Features

‘In the political arena’

Published

8 months ago

2025/07/27

Thilina Walpola

Sarath Amunugama Autobiography

Volume Three (1992 – 2022)
Reviewed by Nigel Hatch, P.C.

Dr. Sarath Amunugama in the final volume of his autobiographical trilogy entitled “In the Political Arena” covers the period 1992 to 2022 which is the contemporary period of politics in Sri Lanka and his frontline role in it.

This memoir covers the presidency of R. Premadasa, the abortive impeachment process against him, the rupture in the UNP and the formation of the DUNF by Lalith Athulatmudali (LA) and Gamini Dissanayake (GD), the author’s sidelining by Ranil Wickremasinghe (RW) in the UNP and his support of Chandika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga (CBK), his Ministerial roles under her presidency and that of Mahinda Rajapaksa and Maithripala Sirisena.

Amunugama in his Introduction observes that as “the modern history of Sri Lanka is full of paradoxes,” asks how did Sri Lanka which at independence had surplus sterling reserves, and one of the most promising States in Asia year marked for modernization and economic growth, end at the bottom of the pile? How is it that a country predominantly Theravada Buddhist could be engaged in fratricidal warfare for almost half the years since independence; and despite a high literacy rate and vibrant intellectual life become reduced to a second rate cultural backwater? One recalls even Lee Kwan Yew trenchantly remarking how we as the envy of Asia had squandered all the positives we had at Independence

The author goes on to explore these tragedies as a failure of a process of modernization and that Sri Lanka 75 years after independence has yet to discover the growth model that suits us. He quotes David Riesman, “The hatred sown by anti-colonialism is harvested in the rejection of every appearance of foreign tutelage. Wanted are modern institutions but not modern ideologies, modern power but not modern purposes, modern wealth but not modern wisdom”.

The failure of economic development is attributed to statist nationalization after 1956 primarily by the SLFP and its “toadies in the left”, the welfare measures commencing from 1933 and rapid population growth which cast an enormous burden on the national exchequer. This led Joan Robinson to sardonically comment “Sri Lanka is trying to taste the fruit of the tree without growing it”.

We are now witnessing the present NPP/JVP Government which has at its core a Marxist orientation, continuing at present with the open economy and the IMF framework for economic stability after the economic meltdown during the Gotabaya Rajapaksa (GR) presidency. The present Government’s continuation of these policies may prove to be more significant than the PA/SLFP’s rejection of the statist model under the leadership of CBK.

Amunugama’s Chapter on R. Premadasa is fittingly entitled “Premadasa Rex (1988 to 1993)”. Although admiring his discipline and his rise to the leadership of the elite dominated UNP, he refers to his “disdainful treatment of Ministers and MPs”. The sidelining of LA and GD, which led to the formation of the DUNF, and the abortive impeachment motion is the subject of a separate chapter.

The abduction and murder of Richard de Zoyza immortalized in the recent film “Rani”, the terror unleashed by the JVP despite Premadasa’s initial sympathy towards them, the testy relationship between Premadasa and Rajiv Gandhi and the withdrawal of the IPKF are discussed.

GD’s return to the UNP under the leadership of President Wijetunga despite obstacles placed within, and the difficulty in finding a place for him on the national list to enter parliament is recounted. Amunugama who had excellent relations with Wijetunga played a seminal role in this endeavor. He states, at first those national list members were unwilling to resign “for love or money”. But persistence prevailed and GD entered parliament and was inducted into the cabinet. GD was assassinated by the LTTE whilst campaigning on the final night for the presidency against CBK. This reviewer accompanied Amunugama and Wickreme Weerasooriya to the President’s House for the meeting with Wijetunga and CBK to discuss funeral arrangements. Amunugama notes that the latter who was PM was extremely gracious, in contrast to her mother’s approach with regard to the funeral arrangements of Dudley Senanayake.

This was a bloody period in Sri Lankan politics, which claimed the lives of Premadasa, Lalith and Gamini and many others , all of whom were assassinated by the LTTE.

