Connect with us

Features

Inauspicious start and getting into my stride at the Victorian Bar

Published

on

Excerpted from a Life in the Law by Nimal Wikramanayake

I drove into work on Monday, 13 October 1972 trembling with excitement. I walked into Owen Dixon Chambers and took the lift up to the third floor to DB’s chambers. DB took me next door and introduced me to a lady barrister, Lyn Opas, in a little dog-box next to his chambers. Next he took me across the corridor and introduced me to a young barrister by the name of John Coldrey. Coldrey had a criminal practice and was later to become the Director of Public Prosecutions, and still later he was appointed to the Supreme Court. Coldrey asked whether I would like to have a cup of coffee and suggested we go up to the lounge on the thirteenth floor.

He was a delightful man with an impish sense of humour. As we walked into the lounge the buzz of conversation suddenly stopped and all the barristers in that room turned around to stare at me. Not a word was spoken as John went up to the servery and ordered two cups of coffee. We sat down and the conversation resumed.

A number of barristers clustered around me and asked me what I was doing there. I told them that I had come to the Victorian Bar to give it some colour. This little quip of mine elicited guffaws of laughter. Coldrey and I then went back down to the third floor and I sat at my little desk. Peter Heerey had arranged for me to sign the Bar Roll on October 26 so that I was now a member of the educated unemployed for the next fortnight.

In the first few weeks, almost every single barrister I saw stopped me to ask me who I was and what I was doing in Owen Dixon Chambers. My stock reply was that I had come to the Bar to give it some colour, but I had to stop my little quip because it elicited some rather snide racist comments.

In the meantime, I was of considerable assistance to DB; having been an advocate/barrister for twelve years, I was extremely skilled in drafting legal documents. I whiled away my time drawing Statements of Claim in the Supreme Court, Particulars of Demand in the County Court, interrogatories and answers to interrogatories.

Mr Nkrumah

November was soon upon me and I sat at my desk for the first two weeks, looking longingly at my telephone and waiting for it to ring. When it did ring suddenly it was my former neighbour, Peter Allaway. While I was a solicitor, we rented a house in Jordan Street, Malvern, but once I made my decision to go to the Bar we moved into a small flat in Myamin Street, Armadale. Peter had been my neighbour in Jordan Street. He had a motor car collision case, or what is commonly called a “crash-and-bash” case.

Peter’s client was IPEC, a large firm of removalists. One of its drivers had been involved in a three-car collision and Peter retained me to appear for the driver, who was the second defendant in the Magistrates’ Court at Williamstown. Peter duly delivered the brief and I spent many an hour preparing it. I would show these young Australian barristers my mettle.

I got up the next morning and left home at 8.30 am for Williamstown. My knowledge of Australian roads was extremely limited as I had been but a year in Melbourne. I had pored over my Gregory’s Street Directory the previous night. Now I wandered up and down the Nepean highway for a couple of hours and was hopelessly lost. I finally arrived at a ferry and went across on it, arriving at the Williamstown Court at 11 am. I rushed into the Magistrates’ Court and learned to my chagrin that my case had been called and was about to be heard. I rushed in and took my seat at the Bar table when two young barristers moved across and sat on either side of me.

I was nonplussed when the first one got up and marked his appearance. He was Peter Rattray and the second was John Tebbutt. After they had marked their appearance I marked my appearance. I had shortened my name to Wikrama when I went to the Bar, and the magistrate, Harry Boarder, asked me to spell my name. I said: W-I-K-R-A-M-A. The magistrate was a beady-eyed, pompous man who looked down at me and said, “Carry on, Mr Nkrumah” (Nkrumah was then the president of Ghana and I can assure you that I bore no resemblance to him.) I gently told the magistrate that my name was Wikrama and not Nkrumah.

His reply was, “That’s alright. Carry on, Mr Nkrumah.” This was my first experience of blatant racism in Australia. Rattray put his client in the box, led his evidence-in-chief, and counsel for the first defendant cross-examined him. I then got up to cross-examine to find that Rattray and Tebbutt each in turn objected to every question I put. Most of my questions were clearly admissible but the magistrate, Harry Boarder, joined in the exchanges. He upheld every single objection, yet most of the objections were completely and utterly frivolous.

The same thing happened when John Tebbutt put his client in the box. My cross-examination was interrupted by Rattray and Tebbutt’s objections. When I put my client in the witness box, these two young heroes objected to every single question I put. I was completely shattered at the end of this experience.

