Historic singing of National Anthem:

Corruption probes push Rajapaksas to the wall

While the group led by former President Mahinda Rajapaksa continues to pander to the most chauvinistic sentiments of the Sinhala-Buddhist community in their bid to regain power, President Maithripala Sirisena and Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe, in a bold political move, allowed the Tamil version of the Sri Lankan national anthem to be sung at the state Independence Day ceremony.

President Sirisena, Prime Minister Wickremesinghe and former President Kumaratunga, three leaders who initiated a silent political revolution on January 8 last year, proudly stood up when a group of Tamil and Muslim children sang the Tamil version of the national anthem. Opposition Leader R. Sampanthan, a veteran Tamil politician who leads the biggest Tamil political party in the country, had tears in his eyes. Former Army Commander Field Marshal Sarath Fonseka and other senior military officers present at the ceremony stood still and saluted the Tamil version of the national anthem in the same way they saluted the Sinhala version at the beginning of the event. It was, needless to say, a proud moment for everyone.

Several deputy ministers, who were present at the ceremony, did not forget to capture this historic moment through the camera-eyes of their mobile phones. Among them were Deputy Foreign Affairs Minister Dr. Harsha de Silva who immediately posted a picture on his Facebook page, dubbing it as “one of most special moments” of his life.

In fact, the ministers, deputy ministers, parliamentarians and other special invitees had every reason to feel special as it was the first time the Tamil version of the national anthem was played at the national-level Independence Day ceremony. Although Tamil patriotic songs were sung at the State Independence Day ceremony in 1949, they did not have any legal or constitutional recognition at the time. Even when Sri Lanka received political independence from the British raj on February 4, 1948, the country did not have a constitutionally accepted national anthem.

It was in 1950 that the then Minister of Finance, J. R. Jayewardene, requested the government to recognise Samarakoon’s Namo Namo Matha as the official national anthem of the country.

Following Jayewardene’s request, the government had appointed a committee headed by Edwin Wijeyeratne, Minister of Home Affairs and Rural Development, to select the national anthem. The committee heard several songs but, after much deliberation, picked Ananda Samarakoon’s composition.

The committee made a minor amendment to Samarakoon’s song, with his approval, changing the lyrics of the tenth line from Nawa jeewana damine... to Nawa jeewana demine,nithina apa pupudu karan matha. The committee’s decision was endorsed by the government on November 22, 1951 and it was first used at the Independence Day ceremony in 1952. M. Nallathamby translated the anthem into the Tamil language at the time.

Former President J.R. Jayewardena’s constitution in 1978 had specific provisions relating to the national anthem. Clause 7 of the 1978 Constitution said: “The National Anthem of the Republic of Sri Lanka shall be Sri Lanka Matha, the words and music of which are set out in the Third Schedule”. It also made it clear that the national anthem should only be sung in the state languages and the constitution accepted both Sinhala and Tamil as the state languages of the country. Therefore, the constitution, in no uncertain terms, accepted singing of the national anthem in Tamil.

The Tamil version of the Sri Lankan national anthem was included in the Tamil translation of the 1978 constitution. It was the same translation done by Nallathambi in the early 50s.

Even before the Tamil version of the national anthem was made constitutional, it was sung at various occasions, even in the presence of heads of state. For instance, the Sinhala and Tamil versions were sung in the 1960s, when the then Prime Minister Dudley Senanayake visited Jaffna for state functions. When Sirimavo Bandaranaike came to Jaffna as premier in 1974, to open the newly set up Jaffna campus of the University of Sri Lanka both versions were sung. Importantly, singing the national anthem in Tamil did not stir up a hornets’ nest in the South, as it did last week.

Ban

It all began when certain chauvinistic elements in the previous government pushed for a ban on use of the national anthem’s Tamil version. In an important turn of events, Minister of Public Administration and Home Affairs, W. D. John Seneviratne, presented a Cabinet paper on December 12, 2010, seeking to make the ban official. Reportedly the Cabinet paper had been drafted on the Singaporean model where the national anthem is sung in the official lyrics and not in any translation of the lyrics. Based on this, the paper recommended that the Sri Lankan National Anthem only be sung in Sinhala and the Tamil translation be abolished.

However, Seneviratne’s Cabinet paper turned a blind eye to the fact that the official lyrics of the Singaporean national anthem is in the Malay language, which is a minority language whereas 75% of Singaporeans are Chinese! The same situation prevails in India, where the national anthem is not in Hindi, the most widely spoken language, but in Bengali, a minority language.

