Connect with us

Opinion

Jesus, freedom and democracy

Published

on

Jesus was a supremely and radically free human being. He was not a slave, a serf, a follower of anybody or under any authority human or divine. There was nothing, no commandment or tradition, no law or regulation that could bind him down. He did not give his companions and his group a constitution or a set of rules to follow. At the end of his earthly carrier of just three years, he gave them one, only one, commandment or rather a guideline. “Love one another as I have loved you.” Living with Jesus this is what his disciples saw and experienced, the freedom and love of Jesus, and to this they bore witness even unto death.

Democracy and freedom

A citizen is a free person in his country. In the ancient Greece and Rome, where the seeds of democracy were sowed, free citizens were only men who were citizens by descent. Women, children and slaves could not vote. Even for men there were different types of citizenship with various restrictions to full freedom. Democracy and freedom developed and evolved historically to what it is today in non-totalitarian countries. Freedom of a citizen is still developing even in the democratic countries. So, keeping the freedom of Jesus as a benchmark let us discuss the freedom of the citizens of Sri Lanka, our country.

Jesus and God

Before we proceed further it is necessary to show evidence for and confirm what I had said in the opening paragraph. Jesus did not bow his head or bend his knee to anyone or any authority, human or divine. Yes, even divine. Jesus called God “Abba”, a cuddly childlike word like “Thaththi” or “Daddy”, he did not use the formal word “Father”. He was God’s son and he told others they are God’s children. For Jesus God is family. In the intimacy of a loving family all are equal, nobody bends his knee or bows his head to anybody else. It was clearly enunciated in the parable of the Prodigal Son. The loving father (God) did not want his younger son to be a servant or a slave in his household. This is the radical freedom that Jesus exercised and enjoyed.

Jesus, authority and fear

Jesus was an authority unto himself. He was free from and above all other authorities. People said he spoke with authority. In the ancient Jewish milieu the authority of the Torah was never questioned. But Jesus taught saying “You were told (by Torah) …but I tell you …” The famous saying that the Sabbath rule was made for man and not man for the Sabbath rule exemplifies it. He freely broke the clean and unclean rules by eating and socialising with tax collectors and sinners, the hoi polloi, the “anavim” or the poorest and the “thrown away people” as Pope Francis calls them. He feared none. He chased out the sellers of animals and money changers from the Temple premises telling them that the Temple was a House of Prayer not a den of thieves. Whether it is Herod the satrap, the chief priests or the imperial governor he would accost them with his head held high on equal terms. Anybody perusing the trial of Jesus cannot avoid noticing how Jesus never showed any fear or subservience to his judges or the crowd or the soldiers. Even after Pilate got him bloodied and showed him to the crowd Jesus was unbowed and unbent. Pilate could not but say to the chief priests and the mob “Ecce Homo”. “Here is a MAN” or “Behold a MAN” in the full Kipling sense of the word.

Love and freedom

The secret of the radical freedom of Jesus was his total and transparent selflessness or his love. He loved as no man ever loved on this planet. He loved people in the same manner as he loved God, his Abba. If one loves as Jesus loved he can do no wrong and do no harm. He doesn’t need commandments, rules, regulations or customs and traditions to make society safe from and for him. As Augustine of Hippo said “Love, and do what you like.” A man or woman who loves as Jesus loved becomes fearless and free.

Are Sri Lankans free?

The obvious answer is that the great majority is not. They can be very easily deceived and led by the nose. It is pathetic to see 6.9 million people making fools of themselves. First of all they are affiliated to parties, ideologies and all kinds of isms and follow blindly any leader without making an evaluation or analysis of the party manifesto or the character of the man they follow. Secondly they believe in myth and superstition. Thirdly fear dominates their lives. What democracy can you have with such people?

The super charlatans

Didn’t the 6.9 million know about the Rajapaksas and the tsunami funds? Didn’t they ever wonder how his three brats were spending like nothing and living it up like playboys? Have they never heard of Siriliya? Have they never heard of the deals between the Krish and the Rajapaksas? Didn’t they ever realise what an enormous amount of money has been wasted on useless white elephants, like the Lotus Tower, the Sooriyawewa Stadium, the Mattala Airport and the Hambantota Conference Hall? Why is it that the murderers of Thajudeen and Lasantha Wickrematunga can never be discovered? The revelation, from circumstantial evidence, is that Adani Group probably has dealings with the Rajapaksas. The Pandora Papers expose has raised the Rajapaksas to the notorious status of International Crooks. This is only the tip of the iceberg. If the 6.9 million had only scratched the garbage heap a little they would have found much more.

