Connect with us

Features

Of Turbans, Ties and Statesmen: Inaugural Session of the State Council of Ceylon and the election of its first Speaker

Published

on

Sir Francis and Lady Molamure being welcomed by the crowds after being elected speaker

When the Donoughmore constitution was put into effect, one of the key changes that happened in Ceylon (as Sri Lanka was known then), was the abolition of the Legislative Council and the formation of the State Council. Among its most groundbreaking reforms was the introduction of universal suffrage—the right for every man and woman over the age of 21 to vote, regardless of class, caste, race or gender. Ceylon thus became the first country in Asia to adopt such a democratic principle, well ahead of its regional neighbours.

Under the Donoughmore Constitution, 50 members representing various constituencies of the country were elected to the State Council as well as 8 others were nominated and appointed by the Governor. Despite the obvious advantages of voting the State Council had, the candidates who prepared themselves for elections ran as mere individuals rather than as members of a political party.

Background

At that time, there were hardly any political parties in Ceylon. However, most of the candidates for the election were members of the Ceylon National Congress, the largest political organization in the country. Ironically, in the absence of a party system, there rose an awkward spectacle when fellow members of the CNC fought against each other for the same seat. The elections themselves were held across a few days in June 1931.

Four of the five constituencies in the North boycotted the election in opposition to the lack of communal representation under the Donoughmore Constitution. Even in this inaugural election of Ceylon, there was intimidation of voters and some violence on election day. Nevertheless, 46 out of 50 representatives were elected, marking a landmark achievement in Ceylon. Apart from these members and the nominated members, three others, known as the Officers of State, were appointed by the Governor were also deemed members of the State Council.

These three were the Chief Secretary, Legal Secretary (Attorney General), and Financial Secretary (Treasurer). These officers, though not having the legal power to vote in session, had many powers vested to them. Essentially, the State Council was a semi-parliamentary system, with the obvious lacking an Opposition. It was hybrid model of self-governance, blending colonial oversight with elected representation—an experimental step toward full independence. For the first time in the country’s legislature, the position of Speaker was introduced. The Speaker presides over Council sessions, maintains order, ensures fair debate, enforces rules, remains impartial, manages administrative functions, and represents the State Council in official and ceremonial capacities.

For the sessions of the State Council, a grand building was being constructed by the Public Works Department. By the time, the elections were completed, the building was also ready to host the first session of the State Council. Unlike in the Legislative Council, the State Council, by the new Constitution, required the appointment of a Speaker, Deputy Speaker and Deputy Chaiman of Committees. All these three positions were to be filled by 3 of the either elected or nominated State Councillors.

Two groups of State Councillors Left image: European Councillors and a Kandyan Councillor Right Image: S. A. Wickremasinghe, S.W.R.D. Bandaranaike, George E. de Silva, A. Ratnayake, P.B. Nugawela Dissawe

Inaugural Session of the State Council

The inaugural session of the newly constituted legislative body unfolded with ceremonial grandeur and a curious blend of anticipation and solemnity. An interested crowd of onlookers lined the short wall which separated Lotus Road from the Council premises and watched the members stepping out of their conveyances. Scattered throughout the Chamber were several distinguished figures, including almost all the newly elected and appointed State Councillors. The only exception was Mr. G. C. S. Corea (later Sir Claude Corea) whose commanding popularity in Chilaw had earned him the largest majority. He was notably absent, having been admitted to a private hospital in Colombo due to a severe bout of influenza.

