Connect with us

Midweek Review

Lanka exposed on eve of Geneva sessions for being taken for a USD 6.5mn ride in trying to influence US

Published

on

By Shamindra Ferdinando

 

One-time Sri Lanka’s Permanent Representative to the United Nations at Geneva Tamara Kunanayakam says the country has no other option, but to oppose the Core Group’s Resolution by calling for a vote when it is tabled at the 46th session of the Geneva-based United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC).

The Core Group, led by the UK, includes Germany, Canada, North Macedonia, Montenegro and Malawi. Kunanayakam, who served in Geneva (2011-2013) emphasized: “If the Resolution is adopted with Sri Lanka accepting, either directly by co-sponsoring or indirectly by not calling for a vote, it will reinstate the notorious HRC Resolution 30/1. By doing so, Sri Lanka will validate its underlying logic that legitimizes the use of illegal unilateral coercive measures against sovereign states; undermine Sri Lanka’s own sovereignty and the UN Charter-based multilateral order, guarantor of that sovereignty; deprive our allies in the Global South of the opportunity to express their views on a precedent-setting resolution that threatens their own sovereignty; and, isolate Sri Lanka, making it more vulnerable than it already is to foreign intervention and aggression. And that will only benefit Washington’s global ambitions for a unilateral world order under US hegemony.”

The then UNP-led coalition co-sponsored the Resolution on Oct 1, 2015. The then Sri Lanka’s PR there Ravinatha Aryasinha was ordered by Colombo to accept the Resolution on Sri Lanka’s behalf after he initially raised objections to it.

Kunanayakam, who had been Sri Lanka’s top envoy in Havana (2009-2011) asserted: “In fact, under today’s conditions, such a resolution will be worse than the 2015 resolution which could easily be dismissed on the basis that the then Foreign Minister Mangala Samaraweera had acted without authorization and there had been widespread opposition within the country, especially from political parties. This time, it will be interpreted as there having been not only an international consensus, but a national consensus, with the added argument that the Government in place was elected with a near two-thirds majority.”

The foreign affairs analyst was responding to the writer’s query as to what should be Sri Lanka’s response? And how could the country avoid a vote on the Core Group’s resolution?

 

UK succeeds US

The UK took command of the Core Group in the wake of the US quitting the UNHRC alleging the Geneva body was a cesspool of political bias. Having succeeded the US, the UK, prodded on by an influential Tamil group of Sri Lanka origin, has mounted a despicable political project meant to humiliate post-war Sri Lanka. The failure on Sri Lanka’s part to counter Western propaganda facilitated their operation. The current administration is no exception. Sri Lanka pathetically failed to exploit disclosures made by Western ‘sources’ since the successful conclusion of the conflict in May 2009 to the chagrin of the oft repeated Western refrain that the Sri Lankan security forces were incapable of crushing the almost invincible military machine of the LTTE. Sri Lanka’s pitiable handling of the Geneva affair certainly made the British project easier.

Sri Lanka should be eternally grateful to Lord Naseby for exposing the British project. The Conservative Party member recently revealed how the British conveniently suppressed information which might have helped the UNHRC to establish the truth. The UK withheld information in spite of it being a member of the 47-nation UNHRC. The availability of such information was made known to the world on Oct 12, 2017 thanks to Lord Naseby.

A parliamentary query raised by Lord Naseby recently revealed the suppression of diplomatic cables from the UK High Commission in Colombo in 2009. If revealed, the cables could have disputed the very basis of the unsubstantiated war crimes allegations leading to Sri Lanka co-sponsoring the 2015 Geneva Resolution against itself.

Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon of the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office on Feb 16 answered Lord Naseby’s written parliamentary question, tabled on Feb 4.

Question:

Lord Naseby asked the government whether the UK supplied to the UN Human Rights Council any (1) censored, and (2) uncensored, copies of dispatches written by Lieutenant Colonel Anthony Gash, the former Defence Attaché of the British High Commission in Sri Lanka about events in that country between 1 January and 18 May 2009, relating to the civil war.

Answer:

Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon said that the UK Government had not received any request from the UN Human Rights Council for copies of dispatches written by the former Defence Attaché at the British High Commission in Sri Lanka, Lieutenant Colonel Gash, about events in Sri Lanka related to the civil war, and had not provided any.

 

British duplicity

Appearing on ‘Face the Nation’ anchored by Shameer Rasooldeen on Feb 15, defence analyst and lecturer Nilanthan Niruthan explained the British duplicity in handling accountability issues. Responding to Rasooldeen, Niruthan didn’t mince his words when explained the rule of law meant that those responsible for crimes should be promptly and fairly prosecuted. Yet the UK government, while seeking to punish the Sri Lanka military, was pushing for a new law – the Overseas Operations Bill – that would make it nearly impossible to prosecute British soldiers for torture and other war crimes committed overseas, Niruthan said. The British actions showed contempt for the rule of law, violation of the UK’s international commitments to prosecute the worst crimes, and risks creating impunity for grave abuse, the programme was told.

The writer on Monday (22) sought a further clarification from Chennai, born Niruthan as regards the British position to the accountability issues. “The British position,” Niruthan, whose parents fled the Jaffna peninsula sometime after the 1983 anti-Tamil riots, said: “… is like a rat accusing a squirrel of being a pest. The UK has been found responsible for systematic war crimes by the ICC prosecutor but the court could not proceed because the UK refused to cooperate with any further investigations. Worse, the UK is now working on a law that will make its own soldiers immune to the very same international prosecutions they are trying to push against the Sri Lankan military. The fact that they are leading the charge against Sri Lanka is evidence of how hypocritical and corrupt the system is. There is a difference between justice and politics. The UK sponsoring the resolution makes it undeniable that all this is much more about politics than anything related to justice. I hope Sri Lankans of all communities are paying attention to these double standards.”

