Midweek Review

Will the electorate be influenced by MPs switching sides, new alliances and foreign interventions?

Published

2 years ago

2024/08/7

By Shamindra Ferdinando

Against the backdrop of realignment of political parties represented in Parliament in the run-up to the presidential election on Sept. 21, it would be pertinent to examine the status of the electorate. Would the electorate follow their representatives in Parliament as they switched allegiance to various presidential candidates? Could they be influenced by turncoat parliamentarians whose political intentions generally depend on personal benefits? That is the ugly truth the electorate must come to terms with.

There’ll be about 1.1 million new voters among 17.1 mn eligible to vote at the presidential election.

Before we discuss the forthcoming presidential poll, let me remind the readers of the composition of the current Parliament. The Parliament consists of 196 elected on a district basis and 29 chosen from the National List.

Fifteen recognized political parties are represented in the Parliament. The following are the political parties and the number of seats they won at the last parliamentary election conducted in August 2020. The Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna (SLPP/145 seats), Samagi Jana Balwegaya (SJB/54), Illankai Thamil Arasu Kadchi (ITAK/10), Jathika Jana Balawegaya (JJB/03), Eelam People’s Democratic Party (EPDP/02), Ahila Ilankai Thamil Congress (AITC/02) and the remaining nine parties, namely Thamil Makkal Viduthalai Pulikal (TMVP), Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP), Muslim National Alliance (MNA), Thamil Makkal Thesiya Kuttani (TMTK), All Ceylon Makkal Congress (ACMC), National Congress (NC), Sri Lanka Muslim Congress (SLMC), United National Party (UNP) and Our Power of People Party (OPPP) secured one seat each.

The number of seats mentioned above included National List slots. Of the 29 NL slots, the SLPP secured 17 and the SJB 07 whereas five other parties-ITAK, JJB, AITC, UNP and OPPP obtained one each.

However, the SLPP has been fragmented to such an extent and in disarray, the party faces a catastrophic situation. The Rajapaksas-led SLPP that handsomely won the last Local Government polls (Feb. 2018), Presidential Polls (Nov. 2019) and the General Election (Aug. 2020) is approaching a real moment of truth. In spite of the likes of its National Organizer Namal Rajapaksa, Johnston Fernando and retired Navy Chief of Staff Sarath Weerasekera continuing to put on a brave face, the ground situation is deteriorating rapidly and the party seems to be in dire straits.

The failure on the part of the ruling party to name its presidential candidate, ahead of President Ranil Wickremesinghe’s declaration of him as an independent candidate, exposed the SLPP badly.

The SLPP has repeatedly assured that its candidate would be disclosed today (07). Business tycoon Dhammika Perera, who had been accommodated in the SLPP National List, in June 2022, in place of Basil Rajapaksa, is widely believed to be their choice. Newcomer Perera, who served as Investment Promotion Minister during Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s presidency (June-July 2022), faces a daunting challenge in obtaining a respectable final count if the former people’s president Mahinda Rajapaksa, too, has been abandoned by his ardent supporters.

Lawmaker Namal Rajapaksa seems still confident that their candidate Dhammika Perera, or a last minute change, could still win the presidential race. With the SLPP’s backing, wartime Defence Secretary Gotabaya Rajapaksa, who had absolutely no experience in politics, secured a staggering 6.9 mn at the last presidential poll. With the original SLPP parliamentary group divided among presidential candidates, UNP leader Ranil Wickremesinghe, SJB leader Sajith Premadasa, MJP leader Dilith Jayaweera and yet to be named SLPP contestant, in terms of numbers, the incumbent President seems to be in the lead. But that could be a grave mistake on the part of the Wickremesinghe’s camp. The number of turncoats does not necessarily mean voters will follow especially because of undying loyalty professed by many to ex-President Mahinda. Even after he was trounced at the January 2015 presidential election and he silently withdrew into his Medamulana abode, it was the ordinary Sinhala masses having realized the anti-national frauds who were elected to replace Rajapaksas, went in their hundreds, if not thousands, daily, as if in pilgrimage, to plead with him to return to national politics. What would have swayed the masses was his natural appeal in his ability to interact with them. He was one leader who made Temple Trees an open house for ordinary people to come and have a meal at their leader’s palace, at least on Wesak days each year. He actually showed his mettle to not only to our masses, but to the whole world when he literally told a delegation of powerful entities from the West, like then British Foreign Secretary David Miliband and French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner, to get lost when they tried to arm twist him into saving terrorist numero uno Velupillai Prabhakaran and his band as they were facing total annihilation in Wanni in 2009.

The SLPP appears to be confident that the voters wouldn’t go along with those who had treacherously pledged their support to Wickremesinghe, Premadasa and Dilith Jayaweera at the expense of the party they represented in Parliament. Dr. Wijeyadasa Rajapakshe, PC, another SLPP MP, is in the fray as the candidate of the National Democratic Front (NDF). Former Justice Minister Rajapakshe is unlikely to attract any sitting MPs representing the SLPP or any other party. He must be relying on his sizeable caste vote to make a strong showing rather than an actual victory.

Impact of Aragalaya on voters

In the absence of proper examination of the events leading to Aragalaya, or change of government through unconstitutional means in July 2022, the SLPP or any other political party represented in Parliament lacked understanding of the ground situation. Therefore, political parties face the first national election in less than 50 days without proper comprehension of the developing situation and the forces working behind the scene.

