Author: TELO Admin

It was reiterated that there is no change in the Government’s decision to hand over the three islands in question in the North Province to China, in the Cabinet media briefing held on Tuesday (16).

“Cabinet has approved the award of tender to a Chinese company, after a competitive bidding process”, Co-Cabinet Spokesperson, Udaya Gammanpila stated at the media briefing this morning.

“Minister of Power has not informed the Cabinet that he wants to post the decisions or cancel that decision so we think that decision prevails” he further added.

“Removing the Sri Lanka Navy Camp from the Port is out of the question since the President has held discussions with China and has granted Sri Lanka Navy the full control authority” Replying to a question posed by a journalist regarding the removal of the Naval base in the Hambantota port the Co-Cabinet Spokesperson, Udaya Gammanpila stated

Sri Lanka has cancelled Pakistan Prime Minister Imran Khan’s address to the Parliament, scheduled for February 24, citing COVID-19 constraints. Khan is set to arrive in Colombo for a two-day visit on February 22.

Foreign Secretary Adm. Prof. Jayanath Colombage said Speaker Mahinda Yapa Abeywardena had written to the government, seeking a postponement of the event, saying that due to the COVID-19 pandemic and the virus variant, which has appeared in various parts of Colombo, he is unable to ensure full attendance in Parliament on the occasion.

According to Foreign Minister Dinesh Gunawardena, the government had agreed to a request by the Pakistan Prime Minister to address the Sri Lankan Parliament, and decided the address would be made on February 24. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi had addressed the Sri Lankan Parliament in March 2015.

According to unofficial but reliable sources, sections of the government had reservations about the decision to have the Pakistan Prime Minister address the Sri Lankan Parliament as it could sour relations with India. The sources believe India might apprehend the Pakistani leader would raise the Kashmir issue in his address.

Traditionally, the Sri Lankan government has been avoiding the Kashmir issue in deference to India’s sensitivity over the matter. But for Pakistan, the Kashmir issue has been the most important one, the fulcrum of the country’s foreign policy, as it were. If Imran Khan were to raise the issue in the Sri Lankan Parliament it would get him brownie points back home.

By seeking an opportunity to speak in the Sri Lankan Parliament, Imran Khan could also achieve parity with his regional rival, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi. But India might demur if Colombo were to equate it with Pakistan.

India-Sri Lanka relations are a bit fragile now, as India is nursing a wound inflicted on it by the sudden cancellation of a deal over the East Container Terminal in Colombo port.

According to an English language daily, the Pakistani Prime Minister is coming to Sri Lanka to strengthen ties with the only South Asian nation with which it has consistently close and good ties. It is undeniable that Sri Lanka-Pakistan relations have been cordial and strong right from the late 1940s when both got independence from Britain.

The All Ceylon Muslim League (ACML), headed by the renowned Muslim leader, the Late, T. B. Jaya, had been a firm supporter of the Pakistan movement through the 1940s. As the ACML was an ally of the then dominant United National Party (UNP), T.B. Jaya was sent to Pakistan as Ceylon’s envoy.

In the 1950s, both Ceylon and Pakistan were in the anti-communist US-led camp. The relationship remained strong even when Ceylon changed its political colour and became pro-Soviet and pro-Beijing during the premiership of Sirimavo Bandaranaike. In fact, Ceylon under Sirimavo Bandaranaike allowed Pakistani military aircraft to refuel in Colombo 174 times during the Bangladesh freedom struggle, when India had banned Pakistani aircraft from flying over its territory. To the latter’s surprise and dismay, Colombo ignored New Delhi’s objections.

Later, in the 1990s, when the West, as well as India, refused to sell or supply weapons to Sri Lanka to fight Tamil separatism and terrorism because they supported the Tamil minority’s political demands or were sympathetic to their plight from the human rights angle, Pakistan stepped into the breach and supplied much needed weaponry. Pakistan’s support had also come at some of the most critical junctures during the war. Pakistani pilots were on hand to advise the Sri Lankan Air Force, which had shifted to the offensive mode for the first time.

Pakistan (along with China and Russia) has been consistently and strongly supporting the Sri Lankan government in international forums on the issue of terrorism and separatism. It has consistently rejected the Western countries’ charge that the Lankan forces had committed “war crimes”.

