Features
The Murder of a Journalist
By Anura Gunasekera
Commencing with Premakeerthi de Alwis in 1986 and concluding with Lasantha Wickrematunge in 2009, 40 accredited Sri Lankan journalists and media personnel, 31 of them of Tamil, have been murdered or died violently. Of these, 31 occurred between April 2004 and March 2009, during the Mahinda Rajapaksa tenure, initially as Prime Minister and then as President. His younger brother Gotabaya, later president himself, was the Defence Secretary of the country from 2005 to 2015.
During the above period, apart from those killed, many were abducted, assaulted and /or tortured, and intimidated in various other ways. A few left the country in fear of their lives. Most, if not all of those journalists, unsurprisingly, had been vocal critics of the government. With the defeat of the Rajapakse government in 2015, all harassment of journalists ceased, abruptly.
Of the above killings, those of Lasantha Wickrematunge (LW) and that of Richard de Zoysa in 1990, as well as the disappearance of Prageeth Ekneligoda in 2010 are, for a variety of reasons, not least the international outrage and condemnation, considered the most prominent. The most disturbing commonality across all these crimes is that none have been comprehensively investigated and the perpetrators punished.
In fact, despite pointers regarding the identity of the masterminds- circumstantial but compelling – and the very public nature of most of the actual incidents themselves, investigations have been either obstructed or stifled, through intimidation of potential witnesses, misleading autopsies, the enthusiastic pursuit of patently false lines of investigation, deliberately disingenuous official statements and, not infrequently, the suppression or disappearance of physical evidence.
The murder of Richard de Zoysa is again in the limelight on account of the recent film, “Rani”, although any hope of the crime being solved is almost zero. The murder of LW has been publicly profiled in the last few weeks, due to the order for the discharge, by the Attorney General (AG), of three suspects linked to events consequent to the murder, on the grounds of insufficient evidence.
Since the murder of LW, four successive governments have assured the country and the international community, that the case would be comprehensively investigated and those responsible punished. The slain Lasantha Wickrematunge had become an international metaphor for delayed justice. The present NPP government, led by president Anura Kumara Dissanayake, made the investigation of previously unsolved crimes, including that of Lasantha’s murder, and the cleansing of corrupt government systems, a cornerstone of its election manifesto. The sweeping victory of the NPP at the recent general elections was largely due to the faith that the electors placed in those promises.
Why is the case of Lasantha Wickrematunge so important?
Investigative Journalists play a vital role in maintaining a free and open society, by providing the public with critical information, holding power to account and exposing corruption and injustice. In that context, LW played a major role through his paper, “The Sunday Leader” which, week after week, exposed the massive corruption within the Rajapaksa regime, citing specific transactions and quite often linking acts of malfeasance to then President Mahinda Rajapaksa, his brother and Defence Secretary Gotabaya, or to close associates of the Rajapaksa family and the regime.
LW’s silence was worth more to the Rajapaksa family in particular, than to anybody else in the country. In fact, LW’s murder was apparently preceded by an unsuccessful attempt, in 2007, by Mahinda Rajapaksa himself, to broker the sale of the paper to an investor of his choice, the offer being made to Lal, LW’s brother (Page 234- Unbowed and Unafraid- Raine Wickrematunge). The only possible reason for a president of a country to personally seek the divestment of ownership of an outspoken newspaper, is control of its narrative content and direction.
Two years later Lasantha’s assassination paved the way for the exercise of this option.
