Features
The presidential election and Premadasa forcing JR to go back on his promise to Mrs. B
JVP murders proponents for third term; JR advised to continue by Rajiv and Lee
(Excerpted from volume ii of Sarath Amunugama autobiograph
The third Presidential election was due in 1989 and JRJ was under pressure to decide on his party candidate in good time. Premadasa was taking an early lead for the nomination supported by Ranjan Wijeratne who was, as mentioned earlier, appointed the President and Secretary of the UNP and also, as an army volunteer officer the leader in the fight back against the JVP military wing.
At this stage JRJ got a message from Rajiv Gandhi that he should contest the forthcoming election as the implementation of the Indo-Lanka accord would need his steadying hand. This was reinforced by a call from Lee Kuan Yew that JRJ should continue for another six years as President if Sri Lanka was to emerge from its crisis-ridden present. In all likelihood Lalith and Gamini who were wary of the Prime Minister would have encouraged the old man as did his coterie of intimate friends who were loath to relinquish all that power if there was a change of President.
JRJ was in two minds but he allowed a study of the constitutional implications of such a move, as his own constitution had restricted a President’s terms of office to two. Menikdiwela, a firm advocate of the third term, then collared two loyal MPs, Lionel Jayatilleke and Merril Kariyawasam, to propose that JRJ should run for a third term. He would never have done that without JRJ’s blessings. However both proposer and seconder were gunned down by the JVP within days and with Premadasa’s belligerence JRJ was forced to give up the idea, especially because his wife strongly opposed such a move and probably thereby saved his life.
Mrs. Jayewardene consistently backed Premadasa and saved him from the internal battles that have marked other political parties .Another key factor was the unstinted support given to the PM by Ranjan Wijeratne who almost single-handedly battled the JVP to the bitter end. He told JRJ that only Premadasa had a chance of giving a fight to Mrs. Bandaranaike who was to be the Opposition candidate. This was accepted by JRJ who knew that Mrs. B would loath to be defeated by Premadasa for both political and social reasons.
I was present in JRJ’s office in Braemar on November 5, 1988 when Premadasa and Ranjan barged in, in an aggressive manner and began arguing with JRJ who had just concluded a negotiation with Mrs. B to dissolve Parliament simultaneously with the calling of nominations for the Presidency. He had assured her and through her the Opposition, including the JVP, that the election would be fair. The JVP had asked for an all-party monitoring committee to oversee the election.
This decision, taken without consulting the main interested party namely Premadasa, naturally infuriated him and he and Ranjan burst into JRJ’s office and rudely criticized the President for this decision which they said undercut UNP chances of winning the election. Premadasa said that he was withdrawing his nomination and JRJ could field anyone he wanted in the forthcoming election. He wanted to contest the Presidency as the incumbent PM with a two third majority in Parliament and if that was not possible he was out of the running.
Ranjan also strongly backed Premadasa and said that the party would fare badly with any other candidate. JRJ then simply stared at the two heavyweights and made a typically bold instantaneous decision. He got Mrs. Bandaranaike on the line and told her that he was withdrawing his pledge to dissolve Parliament. “Premadasa is here in my office protesting against my decision”, he told Mrs. B, “so I have no choice but to go back on my word”.
She did not have a long response but apparently protested and cut the line. Her dismay is seen in the following paragraph of her letter sent the following day. “To my astonishment you telephoned me about one and a half hours later to inform me that after talking to the Prime Minister and some other ministers you were no longer able to fulfill the undertaking you gave me a short time before, unless the JVP agreed to serve in the interim cabinet”.
After the volte face JRJ smiled weakly at his PM and party secretary and ambled out of his office and went upstairs. But obviously that was the decisive moment when the President was outmaneuvered, and the initiative passed on to Premadasa and his well-oiled propaganda machine led by Sirisena Cooray. Notwithstanding these humiliations JRJ and his wife believed that it was only Premadasa who could deliver victory to the UNP, and they were proved right.
