Editorial

Terror and counter terror:upsetting a rubbish mountain

Published

9 months ago

2025/04/13

This comment is being written ahead of the normal Friday deadline for printing the Sunday Island due to the forthcoming New Year holidays – that is before sittings of Parliament commenced on Thursday to debate the Batalanda Commission report. But it has also drawn on some of what was said in the early stages of that debate. This widely anticipated discussion will continue for a second day next month after parliament adjourned for the New Year on Thursday evening.

Batalanda and the torture chamber run there in the wake of the JVP’s second adventure between 1987 and 1989 has received a great deal of publicity, particularly in the electronic media, in recent weeks. As readers are well aware, former President Ranil Wckremesinghe, who began his parliamentary career in 1977 from the Biyagama electorate where Batalanda is located, is specifically targeted.

Earlier this year, Wicremesinghe fared disastrously in Al Jazeera’s Head to Head program, modeled on BBC’s Hard Talk, which famously interrogates interviewees with rapidly fired questions, where a very hard time is given to whoever is interviewed in what are often unequal exchanges. We have in this space previously said that it was clearly apparent during the program, which attracted global publicity, that the former president seemed to have knowingly walked into a trap for reasons that are not easily fathomable. Knowingly because the line of questioning was to be expected and the program host’s strategy of embarrassing the guest would have been obvious. But RW accepted an invitation to appear on a show that put him through a mincing machine. The Sinhala idiom illagena parippu kanawa neatly sums up what eventually happened to our former president.

RW was interviewed in London before a hostile audience dominated by LTTE supporters from the Tamil diaspora. The so-called “expert panel” whose comments were invited during the program was loaded two to one against the former president. Only Mr. Niranjan Deva Additiya, commonly known as Nirj Deva, a former British MP who also sat in the European Parliament could be regarded as not anti-Ranil, having served as a special envoy during the Wickremesinghe presidency. The other two panelists were extremely hostile to Wickremesinghe. Interviewer Mehdi Hasan, gave RW barely a chance to answer his questions fired with machine-gun rapidity, intervening and interrupting most unfairly.

Anybody with an inkling of Sri Lanka’s contemporary history beginning from 1971 when the JVP, which had only a year previously supported the United Front coalition led by Mrs. Sirima Bandaranaike to roundly defeat the Dudley Senanayake-led UNP, would know that Rohana Wijeweera’s ‘new left’ unexpectedly attempted via a youth insurgency to topple a government it had helped elect months earlier. The rebels were mostly armed with home made bombs and commandeered shotguns supplemented with weapons captured from the armories of several police stations they overran.

The then government brutally reacted to crush the rebellion and dead bodies by the roadside and floating down rivers were a common sight at that time. The official death toll was 1,200 including 37 police officers killed and 195 wounded. Wikepedia citing “reliable sources” estimated 4,000 dead. India and Pakistan were among neighboring countries that assisted with men and material to help the beleaguered government at that time. The US sold us six Bell 47G helicopters which were put into combat after minimal pilot training. Britain and the USSR also provided assistance. The North Korean Embassy in Colombo was closed and it’s personnel expelled. China was suspect although there was no evidence whatever to implicate her.

Wijeweera, who had a scholarship to study medicine at Moscow’s Lumumba University had been taking a pro-Chinese line in the USSR and was not permitted to re-enter Russia after he came here on holiday. He flirted briefly with the China wing Communist Party here led by Mr. N. Sanmugathasan (nicknamed Mao Tse-Shan) and sported a tunic suit, beret and a Mao badge at the Criminal Justice Commission that tried him and other JVP leaders following the 1971 insurrection. The JVP’s second adventure between 1987-89 made 1971 pale into insignificance with the country driven to the brink of anarchy with numerous assassinations of politicians, union leaders and sundry others.

Predictably, the opposition and principally the SJB, that was once very much a part of the UNP at that time, while not defending state terror countering JVP terror then credibly made the point that Batalanda was not the only detention center where third degree methods were used during the northern and southern insurgencies. “Why are you merely looking at Batalanda? What about the other places commanded by ex-servicemen who are now part of your government where these things happened? Are you not going to investigate those places too?,” SJB frontbencher Mujibur Rahman asked opening the debate on behalf of the opposition.

He opened his speech describing the whole issue as one of digging up a rubbish mountain several decades after the events. Countering what Deputy Minister Sunil Watagala who quoted a chunk of the commission report, Rahman did likewise with a lengthy quotation from the end of the report saying that in no way could what the JVP and its armed vigilante squads did in that period be countenanced. The commission had reported on its findings of what happened at Batalanda and not, it was implied, on the context in which such extra legal measures were taken.

