Midweek Review

CP Chief calls for re-alignment of political forces to thwart Ranil

Published

3 years ago

2023/07/5

DEW Gunasekara at the Communist Party office last week (pic by Shamindra Ferdinando)

CP Chairman DEW G says lawmakers here should be aware of what is going on in the world. The Parliament cannot turn a blind eye to global developments, the former MP said, pointing out that the ongoing Ukrainian crisis underscored the need for greater understanding of international affairs as the rapid developments taking place with the US hegemony under threat. The crisis reflects the global power struggle.

By Shamindra Ferdinando

Veteran politician Don Edwin Weerasinghe Gunasekara or DEW G, 88, wants left-wing political parties, including his Communist Party (CP), to join forces with centrist political elements to meet the growing future right wing challenge posed by ‘Pohottuwa,’ backed incumbent President Ranil Wickremesinghe.

The former CP General Secretary warned those opposed to the Wickremesinghe-Rajapaksa juggernaut to reach consensus on a tangible political strategy soon or be prepared to face the consequences.

As things stand, Gunasekara declared that UNP leader Wickremesinghe would be the SLPP’s candidate at the next presidential election, therefore urged, what he called, the genuine Opposition to take a stand.

The CP is represented in Parliament by just one MP Weerasinghe Weerasumana from Matara. The first time entrant to Parliament contested the last general election on the Sri Lanka Podujana Peremauna (SLPP) ticket.

Having parted company with the SLPP, or the Pohottuwa party, the CP is now a constituent of the Uththara Lanka Sabhagaya (ULS).

DEW G acknowledged that left-wing parties, including the CP, couldn’t anticipate any future political alliance with the Rajapaksas’ led party, especially with Basil, an arch right winger, like Ranil, playing such a pivotal role in the family and the party they lead. “Therefore, a realignment of political forces, opposed to the incumbent administration, is a must”, he said.

Gunasekara didn’t mince his words when he admitted that left parties lacked the wherewithal to take on the government, though the ground situation has changed quite drastically, owing to unprecedented public protests, engineered or not by the West, as in the case of the Maidan rebellion in Ukraine in 2014, forced Gotabaya Rajapaksa elected, with 6.9 mn votes, to flee.

A smiling Gunasekara asserted that the emerging world environment could be quite advantageous to Sri Lanka with the US and its fiat currency dollar likely to lose world dominant position, if proper repositioning of political parties and groups takes place here to ensure a Left and Centre combination surging ahead with the best global economic environment after 1945, Gunasekara assured.

In an interview with the writer at the CP’s recently refurbished office at No 91, Dr. N.M. Perera Mawatha, Colombo 08, last week, DEW G discussed a range of issues, both domestic and international, with the focus on the deteriorating economic-political and social crisis against the growing uncertainty caused by restructuring of domestic debt.

Unless left parties reached a consensus with those in the centre, the latter would move to the right to the advantage of Ranil Wickremesinghe, Gunasekera said. “At least 90 percent of the country’s capitalist class is with Wickremesinghe and unless something goes awry, the UNP leader is certain to be SLPP’s nominee with or without machinations by the West.”

The Island

sought the much respected politician’s views on current issues against the backdrop of the CP preparing to celebrate its 80th anniversary this week.

At the onset of the interview, one-time Rehabilitation and Prisons Reforms Minister, an Octogenarian himself, emphasized that what the country experienced was an unprecedented critical situation. “We are at a crossroads. We experienced crises in 1952 and in the ’70s, primarily due to external factors. However, though there were certainly foreign influences and interventions, we created the current catastrophe,” the former lawmaker said.

Gunasekara identified what he called an explosive combination of factors that plunged the country into its worst ever post-independence crisis, namely dearth of foreign exchange even to buy basics, like fuel, drastic drop in government revenue, coupled with a crippling debt due to borrowings at high interest from international bond markets, especially by the previous Yahapalana regime.

Referring to the times of JRJ’s Finance Minister Ronnie de Mel (1977-1988) who presided over Sri Lanka embracing a free market economy in the late ’70s, and his successor M.H.M. Naina Marikkar (1988-1989) at the height of the JVP-led second insurrection (1987-1990), the CP veteran pointed out that the erosion of government revenue began after 1978.

A calamity of unimaginable proportions

Pointing out that in 1978 the government revenue had been 24 percent of the GDP (Gross Domestic Product) a gradual decrease began during JRJ’s reign and by the time Gotabaya Rajapaksa, in his capacity as the President, brought in his brother Basil Rajapaksa as the Minister of Finance, in July 2021, the state revenue had dropped to a poor six percent of the GDP. That the Rajapaksa family compelled Gotabaya Rajapaksa to accommodate BR in the Cabinet, even at the expense of the coalition, is a matter that should be addressed separately, the outspoken politician said. President Gotabaya Rajapaksa paid a very heavy price for exploiting the 20th Amendment to the Constitution to appease the family to bring in Basil Rajapaksa, he added.

