Features
Jackboot cannot salvage Sri Lanka
Dictatorship will deplete institutional, social, financial and human capital
Kumar David
Gota knows no other way than to talk tough, hand authority to Army Silva and military brass, undermine confidence of civilian authorities and via 20A erase the democratic ethos that has caught on in Sri Lanka since Independence. Mind you, it is true that democracy has landed us in pretty much of a mess; it has empowered racism and been the midwife of economically damaging populism. Yes, Sri Lankan democracy has been a disappointment – look at the composition of Parliament, if we can’t do better than that, I shudder. I will not repeat the all too well-known riposte ‘Democracy is the worst of all systems except for all the others’ because it smacks of smartarse.
I argue Gota’s post-20A authoritarian status and the prospect of it evolving to dictatorship will undermine public Institutions (the military excepted); it may damage relations amongst communities, undermine political stability, drive corrode finance and deplete the nation’s human capital which I call expertise (intellectual base, innovation, expertise and free exchange of ideas). I attempt to show this in as table. We could conveniently place Institutional, Social, Financial and Expertise as four vertical columns and use four sharply concretized contemporary goings-on as rows to depict how authoritarianism will bring Sri Lanka to so a sorry pass. The events or goings-on that I propose to use are COVID-19 (CV), Direct Post-20A outcome, Rebuilding the Economy in the medium term of three to five years and fourthly Political Stability to build my direction-finder Table.
Clearly CV is the dominant issue now and will remain so in 2021-22 and I was intending to make an evaluation when Dr M. M. Janapriya published “Corona Resurgence ….” In Colombo Telegraph on October 31. I have not known of Janapriya but he speaks with the authority of an expert so he must be one though I wish he had offered a sentence or two to help readers locate his professional role. His case can be summarised thus: Victory in the first leg of the fight against CV was commendable but lulled the authorities. A military task force cannot comprehend or lead against so complex a challenge. “Seemingly the task force did not meet for two months”. The spread of CV in India posed a hazard that was neglected. Janapriya then makes two technical points “Viral genome sequencing of the second wave virus seems wanting” and “Realistic numbers of random tests are not being done”. The implication of this critique is that political preoccupation with 20A trumped national interests and furthermore the public is not being told the truth. I endorse the first censure without hesitation but I don’t know enough about the second.
Moving along the first row of my Table, Institutional scores D (poor) to F (failure) because militarisation of the Task Force undermines civilian norms and institutions; Society scores a B in that not much harm will done to relations between communities by CV and there is no visible social unrest against tough anti-CV measures and will remain so unless the second-wave leads to debacle. CV will harm the economy so Finances should score an F but for a reason I will explain later I compromise at D. Since I don’t expect the CV mess to drive away intellectuals or harm innovation in businesses, I leave the last box on the first row at a harmless C. This is the logic behind the first row of my table.
Potentially, rankings on the table can range from A to D and F; don’t dismiss the exercise as a children’s game since it is useful as a compass or as a direction-finder. Readers can change entries, or change the columns and rows to reset the table and reflect their own priorities. The point is to make assessments of the impact of authoritarianism objective and less arbitrary. True the entries are not hard numbers or statistics but filling out the table enforces mental discipline and forces people on whichever side to reason with care.
Having spelt out the barebones of a methodology I can proceed to fill out the rest of the table. The second row considers the direct effects of 20A within the next two years. I rate its Institutional impact (influence on state and corporate institutions, judiciary and apparatus of state repression) bad. The de facto military seizure of the top echelons of decision is Institutionally harmful – vide Egypt, Burma and the Banana Republics. The people of this country are now not capable of mass movements – except pogroms abetted by the police and military against minorities. In the foreseeable future there is no reason to believe the bourgeoise domestically, or internationally China, India or US will abandon Sri Lanka because it is authoritarian or a potential dictatorship. For these two reasons, I rated it B along the second row in respect of both Society and Finances. The C for Expertise at the end of the row is a shot in the dark; honestly, I am not sure whether innovation, smart-business, broad-human talent and intellectual excellence will desert the country in fear of putative dictatorship. On the third row the across the board C rating for the Economic Factor follows from my negative outlook for economic recovery under a dictator; talk of a tough Gotabaya executing wise economic programmes is partisan myth. Finally, every worm will turn one day hence my across-the-board D index on the last row; that is to say, the people will protest against dictatorship at some point in time and then the guns will come out. The D is meant to signal not current but I fear unavoidable future unrest.
