Features

Gamini Dissanayake the man he was and what fired the Mahaweli project

Published

3 years ago

2022/12/18

Excerpted from volume ii of the Sarath Amunugama autobiography

Since Gamini played an important role in my career I will reproduce here an essay which was entitled; “Fifty; A Beginning”, that I wrote for a felicitation volume which was published to mark his 50th birthday. When I presented the first copy of this volume to JRJ at Braemar, he looked at the title and said, half in jest “I hope it is not the beginning of the end”. Gamini who joined me for the presentation was not amused.

My article in this volume covers Gamin’s considerable contribution to the development of both politics and economic growth in the country. Unfortunately, a few years after this book was published, he was killed by a suicide bomber of the LTTE. Gamini then was on the campaign trail as a Presidential candidate in 1994. He was becoming more and more confident of winning the top prize.

His death was a personal blow to me because I was one of his chief supporters. I was with him that fatal morning in Kandy addressing propaganda meetings. He wanted me to return with him by helicopter to Colombo for the final meeting at Thotalanga on the out skirts of Colombo. But I had an engagement in my electorate and stayed back to see my father and mother in Nugawela. That was a fateful decision since had I got back in the helicopter to Colombo I would have been with Gamini and most probably have been killed along with him.

This is what I wrote in the felicitation volume:

“My earliest recollections of Gamini go back to Trinity College. I was a part of a group of students in whom our principal Norman Walter reposed great hopes as scholars who would enter the University thereby contradicting the oft stated, and certainly ill-deserved notion, that Trinity mostly produced “flannelled fools and muddied oafs”.

“Some of us would assemble regularly at the Kandy Public Library which had an astonishing range of magazines and books. Then we would spend the evening together, walking round the Kandy Lake debating many of the issues we had read about and needed further discussion. On these walks round the lake we would often encounter the Dissanayake boys playing near their lakefront home.

“I remember Gamini most because he had the habit of probing us, his peers, for new ideas and information when we spoke to him. We had a more mundane reason also for knowing Gamini and his brothers. They were the children of the owner of -Silverdale’, Kandy’s best known cafe. After our long walks we would retire to ‘Silverdale’ for a snack and an iced coffee and envy the Dissanayake boys whom we imagined could tuck in to all that delicious food at will!

“Gamini’s father, Andrew, was a leading citizen of Kandy. He had come down from Kotmale and started several businesses, which proved to be so successful that he was a well recognized Kandyan entrepreneur of his time. He was a very affable and gentle person – characteristics which have been inherited by his eldest son. Dissanayake pere (Snr.) always had time for the people of Kandy. We would see him at public gatherings with a large circle of admirers and friends around him.

“He was involved with the politics of the hill country, of Kandy and the Nuwara Eliya regions in particular. He was the President of the All-Island Local Authorities Association and had come to know, at a personal level, the acknowledged father of local government in Sri Lanka, the charismatic S.W.R.D. Bandaranaike.

“After the departure of Dudley Senanayake into semi-retirement from national politics many leading Kandyans found no basis for supporting the ruling UNP caucus of the time. Many of them joined Bandaranaike’s SLFP. Andrew Dissanayake was nominated for the Nuwara Eliya constituency by the SLFP in 1956. He won handsomely and was appointed a deputy minister in the Bandaranaike government.

“Unlike many of his party colleagues, and very much like his son Gamini later on, Andrew was devoid of rancour and hatred. He treated all his constituents and parliamentary colleagues with consideration. This civilized approach to politics has obviously had an impact on Gamini who grew up in an atmosphere of political engagement. Many national party leaders would drop in at their home for a meal and Gamni was an avid listener to their political discussions.

“By 1970, Gamini had passed out as an advocate and was busy building a civil practice in the Chambers of Neville Samarakoon, Queen’s Counsel, another distinguished alumnus of Trinity College. The legal milieu in which he moved, Neville Samarakoon and B.J. Fernando in particular, brought him closer to the ruling circles of the UNP and at the age of 27, Gamini was nominated to stand for his father’s old constituency.

“By this time the SLFP had been rent apart by internal quarrels and Andrew, with many of his early SLFP colleagues, had retired from politics in disgust. It is worth recalling that the SLFP led by Mrs. Bandaranaike, was keen to field young Gamini Dissanayake once it became known that he would enter politics. However, it was Dudley Senanayake’s request that prevailed.

