by D.B. S. Jeyaraj

Hello Friends

Today July 21st is the 50th anniversary of Mrs. Sirima Bandaranaike becoming Prime Minister of Sri Lanka then known as Ceylon. Needless to say she made history then as the world’s first woman prime minister and put the Island nation on the global map.

I thought of remembering on this historically important date this remarkable woman who made a lasting impact on the fate of her country.

I am therefore reproducing on my blog an article written about her by me ten years ago. It was published in the Indian newsmagazine “Frontline” of Aug 19th – Sep 01st 2000 (Vol 17-Issue 17) under the heading “Exit of an Elder Stateswoman”.

I wrote the article after Mrs. Bandaranaike resigned as Prime minister on August 10th 2000. Ill – health had been the primary cause for this decision

I realised then that the days of the grand old lady were numbered. I thought I must write something about her that should be read by her or have it read to her while she was among us rather than pay tribute to her after her death. I also wanted it to have international exposure

So I wrote this article about her and sent it to the Editor N.Ram who kindly consented to publish it in “Frontline”. It was widely read and appreciated

My greatest pleasure however was in knowing that the contents of this article were read out to Mrs. Bandaranaike who was quite happy about it though it was by no means a hagiography.

She was courteous enough to convey her thanks to me for that article about her written in the twilight of her distinguished life.

Two months later on October 10th she passed away gracefully after returning home from voting at the Parliamentary elections.

I was then indeed glad that I had written this short piece while she was living and that she had it read out to her.

When I entered Journalism in 1977 She was the Prime Minister but at the tail-end of her term. One of my earliest assignments for the “Virakesari” was the ceremony at BMICH where she was awarded the “CERES” medal by the FAO. Ceres was the Goddess of Agriculture in Roman mythology

She was ousted from power in the July 21st polls in 1977.

Later I covered many of her meetings .parliament speeches and press conferences.

Among the meetings I vividly recollect are the election propaganda meetings at Batticaloa and Kattankudi, the meeting in Jaffna after her civic rights were denied in 1980 and the Jaffna meeting against the referendum of 1982.

Among the press conferences the one I remember most was the one at her residence in 1980 on the eve of her being deprived of civic rights. I recall her sitting calm and collectedly flanked by Lawyers VW Kularatne and Gamini Iriyagolla while daughter Sunethra was moving about the crowd catering to the needs of the journos.

Sunethra is a very beautiful woman and I remember quipping to Ajit Samaranayake that “this attraction is a distraction” something which Ajit was fond of referring to whenever the subject of Sunethra came up in conversation

I was also present in the old Parliament by the Beira when her civic rights were deprived by Parliament and she was expelled. She was all alone as her party was boycotting proceedings. The rowdy MP’s of the UNP were raucous and boistrous as Mrs. Bandaranaike walked out. It was left to the Opposition leader Appapillai Amirthalingam and TULF president Murugesu Sivasithamparam to flank her on both sides and gallantly escort her out.

In later years I had the opportunity of meeting her thrice for detailed ,off the record discussions. Anura Bandaranaike, Haris Hulugalle and Lasantha Wickrematunga had arranged the meetings respectively and were present

She was particularly keen on knowing what was happening in the North and East and in Tamil Nadu. I too asked her about the past and received frank answers. I obtained fresh insight into many events of the past relating to Tamil politics. I understood some of the reasons for the way in which she had handled or mishandled the Tamil national question.

It is against this backdrop that I present here this piece in the “Frontline” as it was written a decade ago

Mrs. Banadaranaike ~ at 84 ~ pic: http://tux1.aftenposten.no

Here it is Friends -

SIRIMA BANDARANAIKE, who relinquished office voluntarily on August 10 as Sri Lanka’s Prime Minister under a system of executive presidency, has been a dominant matriarchal figure on the island’s political landscape for more than 40 years. She created his tory as the world’s first woman Prime Minister when appointed on July 21, 1960 and was the world’s oldest serving Premier when she stepped down at the age of 84. She was Prime Minister during 1960-65, 1970-77 and 1994-2000 and Leader of the Opposition Leader during 1965-70 and 1989-1994.

Born on April 17, 1916 as the eldest child of a Kandyan Sinhala aristocrat, Barnes Ratwatte, Sirima was educated at Colombo’s St. Bridgette’s Convent. She married Solomon W.R.D. Bandaranaike from a leading downcountry Sinhala family in 1940. She was cont ent to be a housewife for 20 years while her husband went on to win political laurels as Minister, Opposition Leader and then Prime Minister.

After the assassination of her husband by a Buddhist monk in 1959, a reluctant Sirima was propelled to political centre stage. The Sinhala Buddhist nationalist party, the Sri Lanka Freedom Party, founded by her husband, found itself leaderless and party seniors prevailed upon her to take over.

When the relatively young and inexperienced Sirima led her party to victory at the polls and went on to become Prime Minister, the precedent was established for two major developments. On a regional level, it was the harbinger of dynastic politics in Sou th Asia. At a global level, Sirima pioneered the arrival of women as heads of state. It is said that the term “stateswoman” was coined by the British press to describe her.

The Bandaranaikes are the acknowledged first family in Sri Lankan politics. Since the country achieved Independence in 1948, members of the family have been heads of state for 22 years and Leaders of Opposition for 20 years. A unique and perhaps unsurpas sable record was established when the Bandaranaikes’ daughter, Chandrika Kumaratunga, like her parents, became Prime Minister in 1994. She then went on to become the first woman executive President, while her mother Sirima was appointed Premier. The moth er-Prime Minister and daughter-President combination was yet another feat by the family. Sirima’s son Anura too is in politics, as an Opposition member of Parliament and was also earlier a Cabinet Minister and the Leader of the Opposition.

Sirima Bandaranaike was quite unfamiliar with matters of foreign policy when she first became Prime Minister in 1960. She mastered statecraft and the nuances of international politics while in office. Mingling with great leaders such as Jawaharlal Nehru, Gamal Abdel Nasser, Kwame Nkrumah, Josef Tito, and “Bung” Sukarno, she made a name for herself. Like her husband she faithfully adhered to the principle of non-alignment as the cornerstone of her foreign policy. Her crowning achievement came when she wa s elected unofficial head of the developing world at the fifth Non-aligned summit of 1976, held in Colombo.

On a practical level, the success of her foreign policy was realised when the Marxist-Leninist-oriented Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP) launched an armed revolt against her government in April 1971. Most nations, including the United States, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, China, Britain, France, India and Pakistan, rallied to her aid and provided assistance of different types. It was a rare instance, at the height of the Cold War, of countries divided among themselves bonding in common cause to help a “friend”. In a gesture of benign intervention, India deployed aircraft and personnel as part of indirect logistical support.

Despite having been the recipient of Indian assistance, Bandaranaike did not hesitate to afford refuelling facilities to Pakistan in Colombo, when the Bangladesh war of liberation broke out. Although an irritant to New Delhi at the time, Bandaranaike was compelled by regional realpolitik to do so then.

Years later she spearheaded an anti-India campaign in 1987-88, against the Indo-Sri Lanka Accord signed by her arch political rival, J.R. Jayewardene, with Rajiv Gandhi. In spite of these developments, Bandaranaike’s worldview, as in the case of daughter Chandrika, was not anti-Indian.

In fact, it is to the credit of Sirima that she was mindful of India’s interests in the region and avoided areas of friction as far as possible. She did not, for example, plunge the country into a pro-Western and anti-Indian mode as Jayewardene did prio r to the accord. A creditable accomplishment was her resolving the contentious issue of “statelessness” of plantation workers of Indian origin living in the central highlands of the island, estimated at 975,000. The accord with her Indian counterpart, La l Bahadur Shastri, in 1964 provided for India taking 525,000 such people, and Sri Lanka 300,000, leaving a residue of 150,000. Known as the Sirima-Shastri Pact, it was hailed as a diplomatic breakthrough. In 1974 a second accord with Prime Minister Indir a Gandhi saw both countries absorbing 75,000 each of the balance. This agreement also placed the Kachchativu island under Sri Lanka’s control while ensuring certain rights for Indian fishermen.

Sirima Bandaranaike was an ardent advocate of the Indian Ocean peace zone proposal, a concept welcomed by New Delhi then. She also played a tightrope-walking role as a “limited” mediator during the India-China war of 1962.

