Connect with us

News

SC deems Electricity Amendment Bill inconsistent with Constitution

Published

on

By Saman Indrajith

The Supreme Court has determined that the Electricity Amendment Bill is inconsistent with the Constitution as a whole.

Speaker Mahinda Yapa Abeywardena yesterday informed the Parliament of the SC’s ruling.

The Supreme Court has determined that some clauses in the draft Bill were inconsistent with the Articles 3, 4 (a), 12 (1), 14 (1) a, and 76 of the Constitution.

The Court has ruled that the Bill could be passed if it is amended, as per the guidelines stipulated by the Court.

Chief Opposition Whip Lakshman Kiriella raising a point of order said that the amendments recommended by the SC for the Bill could not be studied within a day. Kiriella asked the Speaker to put off the debate scheduled for Thursday (06).

“At the last party leaders’ meeting we pointed out this. It is practically not possible to study all these guidelines today and then go for the debate the day after tomorrow.

This is a very important Bill. It proposes that the CEB be divided into 12 sectors to pave the way for privatization. This affects the lives of 23,000 employees of the CEB. We need time. “

Speaker Mahinda Yapa Abeywardena’s declaration that he couldn’t rule on the matter led to exchange of words between government and Opposition members.

Speaker Abeywardena said that the matter of making that decision was not up to him but to the party leaders.

However, when the MPs kept demanding that a party leaders’ meeting be announced, the Speaker continued in reading his announcements.

SJB and Opposition Leader Sajith Premadasa called for a postponement of the debate. “We need to conduct a broad study on the Bill and the Supreme Court determination and therefore we call for a postponement of the debate set for Thursday,” Premadasa said.

Minister of Power and Energy Kanchana Wijesekera said that the Bill would be amended as per the Supreme Court determination. “We can go ahead with the debate on Thursday with the amendments. The Supreme Court determination is a guideline to ensure that the Bill is consistent with the Constitution. We will ensure that the Electricity Amendment Bill will be made consistent with the Constitution. We have already agreed with some amendments, and we stated this when the case was heard by the Supreme Court. We wonder why the SJB is shouting about the Bill as they themselves have stated in their economic blueprint that they will also restructure the CEB,” the Minister said.

NFF leader Wimal Weerawansa said that it was regrettable to note the way Minister Wijejesekera oversimplified the Supreme Court recommended amendments. “We must study these recommendations and make sure that they are incorporated because this government is notorious for overlooking Supreme Court recommendations in passing Bills,” Weerawansa said.

SLPP dissident MP Chandima Weerakkody: The Supreme Court has determined that this draft Bill violates Article 12(1) of the Constitution. That Article is there to ensure equality of opportunity for all. There are some other recommendations, too. We need time. This could be debated in the Sectoral Oversight Committee for two days.

SLPP Dayasiri Jayasekera: I am a member of Sectoral Oversight Committee on Power and Energy. I know that not all the stakeholders of the power and energy sector have been consulted in making this draft Bill. The reason for trying to rush this Bill through Parliament is obvious to some of us. There are companies lining up to enter into agreements. Suppose the Minister signs an agreement this evening with a wind power company and gets this Bill passed tomorrow, then the provisions of this draft Bill would not be applicable to that company. It is to favour such deals that the need to rush through the Bill arises.

SLPP dissident MP Genvindu Cumaratunga said that the MPs have not been given copies of the Supreme Court ruling. When we ask for the SC rulings, the officials tell us that it would be printed in the Hansard. The Supreme Court rulings are printed in very small letter size in the Hansard that no one bothers to find magnifying glasses to read them. We demand that a copy of the SC ruling be given us today,” he said.

Leader of the House Education Minister Susil Premajayantha said that the government would include all recommended guidelines by the Supreme Court, and it would go ahead to hold the debate on Thursday as scheduled.

Minister Wijesekera said that the government would adhere to the parliamentary process and to the agreements reached at the party leaders meeting. The debate would be on Thursday and the vote would be taken at 6 pm on that day. Those who oppose this bill can come and oppose it on that day too.

State Finance Minister Shehan Samarasinghe said MP Cumaratunga does not know the parliamentary process and becomes a nuisance by raising impertinent points of order. We invite private companies to invest in the electricity sector. We break the ongoing monopoly so that people would benefit. We do so while upholding Supreme Court guidelines. There are some MPs who think like frogs in a well.

