Editorial
Sanitising plunder
Thursday 4th September, 2025
President Anura Kumara Dissanayake visited Kachchativu on Tuesday amidst a campaign by some Tamil Nadu politicians to pressure India into seeking control of it. Among them is Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam Leader and popular actor Joseph Vijay Chandrasekhar popularly known as Vijay. Tamil Nadu film stars, given to melodrama and known for their ludicrous celluloid stunts that not only insult human intelligence but also defy every known law of physics, bellow anti-Sri Lanka rhetoric to gain political mileage.
The Kachchativu issue was settled once and for all about five decades ago. On 30 Nov. 2011, the then Foreign Minister Prof. G. L. Peiris, answering a question in Parliament, stated that Kachchativu had not been ceded to Sri Lanka, and therefore the question of India officially giving up her claim on it did not arise. He pointed out that during negotiations between India and Sri Lanka on ‘the 1974 Maritime Boundary Agreement on the Historic Waters in the Palk Bay and Palk Straits’, Sri Lanka had established its claim to sovereignty over Kachchativu based on historical records since 1665 belonging to the Dutch East India Company and the British Colonial Government. Based on official correspondence, maps and specific legislation made by Ceylon in respect of the island, Sri Lanka had been able to establish through evidence the regular exercise of administrative control over the Island as well, Prof. Peiris said, noting that accordingly, the 1974 Agreement had formally confirmed Sri Lanka’s sovereignty over the island. The Indian position on the matter had been conveyed again on 26 August 2011 by the Minister of External Affairs of India in a statement in the Lok Sabha thus: ” … We will have to also bear in mind the fact that as per the Agreements we have concluded with Sri Lanka in 1974 and 1976, Kachchativu Island lies on the Sri Lankan side of the Maritime boundary. These Agreements were laid before the Parliament. Therefore, as far as the Government of India is concerned, the issue of Maritime boundary between India and Sri Lanka, and consequently, that of sovereignty over Kachchativu Island is a settled matter.”
In September 2008, in answer to a question raised by Anura Kumara Dissanayake, MP, in Parliament, Foreign Minister Rohitha Bogollagama pointed out that the maritime boundary between Sri Lanka and India stood settled; the 1974 and 1976 Agreements taken together with the Exchange of Letters, signed by Kewal Singh, the then Foreign Secretary to the Government of India, and W.T. Jayasinghe, the then Secretary to the Ministry of Defence and Foreign Affairs of Sri Lanka, had put the question of fishing rights beyond doubt. A Foreign Ministry media statement quoted Bogollagama as having said that Paragraph 1 of the Exchange of Letters very clearly ruled out any fishing rights for the fishermen of the two states in each other’s waters: “Fishing vessels and fishermen of India shall not engage in fishing in the historic waters, the territorial sea and the EEZ of Sri Lanka; nor shall the fishing vessels and fishermen of Sri Lanka engage in fishing in the historic waters, the territorial sea and the EEZ of India, without the express permission of Sri Lanka or India, as the case may be.”
Some Indian politicians are now trying to shift the goalposts. They keep raking up the Kachchativu issue and using it as a bargaining chip to exert diplomatic pressure on Sri Lanka in a bid to settle the illegal fishing problem on terms favourable to Indian fishers. Curiously, the incumbent Indian Minister of External Affairs S. Jaishankar reportedly said on 27 June 2025 that the effects of the Emergency (June 1975—March 1977) could still be felt in Tamil Nadu and in India-Sri Lanka relations as the Government of Prime Minister Indira Gandhi had not protected the interests of the Indian fishermen to fish in the Palk Strait while concluding a pact with Sri Lanka during that period. He reportedly said, “If the Emergency had not been there and if we had genuine Parliament at that time, I don’t think such an agreement would have been approved by the Parliament.” He has apparently sought to garner favour with the Tamil Nadu politicians and fishers and settle political scores with the Congress. Going by his logic, one can question the validity of the Indo-Lanka Accord signed by the J. R. Jayewardene government under Indian pressure.
