Displeased with All Sides

I decided to express my views about Sri Lanka’s politics right now. I’m displeased with all sides. I feel that when Gotabaya Rajapaksa came to power, the qualities of all the political parties deteriorated further from its already bad state. This is a serious problem that must be rectified. Sri Lanka needs to be saved from its destructive politics.

I’ll begin with President Ranil Wickremesinghe. I think he’s doing a good job with Sri Lanka’s economic recovery and engagement with the international community. After taking office in July 2022, he was able to end the queues and increase the amount of Sri Lanka’s reserves. The 5 year graph on the Trading Economics website shows reserves increasing from 1.82 billion US dollars in July 2022 to 5.37 billion US dollars in May 2024. In March 2023, Sri Lanka secured an IMF program with the third tranche approved last month. Ranil initiated reforming of State-Owned Enterprises (SOEs) that’s ongoing which is a welcome move due to the drain SOEs have on the country.

The reason why I’m not very enthusiastic about Ranil is because of his politics. I don’t like him teaming up with the Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna (SLPP), the party of the Rajapaksas who consist of most of his government. These are individuals who were part of Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s government. It was not good to see Ranil and his government delaying the local government elections last year which still hasn’t been held. I don’t like Ranil’s handling of human rights issues, including the targeting of protestors. It was distressing to see the controversial Online Safety Bill passed earlier this year.

Ranil acted shamefully in an address to Parliament last November where he accused some members in the Constitutional Council (an independent body) of sabotage. He appointed Deshabandu Tennekoon as the Inspector General of Police (IGP) in February via the Constitutional Council. The current IGP had been ordered by the Supreme Court to pay compensation for violating a person’s fundamental rights a few months prior to his appointment. This appointment was strongly condemned by the Sri Lankan Collective Against Torture (SLCAT).

The Opposition Leader Sajith Premadasa stated that this appointment was unconstitutional. Five votes are required to approve a President’s nomination. Sajith pointed out that there were four yes votes, two no votes and two abstentions. The Speaker of Parliament can only have a casting vote when there’s a tie and he voted for this appointment. It seems that the Speaker abused his power by equating the two abstentions as votes against the appointment.

Sajith Premadasa leads the main opposition party the Samagi Jana Balawegaya (SJB). They are a breakaway party of Ranil’s party the United National Party (UNP). I have not been pleased with the conduct of Sajith Premadasa and the SJB. It’s disappointing to see him embracing populism including plans for it if the SJB comes to power. When he met with the Norwegian Ambassador a few months ago, he spoke of SJB’s plans for a “populist government”. At this year’s SJB May Day rally, Sajith mentioned “populist” as one of the changes an SJB government would make to the IMF agreement.

Sajith has been teaming up with the independent group of the SLPP that eventually became the breakaway party the Freedom People’s Congress (FPC). I did not support Sajith backing Dullas Alahapperuma from that group in the 2022 Parliamentary vote for Sri Lanka’s new President. I provided my views on this in the article “Thoughts on Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s Resignation & Aftermath”. Even though these individuals are no longer officially with the Rajapaksas, I’m not convinced they are against the Rajapaksas now. I wonder if they broke away from the Rajapaksas due to not getting the power they wanted. It’s worth noting that Dullas Alahapperuma attended the book launch of “Nine: The Hidden Story” by Wimal Weerawansa. At this event, Wimal made wild accusations against the US including being responsible for Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s exit from power.

One example of Sajith collaborating with FPC MPs is having Nalaka Godahewa as an economic advisor. Nalaka had previously been an economic advisor to Gotabaya Rajapaksa and a founding member of Viyathmaga. His tenure as Chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission of Sri Lanka (SEC) a decade ago was controversial and faced corruption allegations.

