DailyMirror
Wijedasa, Vasu claim credit for re-nationalisation
Fighting corruption has turned into an election battle with two corruption busters – UPFA Ratnapura District candidate Vasudeva Nanaykkara and UNP Colombo District candidate Wijedasa Rajapaksa – gunning for each other as to who should get the credit for getting several privatization deals including the Sri Lanka Insurance Corporation deal cancelled.
At the centre of the drama is an election advertisement put out by Mr. Rajapaksa claiming that he played a pivotal role in cancelling the privatization of the Sri Lanka Insurance Corporation and thereby saving a large number of national properties.
However Mr. Nanayakkara disputing the claim had written to Mr. Rajapaksa raising objection to the advertisement. But Mr. Rajapaksa said he had already prepared a reply to Mr. Nanayakkara dismissing the claims made by his fellow candidate.
Sources close to Mr. Rajapaksa said he would shortly inform Mr. Nanayakkara that he would not run a correction to the advertisement as it was not necessary as the contents in the advertisement were true because he fought against corruption as the COPE Chairman.
Mr. Nanayakkara who wrote to Mr. Rajapaksa through his lawyers said the sub committee of COPE that investigated the privatization deals was chaired by Minister Dilan Perera and former PERC Chairman Nihal Amarasekere and Former Auditor General S. C.
Mayadunne had assisted him Mr. Nanayakkara had informed Mr. Rajapaksa that he as a respondent failed to appear in courts when the two Fundamental Rights petitions were taken up. He had said Mr. Rajapaksa could not claim credit for it under these circumstances.
The letter sent by Mr. Nananayakkara added that the only person, who actively supported the two FR Applications, was former Chairman PERC, Nihal Sri Ameresekere, a professional Accountant, who as a Respondent, though not a Lawyer, appeared in person in the Supreme Court, to present the relevant facts, and to establish the illegality and fraud, resulting in the two successful Judgments.
“In the circumstances, you should know that you could not claim credit in the public domain for political advantage, for the above achievements of our Client, who obtained for the State, LMSL arrears of taxes and the Port Land and the Sri Lanka Insurance Corporation; whereas these two corrupt privatizations had been carried out during the regime of the UNP, under whom you are now contesting. You carry a moral duty to tell the truth to the public,” he further said in the letter.