By Imaad Majeed | The Sunday Leader
.............................................................................................................................................................................................
More recently the impressive new performing arts theatre has been named after the President – and if that is not bad enough, at the entrance you find a large mugshot of Rajapaksa. On the foundation stone, of which there are two, his name is found, not just once but four times, in English, Tamil, Sinhala and even Chinese! Making sure it is shoved down the throats of this nation irrespective of whether we find it offensive or not.
In the instance of the naming roads etc., after individuals, there is due procedure to be followed. First a proposal is made by a counselor, if it is seconded it must then go before the local council committee, and subsequently brought to the attention of the departments concerned. If all parties agree it will then be published in the local media for anyone who sees fit to object. None of these procedures was observed in the cases mentioned above, with each instance being handled by their respective ministries, ignoring all accepted procedures.
The following of due procedure and naming convention is a matter of principle. It is when the masses come to a consensual agreement to remember the services rendered to the country by an individual, that anything of this sort should take place. Homage is not the pet ego of any individual, but is expected to be paid to show respect, usually after the person concerned is dead.
In Colombo it is not uncommon to find streets named after individuals who have made a significant contribution to the country. From Anagarika Dharmapala Mawatha, to De Soysa Circus, many of the more commonly used roadways have been named after such persons to pay homage to their memory. D. S. Senanayake College, named after the first Prime Minister of Sri Lanka, was named so after his death. Looking back at past presidents, there have been many instances where buildings were to be named during their tenure. In the case of the Keththarama cricket stadium, Ranasinghe Premadasa vehemently opposed the use of his name. It was named after him following his assasination. Both J. R. Jayawardane and Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunge refused to have buildings named after them during their time in power, ignoring requests of those around them who wished to glorify their names, although there is a road named after Kumaratunge in Battaramulla.
However, though this is the norm there have been exceptions. Tyronne Fernando had the De Soysa Park cricket stadium named after him while he was still alive, as was done by Stanley Tillekeratne when a connecting road in Nugegoda was named Stanley Tillekeratne Mawatha.
When it comes to Mahinda Rajapaksa, since his re-election in 2010, the President has gone on to write his name into the Mahawamsa, and subsequently make sure his name is flouted freely in the South. In his hometown in Hambantota there is the Magampura Mahinda Rajapaksa Harbour. While there has been much criticism over the actual usefulness of the port, the fact remains that it serves the purpose of glorifying Rajapaksa’s name. One does not have to look far to find another. The Mahinda Rajapaksa International Cricket Stadium, also in Hambantota, is yet another instance where the President decided (a decision entirely at his discretion) that his name must be inscribed on stone. There is more. Post tsunami, a pavilion at the Galle International Stadium was also named after him and called the Mahinda Rajapaksa Pavilion. Then there is the Mahinda Rajapaksa National School in Homagama.
Mahinda Rajapaksa has also succeeded in stifling dissent on the issue. When The Sunday Leader tried to speak with numerous people in relevant Authorities and obtain their comments on the issue they all steadfastly refused. Colombo Mayor A. J. M. Muzammil, and Chairman of the Urban Development Authority, Janaka Kurukulasuriya, both shied away from commenting.
© The Sunday Leader
Monday, January 02, 2012
A President with a jumbo ego
Monday, January 02, 2012
Sri Lanka: India cannot dictate terms says Govt
BBC Sinhala
.............................................................................................................................................................................................
Minister Nimal Siripala de Silva, who heads the government delegation for talks with Tamil National Alliance (TNA) said its apparent U turn over land and police powers has nothing to do with India.
"No no no no, there was no pressure. Neither India nor other country can dictate how our country is governed," he said in response to a question by BBC Sandesaya.
The government, he said, is "always prepared to discuss land and police powers as well as the re merger of the north and east."
'Only SLFP'
The minister, however, clarified that the team led by him only represents the Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP), the main constituent of the ruling coalition.
The TNA that left talks with the government citing the government's failure to respond to a ten-point plan submitted in March, later re-initiated talks on the government's request.
In a statement issued on 4 August, last year, the TNA called on the government define and state the government's policy on the structure of governance, the division of subjects between the centre and the devolved units and fiscal and financial powers before continuing the dialogue.
President Mahinda Rajapaksa in a recent meeting with newspaper editors has said that the government was not willing to devolve land and police powers to the regions, in line with the 13 amendment to the constitution.
The Indian government, responding to the release of the war panel report, urged Sri Lanka to fulfil it's continuous pledges to implement the 13 amendment that devolved land and police powers to the provinces.
A Sinhala nationalist partner of the coalition government has, meanwhile, criticised the response by India to the report of the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC), which was submitted to the parliament on 16 December.
Saying that the present government has not given any assurances to India to devolve more powers to provinces, the Jathika Hela Urumaya asked India "to clarify which Sri Lankan government has given this assurance."
© BBC Sinhala
This site is best viewed with firefox
Search
Is this evidence of 'war crimes' in Sri Lanka?
Archive
- ► 2010 (1312)
- ► 2011 (687)
Links
- Reporters Sans Frontières
- Media Legal Defence Initiative
- International Press Institute
- International News Safety Institute
- International Media Support
- International Freedom of Expression eXchange
- International Federation of Journalists
- Committee to Protect Journalists
- Asian Human Rights Commission
- Amnesty International