We wish to recall the birth of ‘Aththa’ newspaper on December 14th 1964, as a response to the crying demand of the progressive forces, at a time when they were voiceless and when the entire print media was under the control of the Reactionaries.

The Communist Party of Sri Lanka took the initiative to bring out Aththa, which played a historic role, providing political leadership to the progressive forces, during the years 1964-1994.

As we have entered the second decade of the 21st century, again we witness a similar situation under a totally different and more complicated political environment, with revolutionary changes in the sphere of media.

The need for a progressive weekly or bi-weekly is more felt today than ever before. This is a formidable challenge. Bringing out “Aththa” back is an imperative task, demanded by history. To accomplish this task, we need an initial contribution of Rs.3 million to the proposed “Aththa” Fund within the next 30 days. Your generous contribution for this worthy cause will be much appreciated.

To make the 70th Anniversary of our Party which falls on July 3rd 2013, we propose to bring out “Aththa” once again as a progressive weekly or bi-weekly at the earliest.

Yours sincerely,

Dew Gunasekara _ General Secretary

Communist Party of Sri Lanka

The Political Bureau of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Sri Lanka carefully and comprehensively examined the contents of the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Report.

The C.P.S.L. deeply appreciates the appointment of such a Commission, since it is the acceptable methodology adopted by democratic governments in modern times to ensure sustainable peace and security in the post-conflict environment after a protracted conflict. It also enables the authorities to go into the question of accountability during the period of conflict. It further provides an opportunity to give a message to the international community on observance of good governance not only in keeping with international humanitarian law but also with our traditional culture and values.

The Commission was called upon to inquire and report on the facts and circumstances that led to the failure of the Ceasefire Agreement in force from 21st. September, 2002, and the sequence of events that followed thereafter up to 19th. May, 2009. The mandate also covered several specific matters including the lessons we would learn from these events and their attendant concerns, so as to prevent a recurrence of such a conflict.

Contrarary to comments made by certain extremist elements, it is the considered view of the C.P.S.L. that the Commission has not transgressed its mandate in any manner. It was perfectly within its mandate to look back at the conflict and identify the root cause of the grievances of the Tamil people in particular as much as it was necessary for the Commission to look ahead for an era of healing and peace-building.

The L.L.R.C. Report should be examined in the context of a long-drawn out conflict in respect of which several attempts in search of solutions since Independence were proved futile. Here we tend to agree with the Commission’s contention that the political parties were either unwilling or incapable of finding a solution. The central issue to be considered now is how and why the conflict virtually led to the division of the country with the people totally divided, living in fear, suspicion and distrust, causing untold destruction to the economy and society.

Those who believe that there was no such question as an ethnic problem would naturally feel disillusioned with the findings of Report.

In the view of the Communist Party of Sri Lanka, the L.L.R.C. Report is comprehensive, logical, objective and positive, and its recommendations need implementation in full. The recommendations are both in the nature of short-term and long-term solutions.

History offered us several opportunities for the solution of the problem in the past and it was unfortunate that for whatever reasons adduced, the people of our country were deprived the advantage of those opportunities and were pushed further towards misery and agony. With all seriousness, the Communist Party of Sri Lanka appeals to all the Political Parties not to miss once again this rare opportunity offered by the L.L.R.C., despite its attendant challenges.

The L.L.R.C. Report highlights the imperative need on the part of government and political parties for (i) political will and sincerity of purpose (ii) Seeking a settlement through a consensus (iii) an adequate understanding of the ground realities, and (iv) approaching the process in a spirit of tolerance, accommodation and compromise.

The L.L.R.C. also rightly identifies the areas where decisions are needed. Namely they are good governance, devolution, observance of human rights and international humanitarian law, socio-economic development, solution of livelihood issues-broadly issues affecting hearts and minds of the people.

In our view, the L.L.R.C. has provided a framework to all stakeholders to enable them to construct a platform for consolidation of post-conflict peace and security and development of mutual trust and co-operation among the diverse communities.

The L.L.R.C. Report rightly points out that the grievances of minorities can be addressed only through empowerment of the people and that through devolution to the grass-root level. The sharing of power at the centre as a mechanism for legislative decision-making has also been recommended.

It is not surprising that certain sections of the Tamil Diaspora with an entrenched Ealam mindset will oppose any move for a reconciliation process.

Similarly, certain Western Powers on account of their geo-political interests and international strategies will continue to promote and foster divisive forces. In the context of an economic boom in Asia, foreign interventions and interferences are bound to intensify and the only way to guarantee our national interest would be the consolidation of unity of the people at all levels. This again underlines the need to find solutions internally through the process of negotiations.

The Communist Party of Sri Lanka cannot subscribe to the view expressed in certain quarters that accelerated economic development is the way for redressing the grievances of the Tamil people. The need for them to attend to their local affairs and to live in peace and devoid of fear and distrust with dignity and honour are important basic human rights.

With regard to the question of accountability the L.L.R.C has acted upon evidence before them to arrive at its own conclusions. It has rightly, on the basis of representations made, called upon the authorities to investigate into those matters and to institute action in appropriate courts.

The response to the L.L.R.C Report from the people within the country as well as from the international community is encouraging – The friendly countries that stood by us at the critical stage of the conflict have been eloquent in calling for a peaceful solution to our ethnic problem. They have in fact expressed their unreserved appreciation of the recommendations of the L.L.R.C. Report.

Even some of the Western countries who have called for investigation with charges of war crimes against Sri Lanka and imposition of sanctions against the country have since softened their stance.

The C.P.S.L. calls upon all the Political Parties to seize the opportunity offered by the L.L.R.C. Report, to reflect on their past lapses self-critically and agree to a process of reconciliation so as to reach a consensus without resort to dubious rhetorics as in the past.

We fervently appeal to them not to abdicate their national responsibility at this critical moment of our post-conflict history.

In our view, one of the lessons learnt from our past attempts to find a solution to the ethnic question was the negative or destructive role played by certain media houses at that time. The country now demands a more positive and constructive role on the part of the media, in the implementation of the L.L.R.C. Report.

Following the declaration in last year’s 2011 budget speech by the President, who is also the Minister of Finance, that three pension schemes, one for private sector employees with 2% mandatory contributions of the salary by both employees and employers, another scheme for self employed persons, and the other for immigrant workers, a Bill drafted by the Ministry of Finance to implement the first scheme was tabled to parliament on the 8th of April. This raised quite a furore as it had not been presented or discussed with the trade unions and employer organizations and it had many defects and contradictions. The draft Bill had been made available only at the government bureau of publications.

