21st A: Split SLPP loses ground, BR suffers setback

 SPECIAL REPORT : Part 441

Published

  2022/10/26

In the run up to the 2019 presidential polls, SLPP nominee Gotabaya Rajapaksa with brothers, Mahinda and Basil, at the SLPP office, Nelum Mawatha, Battaramulla

The founder of the Pohottuwa party, Basil Rajapaksa, has suffered a severe setback. All political parties, represented in Parliament, sunk their differences to bring back constitutional impediment that prevents Basil Rajapaksa’s return to Parliament. The UNP’s only MP, Wajira Abeywardena, and the vast majority of the145-member SLPP parliamentary group, voted for 21st Amendment that would thwart Basil Rajapaksa for the time being. UNP leader Ranil Wickremesinghe wouldn’t have secured the presidency on July 20 to complete the remainder of ousted President Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s five-year term, without Basil Rajapaksa’s blessings. At the behest of the strongman, the SLPP voted for Ranil Wickremesinghe. The UNPer won at the expense of Dullas Alahapperuma, who obtained 82 votes, mostly SJBers, whereas Wickremesinghe secured 134. The enactment of the 21st Amendment seemed to have stalled Basil Rajapaksa, on his tracks, having aspired to be national leader at any cost.

By Shamindra Ferdinando

Former Health Minister Pavitradevi Wanniarachchi recently declared that regardless of who served as the President, that person should abide by the decisions taken by twice President Mahinda Rajapaksa.

Ratnapura District SLPP (Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna) lawmaker emphasized that Mahinda Rajapaksa’s word, on whatever matter, should be accepted by all, including the President, regardless of the consequences.

Ever the blind Mahinda Rajapaksa loyalist, Wanniarachchi said so at the launch of the SLPP campaign meant to revive the party, amidst continuing deterioration of its position, both in and outside Parliament. The declaration was made at the meeting chaired by Mahinda Rajapaksa, at Kalutara, on Oct 08, close on the heels of calling off the vote on the 21st Amendment to the Constitution. The vote that was to be taken in the first week of October had to be put off due to the warning issued by the SLPP.

MP Wanniarachchi faulted ousted President Gotabaya Rajapaksa for the heavy setbacks suffered by the SLPP. Declaring that only those with political background should have been given top posts in their government, the Ratnapura District MP alleged that the SLPP suffered as a result of its pathetic failure to provide jobs.

Turning towards Mahinda Rajapaksa, and sounding more like a frivolous schoolgirl, rather than the Attorney-at-Law she is, Wanniarachchi recalled how she, in her capacity as Minister of Youth Affairs and Samurdhi, provided jobs for her supporters in the public sector. Appreciating the support extended by the then President Mahinda Rajapaksa for her endeavours, MP Wanniarachchi lashed out at President Gotabaya Rajapaksa for depriving her of that opportunity.

Exposing more of her immature and selfish thinking, despite the terrible situation the country is facing, the former Health Minister alleged that she couldn’t recruit even one supporter, during her tenure as Health Minister whereas her predecessors, Maithripala Sirisena, and Nimal Siripala de Silva, recruited 10,000 each. Obviously, she hadn’t heard, or taken any notice of the ongoing debate over how massive expansion of the public service contributed to the unprecedented economic fallout.

Public Administration Secretary Priyantha Mayadunne, in late May this year, didn’t mince his words when he warned political parties, represented in Parliament, state and private sector trade unions, and the civil society, that they would soon be categorized as traitors unless they agreed to a far reaching economic reforms agenda.

In late August, the Governor of the Central Bank, Dr. Nandalal Weerasinghe, vigorously assailed the political party system when he was invited by Speaker Mahinda Yapa Abeywardena to address the members of Parliament. Soft spoken Dr. Weerasinghe dealt with the current situation, and related issues at hand. The CB Governor flayed those who governed the country, including the present lot, for bankrupting the country.

Obviously, MP Wanniaarachchi didn’t care or seemed to have conveniently turned a blind eye to ground realities. Otherwise she wouldn’t have blamed Gotabaya Rajapaksa for not allowing her, as well, to further expand the public service, now an unbearable burden on the taxpayer. She had also forgotten the daunting challenge posed by Covid-19, at that time, and the national economy was in such a precarious state a large scale recruitment campaign would have been unthinkable.

A week later, the SLPP followed up with the second meeting of its propaganda campaign. The second meeting, held at Mahindananda Aluthgamage’s Nawalapitiya stronghold, was meant to consolidate the SLPP. However, last week it, and the man who behaved as its godfather, dual citizen Basil Rajapaksa, may have suffered an irreparable setback when the Parliament overwhelmingly voted for the 21st Amendment. A staggering 179 members voted for the new amendment, during the division held at the end of the second reading, whereas just one SLPP, MP Rear Admiral Sarath Weerasekera, voted against it. Subsequently, at the third reading of the Bill, 174 voted in favour, and Sarath Weerasekera again voted against the Bill. Of the 179, who voted for the new law, five refrained from doing so in the third division. Weerasekera had the guts to stand by his principles and voted against the 19th Amendment.

The Navy veteran declared, in Parliament that he couldn’t vote for the 21st Amendment that was meant to revive the 19th Amendment that he then, too, opposed it alone. His stand should be applauded as no other MP, serving the current Parliament, had the strength to take a principled stand. On that day, during the crucial vote, 45 lawmakers hadn’t been present.

