Features
A Golden Age in Public Administration
It is arguable that the golden age of public administration in Ceylon/Sri Lanka were the years between 1948 and 1972, probably extending even upto 1989. Before 1948, it was a colonial, bureaucratic administration. Since 1948, Sri Lanka had a Parliamentary democracy. The administrative system during this period was one of collaboration between the administrators and the politicians, each respecting the other’s role.
There was a degree of autonomy for the public service. Most senior administrators of this period worked in English and so did the politicians. The administrators came largely from the University of Ceylon. Moreover, the parliamentarians were genuine representatives of the people, elected directly through a constituency system. The members of Parliament knew their constituents and they in turn knew their parliamentarians. These systems have gradually been eroded.
Elmo De Silva was a senior administrator during this period. His career ranged from the late 1950s to the early 1990s. The first part of his career was in district administration, and the latter part was in the Customs Department and later in the World Customs Organization. He became an international authority on certain aspects of customs administration like trade facilitation. The volume deals with his career, and also with his early life, describing his school days and university life at Peradeniya in the 1950s. His family and personal life is interwoven into the narrative. Running through his life is his love of music. His marriageto his wife, Naomi, comes through the narrative.
The author’s early life was not a bed of roses, nor was it a bed of thorns. One could describe him as belonging to a middle class family, with his father employed in the postal service, most of the time as a postmaster in the outstations. His father was transferred from one place to another and that consequently affected the author’s education as he had to change schools frequently.
The author describes in some detail, the family life of his childhood and the schools he attended. One school in Ratnapura had a class in which children aged six to 16 were placed together – an intriguing mix of primary and adult education. From his early days, the author had musical talent, and music had been one of his life-long interests. When he married Naomi, his musical interests and enjoyment were complemented by that of his wife who was an excellent pianist.
Elmo De Silva had a successful four years at the University at Peradeniya from 1953 to 1957. He ended with an honours degree in Geography. He describes his days at Peradeniya in some detail. Music was one of his interests at the time. He remembers Ivor Jennings, the Vice Chancellor, who made a big difference to Peradeniya at the time. The author is critical of the quality of some of the lectures, especially in his first year when he had to read history. He describes some of the then students by their nicknames which they probably would like to forget in later years. There are also some interesting references to University slang of that time.
From the late 1950s to the early 1970s, Elmo De Silva’s career was in district administration. He first served as an administrative officer in the Department of Agriculture. Then he joined the Land Commissioner’s Department as a District Land Officer and served in the districts of Hambantota, Galle and Polonnaruwa. He describes, the relationship he had with the members of Parliament of those districts. In those days, it was a friendly relationship.
The MPs knew their constituents intimately and were conversant with their problems. This pattern of relationships between the MP and the public servant at the district level has changed dramatically since the MPs came to be selected through proportional representation. The MPs had no familiarity with problems of constituents as they did not represent any particular geographical area within the district.
Elmo De Silva will always be remembered for his role in the second phase of the Kaudulla colonization scheme in the Polonnaruwa District. He was instrumental in opening up 5,000 acres of new land and settling colonists during his years as District Land Officer in Polonnaruwa. The volume describes his experiences of that time.
C. P. de Silva was the member of Parliament for Minneriya and the Minister of Lands, Irrigation and Power. Prior to that, he had been AGA in Polonnaruwa in the 1940s. He had an intimate knowledge of the district and Elmo de Silva had a close relationship with him (as did Ivan Samarawickrama, the then GA). The volume describes the very unusual role of C. P. de Silva in the district, as AGA, MP and Minister of Lands. There is no other politician one can think of, whose diverse roles in his career converged so intimately with the interests of his constituents (Polonnaruwa district was largely one of colonization schemes).
The author has great admiration for C. P. de Silva. “Hon C. P. de Silva was the first to conceive the Mahaweli River Irrigation Project. He thought of this when standing on the Manampitiya bridge in Polonnaruwa, under which the Mahaweli flows. If I remember correct this is referred to in the foreword to the UNDP sponsored feasibility Report”.
One ubiquitous feature of district administration when the working language was English, was the petition writer who converted complaints of the public into some kind of English in a petition which was then delivered to the relevant administrator. The author describes one of these situations. “The first petition I received was against the farm manager of the Mapalana Agricultural Farm. The petition commenced with a very obsequous sentence, which says ‘we place this petition at your honour’s feet and beg for a solution’. Since the pun of the English language was not known to the writer of the petition, there were exhilarating mistakes. Eg. the petition stated that the farm manager was “giving the works” (work) to the young women and not “giving the works” to the older women. An added ‘s’ made all the difference.
