News
AJBP NL: Disqualification of Ven. Gnanasara thera explained
By Shamindra Ferdinando
Ven. Galagodaatte Gnanasara thera couldn’t have received the National List slot secured by Ape Jana Bala Pakshaya (AJBP) at the Aug.5 general election though he was on its Kurunegala District List, Election Commission (EC) Chairman Nimal Punchihewa told The Island yesterday (23).
Attorney-at-law Punchihewa said that Ven Gnanasara thera wasn’t eligible to receive NL appointment under any circumstances. Such an appointment would have been contrary to both the Constitution and the Parliamentary Election Act No 01 of 1981, the EC Chairman said.
Punchihewa said so in the wake of the EC’s acceptance of Ven. Athureliya Rathana as the AJBP NL member.
Ven. Rathana thera failed in his bid to enter Parliament from the Gampaha district.
The five-member EC consists of N.Punchihewa, S.B. Divaratne, M.M. Mohamed, K.P.P. Pathirana and Jeewan Thyagarajah. In terms of the 20th Amendment to the Constitution enacted in October, the EC now comprises five persons instead of three under the 19th Amendment.
A public battle between former lawmaker Ven. Rathana and Ven. Gnanasara for the NL slot divided the party, with a section quitting the movement.
EC Chairman Punchihewa explained that only those who had been included in the original NL submitted by a particular political party to the EC or a contestant could be considered for NL.
In Ven. Gnanasara thera’s case, the General Secretary of the Bodu Bala Sena (BBS) hadn’t actually contested the last general election as the AJBP list that contained him was rejected by the Chief Returning Officer, Punchihewa said. The Court of Appeal rejected Ven. Gnanasara thera’s writ application filed in respect of the Chief Returning Officer’s decision.
In addition to the Kurunegala list, AJBP nomination lists for Colombo, Moneragala and Kalutara were rejected on technical grounds. Altogether, AJBP fielded about 30 monks.
Responding to another query, the EC Chairman explained in terms of the applicable laws Ven. Gnanasara hadn’t contested the last general election and therefore he was not eligible to receive the NL appointment. Contrary to criticism, the appointment of defeated candidates is within the law, according to EC Chairman.
Asked whether the law prohibited designation of anyone outside the district list and NL of a particular political party, Punchihewa said in case the person who received the original appointment, the party could accommodate outsiders.
The EC could accept Ven. Rathana’s appointment as the warring AJBP factions had settled their differences with a court case filed in respect of the NL vacancy withdrawn. The AJBP managed to secure 67,758 votes from countrywide.
Punchihewa said that soon after the allocation of NL slots, the then AJBP Secretary Vedinigama Wimalasara thera nominated himself as their member of Parliament. Wimalasara thera, in a letter dated Aug 7 addressed to the EC, asserted that he appointed himself pending resolution of the crisis caused by both Gnanasara and Rathana theras demanding the NL slot.
Punchihewa said that there had been other developments relating to the AJBP’s NL issue, however they finally agreed on Ven. Rathana thera’s appointment.
Asked whether the EC felt that there should be a stipulated period to finalize NL designations, lawyer Punchihewa explained in the absence of specific provision in respect of such appointments, political parties could hold up the process. “In other words, political parties can refrain from making NL appointments. EC cannot intervene at all,” the EC Chairman said, acknowledging the need for remedial measures.
Punchihewa assured that the EC was in the process of examining the entire gamut of issues in relation to electoral process. “We will certainly take up these issues with relevant authorities,” lawyer Punchihewa said.
The EC Chief said that representations would also be also made to those in the process of formulating a new Constitution.
Punchihewa pointed out that the EC couldn’t do anything about the UNP holding up the appointment of its solitary NL member. The lawyer said that the issue hadn’t received sufficient attention, hence the current law being silent on a crisis situation such as a party not being able to decide on its NL nominee. Punchihewa pointed out that law could be amended to pave the way for the EC to name the first person on NL submitted by a particular party in case agreement couldn’t be reached within a given period.
The Parliament remained one short of stipulated 225 at the time 2020 sessions ended with the passage of 2021 Budget on Dec 10.
The Parliament is scheduled to meet on January 5.
