![[Image]](f1main.jpg)
Pandemonium broke loose opposite Fort railway Station on July 30 when Police tear gassed, baton charged and used water cannon for the first time to disperse the Inter University Students Federation demonstration. The students were protesting against the new Education Policy of the Govt. Pic. By Anuruddha Lokuhapuarachchi (Reuters) |
Contents |
Tiger guerrillas launched a third counter attack on Operation Jaya Sikurui troops in Omanthai Friday night killing at least 22 soldiers, 35 Policemen and 13 Navy personnel.
After a pitched six hour battle with heavy artillery barrages from Vavuniya, troops repulsed the attack. Bodies of 45 Tiger cadres were recovered in the area by forenoon yesterday. Military claimed that over 100 Tigers were killed and 200 others were injuired.
The attack on the Western defences at Arasamurivukkulam, north of Omanthai, by an estimated 800 LTTE men and women cadres came shortly after 10.30 pm Friday and continued till 3 am a military official said yesterday.
He said the LTTE guerrillas infiltrated the defences manned by Police and Navy units came under cover of mortar fire.
"They fought their way in after firing Rocket Propelled Grenade (RPGs) and small arms. But the troops fought back." After two earlier counter attacks both on troops of the 55 division, Overall Operations Commander, Major General Asoka Jayawardena, had revised the contingency plans. As a result the attackers were unable to seize artillery or mortar positions.
Until noon yesterday more than 60 Police personnel and soldiers were rushed to the Anuradhapura Base Hospital.
Hospital authorities said more casualties were expected and added that more than 20 of the warded were in serious condition.
Among the dead were an Assistant Superintendent of Police and three Navy officers.
The first counter attack on troops on Operation Jaya Sikurui came on June 10. In this attack 180 soldiers were killed, 27 were missing in action and 320 were wounded.
The second counter attack came on June 24 on the Irampaikulam defences (North of Omanthai). 75 soldiers were killed and 201 were wounded in this attack.
According to sources, since the launch of Operation Jaya Sikurui on May 13, over 500 soldiers have been killed and over 2500 wounded.
President Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga has rapped the Police Chief W. B. Rajaguru for ordering a baton charge on student demonstrators outside the Fort Railway Station last Wednesday.
The President is of the view that the demonstration could have been brought under control with the use of minimum force, government sources said yesterday.
More than 30 students were injured in the Police attack, with three of them being warded at the Intensive Care Unit of the National Hospital. Police also used tear gas, fired rubber bullets and turned on a powerful newly imported water cannon meant for riot control on the students.
Among those affected were bystanders and passersby. Some of those affected by the tear gas found they had developed severe skin ailments.
The demonstration by students and supporters of the Inter University Students Federation (IUSF) was held to protest against the government's education reforms.
President Kumaratunga soon after she returned to Colombo from a ten-day visit to Britain personally went into the events leading to the Police action.
The order to use force on the students had come after Police at the scene consulted seniors at Police Headquarters.
Senior PA leaders were concerned over the Police action which they said reflected badly on the government.
The Supreme Court granted leave to proceed in the fundamental rights petition filed by a retired District Court Judge stating that she had been deprived of her emoluments and benefits at the end of 17 1/2 years of service as a judicial officer.
The bench comprised Justices Dr. Ranjith Amarasinghe, Priyantha Perera and Dr. Asoka de Z. Goonawardane.
The petitioner, Ms. C.M.M. Premathilake, cites the Secretary, Judicial Services Commission S. Withanachchi, Director General of Establishment Y.T.B. de Silva, Director Pensions, B.G. Karunaratne and the Attorney General as respondents in her petition.
Police on Friday busted a major pornographic racket when they launched a lightning raid on newspaper stalls within the Colombo city limits seizing more than 5,000 copies of pornographic magazines.
Inspector of Police, T. Ganeshanathan, OIC of the Crime Headquarters who led the raid told The Sunday Times the raid was carried out following information that pornographic publishers were again involved in lucrative business.
UNP leader Ranil Wickremesinghe has pledged his party when it comes to office will give more independence to State media institutions and a better deal for independent media groups.
Addressing a meeting organised by the Friends of the Media to discuss criminal defamation and other laws, Mr. Wickremesinghe said directors of State media would be given a greater degree of freedom and there would be an equitable distribution of State advertising to all media groups.
