Features

Amusing and interesting courtroom experiences in pre-Independent Ceylon

Published

3 years ago

2023/03/12

Excerpted from Memoirs of a Cabinet Secretary by BP Pieris

We have an unusual practice at the Ceylon Bar where lawyers address each other by their Christian or nicknames. This in not the English practice where the rawest junior addresses the most senior silk by his surname. This was forcibly brought to my notice when I accompanied a friend of mine who wanted to meet Sir Henry Curtiss-Bennett regarding his call. When my friend addressed the silk as “Sir Henry”, he said, “Good Lord, to you I am just Curtiss-Bennett”.

My first case in the Supreme court was at the Colombo Assizes before Akbar J. I was assigned by the Crown to defend in a murder case. I took all possible pains over my brief and, when it was my turn to address the jury, put forward what I thought was a fairly good defence. Akbar, in his summing-up, did not put a single one of my points to the jury, and I was too nervous as a beginner to interrupt him. The jury found the accused guilty. The electric fans were stopped; the judge put the black cap on and passed sentence of death.

There was no Court of Criminal Appeal at the time. I mentioned the matter of the summing-up to a few senior lawyers and I was advised to see the judge in chambers next morning and explain my point of view to him. He received me courteously and listened to me with a great deal of patience. At the end of it, I was surprised to hear the judge telling me that I was probably right, that he had had a doubt in his own mind, that he had no sleep the previous night and that he had already recommended to His Excellency the Governor that the sentence of death be not carried out.

He gave me his report to read and said he had typed it himself as his mind was troubling him. He told me that the sentence would be altered to one of life, that is, 20 years, which, with remission for good conduct, would amount to about 14 years. I went to see the man in prison and asked him, now that sentence had been passed on him, to tell me the truth as regards his guilt or innocence. He said he was a religious man with a wife and several children and that murder was not in his line.

Early in my career, I had to see Mr Justice Drieberg in Chambers over a habeas corpus application. I was again nervous about seeing a “live” judge in Chambers, by which I mean a judge without robes and wig, working away in his shirtsleeves. On my knocking at his door, I was asked to come in. The judge rose and shook hands and inquired what my business was. He inquired who was on the other side and desired to see both counsel together. He then stood up, which meant that the interview was over, came across his table to the wing door which he opened in person and bowed me out. I wish there were more men like that in high places showing courtesy to younger fellows and the public.

Soertsz J. held his drinks well but, at work, was a peppery old bird. He was an extremely good speaker, particularly after dinner. In his charges to the jury, the sentences ran, clause within clause, grammatically correct. His sentences were so long that they reminded one of Walter Scott’s novels or a chapter of Thucydides. He was a master or the classics who read some Greek or Latin every morning before he came to court. He had no patience with counsel who wasted his time or who indulged in irrelevancies. On days when he had to pass a sentence of death, his whole household knew from his manner what had happened in court. The judge was in a bad mood; the family had to keep silent because the slightest talk or noise would upset him. It is said that, on these occasions, even his Alsatian crept under the dining table.

At an Assize trial, counsel was trying to make a big point before Soertsz, thumping the Bar table and asking the witness “You say here that you were four fathoms away from James when the stabbing took place. Did you say in the Magistrate’s court that you were together?” Soertsz J.: “Mr…, when the witness says they were together, he does not mean that they were Siamese twins.”

On another day, again at Assizes, a most amusing bit of conversation took place before Soertsz. Defending counsel was not very senior at the Bar and not very good in the subtle use of English words. He just got there in his questions; but only just. Something occasionally misfired in the use of a word. It was a murder trial, and a small boy had completed his evidence. The next witness was the boy’s mother, a very good-looking village woman in her early 30s. Counsel asked “Are you the mother of the previous witness?” Answer, “Yes”. Counsel: “And who is the father of this boy?” The judge, with a slight show of loss of temper at this waste of time asked, “Really, Mr…, is all this relevant to this murder case?” And counsel replied, “My Lord, I will not press the question as it appears to be embarrassing to your Lordship.”

