Connect with us

Opinion

LSSP @ 90: The Sama Samaja Role in Constitutional Issues

Published

3 months ago

on

On the occasion of the ninetieth anniversary of the Lanka Sama Samaja Party (LSSP), this article highlights the party’s positions on constitutional matters. When the LSSP was founded, it had two primary objectives: obtaining complete political independence for Sri Lanka and building a socialist society. The first of these was achieved in two stages. The LSSP directly contributed to achieving semi-independence in 1948 through its anti-imperialist struggle and full political independence in 1972. The second objective remains a distant goal.

Citizenship Act

In the very second year after independence, the D. S. Senanayake government acted to deny citizenship to the Hill-Country Tamil community and, consequently, deprived them of voting rights. In the 1947 election, many Hill-Country Tamils—who voted as British subjects—were inclined toward the Left, and especially toward the Sama Samaja Party. In that election, the Ceylon Indian Congress won seven seats, and with the support of plantation workers in areas where they were numerous, several left-wing candidates were also elected.

Seeing the long-term danger in this alliance, the Sri Lankan capitalist class ensured that the Citizenship Act defined the term “citizen” in a way that denied citizenship to hundreds of thousands of Hill-Country Tamil people. As a result, they also lost their voting rights. At that time, it was the Left, led by the Sama Samaja Party, that opposed this.

While the Tamil Congress, a coalition partner of the government at the time, voted in favour of the legislation, S.J.V. Chelvanayakam stated that the inability of Tamil leaders to protect their cousins—the Hill-Country Tamil community—showed that being a partner in a Colombo-based government brought no benefit to minority groups. He argued that the lesson to be learned was the need for self-government in the regions where they lived. Chelvanayakam’s founding of the Federal Party was one consequence of this process.

Although section 29 of the 1947 Constitution purported protection by providing that no law shall make persons of any community or religion liable to disabilities or restrictions to which persons of other communities or religions are not made liable, neither the Supreme Court of Ceylon nor the Privy Council in England, which was then the country’s highest appellate court, afforded any relief to the Hill-Country Tamil community.

Parity of Status for Sinhala and Tamil and the Ethnic Issue

When the UNP and the SLFP, both of which had previously agreed to grant equal status to the Sinhala and Tamil languages, reversed their positions in 1955 and supported making Sinhala the sole official language, the LSSP stood firmly by its policy of parity. Earlier, when a group of Buddhist monks met N. M. Perera and told him they were prepared to make him Prime Minister if he agreed to make Sinhala the only official language, he rejected the proposal. Had the country heeded Colvin R. de Silva’s famous warning— “One language, two countries; two languages, one country”—the separatist war might have been averted. Because the Left refused to be opportunistic, it lost public support.

During the 1956 debate on the Official Language Bill, Panadura LSSP MP Leslie Goonewardene warned: “The possibility of communal riots is not the only danger I am referring to. There is the graver danger of the division of the country; we must remember that the Northern and Eastern provinces of Ceylon are inhabited principally by Tamil-speaking people, and if those people feel that a grave, irreparable injustice is done to them, there is a possibility of their deciding even to break away from the rest of the country. In fact, there is already a section of political opinion among the Tamil-speaking people which is openly advocating the course of action.” It is an irony of history that Sinhala was designated the sole official language in 1956, yet in 1987, both languages were formally recognised as official.

1972 Republican Constitution

Colvin’s contribution to the making of the 1972 Republican Constitution, which severed Sri Lanka’s political ties with Britain, was immense. Preserving the parliamentary system, recognising fundamental rights, and incorporating directive principles of state policy that supported social justice were further achievements of that Constitution. It also had its weaknesses, and any effort to assign full responsibility for them to Colvin must also be addressed.