The drastic drop of the state revenue to just six percent of the GDP meant that the government didn’t have sufficient funding in Rupees, especially due to a drastic cut in vital taxes, no sooner Gotabaya assumed office. “I have never heard of a disruption of an economy in a particular country for want of whatever local currency, though foreign exchange crisis is certainly not a new occurrence. We ran into trouble at a time when the then government was on a money printing spree.”

Gunasekara attributed the developing crisis to neoliberalist policies adopted in the wake of JRJ’s victory at the 1977 general election. “The change of tax policy in line with neoliberalist strategy brought about the crisis. The gradual change in direct and indirect taxes was nothing but a disaster. At the time of the late Premier Mrs. Sirimavo Bandaranaike, the direct and indirect tax ratio was 70 to 30 percent. JR reduced direct taxes to 55 percent, Ranasinghe Premadasa to 45 percent, Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga to 35 percent, Mahinda Rajapaksa to 28 percent (during his first tenure as the President), then to 24 percent and subsequently to 18 percent and Basil Rajapaksa brought it down to 14 percent.”

The increasing loss of income, due to a sharp drop in direct taxes, was compensated by corresponding increase in indirect taxes, the former Minister said, added that finally the irect and indirect tax ratio stood at 10 and 90 percent, respectively. Instead of taxing the affluent, those struggling to make ends meet were further burdened, Gunasekara said, alleging that tax evasion at the moment was at its zenith. “There is no point in denying successive governments facilitated the tax fraud. The fraudulent process over the years became part of the system in place,” the ex-MP said.

Asked whether Parliament, as the supreme institution responsible for public finance, should be held responsible for the current predicament, a smiling Gunasekara said that was the position constitutionally.

“However, the actual situation is different or in other words Parliament is irrelevant. The Finance Minister takes decisions on behalf of the Cabinet of Ministers which exercises executive powers in Parliament. Whoever at the helm, exercises political authority thereby implements a strategy that may not be in the best interests of the country though appropriate as a political tool. That is the reality.”

Neoliberalism, or market-oriented reform policies, such as doing away with price controls, freeing of capital markets, and reckless lowering of trade barriers, as well as privatization, brought us to this pathetic situation, the former CP leader said.

Regardless of the recent crash, the Wickremesinghe-Rajapaksa government seemed to be hell-bent on following the same wretched policies. “If not, President Wickremesinghe and his acolytes wouldn’t have considered USD 2.9 bn IMF loan facility as the panacea for our economic ills. In a way we are now in an irreversible situation,” Gunasekara said.

The one-time Chairman of the parliamentary watchdog COPE sarcastically declared without hesitation that he was too optimistic of the much-touted economic recovery plan, based on the much debated agreement with the IMF.

“Don’t forget we sought IMF intervention on 16 occasions previously. And the worst IMF intervention is now underway”, the still crisp thinking octogenarian said.

Parliament has deteriorated to such an extent that it no longer commanded the respect of the public. That, too, contributed to the overall decline, Gunasekara said, explaining how the Ranil-Maithree-led Yahapalana government borrowed heavily from international money markets during the 2015-2019 period, though they have conveniently forgotten their own role in the economic ruin. In foreign money markets, minimum interest was six percent and out of the USD 15 bn taken at such high interest rates as much as USD 12.5 bn was obtained by the Yahapalana rule within a short period of time, Gunasekara pointed out.

Perhaps if Mahinda Rajapaksa won the 2015 presidential election, he, as the Finance Minister, too, would have sought more loans from international money markets, Gunasekara said, asserting that the then Secretary to the Treasury Dr. P.B. Jayasundera may have pushed for early presidential elections as he was aware of the impending financial crisis. “But I tried unsuccessfully to convince President Rajapaksa not to face the electorate as he couldn’t have won under any circumstances,” Gunasekara said.

Bid to save Gotabaya

The former Minister recalled how representatives of political parties met at the residence of lawmaker Tiran Alles in the wake of the violent Mirihana protest, in March 2022, to discuss ways and means of saving Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s mandate. According to him, there had been a general agreement of an interim national government for at least a period of one year until some sort of stability could be restored. Among those who had been present were Dullas Alahapperuma and Maithripala Sirisena and other rebel SLPP MPs, Gunasekara said, adding that consensus couldn’t be reached as the President was not free to act as he desired.

“The President somewhat struggled to address never ending concerns of the Rajapaksa family,” the ex-CP boss said, expressing disbelief that the premiership was first offered to Field Marshal Sarath Fonseka and then SJB leader Sajith Premadasa before beleaguered UNP leader accepted the proposal in the second week of May 2022.

Gunasekara acknowledged the writer’s suggestion perhaps the UNP leader was the best choice, politically, at the time though he personally didn’t agree at all with the destructive market-oriented reform policies agenda pursued by the incumbent President to please the IMF.

