SRI LANKAN UNETHICAL BUSINESS TYCOON NUMBER 02

NUMBER 02
SUMAL PERERA


After a career in the private sector with Chandra Senanayake Holdings and Cornel and Company, Sumal Perera, qualified Accountant started his business in 1990. Since its inception, Access Group, has been highly successful in securing major projects for infrastructure development in Sri Lanka funded by agencies such as Japanese OECF, World Bank and ADB. In addition the Group has the franchise for many world renowned brands for domestic sales.
The Group supplies trainer aircraft and helicopters to the Sri Lanka Airforce Maintenance, overhaul and service support for SriLankan Airlines and the Sri Lankan Air Force. They also are a major ground support equipment for SriLankan Airlines, SLAF, Maldives Airport Authority and Chittagong Airport in Bangla Desh. They also supply locomotives and continuous after sales service and support t he Sri Lankan Railways. Access Group also are a major supplier of communications equipment to the Sri Lanka Armed Forces. They supply voice and data transmission equipment to fixed line and cellular operators in the island. Other areas of business are, the exclusive supplies of Driving Licences to the Registrar of Motor Vehicles, EDI solutions to the Apparel Industry.
Access also supply remote access servers to the Sri Lanka Telecom Internet Hub Expansion Project.
Main Companies are:
Access Telecommunication Services Pvt Ltd. - Telecommunication Service Provider
Access So;lar Pvt Ltd. - import, customize, and market, solar powered equipment, viz; solar home systems, telecom backup systems, slar TV, solar lanterns
Access Engineering Ltd. - contractors for design and construction f infrastructure development projects in the fields of irrigation, land, drainage, water supply
Access Industrial Sstem Pvt Ltd. - import and supply of elevators
E*Trade Private Ltd. - provide e-commerce and related technologies
Access Travels Pvt Ltd. - inbound and outbound travel
Access Agencies Pvt Ltd. - import and sales of bathroom accessories
Access Projects Pvt Ltd. - leading supplier and installer of ceilings
Asia Pacific Golf Course Ltd. - owns and manages Waters Edge Golf Course and Spa
Sathosa Motors Pvt Ltd. - established in 1962 when the Isuzu Agency was obtained by the CWE Ltd. and privatized in 1992 whose main shareholder is ITOCHU Corporation of Japan, holding 60%, 30% issued to public in the the CSE. Sumal Perera is a arge shareholder who is the current Chairman (2007) and owns the agency for Isuzu and Opel
Access Printing Ltd. - printing of stationery, corporate documents, packaging material and any other printing requirement
Access Natural Water Pvt Ltd. - established in 2001, one of the largest drinking water bottlers marketing the product under the name of AQUAFRESH
EuroMetallic Pvt Ltd. - joint venture concentrating on the manufacture and export of metal ceiling panels and grid systems
Access Realties Pvt Ltd. - Property Development Management
http://www.access.lk
Sumal Perera on Water edge issue
Chairman of Asia Pacific Golf Courses (Pvt) Ltd Sumal Perera asserted yesterday that the Urban Development Authority (UDA) owed him and his company Rs. 2.5 billion for the Water’s Edge property following the landmark Supreme Court judgment which determined the project illegal and void.“My company has invested Rs. 2.5 billion and it is up to the UDA to reimburse these funds when we hand over the property next February as that was the worth of the project,” Perera told Daily News Business when contacted for his response in the aftermath of the Supreme Court judgment.“We do not know on what basis the UDA valuers will value the property and we do not know whether they will pay us the market rates,” he said.However, when pointed out that the project was illegal from the start going by media reports which highlighted it over the years, he said that he made the investment trusting the bonafides of the then Government of former President Chandrika Kumaratunga and added that he was not aware of the implications until the judgment was given.He said he had not read the judgment at the time this newspaper contacted him but added that the Asia Pacific Golf Courses Board of Directors will study the judgment and its implications in detail.The judgment had also said the golf course company had to return the property by February 2009 and the Water’s Edge will continue as the Urban Development Authority property.He also said the Court has allowed him to continue the operation until the UDA acquisition in February but he stressed that he did not know what to do under the circumstances.The Board of Directors of the company will have to study all the aspects of the practicalities of running the Water’s Edge under the present circumstances, he said.Asked what his sentiments were about losing the prime leisure and entertainment property, he sounded philosophical when he said that all was impermanent. He also said that he was not going to make any more investments in Sri Lanka.However, when pointed out that there was ample scope for golf courses in the rest of the country without going into controversial projects and state owned land, he said he has to consider the investment climate in the country at that stage.

Sumal Perera claims Rs.2.5 billion from Sri Lanka UDA09-10-2008Chairman of Asia Pacific Golf Courses (Pvt) Ltd Sumal Perera asserted yesterday that the Urban Development Authority (UDA) owed him and his company Rs. 2.5 billion for the Water's Edge property following the landmark Supreme Court judgment which determined the project illegal and void.
My company has invested Rs. 2.5 billion and it is up to the UDA to reimburse these funds when we hand over the property next February as that was the worth of the project,? Perera told Daily News Business when contacted for his response in the aftermath of the Supreme Court judgment.
We do not know on what basis the UDA valuers will value the property and we do not know whether they will pay us the market rates,? he said. However, when pointed out that the project was illegal from the start going by media reports which highlighted it over the years, he said that he made the investment trusting the bonafides of the then Government of former President Chandrika Kumaratunga and added that he was not aware of the implications until the judgment was given.
He said he had not read the judgment at the time this newspaper contacted him but added that the Asia Pacific Golf Courses Board of Directors will study the judgment and its implications in detail. The judgment had also said the golf course company had to return the property by February 2009 and the Water?s Edge will continue as the Urban Development Authority property.
He also said the Court has allowed him to continue the operation until the UDA acquisition in February but he stressed that he did not know what to do under the circumstances. The Board of Directors of the company will have to study all the aspects of the practicalities of running the Water's Edge under the present circumstances, he said.
Asked what his sentiments were about losing the prime leisure and entertainment property, he sounded philosophical when he said that all was impermanent. He also said that he was not going to make any more investments in Sri Lanka.
However, when pointed out that there was ample scope for golf courses in the rest of the country without going into controversial projects and state owned land, he said he has to consider the investment climate in the country at that stage.
SUMAL PERERA'S COMMENT ABOUT HIS COMPANY IN WEBSITE
Whenever I reflect on the past 10 years' history of the Access Group, which I had the privilege of founding, I must confess to a sense of surprise and wonder.When we started in 1990, our main goal was definitely to survive as a new business entity and ensure the livelihood of those who had faith in me.The success and growth of Access during its first 10 years is just reward for the dedication, commitment and perseverance withwhich we have pursued our business objectives. Although different reasons may be attributed in different forums, it is my firm belief and conviction that the 3 main reasons for the success and growth of Access are its people, people and people.We started a company as a simple concept and today stand as one of the most dynamic and progressive business entities in Sri Lanka. What we have achieved up to now would be more than enough for most companies. But it definitely is not enough for Access. Frankly it does not surprise me. Some of the best human resources in the country are available at Access; their energy and adventurous spirit would, I believe, sustain the same level of growth even in difficult global conditions.Our short term and long term goals remain the same. Whileconsolidating and making existing enterprises even stronger, we shall continue on an aggressive growth plan of entering vital new businesses and markets with innovative products and services. Today we are a recognized force in many areas. Plans of expanding even more are made with the supreme confidence that we would succeed in every Endeavour we undertake. Ten years ago I would not have believed it, but at the end of the next 10 years I can assure you I would not be surprised. I have seen this company do too many amazing things to be surprised in the future. While I cannot wait to see what we will do next, I can assure you as the Founder, what you can expect from Access in the future is definitely more than perfection, something closer to magic and miracles.God Bless Access Sumal Perera,Chairman/CEO

