Features
Could ‘greenwashing’ Adani wind project help save Mannar?
By Hemantha Withanage
Senior Advisor, Centre for Environmental Justice
There is no gainsaying that we have to look for green energy to combat climate change. However, the world now seeks a “just energy transition”, meaning the development of energy sources that do not harm local communities and nature while doing justice for workers. Mannar, the location for the Adani wind power project, is undoubtedly a very sensitive location for different reasons. This island has been identified as highly vulnerable to climate change. Mannar is expected to lose over 8000 ha of land to sea level rise in the next 25 years.
The proposed wind power project in Mannar has become controversial due to its impact on the birds, the cost of its electricity, and the unsolicited bidding process. The project is unusual as it is an agreement with political regimes in India and Sri Lanka and not an ordinary investment project. It is also linked to the proposed transmission line between India and Sri Lanka. This is not included in the approved Long-Term Energy Generation Plan-2023-2042(LTEGP) or the Renewable Energy Development Master Action Plan (REDMAP) developed by the CEB.
This Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is highly inadequate due to its weak components, including the identification of alternatives, lack of cumulative impacts assessment and an attempt to greenwash a destructive project.
Why is cumulative impact important?
The Ceylon Electricity Board (CEB) manages a 100 MW “Thambapawani” wind power project in Mannar. A feasibility study for a second project has also been conducted. The Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) for the Adani project is the third project set to be built on Mannar Island.
On another note, both coasts of the island have been given to Mars Minerals and Metals, an Indian mining company, to explore ilmenite. Furthermore, an Australian mining company is in the process of purchasing land for ilmenite mining. However, we have noticed that the TOR has not specifically requested a cumulative impact assessment, which is a significant weakness.
The Adani wind power project will install 52 turbines on the entire island and construct several kilometres of access roads across sensitive habitats. The EIA states, “The key result of the cumulative assessment is that the Mannar II wind park would not make any material change to the cumulative impacts for Mannar I and the transmission line, as it would contribute only a small additional risk. I disagree with this statement as the existing project located only one line of turbines on the southern coast of the island; in contrast, the new 250 MW Adani wind power project will lay 52 turbines on the entire island.
The Sustainable Energy Authority should be held responsible for declaring this region a renewable energy generation site without first assessing its social and environmental impact. Ideally, they should have conducted a Strategic Environmental Assessment before inviting investors. However, the MANNAR DEVELOPMENT PLAN 2018-2030 prepared by the Urban Development Authority has identified only the southern coast for renewable energy generation and the northern coast for fishery development. Yet, they compromised this plan when it gave a no-objection letter to the Adani wind power project, perhaps due to political pressure.
Effectiveness of emergency radar shutdown system
The Centre for Environmental Justice pushed the CEB and the Asian Development Bank regarding the ADB-funded 100 MW wind power plant due to the project’s location in the central Asian Flyway. This intervention resulted in installing an emergency radar shutdown system at an extra cost of about 1 million USD. As we know, Mannar is the most important wintering wetlands for migratory birds in Sri Lanka. In my opinion, this radar system is somewhat effective due to the size and location of the CEB project. However, we questioned the effectiveness of a radar system when the Adani Wind power project was built across the entire island.
According to The Island newspaper on 1st April 2024, Power and Energy Minister Kanchana Wijesekera has stated, “According to the EIA Report, meticulous planning has been undertaken to mitigate potential risks to migratory birds. Contrary to assertions, the EIA report explicitly states that turbines will not be within the migratory birds’ flight corridor”. Interestingly, he believes that birds tend to fly within a corridor that spans 2 kilometres in width. Unfortunately, in my opinion, the proposal to create a so-called bird migration corridor is just a greenwashing idea. When we already know that elephant corridors in Sri Lanka are not functioning, how can they expect the birds to follow these human rules?
According to the data reported in Thambapawani solar park, the most affected birds due to turbines were raptors such as Brahminy kites. However, water birds have been adversely affected by the transmission lines. The EIA report endorses the feasibility of the wind park, claiming that the period with high wind does not coincide with the bird migration period. However, the Environment Monitoring Report- Thambapawani Wind Project shows 93 birds from 21 species have been killed during a 4-month period due to both transmission lines and the wind turbines. In the case of Thambapawani Wind Power Project, higher bird collision risks than predicted have occurred, as there are reported bird collisions in the transmission lines. I believe bird collisions will highly increase once the whole island is covered with wind turbines installed under the Adani wind power project.
