News
Media collective faults Speaker
The Media Orgainsations Collective (MOC), comprising Sri Lanka Working Journalists’ Association, Free Media Movement, Sri Lanka Muslim Media Forum, Tamil Media Alliance, Sri Lanka Young Journalists’ Association, and South Asian Free Media Association – Sri Lanka Chapter, yesterday said Speaker Mahinda Yapa Abeywardena’s actions were “an obstruction to the right of journalists to report freely and also impinges on the right of the public to true and accurate information.”
MOC has in a statement requested the Speaker “not to contribute to the government’s efforts to suppress the media, using the powers and privileges of Parliament.”
The text of the statement issued by MOC: When Parliament met on February 08, Member of Parliament D. Weerasinghe cited an article in the Sunday Lankadeepa newspaper, dated January 28, 2024, headlined ‘Supreme Court amendments not in Online Safety Act; Opposition demands meeting of party leaders before Speaker signs it’ as having breached his privileges as a member who voted for the Bill and requested the Speaker to direct the Committee on Parliamentary Privileges to take appropriate action. In response, you stated the request would be presented to the committee as a question of privilege.
We, as leading media organisations in Sri Lanka who are signatories to this letter, wish to inform you that while being alert to the government’s contemptible efforts to use parliamentary powers and privileges to stifle media freedom, we unequivocally condemn all attempts to suppress people’s rights to know the truth by intimidating journalists.
The article published by Lankadeepa was not a news report based on false information. On the contrary, it was an attempt to inform the general public of serious and demonstrated shortcomings that were observed in the process of having the Online Safety Bill adopted. This is a view shared by a majority of the general public.
Communicating the right information to the public is a social responsibility of the media. And in that context, the news article in question was fulfilling that responsibility. The media, civil society activists, trade union activists and the Opposition have, from the outset, urged you, as Speaker of the House, not to present the Bill in Parliament due to its numerous flaws. It is also a well-known fact that you have ignored repeated calls by the Opposition for a meeting of party leaders to discuss the Bill, both before it was brought up for debate and even after it was put up for debate. Several leading organisations, including the Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka, have also issued statements to the media detailing the flaws in the Bill and its process.
We, as leading media organisations, question how reporting on demands made by the Opposition regarding the Online Safety Act or any other Act, can be deemed a breach of parliamentary privileges of MPs. Our conviction is that the media has tried to report on the fundamental rights violation of the people in the hopes of rectifying it, not questioning the parliamentary powers and privileges of its members. This is the role of the media. This is fulfilling its social responsibility.
Your decision to refer the matter related to the news report to the Committee on Parliamentary Privileges is an unwelcome surprise. However, we take this opportunity to inform you that we are keenly watching the government’s efforts to suppress the media using an obsolete law with no specific provisions for ‘trial and punishment’.
Your action is an obstruction to the right of journalists to report freely and also impinges on the right of the public to true and accurate information.
Therefore, we earnestly request you, as the Hon. Speaker not to contribute to the government’s efforts to suppress the media using the powers and privileges of Parliament.
We wish to remind you that we have strongly opposed and expressed our condemnation of instances where journalists were summoned or attempts were made to summon them before the Committee on Parliamentary Privileges in the past and that our stance hasn’t changed. We remain strongly opposed to and condemn any attempts to summon journalists before the Committee on Parliamentary Privileges for fulfilling their journalistic and social responsibility obligations.”
The statement has been signed by Duminda Sampath, President Sri Lanka Working Journalists Association, Hana Ibrahim Convener Free Media Movement, N.M. Ameen President Sri Lanka Muslim Media Forum, Sri Gajan President Tamil Media Alliance, Tharindu Jayawardane President Sri Lanka Young Journalists’ Association, and Lakshman Gunasekara President South Asian Free Media Association – Sri Lanka Chapter.
News
Lanka enters new phase of prosecutions as hurdles clear
MONETABRIEF –The prosecution of high-profile individuals from the former Rajapaksa administrations is set to escalate this month with the clearing of legal hurdles and administrative bottlenecks, according to officials involved in the process.
Former president Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s attempt to secure an order preventing his arrest in connection with the Easter Sunday massacre was turned down by the Court of Appeal on Thursday.
An overseas travel ban has been in operation against Rajapaksa since June, but the Criminal Investigations Department made no move to question him. He instead filed a writ application seeking an order preventing his possible arrest.
President of the Court of Appeal Rohantha Abeysuriya noted that the court would not interfere with the investigative process. Any attempt by the court would amount to an obstruction of the investigation.
In an unrelated case, the same court rejected an application by opposition legislator Dilith Jayaweera seeking the quashing of a contempt charge filed against him by the Fort magistrate. The charges against Jayaweera and a few other opposition politicians are expected to be taken up in the coming week.
Jayaweera and other opposition politicians — Wimal Weerawansa, Udaya Gammanpila, Sugeeshwara Bandara, and Asanka Navaratne
— were hauled up over their remarks relating to the arrest of Suresh Sallay, the former head of the State Intelligence Service.
