Midweek Review
Is Speaker’s announcement consistent with SC determination?
Bill titled ‘Central Bank of Sri Lanka’:
By Shamindra Ferdinando
Speaker Mahinda Yapa Abeywardena made the following announcement immediately after the opening of Parliament on April 04, 2023. The Speaker declared: “I wish to make an announcement in respect of the Bill titled ‘Central Bank of Sri Lanka.’ The court has determined that none of the provisions in the Bill are inconsistent with the Constitution. Accordingly, the court has determined that the Bill can be passed by a simple majority in parliament subject to the amendments which have been mentioned in the determination. I order that the full determination of the Supreme Court be published in the official proceedings of the parliament today.”
Education Minister Susil Premjayantha was the first to address the House after Speaker Abeywardena made several announcements. The video released by parliament showed all seats around Premjyantha empty.
Samagi Jana Balawegaya
(SJB) and Opposition Leader Sajith Premadasa MP who was present in parliament raised the continuing crisis at the Ruhuna University. Chief Opposition Whip Lakshman Kiriella was seated next to lawmaker Premadasa while SJB General Secretary Ranjith Madduma Bandara sat behind the Opposition Leader.
In spite of the fact that April 04 being the only day the parliament met this month, the House was largely empty. Quite surprisingly, no one present sought a clarification as regards Speaker Abeywardena’s statement on the ‘Central Bank of Sri Lanka’ Bill.
If not for Gevindu Cumaratunga, MP, and leader of civil society organisation Yuthukama, Speaker Abeywardena’s announcement would have gone unchallenged before the Sinhala and Tamil New Year. In fact, those responsible for very serious offenses probably thought the Speaker’s announcement on the SC determination would go unchallenged.
Lawmaker Cumaratunga dropped a bombshell at a hastily arranged media briefing at the Communist Party Office at Punchi Borella. Cumaratunga brought the latest development to the notice of the writer before he called the media briefing where he questioned the possibility of Speaker Abeywardena and Parliament being part of a conspiracy to deceive the Parliament, thereby mislead the public.
Speaking on behalf of the Uthara Lanka Sabhagaya (ULS), MP Cumaratunga explained how the Parliament deprived its members’ copies of the SC determination before the announcement was made. Had there been copies of SC determination, those present could have immediately realised the Speaker’s announcement was contrary to the SC ruling, lawmaker Cumaratunga declared. Did anyone instruct those responsible for releasing such communications received by the Speaker from the Chief Justice not to do so?
There hadn’t been a previous instance of such an important SC ruling brazenly misinterpreted, deliberately. Who prepared the short notice in English read out by the Speaker?
The CJ’s communication in English conveniently allowed the Speaker to make the announcement, too, in that language only.
Unfortunately, Cumaratunga’s media briefing didn’t receive the attention it deserved. Actually, the media due to ignorance on their part or otherwise largely ignored the issue at hand. Many an eyebrow was raised at lawmaker Cumaratunga’s shocking exposure, that hadn’t jolted the Opposition into action at least by last Friday.
The joint Opposition should have written immediately to the Speaker in that regard. Regrettably, the joint Opposition missed that opportunity.
It would be pertinent to ask whether the Speaker would respond to MP Cumaratunga’s accusations before the next parliamentary sittings. Parliament cannot allow further deterioration of public confidence in the country’s supreme institution.
Perhaps the Opposition should raise the issue at hand with the Committee on Ethics and Privileges as a matter of utmost importance. One-time Speaker Chamal Rajapaksa heads this committee. Interestingly, a new controversy over a deliberate attempt to mislead Parliament has erupted in the wake of a contentious move to summon SC judges before the Ethics and Privileges Committee.
The Bar Association’s declaration against the bid to summon SC judges over the March 03 ruling in respect of the Local Government polls should be appreciated. The statement dated April 05, warned the government of dire consequences unless the ongoing course of action was reversed.
However, deliberate misinterpretation of SC determination on the Bill titled ‘Central Bank of Sri Lanka underscored the Wickremesinghe –Rajapaksa dispensation’s readiness to do whatever if felt required. The latest action stressed their readiness to go the whole hog.
As Prof. Charitha Herath, former outspoken Chairman of the parliamentary watchdog committee pointed out, President Ranil Wickremesinghe brazenly took advantage of the developing political-economic-social crisis to advance his agenda. Herath, like colleague Cumaratunga accommodated on the SLPP’s National List quit the government parliamentary group last year. Both voted against UNP leader Wickremesinghe at the July 20, 2022 vote in which the incumbent leader received 134 votes of parliamentarians for him to be elected President to complete the remaining period of the previous President Gotabaya Rajapaksa, who was ousted by violent mobs despite him having been elected with a landslide majority.
A significant SC determination
The SC determination was contrary to what the Speaker announced in parliament that the court determined that none of the provisions in the Bill were inconsistent with the Constitution.
In fact, out of the 134 clauses in the Bill titled ‘Central Bank of Sri Lanka’, the Supreme Court had determined that 46 clauses required either to be passed by a 2/3 majority and 2/3 majority plus a referendum. The Speaker’s declaration cannot be justified under any circumstances though he ordered the publication of the SC determination in full in the day’s proceedings.
Justice Minister Dr. Wijeyadasa Rajapakse, PC, wasn’t present at the time the Speaker made the announcement.
The landmark determination was made by the SC bench consisting of Justices Priyantha Jayawardena, PC, Kumudini Wickremasinghe and Arjuna Obeysekere.