In the booklet that he wrote on the 1972 Constitution, he said the following regarding the place given to Buddhism: “I believe in a secular state. But you know, when Constitutions are made by Constituent Assemblies, they are not made by the Minister of Constitutional Affairs.” What he meant was that the final outcome reflected the balance of power within the Constituent Assembly. As a contributor to constitution drafting, this writer’s experience confirms that while drafters do have a role, the final outcome on controversial issues depends on the political forces involved and mirrors the resultant of those forces.

In fact, the original proposal approved by the Constituent Assembly was that Buddhism should be given its “rightful place” as the religion of the majority. However, the subcommittee on religion, chaired by Prime Minister Sirimavo Bandaranaike, changed this to “foremost place.” It is believed that her view was influenced by the fact that one of her ancestors had signed the 1815 Kandyan Convention, in which Buddhism was declared inviolable, and the British undertook to maintain and protect its rites, ministers, and places of worship.

As Dr Nihal Jayawickrama, a member of the committee that drafted the 1972 Constitution, has written, the original draft prepared by Colvin did not describe Sri Lanka as a unitary state. However, Minister Felix Dias Bandaranaike proposed that the country be declared a “unitary state”. Colvin’s view was that, while the proposed constitution would have a unitary structure, unitary constitutions could vary substantially in form and, therefore, flexibility should be allowed. Nevertheless, the proposed phrase found its way to the final draft. “In the course of time, this impetuous, ill-considered, wholly unnecessary embellishment has reached the proportions of a battle cry of individuals and groups who seek to achieve a homogenous Sinhalese state on this island”, Dr Jayawickrama observed.

Indeed, the failure of the 1972 Constitution to make both Sinhala and Tamil official languages was a defeat for the Left. Allowing the use of Tamil in the courts of the Northern and Eastern Provinces and granting the right to obtain Tamil translations in any court in the country were only small achievements.

Devolution

The original Tamil demand was for constitutionally guaranteed representation in the legislature. Given that, in the early stages, they showed greater willingness to share power at the centre than to pursue regional self-government, it is not surprising that the Left believed that ethnic harmony could be ensured through equality. After the conflict escalated, N. M. Perera, now convinced that regional autonomy was the answer to the conflict, wrote in a collection of essays published a few months before his death: “Unfortunately, by the time the pro-Sinhala leaders hobbled along, the young extremists had taken the lead in demanding a separate State. (…) What might have satisfied the Tamil community twenty years back cannot be adequate twenty years later. Other concessions along the lines of regional autonomy will have to be in the offing if healthy and harmonious relations are to be regained.”

After N. M.’s death, his followers continued to advance the proposal for regional self-government. At the All-Party Conference convened after the painful experiences of July 1983, Colvin declared that the ethnic question was “a problem of the Sri Lanka nation and state and not a problem of just this community or that community.” While reaffirming the LSSP’s position that Sri Lanka must remain a single country with a single state, he emphasised that with Tamils living in considerable numbers in a contiguous territory, the state as presently organised does not serve the purposes it should serve, especially in the field of equality of status in relation to the state, the nation and the government. The Left supported the Thirteenth Amendment in principle. More than 200 leftists, including Vijaya Kumaratunga, paid the price with their lives for doing so, 25 of whom were Samasamajists. The All-Party Representatives Committee appointed by President Mahinda Rajapaksa and chaired by LSSP Minister Tissa Vitharana, proposed extensive devolution of power within an undivided country.

Abolishing the Executive Presidency

It is unsurprising that N. M. Perera, who possessed exceptional knowledge of parliamentary procedure worldwide and was one of the finest parliamentarians, was a staunch defender of the parliamentary system. In his collection of essays on the 1978 Constitution, N. M. noted that the parliamentary form of government had worked for thirty years in Sri Lanka with a degree of success that had surprised many Western observers. Today, that book has become a handbook for advocates of abolishing the executive presidency. The Left has consistently and unwaveringly supported the abolition of the executive presidential system, and the Lanka Sama Samaja Party has contributed significantly to this effort.

