Features

The shadow of executive presidency: How excessive centralised power weakens universities

Published

4 years ago

2022/08/2

By Shamala Kumar

How our universities respond during moments of crisis, whether a pandemic or an economic meltdown, is emblematic of the rotten political system in which they function. The apparent lack of sensitivity to students’ struggles, during COVID-19, was astounding. We knew, personally, that students grappled with a range of problems, from crippling debt, to connectivity issues, to family illness. We were aware also of the pressure placed on us by university administrations to transition to online delivery systems, imposed through not-so-veiled threats that the government was watching us, even when the vast majority of students did not possess even a laptop. Resisting such pressures seemed futile then.

My frustrations, at the time, were directed at our institutional structures and their inability to resist the directives coming from above. Within our own circles, we discussed the wheeling and dealing that was happening in spaces we were not privileged enough to occupy; parallel charges of backroom deals and disingenuity in those holding authority come today from the Aragalaya movement. This maneuvering is not limited to our universities, but is, in fact, how our institutions, and the broader political system, work. This is what makes them incapable of responding to the needs of students or the public. Whether at the university level, or the national level, these problems stem from an excess of power concentrated at the apex, epitomized by the Executive Presidency.

Errant Vice Chancellors

To illustrate, I will use two controversial decisions, regarding the Vice Chancellor (VC) positions at two universities, from the recent past. The Universities Act No. 16 of 1978 gives the ultimate authority for appointing VCs, and their removal, to the President. The appointment, this year, of the new VC, to the University of Colombo, demonstrates how these powers are enacted in the university system.

In April, 2022, the incumbent VC, Professor Chandrika Wijeyaratne’s appointment, was not renewed, and, instead, a candidate, who is currently close to the Viyathmaga group, was appointed. The appointment led to much publicity and a spate of resignations from the University Council. According to an article in the Sunday Times, Prof. Wijeyaratne had resisted political pressures to grant degrees to politically-connected individuals, and also opposed efforts by the Urban Development Authority to take over land belonging to the University. Perhaps the widely circulated video would not have helped, of the VC handing over degrees at the convocation, when students refused to accept their awards from the Chancellor (whose appointment they objected to as being purely political). The President must have viewed her actions as challenging his authority. But should this have mattered?

Prof. Wijeyaratne stated, as quoted in the same article, that her vacancy was announced earlier than typical, when she still had some time left in her term, because “they wanted to destabilise the end of my term by displaying that I wouldn’t be in authority for much longer”. She went on to observe, regarding the Council, “As more people resign, more political pawns will replace them…,” indicating the extent of plotting and scheming that goes on backstage when making appointments to the University’s highest decision-making body.

Prof. Ratnam Vigneswaran was dismissed from his post, as VC of the University of Jaffna, in 2019. Subsequent to a Supreme Court case filed by Prof. Vigneswaran, it came to light that his dismissal was linked to his attendance at the unveiling of a new Pongu Tamil memorial plaque in the university premises. This incident had caught the attention of the military, who reported it to the UGC and the Ministry of Higher Education, and with the support of a faction of the university community, the VC was dismissed without any form of inquiry. In an article published in the Colombo Telegraph (September 14, 2019) shortly after, a group of academics from the University of Jaffna wrote that the dismissal was “a politically motivated, authoritarian decision reeking of majoritarianism, made at the instigation of the military”.

Power arrangements

Both these cases demonstrate the precariousness of political appointments. They also indicate the extent to which the appointees must ensure that those at the top of the political hierarchy are satisfied, if they are to remain in power. To ensure that VCs remain favoured by the regime, they too must consolidate adequate power to run universities as prescribed from above. It is not unusual to hear of VCs who rule with an iron grip or through the formation of political alliances and deals with segments of staff and students.

Universities, coming under the Universities Act, however, are designed to operate, according to a very different governance structure that places decision making in the hands of several bodies; the vestiges of that structure remain. For academic decisions, for instance, the University Senate has ultimate authority and must work closely with the Faculty Boards of each Faculty. Committees at faculty and university level facilitate the running of the university. In other words, the power to make decisions is shared among the academic staff, although even within these bodies senior staff hold substantial authority.

