Features
Easter Sunday Bomb Attack on April 21, 2019:
The author is a staunch advocate of police reforms and was one of those who contributed to the proposal put up by the OPA in 2001 that brought some police reforms in the form of the 17th Amendment to the Constitution.
In Retrospect
By Dr. Kingsley Wickremasuriya
Senior Deputy Inspector- General of Police (Retd)
E-mail: kingsley.wickremasuriya@gmail.com
Prologue
It is more than two years since the infamous bomb attack on civilian targets in Colombo, Negombo, and Batticaloa took place on Easter Sunday, 2019. Now that the dust from the political fallout from the incident is almost settling down (or is it?) it would be opportune to look back at the events that took place dispassionately removed from a politically charged environment. Undertaking such a task is particularly pertinent in view of the lingering protests and statements made by the Catholic Church representing the victims expressing fears that there would be a repetition of the violence.
Although many theories have been advanced in the public domain as to who is responsible for the failure to prevent the attack on Easter Sunday, prima facie it would seem that the failure is a clear Neglect of Duty on the part of the police, PREVENTION being its mandatory duty in terms of Section 56 of the Police Ordinance No 16 of 1866. However, looking at it from a practical point of view, invoking Section 56 alone is not realistic. Before coming to any conclusion as to where the final responsibility rests, the incident has to be analyzed in the background of many intervening socio-political factors that have intruded into the body politic of the country since the enactment of this law.
Accordingly, based on what is reported in the media on the instant case, the author would argue, that what contributed to the violence on that fateful Easter Sunday, was more a system failure than deliberate criminal negligence. Going on this premise he would venture to suggest a methodology that could prevent a repetition of another Easter Sunday.
Easter Sunday Attack
Wikipedia reported that , April 21, 2019, a series of Islamic bombings targeted three (St. Anthony’s Church, Katuwapitiya Church, a Church in Batticaloa, and three luxury hotels (the Kingsbury, Shangri-La, and Cinnamon Grand) in the country’s commercial capital, On the same day, minor explosions were reported at an apartment complex in and a lodge in At least 277 people were killed and more than 500 were injured, including at least 45 foreigners, three police officers, and eight bombers during the incident. According to the State Intelligence Service, the second series of raids were planned but were successfully stopped as a result of government raids.
Further, it is reported that all eight bombers were Sri Lankan nationals and affiliates of the . group suspected of having foreign links and has previously targeted and told parliament on April 23 that the government believed the attack was in retaliation for the March 15, 2019 attack on . However, the Tawheed Jamaat has been collecting explosives since January 2019.
While this was the local reaction, at the international level, the United Nations in Sri Lanka responded to the incident by strongly condemning the attacks against civilians carried out in places of worship and city hotels on Easter Sunday and urging the authorities, and all citizens to ensure that the rule of law is upheld.
Police Taken to Task
In the meanwhile, on Monday, November 22, 2021 ‘The Hindu’ reported that, following investigations, Sri Lanka’s former police chief was charged with criminal negligence for failing to act despite receiving prior intelligence warnings in the 2019 Easter Sunday terror attack that killed nearly 270 people, including 11 Indians. A total of 855 charges of criminal negligence were leveled against him as the Sri Lankan High Court began trial proceedings in the case, which has over 1,200 witnesses, according to the lawyers.
The ex-police chief on the other hand has told a panel probing the attack, that the former Sri Lankan President should take responsibility for the 2019 Easter Sunday bombings that claimed the lives of over 250 people, according to media reports.
Courts acquit the Police
The police chief was finally freed after a lengthy Trial at Bar on February 18, 2022 when the Colombo Permanent High Court Trial-at-Bar ordered his acquittal and release from all charges filed against him over the Easter Sunday attacks without even calling for evidence from the Defense, reported News First. If the High Court Bench have found the Inspector-General not guilty, then it is pertinent to ask the question as to who should be held responsible for the failure to prevent the carnage?
Lines of responsibility
It is a well-known fact that the police since its inception worked on the basic principle of law as given in ‘The Police Ordinance No 16 of 1866’ that “Every police officer shall for all purposes in this Ordinance contained be considered to be always on duty, and shall have the powers of a police officer in every part of Sri Lanka“. While the police in keeping with the principle of Separation of Powers draw this power from Parliament (the PEOPLE), and are held responsible to the Courts of Law (who have the power of review over the police) for the exercise of those powers, the administration of the police is vested in the Inspector-General of Police (Section 20) and policy making in the hands of the Minister (Sections 3,4,5,6,9 & 10) following on the same principle.
Further, Section 56 makes it obligatory on the part of every police officer that:
“It shall be his duty
(a) to use his best endeavors and ability to prevent all crimes, offences, and public nuisances;
(b) to preserve the peace;
(c) to apprehend disorderly and suspicious characters;
(d) to detect and bring offender s to justice;
(e) to collect and communicate intelligence affecting the public peace; and
(f) promptly to obey and execute all orders and warrants lawfully issued and directed to him by any competent authority.”
Thus, the lines of authority and responsibility drawn vis a vis the police are clear and unambiguous in law.
