Features
Teaching Sri Lanka’s 2009 UNHRC Geneva Win: The Barcelona Lecture
With the discussion on Sri Lanka and the UNHRC resurfacing this year, the singularity of Geneva 2009 and Sri Lanka’s decisive victory has been noted in Parliament by the Leader of the Opposition.
Though no Lankan institution ever asked me to explain that 2009 outcome, it has figured amply in international scholarly literature.
When I served as Ambassador to France, Spain and Portugal, the prestigious Barcelona Institute for International Relations (IBEI), Spain, invited me to deliver a lecture on the topic in May 2012, the third anniversary of the 2009 outcome. I readily agreed, given that Prof Fred Halliday, Emeritus Professor of International Relations at the LSE and iconic Marxist scholar had spent the last five years of his life as Research Professor at IBEI.
My lecture was chaired by Prof Robert Kissack, Co-ordinator of the MA programme, former student of Prof Halliday at the LSE and his successor at IBEI. A discussant was Dr Margarita Petrova, whose specialization is ‘The Politics of Norm Creation’. Her doctoral dissertation won the American Political Science Association’s Prize for best dissertation in International Relations (2008).
I thought it appropriate to publish the text/transcript of my lecture in a Sri Lankan newspaper because it reconstructs context and conceptual underpinnings of the strategy that succeeded—exceptionally, as it turns out.
The Barcelona Lecture, May 24th 2012
I am especially glad to be here because I knew that one of my intellectual heroes from my early teens, Prof. Fred Halliday, spent many years here and was very fond of this place. I am gratified that Prof Robert Kissack who invited me and is chairing this lecture was a protégé and colleague of his.
As you would have gathered from Dr Kissack’s introduction, I am not a career diplomat. Now that usually is a disclaimer but in my case it means that I am more responsible for what I have done — and not done –as a diplomat than a career diplomat would be. I cannot use the usual cop-out and say I was only following orders. Therefore, I was far more vulnerable to the kind of questions and criticisms that you may ask, and I welcome them because I wrestle with these issues everyday myself as well, as an academic and as a former political activist.
Few things are as difficult as meeting the test of objectivity when discussing a significant event or process in which one played a frontline role. A fairly safe method is to commence with assessments of that event, process and role made by sources which were critical or hostile. While these may not themselves be objective, at least their subjectivity would err on the other side and therefore constitute a litmus test of sorts.
Outside of purely partisan ethnic propaganda, the most serious negative account of Sri Lanka’s war and the conduct of the Sri Lankan state is the solidly researched, well written, intelligent and readable book, The Cage by Gordon Weiss. It contains an entire chapter, 30 pages long, on the international and diplomatic dimension of the conflict’s closing stages (Ch 9: The Watching World). That it does so confirms that diplomacy was an important arena of struggle and contradicts the conception of diplomacy as mood setting Muzak for making nice.
Weiss focuses on the UN in two theatres, New York and Geneva. In an earlier chapter he makes clear the situation in New York:
“As the situation unfolded, the positions of China, Russia and India became clear. There would be no resolution from the UN Security Council warning Sri Lanka to restrain its forces. China and Russia, with separatist movements of their own would veto any motion within the Council. India struck a pose of outward ambivalence, even as it discreetly encouraged the Sri Lankan onslaught, though urging it to limit civilian casualties. But of the veto-wielding ‘perm five’ in the Security Council, it was China…which was the largest stumbling block” (pp.139-140)
“In the halls of the UN in New York, Mexico, which held one of the rotating Security Council seats, tried to have Sri Lanka formally placed on the agenda. While Western and democratic nations broadly lined up in support, it quickly became clear that China would block moves to have the council consider Sri Lanka’s actions….The possibility of an influential Security Council resolution remained distant…Sri Lanka had deftly played its China card and had trumped.” (pp 200-201)
Thus, at the UN New York, Sri Lanka was structurally safe, and in Weiss’ book, its diplomats in that theatre at that time, remain unnamed. The UN Geneva is brought to life rather differently in Weiss’ volume:
“On 27 May at the Palais des nations in Geneva, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Navanethem Pillay, addressed the Human Rights Council and called for an international inquiry into the conduct of both parties to the war. While the EU and a brace of other countries formulated and then moved a resolution in support of Pillay’s call, a majority of countries on the Council rejected it out of hand. Instead, they adopted an alternative motion framed by Sri Lanka’s representatives praising the Sri Lankan government for its victory over the Tigers…” (p229)
In his concluding chapter Weiss describes my role:
“Dayan Jayatilleka, one of the most capable diplomats appointed by the Rajapaksa regime, had outmanoeuvred Western diplomats to help Sri Lanka escape censure from the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva (p256)”.
