.

L E G A L W A T C H
Revulsion at electoral malpractices

by Nayana
One of the most eloquent comments on Sri Lanka's electoral process was delivered nearly ten years ago by a youth representative addressing the Presidential Commission on Youth Unrest which was appointed by President Premadasa following the bloody political conflict of l987-89, and whose members included the present Minister of Justice, Prof. G. L. Peiris. The Commissioners set out the remark thus in their Report:

"The representations made to us by an extensive variety of youth opinion indicated virtual unanimity with regard to one matter. This is the perception that political polarization throughout society has reached a dimension which is intolerably divisive. Party politics has split Sri Lankan society right down the middle. As one representative before the Commission put it: 'The winners always acted in a manner which gave the impression that the supporters of the losing political parties ceased to be citizens of the country'".

Ten years on, it would seem that our politicians, like the Bourbon monarchy, "have learnt nothing and forgotten nothing."

An incident reported from the Wayamba Province makes it clear that, far from being recognized as fellow citizens, political opponents today are sometimes not even treated as human beings. Last Sunday's edition of this newspaper quoted Attorney-at-Law and respected women's activist Nimalka Fernando recounting an incident in the ongoing election campaign where the children of a UNP candidate had been stripped naked and forced to eat mud by some supporters of a PA candidate.

If there is a faint glimmer of a silver lining in the black clouds that cover this country's political system 50 years after independence, it lies in the discernible public revulsion at the level to which politics has sunk, and an increase in the number of voices calling for reform.

Unlike earlier days when malpractices tended to be confirmed only in ex post facto reports by the Elections Commissioner and some non-governmental monitoring groups, the electoral battleground of the Wayamba is daily being visited by activists from across the ideological spectrum who have shown themselves willing to make contemporaneous public statements about what they have seen.

Women's activists in particular, already perturbed at the declining level of female representation in national and local legislative bodies which they all attribute in some degree to the high level of political violence, appear to be moving towards a collective stand on the issue. It is to be hoped that they will not allow their potential for solidarity on this issue to be diluted by any ideological differences they may have on other matters.

Meanwhile we are also seeing the first attempt at an independent professional study of election laws with a view to depoliticising the electoral process. Admittedly the initiative to convene a "citizens' consultation on free and fair elections" came from the United National Party whose own record in regard to elections in the 1980s is now well-known and not inspiring of confidence. However it will be up to the professionals who form the "non-political committee" which has been set up to study the subject, to make meaningful recommendations. Ultimately any proposal should be judged on its own merits and not on the basis of who initiates it.

The UNP proposal of the establishment of an independent three-member Elections Commission is likely to be one of the main items on the agenda. However the recent Supreme Court judgement in the case challenging the Provincial Council Elections (Special Provisions) Bill has strengthened the view that even under present constitutional provisions the Commissioner of Elections has sole authority for the exercise, performance and discharge of the various powers, duties and functions set out in the election laws and that no other authority, not even Parliament through legislation, has a right to interfere with the Commissioner's discretion.

Hence a three-member Commission (copied from India which is of course a much larger and more populous area to administer) may be redundant in this country. One need only recall the fate of the "Commission to Investigate Allegations of Bribery and Corruption" to realise that a three-member commission is not necessarily more effective than one independent public servant with a competent department under him.

Already the Commissioner has displayed a significant initiative in directing Police deployment to protect post offices in Wayamba where polling cards are being stored prior to distribution. Unfortunately this came after the theft of over 4000 cards, and in future it will be necessary for the Commissioner to act to pre-empt malpractices before they occur.

The Supreme Court judgment in the case challenging the result of the 1997 Negombo Municipal Council election records how another well-known malpractice, namely the stuffing of ballot-boxes with bogus votes, can be nullified if there is integrity throughout the Elections Department staff cadre:

"It is the position of the 1st respondent (Commissioner of Elections) that where it was reported that gangs of persons had forcibly entered the polling stations and had forcibly taken ballot papers from the officers, had marked and perforated them and had stuffed them into ballot boxes, he gave specific instructions to the Counting Centre and removed such ballot papers which had not been cast by the registered electors, with reference to he serial numbers given by the Senior Presiding Officers, and thus invalidated and excluded those ballot papers from the count, there by ensuring that only those ballot papers which were validly issued by the elections officers to the registered electors were taken into account at that stage of the count. These averments are supported by the affidavits of the Counting Officers who state that having correctly identified such ballot papers with reference to serial numbers, they were invalidated and excluded from the count in the presence of the Counting Agents who were at the counting centres."

Thus even if politicians are not prepared to mend their ways, an independent Commissioner of Elections and staff, especially if they receive the cooperation of the Police, can thwart many of the malpractices that occur during polling and counting. Public pressure, especially from organized groups and persons of high standing in the community, which we have been witnessing in the Wayamba campaign, is also important.

Having said that however, there is still no justification for politicians who are maintained at considerable public expense and given legislative power over their fellow citizens, to be allowed to carry on their election campaigns as if this country was their private playground. The question of reforming the entire electoral process thus remains relevant and urgent, although the greatest challenge will be to devise a way of putting such reforms in place, given the fact that the legislature that has the power to do it consists of the very people whose conduct the reforms will be designed to curb.

The week that was
Winning of NWPC polls
PA, UNP both brimming with confidence

by Shan Wijetunga
The North Western Provincial Council elections have become a crucial factor for the two main political parties. This is especially true for the People's Alliance because this election would help gauge the standing of the government after four years in office.

If the PA wins this contest it would pave the way for the party to coast through to the other PC elections that will follow. That may be why the President is leading the PA campaign herself.

This time she has not entrusted the election campaign to Gen. Anuruddha Ratwatte as at the earlier local government elections. District leaders operating the campaigns were organised this time by Minister Maithripala Sirisena under the direction of the President.

More powers were entrusted to leaders like D. M. Jayaratne, Dharmasiri Senanayake, Mangala Samaraweera, S. B. Dissanayake and Jeyaraj Fernandopulle. This plug the absence of Gen. Ratwatte in the campaign has provoked a great deal of gossip in political circles.

To the UNP too this election is very important. At the last local government elections the party were badly defeated. If the UNP loses NWP it can be a near fatal body blow.

Opposition and UNP leader Ranil Wickremasinghe launched the NWPC campaign under favourable conditions. The party was better organised than the People's Alliance at the village level through its cluster organisations. Another favourable factor was that NWP had been a UNP stronghold. All these were plus factors which would have tested the PA to the limit.

Visitors to the NWP today will see a sea of blue today with an occasional green flag here and there. The UNP is not trying to make a big campaign show but is concentrating on house-to-house canvassing and small pocket meetings.

The PA, on the other hand is a very visible presence. The countryside and the towns are decked in blue and campaign motorcades and loudspeakers are everywhere. Amidst all the noise and presence of the big guns, the people of the province are getting about their business. They've made up their minds and the polling day will see their verdict.

Much of the headline grabbing incidents of lawlessness and violence have been created by outsiders brought in for the campaigns by the different parties. The voters themselves are not showing their hand.

The UNP believes that the people have made up their minds and if they are allowed to go to the polls unhindered, the result is a foregone conclusion.

The PA is equally confident. And the JVP is carrying out its campaign with minimum fuss hoping that the people's loss of confidence in the two main parties would give it a prize.