Lies, myth and superstition

With a loud noise a cobra emerges from the Kelani River carrying a casket of relics and people rush with flowers to worship and gaze on the relics! The media too, degenerates so low as to make falsehood truth and myth fact. A Muslim doctor was accused of sterilising Sinhala mothers to the tune of thousands without their consent! Those who spread fake news never accepted they had made a mistake or apologised for it because it deliberately spread fake news with an evil political motive . They believed in scandalous tales about Kottu rotti mixed with birth control pills, and underwear soaked in a chemical that causes infertility. Everybody knows but nobody says who the brains behind the Easter Sunday massacre are. Some guessed who it was quite soon. In any crime, the prime suspect is the one who profited most from it. Ask any police detective. Among the 6.9 million there were monks, intellectuals, professionals and artistes who were taken for a jolly good ride. The world was surprised that the citizens of Sri Lanka have such low IQ and can be so easily fooled.

Charlatans and scoundrels leading a country of fools and morons does not amount to democracy. Our democracy is only in name.

A glimmer of hope

Our young generation (between 20-40) called the digital generation or the FB, Twitter, Instagram, Whatsup, Imo, Viber and You Tube generation has given us through their Aragalaya a glimmer of hope. They are politically and socially more aware. A truth seeking, more rational, logical and an independent thinking generation. If they were of the 6.9 million, with humility they accepted their mistake and joined the Aragalaya with a vehemence. They are free from affiliation to any political party or ism or hero worshipping. They are more altruistic and affectionate. They are fearless and courageous. They are truly a new generation.

I gauged them at the Galle Face Gotagogama. The Aragalaya can be defined with the three words they always use, Nirpakshika, Nirprachanda and Aadaraya. Nirpakshika means they are not followers or slaves of anybody, any party or any ism. They are free; they think for themselves and they decide for themselves. Doesn’t this remind us of the freedom of Jesus? Nirprachanda means non-violence stemming from human solidarity. Aragalaya is an experience of solidarity; not the narrow solidarity of groups of the same race, religion, language, class, caste or political party but the all-inclusive solidarity of the human race. This is the ethos of Jesus. Finally they called their movement Aadaraye Aragalaya. “Love one another as I have loved you”. Reading the four Gospels in the New Testament one can clearly see that the three year Aragalaya of Jesus was truly an Aadaraye Aragalaya.

Conclusion

The Aragalaya led by the new generation revealed what is truly necessary for democracy. Aragalaya was democratic as it never had a clear leader. All were welcome to come forward and share their opinion. Various individuals were spokespersons for it but Aragalaya went on, a common project of the people. Everybody shared equal responsibility for the spontaneous project, in such a way that all were leaders. Aragalaya formed citizens fit for true democracy. And that has given us a glimmer of hope. Democracy, not just in name but in practice, is possible in Sri Lanka. The good news of Nirpakshika, Nirprachanda and Aadaraye prajatantravadaya must be spread, countrywide. It is already spreading. This is the foundation for the system change we are looking for. And this is what frightens the enemies of Aragalaya, the Ali Baba and the 225 thieves. They know their evil system is in its death throes. With PTA, Emergency, suppression, new alliances, new parties, fake news and all kinds of crooked deals they are fighting for their survival. They will be vanquished.

Aragalayata Jayawewa!

Fr J.C. Pieris

Galle



Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

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

Opinion

Pot calling the kettle black?

Published

on

Doctor Upul Wijayawardhana (eminent physician), posed a riddle for us. He wrote about that island Sri Lanka as ‘ this little dot in the ocean’ when deriding the remark of President Dissanayake who had said that Sri Lanka was a hunduva , a term that indicated a small volume: me hunduve inna puluvan da? (Can you live in this restricted space?) Most sensible people, even uneducated, judge that the volume of a little drop (of whatever) is smaller than that of a hunduva; so is weight. When the learned doctor emphatically maintains ‘….we are not a hunduva’ but ‘… a little dot in the ocean…’, is the pot calling the kettle black or worse?

Physically and population wise, Sri Lanka is neither ‘a little dot’ nor ‘a hunduva. This is all in the rich imaginations of Dissanayake and Wijayawardhana. I once counted that there were more than 50 members of the UN who were smaller than Sri Lanka in physical and population size. England was a sizeable island with a small population in the northwest corner of Europe in late 18th century when it began to become what China, with 1.3 billion people and jutting out to the Pacific, is now. From about 1850, when the population of Great Britain was about 20 million, less than that of Sri Lanka in 2026, it ruled more than half the world. Besides, do not forget Vanuatu, Kiribati, Cook Islands, Antigua and Barbuda, Barbados, Lesotho and New Zealand (who habitually beats us at cricket). New Zealand with 5 million population played against 1.5 billion population India (1:300) for the T20 cricket championship a few weeks ago. I quietly wished New Zealand would win; so much for crap about dots in the Indian Ocean or the south Pacific.

