Features
IGP stakes: why’s and wherefores of old values of succession being scuttled
BY Kingsley Wickremasuriya, Senior DIG (Retd.)
The post of Inspector-General of Police is ‘vacant’ and the government is dilly-dallying with the appointment of a successor to take over, apparently for reasons of political expediency. This is the first time in the known history of the Department that the Police had to face such a situation.
In all these years the succession to the post of the Inspector-General of Police was almost automatic being based, by and large, on the line of Seniority and Merit. The post usually went to the Senior-most Deputy Inspector-General of Police, the most experienced and respected leader in the department. To name a few, Inspectors-General of Police Aleric Abeygunawardena, John Attygalle, and Cyril Herath were officers par excellence known for their integrity and impartiality and for doing their duty according to the Rule of Law.
The road to succession was known to be either through the post of Director of Headquarters Administration (DHA) or Director of Criminal Investigation (D/CID). This was the norm accepted by the rank and file. The succession was, therefore, smooth and easy and widely accepted by the rank and file and the country at large. This time-tested process gave legitimacy to the post of Inspector-General of Police in the eyes of all the stakeholders including the Police themselves.
In a disciplined service, rank is sacrosanct. An officer has necessarily to aspire to a higher rank through performance. If his work had been of exceptional merit and distinction, he may even be considered for a special promotion. A promotion can also be posthumous where the deceased officer had been exemplary in performance and achievement. An officer will therefore naturally like to safeguard his position in the line of seniority. He will be unhappy if a junior officer is placed over him merely because the latter wields influence. It is natural for an officer in a disciplined service to jealously protect his place in the line of seniority against encroachment (Merril Gunaratna, ‘Perils of a Profession).
This paper will try to find an explanation as to why the police have failed to ‘Serve and Protect’ the citizen, which is the main purpose of a Democracy.
Police & Politics
Police have in recent times come in for sharp criticism from various quarters ostensibly for their failure to contain the lawlessness prevailing in the country and to maintain the Rule of Law, particularly in the face of mass protests that took the country by storm. Critics allege the partiality of the police as the reason for their inability to enforce the Rule of Law. It has led to a near riotous situation being created in many parts of the country by police inaction against lawbreakers.
It is commonly known that this situation has been brought about by the politicization of the Police. A review of the constitutional history will show how undue political interference in police affairs has affected the legitimacy of the Police (and the legitimacy of the government itself, whose agents the police are) contributing to the current lawlessness in the country and the resulting failure of the police to enforce the Rule of Law.
Looking at the root cause, it has been found that the beginnings of political interference in the affairs of the Public Service were a problem even before the country gained Independence from the British. It had its origins in the early 1920s. The reports on the Colebrook – Cameron Reforms, the Donoughmore and Soulbury Reforms are a testimony to the measures they proposed to protect the Public Service from the undue interference of unscrupulous politicians.
Whilst these Commissioners made continuous efforts to ensure an efficient and effective Public Service by protecting it from undue political interference, the working of the Constitution in the aftermath of the Soulbury Commission showed how the highest in the political hierarchy of the country, no less a person than the Prime Minster himself (of the time) attempted to scuttle the legally adopted constitutional provisions by his attempts to circumvent the Constitution.
The legend has it that a Prime Minster (at the time) is alleged to have said once, ‘Public Service Commission or no Commission, I get whom I want’. We also have the story going around in police circles about how the same Prime Minster exhorted the then Inspector-General of Police, Osmund de Silva that the Police should have that ’extra bit of loyalty to the Government’, and how the Inspector-General responded in return by exhorting his officers that what they should uphold is the Rule of Law although he knew that he would be falling out of favour with the premier and that it would affect his tenure.
