Features
13th Amendment and Tamil polity: A pragmatic approach
By Dr Nirmala Chandrahasan
There is much speculation in the Tamil political circles as to the usefulness or otherwise of the 13th Amendment to the Constitution and whether the Provincial Council system set up under its aegis gives a measure of power sharing or devolution of powers to the Tamil speaking provinces, or whether it is an ineffective institution which blocks out any greater devolution under the exercise of internal self- determination. This debate has been sparked by the decision of Tamil speaking parties including the TNA, to send a letter to the Prime Minister of India Narendra Modi, requesting him to use his good offices to induce the Government of Sri Lanka to implement the 13th Amendment fully, in the context that the 13th Amendment arose out of the provisions of the Indo -Sri Lanka Peace Accord of July 1987, to which treaty India and Sir Lanka are signatories. The letter was duly signed by six Tamil party leaders and handed over to the Indian High Commissioner, triggering some protests by those opposing the 13th Amendment. This debate takes on even greater urgency in the context of the impending new constitutional proposals of the Experts Committee appointed by the Gotabaya Government to be tabled in Parliament shortly.
In order to determine which is the better view we have to take a look at the provisions of the 13th Amendment and the workings of the Provincial Councils set up under them, which have been in operation from 1988 onwards in most parts of the Country. Although the PCs as originally envisaged were intended to be set up for the amalgamated Northern and Eastern provinces, to give expression to the long standing demand of the Tamil speaking people since independence, for devolution and power sharing within a Federal framework, it was extended to the Sinhala majority provinces as well although there had been no demand for them in these provinces. The first Provincial Council elections were held in April 1988 for the North Central, North Western, Sabragamuwa and Uva Provinces, and subsequently for the other provinces. In September 1988 the Northern and Eastern provinces were made one administrative unit in accordance with the provisions of the Indo -Sri Lanka Treaty, and in November 1988 elections were held for the North East Provincial Council. In 1990 the PC was dissolved. Thereafter the North East Province was directly administered by the Central government. During the civil war it was not possible to hold PC elections In the northern and eastern parts of the Country. In 2006 pursuant to a Court decision the two provinces were separated. It was only in May 2008 that the Eastern province, Provincial Council election was held. Subsequently after the termination of the war in the north, the Northern Province, Provincial Council election was held on 21st September 2013. We can see that this institution has been operating over a long period of time but during this long period certain sections of the 13th Amendment dealing with the powers conferred on the Provincial Councils, set out in the 3 Appendixes to the 9th Schedule of List 1 Provincial Council List, are yet to be activated and are in abeyance. These Appendixes deal with the following subjects; Appendix 1, law and order which has to do mainly with Police powers and institution of a Provincial Division of the Police Force alongside the National Division of the Force. Appendix 11 Land and land settlement, and Appendix 111 Education.
Apart from the above, the Provincial Council exercises powers in respect of the subjects assigned to it, over which it has both legislative and executive powers. The subjects assigned to the Province and set out in the provincial List, List 1 include inter alia Provincial housing and construction, agriculture and agrarian services, rural development,health, land, Irrigation, roads bridges and ferries within the province, planning, and plan implementation of provincial economic plans, educational services, and supervision and administration of local government authorities. The list even includes ancient and historical monuments other than those declared to be of national importance. I mention this in the context of the Archaeological explorations being made in the northern and eastern provinces by the recently appointed task force on archeology without any representation from the Tamil and Muslim communities. There is also a concurrent list, List 111, over which both the Provincial Council and the Centre can exercise powers, these include planning and appraisal of plan implementation strategies at the provincial level, education and educational services, higher education, agriculture and agrarian services, health, irrigation, tourism, etc. In these areas there can be overlapping powers and hence disputes arise. The Provincial Council can pass statutes and exercise executive powers in respect of the subjects set out in the Provincial and Concurrent lists. These powers are largely based on the powers conferred on the States in the Indian constitution part VI. The States in India are running efficiently and providing the people with the services that they need. Tamil Nadu for example is recognised as having a very efficient administration presently under the Chief Minister M. K Stalin. The question is why the Provincial Council system in Sri Lanka is generally regarded a white elephant and as not effective in providing services to the people. For this we must examine the road blocks in the system and make the necessary adjustments, rather than just dismantling the entire system, and throwing the baby away with the bath water so to speak.
