Wednesday, 17 December 2008 15:57   
Labour Minister Mervyn Silva has given an undertaking to the Supreme Court that he will refrain from harassing or disrupting the duties of media personnel in the future.

His promise came today (Dec. 17th) when the SC took up a fundamental rights petition filed by a camera journalist of MTV Channel (Pvt.) Ltd.

The petitioner claimed the minister had prevented him from carrying out his duties at the opening of the Kelaniya flyover.

The SC also ordered the minister to pay Rs. 750,000 as compensation for the damaged camera equipment of the media institution.

[TamilNet, Wednesday, 17 December 2008, 15:49 GMT]
The Colombo High Court Monday fixed the inquiry into Journalist Dharmaretnam Sivaram murder case for June 1st next year before Sinhala speaking Jury. The sole suspect, Arumugam Sriskandarajah, was produced in court under heavy security when the case was taken up, legal sources said

Journalist Sivaram was murdered in April 2005 in Colombo.

High Court Judge Ms Kumudhini Wickremasinghe said the trial would begin on June 1 and would continue till its completion, legal sources said.

By Wije Dias
17 December 2008

In an extraordinary outburst last week, Sri Lankan President Mahinda Rajapakse lashed out at the country’s Supreme Court, accusing it of undermining his powers, and issued a barely disguised threat that the judges could find themselves the target of violent thugs.
Speaking at a public meeting on December 9, Rajapakse bemoaned the fact that a series of Supreme Council decisions had reduced the status of the president to “less than that of a magistrate”. He continued: “Many of the judgements may place us in a difficult position in the future.”
While declaring that the government respected the court’s rulings, the president ominously reminded the judges of what had happened in the past. “Gentlemen of the judiciary might have forgotten about the time when the homes of the judicial officers were stoned and impeachment motions brought against three Supreme Court judges,” he said.
Rajapakse’s reference was to the early 1980s when President J.R. Jayawardene sought to intimidate the Supreme Court after it ruled against police officers who had brutally attacked peaceful protesters opposed to his government. Thugs associated with Jayawardene’s United National Party (UNP) attacked the houses of the judges and an unsuccessful attempt was made to impeach them.
Rajapakse’s comments are not an idle threat. His government has escalated the communal war begun by Jayawardene against the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE). In the name of national security, Rajapakse has severely curtailed basic democratic rights, threatened the media and attempted to silence critics. Over the past two years, hundreds of people have “disappeared” or been murdered by death squads operating in collaboration with the security forces. Journalists have been threatened, detained, abducted or killed.
Now Rajapakse is turning his sights on the judiciary. He is particularly antagonistic to a Supreme Court decision to order the government to establish the Constitutional Council in accordance with the 17th amendment to the constitution passed in 2001. Rajapakse has simply ignored the constitutional requirement for past three years, using the pretext that he had appointed a parliamentary commission to re-examine the 17th amendment and was awaiting its report.
The Constitutional Commission, which is jointly appointed by the government and opposition, has powers to make appointments to other commissions established under the 17th amendment covering the police, electoral department, judiciary and other areas of public administration. While the amendment was meant to placate public anger over rampant corruption in the state apparatus, even these limited measures are intolerable to Rajapakse.
As public hostility to the war and its impact of living standards has risen, Rajapakse has increasingly concentrated power in his own hands and those of his close associates—particularly his brothers. The president holds the posts of defence and finance. His older brother Chamal is minister for ports and aviation. Younger brother Gotabhaya holds the powerful position in the state bureaucracy of defence secretary and Basil was put in charge of the “liberated” east after the LTTE was driven out.
Basil Rajapakse is also the president’s right hand man when it comes to keeping the government’s unwieldy parliamentary alliance in check. The ruling coalition is composed of disparate parties, all of which have received political payoffs in the form of ministerial posts and other perks. Sri Lanka currently has one of the largest ministries in the world, but the real decisions are made at the presidential secretariat rather than in cabinet. To maintain his precarious grip on power, Rajapakse has had to resort to personal appointments—on a scale that is unprecedented even by Sri Lankan standards—not only to secure allies but to install his loyalists into key posts to ensure his policies are implemented.
