Connect with us

Features

Peaceful and Unlawful Assembly

Published

on

by Lalin Fernando

This is a response to the media, the BASL and foreigners who never give up preaching on how ‘peaceful protesters’ were attacked ‘brutally’ by the Security Forces, especially at Galle Face Green on July. 22. With hundreds of thousands of protesters (Sunday Times Aug . 7) including non-nationals living on charity,, who were the peaceful protesters?

There is a right to peaceful assembly but not to unlawful assembly..Under which law can protesters ‘peacefully’ block access to government buildings or interfere with other purposes the building was designed for? Can they obstruct vehicles or pedestrian traffic or cause a threat to public peace?.Did they not?
Interestingly in the UK the punishment for a public nuisance offence is life imprisonment under laws made eons ago. .So which law, ancient or modern, allowed protesters to occupy the Presidential Secretariat in SL? Was it the same law that allowed protesters to overrun the President’s official residence, the prime minister’s office, set fire to the prime minister’s home, murder persons on May 9 and incinerate 76- 91 homes of MPs etc? Were the people who did so ‘peaceful’, never mind the protests?

An unlawful or any assembly of five or more persons likely to cause a disturbance of the public peace may be ordered to disperse by a magistrate or police officer not below Inspector rank and it will be the duty of the of the members of such assembly to disperse (Code of Criminal Procedure Act (No 15 of 1979 Sect 95).Did the protesters do so? Peacefully or otherwise?

Unlawful assembly is one in which those involved behave in a violent, boisterous, disruptive or tumultuous manner. Who else except Ambassador Chung and the media remembers all these protesters being ‘peaceful’? The leaders and associated ruffians were blood thirsty..

Unlawful assemblies can be dispersed with the use military force by a commissioned officer of any of the three Forces acting alone in the absence of a magistrate or Inspector level police officer (Sect 96).The military has not used military force so far. Possibly because Ms. Chung thinks ‘the time is not right just now’. Will she signal the right time? Heaven help SL when she does, knowing how well she knows what ‘force’ is including ‘shredding’.

Public order – a definition
It is an offence to use threatening or abusive words or behaviour or disorderly behaviour or display in writing signs, a representation of which is threatening or abusive in the hearing or sight of a person that is likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress. Were we deaf and blind from April 22 that we did not see the behaviour of the mobs as ‘threatening’ or ‘abusive’ and in fact by some massive abberation thought they were actually ‘peaceful’?
Who decides which is which? The BASL,the media, Ms. Chung or the police? Why was a magistrate not asked to be present at barricades to decide? Did the sight of ‘ thousands upon thousands’ baying for blood prevent the legal system from functioning through fear and cowardice of those responsible for public security?
The same people who, did not hesitate to castigate, ridicule and insult the police soon after they took office? Who then weighed in profoundly to say the constitution was irrelevant and the government illegitimate helping to creating a state of anarchy? It actually became the popular thing to say so until an Emergency was declared and arrests were made.

Suddenly the Government that had been in a blue funk due to its guilt that made its promise of splendour and prosperity become one of nightmares and bankruptcy, had stood up.,following the example of the present President. Had the BASL taken the place of the judiciary to misdirect the country?
Yes, absolutely no force should be used against ‘peaceful’ protesters or a peaceful assembly in SL .However the time was not long past when mounted police in western capitals laid about with swords (Belgium, France?) to disperse unlawful or not, ‘assemblies’.The Jallianwalla Bagh Amritsar (India) massacre of peaceful protesters (it was a religious holiday) may be forgotten by some but not by Indians

Gen Dyer’s orders to the troops led to 1,200 killed and 1,500 wounded in 1919. Winston Churchill called it ‘intolerably monstrous”.In 2019 Britain ‘expressed regret’ but did not apologise to India..Lessons were not fully learned even 50 years on. .The British in Kenya were intolerable again.The Ohio State National Guard on 4 May 1970 shot and killed 4 Kent University undergrads and wounded nine with 69 rounds being fired by 28 Guardsmen in 13 secs when confronting an unarmed peaceful protests against US involvement in Cambodia.

Some of the dead were only observing the protests from 300 yards.Four million undergrads from universities all over the USA walked out in sympathy.. In 1974 the USA with 7,000 troops and press ganged support from six Caribbean countries invaded Grenada.Why? It had a leftist government supported by Cuba. It is 100 miles from Venezuela. Was this an anti left protest launched by the USA? It ended in a farce .

A mental asylum was bombed by the USAF. USA had 25 troops killed and 59 wounded.The inter force communications had not been tested. It ended with US Navy ships having to call back to their command HQ in USA to inform USAF pilots circling overhead in Grenada about opportunity targets. Grenada had 45 killed in action and 337 wounded inaction (not including Cubans)..

