Features

Crisis in Sri Lanka and the world

Published

1 year ago

2023/12/27

Thilina Walpola

BOOK REVIEW

By W. D. Lakshman, Professor Emeritus,
University of Colombo

Asoka Bandarage, Crisis in Sri Lanka and the World: Colonial and Neoliberal Origins – Ecological and Collective Alternatives. De Gruyter Contemporary Social Sciences. Vol 30. Berlin and Boston: De Gruyter. 2023

Asoka Bandarage is known for her unconventional approach in several of her publications on development which extensively draw case study material from Sri Lanka. Her examination of the current crisis in Sri Lanka also employs an innovative analytical approach, setting it apart from most existing studies on the subject. Her willingness to depart from convention in this exercise is commendable. Notably, emerging economies like Sri Lanka are increasingly finding themselves in turmoil during this era of neoliberalism. Bandarage’s book, therefore, is a must-read for those seeking alternative methodological stances and more comprehensive perspectives on the analysis of socio-economic crises in emerging economies.

The crisis that emerged in Sri Lanka in 2022 has turned out to be of unprecedented severity, leading the country to declare insolvency and debt default for the first time in its history. At the time of the declaration of insolvency, the government reached out to the IMF for a package of measures to resolve the crisis. At the time of writing, the country has been on an IMF package for about eight months.

The IMF package has brought about some changes in the appearance of the crisis. However, many of the fundamental factors, viewed from a holistic angle, that led to the crisis appear to have been further aggravated by the solutions applied. The crisis continues to take its toll on the people in numerous ways.

Most available accounts, including that of the IMF, perceive this crisis as predominantly economic and financial in nature. However, what Sri Lanka is experiencing is a multi-faceted crisis characterised by diverse causes, consequences, and processes. It encompasses not only economic and financial dimensions but also social, nutritional, and health aspects, political and democratic failures, debt-related challenges, institutional and governance lacuna, bribery and corruption allegations, and ecological concerns. Each of these aspects interacts with the others in complex ways.

The remedial measures taken by the government, according to the IMF-written policy package, addressing as they do only a restricted part of the problem, have now made the crisis a very real and pressing concern for the ordinary people in the country. Regrettably, many analysts, particularly economists and financial analysts, continue to emphasise the economic, financial, and debt-related aspects of the crisis, thus neglecting other important factors of grave relevance. Some analysts bring some history into consideration in explaining the crisis, but for many of them, the relevant history does not go beyond a few years in the immediate past.

Furthermore, many accounts tend to view the crisis as a fundamentally Sri Lankan phenomenon, bringing into analysis only some international influences like fluctuations in oil prices or critical commodity scarcities in the world market, failing to recognise the critical influence of holistically viewed global developments as having pushed the country into this predicament.

In this context, Asoka Bandarage’s Crisis in Sri Lanka and the World (hereafter referred to as Crisis) stands out as a refreshing and much-needed addition to the body of literature addressing the Sri Lankan crisis of the 2020s. She provides a holistic viewpoint, highlighting the multifaceted nature of the crisis and tracing its origins back to Sri Lanka’s historical evolution from colonial times. The Crisis is perhaps the only comprehensive publication written from such a holistic approach so far.

The book commences with a conceptual overview in Chapter 1, where Bandarage combines different themes that she develops in further detail in subsequent chapters. She places particular emphasis on the historical origins of the crisis. In Chapter 2, she delves into the development of the plantation economy in Sri Lanka during the colonial era. The subsequent three chapters cover the early post-Independence period (Chapter 3: 1948-77), the early phase of the post-liberalization period (Chapter 4: 1977-2009), and the period immediately preceding the crisis of the early 2020s (Chapter 5: 2009-19).

In this comprehensive historical analysis, Bandarage offers a bird’s-eye view of Sri Lanka’s key socio-political and economic trends over nearly two centuries and their evolving dynamics. She underscores the global influences, originating from diverse sources and with varying degrees of impact, on Sri Lanka’s domestic economy and its trajectory. Within this historical account, Chapters 4 and 5, which cover the closest influences on the early 2020s crisis, hold particular significance.

Chapter 5 delves into the evaluation of geopolitical rivalry, neocolonialism, and political destabilisation, exploring the range of international factors influencing the crisis that emerged in the early 2020s. Influences from Chinese, Indian, and U.S. expansionism into the Indian Ocean region, and interventions from international organisations like the UN Human Rights Council (UNHCR). Mainstream reviews of the 2020s crisis do rarely cover as extensive a terrain as this dealing with the international political economy of the Sri Lankan crisis.