It seems that the Gota autocracy which we much fear will be stillborn because of the two points I make in the next paragraph and also because, despite the Sajith Circus bungling the parliamentary vote, there is strong and deep opposition to 20A in the country. Religious orders, civil society and almost the entire intellectual classes have deplored the amendment and condemned its provisions point by point. There is more fear and opposition within the government than the parliamentary vote indicates. Many opportunist ministers who have sold their souls and sold themselves for a portfolio which is their highest aspiration in life are perturbed by 20A for the reason that it tilts the balance against their personal interests or political implications. All this adds up to two opposite possibilities; either the attempted autocracy will be weak and have little clout, or alliteratively driven by its own weaknesses the regime will lash out in ever more pernicious directions.
I would like to close with broad brush remarks about prospects for the post-20A authoritarianism regime in Sri Lanka. The regime’s supporters are over the moon about two expectations: (a) public services will be reorganised, disciplined and put right, (b) economic development of the nation will take off. This is where a simple matrix like the table gives a snap-shot overview of the lay of the land and the direction in which things are likely to go. My take on both accounts is discouraging. There can be no dispute that though the public service inherited from colonial times served Ceylon and the classes that mattered in the post-independence decade, it is now inefficient, dysfunctional and corrupt. Modernising and restructuring the public services and changing the mind set of public servants is a daunting task; it is easy to say Gota and his military cohorts do not have the visions and that the legislature and judiciary (some cases have been dragging on for a generation and the bottleneck in the courts is a nightmare) are useless but the task is gigantic. In the two Asian territories that have top-class government administration, the colonial administration was obliterated by Japanese occupation in WW2 and a brand-new model was burnished and installed in the 1950s and 1960s. Not only is Sri Lanka but in India, Pakistan and all across Africa the public service seems irreformable.
Economic renewal and growth on a capitalist basis, that’s what we are talking about is also a daunting task at the best of times. We need “creative destruction” (Schumpeter), a lot of useless activities, processes and even jobs have to give way. New product lines, new ways of integration into global supply chains, stronger ties with regional economies and the uphill tasks of raising productivity and benefiting from the digital-economy are gigantic challenges. More sharply, at this juncture Sri Lanka is tossed by surging seas and buffeted by stormy winds. The ocean on which ship Lanka is tossed hither and thither is a restless sea of Chinese, Indian and American agitation, and to make things worse no one can be sure how this second and future waves of the corona virus will pan except to say that year 2021 is likely to be another year of little achievement for nation and government.
There is no need to expand on either because so much said about both and the razor thin margin in the presidential election will not change US foreign policy much and will not reduce the intensity of the “Thucydides Trap” that is containing the rise of China as a parallel world power. Gota is unlucky to be buffeted by these two tidal waves so early in his presidency. But it is also an opportunity; if he overcomes both and rises to high presidential stature he would make a mark, but I have argued in this essay is that by showing a mindset much dependent on command thinking and relying on the military Brass as his delivery vehicle, he has lost the plot in advance. Then, we the people, would have given away our democratic freedoms in exchange for nothing.
Features
Retirement age for judges: Innovation and policy
I. The Constitutional Context
Independence of the judiciary is, without question, an essential element of a functioning democracy. In recognition of this, ample provision is made in the highest law of our country, the Constitution, to engender an environment in which the courts are able to fulfil their public responsibility with total acceptance.
As part of this protective apparatus, judges of the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal are assured of security of tenure by the provision that “they shall not be removed except by an order of the President made after an address of Parliament supported by a majority of the total number of members of Parliament, (including those not present), has been presented to the President for such removal on the ground of proved misbehaviour or incapacity”[Article 107(2)]. Since this assurance holds good for the entirety of tenure, it follows that the age of retirement should be defined with certainty. This is done by the Constitution itself by the provision that “the age of retirement of judges of the Supreme Court shall be 65 years and of judges of the Court of Appeal shall be 63 years”[Article 107(5)].
