News
Herath: COPE dissolution must not hinder probe into economic crisis
by Shamindra Ferdinando
Former Chairman of the Committee on Public Enterprises (COPE) Prof. Charitha Herath yesterday (07) said that though the prorogation of the Parliament led to the dissolution of the watchdog committee it shouldn’t hinder a planned inquiry to identify those responsible for the current economic chaos.
Prof. Herath said that the COPE was about to initiate the probe when the prorogation of the Parliament took place. President Ranil Wickremesinghe prorogued the House at midnight on July 28, just a week after the Parliament overwhelmingly elected him to complete the remainder of President Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s five-year term, won at the Nov 2019 presidential poll.
In a brief interview with The Island, Prof. Herath said as a result of the prorogation, he no longer functioned as the COPE Chairman. All committees, except the High Post Committee, chaired by Speaker Mahinda Yapa Abeywardena, Sectoral Oversight Committees and Select Committees of Parliament, stand dissolved, lawmaker Herath said, urging the powers that be to ensure the continuation of the inquiry.
The proposed inquiry would be largely based on a report received by the Parliament from Auditor General W.P.C. Wickremeratne several weeks ago, Prof. Herath said.
Prof. Herath said that the parliamentary watchdog, he headed, had planned daily sittings over a period of two weeks to inquire into the entire gamut of issues that finally led to the declaration made by incumbent Governor of the Central Bank, Dr. Nandalal Weerasinghe, on 19 May, that the country was no longer in a position to service its foreign debt. This was a week after UNP leader Ranil Wickremesinghe accepted the premiership, Prof. Herath said, while stressing the responsibility on the part of the Parliament to conduct a no holds barred investigation into the whole affair.
According to the first-time entrant to the Parliament, the inquiry was to be launched on July 19, but couldn’t due to the political upheaval, caused by the forced resignation of President Gotabaya Rajapaksa.
Among those asked to appear before the parliamentary committee were the Governor of the Central Bank, Dr. Nandalal Weerasinghe, and his predecessors, Prof. W.D. Lakshman (Dec 2019-Sept 2021) and Ajith Nivard Cabraal (Sept 2021-March 2022), former Secretary to the President Dr. P.B. Jayasundera (Nov 2019-Dec 2021), Finance Secretary Mahinda Sirisiwardana and his predecessors, S.R. Attygalle and Dr. S.R. Samarasinghe, who now functions as an advisor to President Ranil Wickremesinghe.The COPE also planned to summon former members of the Monetary Board, Sanjiva Jayawardena, PC, and Dr. Ranee Jayamaha and others. Governor, CBSL and Secretary to the Treasury are ex-officio members of the Monetary Board.
Asked whether he would like to be re-appointed as COPE Chairman, Prof. Herath said that as his outfit inquired into the issues at hand pertaining to overall financial crisis that caused massive protest campaign, leading to President Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s ouster without fear or favour those interested in serving the watchdog again should be accommodated. Prof. Herath said that he was ready to give the required leadership to it, especially against the backdrop of President Wickremesinghe’s assurance to the Parliament, regarding a high profile anti-corruption campaign.
Herath quoted President Wickremesinghe as having told the Parliament that: “It is essential to completely eliminate bribery, corruption and fraud from our society. I will implement a national policy to combat bribery and corruption. New rules and regulations and orders in this regard are being prepared by the Ministry of Justice. A consensus will be reached with the International Monetary Fund regarding combating corruption.”
Prof. Herath emphasized that regardless of consensus on political matters, the current crisis couldn’t be addressed unless tangible measures were taken to discipline the public sector and also thwart corrupt practices involving the public and private sectors.
Prof. Herath said that those who could provide information, relating to the inquiry, would be given an opportunity to do so.When The Island pointed out he may not be even considered for re-appointment as COPE Chief due to him joining the rebel group, that backed Dullas Alahapperuma, at the presidential contest, Prof. Herath stressed that he was confident his political stand shouldn’t be a disqualification. Should it be the case, would there be any purpose in even talking about an all-party arrangement to address issues at hand.Prof. Herath said that the country couldn’t move forward without establishing who brought on this catastrophe in our country.
Declaring old political strategies would be irrelevant in the current context, Prof. Herath said that no one could challenge the process adopted in the election of President Wickremesinghe as the 8th President.
Lawmaker Herath told a recent media briefing, chaired by SLPP Chairman Prof. G.L. Peiris, at the Madiwela residence of SLPP MP Wasantha Yapa Bandara, that not only legality of a process but legitimacy, too, was of pivotal importance.