Grenada covers an area of 344 sq kms and had a population of 84,000 in 1993. The 7,000 US troops consisted of two Ranger battalions, the crack 82 Airborne Division and the Rapid Deployment Force! In 1919 the British declared martial law in Ceylon.They shot without judicial trial very many national leaders including William Pedris They panicked thinking it was an uprising against British rule. A Brit officer used to have his breakfast watching the executions. Is it not arrant arrogance and stupidity for the US or British envoys whose countries had enslaved Africans, taken native lands by force and attempted genocide of American Indians to preach to SL on how to deal with protesters?

The British action in dealing with ‘protesters’ in Wellawaya in the ‘Great Liberation war’ (1817-18) laid waste the fertile countryside and killed all males above 10 years of age.This was a catastrophy the effects of which were seen in the insurrection of 1971.The survivors swell the ranks of ‘protesters’ yet The SL Police style of operating by first establishing communications with the mobs is exemplary.Their monumental and enduring patience over the last four months is extraordinary.It has to be highly commended. However, except for the Colombo middle and upper middle class originals (generally) ,and the farmers, teachers, unionists etc were there not at Galle Face Green (GFG) peace hating protesters too? Have they been treated differently for being different?

Were they the followers of the terrorists of 1971?; who later together with the then President who had an entente with them, were responsible for 60,000 death in 13 months 1988/9? .Were they the new shock troops, well fed and generously looked after by the original ‘Aragalists with deep pockets, that attacked the police barriers almost daily in 2022 while the poor people were struggling to find food to feed their families among shortages of other bare essentials?

So what were they actually fighting for? (WHO says 6 million – nearly a quarter of the SL population, mainly children and women) are on the brink of starvation? At GFG who would have believed WHO? Food was in plenty and of all varieties, while drink flowed and dancers did the merry baila and other jigs. It looked so western fun, like a song/drug festival in the West whoever funded it.
The police always, repeat always, attempted at first to communicate with the ‘peaceful protesters’ and pacify them at every demo..They did not threaten.They ended up using water canon and firing tear gas when the barrier toppling thousands of ‘peaceniks’ breached their defences.Surely this last police response could not be correct if the protests were ‘peaceful’? Who did something wrong? The police or the ‘protesters’?

To say that only ‘some’ trouble makers have ‘infiltrated the current’ protesters’ as in one newspaper, is hypocrisy..Were the ‘some’ of those ‘peaceful’ thousands who with years of experience in terrorising especially freshers with savage ragging in all except the Northern and Eastern universities ,(they would not have dared) switched from site to site to challenge and overrun, outnumbered, neutered and emasculated police/military (POLMIL) that had their hands/batons/weapons tied?.When the Presidential Secretariat was taken back in July after illegal occupation, the numbers game was reversed. That took the obstinate ‘peaceful’ protesters completely by surprise.

The ‘some’ trouble makers knew the police would only use tear gas and water canon while the troops sadly acted like dummies. Few doubted that a state of near anarchy prevailed. It grew in intensity with every protest. The law was openly flouted (to the delight of many) by these ‘some’ trouble makers.Was it not their actions in 1988/89 that resulted in 60,000 deaths in 13 months? Does Ms Chung know?.

The killings were limited only to the Sinhalese while massive damage was done to govt. property, administrative machinery and national infrastructure. .The country was nearly shut down by the then ‘aragalists/terrorists’ distributing ‘chits’ and slaughtering anyone who disobeyed them even for keeping lights on in one’s home? Is this their third and final attempt?

However there are laws that protect the citizen’s body and his property and also public property.The police are there to see that these laws are enforced. Sadly they did little if nothing instead during these ‘peaceful’ protests due to poor leadership at national level including some of the top brass of the police.
Was this due to ignorance or fear and possibly due to Western interference and influence Or was it due to threats such as the visit to MOD by the western envoys? There was also the fear of a Geneva backlash.

Ironically it was the new elected by parliament President,hardly a Sando, (but much reviled by many of his former friends, sycophants and beneficiaries). who decided to invoke these laws, now called harsh.If these only knew the provisions of the US Patriot Act they would throw up.The new President during most of his over 40 years as a politician was the knight in shining western dress for the elite in Colombo, especially the middle aged women. Where are they now? Have they not done the SL thing? Desert and abandon when the going turns bad.

The former ex-military Prez disappeared. It may have been out of guilt for the horrible state of the nation under him or by being ill advised as usual..Did they all forget the Penal code? Who advised him on his course of action? Were they the same rotters of boastful academic (Viyathmaga) fame who are now deserting like rats?

The past president had a heroic choice when the final push came to overrun the near naked and ordered to be spastic, defenders of President’s 250 year old House (not ‘Palace’ as the western media likes to dub all non western leader’s houses) .Like General Gordon, vastly outnumbered , he could have faced the mobs alone. Gordon with his Egyptian and British troops near starvation after many months of encirclement, faced the Madhi of Sudan and his Dervish army at Khartoum.Gordon had often said that when God distributed fear he ran short of it when he came to Gordon.

