Connect with us

Opinion

Sri Lankan democracy enters new phase of forced retreat

Published

on

Text of the speech delivered by
Prof. Jayadeva Uyangoda
at the launch of the book,

Democracy and Democratization in Sri Lanka: Paths, Trends and imaginations, September 09, 2023, at Kamatha Cultural Center Auditorium, BMICH. Prof. Uyangoda is the Editor of this two-volume publication.

I have no doubt at all that the Chairperson of the BCIS, the Board of Academic Affairs, the BCIS management, the chapter contributors, and the BCIS staff are delighted to see the two volumes of Democracy and Democratization in Sri Lanka: Paths, Trends and imaginations in print. This, as far as I know, is the first major academic publication undertaken by the BCIS. It is Madam Chandrika Kumaratunga’s vision, initiative, guidance and unwavering support that has made this notable achievement possible.

It is she who proposed this research project’s thematic focus. She trusted the Academic Board and the research team and gave them a free hand to develop and work on it. At the same time, I apologize to her on behalf of the team for giving her a few anxious moments.

There were some delays caused partly by the general crisis triggered by the Covid-19 pandemic. Besides, the missed deadlines set during normal times were unavoidable in a project of research and publication of this magnitude, carried out in a time of exceptional crises in our society, politics and the everyday life. For me as the lead researcher and the Editor, seeing these two volumes in print is a worthy reward for two and half years of hard labour.

Context

We at the BCIS began to conceptualize and plan this publication on the experience of democracy in our country, at a time when the Sri Lankan people were on the verge of losing their democratic heritage. When the year 2019 began, the threat of a hard authoritarian system replacing a weak and battered democratic order had indeed become alarmingly real.

We at the BCIS Board of Academic Affairs and its Chairperson felt that an analysis of why a promising democracy at the time of independence had failed so abysmally is a theme warranting critical scholarly inquiry and explanation.

Thus, we launched this research and publication project on democracy and democratization in Sri Lanka in mid -2020. As I have already mentioned, the Covid-19 Pandemic of 2021 came while we had just begun our work. It interfered with our project in a variety of ways, including halting most of the research.

More significantly, the Pandemic had led to a new political process in Sri Lanka. It can be termed as accelerated backsliding of democracy spearheaded by one faction of the ruling elites. It appeared almost like the last stage of Sri Lanka’s democracy.

But, Sri Lanka’s democracy, even in retreat, has shown that it has had some magical capacity for surprises. And that is exactly what we witnessed during the Spring and Summer of 2022. Sri Lankan citizens suddenly woke up demanding more democracy than what the political elites were willing to concede.

During the Aragalaya of 2022, the ordinary people, citizens without wealth or power, rose up demanding substantive democratic reforms. The ordinary citizens in their capacity as demos began to make claims to their ownership of democracy. They also highlighted that Sri Lanka’s democracy in general and representative democracy in particular, were in a deep crisis.

It was indeed an attempt by the people, demos, to re-generate as well as re-invent democracy in Sri Lanka. That is why the citizens’ protest in 2022 diserves to be acknowledged as a significant turning point in the somewhat twisted process of democratization in Sri Lanka.

In brief, the events of 2022 provided new perspectives and critical insights immensely useful to our own work on democracy and democratization in Sri Lanka. It showed us that the ordinary people play a powerful role as an agency for democratization. Their faith in democracy is far greater than that of the elites who exploit democracy for predatory ends. That is the spirit with which these two volumes evolved.

Organisation of the Book

The book has 22 chapters divided into two volumes. They are written by Sri Lankan scholars. The chapters are lined up under six themes which are as follows:

· Democracy in South Asia and Sri Lanka: Historical and Conceptual Contexts.

· Constitutional and Institutional Crises of Democracy in Sri Lanka.

· Democracy in the Social and Ethnic margins

· Alternative Forms of Democratic Thinking and Practice

· Democracy, Discontent and Resistance

· Protests as a Vector of Democratisation.

I want to share with you very briefly what I as the Editor see as unique about this book.

· This is the first book-length scholarly work exclusively devoted to the theme of democracy in Sri Lanka.

· All chapter contributors are Sri Lankan scholars who have been witnesses to the rise, decline and attempts at regeneration of democracy.

