Connect with us

Features

The Parliament bomb: Former Secretary-General remembers

Published

on

(Excerpted from Memories of 33 years in Parliament by Nihal Seneviratne)

On July 29, 1987 President J. R. Jayewardene signed the controversial Indo-Lanka Peace Accord with Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi of India in Colombo. Most observers take the view that Jayewardene, fighting a JVP insurrection in the South and the LTTE insurgency in the North, had little option but to sign an agreement and he was railroaded into accepting India’s terms. The LTTE was determined to win a separate state of Eelam for the Tamil people even at the expense of a ferocious war they waged. The JVP’s second insurgency had created near anarchy in the South. There was no possibility of fighting on two fronts and JRJ signed the agreement which brought the Indian Peace Keeping Force (IPKF) to Lankan soil.

It was fairly well known that President Jayewardene had not consulted his own Cabinet Ministers except for one. The belief was that the Accord draft had been drawn up in India with almost no consultation with the Sri Lankan side. They were trying times for the country and the Government in power. Days before the signing of the Accord, the Indian Air Force had airdropped food supplies over Jaffna, a move that came in for heavy criticism from Prime Minister Ranasinghe Premadasa.

He was among a powerful group within the Government opposed to the signing of the Accord. But JRJ went ahead and signed the agreement. The signs were apparent that the move had angered many including those within the armed forces. A naval rating who was part of the guard-of-honour for Rajiv Gandhi assembled opposite President’s House in Colombo struck him a heavy blow on the shoulder with the butt of his gun. Fortunately, Gandhi was not seriously hurt, suffering only bad bruises, and was immediately led to safety by his own and Sri Lankan security. This single incident which captured global headlines illustrated the mood in the country which caused much heartburn and even anger among the Sri Lankan people.

On August 18, President Jayewardene was due in Parliament as he wanted to address the Government Parliamentary Group and explain the reasons why he signed this Accord /Pact with India. This fact was not fully known to many members of his own Cabinet, including possibly Prime Minister Premadasa. President Jayewardene had kept the contents and the substance of the Agreement a close secret and possibly the only Minister who had been taken into his confidence was Gamini Dissanayake.

The President needed the support of two-third majority in Parliament to enact the enabling legislation by way of the Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution which spelt out the devolution of power to the provinces and the introduction of the Provincial Councils and was seeking to shore up support from those in his Party. While the ruling United National Party (UNP) had the required numbers in Parliament, there were worries that some of them would not support the legislation needed to give effect to the terms of the Accord. President Jayewardene was coming face to face with many of his Party’s lawmakers for the first time since the signing of the Accord and hence the Group meeting was scheduled for the morning on 7 August 1987, ahead of the regular sitting of the House later in the day.

The President arrived in Parliament that morning by around 8.20 a.m. to meet his Parliamentary Group. They were meeting in Committee Room 1, which is the largest Committee Room located on the ground floor which had a seating capacity of almost 150. The meeting was to start around 8.45. before which I got a message that the President wanted to see me. I was initially reluctant to go to the Committee Room .is it was a meeting of only Government MPs and I felt it was incorrect and unwise for me in my position to go there.

But since it was the Head of State who summoned me, I went to the Committee Room. He was sitting at the head table with Prime Minister Premadasa on his right and Minister Vincent Perera, Chief Government Whip, on his left. In front of him sat over a 100 MPs with Ministers seated in the front rows. He inquired from me what business was due to be taken up that day. I had remembered to take the day’s Order Paper with me and together we read through the 25 items of Government business fixed for that day. When this was over, I left the Committee Room and went back to my office upstairs on the second floor.

Not even half an hour later, my office assistant came rushing into my room out of breath and saying excitedly,” Sir, the President and Prime Minister are calling for you.” I was totally unaware of the mayhem that was unfolding in Committee Room One located on the ground floor of the Parliament building but rushed down immediately. At the very entrance to the corridor leading up to the Committee Room I met the Prime Minister with his national dress cloth partly raised excitedly exclaiming “Nihal, a bomb has exploded in the Committee Room. Search and surround the place.” As I rushed to the Committee Room, I saw President Jayewardene, being hurriedly escorted out of the building to his vehicle parked outside the Members’ Entrance.