II. A Proposal for Reform
This provision has been in force ever since the commencement of the Constitution. Significant public interest, therefore, has been aroused by the lead story in a newspaper, Anidda of 13 March, that the government is proposing to extend the term of office of judges of the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal by a period of two years.
This proposal, if indeed it reflects the thinking of the government, is deeply disturbing from the standpoint of policy, and gives rise to grave consequences. The courts operating at the apex of the judicial structure are called upon to do justice between citizens and also between the state and members of the public. It is an indispensable principle governing the administration of justice that not the slightest shadow of doubt should arise in the public mind regarding the absolute objectivity and impartiality with which the courts approach this task.
What is proposed, if the newspaper report is authentic, is to confer on judges of two particular courts, the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal, a substantial benefit or advantage in the form of extension of their years of service. The question is whether the implications of this initiative are healthy for the administration of justice.
III. Governing Considerations of Policy
What is at stake is a principle intuitively identified as a pillar of justice.
Reflecting firm convictions, the legal antecedents reiterate the established position with remarkable emphasis. The classical exposition of the seminal standard is, of course, the pronouncement by Lord Hewart: “It is not merely of some importance, but is of fundamental importance that justice should not only be done, but should manifestly and undoubtedly be seen to be done”. (Rex v. Sussex Justices, ex parte McCarthy). The underlying principle is that perception is no less important than reality. The mere appearance of partiality has been held to vitiate proceedings: Dissanayake v. Kaleel. In particular, reasonableness of apprehension in the mind of the parties to litigation is critical: Ranjit Thakur v. Union of India, a reasonable likelihood of bias being necessarily fatal (Manak Lal v. Prem Chaud Singhvi).
The overriding factor is unshaken public confidence in the judiciary: State of West Bengal v. Shivananda Pathak. The decision must be “demonstrably” (Saleem Marsoof J.) fair. The Bar Association of Sri Lanka has rightly declared: “The authority of the judiciary ultimately depends on the trust reposed in it by the people, which is sustained only when justice is administered in a visibly fair manner”.
Credibility is paramount in this regard. “Justice has to be seen to be believed” (J.B. Morton). Legality of the outcome is not decisive; process is of equal consequence. Judicial decisions, then, must withstand public scrutiny, not merely legal technicality: Mark Fernando J. in the Jana Ghosha case. Conceived as continuing vitality of natural justice principles, these are integral to justice itself: Samarawickrema J. in Fernando v. Attorney General. Institutional integrity depends on eliminating even the appearance of partiality (Mandal Vikas Nigam Ltd. v. Girja Shankar Pant), and “open justice is the cornerstone of our judicial system”: (Sahara India Real Estate Corporation Ltd. v. SEBI).
IV. Practical Constraints
Apart from these compelling considerations of policy, there are practical aspects which call for serious consideration. The effect of the proposal is that, among all judges operating at different levels in the judicature of Sri Lanka, judges of the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal only, to the exclusion of all other judges, are singled out as the beneficiaries of the proposal. An inevitable result is that High Court and District Judges and Magistrates will find their avenues of promotion seriously impeded by the unexpected lengthening of the periods of service of currently serving judges in the two apex courts. Consequently, they will be required to retire at a point of time appreciably earlier than they had anticipated to relinquish judicial office because the prospect of promotion to higher courts, entailing higher age limits for retirement, is precipitately withdrawn. Some degree of demotivation, arising from denial of legitimate expectation, is therefore to be expected.
A possible response to this obvious problem is a decision to make the two-year extension applicable to all judicial officers, rather than confining it to judges of the two highest courts. This would solve the problem of disillusionment at lower levels of the judiciary, but other issues, clearly serious in their impact, will naturally arise.
Public service structures, to be equitable and effective, must be founded on principles of non-discrimination in respect of service conditions and related matters. Arbitrary or invidious treatment is destructive of this purpose. In determining the age of retirement of judges of the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal, some attention has been properly paid to balance and consistency. The age of retirement of a Supreme Court judge is on par with that applicable to university professors and academic staff in the higher education system. They all retire at 65 years. Members of the public service, generally, retire at 60. Medical specialists retire at 63, with the possibility of extension in special circumstances to 65. The age of retirement for High Court Judges is 61, and for Magistrates and District Judges 60. It may be noted that the policy change in 2022 aimed at specifically addressing the issue of uniformity and compatibility.