Bandarage thus brings in a fresh and innovative perspective, shedding light on uncharted terrain of profound relevance to the subject under consideration. Noteworthy in this regard, is her scrutiny of the contemporary influences of the United States, through diplomatic efforts, to secure agreements signed with Sri Lanka in respect of the Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) Compact, the Acquisition and Cross Services Agreement (ACSA), and the Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA).

Chapter 6 encompasses various themes that both characteride and explain the crisis. A central factor is Sri Lanka’s excessive and unbridled debt, particularly its heavy borrowings through International Sovereign Bonds. Bandarage labels this as “debt colonialism” imposed on the country. She also draws attention to the extreme income inequality and widening disparities in the country resulting from decades of neoliberalism. The adverse impact of these factors has been exacerbated by the crippling effects of COVID-19 during 2020-21 and the political turmoil following the protest movement known as the “aragalaya” against the then incumbent regime.

The events set in motion by these protests, culminating in the country’s submission to an IMF programme, are well-documented. The rise, during this kerfuffle, of a political leader known for his extreme right-wing views, described by Bandarage as a “long-time US collaborator” (p. 82), to the all-powerful position of the country’s presidency enabled the seamless implementation of the IMF programme with minimal resistance from the Sri Lankan government.

Bandarage concludes Chapter 6 by illustrating how the cumulative events led to Sri Lanka’s collapse, not only economically but also politically, socially, culturally, and psychologically. She paints a grim picture, stating, “Forces of global financial and corporate power are not leaving any room for the survival of a local economy or a national government that can meet the needs of its people.

The multifaceted crisis is leading to the demise of Sri Lanka’s sovereignty, turning the country into a mere shell of a state, wide open for more external political, economic, and military exploitation” (p. 198). The situation, no doubt, appears dire, but it is worth also noting that Sri Lanka has a history of resilience in overcoming challenges and emerging from crises.

Completing her holistic analysis, Bandarage explores the ecological dimension of the crisis in her final chapter, which has been used to examine ecological and collective alternatives to neoliberal globalisation. This chapter hints at some underlying optimism she shares for Sri Lanka’s future. Bandarage seeks “collective and ecological alternatives to the globalised system underlying perennial socioeconomic, cultural, and political crises, war and refugee crises, leading us to an existential crisis” (p. 204).

In alignment with Karl Polanyi’s viewpoint, she argues (pp. 207-8) that allowing the market mechanism to solely determine the fate of human beings and their natural environment would result in the destruction of society. Bandarage draws inspiration from the Middle Path in Buddhist philosophy, proposing it as a non-violent alternative to extremism of all kinds (p. 211). She advocates policies guided by the Middle Path philosophy to achieve the desired ecological and collective alternatives to neoliberal globalisation.

Several essential themes developed in the Crisis pertaining to the economic, financial, and indebtedness aspects of the 2020s crisis in Sri Lanka merit attention. These themes resonate with my own thinking and published work and hold significance, as they are often disregarded by independent reviewers and government advisors, both domestic and international, including those from International Financial Institutions (IFIs).

One such theme investigates the influence of extreme socio-economic inequality on the 2020s crisis in Sri Lanka. Inequality has persisted in Sri Lanka since the establishment of mercantile capitalism, i.e., the early stages of the colonial plantation economy. After gaining independence from colonial rule, there were brief spells of dominance of social democratic policies that aimed to reduce inequality. The neoliberal regime introduced in 1977 has exacerbated income disparities offsetting the egalitarian trends of the preceding decade.

This trend towards increasing inequality is a common feature of financialised global capitalism, particularly under neoliberal conditions. The super-rich oligarchy in society, often evading foreign exchange regulations and income and other tax rules, acted with detrimental effects on the country’s foreign exchange receipts and tax revenues, contributing to the foreign exchange and fiscal crises of the 2020s.

The rich trading classes (including large industry owners dependent heavily on imported inputs) and those engaged in the underground economy tend to maintain very large funds offshore. The changes in exchange control laws introduced in 2017 have facilitated these practices. Bandarage describes this behaviour as “plunder” by the country’s super-rich through “intentional, dodgy invoicing and stashing the foreign exchange earnings offshore” (p. 13). She refers to a total of US$ 36.833 billion as funds so kept illegally overseas. More recently, a cabinet minister in the incumbent government mentioned an even larger sum, $53.5 billion, held illegally overseas by Sri Lankan oligarchs (see The Island, 24 August 2023).