In his Notes he makes this evaluation: “Jayatilleka was the most lucid of the vocal Government of Sri Lanka representatives…” (p 330)
Gordon Weiss is not the only critical source available to the student of international relations for the objective understanding of Geneva 2009. Some of it is in Wikileaks, cables going not only from Geneva to Washington and back but even from cable traffic from the US Embassy in France and conversations between Ambassador Susan Rice and UN Human Rights High Commissioner Navi Pillay.
Here’s an observation about Geneva 2009, made by the international award-winning journalist and author Nirupama Subramanian:
“As Sri Lanka mulls over last month’s United Nations Human Rights Council resolution, it may look back with nostalgia at its 2009 triumph at Geneva. Then, barely a week after its victory over the LTTE, a group of western countries wanted a resolution passed against Sri Lanka for the civilian deaths and other alleged rights violations by the army during the last stages of the operation. With the blood on the battlefield not still dry, Sri Lanka managed to snatch victory from the jaws of diplomatic defeat, with a resolution that praised the government for its humane handling of civilians and asserted faith in its abilities to bring about reconciliation.” (The Hindu)
There has also been some academic research and publication. The most interesting is a piece which helps advanced students of international relations understand the deeper dimension and wider ramifications—far wider than Sri Lanka—of the battles in UN forums including most notably the May 2009 Special session. This essay talks about a clash on norms which took place in the UN Human Rights Council over the Sri Lankan issue and that the Sri Lankan diplomats played a role of ‘norm entrepreneurs’.
Research scholar David Lewis presented a paper at the University of Edinburgh, entitled ‘The failure of a liberal peace: Sri Lanka’s counterinsurgency in global perspective’, and published in Conflict, Security & Development, 2010, Vol 10:5, pp 647-671. Lewis is Senior Research Fellow at the Centre for International Co-operation and Security in the Department of Peace Studies, University of Bradford, and headed the International Crisis Group’s Sri Lanka programme in 2006-7. He writes:
“Many of the battles over conflict-related norms between Sri Lanka and Europe took place in UN institutions, primarily the Human Rights Council (HRC)…it was Sri Lanka which generally had the best of these diplomatic battles…”
“Although this process of contestation reflects shifting power relations, and the increasing influence of China, Russia and other ‘Rising Powers’, it does not mean that small states are simply the passive recipients of norms created and contested by others. In fact, Sri Lankan diplomats have been active norm entrepreneurs in their own right, making significant efforts to develop alternative norms of conflict management, linking for example Chechnya and Sri Lanka in a discourse of state-centric peace enforcement. They have played a leading role in UN forums such as the UN HRC, where Sri Lankan delegates have helped ensure that the HRC has become an arena, not so much for the promotion of the liberal norms around which it was designed, but as a space in which such norms are contested, rejected or adapted in unexpected ways…”
“As a member of the UN HRC Sri Lanka has played an important role in asserting new, adapted norms opposing both secession and autonomy as possible elements in peace-building—trends that are convergent with views expressed by China, Russia and India…”
“The Sri Lankan conflict may be seen as the beginning of a new international consensus about conflict management, in which sovereignty and non-interference norms are reasserted, backed not only by Russia and China but also by democratic states such as Brazil.” (Lewis: 2010, pp. 658-661)
So, there we have it; that’s the story as seen by critical observer-analysts.
The backdrop of the special session of the UN Human Rights Council in 2009 was emotionally as highly charged as you can possibly imagine. The long Sri Lankan war was reaching its endgame, but what would that endgame be?
There was a lot of pressure not only from the Tamil Diaspora communities from the émigrés but also the liberal humanitarian view that there would be a blood bath which had to be stopped by a humanitarian intervention. It took the formula of a ‘humanitarian pause’. Lakhdar Brahimi and Chris Patten had written a piece in the New York Times about the imminent “bloodbath on the beach”. The EU Parliament was pushing a resolution for a ‘humanitarian pause’ and the resumption of negotiations with the Tigers. This was the template for the resolution that was planned for the UN Human Rights Council.
