Features
Privy Council acquits 1962 coup accused, and “nincompoops” as ambassadors
“The usual 10%” on a government purchase
(Excerpted from Memoirs of a Cabinet Secretary by BP Peiris)
The Governor-General was requested to ascertain, if possible, which way the Chief Justice’s mind was working and the Chief, apparently, gave no indication at all. To avoid a stalemate, the Government was compelled to eat humble pie and restore to the Chief Justice the Judicial Power they had wrested from him. They came b efore Parliament again with the necessary amending Bill which passed into law as the Criminal Law Act, No 31 of 1962. Except for divesting the Minister of Justice of his purported judicial power, the later Act did not touch the obnoxious provisions of the earlier Act
The Chief Justice, in the exercise of the power lawfully vested in him, constituted a Bench consisting of Sansoni, H. N. G. Fernando and L. B. de Silva, JJ to sit at Bar. In April 1965, after a very lengthy trial, the court convicted the accused, and in convicting the accused, said ‘But we must draw attention to the fact that the Act of 1962 radically altered ex post facto the punishments to which the defendants are rendered liable. The Act removed the discretion of the court as to the period of the sentence to be imposed and compels the court to impose a term of ten years’ imprisonment, although we would have wished to differentiate in the matter of sentence between those who organized the conspiracy and those who were induced to join it.
‘It also imposes a compulsory forfeiture of property. These amendments were not merely retroactive: they were also ad hoc, applicable only to the conspiracy which was the subject of the charges we have tried. We are unable to understand this discrimination. To the courts, which must be free of political bias, treasonable offences are equally heinous, whatever be the complexion of the Government in power or whoever be the offender.’
The right of appeal to the Court of Criminal Appeal having been taken away, the only remedy left to the accused was to appeal to Her Majesty in Council. In this appeal, Gratiaen, Q. C., H. W. Jayewardene, Q. C., and Dick Taverne appeared for the accused appellants. Tennekoon, Q. C., our Solicitor-General appeared for the Crown. The tomes of evidence were not read before the Board. Instead, a preliminary question of law was submitted by Gratiaen and upheld by the Privy Council. The appeals were allowed and the convictions quashed.
In holding the Acts, Nos 1 of 1962 and 31 of 1962 to be void as constituting an interference with the judicial power, their Lordships of the Privy Council said: ‘They (that is, the Acts) were aimed at particular known individuals who had been named in a White Paper and were in prison awaiting their fate… That the alterations in the law were not intended for the generality of the citizens or designed as any improvement in the general law is shown by the fact that the effect of those alterations was to be limited to participants in the January coup, and that after these had been dealt with by the judges, the law should revert to its normal state.’
And so, ended on an extremely happy note an extremely unhappy episode.
Our Ambassadorial post in Washington had been vacant for a long time and the Prime Minister informed her Ministers that the American Ambassador, Miss Willis, had suggested that an early appointment be made. The Prime Minister was again outspoken. She said it was time that they stopped appointing to top posts men of no ability merely because they were party men, that it was time they stopped the practice of appointing SLFP ‘nincompoops’ (her actual words) and that in this case a man of proved ability who could carry himself with dignity and bring honour to his country should be appointed. There was a dearth of such men in the country, she said, and she proposed the name of Shirley Amarasinghe, then Permanent Secretary to the Ministry of Finance. The Cabinet unanimously agreed and the unanimous wish of the Cabinet was conveyed to Shirley on the telephone by the Finance Minister, Felix Dias. Shirley begged to be excused.
In July 1962, yet another Queen’s Speech had to be drafted. C. P. de Silva congratulated me on my draft and suggested that I should be given a knighthood and addressed as ‘Sir Bernard’. I replied that
if that misfortune ever befell me, I would be the most impecunious knight in the Island. My draft was mutilated in Cabinet and a fresh one had to be prepared according to the oral instructions of the Ministers. Each time the Ministers saw their draft, they changed their minds, with the result that the Speech was not finally approved until the Ministers had seen my fourth attempt. The Speech was read to Parliament on July 11,1962. It stated that a vigorous policy would be followed in the implementation of the Official Language Act. This line was added by Felix Dias. In view of previous experiences, I thought it would be wiser not to refer to this thorny problem. India was following a far more sensible course.
Rajagopalachari had said that if the all-India medium is given up in the universities and the various regional languages take its place, boys and girls will stand isolated into fifteen islands instead of being common citizens of all India. Calling upon the boys and girls in the universities not to fall into the trap laid for them, he said: You will not find easy scope for employment, which is the only way by which young men and women can serve their country.
Your present mobility will become a thing of the past and you will have to suffer the life of caste and other group preferences, within a narrow boundary. You may find it easier to pass examinations and tests with a regional medium but what will be the benefit that cheap degrees and diplomas will confer on you? It would be like becoming rich with debased money. Hindi cannot take the place of English as an all-India medium and even if it did, we would have surrendered all advantages to those whose mother tongue is Hindi.