A large section of the Rajapaksa Camp abstained, though Chamal Rajapaksa, his son Shasheendra Rajapaksa, and Namal Rajapaksa, voted for it. Among those who skipped the vote was the chief organizer of the Kalutara public rally, MP Rohitha Abeygunawardena and Pavitradevi Wanniarachchi. However, in spite of being dubbed as a staunch Rajapaksa loyalist, Mahindananda Aluthgamage voted for the 21st Amendment. The following is the list of government MPs, not present in Parliament, on that day: Mahinda Rajapaksa, Pavitra Wanniarachchi, Gamini Lokuge, Sanath Nishantha, Sagara Kariyawasam, Jayantha Ketagoda, Sanjiva Edirimanne, Prasanna Ranatunga (overseas), Mahinda Amaraweera (overseas), Prameetha Bandara Tennakoon (overseas), Anuradha Jayaratne (overseas), Siripala Gamlath (overseas), Dr. Seetha Arambepola (overseas), Rohitha Abeygunawardena (overseas), S.M.M. Mushraff (overseas), Maj. Pradeep Udugoda (overseas), Nipuna Ranawaka (overseas), Wimalaweera Dissanayake (hospitalized), Sahan Pradeep Withana (hospitalized), Jayantha Weerasinghe (sick), Janaka Bandara Tennakoon (sick), S.M. Chandrasena (State funeral of Ven. Pallegama Siriniwasa), Johnston Fernando (have to attend Court) and Nalaka Bandara Kottegoda (wedding of his brother)

Jathika Jana Balavegaya (JJB) lawmakers, Anura Kumara Dissanayake, Vijitha Herath and Dr. Harini Amarasuriya voted for the new law, while four out of the10 Tamil National Alliance (TNA) MPs skipped the vote. Rebel SLPP MP Prof. G.L. Peiris was out of the country whereas his group voted for the new amendment. The former Foreign Minister would have definitely voted for the new law if he was present in Parliament, on Oct 21. Other notable absentees were Speaker Mahinda Yapa Abeywardena, Chief Government Whip Prasanna Ranatunga, Johnston Fernando and Sagara Kariyawasam. As party General Secretary Attorney-at-law Kariyawasam wielded immense power being close to Basil Rajapaksa.

Of the 40 parliamentarians, who abstained, approximately 30 skipped the vote over the following issues: (a) With the passage of the new Amendment, anyone who is a dual citizen will no longer be allowed to be a member of Parliament, and present dual-citizen MPs will also lose their seats (b) The constitutional amendment also allows the President to dissolve the Parliament after two and a half years of a Parliament being elected.

In addition to the above-mentioned issues that infuriated former Finance Minister Basil Rajapaksa, the new law also ensured a role for the Opposition Leader in the appointment of civil society members to the constitutional council.

Prez consolidates his position

President Ranil Wickremesinghe has consolidated his position at the expense of the SLPP. At the time the then President Gotabaya Rajapaksa invited Wickremesinghe to accept the premiership, on May 12, he wouldn’t have envisaged losing the presidency to the UNP leader. The SLPP, too, wouldn’t have realized the consequences of electing Wickremesinghe, on July 20, to complete Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s term. The SLPP voted for Wickremesinghe, at the expense of Dullas Alahapperuma, who managed to poll 82 votes, while the winner obtained 134. The SLPP’s strategy caused another split in the party as 13 of its members broke ranks. The SLPP dismissed the challenge posed by the dissidents. They were denied the opportunity to speak in Parliament. Key members were also deprived of positions in the coveted parliamentary committees.

Friday’s vote proved that of the 145-member SLPP parliamentary group, elected at the 2020 August parliamentary election, it has been reduced to between 20 to 30. The Rajapaksas, who voted for the 21st Amendment, are among that group. Chamal Rajapaksa, his son Shasheendra Rajapaksa, holding state ministerial post, and Namal, aspiring to re-join the Cabinet, move can be safely described as a precautionary measure. The SLPP is in a dilemma. The once powerful political grouping is now in a political minefield. But, the Rajapaksa group should never be underestimated to prevent unnecessary complications.

It would be pertinent to mention that a section of the SLPP parliamentary group (Vasudeva Nanayakkara, Wimal Weerawansa, Udaya Gammanpila, Gevindu Cumaratunga et al) vigorously campaigned to retain the 19th Amendment provision on dual citizenship. The 19th Amendment, enacted in 2015, disallowed dual citizens from contesting parliamentary or presidential elections. They refused to vote for the 20th Amendment over the discarding of that provision. But, they changed their stand after getting an assurance from President Gotabaya Rajapaksa, that provision would be included in the proposed new Constitution. The new Constitution project never materialized, though a nine-member expert team, led by President’s Counsel Romesh de Silva ,drafted a new Constitution.

Although many asserted that the enactment of the 21st Amendment diluted executive powers, the incumbent President retained sufficient powers to face political challenges. Contrary to speculation, President Wickremesinghe is very much unlikely to exercise conditional authority to dissolve Parliament, two and half years after the first meeting of the incumbent Parliament. Wickremesinghe is expected to complete the remainder of Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s five-year term. The UNP leader wouldn’t, under any circumstances, explore the possibility of holding early parliamentary elections as his party wouldn’t be able to take any advantage from it in the current state of the country.

With just one seat in Parliament, the UNP is not in a position to face early elections at a time the country is experiencing severe economic difficulties. Chances of re-unification with the main Opposition, Samagi Jana Balavegaya (SJB), their erstwhile colleagues at the moment, also seem unworkable, unless the UNP can engineer a mass exodus from the SJB.