In Sept 2012, businessman and alleged Rajapakse associate, Asanga Seneviratne, many of whose property development and investment deals had been criticized at various times by the “Leader”, bought a 72% stake in the “Leader” and its sister newspaper, “Iruresa”. In the same month Frederica Jansz, then editor of the “Leader” and long-time colleague of LW, was summarily dismissed from her position. In May 2015 the “Leader”, now under a decidedly Rajapaksa-friendly dispensation, tendered an unconditional apology to Gotabaya Rajapksa for a series of articles it had run, during LW’s tenure as editor, on the indisputably questionable method of purchase of MiG-27 aircraft from Ukraine, for the Sri Lanka Air Force. Udayanga Weeratunga, relative of the Rajapaksa family, as then Sri Lanka’s ambassador to Ukraine, allegedly played a major role in facilitating the said transaction. According to Ahimsa, LW’s daughter, LW was on the verge of exposing the highly complex and sordid details of the deal in entirety, when he was murdered (The MiG deal; Why My Father Had To Die- Groundviews-01/08/21).
The above is just one of the hundreds of expose’s featured by LW and he very rarely got it wrong. Very few other journalists in recent decades – the late Victor Ivan was one other- so courageously and in such minute detail, addressed the sins of those in power as LW did. They were issues that many journalists avoided, a self-regulation on truthful journalism brought about as a conditioned survival mechanism, in response to the brutal repression of those who dared to write the truth about power.
LW’s last writing- “Then They Came For Me”– published posthumously and now a classic of Asian journalism, was a chillingly prophetic prediction of his own death, pointing an accusatory finger at his erstwhile friend, then president Mahinda Rajapaksa.
The death of any human being diminishes society but the death of a fearless journalist, who holds a mirror to the foibles of society and power, diminishes our world in a special way; especially a world such as ours where leaders, irrespective of political colour, have proved to be treacherous, unreliable, corrupt, mercenary and nepotistic.
On the 27th of January, Parinda Ranasinghe Jr, Attorney General (AG) of Sri Lanka, ordered the release – citing lack of evidence to proceed with indictments – of Ananda Udalagama, implicated in the abduction in August 2009 of Karunaratne Dias, LW’s driver, and DIG Prasanna Nanayakkara and Sub-inspector Sugathapala, both implicated in the disappearance of a notebook recovered from LW’s vehicle after his murder. Consequent to immediate and widespread criticism and physical demonstrations against this order, it has since been rescinded.
In this episode the primary, indisputable principle, is that it is entirely at the AG’s discretion, to decide whether or not to charge a suspect, taking in to account the validity of admissible evidence available, and the prospect of securing a conviction. The political body has no right suggest a review of such a decision, or to compel the AG to consider such a review, irrespective of the importance of the case. At the same time it is also assumed that the AG and his department will carry out their duties impartially, irrespective of past loyalties – if any – and current personal prejudices, especially in relation to sensational cases involving those previously and currently in power.
Assuming that the release order was issued after a comprehensive analysis of the available evidence, the subsequent reversal is baffling, to say the least. Is it that the AG, or the legal officers responsible, consequent to a re-assessment of available material, suddenly realized that they had a made a serious error of judgment? Or did the AG’s department cave in to political and public pressure and decide to change its decision?
If the AG had braved both public and political displeasure and held fast to the original decision, it would have been perfectly acceptable and even commendable. However, it is now being reported in responsible mainstream newspapers, that the rescinding of the original decision is a response to a request by the Criminal Investigation Department (CID), to give it more time to act on the AG’s order, on account of the controversy surrounding the issue. The official version now appears to be that what is now in place is a suspension of the original decision, and not a reversal.
In the meantime, Ahimsa, through her publicized letter of February 14 to Anura Meddegoda, President of the Bar Association of Sri Lanka, has censured him for his hypocritical support of the AG and his position in this episode. She has supported her position by reference to Meddegoda’s protest against a similar order by the AG, under very similar circumstances, when it involved the murder of one Indika Prasad, allegedly by members of the Special Task Force. The interests of the victim’s wife were represented by Meddegoda.
Ahimsa has condemned the AG’s position in this matter, in the said letter citing seemingly convincing evidence available against the three suspects named earlier. She has even called for the impeachment of the AG, on the grounds that in ordering the discharge of the suspects, he has deliberately chosen to ignore vital evidence.
