Features
Premadasa Rex (1988-1993)
Despite unceasing violence in both north and south of the country, the second presidential election was scheduled to be held on December 19, 1988. Nominations were called for by November 10, 1988. All political parties were in a state of confusion due to the prevailing “reign of terror”. Many politicians of all parties had been summarily executed either by the LTTE or the JVP. With the announcement at a large party rally in Colombo by JRJ that Prime Minister Premadasa will take over as party leader and presidential candidate, former rivals had closed ranks with him and were eyeing the prime minister’s post which would be dispensed at the discretion of the new President.
Canny Premadasa let it be known that he would appoint the person who brought him the largest number of votes at the coming election. Opposition parties particularly the SLFP, MEP, minority parties and even the JVP, explored possibilities of fielding a common candidate against the UNP. That would have been possible if JRJ or Gamini became the candidate. But with the confirmation of Premadasa as the UNP’s presidential contender that effort failed and the SLFP was made to carry the brunt of the challenge to Premadasa.
The JVP then insisted on a boycott of the election and threatened to kill anyone who entered the contest. This was largely aimed at Mrs. Bandaranaike who became the choice of the SLFP. The JVP attempted to assassinate her. They also wrecked her first meeting held in Embilipitya which was well known as pro JVP territory. In the event Mrs. B was badly handicapped in her fight with Premadasa who also won over to his side Ossie Abeygunasekera – a brilliant speaker and the second in command at one time of Vijaya Kumaratunga. He was drafted to humiliate Mrs. B and gather all those votes which would have invariably gone to her if Premadasa was not in the running. The success of this strategy was clearly seen in the final results when Premadasa won by a whisker.
To say that is not to take anything away from the indomitable courage displayed by Premadasa as a campaigner. He completely sidelined JRJ and used emissaries like Rukman Senanayake to try and make peace with the JVP. In his manifesto he pledged to send the IPKF back to India which was the demand of both the JVP and LTTE. He told both those militant formations that he too was an “outsider” like them and unsubtly messaged that he was a member of a minority and a deprived caste just like the Karaiyas vis a vis the Vellalas in the north and the Karawe vis a vis the Goigama in the south. He had no hesitation in characterising his adversary as a “radala” – an epithet which had been flung at Mrs. B. by the conventional left [“Radala Ammandi”].
There were reports that the leadership of the JVP were divided on the possibility of a non-Bandaranaike “common candidate- like Dinesh Gunawardena. But that proposal had been vetoed by their strong University Students Federation which had greater freedom of movement than Wijeweera and the top leaders who were in hiding from the armed services. These leaders were unable to swiftly communicate their decisions to the negotiators who met at “Woodlands” under the presidency of Rukman Senanayake who reported directly to Premadasa on a regular basis.
The election was held on December 10 amidst unprecedented violence. 104 SLFP activists were killed according to author Malalgoda Bandutilleke. Many election officials and voters were killed because they disobeyed the JVP order to boycott the election. This led to an unprecedented low poll but it was sufficient to finalize the results and declare a winner – a stupendous achievement. The results of the Presidential election were as follows:
R Premadasa [UNP] – 2,569,199 [50.43 percent]
Sirimavo Bandaranaike [SLFP] – 2,289,860 [44.95 percent]
Ossie Abeygunasekera [SLMP] – 235,719 [4.63 percent]
Majority 227,339
It was clear that Premadasa had won a noteworthy victory and given the UNP a new lease of life. He had managed to clear the 50 percent barrier to avoid a runoff and his “nominee” Ossie had drawn off enough votes to ensure the defeat of Mrs. B. It was a good example of the thoroughness with which the new President undertook any task. As predicted by JRJ, Mrs. B did not come to the Elections Commissioner’s office to hear the result and congratulate the winner. She believed that she had been robbed of a victory and went to courts to challenge the verdict.
As usual this case dragged on and was dismissed by the Supreme Court after Premadasa’s tragic demise. This in reality was Mrs. B s final fling since she had to concede the party leadership to her daughter CBK, who won in 1994. It was her “last hurrah” and Premadasa whom she had reviled throughout his career had the last laugh.
Maligawa
JRJ with his pretensions to royalty had addressed the nation via radio from the “Pattirippuwa” of the Dalada Maligawa after taking the oaths of office in 1977. Premadasa decided to follow suit but as to be expected he gilded the lily by making it a family occasion. He took his wife, who by now had become a dominant influence on her husband, and their two children to the “Pattirippuwa” and addressed the nation via TV. Anura Goonasekera, the Director of Information who pointed out technical difficulties of such a broadcast had been summarily dismissed and his successor Guruge had cobbled together his Outside Broadcasting Unit [OBU] to ensure a live broadcast.