The Ceylon Daily News (July 8, 1931) made a candid report on the onlookers of the first session: “In the galleries of the Council the fair sex was well represented, and the ladies critically studied the members’ features and clothes”. The Times of Ceylon (July 7, 1931) made an even more interesting remark: “When the assembly bell rang there was hardly a seat vacant in the house. In the four galleries wives, daughters and friends of members were talking and looking down into the mon. below, to catch the eye of this or that member, and to give an embarrassed little wave in reply to a smile. The Ceylon Daily News reporter continued as follows:

“Mr. Jayathilaka (Sir Baron), in a very sober suit of clothes and a wing collar, was an early arrival in the Council Chamber and was soon followed by Mr. Bandaranaike in national dress. His sock suspenders and spectacles alone betrayed a foreign origin. A thin cane finished in Kandyan lacquer work completed the outfit. From a corner of the Chamber Meedeniya Adigar smiled with tolerance as he contemplated Mr. Bandaranaike. Nugawela Dissawe, in the full regalia of the Kandyan dress, brocaded collar and four cornered hat, came in the company of Mr. Abeyagoonasekera.

Mr. Abeyagoonasekera wore a navy-blue suit, mauve orchid and shiny locks over his neck in unconscious imitation of a Victorian statesman. If, like Samson, Mr. Abeyagoonasekera decides to crop his hair short, he would be a less picturesque figure.

Next on the scene were the two Labour members, Messrs. Goonesinha and Dassenaike in flaming red ties, and Mr. Dassenaike also wearing a red button on the lapel of his coat… Mr. Newnham could not but have helped noticing the only morning coat in the Chamber, elegantly encasing the courtly figure of Mr. Obeyesekere. Sartorially, uncle and nephew are Poles apart, and they are both whole-hoggers. The nephew of course, is the latest recruit to national dress… the turbans of the two elected Indian members were seen on the horizon. Mr. Peri Sunderam’s has a streak of gold on it, and he also wears a sash over a long white tunic court. Mr. Vyathialingam on the other hand, crowns a torso in European clothes with a snow-white turban.”

Francis Molamure giving his first speech in the State Council

The first task of the State Council was to elect the Speaker.

The Election of the Speaker

The arrival of the Officers of State—Sir Bernard Bourdillon (Chief Secretary), Sir Wilfrid Woods (Financial Secretary), and Mr. E. St. J. Jackson (Legal Secretary)—signalled the formal commencement of business. These senior officials took their seats on the Speaker’s left, while three Tamil members assumed the front-centre benches once reserved for the executive leaders of the former Council. The other members who clad in the national dress were Robert de Zoysa, C. W. W. Kannangara and Dr. Saravanamuttu.

As the Assembly bell struck 10 a.m., the Clerk of the House stepped in to formally announce the Governor’s assent to the day’s first and most consequential order of business: the election of the Speaker. W. A. de Silva proposed A. F. Molamure, seconded by W. T. B. Karaliadde. In response, Sir Thomas Villiers—builder of Adisham Bungalow and author of Mercantile Lore—nominated Sir Stewart Schneider, with Macan Markar as seconder.

The press had already splashed the news across their front pages, complete with the names and credentials of the two contenders vying for the Speaker’s chair—even before their formal nominations. Molamure, a Kandyan Sinhalese congressman, commanded the support of all 17 members of the Ceylon National Congress. Schneider, a Dutch Burgher, was the preferred candidate of the European bloc. On July 6, a pivotal meeting at the Bristol Hotel, convened by Liberal League members under E. W. Perera and Kandyan delegates, attempted a compromise to avoid a contest—but neither candidate relented. After that, the result seemed inevitable.

Sir Francis Molamure

Candidates, in Profile

Alexander Francis Molamure (1885–1951) was a striking personality. An alumnus of S. Thomas’ College, then at Mutwal, he captained the school’s cricket 1st XI in 1903. Called to the Bar, he practiced in Kegalle, occasionally serving as Police Magistrate and District Judge. His rise in politics was swift—first elected to the Legislative Council for Kegalle, and in 1931 returned unopposed from Dedigama to the State Council. The Times of Ceylon hailed him for his eloquence and mastery of parliamentary procedure, while Ceylon Causerie (1931, No. 4) described him as “a fluent and polished speaker… whose fairness and judicial temperament made him ideally suited to serve as the State Council’s first Speaker.”

