Emerging Common Opposition

The factors which are forging unity among the opposition political parties and the civil society organizations are the immediate need to change the constitution and to abolish the Executive Presidency. This includes also ending the rule of one corrupt family. We have seen the results of the 18^th Amendment to the constitution. How true is Edmund Burke for us today who said, the greater the power, the more dangerous will be the abuses.

Undoubtedly, the preoccupations of the opposition movement reflect some urgent needs of the ordinary people and focusing on them is extremely important.  

However it is also important to raise the question -  will a mere change in the political leadership and the abolition of the Executive Presidency be a panacea to the real issues that our country is afflicted with, such as the high cost of living, the vast income differences, the national issue, threats inflicted on the natural resources, and so on?  My view is that except those who perceive the current political situation in a very narrow sense, all others would agree that the people’s expectations cannot be realized just by making constitutional changes.

Certainly, such changes will bring about a temporary relief and will allow a free space necessary for short term political engagement, but in the long run such a space does not really matter. The real challenges are centered round the differences of opinion over the national issue and the economic strategy among the opposition political parties.

These are difficult questions to solve. If the leadership of the common opposition fails to come to a consensus on the national issue and the economic strategy, a breakdown of the united alliance would be inevitable. The experiences of the last 60 years of the power seeking political parties have failed to agree on a political solution to the national issue. For them the national question was only as a political tool to attract votes.

As regards the economic strategy, the question is whether these political parties in the opposition alliance will come to an understanding as to what their economic strategy for Sri Lanka is going to be.

If they have not agreed on a plan, the only option would be to implement the existing one introduced in different names for expediency, such as “Regaining Sri Lanka” or what was lately known as the “Mahinda Chintanaya” or the “National Physical Plan”.

According to that plan Sri Lanka is to have five centres: Navigation Centre, Aviation Centre, Economic Centre, Knowledge Centre and Energy Centre. It is proposed that the projects include 19 Airports, Mega Cities, Railway and High Ways connected to Asian Network of Roads and Rail Roads and so on. The project is spaced out until year 2030.

If successfully carried out it will make Sri Lanka the ‘Miracle of Asia”. But, there are a few very critical questions that have to be raised and sought answers for.  Is the new regime going to continue this programme.

If yes, at whose expense are they going to implement them? Are they aware of its impact on the peasantry and fishermen, the environment (forests, water ways, flora and fauna) and so on? 

In the context of globalization, we know that those projects are primarily meant as infrastructure facilities for the international companies to carry out their businesses in an efficient way and certainly not aimed at helping the local people. 

Therefore how can we expect through such mega projects, economic justice for people and also the environment? How would such programmes put an end to corrupt practices of governance?  Would they reduce the income differences among different classes?  Or are we to expect just the opposite?

We also know that these projects, as happening with the current regime, will create opportunities to enter into businesses as partners of the foreign investors directly or by co-opting the family members.

Further it is certain that those people who enter into politics do so not with the interest of doing welfare to the people but enriching themselves in the shortest possible time.  In this climate of globalization, doing politics is a big business venture that can earn a massive income without much investment on your part. Nelson Mandela, affirmed this trend when he said that the rich and powerful now have new means to further enrich and empower themselves at the cost of the poorer and weaker people.

In this back drop, we have no reason to believe that the opposition parties aiming at the reign of power will ever overcome these challenges and transform politics in our country into a means of serving the masses.  

I salute those who work to bring about a new regime and constitutional changes, but am surprised to see why these critical issues are kept away from the present debate. 

Now the challenge before the citizens is to contribute and build up people’s power or the movement of the poor and the oppressed and to join in a “creative struggle”, to do away with the structural causes of poverty and marginalization and construct a just Society.

The citizens in this country need to rethink their political mission. Is it to work for the empowerment of power seeking politicians or for the poor and weaker masses?

This strategy I believe is a massive task and has its own mission. Most certainly for several reasons it would not attract those who are engaged in party politics but one possible reason is that it does not guarantee personal benefits. There is one more reason why it would not draw the attention of others. If one opts for such a strategy he/she would not be able to move about with the rich and the powerful because the mission is mostly around the poor, the weak and the marginalized. In my opinion, one of the main tasks that this mission entails is freeing such masses of their mythical beliefs related to religion, development and politics. 