· The analysis developed in the chapters do not belong to a specific disciplinary area of the social sciences, such as political science or constitutional law. There is a plurality of approaches from the fields of social sciences and humanities.

· The book does not advocate or campaign for any particular version or variant of democracy. It argues for the plurality of democracy as a political concept and practice. Yet all chapter contributors stand for bringing the normative ethics of equality, freedom, justice and social emancipation back to the theory and practice of democracy.

Key Messages

What are the messages that these two volumes with chapters on diverse themes convey? Let me share with you a few of them that have a direct bearing on how we should view democracy and democratization anew.

· Democracy, as an organizing principle of political and social life, has strongly local social and popular roots in Sri Lanka as it has been the case elsewhere globally: It is a historical fact that modern democracy in Sri Lanka is an aspect of the European colonial legacy: However, people of Sri Lanka from various social classes have appropriated it and made use of it for their own social interests. In this process, there has been a double transformation. While the local society and its politics has been altered by liberal democracy, the local society has also changed the idea of democracy with a substantive, though subtle, critique of liberal democracy.

This has two theoretical implications. Firstly, the Sri Lankan people have not been passive recipients of a Western, European, or colonial, political idea. Secondly, they have played an active, agential role in appropriating and transforming that European idea. This book describes it as a creative process of ‘localizing democracy.’

· Ideas and practices of democracy have preceded the invention of the language of democracy

: Genealogies of the idea and practices of democracy predates its colonial origins in Sri Lanka and South Asia. The impulses and desires for democracy have always been there everywhere and whenever there were organized political power in the form of the state in pre-modern societies too. Historical and literary evidence in ancient and pre-colonial India and Sri Lanka show that the human desire for freedom from domination, independence, autonomy and justice have been integral to the social and political struggles within organized social formations.

It has been so in the processes of state formation in ancient Sri Lanka and South Asia, as elsewhere. This is the primary historical essence of ‘universalism’ of the idea of democracy. In other words, the idea and practices of democracy have been there in many forms in pre-colonial societies long before the language of modern democracy has been invented and the impulses for democracy rigidly formalized and frozen in meaning.

· The ordinary citizens are more faithful custodians of democracy than the elites:

Democratization is not a process confined to the activities of political elites as well as governments, as wrongly assumed in the mainstream democracy studies and assessments. The Sri Lankan case studies in the book show that democratization from below, at the level of the governed and the disempowered citizens, is most important in mapping paths of democratization in Sri Lanka. This thesis is valid to democracy’s liberal variant too.

The book shows that the dispossessed and the ordinary citizens, rather than the elites, have had a greater stake at defending and consolidating democracy. They have done it through the struggles of resistance against the elite-led de-democratization. The elites have domesticated, tamed, abandoned, and even became hostile to the liberal normative content of democracy.

People have also collaborated with backed the political elites in the latter’s projects of de-democratisation. However, in crucial moments of crisis the people, demos, have defended and deepened the idea and the normative content of even liberal democracy in Sri Lanka.

· Elite capture of liberal democracy has made democracy thin

: A lesson I have learned in the course of research for this book is that liberal democracy has the unintended consequence of dividing the population of Sri Lanka into two new classes in its own way: political elites and political non-elites. This has been a general pattern in other societies too.

Sri Lanka’s process of elite-led democratic backsliding has been paralleled with the introduction of representative government early last century. Elites who benefitted from the electoral, representative democracy have appropriated the liberal democracy and used it as an instrument for consolidating their social, economic, political and familial power.

Thus, the conception of democracy associated with Sri Lanka’s ruling elites has been a thin and truncated version of liberal democracy. Its role in democratization has now come to an effective end. Sri Lankan people await a strong democracy in terms of its social roots and normative commitments.

· Popular resistance to deprivations and unjust exercise of power has deepened the normative foundations of democracy in Sri Lanka

: The instrumentalist use of representative and parliamentary democracy by the elites is only one side of the story of democratization in Sri Lanka. In contrast, there is a subaltern story of democratization too.