ABOUT ACCESS

Access Group of Companies is one of the fastest growing Sri Lankan corporate entities, with it's core business and growth primarily deriving from trading activities, infrastructure development projects and engineering services.The Group represents prestigious International Companies throughout Sri Lanka and Asia in a wide area of business activities. Since inception, the company has been highly successful in securing major projects for infrastructure development of Sri Lanka, funded by Agencies such as Japanese OECF, World Bank and ADB etc.In addition the Group has the franchise for many World-renowned brands for domestic sales.Having had intensely close relationships with leading Japanese trading companies, it's long-term objective and growth is based on the same principles of the Japanese "Sagashosa" vision.The company draws its strength from its core management group consisting of six group directors and other divisional heads working as separate Departments and Companies. They are treated as completely separate entities and given the freedom to work on their own initiative and be responsible for decision-making in their areas of business. The resulting strength of each unit thus contributes to the overall strength of the Group.The Company has a well-developed sense of corporate citizenship. The Group takes a great interest in the personal development of it's staff and their families and promotes sports in Sri Lanka giving special emphasis for the development of sports in the outstations."Access Towers"Level 8, 278, Union Place, Colombo 02,Sri Lanka.Tel 94-1-2302302 Fax 94-1-2302333

CBK’s Golf Course case: SC slams UDA as rich man’s land agent

The Supreme Court asked lawyers appearing in the Fundamental Rights petition filed by two retired public servants complaining against what they call an illegal and corrupt land transaction during the tenure of former President Chandrika Kumaratunga to file their written submissions next month after two day's of arguments this week.
Kumaratunga: First respondent
The two former public servants, Sugathapala Medis of Panadura and Raja Milroy Blasius Senanayake of Colombo, say former President Kumaratunga introduced a Cabinet Paper during her Presidency and obtained BOI (Board of Investment) approval to grant 118 acres of State land near the Parliament Complex at Battaramulla to a private party and that this was an illegal act. Furthermore, they say that a close family friend of Ms. Kumaratunga, Ronnie Peiris, a businessman residing in the United Kingdom benefited to the tune of Rs. 60 million from this transaction.
During the proceedings, Chief Justice Sarath N. Silva who presided over the three-member bench made some strong remarks against the conduct of the Urban Development Authority (UDA) which alienated this extent of land on the instructions of the Cabinet following then President Kumaratunga's proposal. The Chief Justice said that whatever the faults of former Presidents J .R. Jayewardene and R. Premadasa, they had a vision for the upliftment of the poor. He said President Premadasa in a capitalist regime did not utilize public lands for capitalist purposes and instead built housing schemes like Sanchiarachchiwatta.
But, Ms Kumaratunga, in a socialist regime built a luxury golf club and if she had said that at the 1994 election campaign, no one would have voted for her government, the Chief Justice observed.Justice Shirani Thillakawardene and Justice P.A. Ratnayake were the other members on the bench hearing the petition.
Former President Kumaratunga, the Board of Investment (BOI), the Urban Development Authority (UDA), Asia Pacific Golf Course Ltd., Ronnie Pieris, Sumal Perera, former UDA Ministers Mangala Samaraweera and Indika Gunawardena, the Commissioner General of Inland Revenue, Mr. and Mrs. Selvaratnam and Shantha Wijesinghe are among respondents cited.
Attorney J.C. Weliamuna appearing for the petitioners told Court that the entire transaction to lease out the land extending to 224 acres began with former President Ms. Kumaratunga submitting a cabinet paper for a project with Japanese national J. Yanagihara as its foreign investor and Mr. and Mrs. Selvaratnam and Shantha Wijesinghe as local investors.
The golf course in the centre of the legal battle
He said that after the cabinet approval, the Board of Directors of the company changed hands and the Japanese national went missing. Mr. Weliamuna said they were not investors but only facilitators. He said that after the change of directors, Ms. Kumaratunga tried to cancel the approval.
He stated that during the negotiations the respective Provincial council was not consulted as should be the procedure. He said Mr. Peiris who was known to Ms. Kumaratunga, was a facilitator who negotiated the deal with Asia Pacific Golf Course Ltd and had received a payment amounting to Rs 60 million as commission.
Mr. Weliamuna said Mr. Peiris was to be arrested by the Inland Revenue Department in respect of this transaction which should be investigated by the Bribery and Corruption Commission.
President’s Counsel Faiz Musthapha appearing on behalf of eight ejected residents appearing as intervenient petitioners said there was no public interest at all in this transaction. Although the land was acquired for the expansion of the parliamentary administration complex and for a flood retention project, it was given to a private party for a golf course. “There was no public element in it,” he said.
“It was calculated to assist the fourth respondent company, viz Asia Pacific Golf Courses Ltd. on the face of the cabinet memorandum. There was a discount of Rs. 90 million -- a drop of nearly one third and it is contrary to the valuation of the Government Valuer, who valued it as a single entity,” Mr. Musthapha claimed.
He said that in terms of the UDA law, the UDA had no right to give property as a handout without payment. He charged that in order to circumvent the law, the UDA had purportedly executed so-called licences.
“This licence is unknown to the law. They have being notorially executed and the land had being given on a 99-year lease,” he said.
“The cabinet departed from the original project and authorized the order to sell blocks. This is a new purpose as the original assignment of the land was for the golf course. The land was sold by the UDA at Rs. 26,000 a perch to the developer who in turn sold blocks without any building construction for Rs. 5 million a block. The UDA has been a land sales agent,” he said . President’s Counsel D. S. Wijesinghe for Asia Pacific Golf Courses Ltd., the 4th respondent, in his submissions stated that the Asia Pacific Golf Course was a corporate individual and that it should not be penalized for an act committed by another individual. He said the Court should take note whether the shareholders of the company received this land unlawfully and that the court should penalize the people who were responsible -- and not the Asia Pacific Golf Course. President's Counsel Romesh de Silva appearing for the sixth respondent, Sumal Perera, the present Chairman of Asia Pacific Golf Courses Ltd., in his submissions said that the 6th respondent went into this venture after he had obtained all relevant documents from the authorities concerned and that there was no unlawful act committed.
He said the company had, abiding by the terms and conditions stipulated by the UDA, taken steps to preserve the water retention purpose at a cost of Rs. 295 million.
He said the Court should consider that the 6th respondent was not responsible for any unlawful act and should not be penalized. He said the shareholders had invested around Rs. 2,500 million in the project and that they should be compensated if any of the transactions facilitated by the 1st Respondent (former President Kumaratunga) was found to be unlawful. He said that this project was done bona fide.The Chief Justice observed that the company had in fact obtained documents which granted approval for an 18-hole Golf Course and not for a land sale. He said that if the company was to claim any compensation, it should claim it from the people who sold it through the Shareholders Agreement. Justice Thillakawardene said nothing legal could come out of an illegal act, and that the State could not be made to suffer twice over by being asked to pay compensation as well.
Attorney Nihal Jayawardena for the UDA said that after the Waters Edge project started the land value in the surrounding area had appreciated.
The Chief Justice observed that this should not be the motive and the intention of the UDA , and said that again, the UDA was suggesting that poor people should be made to move out of these areas when land values rise and only the rich have access to such properties.
“The purpose of the UDA is to facilitate public interest and not the interests of individuals,” he said. “The basic function of the UDA in allocating the land was to build a park, and a public playground for the benefit of the public whereas it has been used to facilitate a private members only club,” the Chief Justice said. The UDA had acted so badly, it should be "dissolved", the Chief Justice said. President's Counsel Mohan Pieris appearing for the BOI said the Cabinet granted approval for special developments projects to seven BOI projects and approval was granted on the basis that the persons who received the approval should be the investors.
Senior State Counsel Nerin Pulle appearing for the Commissioner General of the Inland Revenue Department said the tax file pertaining to Ronnie Peiris where he admits to collecting Rs. 60 million for this transaction as part of his commission, could be submitted to Court should the Supreme Court direct the Commissioner general to do so.
In their petition, Mr. Medis and Mr. Senanayake say that the former President Chnadrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga is guilty of abuse of power and of corruption, and ask, inter-alia, that those who made illegal monies from this transaction, viz., Mr. Ronnie Peiris, Asia Pacific Golf Courses Ltd., Mr. Siva and Mrs. Suweneetha Gressel Selvaratnam of No. 6/2, Cambridge Place, Colombo 7 and Mr. Shantha Elroy Godwin Wijesinghe of No. 9, 1st Lane Baddegana Road, Pitta Kotte return the monies to the State. The Supreme Court directed all counsel appearing for the respondents to submit written submissions within two weeks and the case to be mentioned on July 7.
SUMAL PERERA AND BASIL RAJAPAKSHE

