Features

Imaginative prevention of grabbing Gannoruwa Vet and Agricultural complex for Gam Udawa

Published

6 months ago

2025/12/28

Example of scribbled warnings during 1088-89 insurgency

I must comment on an important feature of the Presidential Mobile Service. This was the review meeting with the President at the end of the service. The President, elected representatives from the area, a few Ministers, the Secretaries and other senior public officials participated at these meetings. Secretaries had to get up and answer in public any issues raised by elected representatives in the presence of the President. I have myself had the uncomfortable experience of being called up to the stage in order to answer questions at some of these meetings.

At such meetings, with the President presiding, one had to really know what one was talking about. I have seen a few public servants who were unprepared, and also perhaps too nervous, suffering humiliation at these meetings. The meetings themselves were useful. They proved to be a forum for bringing together a number of matters, and increasing awareness. But these were meetings in which none of us was relaxed. We always felt a sense of relief when they were over. As one public servant put it once, “Thank heavens we escaped without loss of life or limb.” In the original Sinhala, his observation was even more picturesque.

Preventive action

I have already described the Gannoruwa Agricultural and Veterinary Science Complex. The whole area was an integrated and very large agricultural complex. We were shocked therefore to hear that the President on a visit to Kandy had inspected some land belonging to the complex to put up the various buildings and structures for his next Gam Udawa exhibition. Such a step, if effected, would have broken up the complex. It would have seriously demoralized the Scientists, Research Officers and others who were proud of this network. Furthermore, it would have constituted an invasion by thousands of people with a grave threat to the experimental plots and plantations of the Agriculture Department.

Agrotech Park Gannoruwa

Once the Gam Udawa was over the permanent structures left behind could be given over to almost anybody, and the security, contiguity, as well as the harmony of the entire set up would have been adversely affected. The Minister himself was furious at this intrusion without any discussion with him, or any assessment of possible implications. Given the character of the President and the Minister’s own somewhat less than warm relations with him, he could not oppose the scheme formally or frontally

Earlier, Mr. Athulathmudali had expectations of being appointed Prime Minister in the Premadasa Administration. However, Mr. Gamini Dissanayake was also a strong rival and contender. The squabbling between the two gave the President the opportunity of appointing neither and giving the post to Mr. D.B. Wijetunge, instead. In my own view, both of them played into the hands of the President on this matter. It was the general opinion that he was really prepared to appoint neither as Prime Minister.

The barrage of propaganda let loose by the two contending Ministers and their supporters highlighting the achievements, the popularity and the suitability of each of them tended to cancel each other out. In fact, I remember telling Mr. Athulathmudali this very thing on one occasion. I said, “The way that both of you are setting about this, I won’t be surprised if the President doesn’t appoint either of you.” Mr. Athulathmudali did accept that there was some merit in this argument. But matters were too far gone by that time.

Thereafter, the relations of both Ministers with the President were not characterized by warmth. Given this background, Mr. Athulathmudali was not prepared to silently accept a Presidential invasion of his valuable agricultural complex. A pitched battle was not possible. But guerrilla warfare was. This form of warfare was greatly assisted by the prevailing real guerrilla warfare conducted by the JVP and the fear psychosis gripping the country. Mr. Athulathmudali made a few statements to various groups of officials, who were themselves incensed by the President’s attempt on their beloved land, to the effect that he was sure that “Our research officers and others would know what to do.” At the conclusion of the statements, he smiled knowingly. The officers were intelligent. They understood.

The outcome was that, the day the surveyors were to proceed to the land to survey it, large hand drawn notices in the style and manner of the JVP were posted on trees promising certain death to the surveyors, their assistants and anyone else stepping into the land. The surveyors first surveyed the notices. Their survey also took in certain grim looking characters hovering in the vicinity, who appeared to be keeping an eye on them. They did not like what they saw. They got the message. They felt unable to survey the land.

They were professionals who were prepared to work under reasonable conditions. They were not prepared to be heroes in a useless cause. All of them went home and refused to go back. We heard that many attempts were made to get other surveyors. But the panic had spread and nobody was willing to risk his life.

After some time the site was abandoned. In an oblique sense the JVP also deserves some credit for this abandonment. The research officers and others traded on the climate of fear created by them. Mr. Athulathmudali and everyone else were very pleased. At subsequent meetings when some difficult issue came up, he used to chuckle and say “Leave it to our research officers, they know what to do.”