“Dudley threw his full support to the young aspirant even though Nuwara Eliya was, at that time, represented by Donald Ranaweera, a UNP Member of Parliament. It was not an easy decision, since the incumbent UNP MP was the publisher of the Times Group of newspapers and an important financier of the party. Ranaweera also had the backing of the Deputy Leader of the party, J R Jayewardene.

“However, Dudley and JRJ finally decided to field Gamini. It turned out that the decision was the right one. Though the UNP, met with a disastrous defeat in 1970, Gamini emerged as a successful candidate. If I remember right, he was the only newcomer to the UNP benches in Parliament that year. The recently formed SLFP government vented its rage on the young MP. It resented the entry of a son of one of its own stalwarts into the ranks of the UNP.

“The SLFP took the defeat of their candidate, William Fernando, Felix Dias Bandaranaike’s protege, as a major affront. Gamini had to face an election petition and a fresh election. He won again which served to enhance his image in the country and reinforce the view that the UNP was getting over its defeat and was on a ‘winning streak’.

“The 1970 to 1977 period was perhaps the best years of the UNP as a mass organization. Though small in numbers in Parliament, UNP MPs challenged the might of the SLFP and was able to outwit and out-maneuver them. Gamini was in the thick of this campaign. He emerged as a front rank speaker and organizer of the Opposition.

“There were three national level speakers of the UNP who went round the country: JRJ, Premadasa and Gamini. He drew large crowds at meetings and became a firm favourite of the party rank and file. Under the leadership of J R Jayewardene, the UNP swept back into power in 1977. They humbled the coalition government of Mrs. Bandaranaike. Gamini’s role in this historic struggle, was recognized by the party when in an internal party poll for its highest executive body, Gamini obtained 110 votes, second only to the veteran R. Premadasa, who polled 118 votes. On the basis of this watershed poll, Gamini emerged as third ranking leader of the UNP, after Jayewardene and Premadasa.

“Accordingly, he was assigned what was to be the most spectacular project of the 1977 UNP government – Mahaweli development. This was in addition to the subjects of Lands and Land development, which were the traditional focus of attention of successive UNP regimes. The Mahaweli project which was just another development programme undertaken by the SLFP, though it was inaugurated during the Dudley Senanayake regime, was expanded into the key lead project of the JRJ government.

“The UNP accelerated the Mahaweli programme which was planned to be completed in 30 years to six on the orders of JRJ. Five major dams – Kotmale, Victoria, Maduru Oya, Randenigala and Rantambe – were constructed with foreign assistance. Three hundred thousand (300,000) acres of land were irrigated and 7,500 megawatts of electrical power was generated through this giant hydro-electrical, agricultural and farmer settlement scheme, the magnitude of which was unprecedented even in Sri Lanka, a country best known for its historic hydraulic civilization.

“As acknowledged by President Jayewardene, the accelerated Mahaweli programme would not have been a reality but for the dedication, skill and perseverance of Gamini Dissanayake. I think it is fair to say that the government itself did not realize the enormity and complexity of this task when it announced the revised Mahaweli scheme.

“At first the World Bank advised against it stating that Sri Lanka did not have the expertise or the resources to undertake this project. After a stormy meeting with World Bank bureaucrats, President Jayewardene requested them to get back to Washington, saying he was going ahead with or without multi-lateral assistance. The World Bank finally relented after JRJ threatened to close down its office in Colombo.

“The Bank, now represented by its sagacious Vice President, David Hopper, undertook to back the project. It was a promise that was faithfully kept by the international community under the umbrella of the World Bank. The reservations of the World Bank were echoed by local critics who said that the accelerated scheme will never become a reality. It is here, I think, that Gamini’s natural leadership qualities, good sense and the ability to get the best out of his staff became crucial to the Mahaweli scheme.

“He did not waste time on getting cheap publicity. His officials know they could debate an issue with him without being publicly humiliated and shunted aside. He backed all his staff who could do a job of work– be they engineers or baas unnhes. He assembled a group of officials who were the envy of the Sri Lankan public service. Most of all they were enthused with the feeling that they were doing a worthwhile, patriotic task and their youthful minister was ‘a co-worker’.

