Features

Peddling the government’s narratives

Published

3 years ago

2023/04/2

President Ranil Wickremesinghe during his keynote address at the ‘Economic Dialogue - IMF and Beyond’ panel discussion, which took place at the Colombo Galle Face Hotel on March (30

By Uditha Devapriya

As of now, Ranil Wickremesinghe has three trump cards he can deal, and he’s dealing all three. First, there is the IMF deal, which his government is more or less using as a shield against criticism of the many austerity measures being enforced in its name. Second, there is the SJB-UNP nexus, or the many not-so-subtle commonalities that have linked the main Opposition with the President’s party. Third, there is the SJB-JVP-NPP divide, which has only fragmented the Opposition, to the government’s benefit. Taken together, these three points are decidedly in Ranil Wickremesinghe’s favour.

Contrary to what Sri Lanka’s neoliberal commentariat may believe, the IMF bailout is not a magic wand. Such bailouts come with strings and conditionalities attached: any government availing itself of these arrangements is bound to comply with those conditions. But such conditions, if complied with in full, are bound to provoke popular resistance, be it from the middle-classes or trade unions.

This is the typical trajectory of IMF austerity: once enforced in full, it tends to provoke unrest and instability, and brings about an authoritarian backlash from the State. The State, for its part, finds itself in a conundrum: if it does not adhere to the conditions in these bailouts, the IMF can theoretically suspend its arrangements, but if those conditions are followed in toto, the public can rise up against it.

The IMF bailout has brought the country’s main Opposition, paradoxically, to a common platform with the government. The SJB’s economic establishment – or troika – have already excoriated political parties critical of the IMF arrangement: their question is not whether the arrangement is in the public’s interest, but whether there is an alternative to dealing with the IMF. And it’s not just at the level of economic theorising: even the regime’s handling of trade unions has elicited their approval. To give the most glaring example, the government suspended 20 workers, including several attached to the Ceylon Petroleum Corporation, for participating in a strike last Tuesday. The following day, SJB MPs S. M. Marikkar and Hirunika Premachandra publicly criticised, not the government, but unions, more or less advocating the regime’s proposals to dismantle and “liberate” the energy sector.

This is utterly fascinating, if not perturbing, because both Marikkar and Premachandra have, through the media, promoted and depicted themselves as populists, indeed as the epitome of the vox populi in Sri Lanka. Premachandra, in particular, was at the forefront of last year’s protests against Ranil Wickremesinghe. Yet like Damitha Abeyrathne, once a heroine of the aragalaya and a self-avowed political neutralist, these politicians, essentially bourgeois if not petty bourgeois, have given way to their class interests. It is significant that the SJB’s leader, Sajith Premadasa, has been braver than any of his colleagues in criticising the IMF deal, even though, in doing so, he has earned the ire of Colombo’s neoliberal establishment. In fact, Mr Premadasa’s remarks about the IMF, taken together with Premachandra’s, Marikkar’s, and the SJB economic troika’s public despatches, have only betrayed the rifts and divisions in the country’s main Opposition – hardly a point in its favour.

What is even more intriguing about these developments is that, as far as the recent spate of strikes go, SJB-allied trade unions have played a somewhat leading role. Among the leaders of the recent CPC strike, for instance, was Ananda Palitha, formerly with the UNP, but with the SJB today. Now, when Palitha attacks the government and threatens strike action, and when the economic “brains trust” of the party his union is linked to excoriates unions, one cannot be faulted for questioning the SJB’s stance on these workers’ struggles. The paradox here is not just between two ideological flanks in the party, but, more disturbingly, between the party and its own advocacy groups. In that sense, Premachandra’s and Marikkar’s remarks don’t just put a damper on the SJB’s union activities; they also reinforce the New Left’s critique of the party as just another bourgeois outfit.