Of Garvin J., I have the pleasantest memories. He had been my father’s classmate at the Royal College. The Editor of the New Law Reports had asked me to report a case regarding a dispute about the sale and purchase of rubber, the amount in dispute being over two lakhs of rupees. The point was taken that there was never any intention to purchase the rubber, that only the difference was to be paid according as the market price rose or fell, and that therefore it was a gaming and wagering contract unenforceable at law.

On the Bench were Garvin and Akbar J. For the appellant was H. V. Perera; against him Soertsz. The judges were told that there might be an appeal to the Privy Council. The law of wagering was traced from the Twelve Tables downwards. All the available law was cited and the Bar table was an array of books. There was a book on the subject by Perezius, a Latin writer, an enormous book about the size of a bound edition of the Times of Ceylon, covered with the dust of the Law Library and which no one on the Library had ever looked at. The judges insisted on looking into the book and it was dusted and brought in, flagged at the proper page and handed to H. V. who said “My Lords, this is in Latin”.

Soertsz rose and said “My Lords, I will translate the relevant passage for Your Lordships”, and went through the passage like a Latin unseen in our school days. The judges wanted a written translation in English which was furnished by E. B. Wikramanayake, who also translated and published a complete work of Perezius.

Professor Lee, in his book on Roman-Dutch Law which the judges now looked at, had, in a footnote, referred the reader to a very useful article on wagering contained in a certain volume of the South African Law Journal which the court wanted but no one seemed to have. A hurried search of the Judges’ Library, the Attorney-General’s Library and the private libraries of the leading Colombo lawyers proved fruitless. I told Soertsz that my uncle Jayawickrama had the book in his library at Matara and, at Garvin’s request, a telegram was sent to him asking him to be kind enough to lend the book. The book was sent; but it was not returned-by the court.

About five months later, I was retained in a rape case at Matara as Junior to my uncle. I drove to his house the previous evening and he complained to me of the probable loss of the book by its loan to the Supreme Court. The set of volumes had lost its value. He did not wish to write officially to the court, but asked me, on my return, to speak to Garvin. And there I was, a few days afterwards, standing before Garvin’s chambers, waiting for the Judge’s return for lunch. While he was having his sandwiches, I related the story of the unreturned book. He was very angry and there and then dictated, to his private secretary, a personal letter of apology to be sent along with the book. In reprimanding his secretary, the judge to my surprise, used one of those famous four letter words which has not yet got into the dictionaries.

Duff House case

The Duff House case, where, Stephen Seneviratne stood charged with the murder of his wife by chloroform, came for trial before Akbar. R. L. Pereira was defending with M. W. H. de Silva, Solicitor-General, and Wendt, Crown Counsel, appearing for the crown. Wendt, a straight man, told me years later, that he was miserable throughout the case. He did not go into detail. Apparently, there were many features grating against decorous judicial behaviour. The jury found the accused guilty and sentence was passed.

There was an appeal to the Privy Council which was allowed. Akbar resigned shortly afterwards. There was something which I found very difficult to explain in Akbar’s attitude whenever a person of some education and respectability appeared before him as an accused. There was the case where a silver-haired Tamil gentleman, shroff in a Bank, stood in the dock between two Fiscal’s officers, accused of fraud. He did not look to me the type of man who would throw an ink pot at the Judge, but as soon as the jury returned a verdict of guilty, the judge said “Handcuff the prisoner”.

Mr Justice E. W. Jayewardene, father of J. R. and Corbett, was portly and pompous, and at the same time, a kindly and dignified man who, on coming on the Bench, carefully placed a few of his personal belongings, like his gold watch, on his desk. He was familiar with his Bible and his Shakespeare and expected counsel to be equally proficient. He was also fond of cracking a joke and appreciated a crown counsel who was able to make an appropriate and equally humorous remark in reply.