Although those who loathe the Tamil version of the national anthem draw India as an example for a multi-lingual country that has one national anthem, they don’t mention the fact the Bengali language is used by less than 8 percent of the country’s entire population.

However, the Rajapaksa government did not have the audacity to pass the Cabinet paper and make the ban official. Instead, the government took tacit measures to prevent the Tamil version of the national anthem being sung in Northern and Eastern provinces. Although some ministers of the previous government, including former Social Integration Minister Vasudeva Nanayakkara, stressed the need for the Tamil version, their efforts did not bear fruit.

It was against this backdrop that the national unity government decided to play the Tamil version of the national anthem at the 68th Independence Day anniversary. The move, while sending ripples across some sections of the South, sent a strong message to the country’s ethnic minorities as well as to the international community that the government was implementing genuine measures towards reconciliation. Even Nisha Biswal, US Assistant Secretary of State for South and Central Asian Affairs, tweeted that she was moved to see the Tamil version of the national anthem being sung at the Independence Day ceremony.

The resistance in the South to the Tamil version of the national anthem was mainly politically motivated. It was all too evident that the group supporting former President Rajapaksa was attempting to use this initiative by the Government for petty political gain, ahead of the Local Government elections. Rajapaksa himself expressed his displeasure over the move to sing the national anthem in Tamil.

When asked by a journalist whether singing the national anthem in Tamil was constitutional, the former President said he had not seen any such provision in the constitution. It was strange that a leader who led the country for 10 years and a lawyer who graduated from the Sri Lanka Law College was not aware of constitutional provisions allowing the use of Tamil version of the national anthem.

“If this trend continues, they will also sing the national anthem in the Arabic language,” the former President said sarcastically when speaking to a journalist on independence day.

Other allies of Rajapaksa, including the National Freedom Front and Pivithuru Hela Urumaya, also expressed their displeasure with the move. The only Rajapaksa ally who appreciated the move was Vasudewa Nanayakkara, who was known to be a Leftist until he was swallowed up by the Rajapaksa camp.

Emil Kanthan

Apart from the Tamil version of the national anthem, there was another important development that concerned the Rajapaksas over the past few days. That was the ruling by the Colombo Special High Court withdrawing the arrest warrant and ‘Red Notice’ issued against former LTTE top ranker Emil Kanthan after his lawyers pledged his surrender to Court within two weeks. The news of Emil Kanthan’s surrender is not good news for the Rajapaksas. The ex-Tiger leader’s name has been mentioned in connection with several controversies during the Rajapaksa administration.

Emil Kanthan alias Anton Chamil Lakshmi Kannan was known as the Financial Manager of the LTTE. He was the go-between in most of the financial transactions involving the LTTE during the last six years of the organization.

The name of Emil Kanthan first transpired during the magisterial inquiry into the controversial RADA case. It was transpired in Courts that high profile officials at RADA had gone to the LTTE controlled area in Kilinochchi and had discussions with LTTE activist Emil Kanthan over reconstruction of houses for tsunami-affected people.

Former RADA Chief and ex-Parliamentarian Tiran Alles also exposed Emil Kanthan’s name after he broke away from the Rajapaksas in 2007. Tiran Alles’s shocking revelation made at a public meeting indicated how Rajapaksa’s camp had allegedly struck a secret deal with the LTTE before the 2005 presidential poll on the one hand while accusing Ranil Wickremesinghe of having a ‘Elephant–Tiger Pact’ with the LTTE on the other.

Following the boycott of the Presidential election in 2005 by the people of the North as per orders from the LTTE, Rajapaksa was able to win the Presidential election with a thin majority of 150000 votes, becoming the fifth executive President in the country. The LTTE’s order to boycott the election was beneficial for Rajapaksa in more ways than one as the Northern province was his weakest battlefront. At the dawn of November 18, 2005, when victorious Rajapaksa met Alles near the staircase on the ground floor of Temple Trees, he joyously hugged the controversial businessman saying, “You made it happen”!

Columnist D.B.S. Jeyaraj, commenting on the move, wrote in his website on Wednesday that Emil Kanthan who allegedly engaged with the Rajapaksa camp in this exercise on behalf of the LTTE, was willing to return to Sri Lanka and reveal complete details about the alleged deal to the Sri Lankan law enforcement and legal authorities.

“The person known as Emil Kanthan, who is resident in a western country at present, is expected to return to Lanka and voluntarily surrender himself to court as part of an unofficial understanding reached with an influential component of the upper echelons of the Sri Lankan Government.

