- Weerawansa, Gammanpila, and party leaders lock horns with Basil over LNG deal
- Party leaders and parliamentary group meetings fail to quell dissent within Govt.
- Adani’s personal visit to SL viewed as personal message on Modi’s support
- Govt.’s shift towards India and US angers China, which adopts intimidation tactics
- Stage set for showdown between Police and Catholic clergy over Easter attacks probe
- Uproar over appointment of convicted Ven. Gnanasara to head ‘one law’ task force
The cold war that was brewing within the governing alliance was now out in the open, with alliance party leaders taking their concerns over the Government’s actions before the public.
Prime Minister Mahinda Rajapaksa had for some time been trying to unite the governing alliance partners by continuously getting President Gotabaya Rajapaksa and Minister of Finance Basil Rajapaksa to initiate dialogues with allied party leaders.
However, cracks are now visible in the public domain, with government ministers and trade union alliances threatening further action, including a 48-hour strike action this week.
It is in this backdrop that President Rajapaksa left the island early last morning (30) to attend the COP26 climate change conference hosted by the United Nations (UN) in Glasgow.
However, prior to his departure, the President issued an extraordinary gazette notification last Friday (29) declaring several services including energy, ports, postal, banking, and several others as essential services. The move was aimed at minimising the impact of a possible trade union action covering key economic sectors.
Prime Minister Rajapaksa was concerned over the growing agitation among governing party allies as well as trade unions over the controversial deal with US-based New Fortress Energy Inc. (NFE) over the Yugadanavi Power Station in Kerawalapitiya.
The group of 10 (G-10) governing party leaders had, in writing, earlier asked the President for an appointment to discuss the growing concerns over the controversial deal, but President Rajapaksa had responded saying that common issues should be discussed at the cabinet meeting or parliamentary group meeting while discussing specific political issues with the Prime Minister and the Finance Minister.
However, the Prime Minister had turned to President Rajapaksa and explained that the failure to grant an appointment to governing party leaders to discuss their concerns over the controversial deal had resulted in the formation of a broad platform consisting of political parties, trade unions, and civil society groups against the Government.
Premier Rajapaksa had convinced the President to convene a party leaders’ meeting to discuss their concerns.
Accordingly, the governing party leaders were informed last Thursday (28) morning that the President and Prime Minister had decided to convene a meeting of governing party leaders at 5.30 p.m. at Temple Trees.
It turned out to be a marathon meeting that lasted over four hours, resulting in the Prime Minister and Minister Vasudeva Nanayakkara leaving the meeting before its conclusion.
Nevertheless, the meeting did not bring about a solution to the existing concerns over the controversial deal.
The G-10 leaders attended the meeting to discuss the issues concerning the Yugadanavi deal, which results in the divestiture of 40% of the plant held by the Treasury to US-based NFE while also giving it a monopoly on Sri Lanka’s liquefied natural gas (LNG) supply for five years.
At the outset of the meeting, participants were handed the meeting agenda that included 12 points to be discussed. Among the topics were the trade union action by teachers and principals, the fertiliser shortage, and the Covid-19 situation in the country. The Yugadanavi deal was listed as the last talking point.
National Freedom Front (NFF) Leader Minister Wimal Weerawansa had then noted that the Yugadanavi deal should be the first topic of discussion, since it was the main issue the majority of the party leaders wished to discuss.
The President and Prime Minister had agreed and the controversial deal was taken up as the first point of discussion.
Weerawansa had noted that the cabinet paper on the controversial Yugadanavi deal had not received cabinet approval as stated, since there was no discussion on the respective paper. He had stated that there were doubts over how the relevant cabinet paper was approved and the cabinet minutes stating that it was approved. “(I) don’t know if there was a technical issue since that cabinet meeting was held via Zoom, but there was no reading of the paper and discussion on it,” Weerawansa had said.
The NFF Leader had then said that Pivithuru Hela Urumaya Leader and Minister of Energy Udaya Gammanpila would explain the concerns over the Yugadanavi agreement.