Amunugama whose political career commenced as an elected Member of the Provincial Council from the Kandy , and his subsequent election to Parliament in 1994 from the UNP is perhaps the last man standing who could recount with personal knowledge and as an insider and participant to the momentous events of that period which were unparallelled in Sri Lanka’s political history.

The author’s political career as a Minister commenced with the decision that he, Wijayapala Mendis, Susil Moonasinghe, Nanda Mathew and a few others took to support CBK over Ranil Wickremasinghe at the Presidential Election of 2000. Their purported expulsion from the UNP under Ranil Wickremasinghe led to the constitutionally significant decision of the Supreme Court which held that expulsion unlawful is of personal significance to the reviewer whose role as Junior Counsel to the late Elanga Wikramanayake is recounted in this memoir in some detail.

The author’s first portfolio was as Minister of Northern Rehabilitation under the CBK presidency. He records how the Government funded and maintained the infrastructure of the Northern Province, despite the LTTE controlling large swaths of territory. This is perhaps unparalleled, in that, despite the separatist war waged by the LTTE, the GOSL continued to ensure that food, medicines, fuel and other essential supplies reached the citizens of those areas under LTTE control.

The reviewer recalls Amunugama telling him that when he visited New Delhi as an emissary of the former President J.R. Jayewardene, he was told that India would remain indifferent if the Government decided to accelerate its military campaign and bomb strongholds of the LTTE even in built up areas of the northern province. This strategy was never pursued, and the fratricidal warfare continued until the military defeat of the LTTE in 2009 under the leadership of Mahinda Rajapaksa.

Amunugama recounts his subsequent portfolios. His tenure as Minister of Irrigation reflects his love for the land and the people, which undoubtedly commenced when he was a civil servant and served in several parts of the country which is brought out also in Volume 1. His sense of humour is replete even in this volume. Anuruddha Ratwatte, who held this portfolio earlier, was unhappy that CBK did not appoint him to this Ministry. He told the author that he had “looked forward while returning from the war zone to landing his helicopter near the NCP tanks and enjoying a country rice meal wrapped in a lotus leaf. He lost both the war and his lotus leaf wrapped lunch.” (pg. 251).

Sri Lanka experienced the politics of cohabitation between CBK as President, and RW as Prime Minister with a cabinet of his choice, when the latter’s coalition secured the largest number of seats in Parliament at the 2001 elections. She faced a torrid time at some cabinet meetings particularly from those who were at one time trusted lieutenants and had defected from her party and joined the UNP.

Politically these were trying times and CBK who made the mistake of conceding the defense portfolio to a UNP Minister, had to seek the first ever opinion from the Supreme Court under Article 129 as regards these powers. The reviewer appeared for her with the late HL de Silva PC and Raja Goonesekere (RKW) and succeeded in that case. The court held that defense was an integral part of the powers of the President.

Events swiftly ensued and CBK exercised her powers and removed some UNP Ministers and dissolved parliament. The reviewer was involved in strategizing these events and recalls a weekend at the President’s house in Nuwara Eliya where Lakshman Kadiragmar (LK) and Mangala Samaraweera were also present.

Amunugama was one of CBK’s representatives in talks between the SLFP and the JVP represented by Tilwin Silva, Anura Kumara Dissanayake (AKD), Bimal Rathnayake and Sunil Handunetti. He states, “very often I was the only one from our side while all JVPers diligently attended discussions”, exemplified by AKD once attending a meeting after coming from Ampara after skipping his meals to be on time (282).

At the ensuing general elections in 2004, CBK’s party in coalition with the JVP secured power and formed a government. Amunugama became the Minister of Finance, a portfolio which had been the domain of several former presidents. He recounts his experience in this portfolio with extensive references to the challenges faced and negotiations with international lending agencies. He comments positively on the four Ministers from the JVP.

