Features

Some giants of the Ceylon Bar I encountered on my return

Published

3 years ago

2023/02/26

Excerpted from the Memoirs of a Cabinet Secretary by BP Peiris

After a couple of days at home, father took me to his classmate and best man at his wedding, B. F. de Silva for advice. B. F. was one of the straightest of men, both at the Bar and in public affairs. He was a man of few words and never wasted the time of the court. He was, at this time, a senior member of the Bar, but got few retainers because each year he raised his fee by one guinea in order that the juniors might get some work.

Would that other seniors followed that example instead of concentrating on their welfare. B. F. was glad to see my father, and welcomed me. His advice to me was crisp and concise, and typical of the man. He said “All I can tell you is this. You are a Barrister-at-law but you don’t know our law. Therefore read our Law Reports from the first to the current volume. Secondly, an advocate’s fee is one guinea. Don’t be ashamed to accept that fee, but don’t appear for two or three rupees and a bundle of cigars as some others seem to be doing. Thirdly, never sign a proctor’s receipt for more than the actual fee paid to you.” And that was all. How correct this advice was will be seen later.

In my practice I was clean and had no contact with the touts who used to hang about the banyan trees that adorn the court premises. I was working in the Chambers of N. K. Choksy, another straight man at the Bar and a perfect gentleman. He was meticulous in his work and I learned a great deal from him, particularly in giving attention to the smaller matters of detail which appeared to weigh heavily with him. He used to spend many hours settling mortgage bonds for which he was well paid. He told me that great care had to be used in drafting pleadings as the entire responsibility would be on you when the matter came to court, and then it would be too late to admit your error.

At the beginning, there was very little work for a Junior. My father’s friend, Francis de Zoysa, K. C., told me that if, at the end of my first year, I averaged four guineas a month, I should consider myself very lucky and as getting on in the profession. According to the fee book which I kept, the fees I earned during my few years in practice did not hit the target, although they came pretty near, which I thought was good according to Francis de Zoysa’s estimate.

My proctor relatives in the outstations and the proctors in my home town, Panadura, used to send me work whenever they could, work in the original courts as well as in appeal, and I took great pains over the study of my briefs.

I received my first brief in the Panadura Magistrate’s court within seven days of my taking my oaths as an advocate and was junior to H. A. P. Sandrasagara, K. C. This eminent silk, well built and very dark in complexion, spoke such good English that if one heard him behind a screen one would have thought it was an Englishman speaking. When my father heard that Sandara, as everyone called him, was to lead me as his junior in my first case, he invited the silk to lunch on the day of the case. The invitation was accepted as the two old gentlemen were friends and as there was no rest house in the town.

He arrived and, while driving from my father’s house to the court, I asked him what he thought about the case. “Which case?” he asked. I said “Today’s case” and he inquired whether I had read the brief. I replied that this was my first case and that I knew my brief inside out. “Young man,” he said seriously, “Take the advice of an old hand. Never study your brief. Always go into court with an open mind.” He was experienced enough to go into court with an open mind, and he won his case too.

There was R. L. Pereira, K. C., a classmate of my father, a dominant personality, who studied his brief so thoroughly that he carried all the facts in his head. He appeared in all the biggest trials, rape, arson, murder, we have had. On one occasion, in a criminal trial, he was opposed to his son R. G. C. who died young. At one stage there was a heated argument between counsel when R. L. said “My learned friend is too old, he has forgotten his law.” After the case, both counsel walked out of court, the incident forgotten, and the son offering the father a cigarette out of his case. Such is the camaraderie of the Bar. Years later, I met R. L. at a party. I went up to him and asked whether he could place me. For a moment he thought and, with that marvellous memory of his, said “Yes, Edmund’s son.”

I have been junior to nearly every King’s Counsel practising at that time. Of them I had the highest regard and respect for F. A. Hayley, who carried with him all the traditions of the English Bar. Without casting any reflection on the other silks at the time, I should like to say this of Hayley. He was the only silk who ever asked me whether I had been paid a proper fee. Bar practice requires that a junior should be paid one-third to half his senior’s fee.

