Features
President Premadasa takes over Education Ministry and signals total trust in me & Ministry
After Minister Athulathmudali’s departure, matters went on in a state of crisis during the whole of September and into mid-October. The Ministry, the Departments and the Agencies went on with their work. There was no slackening. For about one and a half months now, the Ministry was without a Minister. Sometime around October 15 the President telephoned me in office. The crisis was now resolved. The President had prorogued Parliament and turned the tables on his political opponents.
This prevented the impeachment from being presented to Parliament and gained time for him to deal with waverers and malcontents among his MPs. The dissidents were expelled from the Party. “Kehelwatta has triumphed over Kurunduwatte,” said the political commentators and critics. This was a reference to the humble and plebian origins of Mr. Premadasa in the poor area called “Kehelwatte” or banana grove as opposed to the more aristocratic origins, background or associations of his main protagonists of high class, “Kurunduwatte” or Cinnamon Gardens, an area synonymous with privilege, wealth and luxury.
“Cinnamon Gardens” or “Kurunduwatte” was therefore symbolic of the status and values that were the antithesis of a humble “Kehelwatte.” The person from these humble beginnings, who did not possess any University degrees except as he frequently said, a degree from “The University of Life,” had triumphed over pundits who had acquired an array of law degrees from Sri Lanka, Oxford and Harvard. The President was visibly more relaxed now and free to once again concentrate on the affairs of state.
“Dharmasiri, you are without a Minister now. I thought of becoming your Minister for a short time. But I don’t want to do so for long,” the President said over the telephone. I welcomed the idea, and said that the Ministry had been too long without a Minister. “When shall I come to Isurupaya?” he then inquired. We discussed this, and 5 p.m. on October 21, 1991 was decided. Knowing the President’s observances and practices I had the presence of mind to ask him whether he wanted monks to chant Seth Pirith when lie came. He said “Yes. Very good.” I then asked him whether about five monks would do. He said “Yes.”
As I was about to ring off I suddenly remembered that it was best to check from what temple the monks should be invited. I was generally unaware of the politics of temples. To my question, the President answered that it would be best to invite monks from the nearby Kotte Rajamaha Vihare. In the course of this conversation, the President instructed me to see that all the Ministers in the system were present, which included Mr. Hameed. He also wanted the heads and all the senior level officers of the Ministry, departments and other agencies present as well as his own Secretary Mr. Wijayadasa and Mr. Piyadigama, his Additional Secretary overlooking Education from the Presidential Secretariat. Finally, he requested the presence of Ven. Galeboda Gnanissara (Podi Hamuduruwo) of the Gangaramaya Temple and Mr. W.J.M. Loku Bandara a former Minister of Education.
This was quite a gathering. The President who was now the new Minister of Education and Higher Education, arrived sharp on time, was greeted by the Ministers and myself and conducted to the Minister’s room. After the religious observances the meeting commenced. Just before the meeting I informed the new Minister, that I had 11 Cabinet Papers and two Supplementary Estimates going to Parliament to be signed by him. These had piled up in the absence of a Minister, and I wanted some time from him after the meeting.
This was particularly important for me since I was due to depart the following night for Paris to attend the General Conference of UNESCO. The President agreed. The meeting which commenced at around 5.30 p.m. went on till around 7.45 p.m. The President wished to familiarize himself with the work and responsibilities of his new portfolio. During the course of the discussions, he stated that he did not intend to come often to the Ministry. He wanted the Ministers in the system and the Secretary to carry on, and embarrassed me by saying that the Ministry performed better without a Minister. This was of course very much a shot at Mr. Athulathmudali, although it was a fact that the officials did run the Ministry efficiently and without problems.
But this couldn’t have gone on for a long time, without the neglect of important policy issues. The President concluded by saying that once a month he would hold a “Mini Cabinet” meeting of all relevant persons. I had instructed my diligent and efficient personal Assistant Mr. Richard Silva to have the Cabinet Papers and the Supplementary Estimates ready to be brought in, the moment the meeting terminated. When this occurred, the President himself remembered and saying “Come” he moved over to the sitting room area of the room, sat down and patted a seat near him for me to sit.
