Editorial
Cattle slaughter ban
Within days of Prime Minister Mahinda Rajapaksa announcing his proposal to ban cattle slaughter but permit beef imports at a meeting of the government parliamentary group, where it touched a responsive chord among most MPs, the government got into reverse mode with spokesman Keheliya Rambukwella telling the post-cabinet news briefing that this matter had been laid by for a month. The government had obviously realized the error of rushed decision making, or had been nudged in that direction perhaps by the president, and decided not to hastily blunder into controversial areas without adequate study. Muslims, a beef eating community that also control beef and mutton stalls countrywide as well as most slaughter houses, would obviously be unhappy about any decision to ban the slaughter of cattle – something they have resisted over the years. They comprise a fair slice of our population and the new government will not wish to antagonize an entire community this early in its tenure. Surprisingly there was no angry outcry against the proposal no sooner it was publicized.
Nevertheless the first shot has been fired across the bows. We publish today a reader’s letter signed by a Muslim asking why only cattle? Saying, maybe tongue in cheek, that he welcomes the slaughter ban proposal, he asks why not also ban the slaughter of goats, pigs, deer, rabbits and what have you. He adds that to be fair on the quadrupeds, why not include the bipeds like fowl, duck, turkey and doves (we have not heard of doves being hunted for meat although snipe and teal-shooting was a popular sport many years ago). He also asks, sarcastically or otherwise we do not know, whether beef imports will not mean encouraging slaughter of cattle elsewhere to feed us. However that be, he has made a point.
A great many of the Buddhists among us do not eat beef. But they do relish mutton, pork, chicken and bush meat whenever available. This can be explained by the fact that although there is no ‘Sacred Cow’ concept here as in India, a lot of Lankans believe that it is sinful to slaughter and eat the flesh of an animal providing us with milk and playing a useful role as a draught animal to plough our fields and haul our loads. Of course bullock carts, hackeries, thirikkales and similar modes of transport are now receding into memory. However we do see the occasional bullock-drawn kerosene cart in Colombo and some of the other bigger cities. During the earlier and middle part of the last century, there were lot of these carts, owned by the father of the famed surgeon, Dr. P.R. Anthonis who had a large business distributing kerosene oil imported by multinational companies like Shell, Caltex and Standard Vacuum Oil Company until the Sirima Bandaranaike government nationalized the business of importing and distributing petroleum products.
Although it is illegal to slaughter buffaloes, who once served a very useful purpose tilling our rice fields, but have now been almost totally replaced by tractors, an illicit trade in buffalo meat has long existed. In addition to their value as a draught animal, buffalo milk which has a higher fat content than cow milk, is preferred for the making of curd with meekiri long enjoying a top ranking in the market. While on the subject of buffaloes, an anecdote related in parliament by the late Mr. Bernard Soysa during the debate on the Paddy Lands Act is worth retelling. The well-loved LSSP MP said that he and his comrades had toured the rice-gowing areas of the country to win over peasant support for the legislation. At Tissamaharama they told a group of farmers that they can till their fields in the future with tractors rather than buffaloes when an old farmer had piped, “but tractors won’t pataw danawa (calve) like buffaloes!”
Cattle thieving, inevitably for supplying illicit slaughter houses and butchers, has been rampant in the country for a very long period of time and continues either unabated or very poorly controlled to this day. A ban on the slaughter of these animals, will deliver a death blow to that menace and this will be widely welcomed in a country where many Buddhists seek merit by saving the lives of cattle bound for the abattoir. People doing such good deeds are often confronted with the problem of finding a safe haven for these animals to live out their natural life spans. The scarcity of such opportunities are known to sometimes result in the tragedy of once saved animals eventually ending under the butcher’s knife.
