Connect with us

Editorial

Floating inferno: Some queries

Published

on

Friday 28th May, 2021

It is feared that the ill-fated container ship X-Press Pearl, which turned into a floating inferno while at anchorage near Colombo, may break up, spewing out a large amount of oil. Some of its debris is already polluting beaches in the Negombo area. Its cargo in 1,486 freight containers included 25 tons of nitric acid, which caused the fire.

The poor packaging of the chemicals onboard X-Press Pearl has found to be the cause of the disastrous fire. It is hoped that the international environmental organisations will call for punitive action against those whose irresponsible action has caused the disaster. Thankfully, Sri Lanka succeeded in rescuing all crew members of the burning ship.

Everything possible must be done to rescue a distressed vessel, but that is a task to be carried out cautiously. Initial reports, quoting Tim Hartnoll, the executive chairman of Ex-Press Feeders, which operates X-Press Pearl, said two ports in the region—Hazira (India) and Hamad (Qatar)—had denied the vessel entry because it had a leaking acid container. Media reports indicate that at that stage, the vessel was not in danger of having explosions onboard, and the container at issue should have been removed. Perhaps, the disaster could have been averted if the two ports had helped the ship. However, denying these reports, X-Press Feeders has, subsequently, said the vessel underwent discharge and loading operations in thee aforesaid ports, which, however, turned down applications for offloading the leaking nitric acid container on the grounds that there were no ‘specialist facilities or expertise’ immediately available to handle it. X-Press Feeders and its boss are making somewhat contradictory statements, but the fact remains that the ship failed to have the leaking container unloaded in time.

Having thus been left to its fate, X-Press Pearl was faced with the danger of meeting a fiery end. Why was it allowed to make its way towards Colombo? The Sri Lankan authorities that granted permission must have been aware of the danger the vessel posed, and why did they ignore the possibility of a disaster? Going by the X-Press Pearl operator’s version, one wonders why the officials of the Colombo Port thought they were equal to the task of dealing with the leaking acid container unlike their counterparts at Hazira and Hamad; does the Colombo Port have ‘specialist facilities and expertise’ to carry out such a task?

The Sri Lankan authorities may have taken the situation lightly as they were cocky, having successfully put out a blaze on a super tanker off Hambantota, last year––of course, with foreign assistance, Or, were they driven by their yen for dollars as the rescue of a fire-stricken ship is a financially rewarding exercise? These are some of the many questions that need answers. Perhaps, the Sri Lankan port officials thought that as the country had allowed tourists from some Covid-19 hotspots in the world to come here even for quarantine purposes, despite the danger they posed to the country, there was no harm in allowing a distressed ship carrying a chemical cargo about to catch fire to reach Colombo. After all, hundreds of containers full of hazardous foreign waster have found their way into the Colombo Port over the years.

The X-Press Pearl disaster has brought to light how poorly equipped Sri Lanka is where its firefighting capabilities are concerned though it considers itself a maritime hub. Those who permitted X-Press Pearl to be anchored off Colombo should have been aware of the country’s limitations as regards firefighting. Shouldn’t the Colombo Port concentrate on acquiring necessary capabilities to respond to emergencies more effectively and improve its services instead of selling or leasing its terminals to foreigners?



Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

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

Editorial

Exchanging ginger for chillies?

Published

on

President Anura Kumara Dissanayake told Parliament on Thursday that the Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA) would be repealed before the end of 2026. He said the PTA, introduced as a temporary measure, had lasted for 46 long years despite calls for its abolition. It is not clear from media reports on the President’s parliamentary speech how the government will set about the task of doing away with the PTA. However, one may recall that the Ministry of Justice published a proposal for a new anti-terrorism law, the Protection of the State from Terrorism Act (PSTA) in December 2025, seeking public views.

If the government is allowed to replace the PTA with the proposed PSTA, it will be a textbook case of ‘exchanging ginger for chillies’, as a local saying goes. The solution will be as bad as or perhaps even worse than the problem.

President Dissanayake’s admission in Parliament that the PTA is draconian and his government is planning to abolish it in response to concerns expressed by human rights campaigners and other stakeholders can be considered a self-indictment; suspects continue to be arrested and detained under the PTA and Dissanayake himself signs detention orders in his capacity as the Minister of Defence. Perhaps, the JVP leaders know better than others what it is like to be arrested and detained under the PTA. They are among those who bore the brunt of this repressive law, which has been abused by successive governments whose self-righteous leaders condemn it only when they are out of power. Their hypocrisy has resulted in the perpetuation of the PTA.

