Connect with us

Midweek Review

How govt. agenda caused erosion of public faith in some independent commissions

Published

on

By Shamindra Ferdinando

The Supreme Court (SC) on Feb. 10 dismissed a contempt of court application filed by the Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka (HRCSL), delivering a shock therapy to the latter.

The HRCSL filed the contempt case against the Chairman of the Ceylon Electricity Board (CEB) N.S. Illangakoon, the Secretary to the Ministry of Power and Energy, M. P. D. U. K. Mapa Pathirana, and Chairman of the Ceylon Petroleum Corporation (CPC), Uvais Mohamed, for failing to comply with an agreement to provide uninterrupted electricity to students sitting for the 2023 Advanced Level (A/L) examinations.

The HRCSL consists of retired Supreme Court Justice Rohini Marasinghe, Venerable Kalupahana Piyarathana Thera, Dr. M.H. Nimal Karunasiri, Dr. Vijitha Nanayakkara and Ms. Anusuya Shanmuganathan.

Moving of SC was consequent to a controversial determination made by the HRCSL. On Jan. 30, 2023, the HRCSL determined the Secretary, Ministry of Power and Energy, Chairman, CEB, and the Managing Director/Chairman, Ceylon Petroleum Corporation, failed to provide electricity, without interruption, during the Advance Level examination, from Jan. 23 to Feb. 17, 2023. The HRCSL found fault with them for not adhering to an agreement worked out by the independent commission.

The HRCSL deemed the CEB Chairman guilty of the offence of contempt, under the provisions of the Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka Act No. 21 of 1996. The CEB Chairman was accused of willfully and maliciously disregarding the agreement. The Commission called the CEB’s failure to provide an uninterrupted electricity supply, during the examination period, a gross violation of a child’s right to education.

The CEB refused to stop power cuts until the Public Utilities Commission of Sri Lanka (PUCSL) approved a new electricity tariff formula. The CEB announced an end to power cuts immediately after the PUCSL finalized a new electricity formula on Feb. 16.

Of the five-member PUCSL, three, namely Attorney Chaturika Wijesinghe, Douglas Nanayakkara and SG Senaratne, gave the go ahead for a 66 percent tariff increase. They defeated a proposal that had the backing of the PUCSL Chairman, Janaka Ratnayake, for a 36 percent increase. D.N. Kushan Jayasuriya is the other member of the PUCSL.

Having waged a high profile campaign, against the proposed second electricity price hike, Janaka Ratnayake finally suffered a major setback. Ratnayake has lost control of the PUCSL. President Ranil Wickremesinghe personally intervened in the matter and, after careful planning, brought in new members, in place of Mohan Samaranayake and Udeni Wickremesinghe, who served as the Deputy Chairman of the PUCSL at the time trouble erupted at the independent commission.

President Wickremesinghe effected the required changes in the PUCSL to facilitate cooperation between the PUCSL and the Power and Energy Ministry. Wickremesinghe has intervened in the PUCSL in a way no previous President interfered, as he sought to suppress dissent therein. The PUCSL, established by the Public Utilities Commission of Sri Lanka Act No. 35 of 2002, is the economic, technical and safety regulator of the electricity industry, as well as the designated regulator for petroleum and water supply industries. The PUCSL also functions as the shadow regulator for lubricants sold here.

The PUCSL undertakes regulatory responsibilities in terms of the Sri Lanka Electricity Act No. 20 of 2009.

A major contentious issue is the continuing failure, on the part of successive governments, to secure parliamentary approval for the relevant Acts to regulate the water services and petroleum industries.

The HRCSL should examine the quarrelsome issue, involving the CEB, Power and Energy Ministry, and the CPC, over power cuts imposed during Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s administration. The HRCSL cannot take its failure to convince the CPC and the CEB, and the Power and Energy Ministry, to provide uninterrupted power supply during the Advance Level examination, lightly.

Power and Energy Minister Kanchana Wijesekera has been strongly critical of both the PUCSL and the HRCSL. Wijesekera questioned the HRCSL’s intervention after the independent commission announced an unprecedented agreement with the CEB, the CPC and the Power and Energy Ministry.

The recent turmoil undermined both the PUCSL and the HRCSL. Those who are genuinely concerned about the effective operation of the PUCSL and the HRCSL should be seriously concerned about the recent developments.

The Parliament should also examine the inordinate delay in expanding the PUCSL to play the role as water and petroleum sector regulator, as originally envisaged. It would be pertinent to mention that Janaka Ratnayake received appointment as Chairman, PUCSL, for the support he rendered during Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s 2019 presidential election campaign. Ratnayake received the appointment on Feb. 08, 2021. over a year after the last presidential election.

The turmoil in the PUCSL and the HRCSL undermined both commissions and erode public confidence in them.

EC caught up in political agenda

The Wickremesinghe-Rajapaksa government has dealt a deadly blow to the Elections Commission (EC) after its Chairman, Nimal Punchihewa, stood his ground in the face of relentless pressure, exerted by President Ranil Wickremesinghe, to put off the Local Government polls, scheduled for March 09. Wickremesinghe went all out to derail the electoral process, in the wake of the EC’s refusal to bow down to pressure. The government appeared to have been quite surprised by the truly independent stand taken by the EC. Even after EC member, P.S.M. Charles, quit the body, amidst threats received by some of them, Punchihewa, and Director General of the EC, Saman Sri Ratnayake, sustained the effort. However, finally the exasperated Wickremesinghe, having exhausted behind the scene tactics, intervened, publicly, and issued instructions meant to put off the Local Government polls, indefinitely.

