Connect with us

Features

SLIIT should remain non-state and non-profit institution

Published

on

By Professor R.P. Gunawardane

Sri Lanka Institute of Information Technology (SLIIT), one of the best and most popular non-state higher education institutions in this country, is in the news these days. It was established in 1998, with support from the Mahapola Trust Fund and its current status has been challenged by the Committee on Public Enterprises (COPE) of the Parliament of Sri Lanka.

Mahapola Trust Fund (MTF) was established by the late Minister Lalith Athulathmudali in 1981 to grant scholarships for needy undergraduates in the Sri Lankan university system. The Chairman of the MTF has always been the Chief Justice of the country. Nearly half a million of our deserving undergraduates have so far benefitted from the Mahapola Scholarship Scheme. The MTF is certainly a noble organisation, established for a noble purpose by a great visionary, the late Athulathmudali, who was one of the best politicians, and very intelligent and energetic Minister ever produced by this country.

The SLIIT offers a novel model of non-state and non-profit fee-levying university for Sri Lanka although such institutions are common in the developed world. All top universities in the world, including Harvard, Princeton, MIT, Stanford and all Ivy League universities in the US, and even Oxford, Cambridge and London universities, in the UK, are of this type. Although they receive some funding from the government for specific teaching and research projects, none of them are state controlled.

Almost all the top universities in the world are located in the USA, the UK, Europe, Australia and Canada. None of these countries have University Grants Commissions (UGCs) or equivalents, or Universities Acts to govern higher education institutions. All universities are completely independent and managed by their boards of management without any interference from the government. All appointments including the post of Vice-Chancellors are done independently, by the board of management. It is recognised all over the world that this type of independence is required for a university to carry out its duties and functions effectively, maintaining the highest standards.

History of SLIIT

Sri Lanka Institute of Information Technology (SLIIT) commenced its operations in 1999 as a non-state and non-profit higher education institution to train manpower in the field of Computer Science and particularly in the broad field of Information Technology. The development, with rapid expansion, was possible because of a strong commitment by MTF to provide a loan of Rs. 500 million and a lease of a land encompasing 25 acres in Malabe, owned by the Mahapola Trust Fund. However, only Rs. 373 million was released by MTF as a loan for this purpose.

It started functioning at the Bank of Ceylon Merchant Tower, Colombo 3, now called the Metropolitan Campus of the SLIIT. After almost 22 years of its existence and rapid development, it has now become a fully-fledged higher education institution at national university level with wide national and international recognition.

I served the Board of Management of the SLIIT for nearly four years at the initial stages from 2000. I was nominated to the Board of Management by then Minister of Education and Higher Education Richard Pathirana. I also served as a member of the Board of Governors of MTF in my capacity as the Secretary to the Ministry of Education and Higher Education.

During my tenure, I noticed the tremendous potential the SLIIT had in the higher education sector and the effort, dedication, commitment, perseverance and continuous hard work by a group of academics led by Professor Lalith Gamage to bring this institution to the present level. Whatever the mistakes made in the process of developing this institute, this achievement should be recognised and preserved. This institution should not be destroyed.

The SLIIT is a national asset that must be retained and further developed as a non-state sector institution with a framework for checks and balances with regard to the broad national policy.

Current Status of the Institute

Currently, the SLIIT has two campuses and four regional centres. The main campus with all the laboratory, library, auditorium and all other facilities is located on a 25-acre land in Malabe. Its Metropolitan Campus remains in the BoC Merchant building, Colombo 3. Its Regional Centres are spreading throughout the country in the major cities – Matara, Kandy, Kurunegala and Jaffna. About 12,000 students are enrolled in this institution with about 400 highly qualified academic staff and 200 administrative and supporting staff. It has a large number of links and joint degree programmes with prestigious universities in Australia, the US, the UK and Canada.

