Connect with us

Features

Anti-corruption poster boy throws down gauntlet

Published

on

Roshan Ranasinghe

Interview with Roshan Ranasinghe:

… vows to mobilise masses to oust corrupt govt. leaders

by Saman Indrajith

Roshan Ranasinghe needs no introduction. As the Minister of Sports, he plucked up the courage to take on the politically-backed powerful cricket Mafia with international links, only to be hounded out of his ministerial post. The dark forces responsible for his ouster from the Cabinet may have thought they would be able to silence him, but he has proved that he is made of sterner stuff. He has emerged stronger, and is working hard to mobilise the public against the corrupt government leaders and their cronies.

Ranasinghe has launched an anti-corruption movement with a political goal—the Stop Corruption, Build Motherland (SCBM) alliance––and invited all those who want Sri Lanka to be rid of corruption to sink their political differences and join forces to achieve national progress.

What made Ranasinghe to pit himself against the cricket Mafia and what are his future plans? The Island met him recently. Excerpts of our freewheeling interview with him:

Q: Tell us about your background?

I am Ranasinghe Arachchige Roshan Anuruddha. My father’s family, hailing from the South, settled down in Nugawela, Kandy. My paternal grandfather had a home in Harispaththuwa and my paternal grandmother was from Kumbukgete, Kurunegala. My father was the only child in his family. My mother’s father was from Weligama. As such, I have roots in four districts!

Both my maternal and paternal families were staunch UNP supporters. They backed D. S. Senanayake and his vision. My father was close to the late Mr. Gamini Dissanayake. As a result of his politics, we lost our house. My mother had the courage to start life anew from scratch. She worked hard to improve our situation. My sister became a doctor and my two brothers took to accountancy. As soon as I completed my GCE A/L, I wanted to go to Japan.

My brothers were in France at that time. They advised me to visit them first and obtain a resident visa there. In France, I pursued my education, but I couldn’t complete it because I was determined to fulfill my dream of going to Japan. Initially, I went to Japan with a tourist visa. I travelled to many places in Japan and observed the situation in each place. Later, I went to Japan again on a student visa, and studied and worked part-time. I obtained a Diploma in Business Administration and Automobiles. I believe I learned more from Japanese society than from the theories taught in class. That education has served me well in my career as a businessman in several countries and also stood me in good stead in my political activities.

In 1996, my mother passed away, at the age of 49. I was 20 at the time, and her death was a great loss to me. After some time, I met a Sri Lankan girl in Japan. Our friendship developed into a relationship, and she is now my wife. We got married in 1999. Her name is Prashanthi Dinusha Ranasinghe, and she is a lawyer. She has been my strongest support, helping me build my businesses and supporting me in my political endeavours. I have attended four schools: Rajangana Maha Vidyalaya because our businesses were in Rajanganaya, Vidyartha College Kandy, Thambuttegama Central College, and Polonnaruwa Royal College.

Q: What kind of business are you engaged in?

I established my businesses in Japan, the UK, Mozambique, South Africa, and Sri Lanka. In these five countries, I import and sell vehicles, automobile spare parts, and high-end wrist-watches.

Q: When did you take to active politics?

I began my political career in 2009 after receiving invitations from both Ranil Wickremesinghe and Mahinda Rajapaksa. Upon receiving Wickremesinghe’s invitation, I expressed my willingness to contest from Polonnaruwa. He assured me of that opportunity. Later, I received another invitation from Mahinda Rajapaksa. I informed him that I had already given my word to Wickremesinghe and would contest from Polonnaruwa.

Subsequently, Wickremesinghe informed me that Earl Gunasekera did not want me to contest from Polonnaruwa and suggested I contest from Laggala instead. I insisted that I be allowed to contest from Polonnaruwa, and informed Wickremesinghe of Rajapaksa’s offer to contest under the UPFA ticket from the same district. Wickremesinghe wished me good luck, and I joined the UPFA as a district organizer for Polonnaruwa. Other candidates in the same team were electoral organizers who had already secured 40,000 preferential votes, while I had none. Some encouraged me, while others discouraged me.

