Mangala sounds a dire warning over Mahinda comeback

LG polls 2018

SPECIAL REPORT : Part 203

January 30, 2018, 8:56 pm 

By Shamindra Ferdinando

Finance and Media Minister Mangala Samaraweera, MP, has contradicted those who had downplayed the importance of the Feb. 10 local government polls. Samaraweera didn’t mince his words when he acknowledged the growing and formidable challenge posed by the war-winning, twice President Mahinda Rajapaksa, MP-led Joint Opposition/Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna (SLPP), though his colleagues depicted a different picture. Samaraweera, in a statement issued on January 25, warned the electorate of dire consequences over the Rajapaksa group making significant progress.

Declaring that the Feb. 10 countrywide local government poll is much more than a contest to capture political power in local government authorities, Samaraweera asserted: "It is an old regime’s first real attempt to recapture power and restore an old, corrupt and dictatorial order."

Samaraweera warned that electoral inroads made at the forthcoming poll could be utilized to attempt to recapture national control at future elections. The Minister admitted that the outcome of the poll would have ‘national consequences’ and undermined the yahapalana administration. "With the Rajapaksa regime and its fellow barbarians at the gates once more, Sri Lanka is at crossroads at this election," he claimed

Acknowledging the possibility of the January 8, 2015 constituency wavering, Samaraweera, one of those who had spearheaded the campaign, both here and overseas, against the Rajapaksas, in the run-up to the last presidential poll, said: "Perhaps we are not where we hoped to be by this time."

Having reminded the electorate how the then President had brazenly abused power, shot people who asked for clean drinking water and allowed his incompetent brother-in-law to ruin the national carrier et al, Samaraweera said: "On February 10th the people will have to choose once more - will we continue the march to freedom or herald a return to fear."

Samaraweera referred to white vans, grease yakas, attacks on media, killing of journalists, night races in Kandy, Thajudeen killing, though there was no reference to his earlier charge that Rajapaksas had stashed away billions of US dollars in offshore accounts. Samaraweera, some time ago, estimated the Rajapaksas’ ill-gotten stash at a staggering USD 18.5 bn. Did Samaraweera purposely omit that line against the backdrop of the UNP being accused of massive treasury bond scams involving Perpetual Treasuries (PTL), by no less a person than President Maithripala Sirisena. Had the treasury bond scams not taken place, the veteran politician wouldn’t have had to admit: "Perhaps we are not where we hoped to be by this time."

In fact, Samaraweera wouldn’t have had to admit the possibility of former President Rajapaksa making a rapid comeback, if not for the treasury bond scams, perpetrated in 2015 and 2016. Widely dubbed Sri Lanka’s biggest single financial fraud, the treasury bond scams dominated both print and electronic media, since March 2015. The reportage of the treasury bond scams certainly embarrassed the yahapalana government, both locally and internationally.

Prime Ministers of Malaysia Dato’ Sri Mohd Najib bin Tun Abdul Razak (Dec 17-19, 2017) and Singapore Lee Hsien Loong (January 22-24, 2018) and President of Indonesia Joko Widodo (January 24-25, 2018) visited Colombo amidst massive media attack on the government over the fraud, with former External Affairs Minister Prof. G.L. Peiris and former Central Bank Governor Ajith Nivard Cabraal mocking the government and the Tamil National Alliance (TNA) whether the issue of former Central Bank Governor Singaporean Arjuna Mahendran was taken up with Singapore PM Lee Hsien Loong.

Samaraweera’s statement is revealing. One-time member of Mahinda Rajapaksa’s cabinet, Samaraweera obviously realized the risk of Rajapaksa making electoral gains at the Feb. 10 poll ahead of still unscheduled Provincial Council elections.

At the onset of the Eelam war IV, Samaraweera had been Rajapaksa’s Foreign Minister in his first cabinet though he was sacked in early 2007. Having strongly backed Rajapaksa at the Nov. 2005 presidential poll, much to the chargin of the then President Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga, Samaraweera received the coveted foreign portfolio at the expense of Anura Bandaranaike. Samaraweera relentlessly campaigned against the Rajapaksas until the war-winning leader’s reign was brought to an end, in January 2015. Samaraweera also played a strategic role in the abortive January 2010 attempt to dislodge Mahinda Rajapaksa.

The writer, in a recent live TV 1 ‘Face the Nation’ programme, anchored by Shameer Rasooldeen, explained that the Feb. 10 poll was nothing but a referendum on the three-year-old yahapalana government, whereas election monitors, Keerthi Tennakoon (CAFFE), Asoka Abeysinghe (TISL, Sri Lanka) and Manjula Gajanayake (CMEV) argued the poll under the new electoral system was meant to pave the way for cleaner local level administration and an increase in women representation in local government bodies. The writer asserted that having avoided local government polls for over three years, the government was now facing a crucial test with President Sirisena, Premier Ranil Wickremesinghe and former President Rajapaksa battling it out. Having campaigned against Rajapaksa, at two national elections, the civil society groups seemed to be blind to ground realities. Can there be anything as hilarious as expecting cleaner local government administration when no less a person than President Sirisena, who is also the leader of the SLFP, alleging existence of an unholy corrupt alliance in parliament.

Thanks to treasury bond scams, the Rajapaksa led group has been able to make significant progress. In a way, the Feb. 2015 bond scam can be described as an own goal at the onset of a soccer match. If not for the treasury bond scams, those who had been responsible for mega corrupt deals, during the previous administration, would have been in serious trouble now.

UNP strategist Samaraweera’s statement is evidence that the coming contest can inflict an irrevocable setback to an already struggling administration, ripped apart by treasury bond scams. With the Supreme Court recently ruling that the next presidential election has to be held within two years, in terms of the 19th Amendment to the Constitution, the government seems to be in a deepening dilemma. Close on the heels of the unanimous Supreme Court ruling, the UNP declared that its leader, Premier Wickremesinghe, would contest the next presidential poll. The UNP’s declaration should be examined against the backdrop of the UNP fielding war-winning General Sarath Fonseka and SLFP General Secretary Maithripala Sirisena at the 2010 and 2015 presidential polls, respectively.

Samaraweera, in spite of not being Foreign Minister, must be really worried about the local government polls fallout causing serious damage to the constitution making process, which the writer believe is Samaraweera’s priority.

It would be pertinent to mention that Samaraweera, as the first Foreign Minister of the Sirisena-Wickremesinghe administration, was instrumental in co-sponsoring the Geneva Resolution 30/1 that addressed accountability issues. In spite of losing the foreign ministry portfolio, Samaraweera, obviously plays a critical role in the overall government effort to introduce a new Constitution, subjected to a referendum. In fact, a new Constitution has been prescribed by Geneva as its primary remedy to achieve post-war national reconciliation.

The ongoing local government polls campaign has been dominated by treasury bond scams, so much so it’ll certainly have a significant impact on the outcome of the Feb. 10 result. Electoral gains achieved by the JO/SLPP will certainly weaken both the UNP and the SLFP ahead of momentous efforts to secure parliamentary approval for far reaching constitutional reforms this year.

TNA’s strategy

The financial fraud is having a telling impact on the government and the Tamil National Alliance (TNA) working overtime to achieve its PRIMARY objective, a new Constitution. TNA Chief R. Sampanthan has sought international backing for his efforts. Last week, Sampanthan, in talks with Colombo-based EU official, Paul Godfrey, underscored the need to table the draft Constitution in parliament, immediately after the Feb. 10 poll. TNA spokesperson quoted Sampanthan as having told Godfrey: "Soon after the local government elections, the process must be expedited and the draft Constitution submitted to parliament and eventually approved by the people, in a referendum. The TNA statement was issued on January 23, immediately after Sampanthan met Godfrey.

