Connect with us

Features

Come September!

Published

on

Presidential Politics and Prospects

by Rajan Philips

Of all the presidential contenders for the September 21 election, Ranil Wickremesinghe might be the only one who would have seen and possibly remember the 1961 movie “Come September,” a popular lighthearted comedy that starred Rock Hudson and Gina Lollobrigida. Come September – it will be for Sri Lankan voters as it is now confirmed that they will have their chance to vote and elect their next president on Saturday, September 21. A countdown of 49 days starting on Sunday, August 4.

The US presidential election, the campaign for which has been going on forever, is scheduled for November 5, the canonical Tuesday after the first Monday of November. To continue where I left last week, Kamala Harris is till riding high, and Donald Trump is finally being exposed for his crass limitations. But with 94 days to go there is plenty of time left for twists and turns, and ups and downs.

In Sri Lanka, it will not be a straight up contest between two candidates but a drawn out battle involving three main candidates – Anura Kumara Dissanayake, Sajith Premadasa and Ranil Wickremesinghe. There are others who will run but will not count. The three cornered contest is definitely a better scenario for AKD than if he were facing either one of the other two.

For the first time, none of the candidates is likely to pass the 50% mark on the first count, and the winner will have to be decided from the first two candidates by counting the preferential votes cast in their favour on the ballots of the eliminated candidates. Even a coin toss is allowed in the event of an ultimate tie.

The more democratic option would be to hold a second runoff election between the first two candidates. That is the practice in France and several other presidential polities. France even has a repeat election system for its parliamentary election, which provides for a second election in constituencies where there is no 50%+ majority winner in the first leg. Elections are expensive but electing a clearly mandated winner is worth the cost. In France, it was certainly worth having second round as it helped prevent Marine Le Pen’s right wing National Rally alliance from getting a parliamentary majority in the national election in June/July this year.

In the US, the electoral college system for the presidential election undermines the popular vote and predicates the ultimate outcome on the results of a handful of so called swing states. That is how Donald Trump defeated Hillary Clinton in 2016. The strategy did not work for him against Joe Biden in 2020. Trump was cocksure of winning in a rematch against Biden.

But Biden’s withdrawal and the emergence of Kamala Harris as the Democratic candidate has scuppered Trump’s plans. Ms. Harris will of course have to win the critical swing states, but she is in a far better position to do that than Biden. She has the momentum on her side. She is also being helped by the growing Trump fatigue and the age comparison. Trump is now the oldest candidate in an American presidential election.

Until Joe Biden became president, Ronald Reagan was the oldest US president to hold office which he did over two terms from 1981 to 1989. Reagan took office in 1981 at the now relatively young age of 70. Biden was 78 when he became president, and Trump is now 78 and contesting his third consecutive presidential election. Suddenly he looks older and somewhat out of sorts on the campaign trail as he faces the 59-year old-and- young Kamala Harris.

Come September

To connect with Come September, Reagan had been a friend of Rock Hudson in Hollywood when Hudson was among the more prominent actors while Reagan was a minor role player in movies and a speech maker on television. From Hollywood Reagan went on to become a Republican flag bearer, first as Governor of California and later as US President serving two terms in office.

It was during the Reagan presidency, in 1984, that Rock Hudson publicly acknowledged his homosexuality after he was diagnosed with AIDS. He died in October 1985, the first major celebrity to die from AIDS in America. It was Hudson’s AIDS and death at the age of 59 that persuaded Reagan to accept that AIDS was a major public health issue and not a personal moral question.

Fast forward 40 years, the LGBTQ rainbow represents America’s cultural evolution in coming to terms with the biology of multiple sexual orientations. And Pete Buttigieg, the 42 year young, intellectually brilliant and the first-to-be-so openly gay member of the Biden cabinet, is a short-listed contender to be Kamala Harri’s Vice Presidential nominee.

