- Basil expected to leave for the US on Tuesday, likely to miss IMF debate in Parliament
- Discussion on making representations to IMF on conditions to be laid on Sri Lanka
- International community to closely monitor situation in SL amidst state of emergency
- Govt. has obtained $ 2.4 b from India, $ 1 b from China and $ 250 m from Bangladesh so far
- Wimal and Udaya take the lead in calling for interim govt. to normalise and hold polls
- SLFP CC heats up with parliamentary group split on leaving Govt.; one week for final call
- President reiterates commitment to honour agreements reached with TNA to Jaishankar
“Loyalty to country ALWAYS. Loyalty to government, when it deserves it” – Mark Twain
The desperation of the Government led by President Gotabaya Rajapaksa and Prime Minister Mahinda Rajapaksa in the face of the ongoing economic crisis and increasing public dissent was witnessed when the President declared a state of public emergency in the country last Friday (1) night in response to angry people taking to the streets from all parts of the island demanding solutions from their Government. It was further compounded when an island-wide curfew was declared from 6 p.m. yesterday (2) till 6 a.m. tomorrow (4), with the intention of preventing the holding of a mass public protest that was to be held today (3).
It is, however, not the best route for a government to try to stifle public outcry rather than presenting a coherent plan to resolve the ongoing crisis. The President’s emergency proclamation will now have to be presented to Parliament within 14 days, which could be expected to be done this week during sessions, no doubt igniting objections from the Opposition benches. In the event the proclamation fails to receive parliamentary approval, it will stand null and void.
Soon after the announcement, the Bar Association of Sri Lanka (BASL) Executive Committee met last morning to discuss the imposition of emergency regulations and its impact on the public’s actions.
The BASL announced that it was gravely concerned by the declaration of a state of emergency. “The BASL is of the view that a declaration of a state of emergency is not the answer to the present situation in the country, including the spate of public protests which have occurred. These protests reflect the desperate situation of the people who are seeking to secure for themselves and their families some of the most basic essentials in life. Over the past several months the country has been heading towards a grave economic crisis and early warnings given by professionals and experts in the fields both local and international have gone unheeded,” the BASL stated.
The BASL noted that those in authority had until very recently failed to understand the gravity of the situation and the grave impact the crisis has had on the life of the people and the community.
“There has been a failure to understand the aspirations of the people, and to empathise with the suffering of the people of the country. The Government of Sri Lanka must make people aware of its policies and plans for the recovery of the economy in order to alleviate their suffering,” the association noted.
The BASL is firmly of the view that the right to protest and the right to dissent are important aspects of the fundamental rights of the people, including the freedom of expression and the freedom of peaceful assembly.
“If a peaceful protest becomes violent, that will only dilute the objective and purpose of a peaceful expression of dissent and strengthen the hands of those who seek to suppress legitimate dissent. As such violent acts which occur during a protest and destruction of property whether public or private cannot be condoned and must be condemned. Similarly, those engaged in protests must take utmost care to ensure that such protests remain peaceful and must be wary of persons who might seek to cause violence and destruction during such protests,” the BASL added.
In the recent case of Free Media Movement Convenor U.N.S.P. Kurukulasuriya and J. K. W. Jayasekara v Sri Lanka Rupavahini Corporation SCFR 556/2008 and 557/2008 decided on 17 February 2021, the Supreme Court quoted with approval the following passages found in several decisions of Sri Lankan courts: “The right to support or to criticise governments and political parties, policies and programmes is fundamental to the democratic way of life; …and democracy requires not merely that dissent be tolerated, but that it be encouraged” “Criticism of the Government, and of political parties and policies, is per se, a permissible exercise of the freedom of speech and expression under Article14 (1) (a).”
Close watch
While the country has been placed under a state of emergency in an attempt to control the growing public dissension, which in turn could stifle the constitutional rights of the public, Finance Minister Basil Rajapaksa is preparing to leave for Washington DC for official discussions with the International Monetary Fund (IMF) to secure assistance for Sri Lanka to find some form of reprieve.
