Editorial
Saving Anojan: Beyond Executioner’s Blade
Friday 16th October, 2026
Glad tidings come occasionally amidst doom and gloom. Sri Lankans are elated that the Supreme Court of Saudi Arabia has set aside the death sentence imposed on Anojan Sivarasa. He was initially sentenced to five years’ imprisonment and fined three million Saudi riyals over a Facebook comment deemed insulting to the Prophet Muhammad. The death sentence was subsequently imposed on appeal, forcing Sri Lanka to redouble its efforts to save him. The Opposition lost no time in raking the government over the coals, claiming that it had ruined the chances of saving Anojan.
Anojan has been spared the death penalty, but that does not mean his freedom has been secured. His legal fate remains uncertain. Conflicting interpretations of the Saudi Supreme Court ruling and media reports based on them do not establish whether he will face another sentence at the rehearing or incur other legal consequences for the offence of which he was convicted. A prolonged stay in a Saudi prison could prove a fate worse than death. Anojan has already suffered an assault at the hands of a fellow inmate. His ordeal, therefore, is far from over. It is fervently hoped that he will secure his freedom, return to Sri Lanka and be reunited with his family.
It is both heartening and ironic that a government led by the JVP, an organisation with a history of kangaroo trials and extrajudicial executions, has striven to save a life, and rightly so. One hopes that the government will continue to uphold the same respect for the right to life in its broader sense, a fundamental human rights principle that encompasses not only protection against arbitrary deprivation of life but also the state’s duty to safeguard life. Saving Anojan from the executioner’s blade is therefore a welcome act. But respect for the right to life must extend beyond a single individual facing execution abroad. According to the UN Human Rights Committee, the right to life encompasses protection against unlawful killing, foreseeable threats to life, and conditions that prevent people from living with dignity. These include access to essential healthcare and other basic services, protection against environmental degradation and public hazards, and safeguards against deaths in state custody. The principle applies to everyone, including suspects and convicted criminals, regardless of the gravity of their offences.
It is said that victory has a thousand fathers but defeat is an orphan. So, it is only natural that both the government and the Opposition are claiming credit for saving Anojan. If the Saudi Supreme Court had upheld the death sentence, they would have blamed each other.
Sri Lankan taxpayers, who are struggling to keep their heads above water amidst numerous economic hardships and crying out for relief, have a right to know how much the legal and diplomatic efforts to save Anojan from execution have cost the public purse. The government must disclose the expenditure incurred, including legal fees, travel and other related expenses, and explain the principles governing the use of public funds for such interventions.
The government should also make it very clear that all Sri Lankans working or living abroad must understand that they are subject to the laws of their host countries and that insulting religions or committing other offences can have grave consequences. Those who knowingly violate such laws must be prepared to face the legal consequences. At the same time, any policy must allow for exceptional cases in which fundamental rights, access to justice or the risk of disproportionate punishment warrant direct state intervention.
One important lesson that Anojan’s predicament holds for social media users is that freedom of expression is not the freedom of the wild ass. It has limits, and, as the familiar saying goes, one person’s freedom ends where another person’s nose begins.
Editorial
Europe’s protest wave and its ramifications
Tuesday 20th October, 2026
A massive wave of youth-led and anti-austerity protests is sweeping across several European countries. It is driven by a host of issues including soaring cost of living, housing unaffordability, discontent with public services, and resentment at governments’ economic policies that are not beneficial to ordinary people. Protests in France, Italy, Belgium, Albania, Portugal and Spain are not part of a single, centrally organised movement, although the international media often lump them together. All of them however reveal a growing frustration over young people’s prospects and the increasing cost of living in Europe.
No country is immune from what social scientists describe as the cross-border diffusion of discontent and protests. Agitations could have a domino effect across national borders. We have witnessed waves of youth-led protests, in this part of the world, affecting Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Nepal and India. Protesters brought down governments in Bangladesh and Nepal and ousted a Sri Lankan President, causing a subsequent regime change. One may recall that four African countries saw their governments or long-serving rulers fall during the Arab Spring uprisings of 2010–2012.
Main causes of unrest in Europe can be divided into three broad categories. People are facing an unbearable cost-of-living squeeze, with rising prices, expensive energy and housing costs exerting enormous pressure on household budgets. The youth have a diminishing confidence in the future; they are concerned about employment, education, housing and, above all, whether they can achieve financial independence. Then, there is growing public anger over government priorities which are widely considered misplaced.
In Belgium and France, austerity and public spending priorities have driven unions and students to the streets. In Albania, corruption allegations and demands for political accountability are key factors fuelling protests. In Portugal and Spain housing is a central grievance of protesters. The causative factors however are far more complicated.