As mentioned in Volume One of my autobiography Anura never returned to public service after that debacle and died prematurely in Singapore at the age of 62. Knowing the value of having a favourite who would do his bidding in the media field the new President appointed AJ Ranasinghe as the State Minister in charge of the subject. The new State Minister made a public pronouncement that he was willing “even to eat a soup made out of his patrons sandals”. This culinary promise no doubt endeared him even more to Premadasa. The President then won over the Diyawadana Nilame, Neranjan Wijeratne, through patronage by way of providing vehicles, government bungalows and extra funding to win his loyalty.
Earlier he had as Minister of Housing provided a “Ran Viyana” or “Golden canopy” to the Maligawa. He later extended patronage to the senior monks of Asgiriya and Malwatta and became a popular and sought after leader by the Sangha thereby undercutting a traditional base of the SLFP. It was an achievement that JRJ neither desired nor attempted to gain. But Premadasa had no difficulty with the monks during the whole of his tenure. My brother in law SM Tennekone was the Government Agent of Kandy at that time and his fellow Rajan. and my Peradeniya contemporary, Gamini Gunawardene was the Superintendent of Police of Central Province. They were both favourites of the President and were his “eyes and ears”. He did not have much faith in the local politicians whom he looked upon as Gamini Dissanayake supporters. He also was in touch with some key mudalalis in town who would finance the monks when requested by him. He thus secured that flank as no UNP leader had done before or after. This was a significant achievement for the only UNP leader who did not belong to the majority caste.
General Election
The new President dissolved Parliament and fixed the general election for the new Parliament to be held on February 15, 1989. Nominations were fixed for a week ending on January 6. A short date was given so that the UNP could capitalize on Premadasa’s victory and the ensuing confusion among opposition parties. The opposition could not coalesce as they usually did into an electoral alliance, which added to the UNPs advantage. Premadasa skillfully prevented the minority parties forming an alliance with the opposition by bringing down the “cut off” point for selection to Parliament from 12.5 percent of votes polled to five percent. It opened the door for greater representation by minority parties. The country was to pay heavily for this opportunism later when all manner of parties, especially communal ones, began to enter the fray knowing that they could enter Parliament with a lesser number of votes.
The JVP intensified their terror tactics to intimidate both candidates and voters. Many candidates from all leading parties were killed during the campaign as well as a large number of village level officials, particularly grama sevakas, who were in charge of servicing polling stations and the state officials conducting the poll.
The results favoured the UNP although the PR system which was introduced for this election precluded a 1977 like sweep. Another feature of the new system was the emphasis on “block votes” be they caste, community, voter recognition or largeness of the electorate. Party seniors who had a district wide profile found it easier to get votes from the whole electoral district. Name recognition was the name of the game. Let us track the dimensions of the UNP victory by analyzing the aggregates of representatives in a few key districts:
Colombo; UNP 12, SLFP 6, MEP 2.
Gampaha; UNP 10, SLFP 6.
Kalutara; UNP 9, SLFP 5.
Kandy; UNP 8, SLFP 4.
Nuwara Eliya; UNP 5, SLFP 2.
Galle; UNP 7, SLFP 5.
Hambantota; UNP 5, SLFP 2.
Kurunegala; UNP 10, SLFP 5.
It was a clean sweep and a personal victory for the new President. He was so elated that he believed that no one would go against this mandate won for the party by him. Therefore he began aggressively to change the victorious party in his own anti-elitist image. He was mindful of the fact that he had earlier created a “de facto” party-the Puravesi Peramuna, with its own program of action. Several of the new MPs led by Gamini Fonseka had been leading lights in the Peramuna. In international affairs he had a contemptuous approach to India and the UK. All this hubris was to have serious consequences for him in a few years time.
An equally important result of the PR system was the allocation of a substantial number of seats to the opposition, particularly the SLFP, based on the number of votes polled. What would have been a rout under the first past the post system was avoided and nearly all the district leaders of the SLFP were returned to Parliament. Their numbers provided a launching pad for an impeachment motion as we shall see later.
However with a larger number of MPs the internal rivalries in the SLFP came into the open. The writ of Mrs. B was challenged by a group from within the party led by Anura Bandaranaike. A few like Stanley Tillekeratne were openly hostile and were not averse to compromises with Premadasa citing earlier discrimination against them by Mrs. B. The once powerful SLFP was imploding in the face of defeat and the election of a new President who was more anti-Bandaranaike than anti SLFP.
Cabinet
Having installed himself with pomp and glory the new President with characteristic speed then turned to man management. He set about appointing a Cabinet on February 18, 1989 and reshuffling his administrative staff, security services and the administrative service. I will say more about the Cabinet appointments in the next chapter. But it was clear that he wanted full control of the government apparatus before he tackled the many issues that he had highlighted in his manifesto.