Of course, you can guess the inevitable. Rattray won 100 per cent, John Tebbutt’s client was exonerated and in addition received compensation from my client for his damage. Furthermore, my client was made liable to pay two sets of damages and two sets of costs. I was mortified. I walked out of court and told both these heroes that this would never happen to me again – and it never did.

I returned to my chambers and gave Peter Allaway the bad news. He was furious. I was about to have my dinner that evening when Peter burst into our little flat in Armadale. He was screaming and yelling at the top of his voice, and was uncontrollable. He told me that because of my incompetence and stupidity, he had lost an exceptionally good client, as IPEC was taking all its business away from him.

Explanations were useless, as Allaway refused to believe his client could in any way have been negligent. He promised me that he would never brief me again and that I should leave the Bar, as I was hopelessly and utterly incompetent. He stormed out of the flat leaving me speechless. What an inglorious beginning!

My brief fee in the Allaway case was $46 – my only income for November 1972 – an inauspicious beginning.

The Christmas vacation

The Christmas vacation was soon upon me as the courts, in my case the Magistrates’ Court, was closed for two weeks. DB had given me about forty briefs to work on during the summer vacation. I spent the next two weeks diligently working my way through them as Anna Maria had to work through January.

In that month, DB invited us home for dinner. We took chocolates for his four children. The youngest, little Willie, was two years old. He finished eating his slab of chocolate and stood beside me while I was having dinner. He kept staring at my hand which was resting on the arm of my chair. He suddenly leant forward, grabbed my hand and bit it, obviously thinking it was another piece of chocolate. I gave a loud yell and little Willie disappeared.

I returned to work in the first week of January and sat there twiddling my thumbs, as no solicitors delivered briefs to Gamin’s list. I worked through DB’s pleadings and gave my completed work to him when he returned to work on February 1. I got plenty of thanks but no money.The next few months were uneventful, save for the fact that volume one of Williams found its way back to my desk. I was writing in about $400 a month until the time came for me to end my reading.There were about 420 barristers at the Bar at that time and rooms were rare as hens’ teeth. I remember my friends, Peter Buchanan (now the late Mr Justice Buchanan of the Court of Appeal) and Clive Rosen sharing a little cubicle on the first floor in Owen Dixon Chambers.My friend Michael Croyle and I had coffee early in the month of April and he proudly told me that he had obtained a room in Equity Chambers. This is where Sir Eugene (“Pat”) Gorman comes into my story.

Sir Eugene Gorman

In 1952, Dad had brought us out to Australia on a holiday. His friends were aghast because Australia was regarded, as Ava Gardner once said, as “the end of the world” Dad said that he would like to see a place where no one else had been to, so we travelled to Australia on the Neptunia, a Lloyd Triestine vessel. It was a small boat, some 12,000 tonnes in weight, and it rolled badly. We spent three weeks in Melbourne because the Neptunia was to go on to Sydney, be refurbished, and return three weeks later. But the voyage was delightful, as we traveled first class and the service on board first class was unbelievable, second to none.Dad was vice-chairman of the Ceylon Bar Council. When he came to Australia he met two distinguished lawyers, Pat Gorman and Monahan KC, later Mr Justice Monahan of the Supreme Court of Victoria.

Ceylon was one of the richest countries in the world at that time. It was selling its rubber to China as no other country was trading with China. Tea was extremely expensive, costing one English pound for a pound of tea until our prime minister ruined the market in 1954.The stupid man went to England and when he expressed surprise at the price of tea, which he said should not have been one English pound, the price of tea fell to two shillings and sixpence a pound.

In addition, when malaria was virtually eradicated, the population started increasing in leaps and bounds. The final straw came when the government granted free education, which meant Ceylon became a third-world country. I refer to this debacle because Monahan KC was horrified at my father’s fees. He was charging fifty English guineas a day while Monahan was charging fifteen Australian pounds a day.

Pat Gorman and Dad became good friends and when he discovered that Dad was on the committee of the Ceylon Turf Club, he took him to the three race courses in Melbourne. They kept up their friendship over the years. When I decided to emigrate to Australia, Dad wrote to Pat Gorman and told him that I was coming to Australia.

Sir Eugene Gorman (known as Pat) was one of the great advocates at the Victorian Bar. He was born in 1892 and had a large and a lucrative practice. His boast was that he intended retiring at the age of fifty, but the war intervened so he went off to war and retired immediately after. I believe he was a general in the Australian Army and ran the race course in Egypt during the war.

