Midweek Review

Rajiva on Batalanda controversy, govt.’s failure in Geneva and other matters

Published

1 year ago

2025/03/19

Wickremesinghe responds to Hasan during the controversial interview recorded in London

Former President Ranil Wickremesinghe’s recent interview with Mehdi Hasan on Al Jazeera’s ‘Head-to-Head’ series has caused controversy, both in and outside Parliament, over the role played by Wickremesinghe in the counter-insurgency campaign in the late’80s.

The National People’s Power (NPP) seeking to exploit the developing story to its advantage has ended up with egg on its face as the ruling party couldn’t disassociate from the violent past of the JVP. The debate on the damning Presidential Commission report on Batalanda, on April 10, will remind the country of the atrocities perpetrated not only by the UNP, but as well as by the JVP.

The Island sought the views of former outspoken parliamentarian and one-time head of the Government Secretariat for Coordinating the Peace Process (SCOPP) Prof. Rajiva Wijesinha on a range of issues, with the focus on Batalanda and the failure on the part of the war-winning country to counter unsubstantiated war crimes accusations.

The former President and UNP leader Ranil Wickremesinghe’s interview with Al Jazeera exposed the pathetic failure on the part of Sri Lanka to address war crimes accusations and accountability issues. In the face of aggressive interviewer Mehdi Hasan on ‘Head-to-Head,’ Wickremesinghe struggled pathetically to counter unsubstantiated accusations. Six-time Premier Wickremesinghe who also served as President (July 2022-Sept. 2024) seemed incapable of defending the war-winning armed forces. However, the situation wouldn’t have deteriorated to such an extent if President Mahinda Rajapaksa, who gave resolute political leadership during that war, ensured a proper defence of our armed forces in its aftermath as well-choreographed LTTE supporters were well in place, with Western backing, to distort and tarnish that victory completely. As wartime Secretary General of the Government’s Secretariat for Coordinating the Peace Process (since June 2007 till the successful conclusion of the war) and Secretary to the Ministry of Disaster Management and Human Rights (since Jun 2008) what do you think of Wickremesinghe’s performance?

It made him look very foolish, but this is not surprising since he has no proper answers for most of the questions put to him. Least surprising was his performance with regard to the forces, since for years he was part of the assault forces on the successful Army, and expecting him to defend them is like asking a fox to stand guard on chickens.

In spite of trying to overwhelm Wickremesinghe before a definitely pro-LTTE audience at London’s Conway Hall, Hasan further exposed the hatchet job he was doing by never referring to the fact that the UNP leader, in his capacity as the Yahapalana Premier, co-sponsored the treacherous Geneva Resolution in Oc., 2015, against one’s own victorious armed forces. Hasan, Wickremesinghe and three panelists, namely Frances Harrison, former BBC-Sri Lanka correspondent, Director of International Truth and Justice Project and author of ‘Still Counting the Dead: Survivors of Sri Lanka’s Hidden War,’ Dr. Madura Rasaratnam, Executive Director of PEARL (People for Equality and Relief in Lanka) and former UK and EU MP and Wickremesinghe’s presidential envoy, Niranjan Joseph de Silva Deva Aditya, never even once referred to India’s accountability during the programme recorded in late February but released in March. As a UPFA MP (2010-2015) in addition to have served as Peace Secretariat Chief and Secretary to the Disaster Management and Human Rights Ministry, could we discuss the issues at hand leaving India out?

I would not call the interview a hatchet job since Hasan was basically concerned about Wickremesinghe’s woeful record with regard to human rights. In raising his despicable conduct under Jayewardene, Hasan clearly saw continuity, and Wickremesinghe laid himself open to this in that he nailed his colours to the Rajapaksa mast in order to become President, thus making it impossible for him to revert to his previous stance. Sadly, given how incompetent both Wickremesinghe and Rajapaksa were about defending the forces, one cannot expect foreigners to distinguish between them.

You are one of the many UPFA MPs who backed Maithripala Sirisena’s candidature at the 2015 presidential election. The Sirisena-Wickremesinghe duo perpetrated the despicable act of backing the Geneva Resolution against our armed forces and they should be held responsible for that. Having thrown your weight behind the campaign to defeat Mahinda Rajapaksa’s bid to secure a third term, did you feel betrayed by the Geneva Resolution? And if so, what should have the Yahapalana administration done?

By 2014, given the total failure of the Rajapaksas to deal firmly with critiques of our forces, resolutions against us had started and were getting stronger every year. Mahinda Rajapaksa laid us open by sacking Dayan Jayatilleke who had built up a large majority to support our victory against the Tigers, and appointed someone who intrigued with the Americans. He failed to fulfil his commitments with regard to reforms and reconciliation, and allowed for wholesale plundering, so that I have no regrets about working against him at the 2015 election. But I did not expect Wickremesinghe and his cohorts to plunder, too, and ignore the Sirisena manifesto, which is why I parted company with the Yahapalanaya administration, within a couple of months.

I had expected a Sirisena administration to pursue some of the policies associated with the SLFP, but he was a fool and his mentor Chandrika was concerned only with revenge on the Rajapaksas. You cannot talk about betrayal when there was no faith in the first place. But I also blame the Rajapaksas for messing up the August election by attacking Sirisena and driving him further into Ranil’s arms, so that he was a pawn in his hands.