As a sign of change and his desired unfettered loyalty he made the surprise selection of DB Wijetunga as the Prime Minister thereby thwarting the ambitions of Lalith and Gamini who had wholeheartedly supported him at the Presidential election. To gild the lily he had appointed Wijetunga as the Minister of Finance as well. But by appointing his favourite civil servant R Paskaralingam as the Secretary to the Treasury he signaled that he would use Wijetunga only as a cover for his own control of the Finance Ministry.
The second most important Cabinet appointment was that of Ranjan Wijeratne as the Minister of Foreign Affairs, who was entrusted with the negotiations with India to get the IPKF out of the country. He thereby not only hoped to satisfy the LTTE and the JVP but also give expression to his deep seated hostility to India led by the Gandhi family. Later we will analyze the exchange of letters between him and Rajiv Gandhi which in tone was both undiplomatic and offensive. Wijeratne was the king pin in the Presidents strategy to deal with the Indians as well as the LTTE and JVP.
Ranjan had proved himself to be a loyal supporter of Premadasa even to the extent of challenging his relative JRJ on the need to fully support the latter’s candidacy. However there were times when Pramadasa was suspicious of the actions of his Foreign Minister whom he suspected of consulting JRJ. He brought in Bradman Weerakoon to be his “eyes and ears”. At the same time he appointed his accomplice Bernard Tillekeratne as his Foreign Secretary. As the later writings of Indian High Commissioners to Colombo reveal they were often confused by the contradictory stances of the President and his advisors. For instance when Ranjan discussed a final date for the withdrawal of the IPKF which did not fit the President’s deadline he was about to be replaced as a former Indian High Commissioner Mehrotra discloses in his memoirs. After the departure of the IPKF, Premadasa reshuffled his cabinet and Ranjan was replaced by Harold Herath who was a novice in this field and would unhesitatingly carry out his boss’s orders.
With Sirisena Cooray at the helm of the UNP he was overconfident of his hold on his MPs and often humiliated them for their alleged lethargy. Some Cabinet Ministers told me that their weekly meetings were a nightmare. They were at the receiving end regularly of Premadasa’s abuse. It was a mistake that would come to haunt him later as we shall see in the next chapter.
Next week Lalith and Gamini
(Excerpted from vol. 3 of the Sarath Amunugama autobiography In The Political Arena (1992-2022)
“Kill me, but do not kill my good name”
President Premadasa ✍️
Features
The Silent Shadow: The threat of the Nipah virus in Asia
In the quiet woods of West Bengal and the lush countryside of Kerala, a lethal pathogen is once again testing the limits of modern biosafety. The Nipah virus (NiV), a shadow that has flickered across South and South-East Asia for decades, is currently the subject of heightened international surveillance. With a case fatality rate that can soar up to 75%, this virus Nipah is not just a regional concern; it is a priority pathogen on the World Health Organization (WHO) Research and Development Blueprint, alongside Ebola and COVID-19, due to its epidemic potential.
To understand the much-justified fear Nipah inspires in the scientific community, one needs to look at its molecular machinery. Nipah is a negative-sense, single-stranded RNA virus belonging to the genus Henipavirus. In a kind of “Instruction Manual” analogy, Positive-Sense (+RNA) arrive with an instruction manual already written in the cell’s language. As soon as they enter the cell, the cell can start reading the RNA and “printing” viral proteins immediately. In contrast, Negative-Sense (-RNA) viruses like Nipah, Influenza, or Rabies, arrive with an instruction manual that is written backwards or as a “mirror image.” The cell’s machinery cannot read it directly. It cannot dictate terms to the cell. It needs a “translator” to get the cell to do what the virus wants. If the translator is deactivated, the virus becomes inert. However, with the help of the active translator, a replication pathway is created. This specific replication pathway is a major area of study for antiviral drugs. If we can find a way to “jam” that specific viral translator without hurting the host cell’s own functions, we can effectively stop the virus, so to speak, in its tracks.
Nipah is a “Biosafety Level 4” agent; the highest risk category requiring maximum containment. The virus targets the host’s cells lining of blood vessels and the nerve tissues. Once it enters the human body, typically through the binding of its attaching glycoprotein to host receptors, it initiates a devastating cascade. The infection often presents as a dual-threat, namely acute respiratory problems with features of severe “atypical pneumonia,” and potentially fatal involvement of the brain. In its most sinister form, the virus crosses the blood-brain barrier which routinely protects against invasion of the central nervous system by infective organisms, causing massive inflammation of the brain. Symptoms progress rapidly from fever and headache to drowsiness, disorientation, and seizures, often culminating in a coma within 24 to 48 hours.
