Midweek Review
Field Marshal won’t quit SJB
Field Marshal Fonseka’s meeting with President Wickremesinghe, in early Feb this year, in Parliament, during its reconvening, has fuelled speculation of a secret understanding between them. Denying such claims, Fonseka disclosed he met Wickremesinghe not as the President but the Minister in charge of the Finance portfolio regarding some of his funds held by the government. According to Fonseka, his Feb meeting, on the day the President delivered his latest policy speech, was the third. “There were two other previous meetings regarding the same matter,” Fonseka said, adding that the other officials who dealt with the issue at hand were the Governor, CBSL, Treasury Secretary and the Attorney General. Disclosing the Feb meeting lasted just 10 minutes, Fonseka appreciated the fact that the President didn’t discuss politics at all on all occasions. “Perhaps, regarding the same matter, I may have to meet the President again.” The funds held by the government are widely believed to be received by Fonseka in the run-up to 2010 presidential polls.
By Shamindra Ferdinando
Field Marshal Sarath Fonseka insists he’ll remain with the main Opposition Samagi Jana Balawegaya (SJB) regardless of the continuing dispute with an influential section of the party.
The bone of contention is SJB and Opposition Leader Sajith Premadasa’s decision to grant membership to General Daya Ratnayake who served as Commander of the Army (2013-2015) during Mahinda Rajapaksa’s turbulent second tenure as the President.
Tough talking war-winning Army Commander Gardihewa Sarath Chandralal Fonseka, in an exclusive interview with The Island last week, at his political office at Thalahena, Malabe, discussed the developing situation in the SJB, the unceremonious ouster of President Gotabaya Rajapaksa, forthcoming national elections, his contact with President Ranil Wickremesinghe, the challenge posed by a resurgent Janatha Vimukthi Peremuna (JVP), predicament of the ruling Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna (SLPP) and the Gaza war where the US-backed Israel is engaged in a ruthless campaign, despite widespread allegations of committing genocide on hapless Palestinian civilians, by way of relentless bombardments and even by withholding food to them.
Declaring both Palestinians and Israelis have the right to live in their territories, Fonseka stressed that the Gaza war couldn’t be compared with the local brutal conflict that was successfully dealt through military means against the opinion of so many pundits both here and abroad, who openly declared that Lankan security forces were incapable of defeating the Tigers.
The Sinha Regiment veteran, as his family name Gardihewa denotes is from a fighting stock, didn’t mince his words when he questioned the rationale in appointing General Ratnayake, who had been with the Rajapaksas, as SJB advisor on public policy.
Acknowledging that there had been differences between him and the party on some matters of importance, the 73-year-old Gampaha District lawmaker alleged that the situation took a turn for the worse when the party leader brought in Ratnayake, who served the infantry with distinction.
A former military spokesman (2004-2006), Ratnayake served as the General Officer Commanding, 23 Division from Dec 2005 to August 2007 during the campaign in the East.
Fonseka stressed that the party couldn’t have accommodated Ratnayake under any circumstances as he was a beneficiary of successive Rajapaksa administrations.
Asked why he moved court against the party on the premise that the leadership wanted to sack him over his recent criticism of General Ratnayake’s move and what prompted him (Field Marshall) to do so if he felt the SJB didn’t want him, Fonseka said: “This situation was caused by my strong opposition to accommodating General Ratnayake in the SJB. I conveyed my disapproval to the party leader, General Secretary of the party, etc. They ignored my views on this matter. There were several reasons for me to oppose General Ratnayake. He served in different capacities, under the utterly corrupt Rajapaksa administrations, the FM claimed.
Ratnayake also played a significant role in two corrupt military courts which dealt with me. The government reciprocated by elevating him to the Army No. 02 slot over 166 other officers. That was wrong. Therefore, General Ratnayeke received benefits, unlawfully. Ratnayake was one of Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s Viyathmaga activists. He was a key Viyathmaga speaker. Then Ratnayake received appointment as Secretary to the then Industries Minister Wimal Weerawansa and then as Chairman of the Sri Lanka Ports Authority (SLPA).”
How could the party take in such a person even without asking me, the Field Marshal queried, pointing out that as the person who conducted the successful war against the LTTE, the Chairman of the SJB should have been consulted before taking retired military commanders. That was done in a clandestine way, the Field Marshal alleged.
The Field Marshal stressed that there was absolutely no basis for the party leader’s public declarations that he (Fonseka) acted against the powers bestowed on the party leader by the SJB’s Working Committee. Fonseka questioned the basis for the party leader’s declaration that those who opposed forming of an ex-military organization, within the party, should be dealt with firmly.
Field Marshal Fonseka denied the party leader’s accusations that he talked ill of the late President Ranasinghe Premadasa and former First Lady Hema. Field Marshal said that in the wake of a section of the print media reporting punitive disciplinary measures the party intended to take against him over previously mentioned unsubstantiated allegations, he was compelled to resort to legal action to protect his position in the party as well as his organizer’s post.
