Political Column

President Mahinda Rajapaksa left for India this week, now almost certain that he had the numbers needed to avert a defeat at his next Budget due next month. Last week, he wrapped up a deal with the smaller tea plantation trade union-party led by P. Chandrasekeran. The only sop he offered them seemed to be a Ministry to their leader and diplomatic posting to their deputy. For the striking workers they represent, he promised a wage hike. If any plantation leader has shown any sympathy to the LTTE it is him; thus, many an eye-brow was raised when he opted to sit in the Rajapaksa Cabinet.

This week, Rajapaksa went one-step further. Notwithstanding howls of protest from plantation companies, he readily issued a directive to raise the wages of the striking estate workers, and roped in the Ceylon Workers Congress (CWC) into the fold. Last week, the entire party hierarchy gave their supreme leader, Arumugam Thondaman full-powers to do what he liked with Rajapaksa. Needless to say, for Thondaman, politics without power and perks is like a fish without water. Or, more aptly, a cockerel without its feed.

The party that left the Government in a huff saying that Rajapaksa's younger brother had insulted them, when he had pulled up one of its MPs, and demanded an apology from no less a person than the President himself, meekly trooped in to Temple Trees this week and took all their portfolios back - rather apologetically.

But in the process, the Chandrasekeran-led Up Country People's Front, however, is not happy. They are teaming up with United National Party (UNP) and Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP) estate unions to ask for more from Rajapaksa, playing politics with their solitary seat in a wobbly Parliament.

No-faith motion
The Opposition seems adamant to make that wobble into a complete breakdown. This week, in a swift turn of events, Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP) breakaway MP Sripathy Sooriyarachchi was instrumental in having a Vote of No-confidence placed against former UNP Minister Milinda Moragoda, now Tourism Minister in the Rajapaksa administration.

Sooriyarachchi was keen that he gets the UNP and the JVP to support his motion, but the JVP ducked the issue citing the need to get its politburo to approve it. Running out of time, in view of the impending budget, he got his mentor Mangala Samaraweera to sign it, sending different ripples.

Samaraweera and Moragoda come from the same clan, so to say, a factor in Sri Lankan politics. Moragoda loyalists said that this was Samaraweera challenging Moragoda's leadership to that clan. Samaraweera supporters dismiss this as "unadulterated rubbish", arguing that Moragoda is a political eunuch in comparison.

The UNP fielded one of its lesser known MPs, Dilip Wedarachchi from the Hambantota district to sign. Soon, the Moragoda elements in the UNP, and there are a few still who stayed back in the Party, began to make noises. One of them was Colombo Central MP Mohammed Maharoof, who together with Moragoda and others was instrumental in making a huge mess for the Party during the Colombo Municipal Council elections, where the Party list was rejected due to discrepancies with the law.

Party insiders say that Moragoda and Maharoof had a long-standing pact, partly brokered by one-time UNP Secretary and R. Premadasa loyalist, Sirisena Cooray. Moragoda's entry into Parliament was largely from the UNP pocket-borough of Colombo Central. It was Cooray, who as Construction Minister helped Maharoof in many ways.

In the 1980s, Marine Cement, a Swiss company, was hired to sell cement to Sri Lanka's accelerated Mahaveli Development project. Then, a new company was formed called Mahaveli Marine Cement, whereby the original Swiss company held 1/3rd of the shares, and the Ceylon Cement Corporation, the balance 2/3rd.

Enter Maharoof, a cement importer in the 1990s when Premadasa was President. He submits a proposal saying that the Cement Corporation shares be sold back to Marine Cement, and for his troubles he says he is entitled to a 20% stake in the new company. Now, he claims he did not receive his due share, and the matter is before Sri Lankan courts.

Separately, the by-now multi-millionaire Maharoof goes before a Swiss arbitration tribunal complaining that Marine Cement has not paid his dues in the form of a 'Consultancy Agreement', a euphemism for a commission of some US 1 per imported metric tonne of cement. His family company Zeeniya Traders files the case, and loses it. The arbitration panel says that Zeeniya Traders have accepted a Global Settlement Agreement, and no further amounts are due to him. This causes a cash-flow crisis resulting in some bounced cheques that are reported to the Fraud Bureau and the matter being investigated. So, poor Maharoof is in a whirlpool of trouble, political and personal, and coming as it does in the period of Ramadan, he is probably looking for a life-line to bail him out of his problems.

He fired off a letter to his Party Leader Ranil Wickremesinghe saying that he was "amazed" to hear that there was a Vote of No-confidence against his "personal friend" Moragoda, who has been an "immense asset to our party". He slammed the Samaraweera-Sooriyarachchi "duo" saying they failed to fulfil their personal agendas in their own party, and have now joined the UNP to achieve their objectives.

