Features
My Memories of The Rt. Revd. Lakshman Wickremesinghe (1927 – 1983)
Tissa Jayatilaka wrote this article which was published on Sept. 20, 2013. It is reproduced on account of the Bishop’s 40th death anniversary which fell on Oct. 23.
Thirty years have passed by since we experienced three significant events in the recent history of our country. Coincidentally July 23, September and October of 1983 are yoked together in our memory. What we have come to identify as “Black July” of Sri Lanka, when unarmed Tamil citizens were attacked and killed by goons associated with leading members of the Government of Sri Lanka of the time, began on July 23, 1983. Two months later on September 23, one of Sri Lanka’s finest sons spoke sincerely, eloquently, passionately and apologetically about our national tragedy focusing on ‘Black July’ when he addressed his diocese in Kurunegala, in what turned out to be his last Pastoral Address. A month later on October 23, that marvelous son of Sri Lanka lay dead. I refer to the late Bishop Cyril Lakshman Wickremesinghe and write these several inadequate words to remember him with love and gratitude on this thirtieth anniversary of that insightful Pastoral Address.
Lakshman Wickremesinghe, one of four children of Cyril Leonard and Esme Wickremesinghe, was born on March 24, 1927 and died on October 23, 1983. A brilliant product of Royal College, Colombo, the young Lakshman distinguished himself both in the classroom and on the playing fields there carrying away almost every school prize on offer and winning his ‘colours’ in rugger and athletics. Securing a First in Political Science from the University of Ceylon, he went to Oxford and after a few years of study at that ancient university, moved to Ely Theological College in Ely, Cambridgeshire. He was ordained a priest in England where he gained training and experience in parish work after ordination. Returning home to Ceylon, he did a few years of parish work in Mutwal before moving to Peradeniya where he served as the much loved and respected Anglican Chaplain of the University of Ceylon from 1958 to 1962.
The Revd. Lakshman Wickremesinghe was consecrated Bishop of the Kurunegala Diocese in 1962 by his illustrious predecessor Bishop Lakdasa de Mel, prior to the latter’s move to Calcutta on his being appointed Metropolitan of the Province of India, Pakistan, Burma and Ceylon.
I first heard of Bishop Lakshman from my grandaunt Soma Kumari Samarasinha, the first Ceylonese principal (1946 to 1964) of Hillwood College, the leading Anglican girls’ school in Kandy. From 1962 onwards until her retirement two years later, Mrs. Samarasinha worked closely with Bishop Lakshman in guiding the destinies of Hillwood. He was a frequent and welcome visitor to the Hillwood principal’s bungalow during this period.
My acquaintance with Bishop Lakshman deepened after his nephew Rajiva Wijesinha and I became colleagues and friends while we were both fellow-teachers in the Department of English at Peradeniya. Rajiva stayed at my home when he came up to Peradeniya and he reciprocated my hospitality by inviting me to stay at his parental home Lakmahal, the Wickremesinghe- Wijesinha residence on Alfred House Road in Kollupitiya. During my visits to Lakmahal, I had occasion to meet Bishop Lakshman in a more intimate setting as he dropped in, whenever in Colombo, to see his mother Esme, sister Muktha, brother-in-law Sam Wijesinha and family.
As the years went by, I got to know other facets of the many-layered personality of Bishop Lakshman as he was a close friend of my senior Peradeniya colleagues and intimate friends, Ian Goonetileke and Kingsley (K.M.) de Silva. Bishop Lakshman was a regular visitor to the Goonetileke and de Silva households in Peradeniya. Quite literally and metaphorically, Peradeniya was Bishop Lakshman’s spiritual home. Thanks to Ian and Kingsley, I not only got to know Bishop Lakshman better but I also got to know of him better during the mid-to-late 1970s.
Messrs. Goonetileke and de Silva educated me in particular on Bishop Lakshman’s principled opposition to opportunistic politics and his immense capacity to ‘talk truth to power’. He was a fearless champion of all that ennobles humanity. He used to refer to Ian and Roslin Goonetileke’s Upper Hantane home as the Saloon initially and later as the Aramaya. From around 1975 onward, Ian began to grow disillusioned with university life due to the increased politicization of university administration. The rot begun by I.M.R.A. Iriyagolle in the 1965 – 1970 era was now deepening in the post – April 1971 setting. Although born and baptized a Christian, Ian had moved away from the church and in later life was not a practicing Christian. Bishop Lakshman, who shared most of Ian’s political convictions, was most interested in supporting Ian in his political stances while remaining even more interested in getting Ian back to the Christian fold. I wish to quote from some of Bishop Lakshman’s letters to Ian that shed light on both of the above factors- – political collaboration and the possible securing of Ian’s return to his spiritual base. Here is an extract from a letter Bishop Lakshman wrote to Ian on September, 12, 1975:
Your article on Ananda Coomaraswamy was a sheer delight to read – “quintessence Ian”! I am also happy at a more fundamental level that you have so much in common with Coomaraswamy, have slowly moved towards an orientation to and experience of the Transcendent, which is also engendering an interior purification within you. I have always hoped and prayed that in your own way and in your own time you will return to the Source!
The concluding paragraph of Bishop Lakshman’s letter addresses Ian’s disquiet about the quality of life in Peradeniya of the mid-seventies:
I hope you stand the strain by God’s grace in the days to come. All I can [say] is that a very important ‘light’ (representing our way of life and thought) in Peradeniya will be extinguished, if you have to depart.
Nearly five years pass by. At the end of much soul-searching Ian has now taken the painful decision to take early retirement and leave his beloved Peradeniya. In a letter quoted below in full from Lakmahal (obviously on a visit to his parental home in Colombo) dated March 23, 1980 Bishop Lakshman writes:
My dear Ian & Roslin,
This is a brief note before I leave for a week in New Delhi (in the company of Bala Tampoe) to wish you both for your anniversary tomorrow. My prayers avail for you as you prepare to leave for a new abode, and detach yourselves with great difficulty, from the sylvan abode of Upper Hantane. Anicca vata sankhara!