The National People’s Power, in its presidential election manifesto, promised a new constitution that would abolish the executive presidency, devolve power to provinces, districts, and local authorities, and grant all communities a share in governance. However, there appears to be no preparation underway to fulfil these promises. It is the duty of the Left to press for their implementation.

In an article published in The Island on June 6 this year, to commemorate N. M. Perera’s 120th birth anniversary, the writer wrote: “The Left may be weaker and fragmented; nevertheless, the relevance and need for a Left alternative persist. If the LSSP can celebrate its 90th anniversary as a reunited party, that could pave the way for a stronger and united Left as well. Such a development would be the best way to honour NM and other pioneering leaders of the Left.” It is encouraging that some discussion on this matter has now emerged. Merely discussing the history of the LSSP and the Left is insufficient; action is required. It is the duty of leftists to disprove Bernard Soysa’s sarcastic remark, “left activists are good at fighting for the crown that does not exist.”

by (Dr) Jayampathy Wickramaratne,
President’s Counsel


Related Topics:
Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

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

Opinion

Boots on the ground,minds in the dark

Published

9 hours ago

on

2026/04/1

By

Confronting Sri Lanka’s Expanding Drug Threat

Senior security and intelligence professional with extensive experience in counter-terrorism, strategic risk assessment and law enforcement.

A Rising Tide Beneath the Surface

Sri Lanka’s recent success in intercepting large consignments of narcotics at sea is both reassuring and alarming. Reassuring, because it reflects the growing operational capability of the Sri Lanka Navy and the Police Narcotics Bureau. Alarming, because such volumes do not move without a market.

Are we merely intercepting supply, or are we ignoring a rapidly expanding demand within our own society?

· “If seizures are rising, it is not only a sign of enforcement success, it is also a signal of expanding demand.

“Boots on the Ground”: A New Meaning

In today’s Sri Lankan context, “boots on the ground” must be redefined. It is no longer limited to patrols at sea or coastal surveillance. It is about real presence intelligence-led, community-connected, and action-oriented.

Recent interdictions demonstrate a mature intelligence-to-action cycle. For this, the Sri Lanka Navy and Police deserve commendation.

Yet, behind every success lies a silent force

The Silent Shield: Intelligence Networks

Informants, analysts, and field operatives form the backbone of every successful operation.

*  They operate under risk

*  Their exposure can collapse entire networks

*  Their contribution must be recognised discreetly, not publicly

“An exposed informant today is a lost network tomorrow.”

A Market-Driven Menace

Drug trafficking is not accidental, it is profit-driven.

The scale of maritime smuggling suggests that Sri Lanka is no longer just a transit hub. It is increasingly becoming a destination market.

This transforms narcotics from a policing issue into a national social crisis.

Inside the Network: A Structured Ecosystem

The drug trade operates through layered chains:

*  International syndicates

* Maritime couriers

*  Local facilitators

* Urban distributors

* Street-level peddlers

Each layer is insulated. Each link is replaceable.

“Break one link, and the chain adapts. Break the system, and the threat collapses.”

Demand Is Engineered

A critical reality:

Drug networks do not wait for demand; they create it.

* Free or low-cost initial access

* Targeting youth and vulnerable groups

* Expansion through peer networks

* Stealth distribution networks

Addiction is often designed, not accidental.

Awareness: Prevention or Promotion?

Sri Lanka’s awareness programmes show mixed results.

While well-intentioned:

* Overexposure can trigger curiosity

* Fear-based messaging is ineffective

* Generic campaigns lack relevance

“Poorly designed awareness can introduce what it seeks to prevent.”

The Missing Link: Awareness + Recovery

Awareness alone is insufficient.

A modern approach must include:

*  Simple, relatable communication

* Focus on life consequences

* Clear access to rehabilitation

Shift the message:

From: “Say no to drugs”

To: “If trapped, there is a way out”

When Success Creates Strain: The Justice System Under Pressure

An often-overlooked consequence of increased drug detections is the pressure it places on the justice and prison systems.