After Charles quit, Nimal G. Punchihewa (Chairman), S.B. Divaratne, M.M. Mohamed, and K.P.P. Pathirana, remained members of the EC.

Considering the sorry state of the economy, may be this is not the time to hold polls for local councils, which are often corruption-ridden, with as many as 8000 elected members, who are a severe burden, we can do without, especially at this juncture. The Wickremesinghe-Rajapaksa government, however, is pursuing an agenda that erodes independent commissions. Surely the Parliament of this country did not install a new President, whom they thought was a mellowed politician, to complete the term of his predecessor, to suffer his hollow imperial airs. We know what happened to the country because his late uncle, President JRJ, tinkered with the democracy, at every turn, and fixed every election, held under his tenure, including the infamous referendum, and, finally, the whole country literally went up in flames. Let us only hope that history is not repeating itself.

We are not saying this because we have any greater trust in comrades waiting eagerly to taste power, despite having behaved worse than cannibals in the past, that includes their involvement in the May 09, and, thereafter, unconscionable acts of violence. Recently, MP Mahindananda Aluthgamage, at a press conference, gave a detailed list of the obvious charges they have to answe. So we will refrain from adding to them. But imagine what would have happened to this country had they, and their erstwhile comrades, the FSP, successfully stormed the Parliament, as planned last year, after having tasted success at overrunning other vital state bodies, in the guise of peaceful protests. Remember how a mob lynched just one MP, and his police bodyguard, on May 09, in public, or how they systematically destroyed properties of so many government politicians in that one night alone, across the country.

We are grateful to President Ranil Wickremesinghe for standing up to the mob mentality of the JVP/FSP and gathering up the shaken security establishment behind him to resurrect what was left of the government. It is also quite possible all that was a mere show for our consumption with the ‘Great Satan’ working behind the scene, not so mysteriously, to help him, as happened in places like Libya, or Ukraine, after creating similar situations.

As for the Rajapaksas, they threw away, almost overnight, so much they achieved for this country, because of just one sibling, Basil, and Mahinda succumbing to petticoat government to elevate his progeny, especially the eldest, to positions of power, well ahead of his time, without allowing him to season through the system.

For all we care, an inner clique, among the comrade leadership, unknown to their rank and file, and, along with leading Eelamists, could be working for a US agenda, to ultimately plunge, not only this country, but especially India, into chaos.

The government launched the project to undermine the EC, late last year, with Prime Minister Dinesh Gunawardena, who is also the Minister in charge of Public Administration, Home Affairs, Provincial Councils, and Local Government. Summoning the EC twice to the PM’s Office, where it was advised to postpone the scheduled election. Subsequently, President Ranil Wickremesinghe, too, summoned the EC twice. On both occasions, Premier Gunawardena was also present. But, they couldn’t convince the EC to put off the election, that is legitimately due.

Regardless of pressure being exerted on members, the EC insisted that election can be held, though the government experienced difficulty in releasing the required funds.

The police owed an explanation, regarding the status of the investigation into alleged threats, directed at some members of the EC, and a despicable bid made by IGP C.D. Wickremeratne to create another issue, by submitting highly exaggerated expenditure, pertaining to the March 09 poll. Some ministers, too, made a desperate bid to discourage the EC, and the electorate, by repeatedly warning of the government’s inability to meet the poll expenditure.

Wajira Abeywardena, MP, the lone UNP National List MP in Parliament, conducted a campaign of his own to justify the postponement of the poll, whereas UNP Chairman Palitha Range Bandara too played his part.

At the behest of the government, Public Administration, Home Affairs, Provincial Councils and Local Government Ministry Secretary, Neil Bandara Hapuhinna, made an abortive bid to derail the electoral process by directing Divisional Secretaries not to accept deposits from candidates. An angry reaction from the EC compelled Hapuhinna to withdraw instructions, issued on January 09. Hapuhinna found himself in an extremely embarrassing situation after Premier Gunawardena contradicted his claim that January 09 instructions were based on a decision taken by the Cabinet-of-Ministers. Now the matter is before the Supreme Court.

Samagi Jana Balavegaya (SJB) candidate for the post of Mayor of Colombo, Mujibur Rahuman, has moved the Supreme Court against Hapuhinna.

Having failed to manipulate the EC, President Wickremesinghe finally directed the Secretary to the Treasury, Mahinda Siriwardana, and Government Printer, Gangani Liyanage, to stop the electoral process. JVP leader Anura Kumara Dissanayake is on record as having said that the Government Printer was ordered to stop printing until the EC made the payments. There had never been such a deliberate bid to sabotage an election, under any circumstances, since the UNP put off the General Election, scheduled for August 1983.

The then President JRJ held a referendum, on Dec. 22, 1982, to ask the electorate whether it accepted extending the life of Parliament by six more years. Thereby the next General Election was held in 1989.

In terms of Article 104 B (2) and 104 GG (1) of the Constitution it makes it clear that all state authorities are duty bound to cooperate with the Elections Commission and that refusing, or failing to do so, is a criminal offence, punishable with imprisonment. In terms of Article 33 (c) of the Constitution, the President, too, is empowered to ensure the creation of proper conditions for the conduct of free and fair elections, at the request of the Election Commission.