He states that the alliance with the JVP ended when CBK, persuaded by the World Bank and the IMF, negotiated a power sharing arrangement with the LTTE for the rehabilitation of the North and East after the devastating Tsunami of 2004 called the P-TOMS. This initiative was challenged in Court, and this reviewer and RKW led for CBK’s government in separate related cases, whilst HL de Silva, a friend and confidante of CBK, led for the JVP. CBK’s genuine desire for a peaceful negotiated settlement of the ethnic conflict is indisputable. Nevertheless, she had no hesitation on several occasions of directing the navy to blow up LTTE cargo vessels that attempted surreptitiously to smuggle arms during that cease fire.

Amunugama refers to the significant contribution made by Lakshman Kadirgamar PC who was an outstanding foreign minister, and at one point a serious contender to be PM backed by the JVP. The reviewer worked closely with LK on several legal issues including the Ceasefire Agreement that RW as PM unilaterally agreed with the LTTE, difficulties arising from the Norwegian facilitation and required constitutional amendments. LK too was assassinated by the LTTE.

Amunugama unflinchingly refers to the politics of the judiciary when the mercurial Sarath N Silva (SNS), was Chief Justice. He refers to the “Helping Hambantota” controversy, which was a fund set up by MR to collect money in the aftermath of the Tsunami, for the rehabilitation of, “presumably, as its name indicates, the Hambantota district”. He states, “The UNP which worked hand in glove with Mahinda to embarrass CBK, now discovered that their favorite SLPer (MR) whom they nurtured could become a formidable candidate” at the forthcoming presidential election “(p-319).

Kabir Hashim, a UNP MP, challenged the legality of this Fund. Sarath Silva, the then Chief Justice who clipped a year off the term of office that CBK enjoyed in her second term, a decision which he states “was tailor made for his friend Mahinda Rajapaksa”, dismissed that case. Silva subsequently expressed remorse for this decision after he left office, noting that if MR was found guilty, he could have faced imprisonment. Amunugama to his credit admitted in Parliament that the Fund was not properly constituted.

The political ascendancy of Mahinda Rajapaksa, first as the SLFP candidate, and then victorious in the 2005 presidential election by the narrowest of margins over RW, also makes fascinating reading. This was the closest that RW had ever come when he contested the presidency reminiscent of R. Premadasa’s narrow win over Sirimavo Bandaranaike in 1988. This writer recalls Amunugama’s prescient prognostication that with MR’s nomination “CBK had signed her political death warrant”. Relations between the two (CBK and MR) had deteriorated over a period of time, and when The UNP had commenced a long march from the South demanding a presidential election which presaged SN Silva’s judgment on her term of office, she appointed RKW and this reviewer to meet with MR at President’s House. At this meeting MR rightly pressed that a delay in nominating the party candidate would be prejudicial and we duly communicated that to her.

Amunugama was appointed Minister of Public Administration by MR, a portfolio he was happy to get due to his antecedents as a public servant and working with Felix Dias Bandaranaike earlier in that ministry, recounted in Volume 1.

He recounts succinctly the inner politics of the MR administration during that period, including the disaffection of Mangala Samaraweera, his indefatigable campaign manager, due to not being appointed PM, and CBK’s efforts to cause problems for MR. MR faced a potential revolt orchestrated by Anura B and Mangala ostensibly with JVP support, but at the last moment unbeknownst to Anura the JVP pulled out of the arrangement, leaving Anura who crossed over in Parliament, with egg on his face. MR removed Mangala and Anura from their posts and Amunugama notes that Anura never returned to parliament and it was “an ignominious end to a career tailor made to take him to the top.” (348)

His knowledge and experience in economics and finance served him well in his next portfolio, Investment Promotion. As with his other portfolios, Amunugama takes the reader through important events and initiatives that he introduced, including meetings with foreign dignitaries.

The high point of MR’s second term (2009-2015) was the military defeat of the LTTE. He rightly identifies MR as a national hero. The ensuing rift with General Sarath Fonseka, part of the troika with MR and his brother Gotabaya that strategized that victory, could have arisen due to Fonseka’s own plans for the military to bolster his image. Fonseka was wooed by the opposition as a presidential opponent to MR but went on to lose that election in 2010. Instead, he was elected to parliament, and was unsuccessful at the recently concluded presidential election, where he cut a forlorn figure at rallies which were poorly attended.

