Wednesday, June 12, 2019

Legality of agreements with foreign countries

By Neville Ladduwahetty-une 11, 2019, 8:03 pm

A report in The Island of June 8, 2019, carrying the heading "Opposition demands halt to signing agreements with foreign countries in secret", cites MP Dinesh Gunawardena as stating: "The other thing is handing over terminals in Colombo Port to foreign countries. Both these agreements (the ‘other’ referred to being ‘a corridor from Trincomalee to the Colombo Port’) will have a bearing on our national security. These are very crucial assets to us. But the government has handed them over to foreign countries without even consulting Parliament. This is a grave threat to the national security. Therefore, I suggest that such agreements be presented to Parliament and approved by a two-third majority before being inked".

The Island report also cites MP Bimal Ratnayake of the JVP as stating: "How can you sign agreements with foreign countries in secret? What right you have to do something like that? That is why we came up with the suggestion. Before signing sensitive agreements with foreign countries you should present them to Parliament and get them approved by a two-third majority".

IMPACT on SOVEREIGNTY

When any Government of Sri Lanka signs agreements or treaties with foreign governments, all commitments made therein are made in the name of the People of Sri Lanka, who are constitutionally recognized as being sovereign. It is imperative therefore, that such agreements or treaties are conducted in a manner that does not violate the sovereignty of the People. Article 3 of the Constitution states; "sovereignty is in the people and is inalienable. Sovereignty includes the powers of government…" which according to Article 4 states: (a) the legislative power of the People shall be exercised by Parliament…(b) the executive power of the People, including the defence of Sri Lanka, shall be exercised by the President…(c) the judicial power of the People shall be exercised by Parliament through courts, tribunals…".

The wise and good People of Sri Lanka in their wisdom voted to divide their sovereignty relating to legislative and executive power between two organs of government, namely, the Parliament, elected by the People and the President directly elected separately, also by the People. The People of Sri Lanka were cautious not to grant both legislative and executive power to one body – the Parliament, and make it the "supreme instrument of State power" as in the previous Constitution of 1972. Therefore, between Articles 3 and 4 of the Constitution, the People of Sri Lanka made sure that their sovereignty would be better protected and safeguarded by separating powers between a Parliament and an Executive headed by a President. This interpretation was confirmed by Dr. N.M. Perera when he stated: "A President elected directly by the people and therefore entitled also to be an instrument of the sovereignty of the people…" (Critical Analysis of the New Constitution of the Sri Lanka Government). And according to the Supreme Court judgment on the 19th Amendment (S.D. No. 04/2015) "so long as the President remains the Head of the executive, the exercise of his powers remain supreme or sovereign in the executive field and others to whom such power is given (e.g. Cabinet of Ministers) must derive the authority from the President…". Therefore, it is crystal clear that while the Legislative power of the People is exercised separately by Parliament, executive power is exercised separately by the President as part of the collective sovereignty of the People.

This principle of separation of powers is the foundation of Sri Lanka’s present Constitution. This means powers assigned by the People under the Constitution cannot be transferred to another organ of government without the consent of the People through a Referendum. This fact was emphasized by the Supreme Court in their determination relating to the 19th Amendment cited above. The Court stated: "It is in this backdrop the Court in the Nineteenth Amendment Determination came to the conclusion that the transfer, relinquishment or removal of a power attributed to one organ of government to another organ or body would be inconsistent with Article 3 read with Article 4 of the Constitution".

For instance, powers assigned to Parliament cannot be exercised by the President and his Cabinet of Ministers. This applies conversely as well. Thus, it is an absolute imperative that if the sovereignty of the People is to be protected that either Parliament and the Executive act separately within their respectively assigned spheres of influence, or act together if the Peoples’ sovereignty is not to be violated whenever governments make commitments in the name of the People. Therefore, since international treaties and agreements are made in the name of the People, the Executive that initiates such instruments is constitutionally required to seek and obtain the required approvals of Parliament if the sovereignty of the People is not to be violated. It therefore follows that any agreements concluded by a Sri Lankan government without the approval of Parliament, would be in violation of the sovereignty of the People, the Constitution and therefore do not have any legal validity; a fact that needs to be confirmed by a Court of Law.

LEGALITY of AGREEMENTS

Successive governments have signed several agreements, some with foreign governments and others with foreign corporations and companies. Whenever governments do so they commit the People of Sri Lanka to fulfilling the terms of such agreements.

Since such commitments have an impact on their sovereignty it is imperative that all organs of government agree to commitments incorporated in such agreements. Agreements based on commitments made only by one organ of government - the President and the Cabinet of Ministers, or only by the Cabinet of Ministers, amounts to a violation of the People’s sovereignty since they represent only a facet of the sovereignty of the People. If the people’s sovereignty is not to be violated, it is imperative that approval is sought and obtained by the remaining facets of sovereignty such as Parliament, to make up the totality of sovereignty of the People. Since most agreements that Sri Lanka enters into are with sovereign States, approvals of Parliament should meet the threshold of a two-thirds majority of Parliament in keeping with the special majority called for in Article 157 relating to treaties and agreements. This Article states: "Where Parliament by resolution passed by not less than two-third of the whole number of Members of Parliament voting in its favour, approves as being essential for the development of the national economy, any Treaty or Agreement between the Government of Sri Lanka....’’ and the Government of any foreign State for the promotion and protection of the investment in Sri Lanka of such foreign State …such Treaty or Agreement shall have the force of law in Sri Lanka…". Therefore, if any treaty or agreement requires a two-third approval of Parliament if the investments of foreign States are to be protected, it must follow that any treaty or agreement that impacts on the sovereignty of the People also should require a two-third approval as a minimum.

This means that Free Trade Agreements and any other agreements between Sri Lanka and any foreign State and/or agreements with private entities of foreign States would not only have the force of Law if it is approved by a two-third majority of Parliament, but also safeguarding the sovereignty of the People of Sri Lanka.

CONCLUSION

Successive governments have signed treaties and agreements with foreign States or with private entities of foreign States, some with and others without even Cabinet approval in the name of the People of Sri Lanka. Consequently, only the Executive branch of government has committed the People of Sri Lanka to the commitments in these agreements. Such arbitrariness amounts to a betrayal of the sovereignty of the People because Parliament that is also constitutionally empowered to protect the collective sovereignty of the People, is excluded from the process. Therefore, if the sovereignty of the People is to be protected it is imperative that both branches of government, namely, Parliament and the Cabinet are both associated with agreements that commit the People of Sri Lanka. This means all treaties and agreements should require Cabinet approval as well as two-thirds approval of Parliament if the collective sovereignty of the People is to be protected without which Article 3, an entrenched Article, would be impacted resulting in the Constitution being violated.

