The latest dispute that threatens to divide the party right down the middle centres around former Minister A. H. M. Fowzie. Fearing a move to suspend him from the party, Mr. Fowzie has taken pre-emptive action. He filed a case in the Colombo District Court and has obtained interim relief, thus preventing the leadership from taking any disciplinary action against him.

Mr. Fowzie, a one-time UNP mayor of Colombo, crossed over to the SLFP in the 1970s with the backing of the then powerful minister, Felix R. Dias Bandaranaike. Thus he became the first SLFP mayor of Colombo, but he earned the wrath of the then UNP hierarchy. A year after the UNP was swept to power with a historic landslide majority in 1977, Mr. Fowzie was one of those SLFPers who were hauled before a special presidential commission of inquiry on charges of misuse of power. Other SLFPers who faced the commission were Sirima Bandaranaike, Felix Dias Bandaranaike and Hector Kobbekaduwa. The Commission exonerated Mr. Kobbekaduwa but recommended civic disabilities for others for seven years.

After his cross over to the SLFP, Mr. Fowzie became a top rung member of the party. The task of restructuring the SLFP in the city was thrust on him. After several years of political oblivion, Mr. Fowzie returned to active politics in time for the 1994 general elections. He was instrumental in bringing the SLFP back to power in 1994 after its crushing defeat in 1977.

Though Mr. Fowzie earned a reputation as a versatile minister in the PA administration, he created problems for President Chandrika Kumaratunga on many an occassion with his actions.

His disputes with his cabinet colleague and SLMC leader M. H. M. Ashraff even threatened the very survival of the government which had a slim majority in parliament. The President had to intervene personally to settle these disputes.

Mr. Fowzie has been one of the advocates of a national government. After the SLFP's defeat at last year's general election, he started campaigning more vociferously for a national government.

Mr. Mahinda Rajapakse has openly clashed with Mr. Bandaranaike in defence of Mr. Fowzie and Richard Pathirana, another SLFP stalwart who faces the same charge. Mr. Fowzie and Mr. Pathirana were served show-cause letters by the party leadership. Mr. Fowzie in his reply to the President, who is also the SLFP leader, says:

"Your letter dated 26th June 2002 was received by me, on the 12th July 2002.

"An interim reply was sent to you dated 4th July 2002, and as undertaken therein, I set out below the reasons as to why no action should be taken in pursuance of the purported 'Show Cause'.

"Your letter is vague and is not specific. Thus prior to answering the alleged charge, details as to when the alleged statements were made as well as details of the public gathering and to which media they were uttered to must be furnished.

"In any event, and without prejudice to the above there is no decision and/or policy of the SLFP to the effect that there should not be a national government. If you, however, state that there is such a decision or policy, kindly state when and where such decision was taken or policy laid down, and kindly furnish me with documentary proof.

"However in truth and in fact, the converse is the case; since you assumed, to my knowledge, Executive Presidency on the 8th November 1994. Since then you have openly advocated the formation of a national government, and towards the middle of 2001, you initiated discussions with the UNP for the formation of a national government and in fact discussed among other things, the allocation of portfolios.

"You consented to Ranil Wickremesinghe being the Prime Minister. However, the formation of a national government fell through at that time principally because of your avowed opposition to having G. L. Peiris and S. B. Dissanayake in the Cabinet, based on a matter of personal prejudice/dislike, and not as a matter of policy.

"Thus to say the SLFP is opposed to the formation of a "national government" is far from the truth.

"In any event in the circumstances of this matter you have no power to act in terms of section 14 (viii) of the Party Constitution.

"Furthermore, you should not even attempt to act in terms of that section because of the personal animosity you bear against me, in this matter you cannot be the prosecutor and the judge in the same case.

"It is strange that the letter under reference has been signed by you and not by the General Secretary as is the practice of the party. This seems a futile attempt to take cover under Article 35 of the Constitution of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka which in this instance is in any event not applicable.

"In the circumstances,
(a) There is no policy of the SLFP against the formation of a 'national government';
(b) You have failed to specify when the alleged statements were made by me; as well as to which public gathering and to which media;

(c) You have no power in the circumstances of this case to act under Section 14 (viii) of the party constitution;

(d) In any event, since you have personal animus against me in this matter you should not and, in any event cannot act under Section 14 (viii).

"I have always acted in the interest of the party, the country and its people and will never sacrifice my principles for political expediency. In the circumstances, I trust that this matter will now end."

In his District Court petition, too, Mr. Fowzie reiterated his point that the President had no power to suspend him from the party and she was violating the party constitution.

Mr. Fowzie charged President Kumaratunga had personal animosity in this matter against him and she was unlawfully and maliciously trying to suspend him. He also said that he received a show-cause letter but claimed that the allegation of misconduct was vague.

