Connect with us


‘The virus can be beaten decisively if we get our act together’



By Dr. M. I. Latiff D.H.M.S (Pakistan), R.H.M.P. (Pakistan & Sri Lanka)


The headline for this article is adapted from The Island editorial of 09 August lays out where Sri Lanka went wrong and what collective action desired to deter the spread of the covid-19 virus. This article calls for the government to also recognise the contribution that alternative healthcare systems practiced in this country can make and, to co-opt such practitioners – as an important part, but is missing, in the collective action required- to the frontline as they also have robust tools to combat the Covid-19 threats.

Even the most powerful and scientifically advanced countries have not yet come to grips with any reliable strategy to curb the rapid mutations of this virus, which is taking a path of alternating peak infection periods and deaths followed by a relatively disease-free ‘hibernation/mutation’ period. Sri Lanka is currently experiencing a fourth infection wave in which, according to the experts, features the most virile and deadly Delta variant of the virus. The Sri Lankan health sector is completely overwhelmed by the influx of covid patients needing hospitalisation and intensive care and, the undertakers are equally overwhelmed by the number of burials and cremations they are called upon to perform.

Covid-19 is not the first pandemic the world is facing and it will not be the last, but what is puzzling is the frequency of major disease outbreaks, over the last five decades. With the outbreak of Ebola in West Africa there were enough speculators and early warnings from the scientific community that the world remained unprepared to handle an impending pandemic, given the sequence of health hazards within a short space of time occurring in different parts of the world.

When Covid-19 broke out, and engulfed the entire globe the Pharmaceutical Industries, with the financial backing of their governments, went on overdrive to produce vaccines and a number of vaccines, are now rolled out for emergency use. Although various claims are made by the respective manufacturers about the vaccine efficacy and efficiency there still remains many questions unanswered about those vaccines.

Conventionally, vaccines research is a long process, going through many test phases, simulating a range of situations and varying population test-samples including tests on animals, to determine safety, long term positive and negative effects. Such established vaccine-making procedures seem to have been overlooked and short circuited in the case of the Covid-19 vaccines that have been rolled out. It is claimed that conventional rigours in vaccine testing before release need not apply if adopted for emergency use and, the manufacturers are legally protected against vaccine mishaps as long as they are used in emergencies before completing rigorous testing protocols.

Strictly speaking none of the vaccines that are in use in different parts of the world against covid-19 appears to meet the medical and legal definition of vaccines as taught in Medical schools. An injection to qualify as vaccine should meet the following criteria: 1. It must give an antibody immunity and the antibody must give protection against an identified pathogen 2. It must also show that the injection stops the recipient from carrying that pathogen and therefore preventing the person from being a source of transmission to others. Reports from all countries, including Sri Lanka, speak of infection breakthroughs and also deaths. Postmortems carried out on those who also had received both recommended jabs revealed the presence of Covid-19 virus in all the organs, thus questioning the premise of the ‘vaccines’ used. It is well known that Pfizer and Moderna have not even used the antigen of the disease one is trying to prevent but, they have used synthetic RNA fragments encapsulated in Nano-lipid compound in their products. It appears that these manufacturers seem only to have produced a compound to lessen the clinical spike protein and not the actual virus whereby only lessening the infection symptoms. In fact, the actual patents for Pfizer and Moderna injections more truthfully describe them as “gene therapy”.

According to some, what is being carried out as ‘vaccination’ against covid pandemic across the globe is a major experimentation. Adverse effects such as repeated infections and deaths as a result of the Covid-injections seem anticipated outcomes, and they may lead to future refinement or total withdrawal of their products by the manufacturers. The call for a third jab to boost ‘protection’ is an indication that the injections are in the experimental phase. It is at this level of risk that the people are receiving the covid jabs. .

In countries like the USA where alternative healthcare systems are taboo and so much fear had been created in about Covid the general public seem to have no alternative but to comply with the push for vaccinations. In this respect Sri Lanka is very fortunate like many other countries in the region. Healthcare systems like Ayurveda, Unani, Siddha and Homeopathy are well known and practiced for centuries. Sri Lanka has well reputed medical schools in these fields of medicine (except homeopathy) and, practitioners of these medicines firmly believe that Covid-19 or any other ailment can be prevented and treated. Many such practitioners have been, in their own circle of practice, successfully treating illnesses akin to Covid-19 clinical manifestations from the time the threat of this virus was first reported. Unfortunately, successful cases receiving alternative healthcare are not properly followed up, investigated and given adequate publicity in this country by the relevant health authorities. It is equally unfortunate the public is not exposed to the many uncertainties about those Covid vaccines that have been rolled out but, the same people, including the former Health Minister, who gulped an experimental Dhammika Peniya from an enthusiastic novice layman as remedy for covid-19 are condemned, ridiculed and held against any form of alternative remedies.