I was elected with the highest number of preferential votes in the district. Maithripala Sirisena was the district leader, and I respected his leadership while focusing on my responsibilities. Over the next three years, I received no assistance from the party to develop the district. Basil Rajapaksa informed me that he couldn’t allocate funds due to opposition from Maithripala Sirisena. But with the assistance of well-wishers and friends, I did everything possible to serve the people of Polonnaruwa. We constructed roads, generated employment opportunities for the unemployed, and introduced technology to Polonnaruwa.

Q: What made the relationship between you and Maithripala Sirisena turn sour?

When Maithripala Sirisena left the SLFP, he carried with him all the grassroots organizations of the party in Polonnaruwa. Siripala Gamlath and Chandrasiri Sooriyiarachchi remained silent. I was tasked with organizing the presidential campaign in the Polonnaruwa District, which presented one of the biggest challenges I’ve ever faced as a district leader. I was pitted against heavyweight Maithripala Sirisena in that district. However, I enabled the party to perform better in Polonnaruwa than in the Hambantota District. Rajapaksa, as the presidential candidate, secured over 70 percent of the total district votes in his home district, Hambantota, but due to our efforts, Sirisena could poll only 55% of the votes in his home district, Polonnaruwa.

After his victory, Sirisena invited me for talks and had others file a case against me in the High Court of Polonnaruwa, accusing me of attempted murder. As the case is pending, I won’t discuss it further.

During our talks, Sirisena asked whether I would join him and go to heaven or remained loyal to Mahinda Rajapaksa and go to hell. He suggested that if I joined him, the case against me would be dropped, and he would instruct all grassroots party leaders to work with me. However, I told him that there were policy differences that prevented me from joining him.

In the 2018 local government elections, I was put in charge of the SLPP’s Polonnaruwa District campaign. It pitted myself against President Sirisena. Despite his executive powers and support from the then Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe, the people voted for us. We defeated both the UNP and the SLFP.

Q: Don’t you think the Rajapaksas used you and let you down?

I have remained undefeated in elections, and after the SLPP’s victory at the 2020 general election, Mahinda Rajapaksa and Gotabaya Rajapaksa came to Polonnaruwa and said that I would be given a Cabinet portfolio so that I could launch some development projects in the district. However, I was given a State Minister post. I was tasked with helping young entrepreneurs. While I was progressing in that project, I was shifted to the Provincial Councils and Local Government State Ministry.

During the pandemic, I worked with all 330 councils. When the farmers’ crisis came up, I was appointed Mahaweli State Minister. Likewise, I was given three different state ministries within that short period of time. When the fertiliser crisis cropped up, I resigned not only from the ministerial posts but also from the Pohottuwa District leadership. Thereafter, I remained an independent MP. We witnessed massive opposition against those who remained in ministerial posts of the Pohottuwa government.

Then came the Aragalaya protests. President Wickremesinghe invited me to accept responsibilities to work with him and offered four powerful ministries – Sports, Youth Affairs, Mahaweli, and Irrigation. None of those ministries had funds at the time I accepted them. I had been handling the affairs of these ministries successfully when I was shown the door for trying to rid cricket administration of corruption.

Q: Some sports bodies faced bans under your watch. Why?

Rugby was already facing a ban when I assumed duties as the Sports Minister. There was a problem between the Rugby Chairman and the Asian Council. The latter did not recognize the former, so they banned Sri Lankan Rugby. The Chairman was adamant about staying in his post. I requested him to resign for the sake of the country because the Asian Council was ready to lift the ban if he stepped down.

I had to appoint an interim body to control the game. The Chairman then went to courts, where he later expressed his willingness to resign. With his resignation, the Asian Council lifted the ban.

Q: What about the ban on the Football Association?

The football administration is a metaphor for corruption. FIFA had been asking for reforms to the Football Association’s constitution since 2014. Their main demand was to remove football administration from the current national sports law and grant it autonomy. As their demands were not met, FIFA banned Sri Lanka.

I met FIFA General Secretary Fatma Samoura and explained the situation. They agreed to change their stance to allow the football governing body to operate within the framework of national sports laws. They gave us four years to implement this. They wanted us to make it mandatory for football officials to retire at the age of 70. I myself would retire from politics when I reach 65 years. We must let the youth come up.

Q: Your efforts to cleanse the cricket administration backfired. How would you look back at what happened?

Regarding cricket control, the entire nation knows the truth. The ICC ban on Sri Lanka cricket was orchestrated. It was officials who got the ban imposed, and it was they who got it lifted.