The Frontline Socialist Party (FSP) yesterday demanded an immediate termination of what it called a “secretive and dangerous” defence agreement signed between Sri Lanka and India, during Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s 05 April visit.
Addressing a press conference at the party’s headquarters in Nugegoda, FSP Education Secretary Pubudu Jagoda described the agreement as a “betrayal of the nation” and a “crime against the people,” urging the government to invoke Article 12 of the deal and exit it with the required three months’ notice.
Jagoda said the document, which surfaced on social media after being published by a news portal, appears to be the actual agreement signed between the two countries. “The government has not denied its authenticity. That silence is telling,” he said.
Jagoda added that the agreement bears the signatures of Sri Lanka’s Defence Ministry Secretary Sampath Thuiyakontha and Indian High Commissioner Santosh Jha.
“What’s most troubling,” Jagoda warned, “is that both governments attempted to keep the agreement under wraps. Unlike the 1987 Indo-Lanka Accord, which was made public with all annexures, this agreement was hidden from the people, and even now, we don’t know how many other agreements exist between India and Sri Lanka.”
Jagoda said that a Right to Information request made on 04 April was met with a reply from the President’s Office stating that it had no copies of the agreement—raising serious concerns about transparency, even at the highest level. “One could question whether the President has seen it because his office does not have it,” Jagoda said.
The 12-clause of agreement reportedly covers areas such as exchange and training of military personnel, defence industry collaboration, classified information protection, and military medical services, including battlefield healthcare and telemedicine.
Jagoda said the definition of “classified information” in Clause 7 was alarmingly broad. “It allows India to label virtually anything as secret. Even weapons or military assets transferred under this agreement cannot be revealed—not even after the agreement ends,” he said, citing Clause 7.3.
Clause 10 prohibits either country from taking disputes to international courts or involving third-party mediators. “It’s like asking a rabbit to negotiate with a tiger,” Jagoda quipped, drawing parallels to the complications of the 1987 accord, which eventually saw Indian peacekeeping troops refusing to leave until a change in the Indian government.
Jagoda accused the NPP-led government of hypocrisy, pointing out that the JVP, the main component of the current regime, had vehemently opposed Indo-Lanka Accord in 1987. “Now they’ve gone and signed an even more dangerous deal,” he said.
Citing Clause 12, which allows either party to withdraw with three months’ notice, the FSP called on the government to act immediately to exit the pact. “We urge the people to unite and defeat these underhanded, sovereignty-eroding deals. The FSP stands ready to lead that fight,” Jagoda said.
The police yesterday arrested a group of students, including the Convener of the Inter-University Students’ Federation (IUSF), Madushan Chandradith, during a protest held by the Allied Health Science Graduates’ Union in front of the Health Ministry yesterday.
The police obtained an order from Maligakanda Magistrate’s Court, earlier in the day, to prevent protesters from invading the Colombo Hospital Square and the Health Ministry.
Inspector General of Police T.M.W. Deshabandu Tennakoon is set to face formal questioning on Monday (19 May) over serious allegations of misconduct and abuse of power, parliamentary sources said yesterday.
A special Committee appointed to investigate the claims will commence formal proceedings next week, following several rounds of preliminary discussions held within the parliamentary complex in recent weeks.
The IGP has been officially notified to appear before the Committee and is expected to face the inquiry for the first time at 2:00 PM in Committee Room No. 8.
The Committee, which met again on Thursday (15) to finalise arrangements, is investigating allegations that Tennakoon misused his official powers in a manner deemed severe and improper.
-
Features7 days agoSAITM Graduates Overcome Adversity, Excel Despite Challenges
-
Opinion7 days agoDrs. Navaratnam’s consultation fee three rupees NOT Rs. 300
-
News7 days agoDestined to be pope:Brother says Leo XIV always wanted to be a priest
-
Sports7 days agoASBC Asian U22 and Youth Boxing Championships from Monday
-
Features6 days agoChampioning Geckos, Conservation, and Cross-Disciplinary Research in Sri Lanka
-
Business7 days agoDilmah – HSBC future writers festival attracts 150+ entries
-
Midweek Review4 days agoBronze statue for P’karan, NPP defeat in the North and 16th anniversary of triumph over terrorism
-
News2 days agoChikungunya spreading rapidly in Colombo and suburbs