| Political Column | ||||||
| |
||||||
| SB
issue: The other side of midnight If the jailing of ex-Minister Sumanasiri Banda Dissanayake was to become hi-octane fuel injector for an otherwise sleepy United National Party (UNP), that was short lived. A hyped turbo-charged campaign against the UPFA Government misfired, at least for the moment. There were no references this week on most front pages of the print media or prime time slots in TV networks to the issue. So much so, it seemed the issue did not exist. For the ex-minister, the release of his two sons from an assault charge having to pay a fine of Rs. 40,000 for damaged property was the only silver lining in his life now. He was telling his visitors that in his youth he would bathe at the many "peellas' or water-sprouts found in the upcountry areas, but after being a minister he was used to hot water baths. The first days were difficult to get back to cold showers - he gets up at 4 am , an hour before the other inmates, so that he can have more than the given 4 minutes., for a bath. He did miss the air-conditioning and the three meals of rice a day as well, but he can rest assured that he is not the first elected member to be sent to jail for Contempt of Court. Nearly 70 years ago, in August 1935, Francis Molamure was left with the then princely sum of Rs. 50,000 by his uncle the famous Maduwanwela Rate Mahattaya, and the District Court of Ratnapura had decreed that he could take Rs. 35,000 of that amount and leave the rest for the Estate. However, Molamure, then a member of the State Council had taken the entire sum. The Chief Justice McDonald wanted legal action taken against Molamure and asked the Attorney General to take appropriate action. The AG said that no criminal charged could be filed, but that Molamure could be charged on Contempt of Court. Molamure's lawyers argued that such a case had to be heard at the Ratnapura District Court itself. Chief Justice McDonald however over-ruled the argument saying that any Contempt was deemed to be Contempt of the Supreme Court as well, and a three-judge Bench found him guilty and sentenced him to 6 (or 9) months in prison. Molamure lost his seat ( Dedigama ) in the State Council, but S.B. Dissanayake can take heart from the fact that Molamure later became Independent Lanka's first Speaker. The one event of any significance that did occur however was the letter written from his cell by S.B. Dissanayake to his senior Counsel Romesh de Silva. Well, the letter was not actually written by him, it was drafted for him, and his signature obtained by a UNP MP from the Galle district. As everyone knows, MPs are permitted free access to any prison in the country at any time between 5 in the morning and 5.30 in the afternoon. They are not permitted to take meals to inmates, and the purpose of permitting free access is for the peoples' representatives to be able to see the working conditions of the prisons and its inmates. This has now turned out to be an ideal occasion for UNP MPs to use the S.B. Dissanayake cell as the operational headquarters for the party's re-organisation plans. It is, however, turning out to be a headache for the prison authorities, hinting as they are, that if this continues, that the prisoner may have to be transferred to another jail. The contents of the letter from S.B. Dissanayake - written on Parliament stationery and addressed from "Welikada Jail" dated December 15, 2004 betray sharp differences with his Senior Counsel. That it has surfaced post facto (i.e. after his sentencing) is what is at issue. He says that one Prabath Nanayakkara (no reference is given as to who he is) came with a message that his Contempt matter before the Supreme Court will be dropped if the UNP dropped the matter relating to the Chief Justice's name transpiring in an incident where a posse of policemen on night patrol checked the identities of a couple parked at the Diyawanna Gardens near the Parliament complex. Chief Justice Sarath Silva went on record denying that he was the person in the parked car, and Police are still investigating the matter, three months later. S.B. Dissanayake's letter then goes on to say " Thereafter, on my instructions over the phone ... you were requested to meet the Chief Justice and get an assurance to release me without punishment on the basis that I admit the said statement (i.e. probably the statement he made at the Vap Magul ceremony at Habaraduwa on which he was found guilty of Contempt of Court)". By this admission, S.B. Dissanayake is giving away a possible reason why the opposition UNP suddenly went mute after the ho-ha it raised when it was told that the Chief Justice had been found in a parked car with a lady lawyer near the Parliament complex one night. The self-confession only serves as a terrible indictment on S.B. Dissanayake and the UNP that their political opportunities were sacrificed at the altar of personal expediency of the National Organiser. Then comes the most devastating part. S.B. Dissanayake goes on to tell Romesh de Silva that he was persuaded to admit the contents of the controversial statement he had made at Habaraduwa in November last year as Agriculture Minister only after his Senior Counsel (Romesh de Silva) had met the Chief Justice and obtained a tacit nod to admit the statement, and in return, that he would be released. S.B. Dissanayake claims that Romesh de Silva told him this on the mobile telephone of his personal lawyer Chandana Perera, and later at a consultation where other lawyers were also present, the same thing. In his penultimate para, S.B. Dissanayake says, " I am now greatly perturbed on the turn of events with the punishment of two years rigorous imprisonment imposed on me on the 7th of December which is not what