13 November, 2019

Blog

ICES In Sri Lanka Is Under Investigation

By Muttukrishna Sarvananthan

Dr. Muttukrishna Sarvananthan

Dr. Muttukrishna Sarvananthan

In response to the exposes in the Colombo Telegraph during the latter half of January 2016 (see below for titles and the web links) and a formal complaint lodged with the Counter Fraud and Whistleblowing Unit (CFWU) of the Department for International Development (DfID, United Kingdom) by this author, the International Development Research Centre (IDRC, Canada) has launched a forensic audit of the financial accounts of the International Centre for Ethnic Studies (ICES, Colombo, Sri Lanka) pertaining to the Safe and Inclusive Cities (SaIC) and Growth and Economic Opportunities for Women (GrOW) programmes co-funded by the Department for International Development (DfID, UK) and the International Development Research Centre (IDRC, Canada) and managed by the latter. In fact, 70% of the total funding for the GrOW programme is by the DfID.

An international audit firm has been hired by the IDRC to undertake a forensic audit of the accounts pertaining to the aforementioned two projects at the ICES in Colombo. Accordingly, personnel from this multinational audit firm were in Colombo during the week March 14 – 20, 2016 and met this author on March 18, 2016.Their report to the IDRC is due before the end of April 2016. The ICES is probably the only NGO in Sri Lanka that has been subjected to forensic auditing by a grantor to date.

The Board of Directors of the ICES, which has been silent on the exposes in the Colombo Telegraph, has issued a statement to the media in Colombo after two months (reported in the Daily Mirror of March 19, 2016, The Sunday Times of March 27, 2016, and The Sunday Times of April 03, 2016) claiming that “The International Development Research Center, which supports the research, has monitored its progress and communicated its satisfaction at the manner in which the research is progressing.”

The aforesaid statement of triumphalism by the Board of Directors of the ICES hides the fact that it is under intense scrutiny by the co-funders, viz. DfID and IDRC. If the statement by the ICES Board is correct then it is the IDRC which should issue a public statement to that effect. In fact, I believe the IDRC itself is under investigation because of its continued funding of the ICES in spite of a negative project evaluation report by Mark Hoffman of the London School of Economics in May 2009.

Additionally, legal proceedings are underway in Sri Lanka to make the following persons accountable to the fraudulent and illegal actions of the ICES, vis-à-vis the GrOW project: (in alphabetical order) Mr. Franklyn Amerasinghe (Director since mid-2015), Mr. Rajan Asirwatham (Director), Dr. Fazeeha Azmi (Director until mid-2015), Mr. Daneshan Casie Chetty (Chairperson), Mr. Indrajit Coomaraswamy ((Director until mid-2015), Prof. K. M. de Silva (Director), Dr. Mario Gomez (Executive Director), Dr. John Gooneratne (Director), Prof. H.S. Hasbullah (Director since mid-2015), Mr. Tissa Jayatilaka (Director), Dr. Wijaya Jayatilaka (Director since mid-2015), and Prof. Nira Wickramasinghe (Director).

The ICES website claims that it’s Research Fellow “Danesh Jayatilaka is a final year PhD student in Economics”. This particular claim has been online for the past three years (i.e. since 2014). How come a final year Ph.D. student remains so for three consecutive years? How long is this purported “final year”? This is just another deceit and fraud of the ICES headed by Dr. Mario Gomez and Mr. Daneshan Casie Chetty.

Whereas this author’s repeated requests to Mario Gomez to recruit a Tamil speaking person as a Research Assistant for the GrOW project to be based at the ICES in Colombo went unheeded, a buddy of Danesh Jayatilaka was recruited as Research Assistant in January 2015. Recently, Danesh Jayatilaka has offered a Research Assistant position to the person, who this author had proposed in January 2015, in order to buy her silence in the on-going administrative inquiry and judicial action.

The ICES (Colombo) has a history of incorrigible deceitful and fraudulent conduct, which came to national and international spotlight during the 2006 – 2007 periods. Moreover, a sexual harassment case at the ICES in 2005 was hushed-up by the then Executive Director who was concurrently the Chairperson of the Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka at that time. Feedbacks received by this author from past professional staff indicate unrepentant conduct of “rent seeking” and “theft of intellectual property” by the ICES, which could be “piggybacking on its earlier reputation”.

