Midweek Review

Playing politics with disappearances

Published

6 years ago

2020/09/2

A recent protest in Jaffna demanding justice for those who had been reported missing during the conflict and after the successful conclusion of the war, in May 2009(pic posted by PEARL)

By Shamindra Ferdinando

Washington-based People for Equality and Relief in Lanka (PEARL) says it campaigns for justice and self-determination for the Tamil people, living in the Northern and Eastern Provinces. Identifying itself as a non-profit organization, PEARL says formation of the group took place in 2005 in the wake of volunteers visiting Sri Lanka – the year before the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) launched the fourth phase of the war.

Having reignited the war, in August 2006, with devastating initial success, the LTTE, however, lost the entire Eastern Province, by mid-2007. The armed forces brought the war to a successful conclusion in May 2009. Since then, various Tamil politicians, Diaspora organizations and suspicious bleeding hearts, in the West, have been alleging enforced disappearances on a mass scale.

“For too long, the plight of the families of the disappeared has been used as a talking point and a prop for politicians and the international community, but no concrete measures have been taken,” said PEARL’s Executive Director Tasha Manoranjan. “The international community contributed to the destruction of Tamil lives and Tamil aspirations in 2009 — it is now time for the same international community to meet the demands of the families of the disappeared,” she said, in a statement issued in solidarity with the Tamil families of victims of enforced disappearances in Sri Lanka, from the 1980s and during the entirety of the country’s armed conflict. PEARL estimated the number of disappearances at 60,000-100,000, during this period.

PEARL, too, alleges genocide and demands accountability on the part of Sri Lanka. The group admits that it twice revised its five-year strategic plan after wartime Defence Secretary Gotabaya Rajapaksa won the 2019 presidential election. The original plan, put out in 2018, has been revised in Dec 2019 and April-July 2020. Perhaps, PEARL will have to revise its strategic plan further in the wake of President Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s party securing an unprecedented near two-thirds majority at the Aug 5, 2020 general election. PEARL anticipates rapid deterioration of the situation in the Northern and Eastern Provinces as a result of Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s victory. PEARL has conveniently forgotten Tamils living there overwhelmingly voted for General Sarath Fonseka at the 2005 presidential election. The group’s concerns over Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s victory obviously seemed baseless against the backdrop of Tamils’ backing for war-winning Army commander Fonseka’s candidature at the 2005 presidential election.

PEARL will also have to take into consideration the major setback suffered by one-time LTTE mouthpiece, the Tamil National Alliance (TNA), at the recent general election. Having championed hybrid war crimes court in terms of Geneva Resolution 30/1 ‘Promoting reconciliation, accountability and human rights in Sri Lanka’, co-sponsored by the yahapalana government, the TNA felt comfortable though the general election results proved otherwise. The TNA ended up with just 10 seats, its worst performance since winning 22 seats at the April 2004 general election with overt and covert help from the LTTE.

In addition to the TNA, two other political outfits, namely the Ahila Illankai Tamil Congress (AITC) and Tamil Makkal Theshiya Kutani (TMTK), led by Gajendrakumar Ponnambalam and C.V. Wigneswaran, respectively, have emerged at the expense of the TNA grouping, led by veteran Sampanthan. It was more a war of attrition, fought by the two, against the established TNA that resulted in the major electoral reversal by the latter.

It would be pertinent to remind how lawmaker Ponnambalam, on Aug 21, 2020 reiterated genocide allegations during the debate on President Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s policy statement, delivered on the previous day. While declaring their resolve for self-determination, Ponnambalam challenged President Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s mandate, and that of the SLPP, received in Nov 2019 and August 2020. Many an eyebrow was raised when Speaker Mahinda Yapa Abeywardena, in respect of C.V. Wigneswaran’s provocative speech, at the inauguration of the parliament, declared that lawmakers were free to say whatever they wanted to.

The writer felt the need to examine the contentious issue of missing persons, against the backdrop of PEARL’s latest statement, headlined “PEARL stands with Victims’ Families in Sri Lanka on the International Day of the Victims of Enforced Disappearances”, with the strapline ‘Since the end of the war in 2009, thousands of Tamils have not been heard from, after surrendering to the government’

PEARL has estimated the number of disappearances at 60,000-100,000 during the conflict and after. If the number of disappearances has been estimated as much as 100,000, wouldn’t it be necessary to examine the number of killed? Did some of those, who had been listed among the disappeared were actually killed in the fighting, or perished after being caught in the crossfire. Before examining the missing persons issue, let me remind the reader what yahapalana Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe said of those categorized as disappeared.

Ranil sets the record straight

The 2015 presidential election brought an end to war-winning President Mahinda Rajapaksa’s rule. The Rajapaksa administration was repeatedly accused of running secret detention facilities, both in the Northern and Eastern provinces. A section of the Western powers, too, subscribed to these unsubstantiated allegations. In spite of the change of the government, in 2015, accusations persisted. In the run-up to the 2015 Geneva sessions, Sri Lanka was accused of still operating secret detention facilities.