I have no problem with J. Sha. He is a citizen of another country. Sha was used as a shield by Sri Lanka Cricket officials, who were exposed for corruption by the Auditor General. He was misused. I was against it. When I assumed the office, I told those officials that I would not mind what happened in the past and they must be ready to work without any such deals hereafter. In that context, we won a one-day series against Australia, a test series against Pakistan, and we won the Asian Cup. Thereafter, those officials got close to the President, and had me ousted. Sri Lanka’s cricket has been the loser.

Q: You say you are a campaigner against corruption. We have had several Bodhisatvas recently in this country. Aren’t you playing the role of messiah against corruption to further self-interest in politics? When you joined hands with the Rajapaksas, you knew they were corrupt. How would you reconcile your battle against corruption and your association with the Rajapaksas in the past?

I never whitewashed the Rajapaksas. I had no such need. I needed to start somewhere when I decided to take to politics and at that time the Rajapaksas had popular support. Even the JVP supported Mahinda Rajapaksa in 2005. I believe they did so with good intentions, just as I did. We thought that they would do something for the country.

Q: But you continued to back the Rajapaksas even after they were exposed for corruption and various other malpractices. You did not leave them in 2015, when some SLFP stalwarts decamp. What would you say to this?

In 2015, there were some issues, such as nepotism and corruption. But we had to remain there because the alternative to the Rajapaksas was a messy alliance forged by Sirisena and Wickremesinghe. We feared that a country would be plunged into anarchy. We hoped that the Rajapaksas would mend their ways by the end of the Yahapalana government, which was responsible for the Treasury bond scams and failure to prevent the Easter Sunday terror attacks.

While we were planning to bring Gotabaya to power, nobody thought that he would promote family rule. But when we realized that we had made a mistake, we distanced ourselves from the government.

What we need is a righteous leader instead of a person who promotes family bandyism, protects corrupt officials, and indulges in corruption. We have become a bankrupt nation. We are against corruption. Talking about rebuilding this nation without putting an end to corruption is only a pipedream.

Q: You have launched a political movement to eliminate corruption. How would you describe it?

We are forming an alliance under the theme, ‘Let’s put an end to corruption to build our nation.’

There is a pressing need for a formidable force against corruption. We cannot think of a better future unless we go all out to get rid of corruption.

I will give you one example: when I assumed the Ministry of Sports, it did not have money. The country was bankrupt, and the government’s allocation barely sufficed to pay salaries. We ran the Ministry with funds from sponsorships. Nevertheless, during my tenure, this country won the highest number of international medals. Under the watch of SB Dissanayake, the country secured 58 international medals and that was the time when the Sports Ministry had enough funds. I inherited the same Ministry full of crises, and stopped corruption, and the result was really impressive; the country bagged 170 medals in international games.

This shows that when corruption is eliminated, progress follows.

Q: How do you propose to battle corruption and enlist popular support for that endeavour?

We have formed an alliance against corruption and rebuilding the nation. There are many individuals against corruption across the political spectrum, including politicians representing Parliament, as well as those outside Parliament. Anyone who is against corruption and has not engaged in any corrupt activities, can join this alliance.

We have appointed a committee to identify the corrupt, starting with the MPs. Sri Lanka Cricket officials have been exposed by the Auditor General for their corrupt deals, but there are still some MPs who unashamedly support those corrupt elements. They have direct links with the corrupt.

Under the anti-corruption committee, there will be sub-committees tasked with ascertaining the views of the public about corruption and how to battle it.We have a retired Supreme Court Judge, a retired High Court Judge, three lawyers, doctors, engineers, economists, and auditors on the steering committee. They work on a voluntary basis. I will not name them for obvious reasons.

Q: Does it mean that this committee will name the clean politicians and will label the rest as corrupt? How practical is that?

The committee will clear the names, and after that, we will extend invitations. It is up to each of those MPs with clear profiles to either join us or not.

Q: Aren’t you planning to turn the anti-corruption movement into a political force?

To eliminate corruption, we need state power, which we can achieve only by winning elections. We will have to form a party so that people against corruption can vote for it and make a contribution towards ridding the country of corruption.

