Features
A Tragedy of Relying on Misinformation
Import Ban on Synthetic Fertilizers –
by Buddhi Marambe,
Faculty of Agriculture, University of Peradeniya
The ban on importation of synthetic fertilizers and pesticides was imposed on May 6, 2021 through the Extraordinary Gazette Notification No 2226/48. This was one of the 20 activities approved by the Cabinet of Ministers under the theme “Creating a Green Socio-economy with Sustainable Solutions for Climate Change”. The theme carries a long term noble objective. However, the approach suggested for achieving the objective in the agriculture sector is not at all practical, even to maintain the current levels of crop production and productivity in the country thus, threatening food security.
Use of organic matter as a soil conditioner, and a supplementary nutrient source to a certain extent, have always been encouraged by many and practiced by farmers at different levels with various objectives. Organic farming is a specialty practice with product and process certification. It has a good but niche export market and also a promising foreign exchange earner. It is heartening to see that organic fertilizer production and compost production are taking place at a mass scale in the country, in response to this policy decision. However, even with the novel technologies, organic fertilizer and/or compost alone would not suffice in providing the required nutrition to plants at the correct time and quantities. A high crop productivity could be achieved when appropriate strategies are used to match the patterns of supply of nutrients from fertilizer (organic or mineral) and absorption of nutrients by plants/crops. This aspect has been much deliberated and hence, I will not elaborate on the same further.
We have now learned that the decision to ban import of agrochemicals was made due to speculation that the farmers in many parts of the country suffer from many Non-Communicable Diseases (NCDs) including kidney disease and also that the serious damages done to the environment with the use of mineral fertilizers. Furthermore, we were also informed that the government spends huge amounts of foreign exchange annually on mineral fertilizer imports, inferring that there is a foreign currency issue that has also set the base for this decision. The author of this article strongly believe that the decision to ban agrochemicals has been taken on misinformation provided to His Excellency the President. Hence, the correct facts regarding the mineral fertilizer and their utilization in Sri Lanka are presented in this article to debunk the unscientific justifications made by some individuals and groups that would probably have led to the policy directive.
Fertilizer Imports and use in Sri Lanka
The Kethata Aruna fertilizer material subsidy programme was introduced in 2005 and dismantled in 2016-2017 replaced by a cash subsidy. The fertilizer material subsidy was re-introduced thereafter since 2018 in different forms. The import of mineral fertilizers is governed by the Regulation of Fertilizer Act No. 68 of 1988. This is under the purview of the National Fertilizer Secretariat (NFS). It must be noted that all quantities of fertilizer imported are decided by the NFS based on the advice and recommendations of the respective state agencies, i.e. Department of Agriculture, Research Institutes responsible for tea, rubber, coconut, sugarcane, etc. The quantities to be imported are decided annually considering the existing extent (for perennial crops) and anticipated extent (e.g. annual food crops) of cultivation, considering the fertilizer recommendations given by state agencies based on crop-nutrient requirements.
For example, according to the NFS, the anticipated paddy cultivation in Sri Lanka in 2021 (both Yala and Maha seasons together) is 1.3 million ha and the required quantity of fertilizer to be imported is 247,000 mt of Urea, 61,000 mt of Triple Super Phosphate (TSP) and 74,000 mt of Muriate of Potash (MOP). As per government regulations, all paddy fertilizer (subsidized fertilizer) can only be imported and distributed through the government-controlled mechanism. Excluding paddy, the anticipated fertilizer import in 2021 to provide required nutrients to other food crops and perennial/plantation crops for an estimated extent of 1.47 million ha amounts to 298,983 mt of Urea, 102,928 mt of TSP and 243,743 mt of MOP. There are other types of fertilizer also imported under the licenses issued by NFS. Further, excluding the subsidized fertilizer for paddy, the NFS issues permits to the private sector to import fertilizer for other crops on an agreed quota system.
It is important to note that no individual or agency in Sri Lanka (government-owned or private sector) can import fertilizer without an import permit issued by the NFS. The import permits are issued based on the actual crop requirements and anticipated cultivated extents. Therefore, it is clear that the quantity of fertilizer imported to Sri Lanka is not done on an ad hoc basis, but on a clear scientific methodology. Farmers should receive fertilizer at quantities decided by the NFS as recommended by the state institutions, and up to what is required by the country – not in excess. When this is done following an accepted procedure, there is no point in arguing that Sri Lanka is importing more “chemical”/synthetic fertilizers than what is required in a given year. However, many policy makers and professionals still blame farmers for overusing fertilizer, which theoretically cannot be true as the fertilizer quantities are imported based on the actual crop requirements as estimated by the state agencies.