As the crisis over Mr. Fowzie deepens, there is strong speculation that the former minister along with several other SLFP MPs will cross over to the UNF when the time is right.

Meanwhile, at the weekly meeting of the ministers on Wednesday, the Presidential luxury car deal dominated the proceedings.

The President urged the Cabinet to investigate the matter and finish it off soon, saying that 'bazaar' newspapers were waiting to carry out a smear campaign against her.

The remarks led to an exchange of words between the President and Minister Ravi Karunanayake. Finance Minister K.N. Choksy said the investigation could not be completed hurriedly since experts would have to examine the cars.

The President subsequently agreed to a proposal to appoint a five-member expert committee to go into the matter. The committee will comprise representatives from the Registrar of Motor Vehicles, Customs, a representative from the Presidential Secretariat and the Secretary to the Cabinet. Earlier, President Kumaratunga, in a note to the Cabinet, had said it was inappropriate for a team of officials to have access to confidential information regarding President's vehicles as explained earlier.

The note said she had perused the draft minutes of the July 10 Cabinet meeting, which she could not attend due to unavoidable reasons.

The President's note to the Cabinet says:

"I have perused the draft minutes of the Cabinet meeting held on 10/7/2002, the meeting at which I could not be present due to unavoidable reasons. According to item 07 of the minutes (page 7), I find that, having considered my Memorandum dated 10th July 2002, the Cabinet of Ministers has decided, inter-alia, that:

"(a) the recommendation that the Prime Minister should 'view' the vehicles in the Presidential Secretariat is most inappropriate;

"(b) instead, a team of officials to be chosen immediately by the Cabinet Sub-Committee and the President to inspect and not merely 'view' such vehicles and submit details very early to the Cabinet Sub-Committee, with the Presidential Secretariat providing the team with such information and documents the team may require for such purpose;" etc.

"In this connection, I wish to state as follows:

"1. The issue of the vehicles is one regarding the action of the President's Office. It is a matter concerning the Head of State, Head of Government and Head of Cabinet and therefore I thought it quite appropriate that the Prime minister should be the person to whom confidential information about Presidential vehicles should be made available. I do not agree with the Cabinet view that it is "most inappropriate" that the Prime Minister should view the vehicles.

"2. However, if the Prime Minister considers it inappropriate to visit President's House to view vehicles, he may nominate his Secretary to do so. In which event my Secretary will also be present. If the vehicles are viewed it will be established definitively that every one of the vehicles imported is accounted for and none is missing.

"3. I consider it 'most inappropriate' for a team of officials to have access to confidential information regarding President's vehicles as explained in my Cabinet Memo dated 10th July. I consider that it is quite sufficient for the Prime Minister's Secretary or the Prime Minister himself to see the vehicles and be provided with all relevant information.

"4. As stated in the Memo of 10th July, the vehicles could be made available for viewing whenever the Prime Minister or his Secretary is ready to do so. I strongly recommend that this be done immediately, without any further delay."

When the vehicle controversy reached its pitch at the cabinet meeting, Minister Karunanayake dropped another bombshell when he inquired the President about a hi-tech lady' handbag fitted with video cameras capable of filming even in dull light.

The President looked on when Minister Karunanayake said that Additional Director General of the Directorate of Internal Intelligence had placed the order for the purchase of such a handbag.

Mr. Karunanayake showing an illustration of the hand bag told the President, "Madam, it is somewhat similar to what you are using now."

Ministers John Amaratunga and Vajira Abeywardena had observed certain gadgets in the bag, but nobody was certain whether it was the bag in question.

However, Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe did not allow the matter to go out of hand. The Prime Minister said it was not the proper forum to discuss the matter and suggested that if anybody had a complaint, it should be taken up with the Defence Ministry.

The letter written by the Additional Director General of the Directorate of Internal Intelligence on November 13 last year to the relevant company is as follows:

"We wish to place an order for 01 No. unit - VH09 Video handbag hide. Colour camera, twin stereo microphones, remote wireless key-fob activation; Sony DCR-PC9 digital camcorder, incorporating super night shot low light capability. The equipment should be packed in the same type of black bag as provided earlier.

Please instruct your Principals to deliver the above to Mr. Sunil Munasinghe of the Sri Lankan High Commission, No. 13, Hyde Park Gardens, London W2, 2LU. Necessary instructions will be given to Mr. Munasinghe to take delivery of the equipment. The necessary funds for this equipment will be paid by me in Colombo."

The United National Front ministers are now wondering whether the Cabinet proceedings are bugged. If that is so, Sri Lanka is set for its own Watergate episode.

Back to Top

Back to Columns

Copyright © 2001 Wijeya Newspapers Ltd. All rights reserved.
Webmaster