presidential elections of 2015, when the get in touch with of a Tamil boycott as soon as again reared its head, Bishop Rayappu Joseph stepped forward a second time to oppose the boycott contact. He urged the Tamil individuals that the way forward was by participating in the democratic procedure and becoming portion of the process of change that they wanted. This time around, with no LTTE guns to back up the boycott get in touch with, the Tamil individuals rejected the siren get in touch with to remain separate and uninvolved in the electoral process. As an alternative they heeded the contact of democracy and, with each other with their Sinhalese and Muslim co-voters, participated in bringing about the modify they wanted.

Bridging role

The anxiousness that exists in the North and East of the nation right now is about a possibility of the return of the old order, in which the ethnic minorities are mistrusted and mistreated and ethnic majority nationalism prevails. When Tamil political leaders make extremist and Tamil nationalist statements they will only give a boost to these who market extremist nationalism on all sides. As an alternative, the Tamil leadership demands to reassure the Tamil people and give them, and the rest of the nation, the message that they want to participate in the procedure of bringing constructive alter in the nation together, and not separately with the international community. The try of sections of the Tamil polity to utilise the international neighborhood to attain their ends increases Sinhalese apprehensions, is counterproductive and can bring about the quite scenario that the Tamil neighborhood fears.

There is a need for the Tamil polity to convey to the people in the rest of the country their requirements, fears and aspirations. When I met him not too long ago Bishop of Mannar Rayappu Joseph mentioned that it was his intention to engage in this vocation and that he was gathering a team for this goal. At the very same time it is critical that the Tamil polity ought to learn about the needs, fears and aspirations of the others who live in Sri Lanka. The Tamils, Sinhalese and Muslims all need to have to get to know each and every other through dialogue and communication. The government seems determined to function with South Africa on the problem of dealing with the past. It has promised that it will establish a domestic mechanism that will meet international standards. In South Africa, there were numerous who gave leadership to this dialogue, but the particular person who gave the symbolic leadership due to his moral authority was Bishop Desmond Tutu who was appointed Chairperson of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. In African and Asian societies religious clergy continue to get pleasure from a excellent deal of respect, and are also close to the folks.

In Sri Lanka, a single of those who could be a leader in this dialogue of truth and reconciliation is Bishop Rayappu Joseph. A week ago he celebrated his 75th birthday in Mannar at an event that was attended by the Chief Minister of the North, C. V. Wigneswaran who gave recognition to the important part that the Bishop has played in the life of the Northern Tamil neighborhood. He stood in opposition to violence in all its forms and was constantly for a negotiated political solution. He requirements to be recognised for his contribution to supporting democratic institutions when they had been beneath threat. Catholic bishops are required to retire at the age of 75 even though there is provision for extension of service. At a time when Sri Lanka is turning the corner and democratic politics that respects human rights is on the ascendant, it is crucial that a Tamil religious leader of Bishop Joseph’s calibre must remain on in service as an educator and aid to bridge the communal divide by acquiring us to know each other much better.

By Nagananda Kodituwakku –

19A: Section 54 is flawed and violates the sovereignty in the men and women

Transitional Provision (Section 54) in the proposed 19^th Amendment provides that each individual holding office on the day preceding the date on which it becomes law, as the Chairman or a member of the (a) Parliamentary Council (b) Public Solutions Commission (c) National Police Commission (d) Human Rights Commission (e) Commission to Investigate Allegations of Bribery or Corruption or (f) Finance Commission, shall cease to hold such workplace with effect from the date on which the 19^th amendment becomes law. Apparently this move has been adopted by the Sirisena Administration for a cause, that the persons holding such offices referred to above certainly is a hindrance to installing of the Rule of Law and Good Governance.

Nevertheless, the mentioned Transitional provision offers that each individual holding office as (a) the Chief Justice (b) Judges of the Supreme Court (c) the President of the Court of Appeal (d) Judges of the Court of Appeal shall continue to hold such offices and shall, continue to physical exercise, execute and discharge the powers, duties and functions of that office, under the same terms and circumstances.

In the light of certain glaring flawed decision makings by the Supreme Court in the recent past under the de facto Chief Justice, Mohan Pieris, causing tremendous harm to the trust and self-assurance placed in the Judiciary by the folks, any concerned citizen might ask whether or not the Judges holding the office in the Supreme Court must be allowed continue to hold office or whether all the judges also shall ceased to hold office, might be with an alternative to reappoint honorable judges.

Just ahead of the Presidential election, folks of Sri Lanka witnessed as to how submissively the Judges in the Supreme Court, responded to the two questions referred to the Supreme Court by the former President Mahinda Rajapaksa who sought the Court’s opinion to contest for a third term. The Supreme Court, de facto Chief Justice, Mr Mohan Peiris P.C., with all other Justices agreeing, expressed it is opinion in really subservient tone and the Court declared that the President Rajapaksa should seek election for re-election for a additional term. It is important to note that the mentioned opinion was declared on a private matter only affecting the President Rajapaksa, getting denied the citizens any chance to express their views on the matter referred to the Court by the President. The concluding paragraph of the stated opinion was recorded in the following words.

“Hence Your Excellency shall exercise your proper and energy vested in you by virtue of Post 31 (3A) (a) (i) of the Constitution and seek re-election for a additional term and there exists no impediment for Your Excellency to workout the right and powers accorded to you beneath the Constitution to offer yourself for a additional term’.

In the light of the provisions of Write-up 105 of the Constitution, which states inter alia that the Administration of Justice ‘which protect, vindicate and enforce the rights of the people’ shall mainly be the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal of the Republic of Sri Lanka, in my view, any proper considering citizen of this country is entitled to make a case that the functionality of judicial duty in this manner is inappropriate, as such conduct tantamount to compromising of the people’s judicial power the Judges exercise on trust and as a result none of the judges who had ratified De facto Chief Justice Mohan Pieris’s Opinion is deserved to occupy the office as Judges in the Supreme Court.

Therefore, in my forthright view, any citizen of Sri Lanka is entitled to raise their issues that, unless the transitional provision in the 19^th amendment bill (Section 54) is duly amended to contain every single Judge holding office in the Supreme Court who had ratified the mentioned opinion expressed by the de facto Chief Justice Mohan Pieris, to seize to hold office, collectively with other judges appointed to the Superior Court Program by the President Mahinda Rajapaksa, purely according to his whims and fancies, the 19^th Amendment Bill in its present kind is undesirable as it has failed to address the will and want of the men and women of this country for a vibrant and independent judiciary.

By Nishthar Idroos –

The year was 1984 and I had just finished my GCE Sophisticated Level Examinations. My mind was not settled on a particular course of study post GCE Sophisticated Level. Law, Journalism and Advertising attracted me equally. I had roughly four months to make a decision. I had to do some thing during the interim. It was during this period I visited a relative in anticipation of a job. While talking to him he received a phone get in touch with, he excused himself and left momentarily. The radio was on and an eminent Law professor who later became a lot publicised figure in the Sri Lankan political scene was on the air expounding outlandish jargon on jurisprudence. I cannot for confident say no matter whether I totally comprehended all what he mentioned, but how he said it held my interest. The gentleman was from the University of Colombo. He was a PhD and was speaking in impeccable English. I later learnt that the individual was a double PhD. He may have not convinced me to embark on a profession in law but for sure I wanted to speak like him. His vocabulary verbose, syntax correct and impact wholesome. I was galvanised.