I doubt whether the new wind power proposal has real interest in installing an effective radar system. The reason is that the Adani project, which has spread all over Mannar island, has allocated only 253,968 USD for the Emergency Radar Shutdown system. In comparison, the CEB wind project has spent about 1 million USD to install one horizontal and 2 vertical radar systems. Considering the area spread of the Adani project It might require more systems to install. Since there is no design available, this proposal is just a greenwashing.
Flooding may cause severe social impacts
Besides the impact on birds, the project will increase the flooding in the area. Thambapawani wind power project is responsible for the increase in floods on Mannar Island during the last few years, though it was not identified during the EIA stage. We believe that this project will further aggravate the flooding in Mannar. Figure 3-10 on page 109 of the EIA shows high flooding areas encompassing several turbine sites, access roads, and a substantial part of the main road bisecting the island. The risk assessment on page 181 indicates the project is in a flood hazard area, with flood risk for turbine foundations on an annual basis.
Out of 72,000 people living in Mannar island, at least 40,000 people were affected by floods in the past. This project will undoubtedly increase flooding. However, no funds have been allocated for offsetting flood related impacts at the operation stage. The company will not be responsible for future flood mitigation work, and the government of Sri Lanka will have to spend public money on this.
Impacts on freshwater
According to the UDA Mannar Development Plan, water scarcity has been identified as a prominent element. The report states, “Historically, Mannar town has been facing many problems in accessing drinking water. Because Mannar is an only Island, people depend on groundwater for their day-to-day needs, but that is too salty and not suitable for drinking”. Due to ill development in the island including proposed mining, piling work for windmills, the proposed road network and the drainage and flooding will have serious negative impacts on the freshwater availability for human consumption. Who is going to pay for the future water projects?
Energy sovereignty at stake
Energy sovereignty is a prerequisite for the independence of a country. This project will have impacts beyond the environment and society. Although the Sustainable Energy Authority has been the project developer, it is only a proxy proponent. It is taking environmental clearance on behalf of the Adani company, owned by an Indian tycoon, to enter the Sri Lankan energy generation sector. They will have 6% of the control in the energy sector, and with Adani’s second power plant in Poonaryn, they will have 12% control of the energy generation in Sri Lanka. We also know there is ongoing negotiation to connect India and Sri Lanka through a transmission cable. This will seriously compromise the energy sovereignty of Sri Lanka.
Lack of alternative identification
The EIA’s alternative analysis is crucial. It should have also explored the possibility of having offshore turbines, alternative sites, and downscaling the project. High wind energy potential sites in mainland Sri Lanka could also generate 250 MW wind farms without significant ecological damage. Solar power is also a viable alternative. However, these technology alternatives have not been adequately considered in the EIA.
Although we agree that the LTGEP plan 2022-2041 includes multiple renewable energy sources and low-carbon technologies to provide green energy to the country for the next two decades, we have pointed out that this plan has not undergone a Strategic Environmental Assessment. As a result, it fails to identify the negative impacts of wind energy compared to solar power in other locations. Therefore, we would like to reiterate that the alternative site and technology analysis is highly inadequate in this EIA.
Destroying palmyra trees and reforestation
The EIA states that the proposed project will not have major adverse impacts on species of flora in the overall landscape. However, according to the EIA, a total of 4,256 Palmyra palms could be affected due to the installation of the wind turbines in the Hard-Standing Area (95mx90m). Additionally, 4,981 Palmyra palms will be cleared to establish the access roads and internal power cables. The number of palmyra palms in the soft standing area is 8822. We consider this as a major change in the tree cover on the island and will have a severe impact on the bird population as many birds use them for roosting and nesting. This aspect has not been studied adequately in the EIA.
The Mannar residents think that the number of palmyra palms to be removed is much higher as there are many saplings under each mature tree. EIA also states It is difficult to predict the exact number of palmyra palms to be felled site-specifically as action will be taken to minimize the palmyra palms to be cut in the Hard and Soft Standing Areas during the construction stage. Furthermore, a total of 260 coconut palms will be affected by turbine construction.
EIA has proposed an allocation of USD 707,491 for 62 ha of reforestation. However, it has not identified the areas where reforestation will happen. This is very important to negate the impacts of loss of habitats for species. However, such tree plantation will not immediately benefit the birds and other animals which use those trees as habitats and for nesting. The EIA does not provide which species will have significant negative impacts due to the loss of over 8000 trees.