Prez’s strategy

President Wikremesinghe’s UNP is not in a position to contest the Local Government polls. Wickremesinghe’s strategy is geared to avoid election this year. With the UNP now reduced to just one National List MP in Parliament, even though for a long time in the past it was one of the two major parties, is simply unable to conduct a LG polls campaign in its current decimated state. In spite of securing the Presidency, the UNP remains vulnerable, and extremely weak, politically. The UNP has conveniently turned a blind eye to previously taken Supreme Court decisions, relevant to the current situation.

During the Yahapalana administration, on Dec. 15, 2017. the Supreme Court in SCFR 35/2016 clearly explained the pivotal importance of conducting timely elections for local authorities and the importance of the franchise. The SC stated: “Franchise is a fundamental right enjoyed by people. According to Article 3 of the Constitution ‘In the Republic of Sri Lanka sovereignty is in the people and is inalienable. Sovereignty includes the powers of the government, fundamental rights, and the franchise”. Franchise is a fundamental right recognized under Article 10 and 14(1) of the Constitution. The failure to hold elections on the due date or postponing is a violation of fundamental rights of the people. Under Article 4(d) of the Constitution the fundamental rights which are by Constitution declared and recognized shall be respected, secured and advanced by all organs of the Government and shall not be abridged, restricted or denied save in the manner and to the extent hereinafter provided. In the present case the legislature as well as the executive had violated this Article.

If the government gets away with this, the next presidential and parliamentary elections, too, can be postponed on the same claim that economic recovery can be undermined by releasing of funds for the conduct of other elections. The government has conveniently forgotten that the Wickremesinghe-Rajapaksa government has allocated as much as Rs 10 bn for the EC, in 2023.

The possibility of the incumbent government seeking to put off future elections is a serious threat to the fragile democracy. Depending on the success of the current agenda, such actions can set a dangerous precedent for a detested executive or legislature to block the allocation of resources for an election and prevent the people of Sri Lanka from choosing their representatives and leaders.

JVP leader Anura Kumara Dissanayake told this writer that former Speaker Karu Jayasuriya, who recently received the coveted ‘Sri Lankabhimanya’ title, should explain his stand on the government bid to postpone the election. Incumbent head of the National Movement for Social Justice (NMSJ) Jayasuriya owed an explanation as he couldn’t remain silent as President Wickremesinghe has definitely undermined the independent commissions. The JVPer pointed out that the 20th Amendment, enacted in Oct. 2020, largely negated the 19th Amendment, introduced in 2015. The 21st Amendment was brought in Oct. 2022 to restore the provisions of the 19th Amendment and now President Wickremesinghe resorted to a strategy that weakened the very basis of independent commissions.

Having repeatedly assured that he wanted to restore parliamentary superiority and strengthen the independent commissions, the UNP leader not only went back on his word but pursued a deliberate strategy meant to undermine the very system he vowed to protect, lawmaker Dissanayake said.

The JVPer pointed out several decisions by Wickremesinghe, in recent weeks, supposedly aimed at managing public funds, have had the effect of preventing the Elections Commission from conducting the elections. These include a demand by the Government Printer for the release of funds, prior to the printing of ballot papers, and the Secretary to the Treasury claiming that there were no funds available for the elections. This is despite a budget allocation of Rupees 10 Billion for the purpose of elections, the MP said.

The JVPer alleged that the conduct of the Secretary to the Treasury, the Government Printer, and other government officials, and institutions, over the last few weeks clearly demonstrated a concerted effort to bring the elections to a halt, thus undermining the franchise of the people and endangering the sovereignty of the people of Sri Lanka. Such attempts to prevent elections mandated by law represent an unprecedented attack on democracy and the rule of law and pose a grave threat to the electoral process in the future, the JVP leader said.



Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

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

Midweek Review

Batalanda and complexities of paramilitary operations

Published

on

Former President Ranil Wickremesinghe’s recent combative ‘Head-to-Head’ interview with British-American Mehdi Hasan on Al Jazeera has opened a can of worms. As to why Hasan raised the Batalanda Presidential Commission report, during a 49-minute interview conducted at the London’s Conway Hall, with a clearly pro LTTE audience, remains a mystery. This must be yet another notorious way to show how even-handed they are as in the case of its coverage of Russia, China, Palestine or Ukraine for their gullible viewers.

Recorded in February and aired in March 2025, the interview is definitely the most controversial the UNP leader, who is also an Attorney-at-Law, ever faced during his political career; always used to getting kid glove treatment, especially after taking over the party in 1994.

The continuing public discourse on Batalanda should provoke a wider discussion on Sri Lanka’s response to separatist Tamil terrorism, since the cold blooded murder of Jaffna SLFP Mayor Alfred Duriappah, which signalled the beginning of the LTTE terror campaign that ended in May 2009 with the crushing military defeat of the Tigers on the banks of the Nathikadal lagoon, as well as two southern insurgencies in 1971 and 1987-1990.

