Connect with us

Midweek Review

The day Mangala issued a warning to P’karan

Published

on

Mangala Samaraweera left an unforgettable mark in politics

By Shamindra Ferdinando

The late Minister Mangala Samaraweera, on Sept. 8, 2006, warned the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) of dire consequences,unless the group returned to the negotiating table. The LTTE quit the negotiating table, in April 2003, during Ranil Wickremesinghe’s tenure as the Premier. The warning was issued in his capacity as the Foreign Minister, at a meeting with the Colombo-based diplomatic community.

Reiterating the then President Mahinda Rajapaksa’s readiness to consider proposals for a comprehensive and verifiable cession of hostilities, Samaraweera warned the LTTE that military aggression, on their part, would entail, what he called, military costs to them.

The Minister said so when he addressed a section of the diplomatic community in the wake of the successful Army assault on the LTTE first-line of defence across the Kilali-Muhamalai frontline a few days before the military recaptured Sampur in the East on August 4 (Forces seize Tigers’ Jaffna frontline with strapline …any military aggression on their part would entail military costs to them-Foreign Minister, The Island, Sept 11, 2006)

Matara district lawmaker, Mangala Pinsiri Samaraweera, who first entered parliament at the 1989 general election, received the vital foreign affairs portfolio in the wake of the then Premier Mahinda Rajapaksa’s triumph at the 2005 presidential election.

Samaraweera, 65, succumbed to Covid-19, at Lanka Hospital, last week.

Rajapaksa won narrowly against UNP leader Ranil Wickremesinghe, who lost by fewer than 200,000 votes. The polls boycott ordered by the LTTE caused Wickremesinghe’s defeat; he lost the Northern Province Tamil vote, which is traditionally cast in favour of the UNP. Interestingly, the announcement of the undemocratic act of telling the Tamil people not to vote was done by the Tamil National Alliance.

Following the presidential election, the LTTE resumed its offensive action in the Jaffna peninsula, in the first week of Dec. 2005. The LTTE launched a spate of claymore mine attacks in the North in spite of the Oslo-arranged Ceasefire Agreement (CFA) still in place with Peace Co-Chairs, namely the US, Japan, EU and Norway, engaged in the process, in a supervisory role. It looked as if the self-appointed co-chairs were there more to wink at the LTTE as it staged hundreds of CFA violations.

 Following the failed attempt to assassinate the then Army Chief Lt. Gen. Sarath Fonseka, in late April 2006, Mavil-aru battle, in June-July 2006, the LTTE launched large scale offensives, in both the northern and eastern theatres, simultaneously, in the second week of August 2006. The LTTE made some rapid territorial gains, though the armed forces gradually stabilised the situation, on both fronts. Having survived a suicide attack, in late April 2006, and flown to Singapore, where he received specialised treatment, Fonseka was obviously back, wanting to atone for what the LTTE did to him. Back at his heavily fortified headquarters in Colombo where he vowed to finish off the LTTE once and for all.

The LTTE strategy suffered another serious setback when then Defence Secretary Gotabaya Rajapaksa, too, survived an LTTE suicide attack in the first week of Dec 2006.

Foreign Minister Samaraweera issued the warning to the LTTE, ahead of the LTTE assassination attempt on Gotabaya Rajapaksa. Samaraweera received his first ministerial portfolio in 1994, thanks to President Kumaratunga, who accommodated him in her Cabinet as Posts and Telecommunications Minister. Kumaratunga also rewarded Samaraweera with Urban Development, Construction and Public Utilities.

 A cocky LTTE leadership felt confident that its formations could overwhelm the Army in the Jaffna peninsula, having disrupted the Trincomalee- Kankesanthurai Main Supply Route (MSR). Their plans eventually went awry. However, at the time Samaraweera issued the warning, in early Sept 2006, the LTTE was in a commanding position, with the West openly and repeatedly singing hosannas on its behalf claiming that the security forces were incapable of defeating it. A section of the diplomatic community, as well as various experts, believed the LTTE had the wherewithal to bring offensive actions, in the northern theatre, to a successful conclusion. But, by May 2009, just two years and 10 months after the LTTE resumed hostilities, its fighting cadre was left annihilated.

Mangala receives Foreign portfolio

President Rajapaksa rewarded Samaraweera with the Foreign Affairs portfolio, though the latter hadn’t been his first choice. Rajapaksa-Samaraweera duo emerged as a team during the second JVP-inspired insurgency (1987-1990) when they functioned as key spokespersons for the Mothers’ Front. The group represented the interests of those who had been at the receiving end of the military campaign, backed by UNP death squads. The late Anura Bandaranaike, too, expected the President to reappoint him as the Foreign Minister after his failure to secure the premiership with the JVP’s backing. Bandaranaike was sworn in as the Foreign Minister immediately after the assassination of Lakshman Kadirgamar on the night of August 12, 2005, at his private Bullers Lane residence.

It would be pertinent to mention that the JVP contested the 2004 parliamentary election on the UPFA ticket, following the short-lived so-called parivasa administration.

The JVP achieved the unthinkable by securing 39 seats, including three National List slots. In the immediate aftermath of the 2004 polls victory, the JVP, in a letter dated April 5, 2004, addressed to the then President Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga, demanded that Lakshman Kadirgamar be made the Premier.

JVP General Secretary Tilvin Silva emphasised that their second choice was Anura Bandaranaike and the third Maithripala Sirisena, the then General Secretary of the SLFP.