The Ceylon Federation of Trade Unions (CFTU), the private sector trade union associated with the Party, and nine other trade unions including the Sri Lanka Nidahas Sewaka Sangamaya (SLNSS) the trade union associated with the main ruling party, prepared a document to be submitted to the President at the 25th meeting with their criticisms and proposals for amendment. At the request of the participant trade unions the document was presented by the CFTU General Secretary comrade D.W.Subasinghe. At times there were heated exchanges. The final joint trade union request was to postpone the adoption of the Bill in Parliament until a proper discussion with the stake holders is held. The main trade union criticisms and amendments to the draft Bill were as follows:

1. According to the draft Bill when the 2% contributions are completed for 10 years an employee is eligible to become a member of the Fund. Moneys so contributed and interest accrued will constitute his individual account. However when monthly pensions are paid and there is no longer any money lying to his credit in his individual account that employee ceases to be a member of the Fund. This was unacceptable to us. In that case the Fund does not deserve to be called a Pension Fund! We insisted that the Fund must be strengthened to pay monthly pensions for life.
2. The Fund is to be constituted with 2% contributions, 10% of the annual profits of the Employees Trust Fund, “inactive accounts” in the Employees Provident Fund of members over 70 years of age, a one billion Government Bond of long term maturity, 10% of the gratuity payable at retirement of an employee, 2% of the EPF amount payable on retirement and 10% of earnings lying to the credit of an employee in cooperative society under the Cooperative Societies Law.
3. The monthly pension quanta stipulated were 15% of the “simple average” salary for those who have contributed up to 19 years, 30% for those with 29 years and 60% to those who have contributed for 30 years and over. We requested that the percentages be increased by 33%. Today 15% of the basic salary of a worker is about Rs 1500, which is less than half a US$.
4. On the death of a member the draft Bill provided for a lump sum payment to children under 18 years of age without anything for the spouse. We denounced this and insisted that the spouse should be paid a pension.
5. A permanently incapacitated member due to accident or ill health was to get a lump sum payment of 60% of the account lying to the credit of the member with no reference to a monthly pension. We demanded that such person be paid a pension after incapacitation.
6. As we felt that many unacceptable restrictions on benefits included in the draft Bill arose from weakness of the Fund as proposed, we requested that (i) the clause on charging administrative costs of the Fund incurred by the Central Bank’s Monetary Board and the Commissioner of Labour be deleted, and that the state should bear such expenditure until the Fund becomes financially viable to pay its way while discharging all due obligations to its members. (ii) the 10% income tax now wrongly charged on the interest from investments of the EPF money be credited to the Fund. The 2008 EPF annual report says the tax that year was Rs 5.4 billion!
7. We requested that the clause which says that surcharges on employers who delay the 2% monthly remittances would be credited to the Fund to be amended to the effect that such surcharges be credited to individual accounts of affected employees.
8. The clause on investments of moneys of the Fund stipulates that up to 33% of it may be invested in the private sector stock market. We severely criticized this and demanded that it be amended to restrict such investments to 5%.
9. We also criticized the clause on interest rate guarantees on investments in government securities stipulated to be not less than 2.5%. While that may be the minimum we requested that the interest rate should not be less than the average rate on government securities for the past 12 months.
10. In the matter of “inactive accounts” of the EPF mentioned in paragraph two above we pointed out that it violates the EPF Act and requested a proviso to be introduced to the effect that if any member over 70 years or his heirs if they appear, such claims would be settled. This was acknowledged and an amendment agreed to.
11. In the clause on setting up a Consultative Committee, to be consulted from time to time by the Monetary Board of the Central Bank, provided for appointment of one representative each from employers and employees to the Committee . We requested that such representation be enhanced by including two more members each from employees and employers. This was agreed to by the President.

– D.W.Subasinghe.

2011 අප්රේ ල් මස 12 දින එක්සත් ජාතින්ගේ මහ ලේකම් බෑන්-කී-මූන් වෙත භාරදෙනු ලැබූ උපදේශක මණ්ඩල වාර්තාව ශ්රීර ලංකාවේ කොමියුනිස්ට් පක්ෂයේ දේශපාලන මණ්ඩලයේ තියුණු පරීක්ෂණයට ලක් කරනු ලැබීය.

මෙම උපදේශක මණ්ඩලය 2010 ජූනි මස පත් කරනු ලැබූ අවස්ථාවේදීම ශ්රීල ලංකාවේ කොමියුනිස්ට් පක්ෂය ඊට තම විරෝධතාවය පළ කළ බව 2010 අගෝස්තුවල පැවැති සිය 19 වන ජාතික සම්මේලනයේ දේශපාලන යෝජනාවෙන් පැහැදිළි වන්නේ ය. ඒ පිළිබඳව ජනතාවට සහ රජයට අනතුරු හැඟවීමක් කරමින්, ඇතැම් බටහිර බලවතුන්ගේ උපක්රඳමවලට හසු නොවන ලෙසත්, අනවශ්ය ලෙස අධි ප්රනතිකි්රමයා දැක්වීමෙන් වැලකී සිටින ලෙසත් කොමියුනිස්ට් පක්ෂය ඉල්ලා සිටියේය.

තව දුරටත් තම ස්ථාවරය පැහැදිළි කරමින් කොමියුනිස්ට් පක්ෂය ප්රපකාශ කර සිටියේ, බටහිර රටවල් ශ්රීු ලංකාවට එරෙහිව එක්සත් ජාතීන්ගේ මණ්ඩලය වෙත ඉදිරිපත් කළ යෝජනා ව්ය ර්ථ කරනු ලැබුවද, ඉන් නොනැවතී යුද අපරාධ චෝදනා හරහා තම දේශපාලන න්යාකය පත්ර‍ය ඉදිරියට ද ගෙන යනු ඇති බවයි. ඔවුන් එසේ කි්රරයා කළේ, දමිළ ජනතාව කෙරෙහි දක්වන ආදරය හෝ අනුකම්පාවක් නිසා නොව හුදෙක් නව ගෝලීය මූලෝපායික හා භූ දේශපාලනික වුවමනාවන් සාක්ෂාත් කර ගැනීම සඳහා බව පැවසිය යුතුය.