The cordial relationship between India and Sri Lanka during the tenure of the Bandaranaikes was also personified by the friendship enjoyed by the family with their Indian counterparts, the Nehru-Gandhis. A much-publicised photograph of both families led to a guessing game in the 1970s. Of the figures in the photograph, Jawaharlal Nehru, Bandaranaike, Sirima and Indira Gandhi had become Prime ministers. The question was who among the children would become Premiers. Rajiv Gandhi in the 1980s and Chandrika Kumaratunga in the 1990s provided the answers.

In the domestic sphere, Sirima adopted a socialist policy like her husband. Various private enterprises were nationalised. Ceilings were imposed on landholdings and number of houses owned. The single largest group of private newspapers was taken over. St ate-owned institutions were set up to control and run most industrial and commercial ventures. Estates as well as schools were nationalised. Although she came from a feudalistic landowning family, Sirima Bandaranaike did not hesitate to work against her own class interests. Personally she forfeited thousands of acres of land to the state because of her land reform policy.

Her economic policies and populist measures, however, did not bear fruit but plunged the country into ruin over the years. Her association with Trotskyite and Communist parties, resulting in the coalition government of 1970, saw the country become a repu blic with a new Constitution in 1972. The name of the country was changed from Ceylon to Sri Lanka. She also faced a coup attempt in 1962.

At the height of power, Sirima was akin to a venerated figure. Sycophants would prostrate themselves before her or touch her feet. Officials would back out from her presence and address or reply her as one would to royalty in the past. Defence service ch iefs would carry her luggage personally on trips. Once women from a socially inferior caste laid down their hair as a carpet for her to walk on, but she declined the offer.

The situation changed when she was out of power. The ruthless manner in which her government suppressed the JVP revolt also came under criticism. After her electoral defeat in 1977, her successor, Jayewardene, set up a Presidential Commission of inquiry and it found her “guilty” of abuse of power. She was stripped of her civic rights and parliamentary membership in 1980. In spite of being a legal “non-person”, she held on to party leadership and fought a tenacious political battle. After her civic right s were restored in 1986, she contested for presidentship in 1988 but was defeated. She functioned as the Leader of the Opposition from 1989 to 1994. She may very well have become the President in 1994 but for poor health. Handicapped by diabetes and a fo ot ailment, she was confined to a wheelchair during her recent prime ministerial tenure. However, she is mentally alert and agile.

Sirima’s handling of the Tamil national question left much to be desired. Her attempt to push Sinhala as the sole language of official administration led to a mass satyagraha by Tamil politicians, leading to a paralysis of government institutions in the North and the East. She responded by declaring a state of emergency and sending in the Army to break up non-violent protests. Tamil leaders were placed under house arrest. In 1966, she led a campaign against limited rights being awarded to Tamils through district councils.

In the 1970s, it was her government that introduced medium-wise standardisation for university admissions, thereby depriving deserving Tamil students of tertiary education. Tamils were discriminated against in government employment as well.

The 1972 Constitution aggravated ethnic tensions by discarding provisions extending protection to the minorities, affording foremost position to Buddhism and making the country a unitary state. When Tamils dissented, a large number of youth were incarcer ated for long periods without trial. Arguably, the seeds of the Tamil secessionist campaign were sown during Sirima’s rule though Tamil farmers became quite prosperous because of her import substitution policies, which encouraged the raising of cash crops.

Nevertheless, there is no denying that Sirima Bandaranaike was an incorruptible figure. Her financial integrity has been beyond reproach. Her personal conduct too has been without blemish. After decades of service to the people whose lot she helped better, the elder stateswoman of Sri Lanka retires, to enjoy serene bliss in her twilight years.

DBS Jeyaraj can be reached at dbsjeyaraj2005@yahoo.com

US Assistant Secretary of State for South and Central Asian Affairs Robert Blake says Sri Lanka needs to take more steps to encourage greater reconciliation and greater democracy and also noted the need for improvements in media freedom.

Blake noted that achieving reconciliation will be a key element in peace and one part of achieving reconciliation will be to finish resettling all internally displaced personas as soon as possible.

“Another key part of reconciliation is to ensure accountability for past wrongs. US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had recently told External Affairs minister G.L Peiris that Sri Lanka’s Lessons learnt and reconciliation commission holds promise and we hope and expect it will fulfill that promise. A last pillar of reconciliation will be to advance democracy and human rights. Minister Peiris affirmed during his visit to Washington that Sri Lanka wants to review and strengthen its institutions of democracy,” he said

Blake added that progress in implementing greater power sharing with the provinces, implementing the 17th amendment to empower independent commissions such as the human rights, police and bribery commissions and efforts to safeguard media freedom will all be important steps in ensuring an important step of peace and prosperity for all Sri Lankans.

The US official, who met President Mahinda Rajapaksa during his visit to Sri Lanka today, said that the President understands the need for power sharing and wants to go forward.

Blake also said that there is some misunderstanding on the role of the UN panel appointed by UN secretary General Ban ki-moon to advice the UN Chief on Sri Lanka. Blake was of the view that the UN Secretary General appointed the panel to advice him about what might be done to help the Commission in Sri Lanka.

“The US believes the UN panel can play an important advisory role with Sri Lanka’s commission. The panel is only an advisory panel and does not have an investigative role. It can benefit Sri Lanka’s commission,” he said.

On the US decision to review GSP trade benefits for Sri Lanka Blake said that it is important to make a distinction on the US GSP process and the EU GSP plus process saying that while the US had initiated a process to look at human rights in Sri Lanka GSP will remain for Sri Lanka during the process.

Parliamentary oversight on Finance
Article 148 of the Constitution gives Parliament full control over public finance. Since President Wijetunga retained the finance portfolio the authority of the Parliament over finance has been usurped, and created a conflict between the powers of the legislature and the Executive. Even though Article 44(2) of the Constitution provides that the President may retain any subject or function it transgresses the spirit of the Constitution when taken as a whole. As a result the peoples control over public finances has diminished. The present Presidential family controls over 63% of budgeted public expenditure. It is a further erosion of the principle of public accountability through people’s representatives. Checks and balances are possible only when the President and the Finance Minister are two different persons with the latter responsible to Parliament.

Reliability of Financial Data
The budget debate is predicated on the financial data that is provided. The data provided is unreliable. The accounting financial data and the economic information cannot be deciphered from the information provided. The financials provided for Ministries does not have a breakdown by institutions and therefore cannot be constructively critiqued. While the economic data cannot be compiled easily for a sector such as, education as the information is listed under different Ministries. Understandably, there are also errors made in providing information hurriedly and haphazardly.

To improve the quality of the debate an “Office of the Budget” should be created where independent reliable data is available to all legislators from the same data base.

The one thing that is certain about this budget is that revenue is over estimated and costs are underestimated. This has been the case over many years. The budget deficit was estimated at 7.5% of GDP, but the out turn was 9.8% in 2009. Then what is the purpose of the exercise? Is it to intentionally mislead Parliament and thereby the Country? Is it to please the International lending Organisations? Or are those preparing these estimates, incompetent?

I conclude (from my long interaction with government officials) that some of the cleverest and most educated comprise the bureaucrats in our country. If so what? Government officials do not have space and freedom to do their work professionally without fear or favour. I appeal to them to act impartially and professionally in discharging their responsibility, which will make their children and grandchildren proud of their courageous achievement.

Critique of the Development Model of the Government
In the post conflict year that has passed, the Government has focussed on investing in infrastructure. While not denying the need for roads, bridges and waterways, it raises the question of priority in investment. We live in a country with the absence of war but a peace that’s yet to be won and consolidated. A proud country with nationalities that would not bow down to external interferences, and also not bow down to each other, but seek to be equals. The political question needs urgent attention before the goodwill that prevails dissipates. The government’s establishment of a Reconciliation and Lessons Learnt Commission was laudable, but little progress is yet evident.

It is my considered view that the political question needs to be addressed along with the humanitarian and economic issues. However, it appears that the government is proceeding on a path of economic development through hard infrastructure investments over investing in people. This approach strengthens the powerful over the powerless.