The country is in desperate need for any help to arrest the spread of the virus. Very soon there may be more new variants in the pipeline and become dominant threats. No way can vaccines be produced to control each variant at the rate they may be required. In any case, vaccines in such required quantities will be out of question for the poorer countries. Even in advanced countries like the U.S., where vaccines are readily available, a recent study found that one in four is against vaccination because of safety concerns. As a practical matter, therefore, the government of this country must also use other resources that are available to provide effective, affordable and safe treatments.

The alternative medicines, particularly homeopathy (as it is my specialty) works regardless of the variant. Successes from using homeopathy to treat the current pandemic had been reported worldwide and homeopathic therapeutic needs can be manufactured quickly, stored indefinitely at room temperature, distributed easily and it is affordable by the poorest countries. Homeopathy has proven its efficacy against Covid-19 and medicines have no side effects, so that there would be no safety concerns to deter acceptance. According to a recent report (August 14th 2021) the Indian government is aggressively promoting Traditional Systems of Medicine and Homeopathy globally, and it has signged MOUs with a number of Western countries as well. Covid-19 still poses great dangers but, free of politics and dogma it can be brought under control if only the Sri Lankan government can get its act together and gain the trust of the people. In this effort including alternative health practitioners who have the resources but are still untapped will be vital to help in the recovery process.


Form-ation of Higher Education in Sri Lanka



By Hasini Lecamwasam

Improving higher education in Sri Lanka is not only important, but essential and long overdue. However, seeking to achieve higher ‘quality’ by ‘form-ising’ the performance of teachers (or the practice of forcing the entire teaching-learning exercise into forms designed to communicate exactly what and what transpires in a classroom) may not be able to bring about the desired change. A new set of four forms introduced recently to this end requires, among other things, drawing up a minutely detailed plan of each and every lesson to be delivered in class, aligned with the Course Learning Outcomes (CLOs), in turn, to be aligned with the Programme Learning Outcomes (PLOs), which should all then be tied to the graduate profile, or the kind of graduate we seek to ‘produce’ at the end of it all. This may, on the surface of it, sound reasonable enough and not encourage serious debate or resistance because, after all, it is only some forms that need to be filled.

Form by tedious form, however, the teaching-learning process at state universities is becoming increasingly constricted, fragmented, monitored, controlled. In this piece, I wish to briefly ponder on the implications of these requirements and the larger trends they signal, while also attempting to reflect on what instead we may do to ensure ‘quality’ in the delivery of higher education.

The problem with form-ation

The larger ‘Quality Assurance’ (QA) landscape in which these developments take place was discussed in detail in an earlier Kuppi Talk by Kaushalya Perera. In a nutshell, QA seeks to standardise education such that study programmes can be assessed against each other, assigned numbers, and ranked accordingly. The deployment of overarching yardsticks for programmes with hugely varying mandates, methods, and content has been the subject of much critique lately the world over, not the least due to its rather warped understanding of ‘quality’ as something that can be objectively established through metrics and audits.

While I do not question the bona fide motives behind the initiative taken with the aforementioned forms, I do think serious reflection on where these developments push us in the longer term is needed. My primary reservation here has to do with the impact of this lesson-wise breakdown on the creative and democratic exercise that the teaching-learning process is supposed to entail. When each topic is broken down into such fine detail prior to the actual occurrence of the ‘lesson’ (for want of a better word), outcomes are foreclosed rather than collectively and organically evolving in the course of the ‘lesson’, which is particularly important to many of the subjects offered in the Arts Faculties. Exactly how many of us are actually quite so democratic in our classrooms is a valid question in this regard, and one I will return to. The point for me here, however, is that for those who do have a sincere commitment to such a democratic classroom environment, such forms and the limiting of the teaching-learning experience they constitute, may be tantamount to strangulation.

Even if the majority of us admit to being very controlling in our classrooms anyway, does that justify going one step further with these forms and institutionalising such control? Should not our commitment be to the emancipatory ideal, rather than simply what most are on board with? There should be meaningful space for creative, organic, and democratic teaching-learning processes to unfold for teachers who wish to make that choice, and for students to explore and think beyond the teacher’s frame of thinking. Micromanaging beyond the general content of a course (laid down in enough detail in the course syllabus) is inimical to even a possibility of democracy existing in the classroom and within the larger university space.