“As a minister, Gamini always had his eye on the ‘grand concept’ of the Mahaweli and did not waste time nitpicking. His management style has always been to carefully select his aides and then let them get on with the task of doing the job. Sri Lankan professionals – engineers, surveyors, accountants, managers and administrators, who since independence had become pawns in political gamesmanship, found that their skills were, at long last, recognized and rewarded. An aspect of the Mahaweli Development Scheme which has not been properly recognized is that it served as a ‘hundred universities’ for engineering and scientific personnel.

“These `Mahaweli graduates’ of every rank are a tremendous manpower resource. Unfortunately their skills have not been used by our national planners. The decision to accelerate the Mahaweli scheme was perhaps the most effective decision of the Jayewardene regime. This was the peak period of international cooperation. Western regimes were launching their strategy of `rolling back socialism’. Sri Lanka was identified as a lead democratic regime which was turning its back on a controlled economy and switching to market economics. The snag, however, was that the country did not have major development schemes in the pipeline. Donors were ready to support the new government but were demanding realistic and well-designed project proposals.

“The new UNP regime came up with many hare-brained schemes. But the donors were not buying them. It was only the Mahaweli project that could interest the big donors. It was Gamin’s signal contribution that he could rally his engineering, scientific and administrative staff to come up with viable project proposals. He did not rush his staff to produce schemes which would generate cheap publicity for himself. He personally visited donor countries and argued the case for funding.

“On many occasions his detractors, both within and outside his party, would speak about delays in the early phase of the accelerated scheme. As minister in charge, however he knew that the early planning had to be perfect. He defended his planners in Parliament and gave them enough time during the ‘gestation period’ of the new scheme. This strategy paid off. International donors ranging from the USA to the USSR endorsed the Mahaweli scheme.

“The World Bank treated it as one of its `showcase’ projects. It was only after the project was launched that even its detractors realized that the timing of the young minister was near perfect. In real terms, the investment on Mahaweli could never be repeated since inflationary pressures on the world economy during the last decade and the political inwardness of western nations, has totally changed development cooperation patterns in the Third World. There will be no Mahawelis in the future.

“Just as the Mahaweli scheme was a bold initiative in the field of domestic agriculture, Gamini’s short tenure as Minister of Plantation Industries could have led to a rejuvenation of our plantation agriculture. With an intimate knowledge of planting, the socio-economic conditions of the Kandyan peasantry and a wide network of contacts in the tree-crop industry, he was ideally suited to undertake this task. He brought the same enthusiasm to his new Ministry.

“In his usual style he assembled a group of top-level professionals with whom he established a close rapport. Then, he presented a series of proposals which, as in his Mahaweli days, were accepted at all levels including international donor agencies as quite practical. The estate cluster system, decentralization of management, upgrading of professional skills and benefits, estate-village integration and the push for value-added exports and international cooperation among all primary producers, were parts of this landmark development package.

“Another area in which Gamini made a vital contribution was the Indo-Lanka Accord. It is a little-known fact that our highest military leaders requested Gamini to intercede and bring about a settlement in what they called an ‘unwinnable war’. The Generals who made this request were Attygalle, Ranatunga and Seneviratne.

“They first broached this subject with the young minister when he and I were being helicoptered together with them to the President’s House in Kandy for an urgent discussion as the northern war was taking a disastrous turn. After this meeting they flew back to Colombo and continued their plea in Gamini’s home at Alfred House Gardens. Once Gamini was convinced that it was in the national interest to negotiate with India, he set up an informal link-up with Indian policy makers.

“His greatest achievement was the beginning of a dialogue with N Ram, who had been an influential advocate of the Tamil cause. A very close personal relationship followed. While our ineffectual foreign policy establishment fretted and fumed the good relations established among three young people – Rajiv Gandhi, Ram and Gamini – became the basis of an understanding which yielded the dramatic accord of reconciliation.

“President Jayewardene and High Commissioner Dixit who were the principal negotiators could always rely on this groundwork of friendship which for the first time linked the vital triad of Colombo-Delhi-Madras. Gamini’s commitment to a fair and just solution to our ethnic problem was made manifest through his fearless defence of the Accord, when both extremist groups – the LTTE and the JVP – placed him on their ‘hit list’ for not supporting their extremist positions. Gamini is a rare politician totally devoid of racial, religious, and other prejudices.