He got Lalith and Gamini to propose Premadasa’s name as the UNP candidate and addressed his inaugural meeting in Kandy. Tempted by Premadasa’s cynical offer of the Premiership to them both, the young aspirants .campaigned hard for him, which enabled the UNP to present a united front. Only Ronnie de Mel, who never liked the PM, changed sides and earned the wrath of Premadasa and the UNP. His role as a front ranker in the local political scene was over though later from time to time, he held several portfolios under other Presidents.
The third presidential election was held in December 1988 with Premadasa and Mrs. B as the key contestants. It was an election in which the contestants had to wade through a river of blood as the JVP used all their strength to sabotage it. It took great courage for Premadasa to carry out his election campaign amidst much difficulty. The odds were stacked against him. Mrs. B was the opponent who had the advantage of the anti-incumbency factor.
Many private sector bigwigs who normally fund the UNP crossed over to her camp especially because Ronnie de Mel was her chief fund raiser earning for himself the eternal hatred of Premadasa. All the skills that Premadasa had mastered in Colombo Central stood him in good stead. His chief of staff was Sirisena Cooray, and all decision making was devolved on him. He used the resources of the Colombo Municipality for his campaign as he was the mayor.
In spite of the naysayers, Cooray decided to hold their inaugural meeting in Kandy. He employed `Soththi Upali’ a gangster and Municipal contractor to rival the JVP in launching their poster campaign throughout the country on one night, thereby challenging the ‘mystique’ that the JVP assiduously cultivated as the ‘second government’ which could enforce its will countrywide.
The mammoth Kandy meeting was a game changer. Usually a UNP stronghold, its Kandy supporters welcomed the new populist approach of Premadasa and ignored the death threats which were by now familiar tactics of the armed wing of the JVP. In Kandy, Premadasa was helped by the support extended by the new Chief Minister of the Central Provincial Council and its members in spite of the fact that the PM had opposed the formation of Provincial Councils.
It was also a poignant moment for JRJ since it was his last major political intervention which ended a long and distinguished career. He called on the party to work hard for Premadasa whom he endorsed publicly as the winning candidate. By this time Premadasa had made it clear that JRJ would be a liability for his campaign and was not at all enthusiastic about his participation. When JRJ returned to President’s House in Kandy after the meeting, he knew that the leadership had moved to the PM, and he was to be a mere spectator. He took it with his usual inscrutability.
In addition to his courage and ambition, Premadasa planned his campaign with his usual panache. He persuaded Ossie Abeygunasekera, a Vijaya Kumaratunga loyalist, to contest the Presidency. A brilliant speaker, Ossie concentrated on attacking Mrs. B and drawing away her votes. TheJVP too attacked her which added to her lackluster performance during the election campaign. Premadasa who was eight years younger than Mrs. B, exploited the age factor which would have been a liability if JRJ had contested.
When the results were declared Premadasa had squeaked in with a much reduced poll. Ossie had also drawn a significant number of votes and added to Mrs. B’s embarrassment. When the results were announced she refused to come to the counting centre to make her concession speech thereby confirming JRJ’s prediction that she was socially uncomfortable to be challenged by an outsider like Premadasa.
In a sense this election marked the eclipse of both JRJ and Mrs. B. The former retired from the scene while the latter hung on but did not have the unquestioned authority she wielded in her halcyon years.
Soon after his victory the new President called for a parliamentary election in February which was in any case due in 1989. For the Presidential election Premadasa had wooed the minorities, especially Ashraff, who had emerged as the leader of the Eastern Province Muslims and was able to drive a hard bargain in reducing the ‘cut off point’ for eligibility for election, from the previous eight to five percent, thereby opening a Panaoras box 61 small ethnic parties which could bargain for ministerial positions, ambassadorships and state corporation jobs in exchange for their crucial support in Parliament.
These transactions or ‘deals’ became a regular feature of Sri Lankan politics and have added to the corruption which is now endemic in Sri Lankan politics.