Do not mix-up CSR and benefits to local communities
We have learned that the project proponent has already reached out to fishermen groups to convince them on the project. However, except the improved road network, the community will receive no benefits from the project. Mannar is a tourist destination popular among the bird watchers. The EIA report expects tourism potential will develop further as they might be attractive for tourists to watch those turbines. We believe this is not really the case. In fact, tourism potential may be reduced due to a lack of incoming birds. A steep drop in bird visits, a reduction in wildlife and the depletion of the tree cover in Mannare will severely impact Mannar’s economy and the potential for wildlife-based tourism planned by the Tourism Development Authority and Northern Development framework.
Meanwhile, the EIA has included CSR activities as part of the benefits. They cannot be considered the benefit sharing of the project. Adani as an Indian company and mandatory for companies to spend at least 2% of average net profits made during the three immediately preceding fiscal years (the “Minimum CSR Amount”) on CSR initiatives in accordance with the company’s CSR Policy.
We have learnt that non-title holders of lands will not get compensation for their losses. They will only get land development costs and a one-time payment of 100,000 rupees. Information on the land entitlement in the project area is not available. Around 4500 people live in the GN divisions where these wind turbines are planned.
Does the project conform to just energy transition principles?
The climate solution may harm the people and nature who are not even responsible for climate change. While the contribution of people in Mannar is negligible to climate change, the migratory birds are not responsible for the climate crisis. This is where just energy transition principles are important.
‘Just Energy’ transition is about defunding fossil fuels in a way that reduces inequality, shifting the costs of climate action onto wealthy polluters while prioritizing economic, racial, and gender justice. It requires stopping the use of fossil fuels and utilising renewable energy sources, while ensuring that efforts to scale up renewable energy production do not replicate the harms of fossil fuel, like taking land from people without consent and unjust compensation. It also requires working with indigenous community leaders to seek their free, prior, and informed consent when rolling out renewable projects on their land. The Adani project must respect the Just Energy Transition principles. However, this project neglects the community’s voices and participation.
The project could cause more negative impacts than positive ones on the country, posing significant threats to the environment and communities. The EIA has not considered the combined effects of this and future projects. The area has unique natural resources and ecosystems that could be adversely affected. The extended cost-benefit analysis has not considered the loss of fishery, long-term impacts on birds, bird migration, and other ecological impacts. If the project is to continue, it should explore better alternatives. The project-approving agency should advise the proponent to produce an addendum to study such alternatives for this wind power project. Greenwashing, such as the so-called bird migration route, cannot save Mannar Island or the bird life.
Features
Combining local resources,traditional knowledge and science to build a food-secure Sri Lanka
World Food Day 2026: Innovating today for a better food future
by Dr. Kaushalya Wijayasekara
What will be on the Sri Lankan dinner table ten years from now? Will our children be able to get nutritious food at a price their families can afford? Will farmers be able to grow enough despite changing weather and rising costs? And how much of the food we produce will actually reach the consumer, instead of being lost or wasted along the way?
These questions can’t wait. A farmer faces unpredictable weather. A family faces rising food costs. Fruit goes unsold after a good harvest. Some children do not get enough nutrition. The future of food is tied to the future of Sri Lanka itself.
World Food Day 2026 is a chance to look beyond the immediate problems and ask whether we can build a food system that feeds our people well, gives farmers better opportunities, protects the environment and makes better use of what we already have. The answer can be yes, but we will have to think differently.
We are not starting from zero. Sri Lanka has diverse crops, fisheries, traditional food knowledge, indigenous varieties, research institutions, universities and a young generation able to create new solutions. What we need is to bring these together and act. Producing more will not secure our food future on its own. It will depend on how intelligently we produce, process, preserve, distribute and consume food.
Making more of what we already have
Innovation does not always mean inventing something new. Often it means finding better uses for the resources we have.
Sri Lanka grows traditional rice varieties, kurakkan, green gram, cowpea, jackfruit, breadfruit, cassava, sweet potato, coconut and palmyrah. All of them have great potential for modern, nutritious, value-added foods. Jackfruit and breadfruit can be made into flour and other convenient products. Traditional rice varieties can go into new foods that suit changing consumer needs. Palmyrah, with its strong cultural heritage, can create new income through better processing, packaging, quality assurance and market development.
The aim is to connect our traditional food knowledge with modern consumer needs and technology, while keeping our food heritage.