For its part the government dealt its cards stealthily during the recent strike. It did not break the strike at once, nor did it terminate the strikers: Kanchana Wijesekera merely instructed the Chairmen of the CPC and CPSTL to terminate their employment, if they saw it fit. On the other hand, the government showed clearly that it was not above using the army to disrupt the strike. At the same time, even after breaking their strike, the Minister did not fire the workers: he ordered them to be sent on compulsory leave, resorting to an age-old tactic of publishing their names and smearing their reputation. It’s of course hard to say whether the government got what it wanted, but it seems as though, for the moment, it has: it has more or less managed to convince the public of the need to privatise SOEs, and the need to crack down on trade unions, which it depicts as an obstacle to ongoing reforms.

So deftly did the government handle this, in fact, that not a single news outfit saw it fit to assess the companies that had expressed interest in penetrating the country’s fuel sector. While an investigation is yet to be carried out, certain news outfits did, later on, note that these companies seemed dubious, some of them even lacking an online presence. Yet by then the queues and the shortages that had ensued because of the strike – queues which no doubt evoked memories of last year’s crisis – had pushed motorists to criticise unions rather than the government. This, at any rate, was the picture that media outfits painted earlier in the week: the motorists they talked to all seemed to favour privatisation, and they blamed unions for sabotaging “necessary” reforms. Indeed, it goes without saying that media outfits which, less than a year ago, came out in support of activist and civil society groups, are now peddling the State’s narrative on these groups and on those reforms.

Of course, this was only to be expected. The media in Sri Lanka – at least the traditional media – has always craved exposure. It got this exposure last year from the aragalaya, and to that end it spotlighted the protesters. Mr Wickremesinghe’s appointment as Prime Minister, and later President, dislodged this media from that role: from advocating the protesters’ cause, it became a mouthpiece for neoliberal reform, more or less flagging the IMF arrangement as a need of the hour. In doing so it very clearly showed that it was not above marginalising the aragalistas whom it had promoted a few months back. Barring a few critical-progressive voices in the mainstream media, the country’s Fourth Estate soon became an outlet for Colombo’s neoliberal commentariat, whose function now seems to be that of an ideological ballast for the State. The media, in other words, was always going to be a double-edged sword: it could stand for dissenting voices, as it initially did, but it could also peddle the regime’s diatribes against those voices, as it later did.

There is certainly a critique to be made of trade unions, particularly the stronger, more powerful ones. The economic right has, for years, charged these unions of corruption, and have condemned them for holding the economy to ransom and promoting their sectional interests over those of the country. The economic right has its own motives in perpetuating such narratives, but the trade unions have done little to combat them: to give one example, when the CEB threatened to switch off the national grid in 2017 over a pay anomaly, right-wing news websites gleefully published the salary slips of CEB workers, pointing out that an average employee at a State institution was paid much more than his or her counterpart in the private sector. State sector salaries, in effect, were stigmatised: public sector employees were excoriated for making demands supposedly in excess of their earnings.

Considering these developments, the Left has to make an urgent stand. It cannot sit idly by and dabble or indulge in ideological polemics. The truth is that New Left today has fallen far short of its potential, not merely because it lacks the proverbial fire in the belly, but more worryingly because it has let sectarian clashes dominate relationships. Today, the JVP-NPP insists on depicting itself as a purist party, while appealing to the middle-classes: it hence excoriates the IMF even as, several months ago, its own leader accepted the absence of an alternative to the IMF and instead contended that an arrangement with the organisation requires an “exemplary” political group to implement it properly.

The FSP, a more radical outfit, is hamstrung by its own contradictions, even though, as Dayan Jayatilleka has noted, Ranil Wickremesinghe himself has hinted that it represents a threat to him. If the New Left is interested in pursuing its goals, thus, it needs to up its game. The government has stolen a march on them. It is up to them to regain what they have lost to the enemy.

The writer is an international relations analyst, researcher, and columnist who can be reached at udakdev1@gmail.com.