Gammanpila had explained four points. First was the issue of the violation of good governance principles due to the awarding of a tender to a company that had not participated in the tender process.
Second was the diplomacy issue, since the tenders presented by India, Japan, South Korea, and a joint collaboration between China and Pakistan were shortlisted. The tender was to be awarded to the China-Pakistan collaboration. “The countries that were shortlisted and selected by the tender had been friends of Sri Lanka while the US had continuously harassed Sri Lanka. By assigning the tender outside the process, to the US, (it) will make our friendly countries displeased and feel slighted,” Gammanpila had said.
The third point noted was that the NFE’s LNG monopoly, according to the agreement, would not end in five years but would continue, since the cabinet paper had stated that the monopoly would last five years or until the next pipeline is being set up. According to Gammanpila, no investor would be interested in building a pipeline when the NFE held a monopoly. Finally, Gammanpila had noted that the agreement would have a direct impact on local plans to extract LNG.
After Gammanpila’s explanation, Basil had spoken. He had pointed out that the agreement signed on the Kelanitissa Power Plant in 1997 was more detrimental than the Yugadanavi deal. “Where were you at that time?” Basil had questioned.
“I was a young boy and was not in active politics,” Gammanpila had responded.
The Finance Minister had asked if the G-10 had objections only because the agreement was being signed with the US and whether it would not have objected if the Government proceeded with China.
The G-10 leaders had noted that the objections were not over the company that was being assigned for the task, but the monopoly that was being created.
Minister Nanayakkara had then requested for a copy of the initial agreement reached with NFE, since the Cabinet had still not been given copies despite the cabinet paper being approved nearly two months ago.
The Finance Minister had said that even he had not yet received a copy of the agreement from his Ministry Secretary (S.R. Attygalle).
MP Weerasumana Weerasinghe had then questioned: “Isn’t your Ministry Secretary’s office located next to your own room in the Ministry?”
The President and Prime Minister had then admitted that there were some shortcomings in the agreement and had requested the G-10 leaders to submit in writing their proposals to be considered when finalising the agreement.
Minister Prasanna Ranatunga had noted that it was hurtful when alliance partners made public criticisms about the Government. Weerawansa had responded saying that there would not be space to take issues to the public domain if the Government had space for internal discussions.
Raging protests
The G-10 leaders were not convinced of the outcome of Thursday’s meeting. The leaders, together with a joint trade union alliance covering the energy, ports, and power sectors, last week planned a series of agitation campaigns including a public meeting and petition signing last Friday, while the trade union alliance announced a 48-hour protest and blackout from 3 November.
The Ceylon Electricity Board (CEB) United Trade Union Alliance last Friday evening carried out a protest in 19 areas of the country against the Yugadanavi deal.
The alliance also warned of staging trade union action on 3 November 2021.
Alliance Convener Ranjan Jayalal claimed: “Suspend the agreement before 3 November. Suspend it immediately. If you fail to do so, then we will engage in a trade union action that will put the entire country in darkness on 3 November. This will not be something like closing schools. Fuel, ports, and power are much more important sectors of the country. Even if one of these sectors shuts down, it will lead to the remaining other sectors being affected. People will not have access to media, radio, and television. We will engage in a trade union action which will reach the worst case, where one will not even be able to operate the generator at their residences. So please suspend the agreement.”
He added that the leaders of 11 political parties had promised to engage in similar trade union actions simultaneously.
The G-10 leaders, along with the Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP), last Tuesday (26) held a discussion with trade union leaders representing the power, port, and energy sectors at the headquarters of the Communist Party of Sri Lanka.
The discussion was a follow-up to a meeting held several weeks ago, where the governing party leaders and trade unions had discussed the controversial Yugadanavi deal as well as the Government’s move to assign prime lands in Colombo and the Colombo Port to the Chinese.
During last Tuesday’s discussion, the trade unions had noted the need to carry out an aggressive protest campaign against the Government’s alleged arbitrary actions.
