Mawbima News

By Dayan Jayatilleka –

“…we’re going to speak these days about President Sirisena’s thoughts about how to move Sri Lanka away from 30 years of war with the Tamils…”– Secretary of State John Kerry, Feb 12, 2015

Offered that India is Sri Lanka’s only neighbor and that it is a large country and an Asian power, it is correct that Sri Lanka regards the management of its relations with India as the top priority. Consequently, it is suitable that the President Sirisena, preceded by the new Government’s Foreign Minister Mangala Samaraweera must make New Delhi their 1st location. President Sirisena is fairly appropriate to comply with this up with a visit to China in March.

However, the new Foreign Minister visited Washington DC, and certainly London, ahead of he visited Beijing. This is most unfortunate, given that Sri Lanka’s principal identity need to be as an Asian nation and that China is maybe the most essential Asian power and certainly a single of the two top Asian powers, with the other getting India. Given the multifaceted strategic partnership, assistance and solidarity that China has always and unhesitatingly extended Sri Lanka for decades, it would have been each sagacious and ethically appropriate for Foreign Minister Samaraweera to check out Beijing soon after his go to to our neighbor New Delhi and prior to his visit to any other capital, and most undoubtedly ahead of he visited Washington DC. His failure to do so and his check out to the UK and USA prior to China is a clear indication of the external relations doctrine of the new Cabinet.

I emphasize the term ‘the new Cabinet’, since I think that notwithstanding his occasional pronouncements during the elections, President Sirisena is naturally inclined to be a friend of China and to balance amongst India and China, rather than tilt to India, the USA or any emergent Indo-US axis. Nonetheless, the new Cabinet is emerging as an autonomous energy center, since President Sirisena has chosen not to exercising his Constitutional appropriate to chair Cabinet meetings, and it is the Prime Minister who does so.

US Secretary of State John Kerry’s welcoming remarks on the occasion of his meeting with Sri Lanka’s new Foreign Minister revealed two standard truths. Firstly, that even at its most friendly, the US has a slightly prejudiced, if not warped perception of Sri Lanka. Secondly that Foreign Minister Samaraweera is no Lakshman Kadirgamar, the man he succeeded throughout his first stint in the post beneath President Rajapaksa.

Speaking in Washington DC on February 12, 2015, Mr. Kerry concluded his remarks of welcome with the line “…we’re going to speak right now about President Sirisena’s thoughts about how to move Sri Lanka away from 30 years of war with the Tamils to a country that is inclusive and prosperous and peaceful.”

Earlier in his remarks, Secretary Kerry talked of the January 8th election as a “vote to move Sri Lanka in a new direction, to open up greater accountability…and placing with each other a government that will speak for and to the people…”

Mr. Kerry is a very intelligent man, and in any case the LTTE or Tamil Tigers are sufficiently nicely identified, for him to have been aware that Sri Lanka did not wage or experience “30 years of war with the Tamils” but with a separatist terrorist army or militia. So, either the US views the LTTE as getting representative of the Tamils or it thinks that Sri Lanka waged a war for 30 years against the Tamil community. Whichever it was, it is damaging, distorted, insulting and dangerous.

One can think about that had he faced a comparable welcome, Foreign Minister Kadirgamar would have, in his own remarks, gently but clearly set the record straight, rectifying the egregious error. He would undoubtedly not have let his nation and its contemporary history be misrepresented he would certainly not have taken it lying down.

For his portion, Foreign Minister Mangala Samaraweera not only failed to diplomatically correct the utterly false perception of and unfair reference to our nation and implicitly its armed forces, he failed to mention the 30 years of war at all!

Secretary Kerry’s referred to the election as a vote to move Sri Lanka in a new path “opening up higher accountability”. This demonstrates that the hypocritical invocation of accountability hasn’t stopped and that it remains on the front burner of the US agenda on Sri Lanka. There is consequently a gap in between US expectations of Sri Lanka under the new administration, and the national, state and safety interests of Sri Lanka, not to mention the views of the majority of Sri Lankan folks.

Of course Secretary Kerry’ remarks were ironic in the intense since the individual who “moved Sri Lanka from 30 years of war”, was not President Sirisena but his predecessor President Rajapaksa, and that was 5 years ago. It is nice of Mr. Kerry to hope that President Sirisena would move us to a peaceful and prosperous Sri Lanka, but we’ve been peaceful and prosperous for five years, on President Rajapaksa’s watch.

Following her check out to Sri Lanka, Asst. Secretary of State Nisha Biswal and much more importantly, US National Security Advisor Susan Rice referred to assisting in Sri Lanka’s transition. At a single level, the US view rests upon an interesting inaccuracy since Sri Lanka is not genuinely in the kind of transition that the other countries named in their officials’ statements are or have been. Sri Lanka is not in transition from a military or any other type of dictatorship or autocracy. It was always a multiparty democracy in which competitive elections have been held. This time the Opposition won and there was a smooth transfer of power following a peaceful election. So Sri Lanka is not a transitional state or society. Nonetheless, the use of the term ‘transitional’ by the US official reflects the view that Sri Lanka is in some sort of a transition. This can only be a transition from one kind of external relations paradigm which was realistically oriented towards Eurasia, primarily but not only Russia and China, to a competing paradigm which incorporates Sri Lanka into the Western orbit, especially the US pivot to Asia and most concretely, the Indo-US condominium in the Indian ocean region.