The establishment of the Constitutional Council, in which the parliamentary opposition leader and opposition appointees sit, would cut across Rajapakse, which is why he has manoeuvred to block it. The Supreme Court ruled that the body had to be appointed by December 4, but the attorney-general pleaded for an extension on the basis that the president was out of the country on that date. Now the Supreme Court has ruled that the president has to install the Constitutional Council by January 15 and left Rajapakse with no legal escape route. It was at this point that he lashed out last week at the judges.
The Supreme Court in Sri Lanka is no great defender of constitutional or democratic rights as an examination of its record would show. Its latest rulings, however, reflect growing fears in the country’s ruling elite that the Rajapakse government, as it prosecutes the war, is increasingly breaking with the norms of parliamentary democracy and assuming an autocratic form. The concern in these circles is not over the war, with which the entire establishment in Colombo agrees, personal corruption or the abuse of democratic rights. The real fear is that this brittle regime will break apart amid mounting popular opposition and threaten the stability of capitalist rule.
The rulings over the Constitutional Council are only the latest in a series of cases brought by several non-government organisations, including the Centre for Policy Alternatives and Transparency International.
In July, the Supreme Court removed the treasury secretary, P.B. Jayasundera from his post for his role in the privatisation of the state-owned Lanka Marine Services Limited, which the judges found was “irregular and designed to suit one party”. Determined to keep Jayasundera’s services, Rajapakse sent him as a special presidential envoy on a trade delegation to Iran, then appointed him as a special presidential advisor to finance.
A Supreme Court instruction to the police Criminal Investigation Department (CID) and the Commission to Investigate Bribery and Corruption (CIBC) to investigate Jayasundera over criminal charges has been ignored. The judges issued an order to the police top brass, CID, CIBC and the attorney-general to appear in court to explain what action they have taken. Jayasundera had not even been questioned by police.
When the case was taken up on September 29, Chief Justice Sarath N. Silva ruled that the CID director “should be removed from office for failing to perform his duties”. It was only when the judges ordered Jayasundera to appear in court on October 8 that he resigned his posts and gave a guarantee that he would never enter the public service in future.
Another case related to a gazette notice published on August 11 vesting the president with the power to extend the service of any public officer beyond compulsory retirement “if he considered it expedient”. On the basis of that notice, Rajapakse extended the appointment of the attorney-general, who was due to retire at the end of August, by six months. If the Constitutional Council had been established, it would oversee any extensions of service.
The Centre for Policy Alternatives contested the gazette notice as a violation of equality and equal protection guaranteed by law. On September 22, the Supreme Court stayed its implementation. On October 8, the attorney-general announced his retirement, two days before the court was due to deliberate on the issue.
In a third case, the Supreme Court issued a ruling on October 8 on a deal done by former President Chandrika Kumaratunga to sell a large plot of prime government-owned land to a private company to set up a golf course. The judges found that she had “completely betrayed” the public trust and “grossly abused the country” and ordered her to pay back 30 million rupees and return the property to the urban development authority.
While the case involved a previous president, the Supreme Court ruling had potentially wider ramifications, inhibiting the president from using his or her wide-ranging executive powers under the constitution. In its judgment, the court declared: “No single position or office created by the constitution has unlimited power and the constitution itself circumscribes the scope and the ambit of even the power vested with any president who sits as the head of this country.”
The various court cases are part of the subterranean political warfare within the country’s ruling elite as it confronts a deepening political and economic crisis compounded by the island’s reactionary communal war. Rajapakse’s threat against the Supreme Court judges demonstrates just how extreme these tensions have become.

Copyright © 1998-2008 World Socialist Web Site – All rights reserved

(lankadissent.org)

Tuesday, 16 December 2008 14:48
 
Presidential Adviser and former MP, Attorney at Law Vasudewa Nanayakkara has written to the President, himself a lawyer that the official website of the Defence Ministry has published an intimidating report on lawyers who appear for persons suspected of terrorist activities.
“The Report has singled out the Tamil Lawyers who filed cases. Exposing the Tamil Lawyers in this manner is extremely dangerous and discriminatory.” writes Mr. Nanayakkara, who stresses that “Your Excellency’s speedy intervention into an extremely urgent matter.” is necessary.

