Opinion

The day the editor stood in the dock!

Published

5 years ago

2021/01/18

(With Contempt of Court cases making news recently, we publish today an article written by E.C.B. Wijeyesinghe, a famous journalist of yesteryear on the Contempt of Court case against the Editor of the Daily News in the nineteen thirties)

One of the occupational hazards of the editor of a newspaper is to suffer for other people’s sins. There is, of course, a sacred precedent for this kind of undeserved torture: but you cannot put up that plea in mitigation of the punishment when you stand face to face with the majesty of the law. In case you are eager to know what I am driving at, let me say at once that this is just a preamble to a story about an illustrious editor of the Ceylon Daily News who escaped by the skin of his teeth from spending a holiday in the Welikade Prison.

His name is Herbert Hulugalle, who joined the ‘Daily News’ in 1918, when the paper was a toddler and helped the proprietor, D.R. Wijewardene for 30 years to tend it until it grew up to be a mighty giant. For 17 of these 30 years he was the Editor and made the newspaper the most powerful driving force towards Ceylon attaining political freedom. He severed his connection with journalism only after Ceylon became independent and then proceeded to shine in other fields. Hulugalle’s monumental work ‘The Life and Times of D.R. Wijewardene” is virtually the most authoritative and gripping narrative of perhaps the most exciting period of our history.

BUSYBODY

The seed of the trouble in this case was eventually traced to some busybody in the Law Library, who wanted to ingratiate himself with Wijewardene by feeding him with what he thought was a juicy tit-bit. Forty years ago, as now, the Law Library was a sort of clearing house for gossip and the younger practitioners waiting for briefs revelled in stories which had the slightest odour of scandal. They gave flesh to the bare bones of the naughty rumour and embellished it in such a way that there was a big gap between the authorised version and the revised version that was circulated in the corridors of Hulftsdorp. The story that reached the ears of Wijewardene, however, lacked the usual salacious sauce. It was built up on a much more serious theme, namely, that the Supreme Court judges were giving themselves holidays to which they were not entitled. It was a report without any foundation whatsoever but it was good material for a powerful editorial.

TROUBLE

Wijewardene soon got going. He was not the man who allowed the grass to grow under his feet. The Lake House telephone bells started ringing, but the Editor, Herbert Hulugalle, happened to be away. Wijewardene got hold of the next best man in the office to give expression to his indignation. He happened to be J. L.Fernando, who for many years wrote the Parliamentary summary and the weekly political notes for the ‘Daily News.’ From the tone of the Chief’s voice, J. L. Fernando knew that something strong had to be written, and that, quickly. Fernando, who was an Oxford man, put his best foot forward and produced the stuff. To make matters worse from the legal point of view, he gave it the somewhat sarcastic but sinister title ‘Justice on Holiday.’ Then everybody went to bed, happy that the day’s good deed had been done.

TOO LATE

But the euphoria did not last long. At the bewitching hour of midnight something stirred. It was Wijewardene’s conscience. The Chief, whose journalistic instincts for self-preservation were highly developed felt there was something wrong somewhere. He went back to bed with an uneasy feeling, but woke up at half-past four in the morning when the offending sentences began to haunt him again and again. According to what the Boss told Hulugalle, his first impulse at dawn was to take up the telephone and have the editorial altered. But it was too late. Before the cocks began to crow Wijewardene was consulting his lawyer friends to prepare a defence. Shortly afterwards, the fat was in the fire. There in the dock stood the meek and mild Herbert Alexander Jayatilleke Hulugalle, the innocent victim of circumstances, perhaps paying the penalty for some sin he had committed in his previous birth. As the Editor of the ‘Daily News,’ he had to take the full responsibility for what appeared in his paper. He knew it, the proprietor knew it, the leader writer knew it and, above all, the Judges knew it.

