Connect with us

Features

Editors hauled up before bar of Parliament and a stranger in the House

Published

on

J.R.Jayewardene

(Excerpted from Memories of 33 year in Parliament by Nihal Seneviratne)

A few days before Prime Minister J.R.Jayewardene left Parliament to assume duties as the first Executive President of the country, he summoned me to his Chambers in Parliament. He then showed me a copy of the Ceylon Observer of January 30, 1978 which showed a picture of a man and a film actress in a boat and the caption beneath the picture read “The President of one of the leading industrial complexes in South Korea showing the Sri Lanka Foreign Minister Mr. A.C..S. Hameed, around the showrooms of the industrial complex.”

He then told me the editors of the Ceylon Observer were guilty of a breach of privilege of Parliament. In a tactful manner, I disagreed with him by saying this was only a printing and typographical mistake. He disagreed with me and told me to summon to the two editors to Parliament to explain their conduct. I then told him this was uncalled for and suggested that if it was a breach of privilege, the correct and proper action to be taken was to summon them before the Committee of Privileges which had already been established comprising both Government and Opposition members.

Though I argued Mr. Jayewardene disagreed adding that before he leaves Parliament in a few days he wants to see that proper procedure is followed as an example for the future. I still insisted that this was not the legitimate and proper manner to act but he refused to see my point of view. I then added that in the history of Parliament since 1948, never have any journalists been brought to the chamber. I told him I want to be sure that I follow the correct parliamentary procedure since there is no precedent at this stage.

Then he told me, “Nihal, if you have any doubt about the correct procedure to follow, you can consult my brother,” referring to H.W.Jayewardene who was one of his principal advisers. Straightaway I said, “‘The Attorney General is the chief law officer of the Crown and if I need any advice, I will consult him” adding that I know the present Attorney General, Shiva Pasupathi, who is always willing to help and advise me.

Following the Prime Minister’s strict instructions, I studied the subject very carefully and drafted the letter to be sent to the two editors to appear before Parliament for questioning. I was acting on the directions of Speaker Anandatissa de Alwis directing me to summon them. Ironically, the two editors, Harold Pieris and Associate Editor Philip Cooray were close friends of mine from my university days in Peradeniya.

The first item on the agenda on the morning of February 2,1978 was the Question of Privilege raised by Mr. Hameed who said that the appearance of the wrong caption in the Ceylon Observer is defamatory and had damaged his reputation and called for action to be taken, after an inquiry, against those responsible for the lapse. The Speaker said he is satisfied there is a prima facie case of a breach of privilege and called on the Leader of the House, Ranasinghe Premadasa, to move the motion ordering the two editors of the Ceylon Observer, namely Harold Pieris and Philip Cooray, to appear before the Assembly at 5.00 p.m. the same day and show cause why they should not be punished by the National State Assembly for a breach of privilege.

R.J.G. (Ronnie) de Mel , Minister of Finance and Planning, seconded the motion. I was then directed by the Speaker to take necessary action to summon the persons mentioned in the resolution to appear before the Assembly by 5.00 p.m.

At 5.00 p.m., when the House met to discuss the Question of Privilege, Mr. Premadasa moved a motion for the Assembly to form itself into a committee of the entire Assembly to investigate and report back to the Assembly on the complaint of a breach of privilege made by the Minister of Foreign Affairs A.C.S.Hameed. The relevant motion was put to the House and was carried unanimously following which the House formed itself into a committee of the whole Assembly. The Speaker functioned as the Chairman of the Committee and the quorum was set at 20. The Chairman directed the Sergeant-at-Arms to bring to the Bar of the Assembly the persons to whom notices had been served and Mr. Pieris and Mr. Cooray were conducted to the Chamber and asked to introduce themselves.

The Chairman then informed the two Editors that it has been alleged that they have committed an offence set out in Section 22 of the Parliament (Powers and Privileges) Act, as amended by Law No. 5 of 1978. “Have you any cause to show why you should not be dealt with and punished under Section 28 of the Act?”

Mr. Harold Pieris spoke first and said he had a statement and the Speaker asked him to read it. He said that on January 30, 1978 he was away from office as it was his off day and Mr. Philip Cooray , Associate Editor, was acting as the Editor of the Ceylon Observer on this day. However , on January 30, he had come to office around 2.15p.m. as there was a staff meeting and then he had met Mr. Cooray who said there had been a mix up in one of the captions. The Ceylon Observer goes into print around 11 a.m. and the paper had only one edition each day and the very next day a correction and apology regarding this matter was inserted on the same page. Mr. Pieris also tabled copies of the newspapers which carried the correction.