This is my last letter to you addressed to the ‘Saloon’ later turned into an ‘Aramaya’, the scene of so many memories of people, events/happenings and culinary delicacies enjoyed in the midst of quiet reflections on the currents of life in society.
I am reminded of some lines of an Indian poet [Bano Tahira Sayeed] who is in the tradition of Tagore, thinking of your house/saloon/aramaya:
You are a delicious reminder of my past. I envy you your permanence. I, myself, am a mirror of life’s jolts and jerks.
I am that gold which is in the process of purification in the furnace, I am a candle, burning and scattering light, I am a portrait of life itself, Unlike you, who are a ghost of my past.
You have been facing life’s jolts and jerks recently, and to my mind being purified, and being burnt to scatter light in the days to come .
My constant prayer for you has been this and will be always until the shadows lengthen, the busy world is hushed and the fever of life is over:
Lord, teach me to accept your bewildering ways. In my poignant pain, amid deprivation and denial Show me your hidden but all-embracing love.
With my deep gratitude and undimmed affection–Lakshman
Bishop Lakshman and Ian Goonetileke continued to see eye to eye on politics until the end of their earthly lives. Ian, however, despite Bishop Lakshman’s best efforts, died without regaining his lost belief in institutionalized religion.
Ian’s obituary consequent to the sudden death of Bishop Lakshman is reflective of the close friendship he shared with the late Bishop:
He [Bishop Lakshman] wore the purple sash to the manner born but it was never allowed to restrict his passionate concerns for the human condition. When he died he had almost certainly begun to embody the rare and splendid fusion between thought and action, religion and politics, because he had realized, not without struggle, that spiritual emancipation must, in the last analysis, rely almost exclusively on the liberation of man as a political animal. His final message [Pastoral Address of September 23, 1983] bears abundant testimony to the unswerving addiction to the voice of his moral conscience in the thick of contradictions.
My wife (a practicing Buddhist) and I (an extinct Christian) have lost a trusted, cherished and compassionate comrade, always willing to chance his arm in defense of the teetering conscience or the clouded sensibility. For nearly a quarter century until 1980 he was a frequent visitor in our Peradeniya home, and his arrival (announced or unannounced) was sufficient to clear the air of moral ambiguities and environmental wounds. He brought with him cleansing vistas of beauty, strength, symmetry and a balanced joy, and mundane problems melted before the alchemy of his swiftly directed common sense and a clinical, though, impish humour.
Bishop Lakshman’s influence was widespread and extended way beyond his diocese and Sri Lanka. He sought to indigenise the Anglican Church confining himself to Christianity in the Indian region, specifically to its Hindu and Buddhist context. In a lecture titled Christianity Moving Eastwards that he delivered at The House of Saints Gregory and Macrina at Oxford in May 1983, Bishop Lakshman spelt out his personal vision:
Many years ago I left Oxford and England, and taking the advice of
the Buddha, I went in search of myself as a Christian who was rooted
in the Sri Lankan ethos. In his sermon to certain agitated princes and
princesses, the Buddha had observed that it was more valuable to go
in search of oneself than in search of lost ornaments (whether they be
metal or mental). Mine has been a long and painful search. By the grace
of God I have been able to find my identity as a Sri Lankan Christian, and
in doing so, to share the company of those who have been seeking the Indian
face of Christianity. The result has been what Clement envisaged for the Gnostic
Christian – – a more mature and authentic faith in Christ Jesus.
He was an active member of the Kurunegala group of Amnesty International, through which he worked for victims of human rights violations throughout the world irrespective of political or religious considerations. He was a founder member of the Christian Workers Fellowship (CWF) that came into being in the late 1950s, a movement built mainly through a lay initiative to show the relevance of the Christian gospel in the midst of social change. He played a leading role in the establishment (November 1971) and furtherance of the national Civil Rights Movement serving as its Chairman from 1978 for a few years.
In addition to Sevaka Yohan Devananda, Bishop Lakshman was a close friend of three well known activist clergymen – Fr. Tissa Balasuriya, Fr. Paul Caspersz and Fr. Aloysius Peiris, founders respectively of the Centre for Society and Religion, Satyodaya and Tulana. He identified himself with the work and mission of these organizations.
Among Bishop Lakshman’s outstanding leadership qualities was his ability to bring different individuals and organizations together to build consensus and a unity of purpose. He was thereby able to get together several Christian organizations of different denominations involved in development and human rights activities to form the movement of “Christians in the Struggle for Justice”.Significantly the first meeting of this movement was held at Bishop’s House, Kurunegala, on Hartal Day, August 12, 1982.
In a similar vein, Bishop Lakshman was also a great believer in inter – faith dialogue. He was a very close associate of the late Ven. Dr. Kotagama Vacchissara Thero, Professor of Buddhist Philosophy at the Vidyodaya University (now the University of Sri Jayewardenepura). The latter’s untimely death, like the former’s later on, was a significant loss to the progressive movement of our country. Both Bishop Lakshman and his father were regular visitors to the Temple of the Ven. Revata Thero, one-time Atamasthandadipathi (Chief Priest of eight sacred places) at Anuradhapura.
The Ven. Sangharakkhita Thero, Isurumuni Viharadipathi and Chief Sangha Nayake of Nuwara Kalaviya also knew Bishop Lakshman intimately. The Isurumuni Viharadhipathi attended Bishop Lakshman’s funeral in Colombo as well as the religious ceremony held for the interment of his ashes in the Kurunegala Cathedral during which event the Ven. Sangharakkhita delivered an oration. Bishop Lakshman helped in founding the Vimukthi Dharma Kendra (The Liberation Doctrine Centre), an organization for dialogue among the four major religions of Sri Lanka, Buddhism, Hinduism, Christianity and Islam, devoted to the theme of social liberation.
