Features

Official visits with Mrs. B to China, India and the Soviet Union

Published

2 years ago

2024/12/29

Thilina Walpola

“Rapacious West” reference in speech causes convusions

(Excerpted from Rendering Unto Caesar, by Bradman Weerakoon)

Most important visitors to the country called over at Temple Trees to pay their respects to the prime minister. One of the most interesting of these occasions was the morning the West Indies cricket team called over on the initiative of Felix Goonewardene, then Editor of the Times of Ceylon. While world class on the field, most of them like Garfield Sobers and the legendary three W’s Walcott, Weekes and Worrell were distinctly uncomfortable in the prime minister’s presence. Exceptional among them were Conrad Hunte, who spoke eloquently of his MRA (Moral Rearmament) connections and the dashing Rohan Kanhai.

Conference of Six Afro-Asian Non-aligned Countries December 1962

Towards the end of 1962 the situation on the disputed China-India border in the snow-bound Himalayan and Karakoram ranges had deteriorated and the occasional skirmishing between the border guards had broken out into open war between the two countries. Conflict between the two giants of the non-aligned world who had proclaimed “panchseela” and particularly the peaceful resolution of disputes between nations, was embarrassing to say the least to those who had paraded non-alignment as the best way forward for the developing nations in an increasingly divided Cold-War driven world.

It led to the Afro-Asian community taking up the issue and deliberating on what should be done to prevent full-scale war between the two former friends. Sirimavo took the initiative in convening a meeting in- Colombo in early December, which brought together Prince Norodom Sihanouk of Cambodia and General Ne Win of Burma, in addition to representatives from the United Arab Republic, Indonesia and Ghana.

It was the first international conference I had participated in and what struck me was the extreme formality of the occasion the set speeches made by the participants and the overly effusive compliments each gave the other. I was also surprised at the sight of the delegation leaders changing their suits for each session of the meeting. The Conference lasted only a day and it seemed as if they wanted to make sure they were noticed.

It was agreed that the prime minister of Ceylon and three or four of the other leaders should visit China and India before the end of the month; so Felix, Glannie Peiris and I accompanied Sirimavo on the visits to Peking and New Delhi. First to China to meet Chou En-lai and Mao Tse Tung and then to India to speak with Jawaharlal Nehru

The Chinese looked upon the visit as both a mission on behalf of the Colombo powers as well as a state visit of a prime minister of Ceylon to their country, and Sirimavo was received in a right royal manner. It was winter and very cold in Hong Kong and we bought as much warm clothing as we could to protect ourselves from the freezing temperatures that we were warned we would face in Peking. From Hong Kong to Canton, our first stop in the People’s Republic was by train, as no air flights existed in view of the hostile nature of the relations between Hong Kong then a British colony, and China.

I recorded the entry of a Sri Lankan Prime Minister into China for the first time in a piece I did on our return for Ceylon Today, the monthly journal of the Department of Information in the following terms:

“At Samchun, where a little iron bridge marks the frontier between the People’s Republic of China and the new territory leased to Hong Kong on the mainland, the prime minister was received by the vice-governor of Kwangtung Province and Chinese protocol officials. His Excellency Hsieh Ke-Hsi, Chinese Ambassador in Ceylon, also accompanied the party from there on in the special train to Canton.

“After a three-hour train journey through a countryside strikingly similar to rural Ceylon, with its paddy fields and irrigation channels, Canton was reached. At the railway station a reception had been organized and the prime minister was formally welcomed to the city by the provincial governor of Kwangtung. Long lines of children carrying the flags of Ceylon and China cheered the prime minister shouting, “Long Live Friendship between China and Ceylon.”

“Outside, in the station square, several thousands of people, dancers in traditional lion costumes, and bands playing Chinese music greeted the delegation. After inspecting an impressive army Guard-of-Honour and reviewing the march-past, the prime minister, was formally welcomed to the People’s Republic of China by the governor of Kwantung, who referred to the friendly relations that bound the people of the two countries together and to the common desire of the people of China and Ceylon for peace.