I then rushed into the Committee Room and found it in shambles, full of heavy smoke, splintered glass, and shrapnel all over the place; and a few MPs lying prostate on the floor. Others were trying to rush out in the melee that prevailed. I saw Minister Lalith Athulathmudali being placed on a stretcher, bleeding heavily, and taken by ambulance, parked outside the Members Entrance, to the Sri Jayewardenepura Hospital through the back entrance to Parliament. We had hardly used that entrance and kept it closed for security reasons but kept it open on sitting days as it was just about a mile to the Sri Jayewardenepura Hospital. Deniyaya MP Kirthi Abeywickrema and Norbert Senadeera, an official with the Parliament staff, sadly died as a result of shrapnel wounds.

While the enormity of what had taken place did not sink in immediately, it was unlike any situation I have had to face in my many years as a parliamentary official. Quickly I steadied myself and began the process of rushing the injured to the hospital and securing the House, in what turned out to be the longest and most unforgettable day in my Parliamentary career. I immediately rang my university mate, Frank De Silva, then IGP, and told him to come immediately and asked him to provide adequate security right around the perimeters of Parliament to prevent anyone from leaving.

I then ordered the Superintendent of Police posted to Parliament to ensure that no one be allowed to leave the building. In the Committee Room, I asked an MP from where the bomb was thrown, and he pointed to a door behind the head table. I ordered all the Parliament staff on duty not to leave the building. Even after the police contingent arrived, no one was sure how exactly the bomb exploded, or whether it was a bomb at all or whether anyone had fired a gun or some other firearm.

I for one was beginning to suspect that somebody of even the President’s staff who accompanied him to the room, or one of my own Parliamentary staff in the room, may have been responsible. Thinking it was a gunshot the IGP asked me to get each and every member of my staff to have both their hands checked for tell-tale traces of gunpowder believing it was the firing of a weapon. No one was allowed to leave the building and it was close to 9 p.m. that night when the meticulous checking was over. I then permitted the staff to leave. It was around midnight that I was able to go home. During this time, I inquired from a few Members how the door through which the attacker was believed to have entered and how it opened and all they said was that some of them saw a hand clothed in a white sleeve throwing something at the polished table at which the President and the others were seated. That was all I was able to gather about who threw the bomb.

The next morning, I checked whether all of my staff had come to office all were present except four one in hospital, two on approved leave; but one person was missing and his house near Kadawatha was closed. Police after questioning neighbors, learnt that the occupant had left his home that night taking his family with him. I found this was Ajith Kumara, who I had employed as a housekeeper a few years previously. The police rightly regarded him as the prime suspect for having attempted to assassinate the President and Prime Minister of the country and an island-wide dragnet was set up.

After a few days, with Police help, we were able to fit the pieces of the puzzle together Ajith Kumara had come that morning with a hand grenade hidden in his shoe. The Police at the entrance had missed it. The President’s security had checked all the rooms and doors leading to the Committee Room, locked them, and then left. Ajith Kumara, after the President’s security personnel had completed their checks, had opened a door using a false key he had made and had hidden behind a large painting standing the ground.

He had then opened the door leading into the Committee Room and aiming at the President flung the hand grenade he carried which fortunately ricocheted off the polished table at which the President, PM and Govt. Whip sat and landed under the chair on which Lalith Athulathmudali was sitting in the front row. The grenade then exploded blasting a large hole in the ground and injuring Lalith Atulathmudali’s entire back. When he was recovering in the Sri Jayewardenepura Hospital, I called on him and chatted for a while.

He was full of praise for Dr. K. Yoheswaran, who operated on him and saved his life. He told me that he had particularly wanted Dr. Yoheswaran to do the complicated surgery having complete trust in him. Later on, after Lalith had recovered he walked into my room and discussed the incident with me. He told me that Ajith Kumara had made the fundamental mistake of hurling the grenade at the President as soon as he pulled off the pin. With Lalith’s knowledge of arms and defense matters, he told me that once the pin is pulled, one had to count, “One Thousand, Two Thousand, Three Thousand” and then throw the grenade. By his not doing so, all three VIPs seated at the table were spared.

