Features
The Worst Rulings of the Supreme Court in the History of the USA
by Vijaya Chandrasoma
The Supreme Court of the United States of America is the highest court in the land, entrusted with ensuring that legislation is faithfully interpreted and enacted according to the Constitution, in word and in spirit.
The Court is presently comprised of nine Justices, nominated by presidents of the United States. As presidents are assumed to be elected by a majority of the nation, it is assumed that the Court also represents the will of that majority.
Unfortunately, that is not the case with the current Supreme Court. Five of its Justices were appointed by two presidents who won the presidency with a minority of the electorate.
George W. Bush won the presidency in 2000 with a majority in the antiquated Electoral College but a minority popular vote of over 500,000. Trump also won the presidency in 2016 with a majority in the Electoral College, but a minority popular vote of over three million. In any other election in the world, and in any other election in the USA, from dog-catcher upwards, Al Gore and Hillary Clinton would have been declared the winners of the presidency in 2000 and 2016, respectively.
Bush appointed two Justices to the present Court. Justice John Roberts in July, 2005 on the retirement of Sandra Day O’Connor. Roberts was subsequently appointed Chief Justice on the death Chief Justice William Rehnquist, who was replaced in January, 2006 by Justice Samuel Alito. Predictably, these new Justices were members of the Republican Party, with opinions tempered with traditional conservative values.
Trump appointed Neil Gorsuch to replace Antonin Scalia in 2017, Brett Kavanaugh on the retirement of Justice Kennedy in 2018 and Amy Coney Barrett on the death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg in September 2020. All these Justices are light on judiciary qualifications and experience, but espouse the new, hardly traditional, radical right, Evangelical opinions of Trump’s Republican Party.
The sixth Republican Justice of the Court, African American Clarence Thomas, was appointed by the older Bush in 1991.
The Supreme Court has made several rulings in its history, based on politics, against the Constitution and the will of the people. The most egregious of these rulings are:
The Dred Scott ruling of 1857
The Dred Scott decision in 1857 was the Supreme Court ruling that “African Americans could not be citizens of the United States, and therefore, had no standing in the US legal system, and the federal government had no authority to regulate slavery”. Chief Justice Roger Brooke Taney’s ruling “ignored precedent, distorted history, imposed a rigid rather than a flexible construction of the Constitution, ignored specific grants of power in the Constitution, and tortured meanings out of other, more obscure clauses”.A description which perfectly defines the recent decision of today’s radical right, Evangelical Supreme Court, overturning the rights of reproductive freedom granted to all women.
President Abraham Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation on January 1, 1863, as the nation approached its third year of bloody civil war. The Proclamation essentially declared that “all persons held as slaves” within the rebellious states “are, and henceforward shall be free”.
The civil war ended in 1865 with the victory of the Union forces, at an estimated cost of 620,000 lives. Although four million Black slaves were granted their freedom, the Proclamation did not end slavery, but it “captured the hearts and imagination of millions of Americans and fundamentally transformed the character of the civil war”.
The hard-fought freedom achieved by the Union victory was freedom in name only, devoid of any vestige of equality. From 1865, “freedom” was subject to the racial ravages of Reconstruction, with restrictive laws designed to limit the freedom of the slaves. Reconstruction was followed by nearly a century of Jim Crow laws, which mandated legal segregation of the races.
Martin Luther King’s 1963 dream that the “momentous decree” of the Emancipation Proclamation “came as a great light of hope to millions of Negro slaves who had been seared under the flames of withering injustice. It came as a joyous daybreak to end the long night of their captivity”. However, that “joyous daybreak” took over 100 years to see the light of day, in the form of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
His dream of “the day my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the colour of their skin but by the content of their character”, has only dawned in the legal sense. The “flames of withering injustice” of racism remain unfettered in the hearts and minds of a significant section of white America.
The Anti New Deal Laws (specifically the Social Security Act) of 1937
Franklin Delano Roosevelt won his second term in 1936 with, according to the New York Times “the most overwhelming testimonial of approval ever received by a national candidate in the history of the nation”. However, the election victory was tempered with a great fear that a hostile Supreme Court would vote to invalidate Roosevelt’s New Deal – a set of progressive programs designed to provide a safety net to those adversely affected by the Great Depression, and to initiate progressive legislation to improve the national economy. Specifically, the Supreme Court declared that the Social Security Act was “unconstitutional”.