All News Advertisement

Features

Government is willing to address the past

Published

4 hours ago

2026/03/24

Sahan Weerasooriya

Minister Ratnayake

Minister Bimal Rathnayake has urged all Sri Lankan refugees in India to return to Sri Lanka, stating that provision has been made for their reintegration. He called on India to grant citizenship to those who wished to stay on in India, but added that the government would welcome them back with both hands if they chose Sri Lanka. He gave due credit to the Organisation for Eelam Refugees Rehabilitation (OfERR), an NGO led by S. C. Chandrahasan, the son of S. J. V. Chelvanayakam, widely regarded as the foremost advocate of a federal solution and a historic leader of the Federal Party. OfERR has for decades assisted refugees, particularly Sri Lankan Tamils in India, with documentation, advocacy and voluntary repatriation support. Given the slow pace of resettlement of Ditwah cyclone victims, the government will need to make adequate preparations for an influx of Indian returnees for which it will need all possible assistance. The minister’s acknowledgement indicates that the government appreciates the work of NGOs when they directly assist people.

The issue of Sri Lankan refugees in India is a legacy of the three-decade long war that induced mass migration of Tamil people to foreign countries. According to widely cited estimates, the Sri Lankan Tamil diaspora today exceeds one million and is often placed between 1 and 1.5 million globally, with large communities in Canada, the United Kingdom and Australia. India, particularly Tamil Nadu, continues to host a significant refugee population. Current figures indicate that approximately 58,000 to 60,000 Sri Lankan Tamil refugees live in camps in India, with a further 30,000 to 35,000 living outside camps, bringing the total to around 90,000. These numbers have declined over time but remain one of the most visible human legacies of the conflict.

The fact that the government has chosen to make this announcement at this time indicates that it is not attempting to gloss over the human rights issues of the past that continue into the present. Those who suffered victimisation during the war may be encouraged that their concerns remain on the national agenda and have not been forgotten. Apart from those who continue to be refugees in India, there are more than 14,000 complaints of missing persons still under investigation according to the Office on Missing Persons, which has received tens of thousands of complaints since its establishment. There are also unresolved issues of land taken over by the military as high security zones, though some land has been released, and prisoners held in long term detention under the Prevention of Terrorism Act, which the government has pledged to repeal and replace.

Sequenced Response

In addressing the issue of Sri Lankan Tamil refugees in India, the government is sending a message to the Tamil people that it is not going to gloss over the past. The indications are that the government is sequencing its responses to problems arising from the past. The government faces a range of urgent challenges, some inherited from previous governments, such as war era human rights concerns, and others that have arisen more recently after it took office. The most impactful of these crises are not of its own making. Global economic instability has affected Sri Lanka significantly. The Middle East war has contributed to a shortage of essential fuels and fertilizers worldwide. Sri Lanka is particularly vulnerable to rising fuel prices. Just months prior to these global pressures, Sri Lanka faced severe climate related shocks, including being hit by a cyclone that led to floods and landslides across multiple districts and caused loss of life and extensive damage to property and livelihoods.

From the beginning of its term, the government has been compelled to prioritise economic recovery and corruption linked to the economy, which were central to its electoral mandate. As the International Monetary Fund has emphasised, Sri Lanka must continue reforms to restore macroeconomic stability, reduce debt vulnerabilities and strengthen governance. The economic problems that the government must address are urgent and affect all communities, whether in the north or south, and across Sinhalese, Tamil and Muslim populations. These problems cannot be postponed. However, issues such as dealing with the past, holding provincial council elections and reforming the constitution are not experienced as equally urgent by the majority, even though they are of deep importance to minorities. Indeed, the provincial council system was designed to address the concerns of the minorities and a solution to their problems.

Unresolved grievances tend to reappear in new forms when not addressed through political processes. Therefore, they need to be addressed sooner rather than later, even if they are not the most immediate priorities for the government. It must not be forgotten that the ethnic conflict and the three decade long war it generated was the single most destructive blow to the country, greatly diminishing its prospects for rapid economic development. Prolonged conflict reduced investment, diverted public expenditure and weakened institutions. If Sri Lanka’s early leaders had been able to negotiate peacefully and resolve their differences, the country might have fulfilled predictions that it could become the “Switzerland of the East.”