SLIIT, being a non-state non-profit institution, is not under the purview of the UGC, and does not have to abide the Universities Act No. 16 of 1978, which has centralised powers and decision making in the UGC. Thus, SLIIT has a tremendous advantage and full freedom to expand and diversify programmes with innovative approaches, without any clearance or approval from any authorities.

This freedom is lacking in the state universities, and as such clearances and approvals have to be obtained from the UGC and other relevant ministries and agencies to commence new programmes. In recent years, the UGC has taken over more powers outside the Universities Act with regard to introduction of new courses and novel projects requiring to obtain prior approval from the UGC. Sometimes, it takes up to one year or more to obtain necessary approvals or clearances. By the time approval is obtained the programme may be outdated or if it is a joint project with foreign university or international organisation, the other party is no longer interested.

This kind of freedom available to the SLIIT should be retained for further development and implementation of novel and innovative programmes. Our national universities do not have the kind of freedom currently available to SLIIT. That is why our universities cannot compete with other similar institutions in Sri Lanka and abroad although the state universities have sufficient expertise but with limited resources.

It is important to note that the SLIIT (1999) achieved the current status only in about 22 years of its existence while our oldest universities, Colombo (1942) and Peradeniya (1952), existed for about 70-80 years. It is remarkable that this institution has become a vibrant national university beating most of our state universities except perhaps a few universities like Peradeniya and Colombo.

SLIIT may be considered a new experiment and novel approach to higher education in Sri Lanka. Thus, this approach should be further explored for the expansion and diversification of higher education sector in Sri Lanka.

Issues and Concerns

SLIIT administration claims that the loan of Rs. 373 million obtained from the Mahapola Trust Fund (MTF) to establish the SLIIT has been fully paid with interest totalling Rs. 408 million. In addition, they also make the annual lease payment of Rs. 25 million for the land in Malabe regularly, as agreed. However, it should be noted that MTF is not a commercial bank or money lending institution and it does not give loans to others. It has not given loans to any other organisation. It is believed that the MTF at the time wanted to make a long-term investment in the field of higher education in line with the philosophy of its founder Lalith Athulathmudali. The intention would have been to generate additional funding to support the scholarship funding for rapidly increasing number of needy undergraduates. Thus, the support for the establishment of the SLIIT is an investment the MTF made for the future.

I consider the severing of SLIIT’s connection to the MTF is a grave and unforgivable mistake done by the SLIIT administration. SLIIT would not have come up to the present position within two decades if not for the original support of the MTF through a loan of a huge sum and a 60-year lease agreement for the land at a prime location in Malabe.

Furthermore, the refusal of the SLIIT management to appear before the COPE Committee is very unfortunate although they may not have to do so legally due to their current status. However, this act by the SLIIT which was created by a noble organisation such as the Mahapola Trust Fund is highly unethical and needs condemnation. It was also a missed opportunity for the SLIIT management to explain their side of the story to the COPE members in order to get some concessions.

Although they developed innovative and popular academic programmes, rapidly attracting a large number of students, there were a number of unresolved and troubling issues, within the Institute. Some of them are:

1. Insufficient emphasis on high quality research and lack of an initiative to develop a much-needed research culture in the institute are clearly seen.

2. In the past, there were some news reports pertaining to irregularities in the financial administration of the institute by some higher officials. The veracity of these complains cannot be ascertained until an investigation is done. It was reported that there was no properly qualified and experienced accountant or Bursar to handle financial matters, and there has been no internal audit for a long period of time.

Way Forward

It is essential that the SLIIT should not be taken over by the government. If it does, it will certainly do much more harm than good to the higher education sector. First of all, its connection to the Mahapola Trust Fund, which may be considered as the mother institution, must be fully restored. It is also necessary to reconstitute a fully independent Board of Management, consisting of highly qualified and eminent professionals with no history of any misdeeds. It also should include one representation of the Mahapola Trust Fund as well. This institution should continue to run as a non-state and non-profit higher education institution with the fee-levying status. Appointments at all the levels should be made by the Board of Management without any external or government involvement.

