Room for third force, says Sajith Premadasa

By Roshan Peiris

Q: If there is a snap presidential election, will your mother Hema Premadasa come forward as a candidate?

A: Certainly not. She is very much a UNP member and will not do anything to split the party.

Q: Your father said that if he had come forward as an independent candidate, he would not have got even 150,000 votes. he said he won because he contested on a UNP ticket. Is this the reason why your mother won't contest as an independent candidate?

A: My father did say that. It was relevant at that time, but today I see a gradual decline in the support base of the two major parties — the UNP and the PA. There is an increasing disenchantment with main parties, especially among the youth. They say "unuth ekai, munuth ekai." (both are equally bad). No wonder the JVP has made this one of its slogans. So if the major parties do not reform themselves to provide a new deal for the people, there is substantial scope for a third party.

Q: Will Mr. Cooray succeed if he comes forward?

A: It seems he has taken no decision yet. But if he does contest and has a clear vision for the people, he might create a rumble.

Q: Will it create a dent in the UNP vote bank?

A: Any person who once had a following in the UNP and then contests as an independent candidate will draw votes from the UNP.

Q: Is all this being done as a ploy to obtain concessions from the UNP leadership?

A: I am not involved in any ploy. You will have to ask those involved. I will not support any candidate other than the UNP presidential candidate.

Q: You are the son of a former president and in active politics . Do you feel you have some right to leadership of the UNP?

A: I have no inherent right. Whether I succeed in politics or not will be determined by the people. It is my talent, my capacity for hard work and my vision — not my family background — that will determine whether I go up in the political ladder. It is those who have no political backbone nor inherent political skill who fall back on family background and family connections to succeed in politics.

Q: How do you view the new Premadasa front spearheaded by Sirisena Cooray and your mother to safeguard your father's policies?

A: The aim of this political movement is to reinvigorate the Premadasa vision and implement his development programmes that would uplift and give dignity to the rural masses.

Q: Your mother and Sirisena Cooray were at odds when your father was the president. How have they come together again?

A: I know at that time there were misunderstandings between them on various issues. What has brought them together is the common goal of implementing my father's vision.

Q: Does the participation of your mother in Cooray meetings cause embarrassment in the UNP?

A: Why should it embarrass the UNP? Hers is a genuine, service-oriented effort to promote Premadasa policies and help the people whose cause he championed. So my mother's involvement is essentially above petty party politics and service-oriented.

I have no reason to object. After all both Mr. Cooray and my mother were directly instrumental in development projects at Kataragama, Dalada Maligawa and Mirisawetiya.

They have now embarked on a shramadana to give a much-needed facelift to the horribly dilapidated housing scheme at Maligawatte.

Q: Some reports say you are concerned that UNP leader Ranil Wickremesinghe is sidelining you.

A: I have no reason to be so concerned.

Q: You are reported to have criticised Mr. Wickremesinghe recently and some newspapers said disciplinary action might be taken against you. Any comment?

A: It is a joke. What happened was that I went to a newspaper office to hand over an article regarding my pet subject — elephants. A journalist friend referred to me as Lokka and said 'your leader has gone abroad.' Jokingly I replied, 'yes, I am acting on his behalf.' It was all a joke. But two newspapers used this to attack me through editorials and even reported that disciplinary action would be taken against me. Can't people crack jokes? It is ridiculous in this context to talk of disciplinary action.

Q: How is your relationship with Mr. Cooray?

A: I have no personal problems with him.

Q: What about political differences?

A: He is not in mainstream politics as such now".

Q: There are reports that you are trying to undermine the UNP leadership by organising an internal coup with Anura Bandaranaike and others?

A: There is no such thing. I do not play hide and seek in politics. I am not the type who hatches conspiracies. Whatever I do, I do it openly. I am not a snake in the grass.

Q: Are you fighting with UNP organisers in the Hambantota District and keeping a line open to the government through Mangala Samaraweera?

A: I don't fight with organisers. I have no time for it. My priority is to work for the people. That is a sacred duty. Neither am I keeping any line open to the government. It is nonsense. Mr. Samaraweera is a personal friend of mine and of the Premadasa family.

Q: Do you work at Hambantota with the organiser of the Parshada Sanvidanaya at grassroots level?

