.

Second Reading budget debate
Ronnie pats President, warns of danger of political one-upmanship

Let me begin my speech by thanking the permanent Minister of Finance, Her Excellency the President Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga, for coming to this House to present this Budget herself despite the many difficulties and strains she has undergone recently due to the bomb attack on her and despite enhanced security considerations.

I have had the pleasure of knowing her well since her childhood and I have enjoyed her friendship both in this country and abroad. I can personally testify to the fact that she has always been a strong determined and courageous person who has been able to face the ups and downs of life and of fate and fortune with the same bravery and fortitude she has displayed in the last few months. Therefore it is only fitting, that she should present the first budget of the 21st century and the first budget of the new millennium in this Parliament following a long line of distinguished men who have presented the budgets of Sri Lanka since independence in 1948.

Executive Presidency

She is also the first woman to present a Budget in Sri Lanka and I am doubly glad for this reason. I hope she will continue this tradition abolish the Executive Presidency and come down to this House permanently, as soon as possible, with the enactment of the new Constitution.

Mr. Speaker, Parliamentary control of finance is the very foundation of Parliamentary democracy, the fountainhead of freedom and liberty. Without Parliamentary control of finance, Parliament becomes nothing more than a talking shop, a mere debating society. For real Parliamentary control of finance, the Minister of Finance must be in Parliament, must be accountable to Parliament, must answer questions in Parliament and must personally present the Budget to Parliament. That is why the Ministers of Finance are normally in the Lower House. Wherever there are two Houses of Parliament, even in England where there are two Chambers of Parliament, the Chancellor of the Exchequer is always in the Lower House. Even in India, where sometimes the Minister of Finance is in the Upper house, the Rajya Sabha, the Minister of Finance comes down to the Lower House to present the Budget, to present all other Finance Bills and other legislation relevant to the Minister of Finance, to take part in debates in the House and to answer all questions in the Lower House. This happened recently in the case of my good friends, Pranab Mukerjee and Man Mohan Singh, both of whom were and still are in the Upper House.

Parliamentary Democracy

They came down to the Lower House. They used to come down to the Lower House whenever any matter connected with finance was being discussed. Therefore, Sir, this is a sacred tradition both here and abroad and a tradition which we must safeguard and cherish if we are to preserve Parliamentary democracy, liberty and freedom in Sri Lanka.

Mr. Speaker, Sir, this Budget today takes second place to the more important task, the possible enactment of a new constitution in this country which we hope will help to bring about or at least pave the way for peace in Sri Lanka, which we all fervently desire, in order to ensure quick economic development and growth without which Sri Lanka will surely have to take a back seat amongst the countries in this part of the world. Many attempts, Sir, have been made in the past to solve what is known as the ethnic question in Sri Lanka, but they have all failed. It is fashionable, Sir, sometimes to blame the Tamils: sometimes it is fashionable to blame the Muslims for this failure. But I have always strongly felt that we Sinhalese are most to blame for this intractable situation, which is the root cause of most of our present ills.

Mr. Speaker, Sir, as you remember, the first serious attempt to solve this problem was the Bandaranaike-Chelvanayakam Pact of 1958. It failed due largely to the intransigence of the UNP, the abortive march to Kandy and what followed. The second serious attempt to solve this problem was in 1966, the Dudley-Chelvanayakam Pact. This was strongly opposed by the SLFP and its allies. There was the famous march to Temple Trees. I think the Hon. Ratnasiri Wickramanayake remembers it. I was the only person who refused to go on that march because I was not in sympathy with the motives of that march. There was a famous march to Temple Trees. The Rev. Dambarawe Ratanasara died and the Dudley-Chelvanayakam Pact was abandoned. The third serious attempt to solve this question was the Indo-Lanka Accord of 1987. Even the LTTE reluctantly accepted the Accord. A surrender of arms began. As Minister of Finance I obtained all the foreign aid necessary to reconstruct the North and the East at a Special Aid Group meeting in Paris, particularly convened for this purpose. I also obtained further aid directly from India. But the SLFP, the JVP and their allies strongly opposed this Accord. It was clearly opposed and even sabotaged from within by powerful forces within the UNP. Mr. J. R. Jayewardene lost his nerve and began to vacillate in the face of this opposition and the Accord collapsed. When the Government tried to bring the 8 LTTE leaders captured by the Indian Army to Colombo they committed suicide at Palaly Airport and the entire Indo-Lanka Accord and the peace effort collapsed thereafter.

Political Gesture

Therefore, Sir, every serious attempt to settle this problem and bring about peace in Sri Lanka has failed due to one of the two main parties, either the UNP or the SLFP opposing the peace efforts at every stage. I must say in all fairness, Sir, that Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga and her husband Vijaya then in the SLMP supported the Indo-Lanka Accord in 1987 though with some reservations although they were opposed to the UNP politically. That was indeed a magnanimous political gesture which I appreciated very much at the time and I told them so. What will happen now? That is the question. That is the most important question today not this Budget. The party system as practiced today in Sri Lanka gives little room for the civilized and accepted practice of consensus on national questions of importance like in other countries because neither of the two main parties, the PA or the UNP really wish to give the credit for solving this question and bringing lasting peace to Sri Lanka to the other party.

That is the crux of the question. This false attitude of one upmanship of claiming the sole credit has totally ruined this country for so long, an inability to give credit for solving national questions to the other side. Therefore, national questions remain unsolved and insoluble. There is an unending war and the economy cannot go forward. The problems of the people cannot be solved. Poverty remains. Low growth and all ill that come with it. In this connection Mr. Speaker, I was amazed by responsible newspapers in this country with fairly large circulations talking of one leader, sending down googlies at the other. This is not a cricket match. This is far more serious matter. I think this type of irresponsible talk at a moment of grave national crisis is hardly becoming of a responsible paper in this country.

National Problem

Sir, this problem cannot be solved by shadow boxing between leaders or between political parties. One up man ship, trying to claim the sole credit for solving this national problem will never do. The country is in a deep crisis. The economy is not moving at all. We will not have much more time to solve this problem. Time is running out for Sri Lanka. As I have said once before in this House at the conclusion of a Budget Debate like this in the early 1980s, when I wound up for the Government in the early l980s on this very same question before it assumed alarming proportions like this, I was quoting from Edmond Burke who said in the House of Commons -

"Magnanimity in politics is not seldom the truest wisdom. Great issues and little minds go ill together".

Mr. Speaker this Budget is certainly not the most important problem facing Sri Lanka today. Sri Lanka is going through a very deep crisis, is facing three important problems among a whole series of other problems. I would categorize the three most important problems we face today in Sri Lanka. The first one is solving the so called ethnic problem and restoring peace in Sri Lanka. Without peace no economic development or growth is really possible. Without peace we will find it very difficult to reduce Budget deficits or reduce inflation. Without peace nobody takes Sri Lanka seriously, no foreign country, no foreign investor worth his name India can develop notwithstanding the Kashmir problem. India can develop notwithstanding the Kashmir problem. India can develop notwithstanding the fact that it has a coalition government of 14 different parties with different policies, different programmes and different agendas of their own. It has had nearly 8 per cent growth last year and the Bombay Stock Exchange is booming in a way it has never done before. It has gone up nearly 200 per cent in the last year. We in Sri Lanka cannot afford a Kashmir. We are too small for that.

National Consensus

So, peace is essential and for that in my opinion, a national consensus is a sine qua non. Even Norway, the facilitator can do little without a national consensus in this country. Norway can do little. Norway can go on for years and years and years without a national consensus in this country. Therefore restoring peace once more is our first and greatest problem. A national consensus for peace - that is what is important, not the Budget.

The second problem we have to face is, quick economic development and growth without which we cannot really solve any of the pressing problems of the people like unemployment, poverty, better health and education, better roads, better railways, more power, water, housing and so on. We are talking of Information Technology. We are talking of the age of the internet while at least 20 per cent of our people are still living well below the poverty line and over 50 per cent of our people gets Samurdhi though the present Samurdhi, in my opinion, is totally inadequate for this purpose.

In my opinion, and I have always said so for the last 20 years, Sri Lanka needs a minimum 8 per cent growth every year at least for ten years to become what is nebulously known as a Newly Industrialized Country, like Malaysia, Singapore or Thailand. This Budget only postulates a growth of 5 per cent. With a growth of 5 per cent we will not be a NIC for the next 100 years. I can tell you that. An 8 per cent growth, every year for a minimum of ten years, is absolutely necessary for us to become an NIC.

For this too, Sir, we must have lasting peace and we must have a national consensus on basic issues of economic development. Not only a national consensus on the ethnic problem, but a national consensus on basic issues of economic development. They have such a consensus in India, they have such a consensus in Malaysia, they have such a consensus in Singapore. They have such a consensus even in developed countries like Britain, the United States, France or Germany. Why cannot we have a national consensus on the basic economic issues of the country, now that both parties have accepted the free economy? In the old days there was a great division. You and I and the Hon. Ratnasiri Wickramanayake were on the Socialist side. The other side was the Capitalist side. There is no such distinction now after the end of the Cold War and after I liberalized the economy of this country in 1977. All of us are for the free economy. So, there is nothing to disagree. So, on basic economic issues we can have a national consensus.

Therefore, Sir, I think it was a definite step forward that both the UNP and the PA have now embraced the market economy — the PA even more emphatically than the UNP. When I listened to the recent speeches of my young friend, Hon. Indika Gunawardena, a distinguished son of an even more distinguished father — the so called Father of Marxism in Sri Lanka - I was simply overjoyed to hear him speak. Even the Communist Party of Sri Lanka has now embraced the market economy fully and completely.

I have been in two parties; as you know, the SLFP and the UNP. Never in the MEP though some newspapers say that I have been in the MEP. Hon. Ratnasiri Wickramanayake knows that I was never a Member of the MEP. He was a member of the MEP before he joined the SLFP. But, I was never a Member of the MEP. I joined the SLFP for the first time — [Interruption]. Yes, I know that.

Economic Policies

But, I am happy that both parties today embrace the same economic policies. The same free economy that I was largely instrumental in introducing into this country, under Mr. J. R. Jayewardene in my first Budget in 1977. I am happy, if even in a small way I have contributed to a national consensus on economic issues.

The third important problem we face in Sri Lanka, is how to bring about a new political culture into Sri Lanka. To put an end to this "Dushanaya and Beeshanaya" we all talk about, which has affected every aspect of our national life. Mr. Speaker, Sir, you remember the time when you and I were public servants. We were free. We were independent, not slaves and creatures of the political system. You remember that great Parliament of 1965, when you and I were both Members of the Opposition, what a high standard of political culture we had then in this country. But, all this has changed with the Constitution of 1972 and the Constitution of 1978. Both very unfortunate Constitutions, in my opinion, which set the country on a new course where our political culture has changed for the worse. These two Constitutions were great failures, in my opinion, and the sooner we have a new Constitution, which will not only lay the foundation for peace in our land but also lay the foundation for a new political culture, the better it will be for Sri Lanka and its people.

Sir, Constitutions are for man; not man for Constitutions. Constitutions are made to protect the rights of the people against their rulers, not rulers against their people. I think the Hon. Deputy Speaker, Hon. Anil Moonesinghe, mv friend, will agree that that was so in Magna Carte.

