Connect with us

Features

Wimala Wijewardene enchanted by my piano playing at ‘Temple Trees’

Published

on

Monday marks the 64th anniversary of nationalising the Colombo Port by the then Government led by the Sri Lanka Freedom Party. The picture shows the Head of State – Prime Minister S.W.R.D. Bandaranayaka addressing the historic meeting held on August 8, 1958

SWRD plagued by troubles in the port

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

A dispute had arisen with regard to an attendance bonus, the rates of pay for shore workers and the special cost of living allowance for lightermen. The Government again gave way and directed the Commissioner of Labour to secure from the employers the following concessions: if a worker had been in continuous employment and had worked under the same employer for 288 days or more during the year ended November 30, 1956, he should be paid an attendance bonus of Rs 30 before Christmas day 1956. This bonus should be reduced by one rupee for every four days’ absence up to a minimum 232 day attendance which would give a minimum of Rs 16.

The Government promised that steps would be taken to ensure that the legitimate demands of the worker would be satisfied, but felt compelled, in the interests of the public at large, and particularly in view of the intransigent attitude adopted by a section of trade union leaders, to take measures to ensure continuity of work in the Port.

The decision to declare the Port work an industry essential to the life of the community under the Industrial Disputes Act served the dual purpose of providing labour and employers with an efficient machinery for the speedy settlement of industrial disputes and of protecting the community against the effect of capricious strikes. It became illegal to resort to strike action without giving at least twenty-one days’ notice of the matters in dispute and the intention to strike. It also gave the Government an opportunity of negotiating a settlement.

The workers in the Port were now proposing to have a mass rally and strike in defiance of the law. They had appointed an action committee, with ring leaders inside the Port, who were secretly inciting the workers to strike. Their names were known to the Criminal Investigation Department. The Government decided that they should take no action in anticipation of a strike, that in the event of a strike, permanent labour should he given three or four hours’ notice to resume work, and, on the failure to do so, the armed forces should be ordered to work the Port.

The disturbances in and outside the Port continued. A hand grenade was thrown near the Khan Clock Tower injuring several persons. The current labour troubles were not isolated incidents but formed part of a planned programme on the part of certain persons and parties to throw the country into chaos. The Police were again given orders to protect those who were reporting for duty in the port.

Certain trade unions of public servants went on strike. The Cabinet decided that the strikers should not be paid for the days on which they did not work but that the amount to be deducted from their pay should be in such number of installments as the Minister of Finance may determine. It was also agreed that such deductions should not ultimately affect their pensions. The Government still had not learned the lesson of exercising some firmness in the interests of general discipline. They were oozing with the milk of human kindness.

When the strikes first occurred in 1956, the Prime Minister was out of the Island visiting the United Nations, the United States of America, Canada, the United Kingdom and Pakistan, and Ministers were a bit handicapped in taking important decisions. 1956 ended on this note of unrest in labour circles.

Towards the end of 1957, the situation became worse and the Cabinet was compelled to tender advice to the Governor-General for the issue of orders under the Army and Navy Acts, ordering members of the regular army to perform certain duties necessary for the maintenance of supplies and services essential to the life of the community, and ordering members of the Royal Navy to perform certain non-naval duties necessary in the public interest.

To add to the Government’s troubles, it became necessary to watch the financial situation carefully. The budget deficit had increased to Rs 250 million. The Ministers were therefore asked to limit supplementary appropriation to a minimum and a new loan of Rs. 40 million was raised. People were clamouring for houses, landlords were demanding exorbitant rents which were beyond the tenants’ means, and the Government authorized the raising of a further loan of Rs 75 million for housing purposes. In the next year’s budget, Ministers were asked to scrutinize carefully the creation of new posts and to make the most effective use of existing personnel. They were asked to abandon or slow down any continuing works where such action was expedient. Priorities were laid down for new projects.

S.W.R.D., while living at Rosmead Place, once asked me to summon the Cabinet to meet at Temple Trees at 9 p.m. I got there half an hour early to instruct the servants about this emergency meeting and to have the meeting room ready. The upper storey was in total darkness. I asked that the lights be put on and went up to while away my time at the grand piano. Coming down, a few minutes before the meeting, I met Minister Wimala Wijewardene at the bottom if the stairs.