After the meeting, Minister Gammanpila told the media that despite being members of a government they (G-10 leaders) had worked to bring to power, they would not stand silent if the Government was treading a wrong path. “Even if your parents do something wrong, it is wrong,” he said.
Gammanpila reiterated that the G-10 leaders, trade union leaders, and other stakeholders would reconvene as the People’s Council on Friday.
However, Gammanpila was non-committal on whether the governing coalition partners would stage a walk out of the Government.
NFF Leader Weerawansa also maintained that the G-10 leaders would not turn a blind eye if the Government made a wrong move.
Weerawansa recently launched a magazine called Third Path aimed at building a political discourse that would help find solutions to the issues that ail the nation.
On Friday, the G-10 leaders vowed to continue with the fight by even giving up their ministerial portfolios if it came to that.
Meanwhile, the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP) last Tuesday (26) filed a writ application in the Court of Appeal (CoA) against the Yugadanavi deal and said that its trade unions would also be filing a case at the Supreme Court this week regarding the same.
“This agreement is illegal, as it was done in an irregular manner. It was not at all transparent and even the Cabinet of Ministers did not know the contents of the deal despite approving it. Next week, we will file a case in the SC through our trade unions,” National People’s Power (NPP) Attorney-At-Law Sunil Watagala said after filing the petition.
According to the JVP, the application was for a writ of mandamus (an order from a court to an inferior government official to properly fulfil their official duties) to be made on the respondents, preventing them from taking any actions with regard to the matter until the application is taken up and its hearing is concluded.
Group meeting
The much-awaited governing party parliamentary group convened by the President got underway last Sunday evening (24) at the President’s house. Around 108 government MPs had attended the meeting that was followed by drinks and dinner.
President Rajapaksa and Prime Minister Rajapaksa had addressed the parliamentary group and explained the current issues faced by the country.
However, Finance Minister Rajapaksa had remained silent during the meeting and refrained from making any statements.
Chief Government Whip Minister Johnston Fernando had explained matters relating to the impending 2022 Budget while Treasury Secretary Attygalle had explained matters pertaining to the Appropriation Bill for 2022.
When discussing other issues, Minister Rohitha Abeygunawardena and backbench MP Tissa Kuttiarachchi had observed that it was important for the governing parliamentary group to stand united. They had further noted that the governing group members should work together at this decisive time period.
Minister Vasudeva Nanayakkara had responded to these observations saying he possessed political experience of over 50 years and that any government or political movement could successfully move forward if there were frequent internal discussions as well as self-criticisms. He added that Prime Minister Rajapaksa knew this very well.
Premier Rajapaksa had smiled and nodded in acknowledgement.
Contrary to initial reports that the topic of the controversial Yugadanavi deal would be discussed at the parliamentary group meeting, the topic was not taken up for discussion.
A G-10 party leader, Minister Nanayakkara, confirmed the same.
“The meeting went well. We discussed the teacher salary anomalies, the Budget for 2022, and the parliamentary programme for the upcoming week. The fertiliser issue was discussed in length as well last night, and with the feedback received from all parties, the fertiliser issue and the teacher salary issue will be resolved with time. We received feedback from all districts in the Island,” Nanayakkara said.
When inquired about the teacher’s salary anomalies, Nanayakkara responded by saying that all teachers would report to work last Monday (25) as promised, and the anomalies would be resolved in due time.
“The politically motivated activities will not stop, but the teacher and fertiliser issues will gradually settle down. That was the impression we received from all the feedback we got,” concluded Nanayakkara.
Focus on going organic
Along with the ongoing fertiliser controversy, the parliamentary group had also discussed the organic agriculture policy.
Nanayakkara, addressing the gathering, had explained that all members of the Government were supportive of the move to convert to organic agriculture, but the issue was the lack of a mechanism to fully implement the programme.
He noted that conducting any form of transformation required a proper plan/mechanism.
“In this instance, we have done the transformation without a proper mechanism to implement it,” the Minister noted.
Also addressing the gathering, MP Suren Raghavan praised the President over the move to organic agriculture.