It was so in the Bill of Rights, it was so in the Declaration of the Rights of Man and the French Constitution. It was so in the Declaration of Rights and the American Constitution. It was so in the Indian Constitution. All constitutions worth their name are meant to protect people against their rulers, not vice versa. Constitutions are made not to preserve the rule of one party, or the rule of one person for ever. That is why it is necessary to abolish the Executive Presidency and restore the Cabinet System of Government under a Prime Minister once more in Sri Lanka. The Executive Presidency Sir, was inaugurated with the best of intentions to help in the quick economic development of the country. But it has become a Frankenstein monster in Sri Lanka. It is the root cause of all our present ills, political and also economic. It is the root cause of all the "Beeshanaya and Dushanaya" we talk of in this land. It must be abolished. And we must restore the old Prime Ministerial system which served Sri Lanka so well. It can be suitably fashioned to protect the interests of minorities. I understand your concerns, Minister Ashroff. It can be suitably fashioned to protect the interest of minorities also. Article 29 of the Old Soulbury Constitution should in my opinion, be totally restored in the new Constitution. Should be totally restored in the new Constitution, to protect the rights of minorities. We must also ensure free and fair elections which is the foundation of Parliamentary Democracy and human liberty and freedom. For this, Sir, we must enact in our new Constitution and make necessary provision for an independent — a totally independent Elections Commission, a totally independent Public Service Commission, with Provincial Public Service Commission if necessary, a totally independent Judicial Service Commission and a totally independent Police Commission. These four bodies must be totally independent of political control or party control whatsoever, and must be entrusted with all appointments, with all promotions, with all dismissals and with disciplinary control of all public servants, the police, the election officials, the judiciary. These officials must be totally insulated from the present political interference and political control. At the apex of all this as the apex body of the new political culture, there must be Constitutional Council which must also not be weighted to either the Government or the Opposition.

New Constitution

That is the only way we can introduce a new political culture in Sri Lanka which we all want and which we all desire to put an end to all this ‘Bheeshanaya’ and ‘Dhushanaya’ that has ruined our land. If these things are all done, Sir, then the new Constitution will be a worthwhile document and will stand the test of time. Very often my good friend the Hon. G. L. Peiris expresses his hope that this Constitution at least will stand the test of time. I can tell you, it will stand the test of time if some of these salutary provisions are introduced into this Constitution and if it is a Constitution to protect the rights of the people and not to protect the vested interests of a single party. That is the test of a Constitution. If these things are all done, then the new Constitution will certainly stand the test of time. Otherwise it will be another scrap of paper and will be consigned to the dust-heap of history before long like the Constitutions of 1972 and 1978.

Mr. Speaker, I have dealt with these three basic problems of Sri Lanka at some length because I feel, I feel most sincerely Sir. that budgets will come and budgets will go, I also have introduced eleven budgets; but Sri Lanka and its economy will never take off until these three basic problems which I have outlined today are solved. We must solve them at all costs and solve them by national consensus.

New Millennium

Mr. Speaker, this is the beginning of the 21st Century. This is the beginning of a new millennium. We need an economic great leap forward into the new century if the urgent economic problems of our people are to be solved. We need what I would call an economic great leap forward. There is an immediate need for definite policy interventions to achieve an eight per cent annual economic growth. There must be definite policy interventions to achieve an eight per cent annual economic growth. We must take hard and meaningful decisions which would enable such growth. Five per cent growth will never do as stipulated in this budget. We must take hard and meaningful decisions to achieve this growth. We must not only take the necessary policy decisions as I did in 1977 which I took against almost overwhelming opposition from all sides but we also must have a definite programme of accelerated economic development which we also had in 1977 - definite policy decisions for accelerated economic growth and a definite programme of accelerated economic development. Without such policy decisions and without such a programme nothing will happen.

(To be continued Tomorrow)

LEGAL WATCH
Re-examining the law relating to elections

By Nayana
While the politically conscious elements of society focus their attention on the Government’s proposals for a new constitution and the reactions and counter-proposals of other parties, it should not be forgotten that a general election is due by August

It is true that a Cabinet Minister is recently reported to have stated in public that the new constitution will be put in place by May, if necessary by reconstituting Parliament as a constituent assembly, closing down the Courts and sending dissenting judges home. It will be interesting to see how Sri Lankan society deals with this challenge if and when it materializes, but in the meantime one must proceed on the basis that the present Constitution will continue to function.

The unsatisfactory conduct of the electoral process was one of the biggest blots on the political landscape of the 1980s and 1990s. While some commentators have argued - with examples - that a certain lack of scrupulousness with regard to elections was evident even during earlier periods, the widespread public perception of electoral gerrymandering certainly dates from the early 1980s.

There is also a qualitative difference between malpractices by candidates and officially sanctioned interference in the electoral process by State authorities. The first elections where there was documented evidence of the latter was the Jaffna Development Council election of 1981 which was the event that fuelled the rapid rise of armed Tamil militancy in the North. Hence there is merit in the argument that a reform of the electoral process directed to preventing abuse of power by the government of the day should be part and parcel of any meaningful attempt to end this country’s internal conflict.

The extent of Sri Lanka’s lost legacy can be appreciated when we consider that Iran, a country with only limited experience of parliamentary democracy and many anti-democratic pressures still operating on its society, has just done what Sri Lanka, with its 70 years of universal franchise has lost the capacity to do, namely the holding of a free and peaceful election the result of which is accepted by winners and losers alike.

Parallel with the development of unhealthy trends at ground level such as violence and mass impersonation, there is also a widespread perception that the judgment in the last presidential election petition case of Bandaranaike v. Premadasa has made it virtually impossible to unseat a successful candidate, especially in an island-wide presidential election.

A seminar to discuss these issues was recently conducted by the Centre for Policy Alternatives at which several speakers highlighted the impossibility, under currently sanctioned procedures, of concluding an election petition case quickly. This problem was aggravated in the case of a presidential election petition where witnesses may have to be called from many parts of the island.

Bandaranaike v. Premadasa took three and a half years to conclude, with 546 witnesses being called by the petitioner, 399 by the first respondent and 32 by the second respondent. The reason for this tortuous process was the interpretation given by the Supreme Court to Section 91 which allows an election to the office of President to be set aside on the following grounds:

(a) that by reason of general bribery, general treating or general intimidation or other misconduct or other circumstances, whether similar to those enumerated before or not, a majority of electors were or may have been prevented from electing the candidate whom they preferred; or

(b) non-compliance with the provisions of this Act [Presidential Elections Act No. 15 of 1981], if it appears that the election was not conducted in accordance with the principles laid down in such provisions and that such non compliance materially affected the result of the election.

During the course of the hearing the petitioner abandoned ground (b) above and the crucial question thereafter was whether success under clause (a) required simply proof that there had been widespread general intimidation affecting voters, or whether it was necessary for the petitioner additionally to prove that such voters were or may have been prevented from voting for the candidate whom they preferred. The Court opted for the latter interpretation, and the petitioner thus had the task of proving that a majority of the affected voters would have voted for her.

The question arose as to how this interpretation could be reconciled with provisions contained in both the Constitution and the Presidential Elections Act assuring secrecy of the ballot. G. P. S. de Silva, C.J. dealt with the matter thus:

"These [the secrecy] provisions no doubt preclude an elector who has voted from being asked for whom he voted. But do they also preclude a witness who claims to be an organizer or office-bearer of a party branch from stating that the campaign of a candidate was disrupted by certain incidents and that the supporters of that candidate were afraid to go to the poll?"

As a result, oral evidence of witnesses was led from sixteen districts in seven provinces. This development alone is being urged as a good reason for not having a directly elected President. The problem will not be so acute at a general election where each district forms a separate electorate.

Nevertheless the dilatory nature of legal proceedings in an election petition case, with room for "preliminary objections" to be argued at length even before lawyers get down to the business of examining, cross-examining and re- examining witnesses, is believed to have helped to foster the current "win at all costs" mentality of party supporters who know that the law is heavily weighted against unseating a candidate once he/she captures power.

It is believed that this in turn has opened the floodgates to me unrestrained use of thuggery, impersonation and, in the case of the party in power, flagrant misuse of State property for political purposes.

Following the experience of the Bandaranaike v. Premadasa case, many Jurists expressed regret that the Supreme Court has not yet used its rule-making powers under the Constitution to formulate a set of rules designed to avoid such a tortuous procedure in the fixture, e.g. by allowing for the reception of affidavit evidence as in fundamental rights cases.

A different issue arises in the case of Section 91(b) of the Act which is replicated as Section 92(b) in the Parliamentary Elections Act. This deals with non-compliance with the provisions of the Act, which is essentially a lapse or malfeasance on the part of the authorities. While it is right that minor acts of commission or omission should not be used as a reason for setting aside an election, is the mere fact that the result was not affected a justification for upholding even flagrant violations of the law by the very authorities charged with the duty of holding a free and fair election?

The implications were well illustrated by the Jaffna DDC election case in which an identical section in the Development Councils Elections Act saved a poll conducted under shocking circumstances from being set aside, merely because the Tamil United Liberation Front managed to secure an overwhelming victory.

That election was held on 4 June 1981 and it is now well documented, in a Court of Appeal judgment and elsewhere, that the following incidents took place during the build-up to the poll: On 12 May, the leader of the UNP group contesting the election was killed, on 30 May, two policemen on duty at a TULF meeting were killed; within about half an hour of this last incident, there was large scale arson in Jaffna town for which agents of the State were widely believed to have been responsible. A State of Emergency was thereafter declared; a curfew was imposed in the town; and the leader and certain other members of the TULF were taken into "protective custody".

At the same time, by an Emergency Regulation, the Secretary to the Ministry of Defence was empowered "to give such directions as may be necessary to the Returning Officer to ensure the proper conduct of the elections" and the Returning Officer was placed under a duty to comply with such directions.

Acting under those powers, the Defence Secretary then issued a directive to the Returning Officer to revoke the appointments of over 100 Presiding Officers and made fresh appointments. It was alleged that Tamil officers were replaced by Sinhalese.

In short, what took place was overt interference with the electoral process accompanied by acts of criminality by State agents, all of which served to alienate an entire community. The extent of that alienation was evident when, despite all the efforts of the UNP-led Government, the TULF won all ten seats in the Council.

On the wording of Section 92(b) as it presently stands (and stood under the Development Councils Elections Act) the judgment upholding the election was no doubt correct. However the disastrous results of that exercise on the Sri Lankan polity makes it necessary to ask whether the Court should not be given a discretion, in such situations, to void the election and compel the State to conduct a free and fair poll.

However it is also heartening to note that the greater citizen vigilance witnessed in the 1990s would today provide a check against some of the abuses listed above. For instance, in the light of the judgment in the recent Provincial Council elections case (Karunathilake and Deshapriya v. Commissioner of Elections) together with the Supreme Court’s parallel determination on the validity of the Government’s abortive Bill to amend the Provincial Councils Elections Act, both of which emphasized the constitutional independence of the office of Commissioner of Elections, it is unlikely that the Court would uphold an Emergency Regulation which allowed the Secretary, Defence, to issue directives to the Returning Officer of a District.

