Features
In defence of the line of seniority
STANDING UP FOR CONVICTIONS AND STANDARDS
(EXCERPTED FROM SENIOR DIG (RETD) MERRIL GUNARATNE’S “PERILS OF A PROFESSION”)
The process of altering the line of seniority began to occur with monotonous regularity after 1977, due to acts of both politicians as well as police officers. When I was director of the National Intelligence Bureau in 1984, General D S Attygalle, Secretary of Defence, summoned me to the Defence Ministry and requested me to file a confidential report about SSP Tilak Iddamalgoda. He said the President had wanted this in view of complaints received against him in the context of impending promotions to the DIG rank of three officers: Kingsley Wickramasuriya, Neil Weerasinghe and Iddamalgoda.
I instinctively felt that insidious elements were at play, and in the presence of Cyril Herath who was director general of Intelligence and General Attygalle, informed the latter that I would not like to file a report since I was next in line of seniority to Iddamalgoda and would be promoted if the latter was denied promotion. Secretary of Defence then said that it was a directive from the president. I said that I would call for a report from my deputy and submit it without comment. I also added that I would “not like to cut an officer’s neck” and secure a promotion. The Secretary agreed with my proposal.
I thereafter directed my deputy to submit a report telling him that I did not wish to obstruct the officer concerned and secure a promotion at his expense. After a few days, my deputy brought me his report which was not favourable to the officer concerned. Expressing my dismay, I prepared a fresh, favourable report and requested my deputy to sign it. Iddamalgoda against whom a frivolous complaint with malevolent motives had been made, was thus able to obtain his deserved promotion. Neither the President nor Secretary of Defence found fault with me for my course of action. Expressing the truth candidly paid dividends.
A challenge to my own position in the line of seniority.
I was not a favourite of President Premadasa possibly because I had an excellent official relationship with President Jayewardene. It was in these circumstances that I was transferred out of the intelligence assignment in the Defence Ministry to serve as DIG of the Greater Colombo range in mid 1989. Not long after, there were well founded rumours that a DIG subordinate to me was being groomed to be the IGP and that the line of seniority was to be interfered with to facilitate this. I believe the premature retirements of Messrs Rajaguru, Iddamalgoda and Wickramasuriya had much to do with this plan. I was not to be dislodged, but heard that the “favourite” earmarked to be the IGP was to be placed above me in the seniority list by the grant of special increments.
Since 1977, I had always voiced strong views about what I then called the “rape of the seniority line.” In fact I had made room for Iddamalgoda to be promoted, while holding the prestigious post of director of the National Intelligence Bureau. I could have reversed his fortunes and acquired a promotion at his expense. I decided to confront President Premadasa and express my displeasure about plans to place a subordinate officer above me in the seniority line. The president about this time visited one of my areas, Kalutara, for the mobile Presidential Secretariat, and lodged for the night at the circuit bungalow of the Special Task Force. I got an opportunity to speak to him in the circuit bungalow. The president said, ” Gunaratne, what is your problem?” I replied as follows: ” Excellency, there is a move by an officer junior to me to overtake me. I am second to none. If it happens, I will resign from the service”.
For about 10-15 seconds, the president simply looked at me, perhaps startled at my boldness. He then regained his composure and said “I will speak to General Ranatunga, (Secretary of Defence) now. You call him in the night. I will see that you are not overtaken”. His assurance convinced me that the plan had been so well hatched that even the secretary of defence was well aware of it. When speaking, General Ranatunga gave me the impression that he was surprised as to how I had the nerve to speak to the president.
The “compromise formula” the establishment then hatched was for the junior officer to be granted a special increment, but not seniority over me. My position in the seniority line was thus not disturbed because I was not afraid to tell the truth to the head of state and government. It had been unfortunate that many officers who had been overtaken by juniors with influence, had not asserted themselves by making strong protests.
The run up to the general election of 1993
At that time, I was senior DIG of all territorial ranges in the country. DB Wijetunge was president. During the pre-election period, the Attanagalla electorate was tense, since an SLFP supporter had been shot dead, presumably by a UNPer. Gamini Silva who retired as a senior DIG, was SSP Gampaha police division at the time. On a Saturday, President Wijetunge telephoned me and ordered me to take police resources from Colombo and raid the SLFP office at Attanagalla saying that guns stored there were being used to harass political opponents. The party office was the base of Chandrika Kumaratunga who was leading the SLFP at the elections.
I phoned SSP Gamini Silva and ascertained that the guns in the party office were those of security officers. Armed with this information, I visited President’s House, met the president and told him that the weapons in the SLFP office at Attanagalla were legitimate ones and that hence there was no basis to raid it. The president did not take offence, and concurred with what I said.
The following morning, about 8 a.m. on a Sunday, I was again summoned to President’s House. When I entered his office, Paul Perera, minister and MP for Attanagalla was seated with him. The president addressed me and said that SSP Gampaha Gamini Silva should be transferred immediately. When I inquired for the reason, he said that the officer was very partial to the People’s Alliance, and that Minister Paul Perera had no doubt about bias being displayed by the SSP. I then confronted the minister with the question, “Sir, you liked him for so long, why did you suddenly change your mind?” The minister I think took offence, stared at me and said, “He is working for the Peoples Alliance”. I then told the president, “Sir, the SSP is a good officer and is not taking any sides. If you insist on transferring him, please first remove me from my post”. The president then decided not to persist with the matter.