“I have been in the North and East for the past 12 days. People in these areas hail the move. During the period of the war, the people in the North and East carried out their cultivations using organic fertiliser, as they did not have access to chemical fertiliser,” Raghavan said, adding that the people in the South did not have to worry, as those in the North would cultivate food crops to feed even the people in the South.
Meanwhile, State Minister Shasheendra Rajapaksa noted that a decision was taken to compensate farmers for their losses if harvests were compromised due to the switch to organic fertiliser.
“If in the case of a reduction in the harvest, farmers will be compensated through the Farmers’ Trust Fund, and the decision to move from chemical to organic fertiliser was made with such implications in mind. We are working while having the best interest of the people in our conscience,” Rajapaksa told the media last week.
He went on to say that getting reprimanded had become the norm for the Rajapaksa family, and that despite the setbacks, the decision that was made will remain and they will focus on achieving the final goal.
One country, one law drama
The announcement last week by the President, made via an extraordinary gazette notification, on forming a presidential task force on “one country, one law” to be chaired by the outspoken Bodu Bala Sena (BBS) General Secretary Ven. Galagodaaththe Gnanasara Thera caught everyone by surprise.
The move left even governing party allies tongue-tied, with several government ministers resorting to physically running away from media cameras and microphones when asked for a comment on Gnanasara Thera’s appointment.
The gazette notification (2251/30) was issued last Tuesday (26) by virtue of the powers vested with the President.
The 13 members of the task force are: Gnanasara Thera, Prof. Dayananda Banda Esquire, Prof. Shanthinandana Wijesinghe, Prof. Sumedha Siriwardana, N.G. Sujeewa Panditharathna, Iresh Senevirathne, Attorney-at-Law Sanjaya Marambe, Attorney-at-Law Eranda Navarathna, Pani Wewala, Moulavi Mohomad of the Ulama Council in Galle, Mohomad Inthikab, Kaleel Rahuman, and Azeez Nizardeen.
The President appointed Gnanasara Thera as the task force Chairman, and President’s Senior Assistant Secretary Jeevanthie Senanayake as the task force Secretary.
The President authorised the presidential task force to make inquiries and issue instructions as required for the purpose of executing the tasks so entrusted.
Furthermore, the President directed the task force members to submit reports to him at least once a month, and submit the final report on or before 28 February 2022.
The Centre for Policy Alternatives (CPA), issuing a statement, had called on the Government to immediately rescind the relevant gazette notification.
The statement had noted the compounding of a culture of governance by task forces, the promotion of divisive Buddhist clergy linked to incitement of violence, and attacks against religious minorities; all of which entrenched impunity.
The CPA had noted that the phrase “one country, one law” – widely deployed in the run-up to and during the 2019 presidential election – had a very specific majoritarian connotation, and is by no means an expression of a desire for equality or the equal protection under the law. Rather, the advocates of the phrase deliberately distort Sri Lanka’s legal history and legal system and promote a false narrative of a legal system that they claim benefits minorities and harks to a mythical time where Sri Lanka was governed by “one legal system”.
The CPA statement further noted that there were many aspects of the Sri Lankan legal system, including aspects of personal laws, which do not meet the human rights standards guaranteed in Sri Lanka’s Constitution or Sri Lanka’s international obligations, and a serious attempt to bring these laws in line with these human rights obligations would require a genuinely representative and consultative process led by persons with the integrity and capacity to do so.
Minority representation
The issue of minority communities’ representation in the task force headed by Gnanasara Thera was taken up during the governing party leaders’ meeting last Thursday (28).
Ceylon Workers’ Congress (CWC) Vice President Senthil Thondaman, Eelam People’s Democratic Party (EPDP) Leader Minister Douglas Devananda, and A.L.M. Athaullah had raised concerns.
The CWC and EPDP had noted that the non-inclusion of individuals representing the Tamil communities in the country would pose a problem, as the support of all communities was required to implement the “one country, one law” policy.