Roosevelt decided not to undertake the arduous task of a constitutional amendment to pass his programs, which would have been possible given his vast popularity in Congress and the nation. In his opinion, it was not the Constitution that needed change; it was the Composition of the Supreme Court which would best allow him to continue the programs of the New Deal.
In February, 1937, Roosevelt asked Congress to empower him to appoint up to six more Supreme Court Justices, ostensibly to strengthen an aging Supreme Court. “Life tenure” argued Roosevelt, “was not intended to create a static judiciary. A constant and systematic addition of younger blood will vitalize the courts”.
Roosevelt’s plan touched off a grim struggle among the three branches of government. “If Roosevelt won”, opponents warned, “he would destroy the independence of the judiciary and create an evil precedent for successors who wished to ‘pack’ the Court”. If Roosevelt lost, his supporters countered, “a few judges appointed for life would be able to ignore the popular will, destroy programs vital to the welfare of the people, and deny the president and Congress the powers exercised by every other government in the world”. Both opinions have been proved to be valid, even complementary.
However, the latter opinion is particularly relevant to the current Supreme Court, which aims to “destroy programs vital to the welfare of the people” and so deny President Biden his powers to carry out his programs of progressive legislation. These include repairing of crumbling physical infrastructure of the nation, taking necessary steps to combat climate change, and enhancing the social safety net of those Americans who are most vulnerable.
Although the composition of the Supreme Court has been preserved, Roosevelt’s veiled threats to pack the Court staved off the invalidation of the Social Services Act and other progressive reforms. Roosevelt claimed that he “may have lost the battle, but he had won the war”.
That he did. His “socialist” programs continue to provide a limited social safety net to all Americans today.
The Overturning of Roe v. Wade in 2022
The current Supreme Court, with its 6/3 radical right majority, overturned Roe v. Wade, the 1973 ruling granting reproductive freedom without government restrictions to all women. Roe v. Wade has been reconfirmed in the last 50 years by numerous subsequent Supreme Court rulings, and was considered to be the law of the land, popular with over 80% of all Americans.
The present Court threatens to make even more inroads to recently passed progressive legislation. Justice Clarence Thomas recently stated that the Court is taking a second look aimed at scrapping rulings that protect contraception, same-sex marriage and same-sex sexual activity. Even the Voting Rights Act of 1965 and the Civil Rights Act of 1964 are on the list of endangered legislation.
President Biden does not enjoy the popularity FDR enjoyed in the 1930s, although he did inherit an economy approaching recession caused by the Covid epidemic, which had been criminally mismanaged by the Trump administration. The economy has also been hit by the military assistance given to Ukraine to help a sovereign nation combat illegal invasion by Putin’s Russia, now globally described as a “terrorist government”.
The economy of United States is going through a period of near recession and unprecedented inflation, global problems which will be solved in the fullness of time. Biden’s presidency has brought fresh air of decency and integrity to the White House, compared to the stench of vulgarity, corruption and treason of the previous administration. Biden’s previously low popularity ratings have shown significant increases in the past few weeks. If the midterms were held today, most polls indicate that the Democrats lead the Republicans by seven to ten percentage points.
There are a couple of silver linings in these very dark clouds. Recent events indicate that Trump may be losing his stranglehold on the Republican party. His erratic, often maniacal behaviour and the irrefutable evidence emerging of his complicity in the January 6 coup, have the majority of the party questioning if his involvement in the November midterms would not be a liability. As Deputy Chairperson of the January 6 Committee, Liz Cheney said, “it is impossible to support both Donald Trump and the Constitution”.
A viable alternative for Republican leadership, of similar radical right persuasion but more educated and presentable, also seems to be emerging in the persona of Florida Governor, Ron de Santis.
The unpopular reversal of Roe v. Wade, which guaranteed reproductive freedom to all women in America, will take millions of votes away from the Republican Party in the midterm elections in November.As will the Independence Day mass shooting in Highland Park, Illinois, where seven people were killed and over 30 wounded by a 22-year-old white shooter armed with an AR 15 automatic rifle. The killer is in custody and faces seven murder and numerous other charges which will keep him prison for life. This tragedy marks the 314th mass shooting in the USA for this year alone.