Presidential Commission on Youth Unrest

In December 1989, I was invited to give evidence before the Presidential Commission on Youth Unrest. This was an important Commission, particularly in the context of the times, with a raging youth insurgency gripping the country in uncertainty and fear. When we were in Rome we heard of the news of the death of Rohana Wijeweera and Upatissa Gamanayake, the two main leaders of the JVP. I would be less than honest if I said anything other than that all of us felt an immense sense of relief.

This was also the feeling of every Sri Lankan we met in Italy and later back at home, when we returned. Speaking personally, I could not deny that I felt relief. At the same time I felt somewhat bad that anyone’s death should make me feel so. Then I remembered what was told to me by the eminent Paediatrician Dr. Cyril Perera, when the JVP suddenly pulled out the employees of the hospitals. All staff deserted through fear and intimidation, leaving patients even in intensive care unattended. Several helpless, innocent lives were lost. Dr. Perera told me with deep sadness, “I lost two of my little ones today.”

When I remembered this one fact, any stirrings of sympathy were lost. No human being has a right to visit such appalling consequences on other human beings, more so when the victims are helpless little children. But these were but the symptoms of a larger disease. Diagnosing the disease and suggesting a cure was what the youth commission was grappling with. In my evidence I stressed the importance of equity, fairness and transparency in our dealings with all, particularly the youth.

These were vitally important ingredients in all appointments and in the conferment of any official benefits. My experience was that the youth get frustrated and angry when the system is manipulated for personal and political reasons. This reaches a point where they believe they don’t have a stake in such an unjust system. This is one of the reasons for anti-establishment behaviour, and even insurrection. The system must be manifestly credible. It was interesting giving evidence before the commission, where it was possible to discuss a number of important issues.

Rejecting a Rs. 900 million grant

Foreign aid is an important subject and Secretaries spend a considerable amount of their time meeting delegations from bilateral and multilateral agencies in order to discuss various aid projects. Practically, every Ministry has an aid pipeline, which gets replenished periodically. There is however a long process of negotiation before matters get finalized. This usually includes repeated visits from several teams, and a great deal of time gets taken up with preparation for these visits as well as actual negotiations.

It was in this context that I was one day informed by the Director of Agriculture that a team from an important country was due to arrive in order to give us funds to put up a research facility in the area of plants, cut flowers and foliage. Sri Lanka was building up her exports in these areas, and on the face of it the prospect of obtaining grant aid for a research facility was attractive. But in preparing for this visit when I went into matters in some detail, I discovered that we already appeared to have sufficient research facilities. What we really required was relevant equipment related to the export process which would have assisted us in upgrading our products and expediting the entire export process.

I discussed this with the Director of Agriculture and senior officials. They had to admit that my argument was valid. I then asked them whether accepting another research facility without the equipment and components that we really needed would not be tantamount to our taking on the responsibility of running a large facility of no great importance to us, with a significant annual call on the national budget initially for recurrent expenditure and thereafter, for spare parts and other capital items. That indeed appeared to be so.

Now my colleagues who had been discussing this matter with the potential donor had a problem of saying “No, we don’t need it.” They seemed to have fallen into the almost irresistible trap of accepting something, just because it was free. They did not seem to have considered the considerable expenditure down the road just to maintain and run the facility. There was no option. I had to do the unpleasant part of refusal.

When the team came, all of us met in the Ministry. I listened carefully to the comprehensive enunciation of the project by the visiting team leader. When he concluded, I thanked him and politely sketched out our real requirements. I ended by stating that we cannot justify another pure research facility. At this, the leader as well as the others of the visiting delegation seemed to be in some degree of shock. They had come to finalize matters, and here was someone questioning the validity and basis of the entire project.

I tried hard to persuade them to modify the project and give us the equipment we needed. The leader said that he had no mandate to do this. I said that I could understand his position. I hoped that he understood mine. As Secretary and Chief Accounting Officer of the Ministry I could not agree to the gift of what was going to be a “White Elephant.” They pointed out that what I was rejecting was a Rs. 900 million grant. I replied that I fully understood the enormity of what I was doing. I was only asking for relevant modifications to the project.

