Connect with us

Features

Land Rights of Veddas

Published

on

by Jayantha Perera

The chief of Wannila eththo (Veddas or forest dwellers) and the Center for Environmental Justice filed a petition recently in the Appeal Court of Sri Lanka against the clearing of 500 hectares of land in Pollebedda-Rambakan Oya area, a well known ancestral domain of Veddas. The petition stated that the Mahaweli Development Authority had begun an agricultural and livestock project on the land to cultivate maize without conducting an environmental impact assessment. The chief claimed that the land is a part of the ancestral domain of Veddas, and such land clearings would cause their eviction from ancestral land, harm their culture, and usurp their rights over natural resources in the territory. This paper examines their ancestral land rights in the context of international law.

 

Who are Veddas?

Veddas are indigenous peoples, and international law recognizes their existence and rights. They are distinct social and cultural groups who share collective ancestral claims to the lands and natural resources where they live, occupy, or from which they have been displaced. The land and natural resources on which they depend are inextricably linked to their identity, culture, livelihoods, and spiritual well-being. They maintain a language distinct from the official languages.

Veddas live in monsoon dry forests in eastern parts of Sri Lanka. At present, their population is less than 5,000 persons. They consider themselves as Adivasis (original inhabitants) of Sri Lanka. They are forest dwellers who hunt and gather for subsistence. Some are engaged in chena (slash-and-burn) cultivation under rain-fed conditions. Development programs during the past half a century have taken their land, deprived them of their use of natural resources, and limited their access to wildlife sanctuaries that were previously their ancestral land.

Ancestral lands of Veddas have three temporal spaces. The first is the active link with their past traditional domain, which goes back to the pre-colonial time and beyond. The second is the current ancestral domain that overlaps with their past ancestral land or, at least, with a part of it. The third is the traditional domain that they aspire to transmit to their future generations. The social and cultural attachments of an indigenous group to a particular territory are the crucial elements of its indigeneity. International law and international human rights law consider attachment to their ancestral land a fundamental right of indigenous peoples.

 

Veddas and International Law

The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples of 2007 provides the contours of indigenous peoples’ rights framework. Sri Lanka is a signatory to the Declaration. It highlights indigenous peoples’ relationship to their lands, territories, and natural resources as the core of their identity, well-being, and culture. Preservation of the environment, transmitted through traditional knowledge, passes down through generations, is also at the center of their existence.

Article 26 of the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples specifies that:

1. Indigenous peoples have the right to the lands, territories, and resources they have traditionally owned, occupied, or otherwise used or acquired.

2. Indigenous peoples have the right to own, use, develop and control the lands, territories, and resources that they possess because of traditional ownership or other traditional occupation or use and those they have otherwise acquired.

3. States shall give legal recognition and protection to these lands, territories, and resources. Such recognition shall be conducted with due to the indigenous people’s customs, traditions, and land tenure systems.

The Declaration provides a broad legal framework to protect and sustain indigenous communities. At the country-level, such protection and sustenance require a regulatory framework. Sri Lanka still does not have such a framework. As a result, state departments and agencies continue to acquire ancestral land of Veddas for development programmes. In such endevours, departments and agencies do not acknowledge their cultural, spiritual, economic, and social attachments to their ancestral land or obtain their consent. Such actions have deprived them of hunting grounds and ‘criminalized’ their livelihoods, and discourage the continuity of their cultural and spiritual systems.

 

Veddas and the State

The state has usurped several Vedda settlements where they have lived for hundreds of years in harmony with nature. Their hunting and agricultural practices have enabled them to secure basic food security. Occasionally they bartered honey, dried meat, and vegetables with nearby Sinhala and Tamil settlements. Such transactions are not commercial but for survival.

The takeover of Veddas’ ancestral land for development purposes during the past half-century has forced them to resettle at government-sponsored relocation sites out of their territories. As a result, most of them who moved to new relocation sites are socially isolated and economically and politically marginalized. Development projects and urbanization undermine their culture, livelihood systems, and social organization. I remember visiting the Henanigala Vedda resettlement site in the early 1980s. Children were malnourished; adults were depressed and purposeless. They used toilet slabs distributed by Mahaweli to make enclosures for animals.

During the past half-century, Veddas have been losing their distinct cultural identity and lifestyle. Direct outside impacts transform their lifestyle, diminishing the scope of their culture and rituals. Resettlement efforts have changed Veddas’ lifestyle and gradually merged them with Sinhalese and Tamil communities, which hold cultural dominance. Such changes have compelled Veddas to adopt a new world view, religious beliefs, and to give up their unique traditional lifestyle. Their language and matrilineal inheritance patterns, for example, have been diminishing as a result.