Have you advised President Mahinda Rajapaksa’s government how to counter unsubstantiated war crimes allegations propagated by various interested parties, particularly the UN, on the basis of the Panel of Experts (PoE) report released in March 2011? Did the government accept your suggestions/recommendations?

Prof. Rajiva Wijesinha

I kept trying, but Mahinda was not interested at all, and had no idea about how to conduct international relations. Sadly, his Foreign Minister was hanging around behind Namal, and proved incapable of independent thought, in his anxiety to gain further promotion. And given that I was about the only person the international community, that was not prejudiced, took seriously – I refer to the ICRC and the Japanese with whom I continued to work, and, indeed, the Americans, until the Ambassador was bullied by her doctrinaire political affairs officer into active undermining of the Rajapaksas – there was much jealousy, so I was shut out from any influence.

But even the admirable effort, headed by Godfrey Gunatilleke, was not properly used. Mahinda Rajapaksa seemed to me more concerned with providing joy rides for people rather than serious counter measures, and representation in Geneva turned into a joke, with him even undermining Tamara Kunanayagam, who, when he supported her, scored a significant victory against the Americans, in September 2011. The Ambassador, who had been intriguing with her predecessor, then told her they would get us in March, and with a little help from their friends here, they succeeded.

As the writer pointed out in his comment on Wickremesinghe’s controversial Al Jazeera interview, the former Commander-in-Chief failed to mention critically important matters that could have countered Hasan’ s line of questioning meant to humiliate Sri Lanka?

How could you have expected that, since his primary concern has always been himself, not the country, let alone the armed forces?

Do you agree that Western powers and an influential section of the international media cannot stomach Sri Lanka’s triumph over separatist Tamil terrorism?

There was opposition to our victory from the start, but this was strengthened by the failure to move on reconciliation, creating the impression that the victory against the Tigers was seen by the government as a victory against Tamils. The failure of the Foreign Ministry to work with journalists was lamentable, and the few exceptions – for instance the admirable Vadivel Krishnamoorthy in Chennai or Sashikala Premawardhane in Canberra – received no support at all from the Ministry establishment.

A couple of months after the 2019 presidential election, Gotabaya Rajapaksa declared his intention to withdraw from the Geneva process. On behalf of Sri Lanka that announcement was made in Geneva by the then Foreign Minister Dinesh Gunawardena, who became the Premier during Wickremesinghe’s tenure as the President. That declaration was meant to hoodwink the Sinhala community and didn’t alter the Geneva process and even today the project is continuing. As a person who had been closely involved in the overall government response to terrorism and related matters, how do you view the measures taken during Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s short presidency to counter Geneva?

What measures? I am reminded of the idiocy of the responses to the Darusman report by Basil and Gotabaya Rajapaksa, who went on ego trips and produced unreadable volumes trying to get credit for themselves as to issues of little interest to the world. They were planned in response to Darusman, but when I told Gotabaya that his effort was just a narrative of action, he said that responding to Darusman was not his intention. When I said that was necessary, he told me he had asked Chief-of-Staff Roshan Goonetilleke to do that, but Roshan said he had not been asked and had not been given any resources.

My own two short booklets which took the Darusman allegations to pieces were completely ignored by the Foreign Ministry.

Against the backdrop of the Geneva betrayal in 2015 that involved the late Minister Mangala Samaraweera, how do you view President Wickremesinghe’s response to the Geneva threat?

A: Wickremesinghe did not see Geneva as a threat at all. Who exactly is to blame for the hardening of the resolution, after our Ambassador’s efforts to moderate it, will require a straightforward narrative from the Ambassador, Ravinatha Ariyasinha, who felt badly let down by his superiors. Geneva should not be seen as a threat, since as we have seen follow through is minimal, but we should rather see it as an opportunity to put our own house in order.

President Anura Kumara Dissanayake recently questioned both the loyalty and professionalism of our armed forces credited with defeating Northern and Southern terrorism. There hadn’t been a previous occasion, a President or a Premier, under any circumstances, questioned the armed forces’ loyalty or professionalism. We cannot also forget the fact that President Dissanayake is the leader of the once proscribed JVP responsible for death and destruction during 1971 and 1987-1990 terror campaigns. Let us know of your opinion on President Dissanayake’s contentious comments on the armed forces?

A: I do not see them as contentious, I think what is seen as generalizations was critiques of elements in the forces. There have been problems, as we saw from the very different approach of Sarath Fonseka and Daya Ratnayake, with regard to civilian casualties, the latter having planned a campaign in the East which led to hardly any civilian deaths. But having monitored every day, while I headed the Peace Secretariat, all allegations, and obtained explanations of what happened from the forces, I could have proved that they were more disciplined than other forces in similar circumstances.

The violence of the JVP and the LTTE and other such groups was met with violence, but the forces observed some rules which I believe the police, much more ruthlessly politicized by Jayewardene, failed to do. The difference in behaviour between the squads led for instance by Gamini Hettiarachchi and Ronnie Goonesinghe makes this clear.