The Left parties, working class, peasants, the working people, women’s groups, ethnic minorities, and student movements have contributed substantively to deepening the idea, the meaning, normative goals and the social relevance of Sri Lanka’s democracy. Through social practices of demands and direct political action for substantive equality and justice, they have shown how the limits of narrowly conceived and much abused representative democracy could be reformed. Thus, Sri Lanka’s democracy is not the monopolistic possession of the political elites. It is the inheritance of a plurality of non-elite social groups as well.

· Continuing conflict between democratic backsliding and popular demand for more democracy awaits a deep-democratic resolution:

Since independence, Sri Lanka’s democracy has evolved along two contradictory trajectories. The first is the path of democratic backsliding and de-democratization chosen by the elites. The second is the path of demanding and fighting for more democracy by the subordinate and non-elite social classes, trade unions and social movements, the civil society groups, and reformist elites.

The conflict between these two opposing paths is a major facet of the crisis of democratization in Sri Lanka. Its resolution presupposes a project of re-democratisation through radically substantive political and constitutional reforms.

What is Happening to Democracy

Let us briefly reflect on what is happening to democracy in Sri Lanka at present. Sri Lankan democracy seems to have entered a new phase of forced retreat engineered by the new ruling coalition. People of Sri Lanka who have yearend for the revival of democracy find themselves caught up in a new version of what our book calls the ‘de-democratization trap.

’ Its key feature has been the incorporation of ordinary citizens as disempowered voters to a deceitful social contract crafted by the political elites. As the citizen’s protests last year and this year have shown us, that deceitful social contract is now shattered. Citizens want to replace it with a deeply democratic and authentic social contract.

Meanwhile, there seems to be two processes of polarization of the Sri Lankan society into two hostile camps. The first is between the haves and have nots in the economic and social sense. The second is the growing enmity between the majority of the citizens who crave for more democracy and a minority of the elites who thrive on no democracy. The ways in which these polarities and contradictions will play themselves out are sure to shape the nature of politics of Sri Lanka in the months and years to come.

Returning to open democracy, more executive, legislative and judicial accountability, re-democratization of the constitution, the state, the government, and parliament, guaranteeing of economic and social justice to the poor, the working people and the middle classes are essential pre-conditions for resolving these contradictions peacefully with no recourse to violence by any side. That is also a message implicit in our book.

So, students of democracy in Sri Lanka will have a politically exciting time ahead. I and my collaborators sincerely hope that these two volumes will inspire a new interest in democracy studies among the young scholars in Sri Lanka. I am also hopeful that the readers will not fail to notice that the chapters have been written by a team of Sri Lankan scholars who have a deep passion for democracy.

Finally, let me thank a few people whose contribution to the success of this initiative warrants special acknowledgement. I have already referred to the inspiring and non-interventionist leadership provided by Madam Kumaratunga. Of course, it is our team of chapter contributors who have made these two volumes actually possible. They had the patience to tolerate the constant nagging by an impatient Editor and his support staff.

I must also mention the contribution made by our two copy-editors, Madara Rammunthugala and Nicola Perera, for refining the entire text. All reveiwers of the draft chapters also deserve my grateful acknowledgement for their contribution to ensuring the scholarly quality and standards of the publication. Suresh Amuhena designed the cover for us amidst many other commitments. Dr. Minna Taheer and Ms. Isuri Wickramaratna of the BCIS extended to me their assiatance throughout this project.

The BCIS staff Board of Academic Affairs and BMICH Board of Management ensured generous institutional support for the success of this entire intiative. Finally, Mr. Vijitha Yapa and his staff undertook the task of designing, printing and selling the book. All of them are partners of this worthy achievement. There are so many others who deserve my sincere thanks, and they are mentioned by name in the ‘Acknowledgements’ section book.

Finally, I am really happy that we have Professor Pratap Bhanu Mehta, an eminent scholar from India, as our keynote speaker. I will not take any more of your time to allow you to listen to his erudite presentation.



Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

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

Opinion

Appreciation: D. L. O. Mendis Visionary Engineer, Philosopher, and Mentor

Published

on

D.L.O. Mendis

Today, we honour the life and legacy of D.L.O. Mendis, a visionary engineer and philosopher whose contributions defined the standards of our profession. D.L.O. possessed a rare combination of analytical rigor and creative foresight. His numerous technical papers presented here and abroad related to water resources development stand as enduring monuments to his brilliance.