Off the floor, Molamure was a celebrated cricketer. He represented both the Nondescripts and Sinhalese Sports Club, distinguishing himself in fielding and batting. He also played in the annual Ceylonese vs. Europeans match and was part of the team that faced M. A. Noble’s and P. Mac Allister’s Australians in 1909. A noted elephant hunter, he took part in several kraals. His charisma was legend—he was said to charm many with his quick wit. At a Governor’s function, he famously quipped to Lady Stubbs, “May I light my cigarette with the light in the eye of my Lady?”—a remark that earned him a lifetime ban from all gubernatorial events by a thoroughly displeased Sir Reginald Stubbs.

Sir Stewart Schneider (1864–1938) was a prominent Ceylonese legal luminary and public figure. He was admitted to the local Bar as an Advocate in 1898 and established a successful legal practice, while also serving as a lecturer at the Ceylon Law College. In 1917, he briefly held office as the 7th Solicitor General of Ceylon, and in 1921, served in acting Puisne Justice of the Supreme Court. For his service, he was knighted in 1928. Beyond his legal career, Schneider was actively involved in civic and religious life: he was a member of the Foreign and British Bible Society and a former President of the YMCA. A grandson of Gualterus Schneider, Ceylon’s first Surveyor-General, he hailed from a family with longstanding roots in Jaffna dating back to the Dutch colonial era.

Strikingly, both Molamure and Schneider were lawyers, affluent, and old boys of S. Thomas’ College—with cricketing legacies. Before Schneider rose to legal prominence, he had served as a teacher and cricket master at the College for 13 years—ironically mentoring young Molamure, the very man now contesting him for Speaker.

With nominations complete, the chamber moved to the secret ballot. The atmosphere, tense and hushed, evoked a Papal conclave. The secret ballot papers were distributed and duly filled in. A peon then carried around the ballot box—an unnecessarily large and cumbersome vessel for holding scarcely sixty slips of paper. Once the final vote was cast, the box was brought to the Clerk of the House, who summoned the Chief Secretary and the Legal Secretary to serve as scrutineers. With focused solemnity, Sir Bernard Bourdillon drew the slips one by one from the box. Votes cast for Sir Stewart Schneider were placed beneath a paperweight, while those for Mr. A. F. Molamure were handed to Mr. Jackson.

Every eye in the chamber was fixed upon the unfolding count.
“One, two—for Mr. Molamure.”
“One—for Sir Stewart.”
“Three, four, five—for Mr. Molamure.”
“Two, three—for Sir Stewart.”

Members and pressmen alike silently tallied the result, some visibly anxious, others quietly backing their favourites. By the time the Clerk officially announced the outcome, the result was already apparent:

A. F. Molamure – 35

Sir Stewart Schneider – 18

At last, the verdict was clear—A. F. Molamure secured 35 votes to Sir Stewart Schneider’s 18. Cheers echoed through the chamber as Members rose to extend their congratulations even before Schneider’s votes were announced. The House then adjourned until 2.30 p.m., having ceremonially ushered in a new chapter in the island’s legislative history.

Aftermath

Following his election, the newly appointed Speaker of the State Council, Hon. A. F. Molamure, was formally received at Queen’s House by Sir Graeme Thompson, the Governor. Accompanied by his proposer, W. A. de Silva, and seconder, W. T. B. Karaliadde, the Speaker was escorted from the Council Chamber by the Governor’s Private Secretary, Mr. H. S. M. Hoare.

At Queen’s House, the Governor warmly welcomed the Speaker and his party, proposing a toast to the Speaker’s health. In a message conveyed to the Council, His Excellency expressed his full approval, on behalf of His Majesty the King, of Mr. Molamure’s appointment. Upon returning, the Speaker took his oath of office and administered the oath to the other members. The Council then adjourned until 10 a.m. the following day.