However, Maithripala Sirisena strongly advised Kumaratunga against the move, widely believed to have had the backing of staunch Kumaratunga loyalist Samaraweera. Son of the late Minister Mahanama Samaraweera and Khema Samaraweera, outspoken Mangala, a fashion designer by profession, was known for his controversial statements. Samaraweera daringly backed LGBT rights when such things were never even openly discussed here and was at the forefront of such campaigns.

If the JVP strategy succeeded, Mahinda Rajapaksa would have been deprived of the premiership in 2004 and the opportunity to contest the presidential poll in the following year. President Kumaratunga quite wrongly asserted that she could continue till 2006 as the presidential poll scheduled for 2000 under her watch was held in 1999. However, the Supreme Court torpedoed her move. With the collapse of Kumaratunga’s strategy, Samaraweera backed Rajapaksa’s candidature due to failure on her part to secure the backing of party seniors. Samaraweera played a significant role in the overall presidential polls campaign, though both Kumaratunga and Anura Bandaranaike skipped the campaign and more or less worked against Mahinda Rajapaksa, covertly.

Samaraweera had been among several SLFP seniors invited by President Rajapaksa on the evening of Nov 19, 2005 to inform them of the allocation of Cabinet portfolios. The late Jeyaraj Fernandopulle, Maithripala Sirisena, Nimal Siripala de Silva, Mangala Samaraweera, Rohitha Bogollagama, Basil Rajapaksa (not a member of Parliament at the time) and Lalith Weeratunga had been present. Dullas Alahapperuma, too, had been present, though he didn’t sit at that meeting.

“President Rajapaksa didn’t consult anyone as regards allocation of portfolios. He simply informed those who were seated around an oval shaped table what they were going to get. UNPer Rohitha Bogollagama, who switched his allegiance to the SLFP during Kumaratunga’s tenure was offered the Foreign Affairs portfolio. Bogollagama, who held the Foreign Investment portfolio at that time, inquired whether he could retain the same in addition to the foreign affairs. However, the allocation of portfolios quite clearly irritated some party seniors. Shortly, thereafter, only Rohitha Bogollagama sat with President Rajapaksa for dinner whereas others left,” a source familiar with the Temple Trees discussion told the writer.

“Subsequently, the Rajapaksas reached a consensus with Samaraweera by offering him the Foreign portfolio, originally offered to Bogollagama, who accepted the reality.

 Some believed Samaraweera expected the premiership and was quite disappointed when he was told he couldn’t retain the Urban Development portfolio. Samaraweera couldn’t maintain peace with the Rajapaksas and was unceremoniously stripped of the Foreign portfolio, in January 2007, in the wake of him pursuing an agenda opposed to that of the then Defence Secretary Gotabaya Rajapaksa.

President brought in Bogollagama as the Foreign Minister. One-time UNPer handled the Ministry during the most challenging period with the West exerting tremendous pressure to undermine the war effort.

Ousted from SLFP, Mangala joins UNP

In spite of losing the foreign portfolio, Samaraweera antagonised the Rajapaksas by pursuing an agenda which the latter considered was severely inimical to the overall war effort. President Rajapaksa also felt that Samaraweera’s strategy undermined the ruling party, particular at a time the military was engaged in a desperate battle with the LTTE. Finally, President Rajapaksa sacked Samaraweera, along with Anura Bandaranaike and Sripathy Sooriyaarachchi, in the second week of Feb 2007.

However, within days after declaring war on the Rajapaksas, Bandaranaike backtracked and quietly reached an agreement with the ruling clan. President removed the trio after they skipped the vote on the state of emergency. Bandaranaike re-joined what he called ‘Carnival of Clowns’ much to the dismay of Samaraweera, who didn’t receive the support pledged by his colleagues.

A dejected Samaraweera formed the Sri Lanka Freedom Party (Mahajana) Wing. Samaraweera couldn’t secure the much expected backing required to sustain his campaign and finally disbanded his unregistered party, in August 2010, to accept the UNP membership. However, by then Samaraweewa had re-entered Parliament, from the Matara district, on the UNP ticket. Samaraweera had no option but to accept Ranil Wickremesinghe’s leadership and worked diligently for the UNP’s victory, five years later.

Samaraweera played quite a significant role as an Opposition UNP member (2010-2015) and member of the yahapalana administration (2015-2019) before he switched his allegiance to Samagi Jana Balavegaya (SJB) leader Sajith Premadasa.

However, Samaraweera deserted Premadasa in next to no time ahead of the last parliamentary election in August 2020. In an obvious bid meant to undermine the SJB, Samaraweera declared he wouldn’t be in the fray though he handed over nominations as the leader of the Matara District SJB.

Role in 2010 prez poll

In his capacity as the Foreign Minister, Samaraweera clashed with Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s strategy. One of the major issues of disagreement between the two was Samaraweera’s push for the re-opening of the Kandy-Jaffna road, at Muhamalai, to pave the way for the resumption of overland traffic to and from the Jaffna peninsula. Gotabaya Rajapaksa dismissed the suggestion. Rajapaksa asserted that Muhamalai wouldn’t be re-opened through negotiations with the LTTE. Instead, the re-opening would be done by clearing the LTTE fortifications across the Kilali-Muhamalai-Nagarkovil line.

 The then Defence Secretary Rajapaksa told the writer of his decision not to re-open the Muhamalai entry/exit point in agreement with the LTTE, under no circumstances. They also disagreed on the deployment of SLAF choppers to move LTTE leaders around (this was done in terms of the Oslo understanding) and the handling of international NGOs. The Foreign Ministry asserted the military would antagonise Western powers whereas the Defence Secretary emphasised that nothing could be allowed to undermine the war effort.

As promised, the government re-opened the Kandy-Jaffna A9 road, only after the eradication of the LTTE in 2009.

