Connect with us

Features

A Landmark Ruling for the Buddhist world: Supreme Court of Sri Lanka Recognises Bhikkhuni Identity

Published

on

In an era when constitutional justice is often contested in the glare of the media, one of the most significant rulings in Sri Lanka’s legal and religious history, was delivered almost unnoticed — yet its implications could echo globally.

On 16 June 2025, the Supreme Court of Sri Lanka delivered a majority ruling in SC/FR/218/2013, affirming the fundamental rights of a Buddhist nun to be identified as “Bhikkhuni” on her National Identity Card (NIC), thereby recognizing the de facto existence of the Bhikkhuni Sangha in Sri Lanka.

The case had quietly journeyed through the judicial corridors since it was first filed on 31 May 2013, argued before the bench on 24 October 2024, and culminated in a judgment that both restores dignity and acknowledges history. No protest marches, no press conferences, no talk-show panels. And yet, in its silence, the judgment affirms something extraordinary: the legal, historical, and constitutional validity of the Bhikkhuni Sangha in modern Sri Lanka.

Petitioners and Legal Team

The first petitioner in the case was Venerable Welimada Dhammadinna Bhikkhuni, representing thousands of fully ordained Buddhist nuns who have lived in the shadows of official recognition for decades. The second petitioner was Venerable Inamaluwe Sri Sumangala Thero, the Mahanayaka of the Rangiri Dambulla Chapter of the Siyam Nikāya—who has, since 1998, presided over the re-establishment of the Bhikkhuni ordination within his chapter.

Their petition was entrusted to the skill and dedication of a distinguished legal team: President’s Counsel Navin Marapana, with Nandapala Wickramasooriya, Tharanatha Palliyaguruge, and Uchitha Wickramasinghe, instructed by, Ms Eashanie Palliyaguruge.

The Case: For and Against

At the heart of the case was the Department for Registration of Persons’ refusal to issue a NIC bearing the title “Bhikkhuni” for Venerable Dhammadinna. The Department argued that it required verification from the Department of Buddhist Affairs — a government body that, crucially, does not register Bhikkhunis at all. This created a bureaucratic deadlock and denied the petitioner her right to equal recognition.

Supporting the refusal were letters and opinions from the Mahanayakas of the dominant monastic fraternities—Malwathu and Asgiri Chapters of the Siyam Nikāya, and the Amarapura and Rāmañña Nikāyas—who claimed that the Bhikkhuni Sangha no longer existed, and that its recognition would contravene Vinaya (monastic law) and the Constitution’s Article 9 duty to “protect and foster the Buddha Sāsana”.

In stark contrast, the Rangiri Dambulla Chapter maintained that it had legally and validly revived the Bhikkhuni Sangha in 1998, with over 3,000 Bhikkhunis residing in 237 monasteries across Sri Lanka, practising the Vinaya and receiving public support and state recognition through passports, exam results, and now, identity cards.

The Judgement: Equality, Religious Freedom, and Legal Reasoning

Justice E.A.G.R. Amarasekara, writing the majority judgement (concurred by Chief Justice Murdu N.B. Fernando), held that the refusal to issue a NIC identifying the petitioner as “Bhikkhuni” was unconstitutional. It violated Article 12(1) of the Constitution, which guarantees equality before the law, and Article 14(1)(e), which guarantees the right to practise one’s religion individually or in association with others.

Three key findings of the Court are especially notable:

De Facto Existence of the Bhikkhuni Sangha

The Court recognized that the Bhikkhuni Sāsanaya has existed de facto in Sri Lanka since 1998. It acknowledged the Rangiri Dambulla Chapter’s authority and the absence of any disciplinary action from other Nikāyas as tacit consent or lack of jurisdiction.

Unconstitutional Administrative Policy

The circular requiring verification from a department that does not register Bhikkhunis was declared “irrational, arbitrary, and discriminatory”. The Court noted that this effectively locked Bhikkhunis out of the legal system.

Affirmation of Legitimate Expectation and Religious Rights

Since Bhikkhunis had previously received NICs bearing their monastic title, the petitioner had a legitimate expectation for the same treatment. The denial thus infringed her right to equal treatment and religious freedom.

The judgement was allowed with costs, requiring the State to cover legal expenses—a rare and emphatic statement of support.

Justice Mahinda Samayawardhena dissented, arguing that ordination was a religious matter best left to ecclesiastical authority.

A Global Significance

While the ruling is specific to a national identity card in Sri Lanka, its implications ripple far beyond.