Afganistan under Taliban rule

By Dr. Stanley Kalpage
During the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in 1979, resistance fighters - the Mujahideen - were armed abundantly with the latest lethal weapons by the United States and Saudi Arabia. In 1989, when the Soviets made an ignoble retreat, many presumed that Afghanistan would right itself. Instead, age-old ethnic rivalries and simple avarice turned one Mujahideen group against another. The fight for freedom was replaced by civil war.

In September 1994, the Taliban appeared mysteriously on the Afghan political scene in the southern Afghan province of Kandahar. They claimed to be students of Islam who had studied in Muslim schools in Pakistan during the Soviet occupation and that all they wanted to do was to bring Afghanistan under Islamic rule. The Taliban captured Kabul after Afghan government troops retreated fearing heavy civilian casualties. They killed and hanged former Afghan President Najibullah along with his brother, Shahpur Ahmadzai Thousands of refugees fled north or to Pakistan.

The Taliban militia now occupy 90 percent of the country which they call the United Emirate of Afghanistan. But while the Taliban have brought a measure of security to the territory they control, including Kabul, the better part of their attention is focused on what they know best - the strategies of battle, not the burdens of government. The Taliban were initially welcomed by an Afghan population tired of war and disgusted by Kabul’s inept, corrupt Mujahideen government, led by Burhanuddin Rabbani.

Mullah Mohammed Omar

Mullah Mohammad Omar is the mysterious leader of the Taliban militia. Omar studied in several Islamic schools in Pakistan before joining the Jihad against the Russian occupation in the 1980s.

Mullah Omar is a determined man with one eye. He lost his other eye fighting the Soviets. The story in Kandahar is that Mullah Omar had a dream in which the Prophet Muhammad appeared to him and told him to bring peace to Afghanistan. Mullah Omar then gathered men together to fight against Rabbani’s government. In reality this story may be more myth than reality.

Evidence shows that Mullah Omar is most likely a nominal figure trained and controlled by Pakistan’s intelligence agency, the ISI. People opposed to Mullah Omar allege that he is not even a Mullah. They claim that he is an illiterate and that he knows nothing about Islam. His opponents argue that Mullah Omar has made many mistakes when it comes to Islamic law. For example, Mullah Omar stated that the use of opium is wrong, but the selling of it is not, according to Islamic law. In reality, Islam forbids both the use and selling of any type of illegal drugs, including opium.

On April 3rd, 1996, about 1,000 so-called Muslim clergymen chose Mullah Omar as Supreme Leader of the Muslims. They branded President Burhanuddin Rabbani, himself a former Mujahideen leader who valiantly fought against Soviet occupation, as a criminal!

Recognition

Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates are some of the very few countries that recognise the Taliban while Iran is bitterly hostile to it. However, bilateral relations with Iran thawed in late 1999 after Iran opened its borders to trade with Afghanistan and allowed food into the war-wrecked country.

Iran still recognises ousted President Burhanuddin Rabbani’s government. So does the United Nations. Rabbani is one of the leaders of the anti-Taliban alliance, which controls barely 10% of Afghanistan, much of it in the northern Panjshir Valley. Rabbani, along with his ex-defence minister Ahmad Shah Masood has been able to thwart the Taliban’s ambition of getting the whole country under their control.

Iranian President Mohammed Khatami has called for multilateral co-operation to bring peace to Afghanistan, saying that the Afghan crisis was "one of the greatest tragedies of the century". Says Khatami: "The unsettled situation in Afghanistan is a major threat to the regional countries and to international peace".

Afghanistan and terrorism

The Taliban regime has failed to win international recognition largely because of "the perception that they are sponsoring or allowing terrorism". The Taliban seemed to be assisted by Osama bin Ladin’s terrorist network.

The US believes that Islamic extremists from around the world - including large numbers of Egyptians, Algerians, Palestinians, and Saudis - continue to use Afghanistan as a training ground and a base of operations for their worldwide terrorist activities. The US believes that the Taliban, which controls most of the territory in Afghanistan, facilitated the operation of training and indoctrination facilities for non-Afghans and provided logistical support and sometimes passports to members of various terrorist organisations. The Taliban continues to host Usama Bin Ladin, who has been indicted for the bombings of two US Embassies in East Africa.

The opium connection

The Taliban present themselves as true Muslim citizens by banning smoking, gambling and drinking. In reality, the Taliban are involved in the criminal opium trade. Not only do they grow opium to finance their war, but they collect a large tax from civilian farmers who do so for other reasons. It is estimated that in 1999 production of opium in Afghanistan reached 400 tonnes. Many of the major opium producing areas of Afghanistan are in the control of the Taliban.

The annual report of the International Narcotics Control Board (INCB) published in Vienna, has described Afghanistan as "a centre for drug trafficking for the whole world". It cast doubt on the Taliban’s commitment to ban opium poppy cultivation and accused it of collecting taxes on poppies and on the heroin that is made from them - a charge denied by the Taliban militia.

UN envoy to Afghanistan, Francesc Vendrel says this was "part of a vicious circle". He says that the Taliban have reiterated that they are opposed to the drug trade and to drug cultivation. "If they have enough support from the international community in terms of alternative cultivation they would put a stop to it."

Taliban and women

Barbara Crossette, correspondent of the New York Times, is optimistic about the change in the Taliban’s attitude towards women. Three years after the Taliban took control of most of Afghanistan and introduced a harsh and unforgiving Islamic piety that all but obliterated women from public life, months of quiet negotiation with Taliban leaders are beginning to dent the prohibitions.

As Eric de Mul, co-ordinator of the United Nations relief programme in Afghanistan says, as a result of the small advances that the United Nations and a host of relief agencies are making in Afghanistan, the new picture that emerges is of a strongly absolutist movement becoming more aware of daily reality.

"There is mounting pressure from the population itself," said de Mul, who accepts that the Taliban were first welcomed by Afghans, who had had enough of corrupt and violent rule by the Mujahideen.

The United Nations World Food Programme (WFP) headed by an American woman, Catherine Bertini, based in Rome - has made large strides in bringing women into the work force in Afghanistan. de Mul says "the WFP is pushing the right agenda in an intelligent way - with a lot of results."

De Mul describes a three-day event where representatives of all community organisations, including the Taliban authorities, came together. The governor of Kandahar opened it. The meeting ended with a statement of priorities.

The first priority was education - education for girls and boys. The second, to have more and better trained traditional birth assistants, midwives. Third, to have increased possibilities for women to be gainfully employed, especially widows. And these priorities were decided at a meeting where all the representatives were men!

The proposed assembly

The new United Nations envoy to Afghanistan, Francesc Vendrell says that he hoped to rekindle the support of six neighbouring countries in seeking an end to the civil war there. Vendrell said it was important that the efforts of the so-called "six-plus-two" group, which includes Russia and the United States, "are at least co-ordinated and geared to the same end."

Vendrell is of the view that governments are "well disposed to do their best and push the peace process forward." He also said that the Taliban militia which control most of Afghanistan and their enemies in the Afghan Northern Alliance had said "they would be willing to have a cease-fire."

All non-Taliban Afghan groups, including Pashtun tribal leaders and the powerful Tajik northern commander Ahmad Shah Masood, are advocating a consensus-building process through a Grand National Assembly such as has existed in the past during times of trouble in Afghan history. Even mid-and lower-level Pashtuns in the Taliban’s ranks have notified prominent Pashtun leaders that they too, support a board-based intra-Afgan dialogue.

Without exception, all Afghan groups have publicly declared their preference for a united, unpartitioned Afghanistan. Whether Afghanistan’s neighbours including Pakistan with a vested interest in Afghanistan would allow that is the problem. For thousands of years Afghanistan has been one of the great cross-roads of Asia and a line of communication to the Islamic Central Asian States.

Sunday Island Politics
SB’s newest bomb triggers a chain reaction

By Deshavimala
Controversies are the stuff of popularity. But, they sometimes cause problems for those who creates them and embarrassment to his side. Minister S. B. Dissanayake is taken at his word under normal circumstances. But he had disturbed a hornet’s nest which possibly might hurt him with a storm developing.

The week before, Dissanayake in his usual style created a controversy by taking Interim Cricket Board Chief Rienzie Wijetilleke head-on charging that the latter leaked the audit report to the media. This suggested abuse of funds by cricket officials. That controversy reached its peak forcing President Chandrika Kumaratunga to intervene from Temple Trees to resolve the matter.

Hardly two days later Dissanayake was the chief guest at the Institute of Architects. The minister has a tendency to bring politics into areas that do not involve politics. Earlier he did this when inaugurating the Under 19 World Cup ceremony. While speaking about cricket he said President Kumaratunga was absent on the occassion because she was injured by a bomb explosion caused by certain elements to bring a weak leader to power. Obviously he was making indirect reference to the UNP leader Ranil Wickremesinghe. The young cricketers who were here from many nations were interested in playing cricket here and not politics.

Dissanayake addressing the architects deviated from the subject in his usual style. He talked about the new constitution. Explaining the process to implement it, Dissanayake reportedly told them that if the necessity arose, the government would close down Parliament and if judges did not toe the government line they were free to go. This statement which was reported in the Sunday papers was picked up by the members of the judiciary and the opposition political parties.

Present Constitution

Under the present constitution any Member of Parliament or public officer who had taken his oath under the constitution is debarred from violating the provisions of the constitution. The reported statement of Dissanayake is seen as a clear violation. Political analysts say that if there was any truth in the remarks made by the minister, it could be accepted as a move towards dictatorship. Parliamentarians from both sides claim that Dissanayake has violated cabinet responsibility by making loose statements. They say that the President should take stern action if she was to ensure discipline among her cabinet ministers.

In the past when cabinet ministers violated cabinet responsibility or discipline the President who is the head of the cabinet did not hesitate to take them to task. During the J. R. Jayewardene regime, a former Finance Minister M. D. H. Jayawardene, a very close friend of Jayewardene was removed from the cabinet for breach of cabinet responsibility. M. D. H. Jayawardene as then Minister of Plantations criticised the budget of his own government. President Jayewardene did not hesitate to summon his life-long friend to Ward Place to call for his resignation.

The charge faced by M. D. H. Jayawardene was not so serious as the one that is levelled against S. B. Dissanayake today. Similarly, another friend of President Jayewardene, the late Cyril Mathew too was removed from the cabinet for being critical of the government’s stand on the ethnic problem. Mathew was a champion of the Sinhalese who often fought with TULF leader Appapillai Amirthalingam in Parliament. This was not to the liking of the President.

The reported statement of S. B. Dissanayake should be viewed more seriously as it concerns two apex bodies of the country. Parliament and the Judiciary are the two institutions which exercise state power on behalf of the people. If they are shut down, democracy is buried for certain.

The judges of the Supreme Court viewed this statement seriously on Monday. After a long discussion the judges decided to urge the Chief Justice Sarath N. Silva to conduct a probe into the authenticity of the reported statement and take appropriate action. The Chief Justice who heard the judges directed the Editor of the Sunday Times, Sinha Ratnatunga to file an affidavit to affirm what was reported in his paper. Ratnatunga was instructed to submit the affidavit himself or from the journalist who covered the architects’ meeting. The Chief Justice told the judges that an affidavit was necessary as he could not be guided merely on the newspaper report.