He had large salubrious chambers on the third floor of Equity Chambers, and a sign on his door read: Nothing matters half as much in life, as you think it does.Whenever I went to see Pat Gorman he was seated behind his large desk in his large room puffing on a large Cuban cigar. He would greet me with great affection, but within a few minutes would start moaning about how badly off and poor he was. For the life of me I was at a loss to understand why his conversation always started off with his poor financial situation.

It was only after he died that the penny dropped. Gorman thought that every time I visited him I was coming there to “touch him for a load”. When I decided to go to the Bar, he invited two of his friends who were senior partners in two big city firms to dinner with me. Suffice it to say I never got a brief from them.He always threw a large party every Christmas and he invited me to his party when I was reading with DB in 1972. These parties were magnificent affairs, with champagne flowing freely, oysters and the rest.

Anyway, I decided to see Pat Gorman about getting a room in Equity Chambers. I remember going to see him one afternoon in April 1973. His secretary, Pam Nicholson, ushered me into his room and he greeted me with his customary warmth. I told him that there was a room falling vacant in Equity Chambers and asked whether it would be possible for me to have it.

He picked up the phone and dialled Sir James Tate, who then handled accommodation at the bar. Pat Gorman said, “James, I have young Nimal Wikramanayake here with me. I believe there is a room going in Equity Chambers on the second floor. I want you to give it to him” I did not hear what Sir James said but Pat put the phone down, looked up at me and said: “Sonny, the room is yours” This was, I might say with some modesty, the only underhand thing I have ever done in my life. To this day Michael Croyle does not know how he lost his room. Mick died after I began this writing.

I would like to tell you about an interesting incident that happened during the final months of my reading period. It is slightly risque and un-Australian but still amusing. DB decided to take me for a drink to his club, the Victorian Club. It was in Queen Street and the subject of the “Great Bookie Robbery” a few years later. We got there shortly after five pm and joined a large group of about 15 people.

There was a short, florid Australian who appeared to take umbrage at my presence for he started relating racist Indian jokes, obviously under the impression that I was Indian. When he had finished relating his second anti-Indian joke, I asked the group whether I could have the floor and tell them a joke about the “New Australian”. They all agreed to let me have the floor, save for the florid Australian.

I told them that an Italian recently had been granted citizenship. He was excited about it and that evening he went to a pub close to his home, something he had never done before. He asked the bartender for an empty glass and then urinated into it and drank its contents. This created great interest among the members in the pub. He then left the pub with the members trailing behind him. He went back home and entered his garden through a side-gate, went to his fowl run and started choking a few of his hens to death. He then opened the back gate and went into a paddock where a cow was grazing peacefully. He went up to the cow, picked up its tail and put his ear to his rectum. At this stage the police were contacted and he was taken before the authorities for certification as being mentally unsound.

He was furious and said, “Why you arrest me? Me new Australian. Me go the pub, me drinks da piss, me screws da birds and then me listen to da bull-shit.’ This little anecdote was greeted with roars of laughter and the racist gentleman put his drink down and disappeared. I shouted to him to come back as I had a lot more jokes.



Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

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

Features

America at 250: Most unfitting President, Biggest World Cup Tournament

Published

on

Messi and Yamal to face each other in Sunday’s World Cup Final

The world’s oldest constitutional democracy turned 250 on the Fourth of July, two weeks ago. It is a rather quirky coincidence that in the 250th year of its largely successful existence, America should be having as its president the most unfitting person in history, and that in keeping with the American trait for mixing serious purposes with fun and play, it should also be hosting perhaps the largest edition of the World Cup Football Tournament. The triple coincidence – the anniversary, Trump presidency and the World Cup – is not without some meaning.

The essence of the Trump presidency has been to recast America in the mould of Trump’s own vulgar and outlandish presuppositions about who belongs in America and what the rest of the world owes to America. Internal exclusions and external isolation have always been a part of American history, but Trump’s project has been to make them America’s sole and permanent purpose. Make America great again by making it more intolerant and more imperfect, as opposed to pursuing the country’s founding purpose of striving towards a “more perfect union.”

Trump is also giving a new meaning to America’s exceptional isolationism by slashing immigration, deporting American residents whom he and his Maga cabal don’t like for the vilest of reasons, withdrawing from global agencies that America created and closing down American agencies providing global services, imposing tariffs on every country and deeming them as payment for America’s past generosity under weak presidents, and threatening neighbours with annexation while militarily attacking others.

