Features

The Bank of Ceylon: what it was, is and can be

Published

5 years ago

2021/04/11

Preamble

Arising from the global uncertainties and competitive challenges in socio-economic activities and ‘New-Normal’ life styles, in the aftermath of the ‘Covid-19’ pandemic, we as a group of senior retired bankers who have dedicated 30 to 40 years of their working lives to the glory and success of the largest, indigenous Bank of Sri Lanka with a global presence, consider it timely and appropriate to address the attention of all its stakeholders- viz. the government, valued customers, bank staff, trade unions and the public at large. Towards such end, we wish to deal briefly with the bank’s history highlighting a few of its unique performances and achievements particularly during difficult times, by leveraging on its status as the best internationally rated, local bank in Sri Lanka.

A Brief History of the Bank of Ceylon (BOC)

The Bank of Ceylon (BOC) was established in 1939 as the first indigenous State-aided Bank to assist local entrepreneurs and businessmen who were deprived of much needed finances. While meeting its objectives through financial intermediation, the bank’s deposits and advances portfolios grew exponentially withban expanding Import/export economy; so much so, that BOC opened a Branch in London in 1949. With such signs of fulfilling progress, there was no attempt even after the country’s Independence in 1948 to nationalize the bank.

However, due to a major shift in economic policies, BOC was nationalized in 1961 coupled with protective regulations against foreign banks creating a captive market for state-owned banks. Consequently, the bank in the early seventies was requested to extend its services to the rural areas by opening over 300 islandwide Agricultural Service Centre (ASC) branches under an innovative ‘mixed banking’ model. It surely expanded the bank’s relationship with the populace as its clients. In implementing this model, the bank introduced a plethora of concessionary credit schemes with refinance facilities from the Central Bank and

credit lines from international funding agencies such as the World Bank, Asian Development Bank (ADB) and International Finance Corporation (IFC) to uplift the economy of the rural farmers, small and medium entrepreneurs as well as self-employed artisans in the semi-urban sector.

With the introduction of the ‘open economy’ in the late seventies, Sri Lanka’s financial market was liberalized allowing the re-entry of foreign banks creating a fierce competition especially in commercial and international banking. During the decades of eighties and nineties, the bank responded effectively to the growing challenges in a rapidly changing global environment, by introducing techno- savvy innovative products such as credit cards, ATM/debit cards, in a computerized environment adopting appropriate marketing and human resource development strategies. The bank also expanded its horizons and opened overseas branches in Chennai, Karachi, Male and a joint venture bank in Nepal. With its strong balance sheet and financial performance, the bank was rated high by international rating agencies making it a respected borrower in the international financial markets on behalf of the govt. of Sri Lanka too. BOC was the first local bank that ranked among the top 1,000 banks in the world as per the regular surveys conducted by the reputed UK magazine ‘The Banker’ and it sustains the status quo to date. The recognition of the bank by a strong global network of over 900 correspondent banks continued to facilitate its international banking operations to the immense benefit of the country’s exporters and importers. In summary, the bank’s vision of being ‘The Bankers to the Nation with a global presence’ at the time, was satisfactorily achieved by the aforesaid performances.

It is noteworthy, that in addition to being the banker to the millions of the population in all walks of life, through its Islandwide network of branches, the BOC became the de facto banker to the government as well.

For example, when USA imposed an embargo on Iran in 1980, the BOC drawing on its robust international standing was the only bank to continue to negotiate letters of credit for tea shipments to Iran for its customers uninterruptedly and for other banks’ customers too, relying on assurances by Iran’s “Central Bank”, of payments inclusive of interest for delay, and save the country’s economy while averting a collapse of our tea industry.

On another occasion when ships refused to come to Sri Lanka after LTTE bombed the Colombo harbour, the BOC drawing on its International recognition, arranged a Lloyd’s Insurance guarantee within three working days and paved the way for shipments without disruption and kept the country alive.

In instances as above, BOC was and still is, the only bank operating in Sri Lanka that possesses the will and the ‘risk taking ability’ to act at short notice for the benefit of the country.

BOC’s active involvement as the ‘Bankers to the Nation’ and the govt. during the two insurrections and the tsunami, is no secret to the public and the security forces were relieved by the uninterrupted arrangements made by the bank to collect their salaries without any delays.

With the beginning of the new millennium, the bank’s vision was revised to read as ‘to be the No. 01 Bank in Sri Lanka and to be perceived as such by the general public’. Accordingly, the bank kept step with the rapid changes in technology and introduced customer centric innovative products such as ‘SLIPS’, SMS Banking, Internet Banking and Smart Banking etc.