On the following day, Sampanthan told Singaporean PM Loong he expected President Sirisena and Premier Wickremesinghe to convince the Sinhala community of the need to bring in a new Constitution, before the end of 2018. Plainly, the veteran politician has totally ignored the crisis caused by President Sirisena and the SLFP stepping up attacks on the UNP over treasury bond scams. President Sirisena stunned the UNP on Friday when he alleged an influential section of the UNP helping certain business enterprises at the expense of the government.

On Saturday, addressing a gathering at Ratnapura, President Sirisena offered to form an SLFP government immediately if the Rajapaksa-led rebel group joined him. President Sirisena inadvertently referred to the SLFP-led UPFA having 96 elected and appointed members in parliament. JO/SLPP MP Ranjith Zoysa dismissed President Sirisena’s offer contemptuously. The MP was addressing a meeting at Wellawaya, chaired by former President Rajapaksa. Zoysa, too, referred to the UPFA having 96 members. The UPFA won 95 seats at the Aug. 17, 2015 parliamentary polls with more than 50 throwing their weight behind Rajapaksa. Forming an SLFP government is certainly not realistic as the TNA and the JVP are unlikely to support such an initiative, under any circumstances. On the other hand, the JO/SLPP will not be deceived by such an offer, especially against the backdrop of President Sirisena controversial declaration, on the eve of the Aug. 17, 2015 parliamentary polls, that Rajapaksa wouldn’t be appointed Prime Minister in the event of a UPFA victory.

A senior journalist, representing the Tamil media, last Thursday, sought President Sirisena’s explanation as to his battle with the UNP having an impact on the constitution making process in parliament. President Sirisena side-stepped the query. The issue was raised when President Sirisena addressed the media at the President’s House. President Sirisena refrained from responding to the writer’s query whether Sampanthan told him, and Premier Wickremesinghe, of the 2018 deadline for the enactment of the new Constitution, before the matter was discussed with the Singaporean Premier Loong.

The writer used the opportunity to remind the gathering that the Geneva Resolution that had been co-sponsored by Sri Lanka was moved on the basis of unsubstantiated war crimes allegations with the military accused of massacring over 40,000 civilians on the Vanni east front. The gathering was also told how Lord Naseby used confidential wartime dispatches, from the British High Commission in Colombo, to expose a despicable gigantic lie to move Geneva against Sri Lanka. Asked why his government, particularly the Foreign Ministry, turned a Nelsonian eye to the opportunity provided by the respected Britisher Lord at the expense of his own country, President Sirisena said that Sri Lanka’s Permanent Representative (Ravinatha Aryasinha) had made representations on behalf of Sri Lanka in the wake of Naseby’s revelations.

As far as The Island is aware, Sri Lanka hasn’t so far officially requested members of the Geneva body to re-examine the case. Sri Lanka even refrained from referring to Naseby’s revelations at the recent Universal Periodic Review (UPR), in Geneva, whereas the Britisher requested the UN to examine the controversial circumstances under which Resolution 30/1 was adopted, on Oct. 1, 2015.

The President’s House gathering was reminded that Geneva called for a new Constitution on the basis of unverified allegations, propagated by interested parties.

UN Human Rights Chief Zeid bin Ra’ad Zeid-Hussein called for a new Constitution. The unprecedented Resolution has paved the way for a new Constitution, in addition to implementing four specific measures meant to address accountability issues, namely (1) a judicial mechanism with a Special Counsel to investigate allegations of violations and abuses of human rights and violations of international human rights law (2) A Commission for truth, justice, reconciliation and non-recurrence (3) An Office for Missing Persons (OMP) and finally (4) An Office for reparations.

Let me reproduce verbatim what Zeid-Hussein stated in his June 28, 2016, address in Geneva:

= Significant momentum has been achieved in the process of constitutional reform. On 10 March, 2016, Parliament adopted a resolution establishing a constitutional assembly to draft and approve a new constitution, or amendments ,by the end of 2016, which would then be put to a referendum, in 2017. The drafting process has benefited from an inclusive public consultation process, overseen by a Public Representations Committee that received submissions and held district level consultations in the first quarter of 2016.

= From a human rights perspective, the constitutional reform process presents an important opportunity to rectify structural deficiencies that contributed to human rights violations and abuses in the past and reinforce guarantees of non-recurrence. These could include a more comprehensive Bill of Rights, stronger institutional checks and balances, enhanced constitutional review, improved guarantees for the independence of the judiciary, effective individual complaints mechanisms and greater direct enforceability of international human rights treaty. Also, as demonstrated by other countries’ experience, is the strengthening of civilian oversight over the military in the form of multiple oversight and accountability mechanisms over defense policy, discipline and promotion, budgeting and procurement. The new Constitution will also be important in facilitating the establishment of the transitional justice mechanisms envisaged by the Government, for instance the criminalization of international crimes in national law or allowing for the involvement of international judicial personnel. At the same time, the High Commissioner hopes that the political process of adopting constitutional changes will not involve tradeoffs and compromises on core issues of accountability, transitional justice and human rights.

Sampanthan now insists that he wants the Geneva project finalised this year.

The TNA has so far not responded to The Island queries as regards its stance on Naseby’s revelations. Recently, a British parliamentary delegation, comprising Conservative Party members, too, declined to answer its position on the Naseby revelations. However, the next Geneva sessions, scheduled to commence in the last week of February, will take up the Sri Lanka issue. The outgoing Geneva Chief will surely reveal his stand on vis a vis Sri Lanka’s commitment to Resolution 30/1. Sri Lanka has been given two years, beginning March last year, to fully implement the Resolution. The Geneva initiative is likely to suffer further in case the Rajapaksa-led group made headway at the forthcoming local government polls. Rajapaksa will certainly capitalize on the situation and maximize its influence, ahead of the elections to nine provincial councils,, before the next presidential contest, followed by parliamentary polls.

Weerawansa’s move

against PBJ

Minister Samaraweera’s concerns, as regards the Rajapaksas making a comeback, are real though some continue to pretend the Feb. 10 poll posed no danger. The possibility of a situation that had been caused by a member or members of own party can lead to political catastrophe. Let me remind you how National Freedom Front (NFF) leader Wimal Weerawansa fired the first shots at the then Rajapaksa administration, in early 2014, that eventually led to Rajapaksa’s defeat at the January 2015 presidential poll. Weerawansa flayed the then Treasury Secretary Dr. P.B. Jayasundera over the way he managed the economy, then he openly clashed with the then ruling SLFP, leading to a split in the run-up to the Uva Provincial Council poll on Sept, 20, 2014. Although the UPFA managed to secure Uva, comprising Badulla and Moneragala districts, it recorded a significant loss of votes. Weerawansa’s party contested one of the two districts on its own. The former JVP firebrand politician’s campaign caused immense damage to the Rajapaksa administration, ahead of the January 2015 presidential poll. Today, even Weerawansa may have forgotten that he was the first ruling party politician to seek the late Ven Maduluwawe Sobitha thero’s intervention, in June 2014, to heal the Rajapaksa administration. Although he quickly distanced himself from Ven Sobitha, the UNP swiftly moved in with the JHU, too, joining the movement. Weerawansa surely kicked an own goal for petty political reasons, months before the then SLFP General Secretary was approached by the UNP, whose yahapalana dream now is in tatters due to the treasury bond scams, with both the UNP and the SLFP in power, deeply implicated.

Whatever President Sirisena says now, he cannot absolve himself of the responsibility for the second far bigger March 29, 2016 scam. The second robbery could have been averted had he acted swiftly and decisively in the aftermath of the Feb. 27, 2015 scam. Instead, he dissolved parliament, in mid 2015, to thwart the presentation of the parliamentary probe on the first scam and then called for general elections, and, on the eve of the poll, dealt a deadly blow to his own party by declaring that Mahinda Rajapaksa wouldn’t be appointed Prime Minister thereby discouraging a sizable number of supporters from exercising their franchise.