Petitioners were retired Lt. Col. Anil S. Amarasekara (Counsel Manohara de Silva, PC, with Haripriya Kumarage), Jehan Hameed (Canishka Witharana with Sawani Rajakaruna), Anura Darshana Perera Abeysekera (Counsel Canishka Witharana with Sawani Rajakaruna), Pivithuru Hela Urumaya leader Udaya Prabath Gammanpila, MP, (Counsel Manohara de Silva, PC, with Haripriya Kumarage), Dr. Gunadasa Amarasekera (Counsel Manohara de Silva, PC with Haripriya Kumarage), Ven. Athureliye Rathana thero of Ape Jana Bala Pakshaya (Counsel didn’t make representations in court), former JVP MP Wasantha Samarasinghe (Counsel Chamara Nanayakkarawasam with Dimuthu Fernando and Patali Abeyarathna).
The SC bench, too, appeared to have deviated from the usual presentation of such determinations of the court. However, having perused the 54-page document titled ‘Central Bank of Sri Lanka’, there cannot be any doubt the Speaker’s announcement contradicted the determination of the highest court in the country. But one can also assert that the section of the judgment titled ‘Determination’ didn’t clearly reflect the severity of the SC response to the Bill titled ‘Central Bank of Sri Lanka.’
Let me reproduce the section titled ‘Determination’ (page 53): “We have examined the other provisions of the Bill and are of the opinion that, subject to the above (emphasis mine) none of the provisions in the Bill are inconsistent with the Constitution. Therefore, we make our determination that the Bill can be passed by a simple majority in Parliament, subject to the amendments stated above (emphasis mine)
‘We wish to place on record our sincere appreciation for the assistance given by the learned Additional Solicitor General and the learned counsel for the petitioners and the intervenient- petitioners in the consideration of the Bi1l.
We also wish to place on record our sincere appreciation to Dr. Nandalal Weerasinghe, Governor of the Central Bank for assisting the court in making this determination.”
But consideration of what the SC bench referred to as amendments meant that the Bill titled ‘Central Bank of Sri Lanka’ is flawed.
Before proceeding further, it would be necessary to name intervenient petitioners, Ajit Damon Gunewardene, Murtaza Jafferjee, Dumindra Rajith Ratnayaka (Counsel Shivaan Coorey with Amanda Coorey, Dinithi Panambara, Damithu Surasena and Chamath Surasena), L.Y. Dharmasena ( Counsel Nilshantha Sirimanne with Deshara Goonetilleke), Chandra Jayaratne (Counsel Chandaka Jayasundere, PC with Viran Corea, S.A. Beling, Sayuri Liyanasuriya and Imaz Imtiyaz).
The counsel for the intervenient-petitioners assured the SC that no constitutional provisions have been violated by the proposed Bill. They assured the court that the proposed Central Bank Act explicitly provided for the financial stability, economic development, and accountability of the Central Bank.
Respondent was Attorney General (Sanjay Rajaratnam, PC), while the AG was represented by Viraj Dayaratne PC, ASG with Mahen Gopallawa SDSG, Nirmalan Wigneswaran DSG, Sureka Ahmed SSC, Amasara Gajadeera SC and Indumini Randeny SC.
Addressing the media at the Communist Party Office, Punchi Borella, lawmaker Cumaratunga asked who took the responsibility for preparing the Bill titled ‘Central Bank of Sri Lanka.’ Acknowledging that the AG has assured to make the necessary amendments at the Committee Stage, the civil society activist emphasized the powers that be owed an explanation how 46 clauses out of 134 (nearly one third of the Bill) were found to be contrary to the Constitution.
Unprecedented onslaught on new Bill
A careful examination of the high profile but thoroughly disputed Bill underscores the irresponsibility on the part of those responsible for the Bill titled ‘Central Bank of Sri Lanka.’
The crux of the matter is that the SC explicitly held that the Central Bank cannot be made independent of the Executive, in the formulation of monetary policy as well as the parliamentary oversight. And the acceptance of the proposed Bill would infringe Articles 3, 4, 43 and 48 of the Constitution. Obviously, the SC has largely accepted submissions made by Counsel for the petitioners.
Did the Cabinet of Ministers headed by President Ranil Wickremesinghe, who also holds the finance portfolio discuss this Bill? Did the President’s Counsels among the ministers, Justice Minister Dr. Wijeyadasa Rajapakse, and Foreign Affairs Minister Ali Sabry express opinion on this contentious matter?
Counsel for petitioners has drawn the attention of SC to Article 148 of the Constitution which read: “Parliament shall have full control over public finance. No tax, rate or any other levy shall be imposed by any local authority or any other public authority, except by or under the authority of a law passed by Parliament or of any existing law. “
But, those who decried the new Bill must keep in mind that Parliament cannot absolve itself of the responsibility for the developing crisis.
Had Parliament exercised full control of public finance, how could those who moved SC against the controversial Bill explain the circumstances under which Treasury Bond scams were perpetrated in 2015 February and 2016 March during the tenure of yahapalana government. In fact, Ven. Athureliye Rathana Thera and Wasantha Samarasinghe’s JVP backed the yahapalana government to the hilt.The country wouldn’t have had to default on external debt last May if the Parliament fulfilled its responsibilities with regard to public finance. For those who considered SC determination a setback for the incumbent government, particularly President Ranil Wickremesinghe should also examine exactly how successive governments ruined the economy.