The 13 files were brought in which were quite a bundle and arranged on a large chair in two heaps. The President had pulled out his pen and I picked the file containing the first Cabinet paper and started explaining what it was about. The President interrupted interrupted me and said “Not necessary. You have gone through it,” and inquired, “Where do I sign?” I was quite stunned. He signed it. I picked up the next file and tried to explain. He wouldn’t hear of it. “Not necessary,” he said, and wanted only to know “Where do I sign?”
In this manner he blindly signed 11 Cabinet papers and the two Supplementary Estimates going up to a Parliament that very nearly impeached him. “Is that all?” he asked pleasantly at the end of the signing, and then said, “Good night. I will get along then.” I was completely bewildered. I had never directly worked with Mr. Premadasa in any of his Ministries, or in any capacity. I had been a member of the Rasaputram Committee on Poverty Alleviation, but that was on the basis of a Cabinet decision.
I had had no direct contact with him in my entire career in the public service up to this time, except for one or two telephone calls and one or two accidental meetings.
Apart from all this, I was the one who spoke in public, complimentarily of Mr. Athulathmudali at a time when the President loathed him and which speech was carried prominently in the newspapers. Everyone also knew that the President was an avid reader of newspapers, which he did first thing in the morning. The net result of all these seemed to be that he was not even prepared to look at some of the most important papers a Secretary could put up to a Minister, and was ready to sign blindly.
I was first quite stunned, then touched at this strong and visible acknowledgment of my integrity, and also frightened. What if there was a mistake in any of those papers, particularly the ones going up to Parliament? And I was due to leave the country the next day. I quickly got hold of our Senior Additional Secretary Mrs. Kamala Wickremasinghe; Mr. Wimalagunawardena, another Additional Secretary and Mr. Stanley Wijesinghe my Senior Assistant Secretary and asked them to proceed to my room immediately.
The time now was past 8.30 p.m. and they were about to go home. I then described what happened. All of them were quite stunned too. They thought it was a powerful signal of confidence in me. I corrected them and said “the Ministry too,” and reminded them of how we all collectively functioned in the national interest during a most difficult period, not only politically but also emotionally for all of us liked Mr. Athulathmudali very much. I then told them, that as they were aware I was leaving the country the next day. I wanted the three of them to promise me that they would get together and re-check every word and figure in the Cabinet papers, and more particularly the documents going to Parliament, where I emphasized the need to check among other things whether the words tallied with the figures.
In the aftermath of all that had happened we could not take any risk of the President being embarrassed in parliament on a document he had signed on complete trust. I told my three colleagues that unless they personally promised to do as I had wanted, I was going to stay back and do it myself. They solemnly promised and said they would take complete responsibility. I could trust them to be responsible and diligent and I left with a lighter heart.
(Excerpted from In Pursuit of Governance, autobiography of MDD Pieris)
Features
Ranking public services with AI — A roadmap to reviving institutions like SriLankan Airlines
Efficacy measures an organisation’s capacity to achieve its mission and intended outcomes under planned or optimal conditions. It differs from efficiency, which focuses on achieving objectives with minimal resources, and effectiveness, which evaluates results in real-world conditions. Today, modern AI tools, using publicly available data, enable objective assessment of the efficacy of Sri Lanka’s government institutions.
Among key public bodies, the Supreme Court of Sri Lanka emerges as the most efficacious, outperforming the Department of Inland Revenue, Sri Lanka Customs, the Election Commission, and Parliament. In the financial and regulatory sector, the Central Bank of Sri Lanka (CBSL) ranks highest, ahead of the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Public Utilities Commission, the Telecommunications Regulatory Commission, the Insurance Regulatory Commission, and the Sri Lanka Standards Institution.