Molamure was a controversial man, who was involved in alleged financial scandals and elephant kraals, the former prompting him to resign from his post as Speaker as well as his seat in 1934. However, as a Speaker and politician, he was par excellence. He re-entered State Council in 1943 through a by-election and was elected to the 1st Parliament of Ceylon in 1947 as was elected Speaker again, this time in Parliament. Thus, he had the unique record of being the first Speaker of both the State Council and Parliament of Ceylon.

Conclusion

The inaugural session of the State Council was a momentous chapter in Ceylon’s democratic evolution—an occasion steeped in ceremony, symbolism, and spirited contest. Through the election of A. F. Molamure as its first Speaker, the Council not only embraced a new constitutional framework but also reflected the island’s cultural diversity and political maturity. Molamure’s blend of oratory, charisma, and parliamentary acumen positioned him as a defining figure of the era.

Despite controversies that would later shadow his career, his ascent marked the beginning of a bold experiment in self-governance—one that laid the foundation for modern parliamentary democracy in Sri Lanka. Pieter Keneuman who served as an MP for 30 years (1947-1977) wrote one of the best tributes on Molamure as follows: “… Francis Molamure was the most outstanding of them all (Speakers). He was seldom at a loss in retaining the delicate balance between allowing free debate and maintaining order and decorum… Francis Molamure really loved the House, and it was typical of the man that, even when he collapsed in the Chair of a heart attack and was being carried out to his death bed, he tried his best – however weakly – to give the House his final bow of farewell.” (Souvenir of the Opening of the New Parliament, Daily News April 29, 1982)

By Avishka Mario Senewiratne,
Editor, The Ceylon Journal ✍️



Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

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

Features

The Easter investigation must not become ethno-religious politics

Published

on

Zahran and other bombers

Representatives of almost all the main opposition parties were in attendance at the recent book launch by Pivithuru Hela Urumaya leader Udaya Gammanpila. The book written by the PHU leader was his analysis of the Easter bombing of April 2019 that led to the mass killing of 279 persons, caused injuries to more than 500 others and caused panic and shock in the entire country. The Easter bombing was inexplicable for a number of reasons. First, it was perpetrated by suicide bombers who were Sri Lankan Muslims, a community not known for this practice. They targeted Christian churches in particular, which led to the largest number of casualties. The bombing of Sri Lankan Christian churches by Sri Lankan Muslims was also inexplicable in a country that had no history of any serious violence between the two religions.

There were two further inexplicable features of the bombing. The six suicide bombings took place almost simultaneously in different parts of the country. The logistical complexity of this operation exceeded any previously seen in Sri Lanka. Even during the three decade long civil war that pitted the Sri Lankan military against the LTTE, which had earned international notoriety for suicide attacks, Sri Lanka had rarely witnessed such a synchronised operation. The country’s former Attorney General, Dappula de Livera, who investigated the bombing at the time it took place, later stated, upon retirement, that there was a “grand conspiracy” behind the bombings. That phrase has remained central to public debate because it suggested that the visible perpetrators may not have been the only planners behind the attack.

The other inexplicable factor was that intelligence services based in India repeatedly warned their Sri Lankan counterparts that the bombings would take place and even gave specific targets. Later investigations confirmed that warnings were transmitted days before the attacks and repeated again shortly before the explosions, yet they were not acted upon. It was these several inexplicable factors that gave rise to the surmise of a mastermind behind the students and religious fanatics led by the extremist preacher Zahran Hashim from the east of the country, who also blew himself up in the attacks. Even at the time of the bombing there was doubt that such a complex and synchronised operation could have been planned and executed by the motley band who comprised the suicide bombers.

Determined Attempt

The book by PHU leader Gammanpila is a determined attempt to make explicable the inexplicable by marshalling logic and evidence that this complex and synchronised operation was planned and executed by Zahran himself. This is a possible line of argumentation in a democratic society. Competing interpretations of public tragedies are part of political discourse. However, the timing of the intervention makes it politically more significant. The launch of the PHU leader’s book comes at a critical time when the protracted investigation into the Easter bombing appears to be moving forward under the present government.