Niruthan contributes to ‘The Journal of Military Operations and Small Wars’ as well as Asia-Pacific magazine called ‘The Diplomat’. Questioning the response of some countries with vested interests to terrorism and post-conflict Sri Lanka, Niruthan referred to the assassination of his grandfather Rajasundaram Vaithalingam, of Vaddukottai, Jaffna by the TELO (Tamil Eelam Liberation Organization). At the time of Vaithalingam’s assassination in 1985, he had been the SLFP organizer for Jaffna.

Western powers turned a blind eye to Indian intervention causing mayhem here in the 80s. India sponsored terrorist groups, including the TELO, engaged in terrorist acts with impunity. They created an environment conducive for the deployment of the Indian Army here (July 1987-March 1990). India lost nearly 1,500 officers and men during the IPKF (Indian Peace Keeping Force) deployment. Nearly 3,000 others received injuries and the rest is history.

Today India represents the UNHRC. Foreign Secretary retired Admiral Prof. Jayanath Colombage on Feb 19 revealed to Hiru TV Sri Lanka’s request to Indian PM Narendra Modi’s backing at the UNHRC. India never bothered at least to apologize for causing massive death and destruction in Sri Lanka though New Delhi from time to time reminded Colombo of its obligations towards the Tamil community.

 

Indian role in bringing war to an end

Ironically, we have to acknowledge the support provided by India during the Eelam War IV (August 2006-May 2009) as it became patently unable to stomach Tiger insolence to its former patron, for turning its guns on the IPKF and especially after the assassination of its ex-Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi. It would be pertinent to underscore what one-time Indian High Commissioner J, N. Dixit stated in 2004. Dixit, in his memoirs, ‘Makers of India’s Foreign Policy,’ says that he preferred to call India’s interference in Sri Lanka during 1980-1990 period as ‘Indian involvement.’ Dixit asserted that the decision to give active support to Sri Lankan Tamil militants could be considered one of the two major foreign policy blunders made by the then Indian Prime Minister Indira Gandhi. But Dixit strongly defended the Prime Minister’s action, while asserting Gandhi couldn’t have afforded the emergence of Tamil separatism in India by refusing to support the aspirations of Sri Lankan Tamils [Chapter 6:An Indo-centric Practitioner of Realpolitik-Makers of India’s Foreign Policy].

Dixit failed to explain how the Prime Minister hoped to achieve her twin objectives by recruiting, training, arming and deploying thousands of Sri Lankan Tamil youth. India also helped Sri Lankan terrorists establish contact with international terrorist groups.

Indian action caused irrevocable damage to Indo-Lanka relations. The Maldives, too, suffered due to Indian intervention in Sri Lanka. Dixit totally ignored the Maldivian factor, though Indian trained PLOTE (People’s Liberation Organization of Tamil Eelam) was responsible for a coup attempt in the Maldives in Nov. 1988. India had to send in troops to thwart sea borne Sri Lankan terrorists, who mounted the attack on Male. The UNHRC (previously Commission) or Western powers never showed any interest in the suffering of the northern public until the Sri Lankan military eradicated the LTTE.

However, the war could never have been brought to a successful conclusion without New Delhi’s backing. Sri Lanka also needs to understand the US-Japan-India-Australia axis to meet the growing Chinese challenge as it walks a diplomatic tightrope against the backdrop of Colombo’s continuing dependence on Beijing. The Western moves in Geneva, in a way, reflect their overall strategy to undermine China.

Since the end of the conflict in May 2009, the Western powers pushed hard for an accountability process that enabled them to bring Sri Lanka under their domination. They exploited a joint statement issued in the wake of UNSG Ban Ki moon’s visit to Colombo to initiate a direct intimidation process that kicked off with the accusation of killing 40,000 civilians on the Vanni east front by a virtual kangaroo court handpicked by the UNSG and called the Panel of Experts, whose findings neither could be questioned nor can the accusers be cross examined at least for two decades or more. (Report of the Secretary General’s Panel of Experts on Accountability in Sri Lanka released on March 31, 2011).

 

Gathering evidence the UN way

In the absence of a steady stream of complaints, the Centre for War Victims and Human Rights launched an online campaign to gather war crimes complaints. The petition was launched about a week before the expiry of the first deadline (Dec 15, 2010). The deadline was subsequently extended to Dec 31, 2010. The organizers posted a detailed communication from the Secretariat to PoE/PoE on a website named ‘Stop Sri Lanka State Terrorism’, obviously giving away the ultimate aim of the project. Interestingly, those who had complained cannot be examined in view of a confidentiality clause that prevented scrutiny of such for a period of 20 years (from March 2011 to March 2031). What is really surprising is that Sri Lanka never challenged the confidentiality clause. Sri Lanka owed an explanation why it continuously failed to take up contentious matters, such as the confidentiality clause or wartime US Defence Advisor Lt. Col. Lawrence Smith’s defence of the Sri Lankan military at the first post-war defence seminar conducted in 2011. Let me reproduce verbatim what the US official said. Smith was responding to Maj. Gen. (retd) Ashok Mehta (IPKF) who queried about the alleged battlefield executions. Query directed to the then Maj. Gen. Shavendra Silva, No 2 in New York was answered by the American.

