Sunday Observer Editorial

Balance of power

16 October 2016

President Maithripala Sirisena last week strongly criticised the current functioning of certain government institutions that are key to the fulfilment of the National Unity Government’s electoral mandate. These are institutions that are at the forefront of the fight against corruption of all kinds in the public sector, namely the Criminal Investigation Department of the Police (CID), the Financial Crimes Investigation Department, also of the Police (FCID) and, the Bribery Commission.

The gist of the President’s criticism seems to focus on two aspects of these agencies current operations: the manner very senior defence services officers have been arraigned before courts and, the fact that he had not been sufficiently consulted or informed prior to action being taken against such senior officers.

The fact that direct political control over these investigating agencies lay with government ministries while the President, as the commander-in-chief of the defence services, was responsible for those top military personnel now under investigation, gave an impression that two vital arms of the State, namely the Presidency and the Government, were not quite coordinated, at least in the anti-corruption drive.

The immediate reaction by some citizens’ watchdog bodies was the concern that institutions tasked to probe misdemeanours in the State sector – with politicians’ actions also falling within their ambit – were now coming under pressure from the politicians themselves. Statements have been made by some civil society bodies expressing exactly that worry. Some of these groups actively supported the current National Unity coalition’s ascent to power in the last presidential and parliamentary elections and, fighting rampant corruption and nepotism was an important policy plank they had supported. Naturally, these groups wondered whether that policy, now well into implementation, would be affected by this seeming political intervention.

Others – including political enemies of the government - wondered whether the sharp remarks by the President signalled a drifting apart of the coalition itself.

The President, however, took the reassuring step of quickly convening a meeting of the coalition’s top political leadership from the main partners to thrash out the issues. The Prime Minister and other senior ministers from the several political forces in the coalition, held a serious discussion with the President, the main outcome of which was the assurance that the National Unity coalition was not just intact but moving forward in all areas of governance, including the corruption probes.

What is at stake here are two vital aspects of governance and stability of democracy. One aspect is the uprooting of the forest of corruption that has undermined the fabric of the State itself during the decade of the past regime. This is an important ‘repair job’ about which the whole nation is concerned, especially those citizens who had specifically wanted this coalition to come to power to undertake.

The other aspect is the repair of the State system itself after the corroding effect of the corruption and rampant abuse of power.

It was the experience of the corrosion of the State that prompted some citizens’ groups to fear the possibility of a slide backwards to the past regime of wanton political manipulations of State institutions.

The overriding priority should be the continuity of this finely balanced coalition of political forces who came together in 2015 to save the country from collapse - administrative, political, economic, social and even moral. The compulsions of political competition are such that, in a multi-party coalition as the current regime, there must be constant exercising of restraint: restraint from overly competing for every part of the governmental cake at every turn.

Thus, while each political party sees itself in competition with the others in the field, the demands of a national coalition must supersede the competitive dynamic to the extent that political collaboration will ensure comprehensive and smooth implementation of governmental initiatives. At the same time, it is only a continued equilibrium in the balance of power between coalition partners that will restrain any one party’s desire to overcome the others – at least for the duration of Unity coalition’s term.

The Maldives

Our second closest neighbour nation, the archipelago of The Maldives, surprised the world last week with the announcement that it was withdrawing from membership in the Commonwealth of Nations, a world grouping of which Sri Lanka is also a member.

The immediate context in which this withdrawal was announced should be familiar with Sri Lankans. After all, during the past decade, this country came under scrutiny and criticism by not only the Commonwealth but by many other inter-governmental and non-governmental bodies, for the scale of social violence, racism and other forms of discrimination, the violation of human rights, and the deterioration of the democratic system as a whole. The problems in The Maldives are nowhere near the scale we faced.

In recent years, especially after the controversial overturning of the last government in Male and the assumption of power of the current regime, The Maldives has had to meet numerous challenges in the practice of democratic governance. That religious hardline groups are raising their heads only adds to the pressures on Male.

Sri Lanka is geographically and culturally very close to the archipelago. Divehi, the Maldivian language originated largely from medieval Sinhala while Buddhism was the religion of the early civilisation there.