All of these manifold activities in Bishop Lakshman’s search for truth and justice must surely have come at a significant price. He must have endured many a moment of agonized soul searching in his spiritual and political journey. He came from an affluent and privileged ‘upper class’ family that was heavily committed to the establishment and status quo, and Bishop Lakshman, like any normal human being, had a deep-seated attachment to and affection for his family. Some of his political actions based on ‘indigenous Marxist socialism’ (see his D.T. Niles Memorial Lecture titled Living in Christ with People delivered in Bangalore, India in 1981, for details) that he subscribed to, so at variance with his family culture, would certainly have caused more than ripples in the family pond.
Yet he soldiered on undeterred and unfazed. Bishop Lakshman’s enormous strength of character and integrity and the mutual understanding that he and his family shared made possible his maintenance of a fine balance between family commitment and personal conviction. Bishop Lakshman was a man of ‘unyielding convictions’ as he once described himself and there were occasions when he refused to compromise. The tribute paid to Bishop Lakshman on his passing by the Christian Workers Fellowship illustrates the above aspects of his personality:
As a priest and bishop, Bishop Lakshman provided a prophetic and courageous witness to the truly human values of our country, and to the centrality of his struggle for total liberation. Though from an affluent family, he deeply identified himself with the poor workers and peasants of Sri Lanka.
No account of Bishop Lakshman’s life and work will be complete without reference to his deep concern for the Tamil citizens of Sri Lanka and his robust involvement with the fight for justice for our fellow-citizens. Like his struggle with his loyalty to his family on the one hand and his devotion to personal conviction on the other referred to above, Bishop Lakshman’s toil for justice for the Tamils of Sri Lanka was a complex endeavour. He was acutely aware of the many deprivations the marginalized Sinhala peasantry in particular had suffered over the centuries and the many tribulations they continued to labour under.
He was conscious of and receptive to the deep-seated cultural problem of the Sinhala Buddhists in their effort to maintain their identity. He recognized that the Buddhist Sinhalese do not want the dominant culture of Sri Lanka to be either a variation of Dravidian culture or a pale imitation of western culture, either in its religions or secularized form. Where he differed from the majority of the Buddhist Sinhalese, however, was in his conviction that in the final integration of our country, the minorities have a real place as have minority cultures.
Hence Bishop Lakshman’s reaching out to the Tamils was indicative of his quest for human justice. He cared deeply for all human beings from all backgrounds, from all over the world, transcending man-made barriers of ethnicity and class. He was a regular visitor to Jaffna, to the plantation areas in the central highlands and to the eastern province.
His passionate concern for the Tamils of Sri Lanka find expression in a significant talk Bishop Lakshman gave in 1976, the year in which the United Left Front Government (1970 – 1977), under various pretexts, was trying to postpone the general elections then due. The title of that talk was Elections and Christians and whilst challenging the calculated move of the then Government, Bishop Lakshman in the course of that talk also touched on the national political need to redress the grievances of the Tamil citizens of Sri Lanka. He reiterated the need to –
ensure that Sinhala [political] parties give more attention to redress the grievances of the exploited and destitute mainly Tamil estate workers. On many estates, their living conditions are sub-human. Recent Land Reform measures introduced to benefit the landless Sinhala peasantry, have resulted in [Tamil] workers being banished from some estates and becoming destitute. Party manifestos must provide some solution to this issue, and not avoid it because it is an unpleasant and unprofitable matter among the Sinhala voters. It is important that we recognize that persons of Indian origin also have basic human rights, which require state aid.
He then refers to the need for a ‘regional transfer of power and resources’ from the centre to the periphery:
… There is the issue of the Jaffna or Sri Lanka Tamils. They demand transfer or devolution of power and resources from the Sinhala-dominated central government, so that they may have the opportunity to develop their minority community in their traditional territory. To condemn their demand for a separate state and allege their close links with Tamilnadu, is to ignore their main grievance.
If they are not permitted to develop their minority interests in Sinhala territory, they want the space to do so in their homelands. If the Sinhala people want to safeguard their territory against inroads by this Tamil minority, they must accede to their alternative demand! I would like to see all party manifestos dealing creatively with this legitimate demand for a regional transfer of power and resources, under the aegis of the Sinhala – dominated central government. It is a basic human right, we must recognize.
Bishop Lakshman was, as we know, a most perceptive and sensible human being. He thus concluded his talk by hoping that ‘what I consider ethically desirable, will be politically possible’. Alas, no political leader of Sri Lanka has yet been able to make Bishop Lakshman’s vision for Sri Lanka a reality. I am convinced that Bishop Lakshman died eventually more of a broken heart than of a heart attack given his lack of success, try as hard as he did, to bring about reconciliation and harmony among the different ethnic groups of our island home.
Bishop Lakshman’s final message also focused closely on the Sinhala – Tamil conflict. His fragile health coupled with over-work brought on a heart ailment that in turn made it necessary for him to rest and recuperate. On his recovery, he took a sabbatical in Birmingham, England. Cutting short his sabbatical, he returned home in August 1983 after the awful ethnic violence of July.
Disregarding his personal wellbeing, Bishop Lakshman sought to comfort the afflicted. He visited his clergy and people – especially the Tamils among them — in the Kandy and Matale areas where the harm caused to the Tamils was extensive. He visited the ‘refugee camps’ in these areas and then went to Jaffna by train. In between his criss-crossing the country, he rushed to a Meeting of the Christian Conference of Asia (CCA) in Singapore. Having gone around the island, met people and familiarized himself with all that had happened in Sri Lanka in his absence, he began to prepare his Pastoral Address to the Diocesan Council to be delivered on September 23, 1983. The primary focus of his Address, as noted above, was the predicament of the Tamils of Sri Lanka, the upheaval of July 1983 and the resultant national crisis.