The Feb, 10 poll outcome will influence the electorate as the country heads for elections to nine provincial councils, and presidential poll, within the next two years.

Kadirgamar assassination

Decimation of Lanka’s political leadership

SPECIAL REPORT : Part 202

January 23, 2018, 8:19 pm 

By Shamindra Ferdinando

"Today, terrorism has become the major impediment to development and threatens us all. No cause justifies the indiscriminate killing of innocent civilians. Yet there are countries that still use it as an instrument of state policy. We must show zero tolerance for State sponsored terrorism. The perpetrators, organizers, financiers and sponsors of terrorism must be isolated and face action of all societies that cherish freedom.": Indian Law and Justice and Electronics and IT Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad declared in Colombo on January 15, 2018.

Prasad said so delivering the Lakshman Kadirgamar memorial lecture, titled the evolution of India’s Constitution and democratic polity, at the Lakshman Kadirgamar Institute of International Relations and Strategic Studies (LKIRSS), in Colombo.

The Indian minister was here on the invitation of Mrs. Suganthi Kadirgamar who has been organizing the memorial lecture for the past 12 years.

Foreign Minister Tilak Maparana, PC, a former Attorney General, who delivered the introductory remarks, referred to Kadirgamar’s assassination. Let me reproduce the relevant paragraph verbatim: Late Sri Lankabhimanya Lakshman Kadirgamar, in whose memory this lecture is held, is an illustrious son of Sri Lanka. After an extensive practice in Civil Law, as a President’s Counsel, and a number of years service as Head of Asia Pacific Division of the World Intellectual Property Organization, Mr Kadirgamar entered politics as an appointed member of Parliament in 1994, and was appointed as the Foreign Minister of Sri Lanka, a portfolio that he held twice, from 1994 to 2001, and from April 2004 to August 2005, until his assassination.

On the front row, seated with Mrs Kadirgamar, was the Leader of the Opposition, Rajavarothiam Sampanthan, MP, and Indian High Commissioner in Colombo, Taranjit Singh Sandhu. Singh had served as Counsellor (Political) in the High Commission of India, Colombo, from December 2000 to September 2004.

Marapana, who is also the Chairman of LKIRSS, as well as Prasad, a lawyer by profession, hadn’t at least briefly discussed the circumstances under which 73-year-old Kadirgamar was assassinated at his heavily guarded residence at Buller’s Lane, on the night of Aug. 12, 2005. Kadirgamar had just finished a swim and was getting inside his home when he was sniped. The much respected politician was killed in spite of Norway arranged Ceasefire underwritten by the US, Japan and EU in place.

A few hours before he was targeted, Kadirgamar attended a public function to launch the first journal of the Bandaranaike Centre for International Studies, in which the then Indian High Commissioner, Nirupama Rao, participated. The journal was titled ‘International Relations in a Globalised World.’

Prasad, at the onset of his speech, offered warm personal regards to Mrs. Kadirgamar who had visited New Delhi personally to invite him to deliver the Kadirgamar memorial lecture. "I am deeply touched by her extraordinary gesture."

In spite of declaring that no cause justified the indiscriminate killing of innocent civilians and there were countries that used it as an instrument of state policy, Prasad lacked the strength to make reference to the murderous Indian intervention here. Had Prasad acknowledged the despicable Indian destabilization project here, he wouldn’t have been able to demand zero tolerance for State-sponsored terrorism. The Indian minister’s declaration that perpetrators, organizers, financiers and sponsors of terrorism must be isolated and face action of all societies that cherish freedom sounded silly against the backdrop of one-time Indian Foreign Secretary J.N. Dixit’s (1991-1994) admission of India’s guilt in his memoirs: ‘Makers of India’s Foreign Policy’, launched in 2004.

India never apologized officially for ruining Sri Lanka, though New Delhi threw its weight behind the US-led Geneva project.

Destabilization of a neighbour

In a chapter, titled An Indo-centric Practitioner of Realpolitik in Makers of India’s Foreign Policy, Dixit, who had been New Delhi’s High Commissioner in Colombo (1985-1989) thoroughly explained how India fomented terrorism in Sri Lanka, primarily for two reasons, to counter the US, in the context of Cold War rivalry, and thwart the emergence of Tamil separatism in India as a result of New Delhi’s refusal to back, what he called, aspirations of Sri Lankan Tamils.

At the time Dixit launched his memoirs, he was India’s National Security Advisor (2004-2005). Dixit died, in January, 2005.

Dixit faulted the then Indian Prime Minister Indira Gandhi for sponsoring terrorism in Sri Lanka. In fact, Dixit found fault with Mrs Gandhi for two foreign policy decisions, the other being tacit support for the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, in Dec 1979.

Perhaps Dixit, in spite of being the one who had been tasked with implementing the lethal Indian policy, leading to the forcible deployment of the Indian Army, in July 1987, in the Northern and Eastern Provinces of Sri Lanka, didn’t really fancy what he had to do. The killings of veteran former TULF MPs, M. Alalasundaram and V. Dharmalingam on the morning of Sept. 3, 1985, shocked Sri Lanka. The LTTE was immediately accused of the killings though it later transpired that the Tamil Eelam Liberation Organization (TELO) carried out the assassinations at the behest of India.

Twelve years after the double murder, in an exclusive interview with the writer, Dharmalingham Siddarthan (Vanni district MP), the only son of Visvanather Dharmalingham, discussed the circumstances under which his father had been killed along with his parliamentary colleague, Alalasundaram (My mother prepared thosai for us; Prabhakaran was a regular visitor to our home––The Island Dec. 7, 1997). Siddarthan didn’t mince his words when he blamed India’s intelligence agency, the Research and Analysis Wing (RAW) for the assassinations. The then Vanni District MP (Democratic People’s Liberation Front) 49-year-old Dharmalingham Siddarthan claimed that Prabhakaran would have had definitely intervened on his father’s behalf if he had been aware of the RAW plot to kill him. Siddarthan said that the LTTE had the wherewithal to thwart the assassination bid if the RAW-TELO project had been brought to Prabhakaran’s notice.

At that time, TELO had been one of those terrorist groups that had been run by the RAW.

Today, Sampanthan-led Tamil National Alliance (TNA) is made up of three groups, Illankai Thamil Arasu Kadchi (ITAK), TELO and PLOTE. Siddarthan represented the PLOTE. It would be pertinent to keep in mind that at the time, the LTTE assassinated Kadirgamar, the TNA represented the LTTE’s interests in parliament. Having recognized the LTTE as the sole representative of the Tamil speaking people, in late 2001, the TNA comfortably won the lion’s share of electoral districts in the Northern and Eastern Provinces, at the April 2004 general election with the LTTE stuffing ballot boxes to ensure their victory. The EU Election Observers having witnessed the sordid act accused the TNA of winning the majority of seats in the then temporarily merged Province with the backing of Prabhakaran. The TNA never contradicted the EU allegation. Interestingly, the Election Department, the government, or Western powers, never raised the EU allegation with the TNA.

The LTTE had been the sole representative of the Tamil speaking people, at the time the group assassinated Kadirgamar, during Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga’s presidency. Having publicly pledged its support to Prabhakaran, in late 2001, the TNA remained loyal to the LTTE until the very end. Even the evil LTTE decision to use the Vanni population, numbering over 300,000 men, women and children, as a ‘strategic human shield’ in the final phase of the Army offensive, couldn’t influence the TNA to denounce the LTTE. But, Trincomalee District MP Sampanthan, in his capacity as the Leader of the Opposition, sat in the front row of LKIRSS auditorium as top Bharatiya Janatha Party (BJP) member Prasad delivered the Kadirgamar memorial lecture.

Had it not been for the monstrous Indian project here, Prasad wouldn’t have been here to deliver the memorial lecture of Kadirgamar, one among perhaps as many as 40 members, and former members of parliament, assassinated and wounded by terrorist groups, formed by India.