Stop wasting the food we produce
Reducing food loss and waste should be a major priority. Seasonal fruits such as mango, banana, papaya and pineapple can be lost in large quantities when production exceeds demand or when storage, transport and processing facilities are inadequate. With suitable technology, these fruits can become dried products, pulps, powders, beverages and other shelf-stable foods.
Agricultural and fisheries by-products are resources too. They could be turned into food ingredients, animal feed, bio-based products and other useful materials, which would move us toward a more circular food economy.
Technology alone is not enough. We need stronger local processing facilities, cold storage, efficient transport, collection centres and market information systems, especially close to where food is produced. Cutting food loss raises the value of what our farmers and fishers already produce.
Nutrition and food safety come first
Food security means more than having enough food. People also need food that is safe and nutritious.
Sri Lanka can develop affordable, nutritious foods from local pulses, grains, vegetables, fruits and fish. Children and other vulnerable groups should get particular attention. Schoolchildren in particular deserve a focus: safe, nutritious, locally sourced products for school feeding programs would support child nutrition, local farmers and domestic food industries at the same time.
Food safety must stay at the centre of food innovation. Good hygiene, quality control, laboratory testing, traceability and appropriate food safety systems are what make new products safe as well as attractive and nutritious.
A food system that can cope with climate change
Climate change is already affecting agricultural production, water availability, crop yields and food prices. We need food systems that can handle changing conditions. That means climate-resilient crops, efficient water use, soil and water conservation, better storage and resource-efficient food processing.
Traditional knowledge matters here. Generations of Sri Lankan farmers have developed practices suited to local climates and ecosystems. Combining that experience with modern science can give us solutions that fit local conditions and are sustainable. Technology alone will not build the future of food. Science, experience and local knowledge together can.
Give young people a bigger role
Sri Lanka’s universities have an important part to play in shaping our food future. Young people should be encouraged to identify real problems in the food system and work on practical solutions in areas such as food waste, sustainable packaging, nutrition, food safety, modernising traditional foods and digital technologies.
A good research project should not always end as a research paper. Where appropriate, research should be supported to move on to products, technologies, enterprises and community solutions. That needs stronger partnerships between universities and industry, along with mentoring, research funding, business support and market connections. If young researchers and entrepreneurs can turn their ideas into viable food innovations, both consumers and producers will benefit.
A pathway designed for Sri Lanka
We do not need to copy food-system models from other countries. We can build a pathway that suits our own resources, culture and needs. It would bring together local resources, traditional knowledge, scientific research, appropriate technology and entrepreneurship, with farmers, fishers, universities, research institutions, food industries, entrepreneurs and policymakers working side by side.
The goal goes beyond selling raw materials. We need to create more value, reduce waste, improve nutrition, generate jobs and strengthen rural livelihoods. This matters especially for small and medium-scale food enterprises, which can drive local economic development when they get the right technical, financial and market support.
The choices we make today
The food future will not create itself. It will be shaped by what we grow, what we research, what we process, what we consume and what we choose not to waste.
So, the question for World Food Day 2026 is this: what can we do today so that every Sri Lankan has safe, nutritious, affordable and sustainable food tomorrow?
The answers are already around us, in our farms, fisheries, food businesses, universities, laboratories and communities. We have the resources, the traditional knowledge, the scientific expertise and talented young people. What we need now is to connect them and act.
A better food future begins with the choices we make today.
Dr. Kaushalya Wijayasekara
Senior Lecturer, Department of Biosystems Technology, Faculty of Technology, University of Ruhuna
Features
20th Anniversary of Digampathana blast – the day Sri Lanka Navy cried
By Admiral Ravindra C Wijegunaratne
WV, RWP and Bar, RSP, VSV, USP, NI (M) (Pakistan), ndc, psn, Bsc
(Hons) (War Studies) (Karachi) MPhil (Madras)
Former Navy Commander and Former Chief of Defence Staff
Former Chairman, Trincomalee Petroleum Terminals Ltd
Former Managing Director Ceylon Petroleum Corporation
Former High Commissioner to Pakistan
The Digampathana suicide truck attack on 16th October 2006 remains the deadliest single strike in Sri Lanka Navy history, leaving scars that time cannot erase.
