Features
Nihal Jayawickrema discusses the judiciary and human rights with the Anglo American Lawyer magazine
Dr. Nihal Jayawickrama was the Ariel F. Sallows Professor of Human Rights at the University of Saskatchewan, Canada, and Associate Professor of Law at the University of Hong Kong, where he taught both constitutional law and the international law of human rights. He was also Chair of JUSTICE: the Hong Kong Section of the International Commission of Jurists, Executive Director of Transparency International Berlin, Chair of the Trustees of the Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative, London, and a Member of the Permanent Court of Arbitration at The Hague.
A member of the Sri Lanka Bar, he held the offices of Attorney General, and Permanent Secretary to the Ministry of Justice, having been appointed to that office at the age of 32. He was Vice-Chairperson of the Sri Lanka delegation to the United Nations General Assembly and served on the Third Committee which dealt with human rights issues. He is the Coordinator/Rapporteur of the UN sponsored Judicial Integrity Group which formulated the Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct and related instruments.
The AAL Magazine: Dr. Nihal Jayawickrama, we are truly honored by your consent to have a conversation with you especially on your book Judicial Application of Human Rights published by the Cambridge University Press which is now on its second edition. You have touched almost all the topics on human rights. I would say a very comprehensive book on human rights covering jurisprudence of the UN Human Rights monitories bodies. One reason is that you have had a long association with law – runs to around five decades – having been a Professor of Law and your abiding interest in promoting constitutional and human rights especially in Sri Lanka. If I may ask Sir, what really inspired you to write a book on the judicial application of human rights?
Dr. Jayawickrama: In 1978, shortly after I resigned from the Ministry of Justice following a change of government, I was asked by Mr. Paul Sieghart, a prominent Barrister in the United Kingdom and Chairman of JUSTICE, UK, whom I knew, whether I would be interested in researching the emerging body of international human rights law for a book which he proposed to write. I would be appointed a Research Fellow at King’s College, University of London, under the supervision of Professor James Fawcett, then President of the European Commission of Human Rights. I was also informed that the University was willing to enroll me to read for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy if I wished to apply the results of my research in an appropriate way. I accepted both offers. My research on the jurisprudence of the Strasbourg institutions and of national courts was incorporated in Paul Sieghart’s pioneering work, The International Law of Human Rights, which was published by Oxford University Press in 1983. My thesis, which critically examined the governance of post-independence Ceylon/Sri Lanka by reference to international human rights standards, was accepted by the University for the award of the degree of Ph.D.
When I was nine years old, my parents were persuaded by my mother’s brother that I should leave my primary school in the southern town of Galle, and continue my education in his old school, Royal College, Colombo. Consequently, I lived in my uncle’s home in Colombo for the next 19 years, until my marriage in 1965. Meanwhile, my uncle who was a Crown Counsel became Attorney-General, Judge of the Supreme Court, and President of the Court of Final Appeal. He was also the President of the Geneva-based International Commission of Jurists. Justice T.S. Fernando Q.C., had a profound influence on my life. It was at our dinner table that I was introduced to the concept of human rights. His commitment to human rights in whatever capacity he served the State led to my own study of the subject and its application, both in the practice of my profession and in my capacity as the administrative head of the Ministry of Justice.
After I introduced a course on Human Rights Law at the University of Hong Kong, I found that the international human rights regime had strengthened considerably in the decade following the publication of Paul Sieghart’s book. More than 150 countries, spread over every continent had incorporated contemporary human rights standards into their legal systems. More than 100 countries had ratified the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, thereby enabling their inhabitants to access the Human Rights Committee. Nearly all the countries of South and Central America had subscribed to the Inter-American Convention on Human Rights. The resulting jurisprudence had added a new dimension to the concepts that were first articulated in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Unfortunately, Paul Sieghart passed away in 1989. I offered to update his pioneering work, but Oxford University Press was not interested. Cambridge University Press, on the other hand, immediately recognized the need for what they described as “a definitive text on the subject”.
Writing a book which runs into over a thousand pages is difficult to combine with regular teaching at a university, as I soon discovered after I commenced preliminary work on it in Hong Kong. Fortunately, the privilege that the University of Saskatchewan accorded me, by nominating me to the Ariel F. Sallows Chair of Human Rights, enabled me to commence my writing in the exhilarating climate of the Canadian prairies. The first edition of my book was published in 2002, and the second edition in 2017.
The AAL Magazine: Why do you think human rights should be protected by the government and why do you think citizens should pursue their rights if governments have been lethargic on the political will to protect the rights of people?
Dr. Jayawickrama: Respect for human dignity and personality and a belief in justice are rooted deep in the religious and cultural traditions of the world. Hinduism, Buddhism, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam all stress the inviolability of the essential attributes of humanity. This religious and cultural tradition was complemented by many strands of philosophical thought that unfolded the concept of a natural law that was equally inviolable and to which all man-made law must conform. Philosophy began transforming into Law in historic documents such as the Magna Carta of 1215, the English Bill of Rights of 1689, the American Declaration of Independence of 1776, and the French Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen of 1789. However, it was the Second World War, and the events that preceded it in Germany, and in the territories under German occupation, where unprecedented atrocities were perpetrated on millions of its own people by the regime then lawfully in power, that led to the establishment of a set of superior standards to which all national law must conform – an overriding code of international human rights law.
