Connect with us

Opinion

Is JVP/NPP signalling left and turning right?

Published

on

By Lasanda Kurukulasuriya

Since their visit to India at the invitation of the Indian government in February, leaders of the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna-led National People’s Power coalition have become the poster-boys and girls of a complicated Sri Lankan political landscape, in a pre-election period. The once-marginal parliamentary group’s leader is now viewed as a potential future president. Looking beyond the optics of the party’s ongoing image makeover, what is the message behind the Indian ‘invite?’

“The message is in the invitation” JVP/NPP leader Anura Kumara Dissanayake said, on Sirasa TV. “Our response is that we are ready. We are not an extremist project (aanthika deshapalana viyapaarayak nove) We are a project ready to work with any state that will allow us to advance the aspirations of the people without conflicts.” Though AKD’s remarks in this interview by Wasantha Maasinhage on 15.02.24 were wide-ranging, the party has otherwise been reticent about discussions they had with Indian External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar, NSA Ajit Doval, Foreign Secretary Vinay Kwatra and others they met from 5th to 9th Feb. Asked what they discussed with the Indian government, JVP Propaganda Secretary Vijithat Herath is reported as saying their talks had been ‘mostly on regional security issues.’

It appears the JVP has not only moved away from its earlier anti-Indian rhetoric, but made a startling turnaround on Indo-Sri Lanka relations. On the subject of foreign policy, the JVP leader stressed the need to understand and accommodate India’s sensitivities in dealings with other countries. The following exchange is from the interview:

AKD: “India is most interested in Trincomalee and the North. We cannot progress without taking this into consideration, It’s like this – it’s not an ‘Indian’ project. The project has to be within our national policy framework, and within that, we should go for an agreement with India.”

Sirasa: What do you mean.. ‘agreement with India..’ – Without calling for tenders?

AKD: At the very least, call for tenders within India

Sirasa: Only within India.. ?

AKD: At the very least, only within India. That’s not how it’s done right now, is it? The first option should be, consider if we can do the project ourselves. Second option, can we find a state without links to India or China?

Third option is to do the project, within our policy framework, calling for tenders within India.”

Looking back at agreements entered into with India over the past couple of years however, it’s clear that several projects, some of which included a grant component, had conditions, requiring that they be implemented only by Indian companies. Some were defence related, like the project for setting up a Maritime Rescue Coordination Centre in SLN headquarters in Colombo, through an agreement with Bharat Electronics – a company under India’s defence ministry. Facing a crippling economic crisis in 2022, and in desperate need of a US$ 1 billion loan for emergency supplies, Sri Lanka was not in a position to negotiate as an equal partner with India. Terms were dictated by the regional hegemon, with its own strategic objectives in this location, that has become a geopolitical flashpoint.

Renewable energy

During this period, India also consolidated its hold on Sri Lanka’s renewable energy sector – to the dismay of the local industry. Among some controversial MoUs signed in March 2022, were the unsolicited wind power projects in Mannar and Pooneryn, approved by the BOI in February last year, to be given to Adani Green Energy Ltd. The CEB chairman (who later resigned) revealed at a COPE hearing in June 2022 that then president Gotabaya Rajapaksa was under pressure from Indian PM Narendra Modi, to give the project to the Adani group. Indian tycoon Gautam Adani is said to be a close associate of the Indian PM.

Scientists and environmental experts have with one voice condemned this project for its ruinous environmental impact. They point out it does not make economic sense either, with purchase price being negotiated in US dollars at many times the market rate, for a 25 year contract period. While it has been suggested that alternative locations with wind power potential could be sought, it is unlikely the Indian side will agree to this, because it is precisely the site’s location that makes it important to them. In 2021, India’s objections led to the suspension of a contract won by China through an ADB-backed competitive bidding process, for a renewable energy project on three islands off Jaffna. India offered a grant to carry out the same project, and an MoU was signed during a visit by Minister Jaishankar, 28-29 March 2022. This contract was signed last month with U-solar Clean Energy Solutions, chosen through a competitive bidding process for Indian firms, conducted by GoSL, according to The Hindu.