Nelson Mandela famously mentioned “Education is the most strong weapon which you can use to modify the globe.” I do not believe any sensible person would disagree with the statement. It’s a reality, a proverbial truism. It have to also be mentioned in the very same breath that education can also be misused when largesse is dangled at people supposedly of incorruptible integrity who in reality succumb like rats to its set trap. Also what’s the goal of education when these with it remain silent when draconian legislation is passed to further strengthen an autocratic ruler.

Not everyone is capable to do a PhD, a Medical professional of Philosophy, abbreviated as PhD. An award provided in many countries as a postgraduate  degree by universities for academic excellence in a selected field. A doctorate of philosophy varies considerably according to the nation yet the social status it produces is fairly unique. The term philosophy does not refer solely to the field of philosophy, but is employed in a broader sense in accordance with its original Greek which means, which is &#8220love of wisdom&#8221.

When I completed my Masters twenty 5 years later I was naturally inclined to embark on my doctorate. Chosen a university, spoke to the professor and submitted my proposal and it was accepted. The aura and euphoria I skilled was indescribable. In three to five years folks will contact me physician and that was cooly cool. It was at this juncture I met an old friend Uncle Raymond a confirmed rationalist and quintessentially anti-establishment. Though he was twice my age each shared a really like or you could get in touch with it hate for regional politics. We were meeting after a prolong hiatus.

Both had been thrilled at the prospect of seeing every single other. We did a wonderful deal of catching up. He then asked me what I was up to. I told him the usual. I was in two minds whether or not to mention my new adventure. Yes I wanted to impress him and I pitched him straight on for about two minutes. He listened to me rather attentively. Uncle Raymond stared at me and remained pensive and then started to speak “So you have created up your mind to turn out to be a “Permanent Head Damaged person” I said what do you mean. “That’s what they are, those blokes with PhD’s

“Oh Shut up Mr Idroos” “As if the hell caused by your species is not enough” I was puzzled at this unexpected outburst by my friend Raymond Goonatilleke. I can sense the fury in the man’s face but couldn’t realize why he was displaying such intense behaviour. Then he unleashed a tirade on me as if I was a pickpocket. “Show me one bugger of your species, of these living now who has left a worthwhile legacy, an individual with moral rectitude, show me, show me, show me” This conversation was taking location in the Dehiwala junction location and I was questioning why the cops have been not diverting targeted traffic because Uncle Raymond was firing left, proper and centre.

“All the rascals are cheaters, deceivers, opportunists and grand scale collaborators” “This is precisely what they are” “If they had fulfilled what society had anticipated of them, at least the ones who joined party politics could have produced Sri Lanka a significantly much better place”. Then he started to mention names of Ministers and MPs and these outdoors with PhD and started to shred them as if chunky meat was getting grounded to make some other by-product. The choice of words was unparliamentary therefore not reproducible. Mr Raymond Goonatilleke was a democratic citizen and he had each and every cause to express his opinion. I certainly would have been relatively milder but all five fingers are not the exact same.

Abruptly a private bus approached almost knocking us down. The conductor on the footboard chewing beetle was at the top of his voice, shouting Moratuwa, Moratuwa. Uncle Raymond looked at me and said “Putha I got to leave” “No difficult feelings putha, I told you the truth. I have greater trust in the guy who brings the gas cylinder house than our PhD rascals”. He embarked the Moratuwa bound bus which disappeared into the site visitors.

“I’m positive several people celebrating right now will be thinking of loved ones overseas, specially in Sri Lanka. When I met with President Sirisena in Downing Street final month I provided my help for the methods his government has begun to take to address the troubles of the previous. But I was also clear that the Government must go additional and that they need to continue to offer you full assistance to the ongoing UN investigation&#8221 said David Cameron.

Issuing a statement on Tamil and Sinhalese New Year the British Prime Minister said  “I would like to send my very best wishes to everybody in Britain, Sri Lanka and around the planet celebrating Aluth Avurudda and to all Tamil communities celebrating Puthandu these days. It’s a time when millions of folks will be coming with each other with households, pals and neighbours to celebrate their New Year.

“But it is also a time to don’t forget the amazing contribution Tamil and Sinhalese communities make to Britain. We see it about us, each and every single day – in our schools and our hospitals, in the arts and businesses – you play an incredibly important and optimistic part.

“I’m positive several individuals celebrating right now will be considering of loved ones overseas, especially in Sri Lanka. When I met with President Sirisena in Downing Street last month I supplied my assistance for the measures his government has begun to take to address the issues of the past. But I was also clear that the Government have to go further and that they need to continue to offer you complete assistance to the ongoing UN investigation.

“I hope that this New Year will bring communities closer with each other in helping to heal the wounds of the past.

“To everybody celebrating Puthandu and Aluth Avurudda I want you a really content and prosperous New Year.”

Appalling particulars of the manner in which former President Mahinda Rajapaksa, his household members and his henchmen who had been Ministers of the former regime misused the Sri Lanka Air Force aircraft throughout the Presidential election campaigning period, have come to light.

SLAF helicopters and fixed-wing aircrafts have been exploited at the whims and fancies of the Rajapaksas and some of the Ministers of the former regime, which has resulted in a loss of millions of rupees which will now be settled by taxpayers’ cash.

*Rajapaksas&#8217 final flight &#8211 January 09th 2015- Former President Mahinda Rajapaksa boards a Sri Lanka Air Force Mi-17 helicopter for his flight to Tangalle. His sons Namal, Yoshitha and Rohitha went with him. Photo courtesy Susantha Liyanawatte

Weekly newspaper Sunday Instances reported the SLAF aircrafts have been misused by the Rajapaksa loved ones and some of the former Ministers as if it was a ‘local taxi service’.

Former President had used different varieties of helicopters and Chinese constructed Y-12 passenger transport aircraft on 71 flights for the duration of the period of December 1, 2014 – January 9, 2015. They had all been used to attend election rallies except for a couple of official engagements.

Even though his then rival, President Sirisena was not permitted to use the SLAF assets, others who are not entitled for this perk like his son MP Namal Rajapaksa, the then 1st lady Shiranthi Rajapaksa had freely produced use of this facility and obtained free of charge rides on SLAF helicopters.

Shiranthi Rajapaksa had employed SLAF aircrafts on seven trips for which payments have not been created to this day and 1 such trip involves travelling from Rathmalana to Maharagama and back, which is not a lot more than 5 km apart on December 12.

Meanwhile Namal Rajapaksa had utilized the flights on 25 occasions with out producing any type of payment up to this date and travelled to various locations such as Mattala, Tangalle, Rathnapura, Kandy, Anuradhapura, Manna, Palali and so on.

Meanwhile it has been revealed that Rajapaksa sibling, former Minister Basil Rajapaksa had utilised the SLAF aircrafts on seven flights as effectively as other Ministers like Wimal Weerawansa (seven flights), Susil Premjayantha (three flights), North Western province Chief Minister Dayasiri Jayasekera and an individual named S Manamendra who had travelled on a Bell 412 helicopter from Ratmalana to Colombo, Ginigathena and returned to Rathmalana.

