Features
Ratification and accession to treaties under 21st Amendment to Constitution

By Dr. Dayantha Laksiri Mendis
BACKGROUND
It is an important issue to consider under the proposed 21st Amendment to the Constitution whether the President should sign, ratify or accede to treaties in consultation with the Prime Minister. In this article, it is proposed to provide an analysis of this important issue by reference to current constitutional law and practices of Commonwealth countries.
Before I deal with this issue, it is useful to outline the importance of treaties as outlined in the following references: (Richard Ware, “Parliament and Treaties” in Parliament and International Relations, (1991), pp.37-48; Lord McNair, Law of Treaties, (1961), pp.83-94; Sir Kenneth Keith, ‘New Zealand Treaty Practice: The Executive and the Legislature’ (1964), 1 N.Z.L.R., pp.277-281. J.E.S. Fawcett, The British Commonwealth in international law, (1963), at p.65; Anthony Aust – Modern Treaty Law and Practice, OUP UK 2006; F.A. Mann – Foreign Affairs in English Courts, OUP, UK 1986).
TREATIES IN A CONSTITUTIONAL CONTEXT
Treaty is an ancient legal instrument. It contributes to global and national governance. Treaty is a generic term and includes conventions, agreements, protocols, letters of exchange, compacts, etc. It can be defined as Agreements between States or between States and Inter-Governmental Organisations (IGOs) and between IGOs.
In modern times, negotiation and conclusion of treaties are regulated by the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (1969 VCLT) and the 1986 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties between States and International Organizations and between International Organizations (1986 VCLT). It is a specialized branch of international law and those who negotiate and conclude such treaties are diplomats and international civil servants. Usually, they have an understanding of the subject matter, as well as treaty law and practice.
Treaties can be multilateral, plurilateral or bilateral and they generally come into force on signature, ratification or accession. Important multilateral treaties signed, ratified and acceded to by Sri Lanka are: ICCPR 1966 and the Optional Protocol 1976, ICESCR 1966, Convention on the Rights of the Child 1989, Geneva Conventions 1949 and the Additional Protocols 1977, The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty 1968, UN Convention on Climate Change 1992, UN Biodiversity Convention 1992, Paris Agreement, IMO Conventions, ICAO Conventions, etc.
Important plurilateral treaties signed or ratified by Sri Lanka are SAARC, BIMSTEC, IORAC, and they only apply to a group of states belonging to a particular region. Other famous plurilateral treaties are Treaty on European Union (Lisbon Treaty) and Revised Treaty of Chaguaramas (CARICOM Treaty). These two treaties have established a single market and economy with free movement of persons, goods and services.
Important bilateral treaties signed by Sri Lanka are Rubber-Rice Pact 1956; 1987 Indo-Sri Lanka Accord, 1998 Indo-Sri Lanka Free Trade Agreement, and 2018 Singapore-Sri Lanka Free Trade Agreement. Other famous bilateral treaties are Camp David Accord 1976 and Shimla Agreement 1972.
Treaties must be distinguished from non-treaty instruments. Non-treaty instruments are MOUs, guidelines, codes of conduct and Resolutions of the UN Security Council, Human Rights Council, IMO, ICAO, etc. Unlike treaties, non-treaty instruments do not require consent of States. Some non-treaty instruments are legally binding on Member States and they are called “hard law” and some are not binding and they are called “soft law”.
Geneva Resolution 2015 30/1 of the Human Rights Council is a non-treaty instrument which applies to Sri Lanka. It was intended to bring reconciliation between the parties involved in the North-East armed conflict in Sri Lanka for a period of 30 years. This Resolution has created constitutional problems for Sri Lanka than any treaty or non-treaty instrument.
Article 46 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties 1969 states, if a treaty (or non-treaty instrument) manifestly contravenes an internal rule of fundamental importance, a treaty could be rendered void at international level. This rule has evolved through Customary International Law and therefore it can be considered a part of Common Law of the United Kingdom and commonwealth countries.
