Connect with us

Features

Momentous events in Parliament

Published

on

(Continued from last week)

 Chapter 27

A 33 YEAR JOURNEY in PARLIAMENT COMES TO AN END

As I was reaching the age of retirement of 60 years, I felt it was a part of my official duties to call on H.E. the President D.B.Wijetunga to say farewell. Having received an appointment, I called on him. He greeted me very warmly saying “Nihal, why are you trying to leave us?” I promptly replied that at the age of 60, there was no option left to me. I must add that by this time, there had grown a great bond of friendship between us. This arose as a result of President Premadasa falling victim to an assassin bomb at Armour Street on May 1st, 1993. It was my duty to inform the House of this tragic accident. Since there was a vacancy in the Office of President, I as the returning officer under the law, would be receiving nominations from Members for the vacant post and fixed a day for the next Sitting of the House to receive nominations. The Government had by then decided that it was Mr. Wijetunga who was to be their nominee.

Mr. Wijetunga quite elated by the news of his nomination consulted me on many occasions as to how an election would be held and the procedure. I even recall him visiting me in my simple home in Havelock Road, to have a chat with me. Mr. Wijetunga was very well known for his stark simplicity and charm.

On the appointed day in the House, I rose and asked for nominations. Mr. Wijetunga’s name was proposed by the Government and seconded. I then asked for any other name. The SUP had decided not to propose a name and would support Mr. Wijetunga. As there were no other names proposed, after waiting for a few minutes, I declared Mr. Wijetunga elected unanimously as the new President of Sri Lanka. He was overjoyed and thanked me for all my help.

So, at our final meeting he said very cordially, “Nihal, you have over 30 year’s full-fledged experience in Parliamentary matters. We cannot allow you to leave.” I replied, “Sir, this is determined by the Constitution and there is no option for me.” He replied quickly, “‘Mere is a procedure in the Constitution for your term to be extended by moving a Motion in the House and we can get it through”. I said, “No, Sir. That would not be proper and you would be breaking tradition.” I added, “Sir, my Deputy is perfectly qualified to succeed me,” and added in jest, “Sir, he is a good Kandyan too and you should like him more.”

The President then chatted and asked me what my plans were and I replied “Nothing at present, but I will like some leisure time.” He then asked me if I was willing to accept a diplomatic assignment abroad and I thanked him sincerely for his kindness and replied that I would prefer to be with my wife and children here in Sri Lanka. After some more conversation, I took leave of him.

In Parliament, my staff had organized a farewell for me. It was attended by the then Speaker M.H. Mohamed, Deputy Speaker Gamini Fonseka, my two Deputies-Bertram Tittawella, Priyanee Wijesekara and most of the 800 plus staff.

Speeches were made by the above and a few other members of the staff, to which I replied to them for their kind words and thanked them for the full support given to me in running this vast establishment of over 800 and without their cooperation and help I could not have succeeded in my endeavors. On behalf of the entire staff, the Hon. Speaker was kind enough to hand over few generous gifts which I accepted with gracious thanks. After refreshments were served, all 800 plus of us sat for a group photograph outside Parliament.

My final farewell had been fixed for June 8th, 1994. Hansard of that day records as follows:-

Mr. Speaker: Leader of the House, before you move this Motion, may I have the permission of the House to invite Mr. S.N. Seneviratne to take his seat at the table? Does the House agree? Hon. Members: Aye.

Mr. Speaker: Mr. Seneviratne may be invited to the Chamber.

(Whereupon Mr. S.N. Seneviratne, having been escorted into the Chamber took his seat.)

Hon. Wijayapala Mendis — Minister of Transport and Highways and Leader of the House of Parliament:

“Mr. Speaker, I move, That Mr. Speaker be requested to convey to Mr. Sand Nihal Seneviratne on his retirement from the Office of the Secretary General of Parliament, an expression of the deep sense of appreciation of the Members of Parliament for the valuable services performed by him as Second Clerk Assistant and Clerk Assistant of the House of Representative, Deputy Secretary General of Parliament and Secretary-General of Parliament over a period of 33 years, particularly in regard to his wide knowledge of Parliamentary procedures and practices; their sincere thanks for the assistance and advice given by him and their recognition of the unswerving dedication with which he has discharged his responsibilities and the noteworthy contribution he has made to the several Associations of Parliamentarians both within, as well as, outside the Commonwealth”.