Basil is expected to leave for the US on Tuesday (5), which means he will not be attending the parliamentary debate on the IMF report on Sri Lanka scheduled for Friday (8).
It is also learnt that there are discussions among civil groups on making representations to the IMF on the areas that could be taken into consideration when laying down conditions for assistance.
Meanwhile, UN Resident Coordinator in Sri Lanka Hanaa Singer-Hamdy tweeted: “We are monitoring developments and are concerned by reports of violence in #SriLanka. Calling for restraint from all groups.”
US Ambassador to Sri Lanka Julie Chung also noted that the situation in Sri Lanka was being closely watched. In a twitter post, the Ambassador noted that Sri Lankans had a right to protest peacefully, which was essential for democratic expression. “I am watching the situation closely, and hope the coming days bring restraint from all sides, as well as much-needed economic stability and relief for those suffering,” she said.
President Rajapaksa last week also requested Ambassador Chung to assist in Sri Lanka’s approach towards the IMF.
The EU delegation in Sri Lanka and the British High Commissioner to Sri Lanka Sarah Hulton also expressed concern, and said they were closely monitoring the situation in the country.
Amidst the Government’s plan to reach out to the IMF and other foreign countries for assistance, the desperation of the public reached a boiling point with the fuel crisis, LPG crisis and 13-hour power cuts. All these long-festering frustrations exploded in the form of a protest in Mirihana last Thursday (31 March) evening that resulted in a clash between law enforcement personnel and civilians in front of the road to the President’s residence in Mirihana that continued till the early hours of Friday (1) morning.
The President’s Media Division (PMD) issued a statement on Friday morning condemning the attack and terming the protestors near the President’s residence as a group of extremists. “It has been revealed that a group of organised extremists who were protesting near the Jubilee Post in Nugegoda suddenly became riotous and turned violent,” the PMD said in a statement.
The statement was immediately taken to task by civil society activists and the media posing questions to Government ministers on how the PMD had released such a statement even before initial investigations had been conducted.
Civil activists posting pictures on social media of the people involved in the protest, including mothers carrying infants and children, questioned if such citizens resembled ‘extremist groups’. They claimed the people were extremists if it referred to the extreme hunger, extreme frustration, and extreme helplessness the public was feeling at the moment.
Ministers Prasanna Ranatunga, Keheliya Rambukwella, and Dilum Amunugama who faced the media on Friday morning did their best to justify the contents of the statement. However, Amunugama, who said the group were not extremists but terrorists, later retracted the statement following an explanation given by Rambukwella.
Finally Public Security Minister Sarath Weerasekera told the media that there were no extremists but that it was an act of sabotage. “I don’t think they were extremist elements. It was only an act of sabotage. They have come to stage a protest and started damaging the vehicles and public property. That prompted the Police to use tear gas,” Weerasekera told the media.
The Police claimed that the protest had caused damages worth around Rs. 39 million and that 24 Police personnel including 18 STF personnel had been injured during the clashes. According to reports, five journalists and photojournalists had also been attacked during the clashes.
Nevertheless, the solidarity shown by the legal fraternity through their support for the protestors who were arrested caught the Police personnel at the Mirihana Police by surprise.
Hundreds of lawyers arrived at the Mirihana Police and then at the Gangodawila Magistrate’s Court on Friday to appear for those in custody – pro bono. Meanwhile, the Bar Association of Kalutara and Galle Lawyers announced yesterday (2) that they would provide legal services free for any individual arrested within their respective jurisdiction while enforcing rights vested with citizens under Clause 14 of the Constitution.
Meanwhile, Gangodawila Magistrate Prasanna Alwis granted bail to 15 out of the 21 protestors presented before Court on Friday evening. Another six persons in custody are to be presented for an identification parade tomorrow (4).
