Connect with us

Features

Rolling out holistic solution to perennial problem of laws’ delays

Published

on

Speech delivered by

M.U.M. Ali Sabry, PC 

Minister of Justice

at the 47th Annual Convocation of the Bar Association of Sri Lanka on the 27t March 2021 at the BMICH.

Your Lordship the Chief Justice, Hon. Attorney General, Your Lordships the judges of the superior courts, the President of the Bar Association and outgoing President, Committee members and my learned friends.

It is a pleasure to be here today, amongst the familiar faces I am used to seeing across the bar table for many years.

Firstly, I would like to extend my warmest congratulations to Mr. Saliya Peiris, President’s Counsel who won the election as well as the newly appointed members of the Exco. The bar has chosen you as its leader, and I wish you the strength and the determination in performing this important task. You carry on your shoulders the responsibility of guiding this noble profession in the years to come, and I have no doubt that you will continue to maintain the traditions of the bar whilst ensuring that the bar remains apolitical and stands up for the rule of law without fear or favour.

The last year has been a tough one, to say the least, and it is commendable that the BASL throughout this period was actively involved in finding solutions to ongoing problems, and was supportive of its members, the judicial administrative staff and litigants. You have done a great job, and I hope to see the good work continue.

The legal profession is one which has no equal. I say this because, there rests on the profession and with it the Bar Association a heavy responsibility to the citizens of this country, and to the country itself. It has a vital role in protecting the rule of law, maintaining the independence of the judiciary and protecting the sovereignty of the country. This responsibility is not a passive one, it is a positive one where there is a need for the legal profession to be at the forefront of positive social change.

To put this in context, as Judge Sanji Monageng, the First Vice-President of the International Criminal Court, in a speech delivered at the The Hague, on 20 November 2012 stated that:

“…the rule of law and the proper administration of justice, of which an independent judiciary and legal profession are prerequisites, play a central role in the promotion and protection of human rights.”

This role has been universally recognized even by the United Nations as enunciated in Principle 16 of the United Nations Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers.

Lawyers therefore form a core part of the judicial arm of the state. It would be easy to assume by its very wording that the judicial arm consists of judges and courts, but that assumption would be far from the truth. After all, what would be the use of the biggest courthouses or the best judges if the parties can’t be heard? Lawyers are by their very nature officers of court and on many levels the gatekeepers to justice.

The journal article titled “ABA Canons of Professional Ethics” published by the American Bar Association, addressed this very important point. It stated that:

“the stability of Courts and of all departments of government rests upon the approval of the people, it is peculiarly essential that the system for establishing and dispensing Justice be developed to a high point of efficiency and so maintained that the public shall have absolute confidence in the integrity and impartiality of its administration. The future of the Republic, to a great extent, depends upon our maintenance of Justice pure and unsullied.

Thus, the role of a lawyer is not merely one of representing or advising clients for payment. It comes with a high level of responsibility, an overriding need for ethical behaviour, a sense of justice and a national duty. There is an overarching need for the public to have confidence and trust that justice is dispensed from the justice system. In this context, the legal profession has a duty of instilling and maintaining this public confidence and trust in the system.

Looking at the rich history of the legal profession in Sri Lanka, we can be proud of its independence, its contribution to legal jurisprudence and the persons who have come from it over the decades. We have produced world-class lawyers, jurists and judges and have contributed at a disproportionately high level to international law considering the size of our profession.

It would be easy to rest on these laurels and reminisce, and also to be content with the legal profession and the justice administration system as it currently stands, but I believe we need to have a serious reality check. I wasn’t certain that today would be the most suitable place to bring this up, but this is the first opportunity I am getting to talk to my colleagues, the representatives of the judiciary and the official and unofficial bar at the same forum. Therefore, I did not want to miss this opportunity to discuss what, in my opinion, should be front and centre of our journey over the next few years.

As I have mentioned before,

-the average time to enforce a contract in Sri Lanka is 1318 days

-We have been ranked 161 out of 189 countries for the enforcement of contracts

-Our legal system is ranked 5th out of 8 in South Asia.

