Ceylon Today Editorial

Kashmir Resolution & Colombo

10 March 2017

If the first shot to destablise Sri Lanka was fired after the re-election of Indira Gandhi in January 1980, ipso facto with disastrous consequences to the island, then the second shot may well be fired if the international community insists upon international jurists sitting in judgement over the island.

This is in respect of Colombo's war against Tamil terrorism, more specifically against LTTE terrorism, post-July 1987, where, in July '87, all other Tamil terrorist groups, with the exception of the LTTE, laid down their arms, under the controversial Indo-Lanka Peace Accord.

Currently, the international community, wearing the self righteous mantle of the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC), is sitting in judgement, not least over Sri Lanka, at its headquarters in Geneva over allegations of war crimes committed by Colombo in its prosecution of the LTTE war.

These allegations, currently may rest, on the resolution, albeit hastily and foolishly, adopted by Sri Lanka at Geneva on 1 October 2015, by 'agreeing' to foreign Jurists to hear cases against alleged war crimes, led and committed by the Government of Sri Lanka and of its agents (specifically the armed forces and the police), post-July '87, specifically.

Subsequently (though, initially, contradictory), Premier Ranil Wickremesinghe, nevertheless, has 'now' given a 'firm no' to international Jurists sitting in judgement over Colombo. President Maithripala Sirisena has also reiterated this position, albeit, post- October 2015.

The 'Great October Resolution', when it was first proclaimed in public, ipso facto on 1 October 2015 itself, it may not be wrong to say, came as a shock to the majority of Sri Lanka's population, especially its majority 75% Sinhala population. They consider this resolution, firstly, as an affront to Sri Lanka's dignity, and, secondly, by clearly insinuating that Colombo's judicial system cannot be considered as being fair in the eyes of the 'international community' to dispense, or not to be able to dispense justice to the minority Tamil community, as being a further insult to the Sinhala ethos.

Both Wickremesinghe and Sirisena may now have realized their politically disastrous mistake of allegedly supporting this October resolution. They are now backtracking over this issue of foreign Jurists meddling in Sri Lanka's internal affairs as a result.

The UNHRC, led by Sri Lanka's former colonial master the UK, and, seemingly supported by the world's greatest political, economic and military power the USA (which co-sponsored the October resolution) is now asking for the UNHRC to give Colombo more time.(See 'Ceylon Today's' editorial of 3 March, 2017)

In the October resolution, Sri Lanka was given 18 months to get its act right. Now, at Geneva, Sri Lanka has asked for a further 24 months. Obviously, with the USA and the UK now behind the Colombo Government, it's likely that the UNHRC will give Sri Lanka that extra time that it has asked for.

Meanwhile, the seemingly erudite emeritus Prof. G.L. Peiris, former President Mahinda Rajapaksa's External Affairs Minister, has in a local daily, posed the question, that, if Sirisena and Wickremesinghe are opposed to foreign Jurists sitting over Colombo's affairs, how, then, was the 1 October 2015 Resolution, with Sri Lanka's blessings, adopted in the first place? A legitimate question, but to educate and enlighten Peiris, the UN's Kashmir's Resolution of 1948, which was supported by no lesser country that the island's closest 'and largest' neighbour India, perhaps, the ultimate cause for Colombo's current misfortunes, called for a plebiscite for the largely Muslim dominated Kashmir, one of the States that comprises India.

The plebiscite, which, however, is yet to be held, after a near passage of 70 years, is to be based upon two questions, ie, whether the Kashmiris want autonomy or not?

For seemingly obvious reasons, Delhi, so as apparently not to offend its 79.8% Hindu population (Wikipedia), has been postponing the holding of this referendum which itself has supported, with not a word of protest from the UN, or for that matter the UNHRC, the 'self proclaimed' universal defender of human rights.

In as much as the holding of such a referendum may cause chaos and bloodshed in India, by stirring up the emotions of its 79.8% Hindu population, of which the UN/UNHRC may be aware of, but more importantly, which organizations India apparently doesn't care two hoots about, nonetheless, with the passage of nearly 70 years since the passing of that resolution, the holding of such a plebiscite is yet to see the light of day.