President JR Jayewardene expressed a truism saying that “in times of war, laws are silent.” As it happened during the 30-year civil war and the JVP’s 1987-89 insurgency, the state responded to terror with counter terror and there was no serious public opinion among ordinary people against what happened. The JVP which was part of governments and with political alignmnts with the rulers at different times had not, as Mujibur Rahuman pointed out, not bothered to even find out who liquidated Rohana Wijeweera. He alleged that somebody who had been accused as being the killer was recently rubbing shoulders with a high up in the government.

All News Advertisement

Editorial

Jekylls and Hydes

Published

3 hours ago

2025/12/29

Sahan Weerasooriya

Monday 29th December, 2025

Sri Lankan politicians love the media dearly and take up the cudgels for the rights of journalists when they are out of power. The JVP/NPP leaders also defended the media to the hilt while they were languishing in the Opposition. Jekylls become Hydes after being ensconced in power, with the media exposing their failures and malpractices. Those who can, do; those who cannot, attack the media, one may say of the governments in this country, with apologies to Bernard Shaw.

The JVP-led NPP government, angered by bad press, is all out to intimidate the media it cannot control. Previous governments had the police on a string and used them to attack and harass independent journalists. The incumbent administration has gone a step further; the police have reportedly written to the Telecommunications Regulatory Commission (TRC), asking for action against Hiru TV for what they describe as broadcasting unverified, misleading news. Thus, the government has used the police to give Hiru a choice between toeing the official line and losing its licence. Thankfully, its efforts have run into stiff resistance, with media institutions and various associations circling the wagons around Hiru.

If the government thinks Hiru or any other media institution disseminates false information to the detriment of its interests, legal avenues are available for it to seek redress. The police must not be used as a political tool to intimidate the media.

Among the current defenders of the media are the SLPP, the UNP, the SLFP, etc. Their leaders are shedding copious tears for Hiru. But it was while the UNP and SLPP leaders were in power that the suppression of media freedom and violence against journalists became institutionalised for all intents and purposes. UNP governments not only throttled media freedom but also murdered journalists. SLFP regimes had media institutions attacked and journalists killed. An SLFP-led government, with the current SLPP leaders at the helm, had media institutions torched and journalists abducted, assaulted and murdered. These sinners currently in the political wilderness are condemning other sinners in power for suppressing media freedom.

The government deserves the bad press it gets. The police have been reduced to a mere appendage of the JVP/NPP. Two of the NPP’s Retired Police Collective members, namely former Senior DIG Ravi Seneviratne and former SSP Shani Abeysekera, have been appointed Secretary to the Public Security Ministry and CID Director, respectively. Absurd claims the police make in defence of the government remind us of Matilda, whose dreadful lies made one gasp and stretch one’s eyes.

When the police were asked why NPP MP Asoka Ranwala had not been subjected to a breathalyser test immediately after a recent road accident he caused, they had the chutzpah to claim they had run out of test kits. They transferred two of their officers over the incident to enable the government to save face. They arrested one of their own men assaulted by an NPP MP following a recent police raid on a cannabis cultivation in Suriyakanda. Acting just like legendary King Kekille, they let the MP off the hook and arrested the policeman, who was bailed out; they went on to suspend him from service. A few months ago, they unashamedly sided with a group of JVP cadres who stormed a Frontline Socialist Party office in Yakkala and forcibly occupied it. They go out of their way to ensure that the arrests of drug dealers with links to the Opposition get maximum possible publicity, but they do their best to keep the media in the dark when narcotics dealers with ruling party connections are taken into custody. They crack down on Opposition politicians and activists but steer clear of government members and their supporters. The despicable manner in which they are doing political work for the government reminds us of the Gestapo. Now, they are zeroing in on Hiru TV at the behest of their political masters for exposing their sordid actions.

The only way the NPP government can overcome problems and challenges on the political front and shore up its crumbling image is to mend its ways and fulfil its election pledges while taking action against its errant members who have brought it into disrepute and turned public opinion against it. Shooting the messenger is not the way to set about the task.

Editorial

Executive brinkmanship

Published

1 day ago

2025/12/28

Thilina Walpola

Pressure is mounting on President Anura Kumara Dissanayake to ensure that an Auditor General is appointed without further delay. But he has remained unmoved. He is determined to wear down the Constitutional Council (CC) and appoint one of his party loyalists as Auditor General. The CC has rejected his nominees—and rightly so; they are not eligible. Former Executive Presidents went all out to railroad the CC into rubber-stamping their decisions. They had no qualms about doing so while claiming to uphold the independence of the public service. President Dissanayake has failed to be different. His refusal to compromise amounts to brinkmanship; he is waiting until the CC blinks.