How the System Worked
For administration purposes the Island is divided into Police Stations, Districts, Divisions and Ranges. Police station is one of the first bulwarks of democratic government dispensing services to the community at grassroots level. Police station being the basic unit of security in the country, the Officer in Charge (OIC) of the police station played a key role in the System in maintaining law and order. In practical terms, the responsibility started at the Police Station level. The Officer in-charge of the Police (OIC) Station was responsible for securing his area against all threats to public peace. If he failed, the entire System would fail. The OIC naturally had therefore, to take the center stage of the local law and order scene.
In maintaining his position as a key link of the security system in the country, the OIC drew his strength from the Gazetted ranks (ASP & above) in playing his role and looked to his superiors for leadership and personal advancement. This expectation fulfilled, his loyalty never went beyond the Head of the Department, the Inspector-General. So, the SYSTEM worked fairly effectively (in spite of an occasional derailment) and the Police by and large stood their own against any calamity, be it coup d’état, Insurrection or communal violence or even natural disaster.
What went wrong
Although the System worked initially for some time, it was soon overwhelmed by the steadily increasing influence of the Member of Parliament (MP) over time. Various Sessional Papers on Constitutional Reforms reports of the Donoughmore Commission Report (1928), the Soulbury Commission Report (1969) and on Police Reforms such as the Soertz Police Commission Report, Basnayake Police Commission Report(1970)), Subasinghe Committee Report (1978), and Jayasinghe Committee Report (1999) give a detailed account of the gradual encroachment of the System by the MP – first in matters of transfers, promotions etc and then going even to the extent of interfering in police operations like Criminal Investigations.
The three-man Committee headed by Mr. W. T. Jayasinghe, a former Secretary to the Ministry of Defence (1995),
the last committee on Police Reforms describing the extent to which the canker had grown said:
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 increasing incidence of interference by MPP 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 the 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.
These undue pressures were mostly from politicians and those close to politicians. This was one of the main reasons for the breakdown of discipline, loss of morale and high incidence of corruption in the police, the Committee reported.
Thus, Commission after Commission and Committee after Committee reported that the evidence before them showed that there is political interference in the sphere of appointments and promotions. Such interference they said affects the impartial discharge of their duties and consequently their independence. Commenting further, they said that the efficient maintenance of law and order by the Police depends on non-interference with the performance of their duties. This is a prerequisite to the efficient maintenance of law and order. They should have the freedom of performing their duties without the fear of coming under external pressure.
The impact of this continued political onslaught on the police by those in power was subversion of the police into a feudal instrument of political subservience waiting for ’Orders from Above’ (resulting in the abdication of responsibility) than an organization providing services to the community in a democracy according to the Rule of Law. Easter Sunday attack, one cannot therefore rule out, is a direct outcome of this process.
Had it not been the case, I would imagine that the first officer to be on the scene before the attack would have been the OICC of the concerned police stations who would have communicated and shared the information (intelligence) in their possession with the Church/ hotel authorities – the mandatory duty laid down by Section 56 of the Police Ordinance. Having done that, I would imagine that they would have gone further and either posted officers in uniform overtly at the concerned sites or taken other measures like establishing check points or going even to the extent of getting the church services for the day canceled in consultation with the authorities concerned in order to deter any attacks. They could even have considered calling for a local curfew with the support of their superiors instead of waiting for orders from above.
Conclusions
Politicians’ interest in government business in this country is not a new phenomenon. It has been in existence ever since the establishment of constitutional government and the introduction of democratic institutions in Ceylon. Such interest however, is a healthy sign of a vibrant democracy. The author recognizes this development as such and the legitimate right and the duty of the elected representative to represent matters about his electorate and its constituents.
Similarly, he also recognizes the responsibility that an elected Government has towards its constituency and its accountability to the country for its actions through the government machinery and the need to implement its policy through that machinery effectively. But what is of concern here is how undue political pressure brought to bear by elected representatives of the people on those in public service in matters other than policy has been detrimental to Good Governance, Democracy and Rule of Law and how it had led to inefficiency, corruption and inaction in the Public Service. Police are no exception.
Police in a Democracy are an institution responsible for maintaining safety and security of the citizen according to the rule of law. Impartial police therefore are a sine-qua-non-if they are to ensure a just & a peaceful society. Their commitment should ideally be to serve the community “for the happiness of the many, for the welfare of the many” – bahu jana hithaya, bahu jana sukhaya. Any compromise of the role of the police beyond his legal position is bound with calamitous results as we have seen in the case of Easter Sunday attack. Therefore, if we are to prevent a repetition of another Easter Sunday in the future, political tinkering with the police and their impartiality is what must be guarded against at all costs. The way towards achieving the desired end is through repeated police reforms from time to time.
The last Commission sitting on police reforms publicly was the Basnayake Police Commission (1970) – half a century back. Others were only Committees (last Committee sitting in 1999) with a limited scope. Much water has passed under the bridge since then. Police as well as the Community had to grin and bear their grievances without a chance being given to come out with them – particularly the police who have no Trade Union Rights. It is therefore, time to call for police reforms, a task that is best left to the leadership of civil society.
BHAVATU SABBA MANGALAM.!! MAY ALL BEINGS BE HAPPY!!
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 . )
