Features
Some interesting court experiences at the Victorian Bar
Excerpted from A Life In The Law by Nimal Wikramanayake
It was the start of 1976. I had been at the Victorian Bar for nearly four years and I now had a small but busy little practice in the Magistrates’ Court with the occasional sojourn into the County Court. I say “small” because the fees in the Magistrates’ Court were not particularly high. I had a large room on the fourth floor of Equity Chambers into which I had moved early in 1974, but in 1975 I moved into a “B”-sized room on the third floor of Owen Dixon Chambers in March 1976.
At that time it was a floor with a number of distinguished barristers, namely Brian Thomson QC, Ted Laurie QC, John Hanlon QC, Len Ostrowski QC, Paul Guest QC, Philip Mandie QC, John Coldrey QC, Con Heliotis and Dinny Barrett (the magistrate who discharged Lindy Chamberlain in her first committal proceeding) and Fred James.
Fred was a shy, self-effacing man with a wicked sense of humour and an old-world charm. He was a man of reasonably substantial girth and he always wore double-breasted suits, which concealed his extra-large stomach. Fred had the room directly opposite me on the third floor of Owen Dixon Chambers. We soon became very close friends and he would either come into my room every morning or I would go into his room and we would smoke cigarettes together. We would spend a pleasant half hour solving the world’s problems and dealing with our little ones.
It was during the 11 years I spent with Freddie that I realized what a “lonely, cruel place” the Victorian Bar could be. Please do not get me wrong, I do not mean to say that Victorian barristers are cruel and mean. But the Bar is, for some members, an extremely lonely place. I will tell you why. Many years before, Freddie had been an acting Crown Prosecutor and was in the process of being confirmed when he was called in for a medical examination. Unfortunately, he did not meet the health requirements so was not confirmed in this position as he did not pass the medical examination.
His practice was almost entirely in the Magistrates’ Court. We were all in awe of his magnificent phraseology and his command of the English language. Freddie was a delightful orator in court. We would sit there listening with great delight to the Dickensian manner in which he put a sentence together.
As the years rolled by, Freddie and I grew much closer. One day early in the year 1986, I knocked on his door and, as was my wont, walked into his room without waiting to be invited. He was seated as his desk with his face in his hands. He had been crying. When he saw me he looked up and burst out sobbing. I was completely taken aback. What was I to do? What could I do?
He said, “Nimal, I have made a terrible mistake in my life. I tried to rise above my station and see what has happened to me. My father was a bricklayer and my mother insisted I receive an education and not have to be a labourer. I should have been a bricklayer.”
I sat there speechless while Freddie continued. “See what happened to me when I tried to rise above my station in life. I became a lawyer and now all is lost. I promised my wife she would never have to work yet we are now completely destitute. Solicitors have stopped briefing me and I have no work. What am I to do? How can I look after my wife?”
Freddie then started apologizing to me for breaking down and behaving the way he did. I looked him in the eye and said, “Freddie, if you did not break down, you would not be human.”
There was nothing I could do to comfort Freddie so I quietly slipped out of the room.
I went down and saw Freddie’s clerk, Kevin Foley. I told him what had happened and that he must do something to help my friend. Foley told me not to waste my time trying to help Freddie as he was past it. Freddie was younger than I, and in his early fifties. I told Foley, “Look, this man has given you over twenty-five years’ loyal service and has been at one time a big money earner for you. Don’t you feel any loyalty towards him?”
Foley laughed and told me not to waste his time.
I then went and saw one of Freddie’s former readers and asked him whether he could help Freddie. He was equally curt with me and told me that Freddie was over the hill and should give the profession away. I told him that he was quite heartless and he owed something to Freddie for reading with him and being helped by Freddie to get a foothold at the Criminal Bar. He laughed at me.
I remembered my two friends, Max Perry and his cousin, Ray Perry. Max had read with Fred in 1977 and I had spent many a happy hour with them. After they heard my plea, Max and Ray set about trying to resuscitate Freddy’s dead practice, and within a few months Freddie was back with regular appearances in court. Thank God for the fact that we have wonderful kind people like Max and Ray Perry at the Victorian Bar. However, my story has a sad ending. Freddie was dead within a year – dead in his early fifties.
I wrote his wife a long gentle letter and received a beautiful letter from his son, thanking me for spending my time with his father. Freddie had often spoken about me to his family and the wonderful mornings we had together settling the world’s problems. Sleep peacefully my dear friend, you never know, we may meet again soon.