There are already meat and fish imports into the country to meet high-end demand in the big hotels where imported steaks and salmon are on offer, of course at a price that only the very rich can afford. In fact the domestic food processing industry imports mutton – we wrongly call goat meat mutton whereas mutton is the meat of a sheep or lamb – some of which is converted into corned mutton for export. In fact some non-beef eating Lankans domiciled abroad take back cans of corned mutton from here as corned beef is much more available where they live. Be that as it may, a ban on cattle slaughter will have ramifications that go well beyond the hostility of beef eaters who are not only Muslims. In the Eastern Province, for example, a tough and wiry peasantry has been created on beef and milk. Also, logical progression of a ban on cattle slaughter should eventually develop into a demand to end the fishing industry.
President Premadasa, in his tenure, halted government support for the inland fishing industry and some hatcheries producing fingerlings to stock irrigation reservoirs and tanks were closed. But inland fisheries have prevailed with perhaps some of those hatcheries resurrected. It is unlikely, if not impossible, for any country in the modern world to stop the consumption of animal protein. Even if the ban on cattle slaughter is not eventually imposed, we must ensure humane slaughter as a top priority. That is a must.
Editorial
Clear up fuel pricing confusion urgently
Monday 22nd June, 2026
The JVP-NPP government, like all its predecessors, has got obfuscation down to a fine art. It muddies the water whenever issues concerning fuel prices are raised in Parliament or elsewhere. Its leaders give evasive answers to questions about fuel cost calculations in a way that makes one wonder if they stretch the truth and pluck figures out of the air to support their arguments. Curiously, their claims go unchallenged. The Opposition is apparently at sea; it lacks focus. A wag says it seems to have been affected by Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder.
An Opposition MP has at long last realised the need to challenge the government’s claims about its fuel pricing methodology and pump prices. SLPP National Organiser and MP Namal Rajapaksa has called upon the government to disclose how fuel prices are worked out and make public a full cost breakdown so that consumers will know whether its claim of a fuel subsidy is true or false. This is something the Opposition should have done much earlier. MP Rajapaksa has also asked the government to reduce fuel prices in keeping with world oil price decreases following the signing of an interim peace agreement between the US and Iran.
Interestingly, MP Rajapaksa’s contention is at variance with the position of some Opposition parties which are protesting against a government claim that funding will not be available for “the current fuel subsidy” after June. What one gathers from the aforementioned protests is that a section of the Opposition believes that fuel is actually subsidised and the subsidy must be retained. Given these contradictory claims about the so-called fuel subsidy, what needs to be done is to pressure the government to provide fuel cost breakdowns so that they can be examined independently. Figures given by government politicians apparently do not add up where fuel prices are concerned.
Last month, President Anura Kumara Dissanayake publicly stated that a litre of diesel cost as much as Rs 720 though it was sold at Rs. 392 at that time. (The current diesel price is Rs. 407 a litre.) The President also claimed the government provided a subsidy of Rs. 100 per litre on diesel. Prime Minister Dr. Harini Amarasuriya has recently repeated the President’s claim in a bid to support her argument that it is not possible to reduce local fuel prices immediately in keeping with global oil prices drops. Going by the President’s claim, the Ceylon Petroleum Corporation (CPC) and the private fuel companies suffer huge losses.
The government has chosen to remain silent on taxes and a special loss recovery levy of Rs. 50 on a litre of fuel. There have been attempts to have this levy converted into a cess so that the Treasury can recover it from the private fuel companies as well, but they have been in vain, according to some Opposition politicians. This issue must be raised in Parliament. Will the Opposition officially seek an explanation from the government?
It is believed that the government imposes an unconscionably high price mark-up on fuel to recover losses caused by the extensive use of diesel for producing extra power to compensate for the Norochcholai generation loss caused by substandard coal procured fraudulently. The CPC has admitted that it purchased diesel shipments at prices ranging from USD 281 to USD 303 per barrel at the height of the Iran war to prevent supply disruptions. Perhaps, it would not have been so desperate if there had been no coal procurement racket and the Norochcholai coal-fired power plant had operated at full capacity, producing 900 MW.
It is nothing but fair to demand that the CPC and the Finance Ministry provide accurate cost breakdowns whenever fuel prices are revised so that the public can see whether official figures add up or fuel prices are increased arbitrarily. The incumbent government, which came to power promising to usher in good governance, should uphold transparency in the process of determining fuel prices.