The government sought to introduce a new Bill against the backdrop of severe criticism that political interference caused the economic devastation. There is no point in denying the fact that the Central Bank and the five-member Monetary Board contributed to the collapse of the national economy caused by ill-conceived decisions such as abolition of long established foreign exchange controls under the yahapalana rule for inexplicable reasons and doing away of a range of taxes by the Gotabaya Rajapaksa government at the worst possible time and its refusal to seek timely IMF intervention for the 17th time until it was too late for the country and its own good.
Incumbent Central Bank Governor Dr. Weerasinghe’s harsh talk to MPs on Aug 31, last year and his statements before parliamentary watchdogs within weeks after assuming the hot seat set the record straight. The circumstances under which the national economy collapsed during Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s presidency are clear. Of course, Dr. Weerasinghe’s statements should be the basis for an examination of the political-economic-social crisis. The responsibility of the executive, legislature and judiciary should be examined taking into consideration Dr. Weerasinghe’s views.
The SC dealt with major differences between the proposed Central Bank Act and the current Monetary Law Act. The primary objective of the flawed Bill is to maintain domestic price stability, whereas the current law ensured both price stability and financial system stability. The proposed law prohibited monetary financing through purchase of government securities in the primary market though the current Monetary Law Act allowed purchasing of Treasury Bills.
The proposed law excluded public debt management from the Central Bank. This is meant to separate monetary policy and public debt management. The new law provided for a transitional provision for continuing public debt management pending the establishment of a public debt management apparatus.
The AG’s Department asserted that restriction of the government’s role in respect of monetary policy would not amount to alienation of the executive power, as the necessary link between the Executive and the governing bodies of the Central Bank is preserved.
Perhaps one of the most contentious issues is the Clause 3 wherein proposal was made: “The Central Bank shall have its principal place of business in Colombo, and may have such branches, agencies, and correspondents in other places in Sri Lanka or abroad, as may be necessary for the proper conduct of its business.”
Declaring that the words “and may have such branches, agencies, and correspondents in other places in Sri Lanka or abroad, as may be necessary for the proper conduct of its business,” are unwarranted and unjustified, the SC determined Clause 3 of the Bill is inconsistent with Article 12(1) of the Constitution.
SC also ruled that that Clause should be passed in Parliament by a special majority in terms of Article 84(2) of the Constitution.
It found fault with the following Clauses (5, 8, 9, 10, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 19, 20, 23, 24, 25, 31, 40, 43, 47, 59, 73, 80, 84, 85, 86, 100 (3), 102, 103(5), 106, 107, 108, 110, 111, 112, 113(2)(b), 190,120, 123 and 133.
Perhaps, the controversy surrounding the Bill titled ‘Central Bank of Sri Lanka’ should be examined taking into consideration how the yahapalana government abolished time-tested exchange control laws in 2017 and how it contributed to the current crisis.
Then what about private foreign exchange dealers who continue to enable the international drug mafia to freely convert their ill-gotten lucrative drug proceeds from rupees to hard currencies without any questions being asked.
Midweek Review
A retired General’s narrative
Regime change:

Egodawele
Gemunu Watch veteran retired Maj. Gen. K.B. Egodawele painted a bleak picture of the overall failure on the part of the Defence Ministry, National Security Council and the armed forces to deal with the Pangiriwatte, Mirihana, violent protest on 31, March, 2022. Had those responsible for overall security taken tangible measures, after the Pangiriwatte letdown, the rapid deterioration of the situation, leading to the 9 July, 2022, assault on the President’s House, could have been averted, he opined. The author explained how in the absence of even a basic plan to prevent large scale public movement/gathering, the conspirators succeeded in bringing several hundred thousand people to Colombo, that included even a train load of activists from Kandy. Egodawele quite rightly asserted that the hoodwinked ordinary innocent people had been the real strength behind the regime change operation. Egodawele raised a spate of pertinent questions regarding the security aspects, with the focus on the 09 July, 2022, assault, taking into consideration various influencing factors, including Field Marshal Sarath Fonseka’s appeal to the armed forces not to point guns at the public as they didn’t want a repetition of 9 May, 2022, at Galle Face.
Whatever the impact of politicians and religious leaders urging the armed forces not to intervene, the war-winning Army Chief’s appeal may have influenced the military and even some members of the National Security Council.
By Shamindra Ferdinando
Maj. Gen. (retd.) K.B. Egodawele believes the ban on import of chemical fertilisers and agrochemicals, in April/May 2021, that led to staggering drop in crop yields, and countrywide protests, had been a key contributing factors that helped galvanise the Western-engineered Aragalaya plot against President Gotabaya Rajapaksa, similar to parallel regime changes carried out by Washington in Pakistan, Bangladesh and Nepal.
Egodawele, who had served the President as an Additional Secretary (Administration), attached to the Presidential Secretariat, dealt with regime change in ‘Aragalaya: Adarayen Prachandathwayata (From Love to Violence). In fact, according to the ex-Gemunu Watch veteran, who retired in 2004, the crisis caused by the fertiliser ban had been the first major issue that undermined President Rajapaksa.
Turmoil over the fertiliser ban paved the way for a series of other large scale protests. Although not directly connected with the fertiliser issue, teachers’ protests, demanding higher salaries, campaign against Sir John Kotelawala National Defence University (KNDU) Bill, Muslims and Catholics’ protests, targeting the President, followed by countrywide demonstrations over the collapse of essential services and supplies, created an explosive situation. The unexplained explosions of gas cylinders, too, caused anger and confusion among the public struggling to cope up with the developing situation.
