Daily News Editorial

MR's Media Secretary in cuckoo land

16th October 2015

Former President Mahinda Rajapaksa's first appearance yesterday before an inquiry panel following his defeat, failed to generate much excitement. Summoned before the Special Presidential Commission to Probe Serious Acts of Corruption to answer queries pertaining to alleged financial misdemeanours at the ITN, the lawyers representing the former President raised various technical issues. As a result, sittings of the Commission was put off for today, for a ruling on the matters raised.

However, what was interesting was the media release issued subsequently by the former President's Media Secretary seeking to exonerate Rajapaksa from the doings at the ITN during the Presidential Election campaign. One of matters under probe by the Commission was the appointment of Mr. Anura Siriwardena as the Chairman /CEO of the ITN when the position was not vacant. The media release states that the appointment was not made by the former President, but officially by the Secretary to the Treasury, since the Treasury owns the majority of the shares of the ITN.

Is the Media Secretary asking the public to believe that in all government institutions, corporations, Boards etc. which had the Treasury holding a majority shares, heads were appointed by the Treasury Secretary? Was it not under Rajapaksa, who was also the Finance Minister, that the Treasury functioned? Was there any official in the Treasury who was more powerful than the President (read head of the Treasury) to make appointments to institutions where the Treasury had a majority shares, on his/her own? Were all the appointments to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) which was mired in controversy also made by a Treasury official, bypassing Rajapaksa, the President cum Finance Minister?

Going by the argument of the Media Secretary, all Heads of Government bodies under the Rajapaksa regime were appointed by other state controlled bodies which one way or another had a controlling interest in these bodies. Going by this argument the Chairman of Lake House whose majority shares were held by the Public Trustee was appointed by the Public Trustee himself or an officer designated by him. Rajapaksa had no say in the appointment. Neither did the Media Minister. Taking this argument further the Central Bank Governor, the Director General of Customs and Ports Authority Chairman were all appointed bypassing the former President based on the simple requirement that these institutions were under the control of the Treasury or another State body. Who is going to believe this yarn?

During the Presidential election campaign, the ITN Chairman himself presided over programmes that vilified the Common Candidate. Nay, the ITN also stooped to the lowest depths by airing pogrammes with doctored scenes which cast aspersions on the personal character of the Common Candidate. Is the Media Secretary asking the public to believe that the ITN Chairman will go to such lengths to promote Rajapaksa if his appointment was strictly made by the Treasury Secretary? True, the Treasury Secretary may be the appointing authority. But only OFFICIALLY.

The Media Secretary, to another matter under investigation by the Commission, namely, the loss of Rs 86 lakhs suffered by the ITN, due to the money being returned as a result of non airing of the advertisements of the Common Candidate, blandly states that this was an internal administrative matter. This is overlooking the fact that as the Finance Minister it is the responsibility of the former President to ensure that the Treasury (which holds majority shares) receives all the money due to it. By dismissing this loss in cavalier fashion, the Media Secretary has indeed badly compromised his boss. This also shows Rajapaksa in poor light and a reflection of the cavalier approach he has shown towards matter of finances in respect of other transactions as well, justifying the current allegations leveled against him and his siblings.

It is the contention of the Media Secretary that a Presidential candidate of a major political party cannot possibly supervise the advertising campaign carried out on his behalf and that campaign advertisements are given to media organizations by the advertising firm retained by the candidate's political party. He goes on to state that the candidate or his political party very often has no direct contact with the media organisation over advertising. He (the Media Secretary) has again unwittingly compromised his boss by using the term VERY OFTEN. This indicates that there can be times when the candidate can have direct contact. For, no self respecting advertising firm on its own will, while the voting is in progress on the day of the Presidential election, would get the electronic media institution concerned to announce repeatedly that Sajith Premadasa had decamped and joined the Rajapaksa fold.

But the most hilarious of all is the attempt made by the Media Secretary to drag in the Common Candidate into the misdoings of the ITN, during the campaign. He says that all matters relating to the campaign are not the responsibility of the candidate but of the relevant political party or alliance. He says: "when it was proposed within the SLFP that President Mahinda Rajapaksa should contest for the Presidency for the third time, it was the present Chairman (President Sirisena) of the party who seconded that proposal".

Hence President Sirisena too is culpable for all the misdemeanours, the mudslingings and calumni heaped upon himself courtesy the ITN, going by this logic.