Unless the UN/UNHRC casts a similar myopic eye on the October Resolution governing Colombo vis-à-vis foreign Jurists, such a stand may ensure Sri Lanka's stability and be a pivot for Colombo's progress, not least for ethnic reconciliation. But, if the opposite happens, Sri Lanka may well end up being the victim of extremist forces on both sides of the divide.

That will be January 1980 all over again.

Daily News Editorial

Dinesh got it coming

10 March 2017

Speaker Karu Jayasuriya, perhaps, would have been the custodian of parliament in recent memory who has had to endure the worst kind of brickbats, nay invective, from a section of his charges representing the Opposition. Since he assumed the mantle of Speaker of Parliament, in August 2015, to say that Jayasuriya has been wearing a crown of thorns, would indeed be an understatement. Since that day, he has been at the receiving end of scorn, and sometimes vilification, of the worst kind, from the members of the Joint Opposition, for refusing to dance to their tune.

Many have been the instances where his podium had been invaded by the JO hordes, virtually baying for his blood, for not giving rulings in their favour. Wednesday was no different, when the worst kind of rowdysm was witnessed among members of the JO, who, not only defied the ruling of the Chair but resorted to name calling of the Speaker which was unprecedented to say the least. Their grouse; one of their stalwarts, namely Wimal Weerawansa, being overruled in his demand to be recognized as the leader of a political party that has severed its ties with the UPFA, under which banner, the party contested the last General Election. The Speaker's decision, which was arrived at in terms of the rule book, was not to the liking of the Joint Opposition, and WW in particular, who went berserk using unparliamentary, nay, unprintable language, in the August Assembly. The now familiar stampede to the Speaker's podium, to grab the Mace, predictably followed, forcing a multiple suspension of sittings and eventually the Police been summoned to evict a JO member, nay, its parliamentary group leader Dinesh Gunawardena who was making a spectacle of himself in the House, coming to the rescue of his beleaguered colleague, eventually earning for himself one week's suspension from sittings.

It was unbecoming for a politician of the calibre of Dinesh Gunawardena, who boasts of a rich political pedigree, to have conducted himself the way he did in the chambers of parliament. One would have thought that, years of being a parliamentarian, and a leader of a political party (MEP), he would have acted with more maturity and set an example to his junior colleagues. But on Wednesday Gunawardena disported himself as just another garden politician, keen to play to the gallery, for cheap political gain. This was hardly the Gunawardena stock, which the public, particularly the old timers, have come to know although father Phillip himself was a robust and rumbustious politician lionized by his constituents of the Hewagam Korale.

Blood curdling screams, the gnashing of teeth and tearing of hair, to express a point of view, is not going to elevate Dinesh Gunawardena to the ranks of his more illustrious forebears, particularly as the leader of the MEP. No. He will only be reducing himself to the level of politicians of the calibre of Wimal Weerawansa and Mahindananda Aluthgamage. True, there have been numerous instances when boisterous MPs were evicted from parliament in the past. But these disruptions were not deliberate intentions to disrupt parliament and there was no vicious taunts hurled at the Speaker. But what the public have been witnessing during the last two years is a systematic attempt to throw parliament proceedings into disarray, by deliberate attempts at disruption. The demand made by Wimal Weerawansa fits into this pattern. By virtue of being political party leader he will have the privilege of making Special Statements in parliament willy nilly, in addition to raising objections and protests at party leaders’ meetings. Not just WW, Vasudeva, Udaya Gammanpila and Chandrasiri Gajadeera, who are leaders of the NSSP, Pivithuru Hela Urumaya and the Communist Party, respectively would want to be recognized similarly and make “special statements” on a daily basis, and kick up rows in the process, not permitting a smooth running of parliament.

Be that as it may, the Speaker should resolve to deal firmly with members, who willfully disrupt parliament businesses, in the future. As has been pointed out, Rs. 4.6 million is spent by the public for each day's sittings of parliament and they naturally, expect value for money. MPs storming the Speaker’s podium and running away with the Mace and trading insults across the floor is not what they expect their money to be used for. True, parliament should be a place for robust debate and the parry and thrust, that was a hallmark of parliaments of old, when men and women of quality and standing graced the August Assembly. But, many would agree that what we are witnessing today is an abomination, where parliament is akin to an arena of the gladiators.