Present Opportunity

The present government has a rare opportunity to address the issues of the past in a way that ensures long term peace and justice. It has a two thirds majority in parliament, giving it the constitutional space to undertake significant reforms. It has also demonstrated a more inclusive approach to ethnic and religious minorities than many earlier governments which either mobilized ethnic nationalism for its own purposes or feared it too much to take political risks to undertake necessary reforms. Public trust in the government, as noted by international observers, remains relatively strong. During her recent visit, IMF Director General Kristalina Georgieva stated that “there is a window of opportunity for Sri Lanka,” noting that public trust in the government provides a foundation for reform.

It also appears that decades of public education on democracy, human rights and coexistence have had positive effects. This education, carried out by civil society organisations over several decades, sometimes in support of government initiatives and more often in the face of government opposition, provides a foundation for political reform aimed at justice and reconciliation. Civil society initiatives, inter-ethnic dialogue and rights-based advocacy have contributed to shaping a more informed public about controversial issues such as power-sharing, federalism and accountability for war crimes. The government would do well to expand the appreciation it has deservedly given to OfERR to other NGOs that have dedicated themselves addressing the ethnic and religious mistrust in the country and creating greater social cohesion.

The challenge for the government is to engage in reconciliation without undue delay, even as other pressures continue to grow. Sequencing is necessary, but indefinite postponement carries risks. If this opportunity for conflict resolution is not taken, it may be a long time before another presents itself. Sri Lanka may then continue to underperform economically, remaining an ethnically divided polity, not in open warfare, but constrained by unresolved tensions. The government’s recent reference to Tamil refugees in India is therefore significant. It shows that even while prioritising urgent economic and global challenges, it has not forgotten the past. Sri Lanka has a government with both the mandate and the capacity to address that past in a manner that secures a more stable and just future for all its people.

By Jehan Perera

Features

Strategic diplomacy at Sea: Reading the signals from Hormuz

Published

4 hours ago

2026/03/24

Sahan Weerasooriya

The unfolding tensions and diplomatic manoeuvres around the Strait of Hormuz offer more than a snapshot of regional instability. They reveal a deeper transformation in global statecraft, one where influence is exercised through calibrated engagement rather than outright confrontation. This is strategic diplomacy in its modern form: restrained, calculated, and layered with competing interests.

At first glance, the current developments may appear as routine diplomatic exchanges aimed at preventing escalation. However, beneath the surface lies a complex web of signalling among major and middle powers. The United States seeks to maintain deterrence without triggering an open conflict. Iran aims to resist pressure while avoiding isolation. Meanwhile, China and India, two rising powers with expanding global interests are navigating the situation with careful precision.

China’s position is anchored in economic pragmatism. As a major importer of Gulf energy, Beijing has a direct stake in ensuring that the Strait of Hormuz remains open and stable. Any disruption would reverberate through its industrial base and global supply chains. Consequently, China advocates de-escalation and diplomatic resolution. Yet, this is not purely altruistic. Stability serves China’s long-term strategic ambitions, including the protection of its Belt and Road investments and maritime routes. At the same time, Beijing remains alert to India’s growing diplomatic footprint in the region. Should India deepen its engagement with Iran and other Gulf actors, it could gradually reshape the strategic balance in areas traditionally influenced by China.

India’s approach, in contrast, reflects a confident and increasingly sophisticated foreign policy. By engaging Iran directly, while maintaining working relationships with Western powers, New Delhi is positioning itself as a credible intermediary. This is not merely about energy security, though that remains a key driver. It is also about strategic autonomy the ability to act independently in a multipolar world. India’s diplomacy signals that it is no longer a passive player but an active shaper of regional outcomes. Its engagement with Iran, particularly in the context of connectivity and trade routes, underscores its intent to secure long-term strategic access while countering potential encirclement.

Iran, for its part, views the situation through the lens of survival and strategic resilience. Years of sanctions and pressure have shaped a cautious but pragmatic diplomatic posture. Engagement with external actors, including India and China, provides Tehran with avenues to ease isolation and assert relevance. However, Iran’s trust deficit remains significant. Its diplomacy is transactional, focused on immediate gains rather than long-term alignment. The current environment offers opportunities for tactical advantage, but Iran is unlikely to make concessions that could compromise its core strategic objectives.