At the Diocesan Council, at which the above- referenced Pastoral Address was given, a resolution was bought forward on the “Tamil Problem”. This resolution which included an apology by the Sinhala people to the Tamils, was passed by an overwhelming majority. Incidentally he was the first Sinhala citizen of public standing who first offered a public apology to the Tamils for the atrocities committed against them in July 1983. Observing that we must admit the fact that the massive retaliation mainly by the Sinhalese against defenseless Tamils cannot be justified on moral grounds, Bishop Lakshman wanted us to acknowledge our shame. He then went on to say:
And we must do so for the right reasons. It is not enough to be ashamed for the reason that inhuman passions enslaved a section of the Sinhalese for a short period. Nor must we be ashamed because our sense of moral outrage will improve our image abroad. We must be ashamed as Sinhalese for the moral crime other Sinhalese have committed.
Acknowledgement of our shame had, Bishop Lakshman noted, to be accompanied by our apology to those Tamils who were unjustified victims of the massive retaliation. It is only by such a sincere apology that ‘we shall also recover our moral and religious values’. In the course of his Address, Bishop Lakshman also admitted that;
I am among those who have tried hard and failed [to bring about national unity]. But I know and trust in God, who is ever creative in bringing good out of evil.
And he concluded his Address with the words of the late D.T. Niles:
Hope in God arises out of the ruins of our expectations.
Bishop Lakshman died a month after he delivered his September 23, 1983 Pastoral Address substantiating and illustrating for the final time, his tremendous moral clarity and splendid vision. Sadly, and tragically, our expectations for a just and fair Sri Lanka continue to remain unrealized thanks to the obtuseness of the current Government and those from all parties – – political and otherwise – – in the Sinhala establishment who openly or tacitly support the status quo.
Hope in us was briefly rekindled after the brutal internecine war with the Tamil Tigers ended in May 2009, but efforts at a genuine reconciliation have disappointingly fallen short of expectations to-date. The extremism of the Sinhala and Tamil ultra-nationalists that is yet apparent today renders the moderates amongst us impotent. Our national curse has been (and is) Sinhala ineptitude and intransigence feeding Tamil ineptitude and intransigence thanks primarily to the machinations and skullduggery of our respective political leaders.
Will we Sri Lankans ever achieve the moral clarity and mature vision of a Bishop Lakshman Wickremesinghe before we destroy what is left of Sri Lanka?
Professor Mohamed Maheesh’s inquiry into reducing fuel waste amidst a failing public transport system and chronic congestion he discussed in a YouTube on Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/reel/892342193673092) strikes a chord because it addresses a structural crisis with a call for individual agency. While the lack of a robust transit network often makes private vehicle use feel like a forced choice, rather than a luxury, the ‘unnecessary’ waste, he mentions, is often fuelled by a combination of outdated driving habits and a lack of collaborative transit solutions. In a country where idling in gridlock is a daily tax on both the wallet and the environment, the response must be a tactical shift toward high-occupancy behaviour—such as organised carpooling—and a conscious adoption of ‘smooth’ driving techniques that minimise the fuel-heavy cycles of rapid acceleration and braking. Ultimately, while we wait for the systemic overhaul of our railways and bus lanes, the most immediate way to curb waste is to decouple our movement from peak-hour bottlenecks through better route planning and, where possible, advocating for decentralised work models that remove the need for the commute entirely.
Reducing fuel waste
The question raised by Prof Mohamed Maheesh, regarding the feasibility of reducing fuel waste in a country plagued by gridlock and a weak public transport system, is a modern dilemma with deep historical irony. For a nation currently tethered to expensive, imported fossil fuels, the ‘unnecessary consumption’ mentioned by Prof Mohamed Maheesh is not just a personal inconvenience but a macroeconomic burden. While individual driving habits and the adoption of carpooling are immediate sticking points for reform, the core of the issue lies in the structural abandonment of high-capacity, electrified transit—a system that Sri Lanka actually pioneered over a century ago. Between 1892 and 1900, Colombo transitioned from a horse-drawn era to a modern electrical one. Following the call for tenders by the Colombo Municipal Council, the Colombo Electric Tramway was established, with the first lines—the Grandpass and Borella routes—opening on January 11, 1900. This was a period where the city’s movement was decoupled from the price of oil, powered, instead, by a dedicated station in Pettah. At its zenith, the system operated 52 tram cars, providing a reliable, fixed-rail alternative that kept the city’s arteries clear of the chaotic private vehicle growth we see today.
However, the decline of this ‘strong public transport’ began not with a lack of demand, but through labor and management friction. The historic Tramcar Strike of January 23, 1929, led by A.E. Goonesinha, marked a shift in the operational viability of the private firm, Boustead Brothers. Although the Municipal Council took over operations on August 31, 1944, the post-war global trend toward ‘flexible’ rubber-tired vehicles led to the system’s eventual demise. The last tramcar ran on June 30, 1960, and by 1964, even the electric trolley buses, that replaced them, were scrapped.
Importance of railway
This historical trajectory confirms Prof. Maheesh’s underlying point: the current waste is a result of moving away from a system that once worked. To reduce fuel consumption today, we are effectively trying to ‘tech’ our way out of a problem that was solved in 1900. Until we reintegrate the efficiency of rail-based or electrified mass transit, the ‘unnecessary’ waste of fuel in traffic remains an inevitable tax on a society that traded its electric tracks for a congested, oil-dependent future.