The NPP’s election manifesto, A Thriving Nation: A Beautiful Life, attributes the deterioration of the public service to ‘political appointments’ and state workers making political decisions. Among the steps the NPP has promised to take to straighten up the public service are ‘merit-based appointments and promotions’. This principle has fallen by the wayside where the question of appointing the Auditor General is concerned.

The government should take cognisance of the possible negative effects of the prolonged delay in appointing the Auditor General during a period of disaster response and international relief and rebuilding support.

The Bar Association of Sri Lanka has called upon President Dissanayake to appoint a person with proven competence, integrity, and independence, who commands wide acceptance as Auditor General forthwith. It has stressed the need to appoint a nonpartisan professional as the Auditor General to safeguard the integrity of the National Audit Office and inspire the confidence of both citizens and international partners in the financial governance of the State.

Transparency International Sri Lanka, the Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) and the other good governance activists, too, have faulted President Dissanayake and his government for the inordinate delay in appointing the Auditor General. They are of the view that a strong, independent Auditor General enables Parliament and the public to scrutinise government expenditure, identify irregularities, prevent misuse of funds, and ensure that those entrusted with public resources are held to account. The delay in appointing the Auditor General has weakened the effectiveness, authority, and the independence of the entire public audit system and created space for inefficiency, mismanagement, and corruption, they have noted. The situation will take a turn for the worse if the government succeeds in having one of its cronies appointed Auditor General.

The government is apparently playing a waiting game in the hope that the reconstitution of the CC due next year will provide a window of opportunity for it to appoint one of its loyalists as Auditor General.

Why the government is so desperate to place a malleable person at the helm of the National Audit Office is not hard to understand. If it succeeds in its endeavour, the next Auditor General will be beholden to the JVP/NPP. When an ineligible person is elevated to a high post, he or she naturally becomes subservient to the appointing authority. Such officials go out of their way to safeguard the interests of their political masters in case of irregularities involving state funds and other accountability issues.

A protracted delay in appointing the Auditor General or the appointment of a government supporter to that post will increase the risk of mismanagement of state funds and corruption, lead to the erosion of public trust and confidence in the National Audit Office, undermine legislative oversight and impair fiscal discipline. Most of all, the government’s failure to appoint a competent, independent person of integrity as Auditor General will diminish donor confidence especially at a time when the country is seeking disaster relief funds from the international community. There is no way the government can justify its refusal to appoint the current Acting Auditor General as the head of the supreme audit institution. He is obviously the most eligible candidate.

Editorial

Selective transparency

Published

2 days ago

2025/12/27

Thilina Walpola

Saturday 27th December, 2025

The NPP government has released a cordial diplomatic letter from Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi to President Anura Kumara Dissanayake, and gained a great deal of publicity for it as part of a propaganda campaign to boost Dissanayake’s image. Such moves are not uncommon in politics, especially in the developing world, where the heads of powerful states are deified and their visits, invitations and letters are flaunted as achievements of the leaders of smaller nations. However, the release of PM Modi’s letter to President Dissanayake is counterproductive, for it makes one wonder why the government has not made public the MoUs it has signed with India?

PM Modi’s Sri Lanka visit in April 2025 saw the signing of seven MoUs (or pacts as claimed in some quarters) between New Delhi and Colombo. Prominent among them are the MoUs/pacts on the implementation of HVDC (High-Voltage Direct Current) Interconnection for import/export of power, cooperation among the governments of India, Sri Lanka, and the United Arab Emirates on developing Trincomalee as an energy hub, and defence cooperation between India and Sri Lanka.

The NPP government has violated one of the fundamental tenets of good governance––transparency; there has been no transparency about the aforesaid MoUs or pacts, especially the one on defence cooperation. They cannot be disclosed without India’s consent, the government has said. This is a very lame excuse. The JVP/NPP seems to have a very low opinion of the intelligence of the public, who made its meteoric rise to power.

When the JVP/NPP was in opposition, it would flay the previous governments for signing vital MoUs and pacts without transparency. But it has kept even Parliament in the dark about the MoUs/pacts in question.

Ironically, the JVP, which resorted to mindless violence in a bid to scuttle the signing of the Indo-Lanka Accord in 1987, has sought to justify the inking of an MoU/pact on defence cooperation between Sri Lanka and India and keeping it under wraps, about three and a half decades later. The signing of that particular defence MoU/pact marked the JVP’s biggest-ever Machiavellian U-turn. How would the JVP have reacted if a previous government had entered into MoUs with India and kept them secret? It opposed the proposed Economic and Technology Cooperation Agreement (ETCA) between Sri Lanka and India tooth and nail, didn’t it?

Whenever one sees the aforesaid letter doing the rounds in the digital space, one remembers the MoUs/pacts shrouded in secrecy, which have exposed the pusillanimity of the NPP government, whose leaders cannot so much as disclose their contents without India’s consent.