Motions to strip civic rights and maithree

Then and now

"Mr. Deputy Speaker, during the past 50 years of parliamentary history of Sri Lanka, one could say that there had been several significant debates.

"I recall the debate on the imposition of civic disabilities on Sirimavo Bandaranaike as one of the most important debates in the past 20 years.

"It was the prime minister of the day, the late R. Premadasa who introduced the motion to strip Ms. Bandaranaike's civic rights. When Mr. Premadasa became the President, an impeachment motion was brought against him. As an unacceptable decision was given on that impeachment motion, a vote of no confidence motion was introduced against the then Speaker.

" We can refer to these as poignant moments in the parliamentary history of this country. During those debates, we can remember how political parties inside this House, and the representatives of the people conducted themselves.

"Mr. Deputy speaker, today, we in this parliament are faced with still another important motion. A lawfully appointed Special Presidential Commission of Inquiry has found irregular conduct by a representative of the people, someone who represents the people in this parliament, someone who has betrayed the trust reposed on him by the people. It is now for this House to decide how best to implement the decision and recommendations of that commission of inquiry.

"Mr. Deputy Speaker, this is not a personal issue. What did the late Prime Minister R. Premadasa say when motions were introduced to strip the civic rights of Sirimavo Bandaranaike and the late Felix R. Dias Bandaranaike? It is recorded in the Hansard of October 16, 1980 in column 1394 as follows:

'Mr. Speaker, we are not introducing these two motions with any personal animosity. We do it with karuna and maithree.'

"I must admit that the motion for the imposition of civic disabilities against Mrs. Bandaranaike was introduced with a lot of maithree. Likewise today, we introduce this motion with a lot of maithree and with respect for democracy. In that speech, it was further stated as follows:

'We are implementing an election pledge of ours. We went before the people against the rule of Sirimavo Bandaranaike. We told from every platform the damage caused to this country by the government of Sirimavo Bandaranaike. We said that if we are elected to office we will not only reveal all these misdeeds, but we will also punish those responsible.'

"Mr. Deputy Speaker, during the past administration there had been misdeeds. We too pledged that we would inquire into past misdeeds and damage caused to the lives of people and the natural resources of this country and that through parliament, we would inform the people about it. We made this pronouncement very clearly at the 1994 general elections and the presidential elections that followed.

Today's motion is based on such promises. What did Mr. Premadasa say that day, when the motion to strip Ms. Bandaranaike was brought up? A portion of his speech recorded in the Hansard of 16.10.80 column 1444 says: 'I would like to say that if you come to politics you need to face the fate brought about by politics. But when something happens to a person he goes on having this type of meetings, threatening peace, without a thought for others'.

"That is how Mr. Premadasa presented the motion.

"He also said, 'It is not as a personal vendetta that this motion is being tabled but as a step to bring about democratic rule in this country. So I appeal that these two motions be accepted.

"So, the stripping of civic rights move was presented that day, by the UNP, and on a recommendation by a Commission. So the PA is also presenting a motion on the recommendations of a Commission. This is to honour that ruling that we have brought this motion. That is why it has become a big challenge for the UNP to face this move. This has been brought about by fate. It is a challenge for the UNP to show how its leadership would behave when confronted by a situation, which has sprung up from its own acts while it was in power. We are keen to see how the UNP would respond.

'Hon Deputy Speaker, the people of this country have decided to live within the framework of democracy. They have lived in a democratic set up for the last 50 years, and have their faith in Parliamentary democracy, which is an august body of democracy. It is supreme and has been vested with power to legislate and all laws of governance of this country emanate from here.

"Responsibilities of those elected as representatives to this august assembly are also entrenched in this democratic system of government. These representatives must need to behave in a manner so as to preserve the confidence of the people. Today we are doing just that.

"This is not at all a move against a political party or a particular individual. The responsibility of the elected government is to enact laws that are conducive to the growth of this country. The responsibility of those parties in the opposition and outside the govt. is to see that such laws are observed and take up violations of such laws in the House.

So we have the same responsibility in a way, and we cannot escape from it. So the prime responsibility of all MPs is to uphold the dignity of this supreme place.

"This is a motion to decide whether or not the dignity of Parliament is observed. Parliamentarians are expected to behave in such a manner that would uphold the dignity of the House even if they wield, executive powers as a minister.

It is because in the final analysis, it becomes the responsibility of Parliament to answer the people. This motion deals at length on that subject. No parliamentary representative has the right to take away the freedom of any citizen, which has to be enjoyed in full. But that freedom cannot be enjoyed in any inordinate way, or in a manner exclusive to themselves, as men in government who represent the people.

A people's representative cannot live in duplicity, a private life and a public one. He lives in a single environment and cannot go about as he wishes or eat or dress or dance and sing as he wishes. He has to live a life that is answerable to people, open to criticism and highly disciplined. Hence he needs to be very careful, enjoying only what people give him and not what he feels like enjoying.