SLPP academic Mahinda Pathirana is also charged over his public comments about Sallay’s arrest in February under the draconian Prevention of Terrorism Act.
Former president Mahinda Rajapaksa’s son, legislator Namal Rajapaksa, is already in remand custody following his arrest in connection with three cases of bribery and money laundering relating to the 2013 Airbus deal and the Krrish property development in Colombo.
Although Namal has been granted bail in the Airbus money laundering charge, he is in custody until October 13 over the bribery charge relating to the same Airbus transaction. His arrest is under a provision of the Anti-Corruption Act that does not allow a magistrate to grant bail unless under exceptional circumstances.
Meanwhile, his mother Shiranthi Rajapaksa, who had been asked to report to the Financial Crimes Investigations Division on September 24, was a no-show and was yet to return from Singapore.
She had travelled overseas on September 16, and a family spokesman said she was handed the FCID summons at the departure lounge of Bandaranaike International Airport just before she boarded a flight to Singapore.
At the time, the family spokesman said she was due to return in three days.
“We will see greater momentum in the legacy cases in the coming weeks,” an official involved in the prosecutions said.
“We have cleared the legal hurdles to press ahead with more arrests,” he said.
“We are working on a few administrative issues which will be resolved very soon.”
The controversial prosecution of former President Ranil Wickremesinghe is dragging on without him being formally indicted since his arrest in August last year. The Fort magistrate has listed the case again for November 11, when the Attorney-General is expected to report on his decision regarding action against Wickremesinghe.
News
Police warn: Court evaders face property seizure
Police have reminded the public that courts have the power to take legal action against individuals who evade arrest or remain in hiding after warrants have been issued against them.
Police said that under Section 60 of the Code of Criminal Procedure Act No. 15 of 1979, a court could issue a written proclamation requiring a person evading arrest under a warrant to appear at a specified place and time.
The proclamation must allow the person at least 30 days to appear before court, Police said.
If the person fails to appear even after the proclamation has been issued, the court may take further action under Section 61 of the Act.
This includes issuing an order for the attachment of the movable or immovable property belonging to the person concerned.Police issued the reminder highlighting the legal measures available against persons who deliberately evade arrest and remain in hiding after warrants have been issued.
News
Nearly 20 Iranian tankers stranded off Lanka amid US sanctions
Around 20 Iranian oil tankers are reportedly stranded about 15 nautical miles off Sri Lanka’s southwestern coast, with several vessels facing shortages of food, fuel and fresh water amid tightening US sanctions and maritime restrictions, The Wall Street Journal reported.
According to the report published on Thursday (1), US officials have in recent weeks urged Sri Lanka to prevent local vessels from supplying essential provisions to the tankers and their crews.
The report, citing Sri Lankan Government documents and companies involved in supplying the vessels, said the US had raised concerns over assistance being provided to the sanctioned tankers.
The situation follows the United States’ decision to reimpose a maritime blockade of the Strait of Hormuz in July, which has reportedly left dozens of Iranian and Iran-linked tankers involved in transporting sanctioned oil to China stranded near Asian countries, including Sri Lanka and Malaysia.
Most of the vessels are reportedly empty tankers that had previously transported Iranian crude to Asia, often through ship-to-ship transfers, before preparing to return to Iran for additional cargo.
The WSJ reported that the US Embassy had warned Sri Lanka in August that it was monitoring 19 Iranian tankers off the country’s western coast and had raised the possibility of secondary sanctions against companies providing services to sanctioned vessels.
Sri Lankan authorities have maintained that the vessels are located outside the country’s 12-nautical-mile territorial waters and that the Government is not providing them with logistical assistance.
Meanwhile, shipping companies told the WSJ that obtaining approval to supply essential items, including food, drinking water and fuel, as well as repair services, to the Iranian vessels had become increasingly difficult.
Separately, Reuters reported in late August that 27 sanctioned Iran-linked tankers were waiting off Sri Lanka without cargo.
The Trump administration has also imposed additional sanctions on Iran and warned countries and companies trading with Tehran of potential consequences, as Washington seeks to pressure Iran to make concessions amid the ongoing conflict.
Similar concentrations of Iranian-linked tankers have been reported off Malaysia, where waters have historically been used for ship-to-ship transfers of Iranian crude destined mainly for China.
-
News6 days agoPolice remove Thileepan statue in Jaffna
-
Features6 days agoThe 22nd Amendment, constitutional recovery and illiberal slippage
-
Features6 days agoOf foreigners as CEOs of Lankan ventures
-
Latest News4 days agoGold winner Tharanga gets brand-new Honda Vezel from SLAAJ
-
News6 days agoSajith rejects Jt. Opp. protest sabotage claim; SJB TU chief demands remedial action
-
Features4 days agoWhy Sri Lanka needs an Inclusive Civic Nationalism – urgently
-
Features5 days agoThailand’s biggest new global star …
-
News3 days agoUS-assisted ‘Ice’ detection: NPC to examine IGP’s move to transfer drug-busting team