As of January 2026, the epidemiological map of Asia shows several distinct hotspots. India is currently managing two distinct geographical risks. In West Bengal, a recent cluster in Kolkata and Barasat involving healthcare workers has triggered a massive “trace and test” operation. This region, bordering Bangladesh, has a history of outbreaks dating back to 2001. Simultaneously, Kerala in Southern India has become a recurrent epicentre, with four confirmed cases and two deaths reported in mid-2025 across the Malappuram and Palakkad districts.
Bangladesh remains the most consistently affected nation. In 2025 alone, four fatal, unrelated cases were reported across the Barisal, Dhaka, and Rajshahi divisions. Unlike the hospital-based transmission often seen elsewhere, Bangladesh’s outbreaks are frequently linked to a cultural staple, which is the consumption of raw date palm sap.
The current clusters have sent warning currents across the continent. Airports in Thailand (Suvarnabhumi and Phuket), Nepal, and Singapore have reinstated COVID-style health screenings for travellers arriving from affected Indian states. Taiwan has gone a step further, proposing to categorise Nipah as a “Category 5” notifiable disease; the highest level of public health alert.
The natural reservoir of Nipah is the Pteropus genus of fruit bats, commonly known as flying foxes. These bats carry the virus without falling ill themselves, shedding it in their saliva, urine, and excrement. The “spillover” to humans typically occurs via three routes:
= Contaminated Food: Eating fruit partially consumed by bats or drinking raw date palm sap where bats have urinated into the collection pots.
= Intermediate Hosts: In the 1998 Malaysia outbreak, pigs acted as “amplifying hosts” after eating contaminated fruit, later passing the virus to farmworkers.
= Human-to-Human: This is the greatest concern for urban centres. Close contact with the bodily fluids or respiratory droplets of an infected patient, often enough in a home care or hospital setting, can trigger secondary clusters.
While Sri Lanka has not yet recorded a human case of Nipah, the island cannot afford complacency. The risks are grounded in both biology and regional connectivity. Surveillance studies have confirmed that Pteropus bat species are indigenous to Sri Lanka. While the presence of the bat does not guarantee the presence of the virus, the ecological apparatus for a spillover event exists on the island. Environmental changes, such as deforestation, can drive these bats closer to human settlements in search of food, increasing the probability of contact.
Sri Lanka’s proximity to South India, particularly Kerala and Tamil Nadu, creates a constant flow of people and goods. With direct flights and maritime links to regions currently monitoring outbreaks, the risk of an “imported case” is quite considerable. A single undetected traveller in the incubation period, that is the period between the infection and production of the disease, which can last from 4 to 14 days, and in rare cases up to 45, could theoretically introduce the virus into a local clinical setting.
The primary challenge for Sri Lanka lies in looking at what doctors call a “differential diagnosis”, which looks at all possible conditions that have a similar clinical presentation. Early symptoms of Nipah mimic common tropical illnesses like dengue, Japanese encephalitis, or even severe influenza. Without high-level biocontainment labs (BSL-3 or BSL-4) and rapid Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) testing protocols specifically tuned for Henipaviruses, a localised outbreak could gain significant momentum before it is correctly identified. Incidentally, PCR is a sort of molecular photocopier which allows scientists to take a tiny, almost undetectable amount of viral genetic material (RNA or DNA) from a patient’s swab or blood sample and amplify it millions of times until there is enough to be detected and identified.
Currently, there is no licensed vaccine or specific antiviral drug in the treatment for Nipah. Management is limited to intensive supportive care. However, the “One Health” approach offers a roadmap for prevention:
=For the Public: Ensure all fruits are thoroughly washed and peeled, and discard any fruit that shows signs of bird or animal bites (“bat-bitten” fruit).
=For Healthcare Workers: Strict adherence to Infection Prevention and Control (IPC) measures. Wearing personal protective equipment (PPE) when treating patients with unexplained encephalitis or respiratory distress is vital.
=For Authorities: Strengthening surveillance of bat populations and enhancing the diagnostic capacity of national laboratories.
Nipah virus is a reminder of the permeable borders between the wild and the urban. As Asia watches the current clusters in India and Bangladesh, the lesson for Sri Lanka is clear: preparedness is the only antidote to a virus that currently has no cure.
We need to make the general public well aware of preventive guidelines for travellers to other countries, most particularly for those traveling to or from Kerala, West Bengal, or Bangladesh. Before travel, it is necessary to monitor the Sri Lankan Ministry of Health (Epidemiology Unit) website for travel advisories. Currently, screening is focused on passengers arriving from Kolkata and Kerala. It is essential to ensure that travel insurance covers medical evacuation and high-intensity supportive care, as Nipah management requires ICU facilities.
