Features

New job in Public Administration and establishing cordial relation with Minister

Published

6 months ago

2026/04/12

Festus Perera

The Ministry of Public Administration, Provincial Councils and Home Affairs was one of the largest Ministries in government. This was the third large Ministry I had to handle in a row, after Agriculture, Food and Co-operatives, and Education and Higher Education. On the Public Administration side, the Ministry dealt with all the major state services, such as The Sri Lanka Administrative Service, The Sri Lanka Scientific Service; The Sri Lanka Engineering Service; The General Clerical Service; The Stenographers’ Service; The Typists’ Service; The Translators’ Service; The Middle Level Technical Service and so on. These services constituted the great bulk of the public service outside the Corporation sector, and consisted of around 600,000 people, and scores of Trade Unions. In addition to administering these services and resolving the numerous day to day problems that were thrown up, the Ministry was also charged with the responsibility of administrative reforms on which too, significant time and effort had to be spent.

On the Provincial Council side, the Ministry played the role of a mediator and resolver of problems between the government and Provincial Councils. In the early days of the new structure, these were quite numerous and they had to be tackled with discretion and tact. The Ministry also organized and serviced regular conferences of Chief Ministers which were chaired by the Cabinet Minister, and had the responsibility of ensuring follow up action on a large number of decisions taken at these gatherings.

On the Home Affairs side, there were wide and varied responsibilities, which ranged from annually determining and gazetting public holidays to many statutory responsibilities under a number of Ordinances and Acts of Parliament. A large number of documents, letters of appointments, etc., had to be signed by the Secretary personally due to legal requirements.

This section of the Ministry also handled all major state functions, such as the Independence Day celebrations as well as occasions of a doleful nature such as State funerals. One only realized the detailed and meticulous work that had to go in, in arranging these functions where numerous VIPs as well as large crowds were to be present when one was compelled to give one’s mind to them. One seat mislabeled or unavailable could spell disaster.

As in other Ministries, the Secretary had to serve on or chair a number of Boards. These included being Chairman of the Governing Body of the Sri Lanka Institute of Development Administration (SLIDA); Chairman of the Scientific Services Board and Chairman, Engineering Services Board. Overall however, and mercifully I had less Boards to serve on than was the case in Education, although I still had to continue on several of the previous Boards. It was to such a Ministry that I walked in on the morning of June16, 1993. Before I assumed duties, I telephoned a couple of senior level officers with good track records to come and join me in senior capacities in the Ministry. I wanted to form a good team. But they both said “Please Sir, we are prepared to work with you anytime, but we can’t come to that Ministry!”

The situation was really incredible. When I went in that morning most of the officers flocked in to see me. They seemed very pleased at my appointment. There seemed to be a universal expectation as well as belief that I would interact with the Minister in such a manner as to create a less tense atmosphere. The Minister himself was not available in the morning, but we were all to meet at the “Mini Cabinet” meeting to be held in one of the Committee rooms in Parliament at 2.30 p.m. I spent the morning being briefed on a number of matters, as well as attending to some matters that had become urgent.

When I met the Minister in Parliament at 2.30 p.m., he was most cordial. He announced to the officers gathered, that the Ministry was “fortunate,” to have got me. He then proceeded with business. On some occasions, when I saw that he was beginning to lose his temper with officials, I used the opportunity of being seated next to him, to whisper that I would deal with the situation later. Except on a very few matters, we had a reasonably calm and peaceful meeting. The officials saw me whispering to him and understood that I was intervening on their behalf. This was greatly appreciated. Many of them told me after the meeting that this was the most peaceful “Mini Cabinet,” meeting they had for a long time.