Mehdi Hasan also strenuously questioned Wickremesinghe on his role in the UNP’s counter-terror campaign during the 1987-1990 period. The British-American journalists of Indian origins attacked Wickremesinghe over the Batalanda Commission report that had dealt with extra-judicial operations carried out by police, acting on the political leadership given by Wickremesinghe. What is your position?

Wickremesinghe’s use of thugs’ right through his political career is well known. I still recall my disappointment, having thought better of him, when a senior member of the UNP, who disapproved thoroughly of what Jayewardene had done to his party, told me that Wickremesinghe was not honest because he used thugs. In ‘My Fair Lady,’ the heroine talks about someone to whom gin was mother’s milk, and for Wickremesinghe violence is mother’s milk, as can be seen by the horrors he associated with.

The latest revelations about Deshabandu Tennakoon, whom he appointed IGP despite his record, makes clear his approval for extra-judicial operations.

Finally, will you explain how to counter war crimes accusations as well as allegations with regard to the counter-terror campaign in the’80s?

I do not think it is possible to counter allegations about the counter-terror campaign of the eighties, since many of those allegations, starting with the Welikada Prison massacre, which Wickremesinghe’s father admitted to me the government had engendered, are quite accurate. And I should stress that the worst excesses, such as the torture and murder of Wijeyedasa Liyanaarachchi, happened under Jayewardene, since there is a tendency amongst the elite to blame Premadasa. He, to give him his due, was genuine about a ceasefire, which the JVP ignored, foolishly in my view though they may have had doubts about Ranjan Wijeratne’s bona fides.

With regard to war crimes accusations, I have shown how, in my ‘Hard Talk’ interview, which you failed to mention in describing Wickeremesinghe’s failure to respond coherently to Hasan. The speeches Dayan Jayatilleke and I made in Geneva make clear what needed and still needs to be done, but clear sighted arguments based on a moral perspective that is more focused than the meanderings, and the frequent hypocrisy, of critics will not now be easy for the country to furnish.

By Shamindra Ferdinando

All News Advertisement

Midweek Review

A retired General’s narrative

Published

5 days ago

2026/06/3

Sahan Weerasooriya

A bus belonging to the SLA set on fire outside President Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s Pangiriwatte residence on 31 May, 2022

Regime change:

Egodawele

Gemunu Watch veteran retired Maj. Gen. K.B. Egodawele painted a bleak picture of the overall failure on the part of the Defence Ministry, National Security Council and the armed forces to deal with the Pangiriwatte, Mirihana, violent protest on 31, March, 2022. Had those responsible for overall security taken tangible measures, after the Pangiriwatte letdown, the rapid deterioration of the situation, leading to the 9 July, 2022, assault on the President’s House, could have been averted, he opined. The author explained how in the absence of even a basic plan to prevent large scale public movement/gathering, the conspirators succeeded in bringing several hundred thousand people to Colombo, that included even a train load of activists from Kandy. Egodawele quite rightly asserted that the hoodwinked ordinary innocent people had been the real strength behind the regime change operation. Egodawele raised a spate of pertinent questions regarding the security aspects, with the focus on the 09 July, 2022, assault, taking into consideration various influencing factors, including Field Marshal Sarath Fonseka’s appeal to the armed forces not to point guns at the public as they didn’t want a repetition of 9 May, 2022, at Galle Face.

Whatever the impact of politicians and religious leaders urging the armed forces not to intervene, the war-winning Army Chief’s appeal may have influenced the military and even some members of the National Security Council.

By Shamindra Ferdinando

Maj. Gen. (retd.) K.B. Egodawele believes the ban on import of chemical fertilisers and agrochemicals, in April/May 2021, that led to staggering drop in crop yields, and countrywide protests, had been a key contributing factors that helped galvanise the Western-engineered Aragalaya plot against President Gotabaya Rajapaksa, similar to parallel regime changes carried out by Washington in Pakistan, Bangladesh and Nepal.

Egodawele, who had served the President as an Additional Secretary (Administration), attached to the Presidential Secretariat, dealt with regime change in ‘Aragalaya: Adarayen Prachandathwayata (From Love to Violence). In fact, according to the ex-Gemunu Watch veteran, who retired in 2004, the crisis caused by the fertiliser ban had been the first major issue that undermined President Rajapaksa.

Turmoil over the fertiliser ban paved the way for a series of other large scale protests. Although not directly connected with the fertiliser issue, teachers’ protests, demanding higher salaries, campaign against Sir John Kotelawala National Defence University (KNDU) Bill, Muslims and Catholics’ protests, targeting the President, followed by countrywide demonstrations over the collapse of essential services and supplies, created an explosive situation. The unexplained explosions of gas cylinders, too, caused anger and confusion among the public struggling to cope up with the developing situation.

Egodawele asserted that the Tamil Diaspora played a significant role in the regime-change project, with external powers utilising political parties here to carry out the conspiracy. The author is confident that the regime change project got underway soon after the Gajaba Regiment veteran assumed Office, as the seventh executive President.

