Fallout of the CFA judgment

By Dilrukshi Handunnetti

A landmark judgment delivered last Tuesday has firmly resolved the raging dispute about the validity of the Cease-Fire Agreement (CFA) signed between former Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe and LTTE Leader Velupillai Pirapaharan in 2002 by upholding its efficacy.

Rejecting the three petitions that challenged the validity of the CFA, the Court of Appeal ruled that the agreement was indeed valid in addition to it being in full force and in effect.

Not only has the judgment settled the legality of the CFA after five years in existence, it has also given rise to important implied interpretations that would help shape jurisprudence and more so, political analysis in the future.

In what is seen as an important interpretation -- which also reinforces the role of a prime minister, a 'first among equals' in a legislature, the court ruled that it is not only a president who is endowed with powers to enter into a valid agreement but also a prime minister.

1978 Constitution

It is all the more important when the debate continues that the 1978 Constitution had created an all-powerful executive presidency with a figurehead prime minister whose decision making clout is seriously undermined. The landmark judgment, for interpretation purposes, douses enough cold water on this argument by upholding the right of a prime minister to enter into an agreement on behalf of the state.

The three petitions that challenged the CFA were filed by the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP), Jathika Hela Urumaya (JHU) and the Sinhala Jathika Sangamaya (SJS). In delivering judgment, Justice S. Sriskandarajah dismissed all three petitions.

The petitioners' primary objection to the CFA was the purported belief that it lacked a legal foundation, was unconstitutional and therefore illegal as it was not an agreement entered into by the president of the country at the time, Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga. The petitioners had sought a writ of certiorari to have the CFA quashed on the same basis.

PM's right

Justice Sriskandarajah in his order has clearly stated that in addition to the president, the prime minister of the country also enjoyed a right to enter into such agreements.

The judgment was delivered at a politically significant time. The CFA detractors for some time have been alleging that it should not be allowed to complete five years as it would "acquire legitimacy" before the international community in addition to getting crystallised.

Elsewhere, there were mass protests calling for the abrogation of the CFA while a group of Buddhist monks launched a fast unto death just prior to February 22, the fifth anniversary of the truce.

Going beyond the CFA, the Appeal Court also pointed out that the Supreme Court too had accepted the legality of the CFA in its order on the P-TOMS agreement.

Within the law

The judgment stated: "The president appoints the prime minister (Article 43(2) of the Constitution) a member of parliament who in his opinion is most likely to command the confidence of parliament.

"The president, prime minister and the ministers are members of cabinet (Article 43(2) of the Constitution) and the cabinet is responsible to parliament (Article 43(1) of the Constitution).

"In relation to the appointment of cabinet of ministers it is laid down that the president shall make such appointment in consultation with the prime minister. However there is no obligation on the part of the president to follow the advice of the prime minister."

Going further, the judgment also addressed the political situation that prevailed at the time of signing of the truce when the president and the prime minister represented two different political organisations.

Pivotal role

The judgment stated: "In these contexts the prime minister has a pivotal role to play, as being the member of the cabinet and member of parliament who commands the confidence of parliament, especially when the president and the majority of the members of parliament are represented by two different political parties which have different political premise."

And emphasising on the role of the prime minister, it added: "In this instant the prime minister was the head of the governing party and the president belonged to the party which was in the opposition. Hence the submission of the petitioner that the post of the prime minister is in the legislature and not in the executive has no merit."

In referring to the Supreme Court judgment that ruled out the P-TOMS agreement, the Appeal Court in its judgment stated that the validity of the CFA was upheld in the said case.

It said: "In Wimal Weerawansa and 13 others vs Attorney General and three others (supra) the Supreme Court observed that there is no illegality in the president of the republic entering into a Memorandum of Understanding for the establishment of a Tsunami Operation Management Structure (P-TOMS), and in this instant the MOU has been agreed and accepted on 24.6.2005 by the Secretary, Ministry of Relief Rehabilitation and Reconstruction (the third respondent in the said case) for and on behalf of the Government of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka (GOSL) and the fourth respondent (in the said case) for and on behalf of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE).

No merit

"In the above circumstances a public officer has agreed and accepted for and on behalf of the Government of Sri Lanka. As I have discussed above the president, while personally performing some of the executive functions, operates the rest of the executive function of government through the cabinet of ministers and public officers. Hence the submission of the petitioner that the prime minister cannot sign an agreement for and on behalf of the government of Sri Lanka has no merit.