With all these attempts behind the scenes the Public Service Commission at that time worked reasonably well without a major hiccup until the introduction of the first Republican Constitution in 1972 that vested the responsibility of appointments, transfer, dismissal, and disciplinary control of all State Officers with the Cabinet of Ministers by Article 106 and other provisions in Chapter XII of that Constitution giving a blank cheque for political interference. The best illustrations of these efforts are the Chapter XII of the Republican Constitution of 1972 and Chapter IX of the Republican Constitution of 1978. This was the start of the process of politicization of the public service in general and the Police in particular.
In the meanwhile, the effects of these constitutional provisions brought about by Article 106 and the other provisions in Chapter XII of the first Republican Constitution (1972) on the Police have had far-reaching effects on its morale, and discipline. Consequently, delivery of services to the people has suffered severely resulting in the lowering of quality and professional standards that used to be maintained in the Police previously. With the proclamation of the Second Republican Constitution, the provisions of Chapter XII were given effect to more or less completely concerning the control of the Public Service in Chapter IX (The Executive) of the 1978 Republican Constitution. The effects of that on the Police have far exceeded those referred to by the Basnayake Police Commission (1970) or the Subasinghe Committee (1979) in their reports. This is confirmed by the report produced by the Jayasinghe Committee in 1995.
Police Reforms
As far as the Police are concerned several Police Commissions/Committees were appointed by successive governments to go into Police matters and report on reforms. The Soertz Commission Report (1946), the Basnayake Police Commission Report (1970), The Subasinghe Committee Report (1979), and Jayasinghe Committee Report (1995) on Police Reforms spoke eloquently of the impact these constitutional provisions had on the Police. They all spoke of how undue political interference undermined the moral of the Service, led to a poor public image, and loss of public respect or cooperation.
Jayasinghe Committee
In 1995 once again a three-man Committee was appointed by the President headed by Mr. W. T. Jayasinghe, a former Secretary to the Ministry of Defence ‘to inquire into and report on the reorganization of the Police Service’. The Jayasinghe Committee in particular in their report said that all the officers who appeared before them agreed that undue pressure was brought to bear in the matter of appointments, promotions, postings, and even transfers. These undue pressures were mostly from politicians and those close to politicians. They also agreed that this was one of the main reasons for the breakdown of discipline, loss of morale, and high incidence of corruption in the police. The interference did not stop with personnel matters like transfers, promotions, etc. It extended even to operational matters like criminal investigations.
As a result of the increasing incidence of interference by MPs in investigations, the Committee said that some of the officers who were fair and acted impartially were removed and transferred from their stations overnight at the instance of an MP because the offender happened to be a supporter of the MP, and yet others who had a well-known track record of corruption or inefficiency were promoted over the heads of those conscientious and dedicated officers. They also pointed out how in recent years junior officers have been promoted over their seniors, ostensibly on the ground of outstanding merit. This affected the morale of the entire Service.
While tracing back the history of the police to British times in an attempt to explain this phenomenon, the Committee said that the sole function of the police during that time was to safeguard the interests of the rulers. Even after Independence, the stance of the police did not change. The prime duty of the police now became the safety of the State instead. In the process, the police saw their immediate role to be safeguarding the interests of the government in power which eventually took the form of safeguarding the interests of the Members of Parliament (MP) of the ruling party.
They then went on to show how this relationship between the Police Officer and the MP became a particularly sensitive one, much more than that with other Government Officials because of the special demands of those constituents close to him to help them escape the rigorous application of the law by the police. Since every Government is faced with this dilemma resulting from this sensitive relationship between the MP and his constituents and consequently the MP and the police, the Committee thought that in the circumstance it would help the Government and the MPs themselves if a Police Service Commission is established as recommended by the Basnayake Police Commission in 1970 by easing the constituents’ pressure on MPs on police matters on the one hand, and that it will also go a long way to restore the morale and confidence in the police themselves on the other.