The Thilini-Janaki affair reverberates

Before the vote on the 21st Amendment, Justice Minister Wijeyadasa Rajapakse, PC, raised a privilege issue over the reportage of Thilini Priyamali’s case, by a section of the media. Denying a statement attributed to Maithree Gunaratne, PC, that the alleged fraudster was represented by lawyers from Wijeyadasa Rajapaksa’s chambers, an angry Minister alleged that some journalists could be bought for two bottles of arrack. Gunaratne appeared for businessman Abdul Sakthar who had been defrauded to the tune of Rs 226 mn. Minister Rajapaksa requested Speaker Mahinda Yapa Abeywardena to direct the House privileges committee to initiate an inquiry into the alleged unfounded allegations directed by the media. The Minister, who is also the Chairman of the House privileges committee, said that he would step down from his post, temporarily, to allow another member to lead the investigation.

Wijeyadasa Rajapaksa, who first entered Parliament in May 2004 and served different political parties, alleged that some media believed they could manipulate and influence governments. The Minister warned that the media would be appropriately dealt with for propagating lies. Wijeyadasa Rajapakse declared that the day he received a ministerial appointment he closed down his Chambers.

In the wake of the Justice Minister declaration in Parliament, Maithree Gunaratne, in an interview with Chamuditha Samarawickrema (Truth with Chamuditha on social media) said that having seen Attorney-at-Law Dasun Nagasena (Coordinating Secretary to the Justice Minister) and Rakitha Rajapaksa (Justice Minister’s son) at the Fort Magistrate Court, representing Thilini Priyamali, he quipped that the Justice Minister’s full team was here.

Gunaratne said that the media had picked up the conversation between him and the lawyers representing Thilini. Responding to another query, Gunaratne declared that had he served as the Justice Minister he wouldn’t have his sons to represent an accused in such a controversial case.

Gunaratne, no stranger to controversies, questioned the failure on the part of law enforcement authorities so far to apprehend CEO and Director of The One Transworks Square (Pvt) Ltd. Janaki Siriwardena, whose name transpired in the Fort Magistrate Court, and in police investigations. Alleging that a lawmaker in the current Parliament protected Siriwardena and interfered with investigations, Gunaratne said that the matter was brought to the notice of the Fort Magistrate Court. The lawyer asserted that The One Transworks Square (Pvt) Ltd., or Krrish project, built on a five acre land, provided by the Urban Development Authority (UDA), is the eye of the storm. Reference was made to those who had invested in that particular project.

Responding to Chamuditha Samarwickrema’s questions, Gunaratne said that his client invested Rs 226mn with Thilini Priyamali’s Thico Investments based at the World Trade Center on the advice of former Western Province Governor Azath Sally. Gunaratne acknowledged that his client made the investment on the basis of the assurance given by Azath Sally, who is believed to have known Janaki Siriwardena for nearly 20 years.

Gunaratne speculated that the total amount of money collected by Thilini Priyamali and Janaki Siriwardena duo could be as much as Rs 6 to 7 billion though at the moment they estimated the misappropriated sum at Rs 3 bn. The President’s Counsel stressed that an impartial investigation couldn’t be possible as long as Janaki Siriwardena remained free. They discussed whether among those who received calls from Thilini Priyamali after her arrest was Janaki Siriwardena. They also deliberated on the suspect requesting Rs 30 mn from a person to secure bail/release.

Gunaratne questioned the culpability on the part of the Central Bank and the banking system. How could they have failed to detect the transfer of extraordinarily large sums of money within a short span of time?

The Fort Magistrate court was told last week how Rs 3 bn deposited and withdrawn from an account belonging to Thilini Priyamali between January and June this year. Gunaratne disclosed that Thilini Priyamali’s luxurious office at the WTC had been opened by a senior official of the Sampath Bank.

Referring to the yahapalana government allowing the Easter Sunday carnage (April 2019) to take place by ignoring specific intelligence received from India, Gunaratne pointed out that the police and the Attorney General Department pursued an agenda meant to protect the wrongdoers. The lawyer cited the failure on the part of the police and the Attorney General to arrest senior DIG Deshabandu Tennakoon who failed to prevent May 09 attacks on Galle Face protesters in spite of specific directive from the then President Gotabaya Rajapaksa, a glaring case of inaction. Gunaratne acknowledged that he couldn’t say where the embessled money had been secreted to, but expressed the strong belief such a vast amount of money couldn’t have been spent.

Gunaratne asserted that perhaps the Thilini Priyamali-Janaki Siriwardena duo carried out the ‘operation’ within a couple of months.

Over a week ago SJB MP Hesha Vithanage, too, raised the issue at hand. The MP questioned the circumstances under which some interested party posted a list naming several Opposition MPs, including him as investors in the Thico project. The lawmaker questioned the rationale in naming them when former first lady Shiranthi Rajapaksa accepted an invitation from Thilini Priyamali to attend the launch of a movie in March last year. MP Withanage said that former President Maithripala Sirisena, too, had been among the guests. Former President Mahinda Rajapaksa’s Office has denied links between Mrs. Shiranthi Rajapaksa and Thilini Priyamali and also the family.

The Rajapaksas are in a bind, struggling to cope up with new political alliances in the making. The decision for three Rajapaksas to vote for 22nd Amendment and the rest, including Mahinda Rajapaksa to abstain appears to be nothing but a desperate measure that further undermined the party. However, such measures are unlikely to help the Rajapaksa camp to regain lost ground. The SLPP seems unlikely to recover heavy damages suffered with the constitutional impediment imposed on dual citizen Basil Rajapaksa with the passing of 21A.

Thico ‘investments’, money laundering and related matters

 SPECIAL REPORT : Part 440

Published

  2022/10/19

Violence cannot be justified, under any circumstances. Therefore, the practice of referring to the JVP bids to topple the governments of the late Mrs. Sirimavo Bandaranaike (April 1971) and JRJ and Ranasinghe Premadasa (1987-1990) as southern insurrections should be stopped. The armed forces and police defeated the JVP and LTTE terrorism. Several other Tamil terrorist groups gave up violence in 1989/1990.