you conveyed to me". He ends up by saying he wished to canvass this order that sent him to jail, and asking Romesh de Silva for an affidavit regarding his (purported) discussion with the Chief Justice. Now, this letter has created a new twist to the saga that took the nation, and not least, S.B. Dissanayake by surprise. Last week we reported in these columns that Romesh de Silva had asked his client for written instructions on wanting to make an admission before the Supreme Court rather than fight the case out to the bitter end, especially after Senior Counsel had filed a strong answer to the charges preferred against his client. The Supreme Court order, naturally does not refer to any of these developments, and its judgment clearly shows that S.B. Dissanayake adopted different positions at different times when confronted with the speech he had made at Habaraduwa. According to the judgment, the accused had first denied making some of the remarks, then said he admitted some not others, and when the tape-recording of his speech was repeatedly played over inside the Court to him, he had admitted making these remarks. His Defence, filed by way of written submissions, was that he was a populist politician, and he was only speaking to some farmers in the backwoods of Habaraduwa. The Supreme Court remarked that the truth was coming out only in "driblets" from the former Minister. When we contacted Romesh de Silva yesterday he confirmed that he had received this letter but said he was unable to say anything on the record because it involved professional communications. However, in the course of the telephone conversation we got the distinct impression that Romesh de Silva was not in agreement with the facts in the letter. All this drama is like the Sydney Shelden thriller, 'The Other Side of Midnight', where a man and his mistress plead Not Guilty to the murder of the man's wife. They are charged with murder though the body has not been found. Halfway through the trial, where they are winning, thanks to the guile of their brilliant defence attorney, they are told by a third party to plead guilty in return for a light sentence. Instead, because of their plea, they are found guilty, and eventually executed. The 'murdered' wife later turns up. On the other side of Welikada Jail, the party in the meantime is preparing the groundwork for its major rally at Hyde Park in Colombo scheduled for next Tuesday (21st), where it will be asking for the release of its National Organiser. The Long March from Hangurenketha, his constituency in the Nuwara-Eliya district to Colombo in time for this meeting, which started off with 2,500 people led by his wife Tamara, melted down to some 300 - all women - at Kegalle by Friday night. A week later, on Dec. 28, the party plans to launch its anti-government offensive from Kandy. In the meantime, however, the party has got embroiled in a messy legal tangle over the S.B. Dissanayake issue. Former Attorney General and Cabinet Minister Tilak Marapana gave an interview to the 'Lakbima' where he said that his one-time colleague could only get relief through a Presidential pardon. The basis for saying this was that Article 105 (3) of the Constitution states that the Supreme Court can mete out any punishment for Contempt of Court; that Articles 89 and 91 refer to who can be an elector (and therefore an MP), and who is disqualified from sitting as an MP. What Marapana meant by this is not that the UNP should go and beg for a Presidential pardon, but to show the serious consequences that flowed to the party's National Organiser by the severity of the punishment, and that the party should create a climate for a justifiable demand for the President to pardon her one-time political ally turned bitter enemy. These comments of Marapana have nevertheless ruffled feathers among his partymen who are demanding S.B. Dissanayake be released at least to attend Parliament as an MP. Former Finance Minister K.N. Choksy and former Constitutional Affairs Minister G.L. Peiris hold opposite views to Marapana, though they themselves have different views among themselves on the interpretation of Articles 105 (3), 89 and 91 of the Constitution. Marapana's remarks to 'Lakbima' were probably spurred by a previous comment by former Fisheries Minister Mahinda Wijesekera who also demanded for a Presidential pardon for his colleague, and Marapana's own experience of appearing in a case against incumbent Consumer Affairs Minister Jeyeraj Fernandopulle in some airport and aviation case where he (Marapana) argued against a 7-bench Supreme Court hearing a revision application on Contempt of Court filed by Fernandopulle. Marapana argued then that the Court has no jurisdiction to hear such a revision application, and won the case, while Fernandopulle was fined Rs. 50,000. Partly obscuring the S.B. Dissanayake issue, however, was an otherwise not so politically exciting event - Indian mega star Shahrukh Khan's performance at a musical event in the former Race Course along Reid Avenue in Colombo. While the UNP was only boasting of getting millions on the streets to protest the jailing of their National Organiser, hundreds turned up to protest the gala musical event. Not that there were no other musical shows on Saturday, December 11. There were many others that Saturday, among which was the show 'Thuruna Shakthi' at Galle. The very day of Ven. Gangodawila Soma Thera’s death anniversary (December 12) state run Sri Lanka Rupavahini telecast a countrywide musical event 'Nil-wala Hara Sara' from the Sanath Jayasuriya Stadium in Matara to coincide with the 10th anniversary of President Chandrika Kumaratunga assuming the exalted office. A sick mastermind or more saw to it that a grenade was hurled just before the