The matters raised above and any audit reports should be investigated thoroughly and appropriate action be taken in order to improve the image of the institution. As stated in the original agreement of the SLIIT with the MTF, and also as a gesture of goodwill, the SLIIT should pay 20% of its profit annually to the MTF to strengthen the Mahapola Scholarship Scheme. This should be done even if the MTF’s ownership of the Institute is not legally established. This is in addition to the annual lease payment to the Mahapola Trust Fund for its use of 25-acre land at Malabe, where its main campus is located.

Furthermore, SLIIT should establish a scholarship scheme by contributing sufficient funds to provide partial scholarships to needy students covering at least 10% of the total student population in the Institute. This aspect is extremely important for the survival of a non-state fee-levying institution in a country where state universities provide free education.

Restructuring the institute may also be required, avoiding unnecessary and irrelevant structures, units and subject areas and strengthening the teaching, research and consultancy functions in the core area of information technology. It is vital that the non-state and non-profit status of the SLIIT should be retained in order for this institution to develop rapidly to become one of the most prestigious higher education institutions in Asia, attracting a considerable number of foreign students. In this attempt, it would be the best for the SLIIT if Professor Lalith Gamage, the live-wire of this institution, who is mainly responsible for its tremendous success, should continue as the Vice-Chancellor/CEO for a longer period to see the best results.

(The author is a Professor Emeritus, University of Peradeniya, formerly Secretary, Ministry of Education and Higher Education and Chairman, National Education Commission, Sri Lanka)



Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

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

Features

Trump-Xi meet more about economics rather than politics

Published

on

President Donald Trump meets President Xi Jinping in Beijing: Mutually beneficial ties aimed at. (CNN)

The fact that some of the US’ topmost figures in business, such as Tesla chief Elon Musk and major US chipmaker Jensen Huang of NVIDIA fame, occupied as nearly a prominent a position as President Donald Trump at the recent ‘historic and landmark’ visit by the latter to China underscores the continuing vital importance of business in US-China ties. Business seemed to outweigh politics to a considerable degree in importance during the visit although the political dimension in US-China ties appeared to be more ‘headline grabbing’.

To be sure, the political dimension cannot be downplayed. For very good reason China could be seen as holding the power balance somewhat evenly between East and West. The international politics commentator couldn’t be seen as overstating the case if he takes the position that China could exercise substantial influence over the East currently; that is Russia and Iran, in the main. The latter powers hold the key in the Eastern hemisphere to shaping international politics in the direction of further war or of influencing it towards a measure of peace.

For example, time and again China has prevented the West from ‘having its own way’, so to speak, in the UN Security Council, for instance, in respect of the ongoing conflicts involving Russia and Iran, by way of abstaining from voting or by vetoing declarations that it sees as deleterious. That is, China has been what could be seen as a ‘moderating influence’ in international politics thus far. It has helped to keep the power balance somewhat intact between East and West.

At present a meet is ongoing between Chinese President Xi Jinping and Russian President Vladimir Putin in Beijing. This happened almost immediately after the Trump visit. Apparently, Beijing is in an effort to project itself as treating the US and Russia even-handedly while underscoring that it is no ‘special friend’ of the US or the West.

This effort at adopting a non-partisan stance on contentious questions in international politics is also seen in Beijing’s policy position on the Hormuz tangle and issues growing out of it. The Chinese authorities are quoted as saying in this regard, for instance, that China is for ‘a comprehensive and lasting ceasefire in the Middle East’.

Such a position has the effect of enhancing the perception that China is even-handed in its handling of divisive foreign policy posers. It is not openly anti-West nor is it weighing in with Iran and other Eastern actors that are opposed to the West in the West Asian theatre. A ‘comprehensive and lasting ceasefire’ implies that a solution needs to be arrived at that would be seen as fair by all quarters concerned.