Features
From the missing to the missing truth and beyond
by Jehan Perera
The government is preparing to meet the challenge of the UN Human Rights Council next month. A Sri Lankan delegation led by Foreign Minister Vijitha Herath is expected to attend the 63rd session of the UNHRC in Geneva, where the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights will present a written update on Sri Lanka. The government has already submitted its response to the advance version of the report prepared by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. The Foreign Minister, accompanied by officials from Colombo and Sri Lanka’s Permanent Mission in Geneva, is expected to explain the progress made on reconciliation, accountability and human rights. This is therefore an important moment for the government. It is an opportunity not merely to defend its record but to make new commitments.
The government has been criticised, as were its predecessors, for the manner in which it has dealt with past human rights violations, especially those connected with the thirty year war. The vexed issue of thousands of missing persons remains at the centre of this criticism. The government has sought to strengthen the Office on Missing Persons by providing it with additional staff and resources. It has also given support to the excavations at the Chemmani mass grave. Justice and National Integration Minister Harshana Nanayakkara has told Parliament that the government has allocated Rs. 57 million for the excavations and related legal work, though that figure has not been set against the cost of comparable forensic operations elsewhere.
The government also took the significant step of holding a national event in Jaffna to mark the International Day of the Victims of Enforced Disappearances. Minister Harshana Nanayakkara attended the event together with the Chairman of the Office on Missing Persons (OMP), Mahesh Katulanda, and other senior officials and political representatives. Their presence was meant to demonstrate the government’s commitment to addressing the issue. But on the victims’ side there is continuing dissatisfaction. The commemoration in Jaffna was met by a protest outside the District Secretariat, organised by families of the disappeared, who demanded to know what happened to relatives who, according to their accounts, surrendered to or were taken away by the military and were never heard from again.
Jaffna Protests
The protests in Jaffna are a reminder of the gap that remains between what the government is trying to do and what the victims expect. For these families, compensation and death certificates are not substitutes for knowing what actually happened to those they lost. The protests, and the police action taken against some of those who demonstrated, were reported by the international and Tamil media and by international human rights organisations, and overshadowed much of what the government had hoped to showcase at the Jaffna event. The OMP’s mandate is to establish the fate and whereabouts of missing persons, clarify the circumstances in which they went missing, and provide redress and assistance to their families. Accordingly, it has sought to verify complaints, remove duplicate entries, encourage people who have not yet made complaints to come forward, and facilitate compensation and other forms of assistance. The families of victims expect the OMP to do more to clarify the circumstances in which their loved ones went missing. An example would be the disappearance of 158 displaced Tamil persons from the Eastern University campus in Vantharumoolai, Batticaloa District, who were rounded up and forcibly removed in front of thousands of other similarly displaced persons, including the officer in charge Prof T Jayasingam.
The government has also increased the support available to families of the missing, and says it is accelerating the OMP’s investigations. But the scale of what remains undone is stark. There are around 11,000 complaints remaining to be investigated, according to the Justice Minister, while the OMP has reported that final information has been established in only 31 cases, communicated privately to the families concerned. On the government’s own figures, that puts the clearance rate for establishing fate and whereabouts at well under one percent of the outstanding caseload. There is a limit to what the OMP can do even with more resources and time. Its mandate is primarily to establish the fate and whereabouts of individual missing persons. It was not intended to produce the comprehensive, public account of the past that victims and the country as a whole require.
In 2015, the government headed by President Maithripala Sirisena and Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe committed itself to establishing such a commission as part of a comprehensive approach to dealing with Sri Lanka’s past. Human Rights Council Resolution 30/1, which the government co-sponsored, specifically welcomed the proposed establishment of a “commission for truth, justice, reconciliation and non-recurrence”, together with an Office on Missing Persons and an Office for Reparations. However, the commitment to a truth-seeking mechanism was never fulfilled. The government should consider setting one up now. There is a growing feeling among Tamil people in the North and East that the government is failing to deliver on promises that are important to them. On issues important to them, they feel this is once again a Sinhala-dominated government like all the ones that came before.
Establish Truth
For the past two years the government has been concentrating on problems that it deems are important to the country as a whole such as the economy, development, poverty alleviation and corruption and criminality. However, the government needs to demonstrate that national unity means addressing the concerns of all communities, including those whose wounds from the war remain unhealed. Some of its own institutions have begun to act on this. The Office for National Unity and Reconciliation recently staged a drama entitled From Yakaweva to Nandikadal, depicting relationships between people that transcend the destruction caused by war. The drama portrayed the sufferings as well as the prejudices on both sides of the divide, from the Kebithigollewa bus bombing to the final days of the war around the Nandikadal lagoon. Its central message is that without forgiveness there cannot be reconciliation.