If the correct quantities of fertilizer are imported and their distribution is regulated (assuming no illegal entry of fertilizer to the country), the claims for overuse of fertilizer should not have arisen. Further, there should be false alarms ringing to politicians and decision makers that undue quantities of fertilizer has been imported with a huge pressure on foreign exchange drain, and causing severe impacts on the environment. Such false alarms would also have provided a window of opportunity for some to create the “fertilizer demon”.
Once the fertilizer or any other agricultural input is heavily subsidized, their misuse is the most highly likely (mal)practice. In this context, if the state agencies and the NFS have done a fairly accurate estimate for the fertilizer requirement and imports, the best option available would be to remove the fertilizer subsidy (at once or in a phased-out manner) and make “chemical” and organic fertilizers readily available in the market allowing the farmers to take a judicious decision on the fertilizer use on their own. Farmers also need proper training on the judicious use of “chemical” fertilizers with organic matter, i.e. integrated plant nutrient systems (IPNS), and obviously pesticides. Without such well-targeted capacity building, it is not wise to put the blame on the farming community for misusing or overusing agrochemicals and thereby polluting the environment.
Furthermore, some scientists and professionals claim that Sri Lanka uses the highest quantity of fertilizer among those in Asia (or South Asia). The latest FAO statistics available for all countries clearly indicate the low rate of fertilizer use in Sri Lanka (Figure 1), except for few years. Regarding pesticide use, too, Sri Lanka stands at very low rates of application. Hence, the popular notion of heavy use of fertilizers leading to health hazards and environmental pollution is an erroneous conclusion drawn without considering the scientific facts.
Eco-friendly fertilizer use
Organic amendments in agriculture is not an alien practice to our farmers. The IPNS in crop production; i.e. the use of organic matter with “chemical” fertilizers, has been recommended since time immemorial to improve the fertilizer and nutrient use efficiency and to minimize environmental pollution caused by leaching. The Department of Agriculture (DOA) has formally promoted the adoption of Good Agricultural Practices (GAP) to minimize any misuse of agrochemicals, since 2015.The GAP programme has started gaining momentum in 2020. Prior to the current policy directive, the Ministry of Agriculture even had plans to distribute organic fertilizers produced by different private companies to selected paddy growers during 2021 Yala season, together with “chemical” fertilizer. The proportionate allocation of fertilizer for this IPNS was 30% organic fertilizer, and 70% urea, 50% TSP and 70% MOP as per recommendation of the DOA. Similar proportions were also used in the case of bio-fertilizers. This was an excellent initiative. However, the current policy directive will derail this good practice and would create disastrous impacts on crop production.
Figure 1.
Fertilizer use (kg per ha of cropland) in developed and developing countries. Data labels are for the year 2018 (Source: FAOSTAT)
Low quality fertilizer imports
The Sri Lanka Standards Institute (SLSI) has set up standards for the “chemical” and organic fertilizers to be used in Sri Lanka. The NFS relies on such standards, which are adopted for any fertilizer used in Sri Lanka (imported or locally produced). The sparkling revelation made by the Hon. Minister of Agriculture, which also appeared in the Government Audit Report of 2020 which says that 55 fertilizer analysis reports have been tampered to allow inferior quality fertilizers to be released in Sri Lanka. Release of 12,000 mt of imported TSP in 2020 having heavy metals such as lead (Pb) contents higher than the limit set by SLSI (maximum Pb content allowed in TSP is 30 ppm) was reported in electronic and social media, and also raised at the Parliament causing serious concerns over the mishandling of state affairs by certain officials. Hats off to the Hon. Minister of Agriculture who took stern punitive action against some officials for tampering the analytical reports of the fertilizer samples.
Recently, we also heard that organic fertilizer has been imported without proper approvals. Any plant-based organic fertilizer requires the approval and a permit of the DG of the DOA under the Plant Protection Act No 35 of 1999. We also heard that such imports have been done in the past, which should not have been allowed due to multi-folded negative impacts than what is even speculated against agrochemicals. The efforts made by officers of the DOA and the Sri Lanka Customs, and no signs of political interference in releasing the imported consignment is noteworthy and require special commendations.