“During the last four years Gamini has gone through many traumas. But his commitment to politics as the best way of serving the people is constant. Recently, Gamini and I were travelling by car through Dambulla to Anuradhapura. We drove through miles and miles of green paddy fields which were irrigated by Mahaweli waters. We had both known this area earlier as an arid dry zone. We were silent for a long time. Finally, Gamini said quietly, ‘This is what makes politics worthwhile’.”

All News Advertisement

Features

US-CHINA RIVALRY: Maintaining Sri Lanka’s autonomy

Published

1 day ago

2025/12/19

Thilina Walpola

During a discussion at the Regional Center for Strategic Studies (RCSS) in Sri Lanka on 9 December, Dr. Neil DeVotta, Professor at Wake Forest University, North Carolina, USA commented on the “gravity of a geopolitical contest that has already reshaped global politics and will continue to mould the future. For Sri Lanka – positioned at the heart of the Indian Ocean, economically fragile, and diplomatically exposed- his analysis was neither distant nor abstract. It was a warning of the world taking shape around us” (Ceylon Today, December 14, 2025).

Sri Lanka is known for ignoring warnings as it did with the recent cyclone or security lapses in the past that resulted in terrorist attacks. Professor De Votta’s warning too would most likely be ignored considering the unshakable adherence to Non-Alignment held by past and present experts who have walked the halls of the Foreign Ministry, notwithstanding the global reshaping taking place around us almost daily. In contrast, Professor DeVotta “argued that nonalignment is largely a historical notion. Few countries today are truly non-aligned. Most States claiming neutrality are in practice economically or militarily dependent on one of the great powers. Sri Lanka provides a clear example while it pursues the rhetoric of non-alignment, its reliance on Chinese investments for infrastructure projects has effectively been aligned to Beijing. Non-alignment today is more about perceptions than reality. He stressed that smaller nations must carefully manage perceptions while negotiating real strategic dependencies to maintain flexibility in an increasingly polarised world.” (Ibid).

The latest twist to non-alignment is Balancing. Advocates of such policies are under the delusion that the parties who are being “Balanced” are not perceptive enough to realise that what is going on in reality is that they are being used. Furthermore, if as Professor DeVotta says, it is “more about perception than reality”, would not Balancing strain friendly relationships by its hypocrisy? Instead, the hope for a country like Sri Lanka whose significance of its Strategic Location outweighs its size and uniqueness, is to demonstrate by its acts and deeds that Sri Lanka is perceived globally as being Neutral without partiality to any major powers if it is to maintain its autonomy and ensure its security.

DECLARATION OF NEUTRALITY AS A POLICY

Neutrality as a Foreign Policy was first publicly announced by President Gotabaya Rajapaksa during his acceptance speech in the holy city of Anuradhapura and later during his inauguration of the 8th Parliament on January 3, 2020. Since then Sri Lanka’s Political Establishment has accepted Neutrality as its Foreign Policy judging from statements made by former President Ranil Wickremesinghe, Prime Minister Dinesh Gunawardena and Foreign Ministers up to the present when President Dissanayake declared during his maiden speech at the UN General Assembly and captured by the Head Line of Daily Mirror of October 1, 2025: “AKD’s neutral, not nonaligned, stance at UNGA”

The front page of the Daily FT (Oct.9, 2024) carries a report titled “Sri Lanka reaffirms neutral diplomacy” The report states: “The Cabinet Spokesman and Foreign Minister Vijitha Herath yesterday assured that Sri Lanka maintains balanced diplomatic relations with all countries, reaffirming its policy of friends of all and enemy of none”. Quoting the Foreign Minister, the report states: “There is no favouritism. We do not consider any country to be special. Whether it is big or small, Sri Lanka maintains diplomatic relations with all countries – China, India, the US, Russia, Cuba, or Vietnam. We have no bias in our approach, he said…”

NEUTRALITY in OPERATION

“Those who are unaware of the full scope and dynamics of the Foreign Policy of Neutrality perceive it as being too weak and lacking in substance to serve the interests of Sri Lanka. In contrast, those who are ardent advocates of Non-Alignment do not realize that its concepts are a collection of principles formulated and adopted only by a group of like-minded States to meet perceived challenges in the context of a bi-polar world. In the absence of such a world order the principles formulated have lost their relevance” (https://island.lk/relevance-of-a neutral-foreign-policy).

