Ceylon Today Editorial

ANTICS OF WIMAL AND ANGER OF MAVAI...

24th October 2015

The verbal battle between Wimal Weerawansa and Mavai S. Senathirajah in Parliament last Thursday stems to mind the dark days in Parliament in the early 1980s where Cyril Mathew and Appapilai Amirthalingam argued on racial lines which paved the way for communal disharmony and mistrust between the two communities.

At the beginning President J.R. Jayewardene gave a free hand to Mathew to launch attacks on the Tamil United Liberation Front (TULF) on political lines, but it turned racial in the process as Mathew overstepped the line. Amirthalingam responded in the same style and racism raised its ugly head inside the Parliament Chamber. And, it spread to the country. The LTTE made use of that opportunity to take forward the separate State dream of the TULF and violence spread across the country. In the end Amirthalingam himself was a victim of the militancy that he nurtured in the North. The same fate befell the vociferous Vettiveli Yogeswaran who backed his leader in the racial battle with Mathew.

Since the infamous Vaddukoddai Resolution mooted by the TULF in 1976 calling for separation, seeds of hatred were sowed in the country and the Sinhala and Tamil people viewed each other with suspicion. The racial comments made on the TULF election platform during the 1977 general election campaign aggravated the situation. Even Ms. Amirthalingam boarded the election platform to utter racial comments under the guise of promising a separate State after the 1977 July elections. Most of those racial comments were recorded at the Sansoni Commission which was set up to probe racial violence after the 1977 July elections. Sinhala extremists took advantage of the situation and resorted to violence attacking the innocent Tamils living in areas outside the North and East.

Last Thursday, Parliamentarian Wimal Weerawansa stressed the need for people to come together to safeguard the Sinhala identity and the sovereignty of the State. Weerawansa's statement was uncalled for at a time the government was using all available opportunities to forge national unity. In the same tone of Weerawansa, Mavai Senathirajah issued a warning that his party would be compelled to form a separate State with the help of the international community if any party resolved to form a Sinhala dominated State adding that the statement of Weerawansa would push the Tamils to consider a separate State. Senathirajah also used the opportunity to express his dissatisfaction over the OHCHR Resolution that called for a domestic probe on war crimes assisted by foreign observers. His view was quite contrary to the policy followed by his party leadership which has extended support to the government to initiate a credible domestic inquiry. His colleague M.A. Sumanthiran said his party would help the government to work on the resolution.

The country has experienced a three decade terrorist war due to the racial policies followed by politicians of the past. Racial comments made by people like Cyril Mathew, Amirthalingam, Yogeswaran and many others contributed to the separation of the two communities. After the war ended in 2009, no real attempt was made to unify the two communities. The present government has embarked upon the path to build a strong relationship between the two communities. Outstanding Tamil issues that remained unsolved for decades are now being resolved in a gradual process. People from the North visit the South more than before without hassle. Sinhalese pay homage to religious sites in the North and East without trouble. It demonstrates that the country is on the path of reconciliation. Ethnic unity was destroyed by politicians for political gains and not by the people. Both communities suffered due to shortsighted politics practiced by successive Sinhala and Tamil political leaders.

Mavai Senathirajah is an experienced astute politician. He knows politics better than Weerawansa who is a new entrant to democratic politics. Senathirajah must also understand that Weerawansa is a leader of a very small political party and not recognized as party leader in Parliament. Therefore, there's none in the Opposition to control the tongue of Weerawansa. Senathirajah should understand that the general public is more intelligent than Weerawansa and that they would not be guided by his racial comments. Senathirajah has done democratic politics for over four decades. His Leader R. Sampanthan too was at the receiving end from Cyril Mathew in the 1977 Parliament. Sampanthan tackled Mathew with intelligence in the House without confrontation to display that he (Sampanthan) was not a racist.When Weerawansa criticized Sampanthan's appointment as Opposition Leader, Sampanthan took no notice of those unwarranted comments and completely bluffed Weerawansa. Senathirajah must learn from Sampanthan and Sampanthan must teach Senathirajah on how to ignore extremist comments from politicians like Weerawansa. Wimal Weerawansa is 'Nobody's Child' in Parliamentary politics today only playing to the Gallery to cover up his political bankruptcy. Communal harmony is more important to the people than the politician called Wimal Weerawansa.

 

Daily Mirror Editorial

Police stations not torture houses

 

The National Government says it is giving top priority to human rights issues in the wake of the 2015  Geneva resolution and also on the basis of its conviction that all people—the rich and the poor, the powerful and the powerless—are equal and their human rights need to be respected.

To reach this noble vision and goals, the rule of law needs to be restored and stabilised with the judicial service and the Police also being given the freedom to act independently. But with this freedom, the Police specially need to be made aware that their right to freedom is linked to responsibility. Independence of the Police means freedom from party political interference so that the people could confidently go to a people-friendly Police station where they would be treated with courtesy and a just solution is found to their problems.