The US usage of the term ‘transition’ with respect to Sri Lanka might have an internal dimension also, in that the new Government might restructure the state, transitioning it from a robust centripetal unitary state structure with a strong center and an executive presidency, to 1 which is essentially a parliamentary and quasi-federal program, much less able to resist centrifugal ethnic pulls from Tamil separatism and the neighboring South Indian state of Tamil Nadu, and withstand external stress. Sri Lanka seems to be in transition to a State form and model that is significantly less able to safeguard national sovereignty, independence, unity and territorial integrity. The US may possibly be pleased to assist in transition to such a looser, weaker State.

The new Cabinet is overwhelmingly a United National Celebration cabinet. The UNP under the leadership of Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe is officially a member of the International Democratic Union (IDU) which is a collection of rightwing parties headed by the US Republicans and the UK Conservatives. As such the UNP government is far more probably to be oriented towards a prospective US-India axis. The Foreign Minister appears to represent the view of the UNP dominated government, rather than of President Sirisena who is the new leader of the centrist-nationalist Sri Lanka Freedom Celebration (SLFP).

While it will be in Sri Lanka’s national interest that the Sri Lanka Freedom Celebration (SLFP) wins the upcoming parliamentary election and re-balances the country’s political equation, it is unlikely at the moment. This is simply because there is ideological and political confusion in the ranks of the SLFP. Correct now, the UNP has been offered the advantage by President Sirisena due to the fact he has appointed the UNP leader as Prime Minister and a predominantly UNP Cabinet, in spite of the truth that the UNP has not won an election nor has the assistance of a majority in parliament. It is ironic due to the fact President Sirisena is the new leader of the SLFP. But he has conferred an unfair advantage on the rival UNP by empowering it. He and former President Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga have further confused the SLFP by collaborating with the UNP and attacking ex-President Mahinda Rajapaksa who won the majority of the Sinhala majority at the current elections, though he lost in the island as a entire. Mr. Rajapaksa won 58% of the 75% of the population who take place to be Sinhalese. The SLFP wants Mr. Rajapaksa’s recognition to win the upcoming election but the new SLFP leader appears determined to attack him politically. In this deliberate confusion, it is likely that the UNP will win. The only factor that could adjust that scenario is if ex-President Rajapaksa tends to make a political comeback at the parliamentary election by means of the SLFP or an successful new nationalist formation. If the SLFP wins, specially with a Rajapaksa element, then the foreign policy of the SLFP will be closer to that of the Rajapaksa years, though there would be greater balance in between China, India and the USA, and particularly amongst China and India. Nonetheless, if the UNP wins, foreign policy will continue its present shift sharply towards the US, the West and a Washington-Delhi axis.

India can play a very constructive part in the financial, political and diplomatic arenas. Just lately the elected semi-autonomous Northern Provincial Council of Sri Lanka’s Tamil majority location passed a Resolution with the outrageous and aggressive allegation that successive Sri Lankan Governments because Independence in 1948, committed “genocide” against the Tamil neighborhood. India can help Sri Lanka’s rehabilitation approach by assisting oppose trends towards political and ethnic radicalization and polarization. It can do so by creating it very clear to Sri Lanka’s and South India’s Tamil politicians that Delhi strongly opposes such a Resolution and will not countenance such anti-Sri Lankan and potentially separatist postures on the part of the Tamil politicians. India can also assure Sri Lanka of assistance for the island’s sovereignty in any work to counter moves by the UN Higher Commissioner for Human Rights to move forward with an inquiry into Sri Lanka’s successful war against separatist terrorism in 2009.

Problems of a tactical nature between India and Sri Lanka, such as the problems of illegal fishing and Tamil refugees, can be dealt with jointly. What may prove a lot more problematic are two strategic concerns, namely India’s concerns about Sri Lanka-China equation and Sri Lanka’s political handling of its Tamil Query.

By Sudat Pasqual –

Cricket News

International Cricket Council Chief Executive Dave Richardson has vehemently denied that he was referring to the administration of Sri Lanka Cricket when he mentioned that illegal actions was the most pressing concern that had to be addressed by the ICC. &#8220I recognize that thinking about the continuous outrageous conduct of the individuals heading SLC , it is natural to conclude that whenever we at the ICC refers to illegal actions, we are referring to the hierarchy Sri Lanka Cricket. Nevertheless, on this occasion I was merely creating a point about the significance of eliminating illegal BOWLING actions from the game. Illegal actions of SLC will be discussed at length at the next common meeting&#8221, Richardson concluded.

More Cricket

In a gorgeous development , the International Cricket Council has agreed to permit India to bring their personal drop in pitches for all their matches. ICC mentioned that India was effectively inside their rights to demand that they get to defend their title on wickets similar to the ones in the subcontinent. Indian bowlers have struggled on Australian and New Zealand pitches and if we don&#8217t permit them to bring their own pitches India probably won&#8217t make to the 2nd round the statement further explained. That would not be great for the game or the players in India. This makes it a win-win circumstance for India the statement concluded.

