The Commission to Investigate Allegations of Bribery or Corruption (CIABOC) and the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) have been in overdrive, probing and prosecuting Opposition politicians and their family members—and rightly so. Several former ministers are already behind bars. It is being argued in some quarters that the culture of impunity has come to an end under the incumbent dispensation. This, we believe, is an overstatement. The CIABOC and the police acted very efficiently under the previous governments as well when complaints were made against the then Opposition politicians.

The CIABOC and the police including the CID stand accused of dragging their feet on complaints against government politicians and their associates. The fact that they lack their typical high-octane performance when suspects happen to be ruling party politicians is borne out by the manner in which the national anti-graft commission is handling a complaint an Opposition politician has made against a government minister over his alleged involvement in having as many as 323 freight containers including red-flagged ones released without Customs inspection from the Colombo Port in January 2025.

Pivithuru Hela Urumaya leader Udaya Gammanpila visited the CIABOC, on Thursday, to inquire about the progress in an investigation into his complaint against Minister Bimal Rathnayake for the aforesaid questionable release of containers. The CIABOC has become a favoured destination for some politicians and civil society activists seeking media attention. However, Gammanpila raised a valid point, addressing the media; pointing out that one and a half months had elapsed since he made the complaint, he said no action had apparently been taken based on it though the CIABOC acted in double-quick time when complaints were made against Opposition politicians. One could argue that statements of individuals in the political wilderness should be taken with a pinch of salt, but it will be interesting to see whether any investigation has got underway into Gammanpila’s complaint.

Meanwhile, the CID, which is now under a key member of the ruling NPP’s Retired Police Collective, has chosen to probe the container scandal in an absurd manner. It summons the Opposition politicians who keep the issue going—obviously for political reasons—and not the government members and officials blamed for the mega scandal. One is reminded of the legendary King Kekille, who set offenders free and punished the innocent parties in cases heard before him. At this rate, one need not be surprised even if the complainants happen to face legal action while the culprits, including politicians and officials, walk free.

Curiously, the NPP government, which went out of its way to retrieve a nearly 30-year-old presidential commission report on the Batalanda torture chamber, has baulked at releasing the container probe committee report, fuelling speculation that it is attempting a grand cover-up. If it has nothing to hide, as some of its ministers have claimed, it should be able to make the report public without further delay and take action based thereon.

According to a copy of the container probe committee report tabled by the SJB in Parliament a few weeks ago, the release of the containers without inspection at the behest of an internal committee of the Customs caused a clear procedural violation. The Customs would not have done so without the blessings of the government. Close on the heels of the release of containers in question, Deputy Minister of Ports and Civil Aviation Janith Ruwan Kodituwakku told the media that the government would take full responsibility for the cargo so released.

Unless the police and the vital state institutions mandated to combat bribery and corruption are depoliticised and given a free hand, the culture of impunity will prevail, exemplifying the Pigs’ decree in Orwell’s Animal Farm, a dystopian critique of the Stalinist regime in Russia—”All animals are equal, but some animal are more equal than others.”

Saturday 19th July, 2025

US President Donald Trump is known for his about-turns, which are legion. When he declared what he described as reciprocal tariffs, he said his decision was final, and it was his way or highway. But he changed his mind subsequently, and his suo motu downward tariff revision has encouraged many countries like Sri Lanka to seek further tariff reductions. A few more rounds of talks between Sri Lanka and the US on tariffs are on the cards.

While a Sri Lankan delegation is preparing for a hard bargain, former President Ranil Wickremesinghe has said that instead of promising to buy Coca-Cola or gas in return for a US tariff reduction, Sri Lanka should leverage the fact that tariff hikes by the US, which is a member of the Official Creditor Committee (OCC), supporting the IMF bailout package, will only make it even more difficult for Sri Lanka to repay its debt.

The US tariff increases could not have come at a worse time for Sri Lanka, which is struggling to emerge from its worst-ever economic crisis. They are ‘like evil-causing Saturn falling into a beggar’s bowl’, as a popular saying goes in this country.

However, Sri Lanka has only itself to blame for its predicament, which is far worse than those of most other nations affected by the US tariff hikes. If it had diversified its exports and export destinations over the years, while properly managing its foreign currency reserves, it would have been able to cushion the US tariff blow to a considerable extent at least in the short term.

Its failure to do so has bolstered the ruling NPP’s argument that none of its predecessors got macroeconomic fundamentals right. One may recall that the JVP ridiculed President Ranasinghe Premadasa’s garment factory programme by claiming that it would make the Sri Lankan women stitch jangi (underwear) for suddhis (white women) and even coined slogans such as kollanta pavement, kellanta garment (pavements for boys and garment factories for girls) to whip up ani-government sentiments in the 1980s. Ironically, the JVP-led NPP has had to protect the garment industry, which will be the worst affected by the US tariff increases. Its erstwhile comrades in the Frontline Socialist Party, etc., are now accusing it of following Ranil’s economic policies.

