Tours in and out of Sri Lanka to bargain amendments to the 13th amendment

Sri Lanka Minister of Economic Development Basil Rajapakse, the younger brother of President Mahinda Rajapakse, will tour in India this week to make aware the Indian government regarding the amendments mooted to the 13th amendment to the constitution.

Minister Basil Rajapaksa will leave for India on July 04 and he will stay there until July 07, government sources say.

Government sources say that the Minister will meet the Prime Minister Manmohan Sing, Foreign Minister Salman Kurdish, Foreign Secretary Ranjith Mathai and other senior leaders of the Indian government.

Meanwhile, Indian National Security Adviser Shivshankar Menon will also arrive in Sri Lanka on July 07.

All tours in and tours out are focused to the proposed amendments to the 13th amendment of the constitution.

Sri Lanka government has planned to take back the powers devolved to the Provincial Councils introduced under the influence of the Indian government in 1988. 

What is there to celebrate so much in the independence of Sri Lanka?

(February 05, 2011,  Lanka Polity) Sri Lanka celebrated the 63rd Independance Day at Katharama, with retarded elegance. The dusty road, the hurriedly half painted lamp posts with newly pasted election posters on them and the shabbily clad ordinary sectators depicted the under-development of the area.

The writer cannot guess what this country could look like now if it did not come under the British colonial rule. Perhaps, Sri Lanka may look like present Bhutan. However, the fact is a non-entity since the geographical and economical aspects relative to Sri Lanka might never let it be isolated like Bhutan. But one thing is definite. Sri Lanka faced a drastic change in this period and it is a rapid development under the modern concepts and terminology.

British brought Ceylon under one rule. By the beginning of the 15th century when Sri Lanka was invaded by Portuguese, the island was under at least five rulers, three in western side, one each centering Kandy and Jaffna.

To ascertain the unitary nature of the state, British rulers built a network of roads and railway that connected the various parts of the island. They turned Colombo to the administrative and economic capital of the country. For that, they bore a massive expenditure as well, i.e. a big portion of wealth they geberated from the island.

They brought Ceylon under single judiciary system, developed a legislature and introduced a modern development political structure later.

During the latter part of the colonial times, the leaders of the people of apparently accepted these things positively with a constructive criticism.

Anyhow, by the times Ceylon achieved independence, or better say, by the time the ruling powers were transfered to local elite, Lanka was an upcoming, democratic, developing state that was potential to build up as a Lankan nation

However, the rulers that came to power after the independence were prey of the voters that had not understood the core values of superimposed democracy and compelled to initiate measures that hindered the progress of the nation.

Disregarding the provisions compiled by the colonial constitution experts to prevent measures against minority communities, both indigenous Sinhala and Tamil leaders united to disenfranchise the Indian origin plantation worker community. Before long, the Tamils of Northern and Eastern Provinces also had to pay for their folly as the majority Sinhala leaders made the Tamils second class citizen through legalizing Sinhala only as official language in 1956.

Ethnic problem remains the major barrier to nation building and development even after 62 years from independence.

Was colonial rule so bad according to the modernist thinking pattern, sans the fact the King was from a far away nation? If it was so bad, what good we achieved following the so-called independence?

Can anybody explain how the exploitation under present system changes from the plunder in colonial times?


Bookmark, remember and visit us again: www.lankapolity.com

Time to vote for the truth

By Dr. Wickramabahu Karunarathna -

The local “bourgeois democracy” including Lakthilaka, Victor Ivan and the rump of platform for freedom has decided to save democracy by getting General Sarath Fonseka elected. They have made a pandemonium in educated circles about the prime need to get rid of corruption; and hence pressed the point that the removal of executive presidency is the prime task today, for the Lankan masses. Discussions, seminars, and debates started in practically all the media where they have a say. It was a calculated attempt to push the campaign for devolution and discussion on the Tamil national problem, to the backyard. Sarath has been educated by these gentlemen, to stick to the subject of executive presidency and the corruption flowing from it. It is like going back to the days of autocratic monarchy where democracy had to work in secret societies and whispering messages. But the setback in the armed struggle has not removed the burning interest of the Tamil people for freedom. It is still the most damning attack on the corrupt and unjust regime. If the struggle against executive presidency is an important aspect of the campaign for democracy, then the fight for devolution and autonomy is thousand times more important. What does Sarath Fonseka has to say on that subject? He has said the13th amendment is now obsolete and in consequence he has made the topic of devolution itself obsolete.