In Sri Lanka, treaties do not apply at national level, as Sri Lanka is a dualist State where international law is considered a separate legal order. Hence, the transformation of treaties into national legislation by using suitable legislative techniques is necessary to give legal effect to treaties at national level as in other Commonwealth countries. (See: T. O. Elias, The Modern Law of Treaties, (1974), pp.142-50. According to Judge Elias, the question brings into focus the doctrinal controversy between monists and dualists schools of thought in international law. See also: D. L. Mendis, Legislative Transformation of Treaties, Statute Law Review, Volume 13, OUP, UK, 1992.
RATIFICATION OF TREATIES IN COMMON LAW COUNTRIES
In Sri Lanka, the President, under the 1978 Constitution has an inherent right to sign, ratify or accede to treaties without consulting the prime minister and without obtaining parliamentary approval by reference to constitutional provisions. This has led to bitter controversy among cabinet ministers since the Indo-Lanka Accord 1986.
In the United States of America, the President has to obtain approval of the Senate with a two-thirds majority to ratify treaties. Up to now, the President of USA has not been able to obtain the approval of the Senate for ratification of the 1982 LOS Convention.
In the United Kingdom, Her Majesty the Queen signs, ratifies or accedes to treaties on the advice of the Prime Minister. However, the ‘Ponsonby Rule’ was introduced in 1924 by late Mr. Arthur Ponsonby (then Parliamentary Under-Secretary for Foreign Affairs) to obtain parliamentary approval prior to ratification of treaties with a view to encouraging open-government in foreign affairs.
The current application of the ‘Ponsonby rule’ is recorded in the twenty-first edition of Erskine May’s Parliamentary Practice in the following manner –
“When a treaty requires ratification, the Government does not usually proceed with the ratification until a period of twenty-one days has elapsed from the date on which the text of such a treaty was laid before parliament by Her Majesty’s command. This practice is subject to modification, if necessary, when urgent or other important considerations arise.”
The ‘Ponsonby rule’ is followed in many Commonwealth countries with variations and such varied practices relating to the modification of the ‘Ponsonby rule’ in “urgent” or “important” situations are noted in the U.N.I.T.A.R. Study. (See: O. Schachter, M. Nawaz and J. Fried (eds.) – Toward Wider Acceptance of U.N. Treaties, (New York, 1971), pp.95-96). Several variations of the Ponsonby rule are noted in the UNITAR Study at p.95).
AN EMERGING PRACTICE IN COMMONWEALTH COUNTRIES
In recent times, there appears to be an emerging constitutional practice in Commonwealth countries to obtain approval of Parliament either in the form of implementing legislation or by way of the Resolution prior to signature, ratification or accession in regard to certain category of treaties as provided hereinbelow:
1. A treaty itself may mandate the approval of Parliament either by way of a Resolution or in the form of implementing legislation prior to signature, ratification or accession to treaties. It is necessary in such circumstances to obtain Parliamentary approval by way of a Resolution or in the form of implementing legislation prior to signature, ratification or accession to treaties.
For example, Anglo-Irish Agreement (1985) entered into force for the U.K. only after it was subjected to a heated debate in Parliament in November 1985 and was approved by the Parliament as required by the text of the treaty. Similarly, a large number of treaties initiated by or under the auspices of international organizations may require enactment of implementing legislation at national level prior to signature, ratification or accession to such treaties. (See: Articles of Agreement of the I.B.R.D., I.M.F. and I.F.C. require such approval. In moving the second reading in the House of Commons of the Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency (M.I.G.A.) Bill, the former Minister for Overseas Development, Mr. Chris Patten stated: “The Bill is required to enable the United Kingdom to ratify the convention establishing MIGA, which is an international organization associated with the World Bank…”).
2. In some Commonwealth countries, a “binding constitutional practice” has emerged in the sphere of public policy to obtain parliamentary approval in the form of implementing legislation prior to signature, ratification or accession to “important” or “controversial” treaties at national level.