This is what the American had to say: “Hello, may I say something to a couple of questions raised. I’ve been the Defense Ataché here, at the US Embassy, since June 2008. Regarding the various versions of events that came out in the final hours and days of the conflict – from what I was privileged to hear and to see, the offers to surrender that, I am aware of, seemed to come from the mouthpieces of the LTTE – Nadesan, KP – people who weren’t and never had really demonstrated any control over the leadership or the combat power of the LTTE.

“So their offers were a bit suspect anyway, and they tended to vary in content, hour by hour, day by day. I think we need to examine the credibility of those offers before we leap to conclusions that such offers were in fact real.

“And I think the same is true for the version of events. It’s not so uncommon in combat operations, in the fog of war, as we all get our reports second, third and fourth hand from various commanders, at various levels, that the stories don’t seem to all quite match up.

“But, I can say that the version presented here so far in this is what I heard as I was here during that time. And I think I better leave it at that before I get into trouble. “

The US State Department disassociated itself from Lt. Col. Smith’s statement. State Department’s Deputy Spokesman Mark C. Toner responded to questions raised on the basis of The Island report.

QUESTION:

I have one on Sri Lanka. The senior Defense Attaché at the U.S. Mission in Sri Lanka went public in the newspapers (inaudible) that he questioned the credibility of surrender offers made by senior LTTE leaders who was the head of the (inaudible) last year. Does this reflect any change in the U.S. position on the war crime victims?

TONER:

Right. You’re talking about remarks that were made at a conference in Colombo?

QUESTION:

Yes. Yeah.

TONER:

Well, just to clarify, the U.S. did decline invitations to participate in that conference as either a conference speaker or panelist. My understanding is that the Defence Attaché was there as an observer and a note taker. His comments reflected his personal opinions. There’s no change in the policy of the United States, and his remarks do not reflect any change in our policy.

QUESTION:

So that was a personal opinion?

TONER:

Personal opinion. The United States – and just to reiterate that policy – remains deeply concerned by the allegations in the panel of experts report, and we’re committed to seeing a credible accounting of and accountability for violations of international human rights law and international humanitarian law. And we believe that the Sri Lankan Government must act quickly and credibly to address these allegations.

QUESTION:

Who was the attaché?

TONER:

I don’t have his name.

QUESTION:

Is he still the attaché? (Laughter.) Was there any discussion —?

TONER:

I believe he’s still there, but I’ll try to get an update.

Smith’s statement contradicted the very basis of the war crimes allegations. For a decade, Sri Lanka conveniently failed to exploit US statements whereas resolutions were moved in Geneva on the basis of unsubstantiated allegations. Resolutions were passed against Sri Lanka in 2012, 2013 and 2014 before the US backed change of the Rajapaksa administration that paved the way for the US to move the 2015 resolution. Sri Lanka never took any notice of the US State Department declaration that the US spent USD 585 mn to restore democracy in Myanmar, Nigeria and Sri Lanka. If just one third of that amount had been allocated for the Sri Lanka project in addition to funds made available by the USAID in 2015, who were the recipients? The Geneva project can never be really examined without studying the US political designs here. Backing of General Fonseka and Maithripala Sirisena at 2010 and 2015 presidential polls exposed the US strategy. Wikileaks proved that.

 

Zuberi affair

The writer had an opportunity to discuss the accountability issue on ‘Sirasa’ ‘Pathikada’ anchored by Asoka Dias. The programme aired live, hours before Foreign Minister Dinesh Gunawardena addressed the 46th sessions of the UNHRC, dealing with the failure on the part of successive governments to respond properly to the Western strategy. The squandering of a staggering USD 6.5 mn in 2014 for a harebrained project to prevent the US pushing Sri Lanka on the human rights front captured front-page attention of some print media a few days before the beginning of the Geneva sessions. The absence of overall strategy, too, was highlighted with scheduling of Pakistan PM Imran Khan’s visit to Colombo amidst Geneva sessions and ongoing controversy of cremation of Muslim victims of Covid-19. But, the cancellation of Khan’s address to Parliament on the alleged fears of him raising the Kashmir issue after making a grand announcement underscored the pathetic state of affairs.

American of Indian and Pakistani origin Imaad Zuberi, who had donated heavily to Democrats before former President Donald J. Trump’s election, pleaded guilty to charges related to a $900,000 donation to Trump’s inaugural committee, the US media reported last week. Having promised to save Sri Lanka for a sum of USD 8.5 mn, Zuberi received USD 6.5 mn in a deal negotiated through the Sri Lanka Embassy in Washington. In the following year, the US not only played a key role in the change of government in Colombo, it got the UNP-SLFP administration to co-sponsor a Resolution against Sri Lanka’s wartime political leadership and the military.

In 2019 New York Times quoted Zuberi as having said: “To open doors, I have to donate. It’s just a fact of life.”

The smooth operator had donated heavily to Democrats, including committees supporting President Barack Obama and then Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign, before abruptly switching allegiance to Republicans in the wake of Trump’s victory.

The Yahapalana government never made a genuine effort to probe the controversial deal with the American. Investigations revealed that the political agent who had received a 12-year jail term spent vast amounts of Sri Lankan taxpayers’ money to sustain his luxurious lifestyle. Those who had benefited at the expense of Sri Lanka perhaps will never be punished though the military is in the dock. US declaration of Army Chief Gen. Shavendra Silva a persona non grata in the US is a case in point. The same fate befell Field Marshal Sarath Fonseka and Maj. Gen. Chagie Gallage.



Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Midweek Review

BASL fears next set of civil society representatives might be rubber stamps of NPP

Published

on

A group of officials from National Audit Office of Sri Lanka attend a capacity building programme in India

CC in dilemma over filling impending vacancies

Sajith Premadasa

Amidst a simmering row over the controversial move to have Deshabandu Tennakoon as the IGP at the time of crucial presidential election, Opposition Leader Sajith Premadasa alleged: “The Speaker sent a letter to the President, recommending the appointment of Deshabandu Tennakoon as IGP. He distorted the Constitutional Council ruling by interpreting the two abstaining votes of civil society members as votes against Deshabandu and used his casting vote to recommend Deshabandu as the Constitutional Council decision. It is on the basis of the Speaker’s letter that the President made the appointment. The Speaker has blatantly violated the Constitution

.”

Speculation is rife about a possible attempt by the ruling National People’s Power (NPP) to take control of the 10-member Constitutional Council (CC). The only way to take command of the CC is to appoint those willing to pursue the NPP agenda as civil society representatives.

Against the backdrop of the NPP’s failure to obtain CC’s approval to finalise the appointment of the Auditor General, the government seems hell-bent on taking control of it. Civil society representatives, namely Dr. Prathap Ramanujam, Dr. (Mrs.) Dilkushi Anula Wijesundere and Dr. (Mrs.) Weligama Vidana Arachchige Dinesha Samararatne, whose tenure is coming to an end in January, blocked President Anura Kumara Dissanayake’s nominee receiving the AG’s position. They took a courageous stand in the greater interest of the nation.

Chulantha Wickramaratne, who served as AG for a period of six years, retired in April 2025. Following his retirement, President Anura Kumara Dissanayake first nominated H.T.P. Chandana, an audit officer at the Ceylon Petroleum Corporation. The CC rejected the nomination. Subsequently, President Dissanayake appointed the next senior-most official at the National Audit Office (NAO) Dharmapala Gammanpila, as Acting Auditor General for six months. Then, the President nominated Senior Deputy Auditor General L.S.I. Jayarathne to serve in an acting capacity, but her nomination, too, was also rejected.

Many an eyebrow was raised when the President nominated O.R. Rajasinghe, the Internal Audit Director of the Sri Lanka Army, for the top post. As a result, the vital position remains vacant since 07 December. Obviously the overzealous President does not take ‘No’ for an answer when filling key independent positions with his minions

The Bar Association of Sri Lanka (BASL) in a letter dated 22 December, addressed to President Dissanayake, who is the leader of the NPP and the JVP, Prime Minister Dr. Harini Amarasuriya, Speaker Dr. Jagath Wickremaratne and Opposition Leader Sajith Premadasa emphasised their collective responsibility in ensuring transparency in the appointment of civil society representatives.

Cabinet spokesperson and Health and Media Minister, Dr. Nalinda Jayatissa, is on record as having emphasised the urgent need to finalise the appointment. Minister Jayatissa alleged, at the post-Cabinet media briefing, that the President’s nominations had been rejected without giving explanation by certain members, including three representatives of civil society.

Parliament, on 18 January, 2023, approved the former Ministry Secretary Dr. Ramanujam, former Chairperson of the Sri Lanka Medical Association Dr. Wijesundere, and Dr. Samararatne of the University of Colombo as civil society representatives to the CC.

They were the first post-Aragalaya civil society members of the CC. The current CC was introduced by the 21 Amendment to the Constitution which was endorsed on 31st of October, 2022, during a time of grave uncertainty. UNP leader Ranil Wickremesinghe, who had been elected by the SLPP to complete the remainder of ousted President Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s five-year term, sought to manipulate the CC. Wickremesinghe received the SLPP’s backing though they fell out later.

During Wickremesinghe’s tenure as the President, civil society representatives earned the wrath of the then Rajapaksa-Wickremesinghe government by refusing to back Deshabandu Tennakoon’s appointment as the IGP. The then Speaker Mahinda Yapa Abeywardena was accused of manipulating CC’s ruling in respect of Deshabandu Tennakoon to suit Wickremesinghe’s agenda.

Amidst a simmering row over the controversial move to have Deshabandu Tennakoon as the IGP, at the time of crucial presidential election, Opposition Leader Sajith Premadasa alleged: “The Speaker sent a letter to the President, recommending the appointment of Deshabandu Tennakoon as IGP. He distorted the Constitutional Council ruling by interpreting the two abstaining votes of civil society members as votes against Deshabandu and used his casting vote to recommend Deshabandu as the Constitutional Council decision. It is on the basis of the Speaker’s letter that the President made the appointment. The Speaker has blatantly violated the Constitution.”

The NPP realises the urgent need to neutralise the CC. The composition of the CC does not give the Opposition an opportunity to challenge the government if the next three civil society representatives succumb to political pressure. The Speaker is the Chairman of the CC. The present composition of the Constitutional Council is as follows: Speaker (Dr) Jagath Wickramaratne, ex-officio, PM (Dr) Harini Amarasuriya, ex-officio, Leader of the Opposition Sajith Premadasa, ex-officio, Bimal Rathnayake, Aboobucker Athambawa, Ajith P. Perera, Sivagnanam Shritharan, Dr Prathap Ramanujam, Dr Dilkushi Anula Wijesundere and Dr Dinesha Samararatne.

In terms of Article 41E of the Constitution, the CC meets at least twice every month, and may meet as often as may be necessary.

