Features
Proposed CEB Tariff Increase: Is it sensible?
by Romesh Bandaranaike, Ph.D.
A few months ago, the CEB tariff was increased for all consumers. The average increase was approximately 75%. The Minister of Power and Energy has recently stated that there needs to be a further large increase in tariff in January, around 65%, if the CEB is to provide continuous power to the public. Without the increase, he says, there is likely to be eight-hour power cuts.
There were numerous protests relating to the original tariff increase. These protests have come from many different types of consumers including hoteliers, industrialists, temples and residential consumers. Hoteliers and industrialists have gone so far as to say that the increase will have serious negative impacts on the viability of their businesses. They now claim that a further increase as mentioned by the minister would push them to insolvency.
Is the tariff increase mentioned by the minister sensible? Is there any other alternative? Based on my wide experience, there are two reasons why a further CEB tariff increase is necessary. First, not increasing tariffs will adversely impact renewable energy generation growth in the country. Second, it is the fairest and most efficient way to fund power generation cost in the current economic context.
Let me start with my credentials. My dealings with the CEB go back over 20 years, as CEO of the then largest private company building small hydro power plants (40 MW connected to the grid) and later as the executive chairman of a company which built and operated a four MW biomass plant, all selling power to the CEB grid. I have also worked for many years in the policy sphere, primarily in the Ministry of Finance, originally as the CEO of the Plantation Restructuring Unit and later as the Director General, Economic Affairs.
What are the adverse impacts on future renewable energy?
One of the key policy proposals of the Government relating to the power sector is to substantially increase the share of power generated through renewable energy (RE), mainly, small-hydro, wind and solar. The capital cost of RE plants is high, running into hundreds of millions of Rupees per MW. In spite of this, they are financially viable to build and operate because their fuel — wind, sun and water flow in rivers – is free. The policy is to have the private sector undertake the large capital investments in these power generation technologies and sell their generated power to the CEB grid.
The levelized average cost of power generated by RE power plants, even after including their large capital costs, is lower than that of power plants based on fossil fuel, such as coal and oil. RE plants are also much better for the environment compared with fossil fuel-based plants and, increasing their share of power generation will also substantially reduce foreign exchange requirements to import coal and oil.
In spite of the last large increase in tariffs, the CEB is still experiencing major financial difficulties. Faced with these difficulties, the CEB has saved cash for purchasing coal and other fossil fuels and for other expenses such as salaries, by not paying the amounts due to private RE producers who have entered into contracts with the CEB to supply power. The CEB owes a staggering Rs 22 billion to these producers. In many of the cases, invoices going back for over a year have yet to be paid. These producers have continued to supply power to the CEB in spite of the payment delays, primarily because in the case of wind, hydro and solar, there is no fuel cost and these producers have only to pay their operating costs and their bank loans.
To handle their cash flows and to keep going, these producers have begged their bankers for support. How long they can keep it up is anybody’s guess. Biomass and private thermal power producers who have not been paid by the CEB have mostly shut down because they simply cannot afford to pay for fuel. Small-hydro and wind power producers may also close down if the CEB payment delays continue and the developers do not have the financial resources to pay their operating costs and bank loans.
The present grid connected RE plants were almost all built at a time when the CEB was paying the invoices submitted by these plants on a regular basis, with maximum delays of one to two months. In its present financial situation, the CEB is not paying the large arrears owed to these power producers. Clearly, no sensible private sector investor will want to undertake future large investments in RE plants under such circumstances. The only way for the CEB to return to timely payments for power supplied by private RE plants is with a further tariff increase as proposed by the Minister. Without such payments, it will be the end of the Government’s plans for substantial private sector led increases in RE’s share of the grid, along with their attendant benefits enumerated earlier.
How should the cost of CEB’s generation be funded?
We are stuck today with an inefficient CEB with monopoly power. Even if it were possible, it will take years to reduce these inefficiencies. As a result, power costs are higher than they could be with a more efficient operation. The question is, who should bear the cost of the inefficiency today? From an economic policy perspective, there is only one answer. It should be electricity consumers. The alternative is for the tariff not to be raised and the CEB’s losses to be met by the Ministry of Finance (MoF).
MoF, in turn, can raise the funds by either printing money or taxing people. Even printed money is not free, as we have found out recently. It results in everyone having to pay large price increases in the future. In practice, the Government subsidies of the CEB come in small bits and pieces which the CEB has to beg for. In the interim, faced with severe cash flow issues, the CEB reacts by cutting power and not paying RE power suppliers. The cost to the economy of power cuts is also much higher than the adverse effects on businesses and consumers of a further raising of the tariff.