Successive BOC managements and staff have consistently laboured to maintain BOC’s position as the No. 01 Bank in Sri Lanka. In the process, the bank has now expanded its network up to 2,000 local customer touch points with customers showing a significant shift from physical banking to digital banking instruments such as B-app, Smart Pay, and Online Banking etc. The bank also strengthened its global presence by opening a new branch in Seychelles and a second branch in Hulhumale – Maldives. As a result of the said achievements, the bank won Sri Lanka’s No. 01 Banking Brand and No.01 Bank Awards for the last 12 years in succession.

It is pertinent to mention that, with the blessings and support of the successive governments, the bank when necessary, executed a series of reorganization/re-engineering/restructuring exercises with the assistance of renowned foreign consultancies, to achieve this remarkable progress.

Towards achieving BOC’s Centenary Vision -2039

Presently, BOC is progressing at an intermediate level in regard to its global presence led by its fully owned subsidiary in London and supported by branches in Chennai, Maldives and Seychelles. With its additional representative presence in the Middle East and South/East Asia, the BOC’s Vision-2039 projects a ‘Global Model’ providing a variety of tailored banking solutions to a mature international customer base without compromising its existing commitment towards the upliftment of the unbanked segments of the local society engaged in agriculture, fisheries and allied self-employment activities in the small and medium sectors. Thus, BOC’s Vision -2039 would be a de facto vision for the country too.

The envisaged development of the Colombo Port City as a ‘Regional Financial Hub’ in close proximity to the iconic BOC head office with ‘Heritage’ potential as Jaathi‘ye Maha Pahan Temba’ (The great beacon light of the nation), will provide a visible, majestic stature to BOC as the leading bank like in all other big cities of the world. It will not only stand in good stead with the changing skyline but also will render BOC with the much needed strategic advantage to link its head office with an extension office in the Port City itself, handling off-shore banking activities along with corresponding changes in the local banking landscape. Having heard certain rumours to the effect that BOC’s head office is earmarked for acquisition in connection with the Port City development, we have proposed to the authorities to ensure that the present strategic location of BOC‘s head office be retained in order to fully derive the aforesaid strategic advantages.

The unforeseen global pandemic –‘Covid-19’ forcing an array of ‘New Normal’ practices has in a way, accelerated BOC’s journey towards its centenary Vision-2039, through innovative development of many digital, on-line banking products to meet both local and global demands. Conversely, the global pandemic has affected our country rating as well as that of the bank due to obvious reasons. Against this backdrop, BOC will be hard pressed to face the challenge of sustaining robust ratings by the International rating agencies while maintaining its pre-eminent position as the No.01 Bank in Sri Lanka.

In this context, it behoves the govt. to provide the necessary environment and the impetus to allay any negative impact on the bank’s commitments to the local and foreign clientele especially our long standing and reputed network of foreign correspondents and boost BOC’s reputation as the only Sri Lankan bank that can mobilize international assistance in emergencies.

A Proposal

Towards this end, in addition to Central Bank guidelines, we have proposed that a fresh ‘Agreement’ be entered into between the Govt. and the BOC, inter-alia permitting the requisite autonomy to the bank to conduct its business like any other private commercial bank conforming to prudential banking norms (BASLE Accord) and other international norms that bear upon its ratings by renowned International rating agencies. Such action will surely buttress BOC’s stride towards its centenary Vision-2039 and ensure achievement of govt.’s own goal of a prosperous Sri Lanka.

We are confident that the internal stake holders of the Bank such as the staff and trade unions would be quite alive to our submissions.

“In a global financial market, the key financial ratings, supported by the stature and image of a bank are equally critical as its ownership.”

A group of retired members of the Corporate and Executive Management of BOC.

All News Advertisement

Features

Rebuilding the country requires consultation

Published

21 hours ago

2026/01/13

Sahan Weerasooriya

A positive feature of the government that is emerging is its responsiveness to public opinion. The manner in which it has been responding to the furore over the Grade 6 English Reader, in which a weblink to a gay dating site was inserted, has been constructive. Government leaders have taken pains to explain the mishap and reassure everyone concerned that it was not meant to be there and would be removed. They have been meeting religious prelates, educationists and community leaders. In a context where public trust in institutions has been badly eroded over many years, such responsiveness matters. It signals that the government sees itself as accountable to society, including to parents, teachers, and those concerned about the values transmitted through the school system.