She cooed “Oh, Mr Peiris, I heard some lovely music coming from upstairs. I’ve never been upstairs myself”. I said “Madam Minister, I was playing Strauss’ Blue Danube”, and she cooed again “Oh, Mr Peiris, I didn’t know you could do that also”. With my training in legal drafting, where no superfluous or unnecessary word must be used, I have been trying ever since, without success, to give some meaning to that last word.

It was now time to draft S.W.R.D.’s second Speech from the Throne. I took the draft to Rosmead Place; there was no mishap this time, he approved it without any amendment, a most unusual thing for him. The speech began:

“The last Session of Parliament was one in which My Government had to face many difficulties, both internal and external. Internally, the introduction of the Official Language Act, a certain amount of labour unrest, and grievance expressed by a certain section of the public service, caused difficulties. Externally, the situation arising from the dispute over the Suez Canal created problems of a political as well as an economic nature. Notwithstanding these difficulties, My Government has steadfastly pursued the policy outlined in my Speech at the opening of the last Session.”

Further trouble was threatened by the Federal Party by reason of the Sinhala Only Act, and the following paragraph was inserted in the Speech:

“My Government is much concerned at the threat to peace, law and order and communal amity in the country by the activities of the Federal Party and its proposed satyagraha movement in August. My Government is convinced that there is no justification whatever for these activities, particularly in view of the assurance given by My Prime Minister before Prorogation of Parliament. These problems can and should only be dealt with by friendly discussion. My Government, while being prepared to take all necessary steps to satisfy the reasonable grievances of minorities, is determined in the interests of the community as a whole to take all measures required for the preservation of law and order and the safeguarding of the State.”

Wimala Wijewardene

Here was a veiled threat intended, probably, to frighten the Tamil community. The Prime Minister had forgotten a sentence he had inserted in his previous Speech: “My Government wishes to assure minorities, religious, racial and otherwise, that they need have no fear of injustice or discrimination in the carrying out of its policies and programmes.” He had also forgotten that there was no determination on his part to preserve law and order when the mob invaded the Legislative chamber and he told the police “Let the people come.” It was not necessary to consult an astrologer to know that troubles lay ahead.

With all the troubles he was carrying on his head at this time, the Prime Minister took on the additional task of being the Chairman of the Joint Select Committee of the Senate and the House of Representatives which had been appointed to consider the revision of the Constitution with particular reference to the establishment of a Republic and the guaranteeing of fundamental rights. The Prime Minister asked me, as a favour, to assist him in putting the Committee’s decisions into proper legal form. I had no alternative but to agree.

I asked that as I had ceased to be a Draftsman and would be present in a purely unofficial capacity, an officer of the Legal Draftsman’s Department be invited to attend the meetings. Namasivayam was the officer who came. As a matter of historical interest and as, in my opinion, nothing like a Republic will come into being for a long time if Parliament adopts this Select Committee procedure, I should like to set down here the decisions arrived at by that Select Committee.

It was an unwieldy committee and consisted of Philip Gunawardena, Edmund Cooray, Colvin R. de Silva, N. U. Jayawardene, Pieter Keuneman, S. Nadesan, N. M. Perera and R. S. V. Poulier, belonging to different political parties. With such a motley crowd, it was almost impossible to arrive at a unanimous report, but S.W.R.D. told me that he was determined to steer the proceedings in such a way as to have a report without a dissent.

He was prepared to compromise and succeeded in achieving unanimity on Chapter I, which was all that the Committee could do, before Parliament was prorogued and the Joint Select Committee was automatically dissolved. This Chapter dealt with Fundamental Rights and, as the Committee reached it decisions following the Indian Constitution, I prepared the draft.

Chapter I-Fundamental Rights 1, 2. (Enacting clauses. )

3. The State Shall not deny to any person equality before the law or the equal protection of the laws within the territory of Ceylon.

4. (1) The State shall not discriminate against any citizen on grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth, or any of them.

(2) No citizen shall on grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth, or any of them, be subject to any disability, liability, restriction or condition with regard to-

(a) access to shops, public restaurants, hotels and places of public entertainment; or

(b) the use of wells, tanks, bathing places, roads and places of public resort maintained wholly or partly out of state funds or dedicated to the use of the general public.

(3) Nothing in this section shall prevent the State from making any special provision for women and children.

(4) Nothing in this section or in subsection (2) of section II shall prevent the State from asking any special provision for the advancement of any socially and educationally backward classes of citizens.

