Colombo Chief Magistrate Prasanna Alwis, who heard a case against Convenor of the Inter-University Students’ Federation, Wasantha Mudalige, yesterday, ruled that the latter had not committed any offences under the Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA). Mudalige was cleared of the PTA charges, but taken back to remand prison over some other cases pending against him.

Why was the PTA ever used against Mudalige? The government, the police and the state prosecutor should answer this question.

There are situations where protesting university students turn unruly and even become a public nuisance. Troublemakers in the garb of students have to be dealt with according to the law, and the police cannot be faulted for doing so, but draconian measures such as the use of the PTA against them cannot be countenanced on any grounds. Ironically, the incumbent dispensation, which has the police arrest anti-government protesters under the PTA, has chosen to grant presidential pardons to several LTTE cadres serving jail terms for terrorist activities! It seems to think that anti-government protesters are more dangerous than terrorists!

Arrested about five months ago, Mudalige underwent tremendous suffering due to being charged under the PTA. This can happen to anyone who dares organise or take part in anti-government protests. Detention or a protracted stay in remand prison is tantamount to punishment in this country.

The police and all others responsible for having Mudalige arrested under the PTA and pressing trumped-up charges against him must be held to account. There is no way they could justify what they have done to him, and it is hoped that legal action will be instituted against them so that the government and its stooges in the police and the Attorney General’s Department will be deterred from using the PTA as a bludgeon against protesters; most of all, the police will be compelled to act within the confines of the law without overstepping their limits to humour their political masters.

Preaching while splurging

The government has been advertising its financial difficulties for the past few weeks apparently in a bid to bolster its claim that it is not in a position to allocate funds for elections. The Department of Government Printing has reportedly asked the Election Commission to settle its dues and make an advance payment for carrying out election-related printing!

President Ranil Wickremesinghe is reported to have directed all public officials not to obtain goods and services on credit. State Minister of Finance Ranjith Siyambalapitiya has said external debt restructuring is always at the expense of foreign taxpayers, and therefore the countries that have lent funds to Sri Lanka expect us to make sacrifices. One could not agree with him more, but will he explain why the government has not cancelled the Independence Day ceremony, which will cost taxpayers an arm and a leg? The cost of the grand event has been estimated at Rs. 200 million, according to media reports, but there must be other hidden costs. Let the government leaders who are grumbling about lack of funds be urged to learn from Tanzania how to rationalise state expenditure.

Tanzanian President Samia Suluhu Hassan was considerate enough to cancel her country’s Independence Day celebrations, last month, and direct that the funds earmarked for the event be used to construct dormitories at schools for children with special needs. In 2015, the then President of Tanzania John Magufuli cancelled the Independence Day celebrations and allocated funds saved therefrom for the development of roads in Dar es Salaam. He did so again in 2020 and the money allocated for the Independence Day celebrations was used to acquire medical facilities. In this country, money that should be spent on treating and feeding poor children at state-run hospitals is being utilised for Independence Day celebrations!

Media reports say there have been no reductions in funds allocated for the offices of the President, the Prime Minister and others despite the current economic crisis. Don’t the government worthies who are wailing that they cannot meet state expenses think that they have to practise what they preach to others?