A large number of drug-related offences are non-bailable, leading to a steady rise in remand populations. This has resulted in:

*  Severe prison overcrowding

* Heightened tension among inmates

* Increased confrontation between prisoners and prison authorities

Overcrowded prisons are not only a humanitarian concern they are an escalating security risk.

The Forensic Bottleneck: Delays in Government Analyst Reports

At the centre of this strain lies a critical dependency the Government Analyst Department.

Every detection requires scientific confirmation. However, the system is under significant pressure:

* High volume of samples

* Shortage of trained personnel

* Limited availability of chemicals and laboratory materials
·

*  Multiple deadlines imposed by courts

These constraints have led to delays in submitting reports, which in turn:

*  Extend remand periods

*  Increase court backlogs

*  Fuel frustration among inmates

“Justice delayed in narcotics cases becomes both a legal failure and a security threat.”

A Sensitive Concern: Accuracy of Detections

Another emerging concern is that a number of samples sent for analysis reportedly do not contain narcotics.

If substantiated, this raises serious issues:

*  Are arrests being made on insufficient preliminary evidence?

* Are field testing methods reliable?

* Is there undue pressure to increase detection statistics?

The implications are profound:

*  Wrongful detention

*  Loss of public trust

* Weakening of legitimate enforcement efforts

Each inaccurate detection undermines the credibility of the entire system.

A Dangerous Imbalance

Sri Lanka now faces a structural imbalance:

*  Strong enforcement

*  Increasing arrests·

*  Limited forensic capacity·

*  Overburdened courts·

*  Overcrowded prisons

This imbalance creates a chain reaction of institutional stress.

The Strategic Gap: Where Is the Research?

Despite strong enforcement, Sri Lanka lacks a research-driven response.

The Police Narcotics Bureau and National Dangerous Drugs Control Board must be strengthened with:

*  Dedicated research units

*  Data on usage trends·

*  Behavioural analysis·

*  Evaluation of awareness programmes

Supported by international collaboration.

“Without research, strategy becomes a reaction.”

From Sea to Society

“Boots on the ground” must extend beyond enforcement:

*  Religious leaders·

*  Teachers and schools·

*  Parents·

*  Community networks·

The real battle is not only at sea but within society.

A National Priority

The consequences are severe:

* Loss of youth potential·

* Rising crime·

* Family breakdown·

* Long-term public health burden

This is a national security issue with generational consequences.

STRATEGIC CONCLUSION

OFFENSIVE FRAMEWORK (SUPPLY DISRUPTION)

INTERNATIONAL PARTNERS

NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE

SRI LANKA NAVY / COAST GUARD

POLICE NARCOTICS BUREAU

STF / POLICE OPERATIONS

ARRESTS & SEIZURES

JUDICIAL SYSTEM

Focus: Intelligence-led interdiction, maritime dominance, legal enforcement

PREVENTIVE FRAMEWORK (DEMAND REDUCTION)

GOVERNMENT POLICY & RESEARCH

NDDCB / PNB COORDINATION

EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS

TEACHERS / COUNSELLORS

RELIGIOUS & COMMUNITY LEADERS

PARENTS

YOUTH

Focus: Awareness, early detection, social resilience, rehabilitation

INTEGRATED NATIONAL STRATEGY

(OFFENSIVE) (PREVENTIVE)

Sri Lanka has proven its ability to intercept drugs.

But interception alone is not victory.

“If enforcement is strong but society is weak, the problem will return.

If both are strong, the threat can be contained.”

Conclusion

Sri Lanka is no longer confronting a distant or isolated narcotics threat it is facing a deeply embedded, evolving ecosystem that stretches from international waters to the minds of its youth.

The recent surge in maritime interceptions is not merely a success story. It is also a warning.

Every shipment seized at sea is a reflection of a demand that exists on land.

We must therefore move beyond the comfort of operational victories and confront the harder truth: this battle cannot be won by enforcement alone.