If, then, an attempt is made to carve out an ad hoc principle strictly limited to judicial officers, not admitting of a self-evident rationale, the question would inevitably arise whether this is fair by other categories of the public service and whether the latter would not entertain a justifiable sense of grievance.
This is not merely a moral or ethical issue relating to motivation and fulfillment within the public service, but it could potentially give rise to critical legal issues. It is certainly arguable that the proposed course of action represents an infringement of the postulate of equality of treatment, and non-discrimination, enshrined in Article 12(1) of the Constitution.
There would, as well, be the awkward situation that this issue, almost certain to be raised, would then have to be adjudicated upon by the Supreme Court, itself the direct and exclusive beneficiary of the impugned measure.
V. Piecemeal Amendment or an Overall Approach?
If innovation on these lines is contemplated, would it not be desirable to take up the issue as part of the new Constitution, which the government has pledged to formulate and enact, rather than as a piecemeal amendment at this moment to the existing Constitution? After all, Chapter XV, dealing with the Judiciary, contains provisions interlinked with other salient features of the Constitution, and an integrated approach would seem preferable.
VI. Conclusion
In sum, then, it is submitted that the proposed change is injurious to the institutional integrity of the judiciary and to the prestige and stature of judges, and that it should not be implemented without full consideration of all the issues involved.
By Professor G. L. Peiris
D. Phil. (Oxford), Ph. D. (Sri Lanka);
Former Minister of Justice, Constitutional Affairs and National Integration;
Quondam Visiting Fellow of the Universities of Oxford, Cambridge and London;
Former Vice-Chancellor and Emeritus Professor of Law of the University of Colombo.
Features
Ranked 134th in Happiness: Rethinking Sri Lanka’s development through happiness, youth wellbeing and resilience
In recent years, Sri Lanka has experienced a succession of overlapping challenges that have tested its resilience. Cyclone Ditwah struck Sri Lanka in November last year, significantly disrupting the normal lives of its citizens. The infrastructure damage is much more serious than the tsunami. According to World Bank reports and preliminary estimates, the losses amounted to approximately US$ 4.1 billion, nearly 4 per cent of the country’s Gross Domestic Product. Before taking a break from that, the emerging crisis in the Middle East has once again raised concerns about potential economic repercussions. In particular, those already affected by disasters such as Cyclone Ditwah risk falling “from the frying pan into the fire,” facing multiple hardships simultaneously. Currently, we see fuel prices rising, four-day workweeks, a higher cost of living, increased pressure on household incomes, and a reduction in the overall standard of living for ordinary citizens. It would certainly affect people’s happiness. As human beings, we naturally aspire to live happy and fulfilling lives. At a time when the world is increasingly talking about happiness and wellbeing, the World Happiness Report provides a useful way of looking at how countries are doing. The World Happiness Report discusses global well-being and offers strategies to improve it. The report is produced annually with contributions from the University of Oxford’s Wellbeing Research Centre, Gallup, the UN Sustainable Development Solutions Network, and other stakeholders. There are many variables taken into consideration for the index, including the core measure (Cantril Ladder) and six explanatory variables (GDP per Capita ,Social Support,Healthy Life Expectancy,Freedom to Make Life Choices,Generosity,Perceptions of Corruption), with a final comparison.
According to the recently published World Happiness Report 2026, Sri Lanka ranks 134th out of 147 nations. As per the report, this is the first time that Sri Lanka has suffered such a decline. Sri Lanka currently trails behind most of its South Asian neighbours in the happiness index. The World Happiness Report 2026 attributes Sri Lanka’s low ranking (134th) to a combination of persistent economic struggles, social challenges, and modern pressures on younger generations. The 2026 report specifically noted that excessive social media use is a growing factor contributing to declining life satisfaction among young people globally, including in Sri Lanka. This calls for greater vigilance and careful reflection. These concerns should be examined alongside key observations, particularly in the context of education reforms in Sri Lanka, which must look beyond their immediate scope and engage more meaningfully with the country’s future.