Fonseka declared: “I have never violated party discipline. My crime was talking against corrupt elements. I have never betrayed the party or its supporters. Those who took corrupt elements into the party were the ones who betrayed the party. Therefore, I will remain with the party. However, there were sorts of harassment.”
Field Marshal alleged that the party leader ordered the Mahara SJB organization not to give him an opportunity to address a recently organized rally. In spite of being present at the meeting on the invitation of the Mahara organizer, the Chairman of the party was prevented from addressing supporters, the Field Marshal alleged.
Quoting those who had been present there, Fonseka claimed that the party leader went to the extent of threatening the organizers that he wouldn’t attend the meeting if Fonseka turned up. Fonseka pointed out that the party leader acted in a way contrary to the court order obtained by him. Therefore, the party leader could be charged for contempt of court, Fonseka said, adding that he received a warm welcome from those present there though the party leader despised him for speaking the truth.
Future plans
Responding to a query on the Field Marshal’s short and long term plans against the backdrop of national elections scheduled for later this year (presidential) and next (parliamentary), the lawmaker said that his intention was for a clean administration thereby paving the way for Sri Lanka to stand alongside with the international community.
Fonseka said that having entered politics, 14 years ago, he was yet to see leaders and their followers working with a vision or a commitment to develop the country. Those who had served as the President since the successful conclusion of the war in May 2009 didn’t really work towards achieving the targets he, as the former Army Chief, expected them to do, Fonseka declared.
The Field Marshal admitted that he was in a dilemma as to what to do in the current circumstances as political parties, in the absence of tangible action plans to meet mounting challenges, simply struggled to cope with developing situations.
Asked whether he felt confident the presidential and parliamentary polls would be held as scheduled later this year and early next or whether there was a likelihood of President Wickremesinghe advancing the general election to this year, the Field Marshall said that regardless of the party they represented MPs liked presidential polls first though a few would take a different view.
Pointing out that President Wickremesinghe is most likely to contest the next presidential election with the backing of a significant section of the SLPP parliamentary group, regardless of the official position of the party, the writer asked Field Marshal whether he was confident of challenging the incumbent President.
Fonseka said that he hadn’t declared his intention so far to contest the forthcoming presidential poll. A section of the SLPP parliamentary group, including members of the Cabine, backed Wuckremesinghe’s candidature. In addition to that group, Wickremesinghe received the backing of some MPs, led by Nimal Lanza, Fonseka said, pointing out that in case the Rajapaksas fielded a candidate of their own their party would be divided. Fonseka explained: “…the President has yet to decide whether to contest the presidential poll. If the President is not sure of victory, he may not contest. The President hasn’t confirmed his intention to contest yet, though there are different views. We know in the past the UNP leader threw his weight behind common candidates on three occasions: me in 2010, Maithripala Sirisena in 2015 and Sajith Premadasa in 2019. Perhaps, Wickremesinghe did so because he wasn’t sure of the political terrain.”
Asked whether Fonseka would get an opportunity to contest the presidential poll for the second time, a smiling Field Marshal said that such an eventuality hadn’t been discussed at all. Fonseka said that he was still the number two of the SJB and that the Working Committee early last year declared party leader Sajith Premadasa as their candidate. That declaration had been made in a hurry at a time when the presidential election wasn’t even discussed, Fonseka said.
The SJB made the announcement on May 16, 2023. Fonseka said that in other countries political parties conducted surveys before making such announcements.
JVP’s unmistakable challenge
Commenting on the status of the JVP-led Jathika Jana Balawegaya campaign, Fonseka said that the Marxist party commanded the support of about 500,000 until recently. However, they appeared to have increased their support among the electorate and now could poll nearly two million votes. Of some 35% of floating vote and young voters, the JVP could secure a significant percentage, Fonseka asserted, declaring the Marxist party posed quite a challenge to major political parties now.
Fonseka asserted that the SLPP must have recorded a significant drop in support, whereas we (SJB) had a 2.7 mn voter base, and the NPP/JJB continued to expand, and all have to consider the developments taking place in post-Aragalaya politics.
Asked whether the JVP could win the next national election, Field Marshall explained: “That is an issue which needed careful examination. Whatever various interested parties say, there are three major political groups now. For the first time there is a genuine third force. The party that secured the largest block of seats at the next general election will have no option but to seek cooperation from other big players.”
Referring to the outcome at the recent Pakistan general election, Fonseka said that political parties here have to be mindful of that situation.
Fonseka declined to comment on the likelihood of JVP leader Anura Kumara Dissanayake winning the next presidential poll. The former Army Chief said that there would be fierce competition among candidates and the electorate would also examine the qualities of the candidates in addition to the performances of the parties they represented.
