News
Activists slam Lanka’s bid to seek X-Press Pearl compensation in Singapore
(Mongabay) Environmental activists have questioned the decision to file for compensation in Singapore instead of Sri Lanka for a 2021 ship sinking that became the worst maritime disaster in the country’s history, saying there’s less likelihood of winning adequate compensation overseas.
The Sri Lankan government is filing a lawsuit in Singapore for compensation nearly two years since the worst maritime disaster in the country’s history. But activists say it waited too long and would have stood a better chance of adequate compensation had the lawsuit been filed in Sri Lanka.
Speaking before parliament on April 25, Justice Minister Wijeyadasa Rajapakshe confirmed that the Department of the Attorney General had filed legal action before Singapore’s International Commercial Courts (SICC) to claim compensation for the extensive environmental damage caused by the burning and sinking of the Singapore-flagged freight ship the X-Press Pearl in May 2021.
“The decision to lodge the lawsuit in Singapore courts was done in consultation with a group of independent local and international lawyers as Singapore’s legal system is better equipped to handle this type of complex maritime legal battles,” Rajapakshe said.
The sinking of the fire-stricken ship, carrying tons of plastic pellets and toxic chemicals, is considered Sri Lanka’s worst maritime disaster to date. The plastic pellets, known as nurdles, fouled an extensive arc of Sri Lanka’s southwestern shore, with volunteer crews hard at work cleaning up the billions of grain-sized pellets for months on end.
A 40-member expert committee convened by the Marine Environment Protection Authority (MEPA) to assess the environmental damage issued its second interim report in January this year, in which it put a price on the disaster: $6.4 billion.
Maritime rules require a claim for compensation to be filed within two years of the occurrence of the accident. The Singapore-flagged X-Press Pearl caught fire in Sri Lankan waters on May 20, 2021, and sank several days later. But the long wait without filing action has caused anxiety among activists, who have criticized the government for not moving fast enough.
Part of the delay was due to the complexity of the environmental assessment. There was very little baseline data for the expert committee to compare against, especially in the maritime context, which required them to assess damage scenarios over the short, mid- and long terms, said Dharshanie Lahandapura, former chair of the MEPA.
The group of experts continues to monitor the impacts of pollution caused by the disaster. The National Aquatic Resources Research and Development Agency (NARA) is also monitoring impacts to the marine environment, while the Department of Wildlife Conservation (DWC) is assessing the fallout on marine life, Lahandapura told Mongabay.
Based on the future findings, there could be more claims, given that the nurdles and other chemicals are likely to have long-lasting effects, Lahandapura said.
But waiting until just weeks before the two-year deadline “is unacceptable as the strategy should be to file it first without waiting for the outcome of the expert committee evaluation,” said Ravindranath Dabare, a lawyer and chair of the Centre for Environmental Justice (CEJ), a Colombo-based NGO.
“Within the first week of the X-Press Pearl disaster, CEJ filed the first case in local courts to push the authorities to take necessary actions, and subsequently two more cases to expedite the proceedings as the work was lagging,” Dabare told Mongabay.
The X-Press Pearl accident occurred within a few kilometers of the Colombo coast, well within Sri Lanka’s jurisdiction. That renders “the shipping company … a part of our local case and their representatives do participate in the court hearings, so there was no barrier to filing a case in Sri Lankan courts,” Dabare said.
He added the evidence is available in Sri Lanka, as are the experts who conducted the environmental damage assessment. Hiring Singapore-based lawyers will incur a higher cost, in addition to the cost of overseas travel — something Sri Lanka can ill afford as it reels from the worst economic crisis in its history, Dabare said.
“The existing Marine Environment Protection Act and the general law have provisions that enable Sri Lanka to file the lawsuit locally,” said Dan Malika Gunasekera, an expert on international maritime law.
He also noted there’s a limit to the amount of compensation that Sri Lanka can claim when lodging the case in Singapore.
“We must get the compensation from the insurer of the X-Press Pearl, who is in the United Kingdom, and on this basis, it may be better to file in the U.K. than Singapore,” Gunasekera told Mongabay.
Even then, the U.K. would also limit compensation to 19.5 million pounds ($24 million). In Sri Lanka, however, there would be no such cap.
Justice Minister Rajapakshe said the government would appoint a British lawyer to negotiate the compensation limitation set in the U.K. for the insurers. He reiterated the position that prospects for a favorable outcome are better in those overseas courts than in Sri Lanka.