“The train ride into Canton and the People’s Republic was interesting for its first impressions of the contrast between the bustling, over-crowded, capital-driven city of Hong Kong and the rather bleak and forlorn appearance of the mainland. But as we entered the territory of China marked by the small iron bridge and many sign boards, the hospitality of the Chinese customs and railway staff who took over was evident.

“The friendliness of the waitresses with their trays of steaming mugs of green tea, from then on to Canton was infectious. The first sights of the Chinese countryside in deep winter, however, were not very encouraging. Groups of solemn-faced men and women dressed in identical blue tunic suits, waved little paper `lion’ flags as the train passed on. Canton itself was a large and active city. Much of the population seemed to be on the move on bicycles. Their noses and mouths were masked in gauze, as we learned, to prevent the spread of infection and to protect them from the bitterly cold wind.”

In recent Chinese history Canton had been the centre of revolutionary ferment. It is here that the Opium War had its beginnings and the revolution which ushered in Dr Sun Yat Sen’s proclamation of a Chinese revolutionary movement gained ground. That afternoon, the prime minister visited the site of the Peasant Movement Institute.

After a day or two of being feted in Canton, where we were equipped with heavy fur overcoats and headgear, so that we all looked, as Felix remarked ‘like cuddlesome teddy bears’, we left for Peking where the temperature was 10 degrees below zero. Sirimavo was to make a little ‘thank you’ speech as she came down the gangway and set foot on Chinese soil for the first time, but she wasn’t able to do so. The cold was so intense that although she tried to move her lips no sound came forth. The speech was finally made in the warm reception area well inside the airport building.

The meetings with the Chinese side, with Chou En-lai sitting opposite Sirimavo at the table, went into the evening hours when we would adjourn for some Chinese ballet and dinner which was always a feast. The story-line of the ballet or opera was invariably about the incursions of invaders of the past into Chinese territory. The interpretation which came over our headphones was by Chou En-lai’s personal translator, a young man with a strong American accent since he had had his early education in the United States. Hearing snatches of the interpreted dialogue like the heroine asking: “Where is the pass?” and the peasant’s reply: “There ain’t no pass” in a broad American drawl, as we watched Chinese opera in the heart of Peking, was uncanny.

Felix was a great source of strength throughout. Sirimavo passed the baton over to him and he responded magnificently. He intervened, even cross-examined, of course, with great respect and courtesy, at every opportunity. The Chinese were determined to show us that their move over the Himalayas, both on the eastern and western fronts, was right and just and that all they were doing was to correct an anomaly and go up to their historic boundary. The conference table was littered with maps of the Himalayan heights and we heard mention of the MacMahon Line and the Ladakh Plateau and the passes so often during those days that they almost became part of our dreams.

A ceasefire was in place before we arrived and the Colombo powers delegation’s plan was to consolidate this and prevent a recurrence of conflict. After four days of discussions we agreed on a communique which we were then to put to the Chinese side. It was difficult coming to a final agreement. The Chinese strategy in negotiation at the time, seemed to be to agree fairly easily to the principle when the leaders met, but to fight it out to the bitter end when the officials worked on the draft.

I recall one occasion in the middle of the night – we were leaving early the next morning – when Sirimavo had to be put up to speak on the telephone to Chou En-lai, who was at the same Guest House, to object to a particular phraseology that the Chinese officials wanted us to adopt. It did not take long for Chou to agree to our formulation. I felt that this was a useful negotiating ploy, to go for the maximum but to be prepared to back-down, if the opposition was too great.

A minor disaster that we had to face after the China visit was a reported reference in the speech – one of many that Sirimavo made – replying to the toast proposed at the dinner accorded by Chou En-lai. I was responsible for the general speeches like those at dinner and receptions, and had been very careful in drafting about any references to Taiwan, the United Sates and the West. However, although we had not realized it at the time the prime minister was making her speech, the words ‘rapacious West’

appeared in the text, as reported. We actually became aware of it only when we returned to Ceylon as all of us in the delegation were so caught up in the euphoria, which the very act of being in China creates, that nobody realized that we had unwittingly made a slip.

When we checked on our notes, Felix, Glannie and I could not imagine how these words had crept in. Finally we came to the conclusion that it must have been inserted in the final draft by someone who had an axe to grind in the embassy. The finger pointed to the embassy, although there was no proof of it. It taught me a very good lesson as to how careful one had to be with the final copy. We took quite some time to shrug off the ‘rapacious West’ comment which the press kept reminding Sirimavo about for several months.