The Hon. Leader of the House Hon Wijayapala Mendis made a lengthy speech followed by Mr. K.B. Ratnayake, followed by Mr. Ranil Wickremesinghe, Prime Minister, Minister of Industries, Science and Technology. Others who joined to pay tribute were Mr. Dinesh Gunawardena, Mr. V.Anandasangaree, Mr. Mavai Senathirajah, Dr. Wimal Wickremasinghe, Minister of Environment and Parliamentary Affairs, Mr. Maithripala Senanayake, Mr. Richard Pathirana Al Haj S.S.M. Abu Bakar, Mr. P.P. Devaraj, Mr. C.V. Gooneratne, Mr. Ananda Dassanayake, Mr. U.B. Wijekoon, Mr. Dharmasiri Senanayake, Mr. Mangala Moonesinghe, A.H.M. Azwer.

Mr. Speaker finally ended the Proceedings thus: “I thank the Leader of the House and the Leader of the Opposition for jointly moving this Vote of Appreciation of the services of the retiring Secretary-General Mr. Nihal Seneviratne after nearly 33 years in Parliamentary service. Quite a lot has been said about Mr. Seneviratne and his services to Parliament during his three decades of service in various senior positions. I wish to join the Hon. Members who in their speeches referred to the untiring services Mr. Seneviratne has rendered particularly during his time as Secretary-General. I knew Mr. Seneviratne from the time he was Deputy Secretary General in Parliament. He has been a great source of help who was well versed in Parliamentary procedures. The job of a Secretary-General is not an easy one. One will have to adjust temperamentally to the needs of all the Hon. Members at various levels. Mr. Seneviratne did this job well. I have also had many Secretaries who worked under me and are proud to say that Mr. Seneviratne was one of the best. May I now wish Mr. and Mrs. Seneviratne all the very best, good health and prosperity?. I now take great pleasure, on behalf of the House, to present a token of appreciation, this souvenir to Mr. Seneviratne.”

Sittings were over around 12.00 noon and soon after a group photograph of all the Members present along with my self was taken. I bowed out soon after for the last time, saying adieu to the place where I had spent 33 memorable years.

Given the volatility of Sri Lankan politics, there were many momentous events within Parliament which I was privy to. Looking back, I can say that there was never a dull moment While there were ups and downs, great accomplishments, and terrible tragedies for the country, seeing up close and personal the men and women who trod the country’s political landscape during those three and half decades gave me a unique insight into the personal side of larger-than-life public figures, put me at odds with some powerful politicians and earned the respect of many. While I now remember those days with fondness, I feel privileged to have played a role in my quiet and resolute manner to stir the Legislature in the right direction during my time. It was not a career I ever planned for, nor was there any indication in my early life that one day I would be thrust into the center of many momentous and historic events in the country and at times be the cynosure of all eyes. It has indeed been a long journey, one that I feel deeply privileged to have trod.

THE PARLIAMENTARY SYSTEM OF GOVERNMENT IN SRI LANKA

Although institutions of democratic nature have existed in Sri Lanka from ancient times, the Westminster type of parliamentary government was introduced to Sri Lanka in 1948 after independence from British rule. The post-independence Soulbury Constitution of 1948 provided a legislature comprising 101 members, the Governor-General and two Houses – the House of Representatives and the Senate. In 1972, Sri Lanka was declared a Republic. The republican Constitution of 1972, while retaining the Cabinet form of Government provided for a unicameral legislature called the National State Assembly and a nominated President. The present Constitution which came into operation in September 1978 has created a Presidential System of Government within a parliamentary framework. The Parliament of Sri Lanka which was also the First Parliament under the new Constitution consists of 168 members. At the General Election held in 1989, 196 members were elected on the Proportional Representation (PR) system which has been written into the 1978 Constitution and is a significant departure from the earlier first-past-the-post or Westminster System for election. With 29 MPs appointed through the National List, Parliament today consists of 225 members.

Parliament is elected for a period of five years since the introduction of the 19th Amendments to the Constitution in 2015.Prior to that, the term of Parliament was six years. The life of Parliament is divided into sessions with each usually lasting one year. At the opening for each session, the President’s Statement of Government Policy to Parliament outlines the government’s broad policies and proposed legislative programmes. Each Session is terminated by a Prorogation.

In the Republic of Sri Lanka, sovereignty is in the People and is inalienable. Sovereignty includes the powers of Government, fundamental rights, and the franchise. Parliament and the President who exercise the People’s sovereignty are the supreme instruments of State power. Parliament exercises the legislative and judicial powers of the People and the President the executive powers. The judicial powers, however, have to be exercised by Parliament through the courts, tribunals and institutions established by the Constitution and by law. In the discharge of its functions Parliament and its members are fortified by certain privileges , immunities and powers relating to which Parliament may exercise the judicial powers directly according to law and punish any person who commits a breach of privilege.

Sri Lanka has practiced representative democracy since 1833 and enjoyed Universal Franchise since 1931. Close to a century of exercise of the right to Universal Franchise has imbued in our people a keen political awareness and educated them the a process of the working of Parliamentary democracy.