Death warrant

The writer was privileged to receive Kadirgamar’s assessment of political and military situations on many occasions during Kumaratunga’s presidency. Although many believed, asserted and propagated, that Kadirgamar had earned Prabhakaran’s wrath for tirelessly campaigning for the banning of the LTTE, overseas, the possibility of the assassination being purely ‘politically’ motivated cannot be ruled out. Perhaps, the LTTE, and those who had been playing politics with Prabhakaran, felt seriously threatened by the likelihood of Kadirgamar securing the post of Prime Minister, under an SLFP-led government. Although, the issue had never been dealt adequately, in both the Sinhala and English media, the then General Secretary of the SLFP, Maithripala Sirisena, in March 2010, shed light on a JVP initiative to bring in Kadirgamar, an UPFA National List member, to parliament, as Prime Minister, under Kumaratunga’s presidency.

At that time, the SLFP held its regular political briefings at the Mahaweli Center and the writer was one of the few journalists to receive Maithripala Sirisena’s memoirs, titled Aththai Saththai, from him, personally, a few weeks before the April 2004 parliamentary polls. In a chapter, titled ‘Prime Minister’, Sirisena, explained the circumstances under which Kumaratunga had pushed him on the morning of April 11, 2004, to endorse Kadirgamar as the Prime Minister as proposed by the JVP in the run-up to the April 10, 2004, general election. Maithripala Sirisena reproduced a confidential letter, dated April 5, 2010, written by JVP General Secretary Tilvin Silva to Kumaratunga.

Sirisena quoted Kumaratunga as having said that the SLFP couldn’t have denied the JVP request as the Marxist party wielded immense political power due to it securing almost 40 seats. The JVP had 36 elected members and three National List members though under the original plan the JVP was to receive five National List seats. The JVP contested that general election on the UPFA ticket.

Silva stressed five points, on the basis of a discussion the JVP had with Kumaratunga, on April 4, 2004: (1) We strongly believe Lakshman Kadirgamar is the most suitable person to be the Prime Minister (2) The UPFA can immensely benefit due to Kadirgamar having international recognition as well as his acceptance locally (3) Kadirgamar has earned the respect of the Sinhala Buddhist community. There is absolutely no basis for claims that Sinhala Buddhists will oppose Kadirgamar’s appointment as Prime Minister (4) We believe you’ll (Kumaratunga) realize the requirement to have a faithful Prime Minister to implement proposed constitutional changes (5) If, only a Sinhala Buddhist is acceptable as Prime Minister, we propose Anura Bandaranaike or Maithripala Sirisena for the post.

Silva warned of dire consequences unless Kumaratunga accepted the JVP’s proposal.

Sirisena revealed how Kumaratunga sent an SLAF chopper, to Polonnaruwa on the morning of the day after the April 2, 2004 general election for Maithripala to join in the discussions at the President’s House, Fort, chaired by her. Among those who had been present, when Maithripala Sirisena walked in, were Kadirgamar and the then presidential secretary Kusumsiri Balapatabendi. When Kumaratunga had sought Maithripala Sirisena’s opinion as to who should be the Prime Minister, the then SLFP General Secretary retorted; "The people of this country expect Mahinda Rajapaksa as the Prime Minister. An annoyed Kumaratunga said: "How can Mahinda be appointed when the JVP is strongly opposed to him. Maithripala Sirisena: "Madam, we should do what the people expected of us not what the JVP wanted. If, we ignored public concerns, there’ll be serious crisis in the SLFP."

After a disappointed Kadirgamar left the President’s House, Kumaratunga sent Maithripala Sirisena and Balapatabendi to speak to him again and explain the difficulty in carrying out the JVP’s directive. According to Maithripala Sirisena, the JVP had convinced Kadirgamar that he should be the Prime Minister, though Balapatabendi was strongly opposed to the move and finally Kumaratunga agreed to appoint Mahinda Rajapaksa as the Prime Minister. Maithripala Sirisena told Kumaratunga that it was the most correct decision taken by her.

Maithripala Sirisena later also backed strongly PM Rajapaksa as their presidential candidate, much to the disappointment of Kumaratunga, though the then president wanted her brother Anura. The final decision on the presidential candidate was made in August 2005.

Had President Rajapaksa acknowledged Maitripala Sirisena’s pivotal role in thwarting the JVP-Kumaratunga plot, in 2004, as well as Sirisena’s support for him to secure endorsement as the presidential candidate, at the Nov 2005 polls, perhaps the country wouldn’t have been in current turmoil. When the writer, having perused Maithripala Sirisena’s memoirs, inquired from him, at a SLFP briefing, at Mahaweli Center, whether he felt he should be the next Prime Minister, the SLFP General Secretary smiled and said wait till the conclusion of the general election.

Thamilini on LK assassination

Nearly a decade after Sri Lanka’s triumph over the LTTE, the country is yet to undertake a comprehensive examination of the conflict. Subramaniam Sivakamy, alias ‘Col’ Thamilini, a few years after the conclusion of the war, in May 2009, recalled how Prabhakaran boasted of Kadirgamar’s assassination at a meeting of top commanders, on the day after the killing.

The launch of ‘Thiyunu Asipathaka Sevana Yata’ (In the Shadow of a Sharp Sword) the Sinhala translation of her book ‘Oru Koorvaalin Nizhalil’ - life story of high ranking LTTE cadre, took place at the Sri Lanka Foundation Institute (SLFI) on May 13, 2016.

‘Oru Koorvaalin Nizhalil’ was launched earlier on March 19, 2016, in Kilinochchi, a one-time LTTE bastion.

Thamilini’s husband, Jeyakumaran Mahadevan, British national of Sri Lankan origin, earned the wrath of an influential section of Tamil politicians, as well as Tamil Diaspora, for releasing the book. They made a desperate bid to thwart the revelations, made by Thamilini, one of those senior personnel who had access to LTTE leader Velupillai Prabhakaran and top battlefield commanders, throughout the eelam war IV. The book was launched after her death from cancer.

According to Thamilini, Kadirgamar’s assassination was meant to show the LTTE prowess in infiltrating the best guarded targets, as a warning to Colombo.

Kadirgamar, on behalf of Kumaratunga, had been engaged in secret negotiations with the LTTE, since 1999, with the knowledge and support of Norway. In addition to Kadirgamar, Prof. G.L. Peiris, too, had been engaged in secret talks, according to the Norwegians. In spite of talks, the LTTE assassinated TULF lawmaker, Neelan Tiruchelvam, in July 1999, and almost succeed in eliminating Kumaratunga, at the final presidential polls campaign rally, in Colombo, in Dec 1999. An angry Kumaratunga revealed how the LTTE made an attempt to eliminate her amidst Norwegian facilitated talks. Interestingly, at the time of Kadirgamar’s assassination, Norway oversaw Sri Lanka’s peace process.

Had the LTTE succeeded, UNP candidate Ranil Wickremesinghe would have comfortably won the 1999 presidential poll. Kumaratunga won a second term, amidst a massive battlefield defeat on the Vanni front. In April 2000 Sri Lanka suffered its worst battlefield defeat when the LTTE captured Elephant Pass. The LTTE held Elephant Pass till early January 2009.

At the previous presidential poll, the LTTE paved the way for Kumaratunga’s victory by eliminating UNP candidate Gamini Dissanayake in Oct 1994.

The LTTE ensured Kumaratunga’s victory, at the 1994 presidential election, and then unleashed war in April 1995.

At the Nov. 2005 presidential poll, the LTTE/TNA engineered UNP leader Wickremesinghe’s defeat by ordering northern Tamils not to exercise their franchise. Following the LTTE’s eradication, the TNA, voted for war-winning Army Chief the then General Sarath Fonseka and the former SLFP General Secretary, Maithripala Sirisena, at the 2010 and 2015 presidential polls, respectively, with the second US managed project succeeding to pave the way for a change of administration, resulting in the LTTE proxy, the TNA, named the main Opposition in parliament and its leader invited for the Kadirgamar memorial lecture.