It was a seemingly ordinary Monday morning on 16 October 2006, but the calm of that day would soon be shattered in a way none of us could have imagined. As the Commandant of the Naval and Maritime Academy and Flag Officer Commanding Naval Fleet at Trincomalee, I was aware that a number of my cadets were travelling that morning, part of a convoy of fifteen buses carrying naval personnel from Trincomalee, Colombo, and other bases, heading toward Dambulla to rendezvous with another group. The convoy also included trucks and escort vehicles, a routine movement planned and coordinated with the army to ensure the roads were clear. The morning started quietly. Some personnel greeted friends, handed over their weapons, or strolled to a nearby tea shop. It all seemed so ordinary—too ordinary for what would come next.

Sri Lanka Navy sunk LTTE Ships carrying arms, ammunition and warlike materials thousand miles away from Sri Lanka in Indian Ocean in September and October 2007.
By late morning, both convoys had reached the small ground at Digampathana, near the Sigiriya junction, and personnel mingled briefly, unaware that a carefully orchestrated act of terror was waiting. Then, suddenly, an empty half-truck veered directly into the convoy. It exploded with a ferocity I can still recall as if it were yesterday. Nuts, bolts, and high explosives tore through the air. Pandemonium erupted instantly. I later learned that 107 of our naval personnel were killed on the spot and another 153 critically injured. The scene was indescribable—bodies scattered, vehicles mangled, personal effects strewn across the ground. I remember later hearing that the head of the suicide bomber was recovered more than 100 meters away from the blast, a grim testament to the sheer force of the explosion.
I was in my office at the Naval and Maritime Academy when my mobile phone rang. A young midshipman from the 21st intake called, his voice trembling: “Sir, there was a huge explosion at the convoy point! Many are dead … my batch mate Wijesundara is among them.” I immediately jumped into my jeep with my escort Chief Petty Officer and driver and rushed to Digampathana, relying on every ounce of my driving skill to reach the scene. The journey, which usually took little more than an hour, felt endless that day, each passing mile weighed down by dread.
When I arrived, I was confronted with a sight that no training can prepare you for. The injured were being rushed to Dambulla Hospital, where doctors and nurses worked tirelessly, improvising in ways that saved lives despite the overwhelming chaos. I went back to the site after visiting the hospital. The remains of our naval personnel were scattered across the ground, and someone had begun collecting weapons and protective gear. I immediately contacted Surgeon Rear Admiral Nico Jayasekara and received his instructions: collect all body parts in separate bags and transport them to the Trincomalee Naval Hospital mortuary. This gruesome work had to be done with care and dignity, and it filled the icebox in my vehicle. Through DNA testing initiated by Rear Admiral Nico, we were able to identify every naval personnel lost that day, bringing some closure to grieving families.
The Navy Commander at the time, Vice Admiral Wasantha Karannagoda, was devastated. I had worked closely with him and knew how deeply he cared for his men. He ensured that the fallen were honoured with full ceremonial naval funerals at Welisara Naval Base, attended by families and comrades. Sixty-seven funerals were conducted in a single day—a number that still haunts me.
The Digampathana attack remains the largest single loss of naval life in our history. It was a day of sorrow, but also a day that reinforced our resolve. The tragedy galvanized the Navy to target the LTTE Sea Tiger wing with renewed determination and reshaped our maritime operations forever. Every time I think of that day, I remember not just the lives lost, but the courage, professionalism, and dedication of those who survived, those who treated the injured, and those who ensured the fallen were honored properly. May the souls of our naval hero’s rest in peace, their sacrifice guiding us and inspiring generations of naval personnel to come.
Features
‘Murder at Whitby Abbey’
Tales of Mystery and Suspense – 24
I was intrigued by the title of a book I found in a book drop at the condominium of a friend, Murder at Whitby Abbey, and I brought it home with me though I will not be able to return it in the near future. It was described on the cover page as ‘a standout in the crowded medieval mystery field’, though I fear I do not know of other books in this field, apart from the Cadfael series, which I have dealt with earlier.
The book, by Cassandra Clark, is set during the reign of Richard II and has as a backdrop his precarious position, which led to his being replaced, and murdered, by his cousin Henry, who reigned as Henry IV. It is a gloomy book, the action taking place in the twelve days of Christmas leading up to the Epiphany. And the gloom is pervasive, even though this is supposed to be a time of festivity, with mummers performing, and many of those in the guest house where the heroine stays going to town to enjoy themselves, with much drinking and much music, which also fills the guesthouse.