This incident also appears to have strengthened unity within the government. The attempt by some opposition politicians and gender misogynists to pin responsibility for this lapse on Prime Minister Dr Harini Amarasuriya, who is also the Minister of Education, has prompted other senior members of the government to come to her defence. This is contrary to speculation that the powerful JVP component of the government is unhappy with the prime minister. More importantly, it demonstrates an understanding within the government that individual ministers should not be scapegoated for systemic shortcomings. Effective governance depends on collective responsibility and solidarity within the leadership, especially during moments of public controversy.

The continuing important role of the prime minister in the government is evident in her meetings with international dignitaries and also in addressing the general public. Last week she chaired the inaugural meeting of the Presidential Task Force to Rebuild Sri Lanka in the aftermath of Cyclone Ditwah. The composition of the task force once again reflects the responsiveness of the government to public opinion. Unlike previous mechanisms set up by governments, which were either all male or without ethnic minority representation, this one includes both, and also includes civil society representation. Decision-making bodies in which there is diversity are more likely to command public legitimacy.

Task Force

The Presidential Task Force to Rebuild Sri Lanka overlooks eight committees to manage different aspects of the recovery, each headed by a sector minister. These committees will focus on Needs Assessment, Restoration of Public Infrastructure, Housing, Local Economies and Livelihoods, Social Infrastructure, Finance and Funding, Data and Information Systems, and Public Communication. This structure appears comprehensive and well designed. However, experience from post-disaster reconstruction in countries such as Indonesia and Sri Lanka after the 2004 tsunami suggests that institutional design alone does not guarantee success. What matters equally is how far these committees engage with those on the ground and remain open to feedback that may complicate, slow down, or even challenge initial plans.

An option that the task force might wish to consider is to develop a linkage with civil society groups with expertise in the areas that the task force is expected to work. The CSO Collective for Emergency Relief has set up several committees that could be linked to the committees supervised by the task force. Such linkages would not weaken the government’s authority but strengthen it by grounding policy in lived realities. Recent findings emphasise the idea of “co-production”, where state and society jointly shape solutions in which sustainable outcomes often emerge when communities are treated not as passive beneficiaries but as partners in problem-solving.

Cyclone Ditwah destroyed more than physical infrastructure. It also destroyed communities. Some were swallowed by landslides and floods, while many others will need to be moved from their homes as they live in areas vulnerable to future disasters. The trauma of displacement is not merely material but social and psychological. Moving communities to new locations requires careful planning. It is not simply a matter of providing people with houses. They need to be relocated to locations and in a manner that permits communities to live together and to have livelihoods. This will require consultation with those who are displaced. Post-disaster evaluations have acknowledged that relocation schemes imposed without community consent often fail, leading to abandonment of new settlements or the emergence of new forms of marginalisation. Even today, abandoned tsunami housing is to be seen in various places that were affected by the 2004 tsunami.

Malaiyaha Tamils

The large-scale reconstruction that needs to take place in parts of the country most severely affected by Cyclone Ditwah also brings an opportunity to deal with the special problems of the Malaiyaha Tamil population. These are people of recent Indian origin who were unjustly treated at the time of Independence and denied rights of citizenship such as land ownership and the vote. This has been a festering problem and a blot on the conscience of the country. The need to resettle people living in those parts of the hill country which are vulnerable to landslides is an opportunity to do justice by the Malaiyaha Tamil community. Technocratic solutions such as high-rise apartments or English-style townhouses that have or are being contemplated may be cost-effective, but may also be culturally inappropriate and socially disruptive. The task is not simply to build houses but to rebuild communities.

The resettlement of people who have lost their homes and communities requires consultation with them. In the same manner, the education reform programme, of which the textbook controversy is only a small part, too needs to be discussed with concerned stakeholders including school teachers and university faculty. Opening up for discussion does not mean giving up one’s own position or values. Rather, it means recognising that better solutions emerge when different perspectives are heard and negotiated. Consultation takes time and can be frustrating, particularly in contexts of crisis where pressure for quick results is intense. However, solutions developed with stakeholder participation are more resilient and less costly in the long run.

Rebuilding after Cyclone Ditwah, addressing historical injustices faced by the Malaiyaha Tamil community, advancing education reform, changing the electoral system to hold provincial elections without further delay and other challenges facing the government, including national reconciliation, all require dialogue across differences and patience with disagreement. Opening up for discussion is not to give up on one’s own position or values, but to listen, to learn, and to arrive at solutions that have wider acceptance. Consultation needs to be treated as an investment in sustainability and legitimacy and not as an obstacle to rapid decisionmaking. Addressing the problems together, especially engagement with affected parties and those who work with them, offers the best chance of rebuilding not only physical infrastructure but also trust between the government and people in the year ahead.

by Jehan Perera

Features

PSTA: Terrorism without terror continues

Published

21 hours ago

2026/01/13

Sahan Weerasooriya

When the government appointed a committee, led by Rienzie Arsekularatne, Senior President’s Counsel, to draft a new law to replace the Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA), as promised by the ruling NPP, the writer, in an article published in this journal in July 2025, expressed optimism that, given Arsekularatne’s experience in criminal justice, he would be able to address issues from the perspectives of the State, criminal justice, human rights, suspects, accused, activists, and victims. The draft Protection of the State from Terrorism Act (PSTA), produced by the Committee, has been sharply criticised by individuals and organisations who expected a better outcome that aligns with modern criminal justice and human rights principles.