The SJB is opposing everything the government is doing for the sake of opposing. My point isn’t to defend the government or to dismiss all criticisms of the SJB. The SJB is correct to speak out against the bad governance that’s going on. The problem I have is their constant opposition to economic recovery initiatives. When it came to the 21st Amendment to reduce presidential powers following Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s exit, they voted for it. I would have liked to see them similarly vote and participate in some of the economic recovery efforts. They were previously with Ranil and can easily find common ground with him on this front. I think it was immature of them refraining from voting in Parliament for the IMF agreement in April last year. This is despite previously calling for IMF assistance.

I’ll now mention issues I have with both Ranil and Sajith. Dr. Nihal Jayawickrema mentioned in his article “The Constitutional Council – Is It Under Threat?” of Ranil stating that the Constitutional Council is an “executive body” and Sajith stating that it’s “part of the legislature”. They are both incorrect as the Constitutional Council is an independent office of seven parliamentarians and three civil society members who approve or reject the President’s nominations to head state institutions. I don’t like the fact that both Ranil and Sajith have a group of SLPP members with them. It seems to me like they’re trying to compete with who has more SLPP parliamentarians. I want to see a government formed with no SLPP members of any faction including under different names like the FPC.

A growing force is the National People’s Power (NPP). The main party in the NPP is the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP) led by Anura Kumara Dissanayake. I’m concerned that the NPP will come to power. While the JVP is a legitimate political party now, they were previously responsible for two insurrections. This brings risks of them governing in a brutal, violent and oppressive way. I don’t agree with their communist ideology which I feel could derail Sri Lanka’s economic recovery and make the situation even worse. Sri Lanka already has a bloated public sector and I could see the NPP expanding that.

I wish to see the SJB re-integrated with the UNP and the UNP being headed by neither Ranil nor Sajith. I think this fighting between the SJB and the UNP is not in Sri Lanka’s best interest and could enable the NPP to win at the coming elections. It’s my view that the UNP’s policies are more sensible than the SJB’s, but the UNP has many influential figures who reflect what’s wrong with Sri Lanka’s politics such as Akila Viraj Kariyawasam, Palitha Range Bandara, Wajira Abeywardana, Ravi Karunanayake and Sagala Ratnayaka. A rejuvenated UNP should not have such persons in leadership. One person in the UNP who I think may be suitable to lead the party is Deputy Leader Ruwan Wijewardene.

A re-integration of the two parties could bring the best qualities from them. The economic recovery and reforming of state owned enterprises that the UNP is currently involved in should continue. The SJB is rightly against the bad human rights policies of the government that the UNP is engaging in. Having the two parties together could bring back sensible human rights policies. I want the UNP to take a stand against the Rajapaksas like they used to.

Elections are coming up with a Presidential election later this year followed by a Parliamentary election that’s likely to be held next year. We need to elect a stable government with sound policies who will focus on delivering system change that the protests two years ago were calling for.

System Change in Sri Lanka

 

A key demand of the protests in Sri Lanka which kicked the Rajapaksas out of power last year is system change. This is something we have yet to see. In this article, I’ll be giving my thoughts on how system change can be carried out.

Constitution of Sri Lanka

One aspect relates to the Sri Lankan Constitution. Both Mahinda and Gotabaya Rajapaksa, during their presidencies introduced draconian undemocratic amendments to the Constitution strengthening the power of the President, doing harm to rule of law and independence of government institutions which were the 18th Amendment in 2010 and the 20th Amendment in 2020. Following these two Rajapaksa presidencies, there were restorative amendments to the Constitution passed which were the 19th Amendment in 2015 and the 21st Amendment in 2022.

We can’t keep going back and forth between authoritarian and restorative constitutional amendments. This cycle must end. What’s tragic is that many parliamentarians voted for the 18th, 19th, 20th and 21st Amendments. They didn’t see the dangers of draconian amendments and even if they did, their thirst for power prevented them from voting sensibly. Then with the 20th Amendment, they went back to voting for an authoritarian amendment again not learning their lesson.

Firstly, it’s important that we learn not to vote again for rulers who seek to strengthen their powers and engage in corruption. Secondly, we need to elect sensible parliamentarians who won’t vote for such authoritarian laws. In the Parliament we should have, the government and opposition members will have different ideologies and policies, but they would all believe in values such as rule of law, integrity, good governance and serving the country well. Both sides should be competing to perform better in these fronts which would be a healthy competition.