Evidence
In 1976 I became quite friendly with two of my neighbours, the late John Barnett – later Judge Barnett of the County Court – and Peter White, who was later appointed a magistrate. They shared chambers directly opposite me. John had a little room with an anteroom and next door to him was Peter’s slightly larger room. One had to enter Peter’s room through John’s ante-room. The three of us had a common interest in life – horse racing. Every Monday morning I would go into Peter White’s room and Peter, John and I would discuss the results of the previous Saturday’s race meeting.
One Monday morning in 1976 I walked into John’s room. There were two men seated in front of his desk with their backs to me. John wasn’t there, he was in the next room chatting to Peter. I walked into Peter’s room and chatted to John and Peter and then left. I was not feeling at all well and was coming down with influenza.
I decided to go home immediately and rest. I went back to my chambers, packed my bag, went to the car park and drove home. I got into bed and was fast asleep when the telephone by my bedside rang. It was John Barnett. I told him, “John, I’m down with the flu. Can’t you leave me alone?”
John said, “Nimal, do you remember seeing two men in my room this morning?”
I looked at my watch and it was 12 noon. I said, “Yes.”
John then said, “Can you come in at 2.15 and give evidence for me that you saw these two men in my room at 9 o’clock this morning?”
I snapped. “Why do you want me to do that?”
John replied, “They have been charged with suborning witnesses in Heidelberg at 8.45 this morning and I want you to give evidence that you saw them at 9 in my rooms to establish that they could not have done this at 9 am.”
I told him that I had the flu and I was feeling pretty woozy. He said, “Please, please come in and do me this favour.”
I reluctantly agreed and went back to bed.
I got up at 1 pm, had my lunch and went to court. When I got there at 2 pm I spoke to John and he said he would call me when he was ready. The court sat at 2.15 and the tipstaff came and called me to give evidence. As I opened the door I found that it was that lovely man, Judge Bernie Shillitoe, sitting on the bench. Many years earlier, Bernie Shillitoe, Judge Bill Martin and I had sung Irish ballads at a party thrown by Des Wheelan QC. Bernie was fond of me and had been very kind to me whenever I appeared before him.
I got into the witness box and I was sworn. Aaron Schwartz got up to lead my evidence-in-chief in place of John, as they were each separately defending the two accused. Aaron barked at me and said,
“You are Nimal Wikrama, aren’t you?”
I replied, “No”.
There was a look of consternation on Aaron’s face. He repeated the question and I repeated my answer. By this time, Bernie Shillitoe was in paroxysms of laughter and kept falling off his chair. I then put Aaron out of his misery by saying, “My name is Presanna Nimal Wikramanayake’
Aaron then pointed to the two accused in the dock and asked, “Have you seen these two men before?”
I said, “I have never set eyes on them in my life”
Shock and horror registered on Aaron’s face. As he was about to sit down, I said, “Relax. If you ask those two gentlemen to turn around, I might able to answer your question.”
Aaron then asked the two men to turn around with their backs to me and I said, “Yes, I saw those two men this morning about 9 am in John Barnett’s chambers”
The Crown Prosecutor was Joe Dixon, later Judge Dixon of the County Court. Bernie looked at me and grinned. He asked Joe Dixon whether he wanted to ask me any questions but Dixon said no, so I went back home to bed.
Around this time I received a brief from Hall and Wilcox to appear in a sharebroker’s contract matter. The case was Mott v. Jagoda. Lindsay Mott, a sharebroker, was suing Jagoda for monies due under a contract of sale of shares which Lindsay had bought for Mott, including his commission. Jagoda had failed to pay these monies.
It was one of the first cases to be heard by Mr Justice Fullaghar. Before the case started, my opponent Graeme Crossley asked me-what my case was and I said I would be running the case on the pleadings. It was a straightforward case of agency.
When I was halfway through my client’s case, I realized that there was an omission in the pleadings, and in addition to agency there was a clear case of ratification of agency by the defendant. I cross-examined the defendant on this point and obtained several damaging admissions from him. At the close of Crossley’s case I moved to amend my statement of claim by pleading ratification.
Crossley nearly had a fit of apoplexy. He told Fullagher that I had undertaken to him that my case was on the pleadings and that I could not now amend my pleadings to plead ratification. I drew the judge’s attention to the fact that I had cross-examined the defendant on ratification, pointed to the passages in the transcript where I had cross-examined him on this point without objection and argued that I was entitled to plead ratification and that there was no such thing as counsel being estopped from this course of conduct.
