Midweek Review
Impact on Parliament

Landmark Nov. 14 SC ruling:
Parliament should look into how the Committee on Public Accounts (COPA) a couple of months ago recognized the Finance Ministry as a high performing government institution for its performance in 2019 and 2020. The Finance Ministry in spite of being embroiled in 2019 tax cut (implemented without parliamentary approval) and 2020 sugar duty scam and unpardonable negligence that led to economic collapse were awarded the Silver prize for 2019 and 2020. Awards were given at an event attended by President Ranil Wickremesinghe, the current Finance Minister and Premier Dinesh Gunawardena. COPA Chief Lasantha Alagiyawanna owed an explanation as to how the Finance Ministry was chosen for the honours. The SC ruling must compel COPA and Parliament to evaluate the Silver given to the Finance Ministry. We do concede those two were trying years and the Finance Ministry maintained a semblance of normalcy after the devastating Easter Sunday Carnage and COVID-19 pandemic not seen before in our living memory, delivered body blows, especially to tourism and so many other economic arteries of the country. But the question is whether this is the time to pat ourselves in the back when most of the country’s people are literally gasping for life.
By Shamindra Ferdinando
Pivithuru Hela Urumaya (PHU) leader and former Minister Udaya Gammanpila, MP, on Nov 16, 2023, said that the first warning of the impending economic crisis had been given by a section of the ruling Sri Lanka Podujana Peremuna (SLPP) in 2020.
The declaration was made in Parliament two days after the Supreme Court determined that ex-President Gotabaya Rajapaksa and former Finance Ministers Mahinda Rajapaksa (Nov 2019-June 2021) and Basil Rajapaksa (June 2021-April 2022), Treasury Secretary S.R. Atygalle (Nov 2019-April 2022) and ex-Governors of the Central Bank Prof. W.D. Lakshman (Nov 2019-Sept 2021) and Ajith Nivard Cabraal (Sept 2021-April 2022) bore responsibility for the current economic crisis. That determination was made in respect of several fundamental rights applications.
In addition to the above-mentioned politicians and officials, they found fault with Dr. P.B. Jayasundera, Secretary to the President, and the Monetary Board consisting of five persons. At the time of the crisis, the Monetary Board consisted of Governor CB Prof. W.D. Lakshman/Ajith Nivard Cabraal (ex-officio), Treasury Secretary S.R. Attygalle (ex-officio) and Samantha Kumarasinghe, Dr. Ranee Jayamaha and Sanjeeva Jayawardena, PC.
The SC, in a historic ruling, determined they violated the fundamental rights of the people by mismanaging the economy between 2019 and 2022.
Chief Justice Jayantha Jayasuriya, PC, Justices Buwaneka Aluwihare, PC, Priyantha Jayawardena, PC, Vijith K. Malalgoda, PC, and Murdu N.B. Fernando, PC comprised the bench. Justice Jayawardena disagreed.
But the judgement has exonerated ex-Central Banker Dr. Rani Jayamaha and senior Attorney-at-Law Sanjeeva Jayawardena from any penalty. Why did Dr. Jayamaha and Jayawardena not resign if they disagreed with those wrong policies?
Four days after the SC declaration, the Central Bank, in a statement headlined ‘COMPOSITION OF THE GOVERNING BOARD (GB) AND THE MONETARY POLICY BOARD OF THE CENTRAL BANK OF SRI LANKA’ stressed that Dr. Jayamaha and Jayawardena were no longer members of the Governing Board of CBSL appointed in terms of the provisions of the Central Bank of Sri Lanka (CBSL) Act, No. 16 of 2023. The new Act was passed on July 20, 2023. Dr. Ranee Jayamaha who had been a member of the Monetary Board (MB) since 29.07.2020, tendered her resignation from the MB with effect from 12.09.2023, and, therefore, was not a member of the GB. Jayawardena, who continued as a member of the GB, tendered his resignation with effect from 05.11.2023. Therefore, both Dr. Jayamaha and Jayawardena submitted their resignations before the Supreme Court made its final judgment.
Against the backdrop of the SC ruling, the role and the collective responsibility of the Cabinet-of-Ministers regarding the economic collapse should be thoroughly examined. Every member of the then Cabinet, including Attorney-at-Law Gammanpila, therefore bear the responsibility for the current crisis. the Members of the Monetary Board, too, should bear the collective responsibility.
In spite of the five-judge bench being divided 4 to 1 in favour of the decision, it is undoubtedly the most important judgment delivered since the enactment of the 1978 Constitution.
Many an eyebrow was raised when Namal Rajapakse, MP, addressing Parliament on Nov 20 questioned the right of the petitioners to challenge government policy in court. The former minister asserted that such was contrary to the Constitution.
Addressing the Parliament on Nov 16, on the third day of the Budget debate, Colombo District lawmaker Gammanpila said: “We warned in advance of the impending crisis. I’m happy, Dr. Ramesh Pathirana, who served as a member of the then Cabinet, is here. We sought a meeting with the then President Gotabaya Rajapaksa to discuss the deteriorating economic situation. Having repeatedly asked for a meeting we were finally granted an opportunity on Oct. 26, 2020. Dr. P.B.J, Treasury Secretary, Central Bank Governor and the then State Finance Minister Ajith Nivad Cabraal were among those present. The State Minister made the main presentation. We asked them to immediately decide on IMF intervention. All of us were of the view the country required IMF assistance to overcome the crisis. At that time Bangladesh experiencing a similar situation had taken steps to restructure their debt in addition to take a loan facility from the IMF. We stressed the need to restructure our debt. We proposed to seek IMF assistance. They didn’t pay attention to our request. Instead, we were told of them having a domestic solution.”