-Land, Partition and Testamentary cases on average take a generation to be settled.

-A criminal trial takes on average 9 ½ years to conclude in the High Court.

-A criminal matter on average will take a year to be fixed for appeal and 3-4 years for the said appeal to be completed.

We are all very aware that the underlying issues in delay, amongst other matters, is the sheer number of cases before court, and the massive backlog which in turn has resulted in litigation stagnating.

At the end of 2019, there were a total of 766,784 cases pending in our courts, and we had approximately 350 judges to hear these cases. Let us ask ourselves the obvious question – how on earth is an individual judge supposed to manage such a caseload? Even if they were to work 16 hours a day, 7 days a week there would be no logical way to get through this backlog within any reasonable period of time. The outdated laws and the lack of appetite for innovative steps and technological advancement has only served to make matters worse.

This overburdening of judges is reflected in our score on the ‘judges per 1 million population’ index. Countries such as Russia have 242 judges per 1 million population, Germany has 230 and Thailand has 68. India which has been relentlessly criticized for its low number of judges has 20 per million. And our number? 15. Just 15 judges per million population. A reflection of how much of a monumental and humanly impossible task we are expecting our current judiciary to achieve.

These indicators are not just an academic exercise – they reflect the ground reality of the current state of the administration of justice in our country. On a domestic level, the results are quite obvious – how many times have we advised clients at consultations that they need to be ready for a ‘long-haul’ case, and in response to the question ‘how long?’ we have replied ‘years.’ We have been within this system for as long as we can remember, the fact that a case takes years, or the fact that the dates between two trial dates is months does not seem the least bit abnormal to us. We have become desensitized to the plight of our litigants and we do not feel the sting unless it’s one of our own personal cases.

 

This level of delay and inefficiency are not only inconvenient and unfair to the citizens, they have far reaching implications for the future of this Country. Investors are apprehensive about trusting their money in a place with high risk of loss in case of a dispute. Market research of the region prior to any investment would result in investors flocking to the countries high on these indexes, thus we are losing in the long term and we are losing big. Our neighbours understood this early on and started their own competitive drive to rank higher on these indexes and bring the issue of delay and inefficiency of the justice system under control. Take Pakistan for example – in 2018, they were ranked 147 in the ease of doing business index. By 2019, they managed to get to 136. However, from 2019 to 2020 they jumped a staggering 28 places and were ranked 108. This is a clear display of how commitment, focus and drive towards fixing the legal system can result in unthinkable results within a short period of time.

India too has been taking some dynamic strides in its modernization drive. It adopted e-filing earlier on during the pandemic and has commenced a push for digitization of its judicial administration system. In terms of corporate or connected litigation, the Ministry of Corporate Affairs has digitized its entire process and database to the extent that certified copies of Company documents can be obtained through an online process which is admissible evidence in Court.

The United Kingdom is establishing Online Courts which initially was due to the pandemic but will most certainly continue to develop and grow. They also started night sessions for Court hearings to clear the backlog.

In the last few years, Chinese courts have seen rapid developments in online dispute resolution platforms, specialized Internet courts, and the wide use of Artificial Intelligence across the case management and adjudication process in civil and criminal proceedings. They have also adopted other new technologies such as distributed ledgers, blockchain and smart contracts solutions which have been developed and rolled out in specialized courts.

Over the course of 2019, the Estonian Ministry of Justice developed and piloted an artificial intelligence software to hear and decide on small claims disputes less than €7,000.

This is the rapid level at which the other countries have progressed whilst we are still at a stage where cases in the District Court get postponed on multiple occasions, sometimes over a year because summons had not been served on the Post Office so that an employee can give evidence on one postal article receipt to establish that the letter of demand had been sent. Is that not, for lack of a better word, absurd?

