Connect with us

news

Bloody rumpus at Jaffna Central College blamed by CMEV on lack of understanding of counting process

Published

on

By Rathindra Kuruwita

Political party leaders must educate their candidates and their supporters on how the counting process works, National Coordinator of the Center for Monitoring Election Violence (CMEV,) Manjula Gajanayake told The Island yesterday commenting on unrest at the Jaffna Central College on Thursday night between supporters of ITAK candidates Mavai Senathirajah and Sasikala Raviraj.

Supporters of Raviraj accused Senathirajah and Jaffna District MP elect M. A. Sumanthiran of rigging the preferential votes and depriving her of a seat in parliament.

“From midday our observers had noted that a large number of supporters were gathering at the counting centre. Later there was a delay in issuing preferential vote count and when the results were announced, Raviraj had not won. However, Raviraj thought she had come in second and that was also what her supporters expected. Then there were social media posts by Raviraj’s daughter and other supporters that something fishy was going on and her supporters were angry.”

At that point Sumanthiran arrived with his security and supporters of Raviraj expressed their displeasure at his presence and supporters of various candidates clashed, according to Gajanayake. The police and STF officers had come in unarmed. They had left their weapons inside their vehicles because they didn’t want to make matters worse and it became hard to control the situation.

“Finally, the Police and STF officers had to use force to disperse the clashing rival supporters and some people sustained injuries. Sons of both Senathirajah and Raviraj were among those who sustained injuries.”

Gajanayake said that the incident was due lack of understanding of the counting process among candidates and their supporters. Their ignorance and social media were a dangerous combination, the CMEV National Coordinator said.

“The counting process is documented throughout. Our monitors at the counting centre checked the documents and things seemed to be in order. It is very difficult to say that a person has got enough preferential votes to get in, until the very end of the counting process. The ITAK is an alliance of many parties and there are lots of internal issues and this also contributed to the incident.”

Gajanayake added that Raviraj could move courts if she was convinced that she had been wrongfully denied a seat in parliament.

Yesterday morning, Raviraj’s daughter, Praviinaa Raviraj on Facebook blamed Sumanthiran and TNA leader R. Sampanthan for having deprived her mother a seat in parliament. She also blamed Sumanthiran for mobilizing the STF to assault her supporters.

“We aren’t sour losers, but can one win and then lose? To all those in Colombo and away congratulating us and are unaware of the turnaround that happened last night. The final verdict brought my mum down from 2nd to 4th within TNA Jaffna and Kilinochchi District. Personally, I felt the results were delayed to wait for Sumanthiran. And turmoil was created to hide the rigged voting that had happened in two counting booths. Sumanthiran’s STF attacked peaceful protesters with stones and etc.

“So I want to “thank” Sumanthiran and his STF for attacking, wounding not just friends and family but also supporters of other competing parties. I want to “thank” TNA for letting a snake grow in their own garden.”

 Sasikala is the widow of assassinated TNA parliamentarian Nadaraja Raviraj. He was gunned down in Colombo with his police bodyguard in 2006.

 

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

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

news

20A passed at first reading stage amidst protests from SJB

Published

on

By Saman Indrajith

 

The 20th Amendment Bill was passed yesterday in Parliament at the first reading stage amidst protests from the SJB.

Justice Minister Ali Sabry presented the Bill to the House.

SJB members who were wearing black armbands and badges with ‘No to 20’ printed on them shouted. They held placards denouncing the 20th Amendment.

 Some SJB MPs were seen coming from their desks to the Well of the House, and then the government MPs too came down and shouted, ‘Yes to 20’.

Serjeant-at-Arms Narendra Fernando and his deputy Kushan Jayaratne were seen standing before the Mace

 Trade Minister Dr. Bandula Gunawardane moved a number of Orders under the Special Commodity Levy Act for debate.

Seconding the move, Samurdhi, Household Economy, Micro Finance, Self-Employment, Business Development and Underutilised State Resources Development State Minister Shehan Semasinghe said that the Opposition should have raised their concerns elsewhere.

“They can now go before court and express their concerns. They have one more option. That is to secure a two-third majority in Parliament and defeat the Bill. Without doing any of them they shout here to disrupt sittings and thereby waste public funds. We remember how they behaved when they were in power; they brought in several no-confidence motions. They did so after suspending the Standing Orders of the House. The then Speaker Karu Jayasuriya suspended Standing Orders to allow JVP MP Vijitha Herath to move a motion. We do not act in such undemocratic manner. People have given us a mandate to do away with the 19th Amendment. We act according to that mandate.”

SJB Kegalle District MP Kabir Hashim:

There are two groups in this House. One group ruled this country for 20 years. We were in power for five years.

If they say that they need more powers to develop this country that is a joke.

Opposition Leader Sajith Premadasa said the TV camera was not focussed on MP Hashim.

SJB MPs shouted demanding that the camera be focussed on him

MP Hashim:

If this is the manner the government ensuring the rights of MPs before the 20th Amendment, what will happen to us after it becomes law?

MP Hashim:

Have you been able to bring down the price of a single commodity after coming to power? When you came to power in 1994 you promised to abolish the executive presidency, and do away with the open economic policies. You did not do so. Mahinda Rajapaksa too came to power on the same promises. But his government did not honour thems. Today, we are staging this protest to save the powers of the Prime Minister not for our sake. Do you remember the Subha and Yasa story. A palace guard and the king exchanged their places for the fun of it. But the guard did not give back the throne to the king. He remained in the position and even killed the King. The same will happen here when the 20th Amendment is passed.

