Features
DS pilots ship of state, unlucky 13 at Senate refreshment room on Mar. 20, 1952

(Excerpted from the Memoirs of a Cabinet Secretary by BP Peiris)
It is time to get back to D.S. It was early 1950. The Prime Minister was firm that the de facto communist Government in China should be recognized. Some of his colleagues disagreed, but in the end gave way to the Prime Minister’s wish.
There then arose the controversy over the moving of a section of the Supreme Court out of Hultsdorp because of the congestion there. The Minister of Justice informed the Cabinet that he had consulted the Chief Justice, Sir John Howard, the General Council of Advocates and the Law Society. Only the Chief Justice had been helpful. The Minister had personally inspected many sites and had decided on a site at Bambalapitiya. A majority of the Judges of the Supreme Court were in favour of this site.
He had accordingly ordered that steps be taken for the acquisition of the land. Acquisition proceedings had, however, to be stopped when the General Council of Advocates and the Law Society made certain representations. The Council of Advocates had asked for an interview with the Prime Minister and, at this interview, had put forward a rebuilding scheme which the Public Works Department had described as an architectural monstrosity.
Apart from this, the scheme could not be carried out as the building operations would disturb the work of the courts. No alternative accommodation for the court building was available. As a compromise and a gesture of goodwill, he was prepared to retain in Hultsdorp the Assize Courts as well as the Election Courts in addition to the District Courts, and remove to the new site only the Supreme Court in its Appellate jurisdiction. In the end, the proposal was abandoned and the site used for the erection of flats to ease the housing problem.
In February 1950, Jayah, Minister of Labour and Social Services, left the Cabinet to take up the appointment as High Commissioner for Ceylon in Pakistan. He was succeeded by M. D. Banda.
There was much agitation at this time that education should be free, and the Cabinet was compelled to consider the problem and decide on the policy to be adopted. They came to several important decisions after many days of deliberation.
It was agreed that no tuition fees should be levied in Government Primary, Post Primary and Training Schools, in Government Vocational Schools, Training Colleges and in the University, In Primary Schools, the medium of instruction was directed to be the mother tongue, but English should be taught throughout the primary course as a second language. In Post Primary Classes of Sinhalese and Tamil Schools, as regards the medium of instruction, there was to be no change; but where it was not possible to teach certain necessary subjects through their existing medium, English might be used for these subjects.
In standards VI, VII, and VIII of English Schools, Sinhalese and Tamil, for pupils whose parents are Sinhalese speaking and Tamil speaking, should be introduced subject by subject, if necessary, as the media of instruction, in three successive years, as soon as the Government was satisfied that there was a sufficiency of teachers and books for carrying on the work adequately. Children were to be compelled to attend school from the age of five to 14, subject to exemption by the Minister in suitable cases after the age 12, and the exemptions were to be as few as possible.
Schools were divided into two grades – primary and secondary. Children assigned to post primary practical classes and those assigned to vocational schools were permitted to continue their academic education on payment of fees, if their parents wished, but were not provided for in the Government Schools. Scholarships and bursaries were to be provided in the University and other Government institutions for higher education.
The next important matter that the Government had to consider was the Report of Dr Cumpston on the Medical and Public Health Organization. Vital decisions were reached which gave rise to much agitation and controversy many years afterwards and had to be reconsidered by later Cabinets. One of the most controversial decisions was that all private practice by departmental doctors should cease and that all services given to the public by government salaried and pensionable doctors should be free.
This decision could not be implemented immediately. The Minister was therefore requested to formulate a scheme which would lead ultimately to the complete abolition of private practice for government doctors. At the date of writing, a half-hearted and unsatisfactory scheme of channeling a doctor’s practice is in force.
In August 1950, the Cabinet approved the National Flag. A Committee had been appointed to consider and report on this matter over which there were divergent views. Some sections did not approve of the predominance given to the Lion Flag. Hindus and Muslims wanted themselves represented in the flag In the end, to please all sections, different colours were added, as stripes alongside the Lion Flag to represent the different communities in the country.
In spite of the efforts of the Cost of Living Committee the cost of living was rising further, and the Government was compelled to increase the dearness allowance, and to subsidize rice to the extent of five cents a measure from December 1, 1950.
D.S., as I said before, was an amazing man. He was a hard worker and had no fixed hours of work. He forgot that the Government offices closed on Saturdays at 1 p.m. He did not know that a particular day was a Public Holiday. On such a day, he would arrive at his office to find it closed and would inquire, after getting back to Temple Trees, why the office was not open.