"From the above analysis it is clear that the cabinet which is headed by the president and which is in charge of the direction and control of the government could take a policy decision to enter into an agreement with the second respondent and the first respondent who was the prime minister and the member of the cabinet could enter into an agreement for and on behalf of the Government of Sri Lanka.

"In view of the above, the submission of the petitioner that the first respondent is not clothed with any power or authority or jurisdiction to sign the CFA, in as much as the president of the Democratic Socialist Republic is the head of state and the first respondent has usurped the powers of the president by entering into the aforesaid agreement and it is in violation of Article 30 of the Constitution, have no basis."

CFA in force

With regard to the petitioner's position that the LTTE was proscribed by the Government of Sri Lanka under the Prevention of Terrorism Act and any agreement signed by anybody including the first respondent with the LTTE is illegal and bad in law, the Appeal Court once more referred to the Supreme Court ruling on the P-TOMS agreement.

It said: "This question was dealt with by the Supreme Court in Wimal Weerawansa and 13 others vs Attorney General and three others (supra). Where the Chief Justice Sarath N. Silva when deciding the alleged infringement of fundamental rights relating to the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) for the establishment of a Tsunami Operation Management Structure (P-TOMS), which has been agreed and accepted on 24.6.2005 by the third respondent (in the said case), the Secretary, Ministry of Relief Rehabilitation and Reconstruction for and on behalf of the Government of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka (GOSL) and the fourth respondent (in the said case) for and on behalf of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) held: 'Mr. S.L.Gunasekera, contended that it is illegal to enter into the MOU with the LTTE which he described as a terrorist organisation that caused tremendous loss of life and property to this country. The contention is that even assuming that the President could enter into a MOU for the object and reasons stated in the preamble, the other party to the MOU is not an entity recognised in law and should not be so recognised due to antecedent illegal activities of the organisation.'

"In this regard I have to note that the matter so strenuously urged by counsel cannot by itself denude the status of the fourth respondent to enter into the MOU. The circumstances urged by counsel cannot and should not have the effect of placing the fourth respondent and the organisation that he seeks to represent beyond the rule of law. We have to also bear in mind that already a Cease-Fire Agreement has been entered into on 23.2.2002 between the Government of Sri Lanka and the LTTE, which according to Section 2(b) of the MOU 'shall continue in full force and effect.'

'Not illegal'

"Hence the argument flowed that the Supreme Court has unequivocally held that the government entering into an MOU with the LTTE as not being illegal. Therefore from the preamble of the CFA it had been made clear that this document is a policy document on a political issue.

Further, it was submitted that it is axiomatic that the contents of a policy document cannot be read and interpreted as statutory provisions. Too much of legalism cannot be imported in understanding the scope and meaning of the clauses contained in policy formulations."

The Appeal Court judgment further said: "In the first part of my order I have analysed the merits of this application and I have held that this application has no legal basis. In the second part of my order I have analysed whether the CFA is justifiable and I have held that the CFA is not justiciable. As there is no legal basis for this application and as it is misconceived in law this court refuses to issue notice on the respondents," the judgment said.

Landmark judgment

Despite the landmark judgment that clearly specifies the legal position of the CFA and insists that it is "in full force and in effect," its detractors continue to refer to the statehood test and how the CFA has aided the LTTE's position to inch towards international recognition as a separate entity by formalising its structures.

Just the day after the judgment, there was JVP Parliamentary Group Leader, Wimal Weerawansa calling the CFA illegal from his privileged position of a legislator. While different groups as well as individuals certainly have the right to defend their views, the real question before the government itself is a different one.

It is the government that has been vacillating on the CFA issue and included in the presidential manifesto, a pledge to abrogate the CFA. Yet, 14 months after being elected, the Rajapakse administration has not abrogated the agreement, continues to criticise it and sometimes pays lip service (depending on occasion) while by and large, it has failed to honour its commitment.

With the legal position now being very clear, perhaps it is the government that needs to turn the searchlight inwards and strengthen the agreement to create a basis for future peace talks.

Batti, the refugee city

Text and photos by Arthur Wamanan

The town does not look like a war zone. People from as far away as Trincomalee have come to Batticaloa to seek shelter from the shelling.

Though the place has not been touched by the recent violence in the east, people already have got used to the situation.

