Connect with us

Features

Succession to DS, the Hartal and Dudley’s resignation

Published

on

(Excerpted from Memoirs of a Cabinet Secretary by BP Peiris)

When D.S. fell off his horse on Galle Face, Lord Soulbury, Governor-General, was in England and Alan Rose, Chief Justice, was acting. He had all the powers of the Governor-General, but did not take the responsibility of appointing the new Prime Minister. Instead, the following communique was issued by the Governor-General’s office:

“His Excellency the Officer Administering the Government invited the Ministers to meet him this morning at Queen’s House. His Excellency informed the Ministers that a few days before Lord Soulbury’s departure from the Island he had discussed with His Excellency what should be done in the event of the office of Prime Minister falling vacant during Lord Soulbury’s absence.

“His Excellency stated that Lord Soulbury, had then expressed an intention of returning to Ceylon immediately in this eventuality.

“In view of this, His Excellency spoke last night on the telephone to Lord Soulbury who informed him that he would be arriving in the Island on Wednesday.

“Having regard to this, His Excellency stated that, in his opinion, it would be more appropriate to await Lord Soulbury’s arrival before a decision is made us to who should be invited to form an administration.”

Soulbury had a difficult task. It was his duty to ensure the continuance of a stable Government. Between the Premier’s death and the Governor-General’s arrival in the Island, there was considerable political and personal maneuvering, and Rose’s house in Bullers Road had a stream of callers all offering gratuitous advice as to who should be sent for. One person went as far as to send Rose some hot hoppers for breakfast.

Rose kept a diary of the events, the callers, the times they called, and the suggestions they made – a document which ought to make very interesting reading if it is ever published. The Times of Ceylon commented:

“There is at present very clear indication of the successor. The country expects the uncorrupted continuance of the peace and prosperity which the late Premier insured in the nation’s life. His principles of democratic fair play and progress are the nation’s watchword, and the new Prime Minister must be one who can foster those objectives.”

It is clear, reading between the lines, that Sir John Kotelawala was not too popular and was unacceptable. There was no reason to assume that he could not form a stable Government. But 19 members of the Government Parliamentary Party informed Dudley that in the event of his being called upon to form a government they would give their wholehearted support and co-operation. They also intimated their solemn determination not to support an administration formed by anyone else. The Tamil Congress informed the Governor-General that Sir John was not acceptable to their party and would support a government formed by Dudley.

The Governor-General, on his arrival, sent for Dudley and invited him to form a Government. He asked me to summon the Ministers to meet him in the Cabinet Room. It was not a Cabinet meeting as he (Dudley) had not accepted office. At this meeting all the Ministers were present except Sir John. Here, I must debunk a story which has been published in “The Premier Stakes, or Up the Garden Path”, which some persons thought was written by Sir John, but the authorship of which he has publicly denied.

In this book, it is stated “Even the Secretary to the Cabinet was against me and did not summon me to the meeting.” I have never refused or neglected to summon a Minister to a meeting. I cannot imagine any Secretary wilfully omitting to do so. I got all the Ministers on the telephone, but could not get Sir John. Seven Ministers were in my room while I was telephoning, with Minister Sittampalam seated right in front of me at my table. He saw and heard me telephoning.

I tried Sir John’s office, Kandawala, the Orient Club, the Sinhalese Sports Club, Sravasti, the M.Ps’ Hostel, his mother’s house and finally got his brother Justin to whom I gave the message. He was not to be found at any of these places. It was one minute to 2 p.m., the time fixed for the meeting and I gave it up. Immediately after the meeting, which lasted only a few minutes, Sittampalam phoned me from his own office and said, “Peiris, you said you couldn’t get Sir John: he’s in his office.” I merely asked him what the insinuation was. “You saw me telephoning all those members”, I said, and there was no further comment from him. There were a lot of undercurrents working at the time.

Now the gossips and the rumour-mongers started whispering. It was said that D.S. had advised Soulbury to send for Dudley in the event of his death. A more fantastic story, attacking the honour and memory of a dead man, is difficult to imagine. It is within my personal knowledge that D.S. never gave the Governor-General the advice attributed to him. I also know who concocted the story for reasons best known to them. I use the plural because there were two.