Among state-owned enterprises, the Sri Lanka Ports Authority (SLPA) leads in efficacy, followed by Bank of Ceylon and People’s Bank. Other institutions assessed included the State Pharmaceuticals Corporation, the National Water Supply and Drainage Board, the Ceylon Electricity Board, the Ceylon Petroleum Corporation, and the Sri Lanka Transport Board. At the lower end of the spectrum were Lanka Sathosa and Sri Lankan Airlines, highlighting a critical challenge for the national economy.
Sri Lankan Airlines, consistently ranked at the bottom, has long been a financial drain. Despite successive governments’ reform attempts, sustainable solutions remain elusive.
Globally, the most profitable airlines operate as highly integrated, technology-enabled ecosystems rather than as fragmented departments. Operations, finance, fleet management, route planning, engineering, marketing, and customer service are closely coordinated, sharing real-time data to maximise efficiency, safety, and profitability.
The challenge for Sri Lankan Airlines is structural. Its operations are fragmented, overly hierarchical, and poorly aligned. Simply replacing the CEO or senior leadership will not address these deep-seated weaknesses. What the airline needs is a cohesive, integrated organisational ecosystem that leverages technology for cross-functional planning and real-time decision-making.
The government must urgently consider restructuring Sri Lankan Airlines to encourage:
=Joint planning across operational divisions
=Data-driven, evidence-based decision-making
=Continuous cross-functional consultation
=Collaborative strategic decisions on route rationalisation, fleet renewal, partnerships, and cost management, rather than exclusive top-down mandates
Sustainable reform requires systemic change. Without modernised organisational structures, stronger accountability, and aligned incentives across divisions, financial recovery will remain out of reach. An integrated, performance-oriented model offers the most realistic path to operational efficiency and long-term viability.
Reforming loss-making institutions like Sri Lankan Airlines is not merely a matter of leadership change — it is a structural overhaul essential to ensuring these entities contribute productively to the national economy rather than remain perpetual burdens.
By Chula Goonasekera – Citizen Analyst
Features
Why Pi Day?
International Day of Mathematics falls tomorrow
The approximate value of Pi (π) is 3.14 in mathematics. Therefore, the day 14 March is celebrated as the Pi Day. In 2019, UNESCO proclaimed 14 March as the International Day of Mathematics.
Ancient Babylonians and Egyptians figured out that the circumference of a circle is slightly more than three times its diameter. But they could not come up with an exact value for this ratio although they knew that it is a constant. This constant was later named as π which is a letter in the Greek alphabet.
It was the Greek mathematician Archimedes (250 BC) who was able to find an upper bound and a lower bound for this constant. He drew a circle of diameter one unit and drew hexagons inside and outside the circle such that the sides of each hexagon touch the sides of the circle. In mathematics the circle passing through all vertices of a polygon is called a ‘circumcircle’ and the largest circle that fits inside a polygon tangent to all its sides is called an ‘incircle’. The total length of the smaller hexagon then becomes the lower bound of π and the length of the hexagon outside the circle is the upper bound. He realised that by increasing the number of sides of the polygon can make the bounds get closer to the value of Pi and increased the number of sides to 12,24,48 and 60. He argued that by increasing the number of sides will ultimately result in obtaining the original circle, thereby laying the foundation for the theory of limits. He ended up with the lower bound as 22/7 and the upper bound 223/71. He could not continue his research as his hometown Syracuse was invaded by Romans and was killed by one of the soldiers. His last words were ‘do not disturb my circles’, perhaps a reference to his continuing efforts to find the value of π to a greater accuracy.
Archimedes can be considered as the father of geometry. His contributions revolutionised geometry and his methods anticipated integral calculus. He invented the pulley and the hydraulic screw for drawing water from a well. He also discovered the law of hydrostatics. He formulated the law of levers which states that a smaller weight placed farther from a pivot can balance a much heavier weight closer to it. He famously said “Give me a lever long enough and a place to stand and I will move the earth”.