The failure on the part of the NPP to take over Office of the AG must have compelled them to explore ways and means of somehow bringing CC under its influence. The end of the current civil society members’ term, has given the government a chance to fill the vacancies with henchmen.

BASL’s letters that dealt with the appointment of civil society representatives to the CC and the failure to appoint AG, both dated 22 December, paint a bleak picture of the NPP that throughout the presidential and parliamentary polls last year assured the country of a system change. The NPP’s strategy in respect of filling the AG’s vacancy and possible bid to manipulate the CC through the appointment of civil society representatives reminds us of the despicable manipulations undertaken by previous governments.

An appeal to goverment

BASL seems convinced that the NPP would make an attempt to appoint its own to the CC. BASL has urged the government to consult civil society and professional bodies, including them, regarding the forthcoming vacancies in the CC. It would be interesting to examine the NPP’s strategy as civil society, too, would face daunting challenges in choosing representatives.

Civil society representatives are nominated by the Speaker by agreement of the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition.

If consensus cannot be reached swiftly, it would cause further political turmoil at a time the country is experiencing an unexpected burden of dealing with the post-Cyclone Ditwah recovery process.

The term of non-ex-officio members of the Council is three years from the date of appointment. In terms of the Constitution, the civil society representatives should be persons of eminence and integrity who have distinguished themselves in public or professional life and who are not members of any political party. Their nominations should be approved by Parliament.

In spite of the NPP having an absolute 2/3 majority in Parliament, the ruling party is under pressure. The composition of the CC is a big headache for NPP leaders struggling to cope up with rising dissent over a spate of wrongdoings and a plethora of broken promises. The furore over the inordinate delay in finalising AG’s appointment has made matters worse, particularly against the backdrop of the BASL, Transparency International Sri Lanka Chapter and Committee on Public Finance, taking a common stand.

Having been part of the clandestine regime change project in 2022; Western powers and India cannot turn a blind eye to what is going on. Some Colombo-based foreign envoys believe that there is no alternative to the NPP and the government should be given the opportunity to proceed with its action plan. The uncompromising stand taken by the NPP with regard to the appointment of permanent AG has exposed the ruling party.

In the wake of ongoing controversy over the appointment of the AG, the NPP’s integrity and its much-touted vow to tackle waste, corruption, irregularities and mismanagement seems hollow.

The government bigwigs must realise that appointment of those who campaigned for the party at the presidential and parliamentary polls caused deterioration of public confidence. The appointment of ex-top cops Sharnie Abeysekera and Ravi Seneviratne with black marks as Director, CID and Secretary to the Ministry of Public Security and Parliamentary Affairs, eroded public confidence in the NPP administration.

A vital role for CC

The SLPP, reduced to just three lawmakers in the current Parliament, resented the CC. Having secured a near 2/3 majority in the House at the 2020 Parliamentary election, the SLPP made its move against the CC, in a strategy that was meant to strengthen President Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s hands at the expense of Parliament. Introduced in 2001 during Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga’s presidency, the 17th Amendment paved the way for the establishment of the CC. Those who wielded political power subjected the CC to critical changes through 18th, 19th and 20th amendments. Of them, perhaps, the 20th Amendment to the Constitution that had been passed in October 2020 is the worst. The SLPP replaced the CC with a Parliamentary Council. That project was meant to consolidate power in the Executive President, thereby allowing the appointment of key officials, like judges, the Attorney General, and heads of independent commissions.

People may have now forgotten the 20th Amendment removed civil society representatives from the so-called Parliamentary Council consisting of lawmakers who represented the interests of the government and the main Opposition. But such manipulations failed to neutralise the challenge (read Aragalaya) backed by external powers. The role played by the US and India in that project has been established and there cannot be any dispute over their intervention that forced Gotabaya Rajapaksa to flee the country.

Interestingly, Ranil Wickremesinghe, who had been picked by the SLPP to complete the remainder of Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s term, restored the CC through the passage of 21 Amendment on 31 October, 2022. Unfortunately, the NPP now wants to manipulate the CC by packing it with those willing to abide by its agenda.

It would be pertinent to mention that the 20th Amendment was aimed at neutralising dissent at any level. Those who formulated that piece of legislation went to the extent of proposing that the President could sack members appointed to the Parliamentary Council by the Prime Minister and the Opposition Leader without consulting anyone.

If not for the Aragalaya, the Parliamentary Council that didn’t serve any meaningful purpose could have paved the way for the President to fill all key positions with his nominees.

Recommendation of nominations to the President for the appointment of Chairpersons and Members of Commissions specified in the Schedule to Article 41B of the Constitution.

Commissions specified in the Schedule to Article 41B: The Election Commission, the Public Service Commission, the National Police Commission, the Audit Service Commission, the Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka, the Commission to Investigate Allegations of Bribery or Corruption, the Finance Commission, the Delimitation Commission and the National Procurement Commission.

Approval/ Disapproval of recommendations by the President for the appointment to the Offices specified in the Schedule to Article 41C of the Constitution.

Offices specified in the Schedule to Article 41C: The Chief Justice and the Judges of the Supreme Court, the President and the Judges of the Court of Appeal, the Members of the Judicial Service Commission, other than the Chairman, the Attorney-General, the Governor of the Central Bank of Sri Lanka, the Auditor-General, the Inspector-General of Police, the Parliamentary Commissioner for Administration (Ombudsman) and the Secretary-General of Parliament.