It was from the likes of Dinesh Gunawardena that much would have been expected to turn things around and help restore the dignity of this premier people's forum. Sadly though, the scion of Boralugoda had apparently chosen to throw in his lot with the riffraff, that has not only marred the illustrious name he bears but also called into question the political views he espouses.

The Island Editorial

Drama, waste and vanity

10 March 2017

Wednesday’s Parliament drama, which may be called Diyawanna nadagama, had the trappings of a third-rate soap opera. It, however, served the government’s purpose in that it diverted public attention from a vital issue—parliamentary approval for allocating about half a billion rupees to buy super luxury vehicles for ministers and others.

Surprisingly, an otherwise mild-mannered Speaker Karu Jayasuriya saw red when Joint Opposition leader Dinesh Gunawardena launched into a tirade against him, disrupting parliamentary proceedings in the process. Pulling a wry face, he recalled an incident, where Gunawardena, as the then Chief Government Whip under the Rajapaksa regime, had prevented him from even getting up to present the Right to Information Bill as a private member’s motion. The boot is on the other foot!

Gunawardena, obviously, let emotions get the better of him and overstepped his limits. True, he had a grouse and thought the Chair was not giving him a patient hearing. He demanded to know why Wimal Weerawansa’s National Freedom Front, which had pulled out of the UPFA, could not be considered an independent party in the House. His diatribe against the Speaker, however, cannot be countenanced.

We have seen MPs behaving in a far worse manner than Gunawardena in the House without being named or suspended. In 2007, the then Speaker W. J. M. Lokubandara, angered by a free-for-all in the House with some protesting Opposition MPs grabbing some of the files on his table, declared that what he had witnessed was terrorism. A minister once assaulted a manthri hamuduruwo or MP monk, injuring the pendulous parts of the latter’s anatomy in Parliament. Nobody was named or suspended for such rowdy behaviour. Two wrongs, however, don’t make a right and it is incumbent upon all MPs, especially the senior ones on both sides, to behave in the House.

We only hope that the government won’t continue to have Opposition MPs named by the Chair and use its parliamentary majority to suspend them in the name of maintaining discipline in the House. The yahapalanaya administration is becoming increasingly intolerant of political dissent.

A question that needs to be posed to the party leaders in Parliament is why about 114 MPs were absent on Wednesday. MPs are paid salaries and various allowances and given duty free vehicles, soft loans and numerous other perks to attend Parliament and take part in debates therein on behalf of the public. Of what use are MPs who shirk their legislative responsibilities?

Many schools are without sanitary facilities as President Maithripala Sirisena himself has revealed. Hospitals are experiencing drug shortages. Public assistance is sought for purchasing medical equipment. Foreign reserves are dwindling at a rate and the balance of payment woes are worsening. But, the government does not scrimp and save when it comes to feathering the nests of its parliamentarians. Having come to power, promising to run a tight ship and salvage the economy, it is wasting public funds to please unconscionable high-rollers within its ministerial ranks.

Politicians in power are said to suffer from rathagaya or excessive desire for using vehicles. They love to have fleets of SUVs and limos at their disposal to boost their XXL egos. Some of them get into trouble after losing power as a result. Weerawansa’s predicament is a case in point.

One may recall that a few years ago an MP monk caused quite a stir by purchasing a duty free car and disposing of it on the sly. The then Opposition Leader Ranil Wickremesinghe, known for his impish delight in riling his rivals and shocking the press, asked whether the Thera wanted a comfy sedan for his ‘journey along arya astangika margaya or the Noble Eightfold Path’. The JHU heavyweights hauled him over the coals for insulting Buddhism. Ironically, they have got into Parliament on Wickremesinghe’s coat-tails!

The PM should be asked whether his ministers need so many super luxury vehicles to zip along the yahapalana path, which we are told, leads to political nirvana.