In the run-up to the July 2022 calamity, Gunasekara had advised and warned Gotabaya Rajapaksa of the impending economic crisis but was ignored. “Obviously Dr. PBJ and Basil Rajapaksa were at the helm of economic matters. They shaped the damaging policy,” Gunasekara said, recalling him warning Gotabaya Rajapaksa regarding the impending economic crisis at the first public meeting held in Matara following the handing over of nominations for the 2019 presidential election. “The CP organized the Matara meeting where over 5,000 attended. Mahinda Rajapaksa and Mahinda Yapa Abeywardena were among those present. I handed over a printed booklet that dealt with the impending crisis and measures to be taken to Gotabaya. Obviously, he didn’t bother with it.”

Responding to another query, the one-time Prison Reforms Minister said that Gotabaya Rajapaksa was overwhelmed by the Rajapaksa family. “That is the ugly truth. The family didn’t allow the President to proceed on his own path,” Gunasekara said, explaining how the ill-advised Cabinet decision to abolish a range of taxes at the first Cabinet meeting chaired by President Gotabaya Rajapaksa, enactment of the 20th Amendment to pave the way for Basil Rajapaksa’s re-entry into Parliament, chemical fertiliser ban and cancellation of the Japanese-funded Light Rail Project, without consulting the donor, caused immense damage.

The former Minister said that the unveiling of a comprehensive and far reaching alternative economic development programme that dealt with repositioning of Sri Lanka’s foreign trade and economic relations by the CP coincided with their 80th anniversary. Gunasekara emphasized the responsibility on the part of the decision-makers to focus on human resources development, especially against the backdrop of the brain drain and the general perception that there was absolutely no hope of an economic recovery.

Gunasekara said that the vast majority of those who now represented the Parliament, as well as the executive, refused to accept the heavy impact the restructuring of domestic debt was having on the public. Whatever the economic recovery plans under discussion or at the onset of implementation, we lacked the wherewithal and political consensus, Gunasekera said, adding that the issues at hand should be addressed accordingly.

Gunasekara also discussed the continuing failure of Parliament to respond to the growing threats, with quite formidable external interventions taking place right under the noses of the political leadership. References were made to USAID and UNDP interventions at the highest level.

Need for urgent reforms

Gunasekera urged political parties to give sufficient time for new entrants. The ex-lawmaker said that sufficient time should be allocated for new MPs to address Parliament on important issues. How could they deal with a particular issue within three minutes, Gunasekara asked, acknowledging that he wouldn’t have achieved current status if he was denied adequate time.

Gunasekera recalled how he entered Parliament in 1986 in the wake of the death of Sarath Muttetuwegama, 51, lawyer, killed in a car crash at Ratnapura. At the time of his death, Muttetuwegama, married to Manouri, daughter of Dr. Colvin R. de Silva, represented the Kalawana electorate.

Gunasekera said that the decision-making Central Committee of the CP nominated him to fill the vacancy created by Muttetuwegama’s untimely death. There had been provision for a political party to nominate a person to Parliament, within a month, following the creation of a vacancy, and Dew Gunasekera was the CP’s choice though not unanimous. One member of the decision-making body had voted to appoint Manouri Muttetuwegama. In case, a particular political party failed to reach a consensus within a stipulated period of time, the then Election Commission would have called a by-election.

Touching the table, at where he sat, Gunasekara said on the day he took oaths as an MP, the then CP Chairman Pieter Keuneman advised him how to conduct himself in Parliament right here. “We were in this room. I was told to address Parliament while looking at the direction of the Speaker to prevent being disturbed and distracted by opposing MPs. Keuneman stressed the need to be fully prepared to address Parliament. I was also told the importance of having the address in point form and being logical. Perhaps the most important advice was to keep in mind that as an MP he should address the electorate not members of Parliament.”

Towards the end of the interview Gunasekera said that he was not sure whether Gotabaya Rajapaksa wanted to contest the 2019 presidential election or the family fielded him due to Mahinda Rajapaksa being disqualified by the 19th Amendment barring a third term. Gotabaya was not like other Rajapaksas and his wife a humble and gracious lady who never stepped on the toes of anyone. They were never extravagant and basically lived a simple life but Gotabaya Rajapaksa never realized the pitfalls in the political party system here.

Referring to the Matara meeting, immediately after presidential nominations where he advised SLPP candidate Gotabaya Rajapaksa, ex-MP Gunasekera said that the President’s response to concerns raised by the CP at a meeting he chaired on 20 December, 2020, deeply disappointed him.

The meeting had been called to discuss the government response to the Covid-19 threat. “On behalf of the CP, our General Secretary Dr. G. Weerasinghe urged President Rajapaksa not to force Muslims to cremate Covid-19 victims as the decision was not backed by scientific reasons nor by the World Health Organization. The President and others present there were warned of dire consequences of such a drastic decision. But Dr. Weerasinghe’s plea was ignored.”