NPP under pressure

In spite of having the executive presidency, a 2/3 majority in the legislature, and the bulk of Local Government authorities under its control, the NPP is under pressure. Their failure to muster sufficient support among the members of the Colombo Municipal Council (CMC) to pass its 2026 Budget underscored the gravity of the developing situation. The unexpected loss suffered at the CMC shook the ruling party.

But, the NPP faces a far bigger challenge in filling the AG’s vacancy as well as the new composition of the CC. If the NPP succeeds with its efforts to replace the current civil society representatives with rubber stamps, the ruling party may feel vindicated but such feelings are likely to be short-lived.

Having criticised the government over both contentious matters, the BASL may be forced to step up pressure on the government unless they can reach a consensus. It would be really interesting to know whether the government accepted the BASL’s request for consultations with the stakeholders. Unless consensus can be reached between the warring parties there is possibility of opening of a new front with the BASL and civil society being compelled to take a common stand against the government.

The developing scenario should be examined taking into consideration political parties and civil society confronting the government over the proposed Protection of the State from Terrorism Act (PSTA). Having promised to do away with the Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA) in the run up to the presidential election, the NPP is trying to explain that it cannot do without anti-terrorism law. The civil society is deeply unhappy over the NPP’s change of heart.

The National Peace Council (NPP) that has been generally supportive and appreciative of the NPP’s efforts probably with the blessings of its benefactors in the West, too, has now found fault with the proposed PSTA. Dr. Jehan Perera, NPP’s Executive Director commented: “A preliminary review of the draft PSTA indicates that it retains core features of the PTA that have enabled serious abuse over decades. These include provisions permitting detention for up to two years without a person being charged before a court of law. In addition, the broad definition of terrorism under the draft law allows acts of dissent and civil disobedience to be labelled as terrorism, thereby permitting disproportionate and excessive responses by the state. Such provisions replicate the logic of the PTA rather than mark a clear break from it.”

Except the BASL, other professional bodies and political parties haven’t commented on the developing situation at the CC while taking into consideration the delay in appointing an AG. The issue at hand is whether the government intends to hold up AG’s appointment till the change of the CC’s composition in its favour. Whatever the specific reasons, a country that has suffered for want of accountability and transparency, enters 2026 without such an important person to guard against all types of financial shenanigans in the state.

All previous governments sought to influence the Office of the AG. The proposed establishment of NAO prompted the powers that be to undermine the effort. The Yahapalana administration diluted the National Audit Bill and what had been endorsed as National Audit Act, Nov. 19 of 2018 was definitely not the anti-corruption grouping originally proposed. That Act was amended this year but the Office of the AG remains vacant.

The NPP has caused itself immense harm by failing to reach consensus with the CC on filling the AG’s post. Unfortunately, the ruling party seems to be uninterested in addressing the issue expeditiously but is exploring the possibility of taking over control of the CC by stuffing it with civil society members favourable to the current ruling clique.

By Shamindra Ferdinando

Continue Reading

Midweek Review

Towards Decolonizing Social Sciences and Humanities

Published

on

‘Can Asians Think?’

I want to initiate this essay with several questions. That is, are we, in Sri Lanka and in our region, intellectually subservient to what is often referred to as the ‘West’? Specifically, can knowledge production in broad disciplinary areas such as social sciences and humanities be more creative, original and generated in response to local conditions and histories, particularly when it comes to practices such as formulating philosophy and theory as well as concepts and approaches? Why have we so far imported these from Western Europe and North America as has been the undisputed norm?

In exploring the responses and delving into this discussion, I will seek reference from the politics of the recently published book, Decolonial Keywords: South Asian Thoughts and Attitudes edited by Renny Thomas from the Department of Humanities and Social Sciences at the Indian Institute of Science Education and Research – Bhopal and me. The book was brought out by Delhi-based Tulika Publishers in December 2025.

Let me first unpack my anxiety over theory and philosophy, which I have talked about many times previously too. Any social science or humanities text we read here or elsewhere in South Asia invariably borrows concepts, theories and philosophical input generated mostly in Western Europe and North America. It almost appears as if our region is incapable of serious and abstract thinking.  It is in this same context, but specifically with reference to India that Prathama Banerjee, Aditya Nigam and Rakesh Pandey have observed in their critical essay, ‘The Work of Theory Thinking across Traditions’ (2016), that for many “theory appears as a ready-made body of philosophical thought, produced in the West …” They argue, “the more theory-inclined among us simply pick the latest theory off-the-shelf and ‘apply’ it to our context, notwithstanding its provincial European origin, for we believe that ‘theory’ is by definition universal.”

Here, Banerjee et al make two important points. That is, there is an almost universal acceptability in the region that ‘theory’ is a kind of philosophical work that is exclusively produced in the West, followed by an almost blind and unreflective readiness among many of us to simply apply these ideas to local contexts. In doing so, they fail to take into serious consideration the initial temporal and historical contexts in which these bodies of knowledge were generated.  However, theory or philosophy is not universal.

This knowledge is contextually linked to very specific social, political and historical conditions that allowed such knowledge to emanate in the first place. It therefore stands to reason that such knowledge cannot be applied haphazardly/ willy-nilly anywhere in the world without grave consequences.  Of course, some ideas can be of universal validity as long as they are carefully placed in context. But to perceive theory or philosophy as all-weather universals is patently false even though this is the way they are often understood from universities to segments within society in general.  This naiveté is part of the legacy of colonialism from which these disciplines as well as much of their theoretical and philosophical structures have been bequeathed to us.