Even actors on the periphery, such as North Korea, are closely observing these developments. Pyongyang interprets global events through a narrow but consistent framework: regime survival through deterrence. The situation around Iran reinforces its belief that leverage, particularly military capability, is a prerequisite for meaningful negotiation. While North Korea is not directly involved, it draws lessons that may shape its own strategic calculations.

What emerges from these varied perspectives is a clear departure from traditional bloc-based geopolitics. The world is moving towards a more fluid and fragmented order, where alignments are temporary and issue-specific. States cooperate on certain matters while competing with others. This creates a dynamic but unpredictable environment, where misinterpretation and miscalculation remain constant risks.

It is within this evolving context that Sri Lanka’s strategic relevance becomes increasingly visible. The recent visit by the US Special Envoy for South and Central Asia, Sergio Gor, to the Colombo Port; is not a routine diplomatic courtesy call. It is a signal. Ports are no longer just commercial gateways; they are strategic assets embedded in global power competition. A visit of this nature underscores how Sri Lanka’s maritime infrastructure is being viewed through a geopolitical lens particularly in relation to sea lane security, logistics, and regional influence.

Such engagements reflect a broader reality: global powers are not only watching the Strait of Hormuz but are also positioning themselves along the wider Indian Ocean network that connects it. Colombo, situated along one of the busiest east–west shipping routes, becomes part of this extended strategic theatre. The presence and interest of external actors in Sri Lanka’s ports highlight an emerging pattern of influence without overt control a hallmark of modern strategic diplomacy.

For Sri Lanka, these developments are far from abstract. The island’s strategic location along major Indian Ocean shipping routes places it at the intersection of these global currents. The Strait of Hormuz is a vital artery for global energy flows, and any disruption would have immediate consequences for Sri Lanka’s economy, particularly in terms of fuel prices and supply stability.

Moreover, Sri Lanka must manage the competing interests of larger powers operating within its vicinity. India’s expanding regional role, China’s entrenched economic presence, and the growing attention from the United States all converge in the Indian Ocean. This requires a careful balancing act. Aligning too closely with any one power risks alienating others, while inaction could leave Sri Lanka vulnerable to external pressures.

The appropriate response lies in adopting a robust foreign policy that engages all major stakeholders while preserving national autonomy. This involves strengthening diplomatic channels, enhancing maritime security capabilities, and investing in strategic foresight. Sri Lanka must also recognise the growing importance of non-traditional security domains, including cyber threats and information warfare, which increasingly accompany geopolitical competition.

Equally important is the need for internal coherence. Effective diplomacy abroad must be supported by institutional strength at home. Policy consistency, professional expertise, and strategic clarity are essential if Sri Lanka is to navigate an increasingly complex international environment.

The situation in the Strait of Hormuz thus serves as both a warning and an opportunity. It highlights the fragility of global systems, but also underscores the potential for skilled diplomacy to manage tensions. For Sri Lanka, the challenge is not merely to observe these developments, but to position itself wisely within them.

In a world where power is no longer exercised solely through force, but through influence and presence, strategic diplomacy becomes not just an option, but a necessity. The nations that succeed will be those that understand this shift now and act with clarity, balance, and foresight.

Mahil Dole is a senior Sri Lankan police officer with over four decades of experience in law enforcement and intelligence. He previously served as Head of the Counter-Terrorism Division of the State Intelligence Service and has conducted extensive interviews with more than 100 suicide cadres linked to terrorist organisations. He is a graduate of the Asia-Pacific Centre for Security Studies (Hawaii).

By Mahil Dole
Senior Police Officer (Retd.), Former Head of Counter-Terrorism Division, State Intelligence Service, Sri Lanka

Features

Pirivenae Piyathuma – An authentic thought leader enters the heavenly passage

Published

4 hours ago

2026/03/24

Sahan Weerasooriya

Rev. Professor Aloysius Peiris

I knew that I would have to share my thoughts about the most inspiring thought leader of my life, one day. When I spoke of his virtues two years ago, at the time of him celebrating his 90^th birthday with “Tulana” research centre, his coveted creation, reaching 50^th year, I did not expect this day to be so soon. I am referring to the heavenly departure of Rev. Professor Aloysius Peiris, SJ, known to most as “Fr. Aloy’”.

