Features

Speech writing for Mrs. B, mischievous Felix and 1965 general election

Published

12 months ago

2025/01/5

Thilina Walpola

Governor General Gopallawa was a pillar of rectitude

(Excerpted from Rendering unto Caesar, by Bradman Weerakoon

Making speeches and preparing for them, was a constant occupational hazard for the prime minister and her staff. The international speeches were clearly the most important from a personal as well as country’s image-building point of view. Sirimavo gained immense credit from a statement she made in Belgrade at the Nonaligned Summit in 1961, when as the first woman prime minister of the world she used the phrase — As a woman and a mother, I call upon the nations of the world to desist from violence in their dealings with each other …’This phrase,was unique as no other world leader up to then could have used it, and was carried in headlines across the world giving Sirimavo and Ceylon a tremendous boost.

The trouble with great phrases is that once they are made, they cannot be used again, or if so, very sparingly. We faced this problem acutely in Cairo in 1964, at the next Non-aligned Summit. Once again, the drafting team was Felix, Glannie and myself Sirimavo had told us in advance that we must try to make it as powerful as the speech that she had done in Belgrade. We tried as hard as we could, but could not come up with any extra-bright ideas as we struggled through the draft for the rest day, a day before the opening. As a break from our labours, that afternoon we went to visit the Cairo Museum. It was eerie, being so physically close to the Pharaohs, dead and mummified, some three thousand years ago.

Late that evening we were still at it trying to find the magic breakthrough. At 9.30 that night Sirimavo peeped into the room on her way to bed and asked, “How are you doing? Have you found anything exciting to say?” At which point, Felix, at his most mischievous, softly said, “No, not yet Sirima. But how would you like to start it like this, now that you are in Cairo, As a woman and a mummy, I call upon, etc, etc.’ Sirimavo yelled at him, “Felix!” as if she could have strangled him and chuckling softly to herself, turned away closing the door behind her.

The Indo-Sri Lanka Agreement

The question of the citizenship rights of the Tamils of Indian origin who worked on the plantations was something always high on Sirimavo’s agenda. She was well aware of the political implications of the issue. She had personal knowledge of the condition of the people working on estates and the sad quality of their lives, from her childhood in the province of Sabaragamuwa, which had a large number of plantations in both tea and rubber. The Federal Party too, had included citizenship of the Indian Tamils as part of their basic four-point minimum agenda.

The Tamils of recent Indian origin, as a group, had been disenfranchised through the Citizenship Acts of 1949. They had little representation in Parliament, and since the 1950s had been represented only through one or two nominated members of Parliament. Soon after independence, in the first Parliament of 1947, they had had as many as 11 representatives in a House of 101 MPs. The legislation of 1949 had removed most of the Indian Tamil voters from the electoral lists in the up-country areas and their representation by Tamil members of Parliament had declined.

This had enabled, what were referred to as the `Kandyan electorates’, to be represented thereafter more by boomiputras – sons of the soil – rather than by representatives who were deemed to have only a marginal interest in Ceylon and a greater loyalty to India. This was the prevalent feeling among a section of the population who were proud to refer to themselves as Kandyan Sinhalese and the last to be brought under British rule in 1815. But, it had left behind a feeling of having been discriminated against, in the minds of the plantation Tamils and was to be a constant factor in their political agenda.

The Federal Party had been quick to make common cause with the plantation Tamils on this account using it as another example of the domineering character of the majority Sinhalese state.

Sirimavo realized that the critical issue in this very complex she had serious concerns, was to come to agreement with India on the specific numbers as to who would become Ceylon citizens and those who would become Indian citizens. On a visit to New Delhi in October 1964, she arrived at a historic settlement of this problem which had long evaded resolution. The Indo-Ceylon Agreement or the Sirima-Shastri Pact, it was popularly called, was undoubtedly the high point during this period of her two terms as the prime minister of the country.

I recall her telephoning me from Delhi to inquire what the reactions were in Colombo about the Agreement which stated that Ceylon would accept 300,000 of these persons as citizens. I believe she was bothered as to whether this number might be regarded as too large. I assured her that considering that there were at the time many as 975,000 persons of Indian origin in Ceylon and that India had accepted to take 525,000 as citizens of India, we had come out rather well in the negotiations.