A very serious special session of the sort that was held years later on Syria or Libya in the UN Human Rights Council, was sought to be held. This required 16 signatures. The Sri Lankan team together with our friends and allies in the Non-Aligned Movement, in the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) etc., fought a bitter rearguard action to prevent the 16 signatures’ requisite for the holding of a special session and managed to hold it back while the war was on. I was fully conscious of what we were doing in fighting hard to hold back the 16 signatures from being obtained so that a special session could not be moved in which there could have been a UN mandated call for a ‘pause’ on what would be the final attack on the Tigers.
Shortly after that the war was over on the 18th-19th of May 2009, the last signature was obtained. The EU was one signature short for 10 days and then it got that signature and then the session moved on at full speed. Instead of waiting for the EU resolution to be tabled and voted on, Sri Lanka together with the Non-Aligned Movement seized the initiative. We presented a resolution of our own. The special session was held on the 26th-27th May 2009 and it went down to a vote. Because of the nature of the counter-resolution that we crafted together with the Non-Aligned Movement, we obtained almost a two-thirds majority of the UN Human Rights Council.
In a search for a synthesis of values, our resolution actually contained quite a few of the points made by the EU resolution, i.e. everything that was unobjectionable, that was progressive, that was generally liberal in the EU’s resolution. It is the defence of sovereignty, but a national or state sovereignty invested with a commitment to popular sovereignty, that enabled us to obtain the support that we did and to defeat the resolution against us.
The battle of norms was not simply the liberal humanitarian interventionism versus a simple reiteration of national sovereignty. Rather, it was the kind of ideology that you would find Brazil, India, Indonesia, the emergent democracies, very comfortable with: a strong defense of national sovereignty but no less strong commitment to progressive reform.
It was indeed a clash of norms but it would be wrong to see it in an over simplified fashion, in which it is presented by many on either side of the divide. It is usually projected as liberal humanitarianism or ‘liberal humanitarian interventionism’ if you are critic of it, versus old fashioned Westphalian sovereignty, now renamed ‘Eastphalian’ sovereignty.
But we know certainly from Gramsci, and reinforced by Poulantzas and Laclau, that in the political arena you do not have simple contention. It is not a football game of two clearly demarcated sides. You are talking about constellations, about blocs, complex agglomerations with their own changing hegemony. This is true also about ideologies and it is ideologies that help cement these blocs. So, what we are talking about are hybrids on both sides, and you find that one prevails over the other depending on (a) the hybrid (b) the situation.
Liberal humanitarianism or liberal humanitarian intervention prevailed in the case of former Yugoslavia/Kosovo but did not prevail in the case of Sri Lanka in 2009. ‘Liberal humanitarian interventionist’ calls work only when dealing with certain kind of situation, certain kind of regimes/states or involving a movement of a certain sort.
I must confess that I rather liked Dr. Kissinger’s book On China because he understands why the Chinese see things the way they do, with a focus on national/state sovereignty. This is true not only about China but also about Vietnam and many of those societies and nations which see themselves as ancient. Old societies, States which had been in existence for millennia and which therefore have a very acute sense of what external intervention can do.
I reiterate an old point made by Lenin, Trotsky and Gramsci, in terms of the nature of State and society in the East and the West. The State is a much harder nut to crack, the further East you go. But a simple reassertion or assertion of State sovereignty in the absence of a situation in which it is credible, and in the absence of other ideals and values, does not prevail either! One has to always try to understand and discern the constellation of ideas and therefore the blocs that the contending parties have been able to put together.
This is the concluding lesson that I would draw out: if you lose the moral high ground, you lose the vote. If you succeed in occupying the moral high ground and displacing your foes from it, not only in your own eyes but in a universal sense, you win.
BY Dr. Dayan Jayatilleka
Features
Cyclones, greed and philosophy for a new world order
Further to my earlier letter titled, “Psychology of Greed and Philosophy for a New World Order” (The Island 26.11.2025) it may not be far-fetched to say that the cause of the devastating cyclones that hit Sri Lanka and Indonesia last week could be traced back to human greed. Cyclones of this magnitude are said to be unusual in the equatorial region but, according to experts, the raised sea surface temperatures created the conditions for their occurrence. This is directly due to global warming which is caused by excessive emission of Greenhouse gases due to burning of fossil fuels and other activities. These activities cannot be brought under control as the rich, greedy Western powers do not want to abide by the terms and conditions agreed upon at the Paris Agreement of 2015, as was seen at the COP30 meeting in Brazil recently. Is there hope for third world countries? This is why the Global South must develop a New World Order. For this purpose, the proposed contentment/sufficiency philosophy based on morals like dhana, seela, bhavana, may provide the necessary foundation.
