Opinion

Anagarika Dharmapala’s contribution to restoration of Buddha Sasana in India

Published

4 years ago

2021/09/17

By Rohana R. Wasala

It seems I was born to restore the Sasana in India. When I started Buddhist work in India, a lot of lay Buddhists as well as Bhikkhus in Ceylon started working against me. They did not accept my advice……… I left Ceylon and went to India to do the work for the Sasana because there was no one to do that work….. In February 1906, my father passed away. Mrs Mary Foster came to my rescue. Mrs Foster is the modern Vishaka. She is helping the Sasana through me……..The well-to-do Sinhalese have no patriotic love for the land. They run after the British. Our leaders are disunited in faith and nationality. I am leaving a country with a slave mentality due to the Missionary education which is unpatriotic, which is not eager to find modern technologies. Uncultured manners are regarded highly in the society………….. To improve the life of the foolish Sinhalese is a difficult task. Economically they cannot be uplifted. They are lazy. They do not have a vision for progress. They do not have an urge to safeguard the Buddha Sasana….. Even now, Buddhists who did not contribute a cent towards my work in India, questioned me about the details of the accounts. They know only to criticize me and question me about accounts.

Anagarika Dharmapala (‘My Life Story’, ed. Lakshman Jayawardane, Sarasavi Publishers, Nugegoda, Sri Lanka, 2013)

(My opinion is that it is important to interpret the Anagarika, his language and ideas, as reflected in the above extract, in relation to the historical context in which he lived and worked. We today realise how accurate he was in his observations about the moral and economic degeneration of a great nation that suffered under foreign rule for centuries and its lost genius that needed to be restored through its own efforts under a good leadership. Aren’t we still struggling to live down that national humiliation amidst predatory interferences from the descendents of those former colonisers? Contrary to the negative view that most modern Sri Lankans seem to have been brainwashed to entertain about him due to decades of anti-national propaganda, shouldn’t we appreciate how far ahead of his time Anagarika Dharmapala actually was? He is criticised for having been ‘hostile’ towards the ‘minorities’. But were the ‘minorities’ then comparable to the minorities that the majority Sinhala Buddhists coexist peacefully with today? Which minority then thought about the historical homeland of the Sinhalese with the same degree of self-denying love and devotion as they did?)

The 157th Anagarika Dharmapala birth anniversary falls today. To mark this occasion, I thought it appropriate to write about the contribution he made to the revival of Buddhism in the land of its birth.

Anagarika Dharmapala contrived to closely interact with Mahatma Gandhi and other leaders of the Indian independence movement such as Jawaharlal Nehru, Rajendra Prasad, Muslim leader Shaukat Ali, Madan Mohan Malaviya and poet, philosopher and writer Rabindranath Tagore in the early decades of the last (20th) century, and achieved what he could for his own cause in India. Dharmapala was active as a Buddhist missionary who was determined to revive Buddhism in the country where it originated, initiating his campaign by trying to reclaim Buddha Gaya to world Buddhists, among whom he considered the Sinhalese to be foremost as the Custodians of Theravada Buddhism, generally regarded as the pristine form of the Dharma preached by Gautama Buddha. He wanted to take the word of the Buddha to the Western world as well as to strengthen ties with the Buddhist countries of the East. Apart from being in the same boat in terms of their respective life missions, chronologically too they were close to each other: Dharmapala was the senior having been born on September 17, 1864. Gandhi was junior to him by five years, for he was born on October 2, 1869. Close contemporaneity and shared cultural affinity made interaction between the two easier and more natural. This was significant because, by then, Mahatma Gandhi was already a man on a pedestal for many in India.