For an ordinary citizen such as the writer, with only a minimal understanding of criminal law, an analysis of the legal validity of the AG’s management of the case in question is not possible. But, still, to the writer and to several million other citizens who helped to bring the NPP in to power, the delivery of justice in matters of public corruption, politically motivated murders and similar crimes, are issues of supreme importance.
Fearless journalists such as Lasantha Wickrematunge paid with their lives for their reportage and public exposure of the crimes of the politically powerful. The justice for such crimes is owed, not only to the family members of the slain, but to the nation itself. It ceased to be a private, Wickrematunge family project a long time ago.
President AKD has steadfastly maintained that his regime will not interfere with ongoing legal processes, unlike previous regimes which seemed to often guide the hand of the law, in cases which featured those in power, unfavourably. However, what may be prudent and necessary, if justice is to be finally done, is intervention and course correction at critical stages, to ensure that public officers entrusted with relevant responsibilities do not lose sight of both the principle and the objective.
Features
Rethinking post-disaster urban planning: Lessons from Peradeniya
A recent discussion by former Environment Minister, Eng. Patali Champika Ranawaka on the Derana 360 programme has reignited an important national conversation on how Sri Lanka plans, builds and rebuilds in the face of recurring disasters.
His observations, delivered with characteristic clarity and logic, went beyond the immediate causes of recent calamities and focused sharply on long-term solutions—particularly the urgent need for smarter land use and vertical housing development.
Ranawaka’s proposal to introduce multistoried housing schemes in the Gannoruwa area, as a way of reducing pressure on environmentally sensitive and disaster-prone zones, resonated strongly with urban planners and environmentalists alike.
It also echoed ideas that have been quietly discussed within academic and conservation circles for years but rarely translated into policy.
One such voice is that of Professor Siril Wijesundara, Research Professor at the National Institute of Fundamental Studies (NIFS) and former Director General of the Royal Botanic Gardens, Peradeniya, who believes that disasters are often “less acts of nature and more outcomes of poor planning.”
“What we repeatedly see in Sri Lanka is not merely natural disasters, but planning failures,” Professor Wijesundara told The Island.
“Floods, landslides and environmental degradation are intensified because we continue to build horizontally, encroaching on wetlands, forest margins and river reservations, instead of thinking vertically and strategically.”
The former Director General notes that the University of Peradeniya itself offers a compelling case study of both the problem and the solution. The main campus, already densely built and ecologically sensitive, continues to absorb new faculties, hostels and administrative buildings, placing immense pressure on green spaces and drainage systems.
“The Peradeniya campus was designed with landscape harmony in mind,” he said. “But over time, ad-hoc construction has compromised that vision. If development continues in the same manner, the campus will lose not only its aesthetic value but also its ecological resilience.”
Professor Wijesundara supports the idea of reorganising the Rajawatte area—located away from the congested core of the university—as a future development zone. Rather than expanding inward and fragmenting remaining open spaces, he argues that Rajawatte can be planned as a well-designed extension, integrating academic, residential and service infrastructure in a controlled manner.
Crucially, he stresses that such reorganisation must go hand in hand with social responsibility, particularly towards minor staff currently living in the Rajawatte area.
“These workers are the backbone of the university. Any development plan must ensure their dignity and wellbeing,” he said. “Providing them with modern, safe and affordable multistoried housing—especially near the railway line close to the old USO premises—would be both humane and practical.”
According to Professor Wijesundara, housing complexes built near existing transport corridors would reduce daily commuting stress, minimise traffic within the campus, and free up valuable land for planned academic use.
More importantly, vertical housing would significantly reduce the university’s physical footprint.
Drawing parallels with Ranawaka’s Gannoruwa proposal, he emphasised that vertical development is no longer optional for Sri Lanka.
“We are a small island with a growing population and shrinking safe land,” he warned.
“If we continue to spread out instead of building up, disasters will become more frequent and more deadly. Vertical housing, when done properly, is environmentally sound, economically efficient and socially just.”
The veteran botanist also highlighted the often-ignored link between disaster vulnerability and the destruction of green buffers.