As I indicated at the start of this article, numerous commercial parties, including hoteliers and industrialists have claimed that a further increase in tariff will push them to insolvency.
However, this statement cannot be sustained. In 2022 the Sri Lanka rupee exchange rate vis-a-vis the US dollar depreciated by around 80% and inflation as per the NCPI was around 70%. As a result, the rupee prices of every item in the country increased by at least this amount. This includes the price of items sold by hotels (room rates) and items locally produced by industry and farmers, whether it be cement, rice, eggs, fish, vegetables, chocolates, cleaning supplies, toiletries, and so on.
Imported and domestically sourced inputs into industry, hotels, farming, and so on also increased. Power supplied by the CEB is one such input, and the cost to the CEB of producing this power has also increased. It is only rational that the price charged for electricity should also be increased. In the case of industry and commerce, the recent performance figures published by quoted companies show very large increases in rupee profits. Of course, these are devalued rupees. A further increase in electricity price, will reduce these rupee profits somewhat, but, by how much depends on what the electricity cost share is of total input costs. (None of the industries and commercial establishments that are objecting to the past or proposed future tariff increases, has provided any hard financial analyses on the impact on their bottom line of such increases.) It may well be that hotels will go under because there are no tourists. If the Government wants to provide relief to such hotels, this should be done directly, not by subsidizing the price of electricity.
An added benefit of charging electricity consumers the CEB’s inefficiency cost is that a further increase in electricity price will result in a reduction in demand, which will, in turn, reduce the requirement for more costly imported fossil fuels to run the CEB’s power plants. A clear example of such an impact is the recent large increases in transportation fuel costs, which, as reported in the press, has resulted in a 50% reduction in the demand for fuel.
One last point on the social impact of tariff increases. Electricity is fundamental to modern life. Everyone should be able to afford some minimum level of electricity consumption. A further increase in tariffs may put electricity out of reach of the poorest consumers who are struggling to survive today. To protect such consumers, it would be best that those who consume only a small amount of electricity each month be given a special lower tariff. The CEB already has such a tariff for residences consuming less that 60 units (kWh) a month.
A household consuming 30 units in a month only pays Rs 360 under the present tariff, and those consuming 60 units pay a monthly bill of Rs 900. With the latest proposed increases, their respective bills would increase to Rs 1,300 and to Rs 2,960. These increases look large if expressed as a percentage. In absolute rupee terms they are not, compared to the present official poverty line income threshold of Rs 55,000 – 60,000 per month for a family of four. The additional Rs 940 for those consuming 30 units in a month, would be about the same as one meal for a family of four. If the Government wishes to reduce the special tariff for consumption from 30-60 units, the impact on CEB revenue of any such adjustment could be covered by slight increases in the tariff revision to other consumer categories.
What of the longer-term prospects?
The CEB is a mammoth organization, an order of magnitude larger than the largest private sector companies in Sri Lanka. It is abundantly clear that the CEB, like most Government ventures, is not the most efficient of organizations. There is much that can be done to improve its efficiency, but this can only be achieved in the long-term. The minister has proposed the first step, the “unbundling” of the CEB, where the generation, transmission, and distribution parts of the CEB are divided into separate entities. In the case of generation and distribution, these could be divided even further. The idea is that these smaller entities could be better managed, and more importantly, that it should be possible to bring in private sector management into some portions, or even privatize them completely.
The minister’s proposal is not new. Several past attempts were made to do just such an unbundling; one during the time I worked in the Ministry of Finance, around 20 years ago. The engineers who run the CEB, fully aware of the loss of their monopoly control of the entire power supply of the country with such unbundling, blocked these attempts. The present minister thinks he can easily get it through this time. The CEB engineers, who are very smart about looking after their own interests, are biding their time and, I predict, they will put up a fight, and may well succeed in blocking the break up, as they have done in the past.
Politicians across the board, even those who are part of the Government, have been reported in the press as objecting to a further tariff increase by the CEB. None of them have any alternate proposals for how the revenue shortfall of the CEB can be met, other than to make glib comments like “reduce the inefficiency of the CEB,” “recover the money stolen in the sugar scam,” “cut Government waste,” and so on. These things are not going to happen in the coming year or two. The problem is here now. No politician has highlighted the serious adverse impact of no tariff increase on the Government policy to substantially increases RE’s share of the grid which I have highlighted here.