In my first case as Hayley’s junior, he came into the District Court of Colombo fifteen minutes before time and asked me “Have you been feed?” I told him that I had been given a fee and he asked “How much?” I said “One”. He was angry, said he was not appearing in the case until I had been paid my proper fee, and said “Let’s clear out of court”. He then called the proctor and demanded that I be paid my fee. I was then given a further nine guineas, which Hayley asked me to count, after which he marked his appearance in court.

During the case, Hayley asked me only one question “How many square yards are there in an acre?” The case had something to do with a rubber estate with trees planted 15 feet by 15 instead of the normal 18 feet by 18; hence the square yardage. I had to rush to the Law Library and consult Ferguson’s Directory to give Hayley the answer. He once obliged the court by reading a fidei commissum deed which was in Sinhala and which counsel on the other side, a Sinhalese, was unable to read.

H. V. Perera, Q. C. once came to court prepared in a case which, if it was taken up, would have lasted a few days. For some reason, this case was allowed to stand down and another of his cases called. He rose. There was not a mark on his brief. He had not read it. The judges were Garvin and Akbar. He turned to the plaint and summarized it to the Bench. He next read the defendant’s answer, and now knew what the dispute was about.

He then read the issues and had got to the crux of the matter when one of the judges asked him what the trial judge had held on issue four. Quickly, he turned to the judgment and told their Lordships that it would be best if he read the entire judgment to them. Having read it, he put his brief aside, argued a matter of law without reading any of the evidence, and won his case.

A. R. H. Canakeratne had a wonderful memory. He was a simple and a studious man who came daily to the Law Library but did not appear in the courts. He had a large consulting practice. I once had to go to his residence for a consultation and expected to see an extensive library. Instead, I found a small bookcase with a dozen odd volumes of the New Law Reports. The rest of the law he carried in his head.

Sometimes, when a judge put a question to counsel arguing an appeal, Canaks would tug at counsel’s gown and whisper 13 N. L. R. page 43, and that settled the matter. How he carried all this in his head surprised everyone who came in touch with him. In a case of mine, I had looked up all the law to discover a point in my favour but found none. In the end, I went to Canaks and asked him whether he could assist me.

He was always willing to help a junior. When I mentioned my difficulty, he scratched his head for some time, thinking, and then said “You are right. There is no reported case on the point, but if you look at 23 N. L. R. p. 345, you might find three lines in the judgment of the Privy Council which might help you.” And there it was, exactly as he had said.

He had some trouble with his voice, and that was the reason he refused to argue cases in court. If his friends persuaded him to appear, he was brilliant in his argument. After a few appearances in court, he took silk and was shortly afterwards elevated to the Bench.

I remember W. H. Perera, brother of E. W., who had an extensive practice in the District Court of Colombo in land and partition cases. It was W. H. who, in tracing the pedigree in a partition case where the litigants were poor persons, referred to two sections of the descendants of the original owner who had married twice, as being of the first and the second mat respectively. He was a classical scholar and a teetotaller.

There was E. G. P. Jayatilleke, K. C., a leading silk in my time and a charming gentleman. He had a fund of humour and used to entertain us, juniors, with his jokes. In passing, I should like to pay my tribute to F. H. B. Koch, M. T. de S. Amarasekera, N. Nadarajah, C. Nagalingam and his brother Thiagalingam, N. E. Weerasooria, Lalitha Rajapakse, and Gratiaen, whose junior I have been at one time or another. There were G. G. Ponnambalam and Dr Colvin R. de Silva, neither of whom used a small word if a bigger one was available. Colvin never spoke of a page in a book; it was “pagination”, and with him the evidence of a witness was always “testification”. These two friends were small editions of Dr Samuel Johnson.

For a short time with us was Miss Mehta, a Parsee Barrister. When I was working in Choksy’s Chambers one day, he received a letter from Miss Mehta who was then in London, inquiring whether he would have her in his Chambers on her return to Ceylon. Choksy did not like the proposal at all. I told him that he ought to help the only member of his community at the Bar and he agreed on one condition, that I would always be in his Chambers when Miss Mehta was there.