The absence of Anura Bandaranaike is very prominent. According to sources from Rosmead Place, Anura is presently in America for medical care.

Minister Mangala Samaraweera told a conference of the media leaders last Tuesday at his ministry that violence in the NWP is not that bad as painted by the media.

The Minister also stated that the media exaggeration of reports of violence in the NWP may make the ordinary people believe there is a war in the NWP. Media personnel said they reported incidents that really took place. If the reports were not true such reports could be contested.

Minister Mahinda Rajapaksa while engaged in the election campaign opened a "Govi Sevana" at Arachchikattuwa in the absence of Minister D. M. Jayaratne also was expected to participate in the opening of the "Govi Sevana".

The minister in his speech criticised the UNP for importing vegetables when it was in power and thus harming local farmer.

A middle aged, a bit intoxicated from the audience asked the minister the difference between this government and the UNP as the government imported vegetables. The minister replied the government was trying to stop importing vegetables. But the questioner insisted that the government continues to import vegetables.

The minister quipped: "Even a drunkard can question a minister of this government. That is the difference."

The minister asked the questioner: "If an intoxicated person like you questioned in this way from a minister of the UNP government what would have happened?"

The man replied: "Gone on tyre pyres."

The minister then said: "That is the difference."

North East war
There is no hope of a solution to the north east war in the near future. For peace the two main political parties should join hands. But the devolution proposals has widened the gulf between the government and the UNP.

The business community continues with its efforts to resolve the war with unity between the government and the UNP.

The businessmen met the government nominees last Sunday at the BMICH, Colombo. The government representatives were Minister of Justice and Constitutional Affairs, Prof. G. L. Peiris, Minister of Port and Rehabilitation, M. H. M. Ashraff, Southern Provincial Governor, Neville Kanakaratne, and Western Provincial Governor Mr. Vignarya. The representatives of the business community were Deshamanya Lalith Kotelawela, Ken Balendra, Nijeel Austin, Lin Fernando, Nihal Abeysekera and Asoka Gunasekera.

Deshamanya Lalith Kotelawela stated it would be necessary to find the areas on which the two parties could not agree on.

Minister Peiris pointed out the three spheres of differences between the government and the UNP, the main one being the "unitary status" issues. The other two areas are alienation of land and devolution of power.

The business community delegates replied they would study the People's Alliance opinions and that of the UNP. Study the two and decide on a workable solution.

The business leaders wanted to know why the agreement between the President and the Leader of the Opposition arrived at through the mediation of former British Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs, Dr. Liam Fox cannot be activated.

Prof. Peiris said it was because discussions with the LTTE can only begin after there is agreement between the government and the UNP on the basic issues.

Minister Ashraff explained the reason why the minority communities cannot agree with the unitary status concept. The meeting ended hoping to meet again on February 3 armed with the views of the UNP on the three areas of their differences with the government. The business leaders also met the UNP delegates Ms. A. C. S. Hameed, Ronnie de Mel, K. N. Choksy and Swaminathan on Tuesday.

After Mr. Lalith Kotelawela explained the stance of the People's Alliance regarding the differences Mr. Hameed informed that the party has empowered them to discuss points that could activate the Liam Fox agreement. He therefore proposed that the business community arrange a meeting between Chandrika Kamaratunga and Ranil Wickremasinghe.

The business community agreed to arrange an unofficial meeting between the two leaders Chandrika Kumaratunga and Ranil Wickremasinghe.

Mr. Kotelawela informed the UNPers that he had learned from reliable sources that the LTTE was willing to hold discussions with the business community. But the UNP representatives doubted the LTTE's willingness to hold discussion.

Cabinet meeting
The cabinet met on Wednesday morning as usual at 'Temple Trees'.

Except for the Prime Minister all the other ministers were present. But as there were only about 25 proposals for cabinet sanctions the meeting was over in about 45 minutes time.

After the cabinet meeting Ministers Jeyaraj Fernandopulle, Mangala Samaraweera, D. M. Jayaratne, Dharmasiri Senanayake, S. B. Dissanayake, Maithripala Sirisena and Kingsley Wickramaratne stayed back on instructions of the President.

The President met the ministers at about 11.00 a.m. and discussed the election propaganda campaign.

The President after reviewing the progress of the propaganda campaign expressed her satisfaction while pointing out certain shortcomings.

Wayamba elections and party discipline

by Kusal Perera
About a week ago, while at a workshop in Kalutara, a friend of mine who is very good at making jokes on others, suddenly pointed at an elderly tourist who was bald in his head and was limping on his right leg and said, "there, he has also gone to Wayamba". All of us had a hearty laugh. Then a few days later on 14th of this month, 'The Island' carried a headlined coverage of elections related political violence in the Wayamba Province. The coverage included astronomical figures of reported violence with 02 attempted murders by shooting, 15 incidents of shooting '83 assaults and 89 threats and intimidations among others. Could we still laugh ?

Of all political violence in Wayamba, the worst reports come from Anamaduwa. A Deputy Minister from Puttlam district had gone on record accepting that their own PA MP, the Organiser of Anamaduwa is to be blamed for all the violence there and that he is spoiling the name of the government. The other stunning revelation was by a PA nominee from the Puttlam district itself, who claimed that even the PA candidates are not allowed to campaign for the PC elections by this same PA MP for Puttlam district, for he wants his wife, his brother-in-law and another relation elected to the PC from the Puttlam district.

The other campaign leaders in the Puttlam district from the UNP and the JVP had strings of allegations against the PA, mainly focused on this same MP, on assault, arson, thuggery, threats on lives and intimidation. Thus the picture is very or extremely clear as to how the election campaign is set by the PA provincial leaders, who are creating mayhem, in the name of free and fair elections.

The situation in the Kurunegala district is no better from reports given by the independent election monitoring body, the PAFFREL. There too, day in and day out, reports on assault, thuggery and intimidation committed by the PA are filed in the news media far in excess to those by the UNP. In Kurunegala, the worst area is recorded to be Mawathagama.

While allegations and counter allegations are shouted out against each other, Sunday newspapers reported that all Chief Ministerial aspirants of contesting parties, including those of the PA and the UNP, had signed a joint pledge to maintain a conflict free election and to ensure peace after elections results are declared. Added to this, there was ample publicity given to parliamentary back benchers from both sides of the House, who have formed a Joint Committee to maintain peace so as to allow free and fair elections. It was reported that this Joint Committee of Parliamentary back benchers would have two-member supervising cells for every constituency, consisting of PA and UNP Members of Parliament to curb illegal electioneering.

Quite recently, one FM radio station started advertising a spot against political violence and there were media statements under different labels like "Campaign Against Political Violence, Free Media Movement" etc., also against election violence in Wayamba. There had never been campaigns so hyped like this one now in Wayamba, to monitor and maintain a peaceful election, ever before in our history. And then, how could political violence escalate with all these campaigns against political violence in Wayamba? Are these different groups and MPs just making news reports not doing anything? Or, are they mere pawns who are not tall enough to tell party leaders plain and clearly that this bloody "election thuggery" should be stopped ? It certainly should be all this and more, while the poor voter is dragged through suspense, fear and insecurity, in the name of "democracy, justice and fairplay".