Sri Lanka Cricket News

The executive committee of Sri Lanka Cricket responded to Minister&#8217s contact for gentlemanly behavior from SLC administrators in the following manner

&#8221 Since forcefully imposed on our membership by the very first siblings of Sri Lanka, this Executive Committee has diligently followed long established practices of Intransigence at each opportunity. We are and will usually remain committed to bringing the greatest quantity of disrepute in the shortest amount of time tothis cash cow of a game. We have never seeked low-cost publicity by acting in a transparent or accountable manner. We are proud to say that not one particular amongst us is a gentleman. The final of these had been kicked out along with Arjuna Ranatunga. We declare to the globe that this committee will continue its path of destruction of all that&#8217s excellent and decent, such as people such as Kumar Sangakkara. The minister could force us to the fountain of decency and good governance, but he will NOT make us change our uncouth approaches. Thank you.&#8221

MP Watson Hadunhetti has declared that the Secretary of Sri Lanka Cricket Board has agreed to deposit $ 1 billion due in back taxes to Finance Minister&#8217s designated account at the Union Bank. After the transaction is confirmed the funds will be shared with the Minister of Sports and SLC Secretary&#8217s position will be merged with the workplace of the CEO. All’s nicely that ends properly

News of Mrs.Weerawansa

The ethically challenged and factually confused Mrs.Wimal Weerawansa was panic stricken and inconsolable when told that her passport was impounded. Mrs.Weerawansa was heard lamenting, &#8220I am practically out of edible underwear. Now Wimal will start going to these horrible massage parlors once more! I can&#8217t compete with these sophisticated bimbos. Oh my god!&#8221

Weerawansa vows to restrict food intake

Calling the therapy of Mohan Pieris as unjust, the designated imbecile of that Rajapaksa cabinet Wimal Weerawansa vowed to limit his caloric intake to 1,500 per meal till Pieris is created chief of anything. He said it was the very same amount consumed by him throughout the protest against the UN. This type of mean and tasteless behavior was expected of us, but I anticipated a lot more from our Tamils and the Muslim brethren.

By Emil van der Poorten –

Like all those in search of to comment on what is emerging out of the cesspool that passed for governance until this nation rid itself of the Rajapaksas, I have identified myself possessing to indulge in superlatives of the wrong sort, the mildest of which are most likely “ludicrous” or “bizarre.”

The recent, poorly written write-up/media release from Namal Rajapaksa, certainly not a G. L. Peiris production judging by its grammar and syntax, has our erstwhile (I hope) Crown Prince first directing his white charger towards these pointing to the positively outlandish conduct of members of his loved ones other than himself and the man he anticipated to/was expected to succeed, H.M. Mahinda Rajapaksa. He proclaims from the rooftops that it is fair game to be essential of the erstwhile Monarch of Sri Lanka and his Heir Apparent but that it is not cricket to criticize the rest of his family.

Provided the documented conduct of different members of the Rajapaksa family, both extended and quick, I count on that comment is hardly required in that regard.

Nonetheless, what I would like to take up nowadays is the matter of the conduct of the Rajapaksa Triumvirate on the rugby field and all that flowed from that conduct. The explanation for this is the conduct of however yet another opportunist crosser-more than who portrays himself as a defender of all that is noble in the field of services rugby.

I will come to Mr. Navin Dissanayake, Minister of some sort, in due course, but I make no apology for what might look like a lengthy lead-in to that narrative.

Let me say at the outset that there are eye-witnesses, video, and other documentary proof to help every word of what follows.

Namal Rajapaksa has proclaimed that his participation and that of his siblings in competitive rugby was driven purely and simply by adore of the game and an overweening compulsion to promote it in Sri Lanka. I uncover that especially interesting in the context of what I was witness to as a member of the Kandy Sports Club (KSC) on several occasions when its team met the Sri Lanka Navy (SLN) in club competitors.

On each and every occasion that the SLN played the KSC at Nittawela what ought to have been post-game celebrations ended up as monumental brawls. On one particular occasion, I was witness to the reality that males in uniforms of some description, described as “Namal Rajapaksa’s individual security,” led by the Personal Trainer to the Rajapaksa siblings, clambered up to the second level of the major stand, assaulting people willy-nilly with plastic chairs and, as they broke, with pieces thereof, simply because, allegedly, a little plastic water bottle had been thrown at Namal when he was getting into the visitors’ dressing area at the end of the game (that the SLN had lost). Picture, if you will, the unerring marksmanship of whoever threw the missile into players, officials etc. all bunched with each other on their way into the visitors’ dressing area and locating the target, the Crown Prince! Of course the Presidential entourage which incorporated Anarkali Akarsha, the star of film and other enterprises, her mother, H.M Mahinda Rajapaksa and his Consort and a handful of political hangers-on had left the VIP row of seats to go into the post-match reception as guests of the KSC’s President and its major Patron by the time this happened. The attack by the goons went on appropriate about the wives of the President of the KSC and a single of the Vice-Presidents who were waiting to leave the “VIP row” in the stadium as soon as the human targeted traffic bottleneck cleared. I have been offered video that a lot more than adequately documents what was taking place. This does not include footage of the chief cheer-leader of the KSC who typically dances and waves a KSC flag the colours of which are painted on his face. The purpose for his absence from the video was that he was becoming hidden beneath a chair on which the wife of 1 of the VP’s of the KSC was sitting, cowering in worry of his life!