The earlier impression of me that Mr. Festus Perera had formed, the contexts of which I had recorded in earlier chapters, obviously still held. He was treating me with respect, as President Wijetunge was certain he would. As the meeting was ending, I told him that I wished to see him alone for five minutes after the meeting. He agreed. Both of us remained behind, and when we were alone he said “Pieris, I am happy you have come.” I thanked him and said I wouldn’t take up his time, but there was something that I needed to tell him. “As long as I am Secretary here, I want to ensure two things,” I told him. “The first is that I want all the officers to work hard.” “Very good,” he said. “Secondly, I want to see that they laugh a lot whilst they are working hard,” I continued.

He initially looked taken aback at this somewhat unorthodox desire on my part, and the next moment he burst out laughing. “Very good. very good,” he said. Then I briefly discussed a few things such as a regular time for both of us to meet, dates for important meetings and so on. In 10 minutes the conversation was over. It had been a productive first day.

One of the first things I noticed when I walked into the Minister’s room in the Ministry next day, was the wooden plaque on his table bearing his name and designation in Sinhala only. The official languages department came under us and I told him that as the Minister in charge of this subject, he was violating the law by his plaque being in Sinhala only. “I am going to get one in three languages,” I said. He approved. I had no problems working with him whatsoever. As a result the whole atmosphere in the Ministry loosened up.

After a few days, the Minister was not even coming to office. His private Secretaries informed me that this was a remarkable turn-around because, previously he not only came daily, but having stated that he was not coming, suddenly turned up, sometimes at around six o’clock in the evening, when he went around checking. Now, I seemed to have created another problem, because almost within a week of my coming, the Minister was hardly coming to the Ministry. This meant that his private Secretaries and others had to go looking for him! When I took this up with him one day, he said “With you there, I don’t have to come so often.” I thanked him for the confidence he had in me, but suggested a regular programme in the interest of work. After discussion we agreed on certain arrangements which would be convenient both to the officers and to him.

Although the situation in the Ministry had improved a great deal, there were still a few unfortunate incidents where the Minister lost his temper and mercilessly berated some of the officials, among them some senior ones, in the presence of trade unionists and others. By this time we also found that he was suffering from a condition known as hypoglycemia, where sugar levels sharply drop. One day, he himself admitted that this was causing intense irritation. After some time, he tried to remedy this by carrying some sweets along with him. When he felt that his sugar levels were dropping he popped a few sweets into his mouth, and this certainly seemed to help. Overall, the fact that he had a favourable impression of me from the time of the 1960s when I dealt with him as Deputy Food Commissioner, helped now. Except for a rare outburst against particular officers, the situation stabilized, and a looser more relaxed atmosphere prevailed.

Based on my experience in Education, I formed a Senior Staff Group which focussed on policy issues, innovation and change. This group which I chaired, also attempted to identify gaps and seek remedies. One of the things that we discussed was that we did not have reliable data bases pertaining to the various services such as the Sri Lanka Administrative Service as well as others. Given the movement in these services, due to transfers, retirements, resignations, dismissals and deaths, no one really knew where some of the personnel were deployed.

Matters were further complicated by officers going on various scholarships. Seniority was being affected by some of these changes. Under these conditions, even the Ministry did not have uptodate seniority lists, which in turn affected speedy action on some appointments, whilst in some instances it led to disputes and dissatisfaction. It became clear that computerization was the answer. The payroll and some of the accounting functions were already computerized. We needed to extend this to other areas. Work was therefore begun. We decided to begin with the Sri Lanka Administrative Service, and then proceed to the other services. I did not stay long enough to ensure its completion.

The last Presidential Mobile Service – Batticaloa

Before the death of President Premadasa, a Presidential Mobile Service was fixed in Batticaloa. After the events of May 1 (when he was assassinated) there was a review as to whether to proceed with it. It was ultimately decided to go ahead. We therefore flew in to Batticaloa on July 21 in Airforce planes. Most of the Secretaries were accommodated at the large Kallady Army Camp. The officers in charge of the camp had done their utmost to ensure our comfort and safety. Most of them had vacated their quarters within the camp and turned them over to us.