In a murder trial before him, in which Crown Counsel E. H. T. Gunesekera was prosecuting, the Police Inspector was giving evidence and producing several pieces of bloodstained clothing which the deceased, a basket woman, had been wearing at the time she was stabbed to death. There was a bloodstained camboy marked P1, a bloodstained jacket marked P2, and when the Inspector produced a bloodstained chemise marked P3, the judge interjected “Mr Crown Counsel, do basket women wear chemises?” Replied E. H. T., “My Lord, I am not acquainted with the undergarments of basket women”. “Proceed with the case, Mr Crown Counsel,” said the Judge.

On another occasion, again with E. H. T. for the Crown, a string of Sinhalese village witnesses with names like Charles, James, David, had given evidence when the Judge asked “Why these names, Mr Crown Counsel? Haven’t we got good old Sinhalese names?” To which the prosecutor replied that no blame could be attached to these poor villagers for following those more and better educated who preferred to call their sons Richard and Corbett. Crown Counsel was asked to proceed with the case.

This was not rudeness on the part of the judge. He just enjoyed the ready wit even though, at times, it was a hit at him. The foreman of the jury was once dozing in the jury box. E. W. J. would not address him. Instead he said “Mr Registrar, will you please wake up the Foreman of the Jury.” I don’t think the judge was ever known to lose his temper on the Bench. This is a quality inherited by the sons.

MacDonnell, Chief Justice, was a classical scholar from Oxford and a contemporary of Lord Birkenhead. When MacDonnell disliked an argument, he had a habit of slipping down his chair, with the result that he could not be seen from the Bar Table. He held a blue pencil in one hand and a red pencil in the other, and used both pencils and hands to mark his brief, blue for points with which he agreed, red for those contra.

Each day, the briefs for the following day were put into his car. He took these with him to the Galle Face k, and, with his car parked under one of the street lamps, read them all and marked them with his two pencils. Where the trial judge had said that he agreed with the evidence of a witness, the Chief also often agreed and underlined the relevant passage in blue. If the judge had said he disbelieved the evidence, the passage was marked in red. It was thus possible, by looking at the judge’s brief, to see which way his mind was working.

My good and dear friend, James Homer Vanniasinkam who is now dead, had a case before the C. J. in which he was appearing for the respondent. He had a brainwave. The marked briefs were returned to the Registry each morning to be placed on the judge’s desk before court sat. James looked at the brief and found the underlining to be in his favour. He marked his own brief accordingly.

Appellant’s counsel did not have an easy passage with the judge. James rose to reply and did not waste the time of the court. He referred to the “strong” judgement of the trial judge, and the C. J. bowed. He then, shortly referred to page 2, line 5; page 6, line 10, and so on, and each time, the judge gave a polite bow. After about eight of such references, James bowed in turn and sat down. The Chief said “Thank you, Mr Vanniasinkam for putting your case so concisely. It’s amazing, but the identical points struck me last night.”

MacDonnell bought a small Austin motor car and learned to drive. He drove at about five miles an hour up San Sebastian Hill, with the driver seated by his side. Protruding on the right of the driving seat was a peculiar fixture, an artificial hand which was worked from a switch on the dashboard. This worked palm downwards vertically to indicate that the judge was going to slow down, and palm forwards horizontally to indicate that he was ready to be overtaken. The gadget was used liberally by the Chief.

Poyser J., in his last year, was Senior Puisne. As a judge, he was silent and polite. Every member of the Bar liked and respected him. He was, if I may say so, a popular judge. This may not be an appropriate epithet to use in reference to the holder of judicial office, but fact, the undoubted, inexplicable and obvious fact of his popularity, was there. Perhaps, it was the smile on his lips; or it might have been that twinkle in his eye. I do not know. But the Bar, which rarely accords a farewell to a retiring judge except by their presence in court when the Attorney makes his customary farewell speech, rose spontaneously in a body and accorded Mr Justice Poyser a lunch at the Galle Face Hotel.