It is in this context that I would like to discuss the politics our book, Decolonial Keywords: South Asian Thoughts and Attitudes entail. Here, thirty South Asian scholars from across disciplines in social sciences and humanities have come together to “discuss words and ideas from a variety of regional languages, ranging from Sinhala to Hebrew Malayalam” encapsulating “the region’s languages and its vast cultural landscape, crossing national borders.” To be more specific, these languages include Assamese,  Arabic-Malayalam, Bengali, Hebrew Malayalam, Hindi, Nepali, Sanskrit, Sinhala, South Asian uses of English, Tamil-Arabic, Tamil, Urdu and concepts from indigenous languages of Nagaland and Arunachal Pradesh.

Each chapter, focuses on a selected word and “reiterates specific attitudes, ways of seeing and methods of doing that are embedded in the historical and contemporary experiences of the region” keeping in mind “the contexts of their production and how their meanings might have changed at different historical moments.”

In this exploration, the volume attempts to understand “if these words and concepts can infuse a certain intellectual rigour into reinventing social sciences and humanities in the region and beyond.” In short, what we have attempted is to offer a point of departure to a comprehensive and culturally, linguistically and politically inclusive effort at theory-building and conceptual fine-tuning based on South Asian experiences and histories.  We assume these concepts from our region might be able to speak to the world in the same way schools of thought in politically dominant regions of the world have done so far to us. This is a matter of decolonizing our disciplines. But it is still not a claim for universality. After all, our main focus is to come up with a body of conceptual categories that might be useful in reading the region.

When Sri Lankan social sciences and humanities as well as the same disciplines elsewhere in the region thoughtlessly embrace knowledges imported in conditions of unequal power relations, it can never produce forums for discourse from which we can speak to the world with authority.  In this book, Thomas and I have attempted, as an initial and self-conscious effort, to flip the script on theory-building and conceptualization in social sciences and humanities in South Asia in the region’s favour.

We are however mindful that this effort has its risks, intellectually speaking.  That is, we are conscious this effort must be undertaken without succumbing to crude and parochial forms of nativism that are also politically powerful in the region including in Sri Lanka and India. This book presents an array of possibilities if we are serious about decolonizing our social sciences and humanities to infuse power into the discourses we generate and take them to the world instead of celebrating our parochiality like the proverbial frog in the well. Unfortunately, more often than not, we are trained to be intellectually subservient, and mere followers, not innovators and leaders bringing to mind the polemical title of Kishore Mahbubani’s 2002 book, Can Asians Think?

Continue Reading

Midweek Review

The ever-changing river: Chandana Ruwan Jayanetti’s evolving poetic voice

Published

on

Poems from Galle , by Chandana Ruwan Jayanetti, was launched on December 20 at Dakshinapaya, the auditorium of the Chief Ministry of the Southern Provincial Council, Labuduwa, Galle. Head table at the launch (from left): author Jayanetti; Minister of Buddhasasana, Religious and Cultural Affairs Dr. Hiniduma Sunil Senevi; Emeritus Professor Rajiva Wijesinha; and renowned poet, lyricist, and literary figure Dr. Rathna Sri Wijesinghe.

It is said that no man steps into the same river twice, for it is not the same river, and he is not the same man. These words came to mind upon reading Chandana Ruwan Jayanetti’s latest poetry collection, Poems from Galle, which inevitably invites comparison with his earlier work, particularly his first volume of poetry and prose, Reflections in Loneliness: A Collection of Poems and Prose (2015).

In this new collection, Jayanetti is demonstrably not the same poet he was a decade ago. His horizons have widened. his subject matter has diversified, and his thematic range has deepened. The earlier hallmarks of his work, including his empathetic attention to human experience, sensitivity to the natural world, and intimate, reflective tone, remain present. Yet they are now complemented by a stronger defiance, a more deliberate engagement with the political and the cosmic, and a broader mosaic of local and universal concerns. His poetic voice has evolved in scope, tonal range, and thematic ambition.

My own acquaintance with Jayanetti’s poetry dates back to our undergraduate days at Sabaragamuwa University of Sri Lanka, where we were classmates pursuing a BA in Languages (English Special). Even then, his work revealed precise observational skill coupled with profound sympathy for individuals. This early sensibility found fuller articulation in Reflections in Loneliness, a collection spanning nearly two decades of creative endeavor.

That inaugural volume traversed a wide thematic landscape: childhood memories; tender compassion toward humans and animals; tributes to the deserving; the joys and sorrows of young love; and reflections on Sri Lanka’s three-decade Northeast conflict, which concluded in 2009. Jayanetti’s verse, written with sincerity and empathy, moves fluidly from deeply personal to universally human. Moments of striking poignancy include the loss of his wife’s mother, the death of a young friend who marched unflinchingly to the warfront, and the bittersweet parting from a lover.

The prose section of Reflections in Loneliness offered a return to the rural simplicity of the 1970s and ’80s through the perspective of a schoolboy. Essays such as We Buy a Bicycle, Television Descends, The Village Goes to the Fair, Bathing Excursions and Hingurakanda evoke a bygone era with unvarnished authenticity. As literary critic Kamala Wijeratne noted, Jayanetti’s prose merited commendation for its perceptive and affectionate portrayal of rural life, written with the authority of lived experience. His meticulous attention to minute details revealed not only the flaws and frailties of human nature but also its loyalties and quiet virtues, articulated with unforced sympathy.

