A Brief Colonial History Of Ceylon(SriLanka)
Sri Lanka: One Island Two Nations
A Brief Colonial History Of Ceylon(SriLanka)
Sri Lanka: One Island Two Nations
(Full Story)
Search This Blog
Back to 500BC.
==========================
Thiranjala Weerasinghe sj.- One Island Two Nations
?????????????????????????????????????????????????Monday, August 7, 2017
A torrid time in Sri Lankan politics
President Sirisena has the power to remove a minister if he judges that this is necessary. The 19th Amendment did not make any change on this power previously vested with the president.
by Manik de Silva-Aug 7, 2017
(August 7, 2017, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) It
is obvious that the next few days are going to be a torrid time in Sri
Lanka politics. Foreign Minister Ravi Karunanayake’s appearance before
the Presidential Commission appointed to probe the Central Bank bond
scam triggered a deluge of sensational reporting for which the media
cannot be faulted for the simple reason that the disclosures were
sensational. Of course none of the allegations that were made or
material elicited has yet been provenManik. That must await the final
report of the commission. Its term has already been extended at least
twice and there is a lot more work to be done before the proceedings can
be concluded. It is clear that the commissioners are determined to
complete their work as quickly as possible even at the cost of personal
sacrifice. One of the commissioners has decided that he would not attend
a scheduled assignment abroad as he considers the work of the
commission more important. The two Supreme Court judges who are in the
three-member commission must also get back to their regular judicial
duties.
The calls for Karunanayake’s resignation now being heard are inevitable.
There were reports yesterday that the president had talked to him about
this at a ‘Temple Trees’ dinner marking Prime Minister Ranil
Wickremesinghe’s 40th anniversary in politics. How correct these reports
are we do not know but it is quite obvious that differences between the
UNP and the SLFP have sharpened as a result of what is going on.
Whether the minister will resign and retire gracefully to the backbench
or whether he will stay put in his present ministry remains to be seen.
Karunanayake hinted very broadly that his exit from the finance ministry
was a result of the efforts of an unelected colleague in his own party.
There are wheels within wheels in what is going on now and it will be
dangerous for firm conclusions to be reached on the basis of sensational
disclosures that are dime a dozen. Although the fact is that ordinary
people are reaching such conclusions, a commission of inquiry that
includes two serving judges of the Supreme Court and a former deputy
auditor general will not do the same. They will undoubtedly act within
the framework of their mandate and the law.
The basic fact is that Karunanayake was summoned before the commission
to testify on the undated letter he had written regarding the money the
government required to pay some road building contractors. He has
testified that the letter lacking a date and a reference was an
oversight. While different people can have a different take on whether
this is correct or not, the fact is that it has not been proved that it
is otherwise. So also his testimony that he was not aware that a
Perpetual company paid the lease rent for the apartment he and his
family occupied while their own home was being renovated. The minister’s
position is that when he assumed public office in 2015, he severed
connections with his various businesses and these were handled by his
wife and daughter. He says he did not know that Perpetual had paid the
rent which had since been refunded. A company connected with the
Karunanayakes had later bought the apartment. Belief and proof are
entirely different matters. Whether this matter will evolve under a
strict legal frame or whether external commotion will influence the
outcome are open questions.
President Sirisena has the power to remove a minister if he judges that
this is necessary. The 19th Amendment did not make any change on this
power previously vested with the president. But whether he will do that
without the concurrence of the prime minister is also uncertain. He well
knows that but for the votes that the UNP brought him, he could not
have defeated his predecessor two and a half years ago. He has always
been at pains to consult his prime minister on matters relating to the
government instead bulldozing his way through at will. When Karunanayake
was removed from the finance ministry, he was compensated with the
equally prestigious foreign ministry. This arrangement was obviously a
compromise between the president and the prime minister who wanted his
party colleague’s feathers ruffled as little as possible. But recent
developments have made such compromise less possible. We will see how
the papadam crumbles in coming days.
Observers also note that the noisy Joint Opposition that seizes every
opportunity to wade into the government was slow in presenting a vote of
no-confidence against the foreign minister until the smelly stuff hit
the fan last week. When the debate on this motion will be fixed and
whether it will be relevant when the due date comes around if the
minister resigns earlier, are also factors in the equation. We must also
not forget the fact that there are many serious allegations against a
number of active politicians being investigated by various agencies
including the Bribery Commission, FCID and others. Although some of them
have gone into remand and been bailed out and some arraigned before the
courts, they have not been subject to the same trauma as Karunanayake
and are well into the game of pot calling the kettle black. They did not
suffer the misfortune of being hauled before a Presidential Commission
of Inquiry and were not subject to intensive interrogation under the
full glare of publicity as Karunanayake was.
It is unlikely that the commission would go into matters that are not
subject to its mandate. If there are complaints against Karunanayake,
these must be made to the properly constituted authorities tasked with
investigating such matters. If evidence that can sustain a prosecution
is unearthed, then the suspects must be brought to court under due
process. That is how those alleged of wrongdoing under the previous
dispensation are being treated. If there are wrongdoers under the
present regime, and the public perception is that there are many, they
too must be dealt with in the same manner. Karunanayake cannot be made
an exception to that rule merely because a loud hullabaloo has been made
at the proceedings of the ongoing inquiry.
( The writer is the Chief of Editor of the Sunday Island, Colombo, where this piece first appeared)