Of all these anti violence formations the strongest should be the collective of back benchers. And some of the back benchers may have a conscience pricking them, asking them to intervene against violence. But they also have to live in a political culture, where the party leader and a few faithfuls decide on their next "lease on parliamentary life ". And then again, they are totally dependent on Cabinet Ministers to deliver at least tit bits to their electorates and to their supporters. The Ministers, some of whom are closest to the highest power are overseeing the election campaign including that of Anamaduwa. And within that political soup, all of them together, wants to lick another round of political power, the back benchers also competing for higher positions, at the next hustings. So, who would want to talk "justice, fairplay and democracy" to face defeat?

We have far out lived the era of "sincere and humble" politics. An era when politicians travelled in 3rd class railway wagons, along with unconcerned ordinary commuters. When politics was only honorary work and the politician was answerable to his constituency. An era when they had to "nurse" their constituency, at the expense of their inherited wealth or hard earned money. And those politicians are no more, except may be for a maverick or two like Vasudeva. Yes, we have certainly moved in to a more robust and ruthless political era, where a political candidate would readily spend a couple of millions of rupees within a month of electioneering, to "capture" political power. Would hire the support of goon squads to compel voting for him. Thus one simple question that needs to be answered by these politicians publicly is, " why should one spend millions of rupees, face threats to life and limb and also break others limbs, intimidate a whole constituency, just to serve the people ? "

This I dare say, will not be answered by any politician and it seems, no political party would work within their own organisations to curtail discipline that would be the ultimate guarantee for peace and fairplay in society. Take for instance the case of now almost proven Anamaduwa violence. How does the PA react to it ? Would violence stop by saying that the infamous Udugampola is on opposition platforms ? What would be the answer, if another points at the position that Udugampola's most trusted Deputy now holds ? That is only rhetoric and justifies violence and nothing less. Take the case of the government back bencher who is leading the free and fair election campaign, running about in a vehicle without number plates. Allowing vehicles without number plates to roam freely, in itself is ruthless intimidation of the ordinary people, within our political culture, which had enough of it in the recent past. All these were not designed by the PA to stop violence but to place excuses for public consumption. And sad to say, may not be gimmicks that would bring in votes.

What the PA could have done to beef up their lost credibility, was to keep the Dasanayakes totally out of the picture. Out of seeking nominations too. Instead, the PA had given nominations to the wife and a relation of a suspect. Suspected not once but 38 times and yet to prove his innocence in the Courts of law. Having shown their arrogance and their lack of concern for political decency, the PA can not tell] the public that they are allowing the law to take its course. Law is some thing that would never play fair, when the Police are also pressurised with political threats. When Officers are made to understand, there is a route to an unending war, if they don't comply.

If there is a commitment for peace and fairplay, the PA leadership, need not wait for the law to take its normal course. They on their own have a responsibility to instill discipline within their own ranks. The PA General Secretary can, without any limits or restrictions take disciplinary action against any MP when there are very public and blatant charges made against a MP. The first action of suspending a MP from his party membership does not require proven guilt. But it requires a total commitment for maintaining party discipline, by the party leadership. A commitment that would have to be clearly exhibited in public. It would mean, at least in this instance. The PA taking very strict disciplinary action against the Anamaduwa culprit, with no hesitations and no delays. Will it happen ?

This Wayamba election, should not be counted on to find who is the most popular, for that is a futile attempt, whoever wins the elections, on what the Election Commissioner declares. But this election should be used to judge the commitment of the Party Leaders in maintaining discipline within their own parties. To see whether they would take disciplinary action and sack all and every thug in their fold.

Collecting figures and keeping records is good enough and is necessary. But what is of paramount importance right now is hard discipline in these political parties. Thus it is expulsion of thugs from the membership of political parties, whether MPs or Cabinet Ministers, that all Campaigning groups and organisations for Free and Fair Elections should strongly demand for. That I think is their first duty at this Wayamba elections.

p
UNSCOM - Weapons inspectors or spies?

by Dr. Stanley Kalpage
Iraq had always charged that the United Nations Special Commission (UNSCOM), currently chaired by Australian diplomat Richard Butler, was nothing but a tool of the United States. Iraq accused UNSCOM of spying on the Iraqi security establishment with the avowed objective of destabilising and ultimately overthrowing the regime of Saddam Hussein. There was no evidence to substantiate this allegation even though the US had not concealed its hostility towards Iraq describing it contemptuously as a'rogue state'.

Frustrated with the failure to remove the Iraqi president when the victorious UN coalition forces swept Saddam's troops back from Kuwait in February 1991, the US has not disguised its antipathy towards Saddam Hussein. Nevertheless, the allegations made in certain US newspapers against UNSCOM, and particularly its aggressive and outspoken chairman, Richard Butler, came as a surprise.

On 6 December a controversy arose on the alleged spying role of UNSCOM. This was triggered by a damaging report in the Washington Post which claimed that Butler's inspection teams had helped to collect sensitive Iraqi communications for the United States. UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan was reported to have had evidence implicating UNSCOM teams of helping the United States in its designs to undermine the Iraqi government.

The Washington Post report claimed that an aide to Kofi Annan had leaked the story about the close association of the UNSCOM with the United States but it was not clear whether Annan himself had been directly responsible for the leak. Other newspapers like the New York Times and the Boston Globe also published similar reports.

Kofi Annan's reaction
Secretary General Kofi Annan's aides responded but the responses were inconsistent and ambivalent. The Washington Post quoted unnamed confidants close to Annan as saying that the UN Secretary General was convinced that Washington used the eavesdropping operation to penetrate the security apparatus protecting the Iraqi president.

"The Secretary General has become aware of the fact that UNSCOM directly facilitated the creation of an intelligence collection system for the United States in violation of its mandate," said one unidentified Annan adviser. "The United Nations cannot be party to an operation to overthrow one of its member states. In the most fundamental way, that is what's wrong with the UNSCOM operation".

Annan himself was reported to have been displeased with Butler's actions in helping the US to destabilise Saddam Hussein. It will be recalled that Annan had secured an agreement with Saddam Hussein early in 1998 to prevent threatened US air attacks on Iraq. He had wanted to replace Butler with someone less aggressive and more amenable to the wishes of the members of the Security Council other than the United States and the United Kingdom. Evidently these members felt that the UN sanctions on Iraq can never be lifted as long as Butler was in charge of the weapons inspections.

Despite all this, an official spokesman tried subsequently to get the Secretary General out of the controversy by saying that UNSCOM was a subsidiary organ of the Security Council and that the Secretary General had "no operational oversight" for its activities and therefore had "no detailed information of its day-to-day operations."

Richard Butler's denials
UNSCOM chairman, Richard Butler, stoutly denied that allegations of helping the United States in its intelligence gathering operations but admitted that a number of countries including the United States had helped UNSCOM in its fact-finding role in Iraq. Butler said he wanted US officials themselves to clarify whether "some other collection efforts or piggybacking on us may have been taking place. We don't want our system misused in that way."

Butler continued to defend UNSCOM against speculation that it was defunct in the wake of US and British airstrikes on Iraq in December. "As far as I am concerned," said Butler, "I have always been assiduous in insisting that any assistance given to us be strictly related to our disarmament mandate. I have never approved of any assistance to any member state which would serve their unilateral purpose."

