Opinion
USD 2.5 Million: Where is transparency?
The recent “hacking” incident involving Sri Lanka’s Ministry of Finance and the Treasury cannot be treated as a narrow technical glitch. It raises deeper questions about how public money is managed, who is accountable, and whether systems are designed to prevent—or enable—failure. When such an event occurs at the core of public finance, it does not remain an isolated IT issue. It becomes a test of institutional credibility. At stake is not only money, but trust—the invisible asset on which an economy rests.
Public communication around the incident has not helped. Instead of reducing doubt, it has widened uncertainty. When explanations are partial, delayed, or inconsistent, they create space for speculation. Markets dislike ambiguity. So do citizens. In the absence of clear facts, narratives compete, confidence weakens, and the perceived risk of the system rises. In this sense, poor communication can amplify the damage far beyond the original event.
This article therefore looks beyond the label of a “cyberattack.” It treats the incident as a system-level failure that sits at the intersection of technology, governance, and accountability. The goal is to identify what likely went wrong, what global experience already tells us, and what policy actions are necessary—not only to find the truth, but to restore confidence and prevent recurrence.
What is a “Hacking” incident? – A simple view
The term “hacker” often suggests a highly skilled outsider breaking into a system. In practice, most breaches are less dramatic and more mundane. They exploit weaknesses that already exist: unpatched software, weak passwords, poor access controls, or careless user behaviour such as phishing. These are not rare events. They are predictable outcomes of weak system hygiene.
Fully important is the role of internal access. Many serious incidents involve “insider access”—legitimate credentials used improperly, or privileges that are too broad and poorly monitored. Such access is harder to detect because it appears normal. It often bypasses external defences entirely.
For this reason, the key question is not simply “Who entered the system?” but “How was entry allowed?” That question shifts attention from the attacker to the system. It forces us to examine design, controls, and oversight. In other words, it moves the discussion from a technical story to a governance story.
Deeper questions raised by this incident
When a transaction of USD 2.5 million is involved, the issue cannot be reduced to a single breach. Financial systems—especially those handling public funds—are built with layers of control: approvals, audit trails, and separation of duties. These controls are meant to prevent exactly this kind of outcome. If a large transfer can occur despite them, then either the controls failed, were bypassed, or were never properly enforced.
This leads to a more important question: How was such an event permitted within the system? Was it a one-off technical error? A pattern of weak controls? Or a breakdown in oversight? Each possibility points to a different kind of failure, but all point to the same conclusion—this is not a simple incident.
Trust is the operating system of any economy. Once trust is weakened, the effects spread quickly. Citizens begin to question institutions. Investors reassess risk. Lenders demand higher returns. What starts as a technical incident can evolve into a credibility problem. And credibility, once lost, is difficult and costly to rebuild.
Concerns are compounded when responses are delayed or incomplete. If critical system access was known but not acted upon, or if disclosure to responsible authorities was postponed, the issue becomes one of governance. Timely reporting is not a formality; it is a control mechanism. When it fails, the system loses its ability to correct itself.
Key Arguments
1. Erosion of Institutional Trust
Trust in public financial institutions underpins economic stability. When information is unclear or inconsistent, confidence declines. This affects expectations, investment decisions, and the willingness to engage with the system. Over time, weak trust translates into weaker economic performance.
Information Asymmetry and Narrative Control
When full information is not shared, a gap emerges between what authorities know and what the public understands. This asymmetry allows simplified labels—such as “hacker”—to dominate the narrative. Complex issues become reduced to convenient explanations. The cost is delayed truth and prolonged uncertainty.
3. System Reality
Large-value transactions typically require multiple approvals, verifications, and recorded trails. If such a system allows a questionable transfer, it signals a deeper problem. Either controls are ineffective, monitoring is inadequate, or responsibilities are not clearly enforced. In any case, it points to a system weakness, not an isolated glitch.