යුද්ධයේ අවසන් අදියරේදී අවසන් මොහොතේ පවා එල්.ටී.ටී.ඊය පරාජයවීම වළක්වාලීමේ අරමුණ ඇතිව ඊට ඇගිලි ගැසීමට හෝ මැදිහත්වීමට එම බලවේග කි්රඑයා කළ හැටි මෙහිලා සිහිපත් කළ යුතුය. එසේ මැදිහත්වීමට ගත් උත්සාහයන් ව්යඑර්ථ වීමෙන් පසුව, ශ්රීක ලංකාව අස්ථාවර කිරීමට හෝ පාලනයේ වෙනසක් සිදු කිරීමට දිගින් දිගටම ඔවුහු කි්ර යා කළහ. පාර්ලිමේන්තු මැතිවරණයේදී මෙන්ම ජනාධිපතිවරණයේදී ඔවුන් හැසුරුණු ආකාරය ද, විශේෂයෙන් ජනරාල් සරත් ෆොන්සේකා ජනාධිපති අපේක්ෂකයා වශයෙන් නම් කිරීම සහ ඔහුට ආධාර දීම දක්වා තම දේශපාලන න්යාාය පත්රෂයට අනුව, විවිධ උපක්රදම කි්ර්යාත්මක කළ ආකාරය සිහිපත් කළ යුතුය.

යථොක්ත ඊනියා උපදේශක මණ්ඩල වාර්තාවේ අන්තර්ගත කරුණු සලකා බැලීමේදී එම වාර්තාවේ පදනම වී ඇත්තේ හුදෙක් ඔප්පු කළ නොහැකි චෝදනා, ගොතනු ලැබූ කටකථා එල්.ටී.ටී.ඊයට හිතැති සංවිධාන විසින් සපයා ඇති තොරතුරු, උප කල්පන සහ මවා ගත් කරුණුය.

ඒ අනුව, ස්වෛරීය රාජ්යදයකට එරෙහිව ඉදිරිපත් කරනු ලැබ ඇති බරපතල අපරාධ චෝදනා එක්සත් ජාතීන්ගේ සංවිධානයේ සැලකිල්ලට ගැනීම තබා පිළිගැනීමටවත් වටිනාකමක් නැති බව කිව යුතුය.

යථොක්ත වාර්තාව සැකසීමේදී, 1983-2009 දක්වා වූ ඊළාම් යුද්ධ හතර පිළිබඳ ඓතිහාසික පසුබිම, සාම කි්රායාදාමයන් බිඳ වැටීමට තුඩුදුන් හේතු, එල්.ටී.ටී.ඊ ත්ර ස්තවාදයේ ස්වභාවය සහ ඔවුන් සිදු කළ මිනිස් ඝාතන සහ දේපල විනාශය, තිස් වසරක් තුළ ජනතාවට ලබා දුන් වද වේදනා, දුෂ්ඨ ලෙස එහෙත් දක්ෂ ලෙස තම වාර්තාවෙන් වසන් කරනු ලැබ ඇත.

යුද්ධයේ අවසන් දිනවල මිනිස් පළිහක් බවට යොදා ගනිමින් කොටු කරනු ලැබ තිබූ ලක්ෂ තුනකට ආසන්න සිවිල් දමිළ ජනතාවගේ ජීවිත ආරක්ෂක අංශ විසින් ආරක්ෂිතව බේරාගත් බව හිතාමතාම දුෂ්ඨ ලෙස නොසලකා හැර තිබේ. යුද්ධයෙන්, අවතැන්වූවන් යළි පදිංචි කරලීම සහ පුනරුත්ථාපනය කරලීම සඳහා ගත් දැවැන්ත ව්යාධයාමය මෙන්ම යුද්ධයෙන් පසු පවතින සාමකාමී වාතාවරණය ද නොසලකා හැර ඇත. තක්සේරුවට ගෙන ඇත්තේ නැත. එල්.ටී.ටී.ඊ ත්රසස්තවාදීන් හත් දහසක් පමණ පුනරුත්ථාපනයෙන් පසු මුදා හැරීම මුළුමනින්ම නොසලකා හැර ඇත. එල්.ටී.ටී.ඊයේ පරාජයෙන් පසු, ප්රඇචණ්ඩ කි්රමයා මුළුමනින්ම නැවතී තිබීමෙන් ප්රසත්යතක්ෂ ලෙසම ඔප්පු වී ඇත්තේ ප්රටචණ්ඩත්වයේ ප්ර භවය වූයේ එල්.ටී.ටී.ඊ සංවිධානය බවයි.

යථොක්ත ඊනියා උපදේශක මණ්ඩල වාර්තාව තුළින් ඇත්තවශයෙන් සිදු කර ඇත්තේ පැරණි තුවාල සුවවීම වළක්වාලමින් තව දුරටත් පෑරීමයි. ප්ර තිසන්ධාන කි්රකයාවලියට බාධා පැමිණවීමයි. ශ්රීක ලංකා ප්රමජාව තුළ යළිත් ඛෙදීම් ඇති කරලීමයි. ජනතාව යළිත් යුධ ගැටුම් තත්ත්වයකට නැත්නම් ප්රමචණ්ඩත්වයකට තල්ලූ කරලීමයි. ජාතිවාදී බලවේගයන් යළි පණ ගැන්වීමයි. එල්.ටී.ටී.ඊයේ ජාත්යදන්තර ප්රාජාව නොහොත් ඩයස්පෝරාව ශක්තිමත් කිරීමයි. මේ බව ඔවුන්ගේ ප්ර්තිචාරයන්ගෙන් පැහැදිළිය. රට තුළ මෙන්ම කලාපය තුළ උණුසුම් තත්ත්වයක් නිර්මාණය කිරීමයි. ඒ අනුව, එක්සත් ජාතීන්ගේ මහ ලේකම්වරයාගේ වගකීමෙන් තොර නොහොබිනා හැසිරීම හෙළා දැකිය යුතුව ඇත.

මෙම තත්ත්වය යටතේ, ශ්රීක ලංකාවේ කොමියුනිස්ට් පක්ෂය සාමකාමී දමිළ ජනතාවට ආයාචන කර සිටින්නේ, බටහිර රටවල ඉත්තන් බවට පත්වීමෙන් වැළකී සිටින ලෙසයි. ඔවුන්ගේ මායාවන්ට නොරැවටෙන ලෙසයි. ඔවුන්ගේ එකම අරමුණ දමිළ ජනතාව ඔවුන්ගේ ගෝලීය මූලෝපායන්ට සහ භූ දේශපාලනික වුවමනාවන් සඳහා යොදා ගැනීමයි.