At 75 Ranil Wickremesinghe is Sri Lanka’s oldest presidential candidate, eclipsing JR Jayewardene who became president at 71 by way of a constitutional amendment in 1978, and Sirima Bandaranaike who was a losing presidential candidate in 1988. Mr. Wickremesinghe is nearly 20 years older to both Sajith Premadasa (57 years) and Anura Kumara Dissanayake (56 years), but no one seems to be making an issue of Wickremesinghe’s age. It is rather odd that the chief executive of the country could get elected at 75 and go on working till 80 or more, while all government and private sector employees have to comply with varying retirement ages, all under 65.

Wickremesinghe has bigger problems to worry about than his age and so are his two rivals despite their relatively younger ages. RW is the interim president today because parliament elected him to that position to complete the leftover portion of Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s first term, after the latter fled his office and the country. Wickremesinghe of course knows that to continue in office for a new full term as president, he must be elected by the people and not MPs in next month. Yet he seems pre-occupied with showing how many MPs are supporting him in parliament rather than shoring up support among the people at large. Not that RW doesn’t know that there is no direct translation of the support in an unpopular parliament into a popular vote in the presidential election. But top down old habits die hard.

Alliance Politics

Wickremesinghe might be constrained to be focusing on parliament after Namal Rajapaksa got his family elders to support him in denying RW the SLPP’s endorsement of his candidacy. While Namal Rajapaksa’s amateurish move is backfiring as it should, it is not clear why Wickremesinghe should be keen on making a public show of how many SLPP MPs are supporting him. He seems also determined to make a show of how many UNP/SJB MPs he can poach from Sajith Premadasa.

Anura Kumara Dissanayake is just the opposite. According to him, the JVP/NPP has been spurning overtures by current MPs and parties in parliament to join the NPP alliance. AKD’s position is that the NPP will have no truck with those who have destroyed the country. He is of course referring to the current crop of MPs but there are many in the country who will point their finger at the JVP for the destruction it caused in 1971 and again in 1988/89.

But Dissanayake has a point in that it would be impossible to expect any positive contribution to meaningful changes from a majority of the current MPs in parliament. The cynics will have a different take. It would look wonky for the JVP/NPP to strike an alliance with other MPs who will easily outnumber its three MPs.

Ranil Wickremesinghe looks at it differently. He wants all the MPs in parliament to support him in essentially doing whatever he wants to do. He wants MPs to provide him with parliamentary cover and not to bring about changes. Sajith Premadasa might be somewhere in between AKD and RW. There is another similarity and a difference.

A common criticism of RW and SP is that they do not encourage collegial decision making in the UNP and in the SJB. That was one of the reasons why SP broke away from RW’s clutches, and now he is said to have become a clone of RW for decision making in the SJB. The difference between the two UNPers and AKD is that the latter is perceived to be too collegial, and that he may not be the one calling the decisive shots in the JVP and the NPP. Some observers think that the JVP old guard is still in control of decision making in the organization while presenting Anura Kumara Dissanayake as the popular alternative that the people can vote for in the presidential election.

After such a long wait for an election or any election, the actual campaign is now going to be condensed in a matter of seven weeks. Seven weeks are a long time in politics but campaigns can be over even before they can begin. Anura Kumara Dissanayake has been actively campaigning for over two years now. How he will fare in the home stretch where it matters most is now the question.

Wickremesinghe is a late starter after playing the guessing game for so long that even he might have been confused whether he is going to be for real or for fake. Now it is for the people to judge. Sajith Premadasa naturally falls between the two making it impossible for Wickremesinghe to win on the first count and opening up even chances for him and AKD. None of the three should be considered to be a spoiler for there are others coveting that distinction but thankfully without any consequence.



Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

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

Features

Retirement age for judges: Innovation and policy

Published

on

I. The Constitutional Context

Independence of the judiciary is, without question, an essential element of a functioning democracy. In recognition of this, ample provision is made in the highest law of our country, the Constitution, to engender an environment in which the courts are able to fulfil their public responsibility with total acceptance.

As part of this protective apparatus, judges of the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal are assured of security of tenure by the provision that “they shall not be removed except by an order of the President made after an address of Parliament supported by a majority of the total number of members of Parliament, (including those not present), has been presented to the President for such removal on the ground of proved misbehaviour or incapacity”[Article 107(2)]. Since this assurance holds good for the entirety of tenure, it follows that the age of retirement should be defined with certainty. This is done by the Constitution itself by the provision that “the age of retirement of judges of the Supreme Court shall be 65 years and of judges of the Court of Appeal shall be 63 years”[Article 107(5)].