Prof. Peiris emphasized that unless political actions that had been constitutionally correct, received legitimacy, those responsible would always be at a conflict with the public. There couldn’t be a better example than the referendum ordered by the then President J.R.J, in 1982, meant to extend the life of his government by six years, Prof. Herath said.
“No one could find fault with J.R.J for exercising his powers in terms of the Constitution. Therefore, there was no issue with regard to the referendum that allowed the first Executive President to extend the life of the Parliament. The action, in spite of being controversial, is in line with the Constitution. But, J.R.J’s action never received legitimacy. It never will,” Prof. Herath said.
The catastrophic consequences of J.R.J’s actions should be examined, taking into consideration the eruption of separatist Tamil terrorism in the early 80s and the launch of the second JVP-led insurgency, in the wake of the proscription of that party on political grounds, the MP argued.
Prof. Herath urged all political parties, particularly those in power, to secure the legitimacy by taking into consideration concerns raised by various stakeholders. Responding to another query, Prof. Herath recalled how the then COPE Chairman, DEW Gunasekera, was deprived of an opportunity to hand over his report on the Treasury bond scams by the hasty dissolution of Parliament by President Sirisena, in late June 2015. “We shouldn’t repeat past mistakes. People have suffered enough. Therefore, let there be a clear stand on creating an administration responsible and acceptable to all.”
…of seven SOCs only one constituted so far
Sri Lanka’s controversial MoU on Defence Cooperation with India was unlikely to be taken up any time soon in Parliament in spite of the House Sectoral Oversight Committee (SOC) on Governance, Justice and Civil Protection that has been assigned defence, authoritative sources told The Island.
Of the seven SOCs only one was activated with the recent election of Dr. Najith Indika, MP, as the Chairman of the Sectoral Oversight Committee on Governance, Justice, and Civil Protection of the Tenth Parliament.
The inaugural meeting of the current parliament was held on 21 Nov., 2024.
Sources said that the parliament had met for the last time yesterday (10) before the Sinhala and Tamil New Year holiday. It is scheduled to meet again on May 8.
The UNDP that has financially backed the establishment of the SOC system to help strengthen the role of the parliament recently reached a consensus with the government to reduce the number of SCOCs from 17 to seven. The Island, in writing, asked for the UNDP’s reaction to the operation of SOCs but had not received a response at the time this edition went to press.
The SOCs have the power to examine any Bill, except the Bills defined in Article 152 of the Constitution, Treaty, Reports including the Annual and Performance Reports relating to the institutions coming under its purview or any other matter referred to the Committee by Parliament or any Committee or a Minister relating to the subjects and functions within their jurisdiction.
Sources said that out of the seven SOCs only one had been activated during the past five months though the government and the Opposition agreed to share the leadership of them.
Accordingly, it was agreed that the government would appoint chairpersons to four SOCs –– Economic Development and International Relations, Health, Media and Women’s Empowerment, Science, Technology and Digital Transformation and Governance, Justice and Civil Protection .
It was also agreed that the Opposition would appoint chairpersons to the SOCs on Infrastructure and Strategic Development, Education, Manpower and Human Capital, and Environment, Agriculture and Resource Sustainability to the Opposition.
India and Sri Lanka on April 5 signed six MoUs on HVDC interconnection for import/export of power, cooperation in the field of sharing successful digital solutions implemented at population scale for digital transformation, defence cooperation, multi sectoral grant assistance for Eastern province, health and medicine and pharmacopoeia cooperation. In addition to them, India, Sri Lanka and UAE signed a tripartite MoU cooperation in development of Trincomalee as an energy hub.
The Island asked Ali Sabry, PC, who served as foreign minister during Ranil Wickremesinghe’s tenure as the President (July 2022 to Sept 2024) whether the seven MoUs had been discussed during that period. We also asked him whether those MoUs should have been discussed at SOCs before finalisation.
Sabry said: “Most of the MOU to my knowledge were discussed except the one on Defence Cooperation, which I am unaware of. General procedure is the relevant line ministry prepares the initial draft and gets the input from the Foreign Ministry and goes for stakeholder consultation of all ministries and agencies involved. Then the President’s Office grants its sanction and with the approval of the AG, it goes before the cabinet of ministers. With Cabinet approval, the government could sign the MOU.”
Sabry said that he was of the opinion that once the government signed a particular MoU, it should be placed before the parliament. “MOU’s are generally not legally binding and only signify the desire to work together. If the signed MoUs were to be implemented, then they have to be followed by agreements or laws.”