It is clear from the budget speech that the peace dividend which should have come from reductions in defence spending, and waste and expanded economic opportunities and which should have been distributed to the people, is instead diverted elsewhere. There was no immediate relief to the poor, to the small entrepreneur or the “Maw – Piya” shop in the village square. President Premadasa’s development doctrine was in contrast to that of the present government. He once said “There is no point in any development that keeps the people in hunger”, and “we have got used to treating the poor as a set of worthless beings”. Governments like large lumpy investments; infrastructure projects are visible, involve large sums of money, and makes it easy to siphons large commissions.. We live in a country that slashes duties on luxury vehicles but increases taxes on essential food items. A country which spends more than Rs.7.3 billion on the Presidential office, which is more than the subsidies on school text books, transportation, and nourishment for its 3 million students. A student recently asked in a essay “A developed country for a malnourished people - is this not insanity?” We need a people centred development philosophy. In peacetime, even the threat of future terrorism is more likely to diminish by political and socio-economic initiatives. Increased expenditure on education, health and Social Services for the poor and displaced will discourage the seeds of terror both in the North-East and the South.

Debt Trap : Financing Infrastructure Through Expensive Borrowing
Every year since 2005, the government has been planning to spend at least 40% more than they earn. Those are the budgets presented to parliament. Actually, the government has always spent at least 50% more than they earn Last year it spent 70% more than revenue.

Studying the trend in the past 5 years reveals that actual Recurrent Expenditure is always about 5% more than estimated, never less than the estimate. Actual Revenue is on average 10% less than the estimates, It is never more. Estimates can deviate from the actual randomly. But these estimates deviate in a very predictable way, and in a way that misleads parliament, and does not provide the right information for decision making.

Last year, the actual revenue was 22% less than what was given to parliament as the estimate. A budget debate must be based on some belief in the credibility of the numbers it entails. The debate becomes meaningless when the figures that are being debated can deviate so profoundly from the truth.

This year parliament has been asked to approve a budget where the government plans to spend 57% more than it earns. Going by past trends, the actual overspend is then likely to be at least 75% more than earnings. Is this sustainable spending behaviour? If any individual was spending this way, their family and friends would intervene to stop them, and banks would stop lending to them. If an institution was spending this way the auditors would declare it insolvent. Countries can’t last long this way either. The behaviour is unsustainable, and designed to precipitate the government into a debt trap.

After 57 years of independence, the total accumulated debt burden of the government was 2.1 trillion. In the last 5 years, the present government has borrowed as much as all governments put-together borrowed in the last 55 years, and doubled the countries debt burden to 4.2 trillion.

The practice of borrowing so much and at commercial interest rates is very costly for the country. Half the tax revenue comes from Income tax (about 171 billion) and VAT/GST (about 138 billion). The total of that – 309 billion – is what the government now pays just to service the interest component of these borrowings.

The accounting treatment, also helps conceal the total debt. Pension obligations to government servants are debt obligation of the government. It is wrongly classified with welfare payments in government accounts. No government servant thinks his pension is a welfare payment like Samurdhi. Pensions are an entitlement based on their employment contracts. Last year, the government faced a pension bill of 93 billion. If we consider this as the interest payment on a debt obligation, which it effectively is, that implies an additional debt of over 1.2 trillion to past and present government employees to finance their future pensions. Every year this keeps growing. The government promises salaries and higher pensions, which is a good thing, but it does not find the money to pay those bills. The government cannot go on like this without creating a crisis for the future. For the children who can’t escape to foreign countries, there will be terrible consequences from this irresponsible management of finances.

Secret Privatisation and Misappropriation of Public Assets
This government’s declared policy is not to privatise government assets. Hon. Basil Rajapakse the Minister of Economic Development criticised a former government’s privatisation of the Buhari Hotel in Colombo which sold deliciously cooked Buriyani.

The government has constantly said it is against privatisation, But it is constantly engaged in secret privatisation. Some privatisations are the sale of intangible assets, such as licenses to operate radio, television channels, satellite broadcasting, mobile operations and broadband. In other countries including in India these licenses are sold through public auctions and fetch significant revenues. In Sri Lanka these licenses are distributed secretly amongst government supporters, who in turn sell these to private companies and put public money in their pocket. Will the government declare the number of radio, TV, satellite, mobile operations and broadband licences issued since 2005? The fees recovered for each licence? If they do, we can tell you the value of the public property that has been stolen .

The 2010 budget has already partially been appropriated even before presentation to Parliament. The Government needs to work on a more transparent process as it prepares to present its 2011 budget in November. If not it will be another exercise in futility.

Eran Wickramaratne, Member of Parliament and former CEO National Development Bank speaks on some aspects of the budget

Parliamentary oversight on Finance
Article 148 of the Constitution gives Parliament full control over public finance. Since President Wijetunga retained the finance portfolio the authority of the Parliament over finance has been usurped, and created a conflict between the powers of the legislature and the Executive. Even though Article 44(2) of the Constitution provides that the President may retain any subject or function it transgresses the spirit of the Constitution when taken as a whole. As a result the peoples control over public finances has diminished. The present Presidential family controls over 63% of budgeted public expenditure. It is a further erosion of the principle of public accountability through people’s representatives. Checks and balances are possible only when the President and the Finance Minister are two different persons with the latter responsible to Parliament.

Reliability of Financial Data
The budget debate is predicated on the financial data that is provided. The data provided is unreliable. The accounting financial data and the economic information cannot be deciphered from the information provided. The financials provided for Ministries does not have a breakdown by institutions and therefore cannot be constructively critiqued. While the economic data cannot be compiled easily for a sector such as, education as the information is listed under different Ministries. Understandably, there are also errors made in providing information hurriedly and haphazardly.

To improve the quality of the debate an “Office of the Budget” should be created where independent reliable data is available to all legislators from the same data base.

The one thing that is certain about this budget is that revenue is over estimated and costs are underestimated. This has been the case over many years. The budget deficit was estimated at 7.5% of GDP, but the out turn was 9.8% in 2009. Then what is the purpose of the exercise? Is it to intentionally mislead Parliament and thereby the Country? Is it to please the International lending Organisations? Or are those preparing these estimates, incompetent?

I conclude (from my long interaction with government officials) that some of the cleverest and most educated comprise the bureaucrats in our country. If so what? Government officials do not have space and freedom to do their work professionally without fear or favour. I appeal to them to act impartially and professionally in discharging their responsibility, which will make their children and grandchildren proud of their courageous achievement.

Critique of the Development Model of the Government
In the post conflict year that has passed, the Government has focussed on investing in infrastructure. While not denying the need for roads, bridges and waterways, it raises the question of priority in investment. We live in a country with the absence of war but a peace that’s yet to be won and consolidated. A proud country with nationalities that would not bow down to external interferences, and also not bow down to each other, but seek to be equals. The political question needs urgent attention before the goodwill that prevails dissipates. The government’s establishment of a Reconciliation and Lessons Learnt Commission was laudable, but little progress is yet evident.

It is my considered view that the political question needs to be addressed along with the humanitarian and economic issues. However, it appears that the government is proceeding on a path of economic development through hard infrastructure investments over investing in people. This approach strengthens the powerful over the powerless.

It is clear from the budget speech that the peace dividend which should have come from reductions in defence spending, and waste and expanded economic opportunities and which should have been distributed to the people, is instead diverted elsewhere. There was no immediate relief to the poor, to the small entrepreneur or the “Maw – Piya” shop in the village square. President Premadasa’s development doctrine was in contrast to that of the present government. He once said “There is no point in any development that keeps the people in hunger”, and “we have got used to treating the poor as a set of worthless beings”. Governments like large lumpy investments; infrastructure projects are visible, involve large sums of money, and makes it easy to siphons large commissions.. We live in a country that slashes duties on luxury vehicles but increases taxes on essential food items. A country which spends more than Rs.7.3 billion on the Presidential office, which is more than the subsidies on school text books, transportation, and nourishment for its 3 million students. A student recently asked in a essay “A developed country for a malnourished people - is this not insanity?” We need a people centred development philosophy. In peacetime, even the threat of future terrorism is more likely to diminish by political and socio-economic initiatives. Increased expenditure on education, health and Social Services for the poor and displaced will discourage the seeds of terror both in the North-East and the South.

Debt Trap : Financing Infrastructure Through Expensive Borrowing
Every year since 2005, the government has been planning to spend at least 40% more than they earn. Those are the budgets presented to parliament. Actually, the government has always spent at least 50% more than they earn Last year it spent 70% more than revenue.