The Indian politicians who are backing the unchecked plunder of Sri Lanka’s fishing resources have gone to the extent of challenging the agreements between Sri Lanka and India on Kachchativu. The Indian Supreme Court, which heard a preliminary submission by a petitioner that the agreements made in 1974 and 1976 were unconstitutional and void, scheduled the case for final hearing on 15 September, 2025.
There is much more to the issue of poaching than the plunder of Sri Lanka’s fishing resources. Tamil Nadu politicians are using it to undermine Sri Lanka’s sovereignty and perpetuate friction between New Delhi and Colombo. When Dr. Rajitha Senaratne was the Minister of Fisheries, he revealed that the Tamil Nadu politicians who owned trawlers rented them to fishermen on the strict condition that they be used for illegal fishing in Sri Lankan waters. So, India should look beyond the short-term political implications of the poaching issue and take cognisance of the strategic factors that drive it.
It is unbecoming of democratic governments to defend lawbreakers engaged in organised illegal operations at sea or on land. Unfortunately, some key Indian politicians seem intent on legitimising a blatantly illegal practice through diplomatic and legal means.
Editorial
Dons’ frustration and rulers’ nonchalance
Monday 5th October, 2026
The Federation of University Teachers’ Associations (FUTA) has held several media briefings during the past several months to highlight a host of unresolved issues affecting the university system, but the government seems to be unconcerned. Addressing the media, over the weekend, the FUTA raised those problems once again, pointing out that all state universities had been left with only about 5,000 teachers because a large number of academics had already left the country, mostly for economic reasons. The situation was taking a turn for the worse, it warned.
University teachers are among the professionals who played a pivotal role in enabling the JVP-led NPP’s meteoric rise to power, but today they are shouting themselves hoarse in a bid to draw the government’s attention to the problems besetting the university system, but in vain. The same holds true for the state-sector doctors, who have got short shrift from the government, which rides roughshod over the GMOA (Government Medical Officers’ Association) as well as the BASL (Bar Association of Sri Lanka), whose members also campaigned hard for the NPP.
The incumbent government, just like its predecessors, has apparently prioritised a plan to increase the number of universities in keeping with what looks like a politically determined agenda over resourcing and staffing the existing universities adequately. President Anura Kumara Dissanayake, in his wisdom, has promised to establish 50 new universities across the country while almost all state universities are experiencing severe resource constraints, with many academics voting with their feet.
A quality university system cannot be created simply by increasing the number of universities or admitting more students. The need is for a combination of capable academics, adequate resources, institutional autonomy, rigorous standards and a system of accountability. There are certain other conditions that need to be fulfilled for a country to create a vibrant university system that conforms to international standards. First of all, there should be a clear national higher education strategy to establish a diversified, future-oriented tertiary education system that is adequately resourced and staffed.
Universities cannot function properly, much less achieve academic excellence, without enough qualified teachers and appropriate student-to-staff ratios. Adequate and sustained funding, strong research capacity, academic freedom, institutional freedom and rigorous, independent quality assurance, industrial and international links are among the other factors that help ensure the robustness of a university system.
The World Bank’s recent assessment of Sri Lanka’s higher education sector has identified scarcity of qualified academic staff, inadequate research and innovation output and passive student learning among the challenges facing the sector.
FUTA members have told the media that foreign research grants have to be approved by the Cabinet of Ministers; the approval process is frustratingly slow, and therefore universities are without enough funds for research. There are arguments for and against government oversight on research grants, but the real issue is why the government cannot expedite the approval process. Teaching and research are traditionally regarded as inseparable functions of a university. Besides, universities need sufficient freedom to determine curricula, conduct research, appoint staff and make academic decisions without inappropriate political or bureaucratic interference. UNESCO regards academic freedom and institutional autonomy as important conditions for universities to fulfil their teaching and research functions.