BASL President President’s Counsel (PC) Saliya Peiris himself was present in Court to represent the arrested individuals. Many other seniors included Ikram Mohomad PC, Kalinga Indatissa PC, Sarath Jayamanne PC, Anura Meddagoda PC, and Anuja Premaratne PC. Other senior lawyers included Upul Kumarapperuma and Manjula Balasooriya among others.
Accordingly, out of the 53 individuals arrested following last Thursday’s Mirihana protest, 21 were granted bail and six persons were remanded by the Gangodawila Magistrate’s Court. Three individuals were also granted Police bail while 23 individuals are currently receiving medical treatment. The Police had already informed the Gangodawila and Mt. Lavinia Magistrate’s Courts of the 23 individuals currently receiving medical treatment and that they will be presented to court when they recover.
Despite initial allegations by lawyers that the protesters were to be charged under the Prevention of Terrorim Act (PTA), the Police finally charged them under the Penal Code and Public Property Act
President’s meeting
Meanwhile, the President convened a meeting of the governing SLPP parliamentary group on Friday (1) evening at Temple Trees. Members of the G-10 and the SLFP had been absent from the meeting. It is learnt that around 75 governing SLPP MPs had attended.
Prime Minister Rajapaksa and Finance Minister Rajapaksa had sat with the President.
Many governing party members had expressed their concerns over the developing situation in the country and the public’s fast-eroding confidence in the Government. A majority of the parliamentarians had said they feared their houses would also be surrounded by angry masses in the next round.
The MPs had then focused on the mass public protest scheduled for today (3). Pointing out to the widely-circulated messages on social media without any person/group taking leadership for it, the President had been asked to take some form of action as the Sunday protest could also turn violent.
After listening to the call by the MPs to impose curfew to prevent unruly protests, the President had asked what could be done if the public violated the curfew. He had further explained that imposing curfew was only a temporary solution as it would not resolve the ongoing economic crisis. “The only way to resolve this issue is to ensure that we get US Dollars into the country and for that, we all need to work together,” President Rajapaksa had said.
It is learnt that apart from State Minister S.B. Dissanayake, who spoke of improving local production processes in order to minimise imports, the rest of the MPs had spoken of the difficulties faced by them and their families as well as for the need for additional protection due to the prevailing situation.
It is learnt that Minister Namal Rajapaksa had told the meeting that the Government needed to take serious stock of the worsening situation in the country and look at immediately addressing it. Namal further noted that he was prepared to step down if the Government was unable to immediately resolve the ongoing crisis.
It was also noticed that the Prime Minister and Finance Minister had refrained from making statements during the meeting.
However, the President on Friday night declared a state of public emergency in the country.
Meanwhile, Minister Amunugama expressed displeasure at what he termed as the failure on the part of intelligence units to issue a prior warning of the impending threat to the lives of the President and First Lady.
He explained that while there were reports of protests that were to take place island-wide, including outside the President’s Mirihana residence, there had been no warning issued of the violence that took place at the site of the protest.
According to Amunugama, the country’s intelligence units required reformation.
It is learnt that Namal and State Minister Shasheendra Rajapaksa had discussed handing in their resignations from their portfolios.
Increasing dissention
Meanwhile, State Minister Roshan Ranasinghe, who has for the past few months continuously expressed displeasure at the manner in which the Government has allowed the crisis to unfold, tendered his resignation with effect from 1 May 2022.
In his letter, he had informed of his resignation from his portfolio as well as from the post of SLPP Polonnaruwa organiser. Ranasinghe had also called on the Government to pay due compensation to farmers for crop loss and to ensure that they were provided with the fertiliser subsidy for the Yala cultivation period.
Also, a group of disgruntled governing party parliamentarians, who had been contemplating the possibility of sitting independently in Parliament, were at a meeting when the protest outside the President’s Mirihana residence took place.
After watching the protest live on television, the group had decided that they might have to expedite their decision and decided to seek necessary legal advice on the matter.