Responding to a query on the SJB accommodating ex-military officers as if it was engaged in a competition with the NPP/JJB that has attracted a significant number of ex-military officers from a wide array of ranks, Field Marshall emphasized that some definitely didn’t deserve party membership. The NPP/JJB has initiated a unique campaign to attract ex-military personnel and they seemed to be successful in their efforts, Fonseka said.
SF, GR meet and post-Aragalaya developments
The Field Marshal, during a nearly 70-minute interview, discussed his meeting at the height of a public protest campaign to force the then President Gotabaya Rajapaksa to step down. In the run-up to the July 09, 2022 explosion of public anger, primarily instigated by outside forces or otherwise, Fonseka said that he received a message from President Rajapaksa, who served with him in the Army during the war. The President’s call was not to discuss the post of premiership but to take stock of the situation in the wake of May 9/10, 2022, violence that caused serious destruction of property. The ministers and ordinary members of Parliament couldn’t come out on to the streets, therefore the President was very much anxious of the security situation, hence the discussion. “If the invitation was to discuss post-Aragalaya political arrangements, I wouldn’t have accepted the President’s invitation.”
After having dealt with the security situation/developments for about one hour at the President’s House, the President while referring to the invitations that had been extended previously, invited the Field Marshall to accept the premiership. The President wanted Fonseka’s help to overcome the crisis and consolidate the government. Fonseka declined to disclose who else attended that meeting though he said the President sent one person to pick him up.
Commenting on Indian and US interventions here and National Freedom Front (NFF) leader Wimal Weerawansa’s allegations pertaining to his alleged covert contacts with General Shavendra Silva (incumbent Chief of Defence Staff) during the unprecedented security crisis, Field Marshal Fonseka was of the opinion that Weerawansa talked irresponsibly.
Denying claims that he talked with General Silva on 13 occasions on the day crowds surrounded the Parliament, Fonseka disclosed they got in touch over the phone thrice. Fonseka alleged that Weerawansa was a habitual liar. By the time I contacted Gen. Silva, the crowds had overrun police barriers and were pressing the Army. Fonseka quoted Gen. Silva as having told him that the situation on the ground was not that good. About 30 minutes later Gen. Silva phoned Fonseka to report further deterioration of the situation and had been worried as his house, too, was within the area of continuing turmoil.
Fonseka said that he advised Gen. Silva to take measures to bring the situation under control but not order troops to open fire at surging crowds under the circumstances. Fonseka recalled how he advised the military, deployed near the President’s House on July 09, 2022, not to open fire.
For the third time Fonseka had called Gen, Silva later in the day but then the situation was out of control though the Army thwarted the attempt to march on Parliament. Fonseka explained that as the former Commander of the Army and an MP he was constantly in touch with the Army. Fonseka explained the facilities provided to him by the Army over the years.
Fonseka said that only a madman would say a former Army Commander talked to a serving General to conspire.
Fonseka mentioned that Sri Lanka was in such a desperate situation it couldn’t overcome the 2022 crisis without heavy international support. Appreciating the support extended by the international community, including India and the US, the Field Marshall emphasized he didn’t see any harm in receiving US and Indian support. Fonseka underscored the pivotal importance of substantial Indian financial and material support that helped the country to overcome the crisis and then make gradual progress.
“We should be grateful to them,” MP Fonseka said, urging the powers that be to secure whatever support the international community was ready to provide to the country.
Fonseka dismissed allegations of Western conspiracy pointing out that those who ruled the country should accept the responsibility for creating an environment for mass scale public rising due to the collapse of the economy.
Fonseka’s entry into politics
The ex-Army Chief said that it was the then Opposition Leader Wickremesinghe who personally invited him to be the common candidate at the 2010 presidential election. Without disclosing where the meeting took place within days after he relinquished command responsibilities in July 2009, Fonseka said the UNP leader was accompanied by the late Mangala Samaraweera.
Fonseka urged that his resignation and entry into politics be examined against the backdrop of the Rajapaksas’ decision to appoint an officer investigated by him, as his successor as well as post-war corruption and ‘deals.’
The meeting with Wickremesinghe was followed by a powwow with the JVP leadership. Fonseka declared that there was no likelihood of the formation of an alliance like the one that supported him at the 2010 presidential poll.
Pointing out that the 2010 alliance consisted of the UNP, JVP, TNA, SLMC and CWC, Fonseka stressed that unlike previous national polls now there were three political forces. The challenge posed by the JVP couldn’t be underestimated, Fonseka said.
Commenting on the possibility of the SLPP fielding a candidate of its own, Fonseka said that at a recent meeting in Matale the party announced Namal Rajapaksa as their candidate. An influential section of the SLPP remained with President Wickremesinghe though some obviously dreamt of Namal Rajapaksa’s candidature. Fonseka expressed serious doubts over such a political experiment.
