Features
Multilateral treaties are tools for global governance
By Dr. Dayantha Laksiri Mendis
“Multilateral treaties are the bones and sinews of global politic, making it possible for states to move from talk through compromise to solemn commitment.”– Professor Thomas M. Frank
BACKGROUND
The UN system is the catalyst for the creation of multilateral treaties. It is the greatest achievement of the UN system during the last 75 years. These treaties contain binding international rules relating to peace, security, trade, commerce, human rights, international humanitarian law (IHL), protection of the environment, transnational organised crime, cyber-crime, intellectual property rights, international waters, law of the sea and air transport, trafficking in illicit drugs, trade in arms, anti-corruption, money laundering, terrorism, ozone depletion, climate change, nuclear non-proliferation, etc. These multilateral treaties require the consent of States to be bound by them.
The UN Charter of 1945 is the most important multilateral treaty dealing with global governance. It outlaws war, subject to a few exceptions, and recognizes state sovereignty and equality of States. The UN Charter needs to expand the composition of the Security Council to include new regional powers in the UN system. It must incorporate a chapter on Peace Keeping and limit the use of veto powers, restrictively, to three-fourths majority. Unless these changes are made expeditiously, a new global order might emerge very soon as they have emerged already on the horizon
Multilateral treaties are the most important source of international law. They have grown exponentially since World War II. The Australian Jurist, Julius Stone, said in 1954 that in one single year, more treaties were concluded than in the whole of the 19th century. Professor Clive Parry of Cambridge said it is not possible today to understand international law or international relations without the full grasp of multilateral treaties.
Multilateral Treaty is a generic term. It includes conventions, protocols, agreements, concordats, exchanges of letters and note verbales. Treaties relating to Regional Economic Integration, such as EU, CARICOM, ECOWAS, ASEAN, etc., can be treated as multilateral treaties, but they are not universal in their application.
Multilateral treaties must be distinguished from multilateral non-treaty instruments. These constitute Resolutions of the United Nations Security Council and the Resolutions of the Specialized Agencies, MOUs, Codes of Conduct, etc. Some of the non-treaty instruments are considered “hard law” and others “soft law”. Hard law is binding on States and soft law is not binding on States. For example, Resolutions of the Security Council or the Resolutions of ICAO or IMO are binding on State Parties. These Resolutions do not require the consent of States.
Legislation giving effect to multilateral treaties and multilateral non-treaty instruments are described as implementing legislation. Such legislation is also referred to as “enabling” or “uniform” legislation. The way in which implementing legislation are drafted are of capital importance for global governance. In monist States, multilateral treaties constitute law at national level on ratification/accession by states. In dualist states, treaties do not constitute law at the national level on ratification/accession by States. Sometimes, it is necessary to enact implementation legislation in monist and dualist states to ensure compliance with international obligations.
Professor James Rosenau has described “global governance” as governance without a government. He said that the United Nations system and national governments are central to global governance, but they are only part of the full picture as many other international organisations are involved in global governance in a similar manner.
Multilateral treaties are an indispensable tool for Global Governance. It is inextricably interwoven with the UN System. Hence, any multilateral treaty violations relating to Israel, Palestine and Ukraine must cease as soon as possible. It is the most important function of the Security Council. Unfortunately, they were unable to implement a good resolution due to veto powers.
In this context, it is necessary to identify the birth and development of multilateral treaties in the global community.
BIRTH AND DEVELOPMENT OF MULTILATERAL TREATIES
The birth of multilateral treaties dates back to the 1815 Concert of Europe. In Vienna, almost all European states, whether big or small, met for the first time to determine the future of Europe after the disastrous Napoleonic wars. The former US Secretary of State, Dr Henry Kissinger wrote his doctoral dissertation on the 1815 Concert of Europe and observed its importance to multilateral relations and diplomacy. In his book, he illustrated the relevance of the Vienna spirit of “give and take” as an indispensable requirement for the negotiation and conclusion of multilateral treaties to arrive at consensus. In drafting the UN Charter 1945 a more liberal give and take approach was adopted than League of Nations 1919. (Henry A. Kissinger, A World Restored: Metternich, Castlereagh and the Problems of Peace 1812-1822, Literary Licensing, LLC, 2011).
Multilateral treaty drafting is different in today’s world and includes actors such as inter-governmental organisations (IGOs), non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and the International Law Commission. It is a protracted process in which the “rolling text” undergoes many changes. A diplomat or a legal practitioner involved in treaty drafting must have a good knowledge of the legal character of treaties and the widely differing functions of treaty provisions. A treaty drafter must have an interdisciplinary knowledge of the subject matter of the draft treaty and the form and structure of treaties, including the final clauses. (Anthony Aust, Modern Treaty Law and Practice, (Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, 2000; Jan Klabbers, The Concept of Treaty in International Law (Martinus Nijhoff Publishers: The Hague, 1996).
Interpretation of multilateral treaties is crucial for global governance Such interpretation must be undertaken by state parties, legal counsel or by international and national courts and tribunals in accordance with Vienna Rules enshrined in articles 31 and 32 of the VCLT, 1969. It is a moot point (1) whether Article 51 of the UN Charter allows pre-emptive self-defence (Bush doctrine) and the right to protection in a humanitarian crisis; (2) whether the use of drones is legal in the fight against terrorism vis-à-vis international humanitarian law principles; and (3) whether enhanced interrogation techniques fall within the definition of “torture”.
