Colombo (LNW): The Sports Minister of Sri Lanka and the Stabilization Committee appointed by him are becoming contributors to the tradition of neck squeezing instead of hugging and kissing the Asia Rugby. Lasitha Gunaratne of the National Sports Council is the main factor that motivated the Asia President to strangle the neck under the guise of kissing. It is very hilarious in one sense that today he is also a facilitator of the crime he committed. The funniest thing is that he has also become an advisor to the minister.
Asanga Senaviratne is maintains proximity to the Asia President and is among those who are keeping silent regarding the disruption of the journey of Sri Lanka rugby by hiding all these historical facts as required by the Asia President. Asanga was one of the individuals who opposed Lasitha Gunaratne, advocating that Sri Lanka should cast its vote in favor of the present Asia President. The other person who held the same opinion is Rizly Illyas, who is targeting that hatred in the hateful matter of banning Sri Lankan rugby by the Asia President today.
While Rizly and Asanga advocated for voting in favor of the incumbent Asian president, Lasitha cast his vote for the Japanese candidate. The Stabilization Committee, appointed by the Sri Lankan Minister, lent its support to Lasitha’s
decision back then, and currently, also there’s a requirement for the Asia Chairman. According to this matter, the next thing to consider is how the Asian president can use the hatred of not voting for him to ban Sri Lanka in a different way.
Asanga Senaviratne stands as the individual with the closest proximity to the Asia President. Attaining power through an election to be a difficult for him. Because he is the central figure in the allegation of facilitating the participation of foreign players in Sri Lanka’s team. The imposed fine of 50,000 pounds still continues on Sri Lanka rugby as a substantial burden.
During his tenure as president, Lasitha was one of the primary contributors to the financial indebtedness faced by Sri Lanka Rugby. In this scenario, aside from the rugby club’s aspiration to diminish the influence of a handful of sports clubs and seize authority, the alternative avenue for the group with negligible popularity is to establish an interim committee through the utilization of sports legislation under the minister’s jurisdiction.
That is why the interim committee that has come now shows a strong desire to withdraw the vote contribution from the current situation to make a legal way for it. The present voting involvement is an extension of a system prepared by a New Zealander regarding matters such as Sri Lanka’s rugger constitution and the determination of its voters, not one hundred percent prepared by the current administration.
The Asia president with the youngest rugby membership in their country, is using Sri Lankans to attack Sri Lanka rugby which has exceeded one hundred and forty years . That is why Namal Rajapaksa when he was the sports minister, aimed to
establish Sri Lanka’s rugby as a prominent brand within his family, is trying to connect Asanga Senaviratne to the rugby administration as a president of an advisory council to the rugby administration, who worked independently without
attaching his political role to rugby.
This presented a favorable chance for the Asia President to address the concerns pertaining to Sri Lankan rugby and for Minister Namal Rajapakse to extend his influence over the realm of Sri Lankan rugby through his directives. However,
Sri Lankan rugby maintained its integrity by resisting external pressures, upholding its autonomy and striving to safeguard its independence.
Minister Namal Rajapakse gives the order to dissolve Sri Lankan Rugby even if refuses to bow his head and then snap his neck, it will not succeed in the eyes of the law.
Nonetheless, the Asia President remains aligned with the Sports Minister of Sri Lanka, and in an online conversation, the President of Sri Lanka Rugby personally assigned blame to the Asia President.
How should a sports minister of that country take the blame for the influence of the Asia president by improperly using his presidential powers due to a blaming conversation that accuses of influencing the independence of the sport in his country? As an act of standing up for the country, or if not, by punishing the president of the Sri Lanka Rugby for not being a shy goat to the Asia president?
The second scenario has transpired. They are dressing it up in the garb of patriotism and turning it into a celebration in the guise of racism. This exemplifies the nature of the Rajapaksa faction. There is no dispute regarding the affluence and benevolence of the prominent Muslim community. But where the lower society is connected, they have the desire to get votes by stoking the fires and inflaming the ignorance of the oppressed majority.
Even the people who are going to do praises for it do not see falling on their feet in front of the Asian president as dancing to the verse of a Muslim. Because of this peculiar drama, the final act is drawing near for rugby within the Asia Games.
The Supreme Court has extended its reach to encompass the withdrawal of the Stabilization Committee as part of its verdict, citing various reasons and thus causing a delay in the committee’s decision-making process. As a consequence of
this delay, the participation of Sri Lankan rugby in the Asian Games is likely to be hindered.
As one of its steps, citing the Asian Federation, the news started spreading on four hands about the plans to run Rugby without Sri Lanka. This is happening even though the International Federation has said that the rugby team can
participate through the National Olympic Committee.
However, the head of the Olympic Council of Asia has taken actions that seem to undermine this news. Vinod Kumar Tiwari, the Acting Director General of the Olympic Council of Asia, has dispatched a letter to Benjamin Van Rooyen, the
Acting Chief Executive Officer of Asia Rugby, urging the implementation of essential measures to ensure the inclusion of Sri Lanka.
As per insider information, it’s been reported that the President of the National Olympic Committee has likewise forwarded a comparable letter to the World Rugby. Tiwari has conveyed to the Asian executive that they have agreed for the participate of the Sri Lankan rugby team under the flag of the Olympic Council of Asia. Nevertheless, he also mentioned that in the event the team secures a medal, it will be credited to Sri Lanka’s medal count.