In addition to Egodawele, who launched his work in 2023, former Central Bank Governor Ajith Nivard Cabraal (2022), former parliamentarian Wimal Weerawansa (2023), renowned author Sena Thoradeniya (2023), one-time Finance Secretary Mahinda Siriwardana (2025), President Ranil Wickremesinghe’s media head Prof. Sunanda Maddumabandara (2025), political analyst Asanga Abeygunasekera (2026) and President Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s Media head/DG, Information Department Mohan Samaranayake (2026) dealt with the first successful use of calculated violence to achieve a regime change.

As a person who had a ring side view of the rapid developments, Egodawele quite rightly asserted that the crisis got out of hand due to the delay on the part of the government to reach consensus with the International Monetary Fund (IMF) to secure a lifeline. Who caused the delay in Sri Lanka initiating action to obtain IMF assistance for the 18th time? Those who had read Siriwardena’s book know that direct accusations were directed at the then Central Bank Governor W.D. Lakshman and others for their failure to seek IMF assistance, thereby jeopardizing the government. Samaranayake went a step further when he questioned whether such actions had been deliberate and meant to cause the downfall of the President, elected by a huge majority.

Referring to the Covid-19 crisis that dealt a knockout blow to the already weak national economy, Egodawele declared that it wouldn’t be fair by President Gotabaya Rajapaksa to blame him for the economic fallout as previous leaders, too, contributed to the collapse. Alleging that the external and internal conspirators exploited the Covid-19 crisis to achieve their political objective, the author named the main Opposition Samagi Jana Balwegaya (SJB), the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna and JVP breakaway faction Frontline socialist party (FSP/Peratugami pakshaya) as well as other political parties and groups being among the schemers.

The Catholic Church was also accused of direct involvement in the operation against President Gotabaya Rajapaksa. However, the author’s assertion, in the foreword, that extremists took control over the protest campaign that was launched at Kohuwala by those ordinary people affected by the crisis seemed wrong.

Having perused all books which dealt with the regime change operation and discussed the issues at hand with those in government at that time, both civilian and military, The Island is of the view that the whole operation, from the very beginning, was planned and executed by political parties/groups, both in and outside Parliament. Perhaps as Samaranayake pointed out in his study of the regime change project, Switzerland, with the backing of the US, launched the operation in late November, 2029, by staging the abduction drama, with the help of Somalatha or Siriyalatha Perera (later changed to Garnier Banister Francis), a local employee at the Embassy (https://island.lk/focus-on-swiss-role-in-garnier-abduction-as-furgler-succeeds-mock/)

Egodawele’s assertion that President Gotabaya’s decision to accommodate UNP leader Ranil Wickremesinghe in his Cabinet, as Prime Minister, as a correct and prudent move, is questionable. The President had no other option but to reach consensus with Wickremesinghe after the SJB leader Sajith Premadasa declared pre-conditions for him to accept that offer. But, Wickremesinghe’s acceptance of premiership cannot be examined without taking into consideration his role in the US-India backed project. President Gotabaya Rajapaksa, too, declared that Wickremesinghe was the best person to handle the situation but, whatever the assertions, the fact remains he was part of it. The protest couldn’t have exploded at Pangiriwattte, Mirihana, outside the President’s private residence without the direct UNP involvement.

Internal strife

From the very outset, the President failed to receive the anticipated support from his team. In fact, the Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna (SLPP) hadn’t been enthusiastic in fielding the wartime Defence Secretary as their candidate but the circumstances compelled them to do so. In the absence of direct control of the SLPP that commanded a 2/3 majority in Parliament, though it secured only 145 seats at the 2020 general election, the President never really received the backing of the ruling party.

Egodawele discussed this issue to some extent as one of the major reasons for the failure on the part of the President to face daunting challenges, particularly on the economic front. The President had been furious and so disappointed over the way the Central Bank and the Treasury responded to, what he called, the global crisis, and he directly accused them of not briefing him properly. Egodawele, who had been, most probably, present at a meeting the President called on 16 June, 2020, quoted him as having declared that the Central Bank failed to submit a single proposal to strengthen the economy.

The author emphasised the increase of funds required for debt servicing from USD 2 bn in 2014 to USD 6 bn by 2019 end as a key contributing factor for the crisis that overwhelmed President Rajapaksa. Those who had been very fast to blame President Gotabaya for bankruptcy are conveniently silent on the culpability of the UNP-SLFP Yahapalanaya.

The Wickremesinghe-Sirisena duo took an estimated USD 12.05 bn in foreign currency loans through International Sovereign Bonds (ISBs). In addition to ISBs, they borrowed over Rs. 5.7 trillion in domestic (rupee-denominated) loans via treasury bills and bonds. In spite of that, Wickremesinghe emerged as the country’s saviour and he, unashamedly, exploited the situation to his advantage at the 2024 presidential election. The UNP propagated the lie that Wickremesinghe saved the country from ruins without making reference to the massive borrowings, during the Yahapalana administration, that caused irreparable damage to the country and, as to this day, we do not know what they did with such huge borrowings. At least the Rajapaksas built a brand new international airport and a harbour, along with countless other development projects, from expressways to resuscitating badly neglected road network, and even built the country’s very first coal fired power plant at Norochcholai.