Republicans keep blocking meaningful gun control regulations, including a total ban on military style assault rifles. Controls favoured by over 80% of the American people.These two factors – anti-abortion laws and the refusal to enact stringent gun control laws – may help Democrats get the majority they need in Congress in the midterms to address the real problems facing the nation. If the Republicans gain control of Congress, they will surely resume their down-slide on the slippery slope to a Theocratic Autocracy.
Proving the age-old platitude: Nations get the leaders they deserve.Of course, before, during and after the midterms, Trump and his hard-core cult will never give up on their aspirations for the perpetuation of white privilege. Nor will they tolerate the imminent arrest of Trump and/or his enablers, even in the face of undeniable evidence of their complicity in the January 6 coup. These thugs will “not go gentle into that good night”.
The USA may see violence surpassing that suffered during the civil war, in the next few months, until and unless the epidemic of Trumpism is finally stamped out. And this time, these home-made, white supremacist terrorists will be armed not with muskets and bayonets, but with military style killing machines.
Features
Concept of living wage and cost of living
The International Labour Organisation (ILO) now defines a living wage as the wage level necessary for workers and their families to afford a decent standard of living, given national circumstances, for normal hours of work. This standard of living is operationalised through the cost of essential goods and services, typically including food, housing, healthcare, education, transport, and a modest allowance for contingencies and social participation.
In contrast, “cost of living” in economics is a broader price index concept that tracks the overall prices of a representative consumption basket but is not inherently normative about what constitutes decency or dignity.
Living wage methodologies effectively translate a cost-of-living basket, specified for a given family size and living standard, into a monthly income requirement for workers, thereby linking real wages to human development objectives rather than only to market productivity.
Methodologies for computing a living wage
Most contemporary living wage estimates follow a structured “cost of a basic but decent life” approach built around three steps: defining a reference family, costing a normative consumption basket, and converting that cost into a wage per worker.
The Anker methodology, widely used in global supply chains and in Sri Lanka, is a leading example: it defines a model family (e.g., 2 adults and approximately 2–3 children), estimates the cost of a low-cost nutritious diet, adequate housing, and non-food essentials, and then allocates that cost over expected number of full-time workers per family.
Within the Anker framework, the food component is based on locally appropriate diets meeting caloric and nutritional norms, priced using local market surveys and adjusted for waste and home preparation.
Housing costs are derived from standards for minimally acceptable housing (e.g., durable materials, sufficient space, basic services), using rents or imputed rental values from empirical fieldwork. Other essential expenditures, health, education, transport, clothing, and a small margin for unexpected events, are typically estimated as a percentage mark-up over food and housing costs, derived from national household survey data.
Finally, the methodology sets a reference number of workers per family, divides total family living costs by this number to get a net living wage, and then adjusts to a gross living wage by adding payroll taxes and mandatory deductions. Periodic updates are made using consumer price indices (CPIs) to reflect inflation or deflation and, where necessary, new field surveys to capture structural shifts in prices and consumption patterns.
Sri Lanka’s living wage estimates and their link to cost of living (Anker Methodology)
Sri Lanka has been the subject of several living wage studies, notably for the tea estate sector and for urban and rural areas, using the Anker methodology.
In the tea estate sector, an updated 2024 Anker report estimates the cost of a “basic but decent” standard of living for a typical family at about LKR 78,067 per month (approximately USD 260), implying a gross living wage of LKR 48,584 per month (USD 160) and a net, take-home living wage of LKR 44,357.
For urban Sri Lanka, the Anker Living Wage Reference Value was originally set at LKR 84,231 per month in April 2022, corresponding to a net living wage of LKR 77,492 plus social security contributions. After cumulative inflation of about 36.9 percent between April 2022 and June 2025, the updated gross urban living wage is estimated at approximately LKR 115,291 per month (around USD 385), consisting of a net living wage of LKR 106,068 and social security contributions of LKR 9,223
These Sri Lankan figures are explicitly derived from cost-of-living calculations: they incorporate the cost of food, housing, utilities, health, education, and other essentials at local prices and then convert these into wages per adult worker, assuming roughly 1.7–1.8 full-time earners per family. Because living wage estimates are indexed to actual price dynamics, periods of high inflation, as Sri Lanka experienced in 2022–2023, translate almost mechanically into sharp upward revisions in living wages, underlining the tight coupling between living wage levels and the evolving cost of living.