Having said that, it is essential to make an important distinction between Dharmapala and Gandhi as visionary men committed to great missions. Gandhi was more a political pragmatist than a spiritual visionary. Dharmapala kept to his chosen Buddhist missionary role and adopted an unwaveringly apolitical approach to his mission. But this was ignored by the British colonial government, which, during the 1915 Riot, for fear that Dharmapala’s potential presence in Sri Lanka in the years following would be problematic, quite arbitrarily subjected him to a five year long term of house arrest (1915-1920) in Calcutta, where he was then engaged in his normal missionary activities. It was virtually, a punishing term of internment for a constantly active, mobile individual like Dharmapala. Gandhi, on the other hand, in his failure to work with Muslim leaders without compromising legitimate Hindu interests, earned the murderous wrath of a group of Hindu nationalists.

Passage of time and emerging new research studies about them enable us to put them into perspective, and make fresh assessments of their personalities, individual perceptions and achievements. To name just two examples among many books concerning Gandhi, we have “The Gift of Anger: And Other Lessons from My Grandfather Mahatma Gandhi” by Arun Gandhi (2018) that provides evidence of a less admirable aspect of his personality which, if not suppressed by himself, would have been a stain on his nonviolent image (but Gandhi himself viewed anger as an empowering emotion that should not be abused), and “Gandhi in South Africa: A Racist or Liberator?” by Dr Siby K. Joseph (2019) which reveals that he was not initially free from a streak of racist prejudice against black Africans though, as a lawyer, he stood up for their independence and human rights. Regarding Anagarika Dharmapala, there is Dr Sarath Amunugama’s “Lion’s Roar” (2016), which, taking the facts of his life and times into consideration, seems to follow a more cautious, if unconvincing, middle course between passionate admirers of the iconic figure and his traditionally biased detractors, though the book repeats the unfounded eurocentric ‘protestant Buddhism’ thesis to describe the indigenous Buddhist revival movement which Dharmapala saw the beginning of, and which he enriched with his own epochal contribution.

Such deconstructive literature about Dharmapala and Gandhi has by now exposed their feet of clay as well as their focal strengths, and made them credibly and acceptably more human in the public perception. Both were great men and played truly heroic roles in the national and international causes that they championed; Gandhi was the leading anti-colonial Indian nationalist of his time, and the model political ethicist; the non-violent resistance movement that he led ultimately won India its independence from Britain, but failed to prevent the partition of India on August 15, 1947 into two independent states that resulted in two million deaths and 14 million displaced, and in his own assassination a few months later, on January 30, 1948. Dharmapala had to be satisfied with only partial success in his endeavour to acquire Buddha Gaya for Buddhists. But their monumental legacies have left indelible marks on the history of their nations and on that of the world at large, though these are hardly recognized, particularly in respect of Anagarika Dharmapala.

In the 1940s, Gandhi opposed the partition and worked with some Muslim leaders such as the famous Ali brothers, the Maulanas Shaukat and Mohamed Ali, and his friend Badhshah Khan, who shared his vision of an independent India based on religious multiculturalism. The Ali brothers were the leaders of the anti-British Khilafat Movement of Indian Muslims who demanded justice for the Sunni Islamic Turkey (Ottoman Empire). Gandhi’s actively supportive association with that organization made him temporarily popular among the Muslims. But with the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire after WWI and the establishment of the Republic of Turkey under Mustafa Kemal Ataturk in 1923, the Khilafat Movement also ended in 1924. Gandhi and Badhshah Khan had wanted Hindus and Muslims each to open their places of worship to the other for prayer. The Hindus offered their temples to Muslims for prayer, but the Muslims were not ready to reciprocate the conciliatory gesture. The Hindus’ tolerant and accommodating attitude, and the Muslims’ less liberal response are not surprising to anyone who has a basic comparative knowledge of Hinduism and Islam in this respect. It was obvious that Gandhi did not know enough about the second to avoid such embarrassment among his own people, although he had claimed he had a good knowledge of Islam’s holy book.