(5) No person shall be deprived of his life of personal liberty except according to procedure established by law: Provided that, the preceding provisions of this section shall not be deemed to affect the operation of any existing law or to prevent the State from making any law modifying those provisions where the State considers it necessary so to do in the public interest or for the maintenance of public security, law and order or for the maintenance of services essential to the life of the community.



Features

Educational reforms under the NPP government

Published

on

PM Amarasuriya

When the National People’s Power won elections in 2024, there was much hope that the country’s education sector could be made better. Besides the promise of good governance and system change that the NPP offered, this hope was fuelled in part by the appointment of an academic who was at the forefront of the struggle to strengthen free public education and actively involved in the campaign for 6% of GDP for education, as the Minister of Education.

Reforms in the education sector are underway including, a key encouraging move to mainstream vocational education as part of the school curriculum. There has been a marginal increase in budgetary allocations for education. New infrastructure facilities are to be introduced at some universities. The freeze on recruitment is slowly being lifted. However, there is much to be desired in the government’s performance for the past one year. Basic democratic values like rule of law, transparency and consultation, let alone far-reaching systemic changes, such as allocation of more funds for education, combating the neoliberal push towards privatisation and eradication of resource inequalities within the public university system, are not given due importance in the current approach to educational and institutional reforms. This edition of Kuppi Talk focuses on the general educational reforms and the institutional reforms required in the public university system.

General Educational Reforms

Any reform process – whether it is in education or any other area – needs to be shaped by public opinion. A country’s education sector should take into serious consideration the views of students, parents, teachers, educational administrators, associated unions, and the wider public in formulating the reforms. Especially after Aragalaya/Porattam, the country saw a significant political shift. Disillusionment with the traditional political elite mired in corruption, nepotism, racism and self-serving agendas, brought the NPP to power. In such a context, the expectation that any reforms should connect with the people, especially communities that have been systematically excluded from processes of policymaking and governance, is high.

Sadly, the general educational reforms, which are being implemented this year, emerged without much discussion on what recent political changes meant to the people and the education sector. Many felt that the new government should not have been hasty in introducing these reforms in 2026. The present state of affairs calls for self-introspection. As members affiliated to the National Institute of Education (NIE), we must acknowledge that we should have collectively insisted on more time for consultation, deliberations and review.

The government’s conflicts with the teachers’ unions over the extension of school hours, the History teachers’ opposition to the removal of History from the list of compulsory exam subjects for Grades 10 and 11, the discontent with regard to the increase in the number of subjects (now presented as modules) for Grade 6 classes could have been avoided, had there been adequate time spent on consultations.

Given the opposition to the current set of reforms, the government should keep engaging all concerned actors on changes that could be brought about in the coming years. Instead of adopting an intransigent position or ignoring mistakes made, the government and we, the members affiliated to NIE, need to keep the reform process alive, remain open to critique, and treat the latest policy framework, the exams and evaluation methods, and even the modules, as live documents that can be made better, based on constructive feedback and public opinion.

Philosophy and Content

As Ramya Kumar observed in the last edition of Kuppi Talk, there are many refreshing ideas included in the educational philosophy that appears in the latest version of the policy document on educational reforms. But, sadly, it was not possible for curriculum writers to reflect on how this policy could inform the actual content as many of the modules had been sent for printing even before the policy was released to the public. An extensive public discussion of the proposed educational vision would have helped those involved in designing the curriculum to prioritise subjects and disciplines that need to be given importance in a country that went through a protracted civil war and continue to face deep ethno-religious divisions.

While I appreciate the statement made by the Minister of Education, in Parliament, that the histories of minority communities will be included in the new curriculum, a wider public discussion might have pushed the government and NIE to allocate more time for subjects like the Second National Language and include History or a Social Science subject under the list of compulsory subjects. Now that a detailed policy document is in the public domain, there should be a serious conversation about how best the progressive aspects of its philosophy could be made to inform the actual content of the curriculum, its implementation and pedagogy in the future.

University Reforms

Another reform process where the government seems to be going headfirst is the amendments to the Universities Act. While laws need to be revisited and changes be made where required, the existent law should govern the way things are done until a new law comes into place. Recently, a circular was issued by the University Grants Commission (UGC) to halt the process of appointing Heads of Departments and Deans until the proposed amendments to the University Act come into effect. Such an intervention by the UGC is totalitarian and undermines the academic and institutional culture within the public university system and goes against the principle of rule of law.

