Are cracks already showing ?

I thank Dr P. A. Samaraweera for giving me the opportunity to explain further why I think the new government is not different from previous regimes. It seems to be better in some respects, in the short term, which is the norm for new regimes, but most seem at best cosmetic. In his opinion piece “Cracks are showing already – a response” (The Island, 8 November), in response to my piece in The Island of 1st November, Dr Samaraweera says, “UW has not offered an alternative. Is he of the opinion that the SJB, the SLPP or Ranil’s crowd would do better?” I do hope the new regime will succeed but with the proviso that it should take constructive criticism and make course corrections. It is not for me to suggest alternatives but comment when things go wrong. In fact, I was among the first to criticise Pohottuwa when things started going wrong, posing the question “Pohottuwa: Will it blossom or wither?”

Though Dr Samaraweera states mammoth crowds are attending NPP meetings, I have seen a number of reports that voter apathy has already set in and groups who helped AKD to win the presidency seem already disenchanted. This is well stated in the editorial, “Tuk-tuk tut-tutting and ground reality” (The Island, 4 November):

‘Many are those who are tut-tutting over the latest fuel price revision, which has not brought any relief to the general public; trishaw drivers, who served as the JVP-led NPP’s grassroots propaganda foot soldiers, as it were, are prominent among them. Quite a few of them are openly critical of the NPP government.’

Corruption comes in many forms, financial corruption being the most talked about in relation to politics. The NPP does not seem to be guilty of this type of corruption yet and seems to be chasing after politicians guilty of this but at the moment it seems to concentrate on illegal vehicles! But it is certainly guilty of the other type of corruption; ‘jobs for cronies’ and the probable protection of those who have question marks raised against them, as well demonstrated by the Ravi Seneviratne-Shani Abeysekara affair!

Ranil appointed two committees on the Easter Sunday bombing towards the end of his term and some have justifiably questioned his motives but these should have been done at the time of the appointment. Udaya Gammanpila has done the right thing by making the committee findings public, a duty that should have been performed by the President who was elected on the promises of transparency and honesty. As mentioned in my previous article, when he was questioned about these at the ceremony presided over by Cardinal Ranjith in the Katuwapitiya Church on 06 October, the President’s evasive answer gave the impression that he had not read the reports but now it transpired otherwise.

Had the new government, which demanded the release of those reports while in Opposition, decided that it did not agree with the findings and decided to ditch the recommendations, it should have done so, before the expose by Gammanpila. Instead, there were implied threats to Gammanpila! Then followed the vilification of him on social media. Worse still were the accusations made against Justice Janaki de Alwis. Gammanpila’s challenge to justify those accusations has been ignored by the government.

The other report from the committee, headed by Justice S. A. Imam, the findings of which were released by Gammanpila, after I wrote my last piece, exposed unverifiability of the UK Channel 4’s claims. No reasons have been given by the government or Cardinal Ranjith, who has now admitted that he was in possession of both reports, for rejecting this report. Is it that they have already decided who the mastermind is and will appoint yet another committee to support their view?

Another interesting question is whether Cardinal Ranjith has let down the Catholic community by his actions. Perhaps, it is best left for that community to decide.

As the De Alwis Committee recommended taking legal action against both Ravi Seneviratne and Shani Abeysekara, can they be a part of a future investigation into the Easter Sunday attacks, even if the government has decided to discard the report. When there is an element of doubt, in a crucial investigation of this nature, should they be allowed to continue in positions where they could influence the outcome? They should have stepped aside till their names were cleared.

Dr Upul Wijayawardhana