It is doubtful whether Sri Lankan governments have learnt from history how other countries achieved their development goals. The OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) has revealed that universities played a central role in the development of the Global North by producing the educated workforce, scientists, engineers, doctors, teachers, administrators and other professionals needed to build modern economies and strong public institutions. They also became major centres of basic and applied research, generating knowledge that helped drive industrialisation, technological innovation and productivity. The OECD notes that universities in most developed economies remain major providers of research and important contributors to the development of new technologies. The rise of strong university systems was not merely a result of development in the Global North; universities themselves helped usher in progress. It is hoped that Sri Lankan policymakers, particularly politicians, will take cognisance of this simple fact.
The incumbent government has raised the retirement ages of judges. It even went to the extent of amending the Constitution amidst protests from national and international organisations, claiming that it had to do so to clear a backlog of cases. It has also launched a substantial programme to recruit and train thousands of police personnel. Why can’t it take similar action urgently to resolve the shortage of university teachers? It should heed the university teachers’ warning; students who qualify for university admission may have to wait for several years before the commencement of their academic programmes, and universities might end up being empty shells.
Editorial
Kaduwela land grab and statist spectres
A private company has complained to the police, alleging that Kaduwela Mayor Ranjan Jayalal and NPP MP Asitha Niroshana forcibly took over a block of land belonging to it in Athurugiriya for a Metro bus stand. Lawyers representing the company have told the media that the police have not acted on their complaint due to political pressure. The NPP politicians remain defiant, insisting that the new bus stand will not be shifted under any circumstances.
Sri Lanka politicians take leave of their senses when power goes to their heads. During previous governments, there were widespread allegations that some politicians got their supporters to encroach on privately owned estates in the Colombo suburbs and then demanded money from hapless owners to remove the squatters, while others openly grabbed houses and land with impunity. These allegations have gone uninvestigated. The 2024 regime change was expected to bring such illegal practices to an end. But in 2025, a group of JVP activists, led by a deputy minister, stormed a party office belonging to their rival faction, the Frontline Socialist Party (FSP), in Yakkala, and forcibly occupied it after assaulting and driving away a group of FSP members. They even showed the police a document, claiming that it was a court order vesting the ownership of the building in the JVP, and the police promptly cordoned off the area and set up a checkpoint to ensure the safety of the JVPers. But in April 2026, the Gampaha District Court ordered the JVP to return the office to the FSP.
The alleged land grab in Athurugiriya is different from the previous ones in that it is not intended to benefit any political party or any private individual as such, but it cannot be countenanced on any grounds. There should certainly be a place for the Metro buses to be parked in Kaduwela, but the government must not bulldoze its way through to acquire private property. It should negotiate with the company concerned and explore the possibility of purchasing the land at the prevailing commercial rate or taking it on lease. If the owner is unwilling to sell or lease the property, the government will have to look for an alternative location. There is no other way out. That is the way such disputes should be settled in the civilised world. The police must be made to explain why they have not instituted legal action against the Kaduwela Mayor and the NPP MP.
The government’s efforts to develop the Metro service deserve praise, encouragement and public support. The state-owned bus service has to be revitalised. However, the development of the Metro bus service cannot be cited in extenuation of high-handed actions, such as the alleged land grab.
It is high time the JVP/NPP politicians and their supporters realised that a popular mandate is not tantamount to a carte blanche and they cannot act according to their whims and fancies. The alleged land grab is bound to have an unsettling effect on investors, particularly foreign investors, given the JVP’s original ideological programme, which bore the imprimatur of its founder-leader Rohana Wijeweera, and the continuing influence of the party’s old guard over the present government. The JVP’s early programme called for far-reaching socialist economic measures, including the abolition of private ownership in several sectors and revolutionary land reform. The forcible land takeover in Athurugiriya not only smacks of statism but also conjures up the failed communist spectres of the past.
The government should take cognisance of what the US says, in its 2026 Investment Climate Statements: Sri Lanka, about land tenure here. Noting that Sri Lanka has made important progress since the 2022 economic crisis, the report says the investment environment remains difficult and unpredictable. It is not simply a negative report: it acknowledges political stability under the NPP government, commitment to the IMF programme. However, it makes specific mention of “tenure insecurity” in the context of weaknesses in Sri Lanka’s land sector. The report lists it alongside land scarcity, fragmented land administration, land degradation, encroachment and land disputes. Tenure insecurity generally means that a person or business does not have sufficiently certain, legally enforceable and transferable rights over the land they occupy or use. But it also means vulnerability to illegal occupation, land grabbing, encroachment or other involuntary loss of land. The World Bank’s definition of ‘tenure insecurity’ is noteworthy. It says tenure security involves protection against the involuntary loss of land, and notes that insecurity can arise from disputes within families or communities, or from the actions of governments or private claimants.