Politicians on both sides of the divide were effectively put in the dock on Friday, as pent up media bitterness over the use of criminal defamation laws to muzzle free expression exploded in much sound and more fury.
The forum was a discussion on media laws,presided over by retired Supreme Court justice K.M.M.B. Kulatunge and addressed by Leader of the Opposition Ranil Wickremesinghe, Ambassador to Saudi Arabia Javid Yusuf, Attorney at law,former M.P. and ex Editor "Dawasa" S.L.Gunesekera, Editor of "Ravaya"Victor Ivan, and Editor of "Yukthiya" Sunanda Deshapriya. Media Minister Mangala Samaraweera was also present. A statement was read out by President of the International Bar Association President's Counsel Desmond Fernando who is presently overseas.
At issue were fundamental problems like the responsibilities of the press as well as its freedoms. Questions tossed before the audience included the age old conflict of Politics Vs the Press,the manner in which a correct balance could be struck between watchdog journalism and irresponsible reportage, and the extent to which laws could be reformed to correct the situation. The meeting was organised by the Friends of the Media on Friday.
Lawyer and journalist S.L. Gunesekera put the matter in perspective when he reiterated that one cannot look to either the PA or the UNP for help.
"They all need these laws to help nurse their inflated egos." he remarked to a large gathering of lawyers, politicians, academics journalists,members of the Diplomatic Corps and representatives of the Organization of Professional Associations.
At the outset therefore,one point ought to be made clear.The indictment was against politicians of all colours,and the paradox placed before the audience was the dilemma facing journalists who wish to be independent,who strive to be independent but who are driven into the arms of whatever party in the Opposition through force of circumstance. Come the next election,and the succession of the Opposition to governance sees the same vilification of journalists all over again,and a convenient forgetting of its promises to push through effective media reforms. Rest the case for a credible media in the country. Media persons hampered by an industry not yet fully professionalised have thus become the most obvious victims in the country's headlong drive towards a hysterical politicisation that has also had its more insidious effect in other spheres including the legal profession.
"The question now facing journalists is all important.How can we espouse the cause of the free media without involving political parties in it?" asked Editor of Yukthiya Sunanda Deshapriya.
One fact remains stubborn.As pointed out by the Leader of the Opposition Ranil Wickremesinghe, nearing fifty years after independence some progress has been made in almost every sphere of development in the country, except the media.
The media has in fact retrogressed, possessing little of the vibrancy of spirit that was present following independence.That the problem is great has been acknowledged.In this year alone, Parliament has spent as much time on the media as on the ongoing war and the national economy.Some soul searching has to be done, certainly by the media themselves.
Diplomat and member of the Media Law Reform Committee Javid Yusuf remained puzzled as to why individual journalists whom he knew as basically decent people suddenly metamorphasized into different creatures when they took up the pen.His suggestion that a code of ethics might help was refuted at question time by Editor of the Island Gamini Weerakoon who pointed out that a code of ethics for journalists does presently exist, gazetted under the Press Council Law
"I wonder how many persons in this audience are aware of this?" questioned Mr Weerakoon.
Earlier,Mr Yusuf had conceded the point that those politicians who actively intervene in the fight for media freedom are not so enthusiastic when in Government.He saw this as being an inevitable result of the clash of ideas between the Government and the Press,both of whom wield enormous influence on national affairs.The intervention of the Opposition in this relationship meanwhile complicates matters still further.The non state press is seen as an obvious supporter of the Opposition and vice versa.Mr Yusuf however saw a way out.
"What ruffles feathers in Government is the perception that when a journalist criticises it is done with a hidden agenda.Where a journalist is impartial,his comments will be accepted,even though they may not be welcome"he said
Fair comment is therefore permitted.Journalists should in effect remember that the pen wields tremendous power and should be cautious in its use,
But what if even fair comment is sometimes objected to?
"We have to create a culture of tolerance of the media and learn to respect each other's views." he added.
Is it meanwhile necessary to write about what this politician ate or with whom that politician went out for dinner last week ?
"Such comments ought to be allowed only to the extent that they have a bearing on the public life of these persons " Mr Yusuf pointed out.