Comparative living wages: Sri Lanka and other countries
Cross-country comparisons require careful normalisation because living wages reflect local prices, family structures, and social norms, but several datasets provide a structured basis for comparison. [asia.floorwage](https://asia.floorwage.org/living-wage/calculating-a-living-wage/)
The Asia Floor Wage Alliance, for example, publishes a regional living wage benchmark expressed in purchasing power parity (PPP) terms, with a 2024 benchmark of 1,750.54 PPP dollars per month converted into local currencies using country-specific PPP exchange rates.
Using this PPP-based approach, the 2024 living wage equivalent for Sri Lanka is estimated at around LKR 158,353 per month, assuming a PPP exchange rate of about 90.5 Sri Lankan rupees per PPP dollar.
This PPP-normalised figure is substantially higher than the Anker 2024–2025 estate-sector and urban living wage estimates in nominal rupees, partly because the Asia Floor Wage benchmark is set to ensure a more harmonised standard across Asian garment-producing economies and uses a single PPP wage target.
These figures indicate that, within this PPP-based framework, Sri Lanka’s living wage in local currency is relatively high compared to countries such as India and Bangladesh, but the comparison reflects both different PPP exchange rates and domestic price structures.
From a cost-of-living perspective, this pattern is consistent with Sri Lanka being a lower-middle-income country with relatively higher prices for some essentials compared with low-income South Asian economies, especially after recent macroeconomic and inflationary shocks.
Global patterns and high-income economies
Global datasets covering more than 200 countries show that typical-family living wage levels, whether calculated in PPP or nominal terms, tend to correlate positively with national income levels, with North America, Western Europe, and Australia displaying the highest living wage values.
In this global distribution, living wages in middle- and low-income regions of Asia, Africa, and Latin America are lower in absolute terms, though the ratio of living wage to median wages or statutory minimum wages can be high, underscoring the gap between decent-work standards and prevailing labour market outcomes.
Interestingly, some studies note that rural living wage estimates can be relatively high in poorer countries because limited infrastructure and service availability raise the cost of accessing a given standard of living, such as safe water, transport, and education.
For Sri Lanka, rural Anker living wage benchmarks similarly reveal the importance of non-food costs, such as transportation to schools, health facilities, and workplaces, in shaping the total family budget, despite lower nominal rents in many rural areas.
Living wage, social policy, and Sri Lanka’s development trajectory
The emerging international consensus around a living wage is rooted in the human rights-based notion of a “decent life” rather than a subsistence minimum or an arbitrarily set statutory floor.
From a social science perspective, incorporating living wage benchmarks into wage-setting institutions, collective bargaining, and social dialogue reorients labour markets toward social reproduction, intergenerational mobility, and social cohesion, rather than merely cost competitiveness.
For Sri Lanka, where recent crises have eroded real wages and increased household vulnerability, living wage estimates such as the Anker urban and estate-sector benchmarks provide an analytically rigorous yardstick for evaluating whether current wage policies and social transfers are adequate relative to the actual cost of a basic but decent life.
Comparisons with regional PPP-based benchmarks like the Asia Floor Wage suggest that, while Sri Lanka’s living wage requirement in local currency is relatively high, the country also faces significant affordability challenges, especially for low-paid workers in export sectors and informal employment, whose earnings often fall short of these normative thresholds.
In policy terms, the living wage framework highlights the need for coordinated approaches that combine wage-setting reforms, inflation-sensitive social protection, and productivity-enhancing investments, so that rising living-cost-consistent wages do not simply translate into inflationary spirals or employment losses.
For empirical research in Sri Lanka, these benchmarks open avenues for micro-level analysis of wage gaps, household coping strategies, gendered labour outcomes, and the distributional effects of macroeconomic adjustment, all anchored to a transparent and internationally recognised living wage methodology.
(The writer, a senior Chartered Accountant and professional banker, is Professor at SLIIT, Malabe. The views and opinions expressed in this article are personal.)