The modern Light Rail Transit (LRT) proposals for Colombo, primarily the Japan-funded project that reached advanced stages before its cancellation in 2020, represent a massive technological and spatial leap from the original 1900 tram system. While the original Colombo Electric Tramway operated at street level on narrow 12 km routes like the Grandpass and Borella lines, modern LRT plans envision a 75 km network across seven main lines, utilising elevated tracks to entirely bypass the ‘unnecessary traffic’ Prof. Mohamed Maheesh describes. Unlike the streetcars of the past, which were often accused of causing road congestion and operated among pedestrians and horse-drawn carriages, the proposed LRT is designed for high-speed, high-capacity movement—capable of carrying over 30,000 passengers per hour in a single direction, compared to the 52 modest tram cars that served a much smaller, slower-moving Colombo.
Despite these advancements, the two systems share a core philosophy: the electrification of public transport to reduce reliance on fossil fuels. The original trams were powered by a dedicated station in Pettah, a localised energy model that modern LRT would mirror on a much larger scale to insulate the city’s transport costs from global oil prices. However, the modern project has faced significant political and financial hurdles that the British-era system avoided during its first few decades. As of early 2026, although the Sri Lankan government has attempted to revive the project, the Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA) has maintained that approval depends on the successful completion of ongoing multimodal transport hubs. This delay leaves a century-old gap in Colombo’s infrastructure: we have moved from an era of functional electric tracks to one of aspirational elevated rails, while the daily reality remains the fuel-wasting gridlock Prof. Maheesh highlights.
A mirror of values
A transport system is more than a set of roads, buses, and trains. It is a mirror of how a society values its people—their time, their safety, their dignity, and their ability to participate fully in national life. In Sri Lanka, mobility is a daily struggle for millions, yet it is also the foundation upon which economic opportunity, social inclusion, and national cohesion depend. If we are to imagine a more humane and efficient future, we must begin by rethinking transport, not as a technical sector, but as a social contract.
Sri Lanka’s current transport landscape is a paradox. The country possesses a long-established railway network, an extensive road system, and a vibrant culture of movement that keeps even remote communities connected. Yet the lived experience of travel is often stressful, unpredictable, and unsafe. Congestion in urban areas has reached unsustainable levels. Public transport, though essential, suffers from fragmentation, poor coordination, and declining quality. Pedestrians navigate hostile streets, and vulnerable groups—women, elders, children, and disabled people—face daily risks that should be unacceptable in a modern society. A peoplefriendly transport system must, therefore, address not only infrastructure but the deeper structural and cultural issues that shape mobility.
Fundamental requirement
Safety is the most fundamental requirement of a humane transport system. Sri Lanka’s road fatality rates remain among the highest in the region, and these tragedies are not random misfortunes; they are the predictable outcomes of systemic neglect. Treating road safety as a public health priority rather than a policing matter is essential. This means designing roads that slow vehicles where people walk and live, enforcing speed limits consistently, improving driver training, and ensuring that vehicles meet basic safety standards. It also means recognising that certain groups—children walking to school, elders crossing busy roads, women travelling at night—face disproportionate risks. A society that protects its most vulnerable road users creates a safer environment for everyone.
Yet safety alone does not create dignity. A peoplefriendly system must also guarantee accessibility. In Sri Lanka, mobility is often shaped by inequality: urban residents enjoy more options than rural villagers, men feel safer travelling at night than women, and those with private vehicles enjoy privileges that public transport users do not. A humane system ensures that all citizens, regardless of income, gender, age, or physical ability, can travel with dignity. This requires lowfloor buses that elders can board without struggle, stations with ramps and handrails, clear signage for those with visual impairments, and reliable services that do not force women to choose between harassment and immobility. Accessibility is not an optional feature; it is a measure of a society’s moral maturity.
Public transport remains the backbone of mobility for the majority of Sri Lankans. Buses and trains carry millions of passengers daily, yet the system is undermined by fragmentation and outdated operational models. Private buses compete aggressively for passengers, SLTB struggles with limited resources, and rail serv
ices are hampered by ageing infrastructure. A peoplefriendly system requires a shift from competition to coordination. Instead of treating each bus owner as an independent entrepreneur, Sri Lanka must adopt a unified service model in which routes, schedules, and standards are centrally planned. Operators should be paid for service quality rather than passenger volume, eliminating the reckless race for passengers and ensuring that socially necessary routes are maintained even if they are not profitable.
Railway underutilised
The railway system, though historically significant, remains underutilised. Modernising key commuter corridors, upgrading signalling, improving rolling stock, and integrating bus services with rail stations can transform the railway into a reliable, highcapacity alternative to private vehicles. When trains run frequently, on time, and in coordination with buses, they become not only a mode of transport but a catalyst for economic development and urban regeneration. The potential is enormous; what is lacking is a coherent strategy and sustained investment.
A peoplefriendly system must also begin at the most basic level: the street. Walking is the most fundamental mode of transport, yet Sri Lanka’s urban and semiurban areas often treat pedestrians as afterthoughts. Sidewalks are narrow, broken, or non-existent. Crossings are dangerous. Shade is scarce. A humane transport system must reclaim the street as a shared space where pedestrians are respected. Continuous, wellmaintained sidewalks, safe crossings near schools and hospitals, shaded walkways, and trafficcalmed residential zones are essential. When walking becomes safe and pleasant, it reduces the need for short vehicle trips, eases congestion, and improves public health.
Cycling in mobility ecosystem
Cycling, too, deserves a place in the mobility ecosystem. Although not everyone will cycle, those who do reduce pressure on roads and public transport. In cities like Colombo, Kandy, Galle, and Jaffna, even a modest network of protected cycling lanes can encourage more people to choose bicycles for short trips. Cycling infrastructure is relatively inexpensive compared to road widening or flyovers, yet its social and environmental benefits are substantial. A peoplefriendly system recognises that mobility is not only about speed but about choice, and cycling expands the range of choices available to citizens.