Unfortunately for him the Dervish attackers had dodged God too.They were devilishly brave too They hacked off his head. Gota had probably not heard of Gordon who had a steamer on the Nile just behind his house (not Palace) to evacuate him.He refused. Ironically Gota had a SLN ship ready. He used it, fortunately.
It is now rumoured that Gota may come back to SL. Whenever he does, he may be compared by the fanciful SL media that likened him earlier to Hitler,(SL is a sucker for western imagery) to Napoleon coming back from Elba.Would the Western powers then contrive to send him to Guantanamo instead of St Helena even before a 100 days pass?

As for defending not only Presidents but all citizens Penal code Sec 25 para 89 clearly states that ‘nothing is an offence which is done in the exercise of private defence. Why then did the police not use force to defend the President’s life? Where does it say force cannot be used?. Self defence does not cease as long as the threat to life exists.

This important if not vital aspect of law is skillfully or cunningly not elaborated to the lay person by the countless BASL bulletins .The use of force causing even death is within the law in self defence. Six offences are specified.Who judges what is justifiable or proportionate? Is it the BASL, the media, western envoys ,or the individual (s) in danger?

The security forces (police) opened fire only at Rambukkana after a long, hot, whole day of protests that included stone throwing and attemped arson.The protesters hail from a long established JVP hotbed. Their activities included an abortive attempt at setting fire to the only petrol shed and a lone fuel tanker because there was no fuel!. If a person is killed or injured while the person is exercising his right of self defence he may still be arrested until the case is heard and extenuating circumstances if any are proved.This is not the law of the jungle or of asses .The police and others knew but were not convinced there was a level playing or fighting field. prevailing.

The ‘peaceful’ protesters destroyed 91 (MP Welgama in parliament in July 2022) houses of Govt MPs by arson on 9 May 22 and murdered nine(9) people including one MP whose naked body was dragged along the street .Did Mrs Chun see this? What would the BASL and media have stated if the law as given above was acted upon when the threat manifested itself? Would it be called an exhibition of brute force? Have they seen the very same activists displaying different slogans periodically attacking university students who disagree with them?

Para 90 states self defence covers ‘his own body or that of any other person against an offence affecting the human body.’….. and ‘property’. Any citizen, not only the police can act under that law .The police ordinance too provides legal cover.But the police it would appear were ordered to ignore the law.What was the IGP thinking and why?

Para 95 states the right to private defence ‘commences as soon as a reasonable apprehension of danger to the body arises from an attempt or threat and continues as long as apprehension of danger to the body continues’…So when does reasonable apprehension manifest itself and end? Is it after killing(s) and stripped bodies are dragged along streets or when a threat with paving stones, clubs and steel rods is apparent?

Para 96 covers mischief by fire or explosion … where ‘death or grievous hurt’ may result while para 99 covers Mobs.The same rights of defence applies.
Clearly the police are fully aware of all this as are the Forces when trained for duties in Aid of the Civil’ power .The principles followed are prevention,necessity, impartiality and minimum force..Impartiality is required when 2 mobs confront each other..Red shirts only cannot be the targets! Minimum force is the force applied immediately to stop danger to body or property and not after any bargaining as at the Presidential Secretariat in July 22..It normally starts after non lethal methods have failed. A single live round may be fired at a law breaker.If the danger continues 2 rounds may be fired.If the danger persists, heaven forbid but the aggressor may force the issue, a volley may be fired! The last has never happened in SL The worst example was at Amritsar during British rule in the late 1910s when machine guns were used under the orders of Gen Dyer Hundreds of Indians were killed.Dyer was killed in revenge much later in England.

The original protesters were organised, smartly dressed, well fed and wined, educated, witty, tech savvy They were the people who fashioned the ‘aragalaya’.No one else can claim to have done so . .They were the darlings of the media and an inspiration to the youth in particular. They were generous, helpful and kind to all who joined them. .They were not compromised and used for ulterior ends. People may recall their laudable efforts during the December 2004 tsunami and many candle light and other peaceful protests over the years.

Originally the cry was amusingly Go Gota Go which is a rallying cry at rugby.That was mistaken wit..This changed to ‘Gota Go Home’ even after he had been advised or forced to leave his home, and then ‘Ranil go home’ when Ranil wise cracked ‘I am at home’ .However those who confronted the police (and the military later) in many instances were dangerously violent.They were not representative of the original Aragalists.

The Mirihana protest, peaceful at first ,became violent and then certainly intimidating and threatening when a violent group infiltrated the original protesters, turned off the main road and onto the private road that led to the residence of the former President.Their intent was clearly unlawful and violent and could have included murder ,abduction and arson as subsequently happened with increasing frequency and boldness of the ‘protesters’ ..