The author’s career took a dramatic turn in the mid-1970s. From agriculture and lands, he moved to international trade and the Department of Imports and Exports. Harry Gunaratna, the Controller, who was a former DLO colleague asked him to come and join him at the department as Deputy Controller. A couple of years later, a vacancy occurred in the Customs Department for what became later known as the post of Deputy Director General. There were many who were interested in this job.
When the Minister of Finance (Felix R. Dias Bandaranaike) asked the relevant officer in the Ministry “whether there was any applicant who had not lobbied to be appointed to this post. He had said that only I had not done so. Besides, I had my Import and Export control experience. He then ordered Mr. Gomez to appoint me to fill the vacancy”. That was how senior appointments were made those days.
Elmo De Silva had an outstanding career at the Customs, and was a central figure in the Sri Lankan economic transition from a controlled to an open market economy. The new government which came into power in 1977 is credited with this economic transformation. While the politicians decided on broad policies, there were many critical tasks which had to be undertaken to make them a working reality. In opening up the economy, the Customs and the tariff system had a key role to play. Elmo De Silva was actively engaged in facilitating this transition – in the removal of tariff barriers, in trade facilitation, reducing the many requirements of documentation and streamlining the procedures involved. He became an authority on trade facilitation, and was much involved in the international engagements which led to agreed procedures among customs bodies internationally.
He describes the many conferences and seminars which he attended. He worked closely with the Export Development Board. He was appointed a member of the Presidential Tariff Commission of the late 1970s. He was also appointed Chairman of the Trade Facilitation Committee. The author expresses his great regard for ministers such as Ronnie de Mel (Finance) and Lalith Athulathmudali (Trade) for their key role in the overall economic transition of the country which was initiated by President J. R. Jayewardene.
The author’s valuable insights into the operations of government in opening up the economy is a major contribution to the understanding of the economic history of that time. What emerges clearly from this volume is also the close working relationship which prevailed at the time between ministers and public servants. Technical advice was much valued, and there was a clear division between political decision making and administrative action.
Elmo De Silva had five years with the World Customs Organization (WCO) in Brussels. This was a key organization in the entire process of opening up world trade, with the establishment of the World Trade Organization and the reduction of tariff and non-tariff barriers. The author’s expertise in trade facilitation was highly regarded in the many countries and in the many organizations with which he worked while in the WCO. The volume is replete with information of his many engagements while in the WCO.
The high quality of Elmo’s contributions while at the WCO, is illustrated by the tribute paid to him by the Organization of American States (in Washington, USA), and which is contained in the volume.
On a personal note. I have known Elmo since our University days at Peradeniya, and as fellow residents of Ramanathan Hall in the 1950s. Since then, our paths have crossed as fellow District Land Officers in the 1960s. It is a privilege to have known Elmo and his wife Naomi. Elmo De Silva is one of the most conscientious public servants I have known in my career – highly principled and dedicated to his work, and at the same time, a friend for all seasons. His autobiography is indeed an important contribution to the understanding of public administration in our time.
by Jehan Perera
The Batalanda Commission report which goes into details of what happened during the JVP insurrection of 1987-89 has become the centre of public attention. The controversy has long been a point of contention and a reminder of the country’s troubled past and entrenched divisions that still exist. The events that occurred at Batalanda during the violent suppression of the JVP-led insurgency, remain a raw wound, as seen in the sudden resurfacing of the issue. The scars of violence and war still run deep. At a time when the country is grappling with pressing challenges ranging from economic recovery to social stability, there is a need to keep in focus the broader goal of unity for long-term peace and prosperity. But the ghosts of the past need also to be put to rest without continuing to haunt the present and future.
Grisly accounts of what transpired at Batalanda now fill the social media even in the Tamil media, though Tamils were not specifically targeted at that time. There was then a ceasefire between the government and LTTE. The Indo-Lanka Accord had just been signed and the LTTE were fighting the Indian peacekeeping army. The videos that are now circulating on social media would show the Tamil people that they were not the only ones at the receiving end of counter-terrorist measures. The Sinhalese were in danger then, as it was a rebellion of Sinhalese against the state. Sinhalese youth had to be especially careful.
It appears that former president Ranil Wickremesinghe was caught unprepared by the questions from a team from Al Jazeera television. The answers he gave, in which he downplayed the significance of the Batalanda Commission report have been viewed differently, depending on the perspective of the observer. He has also made a statement in which he has rejected the report. The report, which demands introspection, referred to events that had taken place 37 years earlier. But the ghosts of the past have returned. After the issue has come to the fore, there are many relatives and acquaintances of the victims from different backgrounds who are demanding justice and offering to come forward to give evidence of what they had witnessed. They need closure after so many years.