Some of us occupied single rooms in these houses. Others shared. Even though we were within the camp, we were specialty protected. Each time we stepped out an armed guard or guards materialized who walked behind us at all times. We were taken to the school in town where the Mobile Service was held in a heavily guarded convoy of buses, with armoured cars leading the convoy and bringing up the rear. The Army did route patrols, morning and evening before the convoy took to the road. This was because of the threat from land mines. If anything happened, there would have been many vacancies in the higher echelons of the Public Service. Bus loads of Secretaries and Additional Secretaries would have been tempting targets if only they could be reached. Security, therefore was very tight.

We gathered in the officers mess for breakfast and dinner, lunch being served in packets at the school where the mobile service was held. Here again the Army had arranged for special food for us within the camp. We were not subjected to Army rations. Dinner in particular was special, not only for the food provided, but the relaxed atmosphere that prevailed due to the efforts of the officers in the camp. Drinks were served before dinner and a sing song organized. Some musical instruments were produced to enhance the quality of the evening.

On one of the nights, a cultural show was organized for us, which we watched after dinner. They did not allow us to dwell on the unhappy memories of a continuing war. We were briefly their guests and they did everything possible to make us comfortable and give us a good time. We were deeply touched. Thoughts of concern crossed our minds, about the people we were shortly to leave behind. We silently prayed for their safety. On the morning of the day that we were due to leave for Colombo, the officers had arranged for a group photograph to be taken of themselves and us. Breakfast that day was even more special.

It was with a degree of sadness that we finally left. We saw that the officers were sad too. We had enjoyed each other’s company. When I got back I wrote them a letter of thanks on behalf of the entire public service for the care and concern they had shown towards us, and conveying our prayerful good wishes for their safety and success. I, later learnt that this letter was greatly appreciated, and was to constitute an important element in the records of the camp.

On our return, I had to plunge in to organize a conference of Chief Ministers. Detailed work had to be done on the agenda for the conference and on briefing the Minister not only on the agenda, but on anticipated issues that could be raised outside the agenda. This is equally important, because much of good administration consists of intelligent anticipation. Ministers greatly appreciate this, because it makes them look good and in complete charge. It is the duty of a good administrator to provide the Minister this service.

The conference itself dealt with many issues of Central/Provincial relations as well as other matters such as the redefining of the boundary between the Districts of Ampara and Polonnaruwa. Mr. Festus Perera was a good Chairman, fair and conciliatory. He had a similar approach to trade union negotiations. It was largely due to his approach and skills that a UNP government in its final year was able to achieve relative peace in a large public sector. His credibility was high. The issue of credibility comes up all the time. To the extent that one has it, the business of government becomes smoother and speedier. If you can depend on your colleagues and act without reservation or hesitation and if your colleagues in turn can do the same, life becomes much easier.

There is also the question of political interference. There is wide, and indeed, in many instances deserved criticism leveled against political meddling and interference. In the light of my own experience, I could say that matters are somewhat more complex than that. Sometimes politicians intervene due to inefficiency, corruption or unbecoming behaviour on the part of public servants themselves. Politicians cannot be blamed for all the ills in government. The public service too should take a share of it. This is a subject fora separate monograph. I would however like to record just one instance to illustrate what I mean.

There arose an instance where one of the Divisional Secretaries was transferred almost overnight through the intervention of the Minister. This created a disturbance in the service, which reached me. I was not aware of the transfer until it had taken place. It was alleged that it was done at the behest of the local MP. I felt that I needed to take this up with the Minister. One cannot have a stable system of administration if public servants are transferred on the whims and fancies of politicians. The Minister was not immediately available.