When William Congreve wrote in the Mourning Bride, 'hell hath no fury like a woman scorn'd.' over 400 years ago he obviously did not have in mind two little known wannabes who would creep out of the woodwork in the 21st century from the tear drop island in the Indian ocean called Sri Lanka.
But how true Congreve's words ring today for two men who pass off as journalists in Sri Lanka whilst also parading themselves as patriots committed to protect the country's sovereignty and territorial integrity.
Integrity however is perhaps a word alien to these two wannabes who answer to the names, Bandula Jayasekera and Dushy Ranatunge.
In the normal course of events, these two men would seldom draw even a passing reference but their conduct on the sidelines of the recently concluded Geneva talks and the tripe they dished out to the public through the state controlled Daily News warrants a response for no other purpose than setting the record straight.
Eye opener for President
What follows should be an eye opener to President Mahinda Rajapakse as well since it is his government that was brought into disrepute by the piffle that came to be published in the Daily News under the cover of the peace talks where the story was not what was happening behind the scenes in the lead up to the talks but the hotel accommodation of the Editor of The Sunday Leader and the News First team of journalists.
The question that would arise in the mind of any reasonable human being is why the accommodation of a team of journalists at hand to cover the peace talks would be the subject of several newspaper articles when much more important developments were taking place in Geneva in relation to the peace talks.
Green with jealousy
The answer is simple and twofold. Firstly it was sheer envy that had the Jayasekera-Ranatunge combine go ballistic that the editor of this newspaper and the television journalists were occupying the same hotel as the government delegation when they as the choir had to occupy an adjoining hotel courtesy the state of course. More importantly their fury was due to Ranatunge's failure to get a story published in The Sunday Leader accusing President Rajapakse's brother and advisor Basil of being in the pay of Sumal Perera's, Access.
Now read the facts behind the Geneva sideshow.
Given the volatile environment under which the peace talks were to get underway in Geneva, the Norwegian and Swiss authorities in their wisdom decided to house both the government and the LTTE delegations in different hotels.
The LTTE delegation was located at the Royal Hotel while the government delegation was accommodated at the Epsom Hotel, both of which were within a 10 minute leisurely walk. And given the bad publicity received by the government during Geneva I early this year, the government made arrangements to take with them a media contingent consisting of reporters as well.
Among those included in the government media delegation were representatives from Swarnavahini, Derana, Wijeya and Upali newspapers. That is apart from the state media institutions, the Lake House and Sri Lanka Rupavahini Corporation.
This contingent was housed at Hotel Drake in Geneva which was adjacent to the Epsom Hotel.
Paying their way
However, media personnel from Sirasa TV, The Sunday Leader Editor Lasantha Wickrematunge and Head of the AFP Bureau in Sri Lanka Amal Jayasinghe were staying at Epsom Hotel where the government delegation was housed. They were paying their own way.
It is of course normal journalistic practice to do one's homework before taking on an assignment and accordingly The Sunday Leader Editor and the News First team made inquiries on where each delegation was housed for the talks to have ready access and make hotel reservations accordingly.
Therefore the journalists who were not in the state sponsored team decided to lay the groundwork for covering the peace talks and informed the government and LTTE delegations as well as the Norwegian facilitators they would be covering the talks in Geneva and requested for interviews prior to leaving Colombo.The intention of course was to ensure every point of view was reflected in the reporting.
In furtherance of this objective the head of the Government Peace Secretariat,Palitha Kohona was also informed by the Editor of The Sunday Leader of the coverage and a request made for an interview in Geneva.
Kohona readily agreed and said to meet him at the Epsom Hotel where he said the government delegation will be housed.
Thereafter, reservations were made by the News First team and the AFP Bureau Chief as well as The Sunday Leader at Hotel Epsom.
Meeting Kohona
And no sooner these journalists arrived at the hotel on the morning of Thursday, October 26 they met Kohona who was walking out of the restaurant after breakfast and he was asked when he would be in a position to grant the interview as promised in Colombo.
Kohona responded by stating he had not shaven or combed his hair and would give a time for the interview later on.Thanking him, the journalists went in for their breakfast.
Daily News Editor, Bandula Jayasekera and a freelance reporter for the Island , Dushy Ranatunge were staying at Hotel Drake with the other journalists. On the evening of October 26, The Sunday Leader Editor came across Ranatunge who was idling about the Epsom Hotel lobby.
"Are you staying at this hotel? It must be quite expensive?" Ranatunge asked.
"No, it is not that expensive. It's covered by the company," the Editor responded. From the tone of his voice it was clear Ranatunge was none too pleased that the News First team and The Sunday Leader Editor were staying at the same hotel as the government delegation whereas they who had come as the cheering squad had to occupy an adjacent hotel.
To the likes of petty minded Jayasekera and Ranatunge, the government delegation was their private property and no one else who did not support their cause in word and deed should be allowed access to them.
Similar situation
It was a similar sentiment that was expressed towards a journalist from The Sunday Times during the first round of talks in Geneva. Her participation at a dinner held at the ambassador's residence was also questioned by them with a threat to walk out, and reams were written about it as well.
Now who is this Dushy Ranatunge? Suffice to say for now that he is domiciled in England and has house and property in Sri Lanka. He was to also boast in Geneva that he had bought the house of liquor supplier W.M.Mendis in Colombo near Police Park.
Be that as it may, Ranatunge on October 28, wrote an article to the Daily News that an editor from a Sunday newspaper and representatives from a private electronic media station were staying at the same hotel as the government delegation thereby compromising their security. He went on to state that security of the government delegation was compromised because 'their location had been leaked by irresponsible persons in Colombo.'
The article further stated that The Sunday Leader Editor had accosted Kohona asking him for an interview at the Epsom Hotel lobby.
Ranatunge also found fault with The Sunday Leader Eeditor's conduct at the hotel alleging he had compromised the security of the government delegation and also their privacy.
The facts however were otherwise since it is Kohona himself who had agreed to grant an interview and requested that he be met at the Epsom. Thus according to Ranatunge's argument it is Kohona no less who had compromised the security of the government delegation by 'leaking' the location.
Pray, can there be more insanity than that. Even someone as mentally challenged as Ranatunge should realise that the location of the government delegation and that of the LTTE were known to many people who made the arrangements including the likes of Ranatunge who were housed at the adjoining hotel to have ready access for their plugs.
Scuttling in and out
And the question also arises whether it was not the likes of Ranatunge who by scuttling in and out of the hotel lobby when he was not even a guest at the Epsom who in fact was compromising the security and privacy of the delegation?
However, a fact unknown to many is that Ranatunge and Kohona are closely related. Kohona's brother is married to a niece of Ranatunge's mother in-law.
Ranatunge in his article in the Daily News had further said that due to the presence of certain media organisations at Epsom, questions on the safety of secret documents that would be in circulation within the main conference hall at the hotel also arose.
According to Ranatunge, Epsom is a small hotel, but in reality, it has161-bedrooms and was booked to capacity.
Needless to say Ranatunge was insulting the government delegation by implying they cannot even secure their documents which he himself describes as being sensitive in nature.
And if there was a threat to any documents, was it not more likely to come from those persons who were walking in and out of the hotel and even the very conference room Ranatunge is speaking about, especially when they were not even guests of the hotel?
Paying pooja does not pay
Surely Ranatunge and Jayasekera should know they were not accommodated in the same hotel for good reason? Of course their pique and sense of frustration at not being housed in the same hotel despite paying pooja to the government can be understood and should be sympathized with in the context of The Sunday Leader Eeditor and the News First team getting accommodation at the same hotel as the government delegation.
