News

Sacking of SLMC president, council members sparks a furore

Published

5 years ago

2020/12/6

Sahan Weerasooriya

Health Minister’s move ‘completely flawed’

bY SURESH PERERA

The sacking of the president and four members nominated to the Sri Lanka Medical Council (SLMC) by the previous government has triggered an uproar, with medical professionals slamming Health Minister Pavithra Wanniarachchi’s move as “completely flawed” and “an attempt to undermine the autonomy and independence of the apex regulatory body”.

Expressing consternation over his sudden dismissal as the president of the statutory body, eminent Specialist Consultant Paediatrician, Prof. Harendra de Silva, said he was contemplating legal action against his removal by the Minister.

“I will be challenging my dismissal in the Court of Appeal”, he said.

In terms of the Medical Ordinance, there is no provision to remove the president or any of the four council members nominated by the serving Health Minister of the time, he asserted.

“Before I was informed of my termination, some Health Ministry officials urged me to resign, but I declined to do so”, Dr. de Silva told The Sunday Island.

Pressure was also exerted on the other four members of the council to step down, he noted. “However, we collectively stood our ground and refused to throw in the towel”.

“It was after I dismissed the overtures calling for my resignation that a letter indicating that I have been removed as SLMC president was sent across”, he further said.

Prof. Narada Warnasuriya and Dr. Pushpika Ubesiri, two of the other council members who were dismissed, said that they will also be seeking legal redress over their removal in “contravention of the Medical Ordinance”.

Apart from them, the other two ‘Minister’s nominees’, as they are called, who were given the marching orders were Dr. Upul Gunasekara and Dr. Sunil Ratnapriya. However, there was still no word on the four new nominees of the Minister.

Under the Medical Ordinance, the serving Health Minister can name the president and four nominees to the 25-member council. Apart from the Minister’s nominees, the other members are drawn on the basis of one each (generally the Dean) from Faculties of Medicine, and other diverse medical spheres. The Director-General of Health Services is an ex-officio member.

The Government Medical Officers’ Association (GMOA) has four elected representatives in the council – Dr. Anuruddha Padeniya, Dr. Naveen de Zoysa, Dr. Nalinda Herath and Dr. Harris Pathirage. However, Dr. Pathirage has since resigned from the council citing personal reasons, GMOA Assistant Secretary, Dr. Chandana Dharmaratne said.

The SLMC election was on the cards but had to be put off indefinitely due to the worsening Covid-19 pandemic.

Though the Health Minister claimed that the dismissal of the SLMC president and the four nominated council members was based on the findings of the five-member committee appointed by her, that’s not the factual position, said Dr. L. A. Ranasinghe, president of the Association of Medical Specialists (AMS).

“Contrary to the Minister’s assertion in her letter to the SLMC president, personal communications we had with some of the committee members (Dr. Hemantha Perera and Dr. Anula Wijesundara) indicated that they had not singled out any member or the president in their report as responsible person/s for the deficiencies of the SLMC. Neither did they recommended the removal of anyone from the council”, he noted.

According to the committee members, the whole council is responsible for their decisions and actions and not individual members (similar to collective responsibility of Cabinet decisions), he explained.

As far as we know, there is no legal provision for the Minister to remove the SLMC president or any member according to his/her wishes without following the regulations stipulated in the Medical Ordinance, Dr. Ranasinghe remarked.

The process the Health Minister followed is completely flawed and purely based on the agenda of a trade union. This has created a very bad precedent that could be “the first step towards undermining the autonomy and independence of the SLMC”, which is tasked with the regulation of Sri Lanka’s medical profession, the AMS chief further said.

The SLMC is facing a crisis never witnessed in its recent history, he continued, while urging the Health Minister to reverse her decision immediately to avoid unnecessary turbulence in the field of medicine in this hour of dire need.

The five-member committee Health Minister Pavithra Wanniarachchi appointed in September 2020 to “look into the activities of the SLMC” comprised Specialist Prof. Hemantha Perera, former Dean of the Ragama Medical Faculty, Specialist Prof. Prashantha Wijesinghe, Specialist Dr. Anula Wijesundera, Specialist Dr. Maithri Chandraratne and Specialist Dr. Dharshana Sirisena.

The Minister said at the time that the SLMC is an independent body established by a charter and its primary function is to maintain a quality medical service by protecting the rights of patients. The institution protects the quality of medical education and regulates physicians.

Under Section 15 of the Medical Ordinance, the president/council member is deemed to have vacated his post in the event of death, resignation, declared insolvent or bankrupt by a competent court, found guilty by a court of law, cancellation of medical registration, non-attendance of three consecutive board meetings or being away from the country for a period of one year or more, medical officials said.

