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.