When the melee was over, 3 or 4 dozen KSC fans were hospitalized and a couple of Kandy fans were charged with becoming intoxicated! That was the sort of rugby culture that the Rajapaksa siblings were active participants in. And as they used to say in an old, old radio serial, “now for the rest of the story:”

As may well be anticipated, there was a excellent deal of anger in Kandy at what had transpired and several spectators contacted the hierarchy of the KSC with a view to possessing “something done” about all of this.

The upshot of that agitation was that a meeting was convened of those who’d expressed dissatisfaction with the status quo and wanted anything carried out to, at least, prevent a recurrence of this sort of totally unacceptable behavior by visiting goons brought in by the SLN to their rugby matches. I ought to add here that, on at least one occasion, the SLN paid the KSC directly for 5000 tickets for their personnel to attend matches at Nittawela. Element of our national “Defence Spending budget?”

I was invited to participate in the recording of written statements and I was aware of at least a single person who risked his really employment to supply a signed statement describing what had transpired.

The results of this inquiry was presented to the subsequent General Committee Meeting of the KSC and it was unanimously decided by that august assembly that a formal complaint must be produced to the International Rugby Board about the state of affairs prevailing in Sri Lankan rugby and requesting their intervention. I was delegated to prepare the letter of formal complaint, which I did.

Sri Lanka being Sri Lanka, I picked up the reality that the formal complaint to the IRB was being shelved and was, therefore, going nowhere.

When I raised the issue at the next Common Committee Meeting I was informed, not to put a fine point on the matter, that the KSC’s “movers and shakers” had got what is colloquially recognized as a case of “cold feet” and had decided to shelve the complete business. The purpose I was provided was that going direct to the IRB was “not the right procedure.” On that day, I ended up as a minority of one particular in my belief that, if it was not the “right channel,” the IRB would inform us so and, almost certainly, indicate what was the “right channel.” The fact that I was in a minority of one on that occasion is a badge of courage that I will carry proudly for the rest of my days!

This choice by the poo-bahs at the KSC must also be viewed in the context of it being one of the latter straws in a sequence of events that was preceded by an Air Force player discharging an assault weapon in the course of a game, on the field of play. The President of the Sri Lanka Rugby Football Union (SLRFU) at the time was Roshan Goonetilleke, then the lately-retired Air Force chief and Chief of Defence Employees and it was 1 of the more-poorly-kept secrets that he had had his term as President of the SLRFU extended on orders “from above.”

(As a side-bar, I wonder what happened to the inquiry into Mr. Goonetilleke’s vacation residence in a portion of the Knuckles range that is designated as an International Heritage internet site?)

A couple of items happened subsequent to this. Or must I say one of them, at least, didn’t come about subsequent to this?

The letter of complaint to the SLRFU about the firing of the weapon, backed up by the existence of video footage, was not so much as acknowledged and I think that there was some sort of sneering, insulting comment about the complaint in the media by a man carrying the name of Baptist, who held office below Roshan Goonetilleke in the SLRFU. Not only was there video footage, I know that the empty shell casing from the assault weapon was picked up off the ground and handed to the police who did not so a lot as conduct anything resembling an inquiry into the matter. Remember the old, “My enemy’s enemy is my pal?” The KSC was the No. 1 enemy of the SLN and any of its enemies was deserving of any and all help! Obviously!

The final game of that certain season was the championship match played on the grounds of the Royal College Sports Complex. I have a distinct recollection of the events that transpired there and I will make no apology for describing them in some detail.

Contrary to the expectations of even the KSC supporters, their club dominated the SLN in the initial half of the game during which the (Sri Lankan) Presidential entourage was ensconced with the afore-mentioned President of the SLRFU which was the hosting authority. The President of the club competing against the SLN for the championship (the KSC) was not allocated a seat in this august assembly and when invited, actually, up, declined to accept the afterthought. This was an fascinating “protocol error,” offered the reality that the person responsible for it was an erstwhile Forces chief and a clue for the “oversight” may well have been that he was openly cheering on the SLN team!

Anyway, at half-time, the President (of Sri Lanka) left his seat (without having any fanfare) and I didn’t notice him returning till the second half was nicely on its way. What was beyond my knowledge in numerous years of playing and watching rugby was what followed: both teams returned to the field for the second half and then, for better than five minutes, had to await the arrival of the referee who appeared to have been “unavoidably delayed.”

When play ultimately resumed the complexion of the game changed entirely with penalty right after penalty being awarded against the KSC with the SLN narrowing the very first half gap. Then, as the game was drawing to a close, the SLN was close to the KSC purpose line. Video shows the referee about to award the ball to the KSC in a scrum or award a penalty to that group when the touch judge intervenes and speaks to the referee who then awards a penalty to the Navy, resulting in a Navy attempt.

What is relevant to this action on the component of the referee is the reality that there is video displaying a player who was on the bench at the time and was not supposed to leave that bench according to the guidelines of rugby, speaking to the touch judge near the KSC objective line, numerous yards away from mentioned bench. That worthy then speaks to the referee who tends to make the contact referred to earlier. Stick to my drift?