Particularly moving was the fact that the actors themselves came from families touched by the violence on both sides. The son of an LTTE Black Tiger leader and the daughter of an Army officer were among those who performed, alongside others who had experienced and survived some of the sites of carnage. The fact that a state institution is taking this message of reconciliation forward is itself a testament to the government’s openness to dealing with the past. A government institution can reach a population far larger than any civil society campaign could reach on its own, simply because the machinery of the state is so much more extensive. It is in this context that the government needs to give serious thought to setting up a Truth and Reconciliation Commission as the next step in the truth-seeking process. Special care will need to be taken to ensure that those who are appointed are not only politically non-partisan, but are acceptable to all the communities.
A Truth and Reconciliation Commission cannot by itself resolve all the wounds of the past. Nor can it replace criminal investigations or judicial proceedings where these are necessary. But it can provide something that existing institutions cannot provide on their own. This would be a comprehensive national process through which victims can be heard and the truth can be established. The general population needs to understand what happened, so that the country can begin to acknowledge its past without passing it on indefinitely to future generations. The government has already taken several steps. It is supporting the search for the truth at Chemmani. It has begun reaching out to families of the disappeared. Its own institutions are producing messages of reconciliation. But these are still not delivering the results that the victims and their families want. The next step should be to bring these efforts together to begin the journey from the missing to the missing truth, and from there to comprehensive justice.
Features
The long road to educating Sri Lanka’s Bhikkhunis
A robe without recognition:
by Anushka Kahandagamage
Education is the right of every child. Yet somewhere between childhood and the robe, that right becomes precarious for many Buddhist women in Sri Lanka, threatening not only their social standing, but their fundamental access to learning and the institutional discrimination they face. This piece is not about Buddhist disciplinary rules, which discriminates women, rather about how the state’s refusal to fully recognise bhikkhunis as bhikkhunis quietly determines what they are, and are not, permitted to learn.
Unlike dasasil mathas, who occupy a distinct and unofficial category within Buddhist renunciation, bhikkhunis belong to a formally ordained order recognised within Buddhist monastic tradition itself. Dasa sil mata means ‘ten-precept mother.’ They are women who observe the ten precepts (rather than the fuller Vinaya) and live a renunciant, celibate life, often in robes, but formal ordination has not translated into formal recognition by the state. Even after a Supreme Court ruling affirmed their right to be identified as bhikkhunis on their National Identity Cards, many still do not hold one. This stems from the hesitation of the male-dominated Buddhist hierarchy to recognise these women as part of the Theravada tradition, specifically refusing to validate their higher ordination. The identity card lists her title as Dasa Sil Mata. The ruling exists on paper, but they are still waiting for their identity cards. This is not a small bureaucratic oversight. It is the first link in a longer chain, one that reaches, eventually, into the classroom.
A Name Withheld
In Sri Lanka, there are 827 pirivenas, traditional monastic colleges that have, for centuries, served as the primary institutions of Buddhist education. Of these, only 12 are dedicated to female renunciants at all, and of those 12, just five serve fully ordained nuns specifically. The imbalance is stark on its face: 827 institutions for monks, five for fully ordained nuns. But the discrimination here is not only a matter of numbers, but it is also written into the very language used to name these institutions. Monks’ schools are called pirivena, a term carrying centuries of institutional weight, historical continuity, and state recognition under Sri Lanka’s education laws. Bhikkhunis’ schools, by contrast, are not called pirivenas at all. They are designated Buddha Sravika Meheni Adhyapana Ayathanaya (Institute for the Education of Buddha’s Female Disciples), a separate, parallel term that, however similar in function, withholds from bhikkhuni institutions the same legal and institutional status that the word ‘pirivena’ confers. Since there are ten-precept mothers, the institutes have not given the same name as the pirivena and lack the official as well as social recognition they deserve.