They wanted to meet the Minister. But the Minister was out of the country and what we had was an Acting Minister. I advised them that there was no point in meeting the Acting Minister on a matter like this. Finally the team leader asked not entirely in fun, “Mr. Pieris, how can I go back to my country now?” To the best of my ability I soothed his feelings and made a plea for modification of the project. I emphasized that this was not a rejection but only an appeal for adjustment based on the reasons I had given.

The matter ended there for the moment, although not very happily. The delegation was deeply upset. When the Minister came back he said banteringly, “You’re a hell of a chap. I heard you have rejected Rs. 900 million of grant aid.” When I explained matters, he fully agreed with me and said that he will also speak to their Ambassador about this. This episode also revealed a breakdown in communication between the Ministry and the Department of Agriculture.

It appeared to be strange that matters had progressed so far without myself as Secretary not hearing of it. This was probably due to the very size of the Ministry. We tightened procedures thereafter. In the end after a long delay, the other side agreed to give the equipment that we really needed. By that time, I was out of the Ministry.

(Excerpted from In Pursuit of Governance, autobiography of MDD Peiris) ✍️

All News Advertisement

Features

New mediation law for smarter dispute resolution of civil and commercial disputes – I

Published

3 hours ago

2026/06/16

Sahan Weerasooriya

The Mediation (Civil and Commercial Disputes) Bill was passed by the Parliament on Thursday, June 11, 2026. Harshana Nanayakkara, Minister of Justice and National Integration, introduced the Bill, and explained its provisions and value for Sri Lanka and global developments in the use of mediation. Encouragingly, it was passed unanimously.

Sri Lanka’s commitment to provide legislative support for the use of mediation is timely and most welcome. Given that the backlog of cases pending before courts is over a staggering 1.1 million, it is clear that Sri Lanka is yet another country that remains challenged to find responses to make dispute resolution more efficient. The impact of laws delays is serious and damaging not only to the disputants personally, but also for businesses and the economic development of the country. The delays in concluding cases impacts the economy adversely, both directly and indirectly, but are often seen only as an access to Justice concern. This is unfortunate. In many jurisdictions across the globe, alternative dispute resolution processes (ADR), such as mediation, have been introduced to alleviate laws delays. While Sri Lanka enacted legislation (1988) to provide for mediation in respect of minor community disputes of a low monetary threshold, the enactment of the new law heralds a commitment to provide for the recognition of a disciplined regime for its use for higher value civil and commercial disputes.

The new law provides for the recognition of mediation as a dispute resolution option that can be voluntarily selected by parties, and for a governance regime to ensure that mediations are conducted in compliance with certain standards which are globally accepted. It provides statutory recognition to the principle that a mediated settlement agreement that has been signed by the disputants, is valid in law. It does not provide for any management control by government or establish entities. In addition to the voluntary reference by parties, a court can also refer a dispute in an action before it, to mediation, at its discretion, after considering all circumstances and if considered appropriate. The voluntary nature of the process is not affected because, while the court can refer the dispute to mediation and the parties must then engage in the mediation, there is no compulsion for the parties to settle against their will.

The law sets out the obligations of Mediators, disputants and the Service Provider. Certain categories of disputes cannot be referred to mediation. These are disputes the settlement of which requires the inclusion of terms that can be given effect to, only on a decree of court, such as the termination of a marriage or a declaration of nullity of marriage or the adoption of a child or the partition of land to obtain rights in rem. A schedule sets out eleven (11) categories of actions that cannot be settled by mediation. However, matters relevant to such disputes may be mediated for the purpose of submitting terms of settlement to court for consideration of incorporation in a judgement, decree or order in compliance with applicable law.

The new law also provides that in a mediation, certain key principles of the process must be complied with. These include the confidentiality and the without prejudice rule in respect of matters discussed at the mediation; the rule that Mediators must be neutral and impartial; the party centric nature of the process that provides primacy to the wishes of the disputants including that it is they that determine the outcome and that a settlement is reached only if all disputants agree to the terms; the noncoercive role of the mediator whose duty is to facilitate and manage the process using mediation specific skills and techniques, but is debarred from imposing a decision. Although a settlement agreement is valid in law, provision is included to obtain a decree of court, based on the terms of the settlement. A mediated settlement agreement can be set aside on an application made to court, on specific limited grounds which are provided for, including that it is offensive to the public policy of the country. If the parties are unable to agree on a settlement, a certificate of non-settlement is issued. The provisions of the law are based on international best practices and principles articulated in the 1988 UN Mediation Convention (the Singapore Convention) and the UNCITRAL model law.