More than one hundred lawyers, including judges, sat. R. L. Pereira, in proposing the toast of the chief guest, said that he was proud of the fact that he had been asked to give utterance to the mingled feelings of joy and sorrow of the Bar on the promotion of Mr Poyser. He continued: “I can say that we have always found Mr Poyser to be a courteous, patient and painstaking judge. The belief in British justice is as widespread as the British Empire is far-flung and if anybody has done his best to maintain that belief, it is Mr Justice Poyser.

“This is neither the time nor the place for any comparisons to be drawn, but this can be said, that Mr Justice Poyser has made himself a most excellent judge. Coming here to a new system of complex land laws, he soon tackled the problems before him, and in a short time, showed a complete mastery of the laws prevailing in this country. Those of you who have appeared before him will know with what unfailing patience he listened to the rawest junior arguing the complications of a case. Mr Poyser has always listened to them with interest and attention and has made them feel that the points they were urging were fully appreciated and considered by him.

“Our sorrow at his departure is, in a measure, relieved by the fact that he is going on well-earned promotion. After all, it is not possible for a man to resist the temptation of higher office, better salary and the prospects of earning a good pension. From that standpoint, we congratulate him on his good fortune. As a matter of fact, we were surprised that his capabilities were not recognized much earlier. A bird, however, has whispered to me that many promotions did come his way, but his love for Ceylon was so great that he turned them down.”

All News Advertisement

Features

The US-China rivalry and challenges facing the South

Published

4 hours ago

2025/12/11

Sahan Weerasooriya

Prof. Neil DeVotta making his presentation at the RCSS.

The US-China rivalry could be said to make-up the ‘stuff and substance’ of world politics today but rarely does the international politics watcher and student of the global South in particular get the opportunity of having a balanced and comprehensive evaluation of this crucial relationship. But such a balanced assessment is vitally instrumental in making sense of current world power relations.

Thanks to the Regional Centre for Strategic Studies (RCSS), Colombo the above window of opportunity was opened on December 8th for those sections of the public zealously pursuing an understanding of current issues in global politics. The knowledge came via a forum that was conducted at the RCSS titled, ‘The US-China Rivalry and Implications for the Indo-Pacific’, where Professor Neil DeVotta of the Wake Forest University of North Carolina in the US, featured as the speaker.

A widely representative audience was present at the forum, including senior public servants, the diplomatic corps, academics, heads of civil society organizations, senior armed forces personnel and the media. The event was ably managed by the Executive Director of the RCSS, retired ambassador Ravinatha Aryasinha. Following the main presentation a lively Q&A session followed, where many a point of interest was aired and discussed.

While there is no doubt that China is fast catching up with the US with regard to particularly military, economic, scientific and technological capability, Prof. DeVotta helped to balance this standard projection of ‘China’s steady rise’ by pointing to some vital facts about China, the omission of which would amount to the observer having a somewhat uninformed perception of global political realities.

The following are some of the facts about contemporary China that were highlighted by Prof. DeVotta:

* Money is steadily moving out of China and the latter’ s economy is slowing down. In fact the country is in a ‘ Middle Income Trap’. That is, it has reached middle income status but has failed to move to upper income status since then.

* People in marked numbers are moving out of China. It is perhaps little known that some Chinese are seeking to enter the US with a view to living there. The fact is that China’s population too is on the decline.

* Although the private sector is operative in China, there has been an increase in Parastatals; that is, commercial organizations run by the state are also very much in the fore. In fact private enterprises have begun to have ruling Communist Party cells in them.

* China is at its ‘peak power’ but this fact may compel it to act ‘aggressively’ in the international sphere. For instance, it may be compelled to invade Taiwan.

* A Hard Authoritarianism could be said to characterize central power in China today, whereas the expectation in some quarters is that it would shift to a Soft Authoritarian system, as is the case in Singapore.

* China’s influence in the West is greater than it has ever been.

The speaker was equally revelatory about the US today. Just a few of these observations are:

* The US is in a ‘Unipolar Moment’. That is, it is the world’s prime power. Such positions are usually not longstanding but in the case of the US this position has been enjoyed by it for quite a while.