Advisors to governments do not appreciate the constitutional implications associated with agreements between Sri Lanka and other foreign States or its nationals, because they do not realize that when agreements are made in the name of the People of Sri Lanka what is at stake is the sovereignty of the People that is total, comprehensive and inalienable. Either due to their ignorance, or for reasons of personal profit, the implications involved in agreements such as the Acquisition and Cross Service Agreement; Status of Forces Agreement, Millennium Challenge Corporation Compact or the several Free Trade and other Agreements that have been signed or yet to be signed are trivialized on grounds that it is no big deal because such Agreements are commonly signed by many other countries.

While commending the Opposition for the initiative taken to propose that Parliament should be involved in the review and approval of agreements with foreign States and their nationals, there is an urgent need to institutionalize the procedures and practices that should be adopted in respect of treaties and agreements with foreign States and their nationals, if the sovereignty of the People of Sri Lanka is to be protected and the Constitution is to remain inviolate.

AFTERMATH OF EASTER SUNDAY TERROR

12 June 2019

The conundrum of happenings, people who are guilty, not guilty, tried and discharged, sent on bail, conflicting opinions on what has taken place; what is taking place and even about what will take place; is, to say the least, startling and even unbelievable in some instances. The people, especially those who survived the murderous attack, are mostly still in limbo, some even unable to cope with the reality of life. What of those who are alive and desperately need to be rehabilitated? Churches and hotels can be rebuilt, but from the human angle, how do we get these poor survivors to accept those who are not there for them any longer; how do we ask them to accept what they don’t see; how can they talk about the terrible loss of those who are not there; we see grief etched on their faces but cannot see or feel the pain embedded in their minds and hearts? Has the government even thought of setting up any counseling centre to help these poor survivors? The government will probably ask WHY? WHY SHOULD WE? AFTER ALL, IT WAS NOT WE WHO IGNORED THE WARNINGS ABOUT THE BOMBINGS! We have to concentrate on our political infighting. Cardinal Malcolm Ranjith was THE ONLY VOICE OF REASON WHO STEPPED IN TO BRING SOME MEASURE OF CALM, TO RESTORE SOME PEACE IN THE MIDST OF THE TURMOIL AND TOGETHER WITH THE SECURITY FORCES, WITH CURFEW BEING IMPOSED AND APPREHENDING THE REMAINING TERRORIST NETWORK AND THEIR MURDER WEAPONS, THIS MAN OF GOD AND THE FORCES WERE ABLE TO NEUTRALISE THE FEAR THAT STALKED OUR COUNTRY!

Yeoman service rendered by security forces

What of our security forces? A majority of them are young but still carry out their duties with much fortitude, calm, smiling faces and eagerness to help in any way they can, be it to assist a human being to walk to a church, face a mob of rioters, apprehend those murderers who are still around; they are always there! What all of us, especially our politicians, have failed to realise is that these BRAVE MEN AND WOMEN PUT THEIR LIVES ON THE LINE EVERY MINUTE OF EVERY DAY AND THEY DO IT SO SINCERELY SO THAT YOU AND I MAY LIVE PEACEFULLY! THEY ARE ALSO MOTHERS AND FATHERS, SONS AND DAUGHTERS, BROTHERS AND SISTERS, BUT THEY GLADLY FACE DESTINY EVERYDAY OF THEIR LIVES, SO THAT YOU AND I CAN SLEEP SAFE AND WALK THIS COUNTRY WITHOUT FEAR! WE CAN NEVER IN THIS LIFE REPAY THE TREMENDOUS DEBT WE OWE THEM! HAVE WE EVER SEEN A SINGLE HI-FI RICH LADY OR GENTLEMAN, OR ANYONE FOR THAT MATTER STOP AT A CHECKPOINT TO OFFER THE SECURITY FORCES SOMETHING TO EAT, OR MORE IMPORTANTLY, A DRINK TO QUENCH THEIR THIRST IN THE UNBEARABLE HEAT THIS COUNTRY IS GOING THROUGH - THEY ARE MUCH TOO HIGH AND MIGHTY TO DO SOMETHING AS HUMANE AS THAT!

Political infamy

While WE think in terms of the debt we owe our security forces, it was DISGUSTING IN THE EXTREME TO SEE OUR NEWSPAPERS PORTRAYING THE TENTH ANNIVERSARY CELEBRATION OF TRIUMPH OVER LTTE TERRORISM; WHILE THE WIDOWS AND CHILDREN WERE BENT IN GRIEF, AT THE PLAQUE, OUR INFAMOUS POLITICIANS WERE DOUBLED OVER WITH LAUGHTER IN SO-CALLED ‘LIGHT MOMENTS’ – SHAME ON THEM, THAT IS IF THEY HAVE ANY! It was pretty obvious that they were displaying who they really were, with absolutely no feelings or respect for the men who gave their lives for the country so they can carry on their political infamy! What of the man who brought the three decades of war to a close? He is not given any recognition or honour – wonder why they are so in awe of him or perhaps it is fear? We will never know!

Soup kitchen –Gesture of goodwill

It was so heartening to see Cardinal Malcolm Ranjith together with Papal Nuncio Pierre Nguyen Van Tot and His Eminence Fernando Cardinal Filoni from the Vatican, laying the foundation for the building which is to house a soup kitchen for more than 200 needy people adjoining St. Anthony’s Church. What a fantastic gesture of goodwill for the less fortunate; something that is done in most countries to ensure the poor at least have a cup of soup to take away their pangs of hunger – a truly laudable cause.

Trauma of survivors

The trauma most of the 21/4 survivors are going through can never be captured in words – many of them are still in profound emotional shock, some with physical injury, others cannot even begin to comprehend how they can continue to live without the loved ones they lost! As someone has said, their loss could never be weighed even in gold! Has anyone ever given a thought to these absolutely frightening aspects of the aftermath? What has the government done about all these or what does it intend doing?

Opposition against probe committee

Thought-provoking is the fact that when Parliament approved a motion to set up a Select Committee to look into the Easter Sunday attacks to determine if any MP or minister was associated with the terror group that carried out the carnage, the opposition was not in agreement; we wonder why.