Further, such a philosophy need not be parochial and isolationist. It may not be necessary to adopt systems that existed in the past that suited the times but develop a system that would be practical and also pragmatic in the context of the modern world.
It must be reiterated that without controlling the force of collective greed the present destructive socioeconomic system cannot be changed. Hence the need for a philosophy that incorporates the means of controlling greed. Dhana, seela, bhavana may suit Sri Lanka and most of the East which, as mentioned in my earlier letter, share a similar philosophical heritage. The rest of the world also may have to adopt a contentment / sufficiency philosophy with strong and effective tenets that suit their culture, to bring under control the evil of greed. If not, there is no hope for the existence of the world. Global warming will destroy it with cyclones, forest fires, droughts, floods, crop failure and famine.
Leading economists had commented on the damaging effect of greed on the economy while philosophers, ancient as well as modern, had spoken about its degenerating influence on the inborn human morals. Ancient philosophers like Plato, Aristotle, and Epicurus all spoke about greed, viewing it as a destructive force that hindered a good life. They believed greed was rooted in personal immorality and prevented individuals from achieving true happiness by focusing on endless material accumulation rather than the limited wealth needed for natural needs.
Jeffry Sachs argues that greed is a destructive force that undermines social and environmental well-being, citing it as a major driver of climate change and economic inequality, referencing the ideas of Adam Smith, John Maynard Keynes, etc. Joseph Stiglitz, a Nobel Laureate economist, has criticised neoliberal ideology in similar terms.
In my earlier letter, I have discussed how contentment / sufficiency philosophy could effectively transform the socioeconomic system to one that prioritises collective well-being and sufficiency over rampant consumerism and greed, potentially leading to more sustainable economic models.
Obviously, these changes cannot be brought about without a change of attitude, morals and commitment of the rulers and the government. This cannot be achieved without a mass movement; people must realise the need for change. Such a movement would need leadership. In this regard a critical responsibility lies with the educated middle class. It is they who must give leadership to the movement that would have the goal of getting rid of the evil of excessive greed. It is they who must educate the entire nation about the need for these changes.
The middle class would be the vanguard of change. It is the middle class that has the capacity to bring about change. It is the middle class that perform as a vibrant component of the society for political stability. It is the group which supplies political philosophy, ideology, movements, guidance and leaders for the rest of the society. The poor, who are the majority, need the political wisdom and leadership of the middle class.
Further, the middle class is the font of culture, creativity, literature, art and music. Thinkers, writers, artistes, musicians are fostered by the middle class. Cultural activity of the middle class could pervade down to the poor groups and have an effect on their cultural development as well. Similarly, education of a country depends on how educated the middle class is. It is the responsibility of the middle class to provide education to the poor people.
Most importantly, the morals of a society are imbued in the middle class and it is they who foster them. As morals are crucial in the battle against greed, the middle class assume greater credentials to spearhead the movement against greed and bring in sustainable development and growth. Contentment sufficiency philosophy, based on morals, would form the strong foundation necessary for achieving the goal of a new world order. Thus, it is seen that the middle class is eminently suitable to be the vehicle that could adopt and disseminate a contentment/ sufficiency philosophy and lead the movement against the evil neo-liberal system that is destroying the world.
The Global South, which comprises the majority of the world’s poor, may have to realise, before it is too late, that it is they who are the most vulnerable to climate change though they may not be the greatest offenders who cause it. Yet, if they are to survive, they must get together and help each other to achieve self-sufficiency in the essential needs, like food, energy and medicine. Trade must not be via exploitative and weaponised currency but by means of a barter system, based on purchase power parity (PPP). The union of these countries could be an expansion of organisations,like BRICS, ASEAN, SCO, AU, etc., which already have the trade and financial arrangements though in a rudimentary state but with great potential, if only they could sort out their bilateral issues and work towards a Global South which is neither rich nor poor but sufficient, contented and safe, a lesson to the Global North. China, India and South Africa must play the lead role in this venture. They would need the support of a strong philosophy that has the capacity to fight the evil of greed, for they cannot achieve these goals if fettered by greed. The proposed contentment / sufficient philosophy would form a strong philosophical foundation for the Global South, to unite, fight greed and develop a new world order which, above all, will make it safe for life.
by Prof. N. A. de S. Amaratunga
PHD, DSc, DLITT
Features
SINHARAJA: The Living Cathedral of Sri Lanka’s Rainforest Heritage
When Senior biodiversity scientist Vimukthi Weeratunga speaks of Sinharaja, his voice carries the weight of four decades spent beneath its dripping emerald canopy. To him, Sri Lanka’s last great rainforest is not merely a protected area—it is “a cathedral of life,” a sanctuary where evolution whispers through every leaf, stream and shadow.
