The Political Column

24th May 10998

Awaiting LTTE's reaction to Vajpayee stance

By our Political Correspondent

The most traumatic political event of the week was the killing of Jaffna Mayoress Sarojini Yogeswaran by the LTTE.

With an action plan for the development of Jaffna Ms. Yogeswaran had been making headway and growing in popularity.

It looks as if the LTTE is determined to exterminate popular personalities, because it feels that it is no more the custodian of the people of the North.

Earlier the LTTE played not only the role of the defender against government rule but also claimed to be the champion of the Tamil people. This role began to gradually give way after the government introduced civilian rule in the areas. Under the LTTE the people lived in fear because if anybody crossed its path, punishment was severe. Just when the people were beginning to feel the new environment, the LTTE has chosen to remove the Mayoress from the scene. It is important to note the circumstances under which she met with her tragic death. It was only a few days ago, that she had met the Political Secretary of the Indian High Commission and requested India to intervene and settle the North East conflict. The Political Secretary said he would forward the request to Delhi. Did this anger the LTTE or was it a coincidence? It is still not clear what the LTTE's attitude is towards the Vajpayee government in Delhi and what its reaction would be if India chose to play a role.

Come what may, the government is anxious to get the lion's share of the Tamil votes, at the upcoming provincial elections.

Recently Minister Mangala Samaraweera addressed the B-Group of the Lions Club, 74 in number at the BMICH. The B-Group extends from Jaffna to Colombo and has a very significant Tamil participation. Minister Samaraweera has used this occasion and in a very subtle manner spoken about the tragic incidents that took place in 1983 during the ethnic riots. He did not apportion blame to anybody but posed the question, "Why should the Tamil people be treated in this manner?" He recalled that he had just returned from the UK and was near Lake House when he saw a Benz car driven by a young lady. When the crowd indentified her as a Tamil, the next minute the lady and the car were on fire. He said that such brutal behaviour can never be condoned. His speech was well received, so much so, that when it came to the Vote of Thanks, the proposer said if there were a few more Mangalas, Sri Lanka would be a better place to live in. "But, isn't one Mangala enough for a government?" quipped a wag who was present.

Besides these the much awaited debate on the privatisation of AirLanka took place on Tuesday. Many observers point out the overall quality of the debate was poor. They say the debate had a tilt in favour of the opposition UNP, while the government restricted its role to a defensive one.

The thinking of the UNP inner circle is that, though not a charismatic speaker, UNP Opposition leader Ranil Wickremesinghe raised many valid questions which went unanswered.

They say Aviation Minister Dharmasiri Senanayake made an attempt to sweep them under the carpet and paint a rosy picture about the future of AirLanka.

Mr. Wickremesinghe entered the scene at a later stage having installed a dummy speaker at the beginning to take his place.

On the day of the debate UNP's advisors on the AirLanka issue were in the Opposition leader's office to direct operations and give assistance to the speakers. The advisors included Ronald Perera, Daya Pelpola, Milinda Moragoda and Nihal Amarasekera. They were also there to gauge the quality of the speakers.

Mr. Wickremesinghe was seen studying the issues one by one to justify and substantiate his claims.

Subsequently he took part in the debate and presented his arguments, to convince the TV audience, as to why he called the AirLanka - Emirates agreement a great betrayal.

Apart from Mr. Wickremesinghe, Sarath Ranawake projected himself as a person who had acquired good debating skills over the past few years. Though the objective of fielding Sarath Ranawake was mainly to make a political speech he presented many of his arguments in an eloquent manner, without straying into unrelated areas. However he had some indirect swipes at the President, without which his speech would have been excellent.

Other speakers worth mentioning are Mahinda Samarasinghe and Sarath Kongahage who made valuable contributions.

Mr. Samarasinghe speaking in English countered the arguments put forward by Mr. G.L. Peiris in his own style. Mr. Samarasinghe appears to be one who could be groomed as a good debator for the UNP while Sarath Kongahage showed his strength and commitment despite disturbance by government benches.

But Mr. Kongahage spoke more on political lines than on the topic. He also targetted President Kumaratunga and invited criticism from the government benches which eventually compelled Deputy Chairman of Committees Rauff Hakeem to adjourn the debate for a few minutes.