Egodawele asserted that the Tamil Diaspora played a significant role in the regime-change project, with external powers utilising political parties here to carry out the conspiracy. The author is confident that the regime change project got underway soon after the Gajaba Regiment veteran assumed Office, as the seventh executive President.
In addition to Egodawele, who launched his work in 2023, former Central Bank Governor Ajith Nivard Cabraal (2022), former parliamentarian Wimal Weerawansa (2023), renowned author Sena Thoradeniya (2023), one-time Finance Secretary Mahinda Siriwardana (2025), President Ranil Wickremesinghe’s media head Prof. Sunanda Maddumabandara (2025), political analyst Asanga Abeygunasekera (2026) and President Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s Media head/DG, Information Department Mohan Samaranayake (2026) dealt with the first successful use of calculated violence to achieve a regime change.
As a person who had a ring side view of the rapid developments, Egodawele quite rightly asserted that the crisis got out of hand due to the delay on the part of the government to reach consensus with the International Monetary Fund (IMF) to secure a lifeline. Who caused the delay in Sri Lanka initiating action to obtain IMF assistance for the 18th time? Those who had read Siriwardena’s book know that direct accusations were directed at the then Central Bank Governor W.D. Lakshman and others for their failure to seek IMF assistance, thereby jeopardizing the government. Samaranayake went a step further when he questioned whether such actions had been deliberate and meant to cause the downfall of the President, elected by a huge majority.
Referring to the Covid-19 crisis that dealt a knockout blow to the already weak national economy, Egodawele declared that it wouldn’t be fair by President Gotabaya Rajapaksa to blame him for the economic fallout as previous leaders, too, contributed to the collapse. Alleging that the external and internal conspirators exploited the Covid-19 crisis to achieve their political objective, the author named the main Opposition Samagi Jana Balwegaya (SJB), the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna and JVP breakaway faction Frontline socialist party (FSP/Peratugami pakshaya) as well as other political parties and groups being among the schemers.
The Catholic Church was also accused of direct involvement in the operation against President Gotabaya Rajapaksa. However, the author’s assertion, in the foreword, that extremists took control over the protest campaign that was launched at Kohuwala by those ordinary people affected by the crisis seemed wrong.
Having perused all books which dealt with the regime change operation and discussed the issues at hand with those in government at that time, both civilian and military, The Island is of the view that the whole operation, from the very beginning, was planned and executed by political parties/groups, both in and outside Parliament. Perhaps as Samaranayake pointed out in his study of the regime change project, Switzerland, with the backing of the US, launched the operation in late November, 2029, by staging the abduction drama, with the help of Somalatha or Siriyalatha Perera (later changed to Garnier Banister Francis), a local employee at the Embassy (https://island.lk/focus-on-swiss-role-in-garnier-abduction-as-furgler-succeeds-mock/)
Egodawele’s assertion that President Gotabaya’s decision to accommodate UNP leader Ranil Wickremesinghe in his Cabinet, as Prime Minister, as a correct and prudent move, is questionable. The President had no other option but to reach consensus with Wickremesinghe after the SJB leader Sajith Premadasa declared pre-conditions for him to accept that offer. But, Wickremesinghe’s acceptance of premiership cannot be examined without taking into consideration his role in the US-India backed project. President Gotabaya Rajapaksa, too, declared that Wickremesinghe was the best person to handle the situation but, whatever the assertions, the fact remains he was part of it. The protest couldn’t have exploded at Pangiriwattte, Mirihana, outside the President’s private residence without the direct UNP involvement.
Internal strife
From the very outset, the President failed to receive the anticipated support from his team. In fact, the Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna (SLPP) hadn’t been enthusiastic in fielding the wartime Defence Secretary as their candidate but the circumstances compelled them to do so. In the absence of direct control of the SLPP that commanded a 2/3 majority in Parliament, though it secured only 145 seats at the 2020 general election, the President never really received the backing of the ruling party.
Egodawele discussed this issue to some extent as one of the major reasons for the failure on the part of the President to face daunting challenges, particularly on the economic front. The President had been furious and so disappointed over the way the Central Bank and the Treasury responded to, what he called, the global crisis, and he directly accused them of not briefing him properly. Egodawele, who had been, most probably, present at a meeting the President called on 16 June, 2020, quoted him as having declared that the Central Bank failed to submit a single proposal to strengthen the economy.
The author emphasised the increase of funds required for debt servicing from USD 2 bn in 2014 to USD 6 bn by 2019 end as a key contributing factor for the crisis that overwhelmed President Rajapaksa. Those who had been very fast to blame President Gotabaya for bankruptcy are conveniently silent on the culpability of the UNP-SLFP Yahapalanaya.
The Wickremesinghe-Sirisena duo took an estimated USD 12.05 bn in foreign currency loans through International Sovereign Bonds (ISBs). In addition to ISBs, they borrowed over Rs. 5.7 trillion in domestic (rupee-denominated) loans via treasury bills and bonds. In spite of that, Wickremesinghe emerged as the country’s saviour and he, unashamedly, exploited the situation to his advantage at the 2024 presidential election. The UNP propagated the lie that Wickremesinghe saved the country from ruins without making reference to the massive borrowings, during the Yahapalana administration, that caused irreparable damage to the country and, as to this day, we do not know what they did with such huge borrowings. At least the Rajapaksas built a brand new international airport and a harbour, along with countless other development projects, from expressways to resuscitating badly neglected road network, and even built the country’s very first coal fired power plant at Norochcholai.
