Connect with us

Editorial

Sirisena wakes up from hibernation

Published

on

Former President Maithripala Sirisena emerged a few days ago from a long hibernation, interrupted only by his participation in the last parliamentary election to retain his long-held Polonnaruwa district seat. He recently awoke from his slumber sharing a platform with Prime Ministers Narendra Modi of India and Yoshide Suga of Japan at an international symposium on Shared Values and Democracy in Asia organized by the New Delhi-based Vivekananda International Foundation. The event was necessarily held under virtual technology in these Covid-wracked times, and our former president, who chose not to ride gracefully into the sunset at the end of the presidential term, was no doubt flattered to receive the invitation to participate in a prestigious international event. He became president as the common opposition candidate under “fortuitous circumstances,” if we may borrow the expression used by Mr. W. Dahanayaka, the veteran politician of yesteryear, on attaining the prime ministry after Mr. S.W.R.D. Bandaranaike’s assassination.

So much for the background of Sirisena, who retains the leadership of the Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP) he deserted in 2014, to run for president the following year. His speech at the Vivekananda symposium received considerable publicity, both here and abroad. Ironically, its theme was a concept to which politicians worldwide pay lip service, but is sadly something that is commonly discarded upon attaining office. Sirisena is no exception to this actuality and the people of Sri Lanka who voted him into power on high expectations have not forgotten what happened in October 2018 even if the former president has let that sorry episode slip out of his memory. If we may remind him, that was when he committed the impeachable offence of dismissing Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe and his government and appointing Mr. Mahinda Rajapaksa, the man he defeated in 2015, as the new prime minister. Rajapaksa, at Sirisena’s invitation, formed an illegal short-lived government despite being a minority in the legislature and Sirisena, the prime mover of those machinations, was forced to eat humble pie by a unanimous decision of the country’s highest court.

At the start of his speech into which he must have had considerable input, but was surely ghost-written

as far as the English version he read out was concerned, Sirisena quoted from the familiar Pali stanza which appears at the end of the Pirit Pota. Certainly Raja bhavatu dhammiko was not what happened in October 2018; nor Yahapalana post-2015. It may be correctly said that the then prime minister asked for what was done to him by the man whose United National Party anointed as president in 2015. The evocative Sinhala idiom illagena parippu kewa says it all. Sri Lanka’s political history vividly demonstrated in the past, certainly up to the last election when the GOP was reduced to zero, that a common opposition is a sine qua non to topple a powerful government in this country. There is no need to labour the fact that Maithripala Sirisena would not have been elected president in 2015 but for the UNP support of his candidature. Even if 1956 when Mr. Bandaranaike’s SLFP-led Mahajana Eksath Peramuna (MEP) scored a landslide victory, the MEP had a no-contest agreement with the two old left parties, the LSSP and CP, then a formidable presence in the country’s political firmament. The elections of March and July 1960 best illustrate this point. The UNP led by Mr. Dudley Senanayake won in March and formed a minority government which was defeated in the very first Throne Speech presented to Parliament.

Prime Minister Dudley Senanayake recommended dissolution of Parliament and the calling of a new general election to Sir. Oliver Goonatillake, the Governor-General in the then prevailing order. The arithmetic of the March 1960 electoral result clearly showed that many seats the UNP carried there would have been lost if the anti-UNP vote was not divided between the SLFP and the left parties. It is commonly said that it was the entry into politics of Mrs. Sirima Bandaranaike, widely described as the “weeping widow” during that campaign, that made the difference. She replaced Mr. C.P. de Silva as the leader of the SLFP and prime minister-designate. Mrs. Bandaranaike, then not even a Member of the House of Representatives (she chose not to run at that election), became the world’s first woman prime minister as a member of the then Senate. It was the ‘No Contest’ Pact between the SLFP and the old left parties that benefited both sides that enabled the SLFP victory. The blue party was not the sole beneficiary; the reds too won more seats than they otherwise would have. The SLFP having enough seats to form a government of its own did not invite its electoral allies to join the new administration and the LSSP and CP joined the UNP in the opposition.