Asked whether he would like to compare his strategy with that of Patali Champika, Fonseka stressed that though being elected on the SJB ticket the latter operated separately. Fonseka said that he hadn’t even considered leaving the party, while PCR already established his own party though it didn’t have recognition from the Election Commission. “I want to continue with the SJB. In case, the developments lead to the formation of an alliance and the need for a common candidate arises, I wouldn’t refuse that opportunity to be that candidate.”
Midweek Review
NPP drowning in sea of scams
The Opposition is pressing for a one-day debate on USD 2.5 mn Treasury theft, which is more like a daylight robbery that had been kept under wraps by Treasury mandarins till ‘Free Lawyers’ made it public. However, the government is strongly opposed to the Opposition proposal. The Opposition is seeking consensus among
different parties to intensify the campaign against the government, struggling to cope up with a spate of controversies. Against the backdrop of the devastating debate on the coal scam, the NPP seems reluctant to face another over the theft of Treasury funds.
By Shamindra Ferdinando
USD 2.5 mn brazen heist at the Treasury several months ago and the bigwigs there obviously dragging their feet over the matter till it was brought to light recently, thanks to the Free Lawyers movement, which has dampened the NPP’s enthusiasm for May Day. The Treasury fiasco humiliated the cocky NPP leadership against the backdrop of damning report issued by the National Audit Office (NAO) that found fault with the government for awarding the coal tender for 2025/2026 period to Trident Champhar Limited of India in violation of tender procedures. The NAO emphasised that the Indian company shouldn’t have even been considered for the tender.
Even after the exposure of the scandalous handling of the coal tender, the NPP, in spite of some rumblings within the party, remained confident of overcoming the growing accusations regarding governance issues. But, the sudden revelation of the loss suffered by the Treasury, and pathetic efforts made by the NPP to suppress the truth, has caused irreparable harm to the ruling party. The arrogant NPP will have to use May Day to defend the government. Instead of preaching to the masses ad nauseum the corruption allegations against previous administrations, the NPP would have to explain such massive failures/corruption, particularly the loss of USD 2.5 mn.
There hadn’t been a previous instance of such an incident at the Treasury. The NPP will have to answer questions posed by ‘Free Lawyers,’ a civil society group that first raised the Treasury issue. On behalf of ‘Free Lawyers,’ its President Maithri Gunaratne, PC, former Governor of several provinces Rajith Keerthi Tennakoon, and Attorney-at-Law Shiral Lakthikala, targeted the government over the unprecedented Treasury heist. The Opposition, too, censured the NPP, with SJB leader Sajith Premadasa, MP, Chairman of Public Finance Committee (CoPF) Dr. Harsha de Silva, MP, and United Republican Front (URF) taking the lead.
The NPP’s excuses, based on claimed raids carried out by hacker/hackers targeting the Treasury, are untenable. The NPP’s position cannot be defended or supported against growing criticism. The coal scam and Treasury fiasco dominated social media, with the Opposition, as well as ordinary citizens, having a field day at the expense of the NPP, a political party that accused its opponents of waste, corruption, irregularities and mismanagement. Its successful propaganda campaigns, at the presidential and parliamentary polls, in September and November, 2024, respectively, were centered on fighting corruption.
Their anti-corruption platform appealed to the people for obvious reasons. Against the backdrop of bankruptcy, declared in May, 2022, after failing to meet debt commitments, the electorate rallied around the NPP that thrived on waste, corruption, irregularities and mismanagement, perpetrated by previous governments. Having bagged the executive presidency in September, 2024, the NPP assured the electorate that the Parliament would be cleansed of evils at the general election. President Anura Kumara Dissanayake declared that the people have been vested with the responsibility of cleansing the Parliament. Dissanayake went a step further when he addressed a public gathering at the 18th mile post on the Negombo-Colombo road. The NPP leader, who also leads the JVP, asserted that there was no need for an Opposition in Parliament and the House should be filled with NPPers.
Dissanayake based his assertion essentially on two failed No-Confidence Motions (NCMs) moved against Ravi Karunanayake and Keheliya Rambukwella in 2016 and 2023, respectively. The NPP/JVP leader found fault with Yahapalanaya and the Wickremesinghe-Rajapaksa government for protecting the two wrongdoers, hence the call to cleanse Parliament.
The results of the parliamentary election proved that the electorate responded very favourably to Dissanayake’s call. Of the 225-seat Parliament, the NPP secured 159 seats, including 18 National List slots. Having accused previous governments of shielding wrongdoers, Dissanayake easily directed the NPP’s steamroller parliamentary group to defeat the NCM moved against Energy Minister Punyakumara Dissanayake (National List) on 10 April, just a few days after the NAO report exposed the coal scam.
First ex-MP as Treasury Secy.
If its own hands are clean, there is no doubt that the NPP now deeply regrets the appointment of ex-NPP National List MP Harshana Suriyapperuma as the Secretary to the Treasury and the Finance Ministry. That appointment was made in June 2025 to fill the vacancy created by the retirement of Mahinda Siriwardana who, along with Governor of the Central Bank Dr. Nandalal Weerasinghe, played a significant role in the country’s post-Aragalaya recovery programme.