After a lull in such controversies, the present Executive Director Dr. Mario Gomez and the Chairperson Mr. Daneshan Casie Chetty are back in the business of deceit and fraud, which will be exposed to the public during the on-going judicial action by this author against the ICES.

Related posts;

Mario Gomez, ICES, and IDRC commit Research Fraud in Sri Lanka – 17th January 2016

 IDRC Had Raised Questions About ICES Financial Practices Long Before The Sarvananthan Allegations – 22nd January 2016

Canadian IDRC continues to fund corrupt ICES in Sri Lanka even after a damning Evaluation Report – 23rd January 2016

Messiahs of Good Governance at the Helm of Incorrigible ICES in Sri Lanka – 28th January 2016

*Muttukrishna Sarvananthan (Ph.D. Wales, M.Sc. Bristol, M.Sc. Salford, and B.A. (Hons) Delhi) is a Development Economist by profession and the Founder and Principal Researcher of the Point Pedro Institute of Development (http://pointpedro.org), Point Pedro, Northern Province, Sri Lanka. He was an Endeavour Research Fellow at the Monash University, Melbourne (2011 – 2012) and a Fulbright Visiting Research Scholar at the Elliott School of International Affairs, George Washington University, Washington D.C. (2008 – 2009) who can be contacted on sarvi@pointpedro.org

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Latest comments

  • 6
    7

    Sarvananthan,

    Out of curiosity I checked out the Institution’s current events at your website.

    Here is the list of the events as reported as most current under the 10 top-line items of your institutional activities, as per your website:

    Awards and accolades – 2008
    Annual budget review – 2009
    Community service – 2008
    Occasional topical notes – 2011
    Progress report – 2008
    PPID Knowledge products – 2007
    Quarterly economic report – 4the Qtr, 2008
    Research study notes – No items to display!
    Workshop papers – 2009
    Workshops – 2011

    Is the cessation of funding from MR’s regime once the war was concluded that has made you so envious and desperate, that you have to behave this way – first “investigating” the private life of CM, and now fishing in muddy waters hoping to net some sympathy-funds?

    Any chance you can show your contribution since 2010 to the research community as the “Founder and Principal Researcher of the Point Pedro Institute of Development (http://pointpedro.org)” having, presumably continued to receive the remuneration for such work even after 2010,the year the institute seemed to have come to a stand-still?

    (Now, please don’t rush to update the website, either by deleting or adding some faked “current” items.)

    • 8
      1

      Kumar R,

      This is the second time I see you trying to use the outdated information on the PPID homepage to discredit Dr Sarvanathan.

      Maybe Dr Sarvanathan has better things to do than update the homepage or quite simply has nobody to do it? Maybe you know how to work with homepages but many others including myself don’t.

      If you manage to read without bias what Dr Sarvanathan has written you will understand that he has been active with the GrOW project as late as last year.

      I have seen him commenting on many things in the media. The latest that I remember is the “65000 steel houses” project. I assume that he comments free of charge and is not paid to investigate ICES. Because of this he is dangerous for the corrupted elite.

      Dr Sarvanathan was last month involved with World Bank activities in Colombo. I know people who were invited to these.

      I fail to understand why you try to discredit somebody working against abuse of power and corruption. Any explanation?

      • 2
        1

        Anotherwhislblower.

        First, if “keeping outdated information on Saravanan’s own web” discredits him, then the discrediting comes from him, not from me – right?

        Second, the foot note on his article reads “is a Development Economist by profession and the Founder and Principal Researcher of the Point Pedro Institute of Development (http://pointpedro.org), Point Pedro, Northern Province, Sri Lanka. He “IS” the.… Principal Researcher. Not “WAS!” While Sarvan provides the link to the web, you (a side-kick?) want to now claim he has had no time since 2009 or so to attend to reporting the quarterly reports or annual budget, while being in charge of that Institution.

        There lies the explanation that you desperately have difficulty figuring out. Is it not an outrageously suspicious coincidence that once MR’s regime decimated the LTTE, the regime seemingly terminated the funding as they apparently saw no more a need to fund that institution!

        That raises the obvious question – why exactly did MR’s regime fund this institution? Are there similar regional development institutions that they funded?

        The very first time I I remember seeing contributions from Muttu in these columns was the two consecutive articles he wrote very vigorously, unduly and mercilessly castigating the then-upcoming teenage singer MIA for bringing the Tamil issue to international attention, with her new songs. The songs gained such popularity that she was then invited to several TV interviews worldwide, which infuriated the MR regime to no end! AT that particular moment, what precisely was the incentive for the Development economist to feign such outrage in support of MR regime, if not some hidden obligation to MR?