Dr. Wijayawardhana also wrote about history and about ‘The achievements of Hunduwa’. The massive reservoirs and extensive irrigation systems in rajarata and ruhuna as well as the stupa are indeed tremendous works of irrigation and bear witness to superior ingenuity and organising ability, for the time they were built. They compare very well among structures elsewhere in the ancient world. Terms like ‘granary of the East’ must be taken with more than a grain of salt. Facile use of such terms does not take account of whatever shreds of evidence there is of adversity in those times. Monsoon Asia over the ages has more or less regularly suffered from floods, droughts and consequent famines. The last dire famine was in Bengal in 1944. The irrigation works in Lanka were a magnificent response to those phenomena. The modern response has been scientific agriculture making India a major grain exporter, from near famine conditions in 1973-74. Recall Indira Gandhi’s garibi hatao (eliminate poverty) speech to the General Assembly of the UN, that year.

The bhikkhu who wrote down the tripitaka in aluvihara did so because there was the threat of a severe famine in the course of which learned bhikkhu might have come to harm. Buddhist thought over centuries had been passed from generation to generation vocally (saamici patipanno bhagavato savaka (listener) sangho) and the departure from that tradition must have required a major threat of famine. There are stories of bhikkhu from Lanka fleeing from dire straits. In the same vein, while the mahavamsa speaks of kings and their valiant deeds, there is little account of the large mass of little people who lived then. Sensible teaching of the history of a people must include the history of as much of the people as possible and some idea of the history of other peoples in comparable times to avoid feeling dangerously smug and arrogant, which we have seen many times over.

Usvatte-aratchi

Continue Reading

Opinion

Ministerial resignation and new political culture

Published

on

Kumara Jayakody

The resignation of Energy Minister Kumara Jayakody comes after several weeks of controversy over his ministerial role. The controversy sharpened when the minister was indicted by the Commission on Bribery and Corruption for a transaction he was involved in ten years ago as a government official in the Fertiliser Corporation. The other issue was the government’s purchase of substandard coal from a new supplier. Minister Jayakody’s resignation followed the appointment of a Special Presidential Commission of Inquiry to investigate coal and petroleum purchases. The minister who resigned, along with the Secretary to the Ministry of Energy, Udayanga Hemapala, stated that they did not wish to compromise the integrity of the investigation to be undertaken by the Commission of Inquiry.

The government’s initial resistance to holding the minister accountable for the costly purchase was based on the argument that the official procedure had been followed in ordering the coal. However, the fact that the procedure permitted a disadvantageous purchase which has come to light on this occasion suggests a weakness in the process. The government’s appointment of the Special Presidential Commission of Inquiry to examine purchases as far back as 2009 follows from this observation. In this time 450 purchases are reported to have been made, and if several of them were as disadvantageous as this one, the cost to the country can be imagined. The need to investigate transactions since 2009 also arises from the possibility that loopholes in official government procedures in the past would have permitted private enrichment at a high cost to the country.

Concerns have been expressed in the past that the purchase of coal and petroleum, often on an emergency basis, enabled the use of emergency procurement processes which do not require going through the full tender procedures. The government has pledged to eradicate corruption as its priority. As a result, the general population would expect it to do everything within its power to correct those systems that permitted such corruption. Accountability is not only forward looking to ensure non-corrupt practices in the present, it is also backward looking to ensure that corrupt practices of the past are discontinued. This would be a matter of concern to those who headed government ministries and departments in previous governments. Those who have misapplied the systems can be expected to do their utmost to resist any investigation into the past.

Politically Astute

One of the main reasons for the government’s continuing popularity among the general population, as reflected in February 2026 public opinion poll by Verité Research, has been its willingness to address the problem of corruption. Public opinion studies have consistently shown that corruption remains one of the top concerns of citizens in Sri Lanka. The arrests and indictments of members of former governments have been viewed with general satisfaction as paving the way to a less corrupt society. At the same time, the resignations of Minister Kumara Jayakody and Secretary Udayanga Hemapala are an indication that not even government members will be spared if they are found to have crossed red lines. This is an important signal, as public confidence depends not only on holding political opponents to account but also on demonstrating fairness and consistency within one’s own ranks.

There appears to be a strategy on the part of the opposition to target government leaders and allege corruption so that ministers will be forced to step down. Organised protests against other ministers, and demonstrations outside their homes, are on the rise. The government appears not to want to give in to this opposition strategy and therefore delayed the resignation of Minister Jayakody until it had itself established the Special Presidential Commission of Inquiry. It enabled the minister to step down without it seeming that the government was yielding to opposition pressure. In political terms, this was a calibrated response that sought to balance the need for accountability with the need to maintain authority and coherence in governance.