The Charter of the United Nations was the standard-bearer. The member states of the United Nations have pledged themselves to act, both collectively and separately within their domestic jurisdictions, to secure universal respect for, and observance of, human rights and fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language, or religion. That is a legal obligation undertaken by the member states of the UN. The people, therefore, have the right to demand of their governments that the basic legal framework be established, and appropriate action be taken, to enable them to exercise and enjoy their fundamental human rights.
The AAL Magazine: The HR jurisprudence you had referred to in your book is quite comprehensive. It covers over 103 countries which is quite an exhaustive exercise. Which jurisdiction did you find most interesting in terms of the articulation of the rights, judicial reasoning or the remedies proposed by the different types of courts eg; in Europe , Latin America, India Australasia, South Africa or any other jurisdiction. You have mentioned that ‘jurisprudence rich in content and varied in flavor, from diverse cultural traditions, has added a new dimension to the concepts first articulated in the UDHR’. Could you please elaborate? Did you identify any methodology which is more prevalent in some jurisdictions but not in others etc.
Dr. Jayawickrama: At the international level, the Human Rights Committee established under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights has been the principal source of jurisprudence. At the regional level, the European Court and Commission of Human Rights and the Inter-American Court and Commission of Human Rights have been the principal sources. The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council has also played a significant role in interpreting and applying the Bills of Rights contained in the constitutions of British colonial territories. At the national level, the Supreme Courts of India and Canada, and the Constitutional Court of South Africa have made unique contributions towards the interpretation and application of civil and political rights. I should, however, mention that the Table of Cases on which I have drawn extends to 140 pages, and these include the decisions of superior courts in over a hundred countries from the Pacific to the Caribbean, and especially the Constitutional Courts in European States, all of which have also contributed to extending the frontiers of human dignity and freedom.
If I may give an example: the Universal Declaration of Human Rights proclaimed in 1948 that “Everyone has the Right to Life”. Article 6 of the ICCPR required that “This right shall be protected by law”, and that “No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his life”. It recognized the death penalty as an exception and explained the circumstances in which it could be carried out. Of course, some years later, in the Second Optional Protocol, it expressly required the abolition of the death penalty. Meanwhile, through judicial interpretation, the application of Article 6 was extended to cover the unborn child; mentally or disabled persons; the aged, senile, and terminally ill persons; persons in detention; the extradition or deportation of persons; the concept of a healthy environment; access to medical services; war and nuclear weapons; and involuntary disappearances. The Supreme Court of India has described the right to life as taking within its sweep the right to food, the right to clothing, the right to a decent environment, and the right to a reasonable accommodation to live in. That Court also held that the right to life includes the right to livelihood.
The AAL Magazine: As you are well aware, the realization of economic, social and cultural rights are predicated on Government policies. However, reviewing Government policies that are consistent or inconsistent with constitutional principles and obligations under international human rights law is clearly a prerogative of the judiciary. While the judicial activism and attitudes in reviewing Government policy may vary from country to country, I suppose policy review is not policymaking. Do you think by taking decisions based on economic, social, and cultural rights would be seen as being overstepping its constitutional role. How does judicial activism come into play by ensuring such rights are upheld?
Dr. Jayawickrama: International law recognizes not only what may be described as civil and political rights, but also economic, social, and cultural rights. Sri Lanka, as a state party to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, has made a commitment to take measures to progressively achieve the realization of these rights for its citizens. Unfortunately, our Constitution does not recognize these as enforceable rights. Instead, it regards their achievement as “directive principles of state policy” which are not enforceable in any court. These rights are no less important than civil and political rights and are constitutionally protected in many countries.
To give a few examples: The right to work has been interpreted to imply a right not to be arbitrarily prevented from working as, for example, in a country in which the law requires a woman to obtain the permission of her husband in order to work. Also incompatible with this right is the requirement of a female civil servant to resign on marriage. The judicial interpretation of this right has led to the prohibition of forced labour; equitable, just, and reasonable wages; equal remuneration for work of equal value; safe and healthy working conditions; and equal opportunities for promotion. Therefore, I do not agree that the judiciary would be overstepping its constitutional role if it is called upon to monitor compliance by the government of economic, social, and cultural rights that are constitutionally guaranteed. After all, they cover such vital issues in peoples’ lives such as the right to adequate food; freedom from hunger; right to adequate housing; protection from forced evictions; access to sufficient water; right to social security; maternal child and reproductive health; environmental and industrial hygiene; and the right to academic freedom.
(To be continued)
(Mr. Srinath Fernando is the editor of the AAL magazine from which this article was excerpted)
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