Features
Buddhist philosophy and the path to lasting peace
Echoes of ‘The Walk for Peace’
The international Walk for Peace’ reaching Colombo, joined by a large number of monks and devotees, led by spiritual leader Ven Bhikku Pannakara, with the peace dog ‘Aloka,’ completing the 161 km journey.The walk commenced in Dambulla on April 22 following the main ceremony at the Jaya Sri Maha Bodhi in Anuradhapura.Pic by Nishan S.Priyantha
by Ven. Dr. Kirinde Assaji Nayaka Thero
Chief Incumbent, Gangaramaya Temple, Hunupitiya, Colombo
Throughout human history, one of the greatest and most complex challenges has been the establishment of lasting peace and the maintenance of harmonious coexistence. While peace is often understood simply as the absence of war or armed conflict, a deeper, spiritual perspective reveals it as a profound state of social and mental harmony. It is an ideal that must be cultivated within individuals as well as across societies.
Buddhism offers one of the most practical and timeless philosophies of peace. The teachings of the Buddha are rooted in non-violence and the four sublime virtues—loving-kindness, compassion, sympathetic joy, and equanimity. Central to this philosophy is the idea that true peace in the world begins with inner peace within the individual. Conflict, the Buddha taught, arises not on battlefields but within the human mind, driven by greed, hatred, and delusion. Without overcoming these negative forces, lasting peace in the external world remains unattainable.
In today’s world, marked by geopolitical tensions, economic competition, and social unrest—this inward approach to peace is more relevant than ever. Despite technological advancement, humanity continues to grapple with violence and division. The Buddha’s teaching points instead to an internal struggle: a battle against anger, jealousy, and ignorance. Rather than weapons of destruction, Buddhism promotes wisdom, compassion, patience, and discipline as the tools to overcome conflict.
The path to peace begins with understanding its causes. Just as muddy water becomes clear when left undisturbed, the human mind achieves clarity and calm when negative emotions are subdued. This principle is reflected in the Buddha’s intervention during a historic dispute between the Sakya and Koliya clans over water, where he reminded them of the greater value of human life, thereby preventing bloodshed.
In a world increasingly threatened by conflict over limited resources and political power, such lessons remain highly relevant. The Buddha also emphasised the principle of moral causation—actions have consequences.
Yadisaṃ vapate bijaṃ tadisaṃ harate phalaṃ
Kalyaāṇakariī kalyaṃ papakariī ca papakaṃ
Pavutthaṃ tata te bijaṃ phalaṃ paccanubhossasiti
“As one sows the seed, so does one reap the fruit.
The doer of good receives good results, and the doer of evil receives evil results.
Dear one, whatever seed you have planted, you will experience the corresponding fruit of it.”
At the heart of Buddhist ethics is respect for life. All beings fear harm and seek happiness, and therefore, violence against others cannot lead to true well-being. This message is particularly significant in an era where the race for power and advanced weaponry continues to overshadow compassion and humanity.
The fundamental moral discipline in Buddhism is respect for life and opposition to harming living beings. The Buddha taught that all beings desire happiness, and fear suffering, and that harming others will not lead to happiness.
Sabbe tasanti dandassa
sabbe bhayanti maccuno
attanam upamam katva
na haneyya na ghataye.
“All tremble at violence; all fear death. Comparing others with oneself, one should neither kill nor cause others to kill.”
Despite technological advancement, the world appears to be moving backwards in terms of compassion and peace. Power-driven politics and the race for advanced weaponry cannot provide lasting solutions. Global leaders, diplomats, and policymakers must urgently recognise the importance of the tolerant, balanced, and non-violent approach taught in Buddhism. Protecting the right to life of all beings, and acting with compassion beyond divisions of race, religion, or politics, is the only true foundation for world peace.
Sri Lanka, as a nation nourished by the essence of Buddhism, has long upheld this principle. The Sri Lankan tradition, rooted in boundless loving-kindness and compassion, strives to uphold human values even amidst the harsh realities of global politics. From the respect shown by King Dutugemunu towards King Elara, to Sri Lanka’s stance at the 1951 San Francisco Peace Conference invoking the words “Hatred is never appeased by hatred,” to recent humanitarian acts in rescuing sailors in distress—these all reflect a single philosophy: valuing human life above all divisions.