The interpretation of the relevant multilateral treaties has become complex as the global order is threatened by abominable acts – terrorism, aggression, money-laundering and other transnational organised crimes. In Ukraine and Palestine, there is a requirement to apply International Humanitarian Law (IHL) and Human Rights Law standards to resolve problems and challenges encountered in Ukraine and Palestine in the long term.
Multilateral treaties are necessary for global governance at national and international level. At the national level, all three organs of the State must play a pro-active role regarding implementation of such treaties and implementing legislation as illustrated by Lord McNair in his monumental work on Law of Treaties. At the international level, state parties, international organisations and international courts and tribunals play an important role in the implementation process.
UNSC is authorised to impose sanctions or engage in the use of force – as Kofi Annan said – if diplomacy fails, in the first Iraq war, under the collective security paradigm. Unfortunately, sanctions have been imposed or concessions have been given to some states selectively for geo-political reasons.
Resolutions of the UN Human Rights Council are also important for global governance. Their binding nature on States is controversial. Sri Lanka has had difficulties regarding Geneva Resolution 30/1 of 2015 and 40/1 of 2021. These Resolutions deal with the establishment of a hybrid court to investigate accountability during the North-East armed conflict which ended in 2009.
These Resolutions have raised constitutional and legal issues regarding their implementation. Unfortunately, Sri Lanka has not raised up to now Article 46 of VCLT 1969 as a defense for non-implementation.
Implementing Legislation contributes to global governance at the national level. It is a specialised branch of legislative drafting. According to Francis Bennion, treaties are transformed directly by incorporating the treaty in a Schedule or indirectly by re-drafting/re-phrasing the treaty in a manner consistent with the style and form of national legislation.
Implementing legislation also plays an important role in global governance at the national level. Literal interpretation is not suitable for the interpretation of implementing legislation as there is a need to harmonise the legislative provisions with treaty norms and standards in the interpretation of implementing legislation. Various Interpretation Acts across the world have been amended to enable the courts and tribunals to consult extrinsic material in the interpretation of implementing legislation. This paradigm shift in the interpretative technique augurs well for global governance.
Implementing legislation are subject to international compliance and control measures by UN treaty regimes. These treaty regimes require submission of reports, establish verification processes, review mechanisms or engage in diplomatic efforts to ensure compliance. Any intervention by treaty regimes with respect to the implementation of treaty standards must not be construed as an infringement of state sovereignty.
IMPACT OF MULTILATERAL TREATIES ON STATE SOVEREIGNTY
The ratification or accession to multilateral treaties impact on state sovereignty as states are bound (pacta sunt servanda) to implement them. State sovereignty and multilateral treaties may collide at times.
These collisions need to be resolved by state parties by reference to treaty law and practice
In monist states, ratification/accession to multilateral treaties requires the consent of Parliament, Congress or the Senate. In the US, the consent of two-thirds of the Senate is necessary for ratification of treaties. It is a difficult process. President Obama was unable to obtain the consent of the Senate for the ratification of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, 1982. Likewise, President Woodrow Wilson in 1919 was unable to obtain its consent to ratify the Covenant of the League of Nations as the US Senate was bent on “isolationism”. Perhaps, the history of the world would have been very different in the 20th century if the US Senate had provided its consent.
In dualist States, multilateral treaties require implementing legislation. However, there is an emerging constitutional and parliamentary practice to enact implementing legislation before the ratification of important treaties. Many Commonwealth countries now require States to undertake ratification of multilateral treaties with the approval of Parliament.
CONCLUDING REMARKS
Multilateral treaties and multilateral non-treaty instruments impact on global governance and rule-based order. When major multilateral treaties relating to global governance are ratified or acceded by majority of states, it might help the community of states to co-exist without a violent confrontation. No state has a right to override Geneva Conventions or human rights conventions except in exceptional circumstances. Palestine and Ukraine are no exceptions.
The US and Russian exceptionalism to certain international standards and norms create difficulties in the emerging global order. In a multipolar world, it is up to the middle powers and powerful regional economic organisations such as EU, ASEAN, UNASUR, AU, CARICOM, etc., to create a balance between global interest and national interest if these two interests are to co-exist in the emerging world order.
Multilateral treaties and multilateral non-treaty instruments are increasing in volume. At least one-fourth of the Legislative Agenda of Parliaments in developed and developing countries relates in one way or another to these treaties. These two legal instruments are indispensable for international cooperation, international coordination, inter-dependence and above all in maintaining peace and security in a rapidly changing world.
In the 21st century, everything is changing – bit by bit – in front of our very eyes through multilateral treaties and multilateral non-treaty instruments. Unless UNSC is reformed in a multipolar world, UNSC will become a toothless Council in a changing world where new Organisations are emerging to resolve international problems and challenges in a more equitable manner. Unfortunately, USA is losing an opportunity to be the leader of the free world by not balancing the regional interest and national interest in Ukraine and Palestine in an equitable manner
(The author was the former Ambassador and Permanent Representative to the United Nations in Vienna, Austria. He served the UN/DTCD, New York, for many years. He is, at present, the President of the Association of Former International Civil Servants (AFICS). Email : mendis_law@yahoo.com
).
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