Sri Lanka’s decision to do away with the annual Victory Day parade in 2015 should be studied and examined in the context of efforts to gradually erase the memory of a war, caused by a neighbour, while the victor is being hauled up in Geneva.

Let me reproduce what former Ambassador and one-time head of Peace Secretariat, Jayantha Dhanapala, told the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC) in late 2010: "Now I think it is important for us to expand that concept to bring in the culpability of those members of the international community who have subscribed to the situation that has caused injury to the civilians of a nation. I talk about the way in which terrorist groups are given sanctuary; are harboured; are supplied with arms and training by some countries with regard to their neighbours or with regard to other countries. We know that in our case this happened, and I don’t want to name countries, but even countries who have allowed their financial procedures and systems to be abused in such a way that money can flow from their countries in order to buy the arms and ammunition that cause the deaths, the maiming and the destruction of property in Sri Lanka are to blame and there is therefore a responsibility to protect our civilians and the civilians of other nation States from that kind of behavior on the part of members of the international community, and I think this is something that will echo with many countries in the Non Aligned Movement where Sri Lanka has a very respected position and where I hope we will be able to raise this issue."

Indian Law and Justice and Electronics and IT Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad comment on international terrorism seems frivolous when taken with Dhanapala’s assertion. Dhanapala was the Peace Secretariat head at the time the LTTE eliminated Kadirgamar during Norway facilitated talks. The National Peace Council, the major recipient of Norwegian funding, declared immediately after Kadirgamar’s assassination that it was tragic but inevitable.

Mangala Samarawweera, who held the Foreign Ministry portfolio in January 2017, (now he serves as Finance and Media Minister) referred to Kadirgamar, at the Royal Institute of International Affairs, Chatham House, on January 11, 2017, though he refrained from commenting on the circumstances under which Kadirgamar died. Samaraweera said: "Several of my predecessors, too, have spoken here at Chatham House. This includes the late Lakshman Kadirgamar, who spoke at length here, in 1998, about the danger faced by our nation at the time, and democratic societies everywhere, from terrorism."

Thanks to Wikileaks, the world is aware how Norway had talks, in London, with top LTTE representative, Anton Balasingham, to explore ways and means of tackling the fallout of Kadirgamar’s assassination.

Even after Kadirgamar’s assassination, Western powers refused to acknowledge that there couldn’t be a peaceful end to the conflict as long as the LTTE retained conventional military capability. Let me reproduce verbatim statements issued by key players in the wake of Kadirgamar’s assassination to prove their determination to continue with the Norway-led process whatever the consequences. They never had Sri Lanka’s interests in mind.

The then US Secretary of State, Condoleeza Rice, on behalf of peace Co-Chair said: "We must honour Kadirgamar’s memory by re-dedicating ourselves to peace and ensuring the CFA remains in force."

The then European Union Commissioner, Ferrero-Waldner said on behalf of peace Co-Chair EU: "We must all honour the passing of Foreign Minister Kadirgamar by continuing his work for peace and maintaining the CFA."

Peace Co-Chair Japan issued the following statement, through its Foreign Minister Nobutaka Machimura: "I strongly hope for calm response by all parties at this moment so that the move towards the peace process will not be hindered."

In the wake of Kadirgamar’s assassination, peace facilitator and Co-Chair Norway declared: "… It is now of great importance that both parties to the conflict do their utmost to fully fulfill their obligations according to the CFA."

What a pity, we as a nation had conveniently forgotten the past.

Sri Lanka celebrating 70th anniversary under a cloud

Queen’s representatives due amidst Naseby controversy

SPECIAL REPORT : Part 201

January 16, 2018, 9:05 pm 

By Shamindra Ferdinando

A group of British parliamentarians representing the ruling Conservative Party recently declined to respond to The Island queries pertaining to their visit (January 3 to January 8) to Sri Lanka.

The visit took place amidst continuing controversy over Lord Naseby challenging the basis for Geneva Resolution 30/1, co-sponsored by Sri Lanka on Oct 1, 2015.

Conservative Party member Lord Naseby on Oct 12, 2017, in the House of Lords, revealed the treacherous British role in the Geneva project. The UK is struggling to cope up with Naseby’s revelations, with British High Commissioner, in Colombo, James Dauris, playing down Naseby’s challenge. Sri Lanka, too, adopted a similar strategy.

Although the four-member delegation has been named as an All Party Parliamentary Group of Sri Lanka (APPG-SL) all of them represented the Conservative Party. The APPG-SL comprises, in addition to Conservative Party, the Labour Party, the Liberal Democrats, Ulster Unionists and the Democratic Unionist Party (of Northern Ireland).

The Conservative Party group that visited Sri Lanka consisted of MPs, Ranil Jayawardena, Chairman of the APPG-SL, Michelle Donelan, Chris Green, and John Lamont. Jayawardena is a British national of Sri Lankan origin.

The writer forwarded the following questions to the delegation on January 5 through the proper channel and was informed of its decision not to respond on January 10: (1) When did you decide to visit Colombo? (2) Did you raise the Oct 12, 2017 statement in the House of Lords by Lord Naseby with President Sirisena, TNA MP M.A. Sumanthiran or any other politician or Sri Lanka Foreign Ministry (Minister Marapana, Foreign Secretary Prasad Kariyawasam or anyone else) (3) Did President Sirisena, MP Sumanthiran or any other Government representative raise the Naseby issue with you? (4) Did you speak with Lord Naseby before you left London? and finally can you suggest ways and means of establishing the number of dead and missing, during the war, and after?

Obviously, the Conservative Party delegation didn’t want to discuss issues raised by Lord Naseby with the media. Perhaps, the delegation couldn’t have possibly admitted that the revelations made by the former Royal Air Force (RAF) and NATO pilot hadn’t been taken up during its stay here. Statements issued by the Sri Lankan Government in respect of the British delegation’s visit didn’t refer to the Naseby’s affair.

The delegates, also visited Palaly, where they met Maj. Gen. Dharshana Hettiarachchi, Security Forces Commander, Jaffna, and Speaker Karu Jayasuriya in Colombo. Surprisingly, the delegation, nor the hosts, had taken up the Naseby issue seriously. May be, both parties, severely rattled by the Naseby revelations, are of the view they shouldn’t respond to media queries though discussions took place on the contentious issue.

Those who had compelled Sri Lanka to co-sponsor Geneva Resolution 30/1 in Oct 2015 were worried over Naseby’s challenge. They side stepped the issue on several occasions.

UN Special Rapporteur, Pablo de Greiff, too, refused to comment on matters raised by Naseby, in Oct last year. The Island received the following response on Nov 17, 2017, from Pablo’s Office: I regret to inform you that the Special Rapporteur will not be able to comment on the content of private meetings. Thanks for your understanding and best wishes." His office was responding to our queries.

The Island queries: Greiff has had a series of meetings with political and military leaders in Sri Lanka during his two-week official visit. (a) Did Sri Lankan political and military leaders or civil society representatives make representations to him regarding a statement made by Lord Naseby in respect of accountability issues in Sri Lanka and the responsibility on the part of the UN/Geneva to revisit unsubstantiated war crimes allegations against the country? (b) Did Greiff discuss Lord Naseby’s claims with Sri Lankan officials and civil society?

The UN acknowledged receipt of The Island queries on Nov 1 and promised to answer them, obviously the organization subsequently decided against.

Naseby’s Oct 12 declaration that the Vanni death toll couldn’t have been more than 8,000, though the UN quoted 40,000, and that Sri Lanka never purposely targeted the Vanni population, was made when Pablo de Greiff, UN Special Rapporteur on the promotion of truth, justice, reparation and guarantees of non-recurrence, visiting Colombo.