Having ridiculed Fonseka as a person not even capable of commanding the Salvation Army, Samaraweera had no qualms in accepting the challenging task of being the Opposition candidate’s campaign strategist. In fact, Samaraweera, on behalf of Fonseka, assured the US of his good intentions. One such meeting took place on January 6, 2010, a few days before the then US Ambassador in Colombo, Patricia Butenis, in a leaked diplomatic memo, named the Rajapaksa brothers, Mahinda, Gotabaya and Basil and Sarath Fonseka, as war criminals. The massive defeat suffered by Fonseka, at the January 2010 presidential election, revealed serious shortcomings in the overall strategy. The Fonseka campaign suffered due to foolish attempts to placate the Tamil electorate by blaming the Army for battlefield executions during the last phase of the Vanni east offensive. Samaraweera played a significant role in forming the US backed alliance which included the Tamil National Alliance, onetime cat’s paw of Velupillai Prabhakaran. Samaraweera also facilitated the JVP’s participation in the high profile project, spearheaded by the UNP.

Having defeated Ranil Wickremesinghe, by 180,000 votes, at the 2005 presidential election, the President secured a second term by polling over 1.8mn more votes than the war- winning Army Commander. Obviously, Samaraweera’s strategy didn’t work, though many, including some sections of the diplomatic community, strongly believed the former Foreign Minister could turn tables on Mahinda Rajapaksa. At the end, the UNP-led camp made a ridiculous bid to blame the humiliating defeat Fonseka suffered on what bankrupt JVP called a computer jilmaart (fraud)

Mangala as yahapalana FM

 Samaraweera who enjoyed excellent relations with the JVP at politically crucial periods, played strategic roles in both the SLFP and UNP-led camps. At the 2005 presidential poll, Samaraweera threw his weight behind Mahinda Rajapaksa and five years later the electorate saw him spearheading Fonseka’s presidential campaign. Samaraweera proved again in politics there were no permanent friends or enemies.

 Perhaps, one of Samaraweera’s major successes was his ability to secure the support of the powerful Tamil Diaspora. Samaraweera was quite satisfied with the way he handled the Diaspora in the run-up to the 2015 presidential election. The writer, who accompanied the government delegation to London, led by President Sirisena, had an opportunity to discuss the matter with the then Foreign Minister Samaraweera during the visit a couple of months after the presidential election.

Samaraweera facilitated the TNA’s backing for Sirisena that made his triumph over Mahinda Rajapaksa a reality.

The writer sought GTF’s spokesperson Suren Surendiran’s comment on Samaraweera’s demise Surendiran said that his first ever interaction with the late lawmaker had been in 2007 in his personal capacity. However, as the GTF spokesperson, Surendiran had interacted with Samaraweera, in 2011, and again when he visited the UK, in 2012, over dinner at his place with fellow colleagues of GTF. Surendiran said: “In September 2013 we formally met along with other politicians and civil society activists from Sri Lanka, and overseas, in Singapore. We, as GTF, have met him several times in the UK, Germany, Washington, Switzerland, Australia and Singapore.”

Responding to another query, Surendiran said that Samaraweera had been instrumental in arranging the GTF’s first meeting with the then President Maithripala Sirisena, in 2015, in London. Yes, I met you (the writer) downstairs after that meeting). “Mangala was not just a fellow Sri Lankan and politician, he was a great friend. Mangala spoke to several of us from GTF, from various countries, at a virtual meeting, on 17 July 2021. My last personal interaction was on 06 August, 2021, via texts. Under normal circumstances he would have wished me on my birthday but that wasn’t to be as he was moved to ICU a couple of days before.”

Unlike many of his colleagues in the government and the Opposition, Samaraweera never hesitated to take a public stand on the post-war national reconciliation process. Samaraweera openly contradicted President Sirisena’s frequent claims that he hadn’t been aware of the finalisation of the Geneva Resolution on Oct 1, 2015.

Responding to the strong criticism of his role in the Geneva process, Samaraweera included the following section in a bigger statement he issued during the yahapalana administration: The final text of the resolution was largely negotiated over the phone, with the President and I at the same hotel in New York, and the Prime Minister in Colombo, accompanied by the Secretary to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, at the time, and the Ambassador of the US and High Commissioner of the UK. Once consensus was reached , the Secretary to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, at the time, who was in Colombo, had coordinated with Sri Lanka’s Permanent Representative to the UN in Geneva and conveyed the decision of the Government of Sri Lanka to the Human Rights Council.”

What Samaraweera didn’t say was that Sri Lanka’s Permanent Representative to the UN in Geneva, Ravinatha Aryasinghe, had rejected the draft just over a week before, during informal discussion with the Sri Lanka Core Group, headed by the US. Whatever the likes of Samaraweera said the UNP earned the wrath of the people for what was called Geneva betrayal. The treachery in Geneva proved to be as bad as the Treasury bond scams, in Feb 2015 and March 2016, leading to the humiliating defeat at the Feb 2018 Local Government polls. Although President Sirisena switched portfolios, held by Samaraweera and Finance Minister Ravi Karunanayake, in May 2017 in consultation with UNP leader Wickremesinghe, the rot continued unabated. The Wickremesinghe-Samaraweera led strategy that pushed the country towards the US-led Quad alliance with Sri Lanka entering into a Comprehensive Partnership with Japan in the first week of Oct 2015, in addition to talks on SOFA (Status of Forces Agreement) and MCC (Millennium Challenge Corporation) agreements also with the US against the backdrop of President Sirisena entering into ACSA (Access and Cross Servicing Agreement) didn’t help the then government at all.