In the Law Library, Choksy sat at the head of our table. He appeared to have a prescriptive right to the seat and no one dared to sit in his seat if he was present. There was Hayley. Others at this table were D.S. Jayawickrama, D. W. Fernando, N. M., son of B. F. de Silva, J. L. M. and H. N. G. Fernando and the lone woman Miss Mehta. At other tables sat my friends Kariapper, Manikkavasagar, Sivagnanasundaram, Panditha Gunawardena, O. L. de Kretser and D. J. R. Gunawardena, later all judges.

All News Advertisement

Features

A long-running identity conflict flares into full-blown war

Published

15 hours ago

2026/03/5

Sahan Weerasooriya

Ayatollah Ali Khamenei / President Donald Trump

It was Iran’s first spiritual head of state, the late Ayatollah Khomeini, who singled out and castigated the US as the ‘Great Satan’ in the revolutionary turmoil of the late seventies of the last century that ushered in the Islamic Republic of Iran. The core issue driving the long-running confrontation between Islamic Iran and the West has been religious identity and the seasoned observer cannot be faulted for seeing the explosive emergence of the current war in the Middle East as having the elements of a religious conflict.

The current crisis in the Middle East which was triggered off by the recent killing of Iranian spiritual head of state Ayatollah Ali Khamenei in a combined US-Israel military strike is multi-dimensional and highly complex in nature but when the history of relations between Islamic Iran and the West, read the US, is focused on the religious substratum in the conflict cannot be glossed over.

In fact it is not by accident that US President Donald Trump resorts to Biblical language when describing Iran in his denunciations of the latter. Iran, from Trump’s viewpoint, is a primordial source of ‘evil’ and if the Middle East has collapsed into a full-blown regional war today it is because of the ‘evil’ influence and doings of Iran; so runs Trump’s narrative. It is a language that stands on par with that used by the architects of the Iranian revolution in the crucial seventies decade.

In other words, it is a conflict between ‘good’ and ‘evil’ and who is ‘good’ and who is ‘evil’ in the confrontation is determined mainly by the observer’s partialities and loyalties which may not be entirely political in kind. It should not be forgotten that one of President Trump’s support bases is the Christian Right in the US and in the rest of the West and the Trump administration’s policy outlook and actions should not be divorced from the needs of this segment of supporters to be fully made sense of.

The reasons for the strong policy tie-up between Rightist administrations in the US in particular and Israel could be better comprehended when the above religious backdrop is taken into consideration. Israel is the principal actor in the ‘Old Testament’ of the Bible and is seen as ‘the Chosen People of God’ and this characterization of Israel ought to explain the partialities of the Republican Right in particular towards Israel. Among other things, this partiality accounts for the strong defence of Israel by the US.

For the purposes of clarity it needs to be mentioned here that the Bible consists of two parts, an ‘Old’ and ‘New Testament’ , and that the ‘New Testament’ or ‘Message’ embodies the teachings of Jesus Christ and the latter teachings are seen as completing and in a sense giving greater substance to the ‘Old Testament’. However, Judaism is based mainly on ‘Old Testament’ teachings and Judaism is distinct from Christianity.

To be sure, the above theological explanation does not exhaust all the reasons for the war in the Middle East but the observer will be allowing an important dimension to the war to slip past if its importance is underestimated.

It is not sufficiently realized that the Iranian Islamic Revolution of 1979 utterly changed international politics and re-wrote as it were the basic parameters that must be brought to bear in understanding it. So important is the Islamic factor in contemporary world politics that it helped define to a considerable degree the new international political order that came into existence with the collapsing of the Cold War and the disintegration of the USSR .

Since the latter developments ‘political Islam’ could be seen as a chief shaping influence of international politics. For example, it accounts considerably for the 9/11 calamity that led to the emergence of fresh polarities in world politics and ushered in political terrorism of a most destructive kind that is today disquietingly visible the world over.