4. Governance Over Technology
Most major cyber incidents succeed not because technology is absent, but because governance is weak. Accountability is unclear. Oversight is fragmented. Operational discipline is inconsistent. Without these, even advanced systems fail. The central lesson is simple: technology cannot compensate for poor governance.
International lessons
Global experience reinforces these points. Repeated incidents across different countries show a consistent pattern: the root cause is rarely technology alone.
The Bangladesh Bank heist demonstrated how weak internal controls can enable large unauthorised transfers through international payment systems. Monitoring and verification failures were as important as any technical breach.
The Banco de Chile incident highlighted the importance of real-time monitoring and rapid response. Delayed detection allowed attackers to move funds before controls could react.
mex ransomware attack showed that preparedness matters as much as prevention. Without clear response plans and leadership accountability, organisations struggle to contain damage once an incident occurs.
These cases are not isolated. They are lessons. They show that effective protection requires a combination of sound technology and strong governance. The critical question, therefore, is not whether such incidents happen elsewhere—they do—but whether those lessons have been learned and applied.
Real consequences
The visible loss in a case like this is financial. The real cost is broader.
First, public trust declines. When institutions appear uncertain or opaque, confidence erodes. This weakens the effectiveness of policy and administration.
Second, foreign investment becomes more cautious. Investors prioritise stability and transparency. Perceived risk rises when systems appear unreliable.
Third, borrowing costs increase. International markets price risk. Lower credibility leads to higher premiums, making financing more expensive.
h, financial stability can be affected. Doubts about institutions can influence liquidity, flows, and overall system confidence.
Over time, these effects accumulate. Growth slows. Development is constrained. The long-term cost exceeds the immediate loss.
Policy Response
A narrow technical fix will not suffice. The response must be comprehensive.
An independent investigation is essential. It must be credible, free from interference, and supported by both local and international expertise. The objective is to establish facts, not narratives.
A full forensic analysis is required. System logs, access records, and transaction trails must be examined in detail. The aim is to understand both the breach and the conditions that enabled it.
Transparent communication is critical. Regular updates and a final public report help rebuild trust. Silence or delay does the opposite.
Accountability must be clear. Where negligence, misconduct, or failure is identified, appropriate legal action must follow. Responsibility should not be diffused.
System reforms are necessary. Stronger controls—such as dual authorisation, multi-factor authentication, and real-time monitoring—should be standard, not optional.
Cyber security capability must be strengthened. Continuous monitoring, training, and regular risk assessments are essential.
Finally, legal and institutional frameworks need reinforcement. Transparency laws, digital governance standards, and protection for whistleblowers can improve long-term resilience.
Can government remain silent?
Silence is not neutral. It increases uncertainty.
When information is withheld or delayed, speculation fills the gap. Markets react. Confidence weakens. Trust erodes. In public finance, this is costly.
The response must be timely and clear. Facts should be disclosed. Responsibility should be assigned. Weaknesses should be corrected. The process must be seen as fair and independent.
If these steps are not taken, the issue will not remain contained. What appears to be a USD 2.5 million problem can evolve into a wider crisis of confidence. And once confidence is damaged, the cost of repair is far greater than the cost of prevention.
Strong systems depend on capable leadership and sound institutions. Positions of responsibility must be matched by competence and experience. Where gaps exist, they must be addressed.
In the end, the question is simple: will this incident be treated as a minor event to be managed, or as a warning to be acted upon? The answer will determine not only accountability for the past, but the credibility of the system going forward.
By Prof. Ranjith Bandara
Opinion
Protecting Sri Lanka’s natural heritage: The leadership we need for next 75 years
After nearly 77 years of wildlife conservation, Sri Lanka must strengthen the institutions, professional leadership and political will needed to safeguard its natural heritage for generations to come.
By Dilum Alagiyawanna
Sri Lanka has a long and proud history of protecting its natural heritage. Generations of wildlife officers, forest officers, scientists, researchers, field staff and conservationists have worked, often under difficult circumstances, to protect our forests, wildlife and ecosystems. Their contribution deserves recognition and respect.