There is no alternative. This country is in crisis. Our economy has collapsed. The crisis has not prevented the ruling party politicians from enriching themselves at the expense of the public. We must change this system and for that purpose we need power.

Q: The country already has about 80 political parties. Won’t the party you are planning to form end up being another name board?

The main parties are facing disintegration. The SLFP, the SLPP and the UNP are faction ridden. Sri Lankans have realized the need for a change. There is space for a new political force on a mission to eliminate corruption.

Q: Many have predicted that there would be a hung Parliament after the next general election. Supposing your party, which is to be formed, will obtain a substantial number of seats, will it join forces with one or some of the parties that you consider corrupt?

No, that will never happen. Never will we join hands with the corrupt. I believe that the existing political culture has to be changed. Even if we are in the Opposition, we must support a government when it does something right. We must do away with our traditional political approach where the Opposition is always expected to stand against whatever the government does, whether it is right or wrong.

SJB MP Imtiaz Bakeer Markar recently proposed that we allocate 25 percent of seats to young MPs. It is a good proposal, and I agreed with him. During the Sri Lanka Cricket issue, Opposition Leader Sajith Premadasa stood by me, and he did it for the sake of the country. We should appreciate his stance.

Q: Many youths have left the country, and some others are planning to migrate. This will adversely impact the country’s development efforts and future. What plans do your movement have to address this problem?

Most of those who are migrating are from the SME sector, which collapsed because of loans. We asked other nations to reschedule the loans we had taken. The government got local banks to reschedule the loans they had given to the government. But nothing was done to reschedule the loans obtained by the SMEs.

The government is not there to construct culverts and gutters. The government is there to protect people in crisis. Those in the SME sector spent their 24 hours thinking about how to pay back the loans. They have no time to think about how to develop their enterprises. Sri Lanka has received USD 400 million from the Asian Development Bank, USD 300 million from the World Bank, besides IMF assistance.

These funds must be utilized to develop entrepreneurs. Concessions should be given to entrepreneurs. Just because we ask, the youth would not stop leaving the country. We must unveil a plan to ensure a secure future for them. The youth are more conscious of their rights and freedoms and more averse to corruption than others. That is why they took to the streets. If we can convince them that the country will be rid of corruption and a viable programme is underway to develop the economy and improve the people’s lot, they will not leave this country. That is what we are striving to do.



Features

Eastern University and the making of a culture of peace

Published

on

by Jehan Perera

There is an important change in the way peace is being understood in Sri Lanka. The notion that peacebuilding is not simply the responsibility of governments, politicians and peace organisations, but is also a responsibility of educational institutions, appears to be permeating the consciousness of at least a section of the academic community. This was visible on International Peace Day at an event held at Eastern University by the Faculty of Health-Care Sciences. The event was unusual not least because the medical and nursing faculty of the university had decided that peacebuilding was relevant to its academic and professional responsibilities.

Peacebuilding has too often been treated as something undertaken after conflict, when the fighting has stopped and the immediate task is to rebuild relationships between communities. But peace cannot be sustained by governments and peace organisations alone. If it is to become long lasting, the values and practices of peace have to become part of the institutions through which a society educates its younger generations. Universities and other educational institutions are therefore important to peacebuilding. They are among the places where the foundations of a culture of peace can either be built or neglected.

The experience of the Faculty of Health-Care Sciences at Eastern University provides a practical example of what this can mean. Led by its Dean, Prof Thillainathan Sathaananthan, the faculty organised an event which went beyond the ordinary academic scope of a medical faculty. University academics are experts in writing project proposals and applying for research grants. On this occasion, the members of the Faculty of Health-Care Sciences used those skills to apply for a UNESCO grant that they won to conduct an International Peace Day event. The significance lies less in the Rs 200,000 grant than in the decision to use the university’s institutional capacity and resources to invest in peacebuilding. The event at Eastern University needs to be understood as more than a successful university programme. It represents a possible paradigm shift in peace thinking.

Institutional Commitment

The Peace Day event obtained the support of the university administration, including Vice Chancellor Prof P Peratheepan, and reached out to secondary schools in the vicinity to mobilise their attendance. The event itself was meticulously organised. There were cultural items including traditional and modern dance and song in the three languages, performed by combinations of solo, duet and multiple singers, dancers and actors drawn in part from nearby secondary schools. There was a panel discussion by senior academics on the general theme of peacebuilding and how to prepare for it. A discussion among the students followed, where each student spoke on behalf of a religion that was not theirs. This is significant because peacebuilding cannot remain an idea discussed by specialists at conferences. It has to become part of the way institutions educate and prepare people for life in a plural society.