Karu Jayasuriya, chairman UNP was the first politician to voice his opinion about the reported speech of Minister Dissanayake. Issuing a press release, the UNP chairman said: "These remarks are not only a serious and dangerous attempt to scuttle individual freedom and democratic rights of the people but smack of contempt of court and treason". Jayasuriya a moderate politician widely respected in political circles came down hard saying the parliament and the judiciary were the highest and most sacred institutions of the people and the PA government was scheming to prevent the public from seeking legal redress against its anarchial, anti-democratic policies by closing down the courts and sending judges home.

The UNP which took the reported statement seriously did not lose time to act on it. UNP leader Ranil Wickremesinghe met some of his senior members on Tuesday at his Cambridge Terrace office to decide on early action. There it was decided to launch a surprise demonstration in the city. Wickremesinghe personally led the demonstration was held in the same evening at Bambalapitiya. The protest demo which was a success proceeded towards Wellawatte when it met with resistance from the police. The demonstrators were asked to disperse as it had no prior approval by the police.

Wickremesinghe on Wednesday met several of his MPs in parliament to discuss the issue. Those were informal contacts. Many MPs urged Wickremesinghe to hold an emergency group meeting of the party to enable all members to voice their opinion before a decision was taken at party level. Accordingly the UNP leader summoned a meeting of his group in parliament on Thursday morning. The day’s business in the House that morning was the votes on the Ministry of Tourism and Aviation. At the outset Wickremesinghe informed the members about his communication to the President with regard to the UNP proposals on constitutional reforms. He said the President has so far not responded to his call to draw up an agenda to begin talks and attributed the delay on the side of the President to the lack of commitment to interact with the UNP.

Select Committee

Wickremesinghe said the 1997 PA proposals were the property of parliament as it was a report submitted to the House by a Select Committee. "That report included observations from Tamil political parties such as the TULF, EPRLF and EPDP", Wickremesinghe pointed out. The UNP leader recalled that his party at that time reserved the right to forward further proposals in the future. At this point Mahinda Samarasinghe intervened to suggest that it is correct for the UNP to request the government to resume the Select Committee process to discuss the UNP proposals since it was to the Select Committee that the UNP forwarded some of its proposals as far back as 1998.

Wickremesinghe agreed to the suggestion and said that while the party would discuss with President Kumaratunga at Temple Trees it should also urge the government to resume the Select Committee process to enable the proposals to be discussed at length with all political parties in the Committee.

Wickremesinghe told the group that the government was frequently contradicting itself on the issue of discussions with the LTTE and added that the government was at cross purposes on adopting a meaningful strategy. "We have stated that a conducive environment should be created for healthy talks with a confidence building approach", said the UNP leader pointing out that when genuine suggestions were proposed the government was faltering by saying that the UNP was catering to the needs of the LTTE.

The group endorsed the view of the UNP leader and Mahinda Samarasinghe quipped, ’Sir, they lack experience to understand sensitive political issues’. Wickremesinghe noted that LTTE theoretician and spokesman Anton Balasingham has urged the Norwegian government to create a conducive environment with a confidence building approach to start talks. "When we said it earlier, the President accused us for trying to help the LTTE but now the Tigers have asked for the same thing", Wickremesinghe said with a smile. He pointed out that the episode showed that the PA did not know how to set about the exercise and was wasting time. Senior member M. H. Mohamed interjected to propose that the UNP proposals be brought before parliament notwithstanding the PA’s invitation to the conference table and Wickremesinghe agreed.

Gampaha District Parliamentarian John Amaratunga changed the topic at that stage to focus attention on Minister S. B. Dissanayake’s reported statement at the Architects’ Institute. Amaratunga wanted stern action against the minister’s statement outside parliament and follow up action of the demonstration launched the previous day. "Sir, we must also decide on action that can be taken inside parliament under the Standing Orders", Amaratunga urged. He further moved that a Select Committee should be called for to probe the statement of the minister which undermined the parliament.

Wickremesinghe welcomed the suggestion while Dr. Rajitha Senaratne seconded it. Wickremesinghe having approved the suggestion directed Messrs. W. J. M. Lokubandara, Tyronne Fernando, Mahinda Samarasinghe and Henry Jayamaha to draft a motion to be handed over to the Secretary General of Parliament the following day and to move the motion in the House on Monday (tomorrow). The UNP leader said that copies would be made from the cassette containing the speech of Minister Dissanayake to be circulated countrywide for the information of the public to know how a cabinet minister and a trusted lieutenant of President Kumaratunga had violated the constitution and was being kept in the cabinet undermining its dignity.

Wickremesinghe raised Dissanayake’s matter during the votes on the Ministry of Tourism and Aviation the same morning. He said he listened to the tape containing the speech and was satisfied that the minister had made those remarks. "MPs Ananda Kularatne and Ranjith Maddumabandara too listened to it in my company", Wickremesinghe told the House. He then referred to several articles in the constitution that identified Parliament as the sovereign body of the people and the judiciary where people had faith in justice. Wickremesinghe urged Minister Dharmasiri Senanayake to answer his query about Dissanayake’s statement in the latter’s capacity as SLFP General Secretary.

Government Policy

"The people have a right to know whether Minister Dissanayake expressed the policy of the government", Wickremesinghe said. At this point Minister Dissanayake was seen rushing into the chamber to occupy his seat. The opposition thought Dissanayake was going to reply but Minister Senanayake rose to say, "The minister says the newspaper has distorted what he said". Minister Dissanayake was seen smiling to the annoyance of UNP MPs who started to make a noise. UNP backbenchers then started to heckle Dissanayake but he was unmoved. Instead he continued chuckling more to annoy the UNPers which forced the chair to call the House to order.

The silence maintained by Dissanayake despite the opposition storming him to get involved was a rare occassion in the context of his past conduct in the House. During lunch time a group of cabinet ministers were seen discussing the issue. After lunch a minister told this columnist that Dissanayake had been ordered from the ’top’ to keep silent for two weeks to enable the hierarchy to resolve the matter. The minister said that Dissanayake had a tendency to seek popularity by resorting to controversies which embarrassed the government and the President. Asked why the leadership was not taking him to task, the minister quipped, "Don’t you know that there are blue eyed boys everywhere".

UNP Chief Whip Lokubandara instructed by the UNP leader drafted an adjournment motion to be moved the same evening. Accordingly the motion was moved by Lokubandara on Thursday evening. He asked the government whether the views expressed by Dissanayake reported in the press and reflected the government’s policy about promulgating a new constitution. He said the UNP had a tape recording of what was said. This time Minister of Justice and Constitutional Affairs, the learned Professor G. L. Peiris was entrusted to save the government from embarrassment. The professor who appeared to be in the political wilderness with no prominent role in the constitutional reforms process said that it was not the policy of the government to embark upon any course of action that involves the closing down of parliament or dismantling the courts. The minister reiterated that the government had no such policy but was democratic in its conduct on the constitutional reforms process.

The UNP’s Azwer in his usual style tried to heckle the minister saying it was difficult to accept what the minister was saying when an equally powerful minister claimed otherwise. This forced Minister Peiris to raise his voice by moving nearer to the microphone to say, "Mr. Speaker, as the minister in charge of Constitutional Affairs and Justice I would like to state the government’s position on the floor of this House".

The UNP is also planning to file a case in court with regard to Dissanayake’s reported speech. Dr. Rajitha Senaratne is likely to go before court this week on the issue claiming that the minister had violated the constitution that he had pledged to uphold when taking oath as a parliamentarian. All guns are aimed at Dissanayake and it will be interesting to see whether Dissanayake would face charges for contempt of court. Dissanayake who issued a statement on Thursday stated that the newspaper had distorted his speech while some parts were correct. He expressed his regrets to the judges if they had been hurt according to a news report in the our sister paper ‘Divaina’.

While the Dissanayake controversy was given prominence in the political scene, the government moved a resolution to increase the salaries of parliamentarians this week. The resolution was in the order paper for some time and the government used it this week while the Dissanayake controversy became the subject of the day. There was no objection from the opposition UNP as was the past practice. This was a salary revision given to MPs after ten years. As usual the only voice that protested was the LSSP firebrand Vasudeva Nanayakkara. Later he was followed by SLPF MP Nihal Galapaththy who was attacked by both PA and UNP MPs present in the House.

When the issue was raised at the UNP group meeting, Kegalle District MP, Kabir Hashim suggested that a motion should be moved to increase the salaries of public servants too to enable them to meet the rising cost of living for which the government had no regard. The UNP leader endorsed the MP’s view and noted that the salaries of MPs has not been increased for ten years and therefore the party had no right to oppose it. The MPs agreed to a suggestion by Dr. Rajitha Senaratne to give Rs. 10,000 from the arrears they would get to set up a fund for victims of elections violence and Wickremesinghe promised to give his entire salary this month to establish that fund.

The UNP which discussed the President’s failure to respond to its call to draw up an agenda for talk received an invitation from the President on Thursday evening for talks next Thursday. The same morning Wickremesinghe accused the President of not being concerned about his request. President Kumaratunga invited the UNP leader and three others to start talks to draw up an agenda. The UNP welcomed the invitation even at that late stage. UNP Chairman Karu Jayasuriya told this columnist that the party would go to Temple Trees on Thursday. The UNP team will comprise Wickremesinghe, Jayasuriya, Gamini Athukorale and senior MP Ronnie De Mel. The UNP team will rotate after the agenda is prepared and agreed upon by both sides. Wickremesinghe expects to field his experts according to subjects on the agenda. Jayasuriya claimed that the UNP was a party that would cooperate on national issues and therefore they were happy about the invitation extended by the President.

Wickremesinghe is expected to give priority to the issue of abolishing the Executive Presidential system. His party would like to see this through before the next general election is called. Ronnie de Mel is pressing hard on this issue. His motion to have the system scrapped had already been approved by the Working Committee. At the conclusion of the group meeting on Thursday, Wickremesinghe requested de Mel to draft a bill to amend the constitution in respect of the abolition of the Executive Presidency. Mahinda Samarasinghe was asked to assist him.

This Bill is expected to be approved by the party before the end of this month to be placed in Parliament. If the Bill is brought before the House it will be difficult for the PA to oppose it as it was the party that advocated the abolition of the executive presidency calling it the most draconian piece of legislation ever introduced in the constitutional history of parliament.

Sri Lanka Muslim Congress

The UNP proposals submitted to the government is likely to be placed before the diplomatic community this week by Wickremesinghe. Arrangements have been made to call the Colombo based diplomats for a meeting this week. Wickremesinghe is to highlight the move to abolish the executive presidency and recall the pledge given by President Kumaratunga in that regard.

Meanwhile, a battle for popularity has begun in the East between the UNP and the Sri Lanka Muslim Congress. The UNP appointed Segu Issadeen on the National List and SLMC’s Asitha Perera made way for M. Athaulla to come in on the SLMC National List. Last Sunday a ceremony was held to welcome Issadeen as the new MP for Akkaraipattu. UNP MPs Imtiaz Bakeer Markar, A. H. M. Azwer, and Ali Zaheer Moulana, went to Ampara from Colombo on that day to be joined by Eastern MPs P. Dayaratne, Yasendra Bakmeewewa and Chandradasa Galapaththy. A series of events were held there to honour Issadeen. He was taken in a procession that lasted over six hours and looked like a May Day demonstration. The MP was the former Chairman of the SLMC.