In the meantime, I had to go to Parliament, and happened to meet the MP concerned on the corridor. I took the opportunity of asking him about his role in the transfer. What he said was revealing. “This man is a disgrace to the service,” he said. “Everyday in the evening, he is in the Gramasevaka’s home drinking. Please make inquiries. This is a well known fact. In addition, he is unreliable and his work is mediocre. If you make inquiries, Mr. Pieris, you would get to know all this. We were very patient. But it came to a point that we couldn’t tolerate it any more.” I thanked him for the information, and said that I would check. When I did do so, I found the MP’s allegations to be substantially correct. I had experienced other occasions of a similar nature. Everyone had a reputation in the service. If there is diligent inquiry one could always find out. Members of Parliament would perform an important function, if they keep an unbiased eye on the working of the administration. But this too is a complex issue, since they too vary in quality and character. The worst situation is where public servants and Members of Parliament collaborate on doubtful enterprises, which also happen sometimes.

(Excerpted from In Pursuit of Governance, the autobiography of MDD Peiris)

All News Advertisement

Features

Coercive laws recipe for future misrule

Published

22 hours ago

2026/10/13

Sahan Weerasooriya

by Jehan Perera

The NPP government is going after powerful figures from the past and present who have engaged in corruption, fraud and criminal activity in a way that no previous government in Sri Lanka has done. Former ministers, politicians and senior state officials are among those facing investigations and legal proceedings. The government has placed before Parliament a document listing 50 cases involving corruption, fraud and other crimes. These include not only financial offences but also cases relating to the Easter Sunday attacks, the killings of Lasantha Wickrematunge and Wasim Thajudeen, the disappearance of Prageeth Ekneligoda and attacks on journalists Keith Noyahr and Upali Tennakoon.

The significance of this effort is that it can demonstrate that nobody is above the law, regardless of political connections or social standing, which will help restore public confidence in institutions that have long been distrusted. It could also recover public resources, improve the investment climate and strengthen the foundations for a more prosperous and just Sri Lanka. When criticised for focusing on the past and not the present, the government position is that these investigations were initiated under earlier governments, particularly between 2015 and 2019, and that it is now allowing investigators to proceed to deal with the backlog without political interference.

But there is an aspect of the government’s approach that is less justifiable. While pursuing past wrongdoing by powerful individuals, it is also advancing a triumvirate of draft laws that could give the state sweeping powers over citizens, organisations and dissent in the present and future. The draft Prevention of Terrorism legislation, the Prevention of Organised Crimes Bill and the NGO Registration and Supervision Bill raise serious questions about the over-centralisation of power. Each of these laws strengthens the powers of the state while weakening the rights and safeguards that protect people from their misuse and thus questions the basic rights of people in democracy where ‘the power of the people is vested in the government’. This is a recipe for future misrule rather than the rule of law. As the well-known saying goes, power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Proposed Laws

The real test of system change, for which the government obtained an overwhelming mandate, requires not only a government willing to hold others accountable, but one prepared to subject itself to the same principles of legality, transparency and restraint. The three proposed laws that are particularly important in this regard are the Protection of the State from Terrorism Bill, the Prevention of Organised Crimes Bill and the NGO Registration and Supervision Bill. Each of these draft laws has been presented as serving a legitimate purpose. Preventing terrorism, combating organised crime and ensuring that NGOs do not facilitate money laundering or terrorist financing are proper responsibilities of the state. Sri Lanka has international obligations in these areas, and no responsible government can disregard them. However, the existence of a legitimate objective does not justify every means adopted to achieve it.

The proposed Protection of the State from Terrorism Bill illustrates the problem. Although its definition of terrorism draws on a model developed by a former United Nations Special Rapporteur, the Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka has warned that the definition of terrorism extends beyond the model and could bring legitimate political protest, trade union action and civil disobedience within the scope of counter-terrorism legislation. Its concerns also include prolonged detention, inadequate judicial oversight and restrictions on access to legal counsel. These are objections that go to the heart of the relationship between the citizen and the state. The government cannot credibly promise to protect democratic freedoms while creating powers that could be used to restrict them. It is necessary for the government to reassess the draft through transparent consultation and revise provisions that could criminalise legitimate dissent.