We return to Maithripala Sirisena now that we are done with the short capsule of post-Independence political history. Predictably Sirisena outlined at the symposium some of the achievement of his tenure including the shedding of certain presidential powers and the Right to Information Act. Some of the presidential powers removed by the 19th Amendment have been restored by the 20th recently enacted. Sirisena voted in its favour although he boasts of trimming presidential power in his day. He also supported the 18th Amendment which abolished the presidential term limit but did not in any way seek to abolish the presidency which all holders of that office, with the exceptions of Presidents J.R. Jayewardene and Gotabaya Rajapaksa, pledged to do. All of them, Sirisena included, welshed on that promise. Let us not deny him his moment in the limelight following the end of his glory days. But let us not forget the contradictions of his actions as president and the virtues he preached at the symposium.



Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

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

Editorial

Iranian sailors trapped between Scylla and Charybdis

Published

on

Tuesday 6th October, 2026

The US has been doing everything in its power to force Iran into submission, but without success. Its no-holds-barred methods of warfare remind us of some ruthless warriors of yore, who even weaponised hunger to achieve their military goals. Many were the instances where Genghis Khan’s army laid siege to fortified cities and cut off supplies to force its enemies to surrender. During the American Civil War, General Philip Sheridan’s scorched-earth campaign in Virginia’s Shenandoah Valley was so thorough that he reportedly boasted that even a crow flying across the Valley would have to carry its own provisions.

A recent Wall Street Journal report has revealed that Sri Lanka is under US pressure over 20 Iranian oil tankers stranded in international waters off the island. It has been reported that some of those oil carriers, anchored about 15 miles (24 km) off Sri Lanka’s south-western coast, are running short of food, fuel and fresh water. However, Foreign Affairs Minister Vijitha Herath has claimed that the US has not asked Sri Lanka not to provide food and water to the Iranian vessels.

In 04 March 2026, a US submarine sank an Iranian frigate, IRIS Dena, in an unprovoked torpedo attack, which claimed 104 lives off the southern coast of Sri Lanka. Seven months on, the US stands accused of trying to starve an undisclosed number of Iranian sailors on board about 20 oil tankers. Strangely, the powerful nations that pontificate to the Global South about the virtues of human rights and humanitarian assistance are looking the other way. The stranded Iranian sailors must be provided with food, water and medical care. Powerful nations and the UN ought to step in to ensure that the Iranian tanker crews receive lift-sustaining supplies of food and water and medical care urgently.

We believe that the international maritime and seafarers’ law imposes obligations on states to ensure the safety and basic welfare of seafarers, including access to essential supplies and medical assistance. There is a strong humanitarian precedent that the world must follow. One may recall that during the early stages of the Ukraine conflict, the Maritime Safety Committee of the International Maritime Organization expressed serious concerns over the Ukrainian seafarers lacking access to fresh food, water and medical supplies, and called for humanitarian assistance to reprovision the stranded ships. It also stressed that civilian seafarers should not become collateral victims of political or military conflicts. This principle must apply to the stranded Iranian seafarers as well.

The civilised world must not look on while the crew members of the Iranian oil tankers are reportedly languishing without access to essential supplies. There have been some instances of radical humanitarian interventions in support of the Palestinians trapped in Gaza. The Global Sumud Flotilla, the largest maritime mobilisation for Palestine in history, is a case in point. Israel thwarted an attempt by the courageous Global Sumud Flotilla activists on a peaceful solidarity mission to break Israel’s blockade of the Gaza Strip and deliver medical aid and supplies to the Palestinians facing a catastrophic humanitarian crisis. If a large number of boats from different countries set sail simultaneously carrying provisions for the trapped Iranian tanker crews, will the US be able to stop them?

It may be recalled that the US was among the western nations that forced Sri Lanka to continue to send food and medical supplies to the LTTE-held areas during the Eelam war although it was obvious that the LTTE seized most of them. They were right in insisting that Sri Lanka was duty bound to ensure that civilians in the conflict zone had access to food, water and medicines among other things. But why aren’t the US and its allies equally considerate towards the Iranian sailors trapped between the Scylla of US military aggression and the Charybdis of enforced global submission?

Foreign Minister Herath has said the Sri Lankan government has not supplied goods to vessels subjected to US sanction, and private sector individuals providing goods and services to ships have a responsibility to understand the prevailing circumstances and act responsibly. Minister Herath has only obfuscated the issue. If his claim that the government is not under US pressure is true, then Sri Lanka can reprovision the Iranian vessels urgently, can’t it?

Continue Reading

Editorial

Dons’ frustration and rulers’ nonchalance

Published

on

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.

Continue Reading

Editorial

Kaduwela land grab and statist spectres

Published

on

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.

Continue Reading

Trending