Rajapakshe pointed to the case of the oil tanker New Diamond, which caught fire off Sri Lanka’s eastern coast about eight months before the X-Press Pearl incident. Three compensation claims were filed in Sri Lanka’s commercial courts in the New Diamond case, but they came up against various constraints. This, Rajapakshe said, influenced the decision to take the X-Press Pearl case before the Singapore courts.
Ayesh Ranawaka, a maritime expert and former commissioned officer with the Sri Lankan Navy, agreed that the Singapore courts represented a better chance of getting justice in the X-Press Pearl case. This doesn’t mean the local justice system is weak, he told Mongabay, just that there are too many disagreements at the local level about how to proceed.
If the Sri Lankan position is divided, the other party can take advantage of that, Ranawaka said. But when filing in Singapore, the Sri Lankan parties would at least come to a common position. They would also have international laws to fall back on, so the opportunity for justice may be higher, Ranawaka said.
As the government and activists debate what should be the correct course of action to demand compensation, it’s clear that Sri Lanka needs a clear strategy to handle these kinds of marine disasters, Ranawaka said.
“Sri Lanka needs to look beyond the X-Press Pearl incident and treat it as an eye-opener to ensure a proper maritime policy to avoid future mishaps,” he said.
News
Sajith rejects Jt. Opp. protest sabotage claim; SJB TU chief demands remedial action
By Shamindra Ferdinando
Alleging that the Samagi Jana Balawegaya (SJB) had betrayed the joint protest campaign, planned on 24 Sept., at Polduwa junction, against the enactment of the 22nd Amendment without securing public approval at a referendum, SJB trade union leader Ananda Palitha emphasised that SJB and Opposition Leader Sajith Premadasa should take remedial measures to restore the alliance against the NPP government.
Responding to The Island queries, the trade union activist said that he spoke on behalf of the vast majority of the SJBers who felt betrayed by the sudden declaration made by Colombo District SJB lawmaker S.M. Marikkar that they didn’t expect Opposition political parties’ participation, except that of the UNP.
Pointing out that at the behest of Premadasa, MP Marikkar belittled those who had pledged on 17 Sept. to join the SJB-led protest, Palitha emphasised the Opposition leader should be held responsible for restoring the shattered alliance. Palitha warned that the NPP, which was rapidly moving on a dictatorial path, would be the beneficiary of such treacherous actions.
When The Island raised the allegations pertaining to the 24 Sept. protest, Colombo District MP Premadasa said there was no basis for such claims. MP Premadasa called the accusations directed at him ‘rubbish.’
Palitha said that the pathetic failure on the part of the Opposition to genuinely challenge the authoritarian NPP should be examined, taking into consideration the government following an agenda almost 100 percent against the election pledges. Except the much touted anti-corruption campaign, the NPP reneged on all its election promises.
Recalling massive rice imports after having promised to stop the same in the run up to the national elections in 2024, Palitha alleged that the utterly corrupt NPP created an artificial shortage to enable import of large stocks of salt for their benefit. Massive earnings were made through commissions, Palitha said, urging the SJB to reiterate its commitment to the 17 Sept. pledge. According to him, the SJB’s irresponsible action sabotaged the joint Opposition agreement reached on the eve of President Anura Kumara Dissanayake completing two years in Office.
Palitha said that the disruption of a genuinely joint protest, at the last moment, caused irreparable harm to the Opposition. The unexpected eleventh hour declaration made by the SJB upset their efforts to organise a large scale two-day protest on 24 and 25 Sept. Palitha emphasised the responsibility on the part of the SJB leadership and its top management to spearhead an all-out campaign against the government. The former petroleum sector employee said that a strong and transparent campaign could undermine the NPP within as a section of its parliamentary group was deeply dismayed by the current policies and strategies.
Palitha, in his capacity as the trade union leader, invited the Bar Association of Sri Lanka (BASL) to join the trade unions’ protest on 25 Sept. to intensify pressure on the government. BASL President Rajeev Amarasuriya told The Island that they didn’t accept that invitation.