This article is limited to a discussion of the definition of terrorism. As the writer explained previously, the dangers of an overly broad definition go beyond conviction and increased punishment. Special laws on terrorism allow deviations from standard laws in areas such as preventive detention, arrest, administrative detention, restrictions on judicial decisions regarding bail, lengthy pre-trial detention, the use of confessions, superadded punishments, such as confiscation of property and cancellation of professional licences, banning organisations, and restrictions on publications, among others. The misuse of such laws is not uncommon. Drastic legislation, such as the PTA and emergency regulations, although intended to be used to curb intense violence and deal with emergencies, has been exploited to suppress political opposition.

International Standards

The writer’s basic premise is that, for an act to come within the definition of terrorism, it must either involve “terror” or a “state of intense or overwhelming fear” or be committed to achieve an objective of an individual or organisation that uses “terror” or a “state of intense or overwhelming fear” to realise its aims. The UN General Assembly has accepted that the threshold for a possible general offence of terrorism is the provocation of “a state of terror” (Resolution 60/43). The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe has taken a similar view, using the phrase “to create a climate of terror.”

In his 2023 report on the implementation of the UN Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy, the Secretary-General warned that vague and overly broad definitions of terrorism in domestic law, often lacking adequate safeguards, violate the principle of legality under international human rights law. He noted that such laws lead to heavy-handed, ineffective, and counterproductive counter-terrorism practices and are frequently misused to target civil society actors and human rights defenders by labelling them as terrorists to obstruct their work.

The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) has stressed in its Handbook on Criminal Justice Responses to Terrorism that definitions of terrorist acts must use precise and unambiguous language, narrowly define punishable conduct and clearly distinguish it from non-punishable behaviour or offences subject to other penalties. The handbook was developed over several months by a team of international experts, including the writer, and was finalised at a workshop in Vienna.

Anti-Terrorism Bill, 2023

A five-member Bench of the Supreme Court that examined the Anti-Terrorism Bill, 2023, agreed with the petitioners that the definition of terrorism in the Bill was too broad and infringed Article 12(1) of the Constitution, and recommended that an exemption (“carve out”) similar to that used in New Zealand under which “the fact that a person engages in any protest, advocacy, or dissent, or engages in any strike, lockout, or other industrial action, is not, by itself, a sufficient basis for inferring that the person” committed the wrongful acts that would otherwise constitute terrorism.

While recognising the Court’s finding that the definition was too broad, the writer argued, in his previous article, that the political, administrative, and law enforcement cultures of the country concerned are crucial factors to consider. Countries such as New Zealand are well ahead of developing nations, where the risk of misuse is higher, and, therefore, definitions should be narrower, with broader and more precise exemptions. How such a “carve out” would play out in practice is uncertain.

In the Supreme Court, it was submitted that for an act to constitute an offence, under a special law on terrorism, there must be terror unleashed in the commission of the act, or it must be carried out in pursuance of the object of an organisation that uses terror to achieve its objectives. In general, only acts that aim at creating “terror” or a “state of intense or overwhelming fear” should come under the definition of terrorism. There can be terrorism-related acts without violence, for example, when a member of an extremist organisation remotely sabotages an electronic, automated or computerised system in pursuance of the organisation’s goal. But when the same act is committed by, say, a whizz-kid without such a connection, that would be illegal and should be punished, but not under a special law on terrorism. In its determination of the Bill, the Court did not address this submission.

PSTA Proposal

Proposed section 3(1) of the PSTA reads:

Any person who, intentionally or knowingly, commits any act which causes a consequence specified in subsection (2), for the purpose of-

(a) provoking a state of terror;

(b) intimidating the public or any section of the public;

(c) compelling the Government of Sri Lanka, or any other Government, or an international organisation, to do or to abstain from doing any act; or

(d) propagating war, or violating territorial integrity or infringing the sovereignty of Sri Lanka or any other sovereign country, commits the offence of terrorism.

