Focus on Rights

The man who stood up to make a difference

On the contrary, what is important is precisely not to make a difference but merely to save one's own skin, whatever may be the situation and whatever the consequences. And it is in this nauseatingly unashamed affinity with the famed ostrich that Sri Lankans are shown a contrary example by an otherwise harmlessly anonymous Assistant Security Supervisor of the Maheweli Authority, whose exemplary conduct deserves specific mention in this column.

In the early hours of January 19 last year, Sampath Anura Hettiarachchi was on night duty at the Resident Project Manager's office at the Mahaweli H Division at Tham-buttegama when a not so singular incident had occurred. This was when five persons including Saliyananda (an Assistant Security Supervisor at Embili-pitiya), three other employees of the Mahaweli Authority and a driver of a bus parked nearby the office in which there were another 25 persons, had come to the office.

They told Hetti-arachchi that they were on their way to Nikeweratiya to participate in a PA political meeting held in connection with the Wayamba Provincial Council elections and needed to stay the night at the office. Excepting one, all the rest were heavily intoxicated. Hettiarachchi had replied that he had not received instructions to allow them in and that therefore they could not stay. They then wanted to know as to whether they could stay at the Mahaweli Circuit Bungalow in response to which Hettiarachchi had informed them that prior permission had to be obtained for this as well and had advised them to speak to the caretaker. Their demand that he should come with them to meet the Resident Project Manager had also been refused by him on the grounds that he could not leave his post, being on duty. He instead showed the driver the way. For these sins, Hettiarachchi was pulled up shortly thereafter. A complaint was made by Saliyananda and three others to the Director General of the Mahaweli Authority that they had been travelling to Embilipitiya in connection "with an official duty of the Minister of Mahaweli Development" and that Hettiarachchi had refused accommodation to them and had further been most unhelpful. They expressed amazement that, despite Hettiarachchi being told that they had come upon the Minister's order, their requests were turned down. Their complaints were referred in turn to the Senior Security Officer in Charge, Mahaweli H Division.

His summons to Hettiarachchi was met by the latter refusing to make a statement on the basis that the dispute involved an incident between security officers and it should be inquired into by a different inquiry officer. Eight months later, Hettiarachchi was asked to show cause why disciplinary action should not be taken against him. He replied stating that he was not guilty of the charges and asking that a disciplinary inquiry be held to establish his innocence. Notwithstanding this request, he was fined for "breach of duties", for refusing to make a statement at the preliminary investigation and refusing to reply to the show cause letter. He was also subjected to a "punishment transfer" despite his immediate protests.

When Hettiarachchi came before the Supreme Court, asking for relief mid this month, unequivocal judgement was given in his favour. The Bench comprising Justices Mark Fernando, A.R.B. Amerasinghe and D.P.S. Gunesekera made the strong point that instead of being punished, Hettiarachchi should have been commended for "resisting improper attempts to depart from the path of duty". Hettiarachchi had acted perfectly correctly when refusing to be overawed by references to "ministerial duty" which was nothing more than political activities with regard to a pending election. The inquiry held against him was a gross abuse of power and was fundamentally flawed as the exact nature of his misconduct was not notified to him and his objections regarding the inquiry officer was brushed aside. The Bench went on to remind the State that the attempt to intimidate Hettiarachchi to allow the misuse of corporation property was all the graver as it occurred not just in general but in connection with election activities.

"The use of state and corporation resources (whether land, buildings, vehicles, equipment funds or other facilities or human resources) directly or indirectly for the benefit of one political party or group would constitute unequal treatment and political discrimination" theCourt said.Pena-lising Hettiarachchi for resisting improper influences in such circumstances was therefore held to aggravate the infringement of his fundamental rights and convey the wrong message that such influences should not be resisted. 

The Supreme Court went on to grant Hettiarachchi one hundred thousand rupees as compensation and 25,000 rupees as costs. Interestingly, Hetti-arachchi had stated during the course of the case that 275 employees of the Mahaweli Authority had participated in the political meeting at Nikeweratiya for which all the meals had been provided for at the expense of the Mahaweli Authority. Though he produced bills and vouchers, the Mahaweli Authority had not been able to respond to these statements before court. In view of this, the Supreme Court further directed that copies of the judgement and documents relating to the case be forwarded to the Auditor General for inquiry to determine whether there had been any misuse of the resources of the Mahaweli Authority in this respect.

So ended Sampath Anura Hettiarachchi's ordeal. The larger question that his case raised regarding the misuse of state resources in elections times is vital at this moment in time where an oncoming Parliamentary elections sees similarly blatant violations. His complaint was only one of many instances in recent times where judicial displeasure had been voiced regarding the misuse of state resources. Nevertheless, the practice not only continues but is bolstered by the statements and assertions of Ministers of this Government who persist in holding public officers and public funds hostage to their political objectives.

Hettiarachchi's non- partisan and non-political courage in carrying out his duties has to be applauded. But for each Hettiarachchi who speaks out, a thousand others prefer to keep quiet. As long as this silence continues, it does not really matter which party sits on which side of the House in this country. We can only rest assured that what Hettiarachchi had to go through would not be the last of its kind.