A few days after requesting the transfer of SSP Gampaha, the president again telephoned me about an incident which had occurred in Maho. I was acquainted with the incident since in my post as Senior DIG (Ranges), I was monitoring election incidents in police ranges and divisions on a daily basis. The incident about which the president spoke was one where some UNPers had stormed the house of a SLFP supporter armed with dangerous weapons, in order to cause serious harm and damage to persons and property. The inmates of the house had no option but to defend themselves, and in the melee, one of the assailants had lost his life. The president spoke to me and gave a different version of the event. According to him, the UNPer was dragged from the road into the house and done to death.
I think what he expected of me was to distort the correct picture at the inquest. I patiently explained that his version was incorrect, and that according to evidence the ‘invader’ had met with his death amid the house residents exercising their right of self defence. I remember telling the president on the phone, “I am sorry Excellency, I can’t make the accused appear like the victim”. I think the president appreciated my frankness and did not insist on the police building evidence to support the version he had been given. The officers who worked with me in my secretariat monitoring election violence were present when the president spoke to me on the phone.
Minister Gamini Dissanayake’s hostile remarks
When serving as Director General of Intelligence and Security (DGIS) in the ministry of defence, I was once summoned by President Jayewardene to his residence somewhere in 1987. I did not know why I was required. Minister Gamini Dissanayake arrived shortly after me. He entered the office room of the president. A short while later I was called in. I saw a report of mine on the table in front of the president. He said, “Gamini, tell us about Trincomalee”. The minister gave a somewhat glowing report about the work of the Indian Peace Keeping Force (IPKF) in Trincomalee. I realized that the minister had arrived at the president’s residence straight after an observation tour of Trincomalee. When the minister was briefing the president and praising the IPKF, I anticipated the latter asking for my views because the report I had submitted to the president about a week prior and which was before him, was critical of the IPKF performance in Trincomalee.
Just as I guessed, the president turned to me and asked for my views. I had to disagree with the views of the minister because I could not deviate from the content of my report which was before the president. The minister took offense, lost his temper and did not certainly address me in polite terms. I then requested the president to transfer me out of my post if I was not equal to the task (of handling that kind of crticism). The minister then said “sorry Merril”, and continued to discuss some other matters with the president.
Conference of Chief Minister of Western Province at Sethsiripaya in early 1990’s
Susil Moonesinghe, Chief Minister of Western Province, held a conference at the behest of President Premadasa at Sethsiripaya in order to explore ways of keeping Colombo and the suburbs clean. Police officials and heads of local government bodies attended the conference in large numbers. I remember the presence of over 200 participants. When the conference was in progress, Colombo Mayor Ratnasiri Rajapakse stated that the accumulation of dirt and garbage was a regular sight in front of the Pettah police station. The Chief Minister quipped, “Police are collectors of dirt, no?”, provoking laughter.
I felt that the unwanted derisive remark brought the police service to ridicule and thought it appropriate to express protest. Incidentally, I was DIG (Greater Colombo) at the time. The remark was actually in respect of Colombo which was administered by DIG AS Seneviratne. I rose from my seat amidst laughter, and addressing the Chief Minister, said, “Sir, I think it is a very unkind cut, you should withdraw it”. The chief minister immediately said in response, “I am sorry Merril, I am withdrawing it”. I had always believed that a public service should not be treated in a derisive manner in the presence of others for frivolous reasons.
Conference of President Kumaratunga at Temple Trees in 1997
The occasion was the presentation of the report by a committee assigned to examine ways of preventing abuses in regard to tobacco, drugs and alcohol to the president. The committee was headed by Tara De Mel, and I happened to be a member of a predominantly civilian body, since IGP Rajaguru had nominated me to serve on the committee. I was the only police representative in it. Incidentally, I was far from being a favourite of the president at the time, having had to face the Batalanda Commission which was directed against her political rival, Ranil Wickremesinghe.
At the commencement of the conference, Professor Sujeewa Ranaweera gave a brief on the findings of the committee, and when doing so, said that the illicit liquor menace in Chilaw district should also be eradicated. The President interjected and said “police are corrupt, you can’t stop it”. Much later the professor, when summing up findings and recommendations of the committee, again reminded the president that the illicit liquor menace in Chilaw should be eliminated. The President reiterated what she said earlier, “I told you earlier, police are corrupt, you can’t stop it”.
I felt that the police service was being held to ridicule in the presence of a body of officials when in actual fact, politicians of SLFP and UNP had been responsible for providing protection to illicit liquor dealers. I rose from my seat and said, “Excellency, I wish to express a point of view”. She said something like “go ahead”. I then said, “Excellency, it is not the police but the politicians in Chilaw who are corrupt and permit the growth of the illicit liquor menace”. I think my reaction surprised her. The president replied, “I have told the politicians not to interfere”. I thanked her and took my seat.
I later learnt that the president had removed my name from the committee. Cyril Herath, former IGP who then served as chairman NSB and the coordinator of intelligence agencies later said to me that it would have been better if I expressed what I said at the forum privately to the president. I had to explain to him that I was not sufficiently familiar to obtain an appointment with the president. I further said that it may not have been incorrect for me to have told the truth at the time of the conference.
Drought
I think there has been a drought in respect of the willingness or inclination of police seniors to express the truth to the establishment in order to protect those who have acted correctly, or where the service is needlessly ridiculed. If the service and it’s officers have to be protected, the onus lies with seniors including the IGP to express the truth to the political establishment, however unpalatable it may be. In fact, subject to exception, those in the establishment respect frankness. The expression of the truth has to be understood as the presentation of what is professionally correct. Any abdication of this responsibility which is now abundantly evident, only permits interference at all levels. I think we now continue to suffer a perpetual drought, perhaps without hope or redemption.
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