Dharmapala met and made friends with Shaukat Ali and tried to enlist Muslim support on his struggle to legally take possession of the Buddha Gaya holy place for Buddhists. When Ali visited Colombo in 1921, he spoke in support of Gandhi’s work in India for promoting Hindu-Muslim unity. Dharmapala wrote articles in Sinhala expressing solidarity with Indian Muslims engaged in the Khilafat agitation, but he was shrewd enough not to expect the impossible from Muslims unlike Gandhi. His love of peaceful Hindu-Muslim co-existence was utilitarian: he wanted the assistance of both Hindu and Muslim leaders on his struggle at the Buddha’s birthplace. Though Dharmapala was able to gain only partial control of the place for Buddhists, he had better luck at Sarnath. He had founded his Mahabodhi Society with the idea of reclaiming Buddhist sites in India. He bought a plot of land at Sarnath and built the impressive Mulagandhakuti Vihara, which he was able to complete in 1930. It became the main centre of Buddhist worship in India, which it remains even today, as Amunugama says. It drew the admiration not only of Buddhists, but of the colonial government and that of Indian national leaders Nehru, Tagore, and Malaviya. Dharmapala’s remarkable success in causing India’s lost Buddhist cultural heritage to be brought to the forefront of Indian national consciousness was not confined to this.

Buddhism, he learnt from Sir Edwin Arnold’s “Light of Asia”, he expressed his displeasure, implying that an Indian leader of Gandhi’s stature was remiss in acquiring the best part of India’s spiritual knowledge. Dharmapala himself said that it was through the medium of English that he himself learnt the Dhamma, for at that time no decent education was available in the vernacular. People with ability to do so sent their children to English medium schools as Dharmapala’s did. But Dharmapala did learn Sinhala and Pali as well from erudite Buddhist monks.

According to the 2011 census, there were 8.4 million Buddhists in India, mostly concentrated in Maharashtra. But they belong to different sects, not only to the Theravada tradition that Dharmapala represented. The Mahayana sect is the most prevalent form of Buddhism in India today, as it is in the rest of the world. But the inspiration that Dharmapala left in India as a Buddhist revivalist is not small. He was largely responsible for getting the small village of Buddha Gaya in Bihar, where the Buddha attained Buddhahood, with its historic Mahabodhi Temple complex recognized as the most important Buddhist pilgrimage site in the Buddhist world.

All News Advertisement

Opinion

Appreciation: D. L. O. Mendis Visionary Engineer, Philosopher, and Mentor

Published

1 day ago

2026/01/2

Thilina Walpola

D.L.O. Mendis

Today, we honour the life and legacy of D.L.O. Mendis, a visionary engineer and philosopher whose contributions defined the standards of our profession. D.L.O. possessed a rare combination of analytical rigor and creative foresight. His numerous technical papers presented here and abroad related to water resources development stand as enduring monuments to his brilliance.

Beyond creating blueprints and technical specifications, D.L.O. presented bold ideas that challenged and strengthened our professional communities. He was a dedicated mentor to junior engineers, and a leader who firmly believed that engineering was, above all, a service to humanity. While we mourn this great loss, we take solace in knowing that his radical influence shaped our careers and the ethical code that governs our profession.

A Career of Integrity and Excellence

Throughout his career spanning more than 70 years, D.L.O. embodied the highest standards of integrity and technical excellence. He was particularly instrumental in advancing our

understanding of ancient irrigation systems, bridging the gap between historical wisdom and modern development.

Academic and Professional Journey

D.L.O.’s educational journey began at Ladies’ College(which accepted boys in lower grades at the time) before he moved to Royal College. He later entered the University of Ceylon as a member of the pioneering first batch of engineering students in 1950, graduating in 1954 in a class of nearly 25 students.

His professional path was distinguished and diverse:

Irrigation Department:

Served for nearly 10 years.

River Valleys Development Board (RVDB):

Contributed during the construction of the Uda Walawe reservoir.

Ministry of Plan Implementation:

Served as Deputy Director under Director M. S. M. De Silva, where his main contribution was the promotion of appropriate technology, particularly the advancement of historical Kotmale ironwork which has existed since the era of Parakrama Bahu the Great, and the South Eastern Dry Zone Project. (SEDZ).