&#8220The Sri Lanka Air Force is but to acquire payments for flights provided to members of former President Mahinda Rajapaksa’s household and former Ministers of his Government. The rates were charged from the point of departure of the aircraft/helicopter from the SLAF base in Ratmalana. Until yesterday the SLAF has not received any payments for these flights.&#8221 the Sunday Occasions said.

Right here are some of those who took the flights:

Namal Rajapaksa – MP

December 1, 2014 – SLAF Bell 412 helicopter to fly from Ratmalana to Colombo, Mattala and return to Ratmalana.
December three, 2014 – SLAF Bell 412 helicopter to fly from Ratmalana to Koggala, Tangalle, Colombo and return to Ratmalana.
December 7, 2014 – SLAF Bell 412 helicopter to fly from Ratmalana to Colombo, Tangalle, Wellawaya, Hambantota, Colombo and return to Ratmalana.
December 9, 2014 – Harbin Y 12 transport aircraft – to fly from Ratmalana to Mattala, Bandaranaike International Airport and return to Ratmalana.
December 11, 2014 – Bell 412 helicopter to fly from Ratmalana to Colombo, Ratnapura, Kandy, Colombo and return to Ratmalana.
December 12, 2014 – Bell 412 helicopter to fly from Ratmalana to Colombo, Hambantota, Wellawaya, Hambantota, Koggala, Bandaranaike International Airport and return to Ratmalana.
December 14, 2014 – Harbin Y 12 transport aircraft to fly from Ratmalana to Katunayake, Anuradhapura, Bandaranaike International Airport and return to Ratmalana.
December 15, 2014 – Bell 412 helicopter to fly from Ratmalana to Colombo, Ratnapura and return to Ratmalana.
December 16, 2014 – Harbin Y 12 transport aircraft to fly from Ratmalana, Mattala, and return to Ratmalana.
December 17, 2014 – Bell 412 helicopter to fly from Ratmalana to Colombo, Palavi, Mannar, Colombo and return to Ratmalana.
December 21, 2014 – Harbin Y 12 transport aircraft from Ratmalana, Vavuniya and return to Ratmalana.
December 22, 2014 – Bell 412 helicopter to fly from Ratmalana to Colombo, Galgamuwa and return to Ratmalana.
December 24, 2014 – Bell 412 helicopter to fly from Ratmalana to Colombo, Tangalle, Koggala, Tangalle, Colombo and return to Ratmalana.
December 25, 2014- Y12 Harbin transport aircraft from Ratmalana to Ampara.
December 26, 2014 – Y12 Harbin transport aircraft to fly from Ampara and return via Katunayake to Ratmalana.
December 27, 2014 – Bell 412 helicopter to fly from Ratmalana to Colombo, Deraniyagala and return to Ratmalana.
January 1, 2015 – Bell 412 to fly from Ratmalana to Koggala, Tangalle, Kurunegala and return to Ratmalana.
January 2, 2015 – Bell 212 helicopter to fly from Hingurakgoda to Kekirawa, Aralaganwila and return to Hingurakgoda.
January four, 2015 – Harbin Y 12 transport aircraft to fly from Ratmalana to Kankesanthurai (Jaffna), Mattala and return to Ratmalana.
January 5, 2015 – Bell 412 helicopter to fly from Ratmalana to Wirawila, Makandura, Colombo, Kaduwela, Nattandiya and return to Ratmalana.
January six, 2015 – Bell 412 helicopter to fly from Ratmalana to Colombo, Medamulana, Koggala and return to Ratmalana.
January 6, 2015 – Harbin Y 12 transport aircraft to fly from Ratmalana to Mattala and Anuradhapura. Night Stop.
January 7 2015 – Harbin Y 12 transport aircraft to fly from Anuradhapura, Wellawaya and return to Ratmalana.

Basil Rajapaksa, former Minister of Economic Improvement

December 13, 2014 – Bell 412 helicopter to fly from Ratmalana to Colombo, Kurunegala, Kegalle and return to Ratmalana.
December 15, 2014 – Bell 412 helicopter to fly from Ratmalana to Colombo, Ratnapura, Colombo and return to Ratmalana.
December 16, 2014 – Mi- 17 helicopter to fly from Ratmalana to Colombo, Vavuniya, Jaffna and Palaly.
December 16, 2014 – Harbin transport aircraft Y 12 to fly from Ratmalana to Palaly and return to Ratmalana.
December 17, 2014 – Bell 412 helicopter – to fly from Ratmalana to Colombo, Wennappuwa, Colombo and return to Ratmalana.
December 18, 2014 – Bell 412 helicopter – to fly from Ratmalana to Colombo, Matale, Colombo and return to Ratmalana.
January 8 2015 – Bell 412 helicopter – to fly from Ratmalana to Colombo, Medamulana, Koggala, Medamulana, Colombo and return to Ratmalana.

Former initial lady Shiranthi Rajapaksa

December 7, 2014 – Mi-17 helicopter from Colombo to Matale, Pallekele, Kandy and return to Ratmalana.
December eight, 2014 – Mi-17 helicopter from Colombo to Kandy and return to Colombo.
December 10, 2014 – Mi-17 helicopter from Ratmalana to Maharagama and return to Ratmalana.
December 12, 2014 – Mi-17 helicopter from Tangalle to Colombo
January two, 2015 – Mi-17 helicopter to fly from Ratmalana to Colombo, Naula and return to Ratmalana.
January three, 2015 – Mi-17 helicopter to fly from Ratmalana to Badulla, Colombo and return to Ratmalana.
January four, 2015 – Mi-17 helicopter to fly from Colombo to Kurunegala and return to Colombo.

Wimal Weerawansa, former Minister of Housing and Building

December 20, 2014 – Harbin Y 12 transport aircraft to fly from Ratmalana, Ampara and return to Ampara.
December 21, 2014 – Bell 412 helicopter to fly from Ratmalana to Colombo, Moneragala, Wellawaya, Buttala and Koggala and return to Ratmalana.
December 21, 2014 – Harbin Y 12 from Ratmalana to fly to Koggala and return to Ratmalana.
January 1, 2015 – Bell 412 helicopter to fly from Ratmalana to Colombo, Kandy, Colombo and return to Ratmalana.
January 2, 2015 – Bell 412 helicopter to fly from Ratmalana to Kandy, Kantale, Sigiriya and return to Ratmalana.
January two 2015 – Harbin Y 12 transport aircraft from Ratmalana to Hingurakgoda and return to Ratmalana.
January 5 2015 – Mi 17 transport helicopter to fly from Ratmalana to Colombo, Wirawila, Matara, Ambalangoda, Matugama and return to Ratmalana.

Susil Premajayantha, former Minister of Atmosphere and Renewable Energy

December 30, 2014 – Bell 412 helicopter to fly from Ratmalana to Colombo, China Bay, Kantale, Valachchenai and Hingurakgoda. Evening stop.
December 31, 2014 – Bell 412 helicopter to fly from Hingurakgoda to Ampara, Colombo and return to Ratmalana.
January 2, 2015 – Mi-17 helicopter to fly from Ratmalana to Colombo, Palaly, Jaffna, Vavuniya, Mannar and return to Colombo.