All such incidents indicate that the well-articulated fertilizer regulatory process has been breached by some people with vested interests. These are daylight robberies of government (people’s) money and efforts to rape the environment (similar to misuse of any other agricultural inputs). The penalties have been imposed in some cases but it is high time that openings for mal-practices be sealed-off so that even in the future, import of any type of fertilizers is stringently governed.
The case of non-communicable diseases
Agrochemicals are generally considered as the causal factors for many of the non-communicable diseases (NCDs), especially the chronic kidney disease of uncertain etiology (CKDu). Such unproven ideology has been forced into minds of people who are suffering from the disease. Some even dubbed CKDu as ‘Agricultural kidney disease’. This propaganda campaign has brainwashed not only the unfortunate patients, but also the general public and policy makers and thus, creating fear against an important agricultural input.
In those claims, nutrients are probably not targeted as the causal factor for NCDs. For example, both mineral and organic fertilizers provide the essential plant nutrient “Nitrogen” in the form Nitrate (NO3–) or Ammonium (NH4+) ions to be taken up by plants. Further, amino acid supplements providing 13-19% nitrogen can also be taken up by plants directly. The loss of Nitrates in the ecosystems, especially polluting ground water, can be minimized by split application of fertilizer (which is the recommended practice) and with the application of organic matter (manure, fertilizer or composts) as soil amendments. The organic amendments have limited plant nutrient supply (e.g. 1-3.5% N, or rarely up to 6% depending on the source). Lack of soil organic matter (e.g. sandy soils) will create a negative scenario as observed in isolated incidents such as Kalpitiya area. Hence, the popular argument on the impact of fertilizer on human health and environment issues could mainly be focused on the potential contaminants in fertilizers, such as heavy metals.
Nitrogen being the most difficult element to tackle in nature, let me take an example for urea. The maximum limits allowed by the SLS standards for Arsenic (As), Cadmium (Cd) and Lead (Pb) for urea fertilizer used in Sri Lanka is 0.1, 0.1 and 0.1 ppm, respectively. As for solid organic fertilizers the corresponding values are 3, 1.5 and 30 ppm, respectively (SLS 1704:2021). This indicates the danger that could arise from application of solid organic fertilizer with the objective of providing nitrogen to the crops. Extremely low and stringent heavy metal limits have been adopted for urea as there is hardly any chance for such contamination, but the maximum allowable limits for such elements in solid organic fertilizers are higher owing to higher potential for contamination. If the municipal solid waste is used as the source to produce composts for agricultural land, then the maximum allowable limits for As, Cd and Pb are 5, 3 and 150 ppm (SLS 1634:2019), respectively. This needs no further explanation to prove the fact that organic fertilizer targeting Nitrogen could pollute the environment at a higher level than urea.
The popular talk on “Agrochemicals as a causal factor for rising incidence of cancer in Sri Lanka” has surfaced again. I am not a medical professional to provide details on such. However, as per Figure 1, the amount of fertilizer added per ha of cropland in 2018 in Australia was 86 kg, Bangladesh 318 kg and Sri Lanka 138 kg. But, the statistics presented by GLOBOCAN 2020 revealed that five-year prevalence in cancer as a proportion for 100,000 population in Australia is 3,172, Bangladesh 164, and Sri Lanka 354. I will leave it with the learned readers to draw conclusions.
The “demon” created in people’s mind with respect to use of fertilizer and its impact on NCDs such as CKDu was comprehensively refuted recently by the Chairman of the National Research Council (NRC) of Sri Lanka, appearing in a popular TV discussion. The Chairman/NRC clearly stated that the most recent research completed under the funding from NRC has concluded that not drinking adequate volumes of water and the high fluoride content in ground water as the two major causal factors for the CKDu in Anuradhapura area. He further stated that the disease is not due to heavy metals and that this information has been provided to the Ministry of Health.
Need for evidence-based policy making
National policies need to be set based on evidence. Policies driven by advice from those who want their whims and fancies to be realized at the expense of national budget will result in detrimental and irreversible impact on the national economy. Further, the spread of unproven and non-scientific ideologies across the society have already made complete change in focus of the efforts made to find solutions to major issues in the Sri Lankan society, including finding causal factors for human health related problems such as CKDu. Many intellectuals have alarmed that the import ban on “chemical” fertilizers would lead to food shortages and high food prices. In this context, Sri Lanka is likely to import a major portion of basic food needs such as rice, as experienced by Bhutan in their failed attempt to become the first organic country by 2020, adding a huge burden to the government treasury.