The Prevention of Organised Crimes Bill raises similar concerns. It is presented as giving effect to the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organised Crime, which Sri Lanka ratified in 2006. The Centre for Policy Alternatives (CPA) has argued that the convention does not require many of the bill’s provisions. The proposed law extends to a broad range of offences, permits detention orders lasting up to a year, makes confessions to police admissible for purposes of legal evidence, and introduces extensive surveillance powers. A law intended to dismantle criminal networks should not create a parallel system of exceptional powers that could be applied far beyond organised crime. Nor should safeguards developed through years of experience with abuses under the Prevention of Terrorism Act be weakened through legislation bearing a different name. The government should review whether or not existing laws could be used effectively to control these crimes or whether each exceptional power is necessary.

Civil Society

The proposed NGO Registration and Supervision Bill presents another test of the government’s intentions. The government may reasonably seek transparency in the finances of organisations receiving public or foreign funds, including measures to prevent money laundering and terrorist financing. It seeks to justify its overreach on the grounds of meeting the internationally mandated requirements of the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) for the Asia-Pacific region. But these objectives do not justify placing civil society and NGOs under excessive administrative control when even the FATF ranks them as low to medium risks. The draft bill would require registration and renewal, impose extensive obligations on organisations and empower authorities to suspend or deregister them on broadly framed grounds. It is important to redraft provisions that confer excessive discretion over registration, renewal, suspension and deregistration of NGOs.

Among the concerns raised by United Nations human rights special rapporteurs with regard to the draft NGO law are provisions requiring organisations to align with government policies and restrictions that could affect advocacy, dissent and freedom of association. The implications extend well beyond organisations that engage directly with the government. Community groups, human rights organisations, independent researchers and organisations working on reconciliation or accountability could find their activities constrained by uncertainty over how these provisions might be interpreted. Organisations that criticise government policies are not thereby working against the country. Their freedom to do so is part of what distinguishes a democracy from a system in which the government determines which opinions and activities are acceptable.

The government has generated considerable public goodwill through its pursuit of corruption and criminality. It should not assume that this goodwill gives it an unlimited mandate to strengthen the coercive powers of the state. The NPP knows from its own history that governments can treat dissent as a threat and use the machinery of the state against their opponents. There is still time to correct the drafts through transparent public consultation, narrow definitions of offences, meaningful judicial control over detention and surveillance, and effective remedies against arbitrary decisions. A government that pursues corruption while weakening safeguards against state abuse risks undermining its own achievements. Besides bringing to light the abuse of power by previous governments, the NPP government needs to build a system in which no future government can abuse power in the belief they can get away with it.

Features

Quality assurance without quality enhancement: The irony of university QA

Published

22 hours ago

2026/10/13

Sahan Weerasooriya

By Ramya Kumar

According to the Quality Assurance Council (QAC) of the University Grants Commission (UGC), quality assurance (QA) refers to “the means (i.e. the policies, attitudes, actions, procedures, etc.), by which an institution can guarantee with confidence and certainty, that the standards and quality of its educational provision are being maintained and enhanced”.

An expansive structure has been in place since 2005 to govern and implement QA processes within the state university system. The QAC is the focal point at the UGC that implements external reviews of state universities and institutes. Each university has its own Centre for Quality Assurance (CQA) tasked with performing QA in line with QAC directives. Faculties, in turn, have Internal Quality Assurance Cells (IQAC) performing their own QA; they are answerable to the CQA.

The big question is whether this all-encompassing top-down QA system, that in many ways undermines the internal dynamics of university governance, actually supports universities to enhance the quality of education. This article highlights some concerns.

Top-down check-box activities

The QAC conducts external reviews of universities and degree programmes. A review team appointed by the UGC (who may or may not have experience in the institution/programme in question) examines the self-evaluation report submitted by the said institution/programme. The team then conducts a site visit to verify the claims made in the university’s self-evaluation report, clarify issues identified during the desk review, and examine how QA procedures operate in practice. The team holds meetings with the university administration, members of the Council and Senate, Deans, Heads of Departments, academic and non-academic staff, students, and others. Following the visit, a draft report is submitted to the relevant institution/programme for comment before final publication. The reviewed institution/programme then prepares and publishes an action plan addressing the recommendations, with subsequent monitoring of progress.