One important milestone in this journey came in October 1949, when the Wildlife department was established as a separate institution, following the Fauna and Flora Protection Ordinance of 1937 and the expansion of the country’s wildlife reserves. The creation of a dedicated department reflected an important recognition of the time: wildlife conservation required specialised institutional attention.
Today, nearly 77 years after its establishment, Sri Lanka has an opportunity not simply to reflect on that institutional journey, but to consider what kind of institutions and leadership we need for the next 75 years.
This is not an argument about the individuals currently holding positions in our conservation institutions. Nor is it intended to question the commitment, professionalism or sacrifices of the many public servants who have served these institutions over the years.
It is a broader institutional question.
What kind of leadership does Sri Lanka need to protect its natural heritage in the 21st century?
The issue is not who occupies a particular position today. It is whether our system of identifying, developing and appointing leaders is designed to meet the conservation challenges of tomorrow
A Changing conservation landscape
When many of our major conservation institutions were established, the principal challenges were relatively straightforward: establish protected areas, prevent poaching, enforce wildlife legislation and protect forests and wildlife from direct exploitation.
Those responsibilities remain fundamental.
But conservation today is considerably more complex.
Habitat fragmentation, expanding infrastructure, human-elephant conflict, climate change, invasive species, pollution, wildlife disease, road mortality, unplanned tourism and competing demands for land and water are placing increasing pressures on ecosystems.
Conservation can no longer be treated as an isolated environmental concern.
A highway can fragment a wildlife habitat. An irrigation project can alter an ecosystem. Poorly planned tourism can degrade a protected landscape. Agricultural expansion can affect wildlife movement. Climate change can alter species distributions, water availability and ecosystem resilience.
Conservation therefore intersects with agriculture, irrigation, energy, transport, tourism, disaster management, climate policy, land-use planning and national economic development.
It has become a multidisciplinary national policy challenge.
Beyond administration: What conservation leadership requires
There is nothing inherently wrong with a career public service.
Sri Lanka needs a professional, impartial and experienced public administration. Administrative knowledge, institutional memory and an understanding of government procedures are indispensable to the functioning of the State.
The question is whether administrative experience and seniority alone should be the principal criteria for leading institutions entrusted with complex living ecosystems and irreplaceable natural capital.
I believe they should not.
Leadership of major natural-resource institutions should combine administrative competence with scientific and technical understanding, field experience, strategic thinking, integrity, sound judgement and a demonstrated commitment to conservation outcomes.
This is not an argument for automatically replacing administrators with scientists. Nor is personal passion for nature, by itself, sufficient.
What Sri Lanka needs is mission-driven professional leadership.
A person leading a conservation institution should understand not only how to administer a government department, but also why that institution exists, what ecological outcomes it is expected to achieve and what may happen if those outcomes are not achieved.
Dr P. E. P. Deraniyagala: A legacy of scientific leadership
Sri Lanka’s own history provides a remarkable example of what can happen when scientific expertise, intellectual curiosity and institutional leadership come together.
Dr P. E. P. Deraniyagala was a zoologist, palaeontologist and naturalist whose contribution to Sri Lanka’s natural heritage extended far beyond the formal responsibilities of a government position.
He was appointed Director of the Colombo Museum in 1939 and, following the reorganisation of the museums, became the first Director of the Department of National Museums, a position he held until his retirement in 1963. His scientific work ranged from Sri Lanka’s living fauna to fossil elephants and other extinct prehistoric mammals.
It lies in what he brought to that position.
He brought scientific curiosity, intellectual independence, research capability and a lifelong commitment to understanding Sri Lanka’s natural heritage.
He did not simply administer an institution concerned with heritage. He contributed to the body of knowledge upon which our understanding of that heritage depended.
That is an important lesson for today.
