Columns

Like manna from heaven, the two-thirds landslide victory at the August 5 parliamentary election, the alliance is now reaping other political windfalls. It is raining on them as dividends from the internecine frictions within opposition parties in Parliament. Paradoxical enough, the main cause is the once powerful United National Party (UNP), no longer in the hallowed precincts, not even occupying a bonus seat that fell on its lap.

The tussle over the leadership continues. After UNP leader and former Prime Minister, Ranil Wickremesinghe’s defeat in the Colombo district, together with the rout of his party in all other districts, he continues to retain the leader’s post. He championed the Commonwealth Latimer House principles on the three branches of government, the separation of powers between the Legislature, the Executive, and the Judiciary.  Yet, biting the bullet is not easy. He is facing pressure from at least two different fronts, one to appoint a septuagenarian to replace him and the other to leave it in the hands of a young and able politician.

Apart from his own political weaknesses, he is arguably one politician who has faced the most backstabbing and double crossing. That too from those high and mighty within his own party on whom he had imposed immense trust. The catalogue is too long. There were a handful, the awfully close buddies, notoriously called the “gang of four,” who kept him in good spirits with sunshine stories about his immense popularity, public acceptance, and promising survey results. The others spoke of his wrong doings, not to him but behind his back. All this is now water under the bridge but there are cardinal lessons for aspiring future political leaders. One UNP leader who learnt the hard way was President Ranasinghe Premadasa. Whatever faults he may have had, his hands were literally on the pulse of the people. He diagnosed their feelings and shared their pains in his rise from a cantankerous Municipal Councillor to the Presidency. In the exalted seat of the Presidency, however, he lost that touch and did not know how alienated he was from reality until an impeachment motion sprang up on him from within his own camp.

His son, Sajith Premadasa, leader of the Samagi Jana Balavegaya (SJB), has returned to Parliament with 53 more seats. He has thus become the Leader of the Opposition, after a short stint before. He is yet to cut his teeth in the new office. In his first speech in Parliament, on the unanimous election of the Speaker, Mahinda Yapa Abeywardena, he spoke in English whilst most others did so in Sinhala. This week he told Parliament that as a convention, the government in power has ceded to an opposition member the posts of chairpersons of the Committee on Public Enterprises (COPE) and Committee on Public Accounts Committee (COPA). He was unaware, till he was reminded by another MP, that the post of COPA chairman was held by Lasantha Alagiyawanna, a member of the government until dissolution of Parliament in March.

Prime Minister Mahinda Rajapaksa receives from Parliament Secretary General Dhammika Dasanayake a journal titled Parliamenthu Sara Sanhitha containing information regarding a wide range of subjects related to Parliament. Foreign Relations Minister Dinesh Gunawardena is on the left and Speaker Mahinda Yapa Abeywardena is on the right. Photo credit: Prime Minister's office.

With just three days of Parliament sittings so far, the absence of a strong opposition is being felt. Issues of public interest have been sidelined, like for example, the nationwide blackout and subsequent power cuts. Power Minister Dullas Alahapperuma on Wednesday tabled at the Cabinet the report of a committee which said it was an error caused by one individual. Minister Alahapperuma had earlier told a public meeting in Matara that he would resign if his Ministry was in any way involved.

That remark sounded hilarious. The Ministry of Power does not directly operate power generators nor distribute electricity in Sri Lanka. Why then should his Ministry be blamed? One is reminded of an incident in neighbouring India in August 1956 when Lal Bahadur Shastri (later Prime Minister) was the Railways Minister. He sent in his resignation to Premier Jawaharlal Nehru after two different railway accidents.

This created an uproar and Congress MPs appealed to Nehru not to let Shastri go. They said the Minister should be lauded for offering to resign but pointed out that the letter of resignation should not be accepted. The mishap was on account of technical failure. Shastri had his way and Nehru forwarded the resignation to the President for acceptance.

Nehru later told the Lok Sabha “I talked to him. I saw the great distress of his mind and the burden he was carrying. Afterwards I thought of it again and I came to the conclusion that it would be better for me to advice the President to accept his resignation, not because I hold the Railway Minister responsible— obviously not—and I have also spoken in high terms of his work and joint work we have done together… no man can wish for a better colleague in any undertaking… A man of the highest integrity, loyalty, devoted to the ideal, a man of conscience and a man of hard work. We can expect no better. It is because he is such a man of conscience that he [feels] deeply whenever there is any failing in the responsibility entrusted to his charge.”