What is unfolding in Europe portends trouble for the developing world, where people are facing much worse socio-economic problems than their European counterparts. Sri Lanka ranks 120th out of 130 countries in monthly minimum wages in US dollars, according to data compiled by Visual Capitalist from International Labour Organization (ILO) statistics. Its monthly minimum wage (USD 200) has placed it among the lowest globally and at the bottom among surveyed South Asian nations, behind Pakistan (68th at USD 570), Nepal (78th at USD 490), Bangladesh (89th at USD 379), and India (111th at USD 233). Sri Lanka has the highest rate of unemployment among young people with post-secondary education in the Asian economies covered by an International Monetary Fund (IMF) comparison, with about 43% of those aged 15–24 in this category unemployed. The cost of living is increasing, with taxes and tariffs remaining extremely high. Sri Lanka has the highest household electricity tariffs in South Asia.
When economic grievances deepen in a country, with public confidence in the political establishment eroding, people’s resentment tends to find expression in street protests. In 1953, an attempt by the then UNP government to reduce subsidies, which amounted to about 20% of its total expenditure, and the resultant increase in the price of rice led to a hartal that almost brought about a regime change. An austerity drive, among other things, led to the downfall of the United Front government in 1977. Shortages of essentials fuelled the 2022 Aragalaya.
The biggest challenge facing the JVP-NPP government is to find a way to ease the unbearable economic burden on the irate public while raising enough revenue to meet the targets set by the IMF. This is a high-wire act. Rhetoric, political theatre and more promises will be of little avail. People are crying out for relief. Pro-government demonstrations may give the rulers a false sense of security but they cannot help stem the tide of public anger.
Editorial
A foretaste of worse to come
Monday 19th October, 2026
Buddhist monks’ Satyagraha at Viharamahadevi Park, seeking the release of Ven. Galaboda Atte Gnanasara Thera from prison, took a dramatic turn on Saturday evening with a confrontation between protesters and the police. Ven. Balangoda Kassapa Thera, one of the monks leading the protest, was rushed to the Colombo National Hospital. Subsequently, he had himself moved to a private hospital, claiming that he feared for his life. He has been in the government’s crosshairs due to his active involvement in protests.
Satyagraha activists insist that a group of policemen led by an ASP roughed up Kassapa Thera. Police Spokesman ASP F. U. Wootler lost no time in denying the allegation, claiming that Kassapa Thera had ‘slipped and fallen’. The police cannot expect the discerning public to buy into their claims, and cynics say they do not believe anything until the police deny it. It may be recalled that ASP Wootler has been found guilty of violating fundamental rights of a lawyer and ordered to pay compensation from his personal funds.
He that hath an ill name is half-hanged, as the old saying goes. One may recall that when rugby player Wasim Thajudeen was found dead in his car in 2012, the police promptly claimed that he had died in an accident. They ruled out foul play. But subsequently they admitted that Thajudeen had been murdered. In 2018, the CID blamed former LTTE combatants for the killing of two policemen on duty in Vavunathivu and made some arrests. Later, they admitted that the National Thowheed Jamaath, which carried out the Easter Sunday bombings, had murdered the two constables. Thugs armed with clubs and iron rods freely operated in full view of the police during President Mahinda Rajapaksa’s government, and when this was taken up at a media briefing, the then Police Spokesman had the chutzpah to deny the allegation, claiming that they may have carried ‘sticks’ to ward off street dogs. So much for the police and their claims.
It is often said that the truth is the first casualty of war. The same holds true for other conflicts as well. So, we can’t expect both sides to the current dispute between Buddhist monks and the government to tell us the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Only a thorough, impartial investigation will help ascertain what really happened on Saturday evening at Viharamahadevi Park, leading to Kassapa Thera’s hospitalisation. The government must order a probe into the alleged assault incident.
Self-righteous Opposition politicians are trying to dupe the public into believing that the police neither committed excesses nor engaged in political work under their watch. Crackdowns on protests are not of recent origin, and the police have acted like storm troopers under successive governments. The police have a shameful history of doing dirty work for all governments and allowing ruling party thugs to operate alongside them during previous governments. But the fact that police excesses are not unprecedented does not justify suppressing people’s right to stage peaceful protests under the incumbent administration.
The JVP thrived on protests and capitalised on the 2022 Aragalaya to propel itself to power. At the height of the uprising, it also sought to lead protesters in a bid to capture Parliament, but failed. Today, the JVP/NPP is practising the very antithesis of what it preached and did while out of power. Many of the monks engaged in the current Satyagraha at Viharamahadevi Park campaigned hard for the JVP/NPP, enabling its swift rise to power, in 2024.
The police have urged the public to refrain from sharing unverified videos of Saturday’s incident via social media to discredit them. One cannot but agree that social media must not be abused to disseminate disinformation. But shouldn’t the police first take action against government propagandists who are carrying out social media disinformation campaigns with impunity?