Ever since I have taken over the office of the Minister of Justice one common issue is that most of who I meet, across the social and economic spectrum has a complaint about a case which has been pending for years. The Ministry is inundated almost every day with letters by litigants from all over the country complaining about laws’ delays.

We have been comfortable with the status quo for decades, and it’s time we realized that the status quo is just not working. Not only is it not giving any positive results, its actually dragging us backwards by destroying the public trust and confidence that is a pre-requisite for the judicial administration system of the country to function.

We must find a way out of this. It is time that we in Sri Lanka take a page out the books of these countries. It is encouraging that over the last few months we have taken steps towards achieving this. The E-hearing rules issued by the Supreme Court, the provisions made for E-filing as well as the adoption of giving bail online by the Magistrate’s Court are important steps in the right direction. This, however, is not going to be enough. It is vital that we look at a complete structural change from end to end and roll it out in a targeted and efficient way. We have to stop looking at the legal profession as one which exists solely for the sustenance of its members, but as one which plays a much more important role as a public centric body which is driving the justice system forward – one which is ready to innovate, to evolve and to take the right decisions at the right time to create a paradigm shift in the administration of justice. This shift should not be merely one which is a marginal improvement of numbers and statistics – it should be a shift which is felt at the ground level. One where litigants feel that litigation will bring them justice, and it will bring it to them faster than before.

Hence, it is a priority of the government to roll out a holistic solution to this perennial problem of laws’ delays and to resolve this issue.

One which would be a game-changer is to put in motion a practical strategy to take a massive leap in the efficiency of hearing cases. Sri Lanka has close to 800,000 pending cases at the moment and there is no strategy for them in terms of time to conclude. We have to bring in a practical timeline for a disposal of a case and work backwards and put the pieces of the puzzle together to achieve that goal. The future of litigation is in smaller smart courts which can parallelly hear a multitude of cases in a single location, whilst also allocating specific time slots for cases to avoid unnecessary delay to the litigant and lawyer.

In pursuance of this, we are determined to double the number of judges within the next 5 years. As you are aware, the House of Justice project was launched a few weeks ago, and we hope to have the first tower constructed within a short period of time. Pre-trial procedure is to be streamlined and revamped so that it would serve a key factor in cutting down litigation time. The establishment of a ‘Small Claims Court’ is being planned and Debt Conciliation and mediation are being considered as mainstream solutions working in tandem with the courts. One of the vital reforms that are coming in is Digitization and Court automation which is currently at the procurement stage.

There has also been key progress made over the last few months. The increase of Supreme Court and Court of Appeal judges was the first such increase in over 40 years. Justice sector reform has been allocated a record 20 billion from the budget which reflects the largest ever commitment by a government towards the reform of the justice sector. Just earlier this week I was informed by the Government Analyst’s Department that the backlog of outstanding reports numbering approximately 8000 had been cleared in the four months even in the midst of the pandemic due to a multi-pronged approach which we have introduced since then. The measures taken include increasing the cadre, working on two shifts, digitizing the expertise from other institutions and dedicated supervision by a sector specialist.

What this shows is that with commitment, a steel will and the ability to get out of your comfort zone unthinkable results can be achieved within very short periods of time. We should no longer think of fixing this system as a long drawn out, arduous process for our successors to deal with – we have to think of it as something we are capable of doing here and now.

It’s time we looked at moving away from our all too familiar 9.30 or 10.00 am start in Court where everyone sits around waiting for the case to be taken up. This is just not sustainable anymore, and it seriously cuts into the lawyers’ and litigants’ productivity. We should not be afraid to innovate and think out-of-the-box in terms of how we can solve the issues that are being faced – its time we look at case management and allocation of time slots for hearings. Its time we that we hear cases online and embrace technology to shorten delays in matters such as serving of summons and the proving of documents. We must think about reforming our legal system as a whole to be more technological – from sharing calendars to determine the dates of a hearing to the maintenance of records, we need to reduce the dependency on manual processes. Its time we adopted procedures and techniques such as skeleton arguments to cut down the time taken for a hearing. These are all steps that other countries have taken, for which they have been rewarded with judicial administration systems that have pushed their countries forward. My question to you is, If Singapore, Malaysia, Korea and so many others can reinvent themselves, why can’t we?