Ranatunge had also said in his article that complaints were made to Sri Lankan Ambassador in Geneva, Sarala Fernando that an editor from a Sunday newspaper and reporters from a private electronic media station staying at the Epsom Hotel along with the government delegation posed a threat to the government representatives.
The Ambassador, Ranatunge goes on to say, contacted the Swiss authorities and their immediate reaction 'had been to throw the editor and the TV crew out of the hotel and had sought legal opinion.' Nothing was further from the truth and this was yet another blatant lie by this fly by night freelance reporter acting in collusion with Jayasekera.
Following the publication of this tale of fancy, the Editor of The Sunday Leader spoke to top Swiss Embassy official, Martin Steurzinger who was also in Geneva for the talks preparations and inquired whether there was any truth to the Daily News report of the Swiss authorities wanting to throw the team of journalists out of the hotel and consulting legal opinion towards that end.
Legal action
When the inquiry was made Steurzinger said it was unlikely but that he would revert with an official response.What the editor was doing of course was collecting material to file defamation actions against Jayasekera in his capacity as editor, Ranatunge as the author and Lake House.
Not long after, Steurzinger called back with an on the record response. He said there was no plan at any time to 'throw out' the journalists from the hotel nor any steps taken to consult legal opinion.
All that is not true and that is official, Steurzinger said.
Ranatunge's concocted tales did not end there.
He went on to say that the government delegation had to be provided with an alternative place to have their meals due to the presence of certain media personnel at the hotel. Putting the Brothers Grimm to shame, Ranatunge then said there was a deployment of Swiss police personnel in the hotel lobby for the safety of the members of the government delegation.
However, in reality, the government delegation had their meals in the same restaurant as the media personnel and in some instances, they even had their meals together.
Drinks with Sajin
In fact Ranatunge and Jayasekera though not housed at the same hotel were also hosted for breakfast by Sajin Vass Gunewardene at the Epsom restaurant and for drinks at the bar.
We are indeed happy that at least some crumbs were thrown to these wannabe journos panting at the wayside. May be Sajin can chalk up a few merit points towards his long and arduous road to nirvana.
Nonetheless, soon after Ranatunge's article appeared in the Daily News, The Sunday Leader Editor also inquired from Ambassador Fernando if she requested the removal of the media personnel housed at Epsom Hotel.
"The story is a lie. I never said that. However, I had earlier made a request not to allow any media personnel to stay at the same hotel the government delegation was planning to stay, but that does not include you. You were already in the hotel when I made that request," she said. This was said in the presence of the News First journalists and the AFP Bureau Chief in Colombo, Amal Jayasinghe and was an on the record comment.
The Editor said, "But the article published by Dushy and Bandula indicate that you had made such a request with regard to us, Is that correct? "
"I have no idea why Bandula wrote that. That you will have to ask him. The media is always trying to put us in trouble," the Ambassador responded. She also said, "Why did he drag me into writing something like that. No one can put you out."
Added the Ambassador good naturedly to the Editor before departing, " I told Amal I wanted to speak to you earlier but I was shy since I did not know you. Good night."
Now for Jayasekera's wrath which was another motivating factor for the concoction.
Living in the lobby
Jayasekera who was occupying a room at the Drake hotel was practically living in the lobby and conference room at the Epsom and it was while he was coming out of the conference room which Ranatunge said housed all the sensitive documents of the government that he saw the Editor of The Sunday Leader and hailed him. With the Editor at the time was another journalist who has confirmed the contents of the discussion which ensued.
'Is that a gun in your pocket, or are you just happy to see me?'
Leaping eagerly towards The Sunday Leader Editor, Jayasekera drooled, "Hello how are you? Why are you attacking me in your newspaper saying that I carry a gun. I don't have a gun, but I do have a security person because I am threatened by the LTTE. You know I hate the LTTE. You have said I am James Bond. Not nice, no." Jayasekera told the Editor.
The Editor politely reminded Jayasekera of the exchange of words he had with Sunanda Deshapriya of the Free Media Movement during a media event and the FMM activist not wanting to pursue the issue because he was carrying a weapon.
Not so said Jayasekera and added it was with the former Observer Editor Rajpal Abeynaike that Deshapriya had exchanged words. Deshapriya of course stands by the fact that he bandied words with Jayasekera but did not pursue it because of the pistol packing fear.
Jayasekera's verbal diarrheoa continued, "Look at the improvement in the Daily News after I became the editor. I have got mobile phones for the journalists. I have done so much, but Anura Yapa one day called me out of the blues and scolded me. He called me a fu***r. I was not afraid. I asked him not to speak to me in that manner. He then asked me what I planned to do against it and said that he can speak to me in that manner. I then called him by the same name he called me and said that I was not afraid of him.
"I was then given a letter sacking me as editor and I was asked to return my official vehicle. No one spoke on my behalf then and no one even issued a statement. But when Rajpal Abeynaike was sacked there were enough statements condemning it."
"Carrying tales"
"Why, there was a story on your issue carried in The Sunday Times," The Sunday Leader editor responded, drawing Jayasekera out?
The other journalist present at this point told Jayasekera , "Wasn't it you who carried tales and got Rajpal kicked out?"
Visibly upset by the statement, Jayasekera said, "That is what is called spreading stories. I never cut him. He should know how to behave. Chairman Anil Obeysekera had also told him several times not to come to work after liquor. And he was warned about three times."
The Sunday Leader Editor who responded to Jayasekera's statement said, "If you are getting so annoyed over this issue, then why was no statement issued when the President shouted at me in filth."
Jayasekera at this point inquired if it really happened and said that it was wrong for the President to have done so.
In cavalier fashion Jayasekera continued and said he was also accused of being a RAW agent. Said the Editor "I thought you were accused of being a Pakistani ISI agent."
Highly bucked at this reference, Jayasekera, went on to add he was not only RAW and ISI but also CIA according to the allegations.
The Sunday Leader Editor then went back to Abeynaike's issue.
"You speak of Rajpal, I saw an article written by Neville de Silva. In that article he had said the editor's job was first offered to him but that he did not accept it since the Minister could not give him an assurance of independence," the Editor said.
"That is a lie. Everyone knows the truth. No mention was made on working independently. He asked for Rs. 4 lakhs, a house and other perks, that is why he was not given the job," Jayasekera responded and added, "I'm against the LTTE. I don't hide it. I won't give them a chance. I would only do this job for a maximum period of two years. If something happens, I can get a job at The Leader, no?"
The Sunday Leader Editor was aghast at this request but simply smiled politely by way of a response.
No job prospects for Bandula
Jayasekera appeared visibly upset at this point because there was no positive response to the request from The Sunday Leader Editor, moreso given the presence of another journalist.
Clearly it was this, coupled with Ranatunge's anger over his failure to get the Access story against Basil planted in the Leader that motivated the rash of concocted stories in the Daily News.
Now here's the story on the attempt to plant a story against Basil.
All about Basil
Ranatunge wanted a few months back The Sunday Leader and its sister paper, Irudina to publish articles attacking Basil following the power struggle in the Presidential Secretariat.
When Ranatunge arrived in the island several months back, he visited Rohan's Restaurant down Union Place with his family and relations for a meal.
It was during this meal that Ranatunge's sister-in-law revealed something about Basil.
Access
The revelation was that Basil's foreign trips were being sponsored by Access and that a company director accompanied Basil on his overseas trips.
She made this revelation as she was employed at the travel agency that handled the travel arrangements.
A highly elated Ranatunge upon hearing the story had asked a lawyer friend of The Sunday Leader Editor to inform him of the details and expose Basil.
"I can't say it. You say it if you want to," the lawyer had responded.
Ranatunge subsequently called the Editor on his mobile having got the number from the lawyer friend. Ranatunge had only met the Editor for the first time at Geneva I early this year and had no close connections with him. But nevertheless he attempted to get the story planted in the Leader.