Government has to bite the bullet and take the hard decision to increase CEB’s tariffs now. Becoming current and staying current with payments due to RE producers should also be a condition of the tariff increase. If possible, it should leverage the decision with a mutually acceptable agreement with the CEB’s engineers to support the unbundling of the CEB towards improved efficiency.
The author has extensive work experience in renewable energy in private industry, and in policy formulation and implementation in the Ministry of Finance of the GOSL.
Features
Reconciliation, Mood of the Nation and the NPP Government
From the time the search for reconciliation began after the end of the war in 2009 and before the NPP’s victories at the presidential election and the parliamentary election in 2024, there have been four presidents and four governments who variously engaged with the task of reconciliation. From last to first, they were Ranil Wickremesinghe, Gotabaya Rajapaksa, Maithripala Sirisena and Mahinda Rajapaksa. They had nothing in common between them except they were all different from President Anura Kumara Dissanayake and his approach to reconciliation.
The four former presidents approached the problem in the top-down direction, whereas AKD is championing the building-up approach – starting from the grassroots and spreading the message and the marches more laterally across communities. Mahinda Rajapaksa had his ‘agents’ among the Tamils and other minorities. Gotabaya Rajapaksa was the dummy agent for busybodies among the Sinhalese. Maithripala Sirisena and Ranil Wickremesinghe operated through the so called accredited representatives of the Tamils, the Muslims and the Malaiayaka (Indian) Tamils. But their operations did nothing for the strengthening of institutions at the provincial and the local levels. No did they bother about reaching out to the people.
As I recounted last week, the first and the only Northern Provincial Council election was held during the Mahinda Rajapaksa presidency. That nothing worthwhile came out of that Council was not mainly the fault of Mahinda Rajapaksa. His successors, Maithripala Sirisena and Ranil Wickremesinghe as Prime Minister, with the TNA acceding as a partner of their government, cancelled not only the NPC but also all PC elections and indefinitely suspended the functioning of the country’s nine elected provincial councils. Now there are no elected councils, only colonial-style governors and their secretaries.
Hold PC Elections Now
And the PC election can, like so many other inherited rotten cans, is before the NPP government. Is the NPP government going to play footsie with these elections or call them and be done with it? That is the question. Here are the cons and pros as I see them.
By delaying or postponing the PC elections President AKD and the NPP government are setting themselves up to be justifiably seen as following the cynical playbook of the former interim President Ranil Wickremesinghe. What is the point, it will be asked, in subjecting Ranil Wickremesinghe to police harassment over travel expenses while following his playbook in postponing elections?
Come to think of it, no VVIP anywhere can now whine of unfair police arrest after what happened to the disgraced former prince Andrew Mountbatten Windsor in England on Thursday. Good for the land where habeas corpus and due process were born. The King did not know what was happening to his kid brother, and he was wise enough to pronounce that “the law must take its course.” There is no course for the law in Trump’s America where Epstein spun his webs around rich and famous men and helpless teenage girls. Only cover up. Thanks to his Supreme Court, Trump can claim covering up to be a core function of his presidency, and therefore absolutely immune from prosecution. That is by the way.
Back to Sri Lanka, meddling with elections timing and process was the method of operations of previous governments. The NPP is supposed to change from the old ways and project a new way towards a Clean Sri Lanka built on social and ethical pillars. How does postponing elections square with the project of Clean Sri Lanka? That is the question that the government must be asking itself. The decision to hold PC elections should not be influenced by whether India is not asking for it or if Canada is requesting it.
Apart from it is the right thing do, it is also politically the smart thing to do.
The pros are aplenty for holding PC elections as soon it is practically possible for the Election Commission to hold them. Parliament can and must act to fill any legal loophole. The NPP’s political mojo is in the hustle and bustle of campaigning rather than in the sedentary business of governing. An election campaign will motivate the government to re-energize itself and reconnect with the people to regain momentum for the remainder of its term.
While it will not be possible to repeat the landslide miracle of the 2024 parliamentary election, the government can certainly hope and strive to either maintain or improve on its performance in the local government elections. The government is in a better position to test its chances now, before reaching the halfway mark of its first term in office than where it might be once past that mark.
