Connect with us

Editorial

Rejects in overdrive

Published

on

Friday 10th January, 2025

The JVP-led NPP government has announced that its ongoing programme to rid private buses and trishaws of unauthorised accessories and enforce road discipline will go on despite protests. However, following a discussion with the private bus owners, the police have reportedly announced a grace for compliance. It is hoped that noncompliance will be severely dealt with thereafter. Nobody must be allowed to trifle with the law.

Some Opposition politicians are shedding copious tears for the bus and trishaw mudalalis. SLPP MP Namal Rajapaksa has said something to the effect that the government should be lenient. The Rajapaksas’ leniency towards lawbreakers is only well known. They unashamedly shielded even notorious characters like Mervyn, and numerous other rowdies, some of whom went berserk in Parliament in 2018. The members of the former ruling family and others of their ilk, still reeling from last year’s shocking electoral defeats, are making a desperate bid to gain political traction. Some of them have the chutzpah to proffer unsolicited advice to the incumbent government on how to run the country!

Worryingly, the NPP government continues to provide a bunch of political rejects with rallying points, albeit unwittingly. They are on the offensive although they are not in a position to convince the public that they are an alternative to the incumbent dispensation. They cannot even criticise the government in a credible manner without being exposed for stretching the truth and hypocrisy. Some of their absurd claims make one wonder whether they have been able to realise the gravity of the country’s economic situation properly, far less think of a solution.

The Opposition lacks pragmatism, and its leaders except a few like Dr. Harsha de Silva talk nineteen to the dozen, and their circumlocution about economics signifies nothing. They have condemned the ongoing IMF bailout programme as an evil, but they have stopped short of offering any alternative. The same holds true for the non-parliamentary oppositional groups. The Frontline Socialist Party has sought to belittle the increase in Sri Lanka’s foreign currency reserves, which amount to more than USD 6 billion. It is also demanding an immediate end to the IMF programme.

In 2022, the Gotabaya Rajapaksa government sought an IMF bailout when the country’s usable forex reserves plummeted to about USD 20 million. That regime was left with a choice between a soft default and a hard default. It opted for the former. True, an IMF programme is not a long-term solution in itself. Nobody likes the IMF’s constricting loan conditions, which are extremely painful to the people, especially the poor, but it is a sine qua non for economic recovery. Sri Lanka will have to shore up its foreign currency reserves by increasing exports and attracting foreign investment, among other things, to achieve economic recovery.

In fact, the IMF has asked Sri Lanka to do what the latter should have done of its own volition years ago to prevent the current economic crisis. If the Gotabaya administration had asked for IMF help at the first signs of trouble, economic recovery would not have been so difficult and painful.

A claim the SJB is propagating is that the Rajapaksa-Wickremesinghe government undertook to resume debt repayment with effect from 2028 although the IMF had agreed to a grace period until 2033. It has not furnished credible evidence in support of its claim. Dr. de Silva found himself in an embarrassing position in an interview with Derana TV, last week, when he was asked to comment on his party’s aforesaid claim. He should not try to defend the indefensible and ruin his image as an economist.

One can only hope that the political rejects will not get an opportunity to make a comeback by capitalising on the NPP administration’s bungling.



Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Editorial

Legislature’s meek submission to overbearing Executive

Published

on

Friday 24th April, 2026

The Opposition is intensely resentful that the government has thwarted its attempt to have President Anura Kumara Dissanayake, who is also Minister of Finance, summoned before the Parliamentary Select Committee (PSC) probing the green-channelling of 323 red-flagged freight containers in the Colombo Port in January 2025. When the Opposition members of the PSC proposed that President Dissanayake be summoned, their government counterparts put the proposal to a vote and defeated it.

The Opposition’s abortive bid was not devoid of politics, but Sri Lanka Customs, which released the aforementioned containers without mandatory inspections, is under the Finance Ministry. Therefore, the Finance Minister is accountable to Parliament and must answer questions from the container PSC, as it were.

The dispute between the government and the Opposition over the container scandal has more to it than a mere political argy-bargy. It reflects a deeper constitutional issue. The Constitution requires the President to attend Parliament, but frequent politically strategic interventions by him or her dilutes the spirit of the separation of powers and strengthens the Executive’s dominance over the legislature. This practice is bad for the wellbeing of democracy. The President has used, if not misused, Articles 32 and 33 of the Constitution to dominate Parliament in this manner over the years.