Beyond creating blueprints and technical specifications, D.L.O. presented bold ideas that challenged and strengthened our professional communities. He was a dedicated mentor to junior engineers, and a leader who firmly believed that engineering was, above all, a service to humanity. While we mourn this great loss, we take solace in knowing that his radical influence shaped our careers and the ethical code that governs our profession.

A Career of Integrity and Excellence

Throughout his career spanning more than 70 years, D.L.O. embodied the highest standards of integrity and technical excellence. He was particularly instrumental in advancing our

understanding of ancient irrigation systems, bridging the gap between historical wisdom and modern development.

Academic and Professional Journey

D.L.O.’s educational journey began at Ladies’ College(which accepted boys in lower grades at the time) before he moved to Royal College. He later entered the University of Ceylon as a member of the pioneering first batch of engineering students in 1950, graduating in 1954 in a class of nearly 25 students.

His professional path was distinguished and diverse:

Irrigation Department:

Served for nearly 10 years.

River Valleys Development Board (RVDB):

Contributed during the construction of the Uda Walawe reservoir.

Ministry of Plan Implementation:

Served as Deputy Director under Director M. S. M. De Silva, where his main contribution was the promotion of appropriate technology, particularly the advancement of historical Kotmale ironwork which has existed since the era of Parakrama Bahu the Great, and the South Eastern Dry Zone Project. (SEDZ).

Consultancy:

Served as a freelance consultant.

Leadership:

A prolific contributor of a large number of technical papers to the Institution of Engineers, Sri Lanka (IESL), eventually serving as its President.

Personal Reflections and Anecdotes

My association with D.L.O. spanned more than 50 years. I first saw him riding a bicycle past Akbar Hall while I was an engineering student. I later learned his family was residing at Prof. Paul’s residence nearby while he was serving at Uda Walawe Reservoir Project as a senior engineer for the RVDB.

Through D.L.O., I had the privilege of meeting legendary professionals outside the Irrigation Department, includingthe exceptionally bright M.S.M. de Silva and the international economist, Dr. Lal Jayawardena (Mr. N.U.Jayawardena’s son).

A Tribute to a Legacy

We extend our deepest gratitude for Mr. D.L.O. Mendis’slifelong service and offer our sincerest condolences to his family and colleagues. His monumental work and numerous publications remain a lasting gift to future generations of engineers.

May he attain the supreme bliss of Nibbana!

G.T. Dharmasena,
Former Director General of Irrigation

Continue Reading

Opinion

Nature’s revenge for human greed and the plight of the Third World

Published

on

Now there is no doubt about the phenomenon of global warming, its far reaching effects and its causes. Yet Donald Trump says global warming is con and Europe, too, is dithering about what measures should be urgently taken to save Earth. Deliberations at the COP30 meeting in Brazil did not bring the desired results regarding emission of greenhouse gases. The biggest polluters like the US, who have not met the minimum goals regarding emissions, decided at the 2015 Paris Agreement, failed to provide guarantees that they will correct themselves in the coming years. Cyclones that hit Sri Lanka and other Asian countries last month are the direct result of unrestricted burning of fossil fuel and other activities that cause emission of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases. Extreme climate events hit poor countries like the proverbial lightning that strikes the begging bowl.

The last decade has seen some of the worst natural disasters in the history of mankind. The devastating impacts of the climate crisis reached new heights in 2024, with scores of unprecedented heatwaves, floods and storms across the globe, according to the UN’s World Meteorological Organization (WMO). Yet human greed which is the ultimate cause of global warming continues unabated and CO2 emissions reach new records. The WMO’s report on 2024, the hottest year on record, sets out a trail of destruction from extreme weather that took lives, demolished buildings and ravaged vital crops. More than 800,000 people were displaced and made homeless, the highest yearly number since records began in 2008.

The report lists 151 unprecedented extreme weather events in 2024, meaning they were worse than any ever recorded in the region. Heatwaves in Japan left hundreds of thousands of people struck down by heatstroke. Soaring temperatures during heatwaves peaked at 49.9C at Carnarvon in Western Australia, 49.7C in the city of Tabas in Iran, and 48.5C in a nationwide heatwave in Mali.