During the stay in an area of another country that is a high-risk area, avoid “Bat-Bitten” Fruit and do not purchase or consume fruit that has visible puncture marks, scratches, or missing chunks. In regions where fruit bats (Pteropus) are active, they often taste fruit and discard it, leaving saliva and virus behind. It is essential to only eat fruit that you have washed thoroughly with clean water and peeled yourself. Avoid pre-sliced fruit platters in street markets. Stay away from pig farms and bat roosting sites such as large trees where “flying foxes” gather. If you visit rural areas, do not touch surfaces under these trees which may be contaminated with bat urine.
Once a traveller returns to Sri Lanka, the authorities at the ports of entry have to be most vigilant. As for the traveller, it is best to self-monitor for about a month. The incubation period can be long. If you develop a fever, severe headache, or cough within three weeks of returning, isolate yourself immediately. If you seek medical care, the very first thing you should tell the doctor is: “I have recently returned from a region where Nipah cases were reported.”
Healthcare workers have to be extremely careful. This is crucial for doctors and nurses in Sri Lankan Outpatient Departments (OPD) and Emergency Treatment Units (ETUs). Careful medical triage of sorting out possible cases is mandatory. It is necessary to maintain a High Index of Suspicion: In any patient presenting with Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS) or Encephalitis (confusion, seizures, or coma), immediately check their travel history or contact with travellers. It is essential that the health staff do not rule out Nipah just because a patient has a “simple” cough or a “sore throat” as these often precede the neurological crash by 24–48 hours.
Infection Prevention and Control (IPC) measures have to be employed compulsorily. Because Nipah has a high rate of nosocomial (hospital-acquired) spread, the following “Standard Plus” precautions are mandatory for suspected cases:-
=Meticulous hand hygiene before and after patient contact.
=Use of medical masks and eye protection (goggles or face shields).
=Double gloving and the use of fluid-resistant gowns.
If a patient is suspected to suffer from Nipah virus infection, the patient needs to be moved to a dedicated isolation ward immediately. Do not “cohort” (group) them with other encephalitis or flu patients until Nipah is ruled out by PCR. Treat all bodily fluids (blood, urine, saliva) as highly infectious biohazards. Use 0.5% sodium hypochlorite for surface disinfection. Under the Infectious Diseases Act, Nipah is a notifiable disease in Sri Lanka. Contact the regional Medical Officer of Health (MOH) or the Epidemiology Unit immediately upon suspicion. DO NOT WAIT FOR LAB CONFIRMATION.
One final but absolutely vital and life-saving declaration and truism is that the Nipah virus is very sensitive to common soaps and detergents. Regular handwashing with soap for at least 20 seconds is one of the most effective ways to break the chain of transmission, even for a virus that is this lethal.
Features
India shaping-up as model ‘Swing State’
The world of democracy is bound to be cheering India on as it conducts its 77th Republic Day celebrations. The main reasons ought to be plain to see; in the global South it remains one of the most vibrant of democracies while in South Asia it is easily the most successful of democracies.
Besides, this columnist would go so far as to describe India as a principal ‘Swing State.’ To clarify the latter concept in its essentials, it could be stated that the typical ‘Swing State’ wields considerable influence and power regionally and globally. Besides they are thriving democracies and occupy a strategic geographical location which enhances their appeal for other states of the region and enables them to relate to the latter with a degree of equableness. Their strategic location makes it possible for ‘Swing States’ to even mediate in resolving conflicts among states.
More recently, countries such as Indonesia, South Africa and South Korea have qualified, going by the above criteria, to enter the fold.
For us in South Asia, India’s special merit as a successful democracy resides, among other positives, in its constitutionally guaranteed fundamental rights. Of principal appeal in this connection is India’s commitment to secularism. In accordance with these provisions the Indian federal government and all other governing entities, at whatever level, are obliged to adhere to the principle of secularism in governance.
That is, governing bodies are obliged to keep an ‘equidistance’ among the country’s religions and relate to them even-handedly. They are required to reject in full partiality towards any of the country’s religions. Needless to say, practitioners of minority religions are thus put at ease that the Indian judiciary would be treating them and the adherents of majority religions as absolute equals.
To be sure, some politicians may not turn out to be the most exemplary adherents of religious equality but in terms of India’s constitutional provisions any citizen could seek redress in the courts of law confidently for any wrongs inflicted on her on this score and obtain it. The rest of South Asia would do well to take a leaf from India’s Constitution on the question of religious equality and adopt secularism as an essential pillar of governance. It is difficult to see the rest of South Asia settling its religious conflicts peacefully without making secularism an inviolable principle of governance.
The fact is that the Indian Constitution strictly prohibits discriminatory treatment of citizens by the state on religious, racial, caste, sex or place of birth grounds, thus strengthening democratic development. The Sri Lankan governing authorities would do well to be as unambiguous and forthright as their Indian counterparts on these constitutional issues. Generally, in the rest of South Asia, there ought to be a clear separation wall, so to speak, between religion and politics.