"Hello Lasantha this is Dushy. I have a story for you," Ranatunge said.
"What is it?" the Editor asked.
"Basil Rajapakse's travel expenses are covered by Access. A travel agency had already got tickets ready for him to travel to Singapore next week," Ranatunge explained.
Mentioning the lawyer friend's name he asked whether the details were given. But fully alive to the machinations of the likes of Ranatunge and the axes he had to grind the issue was not pursued.
Ranatunge was therefore annoyed that he could not get any articles published against Basil in The Sunday Leader.
Be that as it may, soon after Ranatunge's article appeared in the Daily News on October 28, The Sunday Leader Editor called him on his mobile and asked, "Remember you once gave me a story saying that Access covers Basil's travel expenses. Can you give me the name of the travel agency you mentioned?"
Ranatunge did not respond saying the line was not clear.
The reason for Ranatunge's behavior was written in the Daily News the following day. He had stated that he did not continue with the conversation with the Editor as there was a disturbance in the line and he was afraid the call was being recorded.
However, moments later the Editor saw Ranatunge coming towards the Epsom lobby from the hotel bar in the company of Vaas Gunewardene and Chandra Fernando.
On seeing the Editor, Ranatunge came upto him and was asked once again the name of the travel agency which he claimed from which Access bought the airline tickets of Basil Rajapakse.
Ranatunge , needless to say was no source of the Editor nor did he want confidentiality of the information offered maintained. He was very free with the information he offered on Basil.
Ranatunge who believed the Editor was trying to tape his telephone conversation did not know how to respond when questioned face to face. He possibly also believed, rightly or wrongly, that no conversation can be taped on a mobile phone which is not on answer mode.
Thus he simply responded stating, "He has not gone." He was of course referring to Basil Rajapakse not having undertaken the trip for which he claimed Access bought him the tickets.
Stewing in his own juice
The Editor was not ready to give up and asked, "Through which travel agency was the ticket booked?"
"It happened several months ago, now I can't remember," he responded.
The Editor then asked if he could remember how many tickets were purchased through the travel agency.
"I can't remember now," Ranatunge said.
By now , Ranatunge had possibly sobered to the fact he was walking right into trouble by implicating the President's brother as being in the pay of Access while having a free rein over the Daily News courtesy Bandula Jayasekera.
Ranatunge then started clamping up on the issue fearing the worst.
But he may well have realised the game was up, for his response to the Editor's question on the information tendered on Basil should have been to say, 'I never said such a thing. What are you talking about?'
Corroborated
Instead he corroborated his own earlier version by stating Basil had not gone on the trip and that he cannot now recollect the name of the travel agency since several months had passed. Suffice it to say that a relation of Basil Rajapakse by marriage had by this time in fact listened to the original version of Ranatunge's story and communicated it to Basil. The man by this time was visibly shaken.
The Editor was to then quickly switch gear and inform Ranatunge that details published in the Daily News by him with regard to the hotel accommodation was false and that legal action was to be pursued against himself, Jayasekera and Lake House Publications .
"For example, you have said that I accosted Palitha Kohona for an interview, but it is totally false," the Editor said.
Ranatunge responded by saying, "That cannot be, it was Kohona who told me that."
However, Kohona by then had already informed the Editor on record that he did not make any such statement to Ranatunge and would speak to the freelance reporter on the matter. Kohona also confirmed on the record that the Editor had spoken to him prior to leaving for Geneva and arranged an interview and as such the question of accosting did not arise.
Ranatunge who was unaware of the conversation the Editor had with Kohona, decided to put the blame on Kohona and said it was the Peace Secretariat Chief himself who said he was accosted. Evidence in the possession of The Sunday Leader of course is to the contrary. Simply put either Kohona or Ranatunga was a damn liar.
And as the duo talked, the Editor pointed to the restaurant at the Epsom Hotel.
The restaurant was separated from the lobby by a glass partition and inside the restaurant were Ministers Nimal Siripala de Silva, Ferial Ashraff and several other delegates having dinner.
"You have said the government delegation was given a separate place for their meals because of us, there is no such thing. They are all in the main restaurant and we too are free to go and have our meals there," the Editor said.
"No, a separate place was made for them earlier. However it was changed within a day," Ranatunge responded.
Ranatunge's lies continued to be exposed at the same time.
The Editor later proceeded to dine with Amal Jayasinghe in the restaurant to prove the point there was no bar to them dining in the same restaurant thereby building further his case against Lake House with witnesses to boot.
In fact while they were dining, Attorney Gomin Dayasiri was to stop at the Editor's table and engage in light conversation, once again going to disprove Ranatunge's allegation that the presence of The Sunday Leader was a security threat and an infringement of the delegation's privacy.
"You could have double checked with me before writing," the Editor had moments earlier told Ranatunge. "You were not there at the time," Ranatunge said.
"Why not? You met me and asked me if I was staying at the hotel and how I managed to do so. I made an official inquiry from a Swiss official if there were any moves to remove us from the hotel. He said it was completely false," the Editor had added.
"But police personnel were deployed at the hotel," Ranatunge responded.
"Yes, there are police personnel deployed at LTTE's hotel as well as a general security precaution," quipped the Editor.
The following day, Ranatunge wrote that there was evidence that the Editor had visited the LTTE delegation at the Royal Hotel, implying thereby the threat posed to the Sri Lankan state.
E = MC what?
Such inane logic would have even befuddled Einstein. The government delegation was meeting with the LTTE and shaking hands while scores of journalists were in and out of the two hotels' interviewing delegates both Government and LTTE but according to Ranatunge the threat to national security arose because the Editor of The Sunday Leader too visited the Royal Hotel to get the LTTE side of the story.
He also conveniently left out the fact that it was Jayasekera no less who invited to the Epsom Hotel, NDTV journalist Noopur Tiwari to interview government delegates. And she came to Epsom straight from the Royal Hotel after interviewing Tamilselvan.
Bandu the office peon
In fact the very Jayasekera who spoke of a security threat to the delegation and a lack of privacy in the lobby due to the presence of The Sunday Leader and the News First team was busy as an office peon trying to organise camera angles and equipment placement for the NDTV in the very Epsom lobby. And he was not even a guest at the hotel. Neither was he maintaining the dignity of an editor of a national newspaper, being quite happy to play peon to the government delegation.
In his second article, Ranatunge had also stated that the Editor planned to take legal action against him and the Editor had also requested for his address for the purpose.
He had also said that he had only given his address in London and had refused to give his address in Colombo. Ranatunge had forgotten that it was he who had just 48 hours earlier boasted that he had purchased the Mendis Special house. Many more are the details on the works of Jayasekera and Ranatunge which due to constraints of space will have to wait another day
Mala fides
The mala fides of Ranatunge and Jayasekera in publishing the concocted stories were manifest when at the final press conference on Sunday, Ranatunge in asking a question identified himself as representing the Island newspaper. But the fact is none of the false news reports were published in the Island but only in the Daily News under Ranatunge's name when the Daily News Editor himself was present in Geneva representing the newspaper.
All these developments of course reached President Rajapakse by October 30.
The President who heard that the Daily News had carried misleading reports about The Sunday Leader Editor for not carrying articles against Basil on the alleged Access connection was livid.
"I'm sure Bandula is also behind this if Dushy Ranatunge tried to plant the story against Basil. Please forward to me all the evidence preferably on a CD and I will take action, " the President had told confidants on hearing the cheap games played by the government's media hacks.
And sad to say, the CDs will be on their way and we may not see the likes of Jayasekera and Ranatunge for many a day. Guess Rajpal will have the last laugh.