“On the other hand, ICRC Publication on Neutrality is recognized Internationally “The sources of the international law of neutrality are customary international law and, for certain questions, international treaties, in particular the Paris Declaration of 1856, the 1907 Hague Convention No. V respecting the Rights and Duties of Neutral Powers and Persons in Case of War on Land, the 1907 Hague Convention No. XIII concerning the Rights and Duties of Neutral Powers in Naval War, the four 1949 Geneva Conventions and Additional Protocol I of 1977 (June 2022)” (Ibid).

“A few Key issues addressed in this Publication are: “THE PRINCIPLE OF INVOILABILITY of a Neutral State and THE DUTIES OF NEUTRAL STATES.

“In the process of reaffirming the concept of Neutrality, Foreign Minister Vijitha Herath stated that the Policy of Neutrality would operate in practice in the following manner: “There is no favoritism. We do not consider any country to be special. Whether it is big or small, Sri Lanka maintains diplomatic relations with all countries – China, India, the US, Russia, Cuba or Vietnam. We have no bias in our approach” (The Daily FT, Oct, 9, 2024).

“Essential features of Neutrality, such as inviolability of territory and to be free of the hegemony of power blocks were conveyed by former Foreign Minister Ali Sabry at a forum in Singapore when he stated: “We have always been clear that we are not interested in being an ally of any of these camps. We will be an independent country and work with everyone, but there are conditions. Our land and sea will not be used to threaten anyone else’s security concerns. We will not allow military bases to be built here. We will not be a pawn in their game. We do not want geopolitical games playing out in our neighbourhood, and affecting us. We are very interested in de-escalating tensions. What we could do is have strategic autonomy, negotiate with everyone as sovereign equals, strategically use completion to our advantage” (the daily morning, July 17, 2024)

In addition to the concepts and expectations of a Neutral State cited above, “the Principle of Inviolability of territory and formal position taken by a State as an integral part of ‘Principles and Duties of a Neutral State’ which is not participating in an armed conflict or which does not want to become involved” enabled Sri Lanka not to get involved in the recent Military exchanges between India and Pakistan.

However, there is a strong possibility for the US–China Rivalry to manifest itself engulfing India as well regarding resources in Sri Lanka’s Exclusive Economic Zone. While China has already made attempts to conduct research activities in and around Sri Lanka, objections raised by India have caused Sri Lanka to adopt measures to curtail Chinese activities presumably for the present. The report that the US and India are interested in conducting hydrographic surveys is bound to revive Chinese interests. In the light of such developments it is best that Sri Lanka conveys well in advance that its Policy of Neutrality requires Sri Lanka to prevent Exploration or Exploitation within its Exclusive Economic Zone under the principle of the Inviolability of territory by any country.

Another sphere where Sri Lanka’s Policy of Neutrality would be compromised is associated with Infrastructure Development. Such developments are invariably associated with unsolicited offers such as the reported $3.5 Billion offer for a 200,000 Barrels a day Refinery at Hambantota. Such a Project would fortify its presence at Hambantota as part of its Belt and Road Initiative. Such offers if entertained would prompt other Global Powers to submit similar proposals for other locations. Permitting such developments on grounds of “Balancing” would encourage rivalry and seriously threaten Sri Lanka’s independence to exercise its autonomy over its national interests.

What Sri Lanka should explore instead, is to adopt a fresh approach to develop the Infrastructure it needs. This is to first identify the Infrastructure projects it needs, then formulate its broad scope and then call for Expressions of Interest globally and Finance it with Part of the Remittances that Sri Lanka receives annually from its own citizens. In fact, considering the unabated debt that Sri Lanka is in, it is time that Sri Lanka sets up a Development Fund specifically to implement Infrastructure Projects by syphoning part of the Foreign Remittances it receives annually from its citizens . Such an approach means that it would enable Sri Lanka to exercise its autonomy free of debt.