Sri Lanka is eagerly waiting for Pakistan’s help to garner the support of Muslim countries in the 47-member UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) in which a hostile resolution against it is likely to be introduced in March. The resolution is expected to call for Sri Lanka’s reference to the International Criminal Court at The Hague.

Pakistan and India are both members of the UNHRC and both can help Sri Lanka fight its case. As a result, Sri Lanka has to humour both, a delicate task.

State Minister Roshan Ranasinghe has been appointed as the new State Minister of Provincial Councils and Local Government Affairs.

He previously held the portfolio of State Minister of Land Management, State Enterprises Land and Property Development.

The Polonnaruwa District MP was sworn in before President Gotabaya Rajapaksa at the Presidential Secretariat this morning, the President’s Media Division said.

Meanwhile State Minister of Production, Supply and Regulation of Pharmaceuticals Prof. Channa Jayasumana has been appointed as the Acting Cabinet Minister of Health.

He is to serve as the Acting Health Minster until Health Minister Pavithra Wanniarachchi returns to duty.

A key issue that has created internal division in the country is the cremation of those who have succumbed to the Covid virus. This policy of enforced cremations has been mostly opposed by the Muslim community for whom the burial of the dead is a part of their faith. It has also brought international disapproval to the country. The UN Human Rights Commissioner’s January report on Sri Lanka states that “The COVID-19 pandemic has also impacted on religious freedom and exacerbated the prevailing marginalisation and discrimination suffered by the Muslim community. The High Commissioner is concerned that the Government’s decision to mandate cremations for all those affected by COVID-19 has prevented Muslims from practising their own burial religious rites, and has disproportionately affected religious minorities and exacerbated distress and tensions.”

The shift away from international practices with regard to the burial of Covid victims was initially justified on the basis of science. During the early part of the pandemic when less was known about the disease and more stringent methods were adopted to halt its spread, such as the two-month-long 24-hour curfew practised in Sri Lanka, there was a real fear that the coronavirus could be spread through dead bodies and water. However, when the practice of burying those who died of Covid internationally began to be better known and scientists worldwide, and in Sri Lanka, began to downplay the significance of water transmission of the virus, Sri Lanka’s unwillingness to change its policy began to take on another dimension.

Among those who most strongly opposed the burial of Covid victims have been nationalist ideologues and religious clerics with limited knowledge of science. Many of them placed their faith in indigenous cultural practices of producing antidotes to the virus that had no basis in science. These included measures such as pouring pots of water which had been chanted over into rivers and a concoction of honey and herbs as being efficacious in protecting against infection. There have been some amongst the scientific community itself who have identified with these positions on the grounds of belief in the efficacy of indigenous knowledge. The opposition to burial also took on an anti-Muslim sentiment that had escalated following the Easter bombings of April 2019.

Opposition Support

Over the past ten months the government has come under pressure from a variety of sources to change its policy with regard to enforced cremation on both political and humanitarian grounds but to no avail. The main source of pressure has been the Muslim community within the country and their political representatives. They have been supported by sections of the Christian community to whom burial is the traditional way of farewell to the dead. The human rights organisations in the country and internationally also have made numerous appeals including a campaign of tying white ribbons on burial grounds. A further source of pressure has been the international community with governments of Muslim countries making their own representations to the government.

However, the ramping up of local and international pressure only led the government to harden its stance. It appears that a strategy of the government when it is under pressure is to rally its nationalist voter base. The election-winning platform of the government was the need to uphold national sovereignty and not to yield to either international pressure or to the ethnic and religious minorities. The electoral rejection of the leaders of the previous government who were seen as appeasing both the international community and the minorities within the country has been a lesson that has made inroads into the thinking of the main opposition parties who have been cautious in the positions they take on controversial issues. However, when Sajith Premadasa, the main Opposition leader, led a protest against enforced cremations which was also attended by civil society groups, the prospects of a bipartisan approach to resolving the problem became possible.

Prime Minister Mahinda Rajapaksa’s declaration in parliament last week that burials would be permitted even in the case of Covid victims was welcomed both locally and internationally and has not been politicized by the opposition parties. Ironically, the prime minister’s statement has been contested within the government and not been immediately operationalized. A ruling party parliamentarian had the audacity to say that the prime minister was referring to burials in general and not to Covid burials in particular. The Minister of Health has announced that the matter still needs to be assessed by a committee of experts prior to a final decision being taken. The problem is that different committees of experts have been coming to different conclusions depending on the degree of nationalism they espouse.