The performance of the three previous governments at investigating the bombing was desultory at best. The Supreme Court held former President Maithripala Sirisena and several senior officials responsible for failing to act on prior intelligence and ordered compensation to victims. This judicial finding gave legal recognition to what victims had long maintained, that there was a grave dereliction of duty at the highest levels of the state. In recent weeks the investigation has taken a dramatic turn with the arrest and court production of former State Intelligence Service chief Suresh Sallay on allegations linked directly to the attacks. Whether these allegations are ultimately proven or disproven, they indicate that the present phase of the investigation is moving beyond negligence into possible complicity.

This is why the present moment requires political sobriety. There is a danger that the line of political division regarding the investigation into the Easter bombing can take on an ethnic complexion. The insistence that the suicide bombers alone were the planners and executors of the dastardly crime makes the focus invariably one of Muslim extremism, as the suicide bombers were all Muslims. This may unintentionally narrow public attention away from the unanswered questions regarding intelligence failures, possible political manipulation, and the allegations of a broader conspiracy that remain under active investigation. The minority political parties representing ethnic and religious minorities appear to have realised this danger. Their absence from the book launch was politically significant. It suggests an unwillingness to be drawn into a narrative that could once again stigmatise an entire community for the crimes of a handful of extremists and their possible handlers.

Another Tragedy

It would be another tragedy comparable in political consequence to the havoc wreaked by the Easter bombing if moderate mainstream political parties, such as the SJB to which the Leader of the Opposition belongs, were to subscribe to positions merely to score political points against the present government. They need to guard against the promotion of anti-minority sentiment and the fuelling of majority prejudice against ethnic and religious minorities. Indeed, opposition leader Sajith Premadasa in his Easter message said that justice for the victims of the 2019 Sri Lanka Easter Sunday attacks remains a fundamental responsibility of the state and noted that seven years on, both past and present governments have failed to deliver accountability. He added that building a society grounded in trust and peace, uniting all ethnicities, religions and communities, is vital to ensure such tragedies do not occur again.

Sri Lanka’s post war history offers too many examples of how unresolved security crises become vehicles for majoritarian mobilisation. The Easter tragedy itself was followed by waves of anti-Muslim suspicion and violence in some parts of the country. Responsible political leadership should seek to prevent any return to that atmosphere. There are many other legitimate issues on which the moderate and mainstream opposition parties can take the government to task. These include the lack of decisive action against government members accused of corruption, the passing of the entire burden of rising fuel prices on consumers instead of the government sharing the burden, and the failure to hold provincial council elections within the promised timeframe. These are issues that touch the daily lives of citizens and the health of democratic governance. They offer the opposition ample ground on which to build credibility as a government in waiting.

The search for truth and justice over the Easter bombing needs to continue until all those responsible are identified, whether they were direct perpetrators, negligent officials, or political actors who may have exploited the tragedy. This is what the victim families want and the country needs. But this search must not be turned into a partisan and religiously divisive matter such as by claiming that there are more potential suicide bombers lurking in the country who had been followers of Zaharan. If it is, Sri Lanka risks replacing one national tragedy with another. coming together to discredit the ongoing investigations into the Easter bombing of 2019 is an unacceptable use of ethno-religious nationalism to politically challenge the government. The opposition needs to find legitimate issues on which to challenge the government if they are to gain the respect and support of the general public and not their opprobrium.

by Jehan Perera

Continue Reading

Features

China’s new duty-free regime for Africa: Implications for Global Trade and Sri Lanka

Published

on

Image courtesy The Global Times

The new duty-free regime for Africa, announced by Chinese President Xi Jinping in February, is the most generous unilateral nonreciprocal trade concession offered by any country to developing countries since the beginning of the modern rule based international trading system.