In view of the highly controversial nature of the whole transaction, I beg the reader’s pardon if, after tickling his curiosity in this mysterious way, I say “Thus far and no further. My lips must continue to remain under seal.” D.S. might have been ignorant of Constitutional Law, but he was no ignoramus. He knew that, in the matter of the succession to the Premiership, he could not exercise a right similar to that exercised in Buddhist Ecclesiastical Law under the rule of Sisyanu Sisya Paramparawa. The Constitutional position is set out by Winston Churchill in his War Memoirs:

“It is not customary for a Prime Minister to advice the Sovereign officially upon his successor unless he is asked to do so. As it was war time, I sent the King, in response to a request he had made to me in conversation at our last weekly interview, the following letter [He was going to cross the submarine-infested Atlantic for discussions with President Roosevelt].

10 Downing Street
Whitehall
June 16, 1942
Sir,

In case of my death on this journey I undertake, I avail myself of Your Majesty’s gracious permission to advise that you should entrust the formation of a new government to Mr Anthony Eden, the Secretary of State for Foreign affairs, who is in my mind the outstanding Minister in the largest political party in the House of Commons and in the National Government over which I have the honour to preside, and who I am sure will be found capable of conducting Your Majesty’s affairs with the resolution, experience and capacity which these grievous times require.

I have the honour to remain,

Your Majesty’s faithful and devoted servant and subject,

Winston S. Churchill

Dudley was punctual at the meeting of Ministers he had summoned. No record was kept. He informed the Ministers that he had been asked to form a Government and inquired whether the Ministers would serve under him in the same capacities. All said “Aye”. He then reported back to Queen’s House and was appointed Prime Minister on March 27, 1952.

Sir John, who has always been an officer and a gentleman and who has never been vindictive, issued the following statement:

“I have been associated with the late Prime Minister for over 22 years in the task on building a free nation and should be the last man to wish the freedom we have gained to be overcome by the destructive forces which threaten to overrun our land. I congratulate the new Prime Minister on his appointment. Every right-thinking man will wish him well in the task that lies ahead of him. I am steadfastly of the opinion that the United National Party is the only political party that can save the country and I call upon all my countrymen to rally round the new Prime Minister with the same measure of support they gave his father. My own support will always be available to serve the cause of democracy in my Motherland.”

The new Prime Minister, in his first broadcast talk to the nation, said:

“If there is any lesson that I have learnt from my father, it is that no task, however difficult, should be shirked if it is in the country’s interest that it should be discharged.” He added the following words, significant in the context of present day politics: “I pledge that the administration of this country will be so carried that every one amongst you, whatever the language he speaks, whatever the religion he professes, whatever the race to which he belongs, may live and move on terms of absolute equality.”

On April 4, the Prime Minister decided to dissolve Parliament and go to the country. He stated that though he had the promise of co-operation from a majority of the country, he felt it was his duty to obtain a mandate from the people at the earliest opportunity to work for the ideals for which his father had worked during his lifetime. In a talk to the nation, the Prime Minister said:

“Barely a week has passed since I accepted the invitation of His Excellency the Governor-General to form a government on the death of my revered father. The promises of co-operation which I received from my colleagues in Parliament, as well as from representatives of all sections of the community gave me strength to undertake this task. To my fellow-citizens throughout the Island, I give my heartfelt thanks for the assurance of help and co-operation which 1 have received.

“When I undertook the important responsibilities that my late father bore so well, in my message to the nation, I pledged myself to tread the path he wished us to follow.

“We know very well that my father bent all his energies to achieve the ideal of a free Lanka. Once that freedom was attained, he spent himself, in spite of his health, without any thought of his own comfort or of his personal interests, to preserve that freedom, to realize the concept of a united nation and to establish a stable government.

“The striking demonstration of national feeling shown at his death made it clear to me that my father had become a symbol, not only of the ideals I have mentioned, but of the new Lanka which he hoped to build upon these foundations; the new Lanka whose people, free from want, from sickness and ignorance, through the functioning of democratic institutions, could take their place once again in the comity of the free and happy peoples of the world.

“I have thought very deeply during the last few days of the duty I owe to the people of Lanka. Only some of the ideals for which my father worked have been achieved. In the achievement of these, I have no doubt he gave his life. I have been invited to carry on the work interrupted by his death. If I am to be finally chosen to do so, I feel that I should give the people an opportunity, at this most important moment in Lanka’s history, of expressing their own wish through the exercise of the right which belongs to every citizen of electing those who will administer the affairs of the country on their behalf.