One incident, in which I was involved, is typical of the man. It was a Saturday, and I went to the Senate Refreshment Room for an aperitif. There were three others there – Senator Colonel T. Y. Wright, Senator Sarath Wijesinghe, my classmate at the Royal College, and my friend E. V. R. Samarawickreme, Clerk to the Senate.
I was making my way to another table when Col. Wright said, “Come and join us, young man”. I had a few drinks with my eye on the time. Even when one o’clock came along, I did not feel too easy because I knew that D.S. was working in his office. At a quarter past two (Saturday afternoon) we were still in the Senate when the Prime Minister’s peon walked in and said that I was wanted.
The Prime Minister had a problem and wanted my advice. In the Constitution and the Parliamentary Elections Order in Council, reference had been made to ‘British subject’. The Prime Minister desired to have this altered to ‘Ceylon citizen’ as regards the Election Order in Council, and wanted to know whether, if the amendment was made in that Order, a corresponding amendment would have to be made in the Constitution Order.
His purpose was to restrict the Indian estate labour vote. His difficulty was that an amendment of the Constitution required a two-thirds majority in parliament, and he had not the requisite majority. I answered “Yes, Sir” without reference to either of the two Orders in Council. He called for somebody’s opinion, which his secretary Atukorale brought in, and proceeded to read it out to me. The opinion was to the effect that the Elections Order could be amended without a corresponding amendment having to be made in the Constitution Order.
I said bluntly that the opinion was wrong. He said that I had given an opinion without reference to any books, and that what he had just read was the opinion of a King’s Counsel who had wanted a week’s time to give it.
I told him that, with all respect to the learned King’s Counsel, I was still of the view that the opinion was incorrect. He asked me for my reasons, and I said, still without reference to the Order in Council, that it was because of three words in section so and so in the Constitution Order (I remember using the words “umbilical cord”) which connected the two Orders, the significance of which the learned King’s Counsel had probably missed.
I also advised that if he was proceeding with the amendments, the Constitution amendment should be introduced first because it required a two-thirds majority to become law. “What do I do when you lawyers disagree?” asked the Prime Minister, and I replied that the question ought to be referred to the Law Officers of the Crown. Later, that was done; and the Law Officers agreed with me.
At that time however, the Prime Minister did not accept my advice. He introduced the amendment to the Elections Order first and got it through. He then introduced the amendment to the Constitution Order and failed to get the required majority. The result – the Elections Order today refers to ‘Ceylon citizen’ and the Constitution Order to ‘British subject’.
On another day, I went to the Senate Refreshment Room with Alexis Roberts to find a long lunch table laid for about 60 persons, and on inquiry, was told that it was the Judicial Officer’s lunch, that the Prime Minister was Chief Guest, and that he was due at 12.50 p.m. We drew two chairs and ordered drinks. The time was about 12 noon. The Judges were in conference upstairs. The Prime Minister had mistaken the time and arrived in the Refreshment Room at twelve-thirty.
There was no other guest present and we saw him approaching our table; he joined us and I introduced my friend. The Prime Minister inquired whether he was any relation of the late Dr Emmanuel Roberts, a general medical practitioner whose name is still respected and revered throughout the Island. When he heard that Alexis was the doctor’s youngest son, he was very happy because he had known the doctor well.
They talked of old times. We finished our drink but could not leave, as it would have been discourteous to leave the Prime Minister alone. I therefore asked him whether he could give me permission to order another drink (during office hours) and he said “Certainly, certainly, don’t mind me.” We took leave of him when we saw the Judges coming down the stairs to the lunch room and he thanked us for having kept him company all that time.
D.S. could be firm at times, but he was always polite. I once heard him tell a Permanent Secretary “If you can’t do your job, get out.” His telephone rang one day when I was doing some work with him and someone wanted to speak to one of his clerks, but, by a mistake, had dialed the Prime Minister’s direct number. Patiently, he put his work aside, turned up the directory and gave the caller the correct number. Can you imagine the Office Assistant to the Petrol Controller, referred to earlier, behaving in this dignified manner?
The Government had now to take some positive steps to deal with the problem of the rising cost of living. Several measures were considered. As a first step, it was decided to take over the control and distribution of essential foodstuffs like rice, flour and sugar. This was, I believe, the beginning of what later turned out to be virtual monopoly vested in the Co-operative Wholesale Establishment over the import and distribution of the Island’s principal essential commodities.