Also, in 2017, Indian Railway Minister Suresh Prabhu offered his resignation to Prime Minister Narendra Modi, taking moral responsibility for the two train derailments in four days. He announced his resignation.  Instead of offering to resign, which no one asked, it is important Minister Alahapperuma makes sure that future blackouts and power cuts do not occur. That is his prime public responsibility. After all, the Ceylon Electricity Board (CEB), the power generator, comes under his Ministry. So does the Lanka Electricity Company, the power distributor.

ECONOMIC FRONT

Prime Minister Mahinda Rajapaksa has kickstarted efforts to revive the economy. His first task, as Finance Minister, was to introduce a Vote on Account which was debated in Parliament on Thursday and Friday.

This is to make financial provision for the period from September 1, 2020 and ending on the day immediately preceding the date of commencement of the Appropriation Act providing for the services of the financial year 2020 or ending on December 31, 2020 whichever date occurs first

(a) sums not exceeding rupees nine hundred forty-nine billion seven hundred sixty-three million four hundred sixteen thousand (Rs. 949,763,416,000) payable out of the Consolidated Fund.

and (b) sums not exceeding rupees seven hundred ninety-five billion nine hundred twenty-four million eight hundred thirty-seven thousand (Rs. 795,924,837,000) shall be payable out of the Consolidated Fund, and

(c) sums not exceeding rupees two billion (Rs. 2,000,000,000) in the aggregate, shall be payable by way of advances out of the Consolidated Fund.

(d) and sums not exceeding rupees one thousand three hundred billion (Rs. 1,300,000,000,000) shall be proceeds as loans to be raised in terms of relevant laws whether in or outside Sri Lanka, for and on behalf of the Government.

The above include financial allocations for ministries to operate till yearend.

Premier Rajapaksa’s efforts are now being focused on the 2021 budget which is most likely to be presented to Parliament in November. One of the matters engaging his close attention is relief measures to poorer sections in the form of a package. Another is a review of some aspects of the tax structure.

On Wednesday evening, ahead of the Vote on Account, the government parliamentary group met at Temple Trees. Premier Rajapaksa was in the chair and in attendance were both Treasury Secretary, S. R. Attygalle and the Treasury’s Natioal Budget Director Jude Niluksha. Also present was Ajit Nivard Cabraal, State Minister for Money and Capital Market and State Enterprise Reforms. They explained the rationale behind the introduction of a Vote on Account. Significant enough, an MP asked Attygalle whether the government has printed money. “Yes,” he replied and deftly added that it was done in a way that it would “not contribute to inflation.” That diplomatic response ended any further questions on the subject though some eyebrows were raised.

CONSTITUTIONAL CHANGES

The issue of constitutional changes figured again at Wednesday’s weekly meeting of the Cabinet of Ministers. Three of them – Wimal Weerawansa, Udaya Gammanpila and Vasudeva Nanayakkara – were to point out, one after another, that besides the provision relating to Right to Information, the Audit Commission should also be incorporated in the 20th Amendment. In fact, this position has been accepted by the Government.

However, President Gotabaya Rajapaksa, who wanted to obviate delays, was to opine that such changes could be brought about when a new Constitution is introduced. He noted that it would be advisable to first remove the 19A and move forward. Thereafter, the new Constitution could incorporate all what was necessary, he pointed out. It was then that Minister Weerawansa had proposed that work related to both the abolition of 19A and the new draft constitution should begin simultaneously. The ministers, a source said yesterday, accepted the proposal. Justice Minister Ali Sabry will present a Cabinet memorandum for approval, possibly next week, with the names of an Experts Committee. They will undertake the task and be ready by the time the Legal Draftsman formulates the draft 20A.  Thus, in a short time after 20A is passed, Parliament will be ready to take up the draft new Constitution. This will, however, be a time-consuming process allowing those contesting any provision to go before the Supreme Court. Moreover, Parliament will have to sit as a constitution making body and scrutinise provision by provision of the draft new Constitution.

On August 19, the Cabinet of Ministers decided to give approval to the Legal Draftsman (LD) to (i) draft proposals to restrict the term of Parliament to five years (Note: These provisions exist at present. However, with the annulment of the 19A, the idea is to re-introduce them in 20A)  (ii) For the Justice Minister to provide advice to the Legal Draftsman in consultation with the Cabinet, wherever required, (iii) Submit the draft for Parliament approval after obtaining the Attorney General’s approval and the publication of a Gazette notification, and (iv) or Justice Minister to appoint an Expert Committee to draft a new Constitution. It came on a recommendation made by Justice Minister Sabry.