Amunugama notes that after the war there was a commendable level of economic growth under MR, attributable as in most countries that come out of a long war to budgetary realignments to development projects and donor funding agencies being more receptive and forthcoming. “Accordingly, several highway projects, work on ports and airports, transport and power were undertaken adding to a rapid growth of GDP.” (p-387). Amunugama was given the additional responsibility as Deputy Minister of Finance, and after the parliamentary elections of 2010, was appointed Senior Minister and resumed his role as chief interlocutor with the global financial institutions.

But the decline in MR’s popularity due to the “shenanigans of his relatives” manifested itself in the results of the presidential election of 2015, where he ill-advisedly ran for a third term and lost to Maithripala Sirisena who was nominated by the joint opposition. As a precursor to this maneuver, MR sought an opinion in 2014 from the Supreme Court as to whether he was eligible to run for a third term. A full Bench of the Supreme Court presided over by Mohan Pieris, CJ determined that he was so entitled. Amunugama ruefully states that as regards the removal of the two term limit for a president by the earlier 18th amendment by MR that “however we have to admit that our reluctant vote for this aberration is an unforgivable black mark in our parliamentary record.” (p-416)

Amunugama deals with “The One Term President Maithripala Sirisena (2015-2020)” in the penultimate chapter. The deterioration in the relations between Sirisena, described as an “unreconstructed Marxist with strong socialist views” and RW due to the bond scam, and RW’s sacking as PM, MR’s reinduction as PM for a short period and the ill-advised dissolution of Parliament which was struck down by the Supreme Court are recounted.

This memoir concludes with an Epilogue which covers the political ascendancy of Gotabaya Rajapaksa (GR) , the split in the UNP and formation of the SJB under Sajith Premadasa, and a succinct analysis of the economic debacle under the GR presidency and the resulting Aragalaya . GR was forced into exile due to that popular and peaceful uprising and the “bargain basement sale” of the office of PM, which RW ultimately secured. This catapulted him as the unelected president for the remainder of GR’s term by a vote in Parliament with the backing of MR and his party. The Supreme Court has now held by a majority that the Emergency Regulations he used to end the Aragalaya were violative of Fundamental Rights.

This three-volume memoir is an indispensable reference for the post-independence socio-economic and political history of Sri Lanka and is a rich tapestry of the life and times of a brilliant and now preeminent elder statesman whose sagacity and involvement in national affairs is sorely missed.

Amunugama has spent his adult life in the service of the nation. He has brought into public life, at the highest levels, Minister of inter alia Finance, Irrigation, Education and briefly Foreign Affairs, integrity, intellectual rigor and pragmatism. As with the earlier two volumes, Amunugama writes with clarity and effortless style. His love for culture and the arts- books, and theatre are manifest in this volume as well, which are spliced with lovely images from his personal collection of George Keyt’s art.

All News Advertisement

Features

Retirement age for judges: Innovation and policy

Published

9 hours ago

2026/04/6

Thilina Walpola

I. The Constitutional Context

Independence of the judiciary is, without question, an essential element of a functioning democracy. In recognition of this, ample provision is made in the highest law of our country, the Constitution, to engender an environment in which the courts are able to fulfil their public responsibility with total acceptance.

As part of this protective apparatus, judges of the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal are assured of security of tenure by the provision that “they shall not be removed except by an order of the President made after an address of Parliament supported by a majority of the total number of members of Parliament, (including those not present), has been presented to the President for such removal on the ground of proved misbehaviour or incapacity”[Article 107(2)]. Since this assurance holds good for the entirety of tenure, it follows that the age of retirement should be defined with certainty. This is done by the Constitution itself by the provision that “the age of retirement of judges of the Supreme Court shall be 65 years and of judges of the Court of Appeal shall be 63 years”[Article 107(5)].