A: I do. I am very much involved in projects with them to help the people. I don't limit my work to party activities only.

Q: What are your views on the ethnic problem and the devolution package?

A: The ethnic problem is a national problem — not an issue with which any party should play political games to gain political advantages. It is a complex crisis with no ready-made or easy solution. Everyone has to unite and think as one with the common goal being peace and prosperity. In this context it is timely that several distinguished entrepreneurs led by Lalith Kotelawala have initiated a plan to bring together all parties for a dialogue on how to solve the crisis.

Q: Then what about the devolution package?

A: If the devolution package is to succeed, it must accommodate the policies and perceptions of all parties. It cannot be a one-party solution bulldozed or imposed upon the people of Sri Lanka.

Q: It is reported that a Presidential Commission is to be appointed to probe how your father gave arms to the LTTE. Any comments?

A: My father provided arms only to the LTTE's when deputy Mahattaya was emerging as a rival of Velupillai Prabhakaran. My father's aim was to get Mahattaya to subvert Prabhakaran.

During world war II, Britain and the US gave support to German generals who opposed Hitler. My father was following a covert military strategy of attempting to defeat Prabhakaran from within.

Desmond asks Romesh to resign

Q: When did you first hear of the arrest of High Court Judge Mahanama Tillakeratne?

A: At Vancouver, when I was presiding at the biannual sessions of the IBA. Mr. Neelakkandan brought this matter to the notice of the Judges. At the Judges forum of the IBA and also at the sessions.

Q: When this matter was brought to your notice as the President of the International Bar Association, which is the largest organization of lawyers in the world, how did you respond?

A: I believed Mr. Romesh de Silva, PC, President of the Bar Association has sent a fax giving brief details of the arrest of the High Court Judge, Tillakeratne. The Judges believed that this was an act of political revenge or victimization, but I insisted that there was no such evidence. There was no verbal attack against this particular Judge over the media by government or by the politicians. Therefore, I thought there was not sufficient evidence for us to decide that this was an act of political victimization. I suggested to the Judges' forum that we should warn the government of possible repercussions that would ensue which would erode the independence of the Judiciary. But before we take any decision we thought we should obtain the views of the Government and we wrote to the President.

Q: What are your views of the manner in which Mr. Tillakeratne was arrested by the Police?

A: In other countries when a Judge is arrested, certain courtesies are followed and it is done discreetly. The evidence against the Judge is carefully considered and weighed before any action is taken. The manner in which Mr. Tillakeratne was arrested shocked me.

"I thought that the statement made by the complainant was highly belated. The CID should never have acted to arrest a person holding a judicial office on a belated statement. The AG should never have permitted such a course of action. No one has told us why the CID and the Attorney-General's Department decided to act on such a statement. The complainant and the original witnesses, almost five of them, have not stated either to the Police immediately after the event or to the CID nearly one and a half months after the event that Judge Tillakeratne shot at the complainant. None of these witnesses has mentioned even the mere presence of Mr. Tillakeratne at the scene of offence. To act on such uncorroborated evidence and arrest and charge a High Court Judge on such material is unbelievable. In England the Attorney-General would be held responsible and answerable to Parliament why such action was taken. Though the Attorney-General has given a number of interviews to the media he has not given any reason why such a course of action was taken.

Q: Did you ask Romesh de Silva, P.C. the President of the Bar Association of Sri Lanka to resign?

A: Yes. I did because I felt that Mr. de Silva was not a suitable person to be the President of the Bar Association of Sri Lanka any longer.

Q: What made you as a past President of the BASL and the past President of the IBA to make such a drastic statement?

A: The BASL is a lawyers' organization built up by great and courageous leaders like the late S. Nadesan Q.C., (one time Chairman of the Bar Council), Nimal Senanayake, P.C. Sam Kadirgamar, Q.C., Malcom Perera, and H.L. de Silva, P.C. They were great leaders of the Bar with a high sense of personal honour. They were meticulous of the accuracy of any statement they made, If they made a statement to the press or on television they would have been prepared to say on oath that every word they said was true. Now for the first time we have a BASL President who had made a number of utterances to the media but he is not prepared to swear that the statements he made were true.