Suriyapperuma, who had served as Deputy Minister of Finance and Planning for just seven months, before being appointed the Treasury Secretary/Finance Ministry Secretary, is under heavy fire for suppressing the truth. No less a person than CoPF Chairman Dr. de Silva publicly accused Suriyapperuma of trying to undermine his committee. The SJB has demanded Suriyapperuma’s immediate resignation. Dr. Anil Jayantha succeeded as Deputy Minister of Finance and Planning.
Those who inquired into the crisis-hit Treasury are of the belief that 53-year-old Suriyapperuma lacked the much required experience to fill the shoes of Mahinda Siriwardana. Perhaps, the breach at the Treasury could have been averted if an outsider was not brought in place of Siriwardena. The recent reportage of the incident revealed that Suriyapperuma had been aware of the breach and sought to avoid appearing before the CoPF. The NPP could have responded to the developing situation differently if an ex-MP hadn’t been entrusted with the task of steering the Treasury/Finance Ministry. To make matters worse, President Dissanayake holds the Finance portfolio.
Although the government declared that the theft of USD 2.5 mn had been reported to the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) after initial detection made in January this year, controversy surrounds the failure on the part of law enforcement authorities to bring it to the notice of the courts. Maithri Gunaratne, appearing in Hiru last Saturday (25), questioned why the police failed to inform the relevant Magistrate if the government lodged a complaint in that regard.
Australia has confirmed irregularities in payments owed to their government. Regardless of NPP efforts to blame it on hacker/hackers, the truth is clear. Payments have been made to an account that hadn’t been in the original agreement between the governments of Sri Lanka and Australia. That is the undeniable truth that the NPP cannot suppress by propaganda.
The NPP should be ashamed that such a fraud had been perpetrated on a country still struggling to cope up with the economic destruction caused by the UNP- and the SLFP-led governments with the help of “mission impossible” type roles played by outside interests, especially during Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s tenure using the JVP/Aragalaya.
The world knows how the UNP perpetrated the Treasury bond scams with the direct involvement of the then Governor of the Central Bank Arjuna Mahendran, in February 2015 and March 2016. Regardless of that intolerable scam, the UNP made a desperate attempt to retain the services of the Singaporean as the Governor of the Central Bank. Party leader and the then Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe demanded the re-appointment of Mahendran. That despicable move had to be dropped due to massive Opposition protests and growing public discontent over the Treasury bond scams.
The first Treasury bond scam carried out on 27 February, 2015 caused a direct loss of approximately Rs. 2 billion. On the instructions of Mahendran, the Treasury suddenly and arbitrarily changed the process of issuing Treasury Bonds. According to media reports at that time, higher interest payments, over the next 30 years, caused a further loss of around Rs. 145 billion.
Then Mahendran struck again. Caused further direct losses of more than Rs. 4 billion to the government through the fraudulent increase in interest rates as a result of the Treasury Bond issues on 27th March, 2016 ,and 29th March, 2016, in order to provide an undue advantage to connected primary dealers by indulging in further pre-meditated bond scams.
NPP on back foot
The ruling party put on a brave face with lawmakers and various others trying to play down the incident at the Treasury. Some pathetically tried to compare various accusations directed at the Rajapaksas with the incident at the Treasury which they conveniently blamed on hacker/hackers.
The NPP is facing an explosive mixture of issues. Both the coal and Treasury scams have brought immense pressure on the national economy and caused automatic deterioration. The resignation of Punyakumara aka Kumara Jayakody over the coal scam indicated that defeating the NCM moved against him was a strategic political blunder. Had the NPP asked the tainted first time Minister to step down and appoint a Presidential Commission to go into the coal scam, the NPP could have averted a major disaster. However, the Energy Minister and the Energy Secretary Udayanga Hemapala had to resign before the Parliament took up the NCM. Had the top NPP leadership bothered to peruse the executive summary of the NAO presented to Parliament on 7 April, the Party wouldn’t have tried to defend the minister.
Having championed a corruption-free political party system and then won both the presidential and parliamentary polls on that platform, the NPP executed the shocking move to move 323 containers out of the Colombo Port, in January 2025, without even any cursory checks. Those who perpetrated that operation used continuing port congestion as an excuse to clear red-flagged containers without mandatory physical checking. The NPP recently thwarted a bid by Opposition lawmakers, representing a parliamentary committee inquiring into the illegal release of containers, to summon President Dissanayake.
That committee, headed by Justice Minister Attorney-at-Law Harshana Nanayakkara, owed an explanation as to why President Dissanayake, in his capacity as the Finance Minister, shouldn’t appear before a House committee. President Dissanayake very often addresses Parliament on crucial issues. As the Minister in charge of Finance, the President should offer an explanation regarding the high profile container issue that tarnished the NPP’s image.
