Professor G.L. Peiris commented the other day at a news conference at Dr. N.M. Perera Centre that the move to introduce a new Constitution was an attempt to divert the people’s attention away so the Government could establish a special war crimes court as proposed by the UNHRC to probe alleged war crimes charges and to ‘hunt down’ armed forces personnel.

It appears that the War Crimes Tribunal ‘refrain’ is haunting the Professor because his mentor agreed with the UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon soon after the end of the war that if there were any war crimes, they will be inquired and appropriate action will be taken with the Professor going to the extent of acknowledging the good work done by the ‘Darusman’ committee and extending all support. Not to be outdone, Sri Lanka Ambassador to the UN, Kohone, worked with the UN office handling the issue and accepted the legitimacy of the Darusman committee.

Nowadays, even an O/Level student knows that there cannot be a war crimes investigation against the Sri Lankan armed services personnel unless the UNHRC finds them culpable by majority vote and the UN Security Council votes in favour of such action. Fortunately for us, with the change of Government and policies, the UNHRC is not moving along that path and has given Sri Lanka the leverage to inquire into allegations, if any, on excesses through a credible judicial process which we did not have under Professor Peiris’ watch as Justice Minister. His former Government failed to carry out even the simple tasks promised through the LLRC report implementation ‘road map’ in this connection and Sri Lanka therefore had to face censure and deadlines in this regard. The present administration, as a result, is compelled to take certain steps like having a local inquiry process but certainly not a war crimes inquiry. Professor Peiris and his defeated cohorts are now trying again to spread fear psychosis.

His comment that the people’s mandate was given to President Maithripala Sirisena only to bring in Constitutional amendments, which would not call for referendum is an attempt to hoodwink the people. Maithripala Sirisena became the common candidate to challenge the autocratic dictatorial rule of the previous President on a common theme of abolishing the executive presidency which was the priority policy issue during the Presidential Election of 9 January, 2015 and he quite rightly said that he would not attempt any constitutional changes that needed approval of the people by a referendum. It was very clear that what he meant at that time was to shed the executive powers of the president without tinkering with the entire constitution as a matter of urgency.

But the UNP manifesto which was the common policy statement of the United National front for good governance during the August 2015 General Election very clearly declared that steps would be taken to introduce a new Constitution and measures will be taken to make maximum use of the devolution of power with everyone’s consent under a singular State. The people endorsed this policy and it is not up to the ilk of Professor Peiris to now challenge the action taken to introduce a new constitution with the participation of the people, all political parties and the civil society.

He has also said the Government had taken a u-turn in its policies by introducing bills such as the Theravada Bhikkhu Kathikawath Bill and that this Bill was an attempt to silence the Buddhist monks, who are raising voice against the Government. Professor Peiris should refrain from uttering lies. The Theravada Bikkhu Kathikawatha Bill was introduced in Parliament merely to give legal status to the proposals of the Maha Nayakes and Karaka Sabha of the main Nikayas as reiterated by leading members of the Sangha. They emphasised that this did not originate from the Government but it was the outcome of deliberations of the Sangha continued through several years and the previous Governments failed to take the right steps before. The President and the Justice Minister assured that if there are shortcomings in the Bill, the Maha Sangha can review the Bill and propose amendments which will certainly be incorporated. So the Professor’s statement that “the Government wants to control the Sangha,” is an absolute canard.

One can sympathise with him for his temporary bouts of memory loss or absentmindedness but he should take care before he becomes the laughing stock.

T. Mallawatantri

House has deeds but the land belongs to the State?

Some Government officials have recently visited my  sister’s residence as well as other houses located in Ferguson’s Road, Mattakkuliya, Colombo 15 (Assessment #273/6/S3). The above house was bought in 2010 by my father who passed away in 2013 and is now occupied by my sister.

These officers have surveyed the houses and had said that land on which all these houses have been built belongs to the State and that it was a paddy field in the past and so on; and that our deeds are not valid, etc.

The above house and others are all registered with the land registry. We have the deed for same in our possession.

How come it was registered with the land registry if the land belongs to the Government? In case we are ousted, where do we stand? We have paid for this house with our hard-earned money and we are living in stress because we feel very insecure.

This letter was emailed to [email protected]  but we have not got any feedback to date. Hope, the Minister for Housing on perusal of this letter will inquire into this problem and grant us relief as soon as possible.

M. Zahran

Colombo 

The rest of the details are as follows:

Land Registry reference - A 1155/135 and A930/275

Electoral Register #– 273/06/05/H

CMC property rate division – A/c # 15398082

NWSDB A/c # -10/11/405/125/14

CEB A/c # - 1511043709