What is the response of a house holder if a mob carrying poles, clubs and iron rods assembles by his perimeter wall, baying for his blood? Is he to wait until they scale his wall or should he act in self defence according to the law especially if it is at night? The former course appeared to be the response of, and temporary interpretation of the law by the police.It made the mobs lose fear of the law and its guardians and become reckless.

At the entrance to the Naval Dock Yard Trinco on 10 May 22, TV showed a young woman standing in front of a baying mob , surprisingly in a very mellifluous voice, singing out the refrain, ‘kapapang kapapang’ (cut cut ) and then ominously ‘kayli kayli (pieces pieces).A Sinhala Madame Defarge? The mob were not at a fish market looking to skin fish but were attempting to rush the gates of the Dock Yard, the premier base of the SL Navy and kill the former Prime Minister ..They knew it would have been a step too far had they challenged the Navy.Instead they taunted the Naval guards to entertain the easily cowed and cheap thrilled media instead. The mob attack to storm parliament did not appear to have a single peaceful intention. One JVP leader (not drunk and driving this time) did say they would surround parliament and not allow anyone who did not do what the JVP wanted done,to leave parliament. The stealing of 2 automatic rifles from badly battered troops showed that peace was furthest from their intentions..That was the turning point.The worm had turned. .Have the peaceful protesters now gone underground?Are they cutting off their beards and trimming their hair styles?Are they regrouping? Those 2 rifles must be found quickly. .

That woman in Trinco was not an exception but one of a kind of thousands of unemployable and unemployed rather elderly ‘students’ that launched attacks all over Colombo Fort and surrounding areas, transporting themselves almost magically over long distances while the rest queued 2-4 days for fuel.Who cared whether or how the people got petrol or food or cooking gas?

Why they are/ were called ‘peaceful protesters’ stuns the imagination .They are the same people who switched from one to another barricade encounter.Their leaders remained in the rear, as in 1988/9 when they attempted genocide of the Sinhalese .They have blood on their hands and their thinking is bloody but they masquerade as ‘peaceful’ protesters especially when western media is around. Local media laps them up in mortal fear 24 x 7.So did a western envoy, looking for a political stooge.There are many in SL, if dollars flow.

Were they not screaming obscenities and murderous threats while armed with iron bars and clubs well hidden? Did they at GFG not use force on the leader of the Opposition (9 May 22 – he subsequently dodged contesting the Presidency?!) and gave a former minister, who had produced 2 IRCs at a TV interview in 2019, a taste of the same on 9 July ?

RW correctly asked the US envoy,who declared her admiration if not undying affection for the JVP, whether force was not used by US security officials on the Trump supporters who stormed the Capitol building .He also asked where else in the world would attacks on a President’s office take place without a law enforcement response..He should have also asked what level of force was used on Sadr city protesters in Iraq who were confined in Abu Graib prison and what type of protest the villagers of Mai Lai were doing when Capt Calley (who was never incarcerated as a consequence) and his men murdered and raped the entire village.They killed all the dogs and cats too. South Korean troops were allied to the US forces then to fight the Vietnamese. Or he might have asked why tanks, helicopters and 2 battalions of Air Mobile troops were used to murder hundreds and wound thousands in Gwanju South Korea in 1980. Chung added a caveat.,She said the time was not right just now for strong arm tactics.So when will that correct time be and who will say so ? Is she trying to outdo Mr.Dixit?

Unsurprisingly no regional country criticized SL Thank you brothers and sisters.· The SL Police have acted with sufficient if not overwhelming restraint quoting law and doing their best to solve the continuing impasse, peacefully.They, after negotiating and pleading with the recalcitrant ‘protesters’ for 3 days, used only minimum if any force to execute a written order of the Fort magistrate to vacate the Presidential office which they had trespassed .That was their duty. Brutal force by police is most evident not in SL but where ‘Black Lives matter’ as the whole world knows.

Who set fire and destroyed RW’s house together with those of his brothers and his library and the dogs? Why were RWs brothers’ houses termed ‘neighbours’ houses by the media? Was the whole family a target . Were the attackers a foreign legion or the spearhead troops of the protesters?.Why does the JVP deny gleefully that it was they that did it? Are they pointing fingers at the FSP as everyone else does? Which lunatic calls the FSP ‘peaceful’? What was a leading opposition politician’s sister adding to the the baying by the mob?

How does one distinguish between ‘peaceful’ and violent’ in these circumstances? Has one to wait until foul deeds including murder and arson take place? The law clearly states that once a threat manifests itself, action according to the law, including use of force, is permissibleThe most important question is whether,after a corrupt, ineffective, weak, disgraced etc Govt fails, even as a global recession sets in,and the Ukraine war continues ,is it to be replaced, out of fear of retaliation, by local experts in terror ? Where is the cash coming from to steady SL? According to Sajith P in May 22, Saudi Arabia promised him oil.He has not repeated this very silly statement.The IMF is the only hope SL has. SL should ensure China chips in by restructuring her loans and with out right grants in addition to what India has unhesitatingly and generously given. SL has a very delicate balancing act to perform to ensure our historical Asian benefactors continue to help.She has to be sincere in all she does She should never try to play one against the other.That would be suicide . It will however be difficult for the West not to try to exploit SL at this time.
Pray for SL less the politicians, media, BASL and western imperialists who think they are the reincarnation of Gods.



Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

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

Features

Following the Money: Tourism’s revenue crisis behind the arrival numbers – PART II

Published

on

(Article 2 of the 4-part series on Sri Lanka’s tourism stagnation)

If Sri Lanka’s tourism story were a corporate income statement, the top line would satisfy any minister. Arrivals went up 15.1%, targets met, records broke. But walk down the statement and the story darkens. Revenue barely budges. Per-visitor yield collapses. The money that should accompany all those arrivals has quietly vanished, or, more accurately, never materialised.

This is not a recovery. It is a volume trap, more tourists generating less wealth, with policymakers either oblivious to the math or unwilling to confront it.

Problem Diagnosis: The Paradox of Plenty:

The numbers tell a brutal story.

Read that again: arrivals grew 15.1% year-on-year, but revenue grew only 1.6%. The average tourist in 2025 left behind $181 less than in 2024, an 11.7% decline. Compared to 2018, the drop is even sharper. In real terms, adjusting for inflation and currency depreciation, each visitor in 2025 generates approximately 27-30% less revenue than in 2018, despite Sri Lanka being “cheaper” due to the rupee’s collapse. This is not marginal variance. This is structural value destruction. (See Table 1)

The math is simple and damning: Sri Lanka is working harder for less. More tourists, lower yield, thinner margins. Why? Because we have confused accessibility with competitiveness. We have made ourselves “affordable” through currency collapse and discounting, not through value creation.

Root Causes: The Five Mechanisms of Value Destruction

The yield collapse is not random. It is the predictable outcome of specific policy failures and market dynamics.

1. Currency Depreciation as False Competitiveness

The rupee’s collapse post-2022 has made Sri Lanka appear “cheap” to foreigners. A hotel room priced at $100 in 2018 might cost $70-80 in effective purchasing power today due to depreciation. Tour operators have aggressively discounted to fill capacity during the crisis recovery.

This creates the illusion of competitiveness. Arrivals rise because we are a “bargain.” But the bargain is paid for by domestic suppliers, hotels, transport providers, restaurants, staff, whose input costs (energy, food, imported goods) have skyrocketed in rupee terms while room rates lag in dollar terms.

The transfer is explicit: value flows from Sri Lankan workers and businesses to foreign tourists. The tourism “recovery” extracts wealth from the domestic economy rather than injecting it.

2. Market Composition Shift: Trading European Yields for Asian Volumes

SLTDA data shows a deliberate (or accidental—the policy opacity makes it unclear) shift in source markets. (See Table 2)

The problem is not that we attract Indians or Russians, it is that we attract them without strategies to optimise their yield. As the next article in this series will detail, Indian tourists average approximately 5.27 nights compared to the 8-9 night overall average, with lower per-day spending. We have built recovery on volume from price-sensitive segments rather than value from high-yield segments.

This is a choice, though it appears no one consciously made it. Visa-free entry, aggressive India-focused marketing, and price positioning have tilted the market mix without any apparent analysis of revenue implications.

3. Length of Stay Decline and Activity Compression

Average length of stay has compressed. While overall averages hover around 8-9 nights in recent years, the composition matters. High-yield European and North American tourists who historically spent 10-12 nights are now spending 7-9. Indian tourists spend 5-6 nights.

Shorter stays mean less cumulative spending, fewer experiences consumed, less distribution of value across the tourism chain. A 10-night tourist patronises multiple regions, hotels, guides, restaurants. A 5-night tourist concentrates spending in 2-3 locations, typically Colombo, one beach, one cultural site.

The compression is driven partly by global travel trends (shorter, more frequent trips) but also by Sri Lanka’s failure to develop compelling multi-day itineraries, adequate inter-regional connectivity, and differentiated regional experiences. We have not given tourists reasons to stay longer.

4. Infrastructure Decay and Experience Degradation

Tourists pay for experiences, not arrivals. When experiences degrade, airport congestion, poor road conditions, inadequate facilities at cultural sites, safety concerns, spending falls even if arrivals hold.

The 2024-2025 congestion at Bandaranaike International Airport, with reports of tourists nearly missing flights due to bottlenecks, is the visible tip. Beneath are systemic deficits: poor last-mile connectivity to tourism sites, deteriorating heritage assets, unregistered businesses providing sub-standard services, outbound migration of trained staff.

An ADB report notes that tourism authorities face resource shortages and capital expenditure embargoes, preventing even basic facility improvements at major revenue generators like Sigiriya (which charges $36 per visitor and attracts 25% of all tourists). When a site generates substantial revenue but lacks adequate lighting, safety measures, and visitor facilities, the experience suffers, and so does yield.