PHU leader Gammanpila explained how the government turned a blind eye to their repeated efforts to persuade the GR government to control fuel consumption by increasing prices or to introduce a quota system. Lawmaker Gammanpila recalled the SLPP attack on him after he declared on June 11, 2021 the immediate need to increase fuel prices due to the volatile economic situation. “Finally, a marginal increase of Rs. 7 and Rs 20 for a litre of diesel and petrol, respectively, was effected. The SLPP attacked me over the fuel increase even before the Opposition did.”
The SLPP owed the public an explanation why repeated warnings were ignored. Who actually convinced the Cabinet-of-Ministers of an impractical domestic solution? The bone of contention is whether someone deliberately thwarted counter measures, if taken, could have saved the country.
A callous approach
In spite of rapid deterioration of the economy, the Finance Ministry acted in a manner most unbecoming of one of the two most important ministries, the other being the Defence. Amidst the economic crisis triggered by the Corona epidemic, the Finance Ministry callously decided to issue duty free vehicle permits to 225 MPs of Parliament. That move went awry after print, electronic and social media mercilessly hammered the government.
Then the Finance Ministry shocked the country by slashing the Special Commodity Levy (SCL) on imported sugar. Special gazette notification, dated Oct 13, 2020, brought SCL on imported sugar from Rs 50 to 25 cents a kilo. The then Premier Mahinda Rajapaksa served as the Finance Minister while S.R. Attygalle functioned as the Secretary to the Treasury.
In August 2023, United Republican Front (URF) leader Patali Champika Ranawaka alleged that in spite of both the Committee on Public Finance and the Committee on Public Accounts recommendation that the government take measures to recover losses amounting to Rs 16 bn, the Wickremesinghe-Rajapaksa government is yet to do so.
By then, the Gotabaya Rajapaksa government has caused irreparable damage to the economy by slashing a slew of taxes. That ill-fated decision taken at the first meeting of the Cabinet-of-Ministers, chaired by President Gotabaya Rajapaksa in Nov 2019, marked the beginning of the end. Who actually convinced the wartime Defence Secretary who courageously spearheaded the war effort, that was brought to a successful conclusion in May 2009, to gamble on economic-political-social stability?
In April 2021, amidst further deterioration on the economic front, Dr. PBJ declared his confidence in the overall strategy.
ECONOMYNEXT, in an online report posted on April 04, 2021, quoted Dr. Jayasundera as having said: “President Gotabaya Rajapaksa knew revenue will be lost by tax cuts but he considered it an investment, and an 8 percent tax rate slashed from 15 percent, will remain unchanged for 5 years.”
The report was headlined ‘Sri Lanka President knew revenues will be lost, VAT cut to remain for 5 years: Jayasundera’
ECONOMYNEXT further quoted Dr. Jayasundera as having told Colombo Development Forum in April, 2021: “The President promised this nation a new taxation strategy. He knew the revenue will be lost but he considers that lost revenue as an investment in the country. Therefore, outdated archaic taxes have been given up. Single rate VAT has been introduced. New corporate structure has been introduced.”
Jayasundera is also on record as having said the value added tax cut from 15 to 8 percent will stay for another 5 years and income taxes will not be changed, but the deficit will be brought down to percent in the medium term with economic growth.
“We are assuring the tax regime that what we have instituted will not change. For the next 5 years VAT is 8 percent. Income tax is whatever the rate we have gazetted. No other taxes will be brought in. Custom base taxes will be rationalized. We need much more efficient, transparent, compliance, friendly, tax regime and that is given. If you want to raise the turnover, raise the volume, raise the GDP. That is what this is all about. The Treasury Secretary is not allowed to make any changes in taxes.”
What really went wrong? Dr. PBJ. is certainly not a novice and certainly one of the most capable and experienced people having been a veteran Central Banker who had been seconded to the Treasury from as far back as during Finance Minister Ronnie de Mel’s time and retained by virtually all governments up to the last regime in various capacities. He managed the economy as the Treasury Secretary during the costly fourth phase of the Eelam conflict at a time Western powers sought to undermine the economy in a bid to throw a lifeline to the sinking Tigers.