Consultancy:

Served as a freelance consultant.

Leadership:

A prolific contributor of a large number of technical papers to the Institution of Engineers, Sri Lanka (IESL), eventually serving as its President.

Personal Reflections and Anecdotes

My association with D.L.O. spanned more than 50 years. I first saw him riding a bicycle past Akbar Hall while I was an engineering student. I later learned his family was residing at Prof. Paul’s residence nearby while he was serving at Uda Walawe Reservoir Project as a senior engineer for the RVDB.

Through D.L.O., I had the privilege of meeting legendary professionals outside the Irrigation Department, includingthe exceptionally bright M.S.M. de Silva and the international economist, Dr. Lal Jayawardena (Mr. N.U.Jayawardena’s son).

A Tribute to a Legacy

We extend our deepest gratitude for Mr. D.L.O. Mendis’slifelong service and offer our sincerest condolences to his family and colleagues. His monumental work and numerous publications remain a lasting gift to future generations of engineers.

May he attain the supreme bliss of Nibbana!

G.T. Dharmasena,
Former Director General of Irrigation

Opinion

Nature’s revenge for human greed and the plight of the Third World

Published

1 day ago

2026/01/2

Thilina Walpola

Now there is no doubt about the phenomenon of global warming, its far reaching effects and its causes. Yet Donald Trump says global warming is con and Europe, too, is dithering about what measures should be urgently taken to save Earth. Deliberations at the COP30 meeting in Brazil did not bring the desired results regarding emission of greenhouse gases. The biggest polluters like the US, who have not met the minimum goals regarding emissions, decided at the 2015 Paris Agreement, failed to provide guarantees that they will correct themselves in the coming years. Cyclones that hit Sri Lanka and other Asian countries last month are the direct result of unrestricted burning of fossil fuel and other activities that cause emission of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases. Extreme climate events hit poor countries like the proverbial lightning that strikes the begging bowl.

The last decade has seen some of the worst natural disasters in the history of mankind. The devastating impacts of the climate crisis reached new heights in 2024, with scores of unprecedented heatwaves, floods and storms across the globe, according to the UN’s World Meteorological Organization (WMO). Yet human greed which is the ultimate cause of global warming continues unabated and CO2 emissions reach new records. The WMO’s report on 2024, the hottest year on record, sets out a trail of destruction from extreme weather that took lives, demolished buildings and ravaged vital crops. More than 800,000 people were displaced and made homeless, the highest yearly number since records began in 2008.

The report lists 151 unprecedented extreme weather events in 2024, meaning they were worse than any ever recorded in the region. Heatwaves in Japan left hundreds of thousands of people struck down by heatstroke. Soaring temperatures during heatwaves peaked at 49.9C at Carnarvon in Western Australia, 49.7C in the city of Tabas in Iran, and 48.5C in a nationwide heatwave in Mali.

Record rains in Italy led to floods, landslides and electricity blackouts; torrents destroyed thousands of homes in Senegal; and flash floods in Pakistan and Brazil caused major crop losses.

Storms were also supercharged by global heating in 2024, with an unprecedented six typhoons in under a month hitting the Philippines. Hurricane Helene was the strongest ever recorded to strike the Big Bend region of Florida in the US, while Vietnam was hit by Super Typhoon Yagi, affecting 3.6 million people. Many more unprecedented events will have passed unrecorded.

The world is already deep into the climate crisis, with the WMO report saying that for the first time, the 10 hottest years on record all occurred in the last decade. However, global carbon emissions have continued to rise, which will bring even worse impacts. Experts were particularly critical of the purge of climate scientists and programmes by the US president, Donald Trump, saying that ignoring reality left ordinary people paying the price.

“Leaders must step up – seizing the benefits of cheap, clean renewables for their people and economies – with new national climate plans due this year,” said the UN secretary general, António Guterres.

