{"id":74986,"date":"2021-11-16T02:22:28","date_gmt":"2021-11-16T07:22:28","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/dbsjeyaraj.com\/dbsj\/?p=74986"},"modified":"2021-11-16T18:27:24","modified_gmt":"2021-11-16T23:27:24","slug":"tiruchelvam-qc-and-ali-sabry-pc-a-tale-of-two-ministerial-resignations","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/dbsjeyaraj.com\/dbsj\/?p=74986","title":{"rendered":"Tiruchelvam QC and Ali Sabry PC; A Tale of Two Ministerial Resignations"},"content":{"rendered":"

By
\nD.B.S.Jeyaraj<\/strong><\/p>\n

The controversial appointment of Bodu Bala Sena (BBS) General Secretary Galagoda Aththe Gnanasara Thero as chair of the \u2018One Country, One Law\u2019 (OCOL) Presidential Task Force (PTF) by President Gotabaya Rajapaksa has created a political furore.<\/p>\n

\"\"

Tiruchelvam QC and Ali Sabry PC<\/p><\/div>\n

The purported OCOL objective of the PTF as well as the alleged unsuitability of Gnanasara Thero to head such a body has come in for heavy criticism by several political leaders, religious organisations, human rights activists and influential sections of civil society.<\/p>\n

In a bizarre twist Sri Lanka\u2019s Justice Minister Mohamed Uvais Mohamed Ali Sabry too has resigned his ministerial portfolio and Parliament membership in this regard. However President Gotabaya Rajapaksa has reportedly refused to accept Ali Sabry\u2019s resignation letter.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

OCOL Appointment<\/strong><\/p>\n

On 26 October 2021 President Rajapaksa appointed a 13-member Presidential Task Force to study the implementation of the concept \u2018One Country, One Law\u2019 and prepare a draft Act. The Task Force was to be chaired by BBS Gen-Secy. Galagoda Aththe Gnanasara Thero. It comprised nine Sinhalese (including the BBS Bhikku) and four Muslims.<\/p>\n

According to the Gazette proclamation, President Rajapaksa has mandated the PTF with twin tasks. Firstly, to make a study of the implementation of the concept \u2018One Country, One Law\u2019 within Sri Lanka and prepare a draft Act for the said purpose. Secondly, to study the draft Acts and amendments that have already been prepared by the Ministry of Justice in relation to this subject and their appropriateness and if there are suitable amendments to submit proposals for the purpose and include them in such relevant draft as is deemed appropriate. The PTF is to submit the final report on or before 28 February 2022.<\/p>\n

The bombshell announcement that came out of the blue took most Sri Lankans by surprise. This included Justice Minister M.U.M. Ali Sabry himself who had neither been consulted nor informed of the move beforehand. Minister Ali Sabry told the media that he was unaware of the setting up of the \u2018One Country, One Law\u2019 Presidential Task Force headed by Bodu Bala Sena (BBS) General Secretary Ven. Galagoda Aththe Gnanasara Thero. Sabry told the Sunday Times he was not consulted on the setting up of the Task Force. \u201cI am not happy about the move,\u201d he further said.<\/p>\n

Ali Sabry\u2019s \u2018Resignation\u2019<\/strong><\/p>\n

Consequently several media reports stated that Ali Sabry was to quit the Government, Parliament and party (Sri Lanka Podujana Peramunaa). Another news report said that Prime Minister Mahinda Rajapaksa had cautioned the Justice Minister not to be hasty in resigning. The PM advised Ali Sabry to discuss the Task Force issue with President Rajapaksa after he returned from Glasgow.<\/p>\n

Thereafter some media reports said that the Justice Minister had met the President on 5 November. It was reported that President Rajapaksa had explained the circumstances under which the OCOL Task Force was appointed and had refused to accept Ali Sabry\u2019s resignation letter.<\/p>\n

Subsequently the Justice Minister himself confirmed this to \u201dThe Island\u201d. Responding to a query, Minister Sabry said that President Rajapaksa had declined to accept his resignation. The Minister told the newspaper that the President had explained the circumstances under which the PTF had been appointed. It was to advise the President and was not meant to formulate laws. \u201cThe matter is in a sort of limbo,\u201d Sabry had said.<\/p>\n

Thus a huge question mark hangs over the future of Minister Ali Sabry\u2019s resignation. There is no doubt that the dignity of the Justice Ministry has been eroded and the self-respect of the Justice Minister affronted. Moreover, it is doubtful whether Ali Sabry and Gnanasara Thero can work in tandem in the future to formulate draft legislation regarding the OCOL concept. Furthermore the Sri Lankan Muslim community is perturbed and agitated over the new PTF under the BBS Gen-Secy. There is much anxiety that the OCOL concept will be used to primarily target the beleaguered Muslim people.<\/p>\n

