news
Ding-dong arguments over alleged attempts to protect ‘tie-coat’ thieves of previous regime
By Saman Indrajith
The decision to have deferred telecasts of the proceedings of parliamentary committees including the COPE and the COPA was not aimed at protecting ‘tie-coat thieves of Colombo 07’, the Chief Government Whip told Parliament yesterday.
Chief Government Whip Highways Minister Johnston Fernando said categorizing the thieves of the former government (2015-2019) into two groups––the ‘tie-coat’ and ‘Colombo 07’ was a task for the SJB.
“We have nothing to do with these thieves. Our objective is to expose those who ruined this country. The SJB needs to highlight only one set of thieves.”
Fernando said so in response to some questions raised by Opposition MPs with regard to a decision to change the live telecast of committee sessions to delayed transmission.
SJB Colombo District MP S.M. Marikkar said that the government had decided to have deferred telecasts of the committee proceedings. “The COPE and other committees are going to investigate the malpractices of the previous government during the
period of 2015 to 2019. Various corrupt deals will be exposed and their thieves would be identified. We have no problem with that. The government is going for a delayed transmission to edit the content so that it could spare the names of tie-coat thieves from Colombo 07 in the former government. That is not done.”
Assistant Government Whip Jagath Pushpakumara said MP Marikkar was misleading the House. “The idea of the delayed transmission was discussed at the first COPE meeting. The new chairman asked members to express their opinions. Some Opposition members are asking for the post of Chairman of COPE and COPA. They say that the COPE chairmanship was given to the Opposition in the past. That is wrong. It was given to Sunil Handunnetti of JVP, which was an appendage of the yahapalana government. The JVP was there to protect the interests of the then government. So, the COPE chairmanship was in fact retained by that government.
Chief Opposition Whip Lakshman Kiriella:
The decision to telecast was approved by parliament. I myself as the Leader of the House presented the motion to the effect in this House.
Kurunegala District SJB MP Nalin Bandara:
I am a member of the COPE. The government is trying the stop the live telecast. The decision should come from the COPE Chairman. It is not a decision that could be made by others.
Chief Government Whip Minister Fernando:
That decision was discussed at the Business Committee where MP Kiriella too was present. MP Bandara was not a member of that committee so he does not know. The decision was made at the party leaders’ meeting. It has to be implemented now.
Sports Minister Namal Rajapaksa:
The Opposition is putting on a show wasting public funds. This is not an issue at all. The decision has been made at the party leaders’ meeting. After that, the Opposition MPs come here and shout to attract media attention. This is a waste of the House time and public funds.
SLPP MP Jayantha Ketagoda:
MP Kiriella says that their government made that decision so that we should continue it. That cannot be. We did not come here to implement your decisions. We are a new government and we do things the way we want.
Chief Government Whip Minister Fernando said the previous government had introduced the live telecast as party of its political witch-hunt. The previous government used this live transmission to cast some people in a poor light. “We can also use this live telecast as a political means to an end. But there is something called moral values. What do most TV channels do using these telecasts? They take specific cuts from this telecast and use them for political campaigns. (Referring to MP Marikkar) Yes, channels that represent people like you. We are not letting any public officials lose their self-respect. This government is not putting on media shows. Your government did that. People overwhelmingly rejected what your government did. That is why they gave us a two-thirds majority. We are not doing what your government did.
- News Advertiesment
See Kapruka’s top selling online shopping categories such as Toys, Grocery, Flowers, Birthday Cakes, Fruits, Chocolates, Clothing and Electronics. Also see Kapruka’s unique online services such as Money Remittence,News, Courier/Delivery, Food Delivery and over 700 top brands. Also get products from Amazon & Ebay via Kapruka Gloabal Shop into Sri Lanka.
news
Test post
sdfsdf sdf sf sf sdf sf sdf
news
AG not bound by its recommendations, yet to receive report
PCoI on Easter Sunday attacks:
By Shamindra Ferdinando
Attorney General Dappula de Livera, PC is not bound by recommendations made by the Presidential Commission of Inquiry (P CoI) into the 2019 Easter Sunday carnage, or presidential directives in that regard, according to authoritative sources.
They said that the AG couldn’t under any circumstances initiate legal proceedings until he had received the full PCoI report.
President Gotabaya Rajapaksa received the PCoI report on Feb 1. The President’s Office delivered a set of PCoI reports to Speaker Mahinda Yapa Abeywardena on Feb 23, a day after the report was presented to the cabinet of ministers. The Island raised the matter with relevant authorities in the wake of a section of the media reporting the PCoI recommending punitive measures against former President Maithripala Sirisena, Defence Secretary Hemasiri Fernando, IGP Pujitha Jayasundera, Chief of State Intelligence Senior DIG Nilantha Jayawardena, Chief of National Intelligence retired DIG Sisira Mendis and All Ceylon Makkal Congress (ACMC) leader and Samagi Jana Balavegaya MP Rishad Bathiudeen et al over the Easter Sunday carnage.