Gangrene developing

Just because a tough general has ignored the pressing problem of the Tamil nationality, it cannot disappear like mist. Somebody reminded of the words of the late C.J. Chelvanayakam: “When asked by a journalist [Walter Schwarz of the Guardian] how the TULF would achieve its goal, Chelvanayakam replied prophetically: ‘We would make such a nuisance of ourselves that they [the Sinhalese] would throw us out.’ The trouble with these gentlemen of democracy is that they do not realize that the Tamil national problem is not an isolated problem of the Tamils but a gangrene developing in Lankan society eating into the Sinhalese as well. It will be stupid to campaign for release from the executive presidency and for a new constitution for that purpose, without the necessary item of devolution of power being given to the Tamil nationality. Whether it is in a constituent assembly or the Parliament, the Tamils and consistent democrats will vote only for a new constitution with a devolution acceptable to the Tamil people and the other minority communities.

Devolution itself is a mechanism to arrest the power of the executive presidency. Even the 13th amendment reduced the power of the president in several aspects. In the first place, the president cannot dissolve the provincial councils nor could he remove an elected chief minister. The executive president who could remove any cabinet minister or even the prime minister was humbled by the 13th amendment; at least to some extent. If we give more powers to the provincial councils, particularly in relation to the police, judiciary, land and finance, then to that extent the power at the centre will be reduced. This will be so, whether the power at the centre is in the hands of an executive president or the cabinet of ministers. Why are these gentlemen of democracy, eager to neglect the pressing problem of democracy, namely the national problem, and concentrate only on the executive presidency? Clearly they do not want to take the bull by the horns; Mahinda could be pardoned for his attack on democracy made by his chauvinist war against the Tamil people.The plain truth is, that this war has brought misery and barbarism to all the people of Lanka. Obviously, the general who brags about his heroism in the battle against a rag tag army of the Tamil youth cannot condemn the war. General Fonseka cannot raise a finger against Mahinda and say “you are a war mongering corrupt dictator”. Because both of them are responsible for the hell-hole that we are in today. On the other hand, Mahinda has shown his fraudulent nature, by accepting the 10 points programme of Douglas Devananda that includes autonomy for a Tamil homeland and the right of self-determination to the Tamil peole! It is very necessary to avoid both the fake and the fraud and to vote for the truth.

Gen. Fonseka does a volte-face over charges against Army

by B.Muralidhar Reddy

Less than 24 hours after his sensational statement that Sri Lanka Defence Secretary Gothabaya Rajapaksa had instructed a ground commander in the battle zone during the last phase of the Eelam War IV (May 16 to May 19) to shoot all LTTE leaders that had come out waving a white flag with the intention of surrendering to the military, the retired General and contender for the January 26 presidential poll, Sarath Fonseka did a volte-face.

At a hastily convened news conference on Monday afternoon, the former Army Chief said he is responsible for all the actions of the security forces commanders and forces on the ground throughout the war against the LTTE and no field commander acted in violation of any international law.

The retraction of Gen. (retd) Fonseka came after the government not only categorically denied the charges levelled by the commander turned politician as ‘motivated’, but also said that it was examining the contents of the interview for possible legal action. According to a senior government functionary, the statement, made in the course of an interview for an English weekly, has been referred to the Attorney General for his legal opinion.

True import of comment

Media Secretary to the former Army Chief, Ajit, told The Hindu, “At the hurriedly convened press briefing, the General explained the true import of his comment in his response to a question on the sequence of events during the last days of the war and talked about how senior functionaries in the government are hurling cooked up allegations against him by misinterpreting a media statement made by him.”

Political circles here believe that Gen. (retd) Fonseka chose to distance himself from the controversial statement in the course of the interview after senior opposition leaders pointed out to him that it would not only deprive him of the plank of ‘sole hero’ of the war against the LTTE, but would also be self-inflicting, as he cannot disassociate himself from the actions of the military he led.

The controversy triggered by the remarks of the retired General in the interview and the response of the government has left many in the island nation worried about the dangers of further politicisation of the military and the already divided polarisation of the ethnic communities.

Dominant sentiment in English daily

The dominant sentiment was captured by the English daily, Island in its editorial titled ‘An attempt at hara-kiri’. “There is a high octane performance on the part of government propagandists and their Opposition counterparts engaged in a ruthless mud-slinging contest. The government used to boast that it had ensured there were no irregularities in military purchases unlike in the past. But now, we are being told that while Fonseka was the army commander, his son-in-law was involved in some questionable business deals with the army.

“In the aftermath of Prabhakaran’s death, Fonseka pooh-poohed allegations of war crimes against the army. When asked, at the inaugural press conference after entering politics, to comment on moves being made in some quarters to press war crime charges against the Sri Lankan military, Fonseka said those who wanted to do so had to make specific charges with times, dates, locations, etc mentioned –– the implication being that the allegations levelled against Sri Lanka were baseless. He has also claimed on more than one occasion that he personally handled the successful ground operations which decapitated the LTTE.