The fear generated on agrochemicals thus, seems to be due to chemophobia (irrational fear of chemicals) of some people, who have unduly fed the same into the authorities. His Excellency and the Cabinet of Ministers should not fall prey to ideologies spread by some people that could have unprecedented negative effects, in making decisions in relation to the country’s economy. It is still not late to revisit the decision to ban the import of agrochemicals. Being misinformed is more dangerous than being not informed.
Features
Education, democracy and unravelling liberal order
by Ahilan Kadirgamar
Sri Lanka is now at the crossroads with a new regime in formation that has to choose from different social and economic pathways for the country. In the United States, Trump is back with a fascist tide that is likely to sweep the world. In this context, what will become of the long journey of free education in Sri Lanka?
The trend in Sri Lanka after the open economy reforms of the late 1970s has been defunding free education, leading to the slow implosion of the education system. In fact, particularly over the last decade, there has been an insidious project of engineering the failure of state education, in order to create the environment for commercialising education. Privatisation, including fee-levying institutions, are now making education a cash earner – even as students become indebted – and a privilege of the wealthy. In this column, I sketch the ideological underpinnings of education that have to be debated and struggled for, as education, like other social pillars, are confronted with diverging paths ahead.
Kannangara and Dewey
When it comes to free education in Sri Lanka, we often go back to Kannangara’s Free Education Bill of 1944. Indeed, Kannangara claimed a new democracy like Sri Lanka needed universal free education. There were, however, great gaps in terms of those who continued to be excluded from free education after independence, particularly oppressed caste communities, the rural and urban subaltern classes, and the Hill Country Tamils in the plantations.
Few decades back, when I began thinking about the legacy of free education in Sri Lanka, I also read with much enthusiasm, the American pragmatist philosopher John Dewey’s classic work ‘Democracy and Education’. Dewey put forward an educational philosophy about the importance of critical learning and engagement for a democracy. Such advancements in educational thinking and policies were the backdrop for public free education with the emergence social welfare states in the post-Second World War era, including in the Third World after decolonisation. However, with the neoliberal turn following the long economic downturn in the 1970s, social welfare was rolled back with liberal democratic states abandoning education to the whims of the market.
Now, what happens when the liberal order itself comes under attack as with the re-emergence of Trump? Will it be more of market-oriented education or illiberal education – characterised by attacks, for example, on secularism and progressive values of gender equality – with the rise of conservative forces? Indeed, the story in the United States, in recent times, has been the merging of the two backed, by the Christian Right.
In this context, where is education in Sri Lanka headed? Will the NPP Government be able to redirect education towards universal free education from the commercialised educational thrust we have seen over the last few years? Much will depend on how the World Bank and the elite in Colombo engage with the Government and the resistance put forward by the people.
6% of GDP demand
The NPP claims it will slowly address the demand for 6% of GDP in state expenditure for education. Given the economic constraints and the drastic cuts to spending with the IMF programme, substantively increasing the allocation would require considerable political will on the part of the government, including walking away from the IMF’s austerity conditionalities.
Following the major FUTA struggle with its demand for 6% of GDP 12 years ago, in 2012, some of us took the issue of defunding general education seriously, and did some research on the state of rural schools in the Jaffna District. We found that even where there were adequate facilities and teachers, students did not perform well and many dropped out of school due to poor social and economic conditions. I published some of the findings of this research in a chapter titled, “From the Margins of Jaffna: A Political Economy of the Crisis in Education” (Crisis in Education, Dialogue, Vol. XXXIX 2012). I critiqued the World Bank claim that educational attainment will lead to higher earnings by analysing the opposite causal dynamics, where, in reality, social and economic exclusion undermines educational advancement.
All this is important today, as Sri Lanka goes through a long economic crisis. The social and economic impact in the country today is similar to the great disruption of social life during the decades of war in Jaffna where education deteriorated with intergenerational impact. We know that children are skipping meals, with increasing levels of absenteeism, and also dropping out of schools and universities to find cheap work for survival. While state investment in education is absolutely necessary at the current moment, economic rejuvenation and social protection programmes are also necessary to ensure meaningful education for the children of working people. In other words, the ongoing austerity measures pushed by the IMF, have a double impact on education, both defunding state education and disabling communities’ ability to access and engage in education. I believe, particularly amidst the economic crisis, there is need to think about the social determinants of education, along the lines of progressive analysis in health with their emphasis on the social determinants of health.