        Does that explanation open your eyes as to what the MR’s have been doing with the handful of presumptuous and greed-driven suckers unfortunately entitled to carry a PhD title, and willing to compromise their professional integrity? To name a few: Dr DJ, Dr. RN, Dr. RW, Dr. R(ohan) G(unaratne), and this Dr. MS . Remember MR describing DJ as capable of “prostituting” in a world-wide TV interview. (CT: I would like to emphasize the word is used in a broader sense as defined in Oxford Dictionary).

        I have heard that when one blows, one often automatically shuts one’s eyes — but that had no reference to whistles! Perhaps it is not just a whistle that you are blowing!!

        As a foot note: I might also point out the imagined esteem and compulsion MR had for PhD (given the uneducated goons his family and ancestry) particularly after hearing that Chandrika had not really made it up to a PhD. It is that compulsion that made him so forcefully pursue PhD’s for him-self, his siblings, his sons and even his one-time car driver, the Dr of Kelaniya fame!

        • 1
          1

          Kumar R,

          “While Sarvan provides the link to the web, you (a side-kick?) want to now claim he has had no time since 2009 or so to attend to reporting the quarterly reports or annual budget, while being in charge of that Institution.”

          I don’t know why the PPID homepage has not been updated but know that Dr Sarvanathan has been active.

          Are the reports you mention supposed to be published? Based on what? Have the two ICES projects and the rest of ICES published their reports?

          You fail to get the main point: Dr Sarvanathan has made a complaint about two ICES projects and it has been taken seriously in the UK by the main funding agency. The other “cases” you list should not influence this latest “case”.

          To my best knowledge nobody has made an official complaint anywhere about Dr Sarvanathan or the PPID. Feel free to make a complaint.

          • 2
            1

            Anotherblower,

            Good question: “Are the reports you mention supposed to be published?”

            If PPID is a publicly funded research institute, and if Sarvan is the director as Sarvan identifies in the foot note, then I would assume it is obligatory to publicly make available the Budgets and Quarterly reports. I would also assume that was the intent with which the itemized TOC was specifically included in the website and the reports published up to 2008.

            If however, it is just a personal project of Saravan, and all the web items are to make it look official when it is not, and has no state funding, or no state funding since 2008, then perhaps Sarvan’s claim as director is in effect only of a non-existing institution, however official it is made to look on the web.

            Well, I suppose Sarvan would be the best to give clarification on that – don’t you think? Can you think of any reason why he may not do so, while he explicitly claims (as in his foot note) credentials as the Director?

            • 0
              0

              Kumar,

              “If PPID is a publicly funded research institute, and if Sarvan is the director as Sarvan identifies in the foot note, then I would assume it is obligatory to publicly make available the Budgets and Quarterly reports. I would also assume that was the intent with which the itemized TOC was specifically included in the website and the reports published up to 2008.”

              Are these reports you mention not comments and analysis on SL economy and budget?

              I have always thought that “Sarvi” thru PPID provides consultancy services for mostly foreign customers. Nothing wrong with this or do you disagree?

              • 0
                0

                Lone Wolf and Anotherwhistleblower,

                I think it will be more appropriate that Sarvi answers your question “Are these reports you mention not comments and analysis on SL economy and budget.”

                Sarvi as the founder and director was responsible for the design of the web provisions and to populate those web slots. If he was a salaried employee after 2008 then he has not lived up to his responsibility and he has an obligation to do that.

                If he was not a paid employee of course he could do whatever he wants – it is then his private property. SO there should be no question of unpaid salary that Anotherwhistleblower suggests

                If Sarvi was a paid employee but has not been not paid salary after 2008, and on that count if is not willing to do that work (making sure the web is populated) then he should quit the institution and quit calling himself the director – of course he could still fill in the credentials as “former director”. You can’t have it both ways.

                As for your comment “I have always thought that “Sarvi” thru PPID provides consultancy services for mostly foreign customers. Nothing wrong with this or do you disagree?” – it matters whether he was appointed just to “feed” MR’s propaganda to foreign NGO’s or whether the institution was truly a legitimate research unit.

                Why that suspicion arises is because he will not clarify how he was funded, coupled with the fact that MR employed many gullible PhD’s to do MR’s dirty propaganda. Why are these PhD’s not on the up-and-up in terms of clarifying their association with MR – they were all singing hosannas for MR at one time, and now have seething anger for the same MR. Seems they were scorned by MR/Gota.

