News
GL: Other nations must keep out of SL’s internal affairs as it does not meddle with theirs
By Saman Indrajith
Education Minister Prof. G.L. Peiris says Sri Lanka has gone out of its way to refrain from interfering in the domestic affairs of other nations and expect non-interference by other nations in the country’s internal affairs.
Participating in the third reading debate on Budget 2021, the minister said on Wednesday (25) that Sri Lanka entertained expectations that other nations would respect without question the right of Parliament and the people of Sri Lanka to determine the country’s own destiny.
Prof Peiris said: “As we debate the foreign policy in this august assembly, circumstances in the world at large are certainly not propitious. COVID-19 has proven to be a calamity. There are many lessons to be learnt from this situation. One of the most important lessons is that no nation, no single country, no culture has a monopoly on wisdom. Nobody can claim to know all the right answers. The contemporary experience of the world demonstrates convincingly that there is no room whatsoever for arrogance, bigotry and self-righteousness. Today, more than at any other time in our history if we survive this crisis at all it can only happen on the basis of humility with spontaneous sharing of experiences and readiness to work hand in hand in a spirit of comradeship and solidarity.
“The cornerstones of the foreign policy of our country are crystal clear. They were set out with the exemplary clarity by President Gotabaya Rajapaksa at his inauguration in the hallowed precincts of the Ruwanweliseya in Anuradhapura. We seek friendship with all nations. We go out of our way to refrain from interfering in the domestic affairs of other nations. At the same time reciprocally we entertain expectations that others will respect without question the right of Parliament and the people of Sri Lanka to determine our own destiny. This is the rationale underpinning the statement made by Foreign Minister Dinesh Gunawardena at the Human Rights Council in Geneva barely three months after the assumption of office by President Gotabaya Rajapaksa. The government Minister Gunawardena unequivocally rejected the resolutions of the Human Rights Council 30/1, 34/1, and 40/1 respectively of 2015, 2017 and 2019. These resolutions were not only supported but also co-sponsored by the Yahapalana government of that time. This is scarcely believable when one considers the content and the impact of these resolutions. Undisputedly those resolutions dealt with matters which were within the purview of national institutions in Sri Lanka. They required the re-arrangement of Sri Lanka’s constitutional provisions, the restructuring of our armed forces and police, the repeal of major legislations such as the Prevention of Terrorism Act. These resolutions also empowered foreign and commonwealth judges to adjudicate on grave allegations relating to war crimes which were leveled against the armed forces of Sri Lanka. That is the effect of the operative paragraph six of the resolution of 2015. This was in blatant violation of the supreme law of this country – the constitution. This abdication of self-respect was further compounded by the acceptance by that government of the obligation to report from time to time to the human rights council and to abide by the judgment of that council in respect of the adequacy of the progress that had been made in respect of the implementation of these resolutions.
“The entire edifice of the UN system is based upon one sacred principle. That is the principle relating to sovereign equality of nations. That principle is illustrated amply by the seminal instruments of the UN system such as its Charter, the Declaration of Human Rights and jurisprudence of the International Court of Justice and its predecessor the permanent Court of International Justice. All countries that are members of the international community be they large or small, affluent or not so affluent, are equal in the eyes of the United Nations system – equal in intrinsic worth and equal in inherent value. There can be no discrimination whatsoever. This is why there can be no scope whatsoever for talking down or hectoring and for patronizing attitudes. This is not to be misunderstood. Counsel from friends and sharing of experiences, traditions that are made in a spirit of goodwill and friendship are always welcome. They are healthy. But what absolutely ruled out are judgmental postures in respect of the internal decision making processes of countries dealing with matters which are within their purview. The concept of equality is basic to the entire UN system.
“There is another principle that is equally important. That is the principle of fairness. This is an instinct that is embedded in human nature and it represents a component of all systems of law and justice and indeed of all civilizations since time immemorial. One must look at both sides of an issue. Evidence has to be weighed in the balance and conclusions must be arrived at objectively without bias or prejudgment. From that standpoint very sadly the people of Sri Lanka have good reasons to entertain grave misgivings. Evidence of the highest value has been deliberately disregarded if that evidence is favourable to the armed forces of Sri Lanka. A clear example of that consists of military dispatches by trusted members of foreign countries reporting confidentially to their own capitals. These have been totally ignored. These dispatches have been ferreted out with great difficulty. As pointed out by Minister Dinesh Gunawardena the persons of eminence such as Lord Michael Naseby both within the House of Lords and outside. There were also very critical findings by Queen’s Counsel of the eminence, Sri Desmond Silva, Sir Geoffrey Nice, Rodney Dickson. These findings completely exonerated the armed forces of Sri Lanka from any form of culpability of guilt with regard to war crimes under principles of international humanitarian law and international human rights law. This body of evidence was there and it was never taken into account. It was deliberately ignored. This was done in the lofty name of human rights. But it constituted a cynical violation of natural justice and the rules of fairness both in its substantive and its procedural dimensions.
“Sri Lanka is a country with proud history and a cherished heritage. Reconciliation, ethnic harmony, and transitional justice are not concepts by any means alien to us. We have been nurtured throughout the ages by a rich and vibrant cultural tradition by each of these areas. I want to stress that the mechanisms we have to evolve, if we aspire to any measure of success, must necessarily derive from the aspirations of our people. This is because of the importance of context with regard to these matters. The government of President Gotabaya Rajapaksa and Prime Minister Mahinda Rajapaksa, fortified by an unrivalled mandate obtained from the people of this country at both the presidential and parliamentary elections, has an unflinching resolve to address these issues at earliest. The government has both the moral and legal right and the space to do so. We ask for empathy and understanding as we move forward in partnership with international forces to assure our people a stable and a prosperous future.”
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.”
News
Two arrest warrants issued for Gnanasara thera
The Colombo High Court and Court of Appeal yesterday issued arrest warrants for the Bodu Bala Sena general secretary Galagoda Aththe Gnanasara in a case involving an alleged statement insulting Islam.
The arrest warrants were issued on Tuesday and Wednesday. The Court of Appeal issued an open warrant two weeks after the court rescinded the presidential pardon granted to the thera when he was serving a six-year term for contempt of court.
The Appeals Court also imposed a travel ban on the monk and ordered that the Controller General of Immigration and Emigration be informed of the restriction.
The case was taken up before Colombo High Court Judge Buddhika C. Ragala. Gnanasara Thera was not present when the case was called.
A medical report was submitted stating that Thera was unwell, while his sureties also failed to appear before court. His counsel, Asoka Weerasuriya, told court that his client wished to bring the case to an early conclusion and that representations had been made to the Attorney General in that regard.
However, after considering the submissions, the High Court judge said he was not satisfied with the medical report submitted on behalf of the accused. The court also noted the failure of the sureties to appear.
The judge subsequently ordered that Gnanasara Thera be arrested and produced before court.The Attorney General filed the case under provisions of the Penal Code, alleging that remarks made by Gnanasara Thera concerning the Holy Quran amounted to an insult to Islam.
-
Editorial6 days agoBirth of a bad law
-
News4 days agoPolice remove Thileepan statue in Jaffna
-
News6 days agoTIN mandatory for key transactions from Nov. 1
-
Features4 days agoThe 22nd Amendment, constitutional recovery and illiberal slippage
-
Features4 days agoOf foreigners as CEOs of Lankan ventures
-
Latest News2 days agoGold winner Tharanga gets brand-new Honda Vezel from SLAAJ
-
News4 days agoSajith rejects Jt. Opp. protest sabotage claim; SJB TU chief demands remedial action
-
Features3 days agoThailand’s biggest new global star …