2007: Lionel Messi holding baby Lamine Yamal

He got his nose bloodied after listening to Netanyahu and starting a fight with Iran, made a fool of himself by first announcing that he will provide safe passage to ships through the Strait of Hormuz and charge them 20% of their cargo value, and immediately withdrawing it after being told that it was a lamebrained and impractical idea. The Iranian Foreign Minister tweeted that it is a good approach but 20% is too high! The reality is that Iran has effectively closed the strait again, after Trump said his ceasefire with Iran is over, and there is nothing the might of America can do about it – thanks solely to Trump.

The world, not to mention America, are back to where it was soon after February 28. And Trump is back to February 28, with more attacks on Iran while telling Israel to keep out of it and hoping that Iran will soon come to the table. The Iranian regime is insisting that it is Trump and not Iran who will have to blink first again. For the rest of the world and the people of America, fuel and fertilizer prices are again rising along with the prices of goods and services that depend on them.

Meanwhile, the Fourth of July marking America’s 250th Anniversary of American independence has come and gone. Every year, Americans cheer and celebrate the Fourth of July as a civic festival in their local communities. Families take their children to Washington, Philadelphia, Gettysburg and other historical sites to learn and appreciate their history. The state hardly gets involved and there are no military parades or flights of fighter jets. Trump changed it last year by holding a military parade in Washington but it did not excite anyone. The army had to go to extraordinary lengths to protect the city roads from cracking up while parading its massive tanks. This year Trump’s efforts to turn the 250th anniversary celebration into a personal vanity affair spectacularly backfired and what was becoming a national damp squib. Not so ironically, it was rescued by the 2026 World Cup tournament that began on Thursday, June 11 and will end on Sunday, July 19.

World Cup Down to the Wire

The 23rd FIFA World Cup hosted by America, Mexico and Canada with matches played in 16 cities – 11 in the US, three in Mexico and two in Canada – became a significant occasion for the US. It provided an antidote to Trump’s vain and unsuccessful usurpation of the country’s 250th anniversary, even as it became an occasion to show the world that there is still much more likeable about America in spite of all the ugly MAGA makeover that Trump has been giving it from the White House.

What is unique about America is that it is the first and the only immigrant country to become a superpower in world history. An open door country with a melting pot ethos, America has consistently struggled at every stage of its evolution to defy the homogeneity of the privileged, and to celebrate across-the-board heterogeneity in every aspect of the human condition. If the purpose of Trump’s presidency has been to break this arc of American history, the World Cup became an occasion to demonstrate that the arc will continue in spite of Trump.

The World Cup was an eye opener to both resident Americans and visiting football worshippers. Except for the Olympics sporting events, competitive sports in America are dominated by (American) Football, Baseball, Basketball and (Ice) Hockey, and the competitions are all limited to American teams along with some Canadian teams especially in Hockey. The extent of any international connection is limited to allowing players from Central America and Japan for Baseball, and from Canada and Eastern Europe for Hockey. In other words, American notions of exclusivity and self-sufficiency seamlessly extend to the world of sports from the universe of politics and economics.

The arrival of the World Cup, 32 years after America hosted its first and only World Cup in 1994, was an eye opener to American sports fans and the general public. This was international sports at their doorstep and an occasion to live through the experience of witnessing the world’s best exponents of the game fiercely displaying their talents in friendly competitions. The visiting fans who thronged the games brought life and diversity and retail spin offs to the cities where the games were played. The visitors to a person, both players and fans, were enthralled by the magnificence of America’s sporting facilities and the range of amusement and entertainment the host cities offered.

The tournament also became a smorgasbord of different nationalisms from around the world but manifesting pride and passion in support of national football teams and not boastful belligerence about national militaries. The teams were also more equal on the pitch than their governments are at the UN podium. The better teams of the day won in the end but every team made each game as competitive as it could. Small countries from West Asia, Africa and little Atlantic islands went boot-to-boot with European and South American giants and kept everyone guessing until the final whistle. The really big Asian countries – China, India, Indonesia etc. – could not qualify for admission, while Asia’s two industrial giants – Japan and South Korea – acquitted themselves well even though they were unlucky not to go beyond the group stage.

The team that America fielded should not have been allowed to represent the country based on Trump’s executive negation of all DEI (Diversity, Equity and Inclusion) programs in government and in federal hiring. But it did and the US team would have made the 1960s promoters of cross-racial ‘rainbow’ alliances proud. Similar rainbow teams have become the norm of almost all West European countries and England.