In 2015, Sri Lanka agreed to set up (1) a judicial mechanism with a Special Counsel to investigate allegations of violations and abuses of human rights and violations of international human rights law (11) Commission truth, justice, reconciliation and non-recurrence (111) An Office on missing and (1V) An office for reparations.

In the run-up to the Geneva sessions, Premier Wickremesinghe chose to set the record straight, at a ceremony at Rukmale Sri Dharmaloka Vijayaloka Maha Viharaya, on March 01, 2015, to felicitate the newly appointed Maha Nayaka Thera Ven. Ittapane Dharmalankara. Among those present was Malcolm Cardinal Ranjith, Archbishop of Colombo. Premier Wickremesinghe declared that as all those who had been taken into custody, during the war and the post-conflict period, were being held in legally run facilities, all detainees/prisoners could be accounted for. The UNP leader didn’t mince his words when he emphasized that those missing, but not listed among those in government custody, had either perished during the conflict or were living overseas ‘(Prime Minister denies existence of secret detention camps’. with strap line ‘Those not among prison population either perished during the war or living overseas, The Island March 04, 2015.’)

A couple of days later, Premier Wickremesinghe challenged the much-touted UN claim of over 40,000 civilians killed on the Vanni east front, in 2009. Wickremesinghe also stressed the urgent need to verify the UN claims, as well as various other accusations. Unfortunately, Wickremesinghe’s did nothing. Wickremesinghe handling of the post-war accountability issue, too, contributed to the humiliating defeat his party suffered at the recently concluded general election. Over seven decades old, the UNP ended up without an elected MP. Nearly a month after the general election, the UNP is yet to reach consensus on its solitary National List slot.

The UNP leader Wickremesinghe set the record straight in an exclusive interview with Indian Thanthi TV in which he insisted that figures, quoted by the UN or other organizations, couldn’t be accepted without being verified. The March 6, 2015, interview couldn’t have been conducted at a better time, though Wickremesinghe did nothing subsequently to examine the Vanni death toll. Instead, Wickremesinghe gave the then Foreign Minister Mangala Samaraweera the go ahead to co-sponsor the accountability resolution, in Geneva, on Oct 01, 2015. The rest is history.

When the interviewer, S.A. Hariharan, pointed out that the Tamil Diaspora had estimated the number of civilian deaths closer to 100,000, Wickremesinghe asserted that it wouldn’t even come up to 40,000. Wickremesinghe pointed out that, in addition to the PoE (Panel of Experts) report, there had been other official reports that dealt with accountability issues. The Premier emphasized the pivotal importance of verifying such accusations to establish the number of civilian deaths. The Premier said that some official reports placed the number of civilian deaths at 5,000. The UNP leader never called for the verification of the UN report until he was kicked out of parliament.

In spite of underlining the importance of verifying accusations, Wickremesinghe didn’t take any follow-up action. The Sirisena-Wickremesinghe government conveniently refrained from using heavy ammunition in our rightful defence, provided by Lord Naseby, in Oct 2017, to counter the PoE report. The incumbent government, too, is yet to formulate a cohesive strategy to use Lord Naseby’s disclosure.

PEARL owes an explanation

During the conflict, thousands of Sri Lankan Tamils fled the country. The war here gave them an opportunity to secure political asylum in Europe, the US, Australia and the Scandinavian region. The Tamil Diaspora provided a substantial amount of funding, required by the LTTE to continue its conventional military campaign. The LTTE, in turn, controlled the Diaspora groups. The LTTE maintained strict surveillance over them. The Diaspora groups lacked courage at least to request the LTTE not to use their own helpless people as human shields in 2009. Wouldn’t it be interesting to know what PEARL did during the last phase of the war in Sri Lanka? Did PEARL intervene on behalf of the Vanni Tamils after the LTTE abandoned Kilinochchi, in January 2009? Did PEARL request the LTTE, at least privately, to let go of those who were being held as human shields on the Vanni east front at the behest of a megalomaniac?

PEARL’s Executive Director, Tasha Manoranjan, and a member of its board of directors, having alleged in their latest media release that the international community contributed to the destruction of Tamil lives and Tamil aspirations in 2009, demanded the same international community should meet the demands of the disappeared. As a Diaspora group seeking to influence Western policy, through legal and political advocacy and direct research and reporting, PEARL should know how Western powers prolonged the conflict. In fact, the LTTE wouldn’t have survived nearly three decades without Western support, if not overt, but definitely covert. Western powers allowed the funding required to procure arms, ammunition and equipment needed to wage war though some countries proscribed the group. Neither did they unmask the international Tiger terrorist network, which was also resorting to drug running, extortion, etc., to fund the war here. However, the US facilitated the destruction of the floating arsenals in secret naval operations undertaken by the SLN. This was at the onset of the Vanni offensive.

If PEARL is genuinely interested in knowing what really happened to those who had been reported missing, it would seek the assistance of Western powers, as well as India. A substantial number of those who had been categorized as missing is today living in various countries, in many cases under assumed names. If not for them, there wouldn’t have been so many Diaspora organizations still raising funds on behalf of their people living in the Northern and Eastern Province.