Coercive measures the current administration adopts to discourage protests and the aggressive manner in which the police enforce them could offer a foretaste of what is to come if the proposed Protection of State from Terrorism law, criticised by human rights groups for its draconian features, if enacted.
Editorial
Govt.’s saffron dilemma
A group of Buddhist monks and laypersons were staging a sit-in near the Presidential Secretariat at the time of going to press. The police obtained a court order yesterday morning prohibiting the protest on the grounds that it was being held in a high-security zone. Speculation was rife that the police would be able to disperse the protesters. However, all indications are that the campaign for the release of Ven. Galagoda Aththe Gnanasara Thera from prison is unlikely to end, and the current protest may be shifted to some other venue.
Ironically, the monks’ staged their sit-in at the cradle of Aragalaya, which paved the way for the JVP-NPP’s meteoric rise to power. What began to unfold near the Presidential Secretariat yesterday is more than a protest; it is a test of strength for the government, which may try every trick in the book to prevail in the current dispute.
Opinion may be divided on the protesting monks’ demand for a presidential pardon for Gnanasara Thera, but the current crisis has stemmed from the government’s mishandling of the decision to produe him in court in lay attire. The government first sought to justify the prison officers bringing him to court, dressed in a sarong and shirt. Then, it made an about-turn and changed the prison rules and regulations, allowing monks in jail to appear in court, wearing saffron robes. The Opposition and independent legal experts have argued that there was no need for President Anura Kumara Dissanayake to appoint a committee to review prison regulations, and the Minister of Justice could have simply directed the prison authorities to do what the committee took days to recommend. The government’s delayed action drove the protesters to launch a march from Kandy to Colombo and escalate their demand, calling for the immediate release of Gnanasara Thera. This is what happens when governments overestimate their strength, ignore the ground reality and refuse to take prompt action to resolve issues.
Sri Lankan governments with two-thirds majorities paradoxically become their own enemies. Impervious to reason, they act according to the whims and fancies of their leaders and take unnecessary risks much like drunk drivers recklessly speeding across unprotected level crossings. The SLFP-led United Front government (1970-77) succumbed to the arrogance of power and its two-thirds majority became its undoing, as it were. President J. R. Jayewardene’s government (1977-88) plunged itself as well as the entire country into chaos by misusing its supermajority. President Mahinda Rajapaksa suffered a painful pratfall in 2015 as his government misused its two-thirds majority, and President Gotabaya Rajapaksa had to head for the hills, together with his siblings, and resign although his government had mustered a supermajority. The incumbent government has not learnt from the predicament of its predecessors.
Political rhetoric may be effective in the short term, but it cannot help suppress the truth or obscure reality. At a recent meeting with a group of representatives of the Maha Nayake Theras, who argued that Gnanasara Thera should be allowed to wear his robe, President Anura Kumara Dissanayake said he did not want to issue an order making an exception for one individual while prison regulations remained unchanged and he would appoint a committee to look into the matter and make recommendations. The committee recommended that Buddhist monks and other members of the clergy serving jail terms be permitted to appear in courts in their robes. It was obvious that the President had the prison regulations amended primarily to benefit Gnanasara Thera, while extending the same benefit to other imprisoned monks. The President said something similar when he met a delegation of the Bar Association of Sri Lanka over his government’s move to raise the retirement ages of the superior court judge. He insisted that it was not for the benefit of any particular individual that the 22nd Amendment (22A) would be enacted. But it was obvious that although the government moved to increase the retirement ages of all judges subsequently, 22A was primarily intended to benefit one particular judge who was reaching the age of 65.
The government may have thought trouble would end for it with Gnanasara Thera’s return to prison, but his imprisonment has become an even bigger problem, with President Dissanayake coming under increasing pressure to grant him a presidential pardon. If he gives in, the government will face serious questions over its reversal of policy on presidential pardons and what its supporters may view as a capitulation to the very forces it pledged to defeat. He thus finds itself in a dilemma.
-
Features2 days agoKotahena:A Small Enclave, An Extraordinary Legacy
-
News6 days agoSri Lanka, India caught in US-Iran ship crisis
-
News3 days agoAsgiri Mahanayake calls for immediate release of Gnanasara Thera
-
Latest News7 days agoMissiles intercepted near Riyadh after Saudi coalition hits Yemen fuel depot
-
Latest News7 days agoKusal Mendis’ unbeaten 87 hands Sri Lanka consolation win
-
News2 days agoRecord 1,600 students take Russian Classical Ballet examination in Sri Lanka
-
News5 days agoAC President recuses himself from hearing prison attire case pertaining to Gnanasara Thera
-
Latest News6 days agoHeavy showers above 100 mm are likely at some places in the Western, Sabaragamuwa, Southern, Central, and North-western provinces and in Anuradhapura district.