5. Leakage: The Silent Revenue Drain

Tourism revenue figures are gross. Net foreign exchange contributions after leakages, is rarely calculated or published.

Leakages include:

· Imported food, beverages, amenities in hotels (often 30-40% of operating costs)

· Foreign ownership and profit repatriation

· International tour operators taking commissions upstream (tourists book through foreign platforms that retain substantial margins)

· Unlicensed operators and unregulated businesses evading taxes and formal banking channels

Industry sources estimate leakages can consume 40-60% of gross tourism revenue in developing economies with weak regulatory enforcement. Sri Lanka has not published comprehensive leakage studies, but all indicators, weak licensing enforcement, widespread informal sector activity, foreign ownership concentration in resorts, suggest leakages are substantial and growing.

The result: even the $3.22 billion headline figure overstates actual net contribution to the economy.

The Way Forward: From Volume to Value

Reversing the yield collapse requires

systematic policy reorientation, from arrivals-chasing to value-building.

First

, publish and track yield metrics as primary KPIs. SLTDA should report:

· Revenue per visitor (by source market, by season, by purpose)

· Average daily expenditure (disaggregated by accommodation, activities, food, retail)

· Net foreign exchange contribution after documented leakages

· Revenue per room night (adjusted for real exchange rates)

Make these as visible as arrival numbers. Hold policy-makers accountable for yield, not just volume.

Second

, segment markets explicitly by yield potential. Stop treating all arrivals as equivalent. Conduct market-specific yield analyses:

· Which markets spend most per day?

· Which stays longest?

· Which distributes spending across regions vs. concentrating in Colombo/beach corridors?

· Which book is through formal channels vs. informal operators?

Target marketing and visa policies accordingly. If Western European tourists spend $250/day for 10 nights while another segment spends $120/day for 5 nights, the revenue difference ($2,500 vs. $600) dictates where promotional resources should flow.

Third

, develop multi-day, multi-region itineraries with compelling value propositions. Tourists extend stays when there are reasons to stay. Create integrated experiences:

· Cultural triangle + beach + hill country circuits with seamless connectivity

· Themed tours (wildlife, wellness, culinary, adventure) requiring 10+ days

· Regional spread of accommodation and experiences to distribute economic benefits

This requires infrastructure investment, precisely what has been neglected.

Fourth

, regulations to minimise leakages. Enforce licensing for tourism businesses. Channel bookings through formal operators registered with commercial banks. Tax holiday schemes should prioritise investments that maximise local value retention, staff training, local sourcing, domestic ownership.

Fifth

, stop using currency depreciation as a competitive strategy. A weak rupee makes Sri Lanka “affordable” but destroys margins and transfers wealth outward. Real competitiveness comes from differentiated experiences, quality standards, and strategic positioning, not from being the “cheapest” option.

The Hard Math: What We’re Losing

Let’s make the cost explicit. If Sri Lanka maintained 2018 per-visitor spending levels ($1,877) on 2025 arrivals (2.36 million), revenue would be approximately $4.43 billion, not $3.22 billion. The difference: $1.21 billion in lost revenue, value that should have been generated but wasn’t.

That $1.21 billion is not a theoretical gap. It represents:

· Wages not paid

· Businesses not sustained

· Taxes not collected

· Infrastructure not funded

· Development not achieved

This is the cost of volume-chasing without yield discipline. Every year we continue this model; we lock in value destruction.

The Policy Failure: Why Arrivals Theater Persists

Why do policymakers fixate on arrivals when revenue tells the real story?

Because arrivals are politically legible. A minister can tout “record tourist numbers” in a press conference. Revenue per visitor requires explanation, context, and uncomfortable questions about policy choices.

Arrivals are easy to manipulate upward, visa-free entry, aggressive discounting, currency depreciation. Yield is hard, it requires product development, market curation, infrastructure investment, regulatory enforcement.

Arrivals theater is cheaper and quicker than strategic transformation. But this is governance failure at its most fundamental. Tourism’s contribution to economic recovery is not determined by how many planes land but by how much wealth each visitor creates and retains domestically. Every dollar spent celebrating arrival records while ignoring yield collapse is a waste of dollars.

The Uncomfortable Truth

Sri Lanka’s tourism “boom” is real in volume, but it is a value bust. We are attracting more tourists and generating less wealth. The industry is working harder for lower returns. Margins are compressed, staff are paid less in real terms, infrastructure decays, and the net contribution to national recovery underperforms potential.

This is not sustainable. Eventually, operators will exit. Quality will degrade further. The “affordable” positioning will shift to “cheap and deteriorating.” The volume will follow yield down.

We have two choices: acknowledge the yield crisis and reorient policy toward value creation or continue arrivals theater until the hollowness becomes undeniable.

The money has spoken. The question is whether anyone in power is listening.