PEARL tweeted on August 14, 2020: “Today marks 14 years since the #SLAF dropped 16 bombs over the #Sencholai children’s home, killing at least 51 #Tamil schoolgirls and 4 teachers. We remember them, acknowledge the gendered dimension of genocide, and continue to call for justice and accountability.”

Tasha Manoranjan, who had been in the Vanni at the onset of the Eelam War IV, tweeted on the following day; “I visited Sencholai hours after the bombing. The wailing of the mothers and families of these slaughtered schoolgirls haunt me to this day.”

Now that Tasha Manoranjan had claimed that she was hours away from Sencholai at the time of the SLAF attack on August 14, 2006, how could she become the founder of PEARL, established in 2005.

Manoranjan certainly owed an explanation.

Let me produce the description of the PEARL official on its official website: “Tasha Manoranjan is the founder and director of People for Equality and Relief in Lanka (PEARL). She spent over a year documenting human rights violations committed against Tamil civilians in northern Sri Lanka, and remains committed to pursuing accountability for violations of international law. Tasha was previously an associate in Sidley Austin LLP’s Litigation Practice. Tasha received her B.A., magna-cum-laude, in Justice and Peace Studies from Georgetown University’s School of Foreign Service. Tasha earned her law degree at Yale Law School, where she served as the Features Editor and Book Reviewer for the Yale Journal of International Law, Chair of the South Asian Law Students Association and Community Enrichment Chair of the Women of Color Collective. While at Yale, Tasha wrote a paper entitled “Beaten but not Broken: Tamil Women in Sri Lanka”, which was subsequently published in the Georgetown Journal of International Affairs.”

According to the website, Manoranjan works as a Senior Policy Advisor at the Ontario Human Rights Commission. Is she a Canadian passport holder?

From Vanni to the US

How could Manoranjan, who had been in LTTE held Vanni, on August 14, 2006, ended up in the US? Or had she been a member of the PEARL at the time she entered the Vanni? In other words, what was her status at the time she entered Vanni? Did she ever serve the LTTE? When did she leave the Vanni? And, most importantly, how did she leave the country? Depending on the duration of Manoranjan’s stay in the Vanni, she can surely shed light on the circumstances leading to the entire Vanni population being herded into accompanying the retreating LTTE fighting units. What was Manoranjan’s status in the Vanni? Had she been a displaced person? Did anyone of her family serve the LTTE or any other terrorist group? In Manoranjan’s brief description there is no reference to her being in the Vanni during the conflict.

PEARL board of directors includes Dr. Vino Kanapathipillai, Gajan Raj and Sadena Thevarajah. In addition to the PEARL board of directors, its team comprised Tasha Manoranjan (Executive Director), Mario Arulthas (Strategic Advisor / Sr. Advocacy Officer, US), Anji Manivannan (Legal Director), Vivetha Thambinathan (Research Director), Avi Selvarajah (Sr. Legal Officer), Sivakami Rajamanoharan (Sr. Advocacy Officer, UK), Sagi Thilipkumar (Sr. Advocacy Officer, CH), Archana Ravichandradeva (Sr. Advocacy Officer, CA), Abarna Selvarajah (Advocacy Officer, CA), Thevya Balendran (Advocacy Officer, CA), Ernest Rajakone (Advocacy Officer, US), Luxsiga Ambigaibagan (Research Associate / Education Coordinator), Brannavy Jeyasundaram (Operations Officer) and Athavarn Srikantharajah (Interim Project Manager).

In addition to Manoranjan, did other members of the PEARL board of directors, as well as the PEARL team, live in the Northern and Eastern Provinces, during the conflict? Had their parents been refugees during the conflict? Had their parents served the LTTE, or any other terrorist organization? As PEARL had secured the services of a capable team, it can probe how 60,000-100,000 people disappeared during the conflict. Let me remind multiple causes for disappearances/ cases where bodies were not found.

* Disappearances resulted from fighting among /between Indian trained terrorist groups.

* Abductions of civilians carried out by Tamil terrorist groups

* Disappearances during Eelam War 1 (1983-July 1987) blamed on Sri Lankan military and police.

* Disappearances blamed on the Indian military during its deployment here (July 1987-March 1990).

PEARL should take into consideration the level of fighting between the Indian military and the LTTE as the former lost well over 1,300 officers and men and over 2,000 wounded.

* Those who disappeared /killed during weapons training in India

* Disappearances/deaths due to capsizing of boats taking youth to training facilities in India or while returning from India

* Those LTTE cadres killed by Indian security forces and police after the assassination of Congress leader Rajiv Gandhi on May 21, 1991 at Sriperumbudur, India.

* PLOTE cadres killed/disappeared during an abortive sea borne raid on the Maldives in early Nov 1988 and as a result of Indian military operations.

* Disappearances blamed on the Sri Lankan military during Eelam War II (June 1990 to 1994), Eelam War III ((April 1995 to Dec 2001) and Eelam War IV (Aug 2006 to May 2009)

* Those who perished while trying to reach Australia in boats.