Egodawele should have paid sufficient attention to President Gotabaya’s hasty declaration of sweeping tax cuts to kick start the sagging economy with private investments. Instead of defending the President’s decision, the author should have dealt with the issue with an open mind. The ill-fated tax cuts should be examined taking into consideration the drastic reduction of the Special Commodity Levy (SCL) on imported sugar, from Rs. 50 to 25 cents per kilogram, in October, 2020. Although the author made no reference to the sugar scam, the writer believes it caused massive harm to the Rajapaksa government image and it can be compared with the release of 323 plus two ‘ice’ containers from the Colombo port by the incumbent government, in January, 2025.

Such shortsighted, corrupt and fraudulent actions erode public confidence in those governing the country. That is the undeniable truth our political parties cannot comprehend. The SLPP tried its best to cover up the sugar scam and, within weeks, ended up with a massively tarnished image. It may have been a case of paying back those who funded their previous election. The cocky SLPP never ever bothered to examine its actions. Instead, the SLPP attacked, including its own if they offered a dissenting opinion. Samaranayake, in his must-read memoirs, explained the parliamentary group, at the behest of Basil Rajapaksa, harmed both the party and the administration. (https://island.lk/overall-slpp-failures-stressed-in-new-aragalaya-narrative/)

GR overwhelmed

Amidst the rapid build-up of the unrelenting campaign against him, President Gotabaya requested visiting Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi, on 09 January, 2022, to help Sri Lanka in debt restructuring. Obviously, China, by then, had decided not to intervene and was an obvious spectator as the US-India sinister project developed beyond control.

The JVP/NPP that entered into seven MoUs with India, including one on defence, in April, 2025, and months later, allowed Indian takeover of the Colombo Dockyard Limited after having launched protests, in January, 2022, against President Gotabaya for reaching an agreement with India, regarding the Trincomalee oil tank farm. India neutralised our fake revolutionaries in JVP/NPP with a cue from Washington, their true master, and brought it within its orbit, and today New Delhi’s influence is growing. The recent declaration by Indian High Commissioner Santosh Jha regarding the urgent and vital need to establish an overland bridge between Rameswaram and Talaimannar underscored the gravity of the developing situation.

Egodawele discussed the acceleration of the SLPP’s internal collapse with the formation of a political group, consisting of 11 constituents/groups of the ruling coalition. The establishment of the grouping, on 02 March, 2022, forced the President to sack ministers Wimal Weerawansa and Udaya Gammanpila. According to the author, the President had been reluctant and refrained from taking a decision at a Cabinet meeting held in the morning but gave in after meeting the parliamentary group.

The President made a last ditch attempt to secure IMF help but by then the situation had deteriorated to such an extent a recovery seemed impossible. Pangiriwatte erupted in violence within days after the IMF agreed, in late March, 2022, to initiate action in response to his request. By then, the SLPP parliamentary group had been fragmented and lost direction as various interested parties sought to distance themselves from the beleaguered President.

The author has allocated an entire chapter to the Muslims’ contribution to the regime change operation. The transformation of their anger, initially over Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s support, in his capacity as the Defence Secretary, during Mahinda Rajapaksa’s presidential tenure, to ‘Bodu Bala Sena’ (BBS), to hatred, that demanded the community, as a whole, sought the President’s ouster, depicted a worrisome picture. That brought the Muslims, who had been chased out of the Northern Province in October, 1990, by the LTTE, and subjected a series of brutal massacres, together with the Tamil Diaspora, to support President Gotabaya’s violent and humiliating ouster, despite his pivotal role in eradicating the separatist terrorists, cannot be disputed, under any circumstances.

Unfortunately, President Rajapaksa, instead of addressing the developing issues, appeared to have aggravated the situation by setting “One Country, One Law” commission, under Ven. Galagodaatte Gnanasara, leader of the ultra-nationalist BBS. Obviously these fake ultra nationalist Sinhalese were like the bought over Jihadists in West Asia, who, in fact, were Western moles. But, perhaps, the author should have examined the much-touted claim that a group of Muslims carried out suicide attacks in April, 2019, to facilitate Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s victory at the presidential election as their (Muslim community) were contradictory. Had the Muslim community been so hostile towards Gotabaya Rajapaksa, why on earth would they sacrifice their own lives to help him win the presidency and then join the Tamil Diaspora and the Catholic Church in the Galle Face regime change project.

Egodawele confidently confirmed that a hasty ban on import of chemical fertilisers, and agrochemicals, was taken due to the government’s inability to pay for fertiliser imports. The author asserted that the government found it difficult to allocate as much as USD 400 mn for fertiliser imports on one occasion.

The GMOA’s role, particularly the influencing actions of its President Dr. Anuruddha Padeniya, and the Chinese carbonic fertiliser fiasco that developed into a major diplomatic issue, resulting in catastrophic Chinese response, undermined the President, who further suffered as a result of teachers’ protests demanding higher salaries, KNDU Bill as well as domestic gas cylinder explosions.