FULL COURT

There he was, arraigned for Contempt of Court before a Full Court which is an awesome thing under any circumstances. All the King’s Counsel and all the King’s men, down to the humblest Fiscal’s peon, came to watch the show. In Hulftsdorp and the precincts it was like a Roman Holiday with a harmless Christian being thrown to the lions. The Court consisted of the Chief Justice, Sir Sydney Abrahams, Mr. Justice M.T. Akbar and Mr. Justice F.H.B Koch. Wijewardene retained two of the most eminent practitioners at the Bar to defend Hulugalle. They were R.L. Pereira, K.C, and H.V. Perera, K.C. A better combination could not be found. When the talking began, it became apparent that Sir Sydney Abrahams was riled, not only by the editorial, but by an affidavit for the defence prepared by the great E.J. Samerawickreme, K.C. himself. That affidavit was so ingeniously worded that it sought to make excuses for the editorial without making a full apology. That annoyed Sir Sydney a little more. For the fact of the matter was that there was no defence whatsoever for the offending article. The judges had merely taken a vacation to which they were fully entitled under the Courts Ordinance, which the busybody at the Law Library had misunderstood.

CHIEF ACTOR

Sir Sydney Abrahams, the principal actor in the drama, eventually became a member of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council. He was Chief Justice of Ceylon for three years from 1936 to 1939. Of Jewish extraction, he was one of a trio of brilliant brothers, all of whom excelled at Cambridge in studies as well as in athletics. Before he came to Ceylon he was Chief Justice both in Uganda as well as Tanganyika. As an athlete, he represented Cambridge against Oxford in the long jump and 100 yards for three years, and then went on to be chosen as the British representative in the Olympic Games at Athens and Stockholm. He was the World’s Amateur Long Jump Champion in 1913. An athlete of that calibre had never before adorned the Supreme Court bench of Ceylon and he was generally regarded not only as a great sportsman but as a good sport. But even sportsmen lose their temper when for no valid reason, people try to be funny at the expense of the highest tribunal in the land. All the judicial lions, however, were not in the mood to devour their victim, but their leader could not be restrained because the highest court in the land had been held up to ridicule on baseless grounds. It was the title of the editorial, ‘Justice on Holiday,’ that hurt more than the contents.

CONCESSION

As a mild concession to the “Daily News” which then took pride in describing itself as the watch-dog of the nation, the accused was unleashed for the moment and allowed to sit behind his defenders, which he did biting only his own nails or what was left of them. Money was of no consequence to Wijewardene when it came to a fight. He was always ready to do battle for the freedom of the Press and stand up for his staff. In this instance, however, he knew he was on a sticky wicket. Hulugalle was sentenced, without much demur, to pay a fine of Rs. 1000 and to “imprisonment till the rising of the Court.” The fine was paid promptly because Wijewardene had sent one of his two trusted men, P.C.A.Nelson or E.E.C. Abayasekera, (I forget which one), with a large bundle of currency notes to cover ten times the prescribed punishment, in case it was only a fine.

But the fly in the ointment was the second part of the sentence. Imprisonment is imprisonment, whether it is till the rising of the Court or the arrival of Doomsday. Wijewardene’s strategy was now confined to finding a face-saving device. He decided to appeal to the Privy Council in London and retained Gavin Turnbull Simonds K.C. with Hugh Imbert Hallett, K.C. as junior. On the very day that the appeal came up Simonds was made a judge of the Chancery Division of the High Court. This was just a stepping stone of the Lord High Chancellorship of Britain. Hugh Hallett, K,C, also rose to be a High Court Judge, Queen’s Bench Division. All of which goes to show, that as in Ceylon, the best legal brains in England were harnessed to save Hulugalle. But alas, Justice was not on holiday even in the Privy Council and the appeal was dismissed. When the record of the case came back to Ceylon, Hulugalle was hauled out of his editorial seat once more in order to serve his sentence.

Luckily for him, he still possessed the black coat and striped pants in which he had taken his oaths as an advocate. Shaking off the moth-balls from these garments which he had not worn for fifteen years, Hulugalle slipped into the Supreme Court like a thief in the night, to take his punishment. Those who recognised him, wondered what he was doing in this strange attire. He sat among the advocates, poring over a New Law Report, but all the while serving his sentence till the rising of the Court. At the lunch interval the Registrar of the Supreme Court, Guy O. Grenier, an old friend, virtually took Hulugalle by the hand and led him to his sanctum where they shared Grenier’s sandwiches. Back in Court, Mr. Justice Poyser, the presiding judge, who had a keen sense of humour now seemed to be aware of the comedy of Hulugalle’s incarceration, as the accused was slipping in and out of chairs and pretending to be deeply absorbed in law books which he had not touched since he left the Law College, where Mr. Justice Akbar was one of his teachers. Poyser rose to the occasion. For some unknown reason he adjourned the Court much earlier than usual indicating the fall of the curtain on the case.