Colombo will do well to lend a helping hand to our little neighbour to overcome its political difficulties - as we did ours - and regain its due place in the world community. At the same time, while our good offices should be extended to all sides of the Maldivian political divide, we should be alert that extremist elements in both countries do not get opportunities to converge in their disruptive activities.

Ceylon Today Editorial

Independence of Judiciary restored

16 October 2016

Exactly two months ago President Maithripala Sirisena as the Chief Guest at the 29th Anniversary Conference of LAWASIA held in Colombo said that the 'independence of Sri Lanka's Judiciary has been restored and must stay that way, as the international community including the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) is closely watching its development'.

He added, "I can assure you that we are on the right path, though several things remain to be done".

The President then stressed that to create a just society, the rule of law and independence of the Judiciary, are a must.

Then, mid-week this past week, media, political, Police and even legal circles were plunged into high dudgeon over a Police statement to the effect that a man intimately linked to the infamous Aturugiriya weapons cache had supposedly committed suicide leaving behind a suicide note, supposedly (because it is yet to be proved whether the suicide note was one written of his own volition or under duress), claiming to have been the killer of a leading journalist which case has been grabbing headlines for many years.

This would have passed by without much ado but for the fact that the Mount Lavinia Magistrate on Friday re-remanded Premananda Udalagama until 28 October despite pressures under which the Police and legal authorities are working because of what Wickrematunge's lawyers argued in Court Friday were attempts to impose fiats on the Police and Judiciary. The Mount Lavinia Magistrate heard arguments and re-remanded Udalagama ignoring any perceived pressures relating to how the law must treat servicemen who had served the nation during the war against the LTTE.

While it is argued that there must be some decorum about the manner in which war heroes need to be treated in Court in connection with civil cases, surely, the President cannot be wanting, the same approach in connection with murder cases. Not after his assurances at the LAWASIA Anniversary Conference.

His criticism has been in general terms and not once has he tried to impose executive pleasure on the Police or Judiciary to the detriment of the dispensation of justice where such cases are concerned.

The President, Prime Minister and Minister of Law and Order Sagala Ratnayake also met in closed door discussions last Wednesday and to date the subject of their discussion is not known.

But the suicide note, Udalagama's release in the Tennekoon assault case and immediate re-remanding in the Lasantha murder case came almost simultaneously after the President's censure on the manner in which war heroes are being perceived to being not accorded some special status in Court in the processes of justice.

But the President certainly stopped short of accusing the Police, Independent Commissions and the Judiciary of not doing their work honestly and transparently.

What had caused concern in Police and Judiciary circles is the fact that Wickrematunge's remains were exhumed on a Court order after the CID informed Court that there were inconsistencies in the autopsy report submitted by the then JMO.

The new autopsy report is expected to be released this month. Wickrematunge was assassinated while on his way to work in January 2009.

In July, the CID arrested Udalagama in connection with the Wickrematunge murder. The Army Intelligence Officer was also identified as the person who abducted Dias, the slain editor's driver.

But what specifically worried the Police and the Judiciary is the fact that the President did say last Wednesday, at the Sri Lanka Foundation Institute, that military intelligence officers are being held in remand custody for over 10 months without indictments against them.

Weekend Nation Editorial

Political priorities and Constitution making

16 October 2016

Constitutional expert and parliamentarian Dr. Jayampathy Wickremeratne has requested all the political parties to be flexible and support the government’s efforts to draft a new Constitution. He has also indicated that this is the most opportune moment to come up with a Constitution that will be fitting for the country.

As he had pointed out we should neither delay the process too much nor should we try to do it in a hurry. What it means is that if we try to do it in a hurry we will end up with a faulty document which will serve no purpose, while on the other hand if we delay it too much it will never happen.

A case in point for a faulty document was the infamous seventeenth amendment to the present Constitution. It was approved by parliament unanimously as the purpose was to set up a constitutional council and several independent commissions under it, a move hailed as a great step in democracy. Unwanted haste resulted in the framers of the amendment omitting the inclusion of provisions for quorum in the constitutional council. As a result the council became non-functional when minority parties failed to agree on their nominee to the Council.