An appraisal of the workings shows that most of the stumbling blocks to the smooth functioning of the Provincial Councils are as a result of the provisions of the Provincial Councils Act no 42 of 1987, which was passed alongside the 13th Amendment. Under this Act the Governor is given powers over the finances of the PCs and is given control of the Provincial Public service as well as the Provincial Public Service commission. The 13th Amendment provides that the executive power of the Provincial Council is vested in the Governor and he acts through the Board of ministers or through members of the provincial public service. The Chief Minister and the Board of Ministers aid and advise the Governor in the exercise of his functions and the Governor Shall act in accordance with the advice except where he is required under the Constitution to exercise his discretion. In the Indian Constitution similarly in respect of the States ,the executive power is vested in the Governor but as in the Westminster scheme of governance the Governor acts on the advice of the Chief Ministers and is a nominal head. On the other hand, in Sri Lanka we find many instances of Governors exercising these powers like executive heads and not as nominal heads, particularly in the Tamil majority provinces and not so much in the Sinhalese majority provinces. The Governors stranglehold over the functioning of the PCs is most clearly demonstrated in his power over the finances of the province. To run the PCs money is required and this is where the Councils have been most hamstrung as the Provincial Councils Act gives the Governor controlling power over the finances of the Province. The custody of the Provincial Fund is with the Governor. The PC cannot pass any statute imposing or abolishing taxes without the consent of the Governor. More over the constitutional framework severely limits the revenue raising capacity of the PCS, as pointed out in the Report of the Parliamentary subcommittee on Centre- Periphery relations of November 2016. Hence the PCs have to depend largely on Central grants for their funds.
Another area which needs to be redesigned is the Administrative system. To run the Provincial Councils effectively the Council requires control not only over its funds but also an effective administrative system and defined areas of competence. At present the District Secretary and the Divisional Secretary as well as the Grama Niladaris come under the Central Government These officers perform administrative functions within the territory of the province but without any control from the provincial administration. Also, although the Local Authorities are under the supervisory control of the Provincial Councils as per the devolved List, most of the power at the local level remains with the Central Government.
For efficient administration of the province there has to be defined areas of competence. But in effect, the Centre has been encroaching on the areas assigned to the provincial administration. The reserved List of the Centre List 11, starts with the Rubric” National policy on all subjects”. This has enabled the Centre to take over subjects which it designates as National. To remedy this, what is National policy or National standards should be laid down through a participatory process with the involvement of the Provinces culminating in framework legislation passed by Parliament to which both Centre and Provinces should adhere. This has been proposed in the Report of the Experts Committee on the Constitution,2006. Another matter which has to be amended is the Concurrent list. Here too it has been recommended that the List be eliminated and the relevant subjects be divided between the Centre and the Province, so that they each have defined areas.
In an article of this nature, it is not possible to do a more in-depth study but I have outlined what are the important issues to be addressed if the Provincial Councils are to provide meaningful Devolution. Some of the areas which need amendment are as follows. The Governor’s role has so far tended to be an obstruction to the functioning of the PCs. The Governor should continue as a nominal head and leave the running of PC to the elected representatives. This is also a recommendation of the Parliamentary subcommittee in its 2016 report.