JVP/NPP leader Anura Kumara Dissanayake said that Minister Semasinghe was against privatization when in the Rajapaksa camp and now being a member of the Wickremesinghe camp become an ardent supporter of privatization. “According to his description he was in the well when with Rajapaksas and now is out of the well. This House is known for bypassing Supreme Court determinations. We did not have a chance to attend the party leaders’ meeting that determined the dates for this debate. We keep on asking the Speaker to hold party leaders’ meetings on sitting days. This is what happens when party leaders’ meetings are held on non-sitting days.”

MP Nimal Lanza said that the debate should be held on Thursday and should not be postponed under any ground cited by the Opposition because the latter opposes anything done by the government.

MP Harsha de Silva said that the reforming of CEB was there in the SJB blueprint to revive the economy, but it was wrong for the government to interpret it as privatization. He requested that the debate on the Bill be extended to two days and not to be confined to a single day.

NFF leader Weerawansa said that he and other SLPP dissidents are not represented in the party leaders’ meeting. “We have 17 MPs. When the time is allotted for debates, we get only two slots of seven minutes. Therefore, we, too, demand that the debate on the Bill should be held on two sitting days.”

SJB MP Mujibur Rahuman said that the content of the draft Bill was in contradiction with the SLPP manifesto ‘Vistas of Prosperity.”

Speaker Abeywardena said that the matter should be sorted out at a party leader’s meeting. Then the opposition MPs demanded that a party leaders’ meeting be held, however, the Speaker continued to read the next items in the list of announcements despite the shouting by MPs.



Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

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

News

Coal scandal: Govt. urged to release lab report

Published

on

Pubudu Jagoda

The government is under mounting pressure to release a foreign laboratory report on the controversial coal consignment imported for the Lakvijaya Power Plant, with the Frontline Socialist Party (FSP) accusing the authorities of political interference and tender manipulation.

Speaking to the media after a party meeting in Homagama yesterday, FSP Education Secretary Pubudu Jagoda demanded an immediate explanation for the delay in disclosing the report from a Dutch laboratory, Cotecna, which was commissioned to test samples of the coal stocks in question after doubts were raised about an earlier local laboratory assessment. Jagoda said Cabinet media spokesperson Dr. Nalinda Jayatissa had announced that the report would be submitted by 16 January, but it had yet to be made public.

“The Sri Lankan lab confirmed the coal was substandard and could damage both the environment and power plant machinery. The foreign lab has independently verified the same results, we are told. Yet, political pressure appears to be delaying the release of the report.” He warned that any attempt to issue a false report would eventually be exposed and urged the government and the laboratory to maintain transparency.

SLPP MP D.V. Chanaka told Parliament last week that while 107 metric tonnes of coal were normally required per hour to generate 300 megawatts, but as many as 120 tonnes of newly imported coal were needed to produce the same amount of power due to its lower calorific value. Tests showed the first two shipments had calorific values of 5,600–5,800 kcal/kg, below the required minimum of 5,900 kcal/kg, said.

Jagoda accused the government of tailoring procurement rules to benefit an Indian supplier, citing a drastic reduction in reserve requirements—from one million metric tonnes in 2021 to just 100,000 tonnes in 2025—and alleged previous irregularities by the company, including a 2016 Auditor General finding regarding a rice supply contract and the 2019 suspension of a key agent of the company by the International Cricket Council over match-fixing.

He further criticised systemic manipulation of the coal tender process, including delays in issuing the tender from the usual February-March window to July, and progressively shortening the submission period from six weeks to three, giving an advantage to suppliers with stock on hand.

The Ministry of Energy recently issued an amended tender for 4.5 million metric tonnes of coal for the 2025/26 and 2026/27 periods, following the cancellation of an earlier tender. Jagoda warned that procurement delays and irregularities could trigger coal shortages, higher spot-market purchases, increased electricity costs, and potential power cuts if hydropower falls short.

Jagoda called for urgent investigations into the procurement process, insisting that any mismanagement or corruption should not be passed on to the public.Denying any wrongdoing, the government has said it is waiting for the lab report.

by Saman Indrajith ✍️

Continue Reading

News

Greenland dispute has compelled Europe to acknowledge US terrorising world with tariffs – CPSL

Published

on

Dr Weerasinghe

The Communist Party of Sri Lanka yesterday (18) alleged that the US was terrorising countries with unfair tariffs to compel them to align with its bigot policies.