II. A Proposal for Reform

This provision has been in force ever since the commencement of the Constitution. Significant public interest, therefore, has been aroused by the lead story in a newspaper, Anidda of 13 March, that the government is proposing to extend the term of office of judges of the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal by a period of two years.

This proposal, if indeed it reflects the thinking of the government, is deeply disturbing from the standpoint of policy, and gives rise to grave consequences. The courts operating at the apex of the judicial structure are called upon to do justice between citizens and also between the state and members of the public. It is an indispensable principle governing the administration of justice that not the slightest shadow of doubt should arise in the public mind regarding the absolute objectivity and impartiality with which the courts approach this task.

What is proposed, if the newspaper report is authentic, is to confer on judges of two particular courts, the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal, a substantial benefit or advantage in the form of extension of their years of service. The question is whether the implications of this initiative are healthy for the administration of justice.

III. Governing Considerations of Policy

What is at stake is a principle intuitively identified as a pillar of justice.

Reflecting firm convictions, the legal antecedents reiterate the established position with remarkable emphasis. The classical exposition of the seminal standard is, of course, the pronouncement by Lord Hewart: “It is not merely of some importance, but is of fundamental importance that justice should not only be done, but should manifestly and undoubtedly be seen to be done”. (Rex v. Sussex Justices, ex parte McCarthy). The underlying principle is that perception is no less important than reality. The mere appearance of partiality has been held to vitiate proceedings: Dissanayake v. Kaleel. In particular, reasonableness of apprehension in the mind of the parties to litigation is critical: Ranjit Thakur v. Union of India, a reasonable likelihood of bias being necessarily fatal (Manak Lal v. Prem Chaud Singhvi).

The overriding factor is unshaken public confidence in the judiciary: State of West Bengal v. Shivananda Pathak. The decision must be “demonstrably” (Saleem Marsoof J.) fair. The Bar Association of Sri Lanka has rightly declared: “The authority of the judiciary ultimately depends on the trust reposed in it by the people, which is sustained only when justice is administered in a visibly fair manner”.

Credibility is paramount in this regard. “Justice has to be seen to be believed” (J.B. Morton). Legality of the outcome is not decisive; process is of equal consequence. Judicial decisions, then, must withstand public scrutiny, not merely legal technicality: Mark Fernando J. in the Jana Ghosha case. Conceived as continuing vitality of natural justice principles, these are integral to justice itself: Samarawickrema J. in Fernando v. Attorney General. Institutional integrity depends on eliminating even the appearance of partiality (Mandal Vikas Nigam Ltd. v. Girja Shankar Pant), and “open justice is the cornerstone of our judicial system”: (Sahara India Real Estate Corporation Ltd. v. SEBI).

IV. Practical Constraints

Apart from these compelling considerations of policy, there are practical aspects which call for serious consideration. The effect of the proposal is that, among all judges operating at different levels in the judicature of Sri Lanka, judges of the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal only, to the exclusion of all other judges, are singled out as the beneficiaries of the proposal. An inevitable result is that High Court and District Judges and Magistrates will find their avenues of promotion seriously impeded by the unexpected lengthening of the periods of service of currently serving judges in the two apex courts. Consequently, they will be required to retire at a point of time appreciably earlier than they had anticipated to relinquish judicial office because the prospect of promotion to higher courts, entailing higher age limits for retirement, is precipitately withdrawn. Some degree of demotivation, arising from denial of legitimate expectation, is therefore to be expected.

A possible response to this obvious problem is a decision to make the two-year extension applicable to all judicial officers, rather than confining it to judges of the two highest courts. This would solve the problem of disillusionment at lower levels of the judiciary, but other issues, clearly serious in their impact, will naturally arise.

Public service structures, to be equitable and effective, must be founded on principles of non-discrimination in respect of service conditions and related matters. Arbitrary or invidious treatment is destructive of this purpose. In determining the age of retirement of judges of the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal, some attention has been properly paid to balance and consistency. The age of retirement of a Supreme Court judge is on par with that applicable to university professors and academic staff in the higher education system. They all retire at 65 years. Members of the public service, generally, retire at 60. Medical specialists retire at 63, with the possibility of extension in special circumstances to 65. The age of retirement for High Court Judges is 61, and for Magistrates and District Judges 60. It may be noted that the policy change in 2022 aimed at specifically addressing the issue of uniformity and compatibility.

