Midweek Review
Parliament goes ahead with traditional tea party,regardless of corona threat !

Nov 17, 2020: MPs were invited for tea, halfway during the presentation of the budget.(pic courtesy Parliament)
By Shamindra Ferdinando
Parliament on Monday (16) afternoon announced that following the budget speech on Nov 17th, the traditional tea party, hosted by the Minister of Finance, would be held this year, too, though being limited to Members of Parliament, Ministers, Ambassadors, High Commissioners and invitees.
The statement issued by the Department of Communication, Parliament, didn’t explain how the House intended to hold a tea party, in terms of health guidelines in place, due to the rampaging coronavirus. The statement refrained from explaining how those who had been invited were to maintain the required distance, among guests, as well as follow the strict laws, pertaining to wearing facemasks.
Parliament also announced that only Ambassadors/High Commissioners, and officials, authorised by the Ministry of Finance, were invited, and seats reserved in the Speaker’s Gallery, during the budget presentation, subject to health and safety regulations. The Public Gallery and the Media Gallery ,will remain closed, Shan Wijetunga, Director, Department of Communication, stated in a media communique.
The decision to go ahead with the party is surprising, in the wake of the growing threat posed by the highly contagious coronavirus. Recently, Parliament closed doors to scribes, after several journalists, who covered its proceedings during the fourth week of October, tested corona positive. During the same week, Parliament overturned its own decision to deprive All Ceylon Muslim Congress (SLMC) leader Rishad Bathiudeen of an opportunity to attend the proceedings. The original decision was taken on the basis that lawmaker shouldn’t be allowed to participate in the proceedings, as all those in custody were subjected to quarantine laws.
With the national economy in tatters, as a result of debilitating losses caused by the country being deprived of major revenue sources, due to the worldwide pandemic, lawmakers shouldn’t have been in the mood to join the party. The unprecedented Corona attack disrupted major revenue sources, namely tourism, garment trade and foreign remittances, while also hitting relatively smaller business enterprises. The losses suffered by the national economy and the projected losses are likely to be much bigger than the losses experienced during the conflict.
Having watched former JVP lawmaker and Chairman of the COPE (Committee on Public Enterprises) Sunil Handunnetti, on Sirasa ‘Pathikada,’ on Monday morning, the announcement of the tea party, later in the day, seemed ridiculous. Responding to host Asoka Dias, Handunnetti lucidly explained the rapidly deteriorating financial situation, due to years of waste, corruption and irregularities, further worsened by the corona crisis. The JVPer painted an extremely bleak picture. Handunnetti pointed out how the incumbent government found itself in a deep financial crisis, with growing foreign and local debt threatening to overwhelm the country.
The JVP presence in Parliament has now been reduced to just three members, including one National List nominee (Prof. Harini Amarasuriya). In the previous Parliament, the JVP group comprised six with two National List members (Sunil Handunnetti and Bimal Ratnayake). Handunetti’s presentation was quite disturbing and underscored the urgent need for reforms to stop the rot.
The JVPer warned there were no short term solutions for the rapidly deteriorating situation. “The government cannot overcome depleted foreign reserves by printing money. Perhaps, printing money may seem a short-term answer, though the economic woes cannot be overcome by such measures,” he said
Parliament, as an institution, must review its duties and responsibilities. The country wouldn’t have been in the current financial mess if Parliament had fulfilled its obligations, in the past, under successive regimes. The bottom line is that the House has failed in its primary responsibilities with regard to ensuring financial transparency/stability and enactment of new laws.
Two key watchdog committees
constituted
Parliament will have to take tangible measures to drastically curb waste, corruption and irregularities, or face the consequences. Corona has dealt a massive blow to the national economy, already ruined by an utterly corrupt political party system. Parliament turned a blind eye to those hell-bent on cashing in, even at the expense of economic stability. There cannot be a better example than the Treasury bond scams, perpetrated in Feb 2015 and March 2016. The then President Maithripala Sirisena, having catapulted into power by an array of forces, led by the UNP, and, obviously, directed by foreign hands, used executive powers to save his benefactor, the UNP. Sirisena dissolved Parliament on the night of June 26, 2015 to deprive the then COPE Chairman, the intrepid Dew Gunasekera, an opportunity to present the report on the first bond scam to Parliament.
The then UNP-led government prevented police investigation into theTreasury bond scams. The President, in spite of growing differences with Premier Ranil Wickremesinghe, delayed the appointment of the Presidential Commission to probe it, till January 2017. Parliament received the report in late Dec 2017. Whatever the disputes between the government and the Opposition, the system ensures at least a debate on the report, but that, too, was sabotaged from within and was never held. Over a year after the last presidential election, and the incumbent government’s first budget, Parliament is yet to discuss the bond report. Can there be a system as corrupt as ours in any part of the world! Financial discipline seems the last thing in the minds of our people’s representatives as the situation now seems to be spiralling out of control.
Ironically, the Western champions of democracy, including certain warped UN bodies, who are ever ready to hound this country on apparent trumped-up war crimes charges, are quite conspicuous by their total silence over the sins of their darling, the UNP, when it comes to highway robberies it staged here, like the bond scams, its numerous incompetency, including the handling of the country’s security.