The consequences listed in sub-section (2) include: death; hurt; hostage-taking; abduction or kidnapping; serious damage to any place of public use, any public property, any public or private transportation system or any infrastructure facility or environment; robbery, extortion or theft of public or private property; serious risk to the health and safety of the public or a section of the public; serious obstruction or damage to, or interference with, any electronic or automated or computerised system or network or cyber environment of domains assigned to, or websites registered with such domains assigned to Sri Lanka; destruction of, or serious damage to, religious or cultural property; serious obstruction or damage to, or interference with any electronic, analogue, digital or other wire-linked or wireless transmission system, including signal transmission and any other frequency-based transmission system; without lawful authority, importing, exporting, manufacturing, collecting, obtaining, supplying, trafficking, possessing or using firearms, offensive weapons, ammunition, explosives, articles or things used in the manufacture of explosives or combustible or corrosive substances and biological, chemical, electric, electronic or nuclear weapons, other nuclear explosive devices, nuclear material, radioactive substances, or radiation-emitting devices.

Under section 3(5), “any person who commits an act which constitutes an offence under the nine international treaties on terrorism, ratified by Sri Lanka, also commits the offence of terrorism.” No one would contest that.

The New Zealand “carve-out” is found in sub-section (4): “The fact that a person engages in any protest, advocacy or dissent or engages in any strike, lockout or other industrial action, is not by itself a sufficient basis for inferring that such person (a) commits or attempts, abets, conspires, or prepares to commit the act with the intention or knowledge specified in subsection (1); or (b) is intending to cause or knowingly causes an outcome specified in subsection (2).”

While the Arsekularatne Committee has proposed, including the New Zealand “carve out”, it has ignored a crucial qualification in section 5(2) of that country’s Terrorism Suppression Act, that for an act to be considered a terrorist act, it must be carried out for one or more purposes that are or include advancing “an ideological, political, or religious cause”, with the intention of either intimidating a population or coercing or forcing a government or an international organisation to do or abstain from doing any act.

When the Committee was appointed, the Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka opined that any new offence with respect to “terrorism” should contain a specific and narrow definition of terrorism, such as the following: “Any person who by the use of force or violence unlawfully targets the civilian population or a segment of the civilian population with the intent to spread fear among such population or segment thereof in furtherance of a political, ideological, or religious cause commits the offence of terrorism”.

The writer submits that, rather than bringing in the requirement of “a political, ideological, or religious cause”, it would be prudent to qualify proposed section 3(1) by the requirement that only acts that aim at creating “terror” or a “state of intense or overwhelming fear” or are carried out to achieve a goal of an individual or organisation that employs “terror” or a “state of intense or overwhelming fear” to attain its objectives should come under the definition of terrorism. Such a threshold is recognised internationally; no “carve out” is then needed, and the concerns of the Human Rights Commission would also be addressed.

by Dr. Jayampathy Wickramaratne
President’s Counsel

Features

ROCK meets REGGAE 2026

Published

21 hours ago

2026/01/13

Sahan Weerasooriya

JAYASRI: From Vienna, Austria

We generally have in our midst the famous JAYASRI twins, Rohitha and Rohan, who are based in Austria but make it a point to entertain their fans in Sri Lanka on a regular basis.

Well, rock and reggae fans get ready for a major happening on 28th February (Oops, a special day where I’m concerned!) as the much-awaited ROCK meets REGGAE event booms into action at the Nelum Pokuna outdoor theatre.

It was seven years ago, in 2019, that the last ROCK meets REGGAE concert was held in Colombo, and then the Covid scene cropped up.

Chitral Somapala with BLACK MAJESTY

This year’s event will feature our rock star Chitral Somapala with the Australian Rock+Metal band BLACK MAJESTY, and the reggae twins Rohitha and Rohan Jayalath with the original JAYASRI – the full band, with seven members from Vienna, Austria.

According to Rohitha, the JAYASRI outfit is enthusiastically looking forward to entertaining music lovers here with their brand of music.

Their playlist for 28th February will consist of the songs they do at festivals in Europe, as well as originals, and also English and Sinhala hits, and selected covers.

Says Rohitha: “We have put up a great team, here in Sri Lanka, to give this event an international setting and maintain high standards, and this will be a great experience for our Sri Lankan music lovers … not only for Rock and Reggae fans. Yes, there will be some opening acts, and many surprises, as well.”

Rohitha, Chitral and Rohan: Big scene at ROCK meets REGGAE

Rohitha and Rohan also conveyed their love and festive blessings to everyone in Sri Lanka, stating “This Christmas was different as our country faced a catastrophic situation and, indeed, it’s a great time to help and share the real love of Jesus Christ by helping the poor, the needy and the homeless people. Let’s RISE UP as a great nation in 2026.”