As the supreme legislative authority in the country, Parliament has power to make laws, including repealing and amending existing laws, amending, or adding new provisions to the Constitution. Laws pertaining to the Constitution have to be passed by a two third majority of the whole number of MPs including those not present. The amendment to certain Articles in the Constitution however must receive the approval of the people at a referendum. Parliament cannot enact laws suspending the operation of the Constitution or any part thereof or repealing the Constitution, unless such a law also enacts a new Constitution to replace it.

The Constitution also lays down Directive Principles of State Policy to guide Parliament , the President, and the Cabinet of Ministers to govern and enact laws for the establishment of a free and just society in Sri Lanka. By these principals, the State is sworn to establish a democratic , socialist society that will ensure the full realization of the fundamental rights and freedoms of its people.

Parliament cannot abdicate or in any manner alienate its legislative power and cannot set up any authority with legislative power. No court or tribunal can question on any ground the validity of legislation enacted by Parliament. However, before the enactment of such legislation, the constitutional jurisdiction of the Supreme Court could be invoked by any citizen.

Another principal function of Parliament is to scrutinize government policy and administration, particularly proposals for raising revenue and for expenditure. Parliament has full control over public finance and it alone authorizes taxes and duties to be levied and the various objects of expenditure. The Cabinet of Ministers is charged with the direction and control of the government and is collectively responsible and answerable to Parliament.

The Speaker is the representative and spokesman of Parliament in its collective capacity. He presides over sittings of Parliament and interprets and enforces Standing Orders. In his absence the Deputy Speaker and in their absence the Deputy Chairman of Committee presides over sittings of Parliament and performs the functions of the Speaker.

The head of the Parliament staff is the Secretary General of Parliament who is appointed by the President. The members of his staff are appointed by him with the approval of the Speaker.

The party system is a vital component of Parliamentary democracy and the organization of political parties represented in Parliament as Government and Opposition help to ensure that all aspects and viewpoints of matters placed before Parliament are duly considered before any decision is taken. The Government Group is organised under the Leader of the House and the Chief Government Whip. The leader of the Party in the Opposition with the largest number of members is recognized as the Leader of the Opposition. It also has its Chief Whip. The Leader of the Opposition is accorded the status and given the emoluments of a Cabinet Minister and provided with a separate staff, office, accommodation, official residence, and vehicle. The other parties in the Opposition, at their discretion, may come under the Whip of the Opposition.

The detailed arrangement of government business and the allocation of time for debate is decided at meetings of the Committee on Parliamentary business. It consists of the Speaker as Chairman, the Deputy Speaker, Deputy Chairman of Committees, the Leader of the House, Chief Government Whip, the Leader of the Opposition, the Chief Opposition Whip, and the leaders of the other parties.

The Sri Lanka Parliament has a strong and active Committee system comprising legislative Standing Committees, Select Committees and Committees for Special Purposes such as the Committee on Standing Orders, on Public Accounts, on Parliamentary Business, on Privileges, on Public Enterprisers and on Public Petitions.

The Parliament also by law provides for the establishment of the Office of the Parliamentary Commissioner for Administration (Ombudsman), empowered with the duty of investigating complaints and allegations of the infringement of fundamental rights and other injustices of maladministration,when asked to do so by the Public Petitions Committee of Parliament, to which petitions-presented by Members of Parliament, on behalf of members of the public, are rereferred. The Ombudsman’s powers of investigation extend to administrative actions by Central Government, and Local Government’s departments and corporations . The Ombudsman has access to departmental papers and reports findings to Parliament. The Ombudsman is appointed by the President.

The Committee of Public Petitions has assumed a great deal of importance after the creation of the office of Parliamentary Commissioner for administration because all matters going before the Commissioner have to be referred to him by the Public Petitions Committee. Grievances of citizens presented by Members in the form of petitions to Parliament and approved by the Speaker as conforming to Standing Orders are referred to the PPC. If the matter falls within the jurisdiction of the Parliamentary Commissioner, such petitions are referred to him by the PPC. In other cases, the Committee itself will inquire into the petition for which purpose it has been given powers to summon and question any person and call for papers and documents and to have access to stores and property. Since the Ombudsman started functioning there has been a great increase in the number of petitions presented to Parliament.

The privileges and immunities of Members of Parliament have been embodied in the Parliament (Powers and Privileges) Act. Apart from specifying the offences which are termed breaches of privilege, this Act declares and defines the privileges and immunities of the Parliament and its members. All questions of privilege have to be first discussed with the Speaker in his Chambers and then raised in the House. If the Speaker is satisfied there is a prime facie case, he would advise that the matter be referred to the Committee on Privileges. The practice in such cases has been for the Leader of the House to move a Motion referring the matter to the Committee. Although Parliament as a body can hear evidence and decide on matters of privilege, the practice is to refer it to the Committee which will in turn report back on whether a Breach of Privilege has been committed and make recommendations regarding what should be done.