The visit to New Delhi was noteworthy in that it marked the visible nearing of the end of an era in which the great Nehru had dominated the politics, not only in India but the entire region. I will never forget one late afternoon’s image of a very tired, ageing and bald Nehru having removed his Nehru cap without which I had never seen a photograph of him, walking slowly down the corridor of the South Bloc where his offices were, after a long and not successful round of discussions with our side.

The Himalayas which had been the ‘Great Wall’ of India from time immemorial had been breached and in his historian’s vision of India’s oneness, her purity violated. His policy of friendship with neighbouring countries, especially China had not yielded the expected response. Life, it appeared, would never be the same for him.

We were put up at the Rashtrapati Bhavan itself as the president of India’s guests. It was my first visit there and I was immensely impressed at the sense of power, the architecture, the layout of the gardens and the dress of the uniformed guards. Everything about it exuded majesty, enormous size and strength. The British architect had indeed succeeded in memorializing the immense potency of the Raj’s imperial presence.

Even the old habits and behaviour seemed to yet live, as I was reminded by the “Any one for tennis this afternoon?” query, aired by the young adjutant doing protocol duty for our team, in a very Oxonian accent at his colleagues passing by, as he walked us down the stately corridors to our suites.

State Visits to the Socialist Countries

Our relations with the socialist-bloc countries were so good that we made state visits to several countries which had been earlier `out of bounds’. In addition to Poland, Czechoslovakia and the former German Democratic Republic (East Germany and the eastern side of Berlin separated by the famous Berlin Wall) we were welcome guests in the Soviet Union in the summer of 1962. After three days of talks and the signing of agreements in Moscow we toured, sometimes by Aeroflot and at other times by train to Leningrad (St Petersburg).

The Hermitage museum was a special treat, especially to art lover Lakshmi Bandaranaike, and Volvograd, earlier Stalingrad, where during the great `patriotic war’ almost a million Soviet troops had died during a six-month siege was impressive. I was able to capture the moment in Sirimavo’s speech that morning when she was presented, by the Mayor of Volvograd, with a small silver box containing the soil of the city ‘made sacred by the blood of heroic men’. T B Subasinghe, who with his beautiful wife Lalitha made a very effective contribution as our ambassador, was very complimentary about the prime minister’s speech.

Sirimavo was a very special guest of Khrushchev, the general secretary of the Communist Party, and prime minister of the Soviet Union. He was a bluff and earthy man with a homely wife, who called a spade a spade and the two leaders got on very well together. Sirimavo who was very particular about observing the regulations, asked me whether she could keep the gift that Khrushchev presented her with. I observed that since it was a personal gift, albeit of considerable value, she would be well entitled to keep it on refunding to the state its nominal value.

The question of state gifts continued to be one which always was a concern with the leaders I worked with. When could they be retained by the recipient and in what circumstances should they in terms of the Establishment Code, be returned to the State to be kept in the Colombo museum? The logic behind the rules was that since the taxpayer paid for the gift that was given outwards usually in those days the familiar ebony elephant, caparisoned in silver Kandyan filigree work and encrusted with semi-precious stones, the inward gift also should go to the taxpayer via the Colombo museum.

As a postscript I would add that state gifts today are of much lesser intrinsic value though highly imaginative. The recent state gifts to President George Bush, for example, included in addition to a beautiful coffee-table book, Geoffrey Bawa’s Lunuganga, a substantial block of recycled writing paper. The recycling was of elephant dung, and on hearing this, a recent British visitor remarked that this was indeed an appropriate gift considering the present times.

In Moscow in view of the special relationship that we enjoyed with the Soviet Union, we were not put up at one of the many state guest houses or the state-owned hotels, but were given luxurious suites in the Kremlin Palace itself The Kremlin, contrary to the forbidding and gloomy picture that years of negative media publicity had evoked, was a highly decorative, heavily ornamented, museum-like place. The onion-shaped spires of the familiar exterior seemed to flow into the elaborate interior decor.