They had noted that the process should be an inclusive one and not an exclusive one.
President Rajapaksa, after listening to Thondaman and Devananda, had said he was willing to expand the task force by appointing two more members, representing the Up-country Tamils and Northern Tamils.
The President had requested the two leaders to propose the names of two individuals to be included in the task force.
However, the response received by Athaullah was quite different. The President had said he was willing to hear concerns of all concerned, but maintained that the appointment of the task force under Gnanasara Thera was the correct move.
When questioned for the need for such a task force when the Justice Ministry was engaged in a programme for law reforms, the President had noted that the implementation of “one country, one law” was a must, and that the task force was the way to ensure that occurred.
Meanwhile, Finance Minister Rajapaksa had claimed that Athaullah had no right to question the action taken by the President. Not stopping at that, Basil had told Athaullah that whoever had a problem with the manner in which the Government operated, was free to leave it.
“You people were not with the Pohottuwa (SLPP). The President is working according to the mandate received by him from 6.9 million, and who are you to question that? You can either stay or leave,” Basil had said.
Angry at Basil’s words targeting an alliance partner, Athuraliye Rathana Thera had said the alliance partners could not be intimidated in such a fashion.
“We might not have contested under the SLPP at the last general election, but we all worked for the President at the last presidential election. We therefore have a right to raise concerns of the people who voted for the President,” the Thera had charged.
Going solo
While the G-10 had publicly locked horns with the governing SLPP, the SLFP had launched a programme to set the groundwork to contest the impending provincial council and local government elections on its own.
The SLFP had, for some time, complained over the failure of the SLPP to honour the agreements reached between the two parties in the run-up to the 2019 presidential and 2020 general elections.
A majority of the SLFP Central Committee maintained that the party should take a stronger stance against certain arbitrary actions of the Government while building the party from the grassroots to split from the governing alliance.
According to SLFP sources, around four members of the SLFP parliamentary group were opposed to clashing with the Government, and looked at moving out, while the rest of the group had expressed the need for the party to take a political stand.
The SLFP last week commenced the programme of appointing new electoral and district organisers to fill the existing vacancies.
A five-member committee was appointed to select the electoral and district organisers, and the party was being reorganised.
Discussions were also underway to contest the next provincial council and local government elections separately.
The five-member committee is chaired by SLFP General Secretary State Minister Dayasiri Jayasekara, and included SLFP Senior Vice President Prof. Rohana Luxman Piyadasa, SLFP Senior Deputy Vice President Minister Mahinda Amaraweera, SLFP National Organiser State Minister Duminda Dissanayake, and SLFP Vice Chairman MP Shan Wijayalal de Silva.
The SLFP held interviews last Wednesday (27) at the party headquarters to select the electoral and district organisers to fill vacant posts.
Economic woes
The country’s economic woes show no sign of abating, with international rating agency Moody’s downgrading the Government of Sri Lanka’s Long-Term Foreign Currency Issuer and Senior Unsecured Debt Ratings to Caa2 from Caa1 under review for downgrade. The outlook is stable.
“The decision to downgrade the ratings is driven by Moody’s assessment that the absence of comprehensive financing to meet the Government’s forthcoming significant maturities, in the context of very low foreign exchange reserves, raises default risks,” Moody’s had stated.
In turn, this assessment reflects governance weaknesses in the ability of the country’s institutions to take measures that decisively mitigate significant and urgent risks to the Balance of Payments, the statement said.
“External liquidity risks remain heightened. A large financing envelope that Moody’s considers to be secure remains elusive, and the sovereign continues to rely on piecemeal funding such as swap lines and bilateral loans, although prospects for non-debt-generating inflows have improved somewhat since Moody’s placed Sri Lanka’s rating under review for downgrade.”
Persistently wide fiscal deficits due to the Government’s very narrow revenue base compound this challenge by keeping gross borrowing needs high and removing fiscal flexibility, the ratings agency stated.
The Government, however, expressed strong displeasure on the recent assessment by Moody’s that led to the rating action after being placed under review for downgrade three months ago in a similar fashion.