Under pressure
The public’s anger at the Government seems to have specifically turned towards members of the Rajapaksa family.
A protest was witnessed in Nuwara Eliya on Friday at an event that was to be attended by Prime Minister Rajapaksa’s wife, Shiranthi Rajapaksa.
People in the area protested against an event held to launch the April holiday season in Nuwara Eliya. The protestors claimed there should not be such celebrations when a majority of the people in the country were suffering even without food.
On their way to the ground near Lake Gregory, the protestors engaged in a protest outside Shiranthi’s Carlton school in Nuwara Eliya. She was to attend an event there and had not been at the premises when the incident had taken place.
State Minister Shasheendra Rajapaksa last Friday also had to avoid an official event that was organised at the Mahaweli Ground in Kiriibbanara to distribute deeds among residents after people in the area put up black flags in protest of his visit to the area. Hearing about the black flags that were hoisted and the growing public unrest in the area, Shasheendra had immediately decided not to attend the meeting.
Meanwhile SLFP MP Chamara Sampath Dasanayake had made his way to the event after hearing about the growing public protest in the area. However Dasanayake, who tried to represent the Government at the event, was jeered away by the angry public who also condemned the SLFP for continuing to remain in the Government.
All these protests resulted in Prime Minister Rajapaksa’s son Yoshitha Rajapaksa’s last rugby match being subjected to a change of venue as well as stopping spectators from viewing the match at the venue.
The rugby match between CH and FC (Yoshitha’s team) and Kandy Sports Club scheduled for today (3) was to be played at the Race Course Grounds, but was shifted to the Navy Grounds at Welisara, which is in a Navy camp. It was later announced that fans would not be permitted to witness the live match. Subsequently, due to the island-wide curfew which was imposed from 6 p.m. yesterday to 6 a.m. tomorrow, the match was postponed.
Crisis intensifies
That Sri Lanka is currently on a reversal path due to the aggravating economic crisis is an understatement given the events that unfolded last week. While the country experienced power cuts of over 10 hours, the fuel crisis and the inability of the Government to unload a diesel shipment that had reached the country early last week brought to a halt many privately-owned generators that were being operated island-wide. The inability of the authorities to provide a proper solution has resulted in more frustrated consumers taking to the streets.
Energy Minister Gamini Lokuge’s response to the fuel crisis was to publicise his mobile number saying any person could call him if they had any issue with fuel. It is reliably learnt that the individual who had initially answered the mobile phone number 0777414241 was at the receiving end of comments in colourful language and that it had been switched off for the most part of last week.
To top off this crisis, the Government had to seek additional financial assistance from India and Bangladesh through their senior officials who were in the country to attend the BIMSTEC summit.
A request for an additional $ 250 million swap was made last week from Bangladesh. Sri Lanka earlier received a $ 250 million swap from Bangladesh and its repayment was deferred by the Bangladeshi Government due to the crisis faced by Sri Lanka.
Bangladeshi Foreign Minister A.K. Abdul Momen said his Government had extended the repayment time of the swap facility due to the difficulties faced by Sri Lanka. “They have made another approach and we will look into it,” he said on the sidelines of the BIMSTEC summit. He further noted that the request for another $ 250 million swap was on the table and the Bangladeshi Government was yet to decide on the matter.
Sri Lanka has also sought an additional $ 2.5 billion financial aid package from China, which is in addition to the $ 1 billion swap facility granted by China last year. Out of the fresh $ 2.5 billion being sought from China, $ 1.5 billion is in the form of a credit line for goods and raw materials for industries and the remaining $ 1 billion is to be utilised to settle the loan repayments to China due this year.
The Government has also sought financial assistance from Russia and Australia, but there have not been any follow-up reports on the requests.
The Government last week also turned to India for an additional credit line of $ 1 billion to import essentials amid the ongoing economic crisis through Indian Minister of External Affairs Dr. S. Jaishankar during his visit to Sri Lanka last week. However, there has not been any official confirmation of this fact. There are also discussions on enhancing the fuel credit line granted by India from the current $ 500 million to $ 750 million.