Everywhere there was gold ornamentation not only in the large armchairs of the suites and on the solid headrest of the enormous bed, but even in the bathrooms where the knobs of the water taps appeared to have received a heavy coating of gold. We got a good sense of the basic richness of the Soviet Union, and its heritage from Tsarist times, which was being carefully and proudly, preserved by its present rulers most of the time.

The Ceylon touch after the dinner given at the Kremlin by Khrushchev was the welcome appearance of Chitrasena and Vajira doing excerpts of their ballet ‘Karadiya’. The evening before we had been mesmerized by the grace and sylph-like dancing of the Russian ballerinas in ‘Swan Lake’ at the Bolshoi Theatre. Vajira, then in her prime, did us all proud with the fluid agility and statuesque beauty of her dancing and came a very close second to the star performers of the Bolshoi, the home of classical ballet.

Harvard in the Summer of 1963

In August, Henry Kissinger, then Professor of International Relations at Harvard, invited me to the International Seminar he annually convened, during the three-month summer vacation. This was a good opportunity to go back to ‘school’ after my 1952-53 year at Michigan where I first did my post-graduate work in Sociology. Kissinger even then was quite a character with strong opinions. When we asked him how he would like to be addressed – Dr or Professor – he rather grandly replied, “Just call me Kissinger.” The link with Kissinger was to prove very useful when he moved to Washington later on as the National Security Advisor in the Kennedy administration.

The stay at Harvard was significant for a particular incident which indicated the way in which the United States administration went about its business. One day I had a call from Washington asking whether someone from the state department could call on me at Harvard. It was to ‘tap’ me on what was going on back home. I never found out whether he was from the CIA, but he certainly asked me a whole lot of probing questions that day.

All News Advertisement

Features

Coercive laws recipe for future misrule

Published

2 hours ago

2026/10/13

Sahan Weerasooriya

by Jehan Perera

The NPP government is going after powerful figures from the past and present who have engaged in corruption, fraud and criminal activity in a way that no previous government in Sri Lanka has done. Former ministers, politicians and senior state officials are among those facing investigations and legal proceedings. The government has placed before Parliament a document listing 50 cases involving corruption, fraud and other crimes. These include not only financial offences but also cases relating to the Easter Sunday attacks, the killings of Lasantha Wickrematunge and Wasim Thajudeen, the disappearance of Prageeth Ekneligoda and attacks on journalists Keith Noyahr and Upali Tennakoon.

The significance of this effort is that it can demonstrate that nobody is above the law, regardless of political connections or social standing, which will help restore public confidence in institutions that have long been distrusted. It could also recover public resources, improve the investment climate and strengthen the foundations for a more prosperous and just Sri Lanka. When criticised for focusing on the past and not the present, the government position is that these investigations were initiated under earlier governments, particularly between 2015 and 2019, and that it is now allowing investigators to proceed to deal with the backlog without political interference.

But there is an aspect of the government’s approach that is less justifiable. While pursuing past wrongdoing by powerful individuals, it is also advancing a triumvirate of draft laws that could give the state sweeping powers over citizens, organisations and dissent in the present and future. The draft Prevention of Terrorism legislation, the Prevention of Organised Crimes Bill and the NGO Registration and Supervision Bill raise serious questions about the over-centralisation of power. Each of these laws strengthens the powers of the state while weakening the rights and safeguards that protect people from their misuse and thus questions the basic rights of people in democracy where ‘the power of the people is vested in the government’. This is a recipe for future misrule rather than the rule of law. As the well-known saying goes, power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Proposed Laws

The real test of system change, for which the government obtained an overwhelming mandate, requires not only a government willing to hold others accountable, but one prepared to subject itself to the same principles of legality, transparency and restraint. The three proposed laws that are particularly important in this regard are the Protection of the State from Terrorism Bill, the Prevention of Organised Crimes Bill and the NGO Registration and Supervision Bill. Each of these draft laws has been presented as serving a legitimate purpose. Preventing terrorism, combating organised crime and ensuring that NGOs do not facilitate money laundering or terrorist financing are proper responsibilities of the state. Sri Lanka has international obligations in these areas, and no responsible government can disregard them. However, the existence of a legitimate objective does not justify every means adopted to achieve it.