By S. I. Keethaponcalan –

The adjust of government in January 2015 in Sri Lanka turned the attention of the nation, at least partially, to constitutional reform. President Sirisena won the presidential election promising to make changes to the program of governance. With no wasting as well a lot time, the present government, initial released a draft proposal, then published the draft bill known as the 19^th Amendment to the Constitution, and finally announced amendments to the 19^th Amendment. The proposals entail numerous components. This write-up, even so, deals with the central aspect, i.e, powers of the president and the politics played about this concern.

First Proposal

The 1st proposal published by the government in February 2015 to reform the constitution entailed some radical rudiments as it proposed to transform the current executive presidential program into a parliamentary type of government. According to the original proposal the president was needed to act “always…on the tips of the Prime Minister” except of course “in the case of the appointment of the Prime Minister.” The prime minister was also to be the head of the government.

This was in a way intriguing since President Sirisena did not guarantee to abolish the executive presidential program in his election manifesto. He only promised to take away what he named the “autocratic” powers of the president. Nevertheless, the abolitionists who provided impetus to Sirisena’s election campaign had been elated.

Nevertheless, some of the nationalist Sinhala groups that consisted of political parties and ideological factions were up in arms, especially the Jathika Hela Urumaya (JHU). The group declared that it would not support the proposed adjustments. Why? These groups believed that a diluted political leadership is detrimental to the national security of the country. This notion possibly was based on two assumptions.

One, a robust political leadership (preferably the president) is a precondition to stop a feasible reemergence of the LTTE. The threat perception within this group still remains really strong. They believe that the LTTE will make a comeback with the assistance of the Tamil diaspora and friendly governments in the West. Two, a parliamentary type of government would potentially magnify the power and influence of Tamil parties, specially the Tamil National Alliance (TNA), forcing future governments to make unnecessary concessions. The possibility of an executive prime minister conceding to the Tamils on the far more critical question of devolution of power is not acceptable to these groups. Hence, the assault on the 1st proposal.

19^th Amendment

The resistance forced the UNP government to renegotiate the constitutional amendment with concerned parties and alter its original concepts of constitutional reform. Consequently, the government officially published the draft bill of the Nineteenth Amendment to the Constitution. The 19^th Amendment might be observed as a victory for JHU and other nationalist Sinhala factions simply because the thought to transform the program into a parliamentary type of government was dropped. According to the proposed 19^th Amendment the president is not required to act on the advice of the prime minister.

The draft bill of the 19^th Amendment tried to attain two objectives. 1, it retained the executive presidency although curtailing some of the powers which abetted authoritarianism. For instance, according to the bill, the president shall be “the Head of the State, the Head of the Executive and of the Government and the Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces.” The bill meanwhile proposed to reintroduce the two term limit for the president and restrict the term in office to 5 years as an alternative of the original six years. Two, it proposed to elevate powers of the prime minister. According to this draft the prime minister, for example, will be the head of the cabinet of ministers, decide the number of ministers and have the powers to assign and change subjects of the ministers.

As a result, the proposed 19^th Amendment could be depicted as a compromised formula as it attempted to strike a balance in between agendas that seek to abolish and these that seek to retain the executive presidential method. As the stress mounted against the draft bill, the government not too long ago published what it known as the “Amendments proposed to the 19th Amendment to the Constitution Bill,” which stated that “There shall be a President of the Republic of Sri Lanka, who is the Head of the State, the Head of the Executive and the Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces.”

Regardless of these alterations, the JHU’s resistance continued, which indicated that the celebration was not in favor of constitutional reform at this point in time. It is crucial to note that the celebration, in spite of its meager electoral base, has exercised considerable energy and influence below the present method. Probably there is a nexus amongst the energy the celebration enjoys under the present method and the continuous resistance to any form of constitutional modify.

National Government

Meanwhile, in an fascinating turn of events, the Sri Lanka Freedom Celebration (SLFP), which hitherto performed tasks of the principal opposition party in parliament, accepted ministerial portfolios in the new government and became component of what is termed the national government. For the initial time in the history of Sri Lanka, the two significant parties, the SLFP and the United National Party (UNP) are in the government at the exact same time.

The SLFP’s entry into the government should have raised the likelihood of obtaining the amended version of the bill ratified in the national legislature. The UNP does not have the required two-thirds majority in parliament. With the SLFP assistance, a two-thirds majority could be achieved. Given that both are in the government, theoretically, it must be straightforward to adopt the amendments now.

The SLFP even so is not budging. Party leaders declared that the SLFP would not help the proposed amendment sans provisions to reform the electoral system and want the next general election carried out beneath the new program. The fact that even if the electoral system is reformed quickly, sufficient time needed to provide for implementation does not look to be resonating.

These demands imparted the impression that the present electoral program is detrimental to its probabilities of winning the next general election. It is true that J. R. Jayewardene, the architect of the present constitution, thought that the proportional representation program would bestow an added advantage to the UNP. But the SLFP has won sufficient elections under the present technique. The party can give the UNP a run for its funds if an election is carried out below the present method even nowadays. It is amusing to see the party selecting a but to be determined technique to the present a single.

Consequently, one can argue that concern about the electoral program can’t be the actual lead to of the SLFP resistance to the proposed bill. Some think that the SLFP is covertly operating for President Sirisena. The president understands that weakening the office of the executive president at this point in time could be unsafe. It could pave the way for former president Mahinda Rajapaksa to return to active politics and even enter parliament as the prime minister. Such a situation could be suicidal for Sirisena and his partners such as Democratic Party leader Sarath Fonseka and former president Chadrika Kumaratunga. Naturally, he can’t choose a strengthened office of the prime minister.

If he is not keen to reform the constitution as proposed, one of the very best approaches to delay or scuttle the method is to get the SLFP to make unrealistic demands. Following all, he is the leader of the SLFP. The Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP) has already accused the president of conspiring against the proposed constitutional adjust.

Supreme Court

Obviously, the bill was challenged in the Supreme Court. It was determined that some clauses of the bill had been inconsistent with the constitution. In order to be approved, they require the approval of the men and women in a referendum, in addition to a two-thirds majority in parliament. Importantly, the clauses that bestow powers on the prime minister need approval of the people. The government nevertheless, is not keen to go for a referendum right away. According to news reports coming from Colombo, these clauses will be dropped. This will eliminate any possibility of creating fundamental changes to the system. If approved, the proposals, in the present kind, will take away only a handful of powers of the president and the prime minister will stay a rubber stamp.

*Dr. S. I. Keethaponcalan is Chair of the Conflict Resolution Division, Salisbury University, Maryland.

By Lasanthi Daskon Attanayake –

Dr Ajith C S Perera, in his post ‘Access to Justice : Constitutional Protection for All’ succinctly encapsulate the wide variety of troubles faced by persons living with disabilities in Sri Lanka. His emphasis is ‘access’ of all forms, not just to the constructed atmosphere but to the whole social, political and legal fabric of the country. This is not the initial time Dr Perera wrote about access. He being the only Disability Rights Activist in Sri Lanka to method mainstream print media in writing critical pieces on the want for recognising the huge percentage of persons with disabilities in Sri Lanka continues to campaign difficult .

Much less than four days after we study Dr Perera’s post, a news item seems in a neighborhood newspaper on the discrimination faced by a student with a disability in one particular of the top Girls’ Schools in Colombo, which is followed by however one more article in Colombo Telegraph relating to the issues faced by a traveller with a disability.