Against this backdrop, the JVP leader’s stance that project tenders should be called ‘only within India,’ becomes deeply problematic. Is he saying, that the lop-sided style of project structuring that emerged at the height of the economic crisis, will become a ‘principle’ in the NPP’s programme? Few would dispute his critique of the manner in which governments see-saw between India and China, with corrupt politicians seeking ‘deals’ (on projects) for personal gain. But his position that projects should, as a matter of policy, be given to Indian companies is naïve at best. While he says that a local contractor would be the first option for a project (‘to do the job ourselves’), wouldn’t there be a large project area outside the scope of local expertise, such as in advanced technology? Besides, giving Indian firms preference for important projects would amount to an unquestioning acceptance of Indian strategic calculations. How would the fallout of such a policy affect Sri Lanka’s foreign relations – especially if it claims to be ‘Non-Aligned,’ as NPP ideologues have suggested, in published articles?

Sovereignty concerns

Another problematic MoU signed in 2022 relates to a large INR grant for a Unique Digital Identity (SL-UDI) programme for Sri Lanka, based on the Indian Aadhaar system. At a press briefing on 14.07.23 State Minister of Technology Kanaka Herath announced that tenders had been called for the project, to collect face, eye, fingerprint and ‘several other biometric data’ of all persons, with bidding limited to large Indian companies. The data would be stored in a centralized system, and the government of India would oversee the software development, he said.

Though the JVP/NPP delegation on Feb. 6 visited the Unique Identification Authority of India (that issues the Aadhaar number) it has been silent about this part of its tour. It was Dissanayake who raised concerns over SL-UDI in parliament last year. He is reported to have said his party had no objection to the project, but had concerns over sovereignty and the protection of citizens’ data. The Frontline Socialist Party warned that giving an Indian company access to the population’s biometrics posed a national security threat. However, neither the JVP/NPP nor FSP addressed the risk nearer home, that once the population’s biometric data is collected by government in a centralized, state-controlled database, it could potentially be used for mass surveillance of the citizenry.

While government statements vaguely suggest this project will ‘modernize’ Sri Lanka and make the delivery of state services more efficient, there is a worrying lack of public awareness and debate on the issues surrounding the introduction of such a scheme. For example privacy concerns have not been addressed, nor the question of whether the UDI will be mandatory in order to get welfare benefits and other state services. In India the Aadhaar scheme has been the subject of many supreme court rulings on issues raised by civil liberties groups. The European Parliament in October 2021 voted to back a total ban on biometric surveillance, in accordance with a report from a parliamentary committee on civil liberties.

The Sri Lankan UDI project has been dogged by controversy from the outset. When State Minister Herath announced the call for tenders, he indicated that the software systems would be ‘installed under the full supervision of the Information and Communication Technology Agency of Sri Lanka (ICTA).’ Within days of his press briefing the Parliamentary Committee on Public Enterprise (COPE) exposed bigtime fraud and corruption at ICTA. Three months later AKD alleged in parliament that the tender process had been manipulated to the advantage of a particular company. The two Indian companies that bid for the contract have since then been reportedly disqualified.

As an opposition party, the JVP has often called out corruption in government. With elections on the cards, if it has set its sights on coming to power, it will have to live up to expectations of voters accustomed to its anti-corruption rhetoric and demands for transparency etc while in opposition. How will it navigate issues surrounding the ongoing Indian projects? It has been conspicuously silent on the subject. With regard to ‘Amul’s plans to buy NLDB and Milco’ however, Dissanayake told Sirasa, they had clearly expressed their opposition, and would protect the local industry.

The question arises as to whether the Indian side sought assurances that their plans would not be disrupted, in the event of a significant change in their power status. Was this possibly the thinking behind FSP’s Education Secretary Pubudu Jayagoda’s remarks posted on Youtube, where he asked “Was it a trap that was set to invite the JVP? They have the government party on side, so now they have to get round the opposition”?



Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

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

Opinion

The policy of Sinhala Only and downgrading of English

Published

on

In 1956 a Sri Lankan politician riding a great surge of populism, made a move that, at a stroke, disabled a functioning civil society operating in the English language medium in Sri Lanka. He had thrown the baby out with the bathwater.