As Nandana Gunatilleke (one time JVP General Secretary and ex-MP), Dr. Wasantha Bandara (ex-JVPer and close associate of the slain JVP leader Rohana Wijeweera), Indrananda de Silva (ex-JVPer, incumbent Central Committee member of Frontline Socialist Party [FSP] and ex-military photographer) and Uvindu Wijeweera (Rohana Wijeweera’s son and leader of Dewana Parapura) agreed during the recent Hiru ‘Balaya’ discussion, conducted by Madushan de Silva, the Batalanda operation was in line with the overall counter-terrorist/insurgency strategy of the then government.

The issues at hand cannot be discussed at all without taking into consideration the JVP terrorism that, at one-time, almost overwhelmed the UNP’s unbroken rule, since 1977, carried out while openly brushing aside most of the universally accepted genuine parliamentary norms. The country’s second Republican constitution, promulgated by the UNP regime with a 5/6 majority in Parliament, in 1978, had been amended no less than 13 times by the time they were finally ousted in 1995. This was mainly to facilitate their continuous rule. Unfortunately, all stakeholders have sought to take advantage of Batalanda, thereby preventing a proper dialogue. Quite surprisingly, none of the guests, nor the interviewer, bothered, at least, to make a reference to the JVP bid on President J.R. Jayewardene’s life in Parliament on the morning of July 18, 1987. At the time, JVPer Ajith Kumara, working in the House as a minor employee, hurled two hand grenades towards JRJ, with the then Prime Minister Ranasinghe Premadasa seated next to JRJ. While one government MP lost his life, several others suffered injuries, including then National Security Minister Lalith Athulathmudali, whose spleen had to be removed.

At one point, Gunatilleke declared that they assassinated UNP MP for Tangalle Jinadasa Weerasinghe on July 3, 1987, in response to the government killing well over 100 people, in Colombo, protesting against the signing of the Indo-Lanka accord on July 29, 1987. The parliamentarian was killed near the Barawakumbuka-Welangahawela bridge on the Colombo-Rathnapura-Embilipitiya Road. The UNPer was killed on his way home after having declined Premier Premadasa’s offer to make an SLAF chopper available for him to reach home safely.

Against the backdrop of MP Weerasinghe’s assassination and the grenade attack on the UNP parliamentary group that claimed the life of Keethi Abeywickrema (MP for Deniyaya), the government had no option but to respond likewise. The operation, established at the Batalanda Housing scheme of the State Fertiliser Corporation, constituted part of the counter-insurgency strategy pursued by the UNP.

Those who called Batalanda complex Batalanda torture camp/ wadakagaraya conveniently forgot during the second JVP inspired insurgency, the military had to utilize many public buildings, including schools, as makeshift accommodation for troops. Of course the UNP established Batalanda under different circumstances with the then Industries Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe providing political authority. Batalanda had been an exclusive police operation though the Army had access to it whenever a requirement arose.

Those who had been suddenly withdrawn from the Northern and Eastern Provinces, to meet the rapidly evolving security threat in the South, required accommodation. FSP CC member Indrananada de Silva had received unhindered access to Batalanda in his capacity as a military photographer and the rest is history.

As to why Indrananda de Silva switched his allegiance to the FSP should be examined, taking into consideration his previous role as a trusted military photographer, formerly a Lance Corporal of the Military Police. An influential section of the JVP, led by Kumar Gunaratnam, formed the FSP in April 2012 though it didn’t receive the much anticipated public support. Both Indrananda de Silva and Nandana Gunatilleke, who aligned himself with the UNP, found fault with the JVP-led National People’s Power (NPP) over its handling of the Batalanada issue.

Paramilitary operations

Paramilitary operations had been an integral part of the overall counter-insurgency campaign, directed at the JVP responsible for approximately 6,600 killings. Among those death squads were PRRA primarily drawn from the SLMP (Sri Lanka Mahajana Party) and SRRA (the socialist Revolutionary Red Army). PRRA had close links with the Independent Student Union (ISU) whose leader Daya Pathirana was slain by the JVP. The vast majority of people do not remember that Daya Pathirana, who led the ISU during the turbulent 1985-1986 period, was killed mid-Dec. 1989. The second insurgency hadn’t started at that time though the JVP propagated the lie that they took up arms against the UNP government following the signing of the Indo-Lanka peace accord on July 29, 1987.

In addition to PRRA and SRRA, the government made use of paramilitary groups, namely Kalu balallu, Ukkusso, Rajaliyo, Kaha balallu, Kola koti, Rathu Makaru, Mapila, Gonussa, Nee, Keshara Sinhayo, Le-mappillu and Kalu koti.

The UNP also involved some elements of Indian trained Tamil groups (not of the LTTE) in paramilitary operations. Such operations, that had been backed by respective Cabinet Ministers, were supervised by local law enforcement authorities. Paramilitary operations had been in line with psychological warfare that was meant to cause fear among the JVP, as well as the general population. Military operations that had been combined with paramilitary actions received the blessings of the political leadership at the highest level. In the case of Batalanda (1988-1990) President J.R. Jayewardene and Ranasinghe Premadasa knew of its existence.

Even after the eradication of the top JVP leadership, by Nov. 1989, police, military and paramilitary operations continued unabated. Former JVPers appearing on ‘Balaya’ agreed that counter-insurgency operations were actually brought to an end only after D.B. Wijetunga succeeded President Ranasinghe Premadasa after the latter’s assassination on May Day 1993.