Arguing his case, Mr. Nanayakkara notes, “Civilized citizens agree that every person is presumed innocent, until proved guilty by a court of law. The so-called terrorists are also entitled to obtain the services of a Lawyer. Further, ‘Legal Ethics’ require Lawyers not to decline to appear for a client on the basis of ethnicity. The recent happenings clearly indicate that there is a powerful unit operating within establishments to discourage Lawyers in appearing in cases for LTTE suspects.”

Full text of Mr. Vasudewa Nanayakkara appears below

Vasudewa Nanayakkara
49, Vinayalankara Mawatha, Colombo 10

10-12-2008
His Excellency Mahinda Rajapakse,
President of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka
Presidential Secretariat,
Colombo.

Your Excellency,

I write this as citizens of Sri Lanka, an Attorney-at-Law and colleague of Your Excellency and expect Your Excellency’s speedy intervention into an extremely urgent matter.

The defense Ministry Website: www.defense.lk carried a Report titled “Who are the Human Rights Violators”. This report was uploaded on 16-11-2008 but still on the web with one amendment. The original Report that appeared in the website is annexed for Your Excellency’s easy perusal.

This Report deals with 9 cases, which were filed in the Supreme Court under the Fundamental Rights Jurisdiction. The intention of this Report is clearly to create an opinion that those who file Fundamental Rights cases for LTTE Suspects are unpatriotic and working against the interests of the country. This Report has the effect of inciting people to condemn the Lawyers and even possibly to attack them. Some of the cases are still pending and my information suggests that most of those cases referred to in the Report was withdrawn after the Attorney General agreeing with the Petitioners to discharge the suspects in the absence of any evidence.

The names of the Counsel who are appearing in those cases are not
mentioned in the Report. It has also carefully avoided mentioning the Sinhala Lawyers who filed the cases. The Report has singled out the Tamil Lawyers who filed cases. Exposing the Tamil Lawyers in this manner is extremely dangerous and discriminatory.

Civilized citizens agree that every person is presumed innocent, until
proved guilty by a court of law. The so-called terrorists are also
entitled to obtain the services of a Lawyer. Further, ‘Legal Ethics’
requires Lawyers not to decline to appear for a client on the basis of
ethnicity. The recent happenings clearly indicate that there is a
powerful unit operating within establishments to discourage Lawyers in appearing in cases for LTTE suspects.

Your Excellency will recall that about a month ago a group claiming to be “Mahason Balakaya” circulated a ‘Threatening Notice’ intimidating Lawyers. A copy of this Notice is also annexed for Your Excellency’s easy perusal. In late October, Senior Human Rights Lawyer, Mr. J. C. Weliamuna’s house was attacked but there is nothing to suggest that there was a fair Police Investigation into the attack despite a strong request from the Bar Association.

I therefore, request you as the Head of the State, to immediately take
action to remove the Defence Ministry Website Report naming as traitors for appearing for clients which is a fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution. I hope Your Excellency will forthwith instruct those who are responsible for running the Website to desist from intimidating, threatening and inciting against the lawyers for carrying out their professional duties. Finally, let me request Your Excellency to protect those Lawyers whose names have appeared in the website from any form of coercion or physical harassment.

I have no doubt that as a person who stood for Human Rights in late 80’s Your Excellency is sensitive to this issue and intervene forthwith.

Yours Faithfully,

Vasudeva Nanayakkara

CC: 1. Mr. Gotabhaya Rajapakse:- Secretary, Ministry of Defense.
2. Mr. W. D. Dayaratne:- President, Bar Association of Sri Lanka.

A Sri Lankan court has ruled that an alleged confession made by senior Tamil journalist J.S. Tissainayagam while detained by the Terrorism Investigation Division (TID) was voluntary and admissible as evidence in his trial on terrorism charges. The International Federation of Journalists
(IFJ) is informed however that Tissainayagam was forced to make a statement to TID under extreme duress.

Giving evidence in Colombo’s High Court on November 5, Tissainayagam denied making a voluntary confession.

After being detained by the TID of the Sri Lankan police on March 7 this year, Tissainayagam was held without charge or explanation for more than 150 days. It is alleged that Tissainayagam, the editor of an online newspaper, OutreachSL.com, made a voluntary confession during this time.

