Editorial

Gnanasara and ‘One country, One law’

Published

4 years ago

2021/10/31

Unsurprisingly, the appointment of politician-monk, Ven. Galagodaaththe Gnanasara, as chairman of yet another Presidential Task Force (PTF), this one studying the implementation of the ‘One country, One law’ proposal, has raised hornets’ nests in many quarters; and wide ranging protests have been emerging from a variety of interests. Nobody from the government side has yet defended the monk’s appointment, possibly for the reason that they are the prerogative of the president and he presumably knows what he’s doing. Gnanasara sought his party’s single National List place in Parliament after the last election having been shut out of the poll by the rejection of the Apey Jana Balavegaya’s nomination list in Kurunegala. Eventually Ven. Athureliye Ratana, who has worn many political hats and was a UNP National List MP in the last Parliament, was granted the place; though not before much entertaining melodrama.

Gnanasara won visibility, if not notoriety, from the Bodu Bala Sena which he continues to lead for his belligerent ethno-nationalist credentials. These command support of one section of the polity and dismay of another comprising mostly of minorities. Political analyst Dayan Jayatilleka, in an essay we run today, has perhaps tongue in cheek suggested that former Chief Justice Sarath. N. Silva would have been a better choice to run the task force under discussion. He believes that Silva who was both Attorney General and Chief Justice would in addition to Sinhala nationalist credentials have legal attributes lacking in Gnanasara; that is apart from some brushes with the law hat the pries has had. Obviously the president would not have been unmindful of the flak last week’s appointment would inevitably draw. But he went ahead for reasons he would best know. This was very similar to the pardon he granted one time parliamentarian Duminda Silva, convicted of murder by a High Court with the death sentence imposed confirmed by a five-judge bench of the Supreme Court. The pardoned convict, as an MP, held a supervisory role over the defence ministry when GR was secretary.

Like Silva, Gnanasara too is a convict, jailed for a lesser offence of contempt of court. He won his pardon from former President Maithripala Sirisena after a short spell in prison. Sirisena had also earlier similarly pardoned the Royal Park murder convict, Jude Shramantha Anthony Jayamaha. We do not know how many presidential task forces have been appointed by President Gotabaya Rajapaksa since his 2019 election but there have been many. The most visible of these, of course, is that on Covid 19 PTF headed by Army Commander Shavendra Silva. There have been similar task forces appointed for a variety of subjects including attaining a green economy, and another to review and take forward objectives arising from the president’s much publicized Gama Samaga Pilisandara (Discussions with the village). There’s also a PTF on building a secure country. This comprises entire of military, police and intelligence officers and has drawn the ire of the International Commission of Jurists. Other than for the Covid Task Force, the people don’t know what the others are doing but Gnanasara’s is likely to be different.

Whether the monk, who has previously demonstrated an affinity for both controversy and visibility, will opt for a low profile role in his newest avatar remains to be seen. Duminda Silva who was made Chairman of the National Housing Development Authority weeks after his release from prison has not been in the news in his present capacity. Rajan Philips in his regular column on this page has speculated of the possibility that Gnanasara’s appointment being a counter to Malcolm Cardinal Ranjit, Archbishop of Colombo, who has been increasingly vociferous recently. His focus is what he regards as the glaring lack of accountability over the Easter Sunday massacre and the denial of justice to the victims. His outspoken comments have been well received by his flock much to the embarrassment of the ruling powers. It was widely perceived by analysts and observers that his Eminence favoured President Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s election two years ago. But that scenario has totally changed since the Easter tragedy.

Dayan Jayatilleka has cuttingly drawn attention to what he calls one of Gnanasara’s “many accomplishments,” among them inviting and hosting the “even more notorious monk,” Venerable Ashin Wirathu of Myanmar. Whether Justice Minister Ali Sabry who has been working on the ‘One country, one law’ project for some time will resent the Gnanasara-led PTF looking over his shoulders remains to be seen but we wouldn’t place money on it. The appointment after all came from high up and no boat is likely to be rocked. Gnanasara’s PTF has been required to make a study of the implementation of the “One country, One law’ concept and prepare a draft Act for this purpose. It is also required to study available material at the Justice Ministry and report on them.

It has been noted that the 13-member PTF comprises of a majority of Sinhalese members and four Muslims but no Tamils. Presumably the majority of the Sinhalese are Buddhists and it has not been revealed whether any Christians are among them. Usually bodies such as this are secular and the non-inclusion of Tamils in the PTF has attracted comment. The subjects on the table will probably include the Thesavalamai law and the Muslim Marriages and Divorces Act. Although the Center for Policy Alternatives, well known for its criticism of acts of omission and commission by governments, has demanded rescinding of the gazette creating the PTF, nobody will expect anything more than a deafening silence.