Sources pointed out that due to the inordinate delay in sharing the PCoI report with the AG, the department hadn’t been able to take preliminary measures required to initiate the proceedings. Sources said that a team of officers would take at least six weeks or more to examine the report before tangible measures could be taken.
With the AG scheduled to retire on May 24, 2021, even if the AG Department received the P CoI it would be quite a tough task to initiate proceedings ahead of retirement, sources said. However, in terms of the 20th Amendment to the Constitution enacted in last October, both the AG and the IGP could receive extensions beyond 60 at the President’s discretion.
Dappula de Livera received an Acting appointment as the AG a week after the Easter Sunday carnage whereas his predecessor Jayantha Jayasuriya, PC, was elevated to Chief Justice.
Responding to another query, sources said that the Attorney General two weeks ago requested Secretary to the President for a copy of the P CoI. However, the AG was yet to receive one, sources said. In spite of the AG not receiving a P CoI copy, the AG had instructed the IGP to obtain a copy of the report when he requested the police to complete investigations into the Easter Sunday carnage. The AG issued specific instructions after having examined police files pertaining to the investigations.
The IGP, too, hadn’t received a copy so far though some sections of the report were in the public domain.
Agriculture Minister Mahindananda Aluthgamage displayed at a live political programme on Derana a copy of the P CoI report he received at the cabinet meeting earlier in the day.
Sources said that the Attorney General’s Department couldn’t decide on a course of action in respect of the Easter carnage on the basis of a section of the report. In terms of the Commission of Inquiry Act (Section 24), the AG enjoyed significant powers/authority in respect of investigations; sources said adding that the Department urgently required both the P CoI report and police investigations report. The Attorney General’s Department has raised the delay in receiving a P CoI report amidst the Catholic Church attacking the government over the same issue.
Sources said that ministerial committee appointed to study the P CoI report couldn’t decide on how to proceed with the recommendations and the matter was entirely in the hands of the AG. Sources pointed out that the delay on the part of the government to release the report had received the attention of sections of the international media, including the New York Times. Public Security Minister retired Rear Admiral Sarath Weerasekera having met Malcolm Cardinal Ranjith at the Bishop’s House on Dec 8, 2020 said that the AG would get a copy of the P CoI report once the President received it. Minister Weerasekera said that the CID had handed over the relevant files after having completed investigations into eight blasts. Referring to the Parliamentary Select Committee (PSC) report on the Easter Sunday carnage, the former Navy Chief of Staff said that all such documents would have to be brought to one place and considered before initiating legal proceedings. Acknowledging that there could be delays, lawmaker Weerasekera said that on the instructions of the Attorney General a 12-member team of lawyers was working on the case. The minister vowed to expose the mastermind behind the Easter Sunday attacks. Investigations continued while some of those wanted were overseas, the minister said.
The minister acknowledged that the Attorney General couldn’t proceed without the P CoI report. Minister Weerasekera reiterated that once the President received the P CoI report, it would be sent to the Attorney General. The minister said that there were documents two to three feet high that needed scrutiny. The minister assured comprehensive investigation. The minister said that investigations pertaining to eight blasts had been completed and the reports handed over to the AG. However, the Attorney General had found shortcomings in those investigations.
news
JVP picks holes in PCoI report
By Saman Indrajith
The Presidential Commission of Inquiry on the Easter Sunday bombings had failed to identify the mastermind of , the JVP said yesterday.
Addressing the media at the party headquarters in Pelawatte, JVP Propaganda Secretary MP Vijitha Herath said that the PCoI report had levelled accusations against former President Maithripala Sirisena, former IGP and head of intelligence for their dereliction of duty, shirking of responsibilities and not taking action to prevent the attacks and negligence. There were reference to the causes of the terror attacks and actions to be taken to avoid such attacks and the influence of extremist organisations. “However, there is no mention of the mastermind of the attacks, the handlers of the attackers and those whose interests the carnage served. It is also not mentioned whether there has been any foreign or local organisation behind those attacks. As per the PCoI report the attack took place as a result of culmination of extremism.
“According to the PCoI the extremist activities were a result of the prevailing political situation then. The entire nation was waiting to see who was responsible and who masterminded those attacks. The PCoI has failed to identify the true culprits responsible for the terror attacks. The report says that the leader of the suicide cadres killed himself in the attacks and it was a puzzle. That means those who are actually responsible for the attacks are still at large. The report does not provide exact details of the sources of the attacks. The PCoI had sittings for one year and five months. It summoned various persons and got their statements but it has failed to shed any light on the terror attacks. Everybody knows that the top leaders of the government and heads of security and intelligence establishments failed in their duties. Ranil Wickremesinghe was the second in command and he too is bound by the responsibility but the PCoI report fails to identify him as one of the persons against whom legal action should be instituted. The PCoI has treated Wickremesinghe and former President Maithripala Sirisena differently. We are not telling that this report is a total failure but we cannot accept this as a complete report. The PCoI handed over its report to the President on Feb 1. After 23 days it was sent to Parliament. Now, a copy of the report is there in the parliamentary library for the perusal of MPs.”
Herath said that the PCoI did not have powers to take punitive action. “It only has powers to name those responsible and recommend action to be taken against those named.