This decision legally affirms the revival of the Bhikkhuni Sāsanaya as a constitutionally protected reality, restoring to ordained Buddhist women the right to public recognition of their monastic status. It provides legal and institutional grounding for policy reform across public institutions—from education to counselling and temple governance.

Perhaps more importantly, it sets a precedent for the global Bhikkhuni community. It demonstrates that even in traditions resistant to reform, the voice of justice can prevail quietly, respectfully, and irrevocably.

As Venerable Dhammadinna’s petition now results in official recognition—not just for her, but for thousands of other nuns—it sends a powerful message: The doors are now open to harness the talents, compassion, and wisdom of the Bhikkhuni Sangha for the betterment of society.

No longer invisible. Legally recognized, and spiritually affirmed, the Bhikkhuni Sangha now takes its place in the Fourfold Assembly, just as the Buddha originally demonstrated and practiced.

The ruling is not just a legal milestone; it is a moral turning point. And from this point forward, history — and the Buddha Dhamma — will remember.

(Don de Silva is a University Counsellor and Mentor, residing in the UK. He was a former director of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and also a former director of the International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED).  He initiated innovative programmes to create awareness about sustainability and climate change, which are household words today.)

By Don de Silva ✍️
Case Reference: SC/FR/218/2013
Judgement Delivered: 16 June 2025



Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Features

Ranking public services with AI — A roadmap to reviving institutions like SriLankan Airlines

Published

on

Efficacy measures an organisation’s capacity to achieve its mission and intended outcomes under planned or optimal conditions. It differs from efficiency, which focuses on achieving objectives with minimal resources, and effectiveness, which evaluates results in real-world conditions. Today, modern AI tools, using publicly available data, enable objective assessment of the efficacy of Sri Lanka’s government institutions.

Among key public bodies, the Supreme Court of Sri Lanka emerges as the most efficacious, outperforming the Department of Inland Revenue, Sri Lanka Customs, the Election Commission, and Parliament. In the financial and regulatory sector, the Central Bank of Sri Lanka (CBSL) ranks highest, ahead of the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Public Utilities Commission, the Telecommunications Regulatory Commission, the Insurance Regulatory Commission, and the Sri Lanka Standards Institution.

Among state-owned enterprises, the Sri Lanka Ports Authority (SLPA) leads in efficacy, followed by Bank of Ceylon and People’s Bank. Other institutions assessed included the State Pharmaceuticals Corporation, the National Water Supply and Drainage Board, the Ceylon Electricity Board, the Ceylon Petroleum Corporation, and the Sri Lanka Transport Board. At the lower end of the spectrum were Lanka Sathosa and Sri Lankan Airlines, highlighting a critical challenge for the national economy.

Sri Lankan Airlines, consistently ranked at the bottom, has long been a financial drain. Despite successive governments’ reform attempts, sustainable solutions remain elusive.

Globally, the most profitable airlines operate as highly integrated, technology-enabled ecosystems rather than as fragmented departments. Operations, finance, fleet management, route planning, engineering, marketing, and customer service are closely coordinated, sharing real-time data to maximise efficiency, safety, and profitability.

The challenge for Sri Lankan Airlines is structural. Its operations are fragmented, overly hierarchical, and poorly aligned. Simply replacing the CEO or senior leadership will not address these deep-seated weaknesses. What the airline needs is a cohesive, integrated organisational ecosystem that leverages technology for cross-functional planning and real-time decision-making.

The government must urgently consider restructuring Sri Lankan Airlines to encourage:

=Joint planning across operational divisions

=Data-driven, evidence-based decision-making

=Continuous cross-functional consultation

=Collaborative strategic decisions on route rationalisation, fleet renewal, partnerships, and cost management, rather than exclusive top-down mandates

Sustainable reform requires systemic change. Without modernised organisational structures, stronger accountability, and aligned incentives across divisions, financial recovery will remain out of reach. An integrated, performance-oriented model offers the most realistic path to operational efficiency and long-term viability.

Reforming loss-making institutions like Sri Lankan Airlines is not merely a matter of leadership change — it is a structural overhaul essential to ensuring these entities contribute productively to the national economy rather than remain perpetual burdens.

By Chula Goonasekera – Citizen Analyst

Continue Reading

Features

Why Pi Day?

Published

on

International Day of Mathematics falls tomorrow

The approximate value of Pi (π) is 3.14 in mathematics. Therefore, the day 14 March is celebrated as the Pi Day. In 2019, UNESCO proclaimed 14 March as the International Day of Mathematics.