Hence the Governor’s powers have to be pruned and the Provincial Councils Act suitably amended. The revenue raising capacity of the PCs must be enhanced. It is suggested that they be given the power to obtain loans from foreign sources or at least have the power to administer projects financed by foreign aid. Another important issue is to put in place an administrative structure that can carry out the functions of the Provincial Council in services delivery to the people and for this the administration has to be redesigned so as to bring the District Secretary , the Divisional Secretary and the Grama Niladaris, under the Provincial administration while they still carry out agency services for the Centre. Furthermore, although local Authorities are under the Authority of the PC, as per the devolved List, this provision is being undermined by the Centre using the Urban Development Authority (UDA), Mahaweli Authority and other Central bodies operating within the Province. Hence it must be mandated that such bodies operate within the Province only with the consent and in conjunction with the Provincial and Local Government Authorities. As for the powers in respect of Law and Order and Police powers contained in Appendix 1 of List 1 the 9th schedule , they could be transferred to those PCs which request them as for example in the case of the Northern Ireland Assembly in the UK , where these powers were initially with the Centre, but there was a provision that allowed them to be released on request. In 2010 they were transferred to the Assembly under the Hillsborough Agreement. Until such time as Appendix 1, comes to be activated other provisions can be put in place, such as a policy of recruiting a percentage of the Police cadre stationed in the northern and eastern provinces from these provinces and mandate that they have an O level pass in the Tamil language so that they could operate efficiently in the Tamil speaking areas. I would suggest some similar provision in respect of some areas in the Central provinces so that the upcountry Malayaha Tamils, are also benefited. It is submitted that the Appendix 11 on land be fully implemented as it is essential for the land security of these provinces that the utilization of state land as well as alienation of such land under Presidential order be done in consultation with, or advise of the Provincial Council. The provision in Appendix 11 on the constitution of a National Land Commission with members being appointed from all 3 communities should be carried out forthwith.
I would suggest that the Tamil parties take up the proposed reforms with the Government of Sri Lanka in a negotiated process. As the Government of India was the other party to the Indo Sri Lanka Treaty, India can legitimately demand that the obligations undertaken in the treaty be carried out and the provisions of 13 A be implemented fully so that meaningful devolution is assured to the Tamil speaking people whom the Treaty specifically denotes as the historical inhabitants of the northern and eastern provinces of Sri Lanka. In line with the UNHCR resolution the Sri Lankan Government should also hold the Provincial Council elections so that these institutions can be functioning and not in abeyance as they have been for some years. The Provincial Councils in the South will also benefit from the reforms proposed as it will provide the citizens of the entire Country a stream lined system which is a service provider to the people. I note that the President in his Budget speech has advised the Tamil parties to look to their peoples’ needs and concentrate on economic development of their areas. This can best be done when there is true democracy and the people are taken into the process of consultation as to the strategies for economic development and this is best done at the local level through the Provincial Councils, and local Government Authorities, rather than through bureaucrats sitting in Colombo who have no knowledge of the local conditions or the needs of the people. In my view the Province remains the best unit of devolution at present to serve the needs of the Tamil speaking people. It gives them some measure of autonomy in their traditional areas of inhabitancy. Similarly, in the United Kingdom which is a Unitary State, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland which are ethnically distinct have their own Legislative Assemblies, in the case of Scotland it is called a Parliament, and exercise similar powers to those set out in the 13th Amendment.
I would like to point out that all the major changes suggested in this article respecting the Governors powers, Financing of the Provincial Councils and the Re-designing of the Administrative system in the Provinces have been recommended in the following Reports: Report of the Experts Committee advising the APRC on Constitutional matters and resolution of the National Question 2006, the Report of the APRC( All party Representative Committee) on a new Home grown Constitution 2010, Report of the Parliamentary sub- committee on Centre -Periphery relations 2016 , presented to the Steering Committee of the Constitutional Assembly which was engaged in producing a new Constitution during the tenure of the previous government. In the circumstances the proposed new Constitution could incorporate these features and there is no need to reinvent the wheel. I would submit that the Provincial Council system can be an efficient and successful system if all the short comings referred to above are eliminated and the necessary amendments made. These changes will not require any major constitutional procedures, and can be accomplished by legislation in Parliament with a simple majority, and the administrative changes by Presidential gazette notification under the provisions of the 13th Amendment itself.