On the highly sensitive Taiwan issue, President Xi was comparatively forthright during the Trump visit, but here too it was plain to see that Beijing was not intent on introducing a jarring, discordant note into the ongoing, largely cordial discussions with Washington. On the Taiwan question President Xi was quoted saying: ‘If mishandled, the two nations could collide even come into conflict.’ In other words, the US was cautioned that China’s interests need to be always borne in mind in its handling of the Taiwan issue.

The cautioning had the desired result because Trump in turn had reportedly conveyed to Taiwan that the latter’s concerns on the matter of independence had to be handled discreetly. He had told Taiwan plainly not to declare ‘independence.’

Accordingly, neither the US nor China had said or done anything that would have made either party lose face during their interaction. Apparently, both sides were sensitive to each others’ larger or national interests. And the economic interests of both powers were foremost among the latter considerations.

There is no glossing over or ignoring economic interests in the furtherance of ties between states. They are primal shaping forces of foreign policies and the fact that ‘economics drives politics’ is most apparent in US-China ties. That is, economic survival is fundamental.

Among the more memorable quotes from President Xi during the interaction, which also included US business leaders, was the following: ‘China’s doors will be open wider’ and US firms would have ‘broader prospects in the Chinese market.’

Xi went on to say that the sides had agreed to a ‘new positioning for ties’ based on ‘constructive strategic stability’. The implication here is that both sides would do well not to undermine existing, mutually beneficial economic relations in view of the wider national interests of both powers that are served by a continuation of these economic ties. That is, the way forward, in the words of the Chinese authorities, is ‘win-win cooperation.’

It is the above pronouncements by the Chinese authorities that probably led President Trump to gush that the talks were ‘very successful’ and of ‘historic and landmark’ importance. Such sentiments should only be expected of a billionaire US President, bent on economic empire-building.

One of the most important deals that were put through reportedly during the interaction was a Chinese agreement to buy some 200 Boeing jets and a ‘potential commitment to buy an additional 750 planes.’ However, details were not forthcoming on other business deals that may have been hatched.

Accordingly, from the viewpoint of the protagonists the talks went off well and the chances are that the sides would stand to gain substantially from unruffled future economic ties. However, there was no mention of whether the health of the world economy or the ongoing conflicts in West Asia were taken up for discussion.

Such neglect is regretful. Although the veritable economic power houses of the world, the US and China, are likely to thrive in the short and medium terms and their ruling strata could be expected to benefit enormously from these ongoing economic interactions the same could not be said of most of the rest of the world and its populations.

Needless to say, the ongoing oil and gas crisis, for instance, resulting from the conflict situation in West Asia, is taking a heavy toll on the majority of the world’s economies and the relevant publics. While no urgent intervention to ease the lot of the latter could be expected from the Trump administration there is much that China could do on this score.

China could use its good offices with the US to address the negative fallout on the poorer sections of the world from the present global economic crunch and urge the West to help in introducing systemic changes that could facilitate these positive outcomes. After all, China remains a socialist power.

Continue Reading

Features

The Quiet Shift: China as America’s “+1” in a Changing World Order

Published

on

Xi and Trump

“Everything ever said to me by any Chinese of any station during any visit was part of an intricate design”

— Henry Kissinger

That design may already be complete before this week’s , a meeting that could shape the future balance of global power.

The wind arrives quietly. By the time it is heard, history has already begun to turn. Across Asia, that wind is no longer distant. It carries with it the exhaustion of an old order and the uncertain birth of another. The question now is not whether the world will change. It is whether those who hold power possess the wisdom to guide that change toward something less violent than the century behind us.

Since 1945, the United States has carried the burden of a global order built with its Western allies. To its credit, the world avoided another direct world war between great powers. The conflicts remained contained in distant lands—proxy wars fought in the shadows of ideology, oil, and influence. From Latin America to Asia, the American century expanded not only through prosperity, but through intervention. Yet empires, even democratic ones, grow tired. Fatigue settles slowly into institutions, alliances, and public memory. The role of global policeman no longer inspires certainty in Washington as it once did.