Q: He may have been unable to vouch for the accuracy of every statement he made specially when he discussed the matters with the Attorney-General for over one and a half hours?

A: If he discovered that any statement he had made was inaccurate he had a duty by the profession and the public to say so immediately. Now we are left with the position that neither the profession nor the public are certain that what the President of the Bar Association of Sri Lanka said was true or not. This is a very serious reflection on the BASL President and the legal profession, and it reflects badly on the profession that such a person continues to be the President of the BASL. Of course there must be very strong reasons for making the Attorney-General a party, as such a course of action could divide the Bar.

Q: But it was Mr. de Silva who has invited Ranjith Abeysuriya, P.C. to file a Fundamental Rights application on behalf of the Judge.?

A: The initial steps he took as the President to strengthen the independence of the Judiciary by taking action to prevent this arrest were negated when he failed to give the affidavit required by Mr. Abeysuriya. I believe the case would have been further strengthened if Mr. de Silva stated on oath the uncontradicted statement made by him to the media. He has failed in a very important duty. Never before has that happened. The credibility of the BASL President is now at stake. I state that the President of the BASL should resign and the Bar must be free to choose a person of courage and honour to fill the post of President of the BASL.

Q: Romesh de Silva may have not given the affidavit as Mr. Abeysuriya has gone beyond his mandate when he made Attorney General Sarath N. Silva personally responsible for the violation of the fundamental rights of Mr. Tillakeratne.?

A: If Romesh de Silva's position is that Mr. Abeysuriya has gone beyond his mandate to make the Attorney-General personally responsible he should have informed Mr. Abeysuriya of his concern in making Sarath Silva personally liable right at the start. He should have requested Mr. Abeysuriya to place the material before him or should have had a discussion with Mr. Abeysuriya and decided what course of action and who the Respondents should be. If Mr. Romesh de Silva considered that the material was not sufficient to make Sarath Silva personally liable for the infringement of the fundamental rights of Mr. Tillakeratne then he should have indicated his reservation to him. Then it would have been a decision for Mr. Abeysuriya and his client.

Q: Is it your position that as Mr. Abeysuriya has decided to make the Attorney-General personally responsible, Romesh de Silva should refrain from giving the affidavit?

A: The matters that Mr. Abeysuriya wanted Mr. Romesh de Silva to swear on oath were uncontradicted interviews he has given to the media. Therefore, whoever the Respondents are I reiterate that Romesh de Silva has failed in his duty by not giving the affidavit. The public are questioning the reasons that motivated Romesh de Silva not to give the affidavit.

Q: Did you ask Mr. Abeysuriya whether Romesh de Silva, gave him a limited mandate and did not want to make the Attorney-General personally responsible?

A: I have asked Mr. Abeysuriya, former President of the BASL whether Romesh de Silva gave him only a limited mandate, a course of action I considered prudent. He vehemently denied that statement and said that initially Romesh de Silva brought Mr. Tillakeratne to his chambers and wanted him to file a fundamental rights application and at the last meeting of the Bar Council I am informed that Romesh de Silva mentioned that Mr. Abeysuriya was appearing for Mr. Tillakeratne, and according to Mr. Abeysuriya, nowhere did Romesh de Silva express the view that he has given a limited mandate.

Q: If Mr. Abeysuriya was of the view that he was convinced that the Attorney-General should be made personally responsible should Romesh de Silva and the Bar Association retract from the case ?

A: Mr. Abeysuriya was the Director of Public Prosecution and a Past President of the BASL when Sarath N. Silva was a Counsel of the Attorney General's Department. If he decides what course of action should be taken on the material available it is the bounden duty of Romesh de Silva to state on oath the conversation he had with Sarath N. Silva.

Q: What is your response to the resolution passed by the Bar Council requesting the appointment of a Commission of Inquiry to go into the matters relating to the arrest of Mr. Tillakeratne?

A: In other countries when the governments are in difficulties they appoint Commissions of Inquiry to postpone the issues and to save themselves from imminent embarrassment.

In Sri Lanka in the recent past Commissions of Inquiry are appointed to sling mud at the innocent and let the guilty go scot-free.

More News/Comments  *  When elephants turned sleeping dogs - From the Blue Corner -

Return to News/Comment Contents