It was done to huge, ecstatic public joy and applause at the time but in truth, this action had serious ramifications for the country, the effects have, no doubt, been endlessly mulled over ever since.

However, there is one effect/ aspect that cannot be easily dismissed – the use of legal English of an exact technical quality used for dispensing Jurisprudence (certainty and rational thought). These court certified decisions engendered confidence in law, investment and business not only here but most importantly, among the international business community.

Well qualified, rational men, Judges, thought rationally and impartially through all the aspects of a case in Law brought before them. They were expert in the use of this specialised English, with all its meanings and technicalities – but now, a type of concise English hardly understandable to the casual layman who may casually look through some court proceedings of yesteryear.

They made clear and precise rulings on matters of Sri Lankan Law. These were guiding principles for administrative practice. This body of case law knowledge has been built up over the years before Independence. This was in fact, something extremely valuable for business and everyday life. It brought confidence and trust – essential for conducting business.

English had been developed into a precise tool for analysing and understanding a problem, a matter, or a transaction. Words can have specific meanings, they were not, merely, the play- thing of those producing “fake news”. English words as used at that time, had meaning – they carried weight and meaning – the weight of the law!

Now many progressive countries around the world are embracing English for good economic and cultural reasons, but in complete contrast little Sri Lanka has gone into reverse!

A minority of the Sinhalese population, (the educated ones!) could immediately see at the time the problems that could arise by this move to down-grade English including its high-quality legal determinations. Unfortunately, seemingly, with the downgrading of English came a downgrading of the quality of inter- personal transactions.

A second failure was the failure to improve the “have nots” of the villagers by education. Knowledge and information can be considered a universal right. Leonard Woolf’s book “A village in the Jungle” makes use of this difference in education to prove a point. It makes infinitely good politics to reduce this education gap by education policies that rectify this important disadvantage normal people of Sri Lanka have.

But the yearning of educators to upgrade the education system as a whole, still remains a distant goal. Advanced English spoken language is encouraged individually but not at a state level. It has become an orphaned child. It is the elites that can read the standard classics such as Treasure Island or Sherlock Holmes and enjoy them.

But, perhaps now, with the country in the doldrums, more people will come to reflect on these failures of foresight and policy implementation. Isn’t the doldrums all the proof you need?

by Priyantha Hettige

Continue Reading

Opinion

GOODBYE, DEAR SIR

Published

on

It is with deep gratitude and profound sorrow that we remember Mr. K. L. F. Wijedasa, remarkable athletics coach whose influence reached far beyond the track. He passed away on November 4, exactly six months after his 93rd birthday, having led an exemplary and disciplined life that enabled him to enjoy such a long and meaningful innings. To those he trained, he was not only a masterful coach but a mentor, a friend, a steady father figure, and an enduring source of inspiration. His wisdom, kindness, and unwavering belief in every young athlete shaped countless lives, leaving a legacy that will continue to echo in the hearts of all who were fortunate enough to be guided by him.

I was privileged to be one of the many athletes who trained under his watchful eye from the time Mr. Wijedasa began his close association with Royal College in 1974. He was largely responsible for the golden era of athletics at Royal College from 1973 to 1980. In all but one of those years, Royal swept the board at all the leading Track & Field Championships — from the Senior and Junior Tarbat Shields to the Daily News Trophy Relay Carnival. Not only did the school dominate competitions, but it also produced star-class athletes such as sprinter Royce Koelmeyer; sprint and long & triple jump champions Godfrey Fernando and Ravi Waidyalankara; high jumper and pole vaulter Cletus Dep; Olympic 400m runner Chrisantha Ferdinando; sprinters Roshan Fernando and the Indraratne twins, Asela and Athula; and record-breaking high jumper Dr. Dharshana Wijegunasinghe, to name just a few.

Royal had won the Senior & Junior Tarbats as well as the Relay Carnival in 1973 by a whisker and was looking for a top-class coach to mould an exceptionally talented group of athletes for 1974 and beyond. This was when Mr. Wijedasa entered the scene, beginning a lifelong relationship with the athletes of Royal College from 1974 to 1987. He received excellent support from the then Principal, late Mr. L. D. H. Pieris; Vice Principal, late Mr. E. C. Gunesekera; and Masters-in-Charge Mr. Dharmasena, Mr. M. D. R. Senanayake, and Mr. V. A. B. Samarakone, with whom he maintained a strong and respectful rapport throughout his tenure.