There is also a system of consultative committees, each of these corresponding to the number of Ministries in the Cabinet. The Chairman of the Consultative Committee is the minister in charge of the functions and subjects which the Committee has been empowered to consider . Each Consultative Committee reflects as far as possible the party composition in Parliament. Parliament or the Minister who chairs the Committee can refer to it any matter for inquiry and report including proposals for legislation, supplementary or other estimates, statements of expenditure , motions, annual reports and papers. A Consultative Committee also has the power to initiate a Bill or Motion through the Chairman. It also provides members with a means of raising matters pertaining to their electorates.

With the amended Standing Orders adopted in March 2018, a few new committees have been established including the Committee on Public Finance, the Committee on Constitution Affairs, Liaison Committee, and the Backbenchers Committee.

In addition to that, Sectoral Oversight Committees, numbering not more than 20, have been set up and they have the power to examine any Bill, any subsidiary legislation including Regulation, Resolution, Treaty, Report, or any other matter relating to subjects and functions within their jurisdiction.

Apart from the passing of laws, an important function of Parliament is to provide a forum for Members to raise matters of public importance, to discuss Government policy and to air public grievances. They have the facility to raise questions from Ministers as well as initiate adjournment motions to discuss matters of public importance.

Any speech made in Parliament is recorded in the Official Report of parliamentary debates, the Hansard, in the language in which it was spoken. Members are free to speak in Sinhala, Tamil or English with simultaneous translations provided in all languages.

by Nihal Seneviratne ✍️
Advocate of the Supreme Court
Retired Secretary General of Parliament
(From Memories of 33 years in Parliament)



Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

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

Features

Quandary of Dengue: Some roving perspectives

Published

on

Sri Lanka is currently well and truly trapped in the strangling grip of a devastating and severely enhanced dengue outbreak. The numbers alone are staggering; over 44,000 cases have been recorded across the island so far this year, with the highest concentration systematically suffocating the Western, Southern, and Central provinces. Hospitals and healthcare providers are under extreme pressure, but the cold metrics of morbidity do not capture the true implications and dismay of this current wave. What has profoundly shaken the public consciousness and even sent a shudder through the medical community is a grim shift in the implications for the populace.

Dengue has always been quite a threat, looming over our Motherland from time to time. Yet for all that, historically, child deaths due to the virus were relatively rare in Sri Lanka, thanks to scrupulously adhering to robust clinical guidelines, as well as exceptional paediatric monitoring and management. This year, that safety net seems to be straining quite a bit at the edges and among the reported fatalities are a tragic number of children. The virus is moving faster, hitting harder, and exposing a terrifying reality, even stressing that our existing defence mechanisms are perhaps no longer totally sufficient to deal with the problem.

In response, public health authorities have deployed their traditional arsenal. Teams are busy with intensive surveillance, conducting house-to-house inspections, enforcing strict penalties for standing and stagnant water, and sending fogging machinery through the streets to blanket neighbourhoods in chemical mists. Yet, as case counts climb by nearly 50% week over week, an uncomfortable question must be asked: Are these traditional measures sufficient, or are they bordering on an exercise in futility?

The Illusion of the Fog: Why Our Current Strategy May Be Failing?

To understand why Sri Lanka might be in a tight corner, one must look closely at the enemy. Dengue is transmitted primarily by the Aedes aegypti mosquito, a highly adapted, urbanised insect. While Aedes aegypti is widely considered the primary culprit, Aedes albopictus (commonly known as the Asian tiger mosquito) plays a massive, highly dangerous role in Sri Lanka’s dengue transmission as well. In fact, the interplay between these two species is one of the biggest reasons why controlling dengue on the island is so incredibly difficult. These two vectors behave differently, breed in different places, and require distinct strategies to combat their well-recognised roles in the propagation of the disease that is dengue. Understanding how these two mosquito species split the territory could explain why a single controlling method might not always work across the board.

Aedes aegypti mosquitoes are strictly urban and indoor creatures. They live alongside humans inside houses, apartments, and in heavily built-up commercial areas. They rest on dark clothes in closets, under furniture, and behind curtains. They breed in artificial containers, clear, stagnant water in flower vases, plastic cups, concrete sumps, and overhead tanks. They prefer human blood almost exclusively and bite multiple people to get one full meal, thereby spreading the dengue virus rapidly within even a single household.