Former SLPP Kalutara District MP Sanjeewa Edirimanna said that the SJB was far more keen to organise a large-scale protest to counter the SLPP’s highly successful Anuradhapura rally held on 12 September than a genuine joint protest against the 22nd Amendment or the government. Edirimanna said that they realised that the SJB would probably join a joint protest campaign only after organising a gathering to counter the SLPP. According to him, the SJB hadn’t been honestly interested in a joint protest campaign. Instead, it sought to resist possible challenges from rival political parties, he said.
An aide to UNP leader and former President Ranil Wickremesinghe said that though the SJB announced they were welcome to join the 24 Sept. protest, the party never received an invitation. The official said that some UNPers joined the protest on their own though the party neither directed supporters to join or boycott the event. As the Janathawadi Joint Opposition decided against participating for want of formal invitations, the UNP, as part of that group, decided not to join the 24 Sept. protest.
News
Police remove Thileepan statue in Jaffna
By Norman Palihawadane
Police have removed a memorial statue of former LTTE member Rasaiah Parthipan, alias Thileepan, from the Thileepan Memorial Square in Nallur, Jaffna, following the conclusion of commemorative events, marking the 39th anniversary of his death.
The statue was removed in the early hours of yesterday (27), a day after the final day of the commemoration was held at the site.
CCTV footage from the memorial reportedly shows police officers removing the statue and taking it away in a vehicle.
Tamil National People’s Front (TNPF) Secretary and MP Selvarasa Gajendran alleged that more than 15 police officers arrived at the site, without prior notice, entered the premises wearing footwear, and forcibly removed the statue.
The reason for the removal and the legal basis for the police action had not been officially announced as of yesterday.
Thileepan, a former political wing leader of the LTTE, died in September 1987, after undertaking a hunger strike in Nallur, while making several demands of the Indian Government.
The memorial events, marking the 39th anniversary of his death, were held at the site on Saturday (26). A statue had been erected at the location in connection with the commemoration.
News
NPP, Lal agree to disagree
By Shamindra Ferdinand
NPP Executive Committee member Lal Wijenayake said that he would continue with the ruling party though he disagreed with the 22nd Amendment, sans a referendum. That position wouldn’t be changed, lawyer Wijenayake said, adding that he would continue to support whatever action taken by the Bar Association of Sri Lanka (BASL) to highlight the damaging consequences of the new amendment.
Wijenayake said so in response to The Island query whether he could continue with the NPP after having opposed the 22nd Amendment. When pressed for clarification, Wijenayake revealed that he received an opportunity to discuss the issue at hand with NPP and JVP leader Anura Kumara Dissanayake.
Declaring that he couldn’t reveal what transpired in his meeting with President Dissanayake, Wijenayake said the status quo would remain.
“They wouldn’t seek my removal from the party,” he said, adding he would remain in the Executive Committee, regardless of his unchanged position on the 22nd Amendment. Wijenayake ruled out the possibility of him joining joint Opposition protests against the government.
NPP General Secretary Dr. Nihal Abeyseinghe told The Island that those who urged the ruling party to allow its members to vote, according to their conscience, should know the entire government parliamentary group accepted the need for the 22nd Amendment. Yes, they voted according to their conscience, the Kalutara District lawmaker said, underscoring that regardless of the split in the NPP over the 22nd Amendment, the vote proved otherwise.
Of the 159-member NPP group, 158 voted for the controversial amendment where three Opposition MPs skipped the vote. Ravi Karunanayake and Faizer Musthapha of the New Democratic Front (NDF), led by Ranil Wickremesinghe, were among them. The other absentee Nayana Wasalathilake represents the SJB.
The NDF, which contested under the ‘Gas Cylinder’ symbol secured, five seats at the last parliamentary polls. The remaining three members, Anuradha Jayaratne, Rohitha Abeygunawardena and Chamara Sampath Dassanayake, voted against the 22nd Amendment.
-
News5 days agoMastermind Naufer Moulavi among 15 found guilty
-
News6 days agoProtest against setting up of cement factory in highly populated area near BIA
-
Midweek Review5 days agoThileepan’s fast unto death: An authentic narrative that many missed
-
Latest News4 days agoShowers above 100 mm are likely at some places in the Western, Sabaragamuwa, Central and North-western provinces and in Galle and Matara Districts
-
Editorial6 days agoTrouble beginning in earnest
-
Editorial5 days agoBig Bad Bills
-
News6 days agoGovt. confident of 2/3 majority despite NPP split speculation
-
News6 days agoPolice may seek clarification from US
