The Hon. Anuradha Jayaratne

¶ 01 Hon. Deputy Chairperson of Committees, thank you for giving me time.

¶ 02 At the time we debate the Batalanda Commission Report, on the 1987-1988 events we discuss information from about 35 years ago. The report prepared in 1998 under Court of Appeal Judge Dharmasiri Jayawickrama is presented to this House today for debate.

¶ 03 Hon. Deputy Chairperson of Committees, especially note that this debate will ultimately point to a broader matter: the rule of law, governance, how matters were maintained and conducted — all are being critiqued, and in the end many fingers will be pointed. I say this not for any other reason. On page 161 of the Batalanda Commission Report it states:

¶ 04 “It is with regret that we note that the then Government in fact adopted extra-judicial methods to control the wave of terrorist acts committed by the JVP. There was an attempt to counter JVP terrorism with State terrorism. In that process, not only were some actual terrorists eliminated, but also a large number of innocent young men and women who were not responsible for any unlawful act were either harmed or killed. During this period, politicians of the ruling party actively participated in police work; at times they directed police work. The ‘Batalanda incident’ is only one example of events during that period.”

¶ 05 Hon. Deputy Chairperson of Committees, the main issue we must argue is this: One could bring this report now with some aims in mind. But we must remember: if Batalanda occurred, we must also ask why Batalanda occurred. Likewise, how did the police act, how was power misused — these are argued in the report. Therefore, while investigating Batalanda and acting accordingly, we must also examine how governance operated at that time, including all matters. If we are truly to implement the law, we agree to that.

¶ 06 We in the Opposition also agree, if this is to deliver true justice and to do justice to those innocent people who suffered then. But if the lives of roughly 40,000 innocent people are used for politics and to build an election platform, we do not agree, Hon. Deputy Chairperson of Committees.

¶ 07 If so, in 2009 the terrorist leader Velupillai Prabhakaran was killed. None of us fought against Tamil people. I sit here with votes from Tamil people in the Kandy District. We have no issue with Tamil people. We sit here with the mandate given by Tamils, Muslims and others. Our issue was with the terrorist leader Prabhakaran; that is why war arose. But after 30 years, another generation, and then by 2049 if another report is brought and we keep re-arguing, that would be a grave wrong and a destruction. Thus, we see this as politics on the lives of innocent people.

¶ 08 If we discuss this report, what do we truly expect? If the law is to be implemented with respect to this report, it can be referred to institutions that implement the law — to a Court of Appeal Judge or a Supreme Court Judge. As I recall, then President’s Counsel Yasantha Kodagoda worked in the Attorney-General’s Department. This is such a report. If so, instead of sending it for legal implementation, what do we expect by dividing into two or three and fighting here? The Government must clarify this. As we argue, in the end many fingers will be pointed. Can we conduct a broad inquiry into all those at whom fingers will be pointed?

¶ 09 Today the NPP represents 159 MPs; of these, 102 are NPP and 57 are JVP. That is the composition. Then we have to ask: where are the 102 NPP MPs here today? What are their views on those events? These 159 could line up and state clearly their views on this report, especially as many of them also voted to elevate Mahinda Rajapaksa as President and many to make Maithripala Sirisena President. Even if they are now NPP MPs, they should state openly their views on this report.

¶ 10 Hon. Deputy Chairperson of Committees: Hon. Member, you have one more minute.

¶ 11 Hon. Deputy Chairperson of Committees, if we take this to Parliament and into agitation, we must consider what benefit there is. If this is to charge someone, have them imprisoned, or punished in some way, that is one matter. If challenges arise in Government because of President Ranil Wickremesinghe’s politics outside, that is separate. But to revisit the tragic, grievous memories of those 40,000 innocent lives lost simply to attack Ranil Wickremesinghe is a sin, I remind, Hon. Deputy Chairperson of Committees.

¶ 12 Therefore, if this report is brought sincerely, and the law is implemented so that if anyone did wrong — not only President Ranil Wickremesinghe, but anyone — is punished, we have no issue. We will all support. Punish accordingly. But bringing these reports here with improper expectations and wasting this House’s time and effort is useless, I believe, Hon. Deputy Chairperson of Committees.