The presentation of a “Joint Declaration for Peace” by the Mahanayake Theros at Gangaramaya Temple recently reaffirmed Sri Lanka’s commitment to global peace. Despite global power struggles, Sri Lanka continues to stand as a symbol of compassion and peace, reminding the world that human kindness is more powerful than weapons.
Institutions such as the Gangaramaya Temple have played a vital role in fostering social harmony. Through charitable, educational, and cultural programmes, the temple has encouraged unity across religious and ethnic lines, while also promoting interfaith dialogue and cooperation.
The annual Navam Maha Perahera, organised by the temple, stands as a powerful symbol of national unity, bringing together people from diverse backgrounds in a shared celebration. Similarly, vocational training and educational initiatives have helped empower young people from all communities, strengthening social cohesion.
A recent “Walk for Peace,” led by Venerable Pannakara Thero and supported by the monastic community, further underscored this commitment. More than a physical journey, it represented a spiritual effort to cultivate peace within the human heart and spread a message of compassion to the wider world.
One of the most touching aspects of the event was the participation of a dog named “Aloka,” which accompanied the monks throughout the journey. This simple yet powerful image reflected the Buddhist teaching that all living beings value life and deserve compassion, highlighting the universal nature of peace.
Ultimately, the Buddha’s message remains clear: peace cannot be achieved through hatred or violence. True peace arises from self-discipline, moral conduct, and the cultivation of a pure mind. As the teaching states, avoiding evil, doing good, and purifying one’s mind is the path laid down by the Buddha.
Let us plant the seeds of peace within our hearts and nurture them with loving-kindness. (“Sabba papassa akarananṃ – kusalassa upasampadā – sacitta pariyodapanaṃ – etaṃ Buddhana sasanaṃ”)
In a time when global tensions continue to rise, this timeless message serves as a powerful reminder that lasting peace begins within each individual—and that compassion remains humanity’s greatest strength.
“Devo vassatu kalena – sassa sampatti hetu ca
Pito bhavatu loko ca – rajaā bhavatu dhammiko”
(“May the rains fall at the right time, bringing about abundant harvests.
May the world be joyful and prosperous.
May the ruler be righteous and just.”)
Features
Peace march and promise of reconciliation
The ongoing peace march by a group of international Buddhist monks has captured the sentiment of Sri Lankans in a manner that few public events have done in recent times. It is led by the Vietnamese monk Venerable Thich Pannakara who is associated with a mindfulness movement that has roots in Vietnamese Buddhist practice and actively promoted among diaspora communities in the United States. The peace march by the monks, accompanied by their mascot, the dog Aloka, has generated affection and goodwill within the Buddhist and larger community. It follows earlier peace walks in the United States where monks carried a similar message of mindfulness and compassion across communities but without any government or even media patronage as in Sri Lanka.
This initiative has the potential to unfold into an effort to nurture a culture of peace in Sri Lanka. Such a culture is necessary if the country as the country prepares to move beyond its history of conflict towards a more longlasting reconciliation and a political solution to its ethnic and religious divisions. The government’s support for the peace march can be seen as part of a broader attempt to shape such a culture. The Clean Sri Lanka programme, promoted by the government as a civic responsibility campaign focused on environmental cleanliness, ethical conduct and social discipline, provides a useful framework within which such initiatives can be situated. Its emphasis on collective responsibility and shared public space makes it sit well with the values that peacebuilding requires.
government’s previous plan to promote a culture of peace was on the occasion of “Sri Lanka Day” celebrations which were scheduled to take place on December 12-14 last year but was disrupted by Cyclone Ditwah. The Sri Lanka Day celebrations were to include those talented individuals from each and every community at the district level who had excelled in some field or the other, such as science, business or arts and culture and selected by the District Secretariats in each of the 25 districts. They were to gather in Colombo to engage in cultural performances and community-focused exhibitions. The government’s intention was to build up a discourse around the ideas of unity in diversity as a precursor to addressing the more contentious topics of human rights violations during the war period, and issues of accountability and reparations for wrongs suffered during that dark period.