It would mean in effect that for every four persons of recent Indian origin we took in as citizens, India would take seven. If the Agreement worked out according to plan around 15,000 persons of Indian origin would be repatriated annually over a spread of about 15 years. Things finally did not work out precisely as planned on schedule. But after a while, a regular flow of repatriation took place and the problem which had strained relations between India and Ceylon, and also become a domestic political issue for long, was resolved. It was one of the most notable political and diplomatic achievements that Sirimavo could take credit for.

Her personal touch in foreign relations

Sirimavo evinced great interest in events occurring around the world and brought a personal touch into her dealings with world leaders. Unexpected and dramatic change would affect her in a very personal way. I recall the evident sadness with which she spoke to me on the morning of President Kennedy’s assassination. Her thoughts were of the grieving widow, Jacqueline and the two children Caroline and John junior. It must have brought memories of what she herself had experienced in September 1959.

Frances Willis, the US ambassador had broken the news to her in the early hours of the morning. Frances was the first of a long line of female Heads of the Foreign Missions who came to be appointed for duty in Ceylon at the time on the assumption that they being female, would have easier entry to a woman prime minister than a male ambassador. It did not always work that way, but between Frances and Sirimavo, who were both very dignified in behaviour, there was an excellent rapport.

This certainly helped with all the actions we were taking at the time which were considered adverse to US interests, like the take-over of the oil distribution business which was then shared by the giant transnationals – Shell, Caltex and Mobiloil. At Kennedy’s death, Sirimavo wanted a well-drafted message of sympathy to Jacqueline Kennedy, which was sent by cypher to our ambassador in Washington for handing over. Similarly, the death of Feroze Gandhi, her friend Indira’s husband, also evoked a long and supportive letter of sympathy. She was very good about keeping in touch with her wide circle of friends abroad especially at moments of personal grief

President Tito and his wife Jovanka Broz were also special friends after the many occasions they had been together on the Non-aligned circuit. Yugoslavia was a favourite country of hers, and Sirimavo went as often as she could, both officially and privately, because there she had found a place for effective treatment of the knee problem which troubled her often. She liked the ‘alternative medicine’ method of therapeutic mud-packs, somewhat reminiscent of our own ayurveda which was practised in the clinic in Bratislava on the Adriatic coast. This was the only health problem that she had, throughout the four and a half years of her first premiership. I believe the lift at Temple Trees was installed at this time as she found it very painful, at times when the knee became inflamed, to climb the stairs to her bedroom upstairs. Once or twice, I even had to carry the official files into her room and she would attend to the papers quite cheerily, while propped up in bed.

Administrative Reform at home

Sirimavo made some important changes in public service administration both at the top and the bottom of the ladder. I had a feeling that Felix was very much behind all this. In 1963 after much consideration, the Ceylon Civil Service was abolished and replaced by the Ceylon Administrative Service constructed on broader recruitment base. The writing had been on the wall for a while. The primary reason for the change seemed to be that, Felix particularly, and a few of the other ministers, were not too comfortable with having their chief administrative advisors being people with their own individual minds and opinions.

They would have preferred less debate and more action once the political decisions had been taken. It was not so much obstruction, as the perceived continuing challenge to their authority, which was galling. How much easier it would be if one had more obedient, less intellectually inclined, and less argumentative people to take their orders and carry them out, seemed to be the basic reasoning which the Cabinet accepted.

There was some truth in these suppositions. The Ceylon Civil Service (CCS) which was very much an elite club with its own subculture, still tried to maintain the tradition of the impartial, learned, and omnicompetent advisor. Raw entrants to the service in the post-independence period, were increasingly academically brilliant young men coming in from the rural Maha Vidyalayas. But they were quickly schooled by their peers in the CCS who largely came from the traditional urban public schools, which had earlier produced the base of the service, into the ‘culture’, and became ofttimes stronger keepers of the tradition than their mentors.

After the political revolution of 1956 and the emergence of a new breed of politicians, all this had been under attack. The CCS seemed to be supremely indifferent to the profound changes going on, unless the changes affected their own interests. Radical change in the objectives and methods of governance were afoot. The accent being on delivering what the people at the grassroots wanted, and delivering it quickly. Felix seriously felt that many of the Ceylon Civil Service administrators were too ‘dyed in the wool’ in old-school ways and methods.