As Dr. Wickremeratne himself had pointed out, if we try to get everybody’s approval we will never be able to draft a Constitution. What is necessary is for the document to receive the general approbation of all major political parties that are represented in parliament so that there will not be any allegations to say that the Constitution was designed to help one particular political party or a community.

It is no secret that the Constitution of 1972 was drafted to suit the agendas of the political parties that were in the ruling United Left Front and their socialist ethos. Moreover, it was boycotted by the Tamil political parties. Similarly the 1978 Constitution was pushed through by the JR Jayewardene government using the massive majority they had in parliament disregarding views of all others. There were allegations that the Constitution was tailor-made for JRJ and the UNP.

That is the very reason why none of those Constitutions worked and in fact every government since 1994 came into power with a promise to change the Constitution and the executive presidency although it has not happened up to now. All the efforts by the Chandrika Kumaranatunge government to adopt a new Constitution were scuttled by the UNP that was in the Opposition at the time.

For a Constitution to be successful, it needs the general approval of all major political parties in the country. In that sense the present moment where the two major political parties are working together, with the JVP also playing an active role in parliament, it seems to be more opportune than ever before for drafting a proper Constitution for the country that will last long. The process should neither be delayed nor should it be hastened unduly, but it should happen within a reasonable time for otherwise as the next election approaches the priority will shift from the Constitution to the need for winning the election.

Sunday Times Editorial

Quo vadis the fight against corruption

16 October 2016

President Maithripala Sirisena wanted something off his chest. Speaking at a military event, the Commander-in-chief of the Armed Forces and Minister of Defence made it publicly known that he had nothing to do with the recent dragging of former Defence Secretary Gotabaya Rajapaksa and one-time Service Commanders to court on bribery charges where they faced the indignity of languishing in a cell while their bail was furnished as the law demands.

For those already howling about these former war heroes having to face a possible War Crimes Tribunal at the behest of the UN Human Rights Council, here was the preview; coming events casting their shadows as it were.

The President’s outburst provoked a negative reaction from those running the day-to-day affairs of the Government as our Political Editor describes on this page. Was he right in saying what he said in public; independent institutions like the Bribery and Corruption Commission are appointed by him and therefore must keep him briefed before taking action? For someone who is fond of saying that he does not interfere in the law enforcement process, it is a contradiction that does not sit well.

His coalition partner, the United National Party leadership quickly sought clarification. Many felt that the President was reacting to three factors; popular sympathy for the war heroes, divisions within his Sri Lanka Freedom Party, and the possibility of resentment within sections of the Armed Forces.

The allegations surrounded the controversial Avant Garde floating armoury. Government members made a hue and cry about it in the run-up to the 2015 Presidential election and thereafter. For the President to raise objections to what the Bribery Commission chose to do has also come in for criticism from those who campaigned against corruption in the previous administration. In the proper scheme of things, it will be the duty of the courts to be the final arbiter of the rights and wrongs of that multimillion dollar exercise.

The entire question of bribery and corruption has raised its ugly head once again in this country – and this time, it is not just for the alleged misdeeds of the past administration, but also, for what is happening right now. Just last week, we begged the question why the national carrier’s chairman so casually dismissed a loss of as much as Rs. 25 billion the people of this country have to ultimately pocket out for the acts of a few influential people in the Mahinda Rajapaksa Government. Today, our Business section says the Government itself is dismissing the airline chairman’s flippant remarks and will probe the matter.

We said that those who bungled mega-contracts of yesteryear from the redesign of the Colombo Fort project during the Chandrika Kumaratunga administration, to the oil hedging debacle and the Greek bonds losses during the Mahinda Rajapaksa administration – and, the Airbus lease loss – have all been swept under the carpet over the years. The insider dealings of the Colombo Stock Exchange are all but forgotten. The long arm of the law seems not long enough to bring them to book, while those who seem to have indulged in ‘petty thefts’ are marched to court.