As matters stand, not relating to India on pragmatic and cordial terms is impossible for almost the rest of the world. The country’s stature as a global economic heavyweight accounts in the main for this policy course. Although it may seem that the US is in a position to be dismissive of India’s economic clout and political influence at present, going forward economic realities are bound to dictate a different policy stance.
India has surged to be among the first four of global economic powers and the US would have no choice but to back down in its current tariff strife with India and ensure that both countries get down to more friction-free economic relations.
In this connection the EU has acted most judiciously. While it is true that the EU is in a diplomatic stand-off of sorts with the US over the latter’s threat to take over Greenland and on questions related to Ukraine, it has thought it best to sew-up what is described as an historic free trade agreement with India. This is a truly win-win pact that would benefit both parties considering that together they account for some 25 percent of global GDP and encompass within them 3 billion of the world’s population.
The agreement would reduce trade tariffs between the states and expand market access for both parties. The EU went on record as explaining that the agreement ‘would support investment flows, improve access to European markets and deepen supply chain integration’.
Besides, the parties are working on a draft security and defence partnership. The latter measure ought to put the US on notice that India and the EU would combine in balancing its perceived global military predominance. The budding security partnership could go some distance in curbing US efforts to expand its power and influence in particularly the European theatre.
Among other things, the EU-India trade agreement needs to be seen as a coming together of the world’s foremost democracies. In other words it is a notable endorsement of the democratic system of government and a rebuffing of authoritarianism.
However, the above landmark agreement is not preventing India from building on its ties with China. Both India and China are indicating in no uncertain terms that their present cordiality would be sustained and further enriched. As China’s President Xi observed, it will be a case of the ‘dragon and the elephant dancing together.’
Here too the pragmatic bent in Indian foreign policy could be seen. In economic terms both countries could lose badly if they permit the continuation of strained ties between them. Accordingly, they have a common interest in perpetuating shared economic betterment.
It is also difficult to see India rupturing ties with the US over Realpolitik considerations. Shared economic concerns would keep the US and India together and the Trump administration is yet to do anything drastic to subvert this equation, tariff battles notwithstanding.
Although one would have expected the US President to come down hard on India over the latter’s continuing oil links with Russia, for instance, the US has guarded against making any concrete and drastic moves to disrupt this relationship.
Accordingly, we are left to conclude from the foregoing that all powers that matter, whether they be from the North or South, perceive it to be in their interests to keep their economic and other links with India going doubly strong. There is too much to lose for them by foregoing India’s friendship and goodwill. Thus does India underscore its ‘Swing State’ status.
Features
Securing public trust in public office: A Christian perspective – Part III
Professor, Dept of Public & International Law, Faculty of Law, University of Colombo, Sri Lanka and independent member, Constitutional Council of Sri Lanka (January 2023 to January 2026)
This is an adapted version of the Bishop Cyril Abeynaike Memorial Lecture delivered on 14 June 2025 at the invitation of the Cathedral Institute for Education and Formation, Colombo, Sri Lanka.
(Continued from yesterday)
Conviction
I now turn to my third attribute, which is conviction. We all know that we can have different types of convictions. Depending on our moral commitments, we may think of convictions as good or bad. From the Bible, the convictions of Saul and the contrasting convictions of Paul (Saul was known as Paul after his conversion) provide us with an excellent illustration of the different convictions and value commitments we may have. As Christians we are required to be convinced about the values of the Kingdom of God, such as truthfulness and rationality, the first and second attributes that I spoke of. We are also called to act, based on our convictions in all that we do.
I used to associate conviction with fearlessness, courage or boldness. But in the last two to three years of my own life, I have had the opportunity to think more deeply about the idea of conviction and, increasingly, I am of the view that conviction helps us to stand by certain values, despite our fears, anxieties or lack of courage. Conviction forecloses possibilities of doing what we think is the wrong thing or from giving up. Recall here the third example I referred to, of Lord Wilberforce and his efforts at abolishing the slave trade and slavery. He had to persevere, despite numerous failures, which he clearly did. In my own experiences, whether at the university or at the Constitutional Council, failures, hopelessness, fear or anxiety are real emotions and states of mind that I have had to deal with. In Sri Lanka, if convictions about truth, rationality and justice compel a public official to speak truth to power and act rationally, chances are that such public official has gone against the status quo and given people with real human power, reason to harm them. Acting out of conviction, therefore, can easily give rise to a very human set of reactions – of fear for oneself and for one’s family’s safety, anxiety about grave consequences, including public embarrassment and, sometimes, even regret about taking on the responsibilities that one has taken on. In such situations, such public officials, from what I have noticed, do not ever regret acting out of conviction, but rather struggle with the implications and the consequences that may follow.