Gunasekera said that he took advantage of the opportunity to warn the President of the impending economic crisis again. The ex-MP recalled him telling the President that unless he addressed the issue at hand none of those 6.9 mn voted for him would remain when the troubles erupted. “The President didn’t say anything but smiled nicely.”

Gunasekera criticized the Mahanayake Theras’ response to the developing crisis. Underscoring the responsibility on their part to rein in politicians, Gunasekera said that the emergence of the likes of ‘Pastor’ Jerome Fernando and Natasha Edirisuriya should be examined against the backdrop of the pathetic conduct of politicians and most religious leaders.

Commenting on the Aragalaya and related developments, Gunasekera confirmed that the US Ambassador Julie Chung advised Speaker Mahinda Yapa Abeywardena to succeed President Gotabaya Rajapaksa.

He said that National Freedom Front (NFF) leader Wimal Weerawansa’s recent declaration to that effect was based on what he told the MP.

Wickremesinghe’s emergence as the President, an Office he couldn’t have won at an election, highlighted the ruination of the political party system and the dearth of leaders. The UNP, being restricted to just one National List seat, and the SLFP down to one elected MP (other 13 elected on the Pohottuwa ticket) highlighted the collapse of the political party system, as hitherto known, and further deterioration of the situation.

All News Advertisement

Midweek Review

NPP drowning in sea of scams

Published

2 days ago

2026/04/29

Sahan Weerasooriya

Outgoing Treasury Chief Mahinda Siriwardena congratulates his successor Harshana Suriyapperuma in late June 2025 at the Finance Ministry

The Opposition is pressing for a one-day debate on USD 2.5 mn Treasury theft, which is more like a daylight robbery that had been kept under wraps by Treasury mandarins till ‘Free Lawyers’ made it public. However, the government is strongly opposed to the Opposition proposal. The Opposition is seeking consensus among

different parties to intensify the campaign against the government, struggling to cope up with a spate of controversies. Against the backdrop of the devastating debate on the coal scam, the NPP seems reluctant to face another over the theft of Treasury funds.

By Shamindra Ferdinando

USD 2.5 mn brazen heist at the Treasury several months ago and the bigwigs there obviously dragging their feet over the matter till it was brought to light recently, thanks to the Free Lawyers movement, which has dampened the NPP’s enthusiasm for May Day. The Treasury fiasco humiliated the cocky NPP leadership against the backdrop of damning report issued by the National Audit Office (NAO) that found fault with the government for awarding the coal tender for 2025/2026 period to Trident Champhar Limited of India in violation of tender procedures. The NAO emphasised that the Indian company shouldn’t have even been considered for the tender.

Even after the exposure of the scandalous handling of the coal tender, the NPP, in spite of some rumblings within the party, remained confident of overcoming the growing accusations regarding governance issues. But, the sudden revelation of the loss suffered by the Treasury, and pathetic efforts made by the NPP to suppress the truth, has caused irreparable harm to the ruling party. The arrogant NPP will have to use May Day to defend the government. Instead of preaching to the masses ad nauseum the corruption allegations against previous administrations, the NPP would have to explain such massive failures/corruption, particularly the loss of USD 2.5 mn.

There hadn’t been a previous instance of such an incident at the Treasury. The NPP will have to answer questions posed by ‘Free Lawyers,’ a civil society group that first raised the Treasury issue. On behalf of ‘Free Lawyers,’ its President Maithri Gunaratne, PC, former Governor of several provinces Rajith Keerthi Tennakoon, and Attorney-at-Law Shiral Lakthikala, targeted the government over the unprecedented Treasury heist. The Opposition, too, censured the NPP, with SJB leader Sajith Premadasa, MP, Chairman of Public Finance Committee (CoPF) Dr. Harsha de Silva, MP, and United Republican Front (URF) taking the lead.

The NPP’s excuses, based on claimed raids carried out by hacker/hackers targeting the Treasury, are untenable. The NPP’s position cannot be defended or supported against growing criticism. The coal scam and Treasury fiasco dominated social media, with the Opposition, as well as ordinary citizens, having a field day at the expense of the NPP, a political party that accused its opponents of waste, corruption, irregularities and mismanagement. Its successful propaganda campaigns, at the presidential and parliamentary polls, in September and November, 2024, respectively, were centered on fighting corruption.

Their anti-corruption platform appealed to the people for obvious reasons. Against the backdrop of bankruptcy, declared in May, 2022, after failing to meet debt commitments, the electorate rallied around the NPP that thrived on waste, corruption, irregularities and mismanagement, perpetrated by previous governments. Having bagged the executive presidency in September, 2024, the NPP assured the electorate that the Parliament would be cleansed of evils at the general election. President Anura Kumara Dissanayake declared that the people have been vested with the responsibility of cleansing the Parliament. Dissanayake went a step further when he addressed a public gathering at the 18th mile post on the Negombo-Colombo road. The NPP leader, who also leads the JVP, asserted that there was no need for an Opposition in Parliament and the House should be filled with NPPers.