He took particular aim at Samaraweera. "It has been proved by the CID", he wrote, "that Mr. Samaraweera is responsible for forcefully obtaining a sum of rupees twelve million from Lafarge Cement which cheques have been cashed by his Private Secretary who also happens to be a relative of his".

Then, Maharoof indulges in some self-confessions. "This action of his affected me as my wife is a shareholder and such payments have to be borne by the shareholders of this company". The burly MP then went on to advise his Party Leader to consider appointing the likes of Rukman Senanayake and Sajith Premadasa to the deputy premiership - and not Mangala Samaraweera; and then, he pointedly says that should the No-confidence motion come up in Parliament for a vote, he would vote against it.

While an MP is probably entitled to say what he wants to his Party Leader, the questionable fact in this issue is how Maharoof's letter got distributed to all the national newspaper offices by fax through the Government's Information Department. That gave the show away. Now, the matter will come up at the UNP's next Parliamentary group meeting, and a decision will be taken there on how the Party must vote.

Maharoof will need to convince the group why the Party should not vote for the motion, especially when Moragoda is now - in the Opposition - in the Rajapaksa camp as a Minister. Then, he will have to argue why the House should have confidence in an MP like Moragoda whose family company owes the Central Bank Rs. 4.7 billion in unpaid monies, and played a questionable role in the privatization of the Sri Lanka Insurance Corporation, and in Lanka Marine Services Ltd.,

If he is unable to convince the group, then he comes under the Party whip to vote against his "personal friend". Then, his only option is to apply for a "conscience vote", or face the music of a disciplinary inquiry.

A true Rajapaksa ally
Rajapaksa on the other hand, has found Moragoda a true ally. He took his Tourism Minister the other week to Trincomalee where the Sri Lanka Navy felicitated its heroic men who downed some LTTE weapons carrying vessels in the deep seas. Moragoda loyalists have made it out that he was the one who was responsible for getting US gunboats for the Navy. Of course, should this be true, this would have been when the UNP was in office, and it is a known fact Sri Lanka's then Ambassador to the US, Devinda Subasinghe, was the one instrumental in the initial stages of negotiations with the US in obtaining a reconditioned coast-cutter, and this he did, partly when the UNP was in office, and partly with the late Foreign Minister Lakshman Kadirgamar.

The Opposition motion had a larger strategy in what they were doing. They were not only targeting Moragoda, but the Government as a whole. The motion quotes from the COPE report. The Chairman of COPE is in fact, a Government MP - Wijedasa Rajapaksa. The majority of the members on it are Government allies. So, should the Government back Moragoda, they are turning their backs on the COPE members who have come to these findings on Moragoda. If the Government defeats the Vote of No confidence, it will defeat the COPE findings as well, on which it has studiously not said anything officially uptodate, though it is seriously uncomfortable with it.
The JVP has no option but to support the motion given the fact that it makes the biggest noise about the Government's inaction on the COPE findings.

On Friday, Party leaders in Parliament agreed to fix Dec. 23 for the debate, especially in view of Moragoda's own request for an early debate. However, by yesterday, Health Minister Nimal Siripala Silva, Leader of the House, had reneged on the date, and said that no date has been fixed.

The Samaraweera-Sooriyarachchi-UNP combine forming the National Congress had fixed that date for a public rally, but were prepared to re-schedule it should the debate take place. The Government clearly is doing a re-think of the matter, and in all likelihood would like to push it for the new year, after the budget debate and the Christmas vacation.

Arbour visit
Another significant development is the visit this week to Sri Lanka by Louise Arbor, the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. It comes against the backdrop of at least two other UN officials - Alan Rock and Under Secretary General Sir John Holmes - being branded all kinds of names by Government dignitaries. Arbour had two important meetings on Wednesday, one with leaders of the United National Party (UNP) and the other, the Janatha Vimkuthi Peramuna.

UNP and Opposition leader, Ranil Wickremesinghe, who travelled to Singapore on a private visit, was to have later gone to the United States. Instead, he put off that visit and returned to Sri Lanka for the meeting with Arbour. Joining him was parliamentarian Ravi Karunanayake. The 45 minute meeting covered a wide range of issues. At one point when Wickremesinghe referred to the Government harassment and intimidation of "Iqbal", Arbour turned to him and asked "are you referring to Athas." Evidently, she had been well briefed on the situation in Sri Lanka including matters relating to media freedom issues. As the discussion continued, former Foreign Minister, Mangala Samaraweera, joined in to give Arbour an insight into the workings of the Government. That covered the period when he was Foreign Minister too.