Yet, it is a clear violation of the cornerstone of the multilateral trade law, the Most-Favoured-Nation (MFN) principle.

Hence, its implications on developing countries, without duty-free access to China, will be extremely negative. Sri Lanka is one of the few developing countries without duty-free access to China.

On 14 February, 2026, Chinese President Xi Jinping announced that China will grant zero-tariff treatment to 53 African nations, effective 01 May, 2026. Under this new unilateral policy initiative, China would eliminate all import tariffs on all goods imported from all the countries in Africa, except Eswatini. China already enforces a zero-tariff policy for 33 Least Developed Countries (LDCs) in Africa. Now this policy would be extended to non LDCs as well. This policy initiative clearly aims at reducing the continuously expanding trade deficit between China and Africa. In 2024, China’s trade surplus against Africa was recorded at US $ 61 billion.

This trade initiative, a precious gift amidst ongoing global trade tensions, is the most generous unilateral nonreciprocal trade concession given by any country to developing countries, since the beginning of the modern rule based international trading system.

Though this landmark announcement has far-reaching implications on global trade, as much as President Trump’s “Liberation Day” tariffs, it was almost overlooked by the global media.

Implications for Global Trade

This Chinese policy initiative, though very generous, is a clear violation of the Most-Favoured-Nation (MFN) principle and the “Enabling Clause” of the International Trade Law. The MFN principle is the cornerstone of the multilateral trading system under the World Trade Organisation (WTO) and is enshrined in Article I of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT). It mandates that any trade advantage, privilege, or immunity granted by a WTO member to any country must be extended immediately and unconditionally to all other WTO members. Though, the GATT “Enabling Clause” allows developed nations to offer non-reciprocal preferential treatment (lower tariffs) to developing countries without extending them to all WTO members, this has to be done in a non-discriminatory manner. By extending tariff concessions only to developing countries in Africa, China has also breached this requirement.

This deliberate violation of the MFN principle by China occurs less than 12 months after the announcement of “Liberation Day” tariffs by President Trump, which breached Article I (MFN) and Article II (bound rates) of the GATT. However, it is important to underline that the objectives of the actions by the two Presidents are poles apart; the US objective was to limit imports from all its trading partners, and China’s objective is to increase imports from African countries.

Though the importance of the MFN principle of the WTO law had eroded over the years due to the proliferation of preferential trade agreements and unilateral preferential arrangements, the WTO members almost always obtained WTO waivers, whenever they breached the MFN principle. Now the leaders of the main trading powers have decided to violate the core principles of the multilateral trading system so brazenly, the impact of their decisions on the international trading system will be irrevocable.

Implications for Sri Lanka

China’s unilateral decision to provide zero-tariff treatment to African countries will have a strong adverse impact on Sri Lanka. Currently, all Asian countries, other than India and Sri Lanka, have duty-free access, for most of their exports, into the Chinese market through bilateral or regional trade agreements, or the LDC preferences. Though Sri Lanka, India and China are members of the Asia Pacific Trade Agreement (APTA), preferential margins extended by China under APTA to India and Sri Lanka are limited.

The value of China’s imports from Sri Lanka had declined from US$ 650 million in 2021 to US$ 433 million by 2025. However, China’s exports to Sri Lanka increased significantly during the period, from US$ 5,252 million to US$ 5,753 by 2025. This has resulted in a trade deficit of US$ 5,320 million. Sri Lanka’s exports to China may decline further from next month when African nations with duty-free access start to expand their market share.