“Every time we clear a lowland, a wetland or a forest patch for construction, we remove nature’s shock absorbers,” he said.
“The Royal Botanic Gardens has survived floods for over a century precisely because surrounding landscapes once absorbed excess water. Urban planning must learn from such ecological wisdom.”
Professor Wijesundara believes that universities, as centres of knowledge, should lead by example.
“If an institution like Peradeniya cannot demonstrate sustainable planning, how can we expect cities to do so?” he asked. “This is an opportunity to show that development and conservation are not enemies, but partners.”
As climate-induced disasters intensify across the country, voices like his—and proposals such as those articulated by Patali Champika Ranawaka—underscore a simple but urgent truth: Sri Lanka’s future safety depends not only on disaster response, but on how and where we build today.
The challenge now lies with policymakers and planners to move beyond television studio discussions and academic warnings, and translate these ideas into concrete, people-centred action.
By Ifham Nizam ✍️
Features
Superstition – Major barrier to learning and social advancement
At the initial stage of my six-year involvement in uplifting society through skill-based initiatives, particularly by promoting handicraft work and teaching students to think creatively and independently, my efforts were partially jeopardized by deep-rooted superstition and resistance to rational learning.
Superstitions exerted a deeply adverse impact by encouraging unquestioned belief, fear, and blind conformity instead of reasoning and evidence-based understanding. In society, superstition often sustains harmful practices, social discrimination, exploitation by self-styled godmen, and resistance to scientific or social reforms, thereby weakening rational decision-making and slowing progress. When such beliefs penetrate the educational environment, students gradually lose the habit of asking “why” and “how,” accepting explanations based on fate, omens, or divine intervention rather than observation and logic.
Initially, learners became hesitant to challenge me despite my wrong interpretation of any law, less capable of evaluating information critically, and more vulnerable to misinformation and pseudoscience. As a result, genuine efforts towards social upliftment were obstructed, and the transformative power of education, which could empower individuals economically and intellectually, was weakened by fear-driven beliefs that stood in direct opposition to progress and rational thought. In many communities, illnesses are still attributed to evil spirits or curses rather than treated as medical conditions. I have witnessed educated people postponing important decisions, marriages, journeys, even hospital admissions, because an astrologer predicted an “inauspicious” time, showing how fear governs rational minds.
While teaching students science and mathematics, I have clearly observed how superstition acts as a hidden barrier to learning, critical thinking, and intellectual confidence. Many students come to the classroom already conditioned to believe that success or failure depends on luck, planetary positions, or divine favour rather than effort, practice, and understanding, which directly contradicts the scientific spirit. I have seen students hesitate to perform experiments or solve numerical problems on certain “inauspicious” days.
In mathematics, some students label themselves as “weak by birth”, which creates fear and anxiety even before attempting a problem, turning a subject of logic into a source of emotional stress. In science classes, explanations based on natural laws sometimes clash with supernatural beliefs, and students struggle to accept evidence because it challenges what they were taught at home or in society. This conflict confuses young minds and prevents them from fully trusting experimentation, data, and proof.
Worse still, superstition nurtures dependency; students wait for miracles instead of practising problem-solving, revision, and conceptual clarity. Over time, this mindset damages curiosity, reduces confidence, and limits innovation, making science and mathematics appear difficult, frightening, or irrelevant. Many science teachers themselves do not sufficiently emphasise the need to question or ignore such irrational beliefs and often remain limited to textbook facts and exam-oriented learning, leaving little space to challenge superstition directly. When teachers avoid discussing superstition, they unintentionally reinforce the idea that scientific reasoning and superstitious beliefs can coexist.
To overcome superstition and effectively impose critical thinking among students, I have inculcated the process to create a classroom culture where questioning was encouraged and fear of being “wrong” was removed. Students were taught how to think, not what to think, by consistently using the scientific method—observation, hypothesis, experimentation, evidence, and conclusion—in both science and mathematics lessons. I have deliberately challenged superstitious beliefs through simple demonstrations and hands-on experiments that allow students to see cause-and-effect relationships for themselves, helping them replace belief with proof.