However, Tissainayagam was reportedly subjected to duress and denied private access to lawyers. Court hearings during this period were postponed arbitrarily. The Supreme Court denied Tissainayagam’s lawyers a fundamental rights petition for interim relief, submitted on the grounds of arbitrary arrest, torture, discrimination on the basis of ethnicity and a denial of equality of protection under law.

Indictments against Tissainayagam and his two colleagues, N. Jesiharan and his partner Valarmathi, were filed before the High Court of Colombo on August 25. The three were charged under the Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA), a draconian law introduced in 1979 as an ostensibly temporary measure.

The IFJ and other international press freedom organisations are extremely concerned for the safety and welfare of the three. Tissainayagam and Jesiharan, the owner of E-Kwality Printers, were moved from a remand prison to the notoriously dangerous Magazine Prison in Colombo on November 17, according to the Free Media Movement (FMM), an IFJ affiliate.

The continuation of the trial against Tissainayagam has reportedly been postponed until December 18.

The IFJ joins the FMM in calling for fair judicial process to be applied to all aspects of the continuation of Tissainayagam’s trial, including the procurement of his safety and protection in Magazine Prison.

Writer and publisher N. Jasikaran and his wife Valarmathi were taken in to custody by the Terrorist Investigation Department (TID), par of the Sri Lankan police force, on the 6th March 2008.
Their colleague  senior journalist Tissainayagam was arrested on 7th March after he went to the TID to inquire about Jasikaran and Valarmathi.
Jasikaran and Valarmathi, along with Tissainayagam are directors of E-Kwality Printers, which published the North Eastern Monthly magazine. Approximately one month prior to their arrests, they had commenced work on the website, outreachSL.com.
While the recent international advocacy focus has been on Tissainayagam, threats against Jasikaran’s family highlight a need to urgently increase awareness of the situation regarding Jasikaran and his wife.
Timeline Jasikaran and Valamrathi
• 6th March – Taken in by the TID – held under suspicious of supporting terrorism
• 11th May – Police claim Jasikaran made his confession
• 27th May – Jasikaran produced before Magistrate’s Court. His lawyer tells the judge that Jasikaran has been tortured in custody. Judge orders JMO to assess claim. Afterwards, Jasikaran was returned to the same place of custody, where he was tortured again.
• 13th June – Jasikaran complains to the Magistrate Court that he has been assaulted. JMO ordered to assess. After the assessment, JMO finds that Jasikaran’s injuries are consistent with assault.
• 11th August – Jasikaran is indicted under the Prevention of Terrorism Act. His wife Valarmathi is charged with ‘aiding and abetting’ terrorism.
• 10th December – Hearing to determine if  Jasikaran’s confession was voluntary.

Recent Developments – Nov 26th
The Free Media Movement (FMM) has reported that Jasikaran’s family received a number of threatening phone calls on November 25 and 26. The caller has demanded a ransom to ensure the safety of Jasikaran in prison. FMM has put out an urgent call for the protection of the family and Jasikaran.
( by IN)

 
February 2008
Tissainayagam started news-website called OutreachSL.com using a grant from FLICT (Foundation for Local Initiatives in Conflict Transformation). FLICT is a Sri Lankan based grant making body funded by the international community (primarily the German government). FLICT funds civic and government initiatives including the government’s Peace Secretariat.

7 March 2008
Tissainayagam apprehended by TID (Terrorist Investigation Department) and all staff of the website were apprehended by the TID.

10 March 2008
Tissainayagam’s lawyers denied access to see him (the lawyer was denied access to Tissainayagam until the 21st of March)

19 March 2008
Tissainayagam filed a complaint before the Supreme Court, claiming that since his arrest he had been tortured, suffered discrimination because of his ethnicity and denied equal protection under the law. Four of the staff of the website released without charges being filed.

20 March 2008
Tissainayagam’s wife telephoned Director of TID to request permission to visit Tissainayagam at TID. Director of TID shouted at Tissainayagam’s wife in derogatory language saying that Tissainayagam’s wife could not see Tissainayagam now that a fundamental rights petition had been filed. After Mrs. Tissainayagam pleaded with the Director of TID, the director acceded Tissainayagam’s wife that she could visit the the following day with Tissainayagam’s lawyer.