Either figure can be compared with the officially reported total foreign debt of $49.7 billion at the end of 2022 (Central Bank Annual Report, 2022, pp. 185-6). Furthermore, a significant part of the fiscal deficit issue, lying behind the huge public debt crisis, can be attributed to the non-payment of substantial volumes of tax dues by the wealthiest individuals in society. Tax avoidance and evasion are widely discussed topics. Rich mercantile classes avoid paying not only income tax but also the more revenue-generating indirect taxes of VAT, Import Duty, and Excise taxes.

The next point worth highlighting here is Sri Lanka’s well-known social democratic stance in respect of social policy matters – a matter already referred to briefly. This has been the case even during the post-1977 neoliberal period in matters pertaining to parts of production, trade, and finance. In this respect, the following statement of a leading political analyst is worth citing: ” … (T)he abiding democratic ethos of Sri Lanka (…) has never succumbed to dictatorship of the right or left, despite several civil wars. … This resilient electoral democracy has demonstrated a proclivity for social welfarism. Savage capitalism has never been sustainable here, nor has a foreign policy alien to the values of nonalignment” (Dayan Jayatilleka in The Island, Oct. 26, 2023).

This social ethos came to be established in the Sri Lankan political economy from as early as the 1930s. In 1931, a semi-independent governance system was set up, with a legislature (State Council) elected by the people on universal adult franchise and a Board of Ministers, three-tenths of which comprised of elected State Council members. A strong and widespread left-wing political movement led by a group of charismatic leaders committed to Marxist thinking and practice, developed in the country from this period onwards.

The principal elements of the social democratic stance in social policy, which evolved from this period onwards, was maintained even during the post-1977 neoliberal period. Key aspects of this social democratic ethos include free education, free health services, and the use of consumer and producer subsidies to support the average consumers and small-scale farmers and producers. Although changes have been introduced over time, especially following IMF programmes, the social democratic ethos remains robust. This is a main reason why conventional economic solutions failed to eliminate the dual deficits and debt issues in Sri Lanka.

Out-of-the-box thinking is essential to devise mechanisms that the people can accept to address these economic challenges. The IMF Extended Fund Facility of March 2023 further illustrates the challenges of implementing a stabilization package defined and drafted without giving due care to socio-political peculiarities in Sri Lanka. Policy makers and their advisers are well advised to carefully read Bandarage’s Crisis in search perhaps of useful insights into how policy processes could be modified to achieve improved results.

All News Advertisement

Related Topics:Professor W. D. Lakshman world market

Up Next

Adikaram, a man like no other

Don't Miss

Former beauty queen…in the spotlight again

Thilina Walpola

Click to comment

Features

Getting rid of dark spots

Published

39 seconds ago

2025/04/3

Sahan Weerasooriya

Dark spots can be annoying as they tend to make you look older and dull.

I’ve had a few queries, coming my way, about dark spots and how to get rid of them.

Well, these easy-breezy tips should help you lighten your stubborn dark spots.

Potatoes:

Yes, potatoes do an excellent job of lightening dark spots. Grate half a potato into a pulp. Apply this pulp directly on to the dark spots and wash it off after 15-20 minutes. Using this mask regularly will help in reducing hyperpigmentation.

* Aloe Vera:

Scoop out some aloe vera gel from a freshly plucked aloe leaf and apply it to your face. Rinse it off after 15-20 minutes. With consistent use, your dark spots will start fading away.

Oatmeal:

Mix 03 tablespoons of oatmeal, 01 tablespoon honey and 01 tablespoon milk together to form a paste. Apply this paste to your face and wash it off once it dries completely. You can apply this oatmeal face mask three times a week for clearer skin.

* Turmeric:

Mix 01 teaspoon of turmeric with 01 tablespoon of milk and 01 teaspoon of lemon juice. Apply this paste to your dark spots and rinse it off with water after 10-15 minutes. Repeat this process 02-03 times a week for stronger results.

Green Tea:

Wet two tea bags and pop them in the freezer for about half an hour. Put these tea bags on your dark spots and let them sit for at least 20 minutes. This works against puffy eye bags, too.