Today, some groups are represented in Parliament. The author of ‘Terrorism & the Criminal Law of Sri Lanka’, Attorney-at-law Asela Seresinghe, who researched at the University of Sydney, under the Australia Awards Scholarship Programme for LL.M, dealt with relevant and related issues. Accountability issues cannot be discussed without taking into consideration the immense sacrifices made by the armed forces and police to ensure the continuation of democratic way of life and the utterly reckless and irresponsible conduct of the corrupt political party setup that has brought the country to its knees. Continuation of Sri Lanka’s pathetic performance, at the Geneva based United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC), where the country is under heavy pressure to rescind the Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA), reminds the public of the recurrent failures on the Geneva front, especially in light of the fact the USA and the UK have much more draconian laws in place to tackle the problem of terrorism.

By Shamindra Ferdinando

The recent high profile arrest of Thilini Priyamali, over the misappropriation of massive amounts of money, underscored the need for a no holds barred investigation into her nefarious activities, as well as those of her ‘investors,’ and her employees. But, it wouldn’t be fair to tar all with the same brush.

In spite of quite an extensive coverage of the case, with the focus on Priyamali’s clandestine transactions, and that of her ‘husband’ Isuru Bandara, several contentious issues remains to be properly addressed and investigated.

However, Sri Lanka’s record in investigating high profile cases is pathetic. As examples, we can site quite a few: corruption charges pertaining to the multi-billion dollar aircraft purchase, involving the national carrier SriLankan Airlines, and the Europe-based Airbus consortium, black money stashed abroad, exposed by Panama Papers, Pandora Papers, and 99 percent of revelations about waste, corruption, irregularities, and mismanagement made by parliamentary watchdog committees, have not been pursued to a proper conclusion by those responsible for doing so.

Perhaps, one of the major concerns is whether Priyamali, and those who invested money through what was advertised as a well-diversified duly registered Thico Group of Companies, were involved in money laundering. For a woman, from an ordinary low income family, in Kalutara, with an education only up to eighth grade, there has to be something more to this whole scam.

Priyamali’s enterprise, that claimed to have been established in a range of industries, including construction, entertainment, gem and jewellery, real estate and trading, operated from the 34th floor of the World Trade Centre, situated within walking distance of the Central Bank, and, virtually, under its nose. What is the Bank’s supposed top intelligence unit doing? The couple even exploited the current economic crisis to seek short term foreign currency investments, on the pretext of procuring the much needed crude oil.

It would be pertinent to ask whether the Central Bank has initiated an inquiry into the Thico affair or looked into the lapses on its part. The Central Bank has repeatedly failed to effectively intervene to stop scams operated by various influential groups who preyed on both the corrupt and the naive. Prima facie Thilini Priyamali’s operation seems no exception but a basic much repeated scam, but on steroids.

The One Transworks Square (Pvt.) Ltd. Chief Executive Officer and Director, Janaki Siriwardana, has been accused of facilitating Priyamali’s operation. In the wake of the CID taking Isuru Bandara into custody, on Monday, now the focus is on Siriwardhana. Former Governor Azath Sally is on record as having said that Janaki Siriwardhana, who introduced him to Priyamali at the former’s office, was involved in the alleged scam. Sally said that altogether he and his associates handed over Rs 226 mn to the Priyamali-Siriwardhana duo. The former UNPer questioned the right of the public to ask how they got so much money, according to an interview he gave to Hiru.

Money laundering is meant to disguise criminal proceeds, particularly their illegal origin. One of the primary objectives of money laundering, under whatever circumstances, is to conceal ill-gotten wealth.

Kamal Hassen’s disclosure

The Trico Group controversy should be vigorously examined, taking into consideration the extremely serious accusations and allegations made by prominent businessman Kamal Hassen, the first to seek the intervention of law enforcement authorities. Having lodged a complaint with the Criminal Investigation Department (CID), several weeks ago, with the help of Senior DIG Deshabandu Tennakoon, the senior officer in charge of the Colombo Range. Utterly frustrated with the system in place, Hassen discussed how Thilini Priyamali and Isuru Bandara swindled him of AUD 100,000, USD 60,000 and 136.75 gold sovereigns. Hassen’s exclusive interview with Chamuditha Samarawickrema (Truth with Chamuditha) should certainly help the CID to ascertain the truth.

Hassen accused the Officer-in-Charge of the Fort police station of interfering in his case, on behalf of the suspect.

The intrepid businessman also questioned how the Thico Group proprietor obtained approval for her bodyguards to carry automatic weapons, in a high security zone. Clearance has been received during the previous administration (before the change of the government in July this year).

Responding to Samarawickrema, Hassen revealed that he was inquiring into the alleged involvement of a well-known person whose identity he declined to reveal. Pressed for an answer, Hassen identified the culprit as a man. At one point, Hassen disclosed how Thilini Priyamali received a call from former first lady Shiranthi Rajapaksa, in response to a call she made two minutes before. Hassen alleged that it was all part of the fraudster’s strategy to unnerve those who had been targeted.

When the writer requested Hassen to clarify some of his accusations therein, the businessman stressed that lawyers, appearing for the fraudster recently, tried to convince him, at the Fort Magistrate Court, where the case is heard, to settle it out of Court.

Hassen repeated what he told Samarawickrema that he was offered Rs 10 mn as the initial payment to drop the case. “The culprits have a right to retain lawyers of their choice. There is no dispute over that. Lawyers, too, cannot be faulted for accepting cases. That is their undisputed right.” Hassen said.