Isolated events such as abductions and shootings indicate that Batticaloa is not 100% safe. "The situation in Batticaloa is slightly better than in the surrounding areas. There have been isolated incidents in the area recently. But, you cannot say what will happen," said K. Satheesh, a security guard in Batticaloa.

According to civilians, the security situation in Batticaloa is almost the same as in Jaffna. However, people are able to move out of troubled places relatively easily than in the north.

Only difference

Satheesh said that the only difference was that there was only one road connecting the Jaffna peninsula to the rest of the country, whereas there were several roads connecting Batticaloa with other areas.

"We can get out of the town through many routes avoiding the problem areas. That is why we are in a slightly better position than the people in the north. However, the security situation is almost the same," he said.

The town is also frequently haunted by the booming sounds of artillery fire from the military base in Batticaloa.

Civilians say that the shelling usually goes on for half an hour until the LTTE fires one or two from the other side.

Got used to it

"The LTTE fires one or two shells to the military target, which silences them for about 45 minutes. Then the military starts firing again," Satheesh said.

The people however seem to have got used to the sound of shelling and behave as if the booms are an alarm from a clock tower every 15 minutes.

"We are used to it. We know that the civilian areas would not be targeted by the LTTE as it has not happened so far," he said.

The refugees who have moved to Batticaloa had a very different story to tell. Many of them had been continually displaced for the last 10 months due to frequent attacks.

Santhirakumar Maheswaran (19) lost two of his cousins due to the shelling in Kathiraveli last November. His right arm was also severely injured by one of the metal pieces after the blast.

Shells in the yard

"I was at the doorstep of my house when one of the multi-barrel shells landed in the yard. My cousins were in the yard and were killed instantly. There were others who were killed in the incident as well."

Maheswaran and his family had stayed inside their home until the shelling had stopped. "We did not know where to go at the time. The only safe place was the house. We left a week after the incident, as there was no shelling for some time," he added.

Maheswaran and his family are now in the Thalankuda refugee camp, where there are 416 families. The camp was earlier situated inside the premises of the Thalankuda school, but had to be shifted for the benefit of the students in the area.

A member of the camp management, Eliyathambi Mehala said that the displaced persons came from places as far as Trincomalee.

No shortages

"The people were displaced from Trincomalee to Kathiraveli and then Vaharai. We are working with non-governmental organisations (NGOs) in providing them with the essential items," she said.

She said that there were no shortages in any of the items for the displaced persons and they were looked after by the government agents and the NGOs working with them.

The civilians had moved from LTTE-controlled areas to the government areas.

The refugees said they were forced to move away from the LTTE areas due to continuous shelling by the Sri Lanka military.

"We had no place to run in the LTTE areas because we knew the military would target every place. Therefore, we moved out because we thought the best way to avoid shelling was to go to the place where they were firing from," said Sinnathambi Laganatha (34).

Worried

Loganathan lost one of his daughters in the shelling when they were in the Kathiravely school.

His other daughter had lost one of her arms while his son was seriously injured in the back.

Now, the only worry for Loganathan is his family. "I am a farmer. I had my own land and was satisfied with the income I got. Now I don't know what would befall my family if something happens to me," he said.

The displaced persons also faced the problem of mental depression due to the continuous hardships they face.  "I have gone through enough. One of my children is no more, another one has lost an arm. My wife was also injured. Sometimes I feel like thrashing someone to bits. But, I have to think of my family," he said.

Only wish

Maheswaran on the other hand said that all he wanted was an environment where he could study and enjoy his youth as other youngsters in the country.

He said that it was the government's responsibility to provide help for the displaced persons.

"It is partly because of the government that we have moved out. They say that we have been liberated. Now they have to look after us since we have no hope and no future," he said.

The refugees said that they had not received any help from the government so far.

"We don't hate the government. But, the government looks at us and treats us differently. We are not in a position to hate them. All I want is normalcy where I can be with my family and friends," he said.

Though they seem to be in a safer place, their thoughts and minds are in the homes they have left and the loved ones they had lost on the way to safety.

They do not wish to go back to their homes unless they are assured of their safety. "There have been radio announcements asking us to go back to our homes. We will not go unless there is a peace process going on. Who knows whether the fighting would start after we go back?. We just want to go back home," they said.