Unity

Unity is an issue Sri Lanka has had a problem with for many years with mistrust occurring among different communities. A positive factor of last year’s protests is that it was a rare case of Sri Lankans of different ethnicities being part of a common movement. While that was one moment which didn’t solve unity, it’s imperative that we don’t go back to the way we used to be. That can very easily happen.

We need to have a united Sri Lanka with a common Sri Lankan identity. We should use what happened last year as a stepping stone to overcome our divisions and make permanent unity. It’s important to reflect on how politicians divided Sri Lankans. Unity is a valuable subject to be taught in schools. This issue ties into my previous point of the need for common values across parliamentarians. Unity should be another common value across the political divide.

Abolishing the Executive Presidency

I am of the view that the Executive Presidency needs to be abolished. This concentrates too much power on one individual. I believe it has caused much damage to Sri Lanka and is a major factor which contributed to Sri Lanka’s present state. A President who gets elected on a reform mandate gets corrupted by the system resulting in him or her not performing as promised and infuriating much of Sri Lanka.

It’s worth noting that Gotabaya Rajapaksa got elected President when the 19th Amendment was in force. The 19th Amendment greatly reduced the powers of the President. A parliamentary system could make it less likely for an individual with no political experience to be elected Head of Government. I think that we should transition into having an Executive Prime Minister with a ceremonial President.

Bribery and Corruption

Bribery and corruption unfortunately is very common in Sri Lanka including politics, the public and private sector. We need to have systems in place to deter individuals from engaging in these practices. There needs to be successful bribery and corruption prosecutions especially politicians.

We have been enabling bribery and corruption for a long time. This needs to change. Saying no to paying bribes including politicians will make a difference. If a politician asks for a bribe, when saying no there are important points to tell them. They are, this is causing damage to Sri Lanka, the need for system change and mention their election comments against bribery if they said it. Sri Lankan businesses should implement policies of not paying bribes to the government and for their staff not to solicit bribes from customers.

It’s important to teach school students the dangers of bribery and corruption including not participating in it and saying no to paying bribes. It would be useful for public servants and elected representatives to be instructed not to get involved in bribery and corruption when they start their roles. While this won’t prevent all public servants and elected representatives from engaging in these practices, it has the potential to noticeably reduce it.

Conclusion

I gave my perspective on four issues I think need to be fulfilled for system change in Sri Lanka. This is a small selection I gave with many more issues relating to system change needed. This process is an enormous challenge for us to undertake, but that shouldn’t deter us. We can accomplish system change. I’m interested in hearing your thoughts on this topic.

An Overview & Evaluation of the Senate of Ceylon

Sri Lanka when it was previously known as Ceylon had a Senate. The Senate of Ceylon began in 1947 (one year prior to Ceylon’s independence from Britain) and was part of Ceylon’s Parliament. Parliament initially consisted of two houses with the House of Representatives as the Lower House and the Senate as the Upper House. There were 30 members of the Senate with half of them elected by the House of Representatives and the other half nominated by the Governor-General (a representative of the British Monarch) who was acting on the Prime Minister’s advice. In this article, I will be having a look at how the Senate functioned and discuss the idea of having a Senate again in the context of Sri Lanka’s current problems.

The Senate was established via the Soulbury Constitution, Ceylon’s first constitution. I will be having a look at some sections in the Ceylon (Constitution) Order in Council, 1946 related to the Senate. The conditions of the Senate that I refer to come from the period of its establishment. It is possible there had been changes made to them during the duration of the Senate. The Senate was a permanent body unaffected when Parliament was dissolved. A Senator should have been at least 35 years old who served a six year term and a third of Senators were required to retire every other year. The Senate was required at its first meeting to elect two members to serve as President and Deputy-President of the Senate. 