This distinction between the private life and public life of politicians was roundly scorned by Leader of the Opposition Ranil Wickremesinghe
"We have no private life .Even the soap that we use is being written about in the press.We have to get used to this kind of srutiny." he said.A previous speaker Ravaya Editor Victor Ivan had in fact pointed out that the European Court had recently affirmed that public officials are susceptible to a greater degree of criticism than private persons.This point was also stressed by President's Counsel Desmond Fernando who reiterated that the country's criminal defamation laws were totally out of line with international law.The remedy of civil defamation is sufficient for an aggrieved person,Mr Fernando said.
And do the laws of criminal defamation really help even the politicians? Mr Ranil Wickremesinghe thought not.He went on to comment that a particular piece of news may have gossip value for a week or two,but once a prosecution is launched the repercussions drag on for years..In actual effect, the Penal Code provisions relating to criminal defamation have been of little help to us, the former Prime Minister opinioned.If amendments to the Parliamentary Powers and Privileges Act can be made,the Penal Code could very well be amended so as to do away with the defamation laws.Mr Wickremesinghe appearing unfazed by accusations of hypocrisy against his party, detailed steps that the UNP was taking to prove its bona fides
At present, the Government has indicated the appointment of a Select Committee of Parliament to look into the media problems relating to an independent Broadcasting Authority and the repeal of the Sri Lanka Press Council law, together with the establishment of a Media Council.The UNP has meanwhile suggested that this should also include amendment of Section 479 of the Penal Code,the Official Secrets Act, the Public Security Ordinance and the Parliamentary Powers and Privileges Act.
What would happen if the Opposition and the Government, as is often too woefully apparent, are unable to agree on this ?
'We intend to proceed with our proposals, and discuss with journalists what reform is actually necessary. We would stand by it at the next election." Mr Wckremesinghe said.
Amidst the many arguments put forward against retaining the defamation law in our statute books,former Supreme Court justice K.M.M.B.Kulatunge advanced the most convincing view when he argued that the law violates the right to equality, in that prosecutions are launched only against only those superior mortals in the seats of power.The history of criminal defamation in the country indicates this only too well.In actual fact,the only exception to this was when the Attorney General's Department initiated a prosecution on behalf of Judge A.C.Alles.In practice therefore,the law obviously works unfairly.
"In this day and age, can such laws that violate equal protection be tolerated.?" he asked.A later speaker, Editor Victor Ivan was in complete agreement with these views.
The fact that it is the Attorney General's Department that has the discretion to launch prosecutions for criminal defamation came in for sustained criticism by other speakers.Incidentally,it is worth mentioning at this point that the Media Law Reform Committee in looking into criminal defamation had recommended that even if the law is not abolished,stricter safeguards should be laid down so that prosecution would be resorted to only in the most serious of cases
In his usual firebreathing style,Editor of the "Ravaya" Victor Ivan did not hesitate to hide his contempt for the AG's Department,which he castigated as being "politisized since the days of Shiva Pasupathi"
Describing the manner in which a defamation case was launched against him in relation to a Ravaya publication of allegations of bribery and corruption by former General manager Railways, W.A.X.de Silva, Mr Ivan said that he had called upon the legal profession to take up the cudgels on his behalf ,but the call had been ignored. Later,he had been vindicated,but the agony of being the centre of a defamation suit had taken its toll.
"Perhaps the present defamation case might focus attention on these issues, just as much as the death of Richard De Soyza made the middle classes sit up and take notice" he remarked.The real tragedy however was that in this day and age,the Sri Lankan media was still engaged in discussing obsolete laws that should have been dealt with a century ago.This is a good reflection of the depths to which the media has sunk.
Regardless of to whom the blame should be apportioned,the Hobson's choice facing Sri Lankan journalists was summed up in a particularly pithy manner when a question from the floor posed as to whether editorial offices would not be better off appointing a minor employee as Editor to take the rap when prosecutions are launched against him. Lawyer and journalist S.L.Gunesekera did not hesitate to answer "Why not?" going on later to justify his stand on the basis that just as much as politicians have bodyguards to take the bullets,editors should have similar dummy figures to take the flak.
This is the ultimate indignity not yet inflicted on the Sri Lankan media.Given the present intensity of media under siege,its possibility remains more than a fun question,asked in jest.
Please send your comments and suggestions on this web site to
info@suntimes.is.lk or to
webmaster@infolabs.is.lk