* China is seen by the US as a ‘Revisionist Power’ as opposed to being a ‘Status Quo Power.’ That is China is for changing the world system slowly.

* The US in its latest national security strategy is paying little attention to Soft Power as opposed to Hard Power.

* In terms of this strategy the US would not allow any single country to dominate the Asia-Pacific region.

* The overall tone of this strategy is that the US should step back and allow regional powers to play a greater role in international politics.

* The strategy also holds that the US must improve economic ties with India, but there is very little mention of China in the plan.

Given these observations on the current international situation, a matter of the foremost importance for the economically weakest countries of the South is to figure out how best they could survive materially within it. Today there is no cohesive and vibrant collective organization that could work towards the best interests of the developing world and Dr. DeVotta was more or less correct when he said that the Non-alignment Movement (NAM) has declined.

However, this columnist is of the view that rather being a spent force, NAM was allowed to die out by the South. NAM as an idea could never become extinct as long as economic and material inequalities between North and South exist. Needless to say, this situation is remaining unchanged since the eighties when NAM allowed itself to be a non-entity so to speak in world affairs.

The majority of Southern countries did not do themselves any good by uncritically embracing the ‘market economy’ as a panacea for their ills. As has been proved, this growth paradigm only aggravated the South’s development ills, except for a few states within its fold.

Considering that the US would be preferring regional powers to play a more prominent role in the international economy and given the US’ preference to be a close ally of India, the weakest of the South need to look into the possibility of tying up closely with India and giving the latter a substantive role in advocating the South’s best interests in the councils of the world.

To enable this to happen the South needs to ‘get organized’ once again. The main differences between the past and the present with regard to Southern affairs is that in the past the South had outstanding leaders, such as Jawaharlal Nehru of India, who could doughtily stand up for it. As far as this columnist could ascertain, it is the lack of exceptional leaders that in the main led to the decline of NAM and other South-centred organizations.

Accordingly, an urgent task for the South is to enable the coming into being of exceptional leaders who could work untiringly towards the realization of its just needs, such as economic equity. Meanwhile, Southern countries would do well to, indeed, follow the principles of NAM and relate cordially with all the major powers so as to realizing their best interests.

Features

Sri Lanka and Global Climate Emergency: Lessons of Cyclone Ditwah

Published

4 hours ago

2025/12/11

Sahan Weerasooriya

Floods caused by Cyclone Ditwah. (Image courtesy Vanni Hope)

Tropical Cyclone Ditwah, which made landfall in Sri Lanka on 28 November 2025, is considered the country’s worst natural disaster since the deadly 2004 tsunami. It intensified the northeast monsoon, bringing torrential rainfall, massive flooding, and 215 severe landslides across seven districts. The cyclone left a trail of destruction, killing nearly 500 people, displacing over a million, destroying homes, roads, and railway lines, and disabling critical infrastructure including 4,000 transmission towers. Total economic losses are estimated at USD 6–7 billion—exceeding the country’s foreign reserves.

The Sri Lankan Armed Forces have led the relief efforts, aided by international partners including India and Pakistan. A Sri Lanka Air Force helicopter crashed in Wennappuwa, killing the pilot and injuring four others, while five Sri Lanka Navy personnel died in Chundikkulam in the north while widening waterways to mitigate flooding. The bravery and sacrifice of the Sri Lankan Armed Forces during this disaster—as in past disasters—continue to be held in high esteem by grateful Sri Lankans.

The Sri Lankan government, however, is facing intense criticism for its handling of Cyclone Ditwah, including failure to heed early warnings available since November 12, a slow and poorly coordinated response, and inadequate communication with the public. Systemic issues—underinvestment in disaster management, failure to activate protocols, bureaucratic neglect, and a lack of coordination among state institutions—are also blamed for avoidable deaths and destruction.