SLMC leader Minister Ashraff used Asitha Perera’s resignation to bring Athaulla to counter the popularity of Issadeen in Ampara. The SLMC which witnessed the procession of Issadeen was shocked at the manner the Muslim vote had turned towards the UNP. SLMC Vice President Madur Kathy was reported in a Tamil daily that other National List MPs in the SLMC should also resign and make way to bring more Muslims from the East to represent Parliament.

Ashraff sometimes back urged two other National List MPs to make way to strengthen his base in Ampara but it never materialised. With the Muslim vote turning the UNP way and Issadeen gaining popularity day by day in Ampara, Ashraff is likely to make some moves to ensure his party popularity in the East before the next general election. The SLMC leader summoned a meeting of his politbureau on Thursday night to discuss the party’s position in Ampara and the need to strenghten the party in the East. He told the members that if the party does not make swift moves it would hinder the party’s chances at the next election and warned that the UNP was strengthening itself there to offer stiff resistance at the next general election.

The two MPS on the national list of the SLMC are Rauff Hakeem, the General Secretary and M. M. Zuhair. Ashraff faces an embarrassing situation to request his general secretary to step down in his bid to offer an organiser from the East a chance to enter parliament. Hakeem is also the Deputy Chairman of Committees, an important office in Parliament. Zuhair on the other hand is a lawyer by profession who had contributed immensely towards the party at crisis situations. Both Hakeem and Zuhair are respected by all political parties both inside and outside parliament as moderates.

Sajith and Cooray

Sajith Premadasa on Friday asked what Sirisena Cooray wanted to do by launching a new party by using the Premadasa image and the former Citizens’ Front. Sajith who telephoned this columnist said that his father used that concept not to create a political entity but to pressurise his leaders at that time to help the poor. "When he (my father) had power he helped the poor using that concept", Sajith claimed. Asked why there were no Premadasas in Cooray’s political party which is claimed to be a concept of Ranasinghe Premadasa, Sajith replied, ’The Premadasas’ were and are members of the UNP and my father never had a political party called the ‘Purawesi Peramuna". Sajith claimed the Premadasa policies, principles and legacies while adding that he was at a loss to understand why others were trying to grab those rights when Premadasa had a son to follow them up in the one and only party that his father represented." As the son of Premadasa it is I who continue the policy of helping the down trodden though I have no power in my hand", young Premadasa noted.

PA and UNP consensus on devolution vital

Since the Presidential election there have been some hopeful developments with regard to setting a peace process in motion but there is yet a long way to go and many obstacles to be overcome. Besides the PA Government the UNP and the LTTE have a major responsibility in achieving success. But civil society must also contribute towards this process, this includes the media.

If the country is to be saved from the path of political and economic self destruction that threatens the future of all our people a political solution must be found to the ethnic problem so that the ethnic conflict and the war can be brought to an end and a lasting peace be achieved within a united Sri Lanka. An achievement of this objective requires a high level of statesmanship from all political leaders but specially from the leaders of the two main parties which contend for national political power, the PA and the UNP. Narrow party political interests must give way to the common interest of the Sri Lankan people. Whatever other political and personal differences exist they must be relegated to the background and the two leaders must work together to bring peace to our troubled land. Therefore the National Alliance for Peace requests the two leaders of the PA and the UNP to collaborate as equal partners to achieve this objective.

As a result of the ethnic conflict we are today a divided nation with increasing distrust and hostility among the communities, specially Sinhalese and Tamil. The political culture based on confrontation that is a feature of our national political scene has further divided the nation. For the effective resolution of the ethnic conflict there has to be a process of national reconciliation and consensus building leading to the restoration of mutual trust and confidence. One of the major obstacles to achieving this national consensus has been the failure of the two main parties, the PA/SLFP and the UNP, to reach a consensus on the political solution to the ethnic problem. The reaching of such a consensus must be given the highest priority if we are to forge ahead.

In fact the Tamil community and the LTTE, no doubt influenced by their past experiences, have repeatedly stressed the need for a common position between the UNP and the PA/SLFP. Ideally such a consensus should precede the negotiation process with the representatives of the Tamil people and the LTTE in particular, and such negotiations should be carried out jointly by representatives of the PA Government and the UNP.

Past efforts to solve the problem in the absence of such a consensus through unilateral methods have all failed. Efforts were made by leaders of the UNP while they were heads of governments in power, by President J. R. Jayewardene and President R. Premadasa, but these were unsuccessful. President Jayewardene attempted to form an Interim Council for the North and East, led by the LTTE but this did not materialize. President Premadasa went to the extent of arming the LTTE but to no avail. There were discussions with the LTTE but these broke down. President Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga had talks with the LTTE when she came to power in 1994 but this too did not succeed. Thereafter following an intensified military conflict President Kumaratunga sought to initiate discussions with the LTTE twice, once through the Secretary General of the Commonwealth and subsequently through the Government of Norway, but this too was without success.

The National Alliance for Peace welcomes the offer of support by Mr. Ranil Wickremesinghe to enable the Constitutional amendment, based on the Devolution proposals tabled in Parliament by the PA Government, to be passed by the requisite 2/3 majority. The intention of the UNP thereafter is to support the government’s efforts once it resumes talks with the LTTE on the basis of the Liam Fox Agreement. Under the terms of this agreement the UNP agrees to abide by any decision and agreements reached during the negotiations between the PA Government and the LTTE only if there is prior consultation with the UNP. In effect this would require every single issue at the discussions to be submitted to the UNP for its consent before proceeding to an agreement with the LTTE. This would make the whole process impracticable unless there is a prior agreed position between the leaders of the Government and the UNP.

Taking all the above facts into consideration the National Alliance for Peace would like to emphasise the consistent position that its member organizations, numbering over a hundred, have taken. This is that there should be a national consensus commencing with the political parties and eventually extending to the people. This was also emphasized when representatives of the member organizations of the National Alliance for Peace met at the BMICH on 11th November 1999. At the invitation of President Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga process of political dialogue has been set in motion in the last month or two and a considerable degree of consensus has been reached on the basis of the Devolution Proposals that were presented to parliament in 1997. Among the parties that have reached this degree of consensus are the SLFP, the LSSP, the CP, the SLMP, the DJVP, the SLMC, the CWC, the sections of the UNP (Vikalpa Group), the TULF, the EPDP, the PLOTE and TELO. There are some areas on which consensus remains to be reached.

We are very glad that the UNP has submitted some proposals and agreed to come into this process, but on the basis of a definite agreed agenda. We appeal to the UNP and the PA to approach this dialogue in a constructive manner giving priority to those substantive issues that are of concern to the Tamil people and their representatives including the LTTE. What is required is a unified common position that takes in the content of the PA Government’s proposals and the process for negotiations outlined by the UNP, both suitably modified. If consensus can be reached among all the parties in the democratic stream, but principally the PA/SLFP and the UNP, then for the first time the conditions will be created for a common bipartisan approach to subsequent negotiations with the LTTE. This would convince the Tamil people and the LTTE that when a negotiated settlement is reached it will be honoured by whatever government is in power in Colombo, whether it be the UNP or the PA/SLFP. If this is embodied in an amended Constitution it becomes even more credible and acceptable. The Constitution can be subsequently amended to accommodate the final agreement reached with the LTTE.

The National Alliance for Peace also suggests that there should be a consensual approach to negotiations with the LTTE, in which representatives of the PA Government and the UNP are included. We appeal to all sections of civil society and the media in particular to play a constructive and supportive role in this process. The NAP is prepared to offer its good offices in any way possible to achieve a consensus between the PA and the UNP.

Prof. Tissa Vitarana on behalf of NAP

Devolution or a different Development

by Tisaranee Gunasekera
The proposed political package envisages the near total devolution of power in areas such as health, education, social welfare, poverty alleviation and housing. The rationale for this measure is the theory that devolution results in more effective delivery of these important social services to the people.

This may be another simplification of a rather more complex reality. The abdication of responsibility by the centre in these areas is more likely to result in a deterioration and decline in the supply of these very essential services - both quantitatively and qualitatively. According to the UNDP decentralisation can entail the "danger of letting standards slip.... Decentralisation does not automatically produce gains in efficiency. If poorly planned and executed, decentralisation can add to costs rather than reduce them. One common danger is duplicating layers of administration at national, regional and local levels. In Mexico and Venezuela decentralising the education system increased costs because of the proliferation of different agencies. 12" (Ibid.).

The World Bank offers a similar analysis. "In education for example, involvement of higher levels of government may be needed to prevent fragmentation and to minimise differences in the quality of education in different communities. And in the health sector, the appropriate allocation of responsibilities across levels of government is rarely clear cut. Immunisations, tuberculosis surveillance and vaccine storage all need strong effective management from higher levels of government. In addition, localities may not provide the right frame work for policy formulation and implementation. Consequently, decentralisation should not become a rigid, doctrinaire exercise, pushing functions onto communities and municipalities or artificially separating levels of government 13" (WDR ’97).

This deterioration in the quantity and quality of the services provided is probably a major contributory factor to the considerable regional disparities prevailing in many of the Third World countries with federal/quasi federal structures. According to the Report on Human Development in South Asia there is "tremendous diversity of human development profiles in various Indian states" (Emphasis Mine). In India, about 75 per cent of out of school children live in six states: Andra Pradesh, Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, Rajastan, Uttar Pradesh and West Bengal. From a total of nearly 1000 polytechnics in India about 70 per cent are concentrated in just four states. The HDI for Kerala at 0.597 is equal to China while the HDI for Madhya Pradesh (0.341) is equal to - Ruwanda.

Extensive devolution, instead of combating structural (regional) disparities can therefore actually worsen them. In such a situation even high growth may not provide a way out. Instead, it may cause the further enhancement of existing inequities. Once again India offers a case in point. In India economic growth has accelerated after the liberalisation of the economy; but it has also caused a worsening of regional socio-economic inequities. Comments Amartya Sen: (in India) "the distribution of the benefits of economic expansion tends to be severely unequal. We thus have an odd situation in which the process of economic development is going ahead at a reasonably fast pace, but where a large section of the community - indeed the majority of the community - is not in a position to join in it. 14 (Frontline Special Independence 50th Anniversary Issue - Emphasis Mine).

In India, half the adult population is still illiterate. (India is the country with the highest number of completely illiterate persons in the whole world - which happens to be 30 per cent of the global total). According to a current estimate, the number of primary school age children not attending school is an astronomical 78 million (36 million boys and 42 million girls). Contrary to the widespread belief, poverty is not the cause of this appalling record.

According to the UNDP there is not enough data to prove the theory that decentralised devolved units, because they are closer to the people than the central government, are more responsive to local needs, make better use of resources and priorities areas such as basic health and basic education. This is partly because "many countries have local power structures dominated by elites little interested in human development 15" (HDR ‘93); and "local elites often seize the power that devolves to the lower levels to the detriment of the poor16"(HDR ’96). This is why regional autonomy can often result in the strengthening of regional particularisms of all sorts such as caste. This is why the UNDP states that "devolution in some cases may require a strong central government to ensure that local administrations respect national standards on such matters as women’s rights and civil liberties17" (HDR ’93). (Newspapers have reported how archaic and uncivilised practices such as the public sacrificing of animals are already taking place in Jaffna).