Do I have to name the player in question?

Regardless of all of this, the story had a happy ending since the referee appeared to be arithmetically-challenged due to which the KSC won the championship game by one particular point!

Of course, this wasn’t the finish of that specific saga simply because the KSC dressing room was invaded by “security” who proceeded to beat up some of the Kandy players and jostled (to put it mildly) Kandy supporters, a lot of of my vintage and female into the bargain, who had gone down to congratulate the victorious group. When I remonstrated with the Navy official with whom I had shared the pre-game comments for the Television broadcast, that senior navy officer intervened by acquiring Namal Rajapaksa to contact off the thugs that had invaded the KSC dressing area. The SLN officer concerned told us that the miscreants have been not “navy personnel.”

The most current icing on this specific cake is Navin Dissanayake galloping off in defence of the Rajapaksa siblings who have apparently been “dis-invited” from participating in Army and SLN rugby. How gallant of but one more parachutist of convenience! I’d really like to know where his sense of sportsmanship resided when those whose wellbeing he is so concerned with now had been visiting actually unprecedented mayhem on players unfortunate adequate to provide opposition to teams on which they condescended to play? Perhaps, he’d like to inform us what he thinks of the manner in which most likely Sri Lanka’s finest rugby player of recent times, Fazil Marija, sustained the injuries he did in a game against the Navy, resulting in his becoming carried off the field?

I know it utilised to be identified as the “Uncle-Nephew-Party” at one particular time but provided the fathers- and sons-in-law operation it has now grow to be, it may well be needed to discover a new nickname for the UNP!

In the meantime, maybe Navin Dissanayake can locate anything a small more productive to do than run around playing Sir Galahad to the Bobbsey Triplets of Sri Lankan rugby. Ah, but then, he have to be a genuine acquisition for the existing government thinking about he spent so a lot a lot more (personally beneficial) time with the Mahinda Rajapaksa crew than did his turncoat father-in-law. They have one particular point in widespread though – they came back singly, even though Karu Jayasuriya took eighteen or nineteen with him on his initial journey.

Is this government ever going to discover that you do not deal with huge corruption and violence by enlisting these whose main intent seems to be to acquire “insurance” with the really perpetrators of the unbelievable “governance” that the people of this country had to endure? These men and women had it good then, have it good now and seem to be guaranteeing that, in the occasion of a return to that dark age, they will nevertheless have it excellent.

The newly installed Sri Lanka government has arrested the former Secretary Common of the United National Celebration,(UNP) Tissa Attanayake for allegedly displaying a forged document claiming it to be true. Nevertheless the government has so far failed to arrest Chairman of DCSL Sri Lanka Plc businessman Harry Jayawardena, also identified as &#8220dirty Harry&#8216, who was named in a Police “B” report by Sri Lanka Police’s Commercial Fraud Unit of the Criminal Investigation Department, Colombo Telegraph can reveal today.

Even though the high profile businessman Harry Jayawardena was questioned by the Police and in spite of the Police obtaining filed a ‘B’ report as far back as November 2013 Jayawardena was in no way arrested by the Police or the case proceeded with.

Businessman Harry Jayawardena has been named by the Sri Lanka Police’s Industrial Fraud Unit of the Criminal Investigation Division (CID) in connection with a complaint that a forged document was supplied to the Gibraltar based bank ‘SG Hambros’. The businessman, who has been in the news on a range of subjects, is accused by the complainant of obtaining forged a letter purporting it to have been issued by the Company Secretaries.

The Organization Secretaries have denied ever issuing the letter and have confirmed this to the bank in question – and to the Police as well. Though the B Report was filed on the 22nd of November 2013, the Police questioned Harry Jayawardena as late as the first week in January 2014 in the comfort of his personal premises. Jayawardena’s answers had been then put to the complainants who firmly stood by their original complaint as becoming bona fide. The Police are now anticipated to go ahead and file charges against Harry Jayawardena.

Harry Jayawardena is a higher roller: with extensive links and useful ownership of many corporates he was listed as Sri Lanka’s third richest man in 2013. He maintains close links with all political parties he accompanied president Mahinda Rajapaksa right after he addressed the organization gathering in Colombo at the Cinnamon Grand Hotel. Jayawardena was also a high profile presence for the duration of the ceremony for John Ameratunga taking up his new appointment. It did not go amiss that Ameratunga’s ministry is accountable for the Police department.

The existence of the forged document came to light when Harry Jayawardena’s partners Raj Obeyesekere and Zaki Alif received a routine fax from their business bankers in Gibraltar asking for their account to be put into credit. Their company, Milford Exports Ceylon Restricted was confirmed as becoming the useful owner of 5 Gibraltar firms that have been designed and managed by Hambros Bank Nominee solutions under trust arrangements for Milford Exports.

Obeyesekere and Alif have been practically barred from their offices by safety guards employed at the major gates. Most apologetically they have had to tell Obeyesekere and Alif that their orders were to stop their entry to the organization premises – a company to which they have devoted thirty plus years of effort and where they robustly keep their shareholding. Significantly to the chagrin of Raaj Obeyesekere his workplace of far more than 30 years is now occupied by Hasitha Jayawardene – son of the tycoon.