After the LTTE resumed war in June 1990, just a couple of months after the withdrawal of the Indian Army (July 1987-March1990), the UNP authorized paramilitary operations in the northern and eastern areas. Members of TELO, PLOTE, EPRLF as well as EPDP were made part of the overall government security strategy. They operated in large groups. Some paramilitary units were deployed in the Jaffna islands as well. And these groups were represented in Parliament. They enjoyed privileged status not only in the northern and eastern regions but Colombo as well. The government allowed them to carry weapons in the city and its suburbs.

These groups operated armed units in Colombo. The writer had the opportunity to visit EPDP and PLOTE safe houses in Colombo and its suburbs soon after they reached an understanding with President Ranasinghe Premadasa. Overnight at the behest of President Premadasa, the Election Department granted these Tamil groups political recognition. In other words, armed groups were made political parties. The Premadasa government accepted their right to carry weapons while being represented in Parliament.

It would be pertinent to mention that thousands of Tamil paramilitary personnel served the government during that period. There had been many confrontations between them and the LTTE over the years and the latter sought to eliminate key paramilitary personnel. Let me remind you of the circumstances, the EPRLF’s number 02 Thambirajah Subathiran alias Robert was sniped to death in June 2003. Robert was engaged in routine morning exercises on the top floor of the two-storeyed EPRLF office, on the hospital road, Jaffna, when an LTTE sniper took him out from the nearby Vembadi Girls’ high school. The operation of the Norway managed Ceasefire Agreement (CFA) made no difference as the LTTE removed Robert who led the party here in the absence of leader Varatharaja Perumal, the first and the only Chief Minister of the North-Eastern Province.

In terms of the CFA that had been signed by Premier Ranil Wickremesinghe and LTTE leader Velupillai Prabhakaran, in Feb. 2002, the government agreed to disarm all paramilitary personnel. Many wouldn’t remember now that during Premadasa’s honeymoon with the LTTE, the Army facilitated the LTTE onslaught on paramilitary groups in selected areas.

Muthaliff’s role

During the ‘Balaya’ discussion, the contentious issue of who shot JVP leader Rohana Wijeweera came up. Nandana Gunatilleke, who contested the 1999 Dec. presidential election. as the JVP candidate, pointing to an article carried in the party organ that dealt with Wijeweera’s assassination said that he wrongly named Gaffoor as one of the persons who shot their leader whereas the actual shooter was Muthaliff. The headline named Thoradeniya and Gaffoor as the perpetrators.

Declaring that he personally wrote that article on the basis of information provided by Indrananda de Silva, Gunatilleke named Asoka Thoradeniya and Tuan Nizam Muthaliff of the Army as the perpetrators of the crime. Thoradeniya served as Sri Lanka’s High Commissioner in the Maldives during the Yahapalana administration, while Muthaliff was killed by the LTTE in Colombo in late May 2005. The shooting took place at Polhengoda junction, Narahenpita. Muthaliff was on his way from Manning town, Narahenpita, to the Kotelawala Defence University.

The programme was told that the JVP had over the years developed close relationship with Thoradeniya while Indrananda de Silva accused Dr. Wasantha Bandara of duplicity regarding Muthaliff. How could you recognize Muthaliff, slain by the LTTE, as a war hero as he was actually one of the persons who shot Rohana Wijeweera, the latter asked.

At the time of his assassination, Muthaliff served as the Commanding Officer, 1 st Regiment Sri Lanka Military Intelligence Corps. The then parliamentarian Wimal Weerawansa was among those who paid last respects to Maj. Muthaliff.

At the time of Rohana Wijeweera’s arrest, Muthaliff served as Lieutenant while Thoradeniya was a Major. Indrananda de Silva strongly stressed that atrocities perpetrated by the police and military in the South or in the northern and eastern regions must be dealt with regardless of whom they were conducting operations against. The former JVPer recalled the Army massacre in the east in retaliation for the landmine blast that claimed the lives of Northern Commander Maj. Gen. Denzil Kobbekaduwa and a group of senior officers, including Brigadier Wijaya Wimalaratne, in early Aug. 1990 in Kayts.

Dr. Wasantha Bandara warned of the Western powers taking advantage of what he called false narrative to push for a Truth and Reconciliation Commission.

It would be pertinent to mention that the LTTE also used the underworld as well as some corrupt Army personnel in planning high profile assassinations. Investigations into the assassination of Muthaliff, as well as Maj. Gen. Parami Kulatunga, killed in a suicide attack at Pannipitiya, in June 2006, revealed the direct involvement of military personnel with the LTTE.

Indrananda de Silva disclosed that soon after Anura Kumara Dissanayake won the presidential election last September, the FSP, in writing, requested the JVP leader to inquire into killings during that period, including that of Rohana Wijeweera. The FSPer alleged that President Dissanayake refrained from even acknowledging their letter. Indrananda de Silva emphasized that Al Jazeera never disclosed anything new as regards Batalanda as he exposed the truth years ago. The former JVPer ridiculed the ruling party tabling the Batalanda Commission report in the wake of Wickremesinghe’s Al Jazeera interview whereas the matter was in the public domain for quite some time.

Indrananda de Silva and Nandana Gunatilleke exchanged words over the latter’s declaration that the JVP, too, was subjected to investigation for violence unleashed during the 1987-1990 period. While the FSPer repeatedly declared that those who carried out directives issued by the party were arrested and in some cases killed, Nandana Gunatilleke took up the position that the party should be held accountable for crimes perpetrated during that period.