Three major issues in hand, namely the release of 323 containers, coal scam and theft at the Treasury, regardless of what various apologists say on mainstream and social media, have caused irrevocable damage to the party, let alone escapades involving the likes of Speaker Jagath Wickramaratne, Minister Lal Kantha, etc. The impact on the NPP can be ascertained only at an election. With the public increasingly aware of the growing accusations against it, the ruling party will do whatever possible to put off long delayed Provincial Council elections. Facing the electorate against deepening discontent among the public seems to be a frightening situation. It would be interesting to observe how a House committee, headed by Foreign Minister Vijitha Herath, appointed to explore ways and means to conduct Provincial Council polls, address the issue at hand.
When compared with the three major issues, the resignation of Asoka Ranwala, as the Speaker, in December, 2024, over his failure to produce the much-touted educational qualifications, seems unnecessary. Of course, Ranwala’s case attracted tremendous public attention at that time as the public really believed the NPP wouldn’t deceive them. Ranwala’s lie shocked the public. NPP theoretician Prof. Ranjith Nirmal Dewasiri had no qualms in publicly attacking Ranwala in the wake of the NPP defending the Speaker. But, subsequent NPP actions revealed massive manipulations that shamed the first post-Aragalaya government.
Having accused Ranil Wickremesinghe of squandering as much as Rs 16 mn to join his wife Prof. Maithree in the UK in September, 2023, the NPP has ended up facing far more serious accusations. The incident at the Treasury should be sufficient for the Opposition to move NCM against the government. Of course, the NPP got the numbers in Parliament to easily defeat the NCM but the consequences would be devastating. Those who still talk of recovering the missing USD 2.5 mn must be living in a dreamland. The UNP is labelled with Treasury bond scams (2015 and 2016) and the SLPP faulted with tax cuts (2019) and sugar tax scam (2020). The NPP will have to live with the coal scam and Treasury theft. The NPP will no longer be able to parade on political platforms as paragons of virtue. It would be pertinent to mention that the Presidential Commission appointed to probe the procurement of coal, since 2009, would be able to produce a report to meet the NPP’s expectations. All indications point to that and 2026 is going to be far more challenging, both in and outside Parliament, than the previous year.
NDB fraud
Examined together, the massive fraud at the National Development Bank (NDB), perpetrated during the 2024-2026 period, and the Treasury incident, they underscore the vulnerability of the entire banking system. The 13.2 bn NDB fraud and theft of USD 2.5 mn from the Treasury exposed the regulator, the Central Bank of Sri Lanka, in respect of the NDB. The situation at the NDB cannot be examined without taking into consideration that Ernst & Young is the external auditors of the NDB and its Managing Partner Duminda Hulangamuwa functions as Senior Economic Adviser to President Dissanayake. People haven’t forgotten that Hulangamuwa had been mentioned as the possible successor of Mahinda Siriwardena before the NPP brought in Suriyapperuma. The Central Bank and Securities Exchange Commission (SEC) come under the purview of the Finance Ministry now embroiled in the expanding Treasury fiasco.
The Board of Directors at the NDB consists of Sriyan Cooray (Chairman), Kelum Edirisinghe (Director / Chief Executive Officer (Executive), Bernard Sinniah (Director /Non-Independent), Sujeewa Mudalige (Director /Independent), Kushan D’Alwis (Director/Independent), Kasturi Chellaraja (Director/Independent), Shweta Pandey (Director /Independent), Hasitha Premaratne (Director/Independent), Sanjaya Mohottala (Director (Non-Independent) and Shanil Fernando Director (Independent).
The issue at hand is how such a fraud went unnoticed for a considerable period of time and whether the top management simply ignored warning signs and the failure on the part of the regulator to intervene. Those who have read Mahinda Siriwardana’s ‘Sri Lanka’s Economic Revival: Reflections on the Journey from Crisis to Recovery’ would know the circumstances leading to the 2022 economic collapse. Soft spoken Siriwardana meticulously discussed how the then Central Bank leadership as well as the so-called economic leadership of the Pohottuwa party deliberately deceived President Gotabaya Rajapaksa. Siriwardena’s narrative is explosive. The book, launched before his retirement, with the participation of President Dissanayake, underscored the responsibility on the part of the political leadership and those running the banking system. Obviously Siriwardena’s work had no impact on the current dispensation as well as the top banking management.
The Opposition sees an apparent opportunity to heap pressure on the NPP as it contemplates counter measures. Their challenge is how to take remedial measures without jeopardizing the government. The IMF declaration that it is closely watching the theft of USD 2.5 mn from the Treasury must have added pressure on the government, ripped apart by the situation at the Treasury. Let us hope the government and the Opposition reach consensus on ways and means to improve financial discipline. Overall, the Parliament cannot absolve itself of the responsibility for enactment of laws and ensuring financial discipline and the fact that Sri Lanka needs to start repayment of debt in 2028.