The “rules-based order” now confronts its own contradiction: it was built to be universal, yet it often appeared selective. During my recent visit to , a young researcher asked me quietly, “Does the West itself still believe in the rules-based order?” The question lingered long after the conversation ended. The rising century demands a more inclusive architecture—one that recognises the reality of Asian power, especially China.

My three years of field research across South and Southeast Asia, documented in , revealed a transformation too significant to dismiss as temporary. China has moved beyond being merely a competitor to the United States. In trade, infrastructure, technology, cultural diplomacy, and economic influence, Beijing has established itself as what may be called the world’s “US +1.”

Great powers often search for such a partner. History shows this tendency clearly. When an empire becomes overextended—burdened by wars, alliances, sanctions, tariffs, and crises—it seeks another center of gravity to stabilize the system it can no longer manage alone. The United States today faces disorder stretching from Venezuela to Iran, from Ukraine to the unsettled Middle East. In this landscape, China emerges not simply as a rival, but as a state powerful enough to broker peace where Washington alone no longer can.

Drawing from the lessons of the Nixon–Mao era, warned that “” The United States and China are now engaged in a long-term economic, technological, political, and strategic competition. Managing that competition wisely may become the defining challenge of this century. In such a deeply polarized and unstable world, recognising China as a “US +1” partner is not surrender, but strategic realism.

Donald Trump understood this reality before boarding his flight to meet Xi Jinping. Their meeting inside Zhongnanhai—the guarded compound where China’s leadership governs—was never merely ceremonial. It symbolized a deeper recognition already acknowledged quietly within the itself: China is the nearest peer competitor the United States has ever confronted. Before departing Washington, Trump seemed to reassess not only China’s strength, but its unavoidable position as a “” shaping the future global balance.

Yet the significance of a Trump–Xi meeting extends beyond trade wars, tariffs, or diplomatic spectacle. It presents an opportunity to confront two crises shaping the century ahead: global energy insecurity and regional instability. Washington increasingly understands the limits of direct engagement with Tehran. Decades of pressure, sanctions, and confrontation have produced exhaustion rather than resolution. In that vacuum, Beijing now possesses leverage that Washington does not.

For China, this is an opportunity to evolve from a development partner into a security actor. Xi Jinping’s (GSI) was never designed merely as rhetoric. It was intended as the next phase of Chinese influence—transforming economic dependence into strategic trust. The geopolitical spillover from the Iranian conflict now offers Beijing a historic opening to project itself as a stabilising force in the region, not against the United States, but alongside it as a “US +1” partner.

If China succeeds in helping stabilise the Gulf and secure energy corridors vital to Asia, it will reshape perceptions of Chinese power globally. Beijing would no longer be seen only as the builder of ports, railways, and industrial zones, but as a guarantor of regional balance. This transition—from infrastructure diplomacy to security diplomacy—may become one of the defining geopolitical shifts of the coming decade.

Xi Jinping does not seek open confrontation. His strategy is older, more patient, and perhaps more formidable because of its restraint. Beijing speaks not of domination, but of a “,” advanced through three instruments of influence: the Global Development Initiative (GDI), the Global Security Initiative (GSI), and the Global Civilization Initiative (GCI). These are not slogans alone. Across Asia, many governments increasingly trust China as a development partner more than any other power.

India, despite its ambitions, has not matched this scale of regional penetration. In both ASEAN and South Asia, China’s economic gravity is felt more deeply. Ports, railways, technology networks, and financial dependency have altered the geopolitical map quietly, without the spectacle of war.