This is the first uprising that the Olympic Council of Asia was expected to correct in the face of the actions of the Asian Rugby Association. Tiwari points out how the true love of the game should be awakened when those pretending to love Sri Lankan sports and rugby as much as the international side embrace the wishes of the Asia Rugby President beyond the country. Furthermore, it is difficult to clarify what the case that the Stabilization Committee is presenting to the Supreme Court. If the Court of Appeal has stopped the pressure from the minister and ministry officials and if the World Rugby has banned rugby in Sri Lanka as political interference, how can the stabilization committee appointed on the basis of the minister’s political authority have legal validity?
The letters sent by the World Rugby to inform Sri Lanka, they are addressed to the Executive Director of the Sri Lanka Rugby Administration, which was dissolved by the Minister.
Accordingly, they have stated because of the Stabilization Committee is a political intervention, will not involve the Stabilization Committee in Sri Lanka’s rugger-related affairs.
The current situation is that the Stabilization Committee is reporting to the court through its lawyers that it can get money for Asia Rugby through the Ministry headed by the Minister, the leaking of judicial records cast doubt on the independence of the judiciary.
Even though the World Rugby does not accept it, the National Olympic Committee of the country does not accept it and even though the Court of Appeal has told the Minister to refrain from interfering with rugby, it is clear from all these facts that the intervention of the Minister should not be allowed, if the interim committee appointed by him is valid, then he will be giving hints about the support of the Minister while arguing in the courts. Not all wrong?
Somehow, if the National Olympic Committee goes to the Asia Rugby tournament with Tiwari’s blessing, they do not see a crisis in contacting the official board of Sri Lanka Rugby, which the minister dismissed as resource persons, but which they accepted. In such a scenario, the Ministry cannot avoid its responsibility to support and facilitate those rugby-related activities.
The court’s ruling doesn’t dictate the prohibition of providing facilities for rugby as a national sport, unless it directly undermines its independence. Therefore, if anyone behaves by defining the decision of the court as harmful to the sport, it is also possible that it will be an insult to the law in a certain way.
At the time of writing this note, this is going to be discussed in the Sri Lanka Cricket parliamentary Chamber. However, why isn’t the matter of the Rugby issue and the potential repercussions for Rugby losing the Asia Series being considered by the Supreme Council?
For nearly three years now, the political sports authority of Sri Lanka and the Asia President have wronged the pressure on Rugby, and to find out that the reason for the Sri Lankan protest of the Asia President is the violation of an election promise by a person in the national sports council of the minister, and the former 2018 who is still in a ministerial chair today a sports minister should have evidence.
Parliament has the ability to bring this history to the fore along with the letter sent to that minister in a way that the Asia President threatens in some way. If this matter is deliberated within the Supreme Council of a nation, numerous undisclosed facts have the potential to come to light.
Armed with this information, inquiries could be directed towards the Board of Asia, questioning the reasonability of associating with an individual who incurred a fine of £50,000 for allowing foreign players to play in Sri Lanka. Additionally, the question arises as to why Sri Lanka Rugby continues to bear this expense year after year. Could it not be feasible to recoup a portion of that sum from the officials who made the decisions that led to this situation? How is it that they are currently able to travel abroad without encountering any hindrances through the Immigration and Emigration regulations?
Today, Lasitha Gunaratne, a member of the National Sports Council, displayed frustration due to not casting a vote in favor of the incumbent Asia President during the Asia President’s appointment. Furthermore, hasn’t the Asia President also dispatched a letter to a minister containing certain threats related to Sri Lanka rugby?
Furthermore, it’s worth discussing the ethical considerations surrounding the inclusion of a president who was previously responsible for incurring a fine of £50,000 upon Sri Lanka, as the President of the committee appointed by former Sports Minister Namal Rajapaksa to provide advice on rugby matters.
Taking into account the past 15 years, it’s possible to highlight the financial losses (debt) incurred by Sri Lanka Rugby, can be pointed out according to the tenure of each president. We can also delve into the contributions made by each individual to prevent and mitigate the accrued debt. Indeed, it’s imperative for the Parliament to initiate inquiries into various aspects such as the organization and non-organization of tournaments, the initiation of new competitions, the expansion of rugby, as well as the notable accomplishments and distinctiveness of the outcomes on the international stage.
Rather than engaging in direct negotiations with local rugby sponsors to agree their sponsorship terms for Sri Lanka Rugby, the sports minister of the country involved one of their representatives in their sports sponsorship program and added them to the sponsorship of the Asia Rugby and became a chief guest at the award ceremony.
However, in this scenario, Sri Lankan rugby managed to attract a new set of supporters by conducting themselves in a manner that inspired confidence in their endeavors. The fact that the Asia President can assemble a group of Sri Lankans who are striving diligently to prevent the country from achieving an Asia medal by taking it to court for nothing within the context of rugby reflects the unfortunate reality experienced by certain citizens of this nation.
We should pose the question to the 225 representatives in the Parliament, “Are you all friends?” in light of the Parliament seemingly evading responsibility for this issue. Those individuals who possess evidence of the prolonged resentment of the Asia President, yet among these 225 representatives, prioritize personal alliances over the welfare of a country’s sport and jeopardize the chance of securing a potential medal, should unequivocally be told, “Go to hell.”
*Adapted from original article, “බෙල්ල මිරිකන්න මිස මේ බදා ගැනීම සිප ගන්නට නොවේය..ලංකාවට නොතේරෙන මේ ඇත්ත තේරුම් ගත් තිවාරි” published on 24.08.2023