MORE POLARISATION
The public reaction to the airing of the Al Jazeera television programme is a reminder that atrocities that have taken place cannot be easily buried. The government has tabled the Batalanda Commission report in parliament and hold a two-day debate on it. The two days were to be consecutive but now the government has decided to space them out over two months. There is reason to be concerned about what transpires in the debate. The atrocities that took place during the JVP insurrection involved multiple parties. Batalanda was not the only interrogation site or the only torture chamber. There were many others. Former president Ranil Wickremesinghe was not the only prominent protagonist in the events that transpired at that time.
The atrocities of the late 1980s were not confined to one location, nor were they the responsibility of a single individual or group. The JVP engaged in many atrocities and human rights violations. In addition to members of the former government and military who engaged in counter-terrorism operations there were also other groups that engaged both in self-defence and mayhem. These included members of left political parties who were targeted by the JVP and who formed their own para-military groups. Some of the leaders went on to become ministers in succeeding governments and even represented Sri Lanka at international human rights forums. Even members of the present government will not be able to escape the fallout of the debate over the Batalanda Commission report.
If the debate becomes a battleground for assigning blame rather than seeking solutions, it could have far-reaching consequences for Sri Lanka’s social and political stability. Economic recovery, governance reform, and development require stability and cooperation. The present storm caused by the Batalanda Commission report, and the prospects for increased polarisation and hatred do not bode well for the country. Rather than engaging in potentially divisive debates that could lead to further entrenchment of opposing narratives, Sri Lanka would be better served by a structured and impartial approach to truth-seeking and reconciliation.
NATIONAL HEALING
Earlier this month at the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva, the government rejected the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights assertion that the external evidence gathering unit would continue to collect evidence on human rights violations in Sri Lanka. This evidence gathering unit has a mandate to collect information on a wide range of human rights violations including intimidation and killings of journalists but with a focus on the human rights violations and war crimes during the course of the LTTE war and especially at its end. The government’s position has been that it is determined to deal with human rights challenges including reconciliation through domestic processes.
Addressing the High-Level Segment of the 58th Regular Session of the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) in Geneva in February this year, Foreign Minister Vijitha Herath said: “The contours of a truth and reconciliation framework, will be further discussed with the broadest possible cross section of stakeholders, before operationalisation to ensure a process that has the trust of all Sri Lankans. Our aim is to make the domestic mechanisms credible and sound within the constitutional framework. This will include strengthening the work towards a truth and reconciliation commission empowered to investigate acts of violence caused by racism and religious extremism that give rise to tensions within Sri Lankan society.”
The concept of a truth and reconciliation commission was first broached in 2015 by then prime minister Ranil Wickremesinghe’s government. In 2019 after winning the presidential elections, former president Gotabaya Rajapaksa too saw merit in the idea, but neither of these two leaders had the commitment to ensure that the process was completed. Promoting reconciliation in Sri Lanka among divergent political actors with violent political pasts requires a multi-faceted approach that blends political, social, and psychological strategies.
Given the country’s complex history of armed conflict, ethnic tensions, and political polarisation, the process must be carefully designed to build trust, address grievances, and create a shared vision for the future. A truth and reconciliation process as outlined in Geneva by the government, which has teeth in it for both punishment and amnesty, can give the country the time and space in which to uncover the painful truths and the path to national healing.
Our universities are characterized by hierarchies. They manifest in formal and informal ways, reinforcing power asymmetries based on class, ethnicity and gender, and placing inordinate authority in those with higher status. In medicine, a ‘hidden curriculum’ orients undergraduates to hierarchies from their early days in training, placing professors over lecturers, ‘clinical’ over ‘non-clinical’ teachers, consultants over medical officers, and so on. While hierarchies are needed at universities (and hospitals) to streamline decision-making, dysfunctional hierarchies create unhealthy learning environments and a culture of fear that discourages students from asking questions and voicing concerns. They also legitimize mistreatment, humiliation, bullying, and other abuses of power. A few months ago, when I invited a medical student to participate in a session on ragging and harassment for incoming students, she asked me (quoted with permission), “What’s the point of doing a programme like that if ragging happens in official level by teachers with everyone knowing, Madam?” Her question led me to explore the avenues available at state universities for undergraduates to counter abuses of power by teachers and university administrations.
What can undergrads do?