All News Advertisement

Editorial

Jekylls and Hydes

Published

7 hours ago

2025/12/29

Sahan Weerasooriya

Monday 29th December, 2025

Sri Lankan politicians love the media dearly and take up the cudgels for the rights of journalists when they are out of power. The JVP/NPP leaders also defended the media to the hilt while they were languishing in the Opposition. Jekylls become Hydes after being ensconced in power, with the media exposing their failures and malpractices. Those who can, do; those who cannot, attack the media, one may say of the governments in this country, with apologies to Bernard Shaw.

The JVP-led NPP government, angered by bad press, is all out to intimidate the media it cannot control. Previous governments had the police on a string and used them to attack and harass independent journalists. The incumbent administration has gone a step further; the police have reportedly written to the Telecommunications Regulatory Commission (TRC), asking for action against Hiru TV for what they describe as broadcasting unverified, misleading news. Thus, the government has used the police to give Hiru a choice between toeing the official line and losing its licence. Thankfully, its efforts have run into stiff resistance, with media institutions and various associations circling the wagons around Hiru.

If the government thinks Hiru or any other media institution disseminates false information to the detriment of its interests, legal avenues are available for it to seek redress. The police must not be used as a political tool to intimidate the media.

Among the current defenders of the media are the SLPP, the UNP, the SLFP, etc. Their leaders are shedding copious tears for Hiru. But it was while the UNP and SLPP leaders were in power that the suppression of media freedom and violence against journalists became institutionalised for all intents and purposes. UNP governments not only throttled media freedom but also murdered journalists. SLFP regimes had media institutions attacked and journalists killed. An SLFP-led government, with the current SLPP leaders at the helm, had media institutions torched and journalists abducted, assaulted and murdered. These sinners currently in the political wilderness are condemning other sinners in power for suppressing media freedom.

The government deserves the bad press it gets. The police have been reduced to a mere appendage of the JVP/NPP. Two of the NPP’s Retired Police Collective members, namely former Senior DIG Ravi Seneviratne and former SSP Shani Abeysekera, have been appointed Secretary to the Public Security Ministry and CID Director, respectively. Absurd claims the police make in defence of the government remind us of Matilda, whose dreadful lies made one gasp and stretch one’s eyes.

When the police were asked why NPP MP Asoka Ranwala had not been subjected to a breathalyser test immediately after a recent road accident he caused, they had the chutzpah to claim they had run out of test kits. They transferred two of their officers over the incident to enable the government to save face. They arrested one of their own men assaulted by an NPP MP following a recent police raid on a cannabis cultivation in Suriyakanda. Acting just like legendary King Kekille, they let the MP off the hook and arrested the policeman, who was bailed out; they went on to suspend him from service. A few months ago, they unashamedly sided with a group of JVP cadres who stormed a Frontline Socialist Party office in Yakkala and forcibly occupied it. They go out of their way to ensure that the arrests of drug dealers with links to the Opposition get maximum possible publicity, but they do their best to keep the media in the dark when narcotics dealers with ruling party connections are taken into custody. They crack down on Opposition politicians and activists but steer clear of government members and their supporters. The despicable manner in which they are doing political work for the government reminds us of the Gestapo. Now, they are zeroing in on Hiru TV at the behest of their political masters for exposing their sordid actions.

The only way the NPP government can overcome problems and challenges on the political front and shore up its crumbling image is to mend its ways and fulfil its election pledges while taking action against its errant members who have brought it into disrepute and turned public opinion against it. Shooting the messenger is not the way to set about the task.

Editorial

Executive brinkmanship

Published

1 day ago

2025/12/28

Thilina Walpola

Pressure is mounting on President Anura Kumara Dissanayake to ensure that an Auditor General is appointed without further delay. But he has remained unmoved. He is determined to wear down the Constitutional Council (CC) and appoint one of his party loyalists as Auditor General. The CC has rejected his nominees—and rightly so; they are not eligible. Former Executive Presidents went all out to railroad the CC into rubber-stamping their decisions. They had no qualms about doing so while claiming to uphold the independence of the public service. President Dissanayake has failed to be different. His refusal to compromise amounts to brinkmanship; he is waiting until the CC blinks.

The NPP’s election manifesto, A Thriving Nation: A Beautiful Life, attributes the deterioration of the public service to ‘political appointments’ and state workers making political decisions. Among the steps the NPP has promised to take to straighten up the public service are ‘merit-based appointments and promotions’. This principle has fallen by the wayside where the question of appointing the Auditor General is concerned.