Soon after Mr. Cooray gave evidence and explained that around 10.15 a.m. or so when the proof of Page 3 came to him, he noticed that the caption to Foreign Minister Hameed’s picture was mixed up and instructed the sub-editor to make the correction immediately. However, when the paper started printing, he had noticed that the correct caption to Mr. Hameed’s picture had not been made and immediately ordered the press to be stopped but by then 900 copies of the paper had been printed and distributed to the sellers.

He had corrected the error and the balance 4,000 copies of the Ceylon Observer were printed and distributed with the correct caption. He had also immediately informed the Chairman of Lake House Mr. R.Bodinagoda who had ordered an immediate investigation. Mr. Cooray also tendered an unqualified apology to Mr. Hameed for the error.

Thereafter many MPs including J.R.Jayewardene, Gamini Dissanayake, V.N.Navaratnam, R.Sampanthan, D.M.Chandrapala, R.Premadasa, Dr. P.M.B. Cyril, Ronnie de Mel questioned the Editors at length seeking clarification regarding this unfortunate incident.

The incident ended with the final statement by the Speaker. “I have to report to the Parliament that the Committee has unanimously resolved that, in the view of the explanation and unqualified apology tendered by those responsible for the defamatory publication, a fine of Rs. 1,000 each be imposed on Mr. Pieris and Mr. Cooray the fine to be paid to the Ceylon Deaf and Blind School before February 6, 1978. The appropriate correction and apology with full publicity will be published on Page 1 of the next issues of the Ceylon Observer.”

The Prime Minister said he would ensure that the fne would be paid by the Associated Newspapers of Ceylon Ltd., and not personally by the editors.

Then J.R.Jayewardene, who was to assume office as Executive President two days later on February 4, had the final word when he said that he was glad that the Assembly had conducted itself admirably on the first occasion on which it was sitting in the capacity as a court. Thereafter the Speaker gave permission for the two editors to withdraw, and they left the Parliament Chamber. Thus ended the infamous incident, one that hasn’t been repeated thereafter.

Stranger in the House

Some happenings in Parliament are rather humorous like this one which took place during my early years in Parliament. It is rather trivial and not politically significant but remains an unforgettable incident for me. In the sixties there was to be the Opening Session of a new Parliament after the General Election. The staff and I were all busy with so many new MPs and those Members who had been re-elected trooping into Parliament accompanied by their friends and relatives. Our security staff checking the Members had apparently not been able to check each Member properly.

The quorum bells were rung and we, the Clerks, accompanied the Speaker into the Chamber. After the Proclamation was read out, the next item on the Order Paper was the swearing in of all the Members present. While seated at the Table of the House, a member summoned me and asked me to check on one particular new MP who appeared suspicious. So very cautiously I went across to the second row of the Opposition benches and asked him what his name was and which constituency he represented.

He made a fundamental mistake of saying that he represented Mulkirigala. I immediately knew he was speaking an untruth as I knew well it was George Rajapakse who had been re-elected to that seat. Cautiously and without making it an issue, I asked him to accompany me to the lobby and thereafter asked the Sergeant at Arms to keep him in his custody till the days sitting was over.

I returned to continue the swearing in of the Members. Once the sitting was concluded I took the person, clad in smart national dress, to the Speaker’s Chambers. The Speaker questioned him about himself and his background. We got the biggest shock of all when he blurted out that he came that morning from the Mental Hospital at Angoda! We immediately contacted the hospital authorities who confirmed this. We then asked the Sergeant-at-Arms to accompany him back to his rightful place.

If we had not identified him then, he may very well have taken his oaths as a Member of Parliament and we would have been faced with a bigger problem of dealing with a fully sworn in Member of Parliament, in fact not being a Member of Parliament at all. This was certainly one of the most unforgettable incidents in my lifetime.



Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

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

Features

Rethinking post-disaster urban planning: Lessons from Peradeniya

Published

on

University of Peradeniya

A recent discussion by former Environment Minister, Eng. Patali Champika Ranawaka on the Derana 360 programme has reignited an important national conversation on how Sri Lanka plans, builds and rebuilds in the face of recurring disasters.

His observations, delivered with characteristic clarity and logic, went beyond the immediate causes of recent calamities and focused sharply on long-term solutions—particularly the urgent need for smarter land use and vertical housing development.

Ranawaka’s proposal to introduce multistoried housing schemes in the Gannoruwa area, as a way of reducing pressure on environmentally sensitive and disaster-prone zones, resonated strongly with urban planners and environmentalists alike.