US responses
When the controversy broke, White House spokesmen refused at first to comment on "intelligence matters," noting only that the United States was one of the member states in the United Nations providing support to the UN arms inspectors in Iraq.

Later, by way of explanation of the US role, an anonymous Clinton administration official told the Washington Post, "We've already established that Saddam's personal security apparatus and the apparatus that conceals weapons of mass destruction are one and the same ... distinguishing between them would be impossible for intelligence-gathering efforts." The CIA and the State Department were strangely silent.

Ultimately, US sources admitted that the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) did help UNSCOM, at its request, to eavesdrop electronically on officers of units of the special Republican Guard assigned by Saddam Hussein to both conceal his weapons programs and provide for the Iraqi leader's personal security.

UNSCOM - UN inspection force or US puppet?
What was not clear in the denials and explanations which flooded the media was whether the eavesdropping was aimed in part at helping the inspectors hunt down for forbidden weapons, or the means to conceal them. It would appear that Annan was convinced that Washington used the operation to penetrate the security apparatus protecting the Iraqi president.

The Washington Post quoted one Annan adviser as saying; "The Secretary-General has become aware of the fact that UNSCOM directly facilitated the creation of an intelligence collection system for the United States in violation of its mandate,"

Some observers went to the extent of accusing Butler of violating Article 100 of the UN Charter which states: "In the performance of their duties the Secretary General and the staff shall not seek or receive instructions from any government or from any other authority external to the Organisation. They shall refrain from any action which might reflect on their position as international officials responsible only to the organisation."

Scott Ritter
The leader in the hunt for Iraq's forbidden weapons since 1991 was US ex-marine Scott Ritter (37), once an active member of the UNSCOM. He had devised the intricate system to locate the deadly and sensitive weapons that Saddam is alleged to have hidden.

In fact, Richard Butler had put Ritter in charge of a new Special Investigation Unit, re-packaging the team Ritter already ran, and had given his blessing for Ritter to continue his work.

Ritter believed passionately that, to complete its mandate of depriving Iraq a biological and chemical weapons arsenal and a nuclear program, UNSCOM would have to pierce what Ritter dubbed "the concealment mechanism" of the Baghdad regime. But, subsequently, dissatisfied with US policy towards UNSCOM, Ritter resigned on 26 August 1998. He became an instant celebrity, sought after by congressional Republicans and talk-show hosts.

Ritter became a sharp critic of US policy in Iraq . In fact, Secretary of State Madeleine K. Albright had charged that Ritter "doesn't have a clue" about the broader horizons of American policy, and she speculated privately that he must be planning to run for office like Oliver North. His former boss, Richard Butler, accused Ritter of "unspecified errors of fact and of breaking the law by revealing confidential UNSCOM data."

The confusion in US policy was evident. Assistant Secretary of State Martin Indyk, testifying before a congressional committee said: "Unfortunately, if UNSCOM is to succeed, it must among other things, both be, and be perceived to be, independent." He sought to dismiss Ritter's criticism by saying "it is ironic that Scott Ritter and Saddam Hussein both argue that UNSCOM's independence is being compromised by the United States."

Future of UNSCOM
It is quite clear that UNSCOM in its present form will not be able to go back to Iraq. Even Richard Butler agrees that UNSCOM will have to be "modernised". Of course, Butler does not contemplate resigning; nor would his US backers want him to do so immediately. Denying any wrong-doing, Butler says: "The idea that somehow this whole mega-crisis with Iraq could be solved by giving my head on a plate to the Iraqis is just not serious."

Keeping tabs on Iraq with surveillance flights and other intelligence-gathering measures would be more difficult if the UNSCOM, set up at the end to the Persian gulf war in 1991, were dissolved or sharply curtailed and these overflights may then have to be abandoned. Butler has, infact, announced that US surveillance flights over Iraq would be suspended until the Security Council discussions on the crisis had ended.

It is time that the United Nations took up the whole question of dealing with the situation in Iraq. The Security Council will have to come up with a solution acceptable to all its permanent members, the majority of whom favour the speedy completion of the weapons inspections and the early lifting of the economic sanctions imposed on Iraq, now in force for almost eight years. The way out of the impasse may be the creation of a new inspection system and ways to monitor money that Iraq would earn if it sold oil freely.

Upali Ranjith alias 'Soththi Upali': a Post Script

by Hemantha Warnakulasuriya
Operation "Thaththa' is over. Upali was shot dead, the bullet piercing his forehead. A few days later 'Kaduwela Wasantha' (one of Upali's many enemies,) his brother, his colleague and three wheeler driver were shot dead. The killers did not have the patience even to leave the innocent driver alive. It was a typical underworld killing. But the manner in which Upali was killed, the well planned operation, where the details had been very carefully mapped out and executed with precision and consummate skill, shows that it was done by a rival gang, they are experts at the job.

With the underworld reigning supreme and killing at will it would be interesting to make a scientific study of the socio-economic background of the underworld and find out what makes people take to a life of crime. It would be interesting to begin the study by probing deep into the psychosis of persons like 'Upali' and inquire into and make a scientific study of the underworld and the criminal elements.

Was 'Upali' a underworld gang leader as he was portrayed? Was there evidence that he was involved in heroin trafficking or selling? Was there evidence that he was involved in illicit liquor gambling or large scale organised prostitution? Upali severely denies all these allegations. Did he have sterling human qualities severely wanting amongst those who portray him as an unrepentant killer?

Yet the facet of his character that interested me was the honour with which he conducted his other affairs. When any other human being would have crumpled with the kind of mental and physical torture indicted on him, being framed for every imaginable crime and assassination, being portrayed as a killer and mobster who had more power and arms even than the LTTE and kept in confinement and in remand without any hope of being released would have made most mere mortals a psychological wreck.

He not only refused to submit himself to the overtures made by the authorities to confess to the involvement of leading political figures to a crime which was concocted to harm the political opponents of the government, similarly he resisted the pressures of others to hand over the documents, which were in his possession which would have intensely embarrassed the government.

I wonder whether it was these qualities in the wretched of the earth that drew most of the Marxist oriented French philosophers to embrace them as persons who would one day deliver a total revolution.

The revolutionary French writer Frantz Fanon who ignited the student upheaval in the sixties, exposed the shamelessness of the bourgeoisie and equally disrespected the greed and politicking of the comprador bourgeoisie and espoused that the commitment of the wretched of the earth consisting of criminal elements, the peasants, fishermen and other low classes, and said they have more moral dignity and would not compromise or subvert the truth for greed or gain. He said that these elements should be the vanguard of the total revolution, if it should have any success.

What draws intellectuals of the calibre of Jean Genet to petty thieves, homosexuals, prostitutes, criminal elements and even to beggars and prefers them to the so-called gentlemen? It is because even when Genet was at the Mettray penitentiary in France he soon learnt that it was a place of hard labour, the inmates had a code of love, honour, and justice which was devoid of the pseudo honour found amongst the higher classes, and these codes were enforced by the inmates in a just manner.

Genet found that these elements professed much more honour than the middle and upper class 'gentlemen' where nothing was too big or sordid to be scarificed for one's gain. Is it these revelations that made Jean Paul Sartre write a book about Genet naming it 'Saint Genet' and canonising him.