Our conservation institutions must not merely administer conservation programmes. They must increasingly become knowledge-driven institutions capable of generating, interpreting and applying scientific evidence to management decisions.
From institutional continuity to institutional renewal
After nearly 77 years of experience, the appropriate response is not to criticise or dismantle the institutions that have served the country.
It is to ask how we can make them stronger, more scientifically capable, technologically advanced and better equipped for the next 75 years.
The challenges of 2026 are vastly different from those of 1949.
Satellite remote sensing, GIS, GPS telemetry, camera trapping, drones, genetic analysis, artificial intelligence and ecological modelling can transform how wildlife and ecosystems are understood and managed.
But technology alone cannot transform conservation.
Institutions need the scientific capacity to interpret information, the field capacity to collect reliable data and, above all, leadership capable of turning evidence into timely decisions.
A capable leader, however, also needs an institution with adequate resources, professional autonomy, scientific capacity and the authority to act. Leadership reform therefore cannot be reduced simply to changing individuals. It must also strengthen the institutional environment in which those individuals operate.
From species management to ecosystem stewardship
Sri Lanka must also move beyond a narrow concept of wildlife management.
An elephant is not simply an animal to be managed when it enters a village.
A leopard is not simply a species to be protected when a conflict occurs.
A forest is not simply a designated area on a map.
Each exists within a larger ecological system.
Effective conservation therefore requires landscape-level thinking: protecting habitats, maintaining ecological connectivity, securing watersheds, managing human activity and ensuring that development decisions properly account for ecological consequences.
Conservation expertise must therefore be incorporated into national development planning before decisions are made, rather than being brought into the process after environmental conflicts have already emerged.
Preventing conservation conflicts before they reach the courts
There is another reality that cannot be ignored.
For decades, conservationists, environmental organisations, researchers, professionals and concerned citizens have repeatedly found themselves having to seek administrative, political and sometimes judicial intervention when environmental concerns have not been adequately resolved through normal institutional processes.
The courts have consequently become an important safeguard for environmental protection.
But this should make us ask a deeper question.
Why should citizens repeatedly have to go to court to protect a forest, wildlife habitat, wetland or other environmentally sensitive area when the State already has institutions, laws, scientists and regulatory mechanisms designed to address these matters?
Judicial intervention is an essential component of a democratic system and an important safeguard for the public interest. But courts should not have to become the primary mechanism through which conservation policy is resolved, case by case.
A judicial determination necessarily operates within the legal and evidentiary framework before the court. It cannot substitute for a scientifically informed conservation policy or a strong institutional mechanism capable of identifying and resolving environmental risks at an early stage.
The objective should therefore be to build institutions strong enough to prevent many of these disputes from reaching the courtroom in the first place.
Conservationists and environmental organisations should ideally be able to engage with government institutions early in the decision-making process, supported by credible scientific evidence and transparent procedures, rather than being forced into the role of permanent opponents of the State.
Leadership that gets decisions right
This is precisely why Sri Lanka needs conservation leadership with the knowledge, independence, judgement and courage to make the right decisions at the right time.
Good conservation leadership is not simply about enforcing the law after a conflict has emerged.
It is about anticipating problems, understanding ecological consequences, identifying risks early and taking scientifically sound decisions before an issue becomes a political, social or legal dispute.
Sometimes the right decision may require saying no.
Sometimes it may require proposing a better alternative.
And sometimes it may require bringing scientists, communities, development agencies and political decision-makers together early enough to find a solution that protects both the public interest and the environment.
This is not about confrontation with governments or development.
It is about preventing unnecessary confrontation by getting the decision right in the first place.
The right leader can prevent a conservation problem from becoming an administrative problem, an administrative problem from becoming a political problem, and a political problem from ultimately becoming a legal dispute.
The best conservation decision is often the one that prevents the conflict from arising in the first place.
Conservation requires political will
Strong professional leadership, however, is not enough.