“Boots on the ground” must now mean more than patrol vessels and tactical units. It must represent a nationwide presence of awareness, vigilance, intelligence, and responsibility from coastal radar stations to classrooms, from intelligence cells to family homes.

At the same time, we must protect what protects us from the intelligence networks that operate in silence. Their strength lies in their invisibility. Their recognition must remain measured, discreet, and strategic.

The drug economy is adaptive. It creates demand where none exists, exploits vulnerability where it finds it, and thrives where systems are disconnected. If left unchecked, it will not only fuel crime it will reshape society, erode institutions, and compromise future generations.

What Sri Lanka needs now is not a fragmented response, but a coordinated national doctrine:

*  Strong at sea

*  Smart in policy

*  Deep in research

*  Present in societyBecause the real battleground is no longer just geography it is generational.

What is required now is not just stronger enforcement but smarter systems, balanced capacity, and a unified national response. Because this is no longer just about drugs. It is about the future of the nation.

Mahil Dole is a retired senior police officer and former Head of the Counter-Terrorism Division of Sri Lanka’s State Intelligence Service. With over four decades in policing and intelligence, he has interviewed more than 100 suicide cadres linked to extremist movements. He is a graduate of the Asia-Pacific Center for Security Studies in Hawaii and has received specialist training on terrorist financing in Australia and India.

By Mahil Dole

Continue Reading

Opinion

Sri Lanka has policy, but where is the data?

Published

1 day ago

on

2026/03/31

By

In recent months, President Anura Kumara Dissanayake has repeatedly expressed a concern that the government does not have the accurate data it needs to make good decisions.

At meetings with senior officials from ministries ranging from health and agriculture to education and infrastructure, the President has reportedly lamented that the government often lacks reliable information on what its projects are achieving, how funds are being spent, and whether public investments are producing results. The meeting on December 6th at the Matale District Secretariat was a case in point. The President emphasised the need for most accurate data to award compensation for damaged agricultural lands before the month’s end. He recalled that the Department of Agriculture’s data showed an excess of rice in the country, but the nation has faced a rice shortage.

For a country attempting economic recovery after the most severe crisis in its post-independence history, absence of accurate data is a dangerous position to be in.

Without data, decisions become guesswork. Without evidence, policy becomes speculation.

Ironically, Sri Lanka already possesses the policy architecture required to solve this problem. The National Evaluation Policy (2018) and the National Evaluation Policy Implementation Framework (2023) were created precisely to ensure that public spending is guided by evidence, results, and accountability. Yet today, despite these policies and the presence of a dedicated government agency tasked with monitoring development projects, the country still lacks the integrated digital monitoring and evaluation system needed to turn policy into practice. Until that gap is closed, Sri Lanka will continue to struggle with inefficient public investment, delayed projects, and policy decisions made without reliable evidence.

The scale of the problem

The Department of Project Management and Monitoring (DPMM), operating under the Ministry of Finance, is the central institution responsible for overseeing development projects implemented by government ministries. According to its 2024 Annual Performance Report, the department monitored 226 large-scale development projects across various ministries during the year. These projects collectively had an allocated budget of LKR 705 billion, but the actual expenditure amounted to only LKR 401.96 billion, representing about 56.9% utilization of the allocated funds.

In other words, nearly half of the planned development spending did not materialize.

While fiscal constraints and external factors contributed to this outcome, the data nevertheless highlights a deeper systemic issue: weak monitoring and decision-making structures that fail to identify and resolve implementation problems early.

The report also indicates that many projects face delays due to procurement issues, coordination failures, cost escalations, and operational bottlenecks. What makes the situation more troubling is that information about these problems is often fragmented and slow to reach decision-makers.

The government does monitor projects through reports and field visits, but the information flow remains largely manual and scattered across ministries. In the digital age, such a system is simply inadequate.