There have been longstanding demands with regard to institutional reforms such as a transparent process in appointing council members to the public university system, reforms in the schemes of recruitment and selection processes for Vice Chancellor and academics, and the withdrawal of the circular banning teachers of law from practising, to name a few.

The need for a system where the evaluation of applicants for the post of Vice Chancellor cannot be manipulated by the Council members is strongly felt today, given the way some candidates have reportedly been marked up/down in an unfair manner for subjective criteria (e.g., leadership, integrity) in recent selection processes. Likewise, academic recruitment sometimes penalises scholars with inter-disciplinary backgrounds and compartmentalises knowledge within hermetically sealed boundaries. Rigid disciplinary specificities and ambiguities around terms such as ‘subject’ and ‘field’ in the recruitment scheme have been used to reject applicants with outstanding publications by those within the system who saw them as a threat to their positions. The government should work towards reforms in these areas, too, but through adequate deliberations and dialogue.

From Mindless Efficiency to Patient Deliberations

Given the seeming lack of interest on the part of the government to listen to public opinion, in 2026, academics, trade unions and students should be more active in their struggle for transparency and consultations. This struggle has to happen alongside our ongoing struggles for higher allocations for education, better infrastructure, increased recruitment and better work environment. Part of this struggle involves holding the NPP government, UGC, NIE, our universities and schools accountable.

The new year requires us to think about social justice and accountability in education in new ways, also in the light of the Ditwah catastrophe. The decision to cancel the third-term exams, delegating the authority to decide when to re-open affected schools to local educational bodies and Principals and not change the school hours in view of the difficulties caused by Ditwah are commendable moves. But there is much more that we have to do both in addressing the practical needs of the people affected by Ditwah and understanding the implications of this crisis to our framing of education as social justice.

To what extent is our educational policymaking aware of the special concerns of students, teachers and schools affected by Ditwah and other similar catastrophes? Do the authorities know enough about what these students, teachers and institutions expect via educational and institutional reforms? What steps have we taken to find out their priorities and their understanding of educational reforms at this critical juncture? What steps did we take in the past to consult communities that are prone to climate disasters? We should not shy away from decelerating the reform process, if that is what the present moment of climate crisis exacerbated by historical inequalities of class, gender, ethnicity and region in areas like Malaiyaham requires, especially in a situation where deliberations have been found lacking.

This piece calls for slowing-down as a counter practice, a decelerating move against mindless efficiency and speed demanded by neoliberal donor agencies during reform processes at the risk of public opinion, especially of those on the margins. Such framing can help us see openness, patience, accountability, humility and the will to self-introspect and self-correct as our guides in envisioning and implementing educational reforms in the new year and beyond.

(Mahendran Thiruvarangan is a Senior Lecturer attached to the Department of Linguistics & English at the University of Jaffna)

Kuppi is a politics and pedagogy happening on the margins of the lecture hall that parodies, subverts, and simultaneously reaffirms social hierarchies

by Mahendran Thiruvarangan

Continue Reading

Features

Build trust through inclusion and consultation in the New Year

Published

on

Looking back at the past year, the anxiety among influential sections of the population that the NPP government would destabilise the country has been  dispelled. There was concern that the new government with its strong JVP leadership might not be respectful of private property in the Marxist tradition. These fears have not materialised. The government has made a smooth transition, with no upheavals and no breakdown of governance. This continuity deserves recognition. In general, smooth political transitions following decisive electoral change may be identified as early indicators of democratic consolidation rather than disruption.

Democratic legitimacy is strengthened when new governments respect inherited institutions rather than seek to dismantle them wholesale. On this score, the government’s first year has been positive. However, the challenges that the government faces are many.  The government’s failure to appoint an Auditor General, coupled with its determination to push through nominees of its own choosing without accommodating objections from the opposition and civil society, reflects a deeper problem. The government’s position is that the Constitutional Council is making biased decisions when it rejects the president’s nominations to  the position of Auditor General.