Conservation also requires political leadership with the vision, commitment and political will to support the right decisions, particularly when they may be difficult or politically inconvenient.
India’s Project Tiger, launched in 1973, provides a compelling example. The Government of India established the programme in response to the serious decline of tiger populations, creating a national conservation initiative that combined scientific management, protected areas and strong political commitment.
Indira Gandhi’s interest in environmental protection and her government’s support helped create the political conditions for major conservation initiatives during that period.
The lesson is not that political leaders should run conservation institutions.
It is the opposite.
Political leadership must create the space, authority and support for professional conservation institutions to do their job properly.
A scientifically sound decision made by a conservation institution can achieve little if political leadership is unwilling to stand behind it. Conversely, political will, working together with scientific and professional leadership, can turn a good conservation idea into a transformative national programme.
Sri Lanka needs both sides of this equation:
professional conservation leadership capable of making the right decisions, and political leadership with the will to support those decisions in the national interest.
The ideal relationship is not political interference in conservation.
It is political commitment to evidence-based conservation.
Natural Heritage Is National Capital
Sri Lanka’s natural resources should also be recognised as national capital.
Forests support water security.
Wetlands provide natural flood protection.
Healthy watersheds support agriculture and hydropower.
Biodiversity supports tourism.
Marine ecosystems support fisheries.
Intact landscapes provide resilience against climate-related disasters.
When these systems are degraded, the country incurs an economic cost.
The question should therefore not simply be:
How much will conservation cost?
It should also be:
How much will it cost Sri Lanka if we fail to conserve its natural capital?
This is why conservation expertise must be integrated into national development decision-making from the beginning.
Choosing the leaders for tomorrow
Sri Lanka does not lack people with knowledge, experience and commitment.
Our universities, research institutions, wildlife and forest services, professional organisations and civil society contain scientists, researchers, field practitioners and conservationists with considerable expertise.
What is needed is a system that allows this expertise to contribute more effectively to institutional leadership.
Future appointments to senior positions in natural-resource institutions should therefore consider more than administrative seniority.
They should consider:
Scientific and technical competence
Conservation and field experience
Strategic leadership
Institutional management capability
Integrity and independence
Understanding of communities and stakeholders
A demonstrated record of achieving meaningful outcomes
Such a system would not weaken the public service.
It would strengthen it by bringing administrative excellence and conservation excellence together.
The Wildlife Department is a useful lens through which to examine this broader question, but the issue extends far beyond wildlife. It concerns every institution entrusted with Sri Lanka’s forests, biodiversity, wetlands, coastal ecosystems, marine resources and other forms of natural capital.
What should Sri Lanka’s conservation institutions look like for the next 75 years?
Sri Lanka should be proud of the conservation institutions it has built since the middle of the last century.
But institutional pride should never become institutional complacency.
The establishment of the Wildlife Department in 1949 was itself an example of institutional adaptation. The country recognised that wildlife conservation had become sufficiently important and specialised to require a dedicated institution.
The same principle applies today.
The conservation challenges of 2026 are vastly different from those of 1949.
The answer is not to abandon what was built.
It is to evolve it.
We need conservation institutions that are stronger, more scientific, more innovative and better equipped to influence national development decisions.
We need leadership selection systems that recognise conservation as a specialised professional responsibility.
We need a public service in which administrative excellence is complemented by scientific expertise, field experience and a genuine commitment to conservation outcomes.
And we need political leadership with the vision and will to recognise that protecting natural capital is not an obstacle to national development, but an essential condition for sustainable national prosperity.
This is not about replacing individuals.
It is about building a better system for the future.
It is not about weakening existing institutions.
It is about strengthening them for the challenges ahead.
And it is not about choosing between development and conservation.
It is about ensuring that development does not destroy the natural capital upon which Sri Lanka’s long-term prosperity depends.