Finally, Samaraweera abandoned the UNP and joined the newly formed SJB soon after the 2019 presidential poll only to quit the parliamentary election at the eleventh hour. Following the SLPP’s sweeping victory at the general election, Samaraweera launched a political campaign with the involvement of some civil society activists. His office, situated at T.B. Jayah Mawatha a little distance away from SLFP main office, was called ‘Freedom Hub’, where he addressed his last media briefing on July 25.

Samaraweera warned the current leadership of the dire financial crisis experienced by the country not only due to the raging Covid-19 epidemic but waste, corruption, irregularities and negligence as well. At the time Samaraweera served as the Finance Minister (May 2017 to Nov 2019) the government revenue surpassed Rs 1,900 bn. The shortsighted policy of the SLPP that did away with a range of taxes and duties, immediately after the presidential election resulted in the loss of over Rs 500 bn in government revenue, which too contributed to the current messy financial situation. Perhaps one of Samaraweera’s major achievements was the transformation of the telecommunications sector though he too couldn’t absolve himself of being part of an utterly corrupt and ruinous political party system.



Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

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

Midweek Review

How Prof. Dewasiri’s FB post brought about Speaker Ranwala’s exit

Published

on

By Shamindra Ferdinando

Prof. Nirmal Ranjith Dewasiri was the first to question the National People’s Power government over Speaker ‘Dr.’ Asoka Sapumal Ranwala regarding his academic qualifications.

Dewasiri’s shock query caught the NPP by surprise. The academic questioned the government on his social media account on 05 Dec. The Parliament unanimously appointed Ranwala as Speaker of the Tenth Parliament on 21 Nov.

Dewasiri demanded that the government compel Speaker Ranwala to resign in case the parliamentarian deliberately provided false information. If the Speaker declined to do so, appropriate measures should be taken to remove him, Prof. Dewasiri declared, while finding fault with the new entrant for (i) falsely claiming to have a degree and (ii) believe he could hold such an important position regardless of the deceit perpetrated by him.

Prof. Dewasiri emphasized that the second fault was far worse than the first. One-time spokesperson for the Federation of University Teachers Association (FUTA) and advocate of the Yahapalana administration warned the government of far reaching consequences as it was badly exposed.

The government obviously didn’t take Prof. Dewasiri’s social media post seriously. Perhaps the top leadership felt that the issue at hand wouldn’t attract much public attention. However, the Opposition, both in Parliament and outside, launched an all-out attack.

The SJB declared its intention to move a no-confidence motion against the Speaker. In spite of the NPP having an unprecedented 2/3 majority in Parliament, the ruling party feared to face the Opposition move. The NPP could have easily routed the combined Opposition in Parliament, but to defend an obvious wrongdoer would have ruined President Anura Kumara Dissanayake’s (AKD) parliamentary group as they came to power, less than three months ago, promising to correct all the shenanigans that had been going on in the country, under the guise of democracy, since independence.

Beleaguered AKD had no option but to ask Speaker Ranwala to step down. The NPP could have avoided a lot of flak if the party acted immediately after Prof. Dewasiri’s disclosure. If not for the intervention made by the academic and a vociferous critic of wrongs done by the previous regimes, particularly to academics, Ranwala would still have been the Speaker.

The utterly dispirited SJB wouldn’t have inquired into Ranwala’s credentials under any circumstances. Thanks to Prof. Dewasiri, the Opposition received a mega opportunity to question the very basis of the NPP’s presidential and parliamentary election campaigns.

The SJB and new Democratic Front (NDF) had been rejected by the electorate to such an extent, even if they challenged Ranwala over his educational qualifications, the people may have ignored the issue as the rantings of a frustrated Opposition still licking the wounds of their routing at the polls. Prof. Dewasiri’s disclosure obviously delivered a knockout blow to the government.

Ranwala resigned on 13 Dec., just over a week after Prof. Dewasiri’s bombshell revelation. It would be pertinent to mention that just before the announcemnt of the Speaker’s resignation, President AKD told government media bosses that he wouldn’t protect any wrongdoer.

Having asked the electorate to reject unscrupulous political parties that had ruined the country, the NPP couldn’t have risked its political project to save Ranwala, one-time President of the Ceylon Petroleum Common Workers’ Union, until he was sent on compulsory retirement in March 2023 by the then Minister of Power and Energy Kanchana Wijesekera. The Wickremesinghe-Rajapaksa government accused Ranwala of obstructing fuel distribution services.

The NPP couldn’t have been unaware of Ranwala’s bogus claim. If Ranwala deliberately deceived the NPP, he should be dealt with harshly. Perhaps Ranwala should be asked to resign his parliamentary seat forthwith for deceiving the whole country, to pave the way for the NPP to fill that Gampaha District vacancy thereafter. Having vowed to clean up Parliament, the NPP cannot, under any circumstances, protect any wrongdoer.

But, corrupt political parties shouldn’t think for a moment that they can capitalize on the Speaker’s issue. The people rejected the SJB, NDF and SLPP (Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna) twice this year as they earned the wrath of the people. It would be a grave fault on their part if they believed Ranwala’s ouster could strengthen their campaign against the government.

The NPP should, without delay, set the record straight. The issue is whether Ranwala deceived the NPP with regard to his doctorate, or the party knew all along that their CPC trade unionist didn’t have the academic qualification which he proudly flaunted.

House tricked

Premier Dr. Harini Amarasuriya and Foreign Minister Vijitha Herath, together, accompanied Ranwela to the Speaker’s chair. The Opposition accepted the appointment. The Premier proposed Ranwala, while Minister Herath seconded that proposal.