Emancipatory initiative
As Sri Lanka emerges out of presidential and parliamentary elections, the next six months are going to be crucial for education in Sri Lanka. While Dewey and Kannangara saw education as critical for democracy, I emphasise that the educational system is determined by broader political, social and economic changes. A polarised world with unrestrained extraction of resources and tremendous exploitation in the Global South will drastically affect the educational possibilities of the working people. In this context, what can a left of centre government, coming to power with support of a non-elite electorate, do to address the maligned state of free education?
I argue that demanding larger allocations for education alone will not be enough. We need to struggle against commercialisation of education and once again demand free education for all. Furthermore, free education has to come with the necessary social supports that enable the dispossessed sections of our society to meaningfully access education, which means an end to austerity. Moreover, in the troubling years ahead characterised by the rise of authoritarian and fascist tendencies around the world, the assault on education is likely to come in the form of both commercial extraction through educational businesses and an attack on the liberal freedoms.
In this context, I believe the idea of educational attainment leading to higher earnings and social mobility, in a time when an economic depression has disrupted livelihoods and people don’t even have the wherewithal to access education, for the moment has to be shelved. The struggle for free education needs to draw from more radical thinking in our times as we focus on self-sufficiency and the essential needs of our people. I draw inspiration from Paulo Freire’s ‘Pedagogy of the Oppressed’, and emphasise the need again to think of education as an emancipatory initiative for the millions in our country who have been dispossessed and reduced to poverty. We need to unconditionally reinforce free education as essential for democracy, equality and freedom.
(Ahilan Kadirgamar is a political economist and Senior Lecturer, 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
Features
Govt. needs to consider broader coalition
by Jehan Perera
The government is aware as much as anyone else that the country continues to be in an extremely vulnerable situation with the possibility of reversal to a state of economic decline a possible scenario. Both national and international experts have pointed this out with the IMF saying that the country is poised at knife’s edge. The government’s care taken in navigating the situation has included accepting the IMF package, which the main opposition party is making so bold as to reject, but which the former government negotiated and considered to be its signal triumph. The government has also not been engaging in any high cost and self-interested activities unlike its predecessors who sooner rather than later made major wasteful expenditures.
The government has also demonstrated discipline most commendably by not abusing state resources for election purposes. This indicates a commitment to rule within the law, unlike previous leaders who saw themselves as above the law. The country’s leading election monitoring bodies have made this point, noting that at previous elections, including the recently concluded presidential election, governments were blatant in their misuse of state resources.
All of them used state vehicles, including helicopters, without any hesitation and allocated large sums of money for their party members to spend on the ground as development activities. The NPP government is however showing that it is clearly different from its predecessors and wishes to spearhead the formation of a new political culture.
The government’s desire to show that it is different from its predecessors may also explain the appearance of its aversion to joining hands with other political parties in the formation of a new government. Instead, the government’s leading spokespersons are openly saying that will not offer any positions in the government to the opposition member who appear to be falling over themselves to say that they would like to support the government in its noble endeavours and would want to join up to do the same.
President Anura Kumara Dissanayake has made it plain that after the parliamentary election, when it comes to forming the new government, the only persons who would be offered ministerial positions will be those from within the ruling party.
ADEQUATE REPRESENTATION
The government’s announcement that it will only be having members from within the ruling party appointed as ministers has been in reaction to members of other political parties publicly expressing their readiness to join the government as ministers if invited. Some of them have even claimed endorsement by the president himself for their plans of joining the government.
However, the president has been very specific that he will not be having any members of the two immediate past government in his government. This will rule out that the practices of the past whenever opportunities to move from one side to the other, they did so with gusto, only to find that they were not the only ones who had crossed over.
From the viewpoint of those who feel they have a lot of energies within themselves they would like to join the government to multiply the impact of their work. On the other hand, many of those same political leaders have very poor track records of governance, being highly corrupt and acting with impunity, without following the due process that was set out.
It makes sense for the NPP government to wish to keep a distance between themselves and the older generation of politicians. More or less all of them are now tainted with the brush of corruption and impunity that has made it possible for the more powerful among them to get away with murder.
However, relying on one’s own party to make decisions for the country is inadvisable. The fact is that Sri Lanka is a multi-ethnic, multi religious, multi lingual and multi caste society. The core decision making group within the NPP needs to have the ability the represent them directly.
However, this core group of decision makers is still not widely known but is generally believed to be from the Sinhalese ethnic majority. The question is whether they, even if ideologically driven by the Marxist belief in the equality of all persons, can represent the interests of the ethnic and religious minorities. The reason that adequate representation in decision making is essential is that it is difficult for those who are from one group to fully comprehend the needs and aspirations of those from other groups.