It also echoed ideas that have been quietly discussed within academic and conservation circles for years but rarely translated into policy.

One such voice is that of Professor Siril Wijesundara, Research Professor at the National Institute of Fundamental Studies (NIFS) and former Director General of the Royal Botanic Gardens, Peradeniya, who believes that disasters are often “less acts of nature and more outcomes of poor planning.”

Professor Siril Wijesundara

“What we repeatedly see in Sri Lanka is not merely natural disasters, but planning failures,” Professor Wijesundara told The Island.

“Floods, landslides and environmental degradation are intensified because we continue to build horizontally, encroaching on wetlands, forest margins and river reservations, instead of thinking vertically and strategically.”

The former Director General notes that the University of Peradeniya itself offers a compelling case study of both the problem and the solution. The main campus, already densely built and ecologically sensitive, continues to absorb new faculties, hostels and administrative buildings, placing immense pressure on green spaces and drainage systems.

“The Peradeniya campus was designed with landscape harmony in mind,” he said. “But over time, ad-hoc construction has compromised that vision. If development continues in the same manner, the campus will lose not only its aesthetic value but also its ecological resilience.”

Professor Wijesundara supports the idea of reorganising the Rajawatte area—located away from the congested core of the university—as a future development zone. Rather than expanding inward and fragmenting remaining open spaces, he argues that Rajawatte can be planned as a well-designed extension, integrating academic, residential and service infrastructure in a controlled manner.

Crucially, he stresses that such reorganisation must go hand in hand with social responsibility, particularly towards minor staff currently living in the Rajawatte area.

“These workers are the backbone of the university. Any development plan must ensure their dignity and wellbeing,” he said. “Providing them with modern, safe and affordable multistoried housing—especially near the railway line close to the old USO premises—would be both humane and practical.”

According to Professor Wijesundara, housing complexes built near existing transport corridors would reduce daily commuting stress, minimise traffic within the campus, and free up valuable land for planned academic use.

More importantly, vertical housing would significantly reduce the university’s physical footprint.

Drawing parallels with Ranawaka’s Gannoruwa proposal, he emphasised that vertical development is no longer optional for Sri Lanka.

“We are a small island with a growing population and shrinking safe land,” he warned.

“If we continue to spread out instead of building up, disasters will become more frequent and more deadly. Vertical housing, when done properly, is environmentally sound, economically efficient and socially just.”

Peradeniya University flooded

The veteran botanist also highlighted the often-ignored link between disaster vulnerability and the destruction of green buffers.

“Every time we clear a lowland, a wetland or a forest patch for construction, we remove nature’s shock absorbers,” he said.

“The Royal Botanic Gardens has survived floods for over a century precisely because surrounding landscapes once absorbed excess water. Urban planning must learn from such ecological wisdom.”

Professor Wijesundara believes that universities, as centres of knowledge, should lead by example.

“If an institution like Peradeniya cannot demonstrate sustainable planning, how can we expect cities to do so?” he asked. “This is an opportunity to show that development and conservation are not enemies, but partners.”

As climate-induced disasters intensify across the country, voices like his—and proposals such as those articulated by Patali Champika Ranawaka—underscore a simple but urgent truth: Sri Lanka’s future safety depends not only on disaster response, but on how and where we build today.

The challenge now lies with policymakers and planners to move beyond television studio discussions and academic warnings, and translate these ideas into concrete, people-centred action.

By Ifham Nizam ✍️

Continue Reading

Features

Superstition – Major barrier to learning and social advancement

Published

on

At the initial stage of my six-year involvement in uplifting society through skill-based initiatives, particularly by promoting handicraft work and teaching students to think creatively and independently, my efforts were partially jeopardized by deep-rooted superstition and resistance to rational learning.

Superstitions exerted a deeply adverse impact by encouraging unquestioned belief, fear, and blind conformity instead of reasoning and evidence-based understanding. In society, superstition often sustains harmful practices, social discrimination, exploitation by self-styled godmen, and resistance to scientific or social reforms, thereby weakening rational decision-making and slowing progress. When such beliefs penetrate the educational environment, students gradually lose the habit of asking “why” and “how,” accepting explanations based on fate, omens, or divine intervention rather than observation and logic.

Initially, learners became hesitant to challenge me despite my wrong interpretation of any law, less capable of evaluating information critically, and more vulnerable to misinformation and pseudoscience. As a result, genuine efforts towards social upliftment were obstructed, and the transformative power of education, which could empower individuals economically and intellectually, was weakened by fear-driven beliefs that stood in direct opposition to progress and rational thought. In many communities, illnesses are still attributed to evil spirits or curses rather than treated as medical conditions. I have witnessed educated people postponing important decisions, marriages, journeys, even hospital admissions, because an astrologer predicted an “inauspicious” time, showing how fear governs rational minds.