Regional elites are more likely to be caste/race conscious than the national elites. The recent massacre of Indian peasants in Chiapas in Mexico with the complicity of the state government and the state police and the massive violence against depressed caste communities with the tacit compliance of state authorities in India are violent manifestations of this tendency.

In Mexico, there is such a wide disparity between the HDI of the country’s indigenous and non-indigenous population because the non-indigenous people have "less access to social services and basic infrastructures". (HDR ’93). In India the caste system "which is bolstered by landlordism and seeped in semi-feudal values and ideas of a most retrograde kind, continues to have a malignant durability. It exemplifies social oppression, inequality and injustice in a way that cannot be escaped." ( N Ram - Frontline - Special Independence 50th Anniversary Issue.) If literacy rates in India are disaggregated, the rate for poor rural scheduled caste women is 17% - which is 35 per cent less than the national average and 73 per cent less than that of rich urban males (90 per cent). India’s Capability Poverty Rate (i.e. - the lack of three basic capabilities - to be well nourished and healthy, represented by the proportion of children under 5 who are underweight; healthy reproduction represented by the proportion of births attended by trained health personnel; and female literacy) at 61.5 per cent is probably one of the highest in the world.

Sen identifies social inequality as the biggest failure in India’s post independence history. "The real drag on the Indian economy is the continuation of social inequality and backwardness. It’s dire effect is that lots of people have very few opportunities to lead a good life - to receive medical attention when they are ill, to be able to communicate with others in the country or the rest of the world, to read and write as they like.....It takes its toll both directly in terms of the quality of life - and indirectly - in terms of reducing the economic opportunities that the people have. I think it is illiteracy, the lack of health care, the absence of land reforms, the difficulty in getting micro credit if you belong to the rural poor and of course, the pervasive gender bias between men and women that make the problem of social inequality so large in India." 19 (Ibid.).

India and Sri Lanka

A comparative analysis of regional disparities in India and Sri Lanka may be of interest at this point. In India the gap between the state with the highest level of literacy rate (Kerala: 90) and the lowest level of literacy rate (Rajastan: 41) is a massive 49; by comparison in Sri Lanka the gap between the province with the highest level of literacy (Western Province: 87.2 per cent and the lowest level of literacy (Eastern Province: 74.3 per cent) is only 12.9 per cent.

Despite more than fifteen years of war and two insurgencies, unitary Sri Lanka has performed far better than many of the quasi-federal federal countries in the global South in reaching the goal of balanced, equitable growth. Sri Lanka has been identified by the UNDP as a country which has moved from weak links between human development and growth to strong links between human development and growth in the last three decades. Argentina suffered from "lopsided development in 1980-92 as human development accelerates while growth remains slow". Mexico experienced "rapid economic growth in the 1960s that falters in the 1970s and ceases in the 1980’s". India "remains in the weak links quadrant with low human development and low growth during the 1960s and 1970s. It moves to lop sided development in 1980-92 as growth accelerates while human development remains low". Brazil experienced "relatively high economic growth in the 1960s and 1970s with below average human development 20" (HDR ‘96).

A unitary state structure therefore is not an impediment to higher growth with greater equity - both regionally and socio-economically.

The main developmental sins of centralisation are supposed to be: worsening regional disparities; lack of efficiency in delivering social services to the periphery; insensitivity to local needs; and urban bias. The experiences of countries with quasi-federal/federal structures demonstrate clearly that extensive devolution is often either extraneous to these problems or actually worsens them. The root cause of these problems (apart of course from the nature of capitalism) is not centralisation or the unitary state; it is the fact that "there is no very strong tradition of doing macroeconomics as if poor people and social processes mattered 21" (Reconciling Economic Reform and Sustainable Human Development: Social Critique of Neo Liberalism - L Taylor and U Pieper. Office of Development Studies Discussion Paper UNDP ’96). The solution therefore lies not in devolution but in the development perspective and strategy of the government policy makers. What is needed is a new approach to development which priorities poor/marginalised people and areas.

The recent development experience of Sri Lanka suggests the following:

1) It is possible to find remedies to many of the so called problems of centralisation, within the unitary system.

The two hundred garmet factories programme which made a significant contribution to reducing inter and intra provincial inequities was implemented solely by the Colombo government and not by any Provincial Council. This programme aimed at rural development/industrialisation and investment promotion in Sri Lanka happened not because of devolution but in spite of it. The 200 garment factories programme did more to promote industrialisation, investment and employment generation in the underdeveloped periphery of the country (including the war torn East) than any other programme before or since. By December 1994, 165 enterprises were in operation with 80 per cent (132 factories) located outside the Western Province. These included 9 factories in the war torn North East. Altogether these factories provided employment to 71,088 persons.

This programme also succeeded in debunking the neo-liberal theory of a nexus between employment generation and low wages. At a time when a growing number of American workers are being paid poverty wages, paving the way for the creation of a new type of underclass - the working poor, in underdeveloped Sri Lanka an industrialisation programme was implemented which promoted massive investment and generated employment in hitherto neglected and marginalised rural areas while guaranteeing decent wages and working conditions to the non skilled employees. The 200 garment factories has made and is still making a significantly contribution to ensuring an equitable development and a durable peace (by promoting political stability) without promoting cut throat and counter productive competition among unequal regions for scarce foreign resources.

2) A unitary system is not only conducive but necessary in order to implement certain countrywide social programmes promoting regional and socio-economic and regional equity.

Sri Lanka’s most ambitious and successful housing programme was implemented by the national government (1979 - 1994). Until 1979, homelessness and housing were never considered a priority by successive Sri Lankan governments. Consequently by 1977/1978 Sri Lanka had 400,000 homeless families in need of housing facilities. (F). A major study in the early 1980s identified the need for permanent housing as one of the most urgent tasks before the country (F). It was in this context that the l00,000 Houses Programme was launched to be followed by the one Million houses programme and the 1.5 Million Houses Programme. Priority was granted to addressing the housing needs of the rural poor, followed by that of the urban poor. The programme commenced in a poor and underdeveloped depressed caste village in the North Western Province and throughout its duration priority was accorded to those undeveloped and maginalised rural areas hitherto bypassed by the development process of the country. For example, of the total families who benefited under this programme between 1990-1994, more than half (54.7 per cent) were from the rural low income category. They also received 34.2%, of the loans disbursed.

It was possible to implement this programme successfully because it was one of the lead projects of a strong national government within the unitary structure. The unitary structure ensured speed and effectivity as there were no intermediate layers of authority and governance between the national government and the local officials; the local officials were employed by and therefore solely and directly responsible to the national government.

This would not have been possible if a system similar to the one envisaged in the proposed devolution package had been in place. Since the ownership of state land would have been in the hands of the regional authorities, the central government would have needed to obtain the permission for every housing site - a time consuming process. The existence of multiple layers of administration would have meant the absence of a clear and direct chain of command resulting in greater confusion. Consequently, the central government would have lacked the clear authority needed to ensure the effective implementation of its programmes. Given the political polarisation prevailing in Sri Lanka, if power at the regional level was in the hands of the opposition, non cooperation (or at least lack of corporation) would have been extremely likely.

Promoting equality (both regional and socio-economic) and improving social conditions are important tasks of any Third World country. The solution however is not greater devolution but a different, new approach to development.

(To be continued)

Whither Sri Lanka? towards integration or disintegration

Continued from last Sunday

By K. H. J. Wijayadasa
Former Secretary to the Prime Minister and Secretary to the President 1984-1994

8.2 The proposed federal structure of government will vastly increase the administrative and establishment costs; while government revenues will remain unaffected. This will increase inflationary pressures on the economy. Recurrent expenditure will be so heavy that amounts that can be set apart for capital expenditure will get reduced year by year. More politicians, more officials and more functionaries would result in an escalation of bribery, corruption and waste. The need of the hour is to scale down the number of politicians, officials and governmental overheads to the barest minimum. This is the IMF/World Bank recipe too.

8.3 The fragmentation of markets can be a serious problem creating obstacles to growth and dynamism. There is a fear that using the legislative and executive powers vested in the Regions certain taxes and levies could be imposed on paddy processing or tea manufacturing and thus hold the consumers of the deficit areas of rice and tea to ransom. In an era when countries are getting together to form economic unions such as EU, NAFTA, SAPTA, APEC, etc., to increase competitive advantage by increasing both market size and bargaining power; Sri Lanka seems to be going in the opposite direction by dividing herself into 9 economically unviable petty states whose main objective will be to safeguard parochial interests.

8.4 Even though Currency, Foreign Exchange and Monetary Policy are reserved subjects, the Central Government will not be able to effectively implement its monetary or exchange rate policies, as it would not have full control over the money supply; with certain fiscal powers, borrowing powers and power to obtain foreign assistance devolved to the Regions. The budget deficits of the regions and the consequent need to borrow locally and abroad will affect the money supply. Also, income from large scale alienation of state lands, agricultural lands and forests will affect the money supply. Foreign loans, grants, commodity assistance and direct foreign investment will have a similar impact. Further, an increase in the inflow of foreign currency by way of foreign aid to the Regions can have adverse repercussions on the exchange rate.

8.5 Moreover, the federal states can seek and obtain aid from various international donor countries and agencies. This could lead to a ludicrous situation where the different Regions will compete with each other for donor assistance .Instead of one begging bowl; 10 begging bowls will make endless rounds. Further some regions may urge donors not to provide assistance to other regions. But, I am sure Eelam or Eelanadu will prevail on donors to help Malaynadu and vice versa!! Ironically, according to many Tamil scholars "Eelam" means the "Land of the Sinhalese" having derived from the word "Seehala." So, Tamil Eelam means "Land of the Sinhalese Claimed by the Tamils."

9.0 Some Political Implications

9.1 In Sri Lanka the stark realities of the introduction of the proposed federal Constitution are fivefold. Firstly, it will create greater distrust between the 74 percent Sinhala majority and the 12 1/2 percent Tamil minority; resulting in communal tension, ethnic cleansing and eventual separation. This is what the LTTE is striving for. Secondly, the proposed Muslim Region in the South East; (which incidentally includes Panama Pattuwa AGA Division which is 92 percent Sinhalese); will create communal tension between the Sinhalese and Muslims in the Sinhala majority areas where the majority of the Muslims live in absolute harmony; leading to Sinhala-Muslim clashes and ultimate partition like what happened in British India. Thirdly, the federal system will heighten the parochial-regional (Upcountry, Low-country, Ruhuna, Wayamba); religious (Buddhist, Catholic, Hindu, Muslim), caste, class and political differences and enmities leading to the imposition of disabilities on employment, land ownership, education, investment, etc., which will set up the Sinhalese of one region against the Sinhalese of another region. Fourthly, the Estate Tamils of recent Indian origin will close ranks and may even resort to violence to make their dreamland of "Malayanadu" a reality in the central hills; which had been for 5,000 years (from the time of Rawana) the heartland of the Sinhalese and the watershed of all the major rivers of Sri Lanka. Finally, Eelanadu and Malayanadu will join together forming the largest and most populous State and engulf and devour the weakened Sinhala majority States.