According to the 1956 book “Ceylon and Her Citizens” by I.D.S. & Marguerite I. Weerawardena, the Senate did not have much power. The authors point out that the Senate could share its perspectives, ask questions and be critical of the government. However, unlike the House of Representatives, it could not be an obstacle to the Cabinet. The House of Representatives could do this by declining to provide money requested by the government or by declining to pass laws the government brings. The Senate was incapable of doing these things as the House had the power to override the Senate’s decisions.

After a bill was passed by the House, it got sent to the Senate. The Senate could pass the bill or reject it. If the bill was passed, it would be sent to the Governor-General who usually approved it making it an Act of Parliament. If the Senate rejected the bill, that gave it power to delay the bill by approximately one year until it got sent to the Governor-General as long as the bill got passed a second time by the House. If the bill was related to financial matters, the Senate could only delay the bill by one month. 

Dr. Nihal Jayawickrama wrote an article worth reading called “The Abolition Of The Senate”. The article gives the story behind the abolition of the Senate in 1971. I am not going to discuss the abolition of the Senate, but I found it interesting how he said in his article: “The Senate was one of the five constitutional safeguards that were included in the 1946 Constitution in order to remove the fear of “domination and oppression” by a “permanent and unassailable majority” which existed especially in the minds of Ceylon’s ethnic and religious minorities.” This makes me think if the Senate was beneficial for minorities.  

I wonder if the Senate could have been helpful for this decade with the Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna’s (SLPP) disastrous governance. It’s possible that if the Senate existed now, the SLPP could also have received a two-thirds majority in the Senate like they did at the last Parliamentary election. Section 10.3 of the Ceylon (Constitution) Order in Council, 1946, mentioned that the Governor-General should work to appoint public servants with valuable service or respected professionals. This is referring to the 15 Senators appointed by the Governor-General. I wonder if the Senate in the present context could bring in individuals of suitable quality who don’t usually contest elections. If it was working as expected, it would provide a much needed improvement to governance. Due to the limited functions of the Senate as mentioned above, it seems unlikely it would have been able to protect independent institutions from interference by politicians such as the Rajapaksas. 

The SLPP have been acting so shamelessly. They continue to pander to the Rajapaksas, wanting them to make a comeback. If the Senate was functioning properly with a majority not with the SLPP, they could be standing for justice. The Senate may have been able to delay the passage of the 20th Amendment by one year. They could have provided the necessary work of an opposition which has been lacking by the opposition party, the Samagi Jana Balawegaya (SJB). Something to think about is whether the Senate could have prevented the devastating economic crisis Sri Lanka is facing right now. Of course, if the Senate had not been abolished in 1971, Sri Lanka’s history is likely to have been quite different. The present state may not be anything like it is right now. 

As I wasn’t alive during the Senate of Ceylon and due to the limited amount of information I was able to find on the Senate, this is only a snapshot view of the topic rather than a detailed analysis. I have been thinking if it would be beneficial for Sri Lanka to have a Senate again. I’d be interested in hearing from those who were alive during the Senate of Ceylon of how it functioned and your thoughts on if the Senate would be beneficial to Sri Lanka’s present state. 

Five Interesting Facts from the History of Sri Lanka's Governance

When it comes to the history of Sri Lanka’s government, there are some incidents and facts not

widely known or are known mainly by the older generation of Sri Lankans due to many years passing

since its occurrence. In this article, I am compiling five interesting facts from the history of Sri Lanka’s

governance. It begins 87 years ago.

1. Ministers without Ministries

Before Sri Lanka’s (then Ceylon) Independence in 1948, from 1931 to 1947 there were Ministers but no Ministries under the Donoughmore Constitution. I wonder how the government functioned at this time without Ministries. A possibility I can see is that there was a group of staff under all Ministers performing the responsibilities of Ministerial staff.