Players of colour have become superstars in western football teams and have quite clearly internalized natal nationalism as opposed to being assimilated by them. They are all descendants of birthright citizens of the old empires, a legal tradition that is more universal and anterior to the abolition of slavery and the 14th Amendment in the US, as Chief Justice John Roberts reminded the Trump Administration in overturning its executive order to end the recognition of birthright citizenship in America. A practice that is shared by three dozen countries.

The US Team at the World Cup began as a promising outfit playing with flair and freewheeling style and could have gone as far as the Quarter Finals to play Spain. The team was undone prematurely by Trump’s sleazy intervention with FIFA bosses to suspend the Red Card penalty ban of a US player, Folarin Balogun, for a foul he had committed in an earlier match. Trump’s role and the penalty suspension created a public uproar and in the upshot an inspired Belgium trounced the US whose players performed very poorly perhaps under the weight of the embarrassment that their President had inflicted on them.

The World Cup tournament itself is now down to the final match, the 104th of the tournament, on Sunday, July 19th, between the reigning World Cup champions, Argentina, and Spain, the current Euro Cup holders. The match for the Third Place will be played on Saturday (July 18), between France who lost 0-2 to Spain in a surprisingly one-sided game, and England who went down in a heartbreaking 1-2 defeat to Argentina after leading 1-0 up till five minutes before the final whistle.

The French were the tournament’s cracking team till they came up against Spain who had been belabouring until then. The English team had bestirred all of England back home with their gritty win against Mexico in its national stadium full of 85,000 spectators, but once again came up short in the penultimate game.

The final between Argentina and Spain will feature the 39 year old Argentinian maestro, Lionel Messi, looking to win his second World Cup, and the 19 year old Spanish prodigy, Lamine Yamal. The football internet is abuzz with a 2007 photograph showing then 20 year old Messi carrying Yamal as an infant during a photo session in Barcelona, Spain, where Messi played club football. On Sunday, in New York/New Jersey, they will face each other in a spirited encounter for the biggest prize in sports.

by Rajan Philips

Continue Reading

Features

Two memorable excerpts from a former SLAF commander’s memoir

Published

on

Prime Minister Magaret Thatcher at opening of the Victoria dam. President Jayewardene, Mahaweli Minister Gamini Dissanayake and Finance Minister Ronnie de Mel are also in the picture

These two excerpts from the forthcoming book, To Survive As One Nation, One People by Air Chief Marshal Oliver Ranasinghe. A Retired Commander of the Sri Lanka Airforce makes interesting reading. The first is of a sudden demand on the SLAF for emergency air support for the besieged Jaffna Fort when the only available helicopters were being prepared for a VVIP flight for UK PM Margaret Thatcher and her husband, Mark.

The second deals with ferying PM Rajiv Gandhi and his wife Sonia to Katunayake after a naval rating had hit Gandhi with a rifle butt.

In April 1985, the UK’s first female prime minister visited Sri Lanka to ceremonially declare open the Victoria Dam and Power Station built with aid under the patronage of Queen Elizabeth II. The completion of the project was a significant milestone for the Accelerated Mahaweli Development Programme, with the power station having an installed capacity of 210 MW. Two helicopters were stationed at Air Force Headquarters premises to fly the VVIPs at 6:30 a.m. on 12 April to Victoria Dam. I was Commanding Officer of the Helicopter Wing and assigned to fly Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher and her husband.

However, at around noon on the day before the flight, I got a desperate call from the Joint Operations Command (JOC) requesting that 250 troops be airlifted to the Jaffna Fort immediately, since “hot intelligence” had informed that the enemy had planned to attack the fort that night.

I did not have any helis in the Wing as all had been deployed throughout the North and East. The only other two serviceable helis were in the VVIP security cordon, standing by to fly Prime Minister Thatcher and the other VVIPs the next morning. According to VVIP flying procedures, the helis are kept for 48 hours before the flight within a security cordon which is well-guarded by guards and air dogs. No one is allowed to go witin the security cordon without the Commanding Officer’s approval.

I had to take a quick decision about whether to drop the troops using the two helis from the cordon and run the risk of having no heli to fly Prime Minister Thatcher the next morning. The alternative was to say “No,” to the Army and take the risk of losing hundreds of soldiers at the front, facing a humiliating defeat, loss of prestige, morale and losing the Jaffna Fort, which was the Army’s pride.