Instead of seeking political advantage, political parties, represented in Parliament, should have sought to examine the circumstances leading to the eruption of the violent public protest campaign outside President Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s residence at Pangiriwatte, Mirihana, on the night of March 31, 2022. Even though the US definitely wanted to oust Gotabaya Rajapaksa, the global power couldn’t have achieved its objectives without the SLPP’s unintentional or deliberately flawed decisions contributing to the crisis with economic hitmen working within.

The SLPP parliamentary group cannot absolve itself of the responsibility for the ruination of the economy. Similarly, the UNP and SJB, under any circumstances, cannot deny their culpability for the massive Treasury bond scams perpetrated by the Yahapalana regime in 2015 (February) and 2016 (March) under the then Premier Ranil Wickremesinghe’s watch and still unexplained commercial borrowings. Over USD 10,000 million in new International Sovereign Bonds at high interest that were taken between 2015 and 2019 broke the economy.

The truth is an explosive mixture of domestic and international issues brought Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s government under pressure. The operation got underway within a week after Gotabaya Rajapaksa won the 2019 presidential election with the Swiss Embassy, in Colombo, staging the Garnier Francis drama that even captured the attention of the New York Times.

The swift and decisive exposure of the Swiss and their local counterparts should have alerted the Gotabaya Rajapaksa administration. Unfortunately, the powers that be caused a catastrophic situation by a series of ill-fated decisions. The Covid-19 pandemic made the situation far worse, coupled with unprecedented tax cuts, including pruning of Value Added Tax (VAT) from 15% to 8%, crippled the national economy. Who really advised President Gotabaya Rajapaksa not to reverse the decisions in the wake of the Covid-19 crisis? Or was it his pure stubbornness, coming from a military background?

The entire Cabinet-of-Ministers should be held responsible for the outrageous decision to do away with taxes at a time the country was experiencing severe economic difficulties. In fact, Sri Lanka effected tax cuts, regardless of specific warning issued by the IMF. No less than incumbent Central Bank Governor Dr. Nandalal Weerasinghe exposed the guilty lot when he appeared before a parliamentary watchdog committee in May 2022.

The arrival of a ship-load of allegedly toxic Chinese fertiliser, in the wake of a sudden decision to stop all chemical fertiliser imports in May 2021, Sri Lanka’s refusal to accept the consignment that led to a diplomatic tussle and the blacklisting of a State-owned bank, unsettled the country. President Gotabaya Rajapaksa made the ill-fated announcement as regards the ban on chemical fertiliser on April 22, 2021, at the President’s House. The President was flanked by Presidential Secretary Dr. P. B. Jayasundera, Senior Presidential Advisor Lalith Weeratunga and Finance Secretary S.R. Attygalle.

The sugar tax scam, too, contributed to the government’s downfall. Regardless of the relentless media attacks, and with the Opposition taking it up both in and outside Parliament, the government conveniently turned a blind eye as it would have been their way of paying back their election financiers.

Until the announcement of the Presidential Polls results, the impact of Aragalaya wouldn’t be known. Those who had really suffered as a result of the economic-political-social crisis caused in 2022 are likely to be the easiest to manipulate though public and private sector workers and their families are expected to reflect their discontent with the system.

It would be prudent to examine how the ex-military and police, as well as the serving officers and men, respond to political campaigns. The JJB and SJB are engaged in a fierce contest for those votes, with both making headway. The SJB appears to have consolidated its campaign meant to attract ex-military and serving officers and men in the face of JJB making early gains. Both parties seemed to be quite cleverly exploiting the ‘military vote’ bank as other contenders (Wickremesinghe and SLPP) lacked a cohesive strategy to entice them.

Yahapalana Army Chief General Mahesh Senanayake, one of the unsuccessful candidates at the 2019 presidential election, has joined the SJB campaign. Senanayake polled just over 49,000 votes and was placed fourth on the list of candidates. Gotabaya Rajapaksa polled 6,924,255 votes (52.25%) whereas Sajith Premadasa and Anura Kumara Dissanayake obtained 5,564,239 (41.99%) and 418,553 (3.16%), respectively. Senanayake polled a paltry 49,655 (0.37%).

Past Presidential Polls

Field Marshal Sarath Fonseka on Monday (05) declared his intention to join the presidential fray by paying the stipulated deposit. There had never been so many prominent candidates at any previous presidential polls and the contest was always between two major political groups. However, the entry of several prominent candidates may cause quite disturbing impact on the electorate and may impede the contestant polling the highest number of votes reaching 51% of the votes cast.

The war-winning Army Chief suffered a humiliating defeat at the hands of Mahinda Rajapaksa at the 2010 presidential election. Fonseka, in spite of being backed by the UNP-led coalition that included the JVP, TNA, SLMC, and out rightly supported by Western interests, led by the US, was trounced by Mahinda Rajapaksa. Fonseka lost by a staggering 1.8 mn votes and was abandoned by the UNP. The rest is history.

At the first presidential election held on Oct 20, 1982 there were six candidates. J. R. Jayewardene (UNP) 3,450,811 (52.91%), Hector Kobbekaduwa (SLFP) 2,548,438 (39.07%), Rohana Wijeweera (JVP) 273,428 (4.19%), Kumar Ponnambalam (ACTC) 173,934 (2.67%), Colvin R. de Silva (LSSP) 58,531 (0.90%) and Vasudeva Nanayakkara (NSSP) 17,005 (0.26%).