There are some worthy QA initiatives under implementation, such as improving facilities for students with disabilities and strengthening mechanisms to address sexual- and gender-based violence. However, for the most part, QA activities have little to do with improving the quality of education. They are mostly preoccupied with monitoring faculty and department websites, digital transformation, student feedback, subject evaluation, course evaluation, peer evaluation, and, more recently, staff appraisal. These activities, which consume an inordinate amount of time—so precious at understaffed universities—have become check-box activities completed to generate evidence for the next review. Below is an excerpt of a conversation between two academics (1 and 2) that conveys how QA plays out at universities (reproduced with permission).

1: … .it’s like social media you know, like posting things on Facebook or twitter or Instagram. When people do a lot of social media, everything they do, they do thinking, “okay I’m going to post it in this way… this I have to put on my Instagram.” QA is a little like that… everything is considered in light of, “ah we can use this for the review, as evidence… for example very recently we were encouraged to have all the things that we do in our department in the faculty newsletter so then they can put in the review. Every little thing has to be noted down….

2: And with pictures and all…

1: At the very least it has to be written so that you have written evidence .. you can’t be doing something for the sake of doing something or because it is good for the department … and sometimes people tell me “oh yea that’s a good idea we can fit that under this x, y section of the review..”

2: Yea, and nobody really thinks about the actual outcome… whether it’s actually helping anyone..

1: I also find that a lot of the words that we used in different ways have now been co-opted to the QA discourse ..including quality.. I can’t actually say what I want as an “outcome”, for example, that the outcome of this workshop is that my students “think about” … then I am told “ah but no that’s not one of the Bloom’s taxonomy words, “think about”.…

2: And the worst part is these medical and agriculture people, these types of people go around spreading it like some kind of gospel!

1: Yea, this cookie cutter way of doing things, they think is the height of innovativeness or creativity, when actually it is so mundane … for me the most awful thing about it is like some fungus of mundanity has taken over through QA reviews.

2: yea, when you say QA, my mind closes off immediately and I stop listening…

Auditing everything but power

QA leaves out crucial aspects of university governance. For instance, there is no review or assessment of the “quality” of university administrations under Criterion 1 or the integrity of procedures governing the promotion of academic staff under Criterion 6 of the institutional reviews.

The majority in the Council—the university’s executive and governing body, which is responsible for selecting the Vice-Chancellor (VC)—are appointed in ad hoc fashion. Apart from the Ex-Officio members in the Council (VC, Deans, etc.), and the two members elected by the Senate, the remainder are appointed by the UGC with no formal consultation or vetting procedure. The VC appointment process described in UGC Circular No. 03/2023 exemplifies how an ostensibly technical process can become entangled in political sycophancy. The Registrar invites applications for the position of VC through advertisement. Applicants must submit a curriculum vitae, a statement of vision for the university and supporting documents. The University Council appoints a three-member Search Committee of senior academics to encourage “eminent persons” to apply, while the UGC appoints a former VC from another university to “observe” the selection process.

A Special Meeting of the University Council is convened. Candidates are interviewed and must make a presentation to the Council Members, followed by questions. Each Council member “gives marks” for seven prescribed criteria: strategic focus (20%), effective leadership (20%), holistic thinking/conceptual skills (10%), academic and research excellence (15%), personal integrity (10%), professional communication (10%) and managerial competence (15%). Marks are averaged, and the Council recommends three candidates to the UGC in rank order. The UGC-appointed observer separately submits a confidential report on the selection process.