For example, in the United Kingdom, the Hong Kong Agreement 1984 and the Single European Act 1986 were approved by the House of Commons and implementing legislation was enacted before such treaties were ratified by the Executive. Some treaties initiated by international organizations are also enacted into national law before ratification or accession to such treaties because of their political and legal importance at international and national level.
3. Constitutional or statutory provisions may require parliamentary approval in the form of implementing legislation prior to signature, ratification or accession to a certain category of treaties.
For example, section 3 of the Ratification of Treaties Act 1983 (No. 5 of 1983) of Malta provides that a certain category of treaties require parliamentary approval in the form of implementing legislation.
Similar provisions are also found in the Ratification of Treaties Act 1987 (No.1 of 1987) of Antigua and Barbuda. In such situations, approval of Parliament is generally obtained in the form of implementing legislation before instruments of ratification are deposited. The draft Millennium Challenge Compact (MCC) required the enactment of implementing legislation prior to signature for purpose of its implementation.
CONCLUDING REMARKS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
In Sri Lanka, there is no reference whatsoever to treaties under article 33 of the 1978 Constitution. Hence, it is proposed that the following provisions should be inserted as article 33 (gg) the signature, ratification or accession to treaties by the President shall be undertaken in consultation with the Prime Minister.”
In Sri Lanka, parliamentary approval is not necessary prior to signature, ratification or accession to a treaty, as there are no constitutional or statutory provisions requiring such approval.
Many Commonwealth countries have enacted legislation requiring the approval of Parliament for a certain category of treaties as illustrated in the preceding parts of this article.
In the UK, Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010 requires parliamentary approval for ratification of a certain category of treaties. Thus, this piece of legislation has taken the Ponsonby Rule to its logical end to ensure open government in foreign affairs.
In the Republic of India, the National Commission was established in 2001 to review treaty-making power under the Indian Constitution, as there are no constitutional provisions regulating treaty-making powers. The Commission recommended such approval of Parliament. However, up to now, there has been no constitutional amendment enacted to ensure parliamentary approval for a certain category of treaties, although an attempt was made on 5th March 1993 by George Fernandez to introduce a Constitutional (Amendment) Bill to this effect in Lok Sabha.
In Sri Lanka, the Yaha Palana Draft Constitution inserted the following provision to fill the lacuna in the 1978 Constitution in the following manner:
“47. XX The Constitution would require that every treaty, along with a memorandum explaining its implication, be tabled in Parliament at least one month before ratification. Parliament may adopt a resolution recommending ratification, reservation or even non-ratification. The Executive would be bound by the terms of such resolution.
Parliament shall be informed of the ratification of every such treaty forthwith.
The provision of a human rights treaty shall become part of the domestic law on the expiry of a period of two years reckoned from the date of ratification. Parliament may by resolution extend such period by one year or reduce such period. Any further extension of the period not exceeding one year at a time would require two-thirds majority. Where Parliament passes a law incorporating a part but not the entirety of a treaty before automatic incorporation, the unincorporated provision would become domestic law at the end of the period concerned.
In relation to human rights treaties to which Sri Lanka is a party at the time the new constitutional provisions come into effect, the two-year period shall begin to run from such time.”
I humbly submit that in Sri Lanka parliamentary approval for a certain category of treaties is necessary prior to signature, ratification or accession to treaties. It is the Parliament and only the Parliament should be the final arbiter on granting approval for signature, ratification or accession to treaties. A draft Bill, on this subject, by the author of this article, is contained in the book titled: PERSPECTIVE ON CONSTITUTIONAL REFORM IN SRI LANKA, published by the International and Comparative Law Society, of Sri Lanka, 2021, pp. 492-501. (Editors: Dr. Hiran W. Jayewardene and Prof. Sharya Scharenguivel).
(The view expressed are personal and not that of Lakshman Kadirgamar Institute. He served as Ambassador to Austria and Permanent Representative to the UN in Vienna. He served as UN and Commonwealth Legal Expert/Adviser in many countries. He also served as Legislative and Treaty Drafting Expert at the CARICOM Secretariat in Georgetown, Guyana (South America) for several years. Email: mendis_law@yahoo.com).