දමිළ ජනතාවගේ දුක් ගැනවිලිි, සාධාරණ අයිතීන් හා අභිලාෂයන් පිළිබඳ බරපතල ලෙස අවධානයට ලක්කරන ශ්රීක ලංකාවේ කොමියුනිස්ට් පක්ෂය ඉතිහාසය විසින් අප වෙත පිරිනමා ඇති අනගි අවස්ථාව ප්රශයෝජනයට ගනිමින් ඔවුන්ගේ ජාතික ප්රහශ්නයට අවසන් විසඳුමක් ලබා දීමට කි්රඅයා කරන ලෙස ද ආයාචනය කර සිටී.

මෙයට,

ඩිව් ගුණසේකර
ප්ර්ධාන ලේකම් : ශ්රීක ලංකාවේ කොමියුනිස්ට් පක්ෂය
දේශපාලන මණ්ඩලය වෙනුවෙන්

At the outset, when the so-called Advisory Panel was appointed in June, 2010, the Communist Party through its Political Resolution adopted at its 19th. National Congress held in August, 2010 registered its opposition to the appointment of the said Panel. It also warned the people and the Government to “refrain from over-reacting and also not to fall prey to the provocative tactics of the Western Powers, in dealing with matters relating to international affairs”. To the Communist Party, the legitimacy of the panel was questionable.

The Communist Party of Sri Lanka also took up the position that even though moves on the part of certain Western Powers, soon after the defeat of the LTTE, to adopt a resolution in UN bodies against Sri Lanka were aborted, they would still continue with their political agenda with charges of war crimes against Sri Lanka.

The Communist Party was well aware of the fact that these moves were motivated and dictated by their global strategies and geo-political interests and not by humanitarian considerations or through compassion or love for the Tamil people.

In this connection, the Communist Party wishes to recall how in the last phase of the conflict, attempts were made by those forces to intervene or mediate in order to prevent a total defeat of the LTTE. It was the considered view of the Communist Party that these forces frustrated by their failure to intervene would pursue their political agenda to destabilize Sri Lanka or effect a regime change in Sri Lanka. This has been proved by their undignified behavior since the defeat of the LTTE, and in particular during the Parliamentary and Presidential Elections. The nomination of General Sarath Fonseka was in fact significant in this regard.

As regards the contents of the so-called Advisory Report or Moon report, they are based on unsubstantiated evidence, manufactured stories, rumours, information fed by pro LTTE NGOO and INGOO, exaggerations, imaginations etc. As such, grave charges framed against a sovereign country by an unauthorized external panel do not deserve to be even entertained by an authoritative body of the UN.

The illegitimate Advisory Panel, has mischievously but cleverly overlooked the historical background of the four Eelaam Wars from 1983 – 2009, failures of peace processes, nature and strategies of LTTE terrorists and their despicable record of killings and destructions, and untold suffering caused to the people for three decades.

The Panel has safely discarded the undeniable fact that the security forces bravely secured the lives of nearly three hundred thousand civilians trapped up in Mullaitivu who were used by the LTTE as human shield. The enormous rehabilitation and resettlement work done in the aftermath of the conflict or the present ground realities of the war-stricken areas has been completely ignored in their assessment of the post-war situation. The fact that over 7,000 LTTE cadres apprehended have already been released after rehabilitation has been treated totally irrelevant. The absence of terrorist activities since the defeat of the LTTE demonstrates the stark fact that the source of violence had been the LTTE.

The so-called Advisory Panel Report has in effect only re-opened the old wounds and hindered the process of reconciliation under way. It seeks to cause further divisions within the Sri Lankan community once again. It tends to provoke people and push them again towards confrontation and violence. It strengthens the forces of chauvinism. It has given a moral boost-up to the LTTE Diaspora as evident from their own responses to the Report. Releasing an unauthorized report without the expressed sanction by an authoritative body of the UN with grave charges against a sovereign country has only contributed to the escalation of tension in the country and in the region. In this regard, the Communist Party condemns the irresponsible and undignified role of the UN Secretary General.

The Communist Party calls upon the peace loving Tamil people not to allow themselves to be exploited by the Western Powers or to be carried away by illusions created by them whose sole objective is to strengthen their global strategies and secure their geo-political interests.

The Communist Party calls upon all patriotic and progressive forces of the country to consider seriously the legitimate grievances, rights and aspirations of the Tamil people and not lose sight of the opportunity offered by history to find a lasting solution to the National Question.

The Left Party Alliance in the SLFP-led UPFA has won 72 seats at the March 17 LG polls.

The UPFA secured 1,839 seats at the polls with the SLFP winning at least 1,600 slots.

UPFA General Secretary Petroleum Industries Minister Susil Premjayantha told The Island that the SLFP had obtained as much as 80 per cent of the total number of seats secured by the ruling coalition.

Minister Premjayantha said that there was absolutely no basis for the UNP’s claim that it had obtained the best results as a single political party at the LG polls. The UNP had secured 892 slots, whereas the SLFP had obtained about twice that number, the minister said.

The SLFP-led UPFA emerged victorious at Thursday’s LG polls winning 205 of the 234 Local Government authorities.

The ruling coalition polled 3,338,401 votes (55.65%), while the ITAK, aka TNA, obtained 70,171 votes (1.17%) to secure 12 LG bodies (76 slots)

The UNP came third winning only nine local authorities in spite of a major propaganda campaign spearheaded by UNP leader Ranil Wickremesinghe and his bête noire Sajith Premadasa, MP. The UNP won 31 LG bodies in 2006.

The UNP obtained 2,032,891 votes (33.89%), while its erstwhile partner, the SLMC polled 88,592 votes (1.48%) to take control of four LG bodies.

Communist Party veteran senior Minister Dew Gunasekera told The Island that winning 71 slots hadn’t been an easy task due intense rivalry among partners. “The Left Party Alliance secured 71 seats in 44 LG bodies in 15 electoral districts,” Gunasekara said.

He said the LSSP (32 members), CPSL (31) Democratic Left Front (04) and Sri Lanka Mahajana Party (04) had 71 slots among them. They had sponsored some of their nominees as Independent Left candidates due to the rejection of nominations, he said.

Senior Minister Tissa Vitharana told The Island that the Left Party Alliance had done well under difficult conditions. The National List MP said that they were grateful to the electorate for backing their candidates.