Overview

Fr. Aloy was born on 9^th April, 1934 in Ampitiya, Kandy and peacefully passed away on 22^nd March, 2026 just few weeks before his 93^rd birthday. Hailing from a family that has produced nuns and priests, his religious formation as a Jesuit opened pathways to reach east and west alike, as an eminent theologian, erudite scholar, and an exemplary priest.

Fr. Aloy became the first Sri Lankan Catholic Priest to obtain a Ph.D. in Buddhist Philosophy from the Vidyodaya Campus, University of Sri Lanka. It was Fr. Marceline Jayakody, OMI who became popularly known as Pansale Piyathuma (The priest of the Buddhist temple), because of his association with Buddhist culture, influencing his much-popular hymns with authentic local flavour. I would not hesitate to hail, Fr. Aloy as Pansale Piyathuma (The priest of the Buddhist monastery). It was heartening to see Buddhist monks visiting him to study pitakas and “suttas which are revered religious texts, under his valued guidance. He was awarded the prestigious Honourary Doctorate of Literature (D.Litt) by the same institution, now University of Kelaniya in 2015.

Moreover, Fr. Aloy obtained three theological degrees, an L.Ph. from Sacred Heart College in Shembaganur, India (1959), STL from the Pontifical Theological Faculty in Naples (1966), and a Th.D. from Tilburg University (1987). Fr. Aloy also has a BA in Pali and Sanskrit from the University of London (1961). As he shared with my friend Asoka Dias, during a recent interview of Sirsa TV, the proficiency in both western and eastern languages opened many doors for him to reach out to deserving communities.

It is heat-warming to recall my first encounter with Fr. Aloy as a student awaiting to start my Advanced Level classes, on his 50^th birthday. He guided me how to study rhythmically maintaining the needed balance. My fruitful association with him has spanned over 42 years with enriching guidance, engaging dialogue, and entrusting commitment. I must whole-heartedly acknowledge that He was the one who pursued me to embark on an academic career, moving from the lucrative private sector as an engineer turned manager. It was a conscious shift listening to my yearning inner purpose, and Fr. Aloy was a guiding light and a glittering beacon, showing the salient way. I would simply recognize him with utmost respect, as an authentic thought leader who was an inspirer, influencer, and an initiator.

Fr Aloy as an Inspirer

Fr Aloy inspired millions around the globe through his scholarly writing. His books and articles have been translated into many languages. Among them, An Asian Theology of Liberation and Love Meets Wisdom appear prominently. He is the author of more than 30 books and well over 500 Research Papers. He was of the view that any authentic theology for Asia must grapple with both poverty and religious pluralism. He calls for a theology born from listening not only to Scripture, but also to the suffering of the poor and the wisdom of ancient traditions like Buddhism. There comes the connection to love and wisdom. Fr Aloy argued that Christianity (focused on “love” or agape) and Buddhism (focused on “wisdom” or prajna) are complementary, proposing that authentic engagement requires embracing the core strengths of both traditions to achieve spiritual maturity.

He has been the editor of Vagdevi, a journal of religious reflection, until his demise. I remember receiving a copy of the latest a few months ago, where his authentic views on contemporary Christianity, were clearly and coherently expressed. Same with the case of many of his sought-after religious writings, such as Give Vatican II a Chance, Leadership in the Church, Relishing our Faith in Working for Justice, Lent in Lanka – Reflections and Resolutions and God’s Reign for God’s Poor. I must confess that, though representing a different specialty, my writing has been immensely inspired by Fr. Aloy.

Fr. Aloy as an Influencer

He was a distinctly different thinker in terms of linking theology with poverty on one side and inter-religious dialogue on the other side. He argued that any theology for Asia must consider the realities of poverty, pluralism, and power. Religion, as he perceived, must be a force for healing and liberation and not for division and fragmentation. He was a key resource in the 1980s for the Federation of Asian Bishops’ Conferences (FABC), where he helped shape a distinctly Asian Catholic theology dialogical, incarnational, and deeply rooted in the continent’s spiritual traditions.