What he thought of them was that there was too much of the observance of the letter of the law and not enough sensitivity to the spirit of the new times. In a way there was much truth in what he was saying because the civil servants had the independence of doing things the way they wanted to because of the levels of education and achievement they possessed academically, and also since most of them had independent means. A civil servant was a prized catch for the daughter of a successful businessman or a rich land owner. There were many CC S men of acute intellectual brilliance who had been snared by very rich bus magnates or owners of vast acres of coconut and rubber land. Felix’s point was that with all this acquired wealth behind them would they be able to implement the programme of socialistic reforms the government had in mind?

So without much ado in 1963 all of us civil servants were given the option to retire immediately ‘on abolition of office terms’, or of retiring within the next 10 years on the same generous terms. Several of the older ones left pretty soon while some of the younger ones, like myself, remained to exercise the option at a later stage of our career. Similarly, Sirimavo with Felix’s help, made a strategically important structural change at the bottom of the administrative chain of the highly centralized structure of government in place at the time. This was the abolition of the office of the ‘Village Headman’ and his replacement by the more homely grama sevaka – the servant of the people.

The role of the Governor-General

The results of the general elections called by Prime Minister Sirimavo Bandaranaike in 1965 were inconclusive. The SLFP-led front had not obtained an outright majority of parliamentary seats. The UNP, among the parties that had contested, had won the most number of seats. Sirimavo who always wanted to scrupulously observe the rules and procedures asked me to prepare the usual letters of resignation of her government.

However there were other political forces at work attempting to persuade her to consider other options, before resigning. One such, put forward by Dr Colvin R de Silva, the astute legal brain of the LSSP, was to hold on and face a vote of confidence when Parliament met in ten days time. The debate was fast and furious and tempers ran high. As usual much was at stake. I recall very clearly the alignment of forces. Those of the Left were arguing for the prime minister to stay on, and let the issue be decided by

Parliament when it met. Others, mainly her family members, like her Private Secretary Mackie, Felix and Lakshmi Bandaranaike and James and Siva Obeysekere, were for her doing, what she wanted to do, which was to resign and allow the governor-general the opportunity to call whomever he thought could form a government, to do so.

The delay in the prime minister resigning was leading to unruly behaviour in the city. Outside in the city. Outside Temple Trees a crowd of people gathered at the gates in support of Sirimavo. I saw my university colleague, the diminutive Stanley Tillekeratne, then an SLFP back-bencher, orating before the restive crowd. Through all this William Gopallawa, the governor-general acted with impeccable integrity.

At times like these, the role of the governor-general in terms of the constitution came into its own. At normal times although the highest in the land protocol-wise, he had no effective power to act on his own. After a general election however, and one which was indecisive, he was endowed with wide discretionary power. He could in his discretion, when informed by the prime minister that she had resigned, summon a leader of a political party to form a government, if in his view that political leader could command the confidence of Parliament. He could also, in circumstances that nobody else could do, call on the resigned prime minister to try to win the support of other parties and produce proof that he/she could command the confidence of the House.

It was an excruciatingly difficult time for Gopallawa. It was Sirimavo who in the aftermath of the failed coup d’etat in 1962, and the removal of Sir Oliver, recommended his name to the Queen for appointment as governor-general. There were links of kinship between the Bandaranaikes and the Gopallawas. The other party, in the wings – the UNP – might deal harshly with him if they came in, since he had been appointed by the SLFP.

None of these considerations bothered Gopallawa when it came to doing his duty. During those critical hours when the country’s fate, hung in the balance as it were, Gopallawa was unshakable in his devotion to duty. Almost every hour he would call me to ask whether the prime minister had made up her mind. Once, in exasperation, he asked me whether he should send over Erskine May, the authoritative book on parliamentary procedure and practice, with the relevant portions highlighted. I begged for time.

I was being given a difficult time by the left members. They resented my advice to Sirimavo that she resign and leave it open to the governor-general to take the matter further. Finally Colvin ordered me to leave the room. I countered that I worked for the prime minister and would only leave if the prime minister asked me to do so. Sirimavo remained calm and said nothing. So I remained.

