Features
Dissenting judgement on MR, GR, BR, PB & Cabraal
by. C. A. Chandraprema
The manner in which Justice Priyantha Jayawardena’s dissenting judgement on the two fundamental rights cases numbered 195/2022 and 212/2022 was reported on by sections of the media would convey the impression that it was based entirely on the technical point that the petitioners had not come before the SC within the time frame specified by the Constitution. Justice Jayawardena’s dissenting judgement does state that: “I hold that the parties have not invoked the jurisdiction of this court within one month of the alleged infringements as required by Article 126(2) of the Constitution”. However, that is not the only reason for him to dissent. His dissenting judgement also states, “I am of the view that the petitioners have not established on a balance of probability that the respondents have infringed the Fundamental Rights of the petitioners.”
One of the ways in which the dissenting judgement shows that the petitioners had not approached the SC within the time frame stipulated in the Constitution can be summarised as follows:
* The SC/FR Application No. 195/2022 was filed in the Supreme Court on the 3rd of June, 2022 and SC/FR Application No. 212/2022 was filed on the 17th of June, 2022.
* The reduction in taxes was based on a Cabinet Paper dated 26 November, 2019.
* According to the petitioners, the rating agencies downgraded Sri Lanka immediately after the tax cuts were announced. Hence, according to the petitioner’s own showing, the alleged infringement took place on the day that the Commissioner General of the Inland Revenue published the public notices informing the tax cuts in the years 2019 and 2020.
* Furthermore, the tax reductions referred to in the two petitions were enacted into law in terms of the Inland Revenue Act of 2021, the Value Added Tax Act of 2021, the Economic Service Charge Act of 2021 and the Nation Building Tax Act of 2021, etc.
* Some of these Bills relating to fiscal legislation were challenged in the Supreme Court. However, the petitioners did not challenge any of the said legislation during the legislative process. Hence, they are now estopped from challenging the legislative process. In any event, anyone who sleeps over their rights is not entitled to challenge any decisions after the stipulated time period imposed by law.
* The dates and events referred to above in this judgment show that the said events took place long before the two Fundamental Rights Applications were filed in court.
Quoting the Auditor General’s Report which had drawn attention to a presentation made by Prof. W D Lakshman on 06 January 2020, the judgement observed that the “…tax relief measures are expected to stimulate the economy while actively contributing to improve business confidence …” A segment in the judgement titled Fiscal Policy elaborated as follows:
“Tax cuts are expected to free up disposable income and the circulation of money in the economy and push positive growth values in the medium and long term. Furthermore, reducing taxes improves the economy by boosting spending. Moreover, a corporate income tax cut leads to a sustained increase in Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and productivity. Tax cuts also increase funding available for businesses and may increase production and investment. Moreover, high taxes discourage work and investment. Taxes create a “wedge” between what the employer pays and what the employee receives, so some jobs are not created. High marginal tax rates also discourage people from working overtime or from making new investments. However, tax cuts reduce government revenue and lead to budget deficits or growth in government debt … In his first address to the Congress on the 28th of February, 2001, George W. Bush said, “To create economic growth and opportunity, we must put money back into the hands of the people who buy goods and create jobs.”
Going to the IMF
With regard to the question of going to the IMF to seek a bailout package, the dissenting judgement observed that the decision not to go to the IMF had been communicated to the Parliament on the 10th of December, 2021 by the then finance minister and that the Cabinet of Ministers had decided on 3 January, 2022, not to get the assistance of the IMF and to have a homegrown solution to the fiscal and economic issues that were faced by the country at the time. A Cabinet Memorandum dated 2 January, 2022 had observed that “It would not be incorrect to state that an IMF programme will require the country to accept conditions that will further disrupt the social fabric of the country. While it is acknowledged that an IMF programme will enable the country to access the capital markets with better ease, it is our experience that none of the IMF programmes since the late 60s, have resulted in any lasting reforms being implemented in the country.”
The dissenting judgement observed that “The IMF assists member nations in different capacities. Its most important function is the ability to provide loans to member nations in need of bailouts. Further, if a country has a deficit in its balance of payments, the IMF can step in to fill the gap. However, borrowing governments must adhere to the conditions attached to these loans by the IMF, including prescribing economic and fiscal policies … Moreover, such conditions may cause severe hardships to the general public of the country that seeks assistance from the IMF. Hence, some countries are reluctant to seek the assistance of the IMF. Furthermore, there are instances where countries seek the assistance of the IMF as a last resort and may give up the IMF programmes without completing them due to their inability to comply with the stringent conditions imposed by the IMF. In fact, on several occasions, Sri Lanka has discontinued IMF programmes due to its inability to comply with the conditions laid down by the IMF….”
“In the circumstances, I am of the view that the petitioners have not established that the policy decision of the government not to go to the IMF was grossly arbitrary or irrational. On the contrary, the Auditor General’s Report tendered to court, and the material filed by the respondents, particularly the aforementioned Cabinet Memoranda and the decisions of the Cabinet of Ministers, show that the government has considered the pros and cons of going to the IMF, the past experiences with the IMF, the effects of obtaining assistance from the IMF will have on the economy and the people, and thereafter taken the policy decision not to go to the IMF.”