The NPP can and must draw electoral confidence from the latest (February 2026) results of the Mood of the Nation poll conducted by Verité Research. The government should rate its chances higher than what any and all of the opposition parties would do with theirs. The Mood of the Nation is very positive not only for the NPP government but also about the way the people are thinking about the state of the country and its economy. The government’s approval rating is impressively high at 65% – up from 62% in February 2025 and way up from the lowly 24% that people thought of the Ranil-Rajapaksa government in July 2024. People’s mood is also encouragingly positive about the State of the Economy (57%, up from 35% and 28%); Economic Outlook (64%, up from 55% and 30%); the level of Satisfaction with the direction of the country( 59%, up from 46% and 17%).
These are positively encouraging numbers. Anyone familiar with North America will know that the general level of satisfaction has been abysmally low since the Iraq war and the great economic recession. The sour mood that invariably led to the election of Trump. Now the mood is sourer because of Trump and people in ever increasing numbers are looking for the light at the end of the Trump tunnel. As for Sri Lanka, the country has just come out of the 20-year long Rajapaksa-Ranil tunnel. The NPP represents the post Rajapaksa-Ranil era, and the people seem to be feeling damn good about it.
Of course, the pundits have pooh-poohed the opinion poll results. What else would you expect? You can imagine which twisted way the editorial keypads would have been pounded if the government’s approval rating had come under 50%, even 49.5%. There may have even been calls for the government to step down and get out. But the government has its approval rating at 65% – a level any government anywhere in the Trump-twisted world would be happy to exchange without tariffs. The political mood of the people is not unpalpable. Skeptical pundits and elites will have to only ask their drivers, gardeners and their retinue of domestics as to what they think of AKD, Sajith or Namal. Or they can ride a bus or take the train and check out the mood of fellow passengers. They will find Verité’s numbers are not at all far-fetched.
Confab Threats
The government’s plausible popularity and the opposition’s obvious weaknesses should be good enough reason for the government to have the PC elections sooner than later. A new election campaign will also provide the opportunity not only for the government but also for the opposition parties to push back on the looming threat of bad old communalism making a comeback. As reported last week, a “massive Sangha confab” is to be held at 2:00 PM on Friday, February 20th, at the All Ceylon Buddhist Congress Headquarters in Colombo, purportedly “to address alleged injustices among monks.”
According to a warning quote attributed to one of the organizers, Dambara Amila Thero, “never in the history of Sri Lanka has there been a government—elected by our own votes and the votes of the people—that has targeted and launched such systematic attacks against the entire Sasana as this one.” That is quite a mouthful and worthier practitioners of Buddhism have already criticized this unconvincing claim and its being the premise for a gathering of spuriously disaffected monks. It is not difficult to see the political impetus behind this confab.
The impetus obviously comes from washed up politicians who have tried every slogan from – L-board-economists, to constitutional dictatorship, to save-our children from sex-education fear mongering – to attack the NPP government and its credibility. They have not been able to stick any of that mud on the government. So, the old bandicoots are now trying to bring back the even older bogey of communalism on the pretext that the NPP government has somewhere, somehow, “targeted and launched such systematic attacks against the entire Sasana …”
By using a new election campaign to take on this threat, the government can turn the campaign into a positively educational outreach. That would be consistent with the President’s and the government’s commitment to “rebuild Sri Lanka” on the strength of national unity without allowing “division, racism, or extremism” to undermine unity. A potential election campaign that takes on the confab of extremists will also provide a forum and an opportunity for the opposition parties to let their positions known. There will of course be supporters of the confab monks, but hopefully they will be underwhelming and not overwhelming.
For all their shortcomings, Sajith Premadasa and Namal Rajapaksa belong to the same younger generation as Anura Kumara Dissanayake and they are unlikely to follow the footsteps of their fathers and fan the flames of communalism and extremism all over again. Campaigning against extremism need not and should not take the form of disparaging and deriding those who might be harbouring extremist views. Instead, the fight against extremism should be inclusive and not exclusive, should be positively educational and appeal to the broadest cross-section of people. That is the only sustainable way to fight extremism and weaken its impacts.
Provincial Councils and Reconciliation
In the framework of grand hopes and simple steps of reconciliation, provincial councils fall somewhere in between. They are part of the grand structure of the constitution but they are also usable instruments for achieving simple and practical goals. Obviously, the Northern Provincial Council assumes special significance in undertaking tasks associated with reconciliation. It is the only jurisdiction in the country where the Sri Lankan Tamils are able to mind their own business through their own representatives. All within an indivisibly united island country.