Transparent school bags

Back to school and CHAOS REIGNS SUPREME! The poor kids are frazzled; teachers grab their bags to take out their lunchboxes and hand them over together with their books and throw their bags on the ground. The end result is when the kids come back out, they are fighting over their bags. The children should be instructed to mark their names clearly on their bags so there is no confusion. When teachers themselves are not clear on how to handle the situation, what can you expect from the poor kids? Some bright spark has come up with the IDEA OF ‘SEE THROUGH’ BAGS – we wonder who gets what and how much commission is earned through this. THE ‘SEE THROUGH’ BAGS IDEA BECAME A REALITY PRONTO – WHO ENGINEERED AND BENEFITTED FROM THE REALITY? ANOTHER QUESTION THAT WILL NEVER BE ANSWERED!

Country gripped by political confusion

The country continues to be gripped by political confusion, chaos and conflict; they are divided among themselves and are continually in disagreement. Business is at a standstill, so is tourism, even the hi-fi shoppers seem to be at an all-time low and we are plagued with discounts from every conceivable side: buy two get two free, spend this much and you get a 20% discount, spend a little more and you get a 30% discount, all vying for business! What absolute desperation! One eye-catcher trolled: buy 1 and get 2 free; that was the height of desperation! Yet, the government is proclaiming from the rooftops that all is well.

Enough Is Enough!

By Shiranee Dissanayake –JUNE 12, 2019

Shiranee Dissanayake

Enough is enough! Having lived through the gruesome experience of 30 years of terrorism of the brand of Velupillai Prabhakaran, the people of Sri Lanka be they Sinhala, Tamil Muslim Burgher or Malay have experience the ultimate in physical and mental suffering. The LTTE was allowed to thrive on Sri Lankan soil, expand internationally and develop into the most dangerous, ruthless terrorist organization in the world. Although there were many attempts to resolve the conflict peacefully, political, religious, racial and other considerations by the politicians as well as civil society groups deterred the process from constructively moving forward. Looking back at 71 years of independence it is evident that those who wielded the reins of power have not had the foresight, the qualities of leadership or the political commitment needed to ensure lasting peace, let alone prosperity for this our motherland. The horrific senseless killings of innocent civilians on 21stApril 2019, by the ISIS based Islamic terrorist organization the National Thawheed Jamath (NTJ), which has been operating in Sri Lanka for over 12 years, speak volumes for the lack of concern and commitment, and incompetence of the political leadership in handling issues of this nature. Indeed, another violent odious, terrorist organization is the last thing that Sri Lankans want on Sri Lankan soil. They have already had enough.

When the war ended in 2009, under the political leadership of former President Mahinda Rajapaksa and the military leadership of Field Marshall Sarath Fonseka, backed by the total dedication and commitment of the armed forces and the unstinted support and co-operation of the people of all communities who collectively deserve the credit for this victory, the door finally opened to usher in lasting peace and prosperity. However regrettably, the era that followed was one of bribery, corruption, politicization of government institutions and autocratic family rule.

This prompted the educated elite, the intellectuals, professionals and civil society groups to band together under the guidance and leadership of Ven. Maduluwawe Sobitha Thera to vote Mr. Mahinda Rajapaksa out of power. As Mr. Ranil Wickremesinghe was unable to summon the majority support of the people to run for the presidency, a common candidate in the form of Maithripala Sirisena was put forward by the UNP as the presidential candidate. His promise of a Maithri Palanayak, Sthawara Ratak, appealed to most Sri Lankans who had suffered at the hands of the most ruthless terrorist organization in the world, within a stagnant economy, for more than half of their lives.The Rajapaksa reign of politicization of government institutions, widespread bribery and corruption, and big time robbery of the wealth and resources of this country prompted the people to opt for the national government proposed by the UNP with Maithripala Sirisena of the SLFP as the common presidential candidate.

To cut a long story short, there were great expectations that the national government of Maithripala Sirisena and Ranil Wickremesinghe would give priority to salvaging the country from the economic morass it was engulfed in. It was the fervent hope that this ‘national’ government would do away with racism, religious extremism and inequality. It was the people’s dream that it would ensure justice for all bring about an era of peaceful coexistence among the different ethnic communities and steer the country towards economic prosperity.

However, the performance of the President and the Prime minister after four years of their term of office, has left the voters and all who worked day and night to ensure their victory, in a state of bewilderment and utter disgust followed by a total breakdown of trust and confidence in their leadership.

One of the main reasons for this is that the President has got his priorities wrong. His first priority was to be the leader of the SLFP and nurture the party instead of adopting an apolitical stance, committed to protecting and developing the country in keeping with his position and his promise of a ‘Maithri Palanayak, Sthawara Ratak’. As time progressed, it became abundantly clear to all, that his first priority was not the country but his own political future.

The sudden indiscriminate sacking of Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe and the installation of Mr. Mahinda Rajapaksa as the Prime Minister on October 26th 2019 with total disregard for the provisions of the constitution, put the lid on the collapse of the Maithri/Ranil coalition. Judging by the evidence that has emerged since the April 21st ISIS attack on innocent worshippers in Catholic churches, and guests top ranking tourist hotels, it is clear that national security of the country has been given little or no priority by either of the two leaders.

Looking back at the tragedy of 21st April where 243 innocent people were ruthlessly killed for no fault of theirs and nearly 500 seriously injured, it might be relevant to examine how the government in power handled this severe threat to national security. It has been established beyond doubt that information regarding the impending attacks was communicated to the security top brass as well as His Excellency the President more than two weeks before the attacks took place. It is also clear that there has been a sense of complacency or even indifference among all concerned, regarding the impending danger to the security of the people.

Bhikkhus who go against Buddhism and the Muslim ministers who follow

If both Bhikkhus, Rathana and Gnanasara, while calling for the resignations of the persons concerned in order to facilitate the inquiries of the allegations against them, requested the masses not to intimidate ordinary Muslims who were innocent, and stated the problem cannot be solved by actions such as boycotting Muslim shops, then their protest would not have taken on a racist outlook

Wednesday, 12 June 2019

All Muslim ministers resigned in protest of the anti- Muslim campaign of Buddhist Bhikkhus Athuraliye Rathana, a politician, and Galagoda Aththe Gnanasara, a political activist. Prior to that, Governors Azath Salley and M.L.A.M. Hizbullah had resigned.

First of all, it should be stated that these Bhikkhus acted against the basic principles of Buddhism. Promoting racism, and thereby spreading hate among the masses, is an attack against the foundation of Buddhism, which has never justified killing or harming anyone under any circumstances.