Ali Sabry and Gota<\/strong><\/p>\n

On the other hand, Ali Sabry enjoys a close, personal relationship with President Rajapaksa. The President\u2019s Counsel was Gotabaya\u2019s Chief Legal Adviser during the days of the \u2018Yahapalanaya\u2019 Government when the former Defence Secretary faced many Court cases. Ali Sabry appeared for Gota in several cases. He also campaigned hard for Gota at the 2019 Presidential Poll. Ali Sabry even went to the extent of warning that the community \u201cmay get it in full\u201d (ambaanaikkum kidaikkum) if they did not share in Gota\u2019s victory by voting for him.<\/p>\n

\"\"

Galagoda Aththe Gnanasara Thero and President Gotabaya Rajapaksa<\/p><\/div>\n

Another salient factor is that Ali Sabry hailing from the Kalutara District does not have an independent political base of his own. He was made SLPP National List and Cabinet Minister (the only Muslim in Cabinet) by Gotabaya Rajapaksa and the SLPP. Now Gota says he won\u2019t let Ali Sabry go. What then can Ali Sabry do?<\/p>\n

Also, according to some Tamil news reports, several influential Muslim religious, political and business leaders are pressurising the Justice Minister not to resign. They worry that there would be no Muslim cabinet minister in the Gotabaya Govt if Ali Sabry quits. Despite Ali Sabry\u2019s ineffictiveness in preventing anti-Muslim acts by the Govt like the mandatory cremation of Muslims dying of COVID, this shade of elderly Muslim opinion feels that a Muslim presence in Govt would be beneficial to the community. However postings on Social medi by younger sections of the community demand Ali Sabry\u2019s resignation. M.U.M. Ali Sabry is therefore in an unenviable position. It remains to be seen as to how the lawyer-politician will resolve his difficult problem.<\/p>\n

Ali Sabry\u2019s Hamletian \u201cresign or not to resign\u201d dilemma revives memories of two incidents in the past related to resignations by cabinet ministers.<\/p>\n

The first is the resignation in 1956 of former Indian Prime Minister Lal Bahadur Shastri when he was serving as Minister of Railway and Transport in the Government of Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru. The second is the resignation in 1968 of former Sri Lankan Solicitor-General Murugeysen Tiruchelvam when he was serving as Minister of Local Government in the Government of Prime Minister Dudley Senanayake.<\/p>\n

Tiruchelvam (the father of Dr. Neelan Tiruchelvam) was the representative of the Ilankai Thamil Arasuk Katchi (ITAK) known as the Federal Party (FP)in English in Dudley Senanayake\u2019s National Government formed in 1965. Tiruchelvam who was an eminent Queen\u2019s Counsel (QC) had been nominated to the Senate then.<\/p>\n

Lal Bahadur Shastri<\/strong><\/p>\n

Lal Bahadur Shastri succeeded Jawaharlal Nehru as Prime Minister of India in 1964 and served as PM till his untimely death in 1966. Shastri was earlier the Minister of Railway and Transport in the Cabinet of Jawaharlal Nehru.<\/p>\n

\"\"

Lal Bahadur Shastri<\/p><\/div>\n

In August 1956 there was a major railway accident at Mahbubnagar in the state of Andhra Pradesh; 112 people were killed. Taking moral responsibility for the accident, Shastri tendered his resignation but Nehru persuaded the Minister to withdraw his resignation. However in November 1956 there was another terrible railway accident at Ariyalur in Tamil Nadu State. There were 144 deaths. Shastri promptly submitted his resignation again. Once again Nehru refused to accept it.<\/p>\n

The PM told his minister that the accident was due to no fault of Shastri. It was caused by a technical failure and the Railway Board should be held responsible if necessary. Shastri however was much troubled by the accidents and insisted that he be allowed to resign as a matter of principle. Finally Nehru relented. The resignation was accepted. The Indian PM told \u2018Lok Sabha\u2019 that Shastri was a man of conscience. \u201cIt is because he is such a man of conscience that he feels deeply whenever there is any failing in the responsibility entrusted to his charge,\u201d said Nehru of Shastri.<\/p>\n

\"\"