Premier Amarasuriya, Opposition Leader Sajith Premadasa, and Leader of the Sri Lanka Muslim Congress Rauff Hakeem congratulated National Executive Committee member Ranwala on that occasion.

One-time member of the Biyagama Local government body, Ranwala twice represented the JVP in the Western Provincial Council. According to Parliament website, Ranwala holds a degree in Chemical Engineering from the University of Moratuwa and a doctorate in Biochemistry from Waseda University, Japan.

To make matters worse for the NPP, the Opposition challenged Deputy Speaker Dr. Rizvie Salih’s specialist tag. Salih answered his critics. His FB post explained his nearly 40-year career, with 12 years with the public sector, though he is not a specialist.

The Deputy Speaker told Parliament, on Tuesday, that he is not a specialist and never used the title in his official letterheads, visiting cards and prescriptions. ” I have categorically told that I should not be called a specialist in propaganda material during elections,” he said. In other words, he had found fault with those who handled the propaganda campaign for the NPP

Interested parties also challenged the doctorate of Justice Minister Harshana Nanayakkara, another first time entrant to Parliament.

The controversy over Nanayakkara’s doctorate took an unexpected turn when the Parliament claimed that the doctorate had been inadvertently mentioned by Parliament. Let me reproduce the clarification issued by M. Jayalath Perera, Director Legislative Services / Director Communication (Acting), Parliament: Clarification Regarding the Title of “Dr.” mentioned before the name of the Minister of Justice, Attorney-at-Law, Hon. Harshana Nanayakkara, on the Parliament website.

“I would like to emphasize the following points in relation to reports published in the media regarding the title of ‘’Dr.’’ mentioned before the name of the Minister of Justice and National Integration, Attorney-at-Law, Harshana Nanayakkara, in the directory of Members of Parliament on the Parliament website.

“It is important to note that Hon. Harshana Nanayakkara has not indicated holding a doctoral degree in the information provided to Parliament. The appearance of the title “Dr.” before the Minister’s name was a result of an error in entering the relevant data. Accordingly, steps have been taken to rectify this mistake.

“I express my deepest regret for the inconvenience caused to the Minister of Justice and National Integration, Attorney-at-Law, Hon. Harshana Nanayakkara, in this regard.

“Also, the process of re-checking and updating the information of all Members of Parliament on the Parliament website is currently underway.”

But those who cannot stomach the NPP’s victory ask why didn’t Nanayakkara get that corrected himself if he was not entitled to be called “Dr.”? However, the Justice Minister lodged a complaint with the CID on Monday (16). The investigation can help ascertain whether some interested party conspired to discredit the NPP.

That clarification issued by Parliament meant that Ranwala provided false information to Parliament. According to Jayalath Perera, the parliamentary staff entered the relevant data provided by lawmakers, hence the only mistake on their part pertained to the Justice Minister’s data.

Power Minister Kumara Jayakody, too, lodged a complaint with police seeking an investigation into what he called an organized attempt to discredit him by challenging his academic qualifications. Both Nanayakkara and Jayakody speculated about the possibility of those who had been rejected by the people and their associates and supporters being involved in the high profile campaign.

The NPP cannot afford to disappoint 5.7 mn people who voted for AKD at the presidential election and 6.8 mn at the general election. The NPP increased its voter tally from 5.7 mn to 6.8 mn within a couple of weeks whereas the SJB was reduced to 1.9 mn votes from 4.3 mn at the presidential poll. The NDF was reduced to just 500,000 votes from 2.2mn at the presidential election while the SLPP increased its tally from 340,000 to 350,000. The Opposition is in disarray and in a pathetic situation.

Ranwala’s fiasco has sort of given the Opposition false hopes of a quick comeback. The forthcoming local government polls will show the ground situation. The NPP must keep in mind that in addition to the Ranwala affair, the failure on its part to provide sufficient relief to fuel and electricity consumers as promised has caused much public anger. Having repeatedly alleged that the previous government couldn’t substantially reduce fuel prices as the then Minister Kanchana Wijesekera pocketed the money, and having made those claims against the previous Minister in charge of the subject, the NPP brought down the price of a litre of Octane 92 by just 2 rupees much to the public’s resentment.

The pathetic handling of the rice mafia, too, didn’t do the NPP any good. Throughout the polls campaigns, the NPP repeatedly assured that the rice mafia would be appropriately dealt with and prices brought down and stabilized. The NPP also promised that rice wouldn’t be imported at all though imports would meet the tourist sector requirement. That much touted promise, too, was broken. However, the electorate, the writer is certain, doesn’t see any point in once again pinning their hopes on the utterly corrupt and dishonest lot rejected at the presidential and parliamentary polls.

Why Parliament shouldn’t defend wrongdoers

During the general election campaign, AKD explained why Parliament shouldn’t protect wrongdoers. The President said that the Yahapalana Parliament (2015-2019), during Karu Jayasuriya’s tenure as the Speaker, defeated a no-confidence motion moved against Ravi Karunanayake over the Treasury bond scams, especially after he told the Presidential Commission of Inquiry that probed it, he could not remember the person who gave him a luxury penthouse at Kollupitiya. Then in 2023 the Wickremesinghe-Rajapaksa government defended Keheliya Rambukwella when a no-faith motion was moved against him over corruption in the health sector procurement, the President said.

Having said so, AKD couldn’t have defended Ranwala in case the SJB handed over a no-confidence motion against him. In fact, the NPP has created an environment that may prevent those exercising political power from coming to the rescue of wrongdoers under any circumstances.

During Ranwala’s very short stint as the Speaker, he had the opportunity to receive several foreign dignitaries. Press releases issued by Parliament following those meetings referred to Ranwala as Dr. Ranwala.