It does not follow from the foregoing that Islam, correctly understood, inspires terrorism of any kind. Islam proclaims peace but some of its adherents with political aims interpret the religion in misleading, divisive ways that run contrary to the peaceful intents of the faith. This is a matter of the first importance that sincere adherents of the faith need to address.

However, there is no denying that the Islamic Revolution in Iran of 1979 has been over the past decades a great shaper of international politics and needs to be seen as such by those sections that are desirous of changing the course of the world for the better. The revolution’s importance is such that it led to US political scientist Dr. Samuel P. Huntingdon to formulate his historic thesis that a ‘Clash of Civilizations’ is upon the world currently.

If the above thesis is to be adopted in comprehending the principal trends in contemporary world politics it could be said that Islam, misleadingly interpreted by some, is pitting a good part of the Southern hemisphere against the West, which is also misleadingly seen by some, as homogeneously Christian in orientation. Whereas, the truth is otherwise. The West is not necessarily entirely synonymous with Christianity, correctly understood.

Right now, what is immediately needed in the Middle East is a ceasefire, followed up by a negotiated peace based on humanistic principles. Turning ‘Spears into Ploughshares’ is a long gestation project but the warring sides should pay considerable attention to former Iranian President Mohammad Khatami’s memorable thesis that the world needs to transition from a ‘Clash of Civilizations’ to a ‘Dialogue of Civilizations’. Hopefully, there would emerge from the main divides leaders who could courageously take up the latter challenge.

It ought to be plain to see that the current regional war in the Middle East is jeopardising the best interests of the totality of publics. Those Americans who are for peace need to not only stand up and be counted but bring pressure on the Trump administration to make peace and not continue on the present destructive course that will render the world a far more dangerous place than it is now.

In the Middle East region a durable peace could be ushered if only the just needs of all sides to the conflict are constructively considered. The Palestinians and Arabs have their needs, so does Israel. It cannot be stressed enough that unless and until the security needs of the latter are met there could be no enduring peace in the Middle East.

Features

The art and science of communicating with your little child

Published

15 hours ago

2026/03/5

Sahan Weerasooriya

The two input gateways of communication, sight and sound, are quite well developed at birth. In fact, the auditory system becomes functional around 24 weeks in the womb, and the normal newborn can hear quite well after birth. However, the newborn’s vision is a little blurry at birth, and the baby sees the world in shades of grey, while being able only to focus on things 20 to 30 cm (8–12 inches) away. Coincidentally, this is perhaps the exact distance to a mother’s face during breastfeeding. By 2-3 months, there are colour vision capabilities and the ability to track. By 5-8 months, there is depth perception, and by 12 months, there is adult clarity of vision.

By the time a child turns five, his or her brain has already reached 90% of its adult size. This astonishing physical growth is not just happening on its own; it is, to a certain extent, fuelled by experience, and the most vital experience a young child can have is communication with his or her parents.

Modern developmental neuroscience has shifted our understanding of how children learn. We used to think babies were passive sponges, slowly absorbing the world. We now know they are active characters from day one, constantly seeking interaction to build the architecture of their minds. This architecture is not built by apps, vocabulary flashcards, or educational television. It is built through simple, loving, back-and-forth interactions with anyone they come across, but mostly their parents.

The Foundation: Serve and Return (0–12 Months)

Communication with an infant from birth to one year of age begins long before they speak their first word. In the first year, the goal is to master a phenomenon called Serve and Return. This is a basic scenario picked up from the game of tennis. At the start of each game of a set in tennis, a player serves, and the opponent returns the serve. Just imagine a tennis match, where a baby “serves” by making a sound, making eye contact, reaching for a toy, or crying. The job of anyone in the vicinity, who very often are the parents of the baby, is to “return” the ball. If they babble, you babble back. If they point at a cat, you look and say, “Yes, that’s a furry cat!” This simple act does two things. The first is Brain Building, which creates and strengthens neural pathways in the language and emotional centres of the brain. The other is Emotional Security, a thing which teaches a baby that he or she has some help in the learning processes. The baby absorbs the notion that when he or she signals a need, his or her world will respond. This forms the basis of a secure attachment. Scientists have advocated that during this stage, people, especially the parents of a baby, should embrace what is called ‘parentese’. It is the use of a somewhat high-pitched, exaggerated voice. Research has shown that babies pay more attention to parentese than to regular adult speech, helping them to map the sounds of their native language more quickly.