Six months had passed after the incident and the Police were still on maximum alert for Ajith Kumara. Apprehending the man who had nearly assassinated the President and Prime Minister was then top priority for the Police. After a lapse of a few more months, the Police in the Kegalle area were searching for local illicit alcohol distillers in a village paddy-field. It so happened that Ajith Kumara was then hiding in a small shed nearby; he panicked when he saw the police searching the paddy-field and ran away.

Police saw the fleeing man, chased, and caught him. He was brought to Police Headquarters in Colombo. When they realized they had made a prize catch. They immediately contacted me, and we confirmed that this was indeed Ajith Kumara, the most wanted man in the country. A week later, the police brought him to Parliament after he had confessed to his crime. He had even told the police how he brought in the grenade, the route he had taken through all the corridors to enter the back room and how he had hidden behind the painting. This was after the Presidential security had left after they had completed making their checks. We discovered later that he had surreptitiously made a copy of the key to enter that room.

Two days later, the Speaker and I were summoned before the Cabinet. Speaker E. L. Senanayake diplomatically refused to go saying it was improper for him to present himself before Cabinet. This left me with no option but to face the music. This was the very first time I had to appear before Cabinet, and I nervously walked in feeling like the Christian being thrown to the lions in Roman times. I knew they were going to ask me as to how I had recruited Ajith Kumara to the Parliament staff.

Fortunately, I had asked for a security clearance from Police Headquarters which I had received before he was signed on. In fact, all recruits to our staff required such security clearance. Armed with that clearance file, I sat down before the entire Cabinet. As 1 took my seat, Minister Montague Jayawickrama pounced on me asking me to explain how and why I had recruited Ajith Kumara and why and where I had stationed him that day and many other follow-up questions. I took time and answered all questions from him and many other Cabinet Ministers.

It later transpired that a few weeks after getting clearance from Police screening and having joined the staff of Parliament, the JVP had secretly recruited him. Since the JVP was then very vociferously against the Indo-Sri Lanka Pact signed by the President, they had found in Ajith Kumara working in Parliament the best possible person to assassinate the President, Prime Minister, and other VIPs of Government. I later had a request from Mrs. J. R. Jayewardene to visit the scene and see the room where her husband was nearly killed. She, accompanied by two grandchildren (sons of Ravi whom I knew quite well), inspected the table where the grenade bounced and the Committee Room where it all happened. I was quite moved by her presence and the gracious lady she was, left without making any comments.

The saga of Ajith Kumara had a strange ending. When he was produced in Court and charged with attempted murder, his counsel was able to get him discharged on the grounds of inadmissibility of the confession he had made to Police. Regrettably, the Attorney General’s Department and Police had mishandled the Prosecution and the judge discharged Ajith Kumara who left Court a free man.



Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

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

Features

Peace march and promise of reconciliation

Published

on

Peace walk in progress

The ongoing peace march by a group of international Buddhist monks has captured the sentiment of Sri Lankans in a manner that few public events have done in recent times. It is led by the Vietnamese monk Venerable Thich Pannakara who is associated with a mindfulness movement that has roots in Vietnamese Buddhist practice and actively promoted among diaspora communities in the United States. The peace march by the monks, accompanied by their mascot, the dog Aloka, has generated affection and goodwill within the Buddhist and larger community. It follows earlier peace walks in the United States where monks carried a similar message of mindfulness and compassion across communities but without any government or even media patronage as in Sri Lanka.

This initiative has the potential to unfold into an effort to nurture a culture of peace in Sri Lanka. Such a culture is necessary if the country as the country prepares to move beyond its history of conflict towards a more longlasting reconciliation and a political solution to its ethnic and religious divisions. The government’s support for the peace march can be seen as part of a broader attempt to shape such a culture. The Clean Sri Lanka programme, promoted by the government as a civic responsibility campaign focused on environmental cleanliness, ethical conduct and social discipline, provides a useful framework within which such initiatives can be situated. Its emphasis on collective responsibility and shared public space makes it sit well with the values that peacebuilding requires.

government’s previous plan to promote a culture of peace was on the occasion of “Sri Lanka Day” celebrations which were scheduled to take place on December 12-14 last year but was disrupted by Cyclone Ditwah. The Sri Lanka Day celebrations were to include those talented individuals from each and every community at the district level who had excelled in some field or the other, such as science, business or arts and culture and selected by the District Secretariats in each of the 25 districts. They were to gather in Colombo to engage in cultural performances and community-focused exhibitions. The government’s intention was to build up a discourse around the ideas of unity in diversity as a precursor to addressing the more contentious topics of human rights violations during the war period, and issues of accountability and reparations for wrongs suffered during that dark period.