ENTER KARU JAYASURIYA

It was reported in these columns (Political Commentary – the Sunday Times July 26) that former Speaker Karu Jayasuriya was at the Hill Club in Nuwara Eliya whilst canvassing for his son-in-law, Navin Dissanayake (a UNP candidate who lost in the Nuwara Eliya district). This drew a response from Deshamanya Jayasuriya, a soldier, a diplomat, and a former Speaker (Political Commentary – the Sunday Times August 2). He told old friends that he had not taken part in any campaigning. He said he was not engaged in any political activity but had seen his daughter whilst in Nuwara Eliya. However, the position appears to have changed in the recent weeks and Jayasuriya (79) publicly declared that he wanted to be the leader of the UNP. One is reminded of the words of George Orwell, who declared “there is no such thing as ‘keeping out of politics.” He said, all issues are political issues, and politics itself is a mass of lies, evasions, folly, hatred, and schizophrenia.

The prime mover in project Karu was former Minister, Ravi Karunanayake, who also vied for the UNP leadership. He told confidants that Jayasuriya, turning 80 next month would be 85 at the next presidential and parliamentary elections. Therefore, he said, his own prospects of becoming the UNP leader then, if not now, were brighter. He is being backed by the Nuwara Eliya district’s defeated UNP candidate Naveen Dissanayake, who is Jayasuriya’s son-in-law. Also playing a prominent role was another promoter, strongly opposed to Wickremesinghe, who is now in self-exile in an Asian capital. He has been telephoning many in the UNP to back Jayasuriya to ensure a “vibrant opposition” and to “fight the Rajapaksa regime.” He has also been playing the role of a media campaigner.

Early this week, Jayasuriya declared in a statement he was ready to lead the UNP and added that he had informed the party leadership and seniors of his decision. This, he said, was due to a large number of requests from various quarters for him to take over the UNP leadership. He said, “the UNP founded by D.S. Senanayake led a successful struggle to achieve the country’s independence. The UNP has the expertise, talent and international recognition needed to face the challenges of the 21st century.

“However, the present plight of the party is a cause of frustration for members and the public who seek national progress. Many patriotic forces approached me following the defeat the UNP suffered at the last general election and requested me to accept the party leadership, to steer away the UNP from its current crisis and make it a formidable force once again. Among those who approached me were the members of all religions, including the Maha Sangha, former ministers and MPs of the UNP, intellectuals and well-wishers of the party, leaders of other parties that worked with the UNP in the recent past, representatives of people at provincial council and local government bodies, leaders of trade unions supporting the UNP and members of civil organisations working for the democratic values.

“All those who met me pointed out that we had arrived at a critical point which would decide whether the party would go down or regain its former self. I too believe that if we manage to identify the people’s aspirations and heed their concerns then we may be able to introduce reforms and transform the party into a formidable force.

“I obtained UNP membership in 1994, when Ranil Wickremesinghe accepted the party leadership. Since then, I have rendered service as the party Chairman, Deputy Leader and as President of the party Leadership Council and help improve the UNP’s electoral performance at the 2014 Uva Provincial Council election. It is no secret that I worked to make the 19th Amendment to the Constitution a reality and introduced the Right to Information Act to uphold democratic values in our country. I dedicated myself to introducing party reforms since 1995.”

Several phone calls to Jayasuriya went unanswered. On one occasion, a person who answered said he was a security officer and added Jayasuriya is not responding to calls. He directed that a call be made to his Media Relations Officer, Chaminda Gamage. He told the Sunday Times, “Mr Jayasuriya does not wish to make any comments to the media at this moment as it could lead to further controversy. He wishes to confine himself to the statements which have been issued.” The remarks were a public admission that he has already generated a controversy with his offer to lead the UNP.

Jayasuriya’s offer came up for discussion at the UNP Working Committee meeting last Friday. Wickremesinghe laughingly remarked to his confidants including Vajira Abeywardene and John Ameratunga that “an 80-year-old wants to replace a 71-year-old” when the party was looking for young persons to take over leadership. At the meeting, like during a previous session of the Working Committee, the discussion centered on having a young person as the party leader. The names of Ruwan Wijewardene and Vajira Abeywardene were mooted. It was Wickremesinghe who pointed out that the new leader should be one from members of the Working Committee. Another WC member alleged that Jayasuriya did not have UNP membership.