If the latter happened, our conscience would be inconsolable even today. When we were fighting the battle, we were one unit: Army, Navy, Air Force and Police. The Air Force was always there. We never said no. So, I took the decision to fly immediately to Jaffna to carry out the task using the two VVIP helis. I was taking a huge risk, jeopardizing my career in the Air Force, by disregarding the standing orders and removing the two helis from the VVIP cordon.

By 1:00 p.m., we took off from Katunayake for Jaffna, using the two VVIP helis without Air Force Headquarters approval. I was captaining one heli with Flight Lieutenant Lasantha Waidyaratne as my co-pilot. (He was the pilot who, a long time later on, landed a heli at Jaffna Fort in the impossible task code-named Operation Eagle.) Flight Lieutenant Tennyson Gunawardena was flying the other heli as captain. I had to fly as we did not have any pilots to spare.

From the Palaly airport, we flew with twenty-two passengers without seats, keeping within the maximum all-up weight, and headed into the Jaffna Fort, approaching with the wind and not headwind as usual, avoiding enemy guns.

By 5:30 p.m., Tennyson called me on the receiver transmitter unit and said, “Sir, it is raining heavily in Katunayake, and we have to go in bad weather in the night back to Katunayake. So can I leave now?” I said, “Okay,” and ensured the heli was made ready for the VVIP the next morning. In the meantime, I kept flying the balance troops.

I did not get down at all from the heli and refuelling, too, was done whilst I was sitting in the pilot’s seat. The Brigadier-in-Charge in Jaffna came up to the heli very late in the evening and told me that, if I couldn’t drop all troops that night, to do the balance first thing in the morning. I said, “No, I will drop all tonight as I have to fly back to Katunayake for a very important task.”

We dropped all 250 troops into the Jaffna Fort and, after refuelling at Palaly, left at around 10:00 p.m. to fly back to Katunayake. However, we got caught to heavy rain on the stretch from North of Mannar to Katunayake. The weather was so bad that we had to request radar assistance to steer to Katunayake. However, I decided to disregard radar advice and told my co-pilot to follow the coastline, just to be clear of obstacles such as high-tension wires. Helicopters do not fly in rainy weather, let alone bad weather, and definitely not at night, but we had no choice.

Lasantha, my co-pilot, swears that he has not done a bad weather flight of that nature, either before or since, in his flying career. In fact, he says that he matured as a pilot during the last hours of that flight!

At around midnight, we landed at Katunayake where the crew was ready to take the heli and clean it to VVIP standard, which they did throughout the night. I was relieved and happy that I could return to Katunayake the same night.

The next morning, we positioned the two helis by 6:30 a.m. at Air Force Headquarters premises to fly the VVIP. Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher and her husband, Mr.Denis Thatcher, had a safe and comfortable flight to Victoria and back. In fact, Mrs.Thatcher was fast asleep when we touched down in Colombo!

As the Commanding Officer of the No.4 Helicopter Squadron, I risked my life and career because I did not want the Jaffna Fort to fall into the enemy’s hands and lose Army lives. Also, I did not want to let down the VVIP and spoil the image of the Sri Lanka Air Force. If anything had gone wrong, obviously I would have been “thrown” in the sea. I believe such life and death situations reveal the inborn/emerging leadership potential of individuals.

This excerpt deals with flying Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi and his wife, Sonia, to Katunayake after a naval rating on ab honour guard struck Gandhi with rifle butt.

In July 1987, I was out of the Helicopter Squadron and serving as Base Commander—Anuradhapura. The Commander of the Air Force called me one day and asked me whether I was still current on helis, and I said, “Yes.” He said, “I am sending a Bell 214 for you to do some flying training.” The next day, the heli arrived at Anuradhapura, and I got back into swing doing some flying training.

After two days, I was told to come to Katunayake to do a flight. I was told that I had to fly the visiting Indian Prime Minister, Rajiv Gandhi, from the Bandaranaike International Airport (BIA) to Galle Face and back. He was coming to sign the much-talked about “peace accord.” The Indian Prime Minister arrived at the BIA, and he was ferried to the Galle Face green, from where he was taken in a motorcade to President’s House to sign the Indo-Lanka Peace Accord.

Without taking much time, the motorcade returned to the Galle Face green. There was no panic. Rajiv Gandhi was smiling, but Sonia Gandhi helped Rajiv get in first, to the inner seat of the helicopter, and Sonia sat next to the window. If not for that, everything was normal.