These reforms will be far reaching, and if they are seen through will permanently change the landscape of the profession and this country. We need to make this happen, and for that we need to work together towards this common goal. The process may not be a walk in the park, and it would certainly have some initial creases that to be ironed out, but if we can commit to what is needed to be done, I am certain we can pull this off. I am aware that the best of ideas and progress can fall to abeyance if you have to swim against the tide, which is why I hope that the bar and its members will cooperate with us to achieve this.

The road to make these changes may test our will, may require us to get out of our comfort zone, to go that extra mile and to commit to breaking the status quo.

Let us be remembered as the generation of lawyers and judges that took this country to the next level and the ones that put our justice system on the map. We have the opportunity to make the paradigm shift, and we must go for it with our heart and soul.

Let’s get this done.



Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

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

Features

‘Popular will’ and the democratic process in the US and outside

Published

on

Kamala Harris and Donald Trump

The just concluded presidential election in the US could very well have been the tightest ever such contest in the world’s ‘mightiest democracy’ in recent decades. With some reservations it could be said that the democratic system of government triumphed once again in the US and that the ‘popular will’ asserted itself.

It would have been preferable if the President of the US was elected only by the ‘popular vote’ or the majority of votes she or he directly polls countrywide but unfortunately this is not the case. The Electoral College (EC) system gets in the way of this happening effectively and it is gladdening to note that this issue is being addressed by the more reflective sections in the US. It is time for this question to receive the complete attention of the US’ voting public.

Hopefully, the ‘pluses’ and ‘minuses’ of the EC system would be fully examined by the US public in the days ahead. Right now, critics of the system could not be faulted for seeing it as distorting somewhat the ‘popular will’ or the overall preference of the US voting public in its choice of President.

The close contests between the contenders in what are termed the ‘Swing States’ helped highlight some notable limitations in the EC system. It ought to be plain to see that the requirement that the ‘winner takes all’ of the EC votes in these states needs urgent questioning and rectification.

However, the US and the world’s thriving democracies could take heart from the fact that there has been a legitimate transition of power in the US in the most democratic of ways possible at present for the US. Considering this it could be said that the US is continuing as a frontline, vibrant democratic state.

Not to be forgotten too is the fact that the elections to the US House of Representatives and the Senate have also been simultaneously completed on the basis of laid down legal procedures. That is, elections to all tiers of government have been concluded, testifying to the fact that the ‘democratic health’ of the US is unquestionable.

‘Democracies’ come in numerous forms and it is open to question whether a rigorous definition of the term could be given. Even some of the most authoritarian, autocratic and theocratic states prefer to call themselves ‘democracies’. At first glance, these considerations could lead to some bafflement but it could be stated that, generally, it is only those governing systems that lead to the total empowerment of people that could be considered democratic.

Defenders of and apologists for authoritarian and dictatorial regimes could shoot back on hearing the above observations that since their regimes satisfy the material needs of their populations, their states fully qualify for democratic status.

But the defenders of democracy, correctly understood, may beg to defer. The total empowerment of individuals and publics is realized only when the latter enjoy fundamental rights and freedoms, as enshrined in the UN Declaration of Human Rights, for example.

Accordingly, a regime that does not permit its people total Freedom of Speech and Thought, for instance, could in no way be seen as empowering its people. A regime that does not allow its citizenry the latter rights is repressive and undemocratic and is out of step with democratic development. In fact it is the latter process that even facilitates the material empowerment of publics.

Assessed on the basis of the above yardsticks, the US and other Western states, where fundamental freedoms are generally ‘alive and well’ could be considered democratic although absolute or perfect democracies could nowhere be found. Democracy is a process and it needs to be enriched and given greater depth, going forward. The process is long term and one which progressively evolves.