2. Ministers without Portfolios

Sri Lanka's first Cabinet was appointed 71 years ago on the 14th of October 1947, the day of the first session of Sri Lanka’s Parliament known then as the House of Representatives. In this Cabinet, there was a Minister (R.S.S. Gunawardena) without a portfolio. He was also Chief Government Whip who was unseated via an election petition on the 12th of March 1948. R.S.S. Gunawardena continued to function in his positions until replacements were made in May 1948. Interestingly his successor A.E. Goonesinghe also functioned as a Minister without Portfolio and a Chief Government Whip, though he also got assigned the Minister of State portfolio on the 26th of July that year. I’m interested to know what these Ministers functions were. Perhaps their work included working on topics not covered in the other Ministerial portfolios. 

3. Parliament with Two Houses

As pointed out above, Parliament was known as the House of Representatives at the time of Sri Lanka’s independence. The House of Representatives was one of two houses of Parliament, with the House of Representatives being the Lower House and the Senate of Ceylon being the Upper House. The House of Representatives at its first sitting had 101 MPs, with 95 elected and six appointed by the then Governor-General who represented Britain’s monarch. The Senate had 30 members with 15 members being elected by the House of Representatives and 15 nominated by the Governor-General on the Prime Minister’s advice. The Senate was led by a President and it enabled a system of accountability towards the House of Representatives. This institution continued until its abolishment in 1971. I intend to write about the Senate of Ceylon in a future article.

4. The First Speaker Standing Up to the Prime Minister

The first Speaker Francis Molamure is reported to have told Prime Minister D.S. Senanayake to take his seat. Nihal Seneviratne, former Secretary-General of Parliament revealed in a conversation (video in link) with political scientist Asoka Obeyesekere that he was told that the first Speaker said to Prime Minister D.S. Senanayake: “Honourable Prime Minister, I think you are being irrelevant. Please take your seat.” I hope to see this happen again.

5. Two MPs for Kalawana

Following the 1977 general election, there were two people claiming the seat of Kalawana, a town 106

km from Colombo in the Ratnapura district. The seat was won by Mr. Abeyratne Pilapitiya of the

United National Party (UNP), the party which won the general election. For some reason, it was

challenged by Mr. Sarath Muttetuwegama of the Communist Party of Sri Lanka (CPSL) who

contested against him via an election petition. Mr. Pilapitiya was involved with an accident, and stayed

away from Parliament without requesting leave. As a result of this, he lost his seat which was

believed to be an intentional move on his part. His party then nominated him to fill the vacancy,

changing his position from an elected MP to a nominated MP. In late 1980, the election petition result

in the Supreme Court unseated Mr. Pilapitiya and a by-election was conducted in January 1981 that

elected Mr. Sarath Muttetuwegama.

At about the same time, the government led by then President J.R. Jayewardene brought in a bill, the Third Amendment to the Constitution that would enable the Kalawana electorate to have two MPs, one elected and the other nominated. The Supreme Court ruled that this amendment required both a two-thirds majority and a referendum. Though the bill was passed with a two-thirds majority, a referendum was not held. This issue was concluded with Mr. Pilapitiya resigning resulting in Mr.Muttetuwegama taking his seat as the MP for Kalawana. This shows an instance of the judiciary preventing presidential abuse of power.

Conclusion

I hope you enjoyed these five facts from the history of Sri Lanka’s governance. I’d be interested in

hearing from anyone who remembers any of these happenings, knows more details or has similar

stories they’d like to share.

Six Sri Lankan Specialists Discuss Sri Lankan Issues

I travelled to Sri Lanka in May this year and had the opportunity to meet several specialists to discuss Sri Lankan issues that were mostly related to politics and economics. In this article, I’ll be sharing the highlights of my meetings with the 6 people I had the privilege of talking to.    

In conversation with Asoka Obeyesekere (left)

Monday 8th May 2017

This was the first meeting which was at Verité Research. Their workplace was an old house re-done as an office and it had great architecture.

Janeen Fernando

That afternoon, I met Janeen Fernando who’s the Head of Politics at Verité Research. As part of his role, he’s in charge of the Sri Lankan trilingual political tracking site Manthri.lk. I’ll now list some highlights from our discussion.  