That night dejected and disappointed at the delay, my car was stoned as I drove down Cotta Road to my home in Rajagiriya. I announced tearfully to Damayanthi that I would be resigning the next day if there was not a proper outcome. Around seven the next morning I had a call from Mackie asking me to come to TT (Temple Trees) as soon as possible as the prime minister had decided to sign the letter. I got back to TT, had the letter signed and was coming down the stairs when I met a small group of those who had been trying to persuade the prime minister to stay on, coming up.

I ignored their rather black looks and went over to Queens House. Gopallawa was much relieved and immediately sent for Dudley to see whether he had the required majority. The hero of the story for me was Gopallawa. His had been a supreme act of patriotism; an act of loyalty to the state which transcended party, kinship and even personal obligation.

All News Advertisement

Features

US-CHINA RIVALRY: Maintaining Sri Lanka’s autonomy

Published

1 day ago

2025/12/19

Thilina Walpola

During a discussion at the Regional Center for Strategic Studies (RCSS) in Sri Lanka on 9 December, Dr. Neil DeVotta, Professor at Wake Forest University, North Carolina, USA commented on the “gravity of a geopolitical contest that has already reshaped global politics and will continue to mould the future. For Sri Lanka – positioned at the heart of the Indian Ocean, economically fragile, and diplomatically exposed- his analysis was neither distant nor abstract. It was a warning of the world taking shape around us” (Ceylon Today, December 14, 2025).

Sri Lanka is known for ignoring warnings as it did with the recent cyclone or security lapses in the past that resulted in terrorist attacks. Professor De Votta’s warning too would most likely be ignored considering the unshakable adherence to Non-Alignment held by past and present experts who have walked the halls of the Foreign Ministry, notwithstanding the global reshaping taking place around us almost daily. In contrast, Professor DeVotta “argued that nonalignment is largely a historical notion. Few countries today are truly non-aligned. Most States claiming neutrality are in practice economically or militarily dependent on one of the great powers. Sri Lanka provides a clear example while it pursues the rhetoric of non-alignment, its reliance on Chinese investments for infrastructure projects has effectively been aligned to Beijing. Non-alignment today is more about perceptions than reality. He stressed that smaller nations must carefully manage perceptions while negotiating real strategic dependencies to maintain flexibility in an increasingly polarised world.” (Ibid).

The latest twist to non-alignment is Balancing. Advocates of such policies are under the delusion that the parties who are being “Balanced” are not perceptive enough to realise that what is going on in reality is that they are being used. Furthermore, if as Professor DeVotta says, it is “more about perception than reality”, would not Balancing strain friendly relationships by its hypocrisy? Instead, the hope for a country like Sri Lanka whose significance of its Strategic Location outweighs its size and uniqueness, is to demonstrate by its acts and deeds that Sri Lanka is perceived globally as being Neutral without partiality to any major powers if it is to maintain its autonomy and ensure its security.

DECLARATION OF NEUTRALITY AS A POLICY

Neutrality as a Foreign Policy was first publicly announced by President Gotabaya Rajapaksa during his acceptance speech in the holy city of Anuradhapura and later during his inauguration of the 8th Parliament on January 3, 2020. Since then Sri Lanka’s Political Establishment has accepted Neutrality as its Foreign Policy judging from statements made by former President Ranil Wickremesinghe, Prime Minister Dinesh Gunawardena and Foreign Ministers up to the present when President Dissanayake declared during his maiden speech at the UN General Assembly and captured by the Head Line of Daily Mirror of October 1, 2025: “AKD’s neutral, not nonaligned, stance at UNGA”

The front page of the Daily FT (Oct.9, 2024) carries a report titled “Sri Lanka reaffirms neutral diplomacy” The report states: “The Cabinet Spokesman and Foreign Minister Vijitha Herath yesterday assured that Sri Lanka maintains balanced diplomatic relations with all countries, reaffirming its policy of friends of all and enemy of none”. Quoting the Foreign Minister, the report states: “There is no favouritism. We do not consider any country to be special. Whether it is big or small, Sri Lanka maintains diplomatic relations with all countries – China, India, the US, Russia, Cuba, or Vietnam. We have no bias in our approach, he said…”

NEUTRALITY in OPERATION

“Those who are unaware of the full scope and dynamics of the Foreign Policy of Neutrality perceive it as being too weak and lacking in substance to serve the interests of Sri Lanka. In contrast, those who are ardent advocates of Non-Alignment do not realize that its concepts are a collection of principles formulated and adopted only by a group of like-minded States to meet perceived challenges in the context of a bi-polar world. In the absence of such a world order the principles formulated have lost their relevance” (https://island.lk/relevance-of-a neutral-foreign-policy).