It is learnt that the “agreement” with Emil Kanthan in this respect was reached through the efforts of influential political figures in the corridors of power along with relatives of the ex – LTTE operative in Sri Lanka and Tamil expatriates with LTTE links.

If the arrangement with the man known as Emil Kanthan is implemented as planned, the ex – LTTE intelligence operative will return to Sri Lanka shortly and surrender to court. Thereafter he would voluntarily furnish Sri Lankan authorities with full details about the deal between the LTTE and Mahinda Rajapaksa,” Jeyaraj said, in his report.

Yoshitha

The former President’s second son, Yoshitha Rajapaksa, is now in remand over the FCID investigation into the CSN channel. The young navy officer was taken into custody by Police, as there was evidence to suggest that the latter functioned as the chairman and the main decision-maker of the controversial TV sports channel.

Although Rajapaksa was never an ‘official member’ of the director board, the Police said they had enough ‘e-mail evidence’ to suggest that Yoshitha was heavily involved in the administration of the CSN company.

On the other hand, the same statement also added that the company had raised an initial capital of USD 2.3 million through a transaction with a foreign company. The Police said the alleged transaction was illegal and it amounted to an act of money laundering. That was why Yoshitha and other suspects in the inquiry were charged under the money laundering act when they were produced before the Kaduwela Magistrate on Saturday.

At the same time, there is another serious allegation pertaining to a custom offence for which CSN is under investigation.

Highly placed FCID sources told the Sunday Observer that CSN had allegedly purchased £ 140,000 worth of television equipment from Arena Television in Reddhill, Surrey. However, when paying custom duties, the equipment had been valued at just £ 3200, making way for a multi-million-rupee alleged tax fraud. The original invoice for the transaction with Arena Television had been dated May 28, 2012, months after the establishment of the channel.

Authoritative Police sources said that the name of a senior state official, who held a senior position in the ports sector under the previous administration, had surfaced in connection with the alleged tax fraud. They said the official had functioned as ‘facilitator’ for the TV channel to get its equipment cleared from the Customs Department. The FCID sources added that a statement would shortly be recorded from the official with regard to the tax fraud investigation.

Welikada

Meanwhile, a group of UPFA MPs visited the former President’s son at the Welikada prison last week.

Among them were Deputy Ministers Arundika Fernando ,Nishantha Muthuhettigama, Sumedha Jayasena and Anuradha Jayaratne. At the jail, this group had met former President Rajapaksa who was also visiting his son. During their brief chat with their former boss, the deputy ministers criticized the government and some if its activities, saying they were “highly disappointed” with the current state of affairs.Fernando, speaking to reporters after visiting Yoshitha Rajapaksa said, ” There are many who say that the FCID is illegal at a time when the Police Commission is also functioning. ”

Muthuhettigama, a controversial politician who was protected by the former President when the latter was in power, warned, ” We will not leave the Sri Lanka Freedom Party, but we are prepared to abandon the posts of deputy minister. We have faith that a decision will be made in this regard.” It was a direct threat to step down from their posts if the government did not disband the FCID.

The MP group who visited Rajapaksa at the Welikada prison later had another meeting at Anuradha Jayaratne’s house in Colombo. At the meeting they severely criticized the government and the functioning of the FCID.

“We joined the government after a decision made by the party Central Committee. Now we have been sidelined.

We are being harassed by UNP ministers. We don’t get funds to even construct a village road,” Arundika Fernando told his colleagues, voicing his concerns. Other deputy ministers present at the meeting expressed similar sentiments. It was clear that although they held positions under the national unity government, their loyalty lay with the former President.

It was crystal clear that the FCID had suddenly become a concern for sections in the SLFP. Probably, the party is now attacking the FCID as a tactic to attract its grassroots level supporters who are now lost between two options. The group supporting Rajapaksa is also in the process of forming a new political party and the SLFP needs fresh slogans to retain its traditional voter-base. Waging war on the FCID seems to be the ideal solution for the SLFP, at this juncture.

SLFP seniors such as Nimal Sirpala de Silva and Lakshman Yapa Abeywardena, who hold senior positions in the national unity government, criticized the conduct of the FCID during press conferences last week.

Minister Nimal Siripala de Silva, while admitting that serious allegations had been levelled against Yoshitha, said the SLFP politicians and supporters were concerned about the arrest because it was carried out by the FCID. What the Minister meant was that the FCID, formed after President Sirisena’s ascension to power, had lost credibility in the eyes of the SLFP supporters.