The University Grants Commission (UGC) and all state universities have established mechanisms for reporting complaints of ragging and sexual and gender-based violence (SGBV). The UGC’s online portal entertains complaints on “all forms of ragging; sexual harassment; sexual or gender based violence; threats and intimidation; bullying; and harassment.” Complaint procedures for ragging and SGBV are described in detail on the websites of each university, as well as the websites of some faculties. Students may also take any complaints directly to the Dean, student counsellors, academic advisors/mentors, and teachers. In addition, many faculties have portals to submit online complaints on ragging and harassment, while others rely on informal mechanisms, like complaint boxes, to protect anonymity. While these systems are used by students to some extent, rarely do they function as checks and balances against abuses of power by teachers and others at the pinnacle of the university hierarchy.
Anyone who works at a state university would know that students (and the university community more broadly) have very little confidence in existing complaint and grievance procedures. While the minority of incidents that get reported may make it to the inquiry stage, the complaints are often withdrawn under threat and intimidation from the authorities or simply brushed under the carpet. More recently, certain universities and faculties have worked towards establishing formal student grievance procedures outside the SGBV/ragging reporting systems.
Newer grievance mechanisms
Sabaragamuwa University appears to be the only university with a university-wide policy for grievance redressal. The protocol described in the standard operating procedure (SOP) requires that students submit their complaint in writing to the Dean or Deputy Senior Student Counsellor of the relevant faculty. On receiving a complaint, a Committee will be set up by the Dean/Deputy Senior Student Counsellor to conduct an inquiry. The Committee will comprise five senior staff members, including “two independent members (one representing another department, and one may represent the Gender Equity and Equality Cell of the Faculty where relevant)…” The SOP further states that “any student can oppose to have his/her mentor and/or any faculty member to be in the five-person team handling his/her issue.” However, this information is available only to the discerning student who is able to navigate the university’s complex website, hit the Centre for Quality Assurance tab, view the list of documents and click ‘best practices’.
Several faculties of medicine appear to have introduced grievance mechanisms. The Grievance Committee of the Faculty of Medicine, Colombo, considers complaints regarding “a decision or action that is perceived to adversely affect the grievant in her or his professional academic capacity.” The procedure requires that students submit the grievance in writing to the Dean. The Committee comprises “persons who are not current employees of the Faculty of Medicine” and the complainant may request the presence of a member of the Medical Students’ Welfare Society. The Faculty of Medicine, Ruhuna, implements a grievance policy that is more expansive in scope, covering concerns related to “organizational changes in the teaching and learning environment, decisions by academic staff members affecting individuals or groups of students, changes in the content or structure of academic programmes, changes in the nature and quality of teaching and assessment, supervision of students undertaking research projects, authorship and intellectual property, [and the] quality of student services and access to university facilities and resources.” While the policy notes that incidents related to harassment, discrimination and bullying, come under the jurisdiction of the university’s SGBV policy, it does not entertain complaints about examinations. The medical faculty of the University of Sri Jayewardenepura (SJP), has an online grievance system that investigates complaints related to “any physical, psychological, academic or any other problem related to the University life”. The system commits to maintaining confidentiality, pledging that “information will not be divulged to members outside the Student Grievances Committee without the student’s permission.”
Gaps in existing systems
The university-wide SGBV/ragging reporting system could be used to address harassment and intimidation of all kinds. Sadly, however, undergraduates appear to be unaware of these possibilities or reluctant to use them. It is unclear as to whether the newer grievance mechanisms at universities and faculties have managed to achieve the desired outcome. Are they used by students and do they lead to constructive changes in the learning environment or do they simply exist to tick the check box of quality assurance? None of the websites report on the number of cases investigated or the kinds of redressal measures taken. If these mechanisms are to be used by students, they must fulfill certain basic requirements.
First and foremost, all students and staff must be made aware of existing grievance mechanisms. Policies and procedures cannot simply be included under a tab buried in the faculty/university website, but need to be placed front and centre. Students should know what steps the institution will take to ensure confidentiality and how those who come forward, including witnesses, will be protected. They should be confident that swift action will be taken when any breaches of confidentiality occur. Inquiries need to be conducted without delay and complainants kept informed of the actions taken. All in all, universities and/or faculties must commit to ensuring integrity and fairness in the grievance process.
Second, the independence of inquiries must be guaranteed. Some universities/faculties have SOPs that require the inclusion of ‘independent’ members in grievance committees—members who are currently non-faculty, academics from other faculties and/or student representatives. Whether the inclusion of non-faculty members would be sufficient to safeguard independence is questionable in fields like medicine where there is a tendency to cover up professional misconduct at all levels. Permitting complainants to have a say in the makeup of the inquiry committee may help to increase confidence in the system. It may be advisable for inquiries to be handled by ombudspersons or others who do not have a stake in the outcome, rather than by academic staff who are part of the university hierarchy.