“Whatever the reasons adduced, the crux of the matter here is that the present regime was not comfortable with a president and council that was appointed by former Health Minister, Dr. Rajitha Senaratne under the UNP administration”, they claimed.

“The reality of the situation was that the incumbent Health Minister buckled under pressure from the GMOA to sack the SLMC president and the four nominated members”,

With the appointment of Prof. Vajira H. W. Dissanayake, the Dean of Colombo Medical Faculty, as the new SLMC president, the GMOA welcomed what it called the “restoration of the independence and dignity” of the statutory body.

GMOA Secretary, Dr. Senal Fernando charged that that former Health Minister Rajitha Senaratne interfered with the functions of the SLMC by appointing his henchmen to the council, which resulted in more than one thousand individuals, who failed all three subjects at the Advanced Level examination, being registered as doctors.

He further accused the SLMC of undermining medical education by striking out three recognized Russian universities from the list of foreign universities recognized by Sri Lanka. These higher seats of learning included the world-renowned Patrice Lumumba University, which admit Sri Lankan students for medical degrees.

Expressing dismay over the developments, the Government Medical Officers’ Forum (GMOF) said that never in Sri Lanka’s history has a Health Minister of a government elected to power interfered with the SLMC in this manner by dismissing the nominees of the previous Minister.

Over the years, Nimal Siripala de Silva, Maithripala Sirisena and Rajitha Senaratne, as Health Ministers, respected the independence of the SLMC and the appointments made to it by their predecessors, says GMOF president, Dr. Rukshan Bellana.

They are trying to politicize the SLMC, he charged. “The incumbent Health Minister is giving into the dictates of the GMOA and lost her sense of direction as a result”.

President of the Public Service United Nurses Union, Ven. Muruththettuwe Ananda Thera, said the Health Minister has no right to meddle with the SLMC, which is an independent regulatory body.

Members to the SLMC are nominated to the SLMC for a five-year term by an incumbent Health Minister and dismissing them before they complete their tenure violates the Medical Ordinance, the prelate noted.

He said that health services in the country have plunged to a new low so much so it is more apt to describe the Health Ministry as “Unhealthy Ministry”.

The mess in the health sector could have been prevented if there was at least a secretary with a backbone in charge of the ministry, he asserted.

The Sri Lanka Medical Council (SLMC) was established in 1998 as a statutory body. It replaced the former Ceylon Medical Council formed in 1924.

All News Advertisement

News

INS Airavat makes port call in Colombo

Published

6 hours ago

2026/06/4

Priyan

The Indian Naval Ship (INS) Airavat arrived at the Port of Colombo for Operational Turnaround on 01 Jun 26. The visiting ship was welcomed by the Sri Lanka Navy (SLN) in compliance with time-noured naval traditions.

INS Airavat is a Landing Ship Tank, commanded by Commander IP Patil.

During their stay in the island, the ship’s crew is scheduled to take part in a series of professionally enriching events and camaraderie-building programmes organised by the Sri Lanka Navy.

The Indian naval personnel will also tour several historic and prominent tourist attractions across the country before the ship concludes her deployment.

News

BASL asks govt. to abandon plan to raise retirement ages of CA and SC judges

Published

10 hours ago

2026/06/4

Sahan Weerasooriya

… tells Prez such arbitrary change neither necessary nor desirable

The Bar Association of Sri Lanka (BASL) has urged President Anura Kumara Dissanayake to abandon the controversial plan to increase the retirement age of the judiciary, including the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court.

In a statement issued by the BASL President Rajeev Amarasuriya and its Secretary Nalin de Silva, the BASL pointed out that the proposed increase of the retirement age of the judiciary would undermine the independence, integrity, dignity, and public confidence in the Judiciary, which is essential for the maintenance of the Rule of Law and democratic governance in Sri Lanka.

The text of the BASL statement: “The Bar Association of Sri Lanka (hereinafter referred to as “BASL”) notes with grave concern reports in the public domain that the Government is considering the introduction of an amendment to the Constitution to increase the age of retirement of Judges of the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court.

It is the considered view of the BASL that the age of retirement of the judges of the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court which has stood at 63 years and 65 years respectively from the promulgation of the 1978 Constitution, should not be changed arbitrarily and that such a change is neither necessary nor desirable.

To do so will result in the loss of public confidence in the integrity of the legal system and of the Government’s commitment to preserve and protect the rule of law and the independence of the judiciary. Members of the public are likely to question the motives of the Government in bringing in a Constitutional amendment solely for this purpose.

Your Excellency is no doubt aware that the cadre of the Judges of the Court of Appeal was increased from 12 to 20 Judges (including the President of the Court of Appeal) and that of the Supreme Court from 11 to 17 Judges (including the Chief Justice) by the 20th Amendment to the constitution certified on 29th of October 2020. With such enhancement, workwise, there cannot be a real requirement to extend the retirement ages of these judges.