There was a tug-of-war of sorts before Arbour's meeting with the JVP could begin. A JVP source said Arbour had wanted to meet a JVP delegation at the UN office in Bauddhaloka Mawatha. But the JVP leadership was adamant. They said if she wanted a meeting, she should travel to their office in Battaramulla which Arbour did.

The JVP was solidly of the view that the UN had no business to try and set up a permanent mission in this country. Its Leader Somawansa Amarasinghe made no bones about the party's line. As for the Government, despite the outward bonhomie, there was a public display of differences in positions when Arbour and Human Rights Minister Mahinda Samarasinghe addressed a news conference at the end of her visit. Our page 1 story gives details of these exchanges.

Arbour also met Attorney General C.R. De Silva PC and later President Rajapaksa on Thursday, for which meeting the Attorney General was also invited. But the writing is on the wall for the Government at least as far as Arbour is concerned. It looks pretty obvious that a very negative report is in the offing from some of her public remarks at the news conference.

Who's a traitor?
One need hardly say that if patriotism is a commodity, leave alone Sri Lanka, no Government or its officials around the world, could claim a total monopoly over it. Nor could they arrogate to themselves the sole authority of defining or identifying who a patriot is and who is a traitor.

But this week, a convicted criminal, one who voluntarily confessed to his guilt, laid down new criteria, on behalf of the Government of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka, on how to brand persons as "traitors". Anyone critical of the military, declared Lakshman Hulugalle, Director General of the Media Centre for National Security (MCNS), is a "traitor to the nation as such people undermine the lives of armed forces personnel."

In late 1989, this same Hulugalle came under investigation by the Criminal Investigation Department (CID). He was charged in the High Court of Colombo (Case No: 4423/90) for the criminal misappropriation of Rs. 90,000 worth of timber. He pleaded guilty on August 7, 1990. He was sentenced to two years rigorous imprisonment which was suspended for ten years. He was also fined Rs. 20,000.

Now he is enunciating policy for the MCNS, the official mouthpiece of the military as well as on behalf of the Government. He believes his verbal decree is the last word on what Sri Lankans of all walks of life should say and not say about the military. His "fatwa" (or holy edict) applies to the media.

Outside Sri Lanka, if the Hulugalle Doctrine were to have been applied even centuries or decades ago, the world would surely have been a different and altogether sadder place. People would not have known real truths and the true meaning of the word justice. A lady, later known by the troops as Florence Nightingale, had dispatches sent through war correspondents covering the Crimean war for British newspapers detailing the squalid conditions of the war wounded. Those dispatches were not spiked as reducing the morale of the troops. Instead, they led to an avalanche of support for the troops. Young men and women signed up to go to the front and join Florence Nightingale, and the profession known as Nursing has its roots in that war.

Military historians would not have recorded the crimes of World War I and II. In the Vietnam War, the world would never have heard of Lieutenant William Calley and men from his Bravo Company, who were responsible for the massacre of civilians in the village of Son My Lai in 1968. A US Army cover up had begun no sooner the massacre ended. The first exposure came from an independent American investigative journalist, Seymour Hersh. He was not called a traitor for this. The revelations led to the revival of a legal process and the men involved being punished. No one in the US media who criticized the conduct of some of their Army officers thereafter was called "traitors" either.

So was the case of the conflict in the former Yugoslavia. Generals and politicians responsible for crimes against humanity ended up in the International Criminal Tribunal in The Hague. That was possible due to the exposures of political and military repression in that now fragmented nation. The exposure of the gory scenes of abuse, rape, homicide and torture of inmates in the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq in early 2004, where the United States Army is engaged in a "war on terror," would never have come into the public domain if not for the US media. Beginning with the CBS television network's 60 minute investigative programme, came an avalanche of revelations. Those responsible would have not been brought to justice otherwise. Here again the US media persons were not called traitors.

Many of those in the Sri Lanka's defence and security establishment are not only very familiar with the processes in the United States but also seek close military co-operation with that country. Closer home, in India, the story of the Indian Army's reversals in Kargil in 1999 would never have become public if not for the media. The Government in New Delhi did not brand their media "traitors" for exposing the shortcomings and criticizing some of the military failures. During the tenure of the late Prime Minister, Rajiv Gandhi, the media exposure of the scandal involving the procurement of Bofors artillery guns from Sweden caused a big sensation. Some of the related events still reverberate. The media, here again, were not branded traitors.