Of them, only Vasudeva Nanayakkara, now 85, represents the current Parliament (SLPP Ratnapura District) and the one-time LSSP/NSSP firebrand is unlikely to contest the next general election.

Close on the heels of the presidential election victory, JRJ, in a disgraceful bid to consolidate power in Parliament, staged a rigged national referendum on December 22, 1982, using state resources to the maximum. The referendum gave JRJ the opportunity to extend the life of Parliament by six years, thereby thwarted the possibility of losing his party UNP’s massive (5/6) supermajority in Parliament that it secured in 1977.

The second presidential election was held on December 19, 1988, amidst countrywide violence with the Indian Army deployed in the Northern and Eastern provinces in terms of the Indo-Lanka accord signed on July 29, 1987. The South was on fire with the JVP-led insurgency in full swing. There had been only three candidates with both the UNP and SLFP in the fray. Ranasinghe Premadasa (UNP) won the contest by polling 2,569,199 (50.43%), Sirimavo Bandaranaike (SLFP) obtained 2,289,86 (44.95%) and Ossie Abeygunasekera (Sri Lanka Mahajana Pakshaya) 235,719 (4.63%).

By the time Sri Lanka went for its third presidential election, on November 09, 1994, the SLFP had been transformed to People’s Alliance (PA) and was able to bring the 17-year-old UNP reign to an end. There had been six contestants again with Srima Dissanayake replacing her assassinated husband Gamini Dissanayake. The LTTE, in an obvious bid to manipulate and influence the electorate, assassinated Dissanayake at a public rally at Thotalanga on the night of October 23, 1994.

PA candidate Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga polled 4,709,205 (62.28%), Srima Dissanayake (UNP) 2,715,283 (35.91%), Hudson Samarasinghe (Independent) 58,886 (0.78%), Harischandra Wijayatunga (Sinhalaye Mahasammatha Bhoomiputra Pakshaya) 32,651 (0.43%), A. J. Ranasinghe (Independent) 22,752 (0.30%) and Nihal Galappaththi (Sri Lanka Progressive Front) 22,749 (0.30%).

The fourth presidential poll was again marred by unprecedented violence. The LTTE made an abortive bid to assassinate PA candidate Kumaratunga on December 19, 1999, just two days before the election, in Colombo, while another suicide attack claimed the life of former Army Chief of Staff Lakshman Algama campaigning for UNP candidate Ranil Wickremesinghe. Altogether there had been 13 candidates with interested parties fielding proxies.

Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga (PA) polled 4,312,157 (51.12%), Ranil Wickremasinghe (UNP) 3,602,743 ( 42.71%), Nandana Gunathilake (JVP) 344,173 (4.08%), Harischandra Wijayatunga (Sinhalaye Mahasammatha Bhoomiputra Pakshaya) 35,854 (0.43%), W.V.M. Ranjith (Independent) 27,052 ( 0.32%), Rajiva Wijesinha (Liberal Party) 25,085 ( (0.30%), Vasudeva Nanayakkara (Left & Democratic Alliance) 23,668 ( 0.28%), Tennyson Edirisuriya (Independent) 21,119 (0.25%), Abdul Rasool (Sri Lanka Muslim Party) 17,359 (0.21%), Kamal Karunadasa (People’s Liberation Solidarity Front) 11,333 (0.13%), Hudson Samarasinghe (Independent) 7,184 (0.09%), Ariyawansa Dissanayaka (Democratic United National Front) 4,039 (0.05%) and A. W. Premawardhana (Bahujana Nidahas Peramuna) 3,983 (0.05%).

The fifth presidential election held on November 17, 2005, was called amidst increased threat posed by the LTTE. Against the backdrop of the assassination of Foreign Minister Lakshman Kadirgamar, the war seemed imminent and unavoidable. Like the previous election, there had been 13 candidates. Initially, there had been serious doubts whether the election would be held at all. As incumbent President Kumaratunga had called the 1999 election one year ahead of schedule, she asserted and argued that the extra year should be appended to her second term. The Supreme Court rejected her move and the election went ahead.

Mahinda Rajapaksa (UPFA) won by polling 4,887,152 (50.29%), Ranil Wickremesinghe (UNP) 4,706,366 (48.43%), Siritunga Jayasuriya (United Socialist Party) 35,425 ( 0.36%), A. A. Suraweera (National Development Front) 31,238 (0.32%), Victor Hettigoda (United Lanka People’s Party) 14,458 (0.15%), Chamil Jayaneththi (New Left Front ) 9,296 (0.10%), Aruna de Soyza (Ruhuna People’s Party) 7,685 (0.08%), Wimal Geeganage (Sri Lanka National Front) 6,639 (0.07%), Anura de Silva (United Lalith Front) 6,357 (0.07%), Ajith Arachchige, (Democratic Unity Alliance) 5,082 (0.05%), Wije Dias Socialist Equality Party 3,500 (0.04%), Nelson Perera (Sri Lanka Progressive Front) 2,525 (0.03%) and Hewaheenipellage Dharmadwaja (United National Alternative Front) 1,316 (0.01%).