* Cucumber:

Cut a few slices off a cool cucumber and let it rest on your under-eye area for about 15-20 minutes before washing it off with water. Repeat this process 03-04 times a week.

Features

The Great and Little Traditions and Sri Lankan Historiography

Published

24 hours ago

2025/04/2

Sahan Weerasooriya

Prof. Obeyesekere

Power, Culture, and Historical Memory:

History, broadly defined, is the study of the past. It is a crucial component of the production and reproduction of culture. Studying every past event is neither feasible nor useful. Therefore, it is necessary to be selective about what to study from the countless events in the past. Deciding what to study, what to ignore, how to study, and how deeply to go into the past is a conscious choices shaped by various forms of power and authority. If studying the past is a main element of the production and reproduction of culture and History is its product, can a socially and culturally divided society truly have a common/shared History? To what extent does ‘established’ or ‘authentic’ History reflect the experiences of those remained outside the political, economic, social, and cultural power structures? Do marginalized groups have their own histories, distinct from dominant narratives? If so, how do these histories relate to ‘established’ History? Historiography today cannot ignore these questions, as they challenge the very notion of truth in History. Due to methodological shifts driven by post-positivist critiques of previously accepted assumptions, the discipline of history—particularly historiography—has moved into a new epistemological terrain.

The post-structuralism and related philosophical discourses have necessitated a critical reexamination of the established epistemological core of various social science disciplines, including history. This intellectual shift has led to a blurring of traditional disciplinary boundaries among the social sciences and the humanities. Consequently, concepts, theories, and heuristic frames developed in one discipline are increasingly being incorporated into others, fostering a process of cross-fertilization that enriches and transforms scholarly inquiry

In recent decades, the discipline of History has broadened its scope and methodologies through interactions with perspectives from the Social Sciences and Humanities. Among the many analytical tools adopted from other disciplines, the Great Tradition and Little Tradition have had a significant impact on historical methodology. This article examines how these concepts, originally developed in social anthropology, have been integrated into Sri Lankan historiography and assesses their role in deepening our understanding of the past.

The heuristic construct of the Great and Little Traditions first emerged in the context of US Social Anthropology as a tool/framework for identifying and classifying cultures. In his seminal work Peasant society and culture: an anthropological approach to civilization, (1956), Robert Redfield introduced the idea of Great and Little Traditions to explain the dual structure of cultural expression in societies, particularly in peasant communities that exist within larger civilizations. His main arguments can be summarized as follows:

a) An agrarian society cannot exist as a fully autonomous entity; rather, it is just one dimension of the broader culture in which it is embedded. Therefore, studying an agrarian society in isolation from its surrounding cultural context is neither possible nor meaningful.

b) Agrarian society, when views in isolation, is a ‘half society’, representing a partial aspect/ one dimension of the broader civilization in which it exits. In that sense, agrarian civilization is a half civilization. To fully understand agrarian society—and by extension, agrarian civilization—it is essential to examine the other half that contribute to the whole.

c) Agrarian society was shaped by the interplay of two cultural traditions within a single framework: the Great Tradition and the Little Tradition. These traditions together provided the unity that defined the civilization embedded in agrarian society.

d) The social dimensions of these cultural traditions would be the Great Society and the Little Society.

e) The Great Culture encompasses the cultural framework of the Great Society, shaped by those who establish its norms. This group includes the educated elite, clergy, theologians, and literati, whose discourse is often regarded as erudite and whose language is considered classical.

f) The social groups excluded from the “Great Society”—referred to as the “Little Society”—have their own distinct traditions and culture. The “Great Tradition” represents those who appropriate society’s surplus production, and its cultural expressions reflect this dominance. In contrast, the “Little Tradition” belongs to those who generate surplus production. While the “Great Tradition” is inherently tied to power and authority, the “Little Tradition” is not directly connected to them.

g) According to Robert Redfield, the Great and Little Traditions are not contradictory but rather distinct cultural elements within a society. The cultural totality of peasant society encompasses both traditions. As Redfield describes, they are “two currents of thought and action, distinguishable, yet overflowing into and out of each other.” (Redfield, 1956).