Features
Democracy faces tougher challenges as political Right beefs-up presence

It is becoming increasingly evident that the democracy-authoritarianism division would be a major polarity in international politics going forward. It shouldn’t come as a surprise if quite a few major states of both East and West gain increasing inspiration from the ‘world’s mightiest democracy’ under President Donald Trump from now on and flout the core principles of democratic governance with impunity.
It is the political Right that would gain most might in this evolving new scheme of things. Whether it be the US itself, France, Israel or Turkey, to name just a few countries in the news, it is plain to see that the Right is unleashing its power with hardly a thought for the harm being done to key democratic institutions and norms.
In fact, Donald Trump and his Republican hard liners led from the front, so to speak, in this process of unleashing the power of the Right in contemporary times. It remains a very vital piece of history that the Right in the US savaged democracy’s most valued institutions on January 6, 2021, when it ran amok with the tacit backing of Trump in the US Capitol.
What was being challenged by the mob most was the ‘will of the people’ which was manifest in the latter’s choice of Joe Biden as US President at the time. To date Trump does not accept that popular verdict and insists that the election in question was a flawed one. He does so in the face of enlightened pronouncements to the contrary.
The US Right’s protégé state, Israel, is well on course to doing grave harm to its democratic institutions, with the country’s judiciary being undermined most. To cite two recent examples to support this viewpoint, the Israeli parliament passed a law to empower the country’s election officials to appoint judges, while Prime Minister Netanyahu has installed the new head of the country’s prime security agency, disregarding in the process a Supreme Court decision to retain the former head.
Such decisions were made by the Netanyahu regime in the face of mounting protests by the people. While nothing new may be said if one takes the view that Israel’s democratic credentials have always left much to be desired, the downgrading of a democratic country’s judiciary is something to be sorely regretted by democratic opinion worldwide. After all, in most states, it is the judiciary that ends up serving the best interests of the people.
Meanwhile in France, the indications are that far Right leader Marine Le Pen would not be backing down in the face of a judicial verdict that pronounces her guilty of corruption that may prevent her from running for President in 2027. She is the most popular politician in France currently and it should not come as a surprise if she rallies further popular support for herself in street protests. Among other things, this will be proof of the growing popular appeal of the political Right. Considering that France has been a foremost democracy, this is not good news for democratic opinion.
However, some heart could be taken from current developments in the Gaza and Turkey where the people are challenging their respective dominant governing forces in street protests largely peacefully. In the Gaza anti-Hamas protests have broken out demanding of the group to step down from power, while in Turkey, President Erdogan’s decades-long iron-fist rule is being challenged by pro-democracy popular forces over the incarceration of his foremost political rival.
Right now, the Turkish state is in the process of quashing this revolt through a show of brute force. Essentially, in both situations the popular demand is for democracy and accountable governance and such aims are generally anathema in the ears of the political Right whose forte is repressive, dictatorial rule.
The onus is on the thriving democracies of the world to ensure that the Right anywhere is prevented from coming to power in the name of the core principles and values of democracy. Right now, it is the European Union that could fit into this role best and democratic opinion is obliged to rally behind the organization. Needless to say, peaceful and democratic methods should be deployed in this historic undertaking.
Although the UN is yet to play an effective role in the current international situation, stepped up efforts by it to speed up democratic development everywhere could yield some dividends. Empowerment of people is the goal to be basically achieved.
Interestingly, the Trump administration could be seen as being in league with the Putin regime in Russia at present. This is on account of the glaringly Right wing direction that the US is taking under Trump. In fact, the global balance of political forces has taken an ironic shift with the hitherto number one democracy collaborating with the Putin regime in the latter’s foreign policy pursuits that possess the potential of plunging Europe into another regional war.