Egodawele should have paid sufficient attention to President Gotabaya’s hasty declaration of sweeping tax cuts to kick start the sagging economy with private investments. Instead of defending the President’s decision, the author should have dealt with the issue with an open mind. The ill-fated tax cuts should be examined taking into consideration the drastic reduction of the Special Commodity Levy (SCL) on imported sugar, from Rs. 50 to 25 cents per kilogram, in October, 2020. Although the author made no reference to the sugar scam, the writer believes it caused massive harm to the Rajapaksa government image and it can be compared with the release of 323 plus two ‘ice’ containers from the Colombo port by the incumbent government, in January, 2025.
Such shortsighted, corrupt and fraudulent actions erode public confidence in those governing the country. That is the undeniable truth our political parties cannot comprehend. The SLPP tried its best to cover up the sugar scam and, within weeks, ended up with a massively tarnished image. It may have been a case of paying back those who funded their previous election. The cocky SLPP never ever bothered to examine its actions. Instead, the SLPP attacked, including its own if they offered a dissenting opinion. Samaranayake, in his must-read memoirs, explained the parliamentary group, at the behest of Basil Rajapaksa, harmed both the party and the administration. (https://island.lk/overall-slpp-failures-stressed-in-new-aragalaya-narrative/)
GR overwhelmed
Amidst the rapid build-up of the unrelenting campaign against him, President Gotabaya requested visiting Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi, on 09 January, 2022, to help Sri Lanka in debt restructuring. Obviously, China, by then, had decided not to intervene and was an obvious spectator as the US-India sinister project developed beyond control.
The JVP/NPP that entered into seven MoUs with India, including one on defence, in April, 2025, and months later, allowed Indian takeover of the Colombo Dockyard Limited after having launched protests, in January, 2022, against President Gotabaya for reaching an agreement with India, regarding the Trincomalee oil tank farm. India neutralised our fake revolutionaries in JVP/NPP with a cue from Washington, their true master, and brought it within its orbit, and today New Delhi’s influence is growing. The recent declaration by Indian High Commissioner Santosh Jha regarding the urgent and vital need to establish an overland bridge between Rameswaram and Talaimannar underscored the gravity of the developing situation.
Egodawele discussed the acceleration of the SLPP’s internal collapse with the formation of a political group, consisting of 11 constituents/groups of the ruling coalition. The establishment of the grouping, on 02 March, 2022, forced the President to sack ministers Wimal Weerawansa and Udaya Gammanpila. According to the author, the President had been reluctant and refrained from taking a decision at a Cabinet meeting held in the morning but gave in after meeting the parliamentary group.
The President made a last ditch attempt to secure IMF help but by then the situation had deteriorated to such an extent a recovery seemed impossible. Pangiriwatte erupted in violence within days after the IMF agreed, in late March, 2022, to initiate action in response to his request. By then, the SLPP parliamentary group had been fragmented and lost direction as various interested parties sought to distance themselves from the beleaguered President.
The author has allocated an entire chapter to the Muslims’ contribution to the regime change operation. The transformation of their anger, initially over Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s support, in his capacity as the Defence Secretary, during Mahinda Rajapaksa’s presidential tenure, to ‘Bodu Bala Sena’ (BBS), to hatred, that demanded the community, as a whole, sought the President’s ouster, depicted a worrisome picture. That brought the Muslims, who had been chased out of the Northern Province in October, 1990, by the LTTE, and subjected a series of brutal massacres, together with the Tamil Diaspora, to support President Gotabaya’s violent and humiliating ouster, despite his pivotal role in eradicating the separatist terrorists, cannot be disputed, under any circumstances.
Unfortunately, President Rajapaksa, instead of addressing the developing issues, appeared to have aggravated the situation by setting “One Country, One Law” commission, under Ven. Galagodaatte Gnanasara, leader of the ultra-nationalist BBS. Obviously these fake ultra nationalist Sinhalese were like the bought over Jihadists in West Asia, who, in fact, were Western moles. But, perhaps, the author should have examined the much-touted claim that a group of Muslims carried out suicide attacks in April, 2019, to facilitate Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s victory at the presidential election as their (Muslim community) were contradictory. Had the Muslim community been so hostile towards Gotabaya Rajapaksa, why on earth would they sacrifice their own lives to help him win the presidency and then join the Tamil Diaspora and the Catholic Church in the Galle Face regime change project.
Egodawele confidently confirmed that a hasty ban on import of chemical fertilisers, and agrochemicals, was taken due to the government’s inability to pay for fertiliser imports. The author asserted that the government found it difficult to allocate as much as USD 400 mn for fertiliser imports on one occasion.
The GMOA’s role, particularly the influencing actions of its President Dr. Anuruddha Padeniya, and the Chinese carbonic fertiliser fiasco that developed into a major diplomatic issue, resulting in catastrophic Chinese response, undermined the President, who further suffered as a result of teachers’ protests demanding higher salaries, KNDU Bill as well as domestic gas cylinder explosions.
