Confusion worse confounded
Friday 13th November 2015
The floating armoury issue has taken a dramatic
turn. President Maithripala Sirisena has yielded to pressure from some of his
trusted lieutenants who are all out to bring criminal charges against the Avant
Garde high-ups and their political associates including the Rajapaksas. There
is an air of prosecutorial zeal and judicial abandon about the present
dispensation whereas its predecessor was notorious for letting even criminals off
the hook.
It was only the other day that the then Minister of
Law and Order and Prisons Reforms Tilak Marapana, PC and Justice Minister
Wijeyadasa Rajapakshe, PC told Parliament that Avant Garde operations had been
legal. They even claimed the Attorney General (AG) had declared that there were
no grounds for legal action to be taken against that company. Minister
Rajapakshe even had a slanging match with his erstwhile friend, Field Marshal
Sarath Fonseka, in a bid to prove his point.
Minister Rajapakshe told Parliament that he had
convinced both President Sirisena and Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe that
there had been nothing illegal about the Avant Garde operations. He had also
defeated efforts in some quarters to have former Defence Secretary Gotabhaya
Rajapaksa et al arrested, he said. But, a few days on, President
Maithripala Sirisena has ordered that all Avant Garde operations be
discontinued immediately and its floating armoury handed over to the Navy. He
is also reported to have ordered that the suspects concerned be prosecuted. One
is intrigued. Does the AG subscribe to the legal position Marapana and
Rajapakshe took on Avant Garde in Parliament? Did he hold that there were no
grounds for legal action to be instituted against that company? If so, how can
he prosecute it now?
Minister Marapana resigned from the Cabinet under
duress over his defence of Avant Garde in Parliament, but he insists that he
has told the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Minister
Rajapakshe tells us that some of his ministerial colleagues are out for his
scalp because he, too, has told the truth. The critics of Avant Garde including
Minister Rajitha Senaratne insist that they are also telling the truth. There
can be only one truth. The question is who is lying?
What are the legal implications of the takeover by
the Navy of the Avant Garde floating armoury? Is it that the anti-piracy
operations have been wound up? If so, what will be the reaction of the
countries which benefited from the floating armoury? If not, does the law
permit the Navy to carry out the same operations as a private company? Opinion
is divided on this score.
If Avant Garde, or any other company for that
matter, has been on the wrong side of the law, it has to be severely dealt with
according to the law, but whether to prosecute it or not is best left to the
Attorney General. The state prosecutor should be free from political pressure
to act independently. Most of all, neither the defenders of Avant Garde nor its
critics calling for action against it should seek to advance their hidden
agendas. Those who have spoken in favour of the floating armoury have been
accused of benefiting from Avant Garde largesse; they claim their critics
either want the Rajapaksas and former navy chiefs thrown behind bars or are
working for some businesses eyeing the lucrative anti-piracy operations. Sadly,
the truth has become a casualty of their political war.
Sri Lanka’s contribution to the anti-piracy
operations has stood the vessels threatened by Somali pirates in good stead.
The floating armoury has also helped generate employment opportunities for
ex-service personnel and bring in a considerable amount of foreign exchange. It
is hoped that the government will sort out the Avant Garde issue fast without
letting vested interests play politics with it.
No comments:
Post a Comment