II. A Proposal for Reform

This provision has been in force ever since the commencement of the Constitution. Significant public interest, therefore, has been aroused by the lead story in a newspaper, Anidda of 13 March, that the government is proposing to extend the term of office of judges of the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal by a period of two years.

This proposal, if indeed it reflects the thinking of the government, is deeply disturbing from the standpoint of policy, and gives rise to grave consequences. The courts operating at the apex of the judicial structure are called upon to do justice between citizens and also between the state and members of the public. It is an indispensable principle governing the administration of justice that not the slightest shadow of doubt should arise in the public mind regarding the absolute objectivity and impartiality with which the courts approach this task.

What is proposed, if the newspaper report is authentic, is to confer on judges of two particular courts, the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal, a substantial benefit or advantage in the form of extension of their years of service. The question is whether the implications of this initiative are healthy for the administration of justice.

III. Governing Considerations of Policy

What is at stake is a principle intuitively identified as a pillar of justice.

Reflecting firm convictions, the legal antecedents reiterate the established position with remarkable emphasis. The classical exposition of the seminal standard is, of course, the pronouncement by Lord Hewart: “It is not merely of some importance, but is of fundamental importance that justice should not only be done, but should manifestly and undoubtedly be seen to be done”. (Rex v. Sussex Justices, ex parte McCarthy). The underlying principle is that perception is no less important than reality. The mere appearance of partiality has been held to vitiate proceedings: Dissanayake v. Kaleel. In particular, reasonableness of apprehension in the mind of the parties to litigation is critical: Ranjit Thakur v. Union of India, a reasonable likelihood of bias being necessarily fatal (Manak Lal v. Prem Chaud Singhvi).

The overriding factor is unshaken public confidence in the judiciary: State of West Bengal v. Shivananda Pathak. The decision must be “demonstrably” (Saleem Marsoof J.) fair. The Bar Association of Sri Lanka has rightly declared: “The authority of the judiciary ultimately depends on the trust reposed in it by the people, which is sustained only when justice is administered in a visibly fair manner”.

Credibility is paramount in this regard. “Justice has to be seen to be believed” (J.B. Morton). Legality of the outcome is not decisive; process is of equal consequence. Judicial decisions, then, must withstand public scrutiny, not merely legal technicality: Mark Fernando J. in the Jana Ghosha case. Conceived as continuing vitality of natural justice principles, these are integral to justice itself: Samarawickrema J. in Fernando v. Attorney General. Institutional integrity depends on eliminating even the appearance of partiality (Mandal Vikas Nigam Ltd. v. Girja Shankar Pant), and “open justice is the cornerstone of our judicial system”: (Sahara India Real Estate Corporation Ltd. v. SEBI).

IV. Practical Constraints

Apart from these compelling considerations of policy, there are practical aspects which call for serious consideration. The effect of the proposal is that, among all judges operating at different levels in the judicature of Sri Lanka, judges of the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal only, to the exclusion of all other judges, are singled out as the beneficiaries of the proposal. An inevitable result is that High Court and District Judges and Magistrates will find their avenues of promotion seriously impeded by the unexpected lengthening of the periods of service of currently serving judges in the two apex courts. Consequently, they will be required to retire at a point of time appreciably earlier than they had anticipated to relinquish judicial office because the prospect of promotion to higher courts, entailing higher age limits for retirement, is precipitately withdrawn. Some degree of demotivation, arising from denial of legitimate expectation, is therefore to be expected.

A possible response to this obvious problem is a decision to make the two-year extension applicable to all judicial officers, rather than confining it to judges of the two highest courts. This would solve the problem of disillusionment at lower levels of the judiciary, but other issues, clearly serious in their impact, will naturally arise.