CBSL Chief sets the record straight
Those who carefully listened to the Governor of the Central Bank Dr. Nandalal Weerasinghe when he appeared before parliamentary watchdogs, namely Committee on Public Finance and Committee on Public Enterprises on May 24, and May 25, 2022, respectively, and his unparalleled attack on the political party system, also in Parliament, on August 31, 2022, clearly explained the circumstances leading to the current crisis. The August 31, 2022 speech must have been the strongest delivered by an official at any level in Parliament since independence (Change catastrophic strategies or face consequences – CB warns Parliament, The Island, Sept 07, 2022)
Unfortunately, political parties, represented in Parliament, and the media, didn’t pay sufficient attention to Dr. Weerasinghe’s views. Having perused the SC ruling on the economic collapse, the writer is of the view the SC judgment has justified the CBSL Governor’s declarations in Parliament over a year ago. The Island reported Dr. Weerasinghe’s bombshell revelation in a lead story, headlined ‘MR, ministers, CBSL Governor, Dr. PBJ ignored IMF warnings’ with strapline ‘Dr. Jayamaha says Monetary Board acted regardless of strong opposition’ (The Island, May 26,2022)
Dr. Weerasinghe didn’t mince his words when he declared that the government slashed taxes regardless of IMF advice and also disregarded the CB’s warning regarding the urgent need to secure IMF assistance
The GR government ignored Dr. Weerasinghe’s disclosure. At the time, the outspoken official appeared before the two parliamentary committees in late May 2022, Gotabaya Rajapaksa remained the President though the SLPP was in disarray in the wake of UNP leader Ranil Wickremesinghe receiving the premiership. The Gajaba Regiment frontline combat veteran remained confident of overcoming the crisis. Dr. Weerasinghe’s declarations at watchdog committees didn’t receive the attention they deserved. By the time Dr. Weerasinghe lambasted the political party system on Aug 31, 2022 in Parliament, Gotabaya Rajapaksa was overseas, having fled the country.
Had the SLPP genuinely felt the need to take remedial measures, it could have invited the Opposition to head a Special Parliamentary Select (PSC) Committee to probe the origins of the crisis and to make recommendations. Instead, the SLPP did absolutely nothing. Finally, the Wickremesinghe-Rajapaksa government appointed a PSC in July, 2023, 15 months after Dr. Weerasinghe’s disclosure and a year after Wickremesinghe election by Parliament as the President to complete the balance portion of the ousted President Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s term.
Now that the Supreme Court has declared its verdict, the PSC is irrelevant. The PSC that has been rejected by the main Opposition SJB serves no purpose. The party leaders without delay should reach a consensus on the PSC, headed by SLPP General Secretary and Attorney-at-Law Sagara Kariyawasam.
Perhaps, Prof. Charitha Herath, who has undertaken special assignment to produce a report on the economic ruination, should reconsider his project. The SC judgment must compel both the government and the Opposition to study the verdict.
SLPP lawmaker Namal Rajapaksa revealed how naïve he was when he recently declared that the Parliament is the best place to discuss the economic crisis and remedial measures. Had he listened to Dr. Weerasinghe’s declarations in Parliament in May and August last year, the former Sports Minister wouldn’t have said so. Lawmaker Rajapaksa should realize that having squandered previous opportunities to address the issues at hand, now the matter is certainly out of its hands. All political parties in Parliament should take the SC verdict seriously and appropriately address the issues raised therein.
The way forward
Let us hope all political parties represented in the current Parliament realize that they cannot overcome the crisis by political spin. The overall political environment is bleak. The continuing crisis in Sri Lanka Cricket (SLC) has exposed all with accusations and counter accusations directed at the executive, legislature and the judiciary.
The Wickremesinghe-Rajapaksa government’s response to Opposition backed Sports Minister Roshan Ranasinghe’s offensive against SLC has bared the fragility of even the parliamentary system. The SLC fiasco exposed all. Those who benefited from SLC ended with egg on their face. One thing is clear. The government hasn’t learnt from the catastrophic destruction suffered by the SLPP as a result of the SC judgment. The Supreme Court has given the public fresh hope that politicians and powerful officials aren’t immune to punitive actions. There is hope the SC judgment will strengthen the rule of law. Perhaps, the powerful attack on an utterly corrupt set up that destroyed the country may compel the executive, legislature and judiciary to take a fresh look at the situation on the ground.
The judgment underscored that no one is above the law. Dr. Harsha de Silva, MP, is on record as having said that those who had been faulted by the SC should be deprived of their civic rights. The former UNP State Minister is of the view that strongest possible measures should be taken against them all. The Anti-Corruption Movement affiliated to the SJB recently, in writing, requested President Ranil Wickremesinghe to suspend payment of pension, other facilities, security and vehicles to former Presidents Gotabaya Rajapaksa and Mahinda Rajapaksa. The SJB also asked for suspension of pension to others named by the SC.
But, the breakaway UNP group SJB must be reminded that it owed an explanation regarding three matters namely (1) Treasury bond scams perpetrated in Feb 2015 and March 2016 during the Yahapalana administration (2015-2019). Some of those MPs and several defeated candidates at the last parliamentary polls conducted in August 2020 actively supported bond racketeers. The two massive bond scams caused by that government is yet legally unresolved. For example, then Finance Minister Ravi Karunanayake who was termed by some overseas publication as the best such Minister, claimed, before the Presidential Commission of Inquiry that probed the first bond scam, he was not aware who paid for the costly penthouse he and his family occupied at the time in Colombo.
(2) Why as much as USD 12.5 bn were borrowed from the costly international bond market during the Yahapalana administration for inexplicable reasons without the country at the time either being in any financial crisis or undertaking any new major development projects.