The Left Party Alliance won 8 seats in Western Province, 26 in the South, 20 in Sabaragamuwa, 2 in Uva, 4 in Wayamba, 4 in North Central, 3 in Central and 4 in Eastern Province.

The National Freedom Front, the MEP, Jathika Hela Urumaya, National Congress and the SLMC won about 150 lots.

Local Government Election 2011

RESULTS of the preferential votes

This debate on the extension of the State of Emergency is conducted at the instance of the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP). The Tamil National Alliance (TNA) which too participated in the debate brought the same old arguments and as such it is obligatory on us to answer the matters raised by the JVP.

JVP MP Anura Kumara Dissanayake said that the state of emergency is justifiable neither in the interest of the country or its people, on account of the fact that there is no terrorism today, but peace prevails in the country with conditions conducive to civil administration in place. That is the essence of his argument.

He also said that the emergency is in force not in the interest of the people or country, but to benefit the Government. The emergency is also used to gain political mileage, sponsor State terrorism, suppress democracy, deny the people their Constitutional rights, counter public protests against the rising cost of living and burden the people with taxes, the JVP MP said.

The state of emergency was introduced during the 1983 Black July. The emergency was declared only after six days of riots breaking out in the country, which many have forgotten today. That was the reason, that in the first few days of the riots, 479 Tamil lives were lost in the Colombo city alone.

Free-for-all

The then President failed to address the nation through the mass media till six days into the riots. It was a free-for-all for the army, police, people and the underworld! It was during such an anarchic situation that a state of emergency was invoked. We in the Opposition exposed this delay in declaring a state of emergency.

This state of affairs would not have arisen had the bodies of 13 soldiers been handed back to their relatives for burial. However, as pre-planned, the corpses were deliberately brought to Borella and buried in one place, instigating the Army, police, thugs and the underworld.

The emergency thus declared has continued to date, under six leaders including J.R. Jayewardene, R. Premadasa, D.B. Wijetunga, Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga, Ranil Wickremesinghe and Mahinda Rajapaksa. It is not an emergency President Mahinda Rajapaksa himself enforced after he was re-elected recently. It is true that the war against terrorism ended on May 19, 2009 and since then one year has lapsed. We are, however, aware that this continued for 30 years conflict caused tensions with India too which the factors that led to this situation under such a complicated scenario will not die down immediately. It is a tinder-box situation which is likely to ignite. Responsibility devolves on the Government in case an incident takes place.

It is because we have information with us on political or other developments taking place locally or internationally that we continue with the emergency with parliamentary section each month. None of us would like the emergency to continue as it is not desirable to us.

We are aware that the emergency takes precedence over the law of the land – the rights of the people. We made the minimum use of the emergency law with no impact on the people even during the conflict.

War against terrorism

Many have forgotten that our Security Forces rescued over 300,000 innocent Tamils including Prabhakaran’s parents during the war against terrorism.

A total of 11,696 LTTEers were arrested and 6,000 have since been released. That is how humanely we treated them. They were not herded and bumped off using emergency powers; neither did we follow what took place in Egypt, Tunisia or Yemen. We do not have a dictatorship or monarchy or a feudal society; nor do we have a country dictated by America’s ‘global village’ or ‘geopolitics’.

Neo-liberal economic policies have been foisted on the Arab World.

Their oil reserves have been exploited through dictatorial, brutal regimes and such resources have been taken to USA. A yawning abyss has been created between the haves and have-nots. Consequently the people in such countries have revolted.

Attempts are, however, being made to change the horse again – to replace one with the other! The people have not won as yet.

I am one of those who voted for the emergency; I have also voted against it. The two Ministers in the front row too had voted against the emergency. I was one of the victims of the emergency.

I was also one of those who were remanded first with the promulgation of the emergency in 1983. The LTTErs and JVPers followed. Our party was prosecuted. We have undergone the tribulations of prison life.

Now they talk like saints! For one month no parliamentarian was allowed to visit me in prison. Even MP Sarath Muttetuwegama from our own party was not allowed to visit us.

Have we ever indulged in such things? The UPFA Government has allowed one and all to visit Sarath Fonseka in prison.

The Cabinet of the J.R. Jayewardene Government including Ranil Wickremesinghe and those front row members of the Opposition did not permit the Member of Parliament of our party to visit me.

Our party leaders including the General Secretary were all imprisoned under the Emergency. Therefore, we never justified emergency laws and we have opposed them right through.

Different situations

Different situations arise in the country at various points of time. Whether there is a Socialist, Capitalist or Democratic society situations will arise necessitating recourse to emergency. Accordingly it happened to us to continue with the emergency for 30 years.

The President and the Cabinet will not hesitate to do away with the emergency, if it is feasible.

We have, however, been relaxing the Emergency provisions gradually. Please go through the Hansards during the past five years to understand what the TNA, UNP and JVP MPs had uttered then and now so that you could realise how fairly we have acted. Officials know how emergency laws have sometimes been issued by governments, however, democratic they are.

During the 1971 youth insurrection we know how the then government dealt with some Army officers when Premawathi Manamperi was killed. There were occasions where Army or Police officers were prosecuted as they had violated emergency regulations. MP Anura Kumara Dissanayake said that the emergency was not used to protect the mediamen.

There could be instances in which certain officials misused emergency regulations. Such incidents should be brought to our notice. Action could also be taken against the offenders and relief could be obtained from the Supreme Court.

The Government has, however, used the emergency in a more possible manner with the least impact on public life. Consequently, there is no need to withdraw emergency laws immediately. It may be today or tomorrow that the need will arise to do away with it.

Democracy and freedom

We held the Presidential election, general election and Provincial Council elections as well. The Local Government election will be held soon. There is democracy and full freedom to hold rallies or demonstrations. None of them was fired at or the participants killed.

Democracy has thrived in the country since 1931. The extension of the state of emergency is debated in Parliament monthly, providing the opportunity for Parliamentarians to expose any misuse of emergency powers by the authorities.

It is grossly unfair that adverse criticisms were levelled against the Attorney General. Any specific allegations against the Attorney General could be made through a substantive motion in Parliament. I believe it is totally unjust to make allegations against officials charged with enforcing the law.

This Parliament had dealt with a Chief Justice and they were exonerated. There were occasions when Parliament had dispersed with the services of judges and such action could be taken whenever necessary. Therefore, there is the need to act with a sense of responsibility.

Did we use the emergency against the 11,000 LTTE suspects who had been detained? They were in fact fed, trained, resettled and provided with employment as well.