When we consider the work of Lord Wilberforce, Lalith Ambanwela and Thulsi Madonsela we can see the ways in which their convictions helped them to persist in seeking the truth, in remaining rational and in seeking justice. They demonstrate to us that conviction about truth and justice pushes and even compels us to stand by those ideals and discharge our responsibilities in a principled and ethical way. Convictions help us to do so, even when the odds are stacked against us and when the status quo seems entrenched and impossible to change. This is well illustrated in how Wilberforce persisted with his attempts at law reform, despite the successive failures.
Importantly, some public officials saw the results of acting out of conviction in their lifetime, but others did not. Wilberforce saw the results of his work in his lifetime. Dietrich Bonhoeffer, a German theologian who opposed Hitler’s rule, was executed, by hanging, by the Nazi German state, a couple of weeks before Hitler committed suicide. Paul spent the last stage of his life as a prisoner of the Romans and was crucified. These examples suggest that conviction compels us to action, regardless of our chances of success, and for some of us, even unto death. Yet, conviction gives us hope about the unknown future. Conviction, indeed, is a very powerful human attribute.
I will not go into this, but the Christian faith offers much in terms of how a public official may survive in such difficult situations, as has been my own experience thus far.
Critical Introspection
I chose critical introspection as the fourth attribute for two reasons. One, I think that the practice of critical introspection by public officials is a way of being mindful of our human limitations and second it is a way in which we can deepen and renew our commitment to public service. Critical introspection, therefore, in my view, is essential for securing public trust and it is an attribute that I consider to be less and less familiar among public officials.
In Jesus, and in the traditions of the Church, we find compelling examples of a commitment to critical introspection. During his Ministry, he was unapologetic about taking time off to engage in prayer and self-reflection. He intentionally went away from the crowds. His Ministry was only for three years and he was intentional about identifying and nurturing his disciples. These practices may have made Jesus less available, perhaps less ‘productive’ and perhaps even less popular. However, this is the approach that Jesus role-modelled and I would like to suggest to you today, that there is value in this approach and much to emulate. Similarly, the Biblical concept of the Sabbath has much to offer to public officials even from a secular perspective in terms of rest, stepping away from work, of refraining from ‘doing’ and engaging with the spiritual realm.
Importantly, critical introspection helps us to anticipate that we are bound to make mistakes. no matter how diligent we may be and of our blind spots. Critical introspection creates space for truth, rationality and conviction to continue to form us into public officials who can secure public trust and advance it.
In contrast, I have found, in my work, that many embrace, without questioning, a relentless commitment to working late hours and over the weekends. This is, of course, at the cost of their personal well-being, and, equally importantly, of the well-being of their families. Relentless hard work, at the cost of health and personal relationships, is commonly valorised, rather than questioned, from what I can see, ironically, even in the Church.
One of the greatest risks of public officials not engaging in critical introspection is that they may lose the ability to see how power corrupts them or they may end up taking themselves too seriously. I have seen these risks manifest in some public officials that I work with – power makes them blind to their own abuse of power and they consider themselves to be above others and beyond reproach.
Where a public official does not practice critical introspection, the trappings of public office can place them at risk of taking themselves too seriously and losing their ability to remain service-oriented. Recall the trappings of high constitutional office – the security detail, the protocol and sometimes the kowtowing of others. It is rare for us to see public officials who respond to these trappings of public office lightly and with grace. Unfortunately for us, we have seen many who thrive in it. In my own work, I have come across public officials who are extremely particular about their titles and do not hesitate to reprimand their subordinates if they miss addressing them by one of their titles. Thankfully, I also know and work with public officials who are most uncomfortable with the trappings of public office and suffer it while preserving their attitude of humility and service.
Permit me to add a personal note here. In April 2022 a group of Christians and Catholics decided to celebrate Maundy Thursday by washing the feet of some members of the public. I was invited to come along. On that hot afternoon, in one corner of public place where people were milling about, the few of us washed the feet of some members of the public, including those who maintain the streets of Colombo. I do not know what they thought of our actions but I can tell you how it made me feel. The simple act of kneeling before a stranger and one who was very obviously very different to me, and washing their feet, had a deep impact on me. Many months later, when I was called, most unexpectedly, to be part of Sri Lanka’s Constitutional Council and had to struggle through that role for the better part of my term, that experience of washing feet of member of the public became a powerful and personal reminder to me of the nature of my Christian calling in public service. I do think that the Christian model of servant leadership has much to offer the world in terms of what we require of our public officials.
