Skip to Content

Asian Tribune is published by World Institute For Asian Studies|Powered by WIAS Vol. 11 No. 296               

Sarath Fonseka, Opposition and Chief Prelates

By Manoj Lanka Hettige

Supporters of President Mahinda Rajapakse (MR) and opposition candidate Sarath Fonseka (SF) were those who thought of the Country and those who thought of the stomach respectively says Wimal Weerawansha, leader of National Freedom Front (Rata Gana Hithapu Ayata Rata Giya, Bada Gana Hithapu Ayata Bada Giya).

Many people thought that SF, as a strong army leader would shut all sort of corruptions and utilize the savings from these corruptions into developments (to do this, they should first collect all the bribes and commissions from their party men).

Others thought that after the appointment of president, SF would follow UNP policies which would be eventually good for economy. Though there are people who thought of stomach also supported the president Mahinda Rajapakse, Wimal’s classification could be somewhat correct.

Those who thought of the country had pain and angry of LTTE and some of them had worked hard to eliminate it in different levels and ways. Those who thought of stomach only were ignorant of and idle against, LTTE terrorism.

Therefore, in wider terms, the best suited classification for the supporters backed these two presidential candidates could be that those who had the pain and mad of the LTTE terrorism and those who were ignorant of it even at the peak time of terrorism (exceptional cases like JVP who had acted in self opportune way should be excluded from this formula).

Having tested the above formula from the people I knew, I was fortunate to grab another good example from the press to further verify it. Ironically, it is the report that most venerable chief prelates of Malwatta, Asgiriya Chapters and Amarapura and Ramanya Nikayas decided to summon a conference on the 18th February 2010 inviting all members of the Buddhist Prelates in the country with a view to securing the safety of the people and country.

This is nothing else but a campaign to pressurize the law enforcement entities to release a culprit arrested under the Army Law, because for violating the country’s law and order.

It should be emphasized that not all the people in Sri Lanka died and reborn during past few years but still survive with good memories which would rise following questions.

• Why was not such a conference summoned when Ven. Omalpe Sobhitha Thero started a fast unto death in 2005 in the doorstep of the Temple of the Sacred Tooth (Sri Dalada Maligawa) against the Tsunami relief Council (Tsunami Sahana Mandalaya) to be signed by LTTE and then president Chandrika Kumarathunga?

• Why was not such a conference summoned in 1987 when the 33 Buddhists monks were massacred in cold blood by LTTE in Aranthalawa?

• Why was not such a conference summoned by these venerable prelates when the LTTE terrorists reached even to the Temple of Sacred Tooth destroying the front entrance of the Temple killing around 20 people by a bomb blast in 1998?

• When the UNP was massacring thousands of youths in Sri Lanka in 1988 -1990 period saying that these youths planned to topple the then government, why was not such a conference summoned by these venerable prelates to order the UNP regime to stop it?

• Where were these most venerable chief prelates residing during these dark periods in Sri Lanka? How come a matter of arresting the main suspect who has attempted to topple a government suddenly made to wake up the venerable chief prelates from such deep sleep?

Meanwhile, Sri Lanka opposition parties, comprising mainly UNP and JVP are continuously initiating island wide agitations against the arrest of Sarath Fonseka. Following few such agitations that led for clashes with the police, UNP leader, Mr. Ranil Wickramasinhe had met President Mahinda Rajaakse on 12th February 2010 and requested immediate release of Sarath Fonseka warning that tension is building up in the country because of arrest. Opposition leader should be ashamed for such silly attempt to get released a main suspect without due process of law. Are these the people who campaigned for judiciary freedom?

Sarath Nanda Silva, a former Chief Justice and presently a main supporter of SF said one time in his verdict that ‘’No body above the Law’’. Should not a suspect be arrested because of he was a candidate in a past presidential election? If so, all the Sri Lankans will have a golden opportunity to submit nominations in next presidential election and get immune from law and order of the country. That would be decided with the judgment to be given on 23rd February 2010 when the Supreme Court of Sri Lanka takes to review the Fundamental Rights Violation Application requesting the release of Sarath Fonseka.

Therefore, I earnestly request those venerable chief prelates as well as opposition political parties who always talked about independence of judiciary and democracy, please let the law enforcement authorities do their job without inducing for or taking it to your hand.

- Asian Tribune -

Comments

GUILTY OF HYPOCRISY

GUILTY OF HYPOCRISY

The author makes a perfectly legitimate and decent plea: “... please let the law enforcement authorities do their job without inducing for or taking it to your hand ...”. But regrettably, the fair-sounding author has not only taken the matter to his own hands but has also already passed judgment. Says he with regard to the effort by the Maha Sangha, “This is nothing else but a campaign to pressurize the law enforcement entities to release a CULPRIT arrested under the Army Law”. (Emphasis is mine) Either the author is unaware of the meaning of the English word, ‘culprit’ (i.e. the guilty party, offender, criminal, perpetrator) or expressing his sincere inner hypocrisy – perhaps inadvertently.

Mr. Fonseka has been arrested on the basis of several alleged charges. A citizen of the land like any other, he has a fundamental right to “due process” of the Law and to defend himself by deploying the remedies available to him within the legal system of the nation. The fact that a person has been arrested for alleged crimes does not make him a ‘culprit’ – unless and until the alleged crimes are proven beyond any doubt in a legal assembly. “Innocent, until proven guilty” is the presumption among civilized beings and the likes of the author must not pass judgments on others pre-maturely, perhaps except on themselves: “Guilty of 1st Degree Hypocrisy”.

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.


.