Besides the above considerations, advanced democracies are also characterized by multiple political parties that contest for power within the parameters of democratic principles. States that lack these essential attributes could not be considered democratic.

Going forward, states East and West need to be guided by the above principles because minus the multi-faceted empowerment of people, democratic development would not be possible. Seen from this viewpoint, it would be self-defeating for government leaders of the South in particular to consider opposition parties as inessential.

They need to also consider that there is no question of turning back the hands of time and reverting to strait-jacketed, one-party states of the Soviet era. These formations were thrown out by the relevant peoples themselves as incapable of ‘delivering the goods’ most needed by them.

The recent US presidential election campaign speeches were, for the most part, bereft of any substantive content. As a result, it’s difficult to predict as to the specific directions in which US foreign policy would evolve in the days ahead.

However, while a less pluralistic and ethnically accommodative US could be expected under Trump, a more inward looking foreign policy could very well be on the cards as well. A future Trump administration could see a lesser need to be committed to the Ukraine, for instance, and is likely to pursue more of an isolationist foreign policy which could see a gradual friction build-up between the US and its Western allies. Consequently, the cause of democratic development worldwide could suffer.

However, during one of her closing election addresses Presidential contender Kamala Harris left the world with a nugget of wisdom or two which would need to be treasured by policy planners and governments worldwide. She said, among other things, that one’s opponent should not necessarily be seen as one’s enemy. The latter should be spoken to in a most constructive fashion at the same table and be seen as having something essential to contribute towards nation-building.

The above is a stateswoman like pronouncement. If the international community is desirous of ushering a more peaceful world, Harris’ words would need to be dwelt on and consistently acted on. They come at a time when inhumanity internationally is more the norm rather than the exception.

Continue Reading

Features

Amazing scene in Mexico…

Published

on

All the contestants, vying for the title of Miss Universe 2024, are having an awesome time in the city of Mexico. Sri Lanka is represented by Melloney Dassanayaka and she is doing great in the scene over there, according to reports coming my way. Says Melloney: “I’m having an amazing time in Mexico City, and meeting up with these beautiful ladies is incredible.”

She went on to say that she is super grateful for her incredible roommate, Miss Universe Canada! “She’s kind, funny, caring, and a true sweetheart who made this long pageant month, away from family, so much brighter.

“With her talent as a TV host, and her amazing spirit, I couldn’t have asked for a better companion on this journey. “Huge thanks to Miss Universe @missuniverse for connecting me with all these beautiful souls!”

Plenty of smiles for the cameraman

Melloney has also come in for a lot of praise on social media, with many wishing her ‘good luck’, as well as describing her as…

* Sooo beautiful

* Awww she is cute

* So pretty. Good luck

* Wow! She deserves the crown

The beautiful ladies, in the city of Mexico, are now busy rehearsing and getting themselves fine-tuned for the grand finale, scheduled for next Saturday, 16th November.

By the way, the four top beauty pageants in the world, for women, are (1) Miss Universe, (2) Miss World, (3) Miss Earth, and (4) Miss International.

Continue Reading

Features

Importance of monitoring and follow-up action

Published

on

by Chandrasena Maliyadde

I have worked with all the Executive Presidents, except President Gotabaya Rajapaksa, in different capacities during my tenure in the public service and even afterwards. The way they managed or rather mis-managed the economy was different from one to the other. The late President Ranasinghe Premadasa’s management style was unique, flawless and foolproof. He monitored and followed up each and every decision he made.

We used to keep notepads and pens beside our land phones. Mobile phones were not freely available at the time. The phone could ring any time after 4.00 am. The President would direct us to attend to a particular matter. By 10.00 am a second call would come from him, inquiring about progress.

With this system of monitoring and follow up he was able to establish 200 garment factories in the rural countryside, implement the first-ever government sponsored poverty alleviation programme, Janasaviya, one million Housing Programme, Gam Udawa Programme and the Rural Road Rehabilitation Programme within a period as short as four years.