Record rains in Italy led to floods, landslides and electricity blackouts; torrents destroyed thousands of homes in Senegal; and flash floods in Pakistan and Brazil caused major crop losses.

Storms were also supercharged by global heating in 2024, with an unprecedented six typhoons in under a month hitting the Philippines. Hurricane Helene was the strongest ever recorded to strike the Big Bend region of Florida in the US, while Vietnam was hit by Super Typhoon Yagi, affecting 3.6 million people. Many more unprecedented events will have passed unrecorded.

The world is already deep into the climate crisis, with the WMO report saying that for the first time, the 10 hottest years on record all occurred in the last decade. However, global carbon emissions have continued to rise, which will bring even worse impacts. Experts were particularly critical of the purge of climate scientists and programmes by the US president, Donald Trump, saying that ignoring reality left ordinary people paying the price.

“Leaders must step up – seizing the benefits of cheap, clean renewables for their people and economies – with new national climate plans due this year,” said the UN secretary general, António Guterres.

Extreme climate events like heat waves, intense rainfall, droughts, and severe storms have significantly increased in frequency and intensity over the past decades, driven by global warming, with studies showing a fivefold increase in climate disasters compared to the 1970s, and human influence now clearly linked to many specific events, according to reports from organisations like the UN, WMO, and Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. The number of recorded climate-related disasters (storms, floods, droughts, wildfires) surged from 711 in the 1970s to over 3,000 in the 2000s and 2010s.

The intensity of these events is also alarmingly rising. Heatwaves, heavy precipitation events, and sea-level impacts from cyclones are becoming more severe, with phenomena like extreme heat in North America now considered “virtually impossible” without human-caused climate change. Scientists can now more confidently attribute specific extreme events (like heatwaves in Europe or floods in Asia) to climate change, moving beyond general predictions to clear causation. The warming atmosphere holds more moisture, fueling more intense precipitation, while human activities (like burning fossil fuels) continue to warm the planet, loading the dice for extreme weather.

These disasters could have been considerably lessened if the signatories to the Paris Agreement on climate change signed in 2016 had fulfilled their commitment to the agreement.  The goal of the UN agreement was to reduce the average global temperature rise well below 2 degrees C above pre-industrial levels.  To achieve this, it was necessary to cut down CO2 emission by 20%, increase the renewable energy market by 20% and improve energy efficiency by 20%, the so called 20/20/20 targets.  However, the agreement was non-binding for the individual countries.

Despite all this effort, green-house gas emissions reached an all-time record of 37 billion tons in 2018 and 41 billion tonnes in 2024.  This has caused havoc all over the world, long dry periods affecting crops, desertification, forest fires alternating with torrential rain, huge floods and storms.  Countries like China, the US, EU and India who in that order are the largest emitters of greenhouse gases have a great responsibility in saving the world from total destruction.   Though China, EU and India appear to be on course to achieve Intended Nationally Determined Contributions towards emission reduction, they must do more in double quick time if global temperature rise is to be kept at 1.5C.  In contrast President Trump in his usual bumbling and foolish attitude is planning to withdraw from the Paris Agreement.  .

It has been calculated that if meat consumption is reduced by 20% carbon emission would be reduced by 5%.  Cutting down on meat consumption would be good for health also and would lesson cruelty to animals.  There are several similar measures that people and governments could do to mitigate this problem.  But human greed seems to be uncontrollable. Obviously rich countries have the capacity to deal with extreme weather events and don’t care much about their devastating impact on poor countries.

In a country like Sri Lanka, for instance, when the waters rage, people have nowhere to go. Poor people with limited land resources cannot choose where to live. This is why hawkers whose wayside shops on the Kadugannawa climb were destroyed by recent earth slides are seen reconstructing the shops in the same places. There may not be sufficient land available to relocate all those who live in unsafe places like  the foot of unstable hills, in river basins, sea beaches, etc. in a small country like ours. A significant portion of Sri Lanka’s population lives in disaster-prone areas, with nearly 19 million people residing in vulnerable spots like low-lying or landslide-prone regions, including hill slopes, making them highly susceptible to climate impacts. The National Building and Research Organisation (NBRO) has identified over 14,000 specific landslide-prone locations, affecting thousands of rural and estate homes, with thousands more at high or medium risk, especially in districts like Badulla, Kandy, and Kegalle.