From the beginning, this Government that rode to office on the theme of the Rajapaksa era’s financial crimes, bungled its offensive in tackling this issue. It got off to the worst possible start when the Central Bank bond issue broke out — it is still dragging on — making a public mockery of the Government’s drive against corruption in high places. The President’s invitation to well-known ministerial rascals of yesteryear to join his Cabinet after last year’s parliamentary elections seemed a race to the bottom. Political agendas were prioritised over the battle against corruption.

Last year, on October 4, we wrote under the heading “Battle against Corruption is itself Corrupt”. We pointed out how the newly established Financial Crimes Investigations Division (FCID) and the Attorney General’s Department were merely trading insults over the lackadaisical speed at roping in the crooks of the Rajapaksa regime. Self-righteous politicians were trooping in and out of the FCID and Bribery Commission carrying files, smiling to the press cameras. Over-enthusiastic Ministers and Deputies were saying how the World Bank’s Stolen Assets Recovery Initiative and US Federal investigators were identifying the Rajapaksa rogues. Even US Secretary of State John Kerry raised expectations promising to help in the search for illegal deposits abroad.

PRECIFAC, yet another Commission of Inquiry this time under the President, started its own investigations. One such investigation is following the paper trail on the monies siphoned through the then Central Bank to so-called US lobby firms without the knowledge of the then Cabinet or Parliament. We referred to the nexus between the Governors of the Central Bank under the Rajapaksa Government and the Sirisena Government at the time and how corruption is entrenched in the political system in Sri Lanka.

The Bribery Commission really should shut down. For more than a year and a half it has complained that it has “no teeth” and that it must await a complaint to start an inquiry; but what of the hundreds of complaints already made. It has neither fast-forwarded the amendments to get itself the ‘teeth’ it wants, nor processed the files before it. Going about the country pasting stickers on three-wheelers warning people against corruption, the commission stands accused of being selective in its investigations. The initial hype has all but evaporated. When some Customs men were nabbed, there were media conferences even before the accused were tried, but when questions are asked about the inquiry that began a year ago into the Central Bank bond scam, there are no media conferences while secrecy clauses in the law are quoted.

On November 8, 2015 when we wrote under the heading; “Corruption; the same difference”, we pointed out to a Deputy Minister making a speech overseas to a UN conference of “zero tolerance” for corruption by the new Government and then how ruling coalition politicians have got sucked into the fray by the big bucks of big business.

It is time to take a leaf out of India’s book and permit citizens to go direct to Court through FIRs (First Information Reports) and for judges to conduct suo moto inquiries on their own initiative. This, of course, is apart from the Right to Information Law that is in motion in India.

The monopoly of the FCID and the Bribery Commission in tackling bribery and corruption must cease because they cannot do their job partly due to competence factors and the lack of forensic skills, partly due to bribery and corruption itself, partly the lack of will, and partly due to political interference.

The President’s public comments have sent mixed signals. Quo Vadis the fight against corruption.

Sunday Island Editorial

Lasantha and friction in ruling camp

16 October 2016

 

The investigation into the Lasantha Wickramatunga assassination has taken many twists and turns, some of them bizarre like yesterday’s suicide of a retired Sergeant Major of the Military in Investigation Unit who has taken the blame for the killing and asked that his friend now in custody, also a member of military intelligence, be released. Ordinary people still do not know for sure whether Wickramatunga was shot dead, bludgeoned or stabbed with pointed instruments. News reports at various times have reported these to have been the cause of death. Hopefully, the ongoing forensic investigations following the recent exhumation of the body will at least accurately establish the cause of death. Given that Wickrematunga was killed as far back as Jan. 8, 2009, there were many who had (and have) doubts that evidence hard enough to secure a conviction may not be findable. Nevertheless, there has been a much more serious effort to gather what evidence is possible following the regime change.