In contrast, Aedes albopictus is semi-urban and rural, thrives in vegetations, gardens, rubber plantations, and peri-urban areas where green spaces meet houses. The creature rests in shaded bushes, high grass, and low canopy foliage, as well as holes in trees, leaf axils, coconut shells, discarded tyres and trash. The biting behaviour of these mosquitoes is opportunistic. They bite humans but also feed on birds and domestic mammals, indicating that they can survive easily even when human density is low.

The traditional responses we rely on, most notably thermal fogging, are largely cosmetic public relations exercises rather than a totally effective vector control mechanism. Such fogging misses indoor resting sites, drives resistance, and stagnant water elimination fails against cryptic, microscopic breeding sites.

Fogging utilises “adulticides“, chemical sprays meant to kill flying mosquitoes. However, Aedes aegypti is a domestic creature; it rests indoors, hidden in the dark recesses of closets, under beds, and behind curtains. A fogging process achieves very little penetration into these indoor sanctuaries. Furthermore, over-reliance on these pyrethroid-based chemical sprays has accelerated insecticide resistance, effectively rendering the chemicals useless over time.

Similarly, while the National Dengue Control Unit (NDCU), to their eternal credit, aggressively pursues the elimination of visible standing water, the sheer adaptability of the mosquito outpaces manual human labour in trying to eliminate the breeding places of the vectors. Aedes eggs can remain dormant in dry containers for months, hatching the moment a drop of water touches them. In dense, urbanised areas like Colombo and Gampaha, microscopic breeding sites, from the rim of a discarded plastic bottle cap to the base of an indoor potted plant, are impossible to completely police.

If we continue to rely solely on manual cleaning and chemical fogging, we are fighting a twenty-first-century climate-driven crisis with mid-twentieth-century tools. We must look beyond our borders to see how global science is shifting the paradigm of mosquito control.

The Biological Frontier: Insects fighting Mosquitoes

When searching for international alternatives, many look towards the United States, where vector control districts manage complex mosquito populations across diverse ecosystems. A common point of curiosity is the historical use of “mosquito-eating insects.”

In the US, biological control has long featured predatory species. While some point to insects like dragonfly nymphs or giant non-biting mosquito larvae (Toxorhynchites, which actively prey on other mosquito larvae), the most widely used traditional biological agent in American municipal water systems is actually the Gambusia affinis, commonly known as the “mosquitofish.” A single one of these surface-feeding fish can devour hundreds of mosquito larvae a day.

However, American vector management has largely evolved past simply dumping predatory fish into ponds. The true modern frontier in global mosquito control relies on advanced biological and genetic interventions that turn the mosquitoes against themselves.

1. The Wolbachia Revolution

Perhaps the most successful international intervention against dengue is the introduction of Wolbachia-infected mosquitoes. Wolbachia is a naturally occurring bacterium found in up to sixty per cent of all insect species, but crucially, not naturally present in Aedes aegypti.

When scientists introduce Wolbachia into Aedes mosquitoes in a laboratory and release them into the wild, two extraordinary things happen: –

· Viral Suppression: The bacterium competes with viruses like dengue, Zika, and chikungunya inside the mosquito’s body, making it incredibly difficult for the virus to replicate. If the virus cannot replicate, the mosquito cannot transmit it to a human.

· Population Replacement:

Through a mechanism called cytoplasmic incompatibility, when a Wolbachia-carrying male mates with a wild female that does not carry the bacteria, her eggs do not hatch. If a Wolbachia female mates with a wild male, her offspring will carry the bacteria. Over time, the local mosquito population is entirely replaced by harmless, non-transmission-capable mosquitoes.

In comprehensive global trials, such as those conducted by the World Mosquito Programme in Yogyakarta, Indonesia, the introduction of Wolbachia mosquitoes led to a staggering 77% reduction in dengue incidence and an 86% reduction in dengue-related hospitalisations.

2. Sterile Insect Technique (SIT) and Genetic Modifications

Other countries, including parts of the US (such as the Florida Keys) and Brazil, have turned to genetic engineering. Using the Sterile Insect Technique (SIT) or advanced genetic variants (like those developed by Oxitec), millions of bio-engineered male mosquitoes are released into the wild. Because male mosquitoes do not bite humans, and they feed exclusively on nectar, thereby posing zero risk to the public. These males mate with wild females, but pass on a self-limiting gene that causes the female offspring to die in the larval stage before they can ever mature, bite, or transmit disease. This results in a drastic collapse of the localised vector population without the use of even a single drop of toxic chemical pesticide.

Moving beyond the Status Quo: A Blueprint for Sri Lanka

The current dilemma in Sri Lanka is a classical gridlock: we are deploying immense physical effort and economic capital into vector control measures that yield diminishing returns, while our clinical wards fill with critically ill patients. If we are to break this cycle, our public health policy must undergo a rapid structural evolution

We cannot instantly replicate the multimillion-dollar genetic laboratories of the West, but we can modernise our strategy immediately by adopting a highly targeted, multi-tiered approach.

