And family imminent
P as SLFP Central Committee decides PC polls should th Amendment out, Cabinet decision to be reversed UNP backbenchers want no-faith motion against Wijeyadasa on Hambantota and other issues, but PM scuttles the move
resignation was a victory for good governance.
On dealing with those in the Opposition, as is now clear, the blame rests on the UNP for delaying such cases. It is well known that the counsel assisting the Commission of Inquiry have been toiling hard, ignoring pressures and other coercive moves, to get to the truth. Another accusation against them was the fact that they had worked under leading personalities of the previous regime. True, but that was their duty and they cannot be faulted for it.
Issues relating to state counsel assisting the Commission of Inquiry first surfaced at last Wednesday’s Cabinet meeting. President Sirisena, keen to set the record right about claims that he had a link to them, explained that the wife of one of them had been appointed Chairman of the National Child Protection Authority (NCPA) by him. He said he had given the freedom for ministers to nominate persons for appointments to different positions. Women’s Affairs Minister Chandrani Bandara had met him and urged that the lady in question be appointed. He had carried out that request but had on no occasion spoken to the lady. He had no personal dealings with the senior official of the Attorney General’s Department. Minister Chandrani Bandara endorsed Sirisena’s statement.
Telecommunications Minister Harin Fernando used the lexicon which most politicians do to describe difficult situations. He said it was a “conspiracy”. Sirisena rebuked him when he said that the Commission of Inquiry was not appointed to target any particular person. Many have been saying that those in the past Government should be probed. It has not happened and he has been pointing this out. At one point, when a minister wanted a Commission to probe Rajapaksa, the President replied laughingly that he would name not one but ten if necessary.
At Tuesday’s ministerial meeting Ministers Rajapakshe and Premjayantha were to make some critical observations of the Concession Agreement on the Hambantota Port. It came to light during the discussion where it was stated that Minister Sarath Amunugama, who had chaired a Cabinet subcommittee, has not forwarded its report. Amunugama was to explain that they have had only two sittings but agreed to present his report to ministers next week. Ports and Shipping Minister Mahinda Samarasinghe sought approval from Sirisena to present the signed Concession Agreement to Parliament. He was given approval. Minister Patali Champika Ranawaka criticised the manner in which bond issues had been made but avoided any reference to Karunanayake.
Referring to a Central Bank presentation with regard to the “Primary Issuance System for Treasury Bond,” at a previous Cabinet meeting Minister Ranawaka noted that in 2016 and early 2017, interest rates had recorded a sharp increase. The bond issue was not limited only to the benefits that accrued to Perpetual Treasuries Ltd. He said the rise in interest rates from 8 percent to 10 percent triggered a rise in Government borrowing rates by 5 percent. As a result, investments had to be curtailed. He praised Central Bank Governor Indrajit Coomaraswamy for regaining the confidence of those in the financial markets. His integrity and credibility were the main causes, he said.
Just ahead of the ministerial meeting last Wednesday, a group of SLFP ministers walked up to Premier Wickremesinghe. They told him that if the No Confidence Motion against Karunanayake was presented in Parliament, they would vote in favour. However, on Thursday Speaker Karu Jayasuriya ruled that since the Foreign Minister had resigned, there was no need to debate the motion. According to legal sources, the Speaker had sought the advice of the AG on whether there were legal impediments to the No Confidence Vote against Karunanayake being debated. This was after Premier Wickremesinghe raised issue in Parliament claiming it was sub judice (or under judicial consideration and thus prohibited from public discussion elsewhere). The AG, these sources said, had opined that the Commission of Inquiry was not a Court and the Speaker was free to use his own discretion. It was ironic that while the UNP asked the Speaker to ascertain if a debate was possible on the basis of sub-judice while its MPs were given carte blanche permission to slam the state counsel for their line of questioning before the Bond Commission that is now sitting.
The Karunanayake saga played out through this week. To continue the string of developments reported in these columns last week, Premier Wickremesinghe had a 90 minute meeting with Karunanayake the previous Saturday (August 5) evening. This was after the premier cancelled plans to fly to Nuwara Eliya early that evening. The idea was to persuade Karunanayake to resign his portfolio as Foreign Minister. UNP sources familiar with the goings on said Karunanayake was defiant arguing that he had done no wrong and was not an accused in the bond probe. He had also been bitterly critical of a UNP cabinet colleague. The meeting, the source said, was wound up by Wickremesinghe with the promise that they would meet after his return from Nuwara Eliya.
Last Sunday morning, Wickremesinghe flew from Colombo to Hatton for a string of engagements. Later, due to bad weather, his chopper could not fly him to Nuwara Eliya. He travelled by road. On Monday morning he declared open a new milk processing plant at the Highland Ambewala farm but was forced to cancel other appointments and return to Colombo. President Sirisena had sought to meet him. That Monday he briefed Sirisena on the outcome of his inconclusive talks with Karunanayake. Later in the day, he again met Karunanayake to persuade him to tender his resignation. The source said Wickremesinghe told Karunanayake that if he resigned, there was every prospect of his becoming a Minister in the Cabinet once again after the Commission of Inquiry report was handed in. When Wickremesinghe had won his round of persuasive diplomacy, a meeting with Sirisena on Tuesday was not on the cards. Even the Cabinet meeting for that morning had been put off, first till 6.30 p.m. that day and later to 9.30 a.m. the following day (Wednesday).
Sirisena had travelled to Kandy for ceremonies connected with the Esala Perehera. There, the Diyawadana Nilame makes his customary call on him to report that the Perehera was conducted according to rites and traditions. Thus, a meeting was set with Karunanayake for Wednesday afternoon, hours after the ministerial meeting ended. Karunanayake skipped the Cabinet meeting. Joining President Sirisena were Premier Wickremesinghe and Minister Rajitha Senaratne. According to one source, it was an emotional discussion. Karunanayake was to declare that he was willing to sit as a backbencher but wanted to ensure both Sirisena and Wickremesinghe were protected. This was to prevent the Rajapaksas from making their way into governance. Later, Karunanayake handed in his letter of resignation to Sirisena. During the meeting Wickremesinghe was to raise issue over the Sunday Times political commentary last week quoting utterances made by Sirisena. The President deftly avoided the issue saying he had not spoken to anyone about them.
On Thursday, Karunanayake made a statement in Parliament. Though under heavy pressure, he appeared to maintain his posture. Edited excerpts of his speech appear as a box story. Leaving Parliament thereafter, Karunanayake met a group of supporters outside his own home (now under reconstruction) along Parliament Road and later drove to his apartment. By Thursday night, a group of UNP parliamentarians, more than 30 of them, had gathered at his apartment at Monarch Residencies. Premier Wickremesinghe arrived there and spent over an hour. Also present was Minister Rajitha Senaratne.
Later on Thursday night, Karunanayake attended a dinner hosted by Wickremesinghe at ‘Temple Trees’. Among those present were Ministers Malik Samarawickrema, Akila Viraj Kariyawasam, Mangala Samaraweera and Kabir Hashim.
The Karunanayake saga has ended with his resignation and a statement in Parliament – or has it? Contrary to expectations, it has further exacerbated tensions between the two partners in good governance or yahapalanaya – the SLFP and the UNP. With a continuing dip in their relations, the two sides will for the first time seek public approval of their performance at this year’s planned Provincial Council elections. What they have delivered so far or have not been able to deliver will be in focus.