All who had common sense expected that there would be a communal backlash as a result of the Easter Sunday attacks. At the initial stage, the situation was under control, due to the intervention of the Cardinal. However, the situation went out of control later. There were allegations that there was political influence as well. The intervention of the Cardinal at the initial stage was in a national perspective, but later it was evident that there was a political perspective as well.

The tug of war of the two main partners of the ruling coalition has come to a zenith, through the effort of convincing the people of who was responsible for the failure to avoid the Easter Sunday attack. All of them, including the Opposition, lacked empathy in this situation. On one hand, there is a Select Committee of the Parliament to which the President has objected, and on the other hand Rathana Himi started his hunger campaign. Both these acts were democratic, but the latter ignited the communal unrest which was cooling down. If both Bhikkhus, Rathana and Gnanasara, while calling for the resignations of the persons concerned in order to facilitate the inquiries of the allegations against them, requested the masses not to intimidate ordinary Muslims who were innocent, and stated the problem cannot be solved by actions such as boycotting Muslim shops, then their protest would not have taken on a racist outlook. Their action received mass support throughout the island since there was racism within. People can be provoked very easily in this way.

However, Gnanasara Himi later said that due to the act of Rathana Himi, ordinary Muslims were forced towards extremism, and it was the moderate Muslims who revealed the actions of the Muslim extremists at the initial stage. We do not know whether the stances of these Bhikkhus were changed from time to time, or the merchants who sell news for their livelihood based on ratings had illustrated what they wanted out of the messages of these Bhikkhus.

However, Muslim Ministers have given an excellent democratic answer to this demand. The crux of it was that when there was a tug of war between two parties, one party let the rope go. Buddhists and Buddhist Bhikkhus who are engaged in racist activities should realise that the answer of Buddha to the dilemma of life was also the same. The action taken by the Muslim ministers was in line with the recommendation of the Buddha, who was not a racist, caste-minded person, Buddhist or magician, and who was only a supreme human being. As a result, the posteriors of Rathana Himi, the political henchmen standing behind him, and the people who were provoked in the line of racism, were hit by the ground. Gnanasara Himi was able to reduce the impact since he has changed his stance subsequently.

Gnanasara Himi publicly said that there could be chaos (senakeli) throughout the island if the persons concerned did not resign within a day. It is commendable that he changed his stance later. However, it was a provocative statement. Muslim MPs have one more thing to do. They can demand that the investigations against the relevant Muslim leaders should be conducted and finished within a reasonable period, and if not, they also can tender their resignations from the Parliament. The majority Sinhalese, who were not convinced by any religious or political leader about the danger of racism to the general public, to the country at large, and to the national security of the country in the light of rival foreign influences, may realise the gravity of it by actions like this.

Also, the answer to the fact that the deviation from the general culture of the country by the Muslim community is to negotiate with them, and not to attack them and push them to extremism. A manager who controlled a factory during a condition of a strike would understand this. Sinhala leaders also contributed to this deviation in exchange of votes.

Sri Lanka’s Sinhala-Tamil Divide: A Fatal Tamil Unawareness

The task is challenging because victory, instead of rousing the Sinhalese to magnanimity, has only led to triumphalism and a strengthening of ‘racist’ animosity and hatred

by Charles Sarvan-2019-06-11

I isolate the following two from an email message I received recently:

“The anti-Tamil feeling began in 1949 with the de-citizenizing of Tamils”

“In Kandy there was a Mudali by the name of A. Premadasa whose lorries brought fish from all over the coastal areas in Sri Lanka. He spread the rumour that in the lorry that arrived from Jaffna, the dismembered body of a Sinhalese girl, daughter of a bakery owner in KKS had been found in one of the boxes.” (End of quote)

Regarding the first, I think it’s a case of mistaking cause and effect. Depriving Upcountry Tamils of their citizenship does not mark the beginning of anti-Tamil feeling but the result of such feeling.

With the second, what’s important is not the rumour but the willingness of people to believe it. Why? Because they wanted to believe it. Why? Because, among other reasons, it confirmed their ‘racism’, and justified the appalling violence they were unleashing. Why are the absurd stories of the Mahavamsa readily, if unconsciously, internalised?

Allow me to relate a personal, revelatory, incident from my article, ‘Racism and “exceptionalism”’: “While an undergraduate at the Peradeniya Campus in the 1950s, one of my closest friends happened to be a Sinhalese Buddhist. I spent holidays with him at his parental home in what was then a little village. His mother was a personification of gentleness and kindness, wise and caring, yet ready to smile or laugh. She liked me and it would not be an exaggeration to say she treated me as if I were one of her own family. Yet my friend told me that, while he was a growing child, she had related stories which portrayed Tamils not only as “the Other”, but which created the image in his mind and imagination of the Tamil as trouble and menace, to be distrusted, held at a distance and controlled. I have not the slightest doubt this was not her intention: she simply was not aware of the image of ‘the Other’ that folk tales and folk history create; their effect on the mind and imagination of a child and, finally, on the hapless Tamil. Essentially kind, decent and good she was simply “innocent” (in the sense of being unaware) of the possible long-term effects of the stories she narrated, tales she told and retold simply to entertain her son. Folk history and stories help to explain the intensity of hatred, and the ferocity of attack, during successive anti-Tamil riots and pogroms. They form an unbroken line of suspicion, resentment and hatred from ancient times into the present

I and the public know

What all schoolchildren learn,

Those to whom evil is done

Do evil in return.

(Extract from ‘September 1, 1939‘ by W. H. Auden)

Where does one start in an attempt to understand Sinhalese anger, and their resulting injustice and violence? In Volume 2 of my Public Writings on Sri Lanka, I noted: “Imperialism, particularly British imperialism, was based on, and expressed, utter contempt: contempt for the natives, their colour and person; history and all aspects of their culture, including religion and language. The Buddhist monks who had enjoyed patronage and prestige at the royal court were marginalised. All public business - government, administration and commerce - was conducted in English, and those not proficient in English (the vast majority) were disadvantaged and made to feel inferior. These are some of the factors that created a reservoir of resentment, seething, potentially virulent but inarticulate because of imperial control. Nehru in the speech made at India’s independence said that “the soul of a nation, long suppressed, [now] finds utterance”: in Sri Lanka, it seems the Sinhalese soul at independence was sorely bruised, angry and bitter, confused and impatient. Reaction found vent not on the British – distant, powerful, grudgingly admired – but on the Tamil.”