The heroine Hildegarde is a nun, sent to try to acquire a relic being sold by Whitby Abbey, though this was also a penance set by the Abbot of the monastery that governed her abbess because she had had sex with a man. Soon after she and her companions reach the Abbey set high on a cliff, she finds that there are other bidders, and soon suspects that the hierarchy, not perhaps the Abbot who seems a weakling, but his rapacious bursar, is determined to make money, and not above creating false relics to sell to several aspirants.
After Hildegarde and her Cistercian companions – Whitby is a Benedictine Foundation – two monks, Gregory and Egbert, and a young priest Mark, reach the abbey, they find that Aelwyn, a monk they had met on their way to the guesthouse had died. This was in the apple store, and they realize, when they find the surplices of novices stuffed into the air vents, that he had been left to suffocate in the overwhelming scent of apples.
The Cistercians are asked to look into the death, perhaps because they are likely to get no cooperation from the Abbey folk, but perhaps because those in charge are keen to know what happened. And the infirmarer, an old monk, suggests Hildegarde talk to a man called Edred who worked for the bursar, and had been a friend of Aelwyn’s. But Edred too is killed, before he can keep an appointment he had made with Hildegarde, drowned in a pool near the farmhouse of the Abbey.
Meanwhile tensions arise between the fisherfolk and the abbey for the bursar wants to charge them for using the beach that technically belongs to the abbey to dry their fish and their nets. This leads to physical battles, when the guards used by the abbey, under the command it seems of the bursar whose determination to make money is not resisted by the abbot and the prior, try to storm the area where the fishermen live.
Hildegard finds out more about what had happened through two youngsters, one of whom Torold is the son of Aelwyn by a woman who worked as a prostitute for a cartel, and with whom Mark fell in love. The other works on the farm and had seen Edred meet someone near the pool, after which that someone left the place by himself. And the boy had also found in the pool a sort of dagger with the seal of the abbey.
He and his dog, and Torold who follows her, rescue Hildegarde from a man at arms who has waylaid her and tries to rape her earlier. Escaping into the abbey she was nearly been raped then by the bursar, but she managed to escape, in the process setting fire to him and the muniments room, which led, when he was rescued, to the discovery of a box with the money he said had been stolen, blame being cast on both Aelwyn and Edred.
Matters come to a head when the fisherfolk try to storm the abbey, being resisted by the men at arms stationed on the towers. But then Hildegarde realizes that behind the murders was the bursar’s clerk, whom she pursued to the cathedral. There is great drama then as she escapes from him when he tries to kill her, and then from the man at arms who had tried to both rape and kill her, but they both fall from the scaffolding she had climbed, the latter coming from a tower where he had been stationed.
Both of them think they run the rapacity of the abbey, the latter claiming to work for the nobles opposed to Richard, who is presented throughout the book as devoted to his subjects, not to power or money. But though the villains die, the bursar continues, having got over the hysteria the fire had caused and his acknowledgment then of guilt – and though the abbot and the prior seem less vicious, whether they will be able to assert themselves is questionable.
Before the climax, when the others in the guesthouse were leaving, Hildegarde found that two of them were in possession of the relic, for which they seem to have paid well. Hildegarde herself had made a derisory offer, but before she leaves the abbot gives her the relic, perhaps in gratitude for what she and her fellow Cistercians had discovered, the abbey having made as much money as it needed and more from the gullible other buyers.
Mark’s inamorata is saved from the stews because she moves in with Edred’s widow whom the bursar had thrown out of the rooms he occupied when her husband was found dead. Hildegarde had paid for lodgings, in a house run by the man who ran the brothels, but he had a kindly side and was going to finance them to make nets for the fishermen.
So, the Cistercians set off for their home as swiftly as they can to get there on the day of the Epiphany, having stopped en route to pray for King Richard whose birthday it was.
-
News6 days agoSri Lanka escalates anti-graft drive with Shiranthi’s jailing
-
News7 days agoNPP govt. reminded of its responsibilities as US warship leaves Colombo
-
Latest News5 days agoFarhan and Sadaqat help Pakistan seal series in style
-
News6 days agoIranian ships stranded, Lanka fears US sanctions
-
Latest News4 days agoNissanka’s return headlines Sri Lanka’s Test squad against Pakistan
-
News7 days agoInterdicted top House official Kularatne receives special recognition in Mexican Parliament
-
Features5 days agoIntake 16: 45 years of duty and honour
-
News5 days agoMalwathu Chapter issues statement on talks with President over Gnanasara Thera’s robes