Ancient Babylonians and Egyptians figured out that the circumference of a circle is slightly more than three times its diameter. But they could not come up with an exact value for this ratio although they knew that it is a constant. This constant was later named as π which is a letter in the Greek alphabet.

Archimedes

It was the Greek mathematician Archimedes (250 BC) who was able to find an upper bound and a lower bound for this constant. He drew a circle of diameter one unit and drew hexagons inside and outside the circle such that the sides of each hexagon touch the sides of the circle. In mathematics the circle passing through all vertices of a polygon is called a ‘circumcircle’ and the largest circle that fits inside a polygon tangent to all its sides is called an ‘incircle’. The total length of the smaller hexagon then becomes the lower bound of π and the length of the hexagon outside the circle is the upper bound. He realised that by increasing the number of sides of the polygon can make the bounds get closer to the value of Pi and increased the number of sides to 12,24,48 and 60. He argued that by increasing the number of sides will ultimately result in obtaining the original circle, thereby laying the foundation for the theory of limits. He ended up with the lower bound as 22/7 and the upper bound 223/71. He could not continue his research as his hometown Syracuse was invaded by Romans and was killed by one of the soldiers. His last words were ‘do not disturb my circles’, perhaps a reference to his continuing efforts to find the value of π to a greater accuracy.

Archimedes can be considered as the father of geometry. His contributions revolutionised geometry and his methods anticipated integral calculus. He invented the pulley and the hydraulic screw for drawing water from a well. He also discovered the law of hydrostatics. He formulated the law of levers which states that a smaller weight placed farther from a pivot can balance a much heavier weight closer to it. He famously said “Give me a lever long enough and a place to stand and I will move the earth”.

Mathematicians have found many expressions for π as a sum of infinite series that converge to its value. One such famous series is the Leibniz Series found in 1674 by the German mathematician Gottfried Leibniz, which is given below.

π = 4 ( 1 – 1/3 + 1/5 – 1/7 + 1/9 – ………….)

The Indian mathematical genius Ramanujan came up with a magnificent formula in 1910. The short form of the formula is as follows.

π = 9801/(1103 √8)

For practical applications an approximation is sufficient. Even NASA uses only the approximation 3.141592653589793 for its interplanetary navigation calculations.

It is not just an interesting and curious number. It is used for calculations in navigation, encryption, space exploration, video game development and even in medicine. As π is fundamental to spherical geometry, it is at the heart of positioning systems in GPS navigations. It also contributes significantly to cybersecurity. As it is an irrational number it is an excellent foundation for generating randomness required in encryption and securing communications. In the medical field, it helps to calculate blood flow rates and pressure differentials. In diagnostic tools such as CT scans and MRI, pi is an important component in mathematical algorithms and signal processing techniques.

This elegant, never-ending number demonstrates how mathematics transforms into practical applications that shape our world. The possibilities of what it can do are infinite as the number itself. It has become a symbol of beauty and complexity in mathematics. “It matters little who first arrives at an idea, rather what is significant is how far that idea can go.” said Sophie Germain.

Mathematics fans are intrigued by this irrational number and attempt to calculate it as far as they can. In March 2022, Emma Haruka Iwao of Japan calculated it to 100 trillion decimal places in Google Cloud. It had taken 157 days. The Guinness World Record for reciting the number from memory is held by Rajveer Meena of India for 70000 decimal places over 10 hours.

Happy Pi Day!

The author is a senior examiner of the International Baccalaureate in the UK and an educational consultant at the Overseas School of Colombo.

by R N A de Silva

Continue Reading

Features

Sheer rise of Realpolitik making the world see the brink

Published

on

A combined US-Israel attack on Iran.(BBC)

The recent humanly costly torpedoing of an Iranian naval vessel in Sri Lanka’s Exclusive Economic Zone by a US submarine has raised a number of issues of great importance to international political discourse and law that call for elucidation. It is best that enlightened commentary is brought to bear in such discussions because at present misleading and uninformed speculation on questions arising from the incident are being aired by particularly jingoistic politicians of Sri Lanka’s South which could prove deleterious.

As matters stand, there seems to be no credible evidence that the Indian state was aware of the impending torpedoing of the Iranian vessel but these acerbic-tongued politicians of Sri Lanka’s South would have the local public believe that the tragedy was triggered with India’s connivance. Likewise, India is accused of ‘embroiling’ Sri Lanka in the incident on account of seemingly having prior knowledge of it and not warning Sri Lanka about the impending disaster.