*The writer was a member of the Experts Committee 2006, and a signatory to the Majority Report of this Committee.
by Dr Gotabhya Ranasinghe
Senior Consultant Cardiologist
National Hospital Sri Lanka
When we sought a meeting with Hon Dr. Ramesh Pathirana, Minister of Health, he graciously cleared his busy schedule to accommodate us. Renowned for his attentive listening and deep understanding, Minister Pathirana is dedicated to advancing the health sector. His openness and transparency exemplify the qualities of an exemplary politician and minister.
Dr. Palitha Mahipala, the current Health Secretary, demonstrates both commendable enthusiasm and unwavering support. This combination of attributes makes him a highly compatible colleague for the esteemed Minister of Health.
Our discussion centered on a project that has been in the works for the past 30 years, one that no other minister had managed to advance.
Minister Pathirana, however, recognized the project’s significance and its potential to revolutionize care for heart patients.
The project involves the construction of a state-of-the-art facility at the premises of the National Hospital Colombo. The project’s location within the premises of the National Hospital underscores its importance and relevance to the healthcare infrastructure of the nation.
This facility will include a cardiology building and a tertiary care center, equipped with the latest technology to handle and treat all types of heart-related conditions and surgeries.
Securing funding was a major milestone for this initiative. Minister Pathirana successfully obtained approval for a $40 billion loan from the Asian Development Bank. With the funding in place, the foundation stone is scheduled to be laid in September this year, and construction will begin in January 2025.
This project guarantees a consistent and uninterrupted supply of stents and related medications for heart patients. As a result, patients will have timely access to essential medical supplies during their treatment and recovery. By securing these critical resources, the project aims to enhance patient outcomes, minimize treatment delays, and maintain the highest standards of cardiac care.
Upon its fruition, this monumental building will serve as a beacon of hope and healing, symbolizing the unwavering dedication to improving patient outcomes and fostering a healthier society.We anticipate a future marked by significant progress and positive outcomes in Sri Lanka’s cardiovascular treatment landscape within the foreseeable timeframe.
by Fr. Emmanuel Fernando, OMI
Jesuit Fr. Aloysius Pieris (affectionately called Fr. Aloy) celebrated his 90th birthday on April 9, 2024 and I, as the editor of our Oblate Journal, THE MISSIONARY OBLATE had gone to press by that time. Immediately I decided to publish an article, appreciating the untiring selfless services he continues to offer for inter-Faith dialogue, the renewal of the Catholic Church, his concern for the poor and the suffering Sri Lankan masses and to me, the present writer.
It was in 1988, when I was appointed Director of the Oblate Scholastics at Ampitiya by the then Oblate Provincial Fr. Anselm Silva, that I came to know Fr. Aloy more closely. Knowing well his expertise in matters spiritual, theological, Indological and pastoral, and with the collaborative spirit of my companion-formators, our Oblate Scholastics were sent to Tulana, the Research and Encounter Centre, Kelaniya, of which he is the Founder-Director, for ‘exposure-programmes’ on matters spiritual, biblical, theological and pastoral. Some of these dimensions according to my view and that of my companion-formators, were not available at the National Seminary, Ampitiya.
Ever since that time, our Oblate formators/ accompaniers at the Oblate Scholasticate, Ampitiya , have continued to send our Oblate Scholastics to Tulana Centre for deepening their insights and convictions regarding matters needed to serve the people in today’s context. Fr. Aloy also had tried very enthusiastically with the Oblate team headed by Frs. Oswald Firth and Clement Waidyasekara to begin a Theologate, directed by the Religious Congregations in Sri Lanka, for the contextual formation/ accompaniment of their members. It should very well be a desired goal of the Leaders / Provincials of the Religious Congregations.