Those who supported the emergency in the past speak ill of it today. Those who stressed the importance of the emergency at one time and said that the government was lenient towards the LTTE, today show great love for the Tamil community. There are occasions when the JVP’s past political history takes a 180-degree turn!

Self-determination

During the 1982 Presidential election, Rohana Wijeweera said he was prepared to grant self-determination including secession (to the Tamils), being more leftist than Dr. Colvin R. de Silva or Vasudeva Nanayakkara themselves. Wijeweera received 200,000 votes. After his defeat, in 1984, he joined hands with the Sinhala communalists.

When Lionel Bopage, now domiciled in Australia, resigned from the JVP’s general secretaryship, he showed me his letter of resignation and said that the JVP is a communal party, a “terrorist party’ and an anti-democratic party.

It is time to peruse the Hansard records to find out whether the JVP had changed its stand. There is, of course, no change in our stand whether we are with the government or the Opposition as far as the emergency is concerned.

I do not say the emergency is a good thing. It has, however, been invoked according to its necessity. Accordingly, the President will also use the emergency only till it serve its purpose and would do away with it today or tomorrow when the need ceases.

The above is the speech delivered by Senior Minister D.E.W. Gunasekara during the motion to extend the state of emergency in Parliament on Thursday.

Translated by: K.D.M. Kittanpahuwa

observer ONLINE Sunday, 27 February 2011

The Communist Party of Sri Lanka declares that all communities in our mult-racial country have the right to live and work under conditions of equality, freely developing their languages, cultures and ethnic identities, an determining their own futures, free from any discrimination or harassment.

It condemns and opposes all forms of racism and advocates that the incitement of racial, religious or caste hatred should be a penal offence.

Our Party supports the just demands of Sri Lanka’s minorities for equality and for the ending of the various discriminations and harassments they experience.

We regard the struggle for a just solution of the problems the minorities experience as an integral part of the overall struggle of all the peoples of Sri Lanka for democratic and social progress.

HISTORY

Our country’s history in this century has many examples to show how both imperialism and domestic feudal and capitalist reaction have used racism and the promotion of communal divisons and strife as a political weapon to protect their vested interests and continue their rule.

The imperialists fanned racial suspicion and animosities. They played one community against the other as part of their basic strategy of “dived and rule” in this way, they delayed unduly the winning of political independence.

Even after political independence was won, a just solution of the problems of inter-communal relations has not been found. In many respects, the situation is worse than before.

Several lakhs of Up-country Tamils, the majority of whom are plantation workers who are either born in Sri Lanka or have lived here for many decades, and who contribute substantially to the production of our national wealth, have been rendered stateless by law and excluded from the democratic process.

Tamil speaking people have been subjected, by law, in administrative practice, and in social life to various discriminations, indignities and inequalities in their dealings with public authorities, and in their access to higher education, public employment, land and trade.

Although a handful of the Sri Lanka Moors have been able to amass walth through the gem trade and other speculative activities, the vast majority of this community still experience the educational and other historically inherited disadvantages that have made their social development lag behind those of other communitities.

DETERIORATION

Nothing illustrates more vividly how inter communal relations have deteriorated in recent times than the facts that the post independence era has witnessed three major communal riots; that other imminent riots were narrowly averted; and that the Tamil minorities live in constant fear that riots may break out again.

The deterioration in intercommunal relation has been a major impediment to the progress of Sri Lanka and its peoples.

A part from the loss of innocent lives and the destruction of public and personal property, communal tensions and clashes have led to periodic disruptions in national production, to the exodus abroad of many persons whose professional, scientific and technical skills the country needs; to even greater administrative inefficiency; and to needless restrictions on the access of all communities to higher, scientific and technical education.

Capitalist governments, both UNP and SLFP, in the post independence period have used the deterioration in inter communal relations to impose states of emergency and to introduce permanent law that undermine the democratic rights that the people have won over decades of struggle. They have demonstrated more than once their inability and unwillingness to solve this problem, even though it impedes the social and economic progress of the country.

The present UNP government of President J.R.Jayewardena surpasses all other in this regard.

RACISM

Both before and after political independence, various colonial and capitalist governments, acting sometimes through agents in the labour movement, have used racism as a means to attack the working class, divide its ranks, prevent the development of united and militant working class movement, and do away with fundamental trade union and democratic rights.

The working class can never forget how racism was used to destroy the early militant trade union movements of the 1920s: how upcountry Tamil plantation workers were disenfranchised and rendered stateless in order to stem the big advances made by the Left movement in the 1930s and early 1940s; how under the influence of capitalist parties, trade unionism on racial and linguistic lines was fostered; and how under the guise of stamping out communal violence an terrorism, basic working class and democratic rights such as demonstrations, peaceful picketing, strikes and other means by which the workers have defended themselves from exploitation have been attacked and often legally prohibited.

CAPITALST PATH NO SOLUTION

One of the main reasons why it has not been possible to solve this deteriorating problem in the post independence period is that all the governments of this period, whether UNP or SLFP, have basically followed a policy of trying to develop Sri Lanka on capitalist lines.

Equality and justice for all communities in a multinational country cannot be achieved under capitalism. For this moribund social system, which is already on its way out in human history, can exist only on the basis of the exploitation of man by man and nation by nation. That is why problems of communal discrimination and racist strife continue to plague all multiracial capitalist countries of the contemporary world, including those that parade as parliamentary democracies.

In addition, the path of development followed by Sri Lanka’s two main bourgeois political parties since independence has been one of subordination to imperialism’s international financial agencies like the World Bank and accommodation towards their neo-colonialist strategy.

As a result, Sri Lanka’s economy has remained basically stagnant and dependent, even though its population has more than doubled since World War II. Thus the competition for employment (especially in the public sector that had expanded considerably in the 1960s and 1970s) and for land, higher and scientific education and state patronage, has become acute and provides ready fuel for reactionary forces anxious to ignite communal fires.

The Communist Party of Sri Lanka declares that no just or permanent solution to the problems of intercommunal relations can be found within the framework of capitalist relations or the policies of the Capitalist parties, the bankruptcy of the basic policies of the bourgeois parties and leaders among both Sinhalese and Tamils proves this.

The policy of forcible assimilation of the Tamil speaking minorities by compelling them to give up their language and culture and to accept those of the Sinhalese people has not produced national unity, as its adherents claimed. Instead, it has embittered the Tamils, encouraged fissiparous tendencies among them and ended in a demand for the division of Sri Lanka into two separate states.