“As you are all aware, Parliament need not be dissolved till the end of this year. Though I have the promise of co-operation from a majority of the members of Parliament as well as the good wishes of the country, I feel it my duty to obtain a mandate from the people at the earliest opportunity.

I have therefore advised His Excellency the Governor-General to dissolve Parliament and to announce a day for the nomination of candidates for election to a new Parliament.

“If it be your wish that I should act as the first servant of the people, I pledge myself to honour, to the best of my ability, just as my father did when he was entrusted with similar duties, the trust reposed in me.”

Dudley was returned at the general election. His first Cabinet meeting after the election was on June 5, 1952. There were some of his father’s Ministers, but there were new faces also. Bulankulame Dissawa was Minister of Lands, Dr M. C. M. Kaleel, Minister of Labour, Mr C. W. W. Kannangara in charge of Local Government, V. V. Nalliah in charge of Posts, and the Prime Minister’s cousin, R. G. Senanayake, was given Commerce and Trade.

My draft of the Speech from the Throne was approved with amendments and on the following day, the Cabinet met to consider the estimates for the next financial year. They came to an important decision regarding the salaries of the judges of the Supreme Court. The salary was increased to Rs 36,000 a year with a corresponding increase in the salary of the Chief Justice, and the then prevailing difference in salary between old-entrant and new-entrant judges was abolished.

Henceforth, all judges would be equal and their salaries would not depend on the date of their appointment. This was a most welcome change; but the decision was rescinded a month later, for what reasons I cannot remember. There is no salary distinction today as there are no longer any old-entrant judges.

The question now arose whether, in view of the complexity of our laws and the increasing number of appeals to the Privy Council, a Ceylonese should not be appointed to the Judicial Committee. The request had been made by the Judicial Committee itself, and the proposal was acceptable to the Ceylon Government. Mr L. M. D. de Silva, a former Judge of the Supreme Court was willing to accept the post if it was offered to him. Mr de Silva was accordingly appointed a Privy Councillor.

August 12, 1953, has been called the day of the hartal. I was asked at noon to summon an emergency meeting of the Cabinet for 1.15 pm. Disturbances had occurred in the city of Colombo and in some of the outstations. Trains had stopped running; trains had been stopped and passengers, guards and engine drivers assaulted; railway wagons had been damaged; road transport had been completely disorganized and no omnibuses were running; communications had been interfered with; public officers had been attacked in the performance of their duties; shops had been broken into and shopkeepers intimidated; there was general intimidation on a large scale; the Pettah Police Barracks had been stoned; the Manning Market had been set on fire; the Dompe Police Station had been attacked; there was complete lawlessness at Hanwella; and in one or two places the Police had been compelled to use their firearms.

Essential services had been disrupted. There was no traffic at all on the roads and I got to my office in the Fort from my house in Havelock Road (where I had come for lunch) within five minutes, carrying in my car, for the first time in my life, my loaded revolver in the door-pocket. The Inspector-General of Police who was summoned asked that the Police and the Military, who had been stretched to the maximum, be given adequate powers to preserve law and order. He did not mince matters. He asked for power to shoot.

Shoot whom? Your own people? I saw a gentlemanly pipe-smoking Prime Minister hesitate. The order was not given. Instead there was a declaration of a State of Emergency and the provisions of the Public Security Ordinance were brought into operation and the necessary regulations promulgated.

A legal flaw was now noticed. The provisions of the Public Security Ordinance could only be brought into operation when a state of public emergency in fact existed. The Cabinet thought that the law should be amended to enable the necessary Proclamation to be issued where a state of emergency was apprehended and before it had actually arisen. The Legal Draftsman was directed to examine the legislative powers that had been taken in other Commonwealth countries, particularly India, to meet any emergency and to prepare the draft legislation.

It was decided that our Ordinance should be amended on the lines of section 352 of the Constitution of India to enable a Proclamation of emergency to be issued before the actual occurrence of the emergency, if the Governor-General was satisfied that there was imminent danger thereof. The subject of Civil Defence was allocated to Sir Oliver Goonetilleke who had handled the subject expertly under Admiral Layton.