President Trump promised to bring peace to the Ukraine within a day of returning to power but he currently is at risk of cutting a sorry figure on the world stage because Putin is far from collaborating with his plans regarding Ukraine. Putin is promising the US nothing and Ukraine is unlikely to step down from the position it has always held that its sovereignty, which has been harmed by the Putin regime, is not negotiable.
In fact, the China-Russia alliance could witness a firming-up in the days ahead. Speculation is intense that the US is contemplating a military strike on Iran, but it would face strong opposition from China and Russia in the event of such an adventurist course of action. This is on account of the possibility of China and Russia continuing to be firm in their position that Western designs in the Gulf region should be defeated. On the other hand, Iran could be expected to hit back strongly in a military confrontation with the US.
Considering that organizations such as the EU could be expected to be at cross-purposes with the US on the Ukraine and connected questions, the current world situation could not be seen as a replication of the conventional East-West polarity. The East, that is mainly China and Russia, is remaining united but not so the West. The latter has broadly fragmented into a democratic states versus authoritarian states bipolarity which could render the international situation increasingly unstable and volatile.
Features
Chikungunya Fever in Children

Chikungunya fever, a viral disease transmitted by mosquitoes, poses a significant health concern, particularly for children. It has been around in Sri Lanka sporadically, but there are reports of an increasing occurrence of it in more recent times. While often associated with debilitating joint pain in adults, its manifestations in children can present unique challenges. Understanding the nuances of this disease is crucial for effective management and prevention.
Chikungunya fever is caused by the chikungunya virus (CHIKV), an alphavirus transmitted to humans through the bites of infected Aedes aegypti and Aedes albopictus mosquitoes. These are the same mosquitoes that transmit dengue and Zika viruses, highlighting the overlapping risks in many areas of the world. It is entirely possible for chikungunya and dengue to co-circulate in the same area, leading to co-infections in individuals.
When a mosquito bites a person infected with CHIKV, it ingests the virus. After a period of growth and multiplication of the virus within the mosquito, the virus can be transmitted to another person through subsequent bites. Therefore, the mosquito acts as a vector or an intermediate transmitting agent that spreads the disease, but not as a reservoir of the disease. The spread of chikungunya is influenced by environmental factors that support mosquito breeding, such as stagnant water and warm climates. Urbanization and poor sanitation can exacerbate the problem by creating breeding grounds for these mosquitoes.
The clinical presentation of chikungunya in children can vary, ranging from mild to severe. While some infected children may even be asymptomatic and be normal for all intents and purposes, others can experience a range of symptoms, including a sudden onset of high fever, a common initial symptom. Pain in the joints of the body, while being a hallmark of chikungunya in adults, may be less pronounced in children. However, they can still experience significant discomfort and this must be kept in mind during processes of diagnosis and treatment. It is also important to remember that joint pains can present in various forms, as well as in different locations of the body. There is no characteristic pattern or sites of involvement of joints. Muscle aches and pains can accompany the fever and joint pain as well. A headache, too, could occur at any stage of the disease. Other symptoms may include nausea, vomiting, and fatigue as well.
A reddish elevated rash, referred to in medical jargon as a maculopapular rash, is frequently observed in children, sometimes more so than in adults. While chikungunya is known to cause such a rash, there is a specific characteristic related to nasal discoloration that is worth noting. It is called the “Chik sign” or “Brownie nose” and refers to an increased darkening of the skin, particularly on the nose. This discolouration just appears and is not associated with pain or itching. It can occur during or after the fever, and it can be a helpful clinical sign, especially in areas with limited diagnostic resources. While a generalised rash is a common symptom of chikungunya, a distinctive darkening of the skin on the nose is a particular characteristic that has been observed.
In some rare instances, particularly in infants and very young children, chikungunya can lead to neurological complications, such as involvement of the brain, known as encephalitis. This is associated with a change in the level of alertness, drowsiness, convulsions and weakness of limbs. Equally rarely, some studies indicate that children can experience bleeding tendencies and haemorrhagic manifestations more often than adults.