Egodawele’s narrative explained the serious shortcomings on the part of the government in responding to the rapidly developing situations. The seventh chapter that discussed the 31 March, 2022, incidents, near the President’s private residents, proved that those who had been directly responsible for security of the Head of State were clueless regarding the sinister plan hatched by the interested parties to transform the protest campaign to a violent assault. Security chiefs, as well as the intelligence staff, were obviously caught napping. The author dealt with the then Prime Minister Wickremesinghe’s visit to the Pangiriwatte residence to meet President Rajapaksa, the warning issued by the UNPer regarding the gathering of people outside the President’s residence, and secretly planned protest in addition to the one at Jubilee Post junction that seemed peaceful. The author speculated that the protest at Jubilee Post junction may have been carried out to deceive those in charge of security regarding the conspirators real and deadly intentions. The author alleged that the SJB had been involved in the conspiracy. A private television station was also accused of inviting people to join the Pengiriwatte confrontation
Declaring that the Army had been slow in responding to the situation, Egodawele commended the police for not falling to the protesters’ bid to force them to open fire. Egodawele also questioned the rationale in JVP/NPP leader Anura Kumara Dissanayake’s claim that on 01 April, 2022, there were suspicions regarding a group affiliated to the government causing property damage at Pangiriwatte. The despicable role played by a section of the lawyers, in the aftermath of the Pangiriwatte mayhem, was mentioned by Egodawele who opined that had the President taken punitive measures against all those responsible for the Pangiriwatte security failure, perhaps the subsequent events could have been avoided, or successfully dealt with.
The President’s decision to vacate the Pangiriwatte home and move to the President’s House, on the recommendation of the National Security Council, was taken on 01 April, 2022.
Necessity for a proper investigation
Egodawele carefully examined the circumstances leading to the President’s fall. He seems to believe whatever caused the unprecedented crisis the flight of the President could have been averted if the armed forces acted in unison. He dealt with various situations and possibilities while pointing the finger at the JVP/NPP as the dominant party that exploited the situation and secured the support of some retired armed forces officers and men. It would be pertinent to mention that Egodawele launched his book during Wickremesinghe’s presidency in 2023 as the JVP/NPP was making rapid progress.
The need for comprehensive investigation into regime change operations is required. The military needs to identify the shortcomings (intentional/unintentional) on their part to take remedial measures. The author referred to the Rathupaswala shooting, in 2013, and the Rambukkana incident where the Kegalle police opened fire to prevent a violent group from setting a fully loaded fuel bowser on fire, in April, 2022, as two factors that may have impacted on the police and the military. The Rajapaksas response to Rathupaswala and Rambukkana incidents may have discouraged the armed forces and police to an extent they refrained from taking action. Egodawele also found fault with the intelligence services for their failure to recognise the developing insecurity among the police and armed forces and the growing belief that the growing regime change operation was certain to succeed.
Those who are genuinely interested in the regime change project should peruse Egodawele’s easy to comprehend presentation that lucidly dealt with a crisis created by what can be described as collective blunders by successive governments, though the declaration of bankruptcy was blamed on President Gotabaya Rajapaksa.
Midweek Review
Palm leaf manuscripts of Sri Lanka – IV
Tripitaka was first recorded on palm leaves. Religious histories such as Mahavamsa and Tupavamsa were also written on palm leaves. The printed texts we read today, of ancient classics, were composed after examining and comparing several palm leaf manuscripts. We forget this when we read. We assume that they were always on paper!
It is important to remember that literacy was developed through the use of ola manuscripts. The hodiya (alphabet) was written on palm leaf. The Sinhala hodiya included additional characters to accommodate Sanskrit and Pali phonemes. There were 52 letters. The library of the National Museum, Colombo has a palm leaf hodiya.
The tradition of writing on palm leaves continued throughout the colonial period. Robert Knox, who spent nearly two decades in captivity in the Kandyan Kingdom (Udarata), while the Dutch controlled Sri Lanka’s coastal areas (17th Century), said the ‘books’ available in Sinhala homes were on religion, medicine, magic, etc. This interest continued in the years that followed. In 1930, when the Historical Manuscripts Commission surveyed palm-leaf manuscripts held in private homes in Udarata, it found manuscripts on medicine, astrology, and charms.
The tradition of writing on palm leaves was held in high esteem and was not readily abandoned, observed analysts. Ananda Coomaraswamy, who was in Sri Lanka from 1903 to 1907 during British rule, said that Kandyan craftsmen invariably prepared their jewellery drawings on ola leaves. He had encountered only a handful drawn on paper.
Sirancee Gunawardena’s book titled “Palm leaf manuscripts of Sri Lanka “(1977) is the first and probably only book which gives a comprehensive account of the palm leaf manuscripts of Sri Lanka. The book is a landmark publication. There is no other book like it on the subject. The author deserves much praise and appreciation for her painstaking work.
This book has been written primarily to encourage Sri Lankans to regard palm-leaf manuscripts as a valuable part of Sri Lanka’s heritage. Palm leaf manuscripts are historical documents and should be preserved as such, says Sirancee. They contain rich primary data, making them a valuable source for primary research as well. Some olas, at least, had beautiful handwriting and a high standard of grammar. They also contained palindromes that could be read in all four directions, she says.
The book is the product of 12 years of painstaking research. Sirancee speaks of “the joy and feeling of exultation” she experienced “peering into dusty nooks and cobweb encrusted wooden boxes and forgotten corners of libraries”. She has spoken to a number of specialists, including persons who knew how to prepare ola leaves and those who could read the manuscripts. She has personally copied scores of manuscripts and the drawings in them.
Sirancee has examined manuscripts dating from the 13th century to 19th century. She has examined the 13-century copy of Chullavagga in the Museum library. This manuscript has 144 folios, size is 23″ x 2 ½”. The writing is beautiful. It has wooden covers with a design. This may be the oldest book illustration in Sri Lanka, says Sirancee.
She was able, over a long period, to personally examine most of the ola manuscripts in the National Museum. She also examined the collections in temple libraries. The Potgul Vihara, Hanguranketa, had one of the largest and best-arranged libraries of palm-leaf manuscripts.