While teaching students science and mathematics, I have clearly observed how superstition acts as a hidden barrier to learning, critical thinking, and intellectual confidence. Many students come to the classroom already conditioned to believe that success or failure depends on luck, planetary positions, or divine favour rather than effort, practice, and understanding, which directly contradicts the scientific spirit. I have seen students hesitate to perform experiments or solve numerical problems on certain “inauspicious” days.

In mathematics, some students label themselves as “weak by birth”, which creates fear and anxiety even before attempting a problem, turning a subject of logic into a source of emotional stress. In science classes, explanations based on natural laws sometimes clash with supernatural beliefs, and students struggle to accept evidence because it challenges what they were taught at home or in society. This conflict confuses young minds and prevents them from fully trusting experimentation, data, and proof.

Worse still, superstition nurtures dependency; students wait for miracles instead of practising problem-solving, revision, and conceptual clarity. Over time, this mindset damages curiosity, reduces confidence, and limits innovation, making science and mathematics appear difficult, frightening, or irrelevant. Many science teachers themselves do not sufficiently emphasise the need to question or ignore such irrational beliefs and often remain limited to textbook facts and exam-oriented learning, leaving little space to challenge superstition directly. When teachers avoid discussing superstition, they unintentionally reinforce the idea that scientific reasoning and superstitious beliefs can coexist.

To overcome superstition and effectively impose critical thinking among students, I have inculcated the process to create a classroom culture where questioning was encouraged and fear of being “wrong” was removed. Students were taught how to think, not what to think, by consistently using the scientific method—observation, hypothesis, experimentation, evidence, and conclusion—in both science and mathematics lessons. I have deliberately challenged superstitious beliefs through simple demonstrations and hands-on experiments that allow students to see cause-and-effect relationships for themselves, helping them replace belief with proof.

Many so-called “tantrik shows” that appear supernatural can be clearly explained and exposed through basic scientific principles, making them powerful tools to fight superstition among students. For example, acts where a tantrik places a hand or tongue briefly in fire without injury rely on short contact time, moisture on the skin, or low heat transfer from alcohol-based flames rather than divine power.

“Miracles” like ash or oil repeatedly appearing from hands or idols involve concealment or simple physical and chemical tricks. When these tricks are demonstrated openly in classrooms or science programmes and followed by clear scientific explanations, students quickly realise how easily perception can be deceived and why evidence, experimentation, and critical questioning are far more reliable than blind belief.

Linking concepts to daily life, such as explaining probability to counter ideas of luck, or biology to explain illness instead of supernatural causes, makes rational explanations relatable and convincing.

Another unique example that I faced in my life is presented here. About 10 years ago, when I entered my new house but did not organise traditional rituals that many consider essential for peace and prosperity as my relatives believed that without them prosperity would be blocked.  Later on, I could not utilise the entire space of my newly purchased house for earning money, largely because I chose not to perform certain rituals.

While this decision may have limited my financial gains to some extent, I do not consider it a failure in the true sense. I feel deeply satisfied that my son and daughter have received proper education and are now well settled in their employment, which, to me, is a far greater achievement than any ritual-driven expectation of wealth. My belief has always been that a house should not merely be a source of income or superstition-bound anxiety, but a space with social purpose.

Instead of rituals, I strongly feel that the unused portion of my house should be devoted to running tutorials for poor and underprivileged students, where knowledge, critical thinking, and self-reliance can be nurtured. This conviction gives me inner peace and reinforces my faith that education and service to society are more meaningful measures of success than material profit alone.

Though I have succeeded to some extent, this success has not been complete due to the persistent influence of superstition.

by Dr Debapriya Mukherjee
Former Senior Scientist
Central Pollution Control Board, India ✍️

Continue Reading

Features

Race hate and the need to re-visit the ‘Clash of Civilizations’

Published

on

Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese: ‘No to race hate’

Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has done very well to speak-up against and outlaw race hate in the immediate aftermath of the recent cold-blooded gunning down of several civilians on Australia’s Bondi Beach. The perpetrators of the violence are believed to be ardent practitioners of religious and race hate and it is commendable that the Australian authorities have lost no time in clearly and unambiguously stating their opposition to the dastardly crimes in question.