Public service structures, to be equitable and effective, must be founded on principles of non-discrimination in respect of service conditions and related matters. Arbitrary or invidious treatment is destructive of this purpose. In determining the age of retirement of judges of the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal, some attention has been properly paid to balance and consistency. The age of retirement of a Supreme Court judge is on par with that applicable to university professors and academic staff in the higher education system. They all retire at 65 years. Members of the public service, generally, retire at 60. Medical specialists retire at 63, with the possibility of extension in special circumstances to 65. The age of retirement for High Court Judges is 61, and for Magistrates and District Judges 60. It may be noted that the policy change in 2022 aimed at specifically addressing the issue of uniformity and compatibility.

If, then, an attempt is made to carve out an ad hoc principle strictly limited to judicial officers, not admitting of a self-evident rationale, the question would inevitably arise whether this is fair by other categories of the public service and whether the latter would not entertain a justifiable sense of grievance.

This is not merely a moral or ethical issue relating to motivation and fulfillment within the public service, but it could potentially give rise to critical legal issues. It is certainly arguable that the proposed course of action represents an infringement of the postulate of equality of treatment, and non-discrimination, enshrined in Article 12(1) of the Constitution.

There would, as well, be the awkward situation that this issue, almost certain to be raised, would then have to be adjudicated upon by the Supreme Court, itself the direct and exclusive beneficiary of the impugned measure.

V. Piecemeal Amendment or an Overall Approach?

If innovation on these lines is contemplated, would it not be desirable to take up the issue as part of the new Constitution, which the government has pledged to formulate and enact, rather than as a piecemeal amendment at this moment to the existing Constitution? After all, Chapter XV, dealing with the Judiciary, contains provisions interlinked with other salient features of the Constitution, and an integrated approach would seem preferable.

VI. Conclusion

In sum, then, it is submitted that the proposed change is injurious to the institutional integrity of the judiciary and to the prestige and stature of judges, and that it should not be implemented without full consideration of all the issues involved.

By Professor G. L. Peiris
D. Phil. (Oxford), Ph. D. (Sri Lanka);
Former Minister of Justice, Constitutional Affairs and National Integration;
Quondam Visiting Fellow of the Universities of Oxford, Cambridge and London;
Former Vice-Chancellor and Emeritus Professor of Law of the University of Colombo.

Continue Reading

Features

Ranked 134th in Happiness: Rethinking Sri Lanka’s development through happiness, youth wellbeing and resilience

Published

on

In recent years, Sri Lanka has experienced a succession of overlapping challenges that have tested its resilience. Cyclone Ditwah struck Sri Lanka in November last year, significantly disrupting the normal lives of its citizens. The infrastructure damage is much more serious than the tsunami. According to World Bank reports and preliminary estimates, the losses amounted to approximately US$ 4.1 billion, nearly 4 per cent of the country’s Gross Domestic Product. Before taking a break from that, the emerging crisis in the Middle East has once again raised concerns about potential economic repercussions. In particular, those already affected by disasters such as Cyclone Ditwah risk falling “from the frying pan into the fire,” facing multiple hardships simultaneously. Currently, we see fuel prices rising, four-day workweeks, a higher cost of living, increased pressure on household incomes, and a reduction in the overall standard of living for ordinary citizens. It would certainly affect people’s happiness. As human beings, we naturally aspire to live happy and fulfilling lives. At a time when the world is increasingly talking about happiness and wellbeing, the World Happiness Report provides a useful way of looking at how countries are doing. The World Happiness Report discusses global well-being and offers strategies to improve it. The report is produced annually with contributions from the University of Oxford’s Wellbeing Research Centre, Gallup, the UN Sustainable Development Solutions Network, and other stakeholders. There are many variables taken into consideration for the index, including the core measure (Cantril Ladder) and six explanatory variables (GDP per Capita ,Social Support,Healthy Life Expectancy,Freedom to Make Life Choices,Generosity,Perceptions of Corruption), with a final comparison.