Studying the trend in the past 5 years reveals that actual Recurrent Expenditure is always about 5% more than estimated, never less than the estimate. Actual Revenue is on average 10% less than the estimates, It is never more. Estimates can deviate from the actual randomly. But these estimates deviate in a very predictable way, and in a way that misleads parliament, and does not provide the right information for decision making.

Last year, the actual revenue was 22% less than what was given to parliament as the estimate. A budget debate must be based on some belief in the credibility of the numbers it entails. The debate becomes meaningless when the figures that are being debated can deviate so profoundly from the truth.

This year parliament has been asked to approve a budget where the government plans to spend 57% more than it earns. Going by past trends, the actual overspend is then likely to be at least 75% more than earnings. Is this sustainable spending behaviour? If any individual was spending this way, their family and friends would intervene to stop them, and banks would stop lending to them. If an institution was spending this way the auditors would declare it insolvent. Countries can’t last long this way either. The behaviour is unsustainable, and designed to precipitate the government into a debt trap.

After 57 years of independence, the total accumulated debt burden of the government was 2.1 trillion. In the last 5 years, the present government has borrowed as much as all governments put-together borrowed in the last 55 years, and doubled the countries debt burden to 4.2 trillion.

The practice of borrowing so much and at commercial interest rates is very costly for the country. Half the tax revenue comes from Income tax (about 171 billion) and VAT/GST (about 138 billion). The total of that – 309 billion – is what the government now pays just to service the interest component of these borrowings.

The accounting treatment, also helps conceal the total debt. Pension obligations to government servants are debt obligation of the government. It is wrongly classified with welfare payments in government accounts. No government servant thinks his pension is a welfare payment like Samurdhi. Pensions are an entitlement based on their employment contracts. Last year, the government faced a pension bill of 93 billion. If we consider this as the interest payment on a debt obligation, which it effectively is, that implies an additional debt of over 1.2 trillion to past and present government employees to finance their future pensions. Every year this keeps growing. The government promises salaries and higher pensions, which is a good thing, but it does not find the money to pay those bills. The government cannot go on like this without creating a crisis for the future. For the children who can’t escape to foreign countries, there will be terrible consequences from this irresponsible management of finances.

Secret Privatisation and Misappropriation of Public Assets
This government’s declared policy is not to privatise government assets. Hon. Basil Rajapakse the Minister of Economic Development criticised a former government’s privatisation of the Buhari Hotel in Colombo which sold deliciously cooked Buriyani.

The government has constantly said it is against privatisation, But it is constantly engaged in secret privatisation. Some privatisations are the sale of intangible assets, such as licenses to operate radio, television channels, satellite broadcasting, mobile operations and broadband. In other countries including in India these licenses are sold through public auctions and fetch significant revenues. In Sri Lanka these licenses are distributed secretly amongst government supporters, who in turn sell these to private companies and put public money in their pocket. Will the government declare the number of radio, TV, satellite, mobile operations and broadband licences issued since 2005? The fees recovered for each licence? If they do, we can tell you the value of the public property that has been stolen .

The 2010 budget has already partially been appropriated even before presentation to Parliament. The Government needs to work on a more transparent process as it prepares to present its 2011 budget in November. If not it will be another exercise in futility.

Eran Wickramaratne, Member of Parliament and former CEO National Development Bank speaks on some aspects of the budget

Parliamentary oversight on Finance
Article 148 of the Constitution gives Parliament full control over public finance. Since President Wijetunga retained the finance portfolio the authority of the Parliament over finance has been usurped, and created a conflict between the powers of the legislature and the Executive. Even though Article 44(2) of the Constitution provides that the President may retain any subject or function it transgresses the spirit of the Constitution when taken as a whole. As a result the peoples control over public finances has diminished. The present Presidential family controls over 63% of budgeted public expenditure. It is a further erosion of the principle of public accountability through people’s representatives. Checks and balances are possible only when the President and the Finance Minister are two different persons with the latter responsible to Parliament.

Reliability of Financial Data
The budget debate is predicated on the financial data that is provided. The data provided is unreliable. The accounting financial data and the economic information cannot be deciphered from the information provided. The financials provided for Ministries does not have a breakdown by institutions and therefore cannot be constructively critiqued. While the economic data cannot be compiled easily for a sector such as, education as the information is listed under different Ministries. Understandably, there are also errors made in providing information hurriedly and haphazardly.

To improve the quality of the debate an “Office of the Budget” should be created where independent reliable data is available to all legislators from the same data base.

The one thing that is certain about this budget is that revenue is over estimated and costs are underestimated. This has been the case over many years. The budget deficit was estimated at 7.5% of GDP, but the out turn was 9.8% in 2009. Then what is the purpose of the exercise? Is it to intentionally mislead Parliament and thereby the Country? Is it to please the International lending Organisations? Or are those preparing these estimates, incompetent?

I conclude (from my long interaction with government officials) that some of the cleverest and most educated comprise the bureaucrats in our country. If so what? Government officials do not have space and freedom to do their work professionally without fear or favour. I appeal to them to act impartially and professionally in discharging their responsibility, which will make their children and grandchildren proud of their courageous achievement.

Critique of the Development Model of the Government
In the post conflict year that has passed, the Government has focussed on investing in infrastructure. While not denying the need for roads, bridges and waterways, it raises the question of priority in investment. We live in a country with the absence of war but a peace that’s yet to be won and consolidated. A proud country with nationalities that would not bow down to external interferences, and also not bow down to each other, but seek to be equals. The political question needs urgent attention before the goodwill that prevails dissipates. The government’s establishment of a Reconciliation and Lessons Learnt Commission was laudable, but little progress is yet evident.

It is my considered view that the political question needs to be addressed along with the humanitarian and economic issues. However, it appears that the government is proceeding on a path of economic development through hard infrastructure investments over investing in people. This approach strengthens the powerful over the powerless.

It is clear from the budget speech that the peace dividend which should have come from reductions in defence spending, and waste and expanded economic opportunities and which should have been distributed to the people, is instead diverted elsewhere. There was no immediate relief to the poor, to the small entrepreneur or the “Maw – Piya” shop in the village square. President Premadasa’s development doctrine was in contrast to that of the present government. He once said “There is no point in any development that keeps the people in hunger”, and “we have got used to treating the poor as a set of worthless beings”. Governments like large lumpy investments; infrastructure projects are visible, involve large sums of money, and makes it easy to siphons large commissions.. We live in a country that slashes duties on luxury vehicles but increases taxes on essential food items. A country which spends more than Rs.7.3 billion on the Presidential office, which is more than the subsidies on school text books, transportation, and nourishment for its 3 million students. A student recently asked in a essay “A developed country for a malnourished people - is this not insanity?” We need a people centred development philosophy. In peacetime, even the threat of future terrorism is more likely to diminish by political and socio-economic initiatives. Increased expenditure on education, health and Social Services for the poor and displaced will discourage the seeds of terror both in the North-East and the South.

Debt Trap : Financing Infrastructure Through Expensive Borrowing
Every year since 2005, the government has been planning to spend at least 40% more than they earn. Those are the budgets presented to parliament. Actually, the government has always spent at least 50% more than they earn Last year it spent 70% more than revenue.

Studying the trend in the past 5 years reveals that actual Recurrent Expenditure is always about 5% more than estimated, never less than the estimate. Actual Revenue is on average 10% less than the estimates, It is never more. Estimates can deviate from the actual randomly. But these estimates deviate in a very predictable way, and in a way that misleads parliament, and does not provide the right information for decision making.

Last year, the actual revenue was 22% less than what was given to parliament as the estimate. A budget debate must be based on some belief in the credibility of the numbers it entails. The debate becomes meaningless when the figures that are being debated can deviate so profoundly from the truth.

This year parliament has been asked to approve a budget where the government plans to spend 57% more than it earns. Going by past trends, the actual overspend is then likely to be at least 75% more than earnings. Is this sustainable spending behaviour? If any individual was spending this way, their family and friends would intervene to stop them, and banks would stop lending to them. If an institution was spending this way the auditors would declare it insolvent. Countries can’t last long this way either. The behaviour is unsustainable, and designed to precipitate the government into a debt trap.