“On the other hand, ICRC Publication on Neutrality is recognized Internationally “The sources of the international law of neutrality are customary international law and, for certain questions, international treaties, in particular the Paris Declaration of 1856, the 1907 Hague Convention No. V respecting the Rights and Duties of Neutral Powers and Persons in Case of War on Land, the 1907 Hague Convention No. XIII concerning the Rights and Duties of Neutral Powers in Naval War, the four 1949 Geneva Conventions and Additional Protocol I of 1977 (June 2022)” (Ibid).

“A few Key issues addressed in this Publication are: “THE PRINCIPLE OF INVOILABILITY of a Neutral State and THE DUTIES OF NEUTRAL STATES.

“In the process of reaffirming the concept of Neutrality, Foreign Minister Vijitha Herath stated that the Policy of Neutrality would operate in practice in the following manner: “There is no favoritism. We do not consider any country to be special. Whether it is big or small, Sri Lanka maintains diplomatic relations with all countries – China, India, the US, Russia, Cuba or Vietnam. We have no bias in our approach” (The Daily FT, Oct, 9, 2024).

“Essential features of Neutrality, such as inviolability of territory and to be free of the hegemony of power blocks were conveyed by former Foreign Minister Ali Sabry at a forum in Singapore when he stated: “We have always been clear that we are not interested in being an ally of any of these camps. We will be an independent country and work with everyone, but there are conditions. Our land and sea will not be used to threaten anyone else’s security concerns. We will not allow military bases to be built here. We will not be a pawn in their game. We do not want geopolitical games playing out in our neighbourhood, and affecting us. We are very interested in de-escalating tensions. What we could do is have strategic autonomy, negotiate with everyone as sovereign equals, strategically use completion to our advantage” (the daily morning, July 17, 2024)

In addition to the concepts and expectations of a Neutral State cited above, “the Principle of Inviolability of territory and formal position taken by a State as an integral part of ‘Principles and Duties of a Neutral State’ which is not participating in an armed conflict or which does not want to become involved” enabled Sri Lanka not to get involved in the recent Military exchanges between India and Pakistan.

However, there is a strong possibility for the US–China Rivalry to manifest itself engulfing India as well regarding resources in Sri Lanka’s Exclusive Economic Zone. While China has already made attempts to conduct research activities in and around Sri Lanka, objections raised by India have caused Sri Lanka to adopt measures to curtail Chinese activities presumably for the present. The report that the US and India are interested in conducting hydrographic surveys is bound to revive Chinese interests. In the light of such developments it is best that Sri Lanka conveys well in advance that its Policy of Neutrality requires Sri Lanka to prevent Exploration or Exploitation within its Exclusive Economic Zone under the principle of the Inviolability of territory by any country.

Another sphere where Sri Lanka’s Policy of Neutrality would be compromised is associated with Infrastructure Development. Such developments are invariably associated with unsolicited offers such as the reported $3.5 Billion offer for a 200,000 Barrels a day Refinery at Hambantota. Such a Project would fortify its presence at Hambantota as part of its Belt and Road Initiative. Such offers if entertained would prompt other Global Powers to submit similar proposals for other locations. Permitting such developments on grounds of “Balancing” would encourage rivalry and seriously threaten Sri Lanka’s independence to exercise its autonomy over its national interests.

What Sri Lanka should explore instead, is to adopt a fresh approach to develop the Infrastructure it needs. This is to first identify the Infrastructure projects it needs, then formulate its broad scope and then call for Expressions of Interest globally and Finance it with Part of the Remittances that Sri Lanka receives annually from its own citizens. In fact, considering the unabated debt that Sri Lanka is in, it is time that Sri Lanka sets up a Development Fund specifically to implement Infrastructure Projects by syphoning part of the Foreign Remittances it receives annually from its citizens . Such an approach means that it would enable Sri Lanka to exercise its autonomy free of debt.