“We do not agree with this arrest, having opposed the setting up of the FCID. We also opposed a cabinet paper presented by Prime Minister Wickremesinghe on the FCID,” he said. The minister said the Attorney General must speed up the legal proceedings against Yoshitha because the entire country was watching the case closely and added that he must not be kept in remand custody for months with the case dragging on for several years.

“That is why the SLFP is of the view that there must be an accelerated legal system to hear cases of a highly sensitive nature,” he said. “A suspect is deemed innocent until proven guilty. We won’t comment on the charges levelled against him. But we are sorry for his present predicament, as he is the son of one of the patrons of our party. That is why we ask the government not to incarcerate him for years and mete out justice as early as possible.”

Finance State Minister Lakshman Yapa Abeywardena, who addressed a press conference in Colombo a few days ago, expressed similar sentiments on the Police FCID. The State Minister said a proper mechanism has already been established to probe against financial malpractices and therefore there was no use in having the FCID anymore.

“The SLFP is against the FCID as its establishment is against the general practice of the country. Moreover, other institutions, which fight against corruption and probe financial malpractices, have been strengthened and streamlined under the good governance. Institutions such as the police, CID, Bribery or Corruption Commission, and Police Commission and are available to work against financial misconduct,” he added.

The State Minister, a known ally of President Sirisena, also expressed hopes that the FCID might be dissolved in the future.

“Dissolving the FCID doesn’t mean that the investigations should be discontinued. Investigations should be carried out as usual using other established institutions,” the State Minister added.

It is still not clear whether the views expressed at the press conference were personal views of the minister or the official position of the Government. It is hard to believe that the government will make a decision to disband the FCID as it is one of the major anti-corruption bodies formed after the new government came to power. Importantly, it was initiated by President Maithripala Sirisena, the current leader of the SLFP. The President, at this point, has no reason to reverse his decision and disband the FCID.

Cabinet

Yoshitha Rajapaksa’s arrest and the functioning of the FCID was a hot topic of discussion at the Cabinet meeting too last week. As the meeting started, Minister Nimal Siripala de Silva attempted to justify the remarks he made to media with regard to the functioning of the FCID.

“I didn’t make that remark on behalf of Yoshitha. I was explaining the party’s position,’ de Silva said. However, in response, several members of the cabinet stressed the need for “collective responsibility” when working within the framework of a national government.

Minister Duminda Dissanayake, the General Secretary of the SLFP said that they should have been informed of Yoshitha Rajapaksa’s arrest. In response, Law and Order Minister Sagala Ratnayaka said the Police carried out the arrest as there was serious evidence against the former President’s second son. At this point, Minister S.B. Dissanayake asked whether Yoshitha Rajapaksa’s name was linked to the registration of the company. Responding to Dissanayake, Ratnayaka said there was more than enough e-mail evidence to confirm Rajapaksa’s alleged involvement in the management of the company. After Ratnayaka’s explanation, cabinet members seemed convinced about the FCID’s move to arrest Rajapaksa in connection with the investigation.

Field Marshal Sarath Fonseka's possible appointment to Parliament as a national list MP has become a matter of contention among members of the legal fraternity.

While some argue that Fonseka, as a retired military officer, has every right to become a Member of Parliament, others argue that according to article 91 of the Constitution, the Field Marshal cannot function as a Parliamentarian.

Article 91 says that no person is qualified to be elected as a Member of Parliament or to sit and vote in Parliament if he or she is a member of the Regular Force of the Army, Navy or Air Force.

Although Fonseka is a retired military officer, he is considered to be a lifetime member of the military force enjoying the rank of a Cabinet minister in the government hierarchy.

The lawyers questioning Fonseka's possible appointment argue that as his post of Field Marshal is an appointment made for the life time of the appointee, any person holding the post is immediately disqualified from being appointed as a member of parliament.

“The post of field marshal does not have a pension; it has only a salary paid for a life time, which means he is on active duty.

Any person on active duty cannot enter Parliament,” one lawyer, who spoke on the basis of anonymity, explained.

There are also, yet unconfirmed, reports that a group of lawyers backed by a senior Cabinet minister was preparing to challenge Fonseka's appointment to Parliament on the same grounds.

However, while holding the rank Field Marshal, Fonseka contested the last Parliamentary election from Colombo district and his nomination was accepted by Elections Commissioner Mahinda Deshapriya.

When he contested the Parliamentary election last year, no one contested his eligibility to hold office as a Parliamentarian.