Official announcement

The Batticaloa Government Agent, S. Arumainayagam told The Sunday Leader that the government had not officially asked the displaced persons to go back to their homes.

"We are still preparing the ground work in these areas," he said.

These displaced persons, like all of those in the rest of the country are waiting for a permanent solution to go back home and live with no fear.

"It is far away," said the 19 year-old boy looking across with his eyes full of questions that cannot be answered.

The scorching sun and the heat inside the tents are no match to the suffering and anguish in their minds.   

The rest of the town is waiting for something to happen and continues to live with the booming sounds made by the artillery firing.

President's slow boat to China and the jumbo delegation

Sri Lanka has always held a special place where countries like India and China are concerned. A Sri Lankan head of state therefore is always extended a warm welcome by these two countries.

One reason for the special treatment meted out to Sri Lanka was the good relations the Bandaranaikes had with India and China. Given these good relations, whenever any Sri Lankan leader visited they were extended a warm welcome.

However, President Mahinda Rajapakse did not receive this usual warmth. The President's unhappiness over this was also very visible during his official visits to both India and China.

Denied opportunity

During the President's recent visit to India, he wished to pose for an official photograph with Indian Premier Manmohan Singh, but he was denied this opportunity. The reason was the opposition raised by Singh to the idea. This was one unpleasant incident the President had to undergo during his official visit to India.

All this resulted in several misunderstandings with the Indian government. The deprived photo opportunity reflected the deteriorating good relations that once existed between Sri Lanka and India.

As a result, the President needed the Chinese visit to redeem lost prestige and his visit to China was therefore considered very important.

However, from the time the flight to China took off from Katunayake, things didn't go according to plan.

The President's official visit to China along with his mammoth delegation looked more like a pilgrimage owing to the large number of participants. The President was accompanied by 266 delegates to Beijing according to reports published in the Chinese newspapers no less.

Puzzled

The Chinese were puzzled as to why the President was accompanied by such a large delegation.

From the time the flight landed in Beijing, the President had to face some unpleasant incidents.

It was only the lower ranking Deputy Foreign Minister of China, Zuei Meeyankai who was present at the airport to welcome President Rajapakse and his entourage to China. That is the equivalent of Deputy Foreign Minister Hussein Bhaila going to receive the Chinese President at the Bandaranaike International Airport. The lukewarm welcome was the subject of much discussion among members of the government delegation as it was not the tradition to send a deputy minister to welcome a Head of State.

Protocol

It is common practice usually for the president, vice president, the prime minister or at least the foreign minister of the country to welcome the head of state of another country. Therefore the deputy minister's presence to welcome President Mahinda Rajapakse did not go unnoticed by the members of his delegation.

The size of the President's delegation to China made headlines in China as well and the Chinese press called Rajapakse's delegation a "jumbo delegation."

Usually an official visit to any country by a head of state is concluded within the shortest possible time as it is believed that attention increases if the visiting leader stayed in the country for longer than required. Therefore it is common advice given to all heads of state to conclude their official tours within the shortest possible time.

Longer than required

Rajapakse however broke this tradition and opted to stay in China for six long days. Therefore, even the little attention he generated at the beginning of the visit faded away during the latter part of his tour. The President only visited provincial councils and temples during the latter part of his tour.

The media reported of several agreements signed by the President with the Chinese government during his visit.

However, he could not arrive at any agreement with regard to the much anticipated Hambantota Port Development Project.

The President who undertook the official tour to China with the main aim of securing an agreement to build the Hambantota Port, even spending Rs. 60 mn in the process, failed to come up with any agreement.

The Chinese tour however proved to be quite a joy ride for some. Some even held birthday celebrations there.

Minister Dinesh Gunewardena's birthday was celebrated two days before the tour ended in China. The party was attended by a large number of people including ministers and officials.

No free calls

Meanwhile, several ministers also had to face issues regarding their phone bills as they had to pay for the international calls they had taken to friends and relatives in Sri Lanka.

The President's delegation is usually entitled to free phone calls, but due to the size of the delegation, the Chinese government was forced to hold back the privilege. However, most ministers who were unaware of this made calls to Sri Lanka. That was on the first day of the tour.

On the second day, they were informed that they have to pay for the calls. When inquired, they were informed that they were not entitled to make free international calls.

Interestingly, when former President Chandrika Kumaratunga visited China two years ago, she was extended a warm welcome. The privileges extended to her and her delegation at the time were not extended to Rajapakse and his delegation.