Compassion
Due to limitations of time, I will speak to the fifth attribute only briefly. It is about compassion – an aspect of love. Love is a complex multi-dimensional concept in Christianity and for today’s purposes, I focus on compassion, an idea that is familiar to our society more generally in terms of Karuna or the ability to see suffering in oneself and in others. The Gospels, at one point, record that when Jesus saw the crowds that he was ministering to, that he had compassion on them.
Of course, we know that the people are not always mere innocent victims of the abuse of power but can be active participants of the culture of patronage and corruption in our society. Nevertheless, for public officials to secure public trust, I think compassion, is essential. Compassion, however, is not about bending the rules, arbitrarily, or about showing favouritism, based on sympathy. In Sri Lanka we are hard pressed to find examples of compassion by public officials, at high levels, despite the horrors we have experienced in this land. However, in the everyday and at lower layers of public service, I do think there are powerful acts of compassion. An example that has stayed with me is about an unnamed police officer who is mentioned in the case of Yogalingam Vijitha v Wijesekera SC(FR) 186/2001 (SC Minutes 28 August 2002). In 2001, Yogalingam Vijitha was subject to severe forms of sexual torture by the police. After one episode of horrific torture, including the insertion of the tip of a plaintain-flower dipped in chilli to her vagina, the torturers left her with orders that she should not be given any water. This unnamed police officer, however, provided her with the water that she kept crying out for. In a case which records many horrific details about how Yogalingam Vijitha was tortured, this observation by the Court, about the unnamed police office, stands out as a very powerful example of compassion in public office.
Compassion for those who seek our services whether at university, at courts or at the kachcheri, should be an essential attribute for public officials.
Aspects not explored
There is much more that can be said about what a Christian perspective has to offer in terms of securing public trust in public office but due to limitations of time, I have only spoken about truthfulness, rationality, conviction, critical introspection and compassion – and that, too, in a brief way. I have not explored today several other important attributes, such as the Christian calling to prioritise the vulnerable and the Christian perspectives on confession, forgiveness and mercy that offers us a way of dealing with any mistakes that we might make as public officials. I have also not spoken of the need for authenticity – public officials ought to maintain harmony in the values that they uphold in their public lives with the values that they uphold their personal lives, too. Finally, I have not spoken of how these attributes are to be cultivated, including about the responsibility of the Church in cultivating these attributes, practice them and about how the Church ought to support public officials to do the same.
Securing Public Trust
Permit me to sum up. I have tried to suggest to you that cultivating a commitment to truthfulness, rationality, conviction about the values of public service, critical introspection and compassion – are essential if public officials are to secure public trust.
The crisis of 2022 is a tragic illustration of the pressing need in our society to secure trust in public office. In contrast, the examples of Thulsi Madonsela, former Public Protector of South Africa, of late Lalith Ambanwela, former Audit Superintendent from Sri Lanka and Lord Wilberforce illustrate that individual public officials who approach public service can and have made a significant difference, but, of course, at significant personal cost. Given the mandate of this memorial lecture, I drew from the Christian faith to justify and describe these five attributes. However, I do think that a similar secular justification is possible. Ultimately, secular or faith-based, we urgently need to revive a public and dynamic discourse of our individual responsibilities towards our collective existence, including about the ways in which can secure public trust in public office. I most certainly think that the future of our democracy depends on generating such a discourse and securing the trust of the public in public office.
If any of you here have been wondering whether I am far too idealistic or, as some have tried to say, ‘extreme’ in the standard that I have laid out for myself and others like me who hold public office – I will only say this. Most redeeming or beautiful aspects of our human existence have been developed mostly because individuals and collectives dared to dream of a better future, for themselves and for others. Having gone through what has easily been the toughest two-three years of my life, I know that, here in Sri Lanka, too, we have among us, individuals and collectives who dare to dream of a better future for this land and its peoples – and they are making an impact. Three years ago, you could have dismissed what I have had to say as being the musings of an armchair academic – but today, given my own experiences in public office with such individuals who have dared to dream of a better future for us, I can confidently tell you – these are not mere musings of an armchair academic but rather insights drawn from what I have been witness to.
(Concluded)
by Dinesha Samararatne
-
Business4 days agoComBank, UnionPay launch SplendorPlus Card for travelers to China
-
Business5 days agoComBank advances ForwardTogether agenda with event on sustainable business transformation
-
Opinion5 days agoConference “Microfinance and Credit Regulatory Authority Bill: Neither Here, Nor There”
-
Business1 day agoClimate risks, poverty, and recovery financing in focus at CEPA policy panel
-
Opinion4 days agoLuck knocks at your door every day
-
Business6 days agoDialog Brings the ICC Men’s T20 Cricket World Cup 2026 Closer to Sri Lankans
-
News5 days agoRising climate risks and poverty in focus at CEPA policy panel tomorrow at Open University
-
Business1 day agoBourse positively impacted by CBSL policy rate stance