In spite of getting advice from well-placed strategists like by former strongman Mahinda Rajapaksa &#8211 to “bulldoze their way in” Obeyesekere and Alif have alternatively resorted to the use of eminent legal personalities in their quest to shield their lifetime achievements. Harry J, has apparently carried on regardless and is actively defending these matters in Court.

In documents obtained by the media the Gibraltar Supreme Court received a witness statement from Charles Humbert Gomez in his capacity as a director of Hambros Gibraltar Nominees Limited. Gomez is also a director at Aitken Spence, a blue chip company exactly where the Well-known 4 get pleasure from a considerable indirect shareholding.

Gomez confirms that in 2002 and in subsequent years thereafter, Milford Exports Ceylon Limited (MEL) produced requests for business management and nominee services for Placidrange Holdings Restricted, a Gibraltar firm, whose shares have been to be beneficially owned by MEL. Equivalent written requests had been produced for other Gibraltar companies namely Rubicond Enterprises, Sonetto Holdings, Greenfield Pacific EM Holdings Restricted and Mills Enterprises Restricted. All these arrangements Gomez confirmed had been place in location according to the guidelines received from MEL represented by Harry Jayawardena. Throughout the initial period of setting up, a new organization questionnaire was obtained by Hambros and below details of applicant the names and passport details of Jayawardena and Obeyesekere were provided.

The mandates to operate the account named Jayawardena and Obeyesekere.

In the very same witness statement it has come to be revealed that Hambros ‘took over the accounts with Hatton National Bank plc. of Rubicond and Sonetto and ‘opened bank accounts for Placidrange and Greenfield with the Bank’. Gomez also confirms that Greenfield also purchased a property. Some of the sources we spoke to refer to this transaction as a house in the UAE – though definitive proof was not provided to us.

From the statements produced by Gomez, by Jayawardena himself and by Obeyesekere and Alif too, Harry Jayawardena’s statement created to the Supreme Court in Sri Lanka by way of an affidavit, that he had no interest whatsoever in Greenfield is clearly a blatant falsehood. It is this statement that has led to calls for Jayawardena to be answerable to a question of perjury – unrelated to the forgery charges relating to the forged letter purportedly issued and signed by the Business Secretaries, who have denied that they ever issued such a document.

The magnitude of the greatest fraud in Sri Lanka

A veteran observer of the various stratagems deployed by Jayawardena in his battles with his partners Obeyesekere, Alif and Weinman, says, “to truly recognize the magnitude of what is taking place, a single must realise that the so-known as ‘VAT Fraud’ was identified as possessing an amount of Rs 3.5 Billion in query.

“In this instance the worth of the assets at stake is USD 200 Million – or Rs 26,400,000,000 (Rs 26.4 Billion). For additional comparative purposes, consider that Golden Crucial Credit Card Firm triggered losses to their depositors of Rs 26 Billion. That of course had a depositor base of some 9,054 individuals. In the case of Milford Exports Ceylon Restricted and their assets in Gibraltar, the Rs 26.4 Billion is shared among four shareholders: Harry Jayawardena, Raj Obeyesekere, Zaki Alif and Sonia Weinman”. Jayawardena is disputing that Ms Weinman has shares in Milford Exports amounting to 20% and maintains in his statement to the Court in Gibraltar that her holding is limited to just one particular share. A separate legal case is ongoing in this regard.

Casting aside broadly held perceptions, The Wealthy List 2013 Sri Lanka listed Harry Jayawardena as Sri Lanka’s third richest man with a minimum value of USD 300 Million, behind Sohli Captain (USD 423 Million) and the richest Sri Lankan, Dhammika Perera (USD 538 Million). The book also identified the reality that Jayawardena has just the a single Rs 10 share far more than the other 3 put together. The book refers to the four collectively as “The Well-known Four”.( [email protected])

The Forged Document

The document that was the concentrate of the Police B report was supplied by Harry Jayawardena to SG Hambros in Gibraltar – bankers to Milford Exports Ceylon Restricted.

In the document, Harry Jayawardena states that ‘due to a reorganisation’ of the company a decision was made by the Board to transfer all assets held for the benefit of Milford Exports Ceylon Limited to the individual names of Harry Jayawardena and his wife Priya Jayawardena.

The letter purports to carry an endorsement by the Business Secretaries. Clearly, as the request was asking for the transfer of an asset base of some USD 200 Million – or over Rs 26,000,000,000 (Rs 26 Billion) SG Hambros would have needed some comfort and that comfort would have been offered by the signature of the Firm Secretaries becoming appended to the letter carrying Harry Jayawardena’s signature.

Meanwhile, Raj Obeyesekere and Zaki Alif as effectively as Sonia Weinman were unaware of the moves to appropriate their portion of the Rs 26 Billion fortune held beneath trust arrangements for the benefit of the shareholders of Milford Exports Ceylon Limited.

There had been only 4 recognized shareholders of the organization at that time: Don Harold Stassen Jayawardena, Raj Obeyesekere, Zaki Alif and Sonia Weinman who inherited her shareholding from her late father V.P. Vitachchi.