Governance is perhaps the most overlooked dimension of transport reform. Sri Lanka’s current system is characterised by institutional fragmentation: the national ministry, provincial councils, local authorities, the police, SLTB, private operators, and various regulatory bodies all play roles, often without coordination. A peoplefriendly system requires a single, empowered regional transport authority for major urban areas—especially the Western Province—that can plan, regulate, contract, and monitor all modes of transport. Such an authority must be insulated from political interference, guided by data, and accountable to the public. Without coherent governance, even the best-designed policies will fail.
Technology can support this transformation, but it must serve people rather than dictate their behaviour. Integrated ticketing systems that allow passengers to use a single card or QR code across buses and trains reduce friction and make transfers seamless. Realtime information through apps, SMS, and digital displays reduces uncertainty and improves the perceived quality of service. Open data policies allow universities, startups, and civil society to analyse performance and propose improvements. Technology should not be a shiny distraction but a tool that enhances reliability, transparency, and user experience.
Cultural change is equally important. Sri Lanka’s transport culture is shaped by impatience, competition, and a sense of individual survival on the road. Changing this culture requires education, enforcement, and the redesign of physical spaces to encourage cooperation rather than conflict. When roads are designed to slow vehicles, when public transport is reliable, when pedestrians are protected, and when drivers are trained and held accountable, behaviour begins to change. Culture follows structure; people behave differently when the environment supports different behaviours.
Economic sustainability
Economic sustainability is another essential pillar. Public transport cannot rely solely on fare revenue; it requires stable, predictable funding. This can come from a mix of government budgets, modest fuel or parking charges, and land value capture around major stations. When public transport improves, land values rise; capturing a portion of this increase allows the system to fund itself sustainably. A peoplefriendly system is therefore not only socially just but economically rational.
Transforming Sri Lanka’s transport system will require a phased, realistic approach. Quick improvements—such as enforcing speed limits, repairing sidewalks near schools, improving lighting at stations, and piloting unified bus contracts—can build public trust. Mediumterm reforms—such as establishing regional transport authorities, modernising rail corridors, and implementing integrated ticketing—create structural change. Longterm goals—such as nationwide integration, transitoriented development, and sustained reductions in road deaths—require patience and political commitment. A peoplefriendly system is not built overnight; it is built through consistent, incremental progress guided by a clear vision.
Ultimately, the question of transport is a question of what kind of society Sri Lanka aspires to be. A society that values human dignity will design systems that protect and empower people. A society that values time will create reliable, efficient services. A society that values equality will ensure that mobility is not a privilege but a right. A peoplefriendly transport system is, therefore, not merely an engineering project but a moral project. It reflects a belief that every person—whether a schoolchild in Monaragala, a garment worker in Katunayake, an elder in Kurunegala, or a commuter in Colombo—deserves to move through the country safely, comfortably, and with dignity.
SL at a crossroads
Sri Lanka stands at a crossroads. The old model of endless road widening, unregulated competition, and privatevehicle dominance has reached its limits. Congestion grows, pollution worsens, and the social costs of unsafe roads continue to mount. The alternative is not a utopian dream, but a practical, achievable vision grounded in global best practices and local realities. It is a vision in which buses and trains form an integrated network; in which walking and cycling are safe and pleasant; in which women and children travel without fear; in which rural communities remain connected; and in which the daily journey becomes not a burden but a reflection of a society that values its people.
We urge the Minister of Transport to give urgent attention to the insights shared here and the historical precedents of Colombo’s transit system. It is vital that the Ministry recognises the transition from a once-functional electrified network to our current oil-dependent gridlock as a call to action. By prioritising the revitalisation of high-capacity, integrated, sustainable public transport, the government can directly address the unnecessary fuel waste and economic drain that currently burden the nation, and make the system a passenger friendly system.
by Professor M.W. Amarasiri de Silva
The ownership of Trincomalee port was highly contested by the Dutch, French and British as Gateway to Bay of Bengal in 1700s and 1800s. The famous seafarer Vice Admiral Horatio Nelson, as a fleet Midshipman (trainee Naval officer) on board HMS Seahorse, in 1775, wrote in his journal “Trincomalee is the Finest Natural Harbour in the World”.
What Lord Nelson realised as a Midshipman was the immense Strategic, Natural and Commercial value of the port, considered as one of the deepest natural Harbours in the World.
Vice Admiral Sir Edward Hughes (British Royal Navy) and Vice Admiral Bailli De Suffern (French Navy) had sea battles to take control of Trincomalee from 25th August to 3rd September 1782.
French Forces attempted to capture Trincomalee on 30th August 1782, for supremacy in India and Ceylon (Sri Lanka) Eastern Coast, which prompted the Royal Navy to come into action. Even though both fleets had heavy casualties (British – 51 killed, 283 wounded. French – 82 killed, 255 Wounded), but no ships were lost.
The British captured Trincomalee on 31st August 1795 from the Dutch after taking over Fort Ostenburg.
It is interesting to note Famous Admiral Lord Nelson and Trincomalee have a special connection. One of the Ships built after the death of Admiral Nelson in 1805 was named HMS Trincomalee; it was built in 1812. HMS Trincomalee is still active; it was restored and is now the National Museum of the Royal Navy at Hartlepool, England.
The US National Anthem “The Star- spangled Banner “was written by Francis Scott Key on 14th September 1814, onboard a truce ship at Baltimore harbour, Maryland, USA! It is pertinent to note that Sri Lanka Navy’s latest addition, ex-US Coast Guard Ship DECISIVE (P 628) started her 14,775 nautical miles journey, longest journey by a Sri Lanka Navy Ship, was from Baltimore to Colombo/ Trincomalee, as explained in my previous article.
Trincomalee was under British rule for a very long time. Their fleet was stationed in Trincomalee and the British developed Trincomalee into a major ship repair and logistical facility for their ships. Larger War ships, like Aircraft Carriers, Destroyers and Frigates, were stationed at Trincomalee.