For the VC to function, as per the expectations of a particular regime, difficulties of any sort, such as with programme delivery, “quality” assurance, funding, ragging and sexual harassment, and even student participation in the Aragalaya, if it should displease those above, can mean that their position is under threat, particularly if the regime has authoritarian tendencies. Consider then whether those holding power, within the university system, can truly afford to address ragging, when the reaction to such efforts could result in university closure and bad publicity to the university? Can VCs demand funds to run the university’s programmes without jeopardizing their claim to their position?

For their survival then, especially those whose positions were awarded on political grounds, VCs must ensure that university committees are constituted by individuals who understand the circumstances and will be loyal to them. Those with a passion to address problems may actually be a threat as their motives and actions could be at cross purposes with those at the centre of power. VCs and their acolytes must ensure that decisions made in bodies, such as the Senate, are palatable to those in power, using whatever means possible – hence the backroom deals. One mechanism that has greatly facilitated this process is the formation of internal quality assurance councils (IQAC) in universities, which wield substantial power in formulating policies and monitoring university systems. The IQACs are far closer to the centres of university power than the Faculty Boards and Senates, and are stacked with persons who are “loyal” to the VCs.

Compliance and resistance

The significance of the political appointment of the VC, and the authority the President has to dismiss the appointee, have far reaching consequences within universities. Political considerations that may conflict with one’s job are not restricted to the VC alone. This system reproduces itself at multiple levels, breeding acolytes in various camps, some closer to the Regime than others. Many staff members benefit from patronage; sought after positions, perks, opportunities to represent the country, etc., may depend on staying in the good graces of the Regime.

The consequence of this relationship between universities and the Executive is the ultimate weakening of our institutional structures. Submitting to the powers that be often requires circumventing established procedures and institutional mechanisms for decision making, to ensure that uncomfortable questions are not raised by “troublemakers”. This could also mean neglecting or deprioritizing our responsibilities to students, which is partly why universities seemed immune to the fears and anxieties of students during the pandemic. Even at this moment, when our students are targeted as part of the government’s effort to crackdown on dissent, university administrations remain silent.

Today, as we call for the abolishing of the Executive Presidency, I realise that the effects of such change, along with other measures to democratize governance, will be far reaching. Not only will the Parliament be transformed; if done correctly, our fragile, floundering institutions will be resuscitated. As many speak of the Aragalaya as a distant place in Galle Face, separate from our everyday lives, I see it far closer to me, in everything I do and in everything I love. Aragalayata Jaya Wewa! Poraattam Vettri Kaanum!

(The author teaches at the University of Peradeniya)

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

All News Advertisement

Features

‘The devil is in the details’ in West Asian peace

Published

15 hours ago

2026/06/18

Sahan Weerasooriya

President Donald Trump at the current G7 summit in France. Evelyn Hockstein/Getty Image

It is obviously too early for an outpouring of joy over the seeming cessation of hostilities between the main antagonists in West Asia. While the prospect of there being a measure of calm in the region is being welcomed by considerable sections of the international community, what is ‘on the table’ currently is only a Memorandum of Understanding between the US and Iran to give peace a chance. The hard part in the peace effort remains to be achieved.

In the Middle East of today we have one of the most complex conflicts to break out in modern international politics and the observer would be naive in the extreme to expect a facile and early closure to the tangle. Yet, for the sake of the world’s publics who have been hurting badly in the prolonged hostilities one could only hope that the US-Iran MoU that is expected to be signed by the sides on Friday would lead eventually to a substantive peace. The world’s thanks are due to Pakistan in this connection for its sustained support in the peace drive.

While the sides have agreed to a ceasing of hostilities in the most general terms and have reached accord on the facilitation of uninterrupted oil and gas supplies to the rest of the world, for instance, the ‘devil will prove to be in the details’ in an envisaged comprehensive peace settlement. It is these details that would make or break peace if the negotiations go on in earnest.