Upali belonged to the wretched of the earth. He may have found favour with Fanon. Genet, Sartre and a host of other French philosophers and intellectuals for his unremitting principle and the stand he took towards honouring the truth, and nothing but the truth.

I have with me an affidavit tendered to court and a copy of which was sent to the Chief Justice, where the name of all the political figures the investigation unit of the Lalith Athulathmudali Commission wanted Upali to implicate in his statement. The list is much longer than I had remembered. It included not only the names of Mr. Ranil Wickramasinghe, Mr. Sirisena Cooray, Mr. Weerasinghe Mallimarachchi and U. L. Seneviratne but also of following names. Mr. Gamini Lokuge, the present M.P. for Colombo District, that late K. B. Christy Perera, former Chairman of the Western Provincial Council, Mr. K. H. J. Wijeyadasa former Secretary to President Premadasa, Mr. M. H. Maharoof, the present UNP organiser for Colombo Central and Mr. T. M. Sangadasa, former MMC. Colombo.

The main evidence against Upali Ranjith which implicated him with the assassination of the Late Lalith Athulathmudali came from a witness called Subash Abeysekera. Subash Abeysekera, testified at the commission that he knew Upali from the age of 7 or 8 years and joined Upali when the was 12 years old as one of his 'golayas'. According to his evidence Sotthi Upali used Subash and a number of other aged 12 to 13 years to kill Upali's enemies.

According to Subash he was the closest confidante of Upali. He lived with him at Gothami Road from 1984 until Upali left the Housing Scheme at Gothami Road after the assassination of Lalith Athulathmudali. Upali kept an innocent Tamil boy, who was later identified as Ragunathan at the Gothami Road flat and he ordered Subash to keep watch and guard over Ragunathan. The plot was so fantastic that even the Scotland Yard detectives were misled by the complex and intricate conspiracy.

Ragunathan was chosen as he looked like Janaka Priyankara Jayamanme the hired assassin according to the commission. Janaka Priyankara Jayamanne allegedly shot at Athulathmudali and escaped from the scene of offence without being apprehended by anyone. Later, as planned by the conspirators, at the residence of Mr. Sirisena Cooray, Ragunathan was killed and his body was dumped at Mugalan Road to hoodwink the masses that he was the assassin of Lalith Athulathmudali, and to accuse the LTTE. When Subash gave evidence on the very first day he refused to disclose his identity though his evidence was given the fullest media coverage. Later his identity was revealed.

When I met Jayamanne and Upali at the remand prison neither of them had any clue to who this mysterious Subash Abeysekera was.

As Upali did not have resources to retain a lawyer, the evidence given by Subash against Upali went un-contradicted. In November, 1996 Upali decided to personally appear and cross-examine witnesses who had given evidence against him. He wrote to the Commission requesting an opportunity to do so. On 16th January, 1997, the Commission wrote to Upali and stated that he has refused to answer questions and appear at the office of the Commission, and refused to make a statement to the Commission.

Officers of the Commission had to visit him personally in remand jail and this action has hampered the investigations of the Commission. At various times the Commission complained that Upali had made statements in court which were derogatory and disrespectful of the Commission. When Upali was brought to the Commission he was not given advance notice that he was to cross examine his main adversary, Subash Abeysekera. In fact Upali did not know why he was brought before the Commission on that day.

The evidence of Subash was recorded before the Commission on several dates and the proceedings ran to a couple of hundred pages. Even Sir Edward Marshall Hall would have found it impossible to cross-examine a witness who had given evidence on several days without a single page of the proceedings being made available to him. Upali was brought in and he was told that a witness would be brought before the Commission and he has to cross examine him. Upali never bargained for it.

He had told me that he had been in hospital suffering from acute diabetes nearly getting into a coma. His life was saved due to the kindness of the doctors at the Ragama Hospital. He told me that he has not recovered fully from diabetes and was feeling extremely weak. When the Commission announced that the witness would be brought in Upali wanted an adjournment on the ground that he was not well and weak. The Commission rejected his application.

Then something startling happened. The Commission ordered all the press reporters to leave the Commission. the press which had till then reported the proceedings of The commission gave the fullest publicity of the proceeding which was believed by the credulous public. There must have never been such sensationalism on print as these proceedings.

My juniors and I who were present were puzzled by the attitude of the Commission. Did the Commission believe that the kind of propaganda that had been churned by witnesses that had made a larger than life satanic image of Upali would be ruined by the theatrics of Upali. Or did they expect Upali to unleash a torrent of abuse against the Commission and the witnesses? Or did they expect something extraordinary would happen when Subash meets Upali in the witness box?

When Upali cross-examined Subash and eliccted some answers which clearly proved that Subash Abeysekera was an inveterate liar, worthy of no credit. Upali only had some knowledge of the evidence that had been led of Subash which appeared in the daily newspapers. As an inmate of the remand

prison he had only a few minutes during his leisure to read the evidence as published in the media. It was necessary therefore to cross-examine Subash and establish that far from keeping watch over Ragunathan before he was killed at Gothami Road, he never set foot in the Gothami Road Housing Scheme.

Upali told me that he had information that the Commission had employed a video camera crew to video tape the flats and the vicinity. One of the first few questions put by Upali to Subash was whether he had noticed an important landmark in front of his house. Upali knew that Subash would not have noticed this from the video film. He knew that he would have noticed only a few trees and the garden and would not have noticed the guava tree in front of his house.

As expected Subash could not give an answer. Then Upali asked Subash whether he noticed anything peculiar when he entered his house which came out distinctly and differentiated his house from the rest of the flats. Subash could not answer. Upali said that his house and the concrete ceiling are all painted in green.

Then Upali asked about the flight of stairs in the flat, whether they were in front, middle or in the rear of the flat, Subash said the flight of stairs was from the verandah, which is the usual place where the flight of steps are situated in Government flats. But Upali said that in this flat the flight of stairs was at the rear of the house close to the kitchen.

Then Upali asked about the cartoonist Younus who according to Subash was stabbed by Upali. If Subash was living with Upali from the time he moved to Gothami Road, he should have known the intimate details of this incident which was given the widest possible publicity when it occurred.

Younus was a famous cartoonist working for the Attha newspaper who had been very critical of the then Government. Younus was a cartoonist of a rare breed and was able to convey political messages through brilliant drawings. It was President Premadasa who had given Yoonus a flat at Gothami Road. It was being said at that time that Upali stabbed Yoonus at the behest of President Premadasa as Yoonus continued in the same vein though he was a recipient of a flat by President Premadasa.

This incident was used by the then opposition to get maximum political mileage. But as soon as Upali questioned Subash whether he knew Yoonus Subash retorted and stated with glee that it was Upali who stabbed Yoonus. Then Upali turned round and asked whether he know where Yoonus stayed Subash who may not have had any prior information or coaching about the place of residence of Yoonus said that he did not know of the residence of Yoonus.

Then Upali suggested that Yoonus was staying at a very special place in relation to his house. I, for a moment thought that Upali had messed up any asked an unwanted question, due to the lack of any skill in cross examination. I thought the question asked by Upali gave the witness an opportunity to guess and if the witness guessed correctly the fate of Upali would have been sealed.

On the other hand, if the witness was telling the truth and he had been living with Upali as deposed by him, he would without batting an cyclelid say that Younus stayed next to Upali's flat. But to the amazement of every one present Subash said I do not know.