The causes of climate disasters such as Cyclone Ditwah go far beyond disaster preparedness. Faulty policymaking, mismanagement, and decades of unregulated economic development have eroded the island’s natural defenses. As climate scientist Dr. Thasun Amarasinghe notes:

“Sri Lankan wetlands—the nation’s most effective natural flood-control mechanism—have been bulldosed, filled, encroached upon, and sold. Many of these developments were approved despite warnings from environmental scientists, hydrologists, and even state institutions.”

Sri Lanka’s current vulnerabilities also stem from historical deforestation and plantation agriculture associated with colonial-era export development. Forest cover declined from 82% in 1881 to 70% in 1900, and to 54–50% by 1948, when British rule ended. It fell further to 44% in 1954 and to 16.5% by 2019.

Deforestation contributes an estimated 10–12% of global greenhouse gas emissions. Beyond removing a vital carbon sink, it damages water resources, increases runoff and erosion, and heightens flood and landslide risk. Soil-depleting monocrop agriculture further undermines traditional multi-crop systems that regenerate soil fertility, organic matter, and biodiversity.

In Sri Lanka’s Central Highlands, which were battered by Cyclone Ditwah, deforestation and unregulated construction had destabilised mountain slopes. Although high-risk zones prone to floods and landslides had long been identified, residents were not relocated, and construction and urbanisation continued unchecked.

Sri Lanka was the first country in Asia to adopt neoliberal economic policies. With the “Open Economy” reforms of 1977, a capitalist ideology equating human well-being with quantitative growth and material consumption became widespread. Development efforts were rushed, poorly supervised, and frequently approved without proper environmental assessment.

Privatisation and corporate deregulation weakened state oversight. The recent economic crisis and shrinking budgets further eroded environmental and social protections, including the maintenance of drainage networks, reservoirs, and early-warning systems. These forces have converged to make Sri Lanka a victim of a dual climate threat: gradual environmental collapse and sudden-onset disasters.

Sri Lanka: A Climate Victim

Sri Lanka’s carbon emissions remain relatively small but are rising. The impact of climate change on the island, however, is immense. Annual mean air temperature has increased significantly in recent decades (by 0.016 °C annually between 1961 and 1990). Sea-level rise has caused severe coastal erosion—0.30–0.35 meters per year—affecting nearly 55% of the shoreline. The 2004 tsunami demonstrated the extreme vulnerability of low-lying coastal plains to rising seas.

The Cyclone Ditwah catastrophe was neither wholly new nor surprising. In 2015, the Geneva-based Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre (IDMC) identified Sri Lanka as the South Asian country with the highest relative risk of disaster-related displacement: “For every million inhabitants, 15,000 are at risk of being displaced every year.”

IDMC also noted that in 2017 the country experienced seven disaster events—mainly floods and landslides—resulting in 135,000 new displacements and that Sri Lanka “is also at risk for slow-onset impacts such as soil degradation, saltwater intrusion, water scarcity, and crop failure”.

Sri Lanka ranked sixth among countries most affected by extreme weather events in 2018 (Germanwatch) and second in 2019 (Global Climate Risk Index). Given these warnings, Cyclone Ditwah should not have been a surprise. Scientists have repeatedly cautioned that warmer oceans fuel stronger cyclones and warmer air holds more moisture, leading to extreme rainfall. As the Ceylon Today editorial of December 1, 2025 also observed:

“…our monsoons are no longer predictable. Cyclones form faster, hit harder, and linger longer. Rainfall becomes erratic, intense, and destructive. This is not a coincidence; it is a pattern.”

Without urgent action, even more extreme weather events will threaten Sri Lanka’s habitability and physical survival.

A Global Crisis

Extreme weather events—droughts, wildfires, cyclones, and floods—are becoming the global norm. Up to 1.2 billion people could become “climate refugees” by 2050. Global warming is disrupting weather patterns, destabilising ecosystems, and posing severe risks to life on Earth. Indonesia and Thailand were struck by the rare and devastating Tropical Cyclone Senyar in late November 2025, occurring simultaneously with Cyclone Ditwah’s landfall in Sri Lanka.