Dr. Colvin R. de Silva<\/p><\/div>\n

Shastri set a high benchmark by his act of resignation then. It had a ripple effect in the region. In Sri Lanka, known then as Ceylon, Lanka Sama Samaja Party (LSSP) stalwart Dr. Colvin R. de Silva seized upon it. Colvin, known for pithy sayings such as \u201cOne language, two nations, two languages one nation,\u201d used the Shastri resignation to take pot-shots at Government ministers. Colvin reportedly quipped, \u201cIn India ministers resign over matters of principle. In Ceylon (Sri Lanka) ministers resign themselves to fate.\u201d<\/p>\n

Murugeysen Tiruchelvam<\/strong><\/p>\n

The second incident is the resignation of a Sri Lankan Cabinet Minister who felt insulted and treated unjustly by his Prime Minister. In those non-executive president days, the Prime Minister was the effective head of government though nominally the Governor-General was in charge as the representative of Queen Elizabeth the second. Sri Lanka was not a republic then.<\/p>\n

Murugeysen Tiruchelvam known as M. Tiruchelvam or M. Tiru was the Minister of Local Government in the Dudley Senanayake-led Government of 1965 to 1970. For the first time in post-independence history the leading Tamil political party the ITAK\/FP was a constituent of the ruling Government. Tiruchelvam was the representative of the ITAK\/FP in Dudley\u2019s National Government. He was the only Tamil Cabinet Minister. Tiruchelvam had been nominated to the Upper House known as the Senate to become eligible for a ministerial portfolio as he was not an elected MP. Tiru\u2019s Parliamentary Secretary or Deputy\/Junior Minister was Ranasinghe Premadasa who later became Premier and President of Sri Lanka.<\/p>\n

\"\"

Murugeysen Tiruchelvam<\/p><\/div>\n

Issue over Koneshwaram Temple<\/strong><\/p>\n

The dispute with Premier Senanayake that led to Minister Tiruchelvam\u2019s resignation was over the issue of the famous Hindu temple Koneshwaram or Thirukkoneshwaram being declared a sacred area for the Hindus. There are five ancient temples dedicated to Lord Shiv in the form of Easwaran in different littoral regions of Sri Lanka. They are called \u2018Pancha Easwarams\u2019 or five abodes of Easwaran (Lord Shiva). They are Naguleswaram, Ketheeswaram, Thondeeswaram, Muneeswaram and Koneshwaram. The Koneshwaram Temple in Trincomalee is situated on a hill in the heart of Trincomalee town. Fort Frederick was constructed by the colonialists encompassing the hill inclusive of the temple.<\/p>\n

In early August 1968 a group of prominent Hindus representing several Hindu organisations wrote to Prime Minister Dudley Senanayake and the Hindu Minister in the Government M. Tiruchelvam regarding the Koneshwaram Temple. Their request was that the Fort Frederick precincts be declared a sacred area on account of the historic Koneshwaram Temple being located within. The question of identifying and declaring specific areas as sacred areas fell under the purview of the Local Government Ministry then.<\/p>\n

Prime Minister Senanayake seemed amenable and instructed his Local Government minister to follow it up. Dudley old Tiru to \u201ctake necessary action\u201d on the matter. Minister Tiruchelvam appointed a three-member committee chaired by his ministerial Deputy Ranasinghe Premadasa to delve into the issue and compile a report with necessary recommendations. The appointment of the committee on \u2018Declaration of Fort Frederick of Trincomalee, a Sacred Area\u2019 was gazetted on 27 August 1968.<\/p>\n

On 30 August the Ven. Mangalle Dharmakirti Sri Damasgasare Sri Sumedhankara Nayaka Thera of Tammankaduwe lodged a protest with Prime Minister Senanayake. According to Minister Tiruchelvam\u2019s former Private Secretary Ram Balasubramaniam, the Buddhist monk claimed that an \u201cancient place of Buddhist worship\u201d would \u201cget into the hands of those who are neither Sinhalese nor Buddhists\u201d because of the committee being appointed to declare Koneshwaram a sacred area. A widespread agitation was threatened if the project was not shelved immediately.<\/p>\n

PM Dudley Senanayake was upset by the Buddhist monk\u2019s threat. He told Tiruchelvam to suspend the committee immediately. Tiruchelvam was shocked. He asked the PM not to be hasty and sought an appointment to discuss the matter further. Events however began to overtake.<\/p>\n

As if on cue, Dudley Senanayake\u2019s first cousin and MP for Dambadeniya, R.G. Senanayake raised the issue in Parliament. The Tamil baiting RG was very active in Trincomalee those days claiming that he would liberate the district from the Tamils. He contested in Trincomalee in 1970 in addition to his pocket borough Dambadeniya and lost in both electorates.<\/p>\n