The US investment report provides an important reference to the foreign investors assessing Sri Lanka’s investment climate. The JVP-NPP government therefore should not send the wrong message to investors. In this day and age, news travels almost at subatomic speed, reaching millions of people across the globe within seconds. The government would do well to be mindful of the repercussions of its actions.
Editorial
Fuelling discontent and protest
Saturday 3rd October, 2026
Private fuel bowser owners were up in arms, yesterday, claiming that they were incurring huge losses because the Ceylon Petroleum Corporation (CPC) had not increased commissions for fuel distribution. Unless the CPC responded favourably to their demand for a substantial increase in commissions, they would be left with no alternative but to stop fuel distribution completely with immediate effect, they warned, noting that the CPC had promised to announce its final decision yesterday.
The Ceylon Petroleum Private Tanker Owners’ Association (CPPTOA), which is leading the fuel bowser owners’ struggle, said yesterday that it expected their commission to be raised at least to 20%, as the cost of fuel distribution had increased sharply. A meeting between the CPPTOA representatives and the CPC officials was going on at the time of writing.
It defies comprehension why the CPC lets the grass grow under its feet without addressing issues that have the potential to cripple fuel distribution. The CPPTOA had been protesting for weeks, but the CPC ignored fuel distributors’ demand. It may have expected the problem to go away with the passage of time. Everything possible must be done to prevent pumps from running dry at filling stations, causing hardships to the public and adversely impacting the economy.
The CPC should have taken immediate action at the first sign of trouble and invited the CPPTOA to talks instead of waiting until the eleventh hour. Prudence demands that a game of chicken be averted in a crucial sector like petroleum distribution.
Issues that could cripple the petroleum sector are best sorted out at the negotiating table, which is the ideal place for bargaining. We are not in a position to say whether it is fair for the CPPTOA to demand a 20% commission, but the fuel distributors’ grievances should be addressed and the CPC ought to hold talks with them and negotiate solutions as and when issues crop up. Flexibility is a prerequisite for resolving trade union problems. Intransigence and brinkmanship only aggravate such issues, much to the detriment of the country’s interests. If bowser operators stopped distributing fuel for a couple of days, perish the thought, it would take a considerable time to replenish supplies thereafter, and fuel queues would reappear. Disruptions to fuel distribution could have a domino effect on virtually every other sector of the economy.
The fragile economy, which is recovering from an unprecedented crisis, cannot take any more shocks, and the patience of the public is manifestly wearing thin. Petroleum sector trade unions have claimed that the CPC is selling fuel from older stocks at higher prices, while fuel distributors have called upon the government to scrap the loss-recovery levy immediately, arguing that the CPC’s legacy debt has now been fully repaid. These are the issues the Opposition should take up in Parliament instead of making loud noises that signify nothing.
One can only hope that the CPC and the CPPTOA will resolve the commission issue through negotiations, and the CPC will act more responsibly in the future without trying to wish away trade union issues that could cripple the petroleum sector.
-
Latest News5 days agoGold winner Tharanga gets brand-new Honda Vezel from SLAAJ
-
Features5 days agoWhy Sri Lanka needs an Inclusive Civic Nationalism – urgently
-
News4 days agoUS-assisted ‘Ice’ detection: NPC to examine IGP’s move to transfer drug-busting team
-
Features6 days agoThailand’s biggest new global star …
-
News6 days agoFirst cases taken up by SC after enactment of 22A dismissed
-
News5 days agoCivil society activist accuses govt. of favouring Ven. Gnanasara
-
Editorial3 days agoColombo Port drug bust: The plot thickens
-
Editorial6 days agoAftershocks of 22A