The interviewer posed Nandana Gunatilleke the question whether he was betraying his former comrades after joining the UNP. Nandana Gunatilleke shot back that he joined the UNP in 2015 whereas the JVP joined UNP as far back as 2009 to promote retired Army Chef Sarath Fonseka’s presidential ambition even though he wiped out the JVP presence in Trincomalee region during the second insurgency.

JVP’s accountability

Nandana Gunatilleke is adamant that the party should accept responsibility for the killings carried out at that time. The former JVPer declared that Vijaya Kumaratunga (Feb. 16, 1988), first Vice Chancellor of the Colombo University (March 08, 1989) Dr. Stanley Wijesundera, Ven. Kotikawatte Saddhatissa thera (Aug. 03, 1988) and Chairperson of the State Pharmaceutical Corporation Gladys Jayewardene (Sept. 12, 1989) were among those assassinated by the JVP. SPC Chairperson was killed for importing medicine from India, the former Marxist aligned with the UNP said, while actor-turned-politician Kumaratunga’s assassination was attributed to his dealings with President J.R. Jayewardene.

According to Nandana Gunatilleke, except for a few killings such as General Secretaries of the UNP Harsha Abeywickrema (Dec 23, 1987) and Nandalal Fernando (May 20, 1988), the vast majority of others were ordinary people like grama sevakas killed on mere accusation of being informants. The deaths were ordered on the basis of hearsay, Nandana Gunatilleke said, much to the embarrassment of others who represented the interest of the JVP at that time.

One quite extraordinary moment during the ‘Balaya’ programme was when Nandana Gunatilleke revealed their (JVP’s) direct contact with the Indian High Commission at a time the JVP publicly took an extremely anti-Indian stance. In fact, the JVP propagated a strong anti-Indian line during the insurgency. Turning towards Dr. Wasantha Bandara, Gunatilleke disclosed that both of them had been part of the dialogue with the Indian High Commission.

It reminds me of the late Somawansa Amarasinghe’s first public address delivered at a JVP rally in late Nov. 2001 after returning home from 12 years of self-imposed exile. Of the top JVP leadership, Somawansa Amarasinghe, who had been married to a close relative of powerful UNP Minister Sirisena Cooray, was the only one to survive combined police/military/paramilitary operations.

Amarasinghe didn’t mince his words when he declared at a Kalutara rally that his life was saved by Indian Premier V.P. Singh. Soft spoken Amarasinghe profusely thanked India for saving his life. Unfortunately, those who discuss issues at hand conveniently forget crucial information in the public domain. Such lapses can be both deliberate and due to negligence.

By Shamindra Ferdinando

Continue Reading

Midweek Review

Independent Monitor

Published

on

You may think sloth comes very easy,

To your kingly monitor of the shrinking marsh,

As he lies basking smugly in the morn sun,

But he is organized and alert all the while,

As he awaits his prey with patience infinite,

Free of malice, a professional of a kind,

His cumbrous body not slowing his sprite….

But note, he’s no conspirator spitting guile,

And doesn’t turn nasty unless crossed,

Nor by vengeful plans is he constantly dogged,

Unlike those animals of a more rational kind,

Whose ways have left behind a state so sorry.

By Lynn Ockersz

Continue Reading

Midweek Review

Rajiva on Batalanda controversy, govt.’s failure in Geneva and other matters

Published

on

Wickremesinghe responds to Hasan during the controversial interview recorded in London

Former President Ranil Wickremesinghe’s recent interview with Mehdi Hasan on Al Jazeera’s ‘Head-to-Head’ series has caused controversy, both in and outside Parliament, over the role played by Wickremesinghe in the counter-insurgency campaign in the late’80s.

The National People’s Power (NPP) seeking to exploit the developing story to its advantage has ended up with egg on its face as the ruling party couldn’t disassociate from the violent past of the JVP. The debate on the damning Presidential Commission report on Batalanda, on April 10, will remind the country of the atrocities perpetrated not only by the UNP, but as well as by the JVP.

The Island sought the views of former outspoken parliamentarian and one-time head of the Government Secretariat for Coordinating the Peace Process (SCOPP) Prof. Rajiva Wijesinha on a range of issues, with the focus on Batalanda and the failure on the part of the war-winning country to counter unsubstantiated war crimes accusations.

Q:

The former President and UNP leader Ranil Wickremesinghe’s interview with Al Jazeera exposed the pathetic failure on the part of Sri Lanka to address war crimes accusations and accountability issues. In the face of aggressive interviewer Mehdi Hasan on ‘Head-to-Head,’ Wickremesinghe struggled pathetically to counter unsubstantiated accusations. Six-time Premier Wickremesinghe who also served as President (July 2022-Sept. 2024) seemed incapable of defending the war-winning armed forces. However, the situation wouldn’t have deteriorated to such an extent if President Mahinda Rajapaksa, who gave resolute political leadership during that war, ensured a proper defence of our armed forces in its aftermath as well-choreographed LTTE supporters were well in place, with Western backing, to distort and tarnish that victory completely. As wartime Secretary General of the Government’s Secretariat for Coordinating the Peace Process (since June 2007 till the successful conclusion of the war) and Secretary to the Ministry of Disaster Management and Human Rights (since Jun 2008) what do you think of Wickremesinghe’s performance?