Continue Reading

Features

Misinterpreting President Dissanayake on National Reconciliation

Published

on

President Dissanayake

President Anura Kumara Dissanayake has been investing his political capital in going to the public to explain some of the most politically sensitive and controversial issues. At a time when easier political choices are available, the president is choosing the harder path of confronting ethnic suspicion and communal fears. There are three issues in particular on which the president’s words have generated strong reactions. These are first with regard to Buddhist pilgrims going to the north of the country with nationalist motivations. Second is the controversy relating to the expansion of the Tissa Raja Maha Viharaya, a recently constructed Buddhist temple in Kankesanturai which has become a flashpoint between local Tamil residents and Sinhala nationalist groups. Third is the decision not to give the war victory a central place in the Independence Day celebrations.

Even in the opposition, when his party held only three seats in parliament, Anura Kumara Dissanayake took his role as a public educator seriously. He used to deliver lengthy, well researched and easily digestible speeches in parliament. He continues this practice as president. It can be seen that his statements are primarily meant to elevate the thinking of the people and not to win votes the easy way. The easy way to win votes whether in Sri Lanka or elsewhere in the world is to rouse nationalist and racist sentiments and ride that wave. Sri Lanka’s post independence political history shows that narrow ethnic mobilisation has often produced short term electoral gains but long term national damage.

Sections of the opposition and segments of the general public have been critical of the president for taking these positions. They have claimed that the president is taking these positions in order to obtain more Tamil votes or to appease minority communities. The same may be said in reverse of those others who take contrary positions that they seek the Sinhala votes. These political actors who thrive on nationalist mobilisation have attempted to portray the president’s statements as an abandonment of the majority community. The president’s actions need to be understood within the larger framework of national reconciliation and long term national stability.

Reconciler’s Duty

When the president referred to Buddhist pilgrims from the south going to the north, he was not speaking about pilgrims visiting long established Buddhist heritage sites such as Nagadeepa or Kandarodai. His remarks were directed at a specific and highly contentious development, the recently built Buddhist temple in Kankesanturai and those built elsewhere in the recent past in the north and east. The temple in Kankesanturai did not emerge from the religious needs of a local Buddhist community as there is none in that area. It has been constructed on land that was formerly owned and used by Tamil civilians and which came under military occupation as a high security zone. What has made the issue of the temple particularly controversial is that it was established with the support of the security forces.

The controversy has deepened because the temple authorities have sought to expand the site from approximately one acre to nearly fourteen acres on the basis that there was a historic Buddhist temple in that area up to the colonial period. However, the Tamil residents of the area fear that expansion would further displace surrounding residents and consolidate a permanent Buddhist religious presence in the present period in an area where the local population is overwhelmingly Hindu. For many Tamils in Kankesanturai, the issue is not Buddhism as a religion but the use of religion as a vehicle for territorial assertion and demographic changes in a region that bore the brunt of the war. Likewise, there are other parts of the north and east where other temples or places of worship have been established by the military personnel in their camps during their war-time occupation and questions arise regarding the future when these camps are finally closed.

There are those who have actively organised large scale pilgrimages from the south to make the Tissa temple another important religious site. These pilgrimages are framed publicly as acts of devotion but are widely perceived locally as demonstrations of dominance. Each such visit heightens tension, provokes protest by Tamil residents, and risks confrontation. For communities that experienced mass displacement, military occupation and land loss, the symbolism of a state backed religious structure on contested land with the backing of the security forces is impossible to separate from memories of war and destruction. A president committed to reconciliation cannot remain silent in the face of such provocations, however uncomfortable it may be to challenge sections of the majority community.

High-minded leadership

The controversy regarding the president’s Independence Day speech has also generated strong debate. In that speech the president did not refer to the military victory over the LTTE and also did not use the term “war heroes” to describe soldiers. For many Sinhala nationalist groups, the absence of these references was seen as an attempt to diminish the sacrifices of the armed forces. The reality is that Independence Day means very different things to different communities. In the north and east the same day is marked by protest events and mourning and as a “Black Day”, symbolising the consolidation of a state they continue to experience as excluding them and not empathizing with the full extent of their losses.

By way of contrast, the president’s objective was to ensure that Independence Day could be observed as a day that belonged to all communities in the country. It is not correct to assume that the president takes these positions in order to appease minorities or secure electoral advantage. The president is only one year into his term and does not need to take politically risky positions for short term electoral gains. Indeed, the positions he has taken involve confronting powerful nationalist political forces that can mobilise significant opposition. He risks losing majority support for his statements. This itself indicates that the motivation is not electoral calculation.

President Dissanayake has recognized that Sri Lanka’s long term political stability and economic recovery depend on building trust among communities that once peacefully coexisted and then lived through decades of war. Political leadership is ultimately tested by the willingness to say what is necessary rather than what is politically expedient. The president’s recent interventions demonstrate rare national leadership and constitute an attempt to shift public discourse away from ethnic triumphalism and toward a more inclusive conception of nationhood. Reconciliation cannot take root if national ceremonies reinforce the perception of victory for one community and defeat for another especially in an internal conflict.