Besides being a formator/accompanier at the Oblate Scholasticate, I was entrusted also with the task of editing and publishing our Oblate journal, ‘The Missionary Oblate’. To maintain the quality of the journal I continue to depend on Fr. Aloy for his thought-provoking and stimulating articles on Biblical Spirituality, Biblical Theology and Ecclesiology. I am very grateful to him for his generous assistance. Of late, his writings on renewal of the Church, initiated by Pope St. John XX111 and continued by Pope Francis through the Synodal path, published in our Oblate journal, enable our readers to focus their attention also on the needed renewal in the Catholic Church in Sri Lanka. Fr. Aloy appreciated very much the Synodal path adopted by the Jesuit Pope Francis for the renewal of the Church, rooted very much on prayerful discernment. In my Religious and presbyteral life, Fr.Aloy continues to be my spiritual animator / guide and ongoing formator / acccompanier.
Fr. Aloysius Pieris, BA Hons (Lond), LPh (SHC, India), STL (PFT, Naples), PhD (SLU/VC), ThD (Tilburg), D.Ltt (KU), has been one of the eminent Asian theologians well recognized internationally and one who has lectured and held visiting chairs in many universities both in the West and in the East. Many members of Religious Congregations from Asian countries have benefited from his lectures and guidance in the East Asian Pastoral Institute (EAPI) in Manila, Philippines. He had been a Theologian consulted by the Federation of Asian Bishops’ Conferences for many years. During his professorship at the Gregorian University in Rome, he was called to be a member of a special group of advisers on other religions consulted by Pope Paul VI.
Fr. Aloy is the author of more than 30 books and well over 500 Research Papers. Some of his books and articles have been translated and published in several countries. Among those books, one can find the following: 1) The Genesis of an Asian Theology of Liberation (An Autobiographical Excursus on the Art of Theologising in Asia, 2) An Asian Theology of Liberation, 3) Providential Timeliness of Vatican 11 (a long-overdue halt to a scandalous millennium, 4) Give Vatican 11 a chance, 5) Leadership in the Church, 6) Relishing our faith in working for justice (Themes for study and discussion), 7) A Message meant mainly, not exclusively for Jesuits (Background information necessary for helping Francis renew the Church), 8) Lent in Lanka (Reflections and Resolutions, 9) Love meets wisdom (A Christian Experience of Buddhism, 10) Fire and Water 11) God’s Reign for God’s poor, 12) Our Unhiddden Agenda (How we Jesuits work, pray and form our men). He is also the Editor of two journals, Vagdevi, Journal of Religious Reflection and Dialogue, New Series.
Fr. Aloy has a BA in Pali and Sanskrit from the University of London and a Ph.D in Buddhist Philosophy from the University of Sri Lankan, Vidyodaya Campus. On Nov. 23, 2019, he was awarded the prestigious honorary Doctorate of Literature (D.Litt) by the Chancellor of the University of Kelaniya, the Most Venerable Welamitiyawe Dharmakirthi Sri Kusala Dhamma Thera.
Fr. Aloy continues to be a promoter of Gospel values and virtues. Justice as a constitutive dimension of love and social concern for the downtrodden masses are very much noted in his life and work. He had very much appreciated the commitment of the late Fr. Joseph (Joe) Fernando, the National Director of the Social and Economic Centre (SEDEC) for the poor.
In Sri Lanka, a few religious Congregations – the Good Shepherd Sisters, the Christian Brothers, the Marist Brothers and the Oblates – have invited him to animate their members especially during their Provincial Congresses, Chapters and International Conferences. The mainline Christian Churches also have sought his advice and followed his seminars. I, for one, regret very much, that the Sri Lankan authorities of the Catholic Church –today’s Hierarchy—- have not sought Fr.
Aloy’s expertise for the renewal of the Catholic Church in Sri Lanka and thus have not benefited from the immense store of wisdom and insight that he can offer to our local Church while the Sri Lankan bishops who governed the Catholic church in the immediate aftermath of the Second Vatican Council (Edmund Fernando OMI, Anthony de Saram, Leo Nanayakkara OSB, Frank Marcus Fernando, Paul Perera,) visited him and consulted him on many matters. Among the Tamil Bishops, Bishop Rayappu Joseph was keeping close contact with him and Bishop J. Deogupillai hosted him and his team visiting him after the horrible Black July massacre of Tamils.