Sri Lanka has already obtained $ 2.4 billion from India this year alone – a $ 400 million swap facility, a $ 500 million credit, a $ 500 million credit line for fuel, and a $ 1 billion credit line to purchase medicines and essential commodities.
Jaishankar met Finance Minister Rajapaksa last Monday (28 March). “Discussed the economic situation and India’s supportive response,” Jaishankar said on Twitter, with a photograph of the two officials next to each other.
The Indian Minister had also met President Rajapaksa and Prime Minister Rajapaksa and noted on his official Twitter account that when he had met President Rajapaksa, he had “assured him of India’s continued cooperation and understanding”.
Indian interests
During Jaishankar’s visit, the Government of Sri Lanka and India had also signed six Memoranda of Understanding (MOUs) covering several key economic areas, including one on the controversial hybrid renewable energy generation projects in the islands off Jaffna.
Following Jaishankar’s meeting with his Sri Lankan counterpart, Minister Prof. G.L. Peiris, the six MoUs had been signed, including the ‘MoU on implementation of Hybrid Power Projects in three Islands off Jaffna’.
It was initially a Chinese company – MS Sinosar-Etechwin joint venture – that was shortlisted in the tender for the proposed hybrid power projects. However, following the shortlisting, concerns were raised by India through diplomatic channels over the allocation of a development project in close proximity to India.
The Indian Government had made representations to the Sri Lankan Government expressing its objections over the unfolding and proposed to fund the project in its entirety to prevent it from being carried out by the Chinese. The Sri Lankan Government had however expressed concerns over India’s proposal, saying that there were difficulties in cancelling the tender as the process was being funded by the Asian Development Bank (ADB).
However, after dragging its feet on the proposed hybrid projects for nearly a year, the Government last week signed the MoU for the project with India.
Sri Lanka’s economic crisis and dependence on financial support from foreign partners including neighbouring India has resulted in the signing of several key agreements even without the concurrence of the Cabinet of Ministers.
If the recent revelation by opposition Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP) of five key agreements that were signed by the Sri Lankan Government related to the defence sector prior to finalising the $ 1 billion credit line for food and medicines from India is anything to go by, the latest agreements signed could be a precursor to the other agreements that could be reached between the two countries for further financial assistance from India.
President’s pledge
During his meeting with India’s Jaishankar, President Rajapaksa had pledged to uphold the undertakings given to the Tamil National Alliance (TNA). The President met representatives of the TNA on 25 March and agreed to address five issues raised by the TNA – introducing a new constitution, releasing Tamil prisoners held without trial under the PTA, halting land acquisitions being carried out in the North and East Provinces, inquiring into the complaints of enforced disappearances, and setting up a special development fund for the North and East Provinces.
The President and the TNA had agreed that the first issue, that of introducing a new constitution, could be taken up for discussion after two months when the final draft of the proposed new constitution prepared by an experts’ committee headed by Romesh de Silva PC was made available.
When Jaishankar met President Rajapaksa, the latter had reiterated his commitment to implement the agreements reached during the discussion with the TNA and sought a period of around six months for their implementation. The President had also sought Jaishankar’s assistance in further convincing the TNA of his commitment to resolve the issue of the Tamil people.
After meeting with the President, Jaishankar had met with a group of TNA members at India House in Colombo and conveyed the President’s message to the TNA. The TNA had also responded saying that while the President had agreed to address the issues, it could only be believed through action. The TNA had reminded Jaishankar of the past experiences the TNA had had with successive governments on addressing the issues of the Tamil people.
It is due to this reason that TNA MP M.A. Sumanthiran in a recent statement to a media outlet said that the success of the discussion with the President could only be noticed if and when the Government took the appropriate steps.
It is learnt that the Prime Minister and President had later contacted Sumanthiran over his comments to the media and reiterated his commitment to his undertakings.