At the conclusion of his 14-day visit, Colombian de Greiff, at the UN compound, in Colombo, on Oct 23, 2017, referred to Lord Naseby’s statement. Una McCauley, UN Resident Coordinator and UNDP Resident Representative, flanked de Greiff. But, the UN didn’t want to answer the writer’s simple questions.

Now, the UK Conservative Party delegation has adopted similar tactics. The delegation couldn’t have stated anything contrary to the position taken by the British High Commission in Colombo. Sri Lanka Foreign Ministry, too, dismissed Lord Naseby’s statement when The Island sought its response. Subsequently, FM issued another statement to clarify its first comment that earned the wrath of the vast majority of Sri Lankans.

Army headquarters issued the following statement following the British delegation meeting with Maj. Gen. Hettiarachchi in Palaly."... delegation led by the Chairman of the All Party Parliamentary Group on Sri Lanka (APPG – SL), Ranil Jayawardana was briefed on the post-conflict military commitments in the region and civil-military cooperation projects with special focus on peace-building and reconciliation efforts, by the Jaffna Security Forces Commander during the meeting. They were also educated on other humanitarian projects, initiated by the SFHQ-J in coordination with civil sector participation."

Although, the Tamil National Alliance (TNA) Jaffna District MP M.A. Sumanthiran had met the British delegation, the Alliance refrained from issuing a statement though a photograph was issued. Having had propagated lies as regards the massacre of Tamil civilians, on the Vanni east front, in 2009, the TNA is yet to answer The Island queries in respect of Naseby’s call to amend the Geneva Resolution 30/1.

The Island submitted the following questions to TNA and Opposition Leader R. Sampanthan on Nov 27, 2017, and repeatedly reminded the Opposition Leader’s Office of the delay on its part: Have you (TNA) studied Lord Naseby’s statement made in the House of Lords on Oct 12, 2017, What is TNA’s position on Naseby’s claims?, Did TNA leaders discuss Naseby’s claim among themselves? Did TNA respond to MP Dinesh Gunawardena’s statements in parliament on Naseby’s statement? And Did TNA take up this issue with UK High Commissioner James Dauris?

Several days ago, The Island was again told of Sampanthan’s readiness to answer queries. However, that promise never materialised even though the Opposition Leader granted an extensive interview (We can’t despair, we can’t abandon things, says Sri Lanka’s R. Sampanthan, posted on January 3, 2018) to Colombo based The Hindu correspondent Meera Srinivasan and subsequently issued a statement to the media to mark Thai pongal. Sampanthan, certainly the senior most MP, in the current parliament, with six decades of experience, in his Thai pongal message expressed hope the country could replace the 1978 Constitution this year. Let me reproduce the relevant section verbatim: "...Tamil people’s long standing aspiration for a lasting political solution to the national question still remains unattained. During last year, meaningful steps were taken to frame a new Constitution in order to address this unresolved issue. As a result of such steps, an interim report of the Steering Committee has been submitted to the Constitutional Assembly which contains matters of importance that merit consideration. My prayer is that a new Constitution will be framed without any further delay in the new year, which will uphold the right of dignity, self respect and justice on the basis of equality amongst all citizens of Sri Lanka so as to ensure goodwill, unity and genuine reconciliation within an undivided and indivisible Sri Lanka."

Sri Lankans annually celebrates National Reconciliation Week, countrywide, from January 8 to 14. Unfortunately, the government and Western powers have refused to address primary issues that had undermined post-war national reconciliation efforts. The writer is of the view that national reconciliation will never be possible unless tangible measures were taken to disprove lies propagated against Sri Lanka. The Tamil community will never pardon the Sinhala leadership as long as it believed that a slaughter had taken place on the Vanni east front. Silly competitions and various other events, some sponsored by Western governments, will not make any difference as long as the Tamil community believed Sri Lanka military massacred civilians just for the fun of it. Just imagine, the response of the Tamil community if proper international examination of charges directed at Sri Lanka proved Naseby right. Naseby is on record as having declared that Sri Lanka never intentionally targeted the civilian community and the total number of civilians and LTTE cadres killed not more than 8,000. Naseby has asserted on the basis of wartime dispatches from British defence attache Lt. Colonel Anton Gash that one fourth of the dead could be LTTE personnel. Those who had moved Geneva against Sri Lanka during the previous administration and then forced the Sirisena-Wickremesinghe government to co-sponsor Resolution 30/1, in Oct 2015, are now in a dilemma. They realise that in the wake of Naseby’s revelations their project is no longer tenable. They realise Lord Naseby can be dismissed as a corrupt politician if not for wartime dispatches from the British Commission in Colombo. The bottom line is that they cannot discredit Lord Naseby without disregarding the British High Commission in Colombo. Had that happened, it would have brought all dispatches from Colombo to disrepute.

The UK should reconsider its policy towards Sri Lanka as Colombo prepares to welcome Queen Elizabeth’s representatives, Prince Edward, Earl of Wessex, and Countess of Wessex for Sri Lanka’s 70th anniversary celebration of independence on Feb 4. They’ll arrive in Colombo on 31 January and leave 4 February.

The British High Commission spokesperson said: "The Earl and Countess will travel to Colombo and other parts of Sri Lanka, celebrating the long-standing friendship between the two countries and shared interest in the Commonwealth, youth development and education.

"The royal couple will meet participants in The Duke of Edinburgh’s International Award and young Sri Lankans selected as Queen’s Young Leaders, an initiative to recognize and celebrate exceptional young people across the Commonwealth. The Earl and Countess will also meet representatives of a number of projects advancing causes they support through their work, including MENCAFEP, whose work to help differently-abled children and their families in the Nuwara-Eliya, Trincomalee and Batticaloa Districts illustrates the close links between the people of Sri Lanka and the United Kingdom.

"As the United Kingdom looks forward to hosting the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting in April 2018, their visit will highlight our countries’ shared ambition to ensure the Commonwealth is well-placed to help deliver a bright future for its Members’ citizens.

"Prince Edward is the youngest child of the Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh. The Earl and Countess support the queen in her official duties and undertake many public engagements each year in support of a wide range of charities and non-governmental organizations."

Can the UK and the Commonwealth continue to turn a blind eye to a friendly country being overwhelmed by unsubstantiated war crimes allegations. The UK-led Commonwealth never intervened on behalf of Sri Lanka, in the 80s, when regional Commonwealth power, India, destabilized its neighbour to its heart’s content. Top British diplomat here Dauris has earned the contempt of the vast majority of Sri Lankans by his recent silly attempt to dismiss Lord Naseby’s revelations, based on High Commission assessments.

There’ll never be a better opportunity than the forthcoming 70th anniversary celebrations to clear Sri Lanka of unsubstantiated war crimes allegations. The UK needs to give its consent to Lord Naseby’s call to review the Geneva Resolution. There cannot be any harm in examining allegations on the basis of all available information, particularly wartime dispatches from Western and Indian diplomatic missions in Colombo.

The world must not forget the LTTE attack on Dalada Maligawa, a few days before Sri Lanka’s 50th anniversary celebrations scheduled to take place in Kandy, in 1998. In spite of the attack, Prince Charles attended the event though many expected the UK to call off his visit. It would be pertinent to reproduce a statement that was attributed to the then main Opposition party, the UNP, in a CNN report headlined, "8 killed in Sri Lankan blast at temple," datelined January 25, 1998. The CNN quoted the UNP as having blamed the then Kumaratunga government for the attack. The CNN reported that the UNP, the country’s main opposition party, blamed the government, saying that the celebrations invite trouble.

"The government was baiting the LTTE.... It was a foolish act," the CNN quoted UNP leader Ranil Wickeremasinghe as having said.

The UNP took a similar controversial stand when the LTTE mounted a devastating attack on a civilian target in Jaffna, also during Kumaratunga administration.

The importance of a comprehensive review of Sri Lanka’s response to war crimes allegations shouldn’t be further delayed by the Sirisena-Wickremesinghe government.