Diagnosis is typically made through evaluating the patient’s symptoms and medical history, as well as by special blood tests that can detect the presence of CHIKV antibodies (IgM and IgG) or the virus itself through PCR testing.
There is no specific antiviral treatment for chikungunya. Treatment focuses on relieving symptoms and allowing the body to recover on its own. Adequate rest is essential for recovery, and maintaining hydration is crucial, especially in children with fever. Paracetamol in the correct dosage can be used to reduce fever and pain. It is important to avoid aspirin, as it can increase the risk of a further complication known as Reye’s syndrome in children. In severe cases, hospitalisation and supportive care may be necessary.
While most children recover from chikungunya without any major issues, some may experience long-term sequelae. Joint pain can persist for months or even years in some individuals, impacting their quality of life. In rare cases, chikungunya can lead to chronic arthritis. Children that have suffered from neurological complications can have long term effects.
The ultimate outcome or prognosis for chikungunya in children is generally favourable. Most children recover fully within a few days or a couple of weeks. However, the duration and severity of symptoms can vary quite significantly.
Prevention is key to controlling the spread of chikungunya. Mosquito control is of paramount importance. These include eliminating stagnant water sources where mosquitoes breed, using mosquito repellents, wearing long-sleeved clothing and pants, using mosquito nets, especially for young children and installing protective screens on windows and doors. While a chikungunya vaccine is available, its current use is mainly for adults, especially those traveling to at risk areas. More research is being conducted for child vaccinations.
Chikungunya outbreaks can strain healthcare systems and have significant economic consequences. Public health initiatives aimed at mosquito control and disease surveillance are crucial for preventing and managing outbreaks.
Key considerations for children are that some of them, especially infants and young children, are more vulnerable to severe chikungunya complications and early diagnosis and supportive care are essential for minimising the risk of long-term sequelae. Preventing mosquito bites is the most effective way to protect children from chikungunya. By understanding the causation, clinical features, treatment, and prevention of chikungunya, parents, caregivers, and healthcare professionals can work together to protect children from this illness that could sometimes be quite debilitating.
Dr B. J. C. Perera
MBBS(Cey), DCH(Cey), DCH(Eng), MD(Paed), MRCP(UK), FRCP(Edin), FRCP(Lond), FRCPCH(UK), FSLCPaed, FCCP, Hony. FRCPCH(UK), Hony. FCGP(SL)
Specialist Consultant Paediatrician and Honorary Senior Fellow, Postgraduate Institute of Medicine, University of Colombo, Sri Lanka.
Joint Editor, Sri Lanka Journal of Child Health and Section Editor, Ceylon Medical Journal
Founder President, Sri Lanka College of Paediatricians – 1996-97)
Features
The Great and Little Traditions and Sri Lankan Historiography

Power, Culture, and Historical Memory:
(Continued from yesterday)
Newton Gunasinghe, a pioneering Sri Lankan sociologist and Marxist scholar, made significant contributions to the study of culture and class in Sri Lanka by incorporating the concepts of great and little traditions within an innovative Marxist framework. His theoretical synthesis offered historians a fresh perspective for evaluating the diversity of past narratives.
At the same time, Michel Foucault’s philosophical intervention significantly influenced the study of historical knowledge. In particular, two of his key concepts have had a profound impact on the discipline of history:
1. The relationship between knowledge and power – Knowledge is not merely an objective truth but a manifestation of the power structures of its time.
2. The necessity of considering the ‘other’ in any conceptual construction – Every idea or framework takes shape in relation to its opposite, highlighting the duality inherent in all intellectual constructs.
These concepts challenged historians to rethink their approaches, prompting them to explore the dynamic interplay between knowledge, power, and culture. The existence of Little Tradition prompted historians to pay attention to ‘other’ histories.