CONCLUSION

The adherents of Non-Alignment as Sri Lanka’s Foreign Policy would not have been pleased to hear Dr. DeVotta argue that “non-alignment is largely a historical notion” during his presentation at the Regional Center for Strategic Studies in Colombo. What is encouraging though is that, despite such “historical notions”, the political establishment, starting with President Gotabaya Rajapaksa and other Presidents, Prime Ministers and Ministers of Foreign Affairs extending up to President AKD at the UNGA and Foreign Affairs Minister, Vijitha Herath, have accepted and endorsed neutrality as its foreign policy. However, this lack of congruence between the experts, some of whom are associated with Government institutions, and the Political Establishment, is detrimental to Sri Lanka’s interests.

If as Professor DeVotta warns, the future Global Order would be fashioned by US – China Rivalry, Sri Lanka has to prepare itself if it is not to become a victim of this escalating Rivalry. Since this Rivalry would engulf India a well when it comes to Sri Lanka’s Exclusive Economic Zone (EEC), Sri Lanka should declare well in advance that no Exploration or Exploitation would be permitted within its EEC on the principle of inviolability of territory under provisions of Neutrality and the UN adoption of the Indian Ocean as a Zone of Peace.

As a measure of preparedness serious consideration should be given to the recommendation cited above which is to set up a development fund by allocating part of the annual dollar remittances to finance Sri Lanka’s development without depending on foreign direct investments, export-driven strategies or the need to be flexible to negotiate dependencies; A strategy that is in keeping with Sri Lanka’s civilisational values of self-reliance. Judging from the unprecedented devastation recently experienced by Sri Lanka due to lack of preparedness and unheeded warnings, the lesson for the political establishment is to rely on the wisdom and relevance of Self-Reliance to equip Sri Lanka to face the consequences of the US–China rivalry.

by Neville Ladduwahetty ✍️

Features

1132nd RO Water purification plant opened at Mahinda MV, Kauduluwewa

Published

1 day ago

2025/12/19

Thilina Walpola

Sponsors (senior management from M/S Perera and Sons), Principal and SLN officials at Opening of RO Plant

A project sponsored by Perera and Sons (P&S) Company and built by Sri Lanka Navy

Petroleum Terminals Ltd
Former Managing Director Ceylon Petroleum Corporation
Former High Commissioner to Pakistan

When the 1132nd RO plant built by the Navy with funds generously provided by M/S Perera and Sons, Sri Lanka’s iconic, century-old bakery and food service chain, established in 1902, known for its network of outlets, numbering 235, in Sri Lanka. This company, established in 1902 by Philanthropist K. A. Charles Perera, well known for their efforts to help the needy and humble people. Helping people gain access to drinking water is a project launched with the help of this esteemed company.

The opening of an RO plant

The Chronic Kidney Disease (CKD) started spreading like a wildfire mainly in North Central, North Western and Eastern provinces. Medical experts are of the view that the main cause of the disease is the use of unsafe water for drinking and cooking. The map shows how the CKD is spreading in Sri Lanka.

School where 1132nd RO plants established by SLN

In 2015, when I was the Commander of the Navy, with our Research and Development Unit of SLN led by a brilliant Marine Engineer who with his expertise and innovative skills brought LTTE Sea Tigers Wing to their knees. The famous remote-controlled explosive-laden Arrow boats to fight LTTE SEA TIGER SUCIDE BOATS menace was his innovation!). Then Captain MCP Dissanayake (2015), came up with the idea of manufacturing low- cost Reverse Osmosis Water Purification Plants. The SLN Research and development team manufactured those plants at a cost of one-tenth of an imported plant.

The writer with his PSO’s daughter

Gaurawa Sasthrawedi Panditha Venerable Devahuwe Wimaladhamma TheroP/Saraswathi Devi Primary School, Ashokarama Maha Viharaya, Navanagara, Medirigiriya

The Navy established FIRST such plant at Kadawatha-Rambawa in Madawachiya Divisional Secretariat area, where the CKD patients were the highest. The Plant was opened on 09 December 2015, on the 65th Anniversary of SLN. It was an extremely proud achievement by SLN

Areas where the RO plants are located

First, the plants were sponsored by officers and sailors of the Sri Lanka Navy, from a Social Responsibility Fund established, with officers and sailors contributing Rs 30 each from their salaries every month. This money Rs 30 X 50,000 Naval personnel provided us sufficient funds to build one plant every month.