The proposed Protection of the State from Terrorism Bill illustrates the problem. Although its definition of terrorism draws on a model developed by a former United Nations Special Rapporteur, the Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka has warned that the definition of terrorism extends beyond the model and could bring legitimate political protest, trade union action and civil disobedience within the scope of counter-terrorism legislation. Its concerns also include prolonged detention, inadequate judicial oversight and restrictions on access to legal counsel. These are objections that go to the heart of the relationship between the citizen and the state. The government cannot credibly promise to protect democratic freedoms while creating powers that could be used to restrict them. It is necessary for the government to reassess the draft through transparent consultation and revise provisions that could criminalise legitimate dissent.

The Prevention of Organised Crimes Bill raises similar concerns. It is presented as giving effect to the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organised Crime, which Sri Lanka ratified in 2006. The Centre for Policy Alternatives (CPA) has argued that the convention does not require many of the bill’s provisions. The proposed law extends to a broad range of offences, permits detention orders lasting up to a year, makes confessions to police admissible for purposes of legal evidence, and introduces extensive surveillance powers. A law intended to dismantle criminal networks should not create a parallel system of exceptional powers that could be applied far beyond organised crime. Nor should safeguards developed through years of experience with abuses under the Prevention of Terrorism Act be weakened through legislation bearing a different name. The government should review whether or not existing laws could be used effectively to control these crimes or whether each exceptional power is necessary.

Civil Society

The proposed NGO Registration and Supervision Bill presents another test of the government’s intentions. The government may reasonably seek transparency in the finances of organisations receiving public or foreign funds, including measures to prevent money laundering and terrorist financing. It seeks to justify its overreach on the grounds of meeting the internationally mandated requirements of the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) for the Asia-Pacific region. But these objectives do not justify placing civil society and NGOs under excessive administrative control when even the FATF ranks them as low to medium risks. The draft bill would require registration and renewal, impose extensive obligations on organisations and empower authorities to suspend or deregister them on broadly framed grounds. It is important to redraft provisions that confer excessive discretion over registration, renewal, suspension and deregistration of NGOs.

Among the concerns raised by United Nations human rights special rapporteurs with regard to the draft NGO law are provisions requiring organisations to align with government policies and restrictions that could affect advocacy, dissent and freedom of association. The implications extend well beyond organisations that engage directly with the government. Community groups, human rights organisations, independent researchers and organisations working on reconciliation or accountability could find their activities constrained by uncertainty over how these provisions might be interpreted. Organisations that criticise government policies are not thereby working against the country. Their freedom to do so is part of what distinguishes a democracy from a system in which the government determines which opinions and activities are acceptable.

The government has generated considerable public goodwill through its pursuit of corruption and criminality. It should not assume that this goodwill gives it an unlimited mandate to strengthen the coercive powers of the state. The NPP knows from its own history that governments can treat dissent as a threat and use the machinery of the state against their opponents. There is still time to correct the drafts through transparent public consultation, narrow definitions of offences, meaningful judicial control over detention and surveillance, and effective remedies against arbitrary decisions. A government that pursues corruption while weakening safeguards against state abuse risks undermining its own achievements. Besides bringing to light the abuse of power by previous governments, the NPP government needs to build a system in which no future government can abuse power in the belief they can get away with it.

Features

Quality assurance without quality enhancement: The irony of university QA

Published

2 hours ago

2026/10/13

Sahan Weerasooriya

By Ramya Kumar

According to the Quality Assurance Council (QAC) of the University Grants Commission (UGC), quality assurance (QA) refers to “the means (i.e. the policies, attitudes, actions, procedures, etc.), by which an institution can guarantee with confidence and certainty, that the standards and quality of its educational provision are being maintained and enhanced”.

An expansive structure has been in place since 2005 to govern and implement QA processes within the state university system. The QAC is the focal point at the UGC that implements external reviews of state universities and institutes. Each university has its own Centre for Quality Assurance (CQA) tasked with performing QA in line with QAC directives. Faculties, in turn, have Internal Quality Assurance Cells (IQAC) performing their own QA; they are answerable to the CQA.