However, the sixth presidential election, conducted on January 26, 2010, saw proxies and some seeking to attract limelight (at the previous elections, too, there had been some joining the fray for their own sake). In the absence of any sort of restrictions /safeguards, 22 contested the first presidential poll after the eradication of the LTTE. Mahinda Rajapaksa polled a staggering 6,015,934 (57.88%) to beat General Sarath Fonseka who managed to secure 4,173,185 (40.15%).

At the 2015 presidential that had been convincingly won by Maithripala Sirisena (New Democratic Front) by polling 6,217,162 (51.28%) there were 19 candidates. Mahinda Rajapaksa, who enacted 18th Amendment to enable him to contest, managed to get 5,768,090 (47.58%).

The last presidential election saw a record number of contestants with, for the first time, the number on the ballot paper passing the 30 mark. The election, handsomely won by Gotabaya Rajapaksa, was contested by 35.

Of them, only Gotabaya Rajapaksa and Sajith Premadasa polled more than 500,000 votes. Anura Kumara Dissanayake polled over 400,000 and the rest polled less than 50,000, ranging from 900 to 49,000.

The forthcoming presidential poll that’ll decide Sri Lanka’s fate depends on its outcome and the workable agenda for a bankrupt country.

External interventions will play a crucial role in the election with geopolitics being a key factor in post-Aragalaya Sri Lanka. Two major parties involved in the Aragalaya – the JVP-led JJB and Jana Aragala Sandhanaya that fields lawyer Nuwan Bopage should attract public attention as the importance of their strategic role cannot be underestimated.

****

Is recent history repeating in the South Asia region?

The longest serving Premier of Bangladesh Sheihk Hasina, of the Awami League party, was forced to resign on Monday in the face of a mounting wave of protests and counter action by her government that killed nearly 300 people since mid-July. She took refuge in India after fleeing aboard a Bangladesh Air Force C 130.

The relatively new country Bangladesh was created in 1971 following a successful rebellion against high handed Pakistani rule over Bengalis in the then East Pakistan, launched by her late father Sheikh Mujibur Rahman after Islamabad refused to recognize his popular election victory with predominantly Bengali votes of East Pakistan and jailed by the then rulers.

Most unfortunately Sheikh Mujibur Rahman himself was killed by disgruntled elements in his own Army, along with his entire family, barring Hasina and her sister Rezhana during a subsequent coup in August 1975.

Many compared the 76-year-old leader’s ouster with the forcing out of President Gotabaya Rajapaksa following a similar protest campaign alleged to have been backed by the US. Rajapaksa resigned though India advised him against doing so.

Over two years after Rajapaksa’s ouster the circumstances leading to his ouster remained uninvestigated and unexamined. The role of the Muslim community as a whole in Rajapaksa’s ouster in the wake of the Easter Sunday repercussions and cremation of Covid-19 victims, as well as the Catholic Church interventions, remained to be properly examined. Perhaps, against the backdrop of Hasina’s ouster, Sri Lanka can take a fresh look at the Aragalaya as well as post-Aragalaya issues.

All News Advertisement

Midweek Review

NPP drowning in sea of scams

Published

6 days ago

2026/04/29

Sahan Weerasooriya

Outgoing Treasury Chief Mahinda Siriwardena congratulates his successor Harshana Suriyapperuma in late June 2025 at the Finance Ministry

The Opposition is pressing for a one-day debate on USD 2.5 mn Treasury theft, which is more like a daylight robbery that had been kept under wraps by Treasury mandarins till ‘Free Lawyers’ made it public. However, the government is strongly opposed to the Opposition proposal. The Opposition is seeking consensus among

different parties to intensify the campaign against the government, struggling to cope up with a spate of controversies. Against the backdrop of the devastating debate on the coal scam, the NPP seems reluctant to face another over the theft of Treasury funds.

By Shamindra Ferdinando

USD 2.5 mn brazen heist at the Treasury several months ago and the bigwigs there obviously dragging their feet over the matter till it was brought to light recently, thanks to the Free Lawyers movement, which has dampened the NPP’s enthusiasm for May Day. The Treasury fiasco humiliated the cocky NPP leadership against the backdrop of damning report issued by the National Audit Office (NAO) that found fault with the government for awarding the coal tender for 2025/2026 period to Trident Champhar Limited of India in violation of tender procedures. The NAO emphasised that the Indian company shouldn’t have even been considered for the tender.

Even after the exposure of the scandalous handling of the coal tender, the NPP, in spite of some rumblings within the party, remained confident of overcoming the growing accusations regarding governance issues. But, the sudden revelation of the loss suffered by the Treasury, and pathetic efforts made by the NPP to suppress the truth, has caused irreparable harm to the ruling party. The arrogant NPP will have to use May Day to defend the government. Instead of preaching to the masses ad nauseum the corruption allegations against previous administrations, the NPP would have to explain such massive failures/corruption, particularly the loss of USD 2.5 mn.

There hadn’t been a previous instance of such an incident at the Treasury. The NPP will have to answer questions posed by ‘Free Lawyers,’ a civil society group that first raised the Treasury issue. On behalf of ‘Free Lawyers,’ its President Maithri Gunaratne, PC, former Governor of several provinces Rajith Keerthi Tennakoon, and Attorney-at-Law Shiral Lakthikala, targeted the government over the unprecedented Treasury heist. The Opposition, too, censured the NPP, with SJB leader Sajith Premadasa, MP, Chairman of Public Finance Committee (CoPF) Dr. Harsha de Silva, MP, and United Republican Front (URF) taking the lead.