“Once again, Moody’s irrational rating action with regard to Sri Lanka comes a few days before a key event, namely the announcement of the Government Budget for 2022, and this apparent hastiness and the view expressed during discussions with Moody’s analysts that the nature of the Budget is irrelevant to the financing plans of the Government, clearly demonstrates the lack of understanding of such analysts,” the Central Bank of Sri Lanka (CBSL) said in a statement.
Furthermore, the CBSL highlighted that the rating agency had failed to recognise the medium to long-term funding arrangements that were being finalised with various bilateral sources, which were due to materialise in the near term.
“They include, among others, credit lines of several billions of US dollars from India and Middle Eastern counterparts to procure petroleum, an arrangement for a large forex loan from a Middle Eastern nation as a bilateral long-term loan, and the proposals received for the syndicated loan arrangement that are being evaluated at present. In addition, a substantial amount of funds is expected from the already lined up prioritised project loan-related inflows to the Government. The recent discussions on bilateral currency swap arrangements with several central banks are also expected to provide the country with additional support in the near term,” the statement read.
To add to the economic issues, the People’s Bank of Sri Lanka was, last Friday (29), blacklisted by the Chinese Embassy’s Economic and Commercial office over the bank’s alleged failure to make payments according to letters of credit (LCs) and contracts.
A statement from China’s Ministry of Commerce detailed the same.
“Recently, People’s Bank of Sri Lanka has witnessed a vicious event of LC default, causing huge losses to Chinese enterprises in international trade with Sri Lanka. This bank now has been blacklisted by the Economic and Commercial Office of the Chinese Embassy in Sri Lanka,” the statement said.
The office solemnly reminded all Chinese enterprises to strengthen risk control, and avoid accepting LCs issued by People’s Bank of Sri Lanka in international trade with Sri Lanka.
However, in response to the Chinese Embassy’s blacklisting of the bank, People’s Bank of Sri Lanka said payments were halted due to an interim injunction issued by courts.
The bank further stated that action on payments would be taken based on future court decisions.
The move by China is widely seen as a not-so-subtle signal by the Chinese Government flexing its muscles to try and remind the Sri Lankan Government of where its bread is buttered. The Chinese Government has been growing increasingly flustered, with the regime extending olive branches to India and the US.
China was notably rattled by the private visit to Sri Lanka last week, from Indian business magnate Gautam Adani, who is also a close friend and personal confidant of Indian Premier Narendra Modi.
The visit was widely seen as a signal of strengthening ties between the two countries. The reactions from China make clear that under the Rajapaksa regime, the communist country had considered Sri Lanka to be its private fiefdom and that they had not taken kindly to the cold dose of reality with Sri Lanka entertaining close relations with other countries, including China’s geopolitical foes.
Standing against allegations
Amidst the internal government clashes, the 2019 Easter Sunday attacks probe and the situation of the frustration of the Catholic Church took a new twist last week.
State Intelligence Service (SIS) Director Maj. Gen. Suresh Sallay filed a complaint last Monday (25) at the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) against National Catholic Social Communication Centre Director and Kurana St. Anne’s Church Parish Priest Rev. Fr. Cyril Gamini Fernando over a statement made in reference to him (Sallay) during a recent online discussion.
Sallay had mentioned in his complaint that he had never communicated with Zahran Hashim or anyone affiliated to the National Thowheeth Jama’ath (NTJ), and that the objective of these allegations was not only to mislead the public, but to deliberately tarnish his reputation, as well as to put his life and the lives of his family members in harm’s way.
During a recent online meeting, Fernando had alleged that Sallay had been in touch with the culprits of the Easter Sunday attacks.
A presentation was made alleging that there was credible evidence that Sallay, who was the former Director of Military Intelligence (DMI) and other intelligence agencies, had provided financial and other forms of support to the NTJ group, including Zahran, prior to 2015.