But people in the north will not be able to do anything unless there is a provincial council election and a newly elected council is established. If the NPP were to win a majority of seats in the next Northern Provincial Council that would be a historic achievement and a validation of its approach to national reconciliation. On the other hand, if the NPP fails to win a majority in the north, it will have the opportunity to demonstrate that it has the maturity to positively collaborate from the centre with a different provincial government in the north.
The Eastern Province is now home to all three ethnic groups and almost in equal proportions. Managing the Eastern Province will an experiential microcosm for managing the rest of the country. The NPP will have the opportunity to prove its mettle here – either as a governing party or as a responsible opposition party. The Central Province and the Badulla District in the Uva Province are where Malaiyaka Tamils have been able to reconstitute their citizenship credentials and exercise their voting rights with some meaningful consequence. For decades, the Malaiyaka Tamils were without voting rights. Now they can vote but there is no Council to vote for in the only province and district they predominantly leave. Is that fair?
In all the other six provinces, with the exception of the Greater Colombo Area in the Western Province and pockets of Muslim concentrations in the South, the Sinhalese predominate, and national politics is seamless with provincial politics. The overlap often leads to questions about the duplication in the PC system. Political duplication between national and provincial party organizations is real but can be avoided. But what is more important to avoid is the functional duplication between the central government in Colombo and the provincial councils. The NPP governments needs to develop a different a toolbox for dealing with the six provincial councils.
Indeed, each province regardless of the ethnic composition, has its own unique characteristics. They have long been ignored and smothered by the central bureaucracy. The provincial council system provides the framework for fostering the unique local characteristics and synthesizing them for national development. There is another dimension that could be of special relevance to the purpose of reconciliation.
And that is in the fostering of institutional partnerships and people to-people contacts between those in the North and East and those in the other Provinces. Linkages could be between schools, and between people in specific activities – such as farming, fishing and factory work. Such connections could be materialized through periodical visits, sharing of occupational challenges and experiences, and sports tournaments and ‘educational modules’ between schools. These interactions could become two-way secular pilgrimages supplementing the age old religious pilgrimages.
Historically, as Benedict Anderson discovered, secular pilgrimages have been an important part of nation building in many societies across the world. Read nation building as reconciliation in Sri Lanka. The NPP government with its grassroots prowess is well positioned to facilitate impactful secular pilgrimages. But for all that, there must be provincial councils elections first.
by Rajan Philips
Features
Barking up the wrong tree
The idiom “Barking up the wrong tree” means pursuing a mistaken line of thought, accusing the wrong person, or looking for solutions in the wrong place. It refers to hounds barking at a tree that their prey has already escaped from. This aptly describes the current misplaced blame for young people’s declining interest in religion, especially Buddhism.
It is a global phenomenon that young people are increasingly disengaged from organized religion, but this shift does not equate to total abandonment, many Gen Z and Millennials opt for individual, non-institutional spirituality over traditional structures. However, the circumstances surrounding Buddhism in Sri Lanka is an oddity compared to what goes on with religions in other countries. For example, the interest in Buddha Dhamma in the Western countries is growing, especially among the educated young. The outpouring of emotions along the 3,700 Km Peace March done by 16 Buddhist monks in USA is only one example.
There are good reasons for Gen Z and Millennials in Sri Lanka to be disinterested in Buddhism, but it is not an easy task for Baby Boomer or Baby Bust generations, those born before 1980, to grasp these bitter truths that cast doubt on tradition. The two most important reasons are: a) Sri Lankan Buddhism has drifted away from what the Buddha taught, and b) The Gen Z and Millennials tend to be more informed and better rational thinkers compared to older generations.
This is truly a tragic situation: what the Buddha taught is an advanced view of reality that is supremely suited for rational analyses, but historical circumstances have deprived the younger generations over centuries from knowing that truth. Those who are concerned about the future of Buddhism must endeavor to understand how we got here and take measures to bridge that information gap instead of trying to find fault with others. Both laity and clergy are victims of historical circumstances; but they have the power to shape the future.