After 57 years of independence, the total accumulated debt burden of the government was 2.1 trillion. In the last 5 years, the present government has borrowed as much as all governments put-together borrowed in the last 55 years, and doubled the countries debt burden to 4.2 trillion.

The practice of borrowing so much and at commercial interest rates is very costly for the country. Half the tax revenue comes from Income tax (about 171 billion) and VAT/GST (about 138 billion). The total of that – 309 billion – is what the government now pays just to service the interest component of these borrowings.

The accounting treatment, also helps conceal the total debt. Pension obligations to government servants are debt obligation of the government. It is wrongly classified with welfare payments in government accounts. No government servant thinks his pension is a welfare payment like Samurdhi. Pensions are an entitlement based on their employment contracts. Last year, the government faced a pension bill of 93 billion. If we consider this as the interest payment on a debt obligation, which it effectively is, that implies an additional debt of over 1.2 trillion to past and present government employees to finance their future pensions. Every year this keeps growing. The government promises salaries and higher pensions, which is a good thing, but it does not find the money to pay those bills. The government cannot go on like this without creating a crisis for the future. For the children who can’t escape to foreign countries, there will be terrible consequences from this irresponsible management of finances.

Secret Privatisation and Misappropriation of Public Assets
This government’s declared policy is not to privatise government assets. Hon. Basil Rajapakse the Minister of Economic Development criticised a former government’s privatisation of the Buhari Hotel in Colombo which sold deliciously cooked Buriyani.

The government has constantly said it is against privatisation, But it is constantly engaged in secret privatisation. Some privatisations are the sale of intangible assets, such as licenses to operate radio, television channels, satellite broadcasting, mobile operations and broadband. In other countries including in India these licenses are sold through public auctions and fetch significant revenues. In Sri Lanka these licenses are distributed secretly amongst government supporters, who in turn sell these to private companies and put public money in their pocket. Will the government declare the number of radio, TV, satellite, mobile operations and broadband licences issued since 2005? The fees recovered for each licence? If they do, we can tell you the value of the public property that has been stolen .

The 2010 budget has already partially been appropriated even before presentation to Parliament. The Government needs to work on a more transparent process as it prepares to present its 2011 budget in November. If not it will be another exercise in futility.

Hints of the possibility of an executive prime ministry, as opposed to the prevailing executive presidency, emerged yesterday following one-on-one talks between President Mahinda Rajapaksa and Opposition Leader Ranil Wickremesinghe, well informed sources said.

Wickremesinghe confirmed the meeting which he said will be followed-up on Monday when he will lead a UNP delegation for further talks with the president.

Asked what the meeting was about, Wickremesinghe said that “constitutional affairs’’ had been discussed adding that he had told the president that he could not commit the UNP to any positions on his own and asked that Rajapaksa meets a party delegation.

“We’ll be meeting at 5 p.m. on Monday,’’ he told The Sunday Island.

Political observers regarded yesterday’s developments as a hopeful move towards consensus although there did not appear to be agreement on contentious issues like the 17th amendment on which the UNP’s Deputy Leader Karu Jayasuriya is particularly keen.

The government’s position is that aspects of that amendment could be included in the constitution itself although it is unclear whether proponents of complying with the already enacted amendment will go along with any dilution.

At a meeting with several newspaper editors at his Cambridge Place office last week, Wickremesinghe said his party had a duty to cooperate with efforts aimed at forging constitutional consensus, but stressed that an executive prime ministerial model must be carefully studied.

“You might get a model worse than the executive presidency,’’ he warned.

Wickremesinghe also said that the president was in talks with the TNA which sources close to the ruling hierarchy said had been proceeding satisfactorily. Reports from New Delhi, where a six-member TNA delegation led by Mr. R. Sampanthan met with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and other leaders, also appeared hopeful with Singh urging the TNA to “be pragmatic and move on.’’

“If the government and the TNA reach an agreement, we’ll join to complete the rest of the work,’’ Wickremesinghe told the editors expressing the view that if the Tamils “feel there is no hope for a settlement’’ there would be trouble – not immediately but some years down the road.

“We’ll join once the government and the TNA decide on the parameters,’’ he said.

He also said that all opposition parties agree that removing the two-term limit on the presidency was not a healthy sign. This would increase the power of the president.

“We don’t want to be negative,’’ he said. “Let us take the (constitution making) process forward. We’re willing to engage with the government.’’

Mr. Speaker,
The Rajapakse administration has shown an uncanny ability to create world records in the last few years; prior to the General Election, Sri Lanka had the dubious honour of having the world’s largest number of Ministers and now we have created yet another world record by having the world’s smallest cabinet of two ministers.