The NPP’s excuses, based on claimed raids carried out by hacker/hackers targeting the Treasury, are untenable. The NPP’s position cannot be defended or supported against growing criticism. The coal scam and Treasury fiasco dominated social media, with the Opposition, as well as ordinary citizens, having a field day at the expense of the NPP, a political party that accused its opponents of waste, corruption, irregularities and mismanagement. Its successful propaganda campaigns, at the presidential and parliamentary polls, in September and November, 2024, respectively, were centered on fighting corruption.

Their anti-corruption platform appealed to the people for obvious reasons. Against the backdrop of bankruptcy, declared in May, 2022, after failing to meet debt commitments, the electorate rallied around the NPP that thrived on waste, corruption, irregularities and mismanagement, perpetrated by previous governments. Having bagged the executive presidency in September, 2024, the NPP assured the electorate that the Parliament would be cleansed of evils at the general election. President Anura Kumara Dissanayake declared that the people have been vested with the responsibility of cleansing the Parliament. Dissanayake went a step further when he addressed a public gathering at the 18th mile post on the Negombo-Colombo road. The NPP leader, who also leads the JVP, asserted that there was no need for an Opposition in Parliament and the House should be filled with NPPers.

Dissanayake based his assertion essentially on two failed No-Confidence Motions (NCMs) moved against Ravi Karunanayake and Keheliya Rambukwella in 2016 and 2023, respectively. The NPP/JVP leader found fault with Yahapalanaya and the Wickremesinghe-Rajapaksa government for protecting the two wrongdoers, hence the call to cleanse Parliament.

The results of the parliamentary election proved that the electorate responded very favourably to Dissanayake’s call. Of the 225-seat Parliament, the NPP secured 159 seats, including 18 National List slots. Having accused previous governments of shielding wrongdoers, Dissanayake easily directed the NPP’s steamroller parliamentary group to defeat the NCM moved against Energy Minister Punyakumara Dissanayake (National List) on 10 April, just a few days after the NAO report exposed the coal scam.

First ex-MP as Treasury Secy.

If its own hands are clean, there is no doubt that the NPP now deeply regrets the appointment of ex-NPP National List MP Harshana Suriyapperuma as the Secretary to the Treasury and the Finance Ministry. That appointment was made in June 2025 to fill the vacancy created by the retirement of Mahinda Siriwardana who, along with Governor of the Central Bank Dr. Nandalal Weerasinghe, played a significant role in the country’s post-Aragalaya recovery programme.

Suriyapperuma, who had served as Deputy Minister of Finance and Planning for just seven months, before being appointed the Treasury Secretary/Finance Ministry Secretary, is under heavy fire for suppressing the truth. No less a person than CoPF Chairman Dr. de Silva publicly accused Suriyapperuma of trying to undermine his committee. The SJB has demanded Suriyapperuma’s immediate resignation. Dr. Anil Jayantha succeeded as Deputy Minister of Finance and Planning.

Those who inquired into the crisis-hit Treasury are of the belief that 53-year-old Suriyapperuma lacked the much required experience to fill the shoes of Mahinda Siriwardana. Perhaps, the breach at the Treasury could have been averted if an outsider was not brought in place of Siriwardena. The recent reportage of the incident revealed that Suriyapperuma had been aware of the breach and sought to avoid appearing before the CoPF. The NPP could have responded to the developing situation differently if an ex-MP hadn’t been entrusted with the task of steering the Treasury/Finance Ministry. To make matters worse, President Dissanayake holds the Finance portfolio.

Although the government declared that the theft of USD 2.5 mn had been reported to the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) after initial detection made in January this year, controversy surrounds the failure on the part of law enforcement authorities to bring it to the notice of the courts. Maithri Gunaratne, appearing in Hiru last Saturday (25), questioned why the police failed to inform the relevant Magistrate if the government lodged a complaint in that regard.

Australia has confirmed irregularities in payments owed to their government. Regardless of NPP efforts to blame it on hacker/hackers, the truth is clear. Payments have been made to an account that hadn’t been in the original agreement between the governments of Sri Lanka and Australia. That is the undeniable truth that the NPP cannot suppress by propaganda.

The NPP should be ashamed that such a fraud had been perpetrated on a country still struggling to cope up with the economic destruction caused by the UNP- and the SLFP-led governments with the help of “mission impossible” type roles played by outside interests, especially during Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s tenure using the JVP/Aragalaya.

The world knows how the UNP perpetrated the Treasury bond scams with the direct involvement of the then Governor of the Central Bank Arjuna Mahendran, in February 2015 and March 2016. Regardless of that intolerable scam, the UNP made a desperate attempt to retain the services of the Singaporean as the Governor of the Central Bank. Party leader and the then Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe demanded the re-appointment of Mahendran. That despicable move had to be dropped due to massive Opposition protests and growing public discontent over the Treasury bond scams.

The first Treasury bond scam carried out on 27 February, 2015 caused a direct loss of approximately Rs. 2 billion. On the instructions of Mahendran, the Treasury suddenly and arbitrarily changed the process of issuing Treasury Bonds. According to media reports at that time, higher interest payments, over the next 30 years, caused a further loss of around Rs. 145 billion.