South Korean Ambassador Miyon Lee paid a courtesy call on Speaker Ranwala on 04 Dec. at the Parliament complex. Secretary General of the Parliament Mrs. Kushani Rohanadeera, was also present on the occasion. This happened the day before Prof. Dewasiri exposed the NPP parliamentarian.

Ranwala, not aware of what was coming, addressed the newly elected members on 25 Nov., in Parliament, where he emphasized the responsibility on the part of newcomers (he, too, was a newcomer struggling to handle responsibilities for want of parliamentary experience) to familiarize with parliamentary procedures. Speaker Ranwala said that public expectations couldn’t be met unless they learnt about parliamentary procedures. Ranwala was addressing the inaugural session of the orientation programme for lawmakers.

The Parliament website quoted Speaker Ranwala as having emphasized the importance of organizing such workshops, noting that a thorough understanding of parliamentary traditions, constitutional frameworks, standing orders, and related parliamentary procedures is crucial for serving the people through the diverse debates conducted within Parliament.

Chinese Ambassador in Colombo Ambassador Qi Zhenhong was the first envoy to pay a courtesy call on Ranwala at the Parliament. The Chinese Ambassador conveyed the greetings of the Chairman of the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress of the People’s Republic of China (Speaker of the Parliament of the People’s Republic of China) Zhao Leji, to the newly elected Speaker of the Tenth Parliament during the meeting.

The Chinese envoy was followed by Indian High Commissioner Santosh Jha. Jha paid a courtesy call on the Speaker on 28 Nov. at the Parliament.

The United Nations Resident Coordinator in Sri Lanka, Marc-André Franche, met Speaker Ranwala on 04 Dec.

In the wake of Prof. Dewasiri’s shocking disclosure, Speaker Ranwala received a high-level US delegation led by Assistant Secretary of State for the Bureau of South and Central Asian Affairs Donald Lu. The meeting took place on 06 Dec.

The delegation included Ms. Anjali Kaur, Deputy Assistant Administrator of the Bureau for Asia at USAID, and Mr. Robert Kaproth, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Asia at the US Department of the Treasury.

According to a press release issued by Parliament the meeting focused on Sri Lanka’s reform priorities and the critical role of the House in advancing the people’s mandate for accountability, transparency, and inclusive governance.

Ambassador of the United Arab Emirates to Sri Lanka Khaled Nasser AlAmeri was the next to pay a courtesy call on Speaker Ranwala. That meeting took place on 09 Dec. amidst a stepped-up campaign against Speaker Ranwala. The NPP seems to have operated on the premise that the controversy over the Speaker’s credentials would gradually fade away. But, the media pressed the Cabinet spokesperson Dr. Nalinda Jayatissa over the simmering serious issue. That controversy sort of overwhelmed the NPP that worked so hard to portray all other political parties, other than them, as corrupt to the core.

In fact, the NPP had nothing else but to depend on what it called a new clean political culture. Having impressed the electorate with nothing but promises and assurances that it would do the right thing, it couldn’t have a blatant liar as the Speaker.

If not for the political culture that had been introduced by the NPP, in the wake of Aragalaya in 2022, the false declaration made by Ranwala wouldn’t have been an issue at all. The people would have simply accepted it as just another lie. Our inefficient and useless Parliament had been so disgraceful in its conduct and encouraged public resentment that a Speaker’s false claim wouldn’t have caused a public furore.

The NPP’s failed bid to storm Parliament during the final push against President Gotabaya Rajapaksa should be examined taking into consideration the pathetic state of our Parliament. Some of those unscrupulous men who represented Parliament over the past two to three decades brought about the Parliament’s collapse. Instead of taking remedial measures, political parties allowed the deterioration to continue, unabated. Nothing can be as ridiculous as conducting student parliaments all over the provinces. What the Parliament really expected to achieve by promoting student parliaments at a time the very basis of the parliamentary system is under threat due to overall failure of the political party system.

Parliament must take appropriate measures to restore public confidence in the highest institution in the country. Ranwala’s affair proved beyond doubt that the Speaker, who is also the Chairman of the Constitutional Council, could manipulate the system. No one and no political party should be above the law. War-winning Sri Lanka had suffered unbearable losses for want of proper parliamentary control over public finance over the years.

Let us hope the NPP has learnt a hard lesson at the onset of AKD’s five-year term that would help the party to navigate choppy waters. The daunting challenges faced by a bankrupt country should prompt all political parties, represented in Parliament, to reach consensus on Sri Lanka’s response to the deal with the IMF, signed by Ranil Wickremesinghe. The issue the Parliament must grapple with is how to transform the sick national economy to make it possible for us to start repaying foreign debt in 2028 without making most of us absolute paupers, but many Lankans are already in dire straits economically.

The Parliament can begin by making the Supreme Court judgment on the economic crisis that led to Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s removal available to new members of Parliament. Of the 225 MPs, 162 are new entrants. The Supreme Court in Nov. 2023 issued a symbolic ruling that Rajapaksa brothers – including two ex-Presidents – were guilty of triggering the worst financial crisis by mishandling the economy.

In a majority verdict on multiple petitions filed by academics and civil rights activists, a five-judge bench of the Supreme Court ruled that the respondents, who all later resigned or were sacked, had violated public trust. But that verdict should be examined along with massive foreign loans taken by the Yahapalana government during the 2015-2019 period at high interests that contributed massively to the crisis.

Let there be no holds barred examination of the economic crisis and exposure of all responsible, regardless of their status. However, that wouldn’t be a reality unless the legislature fulfils its basic obligations in terms of the Constitution.