“Sinharaja is the largest and most precious tropical rainforest we have,” Weeratunga said.
“Sixty to seventy percent of the plants and animals found here exist nowhere else on Earth. This forest is the heart of endemic biodiversity in Sri Lanka.”
A Magnet for the World’s Naturalists
Sinharaja’s allure lies not in charismatic megafauna but in the world of the small and extraordinary—tiny, jewel-toned frogs; iridescent butterflies; shy serpents; and canopy birds whose songs drift like threads of silver through the mist.
“You must walk slowly in Sinharaja,” Weeratunga smiled.
“Its beauty reveals itself only to those who are patient and observant.”
For global travellers fascinated by natural history, Sinharaja remains a top draw. Nearly 90% of nature-focused visitors to Sri Lanka place Sinharaja at the top of their itinerary, generating a deep economic pulse for surrounding communities.
A Forest Etched in History
Centuries before conservationists championed its cause, Sinharaja captured the imagination of explorers and scholars. British and Dutch botanists, venturing into the island’s interior from the 17th century onward, mapped streams, documented rare orchids, and penned some of the earliest scientific records of Sri Lanka’s natural heritage.
These chronicles now form the backbone of our understanding of the island’s unique ecology.
The Great Forest War: Saving Sinharaja
But Sinharaja nearly vanished.
In the 1970s, the government—guided by a timber-driven development mindset—greenlit a Canadian-assisted logging project. Forests around Sinharaja fell first; then, the chainsaws approached the ancient core.
“There was very little scientific data to counter the felling,” Weeratunga recalled.
- Poppie’s shrub frog
- Endemic Scimitar babblers
- Blue Magpie
“But people knew instinctively this was a national treasure.”
The public responded with one of the greatest environmental uprisings in Sri Lankan history. Conservation icons Thilo Hoffmann and Neluwe Gunananda Thera led a national movement. After seven tense years, the new government of 1977 halted the project.
What followed was a scientific renaissance. Leading researchers—including Prof. Savithri Gunathilake and Prof. Nimal Gunathilaka, Prof. Sarath Kottagama, and others—descended into the depths of Sinharaja, documenting every possible facet of its biodiversity.
“Those studies paved the way for Sinharaja to become Sri Lanka’s very first natural World Heritage Site,” Weeratunga noted proudly.
- Vimukthi
- Nadika
- Janaka
A Book Woven From 30 Years of Field Wisdom
For Weeratunga, Sinharaja is more than academic terrain—it is home. Since joining the Forest Department in 1985 as a young researcher, he has trekked, photographed, documented and celebrated its secrets.
Now, decades later, he joins Dr. Thilak Jayaratne, the late Dr. Janaka Gallangoda, and Nadika Hapuarachchi in producing, what he calls, the most comprehensive book ever written on Sinharaja.
“This will be the first major publication on Sinharaja since the early 1980s,” he said.
“It covers ecology, history, flora, fauna—and includes rare photographs taken over nearly 30 years.”
Some images were captured after weeks of waiting. Others after years—like the mysterious mass-flowering episodes where clusters of forest giants bloom in synchrony, or the delicate jewels of the understory: tiny jumping spiders, elusive amphibians, and canopy dwellers glimpsed only once in a lifetime.
The book even includes underwater photography from Sinharaja’s crystal-clear streams—worlds unseen by most visitors.
A Tribute to a Departed Friend
Halfway through the project, tragedy struck: co-author Dr. Janaka Gallangoda passed away.
“We stopped the project for a while,” Weeratunga said quietly.
“But Dr. Thilak Jayaratne reminded us that Janaka lived for this forest. So we completed the book in his memory. One of our authors now watches over Sinharaja from above.”
An Invitation to the Public
A special exhibition, showcasing highlights from the book, will be held on 13–14 December, 2025, in Colombo.
“We cannot show Sinharaja in one gallery,” he laughed.
“But we can show a single drop of its beauty—enough to spark curiosity.”