It is sad that a youngster with a disability, be it in a major school or not, has to fight for her rights although the School Principal apparently stated that they can not make adjustments ‘just for 1 student’. What would that Principal expect that ‘one child’ to do, exactly where does she anticipate the child to go, if she is not accepted by her personal college? Do we know how many tiny girls and boys in this country are shut out of education in this way? Do we know that physical infrastructure, most of the time, is not the only situation they face? Do we know how significantly we are burdening the families of those youngsters and the society in turn, by not delivering them the chance to be productive members of society?

This is just one story, one aspect. Disability cuts across all dimensions of society, disability could influence any one of us at any offered time. Disability in its numerous types, come to us in our old age. But, we , as a society, look at disability as the abnormality or the impossibility. Our ‘normal’, ‘perfect’ human selves look at persons with disabilities and feel ‘sorry’ for them, wonder what sins they committed in their previous lives to reside with a disability in this life, and heave sighs of relief that we are fortunate not to have ‘sinned’.

&nbsp

*Dr. Ajith Perera &#8211 Campaigns for the Democratic Correct for Inclusion

We take these attitudes to our governing systems, into our policy generating and into our administration. And we ignore the concerns of persons with disabilities due to the fact, to us, in all our undisputed self-proclaimed perfectness, they are only an unfortunate ‘few’.

What we, as a country are reluctant to recognize is that persons with disabilities are the biggest minority group in the nation, and provided the opportunity to be participants in our socio-financial sphere, they would make their contribution to the nation as significantly as the so-named majority would.

Let us now explore a couple of of the prominent gaps.

Gaps in our Laws

Sri Lanka was among the first countries which signed the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) on the quite day it was opened for signature. We enacted a law relating to disability as far back as 1996, a decade ahead of the CRPD came into getting. Possessing made such progress, we now choose to shy away from ratifying the convention and bringing in new progressive legislation in relation to disability. It is therefore worthy of locating out what trigger or causes have debilitated the aspirations of at least a million and a half (going by the government statistics) persons with disabilities living in the island.

Plainly speaking, the malady of disability rights in Sri Lanka has several tentacles the archaic disability rights legislation, the non-ratification of the CRPD and the reluctance to enact a new, progressive law.

The 1996 Act (Protection of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act. No. 28 of 1996), has only a fleeting mention of the ‘rights’ of the disabled and instead focuses heavily on the establishment of the National Council on Disability, its powers and functions. Professor Fiona Kumari Campbell writes that the Act, despite its pretence of being concerned with rights, severely lack in the provision of a codified statement of rights and a philosophical framework to help interpretation and generate the development of politics and law reform.

Considering that 2006, the Ministry of Social Solutions has been struggling with emerging and disappearing draft disability rights Bills. Mysterious circumstances have made a draft Bill disappear and a various version with no substantial improvements to the 1996 Act emerge. Another Bill was drafted in 2013 which again is mysteriously shelved away. Although wider, nationwide consultations had been suggested on the draft bill by particular advocates, the furthest audience it reached have been a couple of chosen consultants (which includes the author). Yet, the consultants themselves had been not informed whether their suggestions were taken into consideration or not, and as to why the drafting approach did not proceed beyond the point of receiving suggestions from them.

The ratification of the CRPD is an issue vehemently debated by particular disability rights advocates themselves. Some were of the robust opinion that the State can’t ratify the treaty unless and till the domestic law falling in line with the CRPD is enacted.

The core of the debate, according to the author’s understanding, is the vexed query of the Disability Services Authority. The Ministry of Social Solutions appears to be of the firm belief (as expressed by its officials) that the establishment of an Independent Authority will take disability out of the purview of the Ministry and that it would be detrimental to the yeoman services provided by the Ministry to the community of persons with disabilities in Sri Lanka. The members of the National Council on Disability have not voiced their opinion on this concern in the open, but it could be safely assumed that they are drastically divided among themselves on this concern.

Marginalisation within the Movement

It is sad that the majority of the outspoken members of the community of persons with disabilities are not broadly represented in the National Council and that the activities of the Council are not as transparent as it must ideally be.

It is also sad that the majority of activities of Disabled Peoples’ Organisations in Sri Lanka stay in the periphery and does not penetrate into mainstream advocacy. Even though the need for empowerment and service provision is of paramount importance, the require for progression of the movement to influence legal and political adjustments cannot be ignored. The globe has witnessed and is nonetheless witnessing the alterations that are brought about by way of mobilisation and activism. I have often heard Disability Rights Advocates say that aggressive lobbying is not the way to get factors done in Sri Lanka, and that we have to function hand in hand with the political and administrative authorities if we are to acquire good results. But somehow, this mild diplomacy does not appear to have brought a lot good adjustments in the disability sphere.

There is also a lack of solidarity and transparency within the Movement The movement wants to revamp itself, open its doors to young men and women with disabilities and supply them space to express their views. A democratic movement, open for criticism will bring in vigour and vitality. A strengthened movement will inevitably influence social progression and bring in political modify.

Ignorance

Our politicians still remain ignorant (at least) of the potential of the voter base of persons with disabilities and their households. If we go strictly by government statistics (2012) which state that eight.five% of the population reside with some form of a disability and assume that there are close upon a single and a half million persons with disabilities, and add one loved ones member per each individual with a disability, nevertheless the number would be at least 3 million persons. Surprisingly, our political leaders do not seem to accept this as a potential voter base.

Coupled with this disinterest and the extreme lack of access in the electoral procedure, persons with disabilities are kept away from political participation.

Other places

Our whole legal program, like the infrastructure, the courts, the judiciary and the practitioners, remain in the dark of the problems a particular person with a disability would face in accessing legal redress, as quoted at the beginning of this write-up, majority of our schools and universities are not ready to accept a child with a disability, our transport systems, our roads, our public places, regardless of current improvements, remain largely inaccessible to persons with disabilities. Moreover, the corporate sector is poorly informed of the prospective of inclusive firms. All in all, as a nation, as a society, we are totally oblivious to the challenges faced by persons with disabilities in our social and physical atmosphere.

How do we move forward?

The answers are numerous, but the primarily we require to understand that disability is not an isolated problem. It is cross-cutting, and omnipresent, it could affect any 1 of us at any offered time, temporarily or permanently. Persons with Disabilities are not ‘a few’ as many would like to think. they are ‘many’, living among us and with us. Disabilities are not ‘uncommon’ or ‘abnormal’, they are a portion of normality, a reality of life. Persons with Disabilities share the same dreams, aspirations, hopes and feelings as the non-disabled majority.

As a result, as a nation, as a society, it is essential for us to initial and foremost consider inclusion a necessity, not an choice.

*Lasanthi is an Lawyer-at-Law who is reading for her Masters in Human Rights at the University of Colombo. She is an independent consultant on disability and is a going to lecturer at the Department of Disability Studies, Faculty of Medicine, University of Ragama. She is married to Senarath Attanayake, the first and the only elected politician who has lived with a disability his whole life and also the 1st person in a wheelchair to become an Lawyer-at-Law

By Laksiri Fernando –

“If 1 desires to modify the nature of a specific democracy, the electoral program is probably to be the most appropriate and successful instrument of undertaking so.” &#8211  Arend Lijphart

Any electoral reform that intends to substantially alter the proportional representation (PR) in Sri Lanka will go against people’ sovereignty. For that reason, any try to do so need to be opposed. This does not imply that the introduction of ‘first previous the post (FPP) constituencies,’ within the current or a new PR system is undemocratic. In reality these constituencies are necessary to improve the elector-elector links for much better democracy and representative accountability.