According to the recently published World Happiness Report 2026, Sri Lanka ranks 134th out of 147 nations. As per the report, this is the first time that Sri Lanka has suffered such a decline. Sri Lanka currently trails behind most of its South Asian neighbours in the happiness index. The World Happiness Report 2026 attributes Sri Lanka’s low ranking (134th) to a combination of persistent economic struggles, social challenges, and modern pressures on younger generations. The 2026 report specifically noted that excessive social media use is a growing factor contributing to declining life satisfaction among young people globally, including in Sri Lanka. This calls for greater vigilance and careful reflection. These concerns should be examined alongside key observations, particularly in the context of education reforms in Sri Lanka, which must look beyond their immediate scope and engage more meaningfully with the country’s future.

In recent years, a series of events has triggered political upheaval in countries such as Nepal, characterised by widespread protests, government collapse, and the emergence of interim administration. Most reports and news outlets described this as “Gen Z protests.” First, we need to understand what Generation Z is and its key attributes. Born between 1997 and 2012, Generation Z represents the first truly “digital native” generation—raised not just with the internet, but immersed in it. Their lives revolve around digital ecosystems: TikTok sets cultural trends, Instagram fuels discovery, YouTube delivers learning, and WhatsApp sustains peer communities. This constant, feed-driven engagement shapes not only how they consume content but how they think, act, and spend. Tech-savvy and socially aware, Gen Z holds brands to a higher standard. For them, authenticity, transparency, and accountability—especially on environmental and ethical issues—aren’t marketing tools; they’re baseline expectations. We can also observe instances of them becoming unnecessarily arrogant in making quick decisions and becoming tools of some harmful anti-social ideological groups. However, we must understand that any generation should have proper education about certain aspects of the normal world, such as respecting others, listening to others, and living well. More interestingly, a global survey by the McKinsey Health Institute, covering 42,083 people across 26 countries, finds that Gen Z reports poorer mental health than older cohorts and is more likely to perceive social media as harmful.

Youth health behaviour in Sri Lanka reveals growing concerns in mental health and wellbeing. Around 18% of youth (here, school-going adolescents aged 13-17) experience depression, 22.4% feel lonely, and 11.9% struggle with sleep due to worry, with issues rising alongside digital exposure. Suicide-related risks are significant, with notable proportions reporting thoughts, plans, and attempts, particularly among females. Bullying remains a significant concern, particularly among males, with cyberbullying emerging as a notable issue. At the same time, substance use is increasing, including tobacco, smokeless tobacco, and e-cigarettes. These trends highlight the urgent need for targeted interventions to support youth mental health, resilience, and healthier behavioural outcomes in Sri Lanka. We need to create a forum in Sri Lanka to keep young people informed about this. Sri Lanka can designate a date (like April 25th) as a National Youth Empowerment Day to strengthen youth mental health and suicide prevention efforts. This should be supported by a comprehensive, multi-sectoral strategy aligned with basic global guidelines. Key priorities include school-based emotional learning, counselling services, and mental health training for teachers and parents. Strengthening data systems, reducing access to harmful means, and promoting responsible media reporting are essential. Empowering families and communities through awareness and digital tools will ensure this day becomes a meaningful national call to action.

As discussed earlier, Sri Lanka must carefully understand and respond to the challenges arising from its ongoing changes. Sri Lanka should establish an immediate task force comprising responsible stakeholders to engage in discussions on ongoing concerns. Recognising that it is not a comprehensive solution, the World Happiness Index can nevertheless act as an important indicator in guiding a paradigm shift in how we approach education and economic development. For a country seeking to reposition itself globally, Sri Lanka must adopt stronger, more effective strategies across multiple sectors. Building a resilient and prosperous future requires sound policymaking and clear strategic direction.

(The writer is a Professor in Management Studies at the Open University of Sri Lanka. You can reach Professor Abeysekera via nabey@ou.ac.lk)

by Prof. Nalin Abeysekera

Continue Reading

Features

Hidden diversity in Sri Lanka’s killifish revealed: New study reshapes understanding of island’s freshwater biodiversity

Published

on

Aplocheilus parvus

A groundbreaking new study led by an international team of scientists, including Sri Lankan researcher Tharindu Ranasinghe, has uncovered striking genetic distinctions in two closely related killifish species—reshaping long-standing assumptions about freshwater biodiversity shared between Sri Lanka and India.