The big question is whether this all-encompassing top-down QA system, that in many ways undermines the internal dynamics of university governance, actually supports universities to enhance the quality of education. This article highlights some concerns.

Top-down check-box activities

The QAC conducts external reviews of universities and degree programmes. A review team appointed by the UGC (who may or may not have experience in the institution/programme in question) examines the self-evaluation report submitted by the said institution/programme. The team then conducts a site visit to verify the claims made in the university’s self-evaluation report, clarify issues identified during the desk review, and examine how QA procedures operate in practice. The team holds meetings with the university administration, members of the Council and Senate, Deans, Heads of Departments, academic and non-academic staff, students, and others. Following the visit, a draft report is submitted to the relevant institution/programme for comment before final publication. The reviewed institution/programme then prepares and publishes an action plan addressing the recommendations, with subsequent monitoring of progress.

There are some worthy QA initiatives under implementation, such as improving facilities for students with disabilities and strengthening mechanisms to address sexual- and gender-based violence. However, for the most part, QA activities have little to do with improving the quality of education. They are mostly preoccupied with monitoring faculty and department websites, digital transformation, student feedback, subject evaluation, course evaluation, peer evaluation, and, more recently, staff appraisal. These activities, which consume an inordinate amount of time—so precious at understaffed universities—have become check-box activities completed to generate evidence for the next review. Below is an excerpt of a conversation between two academics (1 and 2) that conveys how QA plays out at universities (reproduced with permission).

1: … .it’s like social media you know, like posting things on Facebook or twitter or Instagram. When people do a lot of social media, everything they do, they do thinking, “okay I’m going to post it in this way… this I have to put on my Instagram.” QA is a little like that… everything is considered in light of, “ah we can use this for the review, as evidence… for example very recently we were encouraged to have all the things that we do in our department in the faculty newsletter so then they can put in the review. Every little thing has to be noted down….

2: And with pictures and all…

1: At the very least it has to be written so that you have written evidence .. you can’t be doing something for the sake of doing something or because it is good for the department … and sometimes people tell me “oh yea that’s a good idea we can fit that under this x, y section of the review..”

2: Yea, and nobody really thinks about the actual outcome… whether it’s actually helping anyone..

1: I also find that a lot of the words that we used in different ways have now been co-opted to the QA discourse ..including quality.. I can’t actually say what I want as an “outcome”, for example, that the outcome of this workshop is that my students “think about” … then I am told “ah but no that’s not one of the Bloom’s taxonomy words, “think about”.…

2: And the worst part is these medical and agriculture people, these types of people go around spreading it like some kind of gospel!

1: Yea, this cookie cutter way of doing things, they think is the height of innovativeness or creativity, when actually it is so mundane … for me the most awful thing about it is like some fungus of mundanity has taken over through QA reviews.

2: yea, when you say QA, my mind closes off immediately and I stop listening…

Auditing everything but power

QA leaves out crucial aspects of university governance. For instance, there is no review or assessment of the “quality” of university administrations under Criterion 1 or the integrity of procedures governing the promotion of academic staff under Criterion 6 of the institutional reviews.

The majority in the Council—the university’s executive and governing body, which is responsible for selecting the Vice-Chancellor (VC)—are appointed in ad hoc fashion. Apart from the Ex-Officio members in the Council (VC, Deans, etc.), and the two members elected by the Senate, the remainder are appointed by the UGC with no formal consultation or vetting procedure. The VC appointment process described in UGC Circular No. 03/2023 exemplifies how an ostensibly technical process can become entangled in political sycophancy. The Registrar invites applications for the position of VC through advertisement. Applicants must submit a curriculum vitae, a statement of vision for the university and supporting documents. The University Council appoints a three-member Search Committee of senior academics to encourage “eminent persons” to apply, while the UGC appoints a former VC from another university to “observe” the selection process.

A Special Meeting of the University Council is convened. Candidates are interviewed and must make a presentation to the Council Members, followed by questions. Each Council member “gives marks” for seven prescribed criteria: strategic focus (20%), effective leadership (20%), holistic thinking/conceptual skills (10%), academic and research excellence (15%), personal integrity (10%), professional communication (10%) and managerial competence (15%). Marks are averaged, and the Council recommends three candidates to the UGC in rank order. The UGC-appointed observer separately submits a confidential report on the selection process.