During the 1930s, the British realised that there should be an Energy Storage facility between Oil fields of Saudi Arabia/ Arabian Gulf and Far East Asia, and designed and built a huge Oil Storage Facility at Trincomalee. The word HUGE is appropriate; as they built 100 tanks, each tank can contain ten thousand (10,000) MT of oil. So, an oil tank farm with a capacity of one million metric tons (one BILLION LITERS) was commissioned by 1935. As per their estimates at that time, the strategic oil stocks in Trincomalee were sufficient for their fleet for more than six months! Every country has Strategic Oil reserves except Sri Lanka! Even India stored part of their Strategic Oil Reserve at Trincomalee with the Indian Oil Company.
Building of tanks was a major engineering project; it was an ENGINEERING MARVEL in the 1930s!
IOC tanks on lower tank farm
Four-inch thick best quality Manchester Steel was used to build these tanks. Each plate is hand-riveted. They were built in such a way that if one tank caught fire, the fire would not spread to others. Pipe lines are connecting all tanks, which could be isolated or interconnected. The “TANK FARM “IS IN TWO SECTIONS – Lower tanks (numbering 39) closer to sea and Jetty (known as Oiling jetty) and Upper tanks on the hillock numbering 61 tanks. The Lower tank farm tanks, closer to the sea, were covered with thick concrete walls, to avoid attack by enemy small raid groups.
Huge Pump house, with very powerful pumps, was installed to pump oil to Upper tanks.All this happened almost 100 years ago!
As advancement of Imperial Japanese Army on the Asian Front and German Forces advancement on the Western Front was stopped by Allied forces in 1944/45 and World War Two ended earlier than anticipated due to US Atomic bombing of Japan. Trinco tanks were not fully utilised.
However, the British knew the importance of the Trincomalee harbour.
When we got Independence in 1948, we signed a Defence Pact with the British so that they could retain control of Trincomalee harbour, the oil tank farm and the China bay airfield.
It was on 15 October 1957, the British handed over the Trincomalee port. The then Prime Minister S W R D Bandaranaike was the Chief Guest at the event and the Royal Ceylon Navy Guard of Honour, commanded by Lieutenant Basil Gunasekara, proudly presented the salute to the Prime Minister. After a long time, the the Royal Navy Ensign (flag) was lowered at Trincomalee Naval Base and the Royal Ceylon Navy flag was hoisted. A plaque, erected near the Trincomalee Naval, has information about this historic occasion. The British ultimately left our shores almost after 162 years – (1795 to 1957).
In the 1987 Indo- Sri Lanka Accord, we agreed to develop the Trincomalee Oil Tank farm jointly with the Indian government. Later on, in the Lower tank farm, we gave 14 tanks to Indian Oil Company (IOC) and 24 tanks to the Ceylon Petroleum Company (CPC).
In January 2022, the remaining 61 tanks in the Upper tank farm were allocated for a CPC- IOC joint venture (51:49 shares) and the Managing Director of CPC was appointed the Chairman of this joint venture and CEO of Lanka IOC as Managing Director of the new company. Initially, Rs 100 million (51 million from CPC and 49 million from IOC) was allocated for renovation and development of these 61 tanks on the Upper tank farm. Feasibility study was done by a renowned international company. 
I worked voluntarily as the Chairman of Trincomalee Petroleum Terminals Ltd., (TPTL) for six months in 2023. It was fascinating to work in Trincomalee, where I spent most of my Naval career.
The present situation in the World has proved what the British thought almost 100 years ago is even valid today!
As per my information, Lanka IOC uses all its tanks to store fuel and sometimes do offshore bunkering of ships also. It built TWO MORE NEW TANKS and they have 16 tanks now. All are operational.
The CPC tanks remain unused except three leased to Prima Flour Mills Ltd., for storing fresh water.
The Upper tank farm is being renovated at a very slow pace. Out of 61 tanks on the Upper tank farm, tank No 91 was destroyed during World War II due to Japanese aircraft bombing. There is no tank number 99! (The British also thought 99 was a bad number?). Instead, we have number 101! Tank number 102 is partly built at the top of the hillock! So, that means the British had ideas of expanding tank farms BEYOND 100 TANKS!
The Election Manifesto of the National People’s Front, led by President Anura Kumara Dissanayake, clearly stated that “Trincomalee Oil Tank Farm will be renovated with support of a friendly Foreign County”.
At least now, we should start it without further delay. As a former Chief of Naval Staff of India told me “Ravi, you are sitting on a GOLD MINE at the Trincomalee Naval Base; without realising the value of it”! How true!
By Admiral Ravindra C Wijegunaratne
WV, RWP and Bar, RSP, VSV, USP, NI (M) (Pakistan), ndc, psn, Bsc
(Hons) (War Studies) (Karachi) MPhil (Madras)
Former Navy Commander and Former Chief of Defence Staff
Former Chairman, Trincomalee Petroleum Terminals Ltd
Former Managing Director Ceylon Petroleum Corporation
Former High Commissioner to Pakistan
Dr Asha de Vos PhD: A Sri Lankan voice that reshaped Global Marine Science
Specialist Consultant Paediatrician and Honorary Senior Fellow, Postgraduate Institute of Medicine, University of Colombo, Sri Lanka.
At a recent United Nations (UN) event marking International Women’s Day, a striking portrait of a Sri Lankan lady scientist appeared on the screen, alongside a simple but powerful declaration: “They told me I was not capable – so I made a discovery that changed the world.”
The scientist was Dr Asha de Vos. For many Sri Lankans, this moment passed with little notice, confined to a brief news item in the newspapers. Yet for all that, in that global forum, her presence represented something far greater than personal recognition. It marked the arrival of a Sri Lankan scientist on the world stage, not as a participant, but as a pioneer.
A Discovery that Challenged a Conventional Precept
For decades, marine biology held a well-settled view: blue whales, the largest of mammals, in fact, the largest animals ever to have lived, are migratory. This assumption was repeated in textbooks, scientific articles, and accepted without question.