A meticulously planned int’l project in jeopardy

T bond scams take their toll

SPECIAL REPORT : Part 200

January 9, 2018, 9:23 pm 

July 2, 2016 at Central Bank: President Maithripala Sirisena, Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe and the then CBSL Governor Arjuna Mahendran meet amidst moves to replace the Singaporean over treasury bond scams.

By Shamindra Ferdinando

Japanese Foreign Minister Taro Kono arrived in Colombo on the evening of January 4 with the Sirisena-Wickremesinghe administration in severe turmoil over President Maithripala Sirisena’s statement on Treasury bond scams involving Central Bank and Perpetual Treasuries Limited (PTL).

President Sirisena, who is also the leader of the SLFP, based his statement on the report of the Presidential Commission of Inquiry (CoI) that probed treasury bond scams and findings made by PRECIFAC (Presidential Commission of Inquiry to Investigate and Inquire into Serious Acts of Fraud, Corruption and Abuse of Power, State Resources and Privileges). 

Kono was accompanied by a 24-member delegation. The first official visit by a Japanese foreign minister in 15 years, couldn’t have taken place at a worse time for the government.

President Sirisena’s move placed both the UNP, as well as the SLFP, in a deeply embarrassing position, ahead of the February 10 local government polls.

Kono met President Sirisena and Premier Wickremesinghe, in Colombo, amidst desperate damage control efforts undertaken by the latter. The Grand Old Party has never been humiliated and its top leadership castigated like this before. 

Premier Wickremesinghe’s Office went to the extent of issuing a statement quoting him as having instructed Central Bank Governor, Indrajith Coomaraswamy, to implement recommendations made by the CoI once it was released.

The enormity of the fraud shook the country with Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe being urged to step down over his role in the treasury bond scams. 

Before further comment on treasury scams, let me produce a relevant Japanese Embassy statement that dealt with Kono’s visit: "This visit is aimed at further consolidating the Comprehensive Partnership between Japan and Sri Lanka, based on previous visits by President Maithripala Sirisena in May 2016, and Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe in April 2017.

"Strengthening cooperation and collaboration with Sri Lanka is important for the realization of a free and open Indo-Pacific area, based on the rule of law," the Japanese Embassy said.

Japan and Sri Lanka finalized the ‘Comprehensive Partnership’, in Oct 2015, within months after the change of the Rajapaksa government, perceived to be very close to China. The partnership should be examined against the backdrop of joint US-Japan-India response to the growing Chinese challenge, with Japan facing an enormous economic and strategic challenge from powerful China in the entire Far East.

It would be important to keep in mind that the change of government, in January 2015, paved the way for the ‘Comprehensive Partnership’. In other words, had the US-spearheaded regime change operation failed for a second time, in January 2015, Japan wouldn’t have sought the Comprehensive Partnership. That is the undeniable truth.

A brief but high level visit took place at a time Japan is concerned about legal problems that had been caused to ITOCHU Corporation/Dole investment in agricultural sector here in addition to the long-delayed Japanese funded ‘Digitization of Television Broadcasting’ project.

Dole is one of the world’s largest producers and marketers of high-quality fresh fruit and fresh vegetables and produces and markets a worldwide line of packaged and frozen foods. Japan is pursuing an agenda of its own here in addition to being party to US operation. 

The first US project went awry in January 2010 when war-winning Army Chief General Sarath Fonseka failed to defeat Mahinda Rajapaksa at the presidential poll. In the 2010 operation, those who had wanted the Rajapaksas moved out of office, fielded Fonseka as they believed he was the only one capable of depriving the former of claiming exclusive credit for defeating the LTTE.

The 2015 campaign depicted the Rajapaksas and their cronies as corrupt, while promising good governance and accountability. Those opposed to the Rajapaksas campaigned on anti-corruption platform, vowing to recover USD 18.5 bn Rajapaksa had allegedly stashed in offshore accounts. No less a person than US Secretary of State John Kerry assured US support to recover the stolen assets. The British did the same. Surprisingly, the US and the UK hadn’t said a word on treasury bond scams while foreign-funded NGOs that spearheaded the smear campaign against the overbearing former regime now are struggling to save their faces with the bond scam fallout. 

Those who had backed the regime change, in Colombo would never have expected the new government to rob its own Central Bank. That doesn’t mean the US and its allies ever had problem in protecting some very very corrupt governments in various parts of the world. William Blum’s controversial Rogue State has exposed shocking US interventions in support of corrupt and murderous governments over the years. Nahil Wijesiriya, father of Anika, who had exposed Ravi Karunanayake as to how the Karunanayke family lived at a penthouse at the expense of Perpetual Treasuries owner Arjun Aloysius, sent a copy of Rogue State to the writer during the CoI sittings.  

The US and its allies are unlikely to voice concern over treasury bond scams, in spite of the world’s solitary superpower currently engaged in high profile project to help Sri Lanka recover stolen assets. Obviously, they are only concerned about assets stolen during the previous administration whereas the present lot continues to remain in the good books of Western powers.

Obviously, the US and its allies will not undermine a government that will pursue their strategic line, in spite of being trapped by Beijing. Soon after the change of government, the Sirisena-Wickremesinghe government acted as if Beijing didn’t matter, with then Finance Minister Ravi Karunanayake publicly challenging powerful China. China hit back hard, swiftly brought Sri Lanka to its knees and caused enough turmoil until Colombo didn’t have any other option other than giving into Beijing’s dictates.

Although Western powers are likely to ignore the 2015 and 2016 treasury bond scams, what will be the reaction of the electorate at the forthcoming local government polls? With those who had contributed to Sirisena’s 2015 triumph over Rajapaksa in the fray with the SLFP sharply divided much to the disadvantage of the Sirisena faction, the polls outcome can be devastating. In fact, the UNP and SLFP partnership, under massive pressure in the wake of the presidential statement, on treasury bond scams, will suffer further, whatever the local government polls outcome be. 

Second T bond scam

Had incumbent government’s international supporters intervened in the wake of the first bond scam, perpetrated on the 50th day of President’s100-day project, the UNP wouldn’t have gone ahead with the second, a far bigger heist, in March 2016. Instead, they reiterated support to the corrupt system by endorsing dissolution of parliament to pave the way for the August 2015 parliamentary polls that enabled the re-appointment of Ravi Karunanayake as the Finance Minister. They apparently even ensured that Karunanayake was rewarded with a fake international award as the best Finance Minister in the region.

General Secretary of the Communist Party, Dew Gunasekera, who had inquired into the 2015 treasury bond scam, unequivocally blamed the top UNP leadership for the 2015 and 2016 treasury bond scams. Gunasekera, on January 5, 2018, called a media briefing at CP office, Borella, where he discussed the anatomy of treasury bond scams. 

The writer sought a clarification as to the responsibility on the part of President Sirisena regarding the second treasury bond scam. Could the second robbery have been averted if Gunasekera, in his capacity as the COPE (Committee on Public Enterprises) Chairman, was allowed to present his report to parliament? On the eve of its presentation, parliament was dissolved to save the UNP-SLFP coalition.

The decision to dissolve parliament should be examined against the backdrop of the arrangement between the UNP and Sirisena underwritten by the US and its allies. They couldn’t have allowed, under any circumstances, the collapse of a loyalist administration within months after its formation.

The UNP, SLFP and former President Rajapaksa, as well as those civil society groups, owed the country an explanation as to how Rajapaksa’s 2015 defeat automatically resulted in change of government. Rajapaksa, in spite of having a staggering two-thirds majority in parliament, for whatever the reason remained silent when Wickremesinghe was sworn in as the Prime Minister immediately after Sirisena took oaths as the President, before Chief Justice K. Sripavan. Strange, isn’t it?

Gunasekera acknowledged that the change of government, after Rajapaksa’s defeat at the presidential poll, was still a mystery to him.  