The Language Explosion: Toddlers (1–3 Years)

When a child starts speaking words, the game changes considerably and quite profoundly. This period is defined by a rapid increase in his or her vocabulary and the beginning of grammar. It is very important to narrate everything. The people around, especially the parents, need to become kind of sports commentators for your life. While dressing them, one could say, “First we put on the red sock. After that, we put the other red sock on your left foot.” What we are doing by this is to give them the labels for the world they see.

It is also important to expand, but not truly correct, whatever the child says. If a toddler points to a car and says “Car!”, don’t just say “Yes.” Expand on it: “Yes, that is a big, fast, red car!” You are adding a new vocabulary and grammatical structure through a natural process. If the child says “Me go,” respond with, “Yes, you are going!” rather than correcting and saying “No…, you should say ‘I am going’.”

Toddlers love reading the same book, even one hundred times. While it may be tedious for those around the baby, it is important to realise that such repetition is vital for their learning. They are predicting what comes next, which is a core cognitive skill.

The Preschooler: Building Stories and Logic (3–5 Years)

By age three, the focus shifts from “what” to “why.” Preschoolers are beginning to understand complex emotions, time, and causality. This is the age at which it is best to ask questions which require thought and understanding. Such indirect open-ended questions would sound like “What was the best part of the park today?” or “How do you think that character in the story is feeling?“

A preschooler’s world is full of “big feelings” they cannot yet manage. When they are upset because they cannot have a cookie, avoid saying “Don’t cry over nothing.” Instead, name the emotion: “Don’t cry, you can have a cookie after dinner“. This teaches them emotional literacy. Parents and others around in the home could share stories about when they were little, or make up fantasy tales together. Storytelling teaches sequential logic (beginning, middle, end) and strengthens their imagination.

The Absolute Master Class: Learning Through Play

If communication is the fuel for brain development, play is the engine. For a child under five, play is not a break from learning; play is learning. It is how they explore physics (stacking blocks), mathematics (sorting shapes), social dynamics (sharing toys), and language (pretend play). We can boost their development exponentially by weaving communication into their play.

When a child is playing with blocks, dough, or puzzles, they are building fine motor skills and spatial awareness. It is also useful to use three-dimensional words: “Can you put the blue block on top of the red one?” “The puzzle piece is next to your knee.” One could also ask them to describe the texture: “Is the dough soft or hard?“

Pretend play, such as acting as a doctor, an engineer, a chef, or a superhero, is one of the most cognitively demanding things a child can do. It requires them to understand symbolic thought and to take on another person’s perspective. Join their world as a supporting character, not the director. If they are the doctor, ask, “Doctor, my teddy bear’s tummy hurts. What should I do?” This encourages them to use vocabulary relevant to the scenario and practice complex social problem-solving.

Playing with water, sand, slime, or safe food products allows children to process sensory information. This is the perfect time for descriptive vocabulary. Use contrasting words: wet/dry, hot/cold, sticky/smooth, loud/quiet.

A few special words for parents. You do not need an expensive degree or specialised toys to build your child’s brain. The most powerful tool you have is your own responsiveness. Modern science tells us that the basic recipe for a thriving child is simple: Look at them when they signal you. Respond with warmth and words. Narrate their world and Join their play.

You are not just talking to your child; you are building his or her future, even via just one conversation at a time. So, go on talking to your child and even make him or her a real-life chatterbox.

Dr B. J. C. Perera

MBBS(Cey), DCH(Cey), DCH(Eng), MD(Paediatrics), 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.

