"Maithri took this decision after dropping the past and by thinking of the present and future" -- statement of Nimal Siripala

"Maithri took this decision after dropping the past and by thinking of the present and future" -- statement of Nimal Siripala

Reasons for the decision taken in relation to yesterday's political revolution was officially announced by President Maithri at the media briefing of United People's Freedom Alliance held this evening (27).

Former minister Nimal Sirala de Silva expressed the reason for this decision saying that the UNP had no interest about the attempt on his (President) life; the block which existed in meting out punishment

to offenders of the bond scam and Ranil's necessity to go into contracts with India.

He mentioned those reasons as follows: "News about a conspiracy-story of assassinating the President also crept into this. On this matter connected to the police the President continuously stood his ground both where the cabinet was concerned and also without that the inspector general of police be removed. We received no co-operation or strength from the UNP to implement ideas brought forward in this context by the President. After Nalaka Siva was taken into custody the President focused more attention on this matter. On that occasion he presented this issue to our working committee whether the Yahapalana government could go hand in hand with the UNP any further. What the President wanted was to file legal action in connection with the bond scam report. In the same way, it was not the opinion the President or the SLFP entertained about giving the Eastern block of the port to India which the UNP visualised. Therefore the President told us that he would take a decision by thinking not about the past but by thinking about the present and future instead. We gave our total support and green light for him to take a decision which he thought was fit for him. When we disassociate ourselves from the government on a legal basis, the Prime Minister's portfolio becomes vacant.

As such, according to his opinion Mahinda was thus appointed on the understanding on the premise as to who has the majority in the parliament. As the President it is he who should take the decision. It can be challenged in the House. That of course is a different matter. That appointment will not be invalidated. Its validity depends when an issue crops up in parliament and the House arrives at a decision regarding same. But, till then that order turns into a valid order".