The resurgence of ethnic identities and conflicts has brought renewed attention to the dichotomy of culture, steering the discourse in a new direction. The ethnic resurgence raises three key issues. First, the way non-dominant cultures interpret the past often differs from the narratives produced by dominant cultures, prompting the question: What is historical truth? Second, it underscores the importance of studying the histories of cultural identities through their own perspectives. Finally, and most importantly, it invites reflection on the relationship between ‘Little Traditions’ and the ‘Great Tradition’—how do these ‘other’ histories connect to broader historical narratives?
When the heuristic construct of the cultural dichotomy is applied to historical inquiry, its analytical scope expands far beyond the boundaries of social anthropology. In turn, it broadens the horizons of historical research, producing three main effects:
1. It introduces a new dimension to historical inquiry by bringing marginalised histories to the forefront. In doing so, it directs the attention of professional historians to areas that have traditionally remained outside their scope.
2. It encourages historians to seek new categories of historical sources and adopt more innovative approaches to classifying historical evidence.
3. It compels historians to examine the margins in order to gain a deeper understanding of the center.
The rise of a new theoretical school known as Subaltern Studies in the 1980s provided a significant impetus to the study of history from the perspective of marginalised and oppressed groups—those who have traditionally been excluded from dominant historical narratives and are not linked to power and authority. This movement sought to challenge the Eurocentric and elitist frameworks that had long shaped the study of history, particularly in the context of colonial and postcolonial societies. The writings of historians such as Ranajit Guha and Eric Stokes played a pioneering role in opening up this intellectual path. Guha, in particular, critiqued the way history had been written from the perspective of elites—whether colonial rulers or indigenous upper classes—arguing that such narratives ignored the agency and voices of subaltern groups, such as peasants, laborers, and tribal communities.
Building upon this foundation, several postcolonial scholars further developed the critical examination of power, knowledge, and representation. In her seminal essay Can the Subaltern Speak?, Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak questioned whether marginalized voices—especially those of subaltern women—could truly be represented within dominant intellectual and cultural frameworks, or whether they were inevitably silenced by hegemonic. Another major theorist in this field, Homi Bhabha, also focused on the relationship between knowledge and social power relations. His analysis of identity formation under colonialism revealed the complexities of power dynamics and how they persist in postcolonial societies.
Together, these scholars significantly reshaped historical and cultural studies by emphasising the voices and experiences of those previously ignored in dominant narratives. Their work continues to influence contemporary debates on history, identity, and the politics of knowledge production.
The Sri Lankan historiography from very beginning consists of two distinct yet interrelated traditions: the Great Tradition and the Little Traditions. These traditions reflect different perspectives, sources, and modes of historical transmission that have influenced the way Sri Lanka’s past has been recorded and understood. The Great Tradition refers to the formal, written historiography primarily associated with elite, religious, and state-sponsored chronicles. The origins of the Great Tradition of historiography directly linked to the introduction of Buddhism to the island by a mission sent by Emperor Asoka of the Maurya dynasty of India in the third century B.C. The most significant sources in this tradition include the Mahāvaṃsa, Dīpavaṃsa, Cūḷavaṃsa, and other Buddhist chronicles that were written in Pali and Sanskrit. These works, often compiled by Buddhist monks, emphasise the island’s connection to Buddhism, the role of kingship, and the concept of Sri Lanka as a sacred land linked to the Buddha’s teachings. The Great Tradition was influenced by royal patronage and aimed to legitimise rulers by presenting them as protectors of Buddhism and the Sinhala people.
In contrast, the Little Tradition represents oral histories, folk narratives, and local accounts that were passed down through generations in vernacular languages such as Sinhala and Tamil. These traditions include village folklore, ballads, temple stories, and regional histories that were not necessarily written down but played a crucial role in shaping collective memory. While the Great Tradition often portrays a centralised, Sinhala-Buddhist perspective, the Little Tradition captures the diverse experiences of various communities, including Tamils, Muslims.
What about the history of those who are either unrepresented or only marginally represented in the Great Tradition? They, too, have their own interpretations of the past, independent of dominant narratives. Migration from the four corners of the world did not cease after the 3rd century BC—so what about the cultural traditions that emerged from these movements? Can we reduce these collective memories solely to the Sokari Nadagams?
