News
ITAK acting leader denies instigating removal of Thileepan statue
Senior Vice President of Ilankai Tamil Arasu Katchi (ITAK) C.V.K. Sivagnanam has rejected the Tamil National People’s Front’s allegation that the removal of the bronze Thileepan statue, from the Nallur memorial, was carried out at his instigation, or at his party’s request, Tamil Guardian reported yesterday (29)
“An outrageous allegation has been levelled that I and the Tamil Arasu Katchi were opposed to the placing of the statue, that we abetted the actions of the police, and that the police acted on the basis of our request,” Tamil Guardian quoted him as having said.
“That the statue was removed in the name of a request of mine, or at my instigation, is an outrageous claim and an expression of political spite.”
He ended with a question. “They say that the police removed this statue because I or our party told them to. Are we so powerful?”
The Jaffna Mayor Vivekanandaraja Mathivathani, also of the ITAK, rejected the allegation at a press conference at the Jaffna Municipal Council. “The police told us nothing about removing the statue. Nor did we ask the police to remove it,” she said, adding that the police taking away the statue of a martyr had caused the Council distress.
She said permission had been sought only after the statue was installed, and only for a temporary placement, tied to the conclusion of commemorations on 26 September.
Sivagnanam went on to accuse the Tamil National People’s Front of claiming commemoration as its own property.
“On matters of commemoration, the Tamil National People’s Front proclaim of their own accord that they alone may do everything, as though commemorations have been leased to them, that they alone are everything, and they set up commemoration committees and conduct commemorations,” he said.
“Without the parties that can be called Tamil nationalist parties — the Ilankai Tamil Arasu Katchi, PLOTE, EPRLF, TELO — to act as though their party alone holds a monopoly, tarnishing everyone else, is an expression of political spite. People must understand this.”
He said he did not wish to go further. “I wish to record that it is not a civilised thing for any of us to do politics over the tribute to Thiyagi Thileepan, and my concern that this is what is happening.”
TNPF General Secretary Selvarasa Kajendren had said Sivagnanam asked who gave permission for the statue and warned that if it was not down by the 26th he would take it down himself. Sivagnanam’s statement does not address those words.
“We spoke with C.V.K. Sivagnanam and he asked us, who gave you permission to erect this statue here? If it is not down by the 26th, I will take it down myself,” Kajendren said. “I did not expect him to do such a thing with the help of the police. I believe the ITAK and the Anura government colluded to remove this statue.”
Kajendren also said the Sri Lankan president Anura Kumara Dissanayake had “betrayed the Tamil people” after campaigning on assurances that memorials and statues would be permitted.
Sivagnanam’s statement does not address the words Kajendren attributed to him about taking the statue down himself. It rejects the claim that the police acted on his request or at his instigation.
The Jaffna mayor Vivekanandaraja Mathivathani, of the ITAK, had already rejected the allegation at a press conference at the Jaffna Municipal Council. “In truth, the police told us nothing about removing the statue. Nor did we ask the police to remove it,” she said, adding that the police taking away the statue of a martyr had caused the council distress.
She said permission had been sought only after the statue was installed, and only for a temporary placement tied to the conclusion of commemorations on 26 September.
The ITAK parliamentarian Sivagnanam Shritharan has condemned the removal as a manifestation of Tamil oppression and called for the statue to be reinstated.
The fisheries minister Ramalingam Chandrasekar said the National People’s Power government had no connection to the removal, then turned his criticism on the council. “The police should have done the police’s work, the municipal council should have done the municipal council’s work. But here both matters happened in reverse,” he said. No other NPP parliamentarian has commented.
News
Ambassador of the UAE to Sri Lanka meets with the Prime Minister
[Prime Minister’s Media Division]
Latest News
Prime Minister joins Gandhi Jayanti Commemoration
[Prime Minister’s Media Division]
News
Unions resist tripartite EPF management plan
… warn of dire consequences
A group of trade unions and civil society groups has requested President Anura Kumara Dissanayake to abandon his government’s controversial plan for the proposed tripartite management of the EPF.
The group has told the President: “We strongly object to the government’s plan to transfer the EPF to a tripartite board—jointly promoted by the Employers’ Federation of Ceylon (EFC), International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the International Labour Organisation (ILO)—and to increase the investments of those funds within private equity and debt markets.
“While the EFC and the government jointly project this plan as a ‘modern governance framework’, it poses a serious threat to the EPF’s financial stability, fiduciary conduct, and returns to workers’ life savings, with severe consequences for broader macroeconomic stability. Rather than replacing the corruption existing in the public sector, this tripartite framework paves the way for a corporate takeover of the EPF. Through this, the fund is exposed to unlawful business practices such as insider trading using internal information of EPF investments, conflicts of interest and corporate bailouts of unstable private companies.