Nevertheless, the details would need to be worked out consensually in a spirit of compromise with an eye to the greater good of the world community. Realpolitik or a narrow focus on solely the national interest among the protagonists, for example, would need to give way to a measure of humanity that would encompass within it a consideration of the overall well being of the world. In other words, it is statesmanship that would crucially matter.

The next few weeks would establish whether humanists are ‘asking for far too much’ when they broach the questions at issue in these terms. Yet it is essentially self interest and national security considerations of the first importance that drove the conflict from even prior to February this year and these questions would need to be taken up and resolved to the satisfaction of the US and Iran in the main if some headway is to be made towards a durable settlement.

The nuclear issue would prove to be the proverbial Gordian Knot. From a realistic viewpoint, Iran could not be expected to be without a potential nuclear deterrent in the face of perceived nuclear threats emanating for it from the West and Israel. In the short term, Iran would need to possess this deterrent to a measure, within a mutually agreed international legal framework maybe, until wide agreement is reached on the nuclear tangle. Specifically, Iran’s immediate threat perceptions with regard to her nuclear-powered rivals would need to be defused during initial negotiations.

Ideally it is a world free of nuclear weapons that must be aimed at but since this goal cannot be achieved in the near or medium terms, unfolding negotiations would need to ensure Iran’s absolute security in a world of powers that continue to swear by the nuclear deterrent, if it is to give up the suspected latter capability.

However, it is to the degree to which the present nuclear powers divest themselves of this capability that Iran could be put at ease on this score. Accordingly, it is nothing short of a complete elimination of nuclear weapons from the world that could dissuade keenly security conscious states from developing nuclear weapons of their own with a mass destruction capability.

This is the number one dilemma the international community needs to grapple with going forward and it is to the extent to which it resolves it that a nuclear weapons free world could be envisaged. No doubt, an uphill challenge.

Compelling Israel to support the present negotiatory process constitutes another grueling challenge for the US. Currently the Iranian position essentially is that a Middle East peace is inseparable from a normalization of the security situation in Lebanon. That is, the present Israeli attacks on the Hezbollah presence in Lebanon must cease if a comprehensive peace is to be realized in West Asia.

However, Israel is showing no signs of drawing back from its attacks on Hezbollah strongholds in Lebanon since the security of the Israeli state is being seen as threatened by the militant group. Co-opting Israel into the negotiatory effort therefore would turn out to be a matter of paramount concern for the US.

Moreover, elements in the rightist administration in Israel are seeing the current peace efforts as a ‘sell out’ to the enemies of Israel. They would have none of it. It is left to be seen how the US would be managing these virtual storm centres in the diplomatic process that could very well bring down the overall purported peace drive.

A recent pronouncement by US Vice President J.D. Vance points to yet another problem area in the US’ current peace overtures. He said that, ‘Regional peace and stability includes stopping the funding of terrorist organizations.’ He was obviously referring to the support extended by Iran to Hezbollah when he mentioned ‘terrorist organizations’ but he has given fresh life to the age-old conundrum of ‘Who is a terrorist?’ by these words.

To the Netanyahu government the Hezbollah and other militant organizations fighting Israel are ‘terrorists’ but from the viewpoint of the Iranian regime they are ‘freedom fighters’. This seemingly insurmountable definitional issue would not only stubbornly bedevil the peace effort but could even figure in bringing about its collapse, unless judiciously handled.

Thus, it’s the thorny details that need to be watched to keep the West Asian peace process afloat, once it gets going in earnest. There is no doubt that US President Trump would be receiving a considerable amount of support from the G7 in this historic peace undertaking and his personal appeals to the grouping currently meeting in France for continuous support are likely to elicit a positive response from it.

Likewise, Trump would need to appeal to also the BRICS countries if almost total global support is to be garnered for the peace drive in West Asia. BRICS’ solidarity with the US and the West is likely to carry considerable weight with Iran and other Eastern actors who are key to a sustained peace drive in the Middle East.