Comprehensive Vector Management Strategy

The following are some thoughts that need to be carefully evaluated in a venture towards getting things under control.

· Shift from Adulticides to Target Microbial Larvicides Immediate Phase

Cease the reliance on sweeping chemical thermal fogging. Instead, deploy specialised microbial larvicides such as Bacillus thuringiensis israelensis (Bti). Bti is a naturally occurring soil bacterium that, when ingested by mosquito larvae, destroys their digestive tracts. It is completely non-toxic to humans, pets, and other aquatic life, and can be distributed via localised backpack sprayers or drones into inaccessible urban sumps.

· Scale Up Localised Wolbachia Trials Intermediate Phase

Sri Lanka has previously initiated small-scale, localised pilot releases of Wolbachia mosquitoes in select urban pockets. Given the severity of the 2026 outbreak, these programmes must be aggressively scaled up into an industrial-level national initiative. Public-private partnerships must be leveraged to establish sustainable, high-capacity mosquito-rearing facilities locally.

· Implement Digital Ovitrap Surveillance Continuous Integration

Replace manual, retroactive searching with predictive digital mapping. Deploy networks of smart “ovitraps” (oviposition traps) across high-burden provinces. These traps monitor egg-laying rates in real-time, allowing automated data systems to predict a spike in the adult mosquito population weeks before an actual clinical outbreak occurs, enabling preventative targeting.

The Cost of Inaction

Maintaining our current trajectory is not a neutral choice; it is an endorsement of escalating mortality. The 2026 outbreak has proven that the ecological dynamics of dengue have changed, fuelled by changing weather patterns and urban density. Our public health response must change with it.

The heart-breaking loss of young lives in this current surge must serve as a stark wake-up call. We must look at the international landscape, embrace the biological innovations that have saved lives across the globe, and transition from a policy of panic-driven reaction to one of scientific eradication. It is no longer just a matter of cleaning our drains; it is a matter of upgrading our science.

Why Aedes albopictus Makes the Sri Lankan Crisis Harder

In Sri Lanka, the geographic landscape transitions quickly from dense concrete cities to lush, tropical vegetation. This creates the perfect environment for both species to thrive simultaneously.

· The Surveillance Blindspot: When health authorities focus heavily on checking indoor water storage and concrete drains in cities, they can completely miss the massive Aedes albopictus populations breeding in the surrounding vegetation, suburban gardens, and rural homesteads of the Southern and Central provinces.

· The Failure of Indoor Fogging:

While indoor residual spraying or targeted indoor fogging might hit Aedes aegypti, it has virtually no effect on Aedes albopictus, which spends its life cycle outdoors in the bushes.

· Climate Resilience:

Aedes albopictus eggs are remarkably tolerant of colder temperatures and varied environments. This allows the vector to push higher into the mountainous terrains of the Central Province, bringing dengue to areas that historically saw very few cases.

To truly bring down the case numbers in a severely enhanced outbreak, public health interventions must be dual-targeted: addressing the indoor, urban threat of Aedes aegypti while simultaneously tackling the outdoor, ecological stronghold of Aedes albopictus. We cannot sit back on our laurels of the past. We need to move forward resolutely.

Continue Reading

Features

ANURADHAPURA ANTHEM c.1893

Published

on

Anuradhapura. Image courtesy Central Cultural Fund

R. W. Ievers, who wrote this poem, was the Government Agent of the North Central Province during 1884, 1886, and 1890. He is the author of the Manual of the North Central Province (1899) and a half dozen published reports on the life and practices in the Province. Before his death, he shared it with his good friend H.C.P. Bell, the Archaeological Commissioner of Ceylon at the time. In 1917, Bell had it published in the Times of Ceylon – Christmas Number. Since then, it remained unknown for 109 years, until Ievers’s great-grandson, Turtle Bunbury, historian and author of Living in Sri Lanka (2006) with James Fennell, tipped me off about its source – H.C.P. Bell: Archaeologist of Ceylon and the Maldives (1993), written by Bell’s granddaughters Bethia N. Bell and Heather M. Bell.

THE ANTHEM

Anuradhapura! City grand and vast,

Lanka’s famous Capital, in ages of the past:

In the Mahawansa the story has been told

Of thy palaces, and temples, and pinnacles of gold.

Hail! then hail! to the worth of a bygone day,

Hail! all hail! to the relics of kingly sway

Hail to thee, Fair City, glorious in decay,

Hail! thrice hail! Forever and for aye!