The popularity of mediation has grown for its value in being time efficient, cost effective and party centric. Parties have control over the outcome and have the space to discuss their concerns, fears and interests and need never agree to settle unless fully satisfied that settlement terms address their interests. Disputants are free to walk out of a mediation process at any time, if dissatisfied with the progress. The discussions are confidential and a valuable feature is that the process offers an opportunity to reduce acrimony which is prevalent in most disputes, and to restore fractured relationships which is very important in family and business related disputes. This benefit and the prospects for governments to reduce the cost of the administration of justice, by using mediation, is articulated in the preamble to the 2018 UN Convention on International Settlement Agreements Resulting from Mediation (2018) which states that the use of mediation results in significant benefits.

Pursuant to the interest generated within the country regarding the value of using Mediation for commercial dispute resolution, and heralding what we like to see as the initial steps of a Mediation boom in the country, several positive advancements have taken place –

* Parties have opted to include mediation in the dispute resolution clause in contracts;

* Given that mediating disputes requires very specialised techniques and skills, many professionals, including predominantly Lawyers, have engaged in training programmes offered by international training bodies that offer accreditation;

* Trained Mediators are engaged in an effort to form themselves as a professional Organisation;

* Mediation Advocacy training programmes have been held to train Lawyers on their niche role in the mediation process. That role is distinctly different to that of a court Lawyer who’s obligations are centred on an adversarial approach where the dispute is adjudicated in terms of the law alone. Hence lawyers need training to be useful within a non-adversarial process which is party centric and has a focus on reaching a settlement, based on the interests of disputants.

* Sri Lanka enacted the Recognition and Enforcement of International Mediated Settlement Agreements Act No. 5 of 2024 (the UN Mediation Convention Act) and ratified the Convention becoming the 14th country to do so. Sri Lanka will be seen as an investor friendly country in respect of dispute resolution where mediation is used, since it offers an enforcement regime which is recognised universally.

* The landmark determination of the Supreme Court (SC SD 22 of 2025) in the challenge by the Bar Association to the constitutionality of the Mediation (Civil and Commercial Disputes) Bill, found that none of the provisions of the Bill were unconstitutional and gave a judicial sign off to statutory provisions that seek to ensure that mediation services are provided in this country, in a disciplined manner in compliance with universally accepted standards.

* Perhaps, inspired by the statutory obligation imposed on judges to attempt pretrial settlement of disputes, in terms of the Small Claims Court Act and the Small Claims Court Procedure Act (both of 2022) and the Civil Procedure Code provisions on Pretrial Conference and Pretrial Orders, 125 District Judges were recently trained (with support from the ADB) in Mediation. The training provided a dual benefit – it provided training in skills that are required to settle disputes and equally importantly, provided a comprehensive understanding of how mediation will function when judges themselves refer disputes for settlement by private mediators.

* Trained Mediators are already conducting mediations with success.

* A not-for-profit guarantee company, the International ADR Centre – www.iadrc.lk ) was established in 2018 as a joint venture of the Ceylon Chamber of Commerce and the Institute for the Development of Commercial Law & Practice (ICLP) to promote ADR and is actively engaged in promoting mediation through training, disseminating information and creating awareness among stakeholders, including the business sector. In addition to the International ADR Centre, “Udecide” is a project that promotes training of mediators and other activities that enrich the mediation culture.

* Commercial Mediation has been included in the Masters level programme at the Colombo University;

* The Sri Lanka Law College offers a component on Mediation in the Post Attorney Diploma programme, which commenced recently.

The private sector was actively engaged in the drafting of the Mediation Bill under the leadership of the International ADR Centre, which held many stakeholder consultations to obtain feedback from those that were conversant with the subject. The Centre had previously assisted the government to draft the UN Mediation Convention Act (Act No. 5 of 2024).

Several international Organisations that previously provided for resolution of disputes by arbitration, have provided for institutional rules to provide mediation services. These include WIPO and the ICC. Specifically, in relation to Investor State dispute resolution (ISDR), the International Bar Association (IBA) adopted its Mediation Rules in 2012 and ICSID (of the World Bank group) adopted its Mediation Rules in 2022. UNCITRAL, which is currently working on reforming ISDR, promotes mediation, observing that the use of mediation could reduce the costs of ISDS and also preserve relationships between the investor and the State. UNCITRAL has formulated provisions on and Guidelines for, Mediation for investor state dispute resolution.