At the time Redfield published his book Peasant Society and Culture: an Anthropological Approach to Civilization (1956), the dominant analytical framework for studying non-Western societies was modernization theory. This perspective, which gained prominence in the post-World War II era, was deeply influenced by the US geopolitical concerns. Modernization theory became a guiding paradigm shaping research agendas in anthropology, sociology, political science, and development studies in US institutions of higher learning,

Modernization theory viewed societies as existing along a continuum between “traditional” and “modern” stages, with Western industrialized nations positioned near the modern end. Scholars working within this framework argued that economic growth, technological advancement, urbanization, and the rationalization of social structures drive traditional societies toward modernization. The theory often emphasized Western-style education, democratic institutions, and capitalist economies as essential components of this transition.

While engaging with aspects of modernization theory, Redfield offered a more nuanced perspective on non-Western societies. His concept of the “folk-urban continuum” challenged rigid dichotomies between tradition and modernity, proposing that social change occurs through complex interactions between rural and urban ways of life rather than through the simple replacement of one by the other.

The concepts of the Great and Little Traditions gained prominence in Sri Lankan social science discourse through the works of Gananath Obeyesekere, the renowned sociologist who recently passed away. In his seminal research essay, The Great Tradition and the Little in the Perspective of Sinhalese Buddhism (Journal of Asian Studies, 22, 1963), Gananath Obeyesekere applied and adapted this framework to examine key aspects of Sinhalese Buddhism in Sri Lanka. While Robert Redfield originally developed the concept in the context of agrarian societies, Obeyesekere employed it specifically to analyze Sinhala Buddhist culture, highlighting significant distinctions between the two approaches.

He identifies a phenomenon called ‘Sinhala Buddhism’, which represents a unique fusion of religious and cultural traditions: the Great Tradition (Maha Sampradaya) and the Little Traditions (Chuula Sampradaya). To fully grasp the essence of Sinhala Buddhism, it is essential to understand both of these dimensions and their interplay within society.

The Great Tradition represents the formal, institutionalized aspect of Buddhism, centered on the Three Pitakas and other classical doctrinal texts and commentaries of Theravāda Buddhism. It embodies the orthodoxy of Sinhala Buddhism, emphasizing textual authority, philosophical depth, and ethical conduct. Alongside this exists another dimension of Sinhala Buddhism known as the Little (Chuula) Tradition. This tradition reflects the popular, localized, and ritualistic expressions of Buddhism practiced by laypeople. It encompasses folk beliefs, devotional practices (Bali, Thovil), deity veneration, astrology, and rituals (Hadi and Huunium) aimed at securing worldly benefits. Unlike the doctrinally rigid Great Tradition, the Little Tradition is fluid, adaptive, and shaped by indigenous customs, ancestral practices, and even elements of Hinduism. These Sinhala Buddhist cultural practices are identified as ‘Lay-Buddhism’. Gananath Obeyesekera’s concepts and perspectives on Buddhist culture and society contributed to fostering an active intellectual discourse in society. However, the discussion on the concept of Great and Little Traditions remained largely within the domain of social anthropology.

The scholarly discourse on the concepts of Great and Little Tradition gained new socio-political depth through the work of Newton Gunasinghe, a distinguished Sri Lankan sociologist. He applied these concepts to the study of culture and socio-economic structures in the Kandyan countryside, reframing them in terms of production relations. Through his extensive writings and public lectures, Gunasinghe reinterpreted the Great and Little Tradition framework to explore the interconnections between economy, society, and culture.

Blending conventional social anthropology approach with Marxist analyses of production relations and Gramscian perspectives on culture and politics, he offered a nuanced understanding of these dynamics. In the context of our discussion, his key insights on culture, society, and modes of production can be summarized as follows.

a. The social and economic relations of the central highlands under the Kandyan Kingdom, the immediate pre-colonial social and economic order, were his focus. His analysis did not cover to the hydraulic Civilization of Sri Lanka.

b. He explored the organic and dialectical relationship between culture, forces of production, and modes of production. Drawing on the concepts of Antonio Gramsci and Louis Althusser, he examined how culture, politics, and the economy interact, identifying the relationship between cultural formations and production relations

c. Newton Gunasinghe’s unique approach to the concepts of Great Culture and Little Culture lies in his connection of cultural formations to forces and relations of production. He argues that the relationship between a society’s structures and its superstructures is both dialectical and interpenetrative.

d. He observed that during the Kandyan period, the culture associated with the Little Tradition prevailed, rather than the culture linked to the Great Tradition.

e. The limitations of productive forces led to minimal surplus generation, with a significant portion allocated to defense. The constrained resources sustained only the Little Tradition. Consequently, the predominant cultural mode in the Kandyan Kingdom was, broadly speaking, the Little Tradition.