Let me illustrate the challenges Sri Lanka will face in the Chinese market with one example. Tea (HS0902) is Sri Lanka’s third largest export to China, after garments and gems. Sri Lanka is the largest exporter of tea to China, followed by India, Kenya and Viet Nam. During the last five years the value of China’s imports of tea from Sri Lanka had declined significantly, from US$76 million in 2021 to US$ 57 million by 2025. Meanwhile, imports from our main competitors had increased substantially. Most importantly, imports from Kenya increased from US$ 7.9 million in 2021 to US$ 15 million in 2025. For tea, the existing tariff in China for Sri Lanka is 7.5% and for Kenya is 15%. From next month the tariff for Kenya will be reduced to 0%. What will be its impact on Sri Lanka exports? That was perhaps explained by a former Ambassador to Africa, when he urged Sri Lankan exporters to “leverage duty free access from Kenya” to expand their exports to China!

(The writer is a retired public servant and a former Chairman of WTO Committee on Trade and Development. He can be reached at senadhiragomi@gmail.com)

by Gomi Senadhira

Continue Reading

Features

Daughter in the spotlight …

Published

on

Jeevarani Kurukulasuriya was a famous actress and her name still rings a bell with many. And now in the spotlight is her daughter Senani Wijesena – not as an actress but as a singer – and she has been singing, since the age of five!

The plus factor is that Senani, now based in Australia, is also a songwriter, plays keyboards and piano, dancer, and has filmed and edited some of her own music videos.

Says Senani: “I write the lyrics, melody and music and work with professional musicians who do the needful on my creations.”

Her latest album, ‘Music of the Mirror’, is made up of 16 songs, and her first Sinhala song, called ‘Nidahase’, is scheduled for release this month (April) in Colombo, along with a music video.

‘Nidahase’,

says Senani, is a song about Freedom … of life, movement, love and spirit. Freedom to be your authentic self, express yourself freely and Freedom from any restrictions.

In fact, ‘Nidahase’ is the Sinhala translated version of her English song ‘Free’ which made Senani a celebrity as the song was nominated for a Hollywood Music in Media Award in the RnB /Soul category and reached the Top 20 on the UK Music weekly dance charts, as well as No. 1 on the Yes Home grown Top 15, on Yes FM, for six weeks straight.

Senani went on to say that ‘Nidahase’ has been remixed to include a Sri Lankan touch, using Kandyan drums and the Thammattama drum, with extra music production by local music producer Dilshan L. Silva, and Australia-based Emmy Award winning Producer and Engineer Sean Carey … with Senani also in the scene.

The song was written (lyrics and melody) and produced by Senani and it features Australian musicians, while the music video was produced by Sri Lanka’s Sandesh Bandara and filmed in Sri Lanka.

First Sinhala song scheduled for release this month … in Colombo

Senani’s music is mostly Soul, Funk and RNB – also Fusion, using ethnic sounds such as the tabla, sitar, and sarod – as well as Jazz influenced.

“I also have Alternative Music songs with a rock edge, such as ‘New Day’, and upcoming releases ‘Fly High’ and ‘Whisper’“, says Senani, adding that she has also recorded in other languages, such as Hindi and Spanish.

“As much of my fan base are Sri Lankans, who have asked me to release a song in the Sinhala language, I decided to create and release ‘Nidahase’ and I plan to release other original Sinhala songs in the future.

Senani has a band in Australia and has appeared at festivals in Australia, on radio and TV in Australia, and Sri Lanka.

She trained as a vocalist, through Sydney-based Singing Schools, as well as private tuition, and she has 5th Grade piano music qualifications.

And this makes interesting reading:

“I graduated from the University of Newcastle in Australia with a Bachelor of Medicine and I work part time as a doctor (GP) and an Integrative Medicine practitioner, with a focus on nutrition, and spend the rest of the time dedicated to my music career.”

Senani hails from an illustrious family. In addition to her mum, Jeevarani Kurukulasuriya, who made over 40 films, including starring in the first colour movie ‘Ranmuthu Duwa’, her dad is Dr Lanka Wijesena (retired GP) and she has two sisters – all musical; one is a doctor, while the other is a dietitian/ psychotherapist.

Continue Reading

Trending