Mr. Hakeem as the Deputy Chairman of Committees displayed his skills controlling the House and maintaining its dignity though at times the debate fell below expected standards.

Many people complained about the behaviour of Parliamentarians and expressed the view that the standard was far below than what is expected from the legislators.

One teacher said it set a bad example to the country, especially to the younger generation who look up to the elderly to mould their characters.

But the government's standpoint is different. They think it was an excellent opportunity for them to portray their high degree of honesty and transparency to the country. Though Minister Dharmasiri Senanayake could not answer all the issues raised by Mr. Wickremesinghe in a short time the government politicians argue that answers to almost all the issues raised by Mr. Wickremesinghe are included in the speech made by Minister G. L. Peiris.

Minister Peiris who spoke in English for about an hour, fulfilled the task of addressing the international community which had some misgivings about the AirLanka - Emirates deal.

In fact Minister Peiris defended the government's position against allegations made by UNP's General Secretary Gamini Atukorale which he could not substantiate during the debate in Parliament.

As such, political analysts believe that Minister Peiris should have been entrusted with the task of winding up the debate instead of Minister Senanayake.

Apart from Minister Peiris, Minister Jeyaraj Fernandopulle did his duty by the government. He held all the allegations levelled against the President at bay, when he asked Anura Bandaranaike, whether he believes that any Bandaranaikes would get involved in any corrupt practice as alleged by the UNP. Mr. Bandaranaike's silence as a UNP front liner effectively blocked the UNP's arguments.

Later in the day the President telephoned Mr. Fernandopulle to thank him for the stand he had taken to defend her.

During the debate, the President who watched the proceedings on TV at Temple Trees telephoned ministers from time to time to remind them as to what line they should take. On Monday the President had a crucial meeting with some of her ministers and Emirates officials to discuss their plan. At this meeting the President distributed relevant files to the speakers and Minister Jeyaraj Fernandopulle took charge of the files to be distributed to others who did not attend the meeting.

Emirates officials who participated in this, explained in details the terms of reference and the provisions in the agreement.

They said the agreement was such, that there could not be any kind of loopholes in the deal. In short they said that there are no "kick-backs" involved.

Later they told the President and the ministers to ask many questions as possible, so that they could answer those questions.

After the meeting the ministers and the others dispersed with the intention of meeting again at a dinner hosted by Minister Fowzie.

That morning Minister Fernandopulle learnt that Minister Richard Pathirana who was down to speak on Tuesday, was hospitalised. He immediately contacted the President and informed her of that.

She told him that he should get one of the Deputy Ministers and a back bencher from a constituent party.

They decided on Deputy Minister Athauda Seneviratne from the LSSP and M. M. Zuhair from the SLMC.

Since it would be difficult for Minister Fernandopulle to contact both these members during the short period left he thought of meeting them at the dinner hosted by Minister Fowzie.

Accordingly, the minister gave the relevant files to the two new speakers for them to prepare for the debate.

However, in the debate on AirLanka, Emirates Sales Manager Chandana de Silva's name also figured prominently. The government benches were seen agitated when his name surfaced during the debate but immediately it was swept under the carpet, when the speaker who referred to Chandana de Silva was interrupted.

After all the whole debate was a healthy exercise if not for the unacceptable behaviour of some Parliamentarians.

At the end of it, the UNP is now planning to build up a new debating team with better skills since they believe that it did not fare very well during the debate.

Simultaneously, many members of the UNP inner circle are regretting as to why they allowed time for Ravi Karunanayake to speak since his alleged business dealings have been exposed in Parliament by Jeyaraj Fernandopulle.

Mr. Karunanayake was given 17 minutes of the opposition time through the intervention of Mr. Wickremesinghe and Mr. Bandaranaike. The opposition has also offered time to government backbencher Vasudeva Nanayakkara but he declined.

In Mr. Karunanayake's case he first informed Chief Government Whip by letter asking him to allocate time for him to speak during the AirLanka debate. Since there was no response he met Mr. Pathirana on the day of the debate to make the same request. The government turned down the request but after Zahir Ali Moulana demanded an explanation from Ravi Karunanayake on an allegation made by the directorate of PERC on Mr. Karunanayake's conflict of interests in the privatisation of AirLanka Limited, Mr. Karunanayake asked for time to speak.