Features

Sri Lanka’s elephant paradox: Govt. counts tourism dollars while playing a dangerous numbers game: Expert

Published

15 hours ago

2026/06/18

Sahan Weerasooriya

At a time when Sri Lanka is enjoying a resurgence in wildlife tourism, with elephants remaining the undisputed stars of the country’s national parks and one of its most marketable natural assets, elephant conservationist Supun Lahiru Prakash has sounded a stark warning: the nation is in danger of losing the very species that helps attract millions of tourism dollars while sustaining some of the island’s most important ecosystems.

Supun says repeated claims by authorities that Sri Lanka’s elephant population is increasing, despite the absence of a final survey report and amid continuing elephant deaths, risk creating a misleading narrative that could undermine conservation efforts and encourage retaliation against elephants.

According to Supun, the issue is not merely about numbers. It is about political priorities, scientific credibility and the future of one of Sri Lanka’s most iconic species.

“Repeatedly claiming that the elephant population is increasing appears to be an attempt to hide the Government’s inability to manage the rising annual elephant death rate and the complications of human-elephant conflict,” Supun said.

For decades, the Sri Lankan elephant has been a symbol of the country’s rich natural heritage. It is the centrepiece of wildlife tourism, drawing visitors from across the globe to national parks such as Yala, Udawalawe, Minneriya, Kaudulla and Wilpattu. International wildlife documentaries, tourism campaigns and social media promotions frequently place elephants at the heart of Sri Lanka’s nature tourism brand.

Yet, according to Supun, the country’s conservation policies do not reflect the value of the species.

“On one hand, the Government is enjoying increasing tourism revenue, and elephants remain one of Sri Lanka’s most important wildlife attractions. On the other hand, narratives are being promoted that could encourage retaliation against the very species that contributes significantly to the country’s tourism industry,” Supun said.

According to the First Countrywide National Survey of Elephants conducted in 2011, Sri Lanka had 5,879 elephants. However, official statistics show that 4,167 elephants died between 2012 and 2024.

Supun stressed that these figures represent only the deaths officially recorded by the Department of Wildlife Conservation.

“In a context where more than 70 percent of the country’s elephant population reported in 2011 has died within 13 years, it is difficult to accept claims that the population has increased,” Supun said.

The conservationist pointed out that elephants have the longest gestation period among land mammals and that scientific studies have reported increasing interbirth intervals among female elephants together with high calf mortality.

“When such biological realities are taken into consideration, claims of a dramatic increase in elephant numbers become difficult to understand,” Supun said.

Supun believes that repeated references to increasing elephant populations risk fuelling public hostility towards elephants, particularly among farming communities already affected by crop raids and property damage.

“Such claims can create the impression that elephant populations are exploding and thereby promote retaliation against elephants as well,” Supun said.

According to Supun, Sri Lanka’s elephant crisis cannot be understood solely through population estimates. The real issue lies in the country’s failure to address human-elephant conflict through long-term, science-based solutions.

Sri Lanka continues to record among the highest levels of human-elephant conflict in the world. Every year, hundreds of elephants and dozens of people lose their lives as competition for land and resources intensifies.

Despite the scale of the crisis, Supun says authorities continue to rely on strategies that have repeatedly failed.

Lahiru Prakash

These include driving elephants into protected areas, strengthening electric fences to confine them there and allocating additional manpower to maintain fencing systems.

Supun was also critical of several proposals that emerged from district-level discussions on conflict mitigation, including the sowing of paddy and corn using Air Force drones and the planting of fruit orchards within protected areas.

“Such proposals fail to address the real ecological and social dimensions of the conflict,” Supun said.

While welcoming reports that the Government intends appointing a national-level mechanism to tackle human-elephant conflict, Supun said the challenge required intervention at the highest level of government.

“Given the gravity, complexity and geographical spread of human-elephant conflict, appointing any committee other than a Presidential Task Force is not useful,” Supun said.