The JVP, on a campaign for abolishing the Executive Presidency, played a pivotal role in introducing the 17th, 19th and 21st Amendments to the Constitution to reduce the executive powers of the President, but ensconced in power, it is now silent on its pledge to restore a parliamentary system of government.

The Opposition has claimed that President Maithripala Sirisena testified before the PSC which probed the Easter Sunday terror attacks in 2019, and therefore President Dissanayake ought to do likewise. What it has left unsaid is that President Sirisena made a statement at the 20th meeting of that PSC, held at the Presidential Secretariat, on 20 September 2019. The PSC report has referred to the event as a ‘discussion’. Sirisena, who secured the executive presidency, promising to reduce the powers vested therein, should have refrained from undermining the legislature and visited the Parliament complex to testify before the PSC, as the Minister of Defence.

The least President Dissanayake can do to avoid the public perception that he, too, is undermining the legislature is to follow the precedent created by President Sirisena. Ideally, he ought to appear before the PSC in the parliamentary complex in keeping with his government’s much-touted commitment to upholding accountability and the separation of powers. After all, when the question of summoning President Sirisena before the PSC on the Easter Sunday attacks came up, the then JVP MP Dr. Nalinda Jayatissa, who was also a PSC member, defended the rights of Parliament. He declared that the PSC had the authority to summon anyone for questioning.

Now that the government members of the container PSC have gone out of their way to defend President Dissanayake, the question is whether they can be expected to allow an impartial investigation to be conducted and help uncover anything detrimental to the interests of the President and the ruling coalition.

By scuttling the Opposition PSC members’ effort to have President Dissanayake testify before the container PSC, and undermining the legislature in the process, the JVP-NPP government has unwittingly reminded the public of its unfulfilled election pledge to introduce a new Constitution, inter alia, “abolishing the executive presidency and appointing a president without executive powers by the parliament” (A Thriving Nation: A Beautiful Life, NPP Election Manifesto, p. 109).

Continue Reading

Editorial

Terrorism financing and terrorist assets

Published

on

Thursday 23rd April, 2026

Sri Lanka has reaffirmed its commitment to strengthening its national security and countering terrorism financing with renewed focus on Targeted Financial Sanctions (TFS), according to media reports quoting the Ministry of Defence. Sri Lanka’s compliance with the implementation of the TFS is in line with UN Security Council Resolutions, we are told. The irony of the aforementioned government announcement, which has come close on the heels of the seventh anniversary of the Easter Sunday terror attacks, may not have been lost on political observers.

The targeted financial sanctions, imposed on individuals and organisations suspected of involvement in terrorism or the financing of terrorism, include freezing assets, limiting access to financial systems and preventing designated persons or entities from conducting any form of financial activity within the country. Once a designation is published through a Gazette notification, a legally binding freezing order comes into effect. This results in the immediate freezing of bank accounts and restrictions on the use, transfer, sale, or leasing of movable and immovable assets, including property, vehicles, jewellery, and other valuables.

Eliminating the scourge of terrorism financing is a prerequisite for the success of any anti-terror campaign. Hence, the focus of all operations to defeat terrorism is on following the money trail, which is a forensic investigation technique used to trace financial transactions from their origin to the final destination, uncovering corruption, money laundering, or terrorism. In the case of the Easter Sunday terror strikes, it was not difficult to find out who had funded the National Thowheed Jamaath (NTJ) terror campaign. Sri Lankan investigators and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) of the US confirmed that the Ibrahim family, two of whose members carried out suicide bomb attacks, had financed the TNJ terror project.

The JVP-NPP government has drawn criticism from its political opponents for shielding the head of the Ibrahim family, Mohamed Ibrahim, who was a JVP National List nominee in 2015. Taking exception to the release of the assets seized from the residence of a suspect in the Easter Sunday terror strikes, the Opposition politicians have called for confiscating the wealth of the Ibrahim family and using it to compensate the victims of the Easter Sunday terror attacks. Interestingly, former President Maithripala Sirisena, ex-Defence Secretary Hemasiri Fernando, former IGP Pujith Jayasundara, former State Intelligence Service Chief Nilantha Jayawardena, and ex-State National Intelligence Service Chief Sisira Mendis have paid compensation to the Easter carnage victims, as per a Supreme Court order, for their failure to prevent the terror attacks.