"Hon. Deputy Speaker, what we are debating today is more grave than other debates. Debates such as these, are the order of the day in any Parliament that respects democracy. In India, the largest democracy, the life and times of Prime Minister Rao had been questioned before courts. In the United States the biggest power, President Clinton's character and behaviour are under scrutiny. Former President Richard Nixon, a very popular figure, saw his down fall in the Watergate scandal.

"It was not an offence against any individual. If he failed to fulfil the aspirations of the people he must go. What we say is just that. The question of Mr. Wijeyapala Mendis is not directed at an individual. The UNP as a party that has gone through 50 years of independence has yet to decide whether it wishes to safeguard an individual or preserve democracy. The whole country awaits their decision. This is a challenge. Let us see how they would face upto this challenge. If they vote against this move can they go before the people in the future as leaders of a political party that is wedded to the cause of protecting democracy? This is the challenge.

Hon. Deputy Speaker, the responsibility of this Parliament does not end with people, but the environment, the trees and plants, the animals, the water which are meant for man. We cannot live in a world of our own. What happens if by chance this is challenged like the challenges our parliament had faced in the past?

"Some sections revolted against the parliament system in 1970. They want to destroy this system and instal a dictatorship in place of socialism. But it was rejected by our people. Then in 1989 came the insurgency of some youth against the democratic system.

"They threatened those coming to Parliament, forbidding parliamentary sessions, and threatening the lives of workers of Parliament. But beside darkness, besides curfews the Parliament of the day met in trying circumstances.

"Why was that? It was because we would have no tomorrow unless this system was protected. Then people will have to decide on an alternative system of rule, whether a dictatorship or Army rule.

This is not a problem of an individual. If the people who pledged to go by the constitution, to protect existing rules of the country and to promote peace, to preserve justice on behalf of the people, then reverse roles to enjoy individual benefits, it is a challenge that will have to be decided on.

"A member of the CWC said that he does not approve of stripping an individual's civic right. This is not an individual problem, and hence if we did not decide to stage this move, what will be the position? The Special Presidential Commission has ruled that Mr. Mendis has violated a privilege but we are certain that this move will not have the 2/3rd vote. If then we refrain from moving it in Parliament, what would happen?

"Future generations will curse that we did not do our duty by man, beast. Where is our future? What would happen next, if we deny this Parliamentary system, and elections? The underworld forces will take to arms and rule us taking advantage of our lapses.

"If we cannot respect the confidence of our people, or retain the respect of Parliament, we have only to quit this place, as has happened in the past. So we urge Mr. Mendis to do so. He was a senior UNP leader when I was in it. He has a career of 30 - 40 years in politics. If by some misfortune he fell into this lapse, I appeal in the name of democracy that he resigns out of respect for parliamentary democracy.

Our leader has no IOUs!

By Viruddha Paakshikaya

Last week, the government's self-ap pointed defender of the faith, 'Paakshikaya' was seen castigating the UNP for "corruption" during it's period in office, in a week where the government also continued its political witch hunt over our former Minister Wijeyapala Mendis.

While Paakshikaya holds forth talking of the past - all that "reeking corruption" under the UNP - his own PA has given the finest testimony towards the eradication of corruption - by castrating the permanent commission on Bribery and Corruption.

Having made pious, holier-than-thou pronouncements about corruption , Paakshikaya's PA government needed us to give them the two-thirds majority to set up this Commission. But what has this Commission done in more than three years?

A school principal was indicted (and later discharged) for alleged corruption amounting to accepting cups and saucers worth all of nine hundred rupees.

The Commission then started investigating each other on a mutual basis, and once the Commission began probing a PA Cabinet Minister's private secretary, the Attorney General pulled out his team of prosecutors, and the Police were ordered to withdraw their team of super sleuths.

The Commission's Director General - once the PA's golden girl - has been kicked upstairs to the Justice Ministry to cool her heels and now this Permanent Commission reminds me of the eternal truth in Lord Buddha's words - "anicca wata sankhara" - that nothing is permanent in this world!

Today, the Commission is left with two Commissioners who are refusing to budge, a clerical hand and a few minor staff. Such is the commitment so transparently displayed by the PA to controlling corruption while month after month scandals and tender skeletons tumble out of the cabinet about deals within wheels.

Paakshikaya argues that the UNP and J.R. Jayewardene made only cosmetic changes when dealing with those allegedly involved in "Corruption". He refers to E.L. Senanayake and Ranjan Wijeratne, Anura Daniel and Jalaldeen. And, Paakshikaya has also been very harsh on Gamini Dissanayake though he has not mentioned any specific allegation against him.

But at least, SOMETHING was done. Personally, Paakshikaya, I don't subscribe to corruption by anyone from any party and I feel that had D.B. Wijetunga sacked an errant Minister or two before the 1994 elections, the UNP may even have got yet another term in office.