First, it pays to understand how what the Buddha taught, or Dhamma, transformed into 13 plus schools of Buddhism found today. Based on eternal truths he discovered, the Buddha initiated a profound ethical and intellectual movement that fundamentally challenged the established religious, intellectual, and social structures of sixth-century BCE India. His movement represented a shift away from ritualistic, dogmatic, and hierarchical systems (Brahmanism) toward an empirical, self-reliant path focused on ethics, compassion, and liberation from suffering. When Buddhism spread to other countries, it transformed into different forms by absorbing and adopting the beliefs, rituals, and customs indigenous to such land; Buddha did not teach different truths, he taught one truth.
Sri Lankan Buddhism is not any different. There was resistance to the Buddha’s movement from Brahmins during his lifetime, but it intensified after his passing, which was responsible in part for the disappearance of Buddhism from its birthplace. Brahminism existed in Sri Lanka before the arrival of Buddhism, and the transformation of Buddhism under Brahminic influences is undeniable and it continues to date.
This transformation was additionally enabled by the significant challenges encountered by Buddhism during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries (Wachissara 1961, Mirando 1985). It is sad and difficult to accept, but Buddhism nearly disappeared from the land that committed the Teaching into writing for the first time. During these tough times, with no senior monks to perform ‘upasampada,’ quasi monks who had not been admitted to the order – Ganninanses, maintained the temples. Lacking any understanding of the doctrinal aspects of Buddha’s teaching, they started performing various rituals that Buddha himself rejected (Rahula 1956, Marasinghe 1974, Gombrich 1988, 1997, Obeyesekere 2018).
The agrarian population had no way of knowing or understanding the teachings of the Buddha to realize the difference. They wanted an easy path to salvation, some power to help overcome an illness, protect crops from pests or elements; as a result, the rituals including praying and giving offerings to various deities and spirits, a Brahminic practice that Buddha rejected in no uncertain terms, became established as part of Buddhism.
This incorporation of Brahminic practices was further strengthened by the ascent of Nayakkar princes to the throne of Kandy (1739–1815) who came from the Madurai Nayak dynasty in South India. Even though they converted to Buddhism, they did not have any understanding of the Teaching; they were educated and groomed by Brahminic gurus who opposed Buddhism. However, they had no trouble promoting the beliefs and rituals that were of Brahminic origin and supporting the institution that performed them. By the time British took over, nobody had any doubts that the beliefs, myths, and rituals of the Sinhala people were genuine aspects of Buddha’s teaching. The result is that today, Sri Lankan Buddhists dare doubt the status quo.
The inclusion of Buddhist literary work as historical facts in public education during the late nineteenth century Buddhist revival did not help either. Officially compelling generations of students to believe poetic embellishments as facts gave the impression that Buddhism is a ritualistic practice based on beliefs.
This did not create any conflict in the minds of 19th agrarian society; to them, having any doubts about the tradition was an unthinkable, unforgiving act. However, modernization of society, increased access to information, and promotion of rational thinking changed things. Younger generations have begun to see the futility of current practices and distance themselves from the traditional institution. In fact, they may have never heard of it, but they are following Buddha’s advice to Kalamas, instinctively. They cannot be blamed, instead, their rational thinking must be appreciated and promoted. It is the way the Buddha’s teaching, the eternal truth, is taught and practiced that needs adjustment.
The truths that Buddha discovered are eternal, but they have been interpreted in different ways over two and a half millennia to suit the prevailing status of the society. In this age, when science is considered the standard, the truth must be viewed from that angle. There is nothing wrong or to be afraid of about it for what the Buddha taught is not only highly scientific, but it is also ahead of science in dealing with human mind. It is time to think out of the box, instead of regurgitating exegesis meant for a bygone era.
For example, the Buddhist model of human cognition presented in the formula of Five Aggregates (pancakkhanda) provides solutions to the puzzles that modern neuroscience and philosophers are grappling with. It must be recognized that this formula deals with the way in which human mind gathers and analyzes information, which is the foundation of AI revolution. If the Gen Z and Millennial were introduced to these empirical aspects of Dhamma, they would develop a genuine interest in it. They thrive in that environment. Furthermore, knowing Buddha’s teaching this way has other benefits; they would find solutions to many problems they face today.
Buddha’s teaching is a way to understand nature and the humans place in it. One who understands this can lead a happy and prosperous life. As the Dhammapada verse number 160 states – “One, indeed, is one’s own refuge. Who else could be one’s own refuge?” – such a person does not depend on praying or offering to idols or unknown higher powers for salvation, the Brahminic practice. Therefore, it is time that all involved, clergy and laity, look inwards, and have the crucial discussion on how to educate the next generation if they wish to avoid Sri Lankan Buddhism suffer the same fate it did in India.
by Geewananda Gunawardana, Ph.D.