More than 75% of global greenhouse gas emissions—and nearly 90% of carbon emissions—come from burning coal, oil, and gas, which supply about 80% of the world’s energy. Countries in the Global South, like Sri Lanka, which contribute least to greenhouse gas emissions, are among the most vulnerable to climate devastation. Yet wealthy nations and multilateral institutions, including the World Bank, continue to subsidise fossil fuel exploration and production. Global climate policymaking—including COP 30 in Belém, Brazil, in 2025—has been criticised as ineffectual and dominated by fossil fuel interests.

If the climate is not stabilised, long-term planetary forces beyond human control may be unleashed. Technology and markets are not inherently the problem; rather, the issue lies in the intentions guiding them. The techno-market worldview, which promotes the belief that well-being increases through limitless growth and consumption, has contributed to severe economic inequality and more frequent extreme weather events. The climate crisis, in turn, reflects a profound mismatch between the exponential expansion of a profit-driven global economy and the far slower evolution of human consciousness needed to uphold morality, compassion, generosity and wisdom.

Sri Lanka’s 2025–26 budget, adopted on November 14, 2025—just as Cyclone Ditwah loomed—promised subsidised land and electricity for companies establishing AI data centers in the country.

President Anura Kumara Dissanayake told Parliament: “Don’t come questioning us on why we are giving land this cheap; we have to make these sacrifices.”

Yet Sri Lanka is a highly water-stressed nation, and a growing body of international research shows that AI data centers consume massive amounts of water and electricity, contributing significantly to greenhouse gas emissions.

The failure of the narrow, competitive techno-market approach underscores the need for an ecological and collective framework capable of addressing the deeper roots of this existential crisis—both for Sri Lanka and the world.

A landslide in Sri Lanka (AFP picture)

Ecological and Human Protection

Ecological consciousness demands

recognition that humanity is part of the Earth, not separate from it. Policies to address climate change must be grounded in this understanding, rather than in worldviews that prize infinite growth and technological dominance. Nature has primacy over human-created systems: the natural world does not depend on humanity, while humanity cannot survive without soil, water, air, sunlight, and the Earth’s essential life-support systems.

Although a climate victim today, Sri Lanka is also home to an ancient ecological civilization dating back to the arrival of the Buddhist monk Mahinda Thera in the 3rd century BCE. Upon meeting King Devanampiyatissa, who was out hunting in Mihintale, Mahinda Thera delivered one of the earliest recorded teachings on ecological interdependence and the duty of rulers to protect nature:

“O great King, the birds of the air and the beasts of the forest have as much right to live and move about in any part of this land as thou. The land belongs to the people and all living beings; thou art only its guardian.”

A stone inscription at Mihintale records that the king forbade the killing of animals and the destruction of trees. The Mihintale Wildlife Sanctuary is believed to be the world’s first.

Sri Lanka’s ancient dry-zone irrigation system—maintained over more than a millennium—stands as a marvel of sustainable development. Its network of interconnected reservoirs, canals, and sluices captured monsoon waters, irrigated fields, controlled floods, and even served as a defensive barrier. Floods occurred, but historical records show no disasters comparable in scale, severity, or frequency to those of today. Ancient rulers, including the legendary reservoir-builder King Parākramabāhu, and generations of rice farmers managed their environment with remarkable discipline and ecological wisdom.

The primacy of nature became especially evident when widespread power outages and the collapse of communication networks during Cyclone Ditwah forced people to rely on one another for survival. The disaster ignited spontaneous acts of compassion and solidarity across all communities—men and women, rich and poor, Buddhists, Christians, Muslims, and Hindus. Local and international efforts mobilized to rescue, shelter, feed, and emotionally support those affected. These actions demonstrated a profound human instinct for care and cooperation, often filling vacuums left by formal emergency systems.