• I asked Janeen what his thoughts are on the political alliance between the United National Party (UNP) and the Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP) whether it’s providing benefits, causing problems or both. Janeen responded that these 2 major parties have competing ideologies, a different voter base and that there have been clashes, but the 2 parties working together allows them to carry out major reforms.
• Janeen thinks the government’s priority should be constitutional reform as we’ve never had a Constitution that the 2 parties agreed on as the 1972 Constitution was brought by the SLFP & opposed by the UNP while the 1978 Constitution was brought by the UNP & opposed by the SLFP. He mentioned that a new Constitution by both parties is an opportunity.
• I asked Janeen how the recent Right to Information (RTI) law impacts his work at Manthri.lk. He said that they have filed an RTI request on Parliamentary attendance and are waiting for a response. Subsequently, I discovered that an image on Parliamentary attendance has been posted recently on Manthri.lk.
• Janeen mentioned the interesting fact that during the 1970 General Election, the UNP got more votes than the SLFP, with the results being something like 36% for the SLFP and 37% for the UNP, but that the SLFP won because of the first-past-the-post system.
• I asked Janeen whether the order of Ministers is Cabinet Ministers, State Ministers and Deputy Ministers. He said that it isn’t the case, adding that what’s more important is if the Minister is a Cabinet Minister or a Non-Cabinet Minister based on differences such as a Cabinet Minister attending a Cabinet sub-committee which a Non-Cabinet Minister wouldn’t attend. He also said that a senior Minister might get the State Minister title for their seniority, but that there is no clear distinction between State Ministers and Deputy Ministers.
• Janeen said that the Code of Conduct and the National Audit Bill are 2 promises from the 100 day program that haven’t been delivered.
• On the Code of Conduct, Janeen said that its draft has been released to the public in December and that he has some issues with it.  
• I asked Janeen if the Code of Conduct can reduce corruption. He said that it isn’t a major or magic solution for that, but it’s part of the process of reducing corruption, saying that the Code of Conduct isn’t the role of the Bribery Commission or Supreme Court and that you need both this law and these institutions.    

Tuesday 9th May 2017

This was the busiest day for meetings as I had 3 meetings starting at 9 am.

Dimantha De Silva

I first went to Moratuwa University to meet Dr. Dimantha De Silva for an interview. He’s the Consultant/Team Leader for the Colombo Transport Plan of the Megapolis. The Megapolis is a massive government infrastructure project aiming to improve the Western Region of Sri Lanka. Unlike the other meetings, I won’t list highlights of it only to say that it focused on the Colombo Transport Plan covering mostly transport issues as well as some politics and economics relating to that plan. Those interested in reading the interview can access it here.

Rohan Masakorala
In the afternoon, I met Rohan Masakorala, CEO of the Shippers’ Academy Colombo to discuss economic affairs which he’s very knowledgeable about. The meeting took place at the office of a mutual contact. Here are some highlights from the meeting.

• I asked him how Sri Lanka’s foreign direct investment (FDI) can be increased. He said it would be by correcting the legal system and the tax system as well as institutional reforms.
• On the issue of the planned Economic and Technology Cooperation Agreement (ETCA) for Sri Lanka to sign with India, he wants it to happen, the faster the better. Rohan said that Sri Lanka is “just a small city” compared to India, and that ETCA is more positive to Sri Lanka as it can access a massive market.
• I heard that Rohan had done some work for former Ministers, Lalith Athulathmudali & Ronnie De Mel and asked him about it. Rohan hadn’t done work for Lalith Athulathmudali but knew him well as a teenager in the 1980s. Lalith used to visit Rohan’s family very often and encouraged him to get into the export business, thus Rohan credits Lalith as the reason he went into the export sector. Rohan worked for Ronnie De Mel as a consultant from 1999, associated with him for many years and up to date keeps in touch with him.
• I mentioned 2 controversial institutions being set up at the start of the year. One was the Horana Tyre Factory and the other was the ‘Western Automobile Assembly Factory’ that was originally supposed to be a Volkswagen Assembly Plant. I asked Rohan if he thinks that they can bring benefits to the country despite these controversies. Rohan thinks so, saying that they are a value addition in the smallest scale. He mentioned that this is a beginning, saying that even if someone starts a bicycle tyre business that’s a positive first step. Rohan said that this was how the apparel sector started.
• Rohan thinks Sri Lanka’s RTI law is a reform that’s good for investment.
  