Stressing that Sri Lanka’s economy will not survive if the US tariffs remain as high as 30%, Wickremesinghe has argued that having underwritten IMF-mandated debt restructuring, the US should help Sri Lanka. His argument is logical, and one cannot but agree with him. However, the problem is that Trump is impervious to reasoning and acts whimsically. Diplomacy as well as pragmatism is not one of Trump’s traits; he even tears into visiting foreign dignitaries at the White House if they express views that run counter to his.

All tariff reductions will eventually have to be sanctioned by Trump, and he is no respecter of agreements and obligations. He has turned free trade on its head, opted for isolationist policies, and even antagonised traditional US allies in Europe and other regions. There’s the rub. What Wickremesinghe has suggested by way of having US tariffs reduced is apparently a long shot but is well worth trying.

Trump’s tariffs are bound to generate a blowback effect that significantly harms US industries due to supply chain disruptions, the reconfiguration of costs and the resultant losses or reduced profit margins. Trump may be compelled to respond to domestic pressure, and it is being speculated that there may be another round of tariff reductions. However, there is no guarantee that he will give in to pressure, domestic or foreign. Sri Lanka and other developing countries struggling to keep their economies afloat will be really lucky if moral suasion has the desired effect on Trump.

Friday 18th July, 2025

Never a dull day in Sri Lanka! Hardly a day passes without some controversy or another making headlines and even leading to protests. Issues crop up at such a rapid pace that it is not possible to keep track of them, much less understand them.

The latest controversy is about the education sector, which is no stranger to protests and strikes. A government decision to introduce education reforms has caused quite a stir, with school teachers, their trade unions and university dons letting out howls of protests. The protesters are hauling Prime Minister Dr. Harini Amarasuriya, who is also the Minister of Education, and the Education Ministry officials over the coals for what they describe as a move, inter alia, to sideline history as a school subject. The reforms, in their opinion, are ill-conceived. The Premier has sought to clear the air, but her voice has been drowned in the din of angry protests.

There has been no extensive debate on the proposed education reforms, which have entered the public domain in dribs and drabs, and therefore look ad hoc. The Education Ministry may have striven to make them known to the public, but its efforts do not seem to have yielded the desired results. There is a need for a wider public discussion on the issue.

Prime Minister Dr. Amarasuriya has experience as a seasoned campaigner for education reforms and protecting free education. She actively participated in protest marches in defence of free education under previous governments, demanding more funds for the education sector and better salaries for university teachers, when she was in the groves of academe. Ironically, most of the critics of her education reform package, as it were, are her former university colleagues, who strongly backed the NPP, enabling it to gain a great deal of legitimacy and win elections impressively. Today, some of them are accusing her of following in the footsteps of Ranil Wickremesinghe, who once got into hot water as a Minister of Education over a controversial White Paper. So, the task before the Prime Minister is to sell her education reforms to her former colleagues and secure their support for her mission. She should be able to engage them as well as other stakeholders including school teachers, their trade unions, students, professional associations, and opinion leaders in discussions on the reform package in question.

The incumbent government has a stock excuse for its failure to achieve progress in key sectors; it says it has been in power only for a few months, and Rome was not built in a day. This argument is not wholly untenable in that a government cannot perform miracles, but the question is how the NPP administration has managed to handle a complex, formidable task like introducing education reforms, albeit not far-reaching, so quickly. Its selective efficiency is amazing.

The NPP government declared in its election manifestos its intention to introduce education reforms, which are in fact long overdue. So, it is duty bound to fulfil that pledge. One of the main criticisms of Sri Lanka’s education system is that it has failed to keep pace with the rapidly changing world and placed excessive emphasis on examinations, thereby taking the fun out of learning. Prime Minister Dr. Amarasuriya was heard saying, at a public function, the other day, that it was difficult to make some students attend school regularly.

However, reforming an education system is an extremely complex task that must be handled cautiously however urgent it may be. There are various schools of thought about education reforms besides global trends which keep changing, with various new theories being expounded about education and its goals. Basically, the purpose of an education system is not solely to produce skilled workers for industries to achieve economic development and bring down unemployment rate but nurture citizens who are intellectually well-rounded, civically informed and engaged, adaptable in employment, equipped to face present and future challenges and capable of contributing to national progress.

Some of the key components of a strategy to bring about reforms in any key sector successfully are engaging stakeholders and aligning political and institutional support for them. Those who have undertaken the unenviable task of reforming Sri Lanka’s education system, which is crying out for change, should heed the oxymoronic, classical adage—Festina lente (‘make haste slowly’).

The best course of action available to the government, in our opinion, is to put its education reforms on hold, and initiate a comprehensive discussion with the key stakeholders who claim that their views have not been ascertained.