Twenty four hours of the day international television channels are beaming stories right into the living rooms and bedrooms of Sri Lankans about the brutal military repression in Burma. Members of the venerable Buddhist clergy, who are in the forefront to espouse the cause of the suffering people, are being mauled with rifle butts or shot at with lethal bullets. Images of their bleeding heads and broken legs have shocked the world. State television in Burma claimed all was well in that country and denied media reports worldwide. Yet, there was no mention of the word "traitors" in the Burmese state media against those demanding democracy in that country.

In Pakistan's North East Frontier, Air Force bombardments are taking a heavy civilian toll with hundreds fleeing their homes. In Turkey, Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan, has ordered troops into neighboring Iraq to crush Kurdish rebels. All those who are reporting on such events in the different countries, if one is to go by the Hulugalle doctrine, are all traitors. If the warped theory is taken further, the sentence for treachery in any country is death. Thus, does that mean the purveyors of information, who are keeping the world informed, should all be shot dead for they are traitors? Only criminal minds would think of such outrageous actions in a world that is more civilized now than before.

In Sri Lanka things are quite different. We have had no military dictators who have so far been accused of crimes against humanity or hauled before international criminal courts. Nor have we had or media personnel (or even politicians) who have blatantly committed anti-national acts that constitute treachery. If indeed there was, no law enforcement agency has investigated such acts and brought those responsible before a court of law. We have only seen and heard some lesser mortals in the Government beating their chests and accusing others of "treachery" whenever there is bad news for them.

They only want praises sung. Take the example of senior. Army officers decorating their uniforms with medals they are not entitled to. There was the case of the Vadamaratchchi medal given to members of the armed forces who took part in the Operation Liberation in 1987. Others who did not take part in the operations are not entitled to wear them. When such a case is pointed out, does that mean someone is a "traitor"? At that time the officers concerned and other lesser mortals complained then that such exposures were harmful to them. But some big wigs are continuing to still wear them. A trivial issue one would say.

But this is more serious. We are now talking of the head of the MCNS. Last week, Hulugalle fired off a letter asking the media not to disturb his boss, Defence Secretary Gotabhaya Rajapaksa, at all hours. He told them to contact the MCNS if they had any queries. In other words, he and the MCNS do not only want to take greater control of the dissemination of military information to the media. They want to be the "sole agency" and want to prevent the media from obtaining their information from other reliable sources of their own. What a wonderful place Sri Lanka would be with all the sunshine stories floating around. There would be no cause for any worry. But the question is how many Sri Lankans would truly believe them?

Our Defence Corresponent deals with this new campaign to deny the public the true picture of what is going on. That can include constructive criticism of some in the military hierarchy (with or without the collusion of politicians, bureaucrats and others) trying to endanger the lives of troops in the battlefield. More importantly, does this mean that exposure of corruption, from which politicians, those in uniform and others benefit immensely, should not be done because they would become "treacherous acts"? What better way of silencing the media from highlighting corruption and criticism in the national interest!

The Sunday Times has revealed a number of such instances. There was one in 1999 when some higher ups in the Army wanted to procure Body Armour. This is the heavily armour-plated vest soldiers going to battle wear to prevent bullets piercing the upper part of their bodies. Ballistic tests conducted on a sample provided by a particular supplier, who was the 'hot favourite', showed they were easily penetrated by bullets. The tests were carried out by Army officers themselves using their own firing ranges. Yet, some of the higher ups wanted to go ahead and procure them. There were fat commissions on the pipeline.

In their anxiety to ensure the deal went through, they argued, ironical enough, that prompt compensation could be paid to those who would be affected. That was their answer to procuring the defective Body Armour. Fortunately, our disclosures led to the cancellation of the deal. If Hulugalle were to head media operations then, we would have run the risk of being branded as 'traitors' for carrying that exposure where we criticized the wrong doings of some top brass. Who would have been affected if the faulty Body Armour was procured in large quantities? Would it not be the soldiers? How come one becomes a traitor then? Are all these moves the result of the exposure of the controversial MiG-27 procurement from Ukraine which is riddled with allegations of corruption and other irregularities? Is the aim to prevent any more of those exposures?

Early last year The Sunday Times revealed moves by the former Commander of the Navy, then Vice Admiral (and since promoted Admiral) Daya Sandagiri to procure 25 year old guns after labelling them as 'brand new.' Even the Attorney General's Department whose opinion was then sought on the matter ruled that 25 year old guns could not be brand new. Taking note of The Sunday Times exposures, President Mahinda Rajapaksa called upon the Chief Justice Sarath N. Silva to appoint serving Supreme Court judges to probe the matter. A three-judge bench headed by Justice Shiranee Tillekewardena, The Sunday Times has learnt, which comprised the investigating team, has made scathing indictments against Admiral Sandagiri (and two other then serving top rung Navy officers) in their Interim Report submitted to President Rajapaksa. No action has followed so far. The two other serving officers are now holding very important Government appointments with considerable power and influence.

