Why a future govt. will not probe mega corruption

29 December 2014 06:03 am Views - 4231

 

We do you no harm and you do us no harm is the unwritten consensus in the political realm

Many Sri Lankans concede that the current government was corrupt (In addition to being autocratic and nepotistic).

But, they also tend to believe, partly due to the absence of a better consolation that ‘a little bit of corruption’ is permissible as long as the government was delivering growth. That was the essence of the unwritten social contract between the government and the public.

However, government leaders seemed to have different calculations; if the recent allegations of irregularities in mega development projects are anything, they amount to a large scale systematic plunder of the State coffers.

I am not referring to allegations that have been bandied about in election rallies of the common opposition (though the extensive details enumerated in Champika Ranawaka’s booklet itself are worth attention.) I am referring to more conservative estimates furnished by the former chairman of the National Transport Commission, Prof. Amal Kumarage.

The Moratuwa University academic in logistics and transport and one of the finest in the world in his chosen discipline, in an article published in the Sunday Times, last week revealed that road construction projects - which were awarded under non-competitive tenders during 2014- were 135 per cent costlier than those awarded through competitive tenders.

He says that the country has lost 200 billion Sri Lanka rupees (US $ 1.5 billion) during 2014 alone due to overpriced road projects.

And, those figures nullify the government’s raison d’être for non-competitive tenders, many of which were awarded to Chinese companies as part of conditions of export credits obtained by Chinese banks.

The government told us that the process was faster with pro-active Chinese lenders, whereas the other multilateral lenders have a penchant for long and protracted negotiations.

Now it appears, it is not the only reason. Some people have been making hefty kickbacks out of those secretive deals; the cost of most of which, have been inflated by many folds ; for instance, the extension of the Southern Express Way (Matara to Beliatta) by 545 per cent, the Colombo Outer Circular Expressway (Kadawatha- Kerawalapitiya) by 68  per cent and the  Northern Expressway (Enderamulla-Ambepussa) by 126 per cent.

(Acting Chairman of the Road Development Authority R.W.R. Pemasiri has disputed those allegations. However, his reply is not the most convincing; for instance as to why the Matara- Beliatta extension of the Southern Expressway cost 545 per cent of the first phase of the Southern expressway, he cites marginal increase in the width of the road and technical reasons. Even when those factors are granted, it could hardly explain a monumental increase of 5-6 fold of the cost. )





There is incriminating evidence of large scale mismanagement, if not brazen corruption. How this happened was is obvious. This entire episode is microscopic of the government’s penchant for secrecy in its affairs; and how a few in the inner circle of the ruling cohort have allegedly plundered billions of rupees of public money in the process.

The government entered into mega development projects, secretly and without recourse to public scrutiny, just in the same way it passed the dubious 18th Amendment. And like the 18th Amendment or the impeachment of Chief Justice Shirani Bandaranayake, mega deals were subjected to the whims and fancies of the executive and a few in his inner circles.

The majority of mega projects were awarded through unsolicited proposals and non-competitive tenders; the whole process lacked transparency and financial accountability.

The danger of such practices is higher now than in the past since the government is investing more on infrastructure. While enhanced investment is, after all a good thing, now it appears that a sizable portion of it has been ‘pilfered.’

The extent of irregularities in those mega deals mandates a review of the process and reassessment of individual projects. However, pecuniary benefits the core individuals of the current government receive by perpetuating the existing murky affairs is such that the incumbent government, should it win the election, is unlikely to change the way it conducts business.  

Then the question is whether a future government of the common opposition would probe those allegations, which is now their central argument against the government’s economic policy.

If history is any guide, it is more likely that they won’t. Though people like Champika Ranawaka, who despite his ethno-nationalistic rhetoric seems to have genuine concerns about the impact of the economic mismanagement by the government, the same thing cannot be said about the majority of the fellow travelers of the common opposition.  In recent past, Sri Lanka has not investigated any major politician, leading to prosecution. S.B. Dissanayake who was tried on corruption charges escaped justice over technical reasons.

The court case against Anurudhdha Ratwatte for his failure to account for 43 million rupees worth bank certificates found in a bank vault under his name, dragged on until his death.

Wijepala Mendis who was found guilty by a Presidential Commission on corruption was later cleared by the Supreme Court over another flimsy technical point; i.e. one of the commissioners did not give his assent to the final report of the commission.  

In most cases, technical faults that helped the crooks get out of the hook appear to be deliberate.

In the increasingly politicised state of affairs in the country, there is a sinister nexus between those individuals and the other apparatus of the State, including the one that appoints the commissions and those who conduct investigations.

The unwritten consensus in the political realm is that ‘we do you no harm and you do us no harm.’ This reciprocal understanding between the government and the opposition fosters corruption in successive governments.

Presidential Commissions tend to become eyewash to appease the electorate, rather than to punish the rogue.

I have serious reservations as to whether a future government of the combined opposition ( If they get elected) would want to break that cycle.
Ranil Wickremesinghe is one of the few politicians untainted by corruption.

So is Karu Jayasuriya. I remember one official narrating an encounter with one of the former secretaries of Wickremesinghe at the Pettah bus stand.  The old man has complained that ‘he (Wickremesinghe) did not do anything for himself, nor did let us serve ourselves.’

Mr. Wickremesinghe, however, lacks what it takes to institute decisive actions to probe mismanagement of the economy under the current regime. He is more of a status quo defender.

So is Maithripala Sirisena, the presidential candidate, who would not want to see his old friends inconvenienced by a process that is undersigned by him. And things would be a lot more complicated, if a mass exodus of ruling party Parliamentarians, some of whom would have skeletons in their closets, join him, should he win the election.

Of course, Mr. Sirisena promises, both in his manifesto and in an MoU he entered with the JHU, to appoint a Presidential Commission to probe mega projects and punish the offenders.

But, those words need to be translated into deeds.

You cannot blame individual politicians for our plight, for they themselves have been groomed and conditioned by a political culture, over which they have little control.  Even good people find their hands tied and many others who have been forthright during their early years in politics, have been transformed by the system.

See the metamorphosis of Dullas Alahapperuma in 1994 to today. There is a pervasive systemic effect that changes men beyond recognition.

If Sri Lanka needs to salvage political structure and infuse a degree of credibility into it, one needs to make credible changes within the system, that hold politicians and higher officials accountable for their action, and to make sure their actions are checked by the other apparatus of the State.

We have world- class constitutional affairs experts and legal luminaries who can recommend obvious remedies to fix those problems.

But, political will to do so is in the short supply at present. The incumbent president has proved to be the greatest stumbling block for such a transformative change.

It will be a pleasant surprise if this deficit of political will is addressed under a future government.

However, for the time being, it is always better not to be too overwhelmed by the rhetorical promises of investigations and Presidential Commissions. It is better to be a cynic than being taken for a sucker.

Follow Ranga Jayasuriya @RangaJayasuriya on Twitter