The Political Column

UNP back in Mendis muddle

By our Political Correspondent

Sharply divided opinions and some infighting among members have put the main opposition UNP in an embarrassing position.

The squabbles have intensified in the aftermath of the UNP's defeat in the elections to five provincial councils on April 6 and matters have come to ahead with the Supreme Court judgement which cleared Wijeyapala Mendis after the party had suspended him on the basis of a special presidential commission probe. 

The Supreme Court on Tuesday quashed the findings and recommendations made by the PC against Mr. Mendis and ordered that Rs. 40,000 be paid to him as costs incurred for his case before both the SPC and the Supreme Court.

The SPC probing malpractices and irregularities in public bodies had found Mr. Mendis guilty of an illegal land transaction. This involved an exchange of his land in Pannikulam in Anuradhapura for a prime coconut land in Mahawatte in Dankotuwa.

On the basis of the recommendation by the SPC, a motion was presented in Parliament in March last year to expel Mr. Mendis from Parliament and strip him of his civic rights. 

A parallel inquiry was held by a UNP committee which submitted a report to the disciplinary committee and then to the decision-making working committee which decide by a majority vote to suspend Mr. Mendis though he had already appealed to the Supreme Court against the SPC judgement.

Senior UNPer A. C. S. Hameed was the most outspoken of those who had opposed the move to Mr. Mendis when it came up last year. He said he felt that no action should be taken until the court decide on it. But when the disciplinary committee went ahead, Mr. Hameed walked out. 

He claimed that the Atukorale report had been prepared with the sole intention of expelling Mr. Mendis. Constitutional expert K.N. Choksy said he felt that the committee had recommended expulsion from the party because Mr. Mendis had taken court action. He recommended suspension instead of expulsion.

Former Attorney-General Tilak Marapana said that if the Atukorale committee had read the evidence before the SPC, it would have thrown the commission report out. 

Another UNP frontliner Anura Bandaranaike also took a strong stand in defence of Mr. Mendis. He said a stalwart who served the party for 50 years should not be driven out of the party in this manner.

At that stage, Mr. Hameed asked what the UNP would do if the Supreme Court found Mr. Mendis not guilty. 

Finally Dr. Stanley Kalpage voted against the motion to suspend Mr. Mendis while Mr. Hameed, M. H. Mohamed, Festus Perera, Dharmadasa Banda, Nanda Mathew, A.M.S. Adhikari and Susil Moonesinghe abstained. 

After Tuesday's judgement, a jubilant Mr. Mendis told this column that he was happy over the Supreme Court decision but he would not bear any grudges against anybody in the UNP. He said young people did make mistakes and they had to learn, apparently referring to party leader Mr. Wickremesinghe.

Mr. Mendis said that Mr. Wickremesinghe had given a signed affidavit to the District Court saying that if Mr. Mendis won the case, his suspension would be lifted. Mr. Mendis said this affidavit was filed in court when the District Court issued an enjoining order restraining the working committee from suspending him. 

However, the enjoining order was later dissolved. Mr. Mendis was probably referring to a document filed by Mr. Wickremesinghe in court where he said among other things: "In any event, if a member against whom there are findings of proven misconduct by a Special Presidential Commission, is permitted to enjoy rights and privileges of a member of a party, it would be impossible to maintain discipline in the party which consists of over one million members."

"This defendant states that in the circumstances, the party and this defendant as the leader of the party and the leader of the opposition in Parliament would suffer a greater hardship if the enjoining order is permitted to stand and the interim injunction is allowed, then whatever hardships the plaintiff may allegedly suffer if the suspension of the plaintiff's membership in the party continues. The plaintiff has still a legal remedy which he has belatedly instituted to have the findings of the SPC set aside. If such an order is successfully obtained, appropriate steps to restore membership of the plaintiff of the party would be taken."

But when Mr. Wickremesinghe was asked about Mr. Mendis' claim after Tuesday's judgement, he said he had no knowledge of such an affidavit and Mr. Mendis would have to re-apply for membership of the party and the working committee.

Justice Mark Fernando in his judgment said:

"The summary of facts shows how the Chairman, LRC, so readily fell in line with suggestions strongly put to him by the Commissioners, even to the extent of veering from one position to a diametrically opposite one - all of which the interim report failed to mention. Nimal Gunaratne's evidence was accepted without even a passing reference to the 1st Respondent's rebuke that he was merely coming to say what someone else had asked him to say; and Ramanayake's evidence was rejected because of "the very definite evidence given by Gunaratne", and was characterised as "vague" although none of the Commissioners seem to have thought so at the time.