Extreme climate events like heat waves, intense rainfall, droughts, and severe storms have significantly increased in frequency and intensity over the past decades, driven by global warming, with studies showing a fivefold increase in climate disasters compared to the 1970s, and human influence now clearly linked to many specific events, according to reports from organisations like the UN, WMO, and Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. The number of recorded climate-related disasters (storms, floods, droughts, wildfires) surged from 711 in the 1970s to over 3,000 in the 2000s and 2010s.

The intensity of these events is also alarmingly rising. Heatwaves, heavy precipitation events, and sea-level impacts from cyclones are becoming more severe, with phenomena like extreme heat in North America now considered “virtually impossible” without human-caused climate change. Scientists can now more confidently attribute specific extreme events (like heatwaves in Europe or floods in Asia) to climate change, moving beyond general predictions to clear causation. The warming atmosphere holds more moisture, fueling more intense precipitation, while human activities (like burning fossil fuels) continue to warm the planet, loading the dice for extreme weather.

These disasters could have been considerably lessened if the signatories to the Paris Agreement on climate change signed in 2016 had fulfilled their commitment to the agreement. The goal of the UN agreement was to reduce the average global temperature rise well below 2 degrees C above pre-industrial levels. To achieve this, it was necessary to cut down CO2 emission by 20%, increase the renewable energy market by 20% and improve energy efficiency by 20%, the so called 20/20/20 targets. However, the agreement was non-binding for the individual countries.

Despite all this effort, green-house gas emissions reached an all-time record of 37 billion tons in 2018 and 41 billion tonnes in 2024. This has caused havoc all over the world, long dry periods affecting crops, desertification, forest fires alternating with torrential rain, huge floods and storms. Countries like China, the US, EU and India who in that order are the largest emitters of greenhouse gases have a great responsibility in saving the world from total destruction. Though China, EU and India appear to be on course to achieve Intended Nationally Determined Contributions towards emission reduction, they must do more in double quick time if global temperature rise is to be kept at 1.5C. In contrast President Trump in his usual bumbling and foolish attitude is planning to withdraw from the Paris Agreement. .

It has been calculated that if meat consumption is reduced by 20% carbon emission would be reduced by 5%. Cutting down on meat consumption would be good for health also and would lesson cruelty to animals. There are several similar measures that people and governments could do to mitigate this problem. But human greed seems to be uncontrollable. Obviously rich countries have the capacity to deal with extreme weather events and don’t care much about their devastating impact on poor countries.

In a country like Sri Lanka, for instance, when the waters rage, people have nowhere to go. Poor people with limited land resources cannot choose where to live. This is why hawkers whose wayside shops on the Kadugannawa climb were destroyed by recent earth slides are seen reconstructing the shops in the same places. There may not be sufficient land available to relocate all those who live in unsafe places like the foot of unstable hills, in river basins, sea beaches, etc. in a small country like ours. A significant portion of Sri Lanka’s population lives in disaster-prone areas, with nearly 19 million people residing in vulnerable spots like low-lying or landslide-prone regions, including hill slopes, making them highly susceptible to climate impacts. The National Building and Research Organisation (NBRO) has identified over 14,000 specific landslide-prone locations, affecting thousands of rural and estate homes, with thousands more at high or medium risk, especially in districts like Badulla, Kandy, and Kegalle.

To make life safe from extreme weather for at least the most vulnerable and the poorest may be beyond the means of our poor country with all its economic ills. Experts say we have to be prepared to live with climate change. Rather we may have to die with it unless the preventable is prevented ! According to climate scientists, global warming is preventable. The Director of the Penn Center for Science, Sustainability & the Media, Michael Mann is among many scientists who point to the “game-changing new scientific understanding” that global warming would stabilize relatively quickly (within a decade) if emissions were to reach net zero, meaning that the worst outcomes are avoidable if we act swiftly. The authors of the comprehensive IPCC reports emphasize that every fraction of a degree of warming that is prevented will save countless lives and protect vital ecosystems. These reports serve as the authoritative voice on climate science and policy recommendations.