9.2 It should be remembered that there are over 70 million Tamils living in different parts of the World of whom nearly 60 million are in Tamilnadu State in India; said to be the original homeland of the Tamil race. The Tamils like the Jews, who created Israel are in search of a homeland to establish their pure Tamil State of Eelam. For our bad luck the Tamil Diaspora has chosen the Northern and Eastern provinces of Sri Lanka to set up Tamil Eelam with Trincomalee as the Capital. As for the International Tamil Movement, Sri Lanka is a very fertile ground for establishing Tamil Eelam because of sharp ethnic, religious, linguistic and political divisions; weak governments dependent on minority support; and the lack of human and material resources to match the flow of foreign aid to the Eelamists from the Tamil Diaspora.

10.0 An Environmental Disaster

10.1 In terms of the present Constitution, National Policy on all subjects and functions including those that are vital to natural resource conservation and management such as land, water, soil, forestry, agriculture and environment are reserved to the Central Government. If the proposed Federal Constitution is by any chance passed by Parliament with a two-thirds majority (151 Member of Parliament voting for), and approved by the people at a Referendum (51 percent of the valid votes cast) then 83 percent of Sri Lanka’s land resources (which is State land) will be vested in the Regions and the totality of subjects connected with land such as, water, soil, forestry, agriculture, waterways, irrigation etc., will get fully and exclusively devolved to the Regions. The subject of environment itself is to be devolved to the Regions subject to conforming to national plans on environment and conservation. But, if the so called national plans are disregarded, natural resources indiscriminately exploited and industrial effluents liberally discharged into air, soil, water and rivers by the Federal States, what is the remedy available? Can those subjects and functions be taken over by the Centre? Can the Regional Council concerned be disbanded? These are some pertinent questions which must be answered by the architects of the proposed federal Constitution.

10.2 Forestry has been fully devolved to the Regions. Sri Lanka’s forests comprise some of her most valuable natural assets and their destruction will be a national calamity. Land, water, watersheds, river catchments and forests including World Heritage sites and Strict Natural Reserves such as Sinharaja will be fully under the control of Regional Councils. Further, the management, protection and preservation of the Sinharaja Forest Reserve will be the responsibility of 3 Regional Councils; Western, Sabaragamuwa and Southern. Knowing that some of our politicians are also the biggest timber racketeers; are we going to vest our forests in them?

10.3 Sri Lanka’s mountain and riverine ecosystems; the floodplains, marshes and the wetlands and the forest reserves and the national parks cannot be isolated from one another. They are an integrated whole. They constitute inseparable links in the maintenance of biodiversity and essential life support systems. What will happen to Peak Wilderness, Horton Plains, Rakwana Hills, Uda Walawe National Park, Gal Oya National Park, and the Knuckles Range?

10.4 It is an inviolable principle in statecraft that a small island nation like Sri Lanka should remain as a single political, economic geographical and environmental entity. Can we allow politicians to divide this small country into 9 divisions to satisfy their egos and to strengthen their respective political bases? Are they aware that Sri Lanka is already afflicted with serious problems of deforestation, land degradation, loss of biodiversity, industrial pollution and shortages of freshwater?

10.5 Unfortunately, the architects of this Federal Constitution do not seem to have the faintest idea of the holistic nature of the environment. Environment after all is multi-sectoral, multi-disciplinary and multifaceted in character, and should be treated as an integrated whole and hence indivisible. It cannot be broken up into bits and pieces in this manner. Therefore, it is the duty of Sri Lankans; whether they are Sinhalese, Tamils, Muslims, Burghers or Malays to fight this federal menace which is being flaunted at us in the guise of a devolution package

11.0 No Reason to Break Up Eastern Province

11.1 As far as the Sinhalese and the Muslims who constitute 82 percent of the population are concerned, the biggest threat lies in the proposed merger of the Tamil majority districts of Trincomalee and Batticaloa with the Northern province and the creation of a separate Muslim State. On the one hand the Sinhalese, the Muslims and a large majority of the Tamil people living in Sinhala areas do not want federalism because they understand its dire consequences. On the other hand historically, demographically, archaeologically, socially and culturally, the theory of the Tamil homeland which may be valid in the area North of the Wanni (i.e., North of a line joining Mannar and Mullaitivu) can in no way be extended to the Eastern province.

11.2 Article 127 of the proposed Constitution provides for the merger of the Tamil majority districts of Batticaloa and Trincomalee with the Northern Province, the creation of a Muslim majority South Eastern Region and a Sinhala majority Ampara Region or a merger with Uva Province after conducting Referenda. Sinhalese and Muslims constitute 60 percent of the population in the Eastern province. The Northern and Eastern provinces were ruled throughout history by Sinhalese Kings excepting for brief periods of occupation by South Indian, Portuguese and Dutch invaders. There are thousands of Buddhist archaeological sites, Sinhala inscriptions and numerous irrigation works of Sinhalese Kings in the Eastern province which will invariably be lost for ever. There is ample evidence to prove that during Dutch and early British periods there were some Tamil settlements in the Eastern seaboard; but the vast interior of the Eastern province was dominated by Sinhalese Purana (Traditional) villages. There is a graphic description of the sad plight of the Sinhalese of Trincomalee District (by C. M. Lushington, Assistant Government Agent, Trincomalee in the Ceylon Administrative Reports 1898; Part I; Page F 17) who were persecuted by the British as well as the coastal Tamils. The breaking up of the Eastern Province has been proposed with the ulterior motive of affording the Tamil majority in the Trincomalee and Batticaloa districts the opportunity of opting for a merger with the North, leaving the Sinhalese and Muslims of these two districts in the lurch.

11.3 It is true that many Sinhalese were settled in the Eastern province especially under the Gal Oya Scheme; in the 1950’s and thereafter. However, they were settled in the traditional homelands of the Sinhalese and not that of the Tamils. As against this the Sinhalese have permitted and also regularized the colonization of the traditional homelands as well as the heartlands of the Sinhalese in the Central Hills by Estate Tamils of recent Indian origin. If all the Sinhala majority provinces are going to chase out the Tamils and Muslims, then there is no harm in creating separate ethnic linguistic and religious entities as proposed in the new federal Constitution. Otherwise, the Eastern province must retain its identity and status of a single administrative region. How can Tamil and Muslim Ethnic or Religious Regions be justified when more than 50 percent of ethnic Tamils and nearly 55 percent of Muslims are living in Sinhala majority Provinces?

12.0 Is there a Way Out of this Impasse?

12.1 There is a way out. Firstly, the Sinhalese, Muslims and Estate Tamils who constitute 87 percent of the population should stand united and firm on the 3 basic issues; namely No Federalism; No Merger of any two or more Provinces; and No Breaking Up of any of the Provinces; and these 3 basics should be written into the new Constitution.

12.2 Secondly, whatever the Economic, Social, Human and International consequences are; the war must be fought to an end and terrorism wiped out of our motherland.

12.3 Thirdly, the Mangala Munasinghe Select Committee recommendations should be implemented in full; namely; Non-merger of North and East, further devolution and doing away with the Concurrent List and ensuring that critical subjects such as over arching Legislative and Executive power, Administration of Justice, Law and Order, Lands, Forests and Water and National Policy on all important devolved subjects including Health, Finance, Foreign Aid, Environment, etc., are Reserved to the Centre.

12.4 Fourthly, ensure adequate power sharing at the Centre by providing fair representation to the minorities in the National Level Assemblies and the establishment of an Upper House and multipartisan Executive Committee System of government. It has to be a replication of the State Council Executive Committee System, suitably modified in relation to the two party system prevalent in Sri Lanka.

12.5 Fifthly, the death penalty should be re-introduced and treason, waging war against the State, advocating separatism etc., should be made punishable with death and confiscation of property.

12.6 Sixthly, laws should be enacted and strictly enforced to ensure that there is no ethnic, linguistic, religious, social or cultural discrimination whatsoever. Any kind of ethnic, religious or linguistic cleansing as carried out in the North in recent times should be ruthlessly wiped out.

12.7 Seventhly, emulating the Singapore example the government should embark on Accelerated Programmes of Economic Development, Social Welfare, National Integration and Reunification of all Segments of Society.

The folly of the Eppawala Project proposal

by A. Denis N. Fernando
Fellow National Academy of Sciences Consultant

Mr. Fernando is also the 1998 recipient of the Ananda Coomaraswamy Memorial Medal of the Geological Society of Sri Lanka for his exceptional contribution to the Geology of Sri Lanka

The apatite deposit at Eppawaia contains not only phosphates but also other precious minerals and metals and was discovered in 1971 by Mr. Dulip Jayawardene of the Geological Survey Department when Mr. D. B. Pattiarachl F.N.A.S. was its Director. Nearly 70 drill holes were made and core samples examined for its mineral and metal contents and its extent determined. As far as I am aware when I was Secretary of the Ministry of Minerals and Mineral Based Industries in 1991 no further core drill samples were taken and therefore its content and extent is tentative based on the 1971 drilling. It is estimated that the site proposed to be exploited covers an area of about 60 square kilometre mining area and surrounded by a ten kilometre ‘Buffer Zone’ on all sides bringing the total potentially affected area in the Anuradhapura District to cover about 800 square miles. This would include the developed area of System H as well as the Jaya Ganga and the potential UNESCO World Heritage site. More land is earmarked for processing at the Trincomalee Harbour which would pay put for any development benefits for the exploitation of the vast area that is under our jurisdiction according to the Law of the Sea for which we require Harbour facilities.

As one who has been very closely associated with the Mahaweli Project for three decades, it would also be necessary to say a few words about the ancient and new settlements in this area, which is called System H under the Mahaweli Project.

The ancient paddy area has been cultivated for over one and a half millennia by the purana villages and is indicated in the Accelerated Mahaweli Programme Map of 1978. The existing paddy fields were provided with extra water for double cropping in 1976 with diversion of waters from the Mahaweli ganga through the Polgolla Ukuwela, Bowatenna trans basin tunnel and canal systems when Maithripala Senanayake was minister. With the Accelerated Mahaweli Programme the whole of System H was developed with new Townships, Schools, Hospitals, network of roads and further distribution canals for double cropping of paddy. Several billion rupees were invested by the Government utilising Govt Funds and foreign loans in the time of Mr. Gamini Dissanayake. The Jaya Ganga continues to supply water from Kalawewa to the Sacred City of Anuradhapura. The purana villages of Eppawela and Talawa were firmly settled here in the rehabilitated areas of System H while the displaced Kandyan peasants who sacrificed their lands for the benefit of our country because their lands were inundated under the Victoria and Kotmale Reservoirs were given compensation in alternate lands in Systems H . This is indicated in map 1 together with the proposed Mining Site.

As a Development Planner with over four decades of experience, it is necessary to remind ourselves it is imperative for us to follow well known and accepted criteria project formulation before a project is accepted for implementation as it has to satisfy the following criteria.

1. It must be technically sound and not adversely affect existing projects.

2. It must be economically feasible and subject to the laws of the land.

3. It must be socially desirable.

4. It has to be politically acceptable.

In respect of the above four criteria the project proposal for the mining project of Eppawela fails. It appears to be promoted by personalities who want to make a quick tuck.