CONCLUSION

The adherents of Non-Alignment as Sri Lanka’s Foreign Policy would not have been pleased to hear Dr. DeVotta argue that “non-alignment is largely a historical notion” during his presentation at the Regional Center for Strategic Studies in Colombo. What is encouraging though is that, despite such “historical notions”, the political establishment, starting with President Gotabaya Rajapaksa and other Presidents, Prime Ministers and Ministers of Foreign Affairs extending up to President AKD at the UNGA and Foreign Affairs Minister, Vijitha Herath, have accepted and endorsed neutrality as its foreign policy. However, this lack of congruence between the experts, some of whom are associated with Government institutions, and the Political Establishment, is detrimental to Sri Lanka’s interests.

If as Professor DeVotta warns, the future Global Order would be fashioned by US – China Rivalry, Sri Lanka has to prepare itself if it is not to become a victim of this escalating Rivalry. Since this Rivalry would engulf India a well when it comes to Sri Lanka’s Exclusive Economic Zone (EEC), Sri Lanka should declare well in advance that no Exploration or Exploitation would be permitted within its EEC on the principle of inviolability of territory under provisions of Neutrality and the UN adoption of the Indian Ocean as a Zone of Peace.

As a measure of preparedness serious consideration should be given to the recommendation cited above which is to set up a development fund by allocating part of the annual dollar remittances to finance Sri Lanka’s development without depending on foreign direct investments, export-driven strategies or the need to be flexible to negotiate dependencies; A strategy that is in keeping with Sri Lanka’s civilisational values of self-reliance. Judging from the unprecedented devastation recently experienced by Sri Lanka due to lack of preparedness and unheeded warnings, the lesson for the political establishment is to rely on the wisdom and relevance of Self-Reliance to equip Sri Lanka to face the consequences of the US–China rivalry.

by Neville Ladduwahetty ✍️

Features

1132nd RO Water purification plant opened at Mahinda MV, Kauduluwewa

Published

1 day ago

2025/12/19

Thilina Walpola

Sponsors (senior management from M/S Perera and Sons), Principal and SLN officials at Opening of RO Plant

A project sponsored by Perera and Sons (P&S) Company and built by Sri Lanka Navy

Petroleum Terminals Ltd
Former Managing Director Ceylon Petroleum Corporation
Former High Commissioner to Pakistan

When the 1132nd RO plant built by the Navy with funds generously provided by M/S Perera and Sons, Sri Lanka’s iconic, century-old bakery and food service chain, established in 1902, known for its network of outlets, numbering 235, in Sri Lanka. This company, established in 1902 by Philanthropist K. A. Charles Perera, well known for their efforts to help the needy and humble people. Helping people gain access to drinking water is a project launched with the help of this esteemed company.

The opening of an RO plant

The Chronic Kidney Disease (CKD) started spreading like a wildfire mainly in North Central, North Western and Eastern provinces. Medical experts are of the view that the main cause of the disease is the use of unsafe water for drinking and cooking. The map shows how the CKD is spreading in Sri Lanka.

School where 1132nd RO plants established by SLN

In 2015, when I was the Commander of the Navy, with our Research and Development Unit of SLN led by a brilliant Marine Engineer who with his expertise and innovative skills brought LTTE Sea Tigers Wing to their knees. The famous remote-controlled explosive-laden Arrow boats to fight LTTE SEA TIGER SUCIDE BOATS menace was his innovation!). Then Captain MCP Dissanayake (2015), came up with the idea of manufacturing low- cost Reverse Osmosis Water Purification Plants. The SLN Research and development team manufactured those plants at a cost of one-tenth of an imported plant.

The writer with his PSO’s daughter

Gaurawa Sasthrawedi Panditha Venerable Devahuwe Wimaladhamma TheroP/Saraswathi Devi Primary School, Ashokarama Maha Viharaya, Navanagara, Medirigiriya

The Navy established FIRST such plant at Kadawatha-Rambawa in Madawachiya Divisional Secretariat area, where the CKD patients were the highest. The Plant was opened on 09 December 2015, on the 65th Anniversary of SLN. It was an extremely proud achievement by SLN

Areas where the RO plants are located

First, the plants were sponsored by officers and sailors of the Sri Lanka Navy, from a Social Responsibility Fund established, with officers and sailors contributing Rs 30 each from their salaries every month. This money Rs 30 X 50,000 Naval personnel provided us sufficient funds to build one plant every month.