In , I compared three inward-looking national strategies shaping Asia today: Trump’s MAGA, Modi’s emerging economic nationalism , and Xi’s strategy. Among them, China has demonstrated the greatest structural resilience. Faced with American tariffs and decoupling pressures, Beijing diversified its supply chains across Central Asia, Europe, and Southeast Asia. Rail corridors now connect Chinese industry to European markets through Eurasia. ASEAN has surpassed the United States as China’s largest trading partner, while the European Union follows closely behind. Exports to America have declined sharply, yet China continues to expand. Trump, once defined by confrontation, now arrives seeking a new “” with China—an acknowledgment that economic rivalry alone can no longer define the relationship between the world’s two largest powers.

Unlike Washington, which increasingly retreats from multilateral institutions, Beijing presents itself as the defender of multilateralism. Whether genuine or strategic matters less than perception. In geopolitics, perception often becomes reality.

What emerges, then, is not surrender between rivals, but interdependence between powers too large to isolate one another. The future may not belong to a bipolar Cold War, but to a reluctant coexistence. The United States now recognises that China possesses diversified markets and partnerships capable of reducing dependence on America. China, in turn, understands that its long march toward global primacy still requires strategic engagement with the United States.

This is where the true geopolitical shift begins.

Many analysts continue to frame China solely as a threat. Yet history rarely moves through absolutes. The next world order may not be built through confrontation alone, but through uneasy partnership. Artificial intelligence, technological supremacy, economic stability, and global governance now demand cooperation between Washington and Beijing, whether either side admits it publicly or not.

Trump will likely celebrate his personal relationship with Xi, presenting himself as the American leader capable of negotiating a “better deal” with China than his predecessors. But beneath the rhetoric lies something larger: the gradual acceptance of China’s indispensable role in shaping the future international order.

Even the question of war increasingly returns to Beijing. If Washington seeks an understanding with Tehran, China’s influence becomes unavoidable. Iran listens to Beijing in ways it no longer listens to the West. This alone signals how profoundly the balance of power has shifted. And Xi, careful as always, refuses to openly inherit the mantle of global leadership. He delays, softens, and obscures intention. It is part of a longer strategy: to rise without provoking the final resistance of a declining hegemon too early.

History rarely announces its turning point. Empires fade slowly, while new powers rise quietly beneath the noise of the old order. Washington still holds immense power, but Beijing increasingly holds the patience, reach, and strategic depth to shape what comes after.

The century ahead may not belong to one power alone, but to the uneasy balance between Washington and Beijing. And in that silence, a new world order is already taking shape.

By Asanga Abeyagoonasekera

Continue Reading

Features

Egypt … here I come

Published

on

Chit-Chat Nethali Withanage

Three months ago, 19-year-old Nethali Withanage, with Brian Kerkoven as her mentor, walked the ramp at Colombo Fashion Week. On 06 June, she’ll walk for Sri Lanka in Hurghada, Egypt, as the country’s delegate to Top Model of the World 2026._

I caught up with Nethali as she prepares to fly out, this weekend, and here’s how our chit-chat went:

1. Tell me something about yourself?

I’m someone who blends creativity with ambition. I’ve always loved expressing myself, whether it’s through fashion, styling, or the way I present myself to the world. At the same time, I’m very driven and disciplined, especially when I was working, as a student counsellor, at Campus One, at a young age, where I’ve learned how to connect with people, understand them, and communicate with confidence. I believe I’m still evolving, and that’s what excites me the most … becoming better every single day.

2. What made you decide to be a model?

Modelling felt natural to me because it combines everything I love – fashion, confidence, and storytelling without words. I realised that modelling isn’t just about appearance, it’s about presence and how you carry your energy. I wanted to be part of an industry where I could express different sides of myself, while inspiring others to feel confident in their own skin.

3. What sets you apart from other models?

I would say my ability to connect. Whether it’s with the camera, a brand, or an audience, I bring authenticity. I also have a strong background in communication and sales, which gives me an edge in understanding how to represent a brand, not just wear it. I don’t want to just model clothes, I want to bring them to life.