(To be continued)

by Gamini Keerawella

Features

Celebrating 25 Years of Excellence: The Silver Jubilee of SLIIT – II

Published

1 day ago

2025/04/2

Sahan Weerasooriya

Founded in 1999, with its main campus in Malabe and multiple centres across the country—including Metro Campus (Colombo), Matara, Kurunegala, Kandy (Pallekele), and Jaffna (Northern Uni)—SLIIT provides state-of-the-art facilities for students, now celebrating 25 years of excellence in 2025.

Kandy Campus

SLIIT is a degree-awarding higher education institute authorised and approved by the University Grants Commission (UGC) and Ministry of Higher Education under the University Act of the Government of Sri Lanka. SLIIT is also the first Sri Lankan institute accredited by the Institution of Engineering & Technology, UK. Further, SLIIT is also a member of the Association of Commonwealth Universities (ACU) and the International Association of Universities (IAU).

Since its inception, SLIIT has played a pivotal role in shaping the technological and educational landscape of Sri Lanka, producing graduates who have excelled in both local and global arenas. This milestone is a testament to the institution’s unwavering commitment to academic excellence, research, and industry collaboration.

Summary of SLIIT’s

History and Status

Sri Lanka Institute of Information Technology (SLIIT) operates as a company limited by guarantee, meaning it has no shareholders and reinvests all surpluses into academic and institutional development.

* Independence from Government: SLIIT was established in 1999 as an independent entity without government ownership or funding, apart from an initial industry promotion grant from the Board of Investment (BOI).

* Mahapola Trust Fund Involvement & Malabe Campus: In 2000, the Mahapola Trust Fund (MTF) agreed to support SLIIT with funding and land for the Malabe Campus. In 2015, SLIIT fully repaid MTF with interest, ending financial ties.

* True Independence (2017-Present): In 2017, SLIIT was officially delisted from any government ministry, reaffirming its status as a self-sustaining, non-state higher education institution.

Today, SLIIT is recognised for academic excellence, global collaborations, and its role in producing IT professionals in Sri Lanka

.A Journey of Growth and Innovation

SLIIT began as a pioneering institution dedicated to advancing information technology education in Sri Lanka. Over the past two and a half decades, it has expanded its academic offerings, establishing itself as a multidisciplinary university with programmess in engineering, business, architecture, and humanities, in addition to IT. The growth of SLIIT has been marked by continuous improvement in infrastructure, faculty development, and curriculum enhancement, ensuring that students receive world-class education aligned with industry needs.

Looking Ahead: The Next 25 Years

As SLIIT celebrates its Silver Jubilee, the institution looks forward to the future with a renewed commitment to excellence. With advancements in technology, the rise of artificial intelligence, and the increasing demand for skilled professionals, SLIIT aims to further expand its academic offerings, enhance research capabilities, and continue fostering a culture of innovation. The next 25 years promise to be even more transformative, as the university aspires to make greater contributions to national and global progress.

Sports Achievements:

A Legacy of Excellence

SLIIT has not only excelled in academics but has also built a strong reputation in sports. Over the years, the university has actively promoted athletics and competitive sports by organising inter-university and inter-school competitions, fostering a culture of teamwork, discipline, and resilience. SLIIT teams have secured victories in national and inter-university competitions across various sports, including cricket, basketball, badminton, rugby, football, swimming, and athletics. SLIIT’s sports achievements reflect its dedication to holistic student development, encouraging students to excel beyond the classroom.

Kings of the pool!

Once again, our swimmers have brought glory to SLIIT by emerging as champions at the Asia Pacific Institute of Information and Technology Extravaganza Swimming Championship 2024. They won the Men’s, Women’s, and Overall Championships. Congratulations to all swimmers for their dedication and hard work in the pool, bringing honour to SLIIT.

Winning International Competitions

SLIIT students have participated in and excelled in various international competitions, including Robofest, Codefest, and the University of Queensland – Design Solution for Impact Competition, showcasing their skills and talent on a global stage.