• Rohan thinks the current Central Bank Governor Dr. Indrajit Coomaraswamy is an excellent choice who has integrity, straightforwardness and is non-controversial.

A.C. Visvalingam

Following my meeting with Rohan Masakorala, I met with Dr. A.C. Visvalingam, President of the Citizens Movement for Good Governance (CIMOGG). I met Dr. Visvalingam at his house. Here are some highlights from the meeting.

• Dr. Visvalingam is a 50:50 civil/structural engineer who was a civil engineer in state employment and a structural engineer in the private sector. He has international experience having studied in the UK & spent 16 months in Japan, 11 years in the UK, 3 months in Germany and 30 months in Ghana.
• When he returned to Sri Lanka, he worked as as Deputy General Manager (Civil) of the River Valleys Development Board on the Walawe Project (1971-1973). There was political interference in the Board which nullified all efforts to educate farmers on water conservation and growing crops to the appropriate soil conditions. The Deputy Minister publicly stated that there was no need to listen to engineers and that if the Walawe Ganga ended up having insufficient water, he would “"divert the water of another river into this one". That experience led to his activism for good governance.  
• Dr. Visvalingam got involved in CIMOGG in 2002 when a group of people got together. CIMOGG comprises retired persons, including many public servants. Dr. Visvalingam was elected as their President in 2005.
• CIMOGG does not look for funds from government or local/foreign non-governmental organisations (NGOs) so as to maintain its independence and they don’t wish to have people with political connections associated with the group. Over 90% of the funds are generated internally and a few donations from individuals have been accepted from time to time.
• Dr. Visvalingam has had negative experiences of writing reports on politicians. He said if you write a mix of positive & negative comments about them and conclude with a positive remark, they’ll highlight the concluding positive remark and you become a collaborator. He also said if you write something negative about them, they will go against you.     
• Dr. Visvalingam has a problem with the fact that the 1978 Constitution put Parliament above the Supreme Court, saying that it is difficult for Judges to make independent judgements. He also thinks that corruption really increased since the 1978 Constitution.
• On Sri Lanka’s proposed new Constitution, Dr. Visvalingam thinks that it should have a separation of powers and with a ceremonial President chosen by a committee.
• Dr. Visvalingam believes that despite issues of corruption, to not give up in his desire for good governance such as through his writings, with the hope that it might eventually arrive.

Friday 19th May 2017

After a gap of 10 days, I had my final set of meetings which began in the morning.

Asoka Obeyesekere

I went to Transparency International Sri Lanka at the start of a working day to meet their Executive Director Asoka Obeyesekere. Interestingly, Asoka was the person who came up with the idea of Manthri.lk and used to run the site (The political tracking site now run by Janeen Fernando, the first person that I met) when he worked as a Governance Consultant at Verité Research. Here are some highlights from our meeting.