4. What clothing do you prefer to model?

I enjoy modelling versatile styles, but I’m especially drawn to elegant and expressive fashion pieces that tells a story. I love looks that allow me to embody confidence and femininity, whether it’s a structured outfit or something soft and flowing.

5. What is the most important aspect of modelling?

Confidence combined with professionalism. Confidence allows you to own the moment, but professionalism ensures that you respect the work, the team, and the brand you represent. Both are equally important.

6. If you could change one thing about yourself, what would it be?

I would say I’m learning to trust myself more and not overthink. I’ve realised that growth comes from embracing who you are, not constantly trying to change it. So instead of changing something, I’m focused on becoming more confident in my own voice.

7. School?

I did my O/Ls at Seventh Day Adventist High School Kandana, and, while at school, I was actively involved in creative activities. I enjoyed participating in English Day events that allowed me to express myself and interact with others. Those experiences helped me build confidence, teamwork, and communication skills, which continue to shape who I am today.

8. Happiest moment?

One of my happiest moments is realising how far I’ve come from being unsure of myself to stepping into opportunities, like modelling, and representing myself with confidence. That feeling of growth is something I truly value, and also a dream come true!

9. Your idea of perfect happiness?

Perfect happiness for me is peace of mind, being surrounded by people I love, doing what I’m passionate about, and feeling proud of who I am becoming.

10. Your ideal guy?

My ideal partner is someone who is respectful, supportive, and confident in himself. Someone who values growth, understands my ambitions, and encourages me to be the best version of myself.

11. Which living person do you most admire?

I admire strong, self-made individuals who have built their identity through hard work and resilience. People who stay true to themselves, despite challenges, inspire me, because they show that success is not just about talent, but also about strength and consistency.

12. Your most treasured possession?

My most treasured possession is my confidence. It’s something I’ve built over time, and it allows me to face challenges, take opportunities, and believe in myself, even when things are uncertain.

13. If you were marooned on a desert island, who would you like as your companion?

I would choose someone who is calm, positive, and resourceful, someone who can turn a difficult situation into an adventure. The right mindset matters more than anything.

14. Your most embarrassing moment?

I’m 19 and still haven’t faced any most embarrassing moment. But I would say I’ve had small moments where things didn’t go as planned, but I’ve learned to laugh at myself. Those moments remind me that perfection isn’t necessary; confidence is about how you recover, not how you avoid mistakes.

15. Done anything daring?

Pursuing modelling and stepping into competitions is something I consider daring. It pushed me out of my comfort zone and challenged me to grow, both personally and professionally.

16. Your ideal vacation?

My ideal vacation would be somewhere peaceful, yet beautiful, like a beach destination where I can relax, reflect, and reconnect with myself, while enjoying nature.

17. What kind of music are you into?

I choose music that matches my mood at that time, whether it’s calm and relaxing or energetic and uplifting. Music is something that helps me express emotions and stay inspired.

18. Favourite radio station?

Usually I don’t listen to radio stations but whenever I get into a car I would search for Yes FM because it has a refined balance of contemporary hits and timeless music. I appreciate how it maintains a vibrant yet sophisticated energy, keeping listeners engaged while creating a consistently uplifting atmosphere. It’s something I enjoy because it adds a sense of positivity and elegance to my day.

19. Favourite TV station?

At the moment, I don’t have a television at home, but growing up, my favourite TV station was ‘Nickelodeon’. I genuinely loved the shows and series it aired; they were fun, creative, and full of personality. It was something I always looked forward to, and those memories still bring a sense of joy and nostalgia, whenever I think about it.

20. Any major plans for the future?

My future plans are to grow in the modelling industry, work with international brands, build a strong personal brand and finish completing a Bachelor’s Degree in Business Studies. At the same time, I want to explore my creative side further, especially in fashion and business, so I can create something of my own one day.

Continue Reading

Trending