(3) Finally what did the Yahapalana government intended to achieve by doing away with time-tested Exchange Control Act of 1953. The UNP and the SLFP voted for a new Foreign Exchange Act in 2017 that had been brazenly exploited by unscrupulous exporters and others. SJB leader Sajith Premadasa and two of its experts on economic matters Dr. Harsha de Silva and Eran Wickremarathe remained conveniently silent on this issue. It would be pertinent to mention that the controversial Bill was presented in late July 2017 by the then Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe though he didn’t vote. Parliament approved the new law with 94 votes whereas 18 voted against. Others skipped the vote. That decision alone has enabled flight of capital ever since and still not corrected. So no wonder unscrupulous exporters for instance have parked abroad billions of dollars that should have been brought back to the country. So the above could be termed as one of the root causes of the debt crisis that the country is yet trying to extricate itself out of.
Midweek Review
Ranil in Head-to-Head controversy

Former Commander-in-Chief and ex-President Ranil Wickremesinghe’s inadequate defence of the war-winning armed forces underscores the failure on the part of successive governments to address war crimes allegations. Wickremesinghe’s responses highlighted Sri Lanka’s collective and pathetic failure to defend its armed forces. The country missed an opportunity to question the absurdity of UN war crimes accusations based on claims by persons who couldn’t be questioned till 2030 as a result of shocking confidentiality clauses in the Panel of Experts’ report. Imagine a one sided trial where you cannot cross examine your accusers for 30 long years. No wonder much of the world is increasingly demanding urgent reforms in the United Nations as much of its system is rigged by the collective West since its formation.
By Shamindra Ferdinando
Al Jazeera’s Head-to-Head presenter Mehdi Hasan and former President Ranil Wickremesinghe, in an interview recorded in February but released last week, dealt with the conclusion of the war against the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) in 2009 without referring to the origins of terrorism here, while prolonging the narrative we were the bad guys throughout and not a word about the LTTE and how it terrorised this country for about 30 years.
The chosen audience at London’s Conway Hall, too, conveniently refrained from bringing up accountability on the part of India in sponsoring terrorism, beginning early ’80s. The issue is would there have been Mullivaikkal bloodshed if India didn’t step in here to pacify Tamil Nadu sentiments? Separatist terrorism received extensive backing in the West and there couldn’t be a better example than the LTTE being allowed to operate its International Secretariat in London, even after it assassinated former Indian Premier Rajiv Gandhi in May 1991, while campaigning in Tamil Nadu.
The discussion covered heavy defeat suffered by Wickremesinghe at the last year’s presidential election, still unfinished investigations into the 2019 Easter bombings, the failure on his part to prosecute the Rajapaksas, as well as why punitive measures weren’t taken against Gotabaya Rajapaksa, and unleashing the military on Aragalaya immediately after Parliament elected him President, in July 2022.
Hasan had conveniently forgotten that Wickremesinghe earlier threw his weight behind Aragalaya . Harin Fernando, who had been a SJB member of Parliament at the time of the Aragalaya, is on record as having said that Wickremesinghe directed him to join the campaign to oust Gotabaya Rajapaksa. One-time UNP MP Prof. Ashu Marasinghe, too, disclosed the UNP’s role in Aragalaya.
UK-born British-American broadcaster Hasan aggressively pushed Wickremesinghe on the accountability issues while the UNP leader, at least ended up defending General Shavendra Silva, the wartime General Officer Commanding (GoC) of the celebrated 58 Division (former Task Force 1) accused by the US and UN of perpetrating war crimes without providing any evidence.
Wickremesinghe should have exploited the reference made by the audience to the 1983 violence directed at the Tamil community to remind the world of the events leading to the unprecedented riots. Let me stress that no right thinking person would condone targeting civilians, under any circumstances. However, the country wouldn’t have erupted in July 1983 if not for the Indian military training Tamil terrorist groups and for some inexplicable reason, most probably out of fear, the failure on the part of JRJ to nip the riots in the bud. There were also some extreme elements of the UNP, led by its notorious trade union arm JSS, that perpetrated some of the violence. Some in the police, too, played a part in encouraging rioters, often to make a killing for themselves by taking part of the looted items. President Jayewardene even failed to address the issue for several days. The 1983 riots should be always examined, taking into consideration how the Indian trained LTTE terrorists successfully attacked an Army patrol at Thinnaweli, Jaffna. Of the 14-man contingent, only one survived. There had never been such a devastating attack on the Army, though there were sporadic small arms attacks on police.
Strangely, Hasan and Wickremesinghe discussed war crimes, atrocities and war-related allegations without once referring to the war waged by the Indian Army in the Northern and Eastern regions as if Indians were sacred cows. The audience, too, remained silent. Those who had been demanding accountability on the part of Sri Lanka never once questioned India’s culpability or the innumerable acts of terrorism resorted to by the LTTE, probably taking more Tamil lives, especially those of its rivals and moderate Tamils, who dared to speak up, than the number of security forces personnel and innocent Sinhalese civilians it killed. The fact that India suffered 1,300 officers and men killed and nearly 3,000 others wounded in encounters with the LTTE during July 1987-March 1990 deployment of its euphemistically called Indian Peace Keeping Force here proved the massive security crisis New Delhi helped to create here.