Then Mahendran struck again. Caused further direct losses of more than Rs. 4 billion to the government through the fraudulent increase in interest rates as a result of the Treasury Bond issues on 27th March, 2016 ,and 29th March, 2016, in order to provide an undue advantage to connected primary dealers by indulging in further pre-meditated bond scams.

NPP on back foot

The ruling party put on a brave face with lawmakers and various others trying to play down the incident at the Treasury. Some pathetically tried to compare various accusations directed at the Rajapaksas with the incident at the Treasury which they conveniently blamed on hacker/hackers.

The NPP is facing an explosive mixture of issues. Both the coal and Treasury scams have brought immense pressure on the national economy and caused automatic deterioration. The resignation of Punyakumara aka Kumara Jayakody over the coal scam indicated that defeating the NCM moved against him was a strategic political blunder. Had the NPP asked the tainted first time Minister to step down and appoint a Presidential Commission to go into the coal scam, the NPP could have averted a major disaster. However, the Energy Minister and the Energy Secretary Udayanga Hemapala had to resign before the Parliament took up the NCM. Had the top NPP leadership bothered to peruse the executive summary of the NAO presented to Parliament on 7 April, the Party wouldn’t have tried to defend the minister.

Having championed a corruption-free political party system and then won both the presidential and parliamentary polls on that platform, the NPP executed the shocking move to move 323 containers out of the Colombo Port, in January 2025, without even any cursory checks. Those who perpetrated that operation used continuing port congestion as an excuse to clear red-flagged containers without mandatory physical checking. The NPP recently thwarted a bid by Opposition lawmakers, representing a parliamentary committee inquiring into the illegal release of containers, to summon President Dissanayake.

That committee, headed by Justice Minister Attorney-at-Law Harshana Nanayakkara, owed an explanation as to why President Dissanayake, in his capacity as the Finance Minister, shouldn’t appear before a House committee. President Dissanayake very often addresses Parliament on crucial issues. As the Minister in charge of Finance, the President should offer an explanation regarding the high profile container issue that tarnished the NPP’s image.

Three major issues in hand, namely the release of 323 containers, coal scam and theft at the Treasury, regardless of what various apologists say on mainstream and social media, have caused irrevocable damage to the party, let alone escapades involving the likes of Speaker Jagath Wickramaratne, Minister Lal Kantha, etc. The impact on the NPP can be ascertained only at an election. With the public increasingly aware of the growing accusations against it, the ruling party will do whatever possible to put off long delayed Provincial Council elections. Facing the electorate against deepening discontent among the public seems to be a frightening situation. It would be interesting to observe how a House committee, headed by Foreign Minister Vijitha Herath, appointed to explore ways and means to conduct Provincial Council polls, address the issue at hand.

When compared with the three major issues, the resignation of Asoka Ranwala, as the Speaker, in December, 2024, over his failure to produce the much-touted educational qualifications, seems unnecessary. Of course, Ranwala’s case attracted tremendous public attention at that time as the public really believed the NPP wouldn’t deceive them. Ranwala’s lie shocked the public. NPP theoretician Prof. Ranjith Nirmal Dewasiri had no qualms in publicly attacking Ranwala in the wake of the NPP defending the Speaker. But, subsequent NPP actions revealed massive manipulations that shamed the first post-Aragalaya government.

Having accused Ranil Wickremesinghe of squandering as much as Rs 16 mn to join his wife Prof. Maithree in the UK in September, 2023, the NPP has ended up facing far more serious accusations. The incident at the Treasury should be sufficient for the Opposition to move NCM against the government. Of course, the NPP got the numbers in Parliament to easily defeat the NCM but the consequences would be devastating. Those who still talk of recovering the missing USD 2.5 mn must be living in a dreamland. The UNP is labelled with Treasury bond scams (2015 and 2016) and the SLPP faulted with tax cuts (2019) and sugar tax scam (2020). The NPP will have to live with the coal scam and Treasury theft. The NPP will no longer be able to parade on political platforms as paragons of virtue. It would be pertinent to mention that the Presidential Commission appointed to probe the procurement of coal, since 2009, would be able to produce a report to meet the NPP’s expectations. All indications point to that and 2026 is going to be far more challenging, both in and outside Parliament, than the previous year.

NDB fraud

Examined together, the massive fraud at the National Development Bank (NDB), perpetrated during the 2024-2026 period, and the Treasury incident, they underscore the vulnerability of the entire banking system. The 13.2 bn NDB fraud and theft of USD 2.5 mn from the Treasury exposed the regulator, the Central Bank of Sri Lanka, in respect of the NDB. The situation at the NDB cannot be examined without taking into consideration that Ernst & Young is the external auditors of the NDB and its Managing Partner Duminda Hulangamuwa functions as Senior Economic Adviser to President Dissanayake. People haven’t forgotten that Hulangamuwa had been mentioned as the possible successor of Mahinda Siriwardena before the NPP brought in Suriyapperuma. The Central Bank and Securities Exchange Commission (SEC) come under the purview of the Finance Ministry now embroiled in the expanding Treasury fiasco.