Sri Lanka-Singapore Free Trade Agreement
By Gomi Senadhira
senadhiragomi@gmail.com
“You might tell fairy tales, but the progress of a country cannot be achieved through such narratives. A country cannot be developed by making false promises. The country moved backward because of the electoral promises made by political parties throughout time. We have witnessed that the ultimate result of this is the country becoming bankrupt. Unfortunately, many segments of the population have not come to realize this yet.” – President Ranil Wickremesinghe, 2024 Budget speech
Any Sri Lankan would agree with the above words of President Wickremesinghe on the false promises our politicians and officials make and the fairy tales they narrate which bankrupted this country. So, to understand this, let’s look at one such fairy tale with lots of false promises; Ranil Wickremesinghe’s greatest achievement in the area of international trade and investment promotion during the Yahapalana period, Sri Lanka-Singapore Free Trade Agreement (SLSFTA).
It is appropriate and timely to do it now as Finance Minister Wickremesinghe has just presented to parliament a bill on the National Policy on Economic Transformation which includes the establishment of an Office for International Trade and the Sri Lanka Institute of Economics and International Trade.
Was SLSFTA a “Cleverly negotiated Free Trade Agreement” as stated by the (former) Minister of Development Strategies and International Trade Malik Samarawickrama during the Parliamentary Debate on the SLSFTA in July 2018, or a colossal blunder covered up with lies, false promises, and fairy tales? After SLSFTA was signed there were a number of fairy tales published on this agreement by the Ministry of Development Strategies and International, Institute of Policy Studies, and others.
However, for this article, I would like to limit my comments to the speech by Minister Samarawickrama during the Parliamentary Debate, and the two most important areas in the agreement which were covered up with lies, fairy tales, and false promises, namely: revenue loss for Sri Lanka and Investment from Singapore. On the other important area, “Waste products dumping” I do not want to comment here as I have written extensively on the issue.
1. The revenue loss
During the Parliamentary Debate in July 2018, Minister Samarawickrama stated “…. let me reiterate that this FTA with Singapore has been very cleverly negotiated by us…. The liberalisation programme under this FTA has been carefully designed to have the least impact on domestic industry and revenue collection. We have included all revenue sensitive items in the negative list of items which will not be subject to removal of tariff. Therefore, 97.8% revenue from Customs duty is protected. Our tariff liberalisation will take place over a period of 12-15 years! In fact, the revenue earned through tariffs on goods imported from Singapore last year was Rs. 35 billion.
The revenue loss for over the next 15 years due to the FTA is only Rs. 733 million– which when annualised, on average, is just Rs. 51 million. That is just 0.14% per year! So anyone who claims the Singapore FTA causes revenue loss to the Government cannot do basic arithmetic! Mr. Speaker, in conclusion, I call on my fellow members of this House – don’t mislead the public with baseless criticism that is not grounded in facts. Don’t look at petty politics and use these issues for your own political survival.”
I was surprised to read the minister’s speech because an article published in January 2018 in “The Straits Times“, based on information released by the Singaporean Negotiators stated, “…. With the FTA, tariff savings for Singapore exports are estimated to hit $10 million annually“.
As the annual tariff savings (that is the revenue loss for Sri Lanka) calculated by the Singaporean Negotiators, Singaporean $ 10 million (Sri Lankan rupees 1,200 million in 2018) was way above the rupees’ 733 million revenue loss for 15 years estimated by the Sri Lankan negotiators, it was clear to any observer that one of the parties to the agreement had not done the basic arithmetic!
Six years later, according to a report published by “The Morning” newspaper, speaking at the Committee on Public Finance (COPF) on 7th May 2024, Mr Samarawickrama’s chief trade negotiator K.J. Weerasinghehad had admitted “…. that forecasted revenue loss for the Government of Sri Lanka through the Singapore FTA is Rs. 450 million in 2023 and Rs. 1.3 billion in 2024.”