But one can go further back in history, before the arrival of the Europeans, when Tamil kings from South India invaded the Island. But this is to see the past through the lenses of the present. Professor Romila Thapar’s Somanatha: The Many Voices of a History shows that what is now remembered and transmitted as a Muslim depredation of a Hindu religious site (1026) is not accurate. There were, for example, Indians in Mahmud’s army – even as there were Sinhalese soldiers in Tamil Elara’s army: see, W I Siriweera, ‘The Dutthagamani-Elara Epiisode’ in Ethnicity and Social Change in Sri Lanka (Social Scientists Association of Sri Lanka). I recall an African colleague asserting that Africans never sold fellow Africans into slavery. Seeing my astonishment, he explained that the concept and feeling of ‘African’ then didn’t exist. There were then no “Africans”, and identity and loyalty were on other grounds - as in other regions and places.

Perception is paramount. Professor K M De Silva, in his A History of Sri Lanka states: “When by the middle of the thirteenth century, the Pandyas had established themselves as the dominant power in South India, they were inclined to support the Sinhalese kings against the [Tamil] kingdom in the north of the island” (op. cit., p. 67).

The bulk of what follows, I take from an article with almost the same title (‘Tamils: a fatal historical unawareness’) from Volume 111 of my Public Writings on Sri Lanka: “Eelam [Sri Lankan] Tamils of the present, and even more, those of future generations interested in history will reflect with a view to understanding how and why Eelam Tamils came to be in such a sorry plight. Something of the historical background is sketched in the essay ‘Reign of Anomy’, included in my Public Writings on Sri Lanka, Volume 2.

The reader will, I hope, understand and excuse that I use the document as I return to this inquiry, having been recently sent a booklet, about eighty-five pages, titled Eylom: Beginnings of Freedom Struggle. Sub-title: ‘Dozen documents by C. Suntharalingam with candid comments and criticisms by Lord Soulbury’. It’s a 2007 reprint of documents that had their origin in the 1950s. “The die is cast" is a Latin phrase attributed to Julius Caesar as he led his army across the Rubicon river. There was no longer the option of going back: the die had been cast. Or, to alter lines from Fitzgerald’s translation of The Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam, the moving finger writes and, having written, moves on. Nor can all your tears wipe out a single word. It seems to me that for Tamils the die was cast, the writing done, shortly before Independence in 1948.

Young readers whom I mainly have in mind might wonder who was this C. Suntharalingam. Chellappah Suntharalingam (1895-1985) was awarded a ‘double first’ in mathematics by Balliol College, Oxford. Selected by the prestigious Indian Civil Service, he preferred to join the Ceylon Civil Service but, energetic and restless; bored with bureaucracy, he resigned. For a while, he was vice-principal of Ananda College (unthinkable for a Tamil today); later, the first Professor of Mathematics of ‘Ceylon University College’. Entering politics and winning the Vavuniya seat, he was a proverbial “stormy petrel”; independent, fearlessly frank and outspoken. D S Senanayake, before he became independent Ceylon’s first Prime Minister, frequently visited Suntharalingam, and “Sun” personally knew many of Ceylon’s political leaders, both Sinhalese and Tamil. Of course, there are other aspects to the man but they lie outside the present concern.

Suntharalingam, feeling deeply betrayed by the Sinhalese, was perhaps the earliest of Tamil leaders to advocate a separate state, rejecting federalism. Federalism, he argued (Eylom, page 51), means union; and union means consent but there is no consent from the Sinhalese, not even to discuss it. Suntharalingam reposed hope neither in federalism nor in peaceful protests: the latter has brought only greater insult, humiliation and danger (Eylom, page 76).

I quote from my Public Writings, Volume 11. “The person most identified with this peaceful phase of the Tamil struggle is S. J. V. Chelvanayagam, a soft-spoken man; like Mahatma Gandhi, frail in figure but strong of soul. “SJV” based his struggle on satyagraha (the force, or strength, of truth) drawing inspiration from Gandhi’s non-violent campaign against the British. But in India, the weapon of Satyagraha had been deployed by a majority against a very small (occupying) minority. The parallel did not apply to Sri Lanka because, Island-wide, the Tamils are a small minority, and because of the ready willingness of the Sinhalese government and a section of the Sinhalese people to meet peaceful protest with brutal violence.”

“No proud, cultured people ever obtained freedom or retained their self-respect except through suffering and sacrifice, and the Tamils have before them and their progeny for the immediate future, only toil and tears” (“Sun”, page 20). He could not have known the nature and the degree of suffering that lay ahead! I see this booklet as a bitter lament, the lament of a man who realizes too late the existential peril confronting his people. What’s more, a danger into which he and other Tamil leaders had led them.

Truly, unawareness (ignorance, innocence) can exact a heavy toll. The following is taken from Suntharalingam’s Eylom. If “equality of treatment had not been conceded in 1944 by the very large majority of the State Council, there would have been no appointment of the Soulbury Commission. No Reform of the Constitution, no Dominion Status for Ceylon and no Independence for Lanka! The Tamils to a man would have opposed, tooth and nail, even any talk of reform” (page 17). Had the Tamils known what they now know, “not a single Tamil leader would have joined in the struggle for Ceylon’s independence from British imperialism” (page 22) “Without the consent, concurrence and co-operation of the Tamil leaders of 1947 and before, no Independence was possible or could have been achieved for Ceylon” (page 43).

If the “Tamil leaders had any reason to suspect that the Sinhalese leaders would go behind their undertakings and promises, or to doubt their bona fides, they would have acted differently during the whole course of the country’s struggle for emancipation. Indeed, when the Independence resolution was introduced in the first Parliament of Ceylon not a single Tamil member, including plantation Tamil members, cast their votes against the resolution” (page 56). Then comes what must be a self-lacerating sentence: “If I had not joined the Cabinet, there would not have been that unity between the two major communities of Ceylon without which the British would never have granted independence” (pages 62-3).