He said that he rejected the disgraceful proposal made by a lawyer, on behalf of the accused, as he wanted to pursue the case. In spite of the interviewer pressing Hassen to name the lawyers, he declined to do so.

However, according to Hassen, the alleged fraudster was represented by two President’s Counsels and four other lawyers. Hassen insisted that he talked to the lawyer who made, what he called, an indecent proposal.

Thilini Priyamali is expected to be produced in the Fort Magistrate Court today (19) from remand. The Bar Association of Sri Lanka (BASL) can inquire into this. But, as always the BASL would conveniently say it wouldn’t do so unless the outfit received a complaint. (The writer received that response when an explanation was sought regarding the high profile Aeroflot case in which the conduct of Attorney-at-Law Aruna de Silva received the attention of the Justice Ministry. The lawyer represented the plaintiff the Ireland-based Celestial Aviation Trading Company Ltd., with Avindra Rodrigo, PC, (litigation) of FJ & G.de Saram, leading law firm from colonial times. The Justice Ministry found fault with lawyer De Silva for accompanying a fiscal officer of the Commercial High Court of the Western Province to deliver a court ruling given by High Court Judge S. M. H. S.P. Sethunge in next to no time on 02 June. The government owes an explanation.

Perhaps the Justice Ministry should explain the current status of that particular investigation in the wake of the Office of Chief Justice Jayantha Jayasuriya, PC, being informed of the issue at hand.

Terrorism & Criminal Law

Attorney-at-Law Asela Seresinhe couldn’t have launched ‘Terrorism & the Criminal Law of Sri Lanka’ at a better time. Seresinhe dealt with a range of issues, including money laundering (Prevention of Money Laundering Act No 05 of 2006/page 112). Would the Thico Group of Companies be subjected to a comprehensive inquiry? Only time will tell.

Former Attorney General, Palitha Fernando, PC (2012-2014) in his foreword, recommended Seresinhe’s work for students of international law, the academics as well as the general public, including politicians.

Fernando suggested that ‘Terrorism & The Criminal Law of Sri Lanka’ be translated for the benefit of Sinhala and Tamil speaking people.

Former AG Fernando recollected the time Asela and his wife, Maheshika, served as young officers at the Attorney General’s Department at the time he served as the AG. During his tenure as the AG, at the behest of the then President Mahinda Rajapaksa, Parliament impeached Shirani Bandaranayake, the 43rd Chief Justice. She was removed in January 2013. Seresinhe served as a State Counsel in the Criminal Division of the AG’s Department (2007-2017).

Draconian anti-terrorist laws

Seresinhe has quite rightly acknowledged that in the absence of awareness and understanding, a section of the public distrusted anti-terrorism laws (Prevention of Terrorism Act), the Public Security Ordinance and Emergency Regulations. The operation of the criminal justice system, too, is a matter of concern, author Asela Seresinhe has said, while profusely appreciating the contribution made by his father-in-law Anil Silva, PC, in overall enhancement of his legal knowledge.

Seresinhe has examined the issues at hand against the backdrop of the enactment of the PTA (Temporary Provisions) (Amendment) Act No 12 of 2022 in March this year before violent public protests erupted against the then President Gotabaya Rajapaksa. Having acknowledged the absence of universally acceptable Convention relating to terrorism, the author discussed a wide range of issues and related matters taking into consideration both domestic and international developments/situations as well.

The author mentioned 19 specific international instruments, relating to terrorism (Sri Lanka is a party to 11,out of 19). Seresinhe also made reference to the ‘SAARC Regional Convention on Suppression of Terrorism’ finalised in Kathmandu, Nepal, on Nov 04, 1987, meant to battle domestic and regional terrorism, as well as Law of Armed Conflict/International Humanitarian Law. It would have been better if the author briefly discussed the Indian destabiliation project that was meant to pave the way for the deployment of the Indian Army in Sri Lanka. By the time SAARC finalized the anti-terrorism law, the Indian Army was deployed in the Northern and Eastern regions, in Sri Lanka, in terms of the Indo-Lanka accord, forced on the then JRJ government. Actually, successive governments had pathetically failed to address accountability issues, raised by the Geneva-based United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC), in respect of Sri Lanka’s response to separatist Tamil terrorism. The UNHRC has focused on the fourth phase of the war (2006-2009), while turning a blind eye to the Indian destabilization project, in the run up to the deployment of the Indian Army here (July 1987-March 1990) and atrocities committed by the Indian Army. India never acknowledged the grave violations committed by its Army.

Actually, Sri Lanka never dared, at least, to refer to the status of the Indian Army deployment here. Geneva, too, conveniently ignored the contentious issue. The undeniable truth is that the Indian Army hadn’t been really subjected to Sri Lanka’s domestic laws, nor the Indian sponsorship of terrorism here ever probed. But, India, now a close ally of the US, vis-à-vis China, served as a member of the UNHRC. India abstained at the vote, on the latest resolution, moved in Geneva, against the war-winning Sri Lanka that pulled off an incredible victory despite all odds stacked against her, especially by the West. Altogether 20 countries abstained. Twenty countries voted for, whereas seven voted against.

The UNHRC is seriously concerned about the PTA. Geneva wants the law abolished. President Ranil Wickremesinghe’s government is under heavy pressure, by Western powers, to do away with the PTA with a section of the Opposition, too, finding fault with the Wickremesinghe-Rajapaksa government for using the PTA to suppress those still protesting against the government. Sri Lanka’s anti-terrorism law has become a huge issue, with those represented in Parliament sharply divided over the incumbent government’s response. But it is a fact that some key Aragalaya activists, while claiming to be peaceful protesters, when the opportunity arose they put into operation their sinister plans, as on May 09 when they looted and torched properties of government politicians, right across the country. Likewise, they stormed the PM’s office and even chased the President out of the country, and also torched the private residence of Mr. Wickremesinghe, by taking the law into their own hands. Luckily for the country, President Wickremesinghe took timely counter measures, after taking office, and, thereby, prevented the overrunning of Parliament, as well, in nick of time.