Among the so far discussed or disclosed proposals, the ‘best loser’ approach linked with the Dinesh Gunawardena (DG) recommendations on mixing (not linking) FPP and PR is the most undemocratic.

There are two primary nations which employ the ‘best loser’ (BL) strategy at present: Mauritius and Japan. It is possible that DG or his advisers picked the technique from Japan than Mauritius since the program in Mauritius has been far more controversial than in Japan and it is in the method of abandoning at present. Italy also employed the ‘best loser’ technique throughout 1993 and 2005 but abandoned it for whatever the reason.

Expertise in Mauritius

When Mauritius received independence in 1967, it adapted this method from the colonial practice of ‘communal representation.’ It was an appendage to the Westminster FPP program to let particular minorities to give representation on the basis of their assertion. For this objective all candidates have been compelled to ‘declare their ethnicity/religion’ which was fundamentally undemocratic. At the starting it worked nicely and even considered a needed ingredient in a multi-ethnic/religious society. It had nothing considerably to do with proportional representation.

Mauritius is divided into 21 multimember constituencies and elects 62 members by way of the FPP program. As described before, the constitution compels all contestants to declare his/her ethnicity and particular minorities (Muslims, Christians, Chinese or Creoles) qualify for the ‘best loser’ accommodation for 8 seats in a 70 member assembly. All may possibly be losers, but only the greatest are accommodated under the scheme. For that reason, as a approach this is similar to what is proposed in Sri Lanka.

There is or was some validity in the concept when it is/was applied in the case of representation of tiny ethnic/religious minorities. Similarly, if this is applied for representation of females, nevertheless there can be some validity.

Yet, the practice was challenged just before the UN Human Rights Committee (HRC) as a violation of certain principles in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and a determination was given in August 2012. That is one reason why Mauritius is now thinking about its abolition and devising a greater technique of representation which includes adopting a PR program.

Among the two primary contentions transpired for the duration of the HRC determination, the inadvisability of the stereotyped communal representation and the deviation from the principle of ‘one vote 1 value,’ the latter has a lot relevance in discarding the ‘best loser’ approach in any country.

Sekihairitsu (very best losers) in Japan

In contrast to in Mauritius, Japan makes use of the best loser technique as a portion of proportional representation. This was introduced in 1996. In a 480 member parliament, 300 members are elected via FPP method in single member constituencies and 180 in a PR tier. The PR tier is a list technique. This is also a mixed member technique, nonetheless allocation of seats in one particular tier does not dependent on the other. In other words, the constituency technique is not linked to an general PR program like in Germany or New Zealand.

As Leonard Schoppa has stated “in a mixed member technique, the devil is typically in the details,” whether in Japan, Germany, New Zealand, Sri Lanka or Russia. Russia is another country which has an unlinked mixed member system however with out a ‘best loser’ technique.

The two principal principles in the Japanese system are (1) the double candidacy (choufuku rikkouho), which is typical to a lot of mixed systems, and (2) the ‘best loser’ (sekihairitsu) provisions. The second provision signifies that the candidates in the PR list also be nominated in a single member district or vice versa. Japan usually ranks the candidates in the PR list collectively and not on a preferential order. Then the candidates who win their single member constituencies are deleted from the PR list. Thereafter, the remaining candidates are then ranked according to how close they came to winning their single member constituencies.

The ‘philosophical’ argument goes that possibly the candidate B lost to A by one vote! Consequently, the best loser notion is democratic. In Japan, the calculation employed is not the calculation proposed in Sri Lanka. Japanese ratio equals, in the above example, the votes received by A divided by the votes received by B.

The following nonetheless is the ‘devil’ according to Leonard Schoppa (The Evolution of Japan’s Party Method, 2011).

“The PR component of the new electoral system has provided a few seats to little parties, but the major parties have employed it to resolve nomination troubles in the single-member districts that are at the heart of the system.” (My emphasis).

Where the Devil in Sri Lanka?

We have nevertheless not seen the devil in Sri Lanka! Of course we have seen several devils in the political arena, but what I mean is behind the electoral reform proposals to introduce the ‘best loser’ method. The final report of the Gunawardena (PSC) Committee is not available for public scrutiny. This is even following the acceptance of ‘right to information’ in principle as a constitutional proper. The Interim PSC Report does not have a lot meat. It is only of six pages. What it says in total about the national electoral technique is the following.

“The majority view favours reforms to the present technique leading towards a Mixed Method of a mixture of First-previous-the-post and Proportional Representation Systems. Issues were raised in respect of a proposed adjust of the present program by minority parties and communities of interests who urged the committee to make sure equitable representation in the method that is finally proposed.”

“Your Committee is of the view that a mixed technique be adopted which involves components of Initial-past-the-post and Proportional Representation systems. The modalities and particulars of the technique to be adopted would be further deemed by the Committee at its future sittings and would be presented to Parliament in due course.”

“The Committee is in agreement that the present quantity of Members of Parliament need to not be elevated.”

Of course it calls for a mixed technique. It talks about a combination of FPP and PR. The Interim Report focuses on other issues like national identity cards, postal voting and even electronic voting which are not altogether unnecessary. It is attainable that there was a final report subsequently. Even so, I have heard even the Election Commissioner saying he has not noticed or it was not submitted to him.

There is significantly speak about the ‘best loser method’ or concept nevertheless. However, there can be numerous approaches of applying even the ‘best loser’ approach as we have seen above in the case of Mauritius and Japan.

In the President Maithripala Sirisena’s Election Manifesto he says the following.

&#8220I guarantee the abolition of the preferential method and will ensure that every single electorate will have a Member of Parliament of its personal.  The new electoral technique will be a mixture of the first-past-the post system and the proportional representation of defeated candidates&#8220

The 1st sentence is significantly far more important than the second. It guarantees the abolition of the preferential system and the introduction of electorates (constituencies) with its own Members of Parliament. It does not say about abolishing the PR method. It is apparent that the formulation is not effectively believed out in the hurry probably. Even though it says ‘the proportional representation of defeated candidates’ what is needed is the proportional representation of all deserving parties for good governance in the country.

Like the bizarre terminology of the ‘best loser,’ the advocacy of a ‘program of defeated candidates’ proportional representation’ (DCPR!) smacks democratic principles and excellent governance. It is unfortunate that this has creeped into Mr. Sirisena’s Manifesto. By altering the terminology to ‘runner up’ from ‘best loser’ would not make a distinction.

Greatest-Loser Mentality

Schoppa identified the intent to ‘solve nomination problems’ as the major motive behind the ‘best loser’ approach in Japan. What could be the motives in Sri Lanka? I hardly consider the concern in the Gunawardena report was for the minor or minority parties or democratic principles. It is essential to figure the period in which this ‘secret’ report has finally carved out – 2007.

The political class in Sri Lanka has, by and big, turn out to be a parasitic tribe. Appear at what they say about the Best Loser at the Presidential elections! The very best loser need to turn into the Prime Minister! This is the very same mentality in proposing the ‘best loser’ approach in the electoral program. Gunawardena is the primary man behind each moves.