Suntharalingam unwittingly helped to create structures that made possible “the treacherous process of liquidating the Tamils of Ceylon” (“Sun”, page 13). Advised by Sir Oliver Goonetilleke (described as one of the most astute and wily of men), D S Senanayake, when he set about forming his cabinet, made sure that there were also Tamil (Suntharalingam), Muslim, Malay, European and Burgher ministers. Impressed and reassured, the British Parliament in December 1947 passed the Ceylon Independence Act, renouncing forever its right to legislate for Ceylon. Tamil leaders thought they were laying the foundation for a beautiful (harmonious, inclusive and prosperous) island, unaware that it was their own grave they were digging. “Tamils of Ceylon have been tricked and betrayed” (Suntharalingam, page 25). They had helped to replace British imperialism with Sinhalese imperialism and colonialism. I recall my mother (Mrs V. J. Ponnuthurai, nee Asirwatham, 1908-1988) asking me after ‘Black July’ 1983, whether life hadn’t been, after all, better for the Tamils under British imperialism.

Lord Soulbury, in his Foreword to Bertram Hughes Farmer’s Ceylon: A Divided Nation (Institute of Race Relations, London, 1963) confesses that his Commission would have been less hopeful of a solution to the ethnic problem if it had had “more than a cursory knowledge of the age-long antagonism between these two communities.” It is scandalous that Soulbury made recommendations affecting an entire country on the basis of “cursory” knowledge. After all, the Commission was appointed in 1944. Indirectly he admits that democracy can degenerate to the tyranny of the majority, and no constitutional safeguard would have been in the long run of much avail. In his words, justice and reconciliation will “depend not on constitutional guarantees but on the goodwill, common sense and humanity of the Government in power and the [Sinhalese] people who elect it.”

I am reminded of what Rousseau writes in his The Social Contract: an architect before erecting a building, examines and tests the soil in order to see whether it can support the proposed weight. Similarly, one must first consider whether the people are able to sustain the political and administrative changes proposed, in this case, true democracy with its concomitants such as justice and equality. I think Soulbury is being disingenuous when he claims innocence (ignorance); I suspect he knew full well what the consequences would be but pretended not to, and played the game along with D S Senanayake, aided by ‘innocent’ Tamil leaders. Tamil leaders were from the elite who knew and interacted with the Sinhalese elite. They had no inkling of how deep and widespread was the animosity harboured by the Sinhalese folk, fostered by the Mahavamsa and Buddhist monks; their ‘racist’ feelings and Sinhala-Buddhist hegemonic determination.

Professor Suntharalingam, quoting (page 47) an anonymous poem, addresses his “Fellow Tamils” and asks, “What of the night?” Again (unaware of the far worse that was yet to come) he wrote: “Never in the history of Ilankai has the Ceylon Tamil been in a worse plight”. The stanza from which he took that line reads:

But, watchman, what of the night,

When sorrow and pain are mine,

And the pleasures of life, so sweet and bright,

No longer around me shine?

Moving still forward in time, in the opinion of the Jesuit priest, Paul Caspersz (1925-2017; indefatigable champion of the poor and those discriminated against) there were just grievances underlying both the JVP uprising and the Tamil armed struggle. St Augustine (354-430 CE) wrote that when a grave wrong can be stopped only by violence, it would be a sin to be peaceful: similar thoughts were expressed by Gandhi. Philosophers, ethicists and others have proposed two aspects to war. The first, ‘jus ad bellum’, is the right grounds on which to go to war; the second, ‘jus in bello’ is right conduct in war. A third category now added, ‘jus post bellum’, deals with the morality of post-war settlement and reconstruction.

Regarding the first, jus ad bellum’, Tamil pleas for justice were jeered at and dismissed; peaceful protests were met with mob and state violence. War, therefore, was not the first but the very last resort of a people who had earnestly explored every other means. After the horrific pogrom of July 1983, there was international sympathy for the Tamils but the ‘jus in bello’ (rightly or wrongly) turned sympathy into revulsion and rejection. Present and future generations now have to “pick up the pieces” and build again.

The task is challenging because victory, instead of rousing the Sinhalese to magnanimity, has only led to triumphalism and a strengthening of ‘racist’ animosity and hatred. Military victory is seen as moral and racial vindication. As in the past, Tamils must not gauge Sinhalese feelings and attitudes based on their friends, acquaintances and colleagues nor on the few voices that speak up for equality and inclusion. In short, they must not assume a goodwill that does not exist in reality. Sinhalese leaders know that electoral success and resulting power depends on the easily-excited masses, and on the Buddhist monks who lead them.

They and the masses form a symbiotic relationship. Unawareness and illusions can exact a painful price.

Keep it clean: A reflection

Photo courtesy CNN.

“Give peace within her borders, ‘twixt man and man goodwill,

The love all unsuspicious, the love that works no ill[1]. “

Real stories-real racism

BISHOP DULEEP DE CHICKERA-06/10/2019

A Colombo taxi driver informed a customer that he was a Muslim. It sounded like an apology. His two previous hires had been cancelled after his cultural identity had been guessed.

In the hill-country, a group of persons got into a heated argument with a woman who had accompanied her daughter to an interview. One of them called the police and the woman was taken in for questioning. It had nothing to do with the petty quarrel. She had a scarf draped over her head.

In the deep-south, a Muslim family was asked to leave a private bus. The conductor was barely out of his teens. None of the other passengers objected. The difference it would have made to the humiliated family did not seem to matter.

In several places around the country an unofficial boycott of Muslim shops and businesses is in place. This gets worse when non-Muslims who step into Muslim shops are intimidated as they step out, and Muslims who step into non-Muslim shops are turned away.

This shameful trend took a painful turn in an act of self-infliction at Kekirawa. The destruction of a mosque by some Muslims was a desperate attempt for survival. The ‘perceived enemy’ seemed to be pointing at the ‘real enemy’ so that social anger would be directed elsewhere. The act nevertheless amounted to a criminal breach of the peace. No matter the cheering squads, those who picked up sledgehammers and took the law into their own hands should be prosecuted.

Any credible evidence of sedition being planned or fanned at the demolished Mosque should have been passed on to state authorities. Intra-Muslim violence brings neither credit nor credibility to anyone. It only spreads what it expects to stop. Already judged by their own, the ‘enemy’ Muslims have overnight become targets.

These real stories are about an intrinsic part of the Sri Lankan whole, harassed and sidelined before our very eyes. The speed with which this brazen discrimination and intimidation have spread is shocking. That it happens while those tasked to ensure order and national integration do little to stop it, is outrageous.

Tragedy and obligations

The horrific Easter Sunday bombings spread shock, fear and anger and can never be forgotten. For Christians, remembrance is at the heart of public worship. In fact, when the public remembrance of the dead was denied to the Tamil community for decades, Christians in all parts of the country remembered the dead with thanksgiving, as they remembered the death and resurrection of Christ with thanksgiving. However, the difference Easter 2019 will make to future celebrations is that it will correctly extend Good Friday into the realm of hope, affirming that human suffering and human awakening may not be separated.