Almost all the officers who appeared before the Commission were “vehemently in support of the establishing of such a Commission.” They were further of the view that the Commission should play an active role, unlike the previous PSC in laying down policies and ensuring that they are scrupulously followed. Therefore, while recommending the establishment of a Police Service Commission they were of the view that the Commission should be appointed by the Constitutional Council of the Parliament and the members of that Commission should consist of senior serving or retired administrators, judicial officers, police administrators, and academics in sociology. They also suggested that the Constitution should be suitably amended to give effect to the establishment of a Police Service Commission. The recommendations were of no avail. Once again, the government did nothing to implement these recommendations.
17th Amendment
These recommendations however lay ignored for more than three decades when suddenly came the 17th Amendment, after a long period of inaction. The 17th Amendment was not the result of any of these recommendations. It was the result of some politicians in the opposition waking up from their slumber about police reforms and thinking of acting only after they had been themselves victims of delayed reforms and at the receiving end of a series of events affecting their political interests.
The 17th Amendment was the result of a political initiative launched by Members of Parliament in the Opposition led by the United National Party in 2001. The move was prompted by the violence and alleged election malpractices that was present during the Waymaba Provincial Council Elections in 1998, where it was alleged that “massive thuggery and vote rigging took place on an unprecedented scale”. It was not surprising that the UNP should take the lead because it was, they who suffered most during the election campaign being the victims of their constitutional device introduced during the UNP regime in 1978 placing unlimited power in the hands of the President. The Amendment naturally sought to neutralize or curb those powers vested in the President by Chapter IX of the Constitution of 1978.
The Amendment had its origins in the Report of the Citizens’ Consultation on Free and Fair Elections and De-politicisation of Key Institutions, which was set up by the Leader of the Opposition. That year a Drafting Committee was set up under the chairmanship of Mr. Karu Jayasuriya, MP where the OPA was represented by its General Secretary. A report was drawn up by the Citizens’ Consultation but it lay dormant till 2000 when a first draft of the 17th amendment was made.
After further consultation with an Expert Committee where three Senior Deputy Inspectors-General assisted in Police matters, a preliminary draft was presented by the OPA to the political parties. But what ultimately came out in Parliament on October 3, 2001 was something entirely different from the OPA draft. Even then, out of all the Institutions set up under the 17th Amendment, the National Police Commission was the most criticized by the politicians in the ruling party. If not for the JVP who put pressure on the PA Government, the 17th Amendment would not have seen the light of day even in this form.
Nevertheless, the Amendment wittingly or unwittingly introduced some of the measures contained in the recommendations made by the Basnayake Police Commission and the Jayasighe Committee. One of the major recommendations of the Basnayake Commission was the establishment of a separate Police Service Commission outside the jurisdiction of the PSC with an amendment to the Constitution. The 17th Amendment has already taken this step. It has also met the condition set by Jayasinghe Committee that the Police Service Commission be appointed by a Constitutional Council.
One of the other major conditions set by the Basnayake Police Commission was the Security of Tenure of the Inspector-General. It said that “An Inspector-General who has reached the age of optional retirement or has only a few years to reach that age is haunted by the fear that if he does not please those in power he may be retired either at once or the moment he reaches the age of optional retirement.” They pointed out that the head of so important a department being haunted by such fear in the performance of his very responsible duties is not in the public interest. The Basnayake Commission, therefore, recommended that the Inspector-General should be protected against the irresponsible exercise of the power of removal.
This safeguard is now provided by the Amendment under Article 41C by way of subsequent legislation in the form of Act No. 5 of 2002 which stipulates that the Inspector-General (amongst others) shall not be removed from office except following the procedure laid down in the Act. But, the power of grating extension of service is still in the hands of the President. That has not changed and the Amendment is silent on the matter. So, he will continue to be haunted by the fear of the threat of retirement and that fear will continue to hang over the incumbent like the ‘Sword of Damocles’ in the future as well if steps are not taken to rectify this situation sooner than later.