I recall him having numerous conversations with Rev. Fr. Oscar Abeyrathne (popularly known as Swami Thaththa, initiator of Kithudana Pubuduwa (Catholic Charismatic Renewal” in Sri Lanka). If I may observe, Fr Aloy as the “influencer,” Fr. Oscar was the “implementor.” As a youth leader of “Kithudana Pubuduwa,” I learnt how to wear the national dress with pride and how to participate in Catholic rituals with enhanced oriental flavour. When, “tyer pyres” were prevalent with burning youth, during 88-89 insurrection, we as youth were guided towards a non-violent path, yet, upholding social justice, by both of them.

Fr. Aloy as an Initiator

I remember cycling from my native home in Pamunuwila to an “oasis” overtly known worldwide yet having its humble presence amidst lush greenery. That is what Fr. Aloy initiated 52 years ago as “Tulana”. To be precise, Tulana Research Centre for Encounter and Dialogue. The word Tulana has its origin in Sanskrit, can be translated as discernment. It also symbolically means balancing, harmonis+ing, and complementing, with due reference to Christianity and Buddhism.

According to Fr. Aloy, the primary founding motivation was as a response to two challenges – the challenge of the spirituality and philosophy of Sri Lanka’s major religion, Buddhism, and the challenge of the socio-political aspirations of the highly educated but marginalised rural youth. The vast library, aptly named as Fr. S. G. Perera Memorial Oriental Library, includes mainly the book collection of the late Fr. S. G. Perera, the first Sinhalese Jesuit in Sri Lanka, who gifted his collection to Fr. Pieris so many years ago. I had the rare privilege of reading, relating, and reflecting, in this revered resource centre during my Advanced Level and university times. The collection of science fiction stories I published, were mostly written at Tulana library.

Apart from the rich knowledge base, Tulana has a rare collection of pantings, carvings and many other symbolic ways of demonstrating the eastern perspectives of Christianity. Among many, the creations by Ven. Hathigammana Uthththarananda Thero, depicting Christ in a Buddhist context, are indeed serene and significant.

I will fail in my duty if I do not mention another feat of Fr. Aloy as an initiator. It is the Centre for Education of Hearing Impaired Children (CEHIC). Located in Dalugama, Kelaniya, it is a “small miracle of hope,” for many. Since the inception in 1982, Fr. Aloy has been steadfastly supporting Rev. Sr. Greta Nalawatta, in healing thousands, and paving the path of prosperity. I remember late Prof. Carlo Fonseka saying at CEHIC, what he saw of curing the medically-declared deafness through a holistic auditory-verbal method is a “real miracle.” It gives me immense happiness to be a member of the Education Board of CEHIC, in contributing to the valued vision of Fr Aloy.

A Spiritual Sage of our Age

Many more can be written about Fr. Aloy, as a salient spiritual sage of our age. His intellectual and interactional prowess with people-friendly approach paved way for him to be a sought-after sharer. He was multi-talented in being a musician from his early age as well. He battled a key health challenge but the way he perceived, it was “joyful suffering.” He was not hesitant to call a spade a spade, despite receiving bouquets and brickbats alike. He was highly critical of “Ecclesiastics Politics,” the way he described some inner dynamics of the Church.

Fr. Aloy truly lived a life, meaningfully aligned to the aspiration of St. Ignatius Loyola, the founder of Society of Jesus, his religious order. It is to find God in all things and taking action for the greater glory of God ( Ad Maiorem Dei Gloriam). He duly responded to the question raised by the Buddha (in Yamakavagga). “However many holy words you read, however many you speak, what good will they do you if you do not act on upon them?”

Life is to love, learn, lead and to leave a legacy. Goodbye, my beloved inspirer, influencer, and initiator. May Rev. Fr. Aloysious Peiris, SJ have a blissful heavenly journey.

The writer is
Senior Professor in Management
Postgraduate Institute of Management, University of Sri Jayewardenepura

by Ajantha S. Dharmasiri