Third, grievance mechanisms must address the very real possibility of retaliation from university administrations and teachers. The TOR of the Faculty of Medicine, University of Ruhuna, states that the Committee must ensure “students do not suffer any victimization or discrimination as a result of raising complaints or grievances,” but provides no guidance on how this might be accomplished. Any grievance mechanism must address what recourse to action complainants (and witnesses) have in the event of retaliation. At present, there are no regulations in place to ensure that persons alleged of misconduct are not involved in examination procedures. Neither do universities provide any guarantee that complainants’ academic/employment prospects will not be compromised by coming forward. This is especially concerning in medicine where practical assessments of clinical skills and interview-based examinations (viva) are common, and those at higher rank are usually trainers at the postgraduate level.
Going forward
Student grievance mechanisms provide a structured process for students to voice concerns and seek redress when they feel they have been treated unfairly or unjustly by university staff or policies. The mechanisms currently in place at state universities appear to be weak and insufficient. The UGC could call for universities to participate in a consultative process aimed at developing a policy on handling student grievances in ways that promote fairness in academic matters, faculty conduct, and administration at state universities. While such a policy could foster supportive learning environments, build trust between university administrations and students, and protect students from bullying, intimidation and harassment, it must be accompanied by efforts to address and undo dysfunctional hierarchies within our universities.
(Ramya Kumar is attached to the Department of Community and Family Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, 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 Ramya Kumar
The months literally keep flying and, before long, we will be celebrating Oktoberfest.
In our scene, Oktoberfest is looked forward to by many and the five-star venues, especially, create the ideal kind of atmosphere for the celebration of this event, held in late September and early October.
Suzi Croner, who was in town last month (February), is already contracted to do the Oktoberfest scene at a popular five-star venue, in the city.
She says she will be performing six consecutive nights, from 23rd to 28th September, along with a band from Germany.
Suzi’s scene in Switzerland
According to Suzi, the organisers have indicated that they are looking forward to welcoming around 1,500 Oktoberfest enthusiasts on all six days the festivities are held.
“I’m really looking forward to doing the needful, especially with a German band, and I know, for sure, it’s going to be awesome.”
In fact, Suzi, of the band Friends’ fame, and now based in Switzerland, indicated that she never expected to come to her land of birth for the second time, this year.
“After my trip to Sri Lanka, in February, I thought I would check things out again next year, but I’m so happy that I don’t have to wait that long to see my fans, music lovers and friends for the second time, in 2025.”
Suzi spent 11 amazing days in Sri Lanka, in February, performing six nights at a five-star venue in Colombo, in addition to doing the ‘Country & Western Nite’ scene, at the Ramada, and an unscheduled performance, as well.
Suzi Croner: Colombo here I come…in September
Her next much-looked-forward to event is ‘Country Night,’ Down Under.
It will be her second appearance at this ‘Country Night’ dance and music lovers, in Melbourne, in particular, are waiting eagerly to give Suzi a rousing welcome.
Suzi’s bubbly personality has made her a hit wherever she performs.
In her hometown of Spreitenbach, in Switzerland, she is a big draw-card at many local events.
Suzi was the frontline vocalist for the group Friends, decades ago, and this outfit, too, had a huge following in the local scene, with a fan club that had over 1,500 members.
The band was based abroad and travelled to Sri Lanka, during the festive season, to keep their fans entertained, and it was, invariably, a full house for all their performances in the scene here.
Cabinet approves amendments to Aswasuma Welfare Benefit payment Scheme
Fertilizer, financial subsidy to farmers who are cultivating the paddy in the Yala season 2025
Cabinet approves the submission of amendments for the Personal Data Protection Act No. 9 of 2022
-
Foreign News3 days agoSearch continues in Dominican Republic for missing student Sudiksha Konanki
-
Features6 days agoRichard de Zoysa at 67
-
News7 days agoAlfred Duraiappa’s relative killed in Canada shooting
-
Features3 days agoThe Royal-Thomian and its Timeless Charm
-
Midweek Review7 days agoRanil in Head-to-Head controversy
-
Features6 days agoSL Navy helping save kidneys
-
News4 days agoDPMC unveils brand-new Bajaj three-wheeler
-
Features3 days ago‘Thomia’: Richard Simon’s Masterpiece