A most unusual thing happened at about this time. The Cabinet was to meet at two in the afternoon to discuss our rice stocks which were at a dangerously low level. The relevant Cabinet paper was not prepared in my office; it was not roneoed; it was typed, four copies at a time, in the Ministry of Commerce and Trade. The Minister, R. G. Senanayake, had M. F. de S. Jayaratne as his Permanent Secretary. Twelve of the Ministers had assembled at two but Jayaratne had not sent me any papers by then.

Ministers were becoming impatient. Forty-five minutes had elapsed before Jayaratne came panting into the Cabinet Lobby and put a bundle of papers in my hand saying “Here are 15 copies”. The Ministers’ impatience had turned to anger by this time. There was no time for me to check the draft. Each copy consisted of six pages of typewritten matter fastened by a clip. I counted the clips and there were 15.

I distributed 12 copies to the Ministers, one to Ranasinha (the Secretary) and kept one for myself. The one extra copy was on my table when the discussion began. The meeting which began in the afternoon ended after 3 a.m. the next day, with a short break for dinner, Dudley asked the Ministers to return their copies to the Secretary. I came back to my room far too tired to do anything except to dictate the minutes.

I again counted the clips – there were 15 – and locked the papers up in my steel cupboard. The next day’s Times of Ceylon carried the entire memorandum, including the appendices, in the middle page. Dudley had warned the Ministers to keep the matter a top secret. Soon after the Times was out, Sir Oliver asked me over the telephone how this had happened. I told him that the Ministers all returned their copies to me and that these were at that moment in my steel locker. Dudley then got on to me and said, “Percy, this is a very serious matter. I want you to check on each one of the returned copies. See me in the office in half an hour.”

As was to be expected, there were the fifteen clips, each holding six sheets of foolscap. But the Prime Minister had asked me to check on each copy and, in doing so, I came across a dud one. The clip was there, the six sheets were there but the subject matter contained in the six sheets had nothing to do with the subject matter of the memorandum. What was I to do? My brain was befuddled. I was in charge of 15 copies, and now I had 14 and the press had published the memorandum verbatim.

What could have been more easy than for me to have released the fifteenth copy to the Times and say. “I don’t know how it could have happened. I was so tired and it was such a rush, I only counted the clips and there’s a dud set of papers in one clip.” I knew that would not go down with Dudley. The country had accepted him as a gentleman. He and I were colleagues at the Bar amid friends and, if a third person was not present, we addressed each other by our Christian names.

But the most gentlemanly Prime Minister would not tolerate a crook as his Cabinet Secretary. I went to him in trepidation. “What is this about a dud set?” Dudley asked and I gave him the six sheets of paper with the clip. He read the papers line by line and came across two words altered in ink and initialled in the margin. He asked me whose initials they were and I said I did not know.

He called his Secretary Atukorale who identified the initials as being those of Jayaratne. My heart was palpitating. “Golly, old boy, you’re lucky” I thought. So this was a Ministry Paper, and Minister R. G. had most inadvertently and most carelessly given me the wrong papers and taken the right ones away! Now that I was on a safe wicket, I turned round to Dudley and, in Atukorale’s presence said something for which he might have turned me out of his office, but did not. I said, “Sir, it is a pity that you don’t

get the co-operation of your colleagues that Atu and I get from our staffs.” All he said, deep in thought and with bowed head was “Yes, I know.

A Cabinet Secretary’s life is not all beer and skittles. I had just had a lucky and a narrow shave.In October 1953, Dudley resigned his office for reasons of health and Sir John Kotelawala was appointed Prime Minister.



Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Features

Defend civic space upon which peace is built

Published

on

by Jehan Perera

International Peace Day was observed on 21 September. It finds Sri Lanka with a genuine achievement to record and a demanding test to meet. The UN’s theme this year was “Invest in Peace: For Everyone, Everywhere, Every Day.” It also honoured the “everyday architects of peace”—people driving local action and building a lasting peace from the ground up. In the 2026 Global Peace Index, Sri Lanka rose 30 places, from 97th to 67th among 163 countries. Over the same period, global peacefulness declined for the twelfth consecutive year to its lowest level since the index began, and South Asia suffered the sharpest regional deterioration. The test is whether the government will protect the civic space in which those architects of peace work.