The presentation had claimed: “Credible evidence exists that the NTJ terror group led by Zahran was supported by the intelligence services, including the receipt of funding. Brigadier Suresh Sallay was the Director of Military Intelligence (DMI). He had employed Zahran and the group for intelligence work and kept the group in the payroll of the Defence Ministry. Sallay was removed during the United National Front (UNF)-led Government. However, he was appointed to the Sri Lanka High Commission in Malaysia by President Sirisena for unknown reasons. He had been in India during the Easter Sunday terror attacks.
“Sallay has been the Head of (the) State Intelligence (Service) (SIS) since 2009. We have seen the Thowheeth Jama’ath group active in the Eastern Province since 2006. During that time, there were several clashes between Sufi Muslims and extremist groups. The Kattankudy Police, the then Defence Secretary, and the President had been informed that such a group was being formed. Therefore, there is no doubt that the intelligence services were well aware of these groups.”
Fernando had questioned: “Did the person in charge of the intelligence unit not know these things? If he had known, why hadn’t he taken any action on this? It has been shown that after the formation of the NTJ, an area like Kattankudy seemed to be completely under the control of the extremist group. Accordingly, the SIS and this person should be responsible for protecting these people and not bringing them before the law.”
It is worth noting that Sallay was not heading any intelligence agency in 2009, as alleged by Fr. Fernando. He was, at the time, a junior army officer attached to the Sri Lankan Embassy in France. He was only appointed as DMI in 2014.
Meanwhile, Public Security Ministry Secretary Maj. Gen. (Retd.) Jagath Alwis had said that Fr. Fernando and others who attended said discussion would have to give a statement regarding the basis on which the allegations against Maj. Gen. Sallay were made.
Alwis told The Morning: “This is something the whole world was told. Action must be taken against them. At least those who organised this discussion should have corrected him (Fr. Fernando). When a person like this came to a forum like this and said such a thing, they (the organisers), at the very least, had to say ‘that’s a wrong statement, don’t do that’.”
He had also said that if a person’s name is mentioned in connection with a crime, there must be sufficient evidence to prove it.
Salley was summoned by the CID last Tuesday to record a statement over the complaint filed by him.
Fr. Fernando was summoned by the CID on Thursday, but had sought a one-week extension to appear before the CID.
However, three other church priests had arrived at the CID and handed over a letter to the CID on behalf of Fr. Fernando.
Speaking to the media after handing over said letter, Fr. Shanthi Kumar Weliwita, representing the Archdiocese of Colombo, said: “We are here today to deliver a letter on behalf of Fernando. He asked for a period of one week for legal assistance and advice. Accordingly, the CID gave permission for that.”
Colombo Chief Magistrate Buddhika Sri Ragala had ordered the CID to probe the complaint made by Sallay against Fr. Fernando and some others.
Former SIS Chief under fire
Meanwhile, the Catholic Church had also claimed that former SIS Head Senior DIG Nilantha Jayawardena should be prosecuted instead of being named a state witness, as he had failed to prevent the 2019 Easter Sunday attacks, despite receiving prior warnings of an impending attack.
Archbishop of Colombo Malcolm Cardinal Ranjith told an online discussion recently that the last warning given to Jayawardena before the terror attacks had contained all the information relating to the attacks, such as where the bombings were going to take place.
“Despite these warnings, he didn’t do anything. However, he could have, as a responsible police official, acted upon this intelligence information. Under the Police Ordinance, if a police officer comes to know that there is a threat to any citizen, it is their responsibility to take actions regarding it without waiting for orders from higher authorities,” he had said.
Referring to the Presidential Commission of Inquiry (PCoI) into the Easter Sunday terror attacks, the Cardinal had said the report had clearly recommended that judicial proceedings be instituted against Jayawardena.
He had questioned how he could be made a state witness. “I don’t understand Attorney General (AG) President’s Counsel (PC) Sanjay Rajaratnam at all. This is unacceptable behaviour on the part of any government or law enforcement agency. He cannot be made a state witness and should be prosecuted instead.”