CPSL General Secretary Dr. G. Weerasinghe said so responding to The Island query regarding European countries being threatened with fresh tariffs over their opposition to proposed US take-over of autonomous Danish territory Greenland.

US President Donald Trump has declared a 10% tariff on goods from Denmark, Norway, Sweden, France, Germany, the UK, the Netherlands and Finland with effect from 1 February but could later rise to 25% – and would last until a deal was reached. Targeted countries have condemned the US move.

Dr. Weerasinghe pointed out that none of the above-mentioned countries found fault with the US imposing taxes on countries doing trade with Russia and Iran. Now that they, too, had been targeted with similar US tactics, the CP official said, underscoring the pivotal importance of the world taking a stand against Trump’s behaviour.

Referring to the coverage of the Greenland developments, Dr. Weerasinghe said that news agencies quoted UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer as having said that the move was “completely wrong”, while French President Emmanuel Macron called it “unacceptable.

Dr. Weerasinghe said that Sri Lanka, still struggling to cope up with the post-Aragalaya economic crisis was also the target of discriminating US tariff policy. The top CPSL spokesman said that the recent US declaration of an immediate 25% increase in tariff on imports from countries doing business with Iran revealed the prejudiced nature of the US strategy. “Iran is one of our trading partners as well as the US. Threat of US tariffs on smaller countries is nothing but terrorism,” Dr. Weerasinghe said, stressing the urgent need for the issue at hand to be taken up at the UN.

Responding to another query, Dr. Weerasinghe cited the US targeting India over the latter’s trade with Russia as a case in point. He was commenting on the recent reports on India’s Reliance Industries and state-owned refiners sharply cutting crude oil imports from Russia. The CPSL official said that the EU wouldn’t have even bothered to examine the legitimacy of US tariff action if they hadn’t been targeted by the same action.

Perhaps, those who now complain of US threats over the dispute regarding Greenland’s future owed the world an explanation, Dr. Weerasinghe said. The reportage of the abduction of Venezuela’s President and the first lady underscored that the US intervened because it couldn’t bear the Maduro administration doing trade with China and other countries considered hostile to them, Dr. Weerasinghe said.

The CPSL official said that the NPP couldn’t turn a blind eye to what was happening. Just praising the US wouldn’t do Sri Lanka any good, he said, adding that the Greenland development underscored that the US under Trump was not concerned about the well-being of any other country but pursued an utterly one-sided strategy.

The US dealings with the NPP government, particularly the defence MoU should be examined taking into consideration US tariffs imposed on Sri Lanka at the onset of the second Trump administration and ongoing talks with the US, Dr. Weerasinghe.

By Shamindra Ferdinando ✍️

Continue Reading

News

MPs’ Pension Repeal Bill challenged in Supreme Court

Published

on

 Two petitions have been filed before the Supreme Court challenging the constitutionality of the proposed Parliamentary Pensions (Repeal) Bill, which seeks to scrap pensions for legislators.

The Bill, presented to Parliament on 7 January by the Minister of Justice and National Integration, has drawn strong opposition from retired parliamentarians who argue that it undermines the rights of former lawmakers and their dependents.

One petition has been filed by former MPs M. M. Premasiri, Nawarathne Banda, Nishantha Deepal Gunasekara, and Saman Siri Herath, who served in Parliament from 2004 to 2010. The other petition is by former MPs Piyasoma Upali (1988–2004) and Upali Sarath Danstan Amarasiri (1988–2000).

The petitioners argue that former MPs, many of whom dedicated decades of service to the nation, often sacrificed careers and business prospects for public duty. They contend that retired MPs and some widows rely solely on their pensions, which range between Rs. 60,000 and Rs. 80,000, amounts they say are insufficient to cover basic living and medical expenses.

The petitions seek a declaration that the Bill requires approval by the people through a referendum and a two-thirds majority in Parliament, citing constitutional safeguards.

The petitions were filed through Attorney-at-Law Sanath Wijewardane and are to be supported by Dr. Wijeyadasa Rajapakshe PC.

 By AJA Abeynayake ✍️

Continue Reading

Trending