• I asked Asoka how the implementation of Sri Lanka’s RTI Law is going. He said that effective implementation requires a change in the public sector, referring to its culture of secrecy. He said that the Government Information Department have been training Information Officers on RTI, but don’t seem to be training citizens on how to use it. He mentioned that there is a resistance to RTI in some public bodies, with some Information Officers asking citizens requesting information questions like “Who are you?” & “What do you do?” and that citizens tend to back off when information officers say that. He also said that citizens should ideally have been able to request anything covered under RTI since February.
• I asked Asoka about his thoughts on the performance of Sarath Jayamanne as the Director General of the Commission to Investigate Allegations of Bribery or Corruption (CIABOC) who replaced Dilrukshi Dias Wickramasinghe following her resignation late last year. He spoke positively of Sarath Jayamanne describing him as a very experienced prosecutor, and then went on to say his issues with CIABOC. His issues are the fact that it was set up before there were other anti-corruption agencies thus they compete with one another. He said CIABOC was set up in legal framework as the only agency for these investigations. Asoka said that CIABOC is supposed to investigate money laundering, but that it’s investigated by the FCID (Financial Crimes Investigation Division). He said that these agencies don't want to share information with each other as they are in competition. Police officers are sent to CIABOC and Asoka wonders if the IGP (Inspector General of Police) would be willing to send the best police officers for these investigations pointing out that if you send the best police officers, you won’t be able to use their services.
• Asoka says that we can improve CIABOC via our commitments to some international organisations that include the World Bank. One such commitment is to allow CIABOC to conduct investigations on their own without a complaint having been made.  
• I asked Asoka if he knows of any developing countries that have made successful efforts against corruption. He asked if developing countries could include countries that weren’t in a financially good state when they started their anti-corruption drive. I replied yes, and he mentioned Hong Kong as a place that has taken action against corruption and that it is mentioned a lot in Sri Lanka at present. Asoka mentioned that Sri Lankan politicians spend high sums of money for their campaigns, but get paid a low salary. Thus, this is one of the causes of corruption in Sri Lanka. He mentioned that Kenya has paid their Parliamentarians among the highest in the world due to this, but said that despite the high salaries, the lure of ill gotten wealth is still too great for some politicians to say no to.

Dhananath Fernando

I was to meet Dhananath Fernando next. He’s the Head (Chief Operating Officer) of Public Policy Think Tank Advocata Institute. Unfortunately something came up at the last minute, so he was unable to meet me on that day. I was however able to speak to him on the phone instead. I first heard of Dhananath from his article “What we could have done with the losses of state-owned enterprises” (on dailymirror.lk), and I was speaking to him exactly 1 year after his article had been published. Here are some highlights from our discussion.

• Dhananath said what’s currently going on with Advocata is an essay writing competition and a study of market prices. I asked about the market prices study and he said Sri Lanka has set prices for certain items such as bread. Dhananath said that a free market deals with supply and demand, and that a fixed price can cause problems so they are studying the impact of fixed prices.
• I found out that the losses of the Sri Lanka Transport Board drastically reduced in 2016 from this tweet that used Central Bank figures, and asked Dhananath about this. He said it could be due to a number of factors, and that some of these loss making state entities are profitable in some years. He elaborated that it could be due to global issues such as oil prices, saying that reductions in losses or even profits doesn’t necessarily mean better management. He said there still could be better management which is why they advocate privatisation.
• I asked Dhananath what he thinks should be the government’s economic strategy. He said that economic reforms were promised, but nothing had happened. Dhananath said that as we are in a debt trap, there should be improved tax collection of government revenue with a proper government policy on tax. He also mentioned restructuring of state-owned enterprises.
• I heard that Advocata has a partnership with the Atlas Network, an organisation based in Washington D.C. and asked about it. Dhananth said that there is no official partnership and that the Atlas Network have programs for funding based on project work which they apply for. He said these projects are based on Sri Lanka.
• Dhananath believes the private sector have a big role to play in the Sri Lankan economy. He wants the government to make it easier for them to do their work and to not get in their way.
• On the issue of Sri Lankan Airlines, Dhananath does not believe that the government should be managing an airline.     

I enjoyed meeting these people to discuss Sri Lankan issues. They have knowledge in their respective fields, and talking to them made me understand some subjects I wasn’t sure about. These discussions led me to even re-evaluate my own views on certain issues. It’s interesting to note that Dhananath Fernando and Dr. A.C. Visvalingam both contributed to my article “Impact of the 19th Amendment One Year On” in July 2016.

Thank you to you all for giving me your perspectives on issues relating to your respective field. I wish you all the best in your work and believe you are capable of making Sri Lanka a better place.