Wickrematunga’s brother Lal, now serving as a Sri Lankan consul in Australia, has freely gone on record alleging that the former president had told him not once but several times that a named senior military officer was responsible for the killing. Whether Lal Wickrematunga had asked the president if this was the case why necessary action had not been taken, we do not know. Nor do we know what response if any there was to this question. As far as former President Mahinda Rajapaksa is concerned, General Sarath Fonseka was once "the best army commander in the world." That changed after Fonseka chose to run against him for the presidency. It must be said in fairness to Rajapaksa that arresting a senior commander over Wickrematunga’s assassination at the closing stage of the war when victory was in sight would have shattered military morale and was not an option that could have been considered. But the fact that the more serious and committed investigation following the change of government appears to have unearthed useful material is obvious. Perhaps the bloodhounds are now within reach of establishing who the actual killers were. But is there a serious effort to establish who unleashed them to do the dirty, to our minds more important than who did the job, been launched?

The week that has passed saw President Maithripala Sirisena launching a strong attack on several law enforcement agencies of the government saying that they seem to be acting according to somebody’s political agenda. He was clearly angered by former Defence Secretary Gotabhaya Rajapaksa and three former navy commanders being hauled before the courts on Avant Garde connected matters and "humiliated". Sirisena’s widely publicized speech at an event in Colombo sparked inevitable speculation that the honeymoon between him and Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe’s UNP has ended. Analysts and observers wondered whether Sirisena was moving towards taking over the law and order ministry responsible for the agencies he fired at, currently held by Wickremesinghe loyalist Sagala Ratnayake, either under his own wing or under a minister of his SLFP faction. There were reports that retired Justice T.B. Weerasuriya, Chairman of the Commission to Investigate Allegations of Bribery and Corruption (CIABOC) is likely to resign and so also its Director General Dilrukshi Dias Wickramasinghe.

But the signs yesterday were that a fence-mending exercise between the president and prime minister were afoot and that there will be no boat rocking until both return from overseas visits later this week. There had been a meeting between the president and prime minister, who was accompanied by the law and order minister, on Thursday and some of the heat resulting from the president’s remarks appeared to have dissipated. The chances are that some kind of committee in which both the president and prime minister will participate with representation both from the SLFP (Sirisena faction) and the UNP will be set up to avoid a repetition of past history. We cannot forget what happened when President Chandrika Kumaratunga took over some key UNP ministries in 2004 toppling the then Ranil Wickremesinghe government. Obviously both sides are well aware that differences at the top bodes neither of them any good and the obvious beneficiary will be the former president and his joint opposition.

While several forces that backed Sirisena’s bid for the presidency have been vocally critical about his attack on state agencies probing corruption, nobody can deny the public perception that such investigations that Rajapaksa and his backers have labeled "witch hunts" have not focused on misdoings of the current administration. The so-called bond scam stands out from among these with no anti-corruption agencies investigating these. The president certainly earned brownie points by holding out against re-appointing Mr. Arjuna Mahendran as Governor of the Central Bank. The appointment of Dr. Indrajit Coomaraswamy to this important position was widely welcomed across the political spectrum. With information coming out of the staggering profits earned by companies owned by Mahendran’s son-in-law hitting the public domain, the demand that these matters are meticulously investigated is gathering steam. The prime minister made no secret of his backing for Mahendran, taking him along to Singapore on an official visit soon after the whole business blew up. Whatever the truth or otherwise of the allegation that continue to be widely bruited, they must be properly investigated perhaps by a Commission of Inquiry as has been suggested.

There are only weeks to go before the budget for next year is presented. Government’s revenue needs are huge and additional taxes, some of them unpopular like the VAT proposals, are inevitable. Obviously the government is dragging its feet on holding the long overdue local government elections. The only reason that can be adduced for this is that at least some of its constituents do not relish their prospects. Within such a scenario, political chess games such as engineering defections to secure a parliamentary majority would be unwise. Not even the former president will claim that his administration was lily white. It is imperative that the big rogues are exposed but gathering the necessary evidence unlike proving smaller cases (like misuse of vehicles or non-declaration of assets) is not an easy task. Winning even relatively small cases in the courts than trying to first set off a bang by landing a big fish down the road will not be the most sensible course of action. There is no argument that the president must be kept in the loop on these matters. So also wrongdoers must not be protected, whoever they are. Let us also not antagonize and lose people doing difficult jobs by attributing motives to them. Both president and prime minister must know best that good people are hard to find for the jobs that must be done.