A policy that already foresaw the solution

Sri Lanka’s National Evaluation Policy (NEP), approved by the Cabinet in 2018, recognised this problem years ago. The policy aims to ensure that public investment decisions are guided by reliable evidence, efficiency, and measurable development results.

The NEP outlines several key goals:

· strengthening evidence-based decision making,

· improving efficiency in resource utilisation,

· ensuring transparency and accountability in public expenditure,

· promoting learning from successes and failures of past projects, and

· creating a national culture of evaluation.

To operationalise the policy, the government introduced the National Evaluation Policy Implementation Framework (NEPIF) in 2023. This framework explicitly calls for the creation of integrated information systems capable of gathering and analyzing data across the project cycle—from planning and budgeting to implementation and evaluation. In fact, NEPIF specifically proposes the establishment of a web-based integrated public investment management and evaluation information system to store project data and evaluation reports.

Such a system would allow decision-makers to access reliable information quickly, improving accountability and policy planning. Unfortunately, despite the clarity of this vision, the digital infrastructure necessary to implement it at a national scale is still largely absent.

A revealing moment at a Colombo seminar

The urgency of this gap became strikingly clear at a recent seminar in Colombo organized by a national NGO. The organization demonstrated its cloud-based monitoring and evaluation system which was comprehensive and updated by multiple layers of personnel, to a group of university students. On a large screen, a dashboard displayed real-time information on the organization’s twenty development projects across the country. Each project appeared as a branch of a digital tree, connected to activities, budgets, locations, and beneficiaries. With a few clicks, staff could generate reports showing the status of any project at national, district, or local levels, both of data and graphics. Updated data was available up to the previous day.

What would normally take weeks of manual compilation could be done in less than a minute.

Among the audience was a university academic who observed something obvious but powerful. ‘If a small NGO can run a system like this,’ he asked, ‘why can’t the Government?’ Another participant responded and told that the non-introduction of a digitalized Monitoring and Evaluation mechanism was due to some bureaucrats’ resistance. ‘I heard the Evaluation Reports of several projects of the government was not published because the respective Project Managers had opposed, fearing their failure would be exposed’, another academic commented. Those comments deserve serious reflection on the situation, I believe.

The digital revolution in monitoring and evaluation

Around the world, governments are increasingly adopting digital monitoring and evaluation platforms to track public investments in real time. These systems combine several elements:

· project databases

· geospatial mapping

· financial monitoring tools

· citizen feedback mechanisms

· performance dashboards for decision-makers.

Countries such as Estonia, South Korea, Rwanda, and Chile have integrated such systems into national governance structures. In these systems, ministers and senior officials can see instantly:

· which projects are progressing

· which projects are delayed

· how funds are being spent

· whether outputs and outcomes are being achieved.

More importantly, such platforms enable early intervention. Problems can be identified before they become crises. For Sri Lanka, which must now manage scarce fiscal resources with extreme care, such tools are no longer optional luxuries.

They are necessities.

The cost of not knowing

The absence of integrated data systems carries real economic consequences. Public investment decisions affect everything from roads and irrigation schemes to hospitals and schools. When these investments fail or underperform, the cost is not merely financial. It affects the daily lives of citizens.

A hospital without doctors. An irrigation scheme without water. A school building without teachers.

These are not simply implementation failures; they are information failures.

Without reliable monitoring systems, governments often learn about problems too late. By the time corrective action is taken, budgets have been spent and opportunities lost.

The NEPIF recognises precisely this challenge. It emphasises that evaluation should be an integral part of the entire development cycle—from project design to implementation and feedback for future planning.

But such evaluation cannot occur without reliable data systems.

Building an evaluation culture

Another important goal of the National Evaluation Policy is to create a culture of evaluation within the public sector. This requires a shift in mindset. Evaluation should not be seen as a fault-finding exercise. Instead, it should function as a learning mechanism that helps improve policy design and implementation.