The Mahaweli agencies have not consulted Veddas regarding development projects. I was a resident anthropologist in the Mahaweli H region in the 1970s where I met many of them. They were worried about how fast they were losing their land, identity, and culture. In the late 1980s, I was in System B of the Mahaweli as a irrigation water management specialist. The Vedda community complained that the state had established large wildlife parks such as Madura Oya Sanctuary and relocation sites without consulting them or engaging them in decision-making. International law prescribes that the state or project owners should obtain their ‘free, prior, informed consent. But no such consent-seeking exercises have ever been conducted among Veddas.

Social development indicators show that Veddas are poor performers on critical indicators. For example, in 2017, one-fifth of Vedda’s children did not attend school. 60% of Vedda girls and 15% of the boys were married before they reached 18. The reason for such poor performance was not Vedda culture or their ‘laziness’ or low-level morality, but the failure of the state to protect them and support their interests.

 

A Way Forward

A fundamental human right is that the state respects property and land rights. Another is the right to non-discrimination. These two guarantees that indigenous rights are recognized as established through historical use. The starting point for any meaningful dialogue between the state and Veddas is that the state must not limit indigenous communities’ property rights. For example, resource extraction or land acquisition or transfer should not lead to mass-scale usurpation of their ancestral lands.

The Government has to establish an independent authority in consultation with and participation of the Vedda community to guide and co-ordinate laws and policies to safeguard the interests.

The Government should have a legal framework to accommodate the Declaration of Indigenous Peoples Rights in local legal framework. ‘The Scheduled Tribes and other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006’ in India provides a good example. The Government should also amend Fauna and Flora Protection Ordinance, Forest Ordinance, Mahaweli Development Act, Land Acquisition Act, and National Heritage and Wilderness Areas Act to fit into the new legal framework. Such laws should also recognize Veddas’ cultural rights and ensure due recognition and protection of and access to their traditional forest habitats.

 

(The writer who describes himself as a ‘Safeguard Policy Specialist’ worked worked on indigenous peoples’ issues for over 20 years in Asia. A social anthropologist he did doctoral fieldwork in the Mahaweli in the late 1970s and worked as a water user organization specialist in System B in the late 1980s.)



Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

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

Features

Ranking public services with AI — A roadmap to reviving institutions like SriLankan Airlines

Published

on

Efficacy measures an organisation’s capacity to achieve its mission and intended outcomes under planned or optimal conditions. It differs from efficiency, which focuses on achieving objectives with minimal resources, and effectiveness, which evaluates results in real-world conditions. Today, modern AI tools, using publicly available data, enable objective assessment of the efficacy of Sri Lanka’s government institutions.

Among key public bodies, the Supreme Court of Sri Lanka emerges as the most efficacious, outperforming the Department of Inland Revenue, Sri Lanka Customs, the Election Commission, and Parliament. In the financial and regulatory sector, the Central Bank of Sri Lanka (CBSL) ranks highest, ahead of the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Public Utilities Commission, the Telecommunications Regulatory Commission, the Insurance Regulatory Commission, and the Sri Lanka Standards Institution.

Among state-owned enterprises, the Sri Lanka Ports Authority (SLPA) leads in efficacy, followed by Bank of Ceylon and People’s Bank. Other institutions assessed included the State Pharmaceuticals Corporation, the National Water Supply and Drainage Board, the Ceylon Electricity Board, the Ceylon Petroleum Corporation, and the Sri Lanka Transport Board. At the lower end of the spectrum were Lanka Sathosa and Sri Lankan Airlines, highlighting a critical challenge for the national economy.

Sri Lankan Airlines, consistently ranked at the bottom, has long been a financial drain. Despite successive governments’ reform attempts, sustainable solutions remain elusive.

Globally, the most profitable airlines operate as highly integrated, technology-enabled ecosystems rather than as fragmented departments. Operations, finance, fleet management, route planning, engineering, marketing, and customer service are closely coordinated, sharing real-time data to maximise efficiency, safety, and profitability.

The challenge for Sri Lankan Airlines is structural. Its operations are fragmented, overly hierarchical, and poorly aligned. Simply replacing the CEO or senior leadership will not address these deep-seated weaknesses. What the airline needs is a cohesive, integrated organisational ecosystem that leverages technology for cross-functional planning and real-time decision-making.

The government must urgently consider restructuring Sri Lankan Airlines to encourage:

=Joint planning across operational divisions

=Data-driven, evidence-based decision-making

=Continuous cross-functional consultation

=Collaborative strategic decisions on route rationalisation, fleet renewal, partnerships, and cost management, rather than exclusive top-down mandates

Sustainable reform requires systemic change. Without modernised organisational structures, stronger accountability, and aligned incentives across divisions, financial recovery will remain out of reach. An integrated, performance-oriented model offers the most realistic path to operational efficiency and long-term viability.