HOW MANY HUMMERS ARE THE IN SRILANKA?????????DOES ANY OFF U NOW KANDEE?????HE SAYS HE GOT A HUMMER............IS IT TRUE OR IS HE LIEING??????????
dihan




View Member Profile
ipsmenu.register( "post-member-11593", '', 'popmenubutton-new', 'popmenubutton-new-out' );


Apr 12 2006, 10:19 PM
Post #2
NewbieGroup: MembersPosts: 47Joined: 1-January 06From: ColomboMember No.: 1,293
Black 1 is owned by Mr.Sumal perera (owner of Access) and the Red 1 is a new in town i heard so many ppl told me that theres a Red running around but i havent seen it guys.--------------------
I live life High Speed Slightly disillusioned by weed





Dilesh




View Member Profile
ipsmenu.register( "post-member-11598", '', 'popmenubutton-new', 'popmenubutton-new-out' );


Apr 12 2006, 10:28 PM
Post #3
MitsuEvoGroup: MembersPosts: 2,337Joined: 1-January 06Member No.: 1,847
QUOTE(dihan @ Apr 12 2006, 10:49 PM) [snapback]11593[/snapback]
Black 1 is owned by Mr.Sumal perera (owner of Access) and the Red 1 is a new in town i heard so many ppl told me that theres a Red running around but i havent seen it guys.if Sumal Perera has one, that means there are 2 black H2s in SL... cos i'm sure that the one black oen thats' known is a Mr. Jayasooriya.... it was on Autovision as well...
QUOTE(GihanFX @ Apr 12 2006, 10:36 PM) [snapback]11587[/snapback]
maybe true, 2 or 3 nutrals can do it hey dilesh ur posts 830 min 380 ,, ela parai think i missed that point.. cos when i rwad your post iu were on 383..but cool occurence indeed.. --------------------

ST.ANTHONY'S COLLEGE PAST PUPIL

ANTONIAN AWARDS FOR EXCELLENCE - 2004
After several rounds of deliberations spanning a period of 3 years, involving SACKOBA (Colombo Branch), the Parent Body and the School Authorities, a programme was formulated to recognize Old Antonians who have brought honour to themselves and their Alma Mater by achieving excellence in the various fields of activity they are engaged in. A major criterion here was their integrity, the perception of their achievements and the esteem in which they are held, by the public.
The full criteria for selection of Awardees was issued in a communique circulated amongst Old Antonians, along with a specified nomination form.The selection was made from nominations sent in from Antonians around the world. The selection process was carried out by a select committee, represented by the Parent Body, the Colombo Branch, prominent Old Boys and the College Authorities. The Presentation Ceremony of the inaugural 'Antonian Excellence Awards' was scheduled for Thursday 18th March 2004, in the College Hall, amongst a large and distinguished gathering. All award winners were presented with a Certificate and the 'Antonian Excellence Medallion'.
The Awardees were:
SPORTS
Mr. Ruwan KalpageMr. M.S. FernandoMr. Ranjith SamarasekeraMr. Priyantha EkanayakeMr. Mahesh GunathillakaMr. Bernard PereraMr. T.M. DeenMr. Leroy FonsekaMr. Jude PillaiMr. L.V. EkanayakaMr. Stephen JosephMr. Piyal WijetungaMr. A.C.M.LafirMr. Muttiah MuralidaranMr. Udaya WeerakoonMr. R.N.A. de SilvaMr. Marion Von HagtMr. Umesh de Alwis
ECONOMICS
Dr. Anton BalasuriyaProf. C. SuriyakumaranDr. Patrick NugawelaDIPLOMATIC SERVICE
Dr. Mervyn SikurajapathyMr. Christopher Henricus
MILITARY SERVICE/POLICE
Maj. Gen. Saliya Kulatunge Mr. Raja WeerakoonMr. Asoka RatnaweeraMaj. Gen. Stanley de SilvaMr. P. B. EkanayakeMr. W.B. RajaguruBrig. Udena KendaragamaBrig. Sunil DharmaratneBrig. Aruna Jayatilleke
PUBLIC SERVICE/POLITICS
Mr. Cecil AmarasingheMr. Upali MalalgodaMr. Richie FernandopulleMr. Ivan Samarawickrema Mr. U. Mapa Mr. Palitha Elkaduwa
EDUCATION, SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
Dr. C.R. PanabokkeMr. R.l.T. AllesDr. Willie HerathProf. Malik Peiris
MUSICMr. Rukantha Gunatilleke