This procedure is expected to guarantee quality, but does it? Applications are submitted to the Council Members, who have been appointed on questionable bases, and who are expected to review the applications and give scores, based on objective assessments. But, in reality, most Council Members are manipulated by VC candidates, who often have personal ties with them. The UGC-appointed observer usually has no genuine interest in the outcome. And there is no way for anyone to actually question the Council’s decision once it is made. Although the highest-ranked candidate may ultimately be appointed, the selection remains a political decision made by the President, who retains the discretion to appoint any one of the three.

External reviews also do not look into the promotions of academic staff, except to scrutinise whether there are policies and procedures in place to govern promotion. Academic staff may apply for promotion to Professor once they satisfy the prescribed eligibility requirements, which typically include the period of service, academic qualifications, research and publication achievements, teaching experience, and contributions to the university and wider community. Applications are evaluated against specified criteria, with research output and academic contributions assessed through documentary evidence and expert evaluation. Under the UGC’s scheme for Professors, two experts from outside the applicant’s institution assess specified aspects of research and knowledge dissemination. Again, beneath this technical process, which is externally evaluated, lies a problematic points-based scheme that can be manipulated and abused with impunity.

Rethinking university QA

Like the VC election process and the schemes of promotion for academic staff, QA reviews are open to manipulation. Before a review, there is a chaotic rush to complete evidence gathering and reporting. Academics leave all other work aside, including at times their teaching, to focus on completing documentation and preparing reports. The standardised criteria in the review manuals and scoring sheets often do not reflect differences in disciplines and institutional contexts. But this does not really matter because any serious problems experienced by institutions or programmes are hastily brushed under the carpet to conceal any evidence that could taint the review. The goal is to obtain an A or at least a B grade at whatever cost.

QA may result in positive change if it moves beyond top-down check-box activities towards internally designed and owned processes encompassing all aspects of university governance, led by departments and faculties, and supported by adequate resources. The current QA system needs to be dismantled and replaced by procedures that are accountable, not to the UGC, but to our students and the communities we serve.

(Ramya Kumar is attached to the Department of Community and Family Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, 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.

Features

Down Memory Lane — the Grand 20th Edition!

Published

2 hours ago

2026/10/13

Sahan Weerasooriya

Down Memory Lane: Ready to sing again

Yes, Down Memory Lane, the beloved Sing-Along concert series that first struck a chord, way back in 1997, returns for its landmark 20th edition this Saturday, 17th October, at the beautiful Bolgoda Grand Resort, Moratuwa town centre.

Having celebrated its glorious 25th anniversary with the show in 2023, this milestone 20th concert promises to be even more special.

The organisers, the ever-popular Moratuwa Arts Forum, are pulling out all the stops to present yet another unforgettable evening, brimming with camaraderie, fellowship, and pure nostalgia.

Get ready for two-and-a-half hours of non-stop singing as veteran vocalists, from the Moratuwa Arts Forum, will take the stage to lead and inspire the happy audience to sing, sing and sing to their hearts’ content.

The repertoire? Absolutely magical, according to the organisers.

Veteran Arun Dias Bandaranaike: Will handle the evening’s proceedings / Priya Peiris: Event Conceptor

Around 40 golden oldies — from timeless English vintage evergreens and hits from the 50s to the 90s, to toe-tapping calypsos, soulful American plantation melodies, rousing cowboy and Dixieland favourites, aa well as cherished Sinhala standards. All to be sung with much gusto!

This year’s dedicated organising committee comprises Brian Coorey (Chairman), Priya Peiris (Event Conceptor), Hiran Fernando, Suranga Fernando, Viranjan Perera, Hemka Fernando and Neelesh Silva. Guidance and support comes from Moratuwa Arts Forum President Sarana Guneratne and Secretary Chandani Silva.

Adding his signature charm to the evening, as Master of Ceremonies, will be the veteran Arun Dias Bandaranaike.

Don’t miss this landmark celebration of music and memories!

For further details, contact Hiran Fernando on 0772636446 or WhatsApp 0783636446.