If, then, an attempt is made to carve out an ad hoc principle strictly limited to judicial officers, not admitting of a self-evident rationale, the question would inevitably arise whether this is fair by other categories of the public service and whether the latter would not entertain a justifiable sense of grievance.

This is not merely a moral or ethical issue relating to motivation and fulfillment within the public service, but it could potentially give rise to critical legal issues. It is certainly arguable that the proposed course of action represents an infringement of the postulate of equality of treatment, and non-discrimination, enshrined in Article 12(1) of the Constitution.

There would, as well, be the awkward situation that this issue, almost certain to be raised, would then have to be adjudicated upon by the Supreme Court, itself the direct and exclusive beneficiary of the impugned measure.

V. Piecemeal Amendment or an Overall Approach?

If innovation on these lines is contemplated, would it not be desirable to take up the issue as part of the new Constitution, which the government has pledged to formulate and enact, rather than as a piecemeal amendment at this moment to the existing Constitution? After all, Chapter XV, dealing with the Judiciary, contains provisions interlinked with other salient features of the Constitution, and an integrated approach would seem preferable.

VI. Conclusion

In sum, then, it is submitted that the proposed change is injurious to the institutional integrity of the judiciary and to the prestige and stature of judges, and that it should not be implemented without full consideration of all the issues involved.

By Professor G. L. Peiris
D. Phil. (Oxford), Ph. D. (Sri Lanka);
Former Minister of Justice, Constitutional Affairs and National Integration;
Quondam Visiting Fellow of the Universities of Oxford, Cambridge and London;
Former Vice-Chancellor and Emeritus Professor of Law of the University of Colombo.

Features

Ranked 134th in Happiness: Rethinking Sri Lanka’s development through happiness, youth wellbeing and resilience

Published

10 hours ago

2026/04/6

Thilina Walpola

In recent years, Sri Lanka has experienced a succession of overlapping challenges that have tested its resilience. Cyclone Ditwah struck Sri Lanka in November last year, significantly disrupting the normal lives of its citizens. The infrastructure damage is much more serious than the tsunami. According to World Bank reports and preliminary estimates, the losses amounted to approximately US$ 4.1 billion, nearly 4 per cent of the country’s Gross Domestic Product. Before taking a break from that, the emerging crisis in the Middle East has once again raised concerns about potential economic repercussions. In particular, those already affected by disasters such as Cyclone Ditwah risk falling “from the frying pan into the fire,” facing multiple hardships simultaneously. Currently, we see fuel prices rising, four-day workweeks, a higher cost of living, increased pressure on household incomes, and a reduction in the overall standard of living for ordinary citizens. It would certainly affect people’s happiness. As human beings, we naturally aspire to live happy and fulfilling lives. At a time when the world is increasingly talking about happiness and wellbeing, the World Happiness Report provides a useful way of looking at how countries are doing. The World Happiness Report discusses global well-being and offers strategies to improve it. The report is produced annually with contributions from the University of Oxford’s Wellbeing Research Centre, Gallup, the UN Sustainable Development Solutions Network, and other stakeholders. There are many variables taken into consideration for the index, including the core measure (Cantril Ladder) and six explanatory variables (GDP per Capita ,Social Support,Healthy Life Expectancy,Freedom to Make Life Choices,Generosity,Perceptions of Corruption), with a final comparison.