(To be continued)

by Dhara Wijayatilake
Attorney-at-Law; Former Secretary to the Ministry of Justice; Director and Secretary General of the International ADR Centre.

Features

A Testament to the Sri Lankan family

Published

3 hours ago

2026/06/16

Sahan Weerasooriya

The passing of Dr. Devanesan Nesiah a few days ago brought back memories that spanned more than four decades. Devanesan signed the witness register at my marriage in 2002. It was a year of hope. The Ceasefire Agreement between the government and the LTTE had brought a respite from a war that had devastated the country for nearly two decades. The possibility of peace seemed real. It was fitting that Devanesan should be present on that occasion because his entire life was dedicated to building bridges across divides and seeking rational and humane solutions to conflict. He was a friend, mentor, and guide whose life embodied values that Sri Lanka, indeed the world, needs today.

In reflecting on Dr. Nesiah’s life, we need to be reminded that the forces that unite us as a people in Sri Lanka are stronger than those that divide us, and that the bonds of human affection can transcend even the deepest divisions of ethnicity, history and politics. I first met him in 1984. I had just had my very first newspaper article published in the Jaffna-based Saturday Review. The editor was Gamini Navaratne, a Sinhalese. This was a reminder that even during the darkest period of ethnic conflict, the bonds between communities remained strong. The article I had written was based on my encounters with the anti-Tamil violence of July 1983.

At that time, Dr Nesiah was the Government Agent of Jaffna. Tens of thousands of Tamil people who had fled violence in the south had been transported to the north by a government that had failed to protect them. He came up to me at an event, introduced himself, and told me that he liked what I had written. He also said that he would soon be leaving for Harvard University’s Kennedy School of Government and that we could meet there. Over the next three years, Devanesan and his wife Anita adopted me into their family. I used to visit them two or three times a week, not only to be given meals by Anita but to discuss matters with Devanesan. These included the academic papers and newspaper articles that were written. Later, Anita earned her PhD in religion and served on the boards of many civic organisations, including the National Peace Council.

Practical Solution

In 1992, we had both returned to work in Sri Lanka when Devanesan invited me to accompany him to Jaffna to celebrate the eightieth birthday of his father, K Nesiah, the distinguished educationist affectionately known as Professor Nesiah. The older Nesiah had been a leading member of the Jaffna Youth Congress. This remarkable movement championed complete independence from British rule, national unity, and the eradication of social inequalities based on caste and communal identity.

At a time when many feared that independence would lead to majoritarian domination, the leaders of the Youth Congress chose instead to place their faith in a shared Sri Lankan future. They believed that people from different communities could build a common nation while preserving their distinctive identities. So did Devanesan. This vision remains relevant today. It needs to be actualized.

The tragedy of Sri Lanka’s post-independence history is not that diversity exists. Diversity exists in every society. The tragedy is that we often allow diversity to become a source of fear, though we share many of the same values of family, hospitality, respect for elders and compassion towards others. During our visit to Jaffna in 1992, we met representatives of the LTTE administration, including Raheem. The discussion turned to the controversial issue of merging the Northern and Eastern Provinces. Dr Nesiah argued that if the merger could not be achieved due to political opposition, it might be more rational to seek greater powers for provincial councils instead. Raheem disagreed. Devanesan was interested in finding practical ways to achieve justice and coexistence. That was characteristic of him.

Devanesan Nesiah was a student of conflict and strategy. He became a doctoral student of Professor Thomas Schelling, who would later receive the Nobel Prize for his pioneering work on conflict and cooperation. Schelling’s insight was that even in the midst of conflict, there are usually common interests that adversaries share. Even adversaries locked in a struggle usually depend on each other for the outcome they each want. The challenge is to identify those common interests and build upon them. Conflict is not simply a contest between enemies. It is also a search for ways to coexist. Together as students and peace practitioners, we applied those theories to the Sri Lankan context to understand what was going on and to share that understanding with the Sri Lankan people.