* Clandestine movement of Sri Lankans facilitated by foreign missions in Colombo during the conflict and after.

* Issuance of new foreign passports to Sri Lankans under different names. One of the most glaring examples is Australia issuing a new passport to leader of the breakaway JVP faction Frontline Socialist Party (FSP) Kumar Gunaratnam bearing Noel Mudalige, a Sinhala Buddhist. Many countries continue to issue passports under different names, even to former members of terrorist groups.

*Those taken refuge in India and other countries to avoid forced conscription by the LTTE.

* Bodies disposed of by Sri Lankan and Indian militaries due to their failure to establish identities of the dead. Those killed during clandestine operations in the South. And finally,

* Political asylum in industrial countries for bogus refugees on the false grounds of persecution in Sri Lanka?

Let me end this piece with a story of an ex-LTTE cadre who ended up being an internationally renowned actor. Anthonythasan Jesuthasan, the lead actor of French film ‘Dheepan’ which won the top Palme d’Or prize for director Jacques Audiard at the 68th Cannes International Film Festival in 2015 had been an ex-LTTE cadre who fled the country in early 90s. Jesuthasan is on record as having said that he wanted to reach the UK but had to settle for France. Perhaps, members of the PEARL board of directors/team should watch ‘Dheepan’ if they hadn’t already done so.

Those who had been killed in combat though their bodies were not recovered and those who fled Sri Lanka for various reasons and are leading comfortable lives overseas while Sri Lanka is under pressure to account for the dead and the missing. The vast majority are those who had secured political asylum, on bogus grounds, taking advantage of hostility of some countries towards Sri Lanka.

All News Advertisement

Midweek Review

NPP drowning in sea of scams

Published

2 days ago

2026/04/29

Sahan Weerasooriya

Outgoing Treasury Chief Mahinda Siriwardena congratulates his successor Harshana Suriyapperuma in late June 2025 at the Finance Ministry

The Opposition is pressing for a one-day debate on USD 2.5 mn Treasury theft, which is more like a daylight robbery that had been kept under wraps by Treasury mandarins till ‘Free Lawyers’ made it public. However, the government is strongly opposed to the Opposition proposal. The Opposition is seeking consensus among

different parties to intensify the campaign against the government, struggling to cope up with a spate of controversies. Against the backdrop of the devastating debate on the coal scam, the NPP seems reluctant to face another over the theft of Treasury funds.

By Shamindra Ferdinando

USD 2.5 mn brazen heist at the Treasury several months ago and the bigwigs there obviously dragging their feet over the matter till it was brought to light recently, thanks to the Free Lawyers movement, which has dampened the NPP’s enthusiasm for May Day. The Treasury fiasco humiliated the cocky NPP leadership against the backdrop of damning report issued by the National Audit Office (NAO) that found fault with the government for awarding the coal tender for 2025/2026 period to Trident Champhar Limited of India in violation of tender procedures. The NAO emphasised that the Indian company shouldn’t have even been considered for the tender.

Even after the exposure of the scandalous handling of the coal tender, the NPP, in spite of some rumblings within the party, remained confident of overcoming the growing accusations regarding governance issues. But, the sudden revelation of the loss suffered by the Treasury, and pathetic efforts made by the NPP to suppress the truth, has caused irreparable harm to the ruling party. The arrogant NPP will have to use May Day to defend the government. Instead of preaching to the masses ad nauseum the corruption allegations against previous administrations, the NPP would have to explain such massive failures/corruption, particularly the loss of USD 2.5 mn.

There hadn’t been a previous instance of such an incident at the Treasury. The NPP will have to answer questions posed by ‘Free Lawyers,’ a civil society group that first raised the Treasury issue. On behalf of ‘Free Lawyers,’ its President Maithri Gunaratne, PC, former Governor of several provinces Rajith Keerthi Tennakoon, and Attorney-at-Law Shiral Lakthikala, targeted the government over the unprecedented Treasury heist. The Opposition, too, censured the NPP, with SJB leader Sajith Premadasa, MP, Chairman of Public Finance Committee (CoPF) Dr. Harsha de Silva, MP, and United Republican Front (URF) taking the lead.

The NPP’s excuses, based on claimed raids carried out by hacker/hackers targeting the Treasury, are untenable. The NPP’s position cannot be defended or supported against growing criticism. The coal scam and Treasury fiasco dominated social media, with the Opposition, as well as ordinary citizens, having a field day at the expense of the NPP, a political party that accused its opponents of waste, corruption, irregularities and mismanagement. Its successful propaganda campaigns, at the presidential and parliamentary polls, in September and November, 2024, respectively, were centered on fighting corruption.