The Great Traditions often celebrate the history of the ruling or majority ethnic group. However, Little Traditions play a crucial role in preserving the historical memory and distinct identities of marginalised communities, such as the Vedda and Rodiya peoples. Beyond caste history, Little Traditions also reflect the provincial histories and historical memories of peripheral communities. Examples include the Wanni Rajawaliya and the Kurunegala Visthraya. The historical narratives presented in these sources do not always align with those of the Great Tradition.
The growth of caste histories is a key example of Little Historical Traditions. Jana Wansaya remains an important source in this context. After the 12th century, many non-Goigama castes in Sri Lanka preserved their own oral historical traditions, which were later documented in written form. These caste-based histories are significant because they provide a localised, community-centered perspective on historical developments. Unlike the dominant narratives found in the Great Tradition, they capture the social, economic, and cultural transformations experienced by different caste groups. For instance, the Karava, Salagama, and Durava castes have distinct historical narratives that have been passed down through generations.
Ananda S. Kulasuriya traced this historical tradition back to the formal establishment of Buddhism, noting that it continued even after the decline of the Polonnaruwa Kingdom. He identified these records as “minor chronicles” and classified them into three categories: histories of the Sangha and Sasana, religious writings of historical interest, and secular historical works. According to him, the first category includes the Pujavaliya, the Katikavatas, the Nikaya Sangrahaya, and the Sangha Sarana. The second category comprises the Thupavamsa, Bodhi Vamsa, Anagatha Vamsa, Dalada Sirita, and Dhatu Vamsa, along with the two Sinhalese versions of the Pali Hatthavanagalla Vihara Vamsa, namely the Ehu Attanagalu Vamsa and the Saddharma Ratnakaraya. The third category consists of works that focus more on secular events than religious developments, primarily the Rajavaliya. Additionally, this category includes the Raja Ratnakaraya and several minor works such as the Sulu Rajavaliya, Vanni Rajavaliya, Alakesvara Yuddhaya, Sri Lanka Kadaim Pota, Kurunegala Vistaraya, Buddharajavaliya, Bamba Uppattiya, Sulu Pujavaliya, Matale Kadaim Pota, Kula Nitiya, and Janavamsaya (Kulasuriya, 1978:5). Except for a few mentioned in the third category, all other works are products of the Great Historical tradition.
Over the last few decades, Gananath Obeyesekera has traversed the four corners of Sri Lanka, recovering works of the Little Historical Traditions and making them accessible for historical inquiry, offering a new lens through which to reread Sri Lankan history. Obeyesekera’s efforts to recover the Little Historical Traditions remind us that history is never monolithic; rather, it is a contested space where power, culture, and memory continuously shape our understanding of the past. By bringing the Little Historical Traditions into the fold of Sri Lankan historiography, Obeyesekera challenges us to move beyond dominant narratives and embrace a more pluralistic understanding of the past. The recovery of these traditions is not just an act of historical inquiry but a reminder that power shapes what we remember—and what we forget. Sri Lankan history, like all histories, is a dialogue between great and little traditions and it is to engage both of them. His latest work, The Doomed King: A Requiem for Sri Vikrama Rajasinghe, is a true testament to his re-reading of Sri Lankan history.
BY GAMINI KEERAWELLA
-
Sports5 days ago
Sri Lanka’s eternal search for the elusive all-rounder
-
News4 days ago
Bid to include genocide allegation against Sri Lanka in Canada’s school curriculum thwarted
-
News6 days ago
Gnanasara Thera urged to reveal masterminds behind Easter Sunday terror attacks
-
Sports22 hours ago
To play or not to play is Richmond’s decision
-
Business7 days ago
AIA Higher Education Scholarships Programme celebrating 30-year journey
-
News5 days ago
ComBank crowned Global Finance Best SME Bank in Sri Lanka for 3rd successive year
-
Features5 days ago
Sanctions by The Unpunished
-
Features5 days ago
More parliamentary giants I was privileged to know