PROFESSIONAL CATEGORY
(Medicine/Law/Architecture/
Accountancy/Engineering)Prof. Lakshman AlwisMr. Mihindu KeerthiratneMr. Ananda DiyabalanageMr. Shamil PeirisJustice Asoka de SilvaJustice A.R.B. Amarasinghe Mr. S.H.M. MaharoofDr. Upali IllangasekeraDr. E.A.C. AndreeJustice D. Jayawickrema,Mr. Tissa BandaranayakeProf. A.H. SheriffdeenDr. Leonard Ranasinghe
OTHER PROFESSION AND VOCATIONS(Advertising/HRD/Aviation/Marketing,Banking)
Capt. Lucien RatnayakeMr. Chitral AmarasiriMr. Nishanta SeneviratneMr. Micheal AndreMr. Willie WeerasekeraMr. Ranjan De SilvaMr. Rienzie MartineszMr. J. H. MadawelaMr. Gamini KarunaratneMr. Mangala BoyagodaMr. Rohana Ranaweera
BUSINESS/ENTREPRENEURSHIP
Mr. Vivendra Lintotawela Mr. Sumal Perera Mr. Christopher JoshuaMr. Ranjan GomezMr. Theo FernandoMr. Franklyn AmerasingheMr. Stanley WanigasekeraDr. Lawrence PereraMr. Lakshman PereraMr. Rohan WijesingheMr. Priyanrha MendisMr. Desmond MackyMr. Akantha Pandithasekera
POSTHUMOUS AWARDSCABINET MINISTERSMr. T.B. IllangaratneMr. M.D. BandaMr. N.H. KeerthiratneMr. Chandra BandaraMr. A.C.S. Hameed
GOVERNOR GENERALMr. William Gopallawa
SUPREME COURT JUDGEMr. R. Victor Perera
CHIEF JUSTICEMr. Victor Tennekoon
CIVIL SERVICEMr. S.B. SenanayakeDr. Anton Atapattu
TOWN PLANNINGMr. Piyatissa Bulankulame
EDUCATIONProf. George E. Tennakoon (Dean of Medicine, Peradeniya)
OTHER PROFESSIONALSMr. Herbert Tennekoon - Governor, Central BankMr. Stanley Martin - Presidents' Counsel
SPORTSMr. Ivan Boteju - Represented Sri Lanka in Athletics
OTHERSMr. Stanley Peiris - MusicDr. Leslie Herath - Chairman, CEBMr. A.J.N. Seneviratne - Advisor, UNCTAD.





GihanFX

View Member Profile
ipsmenu.register( "post-member-11610", '', 'popmenubutton-new', 'popmenubutton-new-out' );

Apr 12 2006, 10:44 PM
Post #4
Silent KillerGroup: MembersPosts: 2,519Joined: 1-January 06From: Attidiya, DehiwelaMember No.: 732
QUOTE(Dilesh @ Apr 12 2006, 10:58 PM) [snapback]11598[/snapback]
if Sumal Perera has one, that means there are 2 black H2s in SL... cos i'm sure that the one black oen thats' known is a Mr. Jayasooriya.... it was on Autovision as well...i think i missed that point.. cos when i rwad your post iu were on 383..but cool occurence indeed..yeah classic moment anyway i hope u can reach to 1000 ASAP,

ST.ANTHONY'S COLLEGE-KANDY; PAST PUPIL

ANTONIAN AWARDS FOR EXCELLENCE - 2004
After several rounds of deliberations spanning a period of 3 years, involving SACKOBA (Colombo Branch), the Parent Body and the School Authorities, a programme was formulated to recognize Old Antonians who have brought honour to themselves and their Alma Mater by achieving excellence in the various fields of activity they are engaged in. A major criterion here was their integrity, the perception of their achievements and the esteem in which they are held, by the public.
The full criteria for selection of Awardees was issued in a communique circulated amongst Old Antonians, along with a specified nomination form.The selection was made from nominations sent in from Antonians around the world. The selection process was carried out by a select committee, represented by the Parent Body, the Colombo Branch, prominent Old Boys and the College Authorities. The Presentation Ceremony of the inaugural 'Antonian Excellence Awards' was scheduled for Thursday 18th March 2004, in the College Hall, amongst a large and distinguished gathering. All award winners were presented with a Certificate and the 'Antonian Excellence Medallion'.
The Awardees were:
SPORTS
Mr. Ruwan KalpageMr. M.S. FernandoMr. Ranjith SamarasekeraMr. Priyantha EkanayakeMr. Mahesh GunathillakaMr. Bernard PereraMr. T.M. DeenMr. Leroy FonsekaMr. Jude PillaiMr. L.V. EkanayakaMr. Stephen JosephMr. Piyal WijetungaMr. A.C.M.LafirMr. Muttiah MuralidaranMr. Udaya WeerakoonMr. R.N.A. de SilvaMr. Marion Von HagtMr. Umesh de Alwis
ECONOMICS
Dr. Anton BalasuriyaProf. C. SuriyakumaranDr. Patrick NugawelaDIPLOMATIC SERVICE
Dr. Mervyn SikurajapathyMr. Christopher Henricus
MILITARY SERVICE/POLICE
Maj. Gen. Saliya Kulatunge Mr. Raja WeerakoonMr. Asoka RatnaweeraMaj. Gen. Stanley de SilvaMr. P. B. EkanayakeMr. W.B. RajaguruBrig. Udena KendaragamaBrig. Sunil DharmaratneBrig. Aruna Jayatilleke
PUBLIC SERVICE/POLITICS
Mr. Cecil AmarasingheMr. Upali MalalgodaMr. Richie FernandopulleMr. Ivan Samarawickrema Mr. U. Mapa Mr. Palitha Elkaduwa
EDUCATION, SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
Dr. C.R. PanabokkeMr. R.l.T. AllesDr. Willie HerathProf. Malik Peiris
MUSICMr. Rukantha Gunatilleke

