Editorial
Protecting Parliament
Tuesday 11thApril, 2023
Parliament security personnel have recently undergone a special training in countering possible threats of chemical attacks, according to media reports. Proper threat assessment and the anticipation of possible attacks go a long way towards protecting vulnerable targets. In this day and age, everything can be weaponised; anything is possible and therefore nothing should be left to chance in protecting vital institutions such as Parliament.
Chemical weapons, even crude ones, are hard to come by, and only powerful terrorist organisations are equal to the task of acquiring them. But Sri Lanka is no stranger to terrorism, and therefore has to take all precautions.
Cynics may ask whether any terrorist outfit seeking to destroy a country will ever harm a bunch of failed politicians who have ruined the national economy and thereby diminished the state’s ability to safeguard national security. If Prabhakaran had not launched Eelam War IV, wherein he perished, perhaps he would have been able to buy the North and the East, given the incumbent regime’s desperation for dollars.
But the fact remains that the Parliament of Sri Lanka must be protected at any cost. Possible security threats thereto, if any, should be identified in advance and action taken to neutralise them. Last year saw attacks on two parliaments overseas. A person was arrested in connection with an arson attack on the South African parliament, and a group of unruly protesters set the Libyan parliament on fire.
We, too, would have witnessed something similar here last July but for a successful military operation. The lunatic fringe went so far as to try to march on Parliament. Some of the protesters were wearing Guy Fawkes masks. Initially, it looked like a walk in the park for them. If they had succeeded in their endeavour, perhaps they would have done to the Sri Lankan Parliament what Fawkes failed to do to the Palace of Westminster in the early 17th Century.
Thankfully, President Ranil Wickremesinghe acted decisively and ordered the military to hold the violent hordes at bay. If Parliament had fallen into their hands, the country would have descended into anarchy with protesters occupying the Presidential Secretariat and the Prime Minister’s Office as well. Curiously, the masterminds behind the abortive bid to capture Parliament have not been brought to justice. Have they cut a deal with the government lest they should be arrested under anti-terror laws?
While taking action to protect Parliament against external threats, some of which may be real, the political party leaders and the Speaker should not lose sight of an insidious enemy causing irreparable damage to the national legislature; indiscipline is chipping away at the very foundation of Parliament. More often than not, parliamentary debates are like fish-market brawls; they are governed by Rafferty’s rules or no rules at all. Some MPs go on the rampage and hurl abuse and projectiles at their opponents liberally. They insult their female counterparts with impunity. There have been instances where the police had to move in to escort the Speaker to safety.
The police and the military may be able to protect Parliament against terror attacks, as they did for decades, but there is no defence against public resentment, which is palpable in the polity. It may be recalled that last year, protesters demanded the resignation of all 225 MPs, and even vowed to dislodge the parliamentary system. All the MPs who have incurred the wrath of the public are still there. They have not cared to mend their ways, and are exuding arrogance from every pore, and living the high life. Those who are savouring power have even gone to the extent of undermining the judiciary and summoning judges to Parliament over court orders that are not to their liking. They are inviting trouble.
Let it be repeated that there is no defence against public resentment, which, if allowed to build up, could become more destructive than chemical weapons; it is rocket fuel for popular uprisings.
Editorial
Clear up fuel pricing confusion urgently
Monday 22nd June, 2026
The JVP-NPP government, like all its predecessors, has got obfuscation down to a fine art. It muddies the water whenever issues concerning fuel prices are raised in Parliament or elsewhere. Its leaders give evasive answers to questions about fuel cost calculations in a way that makes one wonder if they stretch the truth and pluck figures out of the air to support their arguments. Curiously, their claims go unchallenged. The Opposition is apparently at sea; it lacks focus. A wag says it seems to have been affected by Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder.
An Opposition MP has at long last realised the need to challenge the government’s claims about its fuel pricing methodology and pump prices. SLPP National Organiser and MP Namal Rajapaksa has called upon the government to disclose how fuel prices are worked out and make public a full cost breakdown so that consumers will know whether its claim of a fuel subsidy is true or false. This is something the Opposition should have done much earlier. MP Rajapaksa has also asked the government to reduce fuel prices in keeping with world oil price decreases following the signing of an interim peace agreement between the US and Iran.
Interestingly, MP Rajapaksa’s contention is at variance with the position of some Opposition parties which are protesting against a government claim that funding will not be available for “the current fuel subsidy” after June. What one gathers from the aforementioned protests is that a section of the Opposition believes that fuel is actually subsidised and the subsidy must be retained. Given these contradictory claims about the so-called fuel subsidy, what needs to be done is to pressure the government to provide fuel cost breakdowns so that they can be examined independently. Figures given by government politicians apparently do not add up where fuel prices are concerned.