I started up, switched on the VHF radio and contacted the Air Force Operations Room for take-off clearance. They told me that at the Navy’s Guard of Honour parade, there had been an incident targeting Rajiv Gandhi. That played havoc in my mind. I had to think that whoever planned and failed would have a “plan B,” and that would be to target the helicopter. Then I realized that, if so, both Rajiv Gandhi’s life and mine would be destroyed by “plan B.” That was my thinking. I had to save this VVIP, our state visitor. To do that, I had to make decisions on my own.

There was no one to tell me what to do. So, I took off in the most unexpected direction and avoided the usual route and followed a different route to BIA, whilst all the time being alert. Coming over BIA, I disregarded the usual approach procedure to the surprise of the Air Traffic Controllers and approached from the wrong direction and landed, but not in the designated landing place, to avoid a possible sniper or RPG attack.

The VVIP got off and walked away to the awaiting Indian Air Force aircraft. That relieved me of the tension of delivering the “precious cargo” in one piece.

(The book is distributed by the Vijitha Yapa Bookshop)

Continue Reading

Business

‘Giving up was never an option’: The fisherman  who fought back after losing millions in SL

Published

on

Seamax factory at Dickowita Harbour

 Spanish Israeli entrepreneur Simon Max Astandoust, a fourth-generation member of the renowned Astan fishing family, has endured years of legal battles, business setbacks and the loss of millions of dollars after investing in Sri Lanka’s fishing industry. Yet, despite the challenges, he has chosen to stay and rebuild.

 In an interview with the Sunday Island, the founder and CEO of Seamax Ceylon (Pvt) Ltd speaks about his struggle, the restoration of his state-of-the-art factory vessel Astan II, and his plans to introduce cutting-edge seafood technology to Sri Lanka.

 Q: You began operations in Sri Lanka in 2018. What was your original vision and investment?

 A: We started operations in 2018 with an initial investment of around US$1 million. Over time, that investment grew into several million dollars because we believed Sri Lanka had enormous potential in the fishing industry.

 My original intention was to develop a project through the Board of Investment (BOI) and introduce new technology to the country. However, the Government at the time encouraged us to work directly with it instead. We believed that this partnership would help us move forward faster and create something unique for Sri Lanka.

Overhauled Astan II

 Our goal was to operate within the harbour and establish a modern fishing operation centred around advanced technology and sustainable seafood processing.

 Q: What challenges did you face after starting operations?

 A: Around eight to 18 months after we began our investment, COVID-19 hit. The pandemic created enormous difficulties. In countries such as Spain and the United States, governments provided financial support to help businesses survive. Here, the Government itself was facing a difficult economic situation and was unable to provide similar assistance.

 Initially, we were told that there would be a grace period and that we would not be pressured for payments as long as we maintained our workforce and kept the operation alive. But later, that understanding changed, and demands for payments began despite the fact that we had a 15-year agreement.

 That was the beginning of the major conflict.

 Q: How did the change of Government affect your operations?

A: When a new Government came into power, the 15-year agreement signed with the previous administration was not recognized. The factory was closed and legal action was initiated against us.

 This was extremely difficult because we had invested heavily based on a long-term agreement. We had built infrastructure, brought in technology and created employment opportunities.

 During this period, while the vessel was caught up in legal disputes, a group of people attempted to take control of the ship. One of the most painful experiences was that some lawyers who had been working for us changed sides and supported those attempting to take the vessel.

Simon Max Astandoust

 The legal battle continued for years and only concluded in 2025.

 Q: Your vessel, Astan II, is central to your investment. What happened to it during this period?

 A:  Astan II is not just a fishing vessel. It is a huge factory vessel with a complete processing facility inside. It was designed to bring a completely new level of technology to Sri Lanka’s fishing industry.

 Unfortunately, because it remained idle during the legal proceedings, it suffered significant damage. Ships cannot simply sit in a harbour for months or years without proper operation and maintenance. The Sri Lankan weather conditions are particularly harsh on vessels.

The vessel deteriorated badly, but after we regained control, we decided to completely restore it. It was overhauled.

 Q: How much did the restoration cost and what work was involved?

 A:  The restoration cost approximately US$1.5 million and took about one year, beginning in 2025. The vessel was almost a complete rebuild. One of the biggest technical challenges was repairing the three generators. Because the harbour did not provide electricity, these generators had been running continuously to maintain the vessel. Over time, this caused significant wear and tear.

 Finding replacement parts was another major challenge. Many of these parts are not imported into Sri Lanka, so every component had to be sourced from different countries and brought in individually.