Poyser bowed to Hulugalle, Hulugalle bowed to Grenier and Grenier bowed to the Counsel, while the Court Crier shouted himself hoarse in a tone suggesting that justice will be done though the heavens fall. Hulugalle quietly proceeded to Lake House, where he received a warm welcome from his colleagues, but better still a substantial cheque from his Boss to compensate him not only for his pain of mind, but for the fine performance he had put up as an actor.

(From “The Good at their Best” Selected writings of E.C.B.Wijeyesinghe, Actor and Journalist)

All News Advertisement

Opinion

Pot calling the kettle black?

Published

3 hours ago

2026/04/23

Sahan Weerasooriya

Doctor Upul Wijayawardhana (eminent physician), posed a riddle for us. He wrote about that island Sri Lanka as ‘ this little dot in the ocean’ when deriding the remark of President Dissanayake who had said that Sri Lanka was a hunduva , a term that indicated a small volume: me hunduve inna puluvan da? (Can you live in this restricted space?) Most sensible people, even uneducated, judge that the volume of a little drop (of whatever) is smaller than that of a hunduva; so is weight. When the learned doctor emphatically maintains ‘….we are not a hunduva’ but ‘… a little dot in the ocean…’, is the pot calling the kettle black or worse?

Physically and population wise, Sri Lanka is neither ‘a little dot’ nor ‘a hunduva. This is all in the rich imaginations of Dissanayake and Wijayawardhana. I once counted that there were more than 50 members of the UN who were smaller than Sri Lanka in physical and population size. England was a sizeable island with a small population in the northwest corner of Europe in late 18th century when it began to become what China, with 1.3 billion people and jutting out to the Pacific, is now. From about 1850, when the population of Great Britain was about 20 million, less than that of Sri Lanka in 2026, it ruled more than half the world. Besides, do not forget Vanuatu, Kiribati, Cook Islands, Antigua and Barbuda, Barbados, Lesotho and New Zealand (who habitually beats us at cricket). New Zealand with 5 million population played against 1.5 billion population India (1:300) for the T20 cricket championship a few weeks ago. I quietly wished New Zealand would win; so much for crap about dots in the Indian Ocean or the south Pacific.

Dr. Wijayawardhana also wrote about history and about ‘The achievements of Hunduwa’. The massive reservoirs and extensive irrigation systems in rajarata and ruhuna as well as the stupa are indeed tremendous works of irrigation and bear witness to superior ingenuity and organising ability, for the time they were built. They compare very well among structures elsewhere in the ancient world. Terms like ‘granary of the East’ must be taken with more than a grain of salt. Facile use of such terms does not take account of whatever shreds of evidence there is of adversity in those times. Monsoon Asia over the ages has more or less regularly suffered from floods, droughts and consequent famines. The last dire famine was in Bengal in 1944. The irrigation works in Lanka were a magnificent response to those phenomena. The modern response has been scientific agriculture making India a major grain exporter, from near famine conditions in 1973-74. Recall Indira Gandhi’s garibi hatao (eliminate poverty) speech to the General Assembly of the UN, that year.

The bhikkhu who wrote down the tripitaka in aluvihara did so because there was the threat of a severe famine in the course of which learned bhikkhu might have come to harm. Buddhist thought over centuries had been passed from generation to generation vocally (saamici patipanno bhagavato savaka (listener) sangho) and the departure from that tradition must have required a major threat of famine. There are stories of bhikkhu from Lanka fleeing from dire straits. In the same vein, while the mahavamsa speaks of kings and their valiant deeds, there is little account of the large mass of little people who lived then. Sensible teaching of the history of a people must include the history of as much of the people as possible and some idea of the history of other peoples in comparable times to avoid feeling dangerously smug and arrogant, which we have seen many times over.