Kept upto date

It was during this tour that the President was informed by his brother and Defence Secretary Gotabhaya Rajapakse of the attack on the foreign ambassadors in Batticaloa. Gotabhaya called the President and kept him up-to-date on the matter.

The President informed Gotabhaya of the steps to be taken. Gotabhaya then requested the President not to permit any foreign diplomat to visit areas where operations were being conducted.

The President however told Gotabhaya that a final decision on the matter would be taken after his return.

Ranil opens out on secret deal with LTTE

While the current political situation in the country has brought into the open the style of governance by the Rajapakse brothers, attention has also been focused on the main opposition, the UNP.

The UNP working committee met at Sirikotha at 4 p.m. last Monday.

The meeting commenced with the reading of names of members who were absent at the meeting. It was only Hemakumara Nanayakkara who had informed of his absence from the meeting out of the 11 UNP working committee members who defected to the government. The others had not informed the working committee of their absence.

On the way out

MP Ravi Karunanayake pointed out that the defectors have not attended two consecutive meetings and said that if they did not attend the third working committee meeting, they would be out of the committee according to the party constitution.

Party Leader Ranil Wickremesinghe then congratulated the nine newly appointed working committee members.

Next on the agenda was for Attorney Daya Pelpola to present the proposals of all members on party reforms. The proposals were then passed.

Another proposal presented at the meeting was for the abolishing of the posts of deputy leader and assistant leader from the party as such posts were not provided for in any other party.

Party convention

The working committee decided to present the proposal at the party's convention scheduled for March 18.

Pelpola then presented a letter that was sent by Navin Dissanayake to the party leader. Members of the working committee decided that a disciplinary inquiry should be held against Dissanayake as he still claims to be a member of the UNP. Karunanayake then presented a statement given to the Lakbima newspaper by Lakshman Yapa Abeywardena.

The working committee then decided to take disciplinary action against Abeywardena as well.

Joseph Michael Perera posed a question at this point. It was on the parliamentary select committee called by Sripathi Sooriyaarachchi.

Support for Sripathi

"Sripathi has turned the country's political scenario upside down. According to him, there has been a secret agreement between the Rajapakses and the LTTE before the election. We must look into it immediately. This select committee is essential to find out the truth about this agreement. We cannot let it go," Perera said.

Wickremesinghe also agreed and said that Sooriyaarachchi's call should be supported.

"Yes, we must look into this secret agreement. We cannot allow COPE to be undermined as well. We must hold rallies and protest campaigns in March to create awareness among the public on the rising cost of living and the impact of the war," Wickremesinghe said.

Accordingly, a protest is to be held in Wattala on March 15 and a public rally is to be held in Gampaha on March 11.

Wickremesinghe then made a statement on Karu Jayasuriya.

Correcting Karu

"Karu Jayasuriya made several statements at the Janapathi Jana Hamuwa on TV recently. He said that he and Milinda have been caught in a mud slinging campaign over the COPE report. Karu also said that a committee privatised three institutions and that it was headed by the then Prime Minister. That is wrong. The COPE report does not say that the privatisation was wrong. The question is the process adopted in privatising the institutions," Wickremesinghe said.

He then said something that he had never said earlier.

"Neither me nor any of my representatives have entered into agreements with the LTTE before or after the presidential election. Before the election one representative held a discussion with the LTTE. He asked the LTTE to respect democracy and allow the people to vote in the north. However, they wanted a written assurance from me on the formation of an ISGA. I didn't like to even talk of it. I said that it would only be discussed once we come into power. The matter ended there.

"I then told my representatives not to even hold talks again," Wickremesinghe said.

Everyone at the meeting then asked who the representative was, but Wickremesinghe said he did not want to respond as it was against proper political practice.

Basil's directive that went unheeded by the ministers

When former Ministers Mangala Samaraweera and Sripathi Sooriyaarachchi were sacked from their portfolios, a large number of people rallied around them, especially around Samaraweera who returned to the island following his sacking.

The large crowd that mobbed Samaraweera when he returned to the island from Singapore was considered a show of strength by Samaraweera.

The President's advisors in turn wanted to show the 'people power' of President Mahinda Rajapakse.

The advisors decided that ministers had to be present at the airport to greet the President upon his return from China. Calls were immediately made to ministers from Basil Rajapakse's office.