Sri Lanka will incur much international opprobrium if the proposed PSTA replaces the PTA. The PSTA has already drawn heavy criticism from international human rights organisations, including the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), which has warned that several provisions of the draft law remain inconsistent with Sri Lanka’s obligations under international human rights law. According to OHCHR’s preliminary analysis, the proposed legislation risks enabling broad criminalisation through vague definitions of terrorism, restrictions on freedom of expression, assembly and association, substantial executive powers with limited safeguards or oversight, arbitrary arrest and prolonged detention, exposure to torture, ill-treatment and enforced disappearance. OHCHR has therefore urged the government to revise the draft legislation substantially “to ensure that Sri Lanka’s counter-terrorism framework complies with international law and does not replicate the serious human rights violations associated with the PTA”.

Various human rights groups, civil society organisations, political activists and the media, too, have pointed out why the PSTA cannot be accepted as an alternative to the PTA. They have echoed OHCHR’s view that the PSTA has not defined terrorism properly, and this fact runs counter to international law. An overly broad definition allows the PSTA to be misused.

Having neutralised three formidable terrorist outfits, the LTTE, the JVP and the National Thowheed Jamaath, Sri Lanka needs robust anti-terror laws to protect itself against terrorism. Nothing must be left to chance. Similarly, all precautions must be taken to ensure that anti-terror laws do not contain structural flaws that can be abused to suppress civil liberties in the name of fighting terrorism.

The PSTA has also been criticised for seeking to empower senior police officers to issue detention orders and authorise pre-charge detention for renewable periods of up to two months for a total of up to one year. It has been pointed out by international human rights organisations, such as Amnesty International, that the PSTA has retained untrammeled executive powers; the presidential powers are so extensive that the sole avenue for appeal against Proscription Orders lies with the Executive itself so much so that they undermine the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).

The present-day leaders will do themselves a favour by abolishing the PTA, for it may be used against them when they lose power. The PTA, by its very nature, lends itself to abuse. The same is true of the proposed PSTA. Hence the pressing need to deep-six the PTA and the draft PSTA, and introduce new anti-terror laws that comply with international law.

Continue Reading

Editorial

Justice, hypocrisy and politics

Published

on

Saturday 27th June, 2026

Governments of all political hues in Sri Lanka usually do not uphold the foundational legal principle of the presumption of innocence when their political rivals happen to be arrested. The JVP-NPP administration has failed to be different despite its election pledge to usher in a new political culture. Its politicians and propagandists ruthlessly vilify their political opponents who are taken into custody. They apparently consider their rivals held on remand guilty until proven innocent.

The inversion of the presumption of innocence could have disastrous consequences, as evident from a large number of summary executions and political assassinations during the past armed conflicts in this country. The SLFP, the UNP and the JVP have committed the sin of physically eliminating their political opponents.

The current SLPP leaders, while they were in the SLFP-led UPFA government from 2010 to 2015, turned a parliamentary select committee into a kangaroo court against a Chief Justice, and hounded her out of office. The UNP also launched witch-hunts against upright public officials and judges and treated suspects as convicts. The JVP-led NPP has prejudged the guilt of three suspects, including former Justice Minister Wijeyadasa Rajapakshe’s son, Rakitha, and SJB organiser for Horana Charith Abeysinghe, arrested on Thursday on suspicion of seeking a bribe from the wife of a drug dealer in custody.

There is no gainsaying that the law must apply to everyone equally, and all allegations of transgressions must be probed. So, nobody should protest against the arrest of the aforementioned trio unless their legitimate rights are violated while in custody. If they are found guilty after a fair trial, stringent punishment must be meted out to them. This task is best left to learned judges. The government must not seek to gain political mileage out of their arrests. What one gathers from various statements the JVP/NPP politicians, including ministers, have been making about Rajapakshe and Abeysinghe is that the government is labouring under the misconception that they should be considered guilty simply because they have been arrested.