show ended. The result -- loss of two innocent lives. The consequences if any of the Indian artistes were killed would have been unimaginable. That could have been similar to how the Arabs were treated in the United States soon after the now infamous 9-11 incidents there. The fact that no Indian national died does not mean feathers have not been unruffled. In fact The Sunday Times learnt New Delhi was displeased that neither the Presidential Secretariat nor the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, or the Tourism Ministry that part-organised the event had thought it fit to reach out to New Delhi or the Indian mission in Colombo to express their concerns over the incident, to apprise them of developments, to inquire over matters related or even to ask whether India's investigators would want to join in the probe. That such was the treatment to a country that had contributed a staggering US $ 500 million in investments in Sri Lanka seems to have been ignored is bad enough. Worst, it appears, is the feeling in New Delhi that it was to India that some politicians ran whenever there were the mildest security threats in Sri Lanka, be it a frightening Tiger guerrilla military build-up in Trincomalee or looming guerrilla threats to the City. In Colombo, India's Deputy High Commissioner Mohan Kumar and senior Indian High Commission officials in Colombo met Tilak Ranaviraja, Secretary to the Ministry of Public Security, Law and Order. They were assured there would soon be a breakthrough and the case would be cracked. But the next day, Senior Superintendent Sarath Lugoda, head of the Colombo Crimes Division, was appealing in the state media for public co-operation to solve the case. If a breakthrough was imminent, why pray for public co-operation, asked one Asian diplomat. But the lessons to the world community came within minutes if not hours after the dastardly incident at the former Race Course that Saturday night. Instead of thoroughbred horses, it was murderers and their accomplices who were now galloping away. The state-run Rupavahini, the national television network, interrupted its late night programmes to announce that a gang linked to a powerful opposition politician from Kotte was involved in the blast at the Bollywood concert. Quoting unnamed police sources, Rupavahini also alleged that the group involved in the attack had earlier in the day met two leading monks of the Jathika Hela Urumaya. The Sunday Times which reported this SLRC claims on the front page last week, quoted UNP's Kotte Parliamentarian Ravi Karunanayake as saying he had not heard of the report and did not wish to comment. If the claims were correct, that seemed both sordid and macabre. Karunanayake, a Shahrukh Khan fan, was himself present at the show, after which he attended the Old Bens dance. Giving a semblance of credence to the Rupavahini report was the President of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka, the Minister of Defence and Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces, Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga. She openly accused the parliamentarian from Kotte of involvement in the incident. This indeed is a world's first. Even before the Police, the main investigative arm of the State could begin investigations, the Head of State and Head of Government had declared the culprits behind the attack. This could be a good lesson for other countries. A Defence Attache representing a foreign country made an interesting quip. To quote him would become the first step to have him declared persona non grata. He said "if you know within minutes who is behind the violent incidents, why the bl...y h.... don't you stop it, and prevent deaths and colossal embarrassment to your country" But, many days after the incident, the Police are yet to find evidence to either confirm or even to remotely suggest that the persons identified by their Commander-in-Chief were in any way involved. Of course the Police could say one thing like all others - that those named were present at the event. Not even after they went to the offices of newspapers and TV stations to collect pictorial evidence could they identify any possible suspects. Is this not a lesson for the whole world of how a country's law enforcement machinery works? After 57 years of independence, we have a Police force, which is facing accusations over its top brass rubbing shoulders with drug barons. Last Monday, a morning newspaper quoted Police Chief Chandra Fernando as saying that he believes the attacker could not have carried out the grenade attack without being seen. "I am sure at least a few persons in the audience saw the attacker," he was quoted as saying. Leave alone the Inspector General of Police of Sri Lanka, even a lowly Reserve Police Constable could have said this. For it is very clear that the two killings and injuries were caused by a grenade throwing and not through the firing of a ballistic missile from Karachi in Pakistan or Kilinochchi in the Wanni. One is reminded of the legendary Peter Sellers who played the lead role in his popular comedy series The Pink Panther. Acting as Inspector Cleuseau he visited a crime scene and remarked, "whoever threw this stone is only a stone's throw away." How come Police Chief Fernando's own men who were there in hundreds could not see who threw the grenade? After all, whoever threw the grenade was only a grenade's throw away. Not when all of them were aware of the unruly mobs who posed security threats from the morning of Saturday. Is this not a sad chapter in a once commendable Police service? Another lesson for Police services throughout the world. An important lesson that comes out of this episode -- no amount of new measures would be effective unless the