The Board of Directors at the NDB consists of Sriyan Cooray (Chairman), Kelum Edirisinghe (Director / Chief Executive Officer (Executive), Bernard Sinniah (Director /Non-Independent), Sujeewa Mudalige (Director /Independent), Kushan D’Alwis (Director/Independent), Kasturi Chellaraja (Director/Independent), Shweta Pandey (Director /Independent), Hasitha Premaratne (Director/Independent), Sanjaya Mohottala (Director (Non-Independent) and Shanil Fernando Director (Independent).

The issue at hand is how such a fraud went unnoticed for a considerable period of time and whether the top management simply ignored warning signs and the failure on the part of the regulator to intervene. Those who have read Mahinda Siriwardana’s ‘Sri Lanka’s Economic Revival: Reflections on the Journey from Crisis to Recovery’ would know the circumstances leading to the 2022 economic collapse. Soft spoken Siriwardana meticulously discussed how the then Central Bank leadership as well as the so-called economic leadership of the Pohottuwa party deliberately deceived President Gotabaya Rajapaksa. Siriwardena’s narrative is explosive. The book, launched before his retirement, with the participation of President Dissanayake, underscored the responsibility on the part of the political leadership and those running the banking system. Obviously Siriwardena’s work had no impact on the current dispensation as well as the top banking management.

The Opposition sees an apparent opportunity to heap pressure on the NPP as it contemplates counter measures. Their challenge is how to take remedial measures without jeopardizing the government. The IMF declaration that it is closely watching the theft of USD 2.5 mn from the Treasury must have added pressure on the government, ripped apart by the situation at the Treasury. Let us hope the government and the Opposition reach consensus on ways and means to improve financial discipline. Overall, the Parliament cannot absolve itself of the responsibility for enactment of laws and ensuring financial discipline and the fact that Sri Lanka needs to start repayment of debt in 2028.

Midweek Review

Is language social or psychological phenomenon?

Published

6 days ago

2026/04/29

Sahan Weerasooriya

This essay was presented at The Philosophy Group of the University of London about 20 years ago. The thought provoking essay published in The Island on 22 April by Usvwatte-aratchi- Some languages confine you; some languages free you prompted me to try to get this essay published if possible. It may help the readers to further their ideas about the importance of usage of language.

Personally, I have firsthand experience in this subject. I was exposed to two different cultures and two languages. In my formative years I was brought up in a certain culture and spoke the language pertaining to that culture/language (Sinhalese -Sri Lanka). I spent all my studying and working life (55 years) using a different language in a different culture (English -England). I must mention that this was not recently. It was the early 1960’s. I can claim that I have enough knowledge and experience to justify this essay topic. In this essay I shall be investigating some of the social aspects of language with the aid of some opinions put forward by some philosophers. Then I shall be making an attempt to see what psychology has to offer before I draw my own conclusions. I am treating social aspects as part and parcel of the culture. In my view these are inseparable entities, unless one chooses to forget his or her cultural upbringing to suit a particular society.

Adoption of different culture

Socially, learning a different language and adopting a different culture is quite possible. In this case what dominates is one’s attitude or the circumstances. Attitude is psychological. I am convinced that circumstances may lead to a change of attitudes. Having said that, we must not forget that there are individuals who have not taken the trouble to learn the language of the culture in which they live. This has created a lot of socio-psychological problems in the community in which they live. It is obvious that the problem is one of communication. The main tool of communication is language. Philosophers and psychologists have spent many years investigating how language helps us to communicate and also how it may lead us to misunderstand our own fellow human beings. Understanding others (family members, members of the community in which we live, and the strangers we meet) is one of the most important aspects of living.

An awareness of the problem of language goes back to the early Greek philosophers. Parmenides gave us the first example of an argument from language to the world, saying that if we speak of a thing it must exist, since we speak of a thing at various times, it must continue to exist in a particular form. It is recently that language itself has come to be studied in a systematic way. The two landmarks in this respect were the development of Linguistics and the philosophy of language in the 20th century. The great philosopher Bertrand Russell (1872-1970) has admitted that until he became a middle-aged man, he did not think about language per se, but regarded it as ‘transparent’. I am sure this is true with most of us although we are not of Russell’s caliber when it comes to philosophy. And one may not have to wait until one reaches one’s middle age.

Linguistics and philosophy of language

It will help us if we understand the difference between Linguistics and philosophy of Language. What linguists discover may be applied to philosophy, sociology, psychology, anthropology or physiology. But as a discipline of study, it remains independent of them. The philosophy of language is different. One of the modern philosophers John Searle (1932-2025) thought, by contrast to linguistics, philosophy tries to solve philosophical problems by analyzing the ordinary use, meaning and relations of words in a particular language. Searle goes on to say that language is crucial to understand human experience. In my opinion this is a very valid comment. At a very practical level we spend a lot of time sharing our experiences. Verbal communication is vital in this area. According to Canadian philosopher Ian Hacking(1936-2023) the influence of language on philosophy has been profound and almost unrecognized. He indicates, if we are not to be misled by this influence, it is necessary to become conscious of it, and to ask ourselves deliberately how far it is legitimate.