The Faculty of Health-Care Sciences at Eastern University has provided a model through its Peace Medicine course modules that were introduced to the curricular as a compulsory core course over 10 years ago. Two senior academics, Dr Kuveriel Eliyas Karunakaran and Dr Thillainathan Sathaananthan, have written a book on “Peace Medicine- A Health Care Concern” that was published five years ago. Its Peace Medicine Module integrates principles of medical ethics, compassion, equity, social justice and community engagement into health education and practice. In his introduction, former Vice Chancellor of Eastern University, Prof T Jayasingam noted “This book is an introduction to a theme which had already been operating in the Faculty of Health Care Sciences as a course.”

Doctors, nurses and health workers know better than anyone the harm that war and violence does. They are the people who treat the wounds and trauma that violence leaves behind. In a hospital, a patient is not asked what their religion or ethnicity is before they are treated. Health care is one of the places where peace is practised every day. The Faculty has therefore found a way of connecting its professional responsibilities with the wider social responsibility of peacebuilding. The question is whether this experience can be replicated throughout the country, at universities and at other educational institutions, so that peacebuilding becomes part of the consciousness of education itself. If that happens on a sufficient scale, it can begin to generate a culture of peace that becomes increasingly difficult to reverse.

Local Action

The Eastern University event corresponded closely to the United Nations theme for this year’s International Day of Peace, “Invest in Peace – For Everyone, Everywhere, Every Day”, which honours the “everyday architects of peace”, people driving local action, laying the groundwork for stability and building lasting peace from the ground up. The emphasis on investment is important. An investment means that something is put in: time, courage and resources. There is no more violent conflict in Sri Lanka today. But the absence of war does not automatically produce a culture of peace. The factors that fed the country’s conflict have not disappeared from the world. Racism, corruption and the violation of laws and human rights are the raw materials of conflict. So too are unresolved grievances, discrimination and the failure to recognise the suffering of others.

A country that does not deal with its past does not escape it. The past can return in the next generation. This is why the experience of Eastern University needs to be replicated countrywide, both at universities and at other educational institutions. The objective should not be to turn every academic discipline into peace studies. Rather, peacebuilding needs to become part of the consciousness of education itself. Eastern University shows that a medical faculty can develop Peace Medicine. A law faculty can examine the relationship between justice, rights and peace. Faculties of education can prepare teachers to work in diverse communities, while the humanities and social sciences can examine the different narratives through which communities understand their histories. Every institution can find its own way of making peacebuilding relevant to what it teaches.

Sri Lanka has had many declarations, pledges and programmes in the past. What matters is whether these produce changes in behaviour and institutional practice. Peacebuilding requires confronting difficult issues rather than avoiding them. It requires respect for different identities, but also engagement across those identities. It requires dealing with grievances in the present while also addressing unresolved issues from the past. It requires truth, accountability, reparations and guarantees of non-recurrence. It requires people to learn that the rights of another community do not diminish their own rights. The International Peace Day event at Eastern University was evidence of a change in the way at least some academics in a part of the country deeply affected by war are thinking about their responsibilities. Peace needs to be invested in and the most important investment will be in the minds of those who will inherit the future.

Continue Reading

Features

Quality assured education commodities

Published

on

by Ahilan Kadirgamar

I have always noticed the little paper tags that are inside the packaging of some products that say quality assured or quality control. I often wonder who might have checked the product and stamped that tag, but I also forget the tag soon enough. Decades later, when I entered academia, I was taken aback by the emphasis placed on quality assurance in our universities. It is not something that could be forgotten and done away with; the entire university system is obsessed with quality assurance.

Beginning with the staff induction programme, quality assurance is drilled into the newly recruited lecturers. It is the norm, not seen as doing any harm and only trying to improve quality. It is accepted as given, and not questioned. Quality Assurance Cells and Committees are omnipresent and hover above the Departments and, at times, even the Faculty Boards. Quality Assurance reviews are feared by the Deans and Vice Chancellors. University life itself seems secondary to the rule of quality assurance. What do we make of this system of quality assurance and what are its implications for our university system?