This complete subservience of the teaching-learning process to red tape signals a larger and troubling trend of corporatisation. Corporatisation may be defined as the restructuring of a publicly owned institution to be managed as a business place would be, with a view to privatising in the long term. In state universities, this shift is couched in the supposedly ‘progressive’ language of student-centered approaches and interactive classrooms, hijacked from the democratic pedagogy of the likes of Paulo Freire, but bereft of any of the emancipatory politics within which these methods assume meaning. Despite the use of these catch-phrases, however, such minutely detailed forms signal a return to an extremely teacher-centered model due to the absence of the possibility for students to meaningfully influence the outcome of a lesson, as it is predetermined for them.

The result, as the Kannangara report worried with remarkable foresight some 80 years ago, is students “with much knowledge and little understanding. They have not read books; they have “studied” texts. They cannot write, they produce essays after a set style. They can answer questions but not question answers … Their imagination has been stunted, their originality suppressed, their capacity for thought undeveloped, their emotions inhibited.”

What alternative can we propose?

A valid question countering what little resistance there is to form-ation asks how we can ensure the education we currently deliver is of an acceptable standard, and that everybody observes such. There seems to prevail tacit and widespread agreement that the ‘democratic nonsense’ within universities is what has allowed many to hide behind debates, deliberations, appeals to creative freedom, and so on, without actually doing their work.

In my view, this is an arbitrary causation to draw. Blaming internal democracy for negligence of duties fails to take into account the highly anti-democratic practices at universities that may better explain such behaviour.

Specifically, I think it is the rigidly entrenched hierarchy within universities that blocks the possibility of even dialogue, let alone debate, particularly when it comes to holding those higher-up in the ladder accountable for their actions (or the lack thereof, as the case may be). Hierarchy is why, among many other things, students cannot question the content or the methods chosen by their teachers. As previous Kuppi Talks have endeavoured to show, hierarchy is silently, and therefore very effectively, observed at every level, ensuring the trumping of students by teachers, juniors by seniors, women by men, minorities by the majority, and originality by tradition. It impedes questioning, stifles dissent, and smothers alternative thinking altogether. The problem, therefore, is not that we have too much democracy in universities, but too little of it.

We must make a sincere and sustained effort to radically democratise the university space by relaxing the classroom to allow open and honest exchange between students and teachers; changing the relations of power between seniors and juniors, starting with undoing the practice of deferential treatment; refusing to tolerate snide and not-so-subtle references to ways of dressing and similar gendered remarks; questioning the exclusive use of the majority language in official communications, as a starting point. In doing so, we would be subverting the crippling hierarchy that inhibits thought and practice within the university. Such a radical change geared towards improved quality through mutual accountability, for me, is the only acceptable way of introducing accountability to a space that, admittedly, sorely lacks it.

(Hasini Lecamwasam is attached to the Department of Political Science, 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.

Continue Reading





by Jehan Perera

The significance of President Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s speech at the UN General Assembly, in New York, last week, was his use of the time allocated to him to provide an outline of the government’s policies towards the main challenges besetting the country. The President covered the main issues that confront the world with his focus on Sri Lanka. These included measures to contain the Covid pandemic, the economic crisis, environmental degradation and violence. In the final section of his well-crafted speech, the President went into some depth regarding the government’s approach to national reconciliation. However, the response within the country, has been muted and for good reason. Those who voted for the government, on an entirely different platform, which emphasised ethnic majority nationalism and anti-international sentiments, are quite probably at a loss.

It is only recently that the government has started to speak in terms of reconciliation and obtaining international support for it. At the two elections that brought this government to power, the Easter Sunday bombing and the consequent threat to national security, took centre stage. The majority, who voted for the government, did so to protect it from a variety of security threats they were told of, both within and outside the country. The wretched failure of the previous government to prevent the bombing, the first terrorist act of any magnitude since the war ended a decade earlier, was attributed to the personal weakness of the then government leaders. It was also attributed to the 19th Amendment which sought to give state institutions protection from use for partisan reasons by government politicians and to consequent disintegration of the system of command and control.

A second theme, at the two elections, was depiction of ethnic and religious minorities as potential security threats. This stemmed from the country’s experience of three decades of internal warfare with the armed Tamil separatist movements. This was followed by the Easter bombings by extremists from the Muslim community, who were feared to be having a vast support base both internally within the country and also externally. In these circumstances, the re-centralisation of power within the government hierarchy and greater role given to the security forces, received public acceptance as being part of the government’s democratic mandate. At the same time, by denying the equally legitimate concerns of the ethnic and religious minorities, the electoral results demonstrated the existence of an acute polarisation, and wound, in the body politic that continues to fester to the point of bringing in involuntary and imposed international interventions.