Whatever various interested parties, especially foreign funded NGOs propagated, all countries are vulnerable and should be prepared to face any eventuality. Some of those who advise Sri Lanka on accountability issues are the worst violators of international laws. The US-UK led invasion of Iraq on ‘sexed up’ intelligence reports on the growing threat posed by Saddam Hussein’s Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMDs), or other Western interventions, as in Libya and Syria, never received genuine attention of the UNHRC. That is the reality. Ruination of Iraq is just one example of the murderous Western strategies meant to annihilate those who didn’t fall in line with their agenda.

UK example

Lawyer Seresinhe asserted that Sri Lanka’s PTA (Prevention of Terrorism Act (Temporary Provisions) Act No 48 of 1979 that had been influenced by the UK legislation, introduced in 1974, to face the challenge posed by IRA terrorism. The lawyer underscored the need for substantial changes to the PTA in view of the continuing threats. The National Thowheed Jamaat (NTJ) mounted the 2019 Easter Sunday attacks at a time the Sirisena-Wickremesinghe administration was busy planning to replace the PTA with new anti-terrorism law. The yahapalana lot pushed for the enactment of the new law, citing the Easter Sunday carnage which could have been thwarted if the government acted on specific intelligence received from the government of India. Obviously, the then President Maithripala Sirisena, and the top UNP leadership, were too preoccupied in fighting an internecine war of their own in the yahapalana government, and its bureaucracy, by their dithering, facilitated the NTJ terror project, by sitting on high value intelligence provided by New Delhi.

The author faulted the political party system for undermining what he called ‘truth seeking’ process. This comment has been made as regards the assassination of one-time National Security Minister Lalith Athulathmudali, in April 1993, and the contradictory positions taken by the police, backed by Scotland Yard, and a Commission appointed, in 1995, by the then President Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga, in terms of the Special Presidential Commission of Inquiry Law No 07 of 1978. It would have been better if the author, at least, briefly discussed the assassination, widely believed to be one of the most controversial political killings.

The police pointed the finger at the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), primarily on the basis of the recovery of the body of Appiah Balakrishnan alias Ragunathan, an undercover LTTE operative. The body was found on the following day on Mugalan Road, at Kirulapone. Both the Sri Lanka police and Scotland Yard asserted that Ragunathan, having been shot by an Army deserter (Tilak Shantha), employed by Lalith Athulathmudali, in spite of injuries suffered, scaled over the nearby wall and ended up on Mugalan Road.

The bullet fired by Tilak Shantha was found on Ragunathan’s body. Having ridiculed and dismissed the Scotland Yard report, the Presidential Commission held that the late Sirisena Cooray and the late Ranasinghe Premadasa ordered the assassination.

‘Terrorism & the Criminal Law of Sri Lanka’ is a must read for those interested in contemporary security issues, including law students, general public, including politicians as suggested by Palitha Fernando, PC.

Against the backdrop of the US, the UK and India exerting pressure on Sri Lanka over accountability issues, the US imposition of travel ban on Chief of Defence Staff (CDS) General Shavendra Silva and his family, in Feb 2020, and the UK considering action against one-time commander of the celebrated Task Force 1/58 Division, the Chapter 8 that dealt with anti-terrorism laws, in the UK, India and the US, is perhaps one of the most interesting sections.

A forgotten episode: Black Sea Tiger raid on Colombo port

 SPECIAL REPORT : Part 439

Published

  2022/10/12

The Israeli built Dvora Fast Attack Craft (FAC) that blew up the explosives-laden Black Sea Tiger craft in the Colombo harbour. The then Ports and Shipping Minister, the late A.H.M. Ashraff, who visited the port hours after the April 1996 incident, declared that necessary counter measures were in place to thwart the suicide raid. Acquired in the 90s, the FAC is still in service.

By Shamindra Ferdinando

Having read the writer’s review of ex-Lankadeepa defence correspondent Ratnapala Gamage’s Ranabime Panhinda (Notes from the battlefront), retired Lieutenant L.S.A.N.T. Siriwardhana sought an explanation regarding the absence of at least a reference to the high profile raid on the Colombo harbour, in April 1996.

The Australia-Sri Lanka dual citizen pointed out that the unprecedented LTTE (Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam) foray into the heavily guarded Colombo port never received the attention it deserved.

“Ratnapala Gamage discussed the commando-style LTTE raid on the Bandaranaike International Airport, carried out in late July 2001 though he left out April 1996 raid on the Colombo port,” Siriwardhana said, asserting perhaps the media never had sufficient access to the required information.

Siriwardhana declared that he felt the need to discuss the Colombo port attack against the backdrop of Sri Lanka’s latest humiliating defeat at the Geneva-based United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC). In the absence of a comprehensive examination of the overall war, with the focus on major specific incidents and developments, successive governments failed to counter continuing propaganda against the country, and its valiant fighting men, by interested parties.

Siriwardhana said that even over 12 years after the successful conclusion of the war, the government hadn’t been able to properly record the conflict. Therefore, Sri Lanka’s failure to effectively counter propaganda and the resultant developments should be a matter of serious concern, Siriwardhana said.