However, Sumanthiran had responded saying that the past experience had been quite bitter as the TNA had on many occasions gone before the Tamil people with assurances given by successive governments but had to face the disappointment of the people when those assurances were not honoured.
The President, it is learnt, had said he understood the situation and continued to express his commitment to address the issues.
The Tamil Diaspora meanwhile has made various statements saying that while they had the money to invest in Sri Lanka, they would only do so once the Government addressed the grievances of the Tamil people.
Worsening conditions
Sri Lanka has about $ 2 billion in reserves against $ 3.9 billion of foreign-currency debt due for the remainder of 2022, according to Bloomberg calculations based on Central Bank data. This includes $ 1 billion of sovereign bonds maturing in July.
Furthermore, the depreciation of the rupee has added to the losses incurred by the Ceylon Petroleum Corporation (CPC) and Ceylon Electricity Board (CEB), and the CEB had sought a loan from a State bank amounting to billions of rupees. However, a request by the CEB to further enhance the loan amount had been turned down by the relevant bank.
Meanwhile, US-based economist Steve Hanke – attached to the Johns Hopkins University in Maryland – has noted that Sri Lanka’s inflation would see further increases in the coming months.
Hanke tweeted: “In this week’s inflation table, Sri Lanka is moving up the ranks. On 24 March, I measured Sri Lanka’s inflation at a sky-high 55%/year. To crush inflation and save the rupee, Sri Lanka needs to install a currency board, like the one it had from 1884 until 1950. It worked like a charm.”
According to the Inflation Dashboard computed by Hanke, the annual inflation rate of Sri Lanka is the sixth highest in the world, behind only Venezuela with an annual inflation rate of 140%, followed by Zimbabwe with an annual inflation rate of 134%, Lebanon with an annual inflation rate of 117%, Turkey with an annual inflation rate of 101%, and Sudan with an annual inflation rate of 96%.
Therefore, according to this Inflation Dashboard Hanke computed, Sri Lanka’s annual inflation rate exceeds that of countries such as Argentina, Pakistan, Nigeria, Russia, and Ukraine.
According to Sri Lanka’s Department of Census and Statistics, the country’s inflation on a year-on-year (YoY) basis reached a 13-year high of 15.1% in February 2022 as per the Colombo Consumer Price Index (CCPI), increasing from 14.2% in January 2022. Similarly, food inflation reached 25.7%, increasing from 25% in January. The CCPI had increased by 1.7 index points during the month of February compared to January, reaching 160.1, which represents an increase of expenditure value by Rs. 1,009.47 in the ‘Market Basket’.
The committee is headed by Foreign Affairs Minister Prof. G.L. Peiris and Justice Minister Ali Sabry PC, while Central Bank Governor Ajith Nivard Cabraal and Finance Ministry Secretary S.R. Attygalle appointed as the other members.
The Government meanwhile has agreed to hold a parliamentary debate this week on the IMF report. However, it is learnt that there were several views regarding the request made by United National Party (UNP) Leader MP Ranil Wickremesinghe and the main Opposition Samagi Jana Balawegaya (SJB) for a debate in the House on the report.
Finance Minister Rajapaksa has not been supportive of such a debate, but Prime Minister Rajapaksa had agreed to it. Accordingly, Chief Government Whip Minister Johnston Fernando last Sunday (27 March) announced that the Government was prepared to hold a debate on the IMF report during the next Parliament week.
Changing tune
The CBSL has reportedly changed a recent statement it issued following the publishing of the IMF’s Article IV Report on Sri Lanka on 25 March.
The initial statement issued by the CBSL later the following morning had stated that, working closely with the Government, “the CBSL stands ready for a closer engagement with the IMF” – making it the first time the CBSL has indicated that it is prepared to go to the IMF under CBSL Governor Ajith Nivard Cabraal.
It had also stated that they were ready for closer engagement in order to ensure that the benefits of such an engagement outweigh any cost associated with the same, from the perspective of the general public and the business investor community.