Matters of govt. policy
The dissenting judgement has taken into account the report of the Auditor General, where the latter is quoted in Sinhala as having stated that the three issues on which the SC had ordered the Auditor General to report back on, pertained to policy decisions of the government and that different parties may give varying interpretations as to the favourable or unfavourable consequences of a policy decision. The Auditor General has also observed that any assessment of the consequences of those decisions will have to take into account the situation created by the Covid pandemic which affected not only Sri Lanka but the entire world. He has further stated that he is not in a position to determine the best way in which limited foreign reserves should be used in a given set of circumstances. The dissenting judgement further observed:
“… the Auditor General … has evaluated the three issues on which he was directed to report to this court. In his report, he has stated that it is not possible to determine whether a loss had been caused to the Central Bank. Further, he has not specified any violations with regard to any of the matters that were referred to him by the court …. However, though the said report stated there are delays in taking decisions by the Monetary Board and the government, it does not set out any specific violations of the law by the respondents. Hence, I am of the view that there is no expert evidence before this court to decide on the economic and fiscal issues raised in the said two applications.”
The dissenting judgement observed that when it comes to policy matters, “the court would leave policy matters for those who are qualified to address the issues, unless the policy or action is inconsistent with the Constitution and laws, grossly arbitrary or irrational … Furthermore, the courts cannot express their opinion as to whether, at a particular point in time or in a particular situation, any such policy should have been introduced or not, or repealed, particularly when a policy is accepted by Parliament either at reading of the budget or in any other instances. Hence, it should be left to the discretion of the government …”
“Moreover, complex executive decisions in economic matters may be empirical or based on experimentation. Its validity cannot be tested on rigid principles or the application of any straitjacket formula. In such matters, even experts may seriously or doubtlessly differ. Courts cannot be expected to decide them, even with the aid of experts. Thus, the courts do not interfere with policy matters or economic decisions, as such matters are highly technical and even experts in that field hold different opinions on the same point.”
The debt trap
The dissenting judgement quotes a Cabinet Memorandum dated 2 January, 2022 under the heading “Economy 2022 and the way forward” which stated the following:
“In fact, it would be pertinent to note that the economic challenges of today are due to two key decisions of the Yahapalana government, which are;
“The aggressive borrowing in the International Bond markets resulted in the country borrowing USD 12 billion dollars during 2015-2019 with USD 6.9 billion being borrowed during a 14 months period of April 2018 to May 2019. As a result, the country’s foreign currency debt stock reached almost 50% of the total debt stock at the end of 2019 with the stock of ISB’s at wound USD 15 billion. This has now reduced to USD 13 billion”.
“Reduction in the price of Petrol and Diesel in 2015, without any thought to recouping the losses of Ceylon Petroleum Corporation (CPC) or the Ceylon Electricity Board (CEB) or to the possibility of an increase in global oil prices”.
“It is noted that of the USD 12 billion so raised only around USD 2 billion had been utilized to settle ISBs, while the bulk seems to have been utilized to finance the imports, especially cars and other passenger vehicles. In fact, consumption of fuel which had decreased by the end 2014 has increased surpassing the previous consumption volumes although economic growth saw a steady decline”.
Impact of the pandemic
The dissenting judgement also draws attention to the Auditor General’s Report furnished to court which had stated: “The Executive Board of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) concluded the Article IV consultation with Sri Lanka on 25 February 2022. The press release No. 22/54 in this regard had been issued on 02 March 2022. Highlights of the press release are as follows. Sri Lanka has been hit hard by COVID-19. On the eve of the pandemic, the country was highly vulnerable to external shocks owing to inadequate external buffers and high risks to public debt sustainability, exacerbated by the Easter Sunday terrorist attacks in 2019 and major policy changes including large tax cuts at late 2019. Real GDP contracted by 3.6 percent in 2020, due to a loss of tourism receipts and necessary lockdown measures. Sri Lanka lost access to international sovereign bond market at the onset of the pandemic”.
The dissenting judgement further observed that: “Moreover, it is pertinent to note that the effects of COVID-19 were similar or more adverse to the effects that were caused during the ‘Great Depression’ economic crisis in 1929. It adversely affected our export income, which brought forex to the country. Similarly, the said pandemic reduced foreign employment opportunities and thereby adversely affected one of Sri Lanka’s main foreign earnings”.
“In fact, the effects of the Easter Sunday bombings and the adverse effects of COVID-19, particularly, the unexpectedly large expenditure incurred for island-wide vaccination programmes and quarantine centres, long periods of lockdowns, island-wide curfews, political uncertainty and rivalry, public protests against implementing the economic policies of the government, specifically with regard to privatisation, litigation challenging the privatisation of State entities and geopolitical issues, disturbed the implementation of the policies of the government. Further, such matters adversely affected the income from tourism and witnessed the withdrawal of overseas and local investors from Sri Lanka. Hence, all such unexpected intervening factors immensely contributed to the economic and financial collapse in Sri Lanka”.
“The IMF country reports and the Cabinet Memorandums filed in court show that the fiscal and economic issues that arose in the year 2022 were partly as a result of accumulated debts that have taken place for several decades. Thus, it is not ‘just and equitable’ to hold the respondents responsible for violations of Fundamental Rights only by considering limited materials filed in court for the period commencing from 2019”.
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