International Support

President Gotabaya Rajapaksa is reported to have informed ambassadors of Western countries who met him that the political decision regarding Covid burials had been taken and what remains is to implement the decision through the Health Ministry. The president is trying to find his way amongst contending powerful forces. The fact that the mainstream opposition parties are also supportive of following the WHO guidelines with regard to the option of burials would be reassuring to the government that this matter would not be politicized to its disadvantage. The problem that the government faces would be confined to an internal one which can more easily be resolved as it is in the self-interest of government members to come to a unified position on these issues.

The manner in which the Covid burial issue is being addressed suggests the way forward with regard to the issue of the upcoming session of the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva. Sri Lanka has been at the receiving end of a very strong report by the UN Human Rights Commissioner which recommends that a variety of punitive sanctions be utilized against the government leaders and those accused of human rights violations. It warns of the accelerating militarization of civilian governmental functions, a reversal of important constitutional safeguards, political obstruction of accountability, intimidation of civil society, and the use of anti-terrorism laws. The report also has several recommendations to the Sri Lankan government. Addressing the issue of the UN report and the recommendations it makes needs to be seen as a national issue in which the government and opposition work together without politicizing the issue for their own partisan advantage.

The issues being canvassed in Geneva are primarily about matters that concern the people of Sri Lanka. The recent march by Tamil and Muslim political parties and civil society groups from the east to the north highlighted issues such as the takeover of land, settling of Sinhalese and construction of Buddhist temples, the neglect of families of the missing, stopping memorials to the dead, and problems faced by cattle farmers. These are matters that are in the interests of all Sri Lankans to peacefully resolve regardless of their communities and political affiliations. Just as the opposition leadership has given its support to the practice of WHO guidelines for the disposal of Covid bodies it needs to give its support to the resolution of these issues of the past and the present. If the government and opposition leaderships are united in their resolve to address the grievances of the ethnic and religious minorities we can be assured that the international community will seek to support Sri Lanka rather than to engage in punitive measures.

When the nationalist forces within the government led by Wimal Weerawansa opposed the 20th Amendment to the Constitution, including the clause that permitted dual citizens to hold public office, SLPP national organiser Basil Rajapaksa was able to garner the support of a group of Muslim MPs to vote in favour of the Amendment.

In this backdrop, it has now been revealed how Basil Rajapaksa was able to secure the support of Muslim parliamentarians. Members of the Sri Lanka Muslim Congress (SLMC) said that they supported the 20th Amendment to the Constitution because the government had stated their desire to allow the burial of Muslim Covid-19 victims.

SLMC MPs Faizal Cassim, H. M. M. Harees, M. S. Thowfeek and Anwer Shamed had voted in favour of the 20th Amendment.

Elaborating further, SLMC MP Faizal Cassim said,

However, leader of the SLMC, MP Rauff Hakeem, said that the party has decided to pardon the MPs who voted in favour of the 20th Amendment if they seek forgiveness from the party and the general public.

The decision to pardon the MPs subject to certain conditions was taken when the Supreme Council of the SLMC convened yesterday (14), SLMC leader Rauff Hakeem said.

The coronavirus death toll in Sri Lanka crossed the 400 mark today.

The Government Information Department said that six new deaths linked to the coronavirus were reported today.

This took the coronavirus death toll in Sri Lanka to 403 today.

Of the six victims, one is a 78-year-old man from Divulankadawala. He died while receiving treatment at the Infectious Disease Hospital (IDH).

The second victim is a 48-year-old woman from Pallethalawinna. She died while receiving treatment at the IDH hospital in Angoda.

The third victim is a 57-year-old man from Hanwella. He was transferred from the Apeksha Hospital in Maharagama to the IDH Hospital where he died.

The fourth victim is an 80-year-old man from Nugegoda. He died while receiving treatment at the IDH hospital in Angoda.

The fifth victim is a 68-year-old man from Wattala. He died at the Homagama Base Hospital.

The sixth victim is a 70-year-old man from Hunnasgiriya. He died while receiving treatment at the Kandy National Hospital.