Other areas of criticism have centered on disgraceful conduct or acts of incompetence by some military officers. In one instance the exposure of shop-lifting by an Army officer sent on a training course to the United States, based on credible information to The Sunday Times by a reliable source, led to the appointment of a Court of Inquiry. Later, he was dishonourably discharged after his commission was withdrawn. There have been numerable occasions where disclosures and exposures in The Sunday Times have led to the appointment of Courts of Inquiry/Courts Martial. The list is too long to enumerate here. But the beneficiaries from such moves were the troops. Is Hulugalle therefore trying to use his new title, traitor, to silence the media?

There are also other aspects. It was The Sunday Times that revealed exclusively that a Police raid on a House in the Millennium City in Athurugiriya in 2003 was in reality an Army Intelligence Cell. The exposure led to then President Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga appointing a Commission of Inquiry. Its findings bore out the facts revealed in this newspaper. Thereafter, the state-run Rupavahini (national television network) produced a documentary on it. It acknowledged that The Sunday Times had revealed the story behind the Intelligence Cell. This was repeatedly broadcast during the presidential election campaign in November 2005. Mahinda Rajapaksa was elected President at this election.

Hulugalle's new decree will also apply in equal measure to the Opposition politicians. However, it is certainly unlikely that they would heed his "fatwa" or start believing wholly and only in what the MCNS trots out as the gospel truth, nothing but the whole truth. In fact an analyst who is keeping track of the guerrilla casualties made an interesting observation about the MCNS for their enemy casualty counts. He said if one were to add them, the deaths of a number of guerrilla cadres would have wiped out two generations. This is on the basis of a remark by a top Army official, when he assumed office that the rebel strength stood at anything from 3,000 to 3,500. This is by no means to suggest there are no guerrilla deaths.

Troops have undoubtedly inflicted casualties, sometimes heavily, on the guerrillas. But the question is whether the MCNS figures on them are altogether credible? The question is being raised in the national interest since public funds are being utilised to prosecute the separatist war. Some argue that during a war, truth is the first casualty. But the question that begs answer is whether continued disinformation at the expense of one's credibility is the answer. A news agency that circulates mobile phone alerts regularly quotes MCNS guerrilla casualty counts at over ten and twenty. Single digits are rare or not reported.

Hence, the ire of the MCNS when media outlets quote their own sources, a standard media practice of trying to provide accurate accounts from their own channels to their readers, listeners or viewers. In this enlightened era of enhanced communications, where the internet has revolutionized the world, both Hulugalle and the MCNS undoubtedly need a lot of tuition. Take for example the protests in Myanmar (Burma). Despite all the curbs by the military junta, reams of video footage about the regime's atrocities are being smuggled out. It is being widely telecast in international television networks. The national television networks in Burma, however, have been repeatedly claimed all is well and it is the foreign networks that are spreading "lies." Does the world at large, leave alone the Burmese people, believe in this? One cannot blame Hulugalle for he knows little or nothing about the media, like his Military Spokesman Brigadier Udaya Nanayakkara.

Thus, they do more harm to their handful of masters and colossal damage to the image of the Government and the country. This lapse, as in the past, is the main reason why they have failed to generate a high level of national enthusiasm to support the valiant troops fighting the separatist war. Instead they seem to believe in the antiquated, archaic approach of saying what they want, urging the media to report only them in the hope that people would believe in that. In doing so, they continue to perceive the media, both the local and foreign, as the second enemy. If any proof is needed, it can be seen by their refusal to allow the media to travel and report from the theatres of conflict except on carefully managed conducted tours. Otherwise all the information is disseminated from Colombo both to the local and foreign media. Any independent verification and reportage is frowned upon. Now such reportage will only lead to those responsible being called names. Knives will be out for them.

These developments are taking place at a critical juncture in the country's history. Since February 2002, a Ceasefire Agreement has been in force. But it is public knowledge that there is an undeclared War (Eelam War IV) is raging. Now, with the budget due next month, the Appropriation Bill speaks of an increase in the nation's defence expenditure by 19.4 per cent. The expenditure which stood at Rs 139 billion will go up to Rs 166 billion - a record high. This is at a time when official claims speak of a weakened enemy on the run. Such monies otherwise would have gone into development projects that would have been of immense benefit to the people. It is factors like these that necessitates that Sri Lankans are told the truth of what is going on in the ongoing undeclared war, how their moneys are being spent and what gains are being made.

The muddle behind the Moragoda motion