Consisting of 31 poems and five prose pieces, Reflections in Loneliness established Jayanetti as a writer of elegance, precision, and emotional depth. The current collection, however, confirms the Heraclitean and Buddhist insights: both the poet and his poetry have changed. The new work reflects an expansion from the personal to the cosmic, from the intimately local to the globally resonant, a testament to an artist in motion, carried forward by the ever-changing current of his creative life.

Jayanetti’s poetic corpus in the new book Poems from Galle, spanning thirty-five evocative works from They Heard the Cock Crow to A Birthday Celebration, reveals a profound and consistent artistic signature rooted in themes of humanity, nature, history, and social consciousness. Throughout these poems, Jayanetti demonstrates a distinctive voice that is simultaneously empathetic, contemplative, and alert to the complexities of his Sri Lankan heritage and the broader human condition. While maintaining a core of thematic and tonal consistency, each poem enriches this foundation by expanding into new dimensions of experience, whether personal, ecological, political, or historical.

A foundational element of Jayanetti’s poetry is the intimate relationship between humans and nature, frequently underscored by a deep ethical awareness. In poems like From a Herdman’s Life and My Neighbor, he gives voice to the quiet dignity of rural existence and animal companionship, portraying a symbiotic bond imbued with mutual care and respect. Similarly, Fallen Elephant and Inhumanity lament the cruelty inflicted upon majestic creatures, indicting human greed and violence. These poems articulate not only empathy for the natural world but also an implicit call for stewardship, threading a moral sensibility throughout the collection.

This concern extends to the socio-political sphere, as Jayanetti often situates his poems within the fraught realities of Sri Lanka’s history and struggles. Homage to Sir Henry Pedris honors a national martyr, while Confession of a Sri Lankan Cop exposes institutional corruption and personal integrity in tension. Hanuma Wannama and Gone Are They tackle political violence and social upheaval, reflecting the poet’s engagement with national trauma and collective memory. These works enrich the thematic landscape by connecting personal narrative to larger historical forces.

Jayanetti’s choice of subjects is remarkably diverse yet unified by a focus on lived experience—ranging from the intimate (To a Puppy That Departed, Benji) to the grand (Mekong, A Voyage). The poet’s attention to place, whether the Sri Lankan cityscape in City Morning and Evening from the College Terrace or the historic Ode to Galle Fort, anchors his work in locality while evoking universal themes of time, change, and belonging. Even poems centered on seemingly mundane moments, such as Staff Meeting or A Game, are elevated by the poet’s keen observational eye and capacity to find meaning in everyday rituals.

Moreover, Jayanetti often draws from historical and cultural memory, as seen in Ludowyk Remembered, Let Ho Chi Minh Guide You, and Rathna Sri Remembered, positioning his poetry as a dialogue between past and present. This choice expands his thematic range to include legacy, identity, and the power of remembrance, linking the individual to the collective consciousness.

Across the collection, Jayanetti’s tone is marked by a blend of gentle empathy and quiet strength. Poems such as A Companion Departed and To a Puppy That Departed convey tenderness and mourning with understated poignancy. His voice is intimate and accessible, inviting readers into personal reflections suffused with emotional depth.

Yet, this empathy is balanced by moments of stark realism and defiance.

In Corona and Hanuma Wannama, the tone shifts to urgent and accusatory, critiquing social injustice and political decay. A Ship Weeps mourns environmental devastation with an elegiac voice that is both sorrowful and admonitory. This tonal range reveals a poet capable of both consolation and confrontation, who embraces complexity rather than sentimentality.

While many poems explore specific moments or relationships, others invite contemplation on broader existential and cosmic themes. For instance, A Voyage and Mekong traverse spatial and temporal boundaries, evoking the interplay between human journeys and natural cycles. A Birthday Celebration reflects on legacy, learning, and the continuum of knowledge, blending personal homage with universal insight.

Even poems like A Bond and A Game gesture toward symbolic resonance, the former exploring interspecies loyalty as a metaphor for fidelity and duty, the latter invoking sport as a microcosm of life’s challenges and hopes. These works demonstrate Jayanetti’s ability to expand familiar motifs into metaphoric and philosophical territory, enriching his poetic landscape.

Jayanetti’s thirty-five poems in Poems from Galle collectively reveal a consistent and compelling artistic signature that intertwines compassionate engagement with nature and society, a profound sense of place, and an acute awareness of history and memory. His voice navigates seamlessly between moments of intimate reflection and urgent social commentary, creating a poetic landscape that resonates with both specificity and universality.

Each poem adds a distinct dimension to this mosaic. Historical and political awareness emerges strongly in poems like Let Ho Chi Minh Guide You and Homage to Sir Henry Pedris, where the sacrifices of national heroes and struggles for justice are evoked with reverence and clarity. Meanwhile, environmental consciousness is vividly articulated in works such as Abandoned Chena, Kottawa Forest, and Fallen Elephant, where the fragility of ecosystems and the human impact on nature are poignantly explored.

Jayanetti also delves deeply into themes of personal loss and companionship in poems like Benji, A Companion Departed, and In Memory of Brownie, tenderly capturing the bond between humans and animals. Poems like Confession of a Sri Lankan Cop and Hanuma Wannama offer raw social critique, revealing layers of political and moral complexity.

Through this interplay of historical, environmental, personal, and political themes, Jayanetti constructs a body of work that is distinctly Sri Lankan in its cultural and geographical grounding yet profoundly universal in its exploration of human experience. His poetry invites readers to reflect on the interconnected fates of humans, animals, and the natural world, urging a deeper awareness of our shared existence and responsibilities.

by Saman Indrajith

Continue Reading

Trending