Fr. Sarath Iddamalgoda

By Fr. Sarath Iddamalgoda -

Fr. Sarath Iddamalgoda

The report that the President Rajapaksa soon after his return from New York has flown to the Vatican to extend an official invitation to the Pope Francis, astonished me.

It was somewhere in July this year that a delegation from the Vatican arrived in Sri Lanka to see to the logistics of the papal visit schedules for January next year. Subsequently there was also a media conference and announcements were made by the Sri Lankan Church authorities with regard to the Pope’s two-day visit. A senior police officer has also been appointed to see to the arrangements.

After all those arrangements have been made, it looks quite strange to me that  the President has now gone to the Vatican personally to invite the Pope. This gives the strange impression that the Pope, as the head of a State, has decided to visit  Sri Lanka without the consent of our government.

I cannot understand the protocol. Has this happened in previous instances when heads of States from China and Japan visited Sri Lanka? Could anyone be kind enough to explain this anomaly to me and to others who may find difficult to understand these proceedings regarding Pope’s visit?

In fact, on two previous occasions, when the popes, namely Paul VI and John Paul II, visited Sri Lanka, there were no visits made to the Vatican by the then prime minister or the President to extend formal invitations.

What was the need for our President to spend the money of the people to make this visit to the Vatican when a papal envoy is residing at Baudhaloka Mawatha a few kilometers away from the Temple Trees?

The ambiguity of this visit by the President at a time when an election is to be held soon in Sri Lanka is really creating suspicion and leaving room for legitimate speculation.

Is the pope having second thoughts about the visit? Is he considering to cancel the intended visit because of the election that is to be held a few days or weeks before or after Pope’s visit?

Is the government planning to get the needed legitimacy through his visit? Will his visit be used by the government as a part of his election campaign to attract the votes in the Catholic belt? Is there a hidden agenda behind the visit not made known to the public? Are the Sri Lankan Church leaders also involved in a secret agenda? Or as some people wonder, is there here an appeal to  the Pope to reverse his previous decision not to visit, bless or open the massive building complex intended for an Opus Dei University constructed by the armed forces  with the dollars of the Opus Dei flowing into the country, and of course to the metropolitan church?

The media has reported also that the Sri Lankan President has mentioned to the Pope about the socio-economic development that is taking place and the high level of religious harmony prevailing in the country.

Perhaps the Pope may not be aware of the results of the recent provincial council elections in Western and Uva provinces, which indicates the people’s fast losing confidence in the governance of the President !

Has Pope Francis Got a Genuine Picture on Sri Lanka?

It is heartening to note, in his statement made after the meeting with the Bishops’ conference of SL, that Pope Francis has drawn attention to the victims of violence and war.

Among many words of wisdom found in the statement, I am very much touched when he notes that the “poor should not be forgotten and inequality not be permitted to grow”. I guess one of his priorities for Sri Lanka is the “elimination of violence”. 

Indeed, the cause for emergence and prevalence of violence in Sri Lankan society is the “increased economic development”. Such development cannot be achieved without “exclusion and inequality in society”, which is a kind of unceasing violence inbuilt into the system of governance and politics.

In Sri Lanka violence takes various forms such as cultural, economic and also political. From his statement we can observe that Pope Francis seems to be well informed about the cultural violence that is prevalent in the country due to ethnic war and “religious extremism”.

However, I wonder whether Pope is sufficiently informed about the fact that cultural violence in Sri Lanka is often a political tool made use of by those engaged in power politics to legitimize their positions. The perpetrators of violence caused by the elements of religious extremism have never been brought before the Law. Hence it can be concluded that even religious extremism seems to be sponsored by those who wield political power.  

Amidst this controversy there is also an effort on the part of the Church and governing authorities to invite the Pope to Sri Lanka. His visit, if happens as planned, will be another cultural event that could be used by the current regime to justify its image before the masses now marred by years of violence inflicted on people.    

On the other hand, if Pope decides to visit Sri Lanka the event ought to become a source of strength to the victims of violence and never let it be a source to legitimize the perpetrators of violence.  

Pope also speaks about economic development that Sri Lanka has achieved. The violent character of economic development can be seen in the way the wealth is distributed. According to an official data the richest 20% of the Sri Lankan society enjoys 54% of our national wealth and the poorest 20% is left with only a 5%.

The 18^th amendment to the constitution is another instance of exclusion. The creation of a system of executive presidency in which all power concentrated in one person is a form of political violence where the principal equality is ruthlessly undermined.  