“Sri Lanka’s corporate sector has a tremendously negative track record, which you alluded to during your victorious election campaign in 2024. This was recently unravelled by the multi-billion-dollar illicit capital flight through trade misinvoicing, which your administration is now actively working to curb in the imports sector.
“The recent banking sector fraud exceeds Rs. 13 billion; widespread corporate tax evasion destabilised the fiscal position (Sri Lanka Auditor General’s Department Annual Reports) and consequently inflated the tax burden on the general public. The EFC has found it convenient to remain silent about these crimes, possibly assuming that their silence would preserve their social standing. Considering this inherent corruption within Sri Lanka’s corporate sector and its disregard to the living standards of the general public, there is no realistic basis to integrate corporate interests to actively manage the EPF. The corporate sector of Sri Lanka has not developed sufficiently on technical and ethical grounds to safely entrust the largest retirement savings pool in the country. The EPF is a captive fund that has no mechanism for the owners to divest if the management is corrupt. This further increases the possibility of corporate fraud when the management of the fund is jointly held with the corporate sector.
“Furthermore, during the recent public discussion with trade unions, Deputy Minister of Finance Dr. Anila Jayantha pointed out that the domestic debt restructuring (DDR) would inflict a loss of Rs. 600 billion to the EPF. Our independent calculations—formally submitted as an affidavit to the Supreme Court approved by the Federation of University Teachers’ Associations in 2024—reveal that nominal loss alone is Rs. 634.4 billion. When factoring in foreclosed reinvestment returns, the true loss skyrockets to Rs. 1,711 billion, wiping out 48% of the fund’s projected gross income for the 2023 – 2028 period. Under the pretext of safeguarding the banking system, this colossal robbery preserved high yields on government bonds held by commercial banks and high-net-worth individuals, subsequently reaping them astronomical profits. Now, the exact same plunder is rearing its head again disguised as a tripartite committee.”
“The main arguments supporting our resistance and viable alternatives for optimising EPF management directly under the Central Bank of Sri Lanka (CBSL), are outlined below.
“Objections to the government’s tripartite proposal:
1. The “International best practice and conflict of interest fallacies”
The government holds that tripartite management of pension funds is the “international best practice” and that there is a “conflict of interest” in CBSL managing the EPF. They are key pillars justifying government’s tripartite proposal.
These two positions are shockingly misleading given that four of the five largest pension funds in the world, in Norway, Japan, the U.S., and Singapore, are managed directly by state bodies or central banks. Therefore, ‘international best practice’ in pension fund management is the exact opposite of what the government and the IMF are proposing. We hence reject these baseless positions.
2. Corporate captivity and bailouts
It is clear that the EFC is desperately pushing for this proposal at a time of global uncertainty, to cushion the effects of the crisis and maximise gains. Under corporate influence within the proposed tripartite board, the private conglomerates can use the multi-trillion-rupee EPF to continue their unstable commercial operations without having to risk their own capital or savings to do so. This will severely erode the financial stability of the EPF and its returns.
3. Risk of front running
“Because the EPF is a colossal fund, its investment decisions can alter asset prices. This creates immense monetary value for the information generated by its investment decisions. Corporate representatives on the proposed tripartite board will be perfectly positioned to use this information to trade ahead of the EPF (front-running), buying assets cheaply and dumping them onto the EPF at inflated prices for guaranteed corporate gain, resulting in a reduction of returns to the EPF.
4. Unavoidable loopholes
“Presence of a separate group of investment analysts, trade union representatives and government officials within the proposed tripartite structure cannot prevent pre-market corporate access to EPF’s investment decisions. Investment proposals made by the analysts has to be first approved by the proposed tripartite committee, making it impossible to prevent corporate access to insider information on EPF investments.”
-
Editorial7 days agoBirth of a bad law
-
News5 days agoPolice remove Thileepan statue in Jaffna
-
News7 days agoTIN mandatory for key transactions from Nov. 1
-
Features5 days agoThe 22nd Amendment, constitutional recovery and illiberal slippage
-
Features5 days agoOf foreigners as CEOs of Lankan ventures
-
Latest News3 days agoGold winner Tharanga gets brand-new Honda Vezel from SLAAJ
-
News5 days agoSajith rejects Jt. Opp. protest sabotage claim; SJB TU chief demands remedial action
-
Features4 days agoThailand’s biggest new global star …