And even those whom you say were corrupt - including those found guilty of corruption by special Presidential Commissions of Inquiry under this government - topped the list of preferences in their districts. How do you explain this co-relation between corruption and popularity, Paakshikaya? It is obviously a relative term and I trust Paakshikaya is an urbane elitist "Colombo-ite" who does not realise that as far as the people of this country are concerned, as long as you have served them well, they will care tuppence about the wealth they have acquired whilst in office.

So, Paakshikaya, you may cry from the rooftops about corruption under the UNP but at least there were results to show-on terra firma-for the people: the opening of Sri Jayawardenepura as a new capital city, the Free Trade Zone, the Mahaweli scheme; the Udagam movement, the development of the Colombo Port and much more. In contrast, Paakshikaya, what has the PA done?

They have started putting their collective hands in the till from the drawing board stage of many a project. I mean, when you decide to import trains with ship engines, what would you think of next?

Then, Paakshikaya, it seems that you got a thrill out of attacking people around our leader, Ranil Wickremesinghe.

You say there was no one in the UNP to talk against one of your Party supporters who got caught for smuggling and was then followed by a major cover-up at the highest levels of your government.

When our General Secretary, Gamini Atukorale clinically displayed and dissected the outrageous cover-up so meticulously planned, your MPs had lost their tongues.

Then, what of those people who are around your leader. Paakshikaya? We know of the Colombo-London-Paris axis. How they stay at stately homes when they come to Colombo. How they are invited to stately banquets. The list of privileges is a long one, indeed.

Our leader - whom you quite rightly call Mr. Clean - has also held high political office. He has occupied Temple Trees. But he has not distributed favours to his hangers-on - nor to his relatives about which the government tries to make a song and dance and which, I understand, has been adequately and convincingly replied by our leader.

Our leader has no IOUs to cash - politically or financially - and he has no dreams of walking the streets of London, Paris or Sri Lanka. He only intends being the next leader of Sri Lanka - a corruption free honourable, Sri Lanka !

In defence of Gamini Dissanayake

In reference to an article published in your paper on March 15 1998 by "Paakshikaya" Navin Dissanayake, son of the late Gamini Dissanayake, says he would like to make some observations as the article contained some highly defamatory statements. In a letter to The Sunday Times, Mr. Dissanayake says:

"Firstly, most of the people who were referred to in the article including my father are no more and the author conveniently uses a pen name to avoid identification because whoever is writing the article knows that had any of the people referred to in the article been alive that the author who wrote the article would be facing a defamation suit. What is the point of slinging mud at people when they are not alive to defend themselves. This is one of the most cowardly things to do. At least have the courage to identify yourself. Had my late father been alive you would be having to face a huge defamation case because of the cheap and unsubstantiated allegations that you have made against him. Let me delve into these allegations more fully.

"You refer to a commission headed by Justice Percy Colin-Thome and say "that commission started sniffing into the assets of Gamini Dissanayake and how he became such a rich man overnight." Who told you about this? Was it the late President himself or Justice Percy Colin-Thome himself? Please tell us, the public have a right to know? If there was any sniffing around as you say that itself would have been mentioned in the Commission's proceedings which would have been recorded. But none of your allegations has come to light.

"If what you say is correct that President Jayewardene stopped the proceedings before they "nabbed" my father why didn't the regime of President Ranasinghe Premadasa which made it a point to investigate everything my father did finish the job off? I would like to refresh your relapsed memory that in the guise of the Mossad Commission and the Cricket Commission that the previous regime went into all the areas of my late father's activities, even to the extent of sending a special unit to find the so called 'apple farm" in Australia but everything turned out to be a farce because there was nothing to find.

You also say that how he became such a rich man overnight.. Very easy to say and make allegations once again but what are your facts. Ever since my late father came to public life he has declared his assets correctly and like every other citizen of this country he has paid his taxes. If my father's assets did not equate with his legitimate income any wrong doing that he would have done would have come to light because there was no higher power protecting him.

You also say that my father was President Jayawardene's "blue-eyed boy". President Jayawardene had several "blue-eyed boys". Which one had deepest blue eyes one would have to ask President Jayawardene himself.

However, I would like to remind your jarred memory that nearly on two occasions my father had to leave the cabinet. Once on the Ms Bandaranaike's civic rights issue and then again on some settlements he initiated in Mahaweli development area. When these incidents occurred he suddenly lost his "blue eyes" that you were talking of.

My father carried out the Mahaweli diversion scheme to the best of his ability. He finished a 30 year project in seven short years. It was successful and the country is benefitting from the scheme because it was properly implemented without any financial scandals. Nothing can take away what he has achieved. Of course there will always be people like you who always criticise. That is accepted. But at least have the courage to put your name to your article and why don't you allow leaders who have made the supreme sacrifice for their country rest in peace"?

More News/Comments * Saffron support for Lankan Tamil cause * How Bangladesh struck peace in the Hill Tracts