“Now, we have Fonseka saying he has information that Defence Secretary Gotabhaya Rajapaksa ordered a ground commander to kill the LTTE leaders who tried to surrender (The Sunday Leader, Dec. 13, 2009). As much as the government's allegations against Fonseka and his son-in-law are tantamount to a self-indictment, Fonseka's charge against Gotabhaya has seriously affected his own credibility, in that, he contradicts his much advertised claim that he alone commanded the victorious army. If Fonseka says that his ground commanders who steered the army to victory took orders from someone else, how could he justify his attempt to promote himself in politics as the man who won the war and seek the executive presidency in return, as it were?,” the paper asked.

Low note

With December 17 set as the D-day for filing of nomination papers to a keenly watched contest between the major opposition parties’ candidate retired General Sarath Fonseka and the incumbent President Mahinda Rajapaksa, charges and counter-charges were anticipated but no one had expected the campaign to hit such a low note at this early a stage.

Several senior opposition leaders are privately discussing the possible adverse repercussions of the controversial interview of the retired General and consulting among themselves on ways and means to limit the damage. The retired General, who, during the day, filed three separate Fundamental Rights petitions before the Supreme Court seeking fair coverage for his campaign by the government media, is hosting a get together to select group of journalists later on Monday evening.

In the The Sunday Leader, General Fonseka has contended that he had no information communicated to him in the final days of the war that three key LTTE leaders had opted to surrender to the military.

“Fonseka charged that communications were instead confined between the LTTE leaders, Norway, various foreign parties, Basil Rajapaksa, Member of Parliament and the powerful senior adviser to the President, and such information was never conveyed to him as he supervised the final stages of the war,” the weekly reported.

The three LTTE leaders he is referring to are Balasingham Nadeshan, a former police constable of Sri Lanka police and the political head of the LTTE. Seevaratnam Pulidevan the head of the “LTTE peace secretariat” and Ramesh, a senior special commander of the military wing.

Fonseka told the weekly that he later learnt about what exactly had taken place as a result of journalists who had been embedded at the time with forces in the battle field.

Predictably the government hit back at the retired General. At a special news conference, Human Rights and Disaster Management Minister, Mahinda Samarasingha had said, “The interview of the retired General is a great betrayal of the nation, people of Sri Lanka and his former colleagues. Since the end of the Eelam War IV in the fourth week of May, there have been so many attempts by so many quarters to defame the security forces of Sri Lanka on charges of human rights violations but the simple truth is up to now no one has been able to prove anything.”

Contradicting himself

Mr. Samarasinghe maintained that the charges made by Gen. (retd) Fonseka are a contradiction of his own statement on July 10 at a function where he was facilitated for successfully leading the forces to militarily defeat the LTTE. He said that the contents of the speech have not only been reported by the local and international media but found a place in the 68-page U.S. State Department report of October 22 to the Congress on the war between the security forces and the LTTE.

The U.S. State Department report says, “July 10 – A media outlet reported on July 18 that at a celebratory event in Ambalangoda, Army Chief General Sarath Fonseka stated that the military had to overlook the traditional rules of war and even kill LTTE rebels who came to surrender carrying white flags during the war against the LTTE.”

Quoting from the media reports on the July 10 speech made by the then Army Chief, the Minister said that Fonseka at the function had gone to the extent of saying that he was under tremendous pressure from several quarters to order the ground troops not to shoot at the LTTE cadres and had taken the position that soldiers in the battle field who have staked their lives are the best judges to decide on such matters.

“It is instructive for every one to remember that Sri Lanka has emerged after 30 years of protracted war and there are forces still out there working for destabilitation of the island nation. We are sad and disappointed that Gen. (retd) Fonseka is wittingly or unwittingly working on their script,” the Minister said. - coutesy: The Hindu -

Fate of the 10,000 insurgent suspects yet to be determined by Sri Lanka state

"Human rights watchers have estimated that close to 10,000 post-war detainees with suspected links to the Tamil Tigers are being held at government safe houses even as screening of war-displaced persons continues in camps in Vavuniya," writes Satarupa Bhattacharjya to Sunday Times of Sri Lanka on June 28, 2009. Over 270,000 displaced people from Vanni are held in these camps.



Sri Lanka state does not consider these persons as political prisoners or prisoners of war but terrorists. Their fate remains still undetermined while several thousands more persons suspected of abetting terror acts are languishing in detention or remand for years due to slow legal process.


"Between March and May 2009, ICRC delegates held private interviews with more than 6,700 security detainees in nearly 135 government-run places of detention throughout the country and provided them with clothes, toiletries and recreational items. The ICRC supported the families of some 1,400 detainees to visit their detained relatives," reported Relief Web.

The government granted amnesty to most of the rebels of 1989 insurrection led by People's Liberation Front (JVP) in a rehabilitation process that stretched for some years while some insurgents were tried for criminal offences. However, the top and middle level leadership was eliminated and the present situation is also similar to 1989 era.