Dissanayake based his assertion essentially on two failed No-Confidence Motions (NCMs) moved against Ravi Karunanayake and Keheliya Rambukwella in 2016 and 2023, respectively. The NPP/JVP leader found fault with Yahapalanaya and the Wickremesinghe-Rajapaksa government for protecting the two wrongdoers, hence the call to cleanse Parliament.

The results of the parliamentary election proved that the electorate responded very favourably to Dissanayake’s call. Of the 225-seat Parliament, the NPP secured 159 seats, including 18 National List slots. Having accused previous governments of shielding wrongdoers, Dissanayake easily directed the NPP’s steamroller parliamentary group to defeat the NCM moved against Energy Minister Punyakumara Dissanayake (National List) on 10 April, just a few days after the NAO report exposed the coal scam.

First ex-MP as Treasury Secy.

If its own hands are clean, there is no doubt that the NPP now deeply regrets the appointment of ex-NPP National List MP Harshana Suriyapperuma as the Secretary to the Treasury and the Finance Ministry. That appointment was made in June 2025 to fill the vacancy created by the retirement of Mahinda Siriwardana who, along with Governor of the Central Bank Dr. Nandalal Weerasinghe, played a significant role in the country’s post-Aragalaya recovery programme.

Suriyapperuma, who had served as Deputy Minister of Finance and Planning for just seven months, before being appointed the Treasury Secretary/Finance Ministry Secretary, is under heavy fire for suppressing the truth. No less a person than CoPF Chairman Dr. de Silva publicly accused Suriyapperuma of trying to undermine his committee. The SJB has demanded Suriyapperuma’s immediate resignation. Dr. Anil Jayantha succeeded as Deputy Minister of Finance and Planning.

Those who inquired into the crisis-hit Treasury are of the belief that 53-year-old Suriyapperuma lacked the much required experience to fill the shoes of Mahinda Siriwardana. Perhaps, the breach at the Treasury could have been averted if an outsider was not brought in place of Siriwardena. The recent reportage of the incident revealed that Suriyapperuma had been aware of the breach and sought to avoid appearing before the CoPF. The NPP could have responded to the developing situation differently if an ex-MP hadn’t been entrusted with the task of steering the Treasury/Finance Ministry. To make matters worse, President Dissanayake holds the Finance portfolio.

Although the government declared that the theft of USD 2.5 mn had been reported to the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) after initial detection made in January this year, controversy surrounds the failure on the part of law enforcement authorities to bring it to the notice of the courts. Maithri Gunaratne, appearing in Hiru last Saturday (25), questioned why the police failed to inform the relevant Magistrate if the government lodged a complaint in that regard.

Australia has confirmed irregularities in payments owed to their government. Regardless of NPP efforts to blame it on hacker/hackers, the truth is clear. Payments have been made to an account that hadn’t been in the original agreement between the governments of Sri Lanka and Australia. That is the undeniable truth that the NPP cannot suppress by propaganda.

The NPP should be ashamed that such a fraud had been perpetrated on a country still struggling to cope up with the economic destruction caused by the UNP- and the SLFP-led governments with the help of “mission impossible” type roles played by outside interests, especially during Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s tenure using the JVP/Aragalaya.

The world knows how the UNP perpetrated the Treasury bond scams with the direct involvement of the then Governor of the Central Bank Arjuna Mahendran, in February 2015 and March 2016. Regardless of that intolerable scam, the UNP made a desperate attempt to retain the services of the Singaporean as the Governor of the Central Bank. Party leader and the then Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe demanded the re-appointment of Mahendran. That despicable move had to be dropped due to massive Opposition protests and growing public discontent over the Treasury bond scams.

The first Treasury bond scam carried out on 27 February, 2015 caused a direct loss of approximately Rs. 2 billion. On the instructions of Mahendran, the Treasury suddenly and arbitrarily changed the process of issuing Treasury Bonds. According to media reports at that time, higher interest payments, over the next 30 years, caused a further loss of around Rs. 145 billion.

Then Mahendran struck again. Caused further direct losses of more than Rs. 4 billion to the government through the fraudulent increase in interest rates as a result of the Treasury Bond issues on 27th March, 2016 ,and 29th March, 2016, in order to provide an undue advantage to connected primary dealers by indulging in further pre-meditated bond scams.

NPP on back foot

The ruling party put on a brave face with lawmakers and various others trying to play down the incident at the Treasury. Some pathetically tried to compare various accusations directed at the Rajapaksas with the incident at the Treasury which they conveniently blamed on hacker/hackers.

The NPP is facing an explosive mixture of issues. Both the coal and Treasury scams have brought immense pressure on the national economy and caused automatic deterioration. The resignation of Punyakumara aka Kumara Jayakody over the coal scam indicated that defeating the NCM moved against him was a strategic political blunder. Had the NPP asked the tainted first time Minister to step down and appoint a Presidential Commission to go into the coal scam, the NPP could have averted a major disaster. However, the Energy Minister and the Energy Secretary Udayanga Hemapala had to resign before the Parliament took up the NCM. Had the top NPP leadership bothered to peruse the executive summary of the NAO presented to Parliament on 7 April, the Party wouldn’t have tried to defend the minister.