A:

It made him look very foolish, but this is not surprising since he has no proper answers for most of the questions put to him. Least surprising was his performance with regard to the forces, since for years he was part of the assault forces on the successful Army, and expecting him to defend them is like asking a fox to stand guard on chickens.

Q:

In spite of trying to overwhelm Wickremesinghe before a definitely pro-LTTE audience at London’s Conway Hall, Hasan further exposed the hatchet job he was doing by never referring to the fact that the UNP leader, in his capacity as the Yahapalana Premier, co-sponsored the treacherous Geneva Resolution in Oc., 2015, against one’s own victorious armed forces. Hasan, Wickremesinghe and three panelists, namely Frances Harrison, former BBC-Sri Lanka correspondent, Director of International Truth and Justice Project and author of ‘Still Counting the Dead: Survivors of Sri Lanka’s Hidden War,’ Dr. Madura Rasaratnam, Executive Director of PEARL (People for Equality and Relief in Lanka) and former UK and EU MP and Wickremesinghe’s presidential envoy, Niranjan Joseph de Silva Deva Aditya, never even once referred to India’s accountability during the programme recorded in late February but released in March. As a UPFA MP (2010-2015) in addition to have served as Peace Secretariat Chief and Secretary to the Disaster Management and Human Rights Ministry, could we discuss the issues at hand leaving India out?

A:

I would not call the interview a hatchet job since Hasan was basically concerned about Wickremesinghe’s woeful record with regard to human rights. In raising his despicable conduct under Jayewardene, Hasan clearly saw continuity, and Wickremesinghe laid himself open to this in that he nailed his colours to the Rajapaksa mast in order to become President, thus making it impossible for him to revert to his previous stance. Sadly, given how incompetent both Wickremesinghe and Rajapaksa were about defending the forces, one cannot expect foreigners to distinguish between them.

Q:

You are one of the many UPFA MPs who backed Maithripala Sirisena’s candidature at the 2015 presidential election. The Sirisena-Wickremesinghe duo perpetrated the despicable act of backing the Geneva Resolution against our armed forces and they should be held responsible for that. Having thrown your weight behind the campaign to defeat Mahinda Rajapaksa’s bid to secure a third term, did you feel betrayed by the Geneva Resolution? And if so, what should have the Yahapalana administration done?

A:

By 2014, given the total failure of the Rajapaksas to deal firmly with critiques of our forces, resolutions against us had started and were getting stronger every year. Mahinda Rajapaksa laid us open by sacking Dayan Jayatilleke who had built up a large majority to support our victory against the Tigers, and appointed someone who intrigued with the Americans. He failed to fulfil his commitments with regard to reforms and reconciliation, and allowed for wholesale plundering, so that I have no regrets about working against him at the 2015 election. But I did not expect Wickremesinghe and his cohorts to plunder, too, and ignore the Sirisena manifesto, which is why I parted company with the Yahapalanaya administration, within a couple of months.

I had expected a Sirisena administration to pursue some of the policies associated with the SLFP, but he was a fool and his mentor Chandrika was concerned only with revenge on the Rajapaksas. You cannot talk about betrayal when there was no faith in the first place. But I also blame the Rajapaksas for messing up the August election by attacking Sirisena and driving him further into Ranil’s arms, so that he was a pawn in his hands.

Q:

Have you advised President Mahinda Rajapaksa’s government how to counter unsubstantiated war crimes allegations propagated by various interested parties, particularly the UN, on the basis of the Panel of Experts (PoE) report released in March 2011? Did the government accept your suggestions/recommendations?

A:

Prof. Rajiva Wijesinha

I kept trying, but Mahinda was not interested at all, and had no idea about how to conduct international relations. Sadly, his Foreign Minister was hanging around behind Namal, and proved incapable of independent thought, in his anxiety to gain further promotion. And given that I was about the only person the international community, that was not prejudiced, took seriously – I refer to the ICRC and the Japanese with whom I continued to work, and, indeed, the Americans, until the Ambassador was bullied by her doctrinaire political affairs officer into active undermining of the Rajapaksas – there was much jealousy, so I was shut out from any influence.

But even the admirable effort, headed by Godfrey Gunatilleke, was not properly used. Mahinda Rajapaksa seemed to me more concerned with providing joy rides for people rather than serious counter measures, and representation in Geneva turned into a joke, with him even undermining Tamara Kunanayagam, who, when he supported her, scored a significant victory against the Americans, in September 2011. The Ambassador, who had been intriguing with her predecessor, then told her they would get us in March, and with a little help from their friends here, they succeeded.

Q:

As the writer pointed out in his comment on Wickremesinghe’s controversial Al Jazeera interview, the former Commander-in-Chief failed to mention critically important matters that could have countered Hasan’ s line of questioning meant to humiliate Sri Lanka?

A:

How could you have expected that, since his primary concern has always been himself, not the country, let alone the armed forces?

Q:

Do you agree that Western powers and an influential section of the international media cannot stomach Sri Lanka’s triumph over separatist Tamil terrorism?