Egodawele’s narrative explained the serious shortcomings on the part of the government in responding to the rapidly developing situations. The seventh chapter that discussed the 31 March, 2022, incidents, near the President’s private residents, proved that those who had been directly responsible for security of the Head of State were clueless regarding the sinister plan hatched by the interested parties to transform the protest campaign to a violent assault. Security chiefs, as well as the intelligence staff, were obviously caught napping. The author dealt with the then Prime Minister Wickremesinghe’s visit to the Pangiriwatte residence to meet President Rajapaksa, the warning issued by the UNPer regarding the gathering of people outside the President’s residence, and secretly planned protest in addition to the one at Jubilee Post junction that seemed peaceful. The author speculated that the protest at Jubilee Post junction may have been carried out to deceive those in charge of security regarding the conspirators real and deadly intentions. The author alleged that the SJB had been involved in the conspiracy. A private television station was also accused of inviting people to join the Pengiriwatte confrontation

Declaring that the Army had been slow in responding to the situation, Egodawele commended the police for not falling to the protesters’ bid to force them to open fire. Egodawele also questioned the rationale in JVP/NPP leader Anura Kumara Dissanayake’s claim that on 01 April, 2022, there were suspicions regarding a group affiliated to the government causing property damage at Pangiriwatte. The despicable role played by a section of the lawyers, in the aftermath of the Pangiriwatte mayhem, was mentioned by Egodawele who opined that had the President taken punitive measures against all those responsible for the Pangiriwatte security failure, perhaps the subsequent events could have been avoided, or successfully dealt with.

The President’s decision to vacate the Pangiriwatte home and move to the President’s House, on the recommendation of the National Security Council, was taken on 01 April, 2022.

Necessity for a proper investigation

Egodawele carefully examined the circumstances leading to the President’s fall. He seems to believe whatever caused the unprecedented crisis the flight of the President could have been averted if the armed forces acted in unison. He dealt with various situations and possibilities while pointing the finger at the JVP/NPP as the dominant party that exploited the situation and secured the support of some retired armed forces officers and men. It would be pertinent to mention that Egodawele launched his book during Wickremesinghe’s presidency in 2023 as the JVP/NPP was making rapid progress.

The need for comprehensive investigation into regime change operations is required. The military needs to identify the shortcomings (intentional/unintentional) on their part to take remedial measures. The author referred to the Rathupaswala shooting, in 2013, and the Rambukkana incident where the Kegalle police opened fire to prevent a violent group from setting a fully loaded fuel bowser on fire, in April, 2022, as two factors that may have impacted on the police and the military. The Rajapaksas response to Rathupaswala and Rambukkana incidents may have discouraged the armed forces and police to an extent they refrained from taking action. Egodawele also found fault with the intelligence services for their failure to recognise the developing insecurity among the police and armed forces and the growing belief that the growing regime change operation was certain to succeed.

Those who are genuinely interested in the regime change project should peruse Egodawele’s easy to comprehend presentation that lucidly dealt with a crisis created by what can be described as collective blunders by successive governments, though the declaration of bankruptcy was blamed on President Gotabaya Rajapaksa.

Midweek Review

Palm leaf manuscripts of Sri Lanka – IV

Published

5 days ago

2026/06/3

Sahan Weerasooriya

Tripitaka was first recorded on palm leaves. Religious histories such as Mahavamsa and Tupavamsa were also written on palm leaves. The printed texts we read today, of ancient classics, were composed after examining and comparing several palm leaf manuscripts. We forget this when we read. We assume that they were always on paper!

It is important to remember that literacy was developed through the use of ola manuscripts. The hodiya (alphabet) was written on palm leaf. The Sinhala hodiya included additional characters to accommodate Sanskrit and Pali phonemes. There were 52 letters. The library of the National Museum, Colombo has a palm leaf hodiya.

The tradition of writing on palm leaves continued throughout the colonial period. Robert Knox, who spent nearly two decades in captivity in the Kandyan Kingdom (Udarata), while the Dutch controlled Sri Lanka’s coastal areas (17th Century), said the ‘books’ available in Sinhala homes were on religion, medicine, magic, etc. This interest continued in the years that followed. In 1930, when the Historical Manuscripts Commission surveyed palm-leaf manuscripts held in private homes in Udarata, it found manuscripts on medicine, astrology, and charms.

The tradition of writing on palm leaves was held in high esteem and was not readily abandoned, observed analysts. Ananda Coomaraswamy, who was in Sri Lanka from 1903 to 1907 during British rule, said that Kandyan craftsmen invariably prepared their jewellery drawings on ola leaves. He had encountered only a handful drawn on paper.

Sirancee Gunawardena’s book titled “Palm leaf manuscripts of Sri Lanka “(1977) is the first and probably only book which gives a comprehensive account of the palm leaf manuscripts of Sri Lanka. The book is a landmark publication. There is no other book like it on the subject. The author deserves much praise and appreciation for her painstaking work.

This book has been written primarily to encourage Sri Lankans to regard palm-leaf manuscripts as a valuable part of Sri Lanka’s heritage. Palm leaf manuscripts are historical documents and should be preserved as such, says Sirancee. They contain rich primary data, making them a valuable source for primary research as well. Some olas, at least, had beautiful handwriting and a high standard of grammar. They also contained palindromes that could be read in all four directions, she says.

The book is the product of 12 years of painstaking research. Sirancee speaks of “the joy and feeling of exultation” she experienced “peering into dusty nooks and cobweb encrusted wooden boxes and forgotten corners of libraries”. She has spoken to a number of specialists, including persons who knew how to prepare ola leaves and those who could read the manuscripts. She has personally copied scores of manuscripts and the drawings in them.