I have noticed in current instances at least two essential political figures, one particular in the government and one in the dubious opposition, lamenting that they may possibly shed their assigned electorates beneath a FPP competitors. A single was also a crucial member of the Gunawardena Committee. So they can only get into parliament under the ‘best loser’ system.

This is not to say that there is something particularly incorrect in placing the exact same candidate in each tiers (FPP and PR), if the political party so wish and the individual so deserve. This might be needed particularly in the case of females candidates. Nonetheless, accommodating the ‘best losers’ or ‘defeated candidates’ need to not be the beginning point or the decisive issue in the PR tier.

There is also a essential distinction in between the constituency of the FPP winner and the PR winner. In the case of Sri Lanka, the first should be the constituency or the electorate and the second need to be the all round district. Duty and accountability need to be different. The losers must not be packed to the exact same ‘Kalawana’ seat. The proposed ‘best loser’ accommodation is arbitrary like the old ‘Kalawana’ double seating.

The ‘best loser’ (initial loser) strategy can be a trick to redistribute PR seats amongst the loser candidates of main parties in any country. What about the second or the second greatest losers? The technique will betray the objective of proportional representation altogether. As some of the members of the HRC pointed out in the Mauritius case, the ideal loser system violates a fundamental principle of universal franchise, ‘one vote a single value.’ What the proportional representation tries to obtain is not the equalisation of (obvious) unproportioned votes among winners and losers but to give due share of representation to proportionate votes that the parties and/or candidates receive from the men and women.

It is very best that the ‘best loser’ idea is entirely dropped in election vocabulary not only in Sri Lanka but everywhere altogether.

By Dayan Jayatilleka –

We have already had a bitter experience with Mr. Wigneswaran and we mustn’t repeat or compound it. Mr. Sampanthan is a cultured gentleman, a superb speaker and a fine parliamentarian in the old tradition. But he would be most unsuitable to be created Leader of the Opposition. It is neither due to the fact he is an ethnic Tamil nor since he is the leader of the TNA that Mr. Sampanthan must not be appointed the Leader of the Opposition of the Sri Lankan parliament. It is because of the political project he subscribes to and the political views he holds. Going by those declared views, he would, as Opposition Leader, not oppose only the policies and practices of the Government of Sri Lanka. Indeed he possibly will not oppose the present Government at all, considering that he helped bring it into workplace his celebration colleague Mr. Sumanthiran is a co-drafter of the 19^th amendment which castrates the executive Presidency, turning that office into a constitutional eunuch and his party the TNA has gone on to defend the 19^th amendment in the Supreme Court. As an alternative, Mr. Sampanthan as Opposition Leader would be opposed to the extremely political neighborhood, the quite political unit, which he would be sworn to uphold and operate squarely within.

To place it differently, a single can not have as the Leader of the Opposition a person who is not loyal to the Sri Lankan State. 1 can not have as Leader of the Opposition, somebody who refuses to uphold the quite character – unitary, not merely united—of the Sri Lankan state.

I refer not only to a decade ago, when Mr. Sampanthan and his celebration contested the election on a single point platform, namely that the separatist-terrorist LTTE was “the sole reputable representative of the Tamil People”. I do not refer mostly to the fact that he has yet to express regret and apology for that stand.

I refer mainly to Mr. Sampathan’s stand on so solemn an occasion as his party’s 14^th Annual Convention in 2012 a mere 3 years ago, nicely into the post-war period when his political conduct can’t be excused by the invocation of a most likely LTTE threat to his life.

A mere three years ago, Mr. Sampanthan, the most prominent neighborhood leader of the Northern Tamil neighborhood, which exists a few miles away from the sub-regional landmass of Tamil Nadu with its aggressively hostile streak towards Sri Lanka, reiterated his party’s commitment to reaching with the help of the international community, the very same ‘soaring aspirations’ that could not be accomplished by way of the force of arms.

He asserted—some would say confirmed—that ‘the international community’, by way of its present stance, might open the space for the achievement of that objective: “&#8230The existing practices of the international neighborhood may give us an chance to accomplish, without the loss of life, the soaring aspirations we had been unable to accomplish by armed force.” (R. Sampanthan, speech at ITAK 14^th Annual Convention, Batticaloa, May possibly 2012, Colombo Telegraph)

Plainly the “soaring aspiration” which was unsuccessfully sought to be achieved via “ armed force” is that of the separate state of Tamil Eelam, which axiomatically entails the dismemberment of Sri Lanka. This is the gentleman who some openly suggest for the post of the Leader of the Opposition!

In his keynote speech on this formal political occasion, Mr. Sampanthan called for the restoration of the degree of sovereignty that the Tamil people are said to have enjoyed over 500 years ago, prior to the advent of colonialism. This refers to a entirely independent political existence. “…Up to 500 years ago, the Tamil individuals established their personal governments, and governed themselves.  Our party symbolizes a time in history…during which our individuals had their personal sovereign Tamil governments&#8230Our basic objective is to regain our community’s Property, its historical habitat and its sovereignty. The symbol of the House symbolizes this unshakeable aim…” (Ibid)

The House Mr. Sampanthan is talking about is not the Parliament of Sri Lanka, where the Sri Lanka Muslim Congress ( SLMC) and particular ideologues of the LSSP such as Mr. Lal Wijenaike would like to see him as Leader of the Opposition! No, Mr. Sampanthan is clearly calling for a separate house as a home—not a roomier space in the current home of the unitary Sri Lankan state.

If the globe have been to be re-ordered by restoring the pre-colonial status quo ante of no less than half a millennium if each and every minority of roughly a million people or a fraction of a country’s citizenry, have been to demand this correct and seek its exercising, the planet would be plunged into anarchy, chaos, bloodshed. This project can’t be entertained—and most surely not on a fairly tiny island with no ‘defense in depth’ adjacent to a landmass which has been historically hostile.

Had Mr. Sampanthan’s transparent declaration of techniques at his party’s Annual Convention just three years back been authored by a Sinhalese, it would have been dubbed ‘racist stereotyping’. “…The softening of our stance regarding particular problems, and the compromise we show in other concerns, are diplomatic techniques to make sure that we do not alienate the international neighborhood. They are not indications that we have abandoned our fundamental objectives…In other words – we have to prove to the international community that we will never ever be capable to recognize our rights within a united Sri Lanka… Despite the fact that the issue at hand is the same, the prevailing conditions are distinct. The struggle is the same, but the approaches we employ are distinct. Our aim is the same, but our techniques are distinct. The players are the same, but the alliances are distinct. That is the nature of the Tamil folks. Although we still have the identical aim, the techniques we use are now different…” (Ibid)

Straightforward logic tells us that if such a individual who holds these views is appointed the Leader of the Opposition, he will use his office to further the aims he believes in and is committed to. As a result we shall have a Leader of the Opposition who has “not abandoned [their] fundamental objectives” who believes that “the struggle is the same” and “the aim is the same” (as that of those who employed “armed force”). Logic tells us that he will use “different strategies”, “approaches” and “alliances” in the service of the unchanged basic objective and aim. Most clearly of all, Mr. Sampanthan as Leader of the Opposition will continue to feel and feel, and act on the pondering and feeling, that he and his celebration “must prove to the international neighborhood that we will never ever be capable to realize our rights inside a united Sri Lanka”. Therefore Mr. Sampanthan is committed to proving to the world that Tamil rights can be realized not “within” but only outside a “united Sri Lanka”.