The parliamentary group loyal to Rajapaksa never bothered to challenge Wickremesinghe or seek a vote in parliament to test whether the UNP leader had the confidence of the majority of the members of parliament. At that time, the UNP parliamentary group comprised less than 50 whereas Rajapaksa commanded very much more than that number.

Joint Opposition heavyweight MP Bandula Gunawardena recently told the writer that they didn’t really know what was happening when an explanation was sought as to why they accepted the change of government.

Gunasekera still insists the change of government is a mystery.

Turning blind eye to mega robbery

President Sirisena, in spite of being strongly opposed to the despicable UNP project, has had no option but to cooperate with the UNP. To his credit, the President made strong effort to discourage PM Wickremesinghe from appointing Singaporean Arjuna Mahendran as the Governor of the Central Bank. 

Having named Mahendran as the Governor, those planning to commit the first daylight robbery moved CB employee Deepa Seneviratne to the Public Debt Department as its head in spite of her not been attached to that particular section before. It seems they had obviously felt comfortable in having a lady officer there they thought they could manipulate at will. But Seneviratne turned tables on the bond thieves by putting up a note to register her strong opposition to Mahendran’s move. The rest is history.

It would be of pivotal importance to keep in mind that the President appointed Commission of Inquiry (CoI) in January 2017, about 10 months after the second robbery, and two years after the first. The commission comprised Justice K.T. Chitrasiri, Justice P S Jayawardena and retired Deputy Auditor General V Kandasamy. Sumathipala Udugamsuriya functioned as its Secretary.

During cross examination of witness PM Wickremesinghe, it transpired how the government received US Treasury advice regarding issuance of treasury bonds in the wake of scams here. Wickremesinghe acknowledged that Sri Lanka had sought the expertise of the IMF and the US Treasury in 2017, to examine the system. Such a study wasn’t done before the 2015 change was made.

Recently, the US revealed the assigning of a resident legal advisor to help Colombo to recover funds moved overseas. The announcement was made by the State Department, in early Dec. 2017.

The Island sought an explanation from the Public Affairs Section of the US Embassy, in Colombo on Dec. 11, regarding the State Department categorizing Sri Lanka among a group of countries selected to receive US assistance to combat corruption. In spite of repeated reminders, the following questions went unanswered:

(a) Has the State Department examined treasury bond scams perpetrated in Feb 2015 and March 2016 before offering special assistance to Sri Lanka, including provision of Resident Legal Advisor, Colombo?

(b) As the State Department has revealed allocation of USD 115 mn annually for global anti-corruption activities, could the embassy reveal the allocation for Sri Lanka?

(c) What is the status of Rs 1.92 bn (USD 13 mn) USAID project meant to strengthen accountability and democratic governance in Sri Lanka against the backdrop of the country being named as one of the four countries which required US assistance to tackle corruption?

The US must be certainly ashamed of those who had been elected at the August 2015 general election, particularly against the backdrop of millions of US dollars spent on the regime change operations here. 

The Attorney General’s Department that had assisted the Justice Chitrasiri commission sustained inquiry in spite of heavy pressure brought on it by an influential section of the UNP. Karunanayake publicly challenged the commission, both in and outside parliament until the very end and continues to do so even now. The UNP reacted angrily to the commission releasing shocking data pertaining to telephone, Viber and SMS contacts among those who had been investigated.

Senior Additional Solicitor General Dappula de Livera, PC, ASG Yasantha Kodagoda, PC, ASG Priyantha Nawana, PC, Senior DSG Milinda Gunathileka, DSG Dilan Ratnayake, Senior State Counsel Shahida Barrie, Senior State Counsel Nayomi Wickremasekera, Senior State Counsel Dr Avanthi Perera, State Counsel Dhanushan Ganeshayogan, State Counsel Jehan Gunasekera. The Attorney General team was assisted by five-member teams from the Central Bank as well as the Criminal Investigation Department.

The joint AG, CID and Central Bank team proved beyond any doubt that Sri Lanka had the required expertise to undertake complex investigation. Had investigators been given a free hand to inquire into revelations made by COPE and Public Accounts Committee (PAC), many Ministers would have been found guilty of waste, corruption and irregularities. Unfortunately, parliament, in spite of boasting of 70 years of parliamentary democracy, never felt the requirement to amend Standing Orders to enable the watchdog committees to summon ministers.

A former navy chief’s assertion

The likes of National Freedom Front leader Wimal Weerawansa are often ridiculed for alleging US interference in Sri Lanka. For some strange reason, political parties here are struggling to face up to US interference at the highest level. Thanks to Wiki Leaks as well State Department statement and information that had been obtained by US-based Hassina Leelaratne through legal means, the world knows the extent of US intervention here.

Much to the disappointment of the US, the new Sri Lanka leadership had jeopardized the project by robbing Central Bank, certainly a first for any country. Retired Admiral Dr. Jayanath Colombage, Director of the Center for Indo-Lanka relations of the Path Founder Foundation, recently commented on the US intervention here in 2015. The unprecedented comment on US project was made by Admiral Colombage in Islamabad. Colombage alleged that the US and Japan spearheaded the regime change operation here. It would be better to go through verbatim what Colombage said in Islamabad at an event organized by the Center for Global and Strategic Studies (CGSS): "Consequently, India, the USA and Japan realized that the Chinese involvement and influence was seen everywhere in the Indian Ocean Region and especially in South Asia. Chinese maritime infrastructure projects were taking place not only in Sri Lanka but also in Myanmar, Bangladesh, Pakistan and the Maldives. Thus, the major powers that are strategic partners of India preferred to see Sri Lanka move away from Chinese influence. When that did not occur, they considered the next option and supported a regime change in 2015. However, this resulted in a predicament as for nearly two years no nation came forward to help Sri Lanka’s economic development after the 2015 presidential and general elections. Following this, Sri Lanka had to reconnect with China in a position of weakness. During this period our economy suffered and now it has fallen to the 6th place among SAARC countries. This is a result of major strategic competition in the Indian Ocean. It is important to note that this region is heavily militarized and nuclearized. An example of this militarization is evident from the number of warships that belong to different countries visiting Sri Lankan ports. From 2009-2017 a total of 398 war ships have visited Sri Lankan ports. A breakdown of this is as follows: India - 82; Pakistan - 24; Japan - 67; Bangladesh - 23; China - 31; USA - 18; and Russia - 26."

Political parties should make a genuine effort to examine foreign interventions here without further delay. They lacked the courage to face up to the challenge....a growing challenge that seems to be too tough for Sri Lanka to handle.

One-time Indian High Commissioner in Colombo (1997-2000) Shivshankar Menon, in his Oct, 2016 launched memoirs, ‘Choices: Inside the making of India’s foreign policy’, indicated that New Delhi had reason to desire a change of government, in Sri Lanka, due to the then President Mahinda Rajapaksa going back on his pledge in respect of Sri Lanka-China relations.

Menon directly alleged that the former President received Chinese funds for his political campaigns, and projects.

The change of government, in January 2015, also paved the way for Western powers to secure the Sirisena-Wickremesinghe government’s consent on Geneva Resolution 30/1 meant to humiliate Sri Lanka. In accordance with the Geneva doctrine, Sri Lanka was told to introduce a new Constitution at the expense of its unitary status, with outgoing Human Rights Commissioner Zeid Ra’ad al-Hussein declaring, in June 2016, the new supreme law should be subjected to a referendum.

But now the project seems to be in tatters with the government being overwhelmed by the fallout of the treasury bond scams. Weakened by corruption charges, the government will find it difficult to sustain the constitutional making process, a project entrusted on the Sirisena-Wickremesinghe administration by Western powers.

For a government struggling to cope up with even basic responsibilities such ensuring smooth supply of petrol as well as fertilizer, bringing in a new Constitution, seems certainly a daunting task that cannot be surmounted.