                There are other supporting evidences as well that raises suspicion on the bona fide’s of Sarvi.

                As Anotherwhistleblower points out these guys were asked to report to Gota the Defense secretary. Does that not raise some doubts about the merits of funding them? Can Sarvi come clean on his reporting responsibilities for the funding he received?

                What exactly prompted the development economist to go berserk on a teenage budding singer on her way to international fame – bombastically blasting her for supportive statements she made on Tamil issues in the national arena. He did that with two consecutive blistering articles as the 2009 Geneva sessions was consideringvoting on the war crime, at which another of PhD (DJ), a back door diplomat successfully blocked the vote! You may recall that in AljaZeera interview broadcast across the globe, MR ended up characterizing Dr. DJ as “prostituting” for an NGO .

                How come the Development economist ended up at the department of study of Terrorism in Australia – possibly the same one that another of MR’s henchmen PhD Rohan G. That PhD finally was proven as a fraud!

                Consider the other PhD that I have taken issue with most often in these columns – Dr.RN. Why is he so shy to come clean on the circumstances that lead to his “delegate” meeting with MR. Who organized it? What were they paid? What was the objective? Who else was in the delegation? What was the basis for selecting delegates?

                If only these PhD’s are forthright then perhaps we can have an objective discussion. Everyone makes mistakes – if because of gullibility or avarice they made mistakes, that is excusable. What is not excusable is still playing hide-and-seek despite now knowing that they were taken for a ride by MR/Gota, and it is these PhD’s participation that helped provide the needed cover to a demonic regime that stands accused of intentionally decimating a mass of innocent women and children under the smokescreen of war.

                That is my gripe! My hope that one of these PhD’s would have the basic courage, integrity and honour to come clean. I can understand the uneducated thugs like Karuna stooping to such low levels, but when idiots with laudable back ground in education and exposure to civility stoop so low that sure annoys me to no end!!

                • 0
                  0

                  Kumar R,

                  Please see my comment posted today April 7, 2016 at 6:43.

                  I have nothing to add.

              • 0
                0

                Lone Wolf,

                Thanks.

                Please don’t waste your time with Kumar R.

                • 0
                  0

                  Another Whistle Blower,

                  I agree with you. There will never be a reply with sound information from people like Kumar R. He does not comprehend who is investigated and why.

                  Thanks.

                  • 0
                    0

                    Oh [Edited out]
                    What farce you try to pull?!

                    If any one of you was genuine and forthright you will not walk into this grotesque comedy, ultimately ending up confirming Sarvananthan’s deceptive ways.

                    If you think the attempt helped Sarvi’s credibility even an iota – you must be dreaming!

                    The blower and lonewolf want to pretend they want to know Sarvan’s obligation or lack of it in updating the Reports, but when Sarvi’ is dump-stuck for a response, you guys want to pat each other’s back and run! Great show boys!! Grow up Sarvi.

                    Incidentally, the moniker “Lone Wolf” is just as degrading as “Walking Eagle.” Lone Wolf becomes lonely, not by choice, but because it gets ostracized by the pack – as it contributes nothing to the pack, but wants to live off of the spoils of the pack as a parasite – I guess your choice of the name was quite apt!

  • 3
    5

    Good work Kumar, spot on. Sarvi was in Australia, trying to do a research on the violent ways of Rajapakse, I heard. People hardly worked with him because they were worried thet they would be dobbed in!

    The other guy had ‘Hambantota’!! Can Sarvi tells us what he did in Australia a few years ago? Endeavour Research Fellow at the Global Terrorism Research Centre??

  • 6
    2

    Dr Sarvananthan,

    Thank you for continuing your fight against the alleged wrong doings. I was hoping that you have not given up and you have now confirmed that this matter has not been closed. Please do not give up!

    “In response to the exposes in the Colombo Telegraph during the latter half of January 2016 (see below for titles and the web links) and a formal complaint lodged with the Counter Fraud and Whistleblowing Unit (CFWU) of the Department for International Development (DfID, United Kingdom) by this author, the International Development Research Centre (IDRC, Canada) has launched a forensic audit of the financial accounts of the International Centre for Ethnic Studies (ICES, Colombo, Sri Lanka) pertaining to the Safe and Inclusive Cities (SaIC) and Growth and Economic Opportunities for Women (GrOW) programmes co-funded by the Department for International Development (DfID, UK) and the International Development Research Centre (IDRC, Canada) and managed by the latter. In fact, 70% of the total funding for the GrOW programme is by the DfID.”