The challenge for the government is to represent the interests of all communities and not only the majority who voted it into power. The problem is that the government’s mandate comes, by and large, from the vote of the ethnic and religious majority in a country that has been polarised on ethnic and religious lines, for many decades. An ugly part of this reality is that in the prisons are several hundreds of Tamils and Muslims for the most part who are in custody for periods ranging from a few months to many years without trial. They are being held under the Prevention of Terrorism Act, ostensibly until the security forces find adequate evidence to put them before the courts of law. This contradicts the rule of law and the presumption in our legal system that we are innocent until proven guilty can have negative consequences.

In June this year, the EU parliament passed a resolution that the GSP Plus tariff privileges, made available to Sri Lanka should be withdrawn unless the government fulfilled its obligations in regard to the upholding of human rights. The resolution, expressing “deep concern over Sri Lanka’s alarming path towards the recurrence of grave human rights violations”, and makes specific reference to the use of the Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA). The resolution notes the “continuing discrimination” against and violence towards religious and ethnic minorities, while voicing “serious concern” about the 20th Amendment passed in 2020, and the “resulting decline in judiciary independence, the reduction of parliamentary control, and the excessive accumulation of power with the presidency”. It also highlights “accelerating militarisation” of civilian government functions in Sri Lanka.

A delegation from the EU is currently in Sri Lanka to meet with members of the government, Opposition and civil society, to ascertain whether the country is fulfilling its obligations to be a beneficiary of EU trade benefits. It is likely that the delegation will be provided with evidence of human rights violations and acts of impunity. There are hundreds of persons languishing in prisons without being put on trial, many of whom are Tamils, suspected to be LTTE members, and more of them are Muslims, suspected of having links with the Easter bombings. When questioned in parliament about the latter, the minister in charge justified those detentions on the grounds that Muslim youth, including the Muslim parliamentarian who had questioned him, could contain Islamic State ideology in their heads and therefore be security threats.


At the last elections, the most potent theme was the failure of the then government to act effectively to protect the country from the Easter suicide bombings and the pressures from human rights actors in Geneva. Among the issues that loomed large at the last election was also the charge that the previous government was giving in too much to the Muslim community within the country. The fact that the Easter attacks were by Muslim suicide bombers added force to this charge. The prioritisation of national security in the election campaign had popular support. The influential religious clergy, associations of professionals and mass media also joined the battle in earnest and their messages reinforced one another. The recent debate in Parliament suggests the government’s thinking continues to be in sync with the mandate it received at those elections.

However, in his speech in New York, President Gotabaya Rajapaksa has shown signs of diverging from the politics of the past. The President said “Fostering greater accountability, restorative justice, and meaningful reconciliation through domestic institutions is essential to achieve lasting peace. So too is ensuring more equitable participation in the fruits of economic development. It is my Government’s firm intention to build a prosperous, stable and secure future for all Sri Lankans, regardless of ethnicity, religion, or gender. We are ready to engage with all domestic stakeholders, and to obtain the support of our international partners and the United Nations, in this process.” However, the President’s speech continues to be at variance with the ground realities at the present time and the general manner of governance since the President took office in November 2019.

So far the pledge of a new direction is articulated in words. The time for the government to make the President’s words real and act accordingly is now. This will help to overcome the deep and dark cynicism that has enveloped the country regarding promises made by politicians. The first step would be to apply the logic of the Justice Minister in Parliament. Replying to an Opposition Parliamentarian who called for the arrest of Minister Lohan Ratwatte who stands accused of entering a prison and threatening prisoners with his gun, the justice minister said that everyone is entitled to the presumption of innocence until proven guilty. This also applies to the hundreds of Tamils and Muslims in jail without evidence to charge them in a court of law. The better way to deal with the threats to national security is to win the confidence of all the communities in the Sri Lanka by treating them without discrimination, as children of one mother, as our national anthem proclaims.

Continue Reading


Face shields, sans masks, on TV shows!



Face shield ONLY does not provide protection from Covid-19

Covid-19 has claimed many lives, in our part of the world. Quite a few musicians, too, have had to face the music, where this deadly virus is concerned.

However, one is perturbed with the setup seen on some of our TV shows, especially where musicians are concerned.

The Covid-19 guidelines are never adhered to – no masks, no social distancing, etc.

There were reality shows held, post pandemic, where judges were seen even hugging their favourite contestants – with no masks.

With the virus turning deadly, some of the judges took to only wearing face shields. And, we now know the results of their stupidity.

By their irresponsible behaviour (wearing only face shields), they seem to be setting a trend for others to follow.

The question being asked is what are the health authorities doing? Why haven’t such folks been taken to task!

If the man on the street is arrested for not wearing a mask, how come these law-breakers go scot-free!

If wearing a mask is a hassle in an air conditioned setup, then such shows should be put on hold, or held virtual…live stream, zoom, from home, etc., and not with the participation of several artistes, in a studio.

Continue Reading