Sirancee has examined manuscripts dating from the 13th century to 19th century. She has examined the 13-century copy of Chullavagga in the Museum library. This manuscript has 144 folios, size is 23″ x 2 ½”. The writing is beautiful. It has wooden covers with a design. This may be the oldest book illustration in Sri Lanka, says Sirancee.

She was able, over a long period, to personally examine most of the ola manuscripts in the National Museum. She also examined the collections in temple libraries. The Potgul Vihara, Hanguranketa, had one of the largest and best-arranged libraries of palm-leaf manuscripts.

There was a photograph of Sirancee examining the ola manuscripts at Sri Rahula Vihara, Bentota, and another of Sirancee writing down the text as Gamariya read out from a copy of the Mahavamsa. This was probably the well-known astrologer Daniel Gamariya.

There was a great range in size and content in palm-leaf manuscripts. The average manuscript seen by Sirancee had 60–65 folios. Most manuscripts were pure text, but Vessantara Jataka and yantra manuscripts were profusely illustrated. In one manuscript, there was a drawing of the peacock vehicle of the Kataragama God. The drawing extended over three pages stitched together.

Some Vessantara Jataka olas are illustrated, event by event. These illustrations closely resemble temple fresco paintings. The Vessantara jataka manuscript at Dharmadasa Vihara, Boralesgamuwa is profusely illustrated and in colour. The Illustrations are small, in cameo form but have minute decorative details. In her book, Sirancee had reproduced the full text, including illustrations, of two Vessantara jataka texts (p 93-126,275-278). An illustrated Vidura Pandita Jataka from the Hugh Nevill collection is also reproduced in full (p 269-273).

Sirancee wants to give the reader some idea of the wide range of subjects found in palm-leaf manuscripts. She provides the following list. She notes that palm-leaf manuscripts are a source of material on ancient medicine, veterinary science, astrology, yantra and mantra practices, land endowments by kings, medieval taxation, agriculture, trade in ancient times, land grants, land transfers, royal amnesties, acupuncture, ophthalmology, music, metaphysics, and cosmology, as well as the construction of tanks, temple building, and ancient systems of taxation.

Let us take a closer look at some of the subjects mentioned above. First, it is clear that the Mahavamsa was not the only historical text found in curated palm-leaf collections. The Dipavamsa and the Rajavaliya were also included. Copies of the Rajavaliya are found in abundance in both public and private collections. These include holdings in the Colombo Museum Library, the University of Peradeniya, the British Library, and the private collections of L. S. D. Peiris and S. W. R. D. Bandaranaike.

The Rajavaliya was also found in the following temples: Subadrarama Vihara, Balapitiya; Kande Vihara, Atabage; Pallewela Sellawali Raja Maha Vihara, Halloluwa; Pravachanodaya Pirivena Temple, Molligoda, Wadduwa; and Yogilalena Temple, Sandalankara. The copy at the Sri Vardhanarama Library, Mohotimulla, is one of the oldest.

Historical Manuscripts Commission of 1930 found that family collections had various olas that gave information on the Sinhala kings, especially Udarata kings, with the exact dates and hour of their death. The Thalgodapitiya family collection had a Sri Wickrama Alankaraya by Vaidyaratne Basnayake nilame, 1882. Kurunegala Vistaraya was found in many private family collections.

The Historical Manuscripts Commission did not consider these manuscripts to be of academic importance. However, it noted that Yapahuwa temple had an ola with the dates of coronation and death of kings and other important events in the life of “all kings of Kandy”.

Buddhist temples collected ola manuscripts on Buddhism, with particular emphasis on the Dhamma. Olas containing religious texts of great significance were wrapped in silk and kept in the inner sanctum of the temple, Sirancee observes.

The histories of important stupas and temples were also written on ola manuscripts. The Tupavamsa gives the history of the Mahathupa, the Lowa Maha Paya, and the Mirisaveti Stupa. The Andreas Nell collection contains an ola manuscript describing how the four boundaries of the Ridi Vihara were determined. The Henry Parker collection includes an ola manuscript which states that, in relation to the Ridi Vihara, silver was discovered in a nearby cave by a traveller during his journey.

The temple collections included these historical texts. Nagolle Vihara had a copy of the Mahabodhivamsa. Copies of the Hathavanagalla Vihara Vamsa were distributed to neighbouring temples and can still be found today at the Attanagalla Raja Maha Vihara and the Beligammana Raja Maha Vihara.

Palm leaf manuscripts also gave the specifications for the Buddha statue. There were manuscripts on the art of making images of the Buddha, as well as hamsa, lata, kinnara and makara images. The Sariputra ola in Colombo Museum gives dimensions of images in general and Buddha in particular. It gives specifications for the standing, sitting and reclining Buddha. It is written in Sinhala, but text is in Sanskrit. It is in good handwriting.

The Historical Manuscripts Commission (1930) reported the discovery of a Pirit Pota in a family collection. The manuscript was written using black vegetable dye. According to the Commission’s report, the letters remain as black today as they were when written a century ago. The coloured floral illuminations were also executed using the same vegetable dye.