To make life safe from extreme weather for at least the most vulnerable and the poorest may be beyond the means of our poor country with all its economic ills. Experts say we have to be prepared to live with climate change. Rather we may have to die with it unless the preventable is prevented ! According to climate scientists, global warming is preventable. The Director of the Penn Center for Science, Sustainability & the Media, Michael Mann is among many scientists who point to the “game-changing new scientific understanding” that global warming would stabilize relatively quickly (within a decade) if emissions were to reach net zero, meaning that the worst outcomes are avoidable if we act swiftly. The authors of the comprehensive IPCC reports emphasize that every fraction of a degree of warming that is prevented will save countless lives and protect vital ecosystems. These reports serve as the authoritative voice on climate science and policy recommendations.

The battle against global warming, it appears, has to be fought by the Global South as the North is not doing enough. It is the poor countries of the Global South that do not have the capacity to absorb the blows that nature delivers, and it is they who have to bear the brunt of the relentless onslaught. As I have mentioned in my earlier letters the Global South has to get together to fight the greed driven neo-liberalism which is the cause of so many ills including global warming. In this regard China, India, South Africa and perhaps Iran with the backing of Russia may have to take the leadership and construct an alternative to the present global economic system which would have to take strong cognition of the need to safeguard the environment and cut down on emissions drastically and quickly. This is not impossible if consumerism, which is the driver of neo-liberalism, could be controlled. To achieve this human greed will have to be restrained, perhaps by means of good morals. Unless the Global South realizes the impending peril and takes necessary measures we are doomed.

by N. A. de S. Amaratunga ✍️

Continue Reading

Opinion

Remembering Douglas Devananda on New Year’s Day 2026

Published

on

Douglas in Geneva

I have no intention of even implicitly commenting on the legality of the ongoing incarceration of Douglas Devananda.

I’ve no legal background, and that’s because having been selected for the Law faculty at the University of Colombo on the basis of my A level results, I opted to study Political Science instead. I did so because I had an acute sense of the asymmetry between the law and justice and had developed a growing compulsion on issues of ethics—issues of right and wrong, good and evil.

However, as someone who has had a book published in the UK on political ethics, I have no compunction is saying that as a country, as a society, there has to be a better way than this.

It is morally and ethically wrong, indeed a travesty, that Douglas, a wounded hero of the anti-LTTE war, should spend New Year 2026 in the dreaded Mahara prison.

Douglas should be honoured as a rare example of a young man, who having quite understandably taken up arms to fight against Sinhala racism and for the Tamil people, decided while still a young man to opt to fight on the side of the democratic Sri Lankan state and to campaign for devolution for the North and East within the framework of a united Sri Lanka and its Constitution.

Douglas was an admired young leader of the PLA, the military wing of the Marxist EPRLF when he began to be known.

Nothing is more ironic than the historical fact that in July 1983 he survived the horrifying Welikada prison massacres, during which Sinhala prisoners, instigated and incentivized from outside (Gonawela Sunil is a name that transpired), slaughtered Tamil prisoners and gauged out their eyes.

Having escaped from jail in Batticaloa, Douglas came back to Sri Lanka in 1989, having had a change of heart after hundreds of youngsters belonging to the EPRLF, PLOT, and TELO had been massacred from 1986 onwards by the hardcore separatist, totalitarian Tigers. He was welcomed by President Premadasa and Minister Ranjan Wijeratne who took him and his ‘boys’ under their wing. There are photos of Douglas in shorts and carrying an automatic weapon, accompanying Ranjan Wijeratne and the Sri Lankan armed forces after the liberation of the islands off Jaffna from the Tiger grip.

It is Douglas who kept those vital islands safe, together with the Navy, throughout the war.

Douglas stayed with the democratic Sri Lankan state, remaining loyal to the elected president of the day, without ever turning on his or her predecessor. He probably still wears, as he did for decades, the fountain pen that President Premadasa gifted him.

During the LTTE’s offensive on Jaffna after the fall of Elephant Pass, the mass base built up by Douglas which gave the EPDP many municipal seats, helped keep Jaffna itself safe, with more Tamil civilians fleeing into Jaffna than out of it. I recall President Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga giving him a satellite phone. Army Chief Lionel Balagalle gave him a pair of mini-Uzis for his safety.

