Much ado about MR’s security

While government and UPFA MPs argue of numbers, the former president refuses to attend public events unless security is enhanced:

by Uditha Kumarasinghe

There is a dispute over the security entitlement of former president Mahinda Rajapaksa, now a frontline member of the Opposition.

The issue of security of the former Head of State, also a war-winning President, was raised in Parliament by UPFA parliamentarian, Dinesh Gunawardene recently. The MP who campaigned for Rajapaksa in the run up to the presidential elections this year, highlighted in the House, the security risks faced by his former leader. Gunawardene said that the security detail of former president Rajapaksa has been curtailed, a claim the government has refuted.

Leader of the House and Higher Education and Highways Minister Lakshman Kiriella on Thursday told Parliament that the allegations of the former president not being given adequate security were false.

“The government has provided all the security necessary for the former president,” Kiriella said. However, he refused to disclose the strength of the security personnel deployed as it may endanger Rajapaksa’s security.

Gunawardene argued that the government should not politicise the issue of security for a former Head of State, insisting that Rajapaksa deserved ‘top priority status’ in security. Kiriella maintained that the security of the former President was extremely important to the government.

Speaking to the Sunday Observer, Minister Kiriella reiterated that the government has not decided to curtail the security of former president Rajapaksa and that there was no reason to do so. “In fact, we want to protect the former president more than the Opposition.

If there is any lapse in his security, the government will be blamed for it. We are really interested in keeping him safe without experiencing any security threat. Security is determined based on security assessments on VIPs carried out by the defence authorities and is not done according to whims and fancies of people,” Kiriella said.

As for MP Gunawardene, Minister Kiriella said that the ‘issue of reduced security for the former president’ was reported in a particular newspaper and insisted that he (Gunawardene) should raise the matter with the relevant publication. “It is absurd to quote a news item in a newspaper and question the government based on it,” he said.

Security concern

Lakshman Kiriella	Dinesh Gunawardene

MP Gunawardene raised this matter while participating in the Committee Stage debate of the Appropriation Bill 2016 under the expenditure heads of the Ministry of Women’s and Children’s Affairs on December 7, referring to a newspaper report that claimed the security provided to the former president had been pruned down, following a Cabinet decision. The MP told the House that Finance Minister Ravi Karunanayake has told a newspaper that the former president had been provided with a 500 –member security contingent, whereas the security personnel actually assigned stood at 80, a woefully inadequate for a VIP who continues to run high risks.

Minister Kiriella said, following instructions from Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe, the government has provided the requisite security personnel to the former president.

“We have responded to this question several times in Parliament. Actually, there is no issue regarding the security of the former president as claimed by MP Gunawardene.”

Kiriella also denied certain media reports that the Finance Minister submitted a report to the Cabinet on the security arrangements of the former president. “We only had a discussion on the security needs of the former president but no final decision was reached during the discussion. We have to reassess his security needs and based on an actual need assessment, security personnel will be deployed in the future. But this does not mean his security is already slashed,” he said.

Careful consideration

The Leader of the House said that the government has “given careful consideration to the former president’s security needs” but refused to share details for “purposes of security.”

“Raising the issue of security of former president Rajapaksa in this manner shows the recklessness of MP Gunawardene. He publicly seeks to discuss a confidential matter. If he is genuinely concerned about the security of the former President, he should have personally taken up this issue with the government and pursued it to the very end. Disclosing the number of security personnel assigned to the former President and claiming that his security has been reduced endangers former president Rajapaksa’s security. It makes him vulnerable or perhaps that was the motive behind this strident claim,” he said, adding; “it’s a cheap tactic and a sinister way to get some public attention.”

Speaking to the Sunday Observer, MP Gunawardena said the issue was raised in a responsible English weekly. The news report alleged that that former president Rajapaksa’s 500 security personnel were viewed as excessive and a decision has been reached to significantly reduce numbers.

Kiriella said that the former president did not have 500 security personnel deployed and had the service of only 82 security personnel and 20 administrative officials.

“So it is an inaccuracy. We are of the view that, besides the incumbent president and the prime minister, the former President should enjoy the highest security contingent. Everyone knows that he remains a prime security target and needs to be protected. He was not only the President of Sri Lanka but also defeated terrorism. There is no place for adhoc decision-making now. It is our duty to ensure the former president’s security and the government will not shirk its duty,” Kiriella said.

In this backdrop, former president Rajapaksa had gone on record having told a Sinhala daily that he intends restricting his participation in public events due to inadequate security. He has also claimed that he has a contingent of 89 security personnel and when some of them go on leave, there is no substitution and the existing numbers are insufficient.