Positive Response

The invitation to the international monks appears to have emerged from within Buddhist religious networks in Sri Lanka that have long maintained links with the larger international Buddhist community. The strong support extended by leading temples and clergy within the country, including the Buddhists Mahanayakes indicates that this was not an isolated effort but one that resonated with the mainstream Buddhist establishment. Indeed, the involvement of senior Buddhist leaders has been particularly noteworthy. A Joint Declaration for Peace in the world, drawing on Sri Lanka’s own experience, and by the Mahanayakes of all Buddhist Chapters took place in the context of the ongoing peace march at the Gangaramaya Temple in Colombo, with participation from the diplomatic community. The declaration, calling for compassion, dialogue and sustainable peace, reflects an effort by religious leadership to assert a moral voice in favour of coexistence.

The popular response to the peace march has also been striking. Large numbers of people have been gathering along the route, offering flowers, water and support to the monks. Schoolchildren have been lining the roads, and communities from different religious backgrounds extend hospitality. On the way, the monks were hosted by both a Hindu temple and a mosque, where food and refreshments were provided. These acts, though simple, carry a message about the possibility of harmony among Sri Lanka’s diverse communities. It helps to counter the perception that the Buddhist community in Sri Lanka is inherently nationalist and resistant to minority concerns that was shaped during the decades of war and reinforced by political mobilisation that too often exploited ethnic identity.

By way of contrast, the peace march offers a different image. It shows a readiness among ordinary people to embrace values of compassion and coexistence that are deeply embedded in Buddhist teaching. The Metta Sutta, one of the most well-known discourses in Buddhism, calls for boundless goodwill towards all beings. It states that one should cultivate a mind that is “boundless towards all beings, free from hatred and ill will.” This emphasis on universal compassion provides a moral foundation for peace that extends beyond national or ethnic boundaries. The monks themselves emphasised this point repeatedly during the walk. Venerable Thich Pannakara reminded those who gathered that while acts of generosity are commendable, mindfulness in everyday life is even more important. He warned that as people become unmindful, they are more prone to react with anger and hatred, thereby contributing to conflict.

More Initiatives

The presence of political leaders at key moments of the march has emphasised the significance that the government attaches to the event. Prime Minister Harini Amarasuriya paid her respects to the peace march monks in Kandy, while President Anura Kumara Dissanayake is expected to do so at the conclusion of the march in Colombo. Such gestures signal an alignment between political authority and moral aspiration, even if the translation of that aspiration into policy remains a work in progress. At the same time, the peace march has not been without its shortcomings. The walk did not engage with the Northern and Eastern parts of the country, regions that were most affected by the war and where the need for reconciliation is most acute. A more inclusive geographic reach would have strengthened the symbolic impact of the initiative.

In addition, the positive impact of the peace march could have been increased if more effort had been taken to coordinate better with other civic and religious groups and include them in the event. Many civil society and religious harmony groups who would have liked to participate in the peace march found themselves unable to do so. There was no place in the programme for them to join. Even government institutions tasked with promoting social cohesion and reconciliation found themselves outside the loop. The Clean Sri Lanka Task Force that organised the peace march may have felt that involving other groups would have made it more complicated to organise the events which have proceeded without problems.

The hope is that the positive energy and goodwill generated by this peace march will not dissipate but will instead inspire further initiatives with the requisite coordination and leadership. The march has generated public discussion, drawn attention to the values of mindfulness and compassion, and created a space in which people can imagine a different future. It has been a special initiative among the many that are needed to build a culture of peace. A culture of peace cannot be imposed from above nor can it emerge overnight. It needs to be nurtured through multiple efforts across society, including education, religious engagement, civic initiatives and political reform. It is within such a culture that the more difficult questions of power sharing, justice and reconciliation can be addressed in a constructive manner.