Sri Lanka’s improvement is real and deserves acknowledgement. In this year’s review, issued a few weeks ago, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights acknowledged progress in the form of action against corruption, arrests and investigations linked to political killings, enforced disappearances and the 2019 Easter Sunday attacks, and continued official denunciation of racism. A ranking, however, records conditions at a particular moment. It does not guarantee that they will last. Sustainable peace will depend on three factors. These are whether the government addresses the unresolved causes of conflict, whether it strengthens accountability for past and present abuses, and whether it protects the civic space in which peace is built from below. On the first two the record is incomplete. On the third, the draft NGO law threatens to weaken the very organisations that press for the other two.

What holds Sri Lanka back from a higher place are the same things that fed the war at home and also feed international conflict that rages elsewhere in the world. These are racism or ethnic nationalism that is narrow-focused, corruption and lawlessness. Equality, accountability and the rule of law are their remedies. The present government has committed itself to these, and is a significant improvement over governments of the recent past. But these pillars are not held up by governments alone. Peace is made in villages, workplaces and university campuses. It is made by families who insist on the truth about their disappeared, by journalists and lawyers who expose abuse, and by community organisations that bring Tamils, Muslims and Sinhalese into practical cooperation.

Unfinished Work

The UN High Commissioner’s report to the current Human Rights Council session, covering October 2025 to July 2026, shows how much remains to be done. The Prevention of Terrorism Act is still being applied, producing arbitrary arrests and long detention without charge. The report calls for a moratorium pending repeal and for the release of long-term detainees. Military-occupied land has not been released, memorialisation lacks support, and tensions over land and religious sites persist. The Batticaloa district illustrates how such problems endure. In the past three years, two Presidents, Ranil Wickremesinghe and Anura Kumara Dissanayake, have visited and instructed that the dispute over grazing land in Mailaththamadu and Mathavanai be resolved. It is a dispute between Tamil cattle farmers and outside Sinhala cultivators, and it has not been resolved. When two Presidents issue instructions and nothing changes, the fault lies in the machinery of State. An unresolved dispute does not stand still. It hardens into the next grievance.

Accountability shows the same pattern. The report documents torture and deaths in custody, and surveillance and intimidation of activists, journalists and civil society. Serious cases remain stalled for years, among them the killing of seventeen aid workers of Action Contre la Faim in Muttur two decades ago. Sharper still is the case of the Eastern University refugee camp at Vantharamoolai, where in 1990 the army took away 158 persons in a single day. They were never seen again. The camp’s officer-in-charge, Dr T. Jayasingam, later Vice Chancellor of the university, identified the officers responsible. More than three decades on, those officers have not been questioned. These cases are still remembered because families, survivors and independent witnesses have refused to let them be forgotten. Meanwhile several commissions of inquiry have completed their investigations but nothing further has happened.

What South Africa, Argentina and other post-conflict societies have found indispensable are four pillars of what is called “Transitional Justice” which are truth, accountability, reparations and non-recurrence. In Sri Lanka’s circumstances, truth means credible, independent investigation of what happened to the disappeared, and support for memorialisation. Accountability means prosecuting Muttur, Vantharamoolai and comparable cases, and removing credibly accused persons from senior office. Reparations mean compensation for victims and the return of military-held land. Non-recurrence means repealing the Prevention of Terrorism Act, releasing those held under it in the meantime, and resolving local disputes such as Mailaththamadu before delay hardens them. A country that buries its past does not escape it. The past returns in the next generation.

Civil Society

It is against this background that the draft NGO law is most troubling. The proposed legislation contains sweeping provisions for State oversight and control of civil society organisations. Among these are enforcing a licensing requirement on NGOs, which is to be renewed every three years, and severe penalties for not submitting reports on time, or for spending on emergency flood relief (for instance) when the NGOs mandate is peacebuilding (as an example) with possible sanctions including deregistration and having to shut down. Civil society groups have warned that it would confer excessive discretion over their registration and operations. Officials in Sri Lanka have abused such powers in the past. Additional power without effective checks invites further abuse. Sound regulation would have clear criteria for registration, an independent registrar and a right of appeal to the courts. What cannot be justified is a regime in which registration becomes a licence to be withheld from organisations that scrutinise policy, expose abuses or advocate for the rights of citizens.