Many if not most of the government’s appointments to high positions of state have been drawn from a narrow base of ruling party members and associates. The government’s core entity, the JVP, has had a traditional voter base of no more than 5 percent. Limiting selection of top officials to its members or associates is a recipe for not getting the best. It leaves out a wide swathe of competent persons which is counterproductive to the national interest. Reliance on a narrow pool of party affiliated individuals for senior state appointments limits access to talent and expertise, though the government may have its own reasons.

The recent furor arising out of the Grade 6 children’s textbook having a weblink to a gay dating site appears to be an act of sabotage. Prime Minister (and Education Minister Harini Amarasuriya) has been unfairly and unreasonably targeted for attack by her political opponents. Governments that professionalise the civil service rather than politicise them have been more successful in sustaining reform in the longer term in keeping with the national interest. In Sri Lanka, officers of the state are not allowed to contest elections while in service (Establishment Code) which indicates that they cannot be linked to any party as they have to serve all.

Skilled Leadership

The government is also being subjected to criticism by the Opposition for promising much in its election manifesto and failing to deliver on those promises.  In this regard, the NPP has been no different to the other political parties that contested those elections making extravagant promises.  The problem is that  the economic collapse of 2022 set the country back several years in terms of income and living standards. The economy regressed to the levels of 2018, which was not due to actions of the NPP. Even the most skilled leadership today cannot simply erase those lost years. The economy rebounded to around five percent growth in the past year, but this recovery now faces new problems following Cyclone Ditwah, which wiped out an estimated ten percent of national income.

In the aftermath of the cyclone, the country’s cause for shame lies with the political parties. Rather than coming together to support relief and recovery, many focused on assigning blame and scoring political points, as in the attacks on the prime minister, undermining public confidence in the state apparatus at a moment when trust was essential.  Despite the politically motivated attacks by some, the government needs to stick to the path of inclusiveness in its approach to governance. The sustainability of policy change depends not only on electoral victory but on inclusive processes that are more likely to endure than those imposed by majorities.

Bipartisanship recognises that national rebuilding and reconciliation requires cooperation across political divides. It requires consultation with the opposition and with civil society. Opposition leader Sajith Premadasa has been generally reasonable and constructive in his approach. A broader view  of bipartisanship is that it needs to extend beyond the mainstream opposition to include ethnic and religious minorities. The government’s commitment to equal rights and non-discrimination has had a positive impact. Visible racism has declined, and minorities report feeling physically safer than in the past. These gains should not be underestimated. However, deeper threats to ethnic harmony remain.

The government needs to do more to make national reconciliation practical and rooted in change on the ground rather than symbolic. Political power sharing is central to this task. Minority communities, particularly in the north and east, continue to feel excluded from national development. While they welcome visits and dialogue with national leaders, frustration grows when development promises remain confined to foundation stones and ceremonies. The construction of Buddhist temples in areas with no Buddhist population, justified on claims of historical precedent, is perceived as threatening rather than reconciliatory.

 Wider Polity

The constitutionally mandated devolution framework provided by the Thirteenth Amendment remains the most viable mechanism for addressing minority grievances within a united country. It was mediated by India as a third party to the agreement. The long delayed provincial council elections need to be held without further postponement. Provincial council elections have not been held for seven years. This prolonged suspension undermines both democratic practice and minority confidence. International experience, whether in India and Switzerland, shows that decentralisation is most effective when regional institutions are electorally accountable and operational rather than dormant.

It is not sufficient to treat individuals as equal citizens in the abstract. Democratic equality also requires recognising communities as collective actors with legitimate interests. Power sharing allows communities to make decisions in areas where they form majorities, reducing alienation and strengthening national cohesion. The government’s first year in office saw it acknowledge many of these problems, but acknowledgment has not yet translated into action. Issues relating to missing persons, prolonged detention, land encroachment and the absence of provincial elections remain unresolved. Even in areas where reform has been attempted, such as the repeal of the Prevention of Terrorism Act, the proposed replacement legislation falls short of international human rights standards.

The New Year must be one in which these foundational issues are addressed decisively. If not, problems will fester, get worse and distract the government from engaging fully in the development process. Devolution through the Thirteenth Amendment and credible reconciliation mechanisms must move from rhetoric to implementation. It is reported that a resolution to appoint a select committee of parliament to look into and report on an electoral system under which the provincial council elections will be held will be taken up this week. Similarly, existing institutions such as the Office of Missing Persons and the Office of Reparations need to be empowered to function effectively, while a truth and reconciliation process must be established that commands public confidence.