Question by Upali: Younus stayed next to my flat?

Answer by Subash: I do not know such a thing.

Question by Upali: I suggest to you that you have never gone to Gothami Road?

Answer by Subash: No answer.

If the answers given by 'Subash' in response to the questions put to him by Upali were investigated by the Commission it would have clearly shown the degree of decetion practised by 'Subash' on every one. But with the investigation the entire theory of the assassination of Lalith Athulathmudali as put forward by the Commission would have collapsed.

When Upali Ranjith was in remand and the government media with the evidence that was being revealed before the commission created an unimaginable monster of Upali, the propaganda blitz was directed at the UNP, for having such a monster in their ranks. At that time an investigative journalist got wind of this information.

Though the government was trying blow the pants of the UNP for its alleged association with Upali, but Chndrika Kumaratunga the head of the government had gone to the extent of signing a bond as the guarantor of Upali for a finance he obtained from a finance company. It was only some vague information and no one believed the truth of this information. On the information available after carefully verifying from other independent sources the scoop was published.

After the publication several important persons tried to obtain the documents relating to the hire purchase agreement and summons issued by the District Court on the partieas s defendants in a money claim.

When I met Upali in Court and in remand I asked him about his transaction. What he told me reveals another aspect of his character which had been hidden in a mass of misinformation. Upali told me that it was his brother Indare, who was responsible for this transaction. Indare was the most sought after bodyguard of Colombo based politicians after the demise of Ossie Corea. As much as Ossie Corea claimed that he was the bodyguard of Mr. Dudley Senanayake, Indare was one of the body-guards of Mr. J. R. Jayewardene before he won the landslide victory at the general elections of 1977.

Mr. Jayewardene went round the country in one of the Cadillacs given to him by Mr. I. M. Perera, an owner of a Finance Company and Indare was always seen in a jeep in front of the Cadillac. Later Indare shifted his allegiance to Mrs. Sirimavo Bandaranaike when she was out of power. When the SLFP split and Vijaya Kumaratunga was about to breakaway, it was Indare and Premadasa alias (Ganda Preme) of Maradana who kept vigil and provided security to Vijaya, when Vijaya was under constant threat from the SLFP.

During this time, Indare's brother Upali entered politics supporting the UNP and as a contractor to lay turf he wanted to purchase a vehicle on finance. During this time it was lndare who had requested Vijaya Kumaratunga to help his brother Upali to obtain finance from a finance company. Vijaya had spoken to Chanaka Amaratunga who had some connections with the Rupee Finance Company and the finance was arranged but the question was finding a suitable guarantor.

Then Vijaya had persuaded his wife Chandrika to sign as a guarantor as both of them knew what a loyal supporter lndare had been when they were in a crisis. I asked Upali why he was refusing to given the documents relating to the financial deal. He said that Indare was murdered because they could not find me. I knew how loyal he was to Vijaya Kumaratunga. My brother had even tried his best to get me to support Vijaya as he felt that Vijaya was a sincere friend to his supporters and would not use them and discard them as most 'mahattayas' do.

Though I was in the UNP and an active supporter in the Colombo South electorate I could not get any 'mahattaya' to even recommend me to a finance company leave alone one of them to be my guarantor. Therefore, how can I betray my brother or his friend Vijaya Kumaratunga? I am sure if I give these details the media would try to use this material politically against the President. I for one will not be a party to such a thing.

Later Upali made statement in the High Court and stated about the transaction. I asked him what made him to change his mind. He said by that time the incident has been published in various newspapers and none seem to believe the story and some have got the impression that I am trying to defame the President by creating a fanciful story. I never gave this information to anyone not even to my wife, but it was published in the newspapers.

I said this in Court, to show that what was published was not what I have created to defame the President. If what I said was untrue then the Commission or Court can charge me for perjury. If the newspapers did not publish it, this whole episode would be buried with me.

Upali's character was indeed complex and reminded me of the 'Anti Hero' concept so well developed into cinema by James Dean. When I think of him I remember Genet. "I am drawn to peoples in revolt. And this is very natural for me, because I myself have the need to call the whole of society into question."

Ending bheeshanaya not a PA achievement

by S. R. Abeywardena
This essay is in response to the bare-faced lies uttered from time to time about Bheeshanaya (terror) and who was responsible for its spread. During the election campaign prior to the General and Presidential election of 1994 and ever since up to the present day, People's Alliance politicians led by President Chandrika Kumaratunga herself have repeatedly accused the United National Party for the terror or bheeshanaya that gripped Sri Lanka especially during 1987-89. It is also the PA's position that this bheeshanaya ended no sooner the PA Government assumed power in 1994.

The second JVP insurrection, which was more violent than the first which erupted in 1971 when Mrs. Sirimavo Bandaranaike was Prime Minister, occurred during 1987-1989. In fact the island-wide bheeshanaya of the type that occurred in 1971 was introduced for the first time to this country only in 1971 by the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna headed by Rohana Wijeweera and his Marxist extremists that included Athula Nimalasiri Jayasinghe alias Loku Athula, Mahinda Wijesekera, Podi Athula alias Victor Ivan, Jayadeva Uyangoda, Somawansa Amarasinghe, Gamanayake and others.

After launching the "Revolution" on April 5th 1971, the JVP ordered its activists that they should attack the residence of the Prime Minister, capture her and bring her dead or alive to Campbell Park on the night of April 6th, 1971. Fortunately, Government received prior information and the sinister plan of the JVP was thwarted. ( For further details, see Rohan Gunaratne: A Lost Revolution p.95). The United Front Government under the Premiership of Mrs. Sirimavo Bandaranaike ruthlessly suppressed the insurrection.

In Appendix III of his book "Insurgency 1971", Justice A C. Alles (former Judge of the Supreme Court states: ~ Some of those arrested may not have been insurgents or were probably on the periphery of the insurgent movement or may have been falsely implicated by their enemies. Accounts from reliable sources indicate that many of these suspected insurgents were summarily shot by a panic stricken police and their bodies burnt on pyres consisting of old rubber tyres impregnated with diesel oil, thereby preventing any kind of identification.. Bodies have been seen floating down the Kelani, Gin Ganga and other rivers.

Rene Dumont who was in the country at the time observes that the police who had killed active or suspected insurgents, let the bodies float downstream in order to terrorise the people. Rohana Wijeweera in a statement from prison in 1972, has stated that 15,000 revolutionaries had been killed, but twice that number of innocent persons had also died. It will be, therefore, seen that tyre pyres with which President Kumaratunga and her followers day in and day out castigate the UNP, was the order of the day even during her mother's premiership. And when the lawfully constituted government of Mrs. Sirimavo Bandaranaike was on the brink of being toppled in 1971, all possible steps within her command were taken by her to bring that very grave situation under control and the main UNP Opposition extended to Mrs. Bandaranaike and her Government all the co-operation and assistance to bring about law and order.