However, disregarding the previous statement, the CBSL had reportedly issued an amended statement a few hours later. The initial statement was issued around 8.56 a.m. while the second one was issued around 11.36 a.m.
The new statement had noted that with the Government indicating it was seeking closer engagement with the IMF, the CBSL stood ready to cooperate in such an engagement, in comparison with the previous statement of “ready for a closer engagement with the IMF”.
Further, the initial statement had acknowledged that views similar to the Article IV Report had been expressed over the past several months by local and foreign commentators on Sri Lanka. However, the amended version of the statement had this particular sentence taken out.
Cabraal, on multiple occasions, had claimed that Sri Lanka is able to finance its outstanding debt, especially international sovereign bonds (ISBs), without causing any pain to our creditors.
During an interview with CNBC early this year, Cabraal argued that the Government did not need to approach the IMF, especially if it was successful in finding government-to-government as well as central bank solutions in the short term.
The same statement issued by the CBSL also noted that some of the recommendations made by the IMF had already been implemented by the Finance Ministry and the CBSL.
Ready for action
The group of 10 (G-10) governing alliance parties together with the Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP) that formed the new group of 11 (G-11), which unveiled their own national programme to overcome the ongoing crisis last month despite being the coalition partners of the incumbent Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna (SLPP)-led Government, is working on a programme to present a motion to Parliament to push for its dissolution.
Amidst the escalating public dissension in the country, the G-10 leaders announced the need to set up an interim government to immediately resolve the ongoing crisis in the country.
National Freedom Front (NFF) Leader Wimal Weerawansa told a news conference on Friday that an economic plan should be worked out with the consensus of all the parties represented in Parliament and that a new Cabinet should be appointed in terms of the Constitution to implement them with the participation of the political parties in Parliament under a caretaker government.
Pivithuru Hela Urumaya (PHU) Leader Udaya Gammanpila said at the same news briefing that an election should be declared after the formation of such a caretaker government.
When questioned whether the SLFP would join the G-10 on this issue, Weerawansa said the G-10 leaders had met with SLFP Leader Maithripala Sirisena and discussed the matter before convening the news conference and that Sirisena had agreed with the proposal. “The SLFP leader will put it to the SLFP Central Committee (CC) as well,” the MP added.
The G-11 was earlier looking at presenting the motion as soon as nine more governing Sri SLPP MPs expressed their support to it.
Gammanpila said that only nine more MPs needed to join their group to pass a motion to enable the dissolution of Parliament, as there were two SLPP MPs with them already.
However, the focus now is on an interim government in order to address the crisis situation and bring the country back to normalcy in order to hold a General Election.
Split in the SLFP
The SLFP is now heading for a split it seems, with pressure mounting on the party’s parliamentary group to sit independently in the House even as several senior members have shown a reluctance to do so.
The SLFP CC had met last Friday with the intention of discussing the party’s plans for the upcoming May Day. Prior to the CC meeting, the party’s parliamentary group had met and discussed the need to send a letter to the Government calling for immediate action to address the ongoing crisis and that the party would be compelled to take a firm stance on the matter.
The letter had been mooted by State Minister Lasantha Alagiyawanna supported by Minister Nimal Siripala de Silva and State Minister Duminda Dissanayake. However, several members had objected saying the party could no longer justify its decision to stand with the Government. It had been finally decided to take the matter up at the CC meeting that evening.
During the meeting, a majority of CC members had insisted that the party should move out of the Government by resigning from their portfolios. They had said the party could sit independently on the Government side like the G-10 members.
Gamini Thilakasiri had proposed to the CC that the party members holding portfolios should resign and the SLFP should sit independently in Parliament. After explaining the plight of the country and its people, he had asked: “Aren’t you ashamed to sit in this Government?”