Si monumentum quaeris

– cast your gaze around

Ruined fanes and dagobas everywhere abound

Alas! for glory faded, for erstwhile beauty sped

For hierarchs and heroes, long numbered with the dead

Hail! then hail!…

Great Ruwanaveli Seya, once fairest of the fair,

The splendour of thy palmy days has melted into air;

And like Imperial Caesar now ‘dead and turned into clay’,

Thy sacred bricks ‘may stop a hole to keep the wind away.’

Note by Tillakaratne:

Since 1873, Bhikku Naranvita Sumanasara has been doing conservation work on this stupa. In 1876, Governor William Gregory, after visiting the work site, wrote that its conservation was not just a religious work but a great National Monument.

See ‘Bayagiri’ massive – ‘Fearless Mount’ forsooth – Centre once of schism rank, from ‘Great Vihara’ truth.

Patched up by prison labour, anew it flaunts on high

A ‘hideous excrescence’ athwart a tranquil sky.

Note by H. C. P. Bell

: T. N. Christie, Planting Member at the time protested in the Legislative Council against the abortive “restoration” by prison labour of the Abhayagiri Dagaba, dubbing its truncated pinnacle, half restored, a “hideous excrescence”.

Jetawanarama, Great Sena’s priestly boon

Comely shape and giddy height will crumble all too soon;

Where forest trees and chequered shade a peaceful picture lend,

From cruel axe and ruthless spade, may gracious Heaven defend.

Note by H. C. P. Bell:

Two decades after these poems were written, the surrounding area of the Jetawanarama was still covered in forest, and the Atamasthana Committee conditionally allowed a monk to clear a limited number of trees. But not a tree remained unfelled, contrary to what the monk was authorized to do.

Thuparama graceful, in outline clear and bold,

Begirt with column chaste and slim, a gem in the ring of gold

To thee pertains high honour a pious people gave – The tomb of Sanghamitta, and Prince Mahinda’s grave.

Note by

H. C. P. Bell: The ruins are pointed out, wrongly, as the tradional tombs of Arahat Mahinda and Sanghamitta Theranee.

With bricks and mortar bolstered up, behold the Sacred Bo;

To some – misguided mortals – ‘tis but a ‘bo-gas’ show.

Where humble Mirisveti a monarch’s fad recalls,

Lo! Royal Siam’s silver now builds its futile walls.

Note by H. C. P. Bell:

According to Mahawansa, Mirisavetiya was so named after King Dutugemunu’s compunction at forgetting chillies (miris) in his alms giving to monks on one occasion. The restoration work on the Mirisavetiya began under the Ceylon Government, with funds provided by the King of Siam. When the money flow began to cease, work also ceased, and bats began to frequent the holed structure.

What need to tell of sculptures, of ‘pokunas’ galore,

Of balustrades and Yogi stones and half a hundred more,

Of Brazen Palace spacious, with gilt-roofed storeys dight –

A modern race more ‘brazen’ would desecrate each site.

For midst these sacred ruins of shrines and cloistered hall,

A reckless generation disports with little balls,

Whilst ‘Parliamentary language’ and imprecations deep

Disturb the peaceful solitude where saintly Rahats sleep.

Note by H. C. P. Bell:

After European residents, old city Anuradhapura in the late 19th century, the area still being cleared between Ruwanveli Seya and Thuparama, was used a ‘golf links’. Ievers did not like the area used as a playground:

Iconoclasts and vandals have had their little day;

No more shall ancient pillars to culverts find their way.

No more a watchful Government such sacrilege condones –

One may not meddle with the gods, nor tamper with the stones.

Anuradhapura! Thy glory shall revive;

Yhu [sic] sons shall swarm within thee like bees about a hive.

The effort of the present for past neglect atones;

New breath of life resuscitates this vale of driest bones.

Composed by R. W. Ievers
(1850-1905)
Introduced by Lokubanda Tillakaratne

Continue Reading

Features

Meththa Rehabilitation Foundation: Restoring Mobility, Dignity and Hope Across Sri Lanka

Published

on

Mahawa Factory

For thousands of Sri Lankans living with limb loss and physical disabilities, access to quality rehabilitation services remains a significant challenge. Yet, for more than three decades, our organisation has quietly transformed lives through innovation, compassion and community-based care. The Meththa Rehabilitation Foundation Guarantee Limited (MRFGL), supported by the Meththa Foundation-UK and in partnership with the Manitha Neyam Trust, the LEBARA Foundation and the Oblates of Mary Immaculate in Jaffna, emerged as one of Sri Lanka’s most effective voluntary rehabilitation service providers, restoring mobility, independence and dignity to some of the country’s most vulnerable citizens.