21 March 2008
Tissainayagam’s wife and lawyer visited Tissainayagam. He was allowed to see his lawyer in presence of the Officer in Charge of the TID. He told his lawyer that he did not know why he was being held and that he was experiencing blurredness of vision.

27 March 2008
First hearing Fundamental Rights petition. The judge asked for the detention order the State counsel said they had detention order but not in their possession to be given to the judge and it was not given to the detainee but it will be produced later. The judgment was put off for the Chief Justice to make the order. The detention order was later issued to Tissainayagam that afternoon in custody, back dated to 7th March

31 March 2008
Second hearing. Document given to the judge by state counsel not disclosed to the defense counsel. State counsel said that Officer In Charge of TID has said in his affidavit that that the Tissainayagam had confessed to taking money from the LTTE. Defence Counsel not allowed to see document.

5 April 2008
Tissainayagam’s wife visited Tissainayagam. Tissainayagam asked OIC to meet Tissainayagam’s wife in private. OIC refused request saying that the investigations are ongoing. Tissainayagam’s wife asked if it was possible to meet in the hall along with the other families meeting their relatives detained by the TID, and the OIC just repeated that the investigations were ongoing. Tissainayagam has up until to date not been able to speak to his wife in private. OIC is always present and listening to conversation.

7 April 2008
Tissainayagam’s wife visited Tissainayagam at the TID. Tissainayagam informed his wife that TID had retaken Tissainayagam’s statement.

15 April 2008
Tissainayagam’s wife visited Tissainayagam at the TID. Tissainayagam informed his wife that TID had ceased to question him.

2 May 2008
Tissainayagam’s wife visited Tissainayagam at the TID. When Tissainayagam’s wife was leaving TID, an investigations officer IP Jayasuriya informed her and a friend who was accompanying her, that the investigations were over and TID had found nothing and they were waiting for ‘orders from the top’ to release Tissainayagam.

8 May 2008
Tissainayagam’s lawyers received OIC affidavit, and the Sinhalese translated copy of Tissainayagam’s statement. The original Tamil statements of Tissainayagam was not provided.

9 May 2008
Tissainayagam taken to eye specialist. Eye specialist said his eye condition changed needs new glasses and review every month.

12 May 2008
Tissainayagam was scheduled to be produced at the Magistrates Court, under the Emergency Regulations of 2005 but Tissainayagam was not produced. Emergency regulations state that a detainee should be produced every 30 days in front of a magistrate to ensure that no torture had taken place.

14 May 2008
Tissainayagam’s lawyers (this was only the second time lawyers were allowed to meet Tissainayagam) Tissainayagam’s lawyers visited Tissainayagam but were only able to talk to Tissainayagam in the presence of the OIC, who Tissainayagam has accused of torturing him.

22 May 2008
Third hearing. Tissainayagam’s lawyers complained that the OIC had been present during Tissainayagam’s client-lawyer conferences, and therefore the Tissainayagam could not advise his lawyers. They also requested the original Tamil statement. Judge ordered state counsel to produce original Tamil statement. Judge ordered that Respondent could not be present but other police personnel could be present during client-lawyer conferences. Next hearing postponed until 10 September 2008. No reasons for the delay in proceedings were given and there is no right to a speedy trial in Sri Lanka.

23 May 2008
Tissainayagam was scheduled to be produced at the Magistrates Court, but was not produced. Magistrate asked TID representing officer for Tissainayagam to be produced on 26 May 2008.

26 May 2008
Tissainayagam was scheduled to be produced at the Magistrates Court, but was not produced. Magistrate asked TID officer for Tissainayagam to be produced on 27 May 2008.
27 May 2008
Tissainayagam was produced at the Magistrates Court, TID legal officer said that investigations were not completed so they needed to further hold Tissainayagam. The magistrate ordered that Tissainayagam be produced on the 6th of June after his 90 days of detention.

6 June 2008
The TID defied the magistrate’s order of the 27th and did not produce Tissainayagam in court. Even though the magistrate gave the TID time till 4.30 p.m to produce him. Under emergency regulations of 2005 (these are the regulations that Tissa is detained under) Tissainayagam was scheduled to be produced after 90 days of his detention.