According to the recently published World Happiness Report 2026, Sri Lanka ranks 134th out of 147 nations. As per the report, this is the first time that Sri Lanka has suffered such a decline. Sri Lanka currently trails behind most of its South Asian neighbours in the happiness index. The World Happiness Report 2026 attributes Sri Lanka’s low ranking (134th) to a combination of persistent economic struggles, social challenges, and modern pressures on younger generations. The 2026 report specifically noted that excessive social media use is a growing factor contributing to declining life satisfaction among young people globally, including in Sri Lanka. This calls for greater vigilance and careful reflection. These concerns should be examined alongside key observations, particularly in the context of education reforms in Sri Lanka, which must look beyond their immediate scope and engage more meaningfully with the country’s future.

In recent years, a series of events has triggered political upheaval in countries such as Nepal, characterised by widespread protests, government collapse, and the emergence of interim administration. Most reports and news outlets described this as “Gen Z protests.” First, we need to understand what Generation Z is and its key attributes. Born between 1997 and 2012, Generation Z represents the first truly “digital native” generation—raised not just with the internet, but immersed in it. Their lives revolve around digital ecosystems: TikTok sets cultural trends, Instagram fuels discovery, YouTube delivers learning, and WhatsApp sustains peer communities. This constant, feed-driven engagement shapes not only how they consume content but how they think, act, and spend. Tech-savvy and socially aware, Gen Z holds brands to a higher standard. For them, authenticity, transparency, and accountability—especially on environmental and ethical issues—aren’t marketing tools; they’re baseline expectations. We can also observe instances of them becoming unnecessarily arrogant in making quick decisions and becoming tools of some harmful anti-social ideological groups. However, we must understand that any generation should have proper education about certain aspects of the normal world, such as respecting others, listening to others, and living well. More interestingly, a global survey by the McKinsey Health Institute, covering 42,083 people across 26 countries, finds that Gen Z reports poorer mental health than older cohorts and is more likely to perceive social media as harmful.

Youth health behaviour in Sri Lanka reveals growing concerns in mental health and wellbeing. Around 18% of youth (here, school-going adolescents aged 13-17) experience depression, 22.4% feel lonely, and 11.9% struggle with sleep due to worry, with issues rising alongside digital exposure. Suicide-related risks are significant, with notable proportions reporting thoughts, plans, and attempts, particularly among females. Bullying remains a significant concern, particularly among males, with cyberbullying emerging as a notable issue. At the same time, substance use is increasing, including tobacco, smokeless tobacco, and e-cigarettes. These trends highlight the urgent need for targeted interventions to support youth mental health, resilience, and healthier behavioural outcomes in Sri Lanka. We need to create a forum in Sri Lanka to keep young people informed about this. Sri Lanka can designate a date (like April 25th) as a National Youth Empowerment Day to strengthen youth mental health and suicide prevention efforts. This should be supported by a comprehensive, multi-sectoral strategy aligned with basic global guidelines. Key priorities include school-based emotional learning, counselling services, and mental health training for teachers and parents. Strengthening data systems, reducing access to harmful means, and promoting responsible media reporting are essential. Empowering families and communities through awareness and digital tools will ensure this day becomes a meaningful national call to action.

As discussed earlier, Sri Lanka must carefully understand and respond to the challenges arising from its ongoing changes. Sri Lanka should establish an immediate task force comprising responsible stakeholders to engage in discussions on ongoing concerns. Recognising that it is not a comprehensive solution, the World Happiness Index can nevertheless act as an important indicator in guiding a paradigm shift in how we approach education and economic development. For a country seeking to reposition itself globally, Sri Lanka must adopt stronger, more effective strategies across multiple sectors. Building a resilient and prosperous future requires sound policymaking and clear strategic direction.

(The writer is a Professor in Management Studies at the Open University of Sri Lanka. You can reach Professor Abeysekera via nabey@ou.ac.lk)

by Prof. Nalin Abeysekera

Features

Hidden diversity in Sri Lanka’s killifish revealed: New study reshapes understanding of island’s freshwater biodiversity

Published

10 hours ago

2026/04/6

Thilina Walpola

Aplocheilus parvus

A groundbreaking new study led by an international team of scientists, including Sri Lankan researcher Tharindu Ranasinghe, has uncovered striking genetic distinctions in two closely related killifish species—reshaping long-standing assumptions about freshwater biodiversity shared between Sri Lanka and India.