The offence of financing terrorism is no less serious than the act of carrying out terrorist attacks. There is reason to believe that the issue of financing the Easter Sunday terror campaign has not been probed properly. The need for a fresh investigation into this vital aspect of the carnage cannot be overstated. However, the incumbent dispensation cannot be expected to open a can of worms by ordering a probe into this issue, and therefore a future government will have to get to the bottom of it.

It must also be found out what has become of the assets of the other terrorist organisations which raised colossal amounts of funds in this country. The LTTE and the JVP carried out numerous robberies, including bank heists, and obtained protection money from many people. They also robbed money and gold jewellery from the public. There have been election promises to trace the overseas assets of former rulers, but no serious effort has been made to fulfil these pledges. Illegal assets stashed away overseas must be brought back. Curiously, no political party has pledged to trace the missing assets of the former terrorist groups.

Continue Reading

Editorial

‘Cops and Robbers’: Role reversals

Published

on

Wednesday 22nd April, 2026

The Opposition is in overdrive, attacking the JVP-NPP government, left, right and centre, over the coal procurement scam, which has resulted in a huge increase in the cost of power generation and electricity tariffs, besides bleeding the Treasury. The government has said the additional cost of burning diesel to produce electricity to meet the Norochcholai generation shortfall will not be passed on to the public, but the funds it is spending on diesel liberally for power generation belong to the public, and not to the JVP or the NPP. It is the people who bear the losses and the cost overruns in power generation caused by the coal procurement scandal.

What we are witnessing is a textbook example of the link between unbridled power and corruption. Allegations of corruption against the incumbent government, which came to power promising to usher in good governance, remind us of a rhetorical question in Juvenal’s Satires: Who guards the guards? (Quis custodiet ipso custodes?) It is being argued in some quarters that self-policing is the way out, but what Juvenal has highlighted is the problem of ensuring accountability at the top as well as the need for effective checks and balances. Guards simply do not care to guard themselves. Acton’s dictum about the correlation between power and corruption also points to the fact that those who wield unchecked power tend to believe they are above the law, beyond criticism and always right. Hence, steamroller parliamentary majorities and the overconcentration of power in one or two political institutions are detrimental to the interests of a country that lacks robust democratic safeguards. This has been Sri Lanka’s experience.

A collective of Opposition parties has pledged to defeat the JVP-NPP government, probe the coal procurement scandal, etc., and throw the corrupt elements in the current dispensation behind bars. Some Opposition bigwigs appeared on television yesterday and made a pledge to that effect. The corrupt no doubt must be brought to justice, but pity a nation that has to rely on the corrupt to punish the corrupt, one may say with apologies to Brecht. Most of the self-righteous Opposition politicians on a crusade against corruption are tainted. They faced serious allegations of corruption while in power. If their corrupt deals and ill-gotten assets had been properly probed, they would have been in jail.

The Opposition politicians who are out for former Energy Minister Kumara Jayakody’s scalp for his involvement in the coal scam and hauling President Anura Kumara Dissanayake over the coals for shielding him, also have a history of defending the corrupt. SLPP politicians are at the forefront of the Opposition’s anti-corruption campaign. During the previous government, they unashamedly shielded the then Health Minister Keheliya Rambukwella, who was embroiled in a procurement racket, and even defeated a no-faith motion against him. They are demanding to know how some JVP full-timers have acquired valuable assets including houses. They themselves are well-heeled, full-time politicians, aren’t they? They have bigger houses than the JVP leaders. How have they acquired their wealth?

Some of the Opposition grandees campaigning against corruption and condemning the incumbent rulers for corrupt deals had the chutzpah to deny the Treasury bond scams (2015) and go so far as to defend the culprits during the UNP-led Yahapalana government. They went to the extent of trying to dilute the COPE (Committee on Public Enterprises) report on the bond scams by having a slew of footnotes incorporated into it. They also sullied their reputations by defending the Yahapalana administration accused of various questionable deals. Interestingly, from 2015 to 2019, they were in league with the JVP leaders who are currently in power. The JVP propped up the Yahapalana government despite the latter’s involvement in the Treasury bond scams and failure to prevent the Easter Sunday carnage. The SLPP, which came to power, vowing to have the UNP leaders jailed over the bond scam, joined forces with the latter in 2022 to retain its hold on power.

Thus, it may be seen that the ruling party politicians and their Opposition counterparts are driven by expediency and not principle; they are ready to do anything to safeguard self-interest despite their moral grandstanding and rhetoric.

Continue Reading

Trending