Mathematicians have found many expressions for π as a sum of infinite series that converge to its value. One such famous series is the Leibniz Series found in 1674 by the German mathematician Gottfried Leibniz, which is given below.
π = 4 ( 1 – 1/3 + 1/5 – 1/7 + 1/9 – ………….)
The Indian mathematical genius Ramanujan came up with a magnificent formula in 1910. The short form of the formula is as follows.
π = 9801/(1103 √8)
For practical applications an approximation is sufficient. Even NASA uses only the approximation 3.141592653589793 for its interplanetary navigation calculations.
It is not just an interesting and curious number. It is used for calculations in navigation, encryption, space exploration, video game development and even in medicine. As π is fundamental to spherical geometry, it is at the heart of positioning systems in GPS navigations. It also contributes significantly to cybersecurity. As it is an irrational number it is an excellent foundation for generating randomness required in encryption and securing communications. In the medical field, it helps to calculate blood flow rates and pressure differentials. In diagnostic tools such as CT scans and MRI, pi is an important component in mathematical algorithms and signal processing techniques.
This elegant, never-ending number demonstrates how mathematics transforms into practical applications that shape our world. The possibilities of what it can do are infinite as the number itself. It has become a symbol of beauty and complexity in mathematics. “It matters little who first arrives at an idea, rather what is significant is how far that idea can go.” said Sophie Germain.
Mathematics fans are intrigued by this irrational number and attempt to calculate it as far as they can. In March 2022, Emma Haruka Iwao of Japan calculated it to 100 trillion decimal places in Google Cloud. It had taken 157 days. The Guinness World Record for reciting the number from memory is held by Rajveer Meena of India for 70000 decimal places over 10 hours.
Happy Pi Day!
The author is a senior examiner of the International Baccalaureate in the UK and an educational consultant at the Overseas School of Colombo.
by R N A de Silva
Features
Sheer rise of Realpolitik making the world see the brink
The recent humanly costly torpedoing of an Iranian naval vessel in Sri Lanka’s Exclusive Economic Zone by a US submarine has raised a number of issues of great importance to international political discourse and law that call for elucidation. It is best that enlightened commentary is brought to bear in such discussions because at present misleading and uninformed speculation on questions arising from the incident are being aired by particularly jingoistic politicians of Sri Lanka’s South which could prove deleterious.
As matters stand, there seems to be no credible evidence that the Indian state was aware of the impending torpedoing of the Iranian vessel but these acerbic-tongued politicians of Sri Lanka’s South would have the local public believe that the tragedy was triggered with India’s connivance. Likewise, India is accused of ‘embroiling’ Sri Lanka in the incident on account of seemingly having prior knowledge of it and not warning Sri Lanka about the impending disaster.
It is plain that a process is once again afoot to raise anti-India hysteria in Sri Lanka. An obligation is cast on the Sri Lankan government to ensure that incendiary speculation of the above kind is defeated and India-Sri Lanka relations are prevented from being in any way harmed. Proactive measures are needed by the Sri Lankan government and well meaning quarters to ensure that public discourse in such matters have a factual and rational basis. ‘Knowledge gaps’ could prove hazardous.
Meanwhile, there could be no doubt that Sri Lanka’s sovereignty was violated by the US because the sinking of the Iranian vessel took place in Sri Lanka’s Exclusive Economic Zone. While there is no international decrying of the incident, and this is to be regretted, Sri Lanka’s helplessness and small player status would enable the US to ‘get away with it’.
Could anything be done by the international community to hold the US to account over the act of lawlessness in question? None is the answer at present. This is because in the current ‘Global Disorder’ major powers could commit the gravest international irregularities with impunity. As the threadbare cliché declares, ‘Might is Right’….. or so it seems.
Unfortunately, the UN could only merely verbally denounce any violations of International Law by the world’s foremost powers. It cannot use countervailing force against violators of the law, for example, on account of the divided nature of the UN Security Council, whose permanent members have shown incapability of seeing eye-to-eye on grave matters relating to International Law and order over the decades.