The Australian Prime Minister is on record as stating in this connection: ‘ New laws will target those who spread hate, division and radicalization. The Home Affairs Minister will also be given new powers to cancel or refuse visas for those who spread hate and a new taskforce will be set up to ensure the education system prevents, tackles and properly responds to antisemitism.’

It is this promptness and single-mindedness to defeat race hate and other forms of identity-based animosities that are expected of democratic governments in particular world wide. For example, is Sri Lanka’s NPP government willing to follow the Australian example? To put the record straight, no past governments of Sri Lanka initiated concrete measures to stamp out the evil of race hate as well but the present Sri Lankan government which has pledged to end ethnic animosities needs to think and act vastly differently. Democratic and progressive opinion in Sri Lanka is waiting expectantly for the NPP government’ s positive response; ideally based on the Australian precedent to end race hate.

Meanwhile, it is apt to remember that inasmuch as those forces of terrorism that target white communities world wide need to be put down their counterpart forces among extremist whites need to be defeated as well. There could be no double standards on this divisive question of quashing race and religious hate, among democratic governments.

The question is invariably bound up with the matter of expeditiously and swiftly advancing democratic development in divided societies. To the extent to which a body politic is genuinely democratized, to the same degree would identity based animosities be effectively managed and even resolved once and for all. To the extent to which a society is deprived of democratic governance, correctly understood, to the same extent would it experience unmanageable identity-bred violence.

This has been Sri Lanka’s situation and generally it could be stated that it is to the degree to which Sri Lankan citizens are genuinely constitutionally empowered that the issue of race hate in their midst would prove manageable. Accordingly, democratic development is the pressing need.

While the dramatic blood-letting on Bondi Beach ought to have driven home to observers and commentators of world politics that the international community is yet to make any concrete progress in the direction of laying the basis for an end to identity-based extremism, the event should also impress on all concerned quarters that continued failure to address the matters at hand could prove fatal. The fact of the matter is that identity-based extremism is very much alive and well and that it could strike devastatingly at a time and place of its choosing.

It is yet premature for the commentator to agree with US political scientist Samuel P. Huntingdon that a ‘Clash of Civilizations’ is upon the world but events such as the Bondi Beach terror and the continuing abduction of scores of school girls by IS-related outfits, for instance, in Northern Africa are concrete evidence of the continuing pervasive presence of identity-based extremism in the global South.

As a matter of great interest it needs mentioning that the crumbling of the Cold War in the West in the early nineties of the last century and the explosive emergence of identity-based violence world wide around that time essentially impelled Huntingdon to propound the hypothesis that the world was seeing the emergence of a ‘Clash of Civilizations’. Basically, the latter phrase implied that the Cold War was replaced by a West versus militant religious fundamentalism division or polarity world wide. Instead of the USSR and its satellites, the West, led by the US, had to now do battle with religion and race-based militant extremism, particularly ‘Islamic fundamentalist violence’ .

Things, of course, came to a head in this regard when the 9/11 calamity centred in New York occurred. The event seemed to be startling proof that the world was indeed faced with a ‘Clash of Civilizations’ that was not easily resolvable. It was a case of ‘Islamic militant fundamentalism’ facing the great bulwark, so to speak, of ‘ Western Civilization’ epitomized by the US and leaving it almost helpless.

However, it was too early to write off the US’ capability to respond, although it did not do so by the best means. Instead, it replied with military interventions, for example, in Iraq and Afghanistan, which moves have only earned for the religious fundamentalists more and more recruits.

Yet, it is too early to speak in terms of a ‘Clash of Civilizations’. Such a phenomenon could be spoken of if only the entirety of the Islamic world took up arms against the West. Clearly, this is not so because the majority of the adherents of Islam are peaceably inclined and want to coexist harmoniously with the rest of the world.

However, it is not too late for the US to stop religious fundamentalism in its tracks. It, for instance, could implement concrete measures to end the blood-letting in the Middle East. Of the first importance is to end the suffering of the Palestinians by keeping a tight leash on the Israeli Right and by making good its boast of rebuilding the Gaza swiftly.

Besides, the US needs to make it a priority aim to foster democratic development worldwide in collaboration with the rest of the West. Military expenditure and the arms race should be considered of secondary importance and the process of distributing development assistance in the South brought to the forefront of its global development agenda, if there is one.

If the fire-breathing religious demagogue’s influence is to be blunted worldwide, then, it is development, understood to mean equitable growth, that needs to be fostered and consolidated by the democratic world. In other words, the priority ought to be the empowerment of individuals and communities. Nothing short of the latter measures would help in ushering a more peaceful world.

Continue Reading

Trending