The demand by opposition parties to focus attention on the coal problem could also be seen as an attempt to shift the national debate from the corruption of the past to controversies in the present. The opposition’s endeavour would be to take the heat off themselves in regard to the corruption of the past and turn it onto the government by making it the focus of inquiries into corruption. The decision to set up a Special Presidential Commission of Inquiry accompanied by the resignation of the minister and the ministry secretary was a politically astute way of demonstrating that the government will have no tolerance for corruption. It will also help to remind the general public about the rampant corruption of past governments which prevents the opposition’s corruption accusations against the government from gaining traction amongst the people.

New Practice

The resignation of a government minister who faces allegations but has not been convicted is still a relatively new practice in Sri Lanka. The general practice in Sri Lanka up to the present time has been for those in government service, if found to be at fault, to be transferred rather than removed from office. This is commonly seen in the case of police officers who, if found to have used excessive force or engaged in abuse, are transferred to another station rather than subjected to more serious disciplinary action. A similar pattern was seen in the case of former minister Keheliya Rambukwella, who faced allegations of corruption in the health field but was reassigned to a different portfolio rather than removed from government.

Against this background, the present resignation assumes greater importance. It signals a willingness to break with past practices and to establish a higher standard of conduct in public office. However, a single instance does not in itself create a lasting change. What is required is the consistent application of the same principle across all cases, irrespective of political affiliation or convenience. This is where the government has an opportunity to strengthen its credibility. By ensuring that the same standards of accountability are applied to its own members as to those of previous governments, it can demonstrate that its commitment to good governance is not selective.

The establishment of the Special Presidential Commission of Inquiry, the willingness to accept ministerial resignation, and the recognition of systemic weaknesses in procurement are all steps in the right direction. The challenge now is to ensure that these steps are followed through with determination and consistency. If the investigations are conducted impartially and lead to meaningful reforms, the present controversy could mark a turning point. The resignation of the minister should not be seen as an isolated event but as the beginning of a new practice. If it becomes part of a broader pattern of accountability, it can contribute to a new political culture and to restoring public trust in government.

by Jehan Perera

Continue Reading

Opinion

Shutting roof top solar panels – a crime

Published

on

The Island newspaper’s lead news item on the 12th of April 2026 was on the CEB request to shut down rooftop solar power during the low demand periods. Their argument is that rooftop solar panels produce about 300 MW power during the day and there is no procedure to balance the grid with such a load.

We as well as a large academic and industrial consortium members have been trying to promote solar energy as a viable and sustainable power source since the early 1990’s. We formed the Solar Energy Society and made representations to Government politicians about the need to have solar power generation. This continuous promotional work contributed to the rapid increase in PV solar companies from three in the early 1990’s to over 650 active PV solar companies established today in the country. These companies have created tens of thousands of high-quality jobs, as well as moving in the right direction for sustainable development.

However, all these efforts appear to have been in vain since the CEB policy makers have continuously rejected solar energy as a viable alternative. Their power generation plans at that time did not include solar energy at all but only relied on imported coal power plants and diesel power generation. Even at the meetings where CEB senior staff were present, we emphasised the importance of installation of battery storage facilities and grid balancing for which they have done nothing at all over the past three decades. Now they have grudgingly accepted the need to include solar energy, which was an election promise of the present government. The government policy is that Sri Lanka should go for renewables to satisfy 70% of its energy needs by 2030 and soon move towards the green hydrogen technology by using solar and wind energy.

The question is why the diesel generators and hydropower stations cannot be shut off one by one to accommodate the solar power generated during the daytime. Unlike a coal-fired plant, diesel generators and hydro power plants can be shut off in a relatively shorter period of time. Norochchalai Lakvijaya power plant produces around 900 MW of power while the total country requirement is 2500 MW on a daily basis. The remainder is provided by diesel generators, hydro and other renewable energy sources.

The need for work to achieve this goal of grid balancing should be the primary responsibility of the CEB. Modern grid balancing systems are in operation in countries such as Germany where around 56% of its energy come from renewable sources. They also plan to increase this to reach 80% of the energy required through renewables by 2030. Our CEB is hell bent on diesel power plants. Who benefits from such emergency power purchases is anybody’s guess?

The Government and the CEB should realise that all roof top solar plants are privately financed through personal funds or bank loans with no financial burden on the Government. It is a crime to request them not to operate these solar panels and get the necessary credits for the power transmitted to the national grid. It appears that the results of CEB’s lack of grid balancing experience and unwillingness to learn over three decades have now passed to the privately-funded rooftop solar panel owners. It is unfortunate that the Government is not considering the contributions of ordinary individuals who provide clean power to the national grid at no cost to the Government. Over 150,000 rooftop solar panels owners are severely affected by these ruthless decisions by the CEB, and this will lead to the un-popularity of this new government in the end.

by Professors Oliver Ileperuma and I M Dharmadasa

Continue Reading

Trending