Justice Fullaghar told us that he was not going to interfere in the dispute between Crossley and me, that this dispute was a matter for another forum and he would allow me to amend the pleadings to plead ratification. I got judgment for a sum in excess of $60,000, which was a large sum of money in those days.
I expected to have a large and lucrative practice after winning such a celebrated case but, lo and behold, I did not get another brief from Hall and Wilcox for another 10 years and, suffice it to say, I won that case too. I have never received another brief from that firm.
One sad outcome from this case was that Crossley reported me to the Bar Council for professional misconduct for the breach of an undertaking. I pointed out to the Ethics Committee of the Bar Council that I certainly had run my case on the pleadings, but I was not estopped from amending my pleadings if I was able to establish ratification. I pointed out to the Ethics Committee that there was nothing improper in what I did and if Crossley had been vigilant he would have objected to my questioning if I had not pleaded ratification.
The upshot of it was that I was exonerated from any professional misconduct by the Ethics Committee. Graeme Crossley, later Judge Crossley, and I remained friends over the next 40 years.
It was now late in the year 1976. I made a calculated decision that I was not going to appear any more in the Magistrates’ Court. I was not going to put up with the boorish behaviour of the magistrates, nor was I going to appear before the justices of the peace. My clerk, Wayne Duncan, was horrified and told me that I would probably starve the following year if I refused to appear in the Magistrates’ Court. I had received a negligible number of briefs from him and if I had relied on him, I would probably have starved for the 16 years that I was on his list.
In December 1976, I was briefed to appear for a man who was accused of fathering a child. Unfortunately, the client was not able to see me before the matter came up for hearing but was able to see me on the day of the case. Despite my misgivings about the Magistrates’ Court, I continued to appear there. I turned up that day and asked Magistrate Moon to delay the matter for an hour so that I could obtain instructions. I duly obtained these instructions and went back into court at 11 am.
My opponent was full of righteous indignation and told me that he was going to fix my client up for the dreadful thing my client had done to his poor lady client. One lesson my father taught me in my early years as an advocate was never to get personally involved in my cases as it would affect my health. My opponent could have done with this advice. He was metaphorically foaming at the mouth.
My client was a married man who had a beautiful home in Frankston and my instructions were that the woman had been sleeping around with other men, and that she was a ‘gold digger.’
When the case was called, my opponent led his evidence. The complainant was an extremely attractive, willowy young lady of Eastern European appearance. After she gave evidence in chief, it was my turn to cross-examine her. I got up, leered at her and said, “Madam, I suggest that you are a common prostitute, and that you would sleep with any man who was available.”
My opponent bounded to his feet with howls of protest. The magistrate started shouting and screaming at me, telling me that I had no business putting such a horrible question to such a lovely young lady. By this stage I had decided that I was not going to put up with any more rudeness from magistrates and I told Magistrate Moon that he was not entitled firstly to raise his voice at me and that he should keep his voice down when addressing me, and secondly, I told him that it was my case that this woman was a loose woman who had slept with many men, including my client. Any one of these men could have fathered the child and I would establish it.
I then cross-examined the lady for about three hours. I began in a fairly gentle manner but it was a rather excruciating experience for her. I suggested to her that on one occasion she was having intercourse with my client in Ballarat late at night in the front seat of his semi-trailer. My client was employed as a truck driver. This act of intercourse was carried out on one of the main streets of Ballarat, the town was sleeping and the street was deserted.
When they heard several cars driving up to the semi-trailer, my client sat up in the driver’s seat while the girl slipped under the dashboard. There were two carloads full of young men who walked up to the truck. One of them asked my client whether he was “fucking the young lady” whom he mentioned by name. Before my client could reply, the young man said, “I would suggest that you get stuck into her because she is no better than a common prostitute.”
When I put this little incident to the complainant, she vehemently denied that the young man had used such words to describe her. I then asked her whether he had used any words to describe her and her response was: “Yes, he told your client to fuck me, as I was the town bike’
After that, I raised my voice and began to attack her. I took her to a number of incidents at a number of parties she had attended where she had walked out of the room where the party was being held and into a bedroom where on different occasions she had intercourse with a number of different men. I mentioned to her that I had several witnesses who were going to testify to these facts. She then readily admitted them and I sat down at 3.45 pm, thoroughly satisfied with myself.
Magistrate Moon enquired from my opponent whether he had any other witnesses, to which my opponent replied “No’
Magistrate Moon then told my opponent, “In that case, I am going to dismiss your complaint as any one of these men could have fathered that child.” My opponent was distraught. I quietly slipped out of court with my client. That was the end of my practice in the Magistrates’ Court.
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