In recent years, a series of events has triggered political upheaval in countries such as Nepal, characterised by widespread protests, government collapse, and the emergence of interim administration. Most reports and news outlets described this as “Gen Z protests.” First, we need to understand what Generation Z is and its key attributes. Born between 1997 and 2012, Generation Z represents the first truly “digital native” generation—raised not just with the internet, but immersed in it. Their lives revolve around digital ecosystems: TikTok sets cultural trends, Instagram fuels discovery, YouTube delivers learning, and WhatsApp sustains peer communities. This constant, feed-driven engagement shapes not only how they consume content but how they think, act, and spend. Tech-savvy and socially aware, Gen Z holds brands to a higher standard. For them, authenticity, transparency, and accountability—especially on environmental and ethical issues—aren’t marketing tools; they’re baseline expectations. We can also observe instances of them becoming unnecessarily arrogant in making quick decisions and becoming tools of some harmful anti-social ideological groups. However, we must understand that any generation should have proper education about certain aspects of the normal world, such as respecting others, listening to others, and living well. More interestingly, a global survey by the McKinsey Health Institute, covering 42,083 people across 26 countries, finds that Gen Z reports poorer mental health than older cohorts and is more likely to perceive social media as harmful.
Youth health behaviour in Sri Lanka reveals growing concerns in mental health and wellbeing. Around 18% of youth (here, school-going adolescents aged 13-17) experience depression, 22.4% feel lonely, and 11.9% struggle with sleep due to worry, with issues rising alongside digital exposure. Suicide-related risks are significant, with notable proportions reporting thoughts, plans, and attempts, particularly among females. Bullying remains a significant concern, particularly among males, with cyberbullying emerging as a notable issue. At the same time, substance use is increasing, including tobacco, smokeless tobacco, and e-cigarettes. These trends highlight the urgent need for targeted interventions to support youth mental health, resilience, and healthier behavioural outcomes in Sri Lanka. We need to create a forum in Sri Lanka to keep young people informed about this. Sri Lanka can designate a date (like April 25th) as a National Youth Empowerment Day to strengthen youth mental health and suicide prevention efforts. This should be supported by a comprehensive, multi-sectoral strategy aligned with basic global guidelines. Key priorities include school-based emotional learning, counselling services, and mental health training for teachers and parents. Strengthening data systems, reducing access to harmful means, and promoting responsible media reporting are essential. Empowering families and communities through awareness and digital tools will ensure this day becomes a meaningful national call to action.
As discussed earlier, Sri Lanka must carefully understand and respond to the challenges arising from its ongoing changes. Sri Lanka should establish an immediate task force comprising responsible stakeholders to engage in discussions on ongoing concerns. Recognising that it is not a comprehensive solution, the World Happiness Index can nevertheless act as an important indicator in guiding a paradigm shift in how we approach education and economic development. For a country seeking to reposition itself globally, Sri Lanka must adopt stronger, more effective strategies across multiple sectors. Building a resilient and prosperous future requires sound policymaking and clear strategic direction.
(The writer is a Professor in Management Studies at the Open University of Sri Lanka. You can reach Professor Abeysekera via nabey@ou.ac.lk)
by Prof. Nalin Abeysekera
Features
Hidden diversity in Sri Lanka’s killifish revealed: New study reshapes understanding of island’s freshwater biodiversity
A groundbreaking new study led by an international team of scientists, including Sri Lankan researcher Tharindu Ranasinghe, has uncovered striking genetic distinctions in two closely related killifish species—reshaping long-standing assumptions about freshwater biodiversity shared between Sri Lanka and India.
Published recently in Zootaxa, the research brings together leading ichthyologists such as Hiranya Sudasinghe, Madhava Meegaskumbura, Neelesh Dahanukar and Rajeev Raghavan, alongside other regional experts, highlighting a growing South Asian collaboration in biodiversity science.
For decades, scientists debated whether Aplocheilus blockii and Aplocheilus parvus were in fact the same species. But the new genetic analysis confirms they are “distinct, reciprocally monophyletic sister species,” providing long-awaited clarity to their taxonomic identity.