"Considered in isolation, each of these is a serious error of law; taken cumulatively, they are so extensive and so grave as to amount to a denial of a fair inquiry."

There were dramatic scenes in the court premises on Tuesday after the Supreme Court upheld Mr. Mendis' petition. 

He was garlanded and conducted to the shrine room at the Hulftsdorp Court Complex. UNP frontliners such as M.H. Mohamed, Susil Moonesinghe and Dr. Stanley Kalpage were present. Later, pansil was conducted by Ven. Elle Gunawansa Thera who gave a talk calling on breakaway groups of the UNP to come together to strengthen the party. He said that today the UNP was plagued by a virus which is similar to the computer virus and said that it would be essential to strengthen this party which contributed to the well-being of the people for nearly fifty years.

The most outspoken party frontliner after the Mendis judgement was Dr. Kalpage. "Mr. Mendis had been vindicated and now the UNP must look into it."

He called upon the UNP hierarchy to apologise to Mr. Mendis if it wished to save face in this fiasco. 

Another frontliner Susil Moonesinghe reiterated what he had said earlier - that he felt the party was acting hastily in suspending Mr. Mendis before the court decision was given. 

In the wake of the Supreme Court decision, Government legal experts said the resolution against Mr. Mendis in Parliament now ceases to exist. They believe Mr. Mendis should now write to the Speaker or the Secretary General of Parliament requesting that the resolution against him be withdrawn.

The UNP is also faced with former minister M. S. Amarasiri who pulled out of the UNP's southern provincial list at the last minute. He made this move after he was told that he would not be named as the chief ministerial candidate but that the post would go to the candidates who polled the highest number of preferential votes. 

UNP General Secretary Gamini Atukorale said Mr. Amarasiri's withdrawal was not a serious blow to the party. But other were not so sanguine Mr. Amarasiri has also resigned from the Galle UNP organisation. 

These events are crystallising in to a single issue of those who would want to mould the UNP in a new image against those who feel the old guard must be brought in with their experience to mount a concerted challenge against the government. 

In another development, Sports Minister S. B. Dissanayake has said he devised a scheme whereby the sports ministry would not give financial assistance to any sports body whose head or the secretary was a member of the Cabinet or a politician. He told delegates who were preparing to leave for the South Asian Games that a circular to this effect was ready. 

If any sports body elects a politician as a head or an office bearer, the ministry would not help it or fund it in the future, he emphasised. He cited the controversial cricket board election as a case in point and said very old people who could not even climb steps should not be allowed to contest elections. 

He also said that he had told ministers Nandimithra Ekanayake, Bertie Premalal Dissanayake and Salinda Dissanayake to resign from their posts in sports bodies. 

The minister said he would also not allow wives of politicians to get posts in sports bodies. 

Meanwhile, a crisis is building up in the LSSP over the dramatic moves by rebel member Vasudeva Nanayakkara. 

Prof. Carlo Fonseka, who heads the LSSP's Kotte branch has proposed that the LSSP, while supporting the PA, should not retain cabinet portfolios.

He has found fault with party leader and Minister Batty Weerakoon whilst defending Mr. Nanayakkara's action. 

It is understood that the party politburo would meet soon to consider the expulsion of Mr. Nanayakkara. But he is likely to challenge not only the expulsion but also the validity of the politburo which had not met for some time. 

At the weekly meeting of the ministers, President Kumaratunga was visibly annoyed when two ministers criticised the Customs Department. First it was Alavi Moulana who accused some Customs officers of using force on businessmen. When the President challenged Mr. Moulana's accusations, Minister Jeyaraj Fernandopulle rose to support him.

As Minister Fernandopulle accused Customs officers of holding guns on the heads of people, the President dashed the file on the table and said she could not accept such charges. 

She insisted that such practices in the Customs were a thing of the past and she as minister in charge had now cleaned up happenings.

"I know what you are trying to say. Maybe about Rajan who has been suspected of helping the LTTE and maybe big businessmen," the President shot back. The matter ended there.

She also threw a challenge to the ministers, saying if anybody could prove these allegations against the Customs, she was prepared to leave her job as the Executive President. 

Situation Report

Editorial/Opinion Contents