It would be relevant to indicate here that the unique upper sluice of the ancient Maduru Oya Dam, which I discovered is also unique in that the bricks of this ancient sluice was bonded together with resinous material making the sluice barrel water proof, in the manner the ancient Persians built them. When the Canadian contractors threatened to blast this ancient Sluice as it was interfering with their work, I had to plead with Mr. Gamini Dissanayake to save it as it is a unique artefact seen nowhere else in the world. He in turn convinced president J. R. Jayewardene who gave an order to save it. The Govt. spent 15 million rupees and constructed a tunnel to save it. Thus by their foresight the ancient and unique ancient sluice of Maduru Oya was saved for posterity. Unlike the Maduru oya Sluice which is a dead artefact, the Jaya Ganga is a living monument with a unique gradient of six inches to the mile that is yet functioning for the last one and a half millennia serving the peasants and delivering water to the Sacred City of Anuradhapura.

The question to ask is what measures have been planned to save the unique Jaya Ganga which is a masterpiece of engineering acclaimed by the entire world from destruction, if the mining projects is approved? Has the cost estimate or plan for, its conservation and use been even thought out by the proposed miners ?

The Apatite deposit at Eppawela contains not only phosphates but also other rare minerals and metals and this deposit is proposed to be exhausted in a 30 year extraction programme. This number 30 reminds me of what happened two millennia ago when the traitor Judas Iscariot betrayed Jesus Christ for 30 pieces of silver, be that as it may.

It would be necessary to mention here the observation of Brohier based on Technical reports, that Jaya Ganga is just not another Transbasin canal transferring water from one basin to another; but which also functions to intercept the natural drainage system between Kalawewa and Anuradhapura. And therefore is not one that can be taken lightly as any disturbance would interfere and decrease the availability of water to the Sacred City of Anuradhapura.

Map 2 Indicates the Apatite, Phosphate Mining site at Eppawala together with the unique ancient hydraulic systems in the area and the settlements under system H; as well as an inset map showing the Apatite deposits indicated in 1995 by the Geological Survey and Mines Bureau, who has wrongly indicated the Jaya Ganga as Kala Oya.

In this connection it would be necessary to bring to the notice of all whether we are in fact violating and compromising the UNESCO declaration Preservation of Monuments for which we are a signatory. This is specifically indicated in the UNESCO declaration in Articles 4 and 5, which are of significance and relevant to us namely

1. That the earth is inherited by us in the present generation only temporarily (Remininisces of the Address by the Red Indian Chief Seattle to the then American President)

2. That reasonable use be made of Natural Resources by the present generation, especially of non renewable resources.

3. That life is not prejudicial by the present generation through harmful modification to the echo-system

4. That Technical and Scientific progress does not harm life on earth.

The Scientists and Fellows of the National Academy of Sciences at the University of Peradeniya and the Institute of Fundamental Studies including Prof. C. B. Dissanayaka FNAS and Prof. Dahanayaka FNAS and others have done pioneering work to utilise the apatite for local fertiliser application using simple chemical process, with the objective of prolonging the use of this natural resources for the benefit of our farmers.

Likewise we are fortunate that the Minister for Science and Technology Batty Weerakone is making every effort to prevent its unethical exploitation, but promoting its use for the benefit of the local agricultural community which is strongly supported by the scientific community

The whole of the peasant community supported by the religious dignitaries of different denominations are against this project to be given to foreign entrepreneurs who would destroy the environment and the means of livelihood of the peasants.

There were in addition several protests against this project by concerned citizens, erudite scholars, former Ambassador to UNESCO and many others which appeared in the newspapers over 50 in number. Even court action against the proposed project has been lodged.

Today we have the Environmental Law that prevents the starting of a project without undergoing an Environment Impacts Assessment, which if not adhered to violates the very law of the country. The Attorney General the foremost Legal Advisor to the Government whose comments in regard to the Draft Agreement in his confidential document dated 7th May 1997 to the Ministry of Industrial Development under which this project is planned states "The above draft agreement has been examined, and it is recommended that changes be made in accordance with guidelines set out in Annexture. In addition amendments will also have to be made in relation to the issues identified below. The provision relating to environment protection and rehabilitation of the project areas do not adequately safeguard the interests of the Government of Sri Lanka. The Agreement should be made consistent with the provisions of the National Environment Act". So far as is known nothing has been done in this direction, are we to believe that the American Multinationals are above the Law of our Land?

The National Academy of Sciences of Sri Lanka has also submitted a detailed report in this regard objecting to the proposed Apatite/Phosphate Mining Project to Her Excellency the President as well.

A book that portrays Independence of the Left

Reviewed by Dr. Laksiri Fernando
Senior Lecturer in Political Science
University of Colombo

Professor Ranjith Amarasinghe’s extensively researched and meticulously written book on the history of the Lanka Sama Samaja Party (1935-1964) titled "Revolutionary Idealism and Parliamentary Politics: A Study of Trotskyism in Sri Lanka" is a categorical testimony to the fact that the Left parties in this country did play and could play a major role in social and political transformation when and if they were sufficiently organized autonomously and independently from any "status quo government" or any "status quo party."

Essence of the Left

The LSSP or the Left, in essence, was a movement from its inception for progressive social transformation and political change in this country whatever the phrases, slogans and metaphors that they used from time to time in its long history. As Amarasinghe says "the LSSP was founded on the joint platform of radical nationalism and socialism.’’ It brought the most radical concept to this country, Sama Samaja (equal society), the raison d’etre of modern human rights philosophy. "The LSSP was also a major motive force behind the introduction of ‘modernizing’ ideas into Sri Lankan politics."

"In the State Council as well as in the country at large, the LSSP conducted a vigorous campaign - in opposition to corrupt practices, nepotism, the widespread patronage system and discrimination against the various minority groups, and for the secularization of the state, the ending of the colonial dependent economy, promotion of industrialization and mass education. The LSSP urged administrative and legal reforms and greater efficiency in government. They supported the creation of a ‘Ceylonese nation’ rather than one that was communally oriented.’, (p.5)

Amarasinghe, a former member of the LSSP and perhaps still a sympathizer, has written this book with a true spirit of Samasamajism. He has not concealed his obvious bias towards Trotskyism against Stalinism. It goes with his saying that, "For the young radicals of the LSSP, influenced not only by socialist ideals but also by democratic practices, Trotskyism was more appealing." (p. 307).

Nevertheless, his treatment of research material and information in this substantial book of 337 pages is scientific and objective. Amarasinghe is a leading political scientist in Sri Lanka. A graduate from the University of Peradeniya he obtained his Masters from the University of York and Ph.D. from the University of London. He currently holds the Chair of Political Science at his Alma Mata, the University of Peradeniya.

The original version of this book was a thesis submitted for his doctorate in 1974. A modest academic by disposition, Amarasinghe has unfortunately taken too much time to bring his findings to the attention of the general reader. Perhaps it is a reflection of a general predicament of many social science researchers who are hampered and discouraged by the lack of infrastructure and support for their research publications. In this respect, Prof. Kumari Jayawardena and the Social Scientists’ Association should be commended in facilitating the current publication although it is two decades after its writing. Earlier publication of this important book perhaps could have arrested what Amarasinghe has correctly identified as the "deradicalization’’ of the LSSP and the Left.

Proud Beginnings

The LSSP and the Left undoubtedly have proud beginnings. Amarasinghe says, "The Birth of the LSSP was brought about by the fusion of locally trained nationalist activists with a few students who had absorbed socialist ideas while studying abroad." Those "few students" - Philip, N.M., S.A., Colvin and Leslie - later to become national leaders in this country undoubtedly were the best intellectuals that a country could produce at any time. The Suriya Mal movement that they organized in the early 1930s was the precursor to the formation of the LSSP in December 1935.

The LSSP was initially formed as a broad based social democratic party and not a sectarian or an ideological one. It gained increasing support from the urban as well as the plantation workers. A major weakness perhaps from the beginning was its inability to arouse the aspirations of the rural poor. Its militancy and principles nevertheless became revealed during the Bracegirdle episode and various working class struggles that it led before the Second World War. It was, however, unfortunate that the movement became split between Trotskyism and Stalinism during the war and due to various "personality" struggles thereafter. Many of the old ideological differences in the Left have no meaning today. Nevertheless, the LSSP and the CP or the other formations of the Left still remain different entities without much unity of independent purpose.

Irrespective of their Marxist stance, the LSSP and the Left have contributed immensely to the development of parliamentary democracy in this country during their formative periods. At times of threats to democracy under emergency (1958) or military coup (1962) they were the faithful defenders of the principles of democracy. They were also the faithful promoters and defenders of many basic needs of the people, what in human rights terms now call economic and social rights. But they terribly failed in defending and upholding the rights of the minorities and understanding the aspirations of the youth in this country. They also became lukewarm or even against, in defending economic and social rights of the people while they were participating in "status quo governments."

The book consists of eight valuable chapters. The first four chapters deal with the rise and development of the LSSP from the early beginnings through to 1964. The last four chapters mainly deal with the character of the LSSP: its policies, structure, ideology and support base. The book contains a valuable bibliography in addition to numerous references given in footnotes. It is indexed by names and subjects. It carries a number of rare photographs depicting various stages of the dynamic history of the movement.

Conclusion

Amarasinghe characterizes the LSSP during its formative period (1935-1948) as a socially radical movement similar to the movements studied by Marcus Franda, John Kautsky and Robert Scalpino in greater Asia. However, he agrees more with Robert Tucker in identifying an "inverse relationship between organizational strength and the preservation of radicalism of these movements." It is on that basis that he explains the "deradicalization" of the LSSP.

"The LSSP’s success among the radicals was no doubt facilitated by the absence of any competitor more radical than itself within the left movement in Sri Lanka, at least until the emergence of the left wing Communist Party of Ceylon in 1963 or the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna much later. "A turning point in its history, and indeed of the Sri Lankan left movement, was reached in June 1964 with the entry of the LSSP into a coalition government with the Sri Lanka Freedom Party." He concludes, "The disillusionment that took place among the radicals over this change of course was to signal the switch of the radical movement in Sri Lanka towards new directions." (p. 318).

Eye opener

Amarasinghe’s book, in my opinion, is an eye opener for the LSSP and the Left in general to reassess their present course in politics. For the new left, there is much to learn from the LSSP’s history in respect of party democracy, mass work and strategies in legislative assemblies (local, provincial and national). For the old left, there is much to learn from its own mistakes especially regarding the pros and cons of being subordinated to a "status quo coalition partner" almost "eternally."

There was nothing wrong in supporting a governmental change for a progressive direction as it did in 1994. But this tactic should not have been subordinated to the strategy of the Left to promote and facilitate a profound social and political transformation in this country as an independent political force. The Left has much more opportunities in the future than before to emerge and re-emerge as an independent united force, without sectarianism, under the system proportional representation and enhanced democracy in many spheres in the country. This eventuality, if it happens, will vindicate the thesis of Professor Ranjith Amarasinghe about "the inherent strength of the left as an independent political force."

  | NEWS | EDITORIAL | DEFENCE | FEATURES | LEISURE | BUSINESS | SPORTS | ADS |