Therefore, it will not be a matter of surprise if he continues to secure his position by pleasing those in power to stay in office despite the many safeguards provided to bring the status quo back to square one. The amendment had several other deficiencies as well (for a detailed discussion on the subject, refer to the original article written by the same author, titled ‘Police. Politics and the 17th Amendment’ published in OPA Journal Vol.22 – May 2007).
Even if this fear is effectively removed through Constitutional Amendment, recent experience has shown that this argument is somewhat flawed in the present context of things considering the tendency some incumbents have shown to overreach their term to secure their position so that they could continue to remain in office even after reaching the age of retirement. The temptation not only to prolong his stay in office as long as possible but also to try and secure high office even thereafter has been reinforced by the recent practice of the governments offering prestigious postings abroad to the retiring Inspectors- General.
This encourages a ‘you scratch my back and I scratch yours’ kind of attitude. It also vitiates all the good intentions contained in the legislation designed to ensure the impartiality of the police by securing the tenure of the Head of the Department. The remedy may, therefore, lie in the appointment of the IGP for a fixed period of the contract, say for 3-4 years (as was the practice previously but discontinued later) with a ‘Retirement Package’ that will enable him to live comfortably without the lure of extensions beyond retirement age, ambassadorial postings or another high office so that he could do his duty by the people.
These, however, are safeguards against an IGP in office. What are the safeguards against the chances of an unscrupulous aspirant getting into office through political lobbying? This has often remained an open question probably until the next IGP stakes. So, safeguards have to be built not only against undue political pressure on the incumbent IGP but also against aspirants from getting to the top post through political lobbying. All other safeguards that have been proposed would be set at naught for having secured the post through lobbying it will be natural for the incumbent to feel obliged to his political Godfathers to ensure he continues in office.
So, when we are discussing ways and means of building public confidence in the police, what should be uppermost in our minds is not only an ‘Independent Police Commission’, but also an independent Head of the Police who by the circumstances of his appointment alone can infuse confidence in the public. Selection procedures (similar to the appointment to the post of Vice Chancellor) that are transparent enough to infuse public confidence in the appointment of the Inspector General have to be put in place in the future towards this end, without delay. Therefore, the need of the hour is not to rush with deadlines for reasons of expediency but to study the problem in-depth and bring meaningful reforms that will restore public confidence in the police, in due process, and in democracy.
Conclusions
The various Commissions on Constitutional Reforms from Colebrook-Cameron to Soulbury and several Police Commissions/Committees on Police Reforms such as Basnayake Police Commission, Subasinghe Committee, and Jayasinghe Committee on Police Reforms have all repeated the ill effects of political interference in the functioning of Police (one of the watchdogs of Democracy) ad nauseam and at great length.
But the provisions in the 1972 Republican Constitution concerning transfers, promotions, etc. of the public officers and its repetition in the next constitution in 1978 demonstrated the determination that has taken the better of politicians of all hues in this country against saner counsel opposing undue political interference in government affairs. Then came the 18th Amendment putting the clock back on all that has been achieved by the 17th Amendment. It simply demonstrated the obstinacy of those in power wanting to politicize everything under the sun.
The outcome of this undue political interference is a Police that is servile, inefficient, corrupt, and pliable that has lost Public Respect. Having lost their Legitimacy in the eyes of the Public they have forfeited their right to Public Support and their Respect for the Law (and the Police themselves). What is therefore at stake is not only the legitimacy of the Police but the very legitimacy of the government itself putting Public Security in jeopardy. That is why people have taken the Law into their own hands and resorted to mass action.
This is an ominous trend that needs to be remedied without delay. What is at stake is the legitimacy of all governments as could be seen from the peoples’ ‘uprisings’ in the form of protests, demonstrations, violence, etc. which are only symptoms of the deep malaise. Police are the bulwark of a democracy. If the Police fail all else will fail in a democracy. Playing with police is playing with fire. Therefore, it is time that civil society woke up from its slumber and take timely steps without waiting to shut the stables after the horses have bolted
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