It is appropriate to bring in Ludwig Wittgenstein(1889-1951) at this point. He brought in the subject predicate theory of language. For example, if we say “John is king”. Where John is the subject and king is the predicate. Here existence requires substance. For Aristotle, forms do not exist independently of things—every form is the form of something. A “substantial” form is a kind that is attributed to a thing, without which that thing would be of a different kind or would cease to exist altogether. Wittgenstein supports Saint Augustine’s view that words are names of objects and that combinations of words have the sole function of describing reality. For example, if we point at a certain object, say a table and try to say to a child “this is a table”, the child will be confused as to what we are pointing at. Is it the colour, the tabletop or one or more of its legs This is called the ostensive definition method of teaching. Ostensive definitions lead to a variety of interpretations. The child may understand a particular case of this definition but there is no guarantee that she will be able to make a transition from one case to others like it.

Plato’s theory

J G Herder (1744-1803) pointed out the object to which we make reference may be defined by numerous different terms. How then can we justify direct, one to one correspondence-either of so many to one, or of one to so many? How are we going to deal with situations where a term describes something non-existent or only possible? Plato’s “Forms” theory cannot be applied here as anything that we can speak of already exists as a Form. Critics of this theory ask the question: “how can the world be crowded with so many imaginary objects?” We use words to describe and define. Is there any room for slang language? This comes in handy in our day to day social communication. Ostensive definition raises the questions that require a constant selection of what counts as relevant. In Aldous Huxley’s novel Chrome Yellow, the character Old Rowley is confused as to: Does ‘pig’ refer to the quality of having a curly tail? Or standing in rows to eat? Or being pink skinned and fat? Or wearing no clothes? When we use the word “piggishness” is it something inherent to pigs, or simply, a matter of how we choose to describe them?

How can we relate the above ideas and theories of language to our daily living? Daily living is a psychosocial activity.

Perceptions

The nature of language reflects the nature of our perceptions, and these are far from straight forward. Franz Brentano (1838-1917) developed his theory of intentionality: that every mental phenomenon has a relation of direction to its object, i.e. perceptions, desires, imagination etc. are related to what is perceived, desired or imagined. I presume this can be applied to any language irrespective of the culture (our social conditioning). Say for instance the images of art and the writings are given the ability to represent objects by imposing the intentionality on the object. Thus, when we assert that we see or believe something, we impose, by convention and intention, (that is true if and only if it is the case) on the statement, and these conditions are not contained intrinsically in the sounds that make it up, but in our perception of belief about the fact. I begin to wonder how this can be applied to non-physical and unseen situations. Sometimes our feelings and attitudes are unknown to the observer. A person may shout because he is angry but you cannot see the anger, only its physical expression. We will not be able to see the prior event that has led to the anger and the utterance. This shows that there is a limit to how much is revealed simply by observing a word and its context; there is often more than that can be said.

How can we account for unexpected linguistic behaviour? This has both social and psychological implications.

For a long time behavioural theorists believed that every development of the human being was controlled by environmental and social factors. This is similar to an ostensive explanation of meaning. It implied that everything was learnt through training and association. But Noam Chomsky (b.1928) was not happy with this idea. He thought language is a complex phenomenon and which is not taught bit by bit or systematically to infants. It is successfully acquired by (almost) everybody. From my own experience it is true to say that the difficulty in learning a second language is a very different process from that experienced with the first language. Chomsky argued that the first language is not in fact learned, but rather acquired through exposure to a particular language. According to him all languages share the same basic structure, and he called this “deep structure”, which may be expressed as surface structures through a process called ‘transformation’. Chomsky’s theory helps us to assume a universal system of grammar, which may generate an infinite number of particular sentences within a language. This explains how we may create sentences within a language we have never encountered before from a limited set of grammatical rules and this appears to be a rational scientific approach.

Social or psychological phenomenon

The argument/discussion whether language is a social or a psychological phenomenon requires much more investigation than this essay warrants. I have briefly brought in various philosophers’ work, which are invaluable to this topic in terms of philosophy of language. In conclusion I am tempted to state my own experiences as a bi-lingual person. When it comes to my first language, which is Sinhalese I don’t think I learned it. I heard my parents speaking it and I picked up a few words and I constructed my own sentences and gradually became proficient by accumulating more words. Of course, the proper grammatical use of even my own language was taught in school and not by my parents. Learning my second language i.e. English took a different form. I was taught to speak, read, and write English at school and I had to work harder at this than my first language, because my English was confined to the classroom situation only, i. e. I learnt English in a non- English environment. First language came naturally and the second one I had to learn to fit into the social and the education structure that prevailed at that time. Compulsion can motivate us to learn!I had no choice but to adopt myself culturally and linguistically as a university student in England and then as a university teacher in England. Apart from the native English students, I have taught students from different countries. European, African and Asian. I had the opportunity to intermingle with them and learned various different cultural and linguistic aspects. After almost a half a century in England, I am back to my own culture (language, customs, food etc) where I was born and started my life. I am still proficient in my own language Sinhalese. No conscious effort needed.

After all the foregoing arguments and philosophy that I have put forward, my own conclusion is Chomsky’s theories are more plausible to me than other theories on this issue. It is difficult to be exact and say whether language is a social or psychological phenomenon. From the above arguments, we can see that culture and language of a given society are tightly bound. This leads us to psychological adjustments in order to fit into a society. Who can deny that even the philosophers mentioned above have not been subjected to their own cultural environment?

by Prof. Sampath
Anson Fernando
Formerly University of
The Arts London