Jataka stories were held in palm leaves. Sirancee has personally examined many magnificent, large Jataka olas held in libraries. Colombo Museum had two large manuscripts containing many jataka stories. One was titled Sinhala Jataka Pota. Each had over one thousand leaves. The leaf strips were 27″ to 33″ by 2 ½. “

The Pansiya Panas Jataka manuscript owned by K.V.J. de Silva is one of the largest manuscripts Sirancee had seen and possibly the largest in Sri Lanka. It was a copy of a manuscript written in the time of king Parakrama bahu IV (1302-1326). It was written in Sinhala and had 984 folios. The folios at the end of the manuscript contained an index to the stories.

There is a manuscript of Vidura Pandita Jataka in the Hugh Nevill collection in the British Library. It is an original manuscript written in the time of king Senerat (1604-1635). It was written by Matale Rate Atapattu Amanthi of Owille in Matara (sic). The text is accompanied by very beautiful illustrations. The LSD Pieris collection has a small jataka manuscript, 10.5 cm in size, containing several illustrated jatakas. One illustration shows Siddhartha Gautama putting his bowl into the river.The most popular jataka story in Sri Lanka, is undoubtedly the Vessantara Jataka. It features prominently in our temple frescos and olas. The T. P. P. Goonetilleke collection held at Peradeniya had 30 Vessantara Jataka manuscripts. Some Vessantara manuscripts are held in private collections as heirlooms.

Legal matters were recorded on palm leaf manuscripts. Abhaya dana was written in olas. The ola had the royal sign “Sri “symbolising the king but inscribed by a Mohottala on the order of the Sannas Rala. Sirancee had come across a manuscript which stated that when a person died intestate the king inherited the lands. The LSD Pieris collection had a manuscript on a money transaction. The ola recorded that the money owed was handed over in the presence of witnesses who were named.

Land grants were recorded on olas. They were recorded on gold, silver and copper plates as well. Sirancee came across many Land grants in the collections she looked at. VP Ratnayake had a manuscript which said “By this it is declared that Godakkumbura Setunge Mudiyanse was given Pallekumbura in Udukaha pattu Kotugampola Korale on Jan 1630 by Monerawila Rajapakse, Bathwadana Nilame, who is the owner of Matale Dissawa and Sat Korale Dissawa.

P.E.E. Fernando found in the record room of the district court of Kandy, a deed of conveyance drawn up at the request of a person named Patra-Abo Sastru-raja, where he transferred to a vihara he had constructed, a house and garden called Dharmapata geratta (sic) in which he was residing, together with other lands, the boundaries of which were set out in great detail. Some movable objects such as a pitcher, palanquin and three slaves including a female slave were also offered. The document was attested by four persons and a fifth person stated that he had written the document.

Temples carefully looked after olas relating to the ownership of their temple lands. Ridi vihara has a very old manuscript titled Sangaraja Vahanseta Mahanuwara Lekan Pota with names and information on the temples given to the chief monk. When paddy lands were offered to temples, the transfer was recorded in an ola. There is an ola which stated that Pahalavela Kumbura was offered to Atkande Vihara by Teliyaskatuwe Lekam and Maddumaya.

Temples also held on to olas which gave the decisions on disputes over temple land. The high priest of Aluvihare, Matale had an ola on litigation relating to Aluvihare lands. The text is given in full by Sirancee on p 298. Uthurupaw Vihara had an ola issued by Adikara Dissawe. It contained the judgment in a land dispute which had taken place in the 15th century.

In ancient times, administration was done through olas. The Esala Perahera in Kandy has a chieftain mounted on an elephant carrying an ola which gives permission for the perahera to take place. Appointments were announced via olas. The Matale Maha Dissawe Kadaimpota, announced that ‘Niharapola Alahakoon Mohottala was appointed lekam of Tun Korale and also received the Ran Panhinda and flag.’ Administrative responsibilities were given in olas. Historical Manuscripts Commission found at the Atkande vihara, a 16th century ola giving information on the dissaves in charge of Kurunegala district.

Kadaimpot and Lekam Miti were held on ola. The Historical Manuscripts Commission found several of these in private collections. The Maya Rata Kadimpota held in a private collection, gave information on the 28 districts or towns in Maya Rata. At Padiyapelella, the Commission found a Kadaimpota dating to 14th Century, dealing with Ruhuna, Maya, Pihiti with names of subdivisions, the ratas, also Kelaniya, Panadura, Dambadeniya and so on. The Lekam Miti Pota of 1.1.1830 listed land holdings in the eastern part of Nuwarakalaviya. (To be continued)

References

Sirancee Gunawardana Palm leaf manuscripts of Sri Lanka 1977

L.S.D. Pieris Yantra drawing on palm leaf sri Lanka. 2018

1st report of the Historical Manuscripts Commission 1933, SP 9 of 1933

3rd report of Historical Manuscripts Commission 1951, SP 19 of 1951

Ismeth Raheem

https://www.sundaytimes.

lk/260426/plus/turning-back-the-pages-of-sri-lankas-paper-trail-639604.html

by KAMALIKA PIERIS