Usvatte-aratchi

Opinion

Ministerial resignation and new political culture

Published

2 days ago

2026/04/21

Thilina Walpola

Kumara Jayakody

The resignation of Energy Minister Kumara Jayakody comes after several weeks of controversy over his ministerial role. The controversy sharpened when the minister was indicted by the Commission on Bribery and Corruption for a transaction he was involved in ten years ago as a government official in the Fertiliser Corporation. The other issue was the government’s purchase of substandard coal from a new supplier. Minister Jayakody’s resignation followed the appointment of a Special Presidential Commission of Inquiry to investigate coal and petroleum purchases. The minister who resigned, along with the Secretary to the Ministry of Energy, Udayanga Hemapala, stated that they did not wish to compromise the integrity of the investigation to be undertaken by the Commission of Inquiry.

The government’s initial resistance to holding the minister accountable for the costly purchase was based on the argument that the official procedure had been followed in ordering the coal. However, the fact that the procedure permitted a disadvantageous purchase which has come to light on this occasion suggests a weakness in the process. The government’s appointment of the Special Presidential Commission of Inquiry to examine purchases as far back as 2009 follows from this observation. In this time 450 purchases are reported to have been made, and if several of them were as disadvantageous as this one, the cost to the country can be imagined. The need to investigate transactions since 2009 also arises from the possibility that loopholes in official government procedures in the past would have permitted private enrichment at a high cost to the country.

Concerns have been expressed in the past that the purchase of coal and petroleum, often on an emergency basis, enabled the use of emergency procurement processes which do not require going through the full tender procedures. The government has pledged to eradicate corruption as its priority. As a result, the general population would expect it to do everything within its power to correct those systems that permitted such corruption. Accountability is not only forward looking to ensure non-corrupt practices in the present, it is also backward looking to ensure that corrupt practices of the past are discontinued. This would be a matter of concern to those who headed government ministries and departments in previous governments. Those who have misapplied the systems can be expected to do their utmost to resist any investigation into the past.

Politically Astute

One of the main reasons for the government’s continuing popularity among the general population, as reflected in February 2026 public opinion poll by Verité Research, has been its willingness to address the problem of corruption. Public opinion studies have consistently shown that corruption remains one of the top concerns of citizens in Sri Lanka. The arrests and indictments of members of former governments have been viewed with general satisfaction as paving the way to a less corrupt society. At the same time, the resignations of Minister Kumara Jayakody and Secretary Udayanga Hemapala are an indication that not even government members will be spared if they are found to have crossed red lines. This is an important signal, as public confidence depends not only on holding political opponents to account but also on demonstrating fairness and consistency within one’s own ranks.

There appears to be a strategy on the part of the opposition to target government leaders and allege corruption so that ministers will be forced to step down. Organised protests against other ministers, and demonstrations outside their homes, are on the rise. The government appears not to want to give in to this opposition strategy and therefore delayed the resignation of Minister Jayakody until it had itself established the Special Presidential Commission of Inquiry. It enabled the minister to step down without it seeming that the government was yielding to opposition pressure. In political terms, this was a calibrated response that sought to balance the need for accountability with the need to maintain authority and coherence in governance.

The demand by opposition parties to focus attention on the coal problem could also be seen as an attempt to shift the national debate from the corruption of the past to controversies in the present. The opposition’s endeavour would be to take the heat off themselves in regard to the corruption of the past and turn it onto the government by making it the focus of inquiries into corruption. The decision to set up a Special Presidential Commission of Inquiry accompanied by the resignation of the minister and the ministry secretary was a politically astute way of demonstrating that the government will have no tolerance for corruption. It will also help to remind the general public about the rampant corruption of past governments which prevents the opposition’s corruption accusations against the government from gaining traction amongst the people.