After nearly 77 years of dedicated wildlife conservation, perhaps this is the right moment to ask a fundamental question:
What should Sri Lanka’s conservation institutions look like for the next 75 years?
The answer should not reject the past.
It should be an ambitious evolution of it.
Because when the next generation looks back at our time, they will not judge us simply by how well we administered the institutions we inherited.
They will judge us by what forests remained standing, what species survived, what ecosystems remained intact, and whether we had the wisdom and courage to pass on Sri Lanka’s extraordinary natural heritage in better condition than we received it.
Author: Dilum Alagiyawanna is a telecommunications engineer turned environmental and wildlife conservationist, citizen scientist and wildlife documentary filmmaker. His work bridges science, public policy and sustainable development, with particular emphasis on the long-term conservation of Sri Lanka’s elephants and other threatened species.
Opinion
The Concrete Road
On Monday 27 December 2021, according to a Flight Safety Foundation narrative, “Cessna 172L 4R-GAF (ex 4R-HDC) of Sakurai Aviation crash landed in a paddy field in Paththayam Watta, Kimbulapitiya, Negombo in the Gampaha district close to Bandaranaike International Airport (VCBI) after the aircraft suffered an engine RPM fluctuation and subsequent engine failure. Three of the four occupants were injured. The charter flight was on its way to Koggala Airport (VCCK) from Sigiriya Airport (VCCS) when the problems started to occur. It had initially taken off from Ratmalana Airport (VCCC) and was supposed to land there after departing Koggala Airport (VCCK). The flight was going to make an emergency landing at Bandaranaike International Airport (VCBI) but while the aircraft was descending the pilot in command informed the controller that he had no control over the engine power. During the final approach to runway 22 the pilot in command then declared a “MAYDAY” call and the aircraft crash landed soon after.”
The touchdown itself at the paddy field was safe but due to a concrete road, which was not visible from to air at low level and running across the field, the nose wheel hit it and broke off creating the destruction and injury.
With the economic recovery, the present government has started reconstructing the highways and expressways that were suspended in the recent past. In countries like the United States of America (USA) there are straight stretches of expressways and highways, at regular intervals, where light to medium size aircraft could safely land in an emergency unlike the accident described above. Not only that, that particular stretch of road is maintained by the local Regulating Authority like the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) in the case of the USA.
A Safe Landing on an Expressway in India.
The Sri Lanka National Aviation Policy of 2017 also recommends that there should be helipads at regular intervals along the expressways/ highways to facilitate medical evacuation in case of motor accidents. It should be noted that the Minister in Charge of Aviation and Highways is one and the same
Will the Government spare a thought for safer multimodal transport especially when there is a push to make Domestic Aviation available for tourism? Or will it be just another pipe dream?
Capt. G A Fernando
Former member of the Accident Investigation Team, Civil Aviation Authority, Sri Lanka.(CAASL)
Immediate past President of Aircraft Owners and Operators Association, Sri Lanka. (AOAOA)
Opinion
Ginige Palitha Sirimal Harischandra de Silva Historian and Archivist
by Geedreck Uswatte-aratchi,
B.A.(Cey.), Ph.D. (Cantab.)
In my first year at Peradeniya, I lived in Room 54 on the ground floor of the first quadrangle of Ramanathan Hall. In room 55 lived the prize-winning short story writer Somapala Wijesinghe, in his second year. On the first night, I walked a bit late to dinner to avoid the fierce raggers. As my luck would have it, there was a short man who barked out, ‘You fresher, what school do you come from?’ ‘From Kuliyapitiya Central School’, said I, meekly. The short man laughed loud derisively, ‘Where the hell is that? You have no business to come to this hallowed place. You look starved. Go and eat, I will deal with you in time.’ I was scared and hungry. So did I meet my first and long-lasting friend in Peradeniya. Haris read history under Ray Chaudhry, Sinha, G. C. Mendis and Lakshman Perera. The brilliant historians of Peradeniya were yet to come. I read Economics in the Takaran Shed School on the embankment across the road from the Arts Building.