The proposal had been seconded by Ajith Basnayake. CC members Prof. Rohana Lakshman Piyadasa, Dhamma Dasanayake, Chamil Liyanage, Shan Wijelala, Sarathi Dushmantha Mithrapala, and several others had claimed they could no longer agree with the party’s parliamentary group if it did not take a stand and become independent in the House.
After looking at the draft letter that had been prepared by the parliamentary group, they had objected saying it was yet another time-buying exercise and an excuse to remain in Government. “You (SLFP parliamentary group) always said you will stand by the decision of the CC. This is what all of us here want. Leave the Government,” they all shouted.
Minister de Silva, angered by the outcry, had said, “You cannot push us to the wall like that. The CC can’t do that. We have been elected by the people and are public representatives. You can’t force us.”
“We may not have contested elections, but we know politics. As university students we worked from 1986 to bring the 1994 SLFP-led Government to power. I lost family members due to the political stance I took. Don’t you dare speak to us as if we are nobodies,” Dhamma Dasanayake had shouted back at de Silva.
Piyadasa and Liyanage had also joined in saying they had all sat at the SLFP CC with political knowledge after standing for a cause and De Silva had been forced to retract his comments.
Alagiyawanna had tried to explain to the CC why the SLFP should remain in the Government. He had noted that the party should remain in the Government to work with the disgruntled SLPPers and leave when they too were ready. The SLFP CC members had said the dialogue could be continued by the party even after leaving the portfolios.
SLFP General Secretary Dayasiri Jayasekera had stood with the majority of the CC and said he was prepared to leave any time, but remained in the Government in order to ensure that there would not be a division in the SLFP.
Party Leader Sirisena had to leave the meeting to meet with his lawyers over the case related to his official residence and he had directed Jayasekera to chair the meeting in his absence.
Duminda Dissanayake had also expressed the need to think twice before leaving the Government as it should be a political decision. The CC had responded that leaving the Government was indeed a political decision.
A decision was finally taken to redraft the letter presented by the SLFP parliamentary group saying that the Government should form a caretaker government to address the issues and then hold an election and a failure to appoint such a caretaker government within one week would compel the SLFP to leave the Government.
Working together
Meanwhile, the 43 Brigade headed by Opposition MP Patali Champika Ranawaka has said it is willing to work with any political party which opposes the Rajapaksas, including those who are with the SLPP.
Ranawaka told journalists that the 43 Brigade was willing to work with even SLFP or even those who oppose the Rajapaksas within SLPP.
Nevertheless, the main Opposition Samagi Jana Balawegaya (SJB) and other Opposition groups as well as dissenting groups in the governing alliance are a little cautious when dealing with Ranawaka, believing that they would not want to fall into his political agenda alone.
Ranawaka has also turned to the United National Party (UNP) following several rounds of talks with UNP seniors, which resulted in the 43 Brigade participating in the UNP’s recent Satyagraha in Colombo. However, this move has not gone down well with the SJB, with several groups in the SJB expressing concerns over Ranawaka’s actions while being a parliamentarian of the SJB.
“The need of the hour is to form a grand alliance to oust the present rulers from power. This is why we are ready to work with any party to form a new grand alliance,” Ranawaka said.
Meanwhile, senior SLFP member State Minister Duminda Dissanayake has highlighted the need to work on a common national plan.
Addressing an event in Nochchiyagama in Anuradhapura last week, he had explained that the country’s politics had resulted in political parties and the public only focusing on defeating those in power at the time during elections and not looking at following a common national programme. He noted that this had been the case since 1977. “We always focus on defeating an individual or a political party and replacing them with another. We have not been able to build on a national programme,” Dissanayake said.
He had also taken a swipe at the JVP and SJB during his speech. Referring to the JVP he said, “There are those who are demanding a change of government. Regardless of who assumes power now, changes to the present situation cannot be done overnight. That’s the truth. There are others who claim that if they are given power, they will address the shortages and the current economic crisis. This is the worst group as they are in a position to help the people as they claim but they are not doing so because they are not in power. It is the best example for political opportunism and the worst selfish kind.”