It is known that Pope Francis has won recognition not only among the Catholics but also among those non Catholics as a world leader who is more than capable of contributing towards making our world more just and humane. He does so by motivating the Catholic community which has been called to be the “leaven in the midst of humanity”. Whether Pope Francis   visit Sri Lanka or not, the Catholic community can be enriched by Pope Francis’s pastoral advice and guidance. Nevertheless in order that his teaching to become more relevant and contextual, the Pope has to be presented with a genuine picture of the socio, economic and political realities affecting the life of a larger majority of the population.

Critical Questions on Weliveriya Incident

The news from Weliveriya is really distressing and the whole country is in a state shock hearing the impact of Army-Police assault on the civilians. The exact number of deaths is not known as yet. At first it was said that one and several were injured. Later it was reported that 4 or 6 are dead. The country has a right to know the exact number of the dead and the injured.

Even if the number of dead is just one, should such killings be tolerated? Could such a protest by the Innocent and unarmed civilians on a just cause drinking water in this instance, be targeted with bullets? In my view the killings at Welveriya cannot be justified on any ground.

Who gave the orders to kill? Nobody in sound senses would order to confront the citizens with bullets when their demand is drinking water, a harmless demand of about citizens of 10 villages.  

People have neither acted on imagination, nor got mobilized by sheer selfish political interests but motivated by a real need, water without which survival is impossible.  The monks who participated in this struggle vouched that the need is genuine. Only those in power consider it otherwise.

This is not the first time that Rajapakha regime used bullets to wound or kill innocent citizens in the land when the citizens asked for their just demands. The killing of FTZ worker Roshen Chanka at Katunayaka and causing injuries to hundreds of others and fishermen at Chilaw were the previous instances. It has now happened at Weliveriya.

After seeing the images of police and military operations against the civilians on TV, one can imagine what had happened to the Tamils in the North and East for past few decades. What did the Tamils demand? They asked for freedom to use their language and political freedom to manage their affairs. The response of our rulers was retaliating with bullets.

Another aspect of this incident is that the priority of the authorities has been protecting the polluters rather than remedying the damage caused to the sources of water.

What has been the role of the Environmental Authority in finding a solution to this issue? Was it unaware that there has been contamination of underground water for some time now? Or did it overlook because the factories are owned by some economically powerful individuals.

These events prompt us to question also the policy of the government over the democratic right of people to protest. Has the Mahinda Chinthanaya withdrawn it and the new policy is to confront the protesting civilians with bullets?

Can this happen is a democracy. The behavior of the government in these instances tells where it is leading us to. In this path of darkness creating a ‘culture of silence’ using bullets become an effective strategy.  Hasn’t the people being in a slumber too long?

Human Rights of People of Weliveriya and Rathupawela

The struggle of people at Rathupaswela for weeks against the factory which has polluted the drinking wells in the area, culminated in three deaths of young people as a result of shooting by the army personnel.

The three dead were two students and a young worker who took shelter inside the Church premises. Today the case regarding this matter was to be heard at the Gampaha magistrate courts but was postponed for some reasons.

Both, the deprivation of sources of drinking water to the villagers and the killings of two students returning home after school and a young worker returning home after work and causing gunshot injuries to many others, were acts of severe injustices and therefore they have to be condemned without any reservation.

Having realized the gravity of this matter the members visited the area on several occasions to meet people and to explore the possibilities for involvement by CSM to support the cause of the victims of these injustices. The CSM was informed also that the villagers of Rathupaswela and Weliveriya are now like the “sheep without shepherds” and that the presence of the members of the clergy will be greatly appreciated specially by the Catholic community in Weliveriya.

So last Monday one decision among a few others was to attend the hearing at courts on the 8^th November as a sign of our solidarity with the victims. It was heartening that 15 members of the Christian clergy (5 men and 10 women) were present at the court premises. However, there was a feeling of sadness in everyone when informed that the case has been postponed.

Yet, seeing the importance witnessing to value of Justice and being present with the victims, everyone agreed to come again on the next day of the hearing.

Now Wild Statements Have Been Attributed To Bishop Rayappu!

April 29, 2013 | Filed under: Colombo Telegraph,Opinion | Posted by: COLOMBO_TELEGRAPH

By Fr. Sarath Iddamalgoda -

Fr. Sarath Iddamalgoda

Bishop Rayappu of Mannar diocese has been accused again. The Nation paper says, ‘the Bishop, TNA resurrect LTTE’s ISGA demand’.