Reforming loss-making institutions like Sri Lankan Airlines is not merely a matter of leadership change — it is a structural overhaul essential to ensuring these entities contribute productively to the national economy rather than remain perpetual burdens.

By Chula Goonasekera – Citizen Analyst

Continue Reading

Features

Why Pi Day?

Published

on

International Day of Mathematics falls tomorrow

The approximate value of Pi (π) is 3.14 in mathematics. Therefore, the day 14 March is celebrated as the Pi Day. In 2019, UNESCO proclaimed 14 March as the International Day of Mathematics.

Ancient Babylonians and Egyptians figured out that the circumference of a circle is slightly more than three times its diameter. But they could not come up with an exact value for this ratio although they knew that it is a constant. This constant was later named as π which is a letter in the Greek alphabet.

Archimedes

It was the Greek mathematician Archimedes (250 BC) who was able to find an upper bound and a lower bound for this constant. He drew a circle of diameter one unit and drew hexagons inside and outside the circle such that the sides of each hexagon touch the sides of the circle. In mathematics the circle passing through all vertices of a polygon is called a ‘circumcircle’ and the largest circle that fits inside a polygon tangent to all its sides is called an ‘incircle’. The total length of the smaller hexagon then becomes the lower bound of π and the length of the hexagon outside the circle is the upper bound. He realised that by increasing the number of sides of the polygon can make the bounds get closer to the value of Pi and increased the number of sides to 12,24,48 and 60. He argued that by increasing the number of sides will ultimately result in obtaining the original circle, thereby laying the foundation for the theory of limits. He ended up with the lower bound as 22/7 and the upper bound 223/71. He could not continue his research as his hometown Syracuse was invaded by Romans and was killed by one of the soldiers. His last words were ‘do not disturb my circles’, perhaps a reference to his continuing efforts to find the value of π to a greater accuracy.

Archimedes can be considered as the father of geometry. His contributions revolutionised geometry and his methods anticipated integral calculus. He invented the pulley and the hydraulic screw for drawing water from a well. He also discovered the law of hydrostatics. He formulated the law of levers which states that a smaller weight placed farther from a pivot can balance a much heavier weight closer to it. He famously said “Give me a lever long enough and a place to stand and I will move the earth”.

Mathematicians have found many expressions for π as a sum of infinite series that converge to its value. One such famous series is the Leibniz Series found in 1674 by the German mathematician Gottfried Leibniz, which is given below.

π = 4 ( 1 – 1/3 + 1/5 – 1/7 + 1/9 – ………….)

The Indian mathematical genius Ramanujan came up with a magnificent formula in 1910. The short form of the formula is as follows.

π = 9801/(1103 √8)

For practical applications an approximation is sufficient. Even NASA uses only the approximation 3.141592653589793 for its interplanetary navigation calculations.

It is not just an interesting and curious number. It is used for calculations in navigation, encryption, space exploration, video game development and even in medicine. As π is fundamental to spherical geometry, it is at the heart of positioning systems in GPS navigations. It also contributes significantly to cybersecurity. As it is an irrational number it is an excellent foundation for generating randomness required in encryption and securing communications. In the medical field, it helps to calculate blood flow rates and pressure differentials. In diagnostic tools such as CT scans and MRI, pi is an important component in mathematical algorithms and signal processing techniques.

This elegant, never-ending number demonstrates how mathematics transforms into practical applications that shape our world. The possibilities of what it can do are infinite as the number itself. It has become a symbol of beauty and complexity in mathematics. “It matters little who first arrives at an idea, rather what is significant is how far that idea can go.” said Sophie Germain.

Mathematics fans are intrigued by this irrational number and attempt to calculate it as far as they can. In March 2022, Emma Haruka Iwao of Japan calculated it to 100 trillion decimal places in Google Cloud. It had taken 157 days. The Guinness World Record for reciting the number from memory is held by Rajveer Meena of India for 70000 decimal places over 10 hours.

Happy Pi Day!

The author is a senior examiner of the International Baccalaureate in the UK and an educational consultant at the Overseas School of Colombo.

by R N A de Silva

Continue Reading

Features

Sheer rise of Realpolitik making the world see the brink

Published

on

A combined US-Israel attack on Iran.(BBC)

The recent humanly costly torpedoing of an Iranian naval vessel in Sri Lanka’s Exclusive Economic Zone by a US submarine has raised a number of issues of great importance to international political discourse and law that call for elucidation. It is best that enlightened commentary is brought to bear in such discussions because at present misleading and uninformed speculation on questions arising from the incident are being aired by particularly jingoistic politicians of Sri Lanka’s South which could prove deleterious.