Equally, the current attempts to establish a spurious “national unity” by seeking forms of agreement with opportunist and capitalist elements among the Tamils in return for a subordinate share of governmental power and state patronage have not succeeded, as they leave untouched the vital interests and problems of the masses of all communities. This is why the UNP-Federal Party government of 1965 collapsed and why the attempts of the present UNP government to re-enact the situation are doomed to fail.

TAMIL CAPITALIST LEADERS

The policies pursued by the capitalist leaders among the Sri Lanka Tamils have also ended in bankruptcy.

When British imperialism ruled Sri Lanka, these leaders sought to make use of its policy of “divide and rule” in order to obtain an equal share of the central administration in return for supporting the British colonialist in their opposition to demands for political freedom for the country. This was most dramatically expressed in the demand of the then-powerful Tamil Congress for “balanced representation” (Fifty-Fifty) and a permanent British presence in Sri Lanka.

When British imperialism came to terms with the Sinhalese bourgeois leaders of the UNP in 1948, the Tamil bourgeois leaders adopted the policy of using the political divisions in the Sinhalese areas to bargain with one or other bourgeois party in order to obtain what concessions they could in return for parliamentary support. Attempts to strengthen this bargaining power by electoral fronts with other parties of the Tamil speaking minorities (e.g. the “All Minorities Front” of the Tamil Congress in Soulbury era, and the formation of the “Tamil United Liberation Front” before the 1977 general election) were part of this process.

But this strategy of the Tamil bourgeois leaders also failed as, after 1956, most governments had a sufficient majority in Parliament to rule without their support. Consequently the “Fronts” they had formed began to disintegrate as more and more unstable or opportunist elements capitulated to the inducements offered by the Sinhalese bourgeois leaders.

The collapse of the traditional strategies of the Tamil bourgeois leaders and the refusal of the bourgeois governments of the UNP and SLFP to grant their just demands has increased the frustrations among the mass of Sri Lanka Tamils, whose support the bourgeois Tamil leaders had enlisted by espousing their demands in regard to employment land (especially in the state sponsored colonisation schemes) and trade the petty bourgeoisie, supported by militant sections of the youth, began to assume an increasingly important position within the TULF leadership. As opposed to the policy of accommodation with the UNP that the Tamil bourgeois leaders advocated, they demanded the creation of a separate state of Elam and sought to obtain international support for its creation.

The fact the expected international support did not materialise increased the moods of frustration and despair. While on the one hand, sections of the petty bourgeois forces in the TULF have tended to join with the bourgeois forces in the search for forms of accomodation with the UNP government, a small section of radical youth began to seek an equally mistaken solution through resort to terrorism.

However, the crisis of bourgeois strategy and policies among the Tamils has also produced a positive and welcome radicalisation among sections of Tamil youth and certain petty-bourgeois Tamil leaders, which is expressed in the growing interest in scientific socialism and acceptance of the fact that it alone has provided permanent solutions to national problems; in growing interest in the socialist countries and support for their policies; and in growing realisation of the need to develop relations of friendship and c-operation with Left forces in the South of Sri Lanka.

SIMILAR

A similar bankruptcy and crisis has been manifested in the policies and strategies of the bourgeois leaders over the question of the Up-country Tamils.

This is seen in the failure of the UNP’s Citizenship Acts and the SLFP’s Indo-Sri Lanka Agreements to solve this problem over the past 3 decades.

Based on a so-called theory of an “absorbable maximum” and substitution agreements with bourgeois governments in India for a settlement based on discussion with the organisations of the Up-country Tamils themselves, the policy of the bourgeois parties has not merely failed to end the “statelessness” of several lakhs of Up-country Tamils but even created new categories of “Stateless Persons”

The bourgeois leadership of the Ceylon Workers Congress which first tried to enlist the support of bourgeois forces in India to gain its objectives, has also chosen to join forces with the UNP once these attempts did not succeed. But apart from minor concessions, the entry of the C.W.C into the UNP cabinet has not, and cannot change the unjust and subordinate position to which the Up-country Tamils have been reduced, both as workers and as a national minority.

ONLY UNDER SOCIALISM

The Communist Party of Sri Lanka declares that no solution to the problems, of the national minorities in our country can be found by the leadership of the bourgeois parties, of both majority and minority communities or through their policies.

One Party considers that the working class forces in our country must advance their own solutions to the problems of the national minorities and win support for them among all progressive and democratic sections of the majority community and the minorities.

This is essential not only in the interests of social justice but also in order to strengthen the struggle to defend living standards and democratic rights from the attacks of the capitalist parties and their growing authoritarianism, and also in order to establish a real alternative of Left and democratic forces led by a united working class that will take Sri Lanka forward to socialism.

History has shown convincingly that it is only under socialism, where all exploitative relations between peoples are abolished that both social and national problems can be solved permanently.

The fight for a just and lasting solution of the problems of national minorities in Sir Lanka must therefore go hand in hand with the overall struggle to break out of the capitalist framework imposed by the bourgeois leaders and parties and to advance towards socialist society.

C.P.S.L PROPOSALS

Basing itself on the teachings of Marxism, Leninism on scientific communism, the Communist Party of Sri Lanka states its own proposals in this matter.

As the party of the working class, our Party takes its fundamental stand on the internationlism of the proletariat, on the need for the fundamental unity of all working people in the struggle for their common interests, irrespective of differences of nationality, caste or religion. We uphold the principle of unity, friendship and brotherhood between people of different nationalities and ethnic communities in the same way as we do their equality.

Our Party seeks to give expression to this principle, which transcends all others in inter communal relation, by seeking to build the unity of the workers of all communities of our country in common class organisations and in solidarity with the working people of all other countries, thereby helping to forge their common class identity and solidarity.

At the same time, our Party accepts and upholds another fundamental principle of Marxism-Leninism namely the right of all nations to self-determination, including, their right, if they so desire, to form their own state.

In seeking a solution to the problems of the Sri Lanka Tamils, our Party proceeds from the basic position that national exploitation is a byproduct of the exploitation of man by man, which is the dominant characteristic of the capitalist system. We are convinced that socialism alone can guarantee the Tamil national rights. Therefore we believe that the struggles of the Sri Lanka Tamils for their fundamental rights should be waged in close liaison with the struggle of all the working people of Sri Lanka for socialist path of development. For these reasons, we consider that the demand for the division of Sri Lanka into two states is detrimental to the interests of both the working class and the oppressed minorities of Sri Lanka.