Midweek Review
Is language social or psychological phenomenon?
This essay was presented at The Philosophy Group of the University of London about 20 years ago. The thought provoking essay published in The Island on 22 April by Usvwatte-aratchi- Some languages confine you; some languages free you prompted me to try to get this essay published if possible. It may help the readers to further their ideas about the importance of usage of language.
Personally, I have firsthand experience in this subject. I was exposed to two different cultures and two languages. In my formative years I was brought up in a certain culture and spoke the language pertaining to that culture/language (Sinhalese -Sri Lanka). I spent all my studying and working life (55 years) using a different language in a different culture (English -England). I must mention that this was not recently. It was the early 1960’s. I can claim that I have enough knowledge and experience to justify this essay topic. In this essay I shall be investigating some of the social aspects of language with the aid of some opinions put forward by some philosophers. Then I shall be making an attempt to see what psychology has to offer before I draw my own conclusions. I am treating social aspects as part and parcel of the culture. In my view these are inseparable entities, unless one chooses to forget his or her cultural upbringing to suit a particular society.
Adoption of different culture
Socially, learning a different language and adopting a different culture is quite possible. In this case what dominates is one’s attitude or the circumstances. Attitude is psychological. I am convinced that circumstances may lead to a change of attitudes. Having said that, we must not forget that there are individuals who have not taken the trouble to learn the language of the culture in which they live. This has created a lot of socio-psychological problems in the community in which they live. It is obvious that the problem is one of communication. The main tool of communication is language. Philosophers and psychologists have spent many years investigating how language helps us to communicate and also how it may lead us to misunderstand our own fellow human beings. Understanding others (family members, members of the community in which we live, and the strangers we meet) is one of the most important aspects of living.
An awareness of the problem of language goes back to the early Greek philosophers. Parmenides gave us the first example of an argument from language to the world, saying that if we speak of a thing it must exist, since we speak of a thing at various times, it must continue to exist in a particular form. It is recently that language itself has come to be studied in a systematic way. The two landmarks in this respect were the development of Linguistics and the philosophy of language in the 20th century. The great philosopher Bertrand Russell (1872-1970) has admitted that until he became a middle-aged man, he did not think about language per se, but regarded it as ‘transparent’. I am sure this is true with most of us although we are not of Russell’s caliber when it comes to philosophy. And one may not have to wait until one reaches one’s middle age.
Linguistics and philosophy of language
It will help us if we understand the difference between Linguistics and philosophy of Language. What linguists discover may be applied to philosophy, sociology, psychology, anthropology or physiology. But as a discipline of study, it remains independent of them. The philosophy of language is different. One of the modern philosophers John Searle (1932-2025) thought, by contrast to linguistics, philosophy tries to solve philosophical problems by analyzing the ordinary use, meaning and relations of words in a particular language. Searle goes on to say that language is crucial to understand human experience. In my opinion this is a very valid comment. At a very practical level we spend a lot of time sharing our experiences. Verbal communication is vital in this area. According to Canadian philosopher Ian Hacking(1936-2023) the influence of language on philosophy has been profound and almost unrecognized. He indicates, if we are not to be misled by this influence, it is necessary to become conscious of it, and to ask ourselves deliberately how far it is legitimate.
It is appropriate to bring in Ludwig Wittgenstein(1889-1951) at this point. He brought in the subject predicate theory of language. For example, if we say “John is king”. Where John is the subject and king is the predicate. Here existence requires substance. For Aristotle, forms do not exist independently of things—every form is the form of something. A “substantial” form is a kind that is attributed to a thing, without which that thing would be of a different kind or would cease to exist altogether. Wittgenstein supports Saint Augustine’s view that words are names of objects and that combinations of words have the sole function of describing reality. For example, if we point at a certain object, say a table and try to say to a child “this is a table”, the child will be confused as to what we are pointing at. Is it the colour, the tabletop or one or more of its legs This is called the ostensive definition method of teaching. Ostensive definitions lead to a variety of interpretations. The child may understand a particular case of this definition but there is no guarantee that she will be able to make a transition from one case to others like it.
Plato’s theory
J G Herder (1744-1803) pointed out the object to which we make reference may be defined by numerous different terms. How then can we justify direct, one to one correspondence-either of so many to one, or of one to so many? How are we going to deal with situations where a term describes something non-existent or only possible? Plato’s “Forms” theory cannot be applied here as anything that we can speak of already exists as a Form. Critics of this theory ask the question: “how can the world be crowded with so many imaginary objects?” We use words to describe and define. Is there any room for slang language? This comes in handy in our day to day social communication. Ostensive definition raises the questions that require a constant selection of what counts as relevant. In Aldous Huxley’s novel Chrome Yellow, the character Old Rowley is confused as to: Does ‘pig’ refer to the quality of having a curly tail? Or standing in rows to eat? Or being pink skinned and fat? Or wearing no clothes? When we use the word “piggishness” is it something inherent to pigs, or simply, a matter of how we choose to describe them?