Haris had an irresistible impish sense of humour. It did not spare friend or foe. When he came to Peradeniya, he brought his decrepit bicycle by rail. It had no bell, no lights, front or tail and no breaks but he never hurt himself or another except once and that grievously when he was very young in Panadura; he lost one eye in a road accident. The offending party was not Haris. That in no way spoiled the fun he had on his bicycle in Peradeniya or later. He was wildly popular and much admired. There was hardly any student in Peradeniya who did not know Haris. Among other things, I learnt from him to wear my shoe, making a slipper of it by beating down the heel.
There were several student’s societies in Peradeniya. It was usual for some of these societies to organise a bus tour to some place of interest. Usually, they came back late at night having shouted themselves hoarse and dead tired. One of our mutual friends joined a trip that year. In the evening, after dinner, Haris came to my room glistening with mischief. We both went in to our friend’s room and systematically dismantled his bed, put the mattress atop the closet, undid the springs and left them all over the floor. Our friend came back eager to hit the pillow but there was no bed. We came solicitously to help him re-assemble his bed and dismount the mattress. Our friend was furious with us till next morning. He bided his time. I joined a trip to Mahiyangana, mainly to go down the 18 bends. I came back dog tired fearing the worst. There might be a bucket of water ready to drench me as I opened my door. There wasn’t but my mattress was atop the closest. Never mind, mi pan rai, as I learnt to say in Bangkok, much later.
Vernugopal, who played hockey and later was a Certified Public Accountant in New Jersey, Haris and I nearly fell into serious trouble in our second year. Norman, son of Weerasuriya, QC, came to see Peradeniya, where he was scheduled to come into residence next year. I did not see him but he had come in a Mercedes Benz and had worn an expensive warm jacket that he had bought in London, earlier in the year. Vernu, for one reason or another, had lifted it and given it to Haris for safe keeping. Ever out for mischief, Haris rushed it to my room and asked me to keep it with me and, the next morning, move it out of the Campus, unobserved. He pressed me the next morning and I complied and forgot about it all. Not for long. One day the Warden knocked on my door; very unusual, I thought. ‘Do you have in your possession an expensive jacket belonging to a visitor to our Hall?’, he asked. ‘I have a jacket but I don’t know whom it belongs to. I will have to consult Haris who gave it to me a few days ago.’ ‘No matter all that. I want the jacket in my quarters before 6, this evening.’. I learnt about the episode later. Nicholas Attygalle had succeeded Ivor Jennings as Vice Chancellor. Attygalle and Weerasurya (Snr.) were pals. We all would have been in trouble if the jacket went missing. I was mighty relieved when all was settled.
Harris had a long string of cousins who lived mostly along Galle Road. They were his mother’s siblings’ children. I lived in a boarding house in Bambalpitiya to go to work. One Saturday morning Haris and I set out in his car to go to Hikkaduva (not the Hikkaduva of today) for the weekend. We visited one cousin in Moratuva, several in Panadura, another in Kalutara and so on and reached Ambalangoda about four in the afternoon. I declined the offer to ride back with him and took the 3.15 next day afternoon train to the Fort.
Haris’ hobby was carpentry. He parked his car on the lawn and the garage turned into a workshop. He had a good collection of tools. Some of the furniture in his house was made by him. He insisted on repairing his roof. One morning someone called from his home that Haris had fallen from the roof and we rushed much concerned. The turf had received him gently and he was none the worse for the accident. He kept on mending his roof.
Hema was a fitting companion to Haris: joyful and a perfect host. Mali and I spent many happy days with them, especially after the two children were born. Haris did a tremendous job bringing up the two of them by himself to be distinguished and highly productive citizens of this country. One of them lived with her family in the father’s house and Haris took great pleasure as the grandchildren went to good universities and eventually took up interesting work.