It is plain that a process is once again afoot to raise anti-India hysteria in Sri Lanka. An obligation is cast on the Sri Lankan government to ensure that incendiary speculation of the above kind is defeated and India-Sri Lanka relations are prevented from being in any way harmed. Proactive measures are needed by the Sri Lankan government and well meaning quarters to ensure that public discourse in such matters have a factual and rational basis. ‘Knowledge gaps’ could prove hazardous.

Meanwhile, there could be no doubt that Sri Lanka’s sovereignty was violated by the US because the sinking of the Iranian vessel took place in Sri Lanka’s Exclusive Economic Zone. While there is no international decrying of the incident, and this is to be regretted, Sri Lanka’s helplessness and small player status would enable the US to ‘get away with it’.

Could anything be done by the international community to hold the US to account over the act of lawlessness in question? None is the answer at present. This is because in the current ‘Global Disorder’ major powers could commit the gravest international irregularities with impunity. As the threadbare cliché declares, ‘Might is Right’….. or so it seems.

Unfortunately, the UN could only merely verbally denounce any violations of International Law by the world’s foremost powers. It cannot use countervailing force against violators of the law, for example, on account of the divided nature of the UN Security Council, whose permanent members have shown incapability of seeing eye-to-eye on grave matters relating to International Law and order over the decades.

The foregoing considerations could force the conclusion on uncritical sections that Political Realism or Realpolitik has won out in the end. A basic premise of the school of thought known as Political Realism is that power or force wielded by states and international actors determine the shape, direction and substance of international relations. This school stands in marked contrast to political idealists who essentially proclaim that moral norms and values determine the nature of local and international politics.

While, British political scientist Thomas Hobbes, for instance, was a proponent of Political Realism, political idealism has its roots in the teachings of Socrates, Plato and latterly Friedrich Hegel of Germany, to name just few such notables.

On the face of it, therefore, there is no getting way from the conclusion that coercive force is the deciding factor in international politics. If this were not so, US President Donald Trump in collaboration with Israeli Rightist Premier Benjamin Natanyahu could not have wielded the ‘big stick’, so to speak, on Iran, killed its Supreme Head of State, terrorized the Iranian public and gone ‘scot-free’. That is, currently, the US’ impunity seems to be limitless.

Moreover, the evidence is that the Western bloc is reuniting in the face of Iran’s threats to stymie the flow of oil from West Asia to the rest of the world. The recent G7 summit witnessed a coming together of the foremost powers of the global North to ensure that the West does not suffer grave negative consequences from any future blocking of western oil supplies.

Meanwhile, Israel is having a ‘free run’ of the Middle East, so to speak, picking out perceived adversarial powers, such as Lebanon, and militarily neutralizing them; once again with impunity. On the other hand, Iran has been bringing under assault, with no questions asked, Gulf states that are seen as allying with the US and Israel. West Asia is facing a compounded crisis and International Law seems to be helplessly silent.

Wittingly or unwittingly, matters at the heart of International Law and peace are being obfuscated by some pro-Trump administration commentators meanwhile. For example, retired US Navy Captain Brent Sadler has cited Article 51 of the UN Charter, which provides for the right to self or collective self-defence of UN member states in the face of armed attacks, as justifying the US sinking of the Iranian vessel (See page 2 of The Island of March 10, 2026). But the Article makes it clear that such measures could be resorted to by UN members only ‘ if an armed attack occurs’ against them and under no other circumstances. But no such thing happened in the incident in question and the US acted under a sheer threat perception.

Clearly, the US has violated the Article through its action and has once again demonstrated its tendency to arbitrarily use military might. The general drift of Sadler’s thinking is that in the face of pressing national priorities, obligations of a state under International Law could be side-stepped. This is a sure recipe for international anarchy because in such a policy environment states could pursue their national interests, irrespective of their merits, disregarding in the process their obligations towards the international community.

Moreover, Article 51 repeatedly reiterates the authority of the UN Security Council and the obligation of those states that act in self-defence to report to the Council and be guided by it. Sadler, therefore, could be said to have cited the Article very selectively, whereas, right along member states’ commitments to the UNSC are stressed.

However, it is beyond doubt that international anarchy has strengthened its grip over the world. While the US set destabilizing precedents after the crumbling of the Cold War that paved the way for the current anarchic situation, Russia further aggravated these degenerative trends through its invasion of Ukraine. Stepping back from anarchy has thus emerged as the prime challenge for the world community.

Continue Reading

Trending