Came 1952. On February 6, I was attending a funeral at Kanatte when I heard someone, whom I did not know, say that the King was dead. The news had been announced from Radio Ceylon. The Prime Minister was a patient in the Merchant’s Ward of the General Hospital. I left the funeral and hurried back home as I knew that there would have to be an emergency meeting of the Cabinet. I called on the Prime Minister at the hospital and was directed to summon the Ministers to meet in his hospital room at nine o’clock the next morning.
There is no fixed place of meeting for the Cabinet. It has, apart from the Cabinet Room, met in the Prime Minister’s bedroom at Temple Trees, at Kandawela, at the Senate, in the Prime Minister’s room at the House of Representatives, and the Lodge at Nuwara Eliya.
Next morning, all the Ministers were present at the General Hospital. In attendance, there were Basnayake, Attorney-General, Sir Kanthiah Vaithianathan, Permanent Secretary to the Ministry of Defence and External Affairs, Sir Ivor Jennings, Vice-Chancellor of the University, and the Clerks to the Senate and the House of Representatives.
On behalf of his colleagues and on his own behalf, the Prime Minister placed on record their sense of the sad loss suffered by the death of His Majesty George VI. He had already dispatched a message of sympathy from the Government of Ceylon. The Cabinet recognized the succession to the Throne and agreed that the following Proclamation should be issued:
Whereas by the decease of our late Sovereign Lord King George the Sixth, the Crown is by our laws solely and rightfully come to the High and Mighty Princess Elizabeth Alexandra Mary; We, the Governor-General, the Prime Minister and other Ministers of the Crown in Ceylon do now hereby, with one voice and consent of tongue and heart, publish and proclaim that the High and Mighty Princess Elizabeth Alexandra Mary is now by the death of our late Sovereign of happy memory, become our Sovereign Queen by the name and style of Elizabeth the Second, to whom her lieges do acknowledge all faith and constant obedience with hearty and humble affection.
On previous occasions, the Proclamation acknowledging a new Sovereign had been signed by the Governor and ‘Other gentlemen of Quality’. On this occasion, it was decided that it should be signed only by the members of the Cabinet. The Governor-General, Lord Soulbury exercised his right to head the proclamation with his signature.
The Proclamation was read from the steps of the House of Representatives on February 8. In recording the minutes of the meeting held at the hospital, I marked the attendance of the lawyer Ministers as being Queen’s Counsel, instead of King’s Counsel which they were the previous day, and asked Sir Ivor whether I was correct. He said, “Yes. See the Demise of the Crown Act.”
March 20, 1952, was Mr D.S. Senanayake’s last Cabinet meeting. On that day, after the meeting, he entertained the Ministers and the Secretaries to lunch in the Senate Refreshment Room. Some Ministers were absent and I pointed out that 13 were sitting to table. I was sent out to bring somebody, some extra person, to make the number 14, but everyone I met appeared to have had his lunch. And so, 13 of us sat down to lunch. Minister Nugawela did not like it at all and said so.
Next morning, while on horseback, the Prime Minister fell off his horse although he was a good horseman. He had apparently had a stroke. He passed away the next day. Her Majesty the Queen was one of the first persons to send a message of sympathy.
Ceylon had lost the Father of the Nation. His wise leadership gave us peace and prosperity. There were no communal differences and controversies in his time. He had Muslims and Hindus in his Cabinet. He was not out for cheap notoriety. There was nothing mean or common in his nature, and his qualities of sincerity, good faith, and love of his native land have generally been accepted by the country. I have attempted to draw a vignette. Some future historian or research worker must give us his biography.
J. L. F.’ writing in the Ceylon Observer of March 23, 1952, said:
“Mr Senanayake was not merely a Prime Minister of a country: he was a leader of men. It was this quality both inborn and matured by experience which gave our country stability when he piloted the ship of state. His was not the leadership buttressed by bayonets and concentration camps in a country’s hinterland. The people followed him, and even his political critics admired him because he was known to be just. And a country of different communities, different religions and different castes needs at the helm someone whom they can all trust as a just man.”