Features

Promoting our beauty and culture to the world

Published

15 hours ago

2026/03/5

Sahan Weerasooriya

Tourism is very much in the news these days and it’s certainly a good sign to see lots of foreigners checking out Sri Lanka.

With this in mind, Ruki’s Model Academy & Agency recently had a spectacular event to select Mrs. Tourism Sri Lanka in order to promote Sri Lanka in the international scene.

Nimesha Premachandra was crowned Mrs. Tourism Sri Lanka 2026.

She says she owes her success to Ruki (Rukmal Senanayake), the National Director and model trainer, and personality and advocacy trainer Tharaka Gurukanda.

Nimesha is a school teacher by profession, an actress and TV presenter by passion, and an entrepreneur by spirit.

She believes in balancing grace with purpose, and using her platform to inspire women, while promoting the beauty and culture of Sri Lanka to the world. And this is how our Chit-Chat went:

Nimesha Premachandra: Mrs. Tourism Sri Lanka 2026

01. How would you describe yourself?

I am a passionate, disciplined, and people-oriented person. I love learning, performing, and guiding others, especially young minds, through education.

02. If you could change one thing about yourself, what would it be?

I would probably try to be less self-critical and allow myself to celebrate achievements more often.

03. If you could change one thing about your family, what would it be?

Nothing major. I am grateful for my family’s love and support, which has shaped who I am today.

04. Is Mrs. Tourism Sri Lanka your very first pageant?

No. I have been part of pageants before, but Mrs. Tourism Sri Lanka is very special because it represents purpose, culture, and global representation.

05. What made you take part in this contest?

I wanted to represent Sri Lanka internationally and use this platform to promote tourism, culture, and women’s empowerment.

06. Obviously, you must be excited about participating in the grand finale, in Vietnam; any special plans for this big event?

Yes, I am extremely excited. My focus is to showcase Sri Lankan elegance, hospitality, and authenticity, while building meaningful connections with participants from around the world.

07. How do you intend promoting tourism, in Sri Lanka, during your rein?

I plan to highlight Sri Lanka’s diverse experiences in culture, heritage, wellness, nature, and local hospitality through media appearances, digital storytelling, and tourism collaborations.

08. School?

Kaluthara Balika. School life played a big role in shaping me. I actively participated in sports and performing arts, which later helped me build confidence as an actress and presenter.

09. Happiest moment?

Being crowned Mrs. Tourism Sri Lanka 2026 and seeing the pride in my family’s eyes – definitely one of my happiest moments.

10. What is your idea of perfect happiness?

Peace of mind, good health, and being surrounded by the people I love while doing work that has meaning.

11. Which living person do you most admire?

I most admire Angelina Jolie because she beautifully balances her work as an actress with meaningful humanitarian efforts. She uses her global platform to support refugees, advocate for human rights, and inspire women to be strong, compassionate, and independent.

12. Which is your most treasured possession?

My memories and experiences because they remind me how far I’ve come, and keep me grounded.

13. Your most embarrassing moment?

Like everyone, I’ve had small on-stage mishaps, but they always taught me to laugh at myself and move forward confidently.

14. Done anything daring?

Participating in pageants while balancing teaching, media work, and family life has been one of the boldest and most rewarding decisions I’ve made.

Keen to use her title to promote Sri Lanka globally

15. Your ideal vacation?

A peaceful destination surrounded by nature; somewhere I can relax, reconnect, and experience local culture.

16. What kind of music are you into?

I enjoy soft, soulful music because it helps me relax and stay inspired.

17. Favourite radio station:

I enjoy stations that blend good music with meaningful conversation and positive energy.

18. Favourite TV station:

Sri Lanka Rupavahini Corporation. It’s where it all began for me. It played a significant role in my journey as a TV presenter and helped shape my confidence and passion for media.

19 What would you like to be born as in your next life?

Someone who continues to inspire others because making a positive impact is what matters most.

20. Any major plans for the future?

I hope to expand my work in media and entrepreneurship while continuing my role as an educator and using my title to promote Sri Lanka globally.