BY Jehan Perera

Continue Reading

Features

Recovery of LTTE weapons

Published

on

Sri Lanka Navy in action

I have read a newspaper report that the Special Task Force of Sri Lanka Police, with help of Military Intelligence, recovered three buried yet well-preserved 84mm Carl Gustaf recoilless rocket launchers used by the LTTE, in the Kudumbimalai area, Batticaloa.

These deadly weapons were used by the LTTE SEA TIGER WING to attack the Sri Lanka Navy ships and craft in 1990s. The first incident was in February 1997, off Iranativu island, in the Gulf of Mannar.

Admiral Cecil Tissera took over as Commander of the Navy on 27 January, 1997, from Admiral Mohan Samarasekara.

The fight against the LTTE was intensified from 1996 and the SLN was using her Vanguard of the Navy, Fast Attack Craft Squadron, to destroy the LTTE’s littoral fighting capabilities. Frequent confrontations against the LTTE Sea Tiger boats were reported off Mullaitivu, Point Pedro and Velvetiturai areas, where SLN units became victorious in most of these sea battles, except in a few incidents where the SLN lost Fast Attack Craft.

Carl Gustaf recoilless rocket launchers

The intelligence reports confirmed that the LTTE Sea Tigers was using new recoilless rocket launchers against aluminium-hull FACs, and they were deadly at close quarter sea battles, but the exact type of this weapon was not disclosed.

The following incident, which occurred in February 1997, helped confirm the weapon was Carl Gustaf 84 mm Recoilless gun!

DATE: 09TH FEBRUARY, 1997, morning 0600 hrs.

LOCATION: OFF IRANATHIVE.

FACs: P 460 ISRAEL BUILT, COMMANDED BY CDR MANOJ JAYESOORIYA

P 452 CDL BUILT, COMMANDED BY LCDR PM WICKRAMASINGHE (ON TEMPORARY COMMAND. PROPER OIC LCDR N HEENATIGALA)

OPERATED FROM KKS.

CONFRONTED WITH LTTE ATTACK CRAFT POWERED WITH FOUR 250 HP OUT BOARD MOTORS.

TARGET WAS DESTROYED AND ONE LTTE MEMBER WAS CAPTURED.

LEADING MARINE ENGINEERING MECHANIC OF THE FAC CAME UP TO THE BRIDGE CARRYING A PROJECTILE WHICH WAS FIRED BY THE LTTE BOAT, DURING CONFRONTATION, WHICH PENETRATED THROUGH THE FAC’s HULL, AND ENTERED THE OICs CABIN (BETWEEN THE TWO BUNKS) AND HIT THE AUXILIARY ENGINE ROOM DOOR AND HAD FALLEN DOWN WITHOUT EXPLODING. THE ENGINE ROOM DOOR WAS HEAVILY DAMAGED LOOSING THE WATER TIGHT INTEGRITY OF THE FAC.

THE PROJECTILE WAS LATER HANDED OVER TO THE NAVAL WEAPONS EXPERTS WHEN THE FACs RETURNED TO KKS. INVESTIGATIONS REVEALED THE WEAPON USED BY THE ENEMY WAS 84 mm CARL GUSTAF SHOULDER-FIRED RECOILLESS GUN AND THIS PROJECTILE WAS AN ILLUMINATER BOMB OF ONE MILLION CANDLE POWER. BUT THE ATTACKERS HAS FAILED TO REMOVE THE SAFETY PIN, THEREFORE THE BOMB WAS NOT ACTIVATED.

Sea Tigers

Carl Gustaf 84 mm recoilless gun was named after Carl Gustaf Stads Gevärsfaktori, which, initially, produced it. Sweden later developed the 84mm shoulder-fired recoilless gun by the Royal Swedish Army Materiel Administration during the second half of 1940s as a crew served man- portable infantry support gun for close range multi-role anti-armour, anti-personnel, battle field illumination, smoke screening and marking fire.

It is confirmed in Wikipedia that Carl Gustaf Recoilless shoulder-fired guns were used by the only non-state actor in the world – the LTTE – during the final Eelam War.

It is extremely important to check the batch numbers of the recently recovered three launchers to find out where they were produced and other details like how they ended up in Batticaloa, Sri Lanka?

By Admiral Ravindra C. Wijegunaratne
WV, RWP and Bar, RSP, VSV, USP, NI (M) (Pakistan), ndc, psn, Bsc (Hons) (War Studies) (Karachi) MPhil (Madras)
Former Navy Commander and Former Chief of Defence Staff
Former Chairman, Trincomalee Petroleum Terminals Ltd
Former Managing Director Ceylon Petroleum Corporation
Former High Commissioner to Pakistan

Continue Reading

Trending