RG taunted his cousin the Premier by asking whether Fort Frederick precincts were going to be declared a Hindu sacred area. Dudley was on the defensive. He vehemently denied it. When RG queried about the committee, Dudley said that he had suspended the working of the committee as it had been formed by the Minister without his (Dudley\u2019s) knowledge. Tiruchelvam being Senator was not in Parliament to defend himself.<\/p>\n

Tiruchelvam and Chelvanayagam<\/strong><\/p>\n

Tiruchelvam was angry and sad at Dudley Senanayake\u2019s actions and words. He decided to quit the Government. However before doing so he needed to get his party\u2019s approval. There was a reason for this. Former Solicitor-General M. Tiruchelvam QC had become the ITAK-nominated Minister in Dudley\u2019s Government to help usher in the passage of District Councils as a unit of devolution. The famous \u201cDudley-Chelva Pact\u201d between Senanayake and ITAK\/FP Leader S.J.V. Chelvanayagam envisaged the creation of DC\u2019s or district councils.<\/p>\n

\"\"

SJV Chelvanayagam<\/p><\/div>\n

In July 1968 a White Paper drafted by Tiruchelvam on the District Councils scheme was presented. But the DCs were bitterly opposed by the SLFP-LSSP-CP combine and a \u2018ginger group\u2019 of 16 backbench MPs within the UNP led by Wennappuwa MP Festus Perera. Dudley got cold feet and backed out. He tried to pacify the ITAK\/FP by offering to resign his Premiership. ITAK leader Chelvanayagam ruled that out as being unnecessary. Meanwhile a disappointed Tiruchelvam wanted to quit the Cabinet in protest. But the party leadership prevailed upon him to desist and continue as a Government Minister. Apparently the ITAK\/FP felt all was not lost and that Dudley could be persuded to pursue the District Council option again. So Tiru acceded to the wishes of his party and leader and stayed in the Govt.<\/p>\n

The Koneshwaram issue however affected Tiruchelvam personally. Tiruchelvam was determined to resign his ministerial portfolio this time. Nevertheless he needed his leader Chelvanayagam\u2019s approval. The bond between Tiruchelvam and Chelvanayagam was unique. Chelva had been the accredited guardian of Tiruchelvam and his brother Rajendra (CCS) when they were students at S. Thomas\u2019 College Mt. Lavinia. Their father was working in Malaysia then. Hence it was imperative for Tiru to get his leader Chelva\u2019s permission to quit though he could have done so unilaterally.<\/p>\n

Tiruchelvam wrote a detailed letter to Chelvanayagam outlining all what had happened with regard to the Koneshwaram issue. He said that he could no longer serve as a minister in the Government of a Premier who had instructed him to take action on the sacred area issue and then suspended the committee he as minister had appointed without consulting him. Just as Shastri pleaded with Nehru to let him resign over the railway accident issue, Tiruchelvam too implored Chelvanayagam to permit him to resign as it was a matter of principle and self-respect.<\/p>\n

Attempt to Reconcile<\/strong><\/p>\n

Chelvanayagam sympathised with Tiruchelvam but wanted to engage in one more attempt to bring about rapprochement. An appointment was obtained with the Prime Minister. Kankesanthurai MP S.J.V. Chelvanayagam, Vaddukkoddai MP Appapillai Amirthalingam, Nallur MP Dr. E.M.V. Naganathan and Senator M. Tiruchelvam met with Dudley Senanayake on 13 September 1968.<\/p>\n

Unfortunately the meeting did not bring about desired results. Both Dudley and Murugeysen indulged in mutual recriminations. While Tiruchelvam blamed Senanayake for unilaterally intervening into his ministerial purview after assigning him a particular task, Senanayake accused Tiruchelvam of failing to keep him informed of his proposed action. Dudley also emphasised that Fort Frederick was under the Defence Ministry and therefore it was under his purview as Defence Minister. There were heated exchanges between Dudley and Tiru. Many years later Amirthalingam was to recall the incident while conversing with me. Amir observes that he had never seen the \u201cgentleman\u201d Tiruchelvam lose his cool as he did on that day.<\/p>\n

Tiruchelvam Resigns<\/strong><\/p>\n

Chelvanayagam realised that no reconciliation was possible. Before authorising Tiruchelvam to quit his ministerial post, Chelvanayagam hastily convened a meeting on 14 September at his residence at Alfred House Gardens in Colombo. Several MPs and Working Committee members attended. The situation was explained in detail by Amirthalingam. Tiruchelvam was absent. Finally Chelvanayagam asked the attendees, what should Minister Tiruchelvam do in this situation? The answer was unanimous: RESIGN!<\/p>\n