Their anti-corruption platform appealed to the people for obvious reasons. Against the backdrop of bankruptcy, declared in May, 2022, after failing to meet debt commitments, the electorate rallied around the NPP that thrived on waste, corruption, irregularities and mismanagement, perpetrated by previous governments. Having bagged the executive presidency in September, 2024, the NPP assured the electorate that the Parliament would be cleansed of evils at the general election. President Anura Kumara Dissanayake declared that the people have been vested with the responsibility of cleansing the Parliament. Dissanayake went a step further when he addressed a public gathering at the 18th mile post on the Negombo-Colombo road. The NPP leader, who also leads the JVP, asserted that there was no need for an Opposition in Parliament and the House should be filled with NPPers.

Dissanayake based his assertion essentially on two failed No-Confidence Motions (NCMs) moved against Ravi Karunanayake and Keheliya Rambukwella in 2016 and 2023, respectively. The NPP/JVP leader found fault with Yahapalanaya and the Wickremesinghe-Rajapaksa government for protecting the two wrongdoers, hence the call to cleanse Parliament.

The results of the parliamentary election proved that the electorate responded very favourably to Dissanayake’s call. Of the 225-seat Parliament, the NPP secured 159 seats, including 18 National List slots. Having accused previous governments of shielding wrongdoers, Dissanayake easily directed the NPP’s steamroller parliamentary group to defeat the NCM moved against Energy Minister Punyakumara Dissanayake (National List) on 10 April, just a few days after the NAO report exposed the coal scam.

First ex-MP as Treasury Secy.

If its own hands are clean, there is no doubt that the NPP now deeply regrets the appointment of ex-NPP National List MP Harshana Suriyapperuma as the Secretary to the Treasury and the Finance Ministry. That appointment was made in June 2025 to fill the vacancy created by the retirement of Mahinda Siriwardana who, along with Governor of the Central Bank Dr. Nandalal Weerasinghe, played a significant role in the country’s post-Aragalaya recovery programme.

Suriyapperuma, who had served as Deputy Minister of Finance and Planning for just seven months, before being appointed the Treasury Secretary/Finance Ministry Secretary, is under heavy fire for suppressing the truth. No less a person than CoPF Chairman Dr. de Silva publicly accused Suriyapperuma of trying to undermine his committee. The SJB has demanded Suriyapperuma’s immediate resignation. Dr. Anil Jayantha succeeded as Deputy Minister of Finance and Planning.

Those who inquired into the crisis-hit Treasury are of the belief that 53-year-old Suriyapperuma lacked the much required experience to fill the shoes of Mahinda Siriwardana. Perhaps, the breach at the Treasury could have been averted if an outsider was not brought in place of Siriwardena. The recent reportage of the incident revealed that Suriyapperuma had been aware of the breach and sought to avoid appearing before the CoPF. The NPP could have responded to the developing situation differently if an ex-MP hadn’t been entrusted with the task of steering the Treasury/Finance Ministry. To make matters worse, President Dissanayake holds the Finance portfolio.

Although the government declared that the theft of USD 2.5 mn had been reported to the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) after initial detection made in January this year, controversy surrounds the failure on the part of law enforcement authorities to bring it to the notice of the courts. Maithri Gunaratne, appearing in Hiru last Saturday (25), questioned why the police failed to inform the relevant Magistrate if the government lodged a complaint in that regard.

Australia has confirmed irregularities in payments owed to their government. Regardless of NPP efforts to blame it on hacker/hackers, the truth is clear. Payments have been made to an account that hadn’t been in the original agreement between the governments of Sri Lanka and Australia. That is the undeniable truth that the NPP cannot suppress by propaganda.

The NPP should be ashamed that such a fraud had been perpetrated on a country still struggling to cope up with the economic destruction caused by the UNP- and the SLFP-led governments with the help of “mission impossible” type roles played by outside interests, especially during Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s tenure using the JVP/Aragalaya.

The world knows how the UNP perpetrated the Treasury bond scams with the direct involvement of the then Governor of the Central Bank Arjuna Mahendran, in February 2015 and March 2016. Regardless of that intolerable scam, the UNP made a desperate attempt to retain the services of the Singaporean as the Governor of the Central Bank. Party leader and the then Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe demanded the re-appointment of Mahendran. That despicable move had to be dropped due to massive Opposition protests and growing public discontent over the Treasury bond scams.

The first Treasury bond scam carried out on 27 February, 2015 caused a direct loss of approximately Rs. 2 billion. On the instructions of Mahendran, the Treasury suddenly and arbitrarily changed the process of issuing Treasury Bonds. According to media reports at that time, higher interest payments, over the next 30 years, caused a further loss of around Rs. 145 billion.

Then Mahendran struck again. Caused further direct losses of more than Rs. 4 billion to the government through the fraudulent increase in interest rates as a result of the Treasury Bond issues on 27th March, 2016 ,and 29th March, 2016, in order to provide an undue advantage to connected primary dealers by indulging in further pre-meditated bond scams.

NPP on back foot

The ruling party put on a brave face with lawmakers and various others trying to play down the incident at the Treasury. Some pathetically tried to compare various accusations directed at the Rajapaksas with the incident at the Treasury which they conveniently blamed on hacker/hackers.