Rational Empathy

Dr Nesiah spoke his mind, truth to power. He was a man of logic, rationality, and principle. His integrity came at a cost. His public service career experienced many ups and downs because he refused to accommodate irrational or corrupt demands. There were periods when he was sidelined into that administrative limbo known as the “pool” and assigned no substantive responsibilities for refusing to give in to political demands. Like the rest of his larger family, most notably the Hoole family of Jaffna, he would not abandon his principles. In 2018, to protest the action of President Maithripala Sirisena in sacking the then government he returned his Deshamanya Award (Pride of the Nation) national civil honourn which was soon thereafter overturned by the Supreme Court as being unconstitutional. His commitment was not to personal advancement, but to what he believed was right.

My wife Sumadhu recalls a story he told her. One day, while travelling on official duty, he told her how he had seen a thalagoya, a monitor lizard, trussed up and being taken away for slaughter. The sight of the creature’s suffering affected him deeply. He said he saw tears in its eyes and described the moment of awakening. From that day onwards, he gave up eating meat.

The story brings to mind the biblical story of the conversion of St Paul on the road to Damascus and the Buddhist exhortation, “May all living beings be well and happy.” But the deeper significance lies not in religious comparison. It lies in the awakening of empathy.

That was the essence of Dr Devanesan Nesiah’s worldview. The prejudices that society often imposes through ethnicity, religion, caste, or gender had little hold on him. He saw them as human constructs that often served to privilege some while excluding others. Such were his values that made him an extraordinary human being. Dr. Nesiah lived according to that understanding. He showed that integrity can survive amidst conflict. He reminded us that reason and compassion are not opposites but partners, that what unites us as Sri Lankans inhabiting our common island home has always been greater than what divides us, and we need to build our institutions accordingly.

I am proud that he was my friend. I am grateful that he was my mentor.

by Jehan Perera

Features

City of Dreams …Heartbeat of Colombo

Published

3 hours ago

2026/06/16

Sahan Weerasooriya

Enroute

If Colombo’s nightlife had a pulse, you’d find it 23 floors up, at Gatz, City of Dreams, Cinnamon Life.

The entertainment lounge has shed its old skin and stepped out supper-club style — think dim lights, clinking glasses, and live music that doesn’t ask you to choose between dinner and a show. You get both.

What’s more, at the new look Gatz the music never stops and it’s all happening seven nights a week … with live entertainment, and this is the scene, beat by beat:

Monday and Tuesday: Top Hats with Daniella/Naomi, from 7.00 pm onwards.

Sohan, Kamal Munasinghe (GM, Cinnamon Life) and Imran of
Funtime Entertainments

One of Colombo’s most sought-after bands is now a Monday-Tuesday ritual.

With a super repertoire, Top Hats can swing from lounge jazz to dancefloor fire. Big venues love them. Now Gatz gets to claim them.

Wednesday: Enroute with Gananath & Debbie – from 7.00 pm onwards.

Want New York at sunset? This is it. Gananath & Debbie transport you straight to the heady days of Frank Sinatra, Dean Martin, and Ray Charles …old-school cool, live and unfiltered.

Thursday to Sunday: Terry & the Big Spenders – from 8.00 pm onwards.

Terry & The Big Spenders

The crowd favourite. A super big band sound that owns the 70s, 80s and 90s.

If you’ve been waiting for horns, harmonies, and nostalgia with volume, Terry & the Big Spenders deliver it nightly. No wonder they’re a huge hit.

Gatz is now an entertainment lounge, in Supper Club style, with Happy Hour very day, from 6.00 pm to 8.00 pm because the night, they say, should start with a toast.

And, from July, weekends at the Gatz go global. Local and foreign guest stars will be around to entertain you. Gatz is certainly booking big.

Wow! That would be another exciting experience for those patronising the most talked about venue in town.

In charge of the new setup is our legendary entertainer/singer Sohan Weerasinghe, along with Imran of Funtime Entertainment.

The twosome, with invaluable assistance from the General Manager, Kamal Munasinghe, and the entire team at Cinnamon Life, have built Gatz into more than a venue. They have turned it into the “Heartbeat of the City.”

So come for happy hour. Stay for Terry’s horns, Sing-along with Enroute and Dance with Top Hats, all on the 23rd floor, and while Colombo sparkles below the bands will take you higher.

Remember, the heartbeat is loudest at Gatz.