Basil's operation

The caller, a brigadier employed in Basil's office, informed all ministers to be present at the Katunayake Airport at 8 p.m. to welcome the President back to Sri Lanka.

Since the operation was being spearheaded by Basil, everyone thought that the airport would be overflowing with ministers.

However, only four cabinet ministers - Jeyaraj Fernandopulle, Rohitha Bogollagama, Karu Jayasuriya and Sarathchandra Gunaratne were present at the airport to welcome the President. Two deputy ministers were also present. Apart from that, several religious leaders were also present at the airport.

One monk had a question for Fernandopulle. "Why didn't you go? You are the minister next to the President."

Fernandopulle smiled and responded. "Your holiness, I do not participate in these embarrassing trips. Over 200 participated in the trip. Is it not enough?"

Talk of the town

The monk who was engaged in a friendly chat with Fernandopulle, then asked for the reason for such a large delegation to travel to China. The monk further noted that since the large delegation was now the talk of the town, he asked as to why the President was not advised against the move. Fernandopulle was evasive in responding to the question.

By this time several officials had made their way to the airport.

"I don't know your holiness, you better advice. Your advice may be heeded," Fernandopulle said.

The monk then inquired after Mangala Samaraweera and Sripathi Sooriyaarachchi.

Fernandopulle told the monk that the battle cannot be fought for long. "They will return to the government soon," he said.

A little while later, Bogollagama and Jayasuriya made their way to the VVIP terminal.

Poor show

"Are we the only ones here?" Bogollagama whispered to Fernandopulle. They agreed that it was not a good sign.

"These are not organised by us, so we cannot be held responsible for this. This was done by the big shots in the Presidential Secretariat. This is the response when big shots do things," Fernandopulle said. Bogollagama however said that at least 50 to 60 ministers should have been present at the airport.

The flight with President Mahinda Rajapakse landed in Katunayake at 9.15 p.m.

The President who looked around the VVIP terminal called an official from the Presidential Secretariat and inquired after the poor turnout of ministers.

The official responded that although the calls were made from Basil's office, this was the best they could do.

The President's facial expression changed with the response.

Word of caution

Meanwhile, shortly after, another incident took place. The President was first blessed by the Buddhist clergy. It was then the turn of the Hindu priest to bless the President. The priest after blessing the President was about to apply holy ash on the forehead when he was interrupted.

"Be careful when you do it. If pictures of you applying ash on my forehead are published by the media, then you too might be killed," the President said. Through his statement, Rajapakse reminded everyone of the fate of the Hindu priest in Vaharai who was shot and killed after he blessed and applied ash on the President's forehead during his visit to the east.

The President then asked the media not to publish pictures of the Hindu priest to protect his life.

How Mangala upstaged Mahinda at the CC

The criticism leveled against the government's actions by former ministers Mangala Samaraweera and Sripathi Sooriyaarachchi earned the wrath of President Mahinda Rajapakse and his brothers, leading to high drama in the political scene.

The President's team to attack Samaraweera and Sooriyaarachchi included SLFP Secretary, Minister Maithripala Sirisena, Dilan Perera and Jeyaraj Fernandopulle. Sirisena leveled many allegations against Samaraweera, including one stating that he had violated party discipline.

Samaraweera on the other hand charged that he was not informed of any official meetings of the SLFP.

Parliamentary group meeting

It is in this backdrop that the SLFP parliamentary group met at Temple Trees last Wednesday. Samaraweera and Sooriyaarachchi were informed of the meeting, but they were later informed that the meeting was cancelled upon arrival at the venue.

However, the party's central committee office bearers were called for a meeting the same night at 7 p.m. at Temple Trees. The administrative secretary of the party headquarters, Ariyapala, informed Samaraweera of the meeting.

With the news of the meeting, various reports started to appear in the media. There were even rumours that Samaraweera was asked to attend the meeting to revoke his party membership.

Samaraweera decided to attend the meeting, but before that asked Ariyapala why the meeting could not be held at the party headquarters. Samaraweera explained to Ariyapala the issues that may arise in attending a meeting at Temple Trees given the present political background in the country. However, Ariyapala noted that the venue could not be changed as due consideration had to be given to the President's security.

Samaraweera finally decided to attend the meeting at Temple Trees.