Corporate speak

Universities globally have been going through major changes with neoliberal education policies. In many countries, universities increasingly became corporatised to be run like businesses in the 1980s. As state support for universities declined, cost cutting became the norm. They started hiring adjunct or part-time staff. Many public non-fee levying universities around the world began to charge fees. Decade by decade, tuition fees became more and more exorbitant, forcing students to take student loans. The total student debt in the United States now stands at close to US$ 2 trillion; which is about 20 times the GDP of Sri Lanka. As the higher education landscape transformed in the West, university administrations began to recruit Presidents, Vice Chancellors and administrative officials with corporate backgrounds and experience.

Such corporatisation of universities in the West has since been imported into countries like Sri Lanka, introducing a new corporate vocabulary, including quality assurance, graduate competencies, programme outcomes, intended learning outcomes, etc. University teaching has become secondary to documenting so-called outcomes. The teacher-student relationship, the environment of the lecture hall and even administering the university have been over-determined by the processes of ensuring quality. How did such major changes come about in such a short time? Indeed, academics of just two generation ago, would never have heard of these terms and processes in the Sri Lankan university system.

World Bank Trojan horse

Since the early 2000s there have been a number of World Bank projects that have drastically changed the character of Sri Lankan universities. Quality assurance as a central agenda within universities, and many other changes to the working of our universities, came through these World Bank initiatives. The Improving Relevance and Quality of Undergraduate Education (IRQUE) project and Higher Education for the 21st Century (HETC) project were two such earlier projects that set up the Quality Assurance and Accreditation Unit (QAAU) under the University Grants Commission (UGC) and established systematic quality assurance reviews for state universities. The public often thinks these are grants from the World Bank to modernise our universities. However, they are not grants but loans.

The most recent such project, Accelerating Higher Education Expansion and Development (AHEAD) is a US$ 100 million loan from the World Bank implemented from 2018 to 2023, which consolidated the quality assurance structures from the earlier projects. Furthermore, these projects are implemented with tremendous arrogance, prioritising their implementation over all other concerns in the universities, when the project over six years for example accounts for just one fourth of our budget allocation for universities this year.

The AHEAD project drastically changed course curricula, sought to increase student enrolment in science, technology, engineering, mathematics (STEM) disciplines, commercialise the university research agenda and create university-business linkages. All of this was pushed to supposedly help us face development challenges. We have heard the ideological attack on our universities and even students claiming they are “unemployable graduates”. These changes to our higher education system were supposedly going to create jobs and increase employment.

The irony of the AHEAD project is that just as it was ending in 2023, apparently after having reached its targets, the Sri Lankan economy was collapsing. The World Bank often gets the direction of causality wrong. It is the economy that creates jobs for graduates, and not the training or kind of graduates that create jobs. It is decades of World Bank policies, and those of its ideological twin the IMF, that have led to such high youth unemployment, not only in Sri Lanka but also in many other countries in the global South.

Sri Lanka entered an IMF agreement in March 2023 and started a new Country Partnership Framework with the World Bank in June 2023. These programmes have little to say about, and actively discourage, government initiatives that aim to create an industrial policy or an employment creation policy. Instead, they push for austerity measures, which not only restrict the allocation for education among other sectors, but also end up contracting the economy to the detriment of increasing employment. Their goal is the commercialisation of higher education, to make universities into businesses and run them like factories.

In this context, the ideology of quality assurance is powerful. The International Organisation for Standardisation (ISO), whose different standards are necessary for marketing, is the institution that came up with the concept of “quality assurance”. It promoted quality assurance as a process of identifying defected products. Therefore, when the World Bank promotes this conceptual framing, our students are, in fact, seen as products on the assembly line, with quality assurance processes aiming to prevent the release of defected products from the university system. For the US$ 100 million we borrowed for the AHEAD project and the many more million dollars in similar World Bank projects, there is no evidence of increased employment of graduates.

Commodity fetishism

Over a century and a half ago, Karl Marx critiqued the economic analysis prevalent at that time that associated some inherent or monetary value for commodities without considering the social relations that underlie the production of those commodities. Marx called this commodity fetishism. Furthermore, he theorised that such commodity fetishism was also a reason for the alienation of human beings from the world. If our labour and what we produce is seen devoid of the social relations that underlie them, we lose our connection with the people and the world. In this process we become alienated from what we produce and the world.