Sir Alan Rose, Acting Governor-General, said:
“During my seven years in this country I have had the opportunity and happiness of seeing Mr Senanayake at very close quarters and from a variety of aspects. Quite apart from his many personal kindnesses, his inflexible courage, his power of mind and his breadth of outlook have combined to create an impression of greatness which I shall always remember.”
Features
Clean Sri Lanka and Noise Pollution (Part I)

by (Dr) Jayampathy Wickramaratne,
President’s Counsel
One area of focus of the ‘Clean Sri Lanka’ programme, initiated by the new government, that has enthused the people at large is the drive to clean the environment. People affected by intense noise hope that cleaning the environment will not be limited to keeping public spaces clean but will also address the issue of noise pollution. This is evident from letters to newspapers and social media posts calling upon the authorities to deal with noise pollution from varied sources, such as entertainment, places of religious worship, vehicular traffic, construction and industrial activities as part of ‘Clean Sri Lanka’.
I write this piece not only as one having an interest in fundamental rights but also as a victim of noise pollution. In the locality where I live, off Rajagiriya, residents have for years been subjected to intense noise forced upon them, mainly by music but also by fireworks, emanating from events conducted on the premises of a government-owned institution. Complaints to the institution, as well as to the Police, bore no results. I refrain from naming the institution as the matter is under investigation by the Human Rights Commission, and the new management of the institution has promised us that remedial measures will be taken.
While the ‘Clean Sri Lanka’ programme was in full swing, a group of tourists, participating in a musical event in the Weligama area, had objected vociferously to the Police prohibiting the use of loudspeakers after 10 p.m. when the period for which a permit had been issued ran out. One female tourist is heard, in a video of the incident, saying that not allowing the use of loudspeakers will adversely affect tourism.
Reacting to the incident, two government spokespersons said that the present government cannot be blamed as the Police were only giving effect to a judgment of the Supreme Court. Not stopping at that, they said that steps would be taken to have the judgment revised. It might interest readers to know that the then Deputy Minister of Tourism, Diana Gamage, made a similar statement in October 2022.
Supreme Court on noise pollution, Ashik v. Bandula
The judgment referred to is Ashik v. Bandula and others, reported in [2007] 1 Sri Lanka Law Reports on page 191, which was widely welcomed. The case commenced as a fundamental rights application by the trustees of a mosque in Weligama against the Police for refusing a loudspeaker permit. The Police contended that residents in the area had complained of noise pollution due to the excessive use of the loudspeakers by three mosques. The Supreme Court noted that the application raised fundamental issues with regard to sound pollution and standards that the Central Environmental Authority (CEA) should enforce. The CEA was accordingly added as a party. Environmental Foundation Limited was permitted to intervene. The court proceeded with the case as being of public interest.
Noting that our country has probably the oldest jurisprudential tradition of a secular approach in dealing with a public nuisance, the Court referred to the 1895 case of Marshall v. Gunaratne Unnanse where the Supreme Court upheld that conviction of the principal trustee of a Buddhist Vihara in Colombo who was charged under the then applicable section 90 of the Police Ordinance for creating noise in the night and disturbing the neighbourhood.
The Supreme Court referred to Re Noise Pollution, a celebrated case decided by the Indian Supreme Court, noting that the latter Court had firmly rejected the contention that there is a fundamental right to make noise associated with the freedom of speech and expression. The Chief Justice of India delved into the etymology of the term “Noise” and noted that it is derived from the Latin word “Nausea”, defined as unwanted sound, a potential hazard to health and communication dumped into the environment without regard to the adverse effect it may have on unwilling ears.
Chief Justice Lahoti continued: “Noise is more than just a nuisance. It constitutes a real and present danger to people’s health. Day and night, at home, at work, and at play, noise can produce serious physical and psClean Sri Lanka and Noise Pollution (Part I)ychological stress. No one is immune to this
stress. Though we seem to adjust to noise by ignoring it, the ear, in fact, never closes and the body still responds —sometimes with extreme tension, as to a strange sound in the night. … Noise is a type of atmospheric pollution. It is a shadowy public enemy whose growing menace has increased in the modern age of industrialisation and technological advancement. … Nobody can claim the fundamental right to create noise by amplifying the sound of his speech with the help of loudspeakers. While one has a right to speech, and others have a right to listen or decline to listen. Nobody can be compelled to listen and nobody can claim that he has a right to make his voice trespass into the ears or mind of others. Nobody can indulge in aural aggression.”