As some say, the new cabinet consists of 2 Ministers and 39 door mats for the family, especially for the young Mr. Rajapakse to wipe his feet on while receiving on job training at the expense of the senior and experienced politicians holding the rest of the name board Ministries.
The Rajapakse triad consisting of the President as Minister of several key Ministries along with his super Minister brother and his super secretary brother control over 63% of the annual budget.According to the report presented to Parliament, out of the total expenditure of Rs.1.9 T, Rs.1.2 T comes under the direct purview of the Rajapakse triad.
However, due to the limited time available, I am not going to discuss the economics of the heads, which come under the Rajapakse triad. At a time when a three member panel of experts has been appointed to advise the UN Secretary General on Sri Lanka, I feel that it is appropriate to talk about the short sighted acts of commission and omission of some of the Ministries under discussion today, which has led to the sorry state of affairs, our country is facing today.
Mr. Speaker,
The appointment of the expert’s panel is the culmination of nearly four years of governance by the Rajapakse regime where the rule of law in our country was systematically undermined, using the war against terrorism as a basis or a justification for doing so.
In fact, as I mentioned in my speech last Friday, I warned the President in writing on the 13thDecember 2006 that, “ due to various omissions and commissions on our part as the Government, our image is deteriorating rapidly which may lead to serious repercussions for the country. As Your Excellency’s Foreign Minister, I would be failing in my duty if I do not highlight some of these concerns and impending perils.”
I also pointed out the outstanding diplomatic victories the President achieved in the first six months in office.However, the emergence of the white van culture of abductions and extra-judicial killings, political assassinations of MPs like Joseph Pararajasingham, Ravi Raj and Maheswaran and the increasing number of attacks on journalists and as aresult of the defence Ministries stubborn refusal to investigate such crimes and the governments inability to respond toserious allegations in a credible manner, the country started to lose the international goodwill we had harnessed. Hurling abuse in the style of a sarong raised village thug became the hallmark of this government in the face of mounting criticism both locally and Internationally.
As I wrote, “ instead of responding to the allegations made against us in a credible and factual manner, people who make such allegations become victims of vicious personal attacks bordering on criminal defamation. This strategy of “shooting the messenger” will only alienate the International community further away from us.”
Mr. Speaker, due to the limited time I have I cannot go into details of the letter but I would like to table it to be included in full in the Hansard.
My sincere appeal fell on deaf years and today Sri Lanka is on the verge of being labelled as an international fugitive and faces the risk of being hauled up before the ICC. (International Criminal Court). This would be a severe blow to the image of our country, which has a proud history of being a much loved and respected member of the International community.
Mr. Speaker,
The ICC Treaty, the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court came into operation in 2002 and as of July 2009,nearly 110 countries had become state parties to this treaty. This international institution, based in the Hague in the Netherlands has jurisdiction to prosecute individuals responsible for the most serious crimes of international concern; genocide, crimes against humanity, the crimes of aggression and war crimes.
However, the ICC has jurisdiction over any of these crimes, only if the country is a state party or a signatory to the Rome Statute. Fortunately for the Rajapakse regime, Sri Lanka is not a signatory to this treaty because PM Ranil Wickramesinghe in 2002 refused to be a signatory on the basis that Sri Lanka has the independent institutions able to undertake such investigations, if and when the necessity arises.
In fact the Rajapakse regime owes a debt of gratitude to the much-maligned Ranil Wickramesinghe for his forward thinking wisdom as PM.
However, the woes of this regime does not end there because there is provision in the treaty for the UN security council to refer a non state party to the ICC like they did to Sudan, also a non signatory to the ICC, in 2005.
Sudan, Mr. Speaker is a case study of interest to Sri Lanka in the present context. Subsequent to the refusal of the Sudanese government to cooperate with the UN to investigate allegations of war crimes and crimes against humanity, the UN Security Council passed resolution 1593 referring “the situation prevailing in Darfur since 1st July 2002” to the prosecutor of the ICC. Despite Sudan insisting that the court has no jurisdiction over the matter, the courts issued arrest warrants in 2007 for the Sudanese Humanitarian Affairs Minister and a militia leader.
In July 2008, an arrest warrant was issued for President Al Bashir making him the first head of state to be indicted by the ICC. In spite of familiar anti western rhetoric and staged protests in Dafur, Bashir remains an international fugitive with an international warrant issued for his arrest; other than to a few other African countries he is unable to travel outside his country.
Mr. Speaker,
Although I have many ‘reservations’ about the leaders of this government, I would hate to see such scenario being enacted in Sri Lanka. The ignominy of such situation would be a devastating blow to our country and our people with devastating consequences for years to come. That is why the government, even at this late stage deal with this problem in a responsible manner to salvage the good name of our country instead of resorting its village thug tactics and wishfully hoping that countries like China will bale us out of a difficult situation in the UN.
In this context, it is interesting to note that China did not use its veto power when the UN Security Council adopted Resolution 1593, referring Sudan to the ICC in March 2005. China abstained along with US allowing the resolution to pass by 11 votes. This was in spite of the fact that China and Sudan have very warm and cordial diplomatic relations. Beijing’s direct investment rose to $1.6b in 2005 making Sudan the 9th largest recipient of Chinese FDI.More recently China backed the US sponsored sanctions despite heavy lobbying by Iran and China is one of Iran’s biggest oil customers. This ought to be a wake up call to elements within this government who are cocky about the prospects of a UN probe because of the apparent support of China for the government. China follows a very pragmatic foreign policy and in many critical votes in the UN, China has never stood in the way of resolutions backed by the western powers.
Mr. Speaker,
If our country is referred to a war crimes prosecution, it will also tarnish the image of our armed forces. The Sri Lanka Army is one of the most disciplined armies in the world and this was the main reason that our army was chosen for peacekeeping activities around the world by the UN in 2002. However, even in the best of Armies, there could be a few black sheep or miscreants who tarnish the image of the entire force by their actions and many countries, protect the reputation of their respective armies by investigating any allegations and punishing those responsible in keeping with the law of the land.
For example, Mr. Speaker, in 2004, Seymour M. Hersh of the New Yorker magazine along with a local TV station related accounts of physical, psychological and sexual abuse including torture and homicide of prisoners held in the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq by personnel of the US Army.
How did the US government respond to these allegations? They did not label the journalist an Al Quid sympathiser and send white van in search of him nor did they bomb the TV station: the secretary defence, unlike in Sri Lanka, the Defence Minister, did not use his position to threaten the media to stop them writing about these allegations.
Instead, the US Department of Defence carried out a full-scale investigation and eleven soldiers were convicted in court between May 2004 and March 2005, sentenced to military prison and dishonourably discharged from service.
Even in the UK, allegations against the armed forces receive the serious attention of the government. The London Times reported on Wednesday, that PM David Cameron is to announce an inquiry into claims that British security services were complicit in the torture of terrorism suspects.
Even in Sri Lanka, previous governments have responded swiftly to allegations of state violence. In the face of mounting criticism and outrage at the rape and murder of 16 year old Krishanthi Coomeraswamy in 1996, President Chandrika Kumaratunge ordered a trial at bar against the army personnel accused while the forces personnel behind the floating Bolgoda bodies in 1995 were also charged and presented to court while the forces personnel who threatened journalist Iqbal Athas were also brought before the law.
This is how responsible governments behave in the face of allegations of state violence, which is inevitable especially in countries that are fighting the menace of terrorism.However, as the International Commission of Jurists in the Berlin Declaration of 28 August 2004 stated;“ In adopting measures aimed at suppressing acts of terrorism, states must adhere strictly to the rule of law, including the core principals of criminal and international law and the specific standards and obligations of international human rights law”
And also states that “ the odious nature of terrorist acts cannot serve as a basis or pretext for states to disregard their international obligations.
The Council of Europe also articulated the need to uphold the law when fighting terrorism, in 2002.
“………..while the state has the right to employ to the full its arsenal of legal weapons to repress and prevent terrorist activities, it may not use indiscriminate measures which would only undermine the fundamental values they seek to protect. For a state to react in such a way would be to fall into the trap set by terrorism for democracy and the rule of law.”
Unfortunately for us in Sri Lanka, the government seems to have fallen into this trap; the way the government, especially the External affairs Ministry along with the rest of the Cabinet is handling the present crisis, Prabakharan may well have the last laugh from beyond the grave.
So for the sake of our country, the government must act in a responsible manner to save its reputation; let experienced diplomats handle this situation instead of the jokers and amateurs who have been posing as diplomats over the last four years.
Let us also not forget for a moment that this crisis has been brought on by the government itself. As I pointed out in this house last Friday, it was MP Mahinda Rajapakse himself who invited the UN and other International human rights agencies to intervene in Sri Lanka 21 years ago.
Even recently, the UN Secretary General stated that he is acting on the basis of the joint statement of the GOSL and UNSG on 23 May 2009, in which the government had given an undertaking to take measures to address the grievance relating to violations of human rights. This position has not been refuted by the government nor has the Foreign Ministry has at any time stated that the joint statement is inoperative. Therefore, the government has obviously conceded the position of the UNSG.
In conclusion, I request the government to cooperate with UN to clear the name of our country instead of howling and barking at the moon like a pack of demented wolves.

The UNP deputy leader, parliamentarian Karu Jayasuriya, issuing a statement said that those kinds of statements would have serious repercussions for the people of Sri Lanka.

“It is well known that this is a strategy adopted by the government, which gets its various mouthpieces to get its messages across to the world while claiming it to be an unofficial or personal remark.

“Minister Weerawansa has failed to stipulate how a responsible government should react to such a situation if it were to arise,” the release said.

The release added that a public statement made by a high ranking government minister could be taken seriously by the UN in which Sri Lanka continues to hold membership.

Karu Jayasuriya has urged the government to take all necessary steps to ensure that UN offices in Colombo are provided with adequate protection to ensure its safety from violence perpetrated by one of its very own ministers.

The statement concludes by reiterating that the UNP would oppose any attempts to interfere in the internal affairs of Sri Lanka.

Page last updated at 15:42 GMT, Saturday, 26 June 2010 16:42 UK

Protest ahead of Toronto summit, 25 June Activists have converged on the summit venues amid tight security

World leaders have been focusing on the disputes with Iran and North Korea on the second day of the G8 summit in Canada, officials say.

In a draft communique, they condemn the alleged sinking by North Korea of a South Korean warship.

And Western leaders are expected to push for a tough stance on Iran over its nuclear programme.

Canada is later to host a summit of the G20 group of industrial and developing powers.

This gathering will discuss the global economy and financial reform.

Efforts to bridge differences over budget policy dominated Friday’s talks.
‘No contradictions’

The twin summits, being held in and near Toronto, have come at a time when largest economies are divided over whether to cut deficits or stimulate economic growth.

US President Barack Obama is worried that a series of austerity measures announced by European countries may delay global recovery.
STEPHANOMICS
Continue reading the main story

The argument over the right way to support the global recovery here at the G20 summit in Toronto is the mirror image of the debate at the London Summit last year

Stephanie Flanders Damned if they do

But on Friday, after an initial meeting of the G8 - US, Canada, Germany, UK, France, Italy, Russiaand Japan - German Chancellor Angela Merkel said there was much common ground.

“I have made it clear that we need sustainable growth and that growth and intelligent austerity measures don’t have to be contradictions,” Mrs Merkel told journalists.

A senior US official told reporters Saturday’s G8 session was “going to focus on peace and security - Iran and North Korea will be discussed”.

The unnamed official said Mr Obama would also meet the leaders of South Korea on Saturday, and of China and Japan on Sunday, to discuss regional security following the sinking of a South Korean warship in March.

An international inquiry blamed North Korea for the incident, in which 46 sailors died. Pyongyang denies involvement.

Canadian government spokesman Dimitri Soudas said the sinking of the Cheonan was “a very serious provocation and threat to regional and international stability”.