Democracy is based on checks and balances. Those who press for accountability are part of those checks. The contradiction is plain. A government that has pledged accountability, equality and the rule of law ought not to be preparing to weaken the very organisations that press for their fulfilment. The organisations most exposed are those working on disappearances, land, memorialisation and reconciliation in the North and East, where the State’s record is weakest and the need for independent witnesses greatest. Silencing them would not remove the grievances they document. It would remove the channel through which those grievances are addressed peacefully. The government appears to be relenting, which is welcome, but a pause is not a withdrawal. The bill should be withdrawn and any replacement drafted in genuine consultation with those it would govern.

Investment in peace as called for by the UN in its International Peace Day theme implies commitment over time, with returns that come slowly. Sri Lanka’s 30-place rise on the Global Peace Index is a first dividend and nothing more. It can be built upon only if the government matches its commitments with action: withdrawing or fundamentally redrafting the NGO law, repealing or suspending the Prevention of Terrorism Act, and bringing Muttur, Vantharamoolai and Mailaththamadu to resolution. A higher place in a global index is not a certificate of success. Sri Lanka’s higher ranking is an encouraging start, but it will endure only if the space in which citizens speak, question and organise is protected. Peace is built from below, and a government that is serious about it will treat civil society as a partner rather than a threat.

Continue Reading

Features

Africa is buying: Sri Lanka must start selling

Published

on

A call to Sri Lankan exporters and agencies: Can Sri Lanka compete with China and India in Africa?

By Kana V. Kananathan
Former Ambassador

Sri Lanka has spent decades concentrating its exports on traditional markets in Europe, North America and Asia. Yet across the Indian Ocean lies a rapidly expanding market that remains significantly underdeveloped by Sri Lankan exporters: Africa.

The opportunity is not theoretical. Sri Lanka already exports packaging, textiles, rubber products, pharmaceuticals, paper, machinery and electrical goods to African markets. The question is whether these modest beginnings can be transformed into a serious export strategy—and whether Sri Lanka can compete against the enormous commercial presence of China and India.

The answer is yes—but Sri Lanka must compete differently.

Kenya: Gateway to East Africa

Kenya should be the starting point.

Sri Lanka exported approximately US$32.08 million to Kenya in 2025, while importing US$11.41 million. But US$32 million is tiny compared with the opportunity: Kenya imported more than US$24 billion in 2025. Even a 1% share of that market would represent nearly US$240 million in annual exports.

And the commercial base already exists. Sri Lanka’s 2025 exports to Kenya included approximately US$9.99 million in paper and paperboard products, US$9.73 million in knitted fabrics, US$3.64 million in pharmaceuticals, US$1.24 million in rubber products and US$1.20 million in machinery.

Kenya’s import structure is equally revealing. In the third quarter of 2025, industrial supplies represented 34.4% of imports, machinery and capital equipment 19.2%, food and beverages 9.0%, and consumer goods 7.3%. The opportunity for Sri Lanka, therefore, extends well beyond consumer goods—we can become a supplier to African industry.

But competition is fierce. Asia supplied around 70% of Kenya’s imports in 2025, with imports from China rising 16.5% and those from India 11.3%.

Sri Lanka cannot challenge China and India across every product category. Nor should it try. We must target sectors where quality, specialisation, reliability, technical capability, smaller production runs and flexibility matter more than simply offering the lowest price.

Where Can Sri Lanka Compete?

Packaging is an obvious starting point. Cartons, boxes, bags and labels are already among Sri Lanka’s exports to Kenya. Importantly, some Sri Lankan companies operating in Kenya are themselves importing these products from Sri Lanka. The market already exists; the challenge is to scale it.

As Africa’s food-processing, pharmaceutical, apparel and consumer-goods industries expand, demand for sophisticated packaging will grow with them. Sri Lanka already possesses the manufacturing capability and industry experience to capture a larger share.

Industrial rubber products, tyres, gloves and specialised rubber components offer another opportunity where Sri Lanka has established manufacturing expertise.

The apparel supply chain is equally promising. Rather than competing directly with African garment factories, Sri Lanka can supply fabrics, elastics, labels, packaging and specialised textile inputs.

Some Sri Lankan apparel manufacturing and export companies already established in Kenya, Togo, Ghana and Ethiopia are importing several of these inputs from Sri Lanka. The supply chain, therefore, already exists. The next step is to move beyond supplying Sri Lankan-owned factories and become a competitive input supplier to the wider African apparel industry.