The NPP is facing an explosive mixture of issues. Both the coal and Treasury scams have brought immense pressure on the national economy and caused automatic deterioration. The resignation of Punyakumara aka Kumara Jayakody over the coal scam indicated that defeating the NCM moved against him was a strategic political blunder. Had the NPP asked the tainted first time Minister to step down and appoint a Presidential Commission to go into the coal scam, the NPP could have averted a major disaster. However, the Energy Minister and the Energy Secretary Udayanga Hemapala had to resign before the Parliament took up the NCM. Had the top NPP leadership bothered to peruse the executive summary of the NAO presented to Parliament on 7 April, the Party wouldn’t have tried to defend the minister.

Having championed a corruption-free political party system and then won both the presidential and parliamentary polls on that platform, the NPP executed the shocking move to move 323 containers out of the Colombo Port, in January 2025, without even any cursory checks. Those who perpetrated that operation used continuing port congestion as an excuse to clear red-flagged containers without mandatory physical checking. The NPP recently thwarted a bid by Opposition lawmakers, representing a parliamentary committee inquiring into the illegal release of containers, to summon President Dissanayake.

That committee, headed by Justice Minister Attorney-at-Law Harshana Nanayakkara, owed an explanation as to why President Dissanayake, in his capacity as the Finance Minister, shouldn’t appear before a House committee. President Dissanayake very often addresses Parliament on crucial issues. As the Minister in charge of Finance, the President should offer an explanation regarding the high profile container issue that tarnished the NPP’s image.

Three major issues in hand, namely the release of 323 containers, coal scam and theft at the Treasury, regardless of what various apologists say on mainstream and social media, have caused irrevocable damage to the party, let alone escapades involving the likes of Speaker Jagath Wickramaratne, Minister Lal Kantha, etc. The impact on the NPP can be ascertained only at an election. With the public increasingly aware of the growing accusations against it, the ruling party will do whatever possible to put off long delayed Provincial Council elections. Facing the electorate against deepening discontent among the public seems to be a frightening situation. It would be interesting to observe how a House committee, headed by Foreign Minister Vijitha Herath, appointed to explore ways and means to conduct Provincial Council polls, address the issue at hand.

When compared with the three major issues, the resignation of Asoka Ranwala, as the Speaker, in December, 2024, over his failure to produce the much-touted educational qualifications, seems unnecessary. Of course, Ranwala’s case attracted tremendous public attention at that time as the public really believed the NPP wouldn’t deceive them. Ranwala’s lie shocked the public. NPP theoretician Prof. Ranjith Nirmal Dewasiri had no qualms in publicly attacking Ranwala in the wake of the NPP defending the Speaker. But, subsequent NPP actions revealed massive manipulations that shamed the first post-Aragalaya government.

Having accused Ranil Wickremesinghe of squandering as much as Rs 16 mn to join his wife Prof. Maithree in the UK in September, 2023, the NPP has ended up facing far more serious accusations. The incident at the Treasury should be sufficient for the Opposition to move NCM against the government. Of course, the NPP got the numbers in Parliament to easily defeat the NCM but the consequences would be devastating. Those who still talk of recovering the missing USD 2.5 mn must be living in a dreamland. The UNP is labelled with Treasury bond scams (2015 and 2016) and the SLPP faulted with tax cuts (2019) and sugar tax scam (2020). The NPP will have to live with the coal scam and Treasury theft. The NPP will no longer be able to parade on political platforms as paragons of virtue. It would be pertinent to mention that the Presidential Commission appointed to probe the procurement of coal, since 2009, would be able to produce a report to meet the NPP’s expectations. All indications point to that and 2026 is going to be far more challenging, both in and outside Parliament, than the previous year.

NDB fraud

Examined together, the massive fraud at the National Development Bank (NDB), perpetrated during the 2024-2026 period, and the Treasury incident, they underscore the vulnerability of the entire banking system. The 13.2 bn NDB fraud and theft of USD 2.5 mn from the Treasury exposed the regulator, the Central Bank of Sri Lanka, in respect of the NDB. The situation at the NDB cannot be examined without taking into consideration that Ernst & Young is the external auditors of the NDB and its Managing Partner Duminda Hulangamuwa functions as Senior Economic Adviser to President Dissanayake. People haven’t forgotten that Hulangamuwa had been mentioned as the possible successor of Mahinda Siriwardena before the NPP brought in Suriyapperuma. The Central Bank and Securities Exchange Commission (SEC) come under the purview of the Finance Ministry now embroiled in the expanding Treasury fiasco.

The Board of Directors at the NDB consists of Sriyan Cooray (Chairman), Kelum Edirisinghe (Director / Chief Executive Officer (Executive), Bernard Sinniah (Director /Non-Independent), Sujeewa Mudalige (Director /Independent), Kushan D’Alwis (Director/Independent), Kasturi Chellaraja (Director/Independent), Shweta Pandey (Director /Independent), Hasitha Premaratne (Director/Independent), Sanjaya Mohottala (Director (Non-Independent) and Shanil Fernando Director (Independent).