Trust in institutions requires respect for constitutional processes, trust in society requires inclusive decision making, and trust across communities requires genuine power sharing and accountability. Economic recovery, disaster reconstruction, institutional integrity and ethnic reconciliation are not separate tasks but interlinked tests of democratic governance. The government needs to move beyond reliance on its core supporters and govern in a manner that draws in the wider polity. Its success here will determine not only the sustainability of its reforms but also the country’s prospects for long term stability and unity.

by Jehan Perera

Continue Reading

Features

Not taking responsibility, lack of accountability

Published

on

While agreeing wholeheartedly with most of the sentiments expressed by Dr Geewananda Gunawardhana in his piece “Pharmaceuticals, deaths, and work ethics” (The Island, 5th January), I must take exception to what he stated regarding corruption: “Enough has been said about corruption, and fortunately, the present government is making an effort to curb it. We must give them some time as only the government has changed, not the people”

With every change of government, we have witnessed the scenario of the incoming government going after the corrupt of the previous, punishing a few politicians in the process. This is nothing new. In fact, some governments have gone after high-ranking public servants, too, punishing them on very flimsy grounds. One of the main reasons, if not the main, of the unexpected massive victory at the polls of this government was the promise of eradication of corruption. Whilst claiming credit for convicting some errant politicians, even for cases that commenced before they came to power, how has the NPP government fared? If one considers corruption to be purely financial, then they have done well, so far. Well, even with previous governments they did not commence plundering the wealth of the nation in the first year!

I would argue that dishonesty, even refusal to take responsibility is corruption. Plucking out of retirement and giving plum jobs to those who canvassed key groups, in my opinion, is even worse corruption than some financial malpractices. There is no need to go into the details of Ranwala affairs as much has been written about but the way the government responded does not reassure anyone expecting and hoping for the NPP government to be corruption free.

One of the first important actions of the government was the election of Ranwala as the speaker. When his claimed doctorate was queried and he stepped down to find the certificate, why didn’t AKD give him a time limit to find it? When he could not substantiate obtaining a PhD, even after a year, why didn’t AKD insist that he resigns the parliamentary seat? Had such actions been taken then the NPP can claim credit that the party does not tolerate dishonesty. What an example are we setting for the youth?

Recent road traffic accident involving Ranwala brough to focus this lapse too, in addition to the laughable way the RTA was handled. The police officers investigating could not breathalyse him as they had run out of ‘balloons’ for the breathalyser! His blood and urine alcohol levels were done only after a safe period had elapsed. Not surprisingly, the results were normal! Honestly, does the government believe that anyone with an iota of intelligence would accept the explanation that these were lapses on the part of the police but not due to political interference?

The release of over 300 ‘red-tagged’ containers continues to remain a mystery. The deputy minister of shipping announced loudly that the ministry would take full responsibility but subsequently it turned out that customs is not under the purview of the ministry of shipping. Report on the affair is yet to see the light of day, the only thing that happened being the senior officer in customs that defended the government’s action being appointed the chief! Are these the actions of a government that came to power on the promise of eradication of corruption?

The new year dawned with another headache for the government that promised ‘system change.’  The most important educational reforms in our political history were those introduced by Dr CWW Kannangara which included free education and the establishment of central schools, etc. He did so after a comprehensive study lasting over six years, but the NPP government has been in a rush! Against the advice of many educationists that reforms should be brought after consultation, the government decided it could rush it on its own. It refuses to take responsibility when things go wrong. Heavens, things have started going wrong even before it started! Grade Six English Language module textbook gives a link to make e-buddies. When I clicked that link what I got was a site that stated: “Buddy, Bad Boys Club, Meet Gay Men for fun”!

Australia has already banned social media to children under 15 years and a recent survey showed that nearly two thirds of parents in the UK also favour such a ban but our minister of education wants children as young as ten years to join social media and have e-buddies!

Coming back to the aforesaid website, instead of an internal investigation to find out what went wrong, the Secretary to the Ministry of Education went to the CID. Of course, who is there in the CID? Shani of Ranjan Ramanayake tape fame! He will surely ‘fix’ someone for ‘sabotaging’ educational reforms! Can we say that the NPP government is less corrupt and any better than its predecessors?

by Dr Upul Wijayawardhana

Continue Reading

Trending