An old boy of several schools — beginning at Kandegoda Sinhala Mixed School in his hometown, moving on to Dharmasoka Vidyalaya, Ambalangoda, Moratu Vidyalaya, and finally Ananda College — he excelled in both sports and studies. He later graduated in Geography, from the University of Peradeniya. During his undergraduate days, he distinguished himself as a sprinter, establishing a new National Record in the 100 metres in 1955. Beyond academics and sports, Mr. Wijedasa also demonstrated remarkable talent in drama.

Though proudly an Anandian, he became equally a Royalist through his deep association with Royal’s athletics from the 1970s. So strong was this bond that he eventually admitted his only son, Duminda, to Royal College. The hallmark of Mr. Wijedasa was his tireless dedication and immense patience as a mentor. Endurance and power training were among his strengths —disciplines that stood many of us in good stead long after we left school.

More than champions on the track, it is the individuals we became in later life that bear true testimony to his loving guidance. Such was his simplicity and warmth that we could visit him and his beloved wife, Ransiri, without appointment. Even long after our school days, we remained in close touch. Those living overseas never failed to visit him whenever they returned to Sri Lanka. These visits were filled with fond reminiscences of our sporting days, discussions on world affairs, and joyful moments of singing old Sinhala songs that he treasured.

It was only fitting, therefore, that on his last birthday on May 4 this year, the Old Royalists’ Athletic Club (ORAC) honoured him with a biography highlighting his immense contribution to athletics at Royal. I was deeply privileged to co-author this book together with Asoka Rodrigo, another old boy of the school.

Royal, however, was not the first school he coached. After joining the tutorial staff of his alma mater following graduation, he naturally coached Ananda College before moving on to Holy Family Convent, Bambalapitiya — where he first met the “love of his life,” Ransiri, a gifted and versatile sportswoman. She was not only a national champion in athletics but also a top netballer and basketball player in the 1960s. After his long and illustrious stint at Royal College, he went on to coach at schools such as Visakha Vidyalaya and Belvoir International.

The school arena was not his only forte. Mr. Wijedasa also produced several top national athletes, including D. K. Podimahattaya, Vijitha Wijesekera, Lionel Karunasena, Ransiri Serasinghe, Kosala Sahabandu, Gregory de Silva, Sunil Gunawardena, Prasad Perera, K. G. Badra, Surangani de Silva, Nandika de Silva, Chrisantha Ferdinando, Tamara Padmini, and Anula Costa. Apart from coaching, he was an efficient administrator as Director of Physical Education at the University of Colombo and held several senior positions in national sporting bodies. He served as President of the Amateur Athletic Association of Sri Lanka in 1994 and was also a founder and later President of the Ceylonese Track & Field Club. He served with distinction as a national selector, starter, judge, and highly qualified timekeeper.

The crowning joy of his life was seeing his legacy continue through his children and grandchildren. His son, Duminda, was a prominent athlete at Royal and later a National Squash player in the 1990s. In his later years, Mr. Wijedasa took great pride in seeing his granddaughter, Tejani, become a reputed throwing champion at Bishop’s College, where she currently serves as Games Captain. Her younger brother, too, is a promising athlete.

He is survived by his beloved wife, Ransiri, with whom he shared 57 years of a happy and devoted marriage, and by their two children, Duminda and Puranya. Duminda, married to Debbie, resides in Brisbane, Australia, with their two daughters, Deandra and Tennille. Puranya, married to Ruvindu, is blessed with three children — Madhuke, Tejani, and Dharishta.

Though he has left this world, the values he instilled, the lives he shaped, and the spirit he ignited on countless tracks and fields will live on forever — etched in the hearts of generations who were privileged to call him Sir (Coach).

NIRAJ DE MEL, Athletics Captain of Royal College 1976

Deputy Chairman, Old Royalists’ Athletics Club (ORAC)

Continue Reading

Opinion

Why Sri Lanka needs a National Budget Performance and Evaluation Office

Published

on

President Dissanayake presenting Budget 2026 in Parliament

Sri Lanka is now grappling with the aftermath of the one of the gravest natural disasters in recent memory, as Cyclone Ditwah and the associated weather system continue to bring relentless rain, flash floods, and landslides across the country.