As matters stand, there seems to be no credible evidence that the Indian state was aware of the impending torpedoing of the Iranian vessel but these acerbic-tongued politicians of Sri Lanka’s South would have the local public believe that the tragedy was triggered with India’s connivance. Likewise, India is accused of ‘embroiling’ Sri Lanka in the incident on account of seemingly having prior knowledge of it and not warning Sri Lanka about the impending disaster.

It is plain that a process is once again afoot to raise anti-India hysteria in Sri Lanka. An obligation is cast on the Sri Lankan government to ensure that incendiary speculation of the above kind is defeated and India-Sri Lanka relations are prevented from being in any way harmed. Proactive measures are needed by the Sri Lankan government and well meaning quarters to ensure that public discourse in such matters have a factual and rational basis. ‘Knowledge gaps’ could prove hazardous.

Meanwhile, there could be no doubt that Sri Lanka’s sovereignty was violated by the US because the sinking of the Iranian vessel took place in Sri Lanka’s Exclusive Economic Zone. While there is no international decrying of the incident, and this is to be regretted, Sri Lanka’s helplessness and small player status would enable the US to ‘get away with it’.

Could anything be done by the international community to hold the US to account over the act of lawlessness in question? None is the answer at present. This is because in the current ‘Global Disorder’ major powers could commit the gravest international irregularities with impunity. As the threadbare cliché declares, ‘Might is Right’….. or so it seems.

Unfortunately, the UN could only merely verbally denounce any violations of International Law by the world’s foremost powers. It cannot use countervailing force against violators of the law, for example, on account of the divided nature of the UN Security Council, whose permanent members have shown incapability of seeing eye-to-eye on grave matters relating to International Law and order over the decades.

The foregoing considerations could force the conclusion on uncritical sections that Political Realism or Realpolitik has won out in the end. A basic premise of the school of thought known as Political Realism is that power or force wielded by states and international actors determine the shape, direction and substance of international relations. This school stands in marked contrast to political idealists who essentially proclaim that moral norms and values determine the nature of local and international politics.

While, British political scientist Thomas Hobbes, for instance, was a proponent of Political Realism, political idealism has its roots in the teachings of Socrates, Plato and latterly Friedrich Hegel of Germany, to name just few such notables.

On the face of it, therefore, there is no getting way from the conclusion that coercive force is the deciding factor in international politics. If this were not so, US President Donald Trump in collaboration with Israeli Rightist Premier Benjamin Natanyahu could not have wielded the ‘big stick’, so to speak, on Iran, killed its Supreme Head of State, terrorized the Iranian public and gone ‘scot-free’. That is, currently, the US’ impunity seems to be limitless.

Moreover, the evidence is that the Western bloc is reuniting in the face of Iran’s threats to stymie the flow of oil from West Asia to the rest of the world. The recent G7 summit witnessed a coming together of the foremost powers of the global North to ensure that the West does not suffer grave negative consequences from any future blocking of western oil supplies.

Meanwhile, Israel is having a ‘free run’ of the Middle East, so to speak, picking out perceived adversarial powers, such as Lebanon, and militarily neutralizing them; once again with impunity. On the other hand, Iran has been bringing under assault, with no questions asked, Gulf states that are seen as allying with the US and Israel. West Asia is facing a compounded crisis and International Law seems to be helplessly silent.

Wittingly or unwittingly, matters at the heart of International Law and peace are being obfuscated by some pro-Trump administration commentators meanwhile. For example, retired US Navy Captain Brent Sadler has cited Article 51 of the UN Charter, which provides for the right to self or collective self-defence of UN member states in the face of armed attacks, as justifying the US sinking of the Iranian vessel (See page 2 of The Island of March 10, 2026). But the Article makes it clear that such measures could be resorted to by UN members only ‘ if an armed attack occurs’ against them and under no other circumstances. But no such thing happened in the incident in question and the US acted under a sheer threat perception.

Clearly, the US has violated the Article through its action and has once again demonstrated its tendency to arbitrarily use military might. The general drift of Sadler’s thinking is that in the face of pressing national priorities, obligations of a state under International Law could be side-stepped. This is a sure recipe for international anarchy because in such a policy environment states could pursue their national interests, irrespective of their merits, disregarding in the process their obligations towards the international community.

Moreover, Article 51 repeatedly reiterates the authority of the UN Security Council and the obligation of those states that act in self-defence to report to the Council and be guided by it. Sadler, therefore, could be said to have cited the Article very selectively, whereas, right along member states’ commitments to the UNSC are stressed.

However, it is beyond doubt that international anarchy has strengthened its grip over the world. While the US set destabilizing precedents after the crumbling of the Cold War that paved the way for the current anarchic situation, Russia further aggravated these degenerative trends through its invasion of Ukraine. Stepping back from anarchy has thus emerged as the prime challenge for the world community.

Continue Reading

Trending