Easter Sunday 2019 also demanded vigilant security operations. Such a continuing task that requires efficiency, sensitivity, and speed, is best left to those trained and set aside to do so. If done professionally, the ethnic identity of citizens will not matter. If not, and our security establishment is biased or weak, nationalists and propagandists will take over, and the ethnic identity of citizens will be made to matter.

But professionalism among the security forces only is not enough. The president, our legislators and public officials in charge of state institutions are to ensure the freedom and equal treatment of all. The democratic mechanisms they uphold will then swiftly resist the incitement of hatred. For instance, shops that refuse to serve some cultures, would be prosecuted and lose their licenses, and those in charge of police stations, where some cultures are treated harshly, would be disciplined if found guilty.

Failed governance

But in reality, this will not happen. Our legislators will not contest the rising animosity against Muslims. Their behaviour in parliament, on the streets and before the cameras, say it all. Consequently, most public officials will not dare to be different. The prospect of a politically manipulated transfer, or isolation in the face of a trumped-up inquiry, undermines accountability to the core and permits the country to divide and rule itself. The system, meant to work as a whole, cannot work for long if it works in parts. The body disintegrates when the head becomes dysfunctional.

The craving for political power and prominence, coupled with a death of conscience, best explains this unwillingness. This is why the president, prime minister, leader of the opposition and all other legislators have not stood together against racism and the prosecution of racists, and this is why they have not collectively affirmed the Muslim community as law abiding citizens. These are unconditional obligations of any democratic leadership, so admirably demonstrated by Jacinda Ardern, the PM of New Zealand.

Standing for the protection, rights and dignity of a smaller community of citizens in times of communal unrest has seldom been a characteristic of persons at the helm of governance in this country. To the contrary, minorities are projected as dispensable and repeatedly disowned.

A glaring example of this practice is the recent release of one with an accumulated record of hatred and aggression against the Muslim community. That this was done at the height of anti-Muslim prejudice, by the highest in the land, indicates the depth to which sectarianism is entrenched in our structures. The word used was pardon. Contempt, poured this way on a Contempt of Court judgement, can only bring contempt on the office authorized to pardon.

A state of Anomie

The aftermath of the Easter Sunday bombings confirmed what has been observed for some time. Long before the tragedy, the country was sliding into a state of anomie; a term the 19thcentury French Sociologist, Emile Durkheim, coined to describe the chronic absence of norms. It was this hollow state of affairs that was exploited by extremists to legitimize anti-Muslim animosity, after the Easter Sunday bombings.

As governments have changed over the years, one hard fact has remained constant. Those endowed with the responsibility to protect, have lost the integrity, wisdom and courage to be equally fair by all citizens. When this gift is lost, the ability to govern is undermined.

Lessons from schoolboys

Last Saturday, school-boys played a fine game of rugby in Kandy. One team was led by a smart and unassuming Muslim boy. Other than his name, nothing during the game reflected the current malaise on our streets. His team, the other team, the referee, the spectators and the commentators, they all ‘played the game.’ Back slaps and hugs after the game indicated that no team had lost.

These thirty plus young sportsmen teach their president, PM, leader of the opposition and all other legislators, a lesson they can still learn. It is certainly possible to play hard and fast, amidst shifting advantages and reversals, and yet keep it clean and fair.

With peace and blessings to all.

###

[1] The late Revd. W. S. Senior

Why Sri Lankan politics needs variety

Mahinda Rajapaksa (left) and President Sirisena

12 June 2019

There is much debate going on in Social Media as to who should represent the country’s people in parliament. Most potential candidates for the presidency have already shortlisted the members of their probable cabinets while dreaming of a better and prosperous Sri Lanka. This is why this year and the following year are important; hence Sri Lankans must use their votes wisely.

Sinhalese hardliners are very happy that the present cabinet doesn’t include any Muslims. This is because Ven. Rathana Thera’s hunger strike influenced nine lawmakers-there were four Cabinet ministers among them-resign from their portfolios.

Sinhala hardliners want people with patriotic ideas to fill the seats in Parliament. The more liberal minded citizens who wish to raise their living conditions and move up a few notches in life would wish to have lawmakers who have an acute sense for business.

Having lawmakers who represent these two types of voters or two sections of the public wouldn’t solve Sri Lanka’s puzzle, which is to find a future leader. Then there are those who harp on the fact that those who enter parliament should be educated and possess a degree as the minimum qualification. This is the tragedy of our thinking. Let me explain.

Sri Lanka needs a set of lawmakers who represent people from all walks of life. This is because Sri Lanka is a multi-religious and multi-cultural nation. We even have a section of the society which is termed the clergy. And even they should be represented in parliament or even at provincial council level.

But take into consideration the Zion Church in Baticaloa. It still remains in its devastated condition after the Easter Sunday bombings
Tourism is the ninth largest foreign exchange earner in Sri Lanka and needs a competent individual in Parliament to represent the industry
Has Nagananda considered having among the educated people he has earmarked those with wisdom and maturity?
As much as you need competence you also need people with wisdom and sometimes wit too. Nagananda seems too straightjacketed and might run into a horde of problems if elected

Take for an example the work of Bishop of Colombo Malcolm Cardinal Ranjith. He now moves closely with parliamentarians and even offered support when Ven. Rathana Thera staged a fast at the Temple of the Tooth; many are of the opinion that the fast was politically motivated.
What is the result of Cardinal’s recent work; the speedy refurbishing of the St.Anthony’s Church in Kochchikade which was wrecked by a bomb blast. But take into consideration the Zion Church in Baticaloa. It still remains in its devastated condition after the Easter Sunday bombings due to lack of political patronage.

The same can be said about roads and school buildings which are in a debilitated condition because those schools and roads are in villages which have limited potential to generate votes for lawmakers. As a result one seldom sees politicians visiting such villages to look into the welfare of the people.
Sinhalese politicians might not fancy Muslims in the north, South, East and Central Provinces.