He added: “North Korea and the North Korean nuclear programme remain a serious threat to global security.”
Linked

On Iran, the UN Security Council earlier this month approved a fourth round of sanctions on Tehran for failing to halt nuclear enrichment.
Continue reading the main story Canadian flag G8 powers to boost aid to mothers Cameron and Obama to hold talks G8/G20 summits security map

The measures include tighter finance curbs and an expanded arms embargo, but not the crippling sanctions the US had wanted.

Later the EU imposed additional sanctions on Iran - a moved that was criticised by Russia.

On Saturday, the G8 leaders will be joined by China and other rising economic powers for the G20 summit.

Mr Obama has called for the group to pull together to promote economic growth, saying that world economies are “inextricably linked”.

BBC economics correspondent Andrew Walker says there is a dilemma for the group on the best timing for fixing debt problems, our correspondent adds.

Also on Friday, the G8 also agreed to donate $5bn (£3.3bn) over five years towards improving the health of mothers and young children in the developing world.

The pledge, intended to help tackle one of the UN Millennium Developments goals, was described as inadequate by anti-poverty groups.

The staff of Rivira Media Corporation are shell-shocked at the
decision by the new management of the newspaper group to stop the
salary of Rivira Founding Editor Upali Tennakoon. Tennakoon who has
been in exile in the United States after he and his wife were brutally
attacked by unidentified gunmen on motorbikes in January last year, is
set to return to Sri Lanka in August this year, even though his
attackers are yet to be brought to book. The attack which came just
weeks after Sunday Leader Editor Lasantha Wickrematunge was
assassinated was believed to have been carried out by
government-affiliated goon squads.

According to staff at the newspaper Tennakoon has supervised the
publication of Rivira via the internet and telephone and the Company
was continuing to retain him as Editor, since he was overseas only
because his personal safety was under threat.

However since Rivira Media was purchased by a businessman last month,
the first executive decision by the new management has been to stop
Tennakoon’s remuneration.

The decision to stop Tennakoon’s salary has been made by newly
appointed CEO Sunil Lakmanasinghe and General Manager Mahinda
Wijeyasuriya, LNT learns, although each is trying to shift the blame
to the other when questioned by angry staff.

Staff members told LNT that if this was the way the new management was
going to treat a respected editor who was made to seek sanctuary
overseas because of attacks by what was in all probability a
government goon squad, they could expect nothing from the new owners
of the newspaper. Journalists have decried the decision as being
inhumane and lacking in common courtesy towards a man who has been
badly victimized in the war against the media.

Upali Tennakoon was formerly editor in chief of the Divina newspaper
and a former President of the Editors Guild of Sri Lanka. He is widely
respected across the country as one of Sri Lanka’s most senior
journalists.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Who wanted to KILL me?

Friday, March 6, 2009 at 6:01pm

UPALI TENNAKOON

There is no clear evidence yet, as to who had done this. In such a scenario, inevitably, the finger would be pointed at the incumbent government and the President. That doubt will remain until the real perpetrators are brought to justice. Therefore, what they need to do is to catch those behind this attack. To do this, the full commitment and responsibility of the Police, and the proper execution of the law, is mandatory

By Upali Tennakoon, Editor, Rivira
It was just another Friday for me. Like any other Friday, on Friday January 23 too I started my routine by getting up at 4:30 in the morning. As usual I started my morning exercises in the front garden. I do my walking also inside the garden. On that day, I felt a strange uneasiness in my mind. I did not know why, and I never told anyone about it.

I usually walk from one end to the other in the garden. Even though it was early dawn, there was sufficient light in the garden. However, I could not see anything beyond the garden wall. But, inside, there was enough light. When I walked towards the extreme end of the garden, I felt some fear gripping my mind. I thought someone would be able to launch an attack on me from beyond the wall. Each time I reached that spot, the same thought started nagging me. I started getting stressed, but somehow managed to suppress my fears.

“No… such a thing cannot happen… There is no one who would want to harm me… I have never wronged anyone… who would want to threaten me?” Such were the thoughts in my mind, as I tried to suppress my fears. But I did not succeed in doing so. So, I began to concentrate on different thoughts. Finally I focussed my mind on Buddhist gatha and managed to calm my restive mind.

After finishing my exercises, I started my routine morning work. I was able to get through it all by 6:30 a.m. I then got into my car, with my wife on the passenger seat, and started the engine, at exactly 6:40 a.m. When we started our journey that morning, we never in our wildest dreams, thought there would be a group of people waiting to block our passage and prevent us from going to our destination.

Mother
Every morning, it is I who put my books and lunch into the car. Then our domestic aid opens the gate. We always leave the house after cracking a joke or two with her. A few yards away from our gate, is my sister’s house. Next to hers is my ancestral home, where my parents reside. My mother usually sits in the veranda near the kitchen. I could always see her when I leave for work in the morning. Sometimes, I stop the car there and speak a few words to her, before proceeding further. On that day, there was no particular need to halt there. I looked towards the house, but I could not see my mother there. I slowed down the car and looked closely. But I still could not see her.

At that moment I turned and looked in front of me, and saw a well-built man, standing right across the main road. Our vehicle was slowly moving towards him and I realised his eyes were fixed on me. Yet I did not see any reason to worry.
I got ready to turn the car to the main road, and while doing so, smiled at the stranger. I never imagined him to be my attacker, but rather thought he was an acquaintance who wanted to exchange a few words with me.

Battle
It took only a fraction of a second. The windscreen was shattered. Then my wife shouted, “What’s happened? Why is this?” I still cannot understand why. I thought it was a mistake. Then, the glass shutter of my side door was also smashed. It was then they started attacking me. I tried to muster a protest. I could only come out with, “don’t… don’t… don’t.”

There were four of them. One was carrying an iron shaft with a sharpened end. Another had a dagger in his hands. The other two had wooden rods. All four of them started attacking us. It was some battle.
There were blows on my face, chest and abdomen. I tried to ward off the blows by trying to grab their weapons. But, I could feel the blows on my hands and body.

At that moment, my wife, who was in the passenger seat, flung herself across the seat to cover me. And she shouted out loudly while doing so. But they kept jabbing at me trying to avoid hitting her. In the end, I received several blows to my face.
Finally the four of them got onto their two motorbikes and sped towards Yagoda Railway Station. Unfortunately we are unable to clearly remember either the number plates of their motorbikes or their faces.

Police
We also cannot recollect exactly how long the attack lasted. We think we must have struggled with them for several long minutes. But, according to many, it could not have lasted more than a mere minute. Everything was over in a moment. By that time, it would have been 6:42 or 6:43 in the morning. I then opened the door and stepped out of the car.
The first thing I did was to call the Gampaha Police from my mobile telephone. I remembered that number well. It was 0332 222 222. A female answered the call.

I clearly mentioned my name and related the incident to her. I requested her to make arrangements to stop the two motorbikes which were speeding towards Yagoda. I also requested her to inform Veliweriya Police. I don’t know how well she understood what I was telling her. “Ok Ok… we will take care of everything. You come to the Police,” she told me.

Then I dialled 119 and repeated the same information given to the Gampaha Police. They too made note of the information. But after about 20 minutes they called back to once again ask for the information regarding the place. I disconnected the call and remained silent.

Neither of the places I called had taken any effective measures to arrest my attackers. They had not even informed the Veliweriya Police about the incident. Nor had they taken any steps to catch the two fleeing motorcyclists.

President
My next step was to call my Associate Editor Mr. Sisira Paranathanthri and inform him about the incident. It was on his information that the Inspector General of Police had started reacting to the incident. It was the IGP who had ultimately informed the Veliweriya Police.

After learning about the incident, within minutes, the President called me. He informed me that he was absolutely shocked to learn of the horrible experience I had just undergone. He requested me to seek medical help immediately, and said that he had ordered the IGP to find those responsible as soon as possible, and bring them to justice.

Meanwhile, a vehicle from my office reached the place where the incident had occurred. It had arrived in just minutes. When I was about to leave for hospital in that vehicle, a team from the Veliweriya Police, including the OIC arrived there. I spoke with them for a few minutes and the OIC ordered one of the Policemen to escort us in the van. With the help of my driver and the Policeman, we were able to reach the Accident Ward in no time. Many were waiting for us there to see us before we were admitted.