The foregoing considerations could force the conclusion on uncritical sections that Political Realism or Realpolitik has won out in the end. A basic premise of the school of thought known as Political Realism is that power or force wielded by states and international actors determine the shape, direction and substance of international relations. This school stands in marked contrast to political idealists who essentially proclaim that moral norms and values determine the nature of local and international politics.
While, British political scientist Thomas Hobbes, for instance, was a proponent of Political Realism, political idealism has its roots in the teachings of Socrates, Plato and latterly Friedrich Hegel of Germany, to name just few such notables.
On the face of it, therefore, there is no getting way from the conclusion that coercive force is the deciding factor in international politics. If this were not so, US President Donald Trump in collaboration with Israeli Rightist Premier Benjamin Natanyahu could not have wielded the ‘big stick’, so to speak, on Iran, killed its Supreme Head of State, terrorized the Iranian public and gone ‘scot-free’. That is, currently, the US’ impunity seems to be limitless.
Moreover, the evidence is that the Western bloc is reuniting in the face of Iran’s threats to stymie the flow of oil from West Asia to the rest of the world. The recent G7 summit witnessed a coming together of the foremost powers of the global North to ensure that the West does not suffer grave negative consequences from any future blocking of western oil supplies.
Meanwhile, Israel is having a ‘free run’ of the Middle East, so to speak, picking out perceived adversarial powers, such as Lebanon, and militarily neutralizing them; once again with impunity. On the other hand, Iran has been bringing under assault, with no questions asked, Gulf states that are seen as allying with the US and Israel. West Asia is facing a compounded crisis and International Law seems to be helplessly silent.
Wittingly or unwittingly, matters at the heart of International Law and peace are being obfuscated by some pro-Trump administration commentators meanwhile. For example, retired US Navy Captain Brent Sadler has cited Article 51 of the UN Charter, which provides for the right to self or collective self-defence of UN member states in the face of armed attacks, as justifying the US sinking of the Iranian vessel (See page 2 of The Island of March 10, 2026). But the Article makes it clear that such measures could be resorted to by UN members only ‘ if an armed attack occurs’ against them and under no other circumstances. But no such thing happened in the incident in question and the US acted under a sheer threat perception.
Clearly, the US has violated the Article through its action and has once again demonstrated its tendency to arbitrarily use military might. The general drift of Sadler’s thinking is that in the face of pressing national priorities, obligations of a state under International Law could be side-stepped. This is a sure recipe for international anarchy because in such a policy environment states could pursue their national interests, irrespective of their merits, disregarding in the process their obligations towards the international community.
Moreover, Article 51 repeatedly reiterates the authority of the UN Security Council and the obligation of those states that act in self-defence to report to the Council and be guided by it. Sadler, therefore, could be said to have cited the Article very selectively, whereas, right along member states’ commitments to the UNSC are stressed.
However, it is beyond doubt that international anarchy has strengthened its grip over the world. While the US set destabilizing precedents after the crumbling of the Cold War that paved the way for the current anarchic situation, Russia further aggravated these degenerative trends through its invasion of Ukraine. Stepping back from anarchy has thus emerged as the prime challenge for the world community.
-
News5 days agoRepatriation of Iranian naval personnel Sri Lanka’s call: Washington
-
Features5 days agoWinds of Change:Geopolitics at the crossroads of South and Southeast Asia
-
News4 days agoProf. Dunusinghe warns Lanka at serious risk due to ME war
-
Sports3 days agoRoyal start favourites in historic Battle of the Blues
-
Sports2 days agoThe 147th Royal–Thomian and 175 Years of the School by the Sea
-
News2 days agoHistoric address by BASL President at the Supreme Court of India
-
News3 days agoCEBEU warns of operational disruptions amid uncertainty over CEB restructuring
-
Business6 days agoSeven decades of sartorial excellence: The legacy of Linton Master Tailors in Kandy