The Sri Lankan Supreme Court held that there was no dispute that people have been denied equal protection of the law by the failure of the executive to establish by way of regulations an effective legal regime as mandated by the National Environmental Act to safeguard the public from the harmful effects of noise pollution. The facts also reveal that there are no guidelines for the effective implementation of the applicable provisions of law so as to provide to the people equal protection of the law guaranteed by Article 12(1) of the Constitution. Accordingly, the Court considered it to be just and equitable in the circumstances of the case to make the following directions:
(i) That the emission of noise by the use of amplifiers, loudspeakers or other equipment or appliances which causes annoyance to the public or to the people in general who dwell or occupy property in the vicinity be considered a public nuisance in terms of section 261 of the Penal Code and that the Police should entertain complaints and take appropriate action for the abatement of such public nuisance;
(ii) That all permits issued by the Police under section 80(1) of the Police Ordinance shall cease to be effective forthwith;
(iii) That no permits shall be issued in terms of section 80(1) of the Police Ordinance for the use of loudspeakers and other instruments for the amplification of noise as specified in that section covering the period 10 p.m. (night) to 6 a.m. (morning). Such permits may be issued for special religious functions and other special events only after ascertaining the views of persons who occupy land premises in the vicinity, a record of such matters to be maintained and the grant of any such permit shall be forthwith reported to the nearest Magistrate Court;
(iv) That in respect of the hours from 6.00 a.m. to 10.00 p.m., permits may be issued for limited periods of time for specific purposes subject to the strict condition that the noise emitted from such amplifier or loudspeaker or equipment does not extend beyond the precincts of the particular premises.
(v) Where a permit is issued in terms of section 80(1) as provided in direction (iii) and (iv) sufficient number of Police Officers should be designated and posted to the particular place of use to ensure that the conditions imposed are strictly complied with;
(vi) That the Police will make special arrangements to entertain any complaint of a member of the public against any person guilty of an offence of public nuisance as provided in section 261 of the Penal Code or of using any loudspeaker, amplifier or other instrument as provided in section 80 of the Police Ordinance contrary to any of these directions and take immediate steps to investigate the matter and warn such person against a continuance of such conduct. If the conduct is continued after that warning to seize and detain the equipment as provided in section 80(4) of the Police Ordinance and to report the matter to the Registrar of this Court.
The Inspector General of Police was directed to submit a report to the Court as to the action taken on the judgment. IGP’s Circular No. 2031/2007 and Crime Circular 17/2007 were issued in conformity with the judgment. A few years later, following representations made mainly by artistes to President Mahinda Rajapakse, the State requested the Supreme Court to extend the time period of permits during weekends. This request was granted.
Accordingly, the Supreme Court directed that musical and cultural shows should be brought to an end at 1.00 a.m. on Fridays and Saturdays and 12.30 a.m. on Sundays. What is important to note is that no change was made to the strict condition made by the Court that noise emitted from an amplifier, loudspeaker or equipment should not extend beyond the precincts of the particular premises.
Southern hoteliers protest relaxing noise laws
The government’s response to a small group of tourists wanting to make merry, unmindful of the rights of the residents of the area, was clearly a knee-jerk reaction. Its spokespersons went to the extent of adding that not permitting loudspeakers till late would adversely affect the tourist industry.
These responses triggered an immediate backlash from citizens concerned with the environment, especially those affected by noise pollution. The Facebook group National Coalition Against Noise Pollution (Shabda Dooshanayata Erehi Jathika Ekamuthuva — type in Sinhala fonts to visit the page) is at the forefront.
The authorities may not have expected opposition from the tourist industry itself. At a media briefing in Galle on 27 January, the Southern Province Tourist Hoteliers Association said that tourists vehemently oppose intense noise. There have been instances of tourists demanding that room charges be paid back and moving out when unable to bear the noise. “Tourists come to Sri Lanka to enjoy the beaches, wildlife and places of historical interest in a relaxing environment. Those who visit discos are drug users. It is they who want noise, not genuine tourists,” the Association explained. A hotel owner from Unawatuna, who had been in the business for 20 years, said that his clients had asked for their money back and left the hotel when disturbed by the intense noise from discos in the neighbourhood. If discos are to be operated, the halls must be constructed so as not to let out sound, he explained —the same condition that our Supreme Court had imposed. A German national whose husband is in the tourist trade in Sri Lanka expressed similar sentiments and blamed Sri Lankan authorities, including the Police, for turning a deaf ear to tourists’ complaints. That tourists want discos and musical shows at night is a misconception, she added. (To be concluded).