Having championed a corruption-free political party system and then won both the presidential and parliamentary polls on that platform, the NPP executed the shocking move to move 323 containers out of the Colombo Port, in January 2025, without even any cursory checks. Those who perpetrated that operation used continuing port congestion as an excuse to clear red-flagged containers without mandatory physical checking. The NPP recently thwarted a bid by Opposition lawmakers, representing a parliamentary committee inquiring into the illegal release of containers, to summon President Dissanayake.

That committee, headed by Justice Minister Attorney-at-Law Harshana Nanayakkara, owed an explanation as to why President Dissanayake, in his capacity as the Finance Minister, shouldn’t appear before a House committee. President Dissanayake very often addresses Parliament on crucial issues. As the Minister in charge of Finance, the President should offer an explanation regarding the high profile container issue that tarnished the NPP’s image.

Three major issues in hand, namely the release of 323 containers, coal scam and theft at the Treasury, regardless of what various apologists say on mainstream and social media, have caused irrevocable damage to the party, let alone escapades involving the likes of Speaker Jagath Wickramaratne, Minister Lal Kantha, etc. The impact on the NPP can be ascertained only at an election. With the public increasingly aware of the growing accusations against it, the ruling party will do whatever possible to put off long delayed Provincial Council elections. Facing the electorate against deepening discontent among the public seems to be a frightening situation. It would be interesting to observe how a House committee, headed by Foreign Minister Vijitha Herath, appointed to explore ways and means to conduct Provincial Council polls, address the issue at hand.

When compared with the three major issues, the resignation of Asoka Ranwala, as the Speaker, in December, 2024, over his failure to produce the much-touted educational qualifications, seems unnecessary. Of course, Ranwala’s case attracted tremendous public attention at that time as the public really believed the NPP wouldn’t deceive them. Ranwala’s lie shocked the public. NPP theoretician Prof. Ranjith Nirmal Dewasiri had no qualms in publicly attacking Ranwala in the wake of the NPP defending the Speaker. But, subsequent NPP actions revealed massive manipulations that shamed the first post-Aragalaya government.

Having accused Ranil Wickremesinghe of squandering as much as Rs 16 mn to join his wife Prof. Maithree in the UK in September, 2023, the NPP has ended up facing far more serious accusations. The incident at the Treasury should be sufficient for the Opposition to move NCM against the government. Of course, the NPP got the numbers in Parliament to easily defeat the NCM but the consequences would be devastating. Those who still talk of recovering the missing USD 2.5 mn must be living in a dreamland. The UNP is labelled with Treasury bond scams (2015 and 2016) and the SLPP faulted with tax cuts (2019) and sugar tax scam (2020). The NPP will have to live with the coal scam and Treasury theft. The NPP will no longer be able to parade on political platforms as paragons of virtue. It would be pertinent to mention that the Presidential Commission appointed to probe the procurement of coal, since 2009, would be able to produce a report to meet the NPP’s expectations. All indications point to that and 2026 is going to be far more challenging, both in and outside Parliament, than the previous year.

NDB fraud

Examined together, the massive fraud at the National Development Bank (NDB), perpetrated during the 2024-2026 period, and the Treasury incident, they underscore the vulnerability of the entire banking system. The 13.2 bn NDB fraud and theft of USD 2.5 mn from the Treasury exposed the regulator, the Central Bank of Sri Lanka, in respect of the NDB. The situation at the NDB cannot be examined without taking into consideration that Ernst & Young is the external auditors of the NDB and its Managing Partner Duminda Hulangamuwa functions as Senior Economic Adviser to President Dissanayake. People haven’t forgotten that Hulangamuwa had been mentioned as the possible successor of Mahinda Siriwardena before the NPP brought in Suriyapperuma. The Central Bank and Securities Exchange Commission (SEC) come under the purview of the Finance Ministry now embroiled in the expanding Treasury fiasco.

The Board of Directors at the NDB consists of Sriyan Cooray (Chairman), Kelum Edirisinghe (Director / Chief Executive Officer (Executive), Bernard Sinniah (Director /Non-Independent), Sujeewa Mudalige (Director /Independent), Kushan D’Alwis (Director/Independent), Kasturi Chellaraja (Director/Independent), Shweta Pandey (Director /Independent), Hasitha Premaratne (Director/Independent), Sanjaya Mohottala (Director (Non-Independent) and Shanil Fernando Director (Independent).