Cold welcome

Samaraweera intended to be at Temple Trees at 7 p.m., but was prevented from doing so at the gate. Samaraweera was thoroughly checked by the security personnel at the gate. His invitation for the meeting was called for and the vehicle was also checked at the first gate. Samaraweera had to endure the same procedure at the second gate as well.

After going through all this, Samaraweera made his way to the venue of the meeting at around 7.08 p.m.

As soon as Samaraweera entered the room many stopped talking. Although Samaraweera could have sat in the front row as the party treasurer, he opted to take a back seat. Pavithra Wanniarachchi was seated next to Samaraweera. Since his arrival in the hall, the discussions stopped and the first to address him was the President himself.

"Honourable Treasurer, how are the party's finances?" the President asked.

"Your Excellency the President, I cannot speak of it off hand, but if you give me two or three days I can submit a report on it," Samaraweera responded.

Money matters

The administrative secretary intervened and said that there were no financial issues.

The President then had a question on the Sudu Nelum movement. "What's the position of Sudu Nelum? Why has a room been allocated for it at the party headquarters?" Rajapakse asked.

"Yes, there are several assets of the movement in that room like T-shirts and so on, but if the room is needed, then it could be cleared and given back," Samaraweera said.

Wanniarachchi then joined the conversation. "We also have some money of the Sudu Nelum movement. Accounts were maintained at district level," Wanniarachchi said.

Samaraweera said that the monies were utilised for welfare activities, especially for the welfare of security personnel.

The President then asked as to who was in control of the funds. Samaraweera responded that it was under the Presidential Secretariat.

Rajapakse immediately called his Secretary Lalith Weeratunga. "Lalith there are some funds of the Sudu Nelum under our office. Look into it immediately," the President said.

Agenda

The next topic to be discussed was the May Day rally.

When the May Day rally was being discussed Sirisena intervened and said, "The next topic according to the agenda is to discuss the current political situation. Ministers like Sripathi and Mangala have put the government in a tight spot. They held press conferences and even publicised letters in the media."

The President agreed. Sirisena proposed that Samaraweera's and Sooriyaarachchi's conduct be brought before a disciplinary committee.

"Please permit me to say a few words," Samaraweera requested at that point.

"No now the matter will be taken up at the disciplinary committee, say what you have to say there," the President said.

Letter

"Your Excellency the President, I am not trying to make any excuse. The topic of discussion here is me and this allegation that I have violated party discipline. It is not right for me to be present when I am the topic of discussion. I may pose an obstacle to those who want to express their opinion on my conduct. Therefore I will present a letter to the party secretary. There is a copy of it as well. Please table that and give a copy to every member. I will leave after that, please allow me to do so," Samaraweera requested.

Samaraweera handed over the letters and prepared to leave the room when the President stopped him.

"No, don't leave. This a democratic party, whatever you have to say you can say," the President said.

"No Mr. President, I do not see that happening. I am fighting to protect that democracy," Samaraweera said.

Samaraweera left the meeting at 7.41 p.m.

As soon as Samaraweera left, Sirisena collected all the copies of the letter from Ariyapala and it was not distributed among the membership.

Letters confiscated

"There is nothing to give in this. It is an international campaign to slander the government," Sirisena said and avoided distributing the letter.

A disciplinary committee was thereafter appointed to look into the conduct of Samaraweera and Sooriyaarachchi.

After Samaraweera's departure, many started to talk. "Look how they speak now. As if they have done so much for the party," Anura Yapa said.

"No, even you gave money to them and helped," the President said.

While Samaraweera was at the meeting another interesting incident took place. When the disciplinary inquiry issue was taken up for discussion, Anura Bandaranaike walked up to Samaraweera.

Bandaranaike first held Samaraweera's hand and then whispered something into his ear.

"Mangala I cannot stay here given the things that are going to happen. I am leaving. However, I admire your courage," he said.

Admirers

Samaraweera received calls soon after he returned home from the meeting. All the callers were full of admiration, saying they were amazed by Samaraweera's courage.

"Sir, you have an amazing strength. The 18 UNPers who defected cannot attend a working committee meeting together, but you attended alone a meeting presided by the Executive President. It was like walking into a wolf's den," some callers said.

Some callers informed Samaraweera that they had not received copies of his letter submitted at the meeting and asked if they could get some copies.

More Issues Articles....

Batti, the refugee city