Observing great work done by SLN, then President Maithripala Sirisena established a Presidential Task Force on eradicating CKD and funding was no issue to the SLN. We developed a factory line at our R and D unit at Welisara and established RO plants at double-quick time. Various companies/ organisations and individuals also funded the project. Project has been on for the last ten years under six Navy Commanders after me, namely Admiral Travis Sinniah, Admiral Sirimevan Ranasinghe, Admiral Piyal de Silva, Admiral Nishantha Ulugetenna, Admiral Priyantha Perera and present Navy Commander Vice Admiral Kanchana Banagoda.

Each plant is capable of producing up to 10,000 litres of clean drinking water a day. This means a staggering 11.32 million litres of clean drinking water every day!

The map indicates the locations of these 1132 plants.

Well done, Navy!

On the occasion of its 75th Anniversary celebrations, which fell on 09 December 2025, the Navy received the biggest honour. Venerable Thero (Venerable Dewahuwe Wimalarathana Thero, Principal of Saraswathi Devi Primary Pirivena in Medirigiriya) who delivered the sermons during opening of 1132nd RO plant, said, “Ten years ago, out of 100 funerals I attended; more than 80 were of those who died of CKD! Today, thanks to the RO plants established by the Navy, including one at my temple also, hardly any death happens in our village due to CKD! Could there be a greater honour?

Features

Poltergeist of Universities Act

Published

1 day ago

2025/12/19

Thilina Walpola

The Universities Act is back in the news – this time with the present government’s attempt to reform it through a proposed amendment (November 2025) presented by the Minister of Education, Higher Education and Vocational Education, Harini Amarasuriya, who herself is a former academic and trade unionist. The first reading of the proposed amendment has already taken place with little debate and without much attention either from the public or the university community. By all counts, the parliament and powers across political divisions seem nonchalant about the relative silence in which this amendment is making its way through the process, indicative of how low higher education has fallen among its stakeholders.

The Universities Act No. 16 of 1978 under which Sri Lankan universities are managed has generated debate, though not always loud, ever since its empowerment. Increasing politicisation of decision making in and about universities due to the deterioration of the conduct of the University Grants Commission (UGC) has been a central concern of those within the university system and without. This politicisation has been particularly acute in recent decades either as a direct result of some of the provisions in the Universities Act or the problematic interpretation of these. There has never been any doubt that the Act needs serious reform – if not a complete overhaul – to make universities more open, reflective, and productive spaces while also becoming the conscience of the nation rather than timid wastelands typified by the state of some universities and some programs.

But given the Minister’s background in what is often called progressive politics in Sri Lanka, why are many colleagues in the university system, including her own former colleagues and friends, so agitated by the present proposed amendment? The anxiety expressed by academics stem from two sources. The first concern is the presentation of the proposed amendment to parliament with no prior consultative process with academics or representative bodies on its content, and the possible urgency with which it will get pushed through parliament (if a second reading takes place as per the regular procedure) in the midst of a national crisis. The second is the content itself.

Appointment of Deans

Let me take the second point first. When it comes to the selection of deans, the existing Act states that a dean will be selected from among a faculty’s own who are heads of department. The provision was crafted this way based on the logic that a serving head of department would have administrative experience and connections that would help run a faculty in an efficient manner. Irrespective of how this worked in practice, the idea behind has merit.

By contrast, the proposed amendment suggests that a dean will be elected by the faculty from among its senior professors, professors, associate professors and senior lecturers (Grade I). In other words, a person no longer needs to be a head of department to be considered for election as a dean. While in a sense, this marks a more democratised approach to the selection, it also allows people lacking in experience to be elected by manoeuvring the electoral process within faculties.

In the existing Act, this appointment is made by the vice chancellor once a dean is elected by a given faculty. In the proposed amendment, this responsibility will shift to the university’s governing council. In the existing Act, if a dean is indisposed for a number of reasons, the vice chancellor can appoint an existing head of department to act for the necessary period of time, following on the logic outlined earlier. The new amendment would empower the vice chancellor to appoint another senior professor, professor, associate professor or senior lecturer (Grade I) from the concerned faculty in an acting capacity. Again, this appears to be a positive development.