Have you ever heard of anyone seeking an explanation from New Delhi for the 1988 PLOTE (People’s Liberation Organization of Tamil Eelam) raid on the Maldives? Indian trained PLOTE cadres carried out the sea-borne operation, targeting the then Maldivian leader Maumoon Abdul Gayoom at the behest of influential Maldivian Abdulla Luthufee. Would Hasan, born to parents from Hyderabad, and nine at the time of the PLOTE raid, dared to question India’s culpability. We haven’t heard anyone demanding to know the identities of those who perished in the failed Maldivian operation or Sri Lankan Tamils killed in India after the assassination of its one-time Premier Rajiv Gandhi by a teenage suicide bomber in Tamil Nadu.
Seasoned politician Wickremesinghe could have taken advantage of the Head-to-Head ‘show’ to set the record straight in the presence of Frances Harrison, former BBC-Sri Lanka correspondent, Director of International Truth and Justice Project and author of ‘Still Counting the Dead: Survivors of Sri Lanka’s Hidden War,’ and Dr. Madura Rasaratnam, Executive Director of PEARL (People for Equality and Relief in Lanka), that was formed in 2005 in the run-up to the Eelam War IV (2006 August to 2009 May). The other panelist was former UK and EU MP and Wickremesinghe’s presidential envoy, Niranjan Joseph de Silva Deva Aditya whose interventions didn’t help Wickremesinghe at all. Aditya’s declaration towards the tail end of the 49-minute programme that Wickremesinghe caused a devastating split in the LTTE, in 2003, during Oslo arranged talks, seemed absurd.
Addressing a hastily arranged press conference in Colombo, Wickremesinghe alleged that the husband of Executive Director, PEARL and senior lecturer at City University of London Dr. Madura Rasaratnam, had been an associate of LTTE theoretician Anton Balasingham. Wickremesinghe asked her to correct him if he was wrong. It would have been better if Wickremesinghe reminded that the late Balasingham had been a British citizen and his Australian-born wife Adele, who promoted recruitment of child soldiers and appeared in LTTE ‘uniform’ and garlanded LTTE female soldiers with their trade mark cyanide capsule, which they always carried around their necks, as they passed out after undergoing training for propaganda purposes. She is now living in the UK, so perhaps Al Jazeera can interview Adele about her sordid role in marching those girls, many of them being underage, to a certain gory death, especially in the event of being captured, as they had been ordered by the LTTE to bite their cyanide capsules.
Hasan accused the Sri Lankan military of depriving the Tamil people of food, medicine and other basic essentials during the war. Unfortunately, former president and six-time Premier Wickremesinghe pathetically failed to counter often repeated lies. Had Wickremesinghe perused the UN Secretary General’s Panel of Experts (PoE) report (read Darusman report) released in 2011, he could have comfortably defended the war-winning military. The UN report acknowledged that the ICRC (International Committee for Red Cross)-run ships evacuated the wounded and the WFP (World Food Programme) sent food to Puthumathalan until the very end. Though the programme is headlined Head-to Head, our ex-President pathetically failed to counter Hasan with credible answers on one-sided questions raised by the interviewer.
Forgotten Lord Naseby’s disclosure
It would be pertinent to mention that Wickremesinghe’s UNP never backed our fighting the Eelam War IV. The UNP quite confidently thought the LTTE could never be defeated, militarily. Actually, the UNP humiliated the military and questioned Lt. Gen. Sarath Fonseka’s suitability to lead the Army. One of its top rung Ministers, the late Mangala Samaraweeer,a even claimed in public that Fonseka was not fit even to lead the Salvation Army, that would have been a case of USAID money disbursed underhand to people like him, working overtime.
Hasan accusing Wickremesinghe of defending the military and the Rajapaksas seemed ridiculous against the backdrop of the latter’s treacherous co-sponsorship of an accountability resolution against one’s own security forces at the Geneva-based United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) by his government.
Then Premier Wickremesinghe teamed up with Yahapalana President Maithripala Sisisena to betray the warwinning military. In line with a backdoor agreement with the US and Tamil National Alliance (TNA), the Yahapalana government agreed to establish hybrid war crimes mechanism to investigate alleged war crimes.
The former President could have used Lord Naseby’s disclosure of confidential wartime British High Commission dispatches from Colombo to question Hasan and the audience on war dead. Both British diplomatic cables and a UN report that had dealt with war dead placed the figure between 7,000 and 8,000 whereas the PoE estimated 40,000 dead. Wickremesinghe couldn’t have been unaware of Lord Naseby’s revelation and the much discussed Colombo based US Defence Attaché Colonel Lawrence Smith’s declaration at the first ever Colombo Defence seminar, in 2011, regarding claims of planned surrender by a section of the LTTE. The writer was present at the event when Smith responded to questions raised by Maj. Gen. Ashok Mehta, who had served as the Indian commander in charge of the Barricaloa-Ampara sector during the 1987-1988 period.
“Hello, may I say something to a couple of questions raised. I’ve been the Defence Attaché here at the US Embassy since June 2008. Regarding the various versions of events that came out in the final hours and days of the conflict — from what I was privileged to hear and to see, the offers to surrender that I am aware of seemed to come from the mouthpieces of the LTTE — Nadesan, KP — people who weren’t and never had really demonstrated any control over the leadership or the combat power of the LTTE.
“So their offers were a bit suspect anyway, and they tended to vary in content hour by hour, day by day. I think we need to examine the credibility of those offers before we leap to conclusions that such offers were in fact real.