The Foundation’s roots stretch back to 1994, when a group of expatriate Sri Lankan professionals in the United Kingdom recognised the severe shortage of rehabilitation services available to disabled persons in Sri Lanka. Drawing upon their expertise in rehabilitation medicine and allied healthcare professions, they established the Meththa Foundation-UK with a simple but powerful vision: to provide affordable, high-quality prosthetic and rehabilitation services to those who needed them most.

Below knee artificial limb Designed and made at Mahawa

What began as an effort to recycle and repurpose high-quality prosthetic components donated by the UK’s National Health Service has evolved into a comprehensive rehabilitation network serving communities across the island.

Clinical services commenced in Sri Lanka in 1995 through a mobile outreach programme that initially supported injured soldiers and later expanded to civilians affected by conflict and disability. The majority of them were victims of land mines. In 2010, the Sri Lankan arm of the organisation was formally registered as the Meththa Rehabilitation Foundation Guarantee Limited, strengthening its ability to deliver sustainable services nationwide.

Today, the Foundation operates four modern rehabilitation centres located in Mahawa, Mankulam, Balapitiya and Kilinochchi. These centres provide prosthetic and orthotic services, posture and mobility support, limb repairs, and rehabilitation assistance to patients from diverse social and economic backgrounds.

Recognising that many disabled individuals live in remote areas with limited access to healthcare, Meththa Foundation also established a mobile outreach service in 2011. Through a successful “Hub and Spoke” model, rehabilitation teams travel regularly to underserved communities, ensuring that patients are not denied care simply because of distance or financial hardship.

The scale of the Foundation’s work is impressive. During 2025 alone, the organisation recorded approximately 2,000 patient contacts, including the provision of 350 new artificial limbs, 850 limb repairs and around 800 other rehabilitation devices. For many beneficiaries, these interventions represent far more than medical treatment; they offer a pathway back to employment, education and social participation.

Innovation has become a hallmark of the Foundation’s approach. Through an active research and development programme, MRFGL has developed affordable prosthetic technologies specifically suited to Sri Lankan conditions. Among its achievements is the development of a modular below-knee artificial limb system manufactured largely from locally sourced materials. The Foundation has also designed low-cost prosthetic knee components that significantly reduce the financial burden on patients while maintaining quality and functionality. These developments are funded by generous International Grants facilitated by affluent members of the Meththa Foundation-UK. Service users are encouraged to donate whatever they can but for those who cannot, which is a majority the services are entirely free.

These innovations not only make rehabilitation more affordable but also strengthen local manufacturing capabilities and reduce dependence on imported components.

Equally important is the Foundation’s commitment for building local expertise. Recognising the shortage of trained rehabilitation professionals in Sri Lanka, Meththa Foundation

established an apprentice-based vocational training programme that recruits and trains young people as prosthetists, orthotists and rehabilitation technicians. Several locally trained staff members are now employed across the Foundation’s centres, helping to create a sustainable workforce for the future.

The organisation’s work has attracted growing recognition within the healthcare sector. Discussions have already taken place with health authorities regarding the potential use of Meththa-designed prosthetic components within Government hospitals. Such collaboration could significantly expand access to affordable rehabilitation services throughout the country.

Beyond its clinical achievements, the Foundation’s impact is measured in restored confidence and renewed independence. Surveys conducted among beneficiaries indicate that many educated amputees successfully return to productive lives after receiving rehabilitation support. However, the findings also highlight an ongoing challenge among poorer and less educated amputees, many of whom struggle to access follow-up care due to transportation difficulties and financial constraints.

To address this issue, the organisation hopes to -expand its mobile services and community outreach programmes. Additional funding would allow rehabilitation teams to reach isolated communities more frequently, ensuring that vulnerable patients continue to receive the support they need.

Operating on an annual expenditure of approximately Rs. 30 million in Sri Lanka, supplemented by overseas fundraising and donations, the Foundation remains heavily reliant on the partnership of charitable trusts such as the Manitha Neyam Trust and LEBARA Foundation and generosity of individual well-wishers. Every contribution directly supports the provision of artificial limbs, mobility devices, training programmes and outreach services for those who might otherwise be left behind.

As Sri Lanka continues to strengthen its healthcare and social welfare systems, organisations such as the Meththa Foundation demonstrate how innovation, volunteerism and dedication can create lasting social

By helping individuals regain mobility and independence, the Foundation is not merely providing artificial limbs—it is rebuilding lives and restoring hope.

For many “beneficiaries, every step they take is a testament to the life-changing work of the Meththa foundation

www.meththafoundation-sl-uk.org

Chairman’s WhatsApp contact number +94 77 788 6119

Prof S P Lamabadusurira, Chairman and Dr B Panagamuwa, ✍️
First Trustee

Continue Reading

Trending