    You have made the correct decision when you approached the DfID. While authorities, NGOs and others in our country decline to reply to questions right to information laws in other countries can and should be used in cases with foreign funding.

    I believe that, for instance, the DfID, has to provide details on everything they have on funding to ICES projects if somebody makes a request. An e-mail is enough.

    “An international audit firm has been hired by the IDRC to undertake a forensic audit of the accounts pertaining to the aforementioned two projects at the ICES in Colombo. Accordingly, personnel from this multinational audit firm were in Colombo during the week March 14 – 20, 2016 and met this author on March 18, 2016.Their report to the IDRC is due before the end of April 2016.”

    I am happy to read about the audit. The results should be made public.

    “After a lull in such controversies, the present Executive Director Dr. Mario Gomez and the Chairperson Mr. Daneshan Casie Chetty are back in the business of deceit and fraud, which will be exposed to the public during the on-going judicial action by this author against the ICES.”

    Please provide more details on the legal action you have taken.

  • 5
    8

    This fellow Sarvi is an absolute fraud. All his entire articles are written on things cooked up in his child like mind. I have a long running battle with this useless fellow. He does not do anything productive but goes around criticizing all the work done by others. Muthu it is time for you to wrap up your straw mat and head back to Pt. Pedro.

    • 2
      1

      Tamil from the north,

      “All his entire articles are written on things cooked up in his child like mind. I have a long running battle with this useless fellow. He does not do anything productive but goes around criticizing all the work done by others.”

      Maybe you are correct. Why don’t you do like Dr Sarvanathan and try to find facts to prove that he is wrong? Assuming that you are Canadian citizen or have PR in Canada you have the right to request basically all information on the GROW project including the audit report.

      If the audit and other reports show that Dr Sarvanathan was wrong you can ridicule him using facts. At the moment you are just providing your opinion.

      Would you be willing to help me to obtain information in Canada? I need somebody there to help me with Right to Information requests. I have relatives in Canada but they are totally disinterested in alleged fraud, abuse etc in the Northern Province and the rest of SL.

  • 0
    2

    Dr Sarvanathan and others,

    “The ICES website claims that it’s Research Fellow “Danesh Jayatilaka is a final year PhD student in Economics”. This particular claim has been online for the past three years (i.e. since 2014). How come a final year Ph.D. student remains so for three consecutive years? How long is this purported “final year”? This is just another deceit and fraud of the ICES headed by Dr. Mario Gomez and Mr. Daneshan Casie Chetty.”

    According to the Linkedln page of Danesh Jayatilaka he has two PhDs. One from Colombo and the other from Sussex.

    https://lk.linkedin.com/in/danesh-jayatilaka-5a484935

    What are the facts? Still a PhD candidate or has one or two PhDs?

    • 2
      1

      Anotherblower,

      It matters to you more whether Daneshan has one or tow PhD’s but the fact that the Director of PPID has not completed either the annual budgets or quarterly reports since 2009 should be of any concern?

      Is the PPID a privately owned self-funded program or is there public/state funds that provides the Director his daily bread?

      Is your point that Sarvan has had no time to complete his obligations in compiling and publishing his budgetary details of the PPID that he claims to head, but has all the time in the world to check on every one else’s budgetary reporting compliance, to investigate sexual misconducts and compile feed-backs and even write volumes on upcoming teenage singers at the beck and call of a rogue regime!

      There is a saying in Sinhalese about ballage wade and booruwage wade – perhaps you could enlighten him on that sometime when you busy having your eyes tightly shut

      • 2
        1

        Kumar R,

        “It matters to you more whether Daneshan has one or tow PhD’s but the fact that the Director of PPID has not completed either the annual budgets or quarterly reports since 2009 should be of any concern?”

        Of Course it does. I have at the moment no interest in the reports or accounts of the PPID or Dr Sarvanathan.

        There is at least one complaint about a project lead by Daneshan.

        The methodology etc of the GROW project has been publicly criticized by competent professionals in Jaffna.

        Is (“double Dr”?) Daneshan in addition to the other alleged wrong doings misleading potential future employers by claiming to have finished his doctorates that he possibly has not finished?