“And I think the same is true for the version of events. It’s not so uncommon in combat operations, in the fog of war, as we all get our reports second, third and fourth hand from various commanders at various levels that the stories don’t seem to all quite match up.
“But I can say that the version presented here so far in this is what I heard as I was here during that time. And I think I better leave it at that before I get into trouble”, he said.
No point in blaming Wickremesinghe for not exploiting such available information in the public domain when the warwinning team (read Rajapaksa governments) shamefully failed to mount an effective counter attack. The Rajapaksas were always in denial mode and never really wanted to address issues in a methodical way. Instead of using all available information to mount an effective defence, the Rajapaksa government squandered millions of USD for propaganda efforts in the US.
Wickremesinghe should have mentioned before the Conway Hall WikiLeaks revelations pertained to the war. WikiLeaks revealed a US dispatch that quoted ICRC Head of Operations for South Asia Jacques de Maio as having told US Ambassador in Geneva, Clint Williamson, though there had been serious violations of International Humanitarian Law, there was no genocide.
Perhaps, one of the most significant declarations that had been made by de Maio was that the Army actually could have won the military battle faster with higher civilian casualties, yet chose a slower approach which led to a greater number of Sri Lankan military deaths. Obviously Wickremesinghe hadn’t been aware of developments he should have been conversant with and as a result the former President couldn’t hit back hard.
How could Yahapalana Premier Wickremesinghe fail to mention two mega lies that had been propagated during his tenure, but subsequently exposed? High profile accusations regarding Mannar mass graves accepted no less a person than UN Human Rights Chief Michelle Bachelet and the then Northern Province Chief Minister C.V. Wigneswaran’s claim of the Army poisoning over 100 LTTE cadres in custody proved to be nothing but lies.
The Fonseka factor
Wickremesinghe could have mentioned conscription of children by the LTTE and indiscriminate use of women in high intensity battles, particularly in the Northern theatre. The ex-President failed to do so. Perhaps, Wickremesinghe should have reminded the Conway Hall crowd that the people of the Northern and Eastern Provinces had clearly disregarded unsubstantiated war crimes accusations by overwhelmingly voting for retired General Sarath Fonseka at the 2010 presidential election. Although Fonseka lost by a staggering 1.8 mn votes, he comfortably won eight predominately Tamil-speaking administrative districts, including Jaffna, just nine months after the conclusion of the war.
War crimes allegations ended up in a wastepaper basket the day the Tamil National Alliance (TNA), one-time LTTE mouthpiece, declared its support for Fonseka. Against the backdrop of the TNA backing Fonseka, whose Army had been accused of human rights violations on a massive scale, often repeated allegations seemed untenable.
Wickremesinghe cannot, under any circumstances, forget that episode as it was his project that brought UNP-TNA-JVP-SLMC and CWC together in 2010. WikiLeaks exposed US dispatches from Colombo pertaining to the US hand in the political project.
We haven’t heard of PEARL or any other organization with similar vision requesting the LTTE to release civilians held during the last phase of the fighting as a human shield by the besieged LTTE. Having forced over 300,000 people to accompany retreating LTTE units, they used them as human shields. The bottom line is that the Diaspora remained blind to civilian sufferings as long as they felt the LTTE could deliver a knockout blow to the Army on the Vanni east front. Canada-based veteran journalist, D. B. S Jayaraj, then considered as an authority on the conflict by many, confidently predicted, in late Dec. 2008, an impending devastating LTTE counter attack and the rolling back of the Army. Then Defence Secretary Gotabaya Rajapaksa, who had been a frontline combat officer during his entire military career till he retired in the early ’90s , told the writer at the time that the LTTE was not in a position to reverse the situation. Within two weeks, the Army overran Kilinochchi, the headquarters of the LTTE. That was the end of the story.
Wickremesinghe and none of those seated at the Conway Hall ever anticipated the fall of Kilinochchi in early January 2009 and the total collapse of the Tiger fighting formations, within five months.
RW’s response to Aragalaya
Hasan questioned Wickremesinghe regarding his response to Aragalaya as well as what was known as the Batalanda torture camp that existed in the late’ 80s.
Hasan never sought Wickremesinghe’s opinion on the alleged US role in Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s ousting, in spite of recent US declarations about USAID interventions in many parts of the world and accusations the US intervened in support of Aragalaya. Interestingly, Hasan found fault with Wickremesinghe for ordering the military to restore law and order while the former President recalled massive destruction caused by Aragalaya and the bid to storm Parliament. Wickremesinghe reminded Hasan how Aragalaya activists killed SLPP parliamentarian Amarakeerthi Atukorale at Nittambuwa. Atukorale was the last MP killed in violence. The LTTE and the JVP killed over 50 serving and ex-parliamentarians and many lesser politicians.
Batalanda operation, whether we like it or not, had been in line with President JRJ counter insurgency strategy at a time the JVP threatened to overwhelm the UNP-led dictatorial government, taking advantage of the Indo-Lanka accord and the deployment of the Indian Army here to inspire violence. Countries that had been threatened by terrorism adopted controversial measures such as ‘extraordinary rendition’ (apprehending/kidnapping suspected terrorists and detain them in countries where torture is widely practiced. The US-led operation received the backing of many countries, including the UK and Sri Lanka).