Note that Mr. Sampanthan utilised the term “united” and not “unitary’. If he does not think that Tamil rights can be realized inside a “united Sri Lanka”, is he not making the case for separation? Do we believe his Supreme Court affidavit or his address as leader, the annual convention of his celebration? In other words do we think what he says in English in Colombo or what he says on a formal occasion, in Tamil, in the North and East? At the extremely least we have right here a case of political schizophrenia. Do we want to have a democratic separatist or at the quite least, a political schizophrenic as the Leader of the Opposition of Sri Lanka? These who advocate this are either utterly irresponsible or subscribe to a sinister separatist project. They are either fools or knaves.

Shrinkage of Sinhala Political Energy

Currently the combination of the 19^th amendment which dismantles the robust Presidency would spot national decision making in the hands of a Prime Minister who could be the prepared or unwilling hostage of the TNA and a parliament and a Cabinet that could be bought up by Diaspora slush funds. Taken collectively with the drive to go beyond the 13^th amendment and Mr. Sampanthan’s belief that Madam Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga will settle the ethnic problem by the end of this year on the basis of her political ‘package’ of the mid-1990s, what the Ranil-Chandrika-TNA troika and their external patrons are embarking on is a road map to weaken the centralizing capacities of the Sri Lankan state and lessen the share of state energy, political power, that the Sinhala community has and is rightfully entitled to be given (a) its overwhelming demographic preponderance, (b) antiquity (if the Northern Tamils had preceded the Sinhalese they would hardly have remained stuck in the least arable Northern cone of the island) and (c) the fact that it is the only neighborhood whose language, an ancient a single, is spoken only on this island.

The suggestion to make Mr. Sampanthan the Leader of the Opposition is part of a macro-strategy to minimize the share of political energy and size of the stake-holding inside the Sri Lankan state that the Sinhala nation is naturally and organically entitled to. Ranil, Chandrika, the TNA, and these nations with substantial concentrations of Tamil voters are moving to dismantle the safeguards for Sinhala political power in this island state. The strategic aim is the dilution and dissolution of Sinhala power, the energy of the majority on the island—not least simply because the Sinhalese are observed as the sole obstacle to Western and neighboring hegemony and as allies of China on this strategically placed island on the Maritime Silk Route, whilst the Northeastern periphery is noticed as a prospective base by the external hegemons, who will therefore tilt towards maximizing the energy of the North as a distinct, very autonomous, certainly quasi-independent political unit a la Kurdistan. This is why Mahinda Rajapaksa was externally de-stabilized and ousted, and a puppet regime “democratically” installed. And that in turn is why the multitude wishes him to return, to steer the destiny of their nation a nation that is now manipulated by external hegemons and their disgraceful neighborhood lackeys. The multitude knows in its bones, nay, in its collective soul that this island is the only nation they have on this planet.

By K. Arulananthan –

Wellawatte : Moving to a new apartments at the third floor, as usual drawn water from kitchen tap and boiled prior to drinking. On the second day, all who shared the same water had complained severe thoracic discomfort. Later, came to know that the tap water is drawn from a tube effectively water and distributed among the unsuspicious residence with no any purification.

Rathupaswala : A quickly increasing town, surrounded by paddy fields, is positioned at about 25 km from Colombo. Water is drawn from open duck properly for drinking. A colleague of mine, who lives in Rathupaswala, drawn water from a effectively at her home and tested at the laboratory, exactly where she performs, discovered that the pH remained in between 2 and three – Acidic (pH significantly less than 7 are mentioned to be acidic).

Now the residents at Rathupaswala are supplied with public water program (pipe borne water), thanks for the mass struggle, which ended with deaths, injuries and damage to home. Nevertheless, no 1 knows what triggered the acidity to the well water, a factory or geology of the soil or each! (Rathu –RED, paswala -SOIL)

Mahaweli Upper Catchment : Below the project “Managing Agro-chemical Multiuse Aquatic Systems (MAMAS)”, water samples had been drawn from upper catchment of Mahaweli River by one particular my collogue for testing agrochemical pollution. The samples were offered to be tested for pesticide at the institute, which constituted the expert group to examine the severity of the oil contamination with ground water at Chunnakam. The institute reported that the pesticide content is “not detectable” (negligible or nil) in all water samples. My colleague told me that, suspecting the outcome, he injected pesticide into the sample and handed more than to the very same institute for testing. Nevertheless the test report from the institute indicated that the pesticide content is at not detectable level!

Coastal waters: A current coastal water quality monitoring outcomes revealed that Escherichia coli, a bacteria associated with fecal matter and cause for water borne disease far exceed the accepted limit (The widely accepted limit is 500 cfu/100 ml).The lead to is identified as the municipal raw sewage, discharged at about 2 km into the sea from coastline in Colombo, in other places it is discharged at the coast line itself. One particular of my colleagues, an on looker of the presentation of the monitoring result told me that “it seems taking a swim at our coastal waters is like swimming in a septic tank!”

Padavi-Sripura : CKDu, Chronic Kidney Disease, where “u” stands for unknown or uncertain etiology, was 1st reported in 1994. Soon after two decades, it is at an epidemic scale, affecting far more than 50,000, additional spreading into Northern, Eastern, North Western, Central, and Uva provinces. I keep in mind, it was earlier told that cooking in an aluminum vessel could be the potential cause for the CKD, not too long ago it is reported that the potential result in could be the drinking water contaminated with pesticides. Nevertheless no one appears to know the trigger!.

Chunnakam : In January 2015, it is reported that the Northern Provincial Council has appointed a team of specialists to investigate the contamination of ground water from Chunnakam Power Station. There are other reports indicated that that two separate teams from the Power and Energy Ministry and the Disaster Management Ministry would assess the ground situation and concern would be addressed inside two weeks and also reported that an independent committee consisting of officials from the ministry and the Central Environmental Authority to study the oil contamination issue (Sundaytimes-25.01.2015).

The most typical and deadly pollutants in the drinking water are of biological origin (pathogenic bacteria, viruses and protozoa) and chemical contaminants, which consist of naturally occurring constituents (Arsenic, Barium, Boron, and so forth ), synthetic pollutants (Cadmium, Mercury, and so on ), organic pollutants (Benzene, Carbon tetrachloride, and so forth.) Sri Lanka Requirements Institute published “Tolerance limits for inland surface waters used as raw water for public water supply (SLS 722)”, which contain, if not all the biological and chemical containments, at least for most of them. Is the drinking water within the tolerance limit? No 1 seems to know!

Secure an efficient and successful monitoring, assessment and enforcement is vital to make certain safe drinking water. Ceylon Environmental Authority is mandated to undertake surveys and investigations as to the causes, nature, extent and prevention of pollution and undertake investigations and inspections to ensure compliance in inland waters.

Systematic Monitoring of water top quality is the very first step to assure secure drinking water. Though, discrete monitoring is reported, in my restricted search, I haven’t come across any systematic continuous monitoring. It appears that we do not have capacity to monitor all the health hazardous chemical contaminants. Even, the instruments offered look to be not in desirable working situation, due to lack of certified and trained personals and lack of information in calibration of instruments. Therefore, as of today, we could never know the good quality of water and continue to drink with deadly pollutants.