        Why don’t we just wait and see the results of the audit of the two ICES projects?

        My main interest is what the ICES has been doing not Daneshan or Dr Sarvanathan.

        • 2
          0

          Anotherblower

          I cannot agree with you more on “Why don’t we just wait and see the results of the audit of the two ICES projects?”

          That precisely is my point in my rebuke of Saravan’s undue if not pre-mature article. Why not wait for the audit of ICES – and in the meanwhile spend the time and resources to get your own house in order, by attending to your own responsibility as the paid Director of PPID to get the annual budgets and quarterly reports current, so that they don’t appear consigned to “history”.

          And as you correctly pointed out, this was my second alert to him that his web is desperately in need of displaying anything current!

          • 0
            0

            Kumar R,

            Thank you for your reply.

            “That precisely is my point in my rebuke of Saravan’s undue if not pre-mature article. Why not wait for the audit of ICES”

            I can understand the articles of Dr Sarvanathan. He feels that he was badly treated by the ICES and even IDRC if I have understood correctly. He was apparently fired from the GROW, his (and others?) salary was not paid and his questions were met with arrogant silence. This is the version we have found on CT and I don’t claim to know what the truth is.

            One thing I do know is that the ICES and similar gangs play in the same “sand pit” in Colombo. It is a closed play group and hostile to outsiders like Dr Sarvanathan. There is a lot of hidden and even open discrimination. Without the PPID GROW became an attempt to research Tamil women done by outsiders. What does the Colombo elite know about the life of women in the Vanni? How do young non Tamil women and men reach these women?

            Unfortunately I have a lot of experience from similar silence from authorities, NGOs etc.

            It must have been exciting for Dr Sarvanathan to find that DFID took his complaint seriously and an audit was started. As a whistle blower I know the feeling.

            Apparently Dr Sarvanathan has started his own legal action against the Board of ICES. As you may know this kind of civil cases can take years and cost a fortune in SL. I can only hope that Dr Sarvanathan has deep pockets and wins the case. To avoid bad PR ICES might be instructed by the foreign funding agencies to offer large compensation for an out of court settlement.

            ” – and in the meanwhile spend the time and resources to get your own house in order, by attending to your own responsibility as the paid Director of PPID to get the annual budgets and quarterly reports current, so that they don’t appear consigned to “history”.”

            Have you asked Dr Sarvanathan to send you these reports? It would be interesting to see how he reacts to such a request. A “man of good governance” should be happy to provide you all you want. At the same time I am not sure he is under any obligation to report. I don’t have any idea of what if anything an institution like PPID is supposed to report. The NGOs were reporting something to Gota.

            • 0
              0

              Anotherblower,

              O.K. – I am glad I pursued this until you felt the need to come clean (somewhat), that this is indeed a personal vendetta and not a social service. You confirm the personal nature in your statements: “He feels that he was badly treated by the ICES”; “He was apparently fired from the GROW”; “His (and others?) salary was not paid”; and”His questions were met with arrogant silence.”

              And of course in the hope (if not also a prayer!) that “ICES might be instructed by the foreign funding agencies to offer large compensation for an out of court settlement!”

              There are four observations in my view that affects Sarvan’s credibility.

              First, his shameless willingness to sing hosannas for MR, with utter disregard to the Tamil, women and children issues that he now wants to champion, as long as MR was showering him with funds, not unlike the other Dr’s whom MR himself characterized as “prostituting” on AljiZeera TV.

              Second, seemingly, just because he could not convince the CM to continue funding the PPID as Sarvan possibly had thought he would, Saravan went on an unduly critical personal attack on CM that almost approached vulgarity, so unbecoming of a professional, especially one who has had ample exposure to civilized behavior. That, you may recall, rightly raised an unusual torrent of irate responses to his article.

              Third, if his concern was the fact that, as you state, his personal issues with ICES, monetary or otherwise, he should have been forthright in presenting his concerns about being so left high-and-dry, rather than burying his true concerns and presenting it as a community service initiative as whistle-blower. Of course he could substantiate the unfairness by providing credible evidence of any “good” work that he had done as the founder and director of PPID, aside from his “favours” to MR that actually was a betrayal of the community interests for a mere handful of rupees.

              Fourth, in case if I was responsible on behalf of a public fund for paying the salary for the director and his staff of an institution, and if the director has been tardy in budget submissions for as long as five or so many years, then I too would be persuaded to cease disbursing the public money for that institution! Wouldn’t you?!