A hallmark of Haris’ life was the simplicity in which he lived it. The lives of Haris and family were almost stoic. Their home, the furniture in it, the clothes they wore and the occasions in life that they celebrated were all lessons in simplicity. One of the children, who was in a learned profession, once worked in Polonnaruva. She came to her home in Colombo, when she could, by bus. She later worked in Panadura and similarly often came back to Colombo by bus. Among a people who notoriously exhibit wealth they do not fully possess (read the ratio of household debt to household income), here was an oasis of serenity and simplicity. I respected him and his family very much.
Haris came to Peradeniya with some familiarity with research work. At Ananada Sastralaya, Kotte where Haris studied to enter university, young Amaradasa Virasinghe was a teacher. Virasinhge had been much inspired by Professor M.D.Ratnasuriya, who came from London University. The world of English literature was rocked by F.R.Leavis’ journal Scrutiny. Gananath Obeysekere had graduated from the English Department which was headed by E.F.C. Ludowyk who had graduated from Cambridge and was familiar with that work. The two young graduates decided to publish a quarterly Sinhala literary review and the first issue of Samskrti appeared in 1953. Haris had a hand in putting the first issue together in Obeysekere’s home in Lauries Road in Bambalapitiya. Virasinghe and his colleagues published Samskrti for about 20 years when Virasinghe decided to go to Pennsylvania. Amaradasa Gunewardena (Sinhala, Ramanathan, 1954) heroically carried on the journal for several years irregularly, until when it ceased publication. Virasinghe came back in 2000 or so and wanted to revive samskrti. With time, much had changed. The original enthusiasts all had moved, except two: Susil Siriwardena from Oxford and Usvatte-aratchi, who had come back after 25 years overseas.. They revived the journal to survive till 2015. Although the university population had multiplied several-fold and the Sinhala readding public even more, publishable material was scarce. And the journal spurted on for a year or two and died.
When Haris joined the Department of Government Archives under Amaravamsa Devaraja, the Department was in Nuvara Eliya. It had been moved from Colombo when there was a risk that Japanese might bomb the capital and the archives might be lost. Further, the cooler and slightly drier climate in Nuvara Eliya was likely to preserve the documents at lower cost. Peradeniya which turned out to be a major user of Archives was in the neighbourhood. However, Colombo had many users who could not afford the delays and the cost of driving to Nuvara Eliya. As time went on three universities had sprung up in and near Colombo and there emerged many users. President Jayewardene himself was a keen reader of Sri Lanka’s history. And there was an excellent site in Independence Square. It fell to Haris who was Deputy Director then to take care of the project to put up the new building and equip it. They could not have found a better person, had they searched the world for years. His integrity in the management of funds was rock solid. He had the cheque ready the day before payment was due and the builder had his first day of surprise when he was so informed. With many young students of history, law, economics and anthropology, there was a heightened interest in Archives and they found an excellent archivist in Haris.
Haris himself enjoyed the work immensely. As time permitted, he wrote two well-researched and data rich valuable works, as I recollect. He never lost interest in history and archives and we regularly chatted about what we were reading, thinking or writing. I dared not make a mistake in history. Haris’ red pen would find employment.
Haris was the first friend I made in Peradeniya and he is the last to whom I bid adieu. You made history and history will treat you splendidly.
-
News6 days agoMissing doctor’s body found in Mahiyanganaya
-
News6 days agoAustralia declines to release Finance Secy Suriyapperuma’s citizenship details
-
News6 days ago22A: BASL suggests CJ recuse himself from hearing petitions
-
News3 days agoEight politicians in drug kingpin probe
-
Editorial7 days agoGovts. drag feet as undergrads age
-
Business3 days agoSri Lanka opens up: A new season of direct connectivity
-
Features5 days agoInsights from Chieftains of Uva: Genealogy of two Kandyan Families – Part II
-
Features1 day ago“Wrap Me Up in My Blazer”— A Gentlemanly Bradby Reminiscence