Mr. J. R. Jayewardene stated in Parliament that the UNP placed itself solidly behind the Prime Minister and her government, not only in the House but also outside it when the JVP insurrection broke out in April 1971. Jayewardene pledged his whole-hearted support to the government to deal with the insurrection. ( A C. Alles: Insurgency 1971 p.212). Despite such public spiritedness and the ability to rise above partisan politics on the part of J. .R Jayewardene unreservedly strengthening the hand of Prime Minister Sirimavo Bandaranaike in her hour of grave danger (JVP planned to arrest her "dead or alive~), it is unbelievable that on her government's orders Jayewardene's son Ravi was arrested and imprisoned on the alleged grounds that he was a JVP supporter. And now thirty years later her daughter, the incumbent President, says that J. R Jayewardene did not have great qualities and is no great statesman, (See The Island 4-1-99) but for whose Constitution, which sagaciously has stipulated a two-thirds majority for all major amendments and not a simple majority, President Kumaratunga would have gone home long ago. What price gratitude!

At this point it is also useful to inquire why the JVP which canvassed for the SLFP during the run-up to the 1970 General Elections, attempted to topple the very Government which it helped to be elected to power, just one year after being so elected. Before answering that question,, a brief account of JVP canvassing on behalf of the SLFP may be relevant so that the hitherto uninformed general public would no longer be taken for a ride by PA liars. One of the earliest instances of SLFP-JVP collaboration can be traced to the run-up to the Parliamentary General Elections of 1970. When the date of the elections, 27th May 1970 was announced, Rohana Wijeweera issued a notice in the name of the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna calling the anti-imperialistic patriotic people to expel the unpatriotic UNP. The notice further stated that the UNP planned to remain in power by creating a security situation and then to postpone elections. If not, the UNP hoped to win the election by deceit corruption or terror. The notice appealed to the masses to organize themselves, to arm themselves and if an election is to be held to defeat the UNP by voting for the United Front". (See Rohan Gunaratne: Sri Lanka: A Lost Revolution at p.82). This position is confirmed by another analyst, C.A Chandraprema who writes: "The JVP proclaimed that the UNP was going to form a dictatorship and put out a statement asking all democratic and peace-loving people to support the UF (United Front) at the May 1970 elections.

Many young JVP activists worked for SLFP candidates in various parts of the country. Hence the 1970 May general elections created a certain amount of fellow-feeling between the JVP and the UF. The UF, for its part, made good use of the anti-dictatorship hysteria of the JVP for its own political mileage." (See C. A. Chandraprema: Sri Lanka: The Years of Terror - The JVP Insurrection 1987-1989). It is quite apparent that the Bheeshanaya Dooshanaya propaganda ploy which the UF, in collaboration with the JVP used during the run up to the May 1970 General Election was similarly used by the People's Alliance, again in collaboration with the JVP, during the run-up to the Parliamentary General and Presidential Elections of 1994.

The main reason given by the JVP for rising against the UF Government for which it so ardently canvassed throughout the country, was that the SLFP/UF had come to power, giving false promises and had been inactive for one year after assumption of office. During the 1982 May Day rallies, Nandana Bandara, President of the Wariyapola electorate Balakaya of the JVP, in his address stated: The SLFP gave false promises to win the general election of 1970 and did not deliver the goods during their term of office up to 1977. I, therefore, joined the JVP to serve the people." (See Rohan Gunaratne : A Lost Revolution at p. 72). Strangely the general criticism levelled against the present People's Alliance (PA) government which too was elected to power with the active support of the JVP is that the PA has come to power giving false promises turning its 1994 Manifesto into a legendary "Gajabinna Alankaaraya~ of modern times. Apparently history has repeated itself with a vengeance even after seventeen years as far as UF/PA/SLFP electioneering tactics and governance are concerned.

Interestingly, Rohana Wijeweera writing in the JVP publication "Ginipupura" states: The first Republican Constitution of Sri Lanka enacted by the then Coalition Government of the SLFP, LSSP, and CP on 22nd July 1972 was the most repressive in the history of this country" And referring to the period of the April 1971 insurgency, Rohana Wijeweera, addressing a rally at Panadura in May 1972, alleged that the LSSP with the CP and the SLFP (UF) tortured to death thousands of innocent youths of this country and imprisoned several thousands of others treating them in the most inhuman manner with the assistance of the armed forces." (See Rohan Gunaratne: A Lost Revolution pp 70-75).

If the PA supporters accuse the UNP of unleashing Bheeshanaya from 1987 up to 1994 then they should look back and also accuse the UF Government under Mrs. Sirimavo Bandaranaike of unleashing Bheeshanaya from 1971 April. As a matter of fact the Opposition UNP at that time not only supported Mrs. Sirimavo Bandaranaike in the counter-subversive measures she took, but did not appoint any Presidential Commissions of Inquiry to inquire into the rights and wrongs of such measures when the UNP was elected to power in 1977, unlike her daughter who has now appointed Presidential Commissions of Inquiry into involuntary disappearawes of some persons but not all persons during the previous regime.

In 1971, long lists of counter-revolutionaries were prepared by the JVP and the order had gone to kill all of them after state power was captured. Ditches were to be dug alongside roads to dump the dead bodies. Had that uprising succeeded, we would have experienced what the Kampucheans went through under Pol Pot during 1972-1975 (C. A Chandraprema: Sri Lanka: The Years of Terror: The JVP Insurrection 1987-1989 at pp 37 and 45)

Having failed to capture state power unlawfully at its first attempt in April 1971, the JVP launched its second so-called "revolution" in 1987. The scale and magnitude of terror-bheeshanaya-spread islandwide by the JVP was quite unlike the situation prevalent in 1971 and unprecedented. Unlike in the 1971 period, the JVP deliberately recruited to its cadres underworld contract killers like Adiris Costa and Lionel Ranasinghe to carry out murders during the 1987-89 period. And in unleashing its second phase of bheesahanaya the JVP made the elimination of political opponents an integral part of its plan to capture state power instead of once again waiting till power was captured to do so. Terror was unleashed on July 28th 1987, just the day before the signing of the Indo-Lanka Peace Accord to combat the LTTE.

The JVP which had consistently condemned Indian expansionism was unfuriated when President J. R.. Jayewardene had agreed to sign the Accord on July 29th. On 28th July 1987, the JVP, the SLFP, MEP and several other organisations launched mob violence within the city of Colombo and despite a curfew being imposed, the violence spread to Matara, Galle, Hambantota, Kalutara, Kandy, Ratnapura and Polonnaruwa. To a large extent the SLFP and the MEP crowds were manipulated by the JVP.

Between July 28th and August 2nd 1987, some 2527 incidents of violence were caused, sixteen persons were murdered, forty injured, 529 government and state corporation buildings and 1005 vehicles were damaged (For further details, see Rohan Gunaratna: Sri Lanka: A Lost Revolution pp 234-237) Rohan Gunaratne makes a further important observation that " thereafter violence in Sri Lanka never died down. It was only the beginning. Throughout 1987 and 1988 violence continued and escalated in 1989. Violence dropped only in early 1990" These are observations made after considerable research by a distinguished analyst who knows what he is talking about.

