News
Govt. faulted for flawed Geneva strategy
By Shamindra Ferdinando
The Federation of Sinhala Organisation has faulted the current dispensation over its response to post-war accountability issues.
Dr. Wasantha Bandara and Yass Dharmadasa of the National Patriotic Front and the Global Sri Lanka Forum, respectively, lambasted the government for what they called the SLPP administration’s failure to realise the growing threat posed by those propagating war crimes accusations to pressure Sri Lanka to give in to their demand for a federal structure in the Northern and Eastern provinces. That would lead to the division of the country on ethnic lines, they warned at a zoom meeting on Saturday (29) organised by the civil society group ‘Children of 1956.’
The Island
(represented by the present writer at the virtual conference) commented on how foreign powers exploited some political parties represented in Parliament to advance their strategies and the failure on the part of successive governments to set the record straight at the Geneva-based United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) as well as New York.
Dr. Bandara and Dharmadasa explained how the SLPP had contributed to the flawed Geneva strategy by entering into a dialogue with a section of the civil society here while offering to initiate a dialogue with the Tamil Diaspora. Alleging that the government was on the wrong path, they asserted that the present-day political leaders appeared to have conveniently forgotten their repeated assurances in the run-up to the 2019 presidential and 2020 parliamentary polls. The speakers questioned what they called ineffectual withdrawal from the 2015 accountability resolution.
Responding to queries from participants, Dr. Bandara emphasised that there was no point in staging protests in Geneva or any other foreign capital against the ongoing high-profile campaign against the war winning Sri Lankan military. Dr. Bandara emphasised that the current need was to pressure the government to change its strategy. Therefore, protests, if any should be in Colombo, to demand tangible measures to address the threat.”
The audience was told that the western powers had advanced their project in the absence of an appropriate response from Sri Lanka. Reference was made to Australia denying a visa to Maj. Gen. Chagie Gallage in 2016, the US refusing a visa to Field Marshal Sarath Fonseka in 2017—the war-winning Army Chief was to accompany the then President Mathripala Sirisena to UNGA—the US tagging Gen. Shavendra Silva, who is also the Chief of Defence Staff (CDS) as a war criminal in 2020 and the US blocking entry of retired Maj. Gen. Udaya Perera, who had a multiple US visa valid for a five-year period.
The audience was reminded that the Geneva crisis hadn’t received sufficient attention against the backdrop of a spate of other simmering issues, particularly the ruination of the Maha yield, the growing difficulties experienced in settling foreign debt and conflict within the ruling coalition over the Yugadanavi deal with the US and the agreement with India in respect of the Trincomalee oil tank farms.
Dharmadasa alleged that the military top brass hadn’t paid sufficient attention to the Geneva challenge. Referring to meetings the nationalistic groups had with several senior officers and in some instances with their wives as well as spouses of other military personnel, Dharmadasa alleged that they seemed to be of the view that the government was handling the issue at hand quite well. “Therefore, we’ll not seek to intervene in individual cases but explore ways and means how the government can be influenced to reassess their strategy.”
Both Dr. Bandara and Dharmadasa warned the government of dire consequences unless tangible measures were taken to counter the lies being propagated about Sri Lanka and its military personnel. Dr. Bandara explained that the Geneva project was meant to trap Sri Lanka over its people and pressure the government to grant the Tamil speaking people a federal structure in return for dropping war crimes proceedings. Once the TNA, the US and the yahapalana government had reached consensus on hybrid war crimes court, Dr. Bandara said, asserting that the West, Diaspora and India used war crimes accusations as a sledgehammer to pressure Sri Lanka to give up unitary status. He asked, “Would they create a situation where Sri Lanka faced war crimes proceedings or reached agreement on a constitutional arrangement that met the aspirations of the Tamil speaking community?”
Dr. Bandara revealed a recent opportunity they had received to make representations to President Gotabaya Rajapaksa, Defence Secretary General Kamal Gunaratne and other senior members of the government as regards the challenges faced by the country.
News
Ambassador of the UAE to Sri Lanka meets with the Prime Minister
[Prime Minister’s Media Division]
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.”
-
Editorial7 days agoBirth of a bad law
-
News5 days agoPolice remove Thileepan statue in Jaffna
-
News7 days agoTIN mandatory for key transactions from Nov. 1
-
Features5 days agoThe 22nd Amendment, constitutional recovery and illiberal slippage
-
Features5 days agoOf foreigners as CEOs of Lankan ventures
-
Latest News2 days agoGold winner Tharanga gets brand-new Honda Vezel from SLAAJ
-
News5 days agoSajith rejects Jt. Opp. protest sabotage claim; SJB TU chief demands remedial action
-
Features4 days agoThailand’s biggest new global star …