Who can challenge the source of reporting, when the ‘Nation’ is totally depending on the army intelligence?

I have been at several meetings where Bishop spoke his mind on the national issue. But he never stood for a separation of the country. He strongly stood for a political solution which respects the Tamil identity.

However he is deeply committed to cause of the Tamil community. For an example very bravely he stood by the Mullikulam people when their land was appropriated by the security forces quite unjustly. Due to such instances, many have misunderstood the Bishop because he takes up unceasingly the cause of the Tamil community despite of the threats he faces from different quarters including the intelligence services. Bishop strongly believes in the cause of Justice. That indeed is the Faith of Christian community which believes ‘Let justice roll on like a river, righteousness like a never-failing stream’. (Amos 5/24)

For some voicing on the rights of the Tamils equals Tigers or supporters of separation.

The real problem lies not with the Bishop but with the government who has no political will to draft a political solution. In fact, it is the opinion of the commission that cause of the crisis is the politicians who governed this country after independence. So far we have not seen any serious attempt on the part of the government to implement the recommendations of the LLRC which was appointed by the President himself.

Now wild statements have been attributed to bishop Rayappu! No one can prevent such accusations. But we can see that the nation paper is having a biased mind and an agenda to destroy the good name of the bishop.

It is a well known that Bishop Rayappu is one of the strongest voices of the Tamil community.  Branding him as a Tiger voice can be a strategy to silence such voices. If one vilifying Bishop Rayappu with that intention, he/she will have a short victory.

An unjust regime can harm Individuals as it is happening in the case of Bishop Rayappu but the prophetic voices cannot be stopped.  Church leaders have a calling to ‘speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves, for the rights of all who are destitute’ (Proverb 31/8).

We pray that Bishop Rayappu be continually blessed to continue his prophetic mission.

Violence against Citizens at Hultsdorf

The government’s behavior in handling the impeachment motion demonstrates that it has no respect for the rule of law. Although, its spokesmen repeatedly declare that everything was done according to the law it has failed to convince the legal community and the civil society within and outside the country.

Another clear instance of government’s disregard for the rule of law is the violence unleashed on the peaceful demonstrators on the 10^th January by the political goons sponsored by the government.

Those thugs with poles and stones in hand arrived there with a clear purpose of committing violence. Indeed their violent actions were really shocking. The fact that they were committing those criminal activities in the presence of hundreds of police officers placed there to maintain law and order, was most surprising. The police inaction to prevent such attacks amounted to police giving protection to those criminals.

This surely would not have happened unless the police had orders from the higher political authorities, to allow a free hand to the attackers and overlook the crimes they were commissioned to commit. The  behavior of the attackers in the streets of Hulsdorp betrayed the fact that they had the blessings of the authorities and had enjoyed the privilege of total immunity.    

Can this happen in a democracy? The right to a peaceful protest is an intrinsic part of a democratic society and is a long and respected tradition even in Sri Lanka. The freedom to hold peaceful demonstrations is a right guaranteed by the constitution. According to the chapter three of our constitution every citizen is entitled to the freedom of speech and expression and the freedom of peaceful assembly.

Therefore everyone who loves democratic traditions should immediately condemn this attack by the Government’s goons and the failure on the part of the State to provide protection to its citizens who arrived there to express their views in the form of a peaceful assembly which is one of their fundamental rights guaranteed by the constitution.

Now the attack has already taken place. One of the unfortunate victims was Thilak Kariyawasam. Fortunately, he was physically strong enough to face the numerous brutal attacks made by the goons with their hands, legs and sticks. Anyone else he would have died on the spot. 

The Police if interested can easily identify the attackers from the images provided by the media. But no action has been taken so far against these brutal attacks. The citizens ought to thank the media personnel for publishing the images of the political goons attacking the peaceful protesters at the hills of Hultsdorf.

Referring to the Chief Justice, the government spokesmen have been heard to reiterate that every wrong doer has to be punished. Although the allegations have not been proved, she has been punished in an illegal manner. 

But no action has been taken against the wrong doers who committed violent criminal acts on those who came to demonstrate in the defense of the independence of the judiciary.

Does it mean that the government is giving a message to the citizens of this country that it has no respect for citizens’ rights and is prepared to unleash goon violence to crush any opposition to its hegemony? This is a sign that we are going to be ruled by political goons! 

Fr. Sarath Iddamalgoda