Last month, President Anura Kumara Dissanayake publicly stated that a litre of diesel cost as much as Rs 720 though it was sold at Rs. 392 at that time. (The current diesel price is Rs. 407 a litre.) The President also claimed the government provided a subsidy of Rs. 100 per litre on diesel. Prime Minister Dr. Harini Amarasuriya has recently repeated the President’s claim in a bid to support her argument that it is not possible to reduce local fuel prices immediately in keeping with global oil prices drops. Going by the President’s claim, the Ceylon Petroleum Corporation (CPC) and the private fuel companies suffer huge losses.
The government has chosen to remain silent on taxes and a special loss recovery levy of Rs. 50 on a litre of fuel. There have been attempts to have this levy converted into a cess so that the Treasury can recover it from the private fuel companies as well, but they have been in vain, according to some Opposition politicians. This issue must be raised in Parliament. Will the Opposition officially seek an explanation from the government?
It is believed that the government imposes an unconscionably high price mark-up on fuel to recover losses caused by the extensive use of diesel for producing extra power to compensate for the Norochcholai generation loss caused by substandard coal procured fraudulently. The CPC has admitted that it purchased diesel shipments at prices ranging from USD 281 to USD 303 per barrel at the height of the Iran war to prevent supply disruptions. Perhaps, it would not have been so desperate if there had been no coal procurement racket and the Norochcholai coal-fired power plant had operated at full capacity, producing 900 MW.
It is nothing but fair to demand that the CPC and the Finance Ministry provide accurate cost breakdowns whenever fuel prices are revised so that the public can see whether official figures add up or fuel prices are increased arbitrarily. The incumbent government, which came to power promising to usher in good governance, should uphold transparency in the process of determining fuel prices.
Successive governments have used the cost reflective fuel pricing formula, claiming that it helps determine fuel prices in a rational and fair manner. If so, the question is why they have not cared to make it legally enforceable and ensure transparency and accountability.
Editorial
Fuel crisis: Beyond price debate
Global oil prices are falling thanks to the US-Iran peace deal. No sooner had US President Donald Trump and Iranian President Dr. Masoud Pezeshkian signed a framework for peace than some Opposition politicians in Sri Lanka began demanding fuel price reductions. The JVP-NPP government, which allegedly increased the prices of fuel stocks procured before the eruption of the West Asia conflict, has ignored the demand for fuel price decreases.
The JVP vehemently protested whenever fuel prices were increased during the previous governments, calling for measures, such as the abolition of petroleum taxes to bring fuel prices down. Its leaders even argued that there was no need for a government if local fuel prices were to be increased whenever global oil prices increased. Slashing fuel prices was one of the key election promises of the JVP/NPP. Now, the JVP-NPP government is under pressure to make good on its pledge.
There is much more to the fuel issue than high prices, and what is needed is a dispassionate appraisal of the situation. It is the prices of WTI and Brent benchmark futures that have decreased, and it will take some time for the oil prices to drop at the pump in many countries. Although the Hormuz Strait has been reopened, it will be weeks before international navigation through that chokepoint normalises, stabilising global oil and fertiliser markets.
There is no gainsaying that Sri Lankan consumers deserve relief and fuel prices should be reduced, but prudence demands that politicians stop playing politics with crucial economic issues, and cooperate to resolve them. The focus of the government and the Opposition must be on formulating a strategy to reduce the country’s dependence on fossil fuel, which accounts for about 20% of national import expenditure. Curtailing the national fuel bill is half the battle in easing the country’s chronic balance of payment pressures and shoring up foreign currency reserves. Populist slogans and politically-driven ad hoc remedies will not help resolve the fuel crisis.
A country that does not strategise to achieve energy security cannot achieve economic development; it remains vulnerable to shocks, both internal and external, as evident from Sri Lanka’s experience in 2022, when a foreign currency crisis almost crippled the power and energy sectors, triggering political upheavals. The possibility of the country experiencing a similar situation either under the current dispensation or under a future government cannot be ruled out. It was a close call when the Iran war escalated, with global oil prices soaring, a few weeks ago. The current Opposition ought not to make the mistake of deriving perverse pleasure from the incumbent government’s predicament, making Machiavellian promises and calling for relief measures that are not feasible. The fuel crisis is likely to worsen under a future government, perhaps to the extent of making its leaders head for the hills. Hence, it will be in the best interests of the government, the Opposition and the public for a national action plan to be formulated, with the participation of all stakeholders, to ease the country’s dependence on fuel imports.