The second JVP insurrection had to be crushed, whatever the consequences were, though President JRJ should be held responsible for the catastrophic political measures that plunged the country into turmoil. Wickremesinghe had been a member of JRJ’s Cabinet and should be held collectively responsible for the mayhem the then President caused.
Proscription of the JVP in the run-up to the 1982 presidential election and the postponement of parliamentary election that was to be held in 1983 to 1989 caused resentment among all communities and set the stage for terrorist campaigns in the North and the South. The UNP that had caused so much political destruction is today represented in Parliament by just one MP (CWC member as the party contested under the Elephant symbol).
Wickremesinghe should be grateful to Hasan for not asking him to explain how under his watch the UNP deteriorated to such an extent that it was reduced to zero in Parliament. It would have been better if Hasan asked Wickremesinghe to explain why the Yahapalana administration from 2015 to 2019 borrowed billions of dollars from the international bond market, at high interest, and contributed to the economic bankruptcy of the country in 2022.
Midweek Review
Guru Geethaya:

A Melancholic Song for Public Education and Social Enlightenment
by Liyanage Amarakeerthi
Guru Geethaya , the song of a teacher, the Sinhala version of Chingiz Aitmatov’s famous novel, The First Teacher, is one of the most inspirational novels among Sinhala readers. Rendered to Sinhala by the veteran translator, Dedigama V. Rodrigo, the novel entered the Sinhala literary scene through the admirable efforts of the Progress Publishers of the former Soviet Union. And like many other Russian and Soviet classics, Guru Geethaya was available at a cheap price. Progress Publishers must be commended for that service. With the fall of the Soviet Union, one of the phenomenal entities that shaped our literary knowledge and taste, the Progress Publishers fell apart. Now, those Russian classics are not easily available, certainly not at an affordable price. Perhaps, a separate essay must be written about the progressive contribution that the Progress Publishers made to enrich Sinhala literary culture. And of course, those Russian classics were translated into Tamil as well.
Sinhala film of a Soviet Novel
Upali Gamlath has made a Sinhala film out of Guru Geethaya, and after waiting in line for many years, the film was recently released. It was heartening to see a sizable audience attended an evening show of Guru Geethaya last weekend at Kandy. I came to know that the film was doing well. Guru Geethaya, the film, regardless of its quality as a work of art, must continue to attract audiences, and it has potential to contribute to the rebuilding of the Sinhala film industry.
As a work of art, I have mixed feelings about Guru Geethaya. After all, it is the first film by the director. Here and there, there are glimpses of cinematic excellence. The actors in the leading role make an admirable effort to create the Duishen and Altynai, one of the best-known fictional couples in the Sinhala literary world. The Sinhala film version of the novel focuses mostly on the latent romantic relationship between the central couple. When Duishen arrives in this remote Kirgiz village in 1924 to establish a school, Altynai was just fourteen years old, and Duishen is, perhaps, in his late twenties. Just seven years after the Russian Revolution, the Soviet Union is in the process of propagating modern education even to distant villages in massive Soviet Russia. This idealist young teacher from the communist party wants the children of these backward hinterlands to receive modern education. When he arrives there, both parents and children of these mountains are illiterate and trapped in a tribal mode of existence. If there is anything called ‘education’ they have received, it is the religious dogma passed on to them by Islamic mullahs.
Youthful Idealism
In an extremely patriarchal world, a fourteen-year-old girl, an orphan, living under the oppression of distant relatives, Altynai has no hope for a happy future. And there is no hope for modern education. Right at that moment, Duishen arrives at the village as an agent of the Russian revolution and as a harbinger of revolutionary modernity. He is passionate about establishing a school there. By the third decade of the twentieth century, education is a right, and every child born into this world must be educated. In Soviet Russia, educating the Russian population was a goal of the revolution. ‘Abolition of illiteracy’ was a revolutionary goal often articulated by Lenin himself.
Among those village kids, only Altynai can share the idealism of Duishen. She has never known a school. But she instinctively knows that education is something desirable and the only way to get out of the trap of ignorance and poverty. In that male-dominated world ruled by Mullah-ethics, she is sold to be the second wife of a much older man. Duishen must liberate the girl from those uncultured men before she is sent away to Moscow for an education institute newly established by the Soviet government. The teacher manages to get her away those men but not before she was abducted and raped.
This slim novel, less than one hundred pages, captures the essence of what the agents of revolution had to face when modernising distant Soviet lands. Of course, they had to engage in this process of social development while the liberal West led by the US, and the religious West, led by the Catholic church, were unitedly working to defeat the revolution. Ironically, the Russian revolution shared many ideals of Western modernity. For example, the liberal West could have supported what people like Duishen were doing in these remote Kirgiz villages in the 1920s. But geopolitics did not work that way, especially during the cold war. It may be cold, but it was certainly ‘war’, and the West was so sure of it. We may have all kinds of issues about the brutality of Stalinist Russia, but the early idealism of the Russian revolution represented in this slim novel, The First Teacher or, Guru Geethaya, has been so inspirational for many of us in the developing world.