The NEPIF stresses that evaluation findings should inform planning, budgeting, and future project selection. However, without systematic information systems, evaluation results often remain scattered across reports that few decision-makers read. Digital platforms can transform this situation by making information visible, accessible, and actionable. They turn data into knowledge. And knowledge into better decisions.

What a national digital system could look like

Sri Lanka does not need to start from scratch. The institutional building blocks already exist:

· the Department of Project Management and Monitoring (DPPM)

· the National Evaluation Policy

· the National Evaluation Policy Implementation Framework

· various sector-specific monitoring systems across ministries.

What is missing is integration.

A national digital monitoring and evaluation platform could include:

1. A centralised project database:

All government development projects recorded with budgets, timelines, outputs, and implementing agencies.

2. Real-time progress dashboards:

Accessible to the President, Cabinet, ministry secretaries, and provincial administrators.

3. Geographic mapping:

Showing where projects are located and how they benefit communities.

4. Automated reporting:

Reducing paperwork and enabling faster decision-making.

5. Citizen transparency portals:

Allowing the public to see how public funds are used.

Such a system would dramatically strengthen transparency, accountability, and efficiency.

The opportunity before Sri Lanka

Sri Lanka today has a rare opportunity. Economic crises often force governments to rethink outdated systems. The country cannot afford inefficient public investments any longer. Every rupee spent must produce measurable results. The National Evaluation Policy and its implementation framework already provide the intellectual foundation for this transformation. What remains is political commitment. A bold decision to build the digital infrastructure of evidence-based governance.

A call to action

The President’s concern about the lack of reliable data in government is both accurate and urgent. But the solution does not require new policies. The policies already exist. What Sri Lanka needs now is implementation. A national digital monitoring and evaluation system would give policymakers something they currently lack: a clear, real-time picture of the country’s development efforts. Such a system would empower leaders to identify problems early, allocate resources wisely, save billions of rupees from wasting and ensure that development projects truly benefit citizens.

In short, it would give Sri Lanka what every modern state needs: a digital nervous system connecting policy, data, and decision-making. The question is no longer whether the country needs such a system.

The question is simply this: how soon Sri Lanka is willing to build it.

by Tilak W. Karunaratne

Continue Reading

Opinion

Tribute to a distinguished BOI leader

Published

3 days ago

on

2026/03/29

By

Mr. Tuli Cooray, former Deputy Director General of the Board of Investment of Sri Lanka (BOI) and former Secretary General of the Joint Apparel Association Forum (JAAF), passed away three months ago, leaving a distinguished legacy of public service and dedication to national economic development.

An alumnus of the University of Colombo, Mr. Cooray graduated with a Special Degree in Economics. He began his career as a Planning Officer at the Ministry of Plan Implementation and later served as an Assistant Director in the Ministry of Finance (Planning Division).

He subsequently joined the Greater Colombo Economic Commission (GCEC), where he rose from Manager to Senior Manager and later Director. During this period, he also served at the Treasury as an Assistant Director. With the transformation of the GCEC into the BOI, he was appointed Executive Director of the Investment Department and later elevated to the position of Deputy Director General.

In recognition of his vast experience and expertise, he was appointed Director General of the Budget Implementation and Policy Coordination Division at the Ministry of Finance and Planning. Following his retirement from government service, he continued to contribute to the national economy through his work with JAAF.

Mr. Cooray was widely respected as a seasoned professional with exceptional expertise in attracting foreign direct investment (FDI) and facilitating investor relations. His commitment, leadership, and humane qualities earned him the admiration and affection of colleagues across institutions.

He was also one of the pioneers of the BOI Past Officers’ Association, and his passing is deeply felt by its members. His demise has created a void that is difficult to fill, particularly within the BOI, where his contributions remain invaluable.

Mr. Cooray will be remembered not only for his professional excellence but also for his integrity, humility, and the lasting impact he made on those who had the privilege of working with him.

The BOI Past Officers’ Association

jagathcds@gmail.com

Continue Reading

Trending