He emphasised the pivotal importance of transparency in the whole process. The ex-minister said: “I think transparency is crucial in these matters. Concealment leads to speculation and assumption of the worst. The MOUs should be tabled in Parliament for public information. Discussion at the relevant SOCs would have been helpful. There are growing fears fueled by lack of information in the public domain. This is a private comment, not to be attributed to me.
Asked whether MoUs, particularly the ones on defence and energy had to be approved by the Attorney General, the former minister said that the AG has to advise the MoUs compatibility with the Constitution. “But Article 157 of the Constitution does not apply; the 2/3 majority stipulated there envisages only investment treaties.” Foreign Minister Vijitha Herath assured Parliament on April 8 that the AG had cleared all seven MoUs and none of them were inimical to the country.
By Shamindra Ferdinando
The Court of Appeal yesterday ordered the Election Commission (EC) to accept 35 additional nomination papers for the 2025 local government elections, which had been previously rejected by election officials.
The ruling was issued yesterday by a bench comprising Acting President of the Court of Appeal, Justice Mohamed Lafar Tahir, and Justice Priyantha Fernando. The court ordered the relevant Returning Officers to accept the nominations following hearings on several petitions filed by political parties and independent groups challenging the rejections.
Last week, the Court of Appeal ordered the EC to accept 37 previously rejected nomination papers.
by A.J.A. Abeynayake
The Communist Party (CP) of Sri Lanka yesterday (10) expressed grave concern over the NPP government’s unilateral decision to enter into a defence MOU with Quad-member India.
The CPSL urged All democratic and progressive forces to pressure the government to reveal the contents of the defence agreement with India. It also asked the NPP government to revive the Indian Ocean Peace Zone proposal at the UN and mobilise global opposition to militarisation in the region. All democratic and progressive forces had to build a United Front against a New Cold War, the CP has said.
General Secretary of CP Dr. G. Weerasinghe has issued the following statement: “This decision has been taken without consultation or debate in Parliament and in the context of a New Cold War and heightened militarisation of the Indian Ocean.
During Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s visit to Sri Lanka from 4-6 April, a defence MOU was exchanged between Secretary of the Ministry of Defence of Sri Lanka retired Air Vice Marshal H.S. Sampath Thuyacontha and Indian Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri.
Indian media has framed this MOU as being part of Indian strategy to counter China’s presence in the region.
President Anura Kumara Dissanayake assured Modi that Sri Lanka, “will not permit its territory to be used in any manner inimical to the security of India as well as towards regional stability”. While the CPSL has no fundamental objection to this, questions remain over India’s own commitment to regional stability.
The fact is that India is a member of the Quad and has partaken in US efforts to contain China in a New Cold War. In 2024, current US Secretary of State Marco Rubio tabled a bill in congress to grant India a status on par with NATO members. During a meeting between Modi and US President Donald Trump in February, India and the US entered into a 10-year defence partnership framework to transfer technology, expand co-production of arms, and strengthen military interoperability.
By entering into defence agreements with India, there is a very real danger of Sri Lanka being dragged into the Quad through the back door as a subordinate of India. Sri Lanka could become a de facto part of the Indo-Pacific Strategy and compromise its non-aligned status. This would be antithetical to Sri Lanka’s interests as China is a major investor and trade partner for the country and has supported our sovereignty in international fora.
Sri Lanka is currently not directly embroiled in any conflict with an external actor and therefore has no need to enter into defence agreements. The last defence agreement that Sri Lanka entered into was with the UK-Ceylon Defence Pact (1947-1957), which was a neocolonial arrangement detrimental to Sri Lanka’s sovereignty and international relations.
The defence MOU with India could also be interpreted as a step towards further militarisation of the Indian Ocean, which is a violation of the UN Declaration of the Indian Ocean as a Zone of Peace which both countries supported.”
-
Business4 days agoColombo Coffee wins coveted management awards
-
Business6 days agoDaraz Sri Lanka ushers in the New Year with 4.4 Avurudu Wasi Pro Max – Sri Lanka’s biggest online Avurudu sale
-
Features5 days agoStarlink in the Global South
-
Business6 days agoNew SL Sovereign Bonds win foreign investor confidence
-
Features2 days agoSri Lanka’s Foreign Policy amid Geopolitical Transformations: 1990-2024 – Part III
-
Features5 days agoModi’s Sri Lanka Sojourn
-
Midweek Review2 days agoInequality is killing the Middle Class
-
Features4 days agoSri Lanka’s Foreign Policy amid Geopolitical Transformations: 1990-2024 – Part I