Therefore while accepting the right of the Tamil nationality to self determination, our Party proposes that this right should be exercised through implementing the principle of regional autonomy within a unitary state. This we are convinced, will strengthen the unity of the working people of all nationalities of our country in their struggles for national and social liberation.

While Communists working among the Sinhalese masses advocate the acceptance of the right of the Tamil nationality to self-determination, Communists who work among the Tamil masses stress the need to find forms of expressing this right to self-determination without dividing Sir Lanka into separate states.

As a means of restoring unity between the Sinhalese and Tamil communities and achieving their fraternal Co-Operation in the overall struggle for the vital interest of the masses, and for democratic rights, social progress and socialism, our Party advocates :-

1. Common acceptance and application of the principle of regional autonomy, with provision for setting up one or more autonomous regions in the Northern and Eastern areas of Sir Lanka, according to the wishes of the peoples of these areas ; and with the right for such autonomous regions to amalgamate, if they so desire;
2. The guarantee that every citizen of Sir Lanka will have the right to deal with, and be dealt with in his own language by the government and the courts ; as well as the right to live and work in any part of the country.

Our party is convinced that, once these guiding principles are accepted, it will not be difficult to work out, through mutual and friendly discussions, details regarding the powers and functions of the autonomous regions, their relations with the central administration, and the respective way in which Sinhala and Tamil, which are both national languages of Sir Lanka, will be used in the central government and the autonomous regions.

ACCEPTANCE

ur Party is happy that there is growing acceptance in the Left movement and among the minorities of the correctneness of its proposals regarding self-determination for the Sri Lanka Tamils and its expression though regional autonomy. It is certain that if the Left parties actively and united campaign for these principles, even broader acceptance of them can be achieved.

Our Party also fights actively, and urges all other Left and democratic forces to do the same against all discriminations which people from the national minorities experience in fields such as education, employment and social benefits provided by the state. This includes disadvantages that arise form discriminatory interpretation and application of the laws regarding the official language and citizenship.

We oppose all attempts to suppress agitation for the redress of the just grievances of the minorities through states of emergency, draconian laws, or the use of the armed services of the state for repression or for occupation of their territories. It is through winning the confidence of the national minorities and through respect for the voluntary principle that a solution to intercommunal relations can be reached and not by force or threats of force.

UP COUNTRY TAMILS

In regard to the Up country Tamils, our Party advocates that :-

1. All persons, who have applied for Sir Lanka citizenship under the 1964 and 1974 Indo-Sri Lanka agreements but who were not registered as such before the agreements lapsed should immediately be given Sri Lank citizenship.
2. All other stateless persons of Indian origin resident in Sir Lanka should be given definite date before which they should apply for Sir Lankan citizenship should be given such citizenship ; and
3. Discussion should be held with the government of India to evolve a scheme whereby both those persons who applied for Indian citizenship under the 1964 and 1974 agreements and are still in Sri Lanka and those others who apply for Indian citizenship under the new opportunity provided are accepted as Indian citizens and can return to India at retiring age or at any earlier time that they voluntarily decide to do so.

A necessary steps should be taken to see that those who become Sri Lankans are able to do so on a basis of equality with other citizens. In this connection, all estate schools and dispensaries should be incorporated into the national systems under which these people are segregated on estates should be abolished and replaced by proper housing that corresponds to the needs of settled communities.

The Up-country Tamil’s the majority of whom are plantation workers, constitute a greal source of strength for the working class of our country. In addition to ending their exclusion from the democratic process, the separation (introduced by the bourgeois leaders) that exists between them and the rest of the organised working class movement should be speedily ended. They should be more and more associated in common struggles and common class organisations with the mainstream of the working class movement.

In regard to the Sir Lanka Moors, our Party solidarises with the progressive movements among the youth and intelligensia of this community that are developing under the influence of the spectacular advances made by the Muslim populations in the Central Asian Republics of the Soviet Union under the socialist system, and as a result of their feelings of solidarity with the anti-imperialist struggles of the Arab and other Muslim peoples.

We support the efforts of these forces to make common cause with the Left and democratic movements of this country against the domination of the community by capitalist leaders. And also against the attempts of both imperialism and their allies to blunt their anti-imperialism by diverting it into bigotry or anti-socialist positions.

Our Party advocates that, due the historically inherited educational and other disadvantages for which the Sir Lanka Moors still suffer, special national arrangements should be made (especially in the access to higher education) to enable them to overcome these disadvantages as rapidly as possible.

The cultural rights, as well as the religious beliefs and customs, of other small interspersed minorities that have lived in Sir Lanka for several generations, should also be respected.

The Communist Party of Sir Lanka appeals to all Left and democratic forces, both among the Sinhalese people and the national minorities, to com together in support of such a programme that can only help to replace racial suspicions and animosities with feelings of mutual trust ; but also unite all Left and democratic forces in the fight against neo-colonialism and capitalist domination and for a bright socialist future.

Before commencing the Anniversary Meeting, an Exhibition depicting the Photos and information bulletins was inaugurated, at which the statue of late Party Leader Comrade Dr. S.A. Wickremasinghe was garlanded.

This was presided over by Comrade Raja Collure, the President of the Party.

Comrade Chandrasiri Gajadheera, District Secretary (Matara) of the Party welcomed all those who participated in this Anniversary Meeting.

Main speech was delivered by Comrade Dew Gunasekara, The General Secretary of the Party.

Speeches were also made by the following:-

1. Hon. Mahinda Yapa Abeywardena, Minister of Cultural Affairs and National Heritage. He also read the Message of Greetings sent by His Excellency Mahinda Rajapaksa, The President of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka and the President of the Sri Lanka Freedom Party.

2. Her Excellency Mrs. Nirsia Castro Guevara, the Ambassador for Cuba in Sri Lanka.

3. Hon. Tissa Vitharana, Minister of Science and Technology and the Leader of the Lanka Samasamaja Party.

4. Comrade Vasudeva Nanayakkara, Leader of the Democratic Left Front.

5. Comrade Weerasumana Weerasinghe, General Secretary of the Youth Federation of the Communist Party and the Southern Provincial Council Member.

6. Vote of thanks delivered by Comrade Binduhewa, the Southern Provincial Council Member.

Also the messages of greetings have been sent by the Communist Party of China, Communist Party of India (Marxist), and the Communist Party of Bangladesh.