Invisible force
There were several injuries on my hands. I had received them while trying to ward off the attack. There was a bone fracture in one finger of my left hand. The left side of my face, just below the eye, had received a severe blow from a wooden rod. It had fractured my facial bone. It could have been a fatal blow and caused my death, in a matter of seconds.
I can now see knife marks on my body, where the knife had slid off without fatally injuring me. I had just missed a knife jab to the neck. There is only a small wound there now.

When I consider all this, I believe that my life was saved by some powerful invisible force. Otherwise, all those knife jabs to the face and neck would not have slid off my body so easily. Similarly, there is no other explanation why the jabs aimed at my chest and abdomen with knife and shafts had slid off of my body that day.

If someone were to insinuate that this was done to threaten me or scare me, I would consider it to be a mere jest. If that were so, the attackers would not have brought with them knives and sharpened iron shafts. Also, it is certain that if either one of the blows to the face or neck had shifted just a mili centimetre, then the attack would have been fatal. Therefore, no one could argue that the attack was not intended to be lethal. No one can say that it was not a lethal attack.

Reason
I’m now in a great quandary, trying to understand the reason for this attack. Who felt the need to harm me? I don’t have any enemies or anyone who wants to take revenge on me. No one has threatened me.

Many people came to visit me from the moment I was admitted to hospital. There were members of the Maha Sangha, the reverend priests of other religious denominations, my neighbours, those who brought me to hospital, government and opposition politicians, many friends and all those who wished me a speedy recovery over the telephone, among them. I take this opportunity to express my sincere gratitude to the priests who have conducted Bodhi Pooja, and priests of other religions who have conducted special masses and poojas at churches and kovils wishing me a speedy recovery.

I have been involved in the media field for nearly 35 years. But I never realised I would ever receive so much kind and considerate attention from so many people. It was only after this tragic incident, that I was able to experience such a lot of kind attention for the first time in over three decades of journalism.

There had been many periods of threats and anxiety while I was with the Divaina paper. During those days, we had reasons to be worried. We were quite anxious. I would not have been surprised if something similar had happened during that time. I would have even accepted it, even if I had died in the incident. But, today, the situation is different. That’s what makes me wonder about this incident.

But what was done, has been done. At least my life was saved, although I’m carrying deadly wounds on my body. No one has yet claimed responsibility for the incident. That is the only difference. Anyone can present any argument. But, what was done, has been done.

If anyone wants to murder me, I am prepared to face that threat. But, that is not by killing them while dying at their hands. Or, even by trying to save myself. That is, by becoming a victim to their threats. I say this because there is no other way. We have always lived freely. I do not want to live an imprisoned life amidst bodyguards. I must reclaim my free and liberal life. This effort might push me towards death. There is no point in telling this to the hangman. For him, I would be just another victim.

Motive
The motive behind the attack is not clear. But it would not change any circumstance in my life. My routine lifestyle or work would not change. Therefore, what is expected of these types of attacks is unclear. I cannot even begin to think which of my activities angered those who perpetrated this attack on me. But, one thing is crystal clear. That is, on whose shoulders lies the burden of responsibility of this attack?

There is no clear evidence yet, as to who had done this. In such a scenario, inevitably, the finger would be pointed at the incumbent government and the President. That doubt will remain until the real perpetrators are brought to justice. Therefore, what they need to do is to catch those behind this attack.
To do this, the full commitment and responsibility of the Police, and the proper execution of the law, is mandatory.

Experts panel taking shape; former IIGEP member to be included
By Our Diplomatic Editor

An Indonesian and an Austrian are to form the panel of experts to advise UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon on accountability issues relating to the last stages of the separatist war in May last year.

The move, a prelude to a possible UN investigation into alleged war crimes, both by troops and Tiger guerrillas, is to be announced in New York in the coming week. This is after Lyn Pascoe, UN Undersecretary General for Political Affairs, who was on a three-day visit to Sri Lanka, briefs the UN Secretary General tomorrow.
Maruzuki Darusman

The Indonesian member has been identified as Maruzuki Darusman, a former Attorney General. He was a member of the now defunct International Independent Group of Eminent Persons (IIGEP) appointed by President Mahinda Rajapaksa to observe proceedings of the Commission of Inquiry mandated to inquire into 16 cases of human rights violations. This included an incident in which a group of aid workers were killed in Trincomalee.

Mr. Darusman had also served in a UN panel that had investigated the death of one time Pakistan Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto. She was assassinated during an election campaign. The identity of the Austrian member of the panel of experts is still not known.

On Friday, Mr. Pascoe told a news conference in Colombo that UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon would next week announce officially the appointment of the experts panel.

The announcement came after the Government gave clearance to a long-awaited request by Mr. Pascoe to visit Sri Lanka. His official declaration in Colombo came just a day ahead of the victory parade where 8,000 troops and 700 officers took part in a national event.

The move by Mr Pascoe to make an official announcement regarding the appointment of the impending panel has already raised concerns both in Government and Opposition circles. External Affairs Minister G.L. Peiris strongly canvassed to stop the move on the grounds that President Rajapaksa has already appointed a Commission to identify lessons learnt and recommend measures for reconciliation.

External Affairs Ministry officials remained tight lipped yesterday over whether Mr. Pascoe made the announcement with the concurrence of the Government. An official who spoke on grounds of anonymity said the Government would express its disapproval “in the strongest terms if and when a UN announcement of the panel of experts is made.”

Sri Lanka’s ongoing battle with Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon over the appointment of a panel of experts to advise him on issues relating to war crimes has a parallel to the charges of ‘’state terrorism” against Israel whose military forces invaded a flotilla of ships carrying humanitarian aid to Gaza last month.

Faced with overwhelming condemnation, Israel followed closely in the footsteps of Sri Lanka by appointing its own commission of inquiry to forestall and outfox Ban Ki-moon. But in a clever move, the Israelis co-opted two international ”observers”, one Irish and the other a Canadian, who for all intents and purposes, have no powers to take a significant role in the investigation.

At a news conference Friday, however, Mr. Ban insisted his proposal for an international investigation of the attack on the Gaza flotilla was still on the table. But to appease the Israelis and the Turks (whose nine nationals died in the attack), his proposed commission will include one Israeli and one Turk, along with three other international experts. Whether this will be a reality or not remains to be seen.

The US, a strong supporter of Israel, obviously does not want the Ban commission. Playing it safe, the US says: “We will go along with any commission provided Israel agrees to it.”‘

Unlike Mr. Ban’s Sri Lanka panel, which has no mandate from the General Assembly, the Security Council or the Human Rights Council, his proposed international commission on Gaza has the approval of the Security Council. So, Sri Lanka has been lobbying vigorously, with support mostly from non-aligned countries and from China and Russia, against the expected announcement of the panel next week.

The government has sent another message last week warning that Mr. Ban was exceeding his authority and acting in violation of the UN charter.

But the speculation in Sri Lanka’s External Affairs Ministry circles is that Mr. Ban is being pressured by a senior UN official from a South Asian country. If, as expected, the panel is announced next week, Sri Lanka is expecting strong support from non-aligned members to politically crucify Mr. Ban, who will soon be getting ready to run for a second term when his current term expires at the end of next year.

By Rathindra Kuruwita

The Democratic National Alliance (DNA) plans to inform the Commonwealth Parliamentary Union (CPU) Secretary General about the government’s attempts to prevent General Sarath Fonseka from attending the CPU conference to be held in Kenya.
He added that the government has no right to prevent Fonseka from travelling to Nairobi since the Speaker has given the greenlight.
“The Speaker gave permission and parliament is the supreme institution. If the government tries to breach Fonseka’s parliamentary privileges, we will have to inform the CPU president and the secretary general. This will be discussed during the conference and it will show the status of democracy in Sri Lanka,” DNA General Secretary Vijitha Herath told LAKBIMAnEWS.
He added that neither the Supreme Court nor any Court Martial had convicted Fonseka of any crime, nor issued a directive barring him from travelling abroad.
“Minister Keheliya Rambukwella has no idea what he is talking about. What does the government want when it says Gen. Fonseka should get clearance from the Supreme Court? Does it want to create a conflict between the judiciary and the legislature? This will only end in disaster for the whole nation.”
Earlier this week Mass Media and Information Minister Keheliya Rambukwella said that General Sarath Fonseka has to get legal permission to attend the Commonwealth Parliamentary Union (CPU) conference in Kenya for his visit, despite the permission given by the Speaker, since he is under military detention.