What Sri Lanka desperately needs to reduce its fossil fuel dependence significantly is a diversified approach combining renewables, biofuel, electrification and energy efficiency. Some progress has been made in expanding solar and wind power, but much more remains to be done. Renewable energy, which provides a reliable hedge against volatile global fuel prices, should constitute the core of any long-term strategy. Once installed, solar panels and wind turbines produce electricity without requiring imported fuel, but renewable energy technologies involve substantial initial investment and this has stood in the way of the expansion of renewable energy production. The government must secure financing without creating unsustainable debt burdens. International climate funds, concessional loans, and public-private partnerships may help bridge this financing gap, according to renewable energy experts. There are other factors that need to be addressed urgently to ensure energy sustainability. They include grid modernisation and the installation of energy storage systems, promoting energy efficiency in households, industries and public institutions, electrifying transport through promotion of electric vehicles and public transport systems.
It is hoped that the government and the Opposition will stop fighting over fuel prices and address the serious issues that threaten the country’s energy security and economic stability.
Editorial
Some suspects “more equal”?
Saturday 20th June, 2026
The Commission to Investigate Allegations of Bribery or Corruption (CIABOC) has netted another senior state official. It arrested the General Manager (GM) of Lanka Salt Ltd., Rathnayaka Mudiyanselage Gunaratne yesterday for allegedly having caused a loss of approximately Rs. 14.3 million to the state and provided an undue advantage to a supplier by procuring Laklunu packaging for the Hambantota Salt Company through a re-order process in breach of procurement procedures.
Such action against state officials is certainly welcome, and all those who have enriched themselves through illegal means and/or caused losses to the state must be brought to justice. After all, that is the raison d’etre of the CIABOC.
On Thursday, the Central Crime Investigation Bureau (CCIB) arrested Sugeeshwara Bandara, who served as former President Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s private secretary. The arrest was made in connection with an ongoing investigation into allegations that Bandara drew two salaries from state institutions and thereby misappropriated public funds. Investigations have reportedly revealed that Bandara, while being Rajapaksa’s private secretary, held the position of Project Director at the Presidential Secretariat during the same period. The CCIB made Bandara’s arrest as dramatic as possible, perhaps to send a political message to other Opposition activists. Produced before court, Bandara was remanded.
Investigations should be conducted into alleged offences and credible evidence ascertained before suspects are arrested. Sri Lanka police often do it the other way around; they begin investigations and evidence gathering only after arresting and even detaining suspects. This deplorable practice is not of recent origin. The police acted in a similar manner during previous governments, which were bent on suppressing democratic dissent. The incumbent government came to power, promising a radical departure from that rotten political culture, but there has been no change.
The high-octane performance of the CIABOC and the police is curiously absent in situations where suspects happen to be cronies of the powers that be. How the CIABOC handled former Energy Minister Kumara Jayakody’s corruption case may serve as an example. The police stand accused of trotting out lame excuses for not arresting three JVP stalwarts involved in a forgery case. If they had been Opposition politicians, the CCIB itself would have swooped on them.
According to charges against Jayakody, while serving as the Manager of the Procurement and Import Division of the Ceylon Fertiliser Company, he committed an offence of corruption in 2016. He allegedly caused a loss of Rs. 8,859,708 to the state by influencing a procurement process for the benefit of a private company.
The CIABOC, which goes hell for leather to arrest suspects like Lanka Salt GM Gunaratne baulked at arresting Jayakody and hauling him up before court. Jayakody obtained bail immediately after being indicted.
Is it that all are equal before the law but JVP/NPP members are ‘more equal’ than others? The Opposition insists that no action has been taken regarding its complaints against Jayakody over a fraudulent coal procurement that has caused staggering losses amounting to billions of rupees to the state and led to an increase in diesel imports to operate oil-fired power plants and compensate for the generation loss at Norochcholai. One may recall that former Ministers Nalin Fernando and Mahindananda Aluthgamage have been sentenced to rigorous imprisonment over losses suffered by the state due to irregularities in the procurement of carrom boards and checkers board in the run-up to the 2015 presidential election. Former North Central Province Chief Minister S. M. Ranjith and his secretary have been jailed for a fraud involving a fuel allowance.
It is our fervent hope that the CIABOC will become independent enough to treat members of the government and the Opposition equally.
-
News7 days agoBeijing Capital Airlines to resume flights to Colombo signalling boost to tourism
-
Features6 days agoKilling of Colombo’s ancient trees — a warning on UN’s World Desertification Day – 17 June
-
News4 days agoCreditor receives USD 2.5 mn as Lankan public bears loss from theft of Treasury funds
-
News3 days agoCreditor not yet paid
-
News3 days agoConsumers bearing 22% tax burden despite 18% VAT claim: Dr. Harsha de Silva
-
Opinion5 days agoBeyond diagnosis: A strategic design for 7% growth by 2029 (Part I)
-
Opinion7 days agoFifty years after Soweto uprising
-
Sports7 days agoCatch every moment of the 2026 FIFA World Cup free on the Dialog PLAY App