Other sectors deserving systematic market development include pharmaceuticals and medical consumables, processed foods, biscuits and confectionery, coconut products, cinnamon and spices, electrical products and cables, industrial chemicals, ceramics, light engineering, agricultural equipment and food-processing machinery.

Sri Lanka should also look beyond physical goods. IT, fintech, banking technology, engineering, healthcare, hospitality management and professional services largely escape the freight disadvantage confronting merchandise exports.

The Tariff Problem Can Become an Opportunity

Market access cannot be discussed without tariffs.The East African Community applies a Common External Tariff with bands of 0%, 10%, 25% and 35%, while certain sensitive products attract still higher protection. Simply filling containers in Colombo with finished consumer goods will therefore not always be commercially competitive.

But that obstacle points towards a bigger opportunity: manufacture in Africa.

Sri Lankan businesses could export intermediate materials while undertaking final assembly, manufacturing, processing or packaging in Kenya. Packaging companies could establish converting plants; electrical manufacturers could assemble locally; pharmaceutical companies could explore manufacturing or packaging partnerships; and food companies could undertake final processing closer to consumers.

Kenya would then become more than an export destination. It could become Sri Lanka’s manufacturing and distribution gateway into East and Central Africa.

With the East African Community now comprising eight partner states and extending geographically from the Indian Ocean towards the Atlantic, establishing a regional presence is increasingly more important than viewing each African country in isolation.

West Africa Cannot Be Ignored

Sri Lanka simultaneously needs a West African strategy.

Ghana offers potential as an English-speaking commercial gateway and host of the AfCFTA Secretariat. Nigeria, with its enormous population and consumer economy, should be approached as a major market in its own right, despite its greater regulatory, currency and operational complexity.

ECOWAS tariff bands of 0%, 5%, 10%, 20% and 35% again make product selection critical. Sri Lanka should concentrate on products with sufficient differentiation and margins to absorb freight, tariffs and distributor costs.

Pharmaceuticals demonstrate both the opportunity and the challenge. Nigeria imported approximately US$766 million in pharmaceuticals in 2025, with India supplying roughly US$394 million and China US$131 million. Ghana imported approximately US$301 million, with India supplying about US$140 million.

Sri Lanka cannot simply offer another generic product and expect to beat India on price. We must identify specialised products, reliable supply arrangements, partnerships and, where commercially justified, local production or packaging.

Stop Promoting Sectors—Identify Products

Sri Lanka now needs an Africa Export Opportunity Study based on individual products, not broad sectors.

The Export Development Board, Foreign Ministry, chambers and private sector should jointly identify 15–20 priority products. For each product, Sri Lanka should calculate the HS code, African annual import demand, principal suppliers, Chinese and Indian market shares, applicable duties, freight from Colombo, regulatory requirements, distributor margins and final landed price.

That will tell us where Sri Lanka genuinely has a competitive advantage.

The Commercial Test

Before spending resources promoting a product, apply one simple test:

African import demand + Sri Lankan production capability + tariff + freight + distributor margin + regulatory cost = final landed competitiveness against China, India and local African production.

Only products that pass this test should receive concentrated export-promotion resources.

This would move Sri Lanka away from exhibitions, delegations and general discussions towards what ultimately matters: specific products, specific buyers, specific distributors and actual export orders.

Give Our Missions Targets

Commercial diplomacy must become results-driven. The Government should set clear annual trade and investment targets for every Sri Lankan mission in Africa.

Missions should be evaluated not merely on diplomatic activity, but on buyers and distributors identified, business introductions made, investments facilitated, market barriers resolved and measurable exports generated.

In a competitive Africa, our missions must become active economic frontlines not merely diplomatic outposts.

A practical strategy could operate through three commercial gateways: Nairobi for East and Central Africa, Accra for selected West African markets and Lagos for Nigeria.

Sri Lanka’s total exports of goods and services reached approximately US$17.25 billion in 2025. Capturing even a small additional share of Africa’s enormous import market could, therefore, make a meaningful contribution to export earnings, investment and foreign-exchange generation.

Africa Will Not Wait

Sri Lankan exporters must stop looking at Africa as a distant or difficult market and start treating it as a strategic growth market.

We cannot compete with China and India on scale, but we can compete on quality, specialisation, flexibility and reliability. Exporters must identify country-specific opportunities, establish strong local distributors, build partnerships with African businesses and use Sri Lankan companies already operating on the continent as gateways into regional supply chains.