The issue at hand is how such a fraud went unnoticed for a considerable period of time and whether the top management simply ignored warning signs and the failure on the part of the regulator to intervene. Those who have read Mahinda Siriwardana’s ‘Sri Lanka’s Economic Revival: Reflections on the Journey from Crisis to Recovery’ would know the circumstances leading to the 2022 economic collapse. Soft spoken Siriwardana meticulously discussed how the then Central Bank leadership as well as the so-called economic leadership of the Pohottuwa party deliberately deceived President Gotabaya Rajapaksa. Siriwardena’s narrative is explosive. The book, launched before his retirement, with the participation of President Dissanayake, underscored the responsibility on the part of the political leadership and those running the banking system. Obviously Siriwardena’s work had no impact on the current dispensation as well as the top banking management.

The Opposition sees an apparent opportunity to heap pressure on the NPP as it contemplates counter measures. Their challenge is how to take remedial measures without jeopardizing the government. The IMF declaration that it is closely watching the theft of USD 2.5 mn from the Treasury must have added pressure on the government, ripped apart by the situation at the Treasury. Let us hope the government and the Opposition reach consensus on ways and means to improve financial discipline. Overall, the Parliament cannot absolve itself of the responsibility for enactment of laws and ensuring financial discipline and the fact that Sri Lanka needs to start repayment of debt in 2028.

Midweek Review

Is language social or psychological phenomenon?

Published

2 days ago

2026/04/29

Sahan Weerasooriya

This essay was presented at The Philosophy Group of the University of London about 20 years ago. The thought provoking essay published in The Island on 22 April by Usvwatte-aratchi- Some languages confine you; some languages free you prompted me to try to get this essay published if possible. It may help the readers to further their ideas about the importance of usage of language.

Personally, I have firsthand experience in this subject. I was exposed to two different cultures and two languages. In my formative years I was brought up in a certain culture and spoke the language pertaining to that culture/language (Sinhalese -Sri Lanka). I spent all my studying and working life (55 years) using a different language in a different culture (English -England). I must mention that this was not recently. It was the early 1960’s. I can claim that I have enough knowledge and experience to justify this essay topic. In this essay I shall be investigating some of the social aspects of language with the aid of some opinions put forward by some philosophers. Then I shall be making an attempt to see what psychology has to offer before I draw my own conclusions. I am treating social aspects as part and parcel of the culture. In my view these are inseparable entities, unless one chooses to forget his or her cultural upbringing to suit a particular society.

Adoption of different culture

Socially, learning a different language and adopting a different culture is quite possible. In this case what dominates is one’s attitude or the circumstances. Attitude is psychological. I am convinced that circumstances may lead to a change of attitudes. Having said that, we must not forget that there are individuals who have not taken the trouble to learn the language of the culture in which they live. This has created a lot of socio-psychological problems in the community in which they live. It is obvious that the problem is one of communication. The main tool of communication is language. Philosophers and psychologists have spent many years investigating how language helps us to communicate and also how it may lead us to misunderstand our own fellow human beings. Understanding others (family members, members of the community in which we live, and the strangers we meet) is one of the most important aspects of living.

An awareness of the problem of language goes back to the early Greek philosophers. Parmenides gave us the first example of an argument from language to the world, saying that if we speak of a thing it must exist, since we speak of a thing at various times, it must continue to exist in a particular form. It is recently that language itself has come to be studied in a systematic way. The two landmarks in this respect were the development of Linguistics and the philosophy of language in the 20th century. The great philosopher Bertrand Russell (1872-1970) has admitted that until he became a middle-aged man, he did not think about language per se, but regarded it as ‘transparent’. I am sure this is true with most of us although we are not of Russell’s caliber when it comes to philosophy. And one may not have to wait until one reaches one’s middle age.

Linguistics and philosophy of language

It will help us if we understand the difference between Linguistics and philosophy of Language. What linguists discover may be applied to philosophy, sociology, psychology, anthropology or physiology. But as a discipline of study, it remains independent of them. The philosophy of language is different. One of the modern philosophers John Searle (1932-2025) thought, by contrast to linguistics, philosophy tries to solve philosophical problems by analyzing the ordinary use, meaning and relations of words in a particular language. Searle goes on to say that language is crucial to understand human experience. In my opinion this is a very valid comment. At a very practical level we spend a lot of time sharing our experiences. Verbal communication is vital in this area. According to Canadian philosopher Ian Hacking(1936-2023) the influence of language on philosophy has been profound and almost unrecognized. He indicates, if we are not to be misled by this influence, it is necessary to become conscious of it, and to ask ourselves deliberately how far it is legitimate.

It is appropriate to bring in Ludwig Wittgenstein(1889-1951) at this point. He brought in the subject predicate theory of language. For example, if we say “John is king”. Where John is the subject and king is the predicate. Here existence requires substance. For Aristotle, forms do not exist independently of things—every form is the form of something. A “substantial” form is a kind that is attributed to a thing, without which that thing would be of a different kind or would cease to exist altogether. Wittgenstein supports Saint Augustine’s view that words are names of objects and that combinations of words have the sole function of describing reality. For example, if we point at a certain object, say a table and try to say to a child “this is a table”, the child will be confused as to what we are pointing at. Is it the colour, the tabletop or one or more of its legs This is called the ostensive definition method of teaching. Ostensive definitions lead to a variety of interpretations. The child may understand a particular case of this definition but there is no guarantee that she will be able to make a transition from one case to others like it.