7 June 2008
Mr. Tissainayagam had been issued with another detention order extending his detention for a further 90 days from the 5th of June. No Charges have been filed against him.

13 June 2008
Tissainayagam was produced in court. His counsel held that he was held in wrongful custody as emergency regulations stipulate that after 90 days detainee must be moved to the custody of the fiscal not police custody. State counsel asked for time to consider and next date was given as of 23rd June.

23 June 2008
When the case was taken up in the Colombo Magistrates courts, Tissa’s lawyers pointed that Tissa was being detained illegally and the Colombo Chief Magistrate reserved the order for June 30th and asked the TID to produce him in courts on that date.

30 June 2008
Members of five media organizations staged a peaceful demonstration Monday around 10.30 a.m, demanding the release Tissanayagam in front of Colombo District Court. The Court extended the detention order served on Tissanayagam and two other Tamils, V. Jasikaran and Ms. V. Valarmathy until September 5 on request made by TID.

11 July 2008
The State Counsel, Parindra Ranasinghe, appearing in Tissainayagam’s wrongful custody case, admitted that investigations in the case had been complete last week, but that decision is yet to be made if the State is going to file charges against Tissainayagam. The Counsel requested from the Court for a further 47 days to make the decision. Tissainayagam has been held in custody for 126 days as of today.

30 July 2008
Colombo Additional Magistrate Ms. Malini Abeyratne ordered Terrorist Investigation Division (TID) police to submit the medical examination reports of Tissanayagam.

25 August 2008
The High Court refused bail for Tissainayagam on the grounds that he was charged under the PTA. He was charged under the PTA with 1) writing to bring discredit to the government and inciting ethnic and racial disharmony, 2) printing and publishing such material in the North Eastern Monthly between June 2006 and June 2007 3) Collecting money for the Northeastern Monthly from NGO’s.

29 August 2008
Counsels for Tissainayagam, S.Jaseeharan and V.Valarmathi who have been indicted by the Sri Lankan Attorney General under the Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA) and Emergency Regulations (ER), informed the Sri Lankan Supreme Court that they were not seeking any interim relief as their fundamental rights violation applications have been listed for hearing on September 10 and November 14

8 September 2008
The International Federation of Journalists (IFJ) and its local affiliates in Sri Lanka launches an online campaign video condemning the arrest and indictment Tissainayagam, who passed his sixth month in jail on September 7.

26 September 2008
The hearing of Tissainayagam’s voir dire inquiry was put off for October 2 and 6 by the Colombo High Court Judge Ms. Deepali Wijesundara as the scheduled witness Assistant Superintendent of Police Ranasinghe of the TID was ill and unable to attend court.

04 October 2008
Cross-examined by the defence on the alleged confession made by journalist J. S. Tissainayagam, Assistant Superintendent of Police of Terrorist Investigation Division (TID) admitted that the TID had made a mistake when submitting the JMO reports in the case. Further trial was put off for October 6.

07 October 2008
At the conclusion of the cross examination of the Assistant Superintendent of Police Sri Lal Ranasinghe during the Voire Dire inquiry,  defence counsel Anil Silva stated in the Colombo High Court that the ASP had not been present at the time J. S. Tissaiayagam was made to write down his statement.

8 November 2008
Tissanayagam testified before Colombo High Court Judge Ms. Deepali Wijesundara in the inquiery to ascertain whether the confession made by him to the TID was a voluntary one or made under pressure and threat.

14 November 2008
Amnesty International (AI), urged Sri Lanka to release Tissanayagam.

17 November 2008
Mahinda Samarasinghe, Minister for Human Rights and Disaster Management, had visited J.S. Tissanayagam at the Remand Prison with the Prison Commissioner.

18 November 2008
Transfer of J.S. Tissanayagam to Magazine Prison in Colombo

28 November 2008
The Colombo High Court Friday reserved its order for December 5 on the Voire Dire inquiry on the admissibility of the purported confession made by Tissainayagam to the TID.

3 December 2008
Tissanayagam has been nominated for a media freedom award (“journalists who through their work, their principled stand or their attitude have displayed support for freedom of information.”) by Paris-based media watchdog Reporters Without Borders (RSF).

