Govt. evades Greek Bond issue in Parliament

By Ashwin Hemmathagama Our Lobby Correspondent

Sub judice was used in Parliament yesterday to adjourn the House prematurely without allowing opposition legislator Dr. Harsha de Silva to open the adjournment debate on the controversial Greek Bond transaction.

Having listened to a few members from both sides, Speaker Chamal Rajapaksa allowed the Government to take refuge behind sub judice highlighting a petition, which is pending leave to proceed by the Supreme Court.

Opposing the adjournment debate, Minister of Irrigation and Water Resources Management and the Leader of the House Nimal Siripala de Silva said: “We have examined the facts related to what Dr. Harsha de Silva is planning to present at Parliament. Member of this House Sujeewa Senasinghe has filed a Fundamental Rights petition at the Supreme Court. We have obtained certified journal entries and a copy of the petition for case number 457/12. The particular case will be reconsidered by Chief Justice Dr. Shirani Bandaranayake, Justice K. Sripavan, and Justice Ratnayake on 15 October 2012.







The petition questions the Greek Bond purchase, identifying the respective transaction as a mystery that took place when the European economy was not sound. Dr. Harsha de Silva is trying to bring in the same that is mentioned in this petition. In line with Standing Order 31 (6), we should not proceed with the debate.”United National Party (UNP) MP Sujeewa Senasinghe accepting the filing of a petition at the Supreme Court stated that unless leave to proceed is granted, it does not violate the Standing Orders.

“Anybody can file a case but the Supreme Court holds the right to accept by granting leave to proceed. Until such, the petition does not become a case. When the same was brought up about Richard de Zoysa, this House ruled that producing a B report alone does not constitute a court case,” he said.

External Affairs Minister Prof. G.L. Peris, agreeing with the Leader of the House, remarked that because the matter is before courts, it could infringe sub judice to be presented in Parliament.

Leader of the Opposition Ranil Wickremesinghe, highlighting a violation of privileges that also relates to Greek bonds, said: “On 17 July, responding to a question I raised, Dr. Sarath Amunugama has misled this House. He said that the reason for investment was the fact that crisis management was supported by a financial package. This is wrong. In the month of April, there was no such situation. The decision was taken by the European Council on 24 or the 25 March to provide financial assistance to member states. So, by 5 April, the Greek Bonds had junk status where the creditors could not recover money. Dr. Sarath Amunugama misled the House on this issue by stating that there is a market for these bonds.”

Dr. Harsha de Silva also agreed with the Leader of the Opposition, certifying that his speech would not contain any facts which would have an impact on the respective petition. “I have nothing related to this petition in my statement. What I am trying to do is to elaborate how Dr. Sarath Amunugama has misled this House on 17 July. Based on the documents he has received from the Central Bank, this House was misled,” insisted Dr. de Silva.

The Central Bank invested about 22 million euros valued last year at more than Rs 3.4 billion in Greek Government Bonds, which was later lost when the country’s economy ran into serious crisis. The issue hit headlines in July with the Committee on Public Enterprises (COPE) and the Auditor General (AG) questioning the action. However, the Central Bank defended the move, emphasising that due process was followed and returns on other bonds have been healthy.