A:

There was opposition to our victory from the start, but this was strengthened by the failure to move on reconciliation, creating the impression that the victory against the Tigers was seen by the government as a victory against Tamils. The failure of the Foreign Ministry to work with journalists was lamentable, and the few exceptions – for instance the admirable Vadivel Krishnamoorthy in Chennai or Sashikala Premawardhane in Canberra – received no support at all from the Ministry establishment.

Q:

A couple of months after the 2019 presidential election, Gotabaya Rajapaksa declared his intention to withdraw from the Geneva process. On behalf of Sri Lanka that announcement was made in Geneva by the then Foreign Minister Dinesh Gunawardena, who became the Premier during Wickremesinghe’s tenure as the President. That declaration was meant to hoodwink the Sinhala community and didn’t alter the Geneva process and even today the project is continuing. As a person who had been closely involved in the overall government response to terrorism and related matters, how do you view the measures taken during Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s short presidency to counter Geneva?

A:

What measures? I am reminded of the idiocy of the responses to the Darusman report by Basil and Gotabaya Rajapaksa, who went on ego trips and produced unreadable volumes trying to get credit for themselves as to issues of little interest to the world. They were planned in response to Darusman, but when I told Gotabaya that his effort was just a narrative of action, he said that responding to Darusman was not his intention. When I said that was necessary, he told me he had asked Chief-of-Staff Roshan Goonetilleke to do that, but Roshan said he had not been asked and had not been given any resources.

My own two short booklets which took the Darusman allegations to pieces were completely ignored by the Foreign Ministry.

Q:

Against the backdrop of the Geneva betrayal in 2015 that involved the late Minister Mangala Samaraweera, how do you view President Wickremesinghe’s response to the Geneva threat?

A: Wickremesinghe did not see Geneva as a threat at all. Who exactly is to blame for the hardening of the resolution, after our Ambassador’s efforts to moderate it, will require a straightforward narrative from the Ambassador, Ravinatha Ariyasinha, who felt badly let down by his superiors. Geneva should not be seen as a threat, since as we have seen follow through is minimal, but we should rather see it as an opportunity to put our own house in order.

Q:

President Anura Kumara Dissanayake recently questioned both the loyalty and professionalism of our armed forces credited with defeating Northern and Southern terrorism. There hadn’t been a previous occasion, a President or a Premier, under any circumstances, questioned the armed forces’ loyalty or professionalism. We cannot also forget the fact that President Dissanayake is the leader of the once proscribed JVP responsible for death and destruction during 1971 and 1987-1990 terror campaigns. Let us know of your opinion on President Dissanayake’s contentious comments on the armed forces?

A: I do not see them as contentious, I think what is seen as generalizations was critiques of elements in the forces. There have been problems, as we saw from the very different approach of Sarath Fonseka and Daya Ratnayake, with regard to civilian casualties, the latter having planned a campaign in the East which led to hardly any civilian deaths. But having monitored every day, while I headed the Peace Secretariat, all allegations, and obtained explanations of what happened from the forces, I could have proved that they were more disciplined than other forces in similar circumstances.

The violence of the JVP and the LTTE and other such groups was met with violence, but the forces observed some rules which I believe the police, much more ruthlessly politicized by Jayewardene, failed to do. The difference in behaviour between the squads led for instance by Gamini Hettiarachchi and Ronnie Goonesinghe makes this clear.

Q:

Mehdi Hasan also strenuously questioned Wickremesinghe on his role in the UNP’s counter-terror campaign during the 1987-1990 period. The British-American journalists of Indian origins attacked Wickremesinghe over the Batalanda Commission report that had dealt with extra-judicial operations carried out by police, acting on the political leadership given by Wickremesinghe. What is your position?

A:

Wickremesinghe’s use of thugs’ right through his political career is well known. I still recall my disappointment, having thought better of him, when a senior member of the UNP, who disapproved thoroughly of what Jayewardene had done to his party, told me that Wickremesinghe was not honest because he used thugs. In ‘My Fair Lady,’ the heroine talks about someone to whom gin was mother’s milk, and for Wickremesinghe violence is mother’s milk, as can be seen by the horrors he associated with.

The latest revelations about Deshabandu Tennakoon, whom he appointed IGP despite his record, makes clear his approval for extra-judicial operations.

Q:

Finally, will you explain how to counter war crimes accusations as well as allegations with regard to the counter-terror campaign in the’80s?

A:

I do not think it is possible to counter allegations about the counter-terror campaign of the eighties, since many of those allegations, starting with the Welikada Prison massacre, which Wickremesinghe’s father admitted to me the government had engendered, are quite accurate. And I should stress that the worst excesses, such as the torture and murder of Wijeyedasa Liyanaarachchi, happened under Jayewardene, since there is a tendency amongst the elite to blame Premadasa. He, to give him his due, was genuine about a ceasefire, which the JVP ignored, foolishly in my view though they may have had doubts about Ranjan Wijeratne’s bona fides.

With regard to war crimes accusations, I have shown how, in my ‘Hard Talk’ interview, which you failed to mention in describing Wickeremesinghe’s failure to respond coherently to Hasan. The speeches Dayan Jayatilleke and I made in Geneva make clear what needed and still needs to be done, but clear sighted arguments based on a moral perspective that is more focused than the meanderings, and the frequent hypocrisy, of critics will not now be easy for the country to furnish.

 

By Shamindra Ferdinando

Continue Reading

Trending