The bheeshanaya during the previous UNP regime was masterminded and spread by the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna to which the SLFP, the MEP and other organisations gave active support both overtly and covertly during the early stages as described above. But as terror escalated the JVP went on a killing spree, sparing neither the UNP nor the SLFP nor the SLMP led by Vijaya Kumaratunga who was gunned down by the JVP on 16th February, 1988 and his murder was a high-water mark in the JVP's campaign of terror. Why did the JVP kill Vijaya Kumaratunga? There were several reasons. Vijaya Kumaratunga was a committed socialist who could change history simply by the force of his personal charisma. Another distinguished analyst, Chandraprema' observes that Rohana Wijeweera was very apprehensive of Vijaya Kumaratunga's rising popularity and this observation is confirmed by Justice A.C Alles who states that to Wijeweera any person who was a threat to his leadership was a doomed man and Vijaya Kumaratunga was killed because he was a potential rival to Rohana Wijeweera (See A C. Alles: Insurgency 1971 at p 280). There were other reasons why the JVP decided to kill Vijaya. On 18th January 1988, the JVP issued a statement under the title of "National Campaign to punish traitors to the motherland" which named Vijaya Kumaratunga and his SLMP, LSSP, CP, NSSP, the Independent Students Union (ISU) and sections of the Samastha Lanka Peasants" Congress as traitors to the motherland and the statement further stated that to wipe out these people is an inseparable part of the struggle against Jayewardene and the Indian imperialists. We have identified the enemy. They will be punished accordingly".

After the Indo-Lanka Peace Accord was signed, Vijaya Kumaratunga had written to the "Sunday Observer" welcoming the Peace Accord and had further expressed very sanguine hopes about its ability to solve the ethnic problem. From this time onwards, Vijaya Kumaratunga was a marked man by the JVP. As the JVP's October 11, 1987 issue of "Vedihanda" had announced, their criteria were not along pro-UNP and Anti-UNP lines but pro-Accord and anti Accord lines. The JVP had earlier issued orders that all whom they considered as traitors, including national figures like Vijaya Kumaratunga, should be killed.

It is also on record that earlier in January, 1988, Vijaya Kumaratunga had been the main speaker at the commemoration of the first death anniversary of Daya Pathirana, undergraduate student leader of the Colombo Campus, brutally killed by contract killers hired by the JVP. (Chandraprema gives a graphic description of this killing in his Book referred to above at pp 148-153).

At this commemoration meeting held at the Town Hall premises in Colombo Vijaya Kumaratunga had declared publicly in a way no left leader had the courage to do so before, that "whatever anybody may say, Pathirana was murdered by the JVP" (C A. Chandraprema at p 205). At the funeral procession of Vijaya Kumaratunga the undergraduates of the Independent Students Union (ISU) were heard chanting vociferous slogans against the JVP, the most frequent being "Vije Aiyawa Maradapu, Wijeweera Maradamaw". These undergrads knew exactly about what they were shouting for. At the JVP polit-bureau which met in Colombo to take a decision to kill Vijaya no member present had opposed the decision to kill him. The killing had been carried out on the orders of Algiriye Munasinghe, the JVP district military leader for Colombo.

Rohan Gunaratne records that Saman Piyasiri Fernando, alias Keerthi Vijayabahu, head of the JVP military wing had instructed Pahala Mullage Lionel Ranasinghe alias Jayatilaka, alias Gamini alias Mahinda who had already killed 49 persons including Vice Chancellor Professor Stanley Wijesundera, DIG Terrence Perera and Nandalal Fernando of the UNP, and who was a hard-core JVP activist to kill Vijaya Kumaratunga. And immediately after the killing, the JVP issued a statement accepting responsibility for the killing of Vijaya Kumaratunga. This statement has never been denied by the JVP up to date.

The state of the country by November 1988, gripped by the bheeshanaya unleashed by the JVP can be gauged by the following description by Rohan Gunaratne: "It was the order of the JVP-the unseen government-which ran the country. A state of near anarchy prevailed. People were threatened and kept away from work. No transport was available as several bus drivers who defied orders of the JVP were killed. Shops were closed for weeks on orders circulated by the JVP on scraps of paper. Banks, Postal and Telecommunication facilities came to a virtual halt. Schools and work places were forcibly boycotted and no persons were to walk or drive on JVP imposed Protest days" or during JVP imposed "curfew" days. On such days all lights, radio and television sets were to be switched off. Streets were deserted, no radio, television or cassette player was heard throughout the length and breadth of the country and the people waited at home helpless and gripped in terror. ( Rohan Gunaratne at pp, 288-293).

C. A. Chandraprema describes the JVP terror prevalent up to the end of 1989 in equally graphic terms: "The very mention of the JVP or DJV (Deshapremi Janatha Viyaparaya) was enough to evoke blind and unthinking fear among the general public. People unquestioningly obeyed their orders-a letter or a telephone call was sufficient to get people to close shops, stop work, call strikes. The JVP shook the government to its foundations in a manner that the Tamil insurrection in the North and the East was never able to do. The business community and the bureaucracy found themselves in a quandary not knowing whom to obey-the government or the "little government" (punchi) aanduwa as the JVP was known at that time). It seemed the government would collapse at any moment". (C. A. Chandraprema: at p 4).

That was the size of the JVP manipulated bheeshanaya that gripped this country from 1987 up to early 1990. Can anyone in his or her proper senses say that after Rohana Wijeweera and most of the other JVP leaders were wiped out by the UNP Government under President Premadasa, bheeshanaya of the kind described above prevailed in this country? In fact it was reported in Parliament that by 15th April 1990, the number of killings had dropped to 28 (See A. C. Alles at p. 303). And by 9.10.92 the killings had dropped to a single digit of 9 (from a recorded 4715 in 1989) according to a report of the National Intellligence Bureau).

In fact after President D. B. Wijetunga assumed office in 1990 there was total absence of killings and disappearances of the kind that prevailed during the JVP bheeshanaya period. The simple explanation for this absence of killings was that the cause for such killings and bheeshanaya namely the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna, the principal perpetrator of such killings and terror was effectively wiped out by the UNP Government under President Premadasa and certainly not by the entry of the PA Government headed by Chandrika Kumaratunga.

When Chandrika Kumaratunga was reliably informed that she was the next target of the JVP, she promptly took off with her two children from Sri Lanka to London where she was in hibernation and came back to Sri Lanka after President Premadasa and President Wijetunga had cleared the way for anyone to live peacefully and engage in political activities peacefully, without bheeshanaya. There is no bheeshanaya today not due to any cleverness of President Kumaratunga or her PA supporters who were hiding under their' beds during 1987-1989, but simply because there is no such JVP terror.

Suppose today there was such JVP bheeshanaya which President Kumaratunga attributes solely to the previous UNP regime purely for cheap political mileage, would the President squat before her illustrious father's statue on Galle Face Green and observe satyagraha while the country was burning? It would be a very graceful act on the part of a Head of State not to take credit for ending the bheeshanaya but acknowledge with gratitude that she is able to freely get about and even make empty boasts about what others had done and even paid for their lives. And finally, if the UNP perpetrated bheeshanaya ended after the entry of the PA, how is it that she was elected to power after very peaceful elections in 1994, thanks to President Wijetunga and the then Prime Minister Hon. Ranil Wickremasinghe who conducted the elections in such a fair manner that he himself had to go home?

If there was bheeshanaya after she returned from London, how was she able to enter into the mainstream of politics, become the Chief Minister of the Western Provincial Council that paved the way to her becoming Prime Minister and President of the country within three months' If there was bheeshanaya during this period she would have rushed off to London again, not for anything else, but for dear life.

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