He argued that a Presidential Task Force chaired by either the President or the Secretary to the President would be better positioned to overcome the bureaucratic delays and institutional fragmentation that have hindered previous efforts.

Supun also stressed the urgent need to restore and protect elephant corridors and home ranges that allow elephants to move safely across landscapes.

He cited the Koholankala elephant corridor in Hambantota as one example where removing obstacles could help reduce conflict while improving habitat connectivity.

At the same time, Supun questioned policies that permit the allocation of forest lands in areas identified by environmental assessments as crucial elephant ranges and movement corridors.

“The opening of elephant corridors and the protection of elephant home ranges must be carried out scientifically and consistently if they are to succeed,” Supun said.

Beyond tourism, Supun emphasised the ecological importance of elephants.

“Elephants are ecosystem engineers. Through their feeding habits and movements, they help maintain habitats that support numerous other species. In many ways, they create safer and healthier environments for wildlife,” Supun said.

According to Supun, protecting elephants means protecting entire ecosystems and the biodiversity upon which Sri Lanka’s wildlife tourism industry depends.

“By protecting elephants, we are also protecting the biodiversity that makes Sri Lanka one of the world’s premier wildlife tourism destinations,” Supun said.

As Sri Lanka seeks to expand tourism earnings and strengthen its reputation as a wildlife destination, Supun believes the country faces a defining choice: continue with policies that have failed to stem elephant deaths and human-elephant conflict, or embrace a science-based conservation strategy that safeguards both people and wildlife.

Without a fundamental shift in policy and political will, Supun warned, Sri Lanka risks losing not only one of its most iconic species but also the ecological and economic benefits that elephants continue to provide.

“The suffering of both farmers and elephants will only intensify unless meaningful action replaces rhetoric,” Supun said.

By Ifham Nizam

Features

Top Model of the World 2026

Published

15 hours ago

2026/06/18

Sahan Weerasooriya

Back-to-back victory for Colombia

Katherine Castaño of Colombia claimed the Top Model of the World 2026 crown, securing a historic back-to-back victory for her country. Angelica Sanchez of Puerto Rico was named first runner-up, and Eunice Deza of the Philippines finished as second runner-up.

Katherine was crowned by outgoing titleholder Natalia Garizabal Vera of Colombia.

Several special category awards, and subsidiary titles, were also presented during the Top Model of the World 2026 pageant.

These awards recognised excellence in modelling, peer support, and regional representation.

Primary Subsidiary Titles

Sri Lanka’s Netalie Withanage: Top 16 at
the grand finale

Miss Globe 2026: Valentina Tabares (Ecuador) — Awarded to the contestant who perfectly balances fashion modelling with traditional beauty queen qualities.

Queen of Europe 2026: Mia Danielle Williams (United Kingdom) — Given to the highest-ranking candidate from a European nation.

Special Awards Recognition

Audience Iconic Award: Charly (Dominican Republic) — Won via the official public online vote, granting her a fast-track direct entry into the Top 6.

Exotic Model of the World: Angel Emeka (Nigeria) — Awarded for exceptional editorial presence and strong runway performance.

Best Body Award: Thailand — Voted directly by fellow contestants at the Flow Spectrum Hotel. The highest-ranking runners-up for this category included Zambia, South Africa, Colombia, and Ghana.

Angelica Sanchez (Puerto Rico): 1st Runner-up

Final Placement

Winner: Katherine Castaño (Colombia)

1st Runner-Up: Angelica Sanchez (Puerto Rico)

2nd Runner-Up: Eunice Deza (Philippines)

Top 6 Finalists: Included contestants from the Dominican Republic, Romania, and Germany.

The pageant, known for focusing on professional modelling careers over just beauty, brought together 36 models from around the globe for two weeks of runway, photoshoots, and cultural events.

Sri Lanka’s Netalie Withanage walked among 36 of the world’s best and powered her way into the Top 16 at the grand finale.