Your Excellency is aware that altering the retirement age of judges of the apex courts would have to be done through a Constitutional amendment. For many years Sri Lanka’s Constitution has been subject to ad hoc amendments, sometimes in order to cater to the political needs of the government in power and often contrary to the interests of the rule of law, the independence of the judiciary and the judiciary.

Extending the retirement age of the sitting Judges of these Courts at this point of time is likely to be viewed by the public as a blatant attempt to interfere with the judiciary. We believe that to go ahead with such an ad hoc move will also be an affront to the Honourable Judges of those courts.

If the Government goes ahead with such a move it will set a dangerous precedent for future Governments too to introduce ad hoc amendments to the Constitution in respect of the functions of the Judiciary.

The independence of the Judiciary and the public confidence reposed in it, are indispensable pillars of the Rule of Law and the democratic framework of our Republic. In that regard, it is of paramount importance that the Judiciary must not only remain independent in fact, but must also be seen by the public to be wholly independent, impartial, and free from even the slightest perception of influence, favour, accommodation, or impropriety.

The Bar Association of Sri Lanka is therefore constrained, in the discharge of its duty to uphold and safeguard the Rule of Law and the independence of the Judiciary, to respectfully express its serious concern regarding any such proposed amendment, which is neither in the interests of the Judiciary and nor of the people.

In the circumstances, the BASL respectfully urges Your Excellency not to proceed with any proposed constitutional amendment seeking to increase the retirement age of the members of the Judiciary including Judges of the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court.

We remain confident that Your Excellency will give due consideration to the importance of preserving and protecting the independence, integrity, dignity, and public confidence in the Judiciary, which is essential to the maintenance of the Rule of Law and democratic governance in Sri Lanka.”

Govt. declines to respond

A member of the Cabinet yesterday declined to comment on the BASL’s letter to President Anura Kumara Dissanayake. The Minister said that he wouldn’t comment for the time being.

News

New US tariffs proposed on 60 countries, including Sri Lanka

Published

10 hours ago

2026/06/4

Sahan Weerasooriya

12.5% additional duties on goods imported from Colombo

The US has proposed additional duties of 10% or 12.5% on imports from 60 economies, including Sri Lanka, over their alleged failure to curb trade in ‌goods made with forced labour.

The proposal made by US Trade Representative’s (USTR) office in terms of Section 301 unfair trade practices investigation to be released, news agencies reported, pointing out that the Trump administration was seeking to rebuild its emergency tariffs, which were struck down by a US Supreme Court decision in February.

The USTR said it determined that it would impose 10% duties related to ⁠the forced labour investigation on imports from Canada, Ecuador, the European Union, Indonesia, Mexico, Pakistan, Argentina, Bangladesh, Cambodia, El Salvador, Guatemala, Indonesia, Malaysia, Taiwan and Britain.

The trade agency said it would impose additional duties of 12.5% on the remaining 45 countries that were investigated.

“The failure of our most important trading partners to address the importation of goods made with forced labour is unacceptable,” US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer said in a statement. “This creates a dynamic where American workers are forced to compete globally on an unlevel playing field.”

According to the trade agency, the USTR found that Sri Lanka has failed to impose and effectively enforce a forced labour import prohibition.

The USTR noted that the results of its investigation indicate that the acts, policies and practices of Sri Lanka related to the failure to impose and effectively enforce a forced labour import prohibition are unreasonable and burden or restrict US commerce.

Accordingly, it has proposed to impose 12.5% additional duties on goods imported from Sri Lanka.

The USTR said it also was proposing a textile mechanism that would allow for a certain volume of apparel and textile imports ‌to ⁠enter the US at a reduced tariff rate, though the duties and volumes were not disclosed.

The announcement comes ahead of the July 24 expiration of a 10% temporary tariff imposed by the Trump administration on February 20, the day the Supreme Court struck down US President Donald Trump’s tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act.

On Monday, the USTR proposed ⁠a 25% duty on many Brazilian goods as a result of a Section 301 investigation into the country’s digital trade practices and preferential tariffs. The trade agency is also expected to soon unveil the findings of another major Section 301 probe into ⁠the buildup of excess industrial capacity in 16 trading partners, including China.

In the forced labour findings, the USTR said it would exempt from the tariffs a number of products, including energy, rare earths and certain ⁠other metals, beef, coffee, certain fruits and vegetables, pharmaceuticals, organic chemicals and aircraft parts.

The USTR said it would accept public comments on the proposed tariffs and other remedies through July 6, with a public hearing scheduled for July 7.