This procedure is expected to guarantee quality, but does it? Applications are submitted to the Council Members, who have been appointed on questionable bases, and who are expected to review the applications and give scores, based on objective assessments. But, in reality, most Council Members are manipulated by VC candidates, who often have personal ties with them. The UGC-appointed observer usually has no genuine interest in the outcome. And there is no way for anyone to actually question the Council’s decision once it is made. Although the highest-ranked candidate may ultimately be appointed, the selection remains a political decision made by the President, who retains the discretion to appoint any one of the three.

External reviews also do not look into the promotions of academic staff, except to scrutinise whether there are policies and procedures in place to govern promotion. Academic staff may apply for promotion to Professor once they satisfy the prescribed eligibility requirements, which typically include the period of service, academic qualifications, research and publication achievements, teaching experience, and contributions to the university and wider community. Applications are evaluated against specified criteria, with research output and academic contributions assessed through documentary evidence and expert evaluation. Under the UGC’s scheme for Professors, two experts from outside the applicant’s institution assess specified aspects of research and knowledge dissemination. Again, beneath this technical process, which is externally evaluated, lies a problematic points-based scheme that can be manipulated and abused with impunity.

Rethinking university QA

Like the VC election process and the schemes of promotion for academic staff, QA reviews are open to manipulation. Before a review, there is a chaotic rush to complete evidence gathering and reporting. Academics leave all other work aside, including at times their teaching, to focus on completing documentation and preparing reports. The standardised criteria in the review manuals and scoring sheets often do not reflect differences in disciplines and institutional contexts. But this does not really matter because any serious problems experienced by institutions or programmes are hastily brushed under the carpet to conceal any evidence that could taint the review. The goal is to obtain an A or at least a B grade at whatever cost.

QA may result in positive change if it moves beyond top-down check-box activities towards internally designed and owned processes encompassing all aspects of university governance, led by departments and faculties, and supported by adequate resources. The current QA system needs to be dismantled and replaced by procedures that are accountable, not to the UGC, but to our students and the communities we serve.

(Ramya Kumar is attached to the Department of Community and Family Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Jaffna)

. Kuppi is a politics and pedagogy happening on the margins of the lecture hall that parodies, subverts, and simultaneously reaffirms social hierarchies.

Features

Down Memory Lane — the Grand 20th Edition!

Published

22 hours ago

2026/10/13

Sahan Weerasooriya

Down Memory Lane: Ready to sing again

Yes, Down Memory Lane, the beloved Sing-Along concert series that first struck a chord, way back in 1997, returns for its landmark 20th edition this Saturday, 17th October, at the beautiful Bolgoda Grand Resort, Moratuwa town centre.

Having celebrated its glorious 25th anniversary with the show in 2023, this milestone 20th concert promises to be even more special.

The organisers, the ever-popular Moratuwa Arts Forum, are pulling out all the stops to present yet another unforgettable evening, brimming with camaraderie, fellowship, and pure nostalgia.

Get ready for two-and-a-half hours of non-stop singing as veteran vocalists, from the Moratuwa Arts Forum, will take the stage to lead and inspire the happy audience to sing, sing and sing to their hearts’ content.

The repertoire? Absolutely magical, according to the organisers.

Veteran Arun Dias Bandaranaike: Will handle the evening’s proceedings / Priya Peiris: Event Conceptor

Around 40 golden oldies — from timeless English vintage evergreens and hits from the 50s to the 90s, to toe-tapping calypsos, soulful American plantation melodies, rousing cowboy and Dixieland favourites, aa well as cherished Sinhala standards. All to be sung with much gusto!

This year’s dedicated organising committee comprises Brian Coorey (Chairman), Priya Peiris (Event Conceptor), Hiran Fernando, Suranga Fernando, Viranjan Perera, Hemka Fernando and Neelesh Silva. Guidance and support comes from Moratuwa Arts Forum President Sarana Guneratne and Secretary Chandani Silva.

Adding his signature charm to the evening, as Master of Ceremonies, will be the veteran Arun Dias Bandaranaike.

Don’t miss this landmark celebration of music and memories!

For further details, contact Hiran Fernando on 0772636446 or WhatsApp 0783636446.