In view of the severe disaster situation, Speaker Jagath Wickramaratne had to amend the schedule for the Committee Stage debates on Budget 2026, which was subsequently passed by Parliament. There have been various interpretations of Budget 2026 by economists, the business community, academics, and civil society. Some analyses draw on economic expertise, others reflect social understanding, while certain groups read the budget through political ideology. But with the country now trying to manage a humanitarian and economic emergency, it is clear that fragmented interpretations will not suffice. This is a moment when Sri Lanka needs a unified, responsible, and collective “national reading” of the budget—one that rises above personal or political positions and focuses on safeguarding citizens, restoring stability, and guiding the nation toward recovery.

Budget 2026 is unique for several reasons. To understand it properly, we must “read” it through the lens of Sri Lanka’s current economic realities as well as the fiscal consolidation pathway outlined under the International Monetary Fund programme. Some argue that this Budget reflects a liberal policy orientation, citing several key allocations that support this view: strong investment in human capital, an infrastructure-led growth strategy, targeted support for private enterprise and MSMEs, and an emphasis on fiscal discipline and transparency.

Anyway, it can be argued that it is still too early to categorise the 2026 budget as a fully liberal budget approach, especially when considering the structural realities that continue to shape Sri Lanka’s economy. Still some sectors in Sri Lanka restricted private-sector space, with state dominance. And also, we can witness a weak performance-based management system with no strong KPI-linked monitoring or institutional performance cells. Moreover, the country still maintains a broad subsidy orientation, where extensive welfare transfers may constrain productivity unless they shift toward targeted and time-bound mechanisms. Even though we can see improved tax administration in the recent past, there is a need to have proper tax rationalisation, requiring significant simplification to become broad-based and globally competitive. These factors collectively indicate that, despite certain reform signals, it may be premature to label Budget 2026 as fully liberal in nature.

Overall, Sri Lanka needs to have proper monitoring mechanisms for the budget. Even if it is a liberal type, development, or any type of budget, we need to see how we can have a budget monitoring system.

Establishing a National Budget Performance and Evaluation Office

Whatever the budgets presented during the last seven decades, the implementation of budget proposals can always be mostly considered as around 30-50 %. Sri Lanka needs to have proper budget monitoring mechanisms. This is not only important for the budget but also for all other activities in Sri Lanka. Most of the countries in the world have this, and we can learn many best practices from them.

Establishing a National Budget Performance and Evaluation Office is essential for strengthening Sri Lanka’s fiscal governance and ensuring that public spending delivers measurable value. Such an office would provide an independent, data-driven mechanism to track budget implementation, monitor programme outcomes, and evaluate whether ministries achieve their intended results. Drawing from global best practices—including India’s PFMS-enabled monitoring and OECD programme-based budgeting frameworks—the office would develop clear KPIs, performance scorecards, and annual evaluation reports linked to national priorities. By integrating financial data, output metrics, and policy outcomes, this institution would enable evidence-based decision-making, improve budget credibility, reduce wastage, and foster greater transparency and accountability across the public sector. Ultimately, this would help shift Sri Lanka’s budgeting process from input-focused allocations toward performance-oriented results.

There is an urgent need for a paradigm shift in Sri Lanka’s economy, where export diversification, strengthened governance, and institutional efficiency become essential pillars of reform. Establishing a National Budget Performance and Evaluation Office is a critical step that can help the country address many long-standing challenges related to governance, fiscal discipline, and evidence-based decision-making. Such an institution would create the mechanisms required for transparency, accountability, and performance-focused budgeting. Ultimately, for Sri Lanka to gain greater global recognition and move toward a more stable, credible economic future, every stakeholder must be equipped with the right knowledge, tools, and systems that support disciplined financial management and a respected national identity.

(The writer is a Professor in Management Studies, Open University of Sri Lanka and you can reach Professor Abeysekera at nabey@ou.ac.lk)

by Prof. Nalin Abeysekera ✍️

Continue Reading

Trending