He was alluding to the crossover by Jayasuriya on January 27, 2007 with a group of 18 UNP parliamentarians. The then President Mahinda Rajapaksa appointed him the Minister of Public Administration and Home Affairs. On December 9, 2008, Jayasuriya re-joined the UNP leaving his colleagues behind. This was after behind-the-scenes talks between him and Wickremesinghe at the Nawaloka private hospital where Jayasuriya was undergoing treatment. Then, he became the UNP Deputy Leader which was a pre-condition for his return.

Another lesser known fact, ahead of this crossover, was a move by then President Chandrika Kumaratunga in 2003 to oust Ranil Wickremesinghe as Prime Minister and foist Jayasuriya in the seat. She was assisted in the move by onetime minister, Milinda Moragoda, now earmarked to be Sri Lanka’s High Commissioner to New Delhi with “Cabinet rank” status. This rank, however, is of no importance in the country of posting since all envoys are on equal status, though the Foreign Secretary Dr. Jayanath Colombage who served in Moragoda’s Pathfinder Foundation is quoted as saying the Cabinet rank was given because of his “international stature”. Yet, this will be the first time such a rank is being conferred on any diplomat in Sri Lanka. Earlier, Moragoda had declined the position when it was offered to him. A Foreign Relations Ministry source said during a renewed offer, he had clinched the “Cabinet rank.”

The move to oust then Premier Wickremesinghe came in 2003 when he was away in Oslo, Norway. A room at the President’s House (Janadipathi Mandiriya) was prepared for Jayasuriya’s overnight stay before he could be sworn-in the next morning. That was to come with the unseating of Wickremesinghe through a Gazette notification. The story, however, leaked and pressure was brought on Jayasuriya, if he was part of the move to back off. Wickremesinghe had been alerted to these moves by Kumaratunga’s brother, Anura Bandaranaike.

After Friday’s Working Committee meeting, the party issued a media statement saying the leadership issue “was lengthily discussed.”  It added, “According to the party constitution, the working committee would convene and decide on the leadership in the first week of September.” Wickremesinghe told UNP seniors he proposed to finalise the leadership issue at this meeting.

On Friday, Jayasuriya hit back at his detractors with another media statement. Here are highlights of what his media unit said: “It has come to our notice that few persons who are responsible for the destruction of the UNP have called a press conference and made comments that former Speaker has not obtained the membership of the UNP for year 2020.

“Therefore, Mr Jayasuriya has released a copy of 2020 membership card No 0459 which was obtained for Rs 20. Apart from that he has also released a copy to the Rs 1000 worth membership card 749047. “(The party did not print membership cards for 2020, therefore the Party secretary has punched  his stamp and signed and issued 2019 membership cards. Therefore, the cards were considered as valid for year 2020.)….

“All party officials came to an understanding that Rs 1000  membership as a lifetime membership even though it is not mentioned in party constitution after 2000. The party officials agreed on the basis that the annual membership fee is Rs 20 and therefore Rs 1000 worth membership which cost 50 times as that amount should be considered as 50-year lasting membership. Accordingly, a member who obtains Rs 1000 membership within the same year secures his position as a lifetime member by donating Rs 1000 to the party fund.

“A former party chairman Gamini Jayawickrema Perera actively worked towards making the Rs 1000 membership ideology a reality, presently the member representing the working committee of the party, former minister Ananada Kularatne held a lot of responsibility in the Rs 1000 membership project.” Jayasuriya distributed photocopies of his membership card to prove his claims for membership. “A Rs 1000 payment only means a 12-month membership and does not entitle one to be a life member,” said a very senior office bearer of the party. He did not wish to be identified.

There is little doubt that Jayasuriya is a member of the UNP. However, whether he remains a “life member” or not, particularly in the light of the remarks made by the very senior office bearer, raises questions. In any event the issue loses its relevance in the light of last Friday’s decision by the UNP Working Committee that the next leader should be a member of this body.

Moreover, another decision to restrict the leadership to a younger person effectively edges out Jayasuriya’s claims and makes clear he has no chance. Perhaps, the furthest he and his backers could go is to push for a vote at the Working Committee. With Wickremesinghe’s own nominees dominating it, that will likely come a cropper. That will leave him only one option – join the SJB heeding the call by Sajith Premadasa or retire from politics once again. With his about-turns, he has also lost his dream of re-uniting the diverse factions of the UNP, including one that has now won 53 parliamentary seats as Samagi Jana Balavegaya (SJB).