Here’s a more detailed look at SLIIT’s involvement in international competitions:

Robofest:

SLIIT’s Faculty of Engineering organises the annual Robofest competition, which aims to empower students with skills in electronics, robotics, critical thinking, and problem-solving, preparing them to compete internationally and bring recognition to Sri Lankan talent.

Codefest:

CODEFEST is a nationwide Software Competition organized by the Faculty of Computing of Sri Lanka Institute of Information Technology (SLIIT) geared towards exhibiting the software application design and developing talents of students island-wide. It is an effort of SLIIT to elevate the entire nation’s ICT knowledge to achieve its aspiration of being the knowledge hub in Asia. CODEFEST was first organised in 2012 and this year it will be held for the 8th consecutive time in parallel with the 20th anniversary celebrations of SLIIT.

University of Queensland – Design Solution for Impact Competition:

SLIIT hosted the first-ever University of Queensland – Design Solution for Impact Competition in Sri Lanka, with 16 school teams from across the country participating.

International Open Day:

SLIIT organises an International Open Day where students can connect with distinguished lecturers and university representatives from prestigious institutions like the University of Queensland, Liverpool John Moores University, and Manchester Metropolitan University.

Brain Busters:

SLIIT Brain Busters is a quiz competition organised by SLIIT. The competition is open to students of National, Private and International Schools Island wide. The programme is broadcast on TV1 television as a series.

Inter-University Dance Competition:

SLIIT Team Diamonds for being selected as finalists and advancing to the Grand Finale of Tantalize 2024, the inter-university dance competition organised by APIIT Sri Lanka. The 14 talented team members from various SLIIT faculties have showcased their skills in Team Diamonds and earned their spot as finalists, competing among over 30 teams from state universities, private universities, and higher education institutes.

Softskills+

For the 11th consecutive year, Softskills+ returns with an exciting lineup of events aimed at honing essential soft skills among students. The program encompasses an interschool quiz contest and a comprehensive workshop focused on developing teamwork, problem-solving abilities, leadership qualities, and fostering creative thinking.

Recently, the Faculty of Business at SLIIT organised its annual Inter-school Quiz Competition and Soft Skills Workshop, marking its fifth successive year. Targeting students in grades 11 to 13 from Commerce streams across State, Private, and International schools, the workshop sought to ignite a passion for soft skills development, emphasising teamwork, problem-solving, creativity, and innovative thinking. Recognising the increasing importance of these soft skills in today’s workforce, the programme aims to fill the gap often left unaddressed in the school curriculum.”

The winners of the soft skill competition with Professor Lakshman Rathnayake: Chairman/Chancellor, Vice Chancellor/MD Professor Lalith Gamage, Professor Nimal Rajapakse: Senior Deputy Vice – Chancellor & Provost, Deputy Vice Chancellor – Research and International Affairs Professor Samantha Thelijjagoda, and Veteran Film Director Somarathna Dissanayake.

VogueFest 2024:

SLIIT Business School organised VogueFest 2024, a platform for emerging fashion designers under 30 to showcase their work and win prizes.

T-shirt Design Competition with Sheffield Hallam University:

SLIIT and Sheffield Hallam University (SHU) UK collaborated on a T-shirt designing competition, with a voting procedure to select the best design.

SLIIT’s Got Talent

: The annual talent show, SLIIT’s Got Talent 2024, was held for the 10th consecutive year at the Nelum Pokuna Mahinda Rajapaksa Theatre on 27th September 2024. SLIIT’s Got Talent had the audience energised with amazing performances, showcasing mind-blowing talent by the orchestra and the talented undergraduates from all faculties.

Other events:

* SLIIT also participates in events like the EDUVision Exhibition organised by the Richmond College Old Boys’ Association.

* They hosted the first-ever University of Queensland – Design Solution for Impact Competition in Sri Lanka.

* SLIIT Business School also organised the Business Proposal Competition.

SLIIT Academy:

SLIIT Academy (Pvt.) Ltd. provides industrial-oriented learning experiences for students.

International Partnerships:

SLIIT has strong international partnerships with universities like Liverpool John Moores University (LJMU), The University of Queensland (UQ), Manchester Metropolitan University (MMU), and Curtin University Australia, providing opportunities for students to study and participate in international events.

(The writer, a senior Chartered Accountant and professional banker, is Professor at SLIIT University, Malabe. He is also the author of the “Doing Social Research and Publishing Results”, a Springer publication (Singapore), and “Samaja Gaveshakaya (in Sinhala).