Many so-called “tantrik shows” that appear supernatural can be clearly explained and exposed through basic scientific principles, making them powerful tools to fight superstition among students. For example, acts where a tantrik places a hand or tongue briefly in fire without injury rely on short contact time, moisture on the skin, or low heat transfer from alcohol-based flames rather than divine power.
“Miracles” like ash or oil repeatedly appearing from hands or idols involve concealment or simple physical and chemical tricks. When these tricks are demonstrated openly in classrooms or science programmes and followed by clear scientific explanations, students quickly realise how easily perception can be deceived and why evidence, experimentation, and critical questioning are far more reliable than blind belief.
Linking concepts to daily life, such as explaining probability to counter ideas of luck, or biology to explain illness instead of supernatural causes, makes rational explanations relatable and convincing.
Another unique example that I faced in my life is presented here. About 10 years ago, when I entered my new house but did not organise traditional rituals that many consider essential for peace and prosperity as my relatives believed that without them prosperity would be blocked. Later on, I could not utilise the entire space of my newly purchased house for earning money, largely because I chose not to perform certain rituals.
While this decision may have limited my financial gains to some extent, I do not consider it a failure in the true sense. I feel deeply satisfied that my son and daughter have received proper education and are now well settled in their employment, which, to me, is a far greater achievement than any ritual-driven expectation of wealth. My belief has always been that a house should not merely be a source of income or superstition-bound anxiety, but a space with social purpose.
Instead of rituals, I strongly feel that the unused portion of my house should be devoted to running tutorials for poor and underprivileged students, where knowledge, critical thinking, and self-reliance can be nurtured. This conviction gives me inner peace and reinforces my faith that education and service to society are more meaningful measures of success than material profit alone.
Though I have succeeded to some extent, this success has not been complete due to the persistent influence of superstition.
by Dr Debapriya Mukherjee
Former Senior Scientist
Central Pollution Control Board, India ✍️
Features
Race hate and the need to re-visit the ‘Clash of Civilizations’
Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has done very well to speak-up against and outlaw race hate in the immediate aftermath of the recent cold-blooded gunning down of several civilians on Australia’s Bondi Beach. The perpetrators of the violence are believed to be ardent practitioners of religious and race hate and it is commendable that the Australian authorities have lost no time in clearly and unambiguously stating their opposition to the dastardly crimes in question.
The Australian Prime Minister is on record as stating in this connection: ‘ New laws will target those who spread hate, division and radicalization. The Home Affairs Minister will also be given new powers to cancel or refuse visas for those who spread hate and a new taskforce will be set up to ensure the education system prevents, tackles and properly responds to antisemitism.’
It is this promptness and single-mindedness to defeat race hate and other forms of identity-based animosities that are expected of democratic governments in particular world wide. For example, is Sri Lanka’s NPP government willing to follow the Australian example? To put the record straight, no past governments of Sri Lanka initiated concrete measures to stamp out the evil of race hate as well but the present Sri Lankan government which has pledged to end ethnic animosities needs to think and act vastly differently. Democratic and progressive opinion in Sri Lanka is waiting expectantly for the NPP government’ s positive response; ideally based on the Australian precedent to end race hate.
Meanwhile, it is apt to remember that inasmuch as those forces of terrorism that target white communities world wide need to be put down their counterpart forces among extremist whites need to be defeated as well. There could be no double standards on this divisive question of quashing race and religious hate, among democratic governments.
The question is invariably bound up with the matter of expeditiously and swiftly advancing democratic development in divided societies. To the extent to which a body politic is genuinely democratized, to the same degree would identity based animosities be effectively managed and even resolved once and for all. To the extent to which a society is deprived of democratic governance, correctly understood, to the same extent would it experience unmanageable identity-bred violence.