PROFESSIONAL CATEGORY
(Medicine/Law/Architecture/
Accountancy/Engineering)Prof. Lakshman AlwisMr. Mihindu KeerthiratneMr. Ananda DiyabalanageMr. Shamil PeirisJustice Asoka de SilvaJustice A.R.B. Amarasinghe Mr. S.H.M. MaharoofDr. Upali IllangasekeraDr. E.A.C. AndreeJustice D. Jayawickrema,Mr. Tissa BandaranayakeProf. A.H. SheriffdeenDr. Leonard Ranasinghe
OTHER PROFESSION AND VOCATIONS(Advertising/HRD/Aviation/Marketing,Banking)
Capt. Lucien RatnayakeMr. Chitral AmarasiriMr. Nishanta SeneviratneMr. Micheal AndreMr. Willie WeerasekeraMr. Ranjan De SilvaMr. Rienzie MartineszMr. J. H. MadawelaMr. Gamini KarunaratneMr. Mangala BoyagodaMr. Rohana Ranaweera
BUSINESS/ENTREPRENEURSHIP
Mr. Vivendra Lintotawela Mr. Sumal Perera Mr. Christopher JoshuaMr. Ranjan GomezMr. Theo FernandoMr. Franklyn AmerasingheMr. Stanley WanigasekeraDr. Lawrence PereraMr. Lakshman PereraMr. Rohan WijesingheMr. Priyanrha MendisMr. Desmond MackyMr. Akantha Pandithasekera
POSTHUMOUS AWARDSCABINET MINISTERSMr. T.B. IllangaratneMr. M.D. BandaMr. N.H. KeerthiratneMr. Chandra BandaraMr. A.C.S. Hameed
GOVERNOR GENERALMr. William Gopallawa
SUPREME COURT JUDGEMr. R. Victor Perera
CHIEF JUSTICEMr. Victor Tennekoon
CIVIL SERVICEMr. S.B. SenanayakeDr. Anton Atapattu
TOWN PLANNINGMr. Piyatissa Bulankulame
EDUCATIONProf. George E. Tennakoon (Dean of Medicine, Peradeniya)
OTHER PROFESSIONALSMr. Herbert Tennekoon - Governor, Central BankMr. Stanley Martin - Presidents' Counsel
SPORTSMr. Ivan Boteju - Represented Sri Lanka in Athletics
OTHERSMr. Stanley Peiris - MusicDr. Leslie Herath - Chairman, CEBMr. A.J.N. Seneviratne - Advisor, UNCTAD. V

Why the Waters Edge deal is illegal in Sri Lanka
Friday, 10 October 2008 - 11:38 AM SL TimeThis Court granted the Petitioners leave to proceed on November 12 2007 on an alleged infringement of Article 12(1) of the Constitution of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka. The Petitioners presented their case on the basis of an infringement pertaining to the acquisition of land on the premise that such land would be utilized to serve a public purpose whereas, by this impugned executive or administrative action the land was knowingly, deliberately and manipulatively sold to a private entrepreneur to serve as an exclusive and private golf resort in Sri Lanka, one carrying a membership fee of Rs. 250,000/-. Learned Counsel submitted that this was done through a process that was conniving and contrary to the equal protection of the law guaranteed by Article 12(1) of the Constitution which assures to the People the Rule of Law. Counsel also submitted that the facts in this case reflected a flagrant betrayal of the purported policy of the 1994 government under :the 1st Respondent to establish transparent governance and eliminate corruption, and that the facts disclose that this transaction reeked of corruption . Counsel submitted that the most disturbing factor of all was that those alleged to have initiated, facilitated and/or conspired to achieve this outcome were those from the highest echelons of the executive and included senior officials, members of the public sector and statutory bodies of the government, the former President (the 1st Respondent), multiple government agencies, the 4th Respondent Company, and as Counsel submitted in particular, the 5th Respondent Mr: Ronnie Peiris chose not to take part in the proceedings despite notices being served on him, and who through tax declarations, was revealed to have obtained a sum of approximately Rs. 60 Million in profit from this transaction despite having no disclosed association with it. Counsel additionally submitted that there had been a series of deliberate acts of gross abuse of executive power by the 1st Respondent. Counsel submitted that given the executive or administrative power wielded by those involved, the nature of the allegations made, and the seriousness of the implications of such allegations upon the national interest and national economy and, importantly, the citizenry of this country, the ramifications of this case, though exceedingly complex, should be carefully and incisively scrutinized by this Court He further submitted that this Court was the last bastion of hope to the people in whom sovereignty is reposed who are the most affected by the patent abuse of executive or administrative power especially by the 1st, 3rd, and 7th Respondents in this case. The facts indeed are complex, as one would expect from the voluminous pleadings presented to Court. Despite its scale and magnitude, a detailed study of the facts of the case has been done and it is appropriate to begin at the inception with an analysis which chronologically unravels the basic, relevant and important sequence of events of the impugned transaction: n According to the Petitioner, on or about 1984 Hon. Gamini Dissanayake, then Minister of Lands, decided to acquire a large tract of land situated in Kalapaluwawa, Rajagiriya, under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act No 9 of 1950 as amended by No. 39 of 1954, No. 22 of 1955, No. 28 of 1964, No. 20 of 1969, No. 48 of 1971, No. 8 of 1979 and No. 12 of 1983 (referred to hereinafter as the Land Acquisition Act ), for the public purpose of urban development and ostensibly for increasing the Parliamentary Administrative Complex and for providing water retention as a low lying area . This fact has not been substantively contested by any of the Respondents. n In terms of Section 5 of the said Land Acquisition Act, as amended, a declaration was issued through the publication of a Gazette notification dated October 1988 (Document P1 (b) of the Petitioner s amended Petition) to notice the owners of the land being acquired, some of whom have intervened in this case as Intervenient Petitioners (hereinafter referred to as the Intervenient Petitioners ). Section 5 of the Land Acquisition Act mandates that the Minister, before acquiring land, shall make a written declaration that such land is needed for a public purpose and will be acquired under the Act . In terms of this section, he accordingly named S. Sakalasuriya, the Divisional Secretary/Additional Government Agent, as the acquiring officer. This officer made payment of compensation in a sum of Rs. 312 per perch, and a Certificate of Vesting was Sued, vesting the land with the 3rd Respondent, the Urban Development Authority (referred to hereinafter as the UDA ). It is to be noted that (i) Document P1(b) categorically declared that the land had been acquired for a public purpose and (ii) the second annexure to the Certificate of Vesting granting the land to the UDA from the Divisional Secretary/Additional Government Agent (Document P1(a) of the Petitioner s amended Petition) expressly declared that The land should not be utilized for any other purpose than that for which it was originally acquired. (Vide Schedule 2) n In spite of the supposed urgency for acquiring the land, no action regarding the said land occurred for approximately 9 years subsequent to the vesting of the land with the UDA. On May 14 1997 the 7th Respondent, the Board of Investment (referred to hereinafter as the 801 ) approved by letter dated June 5 1997 (Document F of the affidavit dated June 13 2008) a BOl proposal dated April 7 1997 (Document B through B4 of the aforementioned affidavit), submitted by one Shantha Wijesinghe in his capacity as Managing Director of Asia Pacific Golf Course Ltd. (referred to hereinafter as Asia Pacific ) to establish an 18-hole Golf Course on 150 acres of the aforesaid land. There are several matters of significance that must be noted land was recommended to Asia Pacific by the UDA in response to Asia Pacific s original inquiry letter In addition to the aforementioned golf course and despite a pledge to harmonize the said golf course with the flood retention purposes of the land, Asia Pacific also proposed the construction of a park, football pitch, cricket pitch, and a hawker centre, which was to be made available to the public, (vide B referred to above) ostensibly to satisfy in some minimal way the original purpose for which such land was acquired. It is to be noted that the purpose for which it was acquired, being solely to serve a public purpose, was to serve the needs of the general public as distinct from the elitist requirements of the relatively small segment of society in Sri Lanka. It is significant to note that under the law this public purpose was attached to the land at the point it was acquired from the original owners. The enactment of laws to allow for such land acquisition was only done because of a legislative belief that private ownership in Sri Lanka is subject to the paramount, essential and greater need to serve the general public, a significant segment who lack even basic living amenities like running water, electricity, and housing. V