Sensing grave financial danger, Obeyesekere and Alif contacted the bank to dispute the request and assured the bankers that there was no such restructuring. The bank, employed to dealing in the major with Harry Jayawardena, initially refused to have a dialogue with Jayawardena’s long time enterprise partners, Obeyesekere and Alif.

That situation changed when the duo, acting for and on behalf of the shareholders of Milford Exports Ceylon Restricted, contracted the services of a effectively respected legal team in Gibraltar to petition the bank.

SG Hambros decided to seek guidance from the Gibraltar Courts. The Gibraltar Court ordered that the bank take their instruction not from Jayawardena, Obeyesekere or Alif in any mixture but rather that they take their directions from the majority decision of the Board of Directors of Milford Exports Ceylon Restricted. It was after all the legal entity that instructed the bank in the very first spot.

In the meantime, Harry Jayawardena and his wife each gave undertakings to the Gibraltar Court that they would return the assets to the control of SG Hambros, so that the status quo would be maintained. In essence, the Jayawardenas withdrew their guidelines to the bank to transfer the assets, enabling the bank to sustain the status quo.

By Dayan Jayatilleka –

To begin with the least of his transgressions, Mahendra De Silva, whoever he could be, naturally has a issue comprehending the language even in the quite paragraph he has quoted! He alleges the following:

&#8220My principal disagreement with Dayan’s views on patriotism is that he failed to distinguish the difference in between enjoy for the nation and enjoy for the rulers of the country. He has taken the position that that defending the nation and defending the rulers of nation are the same.&#8221

The paragraph he has quoted from my report consists of a sentence which categorically says exactly the opposite of what he alleges. I write:

&#8220He will not defend everything its government or state does but defend the nation, he will&#8230&#8221

The paragraph from my post goes on to say: “The wise patriot is constructively crucial about his nation but is fiercely loyal to it all the exact same. He will criticize it but will unconditionally defend his nation from the hypocritical criticism of foreign powers and institutions responsible for or blind to far worse crimes.&#8221

What is worse is that Mahendra de Silva also utters demonstrable inaccuracies. He writes:

“When Dayan was defending Sri Lanka at the Human rights commission in Geneva, just after the war in 2010, I believed that he was an intelligent patriot&#8230 He assured on behalf the Sri Lankan government that a proper investigation would take spot relating to alleged war crimes.”

I did no such point, as the record would show, and I would challenge Mahendra de Silva to prove it. I left Geneva in 2009, not 2010. I did no such factor simply because the only inquiry I approve and am still approving of is the strictly selective and limited 1 suggested by the LLRC. There was no LLRC when I was in Geneva. I pointed out then as I have all through, that no country conducts, nevertheless significantly less submits to such an inquiry when it happens to be a reputable state that has waged a war within its internationally recognized borders against a terrorist foe and won, just lately. I also pointed out repeatedly, in Geneva and France, that the countries that have performed inquiries have completed so decades later, after the wounds have healed.

“He also assured normalcy would be restored quickly. He requested more time for the operate to be carried out.” Nonsense! When and exactly where did I ever say this?

“I personally believe that Dayan is not a racist, and he appreciated the suggestions of LLRT commission. But he kept quiet when recommendations have been not implemented.”

That once more is pure piffle due to the fact even while Ambassador to France, I wrote and spoke in support of the LLRC and criticized the tardiness of implementation. Mine was perhaps the initial report (initially posted on Groundviews) to defend the LLRC and argue for its full and expeditious implementation.

Now here comes an outright lie by Mahendra de Silva, who asks:

“Is it simply because he is a “Smart Patriotic” that he did not make a powerful voice against   extremist agendas of the then government like BBS?”

I was the 1st to contact the BBS “religio-fascist” in print and marched in demonstrations and addressed public seminars against it. The BBC World Service had a story by Charlie Havilland in which I was interviewed on the street. I was also the first to criticize Gotabaya Rapajaksa in the media for his apparent endorsement of the BBS at the launch of a so-known as Political Academy.

De Silva goes on to say: “I do not believe that Dayan appreciated 18th Amendment which expands the powers of executive Precedency. (sic) Yet he did not raise a voice against it.”

I created the point that while the 18th amendment can be legitimately criticized, it surely did not turn the country into a dictatorship and that it could be reversed in parliament with a majority, just as it was endorsed. That is exactly what has been proved today!

More outright falsehoods comply with, proving that this chap is not merely a dumb critic of Intelligent Patriotism, but also a dishonest critic:

“I am positive that Dayan did not approve the unlawful and ruthless infringement of 43rd CJ Shrani Bandaranayke or jailing of the war hero Basic Sarath Fonseka at an unfair military trial. But Dayan did not raise a voice on any of these occasions.”

My criticism of the incarceration of Common Fonseka was in sharp contrast to some of these in the present government who were either silent or endorsed it. My criticism, listing ten points, appeared in an write-up prominently displayed in the Everyday Mirror of Feb 15th 2010 and in an interview in the mid-page of the Lankadeepa in the exact same week!

As for the Shirani Bandaranaike affair, my public criticism commenced mere hours following I returned to Sri Lanka following my term as Ambassador to France, Spain, Portgual and the UNESCO, in the initial days of January. Prior to I had reached my residence from the airport, the site Sri Lanka Mirror had carried a extended interview in which I commenced my criticism of the abrupt removal and the conduct of the Government MPs – some of whom are in Cabinet right now!