Plato’s theory

J G Herder (1744-1803) pointed out the object to which we make reference may be defined by numerous different terms. How then can we justify direct, one to one correspondence-either of so many to one, or of one to so many? How are we going to deal with situations where a term describes something non-existent or only possible? Plato’s “Forms” theory cannot be applied here as anything that we can speak of already exists as a Form. Critics of this theory ask the question: “how can the world be crowded with so many imaginary objects?” We use words to describe and define. Is there any room for slang language? This comes in handy in our day to day social communication. Ostensive definition raises the questions that require a constant selection of what counts as relevant. In Aldous Huxley’s novel Chrome Yellow, the character Old Rowley is confused as to: Does ‘pig’ refer to the quality of having a curly tail? Or standing in rows to eat? Or being pink skinned and fat? Or wearing no clothes? When we use the word “piggishness” is it something inherent to pigs, or simply, a matter of how we choose to describe them?

How can we relate the above ideas and theories of language to our daily living? Daily living is a psychosocial activity.

Perceptions

The nature of language reflects the nature of our perceptions, and these are far from straight forward. Franz Brentano (1838-1917) developed his theory of intentionality: that every mental phenomenon has a relation of direction to its object, i.e. perceptions, desires, imagination etc. are related to what is perceived, desired or imagined. I presume this can be applied to any language irrespective of the culture (our social conditioning). Say for instance the images of art and the writings are given the ability to represent objects by imposing the intentionality on the object. Thus, when we assert that we see or believe something, we impose, by convention and intention, (that is true if and only if it is the case) on the statement, and these conditions are not contained intrinsically in the sounds that make it up, but in our perception of belief about the fact. I begin to wonder how this can be applied to non-physical and unseen situations. Sometimes our feelings and attitudes are unknown to the observer. A person may shout because he is angry but you cannot see the anger, only its physical expression. We will not be able to see the prior event that has led to the anger and the utterance. This shows that there is a limit to how much is revealed simply by observing a word and its context; there is often more than that can be said.

How can we account for unexpected linguistic behaviour? This has both social and psychological implications.

For a long time behavioural theorists believed that every development of the human being was controlled by environmental and social factors. This is similar to an ostensive explanation of meaning. It implied that everything was learnt through training and association. But Noam Chomsky (b.1928) was not happy with this idea. He thought language is a complex phenomenon and which is not taught bit by bit or systematically to infants. It is successfully acquired by (almost) everybody. From my own experience it is true to say that the difficulty in learning a second language is a very different process from that experienced with the first language. Chomsky argued that the first language is not in fact learned, but rather acquired through exposure to a particular language. According to him all languages share the same basic structure, and he called this “deep structure”, which may be expressed as surface structures through a process called ‘transformation’. Chomsky’s theory helps us to assume a universal system of grammar, which may generate an infinite number of particular sentences within a language. This explains how we may create sentences within a language we have never encountered before from a limited set of grammatical rules and this appears to be a rational scientific approach.

Social or psychological phenomenon

The argument/discussion whether language is a social or a psychological phenomenon requires much more investigation than this essay warrants. I have briefly brought in various philosophers’ work, which are invaluable to this topic in terms of philosophy of language. In conclusion I am tempted to state my own experiences as a bi-lingual person. When it comes to my first language, which is Sinhalese I don’t think I learned it. I heard my parents speaking it and I picked up a few words and I constructed my own sentences and gradually became proficient by accumulating more words. Of course, the proper grammatical use of even my own language was taught in school and not by my parents. Learning my second language i.e. English took a different form. I was taught to speak, read, and write English at school and I had to work harder at this than my first language, because my English was confined to the classroom situation only, i. e. I learnt English in a non- English environment. First language came naturally and the second one I had to learn to fit into the social and the education structure that prevailed at that time. Compulsion can motivate us to learn!I had no choice but to adopt myself culturally and linguistically as a university student in England and then as a university teacher in England. Apart from the native English students, I have taught students from different countries. European, African and Asian. I had the opportunity to intermingle with them and learned various different cultural and linguistic aspects. After almost a half a century in England, I am back to my own culture (language, customs, food etc) where I was born and started my life. I am still proficient in my own language Sinhalese. No conscious effort needed.

After all the foregoing arguments and philosophy that I have put forward, my own conclusion is Chomsky’s theories are more plausible to me than other theories on this issue. It is difficult to be exact and say whether language is a social or psychological phenomenon. From the above arguments, we can see that culture and language of a given society are tightly bound. This leads us to psychological adjustments in order to fit into a society. Who can deny that even the philosophers mentioned above have not been subjected to their own cultural environment?

by Prof. Sampath
Anson Fernando
Formerly University of
The Arts London