Let us also not lose sight of hidden hands, especially from the West who make matters worse through their cloak and dagger operations worldwide as also was put into operation here during Gotabaya Rajapaksa presidency, like even cutting off worker remittances from our banking system thereby we couldn’t even scrape together a few million dollars to clear even a shipment of cooking gas. They have done similar jugglery to so many other countries, even in our neighbourhood, as has been the case already in Bangladesh and Pakistan. Modi should not feel all that smug as we do not know what plots are being hatched against him.

Remember the uncompromising Aragalaya activists who were threatening to die for a system change in the country, but disappeared into thin air no sooner Ranil Wickremesimnghe was installed in the seat of power with the ouster of Gotabaya Rajapaksa by extra parliamentary means.

Continue Reading

Midweek Review

Seeking cultural transmission between bodies

Published

on

Mavin Khoo in an Odissi Solo to live music. © Foteini Christofilopoulou (L) / Taji Dias performing low country dance (14th Dec 2024) at Chitrasena Dance Company. Photo credit: Saumya Liyanage 2024 (R)

From Chitrasena to Akram Khan:

by Saumya Liyanage

Akram Khan is a world-renowned dancer, choreographer and the founder of Akram Khan Company (AKC) in the UK. He has been an impactful dancer and choreographer who was initially trained as a Kathak dancer during his apprenticeship under various Kathak Gurus in Asia and elsewhere. He and his dance company have created numerous dance productions that surpass the traditional boundaries. Akram Khan is a recipient of top awards including two Laurence Olivier Awards, the Bessie Award (New York Dance and Performance Award), the prestigious ISPA (International Society for the Performing Arts) Distinguished Artist Award, the Fred and Adele Astaire Award, the Herald Archangel Award at the Edinburgh International Festival, the South Bank Sky Arts Award, and ten Critics’ Circle National Dance Awards for his company.

With the initiative of the British Council in Colombo, the Akram Khan Dance Company contacted me a few months ago. The Legacy International Project Manager of the AKC, Varsha Kumar sent me an email informing me of an exciting project the dance company wanted to initiate in Jaffna. It was an upcoming collaboration between Akram Khan Company supported by the British Council Colombo to conduct an intense dance exchange workshop. This initiative facilitated a five-day intensive cultural transmission of Bharatanatyam dance conducted by Mavin Khoo, the artistic associate of the Akram Khan Company with a selected group of youth from Jaffna.

The idea was to continue and sustain the traditional dance forms and explore how they could be sustained and continued further through innovative practices. Mavin Khoo visited Jaffna for the first time to initiate this cultural transmission project with the hope of conducting this intense workshop on Bharatanatyam. Mavin Khoo, trained as a traditional dancer in Bharatanatyam in Malaysia, is a choreographer and the creative collaborator of Akram Khan. Mavin holds an MA in Choreography from Middlesex University and was a faculty member of the Dance Studies Department, School of Performing Arts at the University of Malta in 2014. He has been working as the rehearsal director of the Akram Khan Company and is exploring traditional dance and its contemporary relevance as a mode of human agency and provocation.

It is an ongoing work that the AKC initiated and this collaboration will continue further in future. Here is something interesting about what happened when Khoo, Varsha and their team came to Colombo after finishing the Jaffna Classical Intensive project. The British council director Edward Orlando invited me to a networking lunch in Colombo, where Khoo and Varsha were present. At lunch, I met some of the Sri Lankan dance community representatives. They included versatile dancers such as Upeka Chitrasena, Heshma Wignaraja, and Kapila Palihawadana. We shared our thoughts and ideas about dance and future collaborations during lunch. After this session, Upeka Chitrasena invited us to visit Chitrasena Dance Company. Akram Khan Company focused on helping peripheral dance groups to sustain and continue their traditional dance heritage and encouraged them to expand their possibilities of innovations, and the Chitrasena Dance Company in Colombo is also dedicated to preserving and continuing Sri Lankan traditional dance practices for posterity.

Dance as Ekstasis

I am not a dancer, but I have been interested in dance and dance theatre throughout my academic career. Dance and theatre share many elements and it is the body that is central to the dancer and actor’s work. A few days ago, at the Faculty of Medicine, a session was conducted by the Centre for Meditation Research on how movement facilitates happiness and wellbeing. With my research collaborators, Kanchana Malshani and Chamanee Darshika, I demonstrated how movement is central to our understanding of the self and the world. The key question that I posed at the seminar is that movement allows us to understand our body, time and space and allows us to understand how we could connect with other bodies. Movement is the primal element of the body of the animated being.

What fascinates me here is that actor/dancer experiences time and space and the Other, in a different way than we experience the same phenomena on the daily basis. Dance scholar and Philosopher Sheets Maxine-Johnston argues that Man comprises temporality within himself, for he is such an ekstatic being. He is always at a distance of himself, always in flight” (Sheets-Johnston, 2015, pp. 16-17). This statement clearly indicates how the dance and dance experience override the objective time and space. Greek etymology of the word ekstatic means how one emancipates from her/his own self and transcends for the daily reality. In this sense, the moving body of the dancer, as I witnessed at the Chitrasena Dance Company, shows that dancers’ “being” is not in the daily reality when they intensely move their bodies in the space and time with the complex drum ensemble. Hence, I argue that our understanding about time and space is constructed through the physiological and mathematical understanding of time and space. The other is understood in a way that we as selves are constructed and defined through various lingual and cultural discourses. In this sense, the dancer/actor surpasses these constructed boundaries when the body becomes animated through dance and acting.