While the newly appointed National Police Commission also plays an important role and working out a code of ethics for Police, the Police themselves need to be educated that they are not only the long arm of the law but also the protectors of the people. They also need to be made aware of the need to use more brain than brawn though in recent decades the trend has been more towards brute force by bully boys. The Police uniform symbolizes the protection and power of law enforcement. Thus when a Police officer assaults or tortures a person or a suspect the crime is graver than when an ordinary citizen commits the same offence.    

The global rights movement, Human Rights Watch (HRW) in a new report last Friday has charged that Sri Lanka’s Police forces regularly tortured and ill-treated criminal suspects in custody. HRW has called on the Sri Lankan Government to set up an independent oversight authority and adopt concrete steps to end Police abuse that has had corrosive effects across Sri Lankan society.

The report, handed over to Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe and Justice Minister Wijeyadasa Rajapakshe, claims the Sri Lankan Police appear to treat the use of torture as a tolerable way of obtaining confessions.

The 59-page report titled “We Live in Constant Fear: Lack of Accountability for Police Abuse in Sri Lanka,” documents various torture methods used by the Sri Lankan Police against criminal suspects. These include severe beatings, electric shock, suspension from ropes in painful positions, and rubbing chili paste in the genitals and eyes.

According to HRW, victims of torture and their families may spend years seeking justice and redress with little hope of success. Previous reports by the right group have focused on wartime abuses, including torture of minority Tamil civilians. The latest report documents how torture and Police abuse are entrenched and devastating to the majority Sinhalese population also.

The HRW has called on the Sri Lankan Government to issue clear, public directives that Police torture and other forms of abuse will not be tolerated; establish an Independent Police Oversight Authority charged with investigating allegations of police abuse, the results of which would then be forwarded to the Attorney General’s Department for prosecution as appropriate. This authority should be housed entirely outside the Police Department, report to the Ministry of Justice, have all relevant authority to conduct investigations, including on its own authority, and be empowered to subpoena Police, other witnesses and Police files.

It also calls for the setting up of an independent office in the Attorney General’s Department tasked specifically with investigating and prosecuting cases of Police abuse, including following up on referrals from the Independent Police Oversight Authority.

According to HRW, there should be laws to ensure Magistrates fully comply with their obligations to ascertain whether a detainee produced in court has suffered torture or other ill-treatment, and to order legislatively mandated confidential medical examinations.

If the Police Stations during the past few years had virtually become branch offices of the ruling party, the new Government must act fast to restore the dignity of the Police service as a vital part of good governance, democracy and accountability.  

Daily News Editorial

The Speaker's words of wisdom

24th October 2015

It is not difficult to guess that Parliamentary proceedings are a fairly expensive affair, given that all facilities have to be provided to the 225 Members. But until now, there was no estimated amount for the cost of a single day's sitting. Speaker Karu Jayasuriya, addressing the MPs last week, revealed just how much the taxpayers (that is, the ordinary public) are paying for our MPs to deliberate on matters of national importance for a single day. According to the Speaker, a sum of Rs.4.6 million is spent on a single day's sitting. The Speaker made this revelation following an incident where sittings had to be suspended, after MP Bandula Gunawardena used a wrong name to address Finance Minister Ravi Karunanayake. The Speaker's contention was that Parliament could not afford to waste valuable time and money on such matters.

This figure of Rs.4.6 million is obviously centred on the expenses incurred on the Chamber itself (such as air-conditioning, lighting, water usage and attendance allowances and possibly Hansard reportage and interpretation), but it is not clear whether it includes meals and other miscellaneous expenses. This clearly does not include the costs for MPs' salaries, Parliamentary staff salaries, security details, vehicles, telephone usage, housing allowances etc. If we include at least some of these factors, a day's sitting could cost well over Rs.5 million and since there are eight sittings per month (except in the November-December budget period when there are continuous sittings including on Saturdays), the monthly expense for sitting days alone is around Rs.40 million, by no means a small sum. The expenses for Parliament as a whole are much more because the Parliamentary staff members work on all other weekdays as well.

But here's the catch: even if only five Members are present in the Chamber, there are expenses that one cannot avoid, such as air-conditioning and electricity bills. It is therefore a terrible waste of public funds if Members do not turn out in their numbers at least for important debates. In fact, the Speaker had noted the poor attendance record of many MPs and exhorted them to attend Parliament regularly. Granted, it is humanely impossible to sit through eight hours of sittings every day, but the Members must make a concerted effort to participate in, and contribute to, at least the more important debates and of course, to the Parliamentary Select Committees where the bulk of the work happens behind the scenes. They should generally clear their diaries on sitting days and set aside other (non-sitting) days for public engagement, opening ceremonies etc.