The COPE, the PAC (Public Accounts Committee), as well as the Finance Commission, under the leadership of newcomer National List MP Dr. Charitha Herath, Prof. Tissa Vitharana (86-year-old LSSP General Secretary) and Anura Priyadarshana Yapa, respectively, bear a very heavy responsibility for ensuring financial stability. The economy is in dire straits. The country is facing such overwhelming challenges, in the wake of the corona-devastated economy, the two watchdog committees and the Finance Commission will have to stand firm or accept responsibility for economic ruination.
The Samagi Jana Balavegaya (SJB) lawmaker Dr. Harsha de Silva offered to accept the daunting challenge of heading both watchdog committees. The government simply ignored the former UNP Deputy Minister’s offer, though he served as UNP leader Ranil Wickremesinghe’s deputy in the yahapalana administration.
The SLPP has now taken the responsibility for maintaining financial discipline among its ministers. Would it be beyond the strength and capacity of COPE and PAC to ensure transparency in financial matters? The Finance Commission primarily deals with the allocation of funds among the Provincial Councils, established in terms of the 13th Amendment to the Constitution, forced on Sri Lanka by New Delhi.
Dr. Herath faces an extraordinary challenge in leading COPE. Whatever political parties said, both COPE and PAC pathetically failed to improve financial discipline, though some of their revelations shocked the public. In spite of periodic revelations, those in power pursued their corrupt strategies, regardless of the consequences. None of those exposed by COPE had ever faced disciplinary inquiries, at party level, whereas those found guilty of corrupt transactions by courts were subsequently rewarded.
As part of the overall efforts to face the economic fallout, resulting from the unprecedented pandemic in our living memory, the government will have to take tangible measures to curb waste, corruption and irregularities. The economy is in such a bad shape, that lawmakers and the top administration cannot afford to continue corrupt practices, or receive further benefits for themselves, like for example brand new luxury vehicles, while the rest of us curse and suffer in silence.
A peacetime UN missive
Prime Minister Mahinda Rajapaksa’s Office last Thursday (12) received a missive from Ms. Hanaa Singer, the UN Resident Coordinator here. Singer intervened, on behalf of those demanding that burial of Muslim corona victims should be resumed or face the consequences. Ms Singer concluded her letter by offering UN assistance in this regard, if Sri Lanka required such support. The UN official cunningly copied the letter to Health Minister Pavitra Wanniarachchi, Foreign Minister Dinesh Gunawardena and Justice Minister Ali Sabry, PC. Naturally it became a cause celebre in newspapers and electronic media.
Why on earth does the GoSL need UN assistance to speak to the Muslim community? Let me reproduce Ms Singar’s missive to the Premier: “Allow me to reiterate the solidarity of the United Nations with the people of Sri Lanka in these challenging times marked by the COVID-19 emergency.
“Please be assured that the United Nations and its specialized agencies, funds and programmes, will continue providing support on the management of the epidemic.
“Across the world, the safe and dignified handling of those patients whose life has been tragically claimed by this virus has been an important part of the COVID-19 response.
“I am following with encouragement recent media reports that the current prohibition of burials of COVID-19 victims in Sri Lanka could be revisited shortly. In this context, I wish to take the opportunity to reiterate the concerns of the United Nations with the existing Ministry of Health guidelines, which stipulate cremation as the only method for the disposal of bodies suspected of COVID-19 infection.
“The World Health Organization, in its 24 March 2020 and subsequent updated interim guidance on 4 September 2020 on the ‘Infection prevention and control for the safe management of a dead body in the context of COVID-19’, notes that based on current knowledge of the symptoms of COVID-19 and its main modes of transmission (droplet/contact), the likelihood of transmission when handling human remains is low. The common assumption that people who died of a communicable disease should be cremated to prevent spread is not supported by evidence. Instead, cremation is a matter of cultural choice and available resources. According to World Health Organization guidance, people who have died from COVID-19 can therefore be buried or cremated according to local standards and family preferences, with appropriate protocols for handling the body.
“In the same context, I deem it important to inform you that I have received impassioned appeals from within and outside the Muslim community that perceive the current policy on burials as discriminatory.
“Against this background, I fear that not allowing burials is having a negative effect on social cohesion and, more importantly, could also adversely impact the measures for containing the spread of the virus as it may discourage people to access medical care when they have symptoms or history of contact.
I recognize that during epidemics, for reasons of public health, Governments often need to take difficult and at times unpopular measures. However, in this case, the negative consequences of not allowing burials seem to outweigh any potential epidemiological benefit. Considering the evidence-based guidance of the World Health Organization, as well as the commitments of the Government of Sri Lanka to respect and uphold the rights of all communities, I therefore express my hope that the existing policy be revised so as to allow the safe and dignified burial of COVID-19 victims.
“The United Nations avails itself of this opportunity to renew its highest consideration to the Government of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka and stands ready to provide any relevant support on this matter.”