Douglas was no paramilitary leader, pure and simple. His public speech on the occasion of the 50th anniversary of the founding of the Sri Lanka Freedom Party, delivered without a teleprompter, is an excellent roadmap for the graduated implementation of the 13th amendment and the attainment of maximum devolution within a unitary state.

Like Chandrika, Douglas has had his sight severely impaired by the LTTE. As a Minister he had visited Tamil detainees imprisoned in wartime, and been set upon by a group of LTTE prisoners who had planned for his visit, concealing sharpened handles of steel buckets in the ceiling, and slammed the pointed metal through his skull. Douglas still needs repeated daily medication for his eyes which were miraculously saved by the Sri Lankan surgeons who repaired his skull, but at a subsequent stage, he was also treated by surgeons overseas.

No Sri Lankan, Sinhala or Tamil, civilian politician or military brass, has survived as many attempted assassinations by the Tigers as has Douglas. I believe the count is eleven. There’s a video somewhere of a suicide bomber blasting herself in his office, yards away from him.

Under no previous Sri Lankan administration since the early 1980s has Douglas found himself behind bars. He has served and/or supported seven democratic Presidents: Premadasa, Wijetunga, Chandrika, Mahinda, Sirisena, Gotabaya and Wickremesinghe. He has been a Minister over decades and a parliamentarian for longer.

He was a firm frontline ally of the Sri Lankan state and its armed forces during the worst challenge the country faced from the worst enemy it had since Independence.

During my tenure as Sri Lanka’s ambassador/Permanent representative to the UN Geneva, Douglas Devananda came from Colombo to defend Sri Lanka in discussions with high level UN officials including UN Human Rights High Commissioner Navanethem Pillay. This was in April 23, mere weeks before the decisive battle of the UN HRC Special session on Sri Lanka which we won handsomely. The media release on his visit reads as follows:

A high-level delegation led by the Hon. Minister Douglas Devananda, Minister of Social Services and Social Welfare, which also included the Hon. Rishad Bathiudeen, Minister of Resettlement and Disaster Relief Services, H.E. Dr. Dayan Jayatilleka, Ambassador/ Permanent Representative of Sri Lanka to the United Nations Office in Geneva, Prof. Rajiva Wijesinha, Secretary to the Ministry of Disaster Management and Human Rights, and Mr. Yasantha Kodagoda, Deputy Solicitor General, Attorney General’s Department, represented Sri Lanka at the Durban Review Conference.

“Organized by the United Nations, the Durban Review Conference provides an opportunity to assess and accelerate progress on implementation of measures adopted at the 2001 World Conference against Racism, including assessment of contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance. On the opening day of this conference, Hon. Douglas Devananda made a statement behalf of the Government of Sri Lanka.

“On the sidelines of the Durban Review Conference which is being held from 20th to 24th of April 2009, the Sri Lankan delegation met with senior UN officials, and a number of dignitaries from diverse countries and updated them on the current situation in Sri Lanka against the backdrop of Sri Lanka’s fight against separatism and terrorism.

Hon. Devananda and Hon. Bathiudeen, along with the rest of the delegation, held meetings with Ms. Navanethem Pillai, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Mr. Antonio Guterres, UN High Commissioner for Refugees (and a former Prime Minister of Portugal) and Mr. Anders Johnsson, Secretary-General of the Inter-Parliamentary Union.’

(https://live.lankamission.org/index.php/human-rights/676-minister-devananda-meets-un-high-commissioners-for-human-rights-and-refugees-2.html)

In contemporary world history, a leader from a minority community who defends the unity of his country against a separatist terrorist force deriving from that minority is hailed as a hero. A leader who takes the side of the democratic state, arms in hand, against a totalitarian fascistic foe, is hailed as a hero. Evidently, not so in current-day Sri Lanka.

[Dayan Jayatilleka, Sri Lanka’s former Ambassador to the UN Geneva; France, Spain, Portugal and UNESCO; and the Russian Federation, was a Vice-President of the UN Human Rights Council and Chairman, ILO.]

by Dr Dayan Jayatilleka  ✍️

Continue Reading

Trending