STAYING POWER
As a country that experienced over three decades of violent ethnic conflict which continues without resolution, the issue of ensuring adequate representation of ethnic and religious minorities in the government needs to be taken as a matter of primary importance. In a similar manner, the issue of adequate representation of women in politics also needs to be taken seriously, with a women’s quota of at least 25 percent becoming part of the political debate. The government will have many other priorities. But having the ethnic and religious minority representation to come from having been elected by the people, and not being simply selected from above, will be essential.
The absence of strong and independent minority representation can be seen in some of the cosmetic actions taken by the government which in their minds might be a worthwhile endeavour. A few weeks ago, a road that had been closed for nearly three decades in the Jaffna airport area was reopened. But the situation there is one of extreme poverty and underdevelopment, which the opening of the road contributes little or nothing to alleviate. They see the road as connecting nowhere special with another place at its end which is also going to nowhere special. The road is seen by the people living there in the north to be an action, but one that is not improving their lifestyles and life prospects.
The NPP’s reversal of its stance on the issue of abolition of the Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA) has been discouraging to the people of the north and east. This law which is called a draconian law on account of its severity, discourages their activism as they do not want to protest about anything and taken in under the PTA. The Tamil and Muslim people see the PTA as a weapon to harass them and to subjugate them through fear of the fate of their compatriots. The way that Sinhalese people see the situation is different and focuses on the fact that for most Sinhalese, the PTA is simply the fastest and most efficient way to provide national security to the country and its people. This is the reason why power sharing between the representatives of the different parties is necessary that they may engage in repeated and frequent internal debates and find themselves rethinking the country and its laws.
Features
Sri Lanka not in the scene at Grammy Awards 2025
The Grammy Awards were much in the news, in our scene, the past few weeks, and that was mainly because our artistes were seeking CONSIDERATION for a Grammy Award.
Those who are not familiar with the criteria for nomination got the impression that submitting an entry for consideration is a great achievement, and there were congratulatory messages on social media.
One must remember that an entry that has been submitted for consideration is sent to the members of the Recording Academy, assuming that particular entry meets the criteria, to be voted on.
From these votes, nominations for each category are derived.
Being Grammy-nominated is a PRESTIGIOUS ACHIEVEMENT, but simply seeking consideration is NOT, and we were seeking consideration for Best Global Music Album.
Well, the nominees for Grammy Awards 2025 were announced last Friday, 8th November, 2024, and Sri Lanka is missing from that list.
Best Global Music Album brought into the spotlight the following:
Alkebulan II
– Matt B feat. Royal Philharmonic Orchestra
Paisajes
– Ciro Hurtado
Heis
– Rema
Historias De Un Flamenco
– Antonio Rey
Born In The Wild
– Tems
Beyoncé added to her all-time record number of Grammy nominations with 11, for the 67th Grammy Awards, followed by Kendrick Lamar, Charli XCX and Billie Eilish with seven nods each.
Beyoncé now has a career total of 99 Grammy nominations – more than any other artiste – but she’s not yet won the Recording Academy’s top prize, Album of the Year. Who knows, we may see her do it this time!
The winners of Grammy Awards 2025 will be revealed at the event in Los Angeles, on 2nd February, 2025.
Yes, Sri Lanka did have a Grammy Award winner, and that was in 2014.
Hussain Jiffry won the prestigious Grammy Award as a member of the Herb Alpert Quintet. They won the Best Pop Instrumental Album Award for their album ‘Steppin’ Out.’
For the record, the renowned bassist, who is now based in LA, in the States, has performed with many artistes, including Sergio Mendes, Al McKay, Yanni, Dave Weckl Band, and Herb Alpert, and is said to be one of the most sought-after bassists in LA.
-
Features3 days ago
When Sir John Kotelawala visited St. Joseph’s College
-
Sports7 days ago
How Sri Lanka stunned everyone in the Hong Kong Sixes
-
Features7 days ago
A call from university teachers for a commitment to free education
-
News3 days ago
SL will not be able to join BRICS right now but membership of its NDB bank okayed
-
Sports3 days ago
Pathum Nissanka; the ace up Sri Lanka’s sleeve
-
News7 days ago
Wijeweera’s son warns the danger of giving NPP 2/3rd majority
-
Editorial7 days ago
CPC skirts main issue
-
Opinion6 days ago
A new dawn for Sri Lanka