We sat at the Chitrasena Dance Company in the afternoon of Dec., 14 2024, and Khoo and Varsha were scheduled to leave Colombo a few hours later. An intense and galvanising performance was unveiled at the bare stage of Chitrasena Dance Company with Thaji Dias and the dance ensemble with seven master drum players. One after the other, a series of traditional dance repertoires unfolded before our eyes. Particularly Thaji Dias’ mesmerising and electrifying bodily motility of Kandyan, Low Country and Sabaragamuwa styles blended with intense rigor and precision. It was evident that some of the dance repertoires that Thaji and the lead male dancer performed were somewhat improvisational, bringing key elements of Kandyan dance into an ecstasy of performance. Both dancers seemed to be connected with each other through somatic means, communicating with facial and bodily gestures to trigger certain dance repertoire to perform together. I witnessed that both dancers were kinesthetically and sensorially joined through learned repertoires to perform a new interpretation of Kandyan dance form.

Cultural Transmission

These traditional dance performances triggered several important questions related to the dance body and cultural transmission of somatic knowledge. First, when Heshma, the artistic director and choreographer of Chitrasena Dance Company introduced a particular dance repertoire developed and choreographed by Vajira Chitrasena, she articulated this as a cultural transmission of choreographic knowledge which came through two generations of dancers. This statement triggered several important questions related to dance historiography. When Chitrasena and Vajira choreographed their works, it may have been done through the embodied knowledge that they possessed through what they learnt and mastered from the traditional Gurus. However, Chitrasena and Vijira may have understood that replicating traditional dance and its repertoire would not add any innovation to their dance interventions. My interest was drawn to this phenomenon and the question emerged on how these individual dance artists have distilled the traditional Kandyan dance to modernist choreographic works through adding innovative elements to their newly founded body notations.

Researchers who are working on the intangible cultural heritage mainly focus on how traditional dance and heritage can be transmitted. They are mainly concerned about how these traditions are continued and sustained through contemporary dance ensembles. However, the intangible heritage discourse has least focused on how these dance traditions have been changing through time and how these new elemental changes have been transformed and transmitted to the next generation of dancers. During our encounters with dance choreographer and artistic director of Chitrasena Dance Company, Heshma discussed how they “do” dance. Her articulation of “doing” dance rather than talking about dance explains how they transmit knowledge of somatic elements of dance through bodies. She said, “We rarely talk … we do not use language but we do dance”. One of the challenges posed by these issues is that the corporeal learning and embodied knowledge cannot be objectified in the researcher’s eyes. They are somatically embedded in the dancers’ bodies and are sedimented within their dance repertoires. A meticulous observation, analysis and categorisation will be required for someone to understand and identify how these dance elements have been changed and embedded in the dancer’s body. As I believe, new dance ethnographic research would be useful for researchers to extricate those elemental dance repertoires to understand how contemporary dancers’ bodies embody dance heritage in their somatic memories.

Conclusion

Akram Khan and his creative associate Mavin Khoo explore the possibilities of preserving traditional dance forms while seeking opportunities to revive them through innovative practices. The Chitrasena Dance Company working in the field of traditional Sri Lankan dance ambitiously is in search of a new era of Sri Lankan dance while passing the Chitrasena -Vajira dance heritage to the next generation of dancers and choreographers. Both companies share similar objectives in dance preservation and innovations within the highly contested Global cultural domains. Khan, Khoo, Chitrasena, Vajira, Thaji and other dancers embody a vast knowledge of somatic practices akin to their own dance traditions. Yet, these ekstatic bodies transcend the daily constructed selves, which carry the somatic knowledge of dance that are waiting to be disseminated in the bodies of the next generation of dancers. These areas of dance-ethnography should be further developed to understand the embodied knowledge and the somatic practices infiltrated through the generations of dancers and drummers. New dance-ethnography, dance historiography and new methodologies should be developed and applied to deepen our understanding of dance as an explicit knowledge of human expressions, emotions and ecstasy.

References

Sheets-Johnston, M. (2015). The phenomenology of dance. Philadelphia (Pensilvania, Estados Unidos) Temple University Press.

Company, Akram Khan. n.d. “Our Biographies.” Akram Khan Company. Cog. Accessed 2024. https://www.akramkhancompany.net/about-us/our-biographies/.

Company, Akram Khan. n.d. “Our Biographies.” Akram Khan Company. Cog. Accessed 2024. https://www.akramkhancompany.net/about-us/our-biographies/.

Nürnberger, Marianne. 2014. “Vajira – the First Professional Female Dancer of the Sinhalese Style.” Sri Lanka Journal of Humanities 40 (0): 99. https://doi.org/10.4038/sljh.v40i0.7232.

Raheem, Mirak. 2022. “Vajira: The Pioneering Female Dancer.” South Asian Dance Intersections 1 (1). https://doi.org/10.55370/sadi.v1i1.1475.

–––

Saumya Liyanage is an actor and professor in Drama and Theatre, currently working at the Department of Theatre Ballet and Modern Dance, Faculty of Dance and Drama, University of Visual and Performing Arts, Colombo, Sri Lanka. saumya.l@vpa.ac.lk

The author wishes to thank Himansi Dehigama for her assistance in preparing this article.

Continue Reading

Midweek Review

Motherhood Triumphs

Published

on

(Photo by Mahmoud Zaki/Xinhua)

By Lynn Ockersz

Out of war’s destructive wastes,

And piles of mortal remains,

There emerge buds of promise,

Hardly into their teenage years,

That radiate childhood innocence,

And a motherhood of selflessness,

That would give fragile humans,

Their only security guarantee,

In a life rifled with uncertainties.

Continue Reading

Trending