However, after the Deputy Chairman of Committees turned down his request the opposition intervened to offer him time to speak on the matter. During the afternoon session Minister Jeyaraj Fernandopulle who plays the role of a "full back" these days rode on Mr. Karunanayake and came out with a strong allegation against him (Mr. Karunanayake) and his involvement in the Air Euro Services (Pvt) Ltd.

Mr. Fernandopulle said that Mr. Karunanayake was not given time to speak since the Air Euro Services (Pvt) Ltd. had offered some services to AirLanka and that Mr. Karunanayake's business interests clashing with the privatisation programme of AirLanka. Though Mr. Karunanayake wanted to explain his position, he was not allowed to do so by the Chair and later sought permission from the Speaker to make a statement in Parliament.

Soon after Minister Fernandopulle's speech where he defended the government and the President strongly, he (Mr. Fernandopulle) went up to Mr. Karunanayake and said that he had to do that despite their friendship in a bid to protect the government and the President.

Mr. Fernandopulle said protecting the government and the President was his first priority. At the same time Minister Fernandopulle had written to the Secretary of the Chief Government Whip with a copy to the Secretary-General of Parliament that they would not allocate government time for Mr. Karunanayake in the future.

They were also considering on a motion to expel Mr. Karunanayake from the People's Alliance. The PA's Executive Committee is likely to discuss this matter shortly. Presently the People's Alliance lawyers are studying the Constitution to determine as to whether Mr. Karunanayake's alleged action is a violation of article 91 (1) (e) of the Constitution.

Article 91 (1) (e) states:

No person shall be qualified to be elected as a Member of Parliament or to sit and vote in Parliament, if he has any such interests in any such contract made by or on behalf of the state or a public corporation as Parliament shall by law prescribe.

However Mr. Karunanayake has now explained his position with regard to the allegations brought against him by Minister Fernandopulle.

This is, in fact, the first time that the people of Sri Lanka witnessed a live Parliamentary debate on the television. The debate on Mr. Wijeyapala Mendis' Motion was one sided because the Opposition boycotted Parliament. It is still not clear exactly what percentage of the population viewed this debate but some estimates put it as high as 52%. But whatever it is, the debate has raised many questions in the minds of the people. With regard to substantial issues neither did the Opposition succeeded in nailing down the issues, nor did the government succeeded in proving that the whole affair was a mud slinging exercise. Meanwhile, some of the metaphors and phrases used certainly went against the dignity of Parliament and a lot of tax-payers seem to wonder whether their legislators are doing justice to them.

But the President seemed annoyed over the manner in which the UNP conducted the debate. The government viewed it as an effort to carry out a mud-slinging campaign against the President.

It is now likely that the government would not allow, telecasting of debates in the future without an undertaking from the opposition, that they would best exploit the situation to sling mud at individuals.

The government speakers during the debate too inquired of the front liners of the UNP who were not billed to speak, but the UNP's position is that nobody could interfere with their choice and it is entirely up to the party concerned to select its band of speakers. Soon after Wednesday's Cabinet meeting several ministers including G. L. Peiris, Nandimithra Ekanayake, Mangala Samaraweera, Jeyaraj Fernandopulle, C.V. Gooneratne, Nimal Siripala de Silva along with President Kumaratunga held a brief discussion on Tuesday's debate in Parliament. President Kumaratunga said she could watch as to how the members conducted themselves in the debate and pin point the weaknesses.

She also made it point to say that Minister G. L. Peiris held the fort for the government while several others helped him.

Minister Samaraweera said Jeyaraj Fernandopulle give a new lease of life to the debate when they were in total confusion. At the same time several ministers appreciated the role played by Minister Fernandopulle.

There were several ministers who were not present for the debate. Among them were Minister Anuruddha Ratwatte and S. B. Dissanayake, two close associates of the President. But both these ministers were present at the Cabinet meeting on Wednesday.

In a separate development UNP leader Ranil Wickremesinghe met the Pakistani High Commissioner in Sri Lanka.

Anura Bandaranaike too participated in these discussions where the Sri Lanka stand on the Indian nuclear tests came in for heavy criticism.

However, this will not have any adverse effect on the forthcoming SAARC summit scheduled to be held in Colombo.

Situation Report

Editorial/Opinion Contents