UNP in a bind
Four months after the last general election, the UNP and the Ape Jana Bala Pakshaya (AJBP) are yet to name their National List candidates. The UNP and the AJBP won a NL slot each at the August general election. The UNP had 106 lawmakers elected and appointed through its NL in the previous parliament, whereas AJBP has never had any representation in Local Government, Provincial Councils or Parliament before securing one NL seat last August.
In the 225-member Parliament, two vacancies remained when Premier Mahinda Rajapaksa, in his capacity as the Finance Minister, presented the 2021 budget.
The AJBP suffered irreparable damage due to a simmering dispute between former lawmaker Ven Atureliye Rathana and Bodu Bala Sena General Secretary Ven Galagodaatte Gnanasara over the NL slot.
Ven Rathana sought the NL slot after making an abortive bid to get elected from Gampaha, whereas their Kuurnegala District nomination list containing Ven Gnanasara and others was rejected by the Returning Officer on technical grounds.
The court dismissed the AJBP’s appeal against the rejection of its lists in several districts, including Kurunegala. The contentious issue of who fills the NL slot is now before the court of law.
In terms of the Parliamentary Election Act and the Constitution, a political party, if so desired, can refrain from naming its NL members. When the writer raised this issue with the then Chairman of the Election Commission (EC) Mahinda Deshapriya explained that the concerned political parties could retain the vacancies. “EC has no power over NL appointments,” Deshapriya said, recalling how the USA (United Socialist Alliance) delayed filling its vacancy in Parliament, following the 1989 general election. The vacancy was filled in 1991 when Raja Collure took oaths as a Member of Parliament. The USA consisted of the Communist Party of Sri Lanka, the Lanka Sama Samaja Party, the Nava Sama Samaja Party and the Sri Lanka Mahajana Pakshaya. The USA, in addition to one NL slot, won two seats.
Today, the vast majority does not remember how the UNP, by way of an infamous referendum, conducted in 1982, put off the general election, scheduled for 1983, to 1989. In other words, after the 1977 general election, that gave JRJ a 5/6 majority, there hadn’t been a general election, till Feb 15, 1989. At the violence-marred ‘89 poll, the UNP secured 125 seats, whereas the SLFP managed 67.
In terms of the system now in place, the appointment of NL members is the prerogative of the General Secretary of a particular party. UNP General Secretary Akila Viraj Kariyawasam will not move until party leader Wickremesinghe directs him. Contrary to expectations, Wickremesinghe refrained from making his decision before the vote on the 20th Amendment to the Constitution on August 22. The UNP is likely to keep its NL slot vacant during the budget debate, too.
There had never been a previous budget debate without the participation of the UNP. The failure to reach consensus on the NL slot has further weakened the party, with the SJB consolidating its position. With corona on the rampage, the SLPP, too, is likely to suffer, both in short and long term, in the absence of a cohesive strategy to meet the daunting economic challenges.
The SLPP winning a 2/3 approval for the 20th Amendment seems to be irrelevant as the epidemic continued to cause debilitating damage to the national economy. The government’s failure to properly ascertain/investigate the eruption of the second corona outbreak raised concerns among the public. The Attorney General seems to be on a collision course with the police, with the latter apparently adopting delaying tactics, an accusation, however, denied by the police. In the meantime, the origins of the second eruption remains a mystery, over six weeks after the detection of the first case in the second wave. The police cannot ignore the fact that the AG, issuing instructions as regards an inquiry, specifically referred to negligence on the part of the Brandix as well as government officials. Contrary to specific instructions received by the police, the police are yet to furnish a progress report on the corona eruption, as requested by the AG.
In the wake of the August defeat, the UNP appeared to have lost its prominent place in national politics. The UNP is unlikely to participate in the budget debate and, therefore, its NL slot is likely to remain vacant this year.
In spite of having an unbeatable near 2/3 majority, the SLPP, too, seems to be in some trouble, against the backdrop of the split over the 20th Amendment. Although the ruling coalition overcame differences and finally voted on Oct 22 for the 20th Amendment without division, political woes remain.
Minister Wimal Weerawansa complained to Premier Mahinda Rajapaksa, before the vote on 20 A, of an alleged attempt made by SLPP NL member Jayantha Ketagoda to convince some NFF members to vote for the new law even if their party decided not to. Political turmoil is set to continue as finances deteriorate.
Midweek Review
Batalanda and complexities of paramilitary operations

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
Midweek Review
Independent Monitor

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

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
-
Sports2 days ago
Sri Lanka’s eternal search for the elusive all-rounder
-
Features6 days ago
Celebrating 25 Years of Excellence: The Silver Jubilee of SLIIT – PART I
-
Business6 days ago
CEB calls for proposals to develop two 50MW wind farm facilities in Mullikulam
-
Business4 days ago
AIA Higher Education Scholarships Programme celebrating 30-year journey
-
News3 days ago
Gnanasara Thera urged to reveal masterminds behind Easter Sunday terror attacks
-
Features6 days ago
Notes from AKD’s Textbook
-
News2 days ago
ComBank crowned Global Finance Best SME Bank in Sri Lanka for 3rd successive year
-
Features2 days ago
Sanctions by The Unpunished