But just sitting through debates is not enough - they must speak on behalf of their constituents in the House. In the last Parliament, there were at least 25 Members who had never spoken in the House even on one occasion. This should not be the case in this Parliament. Moreover, the senior Members should set an example to the novice and younger Members by attending sittings regularly.

This is another reason why Parliamentary proceedings must be broadcast 'live' on national television (and radio) on a regular basis. That will enable the public to know exactly who is contributing to debates and who is either silent or absent altogether. The public will also see as to who is misbehaving in the August Assembly. Discipline is a very important factor in Parliamentary proceedings but there have been many disturbing incidents recently which have shaken our collective faith in the legislature to some extent.

Just a couple of days ago, former minister and senior MP Dinesh Gunawardena ran away with the Mace, a serious breach of Parliamentary traditions and discipline for which there is no excuse. Again, the senior Members must exercise more caution and restraint even in heated moments because the younger Members usually look up to them as role models. Another senior Member and former minister Vasudeva Nanayakkara gained notoriety a few months ago when he uttered a series of expletives in the House much to the horror of other Members including women MPs and schoolchildren in the Public Gallery. It is time to put a full stop to such incidents in the future, before public confidence in the Parliamentary system is eroded completely and irreversibly.

Parliament is the very epitome of democracy. Since all 15 million voters cannot conceivably meet in one forum to discuss matters of national importance, elections are held to select 225 representatives from the nine provinces who can voice our concerns and aspirations in a democratic structure called the Parliament. However, if they do not take their task seriously and shirk their responsibilities towards the voters, they should in turn reject such MPs at the next election and pave the way for those who will actually stand by the voters. If MPs behave more responsibly, there will hopefully be a ripple effect as well whereby members of other elected bodies such as provincial councils also get the message. That will be a victory for all citizens who value democracy and good governance. 

The Island Editorial

Reminiscing of Old Parliament

24th October 2015

Speaker Karu Jayasuriya’s revelation on Wednesday that a single parliamentary sitting cost the taxpayers Rs. 4.6 mn hasn’t had the desired impact on the misbehaving parliamentarians. Some MPs ran riot on Thursday as well, and sittings had to be suspended for five to ten minutes. Cabinet Spokesman, Minister Rajitha Senaratne, has said that the Old Parliament by the sea provided better facilities to its members and they were even served liquor. (Were the MPs in good old days entitled to duty free vehicles, soft loans and pensions after completing five years in Parliament?)

 

What one should be lamenting about is not the non-availability of firewater at the present Parliament at subsidized rates, but the rapid deterioration of parliamentary standards as well as the absence of cut and thrust of political debate. The Old Parliament had men and women of substance who died paupers because of their integrity and altruism. They entered politics to serve the people. When legendary Daha of Galle left Temple Trees after a brief stint as Prime Minister, all he took with him was a suitcase containing some clothes and books!

 

Closing down the parliament liquor bar is one of the few sensible things the late President J. R. Jayewardene did. Perhaps, he may have made that decision because he had no need for liquor to get drunk with. He had the executive presidency for that purpose. He was intoxicated with power. So, were his ministers! However, we repeat, his was a very wise move. Else, it would have been impossible for Parliament to meet due to drunken brawls.

 

When a UPFA Minister assaulted an MP monk in Parliament a few years ago the former was fully sober. The victim spent several days in hospital. What would have been the situation if the assailant had been drunk is not difficult to imagine.

 

The mere mention of the Old Parliament evokes our fond memories of political greats of the calibre of DS, Dudley, SWRD, Sirimavo, Colvin and NM, to name only a few. They adorned the national legislature and did the country proud. The present Parliament, according to its honourable members themselves, is full of gigolos, pimps, buffaloes, old pumpkins etc. On Thursday, an otherwise good-mannered minister, lost his temper, and claimed there was also a hyena in the Opposition ranks! Tempers would fray and flare-ups occur in the Old Parliament as well, but, overall, the situation was much better than it is today.

 

Lawmakers, in other countries, may be enjoying better facilities, as the Cabinet Spokesman says. But, that is no reason why Sri Lanka should make its taxpaying public cough up more funds to pamper their MPs further. However, those nations can be emulated in some other ways; some of them have put in place robust constitutional mechanisms to ensure good governance. India has, for example, tough laws to curtail campaign finance and MPs are even unseated if they are found to have exceeded the ceiling on campaign expenditure.

 

In adopting foreign models our political pundits have mastered the art of throwing out the baby and retaining the dirty bath water! Hence, their efforts to justify living off the fat of the land at the expense of the ordinary people burdened with indirect taxes on even essential commodities. The MPs who speak of the facilities of their foreign counterparts should not lose sight of the dazzling qualifications of ministers in countries like Singapore, which is keeping pace with the developed world because it has its best brains at the levers of power.

 

It was when Sri Lanka was blessed with statesmen that Lee Kuan Yew considered Sri Lanka a role model. Today, Sri Lanka is emulating Singapore! This is the difference between the Old Parliament and the New Parliament.