Central province was one area where there was much tension between these two communities. But the Muslim votes in these troubled areas are important to Sinhalese politicians and that’s why these lawmakers find ways to accommodate members of this minority community; often luring them by offering them ministerial positions. Much is said about Rishad Bathiudeen. He quit before the allegations levelled against him could be proven. Bathiudeen represents the north and the present government is aware of the votes he can generate for them. This is the reason for the efforts the regime takes to shield him from his adversaries. The Muslims in the Western Province are a peaceful lot and have co-existed with the majority Sinhalese in the best possible manner.

Coming back to who should enter parliament a representative each from the island’s key business areas should be appointed to serve parliament. Take for an example the tourism industry.

Entrepreneurs involved in tourism complain that their businesses are choking because travel advisories which were once issued by thriving nations like UK, Switzerland, USA, Netherlands and India. This is why Sri Lanka needs a competent individual as the Minister of Tourism. The present Minister of Tourism John Amaratunga came in for heavy criticism when he once blamed a female rape victim, who was on holiday in Sri Lanka. The minister blamed the tourist who was raped in Nuwara Eliya citing that she exposed herself to risk by hiking alone in the evening. Tourism is the ninth largest foreign exchange earner in Sri Lanka and needs a competent individual in Parliament to represent the industry.

There are 225 slots in parliament, but the core areas of administration or in other words the important ministries must be handled by educated individuals who possess the minimum qualification amounting to a college degree. It leaves room for doubt and suspicion to creep in when the country’s finance minister’s only known qualification is the graduation he earned in clothing and design and technology from St. Martin’s School of Art in London.

It’s essential that such a post like the Minister of Finance is held by a financial expert armed with a degree. That the person selected for the post needing to have a clean track record goes without saying.

Another point that needs to be highlighted is the improvements one makes after entering parliament. A person with a background in transport if made the minister of transport must raise the standard of transport in the country. He must acquire new knowledge and business acumen. Entering parliament is not an achievement in itself if the individual fails to make things happen it would be deemed he was a failure.

Presidential hopeful Nagananda Koddithuwakku boasts of being able to raise the economic profile of the country through a mini Cabinet. He wants to employ only professionals with proven track records and have only those who are truly qualified.

Has Nagananda considered having among the educated people he has earmarked those with wisdom and maturity?

Sometimes politicians, if not the president himself, might be forced to carry a few passengers in a Cabinet due to reasons best known to him or his ‘government’.

When an educated matured person states that he would carry a passenger in the institute he represents and heads, it often amounts to a mature statement.

As much as you need competence you also need people with wisdom and sometimes wit too.
Nagananda seems too straightjacketed and might run into a horde of problems if elected. Right now we know that President Sirisena and Opposition Leader Mahinda Rajapaksa have patched up their differences to some extent. According to newspaper reports Sirisena has said that he wouldn’t run for the presidency a second time. Sirisena has added that he also wouldnt support Mahinda Rajapaksa at future elections. When Mahinda confronted Sirisena recently to inquire into these utterances, Sirisena is reported to have said, “There are things that I said and didn’t say which have been included in these newspaper reports”. But the president didn’t give details about what he didn’t say. This is political maturity and Presidential hopefuls like Nagananda, who want only professionals in parliament, can take a cue from senior politicians like Sirisena.

Dr. P G Punchihewa On Sinhala Buddhagama

By Gamini Seneviratne –JUNE 11, 2019

Gamini Seneviratne

Dr. Punchihewa’s essay on Sinhala Buddhagama comes at the end of his account of Arahant Mahinda’s legacy to the people of this country, – an island named Sinhale or Lanka. It was from here that the buddha dhamma as explained by the Arahant and his associate bhikkus, Ishtiya, Uttiya, Shamkhala and Bhadrashaala spread eastward to Myanmar, Lao, Thailand, Cambodia and Vietnam.

Dr. Punchihewa records too the role played by the Arahanth’s sister, the theri Sanghamitta in ‘empowering’ women – to use a term in frequent use today especially in the western media that determine who should rule the world as they see it and how that should be done.

What instruction we children received on the pathways of life included the weekly daham paaselaat or close by the village temple. Besides guidance at home, generally from their mother, the daham paasela provided pointers towards a life marked by compassion towards all living beings. One of the ‘texts’ used there was the lo vaeda sangarava the 15th century AC instructional poem by the Vidagama Mahathera. (Incidentally, a fresh annotation of the poem together with a translation into English by Jinasoma Weerasuriya, the whole edited by Dr. Punchihewa, has been published recently and would serve as a companion to the book under review here, “Anubudu Mihindu Mahimi”).

In our childhood we had other ‘teachers’ as well, depending. I do not know how it was with Punchi but I was taught Pali at our village temple in Mattumagala before I was four years old. Things did not proceed as hoped, the oldest of us cousins thought to be fit for the sangha taking to medicine, the next to the civil law and I – well, to public administration, coming round through those excursions to the humanities and the social sciences that, together and with much else, seem to straddle ‘religion’.

How close or far those disciplines were/are to Sinhala Buddhism I leave it to you to judge. Reference to matters somewhat close to me are made here also as demonstration that in its history Buddhism has not been treated by the Sinhalese as some exotic kind of worship.

At the daham paasela, usually on the temple premises, occasionally at the village school nearby, we learnt compassion and quietude. At Royal College, a “secular” school (to adopt the much misused current parlance that is value-loaded to obfuscate superstitions put about by the ‘western world’}, we had a reading from a text (the dhammapada, bhagavat gita, bible, koran) twice a week at senior assembly and, at General Assembly each Friday, a talk on one of them by an old boy who could relate those beliefs / injunctions in clear language and hold the attention of 10 to 18 year olds for little short of an hour. Such was the “religious instruction” we received at Royal and it served us well. (The school prize for Comparative Religion – which btw I won – was named after its donor, S H Mackeen: there was a question on each of the religions mentioned above with three out of four requiring an essay – I wrote on Christianity, Islam and on the Upanishads).

In later years, in the Third Form at Royal, I returned to Pali to escape from “Pol-Thel” Baptist and his lessons in the Geography of Ceylon. And I continued with Pali, taught by a later, senior colleague in the CCS, D M P B Dassanayake, in a failed attempt to dodge K C (Penguin) Fernando who taught Sinhala Literature – though he was the compiler of an English-Pali Dictionary then in use in schools and pirivenas. (Mr. Fernando had been a classmate of my father at Ananda and felt obliged to be extra-stern in assessing such work as I managed to do: ‘corporal punishment’ was not unusual at that time and, at a rough guess, I received five times the share that, maybe, was due to me).

Such were some of the circumstances under which Sinhala buddhagama came to be lodged in our consciousness.