Positive Response
The invitation to the international monks appears to have emerged from within Buddhist religious networks in Sri Lanka that have long maintained links with the larger international Buddhist community. The strong support extended by leading temples and clergy within the country, including the Buddhists Mahanayakes indicates that this was not an isolated effort but one that resonated with the mainstream Buddhist establishment. Indeed, the involvement of senior Buddhist leaders has been particularly noteworthy. A Joint Declaration for Peace in the world, drawing on Sri Lanka’s own experience, and by the Mahanayakes of all Buddhist Chapters took place in the context of the ongoing peace march at the Gangaramaya Temple in Colombo, with participation from the diplomatic community. The declaration, calling for compassion, dialogue and sustainable peace, reflects an effort by religious leadership to assert a moral voice in favour of coexistence.
The popular response to the peace march has also been striking. Large numbers of people have been gathering along the route, offering flowers, water and support to the monks. Schoolchildren have been lining the roads, and communities from different religious backgrounds extend hospitality. On the way, the monks were hosted by both a Hindu temple and a mosque, where food and refreshments were provided. These acts, though simple, carry a message about the possibility of harmony among Sri Lanka’s diverse communities. It helps to counter the perception that the Buddhist community in Sri Lanka is inherently nationalist and resistant to minority concerns that was shaped during the decades of war and reinforced by political mobilisation that too often exploited ethnic identity.
By way of contrast, the peace march offers a different image. It shows a readiness among ordinary people to embrace values of compassion and coexistence that are deeply embedded in Buddhist teaching. The Metta Sutta, one of the most well-known discourses in Buddhism, calls for boundless goodwill towards all beings. It states that one should cultivate a mind that is “boundless towards all beings, free from hatred and ill will.” This emphasis on universal compassion provides a moral foundation for peace that extends beyond national or ethnic boundaries. The monks themselves emphasised this point repeatedly during the walk. Venerable Thich Pannakara reminded those who gathered that while acts of generosity are commendable, mindfulness in everyday life is even more important. He warned that as people become unmindful, they are more prone to react with anger and hatred, thereby contributing to conflict.
More Initiatives
The presence of political leaders at key moments of the march has emphasised the significance that the government attaches to the event. Prime Minister Harini Amarasuriya paid her respects to the peace march monks in Kandy, while President Anura Kumara Dissanayake is expected to do so at the conclusion of the march in Colombo. Such gestures signal an alignment between political authority and moral aspiration, even if the translation of that aspiration into policy remains a work in progress. At the same time, the peace march has not been without its shortcomings. The walk did not engage with the Northern and Eastern parts of the country, regions that were most affected by the war and where the need for reconciliation is most acute. A more inclusive geographic reach would have strengthened the symbolic impact of the initiative.
In addition, the positive impact of the peace march could have been increased if more effort had been taken to coordinate better with other civic and religious groups and include them in the event. Many civil society and religious harmony groups who would have liked to participate in the peace march found themselves unable to do so. There was no place in the programme for them to join. Even government institutions tasked with promoting social cohesion and reconciliation found themselves outside the loop. The Clean Sri Lanka Task Force that organised the peace march may have felt that involving other groups would have made it more complicated to organise the events which have proceeded without problems.
The hope is that the positive energy and goodwill generated by this peace march will not dissipate but will instead inspire further initiatives with the requisite coordination and leadership. The march has generated public discussion, drawn attention to the values of mindfulness and compassion, and created a space in which people can imagine a different future. It has been a special initiative among the many that are needed to build a culture of peace. A culture of peace cannot be imposed from above nor can it emerge overnight. It needs to be nurtured through multiple efforts across society, including education, religious engagement, civic initiatives and political reform. It is within such a culture that the more difficult questions of power sharing, justice and reconciliation can be addressed in a constructive manner.
by Jehan Perera
-
News6 days agoLanka faces crisis of conscience over fate of animals: Call for compassion, law reform, and ethical responsibility
-
News5 days agoWhistleblowers ask Treasury Chief to resign over theft of USD 2.5 mn
-
News5 days agoNo cyber hack: Fintech expert exposes shocking legacy flaws that led to $2.5 million theft
-
News2 days agoBIA drug bust: 25 monks including three masterminds arrested
-
Business3 days agoNestlé Lanka Announces Change in Leadership
-
News2 days agoBanks alert customers to phishing attacks
-
News3 days agoHackers steal $3.2 Mn from Finance Ministry
-
News6 days agoUSD 2 mn bribe: CID ordered to arrest Shasheendra R, warrant issued against ex-SriLankan CEO’s wife