Minister Mahindananda Aluthgamage:

This is a government of the people. We will not do anything against people’s aspirations. We uphold democracy. During the times when you were in the government you did not hold elections. There are many MPs in the opposition today who want to join our government. By this morning there were 17 opposition MPs who wanted to join us. We will get 20 MPs from the Opposition to secure the passage of this Bill. You do not worry about saving the powers of the Prime Minister. We will see to that. You passed the 19th Amendment to prevent the Rajapaksas from coming to power. The Opposition paints a dismal picture of the 20th Amendment. Former Minister Hashim laments about the prices of commodities. Tell me the price of a coconut. Tell me. You cannot because you do not know. You do not know because you are living in luxury away from people.  Today a coconut is Rs 70 in the market. You are not with the people that is why you lost the election.

Industry Minister Wimal Weerawansa raising a point of order said that MPs could not demand that the camera be focussed on them. “Whenever there is a protest in the House, the camera should focus either on the Speaker or the Mace. That is the procedure. It was introduced by the former Speaker W. J. M. Lokubandara.”

Opposition Leader Sajith Premadasa:

We register our opposition and frustration over the 20th Amendment. This amendment has provisions that will erode democratic values.

Continue Reading

news

Speaker berates opposition for resorting to harangue at question time

Published

on

By Saman Indrajith

Speaker Mahinda Yapa Abeywardena yesterday (22) reprimanded the Opposition MPs for wasting the time of the House. He said that MPs should not make speeches when raising questions listed in the Order Paper because only one hour had been allotted for the question time.

He said so when Ratnapura District SJB MP Hesha Withanage raised supplementary questions and made a lengthy speech.

Withanage demanded to know from the Prime Minister the number of Cabinet ministers in governments since 1978.

Responding on behalf of the Prime Minister Chief of the Government Whip Highways Minister Johnston Fernando said that there had been nine parliaments since 1978 and there had been different numbers of Cabinet ministers in those government. He said that the first parliament in 1978 had 25 cabinet ministers and the second parliament in 1989 had 21 cabinet ministers. The third parliament in 1994 had 23 cabinet and 31 deputy ministers with a total of 54. The fourth parliament of 2000 had 42 cabinet and 36 deputy ministers with a total of 78. The Fifth Parliament of 2001 had 25 cabinet, 27 non-cabinet and eight deputy ministers with a total of 60. The sixth parliament of 2004 had 31 cabinet, three non-cabinet and 31 deputy ministers with a total of 65. The seventh parliament of 2010 had 37 cabinet 39 deputy ministers with a total of 76 ministers. The eighth parliament of 2015 had 45 cabinet and 38 state ministers making a total of 87 ministers. The eighth parliament of 2019 had 16 cabinet and 38 state ministers with a total of 54. The ninth parliament of 2020 has 27 cabinet and 40 state ministers with a total of 67.

The first and second parliaments of 1978 and 1989 had one female cabinet minister each. Third parliament of 1994 had three cabinet and five deputy female ministers with a total eight female members. The Fourth parliament of 2000 had four female cabinet ministers. The fifth parliament of 2001 had only one female cabinet minister. The sixth parliament of 2004 had three female cabinet ministers. The seventh parliament of 2010 had two female cabinet ministers and one female deputy minister post making it three female ministers. The eighth parliament of 2015 had a total number of six female ministerial posts – two cabinet, two state and two deputy posts.  The eighth parliament of 2019 had one female cabinet minister. The ninth parliament of 2020 has one female cabinet minister and two female state ministers with a total of three.

The highest percentage of female ministers was in 1994 with 13.04% and the lowest was in 2020 with 3.7 percent, Minister Fernando said.

Responding to the question the percentage of female ministers in the present government, Minister Fernando said it was 3.6. He said the figure was the same as the percentage of female representation in Parliament.

When the time came for the supplementary questions, MP Withanage said that if the funds spent on the number of Cabinet ministers since 1978 had been spent for the development, the country would have been in a better position. Then he lamented that the percentage of female members in parliament did not tally with the population’s female percentage. Thereafter, he said that under the previous government a ceiling on the number of Cabinet ministers had been imposed and the incumbent government was planning to remove it. He asked how the government would justify the proposed increase in the number of ministers.

Speaker Abeywardena intervened and said the MPs could not be allowed to make speeches making use of time allocated for questions. “You should ask only supplementary question. This cannot be permitted. We have to give consideration to the time. We move on to the next item in the order paper.”

S.M. Marikkar raising a point of order said that the government Cabinet, state and deputy ministerial posts to serve their people. The Opposition MPs had only one opportunity and that was by raising the people’s questions. “That is our right. Do not deprive us of our right,” MP Marikkar said.

The Speaker said that his concern too was to ensure the MPs’ rights and for that purpose time had to be managed.

Minister Fernando said that MP Withanage had not raised a single supplementary question and made a speech instead and, therefore, if the latter could raise a specific question the government was ready to answer them.

Continue Reading

news

20A challenged in SC

Published

on

A petition was filed in the Supreme Court by Indika Gallage, a lawyer, yesterday, challenging the 20th Amendment to the Constitution. The petitioner has requested the Court to declare that a referendum and a two-thirds majority in Parliament are needed for the passage of the 20th Amendment.

Gallage has made the Attorney General the respondent. The petition claims that the 20th Amendment to the Constitution violates Articles 01, 03, 04 (d,) 12.1, 14 (1) g, 27 (2) and 27 (3.)

Continue Reading

Trending