New Practice

The resignation of a government minister who faces allegations but has not been convicted is still a relatively new practice in Sri Lanka. The general practice in Sri Lanka up to the present time has been for those in government service, if found to be at fault, to be transferred rather than removed from office. This is commonly seen in the case of police officers who, if found to have used excessive force or engaged in abuse, are transferred to another station rather than subjected to more serious disciplinary action. A similar pattern was seen in the case of former minister Keheliya Rambukwella, who faced allegations of corruption in the health field but was reassigned to a different portfolio rather than removed from government.

Against this background, the present resignation assumes greater importance. It signals a willingness to break with past practices and to establish a higher standard of conduct in public office. However, a single instance does not in itself create a lasting change. What is required is the consistent application of the same principle across all cases, irrespective of political affiliation or convenience. This is where the government has an opportunity to strengthen its credibility. By ensuring that the same standards of accountability are applied to its own members as to those of previous governments, it can demonstrate that its commitment to good governance is not selective.

The establishment of the Special Presidential Commission of Inquiry, the willingness to accept ministerial resignation, and the recognition of systemic weaknesses in procurement are all steps in the right direction. The challenge now is to ensure that these steps are followed through with determination and consistency. If the investigations are conducted impartially and lead to meaningful reforms, the present controversy could mark a turning point. The resignation of the minister should not be seen as an isolated event but as the beginning of a new practice. If it becomes part of a broader pattern of accountability, it can contribute to a new political culture and to restoring public trust in government.

by Jehan Perera

Opinion

Shutting roof top solar panels – a crime

Published

3 days ago

2026/04/20

Thilina Walpola

The Island newspaper’s lead news item on the 12th of April 2026 was on the CEB request to shut down rooftop solar power during the low demand periods. Their argument is that rooftop solar panels produce about 300 MW power during the day and there is no procedure to balance the grid with such a load.

We as well as a large academic and industrial consortium members have been trying to promote solar energy as a viable and sustainable power source since the early 1990’s. We formed the Solar Energy Society and made representations to Government politicians about the need to have solar power generation. This continuous promotional work contributed to the rapid increase in PV solar companies from three in the early 1990’s to over 650 active PV solar companies established today in the country. These companies have created tens of thousands of high-quality jobs, as well as moving in the right direction for sustainable development.

However, all these efforts appear to have been in vain since the CEB policy makers have continuously rejected solar energy as a viable alternative. Their power generation plans at that time did not include solar energy at all but only relied on imported coal power plants and diesel power generation. Even at the meetings where CEB senior staff were present, we emphasised the importance of installation of battery storage facilities and grid balancing for which they have done nothing at all over the past three decades. Now they have grudgingly accepted the need to include solar energy, which was an election promise of the present government. The government policy is that Sri Lanka should go for renewables to satisfy 70% of its energy needs by 2030 and soon move towards the green hydrogen technology by using solar and wind energy.

The question is why the diesel generators and hydropower stations cannot be shut off one by one to accommodate the solar power generated during the daytime. Unlike a coal-fired plant, diesel generators and hydro power plants can be shut off in a relatively shorter period of time. Norochchalai Lakvijaya power plant produces around 900 MW of power while the total country requirement is 2500 MW on a daily basis. The remainder is provided by diesel generators, hydro and other renewable energy sources.

The need for work to achieve this goal of grid balancing should be the primary responsibility of the CEB. Modern grid balancing systems are in operation in countries such as Germany where around 56% of its energy come from renewable sources. They also plan to increase this to reach 80% of the energy required through renewables by 2030. Our CEB is hell bent on diesel power plants. Who benefits from such emergency power purchases is anybody’s guess?

The Government and the CEB should realise that all roof top solar plants are privately financed through personal funds or bank loans with no financial burden on the Government. It is a crime to request them not to operate these solar panels and get the necessary credits for the power transmitted to the national grid. It appears that the results of CEB’s lack of grid balancing experience and unwillingness to learn over three decades have now passed to the privately-funded rooftop solar panel owners. It is unfortunate that the Government is not considering the contributions of ordinary individuals who provide clean power to the national grid at no cost to the Government. Over 150,000 rooftop solar panels owners are severely affected by these ruthless decisions by the CEB, and this will lead to the un-popularity of this new government in the end.

by Professors Oliver Ileperuma and I M Dharmadasa