              You ask a rather silly question, if I may: “Have you asked Dr Sarvanathan to send you these reports?.” Sarvan does not have to send me the reports. If he indeed has prepared those reports he should put them up on the Web that he himself cites in his credentials, where he (as the director of PPID) has specifically made provisions to publish those reports. If he needs to clarify the status of the reports, neither you nor I need to explicitly ask him. He wrote an article, and there is a chain of responses. Do you think he evidences professional responsibility, when he chooses to remain cavalier to the responses to his own article. Are you going to again suggest he is too busy to read responses, just as much as you argued he is too busy to make sure his institution’s web pages are properly updated, while he wants to take pride in citing the web site in his credentials?

              Think about it before rushing to pen anything hastily and thoughtlessly.

              • 0
                0

                Kumar R,

                “O.K. – I am glad I pursued this until you felt the need to come clean (somewhat), that this is indeed a personal vendetta and not a social service. You confirm the personal nature in your statements: “He feels that he was badly treated by the ICES”; “He was apparently fired from the GROW”; “His (and others?) salary was not paid”; and”His questions were met with arrogant silence.” And of course in the hope (if not also a prayer!) that “ICES might be instructed by the foreign funding agencies to offer large compensation for an out of court settlement!”

                I have only given my opinion not facts. Both you and me are guessing because facts have not been published. Another opinion is that being angry and hurt does not exclude “social service” as you call it. Do you expect Dr Sarvanathan to be a robot without feelings?

                You keep repeating PPIDs funding from MR and now add even funding from the CM. Any evidence of these? Any evidence of fraud?

                Like Lone Wolf (comment today) I have not found any financial information on PPIDs homepage. Have you? Where?

                Sorry to say this but you seem to oppose some people and just repeat the same over and over again. You have yourself listed them in your comments. What ever your doctors write you oppose. Try to be open minded.

                I still don’t understand why PPID should publish financial information that other similar institutions don’t. It is a good idea but not common in SL. Maybe you are in a foreign country and don’t know ground reality any more?

                Please note that I am trying to be objective. You are not even trying.

              • 0
                0

                Kumar R,

                “Any chance you can show your contribution since 2010 to the research community as the “Founder and Principal Researcher of the Point Pedro Institute of Development (http://pointpedro.org)” having, presumably continued to receive the remuneration for such work even after 2010,the year the institute seemed to have come to a stand-still?”

                I am a bit confused. You have now twice accused Dr Sarvanathan and PPID of having come to a stand-still due to the lack of current activities posted on the home page.

                When I pointed out that there has been activity, for instance, the now infamous GROW project you suddenly started to take up the fact that the financial reports of PPID have not been published since some years.

                Why did you change your story? Why did a problem with the stand-still become a problem of lack of financial reports?

                I have not found any financial reports on the PPID home page but I admit that I haven’t spent much time looking for them. Since you claim to have found them please post links here.

                You can find PPID activities after 2009 on the home page and with any search engine.

                I hope that you understand that a researcher is supposed to be objective and neutral.

                Please define what you mean by public funding.

                Should a researcher use his/her private funds to research?

                Please explain what is the problem with Dr Sarvanathan being the paid founder/director/principal researcher of PPID?

                Since you like to repeat things I will do the same. Instead of posting facts you reiterate opinions to discredit people you dislike. Sometimes your opinions might be correct sometimes not.

                What is your opinion on whistle blowing?

                Should people you dislike be disallowed from whistle blowing, research and commenting on the CT?

                In case you do not reply or reply without giving facts I will consider this matter closed. I have some research to do.

  • 0
    0

    Anotherblower.

    Seems you continue to keep your eyes tightly shut as you Blow!

    I have no dislike for people -my dislike is for nefarious intents of people; and for their inability to be forthright.

    If indeed Sarvi is forthright and up-and-up on his intentions perhaps you should ponder why he is unwilling to disclose as per your own statement ” A ‘man of good governance’ should be happy to provide you all you want. At the same time I am not sure he is under any obligation to report.” Your statement – not mine! Has he helped clarify this to you? Why not? Can you think of any reason, except that “good-governance” seems far from Sarvi?

Leave A Comment

Comments should not exceed 300 words. Embedding external links and writing in capital letters are discouraged. Commenting is automatically shut off on articles after 10 days and approval may take up to 24 hours. Please read our Comments Policy for further details. Your email address will not be published.