Appointing Heads of Department

Under the current Act heads of department have been appointed from among professors, associate professors, senior lecturers or lecturers appointed by the Council upon the recommendation of the vice chancellor. The proposed amendment states the head of department should be a senior professor appointed by the Council upon the recommendation of the vice chancellor, and in the absence of a senior professor, other members of the department are to be considered. In the proposed scheme, a head of department can be removed by the Council. According to the existing Act, an acting head of department appointment can be made by the vice chancellor, while the proposed amendment shifts this responsibility to the Council, based upon the recommendation of the vice chancellor.

The amendment further states that no person should be appointed as the head of the same department for more than one term unless all other eligible people have already completed their responsibilities as heads of department. This is actually a positive development given that some individuals have managed to hang on to the head of department post for years, thereby depriving opportunities to other competent colleagues to serve in the post.

Process of amending the Universities Act

The question is, if some of the contents of the proposed amendment are positive developments, as they appear to be, why are academics anxious about its passing in parliament? This brings me to my first point, that is the way in which this amendment is being rushed through by the government. This has been clearly articulated by the Arts Faculty Teachers Association of University of Colombo. In a letter to the Minister of Education dated 9 December 2025, the Association makes two points, which have merit. First, “the bill has been drafted and tabled in Parliament for first reading without a consultative process with academics in state universities, who are this bill’s main stakeholders. We note that while the academic community may agree with its contents, the process is flawed because it is undemocratic and not transparent. There has not been adequate time for deliberation and discussion of details that may make the amendment stronger, especially in the face of the disaster situation of the country.”

Second, “AFTA’s membership also questions the urgency with which the bill is tabled in Parliament, and the subsequent unethical conduct of the UGC in requesting the postponement of dean selections and heads of department appointments in state universities in expectation of the bill’s passing in Parliament.”

These are serious concerns. No one would question the fact that the Universities Act needs to be amended. However, this must necessarily be based on a comprehensive review process. The haste to change only sections pertaining to the selection of deans and heads of department is strange, to say the least, and that too in the midst of dealing with the worst natural calamity the country has faced in living memory. To compound matters, the process also has been fast-tracked thereby compromising on the time made available to academics to make their views be known.

Similarly, the issuing of a letter by the UGC freezing all appointments of deans and heads of department, even though elections and other formalities have been carried out, is a telling instance of the government’s problematic haste and patently undemocratic process. Notably, this action comes from a government whose members, including the Education Minister herself, have stood steadfastly for sensible university reforms, before coming to power. The present process is manoeuvred in such a manner, that the proposed amendment would soon become law in the way the government requires, including all future appointments being made under this new law. Hence, the attempt to halt appointments, which were already in the pipeline, in the interim period.

It is evident that rather than undertake serious university sector reforms, the government is aiming to control universities and thereby their further politicization amenable to the present dispensation. The ostensible democratis0…..ation of the qualified pool of applicants for deanships opens up the possibilities for people lacking experience, but are proximate to the present powers that be, to hold influential positions within the university. The transfer of appointing powers to the Councils indicates the same trend. After all, Councils are partly made up of outsiders to the university, and such individuals, without exception, are political appointees. The likelihood of them adhering to the interests of the government would be very similar to the manner in which some vice chancellors appointed by the President of the country feel obligated to act.

All things considered, particularly the rushed and non-transparent process adopted thus far by the government does not show sincerity towards genuine and much needed university sector reforms. By contrast, it shows a crude intent to control universities at any cost. It is extremely regrettable that the universities in general have not taken a more proactive and principled position towards the content and the process of the proposed amendment. As I have said many times before, whatever ills that have befallen universities so far is the disastrous fallout of compromises of those within made for personal gain and greed, or the abject silence and disinterest of those within. These culprits have abandoned broader institutional development. This appears to be yet another instance of that sad process.

In this context, I have admiration for my former colleagues in the Faculty of Arts at the University of Colombo for having the ethical courage to indicate clearly the fault lines of the proposed amendment and the problems of its process. What they have asked is a postponement of the process giving them time to engage. In this context, it is indeed disappointing to see the needlessly conciliatory tone of the letter to the Education Minister by the Federation of University Teachers Association dated December 5, 2025, which sends the wrong signal.

If this government still believes it is a people’s government, the least it can do is give these academics time to engage with the proposed amendment. After all, many within the academic community helped bring the government to power. If not and if this amendment is rushed through parliament in needless haste, it will create a precedent that signals the way in which the government intends to do business in the future, abusing its parliamentary majority and denting its credibility for good.