by Jehan Perera

Continue Reading

Features

Regional Universities

Published

on

Development initiatives: Faculty of Technology, University of Jaffna and NCDB

The countryside and peripheral regions have been neglected in the national imagination for many decades. This has also been the case with regional universities which were seen as mere appendages to the university system, and sometimes created to appease political constituencies in the regions. The exclusion of the rural world and the institutions in those regions was not accidental nor inevitable, but the consequence of conscious policies promoted under an extractive and exploitative global order. Neoliberalism globalisation, initiated in the late 1970s with far-reaching policies of free trade and free flow of capital, or the “open economy,” as we call it in Sri Lanka, is now dying. The United States and the Western countries that promoted neoliberalism, as a class project of finance capital to address the falling profits during the long economic downturn in the 1970s, are themselves reversing their policies and are at loggerheads with each other. However, those economic processes will continue to have national consequences into the future.

At the heart of such policies is the neoliberal city, which has become the centre of the economy with expanding financial businesses and a real estate boom. Such financialised cities also had their impact on universities, in lower income countries, where commercialised education with high fees, rising student debt, research for businesses and transnational educational linkages with branch campuses of Western universities, have become a reality.

In the case of Sri Lanka, while neoliberal policies began with the IMF and World Bank Structural Adjustment Programmes, in the late 1970s, the long civil war forestalled the accelerated growth of the neoliberal city. I have argued, over the last decade and a half, that it is with the end of the civil war, in 2009, coinciding with the global financial crisis, that a second wave of neoliberalism in Sri Lanka led to global finance capital being absorbed in infrastructure and real estate in Colombo. The transformation of Colombo into a neoliberal city was overseen by Gotabaya Rajapaksa as Defence Secretary with even the Urban Development Authority brought under the security establishment. While Colombo was drastically changing with a skyline of new buildings and shiny luxury vehicles drawing on massive external debt, there were also moves to promote private higher education institutions. The Board of Investment (BOI) registered many hundred so-called higher education institutions; these were not regulated and many mushroomed like supermarkets and disappeared in no time when they incurred losses.

In contrast to these so-called private higher education institutions that proliferated in and around Colombo, Sri Lanka, drawing on its free education system, has, over the last many decades, also created a number of state universities in peripheral regions. However, these regional universities lack adequate funding and a clear vision and purpose. The current conjuncture with the neoliberal global order unravelling, and the immediate global crisis in energy and transport are grim reminders of the importance of local economies and self-sufficiency. In this column I consider the role of our regional universities and their relationship to the communities within which they are embedded.

Regional context

The necessity and the advantage of robust public services is their reach into peripheral regions and marginalised communities. This is true of public transport, as it is with public hospitals. Private buses will always avoid isolated rural routes as their margins only increase on the busy routes between cities and towns. And private hospitals and clinics flock to the cities to extract from desperate patients, including by unscrupulous doctors who divert patients in public hospitals to be served in the private health facilities they moonlight. Similarly, it is affluent cities and towns that are the attraction for private educational institutions.

Public institutions, including universities, can only ensure their public role if they are adequately funded. Over the last decade and a half, with falling allocations for education, our state universities have been pushed into initiating fee levying courses, both at the post-graduate level and also for undergraduate international students. These programmes are seen as avenues to decrease the dependence of universities on budgetary support. However, the reality is that it is only universities in Colombo that can draw in students capable of paying such high fees. Furthermore, such fee levying courses end up pushing academics into overwork including by offering additional income.

Therefore, allocations for underfunded regional universities need to be steadily increased. Housing facilities and other services for academics working in rural districts would ensure their continued presence and greater engagement with the local communities. Increased time away from teaching and research funding earmarked for community engagement will provide clear direction for academics. Indeed, such funding with a clear vision and role for regional universities can provide considerable social returns. In a time when repeated crises are affecting our society, agricultural production to bolster our food system as well as rural income streams and employment are major issues. Here, regional universities have an important role today in developing social and economic alternatives.

Reimagining development

In recent months, there have been interesting initiatives in the Northern Province, where the Universities of Jaffna and Vavuniya have been engaging state institutions on issues of development. In an initiative to bring different actors together, high level meetings have been convened between the staff of the Agriculture Faculty and officials of the Provincial Agriculture Ministry to figure out solutions for long pending agricultural problems. Similar meetings have also been organised between provincial authorities and the Faculties of Technology and Engineering in Kilinochchi. These initiatives have led to academics engaging communities and co-operatives on their development needs, particularly in formulating new development initiatives and activating idle projects and assets in the region. Such engagement provides opportunities for academics to share their knowledge and skills while learn from communities about challenges that lead to new problems for research.