Tiruchelvam was duly notified. Having obtained the party leadership\u2019s approval to quit, Tiruchelvam submitted his resignation letter to Prime Minister Senanayake on 15 September. It was accepted. On 16 September Ranasinghe Premadasa was sworn in as the new Minister of Local Government. Tiruchelvam was to later say that\u201d the PM\u2019s volte face had brought to naught the unanimous wish of all Hindu religious bodies regarding Koneshwaram\u201d.<\/p>\n

This then is the tale of Murugeysen Tiruchelvam\u2019s resignation as minister of Local Government in 1968. He did so because he felt that the dignity of the ministry had been eroded and his selfrespect as a Minister had been affronted. Now we have another resignation by Ali Sabry. He too felt that the dignity of his ministry had been eroded and his self-respect s a minister hd been affronted. A presidential task force was appointed without his knowledge to oversee and if necessary override the work done by the Justice Ministry in law reform. Comparatively the insult to Ali Sabry is far more serious than what was done to Tiruchelvam. Moreover the OCOL Task force is perceived as a \u201cweapon\u201d targeting the Muslim community to which Ali Sabry belongs.<\/p>\n

Ali Sabry\u2019s Resignation a Gimmick?<\/strong><\/p>\n

Gotabaya however does not want to let his friend Ali Sabry quit despite having treated him with supreme disdain. Insult was added to injury by the appointment of a person like Gnanasara Thero to \u201csupervise\u201d the ministry. Still Gota wants Ali Sabry to remain as Justice minister presumably because having a Muslim at the helm would be advantageous if and when OCOL legislation undermining Muslims is introduced. It is said that the President as is customary would issue an amended gazette to help Ali Sabry save face. If Ali Sabry continues to be in the Govt, critics would say that the so called ministerial resignation of Ali Sabry was always a gimmick and nothing more.<\/p>\n

The multi-crore question therefore is what Minister Ali Sabry would do in the current context? The president\u2019s counsel is one who has hitched his wagon firmly to the Rajapaksa star. Against that backdrop the words of Dr. Colvin R de Silva echo again powefully. Would the minister resign on a matter of principle or resign himself to fate?<\/p>\n

TAILPIECE <\/strong>: According to latest media reports Ali Sabry will continue to remain as Justice Minister in the Gotabaya Govt. President Rajapaksa has issued an amended Gazette as predicted in which the powers originally allocated to the OCOL Presidential Task Force have been diluted.Media reports have also quoted the President as having said that The PTF Headed by Gnansara Thero would formulate the “ONe Country One Law” Concept & present it to the Justice Ministry, which in tourn would prepare draft legislation based on the OCOL Task Force Reports.It appears therefore that MUM Ali Sabry in the words of Dr. Colvin R de Silva “Has resigned himself to fate”.<\/em><\/p>\n

DBS Jeyaraj can be reached at dbsjeyaraj@yahoo.com<\/a><\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n

This is an updated version of an article written for the \u201cPolitical Pulse\u201d Column in the \u201cDaily Financial Times\u201ddated November 10th 2021.It can be accessed here:<\/p>\n

https:\/\/www.ft.lk\/columns\/Tiruchelvam-QC-and-Sabry-PC-A-tale-of-two-resignations\/4-725673<\/a><\/p>\n

Tweet<\/a><\/div>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

By D.B.S.Jeyaraj The controversial appointment of Bodu Bala Sena (BBS) General Secretary Galagoda Aththe Gnanasara Thero as chair of the \u2018One Country, One Law\u2019 (OCOL) Presidential Task Force (PTF) by President Gotabaya Rajapaksa has created a political furore. The purported OCOL objective of the PTF as well as the alleged unsuitability of Gnanasara Thero to …<\/p>\n

Continue reading ‘Tiruchelvam QC and Ali Sabry PC; A Tale of Two Ministerial Resignations’ »<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[27,39],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/dbsjeyaraj.com\/dbsj\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/74986"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/dbsjeyaraj.com\/dbsj\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/dbsjeyaraj.com\/dbsj\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dbsjeyaraj.com\/dbsj\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dbsjeyaraj.com\/dbsj\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=74986"}],"version-history":[{"count":9,"href":"https:\/\/dbsjeyaraj.com\/dbsj\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/74986\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":75013,"href":"https:\/\/dbsjeyaraj.com\/dbsj\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/74986\/revisions\/75013"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/dbsjeyaraj.com\/dbsj\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=74986"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dbsjeyaraj.com\/dbsj\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=74986"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dbsjeyaraj.com\/dbsj\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=74986"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}