The battle against global warming, it appears, has to be fought by the Global South as the North is not doing enough. It is the poor countries of the Global South that do not have the capacity to absorb the blows that nature delivers, and it is they who have to bear the brunt of the relentless onslaught. As I have mentioned in my earlier letters the Global South has to get together to fight the greed driven neo-liberalism which is the cause of so many ills including global warming. In this regard China, India, South Africa and perhaps Iran with the backing of Russia may have to take the leadership and construct an alternative to the present global economic system which would have to take strong cognition of the need to safeguard the environment and cut down on emissions drastically and quickly. This is not impossible if consumerism, which is the driver of neo-liberalism, could be controlled. To achieve this human greed will have to be restrained, perhaps by means of good morals. Unless the Global South realizes the impending peril and takes necessary measures we are doomed.

by N. A. de S. Amaratunga ✍️

Opinion

Remembering Douglas Devananda on New Year’s Day 2026

Published

2 days ago

2026/01/1

Thilina Walpola

Douglas in Geneva

I have no intention of even implicitly commenting on the legality of the ongoing incarceration of Douglas Devananda.

I’ve no legal background, and that’s because having been selected for the Law faculty at the University of Colombo on the basis of my A level results, I opted to study Political Science instead. I did so because I had an acute sense of the asymmetry between the law and justice and had developed a growing compulsion on issues of ethics—issues of right and wrong, good and evil.

However, as someone who has had a book published in the UK on political ethics, I have no compunction is saying that as a country, as a society, there has to be a better way than this.

It is morally and ethically wrong, indeed a travesty, that Douglas, a wounded hero of the anti-LTTE war, should spend New Year 2026 in the dreaded Mahara prison.

Douglas should be honoured as a rare example of a young man, who having quite understandably taken up arms to fight against Sinhala racism and for the Tamil people, decided while still a young man to opt to fight on the side of the democratic Sri Lankan state and to campaign for devolution for the North and East within the framework of a united Sri Lanka and its Constitution.

Douglas was an admired young leader of the PLA, the military wing of the Marxist EPRLF when he began to be known.

Nothing is more ironic than the historical fact that in July 1983 he survived the horrifying Welikada prison massacres, during which Sinhala prisoners, instigated and incentivized from outside (Gonawela Sunil is a name that transpired), slaughtered Tamil prisoners and gauged out their eyes.

Having escaped from jail in Batticaloa, Douglas came back to Sri Lanka in 1989, having had a change of heart after hundreds of youngsters belonging to the EPRLF, PLOT, and TELO had been massacred from 1986 onwards by the hardcore separatist, totalitarian Tigers. He was welcomed by President Premadasa and Minister Ranjan Wijeratne who took him and his ‘boys’ under their wing. There are photos of Douglas in shorts and carrying an automatic weapon, accompanying Ranjan Wijeratne and the Sri Lankan armed forces after the liberation of the islands off Jaffna from the Tiger grip.

It is Douglas who kept those vital islands safe, together with the Navy, throughout the war.

Douglas stayed with the democratic Sri Lankan state, remaining loyal to the elected president of the day, without ever turning on his or her predecessor. He probably still wears, as he did for decades, the fountain pen that President Premadasa gifted him.

During the LTTE’s offensive on Jaffna after the fall of Elephant Pass, the mass base built up by Douglas which gave the EPDP many municipal seats, helped keep Jaffna itself safe, with more Tamil civilians fleeing into Jaffna than out of it. I recall President Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga giving him a satellite phone. Army Chief Lionel Balagalle gave him a pair of mini-Uzis for his safety.

Douglas was no paramilitary leader, pure and simple. His public speech on the occasion of the 50th anniversary of the founding of the Sri Lanka Freedom Party, delivered without a teleprompter, is an excellent roadmap for the graduated implementation of the 13th amendment and the attainment of maximum devolution within a unitary state.