By Uditha Devapriya –

There is practically nothing wrong in regime-modify. Nothing at all incorrect in speaking about democracy or mourning its absence. Self-righteous words nevertheless do have a limit. They run out of steam the moment these who speak them come to energy. Democracy-deficits are objected to by the same individuals who embrace them when they are elected. Sadly.

The &#8220enemy of my enemy is my pal&#8221 argument holds sway, even so. No 1 is a saint. There are lesser evils that want to be taken in to get rid of higher ones.

What we&#8217re seeing in Sri Lanka nowadays is great governance. &#8220Yahapalanaya&#8221. Maithripala Sirisena has promised it all. Commendably. He has promised to look into past abuses and misuses of authority, to punish these deserving and exonerate these wrongly accused or in other techniques punished. That&#8217s commendable too. But hardly sufficient.

Not every appointment created by a government is political. Qualification-specifications, age-limits and term-limits, and appointment-transparency must be kept. And however, even with all these, there is still something &#8220political&#8221 about appointments made by any regime. Why? Simply because it is the government and in specific the Executive that has to sanction appointment. That&#8217s where the &#8220political&#8221 portion to it crops up, soon after all.

There is absolutely nothing incorrect in this, even though, provided the necessarily qualification-caveats are met. Providing a post to somebody on the basis of friendship and ignoring the a lot more deserving are indicators of nepotism. With a capital N. Which is exactly where, sadly sufficient, the new regime isn&#8217t going on track.

Upul Jayasuriya is the President of the Bar Association of Sri Lanka. That is BASL. He&#8217s a lawyer. An eminent 1. He and his organisation spoke against the earlier government, their abuses and techniques, all the way. Regardless of whether they had been tied to celebration preference (Jayasuriya is a UNP activist) much more than democracy-really like is another story. For now, nevertheless, there are troubles. Big ones.

Jayasuriya has been appointed as the chairman of the Board of Investment. Overlook that he&#8217s a lawyer. Forget that his predecessors at the BOI contain Thilan Wijesinghe. Overlook that the BOI site itself states that he served as a Legal Adviser to the Greater Colombo Financial Commission (the forerunner to the BOI), and that his expertise with economics and finance is limited to this. Overlook all these. What&#8217s crucial is timing.

There are other appointments of course. The Chairman of Lake Home, for instance, is the brother of a former Parliamentarian. That&#8217s a far cry from his predecessor Bandula Padmakumara, who wasn&#8217t even remotely associated to a ruling party stalwart.

Padmakumara, in addition, was removed not only from his post, but from a private channel. And as Colombo Telegraph itself notes, that had to do with his political preference (which, if I may possibly add here, is his correct and his appropriate alone) than the need to have for an unbiased media. Due to the fact let&#8217s face it, why would anyone appoint the brother of a former MP as Chairman of state media? Tp prevent bias? No. Then what? Timing!

&#8220Justice,&#8221 a person said, &#8220must not only be accomplished it must also be observed to be carried out.&#8221 Appearance of bias is undesirable. Kavan Ratnayaka is Lake Residence Chairman. His brother (Sagala Ratnayaka) is a (former) UNP parliamentarian. The UNP holds sway over national policy (i.e. the Cabinet). That&#8217s hardly consoling.

Which is why I worry about Upul Jayasuriya&#8217s appointment. Jayasuriya, for all BASL&#8217s posturing about neutrality, was/is a UNP activist. His predecessor, Wijedasa Rajapakshe, is a Minister under that identical party. Any person who appears at Jayasuriya&#8217s track records and thinks he&#8217s politically non-aligned clearly requirements an eye-test. Regardless of whether or not he is biased towards a single celebration isn&#8217t the question here: the truth is that he&#8217s a UNP activist, and his appointment, specifically given his “credentials” in finance and economics, smacks of &#8220politics&#8221 all the way.

Jayasuriya, to make things worse, has shunned the media ever since his appointment. Why? Appointees are needed, not as a matter of law but as a matter of transparency, to speak about their appointments and credentials. He hasn&#8217t completed that. And there is a purpose for this. As Colombo Telegraph reported, Rajitha Senaratne announced that &#8220all public sector officials&#8221 are to &#8220strictly stick to an Establishment Code and that no comments/information ought to be released to the media without getting prior written approval of the relevant Ministry Secretary.&#8221

Initial of all, Senaratne is not the Media Minister. Gayantha Karunathilake is. Whether or not Karunathilake has endorsed this selection is an additional story. But without questioning state officials, with out questioning credential and track record, we can&#8217t genuinely hope for &#8220yahapalanaya&#8221. Yes, it&#8217s that straightforward. Senaratne, sadly sufficient, hasn&#8217t realised this.

Jayasuriya&#8217s appointment is completed and dusted. So is Kavan Ratnayake&#8217s. Each are &#8220political&#8221, by definition and appearance. I don&#8217t a lot know about Kavan to comment on his track record. But Jayasuriya is an additional matter. When compared to maybe one of the most capable and efficient chairmen our Board of Investment ever had (Thilan Wijesinghe), this appointment seems to be “political” no matter how you appear at it. That is not what we voted Maithripala Sirisena for.