Speaking to The Island, Ranasinghe said the findings underscore the hidden complexity of Sri Lanka’s freshwater ecosystems.
“What appears superficially similar can be genetically very different,” he noted. “Our study shows that even widespread, common-looking species can hold deep evolutionary histories that we are only now beginning to understand.”
A tale of two fishes
The study reveals that Aplocheilus blockii is restricted to peninsular India, while Aplocheilus parvus occurs both in southern India and across Sri Lanka’s lowland wetlands.
Despite their close relationship, the two species show clear genetic separation, with a measurable “genetic gap” distinguishing them. Subtle physical differences—such as the pattern of iridescent scales—also help scientists tell them apart.
Co-author Sudasinghe, who has led several landmark studies on Sri Lankan freshwater fishes, noted that such integrative approaches combining genetics and morphology are redefining taxonomy in the region.
Echoes of ancient land bridges
The findings also shed light on the ancient biogeographic links between Sri Lanka and India.
Scientists believe that during periods of low sea levels in the past, the two landmasses were connected by the now-submerged Palk Isthmus, allowing freshwater species to move between them.
Later, rising seas severed this connection, isolating populations and driving genetic divergence.
“These fishes likely dispersed between India and Sri Lanka when the land bridge existed,” Ranasinghe said. “Subsequent isolation has resulted in the patterns of genetic structure we see today.”
Meegaskumbura emphasised that such patterns are increasingly being observed across multiple freshwater fish groups in Sri Lanka, pointing to a shared evolutionary history shaped by geography and climate.
A deeper genetic divide
One of the study’s most striking findings is that Sri Lankan populations of A. parvus are genetically distinct from those in India, with no shared haplotypes between the two regions.
Dahanukar explained that this level of differentiation, despite relatively recent geological separation, highlights how quickly freshwater species can diverge when isolated.
Meanwhile, Raghavan pointed out that these findings reinforce the importance of conserving habitats across both countries, as each region harbours unique genetic diversity.
Implications for conservation
The study carries important implications for conservation, particularly in a country like Sri Lanka where freshwater ecosystems are under increasing pressure from development, pollution, and climate change.
Ranasinghe stressed that understanding genetic diversity is key to protecting species effectively.
“If we treat all populations as identical, we risk losing unique genetic lineages,” he warned. “Conservation planning must recognise these hidden differences.”
Sri Lanka is already recognised as a global biodiversity hotspot, but studies like this suggest that its biological richness may be even greater than previously thought.
A broader scientific shift
The research also contributes to a growing body of work by scientists such as Sudasinghe and Meegaskumbura, challenging traditional assumptions about species distributions in the region.
Earlier studies often assumed that many freshwater fish species were shared uniformly between India and Sri Lanka. However, modern genetic tools are revealing a far more complex picture—one shaped by ancient geography, climatic shifts, and evolutionary processes.
“We are moving from a simplistic view of biodiversity to a much more nuanced understanding,” Ranasinghe said. “And Sri Lanka is proving to be a fascinating natural laboratory for this kind of research.”
Looking ahead
The researchers emphasise that much remains to be explored, with several freshwater fish groups in Sri Lanka still poorly understood at the genetic level.
For Sri Lanka, the message is clear: beneath its rivers, tanks, and wetlands lies a largely untapped reservoir of evolutionary history.
As Ranasinghe puts it:
“Every stream could hold a story of millions of years in the making. We are only just beginning to read them.”
By Ifham Nizam
-
News4 days ago2025 GCE AL: 62% qualify for Uni entrance; results of 111 suspended
-
News6 days agoTariff shock from 01 April as power costs climb across the board
-
Business5 days agoHour of reckoning comes for SL’s power sector
-
Editorial4 days agoSearch for Easter Sunday terror mastermind
-
Features6 days agoSeychelles … here we come
-
Opinion6 days agoSri Lanka has policy, but where is the data?
-
Opinion3 days agoHidden truth of Sri Lanka’s debt story: The untold narrative behind the report
-
Editorial5 days agoIdeological confusion and identity crisis