We are now in a world where our students themselves are fetishised as commodities for the market. Universities are no longer communities concerned about knowledge and human growth, but mere factories producing commodities, which have to be produced without defects to be marketed. In this way, quality assurance has become the cause for the alienation of students, academics and our universities themselves, from the larger relationship with our economy and society.

Our university system does need reform. It is grossly underfunded and not providing the financial support and facilities for our students. Universities have become hierarchical spaces without the academic freedom and democratic ethos necessary for producing knowledge. Academics and students need to engage more with their communities to make their learning and research meaningful, not to mention their contribution to and integration with society. However, when it comes to even questions of governance and regulation of the universities, such concerns are merely reduced to improving quality. In our contemporary times, this singular focus on quality assurance, as opposed to addressing the larger structural issues, is crippling our universities. There may be no way out, but to put back quality assurance where it started, those little tags on goods, to perhaps be noticed but quickly forgotten.

Ahilan Kadirgamar is a political economist and Senior Lecturer, University of Jaffna.

(Kuppi is a politics and pedagogy happening on the margins of the lecture hall that parodies, subverts, and simultaneously reaffirms social hierarchies)

Continue Reading

Features

Thailand’s biggest new global star …

Published

on

The entertainment scene, globally, is agog with excitement, and, why not!

Yes, a new global star has emerged … from Thailand, and she hit the headlines by winning America’s Got Talent.

Rattikarn Amloy, known to millions by her stage name Nene Royal, was crowned the winner of America’s Got Talent (AGT) Season 21 at the live finale at Pasadena Civic Auditorium, California, taking home the USD 1 million grand prize.

The 16-year-old rocker, from the holiday island of Phuket (I’ve been to Phuket, courtesy Tourism Authority of Thailand), has struck a power chord around the world, and is the first Thai national ever to win the hit NBC show.

She beat nine other finalists, including runner-up magician Geno Ploeger, after a blistering final performance.

Nene’s story is pure rock and roll fairy-tale. She says she picked up a guitar at age seven, fell in love at the first chord, and taught herself mostly by watching videos online. That dedication earned her a music scholarship to Kajonkiet International School Phuket.

Her audition at America’s Got Talent — a swaggering, shredding rendition of The Cranberries’ classic ‘Zombie’ — exploded online, amassing over 200 million views across AGT’s platforms, more than any act this season.

She kept wowing: ‘Hysteria’ by Muse, then ‘Black Hole Sun’ by Soundgarden which earned her Spice Girl Mel B’s Golden Buzzer, sending her straight to the live shows.

For the final, she unleashed ‘Seven Nation Army’ by The White Stripes. Judge Howie Mandel shouted: “You should win. Give her the million, America.” Mel B praised her “mysterious, mystical stage presence”.

And for the grand finale, she lived every teen rocker’s dream — performing on stage, alongside US rock giants Linkin Park.

When host Terry Crews announced her as winner, the teenager collapsed to the stage floor in tears. “I’m very happy and you know I’m emotional right now,” she said.

And Thailand erupted. Her school held watch parties, posting: “You did it, congratulations, champion. We are so proud of you.”

Even Prime Minister Anutin Charnvirakul sent a personal congratulation. He had earlier hosted Nene at Government House in July, where she played guitar while he sang a Thai rock song. His office said her talent “brought pride to Thai people.”

Corporate Thailand also rallied behind her — Charoen Pokphand Foods, owned by billionaire Dhanin Chearavanont, even rented a giant billboard in Times Square, New York, to cheer her on.

With her blistering guitar solos, rock-ballad shrieks and fearless spirit, little Nene Royal has just become Thailand’s biggest new global star.

What’s more, this amazing teenager will be bringing her powerful vocals, guitar skills and signature rock-metal style to the stage, as opening act, before one of the world’s biggest rock bands, America’s Avenged Sevenfold, in Singapore, on 13 October.

Unfortunately, we are still to see a local artiste, grab the spotlight, on a global scale … like Thailand’s Nene.

Yes, they do shine, but mostly on social media, and that, too, with the aid of AI (Artificial Intellegence).

Continue Reading

Trending