One of the most rewarding engagements I have been part of is an internship programme for the Technology Faculty of the University of Jaffna, where four batches of final year students, from food technology, green farming and automobile specialities, have been placed for six months within the co-operative movement through the Northern Co-operative Development Bank. This initiative has created a strong relationship between the Technology Faculty and the co-operative movement, with a number of former students now working fulltime in co-operative ventures. They are at the centre of developing solutions for rural co-operatives, including activating idle factories and ensuring quality and standards for their products.

I refer to these concrete initiatives because universities’ role in research and development in Sri Lanka, as in most other countries, are often narrowly conceived to be engagement with private businesses. However, for rural regions, the challenge, even with technological development, is the generation of appropriate technologies that can serve communities.

In Sri Lanka, we have for long emulated the major Western universities and in the process lost sight of the needs of our own youth and communities. Rethinking the development of our universities may have to begin with an understanding of the real challenges and context of our people. Our universities and their academics, if provided with a progressive vision and adequate resources and time to engage their communities, have the potential to address the many economic and social challenges that the next decade of global turmoil is bound to create.

Ahilan Kadirgamar is a political economist and Senior Lecturer, University of Jaffna.

(Kuppi is a politics and pedagogy happening on the margins of the lecture hall that parodies, subverts, and simultaneously reaffirms social hierarchies)

by Ahilan Kadirgamar

Continue Reading

Features

‘Disco Lady’ hitmaker now doing it for Climate Change

Published

on

The name Alston Koch is generally associated with the hit song ‘Disco Lady.’ Yes, he has had several other top-notch songs to his credit but how many music lovers are aware that Alston is one of the few Asian-born entertainers using music for climate advocacy, since 2008.

He is back in the ‘climate change’ scene, with SUNx Malta, to celebrate Earth Day 2026, with the release of ‘A Symphony for Change’ – a vibrant Dodo4Kids video by Alston.

The inspiring musical video highlights ocean conservation and empowers children as future climate champions, honouring Maurice Strong’s legacy through education, creativity, and global collaboration for a sustainable planet.

The four-minute animated musical, composed and performed by platinum award-winning artiste Alston Koch, brings to life a resurrected Dodo, guiding children on a mission to clean up marine environments.

With a catchy melody and an uplifting message, the video blends entertainment with education—making climate awareness accessible and engaging for the next generation.

SUNx Malta is a Climate Friendly Travel system, focused on transforming the global tourism sector that is low-carbon, SDG-linked, and nature-positive.

Professor Geoffrey Lipman, President of SUNx Malta, described the project as a joyful collaboration with purpose:

“It’s always a pleasure to produce music with Alston for the good of our planet. And this time, to incorporate our Dodo4Kids in the video urging the next generation of young climate champions to help save our seas.”

For Alston, now based in Australia, the collaboration continues a long-standing journey of climate-focused creativity:

Says Alston: “I have been working on climate songs since the first release, in 2009, of the video ‘Act Now.’ Since then, I’ve performed at major global events—from Bali to Glasgow. I wrote this song because the climate horizon is darkening, and our kids and grandkids are our best hope for a brighter future.”

Alston’s very first climate song is ‘Can We Take This Climate Change,’ released in 2008.

It was written by Alston for the World Trade Organisation presentation, in London, and presented at ‘Live the Deal Climate Change’ conference in Copenhagen.

The Sri Lankan-born singer was goodwill ambassador for the campaign, and the then UK Minister Barbara Follett called it a “gift in song to the world suffering due to climate change.”

Alston said he wrote it after noticing butterflies, birds, and fruit trees disappearing from his childhood days.

In 2017, his creation ‘Make a Change’ was released in connection with World Tourism Day 2017.

Alston Koch’s work on climate advocacy is pretty inspiring, especially as climate change is now creating horrifying problems worldwide, and in Sri Lanka, too.

Alston also indicated to us that he has plans to visit Sri Lanka, sometime this year, and, maybe, even plan out a date for an Alston Koch special … a concert, no doubt.

Can’t wait for it!

Continue Reading

Trending