A Forest That Must Endure
What makes the book special, he emphasises, is its accessibility.
“We wrote it in simple, clear language—no heavy jargon—so that everyone can understand why Sinharaja is irreplaceable,” Weeratunga said.
“If people know its value, they will protect it.”
To him, Sinharaja is more than a rainforest.
It is Sri Lanka’s living heritage.
A sanctuary of evolution.
A sacred, breathing cathedral that must endure for generations to come.
By Ifham Nizam
Features
How Knuckles was sold out
Leaked RTI Files Reveal Conflicting Approvals, Missing Assessments, and Silent Officials
“This Was Not Mismanagement — It Was a Structured Failure”— CEJ’s Dilena Pathragoda
An investigation, backed by newly released Right to Information (RTI) files, exposes a troubling sequence of events in which multiple state agencies appear to have enabled — or quietly tolerated — unauthorised road construction inside the Knuckles Conservation Forest, a UNESCO World Heritage site.
At the centre of the unfolding scandal is a trail of contradictory letters, unexplained delays, unsigned inspection reports, and sudden reversals by key government offices.
“What these documents show is not confusion or oversight. It is a structured failure,” said Dilena Pathragoda, Executive Director of the Centre for Environmental Justice (CEJ), who has been analysing the leaked records.
“Officials knew the legal requirements. They ignored them. They knew the ecological risks. They dismissed them. The evidence points to a deliberate weakening of safeguards meant to protect one of Sri Lanka’s most fragile ecosystems.”
A Paper Trail of Contradictions
RTI disclosures obtained by activists reveal:
Approvals issued before mandatory field inspections were carried out
Three departments claiming they “did not authorise” the same section of the road
A suspiciously backdated letter clearing a segment already under construction
Internal memos flagging “missing evaluation data” that were never addressed
“No-objection” notes do not hold any legal weight for work inside protected areas, experts say.
One senior officer’s signature appears on two letters with opposing conclusions, sent just three weeks apart — a discrepancy that has raised serious questions within the conservation community.
“This is the kind of documentation that usually surfaces only after damage is done,” Pathragoda said. “It shows a chain of administrative behaviour designed to delay scrutiny until the bulldozers moved in.”
The Silence of the Agencies
Perhaps, more alarming is the behaviour of the regulatory bodies.
Multiple departments — including those legally mandated to halt unauthorised work — acknowledged concerns in internal exchanges but issued no public warnings, took no enforcement action, and allowed machinery to continue operating.
“That silence is the real red flag,” Pathragoda noted.
“Silence is rarely accidental in cases like this. Silence protects someone.”
On the Ground: Damage Already Visible
Independent field teams report:
Fresh erosion scars on steep slopes
Sediment-laden water in downstream streams
Disturbed buffer zones
Workers claiming that they were instructed to “complete the section quickly”
Satellite images from the past two months show accelerated clearing around the contested route.
Environmental experts warn that once the hydrology of the Knuckles slopes is altered, the consequences could be irreversible.
CEJ: “Name Every Official Involved”
CEJ is preparing a formal complaint demanding a multi-agency investigation.
Pathragoda insists that responsibility must be traced along the entire chain — from field officers to approving authorities.
“Every signature, every omission, every backdated approval must be examined,” she said.
“If laws were violated, then prosecutions must follow. Not warnings. Not transfers. Prosecutions.”
A Scandal Still Unfolding
More RTI documents are expected to come out next week, including internal audits and communication logs that could deepen the crisis for several agencies.
As the paper trail widens, one thing is increasingly clear: what happened in Knuckles is not an isolated act — it is an institutional failure, executed quietly, and revealed only because citizens insisted on answers.
by Ifham Nizam
-
News6 days ago
Lunuwila tragedy not caused by those videoing Bell 212: SLAF
-
News13 hours agoOver 35,000 drug offenders nabbed in 36 days
-
News4 days agoLevel III landslide early warning continue to be in force in the districts of Kandy, Kegalle, Kurunegala and Matale
-
Latest News7 days agoLevel III landslide early warnings issued to the districts of Badulla, Kandy, Kegalle, Kurunegala, Matale and Nuwara-Eliya
-
Features7 days agoDitwah: An unusual cyclone
-
Business3 days agoLOLC Finance Factoring powers business growth
-
News3 days agoCPC delegation meets JVP for talks on disaster response
-
News3 days agoA 6th Year Accolade: The Eternal Opulence of My Fair Lady