The aforesaid anecdote will serve to show the importance of monitoring and follow-up.

During the past six weeks or so, President Anura Kumara Dissanayake (AKD) has held meetings with all key Ministries and several other organizations and outlined his government’s plans and expectations. He gave directives related to Agriculture, Education, Power and Energy, Rural Development, Public Service, Exports, Tourism, Industry, Business and Enterprises. the President has underscored the urgency of accelerating and swift implementation of development projects. My intention is to examine how much these decisions have been followed up and translated into action. Considering the limitation of space, I decided to select one area to illustrate this i.e. the devastating flood and the havoc it brought a few days back.

On 14 Oct., the President held a meeting with officials to discuss the flood situation and the measures to be taken. The meeting was attended by the Secretaries to the President and Ministries of Finance, Defence and Disaster Management, Director General of Disaster Management Division, Disaster Management Centre National Building Research Organization and Meteorological Department and Senior Assistant Secretary of the National Disaster Relief Service Centre.

The President has emphasized, at this meeting, the need for a specific and sustainable programme to address the recurring flood situation in the country. He noted that frequent flooding requires long-term solutions for effective control.

Since then three weeks have elapsed; Rain has ceased; Flood victims are returning to their homes; No news on the emphasis on specific and sustainable programmes. Maybe it has to be reemphasized when the next disaster strikes. Until then there is no urgency.

Why is a Specific Sustainable Programme important?

Sri Lanka is a blessed island surrounded by Indian Ocean water but, is punished by water – lack of it, as well as abundance of it. “Water is a gift of nature and its management is man’s (of course woman’s as well) responsibility”.

The recent floods, landslides and the inclement weather brought havoc. Occurrence of heavy rainfall, floods and long droughts increased significantly over the recent years. Sri Lanka is being positioned among the top 10 countries at risk of extreme weather events by the Global Climate Risk Index. Floods are common and widespread among the most frequent weather-related disasters in Sri Lanka. Popular and common belief that disasters are natural is misleading.  Change of the weather is natural. But the disaster occurs when the weather changes intersects with human activities.

The United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNDRR) emphasizes that human actions, such as deforestation, urbanization and inadequate infrastructure, worsen the impacts of events like floods, earthquakes and storms. Building in flood-prone areas and settling communities close to rivers and on mountain slopes increases the vulnerability to floods, transforming into a devastating disaster. Inadequate building norms, marginalisation of people and poor choices on land-use planning make natural disasters worse. Change of weather is a given but the disaster that follows can be avoided.

‘Climate Change’ has come to the top of the Agenda on international platforms. Human Activity is the Cause of Increased Greenhouse Gas Concentrations. Over the last century, burning of fossil fuels, like coal and oil (Sri Lanka is notorious for this), has increased the concentration of atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2). Taken together, these miserable and sometimes deadly effects are what have come to be known as climate change. Human activity is the primary driver.

World Bank 2018, South Asia’s Hotspots: The Impact of Temperature and Precipitation Changes on Living Standards. South Asia Development Matters has estimated that 87 % of Sri Lanka’s population lives in moderate or severe hotspots for disasters. Nearly half of Sri Lanka’s population lacks disaster preparedness, a key vulnerability factor aggravated by accelerating climate risks.

All the above findings point to the fact that disasters are not free from human intervention. Then disaster management arguably requires human intervention, too. We human beings, that include the agencies responsible for disaster handling, need to prepare a specific and sustainable programme to address the recurring disasters and to minimize the damage caused by them.

It was not reported that any of the agencies present at the meeting with the President held on the 14th has commented or qualified the President’s emphasis for a specific sustainable programme. This does not mean that nothing has happened in the past or no institutional and regulatory arrangements are in place. Sri Lanka is abundant in the solutions and technologies and legal and institutional network required addressing disaster management.