Yet spontaneous solidarity alone is insufficient. Sri Lanka urgently needs policies on sustainable development, environmental protection, and climate resilience. These include strict, science-based regulation of construction; protection of forests and wetlands; proper maintenance of reservoirs; and climate-resilient infrastructure. Schools should teach environmental literacy that builds unity and solidarity, rather than controversial and divisive curriculum changes like the planned removal of history and introduction of contested modules on gender and sexuality.

If the IMF and international creditors—especially BlackRock, Sri Lanka’s largest sovereign bondholder, valued at USD 13 trillion—are genuinely concerned about the country’s suffering, could they not cancel at least some of Sri Lanka’s sovereign debt and support its rebuilding efforts? Addressing the climate emergency and the broader existential crisis facing Sri Lanka and the world ultimately requires an evolution in human consciousness guided by morality, compassion, generosity and wisdom. (Courtesy: IPS NEWS)

Dr Asoka Bandarage is the author of Colonialism in Sri Lanka: The Political Economy of the Kandyan Highlands, 1833-1886 (Mouton) Women, Population and Global Crisis: A Politico-Economic Analysis (Zed Books), The Separatist Conflict in Sri Lanka: Terrorism, Ethnicity, Political Economy, ( Routledge), Sustainability and Well-Being: The Middle Path to Environment, Society and the Economy (Palgrave MacMillan) Crisis in Sri Lanka and the World: Colonial and Neoliberal Origins, Ecological and Collective Alternatives (De Gruyter) and numerous other publications. She serves on the Advisory Boards of the Interfaith Moral Action on Climate and Critical Asian Studies.

Features

Cliff and Hank recreate golden era of ‘The Young Ones’

Published

4 hours ago

2025/12/11

Sahan Weerasooriya

Cliff Richard and Hank Marvin’s reunion concert at the Riverside Theatre in Perth, Australia, on 01 November, 2025, was a night to remember.

The duo, who first performed together in the 1950s as part of The Shadows, brought the house down with their classic hits and effortless chemistry.

The concert, part of Cliff’s ‘Can’t Stop Me Now’ tour, featured iconic songs like ‘Summer Holiday’, ‘The Young Ones’, ‘Bachelor Boy’, ‘Living Doll’ and a powerful rendition of ‘Mistletoe and Wine.’

Cliff, 85, and Hank, with his signature red Fender Stratocaster, proved that their music and friendship are timeless.

According to reports, the moment the lights dimmed and the first chords of ‘Move It’ rang out, the crowd knew they were in for something extraordinary.

Backed by a full band, and surrounded by dazzling visuals, Cliff strode onto the stage in immaculate form – energetic and confident – and when Hank Marvin joined him mid-set, guitar in hand, the audience erupted in applause that shook the hall.

Together they launched into ‘The Young Ones’, their timeless 1961 hit which brought the crowd to its feet, with many in attendance moved to tears.

The audience was treated to a journey through time, with vintage film clips and state-of-the-art visuals adding to the nostalgic atmosphere.

Highlights of the evening included Cliff’s powerful vocals, Hank’s distinctive guitar riffs, and their playful banter on stage.

Cliff posing for The Island photographer … February,
2007

Cliff paused between songs to reflect on their shared journey saying:

“It’s been a lifetime of songs, memories, and friendship. Hank and I started this adventure when we were just boys — and look at us now, still up here making noise!”

As the final chords of ‘Congratulations’ filled the theatre, the crowd rose for a thunderous standing ovation that lasted several minutes.

Cliff waved, Hank gave a humble bow, and, together, they left the stage, arm-in-arm, to the refrain of “We’re the young ones — and we always will be.”

Reviews of the show were glowing, with fans and critics alike praising the duo’s energy, camaraderie, and enduring talent.

Overall, the Cliff Richard and Hank Marvin reunion concert was a truly special experience, celebrating the music and friendship that has captivated audiences for decades.

When Cliff Richard visited Sri Lanka, in February, 2007, I was invited to meet him, in his suite, at a hotel, in Colombo, and I presented him with my music page, which carried his story, and he was impressed.

In return, he personally autographed a souvenir for me … that was Cliff Richard, a truly wonderful human being.