Sunday Dec 15, 2024
Sunday Dec 15, 2024
Friday, 23 June 2017 00:00 - - {{hitsCtrl.values.hits}}
Text and Pic by Himal Kotelawala
The Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP) yesterday defended the Government’s response to the Inter University Student Federation (IUSF)’s alleged attack on the Health Ministry premises earlier this week in yet another anti-SAITM protest that got predictably out of hand.
Addressing the media at the weekly SLFP press briefing at the party headquarters in Colombo, Minister Dilan Perera said that while he had his reservations about the controversial private medical college, the path of violence taken by the anti-SAITM lobby was making it difficult for the Government to arrive at a solution agreeable to all stakeholders.
“The law must apply to everyone equally. No one is above the law because they happen to be students or military men or Buddhist monks. The law cannot discriminate like that. The students have a right to protest, but what right do they have to storm a ministry and damage property? What their actions are doing is making a negotiated settlement to this matter difficult,” said Perera.
According to the Minister, CCTV camera footage of the incident exists, and action may be taken against any wrongdoers. The Minister did concede, however, that had the Special Task Force (STF) personnel involved in handling the protesters gone beyond their mandate then any such personnel would also be dealt with.
“The Health Ministry employees there were on duty. The [STF] personnel were there to protect the institute they were assigned to protect. If they had gone past their mandate, they should be punished too, of course. But the STF officers’ kids don’t go to SAITM. These students go and threaten the STF guys,” he said.
Meanwhile, Disaster Management Minister Anura Priyadarshana Yapa, who was also present at the press briefing, said that while there were differences of opinion among him and his colleague over the SAITM question, law enforcement was acting within its capacity.
“Every citizen has a right to peaceful protest. But when that protest escalates to chaos, the Government has a right to take necessary steps to prevent that. This is how it is all over the world. Nobody has a right to cause property damage,” he said.
Minister Perera said that the IUSF is in total opposition to private universities as a concept, whereas the Government Medical Officers’ Association (GMOA), the other strongest critic of SAITM, is open to private medical colleges (PMCs), but only as long as they’re established transparently through proper channels.
“On that point, I’m with the GMOA. Some of my colleagues may be of a different opinion, but this is my position. The GMOA cannot go against PMCs because they engage in private practice themselves,” said Perera.
“We can’t abandon the SAITM graduates. But we must also punish those who brought the illegal institute through the backdoor,” he added.
One proposal that has been discussed, said the Minister, is to put SAITM on the share market, and give priority to doctors when selling shares.
“There are such alternate options. So why are they doing this?” he said.
Minister Dilan Perera, speaking in his personal capacity as an SLFP member of the Unity Government, said yesterday that he was not satisfied with the performance of the Government over the past two years.
The Memorandum of Understanding between the SLFP and the United National Party (UNP) are up for review and, according to Perera, the next three months are going to be crucial in that regard.
“The SLFP Central Committee has to meet and decide whether to extend the MoU with the UNP. We have to go over the incidents that took place over the last two years, the bond scam, etc. The next three months are crucial for us in the SLFP for us to decide whether to stay with the Government or leave,” said Perera.
The Minister placed particular emphasis on the bond scam as having marred the Unity Government’s two-year rule. He attributed the investigation into the incident and the subsequent removal of former Central Bank Governor Arjuna Mahendran to the presence of his party in the Government.
“If we weren’t in this Government, Arjuna Mahendran would still be Central Bank Governor. Then it would no longer be the Central Bank of Sri Lanka, and would be called Arjuna Mahendran’s Perpetual Central Bank.”
“The very fact that we were in the Government prevented the bond scam from continuing,” he added.
In his personal opinion, he said, the past two years have been largely unsatisfactory.
“Am I pleased with the past two years? I can’t tell you the SLFP position until the Central Committee has sat down on it, but my personal opinion is that I’m not satisfied,” he said.
Speaking again in his personal capacity, Minister Dilan Perera said that while he had great respect for Buddhist priests, Galagodaththe Gnanasara Thero of the Bodu Bala Sena (BBS) should’ve surrendered sooner to the courts.
“If he had only been properly advised by his lawyers, and had they explained to him about the allegations, if he had come to courts beforehand, he would’ve gotten bail. It was a bailable offence,” he told Daily FT on the sidelines of yesterday’s SLFP press conference.
“On a bailable offence, he went on a harangue inciting the whole country with this usual racial abuse, and ultimately it was only a lot of noise and nothing else,” he said.
Perera defended the investigations into the thero.
“The problem with some of the people here is that they forget that Ven. Gnanasara is a political party leader. They contested the last general election and lost everywhere. He’s not just a monk. He’s a party leader. We as politicians from another party have every right to counter his political party views if we’re against it,” he said.
“In my case, I feel his party views are racist and I can’t see any difference between him and Sivajilingam or some of these Muslim leaders making various racial statements,” he added.
Asked about the criticism levelled at the Government for not taking strong enough action against the controversial monk and why he continued to be a free man for as long as he did, Perera said: “I don’t know that he’s a free man anymore, because he’s now on bail. The bail conditions are that if you do it again he can’t be a free man,” he said.
“I think now he’s been properly dealt with. I agree that it would’ve been better if he had been arrested before he went and surrendered. On the other hand, if he had surrendered earlier, he would’ve definitely gotten bail because it’s a bailable offence,” he said.
Perera expressed confidence that due process would follow.
“I think due process should follow definitely. I think it should follow to Sivajilingam and other racist leaders as well,” he said.