Dr Asha de Vos challenged it. Working in the waters off Sri Lanka, often with limited resources and without the extensive institutional backing available in more developed research environments, she identified a population of blue whales that does not migrate. These whales remain in Sri Lankan waters throughout the year.
This finding was not just an accident, a chance occurrence, nor an incidental observation. It was a carefully orchestrated scientific expedition that overturned a fundamental assumption about one of the most studied animal species on Earth. In doing so, it reminded the scientific world of an essential truth: that knowledge is never complete, and that even the largest creatures in the oceans can still hold secrets. It showed that such secrets of behaviour that were detected can have a profound impact on the aftermath, as far as the world is concerned.
Global Consequences of a Local Discovery
The implications of this work extended far beyond academic debate. A non-migratory population of blue whales is inherently vulnerable. Concentrated in a relatively small geographic area, these animals face risks that migratory populations can avoid.
The waters off Sri Lanka are among the busiest shipping routes in the world. Large vessels pass through areas that coincide with whale habitats, creating a significant risk of fatal collisions. Dr de Vos’s research brought international attention to this issue. It contributed to changes in shipping practices, including the adjustment of routes and the introduction of measures aimed at reducing whale-ship strikes of blue whales. In this way, her work moved beyond theory to influence real-world policy and conservation efforts.
Science Rooted in Sri Lanka
Equally significant is the context in which this work was carried out. Dr de Vos has consistently advocated for the leadership of local scientists in studying local ecosystems. Her position challenged the long-standing pattern where research in developing regions is often led by external actors. Quite appropriately and most beautifully, she describes the phenomenon as “parachute science”, the practice of Western Scientists collecting data in developing countries and then leaving without training or investing in the locals or the region.
To address this imbalance, she founded Oceanswell, Sri Lanka’s first marine conservation research and education organisation. Through this initiative, she has worked to build local capacity, inspire young researchers, and promote a deeper understanding of marine ecosystems. Her work has demonstrated that world-class science can emerge from a little country like Sri Lanka, not as an extension of external efforts, but as an independent and authoritative effort.
A Journey of Determination
Those widely quoted words attributed to Dr Asha de Vos are not mere rhetoric. They reflect the reality of a journey marked by doubt, resistance, and the challenge of pursuing an unconventional path. Marine biology was not an established field in Sri Lanka when she began her career. Opportunities were limited, and the path was uncertain. Yet, through persistence and conviction, she transformed these limitations into magnificent opportunities.
Dr de Vos has always dreamed of being an “adventure-scientist”. Her achievements include being the first and only Sri Lankan to obtain a PhD in marine mammal research, a distinction that underscores both her pioneering role and the barriers she has overcome. Today, Dr. de Vos is recognised internationally as a leading voice in marine conservation. Her work is cited in scientific literature, her insights are sought in policy discussions, and her presence is felt in global forums. The recognition she received at the United Nations is just one reflection of this standing.
However, her significance to Sri Lanka extends beyond her scientific contributions. She graphically represents the potential of Sri Lankan scholarship. She illustrates what can be achieved through determination and intellectual rigour. The lady serves as an inspiration to a new generation of scientists who may choose to follow paths that are not yet well defined.
A Moment That Should Not Pass Unnoticed
That such an achievement received only limited attention locally is a matter for reflection. Nations are often judged not only by the accomplishments of their citizens, but by the ability of those very same nations to recognise and celebrate them.
Dr Asha de Vos’s work has altered global understanding, influenced international policy, and established a new field of scientific inquiry within Sri Lanka. These are not minor achievements of limited consequence. They are contributions of lasting, immense, and seminal significance.
The image displayed at the United Nations, accompanied by a single sentence, captured a story of perseverance and discovery. It spoke of a brilliant scientist who refused to accept limitations imposed by others. It told of a discovery that reshaped certain types of scientific understanding. It brought to light a voice that, though once doubted, is now heard across the world. It is a voice that our beautiful Pearl of the Indian Ocean would do ever so well to listen to.
This author has not had the honour or the privilege of even meeting Dr Asha de Vos, but is so very pleased to declare that all of us should be so proud of a Sri Lankan Lady Scientist who is recognised, acknowledged and celebrated by the entire scientific world.
We salute you, Madam, for all of your splendid achievements!
Dr B. J. C. Perera
Two killed when Air Canada jet hits fire truck at NYC’s LaGuardia Airport
Bus fares increased by 12.19% from midnight today [23]
Public will not be served as Computer system failure at Department of Registration of Persons
Trump says he is postponing strikes on Iran power plants after ‘productive’ talks on ending war
Asia stocks slide as US and Iran threaten to escalate war
Heat Index at Caution Level in the Western, Sabaragamuwa, Southern and North-western provinces and in Anuradhapura, Mannar and Vavuniya districts
‘Dates have the highest sugar content to fight Coronavirus’
Sunday Island 27 December – Headlines
#SundayIsland 17th December – Headlines
Sunday Island – 28th March
Sunday Island Headlines – 21 March
Sunday Island – 21st February – Headlines
-
News6 days agoCIABOC questions Ex-President GR on house for CJ’s maid
-
News7 days agoSri Lankan marine scientist Asha de Vos honoured at UNGA opening
-
News7 days agoAustralian HC debunks misleading travel risk claims for Sri Lanka
-
News5 days agoBailey Bridge inaugurated at Chilaw
-
News5 days agoPay hike demand: CEB workers climb down from 40 % to 15–20%
-
News4 days agoCIABOC tells court Kapila gave Rs 60 mn to MR and Rs. 20 mn to Priyankara
-
Editorial6 days agoCouple QR-based quota with odd-even rationing
-
News3 days agoColombo, Oslo steps up efforts to strengthen bilateral cooperation in key environmental priority areas