By Upatissa Pethiyagoda –

The second anniversaries of the Presidential and Parliamentary polls are fast approaching. A major promise by the National Peoples’ Power Party (NPP) was the eradication of corruption and waste. The opposition has set about taunting the Government for its failure to rope in the major perpetrators, and has only trapped some sprats, while the major sharks are romping around.

This is not fair and the President Anura Kumara Dissanayake has plausibly explained that 75 * years of laxity and nurture of criminals cannot be cleared in just two years. The cancer has lustily invaded both horizontally and vertically, while the law enforcing authorities (Police and AG’s Department), have not been clean. A major reason is that political interference with the Law appears to have declined spectacularly. On hopes that this is not a chimaera. Pres. AKD has also asserted that it is preferable to build cast- iron cases and supporting evidence to avoid the plague and pantomime of “Discharged for lack of plausible evidence.”

While applauding the authorities for their success in “capturing” absconding criminals abroad, there can be legal obstacles that could obstruct such actions, and that necessary actions and formalities should take precedence, to thwart such outcomes. There could be differences in certain states where hurdles could arise. A case in point may be that of Mahendran, the Central Bank thief.

An interesting issue has arisen, where then President, Mr. Ranil Wickremesinghe, was initially placed in remand custody, which subsequently changed to bail on medical grounds, for using tax-payer money to settle (extraordinarily lavish) hotel bills, with the queer claim that he was “officially” invited to participate in a ceremony at the less known Wolverhampton University (UK), to mark the conferment of an Honorary Professorship award (?) on his spouse, Prof. Maithree Wickremesinghe. This has aroused controversy on whether his sojourn In the UK, can properly be considered as part of his entitlement, on return from official visits to the US and .Cuba. It might seem queer, that four days of rest in the UK, after a trans-Atlantic flight, was justifiable.

Then arises the question of whether the entourage of some ten persons, who were considered necessary companions for the official part of the trip to the US, could also be entitled to a four-day recuperation in London, midway on their return flight home.

All in all, the hotel and Car hire bills, have cost the Sri Lankan State many un-affordable millions. This may serve as a fair example of ‘impunity’. It shows huge insensitivity in splurging massive amounts of public money. A public, who have been repeatedly exhorted to “tighten their belts,” already well beyond the last “bucklehole”.

The claim is that the UK part of this trip was to be considered official, and therefore at the cost of the State. Apparently, the costs incurred by Mrs W’S travel to the Wolverhampton event, was said to have been privately met. In the case of Presidential travel, it has to be conceded that the boundary between “official and private” acts, is often cunningly blurred.

This is cited by the opposition as an example of “political victimization”, while the NPP holds that it is one of its election pledges to combat fraud.

Here the question of the cover provided by invoking the immunity of an incumbent President, in all matters, (including personal actions), may be technically correct, but morally and ethically repugnant.

It may be advisable to follow the practice in the United Nations and its constituent bodies like the FAO, where authorized travel requires a “Back to Station” report, detailing the purpose of the visit, diary of persons met, outcomes of discussions and any other matters that justify this visit. No fluffy reasons such as “To further the existing cordial relations with……… “, will qualify.

Where a person enjoys immunity by virtue of his position, this carries a reciprocal obligation to exercise an abundance of exemplary behavior. In effect, Immunity is best exercised, when the need to invoke it, is never allowed to arise.
Incidentally, it has been noticed, that during the concluding weeks of his incumbency, President RW seems to have been in a frenzy, to engage in as much foreign travel as possible, regardless of purpose or value – a kind of “Voyaging climacteric” or “Dola Dukha”.

Such willful extravagance should not be tolerated.