Observing great work done by SLN, then President Maithripala Sirisena established a Presidential Task Force on eradicating CKD and funding was no issue to the SLN. We developed a factory line at our R and D unit at Welisara and established RO plants at double-quick time. Various companies/ organisations and individuals also funded the project. Project has been on for the last ten years under six Navy Commanders after me, namely Admiral Travis Sinniah, Admiral Sirimevan Ranasinghe, Admiral Piyal de Silva, Admiral Nishantha Ulugetenna, Admiral Priyantha Perera and present Navy Commander Vice Admiral Kanchana Banagoda.

Each plant is capable of producing up to 10,000 litres of clean drinking water a day. This means a staggering 11.32 million litres of clean drinking water every day!

The map indicates the locations of these 1132 plants.

Well done, Navy!

On the occasion of its 75th Anniversary celebrations, which fell on 09 December 2025, the Navy received the biggest honour. Venerable Thero (Venerable Dewahuwe Wimalarathana Thero, Principal of Saraswathi Devi Primary Pirivena in Medirigiriya) who delivered the sermons during opening of 1132nd RO plant, said, “Ten years ago, out of 100 funerals I attended; more than 80 were of those who died of CKD! Today, thanks to the RO plants established by the Navy, including one at my temple also, hardly any death happens in our village due to CKD! Could there be a greater honour?

Features

Poltergeist of Universities Act

Published

1 day ago

2025/12/19

Thilina Walpola

The Universities Act is back in the news – this time with the present government’s attempt to reform it through a proposed amendment (November 2025) presented by the Minister of Education, Higher Education and Vocational Education, Harini Amarasuriya, who herself is a former academic and trade unionist. The first reading of the proposed amendment has already taken place with little debate and without much attention either from the public or the university community. By all counts, the parliament and powers across political divisions seem nonchalant about the relative silence in which this amendment is making its way through the process, indicative of how low higher education has fallen among its stakeholders.

The Universities Act No. 16 of 1978 under which Sri Lankan universities are managed has generated debate, though not always loud, ever since its empowerment. Increasing politicisation of decision making in and about universities due to the deterioration of the conduct of the University Grants Commission (UGC) has been a central concern of those within the university system and without. This politicisation has been particularly acute in recent decades either as a direct result of some of the provisions in the Universities Act or the problematic interpretation of these. There has never been any doubt that the Act needs serious reform – if not a complete overhaul – to make universities more open, reflective, and productive spaces while also becoming the conscience of the nation rather than timid wastelands typified by the state of some universities and some programs.

But given the Minister’s background in what is often called progressive politics in Sri Lanka, why are many colleagues in the university system, including her own former colleagues and friends, so agitated by the present proposed amendment? The anxiety expressed by academics stem from two sources. The first concern is the presentation of the proposed amendment to parliament with no prior consultative process with academics or representative bodies on its content, and the possible urgency with which it will get pushed through parliament (if a second reading takes place as per the regular procedure) in the midst of a national crisis. The second is the content itself.

Appointment of Deans

Let me take the second point first. When it comes to the selection of deans, the existing Act states that a dean will be selected from among a faculty’s own who are heads of department. The provision was crafted this way based on the logic that a serving head of department would have administrative experience and connections that would help run a faculty in an efficient manner. Irrespective of how this worked in practice, the idea behind has merit.

By contrast, the proposed amendment suggests that a dean will be elected by the faculty from among its senior professors, professors, associate professors and senior lecturers (Grade I). In other words, a person no longer needs to be a head of department to be considered for election as a dean. While in a sense, this marks a more democratised approach to the selection, it also allows people lacking in experience to be elected by manoeuvring the electoral process within faculties.

In the existing Act, this appointment is made by the vice chancellor once a dean is elected by a given faculty. In the proposed amendment, this responsibility will shift to the university’s governing council. In the existing Act, if a dean is indisposed for a number of reasons, the vice chancellor can appoint an existing head of department to act for the necessary period of time, following on the logic outlined earlier. The new amendment would empower the vice chancellor to appoint another senior professor, professor, associate professor or senior lecturer (Grade I) from the concerned faculty in an acting capacity. Again, this appears to be a positive development.