The Cardinal had also mentioned that he had sent a letter to the AG mentioning 15 reasons why Jayawardena cannot be named a state witness.
Also, referring to the incident where two police officers were killed in the Vavunathivu area on 30 November 2018, Cardinal Ranjith had claimed that when considering Jayawardena’s actions, it was very clear that he (Jayawardena) had not only manipulated the evidence in said case, but had also attempted to hide the connection between the killing of the two police officers and the NTJ organisation led by Zahran Hashim.
The Cardinal had alleged: “It is very clear from the evidence that there was a deliberate attempt to pass the responsibility onto the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), whereas the SIS was aware that the guns that were in the possession of the two police officers were taken by the Zahran-led group. There was a deliberate attempt on the part of the SIS to hide that.”
He had further claimed that Jayawardena had been promoted and given a very satisfactory appointment instead of being prosecuted. “Now, he doesn’t say anything about this matter. The promotion is kind of a bribe given to him to keep quiet. The authorities are protecting this man. Even when the PCoI had very clearly said that he had committed the crime of culpable neglect of duties, this is the situation.”
Pope’s letter to Cardinal
Cardinal Ranjith had also said last Saturday (23) that His Holiness Pope Francis had written to him asking what assistance or action the Archbishop required from the Pope regarding the investigation into the Easter Sunday terror attacks of 2019.
He had made this revelation during a discussion held with Sri Lankans living in Europe via video conference to brief them on the Easter Sunday attacks probe.
Cardinal Ranjith had said that Pope Francis had written the letter, dated 19 September, in his own handwriting and in response to a letter sent by him previously.
The following excerpts from the letter, which he said he translated from Italian, were read during the online meeting:
“Dear Brother,
“Cardinal Bagnasco has handed over to me your letter of last 24 August in which you explained to me about the ugly situation and that the reality of the 21 April 2019 remains without clarity to the public. Also, in the last few days, a message has arrived from the nunciature in which the same facts were recounted.
“Eminence, this situation makes me very sad. I promise to pray more and remain ready to do whatever you consider opportune. Tomorrow, I will speak with the Secretary of State about it.
“I remember how in those days you were so courageous as to prevent any vengeance by the Christians and you went with the Imam of the Islamic community to meet them so that they may witness the friendship among yourselves. I do not forget that example of a Shepherd.
“Please count on me and indicate what would be best to be done from here.”
Probe completed
Meanwhile, Public Security Minister Rear Admiral (Retd.) Sarath Weerasekera had told the media last Wednesday that all investigations carried out by the Police on the 2019 Easter Sunday attacks were complete.
He had said that all duties of the Police regarding the said investigation had been fulfilled.
“The Police have completed all investigations with regard to the terror attacks and have handed over the findings to the Attorney General. Accordingly, nine lawsuits are currently being heard in five High Courts (HCs) pertaining to the attacks,” the Minister had noted.
Weerasekera had further said investigations had been completed in a short period of about two-and-a-half years and therefore, no one could claim the Government or the Police had not conducted a proper investigation into the Easter Sunday attacks.
“We had to analyse about 110,000 phone calls in a very short period. Also, 24 accused parties who planned these attacks have been indicted. About 23,700 charges have been filed in this regard. So, no one can say that we are trying to sweep the investigations under the carpet,” he had added.
Meanwhile, the case against former Defence Ministry Secretary Hemasiri Fernando and former Inspector General of Police (IGP) Pujith Jayasundara that was filed before the Colombo Chief Magistrate’s Court on charges of criminal negligence of duty owing to the failure to prevent the Easter Sunday attacks despite receiving prior Intelligence information, concluded.
It was taken up before Colombo Acting Magistrate Sanjaya Gamage last week.
The CID had informed the court that another lawsuit against the two defendants was being heard before a Special Trial-At-Bar at the Colombo High Court and the investigating officers had sought the conclusion of the lawsuit filed before the Colombo Chief Magistrate’s Court.
The Acting Magistrate had then ordered to end the relevant proceedings against Fernando and Jayasundara.