News
“Move to hand over Sevanagala Sugar Co. to Daya G alleged”: PMD responds
Dhanushka Ramanayake, Director General (Media) of the President’s Media Division (PMD) has sent us the following clarification:
“The attention of President’s Media Division has beenbrought to the news item on pages 01 and 02 of The Island newspaper dated 30.10.2023, titled “Move to hand over Sevanagala Sugar Co. to Daya G alleged.”
Mr. Daya Gamage, a Sri Lankan entrepreneur and an active member of the United National Party under the leadership of President Ranil Wickremesinghe, is closely associated with politics. This connection highlights that any insinuation of a “conflict among allies” in the news, whether intentional or inadvertent, is misleading and based on incorrect information.
In the spirit of our mutual commitment to delivering accurate information to the public, we wish to present the correct details regarding the news piece in The Island newspaper from 30.10.2023, titled ‘Move to hand over Sevanagala Sugar Co. to Daya G alleged.’
No decision or proposal has been made to transfer Sevanagala Sugar Company to Daya Group.
As per the report in The Island newspaper, the Sevanagala Sugar Factory was brought under government ownership through the Revival of Underperforming Enterprises or Underutilized Assets Act No. 43 of 2011. This act also facilitated the government’s acquisition of several financially struggling institutions, including the Pelwatta Sugar Factory, Hilton Hotel and Grand Hyatt Hotel.
At the time of this acquisition, the investment in the Sevanagala Sugar Factory was attributed to the Daya Group Company, which is owned by Mr. Daya Gamage, a notable Sri Lankan entrepreneur. In cases where financial losses were incurred by investors due to the government takeover of these struggling businesses a designated assessment committee was appointed. The provisions of the same act were invoked to determine and provide compensation where warranted.
Consequently, compensation was disbursed to the companies taken over by the government. However, in the case of the Sevanagala Sugar Company, no compensation was forthcoming due to specific technical issues.
In response to this situation, Mr. Daya Gamage, as the investor in the Sevanagala Sugar Company, initiated three legal proceedings to seek compensation or the return of the property. He expressed his willingness to regain ownership and resume business operations without requiring compensation as an alternative resolution.
The government’s decision in this matter was to provide compensation rather than returning the property. In response, employees at the Sevanagala Sugar Company filed two fundamental rights cases in the Supreme Court, both of which are currently awaiting resolution.
To calculate the compensation owed to the investor for the handover of the Sevanagala Sugar Company to the government a Compensation Commission was re-established. This commission’s task is to assess the losses suffered by the investor encompassing property not only the immovable property of the Sevanagala Sugar Company but also considering the business losses incurred due to the acquisition of specific motor vehicles, machinery and equipment meant for its further development.
The Compensation Commission is chaired by the Chief Valuator of the Government and includes two retired Chief Appraisers from the Government Valuation Department as members. They are responsible for conducting the compensation calculations. To maintain transparency throughout this process, the investor has been granted approval by the cabinet to appoint a monitor.
As it stands, the government’s decision is to compensate the investor for property acquisition losses and business losses determined by the Compensation Commission. No proposal or decision has been made regarding the reversion of the property, and such a proposal has not been approved by the Cabinet.
In an effort to ensure transparency in government property disposal, a new Public Enterprises Reform Unit has been established, with criteria approved by the Cabinet. If the property is to be re-disposed, it will be done through a transparent tender process following these established guidelines.
It’s important to note that the government has not chosen to return the property to the previous investor through any other procedure and an additional related case is still pending in court.
In the spirit of providing a fair platform for all information, I kindly request that you give the same level of publicity to this accurate account as you did to the initial news in the newspaper.
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