Where freight and tariffs weaken competitiveness, businesses must be prepared to move towards local assembly, joint ventures and manufacturing in Africa. Exporters cannot do it alone. They need aggressive, measurable and results-driven commercial diplomacy from Sri Lanka’s missions.

Africa is buying. Its markets are being captured now. Sri Lanka must stop watching from the sidelines. We must enter, compete, build our presence and secure our share.

(Ambassador Kana Kananathan is a businessman, Diplomat, lobbyist and an expert in African affairs, with over four decades of experience on the African continent. A long-time resident of Africa, he served as Sri Lanka’s envoy to Uganda and Kenya, with concurrent accreditation to 22 African Nations, and was the permanent representative to UN Habitat and UN environmental Programme. Over the years, he has been the Elections Monitor across the continent, working closely with African governments, and built enduring partnerships with African leaders. He also served as Economic and Investments Advisor to former President Professor Alpha Condé of the Republic of Guinea)

Continue Reading

Features

Memories and Midnight Magic: Recipe for a perfect 31st Night dance

Published

on

The heart of a great 31st Night dance is memory, and memories come rushing back when those 70s, 80s and 90s golden oldies begin to play — those timeless tunes that make revellers, young and old, rush to the floor and dance the night away.

A perfect 31st Night is not just a party. It is a journey. A journey through time.

The music should flow like a love story. Start slow, start soft. Let couples glide into a waltz for romance. Let the floor come alive with a twist, a rock ‘n’ roll, a jive. Let nostalgia build with beautiful sing-along oldies generally associated with a New Year’s Eve dance.

This is the art that many of our entertainers seem to have forgotten.

The final hour, before midnight, is sacred. It should be collective energy at its peak. The entire crowd, on the dance floor, linking arms, swaying together, singing, at the top of their voices, those sing-along favourites.

Yes, I’m referring to those immortal, nostalgic favourites that unite the world: ‘This Land Is Your Land,’ ‘You Are My Sunshine,’ ‘When The Saints Go Marching In,’ ‘Roll Out The Barrel,’ ‘Celebration,’ ‘She’ll Be Coming Round The Mountain,’ ‘Happy Days Are Here Again,’ and so many more.

One wonders if some of our modern entertainers have even heard of these nostalgia anthems that traditionally lead up to the dawning of the New Year! This is not just music; this is ritual.

Then comes THE moment: Lights dim. Music pauses. A hush falls. The countdown begins — 10, 9, 8… — hugs, wishes, tears of joy, and then … ‘Auld Lang Syne.’ Hands crossed, voices united, bidding farewell to the old and welcoming the new. That moment makes or breaks the night.

Here is the truth that many genuine 31st Night revellers feel but hesitate to say — an overdose of baila music at New Year’s Eve events is NOT welcome.

Of course, baila is required. Baila is our Sri Lankan heartbeat! But a 31st Night dance is for everyone.

When it’s ONLY baila, the twist and rock n’ roll lovers, the waltz kings and queens feel left out. And they are the very people who MADE nostalgia! They are the die-hard revellers who have kept the 31st Night spirit alive for decades.

A family mentioned to me that they went along with friends for a 31st Night dance, in the city, to usher in 2026, and were thoroughly disappointed with the setup.

The bands in attendance, they said, failed to generate the excitement generally associated with a 31st Night event.

If given a free hand, the music at certain Colombo venues will be mostly baila, and that is going to disappoint many. Some are already worried that it will be just a baila scene this year, as well.

A memorable 31st Night respects all rhythms … yes, a waltz for romance, a twist and rock n’ roll for that 60s magic, a cha-cha, a slow foxtrot, and then the baila, after the countdown anthem.

That balance is what makes it inclusive, classy, and truly fun-filled.

Organisers, especially in Colombo, should keep this in mind: let it be 70% nostalgia – Western, and 30% baila, with the last hour left for pure baila madness, after the New Year is in!

Organisers must work out the programme for their 31st Night and instruct the entertainers to follow those instructions. The band should not dictate the night; the spirit of nostalgia should.

This New Year, let’s give Colombo what it truly wants — memories, midnight magic, and music for every soul on the floor.

Let’s dance into 2027 with class.

Continue Reading

Trending