Features
FRIDAY for Hiruni … in the UK

Hiruni Fernando was very much in the spotlight, in the local scene, especially when she formed an all-girls group, called Mantra.
It was an empowering experience, says Hiruni, referring to Mantra.
Her exceptional skills as a bass guitarist, pianist, and vocalist, was quite evident when she found herself inundated with work in the scene here, playing bass for the C&C music band, led by Chandani Hettiarachchi, performing as a lead guitarist and bassist with several other groups, and being featured as a pianist at several five-star venues, including the Galadari Hotel.
“After I got married, I relocated to London with my husband, Damith Sanjaya,” she says, “and we decided to start something together here in the UK, and that’s how our band, FRIDAY, was born.
Damith, a multi-instrumentalist and lead guitarist with over a decade of experience, has been a key partner in her musical endeavours.
- With Chandani Hettiarachchi of C&C fame
- Hiruni Fernando: Her journey began in Sri Lanka
FRIDAY, I’m told, is a vibrant group of seven talented musicians in the UK, mixing Sri Lankan, Indian and English music, and their performances blend genres, pairing traditional rhythms with modern beats … creating a unique experience for all.
Says Hiruni: “We want to bring something fresh and unique to audiences here in the UK,” adding that FRIDAY is more than just a band; it’s a vision.
“We’re a family of musicians, and the energy we share on stage reflects our passion for what we do. With Damith’s support and the incredible talent in our group, I feel like we’re creating something truly special.”
She went on to say that FRIDAY is a mix of experience and youth, with most of the members having over 10 years of experience in music, and that they all bring their unique skills to the table.
A highlight for Hiruni has been performing at events in the UK, featuring renowned Sri Lankan singers. “It’s been amazing to work with some of Sri Lanka’s biggest names at special events here. It feels like I’m carrying a piece of home with me.
“I’ve always believed that music is more than just an art form—it’s a way of connecting with people, across borders and cultures,” says Hiruni who is now making her mark in the UK.
Born and raised in a family deeply immersed in music, Hiruni’s journey began in Sri Lanka.
Her father was a music teacher at the Yamaha School of Music for 15 years and growing up in that environment, music was a natural part of her life, she says.
Starting with the bass guitar in school, she later polished her craft under the guidance of her father, and renowned musicians, like Hussain Jiffry. “Learning from such legends shaped my understanding of music and gave me the foundation to grow as a musician,” she says.
Hiruni has also worked as a Western music teacher, completed Grade 8 certifications in piano, music theory, and classical guitar.
Looking ahead, she says she is excited about what the future holds. “Music has been my life for as long as I can remember, and I feel like this is just the beginning.”
Features
Another scene with Suzi and Manilal

singer/entertainer with a bubbly personality, Suzi Croner (Flückiger) of Friends fame, and who is now based in Switzerland, is heading this way again.
She was in Sri Lanka during the festive season, connected with some family commitments, and was also involved in a few gigs, especially at the Cheers Pub with Manilal Perera.
This time, too she will be in action, with Manilal, at the Cheers Pub.
Says Suzi: “To all my friends … yes, the news is that I’m performing, once again, in Sri Lanka, at the newly opened Cheers Pub at the Cinnamon Grand.
“I will be action with Manilal … on 13th 14th and 15th February. My farewell performance is scheduled for 21st February, at ‘Country Nite’ and then I will be back to base – Switzerland.
In the meanwhile, Roger Menezes, who is in town, from Sydney, will be featured at the Broadway Restaurant and Pub, at Station Road, Dehiwela, on Valentine’s Day, for a night of hits and memories, from 7.00 pm onwards.
-
News4 days ago
Musk reveals ‘crazy waste’ of USAID funds in Sri Lanka
-
News2 days ago
SLAS senior to be HC in London, several new dpl appointments
-
Midweek Review6 days ago
Canada plays politics with Sri Lanka again ahead of its national election
-
Business5 days ago
UNDP, ADB pledge support to SL on its public digital journey at key summit
-
News6 days ago
‘GovPay’, first step to digitalise government services
-
Features5 days ago
Top three at 40th Mrs World pageant
-
Opinion5 days ago
Economic value of Mahinda Rajapaksa
-
Business6 days ago
Govt. approves major amendments to Electricity Act No. 36 of 2024