Growing up as a son of a working-class family in rural Sri Lanka, I would not have become a professor at a university without the free education system of our country. When I first read Guru Geethaya as a teenager in the mid 1980s, I literally fell in love with the novel. Of course, like many others, I too idealised the teacher, Duishen. Many years later, I learned that there were greater novels. Even among Russian novels, this is not the greatest. I would rate Doctor Zhivago, a critique of revolutionary violence and idealism, much higher than Guru Geethaya. Aitmatov himself has written greater novels- many of which have been translated into Sinhala. But people adore this slim novel about a devoted teacher. Perhaps, the love for our free education system is unconsciously projected onto Duishen. Sinhala people often liken good schoolteachers to Duishen.
As I said earlier, the focus of Upali Gamlath’s film version of the novel is on the unexpressed romantic love between Duishen and Altynai. In the novel as a man of revolution and as an adult, Dushen controls his emotions about the pretty and intelligent Altynai. In the Sinhala film, his love is much more pronounced though never expressed in words. In the novel, Altynai from her Moscow school writes a letter to Duishen expressing her love. We do not get to know whether he ever received it. By this time, World War II was around the corner, or the war had already arrived, and the counter-revolutionary forces in Russia were also creating troubles. Stalinist state machine is doing all the bad things that we now know. So, Duishen must have been preoccupied with other things. Or being an ideal teacher, he did not want to accept her love.
Creative Readings and a slim novel
It may be slim in terms of number of pages, but Aitmatov’s novel offers so much to an inventive reader. One could even argue that it is implicitly critical of the Soviet education endeavor. For example, with all due respect to the idealism and kindness of Duishen, he is an extremely limited first teacher. Except for his idealist loyalty to the communist party, he does not have any serious idea of education. In that sense, the novel can be read as an implicit critique of the kind of education the Soviet government established in distant villages. Except for just one girl, we do not know how many others were freed from illiteracy. During much of the early decades of the twentieth century, Lenin wrote extensively about the need for ‘proper education.’ Many of those writings have been collected as On Public Education (1975), again, by Progress Publishers. Writing to safeguard the revolution, by education Lenin meant, a kind of indoctrination aimed at liberating people from ‘bourgeois ideologies’ and getting them under the dictatorship of one party. For me, it is an extremely limited understanding of education. But when he firmly believed that “Russia is the country assigned by history the role of trailblazer of the socialist revolution(p. 77)”, it was easy for Lenin to see education as a huge propaganda programme intended to establish the dominance of a single party, by extension the dominance of a single ideology. When Duishen starts his school in the Kirgiz village, he pastes a photo of Lenin on the wall. There Duishen is an instrument of spreading the ideology of a single party. But with all those ideological limits, the revolutionary government was trying to make the Russian population literate. In a short essay called, “About our schools” written in 1913, included in the book mentioned above, Lenin explains how badly funded and poorly administered Russian schools were under the Tsar administration and religious authorities. It was clear that for the Tsar regime illiteracy was a tool of ruling. The role of teachers such as Duishen needs to be appreciated in that context.
By now history has given Guru Geethaya its proper place. It is a simple, short novel, about a teacher who attempted to live an ideal life within his own historical context.
In the novel, Aitmatov does not tell us what Dushen teaches. The content of that education is not known to us. Reading the novel now, and of course watching the movie, exactly one hundred years after Duishen arrived in that village, we are experienced and theoretically equipped enough to see beyond the context of the novel’s original context. The Sinhala movie, however, does not provide us with such rich artistic experience.
Saving the Girl/Women
When the revolutionary guards arrive in this remote village to assist Duishen, Altynai has been abducted and raped. If the education system was better planned the girl would have had a much more dignified life without going through that humiliation. Her traumatic experience is so much that she does not return to her village until after she becomes a professor, and she is invited to attend a function.
The Sinhala film industry seems to be making a comeback. And it needs a wide variety of movies to regularly attract a diverse audience. In that sense, I am more than happy that Guru Geethaya is doing well. At the same time, in the context of recent political change, where the need for revitalising our free education system is voiced from many quarters, this film is a melancholic song for an uplifting education. Not to get everyone under the ideological will of a single party, our education must be one that liberates us from all forms of dominance and authority.
Though written in 1962, the novel is set in 1924, which was also the year of Lenin’s death -an incident beautifully described in the novel. There he is represented as a visionary man who wanted to create a better future for these rural children. Within a very different context those who initiated the free education system in Sri Lanka also envisioned a better future for us. That is perhaps why Guru Geethaya has been a beloved piece of literature that draws crowds even to its film version.
Midweek Review
Her Story and His Come Together

By Lynn Ockersz
She and He have stood their ground,
In factories and farms down the ages,
Braving the lashings of manor and nature,
Invisible yet radiating the Dignity of Labour,
Giving selflessly the Bread of the nations,
And in March when She is celebrated,
For very good reason too, I assert,
It is apt to revisit the timeless lesson,
That in the matter of feeding the masses,
Her Story and His come together
-
Foreign News1 day ago
Search continues in Dominican Republic for missing student Sudiksha Konanki
-
News5 days ago
Alfred Duraiappa’s relative killed in Canada shooting
-
Opinion7 days ago
Insulting SL armed forces
-
Features4 days ago
Richard de Zoysa at 67
-
Editorial6 days ago
Ghosts refusing to fade away
-
Features4 days ago
SL Navy helping save kidneys
-
Midweek Review5 days ago
Ranil in Head-to-Head controversy
-
Features6 days ago
The Gypsies…one year at a time