The government should take cognisance of the possible negative effects of the prolonged delay in appointing the Auditor General during a period of disaster response and international relief and rebuilding support.

The Bar Association of Sri Lanka has called upon President Dissanayake to appoint a person with proven competence, integrity, and independence, who commands wide acceptance as Auditor General forthwith. It has stressed the need to appoint a nonpartisan professional as the Auditor General to safeguard the integrity of the National Audit Office and inspire the confidence of both citizens and international partners in the financial governance of the State.

Transparency International Sri Lanka, the Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) and the other good governance activists, too, have faulted President Dissanayake and his government for the inordinate delay in appointing the Auditor General. They are of the view that a strong, independent Auditor General enables Parliament and the public to scrutinise government expenditure, identify irregularities, prevent misuse of funds, and ensure that those entrusted with public resources are held to account. The delay in appointing the Auditor General has weakened the effectiveness, authority, and the independence of the entire public audit system and created space for inefficiency, mismanagement, and corruption, they have noted. The situation will take a turn for the worse if the government succeeds in having one of its cronies appointed Auditor General.

The government is apparently playing a waiting game in the hope that the reconstitution of the CC due next year will provide a window of opportunity for it to appoint one of its loyalists as Auditor General.

Why the government is so desperate to place a malleable person at the helm of the National Audit Office is not hard to understand. If it succeeds in its endeavour, the next Auditor General will be beholden to the JVP/NPP. When an ineligible person is elevated to a high post, he or she naturally becomes subservient to the appointing authority. Such officials go out of their way to safeguard the interests of their political masters in case of irregularities involving state funds and other accountability issues.

A protracted delay in appointing the Auditor General or the appointment of a government supporter to that post will increase the risk of mismanagement of state funds and corruption, lead to the erosion of public trust and confidence in the National Audit Office, undermine legislative oversight and impair fiscal discipline. Most of all, the government’s failure to appoint a competent, independent person of integrity as Auditor General will diminish donor confidence especially at a time when the country is seeking disaster relief funds from the international community. There is no way the government can justify its refusal to appoint the current Acting Auditor General as the head of the supreme audit institution. He is obviously the most eligible candidate.

Editorial

Selective transparency

Published

2 days ago

2025/12/27

Thilina Walpola

Saturday 27th December, 2025

The NPP government has released a cordial diplomatic letter from Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi to President Anura Kumara Dissanayake, and gained a great deal of publicity for it as part of a propaganda campaign to boost Dissanayake’s image. Such moves are not uncommon in politics, especially in the developing world, where the heads of powerful states are deified and their visits, invitations and letters are flaunted as achievements of the leaders of smaller nations. However, the release of PM Modi’s letter to President Dissanayake is counterproductive, for it makes one wonder why the government has not made public the MoUs it has signed with India?

PM Modi’s Sri Lanka visit in April 2025 saw the signing of seven MoUs (or pacts as claimed in some quarters) between New Delhi and Colombo. Prominent among them are the MoUs/pacts on the implementation of HVDC (High-Voltage Direct Current) Interconnection for import/export of power, cooperation among the governments of India, Sri Lanka, and the United Arab Emirates on developing Trincomalee as an energy hub, and defence cooperation between India and Sri Lanka.

The NPP government has violated one of the fundamental tenets of good governance––transparency; there has been no transparency about the aforesaid MoUs or pacts, especially the one on defence cooperation. They cannot be disclosed without India’s consent, the government has said. This is a very lame excuse. The JVP/NPP seems to have a very low opinion of the intelligence of the public, who made its meteoric rise to power.

When the JVP/NPP was in opposition, it would flay the previous governments for signing vital MoUs and pacts without transparency. But it has kept even Parliament in the dark about the MoUs/pacts in question.

Ironically, the JVP, which resorted to mindless violence in a bid to scuttle the signing of the Indo-Lanka Accord in 1987, has sought to justify the inking of an MoU/pact on defence cooperation between Sri Lanka and India and keeping it under wraps, about three and a half decades later. The signing of that particular defence MoU/pact marked the JVP’s biggest-ever Machiavellian U-turn. How would the JVP have reacted if a previous government had entered into MoUs with India and kept them secret? It opposed the proposed Economic and Technology Cooperation Agreement (ETCA) between Sri Lanka and India tooth and nail, didn’t it?

Whenever one sees the aforesaid letter doing the rounds in the digital space, one remembers the MoUs/pacts shrouded in secrecy, which have exposed the pusillanimity of the NPP government, whose leaders cannot so much as disclose their contents without India’s consent.