A Pattern a Century in the Making
Following the decline of the Buddhist nun (bhikkhuni) order after the Polonnaruwa period, the first woman to be robed again was ordained in 1905 as a dasasil matha. Although dasasil mathas have long served important religious and societal roles, they have historically lacked access to formal education. Unfortunately, today also, this pattern continuous to exist. Education, in this context, is never just about literacy or dhamma study. It is the currency of religious authority. A bhikkhuni denied equivalent education or educated in an institution the state refuses to name a pirivena, is denied that religious authority. She may know the Tipitaka as well as any monk yet will lack the institutional stamp that would make a lay community trust her reading of it. It was not indifference from the public; it was the accumulated effect of a system that has spent centuries teaching devotees, implicitly, that a woman’s robe does not carry the same weight as a man.
The female renunciants, both dasasil mathas and bhikkunis, although they wear robes, have not been regarded as individuals capable of comprehending or preaching dhamma, simply because they are women. This is most visible in education, the pirivena system, developed historically to train bhikkhus, offered dasasil mathas and bhikkunis no equivalent institutional pathway, no comparable curriculum, certification, or state recognition. This exclusion is notable because it runs counter to Sri Lanka’s broader educational trends, where women have historically outnumbered men in general university enrolment, the gap here is specific to monastic/religious education rather than a reflection of wider societal restrictions on women’s schooling. The country’s National Education Commission Policy has a section on Pirivena education. However, it does not address the education of Buddhist nuns, nor does it mention nuns within the policy. I recently learned that the policy was being reviewed, with a committee appointed by the Ministry of Education, scheduled to begin the review on the 1st of September. This presents an important opportunity to raise the issue of nuns’ education and advocate for its inclusion in the revised policy.
The monks and nuns’ education institutes are funded by the government, which allocates only 5,000–6,000 LKR per student for the entire year. This sum is grossly inadequate to cover even basic institutional needs, accommodation, food, learning materials, and the maintenance of the physical premises, let alone to support any meaningful expansion of the curriculum. With this level of funding, these education institutes are struggling to sustain themselves, and many are forced to rely almost entirely on external support simply to remain operational. This is where the disparity becomes most visible. As female renunciants have historically not been taken seriously, regarded neither as authoritative teachers of dhamma nor as figures worthy of the same reverence extended to their male counterparts, their education centres receive far fewer lay offerings than those for male renunciants. The result is a widening resource gap that mirrors and reinforces the very discrimination that caused it. Underfunded institutions produce fewer well-trained female scholars, which in turn reinforces the perception that female renunciants are less capable, a perception that then justifies continued underinvestment. Without deliberate intervention, either through equitable government allocation or targeted lay support, this cycle is likely to persist rather than resolve on its own.
Sitting Alone at the Bo Tree
I was at Jaya Sri Maha Bodhi in Anuradhapura, where a few monks sat preaching in the shade of the Bo Tree, each surrounded by small clusters of lay devotees. Nearby, I noticed a few female Buddhist renunciants, though I could not immediately tell whether they were bhikkhunîs or dasasil mathas, since visually, in their robes and demeanour, they appeared indistinguishable to an outside observer. Most of them sat alone, without the small crowds of devotees gathered around the monks nearby. This, too, is not incidental. Because women cannot enter the sâsana through the same pathway to ordination, available to men, many Buddhist female renunciants remain dasasil mathas, a status that carries the appearance of monastic life without its legitamised spiritual standing. They observe the 10 precepts, wear robes, and live in renunciation, yet occupy a lower, unofficial rung in the religious hierarchy, one that grants them neither the ordination lineage nor the institutional recognition given to monks. However, in June last year, the Supreme Court of Sri Lanka delivered a landmark majority ruling in SC/FR/218/2013, affirming that fully ordained Buddhist nuns have the fundamental right to use the title ‘Bhikkhuni’ on their National Identity Cards, legally recognising the de facto existence of the Bhikkhuni Sanga.