The government introduced the Sri Lanka Disaster Management Act in 2005. The Act provides the legal foundation and strategic directions and proposes an institutional structure and coordination mechanism from national to local levels. A National Council for Disaster Management (NCDM), a high-level inter-ministerial body chaired by the President and a Disaster Management Centre (DMC), was established. Subsequently a separate Ministry for Disaster Management was established.

The National Disaster Management Policy 2013, National Disaster Management Plan (NDMC) 2013- 2017, and National Emergency Operation Plan (NEOP) 2017 have been developed in accordance with the SLDM Act. Several other policies and plans, such as National Climate Change Adaptation Policy and the Plan, Water Conservation policy, Local Government Policy, Flood Protection Ordinance, National Land Use Policy, National Physical Plan and Policy and several sector-specific policies also contribute to Disaster Risk Management (DRM) in the country.

Integrated Water Resources Development: The Way Forward for Sri Lanka to tackle the Climate Crisis-UNDP  04 October 2023 suggests “In moving forward, Sri Lanka requires a two-track approach. First is to invest in our infrastructure. As this requires more funding and time, in parallel, integrated water resource management should be promoted, tapping into Sri Lanka’s 4,000-year-old cascade systems.”

The question is how, when and who would prepare the programme envisaged by the President, follow it up and monitor the progress?

There is already a National Disaster Management Plan (NDMP) for 2022-2030 prepared in 2022 running into over 200 pages with 8 Chapters, 17 Annexures and 13 Figures. This plan guides all Ministries, Departments, Statutory bodies, officials of sub-national administrations (provincial Ministries and district divisional and local government); relevant officers and personnel from Governmental and UN Agencies, INGOs Non-Governmental organizations; civil-society organizations, private sector, and professional organizations in Sri Lanka.

NDMP would throw a lot of lights in preparation of the programme envisaged by the President. Only drawback is “The NDMP aims to set the 2030 strategic direction for Disaster Risk Management in the country, in line with the national development vision of the Government, “Vistas of Prosperity and Splendor”.

A senior officer once told me “Chandre, when you prepare a report don’t worry too much about the content. But, make sure you have the picture of the President or the Minister on the front cover”. Following that saner advice one can replace “Vistas of Prosperity and Splendor” with “A Rich Country-A Beautiful Life”.

There are two other plans (perhaps more) already prepared. One is the ‘National Drought Plan for Sri Lanka’ by the Ministry of Environment in September 2020; the other is the National Emergency Operation Plan (NEOP) formulated by the Disaster Management Centre in 2017.

The President has made decisions; issued directives; plans, policies, agencies, legal and administrative arrangements are in place. I believe that someone with command, clout and the will to organize an inter/multi-disciplinary/agency committee a). To peruse all relevant documents, reports and plans already in place; b). To set a time target and c). To assign the responsibilities to identified agencies/personnel. The Committee would meet from time to time and monitor the progress and provide assistance and instructions to resolve issues that arise during the implementation stage and follow up.

Sri Lanka has rich experience in such arrangements. I remember Secretaries such as Mr. Paskaralingam, Dr. Wickarma Weerasooria, who were known as super secretaries, have revived “Secretaries Committee’ to monitor the progress of directives and decisions made and follow up by resolving issues that arose in implementation. Dr. Lloyd Fernando, as the DG National Planning, facilitated and serviced the Committee. Mr. Dharmasiri Peiris a luminary in the public service, as the Secretary Ministry of Agriculture established a Committee consisting of players at both the centre and the Provincial level to ensure the Agriculture value chain is working smoothly. H. M. G. S. Palihakkara, the most illustrious Foreign Affairs Secretary, established an inter-ministerial Committee to follow up the developments in all the Ministries for the benefit of Sri Lankan Missions abroad as well as the respective Ministries.

This kind of hands-on experience and the experiments would be useful in establishing a mechanism for monitoring and follow up of directives and decisions made by the President.

Monitoring and follow-ups provide concrete evidence of outcomes.

(The writer is former Secretary to the Ministry of Plan Implementation. He can be reached on chandra.maliyadde@gmail.com)

Continue Reading

Trending