Police who are expected to enforce them are cleaned up. This time it is not the poorly paid constabulary who get kicked around more than footballs but the top brass who are being paid millions. Then to our ebullient Minister of Industry, Tourism and Investment Promotion, Anura Priyadarshi Bandaranaike. Ahead of his annual sojourn in Los Angeles (his 40th to the City of Angels), where he goes to rest and recuperate after gruelling public duties at home, he called upon the Tourism Ministry Secretary, P. Ramanujam for a report on the musical show and the arrangements made for it. Should it not have been the other way around. Was it not the responsibility of his Ministry to have ensured, particularly when foreign artistes are to perform, whether the organisers have made the proper arrangements. That is to ensure bad planning and the resultant developments do not damage Sri Lanka's reputation as a tourist destination. Why the Minister took umbrage only after the grenade attack is another question. It was well-known that Shahrukh Khan is a good friend of Deputy Minister of Tourism Arjuna Ranatunga, and together with the Chairman of the Tourist Board Udaya Nanayakkara they had part-organised the show under the banner of the Tourism Ministry. Some short-circuit somewhere made Anura Bandaranaike shout blue murder calling for reports and what not. Hilarious enough, the current probe to ascertain why no toilets had been provided and why refreshments were over priced comes only after the event. It was not only Shahrukh Khan's mega show that was to bring out some historic lessons. There were other instances too. Another was the Government's call to Norway's Special Envoy Erik Solheim to fly by a fixed wing aircraft of the Sri Lanka Air Force from Ratmalana Airport to Vavuniya. From there he was asked to go by road through the A-9 to meet LTTE leaders in Kilinochchi. Why? All because the Government failed to obtain a guarantee from the Sri Lanka Monitoring Mission (SLMM) that their aircraft will be safe. One is not sure whether to laugh or cry. Even if an assurance is not given, who in the world would believe that the Tiger guerrillas would shoot down a Sri Lanka Air Force helicopter bringing in a Norwegian peace envoy to territory dominated by them? No one except a few in the Government of Sri Lanka. Otherwise such a silly ruling would not have been given. It took President Kumaratunga to change this decision just the night before Solheim and party boarded a helicopter. Our Defence Correspondent deals with this new record by the UPFA Government in his column ' Situation Report '. Also this week, the UPFA reminded the whole world that one need not be in the Opposition to criticise or oppose a Government. It could be done, and done well, by a constituent partner. And the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP), the junior partner of the UPFA, has gone down in history as one party that has done it much better than others. Not even the LSSP during the then Premier, late Sirimavo Bandaranaike's era. The JVP won left handed accolades from the European Union for this conduct. It came soon after the JVP, which received with open arms over Rs 11 million in aid from the Royal Norwegian Government, spurned a request by its Ambassador Hans Brattskar for a meeting. Instead of merely turning down the request, in an unconventional response, they berated Norway and urged them to withdraw from the peace process. The letter to Ambassador Brattskar came from Tilvin Silva, the JVP General Secretary. According to a Peace Secretariat source, this development saw the Norwegian envoy make a call on Secretary General (of the Peace Secretariat and aspirant for UN Secretary General) Jayantha Dhanapala. He sought clarification whether Tilvin Silva's statements represented Government policy or represented the UPFA view. After the meeting, the answers to the questions raised by Ambassador Brattskar were publicly refuted by Foreign Minister Lakshman Kadirgamar. He said Silva's view, or the JVP view, did not constitute Government policy. He also made clear Silva was not even a member of the Cabinet. The issue did not stop at that. On Wednesday three of the four donor co-chairs who pledged a staggering US $ 4.5 billion, hit out at the JVP. They said: "The representatives of three of the four co-chairs of the Tokyo Donors Conference (Japan, European Union and the United States) called on Her Excellency President Kumaratunga on December 14. The co-chair representatives reaffirmed their support for the President's efforts to resume peace talks. They expressed deep concern about the ongoing JVP-led actions against the peace process in Sri Lanka and the Government of Norway's efforts as facilitator of that process. The representatives expressed their bewilderment that a member party of the UPFA could engage in such a campaign in absolute contradiction of the clearly stated position of the President and the Government that they endorse and support the Norwegian role. "The representatives urged the President to address the problem. The representatives re-iterated to President Kumaratunga their full support for the peace process in Sri Lanka and Norway's efforts as facilitator." Whatever the JVP's claims are, the joint statement is not only a slap in the face. It has other serious nuances. In issuing the joint statement, the three donor co-chairs have endorsed a substantive part of LTTE leader, Velupillai Prabhakaran's "Martyr's Day" speech. In this speech, Prabhakaran made some very critical references to the JVP and now the three donor co chairs have seemingly endorsed it. The JVP did not take this lightly firing back with an equally-strong letter. |
||||||
Copyright © 2001 Wijeya Newspapers
Ltd. All rights reserved. |