There was a photograph of Sirancee examining the ola manuscripts at Sri Rahula Vihara, Bentota, and another of Sirancee writing down the text as Gamariya read out from a copy of the Mahavamsa. This was probably the well-known astrologer Daniel Gamariya.
There was a great range in size and content in palm-leaf manuscripts. The average manuscript seen by Sirancee had 60–65 folios. Most manuscripts were pure text, but Vessantara Jataka and yantra manuscripts were profusely illustrated. In one manuscript, there was a drawing of the peacock vehicle of the Kataragama God. The drawing extended over three pages stitched together.
Some Vessantara Jataka olas are illustrated, event by event. These illustrations closely resemble temple fresco paintings. The Vessantara jataka manuscript at Dharmadasa Vihara, Boralesgamuwa is profusely illustrated and in colour. The Illustrations are small, in cameo form but have minute decorative details. In her book, Sirancee had reproduced the full text, including illustrations, of two Vessantara jataka texts (p 93-126,275-278). An illustrated Vidura Pandita Jataka from the Hugh Nevill collection is also reproduced in full (p 269-273).
Sirancee wants to give the reader some idea of the wide range of subjects found in palm-leaf manuscripts. She provides the following list. She notes that palm-leaf manuscripts are a source of material on ancient medicine, veterinary science, astrology, yantra and mantra practices, land endowments by kings, medieval taxation, agriculture, trade in ancient times, land grants, land transfers, royal amnesties, acupuncture, ophthalmology, music, metaphysics, and cosmology, as well as the construction of tanks, temple building, and ancient systems of taxation.
Let us take a closer look at some of the subjects mentioned above. First, it is clear that the Mahavamsa was not the only historical text found in curated palm-leaf collections. The Dipavamsa and the Rajavaliya were also included. Copies of the Rajavaliya are found in abundance in both public and private collections. These include holdings in the Colombo Museum Library, the University of Peradeniya, the British Library, and the private collections of L. S. D. Peiris and S. W. R. D. Bandaranaike.
The Rajavaliya was also found in the following temples: Subadrarama Vihara, Balapitiya; Kande Vihara, Atabage; Pallewela Sellawali Raja Maha Vihara, Halloluwa; Pravachanodaya Pirivena Temple, Molligoda, Wadduwa; and Yogilalena Temple, Sandalankara. The copy at the Sri Vardhanarama Library, Mohotimulla, is one of the oldest.
Historical Manuscripts Commission of 1930 found that family collections had various olas that gave information on the Sinhala kings, especially Udarata kings, with the exact dates and hour of their death. The Thalgodapitiya family collection had a Sri Wickrama Alankaraya by Vaidyaratne Basnayake nilame, 1882. Kurunegala Vistaraya was found in many private family collections.
The Historical Manuscripts Commission did not consider these manuscripts to be of academic importance. However, it noted that Yapahuwa temple had an ola with the dates of coronation and death of kings and other important events in the life of “all kings of Kandy”.
Buddhist temples collected ola manuscripts on Buddhism, with particular emphasis on the Dhamma. Olas containing religious texts of great significance were wrapped in silk and kept in the inner sanctum of the temple, Sirancee observes.
The histories of important stupas and temples were also written on ola manuscripts. The Tupavamsa gives the history of the Mahathupa, the Lowa Maha Paya, and the Mirisaveti Stupa. The Andreas Nell collection contains an ola manuscript describing how the four boundaries of the Ridi Vihara were determined. The Henry Parker collection includes an ola manuscript which states that, in relation to the Ridi Vihara, silver was discovered in a nearby cave by a traveller during his journey.
The temple collections included these historical texts. Nagolle Vihara had a copy of the Mahabodhivamsa. Copies of the Hathavanagalla Vihara Vamsa were distributed to neighbouring temples and can still be found today at the Attanagalla Raja Maha Vihara and the Beligammana Raja Maha Vihara.
Palm leaf manuscripts also gave the specifications for the Buddha statue. There were manuscripts on the art of making images of the Buddha, as well as hamsa, lata, kinnara and makara images. The Sariputra ola in Colombo Museum gives dimensions of images in general and Buddha in particular. It gives specifications for the standing, sitting and reclining Buddha. It is written in Sinhala, but text is in Sanskrit. It is in good handwriting.
The Historical Manuscripts Commission (1930) reported the discovery of a Pirit Pota in a family collection. The manuscript was written using black vegetable dye. According to the Commission’s report, the letters remain as black today as they were when written a century ago. The coloured floral illuminations were also executed using the same vegetable dye.
Jataka stories were held in palm leaves. Sirancee has personally examined many magnificent, large Jataka olas held in libraries. Colombo Museum had two large manuscripts containing many jataka stories. One was titled Sinhala Jataka Pota. Each had over one thousand leaves. The leaf strips were 27″ to 33″ by 2 ½. “
The Pansiya Panas Jataka manuscript owned by K.V.J. de Silva is one of the largest manuscripts Sirancee had seen and possibly the largest in Sri Lanka. It was a copy of a manuscript written in the time of king Parakrama bahu IV (1302-1326). It was written in Sinhala and had 984 folios. The folios at the end of the manuscript contained an index to the stories.