A Closed Loop
Social discrimination and educational discrimination feed each other in a closed loop. Because bhikkhunis have fewer, less recognised institutions, fewer are formally trained to a standard the public recognises. Because fewer are recognised as authoritative teachers, fewer devotees seek them out or support them. Because they attract fewer devotees, the education institutions of female renunciants remain under-resourced and easy to overlook in state budgets and in popular imagination alike. A dasasil matha or bhikkhuni without an active following also lacks the economic support that following brings, since in Sri Lanka’s monastic economy, devotees are patrons as much as students. The precarity is not only spiritual or bureaucratic; it is material, and it compounds across a lifetime spent in robes.
Until bhikkhunis’ education is named, funded, and recognised on the same terms as that of bhikkhus, this will remain a story not only about missing ID cards or under-resourced schools, but about an education system that continues to decide, quietly and continuously, which students are worth investing in. Education was supposed to be the one place where the women can speak for themselves, instead, for these women, it has become just another place where women have to ask permission to be heard.
(Anushka is a Sociologist who is working on contemporary Buddhist movements. She was formerly attached to the University of Colombo)
Kuppi is a politics and pedagogy happening on the margins of the lecture hall that parodies, subverts, and simultaneously reaffirms social hierarchies.
Features
‘Memories of Milton – Live in Concert’ to enchant Dubai
Sri Lankan music knows no borders. Wherever our people go, our melodies follow — and our musicians make sure of it.
From Qatar’s Exit, to Melbourne’s EBONY, to Toronto’s Ceymphony, and Dubai’s Seven Notes, Sri Lankan bands abroad continue to keep the community connected to home, through song.
In July, Rajiv Sebastian set the Dubai stage alight with the band Seven Notes, creating an unforgettable night for Sri Lankans in the UAE. And the live-wire behind that magic? Niluk Uswaththa of Seven Notes.
Well, Niluk says he isn’t stopping there.
Now, Dubai is preparing for something truly special — ‘Memories of Milton – Live in Concert’, a grand musical tribute to one of Sri Lanka’s most beloved voices: Milton Mallawarachchi.
For more than a decade, Milton Mallawarachchi was a trending force in Sri Lankan music. With nearly 850 songs and over 35 albums to his name, he gave us melodies that became the soundtrack to our lives — songs of love, longing, and life itself.
On Saturday, 26th September 2026, from 8:00 PM to 3:00 AM, the Mercure Hotel, Al Barsha Heights, Dubai, will transform into a space of nostalgia.

Ranil Mallawarachchi; Carrying forward his father’s legacy / Yenuli Neriah
With the spotlight on Ranil Mallawarachchi — Milton’s eldest son, carrying forward his father’s legacy — along with Yenuli Neriah and Tharaka, the evening will certainly bring Milton’s timeless classics back to life … on one stage.
Seven Notes will do the needful, providing the live music that made Dubai dance before.
According to Niluk, this isn’t just a concert.
“It’s designed as a nostalgic musical journey — to bring cherished memories and beloved songs back to life,” he says.
And he promises: 26th September will be a night to remember.
In fact, Niluk Uswaththa has become a driving force for Sri Lankan entertainment in Dubai.
Through Seven Notes, he ensures the community always has something special to look forward to — especially when it comes to music that feels like home.
The success of these overseas shows naturally raises one big question back in Sri Lanka.
Yes, music lovers, in Sri Lanka, are keen to know whether the Seven Notes band will pop up in Colombo, sometime soon, for a live performance?
Music lovers, island-wide, will be watching … and waiting!
-
News4 days agoEight politicians in drug kingpin probe
-
Features2 days ago“Wrap Me Up in My Blazer”— A Gentlemanly Bradby Reminiscence
-
Business4 days agoSri Lanka opens up: A new season of direct connectivity
-
Features4 days agoRedefining ageing in Sri Lanka
-
Features6 days agoInsights from Chieftains of Uva: Genealogy of two Kandyan Families – Part II
-
Latest News5 days agoNepal-Tibet floods: What happened, what caused them and who is missing?
-
Editorial6 days agoWarning of power cuts: El Niño and corruption
-
Features6 days agoExport diversification: Missing the wood for the trees – Part I