Another issue for Wickremesinghe is the informal dialogue with the SJB. As revealed exclusively in these columns, it began with a meeting between the UNP leader and Kabir Hashim (former UNP chairman and Cabinet Minister) together with Talatha Athukorale, also a former minister. The meeting took place with the concurrence of their leader, Premadasa. Hard on the heels of this meeting came another one with Wickremesinghe by Tissa Attanayake, onetime General Secretary of the UNP. He crossed over to the earlier Rajapaksa government and was given a ministerial portfolio. That together with a purported letter he circulated during the elections prompted the UNP to take him to court and estranged their relations. The matter, however, was settled out of court after Attanayake extended an apology to Wickremesinghe.

This is what Attanayake told the Sunday Times about the meeting: “I telephoned him (Wickremesinghe) on Sunday (August 23) and asked whether I could meet him. He asked me to come right away. I met him for 45 minutes. It was a casual exchange of views. He started the conversation by saying ‘the people have given a clear message. Haven’t they?’

“He said the people have delivered a verdict on the division of the UNP and the formation of the SJB. He explained that he knew of an SLPP victory but was surprised to learn of a two-thirds majority. Wickremesinghe declared that giving the Rajapaksas or the current government two-thirds power has placed the country in a dangerous predicament.”

“We even talked about the 700,000 rejected votes. Wickremesinghe claimed most have spoiled their votes to show displeasure over the split in the party. However, there were rumours that I went to meet him since he is stepping down. Some others say that I went to discuss the merger of two parties. Those are not true. This was only a friendly meeting. Even though we discussed politics, this was not an official meeting.  At the end of the meeting I said that I would like to be the mediator if there is any need for the two parties to merge in future. He replied, ‘we will see’.”

Quite clearly, Attanayake’s sudden meeting was a feeler to ascertain prospects of a merger. Premadasa believes the SJB would benefit through the use of the UNP headquarters, Siri Kotha, and party branches. However, in the two sides there are formidable sections which are strongly opposed to such a move.

NEW CRISIS IN THE NORTH

If it was internal feuding that has torn the Tamil National Alliance (TNA) apart, fissures have developed between two MPs of the government side in the north. It was sparked by Angajan Ramanathan who issued a directive to Jaffna District Secretary K. Mahesan that he should be kept informed of all development matters in the north. Ramanathan is the head of the Jaffna District Co-ordinating Committee. Fisheries Minister Douglas Devananda has taken strong exception to the move.

This is what Ramanathan has said in a letter in Tamil. It has been translated into English and reads:

“To ensure that Jaffna district development projects are carried out efficiently and reach the people by including all Divisional Secretariats under the programme, I request you to implement the following.

“1. I request you to submit details of all development projects that were initiated after President Gotabaya Rajapaksa took office in 2019. For those projects which have already been completed, take steps to vest them with the public through public spirited events by informing respective Divisional Secretaries.

“2. All projects and development schemes authorised by Cabinet ministries and departments should be implemented with my co-sponsorship. Do not implement any programmes or projects approved by ministries by dealing with the respective Divisional Secretariats directly without my knowledge or approval.

“3. Internally Displaced People (IDPs) are still struggling without basic facilities provided to them in camps. I request you take steps for a discussion with me by collecting details of all those IDP camps in various divisions that come under your purview.

“4. I request you to take steps to allocate adequate office facilities for the Coordinating Office of District Development Committee (DDC) inside District Secretariat premises by contacting my personal Secretary Hon. Sathasivam Ramanathan. (Note: The phone numbers are given in the letter).

“5. Hereby I inform you that my personal secretary Hon. Sathasivam Ramanathan would be functioning as Coordinating Officer between the District Development Committee (DDC) and the District Secretariat.”

Minister Devananda has raised issue with President Rajapaksa. As a result, the President has summoned a meeting of heads of District Co-ordinating Committees and District Secretaries to discuss the delineation of their powers. Devananda wants to take up issue on this occasion.

Sri Lanka is going through an interesting, if not important phase, as the ruling alliance is speeding towards many a change. Ironically, the opposition is so pre-occupied with their own issues that they have little time for those that affect the people. That, no doubt, is a heavy price but the voters cannot be blamed.