There is a manuscript of Vidura Pandita Jataka in the Hugh Nevill collection in the British Library. It is an original manuscript written in the time of king Senerat (1604-1635). It was written by Matale Rate Atapattu Amanthi of Owille in Matara (sic). The text is accompanied by very beautiful illustrations. The LSD Pieris collection has a small jataka manuscript, 10.5 cm in size, containing several illustrated jatakas. One illustration shows Siddhartha Gautama putting his bowl into the river.The most popular jataka story in Sri Lanka, is undoubtedly the Vessantara Jataka. It features prominently in our temple frescos and olas. The T. P. P. Goonetilleke collection held at Peradeniya had 30 Vessantara Jataka manuscripts. Some Vessantara manuscripts are held in private collections as heirlooms.
Legal matters were recorded on palm leaf manuscripts. Abhaya dana was written in olas. The ola had the royal sign “Sri “symbolising the king but inscribed by a Mohottala on the order of the Sannas Rala. Sirancee had come across a manuscript which stated that when a person died intestate the king inherited the lands. The LSD Pieris collection had a manuscript on a money transaction. The ola recorded that the money owed was handed over in the presence of witnesses who were named.
Land grants were recorded on olas. They were recorded on gold, silver and copper plates as well. Sirancee came across many Land grants in the collections she looked at. VP Ratnayake had a manuscript which said “By this it is declared that Godakkumbura Setunge Mudiyanse was given Pallekumbura in Udukaha pattu Kotugampola Korale on Jan 1630 by Monerawila Rajapakse, Bathwadana Nilame, who is the owner of Matale Dissawa and Sat Korale Dissawa.
P.E.E. Fernando found in the record room of the district court of Kandy, a deed of conveyance drawn up at the request of a person named Patra-Abo Sastru-raja, where he transferred to a vihara he had constructed, a house and garden called Dharmapata geratta (sic) in which he was residing, together with other lands, the boundaries of which were set out in great detail. Some movable objects such as a pitcher, palanquin and three slaves including a female slave were also offered. The document was attested by four persons and a fifth person stated that he had written the document.
Temples carefully looked after olas relating to the ownership of their temple lands. Ridi vihara has a very old manuscript titled Sangaraja Vahanseta Mahanuwara Lekan Pota with names and information on the temples given to the chief monk. When paddy lands were offered to temples, the transfer was recorded in an ola. There is an ola which stated that Pahalavela Kumbura was offered to Atkande Vihara by Teliyaskatuwe Lekam and Maddumaya.
Temples also held on to olas which gave the decisions on disputes over temple land. The high priest of Aluvihare, Matale had an ola on litigation relating to Aluvihare lands. The text is given in full by Sirancee on p 298. Uthurupaw Vihara had an ola issued by Adikara Dissawe. It contained the judgment in a land dispute which had taken place in the 15th century.
In ancient times, administration was done through olas. The Esala Perahera in Kandy has a chieftain mounted on an elephant carrying an ola which gives permission for the perahera to take place. Appointments were announced via olas. The Matale Maha Dissawe Kadaimpota, announced that ‘Niharapola Alahakoon Mohottala was appointed lekam of Tun Korale and also received the Ran Panhinda and flag.’ Administrative responsibilities were given in olas. Historical Manuscripts Commission found at the Atkande vihara, a 16th century ola giving information on the dissaves in charge of Kurunegala district.
Kadaimpot and Lekam Miti were held on ola. The Historical Manuscripts Commission found several of these in private collections. The Maya Rata Kadimpota held in a private collection, gave information on the 28 districts or towns in Maya Rata. At Padiyapelella, the Commission found a Kadaimpota dating to 14th Century, dealing with Ruhuna, Maya, Pihiti with names of subdivisions, the ratas, also Kelaniya, Panadura, Dambadeniya and so on. The Lekam Miti Pota of 1.1.1830 listed land holdings in the eastern part of Nuwarakalaviya. (To be continued)
References
Sirancee Gunawardana Palm leaf manuscripts of Sri Lanka 1977
L.S.D. Pieris Yantra drawing on palm leaf sri Lanka. 2018
1st report of the Historical Manuscripts Commission 1933, SP 9 of 1933
3rd report of Historical Manuscripts Commission 1951, SP 19 of 1951
Ismeth Raheem
https://www.sundaytimes.
lk/260426/plus/turning-back-the-pages-of-sri-lankas-paper-trail-639604.html
by KAMALIKA PIERIS
Midweek Review
A Quiet Counter-Revolution Unfolds
A peaceful counter-revolution is taking shape,
Against current ‘Digital Age’ intoxications,
At that ever-green seat of higher learning,
Wolfson College of the University of Cambridge,
Where one hour every Thursday is set apart,
For reading, writing and creative activity,
In the more time-tested analogues ways,
For those who opt for it, in an august space,
Thus paving the way for the Creator to prevail,
Over Creatures who are tending to run berserk,
More so why humans could cry out in one voice:
‘Long Live, WCSA Digital Detox Thursdays!’
By Lynn Ockersz
-
News6 days agoIMF urges Lanka not to meddle with exchange rate
-
News3 days agoLankan duo emerge winners in Latin dance championship held in Blackpool, UK
-
Business4 days agoIMF’s unstated rate:Sri Lanka’s $695m loan costs about 5.33% per annum
-
News6 days agoState of emergency extended
-
Features5 days agoAre threats to Buddha Sasana external or from within?
-
News4 days agoUNP challenges NPP move to amend Vihara – Devalagam Act
-
Business4 days agoSri Lankan scientist-innovator Milinda Edirisinghe introduces AI-integrated gem testing system to gemological world
-
News3 days agoSri Lankan teen killed in Chennai clash; three arrested