Successive governments have used the cost reflective fuel pricing formula, claiming that it helps determine fuel prices in a rational and fair manner. If so, the question is why they have not cared to make it legally enforceable and ensure transparency and accountability.
Editorial
Fuel crisis: Beyond price debate
Global oil prices are falling thanks to the US-Iran peace deal. No sooner had US President Donald Trump and Iranian President Dr. Masoud Pezeshkian signed a framework for peace than some Opposition politicians in Sri Lanka began demanding fuel price reductions. The JVP-NPP government, which allegedly increased the prices of fuel stocks procured before the eruption of the West Asia conflict, has ignored the demand for fuel price decreases.
The JVP vehemently protested whenever fuel prices were increased during the previous governments, calling for measures, such as the abolition of petroleum taxes to bring fuel prices down. Its leaders even argued that there was no need for a government if local fuel prices were to be increased whenever global oil prices increased. Slashing fuel prices was one of the key election promises of the JVP/NPP. Now, the JVP-NPP government is under pressure to make good on its pledge.
There is much more to the fuel issue than high prices, and what is needed is a dispassionate appraisal of the situation. It is the prices of WTI and Brent benchmark futures that have decreased, and it will take some time for the oil prices to drop at the pump in many countries. Although the Hormuz Strait has been reopened, it will be weeks before international navigation through that chokepoint normalises, stabilising global oil and fertiliser markets.
There is no gainsaying that Sri Lankan consumers deserve relief and fuel prices should be reduced, but prudence demands that politicians stop playing politics with crucial economic issues, and cooperate to resolve them. The focus of the government and the Opposition must be on formulating a strategy to reduce the country’s dependence on fossil fuel, which accounts for about 20% of national import expenditure. Curtailing the national fuel bill is half the battle in easing the country’s chronic balance of payment pressures and shoring up foreign currency reserves. Populist slogans and politically-driven ad hoc remedies will not help resolve the fuel crisis.
A country that does not strategise to achieve energy security cannot achieve economic development; it remains vulnerable to shocks, both internal and external, as evident from Sri Lanka’s experience in 2022, when a foreign currency crisis almost crippled the power and energy sectors, triggering political upheavals. The possibility of the country experiencing a similar situation either under the current dispensation or under a future government cannot be ruled out. It was a close call when the Iran war escalated, with global oil prices soaring, a few weeks ago. The current Opposition ought not to make the mistake of deriving perverse pleasure from the incumbent government’s predicament, making Machiavellian promises and calling for relief measures that are not feasible. The fuel crisis is likely to worsen under a future government, perhaps to the extent of making its leaders head for the hills. Hence, it will be in the best interests of the government, the Opposition and the public for a national action plan to be formulated, with the participation of all stakeholders, to ease the country’s dependence on fuel imports.
What Sri Lanka desperately needs to reduce its fossil fuel dependence significantly is a diversified approach combining renewables, biofuel, electrification and energy efficiency. Some progress has been made in expanding solar and wind power, but much more remains to be done. Renewable energy, which provides a reliable hedge against volatile global fuel prices, should constitute the core of any long-term strategy. Once installed, solar panels and wind turbines produce electricity without requiring imported fuel, but renewable energy technologies involve substantial initial investment and this has stood in the way of the expansion of renewable energy production. The government must secure financing without creating unsustainable debt burdens. International climate funds, concessional loans, and public-private partnerships may help bridge this financing gap, according to renewable energy experts. There are other factors that need to be addressed urgently to ensure energy sustainability. They include grid modernisation and the installation of energy storage systems, promoting energy efficiency in households, industries and public institutions, electrifying transport through promotion of electric vehicles and public transport systems.
It is hoped that the government and the Opposition will stop fighting over fuel prices and address the serious issues that threaten the country’s energy security and economic stability.
Editorial
Some suspects “more equal”?