The issue at hand is how such a fraud went unnoticed for a considerable period of time and whether the top management simply ignored warning signs and the failure on the part of the regulator to intervene. Those who have read Mahinda Siriwardana’s ‘Sri Lanka’s Economic Revival: Reflections on the Journey from Crisis to Recovery’ would know the circumstances leading to the 2022 economic collapse. Soft spoken Siriwardana meticulously discussed how the then Central Bank leadership as well as the so-called economic leadership of the Pohottuwa party deliberately deceived President Gotabaya Rajapaksa. Siriwardena’s narrative is explosive. The book, launched before his retirement, with the participation of President Dissanayake, underscored the responsibility on the part of the political leadership and those running the banking system. Obviously Siriwardena’s work had no impact on the current dispensation as well as the top banking management.

The Opposition sees an apparent opportunity to heap pressure on the NPP as it contemplates counter measures. Their challenge is how to take remedial measures without jeopardizing the government. The IMF declaration that it is closely watching the theft of USD 2.5 mn from the Treasury must have added pressure on the government, ripped apart by the situation at the Treasury. Let us hope the government and the Opposition reach consensus on ways and means to improve financial discipline. Overall, the Parliament cannot absolve itself of the responsibility for enactment of laws and ensuring financial discipline and the fact that Sri Lanka needs to start repayment of debt in 2028.

Midweek Review

Is language social or psychological phenomenon?

Published

2 days ago

2026/04/29

Sahan Weerasooriya

This essay was presented at The Philosophy Group of the University of London about 20 years ago. The thought provoking essay published in The Island on 22 April by Usvwatte-aratchi- Some languages confine you; some languages free you prompted me to try to get this essay published if possible. It may help the readers to further their ideas about the importance of usage of language.

Personally, I have firsthand experience in this subject. I was exposed to two different cultures and two languages. In my formative years I was brought up in a certain culture and spoke the language pertaining to that culture/language (Sinhalese -Sri Lanka). I spent all my studying and working life (55 years) using a different language in a different culture (English -England). I must mention that this was not recently. It was the early 1960’s. I can claim that I have enough knowledge and experience to justify this essay topic. In this essay I shall be investigating some of the social aspects of language with the aid of some opinions put forward by some philosophers. Then I shall be making an attempt to see what psychology has to offer before I draw my own conclusions. I am treating social aspects as part and parcel of the culture. In my view these are inseparable entities, unless one chooses to forget his or her cultural upbringing to suit a particular society.

Adoption of different culture

Socially, learning a different language and adopting a different culture is quite possible. In this case what dominates is one’s attitude or the circumstances. Attitude is psychological. I am convinced that circumstances may lead to a change of attitudes. Having said that, we must not forget that there are individuals who have not taken the trouble to learn the language of the culture in which they live. This has created a lot of socio-psychological problems in the community in which they live. It is obvious that the problem is one of communication. The main tool of communication is language. Philosophers and psychologists have spent many years investigating how language helps us to communicate and also how it may lead us to misunderstand our own fellow human beings. Understanding others (family members, members of the community in which we live, and the strangers we meet) is one of the most important aspects of living.

An awareness of the problem of language goes back to the early Greek philosophers. Parmenides gave us the first example of an argument from language to the world, saying that if we speak of a thing it must exist, since we speak of a thing at various times, it must continue to exist in a particular form. It is recently that language itself has come to be studied in a systematic way. The two landmarks in this respect were the development of Linguistics and the philosophy of language in the 20th century. The great philosopher Bertrand Russell (1872-1970) has admitted that until he became a middle-aged man, he did not think about language per se, but regarded it as ‘transparent’. I am sure this is true with most of us although we are not of Russell’s caliber when it comes to philosophy. And one may not have to wait until one reaches one’s middle age.

Linguistics and philosophy of language

It will help us if we understand the difference between Linguistics and philosophy of Language. What linguists discover may be applied to philosophy, sociology, psychology, anthropology or physiology. But as a discipline of study, it remains independent of them. The philosophy of language is different. One of the modern philosophers John Searle (1932-2025) thought, by contrast to linguistics, philosophy tries to solve philosophical problems by analyzing the ordinary use, meaning and relations of words in a particular language. Searle goes on to say that language is crucial to understand human experience. In my opinion this is a very valid comment. At a very practical level we spend a lot of time sharing our experiences. Verbal communication is vital in this area. According to Canadian philosopher Ian Hacking(1936-2023) the influence of language on philosophy has been profound and almost unrecognized. He indicates, if we are not to be misled by this influence, it is necessary to become conscious of it, and to ask ourselves deliberately how far it is legitimate.

It is appropriate to bring in Ludwig Wittgenstein(1889-1951) at this point. He brought in the subject predicate theory of language. For example, if we say “John is king”. Where John is the subject and king is the predicate. Here existence requires substance. For Aristotle, forms do not exist independently of things—every form is the form of something. A “substantial” form is a kind that is attributed to a thing, without which that thing would be of a different kind or would cease to exist altogether. Wittgenstein supports Saint Augustine’s view that words are names of objects and that combinations of words have the sole function of describing reality. For example, if we point at a certain object, say a table and try to say to a child “this is a table”, the child will be confused as to what we are pointing at. Is it the colour, the tabletop or one or more of its legs This is called the ostensive definition method of teaching. Ostensive definitions lead to a variety of interpretations. The child may understand a particular case of this definition but there is no guarantee that she will be able to make a transition from one case to others like it.