LTTE issues statements from London

Following the raid on the Colombo port, on April 12, 1996, the LTTE issued two statements from its International Secretariat, situated at 211, Katherine Road, London E 6, IBU, UK. The LTTE credited the Black Sea Tigers with the attack. It also showed how the British continued to mollycoddle the terrorists, on its soil, even long after the Tigers assassinated former Indian Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi, in May 1991, on all types of pretexts. The UK turned a blind eye to the assassination of President Ranasinghe Premadasa and several lawmakers. Having openly nurtured Tiger terrorists we wonder whether the UK has any right to accuse us of doing any wrong in single handedly crushing that organization, termed by none other than the US Federal Bureau of Investigation, as the most ruthless terrorist organization.

According to the LTTE statements, dated April 13 and 15, 1996, Black Sea Tigers succeeded in destroying three Fast Attack Craft (FACs) and three supply vessels, in the Colombo harbour. The writer covered the Black Sea Tiger incursion which, according to the Sri Lanka Ports Authority (SLPA), had been detected by two minor employees. The two employees, identified as boatmen, had made the chance detection, off the Jaya Container Terminal Stage One. Swift intervention, by the Navy, led to the destruction of an explosive-laden suicide craft, close on the heels of the killing of two underwater saboteurs (LTTE frogmen, identified themselves as ‘Aiya’ (April 15, 1996, The Island). But, later, the deaths of altogether at least four underwater saboteurs were reported.

The Black Sea Tigers raided the Colombo port one year after the LTTE’s extraordinary success in the East, as it launched Eelam War III. The LTTE resumed open warfare, without any warning, with the sinking of two Shanghai Class gunboats moored at the gunboat pier at the SLN dockyard, in the Trincomalee harbour. Underwater saboteurs blasted the vessels SLNS Ranasuru and SLNS Soorya, acquired in 1991 and 1971, respectively, just hours after the LTTE quit the Norwegians arranged negotiations. The LTTE credited two men, and an equal number of women of the Black Sea Tigers, for the attack. A week later, the LTTE brought down two Avro transport aircraft over the strategic Palaly airbase, on two consecutive days. The military lost over 100 officers and men. Shoulder-fired heat-seeking missiles, acquired from the Mujahedeen, in Afghanistan, delivered stunning blows. The suicide strikes, and the introduction of missiles, stunned the Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga government.

But, the raid on the Colombo port, a year later, involved both Black Sea Tigers and an explosive-laden boat.

It was meant to cripple the economy by discouraging foreign vessels, plying international shipping lanes, calling on Colombo. Had the LTTE succeeded, Sri Lanka would have suffered irreparable damage.

It would be pertinent to mention that the LTTE targeted the Colombo port, in the aftermath of the loss of the Jaffna peninsula. Operation ‘Riviresa,’ involving three Divisions, brought back Jaffna town, and its suburbs, under government control, in the first week of Dec. 1995. Having secured the Waligamam region, by Dec. 1995, the military consolidated about 50 percent of the Thennamarachchi and Vadamaratchcy sectors, in the peninsula, by April 1996. The then President CBK’s administration had the upper hand with the entire peninsula under its control. Having launched Eelam War III, the LTTE lost Jaffna peninsula, before the end of that year, and sought to deliver a knock-out blow. The LTTE picked Colombo port to stage a spectacular attack. In spite of 24-hour surveillance, after months of reconnaissance, undertaken by Tiger intelligence operatives, the LTTE mounted the operation on April 12, 1996, as the country was preparing to celebrate the Sinhala and Tamil New Year.

Successful counter-attack

Siriwardhana, who had been the Command Operations Room officer (West) of SLNS Rangala, on the day of the Black Sea Tiger foray, made available to the writer the correspondence he had with Navy headquarters, as well as the Office of the President, pertaining to the incident. In addition to them, there were other documents that dealt with the issue.

Interestingly, the correspondence had taken place two years after the attack on the Colombo port, after Navy headquarters announced awarding of the ‘Rana Wickrama Padakkama’ (gallantry medal) to Lieutenant Commander L.R.N.A. Wijetunga, who had joined the crew of Dvora (P441) that destroyed the explosives-laden Black Sea Tiger boat, tasked to destroy one of the vessels in the harbour.

Siriwardhana challenged the awarding of gallantry award to Wijetunga, who had been the Duty Staff Officer (DSO) (West) at the time of the attack. Why did Wijetunga take the risk of a ‘Dvora ride’ at the time the Colombo port was under attack? What made him skip his primary task of taking control of the Command Operations Room? Instead, Wijetunga, who had been the senior most officer at the scene, boarded the Dvora contrary to his primary responsibility. Did Wijetunga shirk his primary responsibility? But, did he voluntarily risk his life by joining the Dvora crew facing a possible suicide attack?

At the time of the attack, four top officers, responsible for the Western Command, hadn’t been available. Commander Western Naval Area Commodore H.R. Amaraweera, Deputy Area Commander, Captain S.P.F. Wijeratne, Commanding Officer, SLNS, Rangala and Executive Officer, SLNS Rangala, hadn’t been available. Therefore, DSO Wijetunga had been the senior most officer responsible for taking counter measures. Perhaps, he felt confident in joining the Dvora crew, leaving the counter-attack in the hands of Lieutenant Siriwardhana who, efficiently, manned the Command Operations Room. In hindsight, the counter-attack couldn’t have been handled in a better way.

Lieutenant Siriwardhana, in a letter dated Sept. 23, 1998, addressed to the then Commander of the Navy, raised the issue, while categorically denying his intention was to secure a medal.