 A team of around 14 to 20 people worked on the restoration, including a Sri Lankan chief engineer and local professional deck crew. Their expertise and dedication were extremely important.

 Today, the vessel is in brand-new condition.

 Q: You mentioned that the absence of diplomatic representation made your struggle more difficult. Why?

 A: I hold Spanish and Israeli citizenship, and neither Spain nor Israel has an embassy in Sri Lanka. Normally, when a foreign investor faces serious difficulties, an ambassador can engage with authorities and help protect the investor’s interests.

 In my case, I had to face everything alone. I had to deal directly with government institutions and the legal system through my lawyers. Having diplomatic support would have made a significant difference. But ultimately, I had to rely on the courts and the legal process.

 Fortunately, the maritime judges understood the complexity of the situation and the importance of maritime law. Their fair approach restored some of my confidence.

 Q: Your vessel uses unique -70°C “Ultra-Fresh” technology. Can you explain how it works?

 A:  This is one of the most exciting parts of our project. The technology comes from Japan and is only about two years old. Traditional freezing methods often affect the quality of fish because the freezing process is slower and damages the texture. This technology works differently. It uses a glazing process where the fish is frozen from the outside, creating a protective layer.

Within approximately two hours, the fish is completely frozen. This process eliminates bacteria and preserves the quality of the fish.

When the fish is later defrosted using the correct method, it is almost exactly like fresh-caught fish from the ocean. The taste, texture and quality are preserved. At present, nobody else in Sri Lanka is carrying out this type of ultra-fresh freezing technology onboard a fishing vessel.

 Q: What advantage will this technology give Sri Lanka?

 A: Sri Lanka has excellent fishing resources, but we need to move beyond simply catching fish. The future is about value addition, quality control and accessing premium international markets.

With this technology, Sri Lanka can export seafood at a much higher value because customers will receive a product that maintains the quality of freshly caught fish.

 This is not just about one company. It is about introducing a new concept to the country’s fishing industry.

 Q: After everything you have experienced, why did you decide to continue investing in Sri Lanka?

 A: I come from a family of fishermen. This is my fourth generation, and my son represents the fifth generation. Fishermen are not people who give up easily. The sea teaches you resilience. You face storms, difficulties and uncertainty, but you continue. Of course, there were moments when I lost faith. Losing millions of dollars and spending years in court is not easy for anyone.

But eventually, the justice system gave me confidence again. The maritime judges understood the situation and treated the case fairly. That showed me that there are people in Sri Lanka who understand the importance of protecting investment and respecting the law. That is why I decided to continue.

 Many people told me that, despite the difficulties, the Sri Lankan judiciary would ultimately deliver justice. At the time, after years of uncertainty, it was difficult to know what the outcome would be. But in the end, that is exactly what happened. The courts examined the facts and delivered a fair judgment.

 The maritime judges understood the complexity of the situation and the importance of maritime law. Their fair approach restored my confidence—not only in the legal system but also in Sri Lanka itself.

 Q: What are your future plans for Seamax Ceylon?

 A: Our plan is to expand significantly. We intend to bring two or three more large factory vessels to Sri Lanka, along with five local fishing vessels. We also plan to establish a new processing factory near the beach. However, this time we will work through the Board of Investment rather than entering into a direct agreement with the Government.

 The BOI provides a structured framework for investors, and we believe this is the right way forward. My son Sam, who is the CEO of our US-based company, will also return to Sri Lanka to help introduce successful business concepts and support the next stage of development.

 Q: What keeps you motivated after such a difficult journey?

 A:The answer is simple: we do not give up. I come from a family of fishermen. This is my fourth generation, and my son represents the fifth generation. Fishermen understand struggle. You cannot control the ocean, but you learn how to survive. You face storms, difficulties and uncertainty, but you continue moving forward.

 I have lost money, faced difficult times and experienced moments of disappointment. But I never stopped believing in the potential of Sri Lanka. One thing that gave me strength was the faith many people placed in the country’s judiciary. I was repeatedly told that the courts in Sri Lanka would deliver justice, and ultimately that belief was proven right. The maritime judges understood the situation and gave a fair decision based on the law.

That experience reminded me that, despite challenges, Sri Lanka has institutions and people who respect justice. That is why I decided not only to stay but also to invest again.

For me, this is not merely a business project. It is about resilience, trust and proving that when you believe in something, you continue fighting until you succeed.

by Saman Indrajith ✍️

Continue Reading

Trending