The SJB has suspended Abeysinghe’s party membership and launched a disciplinary inquiry. Such action is welcome. However, Abeysinghe should be given an opportunity to tell his side of the story and defend himself. The principle of natural justice must be upheld. That is how such matters are handled in the civilised world.

JVP/NPP politicians and propagandists continue to blame the SJB for having individuals with underworld links within its ranks. It should put its own house in order before telling other political parties how to deal with their members facing allegations.

Former Energy Minister Kumara Jayakody has been indicted for corruption before the Colombo High Court. The JVP/NPP unashamedly defended him to the hilt when the Opposition moved a motion of no confidence against him in Parliament. He stepped down when it became too embarrassing for the government to keep him in the Cabinet. What action has the JVP/NPP taken against him over charges of corruption? Has it at least held a disciplinary inquiry against him? Why hasn’t it suspended his party membership?

Continue Reading

Editorial

Falling oil prices and fallen heroes

Published

on

Friday 26th June, 2026

The whole world is enjoying the benefits of the US-Iran peace deal. Vessel traffic has more than doubled via the Hormuz Strait over the past 36 hours or so, bringing oil prices down steeply, according to media reports. Predictions that oil prices would not return to the pre-conflict levels in the foreseeable future have gone wrong.

World oil prices have come down almost to the pre-Iran war levels, with the global benchmark Brent crude dropping below USD 72.48 a barrel, described as the price it was at the day before the launch of the US-Israel attacks on Iran on 28 Feb., and settling at USD 72.63 per barrel. The US benchmark West Texas Intermediate (WTI) fell below USD 70 per barrel. These are very positive signs. Oil price decreases have stood all economies in good stead.

Some countries, such as the US, Australia and Pakistan, have opted for partial pass-throughs causing pump prices to drop, much to the relief of consumers who were reeling from the inflated fuel costs for more than three months. They have managed to cool inflation to some extent. But Sri Lankans are not that lucky. At the time of going to press, the JVP-NPP government had not decided to lower fuel prices; it was only trotting out various excuses for the so-called lag phase while pressure was mounting on it to reduce fuel prices at least partially. Sri Lanka’s fuel pricing has shown a rockets-and-feathers pattern under successive governments.

The JVP-NPP government did not scruple to opt for an immediate asymmetric cost pass-through when world oil prices increased. It allegedly resorted to price gouging by revaluing oil inventories, procured at lower costs, at prevailing market prices. When the Iran war erupted in late February, the government declared that the country’s fuel stocks were sufficient for several months, but it increased fuel prices immediately afterwards in keeping with global oil price hikes. Thus, it gets the best of both worlds by making fuel prices cost-reflective only when world oil prices rise. It is continuing the policies of the SLPP-UNP government, which it condemned for exploiting the public.

During their opposition days, the JVP/NPP leaders claimed that a government that increased local fuel prices whenever world oil prices rose was not worth its salt; it was a simple task that even a Pettah trader was equal to, they argued. They are now doing exactly what they flayed the previous governments for.

The Opposition has accused the government of keeping fuel prices unconscionably high to recover the staggering losses caused by the coal procurement scam, which has made the diesel-fired power plants operate overtime to compensate for a generation loss at Norochcholai. The Ceylon Petroleum Corporation has admitted that it had to buy some diesel shipments at prices as high as USD 286 per barrel to prevent supply disruptions. What has driven the demand for diesel high is the country’s overdependence on diesel-fired power plants to avoid power cuts.

Meanwhile, private bus operators, who secure fare hikes whenever diesel prices increase significantly, have argued that the operational and regulatory framework involving them and the National Transport Commission does not require them to lower bus fares when diesel prices decrease. If so, the government ought to introduce new laws and regulations to ensure that bus fares reflect diesel price decreases to prevent asymmetric pricing, for fuel is a major cost input in the transport sector.

If the JVP/NPP leaders were in the Opposition today, they would take to the streets demanding fuel price reductions. While out of power, they promised to champion the cause of the poor and resist injustice with might and main, just like Robin Hood and his Merry Men, but once in power, they are accused of behaving like Prince John and Sheriff of Nottingham; they are increasing taxes and enforcing compliance ruthlessly, besides jacking up tariffs. Such a hero-to-villain transformation usually carries significant political costs. No wonder the government is reluctant to face the Provincial Council elections.

Continue Reading

Trending