Like Chandrika, Douglas has had his sight severely impaired by the LTTE. As a Minister he had visited Tamil detainees imprisoned in wartime, and been set upon by a group of LTTE prisoners who had planned for his visit, concealing sharpened handles of steel buckets in the ceiling, and slammed the pointed metal through his skull. Douglas still needs repeated daily medication for his eyes which were miraculously saved by the Sri Lankan surgeons who repaired his skull, but at a subsequent stage, he was also treated by surgeons overseas.

No Sri Lankan, Sinhala or Tamil, civilian politician or military brass, has survived as many attempted assassinations by the Tigers as has Douglas. I believe the count is eleven. There’s a video somewhere of a suicide bomber blasting herself in his office, yards away from him.

Under no previous Sri Lankan administration since the early 1980s has Douglas found himself behind bars. He has served and/or supported seven democratic Presidents: Premadasa, Wijetunga, Chandrika, Mahinda, Sirisena, Gotabaya and Wickremesinghe. He has been a Minister over decades and a parliamentarian for longer.

He was a firm frontline ally of the Sri Lankan state and its armed forces during the worst challenge the country faced from the worst enemy it had since Independence.

During my tenure as Sri Lanka’s ambassador/Permanent representative to the UN Geneva, Douglas Devananda came from Colombo to defend Sri Lanka in discussions with high level UN officials including UN Human Rights High Commissioner Navanethem Pillay. This was in April 23, mere weeks before the decisive battle of the UN HRC Special session on Sri Lanka which we won handsomely. The media release on his visit reads as follows:

A high-level delegation led by the Hon. Minister Douglas Devananda, Minister of Social Services and Social Welfare, which also included the Hon. Rishad Bathiudeen, Minister of Resettlement and Disaster Relief Services, H.E. Dr. Dayan Jayatilleka, Ambassador/ Permanent Representative of Sri Lanka to the United Nations Office in Geneva, Prof. Rajiva Wijesinha, Secretary to the Ministry of Disaster Management and Human Rights, and Mr. Yasantha Kodagoda, Deputy Solicitor General, Attorney General’s Department, represented Sri Lanka at the Durban Review Conference.

“Organized by the United Nations, the Durban Review Conference provides an opportunity to assess and accelerate progress on implementation of measures adopted at the 2001 World Conference against Racism, including assessment of contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance. On the opening day of this conference, Hon. Douglas Devananda made a statement behalf of the Government of Sri Lanka.

“On the sidelines of the Durban Review Conference which is being held from 20th to 24th of April 2009, the Sri Lankan delegation met with senior UN officials, and a number of dignitaries from diverse countries and updated them on the current situation in Sri Lanka against the backdrop of Sri Lanka’s fight against separatism and terrorism.

Hon. Devananda and Hon. Bathiudeen, along with the rest of the delegation, held meetings with Ms. Navanethem Pillai, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Mr. Antonio Guterres, UN High Commissioner for Refugees (and a former Prime Minister of Portugal) and Mr. Anders Johnsson, Secretary-General of the Inter-Parliamentary Union.’

(https://live.lankamission.org/index.php/human-rights/676-minister-devananda-meets-un-high-commissioners-for-human-rights-and-refugees-2.html)

In contemporary world history, a leader from a minority community who defends the unity of his country against a separatist terrorist force deriving from that minority is hailed as a hero. A leader who takes the side of the democratic state, arms in hand, against a totalitarian fascistic foe, is hailed as a hero. Evidently, not so in current-day Sri Lanka.

[Dayan Jayatilleka, Sri Lanka’s former Ambassador to the UN Geneva; France, Spain, Portugal and UNESCO; and the Russian Federation, was a Vice-President of the UN Human Rights Council and Chairman, ILO.]

by Dr Dayan Jayatilleka ✍️