Saturday 20th June, 2026
The Commission to Investigate Allegations of Bribery or Corruption (CIABOC) has netted another senior state official. It arrested the General Manager (GM) of Lanka Salt Ltd., Rathnayaka Mudiyanselage Gunaratne yesterday for allegedly having caused a loss of approximately Rs. 14.3 million to the state and provided an undue advantage to a supplier by procuring Laklunu packaging for the Hambantota Salt Company through a re-order process in breach of procurement procedures.
Such action against state officials is certainly welcome, and all those who have enriched themselves through illegal means and/or caused losses to the state must be brought to justice. After all, that is the raison d’etre of the CIABOC.
On Thursday, the Central Crime Investigation Bureau (CCIB) arrested Sugeeshwara Bandara, who served as former President Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s private secretary. The arrest was made in connection with an ongoing investigation into allegations that Bandara drew two salaries from state institutions and thereby misappropriated public funds. Investigations have reportedly revealed that Bandara, while being Rajapaksa’s private secretary, held the position of Project Director at the Presidential Secretariat during the same period. The CCIB made Bandara’s arrest as dramatic as possible, perhaps to send a political message to other Opposition activists. Produced before court, Bandara was remanded.
Investigations should be conducted into alleged offences and credible evidence ascertained before suspects are arrested. Sri Lanka police often do it the other way around; they begin investigations and evidence gathering only after arresting and even detaining suspects. This deplorable practice is not of recent origin. The police acted in a similar manner during previous governments, which were bent on suppressing democratic dissent. The incumbent government came to power, promising a radical departure from that rotten political culture, but there has been no change.
The high-octane performance of the CIABOC and the police is curiously absent in situations where suspects happen to be cronies of the powers that be. How the CIABOC handled former Energy Minister Kumara Jayakody’s corruption case may serve as an example. The police stand accused of trotting out lame excuses for not arresting three JVP stalwarts involved in a forgery case. If they had been Opposition politicians, the CCIB itself would have swooped on them.
According to charges against Jayakody, while serving as the Manager of the Procurement and Import Division of the Ceylon Fertiliser Company, he committed an offence of corruption in 2016. He allegedly caused a loss of Rs. 8,859,708 to the state by influencing a procurement process for the benefit of a private company.
The CIABOC, which goes hell for leather to arrest suspects like Lanka Salt GM Gunaratne baulked at arresting Jayakody and hauling him up before court. Jayakody obtained bail immediately after being indicted.
Is it that all are equal before the law but JVP/NPP members are ‘more equal’ than others? The Opposition insists that no action has been taken regarding its complaints against Jayakody over a fraudulent coal procurement that has caused staggering losses amounting to billions of rupees to the state and led to an increase in diesel imports to operate oil-fired power plants and compensate for the generation loss at Norochcholai. One may recall that former Ministers Nalin Fernando and Mahindananda Aluthgamage have been sentenced to rigorous imprisonment over losses suffered by the state due to irregularities in the procurement of carrom boards and checkers board in the run-up to the 2015 presidential election. Former North Central Province Chief Minister S. M. Ranjith and his secretary have been jailed for a fraud involving a fuel allowance.
It is our fervent hope that the CIABOC will become independent enough to treat members of the government and the Opposition equally.
-
News7 days agoBeijing Capital Airlines to resume flights to Colombo signalling boost to tourism
-
Features6 days agoKilling of Colombo’s ancient trees — a warning on UN’s World Desertification Day – 17 June
-
News4 days agoCreditor receives USD 2.5 mn as Lankan public bears loss from theft of Treasury funds
-
News3 days agoCreditor not yet paid
-
News3 days agoConsumers bearing 22% tax burden despite 18% VAT claim: Dr. Harsha de Silva
-
Opinion5 days agoBeyond diagnosis: A strategic design for 7% growth by 2029 (Part I)
-
Opinion7 days agoFifty years after Soweto uprising
-
Sports7 days agoCatch every moment of the 2026 FIFA World Cup free on the Dialog PLAY App