The Speech also contained a line which stated that Parliament would be asked to consider a Bill for the removal of Press monopolies. The Government appeared to be determined to take over the Times of Ceylon and the Lake House newspapers. Resolutions were being passed by bodies all over the country against the proposed Press Bill.
One hundred and fifty editors from thirty-three countries urged the withdrawal of Ceylon’s lamentable Press Bill at a meeting in Paris. In due course, the Bill was introduced in Parliament, but had to be taken out of the Order Paper because the Minister introducing it did not follow the correct procedure. Sirimavo’s Government went out of office before further steps could be taken.
The “Daily News” critic severely criticized the Sinhala translation of the Speech. It was in fact a translation, because the Cabinet approved the English version. This was then translated into Sinhala by an officer of the Cabinet Office and into Tamil by Mudaliyar Sabanayagam, then of the Department of Information.
The critic said: ‘The people have a right to expect the Throne Speech to be flawless both in wording and phrasing. Like the Queen’s English it must possess an impeccability of diction. Yet, the melancholy fact has to be recorded that the Throne Speech read out by the Governor-General was anything but that. It was a clumsy piece of workmanship. That clumsiness arose from the fact that it was a mere translation, and as such it was an object lesson in the danger of allowing a task demanding the utmost care and precision of execution to be entrusted to the wrong hands.’
At about this time Sir Oliver, who was then in London, inquired from my brother G. S., who was our Ambassador in Burma, whether my brother would be kind enough to have him as a guest in the Embassy during a visit which he intended to make shortly to that country. My brother was very happy to receive a former Governor-General but, in the context of the past, had the sense to ask the Prime Minister for orders. Sir Oliver had obtained the necessary visas through our High Commissioner in the United Kingdom and the Burmese Ambassador there. The Burmese Government had been worried because they were unaware of the purpose of the visit. My brother was instructed to inform Sir Oliver, with much regret, of his inability to receive him.
Why is it that, with our representatives abroad today in so many foreign capitals, our Ministers fly across whenever a trade or other agreement has to be signed? It surely cannot be that our Ambassador is not competent to handle the matter. What exactly is he there for? And apropos of that, here is a story. My brother was the most senior official in one of our foreign missions at a time when Ceylon was desperately short of rice. After much correspondence between our Mission and the Ministry of External Affairs, a contract had been entered into between the Government of Ceylon and a private corporation in the foreign country for the supply of a specified quantity of rice at a certain price.
My brother had to sign the contract on behalf of the Government as our Ambassador was out of the Capital at the time. On the day of signing, the officer representing the corporation had met my brother and told him that the sum agreed to by the Government included the usual ten percent. My brother had inquired what that was and was told “Oh that’s for you. The usual business commission. You can take it or leave it”. And he left it. The contract was amended and signed for the reduced amount. The commissions or “cut” came to over two lakhs of rupees. He had a snorter from the Ambassador who had told him that he had no business to interfere with figures settled with our Ministry.
In July 1962, Felix announced his Third budget. He relieved taxpayers of a burden of filling several tax forms connected with the personal tax, the wealth tax, the expenditure tax, the capital gains tax and the land tax. This was a very popular move. The filling up of these forms had been a source of annoyance to many persons. A deficit of Rs 512 million had to be met. To cover this, he increased the rate of income tax and reduced the personal allowances previously allowed for wife and children. He reduced the rice ration by half a measure which was a very unpopular move, though a very necessary one. Fears were expressed that the move might affect the future of the party.
Customs duties were increased. Taxation had reached its maximum limit. There was still a gap of Rs 200 million to be filled. To find a little extra revenue, Felix Dias proposed to impose a sales tax on several articles like tea, coffee, Ovaltine, powdered milk and exercise books. The imposition of such a tax would have sent the very high cost of living still higher and the proposal was rejected. A sales tax on several other articles was therefore imposed. The sales tax was fairly high – 7.5% and naturally, the retailers had to increase their prices to the consumer, which they did.
The tax did not work out in the manner expected by the Government. Having raised the price to cover the extra amount paid to the wholesaler, the retailer and every boutique keeper added a further 7.5% to the consumer who therefore was compelled to pay 15% extra on the previous price. The businessmen were against the Government and consumers who protested were told “You put this Government in; go and tell your Government”.
The Government was extremely agitated, over the reaction of the “rural masses who are with us” to the excessive prices charged by the traders who put the blame on the Government. The Cabinet met on two successive days and, at the insistence of four of the Ministers, Felix was compelled to withdraw the tax within two days of its imposition, a most unusual step after he had announced it in his budget speech as one of his major taxation proposals. Opposition members said that such an important step should not have been taken without mature thought and called for his resignation; but Felix Dias, like Old Man River, went on.
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