Plato’s theory

J G Herder (1744-1803) pointed out the object to which we make reference may be defined by numerous different terms. How then can we justify direct, one to one correspondence-either of so many to one, or of one to so many? How are we going to deal with situations where a term describes something non-existent or only possible? Plato’s “Forms” theory cannot be applied here as anything that we can speak of already exists as a Form. Critics of this theory ask the question: “how can the world be crowded with so many imaginary objects?” We use words to describe and define. Is there any room for slang language? This comes in handy in our day to day social communication. Ostensive definition raises the questions that require a constant selection of what counts as relevant. In Aldous Huxley’s novel Chrome Yellow, the character Old Rowley is confused as to: Does ‘pig’ refer to the quality of having a curly tail? Or standing in rows to eat? Or being pink skinned and fat? Or wearing no clothes? When we use the word “piggishness” is it something inherent to pigs, or simply, a matter of how we choose to describe them?

How can we relate the above ideas and theories of language to our daily living? Daily living is a psychosocial activity.

Perceptions

The nature of language reflects the nature of our perceptions, and these are far from straight forward. Franz Brentano (1838-1917) developed his theory of intentionality: that every mental phenomenon has a relation of direction to its object, i.e. perceptions, desires, imagination etc. are related to what is perceived, desired or imagined. I presume this can be applied to any language irrespective of the culture (our social conditioning). Say for instance the images of art and the writings are given the ability to represent objects by imposing the intentionality on the object. Thus, when we assert that we see or believe something, we impose, by convention and intention, (that is true if and only if it is the case) on the statement, and these conditions are not contained intrinsically in the sounds that make it up, but in our perception of belief about the fact. I begin to wonder how this can be applied to non-physical and unseen situations. Sometimes our feelings and attitudes are unknown to the observer. A person may shout because he is angry but you cannot see the anger, only its physical expression. We will not be able to see the prior event that has led to the anger and the utterance. This shows that there is a limit to how much is revealed simply by observing a word and its context; there is often more than that can be said.

How can we account for unexpected linguistic behaviour? This has both social and psychological implications.

For a long time behavioural theorists believed that every development of the human being was controlled by environmental and social factors. This is similar to an ostensive explanation of meaning. It implied that everything was learnt through training and association. But Noam Chomsky (b.1928) was not happy with this idea. He thought language is a complex phenomenon and which is not taught bit by bit or systematically to infants. It is successfully acquired by (almost) everybody. From my own experience it is true to say that the difficulty in learning a second language is a very different process from that experienced with the first language. Chomsky argued that the first language is not in fact learned, but rather acquired through exposure to a particular language. According to him all languages share the same basic structure, and he called this “deep structure”, which may be expressed as surface structures through a process called ‘transformation’. Chomsky’s theory helps us to assume a universal system of grammar, which may generate an infinite number of particular sentences within a language. This explains how we may create sentences within a language we have never encountered before from a limited set of grammatical rules and this appears to be a rational scientific approach.

Social or psychological phenomenon

The argument/discussion whether language is a social or a psychological phenomenon requires much more investigation than this essay warrants. I have briefly brought in various philosophers’ work, which are invaluable to this topic in terms of philosophy of language. In conclusion I am tempted to state my own experiences as a bi-lingual person. When it comes to my first language, which is Sinhalese I don’t think I learned it. I heard my parents speaking it and I picked up a few words and I constructed my own sentences and gradually became proficient by accumulating more words. Of course, the proper grammatical use of even my own language was taught in school and not by my parents. Learning my second language i.e. English took a different form. I was taught to speak, read, and write English at school and I had to work harder at this than my first language, because my English was confined to the classroom situation only, i. e. I learnt English in a non- English environment. First language came naturally and the second one I had to learn to fit into the social and the education structure that prevailed at that time. Compulsion can motivate us to learn!I had no choice but to adopt myself culturally and linguistically as a university student in England and then as a university teacher in England. Apart from the native English students, I have taught students from different countries. European, African and Asian. I had the opportunity to intermingle with them and learned various different cultural and linguistic aspects. After almost a half a century in England, I am back to my own culture (language, customs, food etc) where I was born and started my life. I am still proficient in my own language Sinhalese. No conscious effort needed.

After all the foregoing arguments and philosophy that I have put forward, my own conclusion is Chomsky’s theories are more plausible to me than other theories on this issue. It is difficult to be exact and say whether language is a social or psychological phenomenon. From the above arguments, we can see that culture and language of a given society are tightly bound. This leads us to psychological adjustments in order to fit into a society. Who can deny that even the philosophers mentioned above have not been subjected to their own cultural environment?

by Prof. Sampath
Anson Fernando
Formerly University of
The Arts London