5 December 2008
Colombo High Court Judge Ms. Deepali Wijesundara ruled the confession made by Tissanayagam was voluntary. Next hearing on 18th December.

(lankadissent)Friday, 12 December 2008 16:01
 
The children’s and Women’s Bureau has withdrawn a charge  sheet against director Ashoka Handagama for having used a minor in a nude scene for his film ‘Aksharaya’ or ‘Letter or Fire.’
Colombo additional magistrate Kumari Abeyratne yesterday (Dec. 11th) permitted the withdrawal by the Bureau following advice by the attorney general.
A case was filed against the director on the instructions of the AG under Clause 286 (B) 1 of the Penal Code.
When the additional magistrate took up a motion, Sergeant Priyanthi of the Bureau said that deputy solicitor general Jayantha Jayasuriya, on behalf of the AG, had informed them of faults in the charge sheets.
The matter will be taken up again on January 18th.

Threats against a prominent political cartoonist in Sri Lanka over a cartoon published on December 7 in the weekly Lanka yet again highlight the insidious nature of efforts to impose censorship in Sri Lanka, according to the International Federation of Journalists (IFJ).

Winnie Hettigoda, who is also a writer and television producer, received repeated threats by phone on the evening of December 7 warning he had no right to draw the cartoon, according to the Free Media Movement (FMM) and the Sri Lanka Working Journalists’ Association (SLWJA), both IFJ affiliates.

Hettigoda lodged a complaint with the Koswatta police station. However, it is understood that police have not investigated the threats. Threats against several cartoonists for mainstream newspapers have been commonplace in recent years, according to the FMM and SLWJA.

In another effort to enforce censorship in Sri Lanka this week, two editors of the state-run Sunday Observer and Daily News were removed from their positions on December 9. According to the FMM, the demotions of Dinesh Weerawansa and Pramod de Silva were linked to the publication on December 7 of remarks by Sri Lanka’s army chief, Sarath Fonseka, which prompted India to protest to Sri Lanka’s Government.

Fonseka was cited as saying that India would have no influence on Sri Lanka to restore a ceasefire with the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) and it would not listen to the “political jokers” of Tamil Nadu in India whose “survival depends on the LTTE”. A government official refused to confirm whether the removal of Weerawansa and de Silva was linked to India’s protest about Fonseka’s published comments, according to the FMM. “That editors would be expected to censor the army chief underscores the insidious character of censorship in Sri Lanka,”

IFJ General Secretary Aidan White said. “Censorship, whether through threats against those who seek to express their views freely or the imposition of harsh sanctions against media personnel required to toe the government line, is failing the people of Sri Lanka.”

The IFJ joins the FMM and the SLWJA in calling on authorities to investigate promptly the threats against Hettigoda and to reinstate the two editors to their positions.

 
PTI,Colombo,  December 9, 2008 
 
The editor of a state-run newspaper in Sri Lanka was sacked on Tuesday after it carried derogatory remarks by the Sri Lankan army chief against some Tamil Nadu politicians sympathetic to the Tamil cause in the ethnic strife-torn island nation.

Dinesh Weerawansa, the editor of the Sunday Observer, has been replaced on Monday by Jayatilake De Silva, sources said today. De Silva is a former editor of the paper.

When contacted, a high-ranking government official refused to confirm whether the removal is linked to the outcry in India following army chief Sarath Fonseka’s comments which were published in the paper on Sunday.

Fonseka had said that the Indian government would never influence Sri Lanka to restore the ceasefire with the Tamil Tigers and it would not listen to the “political jokers” of Tamil Nadu whose “survival depends on the LTTE”.

“If the LTTE is wiped out, those political jokers like (Tamil Nationalist Movement leader) P Nedumaran, Vaiko and whoever who is sympathising with the LTTE will most probably lose their income from the LTTE,” he was quoted as saying.

India today said it has lodged a protest with Sri Lanka over the remarks and Colombo has expressed “regret”.

There were sharp reactions to the comments in the political circle in Tamil Nadu, with MDMK leader Vaiko asking the Centre to seek an unconditional apology from the Sri Lankan government for the “outrageous” remarks