How can we relate the above ideas and theories of language to our daily living? Daily living is a psychosocial activity.
Perceptions
The nature of language reflects the nature of our perceptions, and these are far from straight forward. Franz Brentano (1838-1917) developed his theory of intentionality: that every mental phenomenon has a relation of direction to its object, i.e. perceptions, desires, imagination etc. are related to what is perceived, desired or imagined. I presume this can be applied to any language irrespective of the culture (our social conditioning). Say for instance the images of art and the writings are given the ability to represent objects by imposing the intentionality on the object. Thus, when we assert that we see or believe something, we impose, by convention and intention, (that is true if and only if it is the case) on the statement, and these conditions are not contained intrinsically in the sounds that make it up, but in our perception of belief about the fact. I begin to wonder how this can be applied to non-physical and unseen situations. Sometimes our feelings and attitudes are unknown to the observer. A person may shout because he is angry but you cannot see the anger, only its physical expression. We will not be able to see the prior event that has led to the anger and the utterance. This shows that there is a limit to how much is revealed simply by observing a word and its context; there is often more than that can be said.
How can we account for unexpected linguistic behaviour? This has both social and psychological implications.
For a long time behavioural theorists believed that every development of the human being was controlled by environmental and social factors. This is similar to an ostensive explanation of meaning. It implied that everything was learnt through training and association. But Noam Chomsky (b.1928) was not happy with this idea. He thought language is a complex phenomenon and which is not taught bit by bit or systematically to infants. It is successfully acquired by (almost) everybody. From my own experience it is true to say that the difficulty in learning a second language is a very different process from that experienced with the first language. Chomsky argued that the first language is not in fact learned, but rather acquired through exposure to a particular language. According to him all languages share the same basic structure, and he called this “deep structure”, which may be expressed as surface structures through a process called ‘transformation’. Chomsky’s theory helps us to assume a universal system of grammar, which may generate an infinite number of particular sentences within a language. This explains how we may create sentences within a language we have never encountered before from a limited set of grammatical rules and this appears to be a rational scientific approach.
Social or psychological phenomenon
The argument/discussion whether language is a social or a psychological phenomenon requires much more investigation than this essay warrants. I have briefly brought in various philosophers’ work, which are invaluable to this topic in terms of philosophy of language. In conclusion I am tempted to state my own experiences as a bi-lingual person. When it comes to my first language, which is Sinhalese I don’t think I learned it. I heard my parents speaking it and I picked up a few words and I constructed my own sentences and gradually became proficient by accumulating more words. Of course, the proper grammatical use of even my own language was taught in school and not by my parents. Learning my second language i.e. English took a different form. I was taught to speak, read, and write English at school and I had to work harder at this than my first language, because my English was confined to the classroom situation only, i. e. I learnt English in a non- English environment. First language came naturally and the second one I had to learn to fit into the social and the education structure that prevailed at that time. Compulsion can motivate us to learn!I had no choice but to adopt myself culturally and linguistically as a university student in England and then as a university teacher in England. Apart from the native English students, I have taught students from different countries. European, African and Asian. I had the opportunity to intermingle with them and learned various different cultural and linguistic aspects. After almost a half a century in England, I am back to my own culture (language, customs, food etc) where I was born and started my life. I am still proficient in my own language Sinhalese. No conscious effort needed.
After all the foregoing arguments and philosophy that I have put forward, my own conclusion is Chomsky’s theories are more plausible to me than other theories on this issue. It is difficult to be exact and say whether language is a social or psychological phenomenon. From the above arguments, we can see that culture and language of a given society are tightly bound. This leads us to psychological adjustments in order to fit into a society. Who can deny that even the philosophers mentioned above have not been subjected to their own cultural environment?
by Prof. Sampath
Anson Fernando
Formerly University of
The Arts London
Midweek Review
Birthing a Nation
Thanks to community centres,
Taking root and flowering Down-Under,
Sri Lankans have finally given shape,
To a truly National New Year,
Where communities meet and greet,
Partake of the same bubbly pot of rice,
Spread cheer under the same banner,
And end the ‘Us’ and the ‘Other’ fixation.
By Lynn Ockersz
-
News6 days agoTreasury chief’s citizenship details sought from Australia
-
News5 days agoRooftop Solar at Crossroads as Sri Lanka Shifts to Distributed Energy Future
-
News4 days ago“Three-in-one blood pressure pill can significantly reduce risk of recurrent strokes”
-
News7 days agoGovt. assures UN of readiness to introduce ‘vetting process’ for troops on overseas missions
-
Business7 days agoADB-backed grid upgrade tender signals next phase of Sri Lanka’s energy transition
-
News6 days agoCentral Province one before last in AL results
-
Sports6 days agoWell done AKD!
-
Business7 days agoUpdate on independent forensic review