Having joined the Navy, through the Kotelawela Defence Academy (KDA) Intake IX, as an Officer Cadet, Siriwardhana served as an Electrical Officer and left the service, in 1999, due to an injury suffered playing rugger for the KDA and the Navy. Siriwardhana migrated to Australia in 2012. In spite of leaving the country, Siriwardhana pursued the matter, even after Gotabaya Rajapaksa won the presidency at the Nov. 2019 election.

A bid to deceive Navy

Lieutenant L.S.A.N.T.
Siriwardhana

The Black Sea Tiger operation got underway, on April 11, at 7.40 pm, with an anonymous call to the Command Operations Room that sea pirates were planning to board a merchant vessel, outside the Colombo harbour. The call was received by Siriwardhana, who had been, manning the Command Operations Room, at SLNS Rangala. Siriwardhana, however, felt that the caller was making an attempt to trick the Navy to deploy available vessels to track down sea pirates, and, thereby, would have facilitated the Black Sea Tiger operation. Siriwardhana based his assessment on the basis of specific information pertaining to (1) expected arrival of Lanka Asitha, carrying the multi-role Kfir ground attack aircraft. The fighter aircraft were to be unloaded at the Jaya Container Terminal (JCT). The aircraft were the first fighter jets acquired by Sri Lanka since the 1991 acquisition of Chinese fighters (2) Mercs Hendala, another merchant vessel, was being loaded with military hardware, at the Bandaranaike quay. The north-bound cargo was for troops engaged in operations in the Jaffna peninsula (3) SLNS Shakthi (Landing Ship Tank), too, was being loaded at the Rangala pier number 1 with military cargo for troops deployed in the North and (4) another vessel was discharging LP gas near the guide pier.

Anticipating a possible LTTE bid to infiltrate harbour defenses, Siriwardhana, in his capacity as the Command Operations Room officer, having alerted the DSO, regarding the anonymous call received, deployed two lightly armed locally-built Inshore Patrol Craft (IPCs) at the two entrances to the Colombo harbour. The officers-in-charge were told not to chase any suspicious moving craft in the vicinity. The sailor, at the radar watch, and other units assigned for the unenviable task of guarding the harbour, too, were alerted. At 8 pm, April 11, Siriwardhana handed over the Command Operations Room responsibilities to the next officer. Siriwardhana returned to the station at 4 am, on the following day, April 12, and was told of the withdrawal of one IPC. That left one IPC with the daunting task of meeting unforeseen threats. According to Siriwardhana, the sentry at the pilot station, detected the underwater movement and brought the development to his notice at 5.45 am, though the SLPA, at that time,claimed the initial detection was made by two of its minor employees. One cannot deny the ambiguity therein, but regardless of who received the credit for the detection, the Navy cannot, under any circumstances, absolve itself of the responsibility for security at ports.

Dvora confronts Black Sea Tiger craft

Responding to the warning from the sentry at the pilot station, Siriwardhana dispatched two smaller patrol craft to the area where underwater movements were alleged to have taken place. The looming threat was also brought to the notice of the DSO (West). Then one of the two patrol craft confirmed the presence of a diver to Siriwardhana and proceeded to use explosives against the target. As the Navy eliminated the underwater threat, the sailor at the radar point had brought to the notice of his superior that an unauthorized boat was making a bid to enter the harbour through the northern entrance. Siriwardhana, struggling to cope up with the new threat, directed two patrol craft though one of them lacked the main armament. The two boats, and the sailor at the sentry, engaged the boat as Black Sea Tigers fired Rocket Propelled Grenades (RPGs).

However, Dvora P 441, that had been moored at the Rangala pier, had immediately intervened without being directed by the Command Operations Room. Siriwardhana, in his Sept. 23, 1998. letter acknowledged the timely intervention made by the Dvora. Siriwardhana stated: “Then I realized that P 441(Dvora) had gone for assistance and subsequently heard a loud explosion, learnt that the terrorist boat had been destroyed by the Dvora.” The LTTE craft is believed to have been manned by at least five persons.

The then Lt. D.K.P. Dassanayake, Staff Officer, Harbour Defence (later Navy spokesman) had commanded the Dvora in the absence of its Commanding Officer Lt. Commander Manoj Jayasuriya. A salvo from the Dvora blew up the enemy craft. The blast indicated that it had been laden with high explosives. In addition to Dassanayake, the second-in-command of the Dvora Lt. Nalina Dayananada had been onboard the vessel but can the Navy justify Wijetunga joining the crew at the expense of his given task.

Oil tanker ‘ARMA,’ moored at the North pier, car carrier SINGHA ACE at the guide pier, SEA LAND ENDEAVOUR docked at the Jaya Container Terminal 1 pier, and NEDLOYED OBRIDJAN berthed at the Queen Elisabeth Quay, were damaged as a result of RPGs and other weapons fired by Black Sea Tigers.

Perhaps the LTTE had inside information regarding the arrival of four Kfirs and the unloading of a large stock of artillery shells and mortars. The Army warehouse, within the harbour, was one of the key targets whereas there were other ships and assets. The Navy recovered bodies/parts of bodies of four terrorists though six were believed to have been involved in the operation. The boat, laden with explosives, was to enter the port, following near simultaneous attacks carried out by the six infiltrators. But, the chance detection of underwater saboteurs, and the ensuing blasts, prompted Black Sea Tigers, operating the explosives laden boat, to enter the port.

P 441 had been tasked on that particular day to meet any eventuality. Had there been a minute delay, on the part of Dassanayake in taking the Dvora out, the consequences would have been catastrophic. But, P 441 wouldn’t have made a difference if not for the detection made by the sentry at the pilot station, according to the Navy. However, for some reason, the Navy deliberately failed to ascertain the circumstances leading to the detection and the counter-attack. Some officers expressed disgust and disappointment and, at least one, protested.