Published recently in Zootaxa, the research brings together leading ichthyologists such as Hiranya Sudasinghe, Madhava Meegaskumbura, Neelesh Dahanukar and Rajeev Raghavan, alongside other regional experts, highlighting a growing South Asian collaboration in biodiversity science.

For decades, scientists debated whether Aplocheilus blockii and Aplocheilus parvus were in fact the same species. But the new genetic analysis confirms they are “distinct, reciprocally monophyletic sister species,” providing long-awaited clarity to their taxonomic identity.

Speaking to The Island, Ranasinghe said the findings underscore the hidden complexity of Sri Lanka’s freshwater ecosystems.

“What appears superficially similar can be genetically very different,” he noted. “Our study shows that even widespread, common-looking species can hold deep evolutionary histories that we are only now beginning to understand.”

A tale of two fishes

The study reveals that Aplocheilus blockii is restricted to peninsular India, while Aplocheilus parvus occurs both in southern India and across Sri Lanka’s lowland wetlands.

Despite their close relationship, the two species show clear genetic separation, with a measurable “genetic gap” distinguishing them. Subtle physical differences—such as the pattern of iridescent scales—also help scientists tell them apart.

Co-author Sudasinghe, who has led several landmark studies on Sri Lankan freshwater fishes, noted that such integrative approaches combining genetics and morphology are redefining taxonomy in the region.

Echoes of ancient land bridges

The findings also shed light on the ancient biogeographic links between Sri Lanka and India.

Scientists believe that during periods of low sea levels in the past, the two landmasses were connected by the now-submerged Palk Isthmus, allowing freshwater species to move between them.

Later, rising seas severed this connection, isolating populations and driving genetic divergence.

“These fishes likely dispersed between India and Sri Lanka when the land bridge existed,” Ranasinghe said. “Subsequent isolation has resulted in the patterns of genetic structure we see today.”

Meegaskumbura emphasised that such patterns are increasingly being observed across multiple freshwater fish groups in Sri Lanka, pointing to a shared evolutionary history shaped by geography and climate.

A deeper genetic divide

One of the study’s most striking findings is that Sri Lankan populations of A. parvus are genetically distinct from those in India, with no shared haplotypes between the two regions.

Dahanukar explained that this level of differentiation, despite relatively recent geological separation, highlights how quickly freshwater species can diverge when isolated.

Meanwhile, Raghavan pointed out that these findings reinforce the importance of conserving habitats across both countries, as each region harbours unique genetic diversity.

Implications for conservation

The study carries important implications for conservation, particularly in a country like Sri Lanka where freshwater ecosystems are under increasing pressure from development, pollution, and climate change.

Ranasinghe stressed that understanding genetic diversity is key to protecting species effectively.

“If we treat all populations as identical, we risk losing unique genetic lineages,” he warned. “Conservation planning must recognise these hidden differences.”

Sri Lanka is already recognised as a global biodiversity hotspot, but studies like this suggest that its biological richness may be even greater than previously thought.

A broader scientific shift

The research also contributes to a growing body of work by scientists such as Sudasinghe and Meegaskumbura, challenging traditional assumptions about species distributions in the region.

Earlier studies often assumed that many freshwater fish species were shared uniformly between India and Sri Lanka. However, modern genetic tools are revealing a far more complex picture—one shaped by ancient geography, climatic shifts, and evolutionary processes.

“We are moving from a simplistic view of biodiversity to a much more nuanced understanding,” Ranasinghe said. “And Sri Lanka is proving to be a fascinating natural laboratory for this kind of research.”

Looking ahead

The researchers emphasise that much remains to be explored, with several freshwater fish groups in Sri Lanka still poorly understood at the genetic level.

For Sri Lanka, the message is clear: beneath its rivers, tanks, and wetlands lies a largely untapped reservoir of evolutionary history.

As Ranasinghe puts it:

“Every stream could hold a story of millions of years in the making. We are only just beginning to read them.”

By Ifham Nizam