If these numbers are correct, as tariff liberalisation under the SLSFTA has just started, we will pass Rs 2 billion very soon. Then, the question is how Sri Lanka’s trade negotiators made such a colossal blunder. Didn’t they do their basic arithmetic? If they didn’t know how to do basic arithmetic they should have at least done their basic readings. For example, the headline of the article published in The Straits Times in January 2018 was “Singapore, Sri Lanka sign FTA, annual savings of $10m expected”.
Anyway, as Sri Lanka’s chief negotiator reiterated at the COPF meeting that “…. since 99% of the tariffs in Singapore have zero rates of duty, Sri Lanka has agreed on 80% tariff liberalisation over a period of 15 years while expecting Singapore investments to address the imbalance in trade,” let’s turn towards investment.
Investment from Singapore
In July 2018, speaking during the Parliamentary Debate on the FTA this is what Minister Malik Samarawickrama stated on investment from Singapore, “Already, thanks to this FTA, in just the past two-and-a-half months since the agreement came into effect we have received a proposal from Singapore for investment amounting to $ 14.8 billion in an oil refinery for export of petroleum products. In addition, we have proposals for a steel manufacturing plant for exports ($ 1 billion investment), flour milling plant ($ 50 million), sugar refinery ($ 200 million). This adds up to more than $ 16.05 billion in the pipeline on these projects alone.
And all of these projects will create thousands of more jobs for our people. In principle approval has already been granted by the BOI and the investors are awaiting the release of land the environmental approvals to commence the project.
I request the Opposition and those with vested interests to change their narrow-minded thinking and join us to develop our country. We must always look at what is best for the whole community, not just the few who may oppose. We owe it to our people to courageously take decisions that will change their lives for the better.”
According to the media report I quoted earlier, speaking at the Committee on Public Finance (COPF) Chief Negotiator Weerasinghe has admitted that Sri Lanka was not happy with overall Singapore investments that have come in the past few years in return for the trade liberalisation under the Singapore-Sri Lanka Free Trade Agreement. He has added that between 2021 and 2023 the total investment from Singapore had been around $162 million!
What happened to those projects worth $16 billion negotiated, thanks to the SLSFTA, in just the two-and-a-half months after the agreement came into effect and approved by the BOI? I do not know about the steel manufacturing plant for exports ($ 1 billion investment), flour milling plant ($ 50 million) and sugar refinery ($ 200 million).
However, story of the multibillion-dollar investment in the Petroleum Refinery unfolded in a manner that would qualify it as the best fairy tale with false promises presented by our politicians and the officials, prior to 2019 elections.
Though many Sri Lankans got to know, through the media which repeatedly highlighted a plethora of issues surrounding the project and the questionable credentials of the Singaporean investor, the construction work on the Mirrijiwela Oil Refinery along with the cement factory began on the24th of March 2019 with a bang and Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe and his ministers along with the foreign and local dignitaries laid the foundation stones.
That was few months before the 2019 Presidential elections. Inaugurating the construction work Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe said the projects will create thousands of job opportunities in the area and surrounding districts.
The oil refinery, which was to be built over 200 acres of land, with the capacity to refine 200,000 barrels of crude oil per day, was to generate US$7 billion of exports and create 1,500 direct and 3,000 indirect jobs. The construction of the refinery was to be completed in 44 months. Four years later, in August 2023 the Cabinet of Ministers approved the proposal presented by President Ranil Wickremesinghe to cancel the agreement with the investors of the refinery as the project has not been implemented! Can they explain to the country how much money was wasted to produce that fairy tale?
It is obvious that the President, ministers, and officials had made huge blunders and had deliberately misled the public and the parliament on the revenue loss and potential investment from SLSFTA with fairy tales and false promises.
As the president himself said, a country cannot be developed by making false promises or with fairy tales and these false promises and fairy tales had bankrupted the country. “Unfortunately, many segments of the population have not come to realize this yet”.
(The writer, a specialist and an activist on trade and development issues . )
US sports envoys to Lanka to champion youth development
Rahuman questions sudden cancellation of leave of CEB employees