Features
Why does the state threaten Its people with yet another anti-terror law?
The Feminist Collective for Economic Justice (FCEJ) is outraged at the scheme of law proposed by the government titled “Protection of the State from Terrorism Act” (PSTA). The draft law seeks to replace the existing repressive provisions of the Prevention of Terrorism Act 1979 (PTA) with another law of extraordinary powers. We oppose the PSTA for the reason that we stand against repressive laws, normalization of extraordinary executive power and continued militarization. Ruling by fear destroys our societies. It drives inequality, marginalization and corruption.
Our analysis of the draft PSTA is that it is worse than the PTA. It fails to justify why it is necessary in today’s context. The PSTA continues the broad and vague definition of acts of terrorism. It also dangerously expands as threatening activities of ‘encouragement’, ‘publication’ and ‘training’. The draft law proposes broad powers of arrest for the police, introduces powers of arrest to the armed forces and coast guards, and continues to recognize administrative detention. Extremely disappointing is the unjustifiable empowering of the President to make curfew order and to proscribe organizations for indefinite periods of time, the power of the Secretary to the Ministry of Defence to declare prohibited places and police officers in the rank of Deputy Inspector Generals are given the power to secure restriction orders affecting movement of citizens. The draft also introduces, knowing full well the context of laws delays, the legal perversion of empowering the Attorney General to suspend prosecution for 20 years on the condition that a suspect agrees to a form of punishment such as public apology, payment of compensation, community service, and rehabilitation. Sri Lanka does not need a law normalizing extraordinary power.
We take this moment to remind our country of the devastation caused to minoritized populations under laws such as the PTA and the continued militarization, surveillance and oppression aided by rapidly growing security legislation. There is very limited space for recovery and reconciliation post war and also barely space for low income working people to aspire to physical, emotional and financial security. The threat posed by even proposing such an oppressive law as the PSTA is an affront to feminist conceptions of human security. Security must be recognized at an individual and community level to have any meaning.
The urgent human security needs in Sri Lanka are undeniable – over 50% of households in the country are in debt, a quarter of the population are living in poverty, over 30% of households experience moderate/severe food insecurity issues, the police receive over 100,000 complaints of domestic violence each year. We are experiencing deepening inequality, growing poverty, assaults on the education and health systems of the country, tightening of the noose of austerity, the continued failure to breathe confidence and trust towards reconciliation, recovery, restitution post war, and a failure to recognize and respond to structural discrimination based on gender, race and class, religion. State security cannot be conceived or discussed without people first being safe, secure, and can hope for paths towards developing their lives without threat, violence and discrimination. One year into power and there has been no significant legislative or policy moves on addressing austerity, rolling back of repressive laws, addressing domestic and other forms of violence against women, violence associated with household debt, equality in the family, equality of representation at all levels, and the continued discrimination of the Malaiyah people.
The draft PSTA tells us that no lessons have been learnt. It tells us that this government intends to continue state tools of repression and maintain militarization. It is hard to lose hope within just a year of a new government coming into power with a significant mandate from the people to change the system, and yet we are here. For women, young people, children and working class citizens in this country everyday is a struggle, everyday is a minefield of threats and discrimination. We do not need another threat in the form of the PSTA. Withdraw the PSTA now!
The Feminist Collective for Economic Justice is a collective of feminist economists, scholars, feminist activists, university students and lawyers that came together in April 2022 to understand, analyze and give voice to policy recommendations based on lived realities in the current economic crisis in Sri Lanka.
Please send your comments to – feministcollectiveforjustice@gmail.com
-
Business6 days agoMinistry of Brands to launch Sri Lanka’s first off-price retail destination
-
Latest News1 day agoNew Zealand meet familiar opponents Pakistan at spin-friendly Premadasa
-
Latest News1 day agoTariffs ruling is major blow to Trump’s second-term agenda
-
Latest News1 day agoECB push back at Pakistan ‘shadow-ban’ reports ahead of Hundred auction
-
Features6 days agoGiants in our backyard: Why Sri Lanka’s Blue Whales matter to the world
-
Sports3 days agoOld and new at the SSC, just like Pakistan
-
News5 days agoIMF MD here
-
Business5 days agoGreen Minds: A new platform to rethink environmental governance in Sri Lanka