Published recently in Zootaxa, the research brings together leading ichthyologists such as Hiranya Sudasinghe, Madhava Meegaskumbura, Neelesh Dahanukar and Rajeev Raghavan, alongside other regional experts, highlighting a growing South Asian collaboration in biodiversity science.

For decades, scientists debated whether Aplocheilus blockii and Aplocheilus parvus were in fact the same species. But the new genetic analysis confirms they are “distinct, reciprocally monophyletic sister species,” providing long-awaited clarity to their taxonomic identity.

Speaking to The Island, Ranasinghe said the findings underscore the hidden complexity of Sri Lanka’s freshwater ecosystems.

“What appears superficially similar can be genetically very different,” he noted. “Our study shows that even widespread, common-looking species can hold deep evolutionary histories that we are only now beginning to understand.”

A tale of two fishes

The study reveals that Aplocheilus blockii is restricted to peninsular India, while Aplocheilus parvus occurs both in southern India and across Sri Lanka’s lowland wetlands.

Despite their close relationship, the two species show clear genetic separation, with a measurable “genetic gap” distinguishing them. Subtle physical differences—such as the pattern of iridescent scales—also help scientists tell them apart.

Co-author Sudasinghe, who has led several landmark studies on Sri Lankan freshwater fishes, noted that such integrative approaches combining genetics and morphology are redefining taxonomy in the region.

Echoes of ancient land bridges

The findings also shed light on the ancient biogeographic links between Sri Lanka and India.

Scientists believe that during periods of low sea levels in the past, the two landmasses were connected by the now-submerged Palk Isthmus, allowing freshwater species to move between them.

Later, rising seas severed this connection, isolating populations and driving genetic divergence.

“These fishes likely dispersed between India and Sri Lanka when the land bridge existed,” Ranasinghe said. “Subsequent isolation has resulted in the patterns of genetic structure we see today.”

Meegaskumbura emphasised that such patterns are increasingly being observed across multiple freshwater fish groups in Sri Lanka, pointing to a shared evolutionary history shaped by geography and climate.

A deeper genetic divide

One of the study’s most striking findings is that Sri Lankan populations of A. parvus are genetically distinct from those in India, with no shared haplotypes between the two regions.

Dahanukar explained that this level of differentiation, despite relatively recent geological separation, highlights how quickly freshwater species can diverge when isolated.

Meanwhile, Raghavan pointed out that these findings reinforce the importance of conserving habitats across both countries, as each region harbours unique genetic diversity.

Implications for conservation

The study carries important implications for conservation, particularly in a country like Sri Lanka where freshwater ecosystems are under increasing pressure from development, pollution, and climate change.

Ranasinghe stressed that understanding genetic diversity is key to protecting species effectively.

“If we treat all populations as identical, we risk losing unique genetic lineages,” he warned. “Conservation planning must recognise these hidden differences.”

Sri Lanka is already recognised as a global biodiversity hotspot, but studies like this suggest that its biological richness may be even greater than previously thought.

A broader scientific shift

The research also contributes to a growing body of work by scientists such as Sudasinghe and Meegaskumbura, challenging traditional assumptions about species distributions in the region.

Earlier studies often assumed that many freshwater fish species were shared uniformly between India and Sri Lanka. However, modern genetic tools are revealing a far more complex picture—one shaped by ancient geography, climatic shifts, and evolutionary processes.

“We are moving from a simplistic view of biodiversity to a much more nuanced understanding,” Ranasinghe said. “And Sri Lanka is proving to be a fascinating natural laboratory for this kind of research.”

Looking ahead

The researchers emphasise that much remains to be explored, with several freshwater fish groups in Sri Lanka still poorly understood at the genetic level.

For Sri Lanka, the message is clear: beneath its rivers, tanks, and wetlands lies a largely untapped reservoir of evolutionary history.

As Ranasinghe puts it:

“Every stream could hold a story of millions of years in the making. We are only just beginning to read them.”

By Ifham Nizam

Continue Reading

Trending