Appointing Heads of Department

Under the current Act heads of department have been appointed from among professors, associate professors, senior lecturers or lecturers appointed by the Council upon the recommendation of the vice chancellor. The proposed amendment states the head of department should be a senior professor appointed by the Council upon the recommendation of the vice chancellor, and in the absence of a senior professor, other members of the department are to be considered. In the proposed scheme, a head of department can be removed by the Council. According to the existing Act, an acting head of department appointment can be made by the vice chancellor, while the proposed amendment shifts this responsibility to the Council, based upon the recommendation of the vice chancellor.

The amendment further states that no person should be appointed as the head of the same department for more than one term unless all other eligible people have already completed their responsibilities as heads of department. This is actually a positive development given that some individuals have managed to hang on to the head of department post for years, thereby depriving opportunities to other competent colleagues to serve in the post.

Process of amending the Universities Act

The question is, if some of the contents of the proposed amendment are positive developments, as they appear to be, why are academics anxious about its passing in parliament? This brings me to my first point, that is the way in which this amendment is being rushed through by the government. This has been clearly articulated by the Arts Faculty Teachers Association of University of Colombo. In a letter to the Minister of Education dated 9 December 2025, the Association makes two points, which have merit. First, “the bill has been drafted and tabled in Parliament for first reading without a consultative process with academics in state universities, who are this bill’s main stakeholders. We note that while the academic community may agree with its contents, the process is flawed because it is undemocratic and not transparent. There has not been adequate time for deliberation and discussion of details that may make the amendment stronger, especially in the face of the disaster situation of the country.”

Second, “AFTA’s membership also questions the urgency with which the bill is tabled in Parliament, and the subsequent unethical conduct of the UGC in requesting the postponement of dean selections and heads of department appointments in state universities in expectation of the bill’s passing in Parliament.”

These are serious concerns. No one would question the fact that the Universities Act needs to be amended. However, this must necessarily be based on a comprehensive review process. The haste to change only sections pertaining to the selection of deans and heads of department is strange, to say the least, and that too in the midst of dealing with the worst natural calamity the country has faced in living memory. To compound matters, the process also has been fast-tracked thereby compromising on the time made available to academics to make their views be known.

Similarly, the issuing of a letter by the UGC freezing all appointments of deans and heads of department, even though elections and other formalities have been carried out, is a telling instance of the government’s problematic haste and patently undemocratic process. Notably, this action comes from a government whose members, including the Education Minister herself, have stood steadfastly for sensible university reforms, before coming to power. The present process is manoeuvred in such a manner, that the proposed amendment would soon become law in the way the government requires, including all future appointments being made under this new law. Hence, the attempt to halt appointments, which were already in the pipeline, in the interim period.

It is evident that rather than undertake serious university sector reforms, the government is aiming to control universities and thereby their further politicization amenable to the present dispensation. The ostensible democratis0…..ation of the qualified pool of applicants for deanships opens up the possibilities for people lacking experience, but are proximate to the present powers that be, to hold influential positions within the university. The transfer of appointing powers to the Councils indicates the same trend. After all, Councils are partly made up of outsiders to the university, and such individuals, without exception, are political appointees. The likelihood of them adhering to the interests of the government would be very similar to the manner in which some vice chancellors appointed by the President of the country feel obligated to act.

All things considered, particularly the rushed and non-transparent process adopted thus far by the government does not show sincerity towards genuine and much needed university sector reforms. By contrast, it shows a crude intent to control universities at any cost. It is extremely regrettable that the universities in general have not taken a more proactive and principled position towards the content and the process of the proposed amendment. As I have said many times before, whatever ills that have befallen universities so far is the disastrous fallout of compromises of those within made for personal gain and greed, or the abject silence and disinterest of those within. These culprits have abandoned broader institutional development. This appears to be yet another instance of that sad process.

In this context, I have admiration for my former colleagues in the Faculty of Arts at the University of Colombo for having the ethical courage to indicate clearly the fault lines of the proposed amendment and the problems of its process. What they have asked is a postponement of the process giving them time to engage. In this context, it is indeed disappointing to see the needlessly conciliatory tone of the letter to the Education Minister by the Federation of University Teachers Association dated December 5, 2025, which sends the wrong signal.

If this government still believes it is a people’s government, the least it can do is give these academics time to engage with the proposed amendment. After all, many within the academic community helped bring the government to power. If not and if this amendment is rushed through parliament in needless haste, it will create a precedent that signals the way in which the government intends to do business in the future, abusing its parliamentary majority and denting its credibility for good.