This has been Sri Lanka’s situation and generally it could be stated that it is to the degree to which Sri Lankan citizens are genuinely constitutionally empowered that the issue of race hate in their midst would prove manageable. Accordingly, democratic development is the pressing need.
While the dramatic blood-letting on Bondi Beach ought to have driven home to observers and commentators of world politics that the international community is yet to make any concrete progress in the direction of laying the basis for an end to identity-based extremism, the event should also impress on all concerned quarters that continued failure to address the matters at hand could prove fatal. The fact of the matter is that identity-based extremism is very much alive and well and that it could strike devastatingly at a time and place of its choosing.
It is yet premature for the commentator to agree with US political scientist Samuel P. Huntingdon that a ‘Clash of Civilizations’ is upon the world but events such as the Bondi Beach terror and the continuing abduction of scores of school girls by IS-related outfits, for instance, in Northern Africa are concrete evidence of the continuing pervasive presence of identity-based extremism in the global South.
As a matter of great interest it needs mentioning that the crumbling of the Cold War in the West in the early nineties of the last century and the explosive emergence of identity-based violence world wide around that time essentially impelled Huntingdon to propound the hypothesis that the world was seeing the emergence of a ‘Clash of Civilizations’. Basically, the latter phrase implied that the Cold War was replaced by a West versus militant religious fundamentalism division or polarity world wide. Instead of the USSR and its satellites, the West, led by the US, had to now do battle with religion and race-based militant extremism, particularly ‘Islamic fundamentalist violence’ .
Things, of course, came to a head in this regard when the 9/11 calamity centred in New York occurred. The event seemed to be startling proof that the world was indeed faced with a ‘Clash of Civilizations’ that was not easily resolvable. It was a case of ‘Islamic militant fundamentalism’ facing the great bulwark, so to speak, of ‘ Western Civilization’ epitomized by the US and leaving it almost helpless.
However, it was too early to write off the US’ capability to respond, although it did not do so by the best means. Instead, it replied with military interventions, for example, in Iraq and Afghanistan, which moves have only earned for the religious fundamentalists more and more recruits.
Yet, it is too early to speak in terms of a ‘Clash of Civilizations’. Such a phenomenon could be spoken of if only the entirety of the Islamic world took up arms against the West. Clearly, this is not so because the majority of the adherents of Islam are peaceably inclined and want to coexist harmoniously with the rest of the world.
However, it is not too late for the US to stop religious fundamentalism in its tracks. It, for instance, could implement concrete measures to end the blood-letting in the Middle East. Of the first importance is to end the suffering of the Palestinians by keeping a tight leash on the Israeli Right and by making good its boast of rebuilding the Gaza swiftly.
Besides, the US needs to make it a priority aim to foster democratic development worldwide in collaboration with the rest of the West. Military expenditure and the arms race should be considered of secondary importance and the process of distributing development assistance in the South brought to the forefront of its global development agenda, if there is one.
If the fire-breathing religious demagogue’s influence is to be blunted worldwide, then, it is development, understood to mean equitable growth, that needs to be fostered and consolidated by the democratic world. In other words, the priority ought to be the empowerment of individuals and communities. Nothing short of the latter measures would help in ushering a more peaceful world.
-
News4 days agoMembers of Lankan Community in Washington D.C. donates to ‘Rebuilding Sri Lanka’ Flood Relief Fund
-
News2 days agoBritish MP calls on Foreign Secretary to expand sanction package against ‘Sri Lankan war criminals’
-
Business6 days agoBrowns Investments sells luxury Maldivian resort for USD 57.5 mn.
-
News5 days agoAir quality deteriorating in Sri Lanka
-
News5 days agoCardinal urges govt. not to weaken key socio-cultural institutions
-
Features6 days agoHatton Plantations and WNPS PLANT Launch 24 km Riparian Forest Corridor
-
Features6 days agoAnother Christmas, Another Disaster